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.

caladancid wrote:
Does nobody here remember the Leafblower armies? Or how Eldar used to be pre 8th? Nothing in this edition so far comes close to that broken, at least now there are several armies that can compete with each other.

Not an excuse really for GWs very bad rules writing, but honestly this chicken little stuff about Custodes and Tau is ridic.

I do love how the thread started as raising constructive feedback to GW in regards to people's concerns about game balance only for it to devolve into doompilling 40k, selling stuff off to play Battletech and immediately saying that GW will only do this stuff again.

Is this stuff bad? Yes. But god the game has been so much worse in the past and this is nothing like invisible unkillable deathstars from 7th or equally nonsense things we saw in the past. These problems are problems, but they're not "need to reboot the entire game to fix them" levels of problems.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

The other end of it is transhuman and turning off rerolls for 1CP among some other things. I don't have enough experience against the new book to elaborate further though so I welcome other points of view.

Hmm. Not enough experience to talk about them, but still enough to write to GW demanding they fix them....

As for what's next? Wait a week or two for the Eldar codex to drop & you'll have something new to lose your minds over.

caladancid wrote:
If only you had ‘ramped up’ your position for the last year of admech and drukhari, maybe I would think this was something more than a specific army reaction.

1) GW took steps periodically to deal with those armies
2) Those armies were more difficult to access and Custodes are potentially a much worse win rate on a more accessible army
3) Dataslate and 6 month CA were not set on a timetable
4) I own neither Admech nor DE

My concern is now that #3 exists that #1 won't happen and whether or not #2 makes it even more problematic.

Thats awesome.

Can I go into my local store with my Thousand Sons, the rubric marines that I enjoy playing, and not get punted in the balls and put through a table?

I hear thats not really possible without my opponent taking like half my points or something. Which has been the story I've had to endure since 3.5.

So in that regard, if I can't play the army I want to play without getting suplexed through a window by virtue of liking the army I like, the game is still not working.

It doesn't matter if the eldar were crotch chopping people pre 8th. More broken is still broken. Less broken is still broken.

If the answer to play 40k remains that I have to sell off old armies to buy whatever works today (and not really armies as a whole, but subset optimized versions of that army) and that is the acceptable answer every time they adjust something, then its still broken.

Not Online!!! wrote:

caladancid wrote:
Does nobody here remember the Leafblower armies? Or how Eldar used to be pre 8th? Nothing in this edition so far comes close to that broken, at least now there are several armies that can compete with each other.

Not an excuse really for GWs very bad rules writing, but honestly this chicken little stuff about Custodes and Tau is ridic.

by several you mean the clear powerspikes provided by adeptus mechanicus and drukhari which only now got overtaken by custards and Tau? Which seem to have gotten Quite the population for their new iterations ?
There are quite a few dexes out there that can probably spike this even more.

I think it’s clear that GW needs to do much better with writing rules. That being said, once you called them custards any thought that you are objective went away.

 Dysartes wrote:
Question about your Custodes data, Daed - how're the Custodes managing to win 52% of games... against the Custodes?

There's always some quirks depending on whether or not a tournament organizer screwed something up. Here is looks like a couple of games got reported as a loss for both P1 and P2. Sometimes is subfaction shenanigans though I try to smooth that out by assigning a super faction to most stuff.

The lesser of two evils is still evil...

 auticus wrote:
Thats awesome.

Can I go into my local store with my Thousand Sons, the rubric marines that I enjoy playing, and not get punted in the balls and put through a table?

I hear thats not really possible without my opponent taking like half my points or something. Which has been the story I've had to endure since 3.5.

So in that regard, if I can't play the army I want to play without getting suplexed through a window by virtue of liking the army I like, the game is still not working.

It doesn't matter if the eldar were crotch chopping people pre 8th. More broken is still broken. Less broken is still broken.

If the answer to play 40k remains that I have to sell off old armies to buy whatever works today (and not really armies as a whole, but subset optimized versions of that army) and that is the acceptable answer every time they adjust something, then its still broken.

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

Hecaton wrote:
I'm not, dude, it's gak *you* said.

No it isn't and I can't help it if you can't be bothered to actually read my posts and ask questions instead of making half-assed assumptions based on your own personal bs.

