Scouting Opponent Crews

[Icemyn]

Don't let a few over competitive players keep you from participating. Most tournament players are fairly reasonable folk.

Not participating because of possible questionable tactics will only serve to make them more prevalent not less.

[Scott-S6]

In a game like malifaux that allows army selection prior to each game then knowledge of your opponent's preferences and available choices is valuable information. 

 

Many people have lists of their collections or the models that they plan on taking to events available on the internet. Many people will talk about what they have with them. Some people will leave their cases open and some people will take a peak into them.

 

Without changing the rules to force players to stick with a fixed gang selection through the event then scouting opponent's available models is absolutely going to be something that some people are going to do and it is simply not possible to prevent it.

 

As the competitive scene of the game expands then I imagine that we will see it being much more common to take every model from your preferred faction(s) which is by far the easiest way to neutralize this (when declaring "guild" means that you have every guild model and a bunch of mercs in your bag then scouting for available models is pointless). Also, playing pickup games prior to the event with gangs/factions that you intend to use during the event may well happen less (because it gives away preference information).

[Math Mathonwy]

I think in a tournament, ideally, the most skilled player wins. Peeking into someone's bag isn't a skill. Constructing a perfect counter list against Ramos since you know that your opponent forgot his other bag with Rasputina, Colette and Marcus in it isn't something to brag about.

If I knew someone to have a similar style to Spectre in a tournament, I would never interact with said person outside of a direct game and I think that would be the only sensible way to approach such a style. Shun the person completely. And if everyone was the same, then the social aspect of a tournament would die.

But I suppose that some people consider the tournament a fierce competition for that shining prize (that Starter Box must be mine!) as opposed to a social gathering where you meet friends and acquaintances.

[katadder]

hmm, well I have been using the same raspy crew for 4 of my first 6 tourney games and the other 2 used the same marcus crew so people could deduce what I am going to use (especially as marcus is my favourite but doesnt always fit the schemes).

however if you look in my bag you will also find kaeris and a crapton of mercs as I run outcasts including misaki as outcast so that wont help you at all.

 

as I usually finish quite quickly i also get to wander around watching other games, should this be banned as I am getting insight into some opponents crews in theory?  although for me so far I usually decide a crew depending on schemes then only change it depending on enemy faction (neverborn declaration for example)

[SpectreEliteGaming]

I can see how a lot of people are viewing "hyper-competitive" play as detrimental to the well being of the community - and I totally understand that. Whenever you see a hobby/game or whatever else, there is a "soft" and "hard" aspect of it. In Malifaux, I believe that right now the community is mostly "soft" (no negative connotation) - as in, people are here to have fun and have a good time and be nice and build a community and friends. A perfect example of the soft side of Malifuax is A Wyrd Place podcast and facebook - genuine lovers of the hobby and the game. However, compare a game like Malifaux to a game like Magic (where "hard" play is a necessiyt in tourneys) or even players such as the author of the "deception" article in last month's Chronicles. As a game like Malifaux builds community you are going to start attracting hyper-competitive players (yours truly) due in no small part to just how good and complex of a game Malifaux is - this is unavoidable. My hope is that the soft part of Malifaux doesn't erode as the army of neckbeards descend on this great game. I am absolutley a competitive player at heart, but I am consciously aware of the state of the Malifaux community and I think its great. I won't be the one to change it. Regardless, if this community continues to build there will be more and more competitive players "invading" your hobby and hopefully you can accept this reality and still find enjoyment in the game (story mode, hardcore, and enforcer brawl is for "fun" right?) Remember that super competitive people find the same enjoyment in strategy and winning that you find in the hobby and community of the game - they are just a different sort of people and enjoy the game in a different way that might conflict with your enjoyment - this should not instantly make that person a d-bag. I find myself lucky in the sense that I have no problem fitting in and facilitating the community of the game while still trying to maximize my face-smashing when possible. I've never had an opponent be upset with my conduct or my gameplay - if they were, after all, I would have no one to play with. The art to deception, after all, is that your opponent doesn't know you did it. Be a nice person and keep your shadyness to yourself - its unfortunate that most competitive players are unaware/uncaring of of the needs and goals of most casual players, and vice versa.

