Had a chance to look over DZC late last night ( thanks work! :) ) and I must say it is very very cool.  I have seen it before , but never really read the background and gone over the rules in detail.  It very much reminds me of the NOVA OPEN narrative type fluff.  Invaders and defenders battling it out in various cities. It is more like GW's defunct EPIC game with the scale 10mm models and infantry units on 1 base.  The mechanics are very simple and .......make sense ( something GW is not able to do ).  I'm sure there are power list in the game, but I haven't had enough exposure to see what is really what yet.  Still looks like it is much more balanced and yes it is play tested by the player base.  It's also marketed and played as COMPETITIVE. Meaning you have to play it VS taking a OP list with an easy. One last thing is the starter set it incredible. It even comes with terrain and a mat! Literally everything you need to play a legal game.






So more and more I have noticed the Trolls on message boards that can't help themselves from posting comments that one have no constructive value and two make the 40k Player looks like an asshole.  An example is you post a battle report and they comment with " that X army sucks".  Now I'm assuming they are referring to one of the lists and it's composition.  So what value was added by saying that?  Could it be that they were asking why a list was built a certain way?  I'm sure an explanation could be given as why the list was built and for what purpose.  An example would be the Tau army that I played. First it was a causal game with no time limit and a expectation on figuring out how the new Tyranids play.  Second it was trying to be diverse and see a full range of how  the 2 armies would interact.    Third it was for fun and competition.  Tabling your opponent in turn 2 would gleam Zero info and be Zero fun in this case. Now I understand there are some if they are not winning they are not having fun, they just want to win full stop.  Also nothing says this guy/gal is a great player than by winning with a less optimized list. We took lists that seemed to be balanced against each other to make it a game. The Tau player is a GT winning player and we both knew that he could have taken a Net list and stomped my army ( that came from a codex out only hours new ) into the ground by turn 2.  Instead we played a great fun game, learned a ton about the new Tyranids, and accomplished what we set out to do.  So think before you post something as asinine as " that army sucks"  with no explanation as you are only making yourself look stupid.