Jump to content

How do you guys deal with frustration or losing games?


Recommended Posts

The biggest thing that I see is that people want their idea of how a faction should look (meaning they like a set of models and want them to also be competitive) be as competitively viable as a tournament level list.  But thats not how the game operates or is designed.  

Some call that internal balance.  

While I don't think that the game is externally or internally very balanced, at least there are a wide number of books that can place top-10, which indicates that there is some degree of external balance.  After that its up to the player to weed out the garbage units and make lists with the good units internally.  

Some external balance is good enough for me.  Internal balance, I say those people just need to accept that that is not how the game is designed and again either be ok with losing if they have to take models that perform below optimal, or collect the models in the book that are optimal.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Requizen said:

 

I know it's kinda hard to accept, but there's really no such thing as "balanced" in a casual setting. If you're talking about FLGS games with your bros, everyone is going to have different ideas of what "casual" means.

 

I can agree that trying o find a balance in a casual setting is not realistic. Casual means different things but here is a difference in why you want to play and how.

But first  you left out another important kind of newcomer that would show up to casual games. Mike:

Mike comes to Sigmar from skirmish style miniature games wanting to play a larger scale. Deciding on Sigmar he wants to get into competitive gameplay but doesn’t have the store or maybe time to be at there with the competitive people. So he plays his games with Spikes, Timmys and Johnnys. He knows they arent looking to go bigger but at least they can give him practice and games.  He picks an army and builds a list that he hopes will stay strong even if it gets nerfed slightly. We’ll say Daughters. He gets a good list and a couple extra units to switch around to get a good feel for the game. Also Mike spends a lot of time studying and practicing in his head at work. Mike is also willing to help show the others things that could help their own gameplay get better.

Now the questions come in about the others. We know why they all want to play but how do they play. Does Timmy1 just want to toss dice and doesn’t care win or lose long as dice is thrown? Does Johnny2 use the same setup and strategy every time regardless of who he is playing against and get upset that he gets countered hard because he has become too predictable? Does Johnny1 try to fix and tweak his lists between games or does he just want to only use what he has and not try something else despite losing games to Spike and Mike a good bit of the time? Do any of the. expect Mike and Spike to make it easier on then without trying to see if something they might be doing is wrong?

Everyone has different reasons but also different ways to play and how they handle their wins and losses. I think everyone agrees that you do have a responsibility to try and make the game fun, but it is more on you to get what you want out of the game. If you want to play a challenging game that is great too. But if you don’t want to correct possible tactical blunders or just have your opponent just ignore your mistakes even if in reality it would cost the battle right there then it’s more on you to find an opponent that is willing to play that way not expect people on your group to adjust to a handicap that you refuse to overcome.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, King Taloren said:

I can agree that trying o find a balance in a casual setting is not realistic. Casual means different things but here is a difference in why you want to play and how.

But first  you left out another important kind of newcomer that would show up to casual games. Mike:

Mike comes to Sigmar from skirmish style miniature games wanting to play a larger scale. Deciding on Sigmar he wants to get into competitive gameplay but doesn’t have the store or maybe time to be at there with the competitive people. So he plays his games with Spikes, Timmys and Johnnys. He knows they arent looking to go bigger but at least they can give him practice and games.  He picks an army and builds a list that he hopes will stay strong even if it gets nerfed slightly. We’ll say Daughters. He gets a good list and a couple extra units to switch around to get a good feel for the game. Also Mike spends a lot of time studying and practicing in his head at work. Mike is also willing to help show the others things that could help their own gameplay get better.

Now the questions come in about the others. We know why they all want to play but how do they play. Does Timmy1 just want to toss dice and doesn’t care win or lose long as dice is thrown? Does Johnny2 use the same setup and strategy every time regardless of who he is playing against and get upset that he gets countered hard because he has become too predictable? Does Johnny1 try to fix and tweak his lists between games or does he just want to only use what he has and not try something else despite losing games to Spike and Mike a good bit of the time? Do any of the. expect Mike and Spike to make it easier on then without trying to see if something they might be doing is wrong?

Everyone has different reasons but also different ways to play and how they handle their wins and losses. I think everyone agrees that you do have a responsibility to try and make the game fun, but it is more on you to get what you want out of the game. If you want to play a challenging game that is great too. But if you don’t want to correct possible tactical blunders or just have your opponent just ignore your mistakes even if in reality it would cost the battle right there then it’s more on you to find an opponent that is willing to play that way not expect people on your group to adjust to a handicap that you refuse to overcome.

Well first, Mike in this case is pretty well just a Johnny. I forgot to link it, but this is going off of the Timmy/Johnny/Spike ideology in this old article (really? 17 years old? I'm feeling my age...): https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/timmy-johnny-and-spike-2002-03-08

If you are thinking about the game, approaching it with the intent to win but do it in your own way, you're a Johnny. It's a lot more nuanced than that, like there's Timmy/Johnny players or Johnny/Spike players, but that's the general terminology. And yeah, most people who try to win in their own way will tweak their lists or playstyles. Timmys often won't, and either accept that they're just going to lose sometimes but have fun doing it, or get frustrated and quit. That's also part of the paradigm. 

