Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sev

Big FAQ?

Recommended Posts

The Sauron is one of those models where you just don't appreciate its size in its product page until you see it next to other models!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Vextol said:

I don't really care how they deal with it, but this constant need to break anything even remotely cool in the name of 'balance' makes the game so stale and unbalanced.  It's really hard to tell someone an army is unbalanced when there are a gazillion different options and variables.  It's easy when everyone's stuff is simply last years stuff X.0.   

Remove ethereal amulet from the game and a lot of the cool heroes that are finally seeing play will go right back to being shelved.  That makes me sad faced.

There's a lot of wisdom packed between these lines.  Balance is a word that is used a lot but understood a little.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, heavenwatch is gone but maybe not forever. Maybe it will come back in next seraphon battletomb and to be honest, many of the seraphon battletomb's rule are out of date so severely that it is not worth bringing when playing games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

The Ethereal Amulet is way more broken. I am really disappointed they didn‘t change the Amulet so it sets the armour to be 4+ at best.

Just add "but this character cannot reroll save rolls for any reason." to the end of it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As its an FAQ this is more about cleaning things up rather than performing major rebalancing efforts. Which makes sense otherwise it robs the fire of the Generals Handbook. Plus sometimes its good to see a game work for a while without major sweeping changes to balance and properties so that one can make certain that its a case of problem in the game rather than a learning cure element for the players.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feels lacklustre as "A big FAQ" rather "a FAQ to tidy up a few questions but no meaningful changes to game balance bar a nerf for the Dopple cloak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Euphanism said:

Its so weird to me that Chaos Gargants and Aleguzzler Gargants are on different base sizes...but are the exact same model.

They're both on 90 x 52. I think you might have seen the bonegrinder gargant next to the aleguzzler gargant and gotten mixed up, the bonegrinder is a forgeworld model and not the same kit so it makes sense to be on a different base. I made the same mistake at first.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, HammerOfSigmar said:

Well, heavenwatch is gone but maybe not forever. Maybe it will come back in next seraphon battletomb and to be honest, many of the seraphon battletomb's rule are out of date so severely that it is not worth bringing when playing games. 

I joke with my friends but its not a joke. Seraphon are an index army. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm disappointed that GW chose to name the Monster factions for Order and Destruction as "Monsters of Order" and "Monsters of Destruction".

This is beyond lazy and extremely disappointing, specially when Monsters of Chaos and Beasts of the Grave are already pretty great names!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doppelganger cloak was powerful.
It was so strong, being able to just make a whole unit lose its combat phase was too powerful.

BUT now that it is gone, my flesh eater courts list is weaker. I can't send my king around, trying to have more units in combat than my opponent, controlling one of his.
It was strong, but there are many things that are "broken" too: DoK and LoN battlelines, the buffs that you can give to those, the undercosted heroes...
I felt safe with the cloak: I knew that I could tactically use the dragon to block and weaken a big blob of infantry, at least in my phase, and then my opponent was forced to react to it. It was a tactic and not so easy to use. One could just misplay and lose his big monster the following turn. Now I can't do it anymore and I will have to let those 30-40 man strong battlelines destroy everything, thanks to the bucket of dices they unload.

Was doppleganger strong? Yes.
Was it broken? I would say no, because you had counterplay, you just had to endure for the enemy's turn and then charge the monster with more units. The cloack did not protect from shooting or magic.

I agree with what has been said: to nerf all these options makes older armies less able to compete with newer ones, and that's bad for the game I think.

Back to the drawing board, to tinker about new solutions and change the list accordingly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Overread said:

As its an FAQ this is more about cleaning things up rather than performing major rebalancing efforts. Which makes sense otherwise it robs the fire of the Generals Handbook. Plus sometimes its good to see a game work for a while without major sweeping changes to balance and properties so that one can make certain that its a case of problem in the game rather than a learning cure element for the players.

That'd be great if the promised intent of the FAQ was 'small clean up'. But it isn't - GW told us they'd be addressing balance issues in these FAQs and then they chose just to issue a clean up instead, they really missed the messaging mark. That's where the disappointment comes from - we were told these would be one thing and instead got something far less. I'm not looking forward to another 6 months of Grimghasts in LoN as the best unit in a book they aren't even a part of or another 6 months of 60 point hags. 

Edited by SwampHeart
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say I'm blown away that Legions of Nagash AND Daughters dodged a nerf.  Pretty surprising and disappointing, 60 grimghast with LoN recursion is just ridiculous.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jake3991 said:

I have to say I'm blown away that Legions of Nagash AND Daughters dodged a nerf.  Pretty surprising and disappointing, 60 grimghast with LoN recursion is just ridiculous.  

The thing you have to remember is that these are simply FAQs. They are documents that help clarify questions that have been brought up by the community since the GH came out. Some of these clarifications may have changed a thing to two could lead to what some would call a "nerf," but at the end of the day nothing was seriously changed here.

This isn't"GH18v2," its "Let's help the community clear up some questions."

I would agree with some here who think this all was a bit lackluster though; If only because GW touted this as a big deal, so our impressions may have gotten a bit skewed. 

  • Like 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CaptainSoup said:

The thing you have to remember is that these are simply FAQs. They are documents that help clarify questions that have been brought up by the community since the GH came out. Some of these clarifications may have changed a thing to two could lead to what some would call a "nerf," but at the end of the day nothing was seriously changed here.

But they literally said this would be more than that - its not  that our impressions were skewed. It is that GW did not follow through on their stated intent of the bi-yearly FAQs. 

Edited by SwampHeart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

But they literally said this would be more than that - its not  that our impressions were skewed. It is that GW did not follow through on their stated intent of the bi-yearly FAQs. 

Did they though?

Let's take a look:

Sigmar's New FAQ Model

LVO-presentation-295.jpg

At the start of the year GW announced it would set a schedule for rule changes and FAQ releases similar to how they operate the 40k rule set. Let's ignore the fact that the FAQ is really late (or early depending on how you look at it). 

Quote

Larger changes to the game will be handled through two big FAQs each year. These will be released ahead of the spring and summer tournament seasons and will be aimed at ensuring the game stays balanced based on our observations from major competitive gaming events as well as the tireless work of our playtesters and the rules team.

The wording throughout this paragraph is a bit ambiguous, which I believe was intentional on their part. They don't want to promise specific dates and content on the chance that things might changes from the original plan of release. In the case of the big FAQs, they say that the purpose of the big FAQs is to maintain balance based on observations of major competitive events and through the playtesters. If we take GW on their word and they did take in observations and take ques from the playtesters, then the most possible explanation for what we received through this big FAQ was that aside from some rules that needed clearing up, the game itself and its core rules are working as intended. There is nothing so brazenly broken in the game that it is having a large effect on game play in the major tournament scene. 

Does this mean that the game is perfectly balanced? Of course not. Elves are really strong right now and people still can't seem to wrap their head around countering LoN effectively. But that is more to do with the way their respective battletomes work and the players that are playing against them, and GW seems to have determined that while they are very strong right now they are not breaking anything in the game. 

In other words, if you want more precise changes like point values and tome abilities, wait for the next GH. 

To finish up:

The Big FAQ Link

Based on the wording of today's community post,

Quote

With the game in a great state following the release of the new edition and the General’s Handbook 2018, these changes are pretty minor overall and should serve to sort out any queries you might have and clarify any unusual rules interactions.

they even conceded that the changes themselves were minor this time. So to say that GW promised some large over-sweeping changes and that they didn't deliver on them seems a bit disingenuous to me. Nevertheless I hope that this post has helped clear up any confusion that anyone may have had.

  • Like 6
  • LOVE IT! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow so the vlozd with ethereal amulet remains unscathed? I was expecting to give him a rest for the next few months! 🤣🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, CaptainSoup said:

There is nothing so brazenly broken in the game that it is having a large effect on game play in the major tournament scene. 

DoK have an 80% win ratio in major events - that alone means that GW failed in its intent to balance the game. I really don't even feel the need to refute the rest of your post given that one fact. We can look at exactly one thing and determine that yes there is something so brazenly broken that is having a large effect on game play in the major tournament scene. 

So no its not disingenuous to expect GW to follow through with what they stated was the goal of the major FAQ. Its either that or GW is simply OK with the dominance that DoK have right now and they feel like that's good for the game. I honestly don't know which is worse. I guess the thing that I'm sure some of us forgot to factor in is that DoK just got a Christmas box and they can't go messing up the potential sales. 