The design and release philosophy seems to err on the side of overpowered on release, to be adjusted back to the average post release, especially obvious when there is a new model line involved. From a business perspective this makes a lot of sense and doesn't seem likely to change.

The knock-on problem this creates is that by the time things are adjusted back to the average, the winning strategies, units, and tactics have been exhaustively cataloged, which creates a cookie cutter formula that's easily followed for better than average success. This tends to leave the less obvious armies at a disadvantage because the process takes place over a significantly longer period of time, if at all.

It doesn't seem like GW really has an incentive to change this approach.

caladancid wrote:
Does nobody here remember the Leafblower armies? Or how Eldar used to be pre 8th? Nothing in this edition so far comes close to that broken, at least now there are several armies that can compete with each other.

Not an excuse really for GWs very bad rules writing, but honestly this chicken little stuff about Custodes and Tau is ridic.

I want to be very clear that this isn't chicken little. I don't think the sky is falling like some other posters in the thread assert. If I've given the impression otherwise that was not my intention.

I think, however, that there are issues in the pipeline that GW needs to address without making us wait 3 to 6 months.

I don't feel that there is anything wrong with voicing that concern even if others like to go off the deep end with it.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

The other end of it is transhuman and turning off rerolls for 1CP among some other things. I don't have enough experience against the new book to elaborate further though so I welcome other points of view.

Hmm. Not enough experience to talk about them, but still enough to write to GW demanding they fix them....

As for what's next? Wait a week or two for the Eldar codex to drop & you'll have something new to lose your minds over.

I have experience. Perhaps more than most people here ( considering half posting don't play and just like to dog pile issues... ) outside actual Custodes players, but they might be biased and the data is quite painful. There's always an initial learning curve, but I think we learned the lesson with DE and their rise to fame.

And unlike others I am willing to listen to counterpoints if you feel like Custodes or Tau are not problematic.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

caladancid wrote:
Does nobody here remember the Leafblower armies? Or how Eldar used to be pre 8th? Nothing in this edition so far comes close to that broken, at least now there are several armies that can compete with each other.

Not an excuse really for GWs very bad rules writing, but honestly this chicken little stuff about Custodes and Tau is ridic.

I want to be very clear that this isn't chicken little. I don't think the sky is falling like some other posters in the thread assert. If I've given the impression otherwise that was not my intention.

I think, however, that there are issues in the pipeline that GW needs to address without making us wait 3 to 6 months.

I don't feel that there is anything wrong with voicing that concern even if others like to go off the deep end with it.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

The other end of it is transhuman and turning off rerolls for 1CP among some other things. I don't have enough experience against the new book to elaborate further though so I welcome other points of view.

Hmm. Not enough experience to talk about them, but still enough to write to GW demanding they fix them....

As for what's next? Wait a week or two for the Eldar codex to drop & you'll have something new to lose your minds over.

I have experience. Perhaps more than most people here ( considering half posting don't play and just like to dog pile issues... ) outside actual Custodes players, but they might be biased and the data is quite painful. There's always an initial learning curve, but I think we learned the lesson with DE and their rise to fame.

And unlike others I am willing to listen to counterpoints if you feel like Custodes or Tau are not problematic.

Every time something is too strong people immediately scream that this current thing is the most broken thing the game has ever seen ever....I guess it's a natural reaction, but demonstrably false.

I'm an active custodes player however and I say point nerfs are in order. Trajann is way too cheap and the bikes and salvo launchers need to go up a bit as well. Id also give wardens and terminators a slight bump in points. One thing I'm against is touching the strats too much, a very big portion of custodes survivability is now tied to the stratagems and touching them too much can exponentially hurt the faction. I'm not saying don't do anything with them, but gw needs to be careful.

 auticus wrote:
Thats awesome.

Can I go into my local store with my Thousand Sons, the rubric marines that I enjoy playing, and not get punted in the balls and put through a table?

I hear thats not really possible without my opponent taking like half my points or something. Which has been the story I've had to endure since 3.5.

So in that regard, if I can't play the army I want to play without getting suplexed through a window by virtue of liking the army I like, the game is still not working.

It doesn't matter if the eldar were crotch chopping people pre 8th. More broken is still broken. Less broken is still broken.

