Errata, Errata everywhere, but not a page in sight :)


Asroc2000 said:
I find some of these replies quite sad.

Would you accept such errata and changes in others products you buy?
If you had a meal delivered to your table when eating out, would you accept the waiter rushing over just as you were taking your first bit to say sorry, the chef added sugar in stead of salt, and it probably will not taste the way you wanted?
If your new car was recalled before your first drive for tweaks and changes?

I certainly would not, neither would most people I knon.
Just because other companies publish errata does not mean it should (or has) become the norm.

Well what's the alternative?

Fact: Perfect rules are impossible to get in miniature games.

Ergo you either accept errata's in an attempt to get to tad more game or you accept flawed game without any chance of improving it.

And let's see...

Cars gets errata's all the time. They just expect you to pay for them.
Any computer software worth a salt gets errata's. Hell computers are seriously unsafe to use if you don't get those errata's.
Any miniature game that doesn't get errata's are from companies who are saying "we know our product is flawed but you customers can go to hell. You already paid for it so now we ain't bothered to fix found errors".
I have even seen errata's to local newspapers.

Errata's are everywhere! If you don't accept errata's to your products you can't even buy a newspaper from the store! O the horror! ;)

Compared to having to stick with imperfect product I'll take errata's any day.


Asroc2000 said:
Just because we now have the ability to publish changes, and most people will be able to download them is no excuse to all QC standards to slip. In the pre net days, we would have had to do all this by snail mail, and the postage costs alone would probably have crippled the company!

Yes. Which is why we had worse game quality with even more of need for players to house rules.

I sure don't miss that. Now we can have UNIFIED set of fixes so when I go to play with another group I don't have to either play the flawed game or spend couple hours sorting through "what house rules to use?"...

Were miniature games playable pre-net? Yup. But they required lots of house ruling which led to tons of issues when playing OUTSIDE your regular group.

Just because things improve doesn't mean it's bad ;)


tneva82 said:
Yup. But they required lots of house ruling which led to tons of issues when playing OUTSIDE your regular group.

House rules were the standard in the 70's and 80's. It wasn't a question of whether you used some, just what and how.

The errata process around the whole WRG Ancients/Warrior/DBM versions 1 through 6 were legendarily awful with every group playing a slightly variant game depending on who had written Mr. Barker and when.

Battlefront and GW are the thousand pound gorillas in the industry and even they suffer from massive errata issues. I'm not bothered by mistakes/errata as long as I see the commitment to keep supporting, improving and developing the rules system. 90%+ of the businesses in this hobby are owned and run by our fellow hobbyists and I am more than a little inclined to be patient with my fellow gamer as long as they keep communicating their efforts to support the game.


Stickying the errata link at the top of the page, or even better dividing ACTA:AFU and ACTA:NA (and any other permutations) into separate sub forums and stickying the NA errata/annoucements and the SFU errata/annoucements in each of them would be a good idea.

The title of the errata thread could then be modified with the date of the latest errata and the link updated so that people can know when they're browsing the forum when the errata was last updated.


I think the errata is easy to find, but it could be found in a few more places or at least an easier to find link for those who don't know where to look for the errata.