Competitve over leisure games...

[Bastion5]

I just wanted to take a pole on how many people prefer playing WM and Hordes competively and leisurely. you can post replies below just giving a brief explaination:p:p:p

[Amon]

I like to be competitive in leisurely games. :)

I've never played in a tournament but my friends and I aren't afraid to pull out the big guns against each other either.

[whitekong]

We always considered our little group to just play for fun, but we played this year at gen-con and we won more games than we lost. You can have fun and still be competitive.

[Temp22]

I think the competitiveness makes the game fun. I play to win, but when I lose I am still having fun doing it, just not as much. ;)

[Raven Abaddon]

I play for leisure.

No offense to competitive players out there but playing against/general socializing/being seen with competitive players is quite a pain.

Arguing over a sliver of LOS, grinding through Stallmachine and fraternizing with gamers that just don't understand my "I don't care what you did the other day" facial expression just isn't my cup of tea.

I'd rather paint.

Like I said, no offense.

[Alikar]

I'm too completive to enjoy playing commutatively. So I try to play leisurely. Mostly though I end up not playing since it frustrates me to no end when I make a mistake.

[MagnustheJust]

yes.

I do not really care about the format, or whether or not it is competitive or leisurely. I just like to play...

[Valander]

I, and the usual group I play with, play to have fun. "The objective of the game is to win. The point is to have fun." That's the motto I go by.

Sure, we play competitively--we don't fudge rules, dice, measurements, etc., and don't often offer or take take-backs (a little lenient right now with Mk II). At the same time, though, we don't constantly nitpick stuff or play with time limits and the like.

I think it's possible to play the game well (i.e., competitively) without being That Guy mentioned in No Quarter way back. Of course, that's probably one of the reasons why I generally play with a group of friends at my house; I always seem to run into That Guy when I go to any game store to play, so I avoid them.

[Pseudog]

I really don't know. I play competitively, yes. But don't build lists that way. So I guess that puts me to the "leisure game" department :P

[Demeritus]

Leisurely is the main way I do it. The people I game with are laid back so it's more fun.

[necronomitron]

I play for the sake of playing. I try to win, so in that regard it's undeniably competitive. But I love seeing how my list interacts with itself and with my opponents'.

[Techcasualty]

I just wanted to take a pole

....that's what she said?


I perfer a nice mix. I guess at our LGS it is mostly a friendly game, but everyone plays to the best of their ability. Small things get shrugged off (damn it I moved him here instead of here), but not big things like "oops I forgot my feat"

[CT GAMER]

Warma3hine ur s3rious bzness111

That is all.

[Yertle4]

The only difference between competitive and casual games for me is no takebacks and no giving ideas to your opponent.

Otherwise it's about the same - ie. leisurely.

[-Vinsent-]

"The objective of the game is to win. The point is to have fun."

This, a thousand times this.

I think it's too bad that "competitive" often has a bad name. I want my opponent to be trying their utmost to win, bringing everything they can to the table to beat me, and I hope that I can do the same. This however doesn't mean it cant be fun, doesn't mean that you nit pick each and every movement and die roll. There is playing to win, and there is being a jerk, I don't feel one necessitates the other.

[galonso]

I play competitively testing for tournaments and participating in them. During league and casual play, Ill play for fun and try out new things.

[Lord of Death]

This, a thousand times this.

I think it's too bad that "competitive" often has a bad name. I want my opponent to be trying their utmost to win, bringing everything they can to the table to beat me, and I hope that I can do the same. This however doesn't mean it cant be fun, doesn't mean that you nit pick each and every movement and die roll. There is playing to win, and there is being a jerk, I don't feel one necessitates the other.

More this.

I only play for fun. However the key workd there is play. Playing the game. As the quote from Not Dice says, "The objective of the game is to win..." If you're aren't trying to win you aren't really playing the game.

[Cambeul]

Warma3hine ur s3rious bzness111

That is all.

I thought I logged into World of Warcraft forums for a sec.

I prefer Leisure games over Competitive games (or I guess Tournaments).

It is just more fun for the people playing, not worrying over mm of measurment, or you went over 30secs of your timed turn.

Though once in a while I do enjoy the occassional Tourney just to see where I stand.

[Gorbad]

Is there that much of a difference? I suppose it depends on how tournaments/events are run where you play. The WM/H tournaments I've been to over here have been fairly relaxed and very friendly affairs. No asshatterie, plenty of time to socialise, and just generally good fun.

