Switch Theme:

Confused about "you 'learn to play' types"  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Vallejo, CA

I've seen this kind of thing before, but I've noticed a serious uptick in this kind of thing very recently, and it's making me genuinely confused.

More than usual, recently, I've been noticed people taking umbrage at the idea that they're "doing something wrong", and that tactical advice is nothing more than people saying "learn to play the game", and that's a bad thing.

Yes, it is certainly possible to say that something is the way it is because people just aren't smart enough to see whatever voodoo magic is required to make it somehow work in my mind. That's obviously unhelpful. It is, however, possible to deconstruct the rules to figure out how to make things work. A player will get a lot more out of a difficult or weak unit if they play it properly than if they play it poorly - enough, I'd argue, to make lower-quality units still worth taking with a little bit of creativity. And if one isn't drawn to abstract thinking, then I'm sure there's battle reports out there of people winning a game of 40k with warp talons or rough riders in their list.

But here's what I'm genuinely confused on. If people are dismissing a dismissal with a dismissal, as silly as that is, it seems to be missing one of the fundamentals of the game. It's like a person saying "you're just another 'learn to play' hack" is predicating their statement on the idea that 40k isn't a strategy game.

Now, I'll be the first to champion the idea that 40k isn't a SERIOUS strategy game, but that doesn't mean it's not a strategy game AT ALL. Sort of the point of a strategy game is that you do have to learn how to play it, and more clever people and those with more experience and can deconstruct the rules better will have an advantage. If you could just show up with no experience with whatever list you wanted and play it however you wanted to play it, and you had an equal chance of winning, well then it really wouldn't be a strategy game at all, would it?

I mean, what are people railing against "learn to play" really looking for? Why play 40k in the first place? Why would you even be on dakka, for that matter? If you didn't want to play a game where skill played any part, and thus people saying that having more skill means you can do things you can't with less... well... what's the point?

Yeah, you have to question the premise of magic skill that somehow fixes all problems (like makes it so 40k isn't a dice game, for example), but if you have a solid understanding of the impact of player skill on the game, then yeah, you should be able to talk about how the way a unit is used can increase it's effectiveness. How maybe something not appearing powerful enough isn't the result of GW's malevolent soul-sucking game imbalance but perhaps... I dont know... you're just not as good at the game as you think you are?

I agree that people have long been taking way too much credit for winning in 40k, but this seems a peculiar way to avoid the blame for losing. I really don't understand it.


Your one-stop website for batreps, articles, and assorted goodies about the men of Folera: Foleran First Imperial Archives. Read Dakka's favorite narrative battle report series The Hand of the King. Also, check out my commission work, and my terrain.

Abstract Principles of 40k: Why game imbalance and list tailoring is good, and why tournaments are an absurd farce.

Read "The Geomides Affair", now on sale! No bolter porn. Not another inquisitor story. A book written by a dakkanought for dakkanoughts!
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





USA

L2P is just a troll's way of being a troll legally. It doesn't actually mean anything aside from the douchebag way it's used and you won't find any ethical application for the phrase. It's another way elitest jerks exercise their understanding of the game mechanics to make themselves feel superior.

Seriously though, this same sort of thinking/actions is prevalent in every facet of gaming, be it electronic or table top.

Shadowkeepers (4000 points)
3rd Company (3000 points) 
   
Made in au
Oberstleutnant






Perth, West Australia

It's a symptom of the polarization of the playerbase caused by the shocking rules imo. Players tend to move towards a competitive or casual camp, and the casuals then start to treat any suggestions for improvement as you being the "WAAC trash that's ruining the game". If the rules were balanced, players would just be players and a constructive dialogue about tactics wouldn't be a problem.
   
Made in us
Tunneling Trygon






In some cases it can be used as the lazy way out for a common question. I see it in all sorts of community forums, and by all sorts I mean airsoft, but a question that gets asked so often just gets annoying to say AGAIN. Why is a flying Hive Tyrant better than a walking Tyrant with a Guard and Heavy Venom Cannon. Well, because while swooping, the chances of being hit are far less and certain weapons can't even be fired at it. That's in the BRB under 'flying monstrous creatures' and a few other places and simply put, the asking player needs to Learn to Play instead of asking a more experienced player a question he or she has answered prolly a dozen times in Army List recommendations and general tactics threads. I can see it used in a sense of 'if you look it up in the rulebooks, you'll see the answer plain as day so stop asking to be spoon-fed'.

That's atleast my take on it since for a while recently I was the one that needed to learn to play. For a long time, I thought Rapid Fire was based on movement, like Salvo is, since it was that way in 3rd and I never bothered looking it up again. I needed to Learn to Play that bit before I go spouting off to a friend just learning the game about an outdated rule that changes the game immensely.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Vallejo, CA

Frankenberry wrote:It doesn't actually mean anything aside from the douchebag way it's used and you won't find any ethical application for the phrase.

Wait, but there's the entire 40k tactics board. Literally the only purpose to that entire part of the forum is helping people learn how to play better. It's much of what the battle report forum is for as well.

How can it be completely unhelpful or unethical by its very nature? Sure, you could be rude about player skill, I can easily see that. But what is the actual problem with learning how to play 40k better?

And it doesn't seem to be a mythical "fluff nazi" thing either. Casual players KNOW they're going to lose if they're up against optimized players with optimized lists. They know it already. It doesn't bother them, really, because winning isn't what's important to an actual casual player. None of them are going to be surprised by players with more skill winning more.

It's a different group of people I'm struggling to understand. Clearly they're people who want to win, or else they wouldn't be talking about things that would draw comments about tactics or player skill in the first place. But on the other hand, they're people who want to win... but aren't interested in the idea that their play could be improved upon. That makes no sense in a world of a strategy game.



Your one-stop website for batreps, articles, and assorted goodies about the men of Folera: Foleran First Imperial Archives. Read Dakka's favorite narrative battle report series The Hand of the King. Also, check out my commission work, and my terrain.

Abstract Principles of 40k: Why game imbalance and list tailoring is good, and why tournaments are an absurd farce.

Read "The Geomides Affair", now on sale! No bolter porn. Not another inquisitor story. A book written by a dakkanought for dakkanoughts!
 
   
Made in us
Wraith






The "L2P" mentality exists in every game and it's just posturing, nothing more.

Any sort of formal discussion how to win 40k is nearly irrelevant as your local meta and house rules will dictate most thing. A major thing is what to bring to a tournament, but that now wholly depends on their flavor of 40k being offered.

I have seen mostly these boards see an uptick in "Learn to play something else from a game company that doesn't treat you like a walking wallet and offers support for their products above slipshod FAQs and $15 bolt ons."

If you mean L2P that way, then yes, many folks here would benefit from that scenario.

Shine on, Kaldor Dayglow!
Not Ken Lobb

 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Vallejo, CA

I mean, I'll give a few examples of what I'm on about.

In this thread, it basically went like:

Person 1: Terminators are terrible.

Person 2: Terminators can actually do just fine if you don't use them in one particularly bad way.

Person 1: Pssh, another L2P person. Termies are awful.

And, of course, in this thread it went like:

Person 1: I lost badly to eldar several times in a row. Eldar are un-fun.

Person 2: You're making some obvious mistakes, that's why you're losing so badly. They're pretty easy to fix.

Person 1: Pssh, you L2P types, quit being an donkey-cave. Eldar are un-fun to play against.

I mean, ignoring the fact that an ad hominem attack doesn't promote any point of view, what's the point?

What's the point of being in a conversation about the power level and usefulness of a unit and then completely dismissing how a unit is actually used on the table? What is the point of getting upset about losing and then getting upset about people telling them how they could win better?

Clearly we're not talking about casual players here. We're talking about people who are interested in very tactical things, who are then denying that skill is part of tactics.

Why?



Your one-stop website for batreps, articles, and assorted goodies about the men of Folera: Foleran First Imperial Archives. Read Dakka's favorite narrative battle report series The Hand of the King. Also, check out my commission work, and my terrain.

Abstract Principles of 40k: Why game imbalance and list tailoring is good, and why tournaments are an absurd farce.

Read "The Geomides Affair", now on sale! No bolter porn. Not another inquisitor story. A book written by a dakkanought for dakkanoughts!
 
   
Made in us
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets






 Ailaros wrote:
[
It's a different group of people I'm struggling to understand. Clearly they're people who want to win, or else they wouldn't be talking about things that would draw comments about tactics or player skill in the first place. But on the other hand, they're people who want to win... but aren't interested in the idea that their play could be improved upon. That makes no sense in a world of a strategy game.




Ailaros, I think I understand what you're saying. Part of the problem, especially as a new player myself, is that people have a tough time dealing with being told that they just aren't playing right. i've been tabled a couple times and it is frustrating when, after having scraped enough money to get some models, painted them, and taken them to a game only to get cheesed out and later be told that your units are wrong or you are just playing them poorly. I think the lashing out at the L2P people is just a common emotional reaction based in frustration and embarrassment rather than any intelligent argument, from a game that is based not only on skill and logic, but for some people entirely on resources of time and money.

~1.5k
Successful Trades: Ashrog (1), Iron35 (1), Rathryan (3), Leth (1), Eshm (1), Zeke48 (1), Gorkamorka12345 (1),
Melevolence (2), Ascalam (1), Swanny318, (1) ScootyPuffJunior, (1) LValx (1), Jim Solo (1), xSoulgrinderx (1), Reese (1), Pretre (1) 
   
Made in ca
Trustworthy Shas'vre




The idea that there is a right and a wrong way to play the game is the big thing here.

It's a fething game, if you're having fun you're playing it the right way.

Tau and Space Wolves since 5th Edition. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Vallejo, CA

Jefffar wrote:The idea that there is a right and a wrong way to play the game is the big thing here.

It's a fething game, if you're having fun you're playing it the right way.

Well, right, hence my confusion.

If a person is playing 40k in a certain way, and it's making them upset enough to, say, talk about tactics or how much they don't like losing, then it means that they're already playing the wrong way because they're not having fun, right?

If you're in a situation where you're frustrated or angry and the chief source of the irritation relates to losing, then being told about unit strength or how to use them more effectively on the table is relieving this problem. It's playing the game right from the person's own point of view, not just playing the game right in general (whatever that means).

I mean, it's like you getting a burn on your hand and me advising you to put some aloe gel on it, and then you exploding in bitter resentment. Like, not only am I giving you good advice, but I'm trying to help you based on your specific problem. If you didn't want help on treatment, why complain about the fact that you got a burn in the first place? Especially in a setting that's specifically designed to help people?

It's like signing up to the WebMD forum and listing your symptoms and then getting upset at people who tell you what medicine to take. Why bother?

jreilly89 wrote:Part of the problem, especially as a new player myself, is that people have a tough time dealing with being told that they just aren't playing right. i've been tabled a couple times and it is frustrating when, after having scraped enough money to get some models, painted them, and taken them to a game only to get cheesed out and later be told that your units are wrong or you are just playing them poorly.

Right, I was a new player once myself, and I lost many a game very badly. And for reasons I can now see, now that I'm more experienced with the game.

