What does the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps have to do with sportsmanship?

do you really have to do this? Just don't play with each other!!! !!! Stop! Go to your room! Split up! Don't pull his hair!

Mikael, no, it was directed to the OP, but i purposely left it openly enough so some people may revisitate their attitude withouth feeling completely pointed.

We all are "fly casual". The problem lies that you are trying to enforce your "fly casual" attitude to the rest. Which is not flying casual at all.

I enjoy the game differently than you do. I prefer playing with like minded and you too. The problem comes when you start the namecalling and witchhunting against the people that doesn't enjoy the game as you do.

I don't insult people because they play their game as a way for social interaction solely instead of a mental exercise aswell, but i don't have fun playing with them, so i try to avoid playing with them. When i do, i will play very laid back, and i will just enjoy the social aspect (conversation, jokes, etc) but the game will be completely pointless for the most part, i am not flying casual because i am just throwing dice withouth thinking, for peter's sake. I do this, not because "i am a nice guy", but because i also want to have a good time, and i know playing competitively wouldn't make the cut, since i know he can't put a game which i may enjoy playing, i am sure we can make it up by conversation, jokes, etc. I am the one responsible for my fun.

I don't know, i see all the labellizing and to me it speaks more about tribalization of the community (casuals, hardcore, whatever), which has always been toxic to any wargame community. So yeah, just stop the namecalling, the witchhunting, and enjoy the game like you want, with whom you may enjoy playing with. Treat others as you may want to be treated, huh ?

Fly casual.

I woukd like to remind folks that the _actual_ world champion, during the _actual_ tournament reminded his opponent to take some shots that his opponent would have forgotten about.

As the holy Bhudah Mohammed Moses Christo once said: let he whose brain has never farted place the first evade token.

That's what we're talking about, I think. Not something like constantly forgetting, just the simple act of making that small mistake when performing a routine operation. You can't really "learn" how not to have brain farts. By definition, once someone is skilled enough that a failure comes down to a brain fart, they already know the game. So why punish it?

For me, it's the better victory to have been gracious, and the better defeat to know my opponent had every opportunity.

Taking shots I believe is like rebel captive

It is mandatory and not stating so if notice is cheating

Taking shots is not mandatory. If you attack, you must roll dice. You cannot choose to roll zero dice. But you are not obligated to declare an attack.

Ugh. These "the proper way to play with plastic toys" threads always end up terrible.

Situations like these aren't binary and depend entirely on the circumstances. Sometimes I let people take their missed actions, sometimes I don't. It depends on each individual situation.

It's important to remember the 3 rules of real estate as well. Location. Location. Location.

How I play at a friends house over beers is going to be different than how I play giving a demo/teaching the game. That is also different than how I'd play against someone at the LGS for a friendly game, which is different than how I'd play for a League or Tournament game. Even those would be different than how I'd play at Regionals or Worlds.

In all cases I'd try very hard to not be a jerk, to be friendly cheerful, bathed... To not cheer when someone makes a mistake, not to berate them for bad play, to not cheer when I roll 4 <crits> and they roll blanks...

I won't hoot and jump up and down if I win, I won't curse or have a fit if I lose... I'm there to play a game and have a good time doing so. But none of that means I won't play at the best of my ability and expect other people to do the same. I will allow someone to fix some/many/none of their mistakes depending on who and why I'm playing.

She cancels one damage per round. So does threepio.

Unless your opponent is running Jax.

Also you might not want to use the free evade once Scum is out and if you're afraid it'll be stolen by Palob

We all are "fly casual". The problem lies that you are trying to enforce your "fly casual" attitude to the rest. Which is not flying casual at all.

I think that is the problem, really.

Everyone - for some reason, maybe because it was a humorous quote from a movie - wants to be called 'fly casual'.

But, as the saying goes, if everyone is unique, no-one is unique.

If you won't let an opponent correct 'obvious mistakes' (flying right off the board on the ship's first movement?) or go back to 'required' events that work in your favor (they have Mara Jade, nobody took stress), you are not 'fly casual' by insisting 'well, I'd love to help you, but the rules clearly state...', that's WAAC. Or you could say 'rules lawyer', I suppose. Or any of a half dozen other things - maybe we just need to find a more clever term for it.

But that's fine - that's one style of play. There is nothing wrong with it, and pointing out someone is WAAC is not an insult, just an observation. FWIW, that's actually how I *do* play Star Fleet Battles.

The opposite of that is the 'fly casual' players. They are less interested in following the letter of the rules, and instead the spirit of them.

But heck, maybe the problem is the term is loaded. Maybe we should just call them...I dunno, "I have you now" players instead of WAAC. Gets the same idea across - folks using the 'process of playing the game' as a field of battle, and capitalizing on mistakes there, rather than the flow of the game itself.

by insisting 'well, I'd love to help you, but the rules clearly state...', that's WAAC.

Playing by the rules is not, and never can be considered trying to Win At All Costs. It's playing the game according to the rules and nothing else.

Also mandatory effects are just that, and if you notice that they were missed, not fixing it if possible, is in fact cheating.

There is nothing wrong with it, and pointing out someone is WAAC is not an insult, just an observation.

Yes it is, because it's a loaded term, and is meant to be insulting. Playing to Win At All Costs, means something, and it's not just someone who wishes to win, or plays to win. It's someone who as the term states, wants to win no matter what. Is willing to do anything they can get away with in order to win.

If that means badgering the other guy, or nudging their ships, or in some cases out and out cheating, like not pointing out a mandatory effect when they notice it. Then they will do it, because the are out to win at all costs.

Flying Casual does not mean letting the other person play sloppy, take back mistakes, take actions they missed or the like. It never has and I hope never does.

Trying to equate a given way of playing with Fly Casual is to miss the whole point. The point is to simply not be a jerk and take the game so seriously that you ruin it for everyone, and that is something everyone can do.

I think that it is laughable that people are still arguing over this issue. The game is fun and if you are taking the time to go to a tournament, especially a large event like Regionals, Nationals, Worlds, etc., then the game is competitive.

Fly Casual is just don't be a jerk, it's all about your attitude.

That being said, there are specific rules to this game for Tournament play and if you're going to said tournament then you and your opponent should be expected to know and follow them. I, as a fellow competitor should expect that I'm playing against quality players who know the game, who will be polite, respectful, and play at their best level. I should believe that they feel the same about me. It shouldn't be expected that take-backs or whatever will be the norm. I shouldn't have to live in fear of feeling like I have to play their list for them or remind them of every missed opportunity because heaven forbid if I don't then the internet will say that I'm WAAC and my win (should I win) was somehow tainted. If someone wants to give a take-back or missed opportunity, then great, no problem. But it's their choice and they should not be branded as winning at all costs if they deny it. Now if they deny the request while laughing at you and gloating at how stupid you are for making the mistake, then yes, that's not "fly casual" that's being a jerk. Again, I am speaking about events such as store championships, regionals, etc.

I also find the excuse of "well, they played x amount of rounds and it's a long day and they were mentally drained so things will be missed so he should've let him go back on the missed opportunity" insulting. We're not running up and down on a field, catching a ball or tackling somebody, this game is basically 100% mental. If you expect to win a Regional, National, or Worlds, then you should be expected to be mentally prepared for the gauntlet of rounds and long day(s). That's what it takes to be a World champion, staying sharp for the entire event and coming out on top. Even then, everyone makes mistakes.

Again, all of this depends on a lot of factors. However, if you make a mistake and forget to declare x ability and we've moved on, or you set your dial wrong, or moved ships out of the order you intended, or whatever the case may be... own your mistakes, learn from it and move on. Don't be a jerk, from either angle of your feelings on this issue.

I think if we went through this whole thread and changed WAAC to RAW, we might just get along.

RAW - Rules as Written.

WAAC - Win at all costs.

Playing Rules as Written does not make you a Rules Lawyer. A Rules Lawyer is someone who exploits the grey areas for personal benefit.

Fly Casual proponents need to understand that terms like 'Rules Lawyer' and 'Win At All Costs' have a derogatory connotation. It's not okay to use those words on somebody unless their behavior is really harming the game. Someone who plays Rules as Written isn't doing anything wrong. They're playing exactly how the rules tell them to play.

Also, my understanding is that 'Fly Casual' is about GIVING take-backs, not GETTING take-backs.

When it comes to take-backs and reminders, my understanding is that 'Fly Casual' is about GIVING rather than GETTING take-backs and reminders. It's about how you treat the other person, not about how the other person treats you.

I think if we went through this whole thread and changed WAAC to RAW, we might just get along.

RAW - Rules as Written.

WAAC - Win at all costs.

But I'd never call a 'RAW' a 'Fly Casual' player - so is the point of the disagreeableness of the conversation merely that RAW players don't like being grouped with WAAC players, either? Three tiers, then - WAAC, RAW, and FC?

I think if we went through this whole thread and changed WAAC to RAW, we might just get along.

Also, my understanding is that 'Fly Casual' is about GIVING take-backs, not GETTING take-backs.

I agree completely with both these statements.

I'm going to give xanderf the benefit of a doubt, and accept he didn't intend to be insulting, for anyone who doesn't have a background in 40k they may not know how WAAC is used there, and not know it's a derogatory term.

But I'd never call a 'RAW' a 'Fly Casual' player

You can play RAW and still Fly Casual. Fly Casual does not mean you expect to take back mistakes, have help or take actions after the fact.

Fly Casual doesn't even mean you offer them. It really just means that even if you are playing to win, you're not being a jerk about it.

And neither would, I, honestly.

I think if we went through this whole thread and changed WAAC to RAW, we might just get along.

RAW - Rules as Written.

WAAC - Win at all costs.

But I'd never call a 'RAW' a 'Fly Casual' player - so is the point of the disagreeableness of the conversation merely that RAW players don't like being grouped with WAAC players, either? Three tiers, then - WAAC, RAW, and FC?

Frankly, I wouldn't either. I think Fly Casual is more than just being a nice guy. But some people think that being courteous is sufficient. Problems arise when a word or phrase has multiple meanings. Unlike the word "can" it's harder to tell from context whether a 'Fly Casual' is a 'nice-guy-fly-casual' or a 'take-back-remind-you-of-a-missed-opportunity-fly-casual'.

EDIT: So after posting this, it occurred to me how hypocritical it is. Here I'm saying that you can't expect anyone else to do these things that I call "Fly Casual" and yet I'm withholding the term "Fly Casual" from them because they aren't doing those things. So I guess while I don't consider RAW to be "Fly Casual" I can't be in a position to say that they aren't because then I, myself, am not flying casual. Grrr! All this hubub for a silly name/title. Let's just play the game!

I mean, once your ship has lost its shields and has damage...why would a player ever NOT take the 'free evade' action? It literally costs nothing to do - no opportunity cost or anything at all. There is absolutely no in-game reason not to take the free 'evade'.

And Ysanne Isard eats up 4 points, so it's a safe bet someone bringing her along is doing so because they want free evades, not just to spend points for the heck of it.

Yet, somehow, in the very near future, I can see another match starting a heated argument over whether or not the ship with Isard on it had taken an evade action when the player owning it forgot to put the token down...

The person who forgot the token then asked retroactively to have it is the WAACer. He is, after all, literally asking to cheat. And it's really the only person in the situation who could be called such. Whatever position the opponent takes is just following the rules.

The person who forgot the token then asked retroactively to have it is the WAACer. He is, after all, literally asking to cheat. And it's really the only person in the situation who could be called such. Whatever position the opponent takes is just following the rules.

Well .... not necessarily. See, if they pressured you and called you names and threw a tantrum if you declined, then yes, that's WAAC because they're trying to make it unpleasant for you unless you give it to them. But the tournament rules actually say, " If a player forgets to use an effect during the timing specified by that effect, he cannot retroactively use it without the consent of his opponent." So there is precedent for retroactive placement of tokens, etc. in the rules. As long as they fix it with the consent of their opponent, that's RAW.

All this hubub for a silly name/title. Let's just play the game!

Letting someone take back a mistake, or fix one is not Flying Casual. It may be playing casual, but the two are not the same thing. Playing to win, or playing RAW is not contrary to Fly Casual as a concept, because you can do those things and still have a casual attitude about the game.

For some people the game is about pushing toy spaceships around, and having a good time. Fixing a mistake if doing so makes the game more enjoyable for everyone is just part of the mindset. This is again playing a casual game.

For some people it's the competition they enjoy and taking advantage of a mistake is just part of the game. They don't get upset when someone does it to them, and they don't see why someone else should get upset when they do it.

For some, and this really comes more from 40k horror stories, I don't think there were that many people really like this...

They will pounce on any mistake you make, they will never give you a benefit of the doubt. They won't let you shoot when you're less than 1MM from the target. They'll watch you like a hawk when you move your units, but they'll be a bit generous when they move theirs. They will use the rules as a power weapon, to beat the other guy with any interpretation of them that gives them an advantage, but will argue the other way the next game if that is what helps them.

They will scow at you, they will tap their feet if you take longer than they think. They will berate you for every mistake, they will question everything you do. They will cheer for every bad roll you make or good roll they make. They will pout when the dice don't go thier way and try to take the win away with "You just won because you were lucky."

Those are people who want to WAAC and don't Fly Casual. This type of play is what Hothie was trying stop when he started the whole thing. Hothie who was, I should remind everyone the first world champ.

But the tournament rules actually say, " If a player forgets to use an effect during the timing specified by that effect, he cannot retroactively use it without the consent of his opponent." So there is precedent for retroactive placement of tokens, etc. in the rules. As long as they fix it with the consent of their opponent, that's RAW.

Of course, nowhere is it implied that that consent must be given, or that it makes the opponent a bad person if they don't give it.

I get not wanting people to be rules lawyers. But I don't think following the rules of the game makes you a rules lawyer. Without rules, we're barely a step above flying Micro Machines around with our hands making whoosh and pew pew noises. "Letter of the rules" vs. "spirit of the rules" was mentioned earlier. Tell me, what's the "spirit" of "If you fly your ship off the board, it's destroyed"? Seems pretty cut and dried to me.

Mikael, no, it was directed to the OP, but i purposely left it openly enough so some people may revisitate their attitude withouth feeling completely pointed.

We all are "fly casual". The problem lies that you are trying to enforce your "fly casual" attitude to the rest. Which is not flying casual at all.

I enjoy the game differently than you do. I prefer playing with like minded and you too. The problem comes when you start the namecalling and witchhunting against the people that doesn't enjoy the game as you do.

Wow, I do not recognize myself in your characterization at all. How am I trying to enforce my attitude on others? As far as I can tell, I'm adopting a stance of live-and-let-live - just like you are. I think that hard-core players can probably have a lot of fun with one another, as they have the same attitude towards the game. I have flown against some more hard-core players at tournaments. When they point an error of mine out to me, I relent. I have figured they know the rule better than I do, and they're probably right. Maybe they thought I was trying to pull a fast one, I don't know. I certainly did not intend anything by it.

Aside from tournaments, these guys don't tend to come out to the stores where I play on a weekly basis, where gameplay is more casual. They have their own playing circles, which clearly work well for them. When I do see them, I ask how they're doing, and I don't in any way shun playing with them.

Point being: that's hardly the behavior of the fly-casual nazi that you're accusing me of being.

Beyond mischaracterizing how I include/exclude people, I imagine that you've misunderstood what I mean by 'fly casual' altogether, and you're projecting an at-large image you have of fly-casualler people on to me. If that's so, then I'm not the one engaging in tribalism, which begins with such prejudice.

Wow, I do not recognize myself in your characterization at all.

I'm not sure that was aimed at you. But if it was, it was misplaced, because you Mikael do not try to force your play style on anyone, or at least you don't based on comments you've made here.

I already stated it wasn't directed at you, to be honest, i only read the OP when i posted, since this is a common topic, not only on this forums lately, but one that comes from 40k communities. But if you want me to address you, sure Mikael:

I agree with xanderf's premise that this card does have the potential to separate the WAACs from the Casuals. But maybe that's a good thing. I want to know who's a WAAC so that I don't burden them with my hippie/care bear style of play.

As Budgernaut posted above (and Vanor i think), WAAC has a derogatory meaning. It is actually projected as an insult in common discussion forums. The term is broad enough so it can be players who play what the namecaller thinks is a "cheesy lists", "cheesy tactic", or it can be for players who cheat. And everything in between of course. Of course, i dislike cheaters as much as the next guy, but "cheese" is not cheating.

To be honest, i am giving you the benefit of the doubt, since from what i had gathered from your posts, you seem to be new to wargaming/miniature gaming community, and i don't think you meant it as an insult when you phrased the quote above, but i think we are past the point where when we use some term and we want to label a certain type of player, we won't use confrontational terms except if we want to spur flames. So competitive player / casual player.

Of course, being competitive doesn't mean that you don't fly casual, or casual player means that he does fly casual. That's entirely about the player, the person, and not a silly stereotype we just use to label a category of player which sums a big spectrum of them.

I already stated it wasn't directed at you, to be honest, i only read the OP when i posted, since this is a common topic, not only on this forums lately, but one that comes from 40k communities. But if you want me to address you, sure Mikael.

Well, it's you and I having this conversation, quoting one another's posts. Maybe we're confusing one another because in the English language the word 'you' is used for both the second person plural as well as singular. That said, even if you're using it in the plural, that implies a group that includes me. I think that gives me the standing to respond.

I agree with xanderf's premise that this card does have the potential to separate the WAACs from the Casuals. But maybe that's a good thing. I want to know who's a WAAC so that I don't burden them with my hippie/care bear style of play.

As Budgernaut posted above (and Vanor i think), WAAC has a derogatory meaning. It is actually projected as an insult in common discussion forums. The term is broad enough so it can be players who play what the namecaller thinks is a "cheesy lists", "cheesy tactic", or it can be for players who cheat. And everything in between of course. Of course, i dislike cheaters as much as the next guy, but "cheese" is not cheating.

That's true. There is a player whom I've ribbed for flying a cheesy list, but I have certainly not shunned him. In fact, I've stood up for him and his right to fly a cheesy list, when this came into question once.

To be honest, i am giving you the benefit of the doubt, since from what i had gathered from your posts, you seem to be new to wargaming/miniature gaming community, and i don't think you meant it as an insult when you phrased the quote above,...

Well, I'm new to a broader community. I used to play miniature battles (WFB) in the early 90s, and then in the later 90s (W40K), but just with friends. From what I've been reading on this forum, there seems to be the sense that X-Wing is a bit of an oasis from some of the more ugly forms of competitiveness. This is attributed to the 'fly casual' norm.

...but i think we are past the point where when we use some term and we want to label a certain type of player, we won't use confrontational terms except if we want to spur flames. So competitive player / casual player.

Of course, being competitive doesn't mean that you don't fly casual, or casual player means that he does fly casual. That's entirely about the player, the person, and not a silly stereotype we just use to label a category of player which sums a big spectrum of them.

I'm all for more accurate labels. I'm sure you realize that there really is a WAAC end of the spectrum, as well as a hyper-casual end of the spectrum. I wouldn't really enjoy playing with people from either extreme, nor have I encountered them thus far in my X-Wing experience. So, to that extent, I think you're right by using the terms 'competitive' and 'casual', but that doesn't mean that I'm some sort of nazi when I say I would prefer to not play with a WAAC, if I had other options.

Also, being on the 'casual' end for me means that if a player is young, losing, or new, you give them the benefit of the doubt. If that player says that they want to learn the game more quickly with just as many sticks and carrots, then I'm content to let them feel the sting of the stick. I did so last night, when I was playing against a new player. She had an instance where she set the dial the opposite turn direction than intended, and I told her that she did that, but that she should go ahead and make the turn as directed. She opted to take the turn that she had set the dial for and she ran her interceptor over an asteroid. That's good form on her part. I just wanted to give her the option.

Also, in a game against someone last week, I had made a memory error, the results of which would have been unknown, but might have resulted in the loss of my most valuable ship. Rather than trying to go back and figure it out (we were under a time-crunch), I just took my piece off the table and said: "let's just do it this way".

but that doesn't mean that I'm some sort of nazi when I say I would prefer to not play with a WAAC, if I had other options.

That's sorta the point... No one really wants to play with a WAAC type of person. They don't even like playing with those types of people, because that's bound to cause problems.

I'm really puzzled as to how some posters are oblivious to the meaning of the phrase "at all costs". It implies that you will do anything, cheat even, to achieve your goal. So if you aren't meaning to be derogatory I'd suggest not using derogatory terms or phrases. Or just accept that you intend to be derogatory.

I'm not going to play a game of shifting goal posts. Where you should allow this or that take-back in this situation, but not in others or whatever. The rules of X-wing are clear and available to both players, nobody knows the rules of this arbitrary take back game. It's an unsuitable situation to expect an opponent to play an environment with unclear expectations. So no take-backs asked for, none given. If you forget something move on and remember it next time.