I'm not going to lie, the idea that social consequences shouldn't affect how you play a social game is just plain wrong. Tabletop games are a social activity with social pressures. That social pressure is typically called sportsmanship. Therefor behavior that is anti-social, as in damages the social atmosphere is bad sportsmanship(This goes a multitude of ways and is hard to define The best definition follows the sentence). If the way you played has you asking, "Is it unsportsmanlike", the fact you have to ask the question probably means the answer is yes. But next time, ask the players at your store, not the intenet. It's not a place known for social skills or sportsmanship.

The problem with this idea is that it assumes that sportsmanship, or a social group's idea of it anyway, is a concrete measurable standard by which to judge one's actions. There is a big difference between shunning a person because they are actually a jerk versus a group trying to peer pressure someone into altering their game strategy because "they don't like it."

Playing by the rules and accepting one's wins and losses graciously is about all you can concretely define about sportsmanship. Beyond that, you can quickly move into the territory of "I am a true sportsman and other true sportsmen must play within my arbitrarily defined honor code that is separate from the actual game rules" without even realizing it, as this thread has demonstrated

On a lighter note, if it was me with the ywings, I would have decided I was going to lose under the current game state and therefore decided that the only option, was to hunt his nimble a$$ down! I probably would have failed, shook his hand and then thought about how to improve on the glaring and inherent weakness in my list!

It's interesting that people seem to be equating having a bad time with poor sportsmanship. The goal of a game, in a competitive setting, is to win. You are under no obligation to make things fun for your opponent, and to attach some clear cut moral value to that is just silly.

I've stayed away from posting this thread due to my personal beliefs, but really....

The player kills 1 ship then breaks off all combat? He uses his ships to do what they are stat'ed out to be able to do, and takes advantage of what seems to be a lesser skilled player/list, at the time.

Legal? Yes.

Sportsmanlike play? Most definitely not (IMHO).

OK, it's a tournament. A win is a win, as long as it's attained within the confines of the rules. But really? The player had such little skills, or faith in his list, to play a 'Combat based miniatures game' that he actually decided the best way to win this particular match was to be a boring, time wasting, douchebag, coward? In my local meta, that player would quickly get zero games offered or accepted after playing like that. Tourney or otherwise.

I've actually been on the receiving end of just such a thing. But the difference between my experience and what was stated in the op, was that after the game my opponent and I sat down and talked about it. I had dual space-bison and my opponent had Interceptors. He played that same strategy to 'show me my lists weakness's'. Fair enough too, as it did help. But he didn't do it for 40+ minutes. In the end he finished the game the way I would've expected anyone too (He simply shadowed the shuttles and destroyed them).

I don't have a personal problem with the strategy per se. I just think in the case of the op, it was used in an extremely cowardice way. If the opponent was so outclassed that he/she was unable to get a single shot on your ships, then surely the op could've 'grown a set' and relied on his own skills to take the game to his opponent and mercifully put him out of his misery.

Anyway, yes it's a perfectly legal strategy. I just personally think it's an unbelievably cowardly one.

These are my personal thoughts/views on the subject. I don't expect or require others to agree.

Cheers

It's interesting that people seem to be equating having a bad time with poor sportsmanship. The goal of a game, in a competitive setting, is to win. You are under no obligation to make things fun for your opponent, and to attach some clear cut moral value to that is just silly.

Largely because calling your average weekend X-wing tournament competitive is flat out misguided. It's between 6 and 20 guys who all share a hobby there to have a good time. If people aren't having a good time less players come. If less players come the game stops selling as well, and the tournaments eventually stop. That doesn't mean don't bring your A-game, but calling it an event worthy of cutthroat play tactics is frankly silly. You've done the equivelent of beating up your neighbor. You have to deal with these people every tournament, making it a fun place to be is better for everyone.

It's interesting that people seem to be equating having a bad time with poor sportsmanship. The goal of a game, in a competitive setting, is to win. You are under no obligation to make things fun for your opponent, and to attach some clear cut moral value to that is just silly.

Here's the problem, right here. The ME ME ME attitude. This is how it starts, people.

An attitude of "I don't care if the poeple around me are having fun" is awful. You should be ashmaed for promoting this attitude.

I'm not going to lie, the idea that social consequences shouldn't affect how you play a social game is just plain wrong. Tabletop games are a social activity with social pressures. That social pressure is typically called sportsmanship. Therefor behavior that is anti-social, as in damages the social atmosphere is bad sportsmanship(This goes a multitude of ways and is hard to define The best definition follows the sentence). If the way you played has you asking, "Is it unsportsmanlike", the fact you have to ask the question probably means the answer is yes. But next time, ask the players at your store, not the intenet. It's not a place known for social skills or sportsmanship.

The problem with this idea is that it assumes that sportsmanship, or a social group's idea of it anyway, is a concrete measurable standard by which to judge one's actions. There is a big difference between shunning a person because they are actually a jerk versus a group trying to peer pressure someone into altering their game strategy because "they don't like it."

Playing by the rules and accepting one's wins and losses graciously is about all you can concretely define about sportsmanship. Beyond that, you can quickly move into the territory of "I am a true sportsman and other true sportsmen must play within my arbitrarily defined honor code that is separate from the actual game rules" without even realizing it, as this thread has demonstrated

And yet society has all these undefinable rules and moors that we all follow pretty well. The OP knows right and wrong. He wouldn't have asked this question if he didn't feel like what he did was wrong, but he came here looking for validation of his actions. If he knew, really trusted that what he did was fine, he wouldn't have bothered to ask the question. Just like I don't ask, "is blocking my opponents ships as a tactic bad sportsmanship?" when blocking my opponent pisses them off and they call it a cheap tactic. The best metric is your own intuition. If you feel the need to ask if it was bad sportsmanship, you've already answered the question. It is. There's more than just taking your wins and losses with grace.

Wait, now blocking is also bad sportsmanship?

It's interesting that people seem to be equating having a bad time with poor sportsmanship. The goal of a game, in a competitive setting, is to win. You are under no obligation to make things fun for your opponent, and to attach some clear cut moral value to that is just silly.

I'm sorry WonderWAAAGH but I have to disagree here. Just because the rule book, any rule book, all rule books, have no rules for playing in an enjoyable manner it shouldn't mean that playing to win at all costs is acceptable. This way lies nothing but doom and gloom! I believe that it is both players responsibility to try and have fun during a game.

If there is a reason you can't play a tough well thought out competitive list in an enjoyable game, then it probably is just the fact you are a spanner (this should not be read to be directed at you WW, just a general belief). I mean for this comment to be viewed from both sides to, if you are beat by a better player/list/tactics accept that and learn from it. You can't cry 'dodgy' , poor sport, broken, every time you lose a game.

I agree with an earlier post from Aminar, you really don't need to ask someone to justify your shoddy game play, your know it was shoddy.

FLY CASUAL (but accept it if you get spanked all round space!!!)

"Attacking enemy ships is not a required part of playing the game..."

Seriously?? Can I politely direct you to the very first paragraph in the rule book, under Game Overview :

To be honest, what it boils down to for me is that in almost every game of XWing I have played I have literally stated to my opponent (generally by turn two) how much I love this game. Getting whipped by a better player doesn't change this statement at all. Not enjoying a game because of the way a player plays, might change my love for the game.

Also, everyone seems to be associating bad play with the player that wins. I have had my share of regretfully unenjoyable games from opponents who have been terrible. It truly isn't about what you've got, it's about how you use it.

Basically, your game can make both of you want to play another one, or it can make you want to pack up and go home. I personally am always up for another game!

It's interesting that people seem to be equating having a bad time with poor sportsmanship. The goal of a game, in a competitive setting, is to win. You are under no obligation to make things fun for your opponent, and to attach some clear cut moral value to that is just silly.

There is a line separating trying to win, and being a ****, that being said I agree with you.

