The Biggest Loser in 7th ed.

[daboarder]

do your FLGs have a pts standard? as in can you walk up to your FLG with your 1850 list week in week and and be reasonablly assured of a game, or is it 1500 pts? 2k ?

these would all be a form of "community standard"

the very fact that you can probably rock down to the FLG in "wargaming night" and expect a game is a "community standard"

[Morgrim]

Here "community standard" is 1k points and under unless otherwise arranged, which seems to do a lot to limit the messed up combos. I'm not sure how you can really run casual games at 2k points when it takes so many hours to finish them. So I'm not particularly fussed either way.

[Pendragon38]

The only good thing is the fact you will see more themed armies like iron warriors or korne army's or ork speed freak

[Uberbeast]

It seems like before in previous editions, there was a limiter that all players had to use, unless they agreed to break it. Now there will be pretty much no limit and players need to agree how to limit themselves. It's a lot easier to agree on breaking a limit by a set amount than to have to find agreement on how to limit something completely unlimited.

[ElectricPaladin]

I think that the general feeling in the thread that this is not the end of the world is pretty accurate.

Since time immemorial, nothing has stopped you if what you wanted to do was alter the way the game works. As I've mentioned elsewhere, I've played Cities of Death, I've played Kill Team, and in the new campaign my FLGS is starting, I'm likely to play with Escalation and Spearpoint. I've read about, but haven't tried, Planetstrike and Zone Mortalis. I know of folks who have altered the FOC to reflect scout engagements, outriders accidentally meeting, or brawls between powerful HQ units and their bodyguards. And then there's apocalypse, which throws the FOC out the window.

So, the default condition as of 5th and 6th Edition was "here is this structure, but if you want to have fun by messing with it, go to town - and here are some particularly interesting ways to do that, which we will sell as products."

The only difference here is that GW is saying instead "no mandatory structure is the default condition of 7th Edition... but you can create a specific game experience by adding a structure, either by incentive or by game organizer fiat.

In other words, this really is "welcome to the new game, just like the old game." Nothing has really changed. The only difference is that the rules will be written from the neutral position of zero structure, with optional structures that you can impose, rather than being written from the neutral position of this structure, with the option to remove it or replace it with other structures.

Like I said in my comments on the article, I think that GW believes that their game will be better served by putting some of the onus of organization and conversation back on the players. They don't want a game that you can just sit down and play, because they don't think they can do that and still please everyone. Are they correct? Almost certainly not. I play many games with sufficiently tight rules and organizational systems such that I could probably play with someone with whom I have no common language except the game terms and the phrase "is this ok?" (ie. for a wobbly model being placed slightly outside its movement or an unclear measurement). And although I know that wargames can have sufficiently tight rules, the fact also is that I am perfectly capable of having this conversation and clarifying with my opponent that I want a "fun and fluffy and casual game" or "do your worst, this is my badass list" or "let's just bring a whole butt-ton of tanks today, ok?"

What's the big tragedy? When did we forget how to talk? Don't your FLGSs have Facebook groups or forums? Don't your buddies have phones and emails? And if they don't have these things why don't they? Wargaming is inherently superior when you can have these sorts of conversations - I've had more fun playing 40k in a campaign environment than I ever did in random pickup games.

[Defenestratus]

The only good thing is the fact you will see more themed armies like iron warriors or korne army's or ork speed freak

We had this same exact conversation as a community when 6th hit with the allies matrix.

"FINALLY! I'll be able to field my fluffy army XYZ!!"

Yes... you can... but unfortunately the jerkfaces that care more about winning and less about a mutually enjoyable game of plastic toy soldiers will take the same mechanic that allows you to have a fluffy army and twist it into his own perverse machinations. This effect will have a ripple along the entire community as people tire of being stomped and escalate the shenanigans until soon the majority of the players in the group are powergaming dweebs or, as in my group, the players get fed up with the rules and go to a game they feel isn't decided in the roster-creation phase.

[Mr Mystery]

You really should not field a Dark Apostle for each large sized mob of Cultists/PDF dupes. Dark Apostles are RARE. They are leaders of entire Armies or at LEAST counsel a Chaos Lord. If you feel that these mighty champions should lead a squad of lowly cultists (the lead the cultists of entire WORLDS) because it feels right then there is already an issue.


Which is a lovely but naive point of view. While I really appreciate that view it simply doesnt work. Not beeing an arse should come naturally. It doesnt. Thats why we have laws. 2 or 3 people in a group are enough to have an significant negative impact, no matter how many positive people you have around.

Yet they're already arses. Option of no FoC doesn't change that.

Just don't play them. Soon makes their powergaming goonery completely pointless.

As for the Dark Apostles - You have your definition, I'll have mine. It's a large part of the game

[daboarder]

edit: wrong thread

[Horncastle]

If all unbound means is no FOC it's not bad at all. My brother's and I have played like that since 3rd edition. We just pick points and take what we like.

[Wolfshade]

If all unbound means is no FOC it's not bad at all. My brother's and I have played like that since 3rd edition. We just pick points and take what we like.

This is a classic example of "what works for you". So why should all of your games up to the enw edition be invalid? You obviosuly get enjoyment from the way you game, otherwise you wouldn't have played through 3rd...