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.

How do.

Yes it’s another question from ignorance. As ever, keep in mind I ask these things because I genuinely don’t know. These don’t lead to some gotcha.

Now, I see the new Chapter Approved has. Well. I’ll use the word upset because I’m using it neutrally and can’t think of a better one, various folk with seemingly odd and crap rule additions.

Because I’m singularly unable to contribute to that convo, or the convo about specific ones, we have this thread.

Are these things, given GW is paying at least some attention to the competitive scene just completely random changes, or attempts (well or poorly executed) to address emerging issues?

Right. Off you go.

It's GW responding and reshaping the game based upon a small amount of tournament games.

It was described in another thread as a "trickle-down" effect, so every time a tournament player finds some broken combo that GW couldn't be bothered testing for, everyone else has to suffer with their units being nerfed.

Which is why 9th Edition has been, since it's inception, "40k Tournament Edition". So like Street Fighter, but with far less Chun-Li.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It's GW responding and reshaping the game based upon a small amount of tournament games.

You'd have a point if they were actually tackling the problems instead of just throwing darts at a board to see what happens.

As I've already stated as a broken record, the best armies aren't reliant on their Warlord Traits or Relics, and really only need the 6CP to get their Alpha strike going.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It's GW responding and reshaping the game based upon a small amount of tournament games.

You'd have a point if they were actually tackling the problems instead of just throwing darts at a board to see what happens.

As I've already stated as a broken record, the best armies aren't reliant on their Warlord Traits or Relics, and really only need the 6CP to get their Alpha strike going.

Can you go into a bit more detail?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It's GW responding and reshaping the game based upon a small amount of tournament games.

You'd have a point if they were actually tackling the problems instead of just throwing darts at a board to see what happens.

As I've already stated as a broken record, the best armies aren't reliant on their Warlord Traits or Relics, and really only need the 6CP to get their Alpha strike going.

Can you go into a bit more detail?

People are blaming the new "build only what's in the kit" dataslates and the rules patches on tournaments and the competitive crowd. It fails for a multitude of reasons:
1. The rules patches often aren't actually tackling the problems. After all, Dark Eldar and AdMech were on top for how long? GW doesn't actually go into depth on the problem. For this latest "patch", I'd argue they're just trying to limit each army's equivalent of a Smash Captain, but everything else is still untouched. That's because GW, as I said, is just throwing darts at a board to see what happens.
2. Random ass units get the treatment of "only what's in the box". Sword Brethren didn't make a singular splash anywhere, are a new unit, and got an absurd "one of each Power Weapon". If that were a concern of balance, I'd wager 100% of people would say the limited-to-one Power Maul is far worse than the Axe and Sword.

EviscerationPlague wrote:
You'd have a point if they were actually tackling the problems instead of just throwing darts at a board to see what happens.

What they're trying to do and what they're competent enough to achieve are two very different things.

It's a sublime example of why the decision to move to bespoke rules and bespoke weapons for every single unit was a stunningly brilliant and inspirational move.

This way, if a particular unit, rule and/or weapon is causing problems, you have the option to nerf that specific unit/rule/weapon, whilst leaving the rest of the game completely untouched.

The fact that GW never actually does this, and instead fixes minor problems by making sweeping changes to the entire game, is a trivial and unimportant detail.

@Mad Doc

It's worth noting that these rules apply only to Matched play games, and even more specifically games played using the Nephilim Mission pack.

If you continue to use the Vigilus Mission Pack, these rules do not apply. They do not apply to Tempest of War, Crusade, Open Play or BRB missions.

@HBMC- Yes, Matched Play in 9th edition has certainly been driven by tournament play.

Most other modes of play, however, have remained largely unimpacted by changes.

In fact, does anyone know if this mission pack extends the subfaction limit? If I remember correctly, that rule explicitly only applies in Vigilus games, so unless they've added it into the Nephilim Pack or there's been a matched play FAQ I don't know about, I think RAW it just disappears.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
You'd have a point if they were actually tackling the problems instead of just throwing darts at a board to see what happens.

What they're trying to do and what they're competent enough to achieve are two very different things.

And yeah, you're not wrong. Due to not really touching on the actual problems though, I feel to blame the tournament crowd is a bit silly.