Losing also used to bother me a great deal (I was a lot more serious when I started playing), but... it's a strategy game. You only have two ways of handling this frustration - either stop caring so much, or get better so that you win more. Those really are your options. Other than quitting, of course, but if that's your solution, why hang around dakka to talk about 40k anymore? A game you don't even play?

Plus, I don't think there are very many people who are going to look at 40k, a miniature wargame, and get confused with a game where a player's decisions don't matter to the outcome of the game. It really shouldn't come as a shock that some ways of combining units and playing them on the table are going to be more likely to yield a win than others. Because if the list you brought and how you played it didn't really matter to the outcome, then what you're playing isn't a strategy game. It's a game where you can just sort of do whatever and play however you like and not lose. Like a sandbox game, for example.

To have any integrity as a strategy game then new players probably should lose more often. If we want to have a game where mistakes actually have meaning, that is. 40k is already a pretty shallow game, I'll admit, but what we're talking about would necessarily make it even shallower.

jreilly89 wrote: I think the lashing out at the L2P people is just a common emotional reaction based in frustration and embarrassment rather than any intelligent argument, from a game that is based not only on skill and logic, but for some people entirely on resources of time and money.

Sure, but if you want to win, and that's what's important, then you will improve not only skill but you'll also spend the time required to do things like play more games so you get better, and talk to people on forums. You'll also do research so you're less likely to waste your money, and learn to make those things you did spend money on more effective.

I hope it's really just embarrassment (though, really, people are just embarrassing themselves more if they react to their embarrassment in this kind of way). I'd really hate to think it's just raw arrogance. The "I'm a great player, but I'm still losing, so it must be the game's fault. Damn you GW!" kind of thing. I'd have to add a bunch more people to my ignore list if that's the case, and I'd really rather not.


Your one-stop website for batreps, articles, and assorted goodies about the men of Folera: Foleran First Imperial Archives. Read Dakka's favorite narrative battle report series The Hand of the King. Also, check out my commission work, and my terrain.

Abstract Principles of 40k: Why game imbalance and list tailoring is good, and why tournaments are an absurd farce.

Read "The Geomides Affair", now on sale! No bolter porn. Not another inquisitor story. A book written by a dakkanought for dakkanoughts!
 
   
Made in us
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets






I agree, but 40k is exactly known for its simplicity, and in some cases, unless you are willing to sit down and look up every rule, there is a bit of trust you have to share with your opponent that they are not intentionally cheating you. In chess, I know what pieces do, how they can move, etc. Add in FW, Codexices (?), and Apoc games, and there is quite a lot to memorize/remember. My point that yes, a player's decisions are vital to winning, but at times you have no idea what you may be up against.
This is all conjecture, but I'm sure it is a mix of embarrassment and being green behind the ears. Also, no one likes to lose. It is good to learn from your mistakes, but some losses can come hard if you're too proud.

Overall, I think that the 40k community, especially on dakka, is great. I think part of the problems lie in part with some experienced players not wanting to answer the same questions eighty times mixed with the fact that new players do have an ingrained pride of "Look at my tac marines, they're so strong, pew pew!" Again, this is all my opinion, but I would like to think the number of people on either side (the arrogant newbie or the annoyed veteran) is small in comparison to your average decent player.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/23 06:25:33


~1.5k
Successful Trades: Ashrog (1), Iron35 (1), Rathryan (3), Leth (1), Eshm (1), Zeke48 (1), Gorkamorka12345 (1),
Melevolence (2), Ascalam (1), Swanny318, (1) ScootyPuffJunior, (1) LValx (1), Jim Solo (1), xSoulgrinderx (1), Reese (1), Pretre (1) 
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User





People don't like being told what to do, and they choose to learn the hard way. Just let it go; it's really all you can do.
   
Made in us
Slaanesh Chosen Marine Riding a Fiend



Maine

 jreilly89 wrote:
 Ailaros wrote:
[
It's a different group of people I'm struggling to understand. Clearly they're people who want to win, or else they wouldn't be talking about things that would draw comments about tactics or player skill in the first place. But on the other hand, they're people who want to win... but aren't interested in the idea that their play could be improved upon. That makes no sense in a world of a strategy game.




Ailaros, I think I understand what you're saying. Part of the problem, especially as a new player myself, is that people have a tough time dealing with being told that they just aren't playing right. i've been tabled a couple times and it is frustrating when, after having scraped enough money to get some models, painted them, and taken them to a game only to get cheesed out and later be told that your units are wrong or you are just playing them poorly. I think the lashing out at the L2P people is just a common emotional reaction based in frustration and embarrassment rather than any intelligent argument, from a game that is based not only on skill and logic, but for some people entirely on resources of time and money.


During my first few games, I felt this very same way. I was upset, angry even, that I did SO badly. I had done research, watched battle reports, and thought I was ready. But I simply didn't understand my army as much as I had thought. I got annoyed when they tried to explain things, often just making excuses, and leaving on a bad note. But now, I've changed my mind set, and I've accepted any advice people give me. They have played longer than me. Much longer in almost all the cases, and I have to accept that I couldn't enter the game and expect to win right away.

As I look back, I'm more embarassed about HOW I acted then. I'm glad they didn't basically condemn me for my previous bad sportsmanship, and though I'm still learning, I'm kind of an in demand player now because I bring such goofy Orky lists, that people want to play against them and murder me. But each game I play, fluff or strong list aside, lets me learn how their armies play, and how my army needs to be played to counter act it.

I wish/hope other unhappy/inexperienced players learn to take it all in stride like I have. It makes the game a lot less stressful, and a Hell of a lot more fun when you know you're doing better by accepting the tips and begin to pick up steam each and every game.
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

The rulebook is over 200 pages, not to mention the separate information contained in codexes.

