Jump to content

'Playing to Win'


intrizic

Recommended Posts

Naw, It's not a personal judgement thing to me, it's arrogance coupled with a delusional sense of fair play.  

As an example, when I got into Starcraft, everyone told me Terran were the worst, so I picked them and played them to the point that my regular opponents thought Terran were broken.  

 

When I played original Counterstrike (free download mod of Halflife, yo!) I constantly berated the better players for sticking with the best weapons and cleaning up instead of handicapping themselves and using crappier weapons.  I, myself, got really good at the single shot shotgun and scout sniper rifle.  

 

In 40k, I shy away from whatever is the obvious best choice and try to find the second-tier stuff and make it work.  For the most part of course, I still sample from the good stuff too.  

 

In my mind, I'm being a "better" player by taking perceived-to-be-weaker units and I'm showing my skill by winning with them.  That's a pretty arrogant and stupid perception, but I cop to it, it's what I do.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@pax

I respectfully disagree with you.  I think it pertains.  From my experience I have seen 40k players intentionally not take 'power units' in their armies, because they are/were considered 'cheesy'.  I believe this is the scrub mentality that the article describes, in a general sense.  I understand there are many reasons not to take a power unit.

 

to your points:

1. For game balance and costs place all your complaints to the GW help desk :)

2. This one I'm just going to call you out on not knowing the community around these games.  Trust me when i say that the emotional investment is there and in a teamwork environment it gets toxic.

3. Fluger nailed this one.  This is also why the major gaming events/tournaments set up a FAQ.

Personally, I've found there are two forms of cheesy when players use the term: (1) rules/units which introduce a new way of playing which the observer finds to dismantle their intended strategy, and (2) units which are horribly unbalanced and are often banned in most settings (revenant titan, T-ctan). The "scrub" one is the former and relates more to being unprepared to face what the opponent brings. The former creates the illusion of the ladder, but they are not the same thing.

 

I'm also not talking about power units. They are just models. It's the player that may want to scale down their aggressive edge if their opponent is clearly outmatched. It's like adults treating children as equals in fist fights. 40k is no different.

 

Example I watched at GG:

 

3 players. 1 player, clearly the outcast, in a "three way" game with two others. Even points on all sides. The two others didn't attack each other and just focused on the one 1 player. The 1 player was clearly upset, almost crying, though concealing it. The other two had those sadistic smiles that you see in bullies. I asked about the balance, given that the 1 player was basically facing double the points of the other "side." Those two said this was normal for their group and a reasonable way to play. I did establish that this was a horribly unbalanced way to play, and very mean. I haven't seen them playing that unbalanced since, but I do see them in the shop from time to time. One of the other players, in particular, always seems to have an army list that doesn't follow the rules.

 

The two "other" players aren't breaking the rules. They set rules, 3 way battle, even points each player. Just playing the game in the meanest way possible. The armies were, more or less, balanced. It was the players that created the issue.

 

#1 very funny...GW "help" desk... :rolleyes:

 

#2 Not sure what you are referring to, street fighter video games? I was saying there was an emotional investment in 40k.

 

#3 is related to the article being targeted at video games, which do not require a person to know the rules, in order to play by them. In 40k, there are many opponents which conveniently "forget" aspects of the game. There are many opponents which honestly forget aspects of the game. There also many players with just a poor grasp on the rules. This is compounded by having rulebooks which not all the players own. As Fluger mentioned, events which FAQ, and follow said FAQs, are quite awesome at fixing the issues found in 40k scaling. My comments were directed at competitive players, but not in actual events (perhaps because their attitude is unwanted in actual events too).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a scrub mentality with out the blather to my opponents. If that is what they take it is what they take. Even when I try to take the power stuff for a tourney list I end up back at my rule of cool and "scrub" out.

This kind of self-awareness, to me, actually is the key to getting out of the scrub mentality. When you're at the point where you're doing that because it's what you like, without any claim that it's the "right" way to play, it breaks away from all the toxic stuff that the scrub attitude generates.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Pax

 

Three way games are generally like that, but the situation you described was as you described, bullying.

 

1. :D

 

2. And I agree there is emotional investment in 40k, what I though you were trying to say is that there is more emotional investment in 40k than in other games, which I disagree with.  I think it's based on the personal investment and in general terms is equal across all games.  for your consideration: http://evo.shoryuken.com/

 

3.  (Gentle friendly tone) In my opinion (IMO), I believe the article is talking about the barriers we place on ourselves that keep us from improving, in anything really, but I think gaming gives an easier opportunity to gauge improvement (win rate).  This is the bottom line of the article.  IMO, anyone and anytime you are playing to improve, you are playing competitively, maybe not against your opponent, but against yourself (and at this point I would digress off this conversation to address VonVilkee and Flugers point and show my support of WestRider's last post).  Even in these situations play can come across as intense ( especially for high level players in a time crunch for games  :excl: ).  The things you bring up, in your context are fair points, but it makes me wonder what you got out of the article.  I feel that regardless of format ( table-top, video, live action, however you game really ) whether the rules of the games are easy to pick up or erudite in nature people can put mental inhibitors on themselves that hinder there improvement in a game, period.  The format doesn't matter.  Now from what I'm interpreting from your last post, all competitive players are assholes, or exhibit bad behavior.  This isn't the focus of the article, and is an entirely different topic all together, IMO.

