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.

im sorry but in a tornaurment where placing is everything and stuff you should crush them. dont be an donkey-cave but dont hold back. tourneys are for com[etition

I always struggle with stuff like this. I remember playing some games of chess with my friend, where I helped him so much that he joked: it was more like I was playing against myself. I actually hate steamrolling new people in games, but sometimes I've noticed it can be oddly difficult not to, even when you're trying to lose. People miss really obvious stuff that you leave open for them, and then do something suicidal, which is completely out of your control. Times like that I end up thinking it would be kinder to just get it over with, and put them out of their misery.

As much as I wouldn't want to discourage new people from getting into a game, I think I've also come to accept now that how other people cope with losing is really not my problem. I have a friend who loves the card game Dominion, she's played thousands of games online. When she introduced me to the game, I obviously got destroyed. But I still found it fun, so I played again, and got destroyed again... I think I lost something like 50 games in a row, before I finally won one. I don't think she ever took it easy on me, and it didn't bother me at all, because by watching how she beat me, I got to benefit from thousands of games worth of experience. Nowadays, I beat her all the time.

I've met other people who lose two or three games of something, and then decide they never want to play again. I think that's a pretty lousy attitude. People often accuse me of being competitive, but I'm more than happy to lose and lose and lose, and I never get frustrated or flip the board. I think it's the people who can't have fun unless they're winning, that are the ones getting their ego involved, and that are truly the competitive ones. It's not my job to mollycoddle people's feelings.

If it were a friend and I'm trying to teach them the game, then yes, I'm not going to overwhelm them with advanced tactics before they've even grasped the basics, just so I can win. But if it's a tournament then I'd probably just beat them quickly an move on. I wouldn't be a jerk about it, and I'd be sure to let them know that they can ask if they need help with something, I might even compliment them on things they did well, but otherwise I'd just let them play their own game and learn from their own mistakes. If that isn't fun for them, then that's their problem. Learn to be a better sport, and maybe don't turn up to tournaments for games you can't play.

It really depends on a lot of things. Typically I will try to get into a winning position (one where I would need to truely screw up to lose). Then feed some crumbs to my opponent. Build up an indiviual battle between some models that has no real impact on the outcome, cheer when he kills x unit (again that has no impact on the outcome.) Now this is easier to do in some games than others. In Chess for example, when you have mate in 1 you cannot always just put off making that move while you let your opponent take pieces. But in a game like say 40k you could cripple your opponents forces/get far ahead in maelstrom etc, then charge into his SM assault squad with your gretchin (for example) so that he can win an assault etc. I once built up a shooting match between an autocanno dread and an obliterator, neither was doing a good job hurting the other, but I kept throwing it out there as a one on one duel where my oppoent eventually killed my dread.

Alternatively I might do things like not commiting all my units to the fight once ahead. Instead of jumping out of my transport to rapid fire his squad, I'll stay embarked etc.

If you cannot reach a place comfortably ahead...then the newbie doesn't need your help.

It's War. Hammer them into submission and chalk up the easy win. They don't like it? They can always buy a better army.

There's a huge difference between stomping someone and being a douche about it, and stomping them and still being friendly. Don't be a douche, ever, but it's a tournament. If I've not played before I expect to get stomped and learn from it.

When I start new games I know I'll be bad, but that'll I get better. No idea if you were playing 40k or not, but in 40k I got stomped and tabled frequently at the start. The guys were cool and talked through how I could do things better after, and now it's almost always an even match. If they babied me I'd suck and be frustrated they weren't trying when playing me.

This is an interesting question for me because I was in the novice seat recently at a tournament. Not a complete novice, but close.

Basically, my friends, family and I that play (all 4 of us) play in a close little group. We don't play against people outside of our group. Not for lack of interest in doing so, but decided by the fact that we play at our own houses. If it's not someone we know well enough to invite to our house, we don't play them. So we have this little insular meta in any game we play, which skews tactics, play styles and even interpretation of rules. We also only play like once a month, so we are hardly very experienced.

Recently we went to an Infinity tournament. Out of the 3 games, one was against another novice and one was, by luck of the draw, against my nephew. The third was against a veteran with a nasty list who played in tournaments.

Against my nephew, it was a fun enough game, but I'd seen it before. It was the way we play each other on different terrain. Against the other novice, he had some annoying strategies, but his overall goal each game was to find one trick and do it. Against me it was to FO mark something and hit it with a Guided Missile Launcher. Both games I won because I was the only one playing to the objectives, but they weren't terribly interesting.

