40k New Edition Summary - 14th June 17: Lord Duncan paints Primaris in Gravis/non-codex SM focus

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.

**thejughead**

Do you even 40k Brah?

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."

I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."

**Desubot**

Fantastic no more formations... maybe.

im going to assume some will have keywords like Imperium or Space marines or even more specific. hopefully some with costs or otherwise very light bonuses.

command points sound interesting. im hoping for some interesting mechanics.

**ClockworkZion**

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I will miss the more fluffy detachments.. But I can say this is for the better overall. So long as I keep my Legion benefits.

Chapter Tactics and Legion Traits were confirmed to still exist. And from a comment on Facebook today apparently more specific Legion Rules will be dropping too.

**v0iddrgn**

These Detachments are basically FOC's. They give benefits for following these FOC's because they want to curve the appeal of having the convoluted mess of 6 different detachments that were so prevalent in 7th. Feels more like going back to 5th edition, AKA Tournament edition.

**ZebioLizard2**

ClockworkZion wrote:
ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I will miss the more fluffy detachments.. But I can say this is for the better overall. So long as I keep my Legion benefits.

Chapter Tactics and Legion Traits were confirmed to still exist. And from a comment on Facebook today apparently more specific Legion Rules will be dropping too.

Oh? Is there anything specified? I would hate to lose Combat Drugs after finally getting them after so long.

**JohnnyHell**

No formations... for now. Wait for the first Faction Codex. Bound to include exclusive Detachments.

**Jambles**

JohnnyHell wrote:
No formations... for now. Wait for the first Faction Codex. Bound to include exclusive Detachments.

Or at least some way to use your command points in a faction-specific way. I'm anticipating things like Waaagh! moves and the like to be triggered by a command point spend.

**streetsamurai**

Yes. No more formation. These things pretty much broke 7th edition, were confusing, and restricted creativity. what a great news

**Liberal_Perturabo**

Mr Morden wrote:
Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."

I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."

One of the greatest sources of complaints about 7th ed was Formations - - specifically the power dex ones - are they the ones that you want kept in?

Many people will be very happy to see that exploit removed - of course it won't suit everyone.

Yeah the same company offering refunds on Codexes.

They are the ones I want to be fixed. But it seems like it goes against modern GW's politics of rather not giving a damn and putting a large body of work and potential on fire, so they can dumb down and simplify things so that 40k would be more like glorified AoS.

Oh yeah, a refund for a codex bought up to two months prior. I mean who cares about gethering storm or traitor legions books (would your remind me how long were those books valid btw), right? It's not like those were hyped up at all. Really, if you've bought one of those you have only yourself to blame - you've been silly enough to expect consumer friendly politics and not being instantly screwed over in a blink of an eye.

**Vaktathi**

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."

I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."

One of the greatest sources of complaints about 7th ed was Formations - - specifically the power dex ones - are they the ones that you want kept in?

Many people will be very happy to see that exploit removed - of course it won't suit everyone.

Yeah the same company offering refunds on Codexes.

They are the ones I want to be fixed. But it seems like it goes against modern GW's politics of rather not giving a damn and putting a large body of work and potential on fire, so they can dumb down and simplify things so that 40k would be more like glorified AoS.

Oh yeah, a refund for a codex bought up to two months prior. I mean who cares about gethering storm or traitor legions books (would your remind me how long were those books valid btw), right? It's not like those were hyped up at all. Really, if you've bought one of those you have only yourself to blame - you've been silly enough to expect consumer friendly politics and not being instantly screwed over in a blink of an eye.

7E was broken, fundamentally so, and salvaging the books wasnt worth it. Breaking cleanly was the best way to go, particularly as so much 7E material was just marketing crap to push webstore bundles.

The blame should go on GW for creating the mess, not fixing it. A clean break had to happen.

Besides, it's hardly the first time they've invalidated large amounts of material in a short timespan

**Liberal_Perturabo**

warboss wrote:
Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."

I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."

Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.

So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?

**Vaktathi**

Models are models, physical items that dont change often, rules change. I cant run Tank Hunting Autocannon havocs anymore either or run Obliterators as my elites for Iron Warriors, not the end of the world.

Formations, as they existed in 7E, were inherently broken, there was no fixing "buy X get free Y!"

Few armies survive edition changes intact in terms of rules.

**Galas**

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
warboss wrote:
Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."

I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."

Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.

So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?

Because formations really don't add ANYTHING to the game. They are just another layer of rules for no real reason to exist. I despise that they still exist in AoS. At least there they have points.
Formations should only be something of Narrative games to create fluffy things.

**ClockworkZion**

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I will miss the more fluffy detachments.. But I can say this is for the better overall. So long as I keep my Legion benefits.

