Tournaments and competitive can be fun but not all the time and every game. That is why I like ToW. Some units are clearly effective, but this doesn't guarantee anything. A few odd rolls and the game can swing either way quickly. Had that many times after we both thought that "this is it" for two rounds. Meanwhile in 40k it is almost insulting to not take the most effective units because the contrast is so big. Most effective here means "guaranteed outcome", and that is no fun in a game of dice, not if that is every single game. I play space elfs, so the opponent sits by and does nothing, while I basically dictate what unit they have to remove now "because of rules...". Re-roll 2s and switch out dice, activate stratagems. If it was 2001 and Counter Strike, I would use macros to buy an AK and grenade + body armor every round...xD
Witn you 100 percent on This good stream, oh and I'm sure everyone else is like me and remembers thier first time in store to play, ppl like you make that a happy experience
To me the games are about the narrative. Winning is good, but losing well is equally good. I'd rather have unbalanced forces and see what happens rather than just trying to smash the opponent.
Greetings and Salutations! I totally agree with your take on Wargaming. You echo my philosophy on Gaming. Enjoy the story unfolding like watching a film for the first time. Ultimately it´s a game of chance and should be fun for both participants. Thank you, all the best, Billi.
In one word. FUN! Remember, there were no tournaments in early warhammer. Most games were run by a GM. Competitive wargaming didn't really come around until all the card gamers started their exodus to our games, and in my opinion, it has ruined the wargaming hobby.
Something I've done from a "casual" perspective is building a list that may not be optimal but I do it because I just painted something and want to give it a try. I've been playing a lot of Shatterpoint lately, and some of my strike teams have been less optimal than my opponent's due to having finished something I want to play ASAP. My friends and I also take the time to build a board together, placing terrain, analyzing strategic points before we ever roll off and choose a side to deploy on. The goal here is to create something together, make it look cool, and try to create a board that you both feel comfortable playing on. Then, once you roll off and have to deploy, you learn how fair you really made it, but since it was a team effort, there's less "feels bad" moments. We also talk about our decision points and sometimes do some thinking out loud, mostly around options (go left or right, shoot X or Y, etc) just to gain new insights and help each other become better players. Very rarely do we ever need to pull punches/make different choices; in fact, I would say that this never happens.
So good to hear someone who wants the same thing as I do. I have said for years that the most satisfying games are those that end in tight victories on either side. Great video.
i think its called playing kind, because it should be fun for bolth sides .i used to curb stomp when i was young and i saw how depressed it made people now i do the same, and plan to correct my self, with a friend because were all in it to make friends have adventures and have fun. men need that, we need that grand adventure in our lives, and young people too.
Amazing points friend couldn't agree more!! I do think theres also a point to be made that just because it's narrative it doesn't mean it's casual. I play these games more dedicated than a lot of these competitive players in my area who only play it once and awhile. The other point to be made too is that competitive play is more focused on the meta gaming aspects (numbers , lists, etc) whereas narrative (and casual) is more about story and being within that world . Which to me is the real point of enjoying these worlds
It is SO good to see that i am not the only one around who sees it like this :) We are regular group of 4 people, we mostly play 2vs2 and they are all very competetive. And exactly as he said in the video, i try to ¨maneuver¨ the game so that it is more fun and more balanced. And in fact, i do loose most of my games. But it is much more fun and if the other side is winning we play to the end. If my side is winning quite decicively, the other side often just loose interest in the game and even end the game early, because they know that there is veeeery little change that they will win. And i realy dont understand this attitude. I always try to explain them, that we play for fun. It is not about wining the game and tabling your opponent. it is about the time we spend together, talking, drinking beer, pushing some minis, rolling dice. As someone commented here, for me it is much more fun if i loos a close challenging game, then if i win by tabling my opponent easily :)
Pre pandemic I played in a club with a casual approach. Everyone was a narrative player. Then a new guy joined who was a complete power gamer, min maxing constantly and he’d throw a fit when he lost a game. He joined in the middle of a narrative game and struggled to understand that his tactics of wipe the opponent off the table asap wouldn’t necessarily win him the game because the story objectives were the key factor. He dropped out of that narrative campaign and just did pick up games but once everyone had played him once or twice there was only the friend who brought him into the club left who was willing to play him. Everyone else was fielding thematic forces while his were net lists and competitive driven. He was a nice enough guy generally , but at the table he was an ass. He was both a sore winner and loser. That’s just a case where he didn’t mesh with the group.
causal and competitive is pretty mutually exclusive. if both players are competitive then it can be hella exciting. if both causals are just there to roll some dice it’s fun too. story games with also cool with like secret objectives and such. to each his own.
I don't think there's anything wrong with being more "casual" or wanting to have fun close games. That's about how I am too. I just don't like the idea of "fudging" games to be closer. It seems a bit like intentionally throwing tbh. If I was getting stomped bad? I wouldn't want my opponent to fudge. In my mind, yeah it can be unfun, but also it helps me learn the game and the tactics. If it's a good/fun game then I can still have a good time. I absolutely think if you're playing against new players/demoing then yeah I think that's about the only time you should "fudge" or throw a bit. Maybe intentionally give yourself a worse or unoptimized list compared to the opponent.
You brought something to my attention, when I said fudge in the game I did not really clarify what I meant. I will not actually cheat or fudge dice rolls or anything like that, by fudging I meant intentionally making suboptimal choices so that my opponent has a better chance.
Interesting discussion. For me, gaming is about having fun, rolling dice with mates, talking crap with maybe a couple of bevvys thrown in. I did the tournament thing, but it was always about the challenge of playing someone new rather than beating people up to win.
I think a good name for the types of players you are talking about at 7:00 would be "collaborative players." Collaborating together to tell a good story and have a good game where both are having fun. Its like the unofficial slogan of the game Dwarf Fortress "Losing is Fun", because you got a fun story out of the experience.
The purpose is to have fun. I was a hardcore competitive mtg and 40k player for years and what I noticed that I derived fun from making decks that win or making the plays that lead to victory. Not the act of playing. It somehow got lost in the drive to win. And attending tourneys now I can see exactly that. People playing competitive 40k on tourneys look miserable to me. Might just be my store / club but it usually looks like this - one dude, silent and moving his models or nose-deep in the rules. The other dude bored out of his skull waiting for the opponent's turn to end. The only emotion I can spot is when something goes either very wrong or very right and leads to victory. I spotted that in myself and had to reassess my priorities. Am I really painting this model because I like it? No, I was painting this model because it mathematically did 16 mortals in one phase. And will I even enjoy playing that game? Nope, what I enjoyed was using that model to win.
@@LetsTalkTabletopRecovering competitive player, now casual for 4 years with change and loving it. The moment I stopped treating the game as a me vs you and started treating it as "let's both have fun doing this" the games suddenly became what they were meant to be all along. Funny how the little kids had it right all along and we, grown-ass men got it so wrong we needed to revert to that childlike simplicity of just having fun playing.
You hit on something that I wasn’t actually aware that I do. I also view the game as a struggle between two armies or teams, not me vs my opponent. By taking that step back, making the game less personal, I find the experience more enjoyable.
Thanks! When I first started wargaming about 15 years ago I was naturally quite competitive, but I didn't like the anxiety it gave me when worried so much about winning or losing. So I learned to detach from it and then I've enjoyed the hobby infinitely more.
Nailed it, man. To me being an ambassador for gaming means making sure people are not limited to "the one true path to fun". I am a garage gamer. Always have been. Winning is nice, making good stories and memories with friends is better.