Now, "responsibility to try and make the game fun" is a very contentious subject, and something a bit different for each of our three archetypes. Spikes think playing the game by the rules and trying to break the game is fun, so telling them not to do that because other people don't like it is actively removing fun from that player. As you say, it's generally polite to point out blunders or give some advice, but a) some people don't appreciate it and b) for Spikes (and some Johnnys), then you're not really playing the game since you are no longer outplaying your opponent. 

I'm pretty Johnny/Spike. If it's a learning game, or practice with club members training for events, I'll point out mistakes. But a lot of the time when I play, my opponent's misplays are just as important to winning or losing as my own correct plays. Game knowledge is part of the game in Warhammer, I'd argue. But other people see it differently, so it's completely subjective as to what "making the game fun" means. If I misplay and get stomped because of it, I can still have fun trying to recover, but others might throw their hands up and quit. There's no one approach to making the game enjoyable for opponents, and while you should do your best, it's not really a players job to bend over backwards to make their opponent have a good time.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dead Scribe said:

people want their idea of how a faction should look (meaning they like a set of models and want them to also be competitive) be as competitively viable as a tournament level list.  But thats not how the game operates 

QFT (italics added by me)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sleboda said:

No, it's really not.

Not to get too far into real world stuff, but that's a big part of what's messing with several parts of the world today:

It's not up to me to look inward, grow, develop, and achieve. It's up to everyone else to deliberately underachieve so that I can feel better.

In a gaming sense, would you really feel ok with a win where afterward your opponent said "well, you know, I really could have won, but I played with one hand tied behind my back" or would that make you feel like you had not actually achieved anything after all?

Or, to put it more gently, how will you ever improve if you never have to try to?

That’s what’s messing up the world even more. The consistent drive for more more more! Improve improve improve. It’s all about your achievements relative to another and nothing is ever good enough. 

In a gaming sense if you care about having a fighting chance and having fun more than improving and being the best, than you are ruining other people’s road to the absolute top! And don’t you dare get in the way of that for even one game!

would you really feel okay if you had fun but the other person didn’t have the maximum efficiency in improving! Would you really feel you had achieved anything at all! 

Or to put it more gently and with the cheeky wink that’s it’s supposed to be read with. If you exaggerate and present your way of playing as the one and only truth it automatically seems like horsesh*t. That mentality messes up parts of the world? Come on, that’s rediculous. And I’m calling you on that. Why is improving the holy grail, not having fun? 

It’s perfectly fine to be fine with mediocre at your hobby. If that’s how it adds value to your life... that’s how you should approach it. From a personal point I played 4-6 time a week to be the best hockey player I could be for 20 years. Now I make that same effort with my company. AoS is there to be not intense. Just enough to get my focus so I can recharge for the rest. 

Now there is nothing wrong with your approach to the hobby. But claiming the other approach is wrong comes across as a lack of empathy. 

So yes do talk with your opponent and if your approaches and expectations don’t match up, compromise until you find s way that is fun for both or don’t play. Again not saying your approach to the matches is wrong. The comment though is. 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Sleboda said:

No, it's really not

Yes it is, the topic is not about how to get good, it's about how to deal with frustration and not getting frustrated is one of the options. Not everyone enjoy metagaming, some people want to have fun playing what they like and not what they have to.

And it's not about winning, it's about playing, my friend has been frustrated playing against my stormcasts so we played a 1000 points game where I took thunderhead brotherhood, LC on foot and Knight Questor against his chaos force and I won with 2 models still hanging on the table and he had his army mostly intact, but he had fun, I had my victory and it was a good, enjoyble experience. You should not force people who want to play casually or even have a break from competetive to play the game how you see it. If two people can't come to an agreement - they should not play toy soldiers together.

16 hours ago, Dead Scribe said:

I think its as much on the onus for the other person to tone UP and build a more proper list as it is for someone to have to tone down. 

A list for which they might not own models or not be willing to buy those?)

My advice is not about patting losers on their back saying it's okay to be one because we are here talking about a hobby, not the job, relationship or life, it's about hobby and having good time. It's okay to play competetively and crush your opponents (heck yes I love it) and it's okay to play casually, no one is entiteled to tell another person how they should approach their hobby (unless it's complaining about being stomped on competetive scene playing fluffy list with unicorns and rainbows, if that is the case someone need to tell that person to get good)

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A list for which they might not own models or not be willing to buy those?)

I guess that goes both ways then.  I'm not willing to buy extra models just to have a weaker list, someone else may not want to buy extra models to have a stronger list, then at that point examine where the issue lies.  It will typically lie with the person not willing to buy the extra models to have a stronger list, so they should be more selective with who they play against, and trying to shame someone or push some abstract social contract onto people by having them spend more money to buy and paint weaker models should not be encouraged.  

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dead Scribe said:

 

 

I guess that goes both ways then.  I'm not willing to buy extra models just to have a weaker list, someone else may not want to buy extra models to have a stronger list, then at that point examine where the issue lies.  It will typically lie with the person not willing to buy the extra models to have a stronger list, so they should be more selective with who they play against, and trying to shame someone or push some abstract social contract onto people by having them spend more money to buy and paint weaker models should not be encouraged.  

