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.

To me it's not so much " losing " when me and my buddies played for fun, it was a scenario game with background a story Line and we got rid of the more cheesy rules that surround apocalypse today.we would have sucidal missions, areas on the field where a ton of dudes died, last stands, it all depends on the story we spun, we also have very spread out and separated deployment zones to make the game more interesting, not just static lines facing each other. We had many objectives wether they were personal and secrect or out in the open. It may have been an assassination or an escort mission or even just take that high ground, we wouldn't play win but play to acomplish the mission at hand to progress the scenario or campaign.
We would end up with , in a game with 30000 points , alot of small skirmishes between elite units and one or two huge engagements elsewhere on the huge field we play on. Other than seeing the normal two huge armies crashing and racing for objectives in the center.
Ofcoarse pizza, music and drinks always make it more fun and we usually have a bonfire right after with cigars and we have a great time.
We do the same thing with smaller games as well.
So I think in the end, it all comes to personal opinion really, if your competitive and see winning as the ultimate goal and having fun I can see that, your playing this game that you spent hundreds of dollars on to have fun witch is by winning the game or atemping to win, funding lupholes, learning armies, bettering your tactics and strategies and building lists.
As for myself I used to do that to, and at times we do that still, but most of the time myself and group of gamers I played with back in cali we played to relax, drink, eat, chill together, and play some 40k, and see an awesome scenario play out.
Becuase in the end it's your money you spent, have fun with it which ever way is fun for you, or else you wasted your money .
Thanks for reading my rambling lol
Tony

 thedarkavenger wrote:

 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.

Agreed, I play to win, (how much so depends on if I feel like using any cool models and skill gap relative to my opponent) and honestly some people have this idea that people who play to win are obnoxious gakheads, which is untrue, obnoxious gakheads will find a reason to be obnoxious if they win or lose.

I play for both. I used to want to be really good but power gamers just take the fun out of the game. I also feel like specific factions are played frequently because they're OP or the latest hotness for some new army book jumpers.

Unlike some people i like playing new stuff with skaven so i can figure out a problem rather than trying the same old crappy list every skaven army has.

That said it gets annoying after a point. I used to get mad losing 3 games in a row. Now for whatever reason i can't win at all. It's kind of pathetic really. Now we have this fast magical cavalry nonsense and the best way to deal with it is with shooting. I feel sorry for any poor bums that can't afford to adapt (like me) and armies that don't have any shooting or any decent shooting.

I dunno in a sense i'm not winning and not having too much fun either losing all the time. Really it's more to see how close i can get to winning more than anything at this point.

I see what a lot of you guys are saying about playing for both.
I agree that you want to go in to win but at the same time I still have fun when I loose.

That being said I dislike suffering a massacre which rarely happens. When I loose it is normally only by 300-500 total points (at 2.5k) so that's a minor victory by the opponent.

Also trying new builds always keeps things fresh for me. I can see how people bring power lists and I hate that. I like to build competitive lists but also like to try new things out that are a little out of the ordinary so that I can mix up the way I play. I need a new army though, I have tried everything with Skaven and have a few good 2.5k lists I generally stick with.

 chiefbigredman wrote:
I see what a lot of you guys are saying about playing for both.
I agree that you want to go in to win but at the same time I still have fun when I loose.

That being said I dislike suffering a massacre which rarely happens. When I loose it is normally only by 300-500 total points (at 2.5k) so that's a minor victory by the opponent.

Also trying new builds always keeps things fresh for me. I can see how people bring power lists and I hate that. I like to build competitive lists but also like to try new things out that are a little out of the ordinary so that I can mix up the way I play. I need a new army though, I have tried everything with Skaven and have a few good 2.5k lists I generally stick with.

I know exactly what you're going through man. When i joined the skaven ranks i thought weapons teams would be awesome. Instead lizardmen ones usually outclass them and they just break to pieces with any ranged firepower. Wouldn't be so terrible but all it takes is line of sight on a hill, through cavalry or monstrous infantry or a building or some other means and magic and shooting and it's dead. The rule i found for it is enemies with ranged firepower tend to kill them off best but melee armies tend to get owned hard by them. Sadly warhammer has changed so much as to make them not very successful for the most part.

There's also the whole skaven playing 3 lists and relying almost completely on their rare choices. It just gets so boring and all 3 of the rares people use are boring. Then there's the fact it's is the biggest horde army ever and i didn't exactly plan for that. I dunno playing skaven after a while feels a bit bland and it sucks when trying new things ends in a new failed attempt at tactics. It's getting to be enough that i kind of want to switch factions though sadly i don't have the money to which is probably why i'm also doing so poorly. Apparently failing to make enough money in the real world forces you to lose here. Ugh i may as well go back to strategy games. I really hope 'creative assembly' makes a good warhammer fantasy game. They really stopped talking about it after a while.

So in short i like to play for fun and i like to win but losing all the time is not fun though it is an incredibly humbling experience.

I used to have a really poor attitude about losing.
I lost friends over it.
I lightened up, realized it was a game, and now i have a on of fun just playing soldier with my friends

Thanks
Austin

Would prefer to be defeated and learn something than win and learn nothing.

Depends somewhat on the game and setting.

At a tournament I play to win, to do less is not respecting your opponent - this does not mean not enjoying it, and does not mean doing 'edge case' type stuff that bends the rules - don't enjoy a win through my opponent not knowing rules.

More casually? Would prefer to take an off the wall list and enjoy it than aim for a win when building an army.

Also depends upon the game and people I'm playing, used to play SFB a lot, and in a group that was competitive, playing that for a day was perhaps the most thinking I've done in a day ever. Flames of war can be exhausting depending on the army, but will play it all day. Warhammer tends to bore me after five or six games in a weekend but I'll not stop playing it.

Don't play 40k much these days but always played that for the shear sight and thrill of running my IG infantry against anything and seeing just how many curvesballs they could throw.

Fully agree on there being a difference between being a tool and having a focus on the win.

Prefer campaign games, you set your own goals and what appears to be a defeat may strategically be a win.

I build my army and hope to win, but if not its still fun and it gives me a chance to see my flaws commanding my army, so I'm a little bit of both.

I like to bring on table the most diverse in unit type lists that I can think off) So it's mostly for fun for me. But as I think about it I tend to win often anyway.