Sagittarii Orientalis

Most of the units you have mentioned were already appearing on well performing lists, albeit overshadowed by Stormdrakes and longstrike raptors. The "uncompetitive" units I have mentioned in my comment are far, far more abysmal than those you have listed. For example anyone riding Stardrake, Lord-Celestants of all kind, most of Lord-Arcanums, Lord-Veritant, Lord-Ordinator, Knight- Arcanum, Knight-Azyros, Knight-Venator, Knight-Relictor, Knight-Questor, Knight-Zephyros, Sequitors, Celestar Ballistas, Evocators on Foot, Castigators, Vanguard-Palladors, Prosecutors, Vigilors, Hurricane Crossbow Vanguard-Raptors...and so on. I can confidently assure that these units will never, ever be used in competitive games and even most of the casual games. In other words, I think latest balance update do almost nothing to considerably shake up Stormcast internal balance. Maybe some more vanquishers due to Galletian Veterans rule, but not strictly because of Stormcast balance update.

One thing I have noticed while playing both 40K and AoS during the last decade is that simply nerfing the most competitive units(or in other words, "must-haves") does not necessarily diversify list compositions: the players simply bring fewer "must-haves" due to points increase or performance nerf, but they do not suddenly take uncompetitive units which were overlooked before. Just because Stormdrake Guard and Justicar units(particularly longstrikes and judicators) were nerfed does not mean celestar ballistas and stardrakes will suddenly become popular. Nerfing the best options do very little to achieve greater internal diversity. The nerf should be done in tandem with buffs to underperforming units, which unfortunately is what GW has failed to do at least for Stormcasts.

So once-per-game Thunderbolt Volley has been nerfhammered, but 15 Blood Stalkers shooting in hero phase every turn has been completely untouched? Is there something I am missing?

2d6 attacks on rend -1 bow is never really an enticing factor anyway. As long as Drakesworn Templar has the atrocious 4+ save, he will never be taken over Lord-Celestant on Stardrake.

I regularly use 2 knight judicators and 3 ballistas in stormkeep list...for casual games, unfortunately. Ballistas' damage output is too unreliable for their cost. In fact, replacing 3 ballistas with 2 knight judicators is way more efficient use of points. If you want to take competitive shooting unit that is also not vanguard raptors, do not take ballistas. Big block of judicators or even multiple knight judicators would serve you better. I use multiple ballistas only because I like the model and the lore.

My lists are hardly affected by the new battlescroll update. Longstrike Raptors have absurd firepower, but their fragility is equally absurd. In fact, I never used Longstrike Raptors since the new SCE tome was released as they are easily wiped out by even the most modest shooting or spells. They are as good as dead as soon as you loose thunderbolt volley on the first turn. I have instead relied on 15 judicators and/or knight-Judicators supported by ballistas.

And translocation is far less impactful in terms of mobility. I honestly do not understand your message. Translocation has less "cost" involved, but also grants less mobility compared to Ironjaws trick. Ironjaws earn much better results for more costs involved, although some might argue that it's too rewarding for the cost. I personally would like to see all out-of-phase movement and shooting removed altogether from the game to mitigate alpha strikes in the game, but it maybe too drastic a change for GW to handle.

If I can make my hammer units to actually move after teleportation, then I would gladly pay those costs. You write as if the Ironjaw shenanigan you mentioned and translocation are identical.

"Maybe actually try them in fusion builds with proven pieces. Find synergies." is not a valid argument against posters who complained about internal balance of SCE battletomes. You are not providing any counterexamples. The argument is not too different from pointless "git gud" rhetoric which occasionally comes out in balance discussions. Also if you think making an intact unit of paladins, which usually have 3+ save, across the board on foot to combat is similar to sending Gotrek, a model with one of the best defensive mechanisms existing in the game, into melee then I must highly doubt your capability to make fair comparisons between units. And resurrection does not come free in SCE, unless you meant to say investing 300+ points on Yndrasta with lackluster combat power costs nothing in already expensive SCE roster. If you were referring to Lord-Arcanum's unique ability, then you are vastly overestimating its utility.

As an owner of a battery consisting of 4 celestar ballistas, even 10 points discount per model would be appreciated. Better solution would be increasing the consistency of the damage output. D6 damage for a single shot that has to hit, wound, and hope for the enemy to fail save is too unreliable for its cost. Changing the damage characteristic for the single shot profile to 2d3 would improve ballista's performance in this regard. Or maybe d3+3, just like how damage characteristics of some iconic heavy weaponry(lascannon) in 40K are changing into. In fact I'd rather see all d6 characteristics, which are not exclusive to stormcast warscrolls, removed altogether from the game.

All abilities allowing movement or shooting in hero phase should altogether be removed. It gives too much importance to early phases(i.e. first two battle rounds) of the game and, combined with lack of tactically meaningful terrain rules, relegates the matchups into "who decides the priority". Removal of such abilities, along with improvement of terrain rules and layout, would help toning down lethality of the game; thus making later phases of the game more meaningful.

I must first confess that I am no expert on interpreting statistics. But isn't it "disingenuous" to conclude that the above table shows "fairly healthy number of tournament viable factions", when top factions are sporting 20 or even more(in case of SoB, more than 50) 4-1 Wins while Nighthaunt and BoC have ...... 2 or 5 4-1 Wins? And I am not counting 5-0 Wins, of which there are none for two factions(nighthaunt, BoC) you have specifically cited. Unless you are assuming the faction is competitively "viable" as long as there is even a single case of 4-1 Wins for any faction, regardless of how great the gap between top performing factions and underperforming factions is.

It would be ludicrously comical if the usual suspects of the meta(sentinels, morathi + stalkers, tzeentch archaon, sons of behemat) evade nerf bat while already costly vanguard raptors get point hike. Even more hilarious if GW leaves pile of underpowered SCE warscrolls untouched.

Then all the more reasons for me to doubt their competence and/or "equitableness" towards various factions. I do not think I have ever witnessed massive points nerf on models that are yet to be released, let alone accumulate enough data on competitive scenes.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/11/19/dragons-are-on-their-way-but-not-before-a-quick-balance-pass/ So the models that were not even released along with the battletome is found to be too strong, according to Studio's extra playtesting. And the Studio bumped the stormdrake guards' point to 340 from 285. Now, I do not totally disagree with the points increase on the stormdrake guard, although stunning 55 points increase might be debatable. But their decision does make me wonder: if they were enthusiastic enough to drastically adjust points on models that have yet to see tournament plays, how come they are so slow to apply changes to factions/models that are already overperforming for months? You know, Lumineth Sentinels for example? The rules designers maybe doing their best for the balance of the game, but what they have done effectively through this action is making me lose faith in their capabilities.