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.

No. Not across the room...


Have you ever been playing a game and realized that your opponent has no chance of winning.

So you decide to make a couple of "poor decisions," to make the game more interesting... or just tossed all tactical reasoning out the window and tried to make the game more fun?

I wouldn’t say I’ve “thrown” a game in the traditional sense, but I absolutely ease up when I’m playing against new players—especially if they’re just getting into the hobby. I’ll offer pointers mid-game, highlight tactical options they might not see, and generally avoid going full WAAC mode. For me, it’s part of the social contract of tabletop gaming: we’re here to have fun, build community, and make sure people want to come back for another match.

Same goes for games with my wife or family. I’m not trying to dominate—I’m trying to share the experience. If that means letting a unit survive a little longer or nudging someone toward a cool combo, so be it. The long-term win is having more people excited to play again.

 Jammer87 wrote:
I wouldn’t say I’ve “thrown” a game in the traditional sense, but I absolutely ease up when I’m playing against new players—especially if they’re just getting into the hobby. I’ll offer pointers mid-game, highlight tactical options they might not see, and generally avoid going full WAAC mode. For me, it’s part of the social contract of tabletop gaming: we’re here to have fun, build community, and make sure people want to come back for another match.

Same goes for games with my wife or family. I’m not trying to dominate—I’m trying to share the experience. If that means letting a unit survive a little longer or nudging someone toward a cool combo, so be it. The long-term win is having more people excited to play again.

All of this. Especially if I’m ahead, I’ll not play full force, or deny them little wins

Every time I play... and least I tell myself I was throwing it.

I'll never intentionally make a mistake or throw a game, as that is VERY disrespectful to your opponent. I know I'd be furious if I found I won a game because my opponent took a dive. Now, like has already been said, if I'm playing with a new player I'll happily help coach them, so that they can learn the game better. But I won't just let them win, they'll still have to earn it or take their lumps like anyone else.

No.
Throwing a game means I've intentionally lost.
I don't do that*.

There are opponents though where I don't feel the need to bring my toughest forces or my A game to bear.
Or I'll bring my A game coupled with a crap force....
I'm still playing to win, I'm just scaling the difficulty to the opponent.

*There IS a slight exception.
Back in late 8th/early 9th I made a Tyranid force that is almost impossible to lose against.
I tried to translate the movie ALIEN to a 40k game. You know, somebody gets infected, a ripper runs off to hide/grow....
without altering the rules of the game.
The opponant will almost certainly out score me.
They'd have to try not to.
My only real goal is to kill (infect) as many enemy models as possible via Spore Mines or Parasites.
But this loss is thematic. A STORY is being told here.

 Nevelon wrote:

 Jammer87 wrote:
I wouldn’t say I’ve “thrown” a game in the traditional sense, but I absolutely ease up when I’m playing against new players—especially if they’re just getting into the hobby. I’ll offer pointers mid-game, highlight tactical options they might not see, and generally avoid going full WAAC mode. For me, it’s part of the social contract of tabletop gaming: we’re here to have fun, build community, and make sure people want to come back for another match.

Same goes for games with my wife or family. I’m not trying to dominate—I’m trying to share the experience. If that means letting a unit survive a little longer or nudging someone toward a cool combo, so be it. The long-term win is having more people excited to play again.

All of this. Especially if I’m ahead, I’ll not play full force, or deny them little wins

Also all the this.

Sometimes, it’s best done post-game if you’ve time and they’re interested. Point out where they nearly had you, and opportunities they might’ve missed. But if you’re actively coaching them through a game? You can explain your thought process, and why you’re doing a given thing.

It’ll vary person to person. Some are entirely happy to figure it all out for themselves. Others want to be spoon fed. And most are somewhere in between.

Yes, mostly by intentionally rushing my decisions.

Not deliberately, but I have realized later in a game that I made a bad choice which made it difficult, if not impossible, to win afterwards.

If I’m up against a newer player, I’ll usually tone down my list, not my gameplay.

Once the dice start rolling, it’s time to do my best.

I do this with my kids fairly often. Not usally to the extent that I'll deliberately lose, but if we're having fun gaming it's more fun for both of us to play a bit longer and it not be a total blowout.

Sometimes with adults I'll do similarly when victory seems assured early on. I don't aim to lose but -especially if I know we won't have time to do a second game that evening- I may make slightly less than optimal choices in order to:

-Give myself the chance to try out some interesting or characterful ability that normally I might ignore in favor of the most obvious path to victory. It's fairly common to have interesting options available to you that aren't the most cutthroat, and heading towards a sure-win is a good chance to try them out and maybe add some fun along the way.

-Give my opponent a chance to retreat more gracefully with less casualties. This is especially important in campaigns where a crushing defeat can really mess you up for future games. If I'm going to take the win, there's nothing really to be gained in making the rest of the campaign less fun for my opponent by kicking them when they're down.

-Simply give a beginner a chance to play more of the game and learn the mechanics.

All of the above are ways to make the whole experience more enjoyable. They might not be applicable to a WAAC pickup game, but when you're gaming with your friends, in a narrative scenario and/or in a campaign, there really are more important things than turning a defeat into a crushing defeat.

There are lots of people that are very proud they managed to beat me on their first game

Yes.

It is supposed to be fun for everyone. So losing is not a bad thing from time to time.

CB

Not technically no. The one thing I will do is when my opponent is making a decision, I'll just let them know what I can do in response incase they either missed it or didn't think of it. Especially if I have, say, a magic item that will make their movement or attack not work out how they planned.

I play for fun not to beat my opponent. Having a pleasant experience with other players guarantees I can get more games in.

Not for the sake of throwing the game, but I have lost because I was focusing more on completing Agendas than scoring VP. That happens all the time.

Often, the XP (or Intrigue points, Investigation Points, Saint points etc) are more "valuable" than the win.

Of course, there ARE quite a few Agendas that line up with VP, so it isn't universal.