Chapter Tactics and Legion Traits were confirmed to still exist. And from a comment on Facebook today apparently more specific Legion Rules will be dropping too.
Oh? Is there anything specified? I would hate to lose Combat Drugs after finally getting them after so long.

Nothing specifically was mentioned but they were very clear that the rules that give different colored marines their flavor would still exist. Which is frankly a wonderful thing as it reduces mirror matches.

**Liberal_Perturabo**

Vaktathi wrote:

The blame should go on GW for creating the mess, not fixing it. A clean break had to happen.

As I said, if they are capable of complete unit rebalance, what stoppes them from complete formation rebalance except the reasons I've pointed out?

Vaktathi wrote:

Besides, it's hardly the first time they've invalidated large amounts of material in a short timespan

It doesn't in any way make it an ok thing to do though. Not to mention it was being said that 8th was in the making for 2 years so it's not like they had to rush it out.

**Pilum**

+1 for "formations - nice idea, poorly executed" here. Could see where they were trying to go with it, but... meh.

For those getting hung up on the numbers, it's also possible you're keying in to the wrong words. The phrasing is "12 game-wide formations".

If it's "12 you can use any time, +2 'if you both agree to play this type of game' ones" then that means that all statements are true.

**Liberal_Perturabo**

Galas wrote:

Because formations really don't add ANYTHING to the game. They are just another layer of rules for no real reason to exist. I despise that they still exist in AoS. At least there they have points.
Formations should only be something of Narrative games to create fluffy things.

They add tactical depth. They create new playstiles. A good formation will have sensible restrictions while compensating for it with sensible benefits. It's only whoever writes the rules's fault for making insanely OP things run wild, not the system itself.

**streetsamurai**

changemod wrote:
Frankly I've found the attempts to shut down all negativity far more unpleasant to read than any ammount of the negativity itself.

-This is a discussion board, positive and negative views are all part of the discussion.
-It is not unreasonable to comment on rules as they come out, or speculate on how they fit together. We'll get a fuller picture as we go, but there's no crime on commenting on the current picture.
-The idea that one must have perfect information to have an informed view is -sometimes- correct, but is being overused here. To use a fairly non-inflammatory analogy: You need to have a lot of information about Indiana Jones 4 to definitively comment on it's quality, but hearing without seeing it that it uses aliens is enough to comment on the idea of introducing aliens to a franchise without them, and how you think that could impact things.
-A lot is changing, and certain patterns are emerging. These are things which will inevitably cause a lot of negative feeling amongst many, and someone who lashes out at every detail has every bit as much right to discuss the new edition as someone who is hyped up to the point where they'll defend every single aspect of it.

Great post. This phenomenon of having some posters who are adament on always defending GW from all kind of criticism, is weird to say the least, and also very annoying. Only explanation that I can guess is that they are a bit like groupies that live vicariously through some celebrities, but they are doing it through a company.

**Azreal13**

But no different than those that seem hell bent on painting literally every single detail in the worst possible light.

Neither is conducive to a constructive exchange.

EDIT
But lets not get sidetracked into complaining about complaining, as that would be off topic...

**labmouse42**

Kanluwen wrote:
It's unwelcome to me. I enjoyed formations.

I despise the "1 HQ 2 Troops" methodology. I loved Skitarii for not having an HQ.

I really dislike this change and think it is a huge step backwards.

This is a generic ORG. I'm sure there will be Skitarii ones without an HQ.

**EnTyme**

I'm both surprised and a little disappointed to see formations go away. I was hoping they would take the AoS route like they have will so many other aspects of the game and give formations points costs and require the army still fit the FOC.

**jreilly89**

"Formations are terrible, I want them gone!"

"Hey guys, no formations in the edition!"

"No, I want my formations back!"

Bravo, Dakka. Way to play the game.

**ClockworkZion**

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
warboss wrote:
Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."

I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."

Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.

So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?

Jervis stated on a Twitch Stream that all armies where worked on at the same time to better grind out the core mechanics of the game and balance everything. Some of the nonsense we know of now will likely change.

Heck, we already know weapon profiles are changing. It looks like if a ranged weapon isn't specifically anti-monster/vehicle it may not have a rend value.

**Azreal13**

EnTyme wrote:
I'm both surprised and a little disappointed to see formations go away. I was hoping they would take the AoS route like they have will so many other aspects of the game and give formations points costs and require the army still fit the FOC.

As others have mentioned, these are the vanilla formations, we may well see something that looks more like Formations in the faction books or later down the line in Codexes, hopefully with better balance and costs as necessary.

