Casual or competetitive?

For all my years playing games it's become apparent to me that there are two broad categories of gamer.

1. Casual players are kind of in it for the explosions, the cinematic experience or maybe just want to get out of the house for a few hours.
2. Competitive players want to win, burn and/or crush all opposition and hear the lamentations of their women significant other halves.

I should point out that these two categories are very broad with a lot of crossover and hybrids of the two.

I don't care, I was enjoying it!

Over the years I've seen many heated discussions about the two incarnations and their awkward match-up in game, I've been involved in a couple myself. I believe one of the problems is (for example) that casual players prefer thematic lists or builds, which can often be suboptimal and although whilst they definitely follow the 'rule of cool' will sometimes find themselves to be less equal than others.

On the other side of the coin are the competitive players, these are the ones who'll not necessarily follow a theme or historical formation, but they'll investigate the meta of the game in question and learn to (was going to say "exploit") maximise the use of effective options or units within the available parameters.

So, who's right and who's wrong?

I don't believe either side (or any hybrid) is wrong, both are very valid approaches to the vast majority of games and both can be very rewarding to those who seek the experience they offer. They can however quite often be wrong for each other!


When competitive meets casual it can often end in tears/rage but why?

This is generally because in most game systems a competitive and well structured force will beat a poorly structured force 9 times out of 10, regardless of the skill of the commanders involved. For example (in Bolt action) a force of inexperienced partisans whilst they may be very thematic and poorly equipped with pistols, shotguns and a handful of rifles are going to find it very difficult to fight off a force of well trained and equipped German FallschirmJager veterans with their wide array of weapons including the devastating assault rifle. The partisans might be a more realistic representation of some hapless chaps during WW2 and the FallschirmJager would represent a less realistic force, but optimised within the rules. So even though both sides are supposedly equal - one is more equal than the other and quite likely to win (barring atrocious luck.)

• This peculiar system of unbalanced fairness is present in a great many game systems, in fact any system where you might be able to choose what your deck or army is going built from.
• For the casual player - they're going to be faced with min/maxing, rules lawyers, cheese mongers who are no fun and only here to "Win At All Costs".
• Whereas the competitive player is facing a historical buff or reckless fool who doesn't seem to know what they're doing (and possibly just wasting your time!)

So both are right AND both are wrong in varying degrees.

I like to think that a good example of an antithesis of these phenomena is the age old game of chess, both players will have exactly the same starting lineup and limited movement options. This will show if one player has a better tactical brain than the other. Also there's no luck via dice or cards in the game so there can be no "rubbish dice rolling."

I should add now that I am a casual player in any and all games I play, I often choose a force or get a "really cool idea" and run with it, regardless of its success or lack thereof. I choose to play things and lists that I like, sometimes this can work out for me, but I must admit - it generally doesn't :)

A little box of magic

Since I bought the "Eldrazi Assault" MTG intro deck I've been enjoying it!

It is an immensely popular game at Athena where I work and even my son has hopped on board and bought himself a deck, so I've been able to get a few games in. Compared to my usual games involving dozens of models and rulebooks and dice, MTG is extremely portable I can easily keep a couple of decks in my bag so I'm always ready for action.

I've also discovered the joy of boosters! Buying one and opening it brings a certain (albeit small) rush of euphoria as I carefully tear it open to see what cards might be inside. I often say it's like a "mini christmas" every time you open one.

A Magic deck fits in this small box

From observing the many customers in-store I see varying levels of competition. There's casual players who are those that want to enjoy the game at its lower (easier?) levels. Then there is a sliding scale going on up to the serious (for want of a better word) players, who are constantly tweaking their decks with creatures, spells and lands ranging from a few pence up to and often exceeding £100 (per card).

I have myself begun to adjust my primary deck with a couple of cool cards I've found in boosters, I've yet to experience buying single magic cards (although I have got my eye on a couple) Athena Games have an absolutely huge collection available here.

Along side my primary deck I have also amassed quite a few colourless Eldrazi cards which I feel inexplicably drawn to, they favour mighty, slow, behemoths that take a perilously long time to summon - but - once they enter the battlefield they can often stomp your enemies into dust! This has inspired me to purchase a dual deck "Zendikar versus Eldrazi" (for the Eldrazi half at least) which actually helped me win not only my first victory (against another new player) but also a second win against a more established opponent! So this has greatly hyped the Eldrazi in my mind and I think they're going to be featuring much more in my future :)

I need to learn (and memorise) some of the newer cards I now have and hopefully get in a few more practice sessions at work, but I'm feeling more comfortable with the game and look forward to it and it's always available, in my backpack and easy to transport around!

So . . . . Magic

What is all this Magic the Gathering about then?

I'm looking to try my hand at MTG because since I began working at Athena I've realised how astonishingly popular (and portable) it is.

Historically I've never been into card games of any kind, "toy soldiers" have traditionally been more my thing, but I feel I could dip into MTG as it seems relatively cheap to start up and looks like I'd have a plethora of opportunities to play & learn at work.

My first instinct has been to go for an intro deck but after seeking advice from some local players I've been advised to go for either an event deck or a dual deck. Intro decks are your basic startup deck with rather run of mill cards for ease of learning. Event decks are better structured for competitive play (but I imagine a bit trickier to learn?) and finally, dual decks are designed for two players to begin their MTG journey side by side.

Also for my consideration is the five colours of magic, these are the different sources of power (and effect) available and are something like.

• White - Protection & order
• Green - Life & nature
• Black - Decay & death
• Red - Fury & chaos
• Blue - Deceit & intellect

So I need to pester my workmates for a little more info and take the plunge with some form of structured deck, stand by for more info :)

And after some more talking and pondering, I got myself an "Eldrazi Assault" (Red & Black) intro deck with two boosters included. It's given me a ton of cards to start with and try to figure out.