Wh40k 10th Edition Munitorum Field Manual (Points)

[Blurf]

53 minutes ago, MasterDeath said:

I enjoy the new list building. Its a question of "how can i combine characters an Units + enhancements to something interesting " instead of "where can i Cut y Points for x". The Brainstorming is still there, only the question changed

1. There is a correct answer to this question, and once found it never changes.

2. This only works if the unit AND the character aren't terrible.

Take Dominions and Retributors. Both units only have ONE viable character to attach out of the like 40 useless buff characters the army has.

But the correct answer is just 'don't take those units' they're bad an as long as Desolation Marines and Nightspinners are viable, both units are completely useless.

[Kallas]

40 minutes ago, Vazzy said:

But I’m putting together an Intercessor squad rn and still chose to give my sergeant a bolt pistol and power sword despite have the bits to do the optimal sergeant lord out now that a PF/TH and plasma pistol are the same points. 
 

Why? Because it looks cool and I’ve always thought plasma pistols were stupid. 

I guess I'll say it again.

 

This option, to make the loadout you want to (because it looks cool) was always, is still, and always will be an option assuming the bits are in the box. At no point have the rules forced people to build something they don't want to; people are free to build their models the way they want to.

 

The reason some of us are very disappointed with the points is because it removes the choice of which option to take from a perspective of balance: it's no longer a choice of "Do I take the better Plasma Pistol for +5pts, or do I take the cheaper but weaker Bolt Pistol?" and the knock on effect can also be "Do I take a trimmed down list so I can bring more models, or do I take the upgrades but have to scale back on bodies?" Then the inverse of this happens as well: you have chosen to build with a Bolt Pistol on your Sergeant, but the objective truth is that the Plasma Pistol is simply better, because for the same cost you have a better weapon (and can choose to risk your model in-game for an even better shot), but you don't get any benefit (ie, a reduced cost of your squad) for running the weaker loadout.

 

This isn't a 'tournament players crying' thing, this is the core of the game that a lot of us have been playing for decades; and Power Level was pretty soundly disliked by a lot of folks, but at least it didn't replace Points, it was a separate measure that people could choose to use - casual players could easily agree to play a PL game and just run whatever they wanted, but now everyone is forced into PL.

Edited June 17, 2023 by Kallas

[Blurf]

19 minutes ago, Khornestar said:

@Blurf

 

Tried to quote but the abysmal mobile function wouldn’t let me add any text because I dared to tap outside the quote box.

 

But regarding unplayable… to me there’s a difference between actually being unplayable and being pointed horribly. Obviously if the disparity between two armies is so great that one is guaranteed to lose, I can see why you wouldn’t want to play. 
 

Hopefully they correct such things ASAP.

 

My comment about adapting is what I do, personally. My goal is to enjoy myself and make the best of the situation, rather than complain. Obviously that isn’t everyone else’s goal. Be mad, don’t play, not sure what to say other than I hope people find a way to deal and still enjoy the hobby.

There's no compelling reason to try.

 

Should I jump through a bunch of hoops to only have a kind of a bad time OR should I take an edition off and play better games by better companies?

 

The first balance dataslate will decide that. Until then, I'm definitely not giving any money to a company that thinks Retributors are 10pts better than Devastator marines.

Edited June 17, 2023 by Blurf

[Vazzy]

2 minutes ago, Kallas said:

I guess I'll say it again.

 

This option, to make the loadout you want to (because it looks cool) was always, is still, and always will be an option assuming the bits are in the box. At no point have the rules forced people to build something they don't want to; people are free to build their models the way they want to.

 

The reason some of us are very disappointed with the points is because it removes the choice of which option to take from a perspective of balance: it's no longer a choice of "Do I take the better Plasma Pistol for +5pts, or do I take the cheaper but weaker Bolt Pistol?" and the knock on effect can also be "Do I take a trimmed down list so I can bring more models, or do I take the upgrades but have to scale back on bodies?" Then the inverse of this happens as well: you have chosen to build with a Bolt Pistol on your Sergeant, but the objective truth is that the Plasma Pistol is simply better, because for the same cost you have a better weapon (and can choose to risk your model in-game for an even better shot), but you don't get any benefit (ie, a reduced cost of your squad) for running the weaker loadout.

 

This isn't a 'tournament players crying' thing, this is the core of the game that a lot of us have been playing for decades; and Power Level was pretty soundly disliked by a lot of folks, but at least it didn't replace Points, it was a separate measure that people could choose to use - casual players could easily agree to play a PL game and just run whatever they wanted, but now everyone is forced into PL.

