New Warhammer 40,000 Edition announced!

[Mogger351]

25 minutes ago, happyslugger said:

Do people really only play the way GW says they can, outside of tournament scenes?

 

I am not a comp player so I play with my little group as we see fit. 

I think thats a big question with no direct answer.

 

In the context framed are you asking if general people will play with the GW missions, layouts, terrain, points and so on?

 

Everyone has a degree of conformance they'll hit eventually.

[happyslugger]

I suppose I'm asking if people feel they HAVE to play the GW way?

 

I get that in tournaments you have to do XYZ and models have to be legit. 

 

Outside of this competitive scene, don't people play with more freedom and narrative ideas?

 

We don't have to set a table up the way GW says we do. We don't have to put our models away and buy new ones as GW have moved them to legends, and so on. 

 

I've been more of a collector in recent years but have been involved with 40k since we were at secondary school 13/14 years old, now 44. I've never 3 d printed a model but have got the odd one or two third party ones that I liked. 

 

I've always just played as I see fit (with my group). It's more about the fun than what the board looks like or what weapon or model is being used. 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 26 by happyslugger

[Lord Marshal]

1 hour ago, happyslugger said:

Do people really only play the way GW says they can, outside of tournament scenes?

 

I am not a comp player so I play with my little group as we see fit. 

 

From my experience it's directly proportional to how much terrain a store/club has and how long it's been around. There's definitely exceptions, but terrain is an expensive both for stores and players so newer ones - especially with scratch-built terrain being much rarer these days - will tend to go with standard GW layouts because it's all they really know and there's a variety of cheaper MDF or even paper variants on offer (which incidentally market themselves on being to GW tournament standards).

 

If it's a older club with a bunch of grey-hairs you're more likely to have felt mats, craters made out of Plaster of Paris and scale-train-adjacent greenery.

 

Edited May 26 by Lord Marshal

[TheTrans]

8 hours ago, happyslugger said:

I suppose I'm asking if people feel they HAVE to play the GW way?

 

I get that in tournaments you have to do XYZ and models have to be legit. 

 

Outside of this competitive scene, don't people play with more freedom and narrative ideas?
 

......

 

I've always just played as I see fit (with my group). It's more about the fun than what the board looks like or what weapon or model is being used. 

 

I think the issue can stem from people having  a 'group' thats like minded. 

I would warrant that a great many people don't have enough mates in a group that are happy playing 'whatever'. I'd warrant 90% of 40k events run if not in lock step, but abiding very closely to the ITC/ETC whatever internet-points based tournament set up, which GW have legitimised more and more, especially with their terrain set ups following suit. So if that is what 90% of events are going to look out, and people want to practice game for said big events... well... all of a sudden, every game becomes, if not tournament prep, at least playing in the same ruleset as the tournaments in the local area (or what the internet screams is correct).

So while, sure in your own group you can play what and how you want, which is sweet and awesome, its probably not the norm. 

I feel the norm is pickup games at a local against a random, or games at an event, and 90% of the time, they are gonna follow the trash GW/ITC/ETC map layouts and rules. 

TL:DR more people have to abide by '40k prep' mentality than people that  get to chill with like minded dudes in a group doing 'whatever'.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

8 hours ago, happyslugger said:

I suppose I'm asking if people feel they HAVE to play the GW way?

 

I get that in tournaments you have to do XYZ and models have to be legit. 

 

Outside of this competitive scene, don't people play with more freedom and narrative ideas?

 

We don't have to set a table up the way GW says we do. We don't have to put our models away and buy new ones as GW have moved them to legends, and so on. 

 

I've been more of a collector in recent years but have been involved with 40k since we were at secondary school 13/14 years old, now 44. I've never 3 d printed a model but have got the odd one or two third party ones that I liked. 

 

I've always just played as I see fit (with my group). It's more about the fun than what the board looks like or what weapon or model is being used. 

 

 

 

 

It all heavily depends on how well you know the people you play with. 
 

the more you know people and play with them the more willing people are to venture away from what GW recommends.

[happyslugger]

Makes sense. 

 

I don't play at stores or random pickup with people so it's not something I experience. 

