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.

Okay so what Argive said was flat out incorrect

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Okay so what Argive said was flat out incorrect

No, the issue is that GW allready let them test with full dexes with diffrent adapted points, which will release staggered, enforcing like you said that more and more factions get sidelined because their update, even though ready, is not yet out.

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
“We deliberately unbalanced our game so that we can change it to balanced later!” is the dumbest design philosophy ever. If you’re gonna be changing it later you can change the pts with it. Until that pt you’ve fethed the game for undoubtably years for some factions

It gives GW tons of money. Not that dump.

why they'd take it to the dump / trashyard though tneva82

If you think 4-7 factions will be "up there" - then the game isn't obviously "solved", and there is a relatively healthy meta, even if a number of factions don't have a build.

I mean to my mind at various points of 8th, you had a solved meta. You were imperial soup (Castellan+Guard and then probably, but not always, some BA or Custodes).or Eldar Soup (often flyers and some leveraged Ynnari).
Then from middle of last year, you basically had Iron Hands, Ravenguard Successors, or an SM Soup taking advantage of IF LOS ignoring shooting.

Which isn't to say other lists couldn't win - you had for instance the possibly exaggerated Tau panic when Siegler won Nova - but the numbers were so skewed in favour of the above, not taking them was probably foolish (see... Sieger again at the LVO.)

Through the edition you had many lists which would win one major tournament, and then disappear - often because these were toughness lists, which were always vulnerable to an early unlucky streak costing you a game, and statistically that's just likely to happen at some point (and does, hence they don't repeat their success despite people emulating the list.)