Switch Theme:

Coming back to 40k after 15 years Away - Complex, and a bit disappointed  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And that's changed so much now.


It kinda of has. They still have a long road ahead, but 9th has seen quite a diversity of placing armies and lists.


I agree. I just wish they'd quit it with those gak Metawatch articles though. The propaganda arm has never been so busy.


Today's was pretty bad.

Like the last one on first turn advantage article wasn't lying, but it was twisting data to fit the narrative and I don't enjoy that.

One would hope this tournament would further cement the ongoing issues, but there's so much variety that unless DE sweep the top tables ( they won't ) we won't see urgent action on them until the next CA.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/24 00:11:03


   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And that's changed so much now.


It kinda of has. They still have a long road ahead, but 9th has seen quite a diversity of placing armies and lists.


I agree. I just wish they'd quit it with those gak Metawatch articles though. The propaganda arm has never been so busy.


Today's was pretty bad.

Like the last one on first turn advantage article wasn't lying, but it was twisting data to fit the narrative and I don't enjoy that.

One would hope this tournament would further cement the ongoing issues, but there's so much variety that unless DE sweep the top tables ( they won't ) we won't see urgent action on them until the next CA.


Getting certain vibes from those metawatch articles:
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And that's changed so much now.


It kinda of has. They still have a long road ahead, but 9th has seen quite a diversity of placing armies and lists.


I agree. I just wish they'd quit it with those gak Metawatch articles though. The propaganda arm has never been so busy.


Today's was pretty bad.

Like the last one on first turn advantage article wasn't lying, but it was twisting data to fit the narrative and I don't enjoy that.

One would hope this tournament would further cement the ongoing issues, but there's so much variety that unless DE sweep the top tables ( they won't ) we won't see urgent action on them until the next CA.


Was that the one saying "old codexes are 100% A-OK! "? Or is there a new one peddling a different line of now?
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Was that the one saying "old codexes are 100% A-OK! "? Or is there a new one peddling a different line of now?


I think so. The one where they were talking about terrain and first turn advantage, but noted that later rounds the first turn advantage was rather pronounced.

Now, there's lots of reasons why this could be - those players might be willing to deploy aggressively and game on it or they are more likely to play armies with higher mobility ( DE ). So it isn't simple, but the way they presented it was bleck.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/24 00:42:19


   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I think so. The one where they were talking about terrain and first turn advantage, but noted that later rounds the first turn advantage was rather pronounced.

Now, there's lots of reasons why this could be - those players might be willing to deploy aggressively and game on it or they are more likely to play armies with higher mobility ( DE ). So it isn't simple, but the way they presented it was bleck.


Yeah, I found it. Basically reads: "Our terrain fixes everything! ". Yeah, sure, okie dokie.

And agreed, DE won't be getting any nerfs until the next CA, because that's the only way to fix them: points. They just get too much stuff for too little.
   
Made in us
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord





In My Lab

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
I think so. The one where they were talking about terrain and first turn advantage, but noted that later rounds the first turn advantage was rather pronounced.

Now, there's lots of reasons why this could be - those players might be willing to deploy aggressively and game on it or they are more likely to play armies with higher mobility ( DE ). So it isn't simple, but the way they presented it was bleck.


Yeah, I found it. Basically reads: "Our terrain fixes everything! ". Yeah, sure, okie dokie.

And agreed, DE won't be getting any nerfs until the next CA, because that's the only way to fix them: points. They just get too much stuff for too little.
Honestly, I think DE need a new Dex.

It won't happen anytime soon, but they're a terrible combination of really flipping powerful and really damn boring. They're good, for sure-but so much of their stuff is DULL. Blandly strong, not interestingly balanced.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





I'd normally try to spin something positive, but GW doing metawatch feels really ridiculous.

Oh well, anyone that truly cares about the meta gets their tourney info from other established sites.
   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

drbored wrote:
I'd normally try to spin something positive, but GW doing metawatch feels really ridiculous.

Oh well, anyone that truly cares about the meta gets their tourney info from other established sites.

I would hate it less if they were more transparent about things and included some designer insight about what they're seeing and how they're looking to address it any of the negative play experience stuff they see rather than trying and claim the game is perfect and is better than ever.