If someone asks a polite question and you think they are a lazybones for not combing through all this densely packed verbiage the polite thing to do is to ignore them and not post a snide useless answer of "learn to play".


I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
Trigger-Happy Baal Predator Pilot






 Ailaros wrote:
I mean, I'll give a few examples of what I'm on about.

In this thread, it basically went like:

Person 1: Terminators are terrible.

Person 2: Terminators can actually do just fine if you don't use them in one particularly bad way.

Person 1: Pssh, another L2P person. Termies are awful.

And, of course, in this thread it went like:

Person 1: I lost badly to eldar several times in a row. Eldar are un-fun.

Person 2: You're making some obvious mistakes, that's why you're losing so badly. They're pretty easy to fix.

Person 1: Pssh, you L2P types, quit being an donkey-cave. Eldar are un-fun to play against.

I mean, ignoring the fact that an ad hominem attack doesn't promote any point of view, what's the point?

What's the point of being in a conversation about the power level and usefulness of a unit and then completely dismissing how a unit is actually used on the table? What is the point of getting upset about losing and then getting upset about people telling them how they could win better?

Clearly we're not talking about casual players here. We're talking about people who are interested in very tactical things, who are then denying that skill is part of tactics.

Why?




In reference to the Eldar thread, because I read it as it was going on...

The OP made a statement based on his actual table-top experience. Soon after, people bashed him over the head and told him he was an idiot. Even the initial wave of helpful comments had a rude comment that could cause the OP to go on the defensive...

Meanwhile, the OPs overall message is probably true based on the "Poll: Most Powerful army" thread, where Eldar are winning by a landslide.

Basically...people can make true statements on forums and people will find ways to debate about it. *shrug*
   
Made in ca
Trustworthy Shas'vre




Ailaros,

You took my comment in a very different way than I intended it. Fun is in the eye of the beholder, and if fun for someone is using units just because they love the fluff or model, that's fine. If fun for someone is trying to find the hardest, killiest combo unit that leverages badly worded rules, that's fine too.

My point is nobody needs to be told by anybody else that they are doing it wrong if the way they play is fun for them (and they are actually following the rules of play). Telling someone asking for advice or venting about their game frustrations that they are doing it wrong rather than providing useful feedback and suggestions is just plain rude.

There is no reason to answer with "Learn to play" or "Your list is crap". If you don't want to provide useful assistance, you can move on without saying anything.

Tau and Space Wolves since 5th Edition. 
   
Made in us
Mutilatin' Mad Dok





 SharkoutofWata wrote:
In some cases it can be used as the lazy way out for a common question. I see it in all sorts of community forums, and by all sorts I mean airsoft, but a question that gets asked so often just gets annoying to say AGAIN. Why is a flying Hive Tyrant better than a walking Tyrant with a Guard and Heavy Venom Cannon. Well, because while swooping, the chances of being hit are far less and certain weapons can't even be fired at it. That's in the BRB under 'flying monstrous creatures' and a few other places and simply put, the asking player needs to Learn to Play instead of asking a more experienced player a question he or she has answered prolly a dozen times in Army List recommendations and general tactics threads. I can see it used in a sense of 'if you look it up in the rulebooks, you'll see the answer plain as day so stop asking to be spoon-fed'.


No, that's exactly the kind of information that a new player could benefit from having explained. The fact that Skyfire weapons tend to not be able to penetrate its armor, the importance of high mobility, the utility of TL Devourers...those are not plainly apparent. It isn't so much about the bare facts of which is better, but how a veteran player reaches that conclusion, and that is definitely something that needs either explanation or a long and frustrating learning process.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





West Chester, PA

 Ailaros wrote:
I mean, I'll give a few examples of what I'm on about.

In this thread, it basically went like:

Person 1: Terminators are terrible.

Person 2: Terminators can actually do just fine if you don't use them in one particularly bad way.

Person 1: Pssh, another L2P person. Termies are awful.

And, of course, in this thread it went like:

Person 1: I lost badly to eldar several times in a row. Eldar are un-fun.

Person 2: You're making some obvious mistakes, that's why you're losing so badly. They're pretty easy to fix.

Person 1: Pssh, you L2P types, quit being an donkey-cave. Eldar are un-fun to play against.

I mean, ignoring the fact that an ad hominem attack doesn't promote any point of view, what's the point?

What's the point of being in a conversation about the power level and usefulness of a unit and then completely dismissing how a unit is actually used on the table? What is the point of getting upset about losing and then getting upset about people telling them how they could win better?

Clearly we're not talking about casual players here. We're talking about people who are interested in very tactical things, who are then denying that skill is part of tactics.

Why?




That's really not how it happened in the Eldar thread. Here is the l2play post in response to my list:

"You say you've been playing since 3rd edition, yet your list is garbage, being filled with useless items like grenade launchers, and you apparently have no idea what "bubble-wrap" is. Shining Spears can only kill a Leman Russ in assault. How exactly are they going to assault a Leman Russ when it's literally surrounded in a U-shape formation by guardsmen? There is no physical space for Shining Spears to get into assault with it. So they have to punch through the Guardsmen first, and if they're relying on hit and run to not get stuck in then that gives you free reign to shoot them off the board, which you should be able to easily do with the IG's readily available access to AP3 and AP2.

That Eldar are extremely powerful is a given, and I don't think anyone would disagree. However the problem presented in this thread by you is not a balance problem, it's a learn2play problem."

Not quite the helpful, mind-if-I-help-you type...

