new balance data slate update this Thursday

[Cpt_Reaper]

14 minutes ago, chapter master 454 said:

 

First time?

 

A lot of the times, people are rose-tinted glass staring at former editions. Some had interesting ideas and choices, some balance was fun and some...well...lets not.
I can say for certain that 4th edition is just a mess with the Size system. If you thought LoS and Towering was nonsense, just wait until I hide entire knights behind rhinos if that were still a thing because both would be size 3.

Don't even start with blast templates. People shout about them saying they were great...really? You enjoyed watching your horde army opponents (your ideal target) perform the correct tactical move and measuring 2" between EVERY SINGLE ORK they had...and they had 90 odd models to space out...EVERY TIME THEY MOVED. Not just for blast, but for flamer weapons too. And the stupid backwardness of blast templates thus being better if they DID scatter because then they could land inbetween these perfect lattice of ork boys to cause max hits (which at best was 4 btw for your cupcake plate).

 

I will bemoan when I get hit with the bat, but I feel when I moan I don't just call down the sky, annouce the return of Horus and declare the game dead but rather make my comments valid. Knights were in line for nerfs not because they were strong in any real metric right now (Eldar kind of just make any meaningful data impossible right now) but because Towering just outright invalidated entire aspects of gameplay (sort of like Eldar Invalidating the game). So those hits were justified. I don't even mind the lack of points being adjusted if that were the only change just because we would need to see how that shakes out but when they have basically gutted a core mechanic of our faction into being worthless, outright worthless and I will stand on that very hill and challenge all who say that Bondsman has any real value now when the only benefit goes to...snort...our armigers...yes...our small units are truly the damage dealers.

I would maybe consider it reasonable if in exchange they made it so armigers could benefit from multiple bondsman abilites at once. But as it stands...

 

Know what...I got out track. Still salty...anyone got chips (or fries to your americans!) they need salted because I got plenty!

Less my first time and more that while life is currently preventing me from engaging in hobby I can only get my fix online and...well I sort of regret engaging for the most part.

 

Firstly...wow. You just described the majority of my games between 4th and 7th. You forgot to mention uber powerful and expensive tanks dying to a single shot because a penetrating hit rolled a 6.

 

I get the hurt from weird nerfs to your armies. I really do. I play Chaos Knights myself, amongst others. I got supremely lucky in that my armies are all very middle of the road and mostly inoffensive, so I have nothing to write home about. I very much sympathise with those whose armies and models were made redundant/ineffective/less than expected. That sucks, and nothing I say can lessen that blow. However, I cannot agree when people claim that 10th is bad/is dead/cannot be fixed, especially because Their DudesTM were hurt by the recent update. After the first handful of codexes come out, then maybe such a claim as "10th isn't looking good" can be made.

 

Cheers for engaging in conversation.

[acrozatarim]

Tempers will always run high after a change like this. It'll only be in the coming weeks when we see how things pan out that it'll be clear whether those emotions are justified or not, but I don't think it's wrong to feel upset about stuff - just worth tempering that feeling with the knowledge that one might be incorrect, or that there may yet be factors one hadn't figured out that play into things too.

[Quantum]

Though I am glad that GW has tackled at least some issues with this update, I cannot help feeling annoyed by the fact that now my core rulebook not only has lore/background and art that is a copy-paste of the previous edition, and the absolute bare minimum of missions for regular games, it now also has obsolete rules (which are also used to fill out the the campaign book).

 

EUR 55,- is a lot of money, and way overpriced if you -for all intents and purposes- only get a couple of Combat Patrol missions for it. 

Edited September 8, 2023 by Quantum

[Mogger351]

23 minutes ago, Quantum said:

Though I am glad that GW has tackled at least some issues with this update, I cannot help feeling annoyed by the fact that now my core rulebook not only has lore/background and art that is a copy-paste of the previous edition, and the absolute bare minimum of missions for regular games, it now also has obsolete rules (which are also used to fill out the the campaign book).

