Thanks....what you are saying does make a lot of sense. I am glad I am not the only one who thought about it.
...I don’t believe it has a thing to do with the material.So no, I don't tend to buy the argument that GW buffs or nerfs things according to models they want to sell.
Groovy. Amusing even. But seriously, that is in their fluff??Aether wave broadcast company. AWBC.
But 2.0 also massively buffed Slaan by making them all but essential to power-lists with summoning, and also did likewise for Astrolith Bearers, both of which are finecast. Two of our best ranged options are Salamanders and Razordons, both of which are ancient Finecast. One of the newest kits is the Carnosaur/Troglodon, neither of which are particularly meta and which tend to pale in comparison to the Bastiladon.
So no, I don't tend to buy the argument that GW buffs or nerfs things according to models they want to sell. Summoning mechanics for all armies encourage you to buy more things, yet GW did not add in summoning mechanics for all armies, even when it would make thematic sense (Kharadron Overlords for example).
Now, not all of this will be true, but GW is a company that makes money on selling models. Don't fool yourself by believing that they don't have always an eye on how the rules of the play impact on the sales.
Not saying you are wrong...
...but how would that make thematic sense for the SkyDwarfs? Do they have radios?!?
Things have changed greatly for GW since Kevin Roundtree took over, there's no doubt about that. And GW certainly understands that rules play a larger role in purchasing than they once did (guess all those boxes of unsold Pyrovores finally tipped them off). That being said, do I believe this was a grand conspiracy to sell particular models then nerf them once the surplus stock had been sold? Not particularly, no. I honestly don't think GW is that sophisticated. After so many years of seeing the rules department not understand their own game, I really don't see them knowing what makes a unit too good. These are the same people who produced the Gorkanaut and thought it was an awesomely powerful unit.
Thanks.
It has to do with production runs and excess quantities that have not sold as fast as projected...
rules are written years in advance of actual release dates. They're already playtesting GHB2019 and have been for some time.
With AoS, they adjust things on the fly more often than not.
If they were really testing rules for a year before releasing them, i don't see the reason for such a massive FAQ release after less then one month after 2nd edition.
[
Playtesting - like testing in general - is a specific skill of its own. I am happy that they have a community of playtesters but it is hard for people untrained in the testing process to even understand how much they are missing and why.
Computer games have loads of problems with bugs on release after much more testing than GW games get by people supposedly trained as professional testers. Expecting AoS to not have bugs is setting your level of expectation far too high.
disclaimer: I make my living out of knowing how to test stuff and training others to know how to test stuff.
At least not in this edition. Frostlord on Stonehorn and Rogue Idol are examples from AoS1 though.after reading all the armies nerfs buffs and suck Joshua seraphons copped a good hit compared to others, and there is no other unit in the game that got slapped as hard as Kroak
At least not in this edition. Frostlord on Stonehorn and Rogue Idol are examples from AoS1 though.
It's still a rather long list for bugs on release. Not to mention a number of em are so Obvious they should've seen em coming miles away. And quite a lot of em are fairly massive overhauls as well. That say Kroak's CD got a numbers tweak isn't too extra-ordinary. But they didn't just tweak the numbers, they changed nearly every number the spell has, added in several new limitations & changed it purpose (from proper AoE to a "minor" version of his meteors). That's rather an extreme change based on a "minor" bug that was overlooked.[
Playtesting - like testing in general - is a specific skill of its own. I am happy that they have a community of playtesters but it is hard for people untrained in the testing process to even understand how much they are missing and why.
Computer games have loads of problems with bugs on release after much more testing than GW games get by people supposedly trained as professional testers. Expecting AoS to not have bugs is setting your level of expectation far too high.
disclaimer: I make my living out of knowing how to test stuff and training others to know how to test stuff.
It's still a rather long list for bugs on release. Not to mention a number of em are so Obvious they should've seen em coming miles away. And quite a lot of em are fairly massive overhauls as well. That say Kroak's CD got a numbers tweak isn't too extra-ordinary. But they didn't just tweak the numbers, they changed nearly every number the spell has, added in several new limitations & changed it purpose (from proper AoE to a "minor" version of his meteors). That's rather an extreme change based on a "minor" bug that was overlooked.
Feels far more like bad PO-ship and such than a lack of testing.
It makes me really curious as to how they design and test rules. It almost feels as if each rule is made up by 1 guy and noone else even looks at it at times.Plus, if you insert in the same page in the General handbook that sylvaneth units summoned in the hero phase cannot move, and unit summoned by the EotG don't have such a limitation... and then you FAQ it... well, you are many things but "professional" is not one of them.
Uhh... it seems you missed the nerf then. Stoneskin doesn't halve the wounds anymore, since the GHB2017...stoneskin which halves all damage including mortal wounds