Am I a poor sportsman if I roll crits and evades every time I roll dice and my opponent keeps rolling blanks?(Lets assume normal non-modified dice, it was all just normal statistical aberrations, AKA luck) The game would hardly be enjoyable for me or my opponent. Should I "forget" to take shots or take shots I would not normally take, range 3 shots through an asteroid at a A-wing/Interceptor with an evade and a focus and a stealth still up, passing up a range one shot on B-wing/Lambda just so it isn't as bad of a blowout even though we can't control the dice?

Of course their is grey area and always is especially with something like sportsmanship, the only way I can think of measuring sportsmanship is did he do anything malicious that the opponent had no chance of preventing/countering. In this case as it was pointed out no he did not. He did not deny the Y-wing player the option to split his forces and try to catch him(and he probably could have if he did). The Y-wing player is also responsible for making that game unenjoyable, Instead of trying to split his own ships up to trap the A-wings he decided to call the OP unsportsmanlike when he had it in his power to try.

For all of the people attacking WonderWaagh, keep this from getting personal or FFG will lock the thread(as they have done with other threads when the debate has gotten personal), everyone has their opinions and getting nasty calling out someone for calmly expressing their opinions is more unsportsmanlike than taking advantage of a loophole.

I'm not going to lie, the idea that social consequences shouldn't affect how you play a social game is just plain wrong. Tabletop games are a social activity with social pressures. That social pressure is typically called sportsmanship. Therefor behavior that is anti-social, as in damages the social atmosphere is bad sportsmanship(This goes a multitude of ways and is hard to define The best definition follows the sentence). If the way you played has you asking, "Is it unsportsmanlike", the fact you have to ask the question probably means the answer is yes. But next time, ask the players at your store, not the intenet. It's not a place known for social skills or sportsmanship.

The problem with this idea is that it assumes that sportsmanship, or a social group's idea of it anyway, is a concrete measurable standard by which to judge one's actions. There is a big difference between shunning a person because they are actually a jerk versus a group trying to peer pressure someone into altering their game strategy because "they don't like it."

Playing by the rules and accepting one's wins and losses graciously is about all you can concretely define about sportsmanship. Beyond that, you can quickly move into the territory of "I am a true sportsman and other true sportsmen must play within my arbitrarily defined honor code that is separate from the actual game rules" without even realizing it, as this thread has demonstrated

And yet society has all these undefinable rules and moors that we all follow pretty well. The OP knows right and wrong. He wouldn't have asked this question if he didn't feel like what he did was wrong, but he came here looking for validation of his actions. If he knew, really trusted that what he did was fine, he wouldn't have bothered to ask the question. Just like I don't ask, "is blocking my opponents ships as a tactic bad sportsmanship?" when blocking my opponent pisses them off and they call it a cheap tactic. The best metric is your own intuition. If you feel the need to ask if it was bad sportsmanship, you've already answered the question. It is. There's more than just taking your wins and losses with grace.

Wait, now blocking is also bad sportsmanship?

Gods no. I'm pointing out a situation that was similar. I got called cheap for something, but knew full well what I did was fair and legal, and left it be. In his situation where he was called cheap, he couldn't decide, so he came here looking for validation. The fact the internal conflict got that far is his answer. It was too far, because it had him questioning himself. His intuition told him it was wrong, and his intuition is the best judge.

Did the OP fly within the rules? Sadly, yes. Was it legit? Sadly, yes. Would I play someone who did this repeatedly? Hell no! I want to have fun when I play and there's got to be some shooting involved.

Did the Y-Wing player do anything right or wrong? He chose his list because he thought it would be strong for him . He could have played better, he could have changed his tactics, but chose not to and had an unenjoyable game as a result. Was he expecting an opponent to spend the game running away? Probably not.

