This is probably
TL/DR! I apologize. I tried to post it in multiple parts, but it was all collected into one long thread.
[PART 1]
Hey Reese, Mike Walsh here from Endless Gaming &
40K Wrecking Crew!
I just wanted to pipe in with a few small thoughts.
Firstly, I appreciate the efforts you are putting forth to find a BALANCED
40K. We all love the game. There are even some, like the both of us, who eventually went into business selling toy soldiers.
There is a huge outcry from the community right now. Both supporters and detractors of some of the new units, rules, and such that
GW has released. I think the single MOST and I can't stress enough MOST important thing we can do right now is to get people to stop, take a breath, and think about ask the following three questions 1. Where is
40K? 2. Where
40K is going? and 3. How do we help get it there?
I think we all agree there are broken combos in
40K. I think we can all agree that a wild west shootout, unlimited free reign style of
40K could leave to even more harsher combos.
But, is that better or is it worse? Can we find solutions to the problems we have within the new rules that are coming out? Maybe? Maybe not? I think somewhere in the middle is the answer.
[PART 2]
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Before we start banning models. Before we start restricting models. (And for the record I'm not against EITHER, but I think people are WAY jumping the gun.)
We need to figure out how we got here.
What is the cause of the current META GAME in
40K? Maybe a good place to start is the current size of most events. At 1750 and 1850 points the game is viewed as rock, paper, scissors. It can be very polarizing. Maybe we need to expand to a higher point total?
At 1750 and 1850 armies are not very balanced. The point total largely drives out anything but the most efficient, multi-purpose units, strong VOLTRON units. Also, most armies are not able to be well rounded enough to battle against psykers, flyers,
FMCs, 100+ models, 6 tanks, and VOLTRON. That is why armies such as; Demons, Eldar, Tau, and Necrons before them were the most powerful.
40K has always been very cyclical and we always have to strive to fine solutions to problems.
Screamer Star isn't fun to play against, but I have gone 3/4 - 0 versus it with my Rhino Ultramarines lately. Rhinos and combat squads were a great solution for me.
Gareth Hunt recently (at FOB) told me he went to Screamer Star because of the rise of Tau/Eldar. That was his solution to the problem.
Nick Rose and me discussed his army and changing it after Nova. He made a few different choices and won FOB. He included a second Wraithknight because he saw that as a solution to problems.
Similarly Tau became good because of their powerful guns, efficient costs, and for how well they matched up against Necrons. Which were the big bad guy in the room for 6 months last year.
I think we need to allow the game to continue to evolve without making up rules.
By expanding the game to 2,000 points or 2,250 points maybe more armies would be able to take units in their armies to solves problems. Similar to in Warmachine when in expanded from 35 to 50 and widely became more balanced. At 2,250 points you can play double force org and try to take units to kill hordes, flyers,
FMCS, and the such.
Maybe these new Escalation units can help evolve the game similarly to how Colossals helped fix some of the problems Warmachine faced before the expansion from 35 to 50 points.
[PART 3]
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Calming voices are probably the most important for
40K atm. It's most popular players, teams, content producers, need to come together and lead the charge in keeping the peace and making sure we can move forward in a productive manor.
The one thing we can all agree on I think is that the formations are a little WONKY.
LOL. Those seem like they could be legislated a bit. But, whose to say.
---
I understand Reese was in a tight spot for his
GT. I understand 100%! I think you made the right choice releasing a poll. A conservative approach in the immediate is safest. Reese used great word choices and articulated his struggles to find balance in a fantastic way. Hopefully going forward this will be the attitude that is taken.
---
Below are the last 3 comments from me for the night.
1.
We need to AVOID using charged language. Things like "THIS IS MORE FUN" , "THAT ISN'T FUN" to play against, and "SHOULD BE BANNED!"
That type of charged language is polarizing. It's my belief that those sorts of things will only divide an already shaky community. The FOB could probably do the whole community a service by delaying their recently released BANNED LIST article for the time being. (There is plenty of time later for this!) I think this being released this week ONLY added fuel to an already contentious fire.
We have a long time until FOB qualifiers! Avoiding a witch hunt for "broken" "un-fun" armies in the immediate short term is probably the safest avenue. We need to test the hell out of lists, models, & much much more. I'll be happy to contribute anything we at Endless Gaming find and anything that the 40KWC finds to be abusive.
2.
I love Warhammer
40k. We all do. That's why we care so much! Remember that!
.................. And 3
The Magic the Gathering comparisons to banned lists need to be stopped. In Standard
MTG few cards have ever been banned. I played Ravager Affinity in the height of it's power. I played every version of the deck and had a full foil deck. I loved that deck. But, it was too strong. It had to be banned. Arcbound Ravager was too good and too synergistic for the time. Similarly to how powerful Jace TMS was in Cawblade before it was banned. Here is an article about the banning of Jace TMS and Stoneforge.
https://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/148
There is nothing in
40K that is Arcbound Ravager or Jace TMS! Please stop saying that. <3