Even if you don't agree with my statements then at least be aware that there are "jerks" like me lurking around scotuing the field, as it were.

Having said that, I believe the "best player" is the one who maximizes on every single conceivable advantage in addition to being particularly gifted at playing the game (reading articles/strategy and listening to podcasts and battle reports etc.). A Player won't win on shady principles alone - its an extra tool in addition to developing advanced tactics and knowledge. Perhaps you and your opponent are so close in skill that all you needed was that extra push - one thing that he didn't take into consideration - that gave you the advantage. Letting "luck" dictate the winner in this example would be even worse than one player just simply happened to know more than the other. Furthermore, if Player A had advanced knowledge of a majority of the models/aspects of the game whereas Player B is a newer player who plays casually. Player A would almost certainly win and this would almost certainly not be considered cheating yet he still possessed a tremendous advantage that Player B did not have. I would propose that this is unfair but legitimate.

I believe that pre-game scouting is unfair but legitimate.

This would be no different than utilizing psychology on an unknowing opponent - you have one gamer who is critiquing everything that everyone else is doing at all times and another gamer who plays for fun or shows up drunk or just plain doesn't have a battle plan until he reaches the table. Not everyone pays attention to "tells" and psychology - those who do have an advantage not unlike my pre-game scouting. Yet this usually goes undetected or is just absentmindedly dismissed.

TL;DR - Tournament play is a huge grey area. Try to get what you want out of the game and try not to hinder others in their same quest.After reading many of his posts I have no doubt that if Icemyn and I played each other without previously knowing who we were, we would have a really fun and great game.

------

A few extra points:

Observations such as "a full bag of neverborn" are more telling than you think. Unless I had reason to believe otherwise, I would assume that you are a person who plays all over the place and although you have played most/all of the masters you are probably not particilarly knowledgable of any in particular, and if you are - its only one or two with the others being "for fun." I would try to make a particilar point of seeing which masters you field more often, if I felt it necessary. Regardless, deducing your opponent is so much more than just one simple point such as master selection. There are lots of other questions that can reveal the characteristivs of a player that people don't even think of necessarily - Are your opponents models painted well? Did he paint them himself? How concise are his lists? What is his temperment? How seriously does he take the game? Blah blah blah. A "full bag of [faction] player" is not exempt from scrutiny - there is psychology is everything that a person does.

"Really needing to win that starter box" has nothing to do with it. Clearly this statement, if made seriously, is made by a person who is not a competitive player. Winning for winning's sake is what its all about, regardless of prizes or placement. This mentality is often not reserved solely for "wargaming" - this is a broad way of viewing practically everything. Competitive people are competitive by nature and this spans their personal and professional life in addition to the wargaming hobby they might have, most of the time. Like I said before, you play to have fun but my fun comes solely from winning. Hopefully casual and competitive players can one day appreciate and understand these two kinds of people without instantly laballing the other party as d-bags. Besides! If you are a casual player who righteously stomps a neckbeard and makes him nerdrage - is that victory not doubly worth it!?

And that's all I have to say about that.

[zeeblee]

I believe that pre-game scouting is unfair but legitimate.

 

 

I actually have mixed thoughts on that assessment.  Scouting is only as unfair as the economic harshness of obtaining a wide variety of models (it's more expensive to have a large armory than a small one).  But I think scouting should become a part of the game.  Many other wargames and card games require you to register your deck/army list before the tournament and make it freely available to opponents (even if it's only right before your match).  This means everyone will have equal access to information about their opponents and can plan accordingly.  Yes, that means the guy who can afford all of the toys has an advantage over the guy who only has enough money to bring two different crews, but that's the nature of games tied to money.

 

As mentioned before:  this is competitive play in every sport.  If you don't research your opponent ahead of time you are effectively playing with a handicap.  If you only have one trick, then you are playing with a handicap (because 1] it's only one trick, and 2] anyone who bothers to research you will be able to neutralize your trick completely).

 

Even shifting to skill, if we really want to talk about that, then bag contents doesn't actually matter.  Because of how the game is set up (as well as most games) the only way to objectively judge skill is to give both players the exact same tools (ie. Chess).  Taking that back a step they may have access to the same pieces, but choose to use different ones.  In this case scouting bag contents is useless, but scouting play tendencies is very useful.  But now both players can scout and both will take into account the preferences and strengths of the other.  I would argue they are still on relatively equal competitive footing because they both have to think about countering and getting countered.  This is what competitive list building and play is about.  As per my usual I will again point to any League of Legends professional tournament (especially Worlds).

[Ausplosions]

I believe that pre-game scouting is unfair but legitimate.

Yeah, if you showed up at one of my Tourney's you would be ejected before it started, your money refunded and advised not to return for the next one.

"Unfair but legitimate" amounts to "unfair but f*ck you"

[Dirial]

I think SpectreEliteGaming's last post shows a remarkable introspection and is the admirable attempt to be sympathetic to more 'hobbyist' players and trying to bridge the gap. A nod to that.

 

However, I find myself unable to get into your mindset and while I respect your attempt to bridge gaps, I dislike a lot of points you made. (This doesn't mean I dislike you! I have great respect for people who try to articulate different opinions and are introspective like you.) I don't think I could enjoy playing against you. I like winning but I like people way more, and I don't think I find it in me to win at the cost of squeezing every little advantage out of the other. It's a thing I dislike about economics, as well, and the current political fixation on economics, too.

 

Also, I don't believe competitive people are competitive by nature. It's not like a biological imperative that no one can do anything about. Each time someone claims something like that, the psychologist in me cringes.

[zFiend]

Really great post Dirial.

[Dafty]

I'm a very competitive person. But I also enjoy fun. I find no enjoyment in baby seal clubbing. I would rather be extremely Altruistic and help my opponent so they can become a better player. I consistently play my opponents crew in my mind. Of what I would do to win or make the most out if the situation.

That said I think I would enjoy a game against specter. To let loose as it were. But what I don't agree with is that scouting has impact on the actual game. You build your crew around the strategy and schemes. What my opponent brings has no bearing on my crew. Scheme heavy bring runners/denial. Killy schemes bring killy stuff.

But specter is not wrong. Competitive gaming is good for this game. Hopefully our resident psychologist can agree that the elation if victory after battling wits and strategies is quite addictive.

[Dirial]

But specter is not wrong. Competitive gaming is good for this game. Hopefully our resident psychologist can agree that the elation if victory after battling wits and strategies is quite addictive.

 

It is, no denying that! I like winning, too. I just argue that competitiveness is not an undeniable trait that we just have to accept.

[Bodiless]

I'm fine with the concept of scouting an opponent... based on information made public. You have a few minutes after your game ends? Nothing wrong with walking past the other tables to see how games are going and what people are playing. At higher levels, recognizing who your opponents are what their tendencies are is just going to be more and more part of the game. I doubt that anyone who follows the Malifaux scene and plays tournaments in the UK is unaware of the fact that Joel really likes Lilith. And they know that because that is publicly available information, either via game play or forum/blog posts or both. And once you know that I don't think anyone would expect you to pick a crew pretending that you didn't. 

 

I would draw a distinction then between that and scouting the contents of someone's bag, which unless it is sitting out on display is not information that is being made publicly available. If I decide to talk up my collection and show off some paint jobs then no harm no foul, but if someone decided to sit down next to my bag to get an accurate count of my collection I would not be amused.

[Kogan Style]

Like Dirial I commend Spectre's post.

 

Its a difficult point, because I have seen many tournament players look up and over at my side of the board during crew building to try and glean information about who I am taking. I work things out on paper and open my model case so the lid is up facing my opponent, so they can't see the models or cards I'm intending to use. Is it shady to hide selection, is it shady to look? Should either player care? We are both playing a game where knowledge is power (in the crew building phase)

I'll hold my hand up, I saw my opponent walk over with a Lilith crew on a display board, and so I built my crew to exploit her weaker WP. I used information I shouldn't have had, but that information was left in public.

I still can't decide whether its shady/cheating, but then with some people wanting to display their crews (for either great paint jobs or just ease of crew construction) is it just a part of the hobby that can be exploited in certain places? 

[Bodiless]

Like Dirial I commend Spectre's post.

 

Its a difficult point, because I have seen many tournament players look up and over at my side of the board during crew building to try and glean information about who I am taking. I work things out on paper and open my model case so the lid is up facing my opponent, so they can't see the models or cards I'm intending to use. Is it shady to hide selection, is it shady to look? Should either player care? We are both playing a game where knowledge is power (in the crew building phase)

I'll hold my hand up, I saw my opponent walk over with a Lilith crew on a display board, and so I built my crew to exploit her weaker WP. I used information I shouldn't have had, but that information was left in public.

I still can't decide whether its shady/cheating, but then with some people wanting to display their crews (for either great paint jobs or just ease of crew construction) is it just a part of the hobby that can be exploited in certain places? 

 

Public information is public. Once you saw the Lilith crew on the board, how do you "unknow" that? Although you would want to be very sure that was really the only crew the person had before going all in versus WP.... turn about is fair play.

[Lucidicide]

I have, in the past, pulled out a full crew I had no intent on fielding, pulling out cards for different models, and then informing my opponent after they hired.

 

Don't screw with me, people. I play mind games.

[asrian]

That's evil, Aaron.

I never even pay attention to my opponent's models, beyond declared faction, until we reveal as they are locked in at that point. Otherwise it's a guessing game and assumptions to hedge your bets, and I prefer absolutes to maybes.

[mythicFOX]

lol Aaron.

 

Firstly IMHO it's very common mistake to conflate competitive players and problem players.  The two are very different things. I'd hate to anyone to take from this thread the idea that Malifaux tournaments are anything other than fun and relaxed celebrations of the hobby.  I've been playing at events in the UK since early in 1st Ed, and that's always been my experience. 

 

On the issue of 'scouting' specifically;  I don't see any issue with wandering round an event looking at what's on other player's tournament trays, and discussing their collections and the game in general with them.  I also cannot see how it would be practical to outlaw such things without creating a very un-fun environment.

 

I was at a local tournament yesterday. Over lunch I was chatting with another player, and during the coarse of conversation they told me they we're playing a specific master all day to practice with them. Later in the event we played and I used that information to make a change to the crew I'd planned to play that round. I can't say that's why I won the game, but it did help.

 

In the past I've also had the reverse happen to me, and I didn't think any less of my opponent for it.

[4thstringer]

This is what competitive list building and play is about. As per my usual I will again point to any League of Legends professional tournament (especially Worlds).

I would argue that the LOL community is toxic, and exactly what we should be trying to avoid.

[Jonasty]

I would draw a distinction then between that and scouting the contents of someone's bag, which unless it is sitting out on display is not information that is being made publicly available. If I decide to talk up my collection and show off some paint jobs then no harm no foul, but if someone decided to sit down next to my bag to get an accurate count of my collection I would not be amused.

 

Very much this which is my biggest issue with spectre's post and I think other folks. Peaking in a bag is not "public knowledge". Not unless my bag is transparent.

 

Sure if I have my models out for a game or on a carry tray which I use then that's fine. Or me talking about them, etc. All your other examples are fine because that truly is public knowledge. Peaking in a bag just isn't.

[moxypoo]

Yeah, if you showed up at one of my Tourney's you would be ejected before it started, your money refunded and advised not to return for the next one.

"Unfair but legitimate" amounts to "unfair but f*ck you"

Ausplosions, I'm curious as to exactly what behavior would cause this response from you.

 

As Specter mentioned, he's not sneaking around digging through peoples' bags...so I assume "scouting" involves either sitting quietly in the corner observing the room or walking around either observing or interacting with people. 

[Dirial]

I think there is one observation to make here. No one can peek into another person's head. What I distinctly dislike about Spectre's post is that I get the impression that people might talk to me just to get the upper hand against me. If I talk to them at all, I give away information that will be used against me. (I realize that this is a continuum, not an absolute.)

 

In reality, I would probably not even realize this, and thus there's no reason to shun people for talking to other people. Luckily. But the notion just by itself makes me uncomfortable (and glad that I cannot look into people's heads).

[Kogan Style]

Yes its difficult, we are a group of gamers meeting up to push our toys round, the natural conversation opener/icebreaker is "who do you play" or some other variation. Wondering whether the question is meant to open a conversation or an unsubtle attempt at gleaning information can make for a very limiting conversation! You could be vague/lie and say a faction that you never use but then you are shutting yourself off from engaging in talking about the game we all enjoy.   

[Icemyn]

Furthermore, if Player A had advanced knowledge of a majority of the models/aspects of the game whereas Player B is a newer player who plays casually. Player A would almost certainly win and this would almost certainly not be considered cheating yet he still possessed a tremendous advantage that Player B did not have. I would propose that this is unfair but legitimate.

 

You don't honestly think that do you? You just said it to make a point, right? You are saying person A works out 8 hours a day while person B eats cheetos and watchs netflix. Person A and B compete in a marathon Person A's advantage is now unfair? curious.

 

The hard part of this conversation for me is that for the most part I agree with the majority of Spectre's tactics. Scouting is fine and using available/public information to your advantage is fine. I draw the line there though, whereas he seems to be willing to step across.

[Math Mathonwy]

Even if you don't agree with my statements then at least be aware that there are "jerks" like me lurking around scotuing the field, as it were.

Meaning that the logical thing to do would be to never interact with anyone outside of the game. The community should just die completely.

 

Having said that, I believe the "best player" is the one who maximizes on every single conceivable advantage in addition to being particularly gifted at playing the game (reading articles/strategy and listening to podcasts and battle reports etc.).

During WHFB 6th, there was this guy playing in the Finnish tournament scene. He was insanely good. He played the factions known as the very weakest and his army builds went against conventional wisdom. O&G without cavalry, foot High Elves with a lvl 3 Mage, stuff like that. And he won almost every game. Among other things, he won the biggest Finnish tournament ever with those damn foot-HE.

He garnered a lot more respect and was far more "the best player" than he would've been if he had played the actual power lists of the time.

 

"Really needing to win that starter box" has nothing to do with it. Clearly this statement, if made seriously, is made by a person who is not a competitive player.

I'm a really good player when I put my mind into it. During Confrontation's heyday, I won a ridiculous number of tournaments in Finland (I and a couple of friends hosted monthly tournaments and we toured the country taking part in others) with a huge number of different factions and lists. But ultimately I realized that though winning was fun, the more important thing was the community and the hobby and all that. I stopped taking things too seriously, relaxed and became merely a strong contender who occasionally won a tournament as opposed to cleaning well over 90% of them.

Of course these days I simply wouldn't have the time to become truly good (wife, child, career, and so on - not to mention playing a dozen or so minis game systems). But that makes me appreciate the community even more - I really don't have patience for "super competitive" people anymore.

I also note that you didn't comment on the story about MtG. Do you consider it a legit tactic?

[NoHero]

Really great post Dirial.

 

You two really should just get a room at this point.