So the blame is entirely on the OP instead of the Y-wing player? And Not expecting someone to do something is no excuse for poor decision making. "I was not expecting you to turn that way, you can't shoot at my ship at range one when I don't have any defensive tokens up" Sounds silly but I don't know how long the OPs game lasted but after the first 2 or 3 rounds the Y-wing should have caught on and realized "Hey he's retreating if I want to win I need to do something besides what I am doing now"

This is a 3x3 board with asteroids and from the sounds of it at the time 7 ships on it(albeit small bases) its not like 40k with an infinite amount of space (relatively speaking) if you want to catch someone and you have more than one ship you should be able too, you just have to be smarter and maneuver to get the angles you need to catch up rather then trying to tail chase an A-wing

It's interesting that people seem to be equating having a bad time with poor sportsmanship. The goal of a game, in a competitive setting, is to win. You are under no obligation to make things fun for your opponent, and to attach some clear cut moral value to that is just silly.

There is a line separating trying to win, and being a ****, that being said I agree with you.

Am I a poor sportsman if I roll crits and evades every time I roll dice and my opponent keeps rolling blanks?(Lets assume normal non-modified dice, it was all just normal statistical aberrations, AKA luck) The game would hardly be enjoyable for me or my opponent. Should I "forget" to take shots or take shots I would not normally take, range 3 shots through an asteroid at a A-wing/Interceptor with an evade and a focus and a stealth still up, passing up a range one shot on B-wing/Lambda just so it isn't as bad of a blowout even though we can't control the dice?

Of course their is grey area and always is especially with something like sportsmanship, the only way I can think of measuring sportsmanship is did he do anything malicious that the opponent had no chance of preventing/countering. In this case as it was pointed out no he did not. He did not deny the Y-wing player the option to split his forces and try to catch him(and he probably could have if he did). The Y-wing player is also responsible for making that game unenjoyable, Instead of trying to split his own ships up to trap the A-wings he decided to call the OP unsportsmanlike when he had it in his power to try.

For all of the people attacking WonderWaagh, keep this from getting personal or FFG will lock the thread(as they have done with other threads when the debate has gotten personal), everyone has their opinions and getting nasty calling out someone for calmly expressing their opinions is more unsportsmanlike than taking advantage of a loophole.

Of course you aren't a poor sportsman for having a great dice roll, and you opponent should be able to take that with all the grace required in a game where you roll dice! The difference is you have done nothing in your play style, demeanour, or action to reduce your opponents enjoyment of the game. At this point your opponent can however reduce your enjoyment by whinging, being surly, or cracking the sh@&$ because he is getting punished by dice.

Both players responsibility.

Well in the Op defense he was told after the game by the losing player that what he did was poor sportsmanship.

Therefore it made him second guess himself.

I don't know him or what he thinks, but I'd say that during the game he didn't feel he did anything wrong

Which btw he didn't.

He played to win and for that game he won. I feel like the player who lost was a sore loser because the other guy decided to use a cheap yet easy to defeat tactic.

Poor sportsmanship comes from things like being a bad winner, or loser.

Using tactics that give you an unfair advantage,like an infinite combo, or taking 3-4 min each time to decide something.

Playing defensively,or cowardly isn't bad sportsmanship.

From someone who has played a lot of sports when I was younger, and have played a lot of tournaments at a competitive level, what he did wasn't bad sportsmanship.

Things like altering someone Equipment, cheating, or after losing refusing to shake the other teams hand

Or in this case moving your opponents ships. Trying to shake the table. After losing a game storming out, or rage quiting. Picking up your piece and smashing it down in the table, throwing dice, and /or insulting another player. That is poor sportsmanship

So please stop trying to say what he did was poor sportsmanship. What he did was well within the rules.

Call it cheap, cowardly, if you must call it something.

Like playing street fighter. If someone playing Ryu keeps throwing fireballs, that's not poor sportsmanship. If the other player can't figure how to get out of the way, too bad,so sad. It can be considered a cheap move.

I don't see how what he did can be anything even close to poor sportsmanship. The game is a strategy game. His strategy a to get the lead in points and then avoid his opponent.

In all honesty I don't see how his opponent couldn't managed to catch him.

It's not like the board is that huge. Think his opponent was just not a very good player, and not a very good loser,and if anything telling him that what he did was poor sportsmanship, was unsporting.

If he can't counter that, then that's his problem.

I mean really, do you think you would have lost? I don't think I would have, as in sure the more experienced here would have torn him apart

Gods no. I'm pointing out a situation that was similar. I got called cheap for something, but knew full well what I did was fair and legal, and left it be. In his situation where he was called cheap, he couldn't decide, so he came here looking for validation. The fact the internal conflict got that far is his answer. It was too far, because it had him questioning himself. His intuition told him it was wrong, and his intuition is the best judge.

It wasn't his intuition that told him it was wrong, it was his opponent, if I understand the scenario correctly, he seemed to feel it was okay (hence why he did it) and he is just checking here to see if his opponent was right or he was. That said I agree with the general rule that you mentioned, if you are unsure you are doing the right thing then you probably aren't. But in this case it felt like the OP was sure he was right but didn't doubt himself until his opponent was complaining

Did the OP fly within the rules? Sadly, yes. Was it legit? Sadly, yes. Would I play someone who did this repeatedly? Hell no! I want to have fun when I play and there's got to be some shooting involved.

Did the Y-Wing player do anything right or wrong? He chose his list because he thought it would be strong for him . He could have played better, he could have changed his tactics, but chose not to and had an unenjoyable game as a result. Was he expecting an opponent to spend the game running away? Probably not.

So the blame is entirely on the OP instead of the Y-wing player? And Not expecting someone to do something is no excuse for poor decision making. "I was not expecting you to turn that way, you can't shoot at my ship at range one when I don't have any defensive tokens up" Sounds silly but I don't know how long the OPs game lasted but after the first 2 or 3 rounds the Y-wing should have caught on and realized "Hey he's retreating if I want to win I need to do something besides what I am doing now"

This is a 3x3 board with asteroids and from the sounds of it at the time 7 ships on it(albeit small bases) its not like 40k with an infinite amount of space (relatively speaking) if you want to catch someone and you have more than one ship you should be able too, you just have to be smarter and maneuver to get the angles you need to catch up rather then trying to tail chase an A-wing

Gods no. I'm pointing out a situation that was similar. I got called cheap for something, but knew full well what I did was fair and legal, and left it be. In his situation where he was called cheap, he couldn't decide, so he came here looking for validation. The fact the internal conflict got that far is his answer. It was too far, because it had him questioning himself. His intuition told him it was wrong, and his intuition is the best judge.

It wasn't his intuition that told him it was wrong, it was his opponent, if I understand the scenario correctly, he seemed to feel it was okay (hence why he did it) and he is just checking here to see if his opponent was right or he was. That said I agree with the general rule that you mentioned, if you are unsure you are doing the right thing then you probably aren't. But in this case it felt like the OP was sure he was right but didn't doubt himself until his opponent was complaining

Absolutely 100% legal, valid, and acceptable. It may not be very fun to play against a list that can run circles around yours, but that is the game. Some ships are tough and sluggish, others are fragile and nimble. Players need to take that into account when list building and when at the table. If FFG wanted everyone to just throw ships on the table and shove them forward at each other, EVERY ship type would have 5 shields and 3 hull. This is a maneuvering game, and if you can destroy the other guy while avoiding being hit in return, you are doing well!

4 hits and an a-wing is dead so you have to be rather slippery with them.

And no one cares about your record of 77 and 34 except you.

This thread seems to mirror the match in question....either change your debate tactics, or quit and go do something else.

This is a long thread, but two things to help put it perspective:

This thread has more impact on the X-Wing community than the single game in question...conduct yourselves accordingly.

In the amount of time it takes to read this thread completely, you could have probably played a full game.

Well in the Op defense he was told after the game by the losing player that what he did was poor sportsmanship.

Therefore it made him second guess himself.

I don't know him or what he thinks, but I'd say that during the game he didn't feel he did anything wrong

Which btw he didn't.

He played to win and for that game he won. I feel like the player who lost was a sore loser because the other guy decided to use a cheap yet easy to defeat tactic.

Poor sportsmanship comes from things like being a bad winner, or loser.

Using tactics that give you an unfair advantage,like an infinite combo, or taking 3-4 min each time to decide something.

Playing defensively,or cowardly isn't bad sportsmanship.

From someone who has played a lot of sports when I was younger, and have played a lot of tournaments at a competitive level, what he did wasn't bad sportsmanship.

Things like altering someone Equipment, cheating, or after losing refusing to shake the other teams hand

Or in this case moving your opponents ships. Trying to shake the table. After losing a game storming out, or rage quiting. Picking up your piece and smashing it down in the table, throwing dice, and /or insulting another player. That is poor sportsmanship

So please stop trying to say what he did was poor sportsmanship. What he did was well within the rules.

Call it cheap, cowardly, if you must call it something.

Like playing street fighter. If someone playing Ryu keeps throwing fireballs, that's not poor sportsmanship. If the other player can't figure how to get out of the way, too bad,so sad. It can be considered a cheap move.

I don't see how what he did can be anything even close to poor sportsmanship. The game is a strategy game. His strategy a to get the lead in points and then avoid his opponent.

In all honesty I don't see how his opponent couldn't managed to catch him.

It's not like the board is that huge. Think his opponent was just not a very good player, and not a very good loser,and if anything telling him that what he did was poor sportsmanship, was unsporting.

If he can't counter that, then that's his problem.

I mean really, do you think you would have lost? I don't think I would have, as in sure the more experienced here would have torn him apart

I think you are dead right here Krynn. Most people would agree that the tactic employed by the OP wasn't one that was unbeatable (quite the opposite in fact). I think the thread has shifted a little from bad sports to player enjoyment. I agree that the ywing player was probably the biggest culprit for his after game comments. However, that being said, I think the OP didn't actually play a game of xwing (dogfight) and thus reduced his opponents enjoyment of the game. I see no reason why the OP could not have attempted to try and lay some R3 firepower on his opponent and can therefore only conclude that he sacrificed his and his opponents enjoyment of the game in order to achieve a win.

Would I play the OP? Absolutely. Would he be able to run for the whole game? I doubt it. Would I whine if he did? No. I'd get better!

I had a similar experience at a tourney I was in. I had a rookie xwing with r2d2 and 100 percent hull and shields against my opponents wedge with 1 hull left and no upgrades. There was 15 min left and he would max out his speed and I would do the same following right behind but at range 4. I had finally chased him down to the edge of the board and we were about to start our attack phase when time was called. He won since wedge was worth more than my rookie and r2d2. Basically spent 15 min going from 1 edge to another only to get time called. I was a little frustrated to say the least and while I knew he didn't do anything against the rules it still left a bad taste in my mouth. It was pretty obvious he would not survive my attack at range 1 and all that was needed was to finish our round. Like I said it's not against the rules but still there is no skill in just doing the same maneuver over and over just to waste time so you can win. There's no brilliance or smartness to that tactic it's just a cheap way to win. "Oh you have 100 percent hull and shields and I have only 1? Ok I'll just fly 4 straight every turn away from you til time is called". No rules against but people will dislike you very much for it. Believe me I got a good look at his face too and next time I see him he will pay haha.

And no one cares about your record of 77 and 34 except you.

You're right- no one but me cares. But thanks for changing a difference of opinion into a personal attack. Well played- now I am totally convinced of your point of view.

One thing I find kind of hilarious, everyone assumes trying to catch a fleeing opponent isn't fun.

I love me a good game of cat and mouse. Get over here Jerry. It's not for everyone. but to put a blanket "That's not fun" statement over everything is not exactly fairly representing things. This is a maneuvering game first and foremost, the shooting is to see who maneuvered the best.

With the exception of one particular poster, I'm not feeling particularly abused at the moment. We all clearly have different opinions on the matter, and I think we've lost sight of that. There simply is no right or wrong answer.