**streetsamurai**

jreilly89 wrote:
"Formations are terrible, I want them gone!"

"Hey guys, no formations in the edition!"

"No, I want my formations back!"

Bravo, Dakka. Way to play the game.

yeah, it's true that everyone on dakka has the same opinion. Brilliant observation

**Requizen**

streetsamurai wrote:
changemod wrote:
Frankly I've found the attempts to shut down all negativity far more unpleasant to read than any ammount of the negativity itself.

-This is a discussion board, positive and negative views are all part of the discussion.
-It is not unreasonable to comment on rules as they come out, or speculate on how they fit together. We'll get a fuller picture as we go, but there's no crime on commenting on the current picture.
-The idea that one must have perfect information to have an informed view is -sometimes- correct, but is being overused here. To use a fairly non-inflammatory analogy: You need to have a lot of information about Indiana Jones 4 to definitively comment on it's quality, but hearing without seeing it that it uses aliens is enough to comment on the idea of introducing aliens to a franchise without them, and how you think that could impact things.
-A lot is changing, and certain patterns are emerging. These are things which will inevitably cause a lot of negative feeling amongst many, and someone who lashes out at every detail has every bit as much right to discuss the new edition as someone who is hyped up to the point where they'll defend every single aspect of it.

Great post. This phenomenon of having some posters who are adament on always defending GW from all kind of criticism, is weird to say the least, and also very annoying. Only explanation that I can guess is that they are a bit like groupies that live vicariously through some celebrities, but they are doing it through a company.

I feel like it's less "defending GW" and more saying that it makes 0 sense to claim the sky is falling when there is less than half information and a month to go before we know everything.

It's one thing to say "Losing Formations is a bad change, I disagree with it", and another to say "By losing formations there is NO LONGER A WAY TO MAKE FLUFFY THEMED ARMIES BECAUSE THAT WAS THE ONLY WAY", when we haven't seen all the base Detachments nor any of the Faction Detachments. Similar with many of the other complaints, like the idea that we know everything about Morale from a post with 5 paragraphs and saying the sky is falling for X or Y army.

Sensationalist anger has no place. Neither does blind fanboyism, but just because you're arguing against one doesn't mean you exemplify the other.

**Azreal13**

jreilly89 wrote:
"Formations are terrible, I want them gone!"

"Hey guys, no formations in the edition!"

"No, I want my formations back!"

Bravo, Dakka. Way to play the game.

Almost like different people have different ideas, eh?

**Vaktathi**

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:

The blame should go on GW for creating the mess, not fixing it. A clean break had to happen.

As I said, if they are capable of complete unit rebalance, what stoppes them from complete formation rebalance except the reasons I've pointed out?

because the fundamental concept was broken, inherently so. There was no fixing what ultimately was a sales mechanism pushing power creep for webstore bundles.

Vaktathi wrote:

Besides, it's hardly the first time they've invalidated large amounts of material in a short timespan

It doesn't in any way make it an ok thing to do though.

It was a necessary thing, like it or not. Be mad at GW for pushing out garbage content in the first place, by all means. I am.

I'm not going to cry when they demolish the condemned ruins however.

More to the point, the quality of the material was so poor, and the prices so high, I quit buying new books two years ago. Dont support and incentivize garbage material and you wont be burned when it is invalidated

Not to mention it was being said that 8th was in the making for 2 years so it's not like they had to rush it out.

we have no idea whats true or not in that regard, but again, be mad at GW for pushing garbage in the first place by all means, but not for fixing it.

**JimOnMars**

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?

Lol. Oy.

You can still take the models you took in the formation in a detachment. You just lose the OP bonus.

What formation are you whining about?

**Liberal_Perturabo**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
warboss wrote:
Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."

I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."

Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.

So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?

Jervis stated on a Twitch Stream that all armies where worked on at the same time to better grind out the core mechanics of the game and balance everything. Some of the nonsense we know of now will likely change.

Heck, we already know weapon profiles are changing. It looks like if a ranged weapon isn't specifically anti-monster/vehicle it may not have a rend value.

But you need something to exist to apply changes to. Weapon profiles are still here. Formations are not.
Also I'm expressing my opinion on the information GW gives us at the moment. Sure, things may change drastically in the future. Or they may not. That's not the point.

Vaktathi wrote:
Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:

The blame should go on GW for creating the mess, not fixing it. A clean break had to happen.

As I said, if they are capable of complete unit rebalance, what stoppes them from complete formation rebalance except the reasons I've pointed out?
because the fundamental concept was broken, inherently so. There was no fixing what ultimately was a sales mechanism pushing power creep for webstore bundles.

What was so inherently broken about formations concept?