AduroT wrote:
TSons nerfs? I haven’t heard the complaining about them.

Tsagualsa wrote:

 Matrindur wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Might be of use to some:

On one hand, nice that they are printing new ones at all, on the other why not delay the release at this point since they already limited them and people will complain that they get cards with errors

They could do free swaps of cards with errors for the correct ones in-store, but that would be pretty expensive and a huge logistics burden.

Zachectomy wrote:
Videogame industry level quality control. When did releasing first draft level products become the new normal? How hard is it for a multi-million dollar company to hire an editor?

 kodos wrote:

Zachectomy wrote:
Videogame industry level quality control. When did releasing first draft level products become the new normal? How hard is it for a multi-million dollar company to hire an editor?

as I have learned today on this forum:
GW is a miniature company and not a card printing company and for sure not a gaming company you should not expect what you would expect from a card printing company or a gaming company

they don't have enough people to proof read and it is not their job to hier people doing it

/s

 AtoMaki wrote:

Sarouan wrote:
Meanwhile, normal players (also called "casual" for some reason) have fun with the game. Because they treat it as what it is: a game.

As far as I can tell this prediction never realizes and tournament players always get the last laugh.

 AtoMaki wrote:

Sarouan wrote:
Meanwhile, normal players (also called "casual" for some reason) have fun with the game. Because they treat it as what it is: a game.

As far as I can tell this prediction never realizes and tournament players always get the last laugh.

 AtoMaki wrote:

Sarouan wrote:
Meanwhile, normal players (also called "casual" for some reason) have fun with the game. Because they treat it as what it is: a game.

As far as I can tell this prediction never realizes and tournament players always get the last laugh.

tneva82 wrote:

 AtoMaki wrote:

Sarouan wrote:
Meanwhile, normal players (also called "casual" for some reason) have fun with the game. Because they treat it as what it is: a game.

As far as I can tell this prediction never realizes and tournament players always get the last laugh.

So you know casuals have not been fun...how?

As is atm who is crying most? Tournament try hards.

ERJAK wrote:


I think something that gets lost a lot is that OP armies only really impact one game per tournament for people outside the top 10%. Your day to day enjoyment of the game is only impacted by OP armies if you spend a lot of time on the internet (even as a tournament player).

Sarouan wrote:

 AtoMaki wrote:

Sarouan wrote:
Meanwhile, normal players (also called "casual" for some reason) have fun with the game. Because they treat it as what it is: a game.

As far as I can tell this prediction never realizes and tournament players always get the last laugh.

See what happened with Warmachine. The tournament players didn't laugh that much, because they made all the "casual" players run away because of their behaviour. So when Privateer Press did release a "not so balanced" version of the game, there wasn't enough players to keep it alive.

Focusing too much on competition is always a dead end.

 xttz wrote:
Some whispers from a previously reliable source:

Large rules update for release "very soon", possibly tomorrow
Eldar and TSons nerfs
Unspecified changes for some other factions

Tsagualsa wrote:
For a company that barely does any market research 'tournament try hards' are about the only demographic they can get a solid reading on...

 zend wrote:
I always crack up when this thread devolves into a general complaints thread, but I have to agree with the Sisters of Battle index complaints. My friend that plays them was reading through it with me and I was just dying at how awful it is, and how much they lost in flavor through rules (lack thereof rather). For all the meming people do about people quitting over 10th, he actually wants to quit Sisters for another faction and it’s very sad.

Tyranids are a lot of fun for me though, can’t wait to try out the busted sporocyst ability to spam Mucolids before it gets limited to once per turn.

Dudeface wrote:

Oh pipe down, there's a long gap between that hyperbole and not understanding software design at a business level.

They should have proof read more and hire more editors, but they're not multi-millon by aimlessly lobbing money at stuff, thus expect them to continue being tight arsed and working on minimal staff.

