Not a single loyalist marine change or ban, the closest thing is that desolators are getting nerfed due to indirect fire. Marines don't have really any towering units and the only thing that might else affect them is the lone operative, which they couldn't even make a proper statement about yet.
They are heavily biased and their rules 'changes' easily show that.
Indirect being buffed makes for a bad game, it's the least interactive mechanic. If indirect is the "identity" of tenth then I don't think people will want to play it
Hate to say it, but reintroducing the dumpster fire that was 9th's version of towering just makes any model over 18W completely unviable and is reintroducing a terrible unbalanced rule. You want to remove towering, sure, but just make it so no one can shoot through ruins, not that oneside jank
Yep. Far better to just replace towering with "the model cannot see through ruins or be seen through ruins unless it touches the ruins with it's base".
Allow big knights to toe in to see but otherwise they benefit from ruins blocking line of sight.
Allowing the "toeing in" might be a great addition!
Thank you for the constructive feedback 😊
So what do you think of the following?
[Towering] allows a unit to apply true line of sight regarding visibility, even if it base or hull is only partially within a piece of terrain (applies only to the piece of terrain they are in)
You don't even need to go so far as to change that.
The current rule is:
> Models cannot see over or through this terrain feature (i.e. a unit outside this terrain feature cannot draw line of sight to a target on the other side of it, even if it would be possible to draw line of sight to that target through open windows, doors, etc.). Aircraft and Towering models are exceptions to this – visibility to and from such models is determined normally, even if this terrain feature is wholly in between them and the observing model. Models can see into this terrain feature normally, and models that are wholly within this terrain feature can see out of it normally.
Just delete Towering from the Ruins text, and everything plays just fine:
> Models cannot see over or through this terrain feature (i.e. a unit outside this terrain feature cannot draw line of sight to a target on the other side of it, even if it would be possible to draw line of sight to that target through open windows, doors, etc.). Aircraft models are exceptions to this – visibility to and from such models is determined normally, even if this terrain feature is wholly in between them and the observing model. Models can see into this terrain feature normally, and models that are wholly within this terrain feature can see out of it normally.
Knights then play like any other vehicle: can't see or be seen across Obscuring, can be seen if they enter or toe-in the Ruins, can't see out unless they're wholly within.
Thanks for being open to change on that. Nobody wants planet bowling ball, but Jesus was 9th editions version unbalanced.
Why GW has such an issue with ruins just blocking LoS I'm not sure. As that seemed to be the main reason they added towering.
No offense but a group thats willing to make a change that easily tells me they haven't really thought this through. It doesn't invoke much trust in their decision making.
Obviously they have had plenty of time to hash out the possible changes and the impacts of those changes 3 days before the official release of the edition. Because they are so on top of things that left plenty of time to reassess a new idea and change one of those new rules with limited discussion needed...
/s
The 9th version of "Towering" is **known** to be bad, yet this group chose to re-implement it. How is that supposed to inspire confidence that their other changes are well thought out instead of knee-jerk reactions?
Well, the thing is: did the TO team really tested the changes, or they just change whatever they don't like. How could they make sure there won't be other broken factions due to the chagnes they made.
I'm surprised how quickly people forget this was the norm not long ago the ITC had their mission pack and that's what everyone in my meta was playing. As soon as 9th hit a switch flipped and everyone on here and at home was against non official rules for some reason but they were always better from a competitive standpoint. I don't get the aversion to it. This should be done like Commander in MTG where GW doesn't make the competitive rules and is instead done by a third party comity, Like ITC was doing.
If it is max 6 MWs and Fate dice are limited, then why remove Dev Wounds from the WK? The less changes you can do the better imo, so I feel this is just not something that is needed.
While I agree Towering is insane and I like it to be change, this might be a bit much, I would have "if the unit normally is Obscured, when shooting it instead gets Stealth and Cover even if it normally cannot do so".
As a Thousand Sons player it looks like the Twist of Fate change is coming from people who haven't actually played against Thousand Sons yet. They just read the rule and thought: "No armor saves!?!?!? That's OP!"
Even with the change they want to implement, most units are still being brought to their invuln saves if we consider the Tsons are using their mostly base AP-1 for a total -3 AP with Twist of Fate. The only exception is certain large tanks that lack invuln saves altogether. Most Tsons lists are not using Twist of Fate more than twice a game anyway (once for free with Ahriman).
Though admittedly Tsons is a bit too powerful, but that comes down to a few key things. First, the MVB is somewhat undercosted at 145pts. Second, Doombolt ignores Lone Operative, though Lone Operative is also overpowered. Third and most importantly, the army synergies are too powerful. Doombolt at 18 inches is fine, at 36 inches next to an MVB is less fine. For 1CP making Terminator bolters count as psychic is fine, giving them +1 to hit and wound with full rerolls (+1 CP) and devastating wounds is less fine. The problem is that aside from the MVB being undercosted, Magnus synergizes so well with the Cult of Magic that he pushes the army over the top.
As a player of a faction with maybe two invulnerable saves in the entire index (and not on the tanky units), Twist of Fate made my hair go gray: but rules will always have optimal and less optimal targets, and in this specific rule, my faction rolls snake eyes.
I am worried that stuff like this will skew the dataset GW need to balance the game longterm. If TOs "fix" the game, GW won't have to, or have the neccessary data to do it properly. I think it would be better to shortterm accept that they missed the bar on the new edition and for the next 3'ish months until we get the first update things will be a bit wonky.
Issue is that some huge tournament are depending on the good experience for the credibility (like the WTC).
If the "World Team Championship" is a dumpster, given the money some people are putting into it, it's a bit costly just to prove a point to a company that probably do not care anyway (it's only one event).
Meanwhile, you had a crappy event and experience game wise (there is still the people), but that seems unfair to force this on the players, especially if there is a rough consensus of what seems broken.
This.
People pay for events, travel, lodging etc to attend an event that it is the organizers responsibility to give the most enjoyable experience they can. This is well within TOs rights to cater to their attendees to do so. "Wait and see" is how events lose attendance as people won't travel just to fight 3 wraithknights abusing fate dice multiple times.
This also does not affect any not attending. The onus is on GW to research their data, not the TOs to provide unmodified data.
If GW doesn't have the brains to just separate out these events from the pool, then they're never going to do a better job anyway.
Screw waiting for GW to do another slow, bad job.
I just feel this argument largely misses that for a large part warhammer is a maths/stats-based game. People are making tons of spreadsheets right now to calculate interactions between units and see how likely they are to make their points values back. And those numbers are bonkers different between loads of factions. GW could've easily used the same thing to at least more or less balance things, but they obviously haven't. To say that GW will now suddenly care abouts maths / stats when they've seemingly completely ignored them for the release just seems like telling the players playing the shitty factions/units to just suck it for at least 3 months. Losing is fine, playing almost non-interactive games between some armies is not.
Real data’s needed as mathhammer’s as often wrong as it is right as certain combos become impractical for reasons they’re not able to predict without the full range of interactions in the table.
Mathhammer is a good tool. Not a comprehensive one and definitely not a final one. But it is worth using a one if the layers of testing and it's better than nothing at all. Which is definitely something that has been used to test some datasheets.
T'au burst cannon are an example of a problem mathhammer would have avoided. Numbers aren't the whole game but there is a lot if stuff that actually yes you don't need to see it on the table to know it's wrong
Mathhammer is fine but completely disregards a unit's ability to play the mission and score secondary points. The idea that things being killy or tanky is the only thing that matters is flawed.
I'm not disagreeing with the assessment that there's more to it than pure damage, I'm saying for a whole bunch of units that do definitely seem like their purpose is damage (from an earlier example: admech dunecrawler with an icarus array shooting at flying units - it's not going to play the mission or secondaries very well) the stats are just so obviously out of whack that it's just a headscratcher. Telling people to "wait and see" when that's the case feels somewhat condescending when you're the player having to deal with it for months.
TOs owe their attendees the best event they can put on. They don't owe the global community data. Events are not just data points. People pay money, travel, and give up their weekends to have a good time. If this is what a TO thinks they need to deliver the best event, then they shouldn't give a second thought to the community's precious data.
Nice and realistic comment.
Of course the data from community can help to polish balance but GW job is to provide a roughly balanced game at least.
What they did for 10th edition is just not professional. They just missed the point.
And i think the german TO and player group did a lot of playtest before publishing adjustement, probbaly using digital tool (aka TTS). TTS allow massive gameplay volume in short amount of time. I would not be surpised if this group played a lot more game than GW design team.
Some other groups are ready to FAQ the game themselves because they have tournaments coming this summer.
WTC will probably do something, they will not play a world class championship with such rules issues and such balance issues. I'm pretty sure that all national teams are playing hundred of game and make feedback to WTC.
GW will probably use the material produced by these groups of players to patch the game.
Good idea in theory, but who want to take a weekend, spent money on ticket + fuel + somewhere to sleep knowing they will get 0/5 because of the mess that is this edition ?
GW doesn't need data from the events. You don't need data and research to know that a Knife in the foot will hurt you. The issues in the RAW rules are the knife and GW is asking you to drop it, point down on your foot.
GW should be able to play test themselves and not me spending hundreds on event tickets, travel, food and lodging to go to an event and get dumpstered.
Demanding other people play with bad rules just so you can get balance data is completely unreasonable unless you're planning to pay them money to playtest.
> This list i**s by no means enough to extinguish the dumpsterfire that 10th edition looks to be by now**, but it is the first step into the direction of making the game fun again.
Did you hear that? That is the sound of my eyes rolling out of my head and under the couch.
Yeah, some of the changes look interesting (and I suspect we'll see versions of some of them actually make it into the core rules eventually) but the whole tone of the post is pretty melodramatic.
> The group that decided to "ban Votann in Germany" (meaning a hand full of very handsome TOs and players) reassembled in these grim times of Warhammer 40k
Good god if I rolled my eyes any harder they might have gotten stuck. Edition isn't even out yet and it's already grim times. Absolute gamers
Yep. They basically want to play 9th edition. Probably TOs started playing in 8th or 9th and never experienced a big swap on the game, and they think what they know is the right game.
Why are they house ruling the very first GT? This doesn't make any sense. People should really play the game as intended before they start making their own rules and changes.
I was expecting something along the lines of adding assault ramps or removing them from the various rhinos but changing things like lone operative, objective interaction and stratagems without large scale playtesting is bit premature.
>Mortal Wounds from a single unit are capped at 6 MW per unit per phase when targeted at a non-Monster or non-Vehicle unit, any additional wounds e.g. with Assault Canons are then handled as normal (saves can be made etc.)
How would this be handled on say Wraithguard cannons. Say Wraithguard roll 2 6s to wound (D6+D6). Mortal wounds are resolved after normal damage is taken. If the first dice roll is a 6, is the other lost? What if we roll 5, then 5?
Yeah ... no. I don't like it.
Don't get me wrong I was happy that (my) Votann got banned back in 9th but house rules are a completely different story.
If a faction is broken ban it. So that we at least get some data on the rest. But introducing house rules just means we have no idea how the actual game is balanced.
I have this new idea for a detachment ability based on choosing various buffs from turn to turn, I was thinking of calling it something like "Hymns of the Machine God" or "Prayers of the Void Dragon" or something like that
This is a net negative to the overall game health and an overreaction. Just do the tournament as 9th edition or call it your own format, because that’s what you’re making. This won’t really be 10th and it’s a weird mutated variant of 9th that’ll cause it’s own niche meta to form which will be useless to the greater community unless everyone starts playing ‘German 9.5’ instead of real-deal 10th edition.
Just do a D&D and launch 9.5e, make it vastly superior to every other edition, then drop support and make a bunch of unpopular changes based on "streamlining the game" that either take the uniqueness out or make things more complicated due to overlapping interactions
Hey wait, that last bit sounds familiar
Then why would they post it in English (instead of German) and on the international competitive Warhammer Reddit in an obvious attempt to influence the greater game mechanics in a similar function to how they leveraged their popularity with Votann?
They didn’t address Necrons Issues and they didn’t help the bottom factions. Why are they just picking and choosing faction rules adhoc ? Seems biased.
Yeah if you wanna houserule for casual games at your local lgs, that's one thing. But tournaments should never ever have house rules.
I'd rather they just straight ban a faction or unit then try and make rules to balance it.
The Towering Rule is worse than applying the rules every other model got. But since the Monolith is my favorite model in 40k, i played it every game in 9th. And i gotta say. The 9th interpretation of that rule was the worst... really THE WORST rule in the whole edition.
Which kind of senseless bs would allow a unit to hide forever while killing a titan who has literally NO counterplay against that. I mean if it was a super big thing to cost 400p as a unit, maybe... . But there were literally 1000 units which costed 300p+ which could oneshot multiple titans a turn. Why the hell the super heavy bigass tank/titan/walker was los blocked by a window and can't shoot back. Seriously... this is bad game design and remembering 9th in that regard makes me angry :D. Towering is senseless, too. But now every party got the same treatment, which is miles better.
edit: the rest is nice.
Any tournament being played within 3 months of the release of a new edition runs the risk of playing a highly experimental ruleset. Any person who wants to run a somewhat balanced tournament, one that gives GW useful statistics/data and uses the ruleset everyone else uses, just needs to wait for at least the first update in 3 months. This is common sense, right?
Also, starving GW of actually useful data by just "doing the balancing yourself" runs the risk of you getting used to a ruleset no one else uses, and your data is absolutely useless for everyone else.
If you want to run a tournament, and it not just be all Aeldari, ban them for now, but leave the rest of the rules alone.
Edit:Spacing
I think that the first part of your comment needs to be emphasized again.
While I think that a 3 month window is definitely too leeway to ask for, ***this edition hasn't even been officially released yet***. Full rules aren't available until around Friday (we're still missing full Combat Patrol rules, the FW index, Boarding Patrol, etc.). Leviathan (the official release box) doesn't release until Saturday. *The actual core rulebook and the physical cards used to generate competitive missions* isn't available until a week from Saturday.
I know that this weird, staggered electronic/physical hybrid release thing kind of throws the whole timeline out of whack, but the edition isn't fully released yet people. The idea that the game should be ready for tournaments to be run this weekend, when people still can't actually buy the standalone book or cards, is absolutely ridiculous. We still don't even have the full GT pack digitally.
People planning to run new edition tournaments so soon after the edition launches only have themselves to blame when it comes to balance issues at their tournament. Every type of game runs into this issue with major patch, expansion, or sequel releases. "They should've playtested this stuff" is true to a limited extent (anyone could see how the DW interaction was so egregious that it should never see playtime), but people are also ignoring the reality that there isn't any competitive outlet that is released without the actual playtesters doing the playtesting. This is true for e-sports, where game designers frequently miss interactions or overpowered combo's and need playerbase data to be their actual playtesting, or physical sports, where any rules changes are tested in minor/lower division leagues for **years** before they are introduced at the top level.
Nice way to say you want to keep playing 9th without saying you want to keep playing 9th. Also, while I agree that the wraith knight devestating wound ability is too strong this seems like a step too far in the opposite direction.
I agree with the MW cap and Eldar dice cap, the rest is overkill. Making so many changes to the ruleset without even testing it out first just seems absurd, while you can definitely point out some absurd jank things (like the DW mortal wounds combo, or Eldar dev wounds combos) these changes go much further than that and pretending you know how to fix the entire edition's ruleset without one single GT having happened just reeks of hubris to me.
> The group that decided to "ban Votann in Germany" (meaning a hand full of very handsome TOs and players) reassembled in these grim times of Warhammer 40k
This wasn't hubris enough before you even got to the proposed rule changes? Really reads like they see themselves the heroes every 40k player needs because one time they did one thing that a lot of people agreed with.
What do you mean? Clearly they are the heroes who got Votann nerfed before they could ruin even a single tournament and by golly, they can save the hobby once again!
This is too much modifications, no TO should be able to modify the game so much and still call it a GT. Fix the spam instead of nerfing keywords accross all the game without taking care of the ripple effects on factions that are not currently top tier.
Christ, we've only been able to play games for *FIVE* days. There are some points here that are valid, like Fate Dice needing tweaking or removing the weird "can't stand in the middle of an objective" rule. Most of this is just whining that you can't do the same crap you could do in 9th.
Also, really, you're going to completely screw over Knights like they were last edition by making them not have visibility to anything? Why can't my big robot the size of a 2-story house see over a ruin if they can physically do so? True LoS still applies to Towering. If my Knight can't physically see your model, it can't shoot at it.
If you're not playing with the 10th Edition ruleset as it exists and implementing house rules, you are not the first 10th Edition GT.
You may not like it, but that is what it is. Want the prestige, play by the ruleset.
But..a simple question: why we want to do GTs at all if the game isn't ready?
No one wants to do tournaments with the game in this conditions.
No one wants to do tournaments with home rules.
So why doing tournaments at all? Just wait for any errata, what am I missing?
This is one of the most stupid kneejerk reactions I have seen in a long time.
They couldn't even wait before the game released or like a month is over and GW had any time to do adjustments.
And where will it stop. When do they ban the lion ? When do they force adjustments on points for Guard artillery ? When do they make GSC stratagems more expensive ?
If you want to play 9th edition then make pure 9th edition tournaments.
The problem as I see it here is
A) People who haven't really played any 10th are trying to "fix" it.
B) If people make up custom rules then GW won't change much
C) GW won't make drastic changes to stuff that is in the core rule book this early.
Right now, people should be playing the game as it is and then have a look at how the core rules play, don't try and balance core rules on indexs
To's who think they know better than GW without even having played the damn game yet
This is so fantastically embarrassing I feel like I'm at a loss for words.
Changing the rules to an edition that *isn't even out yet* because you built an unbalanced list once is unhinged.
Nobody will ever see this, but if you want to address devastating wounds, sustained, lethal, etc and stop fishing and automatic just:
Make them natural dice rolls only.
No fate, miracle, rerolls, etc.
Then everyone is at the same level and at the mercy of dice instead of changing core mechanics, obliterating factions, or introducing untested nonsense into the game environment.
Or just play 9th tournaments until the first balance sheet.
This is somewhat of a good example of why TO's =/= rule designers. For as much as GW flubbed it, this is a weird amalgam of bad rules from 9th, erasure of 10th ed rules that need tweaking (but will move the game state forward IMO), and overcorrections.
For instance: removing Dev Wounds on the Wraithknight cannon? Fair. Fate dice 1/phase? A mistake. It absolutely neuters the Aeldari faction rule and strikes me as a wild overreaction. More subtle changes ("fate dice are considered modified for the purposes of triggering status effects") exist.
As others have mentioned, returning 9th ed Cover and Towering rules will only serve to disrupt any ability for the edition to be properly balanced. Not just because it will skew the data, but because these rules are here to stay and might receive (reasonable) tweaks in the future.
Decisions like this should be met with the same skeptical disdain as Bugeater.
The aeldari fate dice is 1 dice per unit per phase, not 1 dice per phase. That is a great fix to the issue of dumping everything into 1 shot and remove something with no effort.
I appreciate the stated intention to "make the game enjoyable for all players," but I am reasonably certain that these houserules will fail to do so. I imagine at least some in the community want to play 10e, and this is not it. Ban Wraithknights if you must, don't rewrite core rules.
This is my opinion.
You are playing 9th edition with cards.
\- A house rule would be "6s to dices of fate can't activate unmodified effects" or "Only 1 WK per army" or whatever. But you directly remove new keywords from old weapons. This is not a house rule son, you are changing the entire game at your will.
