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.

 Swabby wrote:
Mike I think you are missing some really big points here.

WYSIWYG is not some elitist thing. It is a huge part of the hobby.

That assumption is where you are wrong. WYSIWYG is an option, not a requirement. Anything else is in and of itself elitist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sining wrote:

 Swabby wrote:
Mike, that is the most ill informed, stereotyping load of BS I have seen posted in this entire 244 page thread.

Considering this is a PB thread and considering their fans, I'd say get used to it

Considering the source....I don't need to know more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
If someone has 2 squadrons of VF's and they modes are built with Medium Range Missiles and the player wants to use them as Long Range Missiles and the other player refuses, that is what kills gaming for casual players. I'm not saying use a Spartan as a Defender but if you have a Spartan and want to use it with a GU-11 then you should not have to use magnets and all to make figures reconfigurable in 10 ways or be forced to buy another mini for every option available. That's stupid.

Which is what most people are doing for WH40k anyway. I guess you're calling them stupid

Sining wrote:
Which is what most people are doing for WH40k anyway. I guess you're calling them stupid

Guess so, if they insist of WYSIWYG all the time...I know a lot of 40k players, very few insist on WYSIWYG except when they go play tournaments. So maybe I just know a good group of people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also someone doing something stupid and being stupid are not the same thing. Don't twist reality here.

I got a big box from Palladium Books yesterday. To say I was surprised was an understatement. I haven't opened it yet- been too busy, and probably will be through next week. Maybe I'll do an unboxing video? It'll be my first time doing such a thing, but eh, why not?

 Mike1975 wrote:

That assumption is where you are wrong..

Are you kidding me? Dude, you just stereotyped in the worst way the entire miniature wargaming community into 3 totally flawed groups. It isn't an assumption. People strive to make their minis match whatever they are trying to look like. It doesn't matter what game it is, it is a massive part of the hobby to attempt to simulate a big ole war on a tiny little scale. A large part of the object of even doing this is to make it look like the thing you are trying to pretend is playing out in front of you in tinyland. This is fact from historicals all the way up to the fanboi driven tentacle bento.

 Swabby wrote:
[quote=Mike1975 521733 7320090 8a4f83402035ee093153a105e3a4f992.png
That assumption is where you are wrong..

Are you kidding me? Dude, you just stereotyped in the worst way the entire miniature wargaming community into 3 totally flawed groups. It isn't an assumption. People strive to make their minis match whatever they are trying to look like. It doesn't matter what game it is, it is a massive part of the hobby to attempt to simulate a big ole war on a tiny little scale. A large part of the object of even doing this is to make it look like the thing you are trying to pretend is playing out in front of you in tinyland. This is fact from historicals all the way up to the fanboi driven tentacle bento.

Im still waiting for any indication at all that my pledge is being shipped to me :(

@Mike

Obviously you have never played anyone who has brought a soda can drop pod army that drops a legion of grey minis from an entirely different game on the table.

There are limits man. It happens.

And quite honestly, people are challenged getting into this hobby for a myriad of reasons, but the one you are mentioning is not one of them in my experience, at all.

 Mike1975 wrote:

 Killionaire wrote:
That's... so very wrong.

These aren't mutually exclusive classes. But rather, 'stats' of how much something is important to you.

Stat1: 'Fluff Importance', ranging from 'none, it's an abstraction' to 'I must make sure every one of my guys is WSIWYG and has a name, backstory, follows 'historical' organization, etc.

Stat2: 'Modeling Importnace', ranging from 'I play with barely assembled models on bases and tokens, to 'Everything painted OK' to 'Everything as best painted as I can and modelled with conversions'

Stat3: 'Rules Importance', ranging from 'I dont understand or care I want to throw dice' to 'I want to play a well balanced game where the rules are clear and fair, while also having factional and gameplay diversity'.

---

There's people that fall in different places on the Rules, Fluff and Modeling stat-curve. But you can have a casual player who has beautifully painted, 'historically' accurate models, as well as a highly analytical competitive tourney player who loves trying to get the most out of beautifully painted, 'historically' accurate models.

I can agree with this. But people who have a high importance of #2 and look down on ALL others are a detriment to the game. I can see how people here won't see it but I do, have, and likely always will.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Forar wrote:
First, I'm not a hardcore WYSIWYG guy myself, but look at the forum we're on. It should be no surprise that such a thing is going to come up and range from a non-issue to flat out expected. The game and official tournament system may not require perfect modeling accuracy, but one shouldn't gak on people who are so inclined, as long as they're not being disrespectful to others about their inclinations.

I mean, I'm not going to magnetize itty bitty little missiles or VT heads, but the Spartan arms and Artillery Pods? Yeah, I'll probably do those, assuming my meager modeling skills can keep up.

Secondly; anyone who supports this game should be nothing but respectful of (at least personally aimed) WYSIWYG inclinations.

Why? Because those are people who will potentially spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars extra over the years to have those perfect combinations, as well as the time and effort that can go into magnetizing and otherwise modding figures to be as accurate as they can.

And finally, I find it somewhat funny that the game isn't WYSIWYG in terms of mech gear, and yet a figure crouching or jumping IS a huge game mechanics deal, in terms of LOS to and from the figure.

The rules don't force anyone to go full out with perfect option representation, but let's keep in mind the audience and PB's business model. "Ohh, I should buy 3 more VT squads to model them with different missiles" is the kind of thing people weep tears of joy to hear (minor hyperbole present), as long as that person doesn't turn around and try to give me gak because I took "gravity bombs" on a figure that isn't, in fact, modelled with "gravity bombs".

Agreed, people who hold WYSIWYG in utmost importance, more often then not, look down on all who do not hold the same standards, and in the end push potential players away. That's life, that fact, that's real. Note: I said more often then not, so there are exceptions. People with the same attitude as some here are more detrimental to the game than poor minis or anything else in the world.

I'm still amazed that you can hand wave away WYSIWYG. It's not a hardcore or elitist thing at all - it's simply polite.
And no - it's not the utmost importance, but you asked the question and now you're rejecting the answer for some reason.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Im still waiting for any indication at all that my pledge is being shipped to me :(

What did you order?

If it was a Battle Cry, it should be in the mail. Check your spam filter and whatnot.

Showdown? Just started shipping. Maybe this week or next? Depends on whether or not they get another container, if what they've told us is true and their/my math holds up.

Reckless? Probably going to be a while yet.

 Mike1975 wrote:
No, many of us play with more casual gamers who are more interested in having fun instead of people who consider themselves Die Hards.

Miniatures gaming has and always will have a few factions, the die hards that want specific armies made to reflect the actual units in toto, who are typically very concerned with the rules and are often very competitive. They also are typically but not always very strict on painted minis and # colors and more.

Then you have more casual gamers that are not as strict but who love to play and that is their primary consideration when buying in to a game. A game with them may often have a 180 point game per side where one player asks if they mind if he ups it to 185 and the other may agree and change something on their own forces instead of focusing in on 180 points.

Then you have the players that play rarely, love the game, and are in many ways the opposite of the die hards. They want to play because they like the universe and story. These are the first and foremost to be pushed away by some, but not all, of those in the Die Hard category. The ones that adamantly push the rare player to conform to their view of what a "real" player is.

Those are what I've seen as the 3 primary groups. There are shades and variations of each.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As a note, typically each group typically cannot understand how the others can enjoy the game in the way they play. The Rare and Die Hards are the most opposed and seem to conflict the most.

 Swabby wrote:
Mike, that is the most ill informed, stereotyping load of BS I have seen posted in this entire 244 page thread.

Really Swabby? really?

Because, I totally agree with Mike...

I've been playing games since 1984, and miniatures games since 1990. In all that time, the die hard competitive players have ALWAYS been the minority... The Die Hard competitives are the one group that makes this hobby unfun for me, and I must say that this has become more and more a problem in the last 14 years.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And yes, I do WYSIWYG. Or I magnetize.

And why? Because my OCD wont let me do otherwise...

Is this thread reenacting a Monty Python sketch?

Joyboozer wrote:
Is this thread reenacting a Monty Python sketch?

We are the Knights who say WYSIWYG!

Yer modeller was a hamster, and yer glue smells of elderberries!

 Mike1975 wrote:
I'm not saying use a Spartan as a Defender.

 Mike1975 wrote:

I'm saying that if you refuse to play with others because they have different standards and/or smaller pocketbooks, you are in fact pushing people away from playing or limiting them, not matter what your intentions.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
That is why younger players are more challenged to jump into the miniatures market because of experienced players who act in this manner.

So Mike, you admit to pushing young/poor players out of the hobby because you enforce your version of WYSIWYG.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Mike1975 wrote:

 Killionaire wrote:
That's... so very wrong.

These aren't mutually exclusive classes. But rather, 'stats' of how much something is important to you.

Stat1: 'Fluff Importance', ranging from 'none, it's an abstraction' to 'I must make sure every one of my guys is WSIWYG and has a name, backstory, follows 'historical' organization, etc.

Stat2: 'Modeling Importnace', ranging from 'I play with barely assembled models on bases and tokens, to 'Everything painted OK' to 'Everything as best painted as I can and modelled with conversions'

Stat3: 'Rules Importance', ranging from 'I dont understand or care I want to throw dice' to 'I want to play a well balanced game where the rules are clear and fair, while also having factional and gameplay diversity'.

---

There's people that fall in different places on the Rules, Fluff and Modeling stat-curve. But you can have a casual player who has beautifully painted, 'historically' accurate models, as well as a highly analytical competitive tourney player who loves trying to get the most out of beautifully painted, 'historically' accurate models.

I can agree with this. But people who have a high importance of #2 and look down on ALL others are a detriment to the game. I can see how people here won't see it but I do, have, and likely always will.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Forar wrote:
First, I'm not a hardcore WYSIWYG guy myself, but look at the forum we're on. It should be no surprise that such a thing is going to come up and range from a non-issue to flat out expected. The game and official tournament system may not require perfect modeling accuracy, but one shouldn't gak on people who are so inclined, as long as they're not being disrespectful to others about their inclinations.

I mean, I'm not going to magnetize itty bitty little missiles or VT heads, but the Spartan arms and Artillery Pods? Yeah, I'll probably do those, assuming my meager modeling skills can keep up.

Secondly; anyone who supports this game should be nothing but respectful of (at least personally aimed) WYSIWYG inclinations.

Why? Because those are people who will potentially spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars extra over the years to have those perfect combinations, as well as the time and effort that can go into magnetizing and otherwise modding figures to be as accurate as they can.

And finally, I find it somewhat funny that the game isn't WYSIWYG in terms of mech gear, and yet a figure crouching or jumping IS a huge game mechanics deal, in terms of LOS to and from the figure.

The rules don't force anyone to go full out with perfect option representation, but let's keep in mind the audience and PB's business model. "Ohh, I should buy 3 more VT squads to model them with different missiles" is the kind of thing people weep tears of joy to hear (minor hyperbole present), as long as that person doesn't turn around and try to give me gak because I took "gravity bombs" on a figure that isn't, in fact, modelled with "gravity bombs".

Agreed, people who hold WYSIWYG in utmost importance, more often then not, look down on all who do not hold the same standards, and in the end push potential players away. That's life, that fact, that's real. Note: I said more often then not, so there are exceptions. People with the same attitude as some here are more detrimental to the game than poor minis or anything else in the world.

I'm still amazed that you can hand wave away WYSIWYG. It's not a hardcore or elitist thing at all - it's simply polite.
And no - it's not the utmost importance, but you asked the question and now you're rejecting the answer for some reason.

I'm not rejecting the answer in any way. The idea of WYSIWYG as an absolute must for all players and all circumstances hurts the hobby...fact


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Swabby wrote:
@Mike

Obviously you have never played anyone who has brought a soda can drop pod army that drops a legion of grey minis from an entirely different game on the table.

There are limits man. It happens.

And quite honestly, people are challenged getting into this hobby for a myriad of reasons, but the one you are mentioning is not one of them in my experience, at all.

That's an extreme example that I never mentioned or said I condoned and is facetiously written.

I never said you said it. I said it was obvious that you have never experienced it.

And I never said that it was an absolute must. I said wysiwyg is something to be admired in a well put together army. You refuted that.

So who exactly is putting words in who's mouth?

Either way your unofficial cards should be advertised as such. You consistantly misrepresent them.

 Mike1975 wrote:
I'm not rejecting the answer in any way. The idea of WYSIWYG as an absolute must for all players and all circumstances hurts the hobby...fact

It's not fact. At all.
It's extremely important in other games - and there are some historical games where the difference between a Sherman M4A3 and a Sherman M4A3E2 is important enough for different rules, and WYSIWYG gets enforced there.
It's not about competitiveness. It's not about eliteness.

It's about politeness and decreasing confusion.

That's an extreme example that I never mentioned or said I condoned and is facetiously written.

You said "I'm not saying use a Spartan as a Defender."
So you agree that WYSIWYG is a good thing, you just disagree on where the line is drawn. I see the difference between heavy and medium missiles to be as important as the difference between a Spartan and a Defender.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 YourSwordisMine wrote:
Really Swabby? really?

Because, I totally agree with Mike...

I've been playing games since 1984, and miniatures games since 1990. In all that time, the die hard competitive players have ALWAYS been the minority... The Die Hard competitives are the one group that makes this hobby unfun for me, and I must say that this has become more and more a problem in the last 14 years.

Yes, really. Because it's possible to be part of more than one of those groups. I'm a competitive player, but I don't care about paint jobs. I buy games because I love to play them. In many games, I don't really care if one person goes over the limit - I'll rarely even change my list (unless it's egregious) - I just want to play.

I still play 40k not because the game is enjoyable, but because the people are enjoyable. I like the universe and the story.
And note that WYSIWYG helps players in all three of Mike's groups.

And yes, I do WYSIWYG. Or I magnetize.

And why? Because my OCD wont let me do otherwise...

Because your OCD understands that a difference in the rules means that there should be a difference on the model. Mike disagrees.

 Swabby wrote:
Mike I think you are missing some really big points here.

WYSIWYG is not some elitist thing. It is a huge part of the hobby.

^^^ This does not exactly Jive with this

 Swabby wrote:
I never said you said it. I said it was obvious that you have never experienced it.

And I never said that it was an absolute must. I said wysiwyg is something to be admired in a well put together army. You refuted that.

So who exactly is putting words in who's mouth?

Either way your unofficial cards should be advertised as such. You consistantly misrepresent them.

My statement has been simple and remains so, if you refuse to play with newer gamers because they do not have their entire army as WYSIWYG, then you are not doing the hobby any favors, quite the contrary. And I am not the only one to experience it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There are limits that common sense must be applied to. When gamers refuse to play with others because a mini shows Long-Range missiles but will be played with Medium-Range missiles......that is wrong. Most players are not going to buy 20 Veritechs and paint them the same to have every option available for someone's OCD to be satisfied.

Using completely different figures may also be allowable IF the other player agrees and for consistency. If someone is a new player and has only the main box and wants to use an Armored Squadron of 4 Tomahawks. I would let him. Of course I'm used to Battletech and the literally hundreds of different units and variants.

Mike the only person talking about refusing to play with anyone is you man!

My whole point in even asking about the card rules is that if you are wrong and Palladium did change the point values someone trying to field a WYSIWYG army could end up mismodeling based off the information you are stating is correct.

