Recasts & WAAC 40k: Where Should We Draw The Line?

tau eldar waac gamers 40k

From Recasts, Drop Boxes and rules shenanigans like the Drop Pod FAQ, where should we draw the line against 40K WAAC players these days?

Another Long War Two-Fer is HERE – Checkout our fantastical webcast and new and exciting podcast of table-top wargaming awesomeness.

logo-old-472x409 the long war

Message us today! 40klongwar AT

fb_banner_ALL long war

Team Long War: From left to right: Kenny Boucher, Stephen Fore, Rob Baer, and Mike Haspil


This week we discuss the new GW FAQ For Space Wolves, making armies “cool” and where to draw the line against WAAC players. Arm yourself with the facts, not hate.

WAAC & 40k Where Do We Draw The Line? – Long War Podcast Episode 56

Section 1 : Intros/banter
Section 2: Table Top Marketplace
Section 3 :Webcast Recap, How to make your army “cool”.
Section 4 :WAAC & 40k Where Should We Draw The Line?



  • Another podcast, another failure to mention that in the article’s title. Its an interesting topic I’d love to read an editorial about, though.

    • Mr.Gold

      nope, they will make a (hidden) podcast about the topic though…

    • JP

      But if they told you it was a podcast, you wouldn’t click on the link! Clicks for the click god, remember?

      • Shiwan8

        Well, at this point it’s honestly pretty evident that these people do not write articles. The word “podcast/videocast” should be synonymous with “dudebros” at this point.

        • grim_dork


          • Shiwan8

            4 sure!

    • I think rob puts it in and another admin edits it out.

    • UnLachy

      I had 27 likes on my comment the last time I mentioned this on a post and it got deleted

      • I had 40 or so on one comment last time, they removed it for no reason. Reposted, another 25, deleted again. Really silly, that.

        • Crevab

          Oh, there’s a reason

          • Yeah, of course. Just not a good or sensible one.

      • Dave Scammell

        Few weeks ago I had one saying the same thing with over 100 up votes. They didn’t like that so they blocked me. Next week, having started a new profile I raised the same point, got about 30 up votes (might be more, memory’s hazy), and they blocked me again.
        Last week. Same thing happened.
        It MUST be more effort going through and deleting and permabanning than simply changing their habits. They used to put ‘Long War Podcast’ the title… But for the last six months it’s been this baity nonsense.
        This has single handedly pissed me off to the point that my BOLS visits have gone from four of five times a day to once every four days, if that.

    • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

      The stealth podcasts are even stealthier in mobile mode.

      • Speaking of that, am I the only one who gets constantly thrown into the mobile mode on a desktop browser? I switch back and the next time I visit, I’m back to mobile. It even switches between front page and articles.

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          Me too. Frontpage seems to know which you are using, but actual posts could show up either way on any device it seems.

        • Brettila

          No, I have all sorts of issues with BoLS. Mobile format, cliking the back arrow won’t work, not letting me comment some times. Losing my connection and my screen going into flashing, whooping llama section of the Monty Python credits mode to name a few.

  • Zingbaby

    I won’t listen, but it’s worth mentioning that BoLS is at least somewhat responsible for encouraging and justifying ‘WAAC’ playing over the years.

    • Randy Randalman

      WAAC players have the same rights to the game as fluff-bunnies. What’s fun for one isn’t for others, and vice versa. Neither of them are in the wrong, violating the mythical spirit of the game, etc.

      • Zingbaby

        That’s like your opinion man.

        I believe WAAC players absolutely violate the “mythical spirit of the game” and bring overall negativity to what should be fun – a game, by turning it into some hyper-competitive cheap-exploit fest.

        • Ronin

          I’m not a tournament or WAAC player, but if that’s how people want to play the game, let them. It’s easier to associate yourself with people who share the same playstyles and opinions than try to force someone to conform. That’s why we don’t force golfers to play football.