The third game was absolutely brutal. The guy had a Tohaa list with 3 TO camo infiltrating specialists, 4 Total Reaction HMG Chaksa, and a pair of triads built for assaulting. It was a list built to win the scenario we were playing - the HMGs would sit back, cover his specialists, who would grab the objectives turn 1 and retreat, while his triads attacked.

I was on the back foot immediately due to bad deployment, which he punished me for. I did, however, throw a spanner in the works because I had to dig deep and think of tactics I'd never use in our little group, because this kind of list would never get played. I was looking up rules I'd never, or rarely, used.

As a result, I lost but had the most fun game at the tournament. The guy tested me and made me think of things I'd never done. I used an AD 3 unit as a Parachutist because of his overlooking HMGs. I speculatively fired light grenades to hit TO camo units behind walls. I jumped canyons to get behind objectives because the normal paths were blocked.

If you're a novice at a tournament, you should be looking at it as a learning experience, not looking for the win which you very likely won't get. And pulling punches doesn't help your opponent learn.

Beat him so bad he cries and wants to quit the game then try to get him to sell you his miniatures dirt cheap.

Just kidding.

 Nevelon wrote:
One problem with not running up the score is that some tournaments use mission points for tiebreakers etc..

One could also argue that if the event uses mission points and also allows somebody who is clearly such a novice to play that they essentially have rigged the contest as the situations allows the novice's opponents to inflate their scores giving them an unfair/unerned advantage.

Sounds like a blast...

Fenrir Kitsune wrote:They can always buy a better army.

Or in most other games that aren't 40K, they might learn to use the army they've got.

I had a very similar experience Loki - I think the thing is for a lot of the less big games tournaments can sometimes be the only opportunity you have to play, so while you sometimes come up against tournament veterans, it's not unheard of to play a complete newbie too.

Out of interest Flashman what game were you playing? No need to be coy about it

I think so much depends on a) what game you are playing and b) the scoring system - i.e. does it reward a crushing victory over just a win, as that will obviously alter how you play the game - hence some of the people above essentially paraphrasing Conan the Barbarian's "hear the lamentation of their women" speech, I think without entirely realising it

The most awkward one I had was at a FoW tournament - out of the 16 players 14 were experienced, and 2 quite new. The random draw had them play each other round one, and due to the nature of the mission, one of them got a big win. As such I was playing him second round.

Now this is tough as in a one day event there are only three games, so to try and win the event two big wins are really needed (if not all three) In the end I decided the most humane thing i could do was smash him off the table quickly, and then replay the mission whilst everyone else was playing and try to teach him what else he could have done

If they show up to a tournament, then you crush them because you are there to win not "show them how to play"

I will NEVER understand why newbies go to tournaments and then don't show up for casual games to learn the game. I've seen it so many times.

 Kirasu wrote:
If they show up to a tournament, then you crush them because you are there to win not "show them how to play"

I will NEVER understand why newbies go to tournaments and then don't show up for casual games to learn the game. I've seen it so many times.

This.

But make sure you explain to him before the game starts that it's a no holds barred match and that you are available to talk with him about the game after it's all said and done. Not only will that ease the incoming slaughter but the discussion after the game can be invaluable for the new player.

 Kirasu wrote:
If they show up to a tournament, then you crush them because you are there to win not "show them how to play"

I will NEVER understand why newbies go to tournaments and then don't show up for casual games to learn the game. I've seen it so many times.

Lack of ability to show up on the casual game day? Know "how to play" from playing at their house with friends but have never ventured to a store for open gaming before? Don't live particularly close to where the casual games are happening, but can justify the drive for the opportunity to play 3 games? Play at a store with only other new players and so have limited experience?

There are a ton of reasons one might do this. Sorry, while I agree that in any game you are there to win (casual or tourney really you should be trying to win most of the time) I would argue that IME most people show up to these events because it is guaranteed gaming time against different opponents. Beating new players into hoplessness is just off putting to me and not particularly enjoyable. I'll still go for the win, but usually will try to throw said person a bone along the way.

Aelyn wrote:

 Krellnus wrote:
I would seriously reconsider attending that TO's tournaments in the future if that was the case, that's for sure.

Really? You think it's the TO'S duty to vet his entrants for experience and refuse entry to people who aren't experienced enough, in what has been specifically described as a friendly tournament?

Sure, if the TO knows someone is new to the game, it's better if he points out that it may not be suitable for new players and to stress that the players are expected to play at a decent pace, etc, but ultimately it's the player's choice to enter.

Short answer? Yes, the TO has the right and the responsibility to maximise the fun of all the players, a newbie isn't going to have fun getting crushed by veterans and the veterans are not going to have any fun playing the newbie, thus the newbie should not be permitted to play for the sake of everyone's enjoyment.

