Switch Theme:

Why does nobody talk about casual play?  [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 ca
Secretive Dark Angels Veteran




Vancouver, BC

 aphyon wrote:
I used those examples as they were the easiest and most obvious to find and identify.
As it so happens i have recently run a themed tyranid all assault army using the 4th ed codex and it worked just fine and i even used it against the 3.5 khorne berserker army (and won) from the codex you seem to think is an auto win button.

BTW Instinctive behavior rolls were the 5th ed codex and did not matter with the 4th dex (which is still overall the best nid codex for thematic play) and it is easy to counter by bringing enough synapse if you choose to go that route.


You don't get it so easy. You get the worst list I can make from the 2001 3rd edition Tyranid codex to take against any codex chosen from before the 4th edition main rule book was published.

This includes using:

Instinctive Behavior

Beyond the immediate reach of the hive mind, lesser Tyranid creatures will often revert back to their basic, often animalistic instincts. To represent this, at the start of the Tyranid turn any broods outside Synapse control range must take a Morale check for being All On Your Own (this being the equivalent Tyranid situation). If failed, roll for the brood's reaction on the table below.

So as not to violate board rules I'll not quote that table in full but will say that 1-2 meant pinned, 3-4 meant falling back to the nearest cover, and 5-6 meant moving 2d6" towards the nearest enemy as if making a sweeping advance.

It's also funny that this rule exists prior to 5th edition...

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/05/03 06:41:15


 
   
Made in us
On a Canoptek Spyder's Waiting List





America

Thank you for the responses everyone. Your explanations make sense and I think a lot of interesting discussion has been started. Though I hope everyone remembers to be polite in general, we owe our fellow man at least a little charity no matter what.
Also, funnily enough it wasn't too long after this post that I found an online group of people discussing Crusade Rules/narrative play and playing for a story instead of winning. So I guess this discussion does happen, just not as much. I'm silly.
   
Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard





washington state USA

@Canadian 5th


Once again you miss the entire point you are purposely trying to force a loss so you can always be right-it is a form of reverse list tailoring. it comes across as a very thin attempt to hide WAAC player behavior. the entire point of the fluff lists when they existed is that they were both in alignment with the lore and also viable lists. some were very restrictive in their options like ravenwing/deathwing and some were less specific like a green tide list for orks (did a battle against a 4th ed ork codex greed tide army -over 100 on foot-recently as well-he won by objectives with only 5 models left in play and i only had 8).

Additionally our group uses the codexes from editions 3-7 in the 5th edition core rules sets that BEST represent the lore as such the 5th ed nid codex is not preferred as it's use of instinctive behavior is applied in a manner that is not in the lore as well as it lacks the biomorphic adaptability the nids are known for. .

That is why i mentioned previously the 3.5 chaos codex-NOBODY uses any other chaos codex (although we may import a newer model in from them from time to time) in our games because none of the rest of them that came after both meet the standards of lore rules&viability.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/03 06:54:49




GAMES-DUST1947/infinity/B5 wars/epic 40K/5th ed 40K/victory at sea/warmachine/battle tactics/monpoc/battletech/battlefleet gothic/castles in the sky,/heavy gear 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
If you need to create your own scenarios or self imposed rules balances, you shouldn't pay for the bad rules to begin with. There's zero reason people should be defending one army's fluffy list is significantly worse than another army's, yet we have people doing it anyway.


As I said, missing the forest for the trees.

You are mistaking two very different things.

I see very few people 'defending' imbalance here. Very few people, outside of, say, Traditio, would say 'it's a good thing that tau are significantly less powerful than everyone else's.
What people are doing is suggesting work around, alternative approaches and fixes at their end to deal with these issues.

Youre a classic black Knight. You are so busy screaming at gw, you think everyone not screaming at gw and not being apoplectic with rage like you is the enemy and is somehow defending the things you are screaming about, just because they're not angry and screaming like you. You're wrong. Get over your hate. In my expenitence, the people working out their issues and game building with each othet are getting a lot more out of their games and their love for their hobby than you are.

