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.

As long as the new units don't come out overpowered, a 6 month period is pretty good.
Ideally, I would like to see new units slightly underpowered, just to be on the safe side and not break an existing balance (that's assuming each successive point change brings us a bit closer to good balance). I'm not really sure that's a reasonable wish, given GW's track record, but there's hope. Mostly because it's much easier to play test a single new unit than it is to playtest a whole codex.

Sounds like it might not even be 6 months before fixes come out - if GW is doing fixes 2x/year, you could have a case a codex/supplement comes out in June and it gets "fixed" in July (that may be too short, but I could see a March release/July fix happening).

What about when the fixes don't fix anything?

How does this fit with Chapter Approved if they are doing that annually every December?

We'll get a FAQ in September that updates points costs for over/underperforming units which is invalidated in 3 months by Chapter Approved (which we have to pay for) which further updates points costs for over/underperforming units which is itself invalidated in 3 months by another FAQ in March which again updates points costs for over/underperforming units?

 Xenomancers wrote:
What about when the fixes don't fix anything?

Then we can, as level headed adults, petition GW with our concerns. I bet it even works better if we don't flip out, too.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
What about when the fixes don't fix anything?

Then we can, as level headed adults, petition GW with our concerns. I bet it even works better if we don't flip out, too.

That would be too reasonable.

lets just hang out here and complain more.

chaos0xomega wrote:
How does this fit with Chapter Approved if they are doing that annually every December?

We'll get a FAQ in September that updates points costs for over/underperforming units which is invalidated in 3 months by Chapter Approved (which we have to pay for) which further updates points costs for over/underperforming units which is itself invalidated in 3 months by another FAQ in March which again updates points costs for over/underperforming units?

So quarterly updates with a break over the summer then.

It sounds reasonable. PP is trying the constant update thing and I thought it would be a great idea at first. It turned out to be a bit of a mess however, as we started getting errata in chunks, causing a nerf to be set in one faction, repeated in another three months later and causing the meta to move around like a drunk mongoose.

Robin Cruddace said pretty much the same thing at the open day on Saturday. He said they had to balance the need to correct unintended combos, etc, with the understandable unhappiness of players who find their dex suddenly FAQd - them not knowing, not having the paperwork on them, etc. Seemed like they were trying to hit a balance.

Honestly twice a year seems fine. It gives GW time to assess concerns and make sure that any perceived problems are actual problems and not just small concerns overinflated by a vocal community.

Regardless of which method they choose, there are going to be people gaking themselves in anger over it.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
Regardless of which method they choose, there are going to be people gaking themselves in anger over it.

Yep.

The worst thing, IMO, are the points fluctuations. GW should really try to prioritize finding balance via rules vs balance via points costs. When the Index was released I wrote a 2000 pt Militarum Tempestus list. It was slightly different from what I had built for previous editions, but I set out to purchase the bits and kits needed to set it up for the new edition. The FAQ dropped mid-build and opened up some options for me so I did some slight tweaking, no big deal.

Then the AM codex dropped a few months later, and my 2000 pt Militarum Tempestus list was looking closer to 2100 pts. Frustrating, but understandable - plasma guns on MT units were kinda OP, so I set out tweaking my list and made some hard choices and cuts to bring it back down to 2000 pts. In the process of doing so, GW FAQ'd Commissars into uselessness, so it made the hard decision of what to cut from my list into an easy no-brainer.

Now, a short couple months later the Chapter Approved book is dropping/has dropped, and again I find my 2000 point army is over 2100 points. Again. I'm at the point I'm considering shelving the project entirely, as coming up with another 100 (technically 111) point savings seems almost impossible and will almost assuredly require me to tear apart my own minis or buy entirely new kits to set up with the proper weapon loadouts to maintain WYSIWYG.

chaos0xomega wrote:
The worst thing, IMO, are the points fluctuations. GW should really try to prioritize finding balance via rules vs balance via points costs. When the Index was released I wrote a 2000 pt Militarum Tempestus list. It was slightly different from what I had built for previous editions, but I set out to purchase the bits and kits needed to set it up for the new edition. The FAQ dropped mid-build and opened up some options for me so I did some slight tweaking, no big deal.

