What powerlevel should the books rally around? (and which should be powered up/down?)

[Wesser]

Yes I see the same tendencies as you do Phazael. Not ignorant of anything you're saying. All though it ain't over till the fat lady sings.
- VC losing Loremaster Generals. Well they should never had have them - the fact that there was inflation with these kind of things in 7th Ed doesn't make it necessarily wrong. A fairly costed access to 'Loremaster' (i.e. 50pts) is something that Tzeentch Daemons ought to have even if it made them the only non-SC in the entire game to have that. I know saying something like that is asking for trouble of this Forum, but a Designer with even the slightest sense of background and integrity wouldn't compromise with that.

I don't think there's necessarily a new policy of actually listenning to whining - and I certainly hope there isn't because that'd be a road to hell paved with the best of intentions. Like people complaining about Horrors in 8th Edition - mmyeah like that's worth even a serious thought ('It isn't really good but it's different so let's start the whinefest!'). I am probably slightly biased, but with Daemons in particular (as I've pointed out up-thread) all though the 'whining' has historically been somewhat warranted it seems when the crowd gets going they sort of miss the trees for the forrest. Like Instability isn't the problem - 25pts Loremasters are... Bloodletters isn't the problem - the Despair Icon is.. That sort of thing.

VC Regen Banner got removed. Then again, almost everyone expected a significant point-increase to Grave Guard (more or less joint with the removal of the Regen flag) and look what we got: You could almost argue they got cheaper. And it's not like VC was 'nerfed' (as a whole) either. Ghouls got some wierd kneejerk hike but that's the only instance I can really think of in this edition, so far.

Empire's automatic Dispel Dice from last edition isn't really an example - that mechanic was intrinsically tighed to the previous Magic Phase and those Priests 'slipped through the net' merely on account of not being proper wizards. And compared to stuff like the new Detachment rules (and other things) I'd venture to say that Army has certainly been 'buffed' as a whole.

But again, I see where you're coming from. Daemons can get anything from the 'best case scenario' (fixed internal balance, surgical fixes of OP details) to the 'sum of all fears' (making them a bland, generally overcosted 'elite undead' army with a bunch of fluff that doesn't translate onto the tabletop). We can only wait and see.

Well, then one could argue that Daemonic Instability is one of the things that slipped through the cracks too. Just replace it with Unstable and I wont grumble about them. Its not like it huge. Daemons dont tend to lsoe combat by a lot and losing the general dont make them crumble either. My problem with Daemons is that they are oddball stuff as an army. By their very nature there doesnt have to be fixed niche or goal with them as an army, and the fact that its more or less 4 different types of army meshed into one makes very hard to balance internally and externally.

My guess is that DoC will stay unbalanced. And be either at the top or bottom forever

[The bearded one]

Yes I see the same tendencies as you do Phazael. Not ignorant of anything you're saying. All though it ain't over till the fat lady sings.
- VC losing Loremaster Generals. Well they should never had have them - the fact that there was inflation with these kind of things in 7th Ed doesn't make it necessarily wrong. A fairly costed access to 'Loremaster' (i.e. 50pts) is something that Tzeentch Daemons ought to have even if it made them the only non-SC in the entire game to have that. I know saying something like that is asking for trouble of this Forum, but a Designer with even the slightest sense of background and integrity wouldn't compromise with that.

I think you can invent fluffjustifications for a lot of wizards to have acces to loremaster, if a tzeentch herald "ought" to have it for 'background integrity'. A tzeentch herald is similar to a horror. They're Tzeentch's daemonic minions which he creates by using magic. If he requires a more powerful servant than horrors, or needs one to lead horrors, he will create a herald; a more stable horror with greater power who can direct other horrors without needing guidance of a lord of change. I don't think they ought to have loremaster at all (+1 or +2 spells at the most), because they're mostly temporary minions created on an ad hoc basis, instead of permanent creatures with that much of a mind of their own who learn magic throughout centuries.

Lords of change, on the other hand, yeah, I think they are justified in loremaster, at least for the lore of tzeentch. They're greater daemons with a focus on spellcasting after all, and they are permanent (if they don't get obliterated in the realm of chaos anyway) and can learn.

