To me the gaming and hobby parts are both about trying to improve myself. I painted a nice table top standard for some time now, so I decided that I wanted to put in the time, effort and frustrations into getting above average, and it pays off.
And I feel the same way when it comes to playing the game, but do I improve by playing ďeasy cookie cutter listsĒ or by thinking out of the box and making the list that I want to play work as good as possible, better than the average performance?
My general thought of the restrictions as an advantage is that it forces people to think out of the box. When the standard list on the internet isnít a legal build, you have to think for yourself, and write your own list. And there by improve yourself.
This might involve that youíre making a list that isnít the best list possible, but I think very few fluffy list automatically becomes useless. The probably get weaker, but then you have to get better at playing it. So itís about skills and not reading lists on the internet.
But then again there is nothing wrong with being competitive and making hardcore army lists, but the problem to me is mainly the fact that I canít find a good way to agree on what the power level of a battle should be.
"Baby, Im a heretic, and your a spineless imperalist"