Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Obviously they screwed the Epic-to-40k names up when they released the Stompa; this isn't in contention. It should have been called a Gargant and the 'nauts could then have been called stompas. But do we really need to have this discussion every time someone brings up the Stompa being worthless? It's pointlessly pedantic, we all know what everyone is going to say, and it just wastes space.

If we accept that 'nauts are worth ~300 pts, then I think it would be fine for the Stompa to be dropped to the 500ish points it's worth. That gives two distinct bands for large walkers in an army, and isn't too far from a proper ratio with what Warhounds are actual worth (also hilariously overcosted after the "well, they're not technically illegal" readjustment).

I'd also be fine with a new datasheet that made them worth the 800-900 points, but that seems like something we'd have to wait for a new codex for.

I find Ork players caring a lot about using the right terminology for orks giant walkers funny because I really can't imagine orks being very strict themselves in the terminology ^^.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I find Ork players caring a lot about using the right terminology for orks giant walkers funny because I really can't imagine orks being very strict themselves in the terminology ^^.

I can. Wars are frequently fought over whether a walker is dedicated to Gork or to Mork.

Rumor has it that the leaks aren't right for SW since the SW land speeders and bikers are going up to their CA 18 points costs (the only marine faction with this problem).

Speculation is that GW printed the wrong page. Anyone heard anything about this? Rumors also of reduced thunder wolf cav prices on the actual 2019 CA. Anyone know anything about this?

Wolves are not remotely the only army with misprints in CA2019.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I find Ork players caring a lot about using the right terminology for orks giant walkers funny because I really can't imagine orks being very strict themselves in the terminology ^^.

I believe that you'll get a really close look at your mek bosses' big choppa if you call his gargant a dread.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I find Ork players caring a lot about using the right terminology for orks giant walkers funny because I really can't imagine orks being very strict themselves in the terminology ^^.

I believe that you'll get a really close look at your mek bosses' big choppa if you call his gargant a dread.

or assume his god icon patronage wrongly.

Rumor has it that the leaks aren't right for SW since the SW land speeders and bikers are going up to their CA 18 points costs (the only marine faction with this problem).

Speculation is that GW printed the wrong page. Anyone heard anything about this? Rumors also of reduced thunder wolf cav prices on the actual 2019 CA. Anyone know anything about this?

TWC Storm Shields went down by 5pts. TWC Battle Leaders and Wolf Lords went down quite a bit.

the_scotsman wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Honestly, a lot of the Ork stuff can be summed up as "we didn't sell as many of those buggies as we wanted".

So i am not the only one thinking that

What? But buggies were explained as

*Checks Great Games Workshop Rules Imbalance Conspiracy Flowchart*

"Games Workshop knew they'd sell so they gave them crap rules on purpose since they were a Sure Thing!"

HOW could bad rules have POSSIBLY affected their sales figures???

No, no silly! GW makes the new stuff overpowered to sell them to veteran players. The brand-new, meta-dominating buggies confirm this tread. GW will now increase their cost to bring it into line, now that the crafty plan has gotten people to buy the new models.

I haven't seen anyone talk about it anywhere but the Relic Javelin Attack Speeder (one of my favorite model) had a 52 point drop!

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I find Ork players caring a lot about using the right terminology for orks giant walkers funny because I really can't imagine orks being very strict themselves in the terminology ^^.

I believe that you'll get a really close look at your mek bosses' big choppa if you call his gargant a dread.

or assume his god icon patronage wrongly.

Nah. Any warboss who can explain the difference between Gork and Mork is lying through his teef (or more likely, someone else's teef).

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Honestly, a lot of the Ork stuff can be summed up as "we didn't sell as many of those buggies as we wanted".

So i am not the only one thinking that

What? But buggies were explained as

*Checks Great Games Workshop Rules Imbalance Conspiracy Flowchart*

"Games Workshop knew they'd sell so they gave them crap rules on purpose since they were a Sure Thing!"

HOW could bad rules have POSSIBLY affected their sales figures???

No, no silly! GW makes the new stuff overpowered to sell them to veteran players. The brand-new, meta-dominating buggies confirm this tread. GW will now increase their cost to bring it into line, now that the crafty plan has gotten people to buy the new models.

the funny part about this....buggies went up in price. They were 45USD now theyre 50....

Voss wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I find Ork players caring a lot about using the right terminology for orks giant walkers funny because I really can't imagine orks being very strict themselves in the terminology ^^.

I believe that you'll get a really close look at your mek bosses' big choppa if you call his gargant a dread.

or assume his god icon patronage wrongly.

Nah. Any warboss who can explain the difference between Gork and Mork is lying through his teef (or more likely, someone else's teef).

Gork is brutal but cunnin' an' Mork is cunnin' but brutal. Any git knows that, ya panzee.

the_scotsman wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Honestly, a lot of the Ork stuff can be summed up as "we didn't sell as many of those buggies as we wanted".

So i am not the only one thinking that

What? But buggies were explained as

*Checks Great Games Workshop Rules Imbalance Conspiracy Flowchart*

"Games Workshop knew they'd sell so they gave them crap rules on purpose since they were a Sure Thing!"

HOW could bad rules have POSSIBLY affected their sales figures???

Yes it's a proper insane conspiracy theory to believe that GW use basic demand manipulation in the sale of their product.

Perhaps they didn't have the stock to sell buggies if they had decent rules before? Perhaps they used the buggies as an exception for all of those people who actually believe that GW don't make rules to sell specific models.

To answer your question it's quite simple - buggies sold before because they were a new kit for a faction whose player base are passionate/not rules driven.

The sales of buggies dried up over the last year because no one needed more than 1 of each (max) as collectors items. Now GW are making them more attractive to field so players are encouraged to buy more. This isn't complex stuff.

On CA - though the Buggy drops are welcome, they aren't enough and with other factions dropping significant points overall its a wash. I don't see the point in CA to be honest - its supposed to be a meta adjusting tool using point changes but it's always 6 months (minimum) too late. Why would I buy this for anything other than the missions?

the alternative to the conspiracy theory would just be that GW does not know what they are doing, how to write rules, how to price units and never plays their own game (with the rules they sell and want others to play it)

for a lot of poeple the conspiracy theory that all those things are intented is much more comfortable than accepting that they are investing a lot of money into a game that is bad because the devs have no clue and don't care

 Jidmah wrote:

Voss wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I find Ork players caring a lot about using the right terminology for orks giant walkers funny because I really can't imagine orks being very strict themselves in the terminology ^^.

I believe that you'll get a really close look at your mek bosses' big choppa if you call his gargant a dread.

or assume his god icon patronage wrongly.

Nah. Any warboss who can explain the difference between Gork and Mork is lying through his teef (or more likely, someone else's teef).

Gork is brutal but cunnin' an' Mork is cunnin' but brutal. Any git knows that, ya panzee.

Zog off, it's da utha way a'round!



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kodos wrote:
the alternative to the conspiracy theory would just be that GW does not know what they are doing, how to write rules, how to price units and never plays their own game (with the rules they sell and want others to play it)

for a lot of poeple the conspiracy theory that all those things are intented is much more comfortable than accepting that they are investing a lot of money into a game that is bad because the devs have no clue and don't care

Need we remind you off the wratihknight developper for GW?
No?

We know that GW suits intervene if it fits their perception of what's selling.


However i do agree that GW also often has not a good enough grasp to actually make rules it seems.
And the playtesting is horrendous / respectively the conclusions drawn from playtesting are horrendous.

 kodos wrote:
the alternative to the conspiracy theory would just be that GW does not know what they are doing, how to write rules, how to price units and never plays their own game (with the rules they sell and want others to play it)

for a lot of poeple the conspiracy theory that all those things are intented is much more comfortable than accepting that they are investing a lot of money into a game that is bad because the devs have no clue and don't care

Problem is GW is changing things too well for sake of selling models to believe they just happen to appear experts on that by random chance.

tneva82 wrote:

 kodos wrote:
the alternative to the conspiracy theory would just be that GW does not know what they are doing, how to write rules, how to price units and never plays their own game (with the rules they sell and want others to play it)

for a lot of poeple the conspiracy theory that all those things are intented is much more comfortable than accepting that they are investing a lot of money into a game that is bad because the devs have no clue and don't care

Problem is GW is changing things too well for sake of selling models to believe they just happen to appear experts on that by random chance.

We know that suits will intervene if they want to sell something.
We also know that GW has playtesting.

If you ask me it's more a question of the wrong end of the company making the game desicions for monetary sakes alone, not realising that if the game would be better balanced it would get a whole slew more custommers on top of those that allready exist.

I suspect on top of that the devs hold points rather low, there's no proof of it but consider AOS launched WITHOUT points, and that 8th edition launched with PL so that "points are optional!" I think the devs have quietly soured on points over all.

tneva82 wrote:

 kodos wrote:
the alternative to the conspiracy theory would just be that GW does not know what they are doing, how to write rules, how to price units and never plays their own game (with the rules they sell and want others to play it)

for a lot of poeple the conspiracy theory that all those things are intented is much more comfortable than accepting that they are investing a lot of money into a game that is bad because the devs have no clue and don't care

Problem is GW is changing things too well for sake of selling models to believe they just happen to appear experts on that by random chance.

