Lets Chat: Competitive Versus Casual

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Dark Mechanicum

 

Talons x2

 

Raven Guard

 

Knights x2

 

Emperors Children

 

Daemons x2

 

Iron Warriors x2

 

Thousand Sons

 

Sons of Horus

[Vykes]

Iron Warriors X3, but legit I can't tell you why (I mean yes they all included tyrants and Pert), but that was the spread.  Add mechanicum to the initial list (they got half the games before the EC player subbed in mid-way through).  

 

And yes I know it's not a good sample size, and yes I know it's anecdotal: but it is relatively normal for my area.  Thus it's what I have to deal with as 'typical'.

Edited January 15, 2020 by Vykes

[MegaVolt87]

6-7 legion to non legion split, despite dupes seems relatively even though IMO.

[Panzer]

Aye, and definitely not SM 24/7.

[Bung]

 

 

ITC has a huge impact on rules. Chapter Approved is more or less published yearly to try and correct any issues found from tournament results, abuse of loopholes and the current meta. They can candy coat it with useless VDR rules or whatever, but the main purpose is to continually rebalance the game as a result of competitive play.

 

Which shouldnt be needed that much, if you had a more or less balanced game.

 

Let's be real though. That isn't how it works,, never will be, and furthermore: It's in neither the players nor the creator's interests to strive towards it.

 

You ever play an online RPG? Something like World of Warcraft? You know how players would always whine about the state of balance, and yet the more balanced it got the more people would complain about the "stale meta" and how there needs to be something new and fresh? So instead what that game (and every other MMORPG) does, is just continually change the balance, change the meta, for no real reason other than to keep people running on the treadmill. Adjusting to changes. Otherwise it just dries up- It gets stale.

 

That, is how it be.

 

That's one of the reasons I can never stick with an online game, for the record. It's the same reason I wouldn't ever take competitive Warhammer seriously.

 

 

I am not into MMOs of any sort, for various reasons. First grinding is nothing i could enjoy and the second is the people i met in that games make it even more  unpleasant as playing 40k neckbeards. Maybe i am to old for that crowd, but neither the typicall grinding of MMORPGs nor the community of minor crybabies that cant lose is in anyway appealing to me.

On the other side, you are right 40k reached a level of some video game companies selling an unfinished product that needs debugging.

 

Sorry give the people enough time to get their job done instead looking for cashflow and there wouldnt be that much need of fixing after release.

[Panzer]

 

On the other side, you are right 40k reached a level of some video game companies selling an unfinished product that needs debugging.

 

Sorry give the people enough time to get their job done instead looking for cashflow and there wouldnt be that much need of fixing after release. 

 

That's not what he said. He's talking about balance patches, not fixing unfinished games.

Also saying "give the people enough time to get their job done" is rather naive. Sure some games get rushed too much but I can assure you that modern games will always have bugs etc. that need fixing no matter how much time the developers would get. This is very offtopic now though.

[Bung]

 

 

On the other side, you are right 40k reached a level of some video game companies selling an unfinished product that needs debugging.

 

Sorry give the people enough time to get their job done instead looking for cashflow and there wouldnt be that much need of fixing after release. 

 

That's not what he said. He's talking about balance patches, not fixing unfinished games.

Also saying "give the people enough time to get their job done" is rather naive. Sure some games get rushed too much but I can assure you that modern games will always have bugs etc. that need fixing no matter how much time the developers would get. This is very offtopic now though.

 

 

Yes it is.

I have been long enough involved with 40k to see it go from "We dont need FaQs and Erratas cause everything we do is fine" (thats been around 4th Edition) to same day FaQ when the Codex hit the shelfs. 

Not much difference to much videogame companies and their patch pattern.

 

I stand by my opinion, get some good game designers with enough time to make a balanced game and if you want to insert something new to the game get some playtesting done so ot will fit into the game. 

When it works for other games, why shouldnt it work for GW? The only answer is loss of sales and unhappy shareholders. 

The other point is, keeping peopel that just cant dial back in your game design team doesnt help either. 

[jaxom]

I was always under the impression that HH was designed with a more narrative perspective in mind. That balance was really just there to make sure it was worth playing.

[DuskRaider]

I was always under the impression that HH was designed with a more narrative perspective in mind. That balance was really just there to make sure it was worth playing.

