Switch Theme:

Are starter set tiny rulebooks ruining things?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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




Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Ailaros, I see what you're getting at, but I would like to point out that a great number of competitive players are actually very into the fluff.

One of my buddies plays Orks and Space Wolves. I wouldn't say he's WAAC but winning is very important to him. But, he reads more 40k novels than anybody else I know.

Some of the least competitive players I know don't really know much about the fluff either. They mostly use it to draw bizarre parallels between their chosen army and Monty Python jokes. In other words, barring some kind of empirical analysis I don't really see how anyone could conclude one way or the other. I've got anecdotal information suggesting that WAAC and fluff appreciation go hand-in-hand with some people.

You could alternatively suggest that people who emphasize competitive play don't emphasize painting. I would disagree with this completely - Peregrine, no offense intended, comes across as someone who puts winning before anything else. But if you look at his gallery you will see a very nicely painted army consisting of pricey FW miniatures. People who don't care about painting and modeling don't generally spend a bucket of cash on resin infantry models where cheaper alternatives exist. I'd put myself in the same category - I build the nastiest lists that I can, and play to win, but my armies are all heavily converted and reasonably well-painted.


You're always going to have the WAAC guy who shows up with models that look like they were painted by a crackhead. He only plays the game because he gets satisfaction from winning. I would argue that this is not the vast majority of competitive players though. IMO, it's more about game investment than anything else.
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: