Powergaming is the controversially unscrupulous practice of taking a a somewhat unbalanced aspect of a game and exploiting it. What this often does is to drastically narrow the scope of the game- once people start powergaming, the only defense is to powergame yourself in a way that counters them. What this results in is people that always use the same ‘units’, strategies, build orders, etc. In short, I hate it because it is BORING.
A great example of Powergaming is in the Tabletop game Warhammer 40,000. In Warhammer 40k, you have an ‘army’ which you have to build under a ‘force organization chart’. What this means is that you can only have so many units of Troops, Heavy Assault, Fast Attack, Elites, and HQ. Troops are grunts, Heavy Assault are the artillery/shooty stuff, and so forth. In general, investing your battle ‘points’ in a little of everything gives you a potentially versatile army no matter what race you are fielding. A lot of races also have factions which let you take more of a certain unit (because of their tactics or abundance). But what do people do? Powergame!
Often powergaming boils down to having maybe 10 models on the board, kitted out to the point where each is nigh-invincible, cutting a swath through the opposition. Lately it seems like one of the more potentially powergamer-friendly armies is the Necrons (big surprise they’re almost as popular as space marines now :rolleyes: ). All their guns can potentially wound, regardless of toughness, and all of their guns/most of their melee attacks can potentially thrash vehicles regardless of Armor Value. The reason I dislike these types of armies so much is because it forces you to build an ‘anti-necron’ army- they are very broken. And it is worse when a powergamer takes a broken army and fields something of the order of 2 Monoliths and a C’tan plus the minimum complement of troops/HQ.