Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
xanderf

Spider sense tingling...Ysanne Isard to cause tension between WAAC and 'Fly Casual' players...

Recommended Posts

Wow, I guess I really am just one big meanie. :lol:

 

Man you are good at this, in one sentence and 1 emotacon you managed to be belittling, condescending, dismissive and arrogant all at the same time, you must be so proud.

 

Your perseverance to put your style of play above that of anyone who plays by the actual rules of the game, is genuinely staggering.

 

On several occasions posters on this thread have acknowledged that for beginners and novices and for anyone playing for fun at home allowing missed opportunities is something that can be allowed and dealt with in a constructive manner, yet you have yet to even remotely consider that playing correctly and to the rules might actually be better in certain play environments (i.e. tournaments)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On several occasions posters on this thread have acknowledged that for beginners and novices and for anyone playing for fun at home allowing missed opportunities is something that can be allowed and dealt with in a constructive manner, yet you have yet to even remotely consider that playing correctly and to the rules might actually be better in certain play environments (i.e. tournaments)

 

Then you may not be reading me very closely, because I have said just that on numerous occasions.

 

Sorry, I have not encountered this creature in the tournaments I've played in. Also, the people that I've played with who have been more towards the WAAC end, weren't all that unreasonable. I'm perfectly fine being corrected on a mistake and not getting a take-back - especially at a tournament. 

I think that hard-core players can probably have a lot of fun with one another, as they have the same attitude towards the game. I have flown against some more hard-core players at tournaments. When they point an error of mine out to me, I relent. I have figured they know the rule better than I do, and they're probably right. Maybe they thought I was trying to pull a fast one, I don't know. I certainly did not intend anything by it.

That's not to say that I don't understand that at highly competitive tournaments there need to be black and white rulings that resolve disputes without doubt.

...

I guess the rule of thumb is to know your social environment. If you're at a tournament with people you don't know, who are not new to the game (ie. being socialized into the X-Wing playing community), then 'Fly Casual' is just about taking your losses and victories with grace. If you're with your mates at the pub or at the FLGS, then 'Fly Casual' has a deeper meaning which allows you to bend or blind-eye the rules in order to make the game more fun.

Edited by Mikael Hasselstein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, many of you may be thinking that actually the Jaffa Cake is the best biscuit, and while I will allow that it can legitimately be considered a biscuit (it's biscuit size, and you eat it like a biscuit), it doesn't have the repeat scoffability of the Bourbon.  Nor does the Chocolate Digestive.  Now, the American style Chocolate Chip Cookie is up there, granted, but I'd argue it lacks that je ne sais pas to really make it the best biscuit.

I find this highly offensive, clearly the jaffa cake is the height of what we've achieved as a species.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On several occasions posters on this thread have acknowledged that for beginners and novices and for anyone playing for fun at home allowing missed opportunities is something that can be allowed and dealt with in a constructive manner, yet you have yet to even remotely consider that playing correctly and to the rules might actually be better in certain play environments (i.e. tournaments)

 

Then you may not be reading me very closely, because I have said just that on numerous occasions.

 

Sorry, I have not encountered this creature in the tournaments I've played in. Also, the people that I've played with who have been more towards the WAAC end, weren't all that unreasonable. I'm perfectly fine being corrected on a mistake and not getting a take-back - especially at a tournament. 

I think that hard-core players can probably have a lot of fun with one another, as they have the same attitude towards the game. I have flown against some more hard-core players at tournaments. When they point an error of mine out to me, I relent. I have figured they know the rule better than I do, and they're probably right. Maybe they thought I was trying to pull a fast one, I don't know. I certainly did not intend anything by it.

That's not to say that I don't understand that at highly competitive tournaments there need to be black and white rulings that resolve disputes without doubt.

...

I guess the rule of thumb is to know your social environment. If you're at a tournament with people you don't know, who are not new to the game (ie. being socialized into the X-Wing playing community), then 'Fly Casual' is just about taking your losses and victories with grace. If you're with your mates at the pub or at the FLGS, then 'Fly Casual' has a deeper meaning which allows you to bend or blind-eye the rules in order to make the game more fun.

 

 

Rather than indicating you think playing to the rules is a good idea in appropriate circumstances, what these quotes do demonstrate is that you ‘tolerate’ players that adhere to the rules. You use terms like “relent” and “not that unreasonable” to describe your interactions with them.

 

Clearly this polarising issue has no obvious resolution.

 

I respect your position and play style, we merely request that you show the same respect to our position on the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rather than indicating you think playing to the rules is a good idea in appropriate circumstances, what these quotes do demonstrate is that you ‘tolerate’ players that adhere to the rules. You use terms like “relent” and “not that unreasonable” to describe your interactions with them.

 

No, these quotes refute what you were saying about me, to wit:

 

...yet you have yet to even remotely consider that playing correctly and to the rules might actually be better in certain play environments (i.e. tournaments).

 

OF COURSE you should play by the rules to the best of your ability in a tournament. We're talking about tournaments for chrissakes!

 

 

I respect your position and play style, we merely request that you show the same respect to our position on the topic.

 

...show you the same respect. Are you you like the Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays crowd where if I say one of those you get all offended? Me stating my preferences is not a negation of your preferences. Suggesting otherwise is some pathetic playing of a fictional victim card.

 

 

Clearly this polarising issue has no obvious resolution.
 
It has a very simple and easy resolution: grow a pair and don't get all bent out of shape if someone expresses an opinion that you don't agree with. You're not the victim of some grand injustice. I'm not your oppressor. You're pretending I'm saying something that I'm not arguing for. Why? I don't know. Maybe you're just not reading what I am writing; maybe you're projecting some other discussions you've had onto what I've written; maybe your tragedy just needs a villain and I happen to be on hand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter. I think that Mikael just wants us to know that take-backs are a good way to be more amicable when playing, which is obviously known by us, in the right circumstances. Of course, a competitive player will disagree on its importance and positive traits, because it creates bad habits, which are not worth it. As always, it is really depends on the context of the situation, the play itself, where they are playing, what kind of players they are, etc. 

 

Taking a black or white stance in this is just silly, which is why i pointed out that quote from Mikael and explained to him that there are several ways to create bonds through competitive play too. Having practice games, trying out strats/plays, all trying to sharp your play and list while helping each other, making that mental exercise a group mental exercise is withouth doubt something clearly positive in my opinion, specially rewarding when one of the players get it all with a list we were together helping him to practice and sharp.

Edited by DreadStar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Rather than indicating you think playing to the rules is a good idea in appropriate circumstances, what these quotes do demonstrate is that you ‘tolerate’ players that adhere to the rules. You use terms like “relent” and “not that unreasonable” to describe your interactions with them.

 

No, these quotes refute what you were saying about me, to wit:

 

...yet you have yet to even remotely consider that playing correctly and to the rules might actually be better in certain play environments (i.e. tournaments).

 

OF COURSE you should play by the rules to the best of your ability in a tournament. We're talking about tournaments for chrissakes!

 

 

I respect your position and play style, we merely request that you show the same respect to our position on the topic.

 

...show you the same respect. Are you you like the Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays crowd where if I say one of those you get all offended? Me stating my preferences is not a negation of your preferences. Suggesting otherwise is some pathetic playing of a fictional victim card.

 

 

Clearly this polarising issue has no obvious resolution.
 
It has a very simple and easy resolution: grow a pair and don't get all bent out of shape if someone expresses an opinion that you don't agree with. You're not the victim of some grand injustice. I'm not your oppressor. You're pretending I'm saying something that I'm not arguing for. Why? I don't know. Maybe you're just not reading what I am writing; maybe you're projecting some other discussions you've had onto what I've written; maybe your tragedy just needs a villain and I happen to be on hand. 

 

 

 

You know what champ, I tried the stick, I tried the carrot, to no avail I tried to extend an olive branch to just let it go and you practically spit in my face.

 

I'm not playing the victim or the oppressor, I don’t feel there needs to be any roles played in this discussion. I have been civil through this whole discussion with exception of when I called you out for your dismissive post on another forum member and all that seemed to do was redirect your personal attacks to me.

 

This discussion has gone on long enough and I'm going to end my part of it here, feel free to continue without me.

Edited by Mace Windu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what champ, I tried the stick, I tried the carrot, to no avail I tried to extend an olive branch to just let it go and you practically spit in my face.

 

I'm sorry you're taking it all so personally. If you're saying you began with the stick, you reap what you sow.

 

Honestly, I don't recall the precise sequence of barbs, nor am I here to be malicious to anybody. From my perspective, you've gone out of your way to misinterpret me. My perspective may be in error.

 

 

Now, I've read from a few of you in the competitive crowd that you feel that those of us in the casual crowd are generally mean to you because we feel that you transgress what we consider the 'fly casual' norm. I'm genuinely interested in this phenomenon, and I think it would be interesting if you could post examples of this behavior. I'm open to having my understanding expanded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm genuinely interested in this phenomenon, and I think it would be interesting if you could post examples of this behavior. I'm open to having my understanding expanded.

Well I'll start with the most extreme case of militantly casual that I saw. Was a discussion some time ago, about moving all your PS X ships together then taking actions for them. May of even been on the rules form.

Well the answer is simple, per the rules, you move a ship, then take the action for that ship, then move on to the next. Moving all your Academy Pilots then barrel rolling them or even giving them a focus is against the rules. Yet there was one guy who not only insisted that he should be able to do just that, as long as the action "didn't have a major impact" but he actually said that in the name of Fly Casual he'd physically assault someone who wouldn't let him. *

Then there's the uncounted number of threads in which it's stated point blank that expecting someone to play RAW is poor sportsmanship.

Such as a ship goes off the table but since only X% of the base is off, you're being a poor sport if you make them count that ship as destroyed.

Or you're a poor sport if you tell someone that they can't take a given action after they've moved another ship.

Or you're a poor sport if you tell someone the defender is out of range or range X if it's only out by a tiny fraction of an inch.

Or you're a poor sport if you use a ship with a Turret, when the other person is flying an interceptor list.

Or you're a poor sport if you use an ion to force someone off the table but they could of gotten off the edge if they were able to make a different maneuver.

Or you're a poor sport if you tell someone they have to take the maneuver they picked, even though it's fairly clear they intended to bank/turn the other way.

Or you're a poor sport if you take someones dial when they do a red and are stressed, and send them off the table.

I'm sure there's more, but those are all cases where people have called those of us who play competitively, by RAW, don't allow a lot of take backs, ect... Have called us a poor sport or worse for simply following the rules as written and taking advantage of someone's mistake.

*As an aside... During that discussion he accused me of "interpreting the rules in the strictest possible way." Apparently the plain reading of the rules as written was offensive to him.

Edited by VanorDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm genuinely interested in this phenomenon, and I think it would be interesting if you could post examples of this behavior. I'm open to having my understanding expanded.

Then there's the uncounted number of threads in which it's stated point blank that expecting someone to play RAW is poor sportsmanship.

 

I'm wondering if you could point me to specific threads in which you recall this being said.

 

For what it's worth, I agree with you that people should do 'move-action; move-action' in ship-by-ship sequential order. If I'm playing against someone new to the game, I'll usually say something to the effect of: "It's cool if you do that for right now, but in a tournament, you'll want to get into the habit of doing moves and actions per each ship."

 

If it's someone who's more used to the game, I'll adopt a voice and say: "dude, you're cheating!" so as to mimic humorously the RAW player they know they might face. Then I'll say that I really try to be disciplined about doing it by the book. It signals that I would actually prefer them to play it by the book. People usually take the hint without feeling corrected. Now, if it's a case where the sequence of events really would make a difference, I'll ask them to do it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering if you could point me to specific threads in which you recall this being said.

No, it's been a ton of different threads over the 2 or so years I've been here. But I have been called a poor sport and much worse for simply saying that people should play by the rules as written.

It's not like I'm even all that strict about it myself, if I'm playing someone new like last night the other guy had few games under his belt, I let things slide, or if I'm playing a friend just for fun. I mean last night the other guy rolled 3 dice to defend when he should of rolled 2. I had 2 hits, he had 2 evades and a blank. I let him have the 2 evades, even though I could of made him reroll.

But if I'm posting here, I tend to take a more strict RAW stance, for the same reason that someone from the DMV takes a similar stance. If we allow sloppy play to be the standard then how much worse can it become?

That and in a vacuum, strictly RAW is the proper way to play. It's when you're not in a vacuum, which is of course all of the time, that you have to consider how strictly RAW you should play. But I have no way of knowing what the situation a given person may be in. So I speak from a vacuum and let them sort out the details where and when they are.

Semi-Finally... My issue isn't with how casual or cutthroat someone should play, how many take backs, how lose with the rules, how likely we are to take advantage of a mistake. Because that's up to the people playing.

My issue is when people try to use Fly Casual as a weapon, to beat someone up, when they don't play the same way they do. Far too often the idea is used as a way to excuse bad or sloppy play, and when called on it, they pull out the Fly Casual hammer to beat the other person in the head with.

Edited by VanorDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do remember a pretty lengthy back and forth over the appropriateness of moving all the ships of a same PS first, THEN doing all their actions.  Can't point to the exact thread, but it happened, and people who were insisting on move-act/move-act were taken to task by more than a few people as being rules lawyers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not like I'm even all that strict about it myself, if I'm playing someone new like last night the other guy had few games under his belt, I let things slide, or if I'm playing a friend just for fun. I mean last night the other guy rolled 3 dice to defend when he should of rolled 2. I had 2 hits, he had 2 evades and a blank. I let him have the 2 evades, even though I could of made him reroll.

 

You hippie care bear. Even I would have had him reroll that one.

 

Well, not if we had already gone on to the next set of rolls, but certainly if I caught it in the moment.

 

I also can't think of anyone in my playgroup who would not have immediately picked up all the green dice and rerolled just the two.

