spideredd
Junior Strategist
Summer Gamer
Posts: 588
|
Post by spideredd on Nov 12, 2017 13:51:01 GMT
PP proposes rules, players playtest those rules and give feedback. Players read over the rules and tighten up the wording. The theory forum plays in the ball pit and overreact to things. That made me chuckle. I think that PP release obviously overpowered rules into CID in week one to see if the community will pick up on it.
|
|
|
Post by beardmonk on Nov 13, 2017 9:21:20 GMT
I think that the Cryx CiD seems to be working fine. Its that changes that were needed/expected As a long term Cryx player we needed to be dialled back in some areas. My issues is the PPs approach to the CiD process itself.
In Mk2 PP were able to make changes across the field on a regular-ish basis without needing to consult the community and in most cases they corrected the majority of issues. They did this only using their internal play testers. So I am struggling to see why, for the changes and/or updates that still need to be made to old models, why PP don’t just go ahead and make the changes. PP shouldn’t needs 4 week of community testing to know how ball busting the GF and Denny1 combo is. We have had over a year and several major tournaments around the world to tell us that. They did it with Khador and Una2. The slow drip-drip-drip of updates to old models seems silly and is having a affect on our metas willingness to play. One example of this is Circle beasts still being are pillow fisted and/or overcosted. We know it’s the case. PP should know it’s the case as Will P is now part of their crew. So just fix it.
I think CiD is useful for testing NEW models for a few weeks and that’s what I thought it was going to be for. While im happier that PP take a more flexible and responsive approach to balance compared to say GW, there is no excuse for us being more than a year into mk3 and many old models still awaiting updates.
|
|
zich
Junior Strategist
Posts: 690
|
Post by zich on Nov 13, 2017 11:15:26 GMT
The scope and frequency of changes is however vastly different from Mk2. And I am happy they are playtesting. It's nice that some very good players are posting reports (I noticed Tim Banky, but there were probably others). PP should probably consult them more often and proactively.
The Fleet changes themselves seem a bit weird at second thought. I think they are missing the correct parts of the puzzle that need adjusting:
The output of the list is not a Revenant issue, it is a Denegrah issue. Aside from Rengrave the output of Revenants is probably okay right now. The issue with the Revenants is that the ways to stop their recursion are not readily available to everyone, so a lot of lists will struggle massively on scenario against them. I like the idea of making the Quatermaster an Officer with SacPawn [Revenant] (or whatever that rule is that allows Grunts in 3" to die for him). Every list could stop the recursion that way, but the player would have to work for it. You could counter it by playing better instead of via list construction.
The Scourge removal and the feat adjustment were spot-on. The Feat and Parasite/Crippling Grasp stacking is an ongoing issue though. If Denny receives further nerfs, she might require buffs in different areas though. It might be for the best to just give her an entirely different (weaker) feat and replace her new spell with something more generally useful (Maybe something defensive or movement-related like Vanish? But not a straight stat shift.).
Not entirely sure how the whole Incorporeal issue is supposed to be handled, or if it should at all. I'd prefer if the themes that lack it got more access to Magical Weapons. The change to the Mistspeaker is a good step in the right direction, though seems a bit round-about to me as a Skorne player.
|
|
|
Post by smoothcriminal on Nov 13, 2017 11:25:28 GMT
Honest question; is the purpose of CID only to gather data from battle reports?This is the only time I've been following the CID process at all, and it seems PP is not discussing the design direction - more like the community has to guess what PP wants, or the answer is more or less "no" without further explanation. This is fine as long as it's the intention, but if so, I have misunderstood the CID completely. I don't mean every brainfart of the community has to be taken seriously, but right now it seems the design team is randomly shooting crap at people and seeing if it sticks (the week one of current cid was a perfect example, Skarre3 heavily overtuned, as well as several units). On the other hand, the only role community seems to be serving is free labor - playtesting team. I'm not negative about it, just trying to identify what CID tries to be. My understanding is that CID is bug finding test for PP. They define what's the flavor and rules of particular models are and community is there to find out if those things work at all and don't break anything. So yes, you are correct, community is a playtesting monkey not involved into development.
|
|
|
Post by Azuresun on Nov 13, 2017 23:13:36 GMT
In Mk2 PP were able to make changes across the field on a regular-ish basis without needing to consult the community and in most cases they corrected the majority of issues. They did this only using their internal play testers. It's the internet, so you'll just have to imagine me staring at you in stark disbelief right now.
|
|