In terms of 'paying for the rules', I also pay for the lore and other stuff that comes packaged in a codex/rulebook. Rules are a bonus, as I see it.

AnomanderRake wrote:

Which is why people don't talk about casual play. There is no casual play. If you want to play 40k you have to sign up to do research, balance matchups yourself, take minis that are good rather than minis you like, and get stomped because you bought the wrong models until you have the expertise to figure out which models are playable and which models aren't. You can't plonk models you like down, throw dice, and have a good time, because someone's going to get tabled immediately because they bought a D-list book that nobody on the design team has given two gaks about for fifteen years.



I'm.not sure why you are quoting me/directing this towards me, it's not something I was addressing? Surely this is better directed towards op?

There very much is casual play but its nature you won't see it discussed here much on a serious board with players/hobbyists who mostly come from the 'serious' end of the scale. As well, ironically, casual play needs a 'guiding hand'.

I mean, you can play Monopoly casually as well, but I bet there's whole books and articles written by someone very serious about it on Monopoly game theory to play the best game of Monopoly that you can.

Here's the thing, I don't disagree. I love this hobby of mine. I put a lot of money and a lot of time into this hobby. Half the reason we got the house we did was I could get a room at the end and turn it into a hobby room (xbox, two cabinets with all 1000+ of my doods) painting desk etc. I think I'd be a very foolish person if I put all this time and effort and money into.something and then didn't do anything much wiyh it ot didn't care about it. I kinda need to be a bit serious at this point, especially after nearly 20 years of hobbying.

And that's the thing. Like most things in real life you can 'arse about' with it, but at a certain point, if you want to go further, get better at it etc, you gotta step up to the plate and put some effort in. It's as true for running, cooking, weight lifting, painting etc. Hell even 'netflix and chill' requires a bit of research to avoid the dross. Wargaming is a very enjoyable, but expensive and time consuming hobby. I think its worth it to put that bit of effort in.

This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2021/05/03 06:59:59


greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy

"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are" 
   
Made in ca
Secretive Dark Angels Veteran




Vancouver, BC

 aphyon wrote:
Once again you miss the entire point you are purposely trying to force a loss so you can always be right-it is a form of reverse list tailoring. it comes across as a very thin attempt to hide WAAC player behavior. the entire point of the fluff lists when they existed is that they were both in alignment with the lore and also viable lists. some were very restrictive in their options like ravenwing/deathwing and some were less specific like a green tide list for orks (did a battle against a 4th ed ork codex greed tide army -over 100 on foot-recently as well-he won by objectives with only 5 models left in play and i only had 8).

I'm reducing the problem to its state of least complexity. Modern 40k started with 3rd edition, so I to start here. In addition to being first, the 3rd edition of 40k has the least rules and, according to posters in this very thread, the single fluffiest codex to have ever been written (3.5 Chaos). To remove subjectivity from the process I aim to create two lists at extremes of the spectrum in terms of rules but which are exactly equal in terms of fluff to show that the two have never been in alignment, except as happy accidents, for any of 40k's long history. In doing such, I will show that 40k cannot be played casually as the balance is far too loose to allow for such a careless play without creating hard feelings for a certain subset of players using a certain subset of lists.

Your rebuttals have all been claims that I have missed the point or incorrect assertions about the state of the rules in the edition I have chosen to pen my proof in.
   
Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard





washington state USA

Each faction has had one codex that was the best for core rules/mechanics that fit the lore than any other to come before or after it without counting newer models that may have been added later. for most factions that was either 3rd or 4th edition with a few exceptions in 5th. the 3.5 chaos codex is not alone in this.