      • Karru

        Well, that depends quite a bit. I care not if I face a WAAC player as long as he does have the following qualities, sportsmanship and logical brain. The same goes with fluff-bunnies.

        If you decide to act like an A-hole that ONLY cares for the win, no matter if the game is nothing but rule twisting and breaking it, I will gladly pack my figures and never play against you. I’d also like to add that if you are a WAAC player and want a match, you better have your army painted, well preferably, if you fight me with plastic then again, I’ll gladly pack my figures and lets try again once you got stuff painted.

        Also the “what’s fun for one isn’t for others” thing is completely right, and I respect that. I also expect that the one that wants to play against me realizes that I have the right to decline the game if I already know that I’m not going to enjoy it one bit.

        • ZeeLobby

          The thing is there is a fair amount of WAAC players who are logical and good sports. Most people who complain about them never go to tournaments and just have that one local competitive player whose a jerk.

          • Karru

            Precisely, but then again the definition of WAAC can differ from one person to the next. For me WAAC people are those that are beyond the highly competitive part. This is split into two groups, the ones that actually do work to earn their win, like research, play testing and skill and those that want to win because they want to win. In order to win, these people are willing to do anything and in some terrible scenarios they aren’t even good sports about it.

            Those that belong into the first group have my respect and if they want to practice for a tournament, I’ll gladly help them. I have met these people and they are amazing sports, they understand difference between casual and highly competitive players.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, I can see that. I guess, even going to tournaments, I see VERY little WAAC players (by your definition). Most are just competitive but friendly, which is an awesome segment of the game I hope GW doesn’t keep ignoring.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            However I don’t see your first example fits the definition of a WAAC player. I mean WAAC only fit your second statement. The first are just competitive and are fine. It’s the true WAAC that we worry about as how can that ever be fun, the idea you have to cheat, or rule lawyer and twist everything to gain a shallow victory with toys is what brings feared negativity. A competitive or hyper competitive person who at least follows rules and logic might bring a mean game, but they are not necessarily going to cross the line into childish behavior to just have a win, unless money is on the line i guess.

          • Brettila

            Weeeeeellll, sort of. However, I’ve dealt with some serious rectal warriors far from home; the worst of which when I wasn’t even playing. Just trying to keep a very experienced player honest against a young noob, who should not have been in the tournament.

  • pokemastercube .

    which battlesuit is the picture? cosit doesnt seem like the XV-8, unless it is the style that makes it not quite seem it

    • Mike Siegmund

      This is a joke right hard to tell online

    • Crevab

      Looks like an edited picture from Mass Effect, to me

    • SilentPony

      Its an edited picture from the Mass Effect 3 Grissom academy mission, where Jack is facing down against an Atlas.

      • pokemastercube .

        thx, the suit does look like it belongs in the tau. i really need to finish playing the trilogy, got the box set but havnt played much of the 1st one

  • William Jameson

    Considering you mention that there are various sections to the podcast, could you add timestamps to link to the start of each section in the YouTube description to allow listeners to skip to the part of the podcast relevant to their interests please?

  • Randy Randalman

    Sorry, but winning is the point of a tournament. It’s competition. A painting competition should be it’s own thing. When two fighters step into the ring, the point is to win. Their love of the history of the sport, what color shorts they are wearing, what new tattoo they got, and even footage of their practice sessions leading up to the event are irrelevant. It’s putting in the game plan to win that should matter above all else.

    SIDE NOTE: The same people whining about “WAAC” players who will take full advantage of every rule in existence to win will then praise a system like Warmachine where the miniatures themselves (and by extension, the hobby) are COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. What the miniature looks like, how it’s painted or posed have no bearing on the outcome of the game; even in casual settings outside of the tournament scene. The game could be played on blank bases with how the rules are set up, and that’s bad for the hobby.


