logo

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Interesting Topic #3: A Gentleman's Agreement
PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 10:59 am 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
The_Celestial_Warrior wrote:
True, I think though in the above examples both you and your opponent know that the other can bring mice. And do they really add something to either's game at that point. Then it goes back to the title of the thread. Why not just agree to go a different way? Even competitively, I know that sounds anathema, and technically against the rules...

Still if my opponent suggested that, I woudl put my faith in him to do the same.

Okay, this is more clear now. Thanks for clarifying the issue.

Yes, I too would be fine with a gentleman's agreement, even in the Champs. But that is only if I knew I could trust the other person to keep his word. If it's someone I know, then I'd be 100% ready to make a gentlemen's agreement about our reinforcements, if I thought it would be a good idea.

The thing is, when making reinforcement choices there are more factors to be considered than simply activations. Can the mice be used effectively as a fodder screen? How many CEs need to be spread, and how widely? What is the opponent playing? Therefore, when two squads with Gha/Lobot play a game, one squad might only really need the mice for activations, while the other squad might have another use for them, beyond just activations. A gentlemen's agreement might not always be a wise or feasible choice for both players, and so there should be no pressure to make one, even if both sides have the same reinforcement options.

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Interesting Topic #3: A Gentleman's Agreement
PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 7:10 pm 
Hall of Fame Member
Hall of Fame Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:33 pm
Posts: 589
Location: Central Pennsylvania
I think some good points have been raised regarding people taking this once a year gathering more seriously than their typical FLGS Saturday morning tournament. I too drive a long way to play. It's my chance once a year to play the best players in the game, as none of them live anywhere near me. Maybe my perspective would be different if I lived in a hotbed of SWM activity, but I don't. I want to play the best players at their best.

Additionally, I played a non-meta squad in the MM because I enjoyed it, not because I expected anyone else to do the same. I am against any 'gentlemen's agreement' because there are too many aspects of that that are just too subjective.

_________________
Cancer is not the boss of me.

Being organized is for people who are too lazy to look for their stuff.

Lasers make everything better... except Alderaan.

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Interesting Topic #3: A Gentleman's Agreement
PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 7:14 pm 
Hall of Fame Member
Hall of Fame Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:33 pm
Posts: 589
Location: Central Pennsylvania
thereisnotry wrote:
Yes, I too would be fine with a gentleman's agreement, even in the Champs.


I want a gentlemen's agreement from Trevor next year not to leave a maple leaf shaped bruise on my butt next year like he did in the team tournament this year lol.

_________________
Cancer is not the boss of me.

Being organized is for people who are too lazy to look for their stuff.

Lasers make everything better... except Alderaan.

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Interesting Topic #3: A Gentleman's Agreement
PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 9:30 pm 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
Darth_Jim wrote:
thereisnotry wrote:
Yes, I too would be fine with a gentleman's agreement, even in the Champs.


I want a gentlemen's agreement from Trevor next year not to leave a maple leaf shaped bruise on my butt next year like he did in the team tournament this year lol.

:lol: Deal!

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Interesting Topic #3: A Gentleman's Agreement
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 8:50 am 
Mandalore
Mandalore
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 7:43 pm
Posts: 1009
Location: Southern Illinois
The_Celestial_Warrior wrote:
I was going to hold this one until #4 or 5, but other statements in other threads has prompted me to push it ahead.

LoboStele wrote:
As for good ole fashioned pride....I dunno. If the Jedi Challenge is based on a bunch of 'fun' events, then the people who win the Jedi Challenge will be the ones that ignore the 'fun' aspect of it and play cut-throat stuff anyways. How much pride is there in beating up on people, when they weren't planning to play tough to beat squads anyways?



First off, who are these "cut throat" people?

Second, why do we continue to do this to ourselves?



To answer the questions directly:

By 'cut throat', I would imagine he is referring to people who 'have fun' mostly by winning. its not enough to just play the game. If they dont play it well, they dont seem to be having a good time. Im not saying anyone in particular is this, just stating that people like that exist. You know who you are, lol.

We continue to do this to ourselves, cause we want to make it so not everything is playing the meta to win.

If you want to have fun events, the cut throat people will still show, and still play competitive stuff, which brings it down to the 'just ban X', etc kinds of arguements.

You cant or shouldnt keep the cut throat people from playing in the fun events, but even people who dont normally need to win to have fun can get very upset if they enter a tourney that was listed as being a 'fun format' who bring their favorite Tusken or Ewok swarm squad, just to watch it get annihilated by meta after meta being played by the cut throat people. Whats the fun of playing a fun squad when you dont hardly get to play it cause it dies in two turns?


Whether or not you agree with anything I said above, my suggestion is: For the jedi Challenge, do whatever events you want (Im not suggesting any), but dont like any of them as being less competitive or more fun than the others. Doing so will just set you up for having players show up with their favority Djerik squad, only to be pissed off by the end of the day cause the tourney wasnt fun at all, and everyone was playing Gha + 10 mice.

_________________
WotC: 890/890
V-Set: 142/142

Wotc GTL: 52ish
Gamers GTL: 2 (dalsiandon, urbanjedi)

fingersandteeth wrote:
Also t4 for override and a cheeky flame.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Interesting Topic #3: A Gentleman's Agreement
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:19 am 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 2:46 pm
Posts: 7960
Location: West Chester, OH (near Cincinnati)
FWIW, when I originally used the term 'cut-throat' I didn't mean it in a derogatory sense. Heck, by my own definition, I tend to be a 'cut-throat' player many times. I simply just use that term to indicate people who play whatever the best thing is in order to have the best chance at winning all of their games. I just simply meant 'competitive' vs. 'for fun'.

_________________
-Aaron
Mand'alor
"You either die a hero, or you live to see yourself become the villain."
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Interesting Topic #3: A Gentleman's Agreement
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:22 am 
Mandalore
Mandalore
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 7:43 pm
Posts: 1009
Location: Southern Illinois
I wasnt trying to portray it as derogatory, so apologies if I did.

A person definitely shouldnt be looked down upon for playing what they feel is fun, no matter how competitive it is.

I think my point still stands though.

_________________
WotC: 890/890
V-Set: 142/142

Wotc GTL: 52ish
Gamers GTL: 2 (dalsiandon, urbanjedi)

fingersandteeth wrote:
Also t4 for override and a cheeky flame.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Darth Ruthven and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Jedi Knights style by Scott Stubblefield