It is... was. It seems since the Prospero book that it's gone in a very different direction from when I played.

[Vermintide]

I am not into MMOs of any sort, for various reasons. First grinding is nothing i could enjoy and the second is the people i met in that games make it even more  unpleasant as playing 40k neckbeards. Maybe i am to old for that crowd, but neither the typicall grinding of MMORPGs nor the community of minor crybabies that cant lose is in anyway appealing to me.

On the other side, you are right 40k reached a level of some video game companies selling an unfinished product that needs debugging.

 

Sorry give the people enough time to get their job done instead looking for cashflow and there wouldnt be that much need of fixing after release.

I don't disagree- It's not the direction I WANT this game to have gone in. But it is, after all, a product sold and run by a commercial entity. It doesn't matter too much what crusty old narrative players like us think. They have to shift units.

 

As Panzer said, you do misunderstand my point. My point isn't that they're releasing something unfinished which they then have to fix later, my point is that it's intentionally rebalanced on entirely arbitrary grounds. The changes themselves are almost irrelevant, the point is that it gives the players a reason to alter their list, buy a couple new models, and gives the podcasts something to discuss.

 

I know this argument is itself hotly contested, but honestly I think it's plain to see, and GW doesn't even deny it. If they didn't continually refresh the books, the rules, the balance, the player base would decline, and more importantly so would sales. Hence why I compared it to MMORPGs- The same reason is why World of Warcraft releases a new expansion like clockwork every other year. As soon as people get used to the meta, and work out the "optimal" build for their character, they find there's nothing left to do. Nothing to work towards.

 

Case in point? Age of Sigmar.

 

(Aside: If you knew me personally you'd know I'm a giant commie and I hate most practices of big business and unrestricted capitalism in general; especially so in the videogame industry. But the difference is the videogame industry is the biggest entertainment industry on Earth. Companies like EA and Blizzard already make billions upon billions of dollars every year, so criticising their business practices is much more valid. Games Workshop, on the other hand, is tiny. Seriously tiny. Therefore, I do tend to let them off the hook a little bit, because they're the kind of company who could very realistically crash and burn if they don't do everything they can to keep money coming in.)

Edited January 17, 2020 by Vermintide

[Bung]

 

I am not into MMOs of any sort, for various reasons. First grinding is nothing i could enjoy and the second is the people i met in that games make it even more  unpleasant as playing 40k neckbeards. Maybe i am to old for that crowd, but neither the typicall grinding of MMORPGs nor the community of minor crybabies that cant lose is in anyway appealing to me.

On the other side, you are right 40k reached a level of some video game companies selling an unfinished product that needs debugging.

 

Sorry give the people enough time to get their job done instead looking for cashflow and there wouldnt be that much need of fixing after release.

I don't disagree- It's not the direction I WANT this game to have gone in. But it is, after all, a product sold and run by a commercial entity. It doesn't matter too much what crusty old narrative players like us think. They have to shift units.

 

As Panzer said, you do misunderstand my point. My point isn't that they're releasing something unfinished which they then have to fix later, my point is that it's intentionally rebalanced on entirely arbitrary grounds. The changes themselves are almost irrelevant, the point is that it gives the players a reason to alter their list, buy a couple new models, and gives the podcasts something to discuss.

 

I know this argument is itself hotly contested, but honestly I think it's plain to see, and GW doesn't even deny it. If they didn't continually refresh the books, the rules, the balance, the player base would decline, and more importantly so would sales. Hence why I compared it to MMORPGs- The same reason is why World of Warcraft releases a new expansion like clockwork every other year. As soon as people get used to the meta, and work out the "optimal" build for their character, they find there's nothing left to do. Nothing to work towards.

 

Case in point? Age of Sigmar.

 

(Aside: If you knew me personally you'd know I'm a giant commie and I hate most practices of big business and unrestricted capitalism in general; especially so in the videogame industry. But the difference is the videogame industry is the biggest entertainment industry on Earth. Companies like EA and Blizzard already make billions upon billions of dollars every year, so criticising their business practices is much more valid. Games Workshop, on the other hand, is tiny. Seriously tiny. Therefore, I do tend to let them off the hook a little bit, because they're the kind of company who could very realistically crash and burn if they don't do everything they can to keep money coming in.)

 

 

I still disagree.