 

 

 

More importantly, it sounds like many of the cases that are being cited is where the person who is on the wrong side of the rules is asking for (or expecting) clemency. In my book, good sportsmanship is anchored in the person who sees an error on someone else's part offering the bending of the rules for the sake of moving forward. Alternatively, someone who catches themselves having done something in error making mention of it and offering to make amends in a way that errs on the side of overcompensation.

 

 

 

I do remember a pretty lengthy back and forth over the appropriateness of moving all the ships of a same PS first, THEN doing all their actions.  Can't point to the exact thread, but it happened, and people who were insisting on move-act/move-act were taken to task by more than a few people as being rules lawyers.

 

It's unfortunate that you don't recall which thread that was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You hippie care bear. Even I would have had him reroll that one.

Well this is the store owner, who tries to remember about 15 different game systems. He is still pretty new to X-Wing itself, and makes a few mistakes so I let it slide but pointed out he should only roll 2.

I mean we're talking about someone who thought you could only change one <focus> into a hit...

In this case what I'm really trying to accomplish is build up a X-Wing community at this shop, so right now playing the game is a means to an end. So I'm going to start off kinda fast and loose with the rules and start to make corrections as I see them.

 

More importantly, it sounds like many of the cases that are being cited is where the person who is on the wrong side of the rules is asking for (or expecting) clemency.

Oddly enough, it's more often the "armchair general's" who are up in arms over it, rather than the person who started the discussion. They quite often are simply asking if they played it correctly or not... Then it tends to go downhill from there.

Like there was a post, again a year + ago I think where someone asked if any part of the base being off the table counted, or if it had to be most. Rules are clear, and so I and a few others pointed out what the rules were. But then you had people championing the idea that unless it's X amount of the base it's poor sportsmanship and not flying casual to count the ship as destroyed.

 

It's unfortunate that you don't recall which thread that was.

I'm almost positive that one was on the Rules board a year or more ago now, maybe even 1.5 years.

Edited by VanorDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do remember a pretty lengthy back and forth over the appropriateness of moving all the ships of a same PS first, THEN doing all their actions.  Can't point to the exact thread, but it happened, and people who were insisting on move-act/move-act were taken to task by more than a few people as being rules lawyers.

That's not really a fair comparison for two reasons:

1) This thread happened before FFG changed the tournament rules to explicitly ban the "move every ship then assign tokens" method.

2) It was about taking shortcuts to save time, not making mistakes. If I have three TIEs next to each other in open space and assign them all the same straight maneuver it's quicker to just move all three of them and then place their focus tokens. I'm not forgetting to do their actions, it's just "everyone moves then focuses" instead of explicitly announcing every step of the activation phase. Nobody was defending things like forgetting an action and then going back to do it later, moving all of your ships and then spending some time thinking about what their actions should be, or even doing it in situations where range/bumping ships/etc could be a factor.

Edited by iPeregrine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not "spider sense tingling", its the thrill OP feels just before he trolls a forum.

 

No, Xanderf is not a troll, but maybe you are. If so, I'm sure you can do better.

 

 

2) It was about taking shortcuts to save time, not making mistakes. If I have three TIEs next to each other in open space and assign them all the same straight maneuver it's quicker to just move all three of them and then place their focus tokens. I'm not forgetting to do their actions, it's just "everyone moves then focuses" instead of explicitly announcing every step of the activation phase. Nobody was defending things like forgetting an action and then going back to do it later, moving all of your ships and then spending some time thinking about what their actions should be, or even doing it in situations where range/bumping ships/etc could be a factor.

 

So, was this a case of people misunderstanding one another or wanting to feel offended? (Both?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:1) This thread happened before FFG changed the tournament rules to explicitly ban the "move every ship then assign tokens" method.

Um no. The rules have never changed. The activation steps are the same now as they were in Wave 1. It has never been allowed by the rules to move more the one ship at a time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, was this a case of people misunderstanding one another or wanting to feel offended? (Both?)

Neither, I think there was a genuine disagreement about whether it should be allowed or not. It's just not one that should be brought up in this thread, since it involves time-saving shortcuts, not making a mistake and wanting to go back and fix it.

 

Um no. The rules have never changed. The activation steps are the same now as they were in Wave 1. It has never been allowed by the rules to move more the one ship at a time.

Of course RAW it was never legal, but prior to FFG changing the tournament rules a lot of people considered it an acceptable shortcut comparable to similar shortcuts in other games (including high-level tournaments in other games). So there was actually room for debate on whether it is poor sportsmanship to deny the use of the shortcut. Now that FFG has explicitly banned it the debate is over, regardless of whether you think FFG was right to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...