1 hour ago, kris40k said:

inc rant...

Sportsmanship.

I'll agree 100% that sportsmanship includes not bad mouthing your opponent, however I believe you somehow missed that good sportsmanship is those unwritten "self made moral laws that do not exist" between players.

Christ, I ******* love being a geek and geek culture, but sometimes it is so **** tiring having to explain to other gamers (not you, here) in competitive tabletop or video games that sometimes just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you should do something, or some of the basic concepts of sportsmanship that they should have learned as kids. Back when I used to be into competitive fighting games, I became familiar with the article @LordBlades linked to, and the attitude that was prevalent in the community of try-hards vs. scrubs. There is some validity to it, such as a players possible lack of understanding of the difference between fireball spam and zoning which is a very important part of fighting games. However, the idea that winning within the confine of the rules is the only thing that matters is a horrible idea to take away from the article, and too many people use it as passage from the bible to excuse their own poor sportsmanship and that anyone who complains otherwise is "just a scrub."

There will always be cases that are not covered by the written rules, or exploits that exist within a designed game, and just because something is legal to do, doesn't make it moral to do. Yes, the developer made it possible to <do whatever>, and yes, you got banned from the game for <doing whatever> because your parents should have raised you better. A clear example of this in X-Wing TMG is slow-playing to delay a game. There is no hard and fast written rule with time limits to set dials, take actions, or about delaying a game, however it falls under the confines of "unsportsmanlike behavior" and a TO can and will call someone on it at their discretion. A less clear and very debatable example is fortressing in a dogfighting game, which thankfully isn't so effective that its become a widespread issue.

Unsportsmanlike conduct is the rule to cover unwritten rules, and to borrow a phrase from Justice Potter about pornography, "I know it when I see it."

Now, the XWing TMG Community spans the world, and what is and is not acceptable to do at the table will differ from store to store in someone's local meta, let alone different countries with different cultures. However good sportsmanship is a concept that is understood everywhere and we can expect a certain level of decorum between players no matter where we are or where we are from. There will be some differences of opinion though that come up, and that's understandable and debatable, but we should do so with respect for each other and with an open mind. Often its very hard to be open to the idea that we could be wrong on a moral level, as could be implied that we might be the baddies but its a sign of wisdom to understand that you may be wrong about something.

With that, I'll apologize if I came across personally insulting to anyone earlier; I sometimes get a little lit up with certain subjects.

You do bring up some very good points in this, but I also think it is important for people to understand that they work in reverse too. While all those who behold to their own set of regulations aren't all scrubs, those who are content to behold to just the base rules of the game are also not all try-hards. Yes, there are jerks, but they jerks don't define all cases. And Just as there is "can but shouldn't" situations involving game mechanics, there are also "can but shouldn't" situations in reacting and judging others.

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth or anything. I just wanted to give another perspective on things. In the end, gaming is a relationship, even between total strangers. Both sides need to be considered, and should be willing to make concessions to the other if the "relationship" is long term, including maybe cutting down on bringing a list the other doesn't like, but also being willing to still play without grumbling when that list does come up.

A key part of all this is communication. Yes, there are standards of good sportsmanship we all know, but there are others that are personal that need to communicated rather than implied.

All of this defensiveness, honestly, reads to me as: "If nobody specifically enumerates every conceivable way in which I shouldn't be a d!ck, how in the world is little ol' me to know what I'm not supposed to do?!"

You know when you're crossing the line, I'm willing to bet. I see it in our local meta, when certain people are just barely sheepish about what they've brought to a 14-person kit tournament, and very quick to defend themselves against any perceived side-eye.

Are there fuzzy lines? Of course there are. There are fuzzy lines in any situation that involves societal norms and compacts. But it's pretty rare when people don't at least know when they've edged into the fuzzy lines. (To be fair, it does happen. I've seen it a few time in five years of X-Wing, but a couple of those were with players on the spectrum, which is just gonna happen.)

7 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

All of this defensiveness, honestly, reads to me as: "If nobody specifically enumerates every conceivable way in which I shouldn't be a d!ck, how in the world is little ol' me to know what I'm not supposed to do?!"

You know when you're crossing the line, I'm willing to bet. I see it in our local meta, when certain people are just barely sheepish about what they've brought to a 14-person kit tournament, and very quick to defend themselves against any perceived side-eye.

Are there fuzzy lines? Of course there are. There are fuzzy lines in any situation that involves societal norms and compacts. But it's pretty rare when people don't at least know when they've edged into the fuzzy lines. (To be fair, it does happen. I've seen it a few time in five years of X-Wing, but a couple of those were with players on the spectrum, which is just gonna happen.)

Yes, that happens, but another reason for the sheepishness is not so much of inward "oh, I did something bad" and more a "am I gonna get grief for flying what I like?" They get defensive because people are judging them because they wanted to play with a character/ship they love that others consider "too meta".

Just now, SabineKey said:

Yes, that happens, but another reason for the sheepishness is not so much of inward "oh, I did something bad" and more a "am I gonna get grief for flying what I like?" They get defensive because people are judging them because they wanted to play with a character/ship they love that others consider "too meta".

Okay. And they know this, but they do it anyway. As is their right. Why do you only champion their right to fly what they want to fly, even in the face of social disapproval, but not champion the right of people to express the social disapproval?

28 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

All of this defensiveness, honestly, reads to me as: "If nobody specifically enumerates every conceivable way in which I shouldn't be a d!ck, how in the world is little ol' me to know what I'm not supposed to do?!"

You know when you're crossing the line, I'm willing to bet. I see it in our local meta, when certain people are just barely sheepish about what they've brought to a 14-person kit tournament, and very quick to defend themselves against any perceived side-eye.

Are there fuzzy lines? Of course there are. There are fuzzy lines in any situation that involves societal norms and compacts. But it's pretty rare when people don't at least know when they've edged into the fuzzy lines. (To be fair, it does happen. I've seen it a few time in five years of X-Wing, but a couple of those were with players on the spectrum, which is just gonna happen.)

I do not go to casual nights, primarily because of the mismatch of goals: I am always looking to test a [competitive] idea, and I am competitive; and not everyone there has the same view.

However, if I go to any store kit tournament, I am going to test an idea, and it will be competitive. And yet, everyone seems to have a good time.

And to be direct, that is how *I* enjoy the game. It's a tournament. I am not trying to diminish the fun of others, and I am trying to have fun.

I'm already avoiding regular game nights, and now people want to dictate the terms of store kits and tournaments? Hard no.

18 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

They get defensive because people are judging them because they wanted to play with a character/ship they love that others consider "too meta".

^ This.

The defensiveness reads because some in this thread projected that the people playing a meta list "know" they're being a ****.

Actually, no, they don't. And no, they're not.

18 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Okay. And they know this, but they do it anyway. As is their right. Why do you only champion their right to fly what they want to fly, even in the face of social disapproval, but not champion the right of people to express the social disapproval?

Because having a right doesn't mean one should exercise it. If there is clear bad sportsmanship (especially repeated) than social disapproval is a prudent course of action. But if the person's "crime" is bringing a list they got off the web because they thought it looked fun (assuming this player conducted himself well in the standards of good sportsmanship), then I think people who are judging that player are being a bit petty, no matter how meta cheese it is. Yes, this feeling about others being petty probably falls under "can but shouldn't" and I will work on it, but you asked. And I engage with anyone who disagrees with that feeling and try to see if from their point of view, as I am trying to do with you right now.

I am not trying to deny anyone their right about how to think. But I do want them to analyze why they hold those beliefs and try to see things from another's point of view. And that person still comes to the same conclusion as before, so be it. But at least the actually tried to look beyond just their view point.

3 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I'm already avoiding regular game nights, and now people want to dictate the terms of store kits and tournaments? Hard no.

See, you guys keep doing this. Nobody is "dictating."

People are expressing their opinion of disapproval. Which is their right. You're ignoring them. Which is your right.

As for why it is always okay -- and always should be okay -- for people to express their opinions at what they perceive to be violations of a social compact, kris40k has expressed it very well.

24 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

Yes, that happens, but another reason for the sheepishness is not so much of inward "oh, I did something bad" and more a "am I gonna get grief for flying what I like?" They get defensive because people are judging them because they wanted to play with a character/ship they love that others consider "too meta".

There's a lot of good posts here, but I'm quoting this one because it reminded me of something.

@Boom Owl mentions that people need to be more open about their expectations, because he's not a telepath, and you mention that communication is key to this, and I 100% agree with both of you there. Communication is key. However it doesn't take telepathy to realize unspoken social contracts, just social skills, both of which may be considered superpowers to those in the wargaming community and why communication is lacking. As a parent to a couple kids on the spectrum, I understand that some people have very hard times picking up on social cues compared to others, so we can't always expect the unspoken to be realized by the person across the table from us. The side-eye that @Jeff Wilder mentions when someone plops down Dengar and Nym on the table may go unnoticed, or noticed and not understood why, and later on they find out that no one likes to play against them.

But if anything, we can't affect what our opponents do or say, we can only affect what we do or say, so the onus of open communication lies on ourselves. Getting to know your local players better and talking about the game will help avoid situations where you didn't know that everyone was avoiding playing certain ships and you are breaking any unspoken rules. Like myself, its an unspoken rule at my local shop that no one runs Kylo Ren (crew). This kinda sucks because the Decimator is my favorite ship in the game and the reason why I started playing X-Wing, and RAClo is an effective ship these days, however I avoid running it. There is no stone tablet mounted on the wall saying, "Thou Shall Not Show Your Neighbor the Dark Side," but other than a few appearances upon release, everyone kind of picked up that no one was having fun playing against the card. Its never been said, and if you did come to the shop for a store kit and plop it down, people will play against you, but you might notice a wrinkled nose or two here or there. Once someone becomes more involved in the local community, they will likely pick up or be informed of the more informal rules.

On ‎24‎/‎09‎/‎2017 at 5:47 PM, Crimsonwarlock said:

I've seen a few posts in multiple areas (even for different games) where people state that they hate net listing. Why is there such hate for this?

I don't see why people get so mad when someone goes to the next to find a good list to play.

Thoughts?

Haters gonna hate. If all they live for is to hate on others then they're very sad people who should be pitied.

Star Wars, and this hobby, is for fun and the joy that escapism to a galaxy far far away brings. If your joy is intense competition, and you enjoy playing against likeminded people, you're playing the game right. If your joy is in searching for the best combos and greatest lists, and you enjoy discussing these lists and testing them against likeminded people, you're playing the game right. If your joy comes from collecting and playing your favourite ships, and you enjoy gaming against fellow collectors, you're playing the game right. If your joy comes from having a theme and telling a story with your collection and games (this is me btw), and you enjoy gaming just to tell the next chapter, you're playing the game right.

Fun. Joy. Enjoyment. Happy. These are the feelings that a hobby, especially Star Wars, should engender.

Hate. Anger. Disappointment. Arguing. If you feel this way then there's the door. Don't let it hit you on the way out.

Each to their own. Respect each other and just be happy that someone is enjoying the same thing you are, even if their enjoyment comes from a different aspect of the same hobby.

Those are my thoughts anyway.

50 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Okay. And they know this, but they do it anyway. As is their right. Why do you only champion their right to fly what they want to fly, even in the face of social disapproval, but not champion the right of people to express the social disapproval?

Because expressing social disapproval for playing within the rules of the game is being a dlck, playing within the rules of the game is not.

Just because lots of people are dlcks, doesn't mean it's right.

7 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Because expressing social disapproval for playing within the rules of the game is being a dlck, playing within the rules of the game is not.

That is simply not necessarily true. People do things within the rules, on smaller and larger scales, all the time that make them collossal d!cks.

The failure to understand that "I'm within the rules" is not a free pass from d!ckdom is the common thread that the defenders of WAAC have. Again, kris40k's posts are on-point here.

2 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Because expressing social disapproval for playing within the rules of the game is being a dlck, playing within the rules of the game is not.

Just because lots of people are dlcks, doesn't mean it's right.

I had a much longer response, but this is apt and succinct.

The weird projections pushed onto people here, for playing within the rules, is super weird and actually quite dickish. Again, for your casual nights, you can simply declare "hey, I'm playing something a bit more fun/thematic/whatever," and not play against dengaroo.

But even new players might want to try out their Nym list, because 1) it's new, and 2) you can build a solid nym that's borderline OP against your 3X list, even as a new player with more limited resources.

I personally hate Nym (the playstyle), but I don't begrudge others for liking it. [I also hate miranda, too, while we're throwing out hates]

I have to say, the funniest thing about these most recent posts is that the Krayts are the absolute poster boys for expressing social disapproval and pressure in dozens of facets of X-Wing.

3 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

That is simply not necessarily true. People do things within the rules, on smaller and larger scales, all the time that make them collossal d!cks.

The failure to understand that "I'm within the rules" is not a free pass from d!ckdom is the common thread that the defenders of WAAC have. Again, kris40k's posts are on-point here.

*shrug*

I disagree.

The social contract we all enter into when we play the game is 'I will abide by the rules of the game'.

Bringing any legal list is well within that contract, unless the rules of the specific tournament have additional restrictions.

There are some specific situations in which it can be a bit of a bad move to be slavish about following the rules, especially when, for instance, your opponent has been lenient with you if you forgot something, it's kind of a jerk move to be harsh with him in the same situation, for instance.

But I wouldn't ever say bringing a list that's legal is a jerk move.

1 minute ago, Jeff Wilder said:

I have to say, the funniest thing about these most recent posts is that the Krayts are the absolute poster boys for expressing social disapproval and pressure in dozens of facets of X-Wing.

Sure... but almost always ironically (meaning we mean the OPPOSITE of that), or to other judgmental people (like here), or to people making unfounded claims (a personal pet peeve of mine, based on my background).

3 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

That is simply not necessarily true. People do things within the rules, on smaller and larger scales, all the time that make them collossal d!cks.

The failure to understand that "I'm within the rules" is not a free pass from d!ckdom is the common thread that the defenders of WAAC have. Again, kris40k's posts are on-point here.

On the other hand, people who bring strong list to a tournament are playing exactly in the spirit of the rules and what a tournament is about. Pretty much every single tournament I've heard of has prizes for the guy who wins it and not so often for the guy who has the most creative list or who rolls the most crits etc. To me this strongly suggests the tournaments have a pretty strong focus on who wins, and not so much on other aspects. Showing 'contempt' to people who follow this spirit and try to win is not good sportsmanship in my book.

After all, what's a tournament where people are socially pressured to not bring their best going to be about ? Who's the best at not really trying to win?

1 minute ago, Tlfj200 said:

Sure... but almost always ironically (meaning we mean the OPPOSITE of that), or to other judgmental people (like here), or to people making unfounded claims (a personal pet peeve of mine, based on my background).

See, it doesn't matter if it's ironic or not. What matters is that you have the right to express your approval or disapproval of certain behaviors in X-Wing, but you're against the rights of others to do the same.

Just for example, it doesn't particularly bother me at all when people blame their dice after I've tabled them. It bothers you guys. You speak out against it ... and, dare I say, unironically. People complaining about the dice are not breaking any rules of the games. They are breaking what you, and the other Krayts, and a good number of other people, perceive to be the social compact of "be a good loser."

Some of us, instead, perceive a social compact of "you have some responsibility for the fun of the opponents you expect to have during that day," and when we believe that social compact to have been broken, we express our disapproval.

The difference? Well, one obvious difference is which social compact -- or either, or both -- that you feel is in effect. The other difference is that, for example, I have made no attempt to tell you that your perceived social compact is wrong, and you're not allowed to "dictate" my statements on dice luck.

Just now, Jeff Wilder said:

See, it doesn't matter if it's ironic or not. What matters is that you have the right to express your approval or disapproval of certain behaviors in X-Wing, but you're against the rights of others to do the same.

Just for example, it doesn't particularly bother me at all when people blame their dice after I've tabled them. It bothers you guys. You speak out against it ... and, dare I say, unironically. People complaining about the dice are not breaking any rules of the games. They are breaking what you, and the other Krayts, and a good number of other people, perceive to be the social compact of "be a good loser."

Some of us, instead, perceive a social compact of "you have some responsibility for the fun of the opponents you expect to have during that day," and when we believe that social compact to have been broken, we express our disapproval.

The difference? Well, one obvious difference is which social compact -- or either, or both -- that you feel is in effect. The other difference is that, for example, I have made no attempt to tell you that your perceived social compact is wrong, and you're not allowed to "dictate" my statements on dice luck.

No, Jeff, I think you misunderstand me.

I'm not against your right to express it. I literally came in here to remind people that, sometimes, people just like the meta lists, and there isn't some weirdly projected, deep-seated self-hatred or character flaw for playing the meta list.

And, yes, I do speak out against the blaming of dice. One reason, more benignly, is simply because they won't get better removing the impact of their decisions from their outcomes (so if someone wishes to improve, they should first start with their own choices). But, possibly more importantly and in theme of your statement that "you have some responsibility for the fun of the opponents you expect to have during that day" - blaming your dice ALSO removes all of your opponents GOOD DECISIONS in beating you (i.e. you're a poor loser).

Did it become super fun to hear from your opponent "you only beat me because of my/your dice"? I missed that update in the "unspoken" social contract.

And, again, you can, and are, doing whatever you want, but as you have stated, I can inform you you're being a ****. And that's actually what the point was - this weird aggressiveness to people playing "good" lists is 1) weird, and 2) dickish.

You can keep doing it - it's not a crime, but a few of us in here [initially] calmly explained that some people play these lists simply because they like them, and that's it.

1 minute ago, Tlfj200 said:

And, again, you can, and are, doing whatever you want, but as you have stated, I can inform you you're being a ****. And that's actually what the point was - this weird aggressiveness to people playing "good" lists is 1) weird, and 2) dickish.

Just so I'm clear, by saying this you are not actually attempting to shape behavior. Instead, you're just, you know, saying it. You don't have any goal in mind. It's just random opinionatin'.

Quote

You can keep doing it - it's not a crime, but a few of us in here [initially] calmly explained that some people play these lists simply because they like them, and that's it.

Yes, they like them, and they like them so much they're willing to discount the fun of their opponents. And, in this case, because you agree with "play whatever you want, as long as YOU like it," it's okay for them to discount the fun of their opponents. But in the case of dice-luck complainers, because you disagree with it, it's not okay for them to discount the fun of their opponents.

As long as we're clear.

And, BTW, speaking of clear, I'd appreciate it if everybody took three minutes to re-read my first post in this thread. Some of y'all are ascribing to me positions and extremity of positions that I have neither staked nor defended. I'm sure it's unintentional.

On 9/25/2017 at 9:36 AM, Jeff Wilder said:

FWIW, I don't hate net-listing. In fact, I think hatred for net-listing is stupid. Net-listing is a perfectly valid way to learn how to build lists and to discover what types of lists you like to fly without accidentally gimping yourself into having a terrible time.

No, I saw this, which is why the rest the responses in the thread took a weird turn...

4 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Just so I'm clear, by saying this you are not actually attempting to shape behavior. Instead, you're just, you know, saying it. You don't have any goal in mind. It's just random opinionatin'.

21 hours ago, Jeff Wilder said:

It always amuses me how the one contingent sees no contradiction in saying, in the same breath, "I have the right to fly whatever I want" and "You don't have the right to express your opinion on it."

Whereas, by contrast, I assert, "You have the right to fly whatever you want" and "I have the right to express how I feel about what you choose to fly."

It's not that subtle a difference, folks.

Look, I'm doing whatever you're doing.

6 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Yes, they like them, and they like them so much they're willing to discount the fun of their opponents. And, in this case, because you agree with "play whatever you want, as long as YOU like it," it's okay for them to discount the fun of their opponents. But in the case of dice-luck complainers, because you disagree with it, it's not okay for them to discount the fun of their opponents.

Come on, Jeff - you know that yelling at dice and telling your opponent, to their face, that they shouldn't have won the game [despite their and/or your own choices], and playing a meta list are not the same.

Maybe, at the end of the day, we simply have very different social contracts (either personally, and/or regionally), if those are the conclusions you are coming to.

10 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

Come on, Jeff - you know that yelling at dice and telling your opponent, to their face, that they shouldn't have won the game [despite their and/or your own choices], and playing a meta list are not the same.

I do know that, but the difference is one of degree, not kind. And you know that shaping the narrative by adding in "yelling at dice" and "telling your opponent [...] they shouldn't have won the game" is disingenuous, because -- in addition to these things -- you guys have expressed your belief that you simply shouldn't blame dice.

Quote

Maybe, at the end of the day, we simply have very different social contracts (either personally, and/or regionally), if those are the conclusions you are coming to.

Well, you can't have a "personal" social contract (I think that would just be an ethos), but otherwise, yes. They do differ by regions and playgroups, significantly. And that's okay, despite the absolutist statements to the contrary made in this thread by the "if it's legal, it's absolutely fine" folks. This is, in fact, one of the reasons that I have always dropped after making a Regionals cut ... the higher the level of competition, the more alien it is to the social contract I prefer to play under.

I'd just like to point out that blaming the dice is only wrong most of the time. I watched a game a couple weeks ago where one of the players attacked at least a couple times every turn, and in the entire game threw one, single hit icon. I'm pretty sure that game, at least, was going to be a loss for him regardless of how well/poorly he flew.

1 hour ago, kris40k said:

There's a lot of good posts here, but I'm quoting this one because it reminded me of something.

@Boom Owl mentions that people need to be more open about their expectations, because he's not a telepath, and you mention that communication is key to this, and I 100% agree with both of you there. Communication is key. However it doesn't take telepathy to realize unspoken social contracts, just social skills, both of which may be considered superpowers to those in the wargaming community and why communication is lacking. As a parent to a couple kids on the spectrum, I understand that some people have very hard times picking up on social cues compared to others, so we can't always expect the unspoken to be realized by the person across the table from us. The side-eye that @Jeff Wilder mentions when someone plops down Dengar and Nym on the table may go unnoticed, or noticed and not understood why, and later on they find out that no one likes to play against them.

But if anything, we can't affect what our opponents do or say, we can only affect what we do or say, so the onus of open communication lies on ourselves. Getting to know your local players better and talking about the game will help avoid situations where you didn't know that everyone was avoiding playing certain ships and you are breaking any unspoken rules. Like myself, its an unspoken rule at my local shop that no one runs Kylo Ren (crew). This kinda sucks because the Decimator is my favorite ship in the game and the reason why I started playing X-Wing, and RAClo is an effective ship these days, however I avoid running it. There is no stone tablet mounted on the wall saying, "Thou Shall Not Show Your Neighbor the Dark Side," but other than a few appearances upon release, everyone kind of picked up that no one was having fun playing against the card. Its never been said, and if you did come to the shop for a store kit and plop it down, people will play against you, but you might notice a wrinkled nose or two here or there. Once someone becomes more involved in the local community, they will likely pick up or be informed of the more informal rules.

Absolutely agreed. But even a tight group can get the wrong signals.

I also think there is an element of good in facing what you don't like. I detest the stressbot in all its forms. But facing it taught me things. It taught me that at times, I need to adapt to preserve my sense of fun rather than count on my friends changing for me, much less a complete stranger I've just now met at a tournament. I learned to separate my feels for the card from my feelings about the player, which I think is the most valuable lesson. Now, if I face a stressbot, I may not have as much fun as I might otherwise, but that's on me to overcome because, like you said, the only person I can control is me.

37 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

And, yes, I do speak out against the blaming of dice. One reason, more benignly, is simply because they won't get better removing the impact of their decisions from their outcomes (so if someone wishes to improve, they should first start with their own choices)

Doesn't netlisting have a similar effect in that it impairs a player's improvement of understanding about different combinations and entire lists?

I don't get why some people think "netlisting" is such a bad thing.

The way I see it is the hobby consists of a couple aspects.

1) Listbuilding

2) Good flying

3) Being sociable while being the game to make sure both players have a fun experience

Then there's a number of catagories of x-wing players:

1) People who are good at listbuilding

2) People who are good at flying

3) People who are good at listbuilding and flying

4) People who aren't good at either and just enjoy the game for the sake of Star Wars and pewpew lasers

So if I am really good at judging distances, but horrible at list building, I should not be allowed to win tournaments? Did you ever see a Formula 1 racer win a race with a car that he built himself? The skill of building a good list and the skill of flying it well are very different things.

If I bring a netlist but I am a fun and sociable opponent, who says the game will not be fun?

I think someones grudge at what is "meta" is a huge biase towards his/her opponent. If I see someone unpack a metalist across the table, I know it's probably a serious player that made an effort to learn to fly a list and will give it his/her best shot to beat me with it. Learning a list takes time and effort as wel. It is no simple copy-paste off of the internet, like some of you imply.

If you're playing in tournaments you have to realize that your opponent will bring a list that will make the game as challenging as possible for you. That's what I wuld expect from my opponents. Then just fight it out and see who's "smarter" than the other person. If you cut corners with the list you brought and thus did not bring your A-game, don't complain. Then you do not belong in the tourament scene. Doesn't mean the game is not for you, I just wouldn't recommend playing it at tournaments.