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.

 Blndmage wrote:
We're not talking about working for a Corporation, we're talking about playing Warhammer.

I'm talking about how life is a struggle and merely using the artifice of sport and capitalism as examples. Games are a reflection of life and should be played with the same vigor lest they become boring.

Or you could play games and do sports in a more relaxed and laid-back manner as a respite from the rat race. Not everyone wants to come home to a second job that they're not even getting paid for.

He is entitled to his opinions. Not everyone plays sports for participation medals, and that's totally fine. There are competitive people and there are more laid back people.

The underlying problem in this thread is that everyone has their own internalized definition of what constitutes a "casual" game/players.

The way I read it, Canadian 5th is only arguing against the notion/implication that anything that's not actual GT setting or an actual 'competition' falls under casual, and that it's wrong to play a casual game of 40k with winning as the goal. All he's claiming is that there is nothing wrong with playing a tight game even in casual settings with the goal to win - winning is just as a valid way to enjoy the game as any other 'casual' fun that can be had while playing 40k.

Everyone has a different views on what they consider 'fun', period. No one's telling you to go play with someone who you consider 'unfun' because they focus on winning the game. Just go find another 'friend' to play with, that's all. No need to get all sour because some people enjoy playing to win.

Why does no one talk about casual play? Because there is nothing to talk about. You either had fun or you didn't. Not much else to saw.

What he is suggesting is that the only right way to play is to play to win, which people are disagreeing with because funnily enough, personal enjoyment is a subjective matter. At which point he went waaaayy off-topic with stuff that has pretty much nothing to do with the topic of playing 40k to justify "there is no such thing as casual wargaming".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Easy E wrote:
Why does no one talk about casual play? Because there is nothing to talk about. You either had fun or you didn't. Not much else to saw.

10 thread pages would seem to suggest otherwise.

 Gert wrote:
What he is suggesting is that the only right way to play is to play to win, which people are disagreeing with because funnily enough, personal enjoyment is a subjective matter. At which point he went waaaayy off-topic with stuff that has pretty much nothing to do with the topic of playing 40k to justify "there is no such thing as casual wargaming".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Easy E wrote:
Why does no one talk about casual play? Because there is nothing to talk about. You either had fun or you didn't. Not much else to saw.

10 thread pages would seem to suggest otherwise.

And there is no particular issue with him thinking the way he thinks in terms of how you view what 'casual' entails and how you play the game, is there? There isn't anything factual about this that demands 4 pages worth of witch hunt IMO.

If he's wrong, he's wrong. If he's right, then he's right. No amount of chatter from the peanut gallery that is internet will change a way a person thinks, especially in an informal setting such as this.

I personally think the term 'casual' was too muddied along the course of this discussion to yield any meaningful discussion going forward.

Those 10 pages are mostly gate keeping and "wrong fun" style posts. So, like I said. Not much to say about it and I AM a casual player.....

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
We're not talking about working for a Corporation, we're talking about playing Warhammer.

I'm talking about how life is a struggle and merely using the artifice of sport and capitalism as examples. Games are a reflection of life and should be played with the same vigor lest they become boring.

Which is your opinion, but not a fact. Which is pretty much what this entire thread has been about, but people like you seem to constantly miss.

It's just as accurate to say people play games as an escape from the very struggles that real life throws at them. The fact people in this thread have already clearly stated they play games in that fashion proves that your assertion is not universally true. I'd argue miniature wargames probably represent that better than most given their ability to provide a creative outlet in terms of both the modelling/painting side of things and the expression of creativity in creating your army list.

 Gert wrote:
What he is suggesting is that the only right way to play is to play to win, which people are disagreeing with because funnily enough, personal enjoyment is a subjective matter. At which point he went waaaayy off-topic with stuff that has pretty much nothing to do with the topic of playing 40k to justify "there is no such thing as casual wargaming".

My argument is that I don't think a hobby that has as much investment can be casual and that the reason casual and narrative players avoid competitive players is that they'd have less fun if they got tabled by turn two every game. Of course, some players who think they're casual will try to handwave this away by calling anybody with a tuned list a WAAC power gamer who uses omega cheese and wants to win in the list-building stage. We're playing the same game, my comp list can be just as well painted and modeled as yours, I could even write a few pages of fluff and battle honors for key units; so why is my playing to win without a desire to handicap myself somehow wrong bad fun?

