Good to hear the guard rant, I learnt a lot as you explained how and why those key units worked so well in their roles. It's going to be hard to eat those increases. Thanks
The wrath is real. This felt like one of those e-mails when you hit send before calming down. I’m not super competitive but always like to listen to this show as you two are champs. Interesting perspective, look forward to seeing if it all comes true.
The points on Grotesques are obviously dumb. But I do think part of it is that they are old resin models (actually, model...) that aren't even for sale anymore, and I don't think GW has any interest in buffing something that they can't sell you. They might get incidental points changes here and there just as part of the general algorithm, but I doubt they or any of the other discontinued Drukhari resin stuff are going to see a deliberate, targeted buff from GW.
People hate it when you say "just obliterate it" because so much of this commentary comes from a position of not caring about 97% of player experiences. The reality is for the vast majority of 40k players (including your audience as you aren't making content for the 50 people playing at the highest level) is that they cannot trivially pivot to different things. A not uncommon scenario is that a person will see a list that seems powerful, perhaps modifies it a bit to include some things they like and then buys builds and hobbies it over probably months to then attend one of the 1-2 GTs they attend per year and 1 RTT they attend every 1-2 months. If you constantly obliterate lists because it is bothersome to people who are on international teams, that is actually pretty shit for the typical tournament go-er. I love you guys, I think I started listening around episode 4, but sometimes your takes really seem like you feel GW should be catering balance changes first and foremost to WTC level players and if it happens to help anyone else that's nice but unimportant. I think Vik had the right of it with what he was saying about tsons: very few people can play them well. That is relevant for balance. Where as wraiths/meganobs will be horrible for everyone.
Couldn't agree more. People want the game to be balanced as a live service game like league of legends without realizing that a HUGE PART of live service games is that everything is free. Sure, if you're on a top team you probably own or have access to every model. The average player isn't anywhere close. And they can't just swap armies / units immediately with zero effort like they can in a live service game. Should the game be balanced? yes, obviously. Can you nuke entire armies into unplayability? Not without seriously harming the consumer's confidence.
I think you make a great point. Honestly it's really tough, because from our standpoint, we're wanting to see changes how we're experiencing the game because we're cautious how it's going to effect the way we interact with the game (super majors/gts/wtc/etc..) and it's eays to forgot how those statements come across for the regular player. On the note of 'obliterate it' - it's more a lazy way of saying 'point the points up significantly to where it can't be spammed', and while I agree in an ideal would that wouldn't ever happen, the reality is that we often call for it because we're afraid of inaction and I think from our point of view, in some circumstances, having a heavy hand is better than a nuanced one when it comes to balancing some of the clearly problematic units in the game (wraiths).
This is a great wording and you Fireside has a great response and perspective to be shared as well. However one thing we seem to need to address is while yes, they can provide perspectives for top players, they arent experiencing the lower tables, so even if you put the armies through a filter for those groups, their answers still may not add up because they are not within that perspective and translations/filters always skew perception. Other groups have more laymen perspectives and positionings that should be congregated from the viewer, not from the creators sharing their experiences and perspectives IMO. Language can be a bit inflamatory but no offense to the Fireside crew but when was the last time they were stuck mid/low tables at a GT to be able to give us a perspective from there? Im sure its been a while
GW and balance team gets PLENTY of data from smaller events and has historically, sometimes to game detriment overall, skewed heavily towards kitchen table metas where people likely dont even play fully by the rules or have house rules or personally-held beliefs, or want balance. This will have top players saying one thing, and low players saying another, but if they average out the job has been done for mid players if theyre catered to. An example: lot of the game has felt in 10E that they had playtested early requiring 2-3 battleline units per army like AoS and the game felt way better balanced out taxing the must-takes the way their initial points did, but since that didnt make it to print, the balance was wacky, but that might also have been the "internal GW design team/their choice of players" assuming being told 'army building like AoS' without deep access to testing rules meant take 2-4 battleline based on game size, and so when they playtested things felt better. This and things like "Ill play assuming this is an error," "wont play this feels busted at first glance" can inadvertently cause problems because there isnt a Regulated Control during testing, and due to competitive players not playtesting or balancing a LOT of things until recently we needed thwir perspectives skewed more for a long time, so seeing and having them to balance out feels good. But now there are more voices of theirs so it feels less balanced advice generally and I think that's where the friction is starting now comes in, but I dont think Foreside should speak to areas they arent familiar with because theyll not always be on point trying to put themselves in shoes that dont fit them
Okay i dont normally do this. Personally i think the podcast owe Josh roberts an apology!!!! Although i dont think your intent you went in on Josh and felt like a personl attack. I think its wrong to throw his name round (not the only podcast doing this) and imply in some way he is making all the decisions and questioning his integrity or impartiality. Josh is the face of a team and its not all down to one man to make the decisions without input/sign off. People saying Josh is only winning because of 18 wraiths! Just shows how stupid ranking systems is and they clearly dont know josh as either a person or player. Josh has won multiple WTC/ETCs and more tournaments in the uk over decades of tournament play. Using guard/GK/orks/eldar/necrons/chaos marines/marines to name a few. Just because hes not a content creator, celebrity or had focussed on teams more than singles in recent years.
Thanks for your insights! You missed all the enhancement changes in your spreadsheet, which contained all the nerfs for some factions (Tsons for example). Maybe slightly skewing some of your reactions.
Holy shit normally I have a blast listening to you guys talk about the meta but this is just an hour and a half of Dave being more sour than a lemon tree and Vik trying to talk him off the ledge.
Very interesting and honest show. Balance team speaks mostly about the Goldilocks zone and you rightly point out this is a single kpi It’s hard to justify this slate overall Inconsistency across the board Thank you Vik and David for another great show
I feel you David, that guard rant was from the heart and a true feeling when someone’s favorite toys gets removed. Felt it many times and will feel it many more. About things getting obliterated points wise, we come to listen to your insights on the game and if that’s your stance it is. So don’t be afraid to keep saying it. Keep up the good work 👍
If only there was some sort of unit classification that the balance team could use to compare datasheets across factions. Like meganobz and abberants, or castigators and disintegrators. You could even give them cool names like 'heavy support' and 'elite'
Is there a way I can reach you about doing a brief consult/coaching session and what your rates for that might be? I'm not sure if it's something you normally do because I'm sure you guys have busy lives outside of 40k.
I really enjoyed this conversation between you both very interesting. As a mid tier competitive Necron player. I think the nerfs and buffs were ok apart from I don’t think canoptek court got hit hard enough they could have raised both wraiths by 30 plus the character and doomstlakers could have gone up 10 along with the other nerfs I think Necrons would still be good but would have been reined in.
Vik mentioning the Sisters win rate and how much good players impact WR. Say little Timmy plays Sisters, and has his list. In this timeline where Vik plays it. Its 55% and needed a nerf, Timmys win rate is slightly carried by faction. If Vik didnt play it, they'd be 47% and Timmy would be thinking his losses are from a weak faction. Same list.
Surprised by the emphasis on %-changes. Stuff like Striking Scorpions , Banshees or Zephyrim at 12+ points-per-(T3)-wound still seem pricy compared to things like JP Assault Intercessors as 8 points-per-(T4!!)-wound, etc..
@1:07:00 id like to say i totally agree with you - having played marine tank spam for 3 months i was looking forward to the ironstorm/firestorm gladiator lists getting smashed into oblivion and a new marine build/builds coming to the fore with points cuts. But the changes are so minor, i still think thats the way to do marines :-(. But then again, a big shakeup can lead to broken metas, and since we've had it pretty good recently maybe not rocking the boat is fine. thanks for the entertainment whilst i paint 3x5 assault intercessors with jump packs tho :-)
Nerfing ironstorm doesn't make the other detachments better. It just makes an already struggling faction worse. We got a few positive point changes in other areas but unfortunately nothing enough to shake up the meta outside seeing more vindicators alongside lancers. What changes we need to see are point buffs to units specific to the other detachments to make the choice more interesting that a no brainer "best in slot" detachment pick (looking at you Ironstorm and SW Stormlance).
He does have a point tho, if Josh is playing such a strong list, that gets no nerfs on the really broken stuff, but gets nerfs on the stuff that can effect your army, I feel he does have a point
Tbh this is why competitive warhammer is not the best way to play this game. It is a semi competitive, narrative based game style that really should not be played hypercompetitively.
40:25 i would say TS army rule Is best in thé game(as TS player) i think any army in thé game would autotake double move any unit in your army each turn. Not even talking about doombolt, noarmor, etc.
I honestly think that your comment here about two codex writers is correct. If you look at all of the codex pairs, they're abysmal imperial codices alongside powerful xenos codices. It seems very likely to me that they have somebody different in charge of each "superfaction". We'll have to wait for the CSM codex to see who is writing the chaos codices, but my money is on the GSC codex being very powerful and the sororitas one being very weak later in the summer.
I think people take issue with it when you say to make somethings unplayable bc a lot of us aren't top tier players that just swap armies when something gets hit. For a lot of us, we're semi-competitive players that want our favorite units in our 1-2 armies to be able to see the table I much prefer a measured approach that attempts to make broken stuff mid rather than just make it total garbage. I can't buy a new list every 3 months, just try to get it in line with everyone else and leave it at that
Also respect for calling Josh Roberts out, not many people have had balls to call him out, he's obviously a top class player, but how's he got away with this, it's fishy af 😅😂
Wraith combo went up 9%, most factions can play a full game without killing a single wraith unit. I don’t get it. Bullgryn and Basilisks go up 11-12%, I get it. They were too good at what they did. Kasrkin go up 20%. This unit comes back on the edges doing secondaries and plinking a few shots in. I don’t think this nerf was needed in the context of the others. Ogryns(65), ratlings(60), cadians(60) are infantry units priced too high for their vulnerability and low output and can go down 5 to make catachans less of an autoinclude. I’d also like to see the Cadian command squad(65) and Castellan(45) go down 5 on the character side. Our compensation buffs were all to vehicles, I am worried we are going to encourage a wave of awful armoured guard armies that spend the game in a traffic jam of our own deployment zone, vulnerable to move blocking, and deployed out in the open (due to lack of space) and so susceptible to turn 1 losses. In conclusion: we still take basilisks(or earthshaker carriages) and Bullgryn and one Kasrkin unit, and do not take enough russes or hydras/hellhounds to break even. A big nerf to guard.
Josh list gone up 140 ish points, to be fair. The sidegrade buffs are for other detachments more - I think this balance slate was focused on internal balance and keeping the confidence of average player that the army they would build will disappear immediately. And what they hurt in guard is what isnt interactive. Im 100% you can make a few different great builds, just have to Focus them. Lastly, if Guard indeed were the predators keeping the game in check... They needed to be nerfed to stop obfuscating problems and for both their prey and themselves to be poparły balancable going forward
@38:00 I'm listening to this bs about Sisters as a Blood Angel player with a way worse win-rate, and wondering why my only great 5-man unit was nerfed so hard. They are getting 1 billion miracle dice a turn and so many tools. Lol
Honestly the more I’ve seen of the 40k creation/balance philosophy the less I’m enthused with playing it GW really needs to hire more people to curate their cash cow product… the speculation of 3-5 person total team with individually written and lightly playtested codices would map perfectly onto how this edition has played out so far
I wouldn't take this podcast as gospel. Light touch changes and mostly balanced across the entire meta is by far the best state the game has ever been in. One of the hosts is just deep throating a salt lick here
@@IscariottActual Bold of you to assume that I can't form opinions by myself and simply copy paste them from people... Also to act as if a "balanced" meta is the key determinate of a writing/balance teams aptitude is laughably shortsighted logic We're really just going to ignore probably the single worst initial launch in the games history followed by "patches" based almost entirely on 9 months of community playtesting/data collection as well as ctrl f % increasing whatever reddit/youtube comments whine about the most... and that is only the tip of the iceberg If you think that this is the best the largest wargaming company in the entire world (that brings in over half a BILLION a year in revenue btw) can do you are missing the forest for the trees
I'm fairly happy with the Guard pts changes, my list went down 20 pts (I don't run artillery or kasrkin), it's made the internal balance of the index a bit better but Marbo and Ratlings could perhaps lose 5 pts each Scions were excellent for 55 pts anyway; at 50 pts they must be S-tier
All valid points, however looking from competitive perspective it's a gut shot. Our detachment promotes standing still, which in a game where you need movement to score points is kinda meh. So the only thing that actually worked was indirect. Guard has also problem with movement speed. So nerfing a decent unit with scout limits our ability to reach objectives even harder. So we lost a way to deal respectable damage and our good screening unit. If you run a list without artillery, you basically play guard without detachment. While scion buff will put them higher in viability tier, essentially changes nothing as scions perform a completely different role than kasrkins do. You can't substitute 30 kasrking with 30 scions and achieve same results as scions will not charge objective as they start in deepstrike and if you dont use their deepstrike they are basically overpriced infantry even with their ability. Guards infantry is a cannon fodder, serious damage is done by tanks and artillery.
I don't like playing guard, indirect sucks for my preferred style, but how you look at top crons and top guard, and put them up the same is insane 😂.. can't wait for top tables of meganobz and wraiths smacking each other in mid board for 5 turns.. so fun 😮😂
We don't hate you for suggesting GW completely bins an OP unit (hopefully"we" don't hate you at all😅). But suggesting that they bin an ARMY, that might be someone's only collection is not a cool take.
yall i think vik's mic is echoing or his audio is getting picked up by dave's mic i know recording over zoom or skype or whatever is hard but for me it makes this a lot more stressful to listen to just letting you know to hopefully drive improvement
I consider it the ultimate 40k honour to take a supposedly underpowered faction and get them nerfed. Kudos David! ruclips.net/user/shortsClaibnBxTtc?si=YGx9wm-iR0E-OObd
I also think that when we take off our Warhammer heads for a second and think about it from a business perspective rules changes and adjustments is probably a KPI so they will have a metric or target to only make a % of changes per quarter etc...
Yeah there's surely some restrictions on how much they can change. Printing expensive books that end up significantly different to the current actual rules within a few months has been complained about in the past so they are probably trying to avoid that now
I think the balance team have been really lazy when it comes to internal balancing factions. They seem to spend a good amount of time on some factions (Aeldari etc). Then completely ignore other ones in such a lazy way. For example Custodes FW has been completely unplayable since the beginning other than Caladius tanks, yet again and again they haven't touched the points to give us more options. Plus FW is literally half our army options too... 😅
He wasn't saying it literally that josh is telling them to nerf armies he plays vs. He said that the way GW is handling it makes it seem that way. Big diff.
@@TheDanthemanJones "i am telling it like it is. people are jokingly saying josh will nerf your army if its close, josh is playing wraiths, wraiths havent been nerfed yet. Thats actually reality. it doesnt feel great." 1:10:00 onwards
@@TheXDesertfisch you're still not getting it he is saying the balance changes GW have made give that optic. He isn't accusing Josh of influencing balance for his own gain.
Great review fellas. You are correct. If a unit is clearly broken and points changes are the only tools to control them then they need to be pointed out of existence. With the three month rota they can be rehabilitated with rules changes twice a year if required. It is better for the game to have units that are unused, than units that are dominant, in every army and make the game boring.
Even with CSM which as you said is a great change, You can see that they don't want to flip-flop and admit mistakes. They didn't undo any of the point changes they made the previous time, instead they targeted all new units. They thus didn't admit that their point changes were bad or overdone. Now legionaries are awesome which is cool, but chosen are overcosted by a little bit. It was pretty undeniable They messed up with CSM considering by the win rate They were more unbalanced after the change than before😂 But it's nice to see they didn't let them languish That is a good direction for the game. Some bad opinions here though by you guys, your facts are good but your opinions are pretty bad. They're clearly the opinions of some people who play the game too much for their own good and think the game should be balanced around how they play it instead of the other 99% of people, or even the other 80% of competitive players. Nerf things into the ground so there's a constant roller coaster of what's good? Nobody likes that who doesn't constantly switch between armies and play so many games they get bored quickly. Completely nerf all the indirect in guard? That's literally our detachment and One of the defining and stand out aspects of playing guard as a faction. It's just speaks to the homogenization these players who play constantly want to see where you have to nerf artillery into the ground instead of dealing with the fact that some armies use it as a defining part of what makes them, them. Guars players like mixed forces, But a guard army that's not supported by strong and deadly backbone of our artillery is just not guard to me. The whole idea is you have to come to us because if you run or hide you'll just get blasted to bits.
Strange that you didn’t do the percentage increase example for Technomancers. That was a 42% increase, or as per your metrics - 840 Points on a 2000 point list. I get it, Wraiths are a sore point, and I agree that they, not the Technomancers should have been the focus - But the trauma seems to override that view?
David understanding of Aeldari is.... insane. Aeldari have many super strong anti match ups. Let alone new codex like Orks(though Old orks where also almost imposible against good player). I see Aeldari being viable in teams where you can doge certain match ups. But wining a single GT is highly unlikely. Unless they get super lucky on match ups. BTW, Laim had a VERY lucky match ups when he played singles with list made for teams. He doged every single bad match up up till the finale.Something trivial like Chaos Knights wold shred that list.
@@firesidepodcast9977 Seeing liam vsl smash the apline cup singles with aeldari, i agree - though i have to say any army in the hands of this man seems strong
Not sure where I fall on the eldar changes as a whole but the point drops were pretty insignificant. Pretending like these drops are going to rewrite the whole meta is silly. The only msu units worth taking are the ones everyone are already running and several got a point hike. Scorpions might see play instead of rangers, guardians still probably won't see much play, banshees still won't see play, storm guardians probably didn't need a change.
Re Guard, you guys often ask 'why the low win rate', now 'why the nerfs'. It's because Guard unlike other armies has baggage, lore, history. We, and GW, all know how a Guard army should look: like a WW2 Soviet charge with tanks, hordes of basic dudes with guns, or like a late war mech company. Bullgryn and kasrkin to support the basic troops, or kasrkin alone in an elite strike force, but to have them together with no basic infantry is not something GW or most Guard players will countenance even if meta, and GW has now stamped on it. You may say 'But this is competitive!' But Guard is never considered just competitively, it's the primary lore carrier of 40k. If that means it will never be top tier, I suspect many Guard players are fine with that. Although, Logan Morrow just won the Spring Incursion with a 'classic' Guard list. You guys are such great players, see if you can win with that.
I don't know what David's stance even is, he advocates for just killing off top factions and spends 1.5 hours being visibly upset that HIS faction was the one that is killed off. I appreciate honesty with regards to y'all's opinion about the meta, but as Vik shows, there is a way to be disappointed in a bit more of a controlled fashion. I hope David is doing ok.
Vik's rather constant dislike of Knights is getting a little stale. It's a bit odd that he complains about the short times that Knights have been at the top of the meta being a problem when Aeldari were at the top of 10th for over 6mths with over 70% win rates.
When eldar were dumb I complained about them too pretty furiously, you can go back to all the episodes around 10th release, WTC and LGT. I'm a bit tongue in cheek about the level of my dislike of Knights, sorry if it offended you, but they are, in my eyes, such a silly looking army on the table and such a defensive skew that they cause balance issues in local gaming stores and the lower/mid tables at tournaments when they are anything other than mediocre. Vik
I would agree with you and changes if we had more than 1 detachment. Right now, even at casual level, if you dont take artillery, you basically play without your detachment rule.
People bitch about reinforcements existing but more than anything else it's the fulcrum around which guard is able to play the game and it's a real treat every now and then when you play someone that realizes it mid game and gives you the "oh wow, this wouldn't even be a game without that" Kasrkin didn't deserve the 20. 10 was warranted, reverse their position with the scions.
Every edition, every meta, there's always something busted that ruins competitive 40k for me. In 9th it was Drukhari, followed by the Tyranids with the character that could fly in, kill whatever it wanted, and fly back out home, without you getting to respond. Now it's 18 wraiths! I hate this stupid build, it's not even a real game into most armies tbh.
The problem is tryhards who actually field that kind of nonsense without having the decency to at least be ashamed of themselves. A while ago, someone won an RTT around my area with 5 C'Tan. The fuck is wrong with these people?
I usually really enjoy your content but the IG nerfs seems to have tilted David the entire episode, especially after the Tsons got brought up around the 1 hour mark. Just digs his heels in on this balance slate being terrible and refusing to listen to anything contrary to the opinions he’s walked in with. I personally can’t think of the last time a Tsons list went top 4 in any GT in singles.
Also Warhammer tends to release FAQs to balance certain things within a couple weeks of dataslates, and the quarterly cycle is enough to determine the meta and maneuver it and gives enough time to give actually thought out changes rather than rush nerf or buff things based on feelings.
I think one thing as well is that it can be hard to accurately gather data outside of tournaments. It's not like I post my living room table match results to GW
Wraiths not getting nerfed shows JR's influence on the process...the guy went from middle of pack (of the top ranked) to the best player in the world exploiting the busted build, it is hard to not think that he was the one stopping the nerf from happening
You really think that he has the final say/ only say on the balances? He is a tremendous player and has been for a long time. He isn't just starting to win super majors. There is no way that just because he is doing well with a faction that he refuses to nerf it.
@@Glasshammer_Mattso it’s just a happy coincidence? Guess that’s just lucky for him then yeah. Wraiths (and Necrons in general) have been an issue for a while. Why not nerf them if you aim is game balance?
@@DarkSquiff he did nerf his build by 100+ points which isn't a small amount. The techomancer went up 25 points which is massive. Would you prefer to see the wraiths go up 15 and him 10 just to feel better? He is a single member of the team and he cannot be solely responsible for the changes. He does have to get authority to his changes too
I hope everything’s ok David
David at 1:06: "I love the hammer and nail, make it unplayable! Piss off, you've had your fun. Peaks and troughs"
David 15 mins later:
Good to hear the guard rant, I learnt a lot as you explained how and why those key units worked so well in their roles. It's going to be hard to eat those increases. Thanks
The wrath is real. This felt like one of those e-mails when you hit send before calming down. I’m not super competitive but always like to listen to this show as you two are champs. Interesting perspective, look forward to seeing if it all comes true.
If Josh is your friend i would hate to be your enemy 😂
Balance team coming out of playtesting with the conclusion that Grotesques and Meganobz should be the same points still puzzles me.
I too am confused. Really expected Grotesques and Hellions to come down a little
The points on Grotesques are obviously dumb. But I do think part of it is that they are old resin models (actually, model...) that aren't even for sale anymore, and I don't think GW has any interest in buffing something that they can't sell you. They might get incidental points changes here and there just as part of the general algorithm, but I doubt they or any of the other discontinued Drukhari resin stuff are going to see a deliberate, targeted buff from GW.
People hate it when you say "just obliterate it" because so much of this commentary comes from a position of not caring about 97% of player experiences.
The reality is for the vast majority of 40k players (including your audience as you aren't making content for the 50 people playing at the highest level) is that they cannot trivially pivot to different things.
A not uncommon scenario is that a person will see a list that seems powerful, perhaps modifies it a bit to include some things they like and then buys builds and hobbies it over probably months to then attend one of the 1-2 GTs they attend per year and 1 RTT they attend every 1-2 months. If you constantly obliterate lists because it is bothersome to people who are on international teams, that is actually pretty shit for the typical tournament go-er.
I love you guys, I think I started listening around episode 4, but sometimes your takes really seem like you feel GW should be catering balance changes first and foremost to WTC level players and if it happens to help anyone else that's nice but unimportant. I think Vik had the right of it with what he was saying about tsons: very few people can play them well. That is relevant for balance. Where as wraiths/meganobs will be horrible for everyone.
Couldn't agree more. People want the game to be balanced as a live service game like league of legends without realizing that a HUGE PART of live service games is that everything is free. Sure, if you're on a top team you probably own or have access to every model. The average player isn't anywhere close. And they can't just swap armies / units immediately with zero effort like they can in a live service game. Should the game be balanced? yes, obviously. Can you nuke entire armies into unplayability? Not without seriously harming the consumer's confidence.
I think you make a great point.
Honestly it's really tough, because from our standpoint, we're wanting to see changes how we're experiencing the game because we're cautious how it's going to effect the way we interact with the game (super majors/gts/wtc/etc..) and it's eays to forgot how those statements come across for the regular player.
On the note of 'obliterate it' - it's more a lazy way of saying 'point the points up significantly to where it can't be spammed', and while I agree in an ideal would that wouldn't ever happen, the reality is that we often call for it because we're afraid of inaction and I think from our point of view, in some circumstances, having a heavy hand is better than a nuanced one when it comes to balancing some of the clearly problematic units in the game (wraiths).
VERY well said.
This is a great wording and you Fireside has a great response and perspective to be shared as well. However one thing we seem to need to address is while yes, they can provide perspectives for top players, they arent experiencing the lower tables, so even if you put the armies through a filter for those groups, their answers still may not add up because they are not within that perspective and translations/filters always skew perception. Other groups have more laymen perspectives and positionings that should be congregated from the viewer, not from the creators sharing their experiences and perspectives IMO. Language can be a bit inflamatory but no offense to the Fireside crew but when was the last time they were stuck mid/low tables at a GT to be able to give us a perspective from there? Im sure its been a while
GW and balance team gets PLENTY of data from smaller events and has historically, sometimes to game detriment overall, skewed heavily towards kitchen table metas where people likely dont even play fully by the rules or have house rules or personally-held beliefs, or want balance. This will have top players saying one thing, and low players saying another, but if they average out the job has been done for mid players if theyre catered to.
An example: lot of the game has felt in 10E that they had playtested early requiring 2-3 battleline units per army like AoS and the game felt way better balanced out taxing the must-takes the way their initial points did, but since that didnt make it to print, the balance was wacky, but that might also have been the "internal GW design team/their choice of players" assuming being told 'army building like AoS' without deep access to testing rules meant take 2-4 battleline based on game size, and so when they playtested things felt better.
This and things like "Ill play assuming this is an error," "wont play this feels busted at first glance" can inadvertently cause problems because there isnt a Regulated Control during testing, and due to competitive players not playtesting or balancing a LOT of things until recently we needed thwir perspectives skewed more for a long time, so seeing and having them to balance out feels good. But now there are more voices of theirs so it feels less balanced advice generally and I think that's where the friction is starting now comes in, but I dont think Foreside should speak to areas they arent familiar with because theyll not always be on point trying to put themselves in shoes that dont fit them
You guys are great! I don't always agree, but great discussion always
Okay i dont normally do this.
Personally i think the podcast owe Josh roberts an apology!!!! Although i dont think your intent you went in on Josh and felt like a personl attack. I think its wrong to throw his name round (not the only podcast doing this) and imply in some way he is making all the decisions and questioning his integrity or impartiality.
Josh is the face of a team and its not all down to one man to make the decisions without input/sign off.
People saying Josh is only winning because of 18 wraiths! Just shows how stupid ranking systems is and they clearly dont know josh as either a person or player. Josh has won multiple WTC/ETCs and more tournaments in the uk over decades of tournament play. Using guard/GK/orks/eldar/necrons/chaos marines/marines to name a few. Just because hes not a content creator, celebrity or had focussed on teams more than singles in recent years.
Yeah calling people out by name because the combo you wanted nerfed didn’t get nerfed makes competitive 40K even more laughable
😊
Thanks for your insights! You missed all the enhancement changes in your spreadsheet, which contained all the nerfs for some factions (Tsons for example). Maybe slightly skewing some of your reactions.
Holy shit normally I have a blast listening to you guys talk about the meta but this is just an hour and a half of Dave being more sour than a lemon tree and Vik trying to talk him off the ledge.
Yeah did not come off great here. My first experience with these guys - sounds like he thinks the balance guy is mean and hates him. Very 12yo old.
Very interesting and honest show. Balance team speaks mostly about the Goldilocks zone and you rightly point out this is a single kpi
It’s hard to justify this slate overall
Inconsistency across the board
Thank you Vik and David for another great show
I feel you David, that guard rant was from the heart and a true feeling when someone’s favorite toys gets removed. Felt it many times and will feel it many more.
About things getting obliterated points wise, we come to listen to your insights on the game and if that’s your stance it is. So don’t be afraid to keep saying it. Keep up the good work 👍
If only there was some sort of unit classification that the balance team could use to compare datasheets across factions. Like meganobz and abberants, or castigators and disintegrators. You could even give them cool names like 'heavy support' and 'elite'
I'm confused how you can advocate for over tuned nerfs, that brings so much more feels bad. Bring the bad stuff up.
Thanks for keeping it real
Is there a way I can reach you about doing a brief consult/coaching session and what your rates for that might be? I'm not sure if it's something you normally do because I'm sure you guys have busy lives outside of 40k.
I really enjoyed this conversation between you both very interesting.
As a mid tier competitive Necron player. I think the nerfs and buffs were ok apart from I don’t think canoptek court got hit hard enough they could have raised both wraiths by 30 plus the character and doomstlakers could have gone up 10 along with the other nerfs I think Necrons would still be good but would have been reined in.
Vik mentioning the Sisters win rate and how much good players impact WR.
Say little Timmy plays Sisters, and has his list. In this timeline where Vik plays it. Its 55% and needed a nerf, Timmys win rate is slightly carried by faction. If Vik didnt play it, they'd be 47% and Timmy would be thinking his losses are from a weak faction. Same list.
Surprised by the emphasis on %-changes. Stuff like Striking Scorpions , Banshees or Zephyrim at 12+ points-per-(T3)-wound still seem pricy compared to things like JP Assault Intercessors as 8 points-per-(T4!!)-wound, etc..
I’m coming back to say this was a great episode. David I feel your pain. Vik I’m glad you’re so positive.
Daemons go 3-2 and are thus a 60% Winrate army, lucky they didn't catch nerfs!
I was very surprised to see such huge guard nerfs in comparison to light necron nerfs.
Thank you for going over these changes
@1:07:00 id like to say i totally agree with you - having played marine tank spam for 3 months i was looking forward to the ironstorm/firestorm gladiator lists getting smashed into oblivion and a new marine build/builds coming to the fore with points cuts. But the changes are so minor, i still think thats the way to do marines :-(. But then again, a big shakeup can lead to broken metas, and since we've had it pretty good recently maybe not rocking the boat is fine.
thanks for the entertainment whilst i paint 3x5 assault intercessors with jump packs tho :-)
Nerfing ironstorm doesn't make the other detachments better. It just makes an already struggling faction worse. We got a few positive point changes in other areas but unfortunately nothing enough to shake up the meta outside seeing more vindicators alongside lancers. What changes we need to see are point buffs to units specific to the other detachments to make the choice more interesting that a no brainer "best in slot" detachment pick (looking at you Ironstorm and SW Stormlance).
Dave going in hard on josh here, holy shit
He does have a point tho, if Josh is playing such a strong list, that gets no nerfs on the really broken stuff, but gets nerfs on the stuff that can effect your army, I feel he does have a point
Tbh this is why competitive warhammer is not the best way to play this game.
It is a semi competitive, narrative based game style that really should not be played hypercompetitively.
100% agree with dave on the guard vs necron changes!
Great stuff Gents- I'm with Dave on the Guard nerfs.
40:25 i would say TS army rule Is best in thé game(as TS player) i think any army in thé game would autotake double move any unit in your army each turn. Not even talking about doombolt, noarmor, etc.
I 100% agree with Vik on the knights thing. They need to be a tad weaker as if they arn't they destroy the meta.
I honestly think that your comment here about two codex writers is correct. If you look at all of the codex pairs, they're abysmal imperial codices alongside powerful xenos codices. It seems very likely to me that they have somebody different in charge of each "superfaction".
We'll have to wait for the CSM codex to see who is writing the chaos codices, but my money is on the GSC codex being very powerful and the sororitas one being very weak later in the summer.
Marines are quite strong; I don’t think there’s a conspiracy about it, they’re just hit or miss
This podcast went off the rails a bit, but hoping for more quality content in the future. Keep it up guys!
I think people take issue with it when you say to make somethings unplayable bc a lot of us aren't top tier players that just swap armies when something gets hit. For a lot of us, we're semi-competitive players that want our favorite units in our 1-2 armies to be able to see the table
I much prefer a measured approach that attempts to make broken stuff mid rather than just make it total garbage. I can't buy a new list every 3 months, just try to get it in line with everyone else and leave it at that
Also respect for calling Josh Roberts out, not many people have had balls to call him out, he's obviously a top class player, but how's he got away with this, it's fishy af 😅😂
Wraith combo went up 9%, most factions can play a full game without killing a single wraith unit. I don’t get it.
Bullgryn and Basilisks go up 11-12%, I get it. They were too good at what they did.
Kasrkin go up 20%. This unit comes back on the edges doing secondaries and plinking a few shots in. I don’t think this nerf was needed in the context of the others.
Ogryns(65), ratlings(60), cadians(60) are infantry units priced too high for their vulnerability and low output and can go down 5 to make catachans less of an autoinclude.
I’d also like to see the Cadian command squad(65) and Castellan(45) go down 5 on the character side.
Our compensation buffs were all to vehicles, I am worried we are going to encourage a wave of awful armoured guard armies that spend the game in a traffic jam of our own deployment zone, vulnerable to move blocking, and deployed out in the open (due to lack of space) and so susceptible to turn 1 losses.
In conclusion: we still take basilisks(or earthshaker carriages) and Bullgryn and one Kasrkin unit, and do not take enough russes or hydras/hellhounds to break even. A big nerf to guard.
Guard got gutted. My list went up 175pts. It's dead and done. Time to change factions.
Hi all, When did Liam VSL play Tsons on stream?
Josh list gone up 140 ish points, to be fair. The sidegrade buffs are for other detachments more - I think this balance slate was focused on internal balance and keeping the confidence of average player that the army they would build will disappear immediately. And what they hurt in guard is what isnt interactive. Im 100% you can make a few different great builds, just have to Focus them. Lastly, if Guard indeed were the predators keeping the game in check... They needed to be nerfed to stop obfuscating problems and for both their prey and themselves to be poparły balancable going forward
Typos sponsored by my stupid phone
@38:00 I'm listening to this bs about Sisters as a Blood Angel player with a way worse win-rate, and wondering why my only great 5-man unit was nerfed so hard. They are getting 1 billion miracle dice a turn and so many tools. Lol
Honestly the more I’ve seen of the 40k creation/balance philosophy the less I’m enthused with playing it
GW really needs to hire more people to curate their cash cow product… the speculation of 3-5 person total team with individually written and lightly playtested codices would map perfectly onto how this edition has played out so far
I wouldn't take this podcast as gospel. Light touch changes and mostly balanced across the entire meta is by far the best state the game has ever been in. One of the hosts is just deep throating a salt lick here
@@IscariottActual Bold of you to assume that I can't form opinions by myself and simply copy paste them from people...
Also to act as if a "balanced" meta is the key determinate of a writing/balance teams aptitude is laughably shortsighted logic
We're really just going to ignore probably the single worst initial launch in the games history followed by "patches" based almost entirely on 9 months of community playtesting/data collection as well as ctrl f % increasing whatever reddit/youtube comments whine about the most... and that is only the tip of the iceberg
If you think that this is the best the largest wargaming company in the entire world (that brings in over half a BILLION a year in revenue btw) can do you are missing the forest for the trees
Well reviewed
I'm fairly happy with the Guard pts changes, my list went down 20 pts (I don't run artillery or kasrkin), it's made the internal balance of the index a bit better but Marbo and Ratlings could perhaps lose 5 pts each
Scions were excellent for 55 pts anyway; at 50 pts they must be S-tier
All valid points, however looking from competitive perspective it's a gut shot. Our detachment promotes standing still, which in a game where you need movement to score points is kinda meh. So the only thing that actually worked was indirect. Guard has also problem with movement speed. So nerfing a decent unit with scout limits our ability to reach objectives even harder. So we lost a way to deal respectable damage and our good screening unit. If you run a list without artillery, you basically play guard without detachment. While scion buff will put them higher in viability tier, essentially changes nothing as scions perform a completely different role than kasrkins do. You can't substitute 30 kasrking with 30 scions and achieve same results as scions will not charge objective as they start in deepstrike and if you dont use their deepstrike they are basically overpriced infantry even with their ability. Guards infantry is a cannon fodder, serious damage is done by tanks and artillery.
I don't like playing guard, indirect sucks for my preferred style, but how you look at top crons and top guard, and put them up the same is insane 😂.. can't wait for top tables of meganobz and wraiths smacking each other in mid board for 5 turns.. so fun 😮😂
We don't hate you for suggesting GW completely bins an OP unit (hopefully"we" don't hate you at all😅). But suggesting that they bin an ARMY, that might be someone's only collection is not a cool take.
I lost my salt…can I get some of yours?
yall i think vik's mic is echoing or his audio is getting picked up by dave's mic
i know recording over zoom or skype or whatever is hard but for me it makes this a lot more stressful to listen to
just letting you know to hopefully drive improvement
I consider it the ultimate 40k honour to take a supposedly underpowered faction and get them nerfed. Kudos David!
ruclips.net/user/shortsClaibnBxTtc?si=YGx9wm-iR0E-OObd
I also think that when we take off our Warhammer heads for a second and think about it from a business perspective rules changes and adjustments is probably a KPI so they will have a metric or target to only make a % of changes per quarter etc...
Yeah there's surely some restrictions on how much they can change. Printing expensive books that end up significantly different to the current actual rules within a few months has been complained about in the past so they are probably trying to avoid that now
I think the balance team have been really lazy when it comes to internal balancing factions. They seem to spend a good amount of time on some factions (Aeldari etc). Then completely ignore other ones in such a lazy way. For example Custodes FW has been completely unplayable since the beginning other than Caladius tanks, yet again and again they haven't touched the points to give us more options. Plus FW is literally half our army options too... 😅
David saying its a reality, that josh nerfs whoever has close games into him is inflammatory and uncalled for.
He wasn't saying it literally that josh is telling them to nerf armies he plays vs. He said that the way GW is handling it makes it seem that way. Big diff.
@@TheDanthemanJones "i am telling it like it is. people are jokingly saying josh will nerf your army if its close, josh is playing wraiths, wraiths havent been nerfed yet. Thats actually reality. it doesnt feel great." 1:10:00 onwards
It's not uncalled for at all. Incredibly accurate in reality.
@@TheXDesertfisch you're still not getting it he is saying the balance changes GW have made give that optic. He isn't accusing Josh of influencing balance for his own gain.
I mean, Daemons didn't get touched despite needing it and we know Josh had a melt down vs the Maltese daemons player at Leicester.
David you consider Rough Riders complete trash?
Great review fellas. You are correct. If a unit is clearly broken and points changes are the only tools to control them then they need to be pointed out of existence. With the three month rota they can be rehabilitated with rules changes twice a year if required. It is better for the game to have units that are unused, than units that are dominant, in every army and make the game boring.
Even with CSM which as you said is a great change, You can see that they don't want to flip-flop and admit mistakes. They didn't undo any of the point changes they made the previous time, instead they targeted all new units. They thus didn't admit that their point changes were bad or overdone. Now legionaries are awesome which is cool, but chosen are overcosted by a little bit. It was pretty undeniable They messed up with CSM considering by the win rate They were more unbalanced after the change than before😂 But it's nice to see they didn't let them languish That is a good direction for the game.
Some bad opinions here though by you guys, your facts are good but your opinions are pretty bad. They're clearly the opinions of some people who play the game too much for their own good and think the game should be balanced around how they play it instead of the other 99% of people, or even the other 80% of competitive players. Nerf things into the ground so there's a constant roller coaster of what's good? Nobody likes that who doesn't constantly switch between armies and play so many games they get bored quickly. Completely nerf all the indirect in guard? That's literally our detachment and One of the defining and stand out aspects of playing guard as a faction. It's just speaks to the homogenization these players who play constantly want to see where you have to nerf artillery into the ground instead of dealing with the fact that some armies use it as a defining part of what makes them, them. Guars players like mixed forces, But a guard army that's not supported by strong and deadly backbone of our artillery is just not guard to me. The whole idea is you have to come to us because if you run or hide you'll just get blasted to bits.
Strange that you didn’t do the percentage increase example for Technomancers. That was a 42% increase, or as per your metrics - 840 Points on a 2000 point list. I get it, Wraiths are a sore point, and I agree that they, not the Technomancers should have been the focus - But the trauma seems to override that view?
David understanding of Aeldari is.... insane. Aeldari have many super strong anti match ups. Let alone new codex like Orks(though Old orks where also almost imposible against good player). I see Aeldari being viable in teams where you can doge certain match ups. But wining a single GT is highly unlikely. Unless they get super lucky on match ups.
BTW, Laim had a VERY lucky match ups when he played singles with list made for teams. He doged every single bad match up up till the finale.Something trivial like Chaos Knights wold shred that list.
Well you know, time will tell, but I think these 15+ hyper MSU aeldari lists are going to be quite strong and popular.
@@firesidepodcast9977 Seeing liam vsl smash the apline cup singles with aeldari, i agree - though i have to say any army in the hands of this man seems strong
Not sure where I fall on the eldar changes as a whole but the point drops were pretty insignificant. Pretending like these drops are going to rewrite the whole meta is silly. The only msu units worth taking are the ones everyone are already running and several got a point hike.
Scorpions might see play instead of rangers, guardians still probably won't see much play, banshees still won't see play, storm guardians probably didn't need a change.
Re Guard, you guys often ask 'why the low win rate', now 'why the nerfs'. It's because Guard unlike other armies has baggage, lore, history. We, and GW, all know how a Guard army should look: like a WW2 Soviet charge with tanks, hordes of basic dudes with guns, or like a late war mech company. Bullgryn and kasrkin to support the basic troops, or kasrkin alone in an elite strike force, but to have them together with no basic infantry is not something GW or most Guard players will countenance even if meta, and GW has now stamped on it.
You may say 'But this is competitive!' But Guard is never considered just competitively, it's the primary lore carrier of 40k. If that means it will never be top tier, I suspect many Guard players are fine with that.
Although, Logan Morrow just won the Spring Incursion with a 'classic' Guard list. You guys are such great players, see if you can win with that.
I don't know what David's stance even is, he advocates for just killing off top factions and spends 1.5 hours being visibly upset that HIS faction was the one that is killed off. I appreciate honesty with regards to y'all's opinion about the meta, but as Vik shows, there is a way to be disappointed in a bit more of a controlled fashion.
I hope David is doing ok.
Vik's rather constant dislike of Knights is getting a little stale.
It's a bit odd that he complains about the short times that Knights have been at the top of the meta being a problem when Aeldari were at the top of 10th for over 6mths with over 70% win rates.
When eldar were dumb I complained about them too pretty furiously, you can go back to all the episodes around 10th release, WTC and LGT.
I'm a bit tongue in cheek about the level of my dislike of Knights, sorry if it offended you, but they are, in my eyes, such a silly looking army on the table and such a defensive skew that they cause balance issues in local gaming stores and the lower/mid tables at tournaments when they are anything other than mediocre.
Vik
Gotta love when people end up so far up their own gt asses they can't see the guard changes being super healthy
I would agree with you and changes if we had more than 1 detachment. Right now, even at casual level, if you dont take artillery, you basically play without your detachment rule.
Vik is downplaying Eldar hard in this video. Good on David to call him out.
You cannot really read anything from the excel sheet...
The necron changes or lack thereof is puzzling. The core of that army is untouched it’s very much a not fun list to play against.
People bitch about reinforcements existing but more than anything else it's the fulcrum around which guard is able to play the game and it's a real treat every now and then when you play someone that realizes it mid game and gives you the "oh wow, this wouldn't even be a game without that"
Kasrkin didn't deserve the 20. 10 was warranted, reverse their position with the scions.
Every edition, every meta, there's always something busted that ruins competitive 40k for me. In 9th it was Drukhari, followed by the Tyranids with the character that could fly in, kill whatever it wanted, and fly back out home, without you getting to respond. Now it's 18 wraiths! I hate this stupid build, it's not even a real game into most armies tbh.
The problem is tryhards who actually field that kind of nonsense without having the decency to at least be ashamed of themselves. A while ago, someone won an RTT around my area with 5 C'Tan. The fuck is wrong with these people?
I usually really enjoy your content but the IG nerfs seems to have tilted David the entire episode, especially after the Tsons got brought up around the 1 hour mark. Just digs his heels in on this balance slate being terrible and refusing to listen to anything contrary to the opinions he’s walked in with. I personally can’t think of the last time a Tsons list went top 4 in any GT in singles.
Its laughable that it takes 3 months for changes when modern games get patched every 2-3 weeks and balance changes every 4-6
Games don't have hobby lag and are usually free, past an initial buy-in price. I don't need to spend £500 and 4 months getting a Dota hero together.
Also Warhammer tends to release FAQs to balance certain things within a couple weeks of dataslates, and the quarterly cycle is enough to determine the meta and maneuver it and gives enough time to give actually thought out changes rather than rush nerf or buff things based on feelings.
I think one thing as well is that it can be hard to accurately gather data outside of tournaments. It's not like I post my living room table match results to GW
Wraiths not getting nerfed shows JR's influence on the process...the guy went from middle of pack (of the top ranked) to the best player in the world exploiting the busted build, it is hard to not think that he was the one stopping the nerf from happening
You really think that he has the final say/ only say on the balances? He is a tremendous player and has been for a long time. He isn't just starting to win super majors. There is no way that just because he is doing well with a faction that he refuses to nerf it.
@@Glasshammer_Mattso it’s just a happy coincidence? Guess that’s just lucky for him then yeah. Wraiths (and Necrons in general) have been an issue for a while. Why not nerf them if you aim is game balance?
@@DarkSquiff he did nerf his build by 100+ points which isn't a small amount. The techomancer went up 25 points which is massive. Would you prefer to see the wraiths go up 15 and him 10 just to feel better? He is a single member of the team and he cannot be solely responsible for the changes. He does have to get authority to his changes too
@@harrisonsaynor8568 Hey that isn't true, so please don't post that.
@@Glasshammer_Matt just FYI I've removed that post, and will remove this one (just an FYI)