[DoctorEvil]

Wait a minute......Warmachines and Hordes is a GAME???? That changes everything!!!!

:)

[LAWwaldo]

If you aren't playing to win then you aren't playing the game.

[saxondog]

We always considered our little group to just play for fun, but we played this year at gen-con and we won more games than we lost. You can have fun and still be competitive.

I think were a little more competitive than Whitekong realizes. None of us are afraid to break out cheese once in a while. Usually before we head off to a tourney. After the tourney we go back to playing whatever the hell we want.


SFK

[CT GAMER]

People are confusing the issue.

"having fun" and "playing for fun" are not the same thing.

You can play in a league game, a national tournament, a play test game, a campaign, or a pick up game at your house and "have fun" in any of them. The format of the game or the associated level of competitiveness attached to any of them does not change this.

"playing for fun" is a whole different thing. Playing for fun means agreeing to play regardless of the level of competitiveness or the balance of said competition/challenge because the act of playing itself is the fun part. Playing for fun is agreeing to play any role required of any specific game/scenario (attacker, defender, outnumbered, surrounded, ambushed, tag teamed, etc.) because the act of playing the game, any game is fun.

Examples of "playing for fun":

1. Playing a scenario in which you are outnumbered and surrounded because it will be cinematic and challenging even though you will most likely lose and you know this.

2. Playing out a campaign game even though you have already lost the campaign based upon campaign mechanics/mathematics because finishing the story the campaign staretd makes sense.

3. Playing an army based upon established fluff and theme even if it isn't the most competitive force.

etc, etc.

"Playing for fun" is playing for the sake of moving models and rolling dice. It is for immersing yourself in the game experience itself usually through the setting of a game, a scenario, theme lists, or to play a given role (attacker, defender, ambushee, doomed patrol, etc., etc.) as your primary motivation. It isnt focused on everything having to be fair and balanced or wins and loses (though you will try to win, it inst the most important motivation and may be impossible in some scenarios, etc.). It is putting fluff and setting and story and cinematics above putting a notch in your gaming belt... It is saying "Hey wouldn't it be cool to see what happened if..."

You can "have fun" "playing for fun".

they are compatible but not the same thing...

Someone who says "you have already beaten me in the campaign so i quit" rather then playing a campaign out to the completion of the story(which is what a campaign is) is not "playing for fun" He was focused on the competition("winning and losing": the focus of competitive formats) and not focused on "telling a story" ( the point of a campaign). If the evolving story of a campaign dictates that you are to be the loser overwhelmed in the end then you should still play it out because that is your role as the story has developed and you went into the creation of siad story (the campaign) knowing this was a possible end to the story. If you went into it focused on the winning and losing itself as the goal of playing then you have missed the boat...

People who say "that scenario favor you I wont play it" are not "playing for fun". People who say "my army doesnt defend well so I don't want to play against x" are not "playing for fun" Such people can't seem to "have fun" while "playing for fun".

Likewise in a league or tournament people can "have fun" playing competitive games but should not be "playing for fun". they should be coming trying to win and focused on giving each opponent the most competitive game possible. That is the point of a competitive format. IF you don't come to a competitive event (tournies and leagues) intending to play a competitively as possible and trying to win as many games a possible you are diluting the functioning of the event.


many problems between gamers happen when people confuse the issue of "playing for fun" and "having fun" and/or try to play competitively or 'for fun" in the wrong format/environment.

[Jestor]

In every game I play, I play to win.
Winning means you must be competing.
In every game I play, I play to have fun and try and make the game enjoyable for my opponent as well.
Playing is fun.

I think the arguement you were looking for is more of a "rules lawyer vs. casual" type arguement. If that's really what you are looking for then my response becomes "I am a casual player" if that's not what you were looking for then the answer is "Yes" or "Both".

[Nion]

I suppose the most accurate statement would be: I play for fun, but I play to win.

[Mithodiel]

In every game I play, I play to win.
Winning means you must be competing.
In every game I play, I play to have fun and try and make the game enjoyable for my opponent as well.
Playing is fun.


This is my philosophy as well. I believe that there is no point to playing a game if you are not trying to win it.

But "playing to win" does not necessarily have to mean "being a jerk". My free time is limited, and my goal is to play as many games of WM/H as possible within my allowed free time. Being a jerk runs counter to that goal, since it decreases the number of people willing to play me. Instead, I strive to be both a gracious winner and a gracious loser.