 

I've not played a lot of games with my lot in recent times, I've gone along and been part of it for social side of things, but only played a handful of games in tenth. I'm looking to get more involved again in 11th.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 27 by happyslugger

[Petitioner's City]

There's a really interesting discussion around this topic of playing a certain authorized way happening in old world - as you may be aware there are several fan comps, with one of the more well known the Renegades/SquareBased approach from Val Heffelfinger (formerly an official organiser for 40k tournaments for GW in north america) and Rob the Honest Wargamer. 

 

A really intriguing analysis of this is by political historian Dr Luke Blaxill:

 

 

 

And more recently Blaxill interviewed Val too, in which Val's history with 40k comes up later in the video:

 

 

Blaxill looks at this and discusses a lot about power, authority, fragmentation and rebellion - quite a fun set of lenses with which to look at how players choose or choose not to respond to a gaming format. He also is a bit of a character! 

 

You also have Germancomp, Aussiecomp (actually scottish) and more - all these "rebellions" (in Blaxill's parlance).

 

But it's so interesting there isn't really this for 40k - whereas Heresy somewhat and old world massively so. 

 

Tables are interesting too - old world and fantasy require less terrain, but it certainly is a visually focused game, and has a need often for hills - where have hills gone from wargaming in general?  (Intriguingly Squarebased did release early in modern TOW table terrain maps). 

 

[Xenith]

On 5/26/2026 at 8:19 PM, happyslugger said:

I suppose I'm asking if people feel they HAVE to play the GW way?

 

 

Yea, kind of. When GW comes out and says "this is the most balanced and fair way to play the game" and has monthly updates on how to play the game this way, and the models and units are point and power balanced based on their terrain and missions, you kind of feel that's the way to play the game and the baseline expected for pickup games. 

Edited Friday at 10:36 PM by Xenith

[irlLordy]

I was just reading through the Kill Team Nemesis book and noticed that Tramplasquigs were mentioned as potential large beasts. As far as I know, these are only available with the Kill Rig, but they do sometimes like to put sneak peeks of unreleased units in the fluff sections of dossiers. Could standalone tramplasquigs be a potential release alongside the codex? 

[Bouargh]

Does anyone watch the games on twitch last WE? I have no sound but judging from some screens only I feel confused. I dropped quickly an eye only on the first minutes of Aeldarii vs. Admechies battle and I ended with a lot of questions and doubts on army composition: the AdMech clearly has 2 detachments but field at the same time Cawl and Thula Guld. These chaps looked by the way I understood the rules to exclude one from another in a rooster. Unless you can now have mutiple Warlords? One per detachement??? ANd the way the lists are presented makes hard to understand who's whho and who's belong to which detachment. Lookes like it will be a nightmare to stay focussed on units on the tables and specific bonuses ones may have through detachment A and others through Detachment B...

 

Unless I mis interprete the images?

[Lord Marshal]

4 hours ago, Petitioner's City said:

 There's a really interesting discussion around this topic of playing a certain authorized way happening in old world - as you may be aware there are several fan comps, with one of the more well known the Renegades/SquareBased approach from Val Heffelfinger (formerly an official organiser for 40k tournaments for GW in north america) and Rob the Honest Wargamer.     

 

A really intriguing analysis of this is by political historian Dr Luke Blaxill:    

 

Blaxill looks at this and discusses a lot about power, authority, fragmentation and rebellion - quite a fun set of lenses with which to look at how players choose or choose not to respond to a gaming format. He also is a bit of a character! 

 

You also have Germancomp, Aussiecomp (actually scottish) and more - all these "rebellions" (in Blaxill's parlance).

 

But it's so interesting there isn't really this for 40k - whereas Heresy somewhat and old world massively so. 

 

Tables are interesting too - old world and fantasy require less terrain, but it certainly is a visually focused game, and has a need often for hills - where have hills gone from wargaming in general?  (Intriguingly Squarebased did release early in modern TOW table terrain maps). 

 

 

My take nobody asked for is that In the case of the 'Renegade Armies' it took a very unique set of circumstances. You had a lot of people with now-'Legacy' armies gathering dust on a shelf until the return of Fantasy, or in the case of armies like Ogres and Dark Elves, those models were still easily accessible due to still being sold for AoS, coupled with them being such a large proportion of old Fantasy armies. It'd be a bit like if GW turned around and said 60% of 40k armies are now illegal for tournaments; that's just so many people in a critical mass it's bound to have more people saying "get stuffed" than if Daemons or Renegades & Heretics got shuffled off in isolated.