And like I’ve said multiple times. I get that. I’ve been playing this game since I was 14. I’m almost 30 now. Points are all I’ve ever known, and list building does feel kinda weird now.
 

Is part of me disappointed? Yeah kind of. It’s different, and I don’t know how it’ll shake out in the long run. At the same time, when I’ve been making Heresy lists I’ve gotten tired of trying to find the perfect combo that works points wise. 
 

At this point I think people should try and see how it plays out. If it’s really awful, I’d just not play. I did that with 8th edition and didn’t regret it. I more am in this hobby to paint and write than play games but I understand that it’s not feasible for plenty of folks.

 

For me personally, I can already tell I’m gonna get really tired of telling people why I built the “less optimal” load out like your post demonstrates. It’s just not how I approach the game or list building. I built what I liked and if it’s cheaper? Neat, go me. If it wasn’t , oh well looks dope so that’s all that matters.

 

 

As I’ve said, I understand why people are upset. Im sorry that your enjoyment of the game has been taken away. Especially for people who have been playing as long or longer than me. I’ve just worked on having a much more positive outlook on things and would rather take the good things instead of focusing on the bad. 
 

This is a good thread for Frater to vent, and it is needed, but I also don’t think it hurts to have a post that is still positive about the edition and are excited for the new rules and models. 

[Brother Captain Alberic]

Weirdly I disliked power level but am now finding it much easier to make a 2k list. Used to drive me nuts being a few points over or under before. No idea why im now fine with a system that seems very much like power level though.

 

I’d also say having watched some reports with the new points I’ve not found them unbalanced so far. Early leviathan reports being one sided  were cause the starter set doesn’t have equally pointed armies.
 

 

[Marshal Loss]

31 minutes ago, Vazzy said:

But I’m putting together an Intercessor squad rn and still chose to give my sergeant a bolt pistol and power sword despite have the bits to do the optimal sergeant lord out now that a PF/TH and plasma pistol are the same points.

 

Why? Because it looks cool and I’ve always thought plasma pistols were stupid.

 

This is a reasonable perspective/example, but I'd note that it is located at one end of the spectrum - Intercessors were never exactly the poster child for options. Complaints are less power sword vs power fist, which will typically have a negligible impact on a game, and more boltgun vs plasma gun, icarus rocket pod vs nothing, plasma rifle vs flamer on a crisis suit, etc. Situations where an option is simply miles ahead of the alternative also means that units now need to be priced like they are armed with the best if they are to be 'balanced'. The odd choice isn't a big deal, but over the course of an army, it can add up dramatically.

 

Personally I think by rolling profiles together where possible (e.g. power weapons), GW had already made things a lot more accessible without compromising much of the game's granularity.

[Lord_Ikka]

=][= This topic will be locked for a short time to allow the moderation team to do a cleanup of inappropriate/off-topic posts and for members to cool off from what is a contentious issue. =][=

[Lord_Ikka]

=][= I would like to remind all frater that this thread is in response to the Munitorum Field Manual and the points system therein. It can tangentially relate to something like purchasing or returning an item due to a player's perception of the value of the item in relation to the points. It is not a discussion about retail service or customer actions, nor is it appropriate to snipe at other fraters for their personal opinions. Keep it clean, have fun. =][=

[WrathOfTheLion]

I personally got no joy out of tweaking small point increments to add an icon, drop a pintle weapon, etc., but that is only my opinion on the matter. Others' opinions obviously differ and that's fair.

Edited June 18, 2023 by WrathOfTheLion

[caladancid]

I found another one my brethren.

 

You can either take a max unit of Battlesuits for 390 points and get 12 drones for free.

 

OR

 

You can pay 210 points for 12 drones separately.

 

When I grow up I want a job I can just spectacularly fail at and be fine, just like the good folks at GW.

[Brother_Angelus]

Given the widespread backlash and analysis already highlighting so many clear inconsistencies, I would be astonished if a full points system isn't implemented in the next couple of months. It could well of been the plan all along.

[Rain]

I bet some guy at GW HQ is feeling frustrated over the fact that a bunch of men in their 30’s and 40’s are ripping into his firm’s newly released rules that they carefully crafted for what they see as their target market of 12 year olds on ADD medication.

[caladancid]

39 minutes ago, Rain said:

I bet some guy at GW HQ is feeling frustrated over the fact that a bunch of men in their 30’s and 40’s are ripping into his firm’s newly released rules that they carefully crafted for what they see as their target market of 12 year olds on ADD medication.

 

If I had a way to do more than one upvote I would do it. This may be the truest thing I have seen on these boards in a very long while.

 

-edit

 

Also why do you gotta call out my age like that.

