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.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
I'll stick with dumb/asinine. Either Mike or one of the other guys stated out right they were not going to update the PDF. That is not a pacing issue, that is a deliberate decision which makes the game less accessible. Asinine fits that decision well.

Wait, what? They have seriously decided that they are not going to make the changes in their rules accessible?

That's... That goes beyond stupid and starts to push into the realm of the pathological. Short of spite, what could possibly motivate a company to make such a decision?

As far as I've ever heard, they haven't made that decision, and the FAQ and changes for "2.5" quickly got large enough that it became obvious to everyone (communicating on the testing forum including staff) that the rulebook would need to be updated, and that the separate PDFs were a stop-gap until that could happen so that the changes could be released as they were finished. I believe the only question was if the revised rulebook w/ changes incorporated would only be released as a PDF or if a print option were viable.

I may not have all the information, but I'd like CptJake to cite where that was said, because I consider myself pretty knowledgable regarding SMV and am very surprised to hear that since I've never heard anything like it.

edit: clarity

Well, lets see:

SpiralingCadaver wrote:
The plan, as far as I understand it, is there's going to be a few FAQ/errata updates (i.e. the immediately upcoming document doesn't contain every change being discussed), but once they're done the rules are supposed to be stable after that point, and there's been no talk about any serious overhaul past 1.5. So, yes, 1.5 + collective errata is going to be the official endpoint for BfA.

(note who said that...)

DaveC wrote:
Everything you need to play is on the sedition wars website in the link I posted above that's the current official rules and cards - they will not be changing again other then some amendments by way of the Errata. The FAQ explains any unclear parts.

All KS backers get the new printed cards in wave 2. There is no word yet on when or even if they will be available for those who bought retail.

Studio McVey wrote:
Just to clear up a few of the questions from this thread (they have been answered by other people involved, but I thought I'd make it "official"). The 1.5 version of the rules is the rules for Battle for Alabaster. So with that and the added errata, that is the full version of the rules, with no plan for a further overhaul. We are very pleased with they way the rules are working now, and they really give us something to build on.

There will be some additions to the errata in the near future, but they will be reasonably minor. This current FAQ is fairly comprehensive and will be the last for a while - there will be more to come, but not for a little while.

Thanks for your patience on this!

mike

all from http://studiomcvey.com/forums/index.php?/topic/1357-sedition-wars-rules-plan/page__st__80

So.... Where is your source for McVey eventually updating the rules PDF?

Umm, none of those state that there is no intention to update a collected PDF. Those were all, I believe, in response to the general upset at how dramatic the 1.5 rules were when everyone was expecting a fine-tuning rather than an overhaul.

The version that was officially called 1.5 is what I've generally referred to as 2 since the changes were so dramatic. I've been calling the current version 2.5 but believe it's still officially considered 1.5.

And I'm not allowed to quote anything from the testing forums, sorry.

Not to cut to the quick or anything, but so let me put it this way: If I bought a retail copy of Sedition Wars, I would get the most current rules (including relevant errata and scenarios) how, exactly?

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Umm, none of those state that there is no intention to update a collected PDF. Those were all, I believe, in response to the general upset at how dramatic the 1.5 rules were when everyone was expecting a fine-tuning rather than an overhaul.

The version that was officially called 1.5 is what I've generally referred to as 2 since the changes were so dramatic. I've been calling the current version 2.5 but believe it's still officially considered 1.5.

And I'm not allowed to quote anything from the testing forums, sorry.

Ummm.

So, yes, 1.5 + collective errata is going to be the official endpoint for BfA.
they will not be changing again other then some amendments by way of the Errata
The 1.5 version of the rules is the rules for Battle for Alabaster. So with that and the added errata, that is the full version of the rules, with no plan for a further overhaul.

All sound that way to me. You asked me to cite, and I did. Put up or shut up, cite me a source stating they will update the PDF of the rules. I got you, Dave and Mike himself saying they remain as they are.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Buzzsaw wrote:
Not to cut to the quick or anything, but so let me put it this way: If I bought a retail copy of Sedition Wars, I would get the most current rules (including relevant errata and scenarios) how, exactly?

Downloading all the documents...

 CptJake wrote:

So, yes, 1.5 + collective errata is going to be the official endpoint for BfA.
they will not be changing again other then some amendments by way of the Errata
The 1.5 version of the rules is the rules for Battle for Alabaster. So with that and the added errata, that is the full version of the rules, with no plan for a further overhaul.

All sound that way to me. You asked me to cite, and I did.

That's how you're interpreting it. I believe you're mistaken, regardless.

Put up or shut up, cite me a source stating they will update the PDF of the rules. I got you, Dave and Mike himself saying they remain as they are.

I'm not going to violate an NDA over an internet challenge, sorry. If I get any info that is explicitly official/available as public knowledge, I'd be happy to share, but those tend to be posted by SMV, well, publicly.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:

close

I understand your frustration when I said a trainwreak I meant in its entirety, beyond terrain which surprisingly I had no issue with misglued turrets I have nothing good to say about it, I really wonder if this is salvageable and if his reputation is recoverable.

The diaspora split off in the 50s, 60s and 70s. Think of it as a regional dialect, with a few differences grammatically and with many words being localised.

I grew up in awe and doing my best to try and emulate what McVey was capable of, with the greatest of respect for him (up until Lemartes, at least - but that model should never have been released). I backed SW for quote a lot of money with the same respect and reverence in mind, but since the money was taken, it's been nothing but disappointment and poor excuses from him, and so his reputation with me is now mud.

 scarletsquig wrote:
TBH, the best way to run a KS is to be on forums like this one, chatting to backers wherever backers are chatting.

That tends to generate a little goodwill that makes people be a little more accepting of any delays or issues (see Dreamforge and Secret Weapon for good examples of this).

You're so right - and Mantic did start to have this happen when James briefly spent some time here, though with him subsequently disappearing and now about to head off to Lenton, I guess Mantic managed to Almost tm that aspect as well. Even the Mierce guy (who I suspect is Rob Lane) posts here regularly. (I really wish those guys would credit the people who got ripped off by the fall of Maelstrom with MM products to make things good - I'm not one of them, BTW since I got my money back thanks to PayPal - so not a "I want freebies" angle at all).

 CptJake wrote:

They provide a FAQ and errata. Those are 'living documents' and players can always grab the most recent version. They seem to feel that is good enough. Perhaps my wording was poor. The changes are accessible via the FAQ and errata, just less accessible than a single 'changes included and up to date' rule book.

And by nature, I am a lazy SOB. I hate having to consolidate crap from different sources and like having it done for me. So it may be much more of an issue for folks like me and much less of an issue for others.

You're right, of course. To be blunt, Sedition Wars is not 40k or WarmaHordes with a huge following and market penetration. If they make it hard to play, or even get the rules all together, people aren't going to go through all of the extra work in order to do so. They'll just play something else.

And most likely, actually, almost certainly, buy something else too...

 CptJake wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:
Not to cut to the quick or anything, but so let me put it this way: If I bought a retail copy of Sedition Wars, I would get the most current rules (including relevant errata and scenarios) how, exactly?

Downloading all the documents...

Yes, thanks.

Let's tackle this a different way: suppose someone picked up the retail box. How would they know that the rules were not up-to-date? If they did know that, where would they go to get "all the documents"? Specifically, what website?

This is not directed at you (CptJake), but rather to illustrate how silly the whole situation is.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

So, yes, 1.5 + collective errata is going to be the official endpoint for BfA.
they will not be changing again other then some amendments by way of the Errata
The 1.5 version of the rules is the rules for Battle for Alabaster. So with that and the added errata, that is the full version of the rules, with no plan for a further overhaul.

All sound that way to me. You asked me to cite, and I did.

That's how you're interpreting it. I believe you're mistaken, regardless.

Put up or shut up, cite me a source stating they will update the PDF of the rules. I got you, Dave and Mike himself saying they remain as they are.

I'm not going to violate an NDA over an internet challenge, sorry. If I get any info that is explicitly official/available as public knowledge, I'd be happy to share, but those tend to be posted by SMV, well, publicly.

And there it is. I cited sources clearly stating something, and since it comes from Mike, tend to believe it. As do a bunch of other folks, 'cause well, that is what we were told.

If you have other info, great. Your own posts on the Studio McVey forum support my opinion. Again, put up or shut up. Get Mike to let the world know he is going to update the rulebook. It is fething stupid to hide that knowledge, if indeed it is the plan. Of course, since Mike stated it is not the plan, I'm going with that info until I get something more solid than you contradicting it.

Buzzsaw, I don't think finding them is very silly, it's at the pretty intuitive URL http://www.seditionwars.com/ (which is on the first page of the rulebook) and look under the heading "rules." It's also on the SMV forum

I do think they needed better notation in their rulebook for which version you're getting. The easiest way to tell is if the rules on the back refer to things as attack or move abilities, since that specification was added in the second version. If there's notation in the rulebook, it's not obvious.

(edit: clarity)




CptJake, I'm not a representative of SMV, just a fan and playtester, have tried to be civil, and have found such attempts fruitless. I'm not going to argue with you any more since apparently my options are break a legally binding contract or "shut up." Nor do I really feel like doing anything you request, since you've been acting like a jerk. I'd rather just click the ignore button and have one more bit of negativity out of my day.

 Buzzsaw wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:
Not to cut to the quick or anything, but so let me put it this way: If I bought a retail copy of Sedition Wars, I would get the most current rules (including relevant errata and scenarios) how, exactly?

Downloading all the documents...

Yes, thanks.

Let's tackle this a different way: suppose someone picked up the retail box. How would they know that the rules were not up-to-date? If they did know that, where would they go to get "all the documents"? Specifically, what website?

This is not directed at you (CptJake), but rather to illustrate how silly the whole situation is.

I concur. I guess they could run into Spiraling Cadaver, give him the Super Secret Studio McVey Handshake and be let in on the Secret Of The Updated Rules.

In a less smart assed answer, a person buying the game blind has no way of knowing. The printed rule books don't even have a version number on them. Unless they do Internet searches (which I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume a lot of folks do now a days) they won't know to get the updates.

I don't generally look online for updates to board game rules... skirmish game rules Maybe, but that's probably what this should have been all along.

Agreed!

I know that I was hoping for a SW skirmish game.

Now?

I don't know what it would take to get me to buy back into the McVey stuff.

 RiTides wrote:
I don't generally look online for updates to board game rules... skirmish game rules Maybe, but that's probably what this should have been all along.

I get that, but I suspect a board gamer buying this may end up online trying to find instructions for assembling the figures.

 Azazelx wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:

close

I understand your frustration when I said a trainwreak I meant in its entirety, beyond terrain which surprisingly I had no issue with misglued turrets I have nothing good to say about it, I really wonder if this is salvageable and if his reputation is recoverable.

The diaspora split off in the 50s, 60s and 70s. Think of it as a regional dialect, with a few differences grammatically and with many words being localised.

I grew up in awe and doing my best to try and emulate what McVey was capable of, with the greatest of respect for him (up until Lemartes, at least - but that model should never have been released). I backed SW for quote a lot of money with the same respect and reverence in mind, but since the money was taken, it's been nothing but disappointment and poor excuses from him, and so his reputation with me is now mud.

Its really surprising how much I am in the same boat, heavily invested in it with his work up to that point in mind and vastly disappointed by almost all of the results if I am allowed it would have been better if this project never happened.

 Azazelx wrote:


Even the Mierce guy (who I suspect is Rob Lane) posts here regularly. (I really wish those guys would credit the people who got ripped off by the fall of Maelstrom with MM products to make things good - I'm not one of them, BTW since I got my money back thanks to PayPal - so not a "I want freebies" angle at all).

a bit off topic for here, but

Folk who had ordered any of the Banelegions stuff from Maelstrom did get their orders fulfilled by Mierce even though they had no legal obligation to do so which is something (and infact why I felt able to back their first KS)...... (and yes it would still suck if you'd ordered other stuff and didn't manage to get a refund from your CC or paypal)

Yeah, I know they filled Bane Legions stuff. But since both businesses are/were owned by the same guy (Maelstrom begat Mierce, after all) they still could/should have given the people who got ripped off Mierce credit. Especially after 3 months of "warehouse-moving-sale"-derived "please keep ordering" and "the order will be in on Friday" bs.

My terrain set from Miniature Market is in the mail . Was delayed just a bit previously as they moved premises last weekend, apparently.

 RiTides wrote:
My terrain set from Miniature Market is in the mail . Was delayed just a bit previously as they moved premises last weekend, apparently.

It has a lot of nice stuff in it. If you'e not using it for Sedition Wars it has too many doors (in my opinion) but everything in it is good. I would have rather seen less doors and either a cheaper price, or more of the other stuff included. Optionally breaking out the doors into their own set and selling the Sci Fi items separately would have worked.

I know some folks had the gun things pre-glued poorly, but if your set avoids that you should be pretty happy with it. Between the fantastic bases and the terrain sets they did well.

Yeah, I got 2 of the terrain sets, and they were quite lovely, lots of good characterful scatter terrain in there. With a lot of great KS stuff out there, the doors could come in handy too.

