1 minute ago, Astech said:

Thats... I... Wow.

You've constructed a strawman argument (a logical fallacy) which did not address my point at all. Both those definitions are equally applicable, but in different circumstances. I have two definitions for the same reason that dictionaries have several - to be prepared for all circumstances of the word's use.

Typically when you use a word with multiple meanings, you are using only one meaning at a time. That way people can understand what you are saying. Your definition of "netlist" that you are using in this argument can't even manage to stay the same in a single post.

You also don't appear to know what the straw man fallacy is. I have yet to ascribe an argument to you.

OTOH you keep pushing the same circular logic. "people shouldn't play list x because it is a netlist, and list x is a netlist because I don't think people should be playing it." You and the others who complain about netlists can't actually define what you mean when you use the term.

Gonna interject because it's relevant to the OP.

I'm introducing a new player to the game and he wants to jump right into competitive play (get it, jump, like the JumpMaster, cause it won't ******* go away).

His first game was strictly to learn the rules, and he played named Interceptors. Nothing to report.
After his second game, playing PhuaBoats against my Nym/Miranda list, he made some observations that I find very telling.. Before I go into that, it's worth mentioning that he a seasoned table-top gamer, not so much miniatures, but other competitive CCG/LCG/etc. games.

- RNG. He noted immediately, despite falling terribly into every bomb my list had, that when he did line up shots or need to roll for any reason, so much of the game depended on dice. That no matter how good you are at maneuvering, he didn't like the dice could simply take the turn from you.

- He also said, to my shock, that bombs seem necessary. The [competitive] ships seem to have so much health that bombs are just as effective (pfft, they're more) at dealing the damage necessary. This is definitely a way of looking at bombs that I have not - they seem OP at the moment (he did point out that bomblet was stupid)

- TLT is broken. He hated TLT and immediately wanted it off the table. Nothing new here.

These are things that I have disagreed with in the past, but, uh, kind of an eye opening moment. He doesn't hate netlisting - he wants to do it almost exclusively. Like me and most of you, he knows that metas have to exist, otherwise there'd by no competitive game. Sorry - maybe this wasn't a response to anything, but i wanted to share.

47 minutes ago, Astech said:

A couple of examples might make my position clearer:

1. If we're at a casual game night and I'm flying 3 B-wings with HLC (just as an example here), and you put down DeNym on the other side of the board you've broken an unspoken rule. You've automatically won the game, and chances are50/50 you'll win without me even taking a shot (what with Nym shenanigans and all). That's no fun for me since the game was decided before it started, and none of my decisions matter whatsoever.

2. If we're in a casual store tournament where you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the strongest list being brought is Brobots, and you choose to take FSR2 you've broken an unspoken rule. You've preyed on the creativity of other players to profit (literally, in most tournaments). That's no fun for your opponents, since everyone else there is now resigned to second place or worse, before the first round starts.

You've shown that you personally are prepared for everything on casual nights, but many people only bring one list (a large proportion of my community, for instance), so when one brings a netlist and nothing else, you're forcing people to either refuse the game or have very little fun in comparison to what they might have against another creative list.

The JM5K, K-wing, Scurrg, Zuckuss and many more are extremely obscure. If you have nostalgia for them, good for you, but don't let a bit of whimsy ruin the fun of other people. I love flying X-wings, but I don't because of prowling netlists. In essence, netlisters are actively preventing me from enjoying my playstyle by flying specific lists.

circumstances. I have two definitions for the same reason that dictionaries have several - to be prepared for all circumstances of the word's use.

I am sorry you don't see you are committing the same sin as you accuse of netlisters, i.e., valuing your fun and guidelines above others. I was hoping otherwise. Oh well.

And let's be clear here, @Embir82. My current impression of you in these posts is that you are a different side of the same coin as @Astech. Instead of communicating and trying to figure out to both get what you want, y'all remain unbending. While I've advocated for netlists, I've also been for compromises that benefit both parties, not just one. That y'all seem unwilling to do so is saddening.

I think I get better what @GreenDragoon was talking about.

1 hour ago, Astech said:

You've shown that you personally are prepared for everything on casual nights, but many people only bring one list (a large proportion of my community, for instance), so when one brings a netlist and nothing else, you're forcing people to either refuse the game or have very little fun in comparison to what they might have against another creative list.

The JM5K, K-wing, Scurrg, Zuckuss and many more are extremely obscure. If you have nostalgia for them, good for you, but don't let a bit of whimsy ruin the fun of other people. I love flying X-wings, but I don't because of prowling netlists. In essence, netlisters are actively preventing me from enjoying my playstyle by flying specific lists.

No, they aren't. You choosing to fly something competitive over what you think is fun is preventing you from flying them. You are literally doing what you accuse the netlisters of doing.

On 1.10.2017 at 0:34 AM, 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.

You can not force your netlist into a casual setting, because in any casual setting players can just decline to play your list. It really is that simple as that. Better have a second list ready in case that happens. ;-)

2 hours ago, Astech said:

A couple of examples might make my position clearer:

1. If we're at a casual game night and I'm flying 3 B-wings with HLC (just as an example here), and you put down DeNym on the other side of the board you've broken an unspoken rule. You've automatically won the game, and chances are50/50 you'll win without me even taking a shot (what with Nym shenanigans and all). That's no fun for me since the game was decided before it started, and none of my decisions matter whatsoever.

2. If we're in a casual store tournament where you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the strongest list being brought is Brobots, and you choose to take FSR2 you've broken an unspoken rule. You've preyed on the creativity of other players to profit (literally, in most tournaments). That's no fun for your opponents, since everyone else there is now resigned to second place or worse, before the first round starts.

You've shown that you personally are prepared for everything on casual nights, but many people only bring one list (a large proportion of my community, for instance), so when one brings a netlist and nothing else, you're forcing people to either refuse the game or have very little fun in comparison to what they might have against another creative list.

So, what I'm getting from this is that I can use the term "netlist" to refer to literally any list that is considerably stronger than the one I choose to play. If I choose to play with just two heavily outfitted TIE Punishers (because I remember them fondly from Galactic Battlegrounds), then I'm entitled to demand that anyone who plays against me has to make their list at least somewhat beatable by mine, otherwise they're netlisting. Because hey, if the lists I want to play aren't potent in the current meta, then clearly my opponent must be a netlister (whether he got his list online or came up with it himself).

...or maybe, just maybe, I need to understand that not all craft are equally viable, and make a decision (if the craft I like to play are weak): enjoy flying the craft I like regardless of whether or not I win, or switch to more powerful lists so I can enjoy winning.

2 hours ago, Astech said:

The JM5K, K-wing, Scurrg, Zuckuss and many more are extremely obscure. If you have nostalgia for them, good for you, but don't let a bit of whimsy ruin the fun of other people. I love flying X-wings, but I don't because of prowling netlists. In essence, netlisters are actively preventing me from enjoying my playstyle by flying specific lists.

As @hawk32 pointed out, you're applying a horrible double standard here. "I should be able to fly the ships I like, so I demand that you stop flying the ships you like!"

If you get upset because you lose, you're not playing casually.

Also, BroBots would be a really strong list in your filthy casual tournament, so why isn't that player being roasted?

But here's a suggestion. Before you set up your side of the board or allow your opponent to do the same, talk to them. Ask them what they're running and then be an adult - politely decline or lose with dignity. If it's a tournament.. Man, I don't even know where to begin. Get better with your tier 6 list.

2 hours ago, hawk32 said:

Typically when you use a word with multiple meanings, you are using only one meaning at a time. That way people can understand what you are saying. Your definition of "netlist" that you are using in this argument can't even manage to stay the same in a single post.

You also don't appear to know what the straw man fallacy is. I have yet to ascribe an argument to you.

OTOH you keep pushing the same circular logic. "people shouldn't play list x because it is a netlist, and list x is a netlist because I don't think people should be playing it." You and the others who complain about netlists can't actually define what you mean when you use the term.

Both definitions are applicable to this discussion. It's also unwieldy to roll then into one for the sake of convenience. My definition stays the same, at the very least.

"A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent."

I'll admit I was a little off the mark with a straw man claim, but you are nevertheless not addressing the key point - that people who netlist in small tournaments (in most scenarios) are abusing the

1 hour ago, SabineKey said:

I am sorry you don't see you are committing the same sin as you accuse of netlisters, i.e., valuing your fun and guidelines above others. I was hoping otherwise. Oh well.

By flying casual lists at casual events I encourage creativity in the community, a diverse meta and closer games. If you take a netlist to a casual event, you force others to do the exact same thing or lose most/all of their games. It's not the same at all.

56 minutes ago, hawk32 said:

No, they aren't. You choosing to fly something competitive over what you think is fun is preventing you from flying them. You are literally doing what you accuse the netlisters of doing.

You sentence structure is kind of muddling your meaning here, but I think you're saying that by flying casual lists I'm forcing my opponent to do the same?

If so, there is absolutely nothing wrong with flying different ships from time to time. Players who shy away from all the second, third, fourth tier stuff are losing out on a big part of the game. If it has to be a choice, I'd rather have the 80% of the game that isn't top tier on casual tables.

49 minutes ago, SEApocalypse said:

You can not force your netlist into a casual setting, because in any casual setting players can just decline to play your list. It really is that simple as that. Better have a second list ready in case that happens. ;-)

In a casual tournament you can, and will. On a casual night it's pretty easy to avoid playing against a netlist if you don't want to, but in a randomly seeded tournament it's nearly impossible. On casual night I do bring a second list, and I think it would be a great idea for the standard format to become similar to the hangar bay to avoid scenarios like this.

10 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

So, what I'm getting from this is that I can use the term "netlist" to refer to literally any list that is considerably stronger than the one I choose to play. If I choose to play with just two heavily outfitted TIE Punishers (because I remember them fondly from Galactic Battlegrounds), then I'm entitled to demand that anyone who plays against me has to make their list at least somewhat beatable by mine, otherwise they're netlisting. Because hey, if the lists I want to play aren't potent in the current meta, then clearly my opponent must be a netlister (whether he got his list online or came up with it himself).

...or maybe, just maybe, I need to understand that not all craft are equally viable, and make a decision (if the craft I like to play are weak): enjoy flying the craft I like regardless of whether or not I win, or switch to more powerful lists so I can enjoy winning.

Not at all. If it's a casual night you'd ideally find an opponent with a list of equal strength (or arrange to have one ahead of time). In tournaments, you can't reasonably expect a list like that to win, suggesting that you're not playing to win. At that point expecting your opponent to give you a chance at winning is a bit unreasonable.

My point is mainly that in casual tournaments a single netlist forces every other player to choose between winning and having the most fun they can. If every one mutually agrees to go with tier 2 lists or lower (by unspoken agreement or otherwise) then creativity becomes part of the game again, improving the fun for everyone.

Quote

As @hawk32 pointed out, you're applying a horrible double standard here. "I should be able to fly the ships I like, so I demand that you stop flying the ships you like!"

The ships I don't like flying (or flying against, normally):

JM5Ks. Scurrgs. K-wings. (And to a much lesser extent Fenn). They are ships that are blatantly above the power curve, and we all know it. The Scurrg and K-wing at least have unique mechanics to play with, but Fenn and JM5Ks are just better versions of existing things.

The ships I do like flying (and flying against, always)

Everything else.

If you can't bear to not fly 4 of the games.... 60? ships in casual tournaments, then you've got no sense of adventure at all.

13 minutes ago, Rinzler in a Tie said:

If you get upset because you lose, you're not playing casually.

Also, BroBots would be a really strong list in your filthy casual tournament, so why isn't that player being roasted?

But here's a suggestion. Before you set up your side of the board or allow your opponent to do the same, talk to them. Ask them what they're running and then be an adult - politely decline or lose with dignity. If it's a tournament.. Man, I don't even know where to begin. Get better with your tier 6 list.

I get annoyed when I lose a game before its even started. I get upset if I've lost 200-0 before the game has started.

Brobots are only okay at the moment, especially in our scene. I find that Asajj can own one of them pretty easily, and then I've got 60 points of list to take care of the other one.

Again - I can't decline to play a game in a casual tournament (without giving up on winning the tournament). On casual nights your point is entirely valid, but it doesn't work in the context of casual tournaments.

@Astech I guess I don't really understand the concept of "casual tournament". You say that if I bring a sub-par list, then I'm clearly not trying to win and don't deserve to win. However, you also seem to be saying that people who bring top lists care too much about winning...and therefore also don't deserve to win. What, then, is the proper balance for such cases?

1 minute ago, JJ48 said:

@Astech I guess I don't really understand the concept of "casual tournament". You say that if I bring a sub-par list, then I'm clearly not trying to win and don't deserve to win. However, you also seem to be saying that people who bring top lists care too much about winning...and therefore also don't deserve to win. What, then, is the proper balance for such cases?

I think the solution is @Astech makes all the lists for a tournament, and players randomly draw them out of a hat.

Just now, hawk32 said:

I think the solution is @Astech makes all the lists for a tournament, and players randomly draw them out of a hat.

Fair enough. But what if I draw a list and don't own the ships for it? Can I borrow someone else's?

Just now, JJ48 said:

Fair enough. But what if I draw a list and don't own the ships for it? Can I borrow someone else's?

Just casually proxy them.

25 minutes ago, Astech said:

JM5Ks. Scurrgs. K-wings. (And to a much lesser extent Fenn). They are ships that are blatantly above the power curve, and we all know it. The Scurrg and K-wing at least have unique mechanics to play with, but Fenn and JM5Ks are just better versions of existing things.

The ships I do like flying (and flying against, always)

Everything else.

If you can't bear to not fly 4 of the games.... 60? ships in casual tournaments, then you've got no sense of adventure at all.

So, a new player comes to this game. Not really knowing anything about the meta, he buys a Jumpmaster because Dengar has always been his favorite bounty hunter. He decides to attend a tournament, and because it's a casual tournament, he figures he'll just have fun flying his favorite ship. But he can't because a couple people there have a policy against Jumpmasters (and didn't bother to write a banlist for the tournament ahead of time).

I'm sorry, but no. If there are certain ships that your community absolutely cannot abide, write it into the rules of the tournament so that potential competitors can view it and decide if they want to attend with those restrictions. If you're holding a tournament that allows any and all ships, then people really shouldn't attend unless they're willing to fly against any and all ships.

32 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

@Astech I guess I don't really understand the concept of "casual tournament". You say that if I bring a sub-par list, then I'm clearly not trying to win and don't deserve to win. However, you also seem to be saying that people who bring top lists care too much about winning...and therefore also don't deserve to win. What, then, is the proper balance for such cases?

There are ships in the game that are widely regarded as "the worst". Examples include T-65s not named Biggs, Punshers, Starvipers before the fix, etc. There are also ships in the game that are superior in every way. Examples include JM5Ks, Scurrgs, Protectorates, etc. All the other ships fit into a grey area of "good, but not fantastic". This category of ships is by far the largest, and most combinations of them are pretty equal in 100/6. In a "casual tournament" the majority of players will be flying these kinds of lists.

You'll get a few people who play bombing punishers or something for fun, and that's cool because they're getting all their enjoyment out of something other than winning.

You'll also likely get a few newer players flying very strong lists as a learning experience. In their cases a lack of experience compensates for the jank to make a suqd that is overall on-par with the rest of the event.

Finally you'll get people who are experience players (likely active on these forums and up-to-date with the new hotness) that for some reason decide that winning is more important than their opponent's enjoyment of the game (because not having important decisions in a game is utterly boring). This is the guilty party.

6 hours ago, JJ48 said:

Fair enough. But what if I draw a list and don't own the ships for it? Can I borrow someone else's?

Most of my list is composed of turretless HWKs, punishers with advanced SLAM and IG88-D. If you don't have those, I'm pretty sure I've got enough Red Squadron pilots to go around.

6 hours ago, JJ48 said:

So, a new player comes to this game. Not really knowing anything about the meta, he buys a Jumpmaster because Dengar has always been his favorite bounty hunter. He decides to attend a tournament, and because it's a casual tournament, he figures he'll just have fun flying his favorite ship. But he can't because a couple people there have a policy against Jumpmasters (and didn't bother to write a banlist for the tournament ahead of time).

I'm sorry, but no. If there are certain ships that your community absolutely cannot abide, write it into the rules of the tournament so that potential competitors can view it and decide if they want to attend with those restrictions. If you're holding a tournament that allows any and all ships, then people really shouldn't attend unless they're willing to fly against any and all ships.

New players are cool flying meta lists. It's a great way to learn. But when they start winning the vast majority of their games (Dengaroo in particular was absurdly easy to fly, back in the day), it's time to dial t back and let them grow in creativity, not mimicry. Additionally, the Scurrg and JM5K are rarely fan favourites, especially among new players who are often introduced into the game by OT goodies.

I (And my community) can abide by JM5Ks, FSR2 and so on, but in their proper place. That place is not in casual tournaments (when flown by seasoned players).

8 hours ago, SabineKey said:

And let's be clear here, @Embir82. My current impression of you in these posts is that you are a different side of the same coin as @Astech. Instead of communicating and trying to figure out to both get what you want, y'all remain unbending. While I've advocated for netlists, I've also been for compromises that benefit both parties, not just one. That y'all seem unwilling to do so is saddening.

I think I get better what @GreenDragoon was talking about.

I don't have to communicate and I don't have to waste time on searching for some moot concept of "figuring out what both of us want" because rules of this game already established what BOTH of us should expect from this game. Namely, if we play 100/6 game without additional agreements I should know that it is fully possible that my opponent will bring top meta list.

I don't have to compromise, I play fully by the rules. I don't claim a right to dictate how others should play this game.

20 minutes ago, Embir82 said:

I don't have to communicate and I don't have to waste time on searching for some moot concept of "figuring out what both of us want" because rules of this game already established what BOTH of us should expect from this game. Namely, if we play 100/6 game without additional agreements I should know that it is fully possible that my opponent will bring top meta list.

I don't have to compromise, I play fully by the rules. I don't claim a right to dictate how others should play this game.

Got it. In every casual opportunity, I'll wait until you've set up a list, then build a hard counter to it on the spot and play that against you. It is entirely within the rules of the game.

This is essentially what you're doing by bringing a meta list against tier <2 lists. A hard counter, with no fun in it.

20 minutes ago, Astech said:

Got it. In every casual opportunity, I'll wait until you've set up a list, then build a hard counter to it on the spot and play that against you. It is entirely within the rules of the game.

And it is fine by me. Even more, I would be happy to challenge myself and try to win against my hard counter.

But even if I was against this "tailoring list to enemy" in casual games I would communicate my objections to you, I would not assume that there is some unwritten rule that prohibits this and you are at fault by doing this.

I think the divide is that some people believe Store level tournaments to be essentially casual night in tournament form, and others that any tournament is cause for competitive play. I think a lot of this would be solved with a few things.

1) OP support for casual play, whether that is putting out a campaign or putting up some scenarios for casual events.

2)Talking with your opponent before your games. Ask what level of play they are looking for. Ask if they would like to play two games one meta one casual so you BOTH get something out if it.

3) people looking for casual play being vocal in their Store and community asking for casual events like OT tournaments, HoTAC, Mario kart, mega game or campaign.

its not competitive players fault that competitive play is the most popular form of organized play, and that they want to prep for it. It’s also not casual players fault that they want to play with what they want and not get roflstomped. We NEED to stop arguing as a community and help each other enjoy the game.

35 minutes ago, Astech said:

Got it. In every casual opportunity, I'll wait until you've set up a list, then build a hard counter to it on the spot and play that against you. It is entirely within the rules of the game.

Also it is not within rules of the game..

Quote, rules reference, page 17:

"The players reveal their squads and gather all of the ships, cards, and other components necessary for their squads"

So you can't tailor list against your enemy because you both reveal lists at the same time.

1 hour ago, Timathius said:

not competitive players fault that competitive play is the most popular form of organized play, and that they want to prep for it. It’s also not casual players fault that they want to play with what they want and not get roflstomped. We NEED to stop arguing as a community and help each other enjoy the game.

I think it really is the casual players fault in a tournament. I don't think the ongoing discussion has been about new players, it's been about people wanting to bring stuff they want to fly, more funsie lists, and not get rolfstomped. I just don't think that's reasonable in a tournament that's open for anyone to play. I've been on both side of these sort of things. I've rolled over 5 Snap/Crack A-Wings in a store kit tournament, which I love and have flown myself, but my opponent knew going into it that he probably wasn't going to win...he just wanted to see how it'd do. I've also taken Rey/Poe to a store championship and been rolled by triple torp boats. I'm not going to label the torp boat player a bad person for me bringing a list based almost entirely on fluff.

I think if someone doesn't want to face meta lists, just don't go to tournaments. If, in a local area, that it's truly just 1-2 people who bring top meta lists and everyone else stops showing up, then they won't have a tournament to dominate and will either stop showing up for them or catch the hint that people are tired of facing those type of lists. What more can you really do?

16 minutes ago, gennataos said:

I think it really is the casual players fault in a tournament. I don't think the ongoing discussion has been about new players, it's been about people wanting to bring stuff they want to fly, more funsie lists, and not get rolfstomped. I just don't think that's reasonable in a tournament that's open for anyone to play. I've been on both side of these sort of things. I've rolled over 5 Snap/Crack A-Wings in a store kit tournament, which I love and have flown myself, but my opponent knew going into it that he probably wasn't going to win...he just wanted to see how it'd do. I've also taken Rey/Poe to a store championship and been rolled by triple torp boats. I'm not going to label the torp boat player a bad person for me bringing a list based almost entirely on fluff.

I think if someone doesn't want to face meta lists, just don't go to tournaments. If, in a local area, that it's truly just 1-2 people who bring top meta lists and everyone else stops showing up, then they won't have a tournament to dominate and will either stop showing up for them or catch the hint that people are tired of facing those type of lists. What more can you really do?

Personally, I think any tournament should be seen as competitive. That said, I do see an argument for Quarterly Kit events to be seen as a casual event. But I think that not understanding that store champs on up is competitive would be naive.

With that comment though, I was referencing casual play on say a week night. It is understandable that someone wants to bring out their punishers or t65s and have a reasonable expectation I am not going to roll up with Ego or fenngaldra and make them hate life. I am in a league currently, and the vast majority of players in it are casual. I take pieces of what I want to practice for tournaments and toss in "fun" pieces against the casual oriented players but I talk to them first. That said, we are now going to be in the play offs in a tournament style. So I think that now it is reasonable that I bring the pain as it were.