There are so many approaches to this hobby that the only right one is to either reach consensus or not play against each other, which was mentioned twice already. For example in my area the norm is to collect a faction so you can play whatever you like no matter how rules flow overtime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dead Scribe said:

 

 

I guess that goes both ways then.  I'm not willing to buy extra models just to have a weaker list, someone else may not want to buy extra models to have a stronger list, then at that point examine where the issue lies.  It will typically lie with the person not willing to buy the extra models to have a stronger list, so they should be more selective with who they play against, and trying to shame someone or push some abstract social contract onto people by having them spend more money to buy and paint weaker models should not be encouraged.  

If you wanted to- there’s often ways to tone down a list without having to buy new models- different (or randomised) artefacts and command traits, or spells if you have them for example. Taking the normal optimal picks out of the equation might be enough to even things out just that little bit? 

Or breaking down larger units- like splitting something like vulkites or skeletons into smaller units to make them more manageable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most frustrating games I play are due to people, not the game. Generally I'm okay losing (immediately after, at the table I do salt up a bit, but as soon as the game is called I'm over it) it's only when people are jerks that I actually get down on the game.

The most common one I run into are the people who throw up their hands and start raging about imbalance waaay too early. I've won games I should have gotten decimated in by winning a turn a role and them sending themselves into a despair spiral.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Just found this thread and have enjoyed reading the posts. I struggle with feeling frustrated and big losses.....where I'm steamrolled over. I am relatively new to the hobby ....playing over a year....and it took me a good while to get phases learned  and now I'm into strategy stuff it's hard as I usually play against way more experienced players who have updated armies and seem to just effortlessly play their army, where I struggle with min e.  Practice makes perfect though

Edited by MattyP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look there are only 2ways a game could end.

Either you win or you let your foe-friend win, out of pity!

never, ever admit defeat, think like a skaven, play as low cunning as you can and your frustration will vanish, and instead you get the feeling of being followed and having an itch to make-plot plans, or to overthrow your friends.

anyways I hope this guide will help you.

although I’m not sure if it works with non skavenplayers🤔

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope I'm not stating something too obvious here or something that's been said already, but for me, above all, two things are important:

1) (learn to) enjoy other aspects of the hobby

2) if you really are a competitive person, find something else to compete in 

While I only prefer matched play and try to optimise my lists as much as I can, I really enjoy painting and creating a cool and thematic army. Thus, the reward of seeing your creations on the tabletop, pitted against your opponents', becomes a reward in itself. For me, having a few hours here and there to paint/convert while listening to the latest Joe Rogan Podcast or whatever is just a great way to wind down at the end of the day. Gaming is almost secondary, and while winning is fun I play Khorne Mortals and have been used to losing the past few years :) 

But competitiveness is part of the human mindset, which I fully respect and am aware of. And I hope I'm not disrespecting anyone, but I just believe it is a waste of human potential for really competitive people to spend all their energy on winning in the Warhammer hobby.  Or more exactly, to invest so much of themselves in the hobby that game results affects self esteem or somewhere close to it (ie. if you care that badly about winning or losing). While I'm definitely not against tournaments, this hobby will never be a sport and don't treat it as such. To satisfy my competitive urges I train and compete (although irregularly and at amateur level) in brazilian jiu jitsu - if you're a competitive person, that's where I recommend you go.

Don't get me wrong - I love this hobby and have been in it for over 20 years - but winning or losing here really isn't something you should invest your emotions in. I mean, ofcourse I do it too from time to time, I'm just trying to keep it in perspective.

Edited by Bjornas
  • Like 5
  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/9/2019 at 5:21 PM, Charleston said:

Do you have any tricks or tipps how to keep frustation away from the table? Or Anectodes which somehow match the topic?

By understanding that the outcome didn't matter either way. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wargaming is like Roleplay games. Its all about finding what kind of group you want to play with. If your current group is hard-core competetive people and you just want to roll dice then maybe you need to find a more chilled group, vice versa as well    fgor those who take the competetive scene seriously.

Alternatively you need to have a frank discussion about what kind of game you want to play and be aware of what your faction can do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short answer - I work with refugees. My best friend and gaming buddy works in paediatric intensive care. Perspective is a wonderful thing when it comes to almost all frustrations in life.

Long answer - when I'm playing with the right people, the way the game goes doesn't matter because the principle thing I'm getting is time with these great people who share my hobby and passions. I enjoy being around them and gaming is a great vehicle for that. Win or lose ive got what I came for, which is fun. On the other hand, if I'm spending my hard earned free time playing That Guy, those little gaming frustrations are gonna bubble up because you're already frustrated by the social side of things. This applies regardless of your style of play. Some of the best people I've met in the hobby are hyper competitive players who I thoroughly enjoyed  playing even as they tabled me in two turns flat. Likewise as an avowed narrative player, we have more than our fair share of That Guy in  the narrative scene. Find the right people to play with and those frustrations disappear.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
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.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...