It also helps that my sense of self-worth is not dependent on whether I can beat another person in a game of toy soldiers. :cool:

-- Mith

[WarDog]

I tend to play what I like, figure-wise. If it wins, great, if it doesn't, I don't really care. I play for leisure, not for competition.

[Haight]

There is no difference in how i play from casual play to tourney play. I play to win, but am gracious and conciliatory when I lose. To me the only difference is how much stuff like "take backs" and "do overs" my opponent can do. Leisure ? As many as you want unless it unbalances the game. Competitive ? Sorry. None. :)


-- haight

[thecsharian]

The only difference I find in the two 'formats' is that at some competative events there are people I try really hard not to lose to.


From my perspective, I always play competatively... I just don't care for being WAAC.
-and if I can't beat you with one hand tied behind my back... then I don't deserve to beat you. :p

[Laserbees]

There is no difference in how i play from casual play to tourney play. I play to win, but am gracious and conciliatory when I lose. To me the only difference is how much stuff like "take backs" and "do overs" my opponent can do. Leisure ? As many as you want unless it unbalances the game. Competitive ? Sorry. None. :)


-- haight

110% agree here.

Also, sore winners are just as bad, if not worse than sore losers.

[CptCaine]

well thats casue Haight knows that nemo really was going to kill Stryker ;)


-CC

[Haight]

well thats casue Haight knows that nemo really was going to kill Stryker ;)


-CC


:D You goin' to TC this year Ross ?

-- Haight

[paddyalexander]

Any game where people play against each other is competitive, be it a wargame, boardgame, cardgame or sport. What's important is that all particapents have fun while taking part.

Why can't I play a competitive game in my lesiure time?

[Samhordes]

I play for a good laugh and some fun. Although saying that I do tournaments and every now and then I get a 3rd place prize/position along some very competitive players. It's good to know that even a casual player who is not too clued up with all the rules most of the time, can still attain some level of achievement in competitive Privateer Press events. Via being aggressive with my moves but at the same time enjoying the company of the player and have a good chat/laugh whilst playing.

Regards
Sam
http://gutsngears.libsyn.com (http://gutsngears.libsyn.com)

[PPS_Mod:Polar_Bear]

While I have no problems running a tournament, you wouldn't catch me dead playing in one.

Friendly games all the way for me.

PB

[Mitch]

I hate competitive games, just watching the other guy just deny / fun suck you to death. Maybe Im just a terrible player (probably), but I much more prefer the just for fun games.

[Emperor's_Spork]

I prefer the competitive environment of fully painted by the involved players, but I often find we play more leisurely with unpainted, un-assembled, proxies and models painted by other people. And that's generally fun enough for day to day.

It is, however, very healthy to aspire to being more competitive with fully self-painted armies, in any table top minis game.

Note, nothing has to be "pro-painted" or any of that hoopla, just evidence shown that you're fully immersed in the whole hobby, not just one part of it. But I do accept that we can't always play at that elite level.

;)

edit: I would gouge my friends eye out before I used unpainted figs in a big tournament. I would gouge my own eyes out before I used un-assembled figs!

[CT GAMER]

I prefer the competitive environment of fully painted by the involved players, but I often find we play more leisurely with unpainted, un-assembled, proxies and models painted by other people. And that's generally fun enough for day to day.

It is, however, very healthy to aspire to being more competitive with fully self-painted armies, in any table top minis game.

Note, nothing has to be "pro-painted" or any of that hoopla, just evidence shown that you're fully immersed in the whole hobby, not just one part of it. But I do accept that we can't always play at that elite level.

;)

edit: I would gouge my friends eye out before I used unpainted figs in a big tournament. I would gouge my own eyes out before I used un-assembled figs!

Is this the cue for someone to throws out the "paint Nazi" defense?

I kid, I kid...;)

[Nalik]

I like to be competitive in leisurely games. :)

I've never played in a tournament but my friends and I aren't afraid to pull out the big guns against each other either.

That sums up our group as well except we do regularly play in tournaments. I guess in some ways we're leisurely challenged.

[-Vinsent-]

I hate competitive games, just watching the other guy just deny / fun suck you to death. Maybe Im just a terrible player (probably), but I much more prefer the just for fun games.

I don't mean to call you out specifically here Mitch, so don't take this personally but I hate this mentality.

Why is competitive == watching the other guy deny / fun suck you to death?