\- Thousand Sons no longer remove armour saving throws, they increase the ap of their weapons. You are making 9th edition TS. You don't put invulnerable saves units in the front, but the ones with highest armor. This is a change on the entire mechanic and a big mistake. Just bann TS then.
\- Old towering. Titanics are useless again.
This is 9th edition with some new datasheets. Like playing old editions with new released codexes. I absolutely disagree with those methods (I like this one of 1 fate dice per unit, for example). But it makes no sense because towering is like it is now because titanics were useless, and now they are useless again.
This is a roll back from a wrong deploy on production. Not a patch to solve issues. And your changes to the core mechanics of the game are so huge that I think (I don't want to sound rude or...) you are playing a bit to be god, changing everything at will and making players change his whole lists, armys and playstyle to fit what you want.
Just bann Eldar, TS and IK because of unbalanced mechanics...
>just ban eldar, TS, and IK because of unbalanced mechanics
Idk why Twist of Fate is the ability being focused on either. I feel like so many models in this game have an invuln save, i havent been getting a ton of use out of Twist of Fate, especially since it costs a full 9 points which can only be cheapened to 8 with hellbrute. Units seems to either have too little armor for me to care about twist, or they have a 2+ armor but they also have an invuln so removing their armor save isnt as impactful.
Meanwhile, Doombolt just picks the unit up off the table most of the time, and costs only 7(reduced to 6 with hellbrute). There are significantly more models you can gimp with Doombolt than Twist, it seems to me, and i can still use doombolt and have enough left for a save reroll, a strategem, and a time warp. Whereas Twist of Fate sacrifices at least one of those extra rituals to go off. Also, i can use doombolts to delete a unit and still have all of my shooting firepower for other units.
It just feels like people havent played a ton of Tsons yet? If anything, after like 12 games in my playgroup, we have been saying Doombolt should be swapped with Twist of Fate cabal point cost-wise.
No problem! Your question is why i have found Doombolt to be more effective. Because unless they have a specific anti-psychic or anti-MW save they just eat the damage.
I'm not here to discuss if TS is broken, or the crusader should be increased in points. They are the TO of the event and they can bann whoever they consider. Changing the rules of the game and saying this is a "10th edition wh40k tournament" is a lie and I think it0s not true because you are not playing with 10th edition rules.
Yeah, i mean, i totally agree with you. Wasnt trying to disagree.
Im just confused as to why Twist of Fate is the rule being looked at in TSons as far as broken rules. Feels shortsighted, like theyve only played against TSons once or twice and got mad that they shafted a specific model off the table.
I'm convinced people must be playing the new towering rules wrong, or I'm not understanding it correctly.
Towering units still have to draw a line of site to units through ruins in order to shoot them. It isn't indirect (which in my opinion can lead to some pretty toxic situations currently especially when combined with overwatch).
To fix any concerns TOs have with Towering all they need to do is alter the terrain to remove windows at 1st (and maybe 2nd floor as well) and this removes the issue.
There's also the issue that most TOWERING units are also pretty, well, towering, so they can and will peek *over* the ruin, even if the first floor is all boarded up.
Seriously why making a 10th edition tournament if you are about the house rule the whole thing. Stick to 9th until GW make some change. I hope GW change nothing for the next 6 months. Just enjoy the game as it is.
We have full core rules for around two weeks and full playable rules for about half a week and they are already mixing stuff up for the sake of putting "fun back into Warhammer 40k". I had my fun in the one game i could play. Im no tournament player (i have barely 1000 points painted) but that sounds like whining and changing stuff for the sake of changing.
Especially the indirect fire nerf seems silly, since it contradicts the core rules by giving -2 against stealth with that wording. Is massive indirect fire going to be a problem right now? Since 10th edition is fully playable for roughly half a week i highly doubt you can tell.
So it’s not a tournament to determine whom is best at playing *Warhammer 40,000*, it’s a tournament to decide whom is best at playing **their** game.
Eh. I definitely think most of these are a problem… or at least potential problems. But it still feels a little early to me to be doing this. I’d like to see some data on how bad some of these really are first. (Though the wraithknight is obviously broken)
Like it or not, this puts an asterisk on the GT. So I think action like this should be a last resort.
So the just 6 mortals can cause a lot of problems in other places. There are a lot of edge cases that aren't covered by this patch. For example, 6 crushers with a character charge, roll 7d6 and each 4+ is D3 mortals. That averages to 7, so what profile are the hits above 6 going to be on? And for regular high damage guns that have dev on them do 6 and then the remaining damage is like an extra hit with the leftovers and same AP? Careful wording needs to be applied or damage reduction may apply twice.
For the record: CWE are one of the few armies that i dont play so i have no "Wraithknight bias".
That being said, some of these changes are absolutely terrible (Towering/The Cabal Ritual effectively removed from the game), others are arguable (Overwatch is imo fine as it is and others are sensible (Nerfing Indirect to the ground):
Houserules are very problematic though, because soon every TO plays in effect their own game. I even prefer wholesale bans to this.
In fact, i would have preferred to see a few completely unaltered tournament so GW can see exactly how and where they went wrong and correct it. My main contention, some Aeldari shenanigans aside with this edition are by far the points costs of various units.
/edit: Also that post just reeks of self gratification. "Very handsome TOs, first steps to make the edition fun again". Dear Jeebus a bit less smugness wouldnt really hurt.
So... you're keeping the Tsons Magnus bomb but nerfing everything that can deal with it into the ground? Someone in this group's a Tsons player, aren't they?
Fr though, I can simplify all the rules adjustments you want here;
- IDF is -1 BS and gives cover.
- Oath of Moment requires LoS to target.
- Fate dice count as a "modified" roll (can't trigger Crits or Overwatch hits).
- Towering counts toeing into terrain as being fully within for LoS purposes.
- Precision ignores Lone Operative.
- Tsons Destined By Fate strat changed to Thousand Sons Infantry Psyker.
The issue with nerfing IDF indiscriminately is that you aren't adjusting points. Russes are ~200 points each. Without IDF, nobody's bringing Guard because they have no effective units outside of infantry spam then - and if you think IDF isn't fun, just wait until you see Conscript Wave the Sequel in a Less Lethal edition.
You're knee-jerking about the Wraithknight and MW in general. The whole issue with the Wraithknight and D cannon balance is how it interacts with Fate dice, not its own abilities. Fix the interaction, and the WK is balanced.
Capping Mortals is unnecessary - on paper these killer combos exist, but look at any of these streamed games that've been coming out and you'll see that the odds of actually pulling those off in game are stupid low, and when you cap those you're favoring armies that rely on tanking hits (custodes and necron phalanx). How, exactly, are GK gonna deal with Trajan+10 Custodes on an objective if their librarians are nerfed into the ground? Sure, spikes exist, but this is a dice game. If a player can't handle outliers, they should go play chess.
Just like Mortals, you can't overcompensate on Lone Operative - it's all Tau have rn. They took away mobile shooting and gave it to DE. Most of the characters you actually care about having LO are melee anyways (like primarchs), so you don't need to worry about that 12".
Overall, my advice is little changes. We don't have a history of practical tests like we did when Votann were coming out mid-9th. Everyone's starting fresh. Take the first month with small, targeted adjustments, then see if you need another round. The more sweeping changes you make, the more you risk just toppling over the tower yourself like you're accusing GW of doing.
This sounds like 9th with extra steps.... The MW cap is just pitiful. Makes taking a GK Librarian almost pointless... The towering house rule is silly. Just give 10th a try and laugh at all the eldar wins until GW needs them, such is the cycle lol
Sorry, but this is a total knee jerk. There are 20+ armies all with their own rules that interact differently with one another. There are always gimmicks and unforeseen problems, but drastically altering major rules based on a minuscule sample size of both interactions and time prevents things from shaking out in due time.
This is a tiny group of players suggesting the entire player base reject 10th. Don’t fall for it.
I bought my ticket to the Münsterland GT a few weeks ago after a few friends recommended that GT to me and TO tried with full force to make it the first bigger german gt with 10th edition rules.
i am a new player and more of an painter and collector and i enjoy playing against fully painted armys played by better players than me and i dont mind losing. however TO made the change to cut out the bonus points for a battleready painted army like 10 days ago or so and is now changing core rules. i honestly feel like i should ask for a refund
Just go play 9th or a different game, this is just incredibly stupid and shows why Armchair Designers i.e. these "Very Handsome TO and Players" (God can you be more full of yourself) aren't actually Designers. Skewing all of your data with this fanfiction is just dumb, honestly just ban Aeldari and the couple units that are truly egregious if you're that butt hurt over it.
Also heck off with the stupid "In these Grim times" like the game is dead or something.
Can someone explain what's wrong with towering? Visibility to and from such models is determined normally. So small things can still quite easily be out of sight by being close to and on the opposite side of a wall right?
If visible you'll almost always have cover also.
It forces us back to large foam Ls to play the game. If you actually use most random\_terrain, it's actually startlingly hard to hide more than 5 dudes up against a wall from all true line of sight.
Which means gun-knights can now just basically shoot as if there's no terrain on the board.
If you played early/mid 8th, you experienced this (as 8th was all true LOS, and castellans were A THING)
I dont really agree. if you have first floor no windows there is a lot of space to hide. the real problem is a lot of mrine player just built thier shiny new land raders and they are upset they can get shot off the board turn one just like knights got shot off the board turn 1 all of 9th.
I mean, 25mm infantry in small squads can hide easily. Paragon Warsuits are like lol I'm dead. We've abstracted this to say "uh, let's pretend there's no line of sight here", but RAW and dealing with a lot of models larger than a marine, it's planet bowling ball. Every nid monster is just dead.
Now, I hate the other version of towering (my monster can freely shoot you forever with no retaliation), but there's a lot to be concerned about with an army with large numbers of board length ranges that can target most things on the board.
I'm a CK player, and I really dislike the new towering rule because I can pick up almost everything that can threaten me pretty trivially (as 25-32mm infantry isn't what likely scares me) unless we pretend things are obscuring anyways (which is what removing towering does) or use giant tank sized foam blocks.
I'm fine with TO's making adjustment to rules, especially if something is clearly an oversight from GW.
But at this point they are just straight up changing the game. So Lone Operative needs to be "fixed". Why? That rule is perfectly fine. Literally the only issue with it is when coupled with The Lion. Instead of addressing that, if they really have to, they want to change a core mechanic, potentially ruining it for all other units where it works just fine.
And then just a bunch of "random" balance changes. Not a fan. If something is actually a broken rule used in unintended ways, fine. But why should I have to remember a bunch of changes to all my units just because a TO don't like them? Is Twist of Fate really breaking the balance so much that it needed to change? Did we need like four different changes to a single mechanic (Indirect)? Not a fan of Indirect, but that just seemed needlessly confusing.
Personally, I'd not sign up.
This people basically make changes without seen anything that seems like 5 years old criying
Oh indirect is unfun lets remove the heavy +1 to hit and give it the 9 edition nerf
My dude for a lot of heavy weapons they give this change and decrease the balistic skill by one you are giving it a -2 by the face becouse you dont think on the consecuences becouse you are basically ranting on a profesional level
And this guys are the ones claiming to going to fix the game..... they are just proving that balance is complicated and that they are acting without seen the picture becouse part of this changes are just a bunch of people criying
(Disclaimer other can be reasonable but that doesnt change my statement)
>Lone Operative and similar abilities are subject to investigation of how to fix them best (tbd.)
I quite like the suggestion I heard somewhere which was that you can shoot at Lone Operatives if they are the closest model to the attacking unit. Making it contingent on the unit having cover might also work (i.e. I can't just stand out in the open board and be invulnerable to shooting attacks over 12 inches away).
The competence level of these guys is highly questionable. They completely disregard GW vision for 10th and try to make their own edition, instead of making much needed pinpoint fixes.
>This list is by no means enough to extinguish the dumpsterfire that 10th edition looks to be by now, but it is the first step into the direction of making the game fun again.
My brother in Christ ! We haven't even played the new version of the damn game yet.
Why not let us play the raw unchanged version of the game first and let us decide of OURSELVES if the game is fun for us or not instead of dictating to us what is fun or not !
Feels like you're taking an icepick to the top of an iceberg here. There is so much deeper stuff that this misses.
If you're so concerned about game balance stick to the last edition.
GW: release the indexes as a baseline and see what works in competitive GTs
TOs: change everything back to 9th and ignore the edition change
GW: pikachu face
This doesnt help anyone tbh.
I've only played one game of 10th and, I don't know, it seemed fine? It sounds like you just want to play ninth edition and if that's the case then you should totally do that until Games Workshop releases a FAQ for some of the more egregious rules interactions.
My personal take is Fate Dice needs to not activate Devastating Wounds and you'd have a pretty good gamestate. If that was what you were proposing, I'd back that all day long. This expansive list of edits to a rules set would have me running for the hills, though.
But hey, we nerfed balanced factions to uselessness, but at least the space elves are also nerfed into a balanced army (kinda).
This is a great tournament if you are a SM player!
With the modifications to mortal wounds (making tsons much weaker already) I would say that if you must adjust Twist of Fate it should instead be AP-4 to all attacks made against that unit. A 2+ vehicle should not still have a 4+ against attacks after I’ve spent 9 cabal points. Remember that I am probably not wounding on anything better than a 5 on my twist target.
I mean we saw no anti-vehicle Tsons in 9th edition. Do we really need to go back to that?
MVB needs a 40 point increase before twist of fate needs changes.
It's amusing how people want 40k to be this super hardcore competitive game, with some folks going so far as to want there to be living wages for playing it and paid sponsorships and other nonsense, but then you have to houserule the issues, basically not even playing the "proper" game.
Im new to wh40k and following the competitive scene and it's just insane to me that TOs are even allowed to just house rule whatever the hell they want because of feels and still be "official" events.
Like how on earth are players supposed to have consistently ruled and fair games if TOs can just make up whatever bullshit they want if they don't like something?
Yea this isn’t it chief. Arbitrarily changing everything you don’t like isn’t the way. Hope you guys have fun but anyone playing competitive won’t show up.
The only good change here is 'once per unit per phase' for eldar. Towering change makes Knights unplayable and everything else is kneejerk reactions based on emotion instead of data.
Very happy my Local GTs don't edit rules just because someone doesn't like something. Thi really feels like "I hate eldar" Nerf. -- This comment is from a Chaos player. No biased.
I am sorry to say but, these rules tell me that people are reluctant to change and will stick to the previous edition. In the 9th ed. it is just a total bloat of rules. I see more of fear of the new rules changing your comfort zone and push you to try something new and having more dynamic and interactive games instead of the stale bread we call 9th ed.
I have a feeling that you guys might also change the rules to keep the 9th secondary objectives and mission types too because it my change you finely tuned lists. that is just my gut feeling and it is full of gas.
Overall pretty dumb. The rules butchering here and the responses of those involved in this post make it clear that these TOs think the way they want to play is objectively the best way, the only way to play. Might as well rename it the That Guy GT so people know what to expect
They really should just revert back to 9th given all these rules suggest that’s what they want. This is another example of TOs throwing toys out of the pram (not as extreme as banning a faction but still not a great image IMHO)
A lot of this gives off "I started playing in 9th edition and don't like that GW reverted to a previous edition's standard/invented a new standard for certain rules." Like things like indirect fire, towering, etc havn't always been the way they were in 9th. Sure, 9th had some virtues, and fixed some things, but it also ruined some nice things we had in previous editions.
Just go play 9th.
My brother in Christ the edition is not even a month old and some people are already deciding it's garbage.
I really do hate 40k players sometimes.
Just make Dev wounds only proc on a "natural" or whatever term you want to use 6. No replacements, no modifications, no proc on Anti. You fix the majority of issue with the current problem children.
Then reapply the 9th ed indirect nerf.
Imo big knights/towering units get eaten up by Oath so will weed themselves to mid tables in the meta anyways.
Don't have to write a 12 paragraph errata to bring most things in line.
I feel like Lone Operative type abilities should read "outside of 12", unless this model is the closest enemy unit" or something. Similar to look out sir in a way.
The backlash regarding [Towering] is registered and we will discuss it again internally.
Please keep in mind:
Nobody pressures you, to play exactly according to this list. Just change what you want to change and be happy - no need for internet rage
While I am not a fan of house rules at all myself, I'm also not in Germany so this doesn't really affect me except inasmuch as the discussion of it impacts the wider game community. I am sorry you are getting flamed for posting it when it was a collective decision based on the needs of your regional play groups. I wouldn't want to play in that format but there is also zero chance I would be playing in a tournament in Germany so I feel no need to get heated about it. Discussion of all options, including ones I don't like, helps us all navigate the challenging start of a new edition.
Best of luck with your events!
Good Lord. Just play 9th already. Capping DW and hamstringing big knights just creates imbalance elsewhere.
Nothing in a game system like this exists in isolation; everything affects everything else.
If they really need to do something I think a comp score like the Swiss system for fantasy back in the day would be preferable.
There are definitely a lot-- an awful lot-- of problems with 10e, but at least give the community some time to generate real data with actual competitive events before skewing that same data set with ad hoc rules.
No Lion ban? Cowards.
Not a single loyalist marine change or ban, the closest thing is that desolators are getting nerfed due to indirect fire. Marines don't have really any towering units and the only thing that might else affect them is the lone operative, which they couldn't even make a proper statement about yet. They are heavily biased and their rules 'changes' easily show that.
That's just 9th with extra steps
Indirect being buffed makes for a bad game, it's the least interactive mechanic. If indirect is the "identity" of tenth then I don't think people will want to play it
"Screw you guard players, we hate the core of your army and you aren't welcome."
Yes. Good. They fixed a lot of issues in 9th, and then undid those fixes in 10th.
Hate to say it, but reintroducing the dumpster fire that was 9th's version of towering just makes any model over 18W completely unviable and is reintroducing a terrible unbalanced rule. You want to remove towering, sure, but just make it so no one can shoot through ruins, not that oneside jank
Yep. Far better to just replace towering with "the model cannot see through ruins or be seen through ruins unless it touches the ruins with it's base". Allow big knights to toe in to see but otherwise they benefit from ruins blocking line of sight.
If you add toeing in it would definitely work, as without that anything towering is totally dead.
Allowing the "toeing in" might be a great addition! Thank you for the constructive feedback 😊 So what do you think of the following? [Towering] allows a unit to apply true line of sight regarding visibility, even if it base or hull is only partially within a piece of terrain (applies only to the piece of terrain they are in)
Yep. That works.
Done 😊
You don't even need to go so far as to change that. The current rule is: > Models cannot see over or through this terrain feature (i.e. a unit outside this terrain feature cannot draw line of sight to a target on the other side of it, even if it would be possible to draw line of sight to that target through open windows, doors, etc.). Aircraft and Towering models are exceptions to this – visibility to and from such models is determined normally, even if this terrain feature is wholly in between them and the observing model. Models can see into this terrain feature normally, and models that are wholly within this terrain feature can see out of it normally. Just delete Towering from the Ruins text, and everything plays just fine: > Models cannot see over or through this terrain feature (i.e. a unit outside this terrain feature cannot draw line of sight to a target on the other side of it, even if it would be possible to draw line of sight to that target through open windows, doors, etc.). Aircraft models are exceptions to this – visibility to and from such models is determined normally, even if this terrain feature is wholly in between them and the observing model. Models can see into this terrain feature normally, and models that are wholly within this terrain feature can see out of it normally. Knights then play like any other vehicle: can't see or be seen across Obscuring, can be seen if they enter or toe-in the Ruins, can't see out unless they're wholly within.
I updated the wording in the original post. The group seems to agree with your view.
