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.

Thanks Vy, those help a lot.

I do try to work on my personality so that I am constantly improving. You should of seen. E in my first tournament. God's I was an arsehole. Frustrated, whining, and complaining at every turn becuase I made mistakes after mistakes. I think I hurt the game for many people back then but I have been trying ever since to make up for that. Hell I even had a guy pack up becuase I doubled checked his placement of squadrons to make sure they were within 2 of a ship.

So when these situations pop up, it makes me flash back to those very uncomfortable parts of my gaming history. Makes me think that I am the problem and maybe I should just stop trying to help.

Annoying is it not?

Oh well. Thanks k you everyone. Sorry for using this as a thread to whine on. It just helps me process since everyone has a different perspective than my own.

Ly, didn't you mention you are on the spectrum? That, combined with your intense desire to win, might lead to the game being basically fine, but the experience of playing against you might be stressful and not as much fun. The social part of the game with an opponent cannot be underestimated... It is basically a guy date for several hours, you know? I spend as much time socializing with my opponent, talking about Star Wars or discussing the cinematic things that happen or whatever as I do moving ships.

Hi, I'm Egg, and I'm a reformed(ing) competitive player.

I used to play 40k. I started playing pretty recently, and thought I would give the Necrons a go as my first army. About a month after I started building the army, the new Necron codex came out and elevated them to a high power level (for the time) that casual players of the game didn't really know how to approach. It gave Necron players a bad name to begin with, which I didn't help with my behavior.

I didn't bring the worst things that I could think of, but I was unforgiving. I played relentlessly. I played to table my opponent. I played to win. The winning was the most important key point. I entered leagues at my FLGS and was super proud to win both the tournaments that I played, never losing a game, or even coming close to losing a game.

After my schedule got more busy and I couldn't commit to multiple weeks of a league, I tried doing some PUGs, but to my surprise, there were no takers. Nobody wanted to play against the dreaded army. They said I was 'too lucky'. My army was 'too OP'. I was 'too competitive'.

At first I thought that it was just salty opponents who were mad about being bad. I wasn't even being 'that guy' too much. It's not like I could bring knights or flying monstrous creatures.

I realized after a while though that it wasn't anything about the game of 40k or the games that I played though, it was how I played the game.

Playing to win gets you noticed. Even if you explain how you win, if you do it gleefully or matter of factly, players may take it as being condescending. If you allow them to take back mistakes, but explain that you're only letting them do it once so that they'll "learn", it's not like you're allowing them to correct errors so that they can fix their gameplay, it's more that you, the superior player who has made no mistakes that you need to take back, are permitting them to do so.

And so I stopped playing 40k for the simple reason that I had no opponents.

I've been very careful with how I play other games, and especially Armada for this reason. With other competitive players, it's not so hard. I know plenty of people who will laugh when you blow up their ISD in one round and they'll come back harder at you the next game.

A lot of gamers are not the most socially adjusted of people though. On both sides. I didn't realize that my attitude was coming across as abrasive, as condescending, as a sense of superiority and an intensity that just wasn't fun for some other people to play against. It's something that I am now extremely mindful of.

One of the things I do now is I buy my opponents waters while we play. It's a long game. Most gamers I know are probably in a perpetual state of dehydration from all the soda and pizza. 1$ is a small price to pay to foster a small sense of camaraderie. I think a lot more about my opponent than just about the game. I want to make sure that they are having a good time and spending their time well with a friendly person and both people are enjoying a game they love.

It's not just how you play the game, it's how people perceive how you play the game. Having someone not want to play you is rough, but remember that you don't need to please everyone, but if you worry about it being a problem, try some new things. Focus on a new challenge. Win, but have fun doing so and make sure that your opponent does too.

It's a challenging concept, especially for a competitive person. It's a new competition; against yourself! The best kind! (Actually not, competitions against yourself are dumb and pointless, inspiring posters notwithstanding).

I hope this incoherent rambling helps a bit. Just taking a break from bar exam studying. (Incidentally, being a lawyer is great for a competitive person. You get paid more than average and you alienate most people straight away anyways just by telling them your profession )

Ly, didn't you mention you are on the spectrum? That, combined with your intense desire to win, might lead to the game being basically fine, but the experience of playing against you might be stressful and not as much fun. The social part of the game with an opponent cannot be underestimated... It is basically a guy date for several hours, you know? I spend as much time socializing with my opponent, talking about Star Wars or discussing the cinematic things that happen or whatever as I do moving ships.

The one thing I can't control. . . /sigh unfortunately you have logic on this one. I try, I don't make many star wars references or pew pew sounds. . . No zooming sounds or things like that. It's not that I look down upon those I just don't think about it.

Hi, I'm Egg, and I'm a reformed(ing) competitive player.

I used to play 40k. I started playing pretty recently, and thought I would give the Necrons a go as my first army. About a month after I started building the army, the new Necron codex came out and elevated them to a high power level (for the time) that casual players of the game didn't really know how to approach. It gave Necron players a bad name to begin with, which I didn't help with my behavior.

I didn't bring the worst things that I could think of, but I was unforgiving. I played relentlessly. I played to table my opponent. I played to win. The winning was the most important key point. I entered leagues at my FLGS and was super proud to win both the tournaments that I played, never losing a game, or even coming close to losing a game.

After my schedule got more busy and I couldn't commit to multiple weeks of a league, I tried doing some PUGs, but to my surprise, there were no takers. Nobody wanted to play against the dreaded army. They said I was 'too lucky'. My army was 'too OP'. I was 'too competitive'.

At first I thought that it was just salty opponents who were mad about being bad. I wasn't even being 'that guy' too much. It's not like I could bring knights or flying monstrous creatures.

I realized after a while though that it wasn't anything about the game of 40k or the games that I played though, it was how I played the game.

Playing to win gets you noticed. Even if you explain how you win, if you do it gleefully or matter of factly, players may take it as being condescending. If you allow them to take back mistakes, but explain that you're only letting them do it once so that they'll "learn", it's not like you're allowing them to correct errors so that they can fix their gameplay, it's more that you, the superior player who has made no mistakes that you need to take back, are permitting them to do so.

And so I stopped playing 40k for the simple reason that I had no opponents.

I've been very careful with how I play other games, and especially Armada for this reason. With other competitive players, it's not so hard. I know plenty of people who will laugh when you blow up their ISD in one round and they'll come back harder at you the next game.

A lot of gamers are not the most socially adjusted of people though. On both sides. I didn't realize that my attitude was coming across as abrasive, as condescending, as a sense of superiority and an intensity that just wasn't fun for some other people to play against. It's something that I am now extremely mindful of.

One of the things I do now is I buy my opponents waters while we play. It's a long game. Most gamers I know are probably in a perpetual state of dehydration from all the soda and pizza. 1$ is a small price to pay to foster a small sense of camaraderie. I think a lot more about my opponent than just about the game. I want to make sure that they are having a good time and spending their time well with a friendly person and both people are enjoying a game they love.

It's not just how you play the game, it's how people perceive how you play the game. Having someone not want to play you is rough, but remember that you don't need to please everyone, but if you worry about it being a problem, try some new things. Focus on a new challenge. Win, but have fun doing so and make sure that your opponent does too.

It's a challenging concept, especially for a competitive person. It's a new competition; against yourself! The best kind! (Actually not, competitions against yourself are dumb and pointless, inspiring posters notwithstanding).

I hope this incoherent rambling helps a bit. Just taking a break from bar exam studying. (Incidentally, being a lawyer is great for a competitive person. You get paid more than average and you alienate most people straight away anyways just by telling them your profession )

HI Egg.

This post hits home hard. I started in 40k where it was competitive. People wanted their armies to win! They wanted to show tactical dominance. . . I was good at that. Then 6th edition dropped and my world was shattered.

Since then I have wanted a balanced game and Armada has appeared, but I do think I do exactly as you say. I explain how to win or what's going on but people may be taking a tone or implications to what I am saying that I don't know is even there. . .

Thanks this helps a lot.

Still, how does one get off that list? Is there a way to get off that list? Does one have to rely on a tournament and try and foster something there since they are forced to play you (if they even do?)

Hi, I'm Egg, and I'm a reformed(ing) competitive player.

I used to play 40k. I started playing pretty recently, and thought I would give the Necrons a go as my first army. About a month after I started building the army, the new Necron codex came out and elevated them to a high power level (for the time) that casual players of the game didn't really know how to approach. It gave Necron players a bad name to begin with, which I didn't help with my behavior.

I didn't bring the worst things that I could think of, but I was unforgiving. I played relentlessly. I played to table my opponent. I played to win. The winning was the most important key point. I entered leagues at my FLGS and was super proud to win both the tournaments that I played, never losing a game, or even coming close to losing a game.

After my schedule got more busy and I couldn't commit to multiple weeks of a league, I tried doing some PUGs, but to my surprise, there were no takers. Nobody wanted to play against the dreaded army. They said I was 'too lucky'. My army was 'too OP'. I was 'too competitive'.

At first I thought that it was just salty opponents who were mad about being bad. I wasn't even being 'that guy' too much. It's not like I could bring knights or flying monstrous creatures.

I realized after a while though that it wasn't anything about the game of 40k or the games that I played though, it was how I played the game.

Playing to win gets you noticed. Even if you explain how you win, if you do it gleefully or matter of factly, players may take it as being condescending. If you allow them to take back mistakes, but explain that you're only letting them do it once so that they'll "learn", it's not like you're allowing them to correct errors so that they can fix their gameplay, it's more that you, the superior player who has made no mistakes that you need to take back, are permitting them to do so.

And so I stopped playing 40k for the simple reason that I had no opponents.

I've been very careful with how I play other games, and especially Armada for this reason. With other competitive players, it's not so hard. I know plenty of people who will laugh when you blow up their ISD in one round and they'll come back harder at you the next game.

A lot of gamers are not the most socially adjusted of people though. On both sides. I didn't realize that my attitude was coming across as abrasive, as condescending, as a sense of superiority and an intensity that just wasn't fun for some other people to play against. It's something that I am now extremely mindful of.

One of the things I do now is I buy my opponents waters while we play. It's a long game. Most gamers I know are probably in a perpetual state of dehydration from all the soda and pizza. 1$ is a small price to pay to foster a small sense of camaraderie. I think a lot more about my opponent than just about the game. I want to make sure that they are having a good time and spending their time well with a friendly person and both people are enjoying a game they love.

It's not just how you play the game, it's how people perceive how you play the game. Having someone not want to play you is rough, but remember that you don't need to please everyone, but if you worry about it being a problem, try some new things. Focus on a new challenge. Win, but have fun doing so and make sure that your opponent does too.

It's a challenging concept, especially for a competitive person. It's a new competition; against yourself! The best kind! (Actually not, competitions against yourself are dumb and pointless, inspiring posters notwithstanding).

I hope this incoherent rambling helps a bit. Just taking a break from bar exam studying. (Incidentally, being a lawyer is great for a competitive person. You get paid more than average and you alienate most people straight away anyways just by telling them your profession )

HI Egg.

This post hits home hard. I started in 40k where it was competitive. People wanted their armies to win! They wanted to show tactical dominance. . . I was good at that. Then 6th edition dropped and my world was shattered.

Since then I have wanted a balanced game and Armada has appeared, but I do think I do exactly as you say. I explain how to win or what's going on but people may be taking a tone or implications to what I am saying that I don't know is even there. . .

Thanks this helps a lot.

Still, how does one get off that list? Is there a way to get off that list? Does one have to rely on a tournament and try and foster something there since they are forced to play you (if they even do?)

I'm not sure how one gets off the list. I took the easy way out and just started playing a new game with a whole new group of people to terrorize.

In all seriousness though, I still play 40k sometimes against friends and other competitive players. People who like to play hard and build crazy lists to try out.

A tournament is possibly a good starting point. People when approaching a tournament should be bringing a competitive list so they can't fault you for bringing a strong list. They can't show up with a knife to the gunfight and not expect to get smashed. Once at the tournament, concentrate on how you play. It'll be tough, especially in a tournament setting where you'll want to focus on your gameplay and play to win even more than normal.

One thing I do with my armada group is we will often discuss the game and how it plays. Combos, lists, best practices. We'll play games and intentionally play slowly, and each side will try to determine what the best play is for both sides at any given time. It's actually extremely informative, and it gives people a chance to learn more about the game without the stress of competition.

Another thing I have done in the past is collaborated with specific opponents before. I'll ask them if there's something in particular they want more practice against. If there's something specific they don't want me to run. I've even had people design the lists they want to play against, for a challenge on my part and practice on their parts.

There are a lot of things you can try, and I think it's a good thing that you're concerned about it and are willing to be mindful of how to change the perception.

A lot of people don't care at all. It's a good thing that not only are you fostering a community but you're also willing to step up and keep it healthy.

I see, this is the wierd thing. Unless it is a store championship or something I really want to win, I don't bring my winall list (I don't need to name it right? Everyone knows it by know I think). I play silly lists. Lists to test theories and to try something new.

I wanted to at my Neb's Away list that I designed for Drasnighta. I wanted to see how it would handle. That is my idea of fun. Learning something new about this deep game.

Just one last point: You should make sure that you still have fun.

It's not on you to make sure your opponent hs fun. That's their job. They play the game too. They have to make a list that they enjoy playing. Presumably they like the game.

All you have to do is make sure that by your actions you are not taking what would otherwise be a fun game for them and making it un-fun.

Don't handicap your own enjoyment of the game or your own sense of fulfillment.

You're never gonna be able to please everybody.

If you are very good and playing against a new player at a casual night offer an asymmetric game, they can be fun.

This post makes me wonder about whether or not its a good idea to bring lists that are maybe "too competitive" to league days... if the balance of the game is such that there are lists or units which are justifiably labeled as competitive.. and that's a big if... perhaps it might be a good idea to bring "fun" lists, and "competitive lists" and then ask your opponent which they are up for... but with so few opportunities to play the game, i could see why people may only bring a competitive list in order to be at least somewhat prepped for an upcoming tourney....

It really depends on the league, SkyCake.

Its fairly open with ours. We tend to jump between Tourney Prep and "Trying something stupid."

Its more in how you play the game, rather than what you're playing with. We're not perfect, but we're generally pretty good.

This can be really subjective, so really the only way to have a clear answer would be to ask the player what he meant exactly. I don't know you, so I really can't tell why someone would refuse to play against you. But I don't think it has anything to do with the list, but probably the attitude in general, how you approach the game.

Maybe what he meant was that you take it too seriously (for his own taste). Have you ever seen this player in a tournament? Maybe a cutthroat game trying to maximize the victory is not his cup of tea.

Yes, ultimately the goal is to win, but for a lot of players, the journey is more important than the destination. What's the point to play (in a casual game) if you will not enjoy those 2 hours? Have you played against him before? How did those games ended?

Maybe he plays Armada because of the theme, because he wants to have a good laugh with his opponent while pushing a Star Destroyer and going pew pew. Maybe he doesn't care about improving his game. Maybe having someone explaining to him why he lost or what he should have done feel like being patronized.

The list being competitive or not is not important, that's how you play it. Even a casual list, or a list that you use just to test some things, can be played competitively. If you play methodically, with your obstacles carefully placed and your ship set in an already planned manner, it might give a feeling of powerlessness to your opponent. If you brought the list to practice something, it will show in your way of playing, and if you only play with the idea to win or learn something, it might turn off some players.

Your way of playing the game is not wrong, but his is not either. There is no right or wrong way of playing the game. The important thing is that you both have fun, and if he thinks he will not, it's probably better for both of you to just not game together. Either ask him why more precisely, or let it go and respect his decision.

There is a short lost of gamer's 4 or 5 in our club that a lot the members will not play any game with for a whole list of reasons, but it breaks down to people just don't enjoy playing the game when they are in it. There is one member I will never play in games they are in and other people are OK with him. I have walked away at the start to play another game or have gone home or sat and read rule books for that playing slot. There are 3 people when GMing a game that will tell them to go play elsewhere when they come to the table to play. So its not just you and this one guy. There will always be people other people don't want to be around and playing a game can make being around them even worse. Its just the way people are.

it might be a good idea to bring "fun" lists, and "competitive lists" and then ask your opponent which they are up for...

Yeah, I need some new fun lists, feel guilty every game where I bring the mc30s now. Need base ideas though.

I would probably play against jar jar binks... that's how much I love this game

it might be a good idea to bring "fun" lists, and "competitive lists" and then ask your opponent which they are up for...

Yeah, I need some new fun lists, feel guilty every game where I bring the mc30s now. Need base ideas though.

This is an issue with Armada then. Any list can be competitive. I can roll up with 6 Nebulon-B's and do great. How do I know? I have done it. So unless I am doing something stupid like putting Gunnery Teams on VSD's with Slaved Turrets, there is no list that can't be ran in a "competitive" sense.

So I am not sure what the issue is there.

I do see that player at tournaments and he is not a new player. He is rather a good player

Then, unfortunately, you must narrow down the fact that, the lists you take may not be the issue at all, and we return to a definition of "Competitive" that is "Not Fun To Play With/Against" rather than "Tournament Ready".

I just hate saying it.

Then, unfortunately, you must narrow down the fact that, the lists you take may not be the issue at all, and we return to a definition of "Competitive" that is "Not Fun To Play With/Against" rather than "Tournament Ready".

I just hate saying it.

Well it just confirms what I suspected, that I am the issue. Which means I can actually be hurting the Armada scene

Then, unfortunately, you must narrow down the fact that, the lists you take may not be the issue at all, and we return to a definition of "Competitive" that is "Not Fun To Play With/Against" rather than "Tournament Ready".

I just hate saying it.

Well it just confirms what I suspected, that I am the issue. Which means I can actually be hurting the Armada scene

So, now we turn it around. How can we make Lyraeus "Not a Problem" without removing him from the Armada Scene. Which, honestly, wouldn't be good for anyone....

There has been a ton of advice given already in this thread.

I used to be thick skinned, but even here online on these forums, I've gotten hurls of abuse through PMs On and off the Forums. Some times, its really gotten to me. Its a mirror of what happened to me with the BADGaming side of things back in Australia, when I coached and organised a tiny little home-built Gaming Club to win the Inter-Club Challenges in the state. Multiple times. I have a reputation as a "know it all", because my brain works in such a way that lets me digest and understand technical documents - including rulebooks - in such a way that I can interpreted rules quickly for others. Which inevitably lead to the rumour that I'd be no fun to play against, because I "Enforced the Rules."

So, I made myself a checklist.

1) Enjoy your Games. Even when they Suck.

2) Give advice when its Asked for. Not before.

3) Laugh it off. All the time. Even when it hurts you.

4) Shake Hands at the Start. Introduce with a Smile.

5) Shake Hands at the End. Win, Lose, Stomping or Close Call.

6) Engage Throughout. Silence and Concentration is easily misinterpreted for Brooding.

7) Congratulate your Opponent on the good moves they make that you didn't see... Even if you saw it.

8) Know at the end of the day, you're a perfectly fallible human being. And so is your opponent. No-one is better than the other.

Then, unfortunately, you must narrow down the fact that, the lists you take may not be the issue at all, and we return to a definition of "Competitive" that is "Not Fun To Play With/Against" rather than "Tournament Ready".

I just hate saying it.

Well it just confirms what I suspected, that I am the issue. Which means I can actually be hurting the Armada scene

So, now we turn it around. How can we make Lyraeus "Not a Problem" without removing him from the Armada Scene. Which, honestly, wouldn't be good for anyone....

There has been a ton of advice given already in this thread.

I used to be thick skinned, but even here online on these forums, I've gotten hurls of abuse through PMs On and off the Forums. Some times, its really gotten to me. Its a mirror of what happened to me with the BADGaming side of things back in Australia, when I coached and organised a tiny little home-built Gaming Club to win the Inter-Club Challenges in the state. Multiple times. I have a reputation as a "know it all", because my brain works in such a way that lets me digest and understand technical documents - including rulebooks - in such a way that I can interpreted rules quickly for others. Which inevitably lead to the rumour that I'd be no fun to play against, because I "Enforced the Rules."

So, I made myself a checklist.

1) Enjoy your Games. Even when they Suck.

2) Give advice when its Asked for. Not before.

3) Laugh it off. All the time. Even when it hurts you.

4) Shake Hands at the Start. Introduce with a Smile.

5) Shake Hands at the End. Win, Lose, Stomping or Close Call.

6) Engage Throughout. Silence and Concentration is easily misinterpreted for Brooding.

7) Congratulate your Opponent on the good moves they make that you didn't see... Even if you saw it.

8) Know at the end of the day, you're a perfectly fallible human being. And so is your opponent. No-one is better than the other.

Makes sense. All of these will be a challenge to remember but I think I can do it.

What do they use to create the custom Armada cards?

Remember #8


I made my checklist. My checklist works for me.

Make your checklist. Make it work for you.



And Blank Templates for Cards can be found here:

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1355130/armada-templates

Oh dear... is it horrible that I just saw that list as command/upgrade cards that I want to make into real ones for you to print out. I'm a horrible person.

Also this thread got me doing some self reflection of my own.

Self Reflection is admirable.

I have come to piece with the fact that. I am an Arsehole.

An Absolute and Total Sarcastic Australian Arsehole.

I don't fit well into Canada. A lot of Australians do, I do not.

So I've forced myself to be very mindful of the situation that I find myself in. I try to be a nice guy.

Its lucky that, honestly, I only really engage with my local group Fortnightly, and I try to put my positive energy into that. The rest of the time, I'm here online. And being online removes a lot of the fact that I am a crabby, S.A.D. effected individual who, basically, hates the situation he is in but tries to work his way through it.

I know I'm guilty of some of these things. So any conversation that gets me thinknow on being a better player, I take advantage of it. Sadly I cannot contribute anything that hasn't already been said to this conversation.

Sadly I sit at the other end of the spectrum. I like being liked (I sometimes desperately wish I was an ass so I didn't always feel guilty when I let my ugly side slip). It curbs most of my more assine tendencies till I genuinely decide I dislike a person.

Eh, anyway.

If you so desire, I can probably wip these up into cards in a few hours (excluding image seaching). Or would that just be rude?

*player Modification. Unlimited.

I understand what you mean by not understanding the idea of being "too competitive." As Worf reminded us, if winning weren't important, you wouldn't keep score.

As to the question at hand I think Snipafist in #13 hits on the two big things. You are either too good or too much of jerk. As Eggzavier points out being good can make you be perceived like a jerk.

Having high expectations for your play can be perceived as patronizing or condescending. Expecting others to have high expectations for their own play and as having a desire to learn and improve can come across as being a jerk to those who are "just trying to have fun." It is so hard for me to not call those people liars.

They're not lying of course. They're being disingenuous. I've come to start thinking about it as a kind of "virtue signaling." They're a "good person" for not being a win at all costs player despite the "netlist" they've brought.

They might also be trying to pad their ego ahead of time if they lose. By not caring if they win they excuse themselves for losing. I've often found that those most vociferous in not caring if they win are often... well... bad players.

I also tend to think with some of those (this came from back in my pool playing days) they're sort of intentionally being bad so as to be able to comfort themselves about being good at something else in their lives. If they're a sh*tty pool player on a Friday night they can view the rest of the crappiness in their lives as not so crappy. This essentially is circling back on what people want out of the game.

One of the things to think about in understanding where folks are coming from with regards this sort of thing and thus how they might react to you is learning what their frame of reference is for measuring their personal achievement. Learn what their standard of excellence is. Learn what their perception of excellence is. Remember that is not so simple of a thing as knowing that Jack Nicklaus or Tiger Woods were excellent at golf.

I've found that people who share my standards and perceptions in that regard tend to not find me condescending or "too competitive."