10th edition tournament results - it doesn't look good

[Interrogator Stobz]

6 minutes ago, Mechanicus Tech-Support said:

2 admech players of 370

Highest rank 177 

At least we're not the absolute worst I suppose  

The codex can't come quick enough, though I'm feeling distinctly pessimistic about the thing.

Seems like many players don't turn up with armies that are obviously trash tier.

 

[Mechanicus Tech-Support]

Which yknow I get..it's a tourney why bring an army you know is trash (aside from your undying and 100% logical love for the omnissiah). Still though, I was still on that hopeium for more data. 

 

 

 

Edited July 19, 2023 by Mechanicus Tech-Support

[Interrogator Stobz]

Between the hopium and the plastic crack we're doomed to serve the GeeDub Overlords 

[MegaVolt87]

3 hours ago, Interrogator Stobz said:

Between the hopium and the plastic crack we're doomed to serve the GeeDub Overlords 

 

Listen, it's going to be the edition we return to the glory of the 3.5 Ed CSM codex, bully the Eldar and show the loyalists we are better just by being the spiky marine version of them- right? 

[spessmarine]

On 7/18/2023 at 8:04 AM, Ahzek451 said:

And I totally admit I am no stock genius, but as most of us agree there is an issue, GW stocks look to be rising. I do wonder if this is just the natural climb due to new edition....or will there be a delayed reaction as more people become disatisfied at the current state. I geuss I am only pointing at the rising stock as a factor for incentive for GW to really do anything about these issues. 

 

A drop in sales of models, missing sales forecast would bring stocks down. Dissatisfaction with the game itself is nothing out of the ordinary.

 

On 7/17/2023 at 12:05 PM, phandaal said:

 

Well, Steve, the win from my perspective would have been to actually finish the Votann Index. For Death Guard, I assume they would have taken a functional ruleset as well. AdMech may also have a few things to say.

 

Framing this as a no-win scenario is very disingenuous. People were more than prepared to overlook the rough edges, but that is hard to do when some things legitimately were not finished. People have every right to voice their displeasure as customers.

 

GW isn't doing it for free nor is a hapless child, I think they can handle some bluntness.

[Captain Idaho]

This annoys me...

 

 

Parading the eldar changes as a victory as if it's changed them. They're still 69% win rate!

[Ahzek451]

4 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

This annoys me...

 

 

Parading the eldar changes as a victory as if it's changed them. They're still 69% win rate!

Like saying the air freshner they added to a rust bucket car with engine problems has "made an impact". 

[caladancid]

I love they don’t even show a meta chart. Hard to make 29 percent vs 65-70 percent look good in any graphic!

[Emperor Ming]

We are doing bugger all until September, its so bad, we aint even doing a chart.

 

That's what I gathered from that vid/article

[spessmarine]

4 hours ago, Emperor Ming said:

We are doing bugger all until September, its so bad, we aint even doing a chart.

 

That's what I gathered from that vid/article

 

Honestly, I don't think they should do anything immediate. Changes off one or two tourneys would be very kneejerk, and an edition where you're combing through balance updates monthly on top of standard edition releases (codex, supplements, new stuff) and it'll burn out anyone but diehards real fast

[Kallas]

51 minutes ago, spessmarine said:

Changes off one or two tourneys would be very kneejerk

I mean, they made changes to Fate Dice already so...

 

Not that they weren't needed or anything, but it's clearly not the sample size that's the issue. GW's 10e launch has been roughshod at best, and they need to iron out the biggest kinks ASAP - be that the top performers or the bottom performers.

[caladancid]

55 minutes ago, spessmarine said:

 

Honestly, I don't think they should do anything immediate. Changes off one or two tourneys would be very kneejerk, and an edition where you're combing through balance updates monthly on top of standard edition releases (codex, supplements, new stuff) and it'll burn out anyone but diehards real fast

 

They don't actually need tournament results to do anything. All of the problems were spotted almost simultaneously with the release of the indexes. It isn't like the tournaments are revealing new problems, they are just making those problems impossible to ignore. 

[Interrogator Stobz]

Yep, players immediately knew which units/combos/rules were broken and immediately proved themselves correct at the tournaments. 

We don't need the stats, a mere glance and some simple maths is enough for experienced gamers.

[MegaVolt87]

2 hours ago, Interrogator Stobz said:

Yep, players immediately knew which units/combos/rules were broken and immediately proved themselves correct at the tournaments. 

We don't need the stats, a mere glance and some simple maths is enough for experienced gamers.

 

Warhammer is one of those rare instances, where experts are challenged they have the credentials and experience to back up their opinions 90% of the time. 

[Plaguecaster]

Cant wait for the 'BIG CHANGES' that they will claim will help ones like DG that will end up changing absolutely nothing.  Will probably think a small point change will somehow be all they need when its how the majority of DG units are as a whole or lack of anything making them anyway decent or survivable that is the main problem.

[sairence]

5 hours ago, caladancid said:

 

They don't actually need tournament results to do anything. All of the problems were spotted almost simultaneously with the release of the indexes. It isn't like the tournaments are revealing new problems, they are just making those problems impossible to ignore. 