 

EUR 55,- is a lot of money, and way overpriced if you -for all intents and purposes- only get a couple of Combat Patrol missions for it. 

The same is said of codex after changes, but three tuths always apply:

1. They need to move away from books as an access mechanism

2. Books will be in part made obsolete as an absolute certainty

3. 85%+ of the book is still valid and perfectly usable

[Sergeant Bastone]

6 hours ago, Lucius_The_Temporary said:

No changes to Battle-shock (other than Insane Bravery being once per game now) is a disappointment. Very positive changes overall though, imo.

 

I'm a newcomer both to B&C and the game in general (although I did get some small-scale games in before 10th launched) so I might be overstepping my boundaries, but here goes: are we sure the negative responses in this thread aren't residual "10th bad" energy? I hated the loss of granularity in list building and "simplified, not simple" being such a hilariously incorrect description, but to me this update looks great, not only in terms of its actual content but in the willingness it shows from the designers to make sweeping changes. Even if 10th is still borked, surely it won't take too many updates with this kind of scope to fix it?

I like 10th better than 9th and I am having a lot of fun.  There's definitely some things that annoy me and a lot of them are unnecessary self-inflicted wounds that are the result of GW putting less thought into stuff than an active message board poster.  It's good to have a place to vent and discuss.  We're on the internet; you've gotta divide all negativity by 4 to get to the right place.

[Special Officer Doofy]

2 hours ago, tzeentch9 said:

Except those things like power level do make it simpler. Not necessarily better, but it is simpler. They did what they said they were going to do and now some people are upset at that fact

 

That part of the game is simpler, but for the life of me I can't find a single person who was asking for simpler list building... 

 

Not sure why GW took it upon themselves to take rules and ideas from their less successful and less popular game and implement it into their flagship.

[Captain Idaho]

YouTuber Mordian Glory made an interesting video the other day in preparation to balance patch.

 

 

I find I agree with much of what he said. And there really is a threat to the game through customer retention regarding the balance of the system. Particularly interesting seeing the connection with the 7th edition balance problems of Warhammer fantasy and how that caused a drop off in customers, resulting in 1 more edition and death.

 

We're not there yet but how this game is balanced will influence the health of the community going forward.

 

A lot of commentators are holding back on a prediction of the impact this balance patch will have on the community but I see it less about balance and more about confidence going forward.

 

We've not even had the first Codex released and look at how many changes GW have had to implement. How can anyone have confidence as the game progresses that it won't be a mess needing constant patches with every new release, especially as that was shown to be the case with several Codex books in 9th edition?

 

This game of simple not simple, is basically going to need a logistical expert to maintain balance through patches come a year in! How that is good for the game and sales medium to long term, I'm yet to be convinced.

 

And GW has refused to roll back any of their wonky rules, merely adding additional rules on top. Case in point; Death Guard just got additional rules to add to their contagion rules, with GW not having a clue that the problem is in a shooting edition, having an aura ability to rely on in a slow moving and easy to kill army is all but pointless.

 

Eldar keep their multiple free reroll Strategums for every unit, untouched or fazed by the massive disparity in win rates and the limit on their Fate Dice did nothing to stop their rampage.

 

These new rules patches might fix some of the game or a lot of it, but the weight of work required to patch our own games, or the balance of future releases require further patching going forward, doesn't fill me with hope for this edition at all.

 

[Sergeant Bastone]

2 hours ago, chapter master 454 said:

 

First time?

 

A lot of the times, people are rose-tinted glass staring at former editions. Some had interesting ideas and choices, some balance was fun and some...well...lets not.
I can say for certain that 4th edition is just a mess with the Size system. If you thought LoS and Towering was nonsense, just wait until I hide entire knights behind rhinos if that were still a thing because both would be size 3.

Don't even start with blast templates. People shout about them saying they were great...really? You enjoyed watching your horde army opponents (your ideal target) perform the correct tactical move and measuring 2" between EVERY SINGLE ORK they had...and they had 90 odd models to space out...EVERY TIME THEY MOVED. Not just for blast, but for flamer weapons too. And the stupid backwardness of blast templates thus being better if they DID scatter because then they could land inbetween these perfect lattice of ork boys to cause max hits (which at best was 4 btw for your cupcake plate).

 

I will bemoan when I get hit with the bat, but I feel when I moan I don't just call down the sky, annouce the return of Horus and declare the game dead but rather make my comments valid. Knights were in line for nerfs not because they were strong in any real metric right now (Eldar kind of just make any meaningful data impossible right now) but because Towering just outright invalidated entire aspects of gameplay (sort of like Eldar Invalidating the game). So those hits were justified. I don't even mind the lack of points being adjusted if that were the only change just because we would need to see how that shakes out but when they have basically gutted a core mechanic of our faction into being worthless, outright worthless and I will stand on that very hill and challenge all who say that Bondsman has any real value now when the only benefit goes to...snort...our armigers...yes...our small units are truly the damage dealers.

I would maybe consider it reasonable if in exchange they made it so armigers could benefit from multiple bondsman abilites at once. But as it stands...

 

Know what...I got out track. Still salty...anyone got chips (or fries to your americans!) they need salted because I got plenty!

My friend group still plays a 4/5 hybrid and I agree about the blast templates.  Spreading your dudes out is tedious.  In 10th I just use movement trays for my guardsmen and it is so much faster and easier.  That said, scatter dice for Deep Strike is so much better than the modern system of having to stay 9" away then getting to set up perfectly where you want after parachuting or teleporting or tunneling into place.  I like being able to 'gamble' with my deep strikes when it's needed.  Having to risk a Sweeping Advance when you fall back is way better than the current rules where you have to cross the battlefield and finally get into sword range only to have the enemy step back 3" so their whole army can shoot you.  Running out of melee should be dangerous and tense!  It doesn't even feel like you're fleeing now, you just walk over and take an objective.

 

I disagree with people saying that it sucked you tank could get blown up in a single lucky hit.  I mean, yeah, it sucks when it happens to you but it's also a dramatic moment!  And vehicles getting immobilized, having weapons destroyed, having crew stunned, all of this led to more immersive and interesting situations than "Okay, that's 4 points off your health bar".  Vehicles don't feel like vehicles any more and walkers especially.  AFAIK walkers are just vehicles that can use the Heroic Intervention strategem.  They used to be so cool!

 

In my day we knew what was fun /s

[Mogger351]

15 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

YouTuber Mordian Glory made an interesting video the other day in preparation to balance patch.

 

I find I agree with much of what he said. And there really is a threat to the game through customer retention regarding the balance of the system. Particularly interesting seeing the connection with the 7th edition balance problems of Warhammer fantasy and how that caused a drop off in customers, resulting in 1 more edition and death.

 

We're not there yet but how this game is balanced will influence the health of the community going forward.

 

A lot of commentators are holding back on a prediction of the impact this balance patch will have on the community but I see it less about balance and more about confidence going forward.

 

We've not even had the first Codex released and look at how many changes GW have had to implement. How can anyone have confidence as the game progresses that it won't be a mess needing constant patches with every new release, especially as that was shown to be the case with several Codex books in 9th edition?

 

This game of simple not simple, is basically going to need a logistical expert to maintain balance through patches come a year in! How that is good for the game and sales medium to long term, I'm yet to be convinced.

 

And GW has refused to roll back any of their wonky rules, merely adding additional rules on top. Case in point; Death Guard just got additional rules to add to their contagion rules, with GW not having a clue that the problem is in a shooting edition, having an aura ability to rely on in a slow moving and easy to kill army is all but pointless.

 

Eldar keep their multiple free reroll Strategums for every unit, untouched or fazed by the massive disparity in win rates and the limit on their Fate Dice did nothing to stop their rampage.

