Min-maxing vs. roleplaying

[Martok]

thecommandtent brought up a question in the Stellaris thread that I don't know we've really discussed much: 

Are you more of a "min-maxer", who employs every possible tip, trick, and tactic (no matter how cheesy or game-breaking) in the pursuit of victory?  Or are you more of a roleplayer, immersing yourself in the game's universe, where enjoying the story/narrative that unfolds over the course of the game is just as important to you as winning? 



I myself am more of a roelplayer when it comes 4x and grand-strategy games.  I still do my best to win, but generally not at the cost of doing something that would break my sense of immersion while playing. 

[Undercovergeek]

I like to think I’m a role player - I like a narrative game filled with revenge and purpose

I like to name ships, fleets, armies and follow their history and keep an eye on them

Until I run into a brick wall and then it’s off to YouTube for ‘how to destroy......’

I like to think I’ll have time to make a video to music one day charting the progress of a single ship or a commander

[bob48]

Again, this is very subjective.

On one hand I will play 'fictional' games that bear little relationship to any historical events. On the the other hand, I play historical game, mainly board war games, not to win at any cost, but usually to explore an historic event, be it a battle or campaign or period, in which I have an interest.

I do not like a mixture and that is likely why I have never played any of the Civ games.

[bbmike]

Definitely a roleplayer. It's why I'm so bad at Civ and other 4x games. And Bob, while Civ does have historical leaders, empires, etc., I've never had a (sandbox/custom) game that came close to actual historical events.

[bob48]

Maybe I should try one of the earlier versions next time I see it in a sale.

[Martok]

I like to think I’ll have time to make a video to music one day charting the progress of a single ship or a commander

That would be very cool.  I've come across a handful of those types of videos, and they're always fun to watch. 

Again, this is very subjective.

On one hand I will play 'fictional' games that bear little relationship to any historical events. On the the other hand, I play historical game, mainly boatd war games, not to win at any cost, but usual to explore an historic event, be a battle or campaign or period, in which I have an interest.

I do not like a mixture and that is likely why I have never played any of the Civ games.

Interesting.  I *was* going to make a broad statement that I don't mind a-historical outcomes in games (so long as it feels "natural"), but I'm suddenly wondering if my views don't hew closer to yours, Bawb.  It would certainly explain (at least in part) why I've never really gotten into the Civilization games, despite the fact that on paper I should be obsessed with them. 

[judgedredd]

What's a min-maxer?

I'm probably that because I don't "role play" so much. Games like B-17 Queen of the Skies just lost me because I had to make my own narrative.

[BanzaiCat]

'Min-maxing' is where you try to game a system to get the best possible stats, usually by analyzing the math behind it and squeezing every spare 0.1 points you can out of various skills, abilities, tools/weapons/armor, and other stats. The term itself I think means investing the minimum possible amount of points/effort/resources into getting the maximum results.

Personally, I don't like it. I think it is beyond the purpose of an RPG, which is story-telling interspersed with actual die-rolling. A good GM will recognize good role-playing and give bonuses (or hindrances) as needed. I think the fun is in the role-playing.

However, I knew a LOT of guys that loved doing this. For them it was more about number-crunching and doing the math. If that's their bag, more power to them. I won't disparage it, but in my opinion it just misses the point.

[Yskonyn]

'Min-maxing' is where you try to game a system to get the best possible stats, usually by analyzing the math behind it and squeezing every spare 0.1 points you can out of various skills, abilities, tools/weapons/armor, and other stats. The term itself I think means investing the minimum possible amount of points/effort/resources into getting the maximum results.

Personally, I don't like it. I think it is beyond the purpose of an RPG, which is story-telling interspersed with actual die-rolling. A good GM will recognize good role-playing and give bonuses (or hindrances) as needed. I think the fun is in the role-playing.

However, I knew a LOT of guys that loved doing this. For them it was more about number-crunching and doing the math. If that's their bag, more power to them. I won't disparage it, but in my opinion it just misses the point.

I have been GM-ing for a group and 2 out of the 5 players are definitely min-maxers. It drives the other three nuts at times, because they would come up with a perfectly viable roleplaying solution to a given problem and the two min-maxers retorted that it really wasnt very efficient in game mechanical terms.
I have tried to make them ‘feel’ the world and their chars in vein for quite some time.
Indeed, their fun with the game are the numbers over narrative. I agree that’s missing the point in any RPG.
Too many people seem to think there is some kind of ‘win’ condition to be chased to ‘solve’ the adventure, much like a boardgame, but they always find out I do not GM that way. Fun times.

Anyway back on topic; it makes more sense to approach a 4X in a min/max way as there definitely is ‘a best way’ to win these games.
Thats just not too important to me personally. But respect to those who have the energy to really turn a computer game inside out.

[thecommandtent]

I'm definitely a roleplayer or at least an aspiring one when it comes to games. I always want to know the story thats going on and be a part of it and have my choices and decisions matter.  Min/maxing becomes to much like a math problem for school where its all about solving the equation the "right" way to achieve success.

Its also why I love reading a good narrative driven AAR and why people's 'war stories' from their games will hook my interest faster than a marketing summary.