Big FAQ has dropped.

[Zeke160]

I don’t understand how the LR Crusader was “over preforming “. It seems more like it just wasn’t preforming according to how they wanted the assault carrier to act. That is to say they didn’t like people using their close support carrier as a tank. It’s daft, I was looking forward to predators having at least one thing better than a leman russ.

[GrinNfool]

Eh some good stuff some head scratching stuff and some weird ones.  Not sure why they would exempt vehicles from bolt discipline, i mean not like any 1 was complaining about LR crusaders lol.  DW losing BD with SIA is a bit of a punch but not terrible, just questionable why DW should be paying extra points for their guns now that SIA is more of a side grade, thats sometimes good.  Valks being nerfed is head scratching, by extension they killed the tempestus drop force from vigilus defiant.  Some good stuff would be normalizing hand flamers to d6, GSC losing turn 1 DS, eldar mixing nerfs, flyer base changes, castellans losing 3++ and being 100 points more, and models with fly or fly-like rules being able to charge over enemy models again.  Also like the prepared positions change to exclude titanic and aircraft.  Assassin strat CP cost change is irrelevant, if you were going to spend 1 you would still spend 2, may as well have left it alone but doesn't really matter.  Which sums up most of the rest of the changes to me, not very important.

 

Overall I'd say its a positive, between this and the Ynnari index GW killed a few  of the more annoying issues in the game.  Of course when you nerf one thing something else will rise to take its place.  My prediction is orks, Tau, and dark eldar.

[Subtleknife]

Oh great space marine vehicles take another hit...it is depressing seeing a predator next to a Lehman russ atm...

[Biscuittzz]

On a side note, when anyone else reads the designers commentary do you think to yourselves “What planet do these guys live on that the consequences of that change took you by surprise?” The fly nerf needing to be rolled back was obvious to anyone reading it for the first time when it was introduced, how are these veteran games designers constantly caught out by this kind of thing?

 

Spot on with this. It reminds me of the kind of speak that Blizzard devs would use all the time when releasing WoW patch notes. The fact it takes them months worth of data and tournaments to realise something is broken is amazing. A quick proof reading will solve everything.

 

Fraters on here can pinpoint the next meta busting combo utilising strategems/relics/units within minutes of a leak, look at the Ynnari white dwarf thread for evidence. GW will come out and say they're still monitoring Ynnari's balance come the next FAQ/CA.

 

I guess the Castellan kit has met its KPI and can be nerfed down a little now. 

[Ishagu]

To anyone complaining that your army didn't get better:

 

All the best things got substantial nerfs. Your army is better, relatively.

[chapter master 454]

I mean, the castellan was over 600 points to field anyway, so I mean...not like it isn't hard to adjust for considering many warped lists around it. Don't think it will affect it too much since it still hits like a freight train! The 4++ change is something that helps too but now basically means anyone taking a Dominus Class knight (which of in most standard actually competitive lists will amount to only 1 at any given time) will always (or should always) give it the Ion Bulwark warlord trait which can be achieved as easily as 1CP for a 4++ all game instead of a 4++ for one turn for 3CP (might want to tone down rotate ion shields back to just being 1CP now or just make it so dominus version is 2CP instead).

 

Then again GW are terrible are balance because it is a new concept to them. However they are trying, just let them make their mistakes and remember to give them feedback.

 

As for bolter discipline not affecting tanks, I can understand why from a thematic viewpoint but can we all agree to one day all march into GW HQ and just slap silly the design and balance team until there is naught but a bloody stump of their empty cranial storage spaces which WERE meant for brains.

Seriously...how many videos on game balance is there on youtube, how many more about problems in the game that need addressed, HOW MANY MEMES ON GKs IS THERE? It is infuriating. If they were willing to pull a points shot on the castellan then could they of fixed the shadowspear units.

 

There is good, there is bad and there is ugly. Good news is GW is in someway getting there, there is progress but they are still a long way from getting it right proper. Hopefully we see some more progress in CA2019. This FAQ is just one big melancholy for me really...just straight mixed feelings. 

[Triszin]

To anyone complaining that your army didn't get better:

 

All the best things got substantial nerfs. Your army is better, relatively.

That's disingenuous, many dexs came out in q4, and they were basically told to look towards the faq in spring as CA 18 came out to soon to actually work em out. Now those dexs seemingly have to wait to catch 19

[PeteySödes]

To anyone complaining that your army didn't get better:

 

All the best things got substantial nerfs. Your army is better, relatively.

 

Contrary and helpful as ever.

[wildweasel]

To anyone complaining that your army didn't get better:

 

All the best things got substantial nerfs. Your army is better, relatively.

 

I mean, sure, an all GK army isn't will be demolished slightly less as brutally against a Castellan Soup list. Yaaaaaaaaaay.

[The great eye]

On a side note, when anyone else reads the designers commentary do you think to yourselves “What planet do these guys live on that the consequences of that change took you by surprise?” The fly nerf needing to be rolled back was obvious to anyone reading it for the first time when it was introduced, how are these veteran games designers constantly caught out by this kind of thing?

I'm sure I'm going to be mangled for this, but in regards to the above statement, I for one feel like GW is not taking the opportunities it has and doing as good as they could be when it comes to managing this game. And I get it, everyone has an opinion. Having said that, I 100% agree that geedubs has truly turned it around these last couple years. Better communication, social media presence, a way to communicate game issues via 40kFAQ, more customer interaction, etc..

 

But honestly...it feels like there is still too much of the old GW. Old GW that claims to have an ear to the ground and pays attention to the fan base. While I am sure that this is true and are trying to do so, it just doesn't feel like it is as strong as it could be. FAQ's are much quicker than ever...but truly....think about it this way: what we have now is always going to be better than what we had because what we had was non-existent. Like saying..."well at least it's faster now". Well duh, anything is faster than not moving at all. And I understand that this game is complex, huge, massive, daunting and a ton to keep track of. So.....this just makes me feel like the one department GW really needs to focus on (and is quite possibly reluctant to do) so is the game and rules. IMHO it feels like the rules team has been stretched and spread out over too many game systems/projects and the resources they actually need to make things run smoother is just not there. It is certainly possible that if the resources were there, things could be more efficient with rules changes and produce faster releases. As well as an updated method other game systems use to keep track of these changes that does not result in carrying around a bunch of books. IMHO a sign of old GW is not taking advantage of these modern methods of game design by using supplements such as the vigilus books to help patch what is broken/missing instead of just going back and fixing it at the source i.e. the codex itself. Another sign of old GW is how they do end up fixing things. They are not as in tune to the world as they or even we would like to think. They still make rules that make seasoned players think "wth?" how did this make it to the printers? And in addition, make wild swings when they do attempt to balance things. For example, I expected a nerf to ion shields, maybe a slight points hike, but to see an extra 100 pts.....do most of you not thing this was just too much of a swing the other way?

 

As others have said, members from the various forums, facebook, etc. can pick apart fresh rules in a matter of min/hours and find the errors/broken combos. Nothing is perfect, you can never catch it all...but GW could be doing better considering my last sentence. These resources exist, dammit GW guys use them!

 

In short, I think I'm saying that IMHO GW has finally made the changes they needed and they are not doing as good as they could be...yet. And I want them to. I want GW to succeed and make more money. Make gamers happier. Sell more models as a result of giving fair and fun rules to old and new models alike. I want them to strike while the iron is hot. And I hope more resources will be given to the game/rules dept.

 

I apologize, I am sure most do not agree with this and I am an oddball that is not in touch myself. But I felt a need to rant, as many of us do.

 

Another pet peeve is GW not acknowledging old models and fixing them as much as they should. For example, I would totally buy a vindicator tank if it received some updates. What GW you dont like to make money? I get the new stuff needs new and shiny rules, but there would be plenty of oldish models that would fly off the shelf more if they just....

