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.

 vict0988 wrote:

 Jjohnso11 wrote:
Unpopular opinion. My thoughts on Drukhari being OP is -good for the players who have patiently waited for their army to finally have a chance. I remember speculating on if they were going to discontinue the Dark Eldar because they went so long without updates and new units.

It's not just unpopular, it's silly. Drukhari were doing great in 8th and okay in 9th and did not need a 70% win rate to make up for anything.

I’ll be transparent. Our 1 Dark Eldar player stopped playing around 6th edition. I haven’t played against Dark Eldar in the newer editions. I also didn’t have an interest in their win rate to fully grasp how solid of an army they supposedly were in the last few editions. What was their WR in 8th?

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Yeah the best units in the Drukhari Codex right now are models they've had since the 2010-2011 reboot.

And pretty much all of them are models every Drukhari player is drowning in already.

Except for wraks - I've never owned a wrak.

And god knows you represent the majority of Deldar players

Well I can guess a lot didn't have wracks pre 8th b.c they were metal then finecast, and when they went to plastic they were basically sold out 80% the time.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Yeah the best units in the Drukhari Codex right now are models they've had since the 2010-2011 reboot.

And pretty much all of them are models every Drukhari player is drowning in already.

Except for wraks - I've never owned a wrak.

And god knows you represent the majority of Deldar players

I, too, am guilty of neglecting the covens. Never really liked the aesthetic and couldn't commit to a colour scheme (I think the Hex was the best looking one but even that was pretty tepid).

 Jjohnso11 wrote:
I also didn’t have an interest in their win rate to fully grasp how solid of an army they supposedly were in the last few editions. What was their WR in 8th?

My best guess would be around 52% overall, they were considered pretty strong at first and really kicked ass when their codex first came out but I don't think they got any buffs after that, while other armies got several rounds of buffs. In 8th the tough covens were good, the shooty kabals were great, the stabby cults were generally weak but cults still performed well in a couple of tournaments in 8th but generally needed an expert player before they were worth much.

Audustum wrote:

 Aenar wrote:
A 55% win rate is close to broken, a 70% one has simply no reason to exist.
I think that with adequate point adjustments the faction can still be fun to play but be less oppressive.

The win rate last weekend was like 62% and they took home no 1st places. I think the meta is, indeed, starting to adjust.

How much would you want to bet that they'd be below 55% win rate in the next 7 days starting 30 days from now assuming missions and points weren't being changed next week?

Where did you get the number 62%? Is that including mirror matches?

Also, the Art of War guys are streaming a match with the new AdMech codex today and it looks as bonkers as it needs to be to bring balance to the Force.

AdMech will either be strong against everyone or fair against the field and stomp Drukhari or they will fail to beat Drukhari. If AdMech stomp everyone better than Drukhari then we are in a worse place. If AdMech are average against the field and stomp Drukhari then Drukhari players will have no fun in that matchup and everyone with terrible Drukhari matchups will still not have a good time against Drukhari, at least the number of Drukhari players might halt. Armies with win rates above 55% are bad for the game.

55% win rates is 100% fine for how insane 40k is to balance, Chess is a 52%-56% win rate for going first... for crying out loud.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Yeah the best units in the Drukhari Codex right now are models they've had since the 2010-2011 reboot.

And pretty much all of them are models every Drukhari player is drowning in already.

Except for wraks - I've never owned a wrak.

And god knows you represent the majority of Deldar players

Nah they have always been hard to get a hold of. I have never seen them on the shelf at any store. On the other hand I have about 60 wyches 80 khabs. Covens have always been the least popular. Because they are ugly mostly. Which is why in 8th they got the best rules. They wanted to sell that stuff and they know every DE player has tons of kabal and wych cult.

Karol wrote:

Now we've evolved to "all the HQ removals from 7th and 8th editions were actually a deep state plot to set up the broken build in 9th".

That's just brilliant.

Do you really think that something like draz was point costed for his actually table top efficiency OR to make him an option you would be foolish not to take? Same with incubi. And it is not that other armies don't get aggresivly pointed new options. Blade guard for marines marines are very good or Ctan for necron. The difference between all prior armies and DE is, that before you couldn't make a 2000pts army out of new stuff. As CCS said, the army feels as if it was designed first and then point costs were allocted to it to fit the standard size game. And it is not like GW has not done stuff like that in the past. I don't understand why people think this is some sort of conspiracy. Heck it is not even a bad thing, because it means someone at the studio sat down and thought how the army should look and function. A lot better then some random collection of units being thrown at people, with the idea behind it being, do something out of it.

>Ctan

Ah yes, the C'tan. Clearly the Void Dragon is as good as it is to aggressively sell a new model. Same deal with the Nightbringer, a (checks notes) gakky old finecast model a third of the price of the new centerpiece C'tan.

Audustum wrote:
The win rate last weekend was like 62% and they took home no 1st places. I think the meta is, indeed, starting to adjust.

I wouldn't put too much stock into one weekend.