Your personal opinion of WYSIWYG in the hobby couldn't matter less to me. Your advertising your cards without declaring them unofficial rules does however.

 Swabby wrote:
Mike the only person talking about refusing to play with anyone is you man!

My whole point in even asking about the card rules is that if you are wrong and Palladium did change the point values someone trying to field a WYSIWYG army could end up mismodeling based off the information you are stating is correct.

Your personal opinion of WYSIWYG in the hobby couldn't matter less to me. Your advertising your cards without declaring them unofficial rules does however.

Out of the all the people that have seen and said something about this download, you seem to be the one confused on this point. Made by someone = not-official. If I made any stat sheets for any game and used my own pics and graphics they would not be considered official. Sorry if I think it pointless to state the obvious.

 Mike1975 wrote:

 Swabby wrote:
The force cards, and more importantly the lack of them really irks me. That info should have been included in the rulebook.

As is if you lose a card you are boned.

Or just download replacements, they are working on permission for that or you can use mine until then. It's not like X-wing has them in the rulebook either. I don't think warmachine does.

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B0VSNzmthd1vSlYtU04xVTlYdWc&usp=sharing

I've found a few mistakes, especially in the Malcontents who I just barely started playing. If you use them and see any let me know.

 Mike1975 wrote:

 Swabby wrote:
Mike the only person talking about refusing to play with anyone is you man!

My whole point in even asking about the card rules is that if you are wrong and Palladium did change the point values someone trying to field a WYSIWYG army could end up mismodeling based off the information you are stating is correct.

Your personal opinion of WYSIWYG in the hobby couldn't matter less to me. Your advertising your cards without declaring them unofficial rules does however.

Out of the all the people that have seen and said something about this download, you seem to be the one confused on this point. Made by someone = not-official. If I made any stat sheets for any game and used my own pics and graphics they would not be considered official. Sorry if I think it pointless to state the obvious.

He's really not the only one. When you provided the link, I assumed it was PB's efforts, until I recognized them as yours.

The file name said "official" last time I saw it, despite containing non-official rules in it.

Though admittedly I haven't gone looking for the most recent edition.

 Mike1975 wrote:
My statement has been simple and remains so, if you refuse to play with newer gamers because they do not have their entire army as WYSIWYG, then you are not doing the hobby any favors, quite the contrary. And I am not the only one to experience it.

Please tell me one time I said I'd refuse to play with someone who wasn't WYSIWYG. I insist on doing it myself, but even you said that some level of WYSIWYG is appropriate.

There are limits that common sense must be applied to. When gamers refuse to play with others because a mini shows Long-Range missiles but will be played with Medium-Range missiles......that is wrong. Most players are not going to buy 20 Veritechs and paint them the same to have every option available for someone's OCD to be satisfied.

Using completely different figures may also be allowable IF the other player agrees and for consistency. If someone is a new player and has only the main box and wants to use an Armored Squadron of 4 Tomahawks. I would let him. Of course I'm used to Battletech and the literally hundreds of different units and variants.

I played WYSIWYG in Battletech as well - even customized a few minis so I could field the variants (The Catapult with PPCs for example). I don't see your point in bringing that up.

You're, again, going off of your perceptions about what's bad and assuming that's what we're saying. We're not. WYSIWYG isn't some evil to be derided at all costs - even you said it's appropriate to a point. You just disagree on where that point is.

If the game has been on store shelves for 6 months and this "new player" has been playing the entire time... and hasn't yet bought the 4 Tomahawks, instead continuing to use, say, Zentradi Pods as proxies... would you continue to play him? What would you do?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Forar wrote:
The file name said "official" last time I saw it, despite containing non-official rules in it.

Though admittedly I haven't gone looking for the most recent edition.

Still says "UEDF Official Squadron Cards" and "Zen Official Squadron Cards".

So yes Mike - despite your objections you are labeling them as official. Perhaps you can understand the confusion, then, when you say "Well of course they aren't."

 Swabby wrote:
Mike the only person talking about refusing to play with anyone is you man!

My whole point in even asking about the card rules is that if you are wrong and Palladium did change the point values someone trying to field a WYSIWYG army could end up mismodeling based off the information you are stating is correct.

Your personal opinion of WYSIWYG in the hobby couldn't matter less to me. Your advertising your cards without declaring them unofficial rules does however.

It's easier to charge windmills than address the actual issue being presented. Besides, didn't we go over all this 6 months ago when someone (can't remember if it was mike or eric smith) decreed that if you prefer painted figs than you're an elitist pig? I think the same exaggerations were made there as well with people who simply paint their own figs and prefer to play against painted ones being demonized by largely imaginary extensions of their views. I have no idea where this warped view of preferring to play the game AS INTENDED AND SHOWN BY THE COMPANY IN THEIR OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS, RULES, AND PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS is somehow a bad thing. It should be admired that someone is willing to set themselves to a higher standard instead of a lower one. This is a visual hobby for most gamers and attractive and appropriate visuals contribute to the experience for many (but not all). If you don't want to model your minis correctly, that's fine. Just be CLEAR AND CONSISTENT with your opponent. Don't pull the ol' this valkyrie with SRMs is really bombs but that one is really SRMs... if you figures are incorrectly modelled for the rules, be consistent and have all of them the same thing as a courtesy to your opponent.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Mike1975 wrote:
My statement has been simple and remains so, if you refuse to play with newer gamers because they do not have their entire army as WYSIWYG, then you are not doing the hobby any favors, quite the contrary. And I am not the only one to experience it.

Please tell me one time I said I'd refuse to play with someone who wasn't WYSIWYG. I insist on doing it myself, but even you said that some level of WYSIWYG is appropriate.

There are limits that common sense must be applied to. When gamers refuse to play with others because a mini shows Long-Range missiles but will be played with Medium-Range missiles......that is wrong. Most players are not going to buy 20 Veritechs and paint them the same to have every option available for someone's OCD to be satisfied.

Using completely different figures may also be allowable IF the other player agrees and for consistency. If someone is a new player and has only the main box and wants to use an Armored Squadron of 4 Tomahawks. I would let him. Of course I'm used to Battletech and the literally hundreds of different units and variants.

I played WYSIWYG in Battletech as well - even customized a few minis so I could field the variants (The Catapult with PPCs for example). I don't see your point in bringing that up.

You're, again, going off of your perceptions about what's bad and assuming that's what we're saying. We're not. WYSIWYG isn't some evil to be derided at all costs - even you said it's appropriate to a point. You just disagree on where that point is.

If the game has been on store shelves for 6 months and this "new player" has been playing the entire time... and hasn't yet bought the 4 Tomahawks, instead continuing to use, say, Zentradi Pods as proxies... would you continue to play him? What would you do?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Forar wrote:
The file name said "official" last time I saw it, despite containing non-official rules in it.

Though admittedly I haven't gone looking for the most recent edition.

Still says "UEDF Official Squadron Cards" and "Zen Official Squadron Cards".

So yes Mike - despite your objections you are labeling them as official. Perhaps you can understand the confusion, then, when you say "Well of course they aren't."

Again, It depends, if the kid is obviously some poor teenager, I might accept it, if he was a grown adult and just cheap, then no. Again, common sense needs to be used, you cannot force WYSIWYG as an absolute for all cases. I did state that using it as an absolute is where die hards push players away. Many people do not bend in any way on this.

As an aside if it helps I can rename the download, the reason they are named that way is that I have others that have additional notation on them that I will be using for testing for future generations. The main concept is a unit size. That way a kick from a Veritech does not do the same as a Kick from a cyclone or an Alpha that are much smaller. I've always opposed the present HTH rules as they exist because when we get into the other generations some things will have to be changed and I'd rather have PB use the rules as they will be after all the other generations come out instead of having to errata the crap out of everything.

 Mike1975 wrote:
Again, It depends, if the kid is obviously some poor teenager, I might accept it, if he was a grown adult and just cheap, then no. Again, common sense needs to be used, you cannot force WYSIWYG as an absolute for all cases.

No one has said that it should be forced. All we've said is that it's not a bad thing, and that it's polite to your opponent to be WYSIWYG. You, on the other hand, have decried anyone who cares about WYSIWYG to be die hards and bad for the game. Reading and understanding what's actually said is good before flying off the handle.

As an aside if it helps I can rename the download, the reason they are named that way is that I have others that have additional notation on them that I will be using for testing for future generations. The main concept is a unit size. That way a kick from a Veritech does not do the same as a Kick from a cyclone or an Alpha that are much smaller. I've always opposed the present HTH rules as they exist because when we get into the other generations some things will have to be changed and I'd rather have PB use the rules as they will be after all the other generations come out instead of having to errata the crap out of everything.

Well, if you're going to say things like "Out of the all the people that have seen and said something about this download, you seem to be the one confused on this point. Made by someone = not-official. If I made any stat sheets for any game and used my own pics and graphics they would not be considered official. Sorry if I think it pointless to state the obvious." and then you name the files "Official" you do understand why there's confusion, right? If it's not official but you call it official, and you've had insight to the literal exact rules/cards before they were printed what are we supposed to think?

This is going a weird place.

It's good to respect that younger people might have limited finances, and yet somehow ignoring that with massive unemployment and financial issues, there are millions (tens of millions?) of "grown adults" that might have limited resources as well.

"But Forar, they probably shouldn't be playing a minis game." some might say.

"And who the hell are we to judge how they choose to spend a little of what disposable income they might have?" I reply.

Look, the issue here isn't "omg YES" or "omg NO", it's simply respecting that these are factors in the hobby. I have friends that played WHF and WH40K, and have tales of friends that would play purely proxy armies using, like, nuts and bolts and washers and lego men. Friends or not, even they reflect back on it and express how frustrating it could be.

So clearly SOME manner of portraying what you have on the field accurately isn't an unreasonable expectation, but here we're just splitting hairs. Is it ideal to know exactly which VT is the J or which Destroid is the Command unit? Sure! Even mixing squads of swarms of BP's might get messy, at least by my understanding of the Reinforcement mechanic.

Is it impossible to overcome? No. Obviously it will simply require asking "hey, is that the command destroid?" just to be clear, or people using magnets/markers (on the mechs or on the bases, as I'm pondering doing, as it'd be infinitely simpler).

There is room for compromise. *AS AN IDEAL*, it'd be nice if everyone had the time, skill, tools, money and other resources to have perfectly modeled and painted up figures for every possible combination of units they might take.

Conversely, those same people seem to mostly be focusing on that it *would be nice*, and that they hold themselves to a higher standard. As long as they don't try to give me gak because I have to use a token to note *this* Defender is a Command figure and that my VT's are using Long Range missiles, not the Medium Range ones as I've modeled, it shouldn't be a problem.

Trying to field an army of bases with legs is one extreme. Expecting 100% accuracy is another. I feel like you (Mike) are arguing against an extreme that isn't being presented as a requirement. I'm sure there ARE some 'elitist' types who would give me gak for those kinds of minimal shifts. Those folks can find someone else to play against.

But this HAS been known about for years now. PB are the ones that said there would be tournament support, and a competitive rules set requires accounting for such things. "Three colour minimum" and what must or needn't be modeled, and any vagueness will cause issues, either through confusion (legit misunderstanding or disagreement between reasonable folks) or "that guy". It's easy to say "oh, I play with friends, and none of them are donkey caves", but *not everyone has that benefit*.

It would be ideal to have all the official rules detailing what these units can take as upgrades prior to modeling.