What about playing to win means that the other person can't have fun? This mentality of don't be competitive you wont have any fun just boggles my mind.

Every time I read/hear this kind of thing, it speaks to me of, "Hes not playing the way I want to play, Im going to take my ball and go home." And it just bothers me.

[carnage4u]

Warmachine/Hordes are quick fast aggressive games.

I dont really see a difference to my play style whether or not it is in a tournament or a playing a game on my game stores weekend night game day.

I do prefer Scenerio games vs caster kill games, because some armies/lists can just take too long to kill the caster.. Vlad hording focus type players, can make me have the game just go tooooo long if the only way to win is caster kill.

People should be just playing to have fun no matter what environment is.


One of my pet peeves is when a bad player loses to someone that goes to a lot of tournaments, and then complains, they lost because they other person took a competitive list. Not the fact they played a horrible game, and a 3rd grader could have beaten them.

[notsoevil]

Tournaments bring out the worst people with the worst attitudes in this game. It has nothing to do with the lists or what models/tactics they're using. It is their demeanor while playing that ruins a game.

Always play to have fun. Always play to win. But be NICE when you play .. not a lot of people seem to have that part down.

As far as lists (competitive versus casual) -- tournies are dominated by meta and net-decked lists. Seems boring to me. I play with what looks good and what I've hopefully have painted up. When I played in tournaments, I did well -- but over time just found them to be drab and boring.

[allistorpreist]

My competative games are friendly and my friendly games are competative. While I will admit that the dials get tweaked depending on the venue and purpose, I really don't go into any game with a totally different mindset.

[Jestor]

tournies are dominated by meta and net-decked lists.

I am glad I don't play in this kind of environment. I goto tournies all over New England and if I have ever played two different players using the same list I can't remember.

To the others who are talking about other people sucking the fun out of it, I don't know what to tell you. In my time around different tournies I ahve found my fun is based off of what I do. If some guy is running around dragging the game out, I find new and inventive things to do. At the end of the day, the game is what YOU make it, no matter who you are playing against.

[Skaramush]

My friends dont really have enough models to match my lists for a competitive play but when do play i do play aggressively but with regard for my opponent obviously. So no silly lists like bane knights galore which i didnt bother to build.

[Weaselcreature]

I mostly play leisurely with my friends, but we play to win, although not necessarily with min/maxed lists all the time. I've had some great times losing games and winning them, and having fun is all that matters.

I did play in one tourney (SoCal Smackdown!) and had a blast, and I didn't run into That Guy there at all...everyone was cool and laid back.

[Ishtar]

My friends and I have this problem: we all say we are playing leisurely, for fun, but we are all such competitive people that we end up taking each game way too seriously and the loser ends up sad. This is compounded I think by the tendency of this game to make both players feel like they are losing/at great risk throughout the whooole game. It's really too bad because we are relatively new to the game, and a lot of players only have 3 or 4 games under their belt. And feel that they have lost every one of them.

Do other people have this problem of wanting to play "for fun" but then finding that competitive streak rise up in them once the models hit the table?

[General Nemo]

As much as I like tournaments, my best games are those with friends. Nothing beats the sound of the entire store yelling and cheering over a stupid dice roll, and that just doesn't happen at tournaments here.

This doesn't affect how I play, however. Go for the throat, always!

[seraphsong]

My LGS is a very competetive environment, even in out "casual" games. Tournaments only hit once every other month, but you can find people playing Warmahordes every day. Looking at the tables you'll see the same nasty lists you'd see in any tournament. You'll hear people nit-picking over LOS, how far a model can actually move, and complaining that their dice are against them.

That said you'll also see people with lists that you'd never see at any convention. You'll even see those lists win games. Come in every other month and you'll see that list get third place in a tournament of 16 players.

This may seem off-putting to a lot of players, but that's how we roll. You'll also hear a lot of joking, smack-talking, laughing, and the occasional rim-shot on the sound system when someone gets a particularly good zinger off on someone.

What it comes down to is that we play hard, and we play to win. We bring out the nasty combos, and we bring out the models that we like to play. We play like we've got a pair, and have a damn good time doing it.

My only real complaint is that warmachine players refuse to play on tables that have water on them. They will "veto" the terrain piece, and complain that it is to much of a hindrance to jacks, and shouldn't be allowed. That and people who turtle up in a corner and shoot you to death.... Page 5, fools. Page 5.

[Nalik]

Do other people have this problem of wanting to play "for fun" but then finding that competitive streak rise up in them once the models hit the table?

