I have been wanting to write the post since early last week, but I decided to not post while I was irritated. I have had some time to contemplate what exactly I wanted to say, so I decided to go for it and post today. Before I go into my rant I just wanted to say this is not directed at anyone in particular and it is just me being frustrated with some of the things I see happening in 40K.
As my title suggests I am trying to figure out when 40K became so competitive. When I first got into playing 40K I was already a Fantasy Battle player. I started 40K because I honestly loved the back story and since I was already into the Hobby with fantasy it was easy to cross over to 40K. I am a D&D player at heart so I enjoy the story of the game as much as playing it. Last week I got very frustrated while reading some posts on other blogs and forums. There are a few trends I have seen in posts that have just gotten under my skin.
This is a Hobby not a competitive sport: Over and over I keep seeing people argue about 40K tournaments and why there shouldn't be soft scores in tournaments. I am not debating this as there are some valid reasons out there that I completely understand. What irritates me is all the people that use competitive sports as a comparison to make their points. First this is a Hobby War-game, not a competitive sport. The comparison makes no sense to me as you often have 2 different armies which have different rule sets to follow. In competitive sports you have two teams that must follow the same set of rules. Even people who compare 40K to chess are not making valid arguments as in chess both players have identical "armies" with identical rules and rely on their skill to play. 40K has different rules for different armies and relies on players skill as well as unpredictable dice rolls. So no matter what you think GW should do you will never have the same type of competition as you see in sports or chess for that matter.
Is the internet to blame: I love the internet, I spend too much of my free time on it. Does it have an impact on power gaming in 40K, hell yes! I blogged earlier about my issues with what I call "Cookie Cutter" armies. Pretty soon every Ork list has Nob Bikers, Every Eldar list has a Jetbike Seer Council. The list goes on and on. Then someone will post an alternative list and the power gamers jump on them... "This list sux, you got no Nob Bikers... noob! I love going through the book and reading about each unit and deciding how I can make them work together, but it seems this is a dying art as players just wait for the power gamers to post their killer list then they copy them.
Is the Hobby aspect of 40K dying: I sure hope not as I feel if it does then 40K itself will die. I worry when I read post that want every hobby aspect of tournament scoring removed. I understand some of the points on removing soft scores, but this is a hobby and some of us players enjoy building a fluffy list, as well as painting our miniatures and for me comp scores and painting scores help support the whole hobby. I can see a problem with the Sportsmanship score, but I also feel that power gamers brought this problem about. The idea that you do whatever you need to do to increase your chance of winning fostered the idea of screwing your opponent with a bad score. Do I think it should be removed? Most definitely because it is just another tool for power gamers to abuse.
Another issue I have seen creeping up is requests for GW to make pre-painted models. I understand that players can be apprehensive about painting but it is part of the hobby. I sucked at painting when I first started but I took the time to learn and practice. I am no Eavy Metal class painter but I am proud of what I paint and it helps make my army mine. I love playing other armies that are painted and converted, it makes the game more fun and immersive. I understand that not everyone is great at this aspect but it only takes asking for advice from the community to get you started.
The last thing I want to gripe about is the attitude that 40K can't be fun unless you are trying to win. I have actually been called a liar on forums when I say I have had just as much fun losing games as I do winning them. I don't know if it is because I got into gaming through RPGs like D&D, but the idea of playing a hobby game like 40K is first for fun, then for the narrative, and lastly hanging out with and making friends. I like to win but in the end it doesn't matter to me as long as I am having fun.
I often do moves in games that might not make the best tactical sense but it is how I feel my army would play in a situation. Recently I was playing a tough Guard list with my Black Templars. He was blowing up my Rhinos like nothing and most of my army was on foot by the end of turn 2. I had my Emperor's Champion lead his squad through insane fire in an attempt to get into the guards line. In the end I lost the game but seeing my Champion (the lone survivor of a 15 man squad) make it to the guard line and wreak havoc made the game both exciting and fun. I played my army fluffy, I lost, but I had fun and have a good story to tell when my buddies and I are talking about gaming.
I am going to bring this to a close as the post is starting to get long winded. I am just voicing some frustrations I have with trends I see in 40K. I by no means think my opinion is correct but I do want to open this up for discussion to see what you all think. I hope no one is offended, and by all means take this opportunity to voice your opinions on the matter, I would love to read them.
-BJ