So, I would like an example of this happening in AoS. I have some ideas what you mean, but I would like you're example. Again, I need an example. Arguing with ethereal ideas doesn't work when we have a concrete game in front of us. I also disagree with Competitive players being vocal. Organizers are definitely vocal, since they have some sway with the community as a whole. Thing about them is they often take feedback from those that attend their events. As for the passion and active part of the community... yes, they should, since if they're passionate and active more than any other part of the community, they should be taken into account when sussing out problems in the community. 'Playstyles' being accepted is still something I need an example of evolving out of this. Teleports have been in the game since the start, so it's not exactly been an exploit. It's been something you have had to interact with since the inception of the game. That and the rules for Teleports have been refined since. Now they are more fair for everyone, and honestly, more fun in my opinion. As to an arms race... that's just power creep? That's something we see as nearly inevitable in GW games. As it stands, the balance is alright. Intriguing, what might this allude to? So a net-list. That's something many armies seem to start with and later branch out as people become more comfortable with the books. FoS being pretty standard right now, but many other DT and TL lists cropping up in tournaments/events. Fair, meaning the book is poorly written, or the game itself works on Rock, Paper, Scissors balancing. I would hope that's not something we see often. What part of AoS has been optimized away? The original Core of the game didn't have a structure at all. That has been removed for a semblance of organization to allow more fair games for people. What has been removed that is not still present? If you want to play your mates in some fun, relaxed games, the structure is there to allow it. If anything, the structure of AoS allows for more varied interactions and different games, see the numerous battleplans NOT present in the Matched play portion of the game. So in your second example, GW has actually addressed an 'exploit' of rules interaction. What you're advocating for otherwise is splitting the player base, especially with a Tier list. [I have seen others advocate for a 2 tier system based upon list structure]. As for different styles of matches.. we have those in battleplans? Or would you like to see Highlander tournaments become more common? Or Restricted Unit tournaments? Perhaps Narrative tournaments can make a comeback? There are definitely other types of events, they're just not widely advertised because, from what I've seen, they're more local and relaxed. Addressing the Bolded First: What? Narrative is literally the base style, and Matched play being the most widely used system. Path to Glory is also readily available, and while imbalanced in places, I've found there's some fan adjustments that are pretty good. Ninthmuskateer over on Dakka Dakka has a fairly nice one. Blanket fixes often also fix multiple instances of exploits and set a standard for any future interactions that might arise. What 'genuine' playstyles do you know have been hurt by such? Small rebalances in points are often also fairly good, drastic points changes literally affect whole swathes of playstyles in negative, and positive, ways. Efficiency does affect exploit viability, but otherwise it wouldn't be an exploit. It would be alright, and fairly balanced then. The italicized sentences I need an example of so we can discuss that further. I am very interested to know what rules these are to prepare for.