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.

I personally think it is the most important prize at an event. But that's probably just me.

Still my favorite prize I have ever earned at a tournament. (Best Sportsman in 2011) It's a wooden plaque - handmade and painted by one of the group that used to run Da Grand Waaagh in California. Tournament had about 120 people in it.

Scoring was interesting. You rated the people you played from best to worst games you had. So if you played 5 games you rated one a 5, one a 4, one a 3, etc. People balked at the harsh scoring method ("But I had 3 GREAT GAMES!" was the common complaint.) but I found that if you were forced to think hard about it, something differentiated even those three great games. (Its a stacked ranking system ultimately).

I was really happy to find that so many of my opponents genuinely enjoyed playing with me - even the ones that I stomped.

Wayniac wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
Because some people have their own fun playing that way. Some people enjoy the game by trying to maximize the efficiency of their army and playing to the best of their abilities. But when you say "but that's unfun for their opponent" you ignore the fact that its unfun for those players to have to play with one hand tied behind their back and handicapping their army. To make it fun for their casual opponent make it unfun for the competitive player which basically defeats the point.

Expecting your opponent who wants to take competitive lists nerf himself "so that you can have fun" is just as selfish as the WAAC player

Why though? The game is clearly skewed towards not competive so should it not be on the competitive player to adapt, rather than force everyone else to adapt to them (and conversely in a highly competitive game like Warmachine, the casual player should adapt).

Again, what I don't get is the continued "GW rules are trash" approach while someone is continuing to abuse them. If you recognize the rules are bad and allow for abuses, and on top of that go out of your way to point out the rules are bad because you can abuse them, then why the feth do you continue to abuse the rules and then deflect blame by saying "It's not me, the gak rules let me do this!"

That's the mentality I don't understand, trying to force a round peg (40k) into a square hole (competitive play) and doing it by cutting the hole larger and saying "It's not my fault, this peg wasn't meant to fit into this hole even though it should!"

I am actually a very casual player but I agree with CrownAxe here. This is why there are events at Adepticon such as the "40k Friendly" tournament. This is also why I do NOT play in events such as the Adepticon or LVO main tournaments. (I primarily play in the other events there such as "Narrative" events or the aforementioned "40k Friendly".

Those main tournament types of events have clearly stated "This is a no-holds barred, winner take all, type of event." Expecting someone to "play casual" at one of these has the casual player in the wrong setting. The current state of 40k is what you make of it. The guys from Frontline are making their tournament (including their rules adjustments) to be a competitive level event. 40k CAN be played that way (its not my particular method of choice), but I certainly won't begrudge any players that want to play that way.

Nor would I ask them to change the way they play to suit my needs. Just like they wouldn't ask me to change the way I play to suit theirs.

 CrownAxe wrote:

Wayniac wrote:

Oh I agree, I'm just curious why the dynamic exists. It feels like the minority trying to make the majority adjust to them instead of vice versa. I absolutely agree that someone shouldn't go to a "cutthroat" tournament with a casual list and complain about the type of lists they face. However I also find that a lot of venom tends to come from the competitive crowd about casual lists and players (the often "build lists that suck" response), when most tournament lists are egregiously lore-breaking (and typically are not built with any care to the lore). But I also see those same people repeatedly say how bad the rules are, and how the rules let them abuse things, yet continue to abuse it knowing how easily abused the rules are.

Bad rules and unbalanced games don't stop people from playing it competitively

Additionally the rules and the fluff are currently easily separated.