When I finish work or need a break from assignments, I will sit at my desk, stick on a movie or show and paint my minis to chill out.
If and when I can get a chance to play some 40k/AoS/BA/Necromunda/30k/whatever else, I'm doing it more for the social aspect of playing a wargame, meeting up with friends, or going to a local store and having a game there. Do I want to win? Sure I do but I'm not going to have my whole experience ruined if I lose the game. I just bought the Drukhari Combat Patrol but I didn't start Drukhari because their rules were top tier, I started them because space elf pirates are cool, the models are great and I have four Chaos armies and two Imperial and needed a change. Warhammer fills exactly the same role as gaming or reading, it's something I do so my whole life isn't working or studying.

Competitive gaming is absolutely a thing with Warhammer but outright stating there can't be anything other than competitive hobbyists is an extremely poor argument when there is ample evidence to the contrary.
Nobody is saying "all competitive players are WAAC power nerds with no skill in painting or modeling". Nobody is saying your version of fun is wrong. What people are saying is that your version of fun is not the only version of fun because it is a subjective concept and therefore cannot be defined one way or another.

 Canadian 5th wrote:
I'm talking about how life is a struggle...

But why are you talking about that?

That's not the topic of this thread. At all.

Again, a lot of people see the person one plays Warhammer with as both a teammate and an opponent. As I said you don't take your teammate out for the glory of the winning score.

It's a little more nuanced due to the fact that you are playing against each other but to many it really is not a real competitive endeavour.

I don't know about a witchhunt but I certainly think it will be beneficial for Karol to hear opposing views, the world is not as bleak as he assumes.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Gert wrote:
What he is suggesting is that the only right way to play is to play to win, which people are disagreeing with because funnily enough, personal enjoyment is a subjective matter. At which point he went waaaayy off-topic with stuff that has pretty much nothing to do with the topic of playing 40k to justify "there is no such thing as casual wargaming".

My argument is that I don't think a hobby that has as much investment can be casual and that the reason casual and narrative players avoid competitive players is that they'd have less fun if they got tabled by turn two every game. Of course, some players who think they're casual will try to handwave this away by calling anybody with a tuned list a WAAC power gamer who uses omega cheese and wants to win in the list-building stage. We're playing the same game, my comp list can be just as well painted and modeled as yours, I could even write a few pages of fluff and battle honors for key units; so why is my playing to win without a desire to handicap myself somehow wrong bad fun?

If you want to play that way, find like minded people play your way. You wanting to play without a "handicap" can be bad fun for the people you play with depending on what those people are in for.
If you for example are playing dark eldar and you had a game with a friend in a non-tournament setting, and said friend doesn't always want to play with super tuned lists, wouldn't it be reasonable for that friend to ask you to turn your dark eldar list down a bit so you both can have fun playing? It's all about expectations and the context of how you want to play.

As I said you don't take your teammate out for the glory of the winning score.

How often were you in a situation where out of a 8-12 people in the class only 2 get a sports scholarship, or 1-2 get added to a national youth team? I can tell you that people are willing to do anything to throw others under the bus, team or no team. There is a reason why every good trainer tells you to never accept food, drink or help from anyone, including fellow team mates, because they may just be setting you up to be disqualifed.

I mean just two years ago, two guys from the Dutch wrestling team got DQ, because seals on their gear were damaged. And the only way for it to happen would be to either them doing it , which would make no sense, their trainer doing it, possible but still strange or someone from their team who got in to top 8 instead of them after the DQ and getting the qualifire.

The thing that goes on in gymnast teams for girls is attrocious, and it is a cross nation cross time know thing. It was horrible in the 90s and it is horrible now. There is a reason why so many of them drop out and start doing everything else, but that.

Football teams, bike teams specially the professional ones where they juice the living hell out of each other. How do you people think they find out they are taking stuff? Because people snitch on each other. The russians lost the right to hymn and flag, just because 3 people and a trainer felt done wrong.

My argument is that I don't think a hobby that has as much investment can be casual and that the reason casual and narrative players avoid competitive players is that they'd have less fun if they got tabled by turn two every game.

no worries mr Canadia, someone will soon inform you that because there are people who collect XVI century paintings and deep sea yachts, w40k as a hobby is a miniscule investment comparing to real hobbies.

Karol wrote:

As I said you don't take your teammate out for the glory of the winning score.

How often were you in a situation where out of a 8-12 people in the class only 2 get a sports scholarship, or 1-2 get added to a national youth team? I can tell you that people are willing to do anything to throw others under the bus, team or no team. There is a reason why every good trainer tells you to never accept food, drink or help from anyone, including fellow team mates, because they may just be setting you up to be disqualifed.