Edited by SwampHeart
  • Like 4
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

DoK have an 80% win ratio in major events - that alone means that GW failed in its intent to balance the game. I really don't even feel the need to refute the rest of your post given that one fact. We can look at exactly one thing and determine that yes there is something so brazenly broken that is having a large effect on game play in the major tournament scene. 

So no its not disingenuous to expect GW to follow through with what they stated was the goal of the major FAQ. Its either that or GW is simply OK with the dominance that DoK have right now and they feel like that's good for the game. I honestly don't know which is worse. I guess the thing that I'm sure some of us forgot to factor in is that DoK just got a Christmas box and they can't go messing up the potential sales. 

even in fantasy they were broken to 11.  Pointy ears have always been GW's softspots.  The smug crown was held by the high elf players until that book came out, then they just took what high smurfs had and pumped it up to 11.

 never mind eh, we've yet to see the teclis and malerion pointy ears yet.  Im sure like their DoK relatives they're going to be equally as fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SwampHeart said:

DoK have an 80% win ratio in major events - that alone means that GW failed in its intent to balance the game. I really don't even feel the need to refute the rest of your post given that one fact. We can look at exactly one thing and determine that yes there is something so brazenly broken that is having a large effect on game play in the major tournament scene. 

So no its not disingenuous to expect GW to follow through with what they stated was the goal of the major FAQ. Its either that or GW is simply OK with the dominance that DoK have right now and they feel like that's good for the game. I honestly don't know which is worse. I guess the thing that I'm sure some of us forgot to factor in is that DoK just got a Christmas box and they can't go messing up the potential sales. 

That sounds like a biased generalization.

We can all agree that elves are strong right now, but based on what GW has posted we can make an educated guess that right now at the current release cycle that there was no need for major sweeping changes to specific battletomes.

You can say otherwise or even ignore what is shown, but that just means the burden of proof is on you to prove your own statements outside how you might feel.

Everyone is welcome to send their opinions and their evidence to GW so that it can be looked into in the next General's Handbook where large specific changes like that can be addressed.

----------

Regarding the FAQ itself, has anyone noticed that not all tomes got an updated FAQ? BCR for example didn't get anything. Makes me wonder if next year will really be destruction focused, or maybe GW just isn't interested in keeping them up to date from here on. I guess we'll have to wait and see for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, CaptainSoup said:

That sounds like a biased generalization.

My statistically provable statement is a biased generalization? 
https://thehonestwargamer.com/age-of-sigmar-stats-dec-3rd-2018/

The fact that DoK have an abnormally high win rate is a known fact, not a biased generalization. It uses verifiable data collected by a TGA forum member from major events. So now I'd like you to re-assess who the burden of proof is on. Even a cursory glance at the tournament scene shows exactly where DoK are and they're clearly outliers and have been for the duration of the 6 month span since GHB 2018 came out. 

The fact of the matter is this FAQ failed in its stated intent - to address balance issues with the game. 

Edited by SwampHeart
  • Like 6
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, CaptainSoup said:

Regarding the FAQ itself, has anyone noticed that not all tomes got an updated FAQ? BCR for example didn't get anything. Makes me wonder if next year will really be destruction focused, or maybe GW just isn't interested in keeping them up to date from here on. I guess we'll have to wait and see for sure.

I mean...what would they need to FAQ for BCR?

Mournfangs gain +2 attacks! 🤩

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

My statistically provable statement is a biased generalization? 
https://thehonestwargamer.com/age-of-sigmar-stats-dec-3rd-2018/

The fact that DoK have an abnormally high win rate is a known fact, not a biased generalization. It uses verifiable data collected by a TGA forum member from major events. So now I'd like you to re-assess who the burden of proof is on. Even a cursory glance at the tournament scene shows exactly where DoK are and they're clearly outliers and have been for the duration of the 6 month span since GHB 2018 came out. 

The fact of the matter is this FAQ failed in its stated intent - to address balance issues with the game. 

Again, no one is arguing that elves are not having a strong showing right now. The claim of them having an 80% win ratio was what I had issue agreeing with here, But we are burying the lead at this point.

On the topic of whether the FAQ did what it was intended to do, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. It's clear you are passionate about this subject and I'll respect that. I hope your games will get better as time goes on, friend.

11 minutes ago, kenshin620 said:

I mean...what would they need to FAQ for BCR?

Mournfangs gain +2 attacks! 🤩

Well I guess you can't really fix a Kirby tome without some serious rethinking. A FAQ won't change that lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×