Jump to content
Ausplosions

Scouting Opponent Crews

Recommended Posts

So you have a rule saying no display boards since everyone who looks at it is cheating. Since they are taking away the display boards players un-revealed crew? Ofc not. That player made it public this is what he is doing. If I see Collodi and puppets and bring raspy I am now a cheater? For using the knowledge they are willfully giving away. That is one of specterss points.

Spectre admitted to peeking into bags. A bag is not a display board. I'm sure that Ausplosions would allow someone to loudly proclaim "I will be fielding the Hoff-ball all day, feel free to tech against me!" What he took exception with was peeking into other players' bags and falsely admiring their paintwork in order to just gleam information.

To skip straight to calling it "victim blaming" is smacking of the pseudo-SJW nonsense that popped up in the Lizzy playtest topic though.

What the hell?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, this thread seems a tad on the absurd side.  On both ends of the extreme.

 

 

People know what people know and they can't pretend like they don't know it. 

 

If I know that a strong player owns thing Y, I'll sometimes build around hosing thing Y, while being less concerned with being weak against things that are only played by people that I know I can beat with my hand tied behind my back:  I know what I know. 

 

I'm not cheating.  I just happen to know with a high degree of certainty that person X is playing thing Y and play accordingly.  I'm not going to sit there and attempt to enter some sort of sanctimonious pretend fugue state, where I make a token non-optimal pick but still pick a list that I know is a strong match up.

 

Now, that being said, if someone is a super tryhard who wants to win so badly that they'll use social engineering to collect information so they can win a game at some convention: then they are absurd.  It doesn't make them cheaters.  It makes them absurd.

 

 

The objective of a miniatures game is to win.  The point is to have fun.

 

If you can't have fun without being a tryharding penguin that skulks around hoping to catch a peek into someone's bag as they open it, then people will laugh at you.

If you can't have fun because of how someone else is having fun, then people will laugh at you.

The people laughing at both sides are likely having twice as much fun as either side.  Given that fun is the objective, that means they are likely ahead by the count that actually matters.

 

 

None of this remotely involves cheating.  It comes nowhere near cheating.  Even the hint of the suggestion that it involves cheating is as absurd as the absurdity of skulking around peeking in people's bags to get knowledge because they think it will help them win.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I've grown away from the WM/Hordes crowd, I really appreciate their dual list system as fixed lists that allows some specialization instead of boring all-comers lists or the potential overwhelming options Malifaux can present with the very late crew options. 

 

Completely off topic, but I find that the two list system popularized by hordesmachine is actually *atrociously* bad for pushing people towards specialized skew lists. There are enough options out there now that there is no way to answer every skew-heavy list out there, so I see a lot of people playing stuff like The Meat Mountain (100+ wounds of armor 20-ish Trollbloods) and hoping to win at list selection. The problem is that you need to play every list at least once, so near the end of the tournament, you may find yourself locked out of the list you want to play and forced to play a matchup that you are very unlikely to win.

 

There are a lot of reasons I stopped playing those games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The objective of a miniatures game is to win.  The point is to have fun.

 

Very well put Norken.

 

<MOD HAT>

 

Skimming some of the conversation on recent pages we've wandered toward territory that tends to be the precursor to someone saying something that'll get them into a lot of trouble.  This is a game of toy soldiers, while we're all very passionate about that let's try and keep the conversation in perspective.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

</MOD HAT>

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like playing Malifaux, and I like playing it on many levels, from the most casual to the competitive. If it's competitive, you take the gloves off and swing for the fences. You bluff, you plan, you lead them on and (loaded word here), you deceive them (but not lying, that is cheating).
But the point of it is to be Br'er Rabbit or Anansi, not Snidley Whiplash. Be a clever person, not a jerk.

Dupe 'em, don't crush their hopes and dreams.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was in a tourney a while ago where my opponent saw I had constructs and took Kang.

Now he could has just assumed based off of a previous match or something. But after that negative play experience I decided to buy a tray big enough for my entire crew.

As far as myself i have talked to my opponents and friends about the weaknesses of certain masters but I never ask them what crew are they running. In some cases I might go against a friend who I know what they run but that hasn't happened in a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was in a tourney a while ago where my opponent saw I had constructs and took Kang.