@@LetsTalkTabletop Long ago, when Wizards of the Coast had a flagship site with retail store, our instructions were to "Let the Wookie win". Meaning to keep a demo interesting and fun and to help the new player walk away feeling good about having tried a new thing. Make it welcoming. Yeah, it was a sales thing and it worked really well, but I've held onto that experience and used the strategy to build gaming community outside of a sales environment.
Casual gaming is 85% of what I enjoy about the hobby. Making a narrative if only in my head about why these forces are fighting is very fun to me (although I do enjoy the occasional tournament my lists are never the meta and usually fluff heavy)
Makes complete sense, from another casual gamer. Is a game going to have a winner and loser? Yes (aside from some exceptions like rpgs) Is the game going to be fun? Depends on who you play with. Does not even need to be wargaming because I imagine there are a lot of people who can think of a friend and say, “I will not play [X] with them,” since, for many different reasons, it’s not fun to play that game with that person.
Oh yeah! When I was a kid, there was many people that I refused to play magic the gathering against because they would just crush me in about two turns. My one friend's brother had a deck that was so finely tuned that you only had about three or four turns to play the game and then you were dead. Wow, that was a lot of fun. 🙄
i have learned you dont have to win to have fun or effect a result in a game many battles were not fought to win, but to delay or cripple an army, or make a stand these were some of the greatest battles in history, Thermopylae, Gettysburg, japan 1600 with samurai these battles were loosing battles and pretty crazy.
I'm pretty much only a casual gamer. I play for fun. I try to win, but I will sometimes make suboptimal choices if it is cool narratively and would be in character for my little dudes.
I don't fudge, per se, but there are different things I do to try to help player engagement. If it's a straight competitive game and it's reaching the avalanche point, I'll simply ask the other player if they want to call it. If I won because of crazy dice luck (mine hot or theirs cold or both) I will very much acknowledge it. After all if you complain when the dice are cold you have to own that hot dice can make anyone look like a genius. For my narrative campaign games, I am generally running against players that I'm a lot more experienced at the game. So generally I line myself up with about three-quarters of what they have and then try to put them in suboptimal positions where they either have to work very hard to win, or sometimes have to decide when it's time to pull back and save what they have. For this next bit, it's a your mileage may vary kind of thing, but if the opposing player(s) are receptive after I've won, I'll often do a little post-game review of what I set out to do and what I was thinking and looking at from my side of the table. (Some people would find that condescending and if I get that feeling I'll just pass it up and shake hands.) And when I've lost, I've also gone back and pointed out the places where they got me and the good plays they made. Better players make me better at what I'm doing, so if I'm better than my opponent in general I try to help them get more up to speed. Which isn't about being competitive, it's the joy of setting cleverness against cleverness and seeing what creativity ensues. Also in campaign games some of that suboptimal decision-making that you talk about is baked in, because I'll tend to have a narrative structure for the enemies. Are they smart or dumb? Are they experienced? Do they really want to be here, are they ready to break up and scatter when they're hit, or are they angry to the point of being reckless? Figuring out the emotional tenor of the game can be another layer to incorporate into the narrative.
Like it tell the guys at my shop: "honestly I'd sit in my basement and watch TV or play N64 with you but since we didn't go to highschool together it'd be weird. Ergo, here I am playing Warhammer/Magic/Pokemon." Casual gaming for me is about hanging out with and meeting people. I also just like playing games. Video, card, board, or war. Also: some people get so upset when they lose it makes winning not fun. Put up a fight but let the other guy win and you'll have tons of people who want to game with you.
I sometimes like to create decks for Magic: the Gathering that I know sill not be competitive but think might be fun to try out for their synergy or tribal theme. Sometimes you find a new card that will blend well with an old card you want to see work together but you know they are not a deck competitive with other decks that are bleeding edge tournament competition. It can be hard to find decks that pair up well against each other but if you already made the deck, you should try at least a handful of games at at several other decks. If you still think a pairing is too lopsided, you can then try experimenting with handicaps if you and/or your opponent still want to keep the matchup going.
The thing I love about casual games is being able to take the cool models that aren't "optimal" just because they look cool. In competitive scenes, you basically fight and create the same lists over and over, and it gets stagnant and boring.
The entire point of a game is to have fun and to give it your all. For some that's giving it all by winning others it's through painting. For me it's the badass stories and random occurrences on the tabletop cause ultimate this is a dice game and the odds are never in my favor. As long as I and my opponent have fun then I couldn't ask for anything more
I only ever played for fun. And as a guy about to return to tabletop gaming, I'm still going to play only for fun. As soon as a game becomes a chore, I'm out. At the end of the day it's moving little toy soldiers around a board, I have no stake in it personally. I'm not my ork warlord, so I don't have to win at any cost. A loss of a game is meaningless to me, unless losing was a damn good laugh - then it becomes a great story of a spectacular loss you can share and repeat like any great legend of yore. In the end, my self-worth is not tied to winning a game of toy soldiers. At its best, it's a game of football with your childhood friends with sweaters on the floor to be the goalposts, never a world championship game in a stadium.
I consider a casual player as someone who doesn't play often for whatever reason, and as a result they aren't super familiar with the rules and spend much of the game referencing their codex. And this is fine. 40k has a ton of rules. I'm the same way when I break out Settlers of Catan once every couple of years. In contrast, when I think about a casual game, it's one where both players have have the same expectations. And those expectations are that the stakes are virtually non-existent. The score is a non-issue and the entire atmosphere is very relaxed. Players will still play their honest best to outscore their opponemt, but they will share more tactical information to prevent any gotchas or missteps. They will be very forgiving with go-backs for rules that might have been missed. I 100% subscribe to the notion that both players should be having a good time and that win or lose, you should consider that. While I can't cosign the idea of manipulating a game to keep it close, I believe in playing your honest best and to the victor goes the spoils. But, I do often take my foot off the gas once I can see that I'm going to win or table my oppoment. At this point, I only do things that will score me points. But I will not go out of my way to sweep up every mode my opponent has left. No need to rub it in their face. Now at the narratives at Shorehammer, I totally see how the mid-game balance fudging is applicable. It keeps everyone invested. But that only works because there is a TO or Game Master at the table making these assessments and offering corrections. Another good video amd conversation. Even if I still think the competitve vs casual topic is fundamentally flawed.
Thanks for watching! Yeah, this topic means so very many different things to different people it is hard to describe. By the way, I realized that I kind of misspoke in the video. By fudging the game to make it more fair, I don't mean faking dice rolls or actually cheating in any way. I just mean making intentionally suboptimal choices so that they have a better chance. A question though: if you're taking your foot off the gas when you see a clear victory coming, isn't that manipulating the game? 🤔
@@LetsTalkTabletop I imagine in some way that could be the case. But I see it more as taking actions that will score me points and finishing the game strong, rather than twisting the knife and completely shutting my opponent down. If killing a unit won't score me points, I won't waste mine nor my opponent's time going through the motions.
So, you are not really going easy on them, you're just not grinding them into the ground and rubbing it in their face. That's a polite thing to do. I see what you're saying.
In my introductory game for Warmachine my 'teacher' tabled my army in turn 2. He sat their with a giant grin on his face and said now I would know what to look out for next time. I didn't play a next time.
You should have learnt from that defeat and improved as a player, the fact you didn't says alot about your inability to improve yourself. You likely have the same attitude in other areas of your life.