 

Outside of Cathay, 99% of current The Old World models are older kits and the Legacy armies are an obvious avenue they could go down to expand the game in the future, so there's an expectation that those Legacy/Renegade armies will probably return to officialdom (totally a word) eventually anyway; that means there's less reason to throw your collection in the bin and just buy into the (currently) tournament legal stuff when your Lizardmen and Skaven are probably going to come around in a few years anyway. That's quite different to most other Legacy situations where it's nearly always guaranteed to be a slow death sentence (or if they do come back it's in a form that necessitates buying the new version anyway).

 

You then have the Renegades project being headed up by an established and (for non-40k) popular pair of influencers, which by virtue of their outreach automatically lends it a greater amount of 'authenticity' and word-of-mouth.

 

I think the most crucial thing though is that Specialist Games appears content to allow the community to head up the tournament side of the game. Warhammer World hosts non-Legacy tournaments, but that's about it. 99.9% of tournaments elsewhere are up to the community, including deciding "Who Da Best TOW Player Iz." It's not like 40k, AoS or Kill Team where there's a good chance of you attending an officially GW-backed tournament where they'll require you to play without the Legacy armies. It's very much like the pre-8th edition days when GW just shrugged and let those competitive weirdos do their strange 'ITC' thing with secondary-scoring-wotsits (yeah right like those'll ever catch on).

 

Ironically the worst thing to happen to 'Renegade' tournaments would probably be for GW to sit up and start taking notice of TOW's competitive scene.

 

For Heresy there is just not a competitive scene period, which I think is the main thing that made houserules slightly more normalised (not unlike Necromunda).

 

 

Edited May 27 by Lord Marshal

[Mogger351]

3 hours ago, Xenith said:

 

Yea, kind of. When GW comes out and says "this is the most balaned and fair way to play the game" and has monthly updates on how to play the game this way, and the models and units are point and power balanced based on their terrain and missions, you kind of feel that's the way to play the game and the baseline expected for pickup games. 

This, it's a negative feeling knowing that by simply attempting to have fun with the sandbox you're told you're making your experience worse. Hence it pulls back to the prescribed defaults.

 

I know there's a crew of people here who will swear they only ever play on custom boards with homebrew missions and not care about balance and all that, but I question how much reality is in that or whether it's common.

[Karhedron]

The thing is that the game was always balanced around a certain amount of terrain and historically, people tended to play with much less than GW used which slanted games in favour of shooty armies. It is not so much that this has changed, rather that GW now provides better guidelines on how much terrain they use when balancing points and abilities.

 

My local club tends to play with boards that are somewhat lighter on terrain than GW standard but I don't bring it up.  I tend to play melee armies but since I am one of the more experienced players, I just regard it as a fair handicap to give less experienced players a more fun time. My BA jump pack army is pretty effective anyway. If we played with more terrain for me to hide behind, I think my opponents would have less fun.

[phandaal]

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

This, it's a negative feeling knowing that by simply attempting to have fun with the sandbox you're told you're making your experience worse. Hence it pulls back to the prescribed defaults.

 

I know there's a crew of people here who will swear they only ever play on custom boards with homebrew missions and not care about balance and all that, but I question how much reality is in that or whether it's common.

 

I think it is a little of both.

 

For pickup games or local leagues using the current version of the game, people do have to stick to whatever GW says is the standard for a variety of reasons. Attempting to deviate from that is met with suspicion or just refusals. My belief based on experience is this is the most common way most 40k players play the game.

 

On the other hand, if you do have a group of people who are willing to go outside of the current edition, it is guaranteed you will be doing things at least a little bit differently than whatever is pointed at as the current standard. Again from my experience, it is not impossible to find groups like this or even start them yourself, but it is not as simple or guaranteed as just going with the main way to play.

[Mogger351]

3 hours ago, Karhedron said:

The thing is that the game was always balanced around a certain amount of terrain and historically, people tended to play with much less than GW used which slanted games in favour of shooty armies. It is not so much that this has changed, rather that GW now provides better guidelines on how much terrain they use when balancing points and abilities.

 

My local club tends to play with boards that are somewhat lighter on terrain than GW standard but I don't bring it up.  I tend to play melee armies but since I am one of the more experienced players, I just regard it as a fair handicap to give less experienced players a more fun time. My BA jump pack army is pretty effective anyway. If we played with more terrain for me to hide behind, I think my opponents would have less fun.

This isn't the same though, it's not a guideline on how much terrain to use. It's a guideline on how much, what type and where.

 

It's also not just terrain layout, because the objectives for the mission are the terrain. So they're using the mission as a stick to encourage you to do the above.

 

Let's face it, 40k is not really a competitive game. The balance is never that great really and the entire vibe for any older players was beer and pretzel. It just sucks that to play that way seems to involve custom terrain rules, missions and likely points/errata(houserules) as none of it lines up as intended.

[DemonGSides]

4 hours ago, Mogger351 said:

is never that great really and the entire vibe for any older players was beer and pretzel.

 

The balance is currently pretty good but we have switched out the beer for Mimosas and the pretzels for bagels, as we start pretty early in the day.

 

People can have fun. You can't force other people to have your kind of fun. Find people who want to have a similar kind of fun and it sorts itself out.

 

7 hours ago, Mogger351 said:

I know there's a crew of people here who will swear they only ever play on custom boards with homebrew missions and not care about balance and all that, but I question how much reality is in that or whether it's common.

 

Make some friends and play the game the way you want to play it. It isn't THAT hard.  If you don't want to make new friend while playing a multiplayer game, then set up the game you want in your own basement and have all the fun you can making pew pew noises.

 

You don't even need homebrew missions. Most every mission in 10th works on any board ( we don't play most of the missions that spawn new objectives because those are super annoying to add in when using visual objective markers such as those on neoprene mats), and if you have any critical thinking ability you can make it work.

 

Getting out of your own way is step #1.

[HeadlessCross]

18 minutes ago, DemonGSides said:

we have switched out the beer for Mimosas and the pretzels for bagels, as we start pretty early in the day.

Oh look at mister fancy pants here drinking mimosas. 

 

It's screwdrivers or nothing LOL

[Mogger351]

29 minutes ago, DemonGSides said:

 

The balance is currently pretty good but we have switched out the beer for Mimosas and the pretzels for bagels, as we start pretty early in the day.

 

People can have fun. You can't force other people to have your kind of fun. Find people who want to have a similar kind of fun and it sorts itself out.

 

 

Make some friends and play the game the way you want to play it. It isn't THAT hard.  If you don't want to make new friend while playing a multiplayer game, then set up the game you want in your own basement and have all the fun you can making pew pew noises.

 

You don't even need homebrew missions. Most every mission in 10th works on any board ( we don't play most of the missions that spawn new objectives because those are super annoying to add in when using visual objective markers such as those on neoprene mats), and if you have any critical thinking ability you can make it work.

 

Getting out of your own way is step #1.

 

Balance is ok-ish externally with almost none internally. It's regardless not the most solid foundation for a true competitive game, albeit moreso now than previously.

 

I play with people with a similar definition of fun. We want to use the terrain we have, we want to make the table look the way we want it to look. We don't want to have to recraft the mission to account for this every game because the objectives aren't where they are and will have a notable game impact.

 

You absolutely will need to homebrew or at least houserule missions in 11th because they're tied to the terrain layouts. If you don't use one half it's safe to say the other half won't work as well.

 

I am not in my own way, this product just doesn't meet my nor my groups needs and expectations specifically.

 

We will find a way round it, but it doesn't make the bagels more pretzel-y.

Edited May 27 by Mogger351

[Karhedron]

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

I play with people with a similar definition of fun. We want to use the terrain we have, we want to make the table look the way we want it to look. We don't want to have to recraft the mission to account for this every game because the objectives aren't where they are and will have a notable game impact.

 

If you don't like the way terrain and objectives are laid out in 11th then just stick to the way it was in 10th or whatever system you currently use. You won't be losing anything and the game balance will not be worse than any games you play now. At worst, you just won't be getting the benefit of the extra thought GW has put into balanced terrain setup. But since that sounds like it isn't something that appeals to you anyway, you won't be missing out on anything.

[Kommisar_K]

On 5/23/2026 at 1:25 PM, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

How about only being able to pass through doors/hatches, and gaps big enough to fit a model, not through random point in the a solid wall?

Didn't see this earlier. I'd like to over-explain. 

 

The issue GW has in making terrain rules is that they need to have a "one size fits all" ruleset, at least for the base game.* Going through doors is all well and good - it's the most realistic after all, but few terrain sets actually follow an identical pattern of openings and gaps. If GW tries the "realistic" mode they'll need to brace for complaints, because people (the hyper competitive ones) will whine about exploitation. Then there's the creative aspect. If terrain has to conform to such a standard to prevent "cheating" then more hobby-oriented people's custom builds will suffer, opening the door to a whole new set of complaints. And battlefields would end up even more "samey" too. 

 

So the suggestion I made (just a suggestion) is intended to be a simple way to make ruins impactful, without worrying about exactly what they look like or how many holes they have. Not the best, but there's the explanation. Ultimately this whole problem would be solved if folks didn't take GW books as law and just, y'know, had fun with the game...

 

*Personally I'd instabuy a "Terrain rules" supplement for cities, trenches, forest scenarios etc., but that's beside the point. 

[Gaz Taylor]

On 5/27/2026 at 8:06 AM, Petitioner's City said:

Blaxill looks at this and discusses a lot about power, authority, fragmentation and rebellion - quite a fun set of lenses with which to look at how players choose or choose not to respond to a gaming format. He also is a bit of a character! 

 

You also have Germancomp, Aussiecomp (actually scottish) and more - all these "rebellions" (in Blaxill's parlance).

 

But it's so interesting there isn't really this for 40k - whereas Heresy somewhat and old world massively so. 

I think the difference between 40K scene and other GW games is that 40K has had the ITC, LVO, Best Coast Pairing, etc, which have been universally adopted by the 40K community before GW really got involved. It's now become part of how the game works as it's seen how a lot of customers want to play, plus members of the 40K studio team are active on the competitive scene. 

 

The other systems haven't really had this or only parts of it.

 

Personally, I think you just play how you want to play. If you want to do competitive events, you will follow the rules for that and visa versa for narrative. 

 

The best and worst thing in my opinion has been the whole competitive aspect that has developed around GW games. I love playing competitively (even though I don't have the time or energy to really do it) but I've never been a fan of how fast the meta changes. It does however feel the current edition is kind of in a good place as we approach the end, which suggest GW knows which levers to pull. I'm looking forwards to the new edition and hoping to get games in soon.

[Lord Marshal]

Some information on the Chapter Approved deck. Think most of it's already been said elsewhere, but probably some new tidbits in there.

 

Quote

Your Army Has Orders

 

At the heart of the new Chapter Approved deck are Force Dispositions – broad strategic approaches that describe how your army intends to win the battle. Some forces advance relentlessly to seize ground. Others are here to annihilate the enemy. Some are swift reconnaissance elements, sabotage forces, raiders, or hardened defenders protecting vital assets at all costs.

 

Each detachment in the new edition is associated with a Force Disposition, helping connect the way your army is built with the way it fights on the table. There are five Force Dispositions. 

 

 

The result is simple but powerful – your detachment doesn’t just give you rules, it helps define your army’s mission. Rather than both armies always approaching the battle in exactly the same way, your Force Disposition interacts with your opponent’s to create the shape of the mission. A force sent to Purge the Foe will experience the battle differently when facing a stubborn Take and Hold army than when clashing with a slippery Reconnaissance force or a sabotage-minded Disruption detachment.

Varied Battles for Everyday Play

Thanks to the way armies are constructed in the new edition, you’re also able to build forces with the flexibility to pursue a variety of missions. For example, an army might be built with one detachment linked to Take and Hold, and another linked to Priority Assets. In everyday pickup games, you and your opponent have the flexibility to choose which Disposition (i.e. which set of orders) your army will adopt prior to each individual battle. This is especially helpful when playing against the same friend or family member on a regular basis, letting you mix up your army’s approach for a fresh experience every time.

 

Chapter Approved also provides a set of maps that indicate where pieces of terrain that count as objectives should be located based upon deployment zones in casual play. Whilst not as prescriptive as the terrain layouts in the Event Companion (see below), these maps provide rough guidelines for you to throw terrain down on a battlefield and get to rolling dice within minutes of opening your Armageddon boxed set.

 

The Chapter Approved Mission Deck contains 15 individual mission matchups, built from the five Force Dispositions. Each matchup creates a distinct strategic challenge, complete with appropriate deployments and mission objectives. Coupled with the ability to select different Force Dispositions from game to game in a casual setting, this gives players a huge amount of variety without losing the clean structure expected from modern matched play.

 

Chapter Approved also includes a brand new set of Twists meant to keep battles fresh and interesting. These can fundamentally alter rules, like providing Hidden for the entire army, or simply mix up what mission you’re playing for a fresh take on a familiar experience. 

 

Refreshed Secondary Mission Cards

While Force Disposition establishes the overarching operational orders your army follows as it marches to war, Secondary Mission Cards represent fragmentary orders received or evolved during the chaos of an active war zone. These cards received several key changes going into the new edition, giving you more agency around when and how you achieve these sudden battlefield opportunities. First, several new missions have been added, while some old familiar ones were updated for the new edition.

 

 

Previously, you only drew new Secondary Mission Cards each turn if you didn’t already have two cards in your hand. Now, you always draw two new missions during each of your Command Phases, giving you the tactical flexibility to choose when and how you’ll achieve these missions. The pressure is still on, however, as you can only score up to 15 points from Secondaries in a single turn, even if you complete missions that would otherwise exceed this value. You no longer feel behind the entire game simply due to an unfortunate early turn draw, but you still can’t wait all game to try and rack up points only in the final turn or two.

 

Finally, and critically, you no longer must score a Secondary card. Combined with the ability to hold cards longer, you may choose not to score a mission when you’ve only achieved a portion of the available points. Holding cards until you’ve achieved their maximum value could net you a mighty shift in game state by the end of the battle, unless you run out of time or units first…

Chapter Approved and the Event Companion

The Event Companion (which will be released as a pdf soon) is designed to integrate with Chapter Approved, providing organisers and participants in singles, doubles, and team events with the rules for fighting Chapter Approved battles in an organised play setting.

 

Unlike casual play, every player selects a single Force Disposition from those available to their army’s detachments. This gives you a clear expectation of the kinds of battles you’ll fight, whilst ensuring balance between players regardless of the number of different Detachments their army has access to. 

 

To ensure variety and make it harder to solve for every scenario, the Event Companion also includes a set of three different terrain layouts for each of the 15 missions, along with guidelines for which layouts to use during which rounds of an organised play event. These have been extensively playtested to ensure the closest representation of the balance outcomes intended with each army’s unit and detachment points. Like with points, community data from games played on these layouts will be continually reviewed to ensure Chapter Approved missions play as intended throughout the season.

A Totally New Battlefield Experience

The many subtle changes to the core rules of Warhammer 40,000 create a feeling of evolution for the new edition. Every phase contains refinements and tweaks that seem light touch individually, but create a greatly improved gaming experience when taken as a whole.

 

In contrast, Chapter Approved changes the fundamental concept of Warhammer 40,000 missions dramatically, adding asymmetry and army-driven battle concepts to deepen the narrative experience and greatly diversify what an effective army might look like from game to game. 

And they haven't been updated purely for narrative purposes. The team have leveraged years of game data and lessons learned to create the overall best Warhammer mission experience possible.

 

Chapter Approved provides players of all types – from at-home friend groups to veteran tournament-goers – with a fresh new take on how to fight a battle in the grim darkness of the 41st Millennium, one driven by player agency and centred on your personalised miniatures collection from start to finish.

 

 

Edited Thursday at 01:58 PM by Lord Marshal

[Ahzek451]

 

 

$280 ouch. If true...yeah I am happy to sit this one out and get a used/discount rulebook and cards. 

 

 

[Jukkiz]

sheesh... GW gonna take ashes out of sauna now too? 

If i even wanted to try new monopose marine half, it´s gonna be 140€ atleast

[Karhedron]

This bit from today's announcement caught my eye.

 

Quote

Chapter Approved also provides a set of maps that indicate where pieces of terrain that count as objectives should be located based upon deployment zones in casual play. Whilst not as prescriptive as the terrain layouts in the Event Companion (see below), these maps provide rough guidelines for you to throw terrain down on a battlefield and get to rolling dice within minutes of opening your Armageddon boxed set.

 

This sound like there are quicker and simpler terrain rules for "casual play" (which is where I think most of us will end up) without having to go to the precision of fully balanced tournament battles. This sounds like the option I will try out first and hopefully will reassure the people who still want beer n' pretzels games.