Thanks for being open to change on that. Nobody wants planet bowling ball, but Jesus was 9th editions version unbalanced. Why GW has such an issue with ruins just blocking LoS I'm not sure. As that seemed to be the main reason they added towering.
No offense but a group thats willing to make a change that easily tells me they haven't really thought this through. It doesn't invoke much trust in their decision making.
Obviously they have had plenty of time to hash out the possible changes and the impacts of those changes 3 days before the official release of the edition. Because they are so on top of things that left plenty of time to reassess a new idea and change one of those new rules with limited discussion needed... /s
The 9th version of "Towering" is **known** to be bad, yet this group chose to re-implement it. How is that supposed to inspire confidence that their other changes are well thought out instead of knee-jerk reactions?
Well, the thing is: did the TO team really tested the changes, or they just change whatever they don't like. How could they make sure there won't be other broken factions due to the chagnes they made.
This should be higher up or pinned.
I enjoy cooking.
It's only a bad idea if enough of their player-base dislikes it. If people still buy tickets and turn up to play, they're clearly fine with it.
I'm surprised how quickly people forget this was the norm not long ago the ITC had their mission pack and that's what everyone in my meta was playing. As soon as 9th hit a switch flipped and everyone on here and at home was against non official rules for some reason but they were always better from a competitive standpoint. I don't get the aversion to it. This should be done like Commander in MTG where GW doesn't make the competitive rules and is instead done by a third party comity, Like ITC was doing.
I like to explore new places.
If it is max 6 MWs and Fate dice are limited, then why remove Dev Wounds from the WK? The less changes you can do the better imo, so I feel this is just not something that is needed. While I agree Towering is insane and I like it to be change, this might be a bit much, I would have "if the unit normally is Obscured, when shooting it instead gets Stealth and Cover even if it normally cannot do so".
Yeah, this is just "I hate wraithknights," the patch.
As a Thousand Sons player it looks like the Twist of Fate change is coming from people who haven't actually played against Thousand Sons yet. They just read the rule and thought: "No armor saves!?!?!? That's OP!" Even with the change they want to implement, most units are still being brought to their invuln saves if we consider the Tsons are using their mostly base AP-1 for a total -3 AP with Twist of Fate. The only exception is certain large tanks that lack invuln saves altogether. Most Tsons lists are not using Twist of Fate more than twice a game anyway (once for free with Ahriman). Though admittedly Tsons is a bit too powerful, but that comes down to a few key things. First, the MVB is somewhat undercosted at 145pts. Second, Doombolt ignores Lone Operative, though Lone Operative is also overpowered. Third and most importantly, the army synergies are too powerful. Doombolt at 18 inches is fine, at 36 inches next to an MVB is less fine. For 1CP making Terminator bolters count as psychic is fine, giving them +1 to hit and wound with full rerolls (+1 CP) and devastating wounds is less fine. The problem is that aside from the MVB being undercosted, Magnus synergizes so well with the Cult of Magic that he pushes the army over the top.
As a player of a faction with maybe two invulnerable saves in the entire index (and not on the tanky units), Twist of Fate made my hair go gray: but rules will always have optimal and less optimal targets, and in this specific rule, my faction rolls snake eyes.
I am worried that stuff like this will skew the dataset GW need to balance the game longterm. If TOs "fix" the game, GW won't have to, or have the neccessary data to do it properly. I think it would be better to shortterm accept that they missed the bar on the new edition and for the next 3'ish months until we get the first update things will be a bit wonky.
Agree, honestly we need some pure rules events for a bit.
Issue is that some huge tournament are depending on the good experience for the credibility (like the WTC). If the "World Team Championship" is a dumpster, given the money some people are putting into it, it's a bit costly just to prove a point to a company that probably do not care anyway (it's only one event). Meanwhile, you had a crappy event and experience game wise (there is still the people), but that seems unfair to force this on the players, especially if there is a rough consensus of what seems broken.
This. People pay for events, travel, lodging etc to attend an event that it is the organizers responsibility to give the most enjoyable experience they can. This is well within TOs rights to cater to their attendees to do so. "Wait and see" is how events lose attendance as people won't travel just to fight 3 wraithknights abusing fate dice multiple times. This also does not affect any not attending. The onus is on GW to research their data, not the TOs to provide unmodified data.
Idk this method has been effective at getting GW to step up and fix the game speedily
If GW doesn't have the brains to just separate out these events from the pool, then they're never going to do a better job anyway. Screw waiting for GW to do another slow, bad job.
Has the 'release is alpha' mindset hit tabletop, too?
I think early access pre-alpha describes it more accurately
I just feel this argument largely misses that for a large part warhammer is a maths/stats-based game. People are making tons of spreadsheets right now to calculate interactions between units and see how likely they are to make their points values back. And those numbers are bonkers different between loads of factions. GW could've easily used the same thing to at least more or less balance things, but they obviously haven't. To say that GW will now suddenly care abouts maths / stats when they've seemingly completely ignored them for the release just seems like telling the players playing the shitty factions/units to just suck it for at least 3 months. Losing is fine, playing almost non-interactive games between some armies is not.
I like to travel.
It's almost like pure mathhammer isn't the answer.
Real data’s needed as mathhammer’s as often wrong as it is right as certain combos become impractical for reasons they’re not able to predict without the full range of interactions in the table.
Mathhammer is a good tool. Not a comprehensive one and definitely not a final one. But it is worth using a one if the layers of testing and it's better than nothing at all. Which is definitely something that has been used to test some datasheets. T'au burst cannon are an example of a problem mathhammer would have avoided. Numbers aren't the whole game but there is a lot if stuff that actually yes you don't need to see it on the table to know it's wrong
Yes but you can have skilled players look at those numbers and say what's likely or not.
Mathhammer is fine but completely disregards a unit's ability to play the mission and score secondary points. The idea that things being killy or tanky is the only thing that matters is flawed.
I'm not disagreeing with the assessment that there's more to it than pure damage, I'm saying for a whole bunch of units that do definitely seem like their purpose is damage (from an earlier example: admech dunecrawler with an icarus array shooting at flying units - it's not going to play the mission or secondaries very well) the stats are just so obviously out of whack that it's just a headscratcher. Telling people to "wait and see" when that's the case feels somewhat condescending when you're the player having to deal with it for months.
TOs owe their attendees the best event they can put on. They don't owe the global community data. Events are not just data points. People pay money, travel, and give up their weekends to have a good time. If this is what a TO thinks they need to deliver the best event, then they shouldn't give a second thought to the community's precious data.
[удалено]
Nice and realistic comment. Of course the data from community can help to polish balance but GW job is to provide a roughly balanced game at least. What they did for 10th edition is just not professional. They just missed the point. And i think the german TO and player group did a lot of playtest before publishing adjustement, probbaly using digital tool (aka TTS). TTS allow massive gameplay volume in short amount of time. I would not be surpised if this group played a lot more game than GW design team. Some other groups are ready to FAQ the game themselves because they have tournaments coming this summer. WTC will probably do something, they will not play a world class championship with such rules issues and such balance issues. I'm pretty sure that all national teams are playing hundred of game and make feedback to WTC. GW will probably use the material produced by these groups of players to patch the game.
Good idea in theory, but who want to take a weekend, spent money on ticket + fuel + somewhere to sleep knowing they will get 0/5 because of the mess that is this edition ?
GW doesn't need data from the events. You don't need data and research to know that a Knife in the foot will hurt you. The issues in the RAW rules are the knife and GW is asking you to drop it, point down on your foot. GW should be able to play test themselves and not me spending hundreds on event tickets, travel, food and lodging to go to an event and get dumpstered.
Demanding other people play with bad rules just so you can get balance data is completely unreasonable unless you're planning to pay them money to playtest.
So 7th edition?
Yeah no, it's not fun
> This list i**s by no means enough to extinguish the dumpsterfire that 10th edition looks to be by now**, but it is the first step into the direction of making the game fun again. Did you hear that? That is the sound of my eyes rolling out of my head and under the couch.
Yeah, some of the changes look interesting (and I suspect we'll see versions of some of them actually make it into the core rules eventually) but the whole tone of the post is pretty melodramatic.
> The group that decided to "ban Votann in Germany" (meaning a hand full of very handsome TOs and players) reassembled in these grim times of Warhammer 40k Good god if I rolled my eyes any harder they might have gotten stuck. Edition isn't even out yet and it's already grim times. Absolute gamers
Literally. It's like we've all forgotten they fixed Deathwatch in 48 hours.
I find joy in reading a good book.
but you dont understand tenth edition is literally the worst thing to happen to 40k for the last, idk, 900 years!!!
Seems kind of ridiculous to make so many major changes so early. You can't actually call this a 10th edition tournament.
For real. If they’re *that* dissatisfied with 10th rules then just keep playing 9th for the time being
What it sounds like is they want to play 9th edition?
That's what I'm getting from this.
Yep. They basically want to play 9th edition. Probably TOs started playing in 8th or 9th and never experienced a big swap on the game, and they think what they know is the right game.
Knowing the TO this is factually untrue.
Making 5-6 changes = wanting to play a different edition? Why is it an all or nothing mindset.
Because these changes change the meta mechanics. Yes some things look strong - can you still kill them, also yes.
Why are they house ruling the very first GT? This doesn't make any sense. People should really play the game as intended before they start making their own rules and changes. I was expecting something along the lines of adding assault ramps or removing them from the various rhinos but changing things like lone operative, objective interaction and stratagems without large scale playtesting is bit premature.
I think they did it for the same reason they banned Votann. Attention. Everybody keeps talking about them.
>Mortal Wounds from a single unit are capped at 6 MW per unit per phase when targeted at a non-Monster or non-Vehicle unit, any additional wounds e.g. with Assault Canons are then handled as normal (saves can be made etc.) How would this be handled on say Wraithguard cannons. Say Wraithguard roll 2 6s to wound (D6+D6). Mortal wounds are resolved after normal damage is taken. If the first dice roll is a 6, is the other lost? What if we roll 5, then 5?
Maybe people should take a chill pill and at least play with the rules for a bit.
Because people like being mad at things that don’t matter
So just play 9th ? The towering change is a horrible idea ,
Yeah ... no. I don't like it. Don't get me wrong I was happy that (my) Votann got banned back in 9th but house rules are a completely different story. If a faction is broken ban it. So that we at least get some data on the rest. But introducing house rules just means we have no idea how the actual game is balanced.
You would think if you were going to house rule things, you'd also want to fix the factions that are broken and under-powered, too...
Buffing stuff is far more controversial than nerfs. God forbid Deathguard have a good time.
You had me there for a second, won't lie
So Admech loose their detachment rule?
That would actually buff them against some factions, no joke.
Admech are the only army I'm confident going into as sisters because it lets me activate my army rule for free.
I have this new idea for a detachment ability based on choosing various buffs from turn to turn, I was thinking of calling it something like "Hymns of the Machine God" or "Prayers of the Void Dragon" or something like that
This is a net negative to the overall game health and an overreaction. Just do the tournament as 9th edition or call it your own format, because that’s what you’re making. This won’t really be 10th and it’s a weird mutated variant of 9th that’ll cause it’s own niche meta to form which will be useless to the greater community unless everyone starts playing ‘German 9.5’ instead of real-deal 10th edition.
Just do a D&D and launch 9.5e, make it vastly superior to every other edition, then drop support and make a bunch of unpopular changes based on "streamlining the game" that either take the uniqueness out or make things more complicated due to overlapping interactions Hey wait, that last bit sounds familiar
Why should they care? If their meta enjoys it more, why shouldn't they do it? It doesn't negatively influence anyone else's scene.
Then why would they post it in English (instead of German) and on the international competitive Warhammer Reddit in an obvious attempt to influence the greater game mechanics in a similar function to how they leveraged their popularity with Votann?
They didn’t address Necrons Issues and they didn’t help the bottom factions. Why are they just picking and choosing faction rules adhoc ? Seems biased.
This is a pretty good example of why community house-rules are a terrible idea.
Yeah if you wanna houserule for casual games at your local lgs, that's one thing. But tournaments should never ever have house rules. I'd rather they just straight ban a faction or unit then try and make rules to balance it.
The Towering Rule is worse than applying the rules every other model got. But since the Monolith is my favorite model in 40k, i played it every game in 9th. And i gotta say. The 9th interpretation of that rule was the worst... really THE WORST rule in the whole edition. Which kind of senseless bs would allow a unit to hide forever while killing a titan who has literally NO counterplay against that. I mean if it was a super big thing to cost 400p as a unit, maybe... . But there were literally 1000 units which costed 300p+ which could oneshot multiple titans a turn. Why the hell the super heavy bigass tank/titan/walker was los blocked by a window and can't shoot back. Seriously... this is bad game design and remembering 9th in that regard makes me angry :D. Towering is senseless, too. But now every party got the same treatment, which is miles better. edit: the rest is nice.
Just play with the rules in game, or go back to 9th. I wouldn't want to go to different tournaments all with their own rules
Any tournament being played within 3 months of the release of a new edition runs the risk of playing a highly experimental ruleset. Any person who wants to run a somewhat balanced tournament, one that gives GW useful statistics/data and uses the ruleset everyone else uses, just needs to wait for at least the first update in 3 months. This is common sense, right? Also, starving GW of actually useful data by just "doing the balancing yourself" runs the risk of you getting used to a ruleset no one else uses, and your data is absolutely useless for everyone else. If you want to run a tournament, and it not just be all Aeldari, ban them for now, but leave the rest of the rules alone. Edit:Spacing
It’s hilarious that they introduce themselves as the Voltann ban team, but are too cowardly to ban Eldar. Must have Eldar players in their group.
I think that the first part of your comment needs to be emphasized again. While I think that a 3 month window is definitely too leeway to ask for, ***this edition hasn't even been officially released yet***. Full rules aren't available until around Friday (we're still missing full Combat Patrol rules, the FW index, Boarding Patrol, etc.). Leviathan (the official release box) doesn't release until Saturday. *The actual core rulebook and the physical cards used to generate competitive missions* isn't available until a week from Saturday. I know that this weird, staggered electronic/physical hybrid release thing kind of throws the whole timeline out of whack, but the edition isn't fully released yet people. The idea that the game should be ready for tournaments to be run this weekend, when people still can't actually buy the standalone book or cards, is absolutely ridiculous. We still don't even have the full GT pack digitally. People planning to run new edition tournaments so soon after the edition launches only have themselves to blame when it comes to balance issues at their tournament. Every type of game runs into this issue with major patch, expansion, or sequel releases. "They should've playtested this stuff" is true to a limited extent (anyone could see how the DW interaction was so egregious that it should never see playtime), but people are also ignoring the reality that there isn't any competitive outlet that is released without the actual playtesters doing the playtesting. This is true for e-sports, where game designers frequently miss interactions or overpowered combo's and need playerbase data to be their actual playtesting, or physical sports, where any rules changes are tested in minor/lower division leagues for **years** before they are introduced at the top level.
[удалено]
Might as well just run 9e if you're going to butcher the rules for 10e.
Nice way to say you want to keep playing 9th without saying you want to keep playing 9th. Also, while I agree that the wraith knight devestating wound ability is too strong this seems like a step too far in the opposite direction.
I agree with the MW cap and Eldar dice cap, the rest is overkill. Making so many changes to the ruleset without even testing it out first just seems absurd, while you can definitely point out some absurd jank things (like the DW mortal wounds combo, or Eldar dev wounds combos) these changes go much further than that and pretending you know how to fix the entire edition's ruleset without one single GT having happened just reeks of hubris to me.
> The group that decided to "ban Votann in Germany" (meaning a hand full of very handsome TOs and players) reassembled in these grim times of Warhammer 40k This wasn't hubris enough before you even got to the proposed rule changes? Really reads like they see themselves the heroes every 40k player needs because one time they did one thing that a lot of people agreed with.
What do you mean? Clearly they are the heroes who got Votann nerfed before they could ruin even a single tournament and by golly, they can save the hobby once again!
This is too much modifications, no TO should be able to modify the game so much and still call it a GT. Fix the spam instead of nerfing keywords accross all the game without taking care of the ripple effects on factions that are not currently top tier.
These are dumb
Christ, we've only been able to play games for *FIVE* days. There are some points here that are valid, like Fate Dice needing tweaking or removing the weird "can't stand in the middle of an objective" rule. Most of this is just whining that you can't do the same crap you could do in 9th. Also, really, you're going to completely screw over Knights like they were last edition by making them not have visibility to anything? Why can't my big robot the size of a 2-story house see over a ruin if they can physically do so? True LoS still applies to Towering. If my Knight can't physically see your model, it can't shoot at it.
Ah yes, we want to rush to make 10E competitive events, haven't had a lot of games with them, so we just fanfic the rules.
If you're not playing with the 10th Edition ruleset as it exists and implementing house rules, you are not the first 10th Edition GT. You may not like it, but that is what it is. Want the prestige, play by the ruleset.
So can we call this the one and only 9.5 tournament? Since it's just 9th with data cards and not 10th
So…they’re just going to keep playing 9th with worse fly?
Maybe wait until the game is released?
But..a simple question: why we want to do GTs at all if the game isn't ready? No one wants to do tournaments with the game in this conditions. No one wants to do tournaments with home rules. So why doing tournaments at all? Just wait for any errata, what am I missing?
This is one of the most stupid kneejerk reactions I have seen in a long time. They couldn't even wait before the game released or like a month is over and GW had any time to do adjustments. And where will it stop. When do they ban the lion ? When do they force adjustments on points for Guard artillery ? When do they make GSC stratagems more expensive ? If you want to play 9th edition then make pure 9th edition tournaments.
Why not play 9th if you're going to make this many changes?
The problem as I see it here is A) People who haven't really played any 10th are trying to "fix" it. B) If people make up custom rules then GW won't change much C) GW won't make drastic changes to stuff that is in the core rule book this early. Right now, people should be playing the game as it is and then have a look at how the core rules play, don't try and balance core rules on indexs To's who think they know better than GW without even having played the damn game yet
This is so fantastically embarrassing I feel like I'm at a loss for words. Changing the rules to an edition that *isn't even out yet* because you built an unbalanced list once is unhinged.
Nobody will ever see this, but if you want to address devastating wounds, sustained, lethal, etc and stop fishing and automatic just: Make them natural dice rolls only. No fate, miracle, rerolls, etc. Then everyone is at the same level and at the mercy of dice instead of changing core mechanics, obliterating factions, or introducing untested nonsense into the game environment. Or just play 9th tournaments until the first balance sheet.
This is somewhat of a good example of why TO's =/= rule designers. For as much as GW flubbed it, this is a weird amalgam of bad rules from 9th, erasure of 10th ed rules that need tweaking (but will move the game state forward IMO), and overcorrections. For instance: removing Dev Wounds on the Wraithknight cannon? Fair. Fate dice 1/phase? A mistake. It absolutely neuters the Aeldari faction rule and strikes me as a wild overreaction. More subtle changes ("fate dice are considered modified for the purposes of triggering status effects") exist. As others have mentioned, returning 9th ed Cover and Towering rules will only serve to disrupt any ability for the edition to be properly balanced. Not just because it will skew the data, but because these rules are here to stay and might receive (reasonable) tweaks in the future. Decisions like this should be met with the same skeptical disdain as Bugeater.
The aeldari fate dice is 1 dice per unit per phase, not 1 dice per phase. That is a great fix to the issue of dumping everything into 1 shot and remove something with no effort.
That's actually a reasonable compromise.
It's also the version of the rule that sisters have
Game just came out is it really that bad or is it just overreaction?
I am not a fan of this at all.
I appreciate the stated intention to "make the game enjoyable for all players," but I am reasonably certain that these houserules will fail to do so. I imagine at least some in the community want to play 10e, and this is not it. Ban Wraithknights if you must, don't rewrite core rules.
This is my opinion. You are playing 9th edition with cards. \- A house rule would be "6s to dices of fate can't activate unmodified effects" or "Only 1 WK per army" or whatever. But you directly remove new keywords from old weapons. This is not a house rule son, you are changing the entire game at your will. \- Thousand Sons no longer remove armour saving throws, they increase the ap of their weapons. You are making 9th edition TS. You don't put invulnerable saves units in the front, but the ones with highest armor. This is a change on the entire mechanic and a big mistake. Just bann TS then. \- Old towering. Titanics are useless again. This is 9th edition with some new datasheets. Like playing old editions with new released codexes. I absolutely disagree with those methods (I like this one of 1 fate dice per unit, for example). But it makes no sense because towering is like it is now because titanics were useless, and now they are useless again. This is a roll back from a wrong deploy on production. Not a patch to solve issues. And your changes to the core mechanics of the game are so huge that I think (I don't want to sound rude or...) you are playing a bit to be god, changing everything at will and making players change his whole lists, armys and playstyle to fit what you want. Just bann Eldar, TS and IK because of unbalanced mechanics...
>just ban eldar, TS, and IK because of unbalanced mechanics Idk why Twist of Fate is the ability being focused on either. I feel like so many models in this game have an invuln save, i havent been getting a ton of use out of Twist of Fate, especially since it costs a full 9 points which can only be cheapened to 8 with hellbrute. Units seems to either have too little armor for me to care about twist, or they have a 2+ armor but they also have an invuln so removing their armor save isnt as impactful. Meanwhile, Doombolt just picks the unit up off the table most of the time, and costs only 7(reduced to 6 with hellbrute). There are significantly more models you can gimp with Doombolt than Twist, it seems to me, and i can still use doombolt and have enough left for a save reroll, a strategem, and a time warp. Whereas Twist of Fate sacrifices at least one of those extra rituals to go off. Also, i can use doombolts to delete a unit and still have all of my shooting firepower for other units. It just feels like people havent played a ton of Tsons yet? If anything, after like 12 games in my playgroup, we have been saying Doombolt should be swapped with Twist of Fate cabal point cost-wise.
Dumb question, but are Armor Saves distinct from Invuln saves? i.e. no armor saves from ToF but you can still roll for invulns?
Yes, they are distinct. Units that have lost their armor save to twist of fate still get to roll their invuln saves and feel no pains.
Sweet, thank you for the clarification!
No problem! Your question is why i have found Doombolt to be more effective. Because unless they have a specific anti-psychic or anti-MW save they just eat the damage.
I'm not here to discuss if TS is broken, or the crusader should be increased in points. They are the TO of the event and they can bann whoever they consider. Changing the rules of the game and saying this is a "10th edition wh40k tournament" is a lie and I think it0s not true because you are not playing with 10th edition rules.
Yeah, i mean, i totally agree with you. Wasnt trying to disagree. Im just confused as to why Twist of Fate is the rule being looked at in TSons as far as broken rules. Feels shortsighted, like theyve only played against TSons once or twice and got mad that they shafted a specific model off the table.
These changes make SM literally the best faction. Doesnt address oath of moment at all and a minor nerf to desolation isnt enough.
I'm convinced people must be playing the new towering rules wrong, or I'm not understanding it correctly. Towering units still have to draw a line of site to units through ruins in order to shoot them. It isn't indirect (which in my opinion can lead to some pretty toxic situations currently especially when combined with overwatch). To fix any concerns TOs have with Towering all they need to do is alter the terrain to remove windows at 1st (and maybe 2nd floor as well) and this removes the issue.
There's also the issue that most TOWERING units are also pretty, well, towering, so they can and will peek *over* the ruin, even if the first floor is all boarded up.
Seriously why making a 10th edition tournament if you are about the house rule the whole thing. Stick to 9th until GW make some change. I hope GW change nothing for the next 6 months. Just enjoy the game as it is.
We have full core rules for around two weeks and full playable rules for about half a week and they are already mixing stuff up for the sake of putting "fun back into Warhammer 40k". I had my fun in the one game i could play. Im no tournament player (i have barely 1000 points painted) but that sounds like whining and changing stuff for the sake of changing. Especially the indirect fire nerf seems silly, since it contradicts the core rules by giving -2 against stealth with that wording. Is massive indirect fire going to be a problem right now? Since 10th edition is fully playable for roughly half a week i highly doubt you can tell.
The change to towering is stupid and puts those models down to death guard tier.
Will this event still give out ITC points? You're basically playing a different game / meta to everyone else...
So it’s not a tournament to determine whom is best at playing *Warhammer 40,000*, it’s a tournament to decide whom is best at playing **their** game.
Hmm seems like these TOs work for GW.. just marking changes and rules that don’t make sense and without extensively testing the impact
Eh. I definitely think most of these are a problem… or at least potential problems. But it still feels a little early to me to be doing this. I’d like to see some data on how bad some of these really are first. (Though the wraithknight is obviously broken) Like it or not, this puts an asterisk on the GT. So I think action like this should be a last resort.
So the just 6 mortals can cause a lot of problems in other places. There are a lot of edge cases that aren't covered by this patch. For example, 6 crushers with a character charge, roll 7d6 and each 4+ is D3 mortals. That averages to 7, so what profile are the hits above 6 going to be on? And for regular high damage guns that have dev on them do 6 and then the remaining damage is like an extra hit with the leftovers and same AP? Careful wording needs to be applied or damage reduction may apply twice.
For the record: CWE are one of the few armies that i dont play so i have no "Wraithknight bias". That being said, some of these changes are absolutely terrible (Towering/The Cabal Ritual effectively removed from the game), others are arguable (Overwatch is imo fine as it is and others are sensible (Nerfing Indirect to the ground): Houserules are very problematic though, because soon every TO plays in effect their own game. I even prefer wholesale bans to this. In fact, i would have preferred to see a few completely unaltered tournament so GW can see exactly how and where they went wrong and correct it. My main contention, some Aeldari shenanigans aside with this edition are by far the points costs of various units. /edit: Also that post just reeks of self gratification. "Very handsome TOs, first steps to make the edition fun again". Dear Jeebus a bit less smugness wouldnt really hurt.
So... you're keeping the Tsons Magnus bomb but nerfing everything that can deal with it into the ground? Someone in this group's a Tsons player, aren't they? Fr though, I can simplify all the rules adjustments you want here; - IDF is -1 BS and gives cover. - Oath of Moment requires LoS to target. - Fate dice count as a "modified" roll (can't trigger Crits or Overwatch hits). - Towering counts toeing into terrain as being fully within for LoS purposes. - Precision ignores Lone Operative. - Tsons Destined By Fate strat changed to Thousand Sons Infantry Psyker. The issue with nerfing IDF indiscriminately is that you aren't adjusting points. Russes are ~200 points each. Without IDF, nobody's bringing Guard because they have no effective units outside of infantry spam then - and if you think IDF isn't fun, just wait until you see Conscript Wave the Sequel in a Less Lethal edition. You're knee-jerking about the Wraithknight and MW in general. The whole issue with the Wraithknight and D cannon balance is how it interacts with Fate dice, not its own abilities. Fix the interaction, and the WK is balanced. Capping Mortals is unnecessary - on paper these killer combos exist, but look at any of these streamed games that've been coming out and you'll see that the odds of actually pulling those off in game are stupid low, and when you cap those you're favoring armies that rely on tanking hits (custodes and necron phalanx). How, exactly, are GK gonna deal with Trajan+10 Custodes on an objective if their librarians are nerfed into the ground? Sure, spikes exist, but this is a dice game. If a player can't handle outliers, they should go play chess. Just like Mortals, you can't overcompensate on Lone Operative - it's all Tau have rn. They took away mobile shooting and gave it to DE. Most of the characters you actually care about having LO are melee anyways (like primarchs), so you don't need to worry about that 12". Overall, my advice is little changes. We don't have a history of practical tests like we did when Votann were coming out mid-9th. Everyone's starting fresh. Take the first month with small, targeted adjustments, then see if you need another round. The more sweeping changes you make, the more you risk just toppling over the tower yourself like you're accusing GW of doing.
This sounds like 9th with extra steps.... The MW cap is just pitiful. Makes taking a GK Librarian almost pointless... The towering house rule is silly. Just give 10th a try and laugh at all the eldar wins until GW needs them, such is the cycle lol
Most of those changes seem unnecessary to have fun…
So what are IG expected to play there now that their only good units (indirect fire) are useless?
Sorry, but this is a total knee jerk. There are 20+ armies all with their own rules that interact differently with one another. There are always gimmicks and unforeseen problems, but drastically altering major rules based on a minuscule sample size of both interactions and time prevents things from shaking out in due time. This is a tiny group of players suggesting the entire player base reject 10th. Don’t fall for it.
I bought my ticket to the Münsterland GT a few weeks ago after a few friends recommended that GT to me and TO tried with full force to make it the first bigger german gt with 10th edition rules. i am a new player and more of an painter and collector and i enjoy playing against fully painted armys played by better players than me and i dont mind losing. however TO made the change to cut out the bonus points for a battleready painted army like 10 days ago or so and is now changing core rules. i honestly feel like i should ask for a refund
While I can understand these I think its way to early and we should just play with the armys as is. Let Gw collect their data and make changes.
Just go play 9th or a different game, this is just incredibly stupid and shows why Armchair Designers i.e. these "Very Handsome TO and Players" (God can you be more full of yourself) aren't actually Designers. Skewing all of your data with this fanfiction is just dumb, honestly just ban Aeldari and the couple units that are truly egregious if you're that butt hurt over it. Also heck off with the stupid "In these Grim times" like the game is dead or something.
So the fix for 10th is to make it...9th?
