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.
2019/10/30 11:52:54
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
a_typical_hero wrote: The last Space Marine Codex got 6 supplements and at least as much playable, fun army lists out of it.
I don't want to hear that they are too strong relative to other factions like Grey Knights. I don't want to hear that people should only be allowed to play with the rules for which Chapter you painted your toy soldiers.
We got 6 Chapters promoting different units and Marine players are free to switch between them so they do not have to play the same mono list for the next 5 years. Great for them and I hope that all factions get a similar treatment in the future, because it will be healthy for the game and good for us players.
...
"I don't want to hear your problems, because Marines are having fun".
As a Chaos Marines player, the tone of the very first post in this thread has got me more angry at the hobby than ever before.
Triggerbaby wrote:In summary, here's your lunch and ask Miss Creaver if she has aloe lotion because I have taken you to school and you have been burned.
Abadabadoobaddon wrote:I too can prove pretty much any assertion I please if I don't count all the evidence that contradicts it.
2019/10/30 12:35:48
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
Not Online!!! wrote: And ignoring Criticism, especially harshly formulated one, is a surefire way to stiffle any and all debate . . .
That's not how conversation works. Points can be made without hyperbole, rudeness, etc.
If someone is going to be a constant ***hole, they should be prepared to not be engaged with. Not engaging ***holes does not automatically stifle debate.
Blunt is not rude.
Regarding blunt automatically as rude is rude.
Ever heard about Schultze von Thun.
Written language and it's uses have even more issues due to not beeing able to carry tone.
a_typical_hero wrote: The last Space Marine Codex got 6 supplements and at least as much playable, fun army lists out of it.
I don't want to hear that they are too strong relative to other factions like Grey Knights. I don't want to hear that people should only be allowed to play with the rules for which Chapter you painted your toy soldiers.
We got 6 Chapters promoting different units and Marine players are free to switch between them so they do not have to play the same mono list for the next 5 years. Great for them and I hope that all factions get a similar treatment in the future, because it will be healthy for the game and good for us players.
...
"I don't want to hear your problems, because Marines are having fun".
As a Chaos Marines player, the tone of the very first post in this thread has got me more angry at the hobby than ever before.
Ahh, beautifull. so There it is, the cat's out the bag now.
The thing is you do not need to formulate your opinion about something so blunt or in a hyperbolic way. I know the internet loves it and it feels if you do not express your opinion stark enough, you won't be heard.
Grey Knight rules are trash at the moment. Ok, we stated our unhappiness now lets look for ways to make it better. Games Workshop sure won't release a better ruleset for them next week, no matter how extreme I state my opinion or how many threads I open on Dakka or how often I bring it up randomly in every discussion on the board.
You know what, first, if that is supposed to be a cheap stab at Karol, which by his own admission has social issues and needed to go to a psychologue, then you seriously have lowered your barely existing argument to 0 allready.
Secondly: Telling someone how he has to feel and talk is quite frankly arrogant at best and questional at worst.
So you allready tick 2 stereotype boxes.
What we can do is engange with the people we are actually playing with and work it out. You played your Grey Knights against your friends new Iron Hands. Some units stand out as being overwhelming for you to handle. That's not great and there are two things you can do:
1. Open a thread on Dakka complaining about Iron Hands. How could GW let that slip through playtesting? Playtesters are a joke! Grey Knights are utterly trash!
2. Open a thread on Dakka saying you played against IH and it wasn't enjoyable at all. You state the problematic units and engage in a fruitful discusscion with others. What units should an IH player not bring or limit in a casual play against GK? What could you improve in your GK list when facing Iron Hands?
In both cases your statement is: Iron Hands are very powerful. Grey Knights are very weak. One will help the community, the other won't.
Who made you the arbiter of what helps and what helps not?
Also contextualise this with your remark on space marine dexes and we get a clear picture that you are infact either A a troll or B a arrogant beeing.
I don't agree with you that not using hyperbole or extreme statements is the same as sugarcoating criticism. You can respectfully disagree with things and people.
And I do not say we should ignore criticism. On the contrary. I advocate to state your critic in a constructive manner. For example by opening a thread like my second example.
First: Telling me what to do or not and then steeping on a personal level is hillarious.
Secondly: Beeing blunt about something is not Equal beeing Hyperbolic about something. Vier-seiten Modell and such, but maybee you just slept during your education.
Thirdly; Considering you didn't even have an introduction thread, and this is your only one and the only one were you really posted i find it quite funny to the point that i honestly consider marking this thread and your account as a troll.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2019/10/31 00:03:02
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2019/10/30 12:57:15
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
I am not at all angry at the hobby. I am really excited about getting back into wargaming, making terrain, building armies and the whole lot.
I am also excited to be getting back into the 40K universe as a setting, planning on using it for a roleplaying game campaign soon, and homebrewing the setting a bit to make it more what I want it to be.
I have not bought a 40K mini since Dark Vengeance 6th edition, so I am very excited to be picking up start collectings and kits for all the great Xenos minis released since then.
GW still makes the best sci fi minis available on the mass market, and their sci fi setting is a hodge podge of lots of things I really love anyway.
But I am not using their rules ecosystem or buying any of the current (inferior) setting material at all. I am perfectly happy working with what I have, taking my favourite bits and discarding the stuff I do not like, and plan to use free rules to represent my miniatures in wargames and roleplaying games. This has opened up a lot of creativity and freedom for me because I am free to use minis from other ranges, alter things to make them fit what I want a bit more, and so on.
Currently I only have one prospective opponent outside my regular RPG group, but I am pretty confident that once I have all my scenery made and a few fully painted forces ready, other people will be more than happy to jump in and try the game with me.
So I am filled with optimism and excitement about my hobby, and GW settings and minis make up part of that. I decided I did not like how the rules are being managed and implemented and it was trivially easy to find alternatives for free once I broke myself of the "I gotta use GW stuff or no one will play with me" mindset.
Thanks for taking the time to elaborate. I get the feeling you've missed out on the bigger changes since the inception of this edition. When is the last time you played?
- I'll commensurate with you on terrain. I play ITC more, because terrain is often too easy to ignore.
- Blast weapons -- for me -- I can do without. Think of it this way : it prevented blobbing, but that did that really do? It just slowed the game down as people maximized their 2". The random shots now represents the variability of the templates.
- Pulse rifle spam is hardly good AV. It's good AV in a pinch, but that's about it, which is not any stronger than those S5 glancing AV11. It wasn't always easy to keep the sides of a predator away from them. Mathematically 10 shots then was about 0.84 glances or 25% of a vehicle's hull points. 10 shots now comes to 0.6 wounds, which is 5% of a vehicle's wounds. Obviously they would never have taken down AV12 or better, but for perspective these days it takes 36 fire warriors the entire game (at long range) to kill a tank.
- Directional casualties were cool, but again...for shooting armies and really tended to slow the game down.
- Deep striking mishaps were thematically cool, but really just aggravating. Even when you weren't near enemies you can land in terrain and die. What's even the point of using it other than random clutch drops that MIGHT kill something useful?
- Stratagems add so much for me. I think GW has become FAR better at making them than the earlier days. Have you seen the new marine ones?
- Orks get around modifiers ok these days (they don't even care about -2 or worse, anyway) - have you seen their new rules?
-Blast weapons made the battlefield as a whole matter more as to how close units where to each other. A lot of times when firing blast weapons, it was important to account for where misses could go so firing close to friendlies was risky while firing in congested areas meant that your misses could still hit other enemy units. It gave the feeling of artillery/bombs/etc blowing up stuff and also made the weapon far more reliant on battlefield conditions (unit concentrations, spacing, etc) than just the theorycraft numbers of how much damage on average this weapon does. 8th edition "blast" weapons shoot like machine guns with Ork RNG shots.
-The pulse weapon example is because of stacking + to wound modifiers that made spamming pulse rifle fire an effective anti Knight weapon. This ties into both the weaknesses of toughness only (anything can wound anything which is stupid) and 8th tendency to have stratagems and other bonuses result in weird situations. In general the feeling that you needed proper AT weapons to deal with an AV13 or AV14 vehicle (or flank around to the side or rear armor) was a compelling gameplay experience instead of throwing a lot of dice at a meatbox on treads (or these days mostly hovering on air).
-Directional casualties again made positioning matter more and factored into target priority and such outside of just number crunching damage outputs. Tying back into the battlefield conditions mattering more.
-Whats the point of using deepstrikes now? The point of them is to get into a position that you couldn't effectively get into while starting on the board and had that whole risk/reward aspect of making risky drops (and using your models to force more risky drops from your opponent). Once again the battlefield mattered and tied in strongly to AV firing arcs in addition to being a counter to hiding behind LOS or putting important characters in the back of unit blobs. Now the 9" bubble means your really not dropping behind the enemy unless they are really incompetent. No AV or directional casualties means getting a flank has little to no effect. (also terrain is basically being in area terrain or no bonus to your save so getting around cover isn't a factor really).
-Stratagems feel too much like a gimmick and again reminds me more of something from Magic (tap a CP and play *insert 40k equivalent to wild growth* to wound on 3s instead of 4s). In general 8th is barren on core gameplay mechanics and unit profiles (especially on older units) and instead relies on stacking bonuses from your subfaction and stratagems to do something "interesting". Stacking bonuses and modifiers feels artificial and clunky. I like my units being able to do their function based on the core and codex rules they have been given without needing to conjure some super power ability from Gork or sending in the logistical drone to give a Fire Warrior the only EMP grenade the army has.
-I don't think d6s are well suited for +1 and -1 modifiers they way 40k does it and i especially don't like modifiers when unit profiles vary as much as 40k's does unlike a game like bolt action where units generally hit on the same value but modifiers are designed around how movement and terrain. You don't have the Germans as an army hitting on 3+ base while the Italians are all hitting on 5+ base then trying to stack on flat modifiers for cover, terrain, etc. Seems like GW might of learned a bit from the stupidity of Eldar getting army wide minus to hit (and stacking it with other - to hit bonuses) but in general I dislike how the math of this stuff plays out.
The crux of the problem of 8th is that it lacks the feel of being a tactical game (as in movement, terrain, spacing, placement, directional shooting, area of effect, risk taking, etc) and its much more along the lines of throwing dice at the enemy and watching things poof out of existence. Even the morale system before was good (when stuff wasn't all fearless) where units would fall back and may rally. Multiple games i've had units that had fallen back return to play an impactful part of the game or made the conscious decision to inflict moderate casualties to multiple units in a turn to force as many morale checks as possible to better neutralize some of their army instead of just focus firing down each unit one by one. That also leads to the general lack of ways to diminish an enemy's ability to fight beyond removing models when before there was things like pinning, forcing jinks, blind, morale causing falling back, fear (again the rare Ork or CSM opponents lol), etc. The game now is much more "roll dice, remove units until one side has nothing else to remove" which is closer to the game Risk than I would like 40k to be.
GW so far hasn't done anything to help shore up any of these weaknesses and instead seems hell bent on pushing power creep and going the whole "layer bonus on top of bonus" route instead of fleshing out the core rules to have some more depth of mechanics. Then again from a design point of view they built themselves in a corner by having such a small base set of rules to work from that it would be difficult to build out the foundation of the game without making it complete unstable or requiring a complete redo of most units in the game.
Last game of 8th for me was probably a year ago but again I find myself enjoying playing 7th (which I've done since then to much enjoyment whenever the opportunity presents itself). Nothing in the past year has made me care to try 8th again as it still lacks what i crave from 40k.
Thanks for taking the time to write that all out. I do feel like the nostalgia glasses are guiding the perspective a bit.
For example -- while units could flee and then rally it was so, so unlikely to be impactful. Most times those units were severely wounded or too far out to make it back before the end of the game. Typically they would just be a hindrance for kill points if you could get them behind cover.
Directional casualties were fun for the person doing the shooting. It was completely unfun for the one being shot. Why? Because you've completely removed their agency. Armies that moved faster had the flexibility to exploit it better. That's literally all it ever was.
The same thing with facings (when people stopped arguing which facing they were in) -- what did facings do? It forced my tanks into a corner from which they would never move. That's not engaging. Would I support some directional bonus to wound or AP? Yes - as long as it's not something that causes large disagreements.
These random blasts you talk about applied to the crappier armies with bad BS. The armies with the multi-blast shots and good BS didn't see the crazy scatter, but they also didn't see tons of hits unless the opponent was bad.
The common thread for all these things - one army is stronger and more capable of exploiting the rules.
You speak about modifiers and stratagems in terms of stacking rules. What were spells like invisibility doing? How were death stars in 7th operating? Rules stacking - I put this character in to make the unit fearless and this one in to make the unit 3++ etc etc. So, the dynamic didn't change. Just the application of much of that stacking is placed behind a cost now, which creates a better opportunity for balance.
- In the near future Black Templars will have a stratagem to prevent fall back. One could get into combat and use regular fists to keep the unit alive. On their turn you force them to stay and finish them off freeing you up to go deeper with a fresh unit on your turn.
- Incursors can lay mines and make part of the battlefield really hard to get through.
- I have to lend consideration to putting fire down into their backfield to open up a spot for me to land deepstrikers.
- Some armies can redeploy models effectively creating a feint
- I can exploit bad positioning by warp timing a defiler and dropping a considerably large mortal wound bubble
While I enjoyed 7th it was never a playground for tactical genius. In my opinion, anyway. Could 8th improve? Absolutely, but it's the most fun I've had with 40K despite the agony of losing terminators to gretchin in 2nd edition.
2019/10/30 13:40:06
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
"I don't want to hear your problems, because Marines are having fun".
As a Chaos Marines player, the tone of the very first post in this thread has got me more angry at the hobby than ever before.
I don't think you got my tone right, then.
Please read my other posts in this thread as well. I'm not telling anybody to shut up and swallow their problems.
You know what, first, if that is supposed to be a cheap stab at Karol, which by his own admission has social issues and needed to go to a psychologue, then you seriously have lowered your barely existing argument to 0 allready.
Secondly: Telling someone how he has to feel and talk is quite frankly arrogant at best and questional at worst.
So you allready tick 2 stereotype boxes.
I am not stabbing at anyone and been using Grey Knights as an example for a weak army since my first post. I apologise to Karol if he feels being picked out here.
Me trying to give advice and suggesting how you can improve your situation when you are not happy about some part of the hobby is a far stretch from telling you how you have to feel and talk.
"If you want people to have a serious discussion with you, you should not jump up and down, wave your hands and scream at them". How is that arrogant or questionable? I'm sorry, I can't follow your logic here.
Who made you the arbiter of what helps and what helps not?
Also contextualise this with your remark on space marine dexes and we get a clear picture that you are infact either A a troll or B a arrogant beeing..
I'm not the arbiter and never claimed authority about it. I'm trying to give advice for some and remind people that there are good things about the hobby, too.
Why do you see me as a troll or arrogant when I'm simply happy that a part of the playerbase got several interesting, powerful supplements? Everybody should get that treatment and I don't see why I should overshadow a great release with "but my Chaos Marines suck by comparison, so you should not have fun rules either!".
Sorry, I don't get your logic here, again.
First: Telling me what to do or not and then steeping on a personal level is hillarious.
Secondly: Beeing blunt about something is not Equal beeing Hyperbolic about something. Vier-seiten Modell and such, but maybee you just slept during your education.
Thirdly; Considering you didn't even have an introduction thread, and this is your only one and the only one were you really posted i find it quite funny to the point that i honestly consider marking this thread and your account as a troll.
I honestly have no idea why you would say such things. It does not feel like you are discussing in good faith. Once again, I simply want to offer some advice to people who might need to hear it. I don't recognise where I did get personal with you.
Your last passage does feel like I ticked some of your boxes indeed, so feel free to don't engage in a discussion with me any further.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/10/30 13:40:50
Designer's Note: Hardened Veterans can be represented by any Imperial Guard models, but we've really included them to allow players to practise their skills at making a really unique and individual unit. Because of this we won't be making models to represent many of the options allowed to a Veteran squad - it's up to you to convert the models. (Imperial Guard, 3rd Edition)
2019/10/30 13:47:20
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
Sorry to be offtopic....but this here is exactly where the often quoted Four-Side-Model of Schulze von Thun is shown.
You said something which -for you- was quite clear and has only one way of getting understood. Others receive it differently and use their Appeal-Ear to filter most of your message and get the idea, that you are telling them what to do.
I don't think anyone means any harm here. No one's a troll, no one is stabbing at anyone
Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless — like soup. Now you put soup in a cup, it becomes the cup; You put soup into a bottle it becomes the bottle; You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now soup can flow or it can crash. Be soup, my friend.
2019/10/30 13:56:41
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
For example -- while units could flee and then rally it was so, so unlikely to be impactful. Most times those units were severely wounded or too far out to make it back before the end of the game. Typically they would just be a hindrance for kill points if you could get them behind cover.
Ehhh, that depended quite a bit on the army no?
While I enjoyed 7th it was never a playground for tactical genius. In my opinion, anyway. Could 8th improve? Absolutely, but it's the most fun I've had with 40K despite the agony of losing terminators to gretchin in 2nd edition.
You can say that, yes, and it is true ,but i would state 7th had less problems with the core mechanics (beyond the psy cough invisible cough) and had more an issue with the rather extensive add ons for rules and formations. In a way that probably is why supplements atleast to me seem frankly like a deja vu.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2019/10/30 13:58:47
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
I think I echoed this in the Knights thread, but this seems super appropriate, too.
8th edition is a great framework. Look at it is just that: a system that is expected to be built upon. Everything is basic and vanilla, and the core is quickly forgotten beneath the layering of additional books... but at the end, it is just options put atop a core framework.
This circles back to Rule 0, "don't be a jerk", or whatever you want to sum up the golden rule of gaming.
GW gave you a framework to work within. You're given this with the intention of you meeting up with friends, and even strangers, and being able to pull out models and engage in a fun game (fun being a very objective term). And this is where the social contract comes into play. You and your opponent DEFINE the terms of the game, you can redefine ANY aspect of the game. If the terrain is too bad for you? Add options on top of it (we've added Hardened Cover, which gives +2 instead of +1, and +1 of that Cover cannot be ignored). I dislike what GW has done with my favorite force? I've designed a new one and ran it through all of my friends and highlighted what I've done to make OUR experiences better (my friends so not actually enjoy running rough-shot over their opponent's, they want to win, but not at the expense of the other player). Regardless, if there is something about the rules set that you and your friends don't like? Change it.
That being said... when you go to tournaments and you play at competition level... you sign away your rights to have that creative say. You are agreeing to play the game as the TO intends, for better or for worse. That's where the game really starts to fall apart. When the social contract is ignored, when we get away from the golden rule of "this is a framework in which the goal is for BOTH of us to have fun... if there's something WE don't like, WE don't have to use it" then you are putting yourselves at the mercy of the dark overlords at GW, who are probably designing things with "Well, they can figure it out" in mind when they make some of these rules (the whole RAI argument).
Competitive players abandon RAI and think it is a failing of the parent company to not have a legal team and English majors on board to translate the rules and their intentions into iron-clad bindings. I really don't think it is something GW concerns themselves with, they expect their players to take some freedoms with their product and use it the way that the consumers want to ensure the consumers have a good time.
I'm actually not sure when GW was expected to write those iron-clad rule sets where there was no wiggle room at all for the consumers, I see a lot more evidence to suggest the opposite. Even my GW rep looks at the way we play, the extra rules and options we've incorporated, and the fun my crew has in our games and tells me: that's what GW wants. I've showed him my custom codex and told him it was something I was playing with for funsies, but will never ask to bring it into his store... and he called me nuts, and he'd love to see a patron's custom work played out, and that taking that creative license was what GW really wants to see from the community... not bickering and arguing over rules as if we were victims to bad writing.
Anyways, my 2 cents. I could go on for days, but at the end of the day, this conversation doesn't help my club have a better time... but hopefully it'll help a few of the more negatively-slanted voices get covered up by some one saying the system is good for those who just... embrace it for what it is.
2019/10/30 14:02:07
Subject: Re:Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
The last Space Marine Codex got 6 supplements and at least as much playable, fun army lists out of it.
I don't want to hear that they are too strong relative to other factions like Grey Knights. I don't want to hear that people should only be allowed to play with the rules for which Chapter you painted your toy soldiers.
We got 6 Chapters promoting different units and Marine players are free to switch between them so they do not have to play the same mono list for the next 5 years. Great for them and I hope that all factions get a similar treatment in the future, because it will be healthy for the game and good for us players.
a_friendly-Hero.
So how is this then not to be considered as arrogant?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I am not stabbing at anyone and been using Grey Knights as an example for a weak army since my first post. I apologise to Karol if he feels being picked out here.
Me trying to give advice and suggesting how you can improve your situation when you are not happy about some part of the hobby is a far stretch from telling you how you have to feel and talk.
"If you want people to have a serious discussion with you, you should not jump up and down, wave your hands and scream at them". How is that arrogant or questionable? I'm sorry, I can't follow your logic here.
The thing is you do not need to formulate your opinion about something so blunt or in a hyperbolic way. I know the internet loves it and it feels if you do not express your opinion stark enough, you won't be heard.
Grey Knight rules are trash at the moment. Ok, we stated our unhappiness now lets look for ways to make it better. Games Workshop sure won't release a better ruleset for them next week, no matter how extreme I state my opinion or how many threads I open on Dakka or how often I bring it up randomly in every discussion on the board.
Hypocritic much?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Why do you see me as a troll or arrogant when I'm simply happy that a part of the playerbase got several interesting, powerful supplements? Everybody should get that treatment and I don't see why I should overshadow a great release with "but my Chaos Marines suck by comparison, so you should not have fun rules either!".
Sorry, I don't get your logic here, again.
You beeing happy to what is in essence the biggest mistake GW has done and is just doing again. Further, considering that Unrefined lists of those supplements literally broke the competitive balance in a strangle hold is no issue according to you?
It is also not valid to point out allready that the basic premise of csm 2.0 is not the same of C.SM 2.0 allready and on top there are now supplements furthering the imbalance in the system on top of that is not valid, because it is just "HYPERBOLE AND COMPLAINING" according to you. That is , why you are consdiered here Arrogant.
Additionally, if you think CSM will get anything, after beeing "updated" (to 1.1 if we are generous) will not get any update anymore beyond what will be in PA 2, which is just a bunch of stratagems and relics so far. So the same core issues that the CSM dex has and the C:SM had, will remain for one faction, whilest the other one just get's bonus on top of bonus is absurd.
And that is by far not the only issue that GW has produced recently, cough Eldar box Cough.
And yes it's nice and fancy that the hobby is compounded by multiple aspects: Thank god it is that way, but the rules are certainly not a high point regardless how you turn it.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2019/10/30 14:28:49
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2019/10/30 14:09:22
Subject: Re:Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
after a slap on the wrist from the Mods, I'll try to reiterate my view
I think for me anger is the wrong word, but GWs position circa 2010-2012(ish) was very much 40k or nowt and as 7th was getting messy I wandered off into the wilds of t'other games
This of course comes with its own perils as GW logistics put most other companies to shame as you can either go to a store or intertubes something and get it a few days later, rather than having to wait months for restocks or dive into the hell of FB trades or Ebay
A few years of wobbly money reports and some new blood at the top meant GW started to make games with varying degrees of time and money commitments, but as I'd already picked up others games in similar genres I've skipped buying back in
Give me some big spaceships mind and I'll be back
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/10/30 14:12:33
"AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME...SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED."
2019/10/30 14:25:03
Subject: Re:Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
dotcomee wrote: I play Tyranids, I've gotten 1 codex. Others have gotten multiple updates, Vigilus, etc. I've gotten mostly points increases and rules changes that have forced me to change my army not because I wanted to, but because I had to.
I was once in same place, lamenting how my outdated army doesn't get an upgrade. Then it finally did, and after reading the Codex, I wished that it hadn't.
I heard this pep talk first time when 6th edition Tau codex came out and I hated the changes. "But it has so much new stuff, read the rules, try it out and maybe you'll like it". Well, I read the rules, played it few times and hated it. And still do and haven't played Tau since, and probably never will again...
Oh well, I still have Space Hulk and BFG.
I'm sorry to hear that the army changed so much that it is not enjoyable anymore for you. That sucks and in a perfect world that would not happen. It's good that you still have (or found) other parts of the hobby that you like to play!
For now. I suspect BFG is next to be ruined. I can already see how it will happen. Facings and Weapon battery tables removed, Deathstar-sized mega-battleships...
Also I have bunch of unpainted Dark Angels which I had big plans for before 8th edition was released. Now with no longer any reason to paint them, they're just gathering dust. Of course I can always sell them...
- Over time I did collect several armies and know how it feels if the army is not getting any support and the rules are weak. It sucks and made me stop playing / collecting for 4-5 years.
I don't think I won a single game in 7th edition with my Deathwing. Might have achieved a tie somewhere. Still I (most of the time) had at least fun playing. With current ruleset, I no longer had fun even when I was winning.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/10/30 14:38:29
Mr Vetock, give back my Multi-tracker!
2019/10/30 14:56:53
Subject: Re:Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
I was once in same place, lamenting how my outdated army doesn't get an upgrade. Then it finally did, and after reading the Codex, I wished that it hadn't.
So be careful what you wish for.
I guess if you are long enough in the hobby then you are bound to have this happen to you. The most fun part about my 5th Grey Knights army for me were the Henchmen led by Coteaz.
I don't think I won a single game in 7th edition with my Deathwing. Might have achieved a tie somewhere. Still I (most of the time) had at least fun playing. With current ruleset, I no longer had fun even when I was winning.
On the small chance that you haven't heard about it, yet. Do you know Vassal? It is an online program with which you can simulate a game of Warhammer 40k (among other systems).
Maybe it is a way for you to be able to play with other people around the globe who want to play older editions.
Designer's Note: Hardened Veterans can be represented by any Imperial Guard models, but we've really included them to allow players to practise their skills at making a really unique and individual unit. Because of this we won't be making models to represent many of the options allowed to a Veteran squad - it's up to you to convert the models. (Imperial Guard, 3rd Edition)
2019/10/30 15:41:19
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
Smirrors wrote: 8th Edition 40K will be as fun as the friends you play it with.
The problem is the human condition where everybody wants to win, and win at all cost.
8th can be treated as a guideline but people push the boundaries to the nth degree.
Just watch battle reports on youtube. Most present the game as it should be played, two friends having a great time with good lists and good attitudes.
8th edition and warhammer in general should not be defined by competitive play.
This whole "the rules are a guide line" needs to fething stop.
We are not supposed to do the job of the designers. Period. We should NOT have to self relegate and feel bad if we want to bring three of a cool looking unit because they're good or bad.
Out of interest, are there other areas of your life where you refuse to self regulate? I'm guessing you must just walk around the office leaving doors swing shut in people's faces, making yourself tea and not asking others if they want a cup, perhaps just belching or farting at your desk. I mean, there are no actual rules preventing you from doing these things, right?
If you want to spam the most powerful stuff and not feel bad - that's cool. Just do it in a competitive environment where everyone expects to come up against the hardest possible lists.
IME 8th is the best edition of 40k since the beginning. In the real world, there are tens of thousands of gamers who are having a great time with their mates. None of them read forums full of repeated whining. It honestly doesn't improve anyone's enjoyment.
If anyone is having a hard time figuring out how to have fun with their toy soldiers, I would recommend watching a selection of winters SEO or Tabletop Tactics youtube vids. That is 40k at it's best IMO.
There are rules, actually. Nobody for the most needs to self regulate because in healthcare we already have outlined rules and regulations that we don't need to adjust. As it turns out, I don't need to do HR's job because they're competent at their jobs overall. Can you say the same for the same company that released Super Doctrines or 7th Edition Scatterbikes or Lash Princes?
If that's really the best argument you have, you never had a leg to stand on to begin with. Come up with something better and maybe I'll reply.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/10/30 16:53:45
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
If tone of content is a concern of yours, you might try 40konline. Dakka has a bit of a Wild West feel to it, that I like but some people don’t.
If you prefer a more... regimented... approach to conversation, that site might work better for you.
And if the same old mods are there, tell’em GBT sends his best. And then yell “psych!” While you dance about, all prickish-like. They’ll appreciate it.
2019/10/30 16:53:54
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
Not Online!!! wrote: And ignoring Criticism, especially harshly formulated one, is a surefire way to stiffle any and all debate . . .
That's not how conversation works. Points can be made without hyperbole, rudeness, etc.
If someone is going to be a constant ***hole, they should be prepared to not be engaged with. Not engaging ***holes does not automatically stifle debate.
Blunt is not rude.
Regarding blunt automatically as rude is rude.
Ever heard about Schultze von Thun.
Written language and it's uses have even more issues due to not beeing able to carry tone.
Blunt is not necessarily rude. But being rude is rude, and being hyperbolic is being hyperbolic. Acknowledging that tone is difficult to convey through writing ought to make for more careful writing, not less. But this is the internet with it's anonymity, and I think it's safe to say that there are many actors who write with less care than they probably act in person.
Purifying Tempest wrote:
8th edition is a great framework. Look at it is just that: a system that is expected to be built upon. Everything is basic and vanilla, and the core is quickly forgotten beneath the layering of additional books... but at the end, it is just options put atop a core framework.
This circles back to Rule 0, "don't be a jerk", or whatever you want to sum up the golden rule of gaming.
I'd agree with this. I started to dabble in 40k back in 6th, played a few games of 7th, but 8th made me dive in.
Can't stress the rule 0 enough. Yes, it's original intent was for RPG's, but when you are gaming overall it is a good rule to go by. Dont be TFG, right?
Purifying Tempest wrote:
I'm actually not sure when GW was expected to write those iron-clad rule sets where there was no wiggle room at all for the consumers, I see a lot more evidence to suggest the opposite. Even my GW rep looks at the way we play, the extra rules and options we've incorporated, and the fun my crew has in our games and tells me: that's what GW wants. I've showed him my custom codex and told him it was something I was playing with for funsies, but will never ask to bring it into his store... and he called me nuts, and he'd love to see a patron's custom work played out, and that taking that creative license was what GW really wants to see from the community... not bickering and arguing over rules as if we were victims to bad writing.
I can second this outlook from multiple GW stores. Even at The Citadel, they will give responses like this.
Overall I think 8th is in a great place, but 40k is going to be an ever evolving product. If there is ONE thing I could get GW to change its going to be the constant book buying. It's gotten FAR too much. Core book, Index, Dex 1.0, Dex 2.0, Vigilus 1, Upcoming PA, and Yearly CA book? Dude!
Finally - Thank you to the OP for this thread. I think while you might have ruffled some feathers the intent was good, and some of it needed to be said.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/10/30 17:16:20
No Pity! No Remorse! No fear!
2019/10/30 22:12:41
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
Hey, I had fun with the game for a while. I'm not angry with "the hobby." I'm frustrated with GW's practices and the state of 40k. More strategic depth and fair prices and I'll jump back in.
EDIT: As a side note, I do get tired of people complaining about the age of some of the models. Most of them still look great,(Eldar especially) some others need retooling, and yes, a few could stand to be replaced with a new version. But stop it with the whining about "this sculpt is old, I want new ones just to have new ones!"
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/10/30 22:33:33
2019/10/30 22:23:46
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
Smirrors wrote: 8th Edition 40K will be as fun as the friends you play it with.
The problem is the human condition where everybody wants to win, and win at all cost.
8th can be treated as a guideline but people push the boundaries to the nth degree.
Just watch battle reports on youtube. Most present the game as it should be played, two friends having a great time with good lists and good attitudes.
8th edition and warhammer in general should not be defined by competitive play.
This whole "the rules are a guide line" needs to fething stop.
We are not supposed to do the job of the designers. Period. We should NOT have to self relegate and feel bad if we want to bring three of a cool looking unit because they're good or bad.
Out of interest, are there other areas of your life where you refuse to self regulate? I'm guessing you must just walk around the office leaving doors swing shut in people's faces, making yourself tea and not asking others if they want a cup, perhaps just belching or farting at your desk. I mean, there are no actual rules preventing you from doing these things, right?
If you want to spam the most powerful stuff and not feel bad - that's cool. Just do it in a competitive environment where everyone expects to come up against the hardest possible lists.
IME 8th is the best edition of 40k since the beginning. In the real world, there are tens of thousands of gamers who are having a great time with their mates. None of them read forums full of repeated whining. It honestly doesn't improve anyone's enjoyment.
If anyone is having a hard time figuring out how to have fun with their toy soldiers, I would recommend watching a selection of winters SEO or Tabletop Tactics youtube vids. That is 40k at it's best IMO.
There are rules, actually. Nobody for the most needs to self regulate because in healthcare we already have outlined rules and regulations that we don't need to adjust. As it turns out, I don't need to do HR's job because they're competent at their jobs overall. Can you say the same for the same company that released Super Doctrines or 7th Edition Scatterbikes or Lash Princes?
If that's really the best argument you have, you never had a leg to stand on to begin with. Come up with something better and maybe I'll reply.
Your work has a rulebook telling you to offer to make people a drink, not to fart in the office and to hold doors for colleagues?! That seems... unlikely
Anyway, my whole point was that everything in your life requires some self regulation. Just don't be TFG and apply it to toy soldiers as well, then you can't go wrong.
2019/10/30 22:47:00
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
Thanks for taking the time to write that all out. I do feel like the nostalgia glasses are guiding the perspective a bit.
For example -- while units could flee and then rally it was so, so unlikely to be impactful. Most times those units were severely wounded or too far out to make it back before the end of the game. Typically they would just be a hindrance for kill points if you could get them behind cover.
Of course, in 8th morale is even less meaningful. I recently accompanied my friend in 40k tournament and watched all his 5 games. Over those 5 games, I think I saw ONE model removed from the board as a result of morale roll.
Great thing about morale in earlier editions was how descriptive the rule was. For example: And They Shall Know No Fear. What does it mean? Well, Marines will never flee. They might get confused for a while after suffering losses, or they might tactically retreat, but they never panic and run off. But in the 8th? Marines are cowards, just like everyone else. They are slightly less likely to run off, but might do it anyway. Then Stubborn and Fearless. Whilst most of the time those rules had strong positive effect, they weren't all great. Fearless units were stupid. They stayed in the fight even when it would have been better to flee, could not go to ground and so on. None of that exists any more. Units and their behaviours are essentially identical.
You speak about modifiers and stratagems in terms of stacking rules. What were spells like invisibility doing? How were death stars in 7th operating? Rules stacking - I put this character in to make the unit fearless and this one in to make the unit 3++ etc etc. So, the dynamic didn't change. Just the application of much of that stacking is placed behind a cost now, which creates a better opportunity for balance.
Stacking effects was something which already began to go wrong with 40k in 6th and 7th edition with massively powerful psychic powers, effect bubbles and so on. In the 8th this all became worse. Command points are clunky and artificial system. Effect stacking is not battlefield tactics. If I want to play Combohammer, I'd play MtG.
On the small chance that you haven't heard about it, yet. Do you know Vassal? It is an online program with which you can simulate a game of Warhammer 40k (among other systems).
Maybe it is a way for you to be able to play with other people around the globe who want to play older editions.
Yes I know Vassal, not interested the slightest. If I want to play such a game on a computer, I'd play Steel Panthers.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/10/30 22:50:09
Mr Vetock, give back my Multi-tracker!
2019/10/30 22:55:36
Subject: Re:Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
I personally think morale in 7th was worse. Anything meaningful was immune as no one would risk an expensive unit on that risk. Anything that lost in combat was outrun by the faster army barring lucky rolls.
Combos make your army function, but they dont play the game for you. There is a lot to be had in the missions played.
2019/10/30 23:00:35
Subject: Re:Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
Daedalus81 wrote: I personally think morale in 7th was worse. Anything meaningful was immune as no one would risk an expensive unit on that risk. Anything that lost in combat was outrun by the faster army barring lucky rolls.
Combos make your army function, but they dont play the game for you. There is a lot to be had in the missions played.
Morale had a better framework, but too much ignored it.
ewar wrote: Your work has a rulebook telling you to offer to make people a drink, not to fart in the office and to hold doors for colleagues?! That seems... unlikely
Anyway, my whole point was that everything in your life requires some self regulation. Just don't be TFG and apply it to toy soldiers as well, then you can't go wrong.
Okay. So, let's take two players, new to the hobby, and introduced at an official GW.
Let's call one Jeremy. Jeremy finds the Iron Hands cool-the black is neat, and the thought of cybernetic Space Marines is awesome!
The other, Matt. Matt finds the Grey Knights cool-the silver and grey looks great, and pyschic, Daemon-killing Marines is awesome!
They both get invested, and buy a good chunk of models. Let's say they drop about $400 to get a 500-800 point army. Matt has a few more points, because Jeremy had to buy a supplement. But, when they play, it's not fun. Jeremy consistently whomps Matt's Grey Knights. He's just so much more powerful, it's not fun.
What should they do? Who's TFG?
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
2019/10/30 23:02:45
Subject: Re:Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
So I feel like a large part of this overwhelming feeling of negativity stems from a lot of the "news" sources. Look at the constant complaining about Iron Hands that has gone on for weeks for a prime example of that (only to refuse to talk about the FAQ and how it helped tone down some of the issues they wouldn't stop talking about).
On Dakka the issue I usually see is that once someone starts the complaint train, about four more threads about the same topic end up being started for no reason other than to try and jump on the bandwagon.
Basically this stuff needs to stop. There is a valid way to critique things, and that isn't it. There is also a valid way to let GW know that you want things to change, but it seems too many people want to complain and not just email GW's FAQ team to get their attention on what is and isn't working in the game.
GW has shown they are more than willing to hammer down anything that sticks out too far, but that approach makes it hard to see what isn't working as well and needs to be adjusted up. That's where emailing GW would be a useful way of providing feedback by laying out what isn't working and why it doesn't work.
Now I'm not saying that the community shouldn't outline what isn't working and why, or even argue if it is or isn't a problem, but this hyperbole of every perceived problem being the death of gaming as we know it is insane. Especially when talking about competetive play. I'm going to nick a post from B&C that I think highlights this issue in how it relates to competetive play:
Prot wrote:I wanted to let some time pass before chiming in with personal opinion.
First off, what is the question? Are we questioning "Marines" period? Are we talking about one or more of the supplements? I think it's a big difference. Marines generally speaking, I'd say absolutely not over powered.
Please remember as I write this that even though I've been an ultra player a long time, I play Chaos Space Marines a lot, and AdMech, and Custodes most often.
At first I think my answer would have been different because I was doing a LOT better with my Ultra's. But then I realized two things: 1. My opponent's weren't used to me using so many options, and they are now learning to adapt. That's huge. 2. And this is a weird one... I was so used to having such a crappy army that severely struggled competitively (I never took Guilliman to a tournament, even in his hay day.) I simply was not used to having anything really... .work in my army! Seriously, I played almost pure Primaris all the time, and I was used to fighting tooth and nail to eek out the odd win against seriously competitive stuff.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I watched some of SoCal and I heard some complaining; "This isn't fun to play against". I heard one player say of marines. (I won't say the guy, but I know some of you know who I'm speaking of).
Here's my piece of advice to anyone going to an ITC event. If you are going for 'fun', the be prepared for some seriously big losses that will put in the 'fun' bracket, where you will definitely enjoy yourself more. However, if you're going to an ITC event with any sense of really competing, take fun, and throw it in the toilet. You (as a person) can be fun, and of course 'fair', but your list is there to kick teeth in.
Marines can kick some teeth in, and some people are having a problem with it.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Let me ask you guys this:
Have you played against Tau drone armies? Ork blobs with fistfulls of smashaguns? How about Deldar Airshow? How about GSC coming out of nowhere and satchel bombing your tank(s) then disappearing?
How are any of those 'fun'? Who's having fun? The guy with all the jets flying in circles, roasting characters, and avoiding interacting with you?
If you are going with Marines to an event, and you want to win, you have to plan for exactly that kind of interaction, and gameplay style from your opponent's army. This is what it takes for any army to compete, not just Marines.
Did they go too far? I don't know, but if anything sticks out right now it is definitely IH / IH successors.
And honestly, I agree with his statements: competitive play isn't about "fun" it's about "winning". Complaining that a game you're playing with the sole purpose of winning lacks "fun" is missing the point of why you're playing, and if you want more fun, maybe don't play competitively.
I mean I'm sure Karol can tell you how "fun" a pure competitive environment is to play in if you don't believe me.
2019/10/30 23:12:15
Subject: Re:Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
And honestly, I agree with his statements: competitive play isn't about "fun" it's about "winning". Complaining that a game you're playing with the sole purpose of winning lacks "fun" is missing the point of why you're playing, and if you want more fun, maybe don't play competitively.
I mean I'm sure Karol can tell you how "fun" a pure competitive environment is to play in if you don't believe me.
Woah, there. Those things are not mutually exclusive. I play games competitively because the challenge, having fun prizes to "fight" for, and yes, winning, are fun. Let's stop demonizing casual or competitive people just because we see them as belonging to a different group.
2019/10/30 23:16:00
Subject: Re:Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
However we are in a moment of time, were some armies haven't seen even a codex
outside of sisters, whom are coming in november I can't think of a single army thats not gotten a codex.
All fw index factions.
Infact some even haven't seen an index?
those factions have never had a codex so why the feth would you expect GW to put out a codex for them? They're not GW supported armies anymore (and never really where) , they're at best legacy armies. It sucks for people who have made a big investment into R&H or Eldar Corsairs, or DKK or any of the other FW armies, but that's the reality.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
2019/10/30 23:16:52
Subject: Re:Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
And honestly, I agree with his statements: competitive play isn't about "fun" it's about "winning". Complaining that a game you're playing with the sole purpose of winning lacks "fun" is missing the point of why you're playing, and if you want more fun, maybe don't play competitively.
I mean I'm sure Karol can tell you how "fun" a pure competitive environment is to play in if you don't believe me.
Woah, there. Those things are not mutually exclusive. I play games competitively because the challenge, having fun prizes to "fight" for, and yes, winning, are fun. Let's stop demonizing casual or competitive people just because we see them as belonging to a different group.
You can have fun in winning, but the focus of tournament play isn't fun, it's winning. Especially stuff like the ITC where the point is to win so much you rank above everyone else.
I'm not saying you can't have fun playing tournaments, I'm saying the nature of tournaments make them focus on winning over fun.
2019/10/30 23:29:31
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
Winning *is* fun. Separating winning from fun is absurd.
One can pursue winning without pursuing fun, but everyone enjoys winning. Winning a prize with substantial value would be fun. Having to work for it might not be fun (ie playing an army you don’t enjoy, because you’re more likely to win with it) but working to attain a desired result can be fun.
2019/10/30 23:31:32
Subject: Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
greatbigtree wrote: Winning *is* fun. Separating winning from fun is absurd.
One can pursue winning without pursuing fun, but everyone enjoys winning. Winning a prize with substantial value would be fun. Having to work for it might not be fun (ie playing an army you don’t enjoy, because you’re more likely to win with it) but working to attain a desired result can be fun.
Winning is fun, but what about when you don't win in an event that prioritizes the act of winning over everything else? Probably don't have any fun.
2019/10/30 23:32:14
Subject: Re:Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
And honestly, I agree with his statements: competitive play isn't about "fun" it's about "winning". Complaining that a game you're playing with the sole purpose of winning lacks "fun" is missing the point of why you're playing, and if you want more fun, maybe don't play competitively.
I mean I'm sure Karol can tell you how "fun" a pure competitive environment is to play in if you don't believe me.
Woah, there. Those things are not mutually exclusive. I play games competitively because the challenge, having fun prizes to "fight" for, and yes, winning, are fun. Let's stop demonizing casual or competitive people just because we see them as belonging to a different group.
You can have fun in winning, but the focus of tournament play isn't fun, it's winning. Especially stuff like the ITC where the point is to win so much you rank above everyone else.
I'm not saying you can't have fun playing tournaments, I'm saying the nature of tournaments make them focus on winning over fun.
Except some casual lists are better than others. What can someone running a fluffy Imperial Guard army do against a GK player? If you're already fluffy, how are they supposed to tone down?
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/10/30 23:32:29
Subject: Re:Hobby Positivity - If you are angry at the hobby, please read this
And honestly, I agree with his statements: competitive play isn't about "fun" it's about "winning". Complaining that a game you're playing with the sole purpose of winning lacks "fun" is missing the point of why you're playing, and if you want more fun, maybe don't play competitively.
I mean I'm sure Karol can tell you how "fun" a pure competitive environment is to play in if you don't believe me.
Woah, there. Those things are not mutually exclusive. I play games competitively because the challenge, having fun prizes to "fight" for, and yes, winning, are fun. Let's stop demonizing casual or competitive people just because we see them as belonging to a different group.
You can have fun in winning, but the focus of tournament play isn't fun, it's winning. Especially stuff like the ITC where the point is to win so much you rank above everyone else.
I'm not saying you can't have fun playing tournaments, I'm saying the nature of tournaments make them focus on winning over fun.
And that is a problem with some games, and gamer culture. I find tournaments fun. Playing games, in any context, should be fun.