I mean just two years ago, two guys from the Dutch wrestling team got DQ, because seals on their gear were damaged. And the only way for it to happen would be to either them doing it , which would make no sense, their trainer doing it, possible but still strange or someone from their team who got in to top 8 instead of them after the DQ and getting the qualifire.

The thing that goes on in gymnast teams for girls is attrocious, and it is a cross nation cross time know thing. It was horrible in the 90s and it is horrible now. There is a reason why so many of them drop out and start doing everything else, but that.

Football teams, bike teams specially the professional ones where they juice the living hell out of each other. How do you people think they find out they are taking stuff? Because people snitch on each other. The russians lost the right to hymn and flag, just because 3 people and a trainer felt done wrong.

My argument is that I don't think a hobby that has as much investment can be casual and that the reason casual and narrative players avoid competitive players is that they'd have less fun if they got tabled by turn two every game.

no worries mr Canadia, someone will soon inform you that because there are people who collect XVI century paintings and deep sea yachts, w40k as a hobby is a miniscule investment comparing to real hobbies.

I don't understant that sports analogy. I am by no means saying you are wrong by stating that there are many sketchy things going on in professional sports, but what does that have to do with playing 40k? People applying for sports scholarships are trying to dedicate their life to that sport and make a living there (at least for some time until they are too old), the pressure and incentive to do anything to gain an advantage there is obviously very high. I don't understand how that translates in any way to playing 40k....I dare to say that 99% of people in this thread are not trying to make a living being a professional 40k player, for the vast majority it is simply a hobby.

And ... I'm out. Casual discussion no longer casual.... have fun folks.

Canadian 5th wrote:

ccs wrote:
Your perception of how things work is not reality.

I'm pretty sure that Karol goes to a school focused on sports as a means to get students into post-secondary education via sports scholarships. So it very likely is - or recently was - a major part of his reality.

I've bolded the relevant parts - most notably how Karol's experience only pertains to his reality, and not everyone else's.

Now, if all the other posters here were saying how "everyone's a lovely person" and "there are no bad eggs" and "our experience of life is the only true one", you'd have a point. But that's not what other posters are saying. What's happening is that Karol's (and I mean this in the tamest possible way) warped world view, brought about by presumably an incredibly toxic environment, does not apply for everyone else, but he is claiming that it does. The only user here who is overwriting the lived experiences of other users here is Karol.

Posters here are quick to assume that a middle-class version of life is everybody else's baseline and that simply isn't true.

Agreed - and likewise, Karol's version of life isn't the same as mine. So when Karol turns around and essentially implies that I shouldn't be capable of having the outlook on life that I do, why on earth should I not call that out?

Canadian 5th wrote:Anything done at the highest level values winning at all costs over anything else.

Remind me where I said I played 40k at the highest levels?

It is human nature to compete. If it wasn't we'd never have developed the technology and social structure that we have.

That is a hilarious misunderstanding of what "human nature" is.

It's animal nature to mindlessly compete and horde resources, to crab bucket the competition. It's human nature (and the nature of some of the most successful species) to co-operate, to support one another, to help and provide. One of the oldest human remains we can find is of an elderly person with signs of healed broken limbs. There's no way they could have supported for themselves in their age and physical condition during the time they were alive, yet the remains indicate that they lived long after the breakage of their bones. The only logical outcome is that, millennia ago, humans were supporting and helping one another - before empires, before cities, before "society".

That's my take on the baloney that is "life can only be a competition".

Canadian 5th wrote:Games are a reflection of life and should be played with the same vigor lest they become boring.

Disagree. Vigour doesn't mean winning.

skchsan wrote:He is entitled to his opinions. Not everyone plays sports for participation medals, and that's totally fine. There are competitive people and there are more laid back people.

He is entitled to his opinions, yes. As am I, and everyone else. I don't see anyone erasing his opinions or saying he can't have them. The issue is that he's imposing his opinions and attitudes that "the game can only be competitive" on everyone else.

The way I read it, Canadian 5th is only arguing against the notion/implication that anything that's not actual GT setting or an actual 'competition' falls under casual, and that it's wrong to play a casual game of 40k with winning as the goal. All he's claiming is that there is nothing wrong with playing a tight game even in casual settings with the goal to win - winning is just as a valid way to enjoy the game as any other 'casual' fun that can be had while playing 40k.

But what I'm seeing is that Canadian is outright unable to recognise that winning isn't always the goal, and claims that such enjoyment is impossible.
There is nothing wrong with playing a tight game in casual settings, but that's also not what everyone wants to play either.

Everyone has a different views on what they consider 'fun', period. No one's telling you to go play with someone who you consider 'unfun' because they focus on winning the game. Just go find another 'friend' to play with, that's all. No need to get all sour because some people enjoy playing to win.

Again, I don't think anyone is getting sour that people play to win. What is evident is that people are getting sour because some people *don't* play to win.

Canadian 5th wrote:My argument is that I don't think a hobby that has as much investment can be casual

Which definition of casual are we using here?

so why is my playing to win without a desire to handicap myself somehow wrong bad fun?

It's not wrong - I've outright encouraged you to enjoy that, if that's what you like. But it's not the same for everyone - which you ought to respect.

Not everyone plays to win. And that's just as valid as playing to win.

Karol wrote:

As I said you don't take your teammate out for the glory of the winning score.

How often were you in a situation where out of a 8-12 people in the class only 2 get a sports scholarship, or 1-2 get added to a national youth team?

What does that have to do with 40k? The more relevant question is how often was winning a game of 40k the thing standing between someone and a scholarship? Karol, you really need to stop making these ridiculous comparisons and start to understand that your situation is only one of a large number of very different situations. 40k is not an Olympic sport, it's not getting people scholarships to prestigious schools or universities. Even if an activity could have that sort of importance riding on its outcome, that's never the only situation where that activity is done. Winning Wimbledon in tennis or the US Open in golf are some of the top accolades a professional sportsperson can achieve. But I can play tennis or golf as a social activity, with the final score less relevant than the chance to spend time with friends doing a mutually enjoyable activity.

If you can’t play Warhammer without being competitive and wanting to crush the other component, how come I can play Warhammer on my own against myself and still really enjoy it even if I’m crushing myself?

 Horla wrote:
If you can’t play Warhammer without being competitive and wanting to crush the other component, how come I can play Warhammer on my own against myself and still really enjoy it even if I’m crushing myself?

Likely some gross personal defect on your part, I'm sure

No. It's far too polite for WoW discussions to be comparable.

It isn't great, but it's still better than that.

 waefre_1 wrote:

 Horla wrote:
If you can’t play Warhammer without being competitive and wanting to crush the other component, how come I can play Warhammer on my own against myself and still really enjoy it even if I’m crushing myself?

Likely some gross personal defect on your part, I'm sure

Spoiler:

/sarcasm for maximal clarity
Also, this thread is giving me some serious deja vu regarding previous discussions I've seen re: games like Classic WoW (eg. people getting gak from beardier sorts for taking an extra 30 mins to clear a portion of one raid when the guild isn't even attempting a speedrun), anyone else feeling that?

Yes, obviously. There's a whole subset of men in nerdy spaces who need to compensate for having what they perceive as a 'childish' hobby by pursuing it with a 'professional' serious attitude and look down on anyone who doesn't have that level of insecurity.

 the_scotsman wrote:

 waefre_1 wrote:

 Horla wrote:
If you can’t play Warhammer without being competitive and wanting to crush the other component, how come I can play Warhammer on my own against myself and still really enjoy it even if I’m crushing myself?

Likely some gross personal defect on your part, I'm sure

Spoiler:

/sarcasm for maximal clarity
Also, this thread is giving me some serious deja vu regarding previous discussions I've seen re: games like Classic WoW (eg. people getting gak from beardier sorts for taking an extra 30 mins to clear a portion of one raid when the guild isn't even attempting a speedrun), anyone else feeling that?

Yes, obviously. There's a whole subset of men in nerdy spaces who need to compensate for having what they perceive as a 'childish' hobby by pursuing it with a 'professional' serious attitude and look down on anyone who doesn't have that level of insecurity.

Too true.

IMO CS Lewis definitely had it right:

CS Lewis wrote: “When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.”

Embrace the ridiculousness of 40k and grown adults playing with toy soldiers!

 waefre_1 wrote:

 Horla wrote:
If you can’t play Warhammer without being competitive and wanting to crush the other component, how come I can play Warhammer on my own against myself and still really enjoy it even if I’m crushing myself?

Likely some gross personal defect on your part, I'm sure

You’ve been talking to my family, haven’t you?

 Horla wrote:

 waefre_1 wrote:

 Horla wrote:
If you can’t play Warhammer without being competitive and wanting to crush the other component, how come I can play Warhammer on my own against myself and still really enjoy it even if I’m crushing myself?

Likely some gross personal defect on your part, I'm sure

You’ve been talking to my family, haven’t you?

This thread suddenly got too real.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
I was suggesting that folks who want to build narrative lists enjoy doing so and not worry so much about winning. Declare victory on their own terms. Look at this army I have brought to life!

This right here. This is the attitude I value and have. I am also lucky to have friends who do this also. We build our armies for a theme like my full wych cults with bests and all that for the past ten years or fluffy catachan or then just a cool looking unit without considering it's power. We do not play to win, we play to have fun.

I also play at my local store against a casual list and tournament lists and I play as I have models on the table even if it's two models left with no way to win. That is actually the moment when you can just throw all sensible tactics out the window and do stupid stuff while thinking "could I pull it off... let's try!" To me individual units heroic deeds and all stuff like that is the thing. Managing to pull off cool things. Win or lose, I don't care and if I managed to do something awesome I'm definately happy.

Also it is a game of dice. There are propabilities but anything can happen. I have rolled 8 rolls of 6 with 10 D6 but also 10 rolls of 1 with 12 D6.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
We're not talking about working for a Corporation, we're talking about playing Warhammer.

I'm talking about how life is a struggle and merely using the artifice of sport and capitalism as examples. Games are a reflection of life and should be played with the same vigor lest they become boring.

This is such a strange idea. I can be competitive and life can be a struggle however, neither of that is life. No one lays on their death bed and says " Man I was so happy I worked so hard and kicked so much butt in games ! They weren't dull at all ! " I'd hope they'd think " I enjoyed every moment I could, I made the positive differences and I did right by my loved ones and those who helped me in life. "

Maybe I'm just way idealistic but breaking life down to that just makes it feel sort of, why even bother ? Why not then burn it all down, do whatever feels great and screw the rest. A very strange and simple view imo.

Games do not need to be signs of lifes struggle, games should perhaps be able to have competition and ups and downs but at the end they should be what takes you away from the daily struggles. That is why people, mostly, do them. No one I know is fired up to play some warhammer because they can't wait to work it like their job because life is tough so games should be equally tough. I just play it because I enjoy it and it's fun and I can put in it what I want to and take out the same win or lose.

Now people are entitled to their opinion, and I'm no casual for life, but if people feel like they have to work games hard because life is struggle that just feels wrong to me.

I do find it interesting that a couple definitions of "casual play" have been provided and (generally) agreed upon in earlier pages, but people say 'you can't talk about it because no one knows what it means' still.

If people here are so 'casual' why do they care if they play nothing but WAAC tournament grinders? If you care enough to set up a crusade campaign or a narrative game that isn't exactly casual.

Slipspace wrote:

Karol wrote:

As I said you don't take your teammate out for the glory of the winning score.

How often were you in a situation where out of a 8-12 people in the class only 2 get a sports scholarship, or 1-2 get added to a national youth team?

What does that have to do with 40k? The more relevant question is how often was winning a game of 40k the thing standing between someone and a scholarship? Karol, you really need to stop making these ridiculous comparisons and start to understand that your situation is only one of a large number of very different situations. 40k is not an Olympic sport, it's not getting people scholarships to prestigious schools or universities. Even if an activity could have that sort of importance riding on its outcome, that's never the only situation where that activity is done. Winning Wimbledon in tennis or the US Open in golf are some of the top accolades a professional sportsperson can achieve. But I can play tennis or golf as a social activity, with the final score less relevant than the chance to spend time with friends doing a mutually enjoyable activity.

It doesn't have to be olympics. And by the way, people do the same thing to each other without scholarships. All it takes is for two streets or blocks to play against each other, specially when people are watching or when people just plain don't like each other. Yes scholarship examples are the easiest for me to think about, because this is my daily life. What kind of a example do you want me to give, that people at work do the same stuff to each other, that siblings do it to get inheritance etc. Doesn't mean that stuff can't be enjoyable. Also the prerequisit of having friends to play w40k is another one of those bizzar ones for me, that come along with the gigantic multi army collections, own houses to play games and cars to transport those collections so you can pre build armies on the spot. w40k cost a ton of money, a lot of people don't even finish getting an army, because the struggle is so hard and the nerfs to armies, so big. Nothing which is that expensive can be considered casual.


Also if you think the results are unimportant, buy and build an army and then lose every game with it for 3 years, while seeing it nerfed over and over again. While watching other people who bought stuff like tablets or bikes with their money, have fun on a daily basis. Do it for 3 years and we can talk about mutally enjoyable activities.