@anab0lic Or, or maybe it's a game we use to relax and not everybody has the required insecurities to be super serious about it. I'm betting that's the case.
@@LetsTalkTabletop To me someone that challenges me and makes me grow as a person is fun to be around. Its nothing to do with insecurities, what are you even talking about, you don't make much sense.
@anab0lic Most competitive try hards are usually insecure people. Needing to prove something to themselves or someone when it's not even required. That's what he means. Most narsacistic folks can't self analyze tho.
I wish I was able to play with people like you. Because I've never had a fun game of 40k , I quit. Even friends I've tried to play only play to stomp. In all the game stores I've been in the people are just overcompetitive.
Wow, that's high praise! Obviously competitiveness varies by location but I know dozens upon dozens of casual gamers from multiple different states. They are out there! Honestly if all I had to play with was competitive players I would also quit 40k.
3 месяца назад+1
This is Why i have now switched to OPR Newcommers are much faster in OPR and can overlook their abilitys and strategies much faster and have more fun. And for the ones i used to play 40k those who would be willing to play OPR with me even though they mostly play 40k are also on the good mindset. But those who allways come with the newest perfectioniced 40K List would also not want to play OPR.
I think the big factor for casual gaming for me is time. In adult life we often have competing time pressures and we often don't have the time to spend constantly swapping out weapons or models in our armies just to optimise for the most recent tournament trends. Casual gaming lets me play an enjoyable game with a reasonable chance of winning, but most importantly it lest me do it with the army I have built over the years without needing a hot-rod list that I've been tuning every day and models I just finished last night.
Merciful player and in war this is dumb but in a community like ours this is essential otherwise u will run out of opponents I use to love casual gaming at my local gw in the early 2000s now warhammer seems more competitive and u need to know all these crazy rules and understand them just to survive
i pick the units i like rather than buy play the way everyone else does with my faction.... I play guard 1 bask, 2-3 tanks, min 3 squads of regular guard, 1 - 2 units of temp scions, a hell hound and 2 baneblades i really want to use but never got the opportunity to use yet xD
Losing can be a lot of fun, too sometimes. I play a lot of Warhammer but never look into meta so... often I use not optimal lists and lose but it´s always fun if friends say thinks like. "How is anyone in your army still alive?" or "If a Space Marine Order has just 1000 Members... how can you lose 1400 of them in just one year?" XD
If you were about to start a new wargame adventure and a spirit told you no matter what the next wargame you play is, you will lose 100% of your games forever. What game would you choose. What format would you play - competitive, casual, narrative? Would you play at all? This can tell you a lot about who you are in gaming and where you derive value.
Well, usually when spirits talk to me they just urge me to kill. (I'm joking RUclips) But, using your analogy I would still play because I enjoy spending time with people. Of course it's nice to win, and I still try to win, but only within reason.
Knowing is half the battle. It comes down to execution. If you pick meta knight in smash it may be the OP choice, but if you can't do anything yourself then you will lose. Does everyone have the time you do? Does everyone have the ability to think on this kind of level? Do you know how football and other games work? It's the same thing. According to you all football and basketball plays are cheating. If you picked up a tournament list, and played it for the first time against me. I could probably beat you with my non-competetive one. I was on your side until you called it cheating. Imagine calling it cheating to do something perfectly in the games rules. Find me the rule that says "your army list must be one that you made with no outside help or influence" and i'll agree with you again. I am entirely a casual gamer btw
Great video! No one drives across town to get their butt kicked for 3 hours. That’s how a hobby group dies. I’ve got a guy like that in my group and he just 3D prints new army to keep making a “casual” meta. Something tells me though that Chaos Knights and Aeldari meta lists aren’t “casual.” Funny enough no one likes to play him anymore. I’d be curious to watch a video on how you’d handle something like this sir, if you have the time.
Thanks for chiming in! And thanks for watching. I am positive I will dive into dealing with jerks in a future video. I have ran our gaming club for 15 years and we have had our share over the time. LOL
I love playing only 2 Rounds of Warhammer and having to call it because I am loosing 25:10 with 3 of my units left on the board who cannot complete secondaries.
The biggest reason why i stopped 40k here in germany is the fact that even "casual" gamers play following tournament rules. And as we all know, the "meta" of 40k changes a few times a year. Thus even some of these "casual" players chase the "meta". If i want to play a tightly balanced competetive game, i play Infinity and that is usually fun. It is a more stable experience. But for a more beer and prezels experience i usually go play something like OPR or for something to tell a story somehing low key like Mordheim, where the dice tell the story, which i love.
Oh boy! Someone has a different view and opinion than myself, how dare he! 😊 I enjoy war games because I like history and I enjoy trying to replay these battles, learn and see if things can be different by using different tactics. I don’t do it for the competition, I am trying to relax and enjoy myself
To have fun with friends. Nothing more, nothing less. Personally i do nt like playing win at all cost gamers. Its not like there is a prize besides bragging rights until the next match.
I always stated as such: If you instead of playing want to sit 30 minutes during your move analysing every unit chart and counting statistic propability and do equasions, then go play EVE Online instead of any of Wargaming games. Because game gets less fun with every minute when I listen to someone overexplaining meta tactics to me, than rather having a blast trying to create their own tactics and having their own way.
I’m not into overly competitive gaming at all. For me, it’s about the experience…narrative gaming all the way. Have fun, make new friends, make it a fantastic social experience….most importantly, tell a great and memorable story. A game that is told over and over again over pints and at the local shop or club for how fun and memorable it was…the lowly foot soldier that somehow defeated the monster or opposing hero. “Make sure you have good games…”
For a competitive person like me, i discovered that to be able to switch gears and play the way you do requires a cartain level of maturity. In the end we are all playing with toy soldiers and rolling dice. Want to be competitive? Then go play chess.
'Competitive Gaming' is easy: You Play to Win. 'Narrative Gaming' takes constant effort: You're asking things like "What would this Ork, dropped into a situation in which he could a) stand back, shoot civilians, and win the game, or b) shoot, charge, and fight a Space Marine, actually do?" You're bringing a list that fits a theme (Tau All-Stealth, Guard All-Tanks), or is what that actual army would probably made of (Few/No duplicates, except maybe the basic Necron Warrior) 'Casual Gaming' is some kind of Frankenstein Monster. I'm bringing a Narrative List, but playing Competitively. I'm bringing Flamers not because they're Brie, but because I want to get close and set things on fire. If the game goes south early for one player, where they have next to no chance to win, you pose the question of whether it was dice gods or loadout, and probably rerack accordingly.
Casual war gamers should no more have to justify their existence than people who like to throw a ball around without any stakes. One should never feel compelled to turn the thing that you love into a life or death struggle.
Casual gaming is just that. You like playing, but you don't put time into it. It's like people who can play chess casually, and people who study the openings and the gambits and will win every game against you. Maybe you could do a handicap in wargaming, like they do in chess, or level the playing field somehow. The list building is a big factor in winning. In Magic there is a solution for that, and that is playing limited, which means that you will have to play with a deck that you build on the spot, with random cards, so no one is using their optimized build in the game. In wargaming that could be done by playing scenarios with pre-made armies. Eventually you will get good in the game, though, but Warhammer changes so quickly that if you don't put effort into it, you will be left behind. Maybe the answer is playing a simpler game like One Page Rules.
The WAAC player and the casual are always going to be at odds. These games weren't created for them originally. However, they insist they're way is the only one that makes sense or is the correct "fun" way to play. Consider this. The hobby is greying and aging from my experience. I have never seen any competitive players actually grow the hobby or successfully introduce younger players to it. It's casual players who put In the time and effort to introduce younger folks without trying to curb stomping them into not playing again.