GAMES-DUST1947/infinity/B5 wars/epic 40K/5th ed 40K/victory at sea/warmachine/battle tactics/monpoc/battletech/battlefleet gothic/castles in the sky,/heavy gear 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




NE Ohio, USA

 Canadian 5th wrote:

ccs wrote:
Define "pool of available options". Same codex? All 3e codex?, All the options (Codex + FW + WD + Journal, etc) in 3e?
I will warn you, I don't consider 3e DE an option as I don't play with models I don't like. Since the only two models in the DE range of that era I liked were the two slave girls from Vects raider.... Well, it's pretty hard to make an army out of 2 models that didn't have rules.

I pick your entire list from codex to wargear using the entire range of options that existed at the end of 3rd edition. I then write fluff for that list that matches with the lore as it stood at the end of 3rd edition. I do this with the aim of giving you the least mechanically functional list that the fluff allows for.

For my own list, I'll do the same but with the aim of making the most mechanically viable force that can be justified by the fluff.


Just saying, you bring me any 3e era DE models (except the slave girls) & you'll have come a long way for nothing.


 Canadian 5th wrote:
F* no. That's why there's different missions, new scenarios, you alter game sizes up/down etc. Even the boardgames I play are highly variable.

I've just described playing 3e with a bad list that you can't afford to upgrade in a shop full of players with better lists. Given how basic that editions matched play scenarios were even that doesn't offer much solace to such an unfortunate soul.


Now you're channeling Karol? Playing in the toxic wastes of Poland vs a bunch of donkey-caves & completely lacking even the tinniest bit of will/creativity to better your army?

 Canadian 5th wrote:
Define "a student's budget".... I can do quite a bit with limited resources though.

Minimum wage @ 24 hours per week, minus the cost of average living expenses for the area you live in, and assuming that this student only spends 25% of his remaining discretionary budget on this hobby and doesn't have more than a few hours per week to devote to the game.


We'll just pretend that's a thing in my area & call the funds available for 40k $30/$35/week. Like I said, I can do a lot with little. This is enough.


 Canadian 5th wrote:
I'm literally aiming to show 40k at its worst here to prove that it is fundamentally broken.


So you've embarked on a fool's errand.
Especially with the $ aspect - because there's any # of pasttimes that people with $30 to spend per week will find prohibitively expensive (unless they're smart & creative -& no, playing with empty black bases counts for neither).
   
Made in dk
Pyro Pilot of a Triach Stalker






 CommanderWalrus wrote:
Thank you for the responses everyone. Your explanations make sense and I think a lot of interesting discussion has been started. Though I hope everyone remembers to be polite in general, we owe our fellow man at least a little charity no matter what.
Also, funnily enough it wasn't too long after this post that I found an online group of people discussing Crusade Rules/narrative play and playing for a story instead of winning. So I guess this discussion does happen, just not as much. I'm silly.

Link?

I made some narrative warzone rules rewrites, I think casuals deserve good rules as well. I also discuss why I think the changes are needed. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/796068.page
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






 Canadian 5th wrote:
 aphyon wrote:
Once again you miss the entire point you are purposely trying to force a loss so you can always be right-it is a form of reverse list tailoring. it comes across as a very thin attempt to hide WAAC player behavior. the entire point of the fluff lists when they existed is that they were both in alignment with the lore and also viable lists. some were very restrictive in their options like ravenwing/deathwing and some were less specific like a green tide list for orks (did a battle against a 4th ed ork codex greed tide army -over 100 on foot-recently as well-he won by objectives with only 5 models left in play and i only had 8).

I'm reducing the problem to its state of least complexity. Modern 40k started with 3rd edition, so I to start here. In addition to being first, the 3rd edition of 40k has the least rules and, according to posters in this very thread, the single fluffiest codex to have ever been written (3.5 Chaos). To remove subjectivity from the process I aim to create two lists at extremes of the spectrum in terms of rules but which are exactly equal in terms of fluff to show that the two have never been in alignment, except as happy accidents, for any of 40k's long history. In doing such, I will show that 40k cannot be played casually as the balance is far too loose to allow for such a careless play without creating hard feelings for a certain subset of players using a certain subset of lists.