Now he could has just assumed based off of a previous match or something. But after that negative play experience I decided to buy a tray big enough for my entire crew.

As far as myself i have talked to my opponents and friends about the weaknesses of certain masters but I never ask them what crew are they running. In some cases I might go against a friend who I know what they run but that hasn't happened in a while.

Kang is one of the strongest arguments against scouting, in my opinion. I mean, you've already got 2 factions where taking him is a very likely option (ressers, arcanists) and another where it's good shot (outcasts): learning you're guaranteed to be running something he buffs against beyond that is pretty rude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kang is one of the strongest arguments against scouting, in my opinion. I mean, you've already got 2 factions where taking him is a very likely option (ressers, arcanists) and another where it's good shot (outcasts): learning you're guaranteed to be running something he buffs against beyond that is pretty rude.

I was running Guild. I took Death Marshals for most of the day, but I took a Warden, Guardian, and 2 Hunters in this particular match.

I placed my models down for the game during crew creation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, but I'm suspicious of adolescent trolling.  The post by the 16+ letter username which appears to have started this thread seems to be a good example of "How to start a fight at a tournament" and/or "How to start a fight about playing at tournaments".  The sort of "But there's no rule against doing this!" behavior that gets doors closed in a person's face, a name added to ignore lists, and polite shunning.  It's really the sort of behavior that causes people to have no one to talk to between games, as far as I can tell, because behavior has consequences.

 

Otherwise, I remember when I read through the Malifaux scenario rules for the first time and thought, "This is a remarkable way for a game designer to motivate players to bring huge collections of models from more than one faction to tournaments."  If someone asks to see your collection, it's polite to ask them to show you theirs.  <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest while this may happen and may start to happen more in the future it's not really a major concern for me. I will go to tournaments for a variety of reasons but winning it isn't one of them. Sure it would be nice to win but to me it's not important.

I have also never come across this type of behaviour, at least I think I haven't, and everyone I have met has been cool, open and willing to talk about the game and give tips etc.

Also, the type of player who is competitive and looks for any advantage isn't likely to be paired with me after the first round. I tend to end up on the bottom tables with the casual players and newbies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thread.  Personally, issues like this speak to a discord between the intentions of the faction system and the realities of it as far as tournaments are concerned.  A player is, in theory, expected to have access to every single model available to them for play, but this is rarely a reality and one that becomes less practical as the game expands.

 

I wouldn't want a rigid list system or even a list pair system like Warmachine.  Both are completely counter to the design of the scheme and strategy pools and the way models are often designed with different objectives in mind.  I do think there is perhaps value in a limited pool kind of design.  Perhaps a limit to 3 masters for the day at a tournament as a starting point?  A limited list of models is probably appropriate as well, but I haven't thought of a great way this works when certain crews are very insular (like Marcus).  

 

In any case, I think going forward there will be a point where limiting factions to a degree will enhance more than hinder the competitive experience.  I'm a big fan of the idea that in competitive games, as soon as players are paired up and start making decisions that affect the game, they should be doing so at some level of parity.  Most games set that parity as a point level or something like deck size, but currently Malifaux sets that as "every model possibly available to a given faction."  Realistically, that value is much smaller and I think it would be advantageous to set it at a more realistic level.  Not rigidly small either, just somewhere in between.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think "peeking into a bag" is crossing a line. These are some pretty expensive models, and the worst NPE is to have your army stolen. We, as a community, need to be vigilant against this.

 

 

Keep out of other people's things without their permission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, just to address a couple things that were mentioned. This game is unlike any other tabletop wargame, and most computer or video games in that you don't make your lists before the event starts, or that you may not have access to every option.

 

In fighters and games like League of Legends, you either have every character available to you, or your opponent doesn't know which champions you own. In the case of LOL, at most tournament events, players are given special tournament realm accounts to eliminate lag, and these accounts have everything unlocked. 

 

In Warmachine/Hordes, or any GW game, you have to submit your list(s) at registration and you don't have the option of adjusting them. It's tough to compare any of the other games to Malifaux, since they either have pre-built lists, or everyone can pick anything. 

