Quote Originally Posted by Voidhawk View Post
The point is to widen the Good Stuff metric until it encompasses everything. Instead of as it currently is, where whatever is Best immediately invalidates literally everything else.

You say "interchangably mediocre" and all I hear is "I hate options". To have valid decision points, one option can't be better than all others.

Have an extreme example:
1 unit of Termis, Bikers or Devastators is 100pts. 2 is 250pts.
You have 300pts to spend on an army.
How much better do Termis have to be, that a second unit is better than Bikers+Devastators?

Curved points make room for more than just the Best. And if you miss judge, you have more than one dial to adjust: the base points of each unit, or the curved costs of the 2nd+ ones.



I agree with you there. Top of turn scoring is pretty dumb; it makes the game much more defensive and penalises risk-taking.



Now you're just victim blaming.
The GW designers have the ability, and the time/money, to create and release a ruleset in which 90% of the models they sell are valid choices.
That they choose not to is a deliberate act, done to take advantage of new players and invalidate existing models.

As players, it is in our interests to push back against this at every turn.



If it's a freely distributed ruleset, GW can do jack about it. There's nothing to sue. And tournament organisers can set whatever requirements/lack they like.

The writers/maintainers getting bought out is a different issue. But seeing as the purpose is to supplant the current rules anyway, that doesn't make the game worse.
They more or less managed it in 8th. The game was in a good state, things were more or less balanced. But GW released new things and instead of these new things fitting in the meta, it shattered it. And then 9th came around and in the development of 9th, GW did something to co-opt the ITC and NOVA.

That I think is my biggest problem with 9th on a whole. We went from Eternal War, Maelstrom, ITC (and other variants), Open War cards and even narrative missions to just Eternal War and Crusade missions which mostly use the same scoring as the Eternal War missions. Before we had constant variety and now each mission is practically the same, particularly if you are playing competitively, because the best Secondaries are ones that don't depend on your opponent, so you take them every game.

Anyways, I do fully support getting the ITC to be releasing rules again. However tournament players apparently don't want that. What they want is the rules to stay the same no matter where they are playing, so they only have to master one ruleset.