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.

 Irbis wrote:
Yup, expanding existing sheet to actually give it options playes asked for for years now is BLOAT now. In other news, sky is pink

They ain't talkin' 'bout the options, boyo, they're talking about the completely unnecessary "fighting stances". I mean... duh!

The fighting stances are a neccesity because having multiple meele weapons in warhammer 40k makes no sense most of the time unless one gives you extra attacks.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/02/04/the-next-warhammer-40000-balance-dataslate-is-here/

New balance update

https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/U57cPZ40cMxHVdxQ.pdf

Drukhari Talos / Cronos lose CORE
Artists of the Flesh works like Ramshackle now

This is such a better method than chapter approved.. and.. its... freee...

Still a garbage update. Does nothing for the armies that got hammered in CA2022 and barely touches Drukhari.

It would be fine if they didn't already have to fix their own mistakes.

Balance datasheet that is created based on actual play has no adjustments for rules that were released in the last two weeks. I’m dying of not surprise.

Limiting orks to one of each buggy seems very unlike GW. It must lead to less of those models being sold, and as far as balance patches goes, it is a very hamfisted one.

 Illumini wrote:
Limiting orks to one of each buggy seems very unlike GW. It must lead to less of those models being sold, and as far as balance patches goes, it is a very hamfisted one.

It's one of each unit of buggies, they're a 1-3 option.

 alextroy wrote:
Balance datasheet that is created based on actual play has no adjustments for rules that were released in the last two weeks. I’m dying of not surprise.

They needed to wait then. The thing this balance slate needed to fix most was CA2022. That book is the biggest problem with faction balance right now. If all this had said was 'revert all changes in the munitorum field manual 2022' it would have been one of the best balance passes GW has ever done.

And show us on the doll where the 2022 MFM touched you, ERJAK...

At least there's not many new changes to remember on the dataslate itself.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
If you don’t have any clue about the books supply chain best not open your mouth.

The only thing I know about it is that it could've been totally avoided for the last 10 years if GW weren't allergic to the magic of the interwebs

...you know we're getting one of these every three months, right? Instead of waiting GW is giving us one now AND one later. It's the best of both worlds.

I don't see why someone would prefer GW's previous approach of not doing anything at all.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Illumini wrote:
Limiting orks to one of each buggy seems very unlike GW. It must lead to less of those models being sold, and as far as balance patches goes, it is a very hamfisted one.

It's one of each unit of buggies, they're a 1-3 option.

Allright, that helps a lot

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
...you know we're getting one of these every three months, right? Instead of waiting GW is giving us one now AND one later. It's the best of both worlds.

I don't see why someone would prefer GW's previous approach of not doing anything at all.

The problem is both approaches are bad. The old approach because things didn't get updated at all, and the new one because it doesn't seem to be meaningfully fixing anything. The question is whether you prefer incompetence or laziness.

Slipspace wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
...you know we're getting one of these every three months, right? Instead of waiting GW is giving us one now AND one later. It's the best of both worlds.

I don't see why someone would prefer GW's previous approach of not doing anything at all.

The problem is both approaches are bad. The old approach because things didn't get updated at all, and the new one because it doesn't seem to be meaningfully fixing anything. The question is whether you prefer incompetence or laziness.

Either way you would be wrong on cause. It's ££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££.

Slipspace wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
...you know we're getting one of these every three months, right? Instead of waiting GW is giving us one now AND one later. It's the best of both worlds.

I don't see why someone would prefer GW's previous approach of not doing anything at all.

The problem is both approaches are bad. The old approach because things didn't get updated at all, and the new one because it doesn't seem to be meaningfully fixing anything. The question is whether you prefer incompetence or laziness.

I prefer something to nothing. And to say they don't meaningfully impact things is just plain false. No, they don't fix everything. Or even as much as they really should. But it is a huge step up from what we had before and I am not so blind that I can't see more stairway.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
...you know we're getting one of these every three months, right? Instead of waiting GW is giving us one now AND one later. It's the best of both worlds.

I don't see why someone would prefer GW's previous approach of not doing anything at all.

Charging nothing for nothing is better than charging lots for garbage.

I definitely preferred them not doing anything at all, and it doesn't create the community/meta deciding there's a 'need' to chase that dragon every few weeks (or worse, the next round 'wait and see' for 'fixes' that never materialize).
Game, army book, go play for five years: far better.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
...you know we're getting one of these every three months, right? Instead of waiting GW is giving us one now AND one later. It's the best of both worlds.

I don't see why someone would prefer GW's previous approach of not doing anything at all.

The problem is both approaches are bad. The old approach because things didn't get updated at all, and the new one because it doesn't seem to be meaningfully fixing anything. The question is whether you prefer incompetence or laziness.

I prefer something to nothing. And to say they don't meaningfully impact things is just plain false. No, they don't fix everything. Or even as much as they really should. But it is a huge step up from what we had before and I am not so blind that I can't see more stairway.

Except between the balance dataslate and CA2022...they made the balance worse, especially in the middle tiers. We would have literally been better off with nothing. Drukhari got a slap on the wrist while multiple other armies got absolutely TANKED and Crusher Stampede took precisely 0 hits.

Pretty sure there's something out there that goes 'First, do no harm.' that GW could learn from.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
...you know we're getting one of these every three months, right? Instead of waiting GW is giving us one now AND one later. It's the best of both worlds.

I don't see why someone would prefer GW's previous approach of not doing anything at all.

Charging nothing for nothing is better than charging lots for garbage.

I definitely preferred them not doing anything at all, and it doesn't create the community/meta deciding there's a 'need' to chase that dragon every few weeks (or worse, the next round 'wait and see' for 'fixes' that never materialize).
Game, army book, go play for five years: far better.

As much as I hated these updates, this does ignore the more common 'game, army book, stomped 5 games in a row because army book is garbage, sell army book, never play 40k again.' that also happened previously.

The balance sheet is free though?

ERJAK wrote:

Pretty sure there's something out there that goes 'First, do no harm.' that GW could learn from.

Did... did you just compare a game to medicine?!

ERJAK wrote:
Pretty sure there's something out there that goes 'First, do no harm.' that GW could learn from.

Nah GW takes a different oath. The Hypocritical Oath.

(/low hanging fruit)

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

Pretty sure there's something out there that goes 'First, do no harm.' that GW could learn from.

Did... did you just compare a game to medicine?!

And what's wrong with that?

The chance of someone dying of bad game rules is very low.

 Jidmah wrote:
The chance of someone dying of bad game rules is very low.

*Puts a 2nd ed Metal Dreadnought in a sock*
But never zero!

Don't make me break out the kan flail

The most common cause of 40k related deaths is probably people impaling themselves on old chaos models or the Sanctum Imperialis plastic terrain.
"Why did you paint blood on those ruins?" "I didn't, that's real blood."

ERJAK wrote:

As much as I hated these updates, this does ignore the more common 'game, army book, stomped 5 games in a row because army book is garbage, sell army book, never play 40k again.' that also happened previously.

As much as that's an internet complaint, it was something I rarely experienced in person.
There were specific books that were way OVER-tuned that caused problems (vampires and daemons off the top of my head during specific fantasy and 40k editions), but that tended to sort itself out in local stores (the players of said armies usually got tired of being picked last for games every week)

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

Pretty sure there's something out there that goes 'First, do no harm.' that GW could learn from.

Did... did you just compare a game to medicine?!

Whooooooooosh.

Also, I'm pretty sure 'at least don't feth anything up' is a pretty universal standard in any industry. Medicine just has the coolest speech.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

As much as I hated these updates, this does ignore the more common 'game, army book, stomped 5 games in a row because army book is garbage, sell army book, never play 40k again.' that also happened previously.

As much as that's an internet complaint, it was something I rarely experienced in person.
There were specific books that were way OVER-tuned that caused problems (vampires and daemons off the top of my head during specific fantasy and 40k editions), but that tended to sort itself out in local stores (the players of said armies usually got tired of being picked last for games every week)

So add in 'army book way too good, can't get a game, sell army book, never play 40k again' to the list.

Also, what you described is why you get these rose tinted goggles people moon-eyeing over previous editions.

"Yeah, when me and my buds played it in our basements or at the 1 table at the FLGS, while pretending half of the rules didn't exist, 5th edition was great!"

ERJAK wrote:

Voss wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

As much as I hated these updates, this does ignore the more common 'game, army book, stomped 5 games in a row because army book is garbage, sell army book, never play 40k again.' that also happened previously.

As much as that's an internet complaint, it was something I rarely experienced in person.
There were specific books that were way OVER-tuned that caused problems (vampires and daemons off the top of my head during specific fantasy and 40k editions), but that tended to sort itself out in local stores (the players of said armies usually got tired of being picked last for games every week)

So add in 'army book way too good, can't get a game, sell army book, never play 40k again' to the list.

I'm going to quote Voss:

Voss wrote:
As much as that's an internet complaint, it was something I rarely experienced in person.