Old scheme pool vs new scheme pool (gg16)

[Dimitri]

Hi guys. In the british city i live my gaming club plays with the gg16 setting. But there are some people who still play the unfair schemes of the book. They refuge to play the proper ones because somewhere is mensioned that you can use the gg16 or the rubbish from the book. What do you think? Should the old ones be OFFICIALLY superseded? 

[Fetid Strumpet]

Ummm,... no. GG216 is not an official replacement for the book schemes. They are an option, nothing more. While many of us who play them might regard them as superior to the original schemes and starts, that doesn't in anyway invalidate the originals. If you don't want to play the originals you don't have to, same for those that don't want to use GG2016. That is my opinion anyway.

[zeeblee]

I view them as seasonal shakeups to the tournament scene rather than full on replacements  for the original material.

[Dimitri]

The original ones are not as ballanced as the new ones. (Personal opinion).

[Omenbringer]

There are likely to be folks who would say the exact opposite.

[Shadowopal]

Gaining Grounds is the tournament rules. Yes one may use them in non tournament games.  But the interview t is to stir up the tournaments and bring something different to them. For the record, I play both. 

[The Warlock]

Both are pretty good in my opinion, though the book ones would be more accessible to players. The 2016 schemes have an advantage by none of them being revealed until VP are scored, which is cool though one can kinda suss out a few if models start moving towards where the centreline meets the table edges.

[Bengt]

While I think the GG16 schemes are more interesting I don't think the difference is that large. So refusing to play with either set seems unreasonable to me. If the players have different preferences I'd say either flip which set to use or alternate between them if you play regularly.

[Sordid Strumpet]

I would say the old ones weren't unfair, just less interesting because fewer different schemes were taken thanks to the ease with which you could achieve protect territory for example. 

The new ones make you think a bit harder, and therefore make for more interesting and closer games in my opinion.

[Omenbringer]

12 hours ago, Sordid Strumpet said:

The new ones make you think a bit harder, and therefore make for more interesting and closer games in my opinion.

The story encounters (asymmetric strategies) do the same thing in my opinion.

[Adran]

On 24/06/2016 at 4:29 PM, Dimitri said:

Hi guys. In the british city i live my gaming club plays with the gg16 setting. But there are some people who still play the unfair schemes of the book. They refuge to play the proper ones because somewhere is mensioned that you can use the gg16 or the rubbish from the book. What do you think? Should the old ones be OFFICIALLY superseded? 

Even if some one did officially supersed the old rules, people would still be able to use them if they want, Justin has already refused to use the wyrd army of Ninja to break into peoples house and remove old rules. 

I honestly think it would be pointless and a bad idea to even try. One of the biggest reasons that the new schemes are so popular (in my opinion) is that they are new. In a years time, when you've played them solidly, you might be much happier to play a game with the old schemes (And whilst the individual scheme my not be as balanced, the games often are, as both players still have the same 5 schems to choose from) just to get away fromt he always take hunting party and show of force. (I don't think they are always take, but who knows how we will have adapted our lists over the next year. Break through and protect territory weren't auto include straight away