    I love the history and hobby aspects of Warhammer/30k/40k/AoS, but in a tournament, they don’t really matter and shouldn’t really matter. Best painted should be entirely an separate, but rewarded category. How well an army is painted shouldn’t affect whether or not you come out on top in the W/L column.

    I hate the Death Star Hammer we’ve been privy to, but the recent FAQ’s – once official – have done a good job at curbing those. Even then, players will still find ways to exploit the rules. That’s what players do. Even those who claim to hate WAAC players will still look for the WAAC lists online and build from their inspiration.

    This whole “stand up against them” movement is absurd. Those players have the same right(s) to play a game with little plastic and resin toys as the fluff-nutters. Just to be spiteful, I hope they stand up against said fluff-nutters and push them all out of the game. Would that seem fair?

    • TenDM

      Yes, winning is the goal of the competitor but that doesn’t make pushing players to do whatever it takes to win a desirable goal of every single tournament. The point of two fighters stepping into the ring is deeper than simply winning. It’s about testing their abilities via competition. It’s about entertainment. That’s why sporting events have governing bodies constantly adjusting the rules. That’s why fights have weight divisions. It’s the difference between a competition and a fight.
      Nobody wants to see a tournament where every fight is just two guys racing to be the first to punch the other in the balls, and many of us feel like that’s the current state of the competitive scene. Not just bringing the best list but bringing lists that use technicalities to trivialise the on table strategic skill requirements.
      Warhammer has a big problem with poorly thought out rules that are ripe for exploitation and while that may not be the individual tournament player’s problem to solve it is an issue for anybody who wants to watch/play some good games or host a tournament that focuses on anything other than hyper min-maxed list building.
      If you want to play that way that’s fine, if you want to run a tournament that way that’s fine too, it’s just that right now the rules inadvertently pander to WAAC players. Coupled with the way information is shared/brainstormed online it makes WAAC players a very prominent, almost unavoidable group. That really sucks for just about every other type of player.

    • Sure

      The point of a tournament is to get a whole bunch of games in a day or two. It’s a dice game with toys (and I love it). It isn’t a sport or a trial. It’s a game. WAAC, in the context of tabletop gaming, is the mentality of a small person with even less to offer the rest of us.

    • Karru

      I’m going to point out few points here. You liked to use fighters as an example, let’s point out something here. If you compare this to miniature gaming, let’s do it. Why should the armies be painted? For the same reason that the game is televised, why it’s located in a large stadium with bright and fancy lights and why there are announcers and the like thrown into the mix. It’s entertainment. That’s one of the reasons why in things like football the players are in matching outfits and not in their own casual clothing.

      In tournament scene, painted armies are no different. I dare to say that majority of players would like to see two painted armies face off. To penalize players for not painting their armies is partially okay in my book. If they haven’t painted the army well, due to lack of skill for example, then they shouldn’t be penalized. If the army is nothing but plastic or it’s only primed, then they deserve to be penalized. Another viewpoint could be that they are rewarding those that took the time to make their army representable. They took hours to paint their armies, they should be rewarded for that.

      With regards to WAAC player hate, I don’t get it either. Respect others choices, if they want to play the way they do then go ahead. Of course the same goes the other way, if I refuse to play against these people then they shouldn’t complain. I’ve met some WAAC people out there, my only complain towards them is the fact that they have a hard time grasping a single concept. If something isn’t in the net list and I field it, I’m not trying to convince that Holocaust never happened. Again and again, I’ve met these people that start a 30 minute rant on the topic of “why I shouldn’t field something that’s not ‘the best’ option”, I couldn’t give a damn if my Dreadnought or Terminators aren’t top tier, I like the models, I’m going to use them.

      Basically I don’t hate WAAC players, I hate everyone that doesn’t respect others the way they play. If you want to break the game, twist the rules and play with unpainted stuff, then go ahead, I won’t play against you, but neither will I openly blame or hate you for it. If you start to blame or hate me because I refused to play against you then we might have a problem.