"Bringer of death, speak your name, For you are my life, and the foe's death." - Litany of the Lasgun

2500 points
1500 points
1250 points
1000 points 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Vallejo, CA

Kilkrazy wrote:The rulebook is over 200 pages, not to mention the separate information contained in codexes.

If someone asks a polite question and you think they are a lazybones for not combing through all this densely packed verbiage the polite thing to do is to ignore them and not post a snide useless answer of "learn to play".
SharkoutofWata wrote: I can see it used in a sense of 'if you look it up in the rulebooks, you'll see the answer plain as day so stop asking to be spoon-fed'.
jreilly89 wrote:I agree, but 40k is exactly known for its simplicity, and in some cases, unless you are willing to sit down and look up every rule, there is a bit of trust you have to share with your opponent that they are not intentionally cheating you. In chess, I know what pieces do, how they can move, etc. Add in FW, Codexices (?), and Apoc games, and there is quite a lot to memorize/remember.
jreilly89 wrote:I think part of the problems lie in part with some experienced players not wanting to answer the same questions eighty times

I guess it's possible, but I'm not really seeing that. I can't think of a time that a person came forward with a question because they were confused and someone basically said "quit being an idiot". Learn to play never seems to come up in the context of people who are already making an effort to learn how to play.

In fact, it almost always seems to be the opposite. Complaining about "you L2P types" seems to always be a way to justify not learning anything.

jreilly89 wrote:My point that yes, a player's decisions are vital to winning, but at times you have no idea what you may be up against.

Sure, and I bristle at the idea that a person could win a game because of a loophole or an exception or knowing a rule better and then deriding their losing opponent for not knowing the rules well enough. That kind of behavior is clearly sociopathic. It's why I, at least, will go out of my way to explain things, and have even let people undo moves before when it's clear they made a stupid mistake because they didn't know a rule.

Of course, I'm a "challenge" type who wouldn't want his win cheapened because it was earned on a technicality or a bit of confusion.

Melevolence wrote:As I look back, I'm more embarassed about HOW I acted then.

Yeah, you'd be surprised how many people on dakka are teenagers or 20-somethings, or have been at some point in their life. The trick is to not do anything where what you say is written down or preserved as a matter of record. You know, like publishing on a forum, or on a blog or personal website.

Hang on for just a moment... I've got something I've got to do real quick...

Voidwraith wrote:Meanwhile, the OPs overall message is probably true based on the "Poll: Most Powerful army" thread, where Eldar are winning by a landslide.

But that wasn't the point of the thread at all, neither in title nor OP content. The thread was about "eldar aren't fun because I'm losing badly to them", and people saying" eldar can be fun to play against if you don't lose badly, and here's how not to lose so badly" were rejected out of hand. Why make a thread about being upset by losing, and then refuse advice to help you win? Honestly, what do you get? As best I can tell, all that such a thread would do is for the OP to advertise that he's a loser, which doesn't make that much sense to me.

Unless you were a hipster and being ironic, or something. Then again, I like mainstream now because hating mainstream was too mainstream.

TheSilo wrote:Not quite the helpful, mind-if-I-help-you type...

It's actually super helpful advice, you just didn't like the tone.

Feeling insulted doesn't change the content of the advice itself, and attacking the advice to clear away feelings of insult doesn't make sense either.

Jefffar wrote:Fun is in the eye of the beholder, and if fun for someone is using units just because they love the fluff or model, that's fine. If fun for someone is trying to find the hardest, killiest combo unit that leverages badly worded rules, that's fine too.

My point is nobody needs to be told by anybody else that they are doing it wrong if the way they play is fun for them (and they are actually following the rules of play). Telling someone asking for advice or venting about their game frustrations that they are doing it wrong rather than providing useful feedback and suggestions is just plain rude.

There is no reason to answer with "Learn to play" or "Your list is crap". If you don't want to provide useful assistance, you can move on without saying anything.

Let me try to explain this again. If you don't want useful assistance in winning a game, then either you're super stubborn, or you're a casual player. If you're a casual player, you will not do things that will illicit a L2P response. You will not complain about losing, and thus draw scrutiny about your list, and thus get "your list is crap" responses, for example. The only way you can behave in such a way where you could get an L2P answer is if you were trying to win, because the entire point of L2P is trying to get people to win. There's no real other reason to say it, right?

So let's only look at players who are trying to win, because they're the only people who could be targeted by this kind of comment.

If the purpose of a game is to have fun, and losing is not fun, then literally by definition the purpose of the game is not to lose it. Any advice that will help people not lose is advice that helps them have fun. As such, L2P-based advice is advice that is designed to help those people have fun.

Yes, a post with literally nothing more to its content than "learn to play, jerk" isn't going to be helpful, but that's not usually what comments are limited to, and if they are, you can always just ask what the person is talking about, and usually they'll elaborate what they meant (clarifying what mistakes they think you were making, etc. etc.). L2P then is either very helpful to having fun, or one step away from very helpful to having fun.

You say "nobody needs to be told by anybody else that they are doing it wrong if the way they play is fun for them" and I whole-heartedly agree, but my point is that L2P is a response to people complaining. To people who aren't having fun. I mean, if I were playing the game the way I like to and having fun, and someone came up to me and said "learn to play" I'd say "I have, look how much fun I'm having. I'm clearly doing things right already, thank you."

What's going on here is people bringing forward problems in an advice-giving setting and then shooting down advice. What's the point?

