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.

Found this buried at the bottom of a warcom metawatch article.

So, what’s next for our favourite pantomime killers? Rest assured that the Warhammer Studio is aware that this particular comedy is at present slightly too divine. Several senior members of the Warhammer 40,000 team were at AdeptiCon to watch things unfold, and the next Balance Dataslate is coming with appropriate fixes next week.

You can therefore expect imminent tweaks and changes to the Harlequins in particular – they’ll remain an awesome faction, but other factions will find them more fun to play against, and Aeldari players will see them support a wider variety of army lists in competitive settings.

That’s not all you’ll find in the Balance Dataslate – stay tuned to the Warhammer Community website for more news on that soon. In the meantime, we believe crafty players can come up with creative solutions to our little clown infestation…

emphasis mine, link to original article


So, they realise they screwed up, and will push out a nerf to them next week.

Given this is the balance dataslate, whatever they are doing is NOT a points adjustment based change (They reserve that for their seasons thing), but an actual rules change to the units.


Things that happened in the last dataslate, as a reference:
-Limited aircraft number to 2 models at 2k in matched play.
-Removal of CORE form Talos, added it to a large number of necron units.
-Added "One each" rule to ork buggies.
-Improved the LRBT save to 2+ and modifed the orders rules
-Gave Knights obsec and counts as 5/10 models ability.


So, what do you guys think they will do to detune the harlies back down to merely bloody good level?

"iF yOu LeT tHe CoMpEtItIVe PlAyErS bAlaNcE tHe GaMe It WiLl Be BeTtEr"

So how are we liking that now that we've seen the game become more of a mess than it arguable ever has been?

I'd love to see them limit vehicle squadrons to 0-1 selections for the entire game. They've tried it multiple times now and it has led to skew issues.

A 0-1 Voidweaver selection per army still allows players to get to the magical number of 3 without the resulting skew of 9 + garbage lists. I think Squadrons were thought to provide a little more flexibility to using those slots, like getting 3 Voidweavers in a Patrol or allowing other HS options (provided they exist, but Ork buggies are still a thing that would benefit from the lens of getting additional FA options with a set of 3 buggies in 1 slot).

But, no good deed goes unpunished, and this is why we're not allowed to have nice things. I think the mask is off (pun intended) and we're going to see the buggy treatment make a visit to the murder clowns.

Purifying Tempest wrote:
I'd love to see them limit vehicle squadrons to 0-1 selections for the entire game. They've tried it multiple times now and it has led to skew issues.

A 0-1 Voidweaver selection per army still allows players to get to the magical number of 3 without the resulting skew of 9 + garbage lists. I think Squadrons were thought to provide a little more flexibility to using those slots, like getting 3 Voidweavers in a Patrol or allowing other HS options (provided they exist, but Ork buggies are still a thing that would benefit from the lens of getting additional FA options with a set of 3 buggies in 1 slot).

But, no good deed goes unpunished, and this is why we're not allowed to have nice things. I think the mask is off (pun intended) and we're going to see the buggy treatment make a visit to the murder clowns.

Weren't Squads of vehicles originally Apocalypse things? I remember a long time ago there were all of these boxes of tanks that featured three copies of said tank and had Apoc on the box. I think this was around fifth edition?

GW's idea of what rules it gives away for free and what it charges for and how this ties in with their view of seasons is confused and confusing.

But really - just because the February Balance Sheet didn't include points (because want to sell you CA, its totally worth it for tweaking about 3 units per faction, honest) doesn't mean they will do the same in this one. Its very easy to go "yeah hats off we screwed up, the Voidweaver is now 110-120 points." It should really just be in the Eldar Codex FAQ.

Other options are more explicit nerfs. So for example Starweavers and Voidweavers could drop to only a 5++ rather than a 4++. Which might prompt some tears - but its what a Venom has. Which seems to prompt a "No but you see the Venom is overcosted, because its not currently in that 1% pool of datasheets crushing tournaments" from the competitive crowd, but they should just be overruled if you don't want the 7th edition style tier gap between armies to remain.

There is nothing wrong with the new stuff always being the best stuff, this is the case in almost every game example card games. If you want to have a higher chance of winning you have to use the meta cards.

The true problem is that the best players always choose to use the new stuff which makes the increase in power seem oppressive.

Anyone can look at the list of players at the event and what armies they selected and you will know the top tables before the games even started.

It is a bandwagon issue amongst competitive players that is causing tournament stats to look insane.

This is why only mugs buy codexes. They are out of date only weeks later

I hope it’s not just Harlequins. I hope there’s some Tau and Custode nerfs too.

Jarms48 wrote:
I hope it’s not just Harlequins. I hope there’s some Tau and Custode nerfs too.

Maybe instead of constant nerfs, they should consider reversing previous nerfs to make the older codexes powerful again. There's a load of Space Marine nerfs from points raises which could easily bring the faction back in line.

You can therefore expect imminent tweaks and changes to the Harlequins in particular – they’ll remain an awesome faction, but other factions will find them more fun to play against, and Aeldari players will see them support a wider variety of army lists in competitive settings.

Just what we need. A DE liquifire style nerf, which this time will let Eldar run multiple builds in a competitive setting. How many faction did even have more then one build at the same tim that was good?

 CKO wrote:
It is a bandwagon issue amongst competitive players that is causing tournament stats to look insane.

There's undoubtedly some swing that probably needs to be taken account of. Quite how much is unclear - but I'd potentially venture about 5%.

On the weekend just gone, Harlequins played 124 tournament games and won 93 of them for a 75% win rate.
That isn't remotely normal.

Why would I ever want to buy a codex if nothing on them is correct.

Gw books aren't even worth the paper they're printed on these days.

 Togusa wrote:
"iF yOu LeT tHe CoMpEtItIVe PlAyErS bAlaNcE tHe GaMe It WiLl Be BeTtEr"

So how are we liking that now that we've seen the game become more of a mess than it arguable ever has been?

It'd be a lot worse TBH hahahaha

 Togusa wrote:
"iF yOu LeT tHe CoMpEtItIVe PlAyErS bAlaNcE tHe GaMe It WiLl Be BeTtEr"

So how are we liking that now that we've seen the game become more of a mess than it arguable ever has been?

This is one of the dumbest sentiments ever expressed on Dakka.

You are literally the only person ON THE PLANET who apparently thinks that competitive players actually have any say in balancing the game.

Many people feel like competitive players are being 'catered too' (it's barely even pandering, in reality) but you're the only person out of touch with reality enough to even suggest that competitive players are actually a meaningful voice in GW's game balance. ESPECIALLY during launches.

What community playtesters they DO use are constantly, AGGRESSIVELY ignored by the rules writers(per multiple sources from literally every product launch).

You couldn't possibly be more egregiously wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sumilidon wrote:

Jarms48 wrote:
I hope it’s not just Harlequins. I hope there’s some Tau and Custode nerfs too.

Maybe instead of constant nerfs, they should consider reversing previous nerfs to make the older codexes powerful again. There's a load of Space Marine nerfs from points raises which could easily bring the faction back in line.

They need both. Tau, Custodes, and Harlequins need signifcant nerfs at the same time they need to revert nerfs on SM, DG, Sisters, ETC.

Only doing one or the other won't change anything. Harlequins make full power ironhands look like guard.

ERJAK wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
"iF yOu LeT tHe CoMpEtItIVe PlAyErS bAlaNcE tHe GaMe It WiLl Be BeTtEr"

So how are we liking that now that we've seen the game become more of a mess than it arguable ever has been?

Many people feel like competitive players are being 'catered too' (it's barely even pandering, in reality) but you're the only person out of touch with reality enough to even suggest that competitive players are actually a meaningful voice in GW's game balance. ESPECIALLY during launches.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sumilidon wrote:

Jarms48 wrote:
I hope it’s not just Harlequins. I hope there’s some Tau and Custode nerfs too.

