So, here is the background (yes this will sound like whining but I am actually perplexed).

We are at our standard Friday night game night and one of the players there flat out refused to play me because (exam words) "you are too competitive".

I don't honestly understand this. Isn't the goal to win? I have fun doing it and I am not playing my DtO so how can one be too competitive?

Do you have anyone you don't want to play? If so, why?

Here is a Quote. From You, which may add a little light to the subject: (And I apologise if its not word-for-word, I'm going by memory.)

"I guess I'll play it out. But I will hate every minute of it."

Never hate a game. Never give anyone reason to hate a game. Never hate a moment of a game.

Play the Game. Enjoy the Game. Foster the Game.

We have seen a few players that don't want to be competitive, meaning they don't want to have to go and buy everything necessary to have a competitive build for tournaments. Normally these folks are more interested in constructing a narrative, and therefore, no, their goal is not to win, but to make a story. I think this is awesome and can respect that style of play.

On the other end of the spectrum, if someone is a sore loser, they can be labeled as competitive. Meaning if someone gets really salty, snippy, short, and loud while losing. This is not fun. We have a guy locally that is getting a reputation of not being fun to play simply because he doesn't have fun unless he wins, and starts getting loud, complaining, etc. This can also be labeled as "too competitive."

Nope never happened to me and I wouldnt refuse to play another player. This is not like 40k when someone brings 3 Knights to the tables and expects to have a fun game against normal marines. Armada is very balanced and anyone can win at any time. Most of my losses and wins come down to one or 2 moments in a game. I rarely get totally outclassed and rarely do I outclass an opponent. As long as I get to play I'm pretty happy. Prefer to win obviously and playing better players does sometimes fill me with dread but when you pull off an unexpected win makes it all the sweeter. Also playing aginst better opponents makes your game better and you can always ask advice after as to what you could have done differently.

Yes as above. Playing against sore losers is never fun. Always play with a smile on your face, have a laugh when things go wrong and shake hands and congratulate your opponent after the game win or lose

I have told people that I prefer not to play them in the past. Not with Armada, but with other games. It is a game and I play for fun first.

You play to win, but others prefer a more casual experience. Both approaches are totally legitimate. So, while a more competitive style of game may be fun for you, it may take away the fun from your opponent. You prefer games played very closely to the rules. In your mind it is good to practice for competitive matches, but for others it takes away the relaxing, fun experience they are after. Again, both are legitimate approaches. Just not always compatible approaches.

Being competitive isn't about your fleet, but your attitude. You say the point is to win, but for many the point is to roll dice, laugh, and enjoy a casual game with an opponent.

You're not doing anything wrong and neither was this other player. You just each want something different from the game.

We have seen a few players that don't want to be competitive, meaning they don't want to have to go and buy everything necessary to have a competitive build for tournaments. Normally these folks are more interested in constructing a narrative, and therefore, no, their goal is not to win, but to make a story. I think this is awesome and can respect that style of play.

On the other end of the spectrum, if someone is a sore loser, they can be labeled as competitive. Meaning if someone gets really salty, snippy, short, and loud while losing. This is not fun. We have a guy locally that is getting a reputation of not being fun to play simply because he doesn't have fun unless he wins, and starts getting loud, complaining, etc. This can also be labeled as "too competitive."

I know I fall under the second label though it occurs when I mess up.

I have only had two games that I have hated every minute of. The first was against Doobleg and was in the first Vassal tournament. The second was against Cninja.

I am competitive but I play weird lists on Fridays. I do ask that people play to the rules. That is just how the game is meant to be played.

We have seen a few players that don't want to be competitive, meaning they don't want to have to go and buy everything necessary to have a competitive build for tournaments. Normally these folks are more interested in constructing a narrative, and therefore, no, their goal is not to win, but to make a story. I think this is awesome and can respect that style of play.

On the other end of the spectrum, if someone is a sore loser, they can be labeled as competitive. Meaning if someone gets really salty, snippy, short, and loud while losing. This is not fun. We have a guy locally that is getting a reputation of not being fun to play simply because he doesn't have fun unless he wins, and starts getting loud, complaining, etc. This can also be labeled as "too competitive."

I know I fall under the second label though it occurs when I mess up.

I have only had two games that I have hated every minute of. The first was against Doobleg and was in the first Vassal tournament. The second was against Cninja.

I am competitive but I play weird lists on Fridays. I do ask that people play to the rules. That is just how the game is meant to be played.

I think we've all been there. I've been frustrated by games, but do my best to just suck it up and try to learn, and do better next time. I definitely don't want to try and be the kind of person people don't like playing, because then you end up not being able to play.

Leagues seem to be a nice balance between competitive and causal. You play some games but then most everyone gets some cool stuff, but there is still a hierarchy to shoot for. We are starting up our first league and I am pretty excited about it.

It might be a good idea for you to open a dialogue with the person, ask them what they feel makes you a competitive player, and try to work on it if you want to.

That said, you can't please everyone, and like Shmitty said, maybe you two are just looking for two different ways to play.

We have seen a few players that don't want to be competitive, meaning they don't want to have to go and buy everything necessary to have a competitive build for tournaments. Normally these folks are more interested in constructing a narrative, and therefore, no, their goal is not to win, but to make a story. I think this is awesome and can respect that style of play.

On the other end of the spectrum, if someone is a sore loser, they can be labeled as competitive. Meaning if someone gets really salty, snippy, short, and loud while losing. This is not fun. We have a guy locally that is getting a reputation of not being fun to play simply because he doesn't have fun unless he wins, and starts getting loud, complaining, etc. This can also be labeled as "too competitive."

I know I fall under the second label though it occurs when I mess up.

I have only had two games that I have hated every minute of. The first was against Doobleg and was in the first Vassal tournament. The second was against Cninja.

I am competitive but I play weird lists on Fridays. I do ask that people play to the rules. That is just how the game is meant to be played.

Yes, the rules are important, but for some people they are just the structure of the fun they are trying to have. Too much focus on the rules can make the game tedious for some players.

Your sig line says to "command casual". Always focusing on the win, the outcome, the optimal play, or following the rules to the letter is not how some people would interpret that statement. Neither of you are wrong or right. It's just a different approach to having fun with Armada.

I don't think I've ever been the one to have someone refuse to play (I've had people quit when they found out my ethnicity but that's it). There are a number of individuals that I would not play again in other game systems, even if I personally had nothing wrong with them as individuals.

For me, there's a very distinct difference in the purpose for playing the game and the objective of the game itself. My purpose for playing the game is to have fun, regardless of the results of the matchup or the luck of the dice. The objective of the game is to defeat my opponents fleet. But when people start taking it as a method to defeat the other player, regardless of their feelings, then it's gone too far. You can be an easy going, fun, jovial, and exacting competitive player that's wonderful to play against, and you can be a whinging, dour, defeatist casual player who is a real pill. Guess which I'd rather play?

The word 'competitive' gets tossed around a little too freely in an attempt to describe negative traits of certain gamers. But both truly competitive and casual players can exhibit those same negative traits. Basically, it's egocentrism: when you, and only you are the focus of all things that happen in the game, then it often creates the conditions for those negative traits to surface. It's a game, it's a shared and cooperative experience within a self enclosed competitive arena: both players bring something beyond simple fleets to the table.

"His majesty, like history, judges us not by the outcome of the war, but in the manner in which it was fought."~The Patriot

I don't think I've ever been the one to have someone refuse to play (I've had people quit when they found out my ethnicity but that's it).

That super sucks, dude. Hate that you have to deal with that kind of terrible behavior.

We have seen a few players that don't want to be competitive, meaning they don't want to have to go and buy everything necessary to have a competitive build for tournaments. Normally these folks are more interested in constructing a narrative, and therefore, no, their goal is not to win, but to make a story. I think this is awesome and can respect that style of play.

On the other end of the spectrum, if someone is a sore loser, they can be labeled as competitive. Meaning if someone gets really salty, snippy, short, and loud while losing. This is not fun. We have a guy locally that is getting a reputation of not being fun to play simply because he doesn't have fun unless he wins, and starts getting loud, complaining, etc. This can also be labeled as "too competitive."

I know I fall under the second label though it occurs when I mess up.

I have only had two games that I have hated every minute of. The first was against Doobleg and was in the first Vassal tournament. The second was against Cninja.

I am competitive but I play weird lists on Fridays. I do ask that people play to the rules. That is just how the game is meant to be played.

Yes, the rules are important, but for some people they are just the structure of the fun they are trying to have. Too much focus on the rules can make the game tedious for some players.

Your sig line says to "command casual". Always focusing on the win, the outcome, the optimal play, or following the rules to the letter is not how some people would interpret that statement. Neither of you are wrong or right. It's just a different approach to having fun with Armada.

See, I don't understand that. This is a game. Playing with out playing by the rules or completely using the rules makes no sense to me.

I am not trying to do the "optimal move". I want to learn, so I make mistakes and am fine with that in fun play. The goal is to learn new things. That is why I play silly lists like my Neb's Away list or 4 Nebulon-B's, or such. These are lists to learn more about. To learn new things and what can be done and what should not be done.

I don't get how that makes me "too competitive"

In my experience, when person A doesn't want to play person B and their excuse is person B is "too competitive" they mean one of two things:

1. The skill gap between the two players is presently vast enough that player A expects to get trounced by such a large margin that they won't really enjoy the game much or learn a lot other than "git gud." Losing by smaller margins can be very instructive, but total blow-outs don't tend to be as helpful.
2. Person A is trying to politely say "I think you're a jerk and I'd rather not play you" without the direct confrontation of calling person B a jerk. "Too competitive" is a less negative way to say that, given that jerkishness is considered a form of competitiveness.

Our local Armadabros are pretty straightforward with one another and some of the less experienced ones will on occasion straight up tell me some version #1. It's usually communicated as "I need a break from playing you for the time being because I need to win or at least get close to winning and I'm finding my current run of losses demoralizing. Maybe next time? I'm gonna look for someone a bit closer to me for this week." And I respect that. It's a game. We're here to have a fun game. We'll do fine and we'll all find someone to play.

Conversely, back when I was into Warmachine, I heard #2 used a lot (and used it myself, rarely). There was a high (but not 100%, it should be noted) correlation between being good at Warmachine and being a rather unpleasant person. Telling those types of people that they're just too competitive makes them feel good (look at those lesser players cowering in fear!) about being turned down and then you can go find someone you actually want to play.

If you're concerned about which it may be, I'd flat-out ask your local crew if you've got a bad rep. If you do, they'll tell you about it. Just be prepared for brutal honesty when you open that door.

You know what makes this hurt me more (back to sounding like I am whining. . . Though have I really ever not sounded that way ). I am the one setting up this game day, so when people don't show it makes me feel like I am to blame. This just makes me feel like that is the truth.

You know what makes this hurt me more (back to sounding like I am whining. . . Though have I really ever not sounded that way ). I am the one setting up this game day, so when people don't show it makes me feel like I am to blame. This just makes me feel like that is the truth.

This is why you should just ask your local group. Feeling like you're perceived to be an unfun jerk has all the downsides of realizing you're an unfun jerk without actually knowing you're an unfun jerk and therefore having the incentive to change (and hopefully some direction). Or maybe you're not an unfun jerk and it's all just your perception. Either way, you won't know for sure unless you ask.

I think you should probably not be so hard on yourself. It sounds like you did a pretty good job of setting up Armada in your local community, which is great. If you are worried about the player that said you are too competitive, maybe talk to him, with your empathy shoes on, and find out what you can do to seem Frimarda days more inviting to him/her.

Important to note: People respect someone in a gaming community not because they are the best and win all the time, but because they are inviting, friendly, and willing to give advice without pontificating.

I don't think I've ever been the one to have someone refuse to play (I've had people quit when they found out my ethnicity but that's it).

That super sucks, dude. Hate that you have to deal with that kind of terrible behavior.

I wanted to loop back around to this to express a hearty "what the fsck?" People have refused to play you due to your ethnicity? Wow. That's horrible. Those people should be ashamed of themselves. Racism is ugly no matter where you find it, but the ugliness gains an almost comical level of absurdity when applied to a matter as silly as a plastic spaceship game. I'm sorry you had to deal with such disturbingly small-minded pettiness in an activity that was supposed to be recreational.

We have seen a few players that don't want to be competitive, meaning they don't want to have to go and buy everything necessary to have a competitive build for tournaments. Normally these folks are more interested in constructing a narrative, and therefore, no, their goal is not to win, but to make a story. I think this is awesome and can respect that style of play.

On the other end of the spectrum, if someone is a sore loser, they can be labeled as competitive. Meaning if someone gets really salty, snippy, short, and loud while losing. This is not fun. We have a guy locally that is getting a reputation of not being fun to play simply because he doesn't have fun unless he wins, and starts getting loud, complaining, etc. This can also be labeled as "too competitive."

I know I fall under the second label though it occurs when I mess up.

I have only had two games that I have hated every minute of. The first was against Doobleg and was in the first Vassal tournament. The second was against Cninja.

I am competitive but I play weird lists on Fridays. I do ask that people play to the rules. That is just how the game is meant to be played.

Yes, the rules are important, but for some people they are just the structure of the fun they are trying to have. Too much focus on the rules can make the game tedious for some players.

Your sig line says to "command casual". Always focusing on the win, the outcome, the optimal play, or following the rules to the letter is not how some people would interpret that statement. Neither of you are wrong or right. It's just a different approach to having fun with Armada.

See, I don't understand that. This is a game. Playing with out playing by the rules or completely using the rules makes no sense to me.

I am not trying to do the "optimal move". I want to learn, so I make mistakes and am fine with that in fun play. The goal is to learn new things. That is why I play silly lists like my Neb's Away list or 4 Nebulon-B's, or such. These are lists to learn more about. To learn new things and what can be done and what should not be done.

I don't get how that makes me "too competitive"

I probably just didn't do a good job of explaining myself. I am a reformed "too competitive" player, which is why I want to help.

Rules are important, but for some they are not the most important aspect of the game. When a casual player plays against a rules-focused player they can feel like their opponent is constantly trying to catch them doing something wrong. That isn't much fun for them.

This is a hard thing for me to explain on a forum. I'm on summer break now. If you'd like we can find time for a game and I can try to better explain what I'm saying.

We have seen a few players that don't want to be competitive, meaning they don't want to have to go and buy everything necessary to have a competitive build for tournaments. Normally these folks are more interested in constructing a narrative, and therefore, no, their goal is not to win, but to make a story. I think this is awesome and can respect that style of play.

On the other end of the spectrum, if someone is a sore loser, they can be labeled as competitive. Meaning if someone gets really salty, snippy, short, and loud while losing. This is not fun. We have a guy locally that is getting a reputation of not being fun to play simply because he doesn't have fun unless he wins, and starts getting loud, complaining, etc. This can also be labeled as "too competitive."

I know I fall under the second label though it occurs when I mess up.

I have only had two games that I have hated every minute of. The first was against Doobleg and was in the first Vassal tournament. The second was against Cninja.

I am competitive but I play weird lists on Fridays. I do ask that people play to the rules. That is just how the game is meant to be played.

Yes, the rules are important, but for some people they are just the structure of the fun they are trying to have. Too much focus on the rules can make the game tedious for some players.

Your sig line says to "command casual". Always focusing on the win, the outcome, the optimal play, or following the rules to the letter is not how some people would interpret that statement. Neither of you are wrong or right. It's just a different approach to having fun with Armada.

See, I don't understand that. This is a game. Playing with out playing by the rules or completely using the rules makes no sense to me.

I am not trying to do the "optimal move". I want to learn, so I make mistakes and am fine with that in fun play. The goal is to learn new things. That is why I play silly lists like my Neb's Away list or 4 Nebulon-B's, or such. These are lists to learn more about. To learn new things and what can be done and what should not be done.

I don't get how that makes me "too competitive"

I probably just didn't do a good job of explaining myself. I am a reformed "too competitive" player, which is why I want to help.

Rules are important, but for some they are not the most important aspect of the game. When a casual player plays against a rules-focused player they can feel like their opponent is constantly trying to catch them doing something wrong. That isn't much fun for them.

This is a hard thing for me to explain on a forum. I'm on summer break now. If you'd like we can find time for a game and I can try to better explain what I'm saying.

I think I am grasping at what you mean (but could be completely wrong, so if I am, let me know). Casual and competitive players both play by the rules, but some "competitive" players won't let you go back a few steps to get a missed opportunity, such as forgetting to resolve an engineering command before attacking, or forgetting to flip a command dial.

I personally, even in tournaments, think not allowing reasonable amounts of backtracking is pretty ****. I want to win because I played better, not because haha you forgot to get an intel sweep token.

We have seen a few players that don't want to be competitive, meaning they don't want to have to go and buy everything necessary to have a competitive build for tournaments. Normally these folks are more interested in constructing a narrative, and therefore, no, their goal is not to win, but to make a story. I think this is awesome and can respect that style of play.

On the other end of the spectrum, if someone is a sore loser, they can be labeled as competitive. Meaning if someone gets really salty, snippy, short, and loud while losing. This is not fun. We have a guy locally that is getting a reputation of not being fun to play simply because he doesn't have fun unless he wins, and starts getting loud, complaining, etc. This can also be labeled as "too competitive."

I know I fall under the second label though it occurs when I mess up.

I have only had two games that I have hated every minute of. The first was against Doobleg and was in the first Vassal tournament. The second was against Cninja.

I am competitive but I play weird lists on Fridays. I do ask that people play to the rules. That is just how the game is meant to be played.

Yes, the rules are important, but for some people they are just the structure of the fun they are trying to have. Too much focus on the rules can make the game tedious for some players.

Your sig line says to "command casual". Always focusing on the win, the outcome, the optimal play, or following the rules to the letter is not how some people would interpret that statement. Neither of you are wrong or right. It's just a different approach to having fun with Armada.

See, I don't understand that. This is a game. Playing with out playing by the rules or completely using the rules makes no sense to me.

I am not trying to do the "optimal move". I want to learn, so I make mistakes and am fine with that in fun play. The goal is to learn new things. That is why I play silly lists like my Neb's Away list or 4 Nebulon-B's, or such. These are lists to learn more about. To learn new things and what can be done and what should not be done.

I don't get how that makes me "too competitive"

I probably just didn't do a good job of explaining myself. I am a reformed "too competitive" player, which is why I want to help.

Rules are important, but for some they are not the most important aspect of the game. When a casual player plays against a rules-focused player they can feel like their opponent is constantly trying to catch them doing something wrong. That isn't much fun for them.

This is a hard thing for me to explain on a forum. I'm on summer break now. If you'd like we can find time for a game and I can try to better explain what I'm saying.

I give everyone the same benefit. In Armada, as long as it's not a move, they get 1 take back. I tell them that I do this because it is an opportunity to learn and that is how we learn.

Sounds harsh but I find that it is fair and does not let the game devolve into a game of takesie backsies

There are so many things you can do while playing Armada. So many things to focus on. Winning, placing your models correctly, relaxing, smiling, forgetting about work/home, thinking of new strategies, trying out a combo, the rules, chatting with a friend, having a beverage, laughing, tournament/league placement, and on and on.

All of these are different components to "playing". Each player orders them differently. Each player focuses on what is important to them at that time. Some might view a focus as too competitive or a different focus as too sloppy, but there is no right way to do it.

That super sucks, dude. Hate that you have to deal with that kind of terrible behavior.

That one's not an easy pill to swallow as it's not something you can change. Not that I'd want too. But the point isn't so much 'poor me' it's that people like that will always exist. You've got to take it in stride even if you don't like it.

We'll use the example that most people have had to face: blow out losses. Very few people expect them, and when everything's going wrong (whether by play or by simple luck) it often has a very deflating effect. Of course, it's made all the worse with people using their experience or -as you so well said, Caldias- pontificating rules that punish the player who's already behind in the match. Even the tournament rules spell it out with the different event levels, lack of rules knowledge at a standard non-premier event is not meant to be used to punish a player. Instruct, don't destruct. All whip and no carrot. [insert countryism here and repeat].

Snapafist I think nailed it on the two distinctions. #2 has been used a lot when the alternative is, "You are really no fun to play against, you self centered, gloating, argumentative, and completely unemphatic creep. But I also don't want to get in a fist fight over a game, and I know that you probably will want to turn it into something like that." Competitive is like WAAC, the true meaning can be easily lost in translation.

I'll use myself as an example, though really there's five or six individuals I could point to as well: I'm classified as a casual gamer. Winning and losing are a secondary concern compared to the amount of enjoyment I derive from playing a Star Wars game with friends and other folk who want to play a game of plastic countertop spaceships. I revel in playing non-standard matches and have more distinct memories of events that transpired in the framing of a story rather than actual results on the tabletop. But I want to learn the nuances of all the rules and I refuse to allow myself take-backs, insist my opponents tell me of any rule deficiencies if I overlook something, and am perfectly fine with assuming I am in the wrong in the case of a rules query. But that's the standard I hold myself too, not others. So, what does that make me? A casual because I don't care about the result, or competitive because I'm inflexible in how the rules pertain to me? Maybe just masochist.

Sorry for the digression. Long story short: the labels of 'competitive' and 'casual' gaming comes with a number of connotations that are not exclusive to either group. So what they say may not be exactly what they mean.

There are so many things you can do while playing Armada. So many things to focus on. Winning, placing your models correctly, relaxing, smiling, forgetting about work/home, thinking of new strategies, trying out a combo, the rules, chatting with a friend, having a beverage, laughing, tournament/league placement, and on and on.

All of these are different components to "playing". Each player orders them differently. Each player focuses on what is important to them at that time. Some might view a focus as too competitive or a different focus as too sloppy, but there is no right way to do it.

Seems so weird. . . The game is what you are playing, so play that. Don't focus on other things because that is how you get distracted

You know, I would rather someone tell me straight out, "hey, I don't really want to play you because of X" that's fine. I would be annoyed but have something to fix if I can fix it, but someone just telling me "you are too competitive" makes now fraking sense to me.

What do I fix? Obviously there are tons of answers to this because all of you great people who are taking this even a tiny bit seriously (I expect tomorrow to get blasted, well, tomorrow for me) have many versions.

So, what can I work on? How do I prove that I can be "fun to play"?

Well, since this is a Discussion Time thread, how does a person get off that" no fun " list?

Ah, but getting distracted isn't always a bad thing. If it leads to a laugh or two, a memorable moment, or just something that's worth telling a tale over in the future, is that worth it?

Think of it in the terms of playing a game for a tournament versus playing a friday night game. The knowledge of the effects of a tournament game result can have a decided effect on how your standings may dictate how to approach a difficult situation in regards to gambling for, or against, a certain result. In a casual game, the result may not matter, but in a tournament standard, the end result (victory or loss) may not matter, but the number of tournament points lost or gained, would.

The social aspect of the game is much like that. What do you lose by taking the gamble, by allowing some additional leeway, or by making a whimsical remark to an opponent when they seem to be sullen?

A 'No fun list' -laughs a bit- that's clever. Ah'ma markin' it on mah list, Ly-ly. How to get off it... that is nebulous, and not that easy to pin down. You may play -exactly- the same and people won't object. I'd maybe ask one of your local group, like Mikael about spying particulars if he's willing, but it's usually about the attitude. Don't take any feedback as a personal failing, just as another area that can be improved (like nailing down the finnicky timing aspects of Armada; how, when, why, and if you don't quite get it and need an FAQ from someone, you might not even agree but it's worth at least considering).

I guess the only thing I can say for starters is the same thing for all conversation; what impression are you trying to impart to others? Find something positive to say about them or what they did rather than relating it to yourself, it can help emphasize what they should work on as well (and this is a shared experience, it's not all about giving or reciev- I don't think I want to finish that sentence). Other things are mostly related to things like tone and intonation, the way you say things and how you can laugh at your own mistakes or ill luck (which can place you on an even level with an opponent instead of them feeling decidedly inferior). Don't dwell on mistakes or gloat about results, you can gloss them in a post game and most people will respond quite well to it, but at the time it's like rubbing salt in a wound or stealing their thunder.