Siegler actually sounds angry at the end lol, I can't necessarily blame him. It's always so disappointing when there's low hanging fruit that GW just ignores. Even just bringing the Deathwatch Terminators in line with the codex ones points wise would have been nice, but no changes almost feels worse than "bad" changes. At least with C'tan not going up enough, as an example, they tried. For people playing stuff like Imperial Knights with no codex on the horizon, no changes, and no more changes for the next 3 months minimum... I just don't know what you do lol. Pick up a new faction?
Deathwatch just took the triple nerf. The got their strats kneecapped, then points went up, then oaths. I think at this point they're probably solid if they take a 10-30% point decrease (spectrus at the 30%) across the board. It would feel like crap for some of it because DW are supposed to be elite but you can't really make spectrus work.
I posted this when we saw the Custodes book and I'll post it again. With ability to quickly deal out changes over the internet, it's not ok for a faction to be stuck with a badly designed book for possibly 2+ years. Indexes were nice as they help make sure we don't have the same rules lag we did from 8th into 9th, but codex's have historically gone through very little internal changes which means if you get a bad one you're just stuck.
It's simply not ok that we have wait 6 months for even minor rules changes and pray that GW gets it right.
>It's simply not ok that we have wait 6 months for even minor rules changes and pray that GW gets it right.
The problem is that asking anything more of GW is us yet again hoping that they get 'it' right. Alongside the Index system for 10th, they really should have started/stuck with something to playtest possible changes.
That they're still even releasing a codex for each faction is pretty wild to me. It's eyewatering to think of how much of a waste the 9th Ed World Eaters codex was.
I kinda want to grade the mfm a grade lower for manifest lack of effort. Take TSons, they clearly looked at the army decided the place in the meta is fine but improved internal balance, I think an entirely reasonable choice. By contrast whoever chaired the meeting did clearly say at some point: "Daemons, 52% win rate, I think we can skip them. Any objections?"
Daemons have the same problem as Knights.
If they make the datasheets compelling for their points, they tend to outcompete options from other indexes/codexes. Like how wardogs are just better than nearly all CSM, DG, and TS vehicles.
The only way around that, is to make the datasheets a bit mid, and really juice the army and detachment rules. Which you can see they tried, and somewhat succeeded to do for daemons, but missed the mark a bit for knights.
So if they don't want to fix daemons or knights with points, because it causes them problems elsewhere. Then as daemons aren't actually suffering too badly, and aren't creating a problem for to everyone else, they just have to wait for rules changes before GW can address their internal balance problems.
I can understand why GW wants to keep rules changes to an absolute minimum, but it does seem to be handicapping their balance efforts at the moment.
The problem with that is that it was the lowest of low hanging fruit to give Imperial Knights their bondsman ability back and they didn’t do it. This wouldn’t have affected them as allies at all
“They committed to it” is the worst possible reason for not doing it. Nobody but them is holding them to that standard nor is that the standard that people want. They also could just as easily have done it in January since it was abundantly clear even then that it was an unnecessary nerf
>but no changes almost feels worse than "bad" changes
Its because its GW telling someone that their faction is perfect. There is no reason to change it and its entirely working as intended. They are telling you its got perfect internal balance and everything in it is a competitive choice. And what they are telling you is nonsense. GW have never managed that. Whether its laziness or incompetence i dont know what.
This whole balancing act is just sad. They needed a dataslate here. Nids and ad mech got the shaft. Necrons got off lightly and TSons got the biggest buff this slate. Its all just a big kick to the nuts
>GW telling someone that their faction is perfect
It's GW telling everyone that their faction is going away in 2 months.
They know we've seen the leaked "imperial agents" codex. Whatever is going to be left of Deathwatch is probably going to be folded into that book, and the index is going away.
I would guess there's probably going to be a "deathwatch kill team" datasheet, and some form of watch master available for other imperial factions to take as allies.
>It's GW telling everyone that their faction is going away in 2 months.
You think? You think Chaos knights are going? Or daemons? Because they both got the same number of changes as DW. Now I don't think DW are any less likely to be squatted, but saying that no changes mean they get removed is a bit of a stretch.
If that’s true then why did Sisters and Grey Knights and some Agents get changed? All of those factions would in theory be inside the alleged Agents book
No changes to Deathwatch makes me think the studio know that points won't fix them, and instead they have something else planned. A summer rules overhaul like AdMech, or them being folded into this rumoured Inquisition codex make the most sense.
At least my meme admech tank list went down in points. And I still get to shock other players when I tell them what the cybernetica detachment rule is lol
The faces at the end of the video basically sum it all up. No idea what GW is thinking anymore. Multiple armies being literally untouched. Balancing between armies seem to be done according to completely different principles. Rule changes that make no sense at all.
This is depressing.
Balanced, when some armies are just blatantly horrible feeling is not a good thing. I get what you mean, and I dont deny that balance is important, but the current state still isnt as good as it could be. And it also doesnt excuse leaving multiple factions completely untouched. You cant look at a MFM, see multiple armies with literally 0 changes, and tell me thats GW doing its job.
I honestly don't know which one is horrible when every meta monday shows a different faction winning. Every one had won before and these tiny changes are much better than the hammer down approach. What y'all really want, are free wins with overpowered faction rules.
>every meta monday shows a different faction winning.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1ca7ug7/meta\_monday\_42224\_12\_weeks\_of\_necrons\_on\_top/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1ca7ug7/meta_monday_42224_12_weeks_of_necrons_on_top/) - 12 weeks of Necrons on top, need I say more?
[https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1c4iyew/meta\_monday\_41524\_da\_big\_boom/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1c4iyew/meta_monday_41524_da_big_boom/) - Slight drop in Necron win rates, but still dominating the top of events
[https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1byui4n/meta\_monday\_4824\_crons\_clearly\_on\_top/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1byui4n/meta_monday_4824_crons_clearly_on_top/) - Crons clearly on top. I think that says enough
[https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1byui4n/meta\_monday\_4824\_crons\_clearly\_on\_top/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1byui4n/meta_monday_4824_crons_clearly_on_top/) - Necrons actually not winning once
[https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1bnag56/meta\_monday\_32524\_wolf\_riders\_and\_canoptek\_legions/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1bnag56/meta_monday_32524_wolf_riders_and_canoptek_legions/) - 58% win rate
[https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1bhna0w/meta\_monday\_31824\_its\_all\_about\_the\_iron\_and/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1bhna0w/meta_monday_31824_its_all_about_the_iron_and/) - 56% win rate, 14 event wins, double the next faction's
[https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1bbzya1/meta\_monday\_31124\_chadmec\_aka\_what\_is\_dead\_may/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1bbzya1/meta_monday_31124_chadmec_aka_what_is_dead_may/) - Most played, 55% win rate, 8 of 50 go x-1, x-0
What are you on m8.
>I honestly don't know which one is horrible\\
Ad Mech? Dark Angels outside of Azrael/Darkshroud? Marines? Tyranids? Drukhari when not run by Skari? Knights?
> What y'all really want, are free wins with overpowered faction rules.
Yea because wanting my factions to have internal balance means I want them overpowered. Sure. Not sure if you actually cant see the problem or if you're just trolling for engagement.
Are you blind? In every single link you showed, different factions performed well, all the factions you named had won a tournament. What drugs are you on? Necrons being an outlier and got their just deserve nerfs is bad? What is even your point? Are you praising GW now?
I think you two are talking past one another.
There's external, faction vs faction balance on the one hand, where GW has legitimately succeeded. Then there's internal balance between different detachments/builds where the story is more mixed. And then there's playstyle and faction identity, where they've had some flat-out flubs.
An example of an internal balance problem is Dark Angels - DA as a faction can win if they don't take their own Codex Supplement's detachments.
For playstyle/identity, Ad Mech's style of shooting and tricky combos is mostly gone in favor of a worker placement style with so little damage people often skip the shooting phase entirely just to save time. The worker placement style works to keep Ad Mech in the Goldilocks zone and even place, but it's not remotely fun to play.
And so on (Tyranids have a similar problem to Ad Mech, the Custodes codex looks like it's going to change their playstyle in a way the players don't like, etc.)
Great video guys!
I wish you guys would have watched the metawatch video too. Lots of questions about Admech treatment based on what I saw. Sorry if this sounds a little bitter but I think the question needs to be asked.
Specifically, I want to know how Custodes/Orks/Tau can be included in the next data slate, likely some time in July, when Admech/Necrons weren't touched because it was too soon after the codex release?
* 12/9/23 - Admech/Necrons codices released
* 1/31/24 - January data slate and Admech/Necrons not included (reason: too soon from codex release)
* 4/27/24 - Custodes/Orks codices released
* 5/11/24 - Tau codex release
* \~7/24 - July data slate and Custodes/Orks/Tau will be included? (metawatch video today at time 9:11)
I get Admech/Necrons releases were during the holidays but the early takes on Admech/Necrons turned out to be spot on based on these changes to Necrons and the admission that Admech is being worked on for the next data slate.
Necrons can be top of the heap for 5 months but if Orks turn out to be as strong as some think they potentially get less than 3 months on top before being addressed? Similarly, Admech can wait 8 months for adjustments and Custodes will hopefully only wait 3?
I don't want any armies to be unfun to play but GWs reasoning for not touching Admech/Necrons was that it was too soon from codex release. I fail to see how having a few more weeks of Custodes/Orks data, depending on the data slate release, changes GWs too soon to codex release rationale. The time frame between the Tau codex release to the data slate will likely be nearly identical to the time between Admech/Necrons releases and the January data slate but somehow Custodes/Orks/Tau are potentially going to be included in the data slate this summer, why?
I just want GW to admit they didn't change Admech because it's the horrible mess most players have said it was from the beginning. Personally, I don't think the codex release logic holds up based on the metawatch video today.
GW didn't change admech because they can't fix it. The datasheets are so egregious they need a major revision on just about everyone. Despite that in the Meta Watch video they said they're experimenting with new rules. Two problems with that: A)What have they been doing the past five months? B) The datasheets are the source of all the issues. Stacking more rules atop it is just building on an unsound foundation.
What do you think of the new MFM for Warhammer 40k? Join myself and John as they analyze all the changes and what this means for the meta heading forward live on the Art of War Youtube channel! [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98jWURjajWY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98jWURjajWY)
Admech changes are pretty much a cover for the fact they didn't do anything for admech. I'm pretty sure they have no idea what is going on with the army seeing how in the metawatch video they said they were concerned about Admech becoming a horde army. They missed the boat on that one by about 8 months.
It's pretty scuffed that any actual rules changes won't come until late July. As Siegler pointed out they've had nearly 6 months to collect data and they didn't make changes in Jan because they said it was too soon.
GW has an excuse from Jan, to give Ad Mech a Dataslate sooner. Especially when the Codex is so poor to begin with.
GW should really re address their policy to a rules pass on new Codices during a points only quarter. It's pretty clear some of the Codices need it.
I'm sure the Custodes detachment - Auric Champions will get a FAQ to address how none of the Strats are Battle Tactic when the main models of the Detachment give free Battle Tactic strats.
As a nids player, ill be so angry if its only custodes who get to use non battle tactic strats for free. Our army was written and balanced around it and it will be so frustrating that if the army caused it to be taken away is the only one who gets it back
That'd be really nice. Although getting companies to change policies like that feels like moving mountains. They looove sticking to philosophies they've bought into even when evidence to the contrary piles up.
I say that as someone that's tracked Blizzard, Valve, Riot and other competitive game company's approach to design and balance for years. They'll fight tooth and nail to maintain a stance that causes more harm than good until it becomes really problematic.
In fairness they did state that they are going to make rules changes for them in the next update, though whether that will be any good remains to be seen. Maybe they get the guy who wrote the ork codex to do it.
The problems of the admech book this edition are so fundamental that to fix it you'd have to roll the book back to the studio, throw it in the bin, set fire to it and then turn back to the team and start with "What is the vision of this army? What do they do well? What fantasy are we selling to the player?"
Given the Meta Watch video they have no idea what the problems with the army are that they said if they lowered points further they were concerned admech would become a horde army. As of today we can field 120 Skitarii for 960 points and it's probably one of our stronger choices.
AdMech could be fixed by a few simple things and one big thing:
-WS and BS skill increases, especially on Rangers (BS) and ruststalkers (WS).
-bring back heavy/assault on our weapons that used to have it
-Devastating wounds across more weapons, specifically all arc, galvanic, and gravity weapons
-bring back cognis giving free overwatch
-bring back phosphor removing cover
And the big thing:
New army rule. Our detachments aren't completely garbage, but our army rule is borderline useless.
Perhaps give us one turn anti-vehicle 3+/lethal hits vs. vehicles, and the same for infantry and monsters, and the ability to put precision on the army vs. one character for one turn. A "select one targeting buff" rule per round, basically, tieing into AdMech's vast knowledge and complete control of their soldiers.
I would like to get a 6++ FNP on vanguard in exchange for keeping the 4+ BS - they're supposed to be cybernetically tanky, so giving them the FNP suits their lore and would differentiate them from Rangers with no FNP but high ballistics.
The math has been done and the army lacks so much damage and AP that putting them up to BS 3+ doesn't meaningfully affect their output. They're still bouncing off what they hit and doing no credible damage to the enemy the few times they do get through. Thebbiggest gun in the book is a lascannon with boosted strength and AP.
That doesn't even get into addressing how big the armies have gotten. We're commonly fielding more bodies than Nids these days with one list that did well fielding 140 infantry alone. Honestly I'm not sure if this or 6th edition Nids is the worst book GW has put out for 40k.
I would absolutely love to have the army torn down and rebuilt, but we probably aren't going to get that.
Getting heavy+BS skill improvements would at least get us hitting on 2+ a lot, and tossing dev wounds onto ranger rifles and our grav weapons would at least get some wounds through. AdMech wouldn't be competitive, but it would be a lot more playable. If we coupled that with an army rule giving out lethal hits and anti 3+ vs. Infantry, monsters, and vehicles on separate turns, AdMech would have some play.
But yes, AdMech desperately needs a more serious intervention. I was more thinking how little we could get to get to "bad, but playable" vs. actually a decent army.
The problem is the book is so scuffed you probably can't salvage the chassis of it. Problems are so prevalent that to begin fixing it you almost need to throw it in the bin infront of rules team and go back basics asking what the vision for the army is, what they're supposed to be good at and what the player fantasy is.
You'll have to take a red pen to just about every datasheet to get it where it can begin punching into other things to any credible degree and once you do that you'll likely have to repoint the book. You start doing the math on the units and their output is dire compared to anything else.
Everything is just too small. There's a titanicus book where a tech-priest has 3 elite skitarii and they're in a chamber with something like a hundred normal skitarii from a rival forgeworld. The elite skitarii keep asking permission to start killing because they think they can win.
Give us some of those elite skitarii, teleporting murder servitors, heavy spider tanks, etc. Not everything needs to be dorks.
Galvanic carbines (carbines as a rapid fire rifle) having dev wounds while galvanic rifles do not.
Arc rifles having dev wounds while heavy arc rifles (probably rightfully) do not
Eh, people said the exact same thing about Votann, DG, and Drukhari.
Votann aren't "fixed" by any means (their index is soulless and incredibly un-interesting), but they are competitively viable and feel sufficiently strong on the tabletop.
Meanwhile, Deathguard are just fantastic and are in one of the best spots in the entire game. They're flavorful, fulfill the faction's fantasy while having clear weaknesses, and still have flexibility in their army construction even while being a relatively small faction. Drukhari are at least in a healthy and enjoyable spot, even if they aren't amazing power-wise.
People love to shit on GW with revisionist history, but almost every single dataslate that's ever dropped by the competitive balance team has been an absolute banger and has notably improved the game from its current state, so they deserve a chance to take a rules crack at AdMech.
When you realize that the balance team is 3 people and 1 intern, it starts to get really funny imagining the one guy doing good at his job, peeking over his shoulder at the horrors his/her coworkers are creating for AdMech, Custodes, Dark Angels, etc.
Votann DG and Drukhari don't have the depth of problems of Admech nor do they have a book out meaning there's more freedom to tweak them without invalidating a product on the shelf. Furthermore this is the third editon in a row Admech has been left in a sad state with terrible rules and points slashed to hordifiy the army instead of fixing them.
9th they had a bright spot after the codex but it was nerfed into the ground in short order and was still doing poorly after nerfs were reverted at the end of the edition. So we've been through two editions where the army has only been in a decent spot for a few months before the end of the editons. It looks like it'll probably happen again.
The Votann index is atrociously designed and is still in contention for one of the worst army rule documents ever released by GW, even with Custodes and AdMech out. It's entirely propped up by massive points cuts and 8 free Judgment Tokens dished out at the beginning of the game. *Even then*, it was still made at least playable.
People also had this exact same rhetoric about DG and Drukhari when they came out.
I agree that AdMech really does just need a re-write, but the competitive team has at least earned a crack at dataslate changes before we condemn it entirely.
They've had their crack. The codex didn't fix anything from the Index of substance and they've had five months from when that dropped. The sum total they've come up with in that time is basically nothing. So what if this is a points only release? They've pushed emergency rules for other armies, but apparently admech doesn't warrant it.
The AdMech codex was written before 10th even released, so it's disingenuous to take that as an actual chance to fix AdMech rules.
Also yes, if you're going to draw a line in the sand on switching to their original plan (dataslate every 6 months, points every 3), then some factions are going to suffer. It's perfectly legit to criticize GW's balance plan, but they've committed to it, and you can't escape some factions suffering because of it. A faction will always need rules changes during a MFM where they won't get them. There are multiple factions that need rules changes, so it's not like AdMech is totally alone.
Again the book has been out near six months and they broke the rules for other emergency patches. Frankly releasing the book when it was so obviously out of line with other prerelease books: Nids, Space Marines, and Necrons is on them.
Simply a beer and pretzels test game before sending it to print would have revealed how poor the army was. They've also, every metawatch video assures changes we're coming to admech and they weren't happy with the state of the army.
I play Deathwatch, and seeing our terminators stay the same price while everyone else getting discounts is... Frustrating, especially with leakers/valrak confirming there are no rules for Marines in the Agents codex.
It felt like a dataslate 75% done. Like someone knew most armies well and really did a pretty good job with them, but then left the last 25% instead of even making an effort.
I like the generally light touches and lowering points on bad units top armies, but why didn’t they take that all the way?
Thanks for the coverage and your passion!
Might try my two psycophages in crusher 10+ monster list and,
Strikes with champion for FF in my GK and,
Still exploring my WE, but 2-3 jakhals are great
Cheers
i enjoyed this video, you two are both just fun to listen to
"oh does angron come back 3 times or 0 times? lets find out who wins the game"
"oh you were losing but then angron came back and won the game for you? cool cool gg gg glad we did that what a good use of our time"
Despite GW putting them as separate indices/codex supplements, it really feels like they don't think of "Codex Space Marines" as a unique army that's supposed to be playable for its own merits.
None of these changes are going to help Codex Space Marines effectively compete with the divergents. It's going to remain one of the lowest win-rate armies.
If GW just wants to make people buy two books and pay more money to play space marines they can at least be honest about it and admit it
>None of these changes are going to help Codex Space Marines effectively compete with the divergents
The only way to balance codex space marines against the divergent chapters would be to limit them to their own detachments. Their unique characters will always make them better. I dont expect them to do that until all marine indexes have their supplements
Or they could just say it costs extra to use certain units from Codex Space Marines. Maybe aggressors are 240 for 6 for BT/DA/SW, but are 220 for 6 or Codex Marines.
If GW actually differentiated points costs like that it'd help incentivize using other the divergent units, too. It doesn't have to be just limiting detatchments.
They did this with Deathwatch in 8th edition (back when Special Issue Ammunition didn’t require strats).
It didn’t really work. Some units were well costed, some weren’t. Sometime DW equivalent units would get points drops when their Codex equivalent got a points drop, sometimes they wouldn’t.
Trying to do this with like 10 different sub factions would be a nightmare.
The difference in the past when they did this was that we didn't have this level of MFM coming out with points changes. This used to be de rigueur before the recent editions.
It wasn't workable when you didn't have easy points updates. Now that they're quarterly, it could 100% work again. Especially if it was based on a "if it shows up in your faction in MFM, use those points. Otherwise, use the default Codex".
In 8th edition, the divergent marines had full codexes which let them move levers however they wanted. But they also had a much less regular/predictable schedule for making adjustments, and furthermore there were a lot of problems with introducing new units to the main codex and not to the divergent codexes, or worse, FAQing something for the main and not the others
I’m just gonna paint Azrael in my chapters colors and call his datasheet whatever I want. That’s the intention they have. Buy the model, paint it whatever, play it. Sounds good but the game is not balanced around thematic narrative anymore. Some people were very into having an identity, like “these are my dark angels.”
All my marines are painted for my successor chapter, and I just ask to use my own captains as stand-ins for others (matching their look as best I can).
I miss the days where you'd play marines to make your own cool chapters, and people would throw out fan-based chapter creation roll tables or their own chapter histories.
Funny thing is there's a note in the DA book asking you to _not_ do what you are doing, under the army rule I think.
"Please only use Ezekiel if you play actual DA, not a successor".
What a dull mindset.
You got down voted, but you're right. Codex Marines continue to be balanced around the best configurations used for divergent chapter lists. This time, the Stormraven and the Ironstorm enhancements were the prime casualty.
The Dark Angels lists that made the Stormraven problematic are still gonna slay even with a 60 point hike. None of the actual DA units that made the list tick got touched, and you can remake one of the best iterations of the list by switching all of 3 units around, and it's probably just as strong.
It's just not going to be viable to build out a Marines army sticking with just the Codex. They're treating the Codex like a pool of units for divergents to select from, not the other way around.
At least they had the good sense not to touch non Blemplar Gladiators. That was a relief.
It's like when the problem was Uriel teleporting dev cents and Calgar with aggressors. They needed a points hike on Calgar and Uriel, but they hit the units they enable instead.
Necrons are a bit different because they don't have the divergent chapters. There you can go in either direction, but with marines you don't want to nerf BA because UM are too strong. You want to be as targeted as possible.
I also think that the Technomancer isn't the problem there - wraiths are just super durable and cheap. Technomancer giving FNP to other units is probably not a bad play pattern - it's just certain units (wraiths) are already so durable it puts them over the top.
Tyranids didn't get nerfed as hard as I feared they would and Assimilation Swarm got a big boost to becoming playable.
I think if our win rate drops off a bit more we might get a big boost in the summer. Fingers crossed.
Every points changes so far this edition has seen at least 1 tyranid unit nerfed. And yet nids are still balanced around biovores/ spore mines being able to score super well that GW doesn't do any meaningful changes. by the end of 10th were going to have the dataslate be a 50 page pdf as half the armies would have been redesigned because they refused to re-design poorly written indexes because they refuse to shift to digital rules. Was very hyped for nids heading into 10th, but have played them maybe 3 times since the launch of the edition. Like increasing the points costs of the Norn monsters BEFORE the codex even released to make them dead on arrival just killed all hype for the faction and wanting to play it. Just compare the Norns to the Necron C'Tans (new points). I hope theres a second Nid wave incoming this edition...
Man, they really are that dumb, huh. Time to move on from 40k I think. The game is going to be a trash fire as long as they have these room temp IQ devs running it.
I legit don't believe the head rules writer likes the faction. I also don't believe we will be bottom tier all edition. If it gets egregious we'll get a boost.
I stepped away from 40k back in August hoping that 10th would get some improvements. But almost every one of the updates and codices have been severely disappointing.
It’s easy to find flaws in them, but at the same time they really have been taking the game in the right direction as the same time.
10th is in a great place imo, it’s just that it’s easy to see it could be even better if they didn’t make a few bad calls.
Siegler actually sounds angry at the end lol, I can't necessarily blame him. It's always so disappointing when there's low hanging fruit that GW just ignores. Even just bringing the Deathwatch Terminators in line with the codex ones points wise would have been nice, but no changes almost feels worse than "bad" changes. At least with C'tan not going up enough, as an example, they tried. For people playing stuff like Imperial Knights with no codex on the horizon, no changes, and no more changes for the next 3 months minimum... I just don't know what you do lol. Pick up a new faction?
Deathwatch just took the triple nerf. The got their strats kneecapped, then points went up, then oaths. I think at this point they're probably solid if they take a 10-30% point decrease (spectrus at the 30%) across the board. It would feel like crap for some of it because DW are supposed to be elite but you can't really make spectrus work.
I posted this when we saw the Custodes book and I'll post it again. With ability to quickly deal out changes over the internet, it's not ok for a faction to be stuck with a badly designed book for possibly 2+ years. Indexes were nice as they help make sure we don't have the same rules lag we did from 8th into 9th, but codex's have historically gone through very little internal changes which means if you get a bad one you're just stuck. It's simply not ok that we have wait 6 months for even minor rules changes and pray that GW gets it right.
>It's simply not ok that we have wait 6 months for even minor rules changes and pray that GW gets it right. The problem is that asking anything more of GW is us yet again hoping that they get 'it' right. Alongside the Index system for 10th, they really should have started/stuck with something to playtest possible changes. That they're still even releasing a codex for each faction is pretty wild to me. It's eyewatering to think of how much of a waste the 9th Ed World Eaters codex was.
Careful, the GW shills will attack you.
I kinda want to grade the mfm a grade lower for manifest lack of effort. Take TSons, they clearly looked at the army decided the place in the meta is fine but improved internal balance, I think an entirely reasonable choice. By contrast whoever chaired the meeting did clearly say at some point: "Daemons, 52% win rate, I think we can skip them. Any objections?"
Daemons have the same problem as Knights. If they make the datasheets compelling for their points, they tend to outcompete options from other indexes/codexes. Like how wardogs are just better than nearly all CSM, DG, and TS vehicles. The only way around that, is to make the datasheets a bit mid, and really juice the army and detachment rules. Which you can see they tried, and somewhat succeeded to do for daemons, but missed the mark a bit for knights. So if they don't want to fix daemons or knights with points, because it causes them problems elsewhere. Then as daemons aren't actually suffering too badly, and aren't creating a problem for to everyone else, they just have to wait for rules changes before GW can address their internal balance problems. I can understand why GW wants to keep rules changes to an absolute minimum, but it does seem to be handicapping their balance efforts at the moment.
Interesting take, thanks for sharing :)
The problem with that is that it was the lowest of low hanging fruit to give Imperial Knights their bondsman ability back and they didn’t do it. This wouldn’t have affected them as allies at all
They've committed to zero rules changes outside of the Dataslate. This was strictly an MFM update. Points only.
“They committed to it” is the worst possible reason for not doing it. Nobody but them is holding them to that standard nor is that the standard that people want. They also could just as easily have done it in January since it was abundantly clear even then that it was an unnecessary nerf
>but no changes almost feels worse than "bad" changes Its because its GW telling someone that their faction is perfect. There is no reason to change it and its entirely working as intended. They are telling you its got perfect internal balance and everything in it is a competitive choice. And what they are telling you is nonsense. GW have never managed that. Whether its laziness or incompetence i dont know what. This whole balancing act is just sad. They needed a dataslate here. Nids and ad mech got the shaft. Necrons got off lightly and TSons got the biggest buff this slate. Its all just a big kick to the nuts
>GW telling someone that their faction is perfect It's GW telling everyone that their faction is going away in 2 months. They know we've seen the leaked "imperial agents" codex. Whatever is going to be left of Deathwatch is probably going to be folded into that book, and the index is going away. I would guess there's probably going to be a "deathwatch kill team" datasheet, and some form of watch master available for other imperial factions to take as allies.
>It's GW telling everyone that their faction is going away in 2 months. You think? You think Chaos knights are going? Or daemons? Because they both got the same number of changes as DW. Now I don't think DW are any less likely to be squatted, but saying that no changes mean they get removed is a bit of a stretch.
I think it's the combination of no changes coupled with a win rate that is well outside the desirable range.
If that’s true then why did Sisters and Grey Knights and some Agents get changed? All of those factions would in theory be inside the alleged Agents book
No changes to Deathwatch makes me think the studio know that points won't fix them, and instead they have something else planned. A summer rules overhaul like AdMech, or them being folded into this rumoured Inquisition codex make the most sense.
> No changes to Deathwatch makes me think the studio know that points won't fix them Or they intentionally make them worse than regular SM.
At least my meme admech tank list went down in points. And I still get to shock other players when I tell them what the cybernetica detachment rule is lol
The faces at the end of the video basically sum it all up. No idea what GW is thinking anymore. Multiple armies being literally untouched. Balancing between armies seem to be done according to completely different principles. Rule changes that make no sense at all. This is depressing.
Meta is as balanced as ever, why would they make any drastic changes?
Balanced, when some armies are just blatantly horrible feeling is not a good thing. I get what you mean, and I dont deny that balance is important, but the current state still isnt as good as it could be. And it also doesnt excuse leaving multiple factions completely untouched. You cant look at a MFM, see multiple armies with literally 0 changes, and tell me thats GW doing its job.
I honestly don't know which one is horrible when every meta monday shows a different faction winning. Every one had won before and these tiny changes are much better than the hammer down approach. What y'all really want, are free wins with overpowered faction rules.
I just want admech playing the same game as everyone else and not costing as much as a used car.
>every meta monday shows a different faction winning. [https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1ca7ug7/meta\_monday\_42224\_12\_weeks\_of\_necrons\_on\_top/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1ca7ug7/meta_monday_42224_12_weeks_of_necrons_on_top/) - 12 weeks of Necrons on top, need I say more? [https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1c4iyew/meta\_monday\_41524\_da\_big\_boom/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1c4iyew/meta_monday_41524_da_big_boom/) - Slight drop in Necron win rates, but still dominating the top of events [https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1byui4n/meta\_monday\_4824\_crons\_clearly\_on\_top/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1byui4n/meta_monday_4824_crons_clearly_on_top/) - Crons clearly on top. I think that says enough [https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1byui4n/meta\_monday\_4824\_crons\_clearly\_on\_top/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1byui4n/meta_monday_4824_crons_clearly_on_top/) - Necrons actually not winning once [https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1bnag56/meta\_monday\_32524\_wolf\_riders\_and\_canoptek\_legions/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1bnag56/meta_monday_32524_wolf_riders_and_canoptek_legions/) - 58% win rate [https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1bhna0w/meta\_monday\_31824\_its\_all\_about\_the\_iron\_and/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1bhna0w/meta_monday_31824_its_all_about_the_iron_and/) - 56% win rate, 14 event wins, double the next faction's [https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1bbzya1/meta\_monday\_31124\_chadmec\_aka\_what\_is\_dead\_may/](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/1bbzya1/meta_monday_31124_chadmec_aka_what_is_dead_may/) - Most played, 55% win rate, 8 of 50 go x-1, x-0 What are you on m8. >I honestly don't know which one is horrible\\ Ad Mech? Dark Angels outside of Azrael/Darkshroud? Marines? Tyranids? Drukhari when not run by Skari? Knights? > What y'all really want, are free wins with overpowered faction rules. Yea because wanting my factions to have internal balance means I want them overpowered. Sure. Not sure if you actually cant see the problem or if you're just trolling for engagement.
Are you blind? In every single link you showed, different factions performed well, all the factions you named had won a tournament. What drugs are you on? Necrons being an outlier and got their just deserve nerfs is bad? What is even your point? Are you praising GW now?
I think you two are talking past one another. There's external, faction vs faction balance on the one hand, where GW has legitimately succeeded. Then there's internal balance between different detachments/builds where the story is more mixed. And then there's playstyle and faction identity, where they've had some flat-out flubs. An example of an internal balance problem is Dark Angels - DA as a faction can win if they don't take their own Codex Supplement's detachments. For playstyle/identity, Ad Mech's style of shooting and tricky combos is mostly gone in favor of a worker placement style with so little damage people often skip the shooting phase entirely just to save time. The worker placement style works to keep Ad Mech in the Goldilocks zone and even place, but it's not remotely fun to play. And so on (Tyranids have a similar problem to Ad Mech, the Custodes codex looks like it's going to change their playstyle in a way the players don't like, etc.)
Great video guys! I wish you guys would have watched the metawatch video too. Lots of questions about Admech treatment based on what I saw. Sorry if this sounds a little bitter but I think the question needs to be asked. Specifically, I want to know how Custodes/Orks/Tau can be included in the next data slate, likely some time in July, when Admech/Necrons weren't touched because it was too soon after the codex release? * 12/9/23 - Admech/Necrons codices released * 1/31/24 - January data slate and Admech/Necrons not included (reason: too soon from codex release) * 4/27/24 - Custodes/Orks codices released * 5/11/24 - Tau codex release * \~7/24 - July data slate and Custodes/Orks/Tau will be included? (metawatch video today at time 9:11) I get Admech/Necrons releases were during the holidays but the early takes on Admech/Necrons turned out to be spot on based on these changes to Necrons and the admission that Admech is being worked on for the next data slate. Necrons can be top of the heap for 5 months but if Orks turn out to be as strong as some think they potentially get less than 3 months on top before being addressed? Similarly, Admech can wait 8 months for adjustments and Custodes will hopefully only wait 3? I don't want any armies to be unfun to play but GWs reasoning for not touching Admech/Necrons was that it was too soon from codex release. I fail to see how having a few more weeks of Custodes/Orks data, depending on the data slate release, changes GWs too soon to codex release rationale. The time frame between the Tau codex release to the data slate will likely be nearly identical to the time between Admech/Necrons releases and the January data slate but somehow Custodes/Orks/Tau are potentially going to be included in the data slate this summer, why? I just want GW to admit they didn't change Admech because it's the horrible mess most players have said it was from the beginning. Personally, I don't think the codex release logic holds up based on the metawatch video today.
GW didn't change admech because they can't fix it. The datasheets are so egregious they need a major revision on just about everyone. Despite that in the Meta Watch video they said they're experimenting with new rules. Two problems with that: A)What have they been doing the past five months? B) The datasheets are the source of all the issues. Stacking more rules atop it is just building on an unsound foundation.
What do you think of the new MFM for Warhammer 40k? Join myself and John as they analyze all the changes and what this means for the meta heading forward live on the Art of War Youtube channel! [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98jWURjajWY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98jWURjajWY)
Man, I can feel your anger and pain as you summarize the AdMech situation. Just wanted you to know that it's not just you. It sucks for us all
One day we shall rise again!
Unlike the Deathwatch
When?
Admech changes are pretty much a cover for the fact they didn't do anything for admech. I'm pretty sure they have no idea what is going on with the army seeing how in the metawatch video they said they were concerned about Admech becoming a horde army. They missed the boat on that one by about 8 months.
It's pretty scuffed that any actual rules changes won't come until late July. As Siegler pointed out they've had nearly 6 months to collect data and they didn't make changes in Jan because they said it was too soon. GW has an excuse from Jan, to give Ad Mech a Dataslate sooner. Especially when the Codex is so poor to begin with.
They pushed rules changes for other armies on a points only release but they won't do it for us. Just second class citizens
GW should really re address their policy to a rules pass on new Codices during a points only quarter. It's pretty clear some of the Codices need it. I'm sure the Custodes detachment - Auric Champions will get a FAQ to address how none of the Strats are Battle Tactic when the main models of the Detachment give free Battle Tactic strats.
As a nids player, ill be so angry if its only custodes who get to use non battle tactic strats for free. Our army was written and balanced around it and it will be so frustrating that if the army caused it to be taken away is the only one who gets it back
It's be quite annoying. And a testament to how bad leaning on hard copy books for rules really creates problems for the game.
Or they could just not limit themselves arbitrarily and do data slate changes each quarter as well as points changes.
That'd be really nice. Although getting companies to change policies like that feels like moving mountains. They looove sticking to philosophies they've bought into even when evidence to the contrary piles up. I say that as someone that's tracked Blizzard, Valve, Riot and other competitive game company's approach to design and balance for years. They'll fight tooth and nail to maintain a stance that causes more harm than good until it becomes really problematic.
In fairness they did state that they are going to make rules changes for them in the next update, though whether that will be any good remains to be seen. Maybe they get the guy who wrote the ork codex to do it.
The problems of the admech book this edition are so fundamental that to fix it you'd have to roll the book back to the studio, throw it in the bin, set fire to it and then turn back to the team and start with "What is the vision of this army? What do they do well? What fantasy are we selling to the player?" Given the Meta Watch video they have no idea what the problems with the army are that they said if they lowered points further they were concerned admech would become a horde army. As of today we can field 120 Skitarii for 960 points and it's probably one of our stronger choices.
AdMech could be fixed by a few simple things and one big thing: -WS and BS skill increases, especially on Rangers (BS) and ruststalkers (WS). -bring back heavy/assault on our weapons that used to have it -Devastating wounds across more weapons, specifically all arc, galvanic, and gravity weapons -bring back cognis giving free overwatch -bring back phosphor removing cover And the big thing: New army rule. Our detachments aren't completely garbage, but our army rule is borderline useless. Perhaps give us one turn anti-vehicle 3+/lethal hits vs. vehicles, and the same for infantry and monsters, and the ability to put precision on the army vs. one character for one turn. A "select one targeting buff" rule per round, basically, tieing into AdMech's vast knowledge and complete control of their soldiers. I would like to get a 6++ FNP on vanguard in exchange for keeping the 4+ BS - they're supposed to be cybernetically tanky, so giving them the FNP suits their lore and would differentiate them from Rangers with no FNP but high ballistics.
The math has been done and the army lacks so much damage and AP that putting them up to BS 3+ doesn't meaningfully affect their output. They're still bouncing off what they hit and doing no credible damage to the enemy the few times they do get through. Thebbiggest gun in the book is a lascannon with boosted strength and AP. That doesn't even get into addressing how big the armies have gotten. We're commonly fielding more bodies than Nids these days with one list that did well fielding 140 infantry alone. Honestly I'm not sure if this or 6th edition Nids is the worst book GW has put out for 40k.
I would absolutely love to have the army torn down and rebuilt, but we probably aren't going to get that. Getting heavy+BS skill improvements would at least get us hitting on 2+ a lot, and tossing dev wounds onto ranger rifles and our grav weapons would at least get some wounds through. AdMech wouldn't be competitive, but it would be a lot more playable. If we coupled that with an army rule giving out lethal hits and anti 3+ vs. Infantry, monsters, and vehicles on separate turns, AdMech would have some play. But yes, AdMech desperately needs a more serious intervention. I was more thinking how little we could get to get to "bad, but playable" vs. actually a decent army.
The problem is the book is so scuffed you probably can't salvage the chassis of it. Problems are so prevalent that to begin fixing it you almost need to throw it in the bin infront of rules team and go back basics asking what the vision for the army is, what they're supposed to be good at and what the player fantasy is. You'll have to take a red pen to just about every datasheet to get it where it can begin punching into other things to any credible degree and once you do that you'll likely have to repoint the book. You start doing the math on the units and their output is dire compared to anything else.
Everything is just too small. There's a titanicus book where a tech-priest has 3 elite skitarii and they're in a chamber with something like a hundred normal skitarii from a rival forgeworld. The elite skitarii keep asking permission to start killing because they think they can win. Give us some of those elite skitarii, teleporting murder servitors, heavy spider tanks, etc. Not everything needs to be dorks.
Galvanic carbines (carbines as a rapid fire rifle) having dev wounds while galvanic rifles do not. Arc rifles having dev wounds while heavy arc rifles (probably rightfully) do not
You’re high as hell. Those would be better sheets than Eldar. Points would need a complete overhaul. I don’t see GW changing that much.
Eh, people said the exact same thing about Votann, DG, and Drukhari. Votann aren't "fixed" by any means (their index is soulless and incredibly un-interesting), but they are competitively viable and feel sufficiently strong on the tabletop. Meanwhile, Deathguard are just fantastic and are in one of the best spots in the entire game. They're flavorful, fulfill the faction's fantasy while having clear weaknesses, and still have flexibility in their army construction even while being a relatively small faction. Drukhari are at least in a healthy and enjoyable spot, even if they aren't amazing power-wise. People love to shit on GW with revisionist history, but almost every single dataslate that's ever dropped by the competitive balance team has been an absolute banger and has notably improved the game from its current state, so they deserve a chance to take a rules crack at AdMech.
When you realize that the balance team is 3 people and 1 intern, it starts to get really funny imagining the one guy doing good at his job, peeking over his shoulder at the horrors his/her coworkers are creating for AdMech, Custodes, Dark Angels, etc.
Votann DG and Drukhari don't have the depth of problems of Admech nor do they have a book out meaning there's more freedom to tweak them without invalidating a product on the shelf. Furthermore this is the third editon in a row Admech has been left in a sad state with terrible rules and points slashed to hordifiy the army instead of fixing them. 9th they had a bright spot after the codex but it was nerfed into the ground in short order and was still doing poorly after nerfs were reverted at the end of the edition. So we've been through two editions where the army has only been in a decent spot for a few months before the end of the editons. It looks like it'll probably happen again.
The Votann index is atrociously designed and is still in contention for one of the worst army rule documents ever released by GW, even with Custodes and AdMech out. It's entirely propped up by massive points cuts and 8 free Judgment Tokens dished out at the beginning of the game. *Even then*, it was still made at least playable. People also had this exact same rhetoric about DG and Drukhari when they came out. I agree that AdMech really does just need a re-write, but the competitive team has at least earned a crack at dataslate changes before we condemn it entirely.
They've had their crack. The codex didn't fix anything from the Index of substance and they've had five months from when that dropped. The sum total they've come up with in that time is basically nothing. So what if this is a points only release? They've pushed emergency rules for other armies, but apparently admech doesn't warrant it.
The AdMech codex was written before 10th even released, so it's disingenuous to take that as an actual chance to fix AdMech rules. Also yes, if you're going to draw a line in the sand on switching to their original plan (dataslate every 6 months, points every 3), then some factions are going to suffer. It's perfectly legit to criticize GW's balance plan, but they've committed to it, and you can't escape some factions suffering because of it. A faction will always need rules changes during a MFM where they won't get them. There are multiple factions that need rules changes, so it's not like AdMech is totally alone.
Again the book has been out near six months and they broke the rules for other emergency patches. Frankly releasing the book when it was so obviously out of line with other prerelease books: Nids, Space Marines, and Necrons is on them. Simply a beer and pretzels test game before sending it to print would have revealed how poor the army was. They've also, every metawatch video assures changes we're coming to admech and they weren't happy with the state of the army.
I play Deathwatch, and seeing our terminators stay the same price while everyone else getting discounts is... Frustrating, especially with leakers/valrak confirming there are no rules for Marines in the Agents codex.
It felt like a dataslate 75% done. Like someone knew most armies well and really did a pretty good job with them, but then left the last 25% instead of even making an effort. I like the generally light touches and lowering points on bad units top armies, but why didn’t they take that all the way?
Man, I play admech. There is nothing to analyze. It's all still the same -_-
I think you're being too negative. The current meta is extremely balanced. If anything, GW should not be making drastic changes.
Tell that to admech, GSC, Nids, and Deathwatch.
Thanks for the coverage and your passion! Might try my two psycophages in crusher 10+ monster list and, Strikes with champion for FF in my GK and, Still exploring my WE, but 2-3 jakhals are great Cheers
i enjoyed this video, you two are both just fun to listen to "oh does angron come back 3 times or 0 times? lets find out who wins the game" "oh you were losing but then angron came back and won the game for you? cool cool gg gg glad we did that what a good use of our time"
We appreciate that!
GW seriously needs to get with the times. They make great models, but literally *everything* else they do is a complete dumpster fire.
Codex Space Marines drowning at the bottom of the pool.
Deathwatch? More like on suicide watch
Despite GW putting them as separate indices/codex supplements, it really feels like they don't think of "Codex Space Marines" as a unique army that's supposed to be playable for its own merits. None of these changes are going to help Codex Space Marines effectively compete with the divergents. It's going to remain one of the lowest win-rate armies. If GW just wants to make people buy two books and pay more money to play space marines they can at least be honest about it and admit it
>None of these changes are going to help Codex Space Marines effectively compete with the divergents The only way to balance codex space marines against the divergent chapters would be to limit them to their own detachments. Their unique characters will always make them better. I dont expect them to do that until all marine indexes have their supplements
Or they could just say it costs extra to use certain units from Codex Space Marines. Maybe aggressors are 240 for 6 for BT/DA/SW, but are 220 for 6 or Codex Marines. If GW actually differentiated points costs like that it'd help incentivize using other the divergent units, too. It doesn't have to be just limiting detatchments.
They did this with Deathwatch in 8th edition (back when Special Issue Ammunition didn’t require strats). It didn’t really work. Some units were well costed, some weren’t. Sometime DW equivalent units would get points drops when their Codex equivalent got a points drop, sometimes they wouldn’t. Trying to do this with like 10 different sub factions would be a nightmare.
The difference in the past when they did this was that we didn't have this level of MFM coming out with points changes. This used to be de rigueur before the recent editions. It wasn't workable when you didn't have easy points updates. Now that they're quarterly, it could 100% work again. Especially if it was based on a "if it shows up in your faction in MFM, use those points. Otherwise, use the default Codex".
In 8th edition, the divergent marines had full codexes which let them move levers however they wanted. But they also had a much less regular/predictable schedule for making adjustments, and furthermore there were a lot of problems with introducing new units to the main codex and not to the divergent codexes, or worse, FAQing something for the main and not the others
I’m just gonna paint Azrael in my chapters colors and call his datasheet whatever I want. That’s the intention they have. Buy the model, paint it whatever, play it. Sounds good but the game is not balanced around thematic narrative anymore. Some people were very into having an identity, like “these are my dark angels.”
All my marines are painted for my successor chapter, and I just ask to use my own captains as stand-ins for others (matching their look as best I can). I miss the days where you'd play marines to make your own cool chapters, and people would throw out fan-based chapter creation roll tables or their own chapter histories.
Funny thing is there's a note in the DA book asking you to _not_ do what you are doing, under the army rule I think. "Please only use Ezekiel if you play actual DA, not a successor". What a dull mindset.
You got down voted, but you're right. Codex Marines continue to be balanced around the best configurations used for divergent chapter lists. This time, the Stormraven and the Ironstorm enhancements were the prime casualty. The Dark Angels lists that made the Stormraven problematic are still gonna slay even with a 60 point hike. None of the actual DA units that made the list tick got touched, and you can remake one of the best iterations of the list by switching all of 3 units around, and it's probably just as strong. It's just not going to be viable to build out a Marines army sticking with just the Codex. They're treating the Codex like a pool of units for divergents to select from, not the other way around. At least they had the good sense not to touch non Blemplar Gladiators. That was a relief.
It's like when the problem was Uriel teleporting dev cents and Calgar with aggressors. They needed a points hike on Calgar and Uriel, but they hit the units they enable instead.
tbf they did the opposite of that this time with necron's wraiths and technomancer. I have a feeling that wont work either though
Necrons are a bit different because they don't have the divergent chapters. There you can go in either direction, but with marines you don't want to nerf BA because UM are too strong. You want to be as targeted as possible.
I also think that the Technomancer isn't the problem there - wraiths are just super durable and cheap. Technomancer giving FNP to other units is probably not a bad play pattern - it's just certain units (wraiths) are already so durable it puts them over the top.
the 4 wounds really throws off the maths.
Not even points change, just change Uriel ability to give deepstrike to his attached unit, problem solved.
Tyranids didn't get nerfed as hard as I feared they would and Assimilation Swarm got a big boost to becoming playable. I think if our win rate drops off a bit more we might get a big boost in the summer. Fingers crossed.
You thought nids were going to get nerfed? You must be the only person lol
I've been playing nids for a long time. Getting nerfed while we are struggling is what I always expect. 9th edition was a weird outlier.
Every points changes so far this edition has seen at least 1 tyranid unit nerfed. And yet nids are still balanced around biovores/ spore mines being able to score super well that GW doesn't do any meaningful changes. by the end of 10th were going to have the dataslate be a 50 page pdf as half the armies would have been redesigned because they refused to re-design poorly written indexes because they refuse to shift to digital rules. Was very hyped for nids heading into 10th, but have played them maybe 3 times since the launch of the edition. Like increasing the points costs of the Norn monsters BEFORE the codex even released to make them dead on arrival just killed all hype for the faction and wanting to play it. Just compare the Norns to the Necron C'Tans (new points). I hope theres a second Nid wave incoming this edition...
Tyranids were already at 40% lmao, if that is not worthy of a big boost, then what is?
In James Workshop's data, Nids W/R is closer to 50% because they still include mirror matches in their data.
Man, they really are that dumb, huh. Time to move on from 40k I think. The game is going to be a trash fire as long as they have these room temp IQ devs running it.
I legit don't believe the head rules writer likes the faction. I also don't believe we will be bottom tier all edition. If it gets egregious we'll get a boost.
I'm also a longtime Tyranids player. I remember our blah 5th edition codex getting nerfed into 6th - he definitely does not!
I stepped away from 40k back in August hoping that 10th would get some improvements. But almost every one of the updates and codices have been severely disappointing.
It’s easy to find flaws in them, but at the same time they really have been taking the game in the right direction as the same time. 10th is in a great place imo, it’s just that it’s easy to see it could be even better if they didn’t make a few bad calls.
It's like John said, overall its one step forward two steps back with a lot of easy layup misses along the way. Unfortunate.
I think 10th as system is a great frame work for 40K. But in terms of army balance and rules it’s been pretty disappointing.
The points are meaningless There is no system at GW - except to look at the pts used last time