Maybe instead of constant nerfs, they should consider reversing previous nerfs to make the older codexes powerful again. There's a load of Space Marine nerfs from points raises which could easily bring the faction back in line.

They need both. Tau, Custodes, and Harlequins need signifcant nerfs at the same time they need to revert nerfs on SM, DG, Sisters, ETC.

Only doing one or the other won't change anything. Harlequins make full power ironhands look like guard.

I suspect you may be the idiot. It is very well documented that GW balance is driven heavily by tournament results and very little by playtester. Point and case is that if it were the latter which was the most important, they wouldn't be released so broken. They are however quick to swing the nerf bat after major tournament wins as that represents a significant amount of data for them to base the nerfs upon. Where else would they get that amount of info? Watching youtube games? Do you clubs submit your game results to GW directly??

As for not doing anything - so you claim. Fact was however that the factions on release were powerful and then nerfed. Want to restore balance? the counter to nerfs are buffs. Maybe then they could return armies to their actual point values in some case and make their codexes valid again.

Karol wrote:

You can therefore expect imminent tweaks and changes to the Harlequins in particular – they’ll remain an awesome faction, but other factions will find them more fun to play against, and Aeldari players will see them support a wider variety of army lists in competitive settings.

Just what we need. A DE liquifire style nerf, which this time will let Eldar run multiple builds in a competitive setting. How many faction did even have more then one build at the same tim that was good?

all of them except GK?

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
"iF yOu LeT tHe CoMpEtItIVe PlAyErS bAlaNcE tHe GaMe It WiLl Be BeTtEr"

So how are we liking that now that we've seen the game become more of a mess than it arguable ever has been?

It'd be a lot worse TBH hahahaha

True. Now, most armies are at least okeyish for 2-3 months. In 8th there were books that came out and made no sense existing within the 8th rule and meta setting.


I like some of the funny stuff playtesters say about how it works. For DE they tested DE with some of the new rules , but with weapons having old stats, so dark lances were doing d6D. And they even told the GW side that they think that the codex is going to be very good. And then when the book came out they saw all the updated gun stats and points costs, and were mind blown. Made for some very fun YT videos to watch.

 CKO wrote:
There is nothing wrong with the new stuff always being the best stuff, this is the case in almost every game example card games. If you want to have a higher chance of winning you have to use the meta cards.

The true problem is that the best players always choose to use the new stuff which makes the increase in power seem oppressive.

Anyone can look at the list of players at the event and what armies they selected and you will know the top tables before the games even started.

It is a bandwagon issue amongst competitive players that is causing tournament stats to look insane.

This is utterly nonsensical.

1. The new stuff isn't always the best stuff. The last few codexes have been wildly OP, but before that Necrons were barely an upgrade, SM was more of a side-grade, and the 9th ed Sisters book was a straight up down-grade. It's even worse if you go kit by kit.

2. The new stuff always being the best stuff is bad. I don't feel like I should have to elaborate on why every new release being immediately superior to previous releases is bad and that it isn't even the case in most TCGs.

3. The best players always use the best stuff. In every game. Always. Magic players use the best cards, League of Legends players use the best champions, Professional athletes use the best equipment and support staff. That's a baseline expectation of competition. Blaming players for using good units is like blaming NFL teams for hiring naturally athletic people. Try saying: 'The biggest problem with professional sports is that all the best teams hire young, athletic, guys in excellent shape!' out loud just to see how silly you sound.

4. Let's say it is a bandwagon issue that's causing the stats to skew as badly as they are...so? What would that change? How is 'the best units in the game are so good that every competitive player is bandwagoning on them and winning 75% of games' result in a meaningfully different outcome than 'the best units in the game are so good that EVERYBODY who uses them can win 65% of their games, regardless of their skill level.'?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sumilidon wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
"iF yOu LeT tHe CoMpEtItIVe PlAyErS bAlaNcE tHe GaMe It WiLl Be BeTtEr"

So how are we liking that now that we've seen the game become more of a mess than it arguable ever has been?