Competitiveness makes the atmosphere stale and boring, It becomes about scoring objectives and extra victory points rather than telling a fun and attractive story through your game. COMPETITIVE WARGAMING SUX
@@LetsTalkTabletop to be clear I'm not saying you or this vid was ridiculous it was great and you seem lovely. Just the idea of WAAC power gamers having to sit down and wrestle with such a question is baffling to me 😅
What you're talking about is etiquette not a difference between competitive or casual play. Have empathy and respect your fellow players. If you can tell that they are upset don't make things worse. The only caveat for me would be in a tournament. Don't go easy on me there, its just condescending.
There is no difference. Whether a game is competitive or casual seems to be entirely dependent on the individual. In general, both players are playing to WIN. That makes it competitive so your entire premise is a false to begin with. It boils down to one side or the other getting upset because the other side beats them. If you were truly a casual (or even your self-styled fluff) gamer, you wouldn't care if you win or lose. The fact that you seem to get upset when the other person doesn't somehow pitch you slow balls. You claim that for YOU it is a social issue and that you don't care. Don't blame your opponent. If the game is not balanced, and turn one is a problem for you, deal with it or put the blame where it belong, i.e. on the shoulders of Games Workshop. The game should have gone to alternating activations, unit by unit a LONG time ago.
All gaming is casul its not even the case of whats the point,,thats what gaming is😂 then it can develop into othed types... basics ye? Heres a question im juxt z wafcher of gamers whats the point of me😂till find it hard to forgive mysslf for the stomping i gave my friends when a kid cos they didnt know the rules as good as me😮 might still have some ppl to play with
Narritive/casual gamers tend to be the types that lack the brain power required to mathmatically and creatively problem solve at a higher level. They dont enjpy competitive gaming, because they simply are not any good at it.
@@LetsTalkTabletop I already get it, its the same kind of cognitively impaired people that enjoy the story-ficiation of video games... they prefer a passive minimal input mode of thinking as opposed to an proactive demanding one.
The idea that you pull back and make bad choices so it's close says a lot about what you think about the people you're playing with. They don't need you to coddle them. Just like you, they recognize that it's a game. Tell them why or how you're doing the things you're doing and let them learn strategies. Coddling them and letting them do better when you feel like it doesn't do anything but hold them back.
Yes, being willing to turn it down in order to make it a closer game, even if I still win, does say a lot about what I think of the people I play with. You hit the nail on the head! They are my friends and we are in a casual and friendly gaming group. So I want them to have fun. You were correct, but not in the way you think you were. And holding them back from what? A lucrative career in wargaming? Maybe these people have jobs and other stresses in life and just want to roll some dice and have fun versus being hyper competitive. This is exactly what I talk about when I say that competitive people see things completely backwards.
@@LetsTalkTabletop People deserve a chance to improve in their endeavors regardless of what money it can make them. I'm not going to be a pro mini painter, but I want to get better at painting. Not everyone is going to go on to win competitions, but they deserve a chance to improve their play. If you decide that it should be a close game and pull back the throttle, you're depriving them of real feedback. Am I saying that it's proper to curb stomp newbies? No, but they'll never NOT be newbies if they never actually get challenged. Make plays. Explain WHY you're making those plays, and maybe your friends will pick it up too. Nurturing a newb doesn't have to be taking it easy on them. Again, that doesn't mean you have to stomp them either.
Okay, this comment I agree with more than the first. But, your stance is assuming that people want to get better. That there is some sort of goal to be achieved. Many people just do this to make friends and relieve stress. Not everything has to be about winning and not everybody cares about getting better. I know that sounds terrible and lazy, but it depends on what you want out of the game. If you want to get better and hone your strategic skills, then great. But many people are either not capable of that or just not interested in it. I actually agree with you in the fact that I always try to get better with my strategy and improve on my game. But my chief concern is that everybody has fun.
@@LetsTalkTabletop Sure. I phrased my first comment poorly. It's not even about winning it's about having a good time. And I don't know a lot of people who DON'T want to get better at the things that they invest time or money into. That doesn't even mean that they get good enough to win, but they personally achieve a level that they deem "good enough". I'm not playing a competitive scene. I love fluff lists, but I like to push those lists to see what they can do. If I didn't get better at the game it's not the list holding me back, it's me holding the list back. Ya know?
Keep going! I agree even more with your third comment. LOL. Just keep in mind that different people want different things out of this game. A lot of us have super stressful lives or jobs and we just do it to chill and have fun and make friends. I completely get your drive to get better with your strategy and list building, but that doesn't mean everybody's like that. I can agree with you about improving my strategy, but it's just not worth the hassle to be overly concerned with winning.
Casual games are for ppl who are too scared to play with the big boys.. When you play comp its: YOU vs thee other guy, you do your best to beat the other guy. The best player wins. Simple. No "fudging"no Rudolph the red nosed reindeer.. I really think casuals are people who have weak hearts and need an excuse if they lose. LOL. I play for fun too! And winning is REALLY fun!!
perhaps you are jocking buf if it's 1st degree it is ... sad. I stopped playing 40K because of the competitive ruleset and switched to OPR, more fun. I play historical too, and now only casual. And I really love hex and counters historical wargames where forces are unbalanced but objectives / time limit are set to keep situation fair. To be honest, I can't imagine going back to competitive 40k
![YoungBoy Never Broke Again - Catch Me [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KxwEXXFQMTY/mqdefault.jpg)
I should clarify, by "fudging the game" I meant make suboptimal choices intentionally, not actually faking rolls or whatever.
Tournaments and competitive can be fun but not all the time and every game.
That is why I like ToW. Some units are clearly effective, but this doesn't guarantee anything. A few odd rolls and the game can swing either way quickly. Had that many times after we both thought that "this is it" for two rounds.
Meanwhile in 40k it is almost insulting to not take the most effective units because the contrast is so big. Most effective here means "guaranteed outcome", and that is no fun in a game of dice, not if that is every single game.
I play space elfs, so the opponent sits by and does nothing, while I basically dictate what unit they have to remove now "because of rules...". Re-roll 2s and switch out dice, activate stratagems. If it was 2001 and Counter Strike, I would use macros to buy an AK and grenade + body armor every round...xD
Witn you 100 percent on This good stream, oh and I'm sure everyone else is like me and remembers thier first time in store to play, ppl like you make that a happy experience
A close loss is more fun than a crushing victory.
Absolutely!
To me the games are about the narrative. Winning is good, but losing well is equally good. I'd rather have unbalanced forces and see what happens rather than just trying to smash the opponent.
Exactly! Have fun and tell a story. A lot of people discount the challenge in that.
Casual games make the hobby more fun. Competitive gaming can ruin a game very quickly.
like diablo 2 😮
Greetings and Salutations! I totally agree with your take on Wargaming. You echo my philosophy on Gaming. Enjoy the story unfolding like watching a film for the first time. Ultimately it´s a game of chance and should be fun for both participants. Thank you, all the best, Billi.
Thanks for saying that billi!
In one word. FUN! Remember, there were no tournaments in early warhammer. Most games were run by a GM. Competitive wargaming didn't really come around until all the card gamers started their exodus to our games, and in my opinion, it has ruined the wargaming hobby.
I miss playing 40K back when me and my friends started out and no one was chasing metas and dumping armies over how good they were.
@@Mosaic117 Me too. I guess those days are long gone.
Exactly! This whole competitive esports bullshit nowadays isn't real Warhammer
@@gk7003 Amen! Preach it!
Wouldn't this just turn the game into DnD?
Something I've done from a "casual" perspective is building a list that may not be optimal but I do it because I just painted something and want to give it a try. I've been playing a lot of Shatterpoint lately, and some of my strike teams have been less optimal than my opponent's due to having finished something I want to play ASAP.
My friends and I also take the time to build a board together, placing terrain, analyzing strategic points before we ever roll off and choose a side to deploy on. The goal here is to create something together, make it look cool, and try to create a board that you both feel comfortable playing on. Then, once you roll off and have to deploy, you learn how fair you really made it, but since it was a team effort, there's less "feels bad" moments.
We also talk about our decision points and sometimes do some thinking out loud, mostly around options (go left or right, shoot X or Y, etc) just to gain new insights and help each other become better players. Very rarely do we ever need to pull punches/make different choices; in fact, I would say that this never happens.
So good to hear someone who wants the same thing as I do. I have said for years that the most satisfying games are those that end in tight victories on either side. Great video.
Thanks! Absolutely!
i think its called playing kind, because it should be fun for bolth sides .i used to curb stomp when i was young and i saw how depressed it made people now i do the same, and plan to correct my self, with a friend because were all in it to make friends have adventures and have fun. men need that, we need that grand adventure in our lives, and young people too.
Amazing points friend couldn't agree more!!
I do think theres also a point to be made that just because it's narrative it doesn't mean it's casual. I play these games more dedicated than a lot of these competitive players in my area who only play it once and awhile.
The other point to be made too is that competitive play is more focused on the meta gaming aspects (numbers , lists, etc) whereas narrative (and casual) is more about story and being within that world . Which to me is the real point of enjoying these worlds
That's a great attitude to have! You're probably a lot of fun to play against.
It is SO good to see that i am not the only one around who sees it like this :) We are regular group of 4 people, we mostly play 2vs2 and they are all very competetive. And exactly as he said in the video, i try to ¨maneuver¨ the game so that it is more fun and more balanced. And in fact, i do loose most of my games. But it is much more fun and if the other side is winning we play to the end. If my side is winning quite decicively, the other side often just loose interest in the game and even end the game early, because they know that there is veeeery little change that they will win. And i realy dont understand this attitude. I always try to explain them, that we play for fun. It is not about wining the game and tabling your opponent. it is about the time we spend together, talking, drinking beer, pushing some minis, rolling dice. As someone commented here, for me it is much more fun if i loos a close challenging game, then if i win by tabling my opponent easily :)
I think there's a level of maturity required to have your attitude about it. There are many people who base their entire personality on this hobby.
@@LetsTalkTabletop then i hope the other guys will mature very soon in the same way. Because we are not going to be any younger.... :D
Pre pandemic I played in a club with a casual approach. Everyone was a narrative player. Then a new guy joined who was a complete power gamer, min maxing constantly and he’d throw a fit when he lost a game. He joined in the middle of a narrative game and struggled to understand that his tactics of wipe the opponent off the table asap wouldn’t necessarily win him the game because the story objectives were the key factor. He dropped out of that narrative campaign and just did pick up games but once everyone had played him once or twice there was only the friend who brought him into the club left who was willing to play him. Everyone else was fielding thematic forces while his were net lists and competitive driven. He was a nice enough guy generally , but at the table he was an ass. He was both a sore winner and loser.
That’s just a case where he didn’t mesh with the group.
Sounds like a real fun guy to be around.
causal and competitive is pretty mutually exclusive.
if both players are competitive then it can be hella exciting.
if both causals are just there to roll some dice it’s fun too.
story games with also cool with like secret objectives and such.
to each his own.
I don't think there's anything wrong with being more "casual" or wanting to have fun close games. That's about how I am too. I just don't like the idea of "fudging" games to be closer. It seems a bit like intentionally throwing tbh.
If I was getting stomped bad? I wouldn't want my opponent to fudge. In my mind, yeah it can be unfun, but also it helps me learn the game and the tactics. If it's a good/fun game then I can still have a good time.
I absolutely think if you're playing against new players/demoing then yeah I think that's about the only time you should "fudge" or throw a bit. Maybe intentionally give yourself a worse or unoptimized list compared to the opponent.
You brought something to my attention, when I said fudge in the game I did not really clarify what I meant. I will not actually cheat or fudge dice rolls or anything like that, by fudging I meant intentionally making suboptimal choices so that my opponent has a better chance.
Interesting discussion. For me, gaming is about having fun, rolling dice with mates, talking crap with maybe a couple of bevvys thrown in. I did the tournament thing, but it was always about the challenge of playing someone new rather than beating people up to win.
I think a good name for the types of players you are talking about at 7:00 would be "collaborative players." Collaborating together to tell a good story and have a good game where both are having fun. Its like the unofficial slogan of the game Dwarf Fortress "Losing is Fun", because you got a fun story out of the experience.
Good point!
The purpose is to have fun. I was a hardcore competitive mtg and 40k player for years and what I noticed that I derived fun from making decks that win or making the plays that lead to victory. Not the act of playing. It somehow got lost in the drive to win. And attending tourneys now I can see exactly that. People playing competitive 40k on tourneys look miserable to me. Might just be my store / club but it usually looks like this - one dude, silent and moving his models or nose-deep in the rules. The other dude bored out of his skull waiting for the opponent's turn to end. The only emotion I can spot is when something goes either very wrong or very right and leads to victory. I spotted that in myself and had to reassess my priorities. Am I really painting this model because I like it? No, I was painting this model because it mathematically did 16 mortals in one phase. And will I even enjoy playing that game? Nope, what I enjoyed was using that model to win.
That's self-reflection is not very common! Good on you for noticing it.
@@LetsTalkTabletopRecovering competitive player, now casual for 4 years with change and loving it. The moment I stopped treating the game as a me vs you and started treating it as "let's both have fun doing this" the games suddenly became what they were meant to be all along. Funny how the little kids had it right all along and we, grown-ass men got it so wrong we needed to revert to that childlike simplicity of just having fun playing.
You hit on something that I wasn’t actually aware that I do. I also view the game as a struggle between two armies or teams, not me vs my opponent. By taking that step back, making the game less personal, I find the experience more enjoyable.
Thanks! When I first started wargaming about 15 years ago I was naturally quite competitive, but I didn't like the anxiety it gave me when worried so much about winning or losing. So I learned to detach from it and then I've enjoyed the hobby infinitely more.
Nailed it, man. To me being an ambassador for gaming means making sure people are not limited to "the one true path to fun". I am a garage gamer. Always have been. Winning is nice, making good stories and memories with friends is better.
Absolutely!!
@@LetsTalkTabletop Long ago, when Wizards of the Coast had a flagship site with retail store, our instructions were to "Let the Wookie win". Meaning to keep a demo interesting and fun and to help the new player walk away feeling good about having tried a new thing. Make it welcoming. Yeah, it was a sales thing and it worked really well, but I've held onto that experience and used the strategy to build gaming community outside of a sales environment.
Casual gaming is 85% of what I enjoy about the hobby. Making a narrative if only in my head about why these forces are fighting is very fun to me (although I do enjoy the occasional tournament my lists are never the meta and usually fluff heavy)
Makes complete sense, from another casual gamer. Is a game going to have a winner and loser? Yes (aside from some exceptions like rpgs) Is the game going to be fun? Depends on who you play with. Does not even need to be wargaming because I imagine there are a lot of people who can think of a friend and say, “I will not play [X] with them,” since, for many different reasons, it’s not fun to play that game with that person.
Oh yeah! When I was a kid, there was many people that I refused to play magic the gathering against because they would just crush me in about two turns. My one friend's brother had a deck that was so finely tuned that you only had about three or four turns to play the game and then you were dead. Wow, that was a lot of fun. 🙄
i have learned you dont have to win to have fun or effect a result in a game many battles were not fought to win, but to delay or cripple an army, or make a stand these were some of the greatest battles in history, Thermopylae, Gettysburg, japan 1600 with samurai these battles were loosing battles and pretty crazy.
I'm pretty much only a casual gamer. I play for fun. I try to win, but I will sometimes make suboptimal choices if it is cool narratively and would be in character for my little dudes.
Casual groups are great if you’re sick of the people who rarely play but think they’re experts because they parrot the stuff they read online
I don't fudge, per se, but there are different things I do to try to help player engagement.
If it's a straight competitive game and it's reaching the avalanche point, I'll simply ask the other player if they want to call it. If I won because of crazy dice luck (mine hot or theirs cold or both) I will very much acknowledge it. After all if you complain when the dice are cold you have to own that hot dice can make anyone look like a genius.
For my narrative campaign games, I am generally running against players that I'm a lot more experienced at the game. So generally I line myself up with about three-quarters of what they have and then try to put them in suboptimal positions where they either have to work very hard to win, or sometimes have to decide when it's time to pull back and save what they have.
For this next bit, it's a your mileage may vary kind of thing, but if the opposing player(s) are receptive after I've won, I'll often do a little post-game review of what I set out to do and what I was thinking and looking at from my side of the table. (Some people would find that condescending and if I get that feeling I'll just pass it up and shake hands.) And when I've lost, I've also gone back and pointed out the places where they got me and the good plays they made.
Better players make me better at what I'm doing, so if I'm better than my opponent in general I try to help them get more up to speed. Which isn't about being competitive, it's the joy of setting cleverness against cleverness and seeing what creativity ensues.
Also in campaign games some of that suboptimal decision-making that you talk about is baked in, because I'll tend to have a narrative structure for the enemies. Are they smart or dumb? Are they experienced? Do they really want to be here, are they ready to break up and scatter when they're hit, or are they angry to the point of being reckless? Figuring out the emotional tenor of the game can be another layer to incorporate into the narrative.
All very logical and thoughtful points! I agree with you.
Like it tell the guys at my shop: "honestly I'd sit in my basement and watch TV or play N64 with you but since we didn't go to highschool together it'd be weird. Ergo, here I am playing Warhammer/Magic/Pokemon."
Casual gaming for me is about hanging out with and meeting people. I also just like playing games. Video, card, board, or war.
Also: some people get so upset when they lose it makes winning not fun. Put up a fight but let the other guy win and you'll have tons of people who want to game with you.
Haha. I think you've got a point there about the n64.
I sometimes like to create decks for Magic: the Gathering that I know sill not be competitive but think might be fun to try out for their synergy or tribal theme. Sometimes you find a new card that will blend well with an old card you want to see work together but you know they are not a deck competitive with other decks that are bleeding edge tournament competition. It can be hard to find decks that pair up well against each other but if you already made the deck, you should try at least a handful of games at at several other decks. If you still think a pairing is too lopsided, you can then try experimenting with handicaps if you and/or your opponent still want to keep the matchup going.
I like your attitude towards gaming sir.
Thanks dude!
The thing I love about casual games is being able to take the cool models that aren't "optimal" just because they look cool. In competitive scenes, you basically fight and create the same lists over and over, and it gets stagnant and boring.
The entire point of a game is to have fun and to give it your all. For some that's giving it all by winning others it's through painting. For me it's the badass stories and random occurrences on the tabletop cause ultimate this is a dice game and the odds are never in my favor. As long as I and my opponent have fun then I couldn't ask for anything more
I only ever played for fun. And as a guy about to return to tabletop gaming, I'm still going to play only for fun. As soon as a game becomes a chore, I'm out. At the end of the day it's moving little toy soldiers around a board, I have no stake in it personally. I'm not my ork warlord, so I don't have to win at any cost. A loss of a game is meaningless to me, unless losing was a damn good laugh - then it becomes a great story of a spectacular loss you can share and repeat like any great legend of yore. In the end, my self-worth is not tied to winning a game of toy soldiers. At its best, it's a game of football with your childhood friends with sweaters on the floor to be the goalposts, never a world championship game in a stadium.
I consider a casual player as someone who doesn't play often for whatever reason, and as a result they aren't super familiar with the rules and spend much of the game referencing their codex. And this is fine. 40k has a ton of rules. I'm the same way when I break out Settlers of Catan once every couple of years.
In contrast, when I think about a casual game, it's one where both players have have the same expectations. And those expectations are that the stakes are virtually non-existent. The score is a non-issue and the entire atmosphere is very relaxed. Players will still play their honest best to outscore their opponemt, but they will share more tactical information to prevent any gotchas or missteps. They will be very forgiving with go-backs for rules that might have been missed.
I 100% subscribe to the notion that both players should be having a good time and that win or lose, you should consider that.
While I can't cosign the idea of manipulating a game to keep it close, I believe in playing your honest best and to the victor goes the spoils. But, I do often take my foot off the gas once I can see that I'm going to win or table my oppoment. At this point, I only do things that will score me points. But I will not go out of my way to sweep up every mode my opponent has left. No need to rub it in their face.
Now at the narratives at Shorehammer, I totally see how the mid-game balance fudging is applicable. It keeps everyone invested. But that only works because there is a TO or Game Master at the table making these assessments and offering corrections.
Another good video amd conversation. Even if I still think the competitve vs casual topic is fundamentally flawed.
Thanks for watching! Yeah, this topic means so very many different things to different people it is hard to describe. By the way, I realized that I kind of misspoke in the video. By fudging the game to make it more fair, I don't mean faking dice rolls or actually cheating in any way. I just mean making intentionally suboptimal choices so that they have a better chance. A question though: if you're taking your foot off the gas when you see a clear victory coming, isn't that manipulating the game? 🤔
@@LetsTalkTabletop I imagine in some way that could be the case. But I see it more as taking actions that will score me points and finishing the game strong, rather than twisting the knife and completely shutting my opponent down. If killing a unit won't score me points, I won't waste mine nor my opponent's time going through the motions.
So, you are not really going easy on them, you're just not grinding them into the ground and rubbing it in their face. That's a polite thing to do. I see what you're saying.
In my introductory game for Warmachine my 'teacher' tabled my army in turn 2. He sat their with a giant grin on his face and said now I would know what to look out for next time. I didn't play a next time.
You should have learnt from that defeat and improved as a player, the fact you didn't says alot about your inability to improve yourself. You likely have the same attitude in other areas of your life.
@anab0lic Or, or maybe it's a game we use to relax and not everybody has the required insecurities to be super serious about it. I'm betting that's the case.
100% agree with you. Go have fun with people who are fun to be around.
@@LetsTalkTabletop To me someone that challenges me and makes me grow as a person is fun to be around. Its nothing to do with insecurities, what are you even talking about, you don't make much sense.
@anab0lic Most competitive try hards are usually insecure people. Needing to prove something to themselves or someone when it's not even required. That's what he means. Most narsacistic folks can't self analyze tho.
I wish I was able to play with people like you. Because I've never had a fun game of 40k , I quit. Even friends I've tried to play only play to stomp. In all the game stores I've been in the people are just overcompetitive.
Wow, that's high praise! Obviously competitiveness varies by location but I know dozens upon dozens of casual gamers from multiple different states. They are out there! Honestly if all I had to play with was competitive players I would also quit 40k.
This is Why i have now switched to OPR
Newcommers are much faster in OPR and can overlook their abilitys and strategies much faster and have more fun.
And for the ones i used to play 40k those who would be willing to play OPR with me even though they mostly play 40k are
also on the good mindset.
But those who allways come with the newest perfectioniced 40K List would also not want to play OPR.
I think the big factor for casual gaming for me is time. In adult life we often have competing time pressures and we often don't have the time to spend constantly swapping out weapons or models in our armies just to optimise for the most recent tournament trends. Casual gaming lets me play an enjoyable game with a reasonable chance of winning, but most importantly it lest me do it with the army I have built over the years without needing a hot-rod list that I've been tuning every day and models I just finished last night.
Merciful player and in war this is dumb but in a community like ours this is essential otherwise u will run out of opponents I use to love casual gaming at my local gw in the early 2000s now warhammer seems more competitive and u need to know all these crazy rules and understand them just to survive
i pick the units i like rather than buy play the way everyone else does with my faction.... I play guard 1 bask, 2-3 tanks, min 3 squads of regular guard, 1 - 2 units of temp scions, a hell hound and 2 baneblades i really want to use but never got the opportunity to use yet xD
Losing can be a lot of fun, too sometimes. I play a lot of Warhammer but never look into meta so... often I use not optimal lists and lose but it´s always fun if friends say thinks like. "How is anyone in your army still alive?" or "If a Space Marine Order has just 1000 Members... how can you lose 1400 of them in just one year?" XD
If you were about to start a new wargame adventure and a spirit told you no matter what the next wargame you play is, you will lose 100% of your games forever. What game would you choose. What format would you play - competitive, casual, narrative? Would you play at all? This can tell you a lot about who you are in gaming and where you derive value.
Well, usually when spirits talk to me they just urge me to kill. (I'm joking RUclips) But, using your analogy I would still play because I enjoy spending time with people. Of course it's nice to win, and I still try to win, but only within reason.
Whats the point of competitive gaming? Generally, it's just a bunch of rules lawyers whining.
Haha
Is that grey corner building the arcade from Tron? 🤩
I honestly don't know, it was 3D printed from panhandle3D. Etsy.com. it probably is, but I was unaware of the reference.
If you win every game, pretty soon you won't have a game to play. Table top wargaming is a social event. Never forget that.
Knowing is half the battle. It comes down to execution.
If you pick meta knight in smash it may be the OP choice, but if you can't do anything yourself then you will lose.
Does everyone have the time you do? Does everyone have the ability to think on this kind of level?
Do you know how football and other games work? It's the same thing. According to you all football and basketball plays are cheating.
If you picked up a tournament list, and played it for the first time against me. I could probably beat you with my non-competetive one.
I was on your side until you called it cheating. Imagine calling it cheating to do something perfectly in the games rules. Find me the rule that says "your army list must be one that you made with no outside help or influence" and i'll agree with you again.
I am entirely a casual gamer btw
Great video! No one drives across town to get their butt kicked for 3 hours. That’s how a hobby group dies. I’ve got a guy like that in my group and he just 3D prints new army to keep making a “casual” meta. Something tells me though that Chaos Knights and Aeldari meta lists aren’t “casual.” Funny enough no one likes to play him anymore. I’d be curious to watch a video on how you’d handle something like this sir, if you have the time.
Thanks for chiming in! And thanks for watching. I am positive I will dive into dealing with jerks in a future video. I have ran our gaming club for 15 years and we have had our share over the time. LOL
@@LetsTalkTabletop looking forward to it!
This is like asking "what's the point of walking" (as opposed to any other gorm of locomotion)
There are different ways to enjoy the hobby. Remember there are more than one way to skin a squig!!!
I love playing only 2 Rounds of Warhammer and having to call it because I am loosing 25:10 with 3 of my units left on the board who cannot complete secondaries.
Oh, then I suppose modern Warhammer was made for you! 😁
The biggest reason why i stopped 40k here in germany is the fact that even "casual" gamers play following tournament rules. And as we all know, the "meta" of 40k changes a few times a year. Thus even some of these "casual" players chase the "meta".
If i want to play a tightly balanced competetive game, i play Infinity and that is usually fun. It is a more stable experience.
But for a more beer and prezels experience i usually go play something like OPR or for something to tell a story somehing low key like Mordheim, where the dice tell the story, which i love.
Oh boy! Someone has a different view and opinion than myself, how dare he! 😊
I enjoy war games because I like history and I enjoy trying to replay these battles, learn and see if things can be different by using different tactics. I don’t do it for the competition, I am trying to relax and enjoy myself
I think you commented on this video and didn't watch it. It was a rhetorical question and I'm a casual gamer.
@@LetsTalkTabletop my comment wasn’t aim at you but at those that got mad because you explain that you prefer to be a casual gamer.
Ah, fair enough. I'm always amazed at how many people that don't watch the video and just comment on the title. My apologies.
To have fun with friends. Nothing more, nothing less. Personally i do nt like playing win at all cost gamers. Its not like there is a prize besides bragging rights until the next match.
I always stated as such: If you instead of playing want to sit 30 minutes during your move analysing every unit chart and counting statistic propability and do equasions, then go play EVE Online instead of any of Wargaming games. Because game gets less fun with every minute when I listen to someone overexplaining meta tactics to me, than rather having a blast trying to create their own tactics and having their own way.
I’m not into overly competitive gaming at all. For me, it’s about the experience…narrative gaming all the way. Have fun, make new friends, make it a fantastic social experience….most importantly, tell a great and memorable story. A game that is told over and over again over pints and at the local shop or club for how fun and memorable it was…the lowly foot soldier that somehow defeated the monster or opposing hero. “Make sure you have good games…”
For a competitive person like me, i discovered that to be able to switch gears and play the way you do requires a cartain level of maturity. In the end we are all playing with toy soldiers and rolling dice. Want to be competitive? Then go play chess.
I agree! But that's the quiet part we don't say out loud lol.
The objective of the game is to win.
The point of the game is to have fun.
How is that so hard to understand?
I mean, there's a lot of other play styles other than just winning. What about telling a story? I don't think it's so cut and dry.
Because some only want to win.
The ending had me laughing 😂
These people and their stupid names. LOL
I don't care about winning...like at all. Its about having a good time, pop some brewski's and create cool stories
Absolutely!
Where’s the video on “What is the point of competitive gaming?” I’ve always wondered, maybe this will enlighten me.
It was the previous video I posted last week on my channel.
'Competitive Gaming' is easy: You Play to Win.
'Narrative Gaming' takes constant effort: You're asking things like "What would this Ork, dropped into a situation in which he could a) stand back, shoot civilians, and win the game, or b) shoot, charge, and fight a Space Marine, actually do?" You're bringing a list that fits a theme (Tau All-Stealth, Guard All-Tanks), or is what that actual army would probably made of (Few/No duplicates, except maybe the basic Necron Warrior)
'Casual Gaming' is some kind of Frankenstein Monster. I'm bringing a Narrative List, but playing Competitively. I'm bringing Flamers not because they're Brie, but because I want to get close and set things on fire. If the game goes south early for one player, where they have next to no chance to win, you pose the question of whether it was dice gods or loadout, and probably rerack accordingly.
All good points!
Casual war gamers should no more have to justify their existence than people who like to throw a ball around without any stakes. One should never feel compelled to turn the thing that you love into a life or death struggle.
Casual games are fun. Competitive games tend not to be.
Casual gaming is just that. You like playing, but you don't put time into it. It's like people who can play chess casually, and people who study the openings and the gambits and will win every game against you. Maybe you could do a handicap in wargaming, like they do in chess, or level the playing field somehow. The list building is a big factor in winning. In Magic there is a solution for that, and that is playing limited, which means that you will have to play with a deck that you build on the spot, with random cards, so no one is using their optimized build in the game. In wargaming that could be done by playing scenarios with pre-made armies. Eventually you will get good in the game, though, but Warhammer changes so quickly that if you don't put effort into it, you will be left behind. Maybe the answer is playing a simpler game like One Page Rules.
The WAAC player and the casual are always going to be at odds. These games weren't created for them originally. However, they insist they're way is the only one that makes sense or is the correct "fun" way to play. Consider this. The hobby is greying and aging from my experience. I have never seen any competitive players actually grow the hobby or successfully introduce younger players to it. It's casual players who put In the time and effort to introduce younger folks without trying to curb stomping them into not playing again.
Competitiveness makes the atmosphere stale and boring, It becomes about scoring objectives and extra victory points rather than telling a fun and attractive story through your game.
COMPETITIVE WARGAMING SUX
This seems ridiculous that it even needs to be asked.
In case you didn't watch the video, it was a rhetorical question.
@@LetsTalkTabletop to be clear I'm not saying you or this vid was ridiculous it was great and you seem lovely. Just the idea of WAAC power gamers having to sit down and wrestle with such a question is baffling to me 😅
Oh, thank you! A startling number of people don't watch videos and just comment on the title. Lol. My apologies.
THIS is what is wrong with the hobby. Most people are casual gamers
You know, my video's actually in defense of casual gaming.
What you're talking about is etiquette not a difference between competitive or casual play. Have empathy and respect your fellow players. If you can tell that they are upset don't make things worse. The only caveat for me would be in a tournament. Don't go easy on me there, its just condescending.
There is no difference. Whether a game is competitive or casual seems to be entirely dependent on the individual. In general, both players are playing to WIN. That makes it competitive so your entire premise is a false to begin with. It boils down to one side or the other getting upset because the other side beats them. If you were truly a casual (or even your self-styled fluff) gamer, you wouldn't care if you win or lose. The fact that you seem to get upset when the other person doesn't somehow pitch you slow balls. You claim that for YOU it is a social issue and that you don't care. Don't blame your opponent. If the game is not balanced, and turn one is a problem for you, deal with it or put the blame where it belong, i.e. on the shoulders of Games Workshop. The game should have gone to alternating activations, unit by unit a LONG time ago.
All gaming is casul its not even the case of whats the point,,thats what gaming is😂 then it can develop into othed types... basics ye? Heres a question im juxt z wafcher of gamers whats the point of me😂till find it hard to forgive mysslf for the stomping i gave my friends when a kid cos they didnt know the rules as good as me😮 might still have some ppl to play with
Narritive/casual gamers tend to be the types that lack the brain power required to mathmatically and creatively problem solve at a higher level. They dont enjpy competitive gaming, because they simply are not any good at it.
Unfortunately that's not so, there's a level of maturity that's required to understand narrative or casual gaming. You'll get it one day buddy.
@@LetsTalkTabletop I already get it, its the same kind of cognitively impaired people that enjoy the story-ficiation of video games... they prefer a passive minimal input mode of thinking as opposed to an proactive demanding one.
The idea that you pull back and make bad choices so it's close says a lot about what you think about the people you're playing with. They don't need you to coddle them. Just like you, they recognize that it's a game. Tell them why or how you're doing the things you're doing and let them learn strategies. Coddling them and letting them do better when you feel like it doesn't do anything but hold them back.
Yes, being willing to turn it down in order to make it a closer game, even if I still win, does say a lot about what I think of the people I play with. You hit the nail on the head! They are my friends and we are in a casual and friendly gaming group. So I want them to have fun. You were correct, but not in the way you think you were.
And holding them back from what? A lucrative career in wargaming? Maybe these people have jobs and other stresses in life and just want to roll some dice and have fun versus being hyper competitive. This is exactly what I talk about when I say that competitive people see things completely backwards.
@@LetsTalkTabletop People deserve a chance to improve in their endeavors regardless of what money it can make them. I'm not going to be a pro mini painter, but I want to get better at painting. Not everyone is going to go on to win competitions, but they deserve a chance to improve their play. If you decide that it should be a close game and pull back the throttle, you're depriving them of real feedback.
Am I saying that it's proper to curb stomp newbies? No, but they'll never NOT be newbies if they never actually get challenged.
Make plays. Explain WHY you're making those plays, and maybe your friends will pick it up too. Nurturing a newb doesn't have to be taking it easy on them. Again, that doesn't mean you have to stomp them either.
Okay, this comment I agree with more than the first. But, your stance is assuming that people want to get better. That there is some sort of goal to be achieved. Many people just do this to make friends and relieve stress. Not everything has to be about winning and not everybody cares about getting better. I know that sounds terrible and lazy, but it depends on what you want out of the game. If you want to get better and hone your strategic skills, then great. But many people are either not capable of that or just not interested in it. I actually agree with you in the fact that I always try to get better with my strategy and improve on my game. But my chief concern is that everybody has fun.
@@LetsTalkTabletop Sure. I phrased my first comment poorly. It's not even about winning it's about having a good time. And I don't know a lot of people who DON'T want to get better at the things that they invest time or money into. That doesn't even mean that they get good enough to win, but they personally achieve a level that they deem "good enough".
I'm not playing a competitive scene. I love fluff lists, but I like to push those lists to see what they can do. If I didn't get better at the game it's not the list holding me back, it's me holding the list back. Ya know?
Keep going! I agree even more with your third comment. LOL. Just keep in mind that different people want different things out of this game. A lot of us have super stressful lives or jobs and we just do it to chill and have fun and make friends. I completely get your drive to get better with your strategy and list building, but that doesn't mean everybody's like that. I can agree with you about improving my strategy, but it's just not worth the hassle to be overly concerned with winning.
Everything you talk about is the failure of your game system, not the fault/ goal of a playstyle
Well actually, there's a lot of Truth in that. Games that are balanced better don't need someone to go easy on the other person.
Casual games are for ppl who are too scared to play with the big boys.. When you play comp its: YOU vs thee other guy, you do your best to beat the other guy. The best player wins. Simple. No "fudging"no Rudolph the red nosed reindeer.. I really think casuals are people who have weak hearts and need an excuse if they lose. LOL. I play for fun too! And winning is REALLY fun!!
I bet you're fun at parties.
People like you are 💯 percent a blight on the hobby.
perhaps you are jocking buf if it's 1st degree it is ... sad. I stopped playing 40K because of the competitive ruleset and switched to OPR, more fun. I play historical too, and now only casual. And I really love hex and counters historical wargames where forces are unbalanced but objectives / time limit are set to keep situation fair.
To be honest, I can't imagine going back to competitive 40k
@@Brazouck I am kidding ;D I do love competetive games but well.. I can play a crusade or two :D
Oh, I did not pick up on the fact that you're joking. It's hard to tell in text. Maybe you really are fun at parties. LOL