 

The difference is that in Malifaux, you bring whatever you might put in a list and declare your faction, and build your crew at the table. This means that some (maybe most) players will not have access to every model in the faction. This also means that you can build lists to combat the general weaknesses or strengths you believe a faction to have. The issue is not so much about using information to make better decisions, it's about the way you obtain that information. If you know your opponent only plays one master, sure, take the crew you think has the biggest advantage. It doesn't guarantee victory, since skill and familiarity are probably bigger factors. 

 

Asking players to show you their models with the express intent of using that knowledge against them, while it may not be cheating, is definitely pretty poisonous behavior. Then when that person realizes what has happened, they may never want to show their models to anyone before an event. I definitely don't want to have a community where that becomes an issue. I understand that you are saying it's "not technically cheating," but it is certainly the kind of behavior that can ruin a game community. The Privateer Press community is generally a very friendly place because even the high level players, while they take the game very seriously, are friendly and mostly very sportsmanlike. 

 

I would not appreciate anyone leering into my miniature bag personally, mostly because you never know what someone's intent is. It could be anything from curiosity to intent to steal, and how am I to know which? Just remember that any tabletop game is a community of players, and the way you conduct yourself affects not only how people see you, but how they see competitive players in general. Please don't make a newer player's first real tournament experience one where someone falsely admired their models so they could stomp them in the first round. Warhammer has a bad reputation for being a community with a lot of cheaters and poor sports, and I don't want Malifaux to be the same way.  

 

I'm not saying that we need rules in place for this, because subjective rules are notoriously impossible to implement fairly. I'm saying that we, as a community of players, should have enough respect for each other not to lie or be unsportsmanlike. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could be alone in this, but I've observed that miniature tournaments that have separate scoring and prizes for sportsmanship tend to go over a bit better than ones that don't.  Let the players decide who is exhibiting friendly behavior and reward those who make the game fun.  It won't necessarily deter the kind of players who truly feel like the only way to have a good time is to crush their opponent by any means necessary from behaving like jerks, but it makes people pretty aware pretty quickly of who the fun players are and who the unsportsmanlike players are.  I find that word gets out pretty quick, even to new players, who the people to be wary of are, so the problem usually resolves itself.

 

That being said, as a TO I would absolutely have no hesitation implementing a warning system for people who are caught touching other people's stuff without express permission.  There's a difference between noticing what models are being played or carried around and tinkering your list to take advantage of that knowledge (no need to handicap yourself in a competitive environment), and taking away people's right to keep their strategies secret.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

way back in the day I used to regularly run tournaments of varying sizes for GW systems, one year I ran a one off special event with some crazier rules (3 days, last day was seige with the lower VP player in the castle, I had to source a LOT of castles) and when designing it I sat with a group of players and talked about what prizes should be offered, the best general, painted etc came up, and sportsmanship was suggested (as Auroraz says, it can work well). One player joked that its a shame we never awarded cheesy (read- super competitive) powergamers as he'd been one all his life and not won a tournament yet, and it was really hard work!, which got me thinking.

 

On the day of the tournament every player was given a playstyle score of 0 (on a comedy swingometer on the wall with 'competitive', on the left and 'fluffy' on the right) after every game their opponent could rate them as either competitive 1/2/3, fluffy 1/2/3 or balanced 1/2/3, and the swingometer moved left, right or toward the centre. at the end of the weekend the player with the highest score in each section won a prize (an expensive roundel of cheese or a teddy bear dressed as a beefeater) and anyone on flat 0 got a small prize too. because there were prizes all round players were actually honest about how their opponent played, they didn't feel like saying that competitive was dirty, or that saying a player was fluffy meant they were a weak player (in fact the fluffiest player also came second) (one of the weaknesses of sportsmanship is when everyone is really nice to the people they beat, and harsh to the people that beat them)

 

Ok that's seems a tangent, (it is a tangent, possibly even a ramble) but in relation to the OP, if I applied that system to malifaux, and someone was found to be deliberately scouting with their pre-game conversation, I wouldn't hesitate to add a +1 competitive to their scorecard, if they went in my bag I'd be bemused (at least) probably talk to the TO and maybe wonder if I was in the right place. 

 

I'll never be a competitive player, but I'm well aware of the extra effort and energy they spend getting to their level in gaming, planning and research, so if he puts the effort in extorting the information from me and then rapidly applies it to his list building in a meaningful way which results in a win- he deserves that cheese. (it was very expensive cheese, seriously, it cost more than any other prize.) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In fighters and games like League of Legends, you either have every character available to you, or your opponent doesn't know which champions you own. In the case of LOL, at most tournament events, players are given special tournament realm accounts to eliminate lag, and these accounts have everything unlocked.  

 

I'm of the mindset that in a competitive environment everyone should have access to everything.  In situations where that's not really feasible (basically every physical game ever) I believe that they should be choosing from an equal set of choices.  In theory, that's true of Malifaux now, but practically, very few players are actually choosing from their entire faction + outside hires.  I'm just in favor of some limits on that to make the selection pools a little more practical to work with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an idea, maybe instead of having sportsmanship award be completely separate, make it a part of the placing strategy.

 

Set requirements for the prizewinning spots- you cannot hold a prizewinning spot if you have the lowest sportsmanship score in the room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an idea, maybe instead of having sportsmanship award be completely separate, make it a part of the placing strategy.

Set requirements for the prizewinning spots- you cannot hold a prizewinning spot if you have the lowest sportsmanship score in the room.

The issue with that is sometimes players give zeros for sportsmanship knowing that it factors in the overall rankings. Knock down everyone they play against to make their own placing better.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a competitive player, but I always pick a list that is fluffy and has the tools for the job. I think the best way to play any game/sport is aim to be the best you can be and see what happens. If you focus on tailoring to beat your opponents list because of some schnyde piece of espionage, then you are not doing that.

 

If you lose to someone better then at least you tried and you can admire that individual for their skill, or alternatively shake their hand, curse your luck, take their number and try and arrange a game another day, you may not have won but at least you made a gaming friend.

 

That being said, you will get bell endz that need to cheat/powergame/grab at any advantage they can get, and sadly they do exist. But it is satisfying when you beat one and see the look of dejection on his face (YES I said HIS, lady players don't seem to be so inclined), or even better being sporting and allowing them an advantage that they denied you previously, and then still beating them! Man that is Souweeeeeet!

 

This weekend I am playing in my first Malifaux tourney and am looking forward to meeting some new people, having an awesome day of gaming, and hopefully seeing and sharing some awesome conversions (thanx wyrd for not being jerks about converted non wyrd models, my steam trunk from a fag packet to name but one). 

 

In addition there may be a little part of me that wants to win that starter box set, but that is more of a bonus than a necessity.  And if I get stomped, that is cool too, as it will teach me about my weaknesses and I can learn how to improve my game for the next tourney.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I have no problem with a person looking around after a tournament has begun. 

 

Malifaux unique crew construction system really negates the value of this. If I bust out my Rezzers, they are just going to see a giant bag of Rezzers, which they would know when I declared my crew. Looking in someones bag to determine their model selection is a bit shady, not because they are looking at the models, but they are peeking in their bag which is not okay basically any time.

 

I do run into problems with my normal opponents occasionally giving away information during the crew build process, where they will place a card where I can see it, or a model on the board. This I can see as an issue, I think the Tournament Policy could give us some guidance to how to do this piece, it might be helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was running Guild. I took Death Marshals for most of the day, but I took a Warden, Guardian, and 2 Hunters in this particular match.

I placed my models down for the game during crew creation.

Yeah, that's BS.

 

 

Obviously not an exactly equivalent example, but how I prefer to run things- A bit ago, I was intending to play Tara with some new toys, and it turned out my opponent was playing Leveticus (for the first time). If I'd gamed it, I could have taken like 6 wretches and just tried to jump up and down on Leveticus's bury mechanic since I knew, regardless of what he was taking with him, Leveticus would want to be burying himself and he'd either be shut down or highly limited with all those incoming attacks. Instead, I took a list that was slightly light on burying since I didn't want a stupid game for what amounts to a very unlikely match up (things that can directly mess with Leveticus's bury stuff). I ended up with Karina messing with one of Leveticus's turns pretty decently, but otherwise getting a pretty straight fight, and considering he ate my one Void Wretch for breakfast, I may have actually lost pretty hard if I'd tried to game against him.

 

In a tournament, if I'd expected/knew my opponent was taking Leveticus, I expect I wouldn't have gone soft on burying (unless it fit my build etc.), but I certainly wouldn't have gone all-in, since either I'm gaming his list or he's trying to mess with me, and I don't think either MO deserves a reward.

Share this post


Link to post
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...