I play non GW Tabletops, especccially after 7th was released. My point is if you watch other miniature companies, other business models work too.

Corvus Belli with its Infintiy game is the best counter point to GWs business practice.

The game isnt 100% perfect, but in terms of balance and models used is way superior than 40k today.

The main difference is simply they are not a stock corporation, dont have to please shareholders and can live with a smaller growth rate.

Look what being a stock corporation did to Boing. 

[Kolgrim DeathHowl]

Well good news I found a local game shop about 20 mins away, they told me to just bring what I have and come meet people and you can see how to play. Going to go one of these Fridays they do 40k stuff see how it goes. I don't have a full army painted but I figure I'll just bring what I do have and see how it goes. More about learning how to play the game and meeting new folks. Just have to make sure I got someone to watch my Grandfather around that time is my only restraint.

[Vermintide]

I still disagree.

I play non GW Tabletops, especccially after 7th was released. My point is if you watch other miniature companies, other business models work too.

Corvus Belli with its Infintiy game is the best counter point to GWs business practice.

The game isnt 100% perfect, but in terms of balance and models used is way superior than 40k today.

The main difference is simply they are not a stock corporation, dont have to please shareholders and can live with a smaller growth rate.

Look what being a stock corporation did to Boing.

I mean that's fair, power to you. But in that case it's only a matter of how niche you want to go before you find the balance that suits you. 40k is the biggest and most mainstream tabletop game, if you want to find players easily then the latest edition of 40k is what you go looking for. That's the compromise we have to accept really- If GW was still the tiny and relatively unknown store chain it was when I was a kid, then sure, maybe we would be playing 3.5ed with perfect balance right now; but the chances are half of us wouldn't be playing at all, because we wouldn't know what it was.

 

I mean 40k is mainstream enough nowadays I don't have to explain it to people when they ask what I'm into. 10 years ago I would still have to awkwardly explain I basically like toy soldiers

[Bung]

If GW was still the tiny and relatively unknown store chain it was when I was a kid, then sure, maybe we would be playing 3.5ed with perfect balance right now; but the chances are half of us wouldn't be playing at all, because we wouldn't know what it was.

 

Well, they still act like some small unknown store chain 

My favorite example:

Instead of trying to keep third party bits producers they should have embraced them. 

Give them a logo like "Designed for (insert favorite GW game here)" and let them make "official" shoulder pads etc. would have helped with production capacities etc. and opened alot of design space.

Instead you got primaris and "you can only use out of the box models with our rules".

Something other companies do better. 

 

Most new people have been brought into GW games through friends and maybe some through video games like Dawn of War butplayers always been mostly recruited through other players and a more fair game would help more with recruitment and long time motivation in my eyes.

I have seen enough beginner players with their lovely painted miniatures to quit cause they got anhilated in turn 3 by a grey plastic "flavor of the month" army.

 

I dont say they dont need to grow but i think a long term strategy with less growth rate of the shares in favor of a fair game with more longtime motivation would be better. 

[mughi3]

I have seen enough beginner players with their lovely painted miniatures to quit cause they got anhilated in turn 3 by a grey plastic "flavor of the month" army.

That sounds like a poor teacher, when I demo ANY game system I never try to smash the new/interested player like I would an experienced friend.

 

It naturally turns them off to the game by giving them a poor experience. you end up with short sighted lack of community building by doing that.

 

The most important question is always "did you have fun? " after I run them through a battle.

[Panzer]

 

I have seen enough beginner players with their lovely painted miniatures to quit cause they got anhilated in turn 3 by a grey plastic "flavor of the month" army.

That sounds like a poor teacher, when I demo ANY game system I never try to smash the new/interested player like I would an experienced friend.

 

It naturally turns them off to the game by giving them a poor experience. you end up with short sighted lack of community building by doing that.

 

The most important question is always "did you have fun? " after I run them through a battle.

 

 

Indeed. We had a 'That Guy' in our FLGS that I saw once play a High Elf gunline army in a demo game against a kid. Of course he got told off by everyone else afterwards but save to say I never saw that kid again.

[brother_b]

All games are competitive, not all games or tournaments. That’s the big difference.

 

Tournament vs. non-tournament is the real question, and why do tournaments drive this game? Not sure. Exposure?

