Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Jan 22, 2019 20:41:28 GMT
Face it, WM/H is RUN by competitive people. It shouldn't surprise us at ALL that they have made a bed they are laying in. Sorry San, but IMO, PPs biggest marketing mistake with Mk3 was trying to soften WM/H image with this "Your Army Your Way" and the "Look! No more Page 5" narrative. Because if we accept the premise that this Thread put forward "Competitive events are dying in Germany", and if we also accept the premise that "No new players are taking up the game". Then PP missed their target by a mile by diluting their brand. They failed at keeping Competitive Players interested, and they failed at attracting the new casual, less "edgy" crowd. Which is why I have always said that PP should just double down on their product's main strength: Competition. This doesn't mean people won't engage with the game at a casual level. Much like how DOTA2, Hearthstone, Overwatch, all have a casual audience, they also have a thriving e-sport scene. It just means you put the Tight Rules, Balance, Convention style events Front and Center. To be fair PP has tried to promote 'play it painted & play for fun' mentality a bit for a while now. Yup, even though I appreciate the effort, it kinda failed.
|
|
|
Post by sand20go on Jan 22, 2019 20:55:51 GMT
Face it, WM/H is RUN by competitive people. It shouldn't surprise us at ALL that they have made a bed they are laying in. Sorry San, but IMO, PPs biggest marketing mistake with Mk3 was trying to soften WM/H image with this "Your Army Your Way" and the "Look! No more Page 5" narrative. Because if we accept the premise that this Thread put forward "Competitive events are dying in Germany", and if we also accept the premise that "No new players are taking up the game". Then PP missed their target by a mile by diluting their brand. They failed at keeping Competitive Players interested, and they failed at attracting the new casual, less "edgy" crowd. Which is why I have always said that PP should just double down on their product's main strength: Competition. This doesn't mean people won't engage with the game at a casual level. Much like how DOTA2, Hearthstone, Overwatch, all have a casual audience, they also have a thriving e-sport scene. It just means you put the Tight Rules, Balance, Convention style events Front and Center. To be fair PP has tried to promote 'play it painted & play for fun' mentality a bit for a while now. Yup, even though I appreciate the effort, it kinda failed. Oh I agree here. What they are doing is failing to make a choice and live with it. Very common business failure. KNow who you are and be happy.
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Jan 22, 2019 20:57:03 GMT
This is just ridiculously smart. What it understands is that you DON"T grow (as much) focusing on the competitive play as your PRIME reason to exist. Carve that out for those that want it _AFTER_ the fact. The fact remains that PP won't out Beer-and-Pretzels the king of Beer-and-Pretzels. But it can let the people that are searching for a game with tighter rules/balance know that there's a better alternative.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Jan 22, 2019 22:50:06 GMT
Companies have a HUGE impact on how a game with IP is marketed and approached. GDW is actually the best analogy we have and you see a VERY conscious marketing decision in play over the past 2 years. It isn't surprising that with KillTeam they only NOW are introducing their "competitive" packaged - some 6-9 months after getting people into playing it as Beer and Pretzels. spikeybits.com/2019/01/how-gw-is-taking-40k-kill-team-to-the-competitive-arena.htmlThis is just ridiculously smart. What it understands is that you DON"T grow (as much) focusing on the competitive play as your PRIME reason to exist. Carve that out for those that want it _AFTER_ the fact. Now the harvard business school challenge is how PP does this now that the horse is so far out of the barn that it is 6 counties away and has a 15 year head start. But it is just data free rambling to suggest that game owners don't have a direct impact on how a community develops. (again, lets even just consider L&L). I _KNOW_ that the semi-finals and finals of the main competitive tournaments were livestreamed and heavily promoted. I am pretty sure that there was no similar live stream to the big huge narrative event that Hungerford ran and I _KNOW_ it wasn't promoted. Or put even another way - if PP cared they would get Jay to put up on his web site the lists for the narrative event at L&L rather than the latest 3rd place winner in some australian tournament.) Marketing executive needed at PP. This isn't rocket science...... GW trying to get in to competitive gaming with Kill Team would be surprising, but that still doesn't change that the only reason for doing so is that their already is a massive competitive community pushing for it DESPITE GW pushing the exact opposite for decades.
For at least since Mk 2 has been out for a year or so, PP has been pushing Narrative scenarios, concepts, and games. Even the seasonal campaigns are representative of this.
Have all the metas stopped being rabid Steamroller-only groups? If anything, they've doubled down on them as a core group to the point that even bringing up a casual point here or there gets ignored or shouted down.
Both of these points put your entire theory to crap, since the communities are the ones who control their metas. They choose what they are going to play and emphasize on those. Presenting narrative options is meaningless if communities do not read them because they are not Organized Play.
Having a tight rule system doesn't turn away the narrative player for the competitive player. Competitive players presenting an atmosphere hostile or disdainful attitude towards narrative play turns away narrative players. Only playing 75 points Steamroller games can alienate new players as well. That is nothing to do with PP, since they can't force JMLs to be organized or come knocking down your LGS for not providing battlebox games to the newbies.
|
|
|
Post by netdragon on Jan 22, 2019 23:49:27 GMT
Companies have a HUGE impact on how a game with IP is marketed and approached. GDW is actually the best analogy we have and you see a VERY conscious marketing decision in play over the past 2 years. It isn't surprising that with KillTeam they only NOW are introducing their "competitive" packaged - some 6-9 months after getting people into playing it as Beer and Pretzels. spikeybits.com/2019/01/how-gw-is-taking-40k-kill-team-to-the-competitive-arena.htmlThis is just ridiculously smart. What it understands is that you DON"T grow (as much) focusing on the competitive play as your PRIME reason to exist. Carve that out for those that want it _AFTER_ the fact. Now the harvard business school challenge is how PP does this now that the horse is so far out of the barn that it is 6 counties away and has a 15 year head start. But it is just data free rambling to suggest that game owners don't have a direct impact on how a community develops. (again, lets even just consider L&L). I _KNOW_ that the semi-finals and finals of the main competitive tournaments were livestreamed and heavily promoted. I am pretty sure that there was no similar live stream to the big huge narrative event that Hungerford ran and I _KNOW_ it wasn't promoted. Or put even another way - if PP cared they would get Jay to put up on his web site the lists for the narrative event at L&L rather than the latest 3rd place winner in some australian tournament.) Marketing executive needed at PP. This isn't rocket science...... GW trying to get in to competitive gaming with Kill Team would be surprising, but that still doesn't change that the only reason for doing so is that their already is a massive competitive community pushing for it DESPITE GW pushing the exact opposite for decades.
For at least since Mk 2 has been out for a year or so, PP has been pushing Narrative scenarios, concepts, and games. Even the seasonal campaigns are representative of this.
Have all the metas stopped being rabid Steamroller-only groups? If anything, they've doubled down on them as a core group to the point that even bringing up a casual point here or there gets ignored or shouted down.
Both of these points put your entire theory to crap, since the communities are the ones who control their metas. They choose what they are going to play and emphasize on those. Presenting narrative options is meaningless if communities do not read them because they are not Organized Play.
Having a tight rule system doesn't turn away the narrative player for the competitive player. Competitive players presenting an atmosphere hostile or disdainful attitude towards narrative play turns away narrative players. Only playing 75 points Steamroller games can alienate new players as well. That is nothing to do with PP, since they can't force JMLs to be organized or come knocking down your LGS for not providing battlebox games to the newbies.
You mean "hypothesis"?
Look at AoS, it isn't going the competitive way but instead got a whole game designed for it (Underworlds). The design does affect the type of player you get.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Jan 23, 2019 0:23:39 GMT
You mean "hypothesis"? Look at AoS, it isn't going the competitive way but instead got a whole game designed for it (Underworlds). The design does affect the type of player you get.
Yet people still hold competitive tournaments for AoS, at least locally they do. Not a competitive game any more than 40K, yet still the community pushes for competitive events. This is at odds with what the presented spirit of what the company has provided. The point is that the community will do whatever it chooses to do. It can make a competitive casual or toxic, or a casual narrative game and make it competitive or toxic. Once it is in the community's hands, responsibility falls from the creator to the player (or organizer).
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Jan 23, 2019 0:34:39 GMT
The design does affect the type of player you get. I agree with this but it's a bit of a truism though. A game that requires Precise measurements, positioning, and deep understanding of rules interactions will attract players that enjoy precise measurements, positioning and like having a deep understanding of rules interactions. What follows is that the type of player described above is ALSO an Uranus neckbeard that likes to win by being a bully rules lawyer. The conclusion being that if the game required less precise measuring, didn't emphasize proper positioning, and only demanded a passing grasp of rules interactions, then the Uranus Neckbeards would just leave. I think it's a flawed reasoning on many levels.
|
|
|
Post by sand20go on Jan 23, 2019 2:34:52 GMT
The design does affect the type of player you get. I agree with this but it's a bit of a truism though. A game that requires Precise measurements, positioning, and deep understanding of rules interactions will attract players that enjoy precise measurements, positioning and like having a deep understanding of rules interactions. What follows is that the type of player described above is ALSO an Uranus neckbeard that likes to win by being a bully rules lawyer. The conclusion being that if the game required less precise measuring, didn't emphasize proper positioning, and only demanded a passing grasp of rules interactions, then the Uranus Neckbeards would just leave. I think it's a flawed reasoning on many levels. That isn't my point. Rather it is that if I had to bet there the number of people that like "Precise measurements, positioning, and deep understanding of rules" is a relatively limited universe. But you know, this is pretty mute. They are hiring a CEO and he has a lot of experience in lots of places in the industry - including with companies that...you know....market. I have a lot of confidence that they are going to address some things. Puts both perspective (and conspiracy) on the prior staffing changes but not at all extraordinary - a LOT of times people move on when a new chief is coming and they came (and stayed) because of the old chie.f
|
|
|
Post by elladan52 on Jan 23, 2019 2:55:00 GMT
Here's what it comes down to for me: we can argue all day about whether PP or the community take the lion's share for whatever ills are present. But I can only change one of those things, so I'm going to focus there.
Certainly posting on this forum only impacts the community, so I think any productive conversation to be had will be in talking about what we as a community can do to shore up our (and PP's) weaknesses. Any talk about how PP can change is really pointless if your goal is to actually improve things. We can't change the rulebook. But we CAN change how we interact with each other.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Jan 23, 2019 2:57:00 GMT
Here's what it comes down to for me: we can argue all day about whether PP or the community take the lion's share for whatever ills are present. But I can only change one of those things, so I'm going to focus there. Certainly posting on this forum only impacts the community, so I think any productive conversation to be had will be in talking about what we as a community can do to shore up our (and PP's) weaknesses. Any talk about how PP can change is really pointless if your goal is to actually improve things. We can't change the rulebook. But we CAN change how we interact with each other. Agreed. While not the point I was making, it is connected to it by extension, at least.
|
|
|
Post by netdragon on Jan 23, 2019 8:48:29 GMT
The design does affect the type of player you get. I agree with this but it's a bit of a truism though. A game that requires Precise measurements, positioning, and deep understanding of rules interactions will attract players that enjoy precise measurements, positioning and like having a deep understanding of rules interactions. What follows is that the type of player described above is ALSO an Uranus neckbeard that likes to win by being a bully rules lawyer. The conclusion being that if the game required less precise measuring, didn't emphasize proper positioning, and only demanded a passing grasp of rules interactions, then the Uranus Neckbeards would just leave. I think it's a flawed reasoning on many levels.
I don't know where the correlation between competitive player and Uranus neckbeard comes from. I've played with many competitive players who are also very nice, but will defeat you if they see an opening.
Uranus neckbeards are everywhere, I'm sure there are many ones playing totally luck-based games like fluxx; so I don't think my reasoning it's flawed, but that you are just equating two things that are not necessarily true.
I do beleve that communities can shape their gaming experience, non-competitive events (or at least ones where defeating an opponent is not the primarly way of winning) are great, relaxed formats help a lot, and overall empathy help a lot. I also hope that the new CEO brings down the noise level coming from PP since last year so communities can start growing again.
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Jan 23, 2019 22:32:45 GMT
I was just pointing out that people fall into a logic trap when they say "The Community is a Problem" and follow with "And PP is at fault because they created a game that attracted that Community" only to conclude that "PP must change the game to change the Community"
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Jan 23, 2019 22:37:14 GMT
I was just pointing out that people fall into a logic trap when they say "The Community is a Problem" and follow with "And PP is at fault because they created a game that attracted that Community" only to conclude that "PP must change the game to change the Community" Even more ironic when PP has done things outside the hyper-competitive aspect of the game, yet is ignored by the community, but assuming that it is the company's fault...
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Jan 23, 2019 23:16:44 GMT
I was just pointing out that people fall into a logic trap when they say "The Community is a Problem" and follow with "And PP is at fault because they created a game that attracted that Community" only to conclude that "PP must change the game to change the Community" Even more ironic when PP has done things outside the hyper-competitive aspect of the game, yet is ignored by the community, but assuming that it is the company's fault... Sigh, yea, they produce 2 or 3 hardcore Competitive documents a Year (Steamroller, Masters and Champions). While they have produced an order of magnitude way more Casual/Narrative material in the form of seasonal leagues, journeyman leagues and historical scenarios. And that's without counting Community driven formats like Who's the Boss, Food Machine, etc.
|
|
pmark
Demo Gamer
Posts: 17
|
Post by pmark on Jan 24, 2019 13:18:32 GMT
Even more ironic when PP has done things outside the hyper-competitive aspect of the game, yet is ignored by the community, but assuming that it is the company's fault... Sigh, yea, they produce 2 or 3 hardcore Competitive documents a Year (Steamroller, Masters and Champions). While they have produced an order of magnitude way more Casual/Narrative material in the form of seasonal leagues, journeyman leagues and historical scenarios. And that's without counting Community driven formats like Who's the Boss, Food Machine, etc. And this is my biggest reason to say "f* off" to people who insist "WM/H is a competitive game" all the time and want to play only SR and such, with clock and minimal terrain and all that.
Basicaly, I agree that due to the kind of ruleset WM/H has (precise rules, high level of interaction between models' rules, etc.) it is understandable it attracts competitive players. What I don't like is that those players tend to "take over" the local meta and scene, driving out everyone else, who want to play more relaxed games, communicating that their is the only way to play the game.
I'm Hungarian, so right now, due to PP's lack of support in Europe I'm waiting for what 2019 will bring to the company. However, if I'm seeing it doing okay and the availability of the game growing a bit, I decided I will dedicate at least half of my participation in wargaming to (re)build a local community around WM/H, which is pointedly aimed at narrative play, lagues and just relaxed gaming. I don't want to wage any wars with the local competitive scenes and I'll encourage participating in both, if the interest is there, but I like this game and I want to have alternative avenues to playing it.
Also, I have the firm oppinion that yes, it is the community's "fault" that it got this competitive focused which decreases how approachable it is to new players and not competitive-minded people, which will (and already is) hamstring the scenes themselves as they are becoming more and more closed. It is bad to the company too, financially.
In PP's place, I'll leave the precise rules and the combination-based gameplay in place, but would push the fluff and casual modes of play even more and more visibly because this needs to change and while surely there are people like me out there, PP could shape this much more effectively.
|
|