ERJAK wrote:
I think something that gets lost a lot is that OP armies only really impact one game per tournament for people outside the top 10%. Your day to day enjoyment of the game is only impacted by OP armies if you spend a lot of time on the internet (even as a tournament player).

 dreadblade wrote:

Spoiler:

 Galef wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
On the other other hand, we’ve got digital ones, why worry about the print ones - especially given we know each set will be defunct as their Codex rolls out.

My army codex isn't due out for over a year. And since scrolling through the digital takes FOREVER (surely, the pages are sloooow to load) and printing is a hassle, I still intend on getting the physical cards to use.
I can also use a sharpie on the cards if something changes

-

If the PDFs are 1:1 scale you can print out any updated cards and cut out the just area that's changed to stick on the physical cards

ERJAK wrote:

I play sisters as my primary army and am building Tyranids through Leviathan and the listbuilding is night and day.

Tyranids aren't exactly great right now, but they're still really fun! They have cool stuff they can do and shenanigans and a couple of standout models and choices and even some gimmicky nonsense.

Sisters, who aren't that far off from nids in terms of raw game effectiveness (though they are worse), are completely soulless. It's like they had Nurse Ratchet design the thing. 'Oh no, deary; You can't attach a Canoness to a Retributor squad, that's far too exciting for your delicate consitution! Why don't you pay 70pts for Devastating wounds in melee instead?'

Bago wrote:
Calling that Goonhammer rant toxic positivity and claim they are writing GW propaganda. Dakkadakka always staying true to itself.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Bago wrote:
Calling that Goonhammer rant toxic positivity and claim they are writing GW propaganda. Dakkadakka always staying true to itself.

Got an actual rebuttal?

Forget bringing a knife to a gun fight, Adeptus Mechanicus are bringing a wet fart to a gak storm. The shooting is bad. The melee is worse. The detachment ability outright helps your opponent in some matchups, and the faction ability is a band-aid on an active grease fire.

The index is bad and it should feel bad.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

More people should read Wing's rant on Goonhammer:

Spoiler:

Last week was a big one, huh? The vast majority of the rules for 10th Edition are now out in the wild, along with the truly upsetting number of words we wrote about them, and players have started to really dig in and get some games under their belts. I think it’s fair to say that emotions have been running high among segments of the playerbase, and that reactions have been mixed at best among the competitive scene. Plenty of people have positive things to say about the game, but the Indexes and Munitorum Field Manual in particular have created quite a bit of blowback, with some extremely alarmist takes about the edition being dead on arrival or unfixable, and some serious grumbling about some factions, which our own team have not been immune from.

Bluntly, the net result of this is that last week sucked as a content creator, because everyone wanted to laser focus in on excuses to get big mad online, all competing to have the most doom-laden take about 40K or their army, often in our comments section. This does not make the absurd amount of hours it takes to produce that volume of material feel particularly rewarding, and I can only imagine what it’s like for the design team. I’m not looking for pity here – I’ve been in online ecosystems a long time, I know how this works – but I do think the extent to which the community seems determined to have the most hostile or negative take on anything that happens has been ballooning in the last year, and this feels like it’s coming to a head in an incredibly negative fashion.

Because here’s the thing: Tenth Edition is fun! It’s really good fun! I have been privileged enough to play quite a few games of it now, and I’ve enjoyed all of them, coming away each time with new aspects I want to tinker with or try out. I’m also not alone in this – the reaction I’ve seen to Tenth among casual players has been wildly more positive than in the competitive scene, and if you’re outside the competitive ecosystem, the vitriol must look completely baffling. Part of that is, of course, that in the information age the speed at which competitive players can identify and start pushing the extremes of a new set of rules is orders of magnitude faster than it used to be. I imagine that if every game of tenth you’ve played is against the most nightmarish Aeldari list you can concoct, it probably doesn’t seem that great, so here’s an idea: Maybe don’t?

No one is saying that there won’t need to be some balance changes – there obviously will, probably sooner rather than later. We have, as a community, pretty conclusively demonstrated that the Aeldari Index is busted in about three days. Go us, new record etc. Now get some new material, because there’s really only two outcomes here.

Either you think Games Workshop will make improvements or you don’t. If you do, there’s a whole bunch of stuff you can explore while you wait, a lot of it great. If you don’t, and you’re online screaming about how GW can’t or won’t fix this, and Tenth Edition is doomed, then I’ve got a couple of questions. One – which Games Workshop have you been looking at for the last six years? It’s clearly a different one than I have. Throughout 9th edition Games Workshop demonstrated a commitment to improving the game quality through balance dataslates, a new rules glossary, and the return of its own tournament circuit in the US and (more recently) in the UK. It’s not an organisation that strikes me as particularly likely to let these problems hang around if they are as bad as some people think. I understand that people want feedback and changes at the speed of a Discord ping, but also we have literally already had the first emergency balance tweak for this edition, and it’s not even out yet!

The second question is honestly the more important one: What’s your endgame? Let’s say you’re right, and that for some reason Games Workshop is locked in to not course correcting this for six months or whatever. What is blasting out hyperbole after wildly incorrect hyperbole about how this is the worst that things have ever been and that the game sucks now going to accomplish? Make you look smart and sophisticated? Convince people that this community is not worth their time? Somehow get them to adopt your personal dream comp pack that definitely, 100% fixes every faction except the one you play?

Take an honest step back and listen to yourselves, because what you’re really pushing for is driving this community into total irrelevance. Competitive 40k has grown spectacularly over the last few years, but it’s still dwarfed by the greater 40k hobby, and if all the vocal parts of our community spend their time doing is screaming about how terrible everything is, that growth can reverse fast. That goes double if all the casual players are having the time of their lives, because why on earth would anyone choose to get involved in a toxic, seething mass of furious Reddit/Facebook/Twitter/Discord posts?

Either way, play games, get some practice in, and then when the hammer drops on Aeldari/Towering/Indirect fire (delete as applicable), your experience will still matter and the meta-chasers’ will be out of date. To be clear, I’m 100% putting my money (quite a bit of it, US hotel prices are wild) where my mouth is on both fronts on this one. I’m flying over to the US Open Tacoma in July and I’m bringing my Necrons rather than my beloved Wraithknight, because I’m vastly more interested in playing them than an Aeldari list that’ll be legal for months at most. Are some games at events going to suck? Yeah, but that’s always a risk if you attend an event however good the balance is – bad dice or bad opponents can still ruin a game for you. My least enjoyable tournament game ever was one that I won by a healthy margin, but it was still such a soul-destroying experience that I was angry for days afterwards. 40K is an imperfect game played by imperfect people. Sometimes it is good, and sometimes it is bad, and that’s life. If the competitive community means anything to you, focus on finding the bits that are good, and trust that the game’s designers want to do that as well.

My assumption is that this intro is going to make people a lot of people very mad and get me called a GW shill or whatever and sure, go nuts, there’s a queue. To be very clear, no one at GW has asked me to write this, and no one told us what to put in our Index reviews. People seem to think that the only possible reason we would choose to say anything nice about the Indexes is because Big GW is breathing down our necks, and that just bluntly isn’t true – we look for the positives because we all like this game and want it to be good! Pointing at something and saying it’s bad is much easier than digging into what’s good, and the latter is much more useful in the long run for building up the game. Also, plenty of our readers are never going to go anywhere near a tournament, and I guarantee you that the majority of them are going to find that their Indexes are just fine, and we’re writing for them as well.

This column, however, remains aimed firmly at the competitive community, and the driving purpose of it has always been to build positivity. If people go looking for competitive 40K content, I want them to find something focused on the creativeness and ingenuity that underpins so much of it, to see players from their local scene get a moment in the sun when they have a breakout performance, and to see their pet unit show up in the finals of a supermajor. I don’t want them to find a giant screed about the latest community drama, the latest prediction of the game’s death or people getting furiously angry that anyone would consider playing a non-optimal list.