Yes, it's possible that it's just arrogance, blaming a far-away, faceless company for your failings, or blaming the rules for your failure to understand them and exploit them properly. Yes, it's possible that it's just stubbornness, where people have a religious devotion to something being bad and it would drive them crazy if they wound up being wrong. Yes, it could just be a breakdown of abstract reasoning skills, and a person needs to see a few subjective examples of something in order for the general principle to be demonstrated and thus clarified.

But that doesn't seem to hold that much water for me. Especially when I see the knee-jerk, emotional nature of the response. The reaction that causes someone to go and attack another personally. "You're just a L2P type, your comments are unworthy" comes from somewhere...


Your one-stop website for batreps, articles, and assorted goodies about the men of Folera: Foleran First Imperial Archives. Read Dakka's favorite narrative battle report series The Hand of the King. Also, check out my commission work, and my terrain.

Abstract Principles of 40k: Why game imbalance and list tailoring is good, and why tournaments are an absurd farce.

Read "The Geomides Affair", now on sale! No bolter porn. Not another inquisitor story. A book written by a dakkanought for dakkanoughts!
 
   
Made in gb
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot





UK

 TheSilo wrote:
 Ailaros wrote:
I mean, I'll give a few examples of what I'm on about.

In this thread, it basically went like:

Person 1: Terminators are terrible.

Person 2: Terminators can actually do just fine if you don't use them in one particularly bad way.

Person 1: Pssh, another L2P person. Termies are awful.

And, of course, in this thread it went like:

Person 1: I lost badly to eldar several times in a row. Eldar are un-fun.

Person 2: You're making some obvious mistakes, that's why you're losing so badly. They're pretty easy to fix.

Person 1: Pssh, you L2P types, quit being an donkey-cave. Eldar are un-fun to play against.

I mean, ignoring the fact that an ad hominem attack doesn't promote any point of view, what's the point?

What's the point of being in a conversation about the power level and usefulness of a unit and then completely dismissing how a unit is actually used on the table? What is the point of getting upset about losing and then getting upset about people telling them how they could win better?

Clearly we're not talking about casual players here. We're talking about people who are interested in very tactical things, who are then denying that skill is part of tactics.

Why?




That's really not how it happened in the Eldar thread. Here is the l2play post in response to my list:

"You say you've been playing since 3rd edition, yet your list is garbage, being filled with useless items like grenade launchers, and you apparently have no idea what "bubble-wrap" is. Shining Spears can only kill a Leman Russ in assault. How exactly are they going to assault a Leman Russ when it's literally surrounded in a U-shape formation by guardsmen? There is no physical space for Shining Spears to get into assault with it. So they have to punch through the Guardsmen first, and if they're relying on hit and run to not get stuck in then that gives you free reign to shoot them off the board, which you should be able to easily do with the IG's readily available access to AP3 and AP2.

That Eldar are extremely powerful is a given, and I don't think anyone would disagree. However the problem presented in this thread by you is not a balance problem, it's a learn2play problem."

Not quite the helpful, mind-if-I-help-you type...


You can't expect everyone to cover their responses in roses and petals when you're challenging people and potentially unsettling people by saying Eldar are "anti-fun." To some people that's frustratedly wrong.

He's not being nasty, he's being to the point and not sugarcoating it. In total honesty, your list was garbage. Saying "its not that good" to sound less harsh would be wrong because "its not that good" would be a competitive list with a few units out of place or unoptimised. You had nothing close to that.

"Learn2play"/"Strategize more" are interchangeable ways of saying the same thing.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/23 19:41:40


 
   
Made in us
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets






 Ailaros wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:g on here is people bringing forward problems in an advice-giving setting and then shooting down advice. What's the point?

Yes, it's possible that it's just arrogance, blaming a far-away, faceless company for your failings, or blaming the rules for your failure to understand them and exploit them properly. Yes, it's possible that it's just stubbornness, where people have a religious devotion to something being bad and it would drive them crazy if they wound up being wrong. Yes, it could just be a breakdown of abstract reasoning skills, and a person needs to see a few subjective examples of something in order for the general principle to be demonstrated and thus clarified.

But that doesn't seem to hold that much water for me. Especially when I see the knee-jerk, emotional nature of the response. The reaction that causes someone to go and attack another personally. "You're just a L2P type, your comments are unworthy" comes from somewhere...



Ailaros, I'm not quite sure what much more you're looking for. People have presented several theories on why they believe this happens, but you don't seem satisfied by any of them. I don't want this to come off as rude, but you seem to have an innate prejudice against the "you 'learn2play' types" (not that I'm defending them). Either people are simply donkey-caves who refuse to take criticism/advice, people lash out emotionally, or there's some underlying motivation as to why people react in this knee-jerk way. Again, everything here is theory, as there's no real hard evidence other than possibly making a poll thread of it.

~1.5k
Successful Trades: Ashrog (1), Iron35 (1), Rathryan (3), Leth (1), Eshm (1), Zeke48 (1), Gorkamorka12345 (1),
Melevolence (2), Ascalam (1), Swanny318, (1) ScootyPuffJunior, (1) LValx (1), Jim Solo (1), xSoulgrinderx (1), Reese (1), Pretre (1) 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





It seems like your main question is "why are people entitled, narcissistic, know-it-all jerks who can't abide anything except an echo chamber of positive reinforcement?"

The answer is fairly tautological: it's because they're people.

When you come up with some grand strategy to change human nature, you let the rest of the world know. But be prepared to have you new way crapped on, and probably lead to your ruination and/or demise.

"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."

This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.


Freelance Ontologist

When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life. 
   
Made in us
Been Around the Block




When someone's being a genuine asshat, return the favor.

I once made the mistake of calling Ragnar Blackmane an Elite instead of an HQ in a forum post showing my progress painting my first army, and some mouthbreather got pissed off and told me I should quit the hobby.

