Soor Sportsmanship

[Genetic]

I played a game yesterday and my opponent spent the whole game complaining and pacing back and forth. and after about the second turn wanted to quit. We are playing in a league based around victory points so I told him he really couldn't quit.

I've been War gaming for bout 16 years now and have never played against anyone like this. I don't know if he was having a bad day or what ..but he just wouldn't stop.. Finally by the end of the third turn is had enough and had to say "dude, SPORTSMANSHIP". and he looked at me like he didn't know what I was saying so i explained it to him. I've never had to point out to a played that they where showing poor sportsmanship .Ever.

As far as me as a player, I like to think I'm an easy guy to play against.. Sure I'm Very competitive but I also know this is just a game. I try not to gloat or brag during a game. Sure I may smile during a game when I think of something devious, or something that could win me the game.

I guess what i want to know is there something i could have done differently, how would you handle a person like this??

[128th_king]

by perchance, were you running Pandora? or a dreamer Alp Bomb, or a Ramos detonation list?

[Ratty]

My guess was he was running a Leviticus, belle list with Molly and Alyce

[128th_king]

was your opponent new to wargames? or using a crew with which he had little to no experience?

[Justin]

I guess what i want to know is there something i could have done differently, how would you handle a person like this??

You should have let him quit.

[Hatchethead]

My guess was he was running a Leveticus, belle list with Molly and Alyce

I'm thinking his opponent was running ... Seamus? Maybe a Convict Gunslinger? :approve:

Lalo is right. If he wants to quit so bad that refusing causes the game to death spiral into a miserable chore, let him quit. I'd say something like, "Sure, you can quit, so long as you forfeit max VP to zero."

That said, I think you did the right thing. It could be that he was so frustrated, he simply wasn't aware of his conduct. Hardly an excuse, but a possibility. Be straightforward, let the other guy know he's out of line; at least then you have grounds to walk away and/or refuse gaming with him in future.

On a side note: This thread is likely fuel on a fire best left to burn itself out. Both of you should sign off and sleep on it before posting anything regrettable. It would be a shame to make a genuine enemy out of a local player and fellow Malifaux enthusiast. Just my two cents.

[Genetic]

Normally I would allow a person to quit, but the league organizer said a played cant back out of a match.

The player was running a 25ss Seamus list, and i wouldn't say he was new to war gaming, I know he has at least 6 Malifaux games under his belt with Seamus, and had been playing Warhammer 40k for a while now.

Normally I would run my dreamer crew, but I wanted to try running a Levi list I've been wanting to run for a while now.. yes that was the list ratty

[Genetic]

Don't get me wrong I dont have anything against the guy, Hes a Nice guy and fun to talk with. I'm just trying to figure out if there is something I could have done differently.

[Ratty]

I can remember when I was starting up I think my 3rd game was against Pandora, (My first 2 were against Pandora too but were quite close, though I think I won them both.) My opponent managed to get a hand which contained 3 high crows. The game was more or less over in turn 2, and I was kind of left there staring at my crew. I think I resigned turn 3. I don't think I would have been amazingly happy carrying on for another 3 turns just to get VP as he mopped up my crew. I think probably your campaign should have an option to resign.

I'm fairly relaxed, but I don't think anyone enjoys a game which is hugely one sided.

[Hatchethead]

You did what you could within reason. Maybe he was having an off night; too much Red Bull, helpless, hopeless, frustrated in defeat. It happens to the best.

You league organizer should consider adding the ability to forfeit a match. Better that than suffering through a miserable waste of time.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Hatchethead

[128th_king]

nah, sounds like you two were on a fairly even match-up. Sometimes games do go horribly badly and I feel that the organiser is being unfair with not letting people forfeit. the seamus player needed a little bit more practise, but you can't help that, you did the right thing,

[Justin]

Normally I would allow a person to quit, but the league organizer said a played cant back out of a match.

The player was running a 25ss Seamus list, and i wouldn't say he was new to war gaming, I know he has at least 6 Malifaux games under his belt with Seamus, and had been playing Warhammer 40k for a while now.

Normally I would run my dreamer crew, but I wanted to try running a Levi list I've been wanting to run for a while now.. yes that was the list ratty

The league organizer could give that player some sort of penalty in the league. But sans arming himself there's not much in the way he can do of making a player finish a game, ya know?

If it was really that bad I would have just let him walk away, told the TO, and shrugged my shoulders. The less you have to deal with it, the better.

Heh, I once played in a tournament game of 40k when my opponent insisted on conceding and they were using levels of victory: major victory, minor victory. That sort of thing. I told the TO I wiped my opponent out. He said it seemed pretty early on in the round. I said, "Yup, he failed his leadership check and broke off the table. You see any models?"

But that's me.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Justin

[Genetic]

I think I'll have a talk with the Event organizer to see what we can do..

[fortythree]

Hmmm... my first reaction is let him quit, and you get max VP to zero, but if that's not allowed... (I do think someone should always have the option of forfeiting, however).

Was he frustrated with you, your crew, his crew, or what? I'd settle him down a little, ask him what is so wrong, and go from there vs just calling him out on it (not that I think that's wrong, you'll probably get better results this way, tho).

Anecdote that may help: I suck at Warhammer fantasy, and one of our local players (who is an incredible player) and I were playing a game, and he was beating the pants off me. I am the worlds most competitive person, and was being a good sport about it (his words; not mine), so he told me somewhere around the time it became clear I was going to lose to just pick a goal- destroy a unit, have a unit alive at the end of the game, whatever- and try for that. If he is losing so bad, or doesn't know his crew well, you could suggest the same. I can't speak for everyone else, but I've played a few games where pretty quickly I was playing for a scheme and knew I was gonna lose. Just trying to achieve that makes the game enjoyable, and helps you learn.

[mythicFOX]

There’s a difference between quitting and conceding.

Conceding would be ending the game when the outcome isn’t in doubt but the game’s not technically over yet. Quitting would be abandoning a game where the outcome is still in doubt. I’d be interested to know which category this fell into.

In casual play, conceding and quitting are both fine (conceding more so than quitting).

The problem with allowing conceding / quitting in a competitive format is that so much of preventing cheating is about making sure the game has a natural outcome. Allowing players to easily agree the outcome of the game within the rules opens a difficult door.

I think it’s ok for a TO to insist that one begun a game must be completed. So long as players know what they’re getting themselves into.

[Genetic]

I've gone into games knowing I didn't have much of a chance of winning. In fact the last tourney I played in with my Leveticus crew i knew i wasn't going to be able to get many vp points because most my crew was insignificant, and we where allowed only 1 scheme. so i build a list I thought was going to be fun to play and just tried to kill as many thinks as possible. which for me if fun.. Win or Lose as long as I kill something violently I'm happy.. and at the end of the game shake hands and say good game.

We are playing for money ( in-store credit) and to me forfeiting just leaves to much to be desired. It would be to easy for some one just to give up so there friend could win the League.. Please DON'T think im saying anyone im my gaming group would do that! because im not.

[BigMek]

Don't think you really could have done anything, if he was having a really bad day theres nothing others can do about it, we all get em.

I can understand your frustration though, it's never fun when the guy your playing with (yes, I say with and not against) is not having fun, it's hard for you to have fun.

[karn987]

In the end, you should NEVER make someone finish a game they want to just quit. Let them quit and talk to your Event Co-ordinator about how many points you would Score. By default I would probably give you about half of your possible Vp or something like that.

But yeah, if the person is just that unhappy there really is not a whole lot you can do at that point. You may as well just let them quit, get over it and save yourself the extreme hassle of dealing with them. Unless you really think you can talk them out of it and get them back into the game and having fun..... well, let him go with his impulse.

[Genetic]

So it seem the consensus is to let a player quit. I will talk to the Event Orginizer about this and point him in the direction of the thread so it might help him make his decision.. Thank you all who voiced there opinions.. Well all but karn's

[nerdelemental]

No one will ever "not let me quit." My time is my time and my fun is defined by me. The problem is in the organizational structure. "Can't back out of a match" is further problematic if there's just a complete tool I'd rather not deal with, I just won't. But I see the argument that put it in place - that you cannot cherry pick easier match-ups, that you want to spread the love between players, etc.

Threatening to kick one person from the league for not complying would quickly lead to a collapse of the league locally. I'd laugh and say "Okay. Anyone want to play me some fun games next week?"

Of course, I'm one of the local organizers so there's a different level of respect, but if you're setting up such a competitive environment this is what will inevitably come.

Then again, you were right about it not being terribly sporstmanlike to simply toss the towel since it does affect you in the league. If I were your oppoenent I'd have said, "You know, I've clearly lost and I'm not going to have much fun going through the motions. Can I just give you the max VP and call it a game?" I'd most likely have continued playing if you insisted, but then I'd be questioning your sportsmanship by making me.

[tajnisvet]

I'd say you get 8 Vp, and your opponent -2 *as there are two schemes that can give you penal points.

So if anyone want to give you advantage on purpose, they'll check twice before they agree to get -2.

AND PLEASE NEVER ENFORCE A PLAYER TO PLAY WHEN HE/SHE WISHES TO QUIT.

If something similar happened to me, I'd never play in that club again. NEVER.

[Hatchethead]

We are playing for money ( in-store credit) and to me forfeiting just leaves to much to be desired. It would be to easy for some one just to give up so there friend could win the League.. Please DON'T think im saying anyone im my gaming group would do that! because im not.

I can understand the rule, meant to prevent collusion.

However, if two players are in cahoots and are dead set on awarding max VP to one or the other, they can make it happen regardless. Unless someone is watching them like a hawk, monitoring both control hands, is familiar with the players, their playstyle and their lifetime W/L record, it's a simple matter of making poor decisions; botched deployment and movement, discarding high cards, failing to cheat up, "forgetting" important abilities and combos, choosing sub-optimal schemes.

Sure, forcing them to play it out makes cheating more of a chore, but if someone wants to throw a game, Malifaux is complex enough that it would be hard to detect barring an OCD level of diligence. Fudging a game likely becomes more difficult as the event draws to a close - fewer tables in play, more spectators and event organizer attention; during the finals and semi-finals of a tournament for instance - but by then you're dealing with players who almost certainly won't be throwing any games.

[nilus]

While you should never force someone to keep playing I think you should penalize someone for just quitting after two turns.

Malifaux is pretty unique in the way just about every model can be very potent in a game. I have seen near complete slaughters turn around in turn 4 or 5. Plus you learn a lot from losing a game.

Personally if I played someone who wanted to quit after turn 2, I'd let them quite but probably not choose to play them again. Like Dave said its your time and if I am going to invest the 15 minutes to setup a game then I don't want to play for a half hour and then be done because my opponent can't handle losing.

[Thunder_God]

Maybe he really had to go to the toilet, or whatever? I have had times in my life where I had to pace, like, so bad, that I couldn't watch a TV show without pacing back and forth across the living room.

I'd say not letting someone "stop playing" is bad behaviour, in ways that go beyond "sportsmanship". Even if the other side were poor sportsmen, which is not relevant.

[mythicFOX]

Let’s be honest, short of fire arms there isn't really any way to force a player who wants to quit to play on. The issue quitting presents in competitive play is that it provides players with ways to cheat / manipulate the outcome of the event more easily.

Taking Karn’s example above, if I’m getting spanked 8-0, I could just quit out of spite and my opponent would only get half victory points.

Similarly if a player quits and the results are treated as an 0-8 loss, if my opponent’s clearly going to beat me 6-0, why wouldn’t I decide to quit given my he’s a nice guy?

tajinisvet’s idea would work. However you’re moving back towards forcing people to play. However you still have the same ‘points gifting’ issue you have in the example above.

Fact is there are no easy answers. The event organiser has to balance the desires of the player with the risks to the outcome.

IMHO my preferred method would be for the TO to decide the end VPs for the game in person based on the game state at the point one player quits. I’m aware that can be fairly impractical.

Edited January 31, 2011 by mythicFOX
SPAG