Tenth Edition has the potential to be a great time for the game – so let’s focus on that, and not the teething issues. We know they’re there, I’ll wager the design team knows about them too, and shouting won’t get them fixed faster. I’m a software architect in my day job, and I know full well that launching a complex, technical project into the wild can sometimes be a bumpy ride, no matter how hard the team has worked, and that figuring out the causes of problems generally happens very quickly, but properly resolving them can, with the best will in the world, take a bit of time. Also, unlike a software project, you cannot simply roll back a release involving shipping spectacular numbers of physical boxes across the entire globe.

I’ll be at the Bristol GT playing pickup games of 10th this weekend (9th has exited my brain at this point), so if there’s something you like about the new edition, or even some constructive thoughts you have about what could be improved, do come and say hi and let me know. Or eradicate my Necrons with a Wraithknight to teach me a lesson, I guess. I technically cannot stop you doing that. I can even provide the Wraithknight, but as above I will be shaking my head in disapproval the whole time.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Bago wrote:
Calling that Goonhammer rant toxic positivity and claim they are writing GW propaganda. Dakkadakka always staying true to itself.

Got an actual rebuttal?

ERJAK wrote:

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Bago wrote:
Calling that Goonhammer rant toxic positivity and claim they are writing GW propaganda. Dakkadakka always staying true to itself.

Got an actual rebuttal?

People who are whining about OP armies have stupidly pie-in-the-sky dreams of being on the final table at LVO and losing because Nick Nanavati rolled 7 6gs on his fate dice against you.

In reality, unless a super basic build of space marines is crazy OP (i.e. 40 intercessors in the IH era that was previously mentioned) You might run into the real grit and grime of the OP armies once or twice per balance cycle.

The Goonhammer guy is objectively correct about the doomsaying being overblown for OP armies. Some areas don't even HAVE Eldar players.


He barely gave lip service to the substandard armies that are the more significant issue, or that GW's track record for taking down the absolute top end is actually pretty okay, but their track record for boosting underperformers is extremely bad (I think Necrons are the only army that saw a significant turnaround without a full codex revamp. Admech were bad from their last round of nerfs to the end of the edition).

leopard wrote:
I'd argue balance matters for narrative and open play even more

Slipspace wrote:

leopard wrote:
I'd argue balance matters for narrative and open play even more

And you'd be entirely correct. This argument that balance only matters for competitive players gets brought up all the time, and is always wrong. Competitive players will adjust their armies to take whatever is currently most powerful and expect to face similarly powerful (or, in GW's case, broken) lists themselves. They might prefer to see better balance between factions, but ultimately it doesn't have much effect on them.

More casual players get hosed by bad balance, especially when it's as bad as GW often manage. I remember playing the 8.5 SM Codex for about 3 weeks, then shelving my SM army because it was just not a fun experience for anyone. The same applied in 9th with people playing against Tyranids. When an entire book is just massively better than everything else, casual players are usually the ones to get most disheartened because they often don't understand why they're constantly losing and usually aren't having fun because of the disparity in power. I've seen it happen too often and I've seen enthusiastic players leave the game entirely because of it. These are players who would never have had any intention of going anywhere near a tournament.

 xttz wrote:
Literally no one here has said that balance doesn't matter, or that it only matters for competitive players.

 kodos wrote:

 xttz wrote:
Literally no one here has said that balance doesn't matter, or that it only matters for competitive players.

well,, this arguments comes up from time to time, but usually in the other way is if people are talking about that different options/units/factions are not balanced, someone steps in and claims "I don't need this because I play narrative" or "in casual games you play for fun and not to win", or the discussion is shut off by "perfect balance is impossible, so should not waste time and money on balance"