So I ordered some green army men, spray painted them in Space Wolves colors, and asked if any Brony chapters would like to fight it out. I think he had an aneurysm.
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

 Ailaros wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:The rulebook is over 200 pages, not to mention the separate information contained in codexes.

If someone asks a polite question and you think they are a lazybones for not combing through all this densely packed verbiage the polite thing to do is to ignore them and not post a snide useless answer of "learn to play".
SharkoutofWata wrote: I can see it used in a sense of 'if you look it up in the rulebooks, you'll see the answer plain as day so stop asking to be spoon-fed'.
jreilly89 wrote:I agree, but 40k is exactly known for its simplicity, and in some cases, unless you are willing to sit down and look up every rule, there is a bit of trust you have to share with your opponent that they are not intentionally cheating you. In chess, I know what pieces do, how they can move, etc. Add in FW, Codexices (?), and Apoc games, and there is quite a lot to memorize/remember.
jreilly89 wrote:I think part of the problems lie in part with some experienced players not wanting to answer the same questions eighty times

I guess it's possible, but I'm not really seeing that. I can't think of a time that a person came forward with a question because they were confused and someone basically said "quit being an idiot". Learn to play never seems to come up in the context of people who are already making an effort to learn how to play.

In fact, it almost always seems to be the opposite. Complaining about "you L2P types" seems to always be a way to justify not learning anything.

What does it matter? DakkaDakka users are not paid for their efforts to teach people how to play.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





West Michigan, deep in Whitebread, USA

The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.

Luckily, I satisfy myself with the thought that of my 20 years of 40K, I have about 18 of them on those guys, who have "been with this thing awhile, now".

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/07/23 22:29:27




"By this point I'm convinced 100% that every single race in the 40k universe have somehow tapped into the ork ability to just have their tech work because they think it should."  
   
Made in us
Flashy Flashgitz





MD

It's pretty easy to explain away these people, some people are suffering in another part of their life, therefore they attempt to compensate by trolling other people, who may/may not be quite as skilled at them in this particular game. Regardless of skill, the game is here for me personally, as a release, gakky day at work? paint some bad-ass hero's for my army! Having a rough one, play a game or two, release some anger/energy etc...

With that said, i'm relatively new to 40k (started at the end of 5th), and in that short span, i've built 3 armies thus far, do i know them inside and out? Nope i don't, do i take tactical advice from time to time? Yup took some today when some SoB whooped my beloved Space Wolves lol. Now luckily i was playing with a buddy, but had i been playing with some snot-nose person who feel's superior, and he had framed it a different way, i would of probably just let it roll off my shoulder's, and continued on. But had this person been one of "those guys", and kept on to the point where i felt disrespected and/or like he was attempting to "get at me" or w/e you wanna call it, i would deal with it accordingly.

I think anyone who feel's the need to belittle or disrespect anyone over what is essentially, a game of army men, well he should expect whatever repurcussions come his way, because it's ridicolous that you feel that need in order to please yourself.

But hey, to each their own, and it's all good until it's not, with that said i have never really encountered anyone like this so far in my 40k experience, but understand they are everywhere in life, not just this game. My thought process is to let it roll off my shoulder's until it's not possible anymore, because unlike the troll, i'm happy with my life, and dont feel the need to belittle anyone to please myself.

Just my 2 cents!

Urban

P.S. i fail at grammer!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/24 00:05:06


3k Points 
   
Made in us
Tunneling Trygon






 TheSilo wrote:


That's really not how it happened in the Eldar thread. Here is the l2play post in response to my list:

"You say you've been playing since 3rd edition, yet your list is garbage, being filled with useless items like grenade launchers, and you apparently have no idea what "bubble-wrap" is. Shining Spears can only kill a Leman Russ in assault. How exactly are they going to assault a Leman Russ when it's literally surrounded in a U-shape formation by guardsmen? There is no physical space for Shining Spears to get into assault with it. So they have to punch through the Guardsmen first, and if they're relying on hit and run to not get stuck in then that gives you free reign to shoot them off the board, which you should be able to easily do with the IG's readily available access to AP3 and AP2.

That Eldar are extremely powerful is a given, and I don't think anyone would disagree. However the problem presented in this thread by you is not a balance problem, it's a learn2play problem."

Not quite the helpful, mind-if-I-help-you type...


Well let's just start up and say that I was already against the poster when he's complaining non-stop about Eldar and Eldar players as I begin an Eldar army in 7th, and likely with a list that he would disapprove of. Especially when there was talk about players wanting to choose what an Eldar player brings to the table. My sympathy had run out that point. But, that aside, the quoted post here doesn't come off as asshat-y. Yes I'm an inexperienced player in 7th and I had never heard of Bubble-wrap in reference to IG, and here in this post is someone that marks the ineffectiveness of a weapon, explains a tactic I had never even considered and pointed you in the direction of better guns. While it wasn't happy and joyful the WAY he said it, oh well, not everyone is a friend and feelings shouldn't get hurt. In this case, 'learn2play' means, well, I (if it were my army doing this) need to rethink tactics, weapon choices and utilize my army in a way that is actually slightly decent and that the fault is with ME, not the Eldar player. If someone points this out to me, good. Knock me off my high horse and remind me that I don't know everything and that I should be learning new ways to do things. Maybe such a stern tone stings less BECAUSE I'm inexperienced with how things are done now, but that's how it should obviously be taken.
   
Made in se
Glorious Lord of Chaos






The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer

 Ailaros wrote:
I mean, I'll give a few examples of what I'm on about.

In this thread, it basically went like:

Person 1: Terminators are terrible.