Breng77 wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
If they show up to a tournament, then you crush them because you are there to win not "show them how to play"

I will NEVER understand why newbies go to tournaments and then don't show up for casual games to learn the game. I've seen it so many times.

Lack of ability to show up on the casual game day? Know "how to play" from playing at their house with friends but have never ventured to a store for open gaming before? Don't live particularly close to where the casual games are happening, but can justify the drive for the opportunity to play 3 games? Play at a store with only other new players and so have limited experience?

There are a ton of reasons one might do this. Sorry, while I agree that in any game you are there to win (casual or tourney really you should be trying to win most of the time) I would argue that IME most people show up to these events because it is guaranteed gaming time against different opponents. Beating new players into hoplessness is just off putting to me and not particularly enjoyable. I'll still go for the win, but usually will try to throw said person a bone along the way.

And the ever popular:
Looking to have a fun game against people that you have never played against.

There have been tournament games where I have had a great time. I am actually more likely to lose in a game where I am having a good time - where the game's the thing, not winning or losing.

There have also been tournament games where I have hated the opponent, usually because he decides that being a jerk is the way to win games. Those, I crush. My play becomes cold and mechanical, with the response for the turn having no heart.

Neither of these has any bearing on how good a tactician the other player is - I have faced murderously good players where losing to them was a lot of fun.

I have faced WAAC veterans that rely on weasel wording and unbalanced lists to win. (My response to that is to not play those games anymore. And, yes, that is a dig at GW.)

I have faced fresh faced new players where taking a moment to explain what is happening can make all the difference. (Back in the seventies, I was that player.)

I have met wet behind the ears new players that think that trash talking will give them an edge. Them, I take down hard and fast.

And then there is my nemesis... innocent looking young players that know what they are doing... danged sandbaggers.... (In the later seventies... I was that player....)

Chess clocks change the dynamics a bit - we use them in the league, but I have not been in a tournament in years. (Not since dropping GW.)

The Auld Grump

 Krellnus wrote:

Aelyn wrote:

 Krellnus wrote:
I would seriously reconsider attending that TO's tournaments in the future if that was the case, that's for sure.

Really? You think it's the TO'S duty to vet his entrants for experience and refuse entry to people who aren't experienced enough, in what has been specifically described as a friendly tournament?

Sure, if the TO knows someone is new to the game, it's better if he points out that it may not be suitable for new players and to stress that the players are expected to play at a decent pace, etc, but ultimately it's the player's choice to enter.

Short answer? Yes, the TO has the right and the responsibility to maximise the fun of all the players, a newbie isn't going to have fun getting crushed by veterans and the veterans are not going to have any fun playing the newbie, thus the newbie should not be permitted to play for the sake of everyone's enjoyment.

Then the newbie never gets any experience and remains forever the Newbie....terrible idea for growing a community.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

And the ever popular:
Looking to have a fun game against people that you have never played against.

There have been tournament games where I have had a great time. I am actually more likely to lose in a game where I am having a good time - where the game's the thing, not winning or losing.

There have also been tournament games where I have hated the opponent, usually because he decides that being a jerk is the way to win games. Those, I crush. My play becomes cold and mechanical, with the response for the turn having no heart.

Neither of these has any bearing on how good a tactician the other player is - I have faced murderously good players where losing to them was a lot of fun.

I have faced WAAC veterans that rely on weasel wording and unbalanced lists to win. (My response to that is to not play those games anymore. And, yes, that is a dig at GW.)

I have faced fresh faced new players where taking a moment to explain what is happening can make all the difference. (Back in the seventies, I was that player.)

I have met wet behind the ears new players that think that trash talking will give them an edge. Them, I take down hard and fast.

And then there is my nemesis... innocent looking young players that know what they are doing... danged sandbaggers.... (In the later seventies... I was that player....)

Chess clocks change the dynamics a bit - we use them in the league, but I have not been in a tournament in years. (Not since dropping GW.)

The Auld Grump

QFT. QFT to the max.

You need to remember that that particular point of view expressed by Krellnus echoes the "competition is BAD and you should feel BAD about it" philosophy that GW is pushing for, even if the game takes place in a tournament, an obvious competitive context. His idea of a community may be very different from yours.

Crush them for bringing a sub-optimal list and laugh at their gakky paint jobs.

Then, go hang out in the hotel bar and wait for your next victim opponent.

I have to say, I have never really subscribed to "If they're a jerk/smug ass, I'll be a jerk/passive aggressive in return." - I'm not aiming this at anyone here, sincerely I'm not. But I don't understand it.
If someone is being an ass, I'll just ignore them and play the game for fun. All it teaches anyone if I'm an ass in return, is that this is acceptable attitude.