If the answer to play 40k remains that I have to sell off old armies to buy whatever works today (and not really armies as a whole, but subset optimized versions of that army) and that is the acceptable answer every time they adjust something, then its still broken.

Bit of an odd whine considering TSons have been strong (but not the very top faction) since their new book in August. Six months of slapping 8th edition books, Death Guard, Necrons, Space Marines, etc about and some good games into a lot of other books with just a few tough match ups at the very top of the meta. With Exalted Sorcerers, Rubrics and Scarabs being the three of the best units in the book.

caladancid wrote:
I think it’s clear that GW needs to do much better with writing rules. That being said, once you called them custards any thought that you are objective went away.

Plenty of people call Custodes "custards" that's nothing new.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
I'm not, dude, it's gak *you* said.

No it isn't and I can't help it if you can't be bothered to actually read my posts and ask questions instead of making half-assed assumptions based on your own personal bs.

Dude, at this point you're trolling.

 auticus wrote:
Thats awesome.

Can I go into my local store with my Thousand Sons, the rubric marines that I enjoy playing, and not get punted in the balls and put through a table?

I hear thats not really possible without my opponent taking like half my points or something. Which has been the story I've had to endure since 3.5.

So in that regard, if I can't play the army I want to play without getting suplexed through a window by virtue of liking the army I like, the game is still not working.

It doesn't matter if the eldar were crotch chopping people pre 8th. More broken is still broken. Less broken is still broken.

If the answer to play 40k remains that I have to sell off old armies to buy whatever works today (and not really armies as a whole, but subset optimized versions of that army) and that is the acceptable answer every time they adjust something, then its still broken.

What? Thousand sons are good now. I don't get why you think they suck.

caladancid wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

caladancid wrote:
Does nobody here remember the Leafblower armies? Or how Eldar used to be pre 8th? Nothing in this edition so far comes close to that broken, at least now there are several armies that can compete with each other.

Not an excuse really for GWs very bad rules writing, but honestly this chicken little stuff about Custodes and Tau is ridic.

by several you mean the clear powerspikes provided by adeptus mechanicus and drukhari which only now got overtaken by custards and Tau? Which seem to have gotten Quite the population for their new iterations ?
There are quite a few dexes out there that can probably spike this even more.

I think it’s clear that GW needs to do much better with writing rules. That being said, once you called them custards any thought that you are objective went away.

custards? Custard, normally over here we call them senfbubbies. Custard boys. ? or am i translating something wrong?

Edit: Nvm custard is a form of pudding, i meant mustard

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there Over here trying to ask people to not bring competitive lists is seen as insulting by a great many players in the pool and generates a lot of anger and drama.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

What? Thousand sons are good now. I don't get why you think they suck.

I haven't actively played since 7th ed shortly after their book came out and they were face dropped unless you were running Magnus and Mortarion (lol...) combo. I have no idea if they suck today. I was told they still suck if you're running a rubric themed Thousand Sons (the reason why most people would choose that legion I'd think).

If rubrics are suddenly able to show up to open game day and not get destroyed by the tournament hotness then awesome. I was under the assumption that is definitely not the case.

And if it is the case then cool. My point stands that if you can't play a faction you enjoy without it being a horrible negative experience getting trounced by busted and OP deck building elements, its not a good game and needs revisited (often over the past many years the answer is simply "just dont play bad factions then and make sure you do your research and play one of the optimal lists".

 auticus wrote:

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there

Well fair enough, but I find it hard to believe that people playing this game in the US are somehow generally more unreasonable and not willing to make the gaming experience fun for both parties.

 auticus wrote:
This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there

Europe, including the UK, is the same way they just won't cop to it.

Tiberias wrote:
Every time something is too strong people immediately scream that this current thing is the most broken thing the game has ever seen ever....I guess it's a natural reaction, but demonstrably false.

I'm an active custodes player however and I say point nerfs are in order. Trajann is way too cheap and the bikes and salvo launchers need to go up a bit as well. Id also give wardens and terminators a slight bump in points. One thing I'm against is touching the strats too much, a very big portion of custodes survivability is now tied to the stratagems and touching them too much can exponentially hurt the faction. I'm not saying don't do anything with them, but gw needs to be careful.

I'd rather see light touches as well. Personally I think the approach GW took with DE was the correct approach even if it didn't solve the problem immediately as the issue can be complex as I'll try and illustrate below.

My particular thrust here is to get GW to communicate with us and make sure they're addressing things in a timely manner and not to specify specific changes or to enforce the will of the communities ideas of balance.

The thing with Trajann is he seems to come with Master and Champion traits considering the others don't really do much for him except maybe Peerless. Master means you're picking up 5 CP regen easily plus 1 for Trajann himself and then 5 per round putting them at 23CP.

This exacerbates the cost of strats. This trait doesn't need to be tied to Trajann either so bumping his points doesn't necessarily clear us from the problem and I don't see GW changing the trait. If Trajann got forced out people would pick up the trait and a dreadnought and dish out rr1s to wound that way.

Custodes have a 1CP interrupt when on an objective ( which will be most of the time ). Clearly it should be 1CP, because otherwise why would it exist, but with such a large pool of CP and superb melee it's just a straight auto use every time it can be. So in this position changing the CP doesn't make sense.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

caladancid wrote:
Does nobody here remember the Leafblower armies? Or how Eldar used to be pre 8th? Nothing in this edition so far comes close to that broken, at least now there are several armies that can compete with each other.

Not an excuse really for GWs very bad rules writing, but honestly this chicken little stuff about Custodes and Tau is ridic.

I want to be very clear that this isn't chicken little. I don't think the sky is falling like some other posters in the thread assert. If I've given the impression otherwise that was not my intention.

I think, however, that there are issues in the pipeline that GW needs to address without making us wait 3 to 6 months.

I don't feel that there is anything wrong with voicing that concern even if others like to go off the deep end with it...

For the sky to be falling releases that are this unbalanced would have to be unusual. It looks a little unusual because we have published data about competitive winrates now that we didn't before the last few years, but if "release unbalanced army->immediately dominates" did any damage to GW's business they would have noticed sometime in the last ten years of releasing unbalanced armies.

i just don't believe the playerbase in the states is that toxic, for sure there are people that don't play in stores as much that you can reach in local facebook groups or something.

Showing up to my store with high powered list outside of an actual tournament would be seen as a dick move by most.

Hecaton wrote:
Dude, at this point you're trolling.

Dream your dreams, man.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
i just don't believe the playerbase in the states is that toxic, for sure there are people that don't play in stores as much that you can reach in local facebook groups or something.

Showing up to my store with high powered list outside of an actual tournament would be seen as a dick move by most.

You'd be surprised. I've gotten kicked out of garagehammer FB groups for daring to ask people if they'd consider playing less competitively.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Tiberias wrote:
Every time something is too strong people immediately scream that this current thing is the most broken thing the game has ever seen ever....I guess it's a natural reaction, but demonstrably false.

I'm an active custodes player however and I say point nerfs are in order. Trajann is way too cheap and the bikes and salvo launchers need to go up a bit as well. Id also give wardens and terminators a slight bump in points. One thing I'm against is touching the strats too much, a very big portion of custodes survivability is now tied to the stratagems and touching them too much can exponentially hurt the faction. I'm not saying don't do anything with them, but gw needs to be careful.

I'd rather see light touches as well. Personally I think the approach GW took with DE was the correct approach even if it didn't solve the problem immediately as the issue can be complex as I'll try and illustrate below.

My particular thrust here is to get GW to communicate with us and make sure they're addressing things in a timely manner and not to specify specific changes or to enforce the will of the communities ideas of balance.

The thing with Trajann is he seems to come with Master and Champion traits considering the others don't really do much for him except maybe Peerless. Master means you're picking up 5 CP regen easily plus 1 for Trajann himself and then 5 per round putting them at 23CP.

This exacerbates the cost of strats. This trait doesn't need to be tied to Trajann either so bumping his points doesn't necessarily clear us from the problem and I don't see GW changing the trait. If Trajann got forced out people would pick up the trait and a dreadnought and dish out rr1s to wound that way.

Custodes have a 1CP interrupt when on an objective ( which will be most of the time ). Clearly it should be 1CP, because otherwise why would it exist, but with such a large pool of CP and superb melee it's just a straight auto use every time it can be. So in this position changing the CP doesn't make sense.

No, DE were not the correct approach. They should absolutely not have been allowed to run roughshod over the competitive meta for 9? months only to now be crowded out not because they got brought in line but because there is even more ridiculous gak out there.

Yeah. DE mightve been considered done correctly if GW didnt give coven an unnecessary buff

even then, they waited too long with them on top. I'm a DE player and seeing them just destroy everything turned me off them

 auticus wrote:

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there Over here trying to ask people to not bring competitive lists is seen as insulting by a great many players in the pool and generates a lot of anger and drama.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

What? Thousand sons are good now. I don't get why you think they suck.

I haven't actively played since 7th ed shortly after their book came out and they were face dropped unless you were running Magnus and Mortarion (lol...) combo. I have no idea if they suck today. I was told they still suck if you're running a rubric themed Thousand Sons (the reason why most people would choose that legion I'd think).

If rubrics are suddenly able to show up to open game day and not get destroyed by the tournament hotness then awesome. I was under the assumption that is definitely not the case.

And if it is the case then cool. My point stands that if you can't play a faction you enjoy without it being a horrible negative experience getting trounced by busted and OP deck building elements, its not a good game and needs revisited (often over the past many years the answer is simply "just dont play bad factions then and make sure you do your research and play one of the optimal lists".

They are dreadfully MEH. The suffer from having a really crappy roster of units to take, because their only 2 gimmick units are dreadfully horrible in the game right now for the point cost.
All is dust might as well be dust, because the rule hardly ever comes into effect, or is useful since everything has multi AP multi Damage.
Magnus is hot garbage, because lving on T7 with a 4++ is like hiding behind a wet paper bag.
The lack of power diversity also greatly hurts them due to the fact that everything is more or less another way to do d3 mortal wounds.

There are a lot of things they could do, that would greatly help them be a lot more viable.
-Add in Sehkmet terminator elite choice (I know they are SOT but specifically a body guard uint) that magnus can utilize similar to death shrouds
-Give more heavy support options Lib dread for example
-Intorduce a silver tower heavy support or LOW unit
-provide more witchfire like power that multiple units can take
-possibly allow Tsons to case the same powers multiple times no stacking them
-allow them to properly ally with daemons of tzeentzch such as pink horrors as troops, screamers, flamers, but with conditions like you need more tsons units then tzeentzch units

Not saying all these need to be done but something along these lines.

Just a side bar on tsons.

Tiberias wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there

Well fair enough, but I find it hard to believe that people playing this game in the US are somehow generally more unreasonable and not willing to make the gaming experience fun for both parties.

I can write an entire book on the last 20 years of me running public narrative campaigns for stores... from being screamed at, having our facebook group hacked, to a guy wanting to fight me in the parking lot because we were using warhammer world scenarios that weren't tournament-standard.

Find it hard to believe all you want but the cooperative experience you are pushing would be great but is just simply not the environment in a lot of regions over here.

 Ordana wrote:
No, DE were not the correct approach. They should absolutely not have been allowed to run roughshod over the competitive meta for 9? months only to now be crowded out not because they got brought in line but because there is even more ridiculous gak out there.

I agree with you, the DE "balance" is a case study in bad decisions by GW. When you only touch the points so infrequently as they do in their current model, they need to be heavier handed. Release date for the DE codex was March 2021 so it is 11 months of them being too good.

Even now they are still too good for Space Marines and Death Guard, and maybe too good for a few of the other 9th edition codexes. This is the flaw with the power creep ladder model GW are using, DE will have been knocked down by Tau and Custodes in win rate, but that doesn't mean they have been fixed into the other codexes, it just means everyone has gone down at least two rungs on the ladder.

 auticus wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there

Well fair enough, but I find it hard to believe that people playing this game in the US are somehow generally more unreasonable and not willing to make the gaming experience fun for both parties.

I can write an entire book on the last 20 years of me running public narrative campaigns for stores... from being screamed at, having our facebook group hacked, to a guy wanting to fight me in the parking lot because we were using warhammer world scenarios that weren't tournament-standard.

Find it hard to believe all you want but the cooperative experience you are pushing would be great but is just simply not the environment in a lot of regions over here.

Genuinely sorry to hear that, sounds awful honestly. Gotta open your own store with blackjack and hookers and better player culture