 

My digression:
At this point I believe that you guys have set your own personal competitive goals.  For example VonVilkee, ( yeah buddy I'm going to dissect you on the ordo boards :D love ya, bro :wink:   :blink: ), VonVilkee, A KNOWN DROP POD PLAYERS FOR DECADES IN THE NORTHWEST, came into 7th with a power list with the invention of Objective secured.  True, he had gravitated towards the sentinels of Terra to enhance his list in 6th.  But when 7th dropped, poor VonVilkee found himself inadvertently sitting on a mean mean list.  He played this list for...4-6 weeks and then promptly nerfed his list and starting playing around with more rock paper scissor units, which were less vogue.  This isn't because of scrub mentality, as Westrider said:

 

This kind of self-awareness, to me, actually is the key to getting out of the scrub mentality. When you're at the point where you're doing that because it's what you like, without any claim that it's the "right" way to play, it breaks away from all the toxic stuff that the scrub attitude generates.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Pax

 

...


2. And I agree there is emotional investment in 40k, what I though you were trying to say is that there is more emotional investment in 40k than in other games, which I disagree with.  I think it's based on the personal investment and in general terms is equal across all games.  for your consideration: http://evo.shoryuken.com/

 

3.  (Gentle friendly tone) In my opinion (IMO), I believe the article is talking about the barriers we place on ourselves that keep us from improving, in anything really, but I think gaming gives an easier opportunity to gauge improvement (win rate).  This is the bottom line of the article.  IMO, anyone and anytime you are playing to improve, you are playing competitively, maybe not against your opponent, but against yourself (and at this point I would digress off this conversation to address VonVilkee and Flugers point and show my support of WestRider's last post).  Even in these situations play can come across as intense ( especially for high level players in a time crunch for games  :excl: ).  The things you bring up, in your context are fair points, but it makes me wonder what you got out of the article.  I feel that regardless of format ( table-top, video, live action, however you game really ) whether the rules of the games are easy to pick up or erudite in nature people can put mental inhibitors on themselves that hinder there improvement in a game, period.  The format doesn't matter.  Now from what I'm interpreting from your last post, all competitive players are assholes, or exhibit bad behavior.  This isn't the focus of the article, and is an entirely different topic all together, IMO.

We agree on #2. I wasn't meaning to put down those fighting games.

 

On #3 I don't think all competitive players are a-holes, but the competitive player that article was describing would be. Mind you, that would be taking the fighting video game mentality to 40k, rather than adjusting to the game.

 

I do think their opinion regarding "scrub" mentality and putting self limits is very accurate. I just don't see a player that sacrifices their opponent's enjoyment for crushing victory as being anything but an a-hole. I'm not talking about cheesy armies or units, but the player's attitude while playing their army. The article describes cold, calculating logic, taking every advantage whenever presented, and describes honorable play as a "scrub" mentality - [big bad swear word] would be a pretty good term for that player in a non-tournament setting. It's a sociopathic approach to 40k.

 

I do agree, you would be more likely to win with such an attitude, but you could be just as likely to be removed from an event or store.

 

Edit: Wonderful, you can use the word, but when I use the singular version, it replaces it with "big bad  swear word"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll say it here and have said it before. It will get bleeped out.

 

"I suck **** for fun. I play to win."

 

What this means to me is.  I am not at the competitive table to knit a scarf with you. I came to play a game that in the end has a winner and a loser.  If we both are playing by the rules. Whatever game that is. I will try my best to win. If your not taking the game seriously your wasting my time. I hope you take the game seriously. I hope you have fun taking the game seriously. If you tell me have fun and dont take it so seriously. I'll bring out Chutes and Ladders. We can both laugh as you slide from 87 to 24. SCRUB.  I learn nothing from an opponent that does not give his best. If I am to become a better player. I must learn from my losses. Better opponents even those that use power game mechanics give you strategies that you might not of seen before. You can learn from an opponent that is better then you. Even if you felt cheated and walk away from the loss with a bitter taste in your mouth.<==B(get it?).

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll say it here and have said it before. It will get bleeped out.

 

"I suck **** for fun. I play to win."

 

What this means to me is.  I am not at the competitive table to knit a scarf with you. I came to play a game that in the end has a winner and a loser.  If we both are playing by the rules. Whatever game that is. I will try my best to win. If your not taking the game seriously your wasting my time. I hope you take the game seriously. I hope you have fun taking the game seriously. If you tell me have fun and dont take it so seriously. I'll bring out Chutes and Ladders. We can both laugh as you slide from 87 to 24. SCRUB.  I learn nothing from an opponent that does not give his best. If I am to become a better player. I must learn from my losses. Better opponents even those that use power game mechanics give you strategies that you might not of seen before. You can learn from an opponent that is better then you. Even if you felt cheated and walk away from the loss with a bitter taste in your mouth.<==B(get it?).

Best thing when playing Frosty is doing something completely random during a game. His brain cannot handle it. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Best thing when playing Frosty is doing something completely random during a game. His brain cannot handle it. 

You missed out on Frosty's best antics when he was younger. He would watch people play Bloodbowl and if someone made a bad move (in his opinion), he would get up from the table and sigh LOUDLY as he exited the room. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...