10 minutes ago, gennataos said:

I think it really is the casual players fault in a tournament. I don't think the ongoing discussion has been about new players, it's been about people wanting to bring stuff they want to fly, more funsie lists, and not get rolfstomped. I just don't think that's reasonable in a tournament that's open for anyone to play. I've been on both side of these sort of things. I've rolled over 5 Snap/Crack A-Wings in a store kit tournament, which I love and have flown myself, but my opponent knew going into it that he probably wasn't going to win...he just wanted to see how it'd do. I've also taken Rey/Poe to a store championship and been rolled by triple torp boats. I'm not going to label the torp boat player a bad person for me bringing a list based almost entirely on fluff.

I think if someone doesn't want to face meta lists, just don't go to tournaments. If, in a local area, that it's truly just 1-2 people who bring top meta lists and everyone else stops showing up, then they won't have a tournament to dominate and will either stop showing up for them or catch the hint that people are tired of facing those type of lists. What more can you really do?

I strongly disagree with this.

Game night kit events should be inclusive and open, fairly casual, and played in a relaxed atmosphere. If you're bringing the hardball attitude to trying to win a GNK event then you're definitely part of the problem. If you know you're the best player in the area then a game night kit is your opportunity to put your feet up, fly something wacky and see if you can win anyway. Nobody achieves or gains anything if you turn up going full speed and just bully your way through a bunch of people who are trying to have a nice day of playing games.

Store Champs upwards? Sure, go for it. Game night kit? Wheaton's Law applies.

I think people just like to have a chance at winning with a list they find fun to play.

One of the most irritating things in my local scene (that I have sucked up and just deal with) is having to tailor any list I bring to deal with the latest hyper-efficiency and general NPE type stuff that I might encounter so that my game isn't over before it begins. It isn't FUN to line up against something that you can't realistically counter-play. Spending 40 minutes watching your list be inevitably ground down with nothing you can do about it just isn't an enjoyable experience. And unfortunately, that can occur with a really, really wide variety of lists against things like Nym + wingman, FSR2.0, etc.

People might be well within their rights to bring the latest powerlist, but it absolutely turns people away from playing that might otherwise attend.

Just now, Timathius said:

Personally, I think any tournament should be seen as competitive. That said, I do see an argument for Quarterly Kit events to be seen as a casual event. But I think that not understanding that store champs on up is competitive would be naive.

With that comment though, I was referencing casual play on say a week night. It is understandable that someone wants to bring out his punishers or t65s and have a reasonable expectation I am not going to roll up with Ego or fenngaldra and make them hate life. I am in a league currently, and the vast majority of players in it are casual. I take pieces of what I want to practice for tournaments and toss in "fun" pieces against the casual oriented players but I talk to them first. That said, we are now going to be in the play offs in a tournament style. So I think that now it is reasonable that I bring the pain as it were.

Oh yeah, I totally agree in that context. I'll ask people if they want to go more funsie or competitive in that context.

1 minute ago, Stay On The Leader said:

I strongly disagree with this.

Game night kit events should be inclusive and open, fairly casual, and played in a relaxed atmosphere. If you're bringing the hardball attitude to trying to win a GNK event then you're definitely part of the problem. If you know you're the best player in the area then a game night kit is your opportunity to put your feet up, fly something wacky and see if you can win anyway. Nobody achieves or gains anything if you turn up going full speed and just bully your way through a bunch of people who are trying to have a nice day of playing games.

Store Champs upwards? Sure, go for it. Game night kit? Wheaton's Law applies.

Hah, well, I'm definitely not the best player in the area and despite my support of "play what you want at a tournament", everything I've brought to any tournament has been of my own invention (albeit many of those lists with inspiration found elsewhere).

Yeah, I can see that. I can see if someone knows they're one of the top local players and they continue to bring their planned Regional/Worlds/Whatever list to any tournament, that wouldn't be cool. I guess I just don't know the context of the complaints people have about netlisting. Locally, there isn't much of it. Those that do play stuff closer to top meta stuff aren't rolling away with every tournament. I'm just thinking from the perspective of someone who flies Omega Leader, sees one of the kit prizes is an AA OL...I'm not going to begrudge them going hard to win that.