Or in this as it will surely drive some people bananas ( and it could be fake ):

A 70% price increase to a unit that's key to the army's primary playstyle? Barely a month after the codex released? I smell 4chan.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
A 70% price increase to a unit that's key to the army's primary playstyle? Barely a month after the codex released? I smell 4chan.

It's making the rounds with other such gems as 8 point Atalan Jackals, 222 point Biophagi, 50 point Lictors and other nonsense.

The internet is having its fun today.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
A 70% price increase to a unit that's key to the army's primary playstyle? Barely a month after the codex released? I smell 4chan.

Good news is GW will copy paste the old 10 point Ravers back in.

EDIT: IDC I like the typo and I'm leaving it.

y, there is no reality in which I accept 145 points for a base Raider being real.

Yeah, all these recent leaks are most likely just a hoax. Expect some of the real leaks to be coming by next week.

145 is insane but hoenstly if an impuslor is 130...a raider should be more than 130 lol.

Obviously the impuslors needs to drop to like 95 and the raider needs to be 100-110.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Good news is GW will copy paste the old 10 point Ravers back in.

As long as I don't see any 917 PPM Fellblades.....

EDIT: IDC I like the typo and I'm leaving it.

You are now obligated to assemble and paint a full squad of them complete with glowsticks.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
You are now obligated to assemble and paint a full squad of them complete with glowsticks.

Don't tempt me with a good time!

 Amishprn86 wrote:
55% win rates is 100% fine for how insane 40k is to balance, Chess is a 52%-56% win rate for going first... for crying out loud.

Tournament chess is also played in matches of a minimum of 7 games and a maximum of 12 games (plus 4 tiebreaker games) if the players keep trading wins. These matches are given three hours for 60 moves and a single tournament is played over three weeks. Chess tournaments are, at a high level, designed around the game's limitations and single games don't decide jack.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
55% win rates is 100% fine for how insane 40k is to balance, Chess is a 52%-56% win rate for going first... for crying out loud.

Tournament chess is also played in matches of a minimum of 7 games and a maximum of 12 games (plus 4 tiebreaker games) if the players keep trading wins. These matches are given three hours for 60 moves and a single tournament is played over three weeks. Chess tournaments are, at a high level, designed around the game's limitations and single games don't decide jack.

Just b.c they do play multiple games swapping first that doesn't take away the advantage of first turn its just giving each player that advantage. In 40k we don't have the ability to play multiple games with the same person for events.

FWIW, I'd be more than happy to see the DE book take a hit to its power level if in exchange we could get an HQ section that doesn't bore me to sleep.

Maybe even some actual new models after a mere 11 years.

 vipoid wrote:
FWIW, I'd be more than happy to see the DE book take a hit to its power level if in exchange we could get an HQ section that doesn't bore me to sleep.

Maybe even some actual new models after a mere 11 years.

100% would be a fine at a 45% win rate if I could get 3-4 more units like literally every other army (well other than GK's they only got a couple)

We are the only army that hasn't gotten a new unit in 4 editions.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
55% win rates is 100% fine for how insane 40k is to balance, Chess is a 52%-56% win rate for going first... for crying out loud.

Tournament chess is also played in matches of a minimum of 7 games and a maximum of 12 games (plus 4 tiebreaker games) if the players keep trading wins. These matches are given three hours for 60 moves and a single tournament is played over three weeks. Chess tournaments are, at a high level, designed around the game's limitations and single games don't decide jack.

Just b.c they do play multiple games swapping first that doesn't take away the advantage of first turn its just giving each player that advantage. In 40k we don't have the ability to play multiple games with the same person for events.

It does change things, if I go first 6 times against Drukhari as AdMech I have a much better chance of winning versus someone going last 6 times against Drukhari. That puts more of my game's victories down to luck than player skill. This is why tournament players love their overpopulated terrain boards, it kills a lot of units from the meta but it means the turn 1 advantage is lowered and tournament players can simply stop taking all the units that are bad on overpopulated boards and have fun regardless of whether they go first or second.

I am not going to go first 6 times against Garry Kasparov in chess, unless we play with loser going first.

Karol wrote:

Now we've evolved to "all the HQ removals from 7th and 8th editions were actually a deep state plot to set up the broken build in 9th".

That's just brilliant.

Do you really think that something like draz was point costed for his actually table top efficiency OR to make him an option you would be foolish not to take? Same with incubi.

No, I think they were costed by a designer at GW who has a fairly tenuous grasp of how the game is actually played in the real world. I suspect about half the games they used Drazhar in while testing he was probably footslogging into a SM gunline. Every time this theory comes up it has to be pointed out that Primaris sucked hard for the first year of their existence. For more recent examples look at Heavy Intercessors (not brilliant, but maybe OK) or all the new SM vehicles (all terrible due to being massively overcosted) or the bunker or turret (terrible as well). For a non-SM example we have Lelith.

There is, and never has been, a strong correlation between a unit being new and it being overpowered. There's one confirmed example of executive meddling from over a decade ago but that's an outlier compared to the way things normally play out.

Honestly, Drukhari wasn't even a big release as models go (nor is AdMech). It's basically a filler book between (for the company's bottom line) much bigger releases of Marines and Sisters with a single model (Lelith) stapled to it.

I don't see how any controlling/management-type not dealing with rules on a day-to-day-basis would have any incentive to bother looking at Drukhari specifically.

Anyone "hypothetically" tasked with massaging the rules to boost sales for the releases this quarter would be looking at Belakor, all the new Sisters-stuff coming up, also Heavy Intercessors and of course making sure AoS 3.0 flies (along with that new Centaur big baddie and whatever else they are currently putting out).

Drukhari is probably broken because it was written by the interns on Friday night in Bugman's bar, because nobody cared.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
55% win rates is 100% fine for how insane 40k is to balance, Chess is a 52%-56% win rate for going first... for crying out loud.

Sure. But chess players can't choose to bring "white" as their army to the tournament. It's balanced assuming you go first half the time over a sufficient large number of games (though you might get lucky for a tournament or two).

The thing with the executive might not even have anything to do with selling kits, Wraithknights were OP in 6th and probably saw as much play then as in 7th when they got the D weapon upgrade for free.

It might just have been a case of believing imbalance is good for the game, there are Dakka posters that believe this and I don't think they have GW stock so it's a legitimate (if silly) belief you can have or that spending time on fidgeting with points would be time wasted. Scat bikes and eventually Skathach Wraithknights became better than the S D regular one, maybe if regular Wraithknight weapons had been worse or costed more appropriately the Skathach Wraithknight would have ended up less OP but the whole of 7th edition was a mess.

But it is a fact that BS still goes on, we know that playtesters complained about IH, GW didn't pay attention. We can see how they increased points by algorithm in 9th rather than with math and testing. GW do not pay enough attention to points. But I agree that the evil money-grubbing thing makes less sense than execs don't know how to design and balance games, because that's also something we see with other games run by execs instead of designers.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Yeah the best units in the Drukhari Codex right now are models they've had since the 2010-2011 reboot.

And pretty much all of them are models every Drukhari player is drowning in already.

Except for wraks - I've never owned a wrak.

And god knows you represent the majority of Deldar players

Lawrence Baker, probably the most famous Drukhari player, said in a recent video that he doesn't own any Wrack, and his studio has a collection of 10k-ish points of drukhari.

Wracks have always been terrible, that's why so many players don't have any, of if they have some it's just a single min squad. They're also extremely expensive money wise.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Audustum wrote:

 Aenar wrote:
A 55% win rate is close to broken, a 70% one has simply no reason to exist.
I think that with adequate point adjustments the faction can still be fun to play but be less oppressive.

The win rate last weekend was like 62% and they took home no 1st places. I think the meta is, indeed, starting to adjust.

Also, the Art of War guys are streaming a match with the new AdMech codex today and it looks as bonkers as it needs to be to bring balance to the Force.

Permanent win rate of 60% or more is broken. Win rate of 70% that gradually drops to something close to 50% after some experience/list changes is perfectly fine.

I think ultimately, GW doesn't care about balance.
They care about writing cool rules.

It's my impression that this is the attitude of most of the player base as well.
Power factors a lot into "cool", everyone thinks a bad unit is lame to try and play with.

So GW more or less throws special rules and fancy guns on the unit, slaps a points value that "feels right" to someone who probably has little experience with the game, and calls it a day.
I think powercreep is a real thing because the bar for a good unit is set roughly at the best of that edition and it scatters from there. If anything scatters upwards on the power curve, that just becomes the new standard power codexes are aiming for.

/shrug

I mean it took them about 4 re-writes (including playtesters collaborating) to get the character-targeting rules correct for 9th Edition.

AdMech boats can now ship fething Assault Centurions, Repentia and Bullgryn around like nobody's business, while Biker-Breachers are stuck with a 100% redundant rule to let them ignore moving and shooting with Heavy Weapons.

And people expect the same rules-writing team to fine-tune points by 10% or 20% to nudge sales?

The Admec transport thing is definitely a typo.
But you're right. It shows the level of care and attention that goes into these things.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
/shrug

I mean it took them about 4 re-writes (including playtesters collaborating) to get the character-targeting rules correct for 9th Edition.

AdMech boats can now ship fething Assault Centurions, Repentia and Bullgryn around like nobody's business, while Biker-Breachers are stuck with a 100% redundant rule to let them ignore moving and shooting with Heavy Weapons.

And people expect the same rules-writing team to fine-tune points by 10% or 20% to nudge sales?

Exactly this. "Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity".
The game designers are not stupid, but the game is so complex and vast that they either 1) hire tens of tecnical writers, playtesters and game designers, test the rules for months and then publish a good product or 2) do their best and rely on the community to fix whatever they miss in their testing.
I'm not opposed to any of these options, but I'd certainly appreciate if the company dedicated even more resources to making a better game.