JackStreicher

I just find you funny since you haven't even read what I wrote but you are making wild claims which have nothing to do with what I said XD but okay be cute

Sorry I am right and you are WRONG XD Who exactly claimed that GW games were ever balanced? XD You are funny 😛

I'd really love that. For me the old ones were what made lizardmen even more interesting back in the day

A lot of words and you actually missed the point. First off: It's not about competetive play. The comp. scene deals rather well with imbalanced. The issue is that the "balancing" or let's say "relative powerlevel" of armies is sometimes worlds apart which ruins CASUAL games. The argument "It's better now than it used to be" is no argument at all, without evolution everything dies. Justifying bad relative powerlevels and bad rules due them having been even worse back in the day is rubbish. GW does too little and them being just the worst a few years back doesn't make the situation now good or something we have to be thankful for. With these topics we rathert clearly point out imbalance otherwise we would not be posting, would we? Edit: I agree however about swiftly labeling units trash or op.

Actually I am still hoping for new multipart Chaos Knight and Chaos Warrior kits 😕 edit: I figured those might be delayed until the new Campaign book is out

Namartii + Akhelian Shields/heads

Namartii if you‘d play them as Slaanesh Chosen

A birthday release, I‘d welcome that. I like the slightly eastern design of Trclis while still staying high elven 👌🏻

Have these news about Teclis already been posted?

You forget that GW is not just one person but many. if designers don‘t listen to plattester then that likely has nothing to do with GW wanting to make money. there‘re so many instances rules have to go through, optimising and streamlining them so no FAQ is needed actually saves them money. Meaning a good balance also saves them money due to less time being spent on creating FAQs to put rules back in line. good balance also keeps long time customers buying their products (I didn‘t extend my DoK collection for two years since I couldn‘t play them due to being too strong and my opponents not having any fun at all) that‘s about 300€ I didn’t spent and instead bought them a year later on eBay. as Memory serves I am not the only one reacting like that to having an overpowered faction. edit: If I realize that my army is grossly underpowered I‘d sell what I have on eBay which again reduces GWs sales. They‘re hurting themself in the long term while losing customers who get tired of their practices.

100% this. Nothing to add.

IIrc Teclis never ascendedto godhood but tyrion did.

Let's hope so!

Yup I remember that one, made me roll my eyes (as a DoK Player) XD

Currently up on Shapeways. I had to rush the design so I am not entirely happy with how he turned out. Once I can afford ZBrush I'll switch to it for good concerning Miniatures. Cheers Jack

It definetively is very hard to balance. Yet if they design a rule that is fitting to the faction and its playstyle (Violent Fury - sorry for bringing it up again, it's just my most common enemy) and they know that the buff is incredibly strong, then WHY aren't they more careful and creative with it and make it conditional? Example: Grants +1 dmg when wounding on a 6s. Or +1 dmg if they charged the previous phase. Just some way that you can counter it and it doesn't spike as it does. The same goes for the locus of diversion, it was obviously too strong on a 2+ and it still took them months to fix that. There's an endless amount of examples for it for cases in which I have to say: This must be on purpose, there is no way you cannot see that such effects are way too potent to be handed out as freely as they are/were. These effects aren't fun to play against and they get dull when playing with them. I grant them mistakes when balancing units. For example the case of Namartii Thralls: It was rather hard to see that they simply don't work with their intended buffs due to too short ranges and all that. That can happen, IF you do not playtest your own game.

True, for the moment. As mentioned before: I don't think GW is even interested in balance or making a better game, it's about making a game many people will get into and buy. The issue of overall balance arises for people who have the luxury to play rather often, and therefore ruins their game experience which will have consequences in the long term (just listen to the overall casual consensus on 40K, most people seem VERY annoyed by the rules and powercreep) However GW claims to produce a "premium" product, which includes rules. The latter clearly isn't premium which pretty much lowers the overall product quality and proves that their product isn't premium at all. Think of it what you will. My hope remains that some GW dev listens to the rather critical feedback and maybe wants to steer the Rules production to a more focussed approach : Setting a level of power (per edition?) that has to be achieved for all new and old books and work towards it. At the moment they seem not to have a idea of powerlevel at all, they design rules that might be cool and slap some points on them, uncaring about the actual power of it.

Around here 40k is almost exclusively competetive even in friendly games which is really killing it for me. Edit: Concerning AoS: It's not fun being rofl-stomped by the Big Waagh 24/7 (with S2D) just because GW was incapable of even remotely balancing Battletomes against one another (One book has superior units, better Allegiance Abilities and cheaper units while the other one is Slaves to Darkness with which this match up feels like you are playing with 30% less points than your opponent). Bad overall balance kills the casual scene big time. Most issues aren't even scratching the endless "balance depate" most rules they slap on units are beyond common sense (powerful or bad).

Except Iron Hands are still broken. Such rules shouldn't have made it through the review process in the first place. @Dead Scribe ITC ist super vaid sicne without it 40K is barely playable. House Rules are great, they're just bad for people who are too slow to adapt to a quick Meta-Shift, meaning: a good General wouldn't mind as long as the rules make sense.

True, I never considered those since I don‘t have any models with great blades (4s to hit is so bad though xD)

Are you listing things they have or things they should have? (They don‘t have any way to get rend)

Same! c‘mon GW the hype has almost died. Fire up the hypetrain again with potato-camera images or pixelated screenshots

Sadly a lot of units in most books have this issue ^^ I‘d prefer if GW regularly updated warscrolls since point adjustments simply don‘t cut it anymore. (It‘s also easily done by a pdf).

The Armies I can rate Best - Daughters of Khaine: Strong Comp. every unit can have it‘s uses. Fun to play Good - Legions of Nagash: Good Unit variance and strong AB Orruk Warclans: Very fluffy, diverse builds and every unit is viable. There‘s a shadow hanging over it however due to grossly underpriced and overperforming Warchanters (+100 points pls, the buff is nuts) and grossly underpriced Ardboys (should be 130 AT LEAST for 5, their stats and Rules are bananas) which cumulate in a combination of both which is destroying the game experience. fyreslayers - They feel right, are fun to play against (and with) and every units seems to be viable. mediocre to good - Cities of Sigmar: Fun to play, can be powerful, pretty horrible internal balance which is mostly due to very over the tops pricing of mediocre units Sylvaneth: Just all around okay and fun to play, they just lack unit variance mediocre to bad - Nighthaunt: is fun to play but is too reliant on squishy pricy heroes, Also totally broken if you manage to get your 10+ charges off every time mediocre - Ossiarchs: Very Strong, the playstyle ruins the game for your opponent, I find the playstyle also boring (sold mine). These should induce fear, all they induce is boredom and strange smily-faces. Bad - Idoneth: No unit variance, horrible internal balance (crappy rules), there‘s only two viable ways to play them, Artefacts are utter trash (trash of the oceans...) and the command abilities are also pretty bad, even the subfactions are only „meh“ - this needs a rewrite or a change to „Eeldoneth Derpkins“ - We only have three units: Soulscryers, Kings and Eeeels Stormcast - Well... chambers that do not synergise at all among one-another, shooting as the only viable (extremely annoying and onesies) build, overall bad internal balance.

Yes! Imo the sweetspot for warriors would be 80-90 pts and a big horde discount if someone is willing to play 30 =}