I'm not crippling myself if i decide to play a fluffy list.
Maybe not, but you are making a conscious choice to play a less competitive game than another, alternative list built using the same codex. That is your decision, and therefore the consequences (you getting tabled) are on your head, not your opponents. Blaming them for being "cheesy" when you're running a 120 cultist Typhus list (or equivalent) is not just childish, it's absurd.
I simply cannot understand why you say that if you don not win you cannot have fun and if you do not exploit any and each way to win you are crippling yourself
That's not what I said at all. I said that SOME players find winning to be fun, and a significant reason to play the game, while others find winning to be completely secondary to engaging in a social storytelling experience. I make no value judgement on which is "better" because it's a completely subjective matter. When I use "cripple" and "disadvantage" then I'm speaking in pure gaming and mathematical terms, not the value of the game itself.
Originally Posted by Stella Cadente
because the game is not about just you.
As they say, it takes two to tango
But then why should a player who wants to win give a fuck about being a good sport.
So following your logic in your previous post, your idea of the best way to play is for each player to write the list for his opponent? That way each player is fighting against a list that they don't mind playing against? Because you're essentially saying that my opponent should be allowed to control to a greater or lesser degree what models I put on the table.
And again, you're making no distinction between bad sportsmanship and competitive gaming. If every competitive gamer was a bad sport, then there would be a lot of prizes going spare at events for the Sportsmanship Award...
GW didn't produce a game conducive to serious and balanced competitive play. The authors of every edition of the game have maintained the purpose is fun, creativity, cooperation, and narrative.
So in that vein, why is it ok for casual players to belittle, criticize, and otherwise bitch about competitive players instead of working within that atmosphere of fun and co-operation? Why are people more receptive to those complaints than complaints about "I wish those fucking fluff bunnies would grow a pair and learn to actually use tactics". Why aren't both ends of the spectrum more tolerant, if that's the flavour of the game system?
On a side note, what the designers of a product intend, and what that product eventually gets used for are not always the same. Does that mean that someone using a product for an unintended purpose should not be allowed to do so? Is their "fun" any less valid than the "fun" obtained by using the product as recommended by the manufacturer? I mean, I strap fireworks to a staff and spin it around my body at bonfire night. Obviously fireworks aren't designed to be used that way, but I have a hell of a lot of fun, and so does anyone watching me. Does someone then have the right to say "That's not the way they were intended to be used, my way is better"?
Given that, it behooves the players to honestly discuss what kind of a game they want to have. Fielding anything other than the most points optimized list is not by definition playing to a lower standard. That would only be true if the measure of a good game was strictly how competitive it was.
Which is exactly what I recommended in my post. That people bitch less, and communicate/compromise more. The point of the thread is that people seem unwilling to do that, and assume that because you play competitively, you are a dick to be avoided.
Because some people don't have £120 to spend on plastic dragons
Come on. I've seen people with collections totalling tens of thousands of pounds who wouldn't know a competitive list if it shat in their bed, and people who have to buy everything off ebay, like myself, because they can't afford NIB prices even from Wayland, but still manage to win tournaments regularly. Money is not a barrier to competitive play. You just need to be willing to shop second hand, convert heavily, or even proxy if you have to. But that's equally true if you wanted to play a "fluffy" Elysian Drop Troops list, because
FW prices, right? You can spend as much or as little as you want on this hobby, and it has nothing to do with how well you play on the table.
It is probably just as boring for sethis to table a player who is fielding an army of Eldar pastoralists with wraithbone pitchforks and the odd space cow, as it is for the same player to set up facing 3 Heldrakes.
Correct. Which is why I routinely set myself a 100-400pt handicap in casual games at the local GW. It's the only way I can make the game fun for both of us.