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.

Don't know if this goes here or not since I'm asking a few questions, but since I'm describing a battle I guess it does?

So today was the first game I played with my Draigowing since the 1.1 nerf . The guy I played against used Orks and was very nice, agreeing to play a game of 2055 to accommodate my wishlist. My list consisted of:

Draigo - 275

Libby Master Level 3 - 200 ( chose to take all divination powers for him, ended up with Prescience, Forewarning, and Perfect Timing)

2 units of 10 paladins, with 4 psycannons (all master crafted), brotherhood banner, psybolt ammo, 1 warding stave, 2 hammers, apothecary, and 6 halberds) - 790 x 2 = 1580

I do not know the point values of his list, but he had 1 units of 30 boyz, 1 unit of 30 hardboyz, 20 or so stormboyz (I forget the exact count), 2 warbosses with powerclaws, one warboss was with one of the boyz unit, the other was in a Trukk(?) with 8 nobz, finally he had 5 deffkoptas that were in reserve and a what may have been a battle wagon (dont know enough about orks to tell). He may have had some more units in reserve, but I forget (and because he quit at the end of turn 1, it doesn't really matter.)

We got mission 4 and hammer and anvil formation. I got to deploy and go first. We both put our units right up to our deployment line. I put Draigo in one unit and the libby in another, then line up my paladins in a zig zag line across my deployment zone (with draigo in front obviously. My opponent places one unit of boys facing each of my paladins units, with stormboyz behind the unit facing my libby paladins and the warboss trukk behing the unit facing draigos. I use Draigo's Grand Strategy and scout ahead. He fails to seize.

My first turn I use libbys Prescience on Draigo's unit. With it I manage to kill all but 9 boyz in one unit (pretty much every shot went through). They fail their leadership and start to retreats. The other unit with my Libby does almost as good, killing 13 boys in the other unit. That ends my turn since I scouted and I couldn't assault.

His turn he has his battle wagon charge up to my Draigon unit, and uses it as a shield blocking the warboss trukk from my line of sight. He then has his stormboyz use their jump packs and move in of his regular boyz. He it at most 5 inches from my paladins. He forgoes shooting (why?) and declares an assault with his stormboyz. I overwatch and managed to kill two. He rolls for his assault...

And rolls a snake eyes.

He sighs, says I win and begins to pack up. I ask him to reconsider and offer to let him re roll the assault dice. He does so, and gets a three. He says I win again and continues to pack up despite my best efforts to ask him to continue. He says that since he can't tarpit me with his stormboyz there it nothing he can do to keep me from tabling him, so he might as well quit.

So the battle was over before it really began, and I have to ask, was what he did fair, to me or to himself? I don't know much about Orks, but was there anything he could have done to win at that point. I feel he should have continued playing against me, at least from the sake of sportsmanship, but was there really any hope for him to win at all? I'd like to hear from anyone whose been in a similar situation whose opponents quick so early, and from ork players as well...

Alright, He wasn't into wasting his time. Frankly his ork list would be hardpressed to deal with two units of 2 wound terminators. It sounds like he fielded 4 units... 1 you shot up and the 2nd failed to hit the charge... From you first turn shooting, he was expecting the 2nd unit to be shot up and charged and at I 2 S3 he wasn't going to take out too many paladins. Now no position but if you did your same prescience and shot up his hard boys, he would be left facing about 18 to 20 terminators with 8 nobz.

The writing was on the wall. He could have given you the satisfaction of beating the crap out of him in turn 2 but he knew any hope he had went out the window with the failed charge.

Sounds like a bit of a wuss, but ok...

That guy, in saving himself some time, also denied himself the opportunity to learn how the Grey Knights army works. If you think you're going to lose a game, then you already have.

To be fair ... i can understand this guy.

I credit you with half the fault. Draigo-wing is a very cheesy list.
It might be fun for you but its never for your opponent.
His loss was 99% sure but he played you nevertheless.
He gets points for that.
In my gaming commuity , players with uber lists are not very popular and soon nobody plays them.
I dont say that you are a .. ehh sorry ... bastard for playing such a list but it wont get you any new friends.
Add bad dice rolls to this guy and off he goes.He saw o reason tho waste precious time while you butcher him.
Its understandable... bad sportmanship ... but understandable.
Personaly i have a wife,a job and 2 children so my time for warhammer is very little.
I would not waste it in a such a game also.
Im sorry but this is how i see it.

I probably would have offered to have another game after what I had leant getting butchered. You tend to learn more when your loosing.

He could have tried to play more laterally, that is, go after the mission objectives instead of after your pallies (unless this was Purge the Aliens), but honestly, it appeared that he didn't have much left after that first turn. He saw just how much damage and how deadly your army was and decided that he could only deal with it had things gone more his way. They didn't and so he felt there was no point in him losing so badly.

Yeah, quitting so early wasn't too cool, but some people just don't like to waste their time on a game they perceive to have very little chance of winning and a large chance of getting beaten badly.

I've lost a lot of games of 40k. I always stick around at least until the end of turn 4. I understand why he quit but don't think I would have if I was in his place.

I'm one of those backwards people who views forfeiting as a sign of GOOD sportsmanship.

If you can recognize when you're honestly, genuinely beat, why go through the pointlessness of continuing the game? This is assuming that you're doing it with grace, and not flipping tables or anything on your way out. It's something you should graciously accept too: I'd consider trying to drag someone through a one-sided asskicking poor sportsmanship also.

Contrast this with one of my friends, who will argue he's not beaten until the bitter end ("I can still beat you, I just have to have every last one of my guys left hit AND wound AND you fail all your armor saves AND I get these guys to fleet 6" AND they wind up getting the assault on you") and argue with you on the post-mortem such useless things as "I would have had you if I just had one more turn...", when in reality, he had half a squad of something like Scorpions left.

Sportsmanship is not necessarily dependent on what you do, but rather how you do it.

1. Conceding shouldnt be confused with ragequitting
2. playing on does not necessarily mean suffering and whining and complaining

I think no one has a problem if you accept your fate and congratulate your opponent for his victory honestly and friendly and ask for his pardon.
If you just go packing as your opponent did, I consider this ragequitting, which is the behaviour of a coward.

But you can as well continue with the game and have a good time although that it is a one sided match. It is always a bigger challenge to be on the wrong side of a superior army than it is being on the right side. You can learn good lessons for later games, you can improve your skills as well on how to act under pressure.
But if each action is connected with whining and complaining about how imbalanced the game is, how much bad luck is in play and what else can be brought out to deny the opponent his earned victory, there is absolutely no point in going on.

To sum it up:

1. I would rather have my opponent ragequitting than have him in a game of useless whining
2. I would offer my opponent his free choice if he is a good guy. If I am on the receiving end, I won't concede most of the time, because I always want to practice. And I tend to deny defeat for a long time. I only concede when no actual game is going to be played after a certain point. (i.e.: having an objective game and I have no troops left and maybe one unit I can now try to hide from half of his army for 3 turns or so)
In tournaments I never concede though since it means max. defeat.

The only list that I have ever thrown in the towel before was against the old 5th ed imperial guard list with 3 manticores and scouting vendettas with vets and demolition charges. He got first turn and killed every single one of my vehicles with his manticores and his scouting vendettas dropped his vets and they demolitioned me off the table.

Eh, Draigowing, cheesy? They've got counters, and they're not completely invincible. Yes, I will admit that this Ork list would have been hard pressed to deal with 2 wound FNP Termies, but in a dice game like this, there's always room for major upsets and ridiculous victories.

As a whole, though, I agree with Nazdreg. Politely saying something like "Look, dude, I don't think there's any point in continuing this; I'd like to call the game, thanks!" in a friendly manner is perfectly fine. Whining, sulking, or slinking away really is the sign of a poor sport.

Forfeiting turn 4+ when things are clearly up a creek? ok.
Forfeiting turn 1, come on.

Bad luck hit his dice and good luck hit yours. Stick it out another turn or two and man up to see if the dice shift. If anything you'll just learn something about your own tactics or your opponent's.

I've gone into PLENTY of one sided games like 18 wraiths vs my firebase eldar. When you lose, you at least learn what you could do better.

Since it's just a game that you play for fun, why make him continue to play when he is clearly having no fun at all? Just so you can have fun?

I have been in his shoes. Granted, I've never given up turn one, but sometimes you can just tell how your day of 40k will go by some dice rolls, and it sounds like with those failed charges he was going to be hard pressed to do anything. He saved you time of having to mop up and saved some grey hairs on his part.

It's just a game, and when it becomes a chore then you have to decide if it's worth it or, as an example, if you're trying to practice for a tournament or something.

He was doing you a favor by playing with a very specific points limit that you have obviously tailored, which is fine; you want to play your dream list and that's great. However, he was doing you a favor by indulging you so I would not fault him for his actions, personally.

Honestly, would wiping out his army over the course of the next turn or two have made game the more fun for you?

I recently played a game versus Space Wolves where my opponent blew up most things of importance turn 1 with long fangs, as well as forcing my kroot to run off the board. I played on, but I knew I had lost. The rest of the game was fun though, as I managed to make an absurd number of 4+ Fire Warrior saves, and wiped out a couple squads of Grey Hunters.

Then there was a game I played against Death Wing, and I killed all 10 Terminators + Belial right as they dropped. This was actually quite hilarious, as Belial ate a railgun to the face. This was mostly due to the fact that my opponent rolled something like 7 1's in a row on armor saves. My opponent threw his dice in the trash from across the room and cussed and shouted for a while, it had the rest of the store laughing pretty hard.

I'd say; don't be like my friend and start throwing dice or anything, but if there's a good reason you know you can't win (like, losing your synapse as nids t1/2, no troops left in an objective mission etc), or if you're simply in a position where you *will* lose next turn (paladins 2" from everything I hold precious), don't drag it out unnecessarily. Sometimes you can get another game in - I usually leave my table set up in those cases. It's often more fun to play 2 games of 1250 than one of 2k.

From what I can see, you likely would've killed him up in the second turn, so he pretty much just saved some time.

 lord limenix wrote:

To be fair ... i can understand this guy.

I credit you with half the fault. Draigo-wing is a very cheesy list.
It might be fun for you but its never for your opponent.
His loss was 99% sure but he played you nevertheless.
He gets points for that.
In my gaming commuity , players with uber lists are not very popular and soon nobody plays them.
I dont say that you are a .. ehh sorry ... bastard for playing such a list but it wont get you any new friends.
Add bad dice rolls to this guy and off he goes.He saw o reason tho waste precious time while you butcher him.
Its understandable... bad sportmanship ... but understandable.
Personaly i have a wife,a job and 2 children so my time for warhammer is very little.
I would not waste it in a such a game also.
Im sorry but this is how i see it.

I'm with him. I don't have a wife or kids or anything but I still understand what he is saying.

You brought a Draigo-wing list, so we could assume winning is important to you and you won fair and square. The guy just helped you do it a lot faster.

I am competitive but I also know when the game is over. You had an amazing turn 1. Maybe the guy could find another game?

I would never again play anyone who quit on Turn 1.

At that point, you've probably invested an hour into getting the little men out, making a battlefield for them, and pushing them around some. Quitting on turn 1 means that person is ok with murdering an hour of my life away.

 TheCrazyCryptek wrote:

 lord limenix wrote:

To be fair ... i can understand this guy.

I credit you with half the fault. Draigo-wing is a very cheesy list.
It might be fun for you but its never for your opponent.
His loss was 99% sure but he played you nevertheless.
He gets points for that.
In my gaming commuity , players with uber lists are not very popular and soon nobody plays them.
I dont say that you are a .. ehh sorry ... bastard for playing such a list but it wont get you any new friends.
Add bad dice rolls to this guy and off he goes.He saw o reason tho waste precious time while you butcher him.
Its understandable... bad sportmanship ... but understandable.
Personaly i have a wife,a job and 2 children so my time for warhammer is very little.
I would not waste it in a such a game also.
Im sorry but this is how i see it.

I'm with him. I don't have a wife or kids or anything but I still understand what he is saying.

You brought a Draigo-wing list, so we could assume winning is important to you and you won fair and square. The guy just helped you do it a lot faster.

First off, thank you everyone for your responses.

Second , to the person in the quote, no, I didnt start Draigowing because I want to WAC. Please do not make that assumption about me. I started Draigowing because it was the cheapest way to start GK and let me get a feel for the army in general. I would rather have started a purifier army with 60 purifiers, rhinos/ razorbacks, and storm ravens, but no way I could afford that. Until recently I had no steady income and Draigowing was all I could afford when it came to starting a new army.

And if you must know, this is actually only the second time I've won with my Draigowing list. Every other time I'm fought against and Eldar guy who takes DE allies and by the end of turn one either Draigo is dead and/or half my paladins are.

DarknessEternal wrote:I would never again play anyone who quit on Turn 1.

At that point, you've probably invested an hour into getting the little men out, making a battlefield for them, and pushing them around some. Quitting on turn 1 means that person is ok with murdering an hour of my life away.

This is all true. It's also only half of the total truth.

Think about it from the ork player's perspective for a moment. He just invested an hour unpacking his army, setting up a battle field, and did a tiny bit of movement. The dice have decided that the rest of the game is going to consist of little more than picking his models back up off the table, and packing them back in his army case. It's not just that he no longer has a chance of winning, it's that he isn't going to be able to field an army, do a bunch of movement, some shooting, and some chopping. He's not actually going to be PLAYING, he's going to be sitting there slowly repacking his army while the other player rolls some dice.

The hour that's been wasted is a fixed cost. The choice that now faces the ork player is if he is going to put away his army slowly and go home, or if he's going to concede and either pack up his army quickly and go home, or perhaps try and get another game in. One where there's an actual game in the game that he can actually play while he plays.

I think conceding in this case is more an act of mercy to both people involved, at least in this case.

It's one of the problems I'm starting to notice with 6th ed. It very much feels like the game is determined by the time the second player gets to the start of his second turn. By the time turn 2 is over, you know who has won. Furthermore, one of the armies is likely so damaged that there aren't many inlets for player skill, and there isn't many opportunities presented by the player's ruined army to actually DO stuff. The element of the game that is a game seems to vanish pretty quickly in a game of 6th edition.

It's kind of like Monopoly or Axis and Allies. Once one player starts losing (which usually becomes apparent pretty quickly), it becomes a matter of the winner slowly choking off the loser's ability to do anything, and the inevitability of the result is only finalized after a joyless slog of a few hours rolling dice. It's becoming clearer to me that this is a real flaw of 6th edition.

In 5th, nobody's stuff died very quickly, and missions were easy to accomplish (and could thus be accomplished by just a few models - a nearly-tabled player could always go for a draw), and assault was real, which meant you had killing power and stuff happening over the course of the entire game. None of this feels like a way to describe 6th edition so far. If the game is really only one or two turns long, then why bother playing the game after turn 2 if you're not actually playing after that because it's rather ceased to be a game?

I'm not going to jump down the OP's throat here, as there are several reasons other than sociopathy to play an army that's not fun to play against. If an opponent can't get satisfaction from the game, it's usually more the game's fault than the opponent's. That said, I think it would be worthwhile to be considerate of the kind of gaming experience you offer to your opponent when you play (I don't mean just you in specific, but everybody). Nobody wants to spend an hour unpacking things just to get tabled without really getting to do anything, and then packing up again. All players have almost a moral responsibility to be and to behave in a manner that makes you worth playing against.

It's really not a matter of "who is right?" or "what qualifies as good sportsmanship?" These concepts are both secondary to the whole point of a game in the first place - the play, and to have fun doing it.

This is always a touchy subject as it does depend partly on why/how you play.

I play for fun, if I see someone across the table with the mindset of 'must use best meta army to table my opponents' I do sometimes think 'Ugh... why do I even bother?'

Although this isn't a fair opinion for me to give because while we are playing each other we are playing very differently and with different aims in mind.

I would rather have fun games and lose 1 million times in a row, than play 1 serious/uber competitive game where I feel like I'm ruining it or making it less fun for my opponent.

It's not about winning or losing for me, its for enjoyment, although luck can be a factor in enjoyment too, as if you have an unlucky game or your opponent does, you sometimes do feel like quitting or understanding why your opponent might, or be at the very least disheartened with the game and hence enjoy it less.

Some people get their fun from the competitive edge though and there is nothing wrong with it, it's a healthy attitude and if its the part of the game that they enjoy then they should do what they can to enjoy it.

So in this case, I can understand why the guy didn't want to carry on, if a game isn't going to be fun for you then I understand its tempting to quit. (I've personally never quit, I'd rather try and learn something or even try and get the other person to begin enjoying it more.)

Although it does suck for you too because his quitting has taken away your fun.

It's one of those areas where both sides can be right, but no one side is more right than the other.

The best advice I can give is to try and play people with a similar mindset, this is obviously easier to do amongst friends or regulars, but if it's a random at your LGS I guess theres not much you can do.

By the way I'm not implying that you are one of these uber competitive guys or that, it's only for the purpose of an example. From the sounds of things and the fact that you are asking for opinions, makes me think that your main aims were to have a fun game but that was also a bit of a challenging/competitive game, which is a good attitude to have too.

Just my 0.02 USD though, and again I'm not trying to imply anything horrible about either player here, it's just you did seem to have different goals in mind.

Rysaer wrote:Some people get their fun from the competitive edge though and there is nothing wrong with it, it's a healthy attitude and if its the part of the game that they enjoy then they should do what they can to enjoy it.

Well, and it's not just a matter of being competitive.

It's not a competition unless there is a reasonable chance that either player could win. If a game continues past this point, it continues without also still being a competitive exercise.

It's the challenge that provides the interest. It's being faced with a set of difficult circumstances and then acting with the greatest of your ability to overcome them. Competition is just a way to ensure that challenges stay fresh over repeated attempts.

If there is no challenge, though, because you no longer have serious obstacles to overcome, or because the game doesn't offer you the ability to apply your player skill in a way that will actually give you the chance of success, then what really is the point?

If anything, this should be frustrating properly competitive players more than anyone. The competition is much better if the game is close to the end than if it's done right away and the rest is just the mechanics of wrapping things up.

I think it was a little bit of bad sportsmanship.

Of course it sounds like he really didn't know how to face a Paladin list in the first place. Stormboys arn't going to tarpit a Paladin squad for any amount of time for one. Secondly, you need to play the mission and not go bash your brains out on a brainmasher.

 Ailaros wrote:
It's one of the problems I'm starting to notice with 6th ed. It very much feels like the game is determined by the time the second player gets to the start of his second turn. By the time turn 2 is over, you know who has won. Furthermore, one of the armies is likely so damaged that there aren't many inlets for player skill, and there isn't many opportunities presented by the player's ruined army to actually DO stuff. The element of the game that is a game seems to vanish pretty quickly in a game of 6th edition.

This has never happened to me in 6th edition-- it was much more common in 5th edition. Alpha strikes are much less effective now thanks to improved vehicle cover, fortifications, and Night Fighting on turn 1 much of the time. What is true is that you have to take objectives a lot more seriously in 6th edition than you did in 5th-- you can't just Tank Shock to contest on turn 5 every game-- but honestly I think that's a good thing!

Took part in a local tournament back in 5th, together with a friend of mine though he just watched as he did not have his models painted yet and did not want to play without painted models.

In the second match, I knew gak hit the fan when I was to play our local TFG. Rolling 1 dice at a time, measuring every single 1/10th of an inch, re-reading everything the other codex, several times throughout the game etc.

Long story short: he pulled off a Draigowing (vs. Oldcrons.). He started getting his minis off the box and on the board (yes, he put them in there after every game.) and saw what he was going for. Checked his army list...full cheesewing. Laughed, called a TO, told him I'd surrender. He looked at me, asked if I was sure and did not want to at least try playing and I told him I'd rather have some fun instead of playing that list. He got a victory, I went go eat something with my friend, chatting a bit, had a good time.

Back at the store, he just stood there alone, waiting on a chair. In his 3rd game, he played against a total first-timer with Eldar and seriously, wow. He mocked him all the time, made fun of his moves etc. Total donkey-cave. Even the TO asked him to step down the trashtalk.

Anyway, he won the tournament (feth you Matt Ward!) but at the same time..well, lost. Best fething moment in my warhammer history!

TOs declared the standings, some little prizes for rank 3, then a blister for the second place. Everyone cheered at them , handshakes etc. And then...haha. People turned away from the scene, started packing their stuff, chatting, talking about their games etc. TOs were confused but proceeded to call out the winner, but...nobody cared. Noone clapped his hands, most did not even look at the "stage". TFG got his prize while my friend was just about to play a game with my Necrons vs another guy. TFG then packed his stuff and left.

Saw him a few times afterwards, playing WHF, afterwards.

Was that bad sportsmanship by me? Yes, probably. It's a tournament and you have to expect facing ass lists like Draigowing. But at that time, I simply saw no point in playing a game with someone who wasn't fun to play against with a list that's a single big red win-button.

The ending ceremony thingy was pretty donkey-cave-ish, gotta admit that, and I did feel a bit bad afterwards, but the pretty unisone reaction showed that I wasn't the only one angry about that guy.

I still consider not playing / turn 1 surrendering a viable option. Some people want to play unfun games and imo, they aren't worth the hassle.

My advice, however, is not doing what I did and rather talk with the other person (not in a tournament ofc ). Say what you feel being in such a situation, ask him why he brought a list and try to find a compromise. If you can't, hey, you tried. Look for other people to play.

Sorry for that long post - have a potato!

I've felt that way before. Like losing 6 tanks turn 1 with my Eldar vs a drop pod melta gun army. It happens.

But playing is way more fun than giving up, and I've run some games way past the point of reason, because I want to take that daring long-shot pigs-flying hail mary chance and laugh as it doesn't work.

 Ailaros wrote:
If an opponent can't get satisfaction from the game, it's usually more the game's fault than the opponent's.

That's patently absurd. If someone doesn't like something, the only conclusion you can draw is they don't like it. I don't like soccer, therefore the billions who do just don't understand how fundamentally flawed the game is? Ridiculous.

Back to the regular topic: agreeing to play a game is a social contract. Bailing on that game is a breach of that contract. Quitting that early means he only cares about games he's winning. Well tough crap, sometimes other people win. Torpedoing their victory with your pouting is the definition poor sportsmenship.

i disagree with it being bad sportsmanship. (unless he flipped the table, turned his face into that of the trollish style and screamed about it) but really it sounds like he built a list on the spot to deal with a prebuilt/tailored/carefully crafted list that happens to be in one of the most powerful codex/factions in the game, and he did it with an older codex (not saying orks are not competative, far from it!) he coulda brought dakkajets if he had em, but it sounded alot like he just wanted to be all orky with odd things here and there. The point though, is sometimes people dont add up all the damage a draigowing/grey knights army can dish out and they dont have alot of good ways to deal with it. His packing up sounded like he was defeated not only on the table (honostly it sounded like you may of had to spend two whole turns taking out everything he had left, so it saved time packing now) but defeated in his mind, and at that point trying to force him to keep going isnt going to actually help. sitting down afterword and discussing how things work in both armys and what options and whatnot are different could.

Also, on leaving early being a breach of contract? thats pretty specific man, almost lawyer like talk. if the game isnt enjoyable by both partys then why in the holy fragnar is YOUR enjoyment worth more then MINE (if im the one who lost 60-80% of my army before i could even GO with them)

Also, you stated you wished to play 60+ Purifiers with razors and stormravens and whatnot? you mean the second most competative grey knight build? how are you not aiming for specific wins? I am kinda a fluffbunny (who sets that aside to bring out horrible doom at tournaments mind you) but you do know there are about that many purifiers in the entire imperium of man right? all of them magically showed up to one battle? That being said, that list really is not any better for the ork player.


6th edition has been pretty rough on alot of the players in my meta, not alot are playing right now and i think its because the area is focusing to much on tournament play (with restrictions like no over 2k points) but hasnt spent alot of time just playing for fun and enjoyment. Alot of us right now are just tired of every game being vs Draigowing, or the 100% nob bikers, or purifierspam or wraithwing, or loganwing...yadda yadda. some of us just wanna sit down and try to play a decent game.

So was it bad sportsmanship? maybe. i dont think so though i think he just was hoping on having fun and when he relised what it was he faced it wasnt going to be alot of fun (as someone mentioned above) just alot of him "putting models back in his case without actually getting to play them"

Also did he SEE your list before hand? and your army? or did he just get asked to play a specifc point value? cause if he was just asked to play a specific point value i feel he is justified. If he knew the point value and the army, he still isnt showing bad sportmanship, and if he knew everything you were bringing i think he has the right to quit, but what in the heck? he shoulda been able to do good with the knowledge of what you were bringing beforehand

 Ailaros wrote:
Well, and it's not just a matter of being competitive.

It's not a competition unless there is a reasonable chance that either player could win. If a game continues past this point, it continues without also still being a competitive exercise.

It's the challenge that provides the interest. It's being faced with a set of difficult circumstances and then acting with the greatest of your ability to overcome them. Competition is just a way to ensure that challenges stay fresh over repeated attempts.

If there is no challenge, though, because you no longer have serious obstacles to overcome, or because the game doesn't offer you the ability to apply your player skill in a way that will actually give you the chance of success, then what really is the point?

If anything, this should be frustrating properly competitive players more than anyone. The competition is much better if the game is close to the end than if it's done right away and the rest is just the mechanics of wrapping things up.

Thats is true but at the start of each game you don't know what the chances are, also the very nature of chance could change drastically/very fast.

Also you are right sometimes there is no challenge and the game may seem pointless which I can understand, but the other side of the table the other player may not always feel this way and this can lead to a very different opinion, this Ork player for example, he had some bad luck and maybe wasn't as prepared to face the foe as he could have been, but he could have risen to the challenge instead of just deciding he was wasting time and tried his best to recover and salvage what he could, maybe even turn the game into a win or at least a draw as well as learning from his mistakes. (I don't know the odds obviously as I wasn't there and I don't know either player or their armies.)

I personally think the only way a competitive player can improve is to keep playing and learn what they can through whole games, if you base wether you keep playing on the first turn or two and then quit.... then I don't see the point.

If I quit everytime I felt something wasn't worth doing, wasn't fun or it's just 'going through the motions' I can tell you I probably would be out of a job and have a lot of free time I could do nothing with.