Kirb your enthusiasm!
"...generalship should be informing list building." - Sir Biscuit
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Posted by Kirby Enthusiasm
After that recent and rather stupid article on BoLS about TLoS they appear to be back-peddling (though I must say I was quite surprised at the positive feedback about my snowmobile...). Check out this post by Mr. Black about enjoying the games we play as...well games. *applause* I agree completely with the core message here, it's a game and we should all remember that and have fun but let's also remember that like all activities where individuals compete within set rules there are going to be disagreements. Whether this is how to take the game (i.e. hobby versus game), rules, paint-jobs or whatever, people are going to argue over it. That's fine as long as it's done in the right way. Here is a great article over on Whiskey & 40k pre-facing the NOVA Open about the divergence in the games we love. A very valid point and something I would like to highlight in what I do and what I appreciate about the game and tying it all in with BoLS's article about TLoS.
People are going to disagree about what units/armies are good and what units/armies are bad. Whilst there is some black & white to this, GW is introducing a huge amount of grey by making their latest books so varied, enjoyable and good. You want to fault them for that be my guest. This disagreement is part of life and something I'm quite comfortable to live with. Hell, I hate comp but if I only get comp tourneys in Australia, I'm happy to go to them with the knowledge all I care about is what people think of my paintjobs (because I take pride in them), my W/L ratio and having a good time (not in any particular order). I'm going to sway some people to my way of thinking when I discuss comp (see: Vinsanity) and some people I'm never going to persuade but that doesn't mean I'm not going to talk to them, talk crap behind their back, etc. In the end as Mr. Black points out, it's a game. Look at Dash and Stelek's game, in the end they are two blokes who have never met and just argued over the internet. I didn't see the game but from what I can gather it was a good atmosphere.
This is what I believe Mike was trying to do with the NOVA Open, provide a venue for competitive gamers to duke it out whilst recognising Fantasy, 40k and whatever other games we play are hobbies as well and this should be recognised. You'll notice here that I've never said otherwise and don't pick on fluffy gamers or hobbyists, I'm an avid painter and converter too and whilst I'm not great by any means, I take great joy in assembling my armies and getting compliments by other gamers is fantastic. Whilst I focus quite a bit on the gaming aspect of 40k & Fantasy, there is a recognition and acceptance of the other side of the coin.
Again, I disagree with changing the rules (i.e. comp, INAT FAQ, etc.) to create a subjectively balanced tournament environment for the 'tournament winner' but that does not mean I do not think awards or recognition shouldn't go to someone with the best army, best paint jobs, best conversions, fluff, etc. and I think the NOVA Open has done this splendidly. We are all part of the community which plays our game and whilst we might get into it for different reasons, we need to recognise we are all playing the same game and should embrace that. If events like the NOVA Open where the winner is based on W/L ratio, paint awards, army awards, etc are handed out and hundreds of games are played by people all over the world and streamed live become common, isn't it best for everyone?
That being said, there are still going to be arguments and quite frankly, I'd be depressed without them. Arguments & debates provide an atmosphere in which everyone can learn assuming the lack of trolls or blind-sided individuals. Furthermore, people are going to be wrong sometimes and without these arguments, no one learns anything from them. That being said e-rage is...well a waste of space. As Brent's Strictly Blogging review of 3++ highlights, the point of my blog is not to tell you how to play or show you what's competitive but to tell you why things work or are good or why things don't work or aren't good. The why is the crux of this blog and something I think is often missing on forums or blogs and that is where I start my arguments. I completely agree with Mike from Whiskey & 40k that as a community we should stop being petty and attacking each other but calling someone out on what they say is still necessary. If I say something stupid or plain wrong, call me out on it. I'm not going to hate you, ban you or e-rage against you and if I think your calling me out is wrong (i.e. I said Orks are bad and you said nah-uh) then we'll discuss it. But when someone says something that is very opinionated or I highly disagree with such as as iamaddj's post about TLoS, I'm going to comment on it and sometimes with derision. If said poster explains his reasoning though, different kettle of fish. There's content there on which to discuss and debate and this is a necessity for improving everyone's knowledge.
Without argument and discussion there is going to be stagnation but let's be reasonable about it people. I'm echoing Mr. Black. This is a game and it's great that we put so much time and effort into it but primarily, we should be enjoying it. I love blogging, sometimes I just don't feel like it and my post count drops (and I crack the whip) but I enjoy doing this because it helps other people (I hope) by explaining the why. I enjoy painting and gaming and I will continue to do all of those even if everyone else paradigm shifts to "comp is great." I'm echoing Mike. We're all in this together, quit the e-drama but don't quit the discussion. If anyone says something silly or doesn't support their argument/side/stance/etc, call them out on it. If you're stating an opinion (i.e. TLoS is bad, comp is good, etc.) justify and explain why. Support events like the NOVA Open where competitive and non-competitive and everything in-between is acknowledged and provided for.