Your rebuttals have all been claims that I have missed the point or incorrect assertions about the state of the rules in the edition I have chosen to pen my proof in.

Careless play is not the same thing as casual play. Casual play is simply the idea of not playing in full-bore-competetive mode, which can be anything from fluffy lists to narrative scenarios with built-in imbalances. Throwing up two random fluffy lists and then playing "for keeps" is precisely missing the point, especially as a dedicated group of casual players will often discuss their lists ahead of time for the sake of theme.

Skew lists of competetive playes can wind up with the same results by virtue of rock-scissor-paper-like interaction.

Chaos 3.5 could make many fluffy lists. Some of which were good, some of which were not good. What made the book enjoyable was options, customizeability and character, not the fact that Siren could be abused as a power. I'm sure that made it enjoyable to some, but it's certainly not why I think the book is the gold standard for a Chaos book.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/03 08:38:52


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Deadnight 798035 11113461 wrote:

In terms of 'paying for the rules', I also pay for the lore and other stuff that comes packaged in a codex/rulebook. Rules are a bonus, as I see it.


That is good for you, but how does it help all the legion of people who bought the models and rules to play the game , and not to paint models, read lore or other stuff?

That is a bit like someone with a fine set of rules, telling someone with a bad set of rules that the game is okey, because they are having fun.



Now you're channeling Karol? Playing in the toxic wastes of Poland vs a bunch of donkey-caves & completely lacking even the tinniest bit of will/creativity to better your army?


only what I talk about has nothing to do with toxicity, and everything with different play enviroments being build based around the fact that people have different levels of income. There is a difference in to playing the game, when you have 30$ per week and someone who has 30$ or less per month.
Took me over 3 years to realise that people in other countries consider having multiple armies as something normal, while here a ton of people quit before they mange to save up enough to buy one army. You don't think that the need to have one working army, while you can't afford multiple armies, doesn't have an impact how a meta is shaped?

The sole fact that a lot of games are played at home in some areas makes it a heck lot of different comparing to those places where you play mostly at stores.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in fi
Ye Lord of The End Times (and a good guy)





 CommanderWalrus wrote:
One thing I've noticed on these forums and pretty much everywhere else people discuss 40k is that the conversation is pretty much universally slanted to a more competitive side.
Why is this? IMO the game is more fun played more casually, and it seems many people share this opinion, but yet 90% of the discussion is on how to win at all costs. Whenever a new codex is out the discussion is heavily weighted on how strong it is and not how fun it is. The 9th edition Necron Codex comes to mind since while it doesn't have the most competitive options, it is a blast to play for more casual games since it has so many cool and unique options. But I see almost no one talk about some of these things because it doesn't relate to "meta". Any idea why this is, in general?


They do. There's no competive games in game that can't be played competively like gw games.

All games in 40k are beer&pertzel games by definition.

2021 painted/bought: 538/575 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Nothing that has a 700$+ cost can be considered b&p. When you start costing like a playstation, you leave the casual for fun area of costs. 100$ for full game, yeah that is B&P, but not w40k. Not even when majority of the models in the area re recasts.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






Karol wrote:
Nothing that has a 700$+ cost can be considered b&p. When you start costing like a playstation, you leave the casual for fun area of costs. 100$ for full game, yeah that is B&P, but not w40k. Not even when majority of the models in the area re recasts.


So your telling me video game players are all competitive and not laid back playing games for causl and fun with many drinking beer and eating snacks when doing so? B.c if so then i have been lied to my entire life and I guess I'm a pro gaming, hmm I wonder what team I can be on for Horizon Zero Dawn?

15k+
3k
Emperor's Spears 2k
Beastmen 9500
CoS: 3500

Reading/Writing LD, be kind!

https://maddpaint.blogspot.com 
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

I think this thread neatly outlines to OP why there isn’t much casual play discussion. It gets drowned out and shut down by people without the willpower to simply not post about something they don’t enjoy. This thread is a sad demonstration of why there’s less casual play chat than there could be.