 

At the end of the day it’s whatever floats your boat.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Yeah the term casual can be misleading.

[Vykes]

All games are competitive, not all games or tournaments. That’s the big difference.

 

Tournament vs. non-tournament is the real question, and why do tournaments drive this game? Not sure. Exposure?

 

At the end of the day it’s whatever floats your boat.

 

-shrugs- I agree with the conclusion but I fundamentally disagree with your premise.  Not all games are competitive, but competitive minded individuals often seek to turn those situations into a competition*.  

 

Though at the end of the day, meh, whateves does it for ya. 

 

Personality differences can be a weird thing.

 

*For Lupercal's sake, my God-mother is so competitive that EVERYTHING becomes 'competitive'. Shopping?  Got it done first, she wins.  Parking?  if someone's in the same lot and she gets a closer spot, she wins.   Cleaning?  If it's done first (and more thorough) then she wins.  She will actively cheat to 'win'.  

 

None of those are inherent competitive acts to normal people.  I will not bring it up with her, as she insists that's the 'losing attitude'.  She won't :cuss clip the branches from a dead tree in her back yard when the neighbors want her too, because that means 'they win'.  Win what?  I don't know.  

Edited January 26, 2020 by Vykes

[mughi3]

 

 

I have seen enough beginner players with their lovely painted miniatures to quit cause they got anhilated in turn 3 by a grey plastic "flavor of the month" army.

That sounds like a poor teacher, when I demo ANY game system I never try to smash the new/interested player like I would an experienced friend.

 

It naturally turns them off to the game by giving them a poor experience. you end up with short sighted lack of community building by doing that.

 

The most important question is always "did you have fun? " after I run them through a battle.

 

 

Indeed. We had a 'That Guy' in our FLGS that I saw once play a High Elf gunline army in a demo game against a kid. Of course he got told off by everyone else afterwards but save to say I never saw that kid again.

 

As it so happens something like this kinda came up with the regular group last night.

 

I played a game of heavy gear because one of our regulars really likes the game. so I built a small army to play it, then I did a game of 8th ed 40K against the new BA rules. (BA won but I took them down to 6 models by the end and we both had fun).

 

the guy playing the BA only plays 40K and only since the end of 7th so we discussed learning a few other systems to broaden his options. one of our regulars who is in the same boat talks a lot about playing other games (and even learns the rules) but never does build armies for anything else(he has spent tons of money on GW building 5 different large 40K armies, the cost of even one of his knights could have actually been used to build an entire force for one of the other systems). pointed out the great white elephant in the room-GW is the easiest game to get gameplay for because it is the most common.

 

that led to the conversation about the community building problem our gaming hobby has. many companies make fantastic minis and rules sets that are far better than 40K but people don't know about them because of the reach GW has. this causes people to give GW a pass on things they would never put up with from any other company. other games curb the problems GW has with bloat, rules imbalance, mechanics problems and so forth that makes learning a system far more tolerable to new players (and often times far cheaper). In point of fact I have never seen any other system who's forums/communities are so filled with debate about game balance, rules interpretations, and player behavior problems

 

 

Most of us learned 40K because somebody took the time to teach us about the game. some of us were attracted by the lore/books, the quality of the minis or even the video games, but we had to learn to play at some point. growing the community is thus directly joined with how we the current players view and transmit the hobby to others.

 

 

As a war game there is always a competitive part of the game. somebody has to win and somebody has to loose. however it is also social activity. I don't go to the shop with all the minis I have taken to time to build and carefully paint to play a game I don't get enjoyment out of. if I didn't want to enjoy it as such I could just stay home and play videogames online instead.

 

I actually do not enjoy games where I just steamroll my opponent. even being on the winning side it isn't fun(even if it is killing elder ) there is no risk, there is no challenge, there is no mutual enjoyment. the game needs to give both players the opportunity to win under a clear rules set and a proper player attitude towards the game. it is one of the reasons why I avoid the tournament like scenes as I find it brings out the worst kind of players or the worst attitudes in people that are detrimental to the community.

 

So the game to me is both competitive as a war game but also casual because I want a pleasurable social experience. I don't find the latter with a certain segment of our specific community in the 40K game.

 

PS. panzer the new BAs are very good in CC but I did scare him a bit with my ironclads, I think he may be adding some to his army now.

Edited January 26, 2020 by mughi3