So I have been thinking about the way that I play, what I enjoy, and what I see in what others do. This applies to both Armada and Xwing, but I will pose it here.

Casual players change lists almost every time they play while competitive players maintain the same list (with a few variations) a majority of the time.

It seems to me that this metric applies. The tournament players who play at the store I frequent run their tourney lists for "practice" almost every time they play, while the non-tourney players seem to like the experimentation. If they run the same list, it is simply to figure it out. When they have done so, they often drop it.

This is not a critique or judgement, just something I notice. Perhaps it suggests that some people, those who enjoy the same thing over and over, are more wired for competitive play.

Thoughts?

I go to every tournament I can and I've never brought the same thing twice. When I'm smart I play the list a couple times before the event. More often though the first three times I play the list are at the event. And no I'm not rare if the other people attending are any sign.

I love competitive play, but rarely use the same list. If I do, it's because I am lazy and have those things ships in my travel kit and don't change them.

Honestly, it's not my play, but the play of those around me that makes me like events. Everyone is just so...on edge...I love to just crack up and have fun.

... I am endeavouring for Store Championships to be the First Time I actually PLAY the list I INTEND TO BEFOREHAND...

None of this sitting on the Stairs before the Store opens wondering how many Nebulon-Bs you can put into a 300pt List, finding out its 4 and still have points for Squadrons, and then doing that instead of the Empire List you'd been thinking of....

Nope always make up my comp lists the day before, although they do get more play than my none comp lists as I play them for a whole 3 games......

Agree with Tarkin here !

I don't think you become more competitive by playing a list over and over, although you start to grasp quite effectively what it can and cannot do.

Changing stuff up and keeping the opponents surprised is what keeps the compeititon fresh. If someone tries the same old and true list over and over again, it becomes easily defeated by direct counter (example : what happened at Worlds where the GenCon special got smashed by a purposefully tailored counter list in the finals).

Some people just take more time learning what the limits of their ships are, and need more experience because they have more of a hands-on approach to learning, but it's not really what define casual vs competitive.

Rather, casual players build list around "I like this ship and I find this upgrade cool", while competitive players build lists around "I think that this ship and this specific upgrade can produce the specific result I'm looking for."

As such, competitive players have more of a result oriented approach while casual players have more of a method oriented approach.

Wait. . . People play the same list more than once?

I tend to try new things all the time. They allow me to experience more aspects of the game and figure out counters

I have tracked players and their lists in my state for the last 20 tournaments and i can honest to god tell you that its different each time they play.

I think the proposed thesis holds more true in other games. In armada, there are simply too many varied and viable options. If I was playing the same people in the same store, I would make an active effort to change it up come tournament time, because it makes me less predictable.

I think the proposed thesis holds more true in other games. In armada, there are simply too many varied and viable options. If I was playing the same people in the same store, I would make an active effort to change it up come tournament time, because it makes me less predictable.

We are in a game where you have ship choices (a vs b) , squadron choices (generic vs ace), upgrade choices, objective choices, play style choices, activation choices, command choices, and meta choices just to cover a good majority. This is far more than most games and thus can change things a lot. So lists will change from player to player and each time they play, the player will gain new experiences that will effect his choices

I think I fit into both categories in your local observations. I have many, many practice lists. Always experimenting and trying to find new angles or builds that appeal to my play style. When I play casually, I never bring my comp lists, and prefer to try new builds or ideas. Also, it's nice to take the meta(ish) builds out for a casual drive, to see how they tick. I have much more fun playing casually and try to get out to see people as often as life permits (too many hobbies).

At my core though, I am a competitive player. I almost always have a few constant competitive lists, but rarely show my comp lists outside the tournament scenes. My comp lists will only fundamentally change, if I find something better, or the meta changes against one or all of them. Practicing with the same lists allows some mastery of the nit-noid intricacies...you KNOW what happens next, spend less time thinking and planning, less likely to forget an "event/activation", and have a better (practiced) response when caught in those "gotcha" moments.

That's just me though Everybody has their own style of play, practice, and with life in general.

I tend to try different builds in Vassal, but always tweaking the build. Sometimes a little, sometimes a lot. For instance I'm currently fascinated by Shrimp frigates, so my list today might have 2 with salvation and a cr90, but the next day's might have 2 with Yavaris and some Bwings. Next week I might think of MC80 based lists, etc.

Well, I would consider myself a tournament player, but I would never trade competition for fun. I don't think I could ever play the same list repeatedly for weeks. Will I play it in 3 rounds at a tournament? Sure. But you can bet that I'm changing it up ASAP!

I like to play with different things, and I like things to be more narrative and thematic I.e. A VSD having plenty of defensive upgrades because there's someone important on board.

I'm thinking that I get in about one organized event a month on average. I typically don't fly the exact same list, but I sure do change my list based on the experience. Wave 1, I was primarily Rebel, but in an effort to understand the Imperials, I switched right before Wave 2 released.

I'm planning on hitting up a store championship this weekend in Philly. I will run the Imperial list I've been playing with ever since Wave 2 released. Will I win? Honestly I don't care. I'm just happy to play. But if I get creamed, I'll sure as hell adjust my list for the next event.

I'll always practice my list before an event, but since I'm my own opponent, it's not a true test. The downside of being the local group.

As far as X Wing goes...I'll play all sorts of lists. There is little rhyme or reason. I may run the same list several times, but I'm ok with running random stuff too.

I agree with the sentiment of the OP (competitive players sticking with a tried and true list because they know how to play it and it'll help them win), but there are also casual players who persist with a particular list because they want to make it work, or because they love the ships they're playing.

This is especially true of X-Wing (double-especially of my friends who fly Scum ), but in my local Armada meta we have players who are staunch Rebels or Imperials, and they'll almost always bring a list that has perhaps 50-80pts worth of changes from the previous tournament (which, in a 400pt game, is negligible enough to count as "tweaks" to their preferred list).

I feel like I'm a competitive player and I can honestly say I have never played the exact same list twice.

I would go further and say I have never even played extremely similar lists twice (unless at a tournament, naturally)

I think the proposed thesis holds more true in other games. In armada, there are simply too many varied and viable options. If I was playing the same people in the same store, I would make an active effort to change it up come tournament time, because it makes me less predictable.

I believe this is key. My musings actually started on how my store (only 3 armada players) has varied lists every time we play. In xwing, however, a couple tourney players bring the same lairs every time they play.

For a few years now I have been thinking that the concept of casual vs competitive is a false dichotomy. These are competitive games, when they are playing one, a person plays to win. Nobody is actively trying to lose.

What I have observed, however, is a difference in when people perceive the competition as starting. In Armada, for example, there are people who view the competition as beginning at the start of the command phase on round 1. Everything before that, choice of mission, choice and placement of obstacles, list building and so on is not part of the competition and can be decided upon in a variety of ways, including just discussing what would be cool with their opponent. People on this end of the spectrum tend to be labeled as "casual", even though during actual gameplay they might be very cut-throat. At the other end of the spectrum, I have met people for whom the choice of which and how many expansions to purchase are part of the competition, they don't make a decision on what to buy based on what would be cool to play with or what they like the looks of, they decide what to buy based on what will give them an advantage when they sit down at the table. Those people tend to get labeled "competitive", or even the dreaded WAAC, even if they are actually fairly laid back with their opponents.

Now, obviously, not many people take it to that extreme, but (in my observations) most discussions (and arguments) about competitive vs casual actually boil down to "when does the "game" actually start".

I like to play tournaments and I consider myself a competitive person. Sometimes when only one other person shows up I even win tournaments. I build my lists with neither of the OPs perspectives in mind. I build mine based on themes or questions. Such as, "in this new meta can I fly a very fighter light build and still be competitive/win?" Out of that comes

Commander: Ozzel

Flagship:

ISD II

Captain Needa

Gunnery Team

ECM

Leading Shots

Ship 1:

GSD II

Demolisher

Ordnance Experts

Engine Techs

APT

Ship 2:

Raider I

Impetuous

Ordnance Experts

Ship 3:

Raider I

Instigator

Ordnance Experts

Squadrons:

IG-2000

TIE Advanced x2

I play the list and win or lose (incidentally I won vs a player who I would consider if not better than me much more experienced, unfortunately he used zero fighters so I didn't gain any knowledge about how performs vs fighter heavy lists) I evaluate, tweak and decide. After playing a list I enjoy a few times to get it into a final iteration I then pocket it and move on to a new question or theme. Playing with a concept or question is half my fun.

X-Wing is a totally different beast. I play the same but there is a very clear separation for most players because there are very narrow tiers of what ship and with which upgrades are tournament competitive. So you need to group specific ships together and then practice flying with them and against other known tournament lists. Armada just has so many more options and is more invested in strategy and less in great piloting (though of course piloting is important). The breadth and depth of competitive list building is one of the reason I prefer Armada to X-Wing.

I'm a casual player (mainly because I don't know of any LGS), my partner and I always try new lists every time we play. Though we have only a few ships at the moment (planning on buying more soon, we don't even have an ISD or MC80 yet, shock horror!), we do find new ways to mix things up. Competitive play doesn't really appeal to us much, neither of us are competitive and just enjoy a casual game once in a while

Well, I would consider myself a tournament player, but I would never trade competition for fun. I don't think I could ever play the same list repeatedly for weeks. Will I play it in 3 rounds at a tournament? Sure. But you can bet that I'm changing it up ASAP!

^This

For the Vassal World Cup I made a very boring Ackbar list (mostly because I cam down from the cabin moment before the deadline). I played it for 4 tournament games, plus maybe five or six casual games. That's the most games with one list. Ever. And boy was I bored by the end of it. Never again!

I like Forgottenlore's spectrum over the dichotomy, but I'm not sure if that logically invalidates the OP's thesis. (I think a lack of correlation would empirically do that.) I would also say that the amount of effort spent thinking before the game (or breaking your head during the game) also factors into it.

For my own sake, I'm fairly competitive, but nowhere near Lyraeus. I spend a bit too much time thinking about this game (work and home life suffer), but it doesn't seem like enough. While I don't play exactly the same list tournament after tournament (unless it's Sullust, and it's all taking place in one weekend), I would say that I'm a pretty consistent Rhymerballer, and my lists are variations on that theme. The way I perceive my local meta, I also don't see a big reason to fundamentally alter the foundational structure of my list (Rhymerball centric), though I do need to figure out a slightly sweeter spot than I've been at recently, as my numbers are slipping.

I think I fit into both categories in your local observations. I have many, many practice lists. Always experimenting and trying to find new angles or builds that appeal to my play style. When I play casually, I never bring my comp lists, and prefer to try new builds or ideas. Also, it's nice to take the meta(ish) builds out for a casual drive, to see how they tick. I have much more fun playing casually and try to get out to see people as often as life permits (too many hobbies).

At my core though, I am a competitive player. I almost always have a few constant competitive lists, but rarely show my comp lists outside the tournament scenes. My comp lists will only fundamentally change, if I find something better, or the meta changes against one or all of them. Practicing with the same lists allows some mastery of the nit-noid intricacies...you KNOW what happens next, spend less time thinking and planning, less likely to forget an "event/activation", and have a better (practiced) response when caught in those "gotcha" moments.

That's just me though Everybody has their own style of play, practice, and with life in general.

This. Casual and competitive are not mutually exclusive things. Playing games is fun. It is more fun to win. Like Worf asks, "If winning isn't important, why keep score?"

It isn't the list you bring or don't bring that determines how competitive or serious you are. It is how much you want to win. How much you hate losing or playing poorly. Changing lists is fun. It is also how you find out how other stuff works so you can beat it. It is how you tweak your list to make it better. It is what you do when reasons for something being in the list likely won't apply.

The trick is not letting being the bastard who wants to win the most and expects the most out of his play make you a really big jerk that no one wants to play with.

For a few years now I have been thinking that the concept of casual vs competitive is a false dichotomy. These are competitive games, when they are playing one, a person plays to win. Nobody is actively trying to lose.

What I have observed, however, is a difference in when people perceive the competition as starting. In Armada, for example, there are people who view the competition as beginning at the start of the command phase on round 1. Everything before that, choice of mission, choice and placement of obstacles, list building and so on is not part of the competition and can be decided upon in a variety of ways, including just discussing what would be cool with their opponent. People on this end of the spectrum tend to be labeled as "casual", even though during actual gameplay they might be very cut-throat. At the other end of the spectrum, I have met people for whom the choice of which and how many expansions to purchase are part of the competition, they don't make a decision on what to buy based on what would be cool to play with or what they like the looks of, they decide what to buy based on what will give them an advantage when they sit down at the table. Those people tend to get labeled "competitive", or even the dreaded WAAC, even if they are actually fairly laid back with their opponents.

Now, obviously, not many people take it to that extreme, but (in my observations) most discussions (and arguments) about competitive vs casual actually boil down to "when does the "game" actually start".

This is a great comment. Exactly it is a false dichotomy. Back in my pool playing days I'd play with guys who I'd be beating pretty soundly want to play for beers or something and I was always thinking, "You don't already want to win? Why are you playing at all if you're not trying to win? I've seen your better game and I can still beat it." That's a version of what you're getting at about when the competition starts.

Casual is you let the guy take a token after the fact. Casual is more a question of what level of rules strictness you're going to enforce and whether you'll play less than your best list because while you still want to win that isn't the most important consideration for this game. Competitive is there in all cases.