Do we have to have a new Version?

bertalucci · Post by **bertalucci** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:21 pm

Setting aside Pedants and Unsportsman like behaviour - I don't think so.

What do you think?

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:25 pm

Given that there is no intention to revise 13 army list books - and this has been said quite a few times - your poll options are hopelessly biased and meaningless.

FWIW I believe a v2 rule set is needed and broadly desired - and that modest list revisions that don't end up costing too much additional to the rule book would be acceptable.

timmy1 · Post by **timmy1** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 2:10 pm

I agree with Nik. I have not voted for that reason.

batesmotel · Post by **batesmotel** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 2:40 pm

I also agree with Nik and didn't vote for the same reasons.

Chris

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 2:54 pm

I also think that v2 appears to be pretty much a given, so other than a protest I'm not sure what this poll aims to achieve

rpayne · Post by **rpayne** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 4:20 pm

I also agree with nik.

For what it's worth, us folks in California are eagerly awaiting a chance to buy more books. We have been waiting for a campaign/weather/naval/siege/scenario book for some time!

GHGAustin · Post by **GHGAustin** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 4:22 pm

Ha, ha. Even with the biased wording and boycott by people how think it is biased, the option for spending 200 GBP is winning! So there.

Go ahead and vote for option 2, even if the poll is biased in its presentation.

Mehrunes · Post by **Mehrunes** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 6:29 pm

Hell, what a useless poll. Could moderators please delete this one? We really need this forum for the important issues.

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 6:37 pm

Mehrunes wrote:Hell, what a useless poll. Could moderators please delete this one? We really need this forum for the important issues.

We could delete over half the posts in the v2 forum if that was a criteria

Just ignore it if you think it is pointless.

Strategos69 · Post by **Strategos69** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 7:30 pm

rpayne wrote:
For what it's worth, us folks in California are eagerly awaiting a chance to buy more books. We have been waiting for a campaign/weather/naval/siege/scenario book for some time!

Phil78 has created a Facebook fan club for that as far as I know.

I hope the new 200 pounds in books include that one too!

By the way, as a buyer, I wouldn't mind to purchase new books provided that they are different enough (new illustrations from the tons Osprey already has). Wargamers are very easy to trick. look how they have done so with Flames of War and Warhammer!

ethan · Post by **ethan** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 9:14 pm

I would certainly appreciate a version 2 of the rules. The army lists can be amended or the amended lists included in a new book would be fine either way.

timmy1 · Post by **timmy1** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 9:21 pm

How about a V2 rules and army lists with the awful Angus McBride artwork - that's got to be worth GBP 200 (not least because it will be 2/3rds the weight)...

While I agree that poll seems 'quirky' to say the least, however as Nik says we should allow the useless question here and there; either that or we have to ban Phil from posting... :)

btw Anyone know Phil's facebook page for the Campaigns etc supplement so I can 'like' it too?

Mehrunes · Post by **Mehrunes** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 11:11 pm

Just ignore it if you think it is pointless.

Just as you did?

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 11:29 pm

Mehrunes wrote:
Just ignore it if you think it is pointless.
Just as you did?

I think there is an underlying valid opinion, just woefully expressed in the poll.

bertalucci · Post by **bertalucci** » Sun Jan 23, 2011 7:58 am

Ow - I sure pricked a boil there didn't I

Unfortunately I'm old enough to remember WRG5th, DBM (god knows how many tweaks) and all those in between until the delivery of FoG (AM&R) which blew a breath of fresh air across the steppes, reinstated the twang of the bowstring, the thrill of the charge, the grind of the melee and then in FogR the smell of the gun powder. Eh forgive me if I'm wrong but that's why we are in this hobby isn't it?

Question honestly posed - those who seek to teleport elephants should know better.
A fix - just ban it - this dosn't need a new rule book.

I always suspected that Romans had been favourably treated so that they were brought out of the box after years of previous rules that did the opposite.
But so what, they are now a challenge and yes I do have one but its still not my favourite army and only sees daylight perhaps once a year.

So I'm in a camp of two that think that the current rule set(s) works well (are great) as long as you are sensible and don't seek to bend every word written.

So be it.

Jilu · Post by **Jilu** » Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:00 am

Well i would not mind a new rule book AND new Army lists BUT all bundeled up in 4 or 5 books with a hardback

TimSnoddy · Post by **TimSnoddy** » Sun Jan 23, 2011 10:04 am

I understand people's reticence or lack of funding to buy new army list books but I do hope we avoid the errata sheet era of the DBM lists. That was when the list book came with an errata sheet which promptly got lost, ignored because it covered so many armies, or misinterpreted by stroking out the wrong word in the main list. For significant changes a new rule book would seem inevitable, and whatever books it takes to cover revised armies gathered together. I am sure someone could come up with a good name for these books.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:27 am

timmy1 wrote:While I agree that poll seems 'quirky' to say the least, however as Nik says we should allow the useless question here and there; either that or we have to ban Phil from posting...

btw Anyone know Phil's facebook page for the Campaigns etc supplement so I can 'like' it too?

What don't you like Tim?

shadowdragon · Post by **shadowdragon** » Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:11 am

nikgaukroger wrote:
Mehrunes wrote:Hell, what a useless poll. Could moderators please delete this one? We really need this forum for the important issues.
We could delete over half the posts in the v2 forum if that was a criteria

There are many people out there who would tell us that our entire hobby is pointless.... to which, I suppose, we should utter, "exactly", accompanied by some kind of existentialist gesture.

So, now, how many angels do you think are dancing on the head of that pin?

grahambriggs · Post by **grahambriggs** » Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:57 am

Unfortunately my option is not in the poll:

"The current rules work reasonably well for a first version but can be improved in terms of the look and feel of an ancient battle for a version 2. Hopefully that will get more people playing them than is the case today. To me, that would be worth the cost of the new rule book. Of course if you prefer the current version you could continue to play that."