Warscroll Changes vs Points Changes

[Gitzdee]

I wont like changes to warscrolls much as it invalidates the battletomes in a big way. I think they way things are now are just fine for casual players like me. I just use the battletome and the free warscroll armybuilder for the recent point costs. I dont play enough games to justify the headache for gathering all the rules updates in faqs/whitedwarfs/general handbook/battletomes and find out what is the most recent change. And i also just like using the awesome looking battletomes and a generals handbook. This is also enough for me to change things up.

I've have played many competitive games over the years, mainly pc and console games and they all suffer from the same thing. Any change u make to a faction or character reflects back on all the others. There will always be a favourite army/character of the moment. Nerf one thing and another will rise and be the best. I think the only way people will be happy if gw goes the route of "patch" updates is if they are going to be free as the only ones that will use these are the ones who are into competitive/matched play. But i really think fast updates are a bad thing and doesnt allow for the meta to settle after a major update to battletomes/generals handbook or new edition. The meta will change so fast there wont be any viable specialist armies or fun lists left. The better allround armies will be ranked really high as they can counter most matchups in a fast changing meta. Fast patch updates also needa a team of people micromanaging rules at all times to keep it consistent or it wont work. I do agree things are a mess at the moment for competitive players. I dont think fast patch like changes are they way to go like in pc gaming. All GW games need a better streamlined structure for rules updates and not scatter rules all over the place. 

One thing i can think of thats being used in a few online games is the ability to ban overpowered characters or rules for competitive/ranked play. The reason for a ban could be that they are so strong it is game breaking or meta shaping. This is a short term solution to give gw time to fix things and wont impact casual play at all. Units could also be limited to a centain number by giving them a unique keyword or something along those lines. Also some allies could be banned for use in another army. This wont result in thing like nighthaunt getting nerfed into nothingness because LoN could abuse some units.

Edit: I just read the 40k dataslate thing. I actually think this can be a good thing if they arent put behind a paywall.

 

Edited November 10, 2021 by Iksdee

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

Here's a point of discussion:

What warscrolls would you actually like to see changed? Apart from Slaangor that is.

In the two armies I play, Gravelords and Cities, I actually don't think too many warscroll changes are necessary. In Gravelords, the standout bad warscroll are Black Knight, but they could become a playable, if uninteresting, option with point drops. Other than that, the Cursed City stuff is kind of... not really bad, but just not good. Although arguably that's where it should be: Not so good that the expensive Radukar's Court bundle becomes a requirment, but not so bad that you can't run the models. Out of all of them, Halgrim the Watch Captain is probably the only one that has no use at all, so he could maybe see a warscroll rewrite. Something to buff Deathrattle Skeletons in some way, maybe.

Cities of Sigmar are a special case, because while they have a lot of redundant warscrolls, that's arguably again just fine. There should probably not be a meaningful choice between Dreadspears, Freeguild Guard, Longbeards, Black Arc Corsairs and Flagellants. You should probably just be able to run whichever flavour fits your concept best. A lot of warscrolls in Cities are kinda janky in 3rd edition, but not to the point that they need a rewrite probably. If I were to buff anything, with warscroll changes it would probably be some of the Ironweld artillery and Wanderers stuff, which both have never been good since the book launched.

EDIT: Actually forgot about the Battlemage on Griffin (as is tradition). That guy straight sucks and is not fixable by points, so he's a prime candidate for a warscroll update.

Edited November 12, 2021 by Neil Arthur Hotep

[Boingrot Bouncer]

For Gitz (and more specific Squigs) that I have the most experience of in 3.0 I think that Mangler Squigs (with or without heroes) are OK for what they do although they could perhaps need some extra punch. Sneaky Snufflers are also OK.

The rest of the squigs however need to be able to do more damage. I can live that they will run away really easy if they at the same time deals a lot of damage, but now it feels like they charge in, kill a model or two and then all run away.

In fact, the most damage output I get (except for Manglers) is when Squig Hoppers fly over enemy and don't engange them and then fly over them the next round (if I get the double) dishing out MW when they fly over. 

[zilberfrid]

1 hour ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

Here's a point of discussion:

What warscrolls would you actually like to see changed? Apart from Slaangor that is.

In the two armies I play, Gravelords and Cities, I actually don't think too many warscroll changes are necessary. In Gravelords, the standout bad warscroll are Black Knight, but they could become a playable, if uninteresting, option with point drops. Other than that, the Cursed City stuff is kind of... not really bad, but just not good. Although arguably that's where it should be: Not so good that the expensive Radukar's Court bundle becomes a requirment, but not so bad that you can't run the models. Out of all of them, Halgrim the Watch Captain is probably the only one that has no use at all, so he could maybe see a warscroll rewrite. Something to buff Deathrattle Skeletons in some way, maybe.

Cities of Sigmar are a special case, because while they have a lot of redundant warscrolls, that's arguably again just fine. There should probably not be a meaningful choice between Dreadspears, Freeguild Guard, Longbeards, Black Arc Corsairs and Flagellants. You should probably just be able to run whichever flavour fits your concept best. A lot of warscrolls in Cities are kinda janky in 3rd edition, but not to the point that they need a rewrite probably. If I were to buff anything, with warscroll changes it would probably be some of the Ironweld artillery and Wanderers stuff, which both have never been good since the book launched.

EDIT: Actually forgot about the Battlemage on Griffin (as is tradition). That guy straight sucks and is not fixable by points, so he's a prime candidate for a warscroll update.

I would like to see Sentinels and the Cathaller rewritten (but not to buff them), plus things like the Drakespawn Knights getting a second attack with their weapons and Battlemage on Griffin getting a second spell.

Because GW is paywalling the warscrolls, this changes, and warscrolls should always be as they are in the last book, because the good way for distribution is gone.

[Maddpainting]

On 11/10/2021 at 3:22 AM, Iksdee said:

I wont like changes to warscrolls much as it invalidates the battletomes in a big way. I think they way things are now are just fine for casual players like me. I just use the battletome and the free warscroll armybuilder for the recent point costs. I dont play enough games to justify the headache for gathering all the rules updates in faqs/whitedwarfs/general handbook/battletomes and find out what is the most recent change. And i also just like using the awesome looking battletomes and a generals handbook. This is also enough for me to change things up.

I've have played many competitive games over the years, mainly pc and console games and they all suffer from the same thing. Any change u make to a faction or character reflects back on all the others. There will always be a favourite army/character of the moment. Nerf one thing and another will rise and be the best. I think the only way people will be happy if gw goes the route of "patch" updates is if they are going to be free as the only ones that will use these are the ones who are into competitive/matched play. But i really think fast updates are a bad thing and doesnt allow for the meta to settle after a major update to battletomes/generals handbook or new edition. The meta will change so fast there wont be any viable specialist armies or fun lists left. The better allround armies will be ranked really high as they can counter most matchups in a fast changing meta. Fast patch updates also needa a team of people micromanaging rules at all times to keep it consistent or it wont work. I do agree things are a mess at the moment for competitive players. I dont think fast patch like changes are they way to go like in pc gaming. All GW games need a better streamlined structure for rules updates and not scatter rules all over the place. 

One thing i can think of thats being used in a few online games is the ability to ban overpowered characters or rules for competitive/ranked play. The reason for a ban could be that they are so strong it is game breaking or meta shaping. This is a short term solution to give gw time to fix things and wont impact casual play at all. Units could also be limited to a centain number by giving them a unique keyword or something along those lines. Also some allies could be banned for use in another army. This wont result in thing like nighthaunt getting nerfed into nothingness because LoN could abuse some units.

Edit: I just read the 40k dataslate thing. I actually think this can be a good thing if they arent put behind a paywall.

 

Bans do not work in Warhammer, you are playing with a collection of things worth 100-1000x more than you would in something like LoL, people already hate events and areas that ban FW and FW has not had any model worst than GW in years. Yeah in Legal a character you might have spent a few dollars on couple get a temp ban, but what about that person with SoB? They could have 4 $200 models, if you banned 1 they need to go buy a different $200 model or 4 smaller giants at the same cost, there is no way that player will play with you or your event. 

Also some armies are only playable right now bc of Allies and the top armies don't even use allies at all, so a band to allies would actually currently lilt the meta even worst.

I do agree that rule changes to often is a bad thing, but a point change 3x a year is not, not at all. Some armies like SoB can't change with points bc how they are set up and will need a minor rules change no matter what, but other armies for sure can use a points change, LrL has a couple units under pointed, heck look at Fulminators, insanely OP but then you have units like Varanguard and they are trash compare, why are their points so similar? One needs to go up and the other needs to go down, there is no reason a unit like Fulminators needs to be that insanely OP. A small points change every 3 months to target problem units is not a bad thing at all and will help the meta bc right now every SCE and CoS series player is bring 4 of them without and its the first unit in their lists. 

Edited November 12, 2021 by Maddpainting

[Dingding123]

I wouldn't mind seeing changes to points every time to keep armies iconic, and to counteract how easy it is to lose models.  If we could reinforce battlelines more easily that would make battleshocks much more manageable for so many horde armies.  The armies that seem to be doing poorly right now could all use more incentive to stack their hordes - imagine painting 140+ Grots in 2.0 and never winning with them now haha.