TR bot weaknesses get found out quickly locally. They are weak to surprise shots from camo and to spec shot grenades (or even MSV/smoke shots). Nobody really uses them long enough for it to become something frustrating.
What 'Tilts' me in Infinity? Two things: -When my Al Hawwa Hacker has to Hack something with her Assault Smartphone, perpetuating the 'dumb blonde' stereotype. I just don't bother any more and field her only to do Sabotage Classified Objective. -When my Azrail, Iguana, Maghi, AlFasid bite the dust in turn one without doing anything but lose F2F AND fail Arm Rolls. You'd expect Arm 5+ in Cover would increase their survivability
Okay, storytime: Played a game against a friend that runs Qapu Khalqi last week, my MAF against his Islam dudes. Turn 1 he hits my Raizot in cover with an HMG. 3 shots, Raizot has armor 11 in cover so I'm only failing on 3s. I roll 1,1,2. Raizot ded. Then said HMG turns to my sogarat, who also takes 3 shots. Arm 9 in cover, only failing on 6s. I roll 3, 4 and 9. Sog also dead. Come my turn, my doctor worm fails to repair the Raizot (on a 14) and my Sog fails his automedikit roll, on a 15. Game went downhill pretty fast after that. Later the same week we play my Bakunin vs his Qapu Khalqi again... And my ML riot bucks his Djan fireteam in the face with 3 crits on a row! This is why I don't get tilted by dice
Not a game thing, and not really "tilt" but when people pronounce the faction as "Ayyy-leff." Only time I've been tilted in the game was when I didn't have an appropriate device or rules to prove that E/M Ammo causes the Permanent IMM state (because the Stat sheet just says E/M and doesn't say its effect) and my opponent insisted it could be fixed with a reset. It was my first tournament and I thought I might have had the rules wrong but I looked it up afterwards and got tilted. I got two Shikami IMM with one hit from a Ghazi, that would have been a steamroll against his list but I used the Irregular order afterwards and he declared reset.
I know I'm a bit late here, but if we go by how the word is used in competitive gaming (typically in poker community, but also in FGC and the like) it's a point where your decision making and performance become affected by your emotional condition. Basically, when you become crappier player because you're upset with how the game went before or something else related. Making irrational moves, failing to pay proper attention, becoming impatient, botching execution etc. Can't you appeal to judge in this case, since it was a tournament? On topic: I always find something to be upset over in my games. It's all good when we play at a party and there are people around who we can laugh such crap off with.
It's just a game- maybe if someone is an offensive player, they have some kind of problem or a bad thing happening in their life that leads them to be that way? They probably do not mean to actually cause offense, so there is no reason to get bothered or upset. Infinity is also a complicated game, and it is easy to forget things or certain rules interactions from time to time. The only thing that seriously tilts me during games is when people say something then change their mind when they realise they're about to get roasted. I don't mean someone umming or ahhing because they are indecisive, or someone saying they will activate a model then saying they forgot an impetuous trooper they need to activate first, or someone saying they think they'll shoot, doing the math in their heads, then realising they can't hit so want to dodge. Almost everyone does things like that, and it's not a problem. The issue arises when people declare an order (Move), start to move their model one direction, then change their mind when I grab the small teardrop template because the camo marker they thought was something else was actually a mine. Or they declare a move, then decide the link leader is going to move out of coherency or that they're going to voluntarily break the link if they see me grab a Spektr or a TO model with a missile launcher from off the table or something. It's really difficult to challenge people on that kind of thing, because in many cases it isn't technically outside the rules, it's just being a dick.
I would suggest you ask them if they're move is "final" and receive a definite yes or no before you reach for any template or figure - it's easier (and more surprising!) that way
Yeah,. but as I noted, it's NOT a word in common usage in our gaming circles (I don't play poker [haven't since high school] and have no idea what an FGC is, either) and I don't hang with the "serious competitive gaming crowd". It's the other part being about getting emotionally destabilised by something in the game. This requires becoming so emotionally invested in the game that you allow this to happen to start with. This just isn't a thing during a game for me - I long ago divorced ego from the game - I'm just a crappy player naturally (because I can't invest emotionally enough into any game in order to GET better at it. I don't know how to. I'm there to relax and roll some dice, not win sheep stations. If I want to get emotionally disturbed by a game, I can over-identify with a local sportsball team and cry every time they lose (which is most of their games, because the local team is shite).
Well, I can sometimes be annoyed at losing my sources of rolls quickly enough, but not fast enough to have some time remaining for a rematch, heh. Fighting Games Community. Some serious source of very competitive players among "Vidiya" Gamers.
Heh. Those guys got trolled hard recently. One of the top players, SonicFox, is a furry. He's good enough that he and his fursona are used in the marketing of games. He usually shows up with ears and a tail. When he takes the ears off, he is about to kick your ass so hard you won't see what the hell just happened. Most recent tournament, he showed up in a full fursuit. The other players laughed and made fun of him, and then he utterly destroyed them. Still wearing the suit.
By "tilt" do people mean angry? Or sort of... psychologically disrupted? What in fighting games is called "mental damage"? Or is it both?
The fact that he won doesn't make it any less embarrassing or really, really, really uncomfortable for everyone at the venue You just know he has a raging erection beneath that suit.
Depends on how hot his opponent is. /s Nah, that's the thing about the FGC... you can be weird as fuck but if you win, people will respect you. Unless you're ChrisG.
I guess tilting for me is when you have a plan A, plan B, and plan C, and they all crap out due to die rolls. Had that happen to me in a tournament recently, last round too, was pretty demoralizing. What can you do, though? It's like poker... sometimes you have to accept that you played your hand right, even if you end up losing. It's about the probabilities.
You guys are reminding me of why I didn't ever bother with online multiplayer vidjagames. (Well apart from the not wanting to play the endless cycle of hardware upgrade to keep current thing. When PS3 wasn't able to play ANY of the PS2 games I had - and even now, most of the games I had are still not available via psn - I just got out of the entire scene - inasmuch as I was ever "in" it.) Too many asshats and 12 year olds smacktalking each other and me without any patience for either of them. Furries, too? eeeeeeeegh. No thank you. I'll stick with the single feather and leave playing with the whole chicken to other folks.
I don't have any problem with people being invested in their game if they're doing the work and the game will properly reward the work. But I think there are all kinds of problems brewing if those things aren't true. If I had a dollar for every kid I've met who thought he was good at Magic: the Gathering because he could beat the other kids at school I'd have enough to ... <thinks> nearly buy a Tier 1 Pro Tour deck. Whereas a friend of mine also takes his chess very seriously, but doesn't think he's very good. His flat is littered with boards set up with correspondence games, and chess books open at pages discussing the situations he's in. He was the captain at a strong London club, and practiced and competed with them several times a week. His ELO is nicely over 1900 but never quite 2000 and he's said he knows he'll never represent nationally ('Grand Master' being ~> 2500 ELO). I also met his friend from the club who had an opinion about the relative difficulty of games and what it meant to be good at one or another of them. Unlike my friend, he readily admitted he was a strong chess player, but was filled with regret that he hadn't played iGo when he was a child instead. He said its a more serious test saying bitterly that he'd 'wasted his life', and would now never be good enough to play iGo well. Thing is, he IS a chess Grand Master! The point being hopefully obvious that decent players of serious games do have a rather sobering sense of their own ability in contrast to players of games with more variance. I've said before that I think Infinity is a really hard game and a genuine test of gaming ability. I also don't mean to suggest I could beat a decent player with more luck - I know that's not true. I just also don't think that Infinity compares to chess or iGo as a serious game of strategy our success at which we can take terribly seriously, and that we maybe ought to be careful about how seriously we take it and how worthwhile we think being good at it is. I wonder if any of the top Infinity players also have a solid chess rating too and what they'd have to say about the games' relative merits. Paging @psychoticstorm for his opinions on chess and Infinity and how they compare as 'serious' games.
Personally my dice rolls sometimes get the better of me even thought I should know better after all these years and have them for granted, I kinda have it contained, but sometimes my dice are particularly "inspiring" Then again I am the guy known in the second interplanetario that used 8 orders to capture an antenna and failed... All games have a skill set that a player been good at can learn, Chess and Go have minimal luck in them (going first been the most hotly debated "luck" element) hence why they are regarded high on skill, but this does not mean other games with luck in them are devoid of skill, the skill lies in understanding probabilities and luck mitigation, a different skill set than in those highly regarded games. It is not and never will be whose game is best, it will always be what game you like to play most.