All the time in our group. Even when we're "testing" new lists we're still very competitive.

[fromager]

I play exclusively leisure games now, I live 70 miles from the nearest LGS. This gives me the opportunity to build terrain, play test new stuff and drink while playing (house rule is that he who p***** out must deal with whatever situation he finds his army in when he awakens). Tournaments are okay, but people take things WAY too seriously.

[Mitch]

I don't mean to call you out specifically here Mitch, so don't take this personally but I hate this mentality.

Why is competitive == watching the other guy deny / fun suck you to death?

What about playing to win means that the other person can't have fun? This mentality of don't be competitive you wont have any fun just boggles my mind.

Every time I read/hear this kind of thing, it speaks to me of, "Hes not playing the way I want to play, Im going to take my ball and go home." And it just bothers me.


I guess really Im trying to say that if the other player is a "nazi" about everything or just rules lawyers me, I find the game less interesting, because it feels as if they are running the game, and Im just there to watch them practice for the upcoming tournament.

As privateer mentions in the books, freedom of information and fun having are a must. But if Im about to make a move and the other guy doesnt say, hey, if you move there, I'll have you with this or, thats a pow XX damage, are you sure you wanna do that, how else will a "new-ish" player learn.

Thats the leisure game I like to play, where if you are about to do something dumb, the other guy lets you re-think for a sec. And vice versa for his dumb moves. Its very important to stick to the rules, I just think when the game is more casual, you can quickly learn how to be more competitive, rather than having your rear handed to you while you sit back and go smoke one.

/end rant
for vinsent, no harm taken, I am regularly bad at self expression. Im sure I've said something else thats the total opposite of what im trying to say! :O
One of the most fun games I played I lost, but it was so thematic and epic. We played casual, I even had one person surrender because to play out would have taken another grueling hour. He would have won, all I had was eSorcha vs his 2 heavies, Kaelyssa (spelling?) and a ghost sniper. So to sum it up, win or lose, l prefer the leisure games.

[fromager]

double post, sorry

[-Vinsent-]

I guess really Im trying to say that if the other player is a "nazi" about everything or just rules lawyers me, I find the game less interesting, because it feels as if they are running the game, and Im just there to watch them practice for the upcoming tournament.

As privateer mentions in the books, freedom of information and fun having are a must. But if Im about to make a move and the other guy doesnt say, hey, if you move there, I'll have you with this or, thats a pow XX damage, are you sure you wanna do that, how else will a "new-ish" player learn.

Thats the leisure game I like to play, where if you are about to do something dumb, the other guy lets you re-think for a sec. And vice versa for his dumb moves. Its very important to stick to the rules, I just think when the game is more casual, you can quickly learn how to be more competitive, rather than having your rear handed to you while you sit back and go smoke one.



Maybe its just a difference in terminology for me then. I honestly feel like I'm more competitive if I tell my opponent about "hey are you sure you want to stop there, I have a charge lane on you with 'Roudy." or whatever.

I want to play an opponent who is smarter than me, and doesn't make mistakes. A trap should be "I have no good options, I have to move here." Not "I guess Ill move here, oh crap I didnt know Caine could do that!!?" I would rather allow take-backs and give out information. That way we both become better players, and we both have a stronger game afterwords. And hell its just more fun.

I don't ever want to win, tourney or whatever because my opponent made a mistake. I want to win because I pushed him or her into a corner. Because I manipulated the field and positioning to get the upper hand. Not because he didn't move his model 0.02" to the left.

Maybe I'm weird but I would allow a takeback at a tourney, and I generally let my opponent decide if I have LOS or not if its questionable. I want to win because I out "strategy-ed" (I made up a word!) you, not out memorized the rulebook you.

[allistorpreist]

You know, long ago one of the posters on the Games-Workshop boards posted a long rant about the difference between playing to win vs playing to make your opponent lose. I wonder if I can find that again, it was pretty brilliant.

It really highlighted playing to win, but still having sportsmanship, and how calling people's lists cheese was often also bad sportsmanship. He really covered the whole thing well. I thought it was Blood Angel Brother Edward, but that looks to be wrong.

Ah, well, I will keep looking and less eloquently posting my thoughts on the subject.

[SoulReclaimer]

Leisure. Too much real life stuff in a day and week to ever take this game too seriously.

Lots of fun and WM/Hordes never lets me down

[Mitch]

I very much agree vinsent