Phasteon

I give up discussing this tome. I have a 100% winrate at the moment after 7 games and I know I would have lost them all before the update, so I am very happy. All the people talking about how bad/disappointing this book is achieve nothing but creating a negative vibe about this amazing army. Thats why I and probably so many others are disagreeing so aggressively. To show people that there are not just people being frustrated. And I dont care how many times you say „its obviously/surely/1000% bad“ I will never agree with you. And just because its your OPINION nothing more, nothing less you have no right to be offensive against people who actually like the book and are happy with it. And there is a huge difference between being „naive“ about the book as some people say and being overly negative about it as I would call it. Being POSITIVE is always better than being NEGATIVE because all you guys create by saying the book has too many flaws/is too restrictive yadda yadda is more negativity. And thats it. You are frustrated and because of that you are frustrating other people. Its ok, we accepted your opinions about it, we disagreed. Can we move on and be constructive* from now on? *Constructive means can we stop crying about what some people wish this book would be and work with what we got?

This is very true though. Interestingly people are still discussing the topic 🤷🏼‍♂️

I have my opinion and you have yours, can we just stop arguing with each other as we wont agree on something anyway. I dont hate balance, I just have a different definition of balance. Accept it. Interesting point you make though. If chess is leagues above warhammer competitively because its so balanced and balance is everything - why is AoS so much more fun? 😉

And every list/game would look the same. Go an play chess then, replacing the tokens with Warhammer models.

You call 1 tournament „proof“ ? So if I roll 1 die and roll a 6 the statistical outcome is 6? Who is bending reality? What a rude choice of words anyway. I‘m not bending reality, I‘m disagreeing with your perception of it. If KO win next tournament will you call them best army then?

Wrong. „Non-constructive“ complains are not needed as they create a wrong picture of the problem. The problem is not bad rule writing, the problem is that people dont want to adapt to a different style of play. Sure, GW could take that criticism serious and make KO like their 1.0 version again, then we could thank our „non-constructive“ crybabies on the internet for ruining our army 🙂. Edit: Of course they could have made the rules so we can use all abilities while garrisoned. Yes they could have let us buff our shooting to over 9000. Then we would discuss the topic „Why are KO so OP, GW is nuts“ Dont you think they toned down the rules on purpose so the tome is not op? The army shall win through superior movement while being barely survivable enough to withstand shots and some combat. If they got everything how are people supposed to beat us?

I‘m absolute about the options people realistically have if they are unhappy with the game they play. You are absolute about a point you cant even proof. 2 very different things, but nice try though.

Sorry, I have no empathy for those people. You either deal with what you got or you stop playing. Complaining is weak sauce. Edit: Oh and btw. If every army had the same strengths/weaknesses and the exact same powerlevel in every regard you could simply role a dice at the beginning and who rolls higher wins. Would save much time. The game is about abusing the imbalance between unit types in different armies. If you do better shooting you outshoot, if you do better fighting you try to melee, if you do better movement you outmaneuver. Show me one army that does ALL the things in the game better than every other army. Hint: you cant, and if you do you probably lie so you dont have to agree that you cant. The „meta“ is only defined by whats played and what is good against whats played. I bet Slaanesh wouldnt have about 60+% winrate if only 1 wound horde armies would have been played.

I already answered to that. Pls read my post. What tournaments? A tournament? Come on man, give those books a few months and 5-6 major events before you bring that point up. But even assuming you are right on your original post: So what? Even if Tzeentch came out on top of the update, whats the point in pointing it out? Its just a random thing put in a discussion. It‘s like me saying: „Well, its sure KO came up on top compared to Mawtribes and Sylvaneth“ Yeah and now what? Should Ogor and Sylvaneth players feel bad now?

Can you elaborate on that? Because, I dont think its sure. Its your opinion, and not even a relatable one because you did not explain it. So stop being so absolute.

And just because you dislike something doesnt mean that it is wrong/bad. Pls stop pretending you know better. Its my right to disagree with you. Edit: Well I can see why you think the main reason is balance - because it kind of can be seen that way. When you get rewarded for leaving the ship, while being inside is the more defensive/safe choice its probably also a thing of balance. But imo thats not the main reason. GW did a HUGE buff on the ships, there is no denying that. And to not make it a game of 2-3 floating boats with 30 models inside them that are actually left in your transport box they made rules that make people want to disembark their units. But thats where our definitions crash. You say its bad design and unlogical, I say its good design and logical because a) Arkanauts for example are labelled ground troops in the background, so they are supposed to do boarding action/ leaving the ships to claim prospects b) It would be boring if we never actually saw those models we painted on the table because its the better choice to just leave them inside the ship. Thats why I think that you dont care for immersion, just for powerlevel because you would be obviously perfectly fine with leaving your units inside the ship, otherwise we wouldnt have this conversation. And thats sad imo. Of course they need to „balance“ the rules around their background - otherwise the army wouldnt be played as intended.

But you have a battalion that allows Arkanauts to be deployed after the ships movement which is a very strong rule imo. (Probably thats what you meant by „normally“ so why not point that out as a strong point?) The logic that a crew garrisoning a ship is not really holding an objective on the ground. They are „holding“ their ship. You know that famous „a small step“ quote? Moon wasnt „claimed“ from inside the shuttle. The man had to get out to place a flag lol. It‘s ok to disagree, but pls don‘t pretend your argument (balance) to be mine when its clearly not. Edit: Lets be honest here, because I read most of your posts in this topic regarding the new tome. You would have liked to be able to do everything from inside the ship. Shooting after fly high with everything (so min. range 10“), holding objectives, getting all abilities while also getting „better synergies“, so +1A from Khemist, even + to wound or sth so that you just put down your boats fully loaded with troops, teleport them, blasting the enemy away easily while holding an objective with 10+ models. And you are disappointed that the tome isnt OP like that. Why dont you just say „I‘m frustrated that the tome is not easymode, I dont care for background or immersion, I just want an easy to play army to stomp my opponents without relying on superior decision making“ ? Then we can all understand your points and be constructive about it. But you hide your true intention behind „issues with the badly written rules“ like many others.

Then disembark? Edit: Its stupid to think that our GROUND TROOPS should be able to claim objectives from inside a FLYING ship, and I dont care for competitiveness in this regard (I‘m very competitive myself) instead I‘m glad GW put logic and background over „strong“ ruling

You are all far too negative about the „garrison restrictions“. You dont get punished or „anti synergies“ in ships, you get rewarded for leaving the ships so you actually see ypur beautifully painted skyfarers on the table and not just inside a boat

Thats your opinion and its fine I guess but I have no problem with the KO tome so far. Won 5/5 Games (I lost against 2 of those armies pretty hard when I played KO the last time) and which is most important its finally fun to play Skyvessels, which are the reason I started the army.

This. This discussion is just a hidden platform created to let off some steam because of OPs frustration about the Idoneth Deepkin Battletome (a tome thats perfectly fine tbh) Classic.

I think KO and Fyreslayers should be the only top tier armies. All other armies need to be nerfed and unfun to play so other people need to watch me enjoying my duardin while being unable to get anything done. Uhm, this is supposed to be a sarcastic thread, isnt it? 🤷🏼‍♂️

I‘m going against Everchosen again tomorrow with the following List (pretty much just tweaked the Admiral) Barak Urbaz: Admiral - Grudgebearer - „Hammer“ of Symmetry (Hysh, +1 Damage) Always played him like that back in the days, I‘m excited about punching Archaon with Damage 6 Attacks! Khemist Endrinmaster Navigator (not sure yet if Flarepistol or Voidstone) 20 Arkanauts 10 Thunderers (Rifles) 2x Gunhauler (1 with Endrinwork) 6 Riggers (all saws this time) Ironclad (Last Word) Grundstock Escort Wing I will share the result, but I‘m quite confident.

Pls make some actual examples about how StD are worse at everything while costing more compared to Big Waagh. If you refuse to, everyone can pretty much do the same: StD have a very good external balance compared to Big Waagh, which makes for general fun games. You sound like the kind of player that takes a 880* point unit of 20 buffed up Evocators and run them into a 600 point buffed up Hearthguard unit (pre FAQ), losing all your Evocators while maybe killing 10 HGB complaining about bad balance when in reality you just made a ****** play. Just because something works for army A doesnt mean that the exact same strategy must work out for army B too to make it a balanced game. *Which is not even the whole picture, as „buffed up“ implies that there are hundreds of points added for Heroes/Battalions

Thanks, this shows exactly what I just wrote 😊👍🏻 So we can surprisingly agree on something: The discussion is over now.

I cant understand why Admins let discussions like this continue for so long. There is nothing constructive just people forever disagreeing on the same points over and over again getting personal sooner or later (as @JackStreicher beautifully shows) because they are unable to convince either side. After all its the player that enjoy the game that win this discussion because everyone crying about imbalance on the internet is definately just wasting his/her time, creating a place where trolls and toxic people can ****** out rants about GW failing at their job or whatever.

Make an example for those „wild claims“. All you do is calling me random things, so go on being a cyber bully.

Then define balance properly. Units are imbalanced to each other but because every unit/ army composition has strengths and weaknesses other units/ army compositions can exploit the game is balanced in general. You all are simply wrong about what he and I just pointed out. I am objectively right, not funny at all. Its sad how negative and toxic the community is, everyone constantly complaining about imbalance instead of upping their game being a part of the problem. Not GW. Nothing more to say about this topic. Edit: Actually, nothing more to say to people like you @JackStreicher, as you will just continue disagreeing anyway. Just made this post to support @DerZauberer, as his post was the most reasonable thing I ever read about this painfully overdiscussed topic.

Ok so here are some fewer words that for sure dont miss the point: He is RIGHT about everything and you* are WRONG. The premise of this thread that „GW has bad balance“ is wrong and hyperbolic. Its just the gap between more competitive and less competitive players playing together at local stores etc. that create an image of armies not being balanced. I win 99% of games at my local store and I neither play the best armies nor the best lists. *You being all the people that discussed the very same topic for as long as threads about this hobby exist.

Wow, I‘m overwhelmed by the negativity of this post. How is it that I just enjoy that tome, winning games left and right and feeling super positive about everything from fluff to rule design while there are people who seem to lose their mind about „how unbalanced and badly written“ this tome is written. I have nothing more to say, just that I completely disagree with pretty much all of your points and I‘m glad that people like you obviously dont develop this game, because otherwise it would probably suck. I‘m done with this thread, wish you guys the best of luck for the future and great fun with this army. To all of you guys thinking GW betrayed you with that tome, you probably got what you deserved.