The New Errata vs Competitive Play

Today, the new errata dropped. There will be much talk in the days to come on the effect that it will have to the game, which is not what is prompting this post. Rather, there is the unfortunate effect that the errata dropped after lists were locked in for the World Team Championship (WTC).

As someone on the local meta GroupMe feed posted, “This only affects like 200 players.” There was also the statement of, “Elite players can adapt in the two months where some players will quit without the changes.” In light of my last post, I think it's important to look at the role of high-level competitive play and how it affects the rest of us.

Let us look at NASCAR. Large amounts of money are spent by a fraction of the population to build “stock” cars capable of high-performance. Followers of the races, casual hot-rodders if you will, purchase parts that were either used in a racing vehicle or built to such specification. Perhaps they buy a slightly less costly part based on either a previous racing specification or made with lesser materials. Others look for parts and accessories stamped with “the official [wiper-blade/motor oil/spark plug/etc] of NASCAR.”

Take a casual tour of any competitive “sport.” Fans and aficionados follow their favorite elites whether they are athletes, musicians, or artists. To improve their own skills and abilities, they try to establish a similar home rig so that their skills might be compared on a equal basis or hints might not have to be translated to different materials.

For instance, I play a variation of Keith Christiansen's epic Caine list that he took to Warmachine Weekend a few years back. Instead of working my way slowly through a bunch of models to come to an ideal place, I jump-started with a known quantity. I am also able to watch video of Keith playing that list to get hints on how to play it effectively. My play improves by piggy-backing on the work of others.

If they were to dramatically shift Caine's feet just before a tournament, then it is likely that a player like Keith might not do as well. All the hours of practice he put in will work against his tournament performance.

Well, in the case of the WTC, they have two weeks to adjust, right? Sure. They have to mentally incorporate how the new errata affects their lists. There is also how their lists work within the framework of their team. If someone's Denegerah pairing was intended for a certain list, then can it still handle that list? Will team captains also have to learn how the errata affects their team?

The WTC might also decide to disregard the errata. That would be great on one level, but bad on another. Every player that a WTC player played against would have to disregard the errata as well. This might harm their performance in tournaments as they have not incorporated the errata into their play. Just consider every time that you have played and had a rules interaction come up that affected you negatively. This is something that might happen to an upsetting degree.

I diverged. This is only 200 players that we are talking about. Perhaps just a percentage of a percent of the Warmachine and Hordes community make up their numbers. Then there are those that were not able to make it on a team, who want to see those who represent their meta do well. Add those who want to see personalities that they like or their national teams. Then there are the players who will be following the data, which 'casters performed better. While you might not follow the WTC, the WTC may end up being on the other side of the table in the form of a list your opponent saw played there.

The errata is what it is. There is nothing that can be done about the timing of its release at this time. It is unfortunate from how Privateer Press interacts with the community. While many of the changes in the errata may have been pondered for years, it none of them affect models that have been in play for less than a year. Holding the change in reserve until mid-November, when all the major tournaments are complete would likely not harm anyone's game. The timing would allow for adding in changes with the updated Steamroller documented. Everyone can win. Hopefully, the mantra of slow to change will guide Privateer Press in the future to best make sure that erratas improve play experience for everyone.

Casual Players - Gaming's "Silent Majority"

There is a term that we often throw around in the war gaming community. For all that we use it, it seems to have no solid definition. Some players use it to describe others, and some players use it to describe their own self. Yet, if you were to ask those players what the word meant, then you might be surprised at how many definitions you come up with. The word is “casual.”

I had always lived with the prospect of a casual player being familiar but not expert with the rules. He or she plays for the enjoyment of playing with winning being much lower on the list of goals than camaraderie or creating interesting stories. That's what I thought as I approached a friend when I was explaining how a competitive game system benefited the casual players.

For my friend, he saw himself as a casual player. He would get his models out a couple of time a year. He would do his best to build a hard army to beat. While the bit about familiarity with the rules was there, rules would be remembered in a manner that benefited my friend; or challenged when they did not. Play further degenerated when the books were turned to for seeing exactly what the rules were.

I realized at that point, we were speaking of different things. There are things about his playstyle that reminded me more of what some would find in a competitive player. Yet, by his own definition, he was casual.

Since Warmachine and Hordes were built with competition in mind, we try to be considerate of our expectation of a casual player. On podcasts when a new ruling about a rule comes into play like unit attachments granting their troop type to a unit they join or Rhyas gaining reach; there is some mention that casual players might not be aware of the changes or be able to understand the full implementation of the ruling without the play style that competition brings. Think, for a second, of how that shows how we think of casual players.

There is a part of the more competitive community that does not think that the casual community pays attention to rest of the world. Read the big boards, though, and you will see casual players looking for advice on better army builds. (I'll have to deal with that topic at some point, there are bad army builds. You know it, and I know it.) You'll see questions pop-up in the rules forum that could be answered by most competitive players, but casual players don't come across those types of situations very often. Care to venture a guess how many of the views for those posts are casual players trying to find an answer to a question that came up in one of their games? Something that made them feel bad about their play experience?

This is something to think about when we posit ways that Privateer Press and the Warmachine/Hordes community might fix models that have gathered dust on the shelves of gaming stores and competitive players by posting new rules or cards. However, we defend inaction to do such things with the thought that casual players won't be able to keep up with the changes. It may be time to change how we think about what casual play means. Perhaps we need better terms than “casual” player.