It feels like someone with a degree in marketing is pushing the metawatch articles as a way to tell customers that the game isn't the problem, the way they're playing it is so if they just played it like GW intended then they'd be happier. Then again that could be the part of me that's cynical of GW the company speaking. I guess seeing the James Hewitt interviews helped me understand the faults of the company behind the scenes more (like how White Dwarf led to the company splitting the original Ad Mech into two codexes or Necromunda being launched untested and split into three books) especially when some of those same patterns keep cropping up (LRL and Sisters of Battle both seeing new books in less than a year just to add the rest of their army), and the company insisting that they need to monetize the rules, or sticking to IGOUGO because it's simplier, not because it makes the game better (I've heard mention that Andy Chambers has a designer's note that BFG plays better as an AA, and scuttlebutt that he wanted to bring AA into 40k back in 4th but if that's true some people in the studio are married to the idea of IGOUGO even if it makes the game worse).
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.

Not saying GW is the devil, that would be crazy, just saying they did their job well of selling new GW. They care about as much about the state of their game as they always have, they just say a lot more about it now and try and fluff away worries of concerns.

Hence they say " Well this is too strong, but it's because of this..so buy these ! " They know enough to know the issues but in the end don't really care to address them right away. As well with the release schedule even slowed down like it is now is moving way faster than many years prior.

Why really fix anything when they can just sell fixes in new supplement/dlc/books etc. Nerf the largest issues then keep the churn rolling, keep making new issues along the way but people are happy as they always have new hope and new stuff to buy.

It's a cynical view but it does feel like their community arm is way more about optics and less about actual substance, or caring.
   
Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard





washington state USA

I think Andy's work Post GW speaks volumes on what he could have wanted to do.



GAMES-DUST1947/infinity/B5 wars/epic 40K/5th ed 40K/victory at sea/warmachine/battle tactics/monpoc/battletech/battlefleet gothic/castles in the sky,/heavy gear 
   
Made in us
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord






drbored wrote:
I'd normally try to spin something positive, but GW doing metawatch feels really ridiculous.

Oh well, anyone that truly cares about the meta gets their tourney info from other established sites.


Tournament edition 40k! This is what you get, the proverbial monkey's paw has curled and left us with this, no matter how many people try to deny it but the tournament crowd are the horse that GW has backed, so we're stuck with this and the continual ramming of that square peg into 40k's round hole for the foreseeable future.




A GW fan walks into a bar, buys the same drink as yesterday but pays more.

""Unite" is a human word, ... join me or die."

If you break apart my or anyone else's posts line by line I will not read them. 
   
Made in dk
Pyro Pilot of a Triach Stalker






 Grimtuff wrote:
drbored wrote:
I'd normally try to spin something positive, but GW doing metawatch feels really ridiculous.

Oh well, anyone that truly cares about the meta gets their tourney info from other established sites.


Tournament edition 40k! This is what you get, the proverbial monkey's paw has curled and left us with this, no matter how many people try to deny it but the tournament crowd are the horse that GW has backed, so we're stuck with this and the continual ramming of that square peg into 40k's round hole for the foreseeable future.


If the game was designed for tournaments you wouldn't need to write spin to make the game seem good for competitive, it would actually be good for competitive play. The reason the spin is needed is because it's the casual edition but GW still wants people to pay for books as if they're balanced despite them having just been hammered out with no regard for competitive balance.
   
Made in ie
Ruthless Rafkin





 vict0988 wrote:
 Grimtuff wrote:
drbored wrote:
I'd normally try to spin something positive, but GW doing metawatch feels really ridiculous.

Oh well, anyone that truly cares about the meta gets their tourney info from other established sites.


Tournament edition 40k! This is what you get, the proverbial monkey's paw has curled and left us with this, no matter how many people try to deny it but the tournament crowd are the horse that GW has backed, so we're stuck with this and the continual ramming of that square peg into 40k's round hole for the foreseeable future.


If the game was designed for tournaments you wouldn't need to write spin to make the game seem good for competitive, it would actually be good for competitive play. The reason the spin is needed is because it's the casual edition but GW still wants people to pay for books as if they're balanced despite them having just been hammered out with no regard for competitive balance.


