Get on the same page and stop being Rats to the GW Piper (7e (6.1e))

[RexScarlet]

(But the real reason is because, as an Eldar player, I know that I'm not going to have to wait another 7 freakin years for new stuff)

.
I laughed very loudly, but then shed a Tear for the SoB players, lol...

[Tomgar]

Here's a suggestion: why don't we all chill the hell out and play Warhammer the way we wanna play Warhammer? Discuss bones of contention with opponents and come to a consensus if things are really so disorientating and confusing for you. I mean, it's a wargame with toy soldiers, not an intense legal battle.

[RexScarlet]

To throw in my personal two cents, right now in the last few years the game itself (organization and players) have yielded several ways to play:
Friendly Games,
Competitive Games,
Killteam,
Combat Patrol,
Normal 40k,
Apocalypse,
Tournament Style Limitations, etc.
I think its really up to each and every gamer to figure out what they want to do.

With the internet present hopefully the only real limitation to your games is your own laziness and your willingness to compromise.

.
Well said.
.
Yes, there are many ways to play, Pew-Pew, and players decide how to play all the time.
But like it or not, "Normal 40K" as you put it (MRB two player versus) is the mainstay, of which there is little agreement, who wants to discuss/debate for an hour before a game on which, what, and how they are going to play?
What a waste of energy.
.
Players want the "Game Company" to lead them (answer questions.)
.
Compromise is a huge issue.

[RexScarlet]

I like the design team better than event organisers. In terms of game balance (or lack thereof). I don't trust event organisers to bring what the authors can't - most event organisers pander to the tourney scene.


PS why is this news or rumours?

.
Yes, but the community has more influence and insight than GW on fair play (and time constraints, etc.)
.
News, I think I forgot to put 7e (6.1e) on my original post, but it is really about the vomiting of rules onto the community at an alarming rate.

[RexScarlet]

He's missing the exponents. And all the rest of the math that would explain why its relevant. And while 264-1 is relevant to the wheat and chessboard problem, I'm not sure why it's particularly relevant to the discussion. Tournament players aren't happy with some of the new stuff, not because it's too complex to wrap our heads around with a little practice, but because a lot of it is massively imbalanced to the point of utterly ruining 40k as a potentially competitive game.

.
ROFL, take the Maths complaints to Wikipedia... (I would hope the both of you get the referencing of the cross referencing of the cross referenced reference I presented, lol)
.
It is not just Tournament players (I do not play in Tournaments) it is the state of the game in general rules wise, that effects ALL players in some way.
.
I would challenge you to present a list of ALL the rules publications and what format said rules are in (E-Book, Book, Rules in box only leaflet, etc) that are to be used in current 40K. Please, because I do not have that kind of time...

[Tomgar]

Okay, seriously, am I high right now?

[RexScarlet]

There are three steps in presenting a case simply:
1. State your position. The answer you want the audience to agree with. "Tell them what you are going to tell them"
2. State your supporting facts. Connect the dots. Start from point A and arrive at point B. "Tell them."
3. State your position. Repeat your conclusion. "Tell them what you just told them."

.
Kind of thanks? (I think I forgot to put 7e (6.1e) rumor on my original post, sorry to everyone).
.
1) GW's new strategy is vomiting out rules faster than ever on multiple platforms (E-Books, rules only in box leaflets, Physical Books, etc.), which is creating exponential problems.
2) Wheat and Chessboard example, which players do not seem to see happening, but tournaments, and the larger more organised 40K communities see it.
3) The ENTIRE community should get/band together and make a decision on which rules to use/not use, which will help quell the exponential problems.
.
Yes, "...everyone just go about your business, so long as you have an opinion on the matter. Everyone else needs to form one."
And I would then add; Note; Pew-Pew not the topic.
.
I really got a kick out of this, thank you very much for the streamlining, as I was half asleep and on bedrest when I wrote the original post.

[Wildeybeast]

Players want the "Game Company" to lead them (answer questions.)

No they don't. If the internet has taught us anything, it's that players want to lead the game company. Which would be fine, except people don't know what they want and as a whole gaming community can agree on nothing. That much I can agree with you on. But that does not mean GW should dictate one style of play. It also undermines your point that we should all unite one way or the other. That simply won't happen.

GW has recognised that gamers want different things, different ways to play and is capitalising on it. Want to field every single model you have without worrying too much about points? Here, have Apocalypse. Really want to re-fight the Horus Heresy? Go for it. Have burning desire to play through the opening stages of a planetary invasion? Knock yourself out with Planetstrike. Variety is the spice of life, people get to play with the bits they want. If you are spending an hour debating which type of game to play, I politely suggest that the issue is not with GW but with you and/or the people you are gaming with.

[Tomgar]

.
3) The ENTIRE community should get/band together and make a decision on which rules to use/not use, which will help quell the exponential problems.

My friends and I enjoy the current release strategy and we love new stuff like the Imperial Knights coming out. It adds more variety to our games. If "The Community" decides not to follow those rules, why should my friends and I be excluded from the wider Warhammer scene simply for playing the game we want to play. Trying to artificially impose some nonsensical and subjective version of what the meta should be (in your eyes) will just exclude people who don't want to play like that. It's contrary to the "play how you want" idea that's been central to Warhammer since its inception.

[RexScarlet]

Here's a suggestion: why don't we all chill the hell out and play Warhammer the way we wanna play Warhammer? Discuss bones of contention with opponents and come to a consensus if things are really so disorientating and confusing for you. I mean, it's a wargame with toy soldiers, not an intense legal battle.

.
Great point,
pack up stuff,
go to location
what rules would you like to play?
discuss/debate for an hour or so
read/check all the rules publications your opponent is going to use, and give all your rules publications you are going to use to your opponent to read/check
discuss Q&A any issues either of you may have
set-up
play
pack up
go home
.
Yep, you are right those three added steps are not to much to ask for a game of toy soldiers...