Philosophy of Uncertainty - new blog post

[Joel]

Hi guys, 

I'm resurrecting my blog once more and have posted a new one 

joelfaux.blogspot.com

give it a read and let me know what you think.

 

Joel

[SurreyLee]

To the point and very spot on. It's so easy to get caught up etc in others and this causes flip-flopping of models etc and then you never truly grasp any of them...or if you do it takes a lot longer. 

Glad you are resurrecting your blog. More often than not makes for an interesting read. 

[Strangely Brown]

Really good advice, many thanks for this.

I'm just turning my attention to my second faction so this is really timely.  I shall definitely try and find my own path with this one!

 

Russ

[Joel]

thanks for the feedback, it's really appreciated.

[Nikodemus]

Timely as I just ordered stuff for a new faction from the LGS.

I've enjoyed reading your blog in the past. Good if it gets rolling again. Are you trying to enforce any particular schedule or will you just write more when the mood strikes you?

[Joel]

5 minutes ago, Nikodemus said:

Timely as I just ordered stuff for a new faction from the LGS.

I've enjoyed reading your blog in the past. Good if it gets rolling again. Are you trying to enforce any particular schedule or will you just write more when the mood strikes you?

I'd probably be better if I enforced a schedule on myself - but life always seems to get in the way when I do.  Will be trying to post once every 2 weeks though.

[scarlett fever]

Good advice. I have been guilty of all those sins at one time or another. I've just moved factions myself and can feel the internet claustrophobia and expert advice seeping into my brain, ugh. Yay for diversity. 

[Thana.]

In the interest of providing honest feedback and offering a different perspective, here's what stands out to me:

Your descriptions of how advice is given on the internet, while vibrantly described, is hyperbole. You use supplicants before God to characterize the relationship between advice seeker and advice givers. I don't, personally, tend to find forum/facebook Malifaux advice very useful but it's uncharitable to describe what, I assume, are the honest opinions of well meaning people attempting to help others improve as creativity-killing squawking.

When a newer, or weaker, or even a very strong player asks me for list advice because they want to improve, if the advice I give is intended to foster list diversity instead of reflect my honest opinion of what works and why then, I think, I've answered in bad faith.  

I also find the notion that uniformity shouldn't exist to be an odd one. Consider your notion in the context of other games with much stronger players and scenes. If I'm playing poker and a new player is hemorrhaging money because they're open limping 70% of their range in a 10 player game, any advice that doesn't discourage this is very dubious. Chess would be a more diverse game if people opened knight to f3 more often but given how weak that opening move is I, personally, wouldn't find it more enjoyable. 

Anecdotally, when we've played (same vassal name as forum) you've been pretty quick to give your opinion, stated as fact. I'm not mentioning this to call you out or suggest that it undermines the message of your blog post, but rather to highlight that I actually found it conducive to learning. One thing I remember was you stating that two mid cost models (ronin + coppelius in this case) forces tough choices on a flank in a way that a single high cost model does not. My reaction to hearing this was thinking that you were about to lose your flank to Nekima while I score uncontested vp all game long. It's interesting (to me) when two differing lists, informed by two differing ways of thinking that result in two differing strategies meet. In that game it went as I thought it would but it got me thinking, did his plan fail because it was fundamentally ill conceived? would it have worked with other model choices? which s&s favour making a "fork" play with two mid costed models vs a single high cost one? What about a single, durable, mid-cost, blocker model that could neutralize twice its ss cost while denying scoring opportunities as an alternative? I have since added strategies informed by your way of thinking, with the models switched up, to my arsenal. Had you not expressed your thoughts as explicitly as you had I probably would have just chalked it up to a mistake. 

I'm glad you wrote the article and put the ideas out there, I hope my comment adds to the discussion.  

 

[Masquer]

When I query on the forum, or in any capacity, I expect subjective bias. I analyse the biased data, and refine it until I have something I can work with. Some people are better at providing refined data than others. Sometimes the information provided is purely subjective.

[tactician]

12 hours ago, Thana. said:

In that game it went as I thought it would but it got me thinking, did his plan fail because it was fundamentally ill conceived? would it have worked with other model choices? which s&s favour making a "fork" play with two mid costed models vs a single high cost one? What about a single, durable, mid-cost, blocker model that could neutralize twice its ss cost while denying scoring opportunities as an alternative? I have since added strategies informed by your way of thinking, with the models switched up, to my arsenal. Had you not expressed your thoughts as explicitly as you had I probably would have just chalked it up to a mistake.

This is taking advice with the proverbial grain of salt!

Your attitude was proper, because Joel's statement stimulated your mind and imagination, instead of castrating it. The message here is that it takes two to tango and any advice given is also somehow taken. The what's and how's of giving and taking is what the blog post is about and I agree with the post's content.

To add to the discussion: I want to dwell on the exploration aspect of the game. Playing to win is one thing and finding paths to victory quite another. Even if the dispensed advice is thoroughly successful in improving the recipient's performance, it has curtailed his time spent exploring - a typical trade-off situation. From personal experience, I find that new players should be formally introduced to this concept so that their choice of executing vs exploring is more conscious and less dependent on character.

[Joel]

this last statement, of all the great posts here, rings true for me - exploration within the game is one of the great pulls, and it's also a great way of building personal experience with models.  

I guess many people want to learn how to win, when perhaps the focus should be on exploring different ways to play - which will in turn lead to the first goal, just down a fuller, longer, more interesting path.

When someone plays against a player who is more experienced than they, one of the few advantages they can bring to the table is to bring something unexpected - something outside of the experience of the other player.  This doesn't mean they should just throw random models in without any knowledge of how to use them, but it is a call to explore models and try things out for yourselves in order to find that path to victory.

I think I want more people to ask "what if...?" and to test that for themselves, and to feel free to do so in a supportive environment.

I may have come across as a little uncharitable in by description of the aid given here and by my use of the supplicant/god device.  On reflection I think a different metaphor would be more appropriate - that of a beggar in the street and those walking by.

 

The beggar just begs - he doesn't contribute to the process.  He wants something and asks for it.  Hopefully gives a little thanks to any who assist him.  He's not offering anything in exchange for the help.

 

The people pass him by fit into one of three groups:

1) those who ignore him because they are unable/unwilling to help

2) those who drop him a few coins and nothing more

3) those who sit down with him, chat, find out what he needs and help him get that thing

 

I've seen all three and been all three in the past.  Passing on the coins is quick and easy, well-intentioned even, but doesn't fix the problem.  I've also been the beggar from time to time, but I do try to bring more than zero to the discussion even in that situation.

I don't know if I've just dug myself a bigger hole here, or explained myself better, but I'll leave that to you guys

thanks to all for the great feedback though - its been great to read.