The game is absolutely designed with the intention to appease tournament players, GW is just incompetent/cheap/lazy.. Why do you think the Meta Watch articles exist at all? WarCom is just an advertising site, do you expect them to put up articles admitting they can't write decent rules?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/24 07:56:26



 
   
Made in dk
Pyro Pilot of a Triach Stalker






 Sim-Life wrote:
 vict0988 wrote:
 Grimtuff wrote:
drbored wrote:
I'd normally try to spin something positive, but GW doing metawatch feels really ridiculous.

Oh well, anyone that truly cares about the meta gets their tourney info from other established sites.


Tournament edition 40k! This is what you get, the proverbial monkey's paw has curled and left us with this, no matter how many people try to deny it but the tournament crowd are the horse that GW has backed, so we're stuck with this and the continual ramming of that square peg into 40k's round hole for the foreseeable future.


If the game was designed for tournaments you wouldn't need to write spin to make the game seem good for competitive, it would actually be good for competitive play. The reason the spin is needed is because it's the casual edition but GW still wants people to pay for books as if they're balanced despite them having just been hammered out with no regard for competitive balance.


The game is absolutely designed with the intention to appease tournament players, GW is just incompetent/cheap/lazy.. Why do you think the Meta Watch articles exist at all? WarCom is just an advertising site, do you expect them to put up articles admitting they can't write decent rules?

it's the casual edition but GW still wants people to pay for books as if they're balanced

If GW admitted it was a casual edition and that the books they produced weren't tested properly and ended up being unbalanced garbage because of it, competitive players might wake up and decide to take action by doing a boycott and playing without stupid releases like the AdMech/Wych Cult bonus campaign supplement, just like IH and IF should have been banned from competitive play when they were first released to make GW give a gak about balance. Casual players are getting what they want, they can represent their fluffy armies using a mountain of rules.
   
Made in ie
Ruthless Rafkin





 vict0988 wrote:
 Sim-Life wrote:
 vict0988 wrote:
 Grimtuff wrote:
drbored wrote:
I'd normally try to spin something positive, but GW doing metawatch feels really ridiculous.

Oh well, anyone that truly cares about the meta gets their tourney info from other established sites.


Tournament edition 40k! This is what you get, the proverbial monkey's paw has curled and left us with this, no matter how many people try to deny it but the tournament crowd are the horse that GW has backed, so we're stuck with this and the continual ramming of that square peg into 40k's round hole for the foreseeable future.


If the game was designed for tournaments you wouldn't need to write spin to make the game seem good for competitive, it would actually be good for competitive play. The reason the spin is needed is because it's the casual edition but GW still wants people to pay for books as if they're balanced despite them having just been hammered out with no regard for competitive balance.


The game is absolutely designed with the intention to appease tournament players, GW is just incompetent/cheap/lazy.. Why do you think the Meta Watch articles exist at all? WarCom is just an advertising site, do you expect them to put up articles admitting they can't write decent rules?

it's the casual edition but GW still wants people to pay for books as if they're balanced

If GW admitted it was a casual edition and that the books they produced weren't tested properly and ended up being unbalanced garbage because of it, competitive players might wake up and decide to take action by doing a boycott and playing without stupid releases like the AdMech/Wych Cult bonus campaign supplement, just like IH and IF should have been banned from competitive play when they were first released to make GW give a gak about balance. Casual players are getting what they want, they can represent their fluffy armies using a mountain of rules.


Why do you think casual players don't want balance? Or that we want mountains of rules? Have you even thought through what you're saying? Also competitive GW players are the biggest GW drones around. GW could have 10th Ed be based on resolving everything via Rock, Paper,.Scissors and they'd still try and chase the meta.


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




I don't really mind the metawatch articles, I just never feel they are that perceptive.

I'd love GW to write articles to the tune of:

"1. What is happening in the competitive space.
2. Why is it happening in the competitive space?
3. As a result, what changes, if any, do we think could enter the game in the future."

Now I don't imagine we'd ever get it - GW aren't going to say "melt down your DE collections, we're nerfing them into the ground tomorrow" - but still. We could get a window into their thinking - and a conversation about the game, faction and unit balance, fun etc.

Writing things like "look, Dave won 2 out of 5 games with his GSC, every faction can compete" just feels wrong. You can I think legitimately argue its more diverse than 40k has ever managed in the past (and is therefore the most balanced its ever been). But it doesn't change the fact certain factions are clearly bad.

The latest article for instance just feels like it lacks focus. "Terrain matters". But why and how? "Orks and Sisters might be good I guess?" I mean okay, but that's really quite thin.

I think the article wants to say "We've set up terrain such its really hard to shoot your entire army at your opponents entire army, so things often find they can't shoot at all - or are shooting things they are inefficient against. This means people can survive long enough to win a board-control game even in matchups that faction and that approach wouldn't normally be favoured". But it never really sets that down in words of one syllable.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Sim-Life wrote:
Why do you think casual players don't want balance? Or that we want mountains of rules? Have you even thought through what you're saying? Also competitive GW players are the biggest GW drones around. GW could have 10th Ed be based on resolving everything via Rock, Paper,.Scissors and they'd still try and chase the meta.


Is that why GW sales were so high in 6th and 7th?

   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

 AngryAngel80 wrote:
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.

Not saying GW is the devil, that would be crazy, just saying they did their job well of selling new GW. They care about as much about the state of their game as they always have, they just say a lot more about it now and try and fluff away worries of concerns.

Hence they say " Well this is too strong, but it's because of this..so buy these ! " They know enough to know the issues but in the end don't really care to address them right away. As well with the release schedule even slowed down like it is now is moving way faster than many years prior.

Why really fix anything when they can just sell fixes in new supplement/dlc/books etc. Nerf the largest issues then keep the churn rolling, keep making new issues along the way but people are happy as they always have new hope and new stuff to buy.

It's a cynical view but it does feel like their community arm is way more about optics and less about actual substance, or caring.

I feel that this is a bit reductive of the studio and honest sounds like maliciousness while I prefer to assume ignorance being the issue. The studio team being insulated from the general public and not being aware of the real problems seems more likely since Cruddace was on record as being shocked by the amount of spam the tournament scene engaged with when he went to one of the major tournaments pre-COVID. That said marketing going to market and WHC is GW's marketing arm.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Grimtuff wrote:
drbored wrote:
I'd normally try to spin something positive, but GW doing metawatch feels really ridiculous.

Oh well, anyone that truly cares about the meta gets their tourney info from other established sites.


Tournament edition 40k! This is what you get, the proverbial monkey's paw has curled and left us with this, no matter how many people try to deny it but the tournament crowd are the horse that GW has backed, so we're stuck with this and the continual ramming of that square peg into 40k's round hole for the foreseeable future.


From the Goonhammer interviews James Hewitt mentioned that in the post-Kirby era the studio is being led by Pete Foley who was their competitive guy in the studio, so it fits with the tournament focused mentality they've had, even if they haven't capitalized on it well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 vict0988 wrote:
 Grimtuff wrote:
drbored wrote:
I'd normally try to spin something positive, but GW doing metawatch feels really ridiculous.

Oh well, anyone that truly cares about the meta gets their tourney info from other established sites.


Tournament edition 40k! This is what you get, the proverbial monkey's paw has curled and left us with this, no matter how many people try to deny it but the tournament crowd are the horse that GW has backed, so we're stuck with this and the continual ramming of that square peg into 40k's round hole for the foreseeable future.


If the game was designed for tournaments you wouldn't need to write spin to make the game seem good for competitive, it would actually be good for competitive play. The reason the spin is needed is because it's the casual edition but GW still wants people to pay for books as if they're balanced despite them having just been hammered out with no regard for competitive balance.

This is because GW still thinks rules should be a source of revenue when rules should be the only thing they don't monetize.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/09/24 12:50:37


 
   
Made in ie
Ruthless Rafkin





 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Sim-Life wrote:
Why do you think casual yplayers don't want balance? Or that we want mountains of rules? Have you even thought through what you're saying? Also competitive GW players are the biggest GW drones around. GW could have 10th Ed be based on resolving everything via Rock, Paper,.Scissors and they'd still try and chase the meta.


Is that why GW sales were so high in 6th and 7th?


Did tournaments stop due to lack of attendance in 6th and 7th? Or was there a bunch of tournament players buying a Decurions-worth of Necrons?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/24 13:36:40



 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Sim-Life wrote:
Did tournaments stop due to lack of attendance in 6th and 7th? Or was there a bunch of tournament players buying a Decurions-worth of Necrons?


People will find ways to play with their miniatures. I'll never be one of the ones to buy gakloads of models to "make it work" and neither will the majority, which is why GW suffered.

   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: