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.

Hey everyone,

I was watching a video on miniwargaming about playing to win and I thought it was pretty interesting.

I know 40k you see these types of things all the time but with Fantasy I find that the community as a whole is a little bit less focused on being ultra competitive. Maybe that's because the rules are a little more balanced and there are less super hard to beat lists I not sure.

For me I could care less if I win or lose. I obviously build lists that can win but my main objective is just to have fun and meet people who like to have fun. I am playing on a tournament this weekend which will be my first tournament so I am interested to see how some of the other people in the community around me play.

Do you guys play to win or is winning not really important to you? Its kind of a strange question because I think lots of people will be on the fence but that's why there's a third option in the poll

For me I play the game itself to win but I don't focus on winning when building lists.

Once the dice start rolling I'm always aiming to outwit my opponent, but when it comes to choosing the units beforehand I go for the models I like and the sort of force I want to build rather than weighing up which options are better.

I play Warhams to put lots of cool models on the table and see what craziness happens - it's called Yahtzeehammer for a reason

(Conversely, I play WarmaHordes to put fewer, less cool models on the table and have a rewarding game of tactical acumen, with a side of dice )

- Salvage

I like winning, obviously, but I play for fun. And I always say you can have fun while losing, if you find the right way to lose.

I make a list that fits my fluff, and feel a bit guilty for it since Scout/Waywatcher lists are so powerful in this edition... but I've been playing the same Wood Elf army since Ariel was a viable Character choice, so that takes some of the stigma off.

I play to win, but apparently my opponents play better.

And it just so happens that we have a ton of fun along the way, so...

I list build for fun but i still play to win

considering the goal of a game IS to win

I play to put mandollies on the table, move them around, roll some dice and have fun.

Winning, if it happens, is a bonus, not the primary reason.

I'd much rather a hard fought draw than a walk-over (from either side) but if I relied on winning games keeping me in the hobby, I'd have left it 30 years ago.

I play to win but I rather want the game to be neck and neck super close then a stomp fest on either side.

As Tomb Kings, I expect to lose most of the time, but I do like to win. I just don't sacrifice fun to do so. If I wanna play a certain list or theme that sounds awesome, I'll give it a shot, but I want to win in doing so, since that is the point of the game.

I build lists with my opponent in mind. Sometimes I'll even ask them to pick the magic lore my mages will use (in case they've fought against specific lists, time and time again). The games are more fun.

I grabbed my friend's Tomb Kings army and got squashed because of poor deployment on my end. The new player assumed I was a total noob. The next week I brought my army out and put him in his place.

I think it's more fun (and challenging) to bring a handicapped list against people who insist on the Win At All Costs lists and show them how superior tactics can outclass list building.

Luckily, most people I surround myself with have great attitudes, and like switching it up between competitive and fluffy for the sake of not burning themselves out.

I have to say both but more for fun. My lists tend to be kinda dumb but I do get them in the best postion gear set up I can ext. But I try things like Skragg with mass ogres and gorgers nothing else lol

They are not mutually exclusive.

I play to win, but not to win 'at all costs'.

I realize I should say that while I play for fun, I'm still going to play as well as I can. It's more that I try to play without getting worked up about what the result might be, and just try to enjoy the game whatever happens.

I've never won a games of WHFB (fecking Lizardmen) so I'm firmly in the FUN section.

Except I don't really have that much fun, as I tend to play the same guys Dark Elf army that hasn't changed since the new book came out.

I'd much rather have an interesting fun game than a game which is a brutal win for either side. However I do like the feeling of crushing my foes skull with my bare hands (in game obviously, otherwise no one would play me), so it's a bit of both depending on my mood.

wfr12n wrote:
I build lists with my opponent in mind. Sometimes I'll even ask them to pick the magic lore my mages will use (in case they've fought against specific lists, time and time again). The games are more fun.

I grabbed my friend's Tomb Kings army and got squashed because of poor deployment on my end. The new player assumed I was a total noob. The next week I brought my army out and put him in his place.

I think it's more fun (and challenging) to bring a handicapped list against people who insist on the Win At All Costs lists and show them how superior tactics can outclass list building.

Luckily, most people I surround myself with have great attitudes, and like switching it up between competitive and fluffy for the sake of not burning themselves out.

Nice attitude! Once my army gets larger I would like to take some of these points on board.

I play Tomb Kings, so obviously I don't play to win.

But it would be nice to win....just once....please.

 Shredder wrote:
I play Tomb Kings, so obviously I don't play to win.

But it would be nice to win....just once....please.

Same here man. Same here. The only legitimate game I've won was the first time my friend ever played, and he used Skaven. Even then, it was a hard match for me to win.

I play Brettonian and want to play beast men I dont think I'm ever going to win again, but honestly I play death korps of Krieg for 40k , I've spent way to much money to not have fun while I play, that's the only reason why I still play!

 Shredder wrote:
I play Tomb Kings, so obviously I don't play to win.

But it would be nice to win....just once....please.

Not enough shooting, necroknights or banishments.

I don't play to win but I don't like losing. Currently I run a very magic heavy Undead Legions list and it's quite strong.

Hierotitan, Casket, Mortis engine, black periapt, master of black arts.

+d3 cast, +d3 dice, +2 lore of vampires, save 2 dice, reroll winds of magic. Usually i have a lvl 4 Vamps, lvl 4 Death & a couple lvl 1 vamps for more invocations.

I play Beastmen so... I'm obviously here to win!!!

On a more serious note I would say I'm in the middle like so many others, I like to play but I don't like losing like a boss either. My vote is pretty crooked though, as Fantasy is my second game after 40k for me so I entered Fantasy with the complete intention of having fun and getting into the better fluff and modeling and so on and so forth instead of trying to win and just be overall scum 24/7. If I wanna WAAC and go for broke then I just take a break and build a drop pod spam list or a all bikes list or something equally slowed to go win with in 40k, not much fun though.

So for me Fantasy is a hobby of love, I play to move big blocks of dudes around, in my case big blocks of cows.

Bad poll, it makes it seem like they are mutually exclusive extremes.

My answer is none of the above: Both in equal measure.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Bad poll, it makes it seem like they are mutually exclusive extremes.

My answer is none of the above: Both in equal measure.

That is why there is a third option called "a bit of both" just saying

 chiefbigredman wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Bad poll, it makes it seem like they are mutually exclusive extremes.

My answer is none of the above: Both in equal measure.

That is why there is a third option called "a bit of both" just saying

A bit of both isn't "I like both". Its a false middle ground, implying that they're opposite goals on the same scale. When they're really two separate things.

I can play to win and not for fun at all. I can also play for fun and not to win.

Or I can do both.

Where's the fun in losing? I hate miserable people who enjoy losing, really.

It provides an oppurtunity for reflection and learning?

 Krellnus wrote:
It provides an oppurtunity for reflection and learning?

I still don't see any reason to go into a game with any intention other than victory. It's a contest, basically. Victory should be your goal.

That said, there's a difference between being a tool, and being focused on winning.