If not for the face plenty of models never sold well and are consistently bad, including some of the newer ones, this works have been plausible.
Heck, for a long time Primaris as a whole sucked! GW rules team are just not good at it. They are the same couple of guys for ages and they still fail not only to balance, but to keep basic writing consistentcy

tneva82 wrote:

 kodos wrote:
the alternative to the conspiracy theory would just be that GW does not know what they are doing, how to write rules, how to price units and never plays their own game (with the rules they sell and want others to play it)

for a lot of poeple the conspiracy theory that all those things are intented is much more comfortable than accepting that they are investing a lot of money into a game that is bad because the devs have no clue and don't care

Problem is GW is changing things too well for sake of selling models to believe they just happen to appear experts on that by random chance.

Assuming the "they try to sell models" theory, they are trying to sell the ancient deff kopta now?
They also dropped points on almost all ork models deemed unplayable, none of them are old models nor in dire need of additional sales. There is as much evidence for them actually trying to make bad units better rather than just dropping points to sell models.

Plot twist: Making bad units better inevitably sells more models.

 Jidmah wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 kodos wrote:
the alternative to the conspiracy theory would just be that GW does not know what they are doing, how to write rules, how to price units and never plays their own game (with the rules they sell and want others to play it)

for a lot of poeple the conspiracy theory that all those things are intented is much more comfortable than accepting that they are investing a lot of money into a game that is bad because the devs have no clue and don't care

Problem is GW is changing things too well for sake of selling models to believe they just happen to appear experts on that by random chance.

Assuming the "they try to sell models" theory, they are trying to sell the ancient deff kopta now?
They also dropped points on almost all ork models deemed unplayable, none of them are old models nor in dire need of additional sales. There is as much evidence for them actually trying to make bad units better rather than just dropping points to sell models.

Plot twist: Making bad units better inevitably sells more models.

Or perhaps is a mix and not as black and white as people make out?

New models are generally OP because they want them to sell. We've seen this time and time again AND we have a literal GW developer telling us as much. I'm not sure what more evidence people want.

GW wants to at least pretend to be balancing the game (for new GW social cred) so they buff other units arbitrarily.

As to the Ork units they buffed - excluding the Buggies we had drops on Dreads and Kans - both feature heavily in the Apoc set (that probably didn't sell very well because they were awfully pointed units previously) and dreads are in the starter set. Flash Gits are relatively expensive, new and are likely in stock because they weren't exactly formidable on release last edition. Koptas are impossible to get ahold of outside of a weird, US exclusive set and eBay if I'm not mistaken. Note that one of our most competitive units, that is required for competitive Ork play at the top level(Mek Guns) is also one of the most expensive £ to point.

Koptas are impossible to get ahold of outside of a weird, US exclusive set and eBay if I'm not mistaken

you can also still buy the old metal ones... they really do need to replace it though,

BrianDavion wrote:

Koptas are impossible to get ahold of outside of a weird, US exclusive set and eBay if I'm not mistaken

you can also still buy the old metal ones... they really do need to replace it though,

Well exactly. Perhaps they want to shift the last dregs of their old, metal stock?

Not Online!!! wrote:

Need we remind you off the wratihknight developper for GW?
No?

We know that GW suits intervene if it fits their perception of what's selling.

It's really disingenuous to cite this as basis for an argument when the same person who told that story also made the following points at the same time:

The senior person who made that decision has since left the company

"I should stress that that sort of thing didn't happen very often"

"Thankfully, that was the old days. Things are very different now!"

Many of the most grevious rules slip-ups of the 8E-era have largely been a result of either FW's rush job with their indexes, or unforeseen interactions of multiple unit/faction-level rules that should have been examined in more detail.

This 'conspiracy' is dumb and is far better explained by paraphrasing Hanlon's razor. Perhaps this can be Lenton's razor:

Never attribute to greed what can adequately be explained by lacking attention to detail.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:


New models are generally OP because they want them to sell.

I bet I can find more examples of recent new models that had over-costed or ineffective rules on release than you can find new OP models. Like, it won't even be difficult.

 xttz wrote:
Many of the most grevious rules slip-ups of the 8E-era have largely been a result of either FW's rush job with their indexes, or unforeseen interactions of multiple unit/faction-level rules that should have been examined in more detail.