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Karol wrote:

That is good for you, but how does it help all the legion of people who bought the models and rules to play the game , and not to paint models, read lore or other stuff?

That is a bit like someone with a fine set of rules, telling someone with a bad set of rules that the game is okey, because they are having fun.


Yes but Not really. It's someone whose figured out an approach that makes the game work for them, and they're now enjoying their games and are having fun. Am I wrong in having fun? Am I wrong in telling people I'm having fun and enjoying my gsmes? Am I wrong in suggesting this approach? You not taking up the advice- well that's on you. Go ahead, be miserable. Be a martyr. I can't make you enjoy your games but I can sure enjoy mine.


I buy the same books as you. I just don't subscribe to the 'cult of officialdom' that treats rules as a bitter angry god thst demands unquestioning obedience and zero deviation.

If you're only in it to play the game - firstly there is nothing wrong with that, but from my pov you're missing out on a lot of what this hobby is about, and what, imo makes it great.

If you're buying gw rules and models just to play gw games, firstly, that is in my mind the worst reason to get into gw games. You're missing out on so much of what makes this hobby great. it doesn't take much research to learn gw's rules writing isn't the best, is pretty crap more often than not, and frankly, if that's what you're after, you're going in with your eyes shut and determined to stick it out, and aren't interested in the lore, hobbyimg or other stuff, you're being foolish, you're going to be bitterly disappointed by gw, and only less slightly less bitterly disappointed by the other ttgs as frankly, all of them have flaws and limitations - it's the nature of the medium, really.
Far better, imo to find other aspects of the game/hobby and other approaches that mitigate this. Ot worst case scenario, consider if this hobby really is for you.

Anyway, How does it help? I'm providing advise on different perspectives and different approaches to this game/hobby that have in some ways, made me fall in love with my hobby again and which I feel may benefit others other than myself. Its called 'learning'. You should always be willing to listen to advise and other perspectives from other folks. Now if you choose not to take up this advise that's fine, but if you don't and you stay miserable, maybe consider that your approach, and your community that insists on a toxic approach is what is contributing to your frustration.

Karol wrote:
Nothing that has a 700$+ cost can be considered b&p. When you start costing like a playstation, you leave the casual for fun area of costs. 100$ for full game, yeah that is B&P, but not w40k. Not even when majority of the models in the area re recasts.


So wrong...

So.i guess I can't casually play my xbox one and all my games then? I can't have an 'easy game that I can faff about with then?

I guess I've been videogaming wrong for thirty years now...

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/05/03 09:13:33


 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




So wrong...

So.i guess I can't casually play my xbox one and all my games then? I can't have an 'easy game that I can faff about with then?


Well maybe it is just my low english skill. But casual to me is something that is unimportant in its outcome. Doesn't mean if you win or lose. Money on the other hand makes everything serious. If playing w40k cost 100-150$, well then I would say it could be a casual game, even if the real armies cost more. The thing about w40k is though, that it does not cost 100-150$. And when something costs two of your moms monthly salaries, it stops to be in the the cathegory where you don't care about the out comes. Specially when there is such a huge gap between bad and good armies, and being a bad army doesn't mean you cost less.

Or to make an easy example. Imagine you buy an xbox in Poland, and you don't live in one of the 5-6 biggest cities, and then find out that to play it you need a good internet connection 24/7 or it just turns itself off. There is a reason why I used a playstation in my example. Same can be said about almost no one here using apple products etc a 1000$ army with books and updates + hours spent painting is not something that could be describe as a casual hobby around here, and yes I do know that there are people in the world that considered collecting yachts and jet liners as a hobby.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Karol wrote:
So wrong...

So.i guess I can't casually play my xbox one and all my games then? I can't have an 'easy game that I can faff about with then?


