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.

Supposedly IG are going to be nerfed in the faq on Saturday with restrictions on command squads and conscripts having a point raise. If this is true what do we think ? Is it a good thing GW knee jerking a change or should they have left it for a while? There could be many other point changes.

If there are points changes in an FAQ/Chapter Approved, I will be so happy. It means we may actually have an opportunity to see things balanced and changed this edition instead of the - "oops, guess it's OP until the next edition! our bad!" philosophy that has been going on forever.

50 Conscripts, along with Heavy Weapons Teams; are so cheap for what they provide, it's not even funny.

Is it just me, or does a lot of what GW is doing in 8th basically make it seem like they've been reading my posts here?

Basically from my "bolters should wound landraiders on 6s" to "I want missile launchers to be better" to "I think that tactical marines should have relentless," much of it is in 8th.

And recently I've been complaining about commissars + conscripts...

Coincidence?

I think probably.

Better nerf other stuff too then. Would be odd to only target one army

PUFNSTUF wrote:
Better nerf other stuff too then. Would be odd to only target one army

I don't think that much needs to be nerfed. Tyrranids and IG seem the be the biggest outliers in terms of power.

I suspect the point cost for a Dire Avenger Shuriken catapault will be changed. 17ppm for Dire Avengers seems rather high, even with all their abilities taken into account.

Any sort of source for this or is it pure conjecture?

 Nazrak wrote:
Any sort of source for this or is it pure conjecture?

From someone who is very close to the playtesters.

This is a good thing, if they are already moving to try fixing issues. Then i will be all on board

Maybe they will move to fix some of the other silly things picked up on already also. Then it will be awesome !

honestly i would just like to see a points sheet that gets updated regularly for each book.

I hope there will be a FAQ, because many rules aren't clear at all. If GW has been paying attention, they should already know about most of them.

As for erratas on point cost, I would also be glad to see it, and it would be a change in the right direction to change the content of a book on the day of its release.

If true, it doesn't inspire confidence in the playtesting/proofreading though, does it?

On the one hand it's great to see them making these changes quickly. On the other hand, it feels bad to buy a book and have it already be partially obsolete. This kind of the reason I was hoping for online rules.

I would NOT assume the points we've seen are final,

Its good on the one hand, if true, as it shows a concern for balance from the outset. On the other hand, it is a bit of a kick in the balls to people buying the books. If I want to get into 8th and for the record, I'm not, but because of the spread of my armies I need to pay £100 for the main rulebook and the index books. If I had just shelled out £100 for the books only to find one or more obsolete literally the very next day, I would be quite peeved.

BTW the reason why I'm not assuming the points we've seen are final are two fold. 1: those may be "early inital printings" and thus mild changes may have been made at the alst minute. 2: it's possiable GW intentionally made each copy theys ent out have some wrong points so they could pin point the source of any one leaking too much. it's worth noting that GW apparently caught the guy who did the leakings and black listed him from carrying any more GW product (as they should have) very fast

 Egyptian Space Zombie wrote:
On the one hand it's great to see them making these changes quickly. On the other hand, it feels bad to buy a book and have it already be partially obsolete. This kind of the reason I was hoping for online rules.

the most sensible thing to do imo would have been to release the core rules for free online and as books (with boxed sets & to buy on their own maybe with some other goodies) and then have the advanced rules & codexes accessible online with a yearly subscription fee. that way they still make their money, have incentive to fine tune the rules in a reasonable timeframe and it doesn't piss people off by making their expensive books obsolete in the process.

 Traditio wrote:
Is it just me, or does a lot of what GW is doing in 8th basically make it seem like they've been reading my posts here?

Basically from my "bolters should wound landraiders on 6s" to "I want missile launchers to be better" to "I think that tactical marines should have relentless," much of it is in 8th.

And recently I've been complaining about commissars + conscripts...

Coincidence?

I think probably.

Hopefully not. You have no concept of game design based on your proposed rules track record.

Are there other rumors for point change to other armies?

Better a living edition than waiting five years for an update just to find they didn't fix anything that needed it.

Jpr wrote:
Supposedly IG are going to be nerfed in the faq on Saturday with restrictions on command squads and conscripts having a point raise. If this is true what do we think ? Is it a good thing GW knee jerking a change or should they have left it for a while? There could be many other point changes.

Don't believe it. So you're telling me conscripts point cost is now going to be increased to 4ppm even though at 3ppm in 7th edition IG got absolutely slaughtered? Let me guess, infantry squads are going back up to 5ppm like in 7th edition also? If any of the above happens that will pretty much end all of my excitement for this edition. We haven't even got our hands on the rulebook/index's yet. How can they possibly nerf something before the community has even had a chance to field it? How could their initial internal tests be so inaccurate if they feel these changes are needed?

The game hasn't been released yet, why would they FAQ it before release?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
The game hasn't been released yet, why would they FAQ it before release?

Day 1 releases are pretty common. And remember the books have been printed for like few months already. Plenty time they might have noticed errors in the meanwhile not to mention all the questions they must have been got after leaks thanks to the more holes than swiss cheese rules writing.

 Commissar Benny wrote:

Jpr wrote:
Supposedly IG are going to be nerfed in the faq on Saturday with restrictions on command squads and conscripts having a point raise. If this is true what do we think ? Is it a good thing GW knee jerking a change or should they have left it for a while? There could be many other point changes.

Don't believe it. So you're telling me conscripts point cost is now going to be increased to 4ppm even though at 3ppm in 7th edition IG got absolutely slaughtered? Let me guess, infantry squads are going back up to 5ppm like in 7th edition also? If any of the above happens that will pretty much end all of my excitement for this edition. We haven't even got our hands on the rulebook/index's yet. How can they possibly nerf something before the community has even had a chance to field it? How could their initial internal tests be so inaccurate if they feel these changes are needed?

Don't compare anything now with 7th. The whole game is *very* different.

Maybe some late playtesting result pulled up a huge problem? I'd rather they fixed the game than left it broken. That's what we want, isn't it? A fixed game?

It doesn't invalidate anyone's books. It's just a points change. This was the whole point of having separate weapon and unit costs per faction - so fine changes can be made. For anyone playing casually, this makes no difference at all.

Enigma of the Absolute wrote:
If true, it doesn't inspire confidence in the playtesting/proofreading though, does it?

overall the 500+ different units in 40k are really well balanced in 8th as many design philosophies are set. However this is a min max point game and a few points can drastically make something over or underpowered. Conscripts aren't anything that's scary by themselves however they are extremely tedious this edition for the points. If true the playtesters are still doing thier job and with the 3 weeks of open testing since the leaks people are trying to twist things and break things and very few broken combos exist. Furthermore these books were likely sent to the printers over 2 months ago plenty of time left to find errors.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:
BTW the reason why I'm not assuming the points we've seen are final are two fold. 1: those may be "early inital printings" and thus mild changes may have been made at the alst minute. 2: it's possiable GW intentionally made each copy theys ent out have some wrong points so they could pin point the source of any one leaking too much. it's worth noting that GW apparently caught the guy who did the leakings and black listed him from carrying any more GW product (as they should have) very fast

the leaks were the store copies not exactly earth shattering info when gw sent each store a working copy and people took phone photos and put it online. And with the cost of printing gw isn't just making a few bad copies to send out.

There has never been a rulebook I've played for any game that didn't require SOME errata.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
The game hasn't been released yet, why would they FAQ it before release?

Maybe they noticed the glaring points discrepancies like Avenger Shuriken catapults, Angelus Boltguns and probably a few others.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
The game hasn't been released yet, why would they FAQ it before release?

Better to be on release day than subsequently surely.

 filbert wrote:
Its good on the one hand, if true, as it shows a concern for balance from the outset. On the other hand, it is a bit of a kick in the balls to people buying the books. If I want to get into 8th and for the record, I'm not, but because of the spread of my armies I need to pay £100 for the main rulebook and the index books. If I had just shelled out £100 for the books only to find one or more obsolete literally the very next day, I would be quite peeved.

We know there are defiantely issues with some bits and pieces and errors will always creep in - see the FAQ compilation thread.

I have pre-ordered all the books - now if tis just points tweeks here and there - not so bothered tbh - I would rather they fix stuff than not.

If however its widespread changes to the units rules - then I will be indeed be irritated - this happens with Dropfleet/Dropzone and makes the books pretty much worthless for rules reference and as these are index books to be pretty much just for that rather than full of fluff and pretty pictures it would be annoying.

 Commissar Benny wrote:

Jpr wrote:
Supposedly IG are going to be nerfed in the faq on Saturday with restrictions on command squads and conscripts having a point raise. If this is true what do we think ? Is it a good thing GW knee jerking a change or should they have left it for a while? There could be many other point changes.

Don't believe it. So you're telling me conscripts point cost is now going to be increased to 4ppm even though at 3ppm in 7th edition IG got absolutely slaughtered? Let me guess, infantry squads are going back up to 5ppm like in 7th edition also? If any of the above happens that will pretty much end all of my excitement for this edition. We haven't even got our hands on the rulebook/index's yet. How can they possibly nerf something before the community has even had a chance to field it? How could their initial internal tests be so inaccurate if they feel these changes are needed?

A lot of rules in 8th that didn't exist in 7th that heavily favor mass units. Guard will be fine.

Arachnofiend wrote:
A lot of rules in 8th that didn't exist in 7th that heavily favor mass units. Guard will be fine.

Yeah. Too bad it requires basically shelfing of units guard players used previously and mass buying units that didn't see much point previously like tempestus command squads and mortars.

So short of those massive collectors who have lots of everything prepare to hand out hundreds of euros to get back in game or get hit badly.

Well with xxxxxxx people playing and giving comments about the game is logic that GW could realice about the mistakes (a different thing is that they accept them and fix them (they always have their favorites or comercial Plans).

For example, regular guardmen are very cheap for what they can provide. Possibility the standard gants from the nids are also very cheap.
Or necromancer warriors... They are so absolutely monsters for the price they have.

At same time there are no few overcostered units

tneva82 wrote:

Arachnofiend wrote:
A lot of rules in 8th that didn't exist in 7th that heavily favor mass units. Guard will be fine.

Yeah. Too bad it requires basically shelfing of units guard players used previously and mass buying units that didn't see much point previously like tempestus command squads and mortars.

So short of those massive collectors who have lots of everything prepare to hand out hundreds of euros to get back in game or get hit badly.

What, why? The typical IG units look just fine. Platoons are gone, unfortunately, but conscripts can still be fielded in huge groups.