but the idea that tournaments are the be-all and end-all of this game is short-sighted and narrow-minded nonsense.

How many people actually think that? I think there is an argument that could be made that there are casual players who would truly love the tournament environment if they gave it a try, and so there's nothing wrong with encouraging people to give it a try.

I've seen a number of people posting here who have some pretty out of line with reality presuppositions about what tournaments are like.

But how many people actually think FFG should do nothing to support casual games? I'd hazard to guess the number is about the same as those who think FFG should drop tournament support completely.

but I wouldn't consider myself "Militant Casual".

If anyone called you such, I'd be more than happy to set them straight myself. Your behavior is IMO how most people should behave. You aren't interested in competitive play but you never belittle or are insulting to those who are. But more importantly you're willing to put your effort into helping other casual players.

Personally I enjoy the tournament play over casual. I think it is fun really testing yourself against a good player and I find joy in that. But it CAN be a double edge sword. With tournament play goes a lot of work to get ready, so naturally when things kinda don't work out it can be irritating and we may get a little overly emotional. My frustration is usually not with the other player, but with myself honestly. If I work hard to limit my mistakes and then blow a game because I made a dumb mistake I will be pretty mad and overly critical of myself because that is just the style of game that I enjoy.

That being said, I love playing games with new players at a casual level to teach the game and show some of the things that make X-Wing awesome. When I go to my local store for "free play" night, I typically bring a couple lists with me. The first list is something I know I can win with (typically whatever competitive build I plan on running), a for fun list that is wonky, and a list that has ships that I just want to fly. Those games I "fly casual" and allow my opponent to do missed actions and all of that because I understand not everybody enjoys the game the same way I do. I typically don't allow myself to take missed actions because I should know better but I have no issues if a guy wants to take a focus or take a TL.

I think there is middle ground for everyone and we should all just love the game and appreciate each person for the insight they bring to the forums no matter our attitude on what way to play is better in our own mind. Just my two cents anyways.

I'd like to start off saying that I think the majority of X-wing players out there in the world are in the middle. They like Casual games and they like Tournament games. They don't feel strongly either way. There is no tension. Practicing for tournaments happens until the end of Regionals, and then people get burnt out and want to try other things.

You see us how you want to see us - in the simplest terms, in the most convenient definitions. But what we found out is that each one of us is a care-bear...

And a min-maxer...

And a player who can enjoy losing a good game.

A person who gets ****ed by their dice...

And a person who quotes Star Wars at the table.

Does that answer your question?

Sincerely yours,

The X-Wing Club.

But wait... I thought it was okay to like both competitive and casual play? Now casual play wants to change the way competitive events work? Why? I thought casual play was about not imposing strict rules on the game and encouraging scenario play.

I mean, yes FFG could support more scenarios, but asking them to design five different games in one is kind of silly and I think it's a little much. X-WIng is designed around the 100 point game and it's this standard format that allows the designers to make a balanced system. Also, what point would there be to designing ships as stand-alone units? You would just end up with individually powerful units whose combined value was exceedingly high. I think it would be disastrous in the long run for FFG to even consider breaking away from the 100 point mould because then you have all these new ships and rules all trying to interact and balance with one another at all these different point values. Throw in a bunch of special scenario rules and it becomes even more of a mess.

So X-Wing goes full on forge the narrative mode, and then what? You can't find a pick up game because no one wants to play your scenario or no one likes X mission because Y pilot is broken in that game with this card.

No, you guys are asking for silly things. Stop being silly now. Pants go on legs, not on heads.

Now casual play wants to change the way competitive events work?

I think that you again might find the odd extremist who wants to do away with competitive play or change how competitive play works, but that's not an opinion that many people share.

What a number of people would like to see, is more official support from FFG for casual and alt-format games. See FFG buy the rights to the HotAC and produce a box set for it. See support for 150 point tournaments or epic tournaments.

I think a mistake some people make, is that Casual = Sloppy or playing loose with the rules. Which isn't always true, many casual players are going to play by RAW and can play to win.

For casual players winning isn't as important as it is for competitive players, but that no more means they don't want to win then it means competitive players only goal is to win.

Saddly however there are people who use 'Fly Casual' as an excuse for poor play, for bending or breaking the rules or other things. People who use Fly Casual as a weapon to beat the other person with... Because in many cases they're actually just WAAC'ers disguised as Casuals.

Please ignore.

Part of the problem is that there is no agreed upon definition of Casual or Competitive.

I play in tournaments because I know I can get 3 or 4 games that day. Showing up on a game night might get me one or two or none. I'm happy to play hard, optimized lists as well as goofy themed lists. I'm happy to play with noobies and show them the ropes. I'm happy to allow missed actions and rolling for things when there's no clear resolution (bumped obstacles etc). I'm willing to play against proxies of spoiled cards from upcoming releases.

But I want my games to be competitive in the sense that the outcome is in doubt. I don't want a 100-0 blow out in my favor or the reverse. I want 100-84 where Backstabber is the lone survivor. I want a dramatic conclusion, not a forgone one. I like games to conclude naturally, not because of time.

So does that make me casually competitive or competitively casual?

A lot has changed in the past year. The forums have become more hostile. Fight between casual and tournament growing too.

As someone already said Heroes of the Aturi Cluster is exactly the sort of product that FFG should be putting together". Missions are great but a story arc or more importantly progression is what we have wanted and been trained for in our games.

One area I am concerned is the "Professional" circuit and some of the noriety. Most are still good folk, but I see some trends that may increase the problem.

/Gripe. Having the same players, especially more elite, traveling around and winning more than one event like Store Champion or even taking the swag for Top Levels is discouraging to local players. Regionals even include people traveling 200+ miles outside of thier regional area to compete. Nothing "wrong" with this but it is creating a class division. It is also discouraging for time/location constrained players. /Gripe

Fly casual had nothing to my gripe. To me fly casual is be respectful and helpful in game and player growth. Having self discipline and emotional maturity. (I am a poor loser so always working on it)

The other day at Regionals I was talking a list and interrupted that it is not viable. Not talking tournament list buddy... Thanks for your unsolicited comment. All good... But you missed the point. Not every game has to be constructed to the Best list to destroy. Sone of us weirdos like to play non-viable lists even at Regionals. Thanks.

Most of us like Star Wars because of the content. Don't ruin it for us by trying to control by tournament mentality (which I participate).

Way forward? Try different league or tournament formats. Host HotAC. Try random list generators. Finally, play Epic occasionally with a huge ship.

Sincerely yours,

The X-Wing Club.

Don't you.......forget about me.....I'll be alone.....gaming, you know it baby......

But wait... I thought it was okay to like both competitive and casual play? Now casual play wants to change the way competitive events work? Why? I thought casual play was about not imposing strict rules on the game and encouraging scenario play.

I think most people are not "casual only" or "tournament only". I think there is a lot of in-between. I also think there is room for the game to have FFG release other forms of tournaments besides 100 pt deathmatch. Personally, I would love to see a random package of balanced missions that would require each person to take a relatively All Comers type list and play the missions that come up with what you have. Oh, there would still be "meta" in that and favorites and all that, but there would also be a lot more variety in the types of lists you would face. For me, the current tournament scene gets monotonous. The variety in lists is slight and you usually see the same 3-4 lists played over and over again. It just gets boring to me. I'd rather have variety in the opponents that I play. That's....just my personal opinion.

I mean, yes FFG could support more scenarios, but asking them to design five different games in one is kind of silly and I think it's a little much. X-WIng is designed around the 100 point game and it's this standard format that allows the designers to make a balanced system. Also, what point would there be to designing ships as stand-alone units? You would just end up with individually powerful units whose combined value was exceedingly high. I think it would be disastrous in the long run for FFG to even consider breaking away from the 100 point mould because then you have all these new ships and rules all trying to interact and balance with one another at all these different point values. Throw in a bunch of special scenario rules and it becomes even more of a mess.

So X-Wing goes full on forge the narrative mode, and then what? You can't find a pick up game because no one wants to play your scenario or no one likes X mission because Y pilot is broken in that game with this card.

No, you guys are asking for silly things. Stop being silly now. Pants go on legs, not on heads.

The game is designed around the 100 pt death match. That's fine. If that's balanced, then the game for missions and such is usually balanced, too. If a ship works for 100 pt tournament type games, it's usually fine for the various missions that come out in the Core set and such. You don't need to redesign the game like that. You can tweak the missions to fit. In my mind, it wouldn't take that much effort to crank out some new missions every now and again. Heck, they can just revamp Mission Control and pluck the best ones from that. That would even take less effort on their part.

You also talk about "breaking away from the 100 pt mold". FFG introducing other formats wouldn't "break" the 100 pt game. It just gives more options for more types of games. It doesn't take away from the 100 pt game. Introducing narrative events or campaigns or 150 pt events or mission based does not mean the 100 pt death match is going to go away. It just means those that get tired of 100 pt death matches have options for other types of games. Variety is the spice of life.

I hardly think it's silly for someone to be asking for other formats than 100 pt deathmatch. Even FFG said they had expected people to have gotten sick of it and wanted more at this point. It seems there are quite a few players who are fine with continuing in such a way. Not everyone is and it's not silly to think otherwise. I mean, FFG is now selling the #1 miniature game in the world as it beat it out 40k. I don't think it would cost too much to hire one guy to start spinning out other formats. I clearly see a desire from more than a handful of players that would be interested in such changes. It wouldn't effect those that want to stay 100 pt, either.

EDIT: Oh, and the whole Casual vs. Competitive doesn't really work for me. I tend to get competitive no matter what I play. I call it Casual and Tournament. Casual X-wing for me means non-meta lists, or Epic, or 150 pts, or Cinematic, or Missions, or.....anything other than 100 pts prep for tournaments.

It really isn't that hard to understand. People can be jerks. Thus, conflict will arise. I have seen this exact same fight pop up before, and it will continue to pop up when a game has tournaments.

As for the "traveling Pro" I'll take the opposite perspective. While I think it would be great for FFG to have different divisions and levels of players I also find it fantastic that I may set down across the table from a ( fill in the blank) Champion and fly against him/her. Yes, it is very likely this will end in 0/100 loss for me but I will definitely learn something and have fun. And who knows, maybe the green dice like me better.

Recent like when Paul Heaver was commenting on all of the bad ships that have fallen out of the meta-game I got psychotically aggravated at him. I might of even cursed at the monitor several times during the Steele-meta-events.

Then I started to giggles because I remembered that I am night and they are day.

It's all good,

I am just happy that I am not like that... being chill is my style. RPG'ish level detailed spaceship games are my thing because I love STAR WARS... not math.

I think this is the biggest fault here in almost every post that those two things get mixed up together.

I am all about making my own good lists for tournament and I love playing with all kinds of crazy ideas, it is the best way to search new depths from the game. Duplicating those squads don't really achieve anything for the game or community, but they are also essential part to keep them alive.

As mentioned many times, its purely play preference.

I prefer to have fun above all else. I dont care if i lose, long as i dont get completely robbed of my game (ion spam ywings) or utterly crushed in 3 volleys due to insanely lucky/unlucky dice i still have fun.

Hence why i make so many completely unorthodox lists. If i were to bring majority of them to a tournament i'd get flattened lol but sometimes i find something that the sheer "WTF?!" response from it alone gets me wins lol (daredevil on a firespray or expert handling on a decimator)

I dont have fun when im the one crushing my opponent either. I love it when the game somehow ends in 2 ships doing a super intense dogfight at the end. It takes for **** ever but its fun and really tests your flying capability and prediction skills. Last game i had like that was a Bwing vs Guri...both of us had Adv Sensors for pre-move barrelroll and he had PTL/Cloak too. THAT was hard to predict where either of us were going but **** was it fun.

Other people on the other hand only have fun when they not just win but utterly decimate their opponent, including just by robbing them of the fun in playing in the process. I will never understand these people, as theyre also the type to GameGenie their games instead of actually play it for the challenge it offers

It's not a huge deal but I have noticed a clear divergence here. Some people are all about the competetive scene, others only care about casual play, and then there's people like me, somewhere in between. Anyway there just seems to be some flack that gets thrown around fairly regularly, from discounting lists that are meant to be casual, or claiming that competetive less thematic lists ruin the game. My opinion is it's just a game and I love both types of squads. But seriously, why the flack? I just don't see why the passions need run so high when we are all just sharing thoughts on a hobby. I don't know, it's just my crazy opinion for the day.

Only thing that is bad for this game is sense of entitlement coming from some of the casual players. Tournament players don't care what list you bring, don't care how you play the game and what you find fun in X-Wing. They find fun in rivalry and don't try to force upon their view of this game on others. Competitive players are the most tolerant of all X-Wing players.

Also I don't understand what is wrong in criticizing posted squad lists. The whole point of posting lists is to hear opinion of others. If you are competitve player this criticism can be valuable, but if you are casual gamer and you feel offended that someone criticise your list what was the point in publishing said list in the first place? To hear some empty, useless words of appreciation with no real meaning? After all if you are casual gamer it doesn't matter what list you play - as long as you have fun. What is the point then in asking people about your list?

Competitive players can have just as much of a sense of entitlement as casual gamers. It's easier to get more so.

When you have a game where a casual player is playing a competitive gamer using a meta list whose going to win barring extreme luck?

Is the casual player entitled for wanting the competitive gamer to tone down the list to provide a more even challenge? I'd say that the competitive gamer is more entitled because they feel that they deserve to have fun by steamrolling the opponent without regard for if they're having fun.

Myself... I'd say that I'm a competitive casual gamer. I loathe playing with and against the same uber-optimised lists over and over again. I really do want to win my games but I want it to be because I played really well and not because I had tweaked out my list to the point where it out performs my opponents.

I'm never going to field Palpatine or Soontir Fel decked out. I'm never going to play interceptors with the all important Auto thrusters. I'm never going to use TLT, or U Boats, or rely upon Biggs/Poe/Curran as a crutch. I'm going to play with generic X Wings, E Wings, the TIE/SF regardless of its competitiveness.

But I will pay attention to the board and move and take actions to win my games though while making sure both myself and my opponent are having fun.

It's not a huge deal but I have noticed a clear divergence here. Some people are all about the competetive scene, others only care about casual play, and then there's people like me, somewhere in between. Anyway there just seems to be some flack that gets thrown around fairly regularly, from discounting lists that are meant to be casual, or claiming that competetive less thematic lists ruin the game. My opinion is it's just a game and I love both types of squads. But seriously, why the flack? I just don't see why the passions need run so high when we are all just sharing thoughts on a hobby. I don't know, it's just my crazy opinion for the day.

Only thing that is bad for this game is sense of entitlement coming from some of the casual players. Tournament players don't care what list you bring, don't care how you play the game and what you find fun in X-Wing. They find fun in rivalry and don't try to force upon their view of this game on others. Competitive players are the most tolerant of all X-Wing players.

Also I don't understand what is wrong in criticizing posted squad lists. The whole point of posting lists is to hear opinion of others. If you are competitve player this criticism can be valuable, but if you are casual gamer and you feel offended that someone criticise your list what was the point in publishing said list in the first place? To hear some empty, useless words of appreciation with no real meaning? After all if you are casual gamer it doesn't matter what list you play - as long as you have fun. What is the point then in asking people about your list?

Competitive players can have just as much of a sense of entitlement as casual gamers. It's easier to get more so.

When you have a game where a casual player is playing a competitive gamer using a meta list whose going to win barring extreme luck?

Is the casual player entitled for wanting the competitive gamer to tone down the list to provide a more even challenge? I'd say that the competitive gamer is more entitled because they feel that they deserve to have fun by steamrolling the opponent without regard for if they're having fun.

Myself... I'd say that I'm a competitive casual gamer. I loathe playing with and against the same uber-optimised lists over and over again. I really do want to win my games but I want it to be because I played really well and not because I had tweaked out my list to the point where it out performs my opponents.

I'm never going to field Palpatine or Soontir Fel decked out. I'm never going to play interceptors with the all important Auto thrusters. I'm never going to use TLT, or U Boats, or rely upon Biggs/Poe/Curran as a crutch. I'm going to play with generic X Wings, E Wings, the TIE/SF regardless of its competitiveness.

But I will pay attention to the board and move and take actions to win my games though while making sure both myself and my opponent are having fun.

So let me preface by stating that 1) I'm very lucky in my gaming group because we're all friends who get along well together and share a similar point of view about what is fun and what is not and 2) I find the entire concept of going to a store to play people I've never met (or only met once or twice at the store) without first arranging a game via facebook or text, completely alien.

So X-Wing goes full on forge the narrative mode, and then what? You can't find a pick up game because no one wants to play your scenario or no one likes X mission because Y pilot is broken in that game with this card.

This is already the case. There are a handful of pilots and builds that are 'broken' in the 100/6 format and no one ever wants to play ANY scenario other than the 100/6 format.

The comment that "competitive gamers are more accepting than casual gamers because they don't care what you bring" misses the point. Competitive gamers might not care what ships you bring, but they're incredibly strict about playing the 100/6 format, which is IMO the greatest tragedy of X Wing. At the risk of beating a dead horse, there is so much range and scope in the Star Wars galaxy! I literally cannot fathom players not wanting to explore that enormous, rich and varied galaxy through X Wing. Doing bombing runs on capital ships, chasing down enemy shuttles and capturing officers, breaking through enemy blockades, laying traps, escorting transports, playing tiny games with duelling aces, playing massive games with multiple squadrons per side, there's just so much out there that I could never limit myself to a single scenario, with a single points value, with prescribed terrain EVERY game!

And the fact that everyone wants to play that format, because they were told it's the standard and because it's used in ALL the tournaments, makes it really hard for someone who wants to explore the rest of X Wing.

Because no one can just play the way they want.

Everyone has to play the way they and their opponent agree to play. And so many people are hardline, 100/6, my way or the highway that many casual gamers never get to play they way they want. I mean, there's half a dozen examples in this thread alone of people either getting turned away, or not wanting to play anything other than the tournament style games.

If you love the 100/6 game then more power to you. I agree, it's a lot of fun. But please, you're never going to have trouble finding that type of game and there'll never be a shortage of people trying to play that type of game, so if someone asks about playing a scenario or mission, or an Epic game or just trying a different points value, please try and be accommodating and realise that maybe, the 100/6 style game isn't the way this person really likes to play. You can get a 100/6 game in later, or tomorrow, or next week but if you say no to that person asking for a different type of game, they might go for a very long time before someone else says yes.

But towit, will you still be having fun if I beat you quite badly over and over again? If you stop having fun will you still be invested in my enjoyment of the game?

In any game the player with the most experience will invariably have an advantage. Part of tactical games like X-WIng is deciding what to use and how to use it. Another often over looked fact is that some people have a better mind for things. Some people are really good at mathematics and can do calculus in their head while others are talented artists. Some people have a talent for critical decision making and some people are very cunning. So there is a level of mental acuity involved in gaming and some people simply cannot reach the level of cognitive function that others can. Simply put, some people are just smarter.

The game isn't designed around Soontir Fel and PTL. We didn't start with an obscure character and design a game around him and three tokens that make a funny face. Yes, obviously someone meant for it to happen, but it's not the only upgrade for him and it certainly won't be the last. Is Soontir the only pilot that PTL works on? Is Autothrusters a Soontir Fel only card?

There is a misconception that if something works well it must be unfriendly or that if you want to play games competitively you are somehow different from someone who wants to play casually. It's not strange to want to participate and compete with peers, when did that become strange? Haha. If anything this drive towards the all-inclusive participation prize party is what is really strange and almost diabolic. These days we reward people for simply showing up, for taking part. Participation prizes are like cookies for joining the group. What kind of mentality is that? That is something to really worry about! Hell, all the competitive scene asks is that you treat everyone fairly and play a tight game. Since when is demanding sportsmanship and fair play a bad thing?

Hell, all the competitive scene asks is that you treat everyone fairly and play a tight game. Since when is demanding sportsmanship and fair play a bad thing?

It also asks that you play 100/6.

And lots of people would prefer to play something else.

THAT is where so much of the head-butting comes from. I always play to win, I always compete , but I find the 100/6 format boring and don't like playing it very much.

So let me preface by stating that 1) I'm very lucky in my gaming group because we're all friends who get along well together and share a similar point of view about what is fun and what is not and 2) I find the entire concept of going to a store to play people I've never met (or only met once or twice at the store) without first arranging a game via facebook or text, completely alien.

So X-Wing goes full on forge the narrative mode, and then what? You can't find a pick up game because no one wants to play your scenario or no one likes X mission because Y pilot is broken in that game with this card.

This is already the case. There are a handful of pilots and builds that are 'broken' in the 100/6 format and no one ever wants to play ANY scenario other than the 100/6 format.

The comment that "competitive gamers are more accepting than casual gamers because they don't care what you bring" misses the point. Competitive gamers might not care what ships you bring, but they're incredibly strict about playing the 100/6 format, which is IMO the greatest tragedy of X Wing. At the risk of beating a dead horse, there is so much range and scope in the Star Wars galaxy! I literally cannot fathom players not wanting to explore that enormous, rich and varied galaxy through X Wing. Doing bombing runs on capital ships, chasing down enemy shuttles and capturing officers, breaking through enemy blockades, laying traps, escorting transports, playing tiny games with duelling aces, playing massive games with multiple squadrons per side, there's just so much out there that I could never limit myself to a single scenario, with a single points value, with prescribed terrain EVERY game!

And the fact that everyone wants to play that format, because they were told it's the standard and because it's used in ALL the tournaments, makes it really hard for someone who wants to explore the rest of X Wing.

Because no one can just play the way they want.

Everyone has to play the way they and their opponent agree to play. And so many people are hardline, 100/6, my way or the highway that many casual gamers never get to play they way they want. I mean, there's half a dozen examples in this thread alone of people either getting turned away, or not wanting to play anything other than the tournament style games.

If you love the 100/6 game then more power to you. I agree, it's a lot of fun. But please, you're never going to have trouble finding that type of game and there'll never be a shortage of people trying to play that type of game, so if someone asks about playing a scenario or mission, or an Epic game or just trying a different points value, please try and be accommodating and realise that maybe, the 100/6 style game isn't the way this person really likes to play. You can get a 100/6 game in later, or tomorrow, or next week but if you say no to that person asking for a different type of game, they might go for a very long time before someone else says yes.

Okay, you know what, that is all awesome stuff and this is exactly why FFG should make an expansion series of rules for X-Wing (TIE Fighter, an Advanced X-WIng Expansion TM). You have a point, you really do. But the thing is this, X-WIng has an incredible competitive play value and it's not Star Wars that draws people in to play it at tournaments. I myself decided to buy the core set based solely on the fact that this was a game that was solid enough to invest in playing competitively. I am really enjoying myself so far. Does X-Wing now have to cater to the scenario player when the scenarios are not even the basis for the design pattern, because it seems like that's what casual players are demanding. It seems pretty unreasonable that any portion of the playerbase should make demands of any other portion for the sake of their favoured game. FFG supports 100 point matches played for 75 minutes at Formal level and up events. Why can't casual players just run Casual level events and... do whatever you want! It says you can, so what exactly is the big deal?

When I say FFG should support more scenario play, what I mean is they should make more of them. Anyone can run an X-Wing event and do whatever they want, and if they want FFG to legitimize it, well... they have. It's called Casual Format and you literally have FFGs permission to do whatever you want, you can even buy an event kit and give away those exact same cards that us competitive types worry over.

Casual gamers come to X-Wing looking for Star Wars the RPG in Space and they get Star Wars the Competitive Test of Skill and Luck. X-Wing should always be first and foremost a game of concise rules and quick, intelligent play. Don't petition FFG to change that, instead petition FFG for Star Wars the RPG in Space. Call it TIE Fighter and you know what? I'll play the **** out of it with you. But I'll also still play X-Wing.

As a side note about playing people in formats you're not comfortable with, no way. That's a silly thing to suggest. I had a game today against a new player with a small collection and I gave him fair warning about my list and even tried to take it easy. I won by a big margin and no one had fun. Don't play the game you don't want to play and don't begrudge anyone if they don't want to play against you.

Does X-Wing now have to cater to the scenario player when the scenarios are not even the basis for the design pattern, because it seems like that's what casual players are demanding.

No one is demanding anything. I think it would be good for the game if FFG issued a statement saying that they made a mistake when they said the standard game was 100/6 and that tournaments can now be any points level with any scenarios. I think that would be awesome. But I'm not demanding it.

...It seems pretty unreasonable that any portion of the playerbase should make demands of any other portion for the sake of their favoured game....

...As a side note about playing people in formats you're not comfortable with, no way. That's a silly thing to suggest...

It's easy to say that when you're part of the overwhelming majority and can always find a game of exactly the type you want to play. For the rest of us, getting a game of the kind WE want relies solely on 1)Asking people to play formats they're not comfortable with and 2)their generosity in agreeing.

It's a simple fact of life that when two people desire different outcomes from the same situation that one party is going to be disappointed. I'll still enjoy a 100/6 game of X Wing, but not as much as I would have enjoyed a 500 point cinematic game, or even a 150 point deathmatch.

It is incumbent, IMO, on the players in the majority to sometimes agree to help the players in the minority out. There will never be a shortage of people wanting to play 100/6 since FFG promotes it as the standard (and premier) level of play. But it can be a LONG time between drinks for people who enjoy playing non-standard games. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask the 100/6 community to sometimes consider playing other formats.

Casual gamers come to X-Wing looking for Star Wars the RPG in Space and they get Star Wars the Competitive Test of Skill and Luck. X-Wing should always be first and foremost a game of concise rules and quick, intelligent play. Don't petition FFG to change that, instead petition FFG for Star Wars the RPG in Space. Call it TIE Fighter and you know what? I'll play the **** out of it with you. But I'll also still play X-Wing.

I don't want Star Wars the RPG in space. I want Star Wars the wargame in space. I've been wargaming for a few decades now, and X Wing is one of the only games I've played that DOESN'T encourage a range of different game sizes and scenarios. Most other games have them built into the core rules. X Wing is made by a board/card game company, and marketed towards board/card gamers who have often not been exposed to traditional wargames and the way they alter the play experience by varying scenarios and game sizes. For many X Wing players this is their first miniatures game. But there is a rich tradition among wargames of incorporating those varied game sizes and scenarios in order to deliberately alter the game experience, and it's omission in X Wing is glaring to those of us that have played other games in the past.

Does X-Wing now have to cater to the scenario player when the scenarios are not even the basis for the design pattern, because it seems like that's what casual players are demanding. It seems pretty unreasonable that any portion of the playerbase should make demands of any other portion for the sake of their favoured game. FFG supports 100 point matches played for 75 minutes at Formal level and up events. Why can't casual players just run Casual level events and... do whatever you want! It says you can, so what exactly is the big deal?

Well, FFG put Missions in the Core rule set before there ever was a tournament. It's not like they have never done anything for those of us that like missions. It's not been anywhere near the level of support that the tournament gamers have gotten, but it has been there. So, catering to the casual gamer isn't something new.

It would help if FFG game out a little something for the non-standard gamer. New missions or our own tournament kit would be great. Heck, even just fixing all the issues with Mission Control would make me extremely happy.

When I say FFG should support more scenario play, what I mean is they should make more of them. Anyone can run an X-Wing event and do whatever they want, and if they want FFG to legitimize it, well... they have. It's called Casual Format and you literally have FFGs permission to do whatever you want, you can even buy an event kit and give away those exact same cards that us competitive types worry over.

Except each store is only allowed to buy 2 of each kit. If there are standard tournaments, then they get used up for those. There are none left for Casual events.

It almost seems like if FFG did something for non-standard 100 pt tournaments that it would somehow take away from standard tournament games. It would somehow be "catering" or "changing" the standard 100 pt tournaments. I don't get that. Why can't there be several formats side by side? Why does there only have to be one main one around that gets all the love and attention from FFG?

Casual gamers come to X-Wing looking for Star Wars the RPG in Space and they get Star Wars the Competitive Test of Skill and Luck. X-Wing should always be first and foremost a game of concise rules and quick, intelligent play. Don't petition FFG to change that, instead petition FFG for Star Wars the RPG in Space. Call it TIE Fighter and you know what? I'll play the **** out of it with you. But I'll also still play X-Wing.

As a side note about playing people in formats you're not comfortable with, no way. That's a silly thing to suggest. I had a game today against a new player with a small collection and I gave him fair warning about my list and even tried to take it easy. I won by a big margin and no one had fun. Don't play the game you don't want to play and don't begrudge anyone if they don't want to play against you.

But towit, will you still be having fun if I beat you quite badly over and over again? If you stop having fun will you still be invested in my enjoyment of the game?

In any game the player with the most experience will invariably have an advantage. Part of tactical games like X-WIng is deciding what to use and how to use it. Another often over looked fact is that some people have a better mind for things. Some people are really good at mathematics and can do calculus in their head while others are talented artists. Some people have a talent for critical decision making and some people are very cunning. So there is a level of mental acuity involved in gaming and some people simply cannot reach the level of cognitive function that others can. Simply put, some people are just smarter.

The game isn't designed around Soontir Fel and PTL. We didn't start with an obscure character and design a game around him and three tokens that make a funny face. Yes, obviously someone meant for it to happen, but it's not the only upgrade for him and it certainly won't be the last. Is Soontir the only pilot that PTL works on? Is Autothrusters a Soontir Fel only card?

There is a misconception that if something works well it must be unfriendly or that if you want to play games competitively you are somehow different from someone who wants to play casually. It's not strange to want to participate and compete with peers, when did that become strange? Haha. If anything this drive towards the all-inclusive participation prize party is what is really strange and almost diabolic. These days we reward people for simply showing up, for taking part. Participation prizes are like cookies for joining the group. What kind of mentality is that? That is something to really worry about! Hell, all the competitive scene asks is that you treat everyone fairly and play a tight game. Since when is demanding sportsmanship and fair play a bad thing?

No... I would not have fun losing to you again and again. I enjoy playing wargames and practicing and challenging my tactical and strategic mindset and I have for the last 18 years.

I quit playing both 40k and Warmachine because I was fed up with the competitive mindset the game groups in my area had. The games were no fun because I was just playing against people who were obsessed with completely optimizing their lists.

I enjoyed purposefully handicapping my lists and seeing how I could make them work... It does great when you're playing with someone at about 75-80% optimized lists but falls flat when played against the uber-optimized lists.

I am an Industrial Engineer by trade... My life is centered around statistics, and optimizing systems for efficiency.

I feel that it is extremely cheap and unsatisfying to win because you built a better list than the opponent. I can optimize whatever I want at work. In my free time I want to practice strategy and tactics not figuring out the mathematically optimized solution to list-building and then hitting other players over the heads with it.

I think that it is very sad that you felt so entitled to your precious competitive playstyle that you had to put a new player through a mindless beatdown just because he didn't have the time or resources to create as powerful of a list as you did. You say yourself that you didn't enjoy it... So why did you do it? Why didn't you just get out some more inefficient models to actually challenge yourself while treating the new player to a somewhat more evenly matched game? You would have still most likely beaten him, but you would have given him a shot, gotten more comfortable with ships you're not as used to, and been more likely to encourage the new player to actually continue playing instead of just quitting out of frustration.

In general people on here are right. There are not as high of tensions outside the forums between casual and competitive gamers... That's because the local meta's naturally swing to one or the other sides.

In competitive markets there isn't tension because casual players try to learn the game, find it miserable and just quit. You don't see them hanging around fighting with everyone because they just don't want to play with the competitive gamers.

In casual meta's the competitive player just has fun winning most of their games, so there's not really tension there either. The only problem is that if the rest of the group gets frustrated at the one player dominating everyone so they uniformly refuse to play games. This only really happens with the obnoxious competitive gamers though not the polite ones that are good sportsmen. But then there's still not really tension.

I'm sorry if the "entitled" casual players are shoving their varied gaming down your throats... You can go to a store and pick up a competitive game any day. Get multiple games in a day. Shove your competitive game down the throat of new players.

I'll just have to wait till the 1 player I have found willing just to have a non-ubercompetitive game with me will have his schedule match up with mine... Hopefully I'll be able to get a game in July sometime...

Casual

Serious

Incompatible?

It all depends on which you like better:

1. Winning.

2. Playing the Game.

People who enjoy playing the game can come to a compromise, both competitive and casual alike. However, if your definition of competitive is "Winning is fun, losing is bogus." or your definition of casual is "I don't like to lose, so I never play at 100%." you won't get very far compromise-wise.