|
Post by kanelbullen on Mar 25, 2018 16:01:53 GMT
Back here in Finland it would be nice if we even had a scene to begin with. It's GW land here sadly.
|
|
kaernak
Junior Strategist
Either pray to Menoth or feel his fury. You'll burn either way.
Posts: 172
|
Post by kaernak on Mar 26, 2018 12:56:51 GMT
Again, play smaller games, get people used to the rules, play down to their level of play...no game is created to be intrinsically competitive, but for having fun. Having a small list and being told you're playing bad models/cards/dice is never fun. Play the game from a new perspective. I am not saying throw out competitive play either, just remember not everyone is in it for the tournaments. Some people, like myself, are in the game for laughs, jank moves, and seeing what pinky and the brain idea will work today. Today I try to take over the world. NARF! I do think that you can attempt to help new players and steer them towards the more.....competitive(?) choices if they express interest in playing to tournament quality. We have a guy that just wants to play "big dumb khador stuff" and doesn't really care if its competitive or not. However, if he asked, I'd definitely have some tips for him.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Mar 26, 2018 13:20:14 GMT
If you want people to play against then you have to nurture your local meta, it's really as simple as that. When I play newer players I tend to offer advice during the game, and warn them if they are about to make a big error, I also quite enjoy taking them through step by step plays they could go for, giving them the rationale behind the order of activations, and showing them plays that they would not have considered.
After a game I will chat to them about the match up in general, what they could do differently and what they could change in their list, there is one guy at the club where I play who went from being a beginner to now holding his own in the group, and our club is much better for it.
|
|
unded
Junior Strategist
Posts: 760
|
Post by unded on Mar 26, 2018 13:35:37 GMT
If you want people to play against then you have to nurture your local meta, it's really as simple as that. When I play newer players I tend to offer advice during the game, and warn them if they are about to make a big error, I also quite enjoy taking them through step by step plays they could go for, giving them the rationale behind the order of activations, and showing them plays that they would not have considered. After a game I will chat to them about the match up in general, what they could do differently and what they could change in their list, there is one guy at the club where I play who went from being a beginner to now holding his own in the group, and our club is much better for it. See this approach is something I agree with (and similarly practice). You don't have to be an arse to newbies, but you don't have to go the the extreme of patronising them either. Show them the cool combos - I promise you they want to make them work themselves. Show them the nasty assassinations, and show them how to defend against them. show them how to position infantry - it's an art all on its own. Let them take back errors that will wreck their game, but ensure they know why those errors are going to cost them the game. Sometimes this means showing them the hard way. Hell, I even offer newbies the option of a "training game", where I explain my plans with each move in detail, and in similar detail discuss their plans during their turn (this can be a very long game, so if you want to do similar then budget the time). Nothing I've recommended involves throwing games, or playing dumbed-down lists, and self-handicapping in any way. Newbies are not idiots, and they very quickly see that there is a steep learning curve to climb, so let them enjoy the struggle and feel the genuine triumph when they do earn that first win against a strong opponent. I think there's a disconnect between the guys advocating the tournament-style approach (like myself) versus the guys advocating the softer approach. My camp are NOT advocating to curb-stomp newbies ruthlessessly while posting videos of them being teabagged - we're talking of a different (some might say harsher) style of getting newbies up to speed with the game we love, not just throwing them to the wolves. It's possible my camp isn't exactly viewing the other lot in a fair light either, but I think this thread has made it crystal clear that you're just a bunch of whiny creampuffs who want to raise newbies on stories of rainbow guns and marshmallow feats -und_ed
|
|
draycos
Junior Strategist
Posts: 167
|
Post by draycos on Mar 26, 2018 14:08:01 GMT
When I first started, I was one of the only new players in my local meta. I had a few games like the ones Unded described. I may be biased as I am a fan of trial by fire (nice and considerate fire). Once I had a general handle on the game, I was told to expect to lose, possibly, 30 some games in a row. I was okay with that. But, that also made me want to prove them wrong. And I did, to a degree. I probably won 5 to 12 games out of that first 30. Note: almost all of them were Lylyth 1&2 assassinations in MK-2 where that was really good.
I think it can also help if you guide them towards a singular goal. As with my lylyth story, I started with the battlebox. My goal with lyly 1 was assassination. I bought parts and built an army (with guidance) that accomplished that goal. I think the game is easier to learn if you are given one goal to focus on while learning all of the rules and interactions. Keeps it simple.
|
|
unded
Junior Strategist
Posts: 760
|
Post by unded on Mar 26, 2018 14:47:06 GMT
When I first started, I was one of the only new players in my local meta. I had a few games like the ones Unded described. I may be biased as I am a fan of trial by fire (nice and considerate fire). Once I had a general handle on the game, I was told to expect to lose, possibly, 30 some games in a row. I was okay with that. But, that also made me want to prove them wrong. And I did, to a degree. I probably won 5 to 12 games out of that first 30. Note: almost all of them were Lylyth 1&2 assassinations in MK-2 where that was really good. I think it can also help if you guide them towards a singular goal. As with my lylyth story, I started with the battlebox. My goal with lyly 1 was assassination. I bought parts and built an army (with guidance) that accomplished that goal. I think the game is easier to learn if you are given one goal to focus on while learning all of the rules and interactions. Keeps it simple. Very similar to my introduction. Took me 3 months of Rahn kicking in my teeth before I finally got Lyly2 painted and put that silly elf in the dirt. I remember that introduction fondly. Most of my crowd remembers the same. It didn't cripple us, it lit a fire in us. -und_ed
|
|
kaernak
Junior Strategist
Either pray to Menoth or feel his fury. You'll burn either way.
Posts: 172
|
Post by kaernak on Mar 26, 2018 15:06:53 GMT
If you want people to play against then you have to nurture your local meta, it's really as simple as that. When I play newer players I tend to offer advice during the game, and warn them if they are about to make a big error, I also quite enjoy taking them through step by step plays they could go for, giving them the rationale behind the order of activations, and showing them plays that they would not have considered. After a game I will chat to them about the match up in general, what they could do differently and what they could change in their list, there is one guy at the club where I play who went from being a beginner to now holding his own in the group, and our club is much better for it. See this approach is something I agree with (and similarly practice). You don't have to be an arse to newbies, but you don't have to go the the extreme of patronising them either. Show them the cool combos - I promise you they want to make them work themselves. Show them the nasty assassinations, and show them how to defend against them. show them how to position infantry - it's an art all on its own. Let them take back errors that will wreck their game, but ensure they know why those errors are going to cost them the game. Sometimes this means showing them the hard way. Hell, I even offer newbies the option of a "training game", where I explain my plans with each move in detail, and in similar detail discuss their plans during their turn (this can be a very long game, so if you want to do similar then budget the time). Nothing I've recommended involves throwing games, or playing dumbed-down lists, and self-handicapping in any way. Newbies are not idiots, and they very quickly see that there is a steep learning curve to climb, so let them enjoy the struggle and feel the genuine triumph when they do earn that first win against a strong opponent. I think there's a disconnect between the guys advocating the tournament-style approach (like myself) versus the guys advocating the softer approach. My camp are NOT advocating to curb-stomp newbies ruthlessessly while posting videos of them being teabagged - we're talking of a different (some might say harsher) style of getting newbies up to speed with the game we love, not just throwing them to the wolves. It's possible my camp isn't exactly viewing the other lot in a fair light either, but I think this thread has made it crystal clear that you're just a bunch of whiny creampuffs who want to raise newbies on stories of rainbow guns and marshmallow feats -und_ed We do a slow step down from take backs with our new guys. One of ours just got his first win against one of our regular SR players and he was so happy. Then he asked to play me. He did NOT win that game. But he is playing A LOT better than he was and keeps coming back and throwing down with us. Beat em up, but make em learn while doing it. Pg 5 etc.
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Mar 26, 2018 17:34:29 GMT
Take all of this with a grain of salt.
I was a Press Ganger for almost 5 years, and in that time I saw the full spectrum of player types going in and out of the game: Hyper competitive players that devoured every BatRep on YouTube and every tournament report in the Forums, Snow Flake players that refused to play "the broken stuff" and stuck to their weird yanky lists, guys so casual they brought their armies in shoe boxes, that odd Significant Other that is only playing because the BF plays, and even one guy that quit WM/H because it wasn't fluffy enough and went back to 40k.
And during all of that, what I learned was that you can't force people to play in a way that they don't want to play. You can't expect a casual to keep up with the meta, and you can't expect a competitive player to always be pulling the punches. Don't get me wrong, everyone will occasionally make concessions to accommodate another person, but do it enough times and suddenly you are sacrificing your own leisure time for the sake of someone else's, and then resentment starts brooding.
Ultimately, the question of "How to keep the less experience players interested?" is an incomplete question. Because there are a lot of different aspects of the game that people gravitate towards.
If you reformulate the question into "If a player wants to get good at the game and be competitive, what can I do to make the learning curve less punishing?" then I think there are already a lot of good suggestions here. But ultimately in depends on the individual.
Like I said, demo-ing and mentoring for nearly 5 years I saw a lot of things, including players that you had to cuddle and ease in to the meta, and day 1 players that jumped straight to 50 points and demanded to play against a meta-bending lists.
What I realized during my time PGing is that nobody, and most certainly no game, can be everything to everybody, so each individual needs to take personal responsibility for their own leisure time: New players should seek out mentors with the understanding that they are providing a favor and will most likely want to play against someone their own skill level regularly, and Veterans should keep in mind that a meta that stagnates will die out without new blood.
|
|
|
Post by elshinare on Mar 26, 2018 21:30:49 GMT
If you want people to play against then you have to nurture your local meta, it's really as simple as that. When I play newer players I tend to offer advice during the game, and warn them if they are about to make a big error, I also quite enjoy taking them through step by step plays they could go for, giving them the rationale behind the order of activations, and showing them plays that they would not have considered. After a game I will chat to them about the match up in general, what they could do differently and what they could change in their list, there is one guy at the club where I play who went from being a beginner to now holding his own in the group, and our club is much better for it. I am one of those players, but to everyone, even the competitive players I will point out of they are making a bad move or at least say "are you sure? look at the board state"
|
|
walden
Junior Strategist
Posts: 136
|
Post by walden on Mar 27, 2018 20:08:24 GMT
So In my meta we exclusively play 75 pt lists, except with absolute newbies who have small model collections. For them we set a specific time to play them. If they come to a game night usually it is to play 75pt steamroller format.
On that topic I am pretty straight forward. I will explain my list and what it does to a newbie. Then crush them mercilessly beneath my gatory boot. Then I'll rematch with them and explain during the game what they can do to negate my tech or do things different, one example being going for scenario wins.
|
|
|
Post by ForEver_Blight on Mar 27, 2018 20:32:16 GMT
So In my meta we exclusively play 75 pt lists, except with absolute newbies who have small model collections. For them we set a specific time to play them. If they come to a game night usually it is to play 75pt steamroller format. On that topic I am pretty straight forward. I will explain my list and what it does to a newbie. Then crush them mercilessly beneath my gatory boot. Then I'll rematch with them and explain during the game what they can do to negate my tech or do things different, one example being going for scenario wins. Could that process be reversed? Give them the teaching lesson first, then rematch and fight them at 100%. The second game they would have a better working knowledge of both lists that a veteran would be more likely to have. So that they can have a chance at a more fair game and not just loose woefully and feel like a terrible player.
|
|
|
Post by chillychinaman on Mar 27, 2018 20:54:22 GMT
Personally, I'm with Walden on this one. To protect the meager amounts of confidence I have as a player, I'd rather get stomped into the ground then picked back up. In the reverse scenario I'd probably only be marginally more successful and still get crushed under the weight of raw experience.
Not that there's, anything wrong with FEB's viewpoint.
As an aside, is it better for a new(ish) player to try out the breadth of their faction or focus on something in depth?
|
|
|
Post by erythro on Mar 27, 2018 21:00:17 GMT
My local meta is quite small, 6-7 players. I am very much a casual player, in it for cool models and converting. Others are a bit more serious, but they are accommodating. We have weekly games, all good fun. However, there is one player that always brings super competative lists. Fully optimised, net lists. He almost always wins his games. Which is great, he knows his stuff. BUT he almost never gets a game! No one wants to play him. I felt sorry and so I have tried, he knows I play casual fun lists. The last game we had, after I asked him to bring a fun list he brought an almost entirely incorporeal/untargetable list of instant death. He charged a ghostly battle engine into my lines. I was just so disappointed that my precious hobby time was being drained away. I walked my caster up to the battle engine, turned my back and then packed up my models. He knew I had no magic weapons, but still wanted to "play" his optimised list. Perhaps I could of tried some scenario nonsense, perhaps I could of dragged it out a little bit until the inevitable. Against others i probably would have. But he is unfortunately just too much work.
If it wasn't for the other players I would of quit years ago. Now I just avoid him, I would prefer to not play rather than try again.
Hmm. Got a bit ranty. Anyway, just a heads up for the players who are all about competitions and events. There are those of us that enjoy the hobby for other reasons. Please listen to your opponent when your organising a game.
Remember, it is a game, it needs 2 people to have fun.
|
|
walden
Junior Strategist
Posts: 136
|
Post by walden on Mar 28, 2018 5:12:29 GMT
So In my meta we exclusively play 75 pt lists, except with absolute newbies who have small model collections. For them we set a specific time to play them. If they come to a game night usually it is to play 75pt steamroller format. On that topic I am pretty straight forward. I will explain my list and what it does to a newbie. Then crush them mercilessly beneath my gatory boot. Then I'll rematch with them and explain during the game what they can do to negate my tech or do things different, one example being going for scenario wins. Could that process be reversed? Give them the teaching lesson first, then rematch and fight them at 100%. The second game they would have a better working knowledge of both lists that a veteran would be more likely to have. So that they can have a chance at a more fair game and not just loose woefully and feel like a terrible player. Oh absolutely. I'm just quite lazy and a terrible person who doesn't like talking much lol. My guilt drives the second game Hahaha. But more seriously I'm the type of person who would rather be curb stomped, and then have my opponent explain what went wrong, then to have them explain it and struggle in what still isn't a fair fight due to experience. I won't remember if you subtly called me. A name, but I'll remember if you punched me in the face. Somehow make sense?
|
|
|
Post by ForEver_Blight on Mar 28, 2018 12:18:34 GMT
Oh absolutely. I'm just quite lazy and a terrible person who doesn't like talking much lol. My guilt drives the second game Hahaha. But more seriously I'm the type of person who would rather be curb stomped, and then have my opponent explain what went wrong, then to have them explain it and struggle in what still isn't a fair fight due to experience. I won't remember if you subtly called me. A name, but I'll remember if you punched me in the face. Somehow make sense? It makes sense. It's just down to personal preference. I myself try to teach first. Though this lead to accusations of "Press Gang-ing" players, even ones who considered themselves experienced. And I still plan to do it when I see fit. I don't mind loosing. I myself learn nothing from a crushing defeat because I get mad. Thus I don't listen or talk about the game and how it went wrong. I just sit and fume over mistakes. That's not helpful nor is it sportsman-like. So yes, when facing a new~ish player I will try my best to give them more than enough information about my and their army, to make solid moves. Then I run up and swat away at their army leaving the perception that they are now "behind". But in actuality I run beasts too hot to transfer. My caster is in a good line to something in their army. I don't have my models facing in just the right direction, and so on. At this point they start thinking to themselves they have no chance. But I go over what rules I've just bound myself by. Then I help walk them through how they can get to my caster. This leads to a good "look what your army/caster can do" moment and they realize that it's not an automatic loss if the loose a model or two, etc... Then they are in a good mood because they won a game. Even if it was a player being nice to them they (in my experience so far) are much happier about the game and are more willing to talk about it. That is my intent. I want you to have fun and tell me about it. I want you to tell me what you find cool about your army and what you think was powerful/effective. I want you to have a reason to stay in the game.
|
|