In fairness to FW, everything I've heard indicates they got very little notice of 8th edition coming around, and were working on further 7th edition material at the time - it wasn't a rush job because they wanted it to be, but due to poor internal communication at Lenton.

Out of the new phobos/vanguard stuff for primaris the only thing that had OP rules from day 1 is the Invictor. Its a dakka predator but cheaper that can fight well in melee and have scout deployment.

The infiltrators, incursors, suppressors, eliminators and characters did not have great rules. Eliminators have been buffed so are now great.

For the other primaris its a mixed bag. Reivers suck. Agressors and Inceptors got buffed but still very niched units and there are better options for both. Agressors could also be subjected to huge indirect nerfs if they FAQ master of ambush or the deepstrike stratagems since without those they arent even good. Helblasters are an expensive trap unit. Redemptors arent bad but you have better dreads for shooting and better units for melee. Most of the non named primaris characters are quite bad since they all follow "no model no rules" to a teeth and have bad equipment like powersword and plasma pistols on 80pt models or might even lack a melee weapon.

Whats left is the repulsors and intercessors. Intercessors are now great but they didnt start that way. Its multiple buffs and point changes that have got them there. The repulsor executioner is quite good and have been that way from day 1 but its an outlier together with the Invictor.

2 out of like 20 datasheets have had rules good enough to push the models only by the fact of their rules. The rest havent and even with some buffs I would say its still only 3 that stand out now. Invictors, eliminators and Executioners.

The primaris range they have been pushing down our throat disprove the conspiracy. I dont think they try to make bad rules either but that its more of a coin toss if a unit gets good rules or not.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Perhaps they used the buggies as an exception for all of those people who actually believe that GW don't make rules to sell specific models.

Let me guess, entire primaris range was 'exception' for years too? Especially reivers to this very day?

I can't think of a single new 8th edition model that was in any way broken on release (with maybe a single exception of Kelermorph), yes, knights were undercosted at start but the biggest offenders were the old kits and new Armigers were hardly the hotness.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Need we remind you off the wratihknight developper for GW?

I like how people still cling to murky, off hand comment thrown by someone who no longer works at GW (and can't exactly be disproved by anyone still working there, not that people looking for conspiracies would believe it anyway). The actual reality is that every single Eldar book since 4th edition was broken in some way by Phil Kelly, rules writer who has no idea how math works and only cares about winning matches with his pet faction.

Do tell, were OP aspectwings of 7th edition meant as new model selling tactic? Oh wait, all of the aspects are ancient, cheap gak. Was Reaper spam of 8th selling new models? Wave Serpents of 6th? Current Crimson Hunters? Windriders (they only got new models halfway in being broken)? These are all old, cheap models, and maybe, just maybe, the wratihknights were just accidental new model in avalanche of cheese that were these books...

 Irbis wrote:
(with maybe a single exception of Kelermorph)

Which died to a stiff breeze and apparently lead to the entire army being nerfed into oblivion due to turn 1 ambush being disallowed.

Despite the screaming, kelermorphs at best killed a character and then promptly died. If anything they're a great example of just how much offense is under valued right now, but no more broken than the cost of a lascannon.

 xttz wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:


New models are generally OP because they want them to sell.

I bet I can find more examples of recent new models that had over-costed or ineffective rules on release than you can find new OP models. Like, it won't even be difficult.

Crack on with that mate.

I've done this list before. You'd be surprised.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Irbis wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Perhaps they used the buggies as an exception for all of those people who actually believe that GW don't make rules to sell specific models.

Let me guess, entire primaris range was 'exception' for years too? Especially reivers to this very day?

I can't think of a single new 8th edition model that was in any way broken on release (with maybe a single exception of Kelermorph), yes, knights were undercosted at start but the biggest offenders were the old kits and new Armigers were hardly the hotness.

How quickly people 'forget' the Castellan domination meta.

And there is a difference between 'OP' and 'broken'. Don't put words in my mouth - the new unit doesn't have to be broken to be pointed to sell.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Irbis wrote:

I like how people still cling to murky, off hand comment thrown by someone who no longer works at GW (and can't exactly be disproved by anyone still working there, not that people looking for conspiracies would believe it anyway). The actual reality is that every single Eldar book since 4th edition was broken in some way by Phil Kelly, rules writer who has no idea how math works and only cares about winning matches with his pet faction.

Oh yes. That makes way more sense. Despite a statement from an ex employee literally explaining how management told him to point a unit so it sold more, the truth is that a particular person who works for GW loves his 'pet faction' so much he writes rules so he always wins. Its gotta be that! How silly we have been to not see this obvious truth.