Person 2: Terminators can actually do just fine if you don't use them in one particularly bad way.

Person 1: Pssh, another L2P person. Termies are awful.


No, it went like this.

Person 1: Terminators are terrible and need changes.

Person 2: Terminators can actually do just fine if you don't use them in one particularly bad way.

Person 1: One particularly bad way? They have one tiny nische that practically does not exist, and that honor guard do better anyway.

Person 2: No, they are fine, you are just using them badly.

Person 1: But they are mathematically crappy at even the jobs they are supposed to excel at!

Person 2: No, they are fine, you are just using them badly.

Person 1: Look, they are supposed to tank lots of small arms fire, yes? That is sort of the point of terminators. But they are twice the resilience for three times the points, making them an inferior choice.

Person 2: No, they are fine, you are just using them badly.

Person 1: The firepower of tactical terminators is underwhelming and their melee ability leaves much to be asked. Sure, they can kill vehicles in melee, but tactical marines can do that too.

Person 2: No, they are fine, you are just using them badly.

Person 1: Even in melee against a monstrous creature or something they do badly. They lack the attacks to make any real dent in anything, and they come at a horrendous price tag. Not to mention that they will never reach melee with said monstrous creature.

Person 2: No, they are fine, you are just using them badly.

Person 1: Deepstriking them means they get vulnerable. They can easily be focused on. And using them as a bully unit is useless, honour guard do that cheaper and for less than 30 ppm.

Person 2: No, they are fine, you are just using them badly.

Person 1: How do you use them, then?

Person 2: You use them to shoot/take down vehicles or MCs in melee/take down hordes in melee/deepstrike down and tank/as a bully unit.

Person 1: Pls. I just showed you they can't do that efficiently.

Person 2: No, they are fine, you are just using them badly. Also, you are rude, I'm out.

:|

The thread was ridiculous, but only because the 'it's fine' crowd maintained that they were appropriate and refused to provide waterproof evidence for this, while ignoring the evidence to the contrary.

This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2014/07/24 04:13:54


I should think of a new signature... In the meantime, have a  
   
Made in us
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets






 SharkoutofWata wrote:
While it wasn't happy and joyful the WAY he said it, oh well, not everyone is a friend and feelings shouldn't get hurt. In this case, 'learn2play' means, well, I (if it were my army doing this) need to rethink tactics, weapon choices and utilize my army in a way that is actually slightly decent and that the fault is with ME, not the Eldar player. If someone points this out to me, good. Knock me off my high horse and remind me that I don't know everything and that I should be learning new ways to do things. Maybe such a stern tone stings less BECAUSE I'm inexperienced with how things are done now, but that's how it should obviously be taken.


Look, lets start out with his list was rough and he was inexperienced I'm guessing, never having gone up against a Tau/Eldar list. He got whooped. Understandable. I also read that thread, and as much as he was complaing about Eldar being anti-fun (yes he took it harder than he should have), the amount of pro-Eldar that came out of the woodwork was astounding. The game is clearly unbalanced. IG could beat Eldar, but the Eldar codex definitely has an advantage.

This guy learned a hard lesson, and hopefully he works it out and changes for the better, but to say people gave him advice is laughable. The advice lasted maybe the first page before devolving into pure anger at him (one of the pieces of advice was something along the lines of "grenade launchers suck, conscripts suck, you wasted your units potential and therefore you suck). That being said, OP also contributed to it by lashing out people trying to give him advice (probably because he had just been trouned not an hour or two earlier).

I think everyone was in the wrong and it was an embarrassing thread to read, but it was not one-sided at all. People on both of sides of the thread have a lot to learn.

~1.5k
Successful Trades: Ashrog (1), Iron35 (1), Rathryan (3), Leth (1), Eshm (1), Zeke48 (1), Gorkamorka12345 (1),
Melevolence (2), Ascalam (1), Swanny318, (1) ScootyPuffJunior, (1) LValx (1), Jim Solo (1), xSoulgrinderx (1), Reese (1), Pretre (1) 
   
Made in us
Trustworthy Shas'vre




DFW area Texas - Rarely

The "just another l2play jerk" is because people don't like information that is contrary to their belief system.

Pure and simple.

In many cases, its more comfortable to assume that the player is good, and that the situation/luck/army/life is the problem.

It also goes to just how well a person takes on self accountability - for example, is it the cop's fault you got a speeding ticket, or your for going 20mph over the limit?

Don't get me wrong - when some people actually just say "learn2play" - thats a bit rude and can be an elitist attitude.

However, someone giving actual useful advice - and someone else dismissing for what are basically ego reasons - that is a different matter.

One of the biggest problems is that in 40k (or in some situations in life) some players may have had the misfortune to learn with armies that were either very forgiving or very high powered when they started. Thus, they had a crutch and did not realize it, and did not as easily develop the skills to play the game well (I have actually seen this happen, many times over the years).

Then when either their codex falls out of favor, or a counter comes along to an very "forgiving" army, they suffer - and usually externalize blame.
(similar to a kid who's parents do their homework, then they fail the test - and blame the test).

I think other posters in this thread have summarized the specific situation (some poor choices in posts) but overall, I have found that maturity (maturity, not age, they are very different) is a huge factor to how well someone takes feedback or criticism - especially if it challenges the ego.

Fascinating thread....thanks for sharing.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/24 05:38:36


DavePak
"Remember, in life, the only thing you absolutely control is your own attitude - do not squander that power."
Fully Painted armies:
TAU: 10k Nids: 9600 Marines: 4000 Crons: 7600
Actor, Gamer, Comic, Corporate Nerd
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: