Guest Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 So, online people keep complaining about balance. It's mostly in regards to FW units, the tyranid codex, the escalation book, or the stronghold assault book. I don't really think these are that unbalanced. I think what is happening is that GW released too many meta changes at once and everyone is struggling to adapt. I, repeat, I don't think it's a lack of balance. Just accept the new rules and slowly adapt to the newer 40k. Check your breathing and stay calm. Enjoy yourself again. -Pax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. Bigglesworth Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 Meta breaking is a form of unbalancing. all but the tyranids codex have done that. I agree wth he sentiment. This game is so large any time you bring in a meta breaker you change the requiements for a all comers list. At this point, most armies can't bring an all comers list. Most codex couldn't make an adequite all comers list and that is fin, but each new supplement/expansion/release widen the gaps more. For example the requirements to handle a lords of war super heavy versus handling a fmc list are completely different, with minimal overlap. I wish I could agree with you but I don't. I admire your optimism. I complain but I still buy into the hobby and still play and I play with more like minded folks. I still get plenty of joy out of these imbalances. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthweasel Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 I would posit there are different expectations in play, as well. Most people interested enough to go online to a forum have...lets say a deeper interest in the game. They know the percentage chance to make an 8" charge, have considered the cost/benefit of say...lascannon versus assault cannon... whereas GW deliberately makes the game for people who look and say "I have 20 tac marines, there are two troops choices...I have a land raider and dreadnought, okay, my list is done, lets play." When you try to make a game that is inherently, deliberately unequal into a "fair contest" there are going to be imbalances. Thing is, there are thousands of people playing at small game stores, or in their garages, or on the kitchen table, doubtless making numerous rules errors most games and not caring, having a good time and never realizing the reason their buddy has beaten them 276 consecutive times is because he has better troop options...but their voices are only heard in purchases, not forums. Note that I have no dog in the fight...balanced, imbalanced, doesn't matter to me, I enjoy the game...but I get both those who rail against the imbalances and those who don't notice them. Just trying to bring a neutral view to it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombking Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 I don't think the tournament scene is what the new supplements are aimed at. They really look to me more of here are some cool ways to use different units and scenarios and not have to make up rules as you go. This is for the guys who meet on weekend afternoons/evenings just to get together an have a fun time with cool models and be able to try something out other than lining up on opposite sides and grabbing objectives, etc. And I think that is a good thing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashneeb Posted January 19, 2014 Report Share Posted January 19, 2014 Forge World is one of two flavors of W's. "Whatever" or "Wtf?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaosGerbil Posted January 20, 2014 Report Share Posted January 20, 2014 40k and many other wargames aren't balanced that well, there is no rationale behind it, just sloppiness. The excuses we hear don't make up for all the wasted time and frustration. The player base would be stronger and therefore sales would be higher if: • the rules were less ambiguous • there were fewer overpowered / undercosted units • there were fewer underpowered / overcosted units Also the consistency is a bit off. A piece of wargear should cost the same and act the same no matter what codex it is bought from. Otherwise you just confuse people and add to imbalances. I could see an exception for HQ, HQ should have to pay an extra 5-10 pt tax or so on certain items, but it would be cleaner to just factor things into their base cost. Maybe you could argue troops with a lower BS or worse assault stats should pay less (like Guardsmen) but it drives me crazy when Marines aren't standardized for the same equipment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted January 20, 2014 Report Share Posted January 20, 2014 Also the consistency is a bit off. A piece of wargear should cost the same and act the same no matter what codex it is bought from. Otherwise you just confuse people and add to imbalances. I could see an exception for HQ, HQ should have to pay an extra 5-10 pt tax or so on certain items, but it would be cleaner to just factor things into their base cost. Maybe you could argue troops with a lower BS or worse assault stats should pay less (like Guardsmen) but it drives me crazy when Marines aren't standardized for the same equipment. There needs to be variation for things that depend on the statline of the Model carrying it. There's no way a PowerFist is worth the same amount on a S3 A2 IG Vet Sergeant as it is on a S4 A4 SM Chapter Master. For shooting stuff, tho, I reckon the benefits from IG Orders make up enough for the lower BS that the same pricing is reasonable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intrizic Posted January 20, 2014 Report Share Posted January 20, 2014 this depends on your definition of 'balance'. The best metaphor or analogy, for me, that I've heard for balance goes like this: Balance is not: no one complains Balance is: everyone complaining at the same volume Let's be honest, everyone complains, even Tau/Eldar/X-wing/League of Legends/49ner fans/WoW/WoT/Skylander/MTG/ players complain and that's ok, we're humans, it's what we do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashneeb Posted January 20, 2014 Report Share Posted January 20, 2014 All that complaining. People still buying the game. GW doesn't need to fix anything, because people are still buying. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratrek Posted January 20, 2014 Report Share Posted January 20, 2014 All that complaining. People still buying the game. GW doesn't need to fix anything, because people are still buying. 24% drop in share price says otherwise. Yes, GW is always down in January but not that much. It was 4 years ago the last time they had such a drop off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted January 20, 2014 Report Share Posted January 20, 2014 24% drop in share price says otherwise. Yes, GW is always down in January but not that much. It was 4 years ago the last time they had such a drop off. 4 Years ago, you mean the last time they were in a mid-edition slump? Cycles are weird. :) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBeadle Posted January 20, 2014 Report Share Posted January 20, 2014 Put twenty gamers into a cup, ask them all a subjective question like is this balanced vs that, and then roll them onto the table. You will get at least 15 different answers. Its a fun game, thats all I care about. The super competative stuff ruins if for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy'sLawyer Posted January 20, 2014 Report Share Posted January 20, 2014 Not that my opinion matters here but the competitive gamers are the ones having the main issues at this time. With all the quick changes and a release schedual that is amazing it is not like the old days. Back when you could learn a codex fully learn its counters before the next beastly codex comes out. And the really competitive players codex jumped everytime a new one came out that had good rules. Now that is in the past and the new way is flood the scene with new toys that are a Rocm, Paper, Sissors where no one codex rules them all. And Allies made building a unbeatable list impossible. Us non-competitive players are just enjoying the new stuff coming out without compairing and breaking numbers down to maximise our new list effectiveness. In fact it might be a long time before I play a non Kill Team game and hope that the winds have died down some and players can once again bring that 'fun' list out becuase they wanted to try out unit X without being concerned wheather or not their list is competitive. I just want to have fun and share some laughs and stories. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aventine Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 I got agitated a bit during December. Then I realized I wasn't agitated by anything GW was doing, I was just agitated by all the bitching and belly-aching I was hearing about it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashneeb Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 I'd point out that there are plenty of things that go into a stock price, and it's more than just people aren't buying. There could be supply chain issues, there could be the fact that there were greater outlays this year because of opening a crapload of stores, there could be price increases for their resources to make miniatures, etc. Those all eat into profits. If they said sales were down across the board all over and everything else was stable, then it could be said people aren't buying. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy'sLawyer Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 @Dashneeb. Well let's not forget the White Elephant in the room, New Releases! People forget the money that is put into production and it is not made up in the first year of release. And if rumors are right they will keep up with the high release rate for the next year at least. The new CEO obviously has an ambitious idea on how the company will run. It maybe 2-3 years before they see how the returns will do. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratrek Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 There certainly are many reasons why people aren't buying. Many of them are listed in the share holders report and very few of them have anything to do with your examples. I'll leave off this until we've actually all read the report so are talking about the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy'sLawyer Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 There certainly are many reasons why people aren't buying. Many of them are listed in the share holders report and very few of them have anything to do with your examples. I'll leave off this until we've actually all read the report so are talking about the same thing. I would love to see the stock reports. Remember stocks drop for many reasons, not just drop in sales. GW has been going through a big change and having anew CEO taking the company into new waters will make stock holders shakey. They would sell their shares till the waters settle down and the return comes in from the new changes. Also there is two very distinct differences between 'drop in sales' and 'sale failed to meet expectations.' Our company beats its sales from the previous year but they get shakey when it doesn't meet their projected growth. Then 6 months down the road things settle out and bam, we're back on track meeting the expected projections. But if you can get a hold of a link or copy of the last years sales compared to the previous year's I would love to see them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaosGerbil Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 ... And Allies made building a unbeatable list impossible. ... There may be no unbeatable lists, but there are near unbeatable matchups, which aren't much fun for either player. If you have to tailor your list specifically to fight a combo netlist on a somewhat level field, something is very wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuliusRedwings Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 Put twenty gamers into a cup... Dude twenty gamers?! Last time it was just two girls.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombking Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 Dude twenty gamers?! Last time it was just two girls.... Either way I don't want to see it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.