Number one

"Yeah, there's this new guy that's been coming around the local gaming store. He's a real jerk. He has an ____ army and he just plays to win. It's annoying. I've spent months painting and writing fluff for my army. His army looks like it was painted in twenty minutes. It just sucks because he always beats the pants off my friends and I. He's won two tournaments in a row already! No one can beat him unless we 'powergame' our lists too. It's just not fun to play anymore when people actually try to win for some reason..."

Number two (Same thing, different perspective.)

"Yeah, there's this new guy that's been coming around the local gaming store. He's a real jerk. He has an ____ army and he devotes his entire day to painting and converting it. It looks so awesome it's annoying. He makes everyone else' army look like crap. He doesn't win all the time but he's constantly getting comments about how cool his army is whenever we play. Even if we win we don't get any recognition. It's annoying. I asked for his army background and he e-mailed me a friggen book. Now my friends and I have to spend hours and hours repainting our armies just so we not so embarassed when we match up against him. Warhammer used to be fun until he came along being a snob."

Hating someone for playing warhammer for the thrill of competition and winning is just as stupid to me as hating someone for treating the game like an art form. We all have different ideas of what's fun and worthwhile, so get over yourself and start focusing on what makes you happy.

Unless hating people makes you happy, I suppose, but gee I can't imagine anyone having too many friends that way...

Well I'm going to go ahead and disagree with you. It's really not the same. I think the key difference is how it relates to the hypothetical speaker, not the hypothetical power gamer/power painter. Personally, I enjoy the pants out of a well painted army. It's great to see a coalition of well blended, highlighted, etc. models on a table-top. In fact it's quite inspiring, at least to me.

The contrast to this is me not enjoying a power-gamer. I'm never inspired when I'm wiped out by three fourth-edition falcons. I'm just mildly perturbed. It's the difference between a gamer who seemingly gets his enjoyment out of artistically styling his army versus one who gets it out of obliterating everyone else.

But your partially right. The hobby is about what you get out of it, not what others do. It's just much more difficult to get the maximum enjoyment when I'm being wiped off the board by a powergamer than a powerpainter. At least in the second example it looks pretty.

Good post, regardless.

I agree with you Ironjack, people find enjoyment out of all different things. Plus you have to learn to have fun when your loosing. It's not all about winning, some of my favorite games are the ones I lost in. I don't really see why people get annoyed about loosing a few a games. What do you get out of winning? unless it's a tournament or your a gambler all winning does is give your ego a couple strokes.

Pretty good stuff!

Hey,

people find enjoyment out of all different things

Oh yes - Battery, arson, pulling the legs off of living things.
That stuff''s all "fun" so we shouldn't judge, right?
I mean, it seems to make *them* happy . . .

It's not all about winning, some of my favorite games are the ones I lost

You've missed at least half the point of the OP.
Gaming is about *both* sides having fun. Full stop.
People subjected to abuse or humiliation may not like it.

That hypothetical player with the unbeatable army obviously isn't interested in a challenge.
So why then does he play at all? What sort of person could continue to play like that?

I don't really see why people get annoyed about loosing a few a games

That's not what this is about - the OP is comparing hobbyists to sadists.
Hobbyists craft an army, cheer it on to victory, and mourn its misfortunes.
Sadists want only to get a "top tier" bully list on the board so THEY can beat YOU.

It's easy to recognize the poor bastards: for them, it's not just a game - it's personal.
Trying to turn this around on the Beautiful Loser in example two was beyond the OP's means.
"I can't enjoy the slaughter of this army because it's too pretty." What? No.

Fail.


Playa

Geez, playa, retract the claws a little, huh? You're looking into this way too deeply. I never said the guy in the first example was a sadist; he was just competitive and played to win. Some people don't like it when others play the game strictly for the game aspect if it. I attempted to make it clear that he was not boastful and full of himself; the speaker was just whining about having to change his play style to be competitive.


i'm also trying to look at both situations objectively, but it seems this issue has a lot of very passionate and *ahem* biased opinions based on personal experiences...I mean geez, you're comparing winning in warhammer to battery and arson for Pete's sake.

Personally, i don't really agree, if i put loads of time and effort into converting, painting and giving my force a background, i really don't feel i deserve criticism. I don't expect people to carry me on their shoulders but if i turn up with a fully painted 1k empire army i don't think anyone gets to look at me cross eyed.

Let me put it this way. Work deserves respect, lack of commitment warrants scorn in (whatever form or severity).

I don't think I've ever come across a situation, both in real life or online, where someone has resented another person for having a well painted army.

I don't think I've ever come across a situation, both in real life or online, where someone has resented another person for having a well painted army.


Unless it's pretty than mine, then I hate them.......

- Boomer.

I feel that sidelines are being disassembled and scrutinized while the main issue is left untouched.

Yes, there will always be different opinions about what is the most rewarding aspect of the hobby. Some will like painting best and some will always try to win at whatever cost.

If you are one or the other and don't want to risk playing a player with a differing view, politely ask them before the game. If you find yourself in a game against an opponent who you don't enjoy playing, then politely decline any further games against the same opponent.

My personal experience though is that the main issue is not about game style. I don't like fielding unpainted models. I'm neither a brilliant player nor a brilliant painter/modeller. I find most of the time that the most rewarding game is against a painted army with a player where I feel I have a shot at winning. However, one of the best games I ever played was against a very good eldar player. I knew I stood a very slim chance indeed to beat him. He proved to be a very good sport though. I got soundly trashed and not once did I feel bad about it, all because of his pleasant manners. After the game, he gave me a few friendly pointers and we laughed at crappy dice rolls.

So, where am I headed? If you don't enjoy playing an opponent, don't play him/her. It's as much your responsibility that you enjoy it as it is your opponents. In the end however, what matters more is often if the player on the other side of the table is a jerk. (Or if the one on your side is... ;) )

Well, it;s similar for me in sports in that it's silly to hate a team just because they have more money, and thus earn more all-stars. (Except for the Red Sox who beat the Rockies last year:freaked-out:)

However, it's not too silly to hate a team because they are a bunch of show-offs.

That being said, I don't mind it if someone has a great painted army (in fact, I love it), so long as they don't rag on my less-than-average painting skills. Similarly, I don't care if someone's army can grind mine into dust so long as they don't rag on my less-than-average list building.

For me, attitude is what matters, and that has little to do with the army itself.

I'm going to have to agree with Mech on this one. It doesn't matter if you're playing a power fluff maker or a power gamer, if the person you're gaming with is a jerk, it's not fun. In scenario 1, if the power gamer is a prick about his winning, of course nobody likes him. If the guy in scene 2 belittles your paint/story or lack of paint/story, then he's not much fun to play with either.

These are varied scenarios, though, despite some similarities. Scenario 1 has a guy complaining about a new player that brings a power list to the game and destroys them every time. Stop right here. At this point, it doesn't matter how many hours of fluff, painting, or converting was put into the whiner's army, the fact is that he can't beat this other army with the one he has written. What if the champion's army is also well painted, has a book-sized story, etc? The fact that he can't beat the power gamer is the same. Whining about how much effort he put into his own army has absolutely nothing to do with it. The whiner goes on to talk about the recognition earned that he wishes he had, winning Tournaments when the painter likely hasn't won any.

Power gamers are only annoying to me when they bring the same list to the game, especially friendly games, every time. I wouldn't care if a power gamer had 8 different army lists, all built for supreme efficiency, so long as the game was different each time. When he only brings Double-Lash Prince and Plasma Plague Marines every single time, it gets old. However, that list can't really mess with Mech Eldar so they'd just get shot to shreds. Every power list is powerful because it focuses on a weakness and exploits it. If you don't have the weakness that's being exploited, you don't have any issues. Many people find it odd to purposefully tone down armies for the sake of "friendliness".

Power fluffers and painters are only annoying when they belittle everyone else's armies that they consider to be poor quality. This doesn't seem to be the case in Scene 2, he's just jealous of the recognition.