Well maybe it is just my low english skill. But casual to me is something that is unimportant in its outcome. Doesn't mean if you win or lose. Money on the other hand makes everything serious. If playing w40k cost 100-150$, well then I would say it could be a casual game, even if the real armies cost more. The thing about w40k is though, that it does not cost 100-150$. And when something costs two of your moms monthly salaries, it stops to be in the the cathegory where you don't care about the out comes. Specially when there is such a huge gap between bad and good armies, and being a bad army doesn't mean you cost less.

Or to make an easy example. Imagine you buy an xbox in Poland, and you don't live in one of the 5-6 biggest cities, and then find out that to play it you need a good internet connection 24/7 or it just turns itself off. There is a reason why I used a playstation in my example. Same can be said about almost no one here using apple products etc a 1000$ army with books and updates + hours spent painting is not something that could be describe as a casual hobby around here, and yes I do know that there are people in the world that considered collecting yachts and jet liners as a hobby.


You should have done your research then on your xbox and if it's unworkable, consider an alternative approach. In this case, playstation. In wargaming terms, a different perspective and way of playing.

Your initisl point was it can't be beer an pretzels if it costs a bit. That's patently false. Stop trying to row back.

You can absolutely be serious about your hobby, spend big bucks, and enjoy beer and pretzel type games. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Especially if it costs money you should be serious about it, you should consider the best way of getting value out of it. Which is why you should consider the alternative advice and perspectives from.folks who have mitigated a lot of the issues that you embrace unquestioningly.

greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy

"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are" 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Wrote an unreadable wall of text.

To make it simple. I did research. No tells you that an army can be bad and stay bad, when they sell it. And me being me at 13, I did not expect something that costs that much be of such low quality and with the company that makes it not wanting to fix it.

I don't have an Xbox or Playstation or a tablet, because I bought my army. I wouldn't buy an xbox where I live, because how it works, or rather doesn't, is common knowladge. And on the forums I was told to pick the stuff I liked and play that. And I did, and it ended really bad.

There is no outside stuff for me to do in the hobby anyway. GW doesn't have novels about my army, the last new models came out in 7th ed, and my stuff is already painted, although the bases being colour coded somehow count as not painted, but I ain't going to fix that.

So no I don't think that stuff that cost upwards of 1000$, which is around 2 normal salaries in my area, is for me or people living in my area something casual or that makes it a B&P game. Not when beer costs 1,5$ and a bag of pretzels around 0,75$.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/05/03 09:40:43


 
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

Significant misapprehension in your posts, Karol.

You can absolutely spend the required cash to play 40K, enjoy the hobby and social aspect, and not give two hoots if you win or lose so long as it’s a fun game. The cash spent on 40K is not solely towards winning games of 40K, for most folk. If that’s your whole goal then you might feel burnt if you lose. But there is lot happens off the gaming table that is valid hobby and people love.

Just because you don’t share a mindset does not mean it doesn’t exist.

I know you got tricked into buying GK and have been your scene’s whipping boy for several editions, and that colours your outlook, but try seeing things from someone else’s POV and you might grok things better.

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in ca
Secretive Dark Angels Veteran




Vancouver, BC

 JohnnyHell wrote:
I know you got tricked into buying GK and have been your scene’s whipping boy for several editions, and that colours your outlook, but try seeing things from someone else’s POV and you might grok things better.

I know you were born poor and ended up getting kicked down the rungs of society's greased ladder for your entire life, and that colours your outlook, but try imagining how sweet life is for the upper-classes and you'll see why your experience is invalid.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/03 10:05:03


 
   
Made in ch
Warped Arch Heretic of Chaos





yup, for the price the B&P game demands, it's laughable what get's let through.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page
A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

In the 41st millennium there is only overpriced hamberders.

 
   
Made in gb
Lit By the Flames of Prospero






How have people turned playing a game casually into a competition?
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I'm not sure dakka spends much time talking about competitive 40k.

It just talks about "balance" - which is a topic you can weigh in on regardless of knowledge or experience. By contrast its hard to enter a discussion on two players just having a good time. It turns out 40k is quite fun if you play it with friends - which may serve as a tonic for all the people who can't understand why it continues to be commercially successful - but I'm not sure what to say beyond that.

