HomeDark Eldar WikiDark Eldar ResourcesNull CityFAQUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Does this make sense?

Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
AuthorMessage
Marrath
Wych
avatar

Posts : 686
Join date : 2014-01-01
Location : A very spiky Webway-Hulk

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Wed Oct 08 2014, 21:51

I think GWs aim is not to make us happy but to make us buy models.
My speculations about some decisions (keep in mind i'm a total noob please):

Ravagers for example have been one of the go-to units or even the go-to unit of our Heavy Support and/or anti tank section if i've read this forum correctly, so maybe most long time players probably have baught their approximate max of ravagers
= Content customers, sitting on their mighty ravagers, not buying new models.

Solution: Nerf Ravager
= Discontent customer, shelves ravager, has to buy new Heavy Support and/or anti tank unit.

It could be that i'm oversimplifying here, but to me it seems that they nerfed/killed the units that most payers probably had enough of already, or couldn't even buy if they wanted (HQs, Haywire Wyches, Ravager) and buffed the ones that collected dust in the shops because of bad rules like Mandrakes and Scourges.

Drastic change might be the key to our pockets here.

And about the Void Raven, i think it's a test.
It's a ridiculously gorgeous model with a hefty price tag on it and, apparently, rather sub-par rules.
So here they can see what really counts for dark eldar players:
The model or the rules.
If it sells bad they can still buff it and nerf everything else in the next codex.

I could also be totally overestimating GWs analysing and long term thinking lol.

_________________
Archon of the Kabal of the Burning Misery
Thanks for making the Djinn Blade great for once Smile
Back to top Go down
Matador09
Slave
avatar

Posts : 6
Join date : 2014-10-08
Location : San Antonio, TX

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Wed Oct 08 2014, 22:24

Marrath, you've taken the words out of my mouth. I fully believe this codex rewrite began with a sales primer. "Ravagers, Hellions, Wyches and Beasts are in low stock with flat sales. Mandrakes, Courts, Taloi, Grots and Scourges are in high stock with flat sales. Let's sell more of the latter! Make it work team!" So instead of only strongly buffing those units--the way in which we received our new craftworld overlords, they nerfed the popular units and slightly buffed the unpopular. So instead of getting a great codex, we got a mediocre one with a clear motive.

At the end of the day, they do understand market saturation, even at a rudimentary level. We've all bought all the Ravagers we're going to buy. We are no longer spending money. So GW needed to make the new hotness something we don't already own in spades. So now we get to drag out our wallets and buy Scourges or Grots or shudder Mandrakes...what have you. They get money from us they wouldn't have gotten otherwise.
Back to top Go down
Expletive Deleted
Wych
avatar

Posts : 581
Join date : 2013-07-31

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Wed Oct 08 2014, 23:04

The book actually had the opposite effect on me. It prevented me from buying the only model I was even interested in with this release. I've almost all the scourges I need already because they happen to be beautiful and cheap. I'm not going to go buy more mandrakes, taloi, court models, or grotesques. 40k is all about shooting. In the 2-3 turns it took my grotesques/llhameans/taloi to get into assault, my scourges and venoms have actually been doing something.

_________________
"Excess, yeah that's what we do best."
Back to top Go down
Spiney Norman
Hellion
avatar

Posts : 57
Join date : 2011-08-09

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Wed Oct 08 2014, 23:22

@sweetbacon wrote:
This discussion also got me thinking about the seeming randomness of how they are updating these codexes.  Ravagers get worse but more expensive?  Scourges and Grots get better but stay the same price or see a marked decrease.  Conceding the fact that GW doesn't care about balance or play testing, do they truly not recognize that models that are worse on the table top won't sell as much as those that are good?  At the same time, making models that were selling fine worse also hurts their bottom line.   I would like to believe that GW is a company full of rational actors who are driven by normal market forces, but purposely making one's own products less desirable to the consumer seems so odd to me that I feel like I'm taking crazy pills when I try to suss out the reasons for why they do what they do.

To be completely fair comparisons to the previous codex aren't really valid, there have been two new editions of the game since the 5th ed codex was released, the game has changed a lot since then, the question cannot be whether the Ravager is better or worse than it was in the last book, but whether its points cost reflects how good it is in the current edition.

Bear in mind that back in 5th (when the previous Ravager was designed) jink was not even a thing, compared to a 5th ed Ravager in 5th ed the current version is better.
Back to top Go down
Count Adhemar
Dark Lord of Granbretan
avatar

Posts : 7216
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : London

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 00:20

@Spiney Norman wrote:
Bear in mind that back in 5th (when the previous Ravager was designed) jink was not even a thing, compared to a 5th ed Ravager in 5th ed the current version is better.

Not sure how you reach that conclusion. In a game where Jink did not exist, a Ravager with 3 Dark Lances that could always fire at full effect, and a 5++ save from Flickerfields is comparatively much better than the current version that cannot have an invulnerable save at all, can only fire 2 of its weapons at full effect, loses almost all firepower if it Jinks and costs more points.

_________________

You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting. In what world could you possibly beat me?
Back to top Go down
HERO
Wych
avatar

Posts : 783
Join date : 2012-04-13

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 00:22

@The_Burning_Eye wrote:
Here's a theory - maybe they've tried with this codex to address the spam element that we tended to see with many (admittedly not all) DE lists. the fluff is that Kabalite Wrriors form the core of a DE force, but we were seeing lists with Hellions and Wracks as troops instead, so remove the options for them to be troops. Similarly, troops selections full of wyches with haywire grenades - this doesn't fit the fluff so take away that option for them.

Of course this theory falls flat when you look at venoms and the fact we can now take 14 in one single detachment.

Yeah, definitely not.

If their attempt was to fix spam then they failed epically, worthy for the annals of the Jedi Order.
Back to top Go down
http://lkhero.blogspot.com/
Expletive Deleted
Wych
avatar

Posts : 581
Join date : 2013-07-31

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 00:39

@HERO wrote:
@The_Burning_Eye wrote:
Here's a theory - maybe they've tried with this codex to address the spam element that we tended to see with many (admittedly not all) DE lists. the fluff is that Kabalite Wrriors form the core of a DE force, but we were seeing lists with Hellions and Wracks as troops instead, so remove the options for them to be troops. Similarly, troops selections full of wyches with haywire grenades - this doesn't fit the fluff so take away that option for them.

Of course this theory falls flat when you look at venoms and the fact we can now take 14 in one single detachment.

Yeah, definitely not.

If their attempt was to fix spam then they failed epically, worthy for the annals of the Jedi Order.

Five warriors on venoms with blasters comes in around 720 points. That's pretty solid. And I have a whole half an army left to build!

_________________
"Excess, yeah that's what we do best."
Back to top Go down
The PayneTrayn
Hellion
avatar

Posts : 71
Join date : 2014-07-20

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 00:41

@Expletive Deleted wrote:
The book actually had the opposite effect on me. It prevented me from buying the only model I was even interested in with this release. I've almost all the scourges I need already because they happen to be beautiful and cheap. I'm not going to go buy more mandrakes, taloi, court models, or grotesques. 40k is all about shooting. In the 2-3 turns it took my grotesques/llhameans/taloi to get into assault, my scourges and venoms have actually been doing something.

I feel pretty much the same way. Thought the Voidraven looked fantastic...but I don't want to drop the money on something I can't use (looks my ravager is becoming a fancy raider). Scourges I was planning on making via a beautiful conversion I saw. I plan on doing a lot of kitbashing once I get home...
Back to top Go down
Mandor
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 176
Join date : 2011-12-14
Location : The Netherlands

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 09:09

@The PayneTrayn wrote:
@Expletive Deleted wrote:
The book actually had the opposite effect on me. It prevented me from buying the only model I was even interested in with this release. I've almost all the scourges I need already because they happen to be beautiful and cheap. I'm not going to go buy more mandrakes, taloi, court models, or grotesques. 40k is all about shooting. In the 2-3 turns it took my grotesques/llhameans/taloi to get into assault, my scourges and venoms have actually been doing something.

I feel pretty much the same way. Thought the Voidraven looked fantastic...but I don't want to drop the money on something I can't use (looks my ravager is becoming a fancy raider). Scourges I was planning on making via a beautiful conversion I saw. I plan on doing a lot of kitbashing once I get home...
Why buy anything from GW when their last three codex releases have been complete failures? Plenty of other gaming companies are arising, with better systems, better support, better marketing, better customer service (though I'm not complaining about GW's) and developers who actually listen to their player base. 40k is an awesome universe and I will always love my Dark Eldar models, but I feel GW is dropping the ball on it.
Back to top Go down
Klaivex Charondyr
Wych
avatar

Posts : 918
Join date : 2014-09-08

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 09:58

Quote :
I think GWs aim is not to make us happy but to make us buy models.

I only buy models if Im happy Wink
Back to top Go down
sweetbacon
Sybarite


Posts : 369
Join date : 2014-02-09

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 10:39

Marrath Schlagschatten wrote:
I think GWs aim is not to make us happy but to make us buy models.
My speculations about some decisions (keep in mind i'm a total noob please):

Ravagers for example have been one of the go-to units or even the go-to unit of our Heavy Support and/or anti tank section if i've read this forum correctly, so maybe most long time players probably have baught their approximate max of ravagers
= Content customers, sitting on their mighty ravagers, not buying new models.

Solution: Nerf Ravager
= Discontent customer, shelves ravager, has to buy new Heavy Support and/or anti tank unit.

It could be that i'm oversimplifying here, but to me it seems that they nerfed/killed the units that most payers probably had enough of already, or couldn't even buy if they wanted (HQs, Haywire Wyches, Ravager) and buffed the ones that collected dust in the shops because of bad rules like Mandrakes and Scourges.

Drastic change might be the key to our pockets here.

And about the Void Raven, i think it's a test.
It's a ridiculously gorgeous model with a hefty price tag on it and, apparently, rather sub-par rules.
So here they can see what really counts for dark eldar players:
The model or the rules.
If it sells bad they can still buff it and nerf everything else in the next codex.

I could also be totally overestimating GWs analysing and long term thinking lol.

I totally agree.  I think that the sales team dictates what the design team does and not the other way around.  Which is infuriating because even though most DE players may not be looking to buy more Ravagers or Wyches, if they had just made Scourges and Taloi, etc, better, we would still buy them just to have new and different ways to play our army.  It is the cynical and calculated nature of the intent behind the nerfs that is most galling.
Back to top Go down
The_Burning_Eye
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2501
Join date : 2012-01-16
Location : Rutland - UK

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 10:50

I really think this is being overstated - under the old codex there's no way in gaming terms you'd take scourges instead of ravagers.

Now, everything is much more of a level playing field, i can take 5 scourges with haywire blasters for 120 that has a decent chance of wrecking your average vehicle in 1 turn, or for a similar amount of points i can take a ravager, that has a lower chance of wrecking that vehicle, but might blow it up and is more survivable in return.

Similarly how many people took dissie ravagers last book? I didn't see them in many lists, but now they're cheaper than the lance version (and can stay out of range of return fire from things like grav centurions) and I'm hearing people considering them because AT is more viable elsewhere.

_________________
Tan? You're joking, I'm a gamer, you're lucky I'm wearing deodorant!

My Blog - The Burning Eye Blog (check it out - comments always welcome)

My Project Log - Visions of the Burning Eye

My Gaming Log - Chronicles of the Burning Eye

My Club - MAD Wargaming

My Fluff - Kabal of the Burning Eye, Cult of the Shadowed Blade and Coven of Distorted Perfection
Back to top Go down
http://theburningeye.blogspot.com
Mandor
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 176
Join date : 2011-12-14
Location : The Netherlands

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 10:59

@The_Burning_Eye wrote:
I really think this is being overstated - under the old codex there's no way in gaming terms you'd take scourges instead of ravagers.

Now, everything is much more of a level playing field, i can take 5 scourges with haywire blasters for 120 that has a decent chance of wrecking your average vehicle in 1 turn, or for a similar amount of points i can take a ravager, that has a lower chance of wrecking that vehicle, but might blow it up and is more survivable in return.

Similarly how many people took dissie ravagers last book? I didn't see them in many lists, but now they're cheaper than the lance version (and can stay out of range of return fire from things like grav centurions) and I'm hearing people considering them because AT is more viable elsewhere.

True. So they made Scourges a worthwhile investment instead of a useless filler in the codex (though a lot of units got this treatment the other way around). So why nerf the Ravager then? Dark Eldar are supposed to be the fastest army in 40k. Glass cannon and all. The Ravager wasn't a spectacular vehicle killer in 5th, got worse at killing (though more survivable) in 6th, got even worse at killing (though more survivable) in 7th and now with the new codex, GW decided to step it up and made it worse than ever.

So instead of focusing on the Dark Eldar strengths and the army's defining traits, they consistently nerfed the Ravager. The same goes for the rest of the army, in general.
Back to top Go down
Ichi Aenis
Slave
avatar

Posts : 7
Join date : 2014-10-09
Location : Notts, UK

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 12:38

To be honest (I'm probably a minority) I always saw the merit in taking Scourges. Sure they could have been better...& they were clearly a "Dark Eldar version of a Swooping Hawk".

Now they've upped the "2 out of 5 models can upgrade to special weapons" to "4 of 5", the fact they still have arguably the most reliable armour in the army added to the jump troop factor, I always figured they had a role to play in most of my builds.
Back to top Go down
wanderingblade
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 225
Join date : 2013-01-15

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 12:45

I tend to find that any theory on GW's design strategy tends to bump into some major holes sooner or later.

If they were using this book to prevent spam armies, they wouldn't have given us only 1 worthwhile troop choice and 6 fast attack slots. If they want to rebalance the book to encourage people to take less used options, then Razorwings should be worse than Voidravens, Grotesques shouldn't have got better, Chronoi would have got more of a bump, and so on. If it's just to pimp new models, troop choice Wracks and stronger Voidravens.

Which is not to say the theories are neccessarily wrong, but rather, they must be subordinate to the most logically strong theory of all which is -

GW's relevant resources are not fit for purpose.

Maybe the staff are incompetent, maybe there's too few of them, maybe they're being poorly managed - I don't know what, but it seems incredibly likely that whatever brief GW's design studio et al have, they simply are not able to execute it properly.

And once you've reached that conclusion, trying to reach any other conclusions about what they're doing becomes tricksy.
Back to top Go down
The_Burning_Eye
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2501
Join date : 2012-01-16
Location : Rutland - UK

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 13:30

Or that the 'team' approach to writing codices succeeds in terms of bringing the codices to a general level, but muddles up some of the unit thinking - first example off the top of my head is the mob rule in the ork codex. Sure, works fine on big units where a couple of casualties are just chaff. Not so much when you've got a mob on a trukk and in order to pass a morale check you kill of 30% of the unit!

_________________
Tan? You're joking, I'm a gamer, you're lucky I'm wearing deodorant!

My Blog - The Burning Eye Blog (check it out - comments always welcome)

My Project Log - Visions of the Burning Eye

My Gaming Log - Chronicles of the Burning Eye

My Club - MAD Wargaming

My Fluff - Kabal of the Burning Eye, Cult of the Shadowed Blade and Coven of Distorted Perfection
Back to top Go down
http://theburningeye.blogspot.com
Klaivex Charondyr
Wych
avatar

Posts : 918
Join date : 2014-09-08

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 13:47

I dont believe in a "general level".
Wanna bet that the Blood Angels will have a Lord of War and dedicated Anti Air (without having to take fliers)? And also that they will keep rules which made up their flavor?
Back to top Go down
The_Burning_Eye
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2501
Join date : 2012-01-16
Location : Rutland - UK

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 14:20

I'm 100% expecting Blood Angels to have a Lord of War. As for dedicated anti air, I'm not so sure, they might get the stalker/hunter but they're very meh, lack of interceptor on it really hurts.

They might keep their flavour yes, but I also fully expect that they'll drag their special rules into line with the rule book. As a Blood Angels player I'm very interested to see what they do with them, but I'm not expecting a dex that makes everyone collect Blood Angels again.

To my mind, Eldar and Tau stand out above the majority of the codexes, with Knights off to one side as weird. All the others have their own quirks, but none really stand out as better than the rest. SM tend to outperform a lot of armies but that's mainly because they're not bad in any area (and they still have some bad units - terminators are horrendously overpriced in terms of both resilience and damage output, assault marines are poor at the moment but then isn't almost all assault)

_________________
Tan? You're joking, I'm a gamer, you're lucky I'm wearing deodorant!

My Blog - The Burning Eye Blog (check it out - comments always welcome)

My Project Log - Visions of the Burning Eye

My Gaming Log - Chronicles of the Burning Eye

My Club - MAD Wargaming

My Fluff - Kabal of the Burning Eye, Cult of the Shadowed Blade and Coven of Distorted Perfection
Back to top Go down
http://theburningeye.blogspot.com
Klaivex Charondyr
Wych
avatar

Posts : 918
Join date : 2014-09-08

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 14:25

Quote :
I'm 100% expecting Blood Angels to have a Lord of War. As for dedicated anti air, I'm not so sure, they might get the stalker/hunter but they're very meh, lack of interceptor on it really hurts.

Which does not matter. At least they have a possibility to get AA without having to take a Flyer (which also every codex has).
Also if they get a LoW (like every other 7th codex), we are not "on a general level" but beneath it.
Back to top Go down
The_Burning_Eye
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2501
Join date : 2012-01-16
Location : Rutland - UK

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 14:39

@Klaivex Charondyr wrote:
Quote :
I'm 100% expecting Blood Angels to have a Lord of War. As for dedicated anti air, I'm not so sure, they might get the stalker/hunter but they're very meh, lack of interceptor on it really hurts.

Which does not matter. At least they have a possibility to get AA without having to take a Flyer (which also every codex has).
Also if they get a LoW (like every other 7th codex), we are not "on a general level" but beneath it.

Every codex can take AA without having a flyer. They're called quad guns and icarus lascannons. I've seen all the arguments that they're 'not very dark eldar' but just to ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist is ridiculous. If you really want to justify it, it's simple. It's not my quad gun, it's yours, I just sent some guys ahead and they killed the squad manning it, so now I'm using it instead of you.

_________________
Tan? You're joking, I'm a gamer, you're lucky I'm wearing deodorant!

My Blog - The Burning Eye Blog (check it out - comments always welcome)

My Project Log - Visions of the Burning Eye

My Gaming Log - Chronicles of the Burning Eye

My Club - MAD Wargaming

My Fluff - Kabal of the Burning Eye, Cult of the Shadowed Blade and Coven of Distorted Perfection
Back to top Go down
http://theburningeye.blogspot.com
Count Adhemar
Dark Lord of Granbretan
avatar

Posts : 7216
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : London

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 14:50

Can I make my opponent pay the points for it too? Laughing

_________________

You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting. In what world could you possibly beat me?
Back to top Go down
Mandor
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 176
Join date : 2011-12-14
Location : The Netherlands

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 14:55

And could that quadgun or icarus lascannon shoot down two or three scythes a turn, pretty please?
Back to top Go down
The_Burning_Eye
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2501
Join date : 2012-01-16
Location : Rutland - UK

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 15:00

@Count Adhemar wrote:
Can I make my opponent pay the points for it too? Laughing

You could always ask them...

Or you could be even sneakier, and if they bring one, deep strike your wwp units next to it, shoot the unit off it and then really do use their gun against them!

_________________
Tan? You're joking, I'm a gamer, you're lucky I'm wearing deodorant!

My Blog - The Burning Eye Blog (check it out - comments always welcome)

My Project Log - Visions of the Burning Eye

My Gaming Log - Chronicles of the Burning Eye

My Club - MAD Wargaming

My Fluff - Kabal of the Burning Eye, Cult of the Shadowed Blade and Coven of Distorted Perfection
Back to top Go down
http://theburningeye.blogspot.com
Klaivex Charondyr
Wych
avatar

Posts : 918
Join date : 2014-09-08

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 15:11

Quote :
Every codex can take AA without having a flyer. They're called quad guns and icarus lascannons. I've seen all the arguments that they're 'not very dark eldar' but just to ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist is ridiculous. If you really want to justify it, it's simple. It's not my quad gun, it's yours, I just sent some guys ahead and they killed the squad manning it, so now I'm using it instead of you.

Which is not the same as having Hydras, Hunter/Stalker, Soulgrinder with AA, Havocs with AA Missiles, Warwalker with AA Missiles, Riptides, Traktor Kannons,...

EVERY Codex got either a complete new unit as dedicated ground AA or an existing unit repurposed or upgradeable to mount AA. In ADDITION to the Aegis. Except for Sisters, Grey Knights and us.
And im sure the next (non rushed, with a bigger release window and more models) codices will all see dedicated ground AA and a LoW.
Back to top Go down
The_Burning_Eye
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2501
Join date : 2012-01-16
Location : Rutland - UK

PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   Thu Oct 09 2014, 15:24

quite frankly I'd rather not have a model than have the stalker without interceptor. Even more though, I'd have liked anti air missile options on the razorwing, instead of three different missiles that all do almost exactly the same thing. (And incidentally, the stalker is in fact almost exactly the same as having a quad gun)

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree though, i don't see it as a failing of our codex to not have AA outside of fortifications and you clearly do.

_________________
Tan? You're joking, I'm a gamer, you're lucky I'm wearing deodorant!

My Blog - The Burning Eye Blog (check it out - comments always welcome)

My Project Log - Visions of the Burning Eye

My Gaming Log - Chronicles of the Burning Eye

My Club - MAD Wargaming

My Fluff - Kabal of the Burning Eye, Cult of the Shadowed Blade and Coven of Distorted Perfection
Back to top Go down
http://theburningeye.blogspot.com
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Does this make sense?   

Back to top Go down
 
Does this make sense?
Back to top 
Page 2 of 3Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
THE DARK CITY :: 

GENERAL DRUKHARI DISCUSSION

 :: Drukhari Discussion
-
Jump to: