wendan
Junior Strategist
Posts: 785
|
Post by wendan on Jan 5, 2019 21:28:42 GMT
Let me know, I'll happily play games. I am not certain I will be out this week, but depending on work I'll be around.
|
|
Juris
Junior Strategist
Posts: 578
|
Post by Juris on Jan 8, 2019 21:47:35 GMT
Thoughts continued in PM. But, yeah: if you want a community to grow around the game, then (in general) I would suggest you ensure that the hyper competitive folks are not the ones doing the introduction. Casual players breed casual players and competitive players; competitive players generally don’t bring in new people to the community. Just my experience. But, something, something, something. Start running those demo days there, sand, and keep the competitive crowd far away when you do. I disagree with that statement quite a bit. Most well-developed competitive players know how to play a game with a newer player and make sure they have fun. I can also say that it excites people to have "hyper-competitive" players in their meta who travel to cons. There's absolutely no reason to quarantine competetive WMH players away fro new players or casual players. In fact, it's harmful to your community to do so. What is necessary is open and honest communication. Telling your opponent what you want to get out of a game leads to a happy and healthy community. Telling new players that "those guys are sharks, stay far away from them," or telling experienced players "stay away from the newbies or else!" leads to a divided and unhealthy meta (in terms of fun, quality, and diversity of gameplay). To this specific scenario, Sand20go gets what he wants out of games with me. He is not a new player and (despite what he occasionally says) he is not a straight-up casual either. He builds and adopts strong lists and tries to play as competitively as possible. If he asked for a BS game where I played a BS list, I would happily build and play something "uncompetetive" (and, in fact, we've done this before). What I'm not going to do is pull punches in a game (and nobody should ever pull punches in anything other than a battlebox game with a learner); it does not promote good learning, fun, or enthusiasm.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 8, 2019 23:12:20 GMT
(I skimmed.)
The actually good competitive players are usually decent people. But you’re talking one person per shop? Two? The rest of the competitive crowd tends not to be good for introductions, in my experience.
Too many people forget what it was like to be brand new to this game, when they would wonder how many dice they needed to roll, or how many times you can boost, or how chargeable work, or whatever.
Too many people will interrupt a “here are the basic mechanics of this game” demo to tell somebody *in excruciating detail* how they should build their 75-point list, and what they should pair it with, because of “meta” boogeyman X Y Z (often something this new player will never encounter).
Absolutely all of that is at best irrelevant and most often actively detrimental to getting a new player into the game. Help them *if they solicit the information* sure, but don’t deluge a prospective player with useless crap because it’ll drive them away.
Blah blah, etc., etc., stuff, things.
|
|
Juris
Junior Strategist
Posts: 578
|
Post by Juris on Jan 9, 2019 0:24:05 GMT
(I skimmed.) The actually good competitive players are usually decent people. But you’re talking one person per shop? Two? The rest of the competitive crowd tends not to be good for introductions, in my experience. Too many people forget what it was like to be brand new to this game, when they would wonder how many dice they needed to roll, or how many times you can boost, or how chargeable work, or whatever. Too many people will interrupt a “here are the basic mechanics of this game” demo to tell somebody *in excruciating detail* how they should build their 75-point list, and what they should pair it with, because of “meta” boogeyman X Y Z (often something this new player will never encounter). Absolutely all of that is at best irrelevant and most often actively detrimental to getting a new player into the game. Help them *if they solicit the information* sure, but don’t deluge a prospective player with useless crap because it’ll drive them away. Blah blah, etc., etc., stuff, things. I'd ask you to provide more details about the nature of the sample from which you are extrapolating these conclusions (because they don't mesh at all with what I've experienced), but I think there's a better response. You seem to be using the label "competitive player" when you should be referring to individuals with specific bad habits. If you find yourself using the word "competitive" as a slur (which you are here), you're probably using it wrong.
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Jan 9, 2019 2:28:46 GMT
I'm drawing a bit of a blank on what these new "stop opponent from playing" lists actually are... I was actually going to ask this same question. There have been literally zero Hard control casters coming out of CID. Only challenge I see right now is that good SPD and Positioning are practically required in scenario play, but that's nothing insurmountable. Anyway. I understand when people are not having fun, and I really think it's time to move on peacefully, I don't think there's shame in that. I for one am still enjoying the game immensely, at least when I get to play it since my local meta died due to our FLGS closing. I'm even planning an LVO trip and hitting more then a few Cons this year Its not anything like that, we're rounding the old player death spiral, where old players have to have some offense given them rather than just deciding a game isn't for them anymore. SOMETHING has to be broken, despite there's no real evidence currently of profoundly dominant faction. Or "stop the opponent from playing" list, or lack of support for narrative/casual play. People can't just say "eh, it isn't for me anymore" and go do something else. They have to lurk forums and piss and moan about it for a year or so first.
|
|
|
Post by sand20go on Jan 9, 2019 2:51:29 GMT
Thoughts continued in PM. But, yeah: if you want a community to grow around the game, then (in general) I would suggest you ensure that the hyper competitive folks are not the ones doing the introduction. Casual players breed casual players and competitive players; competitive players generally don’t bring in new people to the community. Just my experience. But, something, something, something. Start running those demo days there, sand, and keep the competitive crowd far away when you do. I disagree with that statement quite a bit. Most well-developed competitive players know how to play a game with a newer player and make sure they have fun. I can also say that it excites people to have "hyper-competitive" players in their meta who travel to cons. There's absolutely no reason to quarantine competetive WMH players away fro new players or casual players. In fact, it's harmful to your community to do so. What is necessary is open and honest communication. Telling your opponent what you want to get out of a game leads to a happy and healthy community. Telling new players that "those guys are sharks, stay far away from them," or telling experienced players "stay away from the newbies or else!" leads to a divided and unhealthy meta (in terms of fun, quality, and diversity of gameplay). To this specific scenario, Sand20go gets what he wants out of games with me. He is not a new player and (despite what he occasionally says) he is not a straight-up casual either. He builds and adopts strong lists and tries to play as competitively as possible. If he asked for a BS game where I played a BS list, I would happily build and play something "uncompetetive" (and, in fact, we've done this before). What I'm not going to do is pull punches in a game (and nobody should ever pull punches in anything other than a battlebox game with a learner); it does not promote good learning, fun, or enthusiasm. So since you brought me up....an analogy, an anecdote, and an observation. So an industry that has struggled but now seems to be coming back is skiing. A big thing that they found (in addition to embracing boarders) is that there is a BIG market right where I am....a 50+ year old guy who can not ski K-22 any more (ah, to be 26 again and skiing everything squaw had to offer and more). Knees can't do it, don't get up more than 4 days a year, yada yada yada. So what did the industry do? It went out and bought/designed Cats which could now go up formerly mogul filled Black Diamond runs and flattened them every night into wonderful double blue square cruiser runs that old farts like me love to ski. Brought the industry back. Now you see grooming reports (I scoff when I imagine I am 26 again) and mid-day grooming to keep us skiing on corduroy. Well that is what WM/H doesn't do. Unlike my dear, single, largely unmarried competitive cohort I don't have the time (or inclination) to make Wm/H a way of life. I perhaps travel up to LA to play once or twice a quarter. I play one night a week. I feel guilty spending more than $50 a quarter on models. Yada yada yada. I know the rules fairly well but still forget things and haven't spent the time (or effort or really have the innate skills) to put to memory the deeper aspect of the rule set (such as the exact order of the 23 precise steps of the turn.) My own PERSONAL opinion is that this is a problem with the PP business model and the interesting (cause I am very interested in business) is that GDW has SOMEHOW figured this out cause 50+ year old farts DO play that game (there is a noticable younger skew to WM/H or at the very least GDW seems to have a wider age range). The analogy - what WM/H lacks is that big blue cruiser runs and a way to broaden its appeal. You and the the other WTC guys can play in the bumps - just let me push my tiny men around. The anecdote - last saturday at Gameology I saw a bunch of guys my age playing ASL (advance squad leader for those playing at home). Fiddling bits. Its rule book put the WM/H to shame. Competive. But just a different vibe - in part because you are telling through a competitive game a narrative of historic interest. They all seemed to be having fun and, as an old ASL vet, it is just as complicated and janky as PP ever was. But it definately isn't a chess game. I would have to think deeply about why. Observation - I think an honest appraisal of our meta is that it isn't as healthy as it should be. I am not sure we are that "net positive" for 2018 if we look at the number of players. It is better than it was 2 years ago (when it was on life support), in large part because people (you included Juris) stepped up to do SRs and that helped encourage people to stay with the game. Kudos. But we haven't figured out a great way to GROW it - to get 3-4-5 guys and gals a month trying it out, sticking with it, and having fun. There is the "friday night" group (something which should be nurtered and grown) but I was struck saturday that it wasn't a lot of NEW people playing in that SR - just that we had a new store with much of the same crowd from the greater southland. Not sure for 2 games the 3 hours on the road up and back were worth it. But it was taking one for the team since they come down to San Diego so just being hospitable required doing it at least once. Food for thought. Not really worth arguing cause we are dealing with a real lack of hard data. But one guys impression. Take it for what it is worth.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 9, 2019 17:42:54 GMT
(I skimmed.) The actually good competitive players are usually decent people. But you’re talking one person per shop? Two? The rest of the competitive crowd tends not to be good for introductions, in my experience. Too many people forget what it was like to be brand new to this game, when they would wonder how many dice they needed to roll, or how many times you can boost, or how chargeable work, or whatever. Too many people will interrupt a “here are the basic mechanics of this game” demo to tell somebody *in excruciating detail* how they should build their 75-point list, and what they should pair it with, because of “meta” boogeyman X Y Z (often something this new player will never encounter). Absolutely all of that is at best irrelevant and most often actively detrimental to getting a new player into the game. Help them *if they solicit the information* sure, but don’t deluge a prospective player with useless crap because it’ll drive them away. Blah blah, etc., etc., stuff, things. I'd ask you to provide more details about the nature of the sample from which you are extrapolating these conclusions (because they don't mesh at all with what I've experienced), but I think there's a better response. You seem to be using the label "competitive player" when you should be referring to individuals with specific bad habits. If you find yourself using the word "competitive" as a slur (which you are here), you're probably using it wrong. Competitive = people who always tend to be practicing for the next Steamroller. People who would not have fun playing a casual event with wacky rules. People whose approach to the game is “how does this affect my two-list pair?” rather than “I hope this is a fun game for both players.” People who know exactly how the game is going to turn out after round 1 ends. People who literally can’t help but make optimimal decisions in list building and during turn-by-turn play. You can be a competitive player and be a perfectly nice person and be absolute poison to helping foster a community with new players. Why? Because a competitive player’s goals when playing this game are radically different from a casual player’s goals when playing this game.Much like Sand, my goal for playing this game is to have fun, build awesome-looking armies, and have fun pushing my toy soldiers around on the table while making the occasional “pew pew” noise. Am I capable of playing the competitive folks in my store? Sure. I am actually quite capable at this game. I can play very well, if I so desire. Quite often the competitive folks run up against a weird rule situation and say “Hey Michael...” when they are stumped. Do I enjoy playing against the competitive players? No, not at all. We play entirely different games. Me playing against Watt is a waste of his time, because he’s trying to stress test his latest list and get in the reps with Caster X or whatever, while I do not enjoy spending my leisure time thinking “how do I optimize my list?” or trying to crack a nearly impenetrable game state in my favor. Will I safely camp the flag with my caster for three more turns and win, or will I send my caster charging off to attempt a bad chance at triggering Blood Boon so I can spell snipe a model with Razor Wind because it looks totally epic and sounds fun? Guess which one I pick? Watt is an awesome guy. He’s totally cool. But we rarely play each other, because we are after different experiences in this game. So...something something something. Typing from a phone stinks.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 9, 2019 17:55:29 GMT
Oh yeah, my point. There is nothing wrong with the mindset I describe above — either mindset! But, somebody interested in this game for more casual purposes is going to be turned off rapidly when confronted with the competitive mindset of “you have to play X to win”, or all the other hundred “required” considerations for playing Warmachine. Watch one of the casual folks (either effectively or actually) lose the game on turn 2 because they couldn’t contest a flag/zone or because they didn’t see an assassination vector or they didn’t build their list to handle X Y Z, and watch them not enjoy the game at all and rapidly distance themselves from it. Again, the competitive mindset carries a lot of baggage with it, and almost all that baggage is wildly detrimental to helping new players pick up the game and have fun. The pool of casual players feeds the pool of competitive players. It does not (in general) flow in reverse, not in my experience. Seriously. There’s a reason that the Lock & Load Iron Arena has had 10x the participation of the tournaments every single year I’ve been.
|
|
Juris
Junior Strategist
Posts: 578
|
Post by Juris on Jan 9, 2019 18:39:09 GMT
I disagree with that statement quite a bit. Most well-developed competitive players know how to play a game with a newer player and make sure they have fun. I can also say that it excites people to have "hyper-competitive" players in their meta who travel to cons. There's absolutely no reason to quarantine competetive WMH players away fro new players or casual players. In fact, it's harmful to your community to do so. What is necessary is open and honest communication. Telling your opponent what you want to get out of a game leads to a happy and healthy community. Telling new players that "those guys are sharks, stay far away from them," or telling experienced players "stay away from the newbies or else!" leads to a divided and unhealthy meta (in terms of fun, quality, and diversity of gameplay). To this specific scenario, Sand20go gets what he wants out of games with me. He is not a new player and (despite what he occasionally says) he is not a straight-up casual either. He builds and adopts strong lists and tries to play as competitively as possible. If he asked for a BS game where I played a BS list, I would happily build and play something "uncompetetive" (and, in fact, we've done this before). What I'm not going to do is pull punches in a game (and nobody should ever pull punches in anything other than a battlebox game with a learner); it does not promote good learning, fun, or enthusiasm. So since you brought me up....an analogy, an anecdote, and an observation. So an industry that has struggled but now seems to be coming back is skiing. A big thing that they found (in addition to embracing boarders) is that there is a BIG market right where I am....a 50+ year old guy who can not ski K-22 any more (ah, to be 26 again and skiing everything squaw had to offer and more). Knees can't do it, don't get up more than 4 days a year, yada yada yada. So what did the industry do? It went out and bought/designed Cats which could now go up formerly mogul filled Black Diamond runs and flattened them every night into wonderful double blue square cruiser runs that old farts like me love to ski. Brought the industry back. Now you see grooming reports (I scoff when I imagine I am 26 again) and mid-day grooming to keep us skiing on corduroy. Well that is what WM/H doesn't do. Unlike my dear, single, largely unmarried competitive cohort I don't have the time (or inclination) to make Wm/H a way of life. I perhaps travel up to LA to play once or twice a quarter. I play one night a week. I feel guilty spending more than $50 a quarter on models. Yada yada yada. I know the rules fairly well but still forget things and haven't spent the time (or effort or really have the innate skills) to put to memory the deeper aspect of the rule set (such as the exact order of the 23 precise steps of the turn.) My own PERSONAL opinion is that this is a problem with the PP business model and the interesting (cause I am very interested in business) is that GDW has SOMEHOW figured this out cause 50+ year old farts DO play that game (there is a noticable younger skew to WM/H or at the very least GDW seems to have a wider age range). The analogy - what WM/H lacks is that big blue cruiser runs and a way to broaden its appeal. You and the the other WTC guys can play in the bumps - just let me push my tiny men around. The anecdote - last saturday at Gameology I saw a bunch of guys my age playing ASL (advance squad leader for those playing at home). Fiddling bits. Its rule book put the WM/H to shame. Competive. But just a different vibe - in part because you are telling through a competitive game a narrative of historic interest. They all seemed to be having fun and, as an old ASL vet, it is just as complicated and janky as PP ever was. But it definately isn't a chess game. I would have to think deeply about why. Observation - I think an honest appraisal of our meta is that it isn't as healthy as it should be. I am not sure we are that "net positive" for 2018 if we look at the number of players. It is better than it was 2 years ago (when it was on life support), in large part because people (you included Juris) stepped up to do SRs and that helped encourage people to stay with the game. Kudos. But we haven't figured out a great way to GROW it - to get 3-4-5 guys and gals a month trying it out, sticking with it, and having fun. There is the "friday night" group (something which should be nurtered and grown) but I was struck saturday that it wasn't a lot of NEW people playing in that SR - just that we had a new store with much of the same crowd from the greater southland. Not sure for 2 games the 3 hours on the road up and back were worth it. But it was taking one for the team since they come down to San Diego so just being hospitable required doing it at least once. Food for thought. Not really worth arguing cause we are dealing with a real lack of hard data. But one guys impression. Take it for what it is worth. Specifically as to whether the meta is net positive, there are many factors at play. One important thing to consider in San Diego is the influence of military life on the player populace (and population at large), because we have several players who get transferred or deployed etc. Another thing is play-space. As you know, we had a major shakeup in terms of play space in the last 6 months and that adversely affected the community (in terms of regular attendance, etc.). In terms of actual number of people who play the game, I'm not really sure how you can get 3 to 5 new players per month (or even 1) without a store advertising and actively recruiting people to play. Honestly, I doubt we'll see any growth unless/until there is a store that consistently supports the game and wants to see it grow. Maybe at TC Rocket's, but that is too far for me to drive regularly during the week.
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Jan 9, 2019 19:44:28 GMT
Much like Sand, my goal for playing this game is to have fun, build awesome-looking armies, and have fun pushing my toy soldiers around on the table while making the occasional “pew pew” noise. Point of order. I would argue that Casual vs Competitive is a false dichotomy. In reality you can play 1 game a month and still want to give it your all to win in (while following the rules and respecting sportsmanship norms of course) I would say your level of engagement can be gaged by estimating How much effort you exert to prepare for a game Vs How often you actually play. Knowing him personally, San is very competitive but he just lacks the time and resources to be at Juris' level. For the longest time Juris was the White Whale to San's Ahab
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 9, 2019 19:55:17 GMT
Much like Sand, my goal for playing this game is to have fun, build awesome-looking armies, and have fun pushing my toy soldiers around on the table while making the occasional “pew pew” noise. Point of order. I would argue that Casual vs Competitive is a false dichotomy. In reality you can play 1 game a month and still want to give it your all to win in (while following the rules and respecting sportsmanship norms of course) I would say your level of engagement can be gaged by estimating How much effort you exert to prepare for a game Vs How often you actually play. Knowing him personally, San is very competitive but he just lacks the time and resources to be at Juris' level. For the longest time Juris was the White Whale to San's Ahab Oh, I don’t play like a slouch when I play. I don’t softball everything to my opponent. I play smart, etc.,etc. But I’m playing to have fun first. And sometimes “having fun” means “doing something non-optimal because it looks cool.” “Casual vs. competitive”, as I poorly elaborated above (because, phone) is more along the lines of “people who can do something dumb that they know will cost them the game because it is sufficiently epic that both players will enjoy it”, or just generally a more relaxed approach to the game. You know it when you see it, you know? Like, outside of Unbound, I do not build lists. Ever. When somebody says “Hey let’s play” I build my army then and there based on the following considerations: 1) Did I just finish painting it? It’s in. 2) Have I not used this model for a long time? It’s in. 3) Does it look cool? It’s in. 4) Do I need a specific model for a specific reason (like I built an all-guns army and I need like at least one melee piece, or a solo or something)? Add that. 5) Do I have any points left over, and if so, is there something that would work well with all of the above? Some players’ heads would explode if they were forced to build their list based on “what looks cool or was most recently painted” instead of “what delivers power combo A B C.” You know? They couldn’t do it, or they couldn’t do it and still enjoy the subsequent game. They’re the kind of people who would never play Magnus1, ever, because Magnus2 exists. That’s the difference.
|
|
|
Post by sand20go on Jan 9, 2019 22:44:12 GMT
Much like Sand, my goal for playing this game is to have fun, build awesome-looking armies, and have fun pushing my toy soldiers around on the table while making the occasional “pew pew” noise. Point of order. I would argue that Casual vs Competitive is a false dichotomy. In reality you can play 1 game a month and still want to give it your all to win in (while following the rules and respecting sportsmanship norms of course) I would say your level of engagement can be gaged by estimating How much effort you exert to prepare for a game Vs How often you actually play. Knowing him personally, San is very competitive but he just lacks the time and resources to be at Juris' level. For the longest time Juris was the White Whale to San's Ahab I agree here. Thus I think the issue is WM/H as a way of life vs. WM/H as a leisure activity. To grow WM/H needs to figure out how to cater to a wider range and think about where growth comes from.
Here is what I DON"T understand though (and perhaps someone will do some thinking and elaborate).....why is 40K growing (or at least seems to be - same meta Juris with military people and yet the company thought enough demand in our county to open I believe its second GW store - third if you count temecula's. As a business proposition those have to be rough (hourly employee, overhead, only GW products). I know they pay like crap and are pretty small but it is telling.
And it isn't even TIME. Painting up a GW army is time consuming. But there is something in the rule set, ethos, marketing support, etc. that seems to be in a more healthy place, at least in our meta, than PP. And don't say it is just that the store owners love it. They do....and I know that drives things and that they made some bad choices on PP.....but small biz owners will fall in love with things that sell.
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Jan 10, 2019 0:04:13 GMT
Healthy is subjective though.
My wife, for example, accompanies me to nearly every major Con and SR I participate in, and even she easily picked up how it seems that 40k players just aren't as kind and friendly as WM/H players.
I think 40k draws a different crowd actually. I don't see Juris playing 40k competitively for example (although I may be mistaken).
I don't think WM/H needs to cater to a wider audience the same way 40k does. That just didn't work when Mk3 released and their main advertisement was "Your Army, Your Way". It sent mixed signals and didn't achieve what they wanted: to draw new players in.
This is the reason I think PP should just double down on their main strengths as their marketing strategy: Solid living ruleset, faction balance, and robust organized play.
I believe that if you do this, and lower the barrier of entry with a limited format such that you reduce the brain cycles required to be successful, you will get new players.
|
|
Juris
Junior Strategist
Posts: 578
|
Post by Juris on Jan 10, 2019 0:10:38 GMT
Point of order. I would argue that Casual vs Competitive is a false dichotomy. In reality you can play 1 game a month and still want to give it your all to win in (while following the rules and respecting sportsmanship norms of course) I would say your level of engagement can be gaged by estimating How much effort you exert to prepare for a game Vs How often you actually play. Knowing him personally, San is very competitive but he just lacks the time and resources to be at Juris' level. For the longest time Juris was the White Whale to San's Ahab I agree here. Thus I think the issue is WM/H as a way of life vs. WM/H as a leisure activity. To grow WM/H needs to figure out how to cater to a wider range and think about where growth comes from.
Here is what I DON"T understand though (and perhaps someone will do some thinking and elaborate).....why is 40K growing (or at least seems to be - same meta Juris with military people and yet the company thought enough demand in our county to open I believe its second GW store - third if you count temecula's. As a business proposition those have to be rough (hourly employee, overhead, only GW products). I know they pay like crap and are pretty small but it is telling.
And it isn't even TIME. Painting up a GW army is time consuming. But there is something in the rule set, ethos, marketing support, etc. that seems to be in a more healthy place, at least in our meta, than PP. And don't say it is just that the store owners love it. They do....and I know that drives things and that they made some bad choices on PP.....but small biz owners will fall in love with things that sell.
That's an MBA question, and my assumption is that it has something to do with GW's being first in the market. Even non-gamers have heard of Warhammer. They also have a ton of cross-over ventures (tons of video games, for instance, as well as many board games and other games that people actually play). More salient, perhaps, is the idea that Warhammer is a lowest common denominator game, and so you will naturally get larger groups of people to play it. That's how LCD's work.
|
|
|
Post by pyr0maniacal on Jan 10, 2019 21:17:23 GMT
In my case, I started with 40k because that's what my friends were playing. I still have brainfart moments where I get the rule sets mixed up.
On a side note, it's looking less likely I'll get to game this week, what with being a responsible adult and all.
|
|