Bad dice happen and can end a game real early and its okay to be miffed about it, just don't try and make the other guy feel bad for winning.

I hate how people misuse the word militant, because you won't just shut up and let the other guy express their view unopposed your a militant these days.

No one's aggressively telling you that you must let people take missed actions or change their dials if they mistakenly fly off the board, they are saying you would be a good sport to do so.

I don't think people would get so very hurt if they didn't on some level think maybe the "militant" casuals might be right.

You must have missed all the starred out words we were called for being the types of players who would fly an enemy ship off the board. I don't appreciate being insulted by anyone, militant or otherwise. Do you?

Eh, it's interior displeasure that I was putting out there. This is a topic about what grinds our gears and I put it out there. I'm sorry if you feel it is targeting you specifically. Chucknuckle hit the nail on the head for me. I am of the belief that sometimes you should give your opponent a break. Furthermore, my argument does not go against the letter of the law (or rules) merely the way those rules are then twisted into maximising your advantage and minimising the fun. I would never dream of running my opponent off the board through a mistake. I want to beat the player who is giving it his best, not win because I took advantage of a mistake that resulted in me performing an extremely unfair move.

If he were to win and then feel bad, he shouldn't, it was the call that was made in the end and he should be glad he was able to turn it around and make the most out of a bad situation.

As for promoting sloppy play, while I can see that opinion, Sometimes the mere thought of being in that situation is enough to change how you play. However I really do not care, this is about having fun and while I will follow the rules, I will not compromise my fun by hazing people in order to make them 'play less sloppily'.

Yes I have a problem with WAAC playing, and to me, that's what I see it as, but that's just my opinion. Also for further clarification, my issue isn't with the rules, but how they are used by both players involved. If a player want to fix a mistake, he asks, but should not expect it. Likewise the opponent should not take advantage by being a bad sportsman. They missed ACD....top bad. It passed and the rules are clear...but there is no need when you are out in control to fly another persons ship off the edge. You already have an advantage, there is no need for it.

3. There's being a better and more skilled player....and then there is being a ****. One my opponent did a red Manuver while he was stressed. I did not be a **** and run him off the board edge. I took what I believed to be the fly casual approach and simply chose a move that put him in a position where he could not Attack me but I could Attack him. Unlike another match where I saw a fat Han player give himself an even bigger advantage by Intentionally getting a Y-Wing player who made the same mistake to fly off the edge. In my opinion, that was a sick move and not I the spirit of the game. People moan this is a game about maneuvering and being the best pilot...and then win by ring out on an opponents when they could have in my opinion been much more sporting.

Ah-hah! A perfect example of what grinds my gears: people who think they can insult and make sweeping negative generalizations about other players, when all they know about these people is that they also like to play X-wing and are fluent in the rules of the game, and then somehow think they can still claim the moral high ground over these people.

I'd go so far as to say it's outright infuriating.

Eh, it's interior displeasure that I was putting out there. This is a topic about what grinds our gears and I put it out there. I'm sorry if you feel it is targeting you specifically. Chucknuckle hit the nail on the head for me. I am of the belief that sometimes you should give your opponent a break. Furthermore, my argument does not go against the letter of the law (or rules) merely the way those rules are then twisted into maximising your advantage and minimising the fun. I would never dream of running my opponent off the board through a mistake. I want to beat the player who is giving it his best, not win because I took advantage of a mistake that resulted in me performing an extremely unfair move.

If he were to win and then feel bad, he shouldn't, it was the call that was made in the end and he should be glad he was able to turn it around and make the most out of a bad situation.

As for promoting sloppy play, while I can see that opinion, Sometimes the mere thought of being in that situation is enough to change how you play. However I really do not care, this is about having fun and while I will follow the rules, I will not compromise my fun by hazing people in order to make them 'play less sloppily'.

Yes I have a problem with WAAC playing, and to me, that's what I see it as, but that's just my opinion. Also for further clarification, my issue isn't with the rules, but how they are used by both players involved. If a player want to fix a mistake, he asks, but should not expect it. Likewise the opponent should not take advantage by being a bad sportsman. They missed ACD....top bad. It passed and the rules are clear...but there is no need when you are out in control to fly another persons ship off the edge. You already have an advantage, there is no need for it.

Making mistakes is part of the game; perhaps you should consider that you are playing a person at their best when they choose a red maneuver while stressed.

I've had a lot of close calls in X-Wing, but maybe that's just my experience. I can only hope you frequently give your opponents enough leeway to come back and beat you, especially while there's prize support on the line.

A casual and a tournament game are two different things that require different attitude.

A casual game is all about two friends having fun playing a game. There is no constraint except for those that you give yourself. If things go bad, there is nothing stopping you for conceding the match and start a new one. If your opponent make a stupid mistake that would put him in a dire situation, like flying his 60 pts ship out of the map, you should let him pick a new maneuver just so the match doesn't end right there. I can't tell you how many times I allowed my opponent to take his maneuver back because he inadvertantly picked left instead of right. I don't care, it's only for fun.

A tournament game is about testing your skills against others. See where you are. If I make a mistake, I don't expect my opponent to let it go. If I misjudged the distance and fly my ship out, it's my error. If I pick a red maneuver when stressed, it's my error, and I expect my opponent to punish me from doing it. There is time constraint, there is MoV, if my opponent have an opportunity to take one of my ship out, be it a 12 pts Tie or a 50 pts IG, he better take it. I played badly and deserve the consequence. Quite frankly, if my opponent kept my ship into the game when he had the chance to take it out, I would be insulted and consider it bad sport. Don't give me chances. I expect my opponent to do his best to beat me and if it means I lose 0 to 100, so be it. I'll shake your hand with a smile and be glad for being humbled. And if I win, I want to be sure that it is because I flew better and that my opponent didn't gave me any chances. A test of skills. But there is also the obvious situations when I'll allow my opponent to rewind: the cloak action with ACD, letting him do a focus action if he forgot to pick an action, Rebel Captive, Ysanne Evade, I'll remind my opponent of their upgrades like Predator, etc... Like I said, I want to win fair and square; he paid for those upgrades, he deserve to use them.

This is exactly what people are talking about when they complain how the term, "Fly Casual" has been taken by the, "militant casual" and is used in such a manner to justify sloppy play and stigmatize players following the rules.

First, there is no such thing as the militant casual. There are people who don't like the idea of giving breaks, and there are people who like to give (and receive) breaks. Being polite to your opponent, not gloating in victory or pouting in defeat, these things aren't sportsmanship. They're just manners. Common courtesy.

Sportsmanship is just giving the other guy a hand, even when you don't have to. When the rules don't require it, and indeed when it might even be to your disadvantage. That's what sportsmanship is. Now of course there are many complexities involved, some opponents might be insulted if you try and give them a break, but that's where a players people skills come into the equation and I'm sure no one here needs me to break that down for them.

Some people refuse to do anything not required of them by the rules and whenever possible, make choices that are the most to their advantage regardless of their opponents feelings on the matter. These players are not displaying good sportsmanship. Now bear in mind what I said above about reading your opponent and treating them accordingly, not all players WANT to be given a break, but the fact remains that giving breaks is what defines a good sport from someone who is just polite. If people who refuse to give breaks are tired of being labelled as not-good-sports (which can be different from being an actively BAD sport) then perhaps they need to look inwards, and not blame others.

I think we've stumbled into a serious disagreement on the definition of sportsmanship. You have stated definition:

a) Sportsmanship is just giving the other guy a hand, even when you don't have to. When the rules don't require it, and indeed when it might even be to your disadvantage.

This seems like a good metric, but as you admit, it definitely breaks down at the margins. Clearly just blatantly handicapping oneself can be patronizing rather than sportsmanlike, e.g.

(video should be starting at 3:59, but the embed seems to be stripping that out.)

I lean more towards another definition of sportsmanship, which can be summed up as

b) attempting to play by the spirit of the rules, even if one could obtain advantage by following the letter of the rules.

This means that while I will definitely run your Falcon off the board if you pick a red move while stressed, I will be diligent about reminding you to about non-optional effects like Rebel Captive and Tactician, and I won't use outside-the-game tactics or slow play to try to degrade your play or mess with you. (Reminders to an opponent to take optional actions are a gray area, but if the player was sloppy/tired and forgot to do something that was clearly to their advantage, e.g. 2014 Nationals, I would allow it.)

This is a much less forgiving definition of sportsmanship, but also seems more compatible with a competitive tournament format. I firmly believe that a win that the opponent gave to me by going easy on me is one that I didn't earn.

To paraphrase a completely unrelated SF hero, a true victory cannot be given by your opponent; it can only be taken from him.

If the definition of sportsmanship is giving the other guy a hand, should we now consider serving an Ace in Tennis a **** move?

Sportsmanship is in the attitude, not in giving chances to the opponent.

If the definition of sportsmanship is giving the other guy a hand, should we now consider serving an Ace in Tennis a **** move?

Sportsmanship is in the attitude, not in giving chances to the opponent.

That really does not work as an analogy neither would using golf and a hole in one.

Miniature gaming is not a sport, there are no sponsors to win deals from no commercial deals to be had and your never gonna sell your image to a games developer.

Your playing for the prestige of being the best in a niche of a niche, end of the day is it really worth getting to that place by being an ass?

What good is the best collection of dice and tokens if you can't look at them and be proud of how you won them?

As we've seen you can get pretty **** far while being a good sport.

A tournament game is about testing your skills against others. See where you are. If I make a mistake, I don't expect my opponent to let it go. If I misjudged the distance and fly my ship out, it's my error. If I pick a red maneuver when stressed, it's my error, and I expect my opponent to punish me from doing it. There is time constraint, there is MoV, if my opponent have an opportunity to take one of my ship out, be it a 12 pts Tie or a 50 pts IG, he better take it. I played badly and deserve the consequence. Quite frankly, if my opponent kept my ship into the game when he had the chance to take it out, I would be insulted and consider it bad sport. Don't give me chances. I expect my opponent to do his best to beat me and if it means I lose 0 to 100, so be it. I'll shake your hand with a smile and be glad for being humbled. And if I win, I want to be sure that it is because I flew better and that my opponent didn't gave me any chances. A test of skills. But there is also the obvious situations when I'll allow my opponent to rewind: the cloak action with ACD, letting him do a focus action if he forgot to pick an action, Rebel Captive, Ysanne Evade, I'll remind my opponent of their upgrades like Predator, etc... Like I said, I want to win fair and square; he paid for those upgrades, he deserve to use them.

If the definition of sportsmanship is giving the other guy a hand, should we now consider serving an Ace in Tennis a **** move?

Sportsmanship is in the attitude, not in giving chances to the opponent.

That really does not work as an analogy neither would using golf and a hole in one.

Miniature gaming is not a sport, there are no sponsors to win deals from no commercial deals to be had and your never gonna sell your image to a games developer.

Your playing for the prestige of being the best in a niche of a niche, end of the day is it really worth getting to that place by being an ass?

What good is the best collection of dice and tokens if you can't look at them and be proud of how you won them?

As we've seen you can get pretty **** far while being a good sport.

Of course X-Wing is not a sport! But it is still a competitive setting. Ultimately, the objective of the tournament is the same: To be the best that day. The nature of the game, or sport, is to be the best, not to get a sponsor. Sponsorship is a new kind of problem in modern sport, but there is no point discussing it here.

As far as pride goes, that's what I meant with my earlier message. I want to be proud of how I won those tournaments. That means that if my opponent gave me a hand by not driving my ship out when he could or whatever, I won't have won the game fair and square. My opponent will not have done his best to win.

You can give no chance (learn to live with your errors) to your opponent and still be a good sport: I cheer for my opponent when he pull a perfect maneuver in a knife fight or an asteroid field, I joyfully laugh when he roll a perfect evade in a critical moment, I congratulate him with a smile when he win. It's not because you're a competitive person that you are a ****.

Extreme can be found in both direction: I won,t enjoy a game with a bad sport attitude player, but I won't enjoy a game with an extremely sloppy person either(always bump ships and replace them without much care, don't place his maneuver template accordingly, roll dice right in the middle of the knife fight, etc).

Games like this are always a meeting of two people, and if one player wants a cut throat competitive game and the other wants a beer-and-pretzels narrative game, then either both players need to compromise or both players are going to walk away from the table unhappy.

Games like this are always a meeting of two people, and if one player wants a cut throat competitive game and the other wants a beer-and-pretzels narrative game, then either both players need to compromise or both players are going to walk away from the table unhappy.

I disagree here.

The beer and pretzels player should not need the more competitive play to change his play style or vise versa. At the end of the day, YOU decide if you're having fun or not. Even an unfriendly player shouldn't be able to deter you from having fun. Both players are only required to play inside the rules. This is all I expect of my opponent and I ask nothing more.

Maybe this is why some players think Fly Casual is on its way out. They are expecting others to play as if they were their best friends, sitting around the dinning room table, playing at a mutual friends house. That's not a tournament. Its competitive. Your opponent may want to speak as little as possible because that is how he/she enjoys the game. I personally enjoy chatting while playing. If my opponent doesn't want to strike up a conversation, I'll talk to someone else in earshot of where I'm playing. I decide if I'm having fun or not. I Fly Casual.

Here's Merriam-Websters definition of Sportsmanship.

fair play, respect for opponents, and polite behavior by someone who is competing in a sport or other competition

I see nothing in there about helping out the other person, or giving them a break. So we can drop that whole pretense as the nonsense it really is. I don't need to cut someone a break to be a good sport, I simply need to treat the other player with respect and polite behavior, while playing fairly.

Games like this are always a meeting of two people, and if one player wants a cut throat competitive game and the other wants a beer-and-pretzels narrative game, then either both players need to compromise or both players are going to walk away from the table unhappy.

I disagree here.

The beer and pretzels player should not need the more competitive play to change his play style or vise versa. At the end of the day, YOU decide if you're having fun or not. Even an unfriendly player shouldn't be able to deter you from having fun. Both players are only required to play inside the rules. This is all I expect of my opponent and I ask nothing more.

Maybe this is why some players think Fly Casual is on its way out. They are expecting others to play as if they were their best friends, sitting around the dinning room table, playing at a mutual friends house. That's not a tournament. Its competitive. Your opponent may want to speak as little as possible because that is how he/she enjoys the game. I personally enjoy chatting while playing. If my opponent doesn't want to strike up a conversation, I'll talk to someone else in earshot of where I'm playing. I decide if I'm having fun or not. I Fly Casual.

You're conflating "competitive gamer" with "white knuckle, anti-social neckbeard", which is something that bugs me.

I'm a competitive gamer, and at a tournament I'm coming at you to beat you. I'm not letting you take back mistakes and I will call you out if you flub a rule (and I expect you to do the same with me).

BUT I'm also going to do my best to be pleasant and social (I usually don't even have to try - this game lends itself to fun conversations and jokes). This is NOT optional, in my opinion. This is a key part of interactive, in-person gaming, and though I can't enforce anything on this person, I don't feel the least bit bad in labeling this person as an unpleasant nerf-herder. Honestly. If someone wants to be anti-social and game, there are a wealth of opportunities in the digital realm.

So don't lump me (a competitive gamer) in with those nerf herders.

Your playing for the prestige of being the best in a niche of a niche, end of the day is it really worth getting to that place by being an ass?

What good is the best collection of dice and tokens if you can't look at them and be proud of how you won them?

But that is obviously a subjective opinion as to what one should be proud of is it not? I'm not saying I think that people should be rude but playing 100% by the rules, while being cordial about it wouldn't make someone a jerk - the only reason I wouldn't be proud of how I won something would be if I cheated or beat somebody that was not on the same competitive spectrum (ie - beating a first timer, etc...)

We must be careful that we don't project our own ideals of right and wrong onto people when there is an objective standard by which to play the game. (ie - the rules). Just be polite about it.

I have the same problem with this thread as I do with many other similar threads...

People need to remember that the following attributes are independent:

• Sportsmanlike conduct / Unsportsmanlike conduct
• Competitive / Casual
• Social / Asocial
• Friendly / Mean

Also, on one hand people complain that "Fly Casual" has been denatured...

And then proceed to badly misuse "Sportsmanship".

Games like this are always a meeting of two people, and if one player wants a cut throat competitive game and the other wants a beer-and-pretzels narrative game, then either both players need to compromise or both players are going to walk away from the table unhappy.

I disagree here.

The beer and pretzels player should not need the more competitive play to change his play style or vise versa. At the end of the day, YOU decide if you're having fun or not. Even an unfriendly player shouldn't be able to deter you from having fun. Both players are only required to play inside the rules. This is all I expect of my opponent and I ask nothing more.

Maybe this is why some players think Fly Casual is on its way out. They are expecting others to play as if they were their best friends, sitting around the dinning room table, playing at a mutual friends house. That's not a tournament. Its competitive. Your opponent may want to speak as little as possible because that is how he/she enjoys the game. I personally enjoy chatting while playing. If my opponent doesn't want to strike up a conversation, I'll talk to someone else in earshot of where I'm playing. I decide if I'm having fun or not. I Fly Casual.

You're conflating "competitive gamer" with "white knuckle, anti-social neckbeard", which is something that bugs me.

I'm a competitive gamer, and at a tournament I'm coming at you to beat you. I'm not letting you take back mistakes and I will call you out if you flub a rule (and I expect you to do the same with me).

BUT I'm also going to do my best to be pleasant and social (I usually don't even have to try - this game lends itself to fun conversations and jokes). This is NOT optional, in my opinion. This is a key part of interactive, in-person gaming, and though I can't enforce anything on this person, I don't feel the least bit bad in labeling this person as an unpleasant nerf-herder. Honestly. If someone wants to be anti-social and game, there are a wealth of opportunities in the digital realm.

So don't lump me (a competitive gamer) in with those nerf herders.

Droofus,

You are expecting everyone to have the same idea of "friendly" and "social" as you. Extremely introverted people are not rude. They just socialized differently than extroverted people. Further more, conditions like Aspergers is common in the table top community. There are many people with social disorders that enjoy being around people, but communicate very differently. You should respect this. All that is required of your opponent is to play inside of the rules. This should be enough for you to have fun while playing your game. Allow your opponent to enjoy their game in the manor that brings them happiness as well.

I've come to a whole new appreciation for Fly Casual since I started the league at my LGS.

We have some very good players, and some not so good players. Based on last seasons score, I'm in the top end of that, finished 3rd out of 9 people, and did so by a fair margin. 2nd place wasn't too far ahead of me. Dave who finished 1st is very good.

First place for the season gets $30 worth of store credit, 2nd get $15. So there's a real incentive to do well.

We all play pretty strictly by the rules, and don't pull any punches. But we have a lot of fun playing, we chat we give each other a hard time, we're fairly relaxed all in all. To me that's what Fly Casual is all about. When you're done with the games if you're more stressed than when you started, short of something like a Regional championship round... Then you're doing it wrong.

Games like this are always a meeting of two people, and if one player wants a cut throat competitive game and the other wants a beer-and-pretzels narrative game, then either both players need to compromise or both players are going to walk away from the table unhappy.

I disagree here.

The beer and pretzels player should not need the more competitive play to change his play style or vise versa. At the end of the day, YOU decide if you're having fun or not. Even an unfriendly player shouldn't be able to deter you from having fun. Both players are only required to play inside the rules. This is all I expect of my opponent and I ask nothing more.

Maybe this is why some players think Fly Casual is on its way out. They are expecting others to play as if they were their best friends, sitting around the dinning room table, playing at a mutual friends house. That's not a tournament. Its competitive. Your opponent may want to speak as little as possible because that is how he/she enjoys the game. I personally enjoy chatting while playing. If my opponent doesn't want to strike up a conversation, I'll talk to someone else in earshot of where I'm playing. I decide if I'm having fun or not. I Fly Casual.

You're conflating "competitive gamer" with "white knuckle, anti-social neckbeard", which is something that bugs me.

I'm a competitive gamer, and at a tournament I'm coming at you to beat you. I'm not letting you take back mistakes and I will call you out if you flub a rule (and I expect you to do the same with me).

BUT I'm also going to do my best to be pleasant and social (I usually don't even have to try - this game lends itself to fun conversations and jokes). This is NOT optional, in my opinion. This is a key part of interactive, in-person gaming, and though I can't enforce anything on this person, I don't feel the least bit bad in labeling this person as an unpleasant nerf-herder. Honestly. If someone wants to be anti-social and game, there are a wealth of opportunities in the digital realm.

So don't lump me (a competitive gamer) in with those nerf herders.

Droofus,

You are expecting everyone to have the same idea of "friendly" and "social" as you. Extremely introverted people are not rude. They just socialized differently than extroverted people. Further more, conditions like Aspergers is common in the table top community. There are many people with social disorders that enjoy being around people, but communicate very differently. You should respect this. All that is required of your opponent is to play inside of the rules. This should be enough for you to have fun while playing your game. Allow your opponent to enjoy their game in the manor that brings them happiness as well.

First off, in the same breath that you tell me to respect how others enjoy the game, you are defining what "should be enough" for me to enjoy the game.

I have played with MANY MANY introverts in my time in this game and others. As you say, many people in this community and related communities (40k, WM/H, etc) are introverts or perhaps even on the spectrum. I'm canny enough to understand that part of being friendly with opponent is realizing where they're at socially and meeting them there. If they're uncomfortable, I'll dial back my jokes and conversations. But they need to meet me where I live too and put a little bit of effort into talking and keep thing light. I don't think that's too much to ask.

But there are others, who I have encountered in other games, who ooze an attitude of "screw you, I only see you as a stepping stone to the next round". Regardless of what their personal situation is, this is anti-social behavior and should be treated as such. These are the nerf herders I referred to in my previous post.

Chatting between rounds at a tournament is good. Once the clock starts chatty Kathy is a slowplayer.

Finish fast first then chat.

but technically speaking - you are a stepping stone or obstacle to the next round. That is indeed the purpose and point of competitive play. Aside from playing by the rules and not being unduly rude (which could be mediated by a TO if it is felt to be over the line) - the opponent, especially in competitive play, owes you nothing.

the opponent, especially in competitive play, owes you nothing.

Sure, and if I play against someone who isn't interested in chatting either before, during or after the game that's up to them.

But there's a line between not chatty and anti-social. I've played against the anti-social types before, and even without saying a word you can tell what kind of person they are. They grumble, get pissed, even start swearing every time the dice fail them. They laugh at mistakes you make and cheer when the dice fail you.

Here's the difference IMO between neutral play, Fly Casual and a nerf herder...

Neutral play means when everyone sets their dials down, both sides wait to start revealing them until both sides say 'ready' or 'done', and then starting to reveal your dials. At this point changing a dial isn't allowed, even if no dials have been revealed yet.

Fly Casual means even after both sides are done, as long as no dials have been revealed yet, you'd let the other guy change 1 or more of them if they realize they made a mistake.

Nerf herders don't wait for you to say done, as soon as you put that last dial on the table you're done and they'll start to reveal their dials, or demand that you start to reveal yours.

Chatting between rounds at a tournament is good. Once the clock starts chatty Kathy is a slowplayer.

Finish fast first then chat.

Oh, I think most people can walk and chew gum.

but technically speaking - you are a stepping stone or obstacle to the next round. That is indeed the purpose and point of competitive play. Aside from playing by the rules and not being unduly rude (which could be mediated by a TO if it is felt to be over the line) - the opponent, especially in competitive play, owes you nothing.

It's exactly this cut-throat (OWE THEM NOTHING RAWR) mindset that ruins competitive environments in other games.

We owe each other friendly competition. An opponent in a spaceship game is not an enemy and should not be treated as such.

EDIT: Vanor DM explained the nerf-herder behavior better than I did.

An opponent in a spaceship game is not an enemy and should not be treated as such.

Idealy both players should be interested in an enjoyable, fair match. The problem is when you have someone who truly believes and behaves like the best way to play is...

Crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women.