Warscroll Changes vs Points Changes

[Zappgrot]

1 hour ago, Yondaime said:

There is a list that won a major tournament with 6 knight judicators and a fox

 

For some units a point change is not enought, pink horrors, kairos and belakor are wrong on warscroll level for example

Damm those are the only things i have in my army.......

But yes it's compleetly true. Some scrolls are just inherently broken. Horror's are a great example. They are just inherently a sort of swamp that sucks units into pointless combats. That is what the scroll does. But an use like that stands or fails purely on the pointcost. Make the horror's to expensive and its pointless cause you can not suck in enoug of the enemy to make it worth useing the horror's make them to cheap and they will drown the battle field in bodies and nothing happens.   So there almost no way they can be balanced. They are either to good or to bad. for what they cost. 

[Yondaime]

1 minute ago, Zappgrot said:

Damm those are the only things i have in my army.......

But yes it's compleetly true. Some scrolls are just inherently broken. Horror's are a great example. They are just inherently a sort of swamp that sucks units into pointless combats. That is what the scroll does. But an use like that stands or fails purely on the pointcost. Make the horror's to expensive and its pointless cause you can not suck in enoug of the enemy to make it worth useing the horror's make them to cheap and they will drown the battle field in bodies and nothing happens.   So there almost no way they can be balanced. They are either to good or to bad. for what they cost. 

Also, they do not shock until you reach the brimstones

Damn i hate that unit  

its like they made tzeecht op for so long on purpose

[Yondaime]

52 minutes ago, MitGas said:

Fix Chaos Warriors for Eff‘s sake already… 🙄 Seriously, GW should‘ve redone some warscrolls like 2 years ago. No idea what they are thinking in some cases. Some are neither fluffy nor competitive and nothing changes despite having to keep up with multiple things. They also need to really look at the overall rules of the game if they want AoS to continue thriving like it should… 

i know this is OT, but until double turn is a thing shooting/heavy casting armies will be top tier regardless of point cost

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

20 minutes ago, Yondaime said:

i know this is OT, but until double turn is a thing shooting/heavy casting armies will be top tier regardless of point cost

It's kinda pick your poison. If the only options are double turn and "I go, you go" then in the former case turn 2 counter punching or in the latter alpha strikes will be top tier.

[Mattrulesok]

4 hours ago, Yondaime said:

There is a list that won a major tournament with 6 knight judicators and a fox

 

For some units a point change is not enought, pink horrors, kairos and belakor are wrong on warscroll level for example

Yep that's the list we were referring to i believe (although i think it was 5 knight judicators?)

 

As for all those warscrolls you listed i think they are all fine just too cheap and only a little for the most part. There is nothing wrong with powerful warscrolls but they should be priced highly, you want your god level characters and fabled heroes to feel like it on the table but ideally you want them priced so they slap in casual games but are just too expensive for competitive.

[novakai]

Interestingly the 40K survey seem to be asking if people wanted more frequent point changes ( quarterly or monthly point changes)

[Skreech Verminking]

1 minute ago, novakai said:

Interestingly the 40K survey seem to be asking if people wanted more frequent point changes ( quarterly or monthly point changes)

They are probably hoping that a monthly update, could fix the currently very strong Drukhari and admech armies.

personally I don’t really care too much for 40k.

It is a great game among friends, not really something I enjoy playing on tournaments 

[Zappgrot]

2 hours ago, Skreech Verminking said:

They are probably hoping that a monthly update, could fix the currently very strong Drukhari and admech armies.

personally I don’t really care too much for 40k.

It is a great game among friends, not really something I enjoy playing on tournaments 

Monthly updates would be overkill.  I mean who can keep up whit monthly changeing amries. 

[Skreech Verminking]

10 minutes ago, Zappgrot said:

Monthly updates would be overkill.  I mean who can keep up whit monthly changeing amries. 

I doubt anybody could.

I’m currently happy with the half a year update they have for aos.

Would be great though, if gw would go more agreesive with the points, when it comes down with armies that are currently struggling in the meta.

hoping for a increase in size for stormvermins and Plague monks as well as a decrease in points for clanrats

[novakai]

I mean with how little they change point every 6 months we probably actually make progress if it was monthly 

[Neverchosen]

I think it is an extremely interesting topic that does not always have a clear answer. I would prefer points adjustments as they mean that I can continue to use my battletome with relatively few issues. However, there are some units that require massive overhauls as already indicated in this thread. Sometimes that requires a full reworking of the warscroll, but other times it can be a compositional army change like giving a unit the ability to be taken as battleline, new keywords, dedicated subfation buffs, or a hero with developed synergies with the unit. The amount of interesting dynamics in Stormcast to have developed simply from the use of various Keywords determining special rules, synergies and battleline options is really fascinating. However, these changes of course were paired with some really necessary warscroll changes but still the keyword Paladin and Redeemer now have wider implications that make those units much more interesting.


So in more succinct terms: I think that there are a few options that could be rather interesting, beyond simple point changes and complicated warscroll alterations. But I will be the first to confess there are some units that just need to be reworked entirely, heres looking at you Underworld and Warcry Warbands. 

[zilberfrid]

15 hours ago, novakai said:

Interestingly the 40K survey seem to be asking if people wanted more frequent point changes ( quarterly or monthly point changes)

I didn't get far into the survey. Clicked on it hoping it would be about models.

[Skreech Verminking]

10 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

I didn't get far into the survey. Clicked on it hoping it would be about models.

I just personally asked for more skaven models, in other words since it is a 40k survey, I asked for some cheese stealer models

[zilberfrid]

17 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

I just personally asked for more skaven models, in other words since it is a 40k survey, I asked for some cheese stealer models

It asked whether I played the game, then why not, and it ended.

[Skreech Verminking]

30 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

It asked whether I played the game, then why not, and it ended.

Uff, good to know

[zilberfrid]

43 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Uff, good to know

I don't think this was a bad thing, I could fill in things like "prefer different game", "barrier of entry too high" etc.

[novakai]

They want feedback of people who play the game in 9th edition. It was probably gauging gameplay, updates, and community experience and not really about community wishlisting

[Skreech Verminking]

13 minutes ago, novakai said:

They want feedback of people who play the game in 9th edition. It was probably gauging gameplay, updates, and community experience and not really about community wishlisting

Well I’m more a fun/narrative player, when it comes down to 40k.

 

[Scurvydog]

At least with the new 3.0 books there is less allegiance ability bloat, which makes point adjustments somewhat easier, as most of the value is in the warscroll itself. This also creates the danger of making the faction more bland as a whole though.

This is also why allies and soup can become a problem, like cities of sigmar. Stormcast got some new warscrolls, yet they still have almost no allegiance rules to speak of. Just wait for Stormdrake guard in living city, where they can appear from the board edge, shoot with breath attacks and then move+charge for 1 CP. 

Sentinels is a prime example of all kinds of layers that makes them the terror to the game they are, if you grab a unit and ally them into a different army, they are rather OK, as the extreme range is offset by baseline weak staying power and moderate damage. The problem arises when they get spells to reroll hits, with multiple ways to deliver that spell and bonuses to increase cast probability. This increases damage exponentially, then add on top other allegiance abilities and spells which turns the low durability intent on its head, as they suddenly have baseline -1 to be hit, 5+ ward saves from multiple possible sources, teleports and quartz to increase saves, in addition to entirely ignore battleshock on a 2+ with some support. 

What should be changed there? just make them more expensive? If the LRL player had to remove 10 wardens to afford a 30 block, would that really make all the difference and "fix" the experience? I do not think so. It might make it harder to win than otherwise for the LRL player in that case, but it does not make the sentinels any less of a problem to deal with and any more fun to face for the opponent. Arguably it just feels bad for the LRL player while the opponent will still hate to face the sentinels as much as before. 

I think any changes in a vacuum are dangerous in this case, as it is a layered problem. The streamlining of the current 2 3.0 books could indicate a move away from all these layers of rules to create "monsters", which makes point adjustments easier. Warscroll changes would also be easier, especially for units being used across books, just see the nightmare created with Archaon, which was especially apparent by the end of 2.0.

We should also be aware of knee ****** reactions. Rumors of Stormdrake guard getting both point increases AND warscroll changes seem strange, as it would also indicate a total design failure in that case. If the warscroll was ok, but points too low, then increase points. If the points was the intended design to fit into certain lists, then change the warscroll. If they go and change both aspects, then that would indicate they had no idea what they were doing and playtesting was not properly done or adhered to at all.

[EMMachine]

20 hours ago, novakai said:

Interestingly the 40K survey seem to be asking if people wanted more frequent point changes ( quarterly or monthly point changes)

20 hours ago, Skreech Verminking said:

They are probably hoping that a monthly update, could fix the currently very strong Drukhari and admech armies.

personally I don’t really care too much for 40k.

It is a great game among friends, not really something I enjoy playing on tournaments 

If the updates are made with the FAQ, having pointchanges more frequently wouldn't be that much of a problem, if you had to buy an additional book it would be more of a problem.

In addition, in 40k it is worse with the point updates. While we simply switched an entire pitched battle profile table for another one and have to look which one is the last updated one, in 40k only the models and equipment that was changed is mentioned in chapters approved (if they haven't changed it with the 2021 version). This means you have to look in both the codex and chapter approved to find the changes.

46 minutes ago, Scurvydog said:

Sentinels is a prime example of all kinds of layers that makes them the terror to the game they are, if you grab a unit and ally them into a different army, they are rather OK, as the extreme range is offset by baseline weak staying power and moderate damage. The problem arises when they get spells to reroll hits, with multiple ways to deliver that spell and bonuses to increase cast probability. This increases damage exponentially, then add on top other allegiance abilities and spells which turns the low durability intent on its head, as they suddenly have baseline -1 to be hit, 5+ ward saves from multiple possible sources, teleports and quartz to increase saves, in addition to entirely ignore battleshock on a 2+ with some support. 

What should be changed there? just make them more expensive? If the LRL player had to remove 10 wardens to afford a 30 block, would that really make all the difference and "fix" the experience? I do not think so. It might make it harder to win than otherwise for the LRL player in that case, but it does not make the sentinels any less of a problem to deal with and any more fun to face for the opponent. Arguably it just feels bad for the LRL player while the opponent will still hate to face the sentinels as much as before.

I would simply say, if the Sentinels would only make mortal wounds when using the direct shot profile, than they would be a little less OP because you could at least hide against the mortal wounds.

[Skreech Verminking]

15 minutes ago, EMMachine said:

I would simply say, if the Sentinels would only make mortal wounds when using the direct shot profile, than they would be a little less OP because you could at least hide against the mortal wounds.

Actually if they would remove the, los ignoring rule on the units champions, there would be a lot of possibilities to try and keep the more fragile heroes alive 

[Scurvydog]

12 minutes ago, EMMachine said:

I would simply say, if the Sentinels would only make mortal wounds when using the direct shot profile, than they would be a little less OP because you could at least hide against the mortal wounds.

Yes I agree such a change is exactly what should be considered. I do not think it is healthy for the game to massively change core warscroll effectiveness and points outside of new books, as people need to be able to purchase armies with at least some certainty it is going to work decently throughout the current books lifespan.

In the sentinel example (yes yes they are just so obvious to use for this) it would go a long way to make them better in the game without breaking the unit, to only make the lofted shots able to be fired when stationary. Basically they got it right with how such a unit is supposed to work, so taking some from that and adjusting a warscroll would be all good, without breaking the core role and purpose of the unit and without requiring points adjustments, so wont break a list someone might love to run.

If only GW would take the plunge to become primarily digital much of this would be so much easier, yet we know how reliable the app is, so until they prove the digital product can be stable, I think many will resist this change if it was suggested.

[Lucio]

Biggest problem is that points changes are basically a page from a book changing, a Warscroll change invalidates the whole army book (or requires a supplement book release)

 

So as much as I agree, GW needs to sort the rulea distribution problem out by modernising their distribution

 

[Chaos Shepard]

Well I thought it might worth pointing out that the most recent balance patch for 40k had a large focus on rules alteration and not just points adjustment.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/11/09/game-balance-is-at-the-heart-of-this-official-warhammer-40000-rules-update/

Could be that we will see something similar for AoS.

[Dingding123]

On 10/30/2021 at 1:43 PM, yukishiro1 said:

I think the stormcast heroes are hopeless, there's just double as many as any faction could ever reasonably need. There's no possible way to make 36 different hero options all compelling choices. 

On updating generally, they need to move into the 21st century and use a digital rules distribution system, not tie rules to physical books that only get updated every 3-4 years. It's just so horribly out of date. 

Honestly they should homogenize them down into seven or even ten different types of heroes at most.  No one's gonna remember what each individial guy does haha.

Imagine having an army of 15+ different weenie heroes lol