Many people feel like competitive players are being 'catered too' (it's barely even pandering, in reality) but you're the only person out of touch with reality enough to even suggest that competitive players are actually a meaningful voice in GW's game balance. ESPECIALLY during launches.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sumilidon wrote:

Jarms48 wrote:
I hope it’s not just Harlequins. I hope there’s some Tau and Custode nerfs too.

Maybe instead of constant nerfs, they should consider reversing previous nerfs to make the older codexes powerful again. There's a load of Space Marine nerfs from points raises which could easily bring the faction back in line.

They need both. Tau, Custodes, and Harlequins need signifcant nerfs at the same time they need to revert nerfs on SM, DG, Sisters, ETC.

Only doing one or the other won't change anything. Harlequins make full power ironhands look like guard.

I suspect you may be the idiot. It is very well documented that GW balance is driven heavily by tournament results and very little by playtester. Point and case is that if it were the latter which was the most important, they wouldn't be released so broken. They are however quick to swing the nerf bat after major tournament wins as that represents a significant amount of data for them to base the nerfs upon. Where else would they get that amount of info? Watching youtube games? Do you clubs submit your game results to GW directly??

As for not doing anything - so you claim. Fact was however that the factions on release were powerful and then nerfed. Want to restore balance? the counter to nerfs are buffs. Maybe then they could return armies to their actual point values in some case and make their codexes valid again.

Do you even read any of the balance changes? "Where does it come from?!?!?" THEIR BUTTS. 90% of GW's balance changes, especially release books, come from their butts.

People who feel like competitive players are being 'catered to' are, like you, simply not paying attention to what's actually happening.

GW's emergency balance changes are driven by ONLY EXTREMELY egregious tournament results, even then it's a total crapshoot if they'll make any changes that are actually helpful.

GW's points changes are driven by some arcane spreadsheet someone put together on their lunch break 8 months before the book releases.

GW's FAQ changes are driven by...honestly, there doesn't seem to be any driving force behind their FAQs. Remain stationary doesn't work coming out of transports. Why? No one knows. Literally no plausible reason for that.

GW's actual releases seem to be built entirely off of finding what playtesters identify as too power and then dropping it's point cost.

The rest is them throwing darts. Or did you think Deathshroud terminators needed a nerf?

None of that means competitive players have any say in how the balance of the game looks. GW making wild swings in roughly the direction of significant balance issues identified by tournament results

Undoing nerfs is necessary in some cases, but A. Only 2 factions (admech and drukhari) would be anywhere near where Tau, Custodes, and Harlequins are now even at full power and B. Moving the game to that level of power is just as bad as the current imbalance is.

Maybe instead of constant nerfs, they should consider reversing previous nerfs to make the older codexes powerful again. There's a load of Space Marine nerfs from points raises which could easily bring the faction back in line.

While I completely agree that basically every army except Tau, Custodes, and Harlies should have their points reversed from what GW changed in CA2022 it won’t make them content with those mentioned factions. It will certainly help though.

Custodes wrote:Change Trait 1 of the Magna Imperator shield host fighting style to read: 'Each time a model in a unit with this trait would lose a wound as a result of a mortal wound, roll one D6: on a 5+, that wound is not lost.'

The Emperor's Auspice: Change the cost of this Stratagem to ‘2CP/3CP’

Arcane Genetic Alchemy: Change the cost of this Stratagem to ‘2CP/3CP’

Harlequins wrote:Change the first bullet point of the Characterisation - Blaze of Light to read: ‘Each time an attack is made against a unit with this characterisation, if the attacking model is more than 24" away, an unmodified hit roll of 1-3 for that attack fails, irrespective of any abilities that the weapon or the model making that attack may have.’

Change the unit size of Voidweavers to: ‘1-2 models’.

Capricious Reflections: Change the cost of this Stratagem to ‘2CP’

Genestealer Cults wrote:Add the Core keyword to the Keywords section of the following datasheets: Aberrants, Goliath Truck.

Tau Empire wrote:Change the last bullet point from the Wargear section of the following datasheets - Crisis Battlesuits, Crisis Bodyguards and Broadside Battlesuits to read: ‘This unit can be equipped with up to two of the following, in any combination (Power Rating +1): 1 Gun Drone; 1 Marker Drone; 1 Shield Drone (pg 94-97).’

Remove the Core keyword from the Keywords section of the Broadside Battlesuit datasheet.

Let's see if any of this turns out to be true...

Owning the competition is compensation for not receiving a single new model. TOUGH!

I saw a different set of leaks, lol.

The set I saw did limit Voidweavers to 1-2, but also... gave Astra Militarum and Chaos Space Marines 200 extra points!

ERJAK wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
"iF yOu LeT tHe CoMpEtItIVe PlAyErS bAlaNcE tHe GaMe It WiLl Be BeTtEr"

So how are we liking that now that we've seen the game become more of a mess than it arguable ever has been?

This is one of the dumbest sentiments ever expressed on Dakka.

You are literally the only person ON THE PLANET who apparently thinks that competitive players actually have any say in balancing the game.

Many people feel like competitive players are being 'catered too' (it's barely even pandering, in reality) but you're the only person out of touch with reality enough to even suggest that competitive players are actually a meaningful voice in GW's game balance. ESPECIALLY during launches.

What community playtesters they DO use are constantly, AGGRESSIVELY ignored by the rules writers(per multiple sources from literally every product launch).

You couldn't possibly be more egregiously wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sumilidon wrote:

Jarms48 wrote:
I hope it’s not just Harlequins. I hope there’s some Tau and Custode nerfs too.

Maybe instead of constant nerfs, they should consider reversing previous nerfs to make the older codexes powerful again. There's a load of Space Marine nerfs from points raises which could easily bring the faction back in line.

They need both. Tau, Custodes, and Harlequins need signifcant nerfs at the same time they need to revert nerfs on SM, DG, Sisters, ETC.

Only doing one or the other won't change anything. Harlequins make full power ironhands look like guard.

I totally believe you. They don't listen to the Frontline people at all.

 Togusa wrote:
"iF yOu LeT tHe CoMpEtItIVe PlAyErS bAlaNcE tHe GaMe It WiLl Be BeTtEr"

So how are we liking that now that we've seen the game become more of a mess than it arguable ever has been?

The competitive players aren't the ones that released 4 codexes in a row in a totally broken state. The competitive players are the ones saying "hey, uh, this is no fun even when I'm winning because it's like playing basketball against a 5 year old unless the enemy has the same codex. Please fix." If we were balancing it for casual play, voidweavers could just remain broken because nobody is buying 9 of them for garagehammer with their buddies on board game night.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CKO wrote:
There is nothing wrong with the new stuff always being the best stuff, this is the case in almost every game example card games. If you want to have a higher chance of winning you have to use the meta cards.

You can play with cards the minute you open the pack or buy the single. Same with video game characters, if my favorite hero gets nerfed or a new OP one comes out, I just click a different spot on the screen during hero selection. If that were the case with Warhammer, that type of balancing would be fine. When you have to build and paint the models, flavor of the week metas are awful. Players in a competitive environment are always going to play whatever gives them the best chance to win. If the game designer is halfway competent at their job, "whatever gives them the best chance to win" will be more than 1 codex spamming the max amount of 1 specific unit and using 1 specific army-wide trait. It is not the player's fault that GW is either completely incompetent at balancing or chooses sales over gameplay.

Purifying Tempest wrote:
I'd love to see them limit vehicle squadrons to 0-1 selections for the entire game. They've tried it multiple times now and it has led to skew issues.

So, because they released Voidweaver rules that you can't deal with in your precious tournies, people running multiple squadrons of Sentinels/Killa Kanz/Grot tanks/Mek Gunz (even though thats just a bad idea)/GSC ridge runners/land speeders/SoB Penitent Engines/etc etc etc should be punished?

And yes, people DO play these things. Maybe not in a tourney, but certainly in casual play.

You need:
• To target the changes to the problem units.
• Restrict the changes to applying to tourney play. Wich is not the same as casual matched play.

 CKO wrote:
There is nothing wrong with the new stuff always being the best stuff, this is the case in almost every game example card games. If you want to have a higher chance of winning you have to use the meta cards.

Sure if you apply stupid game designer style who cares not for balance.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sumilidon wrote:

I suspect you may be the idiot. It is very well documented that GW balance is driven heavily by tournament results and very little by playtester. Point and case is that if it were the latter which was the most important, they wouldn't be released so broken. They are however quick to swing the nerf bat after major tournament wins as that represents a significant amount of data for them to base the nerfs upon. Where else would they get that amount of info? Watching youtube games? Do you clubs submit your game results to GW directly??.

If they wanted balance they wouldn't need tournament stats. 40k isn't complex game. It's dead easy with elementary school kid who can read english able to create best lists and spot issues.

Gw could fix 99%+ issues by just reading through codex pre-release.

But balance is bad for profit margin. Shifting imbalance meanwhile good. Guess you can tell what gw goes for...

Toofast wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
"iF yOu LeT tHe CoMpEtItIVe PlAyErS bAlaNcE tHe GaMe It WiLl Be BeTtEr"

So how are we liking that now that we've seen the game become more of a mess than it arguable ever has been?

The competitive players aren't the ones that released 4 codexes in a row in a totally broken state. The competitive players are the ones saying "hey, uh, this is no fun even when I'm winning because it's like playing basketball against a 5 year old unless the enemy has the same codex. Please fix." If we were balancing it for casual play, voidweavers could just remain broken because nobody is buying 9 of them for garagehammer with their buddies on board game night.

Yeah. If anything, this is getting fixed (hopefully) in record time because of competitive players. Shame they didn't pass the book around more (or listen) beforehand.

xerxeskingofking wrote:Found this buried at the bottom of a warcom metawatch article.

On the other hand, this isn't right either. This wasn't 'buried' at the bottom of the article. The entire point of the article was a reassurance that they know (now) that its borked and fix is coming. It might well end up being insufficient (or a mis-aimed overreaction), but an entire article about how badly they messed things up isn't 'burying' the fix announcement.

Purifying Tempest wrote:
I'd love to see them limit vehicle squadrons to 0-1 selections for the entire game. They've tried it multiple times now and it has led to skew issues.

You sure you're not a GW rules writer? 'Cause massive sweeping changes to fix specific problems is exactly what they would do.

If the problem is Voidthingies, then fix Voidthingies. Don't feth over every other type of vehicle squadron because one unit is too powerful.

This is exactly the attitude that caused GW to limit all aircraft because Ork and AdMech aircraft were too powerful. "Sorry, Mr. Air Cav Guard player, because the Ork planes have just too much dakka, you can't play your army anymore! Sucks to be you!" "That's a real shame Mr. Deathwatch player, but because an AdMech player wiped his opponent off the board with his techno-jets before that player even had their first turn your airborne assault in Blackstars will have to wait, because you can only bring two now. Guess you'd better sell the other ones you bought! ".

No!

Rumor is that voidweaver squads are going to 1-2 (down from 3) and the prismatic cannon is going up by 10 points. If true, this seems like a nice and tidy fix.

 mokoshkana wrote:
Rumor is that voidweaver squads are going to 1-2 (down from 3) and the prismatic cannon is going up by 10 points. If true, this seems like a nice and tidy fix.

That looks like a good change. Maybe we will see some haywire voidweaver. Haywire is good but not good as prismatic cannon.