Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Welcome Guest!

Join us now to get access to all our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, and so, so much more. It's also quick and totally free, so what are you waiting for?

Infeston

Members
  • Content count

    328
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Infeston last won the day on May 18

Infeston had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

457 Celestant-Prime

About Infeston

  • Rank
    Dracothian Guard

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Infeston

    6 Nations take aways

    I agree that everyone can play the way they want. But on the other side I also have to say that many competitive players and the competitive mentality drives away narrative gamers from the game. You can even read this in the comments. There are people who want to play narrative but most of the players in the clubs don't want to play with them or don't like narrative play. So I can really emphasize with the people getting a little bit sick of the competitive mindset. It does not mean that me and those people don't want people to play competitively anymore. It is just because the competitive crowd often makes it seem like only their opinions matter. The first thing GW always has to do is "balance" things. But this might not be the same thing that we narrative players want. We might want fluffy rules that portray the character of our armies, which might not be "balanced" in the end. Sometimes you can satify both kind of players, but sometimes GW also needs to choose to satisfy another half of the players, while they have to neglect the other group, just because their needs are contradictory to each other. I think some of us just have the feeling that they will never be heard, because the discussions about balance, lists, etc. overshadow any narrative or fluff discussions. For me it is a small fear, because I have seen this happen with many games I played. At the beginning of these games there was always a small and engaged minority of players who wrote stories, created art and shared their experiences and love for the game. Then after the game gets more popular and also gets a huge influx of players it often gets more and more focussed on competition and balance. And then after that some players who loved the game before have to move away from it. Please don't get me wrong. I want everyone to play the way they want. I want competitive players enjoy this game as well as narrative players. I just want that GW listens to both groups and caters to their wishes. At the moment they do also do that by providing content for everyone. But they also now integrated things into the core rules because of the competitive crowd, which influence every playstyle for example.
  2. Infeston

    6 Nations take aways

    @Skabnoze Jeah. I think they could propably have gotten more technical and precise with the terms. And I also agree on what you said about the presentation of this video. But I also think this video is created to make the concept more accesible and understandable. But to make something better to understand you often have to remove or reduce other aspects, which might have been important. And I think the term "Perfect Imbalance" is more accessible for people rather than "Asymmetrical design", which might be a better term from a linguistic or technical standpoint.
  3. Infeston

    6 Nations take aways

    @blueshirtman I agree with you. But if you also look at the video that I posted, the design of BCR is a perfect example of how this could be done wrong. Unbalance is only "balanced" if every faction has some extraordinary tools to use. But if there are factions which own all the tools like Stormcasts or other faction who don't own all the tools it just ends up being unfair. I am all in for imbalance, but only if every faction has tools to counter other factions and not if one faction has all the tools (deepstriking + summoning + alpha striking etc.) whereas other factions don't have any tools. But I also have to agree that most of AoS players propably don't have the money to always adjust to the changes. I for myself could never afford to buy a new army everytime the meta changes.
  4. Infeston

    6 Nations take aways

    To expand on this. When discussions about something being unbalanced or too strong often occur on the internet, I always have to point out this video: I can only recommend people to watch this video to understand how something could or should be balanced the right way. The problem is that some armies in AoS are "like this video stated" good at everything, which is not always the right way to do things.
  5. Infeston

    6 Nations take aways

    @Sleboda I think there might be a misunderstanding what narrative and open play is about. It has nothing to do with pitying your opponent. It is more about forging a narrative or writing a story. But it might be hard to explain this. I don't think those players see this as "limiting yourself" or "pitying your opponent". I can understand that in a competitive mindset it might look that way, But to really understand what this is about, you have to move away from the competitive mindset and try to emphasize in a different mindset.
  6. Infeston

    6 Nations take aways

    I think you are hitting a nail here. There is a strong division between competitive and non-competitive players at the moment. But the thing is that competitive players have a certain impact on the game, because they are selected as playtesters and can influence the direction of the game, while the other non-competitive crowd has no influence on the game whatsoever. This might also be a point where a lot of frustration might stem from. But I also have to say that I don't really know who tests the game. I just "heard" that competitive players test the game. So I am just speculating. In the end I don't want to state anything as a fact if it is totally different. And the competitive and tournament players are very different from each other. While the competitive crowd might already have learned all the new rules, the non-competitive players propably still try to adapt to the new system or have never even played an AoS 2.0 game. So it has a huge impact if only the competitive players have a saying in the design of rules etc.
  7. Infeston

    6 Nations take aways

    @JackStreicher and @Solaris. The thing is that you are both now very confrontational with each other. But in the end you are both people who enjoy this hobby and I don't think that anyone of you is what is wrong about this community. I can understand both your points in this discussion. I can understand your point @Solaris that it is fun to try to get the "perfect list", but on the other hand I can also understand @JackStreicher who has a big problem with the min-maxing attitude that drives many people away from the hobby. I also am a little bit sad that all of the boards and forums are dominated by lists, points and competitive discussions. I don't think that the competitive mindset is bad, but I think the mindset has reached a point where the competitiveness has turned into toxicity and produced many conflicts in the community. Edit: @Solaris The problem is that those events only portray a small minority of people playing AoS. You won't see most of the people affected by all the changes to the game. Many people also don't have the money or time to visit those events. So you will only see a small percentage of the AoS Community at those events. Even if the people at this event enjoyed themselves doesn't mean that the vast mayority enjoys the game at its current state.
  8. Infeston

    6 Nations take aways

    I talked about this in another thread. I also don't think competitive gaming is bad - per sé. But at the moment I think we are at a point where the competitive mindset spawns a lot of negativity and negative or toxic attitudes. People are forgetting what wargaming and tabletop gaming is about. It is about the fun and enjoyment of the hobby. Have a look at Rule Zero for roleplaying and miniature games from 4Chan: "Roleplaying games and miniature wargames are entertainment; your goal as a group is to make your games as entertaining as possible. If that means breaking the rules temporarily, or permanently as a house-rule, then so be it." But "breaking the rules" never meant breaking them so far that the match will end up unenjoyable for your opponent, but instead only break the rules if they don't make the game enjoyable for both players. This also means not abusing powerful abilities or artifacts to completely destroy your opponent. I know that the situation at tournaments is very different, but most AoS gaming groups propably have never seen a tournament at all.
  9. Infeston

    Can Age of Sigmar 2 be a competitive game?

    @Xasz That is not what I said at all. It might be your interpretation of what I said, but it certainly was not what I intended to say. Like you said, GW supports all aspects of play and I also still want them to. But I also dont want them to move too far into the competitive direction with AoS. The thing is that evolution can be interpreted very differently, depending on the person who looks at it. What you might see as a progression, I might see as a regression. And I think we as players decide in which way the game should evolve. I never said that only my way to play the game is a valid one. I very often pointed out that I think that there should be something for everyone. My problem is more about that most of the other players (narrative or open) problems gets overshadowed by the huge outcries of the competitive crowd in a way that none of the other feedback, which is not about competitive play is often ignored or overheard. And I feel the need to voice my opinion on this matter. But I don't want competitive play to go awy or anything like that. But I have to say that I also don't want GW to treat competitive play as more important than the other types of play. So I just wanted to voice that I don't think GW should focus too much on competitive play by ignoring other aspects of the game. There are enough competitive games out there where people can show off their skills. But AoS in my opinion, isn't a game which is especially suited for competitive play. You can play this game competitively, but you will propably miss out on a lot things, which make this game special. And if GW tries to cater to its competitive audience too much they might ruin things for other people playing this game. I just think that GW needs to be careful and consider the opinions of all the different players and not just the competitive crowd.
  10. Infeston

    Can Age of Sigmar 2 be a competitive game?

    I wouldn't say this is the way it is. Because it was different in AoS before the introduction of points and GW trying to make the game more competitive. It was because of GWs decision to make AoS "competitively viable" that the discussions and topics changed this way. I just think that in a world where everything is about competition and where you can't find any game, hobby or activity, which isn't about competing with each other, AoS was a game, which you could play differently most of the time. A game which provided a place to rest and flee from this competitive mindset, which is sometimes everywhere. And it still does, because GW still provides resources for narrative players. But now AoS also gets sucked into the competitive spiral as many games before. And from my experience with more competitiveness also spawns more toxicity. toxic behaviour very often stems from environments, where people have to compete with each other. It is a slow evolution from a mindset to play together "with someone" to a mindset to play "against someone". And in my experience: the stronger the focus of a game on competitiveness - the bigger the toxicity gets. I know that there are competitive players who are not toxic. There are many respectful competitive players out there. But a strong focus on competitiveness often leads to more toxicity and more "that guys" in the future. If I look back at the forums and reddit before the first GHB there was a lot of creativity. People creating their own rules, people writing battle reports and telling stories, people writing backround stories for their models. There are still people doing this. But there are less people. At the moment GW tries to provide something for every kind of player, which I like. But I still fear that some day they might move away from that, because of the pressure of the community to balance things. All the discussions are often about points, lists and viability. Nobody talks about cave battles or sky battles or all the other cool narrative rules.
  11. Infeston

    6 Nations take aways

    @chord I agree with you. The thing is that we don't really know who gets to testplay the game. And from the information I got it seems like most of the playtesters are competitive players. It would be better if there was a mixture of different kinds of players also for playtesting. If only the competitive crowd has their saying on how the game should be designed, a huge amount of other players get excluded. But in the end I also don't know who playtests these rules. Maybe it is only GW staff, maybe they ask competitive players or maybe the select players at random. Ideally they should pick a variety of different players and not only orient on the feedback of the top competitive players. On the other hand I don't play competitive play very often and if something is really broken in my gaming group we agree on not using this rule. So I personally have no problem with most of the things here.
  12. Infeston

    Can Age of Sigmar 2 be a competitive game?

    Mhmmm. I understand your point @Xasz. But I don't agree with the statement that only one side can win in narrative scenarios, because the narrative approach is very different. But I also can't speak for every narrative gamer. I would say narrative gameplay also includes that you don't necessarily need to pick a side. Narrative gamers want the battles to be entertaining and exciting. And they propably want many random things happening on the board. But if I play narrative scenarios I don't always want my army to win. It is more about telling a story. So I wouldn't directly say that one player "wins" a game. In a lot of narrative scenarios I maybe want my army to loose, because I the other side fought gloriously and have proven to be worthy of a victory. But in a truly narrative setting you don't really play to win, but to see a story being told in the front of your eyes with every dice roll. Mhm I think I am failing to describe what I mean. I just think that the mindset is inherently different for narrative play than competitive play and that concepts such as "winning" don't really fit in the narrative mindset. The thing with the competitive mindset is that it wouldn't be such a big problem if competitive discussions weren't dominating 90% of all AoS discussions. Every discussion I read is about balance and everything which isn't about competitive play is often ignored or undermined. I for myself sometimes fear that this competitive mindset will shape the game in a way which I don't like. To make a game truly competitive you often have to remove things which would be fluffy or cool, because of balance. Before the introduction of points and competitive play there were many people writing interesting narrative battle reports or trying different scenarios. Now you don't read things like that very often anymore. I also think there should be something for every kind of player. But my problem is that the discussions about balance, competitiveness, lists etc. are dominating all discussions across all AoS boards. You can't start one topic without people always talking about points, list, etc.
  13. Infeston

    6 Nations take aways

    But wouldn't he ultimately be slain at the end of the battleround, because the number of wounds (which would be infinite D6) excels his bravery at the end of the battleround?
  14. Infeston

    Can Age of Sigmar 2 be a competitive game?

    I disagree with your statement. But only at one point. You said "Everything that is played against another person is competitive by nature". I don't think AoS is meant to be played against someone but more "with" someone. It depends on your mindset. And AoS in its core seems to be intended to be played "with" someone and not against. I would say it depends on the mindset. I would say "Yes, AoS can be competitive. But to unleash the full potential of AoS you should play narrative or open play".
  15. Infeston

    Can Age of Sigmar 2 be a competitive game?

    I do have to agree with the "the competitive scene tends to make a game sour" - statement. At least for me it often went this way. Every other game which I played casually was made sour for me, because of the competitive scene or an overly competitive mindset. For every game that exists, also exists a competitive scene. The problem is that in every forum the competitive crowd always dominates the discussions and everything focusses on balance and competitive play. I have seen this with all the games I played before. As soon as I visit the subreddit of a game I get dragged into this very often. I also wanted to stay away from subreddits and forums for AoS, because as soon as I visit the internet to research everything about a game I very often find discussions about what is good and what is bad. There is a meta for every game. And sometimes it happens that you can feel yourself excluded, because you might not have the right list or you don't play the right character with the right combos. AoS is a game where I try to flee from this mindset, which I always have to face with other games. Don't get me wrong. I also have games which I solely play with a competitive mindset and where I embrace the competitive nature of the game. But AoS is the game, which I treat more like an RPG or like Dungeons and Dragons. The storytelling and forging a narrative is far more important for me than the competitive side. But thankfully GW tries to cater to different tastes by providing something for every playstyle. I for myself got so much stuff and special rules to create my own battles with the new books. It's fantastic!
×