I do think "fluff" has sort of stopped being a feature of list building - although I think in some way that's because GW has sort of embraced it themselves. So going beyond where the rules (chapter tactics and other bonuses) are taking you feels stranger than perhaps it did in the old days.

So for example the new DE codex may be the most overpowered thing since Marines 2.0 since the Knights Codex since 7th edition Eldar since.... etc.

But is it fluffy? Well.. kinda. If you think an Incubi should chop marines down left and right they do that.

But to my mind there isn't much in that book that allows personal fluff expression. Your army - even if you lean really heavily into one of the subfactions - will look much like everyone else's. Unless you go really off the reservation - lets say no transports and random bad custom chapter tactics. At that point I'm not sure I'm satisfying a fluff vision, I'm just making a bad list for the sake of it.

To a degree I think this is just a mentality thing. I find it often in computer games - when I know nothing, I can just have fun. Once I know a lot however its jarring to go "I'm going to combine suboptimal thing with suboptimal thing and look at my complete lack of synergy". The result is just "oh this doesn't work as well" - which I knew would be the case. Exploration has given way to a focus on results. I might not like it, but its hard to go back.
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

 Canadian 5th wrote:
 JohnnyHell wrote:
I know you got tricked into buying GK and have been your scene’s whipping boy for several editions, and that colours your outlook, but try seeing things from someone else’s POV and you might grok things better.

I know you were born poor and ended up getting kicked down the rungs of society's greased ladder for your entire life, and that colours your outlook, but try imagining how sweet life is for the upper-classes and you'll see why your experience is invalid.


I genuinely don’t know if this is agreement, rebuttal, Rule 1 violation or what! Help me out and explain?

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






delete

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/03 11:13:26


15k+
3k
Emperor's Spears 2k
Beastmen 9500
CoS: 3500

Reading/Writing LD, be kind!

https://maddpaint.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







I have Canadian5th on ignore so I am only getting half the conversation and it is hilarious.

The type of guy that would be shunned in any play environment warrants a response on Dakka - which is why we can't talk about casual play. People don't ignore the clown in the room like you can IRL.
   
Made in us
Exalted Beastlord




 JohnnyHell wrote:
 Canadian 5th wrote:
 JohnnyHell wrote:
I know you got tricked into buying GK and have been your scene’s whipping boy for several editions, and that colours your outlook, but try seeing things from someone else’s POV and you might grok things better.

I know you were born poor and ended up getting kicked down the rungs of society's greased ladder for your entire life, and that colours your outlook, but try imagining how sweet life is for the upper-classes and you'll see why your experience is invalid.


I genuinely don’t know if this is agreement, rebuttal, Rule 1 violation or what! Help me out and explain?


Canadian's 'rephrasing' what you said to Karol, because apparently 'obviously' you're actually going for oppressive class warfare in your stance.

However you want to take it, I wouldn't bother with engaging it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/03 11:26:00


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






The wild thing, for me, is the fact that it's easier - and I know, I know, everyone is going to jump down my throat and say BUT WHAT IF I JUST HAPPENED TO CHOOSE EXACTLY THE COMPETITIVE UNITS OF JUST THIS EXACT MOMENT WHAT THEN but, outside of bizarre outliers like that that do happen, its easier and cheaper to just not...make super competitive skew lists.

I've played somewhere that it's just not all that common practice for anyone to keep up with the competitive joneses for the longest time, and the net result is just that you generally end up with less one-sided PUGs, more games that actually last to turn 5, and everyone involved saves a ton of money.

There are flukes, obviously. In 7th ed, we had a longstanding Saim-Hann player who got the whole scatter laser jetbike thing dropped into his lap, and while his army did include several Vypers which were one of the few bad eldar units at the time and his bikes did all adhere to the old 'one heavy weapon in 3" restriction, he was pretty dang miserable to play against for a while. The biggest mess occurred when Space Marines 2.0 basically shattered the meta, because we had five or six players with all-primaris or mostly-primaris army lists that ended up head and shoulders above everyone else, and because there were so many space marine players present, didnt feel any pressure to dial back on their lists at all because nobody else was doing it.

In all my time of playing since the beginning of fifth, I've never seen someone actually manage to coincidentally create a real, honest to god competitive S-tier army list by accident. The Eldar player in 7th had no wraithknights, had Vypers and Shining Spears (which were both bad at the time) and had mostly shuricat/shuricannon jetbikes rather than the meta scatter lasers.

With the marine 2.0 lists, it was like

-one guy playing Iron Hands who had the usual 'played SM before primaris' list of mostly firstborn tanks+the primaris troops from the various starter boxes

-two guys playing space wolves with mostly the unique space wolf units eg wulfen thunderwolves shield dreads etc

-one guy playing BA with the BA unique stuff+primaris troops

-one guy playing ravenguard with the new primaris sneaky boys

-one guy playing salamanders+blood angels who liked dreadnoughts and wanted to bring as many dreadnoughts as possible

-a couple dark angels players mostly focusing on the deathwing

-a guy playing all bike and jump pack white scars

-a guy playing super classic all-primaris ultramarine gunpile with either guilliman or the new calgar model

the closest to an up to the moment competitive list was probably the raven guard player? but he never had the thing they were really notorious for which was sneak-striking the big chunky guys straight into your lines turn 1.

Sure, you could be our resident raven guard player and you could get your new SM 2.0 codex and you could be like 'oh boy time to get a couple boxes of Assault Cents and paint 'em up!' but...why? He was already winning games really easily with his awesome new codex rules. He hated the way centurions looked, and they didnt fit at all with the theme of his army. they'd cost him like 120 dollars for the full squad of six and take like 20 hours to paint up, and to get what? To make him win games in 1 hour instead of 1.5 hours?

At the end of the day, people understand that what goes around, comes around. What's amazing right now is unlikely to stay that way for 6 months. So the general, unspoken club policy is that people just don't tend to choose to buy things just to get the rules that those things have right now, and they tend not to throw models in the garbage if the balancing cycle of the game has moved past them. Sure, every once in a while, something being really competitive catches someone's attention and they build a unit in a particular way, but then people tend to just keep them on after they're not top tier anymore because gak's not free. The guy who bought into Militarum Tempestus because he'd always liked how they looked but they suddenly became really good in early 8th is still playing his MT army now that they're lower-tier, as is the guy who got into custodes when they were having a moment.

Its incredible to me that there apparently exist groups out there where the norm is dropping hundreds and hundreds of dollars and dozens of hours trying to chase the dragon of having an up-to-the-moment tournament tier list at any given time. That's so many times more effort than just everyone building their collections at a reasonable, affordable pace, and what do you get for it? A group that's just impenetrable by new players or returning collectors? Shorter, less interesting games? a 4x more expensive hobby?

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in us
Powerful Pegasus Knight





 Gert wrote:
How have people turned playing a game casually into a competition?
This is human nature like i stated before. This thread shows the arms-race in action. Rules have to attempt to accommodate for that in the listbuilding phase or people are just going to get blown out before the game even starts.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







Well, on the whole "accidentally good army list" front, that happened to me with both 40k and AoS.

In 2017, I created a fun Slaanesh Daemons army. The lore was built around the idea of a "court" of six Keepers of Secrets around an Exalted Keeper. So seven Keepers, all using 3rd party models because the current keeper at the time was from like 2nd edition.

Suddenly, in 2019, an explosion of new Slaanesh releases (new battletome for AoS) and abrupt support for an army that everyone genuinely thought would be killed off. In AoS, Keeper spam became the super amazing ridiculous list, and so I quit playing.

Come 9th edition 40k, and once again keepers of secrets are the gold standard for a tough, fast, fighty melee unit on a small board. The max allowed KoS is not an uncommon list.

Fortunately the latest AoS battletome toned them back down, but jeepers batman.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: