Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I haven't really posted in any great length/ depth in a public AOS discussion in some time. I have largely moved on to other games and have been focused on building that.

The AOS that we play in my group is a largely houseruled set of rules that isn't really AOS at that point.

Perhaps this topic has run its course if we’re berating some dude about his opinions. If you don’t like what someone says, you don’t have to reply to them, it’s easy to avoid warping a thread around them by just ignoring them.
So if Auticus has an opinion you aren’t super fond of, just don’t reply to him? No need to be rude to anyone.

 Sasori wrote:

 auticus wrote:
I was being sarcastic and passive aggressive. A poster on the previous page suggested putting me on ignore because i sometimes speak ill of aos and its gaktastic balance.

I fully agree that the amount of traps and negative play experiences can lead to a horrible time if players arent coached correctly and know how to minmax out the gate. Otherwise youre blowing a ton of money on a bad experience.

Further you may have to regularly change armies out as they cycle one army out for another in power.

The problem is that you are overly negative to a huge degree, that not only multiple topics have been warped from your posts, I think the entire AoS section has.

Here are some examples:

#1 AoS Wary example. Here Nels breaks down several of Auticus posts on the matter

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/778224.page#10525019

#2 Auticus' threatening to quit multiple times over a great timeline. Another great break down by Nels

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/765565.page#10196127

#3 Just have a read down this page, again warped around auticus

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/810/772521.page

#4 You were literally banned from another forum because of your posting habits.



Your posts are literally a negative black hole that consistently sucks and warps topics around it. It's like you have a pathological need to constantly have attention and be negative about AoS and GW.

Criticism Of GW is fair, and so is criticism of AoS. The System is not perfect, and there are much better game systems out there no question. The problem is you take it to the extreme, where you are so negative most of any criticism is lost because all you do post negative crap day in and day out.

It gets tiring. I don't like that TGA is overly positive and pro gw, but it's a hell of a lot better than every topic being drowned in your negativity and influx of posts. There are actual fruitful discussions over there on Tactics, balance, lore and other topics. Look at how this section of the forum is almost dead. I truly believe that is in large part due to the fact that almost every topic has you chime in with your negative opinion in some form or fashion.

It really is too bad, because you are clearly a thoughtful person and I have seen many posts that I agree with.

I am bummed that I can only exalt this a single time. Well stated, and backed up. Auticus, you flat out share your disgust with AoS, and remark how easy it is to play other games. If you really feel THIS bad about AoS, why are you still playing it? You’ve shared many times how people expect you to build missions and rules for them and fight you over them; how masochistic towards yourself are you going to get about the whole thing?

Well this topic has been derailed.

Has it though? The original poster is thinking about jumping ship, and one person is being excessively negative. Not only might it convince that one person not to switch to AoS, it could be toxic enough to prevent other people who have the same questions (but don't want to start a duplicate thread) from even bothering. So yes, it is relevant to the thread to ask him why he's even bothering if he is so hostile towards the game. I'd consider the posters who are commenting "GW isn't the only game in town, go try something else" to be MORE off topic; the OP stated he is a "GW fanboi" (his own words, not mine), and people are telling him to pick up something else. If he already stated he wanted to stick with GW because of personal preference and what his friends play, suggesting something outside of that (or home-made "fixes" to AoS) are the actual off topic posts.

Alright well everyone has said their peace about Auticus and his opinions, let’s move on rather than be excessively rude about him.

Imo, AoS has a few issues but is overall a ton of fun. If your group of friends are chill and not min-maxers, then you’ll have a great time with the game, especially if you prefer a system with less shooting. If, however, they are highly competitive, then you’re in for a messy and obnoxious time dealing with a hilarious amount of mortal wounds.
I play with a group who like to make competent armies but don’t min-max and we have heaps of fun and quite close games. We also house rule the random turn sequence away which has made things infinitely better.

Facts are being presented, It's not a measure of rudeness to point out all the issues being presented.

The original poster is thinking about jumping ship, and one person is being excessively negative.

If the following comments are considered excessive and toxic, I think you need to do something about your sensitivity issues:

Be wary for AOS is a game all about absurd deck/list building lol.

In response to wanting to get away from a deck building list building game.

It can run narratively but it will only take one guy bringing a powerlist to start the arms race and force the rest of the group to follow suit.

Excessively negative and toxic? Or common sense? In response to if you're playing narratively and not powergaming then its ok. (its right, if you and your group are actively NOT powergaming the game can be fun)

Thats pretty common everywhere in the States, which is also I think a big reason people looking for more out of their games can get salty. There often is no other choice

In response to "GW is the only game in my town" from another poster. Excessively negative and toxic?

GW is the only game in town for places because few people try to make that not so.

Again, excessively negative and toxic? Or for many people the reality of their gaming environment? In response to GW is the only game in town for the poster I was responding to.

Because if I am looking for a game to get into, I want to know all of the pros and cons. Not just the pros to seal clap towards.

Otherwise you get someone jumping into the game, to then find out the above things that the seal clapping people didn't want to talk about because its "toxic", and then they themselves become "toxic" and frustrated that they dumped $500+ into the game that had these issues, which you may find fine, but which they may or may not find fine, because they can't get a 360 degree all perspectives look at the game because all people want to do is cheerlead and avoid negative commentary.

And again if the above quotes were "too toxic" we have a serious sensitivity issue going on. Because where I'm at if I'm looking for pros and cons of a game, and I've SPECIFICALLY mentioned not wanting a game with excessive list building elements, it is highly disingenuous to gloss over AOS being ok so long as everyone plays nice. Because you and I and everyone all know that that requires a bit of social engineering. If you're ok with that, then awesome. But you need to know that going in.

Your entire post is disingenuous. You quoted half my sentence, and left part of it out, leading you to accuse me of being sensitive. I'm not. I am a bit confused though as to why you continue to torment yourself with a game you appear to hate so much. I didn't ever say that I found your posts toxic personally. I said that your negative attitude could easily be seen as toxic by new people coming in, and it has the potential to turn them away before they even try it for themselves. Can you see the difference?

I know you and I don't see eye to eye. We've already discussed that and had it out over the KoS rules. I play what I like, you play casual only or over-write the rules in your circle of people to be what you want. If that works for you, cool; that's you and your group. But it doesn't work that way for everyone else.

Why don't you go back and look through your posts in the AoS sub-forum as a whole. Based on memorable posts, most of yours are usually negative towards AoS. If people are looking to jump in, maybe try occasionally putting in positives; like "army synergy matters" or "big stompy stuff doesn't die as easily as it does in 40K". You know, give people a reason to actually pay attention to what you say, instead of trying to become the BCB of the AoS sub-forum.

Auticus is one of the most knowledgeable posters here who tells it like it is, without the cloud of "GW is the bestest ever" kind of horsegak you see peddled elsewhere. His negativity and criticism are often entirely warranted to present the other side of the spectrum as far too often you find people who will just blindly encourage "Yeah man go for it! AOS is a great game with awesome models!" and another such positive-only posting that hides or otherwise pretends that all the bad parts do not exist. Someone needs to know the good and bad, and there is quite a lot of bad, in order to make an informed decision. I do agree sometimes that auticus can come off as only focusing on the negative, but often focusing on the negative lays it out where otherwise it might be sugar-coated too much to not indicate how big of an issue it is.

He's also absolutely right that GW is often the only game in town because there's no desire to do anything else. Stores don't want to stock other games, people don't want to play games the store doesn't stock, people are just ignorant of games because they don't look for other games, a myriad of reasons where the end result is that people play Warhammer and only Warhammer because everyone else plays Warhammer and only Warhammer, in some sort of Orobourous type situation.

It's telling that the reason auticus was banned from TGA was due to the owner being buddy-buddy with GW's designers, at least one of whom posted regularly and was part of his gaming club, and wanted to stifle any negative criticism of GW, going so far as to say that the entire reason TGA existed was to positively endorse and talk about how great GW and AOS was. There's a reason TGA is derisively known as the unofficial GW forums; because it's essentially just GW propaganda (although in their defense the anti-negativity policy was relaxed a bit afterward)

Wayniac wrote:
Auticus is one of the most knowledgeable posters here

Well, I'd debate that. Complains about StD being weak(perfectly reasonable), but does it every thread when something new is released (very unreasonable), but then makes a thread like this:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/774585.page

that perfectly demonstrates that he doesn't understand how the army that he says he plays and constantly complains about works. Like I said in that thread, it raises alot of questions but I didn't press it. Main one being, "Do you even play?" That was when I solidified my belief that dude doesn't really even play AoS. His hobby is complaining about the game, usually chicken little stuff before a release (see the Forbidden Power thread), rather than playing the game.

Glad to see so many people taking a stand, tbh.

edit: With that said, he does get some stuff right and I agree with him from time to time, but its usually the super obvious stuff.

maybe try occasionally putting in positives

I have several times said that the background and models are usually pretty great. I also in the warcry thread said that the rules themselves were an improvement over AOS and that I gave the rules (not the campaign, the gameplay rules) a 6 out of 10 which is slightly above average (it is by itself the only reason I considered it) and that the models were awesome.

I don't roam in every thread posting negativity. But if there's a thread about the pros and cons of the game, I'll probably comment, because I've seen several people locally go jump into the game because the seal-clapping masses said it was the best EVAH and then get disillusioned fast after dumping $500 - $800 or more on a new army and seeing that what they thought they were getting didn't come close to what the actual experience was that they got into.

At the VERY least ask a potential new player "do you like playing games competitively? (because burn and churn is real and they better be prepared to buy and sell armies regularly) and "are you looking for a wargame where things operate as a battle would (like kings of war, 9th age, conquest, etc push) or are you looking for a pretty card game with models that stacks synergies and emphasizes list building over everything else?"

or even "do you care more about rules or more about having an abundance of people to play against despite a common perception of poor rules"?

Because those things are at the heart of nearly every rage post I've encountered when it comes to AOS or 40k. And asking those questions isn't negative.

I realize that if you are a self proclaimed "fan boy", "white knight" or "fan" that you don't want to see negativity or criticism because you're afraid others will be "driven off", but its equally not fair to sucker people in to a game and obfuscate what that game is. If they like the things that AOS is then fair enough.

Some of you who dogtail me everywhere on here to heap poop on me to discredit what I say have liked my posts over on TGA, and I post in the same manner (because you didn't realize that it was me). I have a pretty high accountability in every other medium I post in (and staunchly defended AOS in the beginning days) and the only difference between those places and here, which I post in the exact same tone, is that AOS is not something I write glowingly about and it seems to be current culture to leave subject matter alone unless you are a glowing fan. You cannot even criticize a sports team you like without getting unloaded on. That is what it is.

I'm not going to go through all the threads on here or TGA or twitter and criticize AOS, I haven't even posted much on AOS at all in the past while because AOS will not change. However if I see a post talking about its balance or someone asking if they should jump into it, I will give my two cents.

You can try to say I don't play AOS to try and further prove that I just don't know what I'm talking about, and thats all well and good if you feel you are clairvoyant, but I play the game regularly. I had to log about 40 games in over the summer for campaign playtesting, and now that our annual campaign is running I will get another 15 or so games in. I'm not playing in a powergaming fashion, but I follow the tournament player threads pretty much daily to see what is being generated and what type of game is being played in that regard. I don't really comment on how to play in tournaments, but I do comment on how casual players are impacted by tournament players dropping tournament lists in the middle of casual for-fun nights, because that is what I have to combat daily during our campaign seasons.

 auticus wrote:
We live in the new seal-clapping era of communication. Well I shouldn't say new. Its been that way for a few years now.

Debate and discussion are not desired. Reinforcement of what we like is what is desired. Those that do not reinforce what we like are toxic and cause us to not want to participate any longer. Politics, religion, gaming, sports teams, doesn't matter. A poster in the TGA actually laid it out quite well.

"I do not come to internet forums to debate or discuss the things that I like. I come here to read about news and forums and get excited about the things that I like. Criticism and negative posts about the things I like make me not want to read posts there any longer."

Which is a stark contrast to how forums were 10 or more years ago where the rule was openly debate and discuss (thats what discussion forums are for) but do not attack other posters. The times we live in and all.

The problem with that is that by not being allowed to voice criticism the company continues down its merry road surrounded by its echo chamber. If I did my games design and all of the projects that I have done in that environment, I would never have gotten to where I am professionally.

You were literally banned from another forum because of your posting habits.

I was most definitely not banned from that forum for my posting habits. At the time I was banned I was ranked #7 or so on their top posters in terms of the likes / exalts that they collect (they have a scoreboard, and I often "won the day" and had more likes than posts). I was banned explicitly because Ben Curry stated the TGA had a zero-tolerance on negative posts and that there would be NO criticism of AOS allowed on that forum. The funny thing is I have been posting on TGA for a few months now with nary a complaint, and some of YOU have even liked or agreed with things I have said over there.

Once again Auticus, you seem to miss the point entirely.

No one here wants a an echo chamber, and it's not about seal clapping. It's about the way you constantly present everything about AoS in the most negative way possible, to the point that there is no reasonable way to have a discussion with you because it's not worth it. Criticism is fine and to be encouraged, but you just take it to a completely different level. Overread covered this quite well in his post.

I even point out in my post that I don't like the way TGA is so pro GW and that AOS is by no means a perfect system. The difference is that you can actually have reasonable discussions over there, without multiple topics being warped around a single poster. These forums are pretty much dominated by your posts, which is why it is such a poor place for discussions. The fact that several other posters in this thread have cited the same thing for moving elsewhere is proof that this is indeed a problem.

Please link to some of your new posts on TGA. I'd love to read them. As I said in my post you can post some good well thought out posts on occasion. The problem is those are drowned out by the rest of them. I'd also imagine that your posts are more measured now on TGA than they are here.

Wayniac wrote:
Auticus is one of the most knowledgeable posters here who tells it like it is, without the cloud of "GW is the bestest ever" kind of horsegak you see peddled elsewhere. His negativity and criticism are often entirely warranted to present the other side of the spectrum as far too often you find people who will just blindly encourage "Yeah man go for it! AOS is a great game with awesome models!" and another such positive-only posting that hides or otherwise pretends that all the bad parts do not exist. Someone needs to know the good and bad, and there is quite a lot of bad, in order to make an informed decision. I do agree sometimes that auticus can come off as only focusing on the negative, but often focusing on the negative lays it out where otherwise it might be sugar-coated too much to not indicate how big of an issue it is.

He's also absolutely right that GW is often the only game in town because there's no desire to do anything else. Stores don't want to stock other games, people don't want to play games the store doesn't stock, people are just ignorant of games because they don't look for other games, a myriad of reasons where the end result is that people play Warhammer and only Warhammer because everyone else plays Warhammer and only Warhammer, in some sort of Orobourous type situation.

It's telling that the reason auticus was banned from TGA was due to the owner being buddy-buddy with GW's designers, at least one of whom posted regularly and was part of his gaming club, and wanted to stifle any negative criticism of GW, going so far as to say that the entire reason TGA existed was to positively endorse and talk about how great GW and AOS was. There's a reason TGA is derisively known as the unofficial GW forums; because it's essentially just GW propaganda (although in their defense the anti-negativity policy was relaxed a bit afterward)

I would disagree with this as well.

The first bit mentions that focusing on the negative lays it out.. Not if you are constantly being hyperbolic and blowing out the situation every time a situation is presented. He has turned threads into criticism and negativity focused on his own works when they weren't involved.

And the second.. Well yes, if something sells and people enjoy playing it, that tends to be what happens. The idea that Warhammer is only played because nobody apparently enjoys it is a farce. That one cannot conceive that people are playing Warhammer products just because they like it is the peak negativity that one has surrounded themselves in.

Hahaha, guys, you're aware that you're all suddenly making this a thread about Auticus? Lets move on shall we? Everyone has said what they want to say, we should really just talk about more things instead of beating a dead horse.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
And the second.. Well yes, if something sells and people enjoy playing it, that tends to be what happens. The idea that Warhammer is only played because nobody apparently enjoys it is a farce. That one cannot conceive that people are playing Warhammer products just because they like it is the peak negativity that one has surrounded themselves in.

That isn't what I said, I said people are generally unwilling to try things other than Warhammer because everyone else is playing Warhammer and is unwilling to try other games because everyone else is playing Warhammer because.... It's a sort of insular isolationism that gets propagated by the fact you can reasonably assume a game store will stock Warhammer and be reluctant to stock anything else, knowing full well that means the people who go there will be reluctant to even learn about other games because they can't buy it at their "pet" gaming store.

It's perfectly reasonable to assume people enjoy Warhammer (I don't hate it by any means, just feel it's a really lousy game and I've lately been dabbling in other things so haven't played in a couple of months). My point is more that I find Warhammer players, in particular, live in a bubble for whatever reason and aren't aware of any other games or are even willing to try other games, so all they see is Warhammer; it becomes the center of their universe. And, if they do know about other games it's usually in a disparaging light compared to Warhammer because of whatever reason, so again it keeps the idea going that Warhammer is the only game in town and nothing else even gets off the ground because everyone is unwilling to even try other things. It's like a town that has a local diner everyone goes to. The diner has good enough food but its nothing to write home about, but everyone enjoys it even if it's not really amazing. Other restaurants that pop up never get traction because nobody is willing to try them since the diner food is good enough for everyone and they don't want to try something new.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Hahaha, guys, you're aware that you're all suddenly making this a thread about Auticus? Lets move on shall we? Everyone has said what they want to say, we should really just talk about more things instead of beating a dead horse.

This has been a long time coming.

 EnTyme wrote:

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Hahaha, guys, you're aware that you're all suddenly making this a thread about Auticus? Lets move on shall we? Everyone has said what they want to say, we should really just talk about more things instead of beating a dead horse.

This has been a long time coming.

Absolutely. Its not just this thread, but the body of work that people are fed up with.

This sort of situation then is exactly what the Ignore fucntion was added to Dakka for.

Nobody likes to be put on Ignore, and I think it would be better if we could learn to tolerate dissenting opinions even if we disagree with them or find them tedious, but if it is bothering you guys so much I don't understand why you do not just press the button.

For myself, I appreciate hearing the good and the bad about any game system. It helped me make decisions about what to play.

but if it is bothering you guys so much I don't understand why you do not just press the button.

A few of them have expressed that they are afraid someone wants to join AOS and if someone gives them a negative answer that that will be seen as toxic and they will give up on AOS because of that negative toxic answer (I have outlined all of my responses in this thread up to this point and none were extreme, hyperbolic, or "toxic", but the mere presence of my posting anything even so much as a "this may not be fun if you are looking for this" triggers several of these posters into pages long rants and links to threads up to months ago as a means of discrediting any input that does not glorify the game.

I don't mind being put on ignore. Please, by all means if your only point in being is to exalt and glorify and only want positive vibes for your hobby, put on ignore all posters that don't match your mindset.

If someone asks about input on the game, you may want to make sure I am on ignore if you don't want to read a dissenting opinion.

I have gotten into the habit now to question if they are competitive, if they are ok with burn and churn, and if balance is a big deal to them or if they are just looking for a social experience. IIf someone states they are getting out of 40k because they don't like listbuilding dominance, it is downright lying to them to pretend AOS is not, and I said that its the same experience.

Some people like that and don't care. Others are sensitive to that and I don't want to see them dump nearly a grand into a game that they will abhor later because they discover too late what list building dominant systems are when they weren't looking for that.

And some people get triggered by that response.

I am doing my best to not post over the top responses any longer, and I think I've done pretty good over the past few months at limiting my responses.

 Da Boss wrote:
This sort of situation then is exactly what the Ignore fucntion was added to Dakka for.

Nobody likes to be put on Ignore, and I think it would be better if we could learn to tolerate dissenting opinions even if we disagree with them or find them tedious, but if it is bothering you guys so much I don't understand why you do not just press the button.

For myself, I appreciate hearing the good and the bad about any game system. It helped me make decisions about what to play.

If only that was a good solution, but the truth is that auticus posts so much, that sometimes every other post is his post. Then other posters reply to his posts, then the whole discussion is coloured by auticus endless negativity, that it drowns out most other voices and debat or simply sharing of enthusiasm about the hobby we share.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that people should be using the ignore button on someone like auticus, but I am also painfully aware that it does not alleviate the problem. Which is the main reason why I mostly withdrew from the AoS section on Dakkadakka.
All in all it's a shame though, because Dakkadakka could be a good home for many more hobbyist that share their enjoyment with AoS, but as it stands now, it would need more actively moderation which is not really how Dakkadakka seems to operate. In my opinion of course.

Maybe the issue then is to accept that "the hobby we share" (which btw Warhammer is only a part of "the hobby") has serious design flaws that people need to be aware of instead of pretending they don't exist?

Is anyone pretending they don't exist, though? At, worst, most of us are downplaying the flaws because in our opinions, they aren't outweighed by the things we like about the game. Just about everyone in this thread has at least pointed out the shortcomings of AoS before moving on the the things that make us want to keep playing.

I wish someone like auticus was at my store and asked me questions, before I trusted the sellers and people from school and bought in to an army, I now can't sell and which is horrible unfun to play, and which updating costs so much, I may as well buy a new good army. I can tell you that.

it would need more actively moderation which is not really how Dakkadakka seems to operate

I would be highly curious as to how you would implement forum rules and what rules would be considered violations requiring moderation (and banning). Fun fact, I post more about AOS (in the same tone) on TGA and I assume one of the main facebook groups with not a complaint.

Sounds like what you guys are advocating for is a no-criticism rule. I mean all it took in this thread was a post by me saying that the game was just as bent around listbuilding as 40k in response to the poster asking specifically about that for you all to go ape-****. In the warcry thread it was me saying I didn't like the campaign rules and wished they were deeper to trigger you all into a pages-long dogpile and back and forth. Really the pattern seems if I post anything period that is not glowing, the dogpile is incoming. If I had posted the exact same posts under a different name, none of you would have said anything. (and on other forums we share, some of you have even "liked" my responses).

What do I like about AOS? Gw's models and imagery and a good deal of their narrative. I've said that in many places. Said that in the warcry thread, even said the gameplay was a solid 6 and fairly fun, which elicited no discussion. However some of you continued to say "but you never post anything positive" despite there being things I have said that were positive. My inclination is that you just jump to the parts you want to rip into me about and gloss over or ignore the rest.

Funny that.

You know what gets no change to happen? Everyone seal-clapping and not discussing the flaws either. Guess what this thread is about? Person considering dumping 40k for AOS, but being concerned that listbuilding is as gak as it is in 40k. The few sentences I posted prior to you all losing your GD minds was all addressing on-topic that person's question. No hyperbole. No strong language. Basic sentence that said listbuilding is as much a thing in aos as it is in 40k. False statement? I don't think so. I think its spot-on.

Know what I've noticed on TGA since being back there since the spring? There is an undercurrent of annoyed people that want GW to pick up the ball and do what they should be doing... making the best game in the industry.

Know what I'll always argue against? People and ideas that support that its ok to have to buy new armies every year to play a good game. Because it leaves a trail of angry and burnt people in its wake, despite the tournament faithful preaching the great balance. When you pick up a game at the store, you don't expect the Shoe to get to collect $540 on Go when the Car only gets $200. Its not common sense that a game is designed that way, and a lot of people don't know any better when they get suckered into dumping a grand on an army and then find out the hard way what the reality is.

For every person annoyed at what I post, there is another person that I go back and forth with that either shares my experience, or at least went into the game eyes open instead of their seal clapping community telling them that that starter box of khorne should just be fine... (lol)

Spiky Norman wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
This sort of situation then is exactly what the Ignore fucntion was added to Dakka for.

Nobody likes to be put on Ignore, and I think it would be better if we could learn to tolerate dissenting opinions even if we disagree with them or find them tedious, but if it is bothering you guys so much I don't understand why you do not just press the button.

For myself, I appreciate hearing the good and the bad about any game system. It helped me make decisions about what to play.

If only that was a good solution, but the truth is that auticus posts so much, that sometimes every other post is his post. Then other posters reply to his posts, then the whole discussion is coloured by auticus endless negativity, that it drowns out most other voices and debat or simply sharing of enthusiasm about the hobby we share.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that people should be using the ignore button on someone like auticus, but I am also painfully aware that it does not alleviate the problem. Which is the main reason why I mostly withdrew from the AoS section on Dakkadakka.
All in all it's a shame though, because Dakkadakka could be a good home for many more hobbyist that share their enjoyment with AoS, but as it stands now, it would need more actively moderation which is not really how Dakkadakka seems to operate. In my opinion of course.

Yes, this is exactly the problem.

Wayniac wrote:Maybe the issue then is to accept that "the hobby we share" (which btw Warhammer is only a part of "the hobby") has serious design flaws that people need to be aware of instead of pretending they don't exist?

This another great example of pure hyperbole. No one here is promoting the system as the perfect gaming system by all means. We have all acknowledged there are issues, there are just disagreements on the degree and severity of the issues. Which is the entire point of discussion. The problem becomes when one voice dominates nearly every single discussion with pure negativity that dissuades other people from posting. like Spiky Norman pointed out. The fact that you cannot acknolwedge this is a problem, despite the numerous people that have come into this thread to voice that speaks volumes.

Claiming we all think the system is perfect is nonsense and purely disingenuous.

EnTyme wrote:Is anyone pretending they don't exist, though? At, worst, most of us are downplaying the flaws because in our opinions, they aren't outweighed by the things we like about the game. Just about everyone in this thread has at least pointed out the shortcomings of AoS before moving on the the things that make us want to keep playing.

No, it's the usual hyperbole.

Karol wrote:I wish someone like auticus was at my store and asked me questions, before I trusted the sellers and people from school and bought in to an army, I now can't sell and which is horrible unfun to play, and which updating costs so much, I may as well buy a new good army. I can tell you that.

I am sorry that happened to you, but this is a false equivalency. If you were to ask here about any army we would tell you the pros and cons of them. For instance I would not recommend anyone start Nighthaunt in the current state, and Nighthaunt were my first army.

No, it's the usual hyperbole

There is zero hyperbole from anything I posted in this thread. There is an opinion that you don't like.

Issues presented when opinions are stated as facts, which is where one of the major issues come forth. It is indeed Hyperbole.

You've already tried to downplay other opinions yourself, given your light insults about "Seal clappers", so there's some irony here.

Color me skeptical about the “I post on TGA” claim.

It is an automatically assumed stance that every opinion stated... is in fact an opinion.

Anyone claiming someone is stating an opinion as a fact is simply reflecting. I know I have certainly never once ever in any venue stated anything I post is a fact, and is assumed to be an opinion just like everything out of everyone's mouth here is 100% opinion. I don't dogtail after posters ranting at them that they are posting opinion like fact, because thats an absurd statement that has neither any actual backing facts or basis in provability short of a person stating that they are speaking factual when they are actually only giving an opinion.

I don't have to state IMO after everything I type. That is both redundant and mindless.

Hyperbole is exaggerating a situation, not stating an opinion.

The exact english definition of hyperbole is:
"exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally"

Indeed everything I have posted in this thread in response to the poster was *literally* not hyperbole but an opinion that triggered some of you.

Seal Clapping is a phrase that is synonymous with echo chamber. It has nothing to do with an actual opinion or looking down on an opinion. Rather it has everything to do with there is an expected direction of opinions allowed (seal clapping) and anything outside of that is to be ostracized. For example, Ninth is a poster that posts mostly thoughtful posts, that sometimes are not aligned with mine, but he is also accepting of differing opinions and despite he and I not agreeing with everything, does not "seal clap" for the sake of providing a safe place for everyone.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 nels1031 wrote:
Color me skeptical about the “I post on TGA” claim.

Its ok I'll sleep fine at night knowing that you are skeptical. Its not very hard to create a new account. It appears we are escalating from "I hate your opinion and wish you'd not post it in a forum that I am free to ignore but am compelled to read and respond angrily towards" onto the attack the poster phase, call them a liar, etc. You know - everything opposite of what most forum rules say you should be doing.