pretre Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 I'd much rather they list the questions and answers, than make a list like they do. The whole point of the FAQ is to add some context to a rule. The thing is already enormous. Adding extra text just for the sake of making you feel better would double or triple the size. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 The thing is already enormous. Adding extra text just for the sake of making you feel better would double or triple the size. So? I think the value of the FAQ is entirely lost without the context of showing the questions and the answers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 So? I think the value of the FAQ is entirely lost without the context of showing the questions and the answers. The success of the ITC disagrees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted September 2, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 The success of the ITC disagrees. Hence my original title. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfestedKerrigan Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Hence my original title. The beginning is the end is the beginning. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 I think, to be fair... That there have been a number of FAQ's that were "successful". that did not mean they were correct. I still cannot forget the miscues of the INAT which was constantly being contradicted by GW's FAQ's afterwards and the equally annoying fanboi's who loved it so much they tried to brow beat you into either "liking it or else you're a DICK". Now admittedly, some of the players guilty are notoriously poor tempered folks, so I suppose some of it was the messenger, but still, online, there were plenty of fanboi's who like tournaments so much that they would gobble anything up if it meant they knew what to jimmy and what they couldnt. I will say again that I hold out more hope for this version than any before it though. Here's to hoping. =) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 I still cannot forget the miscues of the INAT which was constantly being contradicted by GW's FAQ's afterwards and the equally annoying fanboi's who loved it so much they tried to brow beat you into either "liking it or else you're a DICK". Umm. INAT was only contradicted by GW because GW contradicts everything. You know INAT was specifically called out in the thank yous of GW's FAQs for quite a while, right? "Thanks to Jon ‘yakface’ Regul and his FAQ ruling council" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skkipper Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Yep Jon put together a great team of people and wrote the inat. It was awesome. The ITC does similar things but in a less professional less overreaching way. I think both were great for tourney 40k. Like I said before if you don't like it avoid those events. Like I avoid Hanaurs events Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Yep Jon put together a great team of people and wrote the inat. It was awesome. The ITC does similar things but in a less professional less overreaching way. I think both were great for tourney 40k. Like I said before if you don't like it avoid those events. Like I avoid Hanaurs events You were going so well... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Umm. INAT was only contradicted by GW because GW contradicts everything. You know INAT was specifically called out in the thank yous of GW's FAQs for quite a while, right? "Thanks to Jon ‘yakface’ Regul and his FAQ ruling council" Im aware...and yet it contradicted them repeatedly in the end. As predicted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 You were going so well... Can't please everyone all the time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 The success of the ITC disagrees. Success? You mean like how microsoft is successful? Just because it's successful, doesn't make it a good thing. Historically, don't the meanest, most dominating countries tend to survive....? Success isn't exactly a measure of quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 I do miss the INAT faq. Even when I disagreed with their rulings on some things, it was a very high quality FAQ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Success? You mean like how microsoft is successful? Just because it's successful, doesn't make it a good thing. Historically, don't the meanest, most dominating countries tend to survive....? Success isn't exactly a measure of quality. Mixing your metaphors a bit there... :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Mixing your metaphors a bit there... :) They were on the same topic, though I wasn't addressing the FAQ with either, I was addressing your statement which seemed to equate quality to success. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skkipper Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Success is a product of work and desire. Quality has little to do with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Tru dat. Work and desire dont spell success automatically either, as I am sure many have experienced. Success is in the eye of the beholder, and we tend to beleive what we want to beleive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skkipper Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Nope I always succeed when I want to and work for it. But I am good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skkipper Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 The only thing I wanted in 40k was to go to the finals in hard boyz and I did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aventine Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 And that is my main beef with ITC. I want to play 7th, and a FAQ which modifies 7th into 5th is unwanted (by me, clearly wanted by others). I would welcome a FAQ system that modifies 7th into a more functional 7th, but the ITC isn't trying to be that. What does ITC do that makes the game more like 5th?? It does not buff IG, GK, SW, BA, or transports, nor does it simplify missions. Do you remember 5th? Have you played ITC? Just seems like a really, really weird comparison to me... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aventine Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 The only thing I wanted in 40k was to go to the finals in hard boyz and I did. Not exactly a high bar there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 The beginning is the end is the beginning. The end is the beginning is the end. The ITC does similar things but in a less professional less overreaching way. I think both were great for tourney 40k. "Less professional" than INAT? Ahahahahaha no. INAT died a dog's death because it was a grossly-overreaching document full of personal bias. Every complaint you have against the ITC FAQ was twice as bad in INAT. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 What does ITC do that makes the game more like 5th?? It does not buff IG, GK, SW, BA, or transports, nor does it simplify missions. Do you remember 5th? Have you played ITC? Just seems like a really, really weird comparison to me...Pax likes to think of ITC as the bastard child of people who loved 'Ard Boyz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aventine Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Pax likes to think of ITC as the bastard child of people who loved 'Ard Boyz. To quote you, "Ugh." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.