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.) |
0 Yorumlar