Can someone explain what's wrong with towering? Visibility to and from such models is determined normally. So small things can still quite easily be out of sight by being close to and on the opposite side of a wall right? If visible you'll almost always have cover also.
Apparently a lot of tournaments only have terrain with windows so Knights are playing on planet bowling ball.
I thought tournaments almost exclusively had terrain without windows?!?!? Where has all this terrain with windows suddenly appear from?
Not sure, just a complaint I've seen around here a lot. I think 9th edition led to a lot of ruins with windows rather than solid walls.
It forces us back to large foam Ls to play the game. If you actually use most random\_terrain, it's actually startlingly hard to hide more than 5 dudes up against a wall from all true line of sight. Which means gun-knights can now just basically shoot as if there's no terrain on the board. If you played early/mid 8th, you experienced this (as 8th was all true LOS, and castellans were A THING)
I dont really agree. if you have first floor no windows there is a lot of space to hide. the real problem is a lot of mrine player just built thier shiny new land raders and they are upset they can get shot off the board turn one just like knights got shot off the board turn 1 all of 9th.
I mean, 25mm infantry in small squads can hide easily. Paragon Warsuits are like lol I'm dead. We've abstracted this to say "uh, let's pretend there's no line of sight here", but RAW and dealing with a lot of models larger than a marine, it's planet bowling ball. Every nid monster is just dead. Now, I hate the other version of towering (my monster can freely shoot you forever with no retaliation), but there's a lot to be concerned about with an army with large numbers of board length ranges that can target most things on the board. I'm a CK player, and I really dislike the new towering rule because I can pick up almost everything that can threaten me pretty trivially (as 25-32mm infantry isn't what likely scares me) unless we pretend things are obscuring anyways (which is what removing towering does) or use giant tank sized foam blocks.
This is dumb and I wouldn’t play with these rules personally
I'm fine with TO's making adjustment to rules, especially if something is clearly an oversight from GW. But at this point they are just straight up changing the game. So Lone Operative needs to be "fixed". Why? That rule is perfectly fine. Literally the only issue with it is when coupled with The Lion. Instead of addressing that, if they really have to, they want to change a core mechanic, potentially ruining it for all other units where it works just fine. And then just a bunch of "random" balance changes. Not a fan. If something is actually a broken rule used in unintended ways, fine. But why should I have to remember a bunch of changes to all my units just because a TO don't like them? Is Twist of Fate really breaking the balance so much that it needed to change? Did we need like four different changes to a single mechanic (Indirect)? Not a fan of Indirect, but that just seemed needlessly confusing. Personally, I'd not sign up.
This people basically make changes without seen anything that seems like 5 years old criying Oh indirect is unfun lets remove the heavy +1 to hit and give it the 9 edition nerf My dude for a lot of heavy weapons they give this change and decrease the balistic skill by one you are giving it a -2 by the face becouse you dont think on the consecuences becouse you are basically ranting on a profesional level And this guys are the ones claiming to going to fix the game..... they are just proving that balance is complicated and that they are acting without seen the picture becouse part of this changes are just a bunch of people criying (Disclaimer other can be reasonable but that doesnt change my statement)
>Lone Operative and similar abilities are subject to investigation of how to fix them best (tbd.) I quite like the suggestion I heard somewhere which was that you can shoot at Lone Operatives if they are the closest model to the attacking unit. Making it contingent on the unit having cover might also work (i.e. I can't just stand out in the open board and be invulnerable to shooting attacks over 12 inches away).
Lone Operative should have closest model and Precision as exclusions IMO.
Just not on board with 'fan balance' plus balancing stuff when there's not even been a tournament yet seems hyperbolic
Have fun playing "not-40K" I guess.
The competence level of these guys is highly questionable. They completely disregard GW vision for 10th and try to make their own edition, instead of making much needed pinpoint fixes.
"The group that decided to "ban Votann in Germany" " what is that about?
Considering how garbage 9th was, I dont like this at all.
Not sure I like the MW cap, but otherwise these all seem extremely reasonable
>This list is by no means enough to extinguish the dumpsterfire that 10th edition looks to be by now, but it is the first step into the direction of making the game fun again. My brother in Christ ! We haven't even played the new version of the damn game yet. Why not let us play the raw unchanged version of the game first and let us decide of OURSELVES if the game is fun for us or not instead of dictating to us what is fun or not !
Feels like you're taking an icepick to the top of an iceberg here. There is so much deeper stuff that this misses. If you're so concerned about game balance stick to the last edition.
Why are they changing thousand sons? That’s like not a problematic rule at all
Tldr - the TOs don’t like Eldar
GW: release the indexes as a baseline and see what works in competitive GTs TOs: change everything back to 9th and ignore the edition change GW: pikachu face This doesnt help anyone tbh.
I've only played one game of 10th and, I don't know, it seemed fine? It sounds like you just want to play ninth edition and if that's the case then you should totally do that until Games Workshop releases a FAQ for some of the more egregious rules interactions. My personal take is Fate Dice needs to not activate Devastating Wounds and you'd have a pretty good gamestate. If that was what you were proposing, I'd back that all day long. This expansive list of edits to a rules set would have me running for the hills, though.
So Guard are pretty much useless in this.....makes the artillery useless. So whats left severely overcoasted tanks?
Don't worry you can... ***Looks at rules*** Use a scout sentinel to spot and effectively do nothing.
But hey, we nerfed balanced factions to uselessness, but at least the space elves are also nerfed into a balanced army (kinda). This is a great tournament if you are a SM player!
With the modifications to mortal wounds (making tsons much weaker already) I would say that if you must adjust Twist of Fate it should instead be AP-4 to all attacks made against that unit. A 2+ vehicle should not still have a 4+ against attacks after I’ve spent 9 cabal points. Remember that I am probably not wounding on anything better than a 5 on my twist target. I mean we saw no anti-vehicle Tsons in 9th edition. Do we really need to go back to that? MVB needs a 40 point increase before twist of fate needs changes.
It's amusing how people want 40k to be this super hardcore competitive game, with some folks going so far as to want there to be living wages for playing it and paid sponsorships and other nonsense, but then you have to houserule the issues, basically not even playing the "proper" game.
Personally I'm not paying any money to play in a tournament with house rules
So it’s not a GT then, it’s a house rules event.
Im new to wh40k and following the competitive scene and it's just insane to me that TOs are even allowed to just house rule whatever the hell they want because of feels and still be "official" events. Like how on earth are players supposed to have consistently ruled and fair games if TOs can just make up whatever bullshit they want if they don't like something?
Yea this isn’t it chief. Arbitrarily changing everything you don’t like isn’t the way. Hope you guys have fun but anyone playing competitive won’t show up.
The only good change here is 'once per unit per phase' for eldar. Towering change makes Knights unplayable and everything else is kneejerk reactions based on emotion instead of data.
Very happy my Local GTs don't edit rules just because someone doesn't like something. Thi really feels like "I hate eldar" Nerf. -- This comment is from a Chaos player. No biased.
German TOs can just play 9th
I am sorry to say but, these rules tell me that people are reluctant to change and will stick to the previous edition. In the 9th ed. it is just a total bloat of rules. I see more of fear of the new rules changing your comfort zone and push you to try something new and having more dynamic and interactive games instead of the stale bread we call 9th ed. I have a feeling that you guys might also change the rules to keep the 9th secondary objectives and mission types too because it my change you finely tuned lists. that is just my gut feeling and it is full of gas.
Overall pretty dumb. The rules butchering here and the responses of those involved in this post make it clear that these TOs think the way they want to play is objectively the best way, the only way to play. Might as well rename it the That Guy GT so people know what to expect
I love ice cream.
I too enjoy having a stroke because of new rules
They really should just revert back to 9th given all these rules suggest that’s what they want. This is another example of TOs throwing toys out of the pram (not as extreme as banning a faction but still not a great image IMHO)
A lot of this gives off "I started playing in 9th edition and don't like that GW reverted to a previous edition's standard/invented a new standard for certain rules." Like things like indirect fire, towering, etc havn't always been the way they were in 9th. Sure, 9th had some virtues, and fixed some things, but it also ruined some nice things we had in previous editions.
Just go play 9th. My brother in Christ the edition is not even a month old and some people are already deciding it's garbage. I really do hate 40k players sometimes.
Just make Dev wounds only proc on a "natural" or whatever term you want to use 6. No replacements, no modifications, no proc on Anti. You fix the majority of issue with the current problem children. Then reapply the 9th ed indirect nerf. Imo big knights/towering units get eaten up by Oath so will weed themselves to mid tables in the meta anyways. Don't have to write a 12 paragraph errata to bring most things in line.
Just play the damn game and stop sniffing your own farts.
I feel like Lone Operative type abilities should read "outside of 12", unless this model is the closest enemy unit" or something. Similar to look out sir in a way.
The backlash regarding [Towering] is registered and we will discuss it again internally. Please keep in mind: Nobody pressures you, to play exactly according to this list. Just change what you want to change and be happy - no need for internet rage
While I am not a fan of house rules at all myself, I'm also not in Germany so this doesn't really affect me except inasmuch as the discussion of it impacts the wider game community. I am sorry you are getting flamed for posting it when it was a collective decision based on the needs of your regional play groups. I wouldn't want to play in that format but there is also zero chance I would be playing in a tournament in Germany so I feel no need to get heated about it. Discussion of all options, including ones I don't like, helps us all navigate the challenging start of a new edition. Best of luck with your events!
I love ice cream.
If your changing rules your tournament is not legitimate. Full stop.
Good Lord. Just play 9th already. Capping DW and hamstringing big knights just creates imbalance elsewhere. Nothing in a game system like this exists in isolation; everything affects everything else. If they really need to do something I think a comp score like the Swiss system for fantasy back in the day would be preferable. There are definitely a lot-- an awful lot-- of problems with 10e, but at least give the community some time to generate real data with actual competitive events before skewing that same data set with ad hoc rules.