Warhammer - Becoming a Sport/E-Sport

[Okami]

Open Discussion to everyone: Rob Symes (The Honest Wargamer) about 6 months ago now in an interview with Scruby & Wells. Said that one day he hoped to see Warhammer become an E-Sport like hobby. We see it with Video games with League of Legends, Overwatch, Call of Duty etc. Where we get big time players earning a killing.

 

I want to gauge peoples minds what would they think if the hobby became like that? For one of my next coming episodes (https://shadowhammer.podbean.com/) with the new edition coming out. I wanna talk about how competitive age of sigmar may move towards or where I see it going. I myself am a competitive player and wouldn't say i want to be known as a full time wargamer but would think it would be cool to see players be considered sporting stars.

 

I know our game is about chance but also has some strategic skill. Right now with the GHB and New edition I do see GW leaning towards the more in depth game where it is going to be the type of game that I would happily watch spectate. We see it already with Twitch stream, do you think GW or the community can take it on step further with it? 

 

So where do you guys hope to see the game move into? When it comes to competitive play, do you want it to be known as a famous war gamer and have people watch you on TV/online like we already do with Video Game players. Or would you want it to stay where it is where its just a social aspect competitive game.

 

[AthlorianStoners]

That’d be cool. I’d definitely follow

it. 

[TheWilddog]

I personally enjoy the historically beer and pretzel casual feel of Warhammer and the current AOS scene. In my younger days I was a fairly competitive Magic the Gathering player, did the whole traveling around from tournament to tournament, chasing a spot on the Pro Tour.  I even qualified twice. At that level the game was almost a job. I felt I had to play magic even when I did not want to, in order to prep for the next event.  I enjoyed the time I spent with my friends in the game but the actual game itself became a results orient focus, if I won I was happy if I lost I was not.  Eventually, I lost the desire to play and slowly moved away from the game.

I always had a casual interest in Warhammer and painting, so after my magic days I jumped in to scratch the fantasy itch. After immersion in the ultra (and I mean ultra) competitive Magic scene the hobby/bear and pretzel nature of Warhammer was the most attractive element for me.  Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against people who enjoy Warhammer and AOS in a competitive way, I just feel that too much of an emphasis on the competitive side loses something essential to the core of Warhammer.  Just my two cents. 

[Gotrek]

I don't think a livestreamed warhammer game will get much traction. There's too much downtime as people deliberate what to do. Now I could see the game being appealing to outsiders if the recordings were sped up or edited out downtime and tabletalk while the commentator kept the viewers up to speed. It was my biggest problem with WHTV live games, Rob did his best to fill in the blank space but there's only so much you can do about it without editing or speeding it up

[Richelieu]

I think it would require too much officiating.  With money on the line there are too many situations where the gentleman's agreements that govern ambiguous situations would break down.  At least that's what I see as one of the major hurdles. 

That and the fact that hurriedly painted armies look bad on camera. I'm a culprit of this right now.  Going to a GT in ten days and I'm trying to get DoK painted in time but it's not going to be top notch job.  I also think some people are too judgy about people who slap paint on to make it to a tournament.  This has actually been a positive for me since I typically am veeeeeery slow at the hobby part and it has forced me to have the discipline to paint every night.

[Skabnoze]

I would not be surprised to see some wargame end up like this at some point, but I don’t think it will be Warhammer - or any GW game.  Their rules in general are just not solid enough to facilitate something as competitive as a professional circuit.  Whatever game ends up filling the eSport type of spot will probably have to be designed with that goal in mind (probably also have to design with an eye to viewership).

[BURF1]

1 hour ago, Richelieu said:

I think it would require too much officiating.  With money on the line there are too many situations where the gentleman's agreements that govern ambiguous situations would break down.  At least that's what I see as one of the major hurdles. 

That and the fact that hurriedly painted armies look bad on camera. I'm a culprit of this right now.  Going to a GT in ten days and I'm trying to get DoK painted in time but it's not going to be top notch job.  I also think some people are too judgy about people who slap paint on to make it to a tournament.  This has actually been a positive for me since I typically am veeeeeery slow at the hobby part and it has forced me to have the discipline to paint every night.

Money's already on the line at most tournaments, at least in NA. If you're good enough you could conceivably finance your entire hobby with tournament wins.

[Samanar]

Shadespire may be that game. It's fast, doesn't take months to prepare / paint your army to a decent level and the rules are less ambigous than AOS plus it looks good on camera. It was created as a competitive game from the start so it has a chance to become esport like phenom. Only thing that's needed is the $$$ funding and big tournaments will happen. 

 

PS. Psport? As in painting sport

[Malfunct Bot]

Yeah if any GW game were to become an "E-Sport" it'd be Shadespire, Warhammer (either of them) just isn't designed for it. Just compare how many factions Warhammer has compared to something like Starcraft.

[Killax]

It would be a dumb move on gw parts if theyd do it, due to focussing on ultra competitive mindset. It leads to fun and chance often being removed for tactical snowballing effects. The option to lose first turn. More importantly, unless the game is additionally balanced/ruled by an electronic device you will see too many updates to make sence of it all. 40K is nearing that state.

[Ungface]

Id like it too but it wont. It costs way too much money and time to experiment with different lists for it to ever get big.

[ZaelART]

I doubt they could do it with their current IPs.

They'd need to create a very streamlined, unambiguous and highly balanced game. Which probably means starting from scratch.

[Kramer]

Oh please no, of course if it makes people happy go for it the market decides, but even now you see the completely unrealistic assumption that everything should be balanced. It ain’t gonna happen. And if it becomes a e-sport (with the appropriate financial rewards and stakes) that’s something that they can’t let go. So they either have to start again with a e-sport version and or really cut into the amount of units. Also the game is quite long with a lot of dice rolling. Don’t know how watchable it is, even the games workshop twitch stream games take several hours. 

[Mcthew]

It’s an idea, though chess (and perhaps card games) is the only game of this type - that of ponderous gameplay - proven to draw a crowd that warrants broadcasting as a sport. But chess has history on its side.

Warhammer is too exclusive at the moment to even consider doing this as a viable proposition. It might go that way eventually but to do that would require it to be more accessible and a quicker game.

However, as shown on this forum by the often minutiae rules-poring by competitive players, this is unlikely to happen any time soon without a cultural, and perhaps contradictory, shift in tournament behaviour.

[RuneBrush]

As cool as this sounds, I'd agree with the comments that I'm not 100% it would work for AoS as it currently stands.  Most sports fall into seasons of games, during which time the rules are locked in place and there's a largely level playing field.  So far, the Generals Handbook hasn't come out on the same date, we have frequent FAQs/errata and every couple of months a brand new army.

I'm also not sure how engaging non-gamers would find the hobby.  The E-sports things I've watched have tended to be pretty jam packed with action, whereas you do have periods of dullness when you have to count out 50+ dice and similar.  I suppose you could reduce some of the things like that (dice roller on an iPad or similar) and ultimately practice would speed up moving units and similar.

I could see if the format was right that some of the smaller games could work quite well.  Shadespire has already been mentioned, but I could see the new Adeptus Titanicus working too (would translate well into a hybrid virtual/board game)

[AaronWilson]

I think the problem with trying to make a game like this a "sport / e-sport" is at  the end of the day it's just not that exciting to watch. It is to us, we love the game and we know what's going on. The great thing about the "big" sports is you can watch and it's dynamic, lots of moving parts and visually it keeps you entertained. 

A top down view of a game just won't grab people that aren't interested. 

[ZaelART]

2 minutes ago, AaronWIlson said:

A top down view of a game just won't grab people that aren't interested. 

Until we start adding roaming purple suns and units being zipped across the map and dropped into even more randomly generated dangerous terrain... that happens to also have a gigantic roaming pac-man on it.  

[Killax]

I'd even say that some who want this should thake a look at PP's Warmachine and Hordes first before understanding what such a tournament mindset actually does for the game. With this I mean that most often there are several sides to tournament-only-players which actually leads to very niche ammount of players picking it up. This is also why I highly doubt Games Workshop will ever go that way. As the consequences are more drastic as some seem to realize.

First and foremost, if Games Workshop would actively aim to make it an E-sport, or better put, reward the utmost competitive players more as others the GW stores will actually become 'tournament' houses. As someone who worked in retail, sold specialist games like Warhammer I can actually confirm that the "tournament players" actively are but 20% of the potential market, where 80% are "casual players and hobbiests". 

Comming back at the Privateer Press Warmachine example again, here in Europe you have look REALLY hard to find PP product anywhere. In addition to that I'd say Warmachine and Hordes is one of the most competitive miniature army games and honestly it is so competitive that playing it casually is actively very hard to do. It has many factors who largely eliminate chance. With Mk3 being close to 3 years old now even more chance is removed with implementing pre-meassurement whilst retaining stat bonuses and debuffs which often lead to a 5 being rold on 2d6 to 'connect'. Death of certain models as such is guaranteed. In fact the most tactical depth is found in model placement now, not really or if at all in rolling dice.

What I actively like about Age of Sigmar and Games Workshop products is that they embrace the casual mindset.
Age of Sigmar has/had three types of play:
- Open play
- Narrative play
- Matched play
Out of these three I'd actively say only Matched play really comes close to competitive play and even in that just partially. With this I mean that we currently are going to a system where dice rolls will get more of a focus. Best examples were shown yesterday with how certain spells are less potent and easier to unbind. All of that for example does not excist in Warmachine or Hordes.

Lastly, I like PP's products for what it is. I think that the 'ulta' competitive mindset is something a game can go into but doesn't apply to GW ever. Nor should it, because there are too many GW stores and too big of an HQ to really focus on but a fraction of potential customers. If anything the new comic stuff shows us GW wants to branch out rather than to specialize on one market. In addition to that Warmachine and Hordes comes with additional downsides:
- Models can't be converted. Age of Sigmar most certainly allows for it and I love this because it appeals to the hobbyist too.
- Models don't need to be painted. Attend to a Warmachine event and see how uninspiring it is to see more than half the armies not painted or rushed.
- Army desigsn are more and more predictable because it directly focusses on the best. AoS was suffering from this now, 2nd edition hopefully mixes things up and seems to with increased Magic (but this is a dice-off) increased Combat importance and reduced Hero-sniping.

So if anything, I'd even actively protest against AoS becomming an e-sport. It drives out the fun and will only lead to a competitive mindset. In order to understand it I'd highly recommend players testing out other miniatures games who focus on this aspect more.

[Killax]

21 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

Shadespire has already been mentioned, but I could see the new Adeptus Titanicus working too (would translate well into a hybrid virtual/board game)

Not to knock on Shadespire fans or designers (I am a fan myself) but it is the perfect example that the design team in GW isn't even able to do it.

So far Shadepire has had a ton of errata and wording that needed to be explained because as written it doesn't make sence. In addition to that there is no emulation or clear power curve of cards designed in Shadepire. Some super powerful effects have a 50/50 dice roll attached, others don't. In addition to that a Beta rule is in effect for the Katophrane Artefacts that makes them 2 Glory instead of one. Only because Stormcasts is designed in such a way that by doing nothing they can win. 

With my experience, and I really love GW more and more these days, GW is unable to create a competitive balance. I don't see this as an issue as I do not think GW pretends they have found it. Sometimes they do mention that they are extremely happy with edition such and so and think it's the best they've ever made (early 8th 40k) but I cringe when then 4 months later they errata the heck of out that edition.

So if GW is reading, at all cost, keep it casual. It's what you do best and also draws in the most customers. Part of why Magic the Gathering is or became so succesful is their high luck factor. Not their high skill rewarding design that allows you to snowball into a win based on game knowledge and skill. I've played sufficient games like that and as above, I've found only roughly 20% of a customer base actually likes that. Because fun isn't rewarded, only the win is.

It's also no coincedence that most (casual) MtG players prefer playing Commander over Modern or Standard these days, at least I became aware this is the case here locally. Or that Shadespire isn't going to thake over the full AoS or 40K player base. People like fun. People like to be able to choose whatever they like and give it a swing. Instead of cross comparing units with math and only play 'the best'.
If AoS fans actually all wanted to be ultra competitive we'd also accept the fact more that certain armies are tier 1 and many arn't. In E-sports this acceptence is there and not complained about.

[syph0n]

34 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

As cool as this sounds, I'd agree with the comments that I'm not 100% it would work for AoS as it currently stands.  Most sports fall into seasons of games, during which time the rules are locked in place and there's a largely level playing field.  So far, the Generals Handbook hasn't come out on the same date, we have frequent FAQs/errata and every couple of months a brand new army.

I'm also not sure how engaging non-gamers would find the hobby.  The E-sports things I've watched have tended to be pretty jam packed with action, whereas you do have periods of dullness when you have to count out 50+ dice and similar.  I suppose you could reduce some of the things like that (dice roller on an iPad or similar) and ultimately practice would speed up moving units and similar.

I could see if the format was right that some of the smaller games could work quite well.  Shadespire has already been mentioned, but I could see the new Adeptus Titanicus working too (would translate well into a hybrid virtual/board game)

I think the first part is less of an issue. I play Street Fighter a fair bit and follow the competitive scene. Each season is roughly equal, but within a season 6 new characters are launched throughout. Tournaments just decide whether or not they will allow the new character if it falls near to its release. There are balance patches occasionally, little tweaks etc. I wouldn't even say they've tried particularly hard if you look at the "top tiers" over the past few seasons either. 

As someone who watches lots of competitive Street Fighter, its the quality of play that's obvious that makes it interesting, less the length of the sets. They are relatively short however, especially compared to a game of Warhammer. Also, commentary plays a role. I've not seen much of WHTV, but what I have seen is generally very relaxed and often isn't even discussing the game. That's fine, but to be honest, a lot of the time you have no idea what's happening, which isn't good for esports. 

I don't think game length is an issue, people watch cricket and snooker after all ??

Is there any desire whatsoever from GW HQ? How would the tournament scene culminate? Will there be a tour? How will prize funds be raised? Are they remotely interested in making a hugely balanced competitive game? I think I heard on WHTV that the models get made, the rules follow. That's not esports. I think this is your biggest barrier. 

I hope we see more games streamed, but the ultra competitive side isn't for me. 

 

[silentdeathz]

37 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

As cool as this sounds, I'd agree with the comments that I'm not 100% it would work for AoS as it currently stands.  Most sports fall into seasons of games, during which time the rules are locked in place and there's a largely level playing field.  So far, the Generals Handbook hasn't come out on the same date, we have frequent FAQs/errata and every couple of months a brand new army.

I'm also not sure how engaging non-gamers would find the hobby.  The E-sports things I've watched have tended to be pretty jam packed with action, whereas you do have periods of dullness when you have to count out 50+ dice and similar.  I suppose you could reduce some of the things like that (dice roller on an iPad or similar) and ultimately practice would speed up moving units and similar.

I could see if the format was right that some of the smaller games could work quite well.  Shadespire has already been mentioned, but I could see the new Adeptus Titanicus working too (would translate well into a hybrid virtual/board game)

Let me preface this a little - I first started collecting Warhammer ~20 years ago, and took a break for the better part of the last decade from the hobby prior to returning early this year. 

I've been a PC gamer for just as long, and have played practically every genre of esport, and all of the major titles to a pretty high level - including pro/semi pro teams and so forth. Although I'm no longer really competing at that level, I've spent a LOT of time as a 'tryhard/nolifer' and seen the esports scene grow both as a spectator and as a player.  

It's pretty typical for balance patches to happen throughout comp seasons in games, and the meta (and what is top tier/weak etc) to change frequently in plenty of competitive/esports games. If anything, AoS is probably less fluid than most of them in terms of balance adjustment frequency. So I don't think that aspects is a particular issue - although some of the rules are FAR too ambiguous and GW really need to focus on proofreading sometimes.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of aspects that, imo, make it very unlikely for a real esports scene. The most obvious being the amount of RNG. But that alone isnt a dealbreaker (as seen in hearthstone etc - although one could argue whether these games are esports simply due to the companies posting prize pools rather than their inherent gameplay) as often esports have a relatively low amount of RNG - or do a much better job of masking it from the player. 

Bigger issues are ones such as the cost to buy in being very high,  the need to physically be at a location, the time investment OUTSIDE of playing (painting etc) and tournaments having aspects such as points for 'sportmanship' / 'painting' etc which all add in additional variables that you wouldnt traditionally see. If you look at popular esports, they are often things that can run on lower end hardware (suitable for PC bangs/cafes etc) and/or are free to play - because you NEED a sizeable player base - not just for matchmaking etc aspects, but because you NEED a huge casual player base to provide revenue etc for the markedly smaller competitive player population. Esports live based on good competition, but die with a lack of a strong casual scene. And that's one of the hardest balancing acts. 

And, unfortunately, standing above all is that it (AoS) is NOT an easy thing to watch without knowing the rules etc and be engaged in. I can see narrative campaigns etc drawing people in for the storyline, but esports like tournaments would not have that aspect.  Similarly, the game pace is very slow, and the high downtime (as you touched on) and other aspects just make it a poor spectator sport in terms of entertainment/pace and time spent watching.

I think the smaller games (again mentioned) like Shadespire would stand a much better chance, but I can't see a TTG with such a strong hobby sided focus ever being that popular as an 'esport' in the sense of a strong online presence through streaming etc. 

Another aspect is that there are, from what I have seen, a lot of people in this hobby who view 'cheese' or 'beardy' or 'meta' or 'netlists' etc with disdain/negative favour which is inherently at odds with typical esports mentality where if something is 'meta' and you don't do it then YOU would typically be looked at unfavourably for being 'bad'/'noob'/ a 'scrub' etc.

Now, I apologise if this post is a little incoherent - but its 9am and I haven't slept yet. I could go on, and can easily expand further on any points, but I think I've made something of a general point.

Tabletop games that have a high buy in cost, a high time investment to get started (incl. learning curve), and even just a high challenge in terms of finding people to play with, and are slow paced with lots of downtime,  are inherently very unfavourable for an esport. 

Now, I'm not saying there can't be a very healthy tournament scene, just that generating mass appeal (and retaining it) is just not likely to happen. And with the rules often being somewhat ambiguous, and the existing community (in my opinion) being somewhat at odds with the esports mentality I don't really see it happening. 

[Caffran101]

I think one off "invitational" style tournaments could be tailored in a 'e-sports' type way - like Ben Curry's Master's invitational event or the Six nations tournament.

To keep the interest / excitement levels high you could flick between different tables to ensure that there is constantly something interesting and engaging going on.

Also - just because a lot of games have become e-sports doesn't mean that the core game still isn't casual. I still play hearthstone, League of Legends etc casually

[TheDayman]

Oh gods no, I would hate to see any of GW's games go into an e-sports like competitive scene. Being a casual gamer, constantly going up against supremely optimised lists that would wipe me off the table within the first 3 turns of the game is not fun. @Killax has explained why it would not be a good thing much better than I. But ultimately I think it would drive people away from the hobby rather than towards it, as well as shine a bad light on those who play the game.

[Beliman]

I understand the theory behind the concept, but if we start to analyze every point, we see that we already have what we are asking for:

-E-sports are from "electronic" (digital-software) that uses some type of sport-y rules between two teams or even versus IA (hard modes from some MMOs). The point behind that concept is not the mechanic itself or the game, is the entertainment that can accomplish with some cameras and points of view (90% of this being 3-5 minuts delayed from original source, so you can't edit and put your product on "video/youtube" labbel).

-At the same time, the game needs to be entertaining (the pr0-players don't make the game succesfull, it's the community behind it). So the target should be prepared to understand what the game is about (some knowledge) and the company/game needs to give the viewers something in return. At this moment, the digital communication is a fast-phased community (there is point in splitting the community and focus in one vector...but in any e-sport it's just a kamikaze strategy). So slow-phased games, changing povs (dice-table-dice-etc...) without any external mass-motivations (casters, interactive interface, etc...), etc...have some technical handicaps. Not going to say that it's impossible to fix all this issues, but you need time and money to do that, and it's not something that is set in stone; maybe after 6 months working on that, the result will be alot less than what you expected (or worst, it will become lost money without anything in return).

-Ongoing game: E-sports have one thing in common: ongoing streams 24/7. That is accomplished with people playing the game, and the game has some type of support to still be entertaining (electronic games have some good points being displayed in 2D in every monitor and stream softwares compatibles and eazy to use). This helps the game to continue be "alive", even without any competition ongoing, and make every player the possibility (and tempting them) of playing the game (just go to steam or any other shop and buy the game). 

This are some points (not all of course). We have the first point (rules and meta). And we have some digital support (warhammer community/twitch/facebook) and an ongoing community, but the technical problems stop the whole game to become an e-sport (because tabletops are not an e-sport), but if we look at what we have, we are already playing a competitive tabletop game. Knowing all of this we can argue how can we make the game more "impactful" to the digital community? But that's another point. Sorry for the wall of text btw.

[Melcavuk]

As a narrative gamer the concept of it becoming potentially a lucrative esport and potentially seeing all development geared toward that doesn’t fil me with good feelings. The story would merely become a crutch for a scoring mechanism and narrative would be disregarded in favour of match ups. Right now it exists in a state of balance catering to all three types of play, to see one favoured would alienate others