On 9/26/2017 at 1:27 PM, thespaceinvader said:

*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'.

The rules include a prohibition on unsportsmanlike conduct... which is I think the grey area everyone is discussing. Where are the lines where competition crosses from sportsmanlike to unsportsmanlike?

Net decking clearly cannot be unsportsmanlike, if for no other reason than you still need to actually practice flying it against other lists including itself. I have yet to see anything printed that could be realistically considered and exploit that wasn't rapidly addressed with a FAQ change. Sure some over powered interactions but nothing that just means you WILL win against anyone who didn't know about the exploit.

The unsportsmanlike part would occur when for example you bring a highly competitive list to a casual night for the purpose of stomping the competition. If you know someone else is bringing a competitive list and you want to play them fine but the people who are there to learn and fool around... it's like Shaq showing up at a high school basketball game and offering to play and just dominating the team mercilessly all night.

A kit night is played for a prize, it might be just a fun prize but there is still the element of competition so the expectation of toning it down should not be there. However as the skill levels will vary a lot it would make sense to be a little forgiving on simple mistakes that the other player clearly didn't mean to make.

At a competition tournament such as worlds. The expectation of competitiveness should be at its zenith. However that does not mean you are free to start being unsportsmanlike. I used to see people argue that psychological warfare was fair game at the top levels. Creating annoying noises, staring at your opponent, derogatory language, anything to put them off their game. That's crossing the line.

Those are the rules outside the rules of the game that always matter. You can ignore them but you will likely be disliked or expelled for violating them. I've seen people specifically lie about their skill level at Gencon at a board game to seed the max number of tables with their friends then pull out their max efficiency gameplay combos on new players just to seed the finals with their group of friends... this was a casual fun tournament that some lady was running of her own accord. Just following the rules of the game is not sufficient to qualify your conduct as sportsmanlike.

26 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

One combo. And the way netlisting was mostly used in this thread means that they more trust the wide success than try to understand all the options

Netlisting is also, understanding all the options, accepting that netlists at the top of the meta are there for a reason, and being humble enough to accept that Clever Sausages have worked out the moving pieces to make a meta defining monster. Researching top preforming squads (read:netlisting) benefits one as a listbuilder, moreover, it gives us something to aspire to. To join the ranks of Saint Oldpara, Saint Phua, to take a seat beside the throne: to define the meta.

Others have brought up a sort of caricature of every netlister as a sore loser who doesn’t understand the game but expects to win it anyway. There are some like that, but I posit another archetype for a netlister: someone who uses the work of others to expand their understanding of the upward limits of the game. I posit a third: someone who derives his enjoyment on the table, not in the hangar, but still wants to fly the cutting edge of squad tech.

Furthermore, I will join the chorus of others in this thread: some of us really do enjoy flying these squads.

12 minutes ago, Jetfire said:

What does any of that have to do with netlisting?

What you describe is just generally bad behavior at worst or a crippling lack of communication at best. Don't wanna play against the fresh netlist hotness on casual night at the FLGS? Don't. You are, presumably, a human being, with agency. Exercise it. Explain that you're here tonight on a strictly pew-pew basis, and you're here to get janky. You're opponent has 2 options: play some goofy list and get into the spirit expected of them by you, now explicitly, or find someone else whose looking for a more meta, tournament practice, bleeding edge tech kind of game. Takes all of 3 minutes, no hard feels, no time wasted. There is that part of the game where you look at your opponent's list/cards: it's a great time to broach the subject.

Theres this assumption that "someone else made a great list and I'm going to fly it" is behavior that goes hand and hand with with moustache twirling, puppy kicking villainy on the order of *gasp* stacking a tournament at GenCon. I say simply: it does not.

3 minutes ago, E Chu Ta said:

What does any of that have to do with netlisting?

What you describe is just generally bad behavior at worst or a crippling lack of communication at best. Don't wanna play against the fresh netlist hotness on casual night at the FLGS? Don't. You are, presumably, a human being, with agency. Exercise it. Explain that you're here tonight on a strictly pew-pew basis, and you're here to get janky. You're opponent has 2 options: play some goofy list and get into the spirit expected of them by you, now explicitly, or find someone else whose looking for a more meta, tournament practice, bleeding edge tech kind of game. Takes all of 3 minutes, no hard feels, no time wasted. There is that part of the game where you look at your opponent's list/cards: it's a great time to broach the subject.

Theres this assumption that "someone else made a great list and I'm going to fly it" is behavior that goes hand and hand with with moustache twirling, puppy kicking villainy on the order of *gasp* stacking a tournament at GenCon. I say simply: it does not.

It was explicitly a comment on another post that the only social requirement for showing up is following the rules and all the social skill stuff means nothing.

I specifically said that netlisting is not and cannot be labeled unsportsmanlike conduct in and of itself. Any unsportsmanlike conduct by a person that netlists is an explicit separate behavior and netlisting itself is not the issue.

1 minute ago, Jetfire said:

I specifically said that netlisting is not and cannot be labeled unsportsmanlike conduct in and of itself. Any unsportsmanlike conduct by a person that netlists is an explicit separate behavior and netlisting itself is not the issue.

We agree on that, full stop.

The phantom netlister, the one some of these posters have had the misfortune of finding across the table from them, the bad sportsman, sore loser, unpracticed, entitled jerk who wants the list to win for him and damned the way his opponent feels: that phantom would still be a problematic player if they were running some out-there jank. I couldnt speak more to the point than this: being a jerk makes you a jerk. Netlisting just informs the means by which you put a given squad on the table.

3 hours ago, E Chu Ta said:

Netlisting is also, understanding all the options

Is it? Why? The netlisting we're talking about is pretty explicitly NOT that. Instead it's meta-wing.com, squad archetype pick your faction and a list.

3 hours ago, E Chu Ta said:

accepting that netlists at the top of the meta are there for a reason

That requires some more effort - and understanding the reasons are either going into listbuilding, or into picking the appropriate netlist. But that means your point is neutral as both sides can do that.

3 hours ago, E Chu Ta said:

and being humble enough to accept that Clever Sausages have worked out the moving pieces to make a meta defining monster

"being humble enough" is an interesting wording, particularly because I used it again and again in this context. The rest of my sentence was usually: "Netlisting is no problem as long as someone is humble enough to realize it". It's also interesting because you heavily imply that "we" (the ones arguing against netlisting) are building a strawman. My strawman had at least one pretty well defined condition: he's not humble. Because otherwise it's no problem.

3 hours ago, E Chu Ta said:

Researching top preforming squads (read:netlisting) benefits one as a listbuilder, moreover, it gives us something to aspire to.

So at what point does someone stop netlisting and start listbuilding? Because netlisting is not the same as "researching top performing squads".

3 hours ago, E Chu Ta said:

I posit another archetype for a netlister: someone who uses the work of others to expand their understanding of the upward limits of the game.

And how is that connected to being a netlister? Again, both can do that. This is no inherent netlister quality, so it drops out if we compare the two.

3 hours ago, E Chu Ta said:

I posit a third: someone who derives his enjoyment on the table, not in the hangar, but still wants to fly the cutting edge of squad tech.

And again, you can find me all over saying that's not a problem. As long as that someone realizes how important the list is to his success.

3 hours ago, E Chu Ta said:

Furthermore, I will join the chorus of others in this thread: some of us really do enjoy flying these squads.

That's ok. I don't mind, I really don't. You can fly whatever you like. However, if (if!) you keep enjoying the best squads, every time the meta changes, then maybe that's dishonest. Maybe you like dominating others, maybe you like winning. And that is ALSO OK. But don't hide it.

Edit: I keep enjoying the game either way. Tomorrow I‘ll fly against these strikers again and you know what? I will most likely put a metacheese on the table, to train it.

Netlisting isn‘t bad in itself

Extensive netlisting without reflection is

12 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I don't mind, I really don't. You can fly whatever you like. However, if (if!) you keep enjoying the best squads, every time the meta changes, then maybe that's dishonest. Maybe you like dominating others, maybe you like winning. And that is ALSO OK. But don't hide it.

Just quoting this to make sure it's seen. This seems to me pretty insightful.

28 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

That's ok. I don't mind, I really don't. You can fly whatever you like. However, if (if!) you keep enjoying the best squads, every time the meta changes, then maybe that's dishonest. Maybe you like dominating others, maybe you like winning. And that is ALSO OK. But don't hide it.

Fair, but there also needs to be a clause about accepting it when someone says they are hiding nothing.

On 9/24/2017 at 5:25 PM, Transmogrifier said:

The thing that bothers me about the hate against "net listing" is the assumption that the only way to come up with powerful lists is to steal them from the internet. The reality is that a lot of the powerful combinations are fairly obvious or will be 'discovered' independently by multiple players. It's pretty rare for a list to be truly innovative, so it's pretty ridiculous to hate on people for putting together powerful abilities and running them just because other people arrived at the same conclusions.

Pretty much this. Community needs to realize the hate for "net listing" is arbitrary, sort of like how some people (still) think that blocking or bumping is dishonorable when there is no basis for that belief.

Most of the hate is also towards the unbalances in the game that are the fault of game designers (or perhaps just unavoidable consequences of the complexity of the system versus the capabilities of the publisher). While there may have been some hate for TIE swarm when it was abundant, and you could have called the variations 'netlists' I don't think it bothered people nearly as much as when Whisper was broken or the triple jumpmaster reign of terror. If it's a list that murders a lot of the fun part of the game (that is the maneuvering, and the gambits and positioning quandaries involved... and indeed the list building as well) then it's deserving of hate but you can't totally blame the players.

If nobody played the popular netlists (translate: the most powerful and reliable combos in the game) out of the goodness of their hearts then that one jerk who is willing to do it will just abuse it via tournaments. It's a classic 'tragedy of the commons' scenario. It would just benefit the most 'immoral' (willing to sacrifice the fun of the game for everyone) all the more.

15 hours ago, Meade said:

If it's a list that murders a lot of the fun part of the game (that is the maneuvering, and the gambits and positioning quandaries involved... and indeed the list building as well) then it's deserving of hate but you can't totally blame the players.

I've never seen anybody -- not even the most militant anti-netlister -- totally blame the players. The two sides seem roughly to be:

(1) The players are blameless. If it's legal, they should not be pressured, in any way, to not fly the list.

(2) The players bear some of the responsibility of their choice to do it, and social pressure is reasonable as a consequence of that responsibility.

After that, you get into nuance. (Just for instance, and I have no intention of re-litigating here, I think net-listing can be helpful and fun for players, and it's only when it goes to extremes of meta-cheese and preening that I'll start pressuring people who do it.)

On ‎29‎/‎09‎/‎2017 at 7:25 PM, Jetfire said:

I specifically said that netlisting is not and cannot be labeled unsportsmanlike conduct in and of itself. Any unsportsmanlike conduct by a person that netlists is an explicit separate behavior and netlisting itself is not the issue.

Indeed. I played Paul Heaver's Miranda/Nym squad three times over Nationals weekend; lost three times as well. I only took exception to one of the losses, where I caught the other player deliberately trying to cheat. It was a challenge trying to take down a top-tier squad, and I don't for a second blame anyone for using the best (or what they perceive to be the best) tools at their disposal, but don't try doing something dishonest.

And don't try asking for a 100-0 after the match, either. That kind of defeats the entire purpose of Swiss pairings.

23 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

That's ok. I don't mind, I really don't. You can fly whatever you like. However, if (if!) you keep enjoying the best squads, every time the meta changes, then maybe that's dishonest. Maybe you like dominating others, maybe you like winning. And that is ALSO OK. But don't hide it.

On the other hand, most factions have a playstyle (or a limited set of playstyles). If you enjoy that, and it happens to be on top, it's likely you will enjoy most power lists for that faction.

Take Imperials for example. For as long as I've played (since wave 6) until their decline post Palp nerf, most Imperial meta lists have included at least one ace. If you like playing aces, what's so hard to believe you enjoyed all Imperal meta lists until their downfall?

Same for Rebels and fat Turrets.

Quote

That's ok. I don't mind, I really don't. You can fly whatever you like. However, if (if!) you keep enjoying the best squads, every time the meta changes, then maybe that's dishonest. Maybe you like dominating others, maybe you like winning. And that is ALSO OK. But don't hide it.

What is best in life?

People screaming "I HATE PLAYERS USING NETLIST!!!" are the most obnoxious part of the community.
Why?
Because they think they have the right to force on others their idea of "fun". In this case by forcing others to not use a lists that our all-knowing rightous pricks call "unappropriate netlists".
Also they want to force on others their own idea of fun - because heaven forbid if someone finds fun in winning with strongest netlist! No! You can play only using lists that "anti-netlist players" find appropriate by their own subjective criteria.
I hate bombs, I hate big base ships - but I would never have a grudge against the player that is using powerful combos of ships and cards - because both of us have a common ground, namely rules of this game. And as long as player is playing by the rules, be it by using fringe thematic list or newest OP netlist it should be fine by me, because by objecitve standards (i.e. rules of this game) he plays in appropriate way.

3 minutes ago, Embir82 said:

People screaming "I HATE PLAYERS USING NETLIST!!!" are the most obnoxious part of the community.
Why?
Because they think they have the right to force on others their idea of "fun". In this case by forcing others to not use a lists that our all-knowing rightous pricks call "unappropriate netlists".
Also they want to force on others their own idea of fun - because heaven forbid if someone finds fun in winning with strongest netlist! No! You can play only using lists that "anti-netlist players" find appropriate by their own subjective criteria.
I hate bombs, I hate big base ships - but I would never have a grudge against the player that is using powerful combos of ships and cards - because both of us have a common ground, namely rules of this game. And as long as player is playing by the rules, be it by using fringe thematic list or newest OP netlist it should be fine by me, because by objecitve standards (i.e. rules of this game) he plays in appropriate way.

If you take a netlist in a casual setting, you're forcing your own idea of fun onto the other player. Very few people get any enjoyment out of being demolished by a list they knew was going to beat them handily before dials were set.

If you take a netlist in a store level event, you're forcing your idea of fun on the othe players. Because you've brought the top power level to the event, you force othe players to either netlist or settle for second place before the tournament begins.

In regional events and above, netlisting is fine, since the expectation is that winning is the most important aspect of each game.

According to the "objective rules" I can do a lot of awful things. On Vassal, I could wait for my opponent to spawn his list and then spawn my own hard counter, thus ruining the game for them. The phrase "morally praiseworthy but not morally obligatory" is appropriate here.

6 hours ago, Astech said:

If you take a netlist in a casual setting, you're forcing your own idea of fun onto the other player. Very few people get any enjoyment out of being demolished by a list they knew was going to beat them handily before dials were set.

If you take a netlist in a store level event, you're forcing your idea of fun on the othe players. Because you've brought the top power level to the event, you force othe players to either netlist or settle for second place before the tournament begins.

In regional events and above, netlisting is fine, since the expectation is that winning is the most important aspect of each game.

Man, I really feel bad for folks like yourself. There are a fair amount of people that have this viewpoint. I guess you're just in a crappy local community and can't/don't talk to each other.

6 hours ago, Astech said:

If you take a netlist in a casual setting, you're forcing your own idea of fun onto the other player. Very few people get any enjoyment out of being demolished by a list they knew was going to beat them handily before dials were set.

If you take a netlist in a store level event, you're forcing your idea of fun on the othe players. Because you've brought the top power level to the event, you force othe players to either netlist or settle for second place before the tournament begins.

In regional events and above, netlisting is fine, since the expectation is that winning is the most important aspect of each game.

According to the "objective rules" I can do a lot of awful things. On Vassal, I could wait for my opponent to spawn his list and then spawn my own hard counter, thus ruining the game for them. The phrase "morally praiseworthy but not morally obligatory" is appropriate here.

Define netlist.

7 hours ago, gennataos said:

Man, I really feel bad for folks like yourself. There are a fair amount of people that have this viewpoint. I guess you're just in a crappy local community and can't/don't talk to each other.

My local meta is normally fantastic on casual game nights. We get massive list variety to the point of Luke and Wedge often being in squadrons.

The trouble for us (and particularly myself) is that at store championships and monthly events we get one or two players that go for the new hotness, almost invariably taking first and second place.

Since I refuse to play JM5Ks or Nym on principal (although I have no problem with others playing them in the right context) I'm often at quite a disadvantage. My creative list building and unorthodox strategies (Cloaking Unkar, Generic Phantoms, etc) have gotten me into the top 4 numerous times, but I so very rarely win simply because of my expression of creativity.

7 hours ago, hawk32 said:

Define netlist.

I've got two definitions that depend on the situation:

1. A list that is designed to win above all else(typically brainstormed by a community). Examples of this include a Chiraneau with Kylo + Colzet escort list, which is pretty much the definition of NPE in this game. Others include FSR2 which quite often goes to a final salvo after 75 minutes of meaningless decisions and Advanced sensors Nym, which if played against certain matchups takes all the skill out of the game and gives your opponent an auto-loss.

2. Lists that are literally taken from the internet. Typically these are lists which are featured in the streams of top tables in high profile events like Hoth or Worlds. I'm all for players flying these lists to learn mechanics, but ripping them off card for card in tournaments because you know it will give you a large advantage is bordering on unsportsmanlike. It can also include lists that rank highly on List Juggler or other meta analysers.

I find that type 1 netlists are more unbearable to play against, but type 2 netlists leave me with a worse impression of the player I'm going against if they've payed it in the wrong circumstances.

14 hours ago, Astech said:

According to the "objective rules" I can do a lot of awful things. On Vassal, I could wait for my opponent to spawn his list and then spawn my own hard counter, thus ruining the game for them. The phrase "morally praiseworthy but not morally obligatory" is appropriate here.

Your argument makes no sense.
It is the same as if you said: "Rules don't prohibit me from punching oponent in the face so I will do this." Which is absurd way of thought.
And the more absurd thing is pulling netlisting into the same category of immoral behaviour.

On 9/29/2017 at 2:58 PM, SabineKey said:

Fair, but there also needs to be a clause about accepting it when someone says they are hiding nothing.

What's the old saying?

"Once is an accident. Twice is a coincidence. Three times is an enemy action. "

1 minute ago, Embir82 said:

Your argument makes no sense.
It is the same as if you said: "Rules don't prohibit me from punching oponent in the face so I will do this." Which is absurd way of thought.
And the more absurd thing is pulling netlisting into the same category of immoral behaviour.

My argument was that the written rules of a game are not the only rules we live by. As you yourself said, it'd be stupid to think you could punch someone in the face just because nobody explicitly said you couldn't.

Similarly, if you're going to sit down across from me and whip out a netlist (especially if you've already seen my triple advanced proton torpedo punishers) then you've broken a very distinct and clear unspoken rule - keeping the game fun for both sides.

It's also immoral in small, local tournaments to bring a netlist when you know the vast majority won't, since you're preying on their creativity to better yourself.

I'll reiterate that at larger tournaments, netlisting is totally understandable and acceptable to me.

1 minute ago, Astech said:

My argument was that the written rules of a game are not the only rules we live by. As you yourself said, it'd be stupid to think you could punch someone in the face just because nobody explicitly said you couldn't.

Similarly, if you're going to sit down across from me and whip out a netlist (especially if you've already seen my triple advanced proton torpedo punishers) then you've broken a very distinct and clear unspoken rule - keeping the game fun for both sides.

It's also immoral in small, local tournaments to bring a netlist when you know the vast majority won't, since you're preying on their creativity to better yourself.

I'll reiterate that at larger tournaments, netlisting is totally understandable and acceptable to me.

Keeping the game fun for both sides - and you know how do you achieve this thing? By being cultural, polite and by playing by the rules, by not cheating, not insulting and definietly not bragging after defeating your opponent. In short - by being decent human being. This is how you make game fun. And this are well established unwritten rules. Social convention about netlists exists only in your head.

8 minutes ago, Astech said:

My local meta is normally fantastic on casual game nights. We get massive list variety to the point of Luke and Wedge often being in squadrons.

The trouble for us (and particularly myself) is that at store championships and monthly events we get one or two players that go for the new hotness, almost invariably taking first and second place.

Since I refuse to play JM5Ks or Nym on principal (although I have no problem with others playing them in the right context) I'm often at quite a disadvantage. My creative list building and unorthodox strategies (Cloaking Unkar, Generic Phantoms, etc) have gotten me into the top 4 numerous times, but I so very rarely win simply because of my expression of creativity.

Prioritize you winning or you being creative. Where is the bar on what people can bring? Why are you the arbiter of what people can and cannot bring?

You may not be like this in person, but if you were whining like this in person, I would purposefully bring the most dreadful bull I could find just to spite you. There's no unspoke rule about playing in a tournament. Sheesh.

2 minutes ago, Embir82 said:

Social convention about netlists exists only in your head.

The fact that we are discussing this convention on an open forum with more than one person on that side proves otherwise.