Other wizards you could justify loremaster for on basis of background if heralds of tzeentch got it, would be guys like high elf archmages (studying for centuries to millenia in the centres of magical learning on Ulthuan), high liche priests with the lore of nehekhara (they invented that damn lore.. Any 5th generation priest should know it by heart, and generations close to that easily as well), slann (come on.. they're slann! Down to the very youngest of them they were on the planet before the realm of chaos was even fully formed and before the polar gates fell!), vampire lords who focus on the study of necromancy or other magic, such as the Necrarchs, Tzeentch wizards of chaos (the mortal ones) andsoforth.

[The Low King]

So, you would make them cost one less than a Lead Beltcher? Yeah, going to have to call shennanigans on that one. For one more point the Lead Beltcher has:

More Range, but less BS- Wash
One more Attack and a stomp for one less S- Advantage Beltcher
Impact Hits on the charge- Advantage Beltcher
Immune to Stomps- Adv Beltcher
Does not Skirmish- Major Adv Flamer
Armor Piercing Shots- Adv Beltcher
No Flaming Attacks- Wash, any peg mounted hero with the Dragon Helm owns flamers
One more WS- Adv Beltcher
No Ward, but one more wound- Wash
No ITP- Mostly Adv Flamer
Is in the Special Slot- Major Adv Beltcher

Lead Beltchers sure would get a lot for that one point if flamers went up to 42 in cost!

Seriously, in the age of the deathstar (and Dreaded 13th), flamers are not really a problem anymore. Most people who take them now do it to bunker a Tzeench herald without having to buy Horrors.

You forget something key there (aswell as other things), one is the only shooting unit in an army that is a combat beast, the other is in an army where a you can field a gunline if you want.

[Phazael]

Well, if you look at the Empire book as an example, a couple of things stand out:

Extra Dispell dice got yanked, but no one is really surprised by that. Flaggellents got pulled from being a core option is another major change to a unit that people complained about. The mass unbreakable tactic also got completely quashed, outside of the now much more reasonable Steam Tank. Van Hels also became a mandatory swap, vastly curtailing its use in certain ways. Mortars took it to the face with the nerf bat, as well. If you had asked west coast players, specifically the more casual ones, for a list of things that irritated them about Empire, the new book pretty much abolished all of them. The Vampire book also has a ton of things pulled from the prior one, many of which could have simply been rebalanced, that were a common source of internet rage for the bulk of players, such as the Regen Banner, Crown, and so on.

While it seems silly to think GW would listen to the whiners, my personal experience in seeing how 40k has been handled tells me otherwise. While I think the newer books (aside from the way too weak TK and slightly under par Orc book) are on the right track, they have also been grabbing the low handing fruit. The issues with Empire, VC, and Ogres were relatively simple adjustments to make, mostly some cost changes and force org moves combined with some minor rules changes. Several armies remaining will be easily handled in this way, like Warriors, Dwarves, and Brettonians, as examples. Daemons are going to be considerably more difficult to balance, because there is so much off base perception of the army and its hard to take the list and have it make for an interesting army under the 8th mechanics, without either winding up with something massively bland and week (pre Storm of Chaos Daemons) or something so broken that it busts the game in the other direction (Storm of Chaos and initial 7th edition era). All of the elven armies are going to have similar issues, particularly the Dark Elves who's problems go beyond pulling a few items and recosting things, but are rather systemic and cannot easily be fixed without rendering the army unplayable, like Gav Thorpes prior disaster (still the only book so bad that GW actually issued a public correction on it).

[Phazael]

You forget something key there (aswell as other things), one is the only shooting unit in an army that is a combat beast, the other is in an army where a you can field a gunline if you want.

By that logic, things like Mournfang Cavalry should cost way more because they add a high armor save cavalry unit to armies that do not otherwise get it. Or one of a bunch of other examples in the game where one unit is the only thing its book that performs a certain task. Not really a good basis for costing units. And really, Daemons are not even in the top 5 for close combat armies. Night Goblins and Skaven Slaves win on a point for point basis. Marauders, Ogre Bulls, Flaggelents, and Witch Elves obliterate them in point efficiency. Saurus, Chaos Warriors, and just about all elite HE infantry pretty much equal or best any Daemon unit out there in close combat. They don't even have the best combat lord choices anymore; you get so much more for your points with an Ogre Tyrant, Vampire Lord, Doombull, or even a Saurus Oldblood, all of which can be decked out to tackle a greater daemon with ease. Thats not even taking the Reverse Ward Save shennanigans into accout.

[The Low King]

By that logic, things like Mournfang Cavalry should cost way more because they add a high armor save cavalry unit to armies that do not otherwise get it. Or one of a bunch of other examples in the game where one unit is the only thing its book that performs a certain task. Not really a good basis for costing units.

Nope, that is not the same logic; being the only unit that performs a certain task is not the same as being a unit that fills a key weakness in an army. The same logic would be to say that cavalry would cost more in a dwarf army than in an Empire army or that Elite infantry would cost more in a Brettonian army than in a high elf army.

And really, Daemons are not even in the top 5 for close combat armies. Night Goblins and Skaven Slaves win on a point for point basis. Marauders, Ogre Bulls, Flaggelents, and Witch Elves obliterate them in point efficiency. Saurus, Chaos Warriors, and just about all elite HE infantry pretty much equal or best any Daemon unit out there in close combat. They don't even have the best combat lord choices anymore; you get so much more for your points with an Ogre Tyrant, Vampire Lord, Doombull, or even a Saurus Oldblood, all of which can be decked out to tackle a greater daemon with ease. Thats not even taking the Reverse Ward Save shennanigans into accout.

So, in your opinion exactly how are they winning? If they have next to no shooting, Useless combat troops and poor characters why is it that daemons are still regarded as one of the top armies? (and no, it isnt just people like complaining)

[Agoz]

By that logic, things like Mournfang Cavalry should cost way more because they add a high armor save cavalry unit to armies that do not otherwise get it. Or one of a bunch of other examples in the game where one unit is the only thing its book that performs a certain task. Not really a good basis for costing units. And really, Daemons are not even in the top 5 for close combat armies. Night Goblins and Skaven Slaves win on a point for point basis. Marauders, Ogre Bulls, Flaggelents, and Witch Elves obliterate them in point efficiency. Saurus, Chaos Warriors, and just about all elite HE infantry pretty much equal or best any Daemon unit out there in close combat. They don't even have the best combat lord choices anymore; you get so much more for your points with an Ogre Tyrant, Vampire Lord, Doombull, or even a Saurus Oldblood, all of which can be decked out to tackle a greater daemon with ease. Thats not even taking the Reverse Ward Save shennanigans into accout.

I've actually tried attacking a greater deamon in combat with an ogre tyrant, Tyrant died before getting to make any attacks. (Great unclean one with balesword and miasma)

[fubukii]

the GUO with the balesword is probably the only GD that even stands a chance vs a ogre character. He is also over double his cost.

[The bearded one]

What kind of equipment are we thinking of on that tyrant?

[Torga_DW]

Myself (slowly working on an ogre list) if i was going to take a tyrant at all (would need high points level as a slaughtermaster is very hard to pass up), so off the top of my head:

glittering scales, fencers blade, then either greedy fist or giantbreaker and the other tricksters shard. ws 10, -1 to be hit, str 6, 6 attacks

[Mr Ogre]

Tyrant...

Sword of Anti-Heroes, Other Tricksters Shard, Tricksters Helm, Heavy Armour, Iron Fist.

Absolutely nails, and designed for challenges.

But, back to the original question....The first five books out have been pretty well balanced. Each army has it's own defined role, and a fair amount of flexibility. I think the next four could do worse than being Dark Elves, Daemons, Bretonnians and Wood Elves. Though in no particular order! Those are the ones that need either toning down, or doing up.

[HalfBlood]

Nope, that is not the same logic; being the only unit that performs a certain task is not the same as being a unit that fills a key weakness in an army. The same logic would be to say that cavalry would cost more in a dwarf army than in an Empire army or that Elite infantry would cost more in a Brettonian army than in a high elf army.



So, in your opinion exactly how are they winning? If they have next to no shooting, Useless combat troops and poor characters why is it that daemons are still regarded as one of the top armies? (and no, it isnt just people like complaining)

Daemons are at the bottom of top tier.

Daemons win due to easy obtainable magic, with magical combos that can buff up are CC units.

Most people consider them to be top tier because of their cheap magic, Daemonic instability, and some daemonic gifts like Siren Song.

[Phazael]

So, in your opinion exactly how are they winning? If they have next to no shooting, Useless combat troops and poor characters why is it that daemons are still regarded as one of the top armies? (and no, it isnt just people like complaining)

They are _not_ winning, at least not at the highest levels of play. They are a strong army, for certain, and are always a challenge to face, but in terms of GT overall and best general wins, they really have not been winning very much since even before 8th edition came out. You can get a lot of this information from Rankings HQ, incidentally, and see that while they tend to do well (solid win percentage), its rare to see them actually come out on top. Even Hard Boyz (one of the few formats to allow Kairos) saw them sidelined by Lizardmen and Dark Elves, for the most part. This is not opinion, this is verifiable fact. So while casual players (who would get crushed no matter who they faced at an average GT) bemoan how hard Daemons are in their club games, the reality is that the army simply is nowhere near as dominant as it was for that two year window everyone complains about. Specifically, the last GT season with Storm of Magic in play and the first year the current book was in play. The fact that powergames could get into the army relatively cheaply (money wise) did not help the reputation of the army, either, since a lot of WAAC mentality players rolled out some really rdiculously unbalanced lists that first year the book was out for very little cash investment.

Again, the book is a solid performer, largely due to reliability, but its not even in the top five books right now. I would personally place them after DE, Skaven, LM, Ogres, and Warriors, in that exact order. The old Empire book was definately stronger than Daemons, too, but until we have a couple months of the new one to examine, I am not going to speculate on its power level.

[DaemonReign]

@ Phazael and Halfblood: I don't know, but perhaps this is something that you'd enjoy checking out?

On Topic:

Phazael said:

Daemons are going to be considerably more difficult to balance, because there is so much off base perception of the army and its hard to take the list and have it make for an interesting army under the 8th mechanics, without either winding up with something massively bland and week (pre Storm of Chaos Daemons) or something so broken that it busts the game in the other direction (Storm of Chaos and initial 7th edition era). All of the elven armies are going to have similar issues, particularly the Dark Elves who's problems go beyond pulling a few items and recosting things, but are rather systemic and cannot easily be fixed without rendering the army unplayable, like Gav Thorpes prior disaster (still the only book so bad that GW actually issued a public correction on it).

This true. Revamping some armybooks carry a lot more contingencies with it than others. On the flip side 8th Ed is more dynamic. I think you do have a little bit more room for Error, so to speak, whether we're talking about accidentally making something 10pts too cheap or too expensive.

That being said, I think your over-all analysis is quite on point.

With Daemons, then *sigh*, and I might be repeating myself, I've spent some effort/time myself looking at them from these perspectives we're talking about. In a nutshell, I believe a Designer should start at two very specific ends with them:
1 - Internal balance. You should be choosing Bloodletters because you're doing something specific, not because they are clearly the best Core choice (etcetera). Now it's important to realize that this isn't solely a question of raising the cost of Bloodletters - as much as Warseer jargon would like to have it so - but there are actually quite a few things that would have to go down as well (or become 'better').
2 - Intentionally undercosted fluff-oriented things should be given appropriate costs. If you stay objective in that persuit I really don't think you can fare too wrong in the end. Master of Sorcery should be 50pts. Siren Song, Despair Icon, The Masque - shouldn't be the crutches you need. Again, fixing these things also require tending to the 'problems' we've so far been able to masque with these items.

I just hope GW is clever enough to make a book with integrity. I'm pretty hopefull actually. But I agree it's certainly one of the books where they have a few mines they need to avoid.

[CaliforniaGamer]

Although it is FAR too early to begin speculating on Daemons I think everyone can agree to the following:
1.) the Daemonic instability rule will fall away and the new 8th ed Unstable rule will replace it. This will make Stubborn as worthless for DoC as it for the Undead types now.
2.) Daemonic gifts and banners will be unique 1xarmy as other magic items are and they will be reduced in number and variety.

the 2 above without any additional changes will greatly rebalance DoC.

[King Thurgun]

Ok, took most of the afternoon and the entirety of my intellect but I think I've got it.

Number of remaining books: B
Accumulated balance expertise of the Warseer forums: F
Wishlisting Integer: W
What GW is really making the rules for: $
Power Level: P

So the equation is: BxF/W to the factor of $ = P

Plugging in the numbers: 9x.00004/-2,478,837 to the factor of "phat stacks"=

OVER NINE THOOOUUUSSSSAAAAAAAANNNNNNNDDDDD!

#ElaborateDBZReferences

[Snowflake]

Although it is FAR too early to begin speculating on Daemons I think everyone can agree to the following:
1.) the Daemonic instability rule will fall away and the new 8th ed Unstable rule will replace it. This will make Stubborn as worthless for DoC as it for the Undead types now.
2.) Daemonic gifts and banners will be unique 1xarmy as other magic items are and they will be reduced in number and variety.

the 2 above without any additional changes will greatly rebalance DoC.

Don't know why you think that everyone will agree on those. I play undead and I don't want to see Demons get shafted with the same poorly thought out mechanics that we did for 8th. I think instability will change a bit, but I really really doubt that they will just make them the same as undead.

[Aluinn]

I have to agree with Tom here. There will naturally be cries for WE and Bretonnians to get the next books, but I think these books have held up quite well in truth, old though they may be. The problem with WE for example is not that they're at all weak, it's that internal balance is a little poor (I mean, Eternal Guard, really?), but that's a common problem that crops up even in newly-released books--and possibly that they are sometimes annoying to play against for not-super-fast, near-purely-combat-focused armies, but arguably that is a design feature, albeit one that could be looked and tweaked a bit surely.

The most important power adjustments that need to be made right now are nerfs, again, I absolutely agree. I regularly play against Daemons and even when that dude "tones his list down a bit", the substantial undercosting of goshdarn near everything in the book is painfully evident; I semi-regularly play against Skaven and their ability to have both plentiful "toys" and enormous hordes of rats is again blatantly OTT, as well as their rather-not-all-that-relatively-random "randomness", to say nothing of their actually-quite-reliable "unreliability" in the morale department. Not to say that you can't win against these armies (Daemons, Skaven, DE, LM, as the consensus goes), but as more 8th Ed. books come out, the problems with them only become clearer.

IMO the difference in power between even TK and Ogres is a very minor quibble compared to the difference between the top several armies and everything else.

[HalfBlood]

Although it is FAR too early to begin speculating on Daemons I think everyone can agree to the following:
1.) the Daemonic instability rule will fall away and the new 8th ed Unstable rule will replace it. This will make Stubborn as worthless for DoC as it for the Undead types now.
2.) Daemonic gifts and banners will be unique 1xarmy as other magic items are and they will be reduced in number and variety.

the 2 above without any additional changes will greatly rebalance DoC.

I see Daemonic Instability getting changed, however I dont see it turning into the Unstable rule. One of the reasons VC/TK have the Unstable rule is the fact that their Lores have significant healing(VC way more then TK). I have faith that GW will adjust Daemonic Instability by lowering LD across the board, or they might keep DI the same as before.

Daemonic Gifts will probably get changed to one per army.

[Phazael]

The Brett Book is actually pretty solid without being overpowering in the current environment. I actually did better with Bretts for a year at GTs than I did with Daemons, in terms of win loss record including crushing every Daemon opponent I faced over an 18 month span. Wood elves deffinately need some help, though. Of all the elf armies, they are probably the easiest to fix and give the best options for new units and model opportunities. Some adjustments to the Forest Spirit rules, some point alterations, a new lore of Athel Loren, and a couple unit additions/force org swaps; thats all the Wood Elves would really need, which is not far from how the Empire and Ogre revamps were done. Personally, I would rather they keep doing what they are and taking care of the easy fixes.

Really, you guys trying to float the idea of unstable on DoC do not know what you are asking for. Right now break mechanics actually matter to DoC and the instability test is the most major element of risk in the army, especially for the Greater Daemon. Being Unstable basically would take all of the guesswork out of risk managing combats and further encourage people to deathstar up, two things you really do not want. It would make the army even more powerful when used by an expert player. Yeah it sucks when a lone flamer roles snake eyes for a break test and I guess its theoretically possible for a DoC unit to lose combat but be steadfast (against what, I am not exactly sure), but for the most part the risk of losing combat by one and blowing the instability is what keeps DoC players in check and in tight orbit around their BSBs. The DoC army needs to be a little more vulnerable to bad dice, not less.

I have a pretty good idea what I would do with the book and the Ogre and VC books are what I would use for a baseline. Mainly, the core units need to be reworked so that they are not so character dependant to get their worth. A few adjustments to the things that make people butthurt would be good too (eg, Flamers 3 shots each instead of rolling, Siren confined to Slaanesh Heralds only, Leadership Bomb stacking limited in certain ways, ect) which is what they did with VC. Its certainly going to be a lot easier to temper than the Dark Elves or Skaven....