In HeroClix... I'm a master baiter. Sometimes I will lose the bait figure rather quickly, but now my opponent is completely exposed for a massive retaliation. It really surprises me how many people fall for it.

And I'm a Master Baiter in WoW. I've won the fishing derby, which isn't an easy task, and yes that is the title!

It's not so serious... it's just a way for me to improve myself as a gamer.

And Gentlegamer, let me ask you a question bro... when was the last time you went to a tourney at your venue and said this?

"Wow, I hope I'm a loser tonight! I'm going to play to lose! I hope I get last place!"

If you aren't playing to win, you are playing to lose. Just because you play to win doesn't mean you can't have fun. Besides, nobody wants to be a loser.

I lose... but I don't go with the goal of losing. If you go to lose, why even play?

Huh. I have really mixed feelings about this thread right now. On the one hand, I think that how the match went down should be a non-issue.

I have to give respect to George, for saying more than just "token" to Alan. If I'd been playing against him and my opponent gave me anything close to what the semi-quote that has been bandied about was, I'd have immediately become suspicious that I had just screwed up in a way I hadn't anticipated. He also gets my respect for asking the judge about first turn immunity instead of telling his opponent. The former is a polite way to seek a clarification, and implies that he is accepting that he could be wrong about this. The latter is seizing the reins of power from the judge, slapping around his opponent mentally, and throwing his opponent's game off. Psychological playing like that is, well, I guess it's "unsportsmanlike" in clix. It's de rigueur in a lot of other games.

And that brings me to my "on the other hand." On the other hand, I can't believe that something as simple as leaving a figure inactive on the first turn could be seen as a bad move, especially a figure with range or with a move and attack ability. I'd naturally want that figure to not act until it could reach someone. Let my opponent move in, then I'll surge forward and attack. That's not "passing," it's strategy.

And, as for "baiting" your opponent into moving somewhere, I'm surprised anyone isn't doing it. Bait, decoys, pincers, limiting your opponent's avenues of movement and more are all part of basic tabletop miniatures strategy. Positioning can be everything, and every one of your moves can influence your opponents' moves to your advantage.

Me, I'm all about the sacrificial pawn feint. So much so, that one of my opponents will hold off on attacking that lone 40-point character who seems to have strayed out in front of the rest of my army... just because he can't figure out what I'll do if he attacks it. And sometimes, I don't have anything special to do with that pawn, I'm just testing his resolve. If he goes for the pawn, he uses up actions and puts tokens on folk. If he doesn't, I know he's not ready for his charge yet. And you don't even want to know what I'll do with the pinata and a low-cost stealth character.

Hasn't anyone else here ever paused before the end of their turn and counted out the movement & range of a RS character who already had one token placed on them that turn? Whether or not you actually intend to push them the next turn, you've now laid the seeds of belief in your opponent's head that you just might, and you've even shown him just where he shouldn't put his figures... heh. And if he decides to attack that RS character, well, at least he's attacking a tokened character, and not the ones who can attack the next turn without pushing. With a little luck, your opponent will waste an entire turn going after someone they shouldn't have been worrying about.

It sounds like a lot of people aren't comfortable with that kind of play in heroclix, and that's fine. I generally prefer a nice, relaxed game of clix myself. If I want a game with bluffing, poker faces, feints, decoys, and (in multiplayer) constantly-shifting alliances, I'll play the Legend of the Five Rings CCG. There, the psychological / social aspect of the game, how you handle your cards, and even if / when / how you fidget (or pretend to) can win or lose a game for you. I DON'T do all of that type of thing in heroclix, because it's a "just for fun" game.

At Worlds, however, I always suspected that I'd want to step up to that "magnificent so-and-so" level of play. And I certainly wouldn't hold it against anyone to use lots of tactics like that in a major tournament. For myself, though, I can either have fun playing the game, or be truly competitive. Hence, the reason I don't play competitively, and am happy to judge at most of the venues in my city. That's just more fun for everyone. Still, I do dip into the bag labeled "Sun & Miyamoto, LLC." every once in a while, just to spice up the game play.

Yeah, I kind of knew where you were going with this once you got to "expert baiter".... doesn't mean I don't want to rep you for it though. I already repped a post of yours a few posts back though.

Great link. Thanks. I will read more. Lol, on the Scrub... people who call all strategies cheap... or cheese for that matter. Yeah, turtling is cheese, SI Strange is cheese, using ICWO on non-Batman is cheese, Cr Darkseid is chees... come on now. If it's legal it ain't cheese.

I used the tower rush on someone on Warcraft 3 a while back. While I was beating this person, he/she said I was using a noobie tactic... and in my mind, well if you're losing against a noobie tactic, then what does that make you? Anyway, ppl should stop complaining and just man up. In those WC3 tournaments, you have to win as many games as you can in a set amount of time... so, the fastest win is the best way to win the whole thing... ergo the tower rush...

Hah! Rep for the WC3 Tower Rush!

The funniest was actually with the Elf bases that could get up, walk, and fight. I could never pull it off personally, but I saw one of my buddies build a base nearby an enemy, then proceed to beat the enemy down with his buildings he had just constructed. lmao.... good times.

I do believe you've been baited quite effectively in this thread Harpua.

It is "a" way to improve as a gamer, not "the" way to improve.

Oh by the way . . . wanna know how I got these scars?
The sentiment, "winning isn't everything: winning is the only thing" is as old as competition itself. The modern statement is "just win, baby!" However expressed, it misses the point.

The nature of play is not binary.

yeah, it's the equivalent of the tower for Elves... the trees that throw rocks.
it's a little harder to pull off though. But you only need a few and they can uproot and piggy back their way into the enemy base.... shades of Lord of the Rings II huh?

Not a prob! Sirlin is the guru gaming god.

LOL at WC3 Tower Rush. I love that game!

Like you said.. if it it s a noob tactic.. then why can't your opponent beat you? Unless that is, he's a scrub!

I agree... there is no cheese. Sometimes I'll use the term, but I'm not being serious.

To be honest though.... in friendly game or many local venue games... I am a scrub. I'm playing older, non-competitive comic-accurate theme teams, which limits my chances at victory.

But when I get serious, and I do many times... I rarely, if ever lose. I did an experiment last year, a 12 week experiment, where odd weeks I'd play as a scrub, and the even weeks I'd play to win. The 6 weeks I played to win, I won every championship those weeks, and rather easily I might add. Out of the 6 scrub weeks, I won two of the championships using sub-par scrub teams.

But back on the topic at hand...

The HC rules clearly state, with no way to misinterpret them, that you declare an action then you resolve that action. There are no takebacks.

Didn't notice I had Defend, Skrulls, or Shapechange before you declared that action? Too bad... you're stuck doing that action.

One of the few things I hate...

Opponent:"I do a Running Shot on Human Torch"

Me: "OK, I use the Fantastic Four ATA, and after hindering terrain and my perplexes, I have a 22 Defense Value"

Opponent: "Oh, that's right, you have the FF ATA... ok, instead, I'll attack so and so."

...Sorry bub... you made your bed, now you must sleep in it, roll the dice! It's called personally responsibility and paying attention to the details.

Haven't read the whole thread yet, but I feel an urgent need to respond to this comment.

How is what Harpua said about declaring and finishing Outwit dickery?

You (the Outwitter) said who is doing what and to whom. End of action. No takebacks.

Let's think of HeroClix as a computer gamer for a second. To use Outwit you would first choose your character, then choose what action you want to do (Outwit in this case) and then when you would click on the target character's power. Outwit would be completed and that would be all.

How is transforming this very clear and straighforward action from a strictly rules based environment (computer) to a more forgiving environment (the real world) dickery? Games are about rules after all.

I have a slightly varied philosophy in this matter. I don't play to win, I play not to lose.

Just remember that you don't declare the target when you declare the Running Shot. If your opponent declares "Running Shot on Human Torch" and then you tell him about Torch's DV he can still choose to shoot someone else (though he can't take back the declared power action of RS). The target of the free ranged combat action from RS is declared after the move.

Let's assume that George saw what was coming. The quotes from George's postings even indicate that is the case. Is it his responsibility in any way to tell his opponent "you can't outwit Shazadam on the first turn if I don't move him?" I would argue it is not.

Next, Alan moves Metron as he did. George noww faces (in the span of seconds here) two choices. Force the token to be placed or not.

Scenario 1 - say nothing about the token. Alan would then attempt to outwit Shazadam, George points out the immunity, and the debate now becomes "was the action really over if the token wasn't placed?" Granted, I'm quite sure Harpua (and I, if I were asked) would have ruled the same (that starting the Outwit action on its own implies that the move action was done), but using my magic mirror to peek into this alternate reality, I assure you, there are threads galore declaring that the judges were dinks because the token wasn't placed yet.

Scenario 2 - Force the move action to be tokened. As has been pointed out, this is what should be happening as per the rules. Played so often as a friendly game, these things are very loose in practice. See my earlier posts and you'll see how I play loosely most of the time I play. However, when I play in a competitive event, it's a different story. I know this and I expect nothing else from my opponents.

You keep saying that George induced Alan to make a mistake. The game error was trying to outwit Shazadam. The mistake that led to that error was moving Metron. George induced neither of these things. Alan picked up his figures and moved them haflway across the board all on his own. George asked that the move be committed before the next action takes place.

Now, if Alan had looked at the situation, realized that Metron would not be able to outwit and decided not to move Metron there, we could be looking at another set of threads about taking something back when you haven't placed a token yet.

Consider your opponents skill level. If they are new, you should help them a bit, and give them tips. If they are an experienced player, by all means, play by the book. They will get better at remembering and strategizing , if they don't get away with that stuff an a regular basis.

Players make their own mistakes. You can't force a great player to make a mistake; if he's that great, he'll know the rules thoroughly enough to avoid it.

There's also nothing wrong with exploiting the mistakes of an opponent. Unless you've in love with random chance, this is one of the primary ways to win a match.

In a more casual environment, it's generally good practice to remind your opponent not to make rookie mistakes - forgetting to free-move a Prob Controller before attacking, for example. You want your opponent to be at least competent at the game so that your victories are meaningful.

But at a higher level of competition, you expect your opponent to bring their "A" game. This is actually much harder than just knowing all the rules. If your opponent loses his focus, if he makes a mistake when he should have known better, then he is not as good a player as the guy who doesn't do this. "Not making any mistakes" is presumably one of the things you'd say about the champ.

I'm positive that Alan is a really good player. He hasto be, to get that far. But nobody "made" Alan forget how first turn immunity works. George didn't say anything misleading or deceptive. He asked for absolute clarity on action declaration and resolution, which made Alan's mistake obvious and inarguable, and didn't allow a takeback. If you're competing to be "the best of the best", you shouldn't need takebacks.

This is not how I prefer to play in more casual tournaments. However, in a championship game, it seems perfectly above board and appropriate.

Well stated