Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Poll Results: 40K Complexity

by SandWyrm


Well, the results are in. How complex should 40K be?

50% Less Complex (1 Hour Competitive Games)
  5 (4.3%)
25% Less Complex (1.5 Hour Competitive Games)
  29 (25.2%)
The Same As Now (2 Hour Competitive Games)
  46 (40%)
A Bit More Detailed (2.5 Hour Competitive Games)
  19 (16.5%)
A LOT More Detailed (3 Hour Competitive Games)
  16 (13.9%)

Not surprisingly, most of you (40%), want 40K to say pretty much the same as it is now. Though I had expected that number to be more like 66%.



What's interesting to me though, is that the numbers of readers who want 40K to get either more (30.4%) or less (29.6%) complex are about even. On the less complex side, the vast majority want the game to run about a half hour less. While on the more side, it's about evenly split between those who want a little more detail, and those who want a LOT more detail. I'll presume those on the extreme here want a more detailed game, with fewer models on the table to keep the play time down. Something more like 2nd Edition, with 1500 point games as the upper limit of normal play.


Frankly I had expected the Less side to be in the minority. But this even dichotomy really points to something of a crisis point in 40K. Whichever direction GW goes, it could alienate at least 30% of it's player base in the process. Probably into the arms of it's new competitors. The safe bet is probably to keep things about as they are. But is that enough? Or will it just alienate people regardless?

(Standard caveats about this not being a scientific poll, limited readership, etc.)




5 comments:

  1. Overblown concern on this case.

    Catering the the very vocal minority that wants 2nd edition back to "keep space marine kiddies off my 40k" (who mostly dwells on Warseer) would be a massively stupid thing to do.

    On a game as old as 40k, you will always see people wanting to go back to the edition that they used to play when they started. But IF (huge IF here) the improvements to the game are positive, they kinda have to be ignored to be able to move forward.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I voted for it to stay about the same. I think the game changes slowly enough that everyone can keep up and adapt. But that is just my two cents.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think the question is skewing the results as "simpler" can mean different things to different people. I for instance want to simplifiy the rules in the sence that each individual rule should be clear and simple and unrelated rules shouldn't work in different ways. If there is a set logic to all rules it is far easier to understand them and reason about them.

    Basically write rules to avoid ambiguity. Multi assault rules for instance is really fuzzy in places.

    But I also want more rules. I want the game itself to matter more so the codexes isn't such a defining factor for winning. I want more strategic and tactical options that aren't rules abuse or clever loopholes. I.e. I am neither a politician nor a lawyer :)

    So, I could have answered both more and less:)

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm not sure 40k is complex so much as convoluted. I'd take more complexity if they made the game more streamlined. It's just feels all over the place right now. Streamline the core and make the army books introduce the complexity? Just thinking aloud.

    ReplyDelete

Recent Favorites

All-Time Favorites