I played a team tourney recently where three of my team mates got frustrated and left the table, leaving me rather embarrassed and holding fort against four extremely competitive guys. It was perhaps overzealous of our opponents to treat us so harshly that my friends left. It was reinforcing that behaviour as dominant/superior to spit the lollipop out and leave.

It wasn't a "power of friendship" moment we could have turned around, our vessel was taking on water before the game even started against such an opponent, we were doomed. But I think both sides could have behaved better.

 Buttery Commissar wrote:
I have to say, I have never really subscribed to "If they're a jerk/smug ass, I'll be a jerk/passive aggressive in return." - I'm not aiming this at anyone here, sincerely I'm not. But I don't understand it.
If someone is being an ass, I'll just ignore them and play the game for fun. All it teaches anyone if I'm an ass in return, is that this is acceptable attitude.

I played a team tourney recently where three of my team mates got frustrated and left the table, leaving me rather embarrassed and holding fort against four extremely competitive guys. It was perhaps overzealous of our opponents to treat us so harshly that my friends left. It was reinforcing that behaviour as dominant/superior to spit the lollipop out and leave.

It wasn't a "power of friendship" moment we could have turned around, our vessel was taking on water before the game even started against such an opponent, we were doomed. But I think both sides could have behaved better.

Yep. I've had games where I got slaughtered, but it was fun and I held out as much as I could

Breng77 wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
If they show up to a tournament, then you crush them because you are there to win not "show them how to play"

I will NEVER understand why newbies go to tournaments and then don't show up for casual games to learn the game. I've seen it so many times.

Lack of ability to show up on the casual game day? Know "how to play" from playing at their house with friends but have never ventured to a store for open gaming before? Don't live particularly close to where the casual games are happening, but can justify the drive for the opportunity to play 3 games? Play at a store with only other new players and so have limited experience?

There are a ton of reasons one might do this. Sorry, while I agree that in any game you are there to win (casual or tourney really you should be trying to win most of the time) I would argue that IME most people show up to these events because it is guaranteed gaming time against different opponents. Beating new players into hoplessness is just off putting to me and not particularly enjoyable. I'll still go for the win, but usually will try to throw said person a bone along the way.

Well, I guess we can all see who AREN'T finely-tuned pro warhammer athletes in this thread. I bet you guys don't even train properly.

New rule -- no first-timers at an event, ever. *THAT* is how you grow the competitive scene. Back when GTs were friendlier affairs for milksops, GW couldn't give those tickets away. Now that the pro tour has gone hardcore...attendence and ticket sales are BOOMING.

 Pacific wrote:
Out of interest Flashman what game were you playing? No need to be coy about it

Lol, I'm being coy, because the game only has a small (if growing) following at present and if the person were to read this, it wouldn't be hard to work out who was being discussed.

Therefore, PM sent

If it's a tournament, you play your best, and if that means your opponent is getting stomped on, be a good sport and gracious about it.

And if you're getting stomped on, be a good sport and gracious about it.

A tournament is not the time someone should expect opponents to go easy, just because they're new.

If I know my opponent is new, I'll be a little more lenient on "Missed Opportunity" rules (Like a unit moving and attacking before the next unit activates in Warmachine, or taking an action in X-wing). However, if crushing them with no casualties helps ensure that I'll take 2nd instead of 3rd if I lose in the last round, then I will crush them.

I say win. Thats all. Just win. Dont try to make it a mission to wipe him off the board, dont try to do anything but win.
I have to do this often. and every time I feel like gak gak gak. One time It happened when I was trying old Ovesa star, One was a guy just back into the game, didnt understand anything about tau.
the other was a new kid playing what he had. I just felt bad TBH

Breng77 wrote:Then the newbie never gets any experience and remains forever the Newbie....terrible idea for growing a community.

Dewd, wargames might be a slightly different matter, but you don't grow a golf community, fr'instance, by throwing a kid into an explicit competition with Darren Clarke. There are other ways.

Flashman wrote:Lol, I'm being coy, because the game only has a small (if growing) following at present and if the person were to read this, it wouldn't be hard to work out who was being discussed.

Therefore, PM sent

D'oooh!

Clearly the only option is to crush them in a soul-smearing defeat, and when they look at you with tears welling in their eyes, take their mom out on a date-and make sure you tell your opponent you're taking her out for dinner then breakfast.

*Bonus points if you tell her "hail to the king, baby" then tip her back for a big kiss, Ashley Williams style.



Also, win, but try to guide them and if they make a boo-boo, let them take it back. If it's obvious they're learning, be forgiving of their mistakes if they realize it quickly (forgetting to shoot and be about to move on to combat, etc).

He entered the tournament, he knew what he was in for !

Annihilate them while showing them the ropes !