 

Partially yes. Not completely. Various Youtubers ranked Guard as A or S-Tier, based of indirect fire and now they sit at 42%, after sitting below 40 the first few weeks 

 

Honestly, the for me likely reason they didn't do a chart is probably that Tacoma was going to be the big event they were attending personally and that they wanted to include for their next round of changes. 

 

Hence why we got a hype interview, instead of any discussion of planned changes. I feel people often want to see malicious intent, when it's often just not what was planned, or maybe wasn't even considered by GW. 

[Special Officer Doofy]

1 hour ago, Plaguecaster said:

Cant wait for the 'BIG CHANGES' that they will claim will help ones like DG that will end up changing absolutely nothing.  Will probably think a small point change will somehow be all they need when its how the majority of DG units are as a whole or lack of anything making them anyway decent or survivable that is the main problem.

 

Dude they already fixed all the issues "plaguing" Death Guard. We can take plaguemarines in units of 7 again. Problem solved.

[Redcomet]

In the Meta Talk video Stu said

 

”There are even some brave souls who brought Admech”

 

So they KNEW that the games balance was completely borked from the get go, and that some factions are borderline unplayable.

[Dont-Be-Haten]

2 hours ago, sairence said:

 

Partially yes. Not completely. Various Youtubers ranked Guard as A or S-Tier, based of indirect fire and now they sit at 42%, after sitting below 40 the first few weeks 

 

Honestly, the for me likely reason they didn't do a chart is probably that Tacoma was going to be the big event they were attending personally and that they wanted to include for their next round of changes. 

 

Hence why we got a hype interview, instead of any discussion of planned changes. I feel people often want to see malicious intent, when it's often just not what was planned, or maybe wasn't even considered by GW. 

Dude when they released the Aeldari list I knew right then they were hokey. Free dice manipulation on an introduction of "critical" dice rolls is pants. 

[Akerkoke]

19 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

This annoys me...

 

 

Parading the eldar changes as a victory as if it's changed them. They're still 69% win rate!

Well they said it made an impact, from 74% win rate to 69% maybe :D

[sairence]

2 hours ago, Dont-Be-Haten said:

Dude when they released the Aeldari list I knew right then they were hokey. Free dice manipulation on an introduction of "critical" dice rolls is pants. 

 

Yeah? So did most people. If you read again you can see that I didn't say that no one saw it coming 

[caladancid]

7 hours ago, sairence said:

 

Partially yes. Not completely. Various Youtubers ranked Guard as A or S-Tier, based of indirect fire and now they sit at 42%, after sitting below 40 the first few weeks 

 

Honestly, the for me likely reason they didn't do a chart is probably that Tacoma was going to be the big event they were attending personally and that they wanted to include for their next round of changes. 

 

Hence why we got a hype interview, instead of any discussion of planned changes. I feel people often want to see malicious intent, when it's often just not what was planned, or maybe wasn't even considered by GW. 

 

Well to be clear, I really don't attribute malice to GW's business practices or the incredibly poor rules situation. I do think they intentionally do things, I don't attribute all of their behavior to happy or unhappy accidents.

 

Sometimes I think the two 'sides' to this issue agree that GW is bumbling around. The difference seems to be that you (and others) really want to defend GW (what is the conclusion to your point about the Guard? things aren't broken across the board? Because some random youtubers weren't on point about the guard the other multiple broken armies are good?) as though they are your friends from the club who have found themselves in a wacky situation where they own a million dollar company.

 

I just want a good game that I am happy to pay the premium price for, and I am willing to hold GW accountable when they mess up big time. This currently is not good. And the longer people go on reaching and clawing to make excuses for them, the longer it will be until things can start to improve. 

[Captain Idaho]

Let's refocus this topic back to game balance, tournament results and away from demographics of customer base and finances.

 

Regarding balance, I think the "casual player" (a clumsy term, inaccurately one half of a binary) cares more about it than tournament players.

 

My friends are these fabled casuals and I can tell you, if something is massively broken or unfair, they just don't play. They have no inclination to put effort into something to house rule a game on behalf of GW failing to balance something.

 

That's not to be confused with tweaks of minor things, like the house rule for the Necromunda campaign of throwing grenades on ledges but not being able to see the ground. 40K requires substantial balance house ruling and people just don't want to do it as it requires a lot of consensus and hard work.

 

Eldar being my go to example, our eldar playing friend doesn't agree they're broke and in fact has been moaning about how under powered they are, would you believe it. He doesn't agree with any of our criticism of the rules. How can we balance that with house rules then?

 

Ultimately, poor game balance turns off casuals just as much as tournament players, not that I agree with players fitting into those broad binaries. We've got jobs and kids to deal with. 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Captain Idaho

[Xenith]

=][= I've split the [very insightful] GW demographic discussion off into it's own topic, please keep this topic for discussion of 10th ed tournament results and their effect on the game =][=

 

 

[Rogue]

1 hour ago, Captain Idaho said:

 

Eldar being my go to example, our eldar playing friend doesn't agree they're broke and in fact has been moaning about how under powered they are, would you believe it. He doesn't agree with any of our criticism of the rules. How can we balance that with house rules then?

 

 

How good is your Eldar friend? Is he winning all his games with the Eldar, or losing lots even with a strong Index?

 

Because that's a further issue with more casual groups and balance. If one of the stronger players and one of the weaker ones both play the same faction (and consequently get very different results with it), how would you even try to house rule that?

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Rogue
Double post