 

I mean, it worked for necron destroyers. Was this an accident GW? Haha

Edited April 29, 2019 by The great eye

[wildweasel]

 

On a side note, when anyone else reads the designers commentary do you think to yourselves “What planet do these guys live on that the consequences of that change took you by surprise?” The fly nerf needing to be rolled back was obvious to anyone reading it for the first time when it was introduced, how are these veteran games designers constantly caught out by this kind of thing?

I'm sure I'm going to be mangled for this, but in regards to the above statement, I for one feel like GW is not taking the opportunities it has and doing as good as they could be when it comes to managing this game. And I get it, everyone has an opinion. Having said that, I 100% agree that geedubs has truly turned it around these last couple years. Better communication, social media presence, a way to communicate game issues via 40kFAQ, more customer interaction, etc..

 

**CLIP**

 

 

Honestly, I think you are pretty spot on. I believe GW is very much acting in good faith, but they still have a lot of corporate culture baggage around how the game "should" be played that they are still shedding.

 

And just as note on the Castellan: yeah, a 100 points is a lot...but that's on a 600 point model, so it's an increase of about 16.7%. Consider just how prevalent and dominant it was, that's actually a pretty reasonable adjustment.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

To anyone complaining that your army didn't get better:

 

All the best things got substantial nerfs. Your army is better, relatively.

 

Spot on Ishagu the tier structure has been thrown under the proverbial bus. I see Orks as being even more potent now .

[Toxichobbit]

To anyone complaining that your army didn't get better:

 

All the best things got substantial nerfs. Your army is better, relatively.

 

Maybe. I think it's too early to tell. There's been a shake up for sure and the top spots might have changed. But, that doesn't mean the bottom spots have changed. Some of the really bad armies might be just as bad. I don't think GK players really care who is on top, be it Orks, GSC, Ynnari, Craftworlds, because they're (probably) still stuck at the bottom.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

We all know GK are really bad this edition - that doesn't change what Ishagu said though.

[Ishagu]

I agree that some factions still need more substantial alterations but those will come with a new codex. Neither the FAQ nor Chapter Approved has really changed the way armies play beyond toning down the most egregious combinations of rules or units. If this FAQ funnels more forces into the category of winning 45%-55% of games then it's succeeded. I don't think that the existing lists that win the overwhelming majority of games will continue to do so.

 

I have a prediction that Knights will be deminished significantly and that Castellans will remain popular as the model is widely in circulation but it won't be involved in any more major tournament winning lists. It's swung a bit to the point where destroying it is a likely outcome for the right list in the initial turn, and that's too much of a gamble. You can't base a winning strategy over having to go first in every game to neutralise key threats or be destroyed. Imo the 4++ cap to the Ion shield was all that it needed, but at least using one won't lead to accusations of power gaming anymore

Edited April 29, 2019 by Ishagu

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I’m really glad they jacked the points that is the last nail for sure .

[Toxichobbit]

We all know GK are really bad this edition - that doesn't change what Ishagu said though.

 

That's not the point I'm making. An army becoming better in relation to everyone else doesn't really make much of a difference to those stuck at the bottom and from initial reactions it seems that not much has changed for those armies. We'll have to give it time for things to shake out to see if the bottom armies really have improved enough to affect their performance, or if it's just a shift of the mid-top tier armies.

 

I agree that some factions still need more substantial alterations but those will come with a new codex. Neither the FAQ nor Chapter Approved has really changed the way armies play beyond toning down the most egregious combinations of rules or units.

 

I have a prediction that Knights will be deminished significantly and that Castellans will remain popular as the model is widely in circulation but it won't be involved in any more major tournament winning lists. It's swung a bit to the point where destroying it is a likely outcome for the right list in the initial turn, and that's too much of a gamble. You can't base a winning strategy over having to go first in every game to neutralise key threats or be destroyed. Imo the 4++ cap to the Ion shield was all that it needed, but at least using one won't lead to accusations of power gaming anymore

 

Agreed. Some armies are in such a bad place at the moment that they need more than just points changes or FAQs/errata to fix them. I think you're right that Codex updates are what's going to improve them.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

You’ve just repeated yourself and it’s a moot point because you chose the LCD .

[Toxichobbit]

You’ve just repeated yourself and it’s a moot point because you chose the LCD .

 

Let me put it another way. What Ishagu is saying about armies getting relatively better is correct, as when you tone down the top tier then the rest by default become stronger. What I'm saying is that even though the armies are better, it's not relevant to the people at the bottom. So I'm confused as to why you're telling me that my statement doesn't change what Ishagu said, because it wasn't intended to. It's not a disagreement, it's another perspective.

 

Also, what's LCD an acronym for in this context?

[chapter master 454]

Again I would say I am in the camp that the points change doesn't matter. By all accounts, we have all came to the realisation that turn 1 OTK on the castellan was always a good way to get any strat going against such lists using the knight as support (and effectively as their nigh-solo anti-tank. Smash Captains being the other thing they would bring) and now it is just more effective but not a kneecap removing thing. Mind the Valiant is still a thing and has largely been overshadowed by its brother. Certainly not a volcano lance from downtown but the harpoon still hits like a dump truck and the congratulation cannon hits just as hard. Takes a turn to get somewhere but by all accounts, still mounts the durability and formidable frame of a dominus.

To remind as well: I don't think the 100 points mean much. I'm sure top lists can trim the fat elsewhere to keep the list running at fairly similar levels, heck, just trimming some intercessors or what not could see it occur again.

 

Oh and Eldar being nerfed? Hahaha, not like they still aren't one of the best codexes there are. As for your prediction with Tau I would agree though it depends, recent experiments with Shield Drones + Riptides with HBCs by my friend is showing some real promise (like serious promise, saviour protocol with the 5+++ the drones has is REALLY hard to get through and HBCs with ATS are just avenger gatlings but can be amped to 18 shots). Just a host of 30 fire warriors, 30 path finders and 20 odd shield drones here and there with those rip-tides backed by some broadsides gives some serious ouch power.

[ERJAK]

 

To anyone complaining that your army didn't get better:

 

All the best things got substantial nerfs. Your army is better, relatively.

That's disingenuous, many dexs came out in q4, and they were basically told to look towards the faq in spring as CA 18 came out to soon to actually work em out. Now those dexs seemingly have to wait to catch 19

 

The only actually bad Dex that came out in that time period was Sisters. Everyone else is more or less fine.

[The great eye]

Indeed, I considered the thought that these changes are substantial(knights and eldar)to the meta....but perhaps not in the way we might expect. I expected or rather, hoped that GW would acknowledge and make a substantial change concerning soup, CP, and armies without allies. But either they are slow to process this and make the necessary changes or they refuse to do anything about it. Old GW perhaps?

[Kastor Krieg]

The LRC got nerfed hard. From all Black Templars players: you GW

Yeah, it's :cussing sad. The brick started seeing table time. Back on the shelf, venerable brick :(

[Kastor Krieg]

To anyone complaining that your army didn't get better:

 

All the best things got substantial nerfs. Your army is better, relatively.

At least you admit that our Land Raiders are best, I guess.

[ERJAK]

Indeed, I considered the thought that these changes are substantial(knights and eldar)to the meta....but perhaps not in the way we might expect. I expected or rather, hoped that GW would acknowledge and make a substantial change concerning soup, CP, and armies without allies. But either they are slow to process this and make the necessary changes or they refuse to do anything about it. Old GW perhaps?

tbf, by FAR the biggest outlier when it came to soup lists were Ynnari and Castellan based list and both of those are getting addressed. 

 

After this point, while soup will most definitely still be a thing, I don't think it will actually be oppressive enough to require targeted nerfs anymore.