 

These new rules patches might fix some of the game or a lot of it, but the weight of work required to patch our own games, or the balance of future releases require further patching going forward, doesn't fill me with hope for this edition at all.

 

Having subjected myself to that podcast to perform a measured response: top table competitive 40k is not "the community", it never should be, never should have been. Those people need to realise this isn't an e-sport, it can't be. The game can and should be balanced better. But 99% of people are not playing top end tournament play, I'd wager less than 10% attend formal events where they'll experience the bulk of these problems.

 

The game is "doomed" because the top 1% can't play it like a sport. Then people repeat that ad nauseum because they mindlessly echo it and can't divorce "fun" from "being competitive". The game is nowhere near on it's knees and will not be because of a 2-3 month period of imbalance after a total reset, people need to temper their expectations and stop chicken little-ing.

 

The community needs to stop pushing the game as a competitive sport like a video game, it isn't in a framework to support it.

[Xenith]

So by adding aditional rules to death guard, without taking any rules away, did GW break their primary iron rule for 10th edition already, the promise of a 'one in, one out' system of rules?

Edited September 8, 2023 by Xenith

[nodnol88]

I’m an outlier here I’m sure because I only returned after 20+ years last year.

 

However, I think the delivery of major shifts to rules and balance tweaks are really welcome. The double-edged sword is the reliance of physical media, and the lack of a robust digital offering with a paywall that makes sense.

 

They should 100% offer digital only codex’s for a nominal fee, whilst the physical version acts as a premium offering with a digital unlock, like now.

 

If you want frequent updates, that will inherently invalidate certain physical releases based on the timescales involved in producing said physical media. You can argue GW are in the wrong to sell physical media that is quickly invalidated, but I’d also argue some of the onus is on the customer to make smart decisions, I.E don’t but Index cards, knowing full well they will be made redundant shortly, and then complain. 
 

Like a lot of GW decisions, it’s the delivery and the gate keeping involved. They need to implement a consumer friendly digital solution; digital only codex’s, tiers for Warhammer+ that give you 1, 3 and Unlimited codex’s for a premium.

 

I do think that the biggest issue this highlights is their removal of external play testers. They can talk about how long 10th was in development for all they want, but it clearly wasn’t properly tested. The community will always highlight the absolute meta and the finer nuances of rule implementation, but some of the outliers should have been obvious with minimal testing. 
 

Ultimately, you have to always remember GW are a miniature company first and foremost, that 40K will never be balanced, and as long as you and your friends, gaming group or local scene can find a common ground to enjoy a game, the noise doesn’t really matter. 

[Special Officer Doofy]

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

Having subjected myself to that podcast to perform a measured response: top table competitive 40k is not "the community", it never should be, never should have been. Those people need to realise this isn't an e-sport, it can't be. The game can and should be balanced better. But 99% of people are not playing top end tournament play, I'd wager less than 10% attend formal events where they'll experience the bulk of these problems.

 

The game is "doomed" because the top 1% can't play it like a sport. Then people repeat that ad nauseum because they mindlessly echo it and can't divorce "fun" from "being competitive". The game is nowhere near on it's knees and will not be because of a 2-3 month period of imbalance after a total reset, people need to temper their expectations and stop chicken little-ing.

 

The community needs to stop pushing the game as a competitive sport like a video game, it isn't in a framework to support it.

 

What about my entire gaming group of guys from 3ed who only play at each other's houses and don't go to tournaments but quit because of the bad rules and balance? I never understood this take. Most casual players want balance too. I'm not saying the game is doomed, but the only other edition I sat out is 7th, this one is not shaping up any better. If 11th doesn't correct the course I'm out, selling my models and walking away.

 

It's 2023 and they refuse to go digital, even with more expensive raw materials and logistic issues by printing in other countries. Digital will also be much better if they can't balance they game and constantly have to change stuff instead of play testing. They are behind on lots of stuff. For as much time and money most of us invest, we are allowed to expect more. You don't have to, and that's okay too.

