Jump to content

Winter FAQs & Errata - 2019


Recommended Posts

Monsters are cool.  I wonder if they'll get a 'counts as more models than 1' rule in the next GHB?

I looked at the Plague Monks scroll on the GW site, I couldn't tell how it was different, they still get the reroll hits for pairs of foetid blades, and all the upgrade dudes are there.  They have a 6+ save now, is that new?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Overall I've liked the changes, for a lot of armies this was less about reining in stronger options and more about making some less than optimal choices a bit cheaper to make them more attractive to t

You know exactly when you are going to get nerfed or buffed. Two weeks after a new battletome comes out for unintended rules interactions, twice a year with the rebalancing faqs and each year with the

Seraphon, tzeentch, and overlords weren't touched, I imagine because they are about to get new tomes

Posted Images

1 minute ago, Lord Krungharr said:

Monsters are cool.  I wonder if they'll get a 'counts as more models than 1' rule in the next GHB?

I looked at the Plague Monks scroll on the GW site, I couldn't tell how it was different, they still get the reroll hits for pairs of foetid blades, and all the upgrade dudes are there.  They have a 6+ save now, is that new?

It hasn't actually been updated yet. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a stormcast player, I'm quite disappointed.  The one viable list got nerfed, and we got 3 drops total on units that are terrible and still terrible even after the drops, barring the dracolines.  It's honestly kinda crazy.  Stormcast are trash currently and STILL get a bit of a nerf.  It's unbelievable.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Celestantpants said:

As a stormcast player, I'm quite disappointed.  The one viable list got nerfed, and we got 3 drops total on units that are terrible and still terrible even after the drops, barring the dracolines.  It's honestly kinda crazy.  Stormcast are trash currently and STILL get a bit of a nerf.  It's unbelievable.

And how exactly did the one viable list get nerfed?  The only changes were that evocator's celestial lightning arc only triggers once in combat (which since there is no fight twice in the stormcast tome, only really nerfs the evocators when taken as allies/cities of sigmar) and then points got reduced for 3 different models.  While I agree that the stardrakes still aren't particularly great at their new point totals, I found the evokitties decent at their previous point total, and great at the new one.

As for previous lists, the only really competitive list prior to this was anvils + longstrikes shootcast, with gavbomb and ballista spam getting honorable mentions (though neither of those were better than 3-2 lists).  None of these lists are affected by the changes, except that some may consider running kitties rather than foot evocators now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My issue with slaanesh summon changes was that gw didn't into account the fact that it is still much better to summon new heroes as they will generate more dp. I mean look at the big chariot and herald on big chariot, their difference is just 3 lousy dp. Unless you really need something out now (and you are couple points short), there is no reason to ever summon the heraldless chariot. They could have fixed this issue by making these big multiwound heroes more expensive (both points and dp) so that you would have to make hard choice: "hmmm, do I summon this unit that can't generate dp now or wait for at least 1 turn to summon this hero instead"

Still, complaints aside, I'm glad they nerfed slaanesh. In general I'm reasonably positive about most of the changes. Even if they won't have massive impact on giving a power boost to underpowered factions, the fact that we get more viable unit options is always a plus in my mind. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, tripchimeras said:

think the locus change in particular is going to be meaningful... We will obviously have to wait and see though.

Although I agree with this again they went the aggro route. They could also have changed the ‘+2 for greater daemons’ rule to +1. They would have achieved the same, slightly decreasing the keepers effectiveness, but not hurt the other heroes that don’t see mich table time as well. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, angrycontra said:

My issue with slaanesh summon changes was that gw didn't into account the fact that it is still much better to summon new heroes as they will generate more dp. I mean look at the big chariot and herald on big chariot, their difference is just 3 lousy dp. Unless you really need something out now (and you are couple points short), there is no reason to ever summon the heraldless chariot. They could have fixed this issue by making these big multiwound heroes more expensive (both points and dp) so that you would have to make hard choice: "hmmm, do I summon this unit that can't generate dp now or wait for at least 1 turn to summon this hero instead"

Still, complaints aside, I'm glad they nerfed slaanesh. In general I'm reasonably positive about most of the changes. Even if they won't have massive impact on giving a power boost to underpowered factions, the fact that we get more viable unit options is always a plus in my mind. 

Easiest solution is that summoned units don't generate DP.  Still plenty of DP about in a game but you don't get the recursion imbalance.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, Hearthguard Berzerkers are now 400 for 20 making them easier to efficiently use than before, right?

Could anyone explain how those are comparable to say 20 Libs for 400 or 20 Chaos Warriors for 400 or 10 Evocators for 440 etc.? Maybe I am overestimating Berzerkers due to some very bad experiences.

Edited by Primes
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of the changes are OK and it is always nice that they actually care somewhat and try to make some changes. In general I'm much more of a fan of smaller changes (20-40 pts. adjustments) rather than sweeping ones. It is no fun to have invested a lot of cash and time painting an army, only to have it nerfed to oblivion which would leave a bad taste in the mouth.

Some of the changes do seem like knee-****** reactions (like Slaanesh point changes) and wont really change the fundamental issues with said armies. The change to Fyreslayers HGB is actually kinda smart at first glance (changing cap from 30 to 20), but when you look into it further it is actually a buff since they get a horde discount now at 20. Fyreslayer players will likely just field 2x 20 instead of 1x30, which is much harder to deal with for many armies.

It is difficult though - I'm sure GW got loads of different motivations for making changes to armies/units (sales especially) but who should they listen to for feedback for future changes? It is kinda obvious from a lot of the FAQs that they don't really playtest armies/units internally beside simply checking "does this work on the table?" rather than "is this broken OP when optimized around X, Y and Z?". Personally I'm a casual-competitive player (I don't really go to big tournaments, but I still enjoy competing with locals) but wouldn't like the game balanced around the very top players that got the "WAAC mentality".

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...