There's a part of this conversation that shouldn't go without some response.
"the big difference is the vets tend to criticize the game, the other side launches personnal attacks on the vets. Now the vets have eventually fired back in kind with attacks, which is unfortunate, but yet completely predictable."
That is a blanket defense of "the vets" that simply isn't warranted or accurate. As the subject of innumerable ad hominem attacks, I can tell you without doubt that many of them were unwarranted attacks after my comments on the game, usually (not always) in defense of a particular aspect of the changes. I can understand that a "vet" who has played a game for months or years would be upset that the game was changing and he will have to learn new skills if he is going to continue at his same level of achievement. But being upset at the changing game in no way justifies ad hominem attacks at anyone. Of course, neither does defense of the game, nor does any honest difference of opinion about the game. Neither game defenders nor opponents are ever justified in personal attacks (yes, including me). Moreover, there is no justification under any circumstance for the level of hate posts and infantile name-calling ("Spudtard" for example) emanating from a few of the "vets." Whether you are a fan of the new game or disappointed in the changes and leaving it, let's do it with a little class, and if that is beyond you, just keep it zipped.