Another Rules Update? Seriously??

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • N3okorrales wrote:

    Im surprise people manage to go through their first year of school if they consider 5 lines of text such a huge change to turn players away, but of course suffering unplayable or broken OP books for years is far better than reading 5 new lines every couple months.
    Actually, I have over 6 years of post-secondary education. It's my work-life balance that holds me back.

    As you say, it's not the 5 lines of text. It's the constant change. Before I can even settle down on the change, it changes! Things might be different if I played 2 games a week, but if this keeps up it's more likely to be two games a year!
    :VC: The covenant shall bind you... :beer:

  • Just to sum things up...

    LOCK DOWN THE CORE RULE BOOK! Please it's hard enough to teach a new player and grow a community already...changing the rules even with the minor updates undermines an individuals confidence to learn the rules knowing how frequent things change....


    Changing Armybooks! Please do! Update what isn't working and not popular/nerf bat what is doing too well! Everyone well usually people that play those armies love new armies! Just like Swedish Comp...great system since they had never control of the rules only balancing :)

  • Hey, you know what?
    No need to complain further about too frequent changes... it is not happening anymore!

    As announced, the freeze will last at minimum till August. Actually, it is quite possible that it lasts longer, because we will have to wait for V2 to be ready.
    And when V2 will be stabilized... no more change of core rulebook for years!

    Social Media Team

    UN Coordinator, aka UNSG

    - druchii.net contribution: The 9th Age - Dread Elves

  • N3okorrales wrote:

    pk-ng wrote:

    *grabs the popcorn*
    @Darkvoice has a point and it's turning away alot of prospective new players due to the constant changes. Unfortunately this game won't be able to be sustained just by veterans alone. You need new blood and these changes ain't helping.....it's actually hurting itself more and more each time there is a "new" rules update as this game requires long term investment (i.e 1 year+) in order to play it and no new players are going to invest into something that constantly changes regardless if it's for good or bad. Whilst GW did release broken rules at least it was stable i.e 5 years + and people can be invested into it.

    But I'm just here to read the smack-tal
    Im surprise people manage to go through their first year of school if they consider 5 lines of text such a huge change to turn players away, but of course suffering unplayable or broken OP books for years is far better than reading 5 new lines every couple months.


    Regardless of their schooling experience. 5 lines or 10 lines it is still change. They will need to reread the entire rulebook again because they are NEW to the game and this will deter them. For veterans it's just reading 5 lines as we are familiar with the rules. They are at the bottom of the learning curve and we are at the top - big difference.

    But less obvious to those wanting to be high and mighty.
    :HE: Beware of the panda....with big guns

  • Darkvoice wrote:

    pk-ng wrote:

    But I'm just here to read the smack-talk
    @pk-ng enjoy, lol.Seriously though, I'm not trying to start a flame war, I'd rather keep this civilized.

    WhammeWhamme wrote:

    So I suggest you play with 1.3, ignore 2.0 when it hits (it shouldn't be out for too long), and then learn 2.1 as the last version of T9A you'll need to learn for 4+ years
    4+ years, now you're talking, though that may turn out to be a little too stable. We'll see.

    WhammeWhamme wrote:

    That's not so bad, is it? One more change you'll have to learn and then you're done?
    Yeah right. I'm sure each of those versions will have 3-4 subversions (2.0.1 etc) so it's actually like 6-8 versions..

    I'm not against change by any means! Just not this pace of change as I don't have time. The game has been 'good enough' for many versions, and I look forward to it's continued improvement. Maybe 1 update per year in the same month each year? At least something predictable!!


    And yes, stable broken book is preferable to changing the change of the change of the change of the change of the change of the change of thethe change of the change of the change of the change of the change of the change of thechange... seriously, I was going to try and do the right number of changes since this came out like 2 years ago, but I don't even know. (In 1.3 alone we are already at the change of the change of the change of the change of the change of the change (1.3 was itself a change)).

    When things were broken we just didn't use them, or didn't overuse them. Or you can play with people who use all the broken stuff and just play to win, but we have a name for those kind of people...

    About the latest rules, is there a changelog somewhere? Since it seems they didn't colour code the changes will I have to read the entire book to find what is different between the two?
    Look down at the bottom of the book. If there isn't a changelog, we changed nothing. After all, the purpose of this update was just to clean up the blue and crossed text. There might still be a few blue text and thus non empty changelogs. That is because the community suggested some clarifications to make the rules easier to use and understand, and we did listen, review and implement some of these suggestions. But none of them were actual rules change.
    When you see any update that reach the third number, that is actually only what is is about. Clarifications, correcting any forgotten word or language errors. These are not rule updates, just clean ups, and the game should be exactly the same. Don't be afraid of them. ;)