      • Shiwan8

        So, in the end you really do hate WAAC players because they do not respect other ways of enjoying the game. Rest of the scene hates WAACs, not because they play like they play but because they force their taste of games upon the rest of us. They hate us for not jumping their proverbial band wagon.

        • Karru

          hmm… Maybe I wrote something wrong. I don’t hate WAAC players. I don’t like to play against them that’s all. Not liking and hating something are very different, at least in my book. I’ve never enjoyed competitiveness in any way, be it miniature gaming or video games, so I avoid that as much as possible. This is why I don’t go to tournaments. Whe my club was still around, we had some highly competitive players that went to tournaments often. When a tournament was coming, they wanted to practice so they asked people to play against them. I would gladly accept the game since I knew that even if they wanted to practice for a tournament and thus went with highly competitive list that they were good people. They knew that I didn’t enjoy hardcore games as much as they did so even if they crushed me, they made sure that it was because of skill and not rule lawyering or twisting.

          This might also be the case of different opinion when it comes to the term “WAAC”. Yes, it means Win At All Cost, but this for me means to things. First, it’s the idea of list building and skill honing that makes them considered WAAC to some people, because they spend so much time going trough the rules, play testing and doing research for it. This they use to make the “optimal” list, the one that will win them the tournament. These are the people I respect. Then there are those that only care for the absolute destruction and crushing of their opponent trough rule breaking and non-sportsmanship like tendencies. These are the people I hate above everything.

          • Shiwan8

            Playing well, by the rules and in the spirit of the game is powergaming as far as I know. That is fine. The rule abusers and others that do not play the game but rather game the game are the WAACs. Most active tournament players are like that. Not all, most.

            It’s ok to hate the dishonest and crooked people. I do too.

    • Spacefrisian

      No man, you shouldnt bring OP lists to a tournament, and you cannot make a deal with your opponent to bring the cheesiest of all beardiest lists you can think up, even when that means using proxy supreme powers. Lore bunnies demand you to not do that…

      So about this own oppinion thing…

      • Shiwan8

        People can do all kinds of stupid sh*t. Does that mean that they should?

    • Dan Wilson

      The point of competition should be to improve yourself. And you learn far better from mistakes and defeats than you do from winning.

    • Shiwan8

      Since every game is a competition of sorts should we start punching kids to take them out of the competition while playing Hungry Hungry Hippos?

      • I like to ask myself “what would Archer do” in these circumstances. And the answer is throat punch that little nerd

        • Shiwan8

          Randy here seems to agree with that line of thinking. Also forcing those little nerds to play against him even though that throat punch is coming seems to be the way to go for him.

          I have no idea why “let’s force normal people to play against WAACs” is a good idea in his mind but hey, as a WAAC he must enjoy the game of “who chose the better codex” over a game of “who played it better”.

  • LordKrungharr

    Different means of prize distribution at tournaments other than the top three killer armies would help make that scene more likely to show a variety of armies and let people bring fun models they like. I thinks a glorious trophy rather than high dollar value swag for the winningest general is appropriate. Then you could have other trophies for different categories like best single detachment army, best no psykers army, best highlander army, stuff like that. Raffle prizes would give everyone a chance to recoup their entry fees including players who maybe need some help with their armies for whatever reason.

    I got no problem with recasts or even proxies so long as they have recognizable upgrades that are easy to spot. I wouldnt expect or demand people show me their forgeworld receipts.

    I didnt listen to the podcast cuz I hate them but figured my comments were somehow on the right subject.

  • Wrathmaw

    I’ve always been of a fan of a TO putting out a an Ethos or mission statement out with their event. While arguably ‘To have fun’ might have been an adequate statement in the past, it is clearly open to different and entirely justified opinions given the current state of 40k. ‘Balance’ or ‘Fairness’ are also terms that get thrown about by TOs, often without regard to how those concepts may be interpreted the people who play the game. A little communication goes along way. Be explicit in your intentions and expected outcomes and everyone should leave happy. Unless you are a sly and require a level of obfuscation to help you ‘win’.

  • Ronin

    Considering all the trash talking I’ve been seeing in the soccer/futbol tournaments, I wonder if TO’s would ok trashtalking and getting under their skin just to throw off your opponent lol.

  • Stealthbadger

    How it could have gone (also if I was writing it):-

    Drop Boxes:- No idea what this is, not listening to the dudebros to find out

    Drop Pod FAQ,:- presume these means the petal things. The consensus on here seems to be that its a dumb ruling. Discuss with opponent but it really seems to be in both players interests to ignore the petals as EVERYONE I’ve ever met has done previously.

    40K WAAC players:- Don’t mind, play how you want but I personally will avoid WAAC list players as I don’t think I’d have any fun. They’re cool to play other WAAC’ers though. Seems like there’s enough people who hate the WAAC crown on here that I won’t struggle to find am opponent.

    Recasters:- No judgment but I’m strongly against this. I don’t care about whether you think prices are too high or some bollocks about you’d never have bought it anyway (but clearly wanted it which is why you ‘bought’ it from China). Same as internet pirates (and real pirates Arrrrr) its taking someone else’s hard work and not rewarding them for it.

    • Aezeal

      I’m not pro recast.. but I’ve been looking into it to see if they had the Skullvane manse. If I could find that anywhere for a price equal to the original GW price.. I’d get it. If GW makes it again.. I’d get it. If I find it at a recaster I’d get it too.

      • Stealthbadger

        I agree that’s a tricky situation brought about by GW not wanting to supply the market. Possibly the numbers didn’t justify the costs but who knows.

        To be honest though my point is more aimed at the pirate/recast crowd who obtain readily available products.

  • Shiwan8

    Couple of points:

    – Because there is no way to easily make sure you have the latest rules or that when you buy the rules that they will not release a new edition for that book within a short period of time one can not really reasonably judge others that get a digital copy of a book. If FW would for example release an errata that would bring the second to latest book in line with the latest book then sure, you could be fairly sure that you do not buy a product that is obsolete within a week of purchase (which is usually less time than it takes for them to deliver the book). In that case whining about “rules in a tablet/phone” would actually make sense. At the moment it does not.
    That, and if you actually think it is reasonable to demand that who ever plays an army with more than one source brings all the FW books too…well, you can not lift that much paper even if you wanted so why do you expect that from others?

    – Chinacast is a thing for a very clear and good reason. Look at the FW ogryns, 19-22 pounds per model. Landraider with a TFC barrel costs about double of what the landraider costs. Half of the FW products cost is made out of brand name printed on the box and or assembly manual. People just do not want to pay money for FW ego boosts. It is the same model and usually as good or better quality cast than what FW sends you. If FW actually made a product that is so good that the extra cost would be reasonable then sure, whining about recasts would be reasonable. At the moment it is not.

    FW rules are simply better designs than GW ones and many of their models are also better looking than the even more cartoonish GW versions. Double cost “codices” are fine since they are just that much better. Doubling or tripling the cost for models is still just unreasonable.

    What was said about WAACs are points I agree with. The problem is that the powergaming rule lawyers are the most vocal bunch and mostly rule the scene. The irony is that the scene survives just fine without them but if the normal gamers stop playing the game the scene is dead within couple of years.

  • Was there some unseen schism that lead Kenny and Rob to drop off Forge the Narrative and switch to this show?

  • wibbling

    As a response to the title: it’s a game. Let people play it however they wish to. What those people shouldn’t do is complain what they don’t like it. There’s too much randomness involved.

  • SilentPony

    What’s the ironic part again? I’ve been listening to the podcast for…I dunno, 15-17 casts now. I’ve never picked up on an ‘ironic take’ on the rules when you talk about loaded-dice level of shenanigans.