There's no way I would ever buy any more SW product. I have everything from Biohazard and the clear Vanguard still sitting in their packages in the corner that i look at and sigh every once and a while. After first finding out how many hours it would need to clean the minin (even the base game ones), to never getting the quarantine campaign as promised, and then finally getting duped into buying the "fixed" 2.0 rules when they already needed errata/FAQ's by the time they freaking showed up on my door....no way. The rules issue was the last straw for sure.

I have seen miniatures games with rulebooks that are of higher caliber and composition being distributed for free online. I can get rules for Epic: Armageddon from a fansite that contain all the official GW errata changed internally and with FAQ's as footnotes on the bottom of each relevant page of rules, plus a dozen new, play-tested army lists as a free release by a group of fans, but a company can't do the same thing for rules I am paying them for? That's not right.

Sedition Wars was an absolute "once bitten twice shy" first kickstarter for me.

Hey Aegis, PM on the way.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I have seen miniatures games with rulebooks that are of higher caliber and composition being distributed for free online. I can get rules for Epic: Armageddon from a fansite that contain all the official GW errata changed internally and with FAQ's as footnotes on the bottom of each relevant page of rules, plus a dozen new, play-tested army lists as a free release by a group of fans, but a company can't do the same thing for rules I am paying them for? That's not right.

Not saying SW's rules couldn't be better, but...

-Epic had a large company backing it for years, and a large and devoted fanbase for even longer. Of course they have a ton of material now.
-If you're talking about freedom of material, SW's rules are available (in a poorly organazed fashion), and, with the exception of a period where GW was distributing some specialist games and supplementary rules, they've always charged for rules (preview or otherwise).

I don't think it's really an accurate comparison. If some other smallish company had (and there probably has been one) come out with a great, large, well-formatted, and free rulebook with a lot of variety, that'd be a better comparison. For instance, Infinity has a bunch of material for free, I know, but I don't know if they started that way or how easy it is to search, but that's the comparison I'd have made.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Buzzsaw, I don't think finding them is very silly, it's at the pretty intuitive URL http://www.seditionwars.com/ (which is on the first page of the rulebook) and look under the heading "rules." It's also on the SMV forum

I do think they needed better notation in their rulebook for which version you're getting. The easiest way to tell is if the rules on the back refer to things as attack or move abilities, since that specification was added in the second version. If there's notation in the rulebook, it's not obvious.

Yeah.... So I checked out the Sedition Wars page, and I'm inclined to stick with my "very silly" criticism. Is there a sticker or something on the retail boxes now that alerts people that the version 1 rules are out of date? I honestly don't know. When one goes onto the website, there is nothing that indicates 'hey, make sure you rules are up to date!', in fact, there doesn't appear to be anything that explicitly tells people that Sedition War boxes shipped with rules that are one or two generations behind the current. Then the "Rules" link is the seventh on the menu, right between 'assembly' and 'map editor'.

There is an obvious and natural resistance for a company to broadcast an admission of failure: it's like having a car part recalled for being faulty. The problem is that from McVey's point of view, it seems that they are inclined to think that it's better for the problem to just go unnoticed rather then be fixed.

Like you said, it's not immediately obvious in any real way how to know if your rules are up-to-date. That's on top of the fact that, as a general rule, I would presume that very few boardgame buyers will go to the internet after buying without additional prompting. The natural assumption, after all, is that a boardgame is a finished and self-contained product.

Boardgame buyers who play with a group of friends will have a decent game (with either box 1 or box 2) which requires a bit of house rules in the odd spot but nothing more than many games do

the original rules only fall apart when playing high stakes win or loose games with total strangers at a gaming store or similar
(or if you're saddled with real rules lawyer mates)

I do agree flashing the 2nd edition boxes in some way would have been preferable

 AegisGrimm wrote:
There's no way I would ever buy any more SW product. <snip> Sedition Wars was an absolute "once bitten twice shy" first kickstarter for me.

Right there with you.

The bases were nice though...

Buzzsaw, I don't feel like menu order after about the first 2 matters, but 100% agree that they should have put a 2nd edition sticker on, or something.

Orlando, mostly agreed re: fine if you don't play too competitively, except Nano, which was pretty useless in the first iteration; absolutely lethal in the second, and pretty balanced currently.

Well, Sedition Wars did finally give me a use for my spare WGF Shock Troop heads.






Now, if only there was a way to make the THI suits big enough to look like power armor for adults...

Nice work, Bob. Now you just need to replace that silly-looking sword with something a bit better looking. Thunder hammer, perhaps?