|
Post by Charistoph on Mar 21, 2018 18:24:15 GMT
Sorry I misunderstood then. I read having fun lists or list other than my tournament lists (like trading my siege animatrixs for 2 cannoneers in my list) or dialing back my crazy plays (don't go for an assassination) as subtle ways of throwing a game where your opponent will not notice. I apologize for my misunderstanding. Thanks for pointing it out. While softer/fun lists would be considered "throwing" a game against an experienced player, that doesn't necessarily equate to the same thing with an inexperienced player. If anything, I would suggest that this would be the time to work out those quirky combos that don't seem to work well on paper, or even just playing with models you haven't used for a while. Experienced players have an advantage in that they know how their models work, while inexperienced players do not. If you are playing with models you are less familiar with, you are at least getting closer to leveling the playing field and making the game more fun for both of you. Let's face it you can take a 'Jack 'Caster with a minimal Battlegroup and maximized infantry and still beat someone who has to look at his spell card to know what he can cast. You can reverse it around and take an Infantry 'Caster in a 0 pt Mangled Metal to help them learn all that timing while creating a challenge for you. There are two main types of competitive player, those who play for the challenge and those who play for the dominance. It is those in the latter category who tend to sour the meta for new players, while the former look for ways to develop their skills with a new challenge.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Mar 21, 2018 18:38:21 GMT
It isn't throwing games. When players of a very different experience levels meet outside the rigid environment of a tournament, IMO it's up to the more experienced player, who knows the game more, to moderate the game's difficulty level to accomodate for the difference.
The point of that is to make the game fair and interesting for both parties, and more dependant on gameplay rather than amount of hours spent copying ideas from internet forums and filling online shop carts with OP stuff. The obvious way for me to do this is to have the experienced player take less optimal list (thus increasing the difficulty for him to avoid making the game too easy and not interesting/satisfying), as list's strength is more dependant on natural imbalances in a bloated, assymetric, background-driven game rather than anything that can be atributed to the player himself.
I would advise against "dumbing-down" gameplay itself, it's, unlike the list, player's own skill, and he deserves to use it and show it.
So my advice (and what I do in all games I play, when I play against newbies and the nature of the game allows that) is to play to the best of your ability ( take advantage of personal skill), but using inferior tools (ditch the advantage of factors that are not your credit) so that the game isn't too easy for you, too hard for your opponent and there's bigger chance that it can be challenging for both of you as a result.
For example when I play a split-screen Playstation FPS game with someone who is not accustomed to PS controls, I can take a pistol, while they take a regular, automatic weapon. As a result the game is an interesting challenge for me (because I have inferior weapon) and for them (because they face a more experienced player) and the match can be tense. If I took the best gun in the game, they would stand no chance and the game would be a complete, unsatisfying waste of time for both of us, with me feeling silly and embarassed and them discouraged from ever trying it out again.
|
|
|
Post by The Snark Knight on Mar 21, 2018 18:42:40 GMT
I can take a pistol, while they take a regular, automatic weapon. As a result the game is an interesting challenge for me (because I have inferior weapon) and for them (because they face a more experienced player) and the match can be tense. If I took the best gun in the game, they would stand no chance and the game would be a complete, unsatisfying waste of time for both of us, with me feeling silly and embarassed and them discouraged from ever trying it out again. Clearly you are trying to lure unsuspecting newbs into playing Halo: Combat Evolved. You monster.
|
|
|
Post by sirbrokensword on Mar 21, 2018 23:15:13 GMT
Warmachine is the wrong game if your going to get bored of competitive lists. Time for them to move on. Because the best way to build your Warmachine community is to tell people to go play 40K instead? Yes, if they are unhappy with playing good players with strong lists they should find a game that doesn't care about competition and leave the rest of us to play the game we want. There's lots of those wargames out there, theres only one warmachine.
|
|
|
Post by dogganmguest on Mar 22, 2018 0:33:36 GMT
So, I've now seen:
Don't like the way that themes have infested the game? Leave. Don't want to play 75 point steamrollers on a deathclock every time? Leave. Don't want to play list-of-the-month or get completely run into the ground? Leave.
Ladies and gentlemen: the welcoming and inclusive Warmachine community.
I, for one, will happily leave you to play the game you want. I wish you good luck in still being able to play it after people take your "advice".
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Mar 22, 2018 5:02:16 GMT
I am a little confused by how many posts here seem to boil down to "Teach your veteran players how to throw games to the less experienced players in ways that are not obvious" Yup. There are a number of posters here (Blarg is their unapologetic banner-bearer) who seem to think if two groups of people (Vets and casuals) have differing desires from a game, it should all be up to one group (the Vets) to accommodate the other. They seem to also labour under the misguided notion that being competitive will somehow destroy a local meta. I contest that both notions are utter bollocks. The strong competitive nature of Warmachine is precisely its advantage over other systems. It’s what WM does better than anyone else, and telling people to shy away from it is batty imo. Similiarly, if a group’s desires and your own don’t gel, it’s useless to rail against the uncaring skies that the group should change. If you find a group to play with, you need to respect the values of the group. If your preferences / needs are so different from that of the group that you cannot play nice together, then you need to find a more like-minded group. How firetrucking entitled do you have to be to insist that a functioning group of regular players upend their own apple-cart just to suit you? OK. I’ll stop before I mix all of the metaphors. -und_ed Because the best way to build your Warmachine community is to tell people to go play 40K instead? Yes, if they are unhappy with playing good players with strong lists they should find a game that doesn't care about competition and leave the rest of us to play the game we want. There's lots of those wargames out there, theres only one warmachine. Wtf the both of you. That is not how competitive games work or should work. Ya hats Players need time and help to reach a level where they can offer a significant challenge. They need to train. Literally every sport requires mentoring and coaching. Take the chess and go communities. 2 very competitive games. Teaching academies and novice clubs exist all over the place. Veterans take the time to teach new players how to evolve their strategies. In go if you are a significantly better player you can increase your handicap to make it a more fair game. And learning games are totally a thing. If you want to foster the community you take the time to help expand it. Fighting games are also a very competitive scene. We have one in our lsg and there is an arcade nearby. One of the guys is significantly above the rest. What does he do? He Firetrucken sits there coaching the newer guys on proper blocking, diving and other scenarios. He also plays characters he can't play as well to give himself a handicap. Again if you want to foster the community you take the time to help expand. So yeah. Play a less competitive list. Play out of theme. Help explain what they are doing wrong. Put your casters in dangerous situations to help teach them how to catch people over extending. They literally just started the game. Literally the only thing they can try to do is get better. And if you want quality opponents then you need to help them improve cause otherwise they are gonna have a harder time getting better. And they will either take a very long time to reach the level of most competitive players or just quit cause you're not being accomodating. Or maybe you don't care about having quality opponents, or in helping grow the hobby. And all you care about is getting victories to fulfill your mighty ego, or you can't be bothered to help newbs cause you're too good for that shit. Well in that case you can go Firetruck off to 40k with your bad sportsmanship. What makes warmachine unique is not that it is competitive but that it has a solid rules and an aura of good sportsmanship in the community. That fosters competitiveness and players striving to be their best. Your approach is stripping the game of one of its core assets, a welcoming and helpful community.
|
|
Provengreil
Junior Strategist
Choir Kills: 12
Posts: 850
|
Post by Provengreil on Mar 22, 2018 12:29:09 GMT
Yup. There are a number of posters here (Blarg is their unapologetic banner-bearer) who seem to think if two groups of people (Vets and casuals) have differing desires from a game, it should all be up to one group (the Vets) to accommodate the other. They seem to also labour under the misguided notion that being competitive will somehow destroy a local meta. I contest that both notions are utter bollocks. The strong competitive nature of Warmachine is precisely its advantage over other systems. It’s what WM does better than anyone else, and telling people to shy away from it is batty imo. Similiarly, if a group’s desires and your own don’t gel, it’s useless to rail against the uncaring skies that the group should change. If you find a group to play with, you need to respect the values of the group. If your preferences / needs are so different from that of the group that you cannot play nice together, then you need to find a more like-minded group. How firetrucking entitled do you have to be to insist that a functioning group of regular players upend their own apple-cart just to suit you? OK. I’ll stop before I mix all of the metaphors. -und_ed Yes, if they are unhappy with playing good players with strong lists they should find a game that doesn't care about competition and leave the rest of us to play the game we want. There's lots of those wargames out there, theres only one warmachine. Wtf the both of you. That is not how competitive games work or should work. Ya hats Players need time and help to reach a level where they can offer a significant challenge. They need to train. Literally every sport requires mentoring and coaching. Take the chess and go communities. 2 very competitive games. Teaching academies and novice clubs exist all over the place. Veterans take the time to teach new players how to evolve their strategies. In go if you are a significantly better player you can increase your handicap to make it a more fair game. And learning games are totally a thing. If you want to foster the community you take the time to help expand it. Fighting games are also a very competitive scene. We have one in our lsg and there is an arcade nearby. One of the guys is significantly above the rest. What does he do? He Firetrucken sits there coaching the newer guys on proper blocking, diving and other scenarios. He also plays characters he can't play as well to give himself a handicap. Again if you want to foster the community you take the time to help expand. So yeah. Play a less competitive list. Play out of theme. Help explain what they are doing wrong. Put your casters in dangerous situations to help teach them how to catch people over extending. They literally just started the game. Literally the only thing they can try to do is get better. And if you want quality opponents then you need to help them improve cause otherwise they are gonna have a harder time getting better. And they will either take a very long time to reach the level of most competitive players or just quit cause you're not being accomodating. Or maybe you don't care about having quality opponents, or in helping grow the hobby. And all you care about is getting victories to fulfill your mighty ego, or you can't be bothered to help newbs cause you're too good for that shit. Well in that case you can go Firetruck off to 40k with your bad sportsmanship. What makes warmachine unique is not that it is competitive but that it has a solid rules and an aura of good sportsmanship in the community. That fosters competitiveness and players striving to be their best. Your approach is stripping the game of one of its core assets, a welcoming and helpful community. I regret that I have but one like to give unto this post.
CSB tho:
I have a friend who went to his local club to try out warmachine after I told him I was buying into it. He bought a starter set, asked for a few battlebox level games (MK 2, so ~10-15 points I think it was) and he got turn 2'd three times since he didn't really understand the game. When he asked for help, their apparent response was "page 5, man". While he has a severe tendency to take things too hard, he wouldn't have come up with the page 5 thing on his own. He told me he was never going to play with them again.
He kept the models though, just to paly with me and another two friends, just between us. He picked up some trenchers and a blockhouse as well, liking their theme. A few months ago I was able to take a trip out that way, and I purpose-built an army to play against him, not with smashing him in mind but with giving him the most fun game I could think of. I ended up with Sorscha 2 WGK, and took time out to point out available strategies that may not have been apparent, like that he didn't have to kill my heavy if he could get that charger to see my junior caster. I made sure, in a single match, to use tactics that were sometimes completely invalidated by his army style, and others the went straight through it (ex, dug in trencher vs blasts and grapeshot). I ended the game with a non-feat attempt to take out his caster, siege 2, with sorcha after burning half my stack just to reach him, and left him on 4 boxes. Got smashed for it. We went on to explore 3 other factions and the limits of the casters he owned at the time.
He's now got too many trenchers to fit in a standard list, is building towards storm division, and has told me of a few local games he's had. A lot of his interest is due to me and my other friends blowing on a spark of interest, rather than stamping it out and calling it fun.
|
|
|
Post by onijet01 on Mar 24, 2018 4:14:51 GMT
The abouve post is my response.
I generally follow this style of teaching new players.
1. Discuss a thematic over view of model/faction they are interested in. (My last friend was Cygnar shooting)
2. Discuss rules (usualy in game by example)
3. Boxed to 25. A rule i use using battle boxes (2 games min) and non-battlegoup models (2 games min) ending in a 25 point army game.
4. Help the player learn to play into both good and bad match ups. This is harder as it requires me to do massive research. But i like to set 3 to 5 games set up at a 40/60 disadvantage/advantage games were i can play out to my opponent to talk them through both good and bad matchups and help them to develop tactical experiance.
I dont believe in holding back on the game but i do feel its good to let new players know how their playstyle can be improved and optimized.
Fyi. My cygnar buddy ive lost a few times to due to my own mistakes he caught and things i did not relize.
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Mar 24, 2018 5:15:47 GMT
I feel like a REALLY big one is to tamp down on complaining about the game around potential new players. No one wants to get into a game where the vets are all standing around Female Doging about how OP this is or how broken the game is and how badly the company running it sucks.
|
|
|
Post by josephkerr on Mar 24, 2018 5:48:14 GMT
I try and cut down on good assassination runs, instead pointing out the option I have to clear X models and deliver the assassination, then continue attritioning. I dont like making new players take the ten-fifteen minutes to set up, play one round, then lose, but I like to point out how its available. People tighten up their games imho.
|
|
|
Post by sirbrokensword on Mar 24, 2018 16:51:57 GMT
Or maybe you don't care about having quality opponents, or in helping grow the hobby. And all you care about is getting victories to fulfill your mighty ego, or you can't be bothered to help newbs cause you're too good for that shit. Well in that case you can go Firetruck off to 40k with your bad sportsmanship. What makes warmachine unique is not that it is competitive but that it has a solid rules and an aura of good sportsmanship in the community. That fosters competitiveness and players striving to be their best. Your approach is stripping the game of one of its core assets, a welcoming and helpful community. In my opinion it's players like you that show the real example of poor sportsmanship. By trying to force others to play the game in a way you prefer instead of how they prefer. And yes, 40k is the game for you if you want to control the competitiveness of your opponents.
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Mar 24, 2018 17:41:23 GMT
Or maybe you don't care about having quality opponents, or in helping grow the hobby. And all you care about is getting victories to fulfill your mighty ego, or you can't be bothered to help newbs cause you're too good for that shit. Well in that case you can go Firetruck off to 40k with your bad sportsmanship. What makes warmachine unique is not that it is competitive but that it has a solid rules and an aura of good sportsmanship in the community. That fosters competitiveness and players striving to be their best. Your approach is stripping the game of one of its core assets, a welcoming and helpful community. In my opinion it's players like you that show the real example of poor sportsmanship. By trying to force others to play the game in a way you prefer instead of how they prefer. And yes, 40k is the game for you if you want to control the competitiveness of your opponents. 1) at this point I could care less about your opinion cause you're a toxic piece of garbage 2) I'm not telling you how to enjoy your game. I'm telling you what not to do. If you don't want to deal with new players and the compromises necessary to tutor them up, don't play new players and then Female Dog that they should go to 40k. 3) this game requires 2 players. So when the goals of the two players are different and you refuse to compromise then you're forcing the new player to play in a way that is not enjoyable to them. Basically when playing A new player you're forcing them to play a certain way because you enjoy playing that way without accounting for How they would enjoy. Basically you do what you're claiming I'm doing but on a regular basis. 4) you're still a diseased pustule of ass hole mixed with jackass 5) I'll gladly take 5 bans for the insults. You deserve them. #triggermetimbers
|
|
|
Post by sirbrokensword on Mar 24, 2018 18:08:31 GMT
1) at this point I could care less about your opinion cause you're a toxic piece of garbage Classy
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Mar 24, 2018 18:10:01 GMT
1) at this point I could care less about your opinion cause you're a toxic piece of garbage Classy Thank you, see above comment
|
|
|
Post by sirbrokensword on Mar 24, 2018 18:13:56 GMT
Thank you, see above comment Sure, call me out by name, and get pissy because I disagree. I guess we'll see soon if the mods care to allow trolls like you to remain.
|
|