Great that they released a statement. I suspect this was always going to be the news in the coming week. But ah, the cycle cannot be broken. People take the shady memory of events to feed ever deepening cycles of skepticism and self masturbatory outbreaks.
FYI got any evidence that they were going to release mrrf alongside Shas, that's definitely not my recollection of it. Also also, it helps if you make actual arguments rather than fallacies if you don't want to get fallacies back.
The problem with that policy is that it seemingly always takes these crazy Chicken Little doomtrain threads to bring out official statements. Sure, maybe there always was intended to be an article or whatever...but the wording on this one indicates(at least to me, so you're free to call it biased) it was done as a reaction to this craziness rather than a scheduled article.
C'mon man. Are you not willing to entertain the possibility that this over-heated thread wasn't, in fact, a reason for CB to completely 180 on their central strategy for the year? That, with occam's razor, we can see it's much simpler to suppose that the original rumour was just incomplete information, and CB were forced to respond with a more complete context, because of the mad flames that were being generated? I do think that the above great CB statement was caused by the flames. However I see no real reason why the content of the statement - i.e. the long-term strategy of the business - should be similarly caused. And here's the real kicker. We should always be very careful when our reactive attempt to rationalise a turn of events exonerates us from our mistakes, no matter how small they were. It feels good, and so we like to indulge such ratonalisations, but that doesn't in any way indicate their veridical relation to the facts at hand. So: both explanations fit, but one requires a greater leap of faith and more assumptions, and it is therefore generally best practice to favour its alternative, no matter our personal investment in wanting it to exonerate us. Either way, perhaps we should all just part in good company & brotherhood, happy with the resolution, as fellow aficonados of the game?
Got any evidence they weren't? I'm not digging up quotes from HSN3's launch for you. The rumors were from that timeframe, the basic commentary was that USARF was replacing FRRM just as Onyx was replacing SEF and both would come back around the same time as they presented similar design philosophies. You might want to extend that wonderful knowledge to some of the others here, just a helpful hint.
I've literally replied above that both are possible, the real intention is unknown and either they werent' affected by this thread (in which case it's yet another thread here) or they were (in which case it's probably pretty good several people joined in the uproar). And I've said my peace, I'm happy with the resolution, but several people just keep stabbing at me and attempting to provoke me, calling me an idiot and worse, calling out for a ban or the thread to be deleted and the moderator is nowhere to be see, as per usual. Those cringeworthy people are apparently unable to discuss differences in constructive manner, heated or not, they default to ad personam insults, slurs and that's the extent of their input. Thus, this is the end of this thread for me. Mission accomplished.
I'm not the one throwing it around to support your argument about CBs track record. I don't remember it being like that but I could be wrong. And memories are coloured by our general perception of something. But it's called the burden of proof. You want to use it in your argument, it's not my job to prove everything you claim as wrong.
I sure hope not. I don’t want dry, perfectly planned out schedule detailing only completely no-risk talking points. I get enough of that at work. This is entertainment. I’m paying to be entertained. That includes great art (the models themselves), great story, great game play, and Bostria and companies interaction with the community. They entertain me with their delivery, their talking shit like we’re buddies, their sneak peak into the creative process. I don’t care is they are 100% accurate. I don’t care if plans change. It’s entertaining. I hope we don’t loose this and I’ll gladly pay for a new army/sectional to make sure CB can make enough money to keep entertaining us. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
And, at the end of the day, it’s a game of little metal army men, no matter how we dress it up and how much import we give it...
Well, I'd like to add to the voices saying that this is very good and welcome news. @Aiwe, @Koni, thank you very much for bringing us this info. Please pass a thank you to the author as well :) Regarding what we did or didn't do; I'm pretty sure that decision to go about the transition in this way was made a while ago and we had no hand in influencing it. What we did was forcing a high-level response that painted a clear picture. Additionally, the level of attachment to older armies is likely to influence to a degree how the company will view them, and attention they might get during their overhaul.
Aw, I am sorry... ...CITIZEN Also, guys, why is it so necessary to argue if this was actual change of plans or just their plan all along? While I absolutely dislike panicking, the loud feedback was justified because of rumors that CB did let happen. If we as a community managed to influence their plans (to the benefit of some players and seemingly no loss for those who did not care), good. If it was a miscommunication, that's also fine, I am sure both parties have something to learn here. As I see it, both versions are possible, and we will probably never know what happened. But the resolution is positive, so why dont we just celebrate it (with buying moar lovely miniatures of course).
There's a reason why I haven't given definitive quotes. We're talking about stuff that is how long ago at this point? You're absolutely right that it's "called the burden of proof"...except even if I threw an exacting quote up, I'd still get called a troll or that I "didn't understand" what was said or that I was just being "needlessly negative". You want to call me out as wrong? You can provide the same level of evidence you're expecting me to. It's not my job to give you a Works Cited page. I did that on the previous forums, and it didn't change the way the message was received or how the discussion happened. I pretty consistently was getting PMs from people calling me "condescending" or "smug", usually with terms that I would get warnings about not using because of a "vulgarity ban". So you want me to provide sources? Tough. You get them when the level of discussion around here is cleaned up and when some of the Usual Suspects start doing the same instead of just throwing gasoline on the discussion.
Person, I think the biggest take away is that we shouldn't let unsubstantiated rumors get us to the point where people are calling for the firing of CB employees and calling anyone who defends the company as shills, scabs, bootlickers, white knights, etc... I for one don't want to see this community devolve into random facebook rumors turn into an angry mob every week where we demand answers or blood. I don't think that's a very healthy community.
I'm not gonna quote everyone that mentionned it, but I disagree with the whole idea that we "lost nothing". We lost relationship quality with each-others and potentially CB, while exposing ourself to positive reinforcement for such behaviors -so each time it happens it is more likely to happen again. This is kinda part of the PersDev bullshit I don't usually like but, trust in each other is valuable, it eases mind by reducing mental workload. Therefor in some situations, I think one should actively try to preserve it, maybe to a (somewhat) irrationnal point. I want to enjoy my minis and my forum or stop playing altogether, not be stuck in an awkward relationship of half fun, half mistrust or drama. It's also clear that some people here will meet the great naturalization process, they actually met it already, and that always makes me feel sad. I guess only so much can be done to help.
The new armies with their new rules sells miniatures which makes them money. Updating rules for an army they don’t sell doesn’t just not make them money, it costs them money. You can argue it creates good will, which eventually makes them money, but as a small company you can only afford to pay for some much good will. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Why should I have to meet some standard that nobody else is held to? What exactly did you think I was going to say, "LET ME DO ALL THESE THINGS THAT NOBODY ELSE HAS TO DO IN ORDER TO IMPRESS THIS ONE PERSON ON THE INTERNETS"? You want better discussion, you start elevating it yourself. It's not like the forum was all gumdrops and rainbows before I started posting here again.