Edited June 18, 2023 by caladancid

[Scribe]

46 minutes ago, Rain said:

I bet some guy at GW HQ is feeling frustrated over the fact that a bunch of men in their 30’s and 40’s are ripping into his firm’s newly released rules that they carefully crafted for what they see as their target market of 12 year olds on ADD medication.

 

As if 12 year olds can afford the new kits. :D

[Marshal Loss]

1 hour ago, Brother_Angelus said:

Given the widespread backlash and analysis already highlighting so many clear inconsistencies, I would be astonished if a full points system isn't implemented in the next couple of months. It could well of been the plan all along.

 

To be honest, I think they'll probably just wait out the backlash. To change back so soon would represent a huge 180 from the WHC article that accompanied the field manual which described their approach, out of touch as it was, and I can't see them changing direction anytime in the short term. They'll change points costs to balance things a bit better but will leave wargear as free/unit sizes the way they are. Hope to be wrong.

Edited June 18, 2023 by Marshal Loss

[TheFinisher4Ever]

I just don't understand why they didn't stick with the plan from late 9th marines. Sure, strip away the points values for small upgrades like pistols and cherubs and such while keeping the upgrade costs for things like heavy weapons on a dev squad.

[BrainFireBob]

12 minutes ago, TheFinisher4Ever said:

I just don't understand why they didn't stick with the plan from late 9th marines. Sure, strip away the points values for small upgrades like pistols and cherubs and such while keeping the upgrade costs for things like heavy weapons on a dev squad.

If I was forced to guess, someone bad at forecasting into the future thinks high costing is "telling us" what is best, and eliminating costs will "hide" the best option. Because people judge based on themselves.

 

And another shout out to Kallas fir patiently repeating that yes, you could always run the suboptimal choice, and that is not changed by this, but in fact there is now no benefit whatsoever

[Malakithe]

5 hours ago, Khornestar said:

Hopefully they correct such things ASAP

ASAP = soon 

soon for GW = 6 months minimum 

 

So...we screwed for now folks

[chapter master 454]

GW getting RKOed, Clotheslined, stunnered, put through the table and bawh gawd the steel chair too.

 

Incredible how positive the vibes were, even with some of the more shakey choices they made with units in the indices and now it is all just straight slamming them. Big oof

[Vazzy]

5 minutes ago, chapter master 454 said:

GW getting RKOed, Clotheslined, stunnered, put through the table and bawh gawd the steel chair too.

 

Incredible how positive the vibes were, even with some of the more shakey choices they made with units in the indices and now it is all just straight slamming them. Big oof

i think a lot of the negativity is online. Call me a shill or whatever but I went to my lgs and people are already getting games in and having fun (it was marine v orks though so, you know take it with a grain of salt. I’d feel more confident if it was ad mech lol) 
 

i think this is a misstep on GWs part, but we all know they don’t care what people on this forum or Reddit or Facebook say. We’ll only see a change if models stop selling, and I just don’t see that happening. Too many people say one thing but then vote another way with their wallet. 

Edited June 18, 2023 by Vazzy

[Interrogator Stobz]

Wait, didn't they spend 3 years during 9th balancing points? They seemed OK to me by the end.

 

Most 10th units aren't that different balance wise to how they were in 9th, except where GeeDub went a bit silly with the nerf bat.

They could literally just port those 9th Ed points across and 99% of the issues go away. 

 

The total lack of forward thinking is hilarious.

[DemonGSides]

Necrons feel busted to play against now that they can reanimate multiple times per turn and for 0 CP half the time.

 

Really tough to stick any damage. Needs some balancing. Death Guard also are just so bland. 

[Scribe]

3 minutes ago, Interrogator Stobz said:

Wait, didn't they spend 3 years during 9th balancing points? They seemed OK to me by the end.

 

Most 10th units aren't that different balance wise to how they were in 9th, except where GeeDub went a bit silly with the nerf bat.

They could literally just port those 9th Ed points across and 99% of the issues go away. 

 

The total lack of forward thinking is hilarious.

 

If that were the case, couldnt it be reverse engineered?

 

Just assume that the index cost is "every upgrade possible" and then look at the cost of said upgrades in 9th vs the 10th Index?

[Interrogator Stobz]

It definitely needs looking at from both directions to get rhe basics right, and then sideways for balance.

 

It's Janky, Wonky and Wobbly everywhere. 

 

I really hope they do listen, both for points and other areas. 

Edited June 18, 2023 by Interrogator Stobz

[Ahzek451]

The introduction of characters joining units seems to go against the whole "simplified not simple". So much janky interactions. More questions than simplicity.