Edited September 8, 2023 by Special Officer Doofy

[Special Officer Doofy]

9 minutes ago, Xenith said:

So by adding aditional rules to death guard, without taking any rules away, did GW break their primary iron rule for 10th edition already, the promise of a 'one in, one out' system of rules?

 

Welllll if you want to get technical they did take a rule away in 10th. Disgustingly Resilient. They must have forgot they did that hence the movement nerfs and barely 30% win rate haha.

[Progenitor]

I like the changes to vehicles, I got very frustrated turn after turn, of Ravagers and Raiders with their Dark Lances always shaking/stunning the crew turn after turn and doing no meaningful damage (obviously that was just down to bad luck) so being able to chip away wounds at least feels like you're doing something now. 

[Malakithe]

42 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

customer retention

Gamplay wont be the reason. Sure people will rage quit over game play. Happens all the time with video games. But the main reason will be GWs :cuss:ty business practices like forcing WH+ subs for their app on top of forcing everyone to buy new rulebooks that are printed with errors then made obsolete by releasing digital fixes while not going fully digital and embracing the modern age. And price hikes when they can easily eat the costs if their operating costs rise. But the reality is they are upping costs just for greed. 

 

They shouldnt be worried about retention of customers in their 40s+. They should be worried about bringing in new customers.

[Xanthous]

9 minutes ago, Xenith said:

So by adding aditional rules to death guard, without taking any rules away, did GW break their primary iron rule for 10th edition already, the promise of a 'one in, one out' system of rules?

They've just added a second aspect to the 'Spread the Sickness' detachment rule. It will function the same in terms of 'one in, one out' when the rest of the DG detachments come out, its just a bit more multifaceted now. Doesn't make it good, though.

[Malakithe]

17 minutes ago, nodnol88 said:

They should 100% offer digital only codex’s for a nominal fee, whilst the physical version acts as a premium offering with a digital unlock, like now.

They did this when Age of Sigmar first came out. Their first version of an app offered digital books through the app and it was the best thing they ever did.

[nodnol88]

56 minutes ago, Malakithe said:

They did this when Age of Sigmar first came out. Their first version of an app offered digital books through the app and it was the best thing they ever did.

 

AoS seems a better thought out product now than 40K ever had been. Granted I haven’t played it, never played Fantasy and completely missed the 1st edition of it (very strange returning to the hobby last year and discovering Primarchs are back and Fantasy was nuked).

 

 They CAN do it, but it seems if you listen to a lot of ex-GW employees, there’s a lot of poor decision making from middle management upwards. 
 

We know there is a hard rule for their mark up, hence the constant price rises. GW’s operating costs are massive because they do so much in house, but the digital only heeldragging is so frustrating because it completely removes the reliance on a few costly practices. No more outsourcing printing, packaging, production etc, at least on the current scale. I believe it’s a 19 week turnaround for certain outsourced products, like printing, so the reality is I bet it’s not just the Nid and Marine codex that will be outdated, but also the ones coming after that. 
 

A more robust digital offering makes so much sense. The only way they will change is if they see a sharp decline in the sales, but the digital model clearly intimidates them. They need to move to the model most video games have, where the special editions just contain a download code and you get a load of themed physical stuff to buff out the offering. Move to digital codex’s, but charge a premium on the physical copies that include an all singing all dancing special edition too. They might not turn over the same, but their profit should be better. 
 

Ultimately if they can deliver reactive game changes and balances more often, in a more consumer friendly manner, everyone’s a winner. Ultimately, GW care most about selling plastic figures and selling them primarily to newcomers to the hobby. A digital onboarding ramp makes way more sense in 2023. 

[Captain Idaho]

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

Having subjected myself to that podcast to perform a measured response: top table competitive 40k is not "the community", it never should be, never should have been. Those people need to realise this isn't an e-sport, it can't be. The game can and should be balanced better. But 99% of people are not playing top end tournament play, I'd wager less than 10% attend formal events where they'll experience the bulk of these problems.

 

The game is "doomed" because the top 1% can't play it like a sport. Then people repeat that ad nauseum because they mindlessly echo it and can't divorce "fun" from "being competitive". The game is nowhere near on it's knees and will not be because of a 2-3 month period of imbalance after a total reset, people need to temper their expectations and stop chicken little-ing.

 

The community needs to stop pushing the game as a competitive sport like a video game, it isn't in a framework to support it.

 

My post details things beyond the video, particularly the cognitive burden of patching an imbalanced game constantly. That was the main point.

 

I also say we're not where Warhammer Fantasy 7th edition was yet.

 

People like to think the tournament community has no bearing on the rest of the community, as if the rest of the community are playing with different rules and models to the tournament community. As said in the video and I'll support, what happens in the tournament scene mirrors what happens outside it.

 

Also, the non-tournament part of the community aren't a unified group any more than the tournament part of the community is. There's more than a lot of them who take borked units just like anyone else, or enjoy winning games.

[Captain Idaho]

1 hour ago, Malakithe said:

Gamplay wont be the reason. Sure people will rage quit over game play. Happens all the time with video games. But the main reason will be GWs :cuss:ty business practices like forcing WH+ subs for their app on top of forcing everyone to buy new rulebooks that are printed with errors then made obsolete by releasing digital fixes while not going fully digital and embracing the modern age. And price hikes when they can easily eat the costs if their operating costs rise. But the reality is they are upping costs just for greed. 

 

They shouldnt be worried about retention of customers in their 40s+. They should be worried about bringing in new customers.

 

Well not being worried about retaining your core business because you want new customers is a recipe for disaster.

 

But I otherwise agree - customer retention is hurt by multiple factors. Ultimately it comes down to why you're in the hobby. For many, the game is important. Add terrible business practices to terrible game design and you'll likely see customer retention decline.

[jaxom]

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

Having subjected myself to that podcast to perform a measured response: top table competitive 40k is not "the community", it never should be, never should have been. Those people need to realise this isn't an e-sport, it can't be. The game can and should be balanced better. But 99% of people are not playing top end tournament play, I'd wager less than 10% attend formal events where they'll experience the bulk of these problems.

 

The game is "doomed" because the top 1% can't play it like a sport. Then people repeat that ad nauseum because they mindlessly echo it and can't divorce "fun" from "being competitive". The game is nowhere near on it's knees and will not be because of a 2-3 month period of imbalance after a total reset, people need to temper their expectations and stop chicken little-ing.

 

The community needs to stop pushing the game as a competitive sport like a video game, it isn't in a framework to support it.

 

1 hour ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

 

What about my entire gaming group of guys from 3ed who only play at each other's houses and don't go to tournaments but quit because of the bad rules and balance? I never understood this take. Most casual players want balance too. I'm not saying the game is doomed, but the only other edition I sat out is 7th, this one is not shaping up any better. If 11th doesn't correct the course I'm out, selling my models and walking away.

 

I think it's fine if the rules work and are stable. Tournament players can keep up with whatever point changes come out, while non-tournament players can choose if its worth the time to see if they need to rejigger their lists. It's more like when software was hard medium. The shipped product has to work and anyone who wants to really work in its guts chooses to do so.

[apologist]

2 hours ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

It's 2023 and they refuse to go digital, even with more expensive raw materials and logistic issues by printing in other countries. Digital will also be much better if they can't balance they game and constantly have to change stuff instead of play testing. They are behind on lots of stuff. For as much time and money most of us invest, we are allowed to expect more. You don't have to, and that's okay too.

 

Although I prefer physical product over digital, I agree with the frustration.

 

I think the halfway-house approach between digital and physical rules is leaving no-one happy. While this approach brings in the broadest church of gamers, neither is getting the benefits, and we're getting both sets of drawbacks.

 

Because corrections and updates to physical books were awkward, expensive and slow, they traditionally have a great deal more thought, effort and checking (both editorially and in terms of gaming rules, playtesting) put into them, so they last. All-physical media games have the benefit of clarity as everyone is using the same text; they have the drawback that imbalances and mistakes are enshrined until the next printing – and even then, there's an argument to leave non-critical issues to avoid causing conflicts between different printings. Because of the additional expense in creating, checking and shipping a physical product, they tend to be expensive. They are, however, reliable and easy to share with the other player for discussion. Internal reference relies on familiarity with layout or a (frequently absent) index.

 

Digital products offer solutions to a lot of these drawbacks. They are usually more portable and convenient than a physical rulebook, and if they are well-made, referencing can be done electronically. Mistakes can be corrected and errata disseminated very quickly and cheaply – and if there is a substantial change, the material can be centrally over-written, so there's no chance of different versions being used and causing conflict. On the negative side, digital products rely on compatiblity and battery life of the viewer; which in turn tend to be small and awkward to share. At the risk of sounding like a right old grump, it's also distracting to have your phone or tablet in your hand all the time, rather than interacting with the other player. Finally, there's the downside of impermanence. A physical book needs storage, but digital rules can disappear, become incompatible, or be hidden behind a paywall at any time.

 

+++

 

GW's rules seem to compound problems from both. Their rules are expensive but change quickly. Split over both print and digital (and across multiple physical media – books and cards), changes aren't necessarily communicated or disseminated. There's an impression of over-correction; of responsiveness and speed always trumping a slower, more considered change. Stability – even if it preserves flaws longer than necessary – has its own virtue in tabletop wargaming.

 

As others  have alluded to, treating a physical tabletop wargame like a computer game – with constant updates, bug fixes, patches and expansions – does a disservice to the players. The computer does the boring crunch for gaming; here, updates just pile more unnecessary pressure on the players, making what should be a relaxing experience with friends into a chore.

Edited September 8, 2023 by apologist

[Redcomet]

Physical media and constant patching just doesn’t go together well. Having your expensive book, whose only real value these days is the rules, be out of date before it has reached the shelves, is just a bad look. 

[phandaal]

6 hours ago, tzeentch9 said:

Except those things like power level do make it simpler. Not necessarily better, but it is simpler. They did what they said they were going to do and now some people are upset at that fact

 

So the whole "simplified, not simple" thing is 100% a response to One Page Rules' Grimdark Future, yeah?

 

Well, even in that game they still have points costs for wargear.

 

And in fact, GW did not do what they said they were going to do. They said - no more Power Levels, only Points. Straight up, no beating around the bush. Then, instead of that, they did the opposite.

 

Okay, @Arbedark, which part do you respectfully disagree with? "Simplified not simple" being a response to OPR, Grimdark Future having points for wargear, GW saying in a community article that Power Levels are going away, or our army building system for 10th being Power Levels?

 

Only the first one of those is an opinion.

 

Edited September 8, 2023 by phandaal

[Isual]

2 hours ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

 

What about my entire gaming group of guys from 3ed who only play at each other's houses and don't go to tournaments but quit because of the bad rules and balance? I never understood this take. Most casual players want balance too. I'm not saying the game is doomed, but the only other edition I sat out is 7th, this one is not shaping up any better. If 11th doesn't correct the course I'm out, selling my models and walking away.

 

If you only play each other, why didn't you just set some guidelines so everyone can have fun?
 

That's the thing we have compared to the competitive crowd. If we don't want to play a busted list we don't have to. And if we play our friends it should be even more easy... "hey X, we both know that WK are op right now. Please don't bring a list with three of them, we all want to have fun"

 

And if they don't agree there are probably more issues.

 

And if somebody comes up with "I don't want to do GWs job for them...", than yea I can't really help you with that.