Then the AM codex dropped a few months later, and my 2000 pt Militarum Tempestus list was looking closer to 2100 pts. Frustrating, but understandable - plasma guns on MT units were kinda OP, so I set out tweaking my list and made some hard choices and cuts to bring it back down to 2000 pts. In the process of doing so, GW FAQ'd Commissars into uselessness, so it made the hard decision of what to cut from my list into an easy no-brainer.

Now, a short couple months later the Chapter Approved book is dropping/has dropped, and again I find my 2000 point army is over 2100 points. Again. I'm at the point I'm considering shelving the project entirely, as coming up with another 100 (technically 111) point savings seems almost impossible and will almost assuredly require me to tear apart my own minis or buy entirely new kits to set up with the proper weapon loadouts to maintain WYSIWYG.

That's a pretty narrow case. It's not every time you get an index, codex, and chapter approved within 6 months. Future changes will be once every several months rather than 3.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
Regardless of which method they choose, there are going to be people gaking themselves in anger over it.

Yep.

Or some people that are just perpetually angry until their *insert snowflake faction here* is obscenely overpowered, and then they'll argue that it's finally balanced.

6 months is reasonable for major updates. It gives them time to see if the meta will correct itself, which is preferable to nerfing certain units into the ground.

Small fixes to obvious mistakes, like if the rules as written clearly do not reflect the intention, should come sooner.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Again. I'm at the point I'm considering shelving the project entirely, as coming up with another 100 (technically 111) point savings seems almost impossible and will almost assuredly require me to tear apart my own minis or buy entirely new kits to set up with the proper weapon loadouts to maintain WYSIWYG.

WYSIWYG isn't a rule, though - you can keep your models as-is without any real issue.

M.

 Hollow wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Hollow wrote:
Sounds fantastic. Unlike the cynical, jaded, negative attempt at a thread title. I do hope those with this mindet are able to find a new hobby.

After 20 years I get the right to be cynical, especially when 8th edition had so much promise.

Been playing as long (a little longer in fact) so therefore I have the right, to tell you, you don't have the right, to be cynical. Like it, be constructive, or leave. It really is that simple.

It always is kinda funny when someone thinks they are making the rules.
It takes all kinds to make the world go round so you can hope all you want: "Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment" such a fine 40k quote.
Since we seem to like to compare our "entitlement" I got involved in 40k at the tail end of 2nd edition SO THERE!

I think for anyone to get past their "self-interest" we need to see something of "worth" in others, being told to leave will not get that kind of thinking.

So ON TOPIC the 6 month cycle for actual changes to rules rather than clarification seems like a perfectly acceptable way of doing things.
At least those planning on buying an army based on their rules merit at least are aware of a possible expiry date rather than a change coming out of nowhere (How many conscripts did anyone get in the last while?).

8th edition did have a lot of promise and I think it is a big improvement.
Having the meta change at intervals is good, that can be part of the fun.
The cup-half empty view of course is allowing those "broken meta" armies to have their day for 6 months... oh, well, too bad.
Better than until the next codex or the next BRB release.
Heck, we are getting a "Chapter Approved" which had not been seen for quite some time.

I find the main complaint is of the players, the rules changes by GW seem to have little impact on that.

This is perfect. 6 month balance updates is just what this game needed
1. It will be easier to balance when instead of an entire new rule set we are getting an update.
2. Allows for broken builds to be moved out and underpowered to move in a a reasonable pace. No more army x not getting updated for 10 years while while army y has a new codex every year
Most competitive games have seasons for this exact reason. Each season typically brings you closer to perfect balance (can never be achieved) and shakes up the meta enough that by the time it settles a new update is right around the corner.

My only recommendation for GW is to put ALL points in these updates (not just updated points) so that we don’t have 2-3 active books we need to bring to games.

This thread title is idiotic. When have we ever had a period where things would be amended and tweaked to try and balance the game every 6 months? The title should read "No longer several years of broken meta" but that wouldn't get BCB the attention he craves.