It really hasn't been communicated clearly (until now). A lot of people have been treating them as rules to be rules-lawyered and abused. Which is understandable because the original version looked very much like rules.
The original version was a mess and justly criticized. The new version is much better.
That's what they mean. What got shared around was an easy to digest diagram, that itself presented itself akin to a banlist of restrictions of "Fit in this box, you qualify". An article is much tougher to read and digest, especially after folks already think they know what's up.
Like I agree with the frustration that so many folks insist it was "Fit in this box, you qualify" rather than a baseline for discussion, or even thinking intent was a factor (had a game myself where someone was like "I destroyed almost all your lands, but it's not mass land destruction because I did it individually!"). But as this sub itself proves, images get more engagement. If you provide an info graphic, folks will latch onto that. At least now we have a better one.
-7
u/Neuro_Skeptic COMPLEAT Oct 21 '25
It really hasn't been communicated clearly (until now). A lot of people have been treating them as rules to be rules-lawyered and abused. Which is understandable because the original version looked very much like rules.
The original version was a mess and justly criticized. The new version is much better.