and the changes since then, which were not. Edit: note that I'm referring to older sectorials, like Corregidor.
TAG changes (while technically non-core) are significant pretty much across the board (Ariadna, to an admittedly lesser extent, included: it buffs the plethora of anti-armour options they have available). And several ‘minor’ changes since HSN3 make big changes to certain specific things (for instance, Kusanagi + Custodier + Healer wasn’t allowed until after HSN3 and gives a notable non-Grrls list option to Bakunin). This 12 months is a major push of ‘new’ stuff. Once it’s finished there’s very little left ‘new’ that is expected to be pushed out (IA and WB being the major exceptions). The aging sectorials do need some* love, but a 2019/2020 timeline seems realistic, particularly if we see the consistent stream of minor balance passes continue to get pushed out in the meantime. If by this time next year we’re not seeing the writing on the wall that CB has started more of a refresh, I’ll join you at the pitchfork stand. * Opinions vary on how much, I tend to the “some design archetypes common to older sectorials are sub-optimal (eg Non-fury pure HI cores), some specific units are clearly sub-optimal overall (eg Bolts), some specific units are supra-optimal overall (eg Gazi), and some specific units are supra-optimal compared to their intra-sectorial peers (eg Grrls) BUT overall intersectorial balance is basically fine”
OK, maybe we're getting our wires crossed here: I'm not at the pitchfork + torch angry mob here, I'm just trying to politely let my feelings known. We have received a new book, new profiles, and new rules... but it hasn't been proliferated. I was there for HSN2, Paradiso, N3 and HSN3. Each of these were released with updates to existing profiles and changes to existing armies in addition to the new stuff. Maybe this is part of CB moving away from releasing new rulebooks with their "living game" approach... but in the past we had profiles in hand years before the models were released, and every army was updated at the same time. Now, we have a new book [Uprising], without profiles or any rules [except for the MMR], and the only armies being updated are the ones getting new models. I'm not trying to raise a rabble, I just want to politely state that every army should be updated at the same time to maintain balance and interest in the game.
Steel phalanx uses an alternative fireteam structure that forgoes the standard in order to potentially exploit weaknesses within said standard. Allowing the alternative and standard together means that you have full power in the active turn and the potential to optimise everything for ARO. I'm not even arguing that it's a good trade, but it is the trade that has been made. Wait to see what Vedic comes with if you want standard fireteams in aleph, though even then that might not be what you want... That used to be the case. They've switched from updating everything at once every 3 years with a new book to updating the most important thing when it's ready. This way something new and exciting shows up every few months and in theory they get a better view of what needs fixing because they're not changing 50 other things around it.
Importantly it's more achievable with how sprawling Infinity is now. Trying to review everything for every release is completely impractical. And @DFW my apologies: you just appeared to be bandwagoning with Xagroth whose posts had a distinct "Burn the witch!" vibe.
Right, and my concern is that this is a slippery slope. This is GW's release model, where "the most important thing" is Space Marines and whatever Xenos faction the designers are crushing on. I find it ironic that the French needed an update, but they are to be discontinued. What is "the most important thing" to CB, the new hotness, or that one sectorial that hasn't been updated since N3 dropped? I'm not trying to say "burn the witch!"... I'm trying to say "don't forget about the old factions!"
I actually agree. 3 Sectorials max per faction. Merge the others or make their units Vanilla only. Forget Tohaa sectorials. OSS then Ramah will be the last released. Scrub non-aligned.
Vanilla + 3 is a good model. I'm ok with PanO getting Vanilla+4 because of how limited MO is and legacy reasons. FRRM never getting properly updated is also fine, but I'm fundamentally ok with it existing due legacy reasons. I don't mind NA2. It's a useful dumping ground for additional factions, without cluttering Vanilla with additional units. Notably its factions (outside JSA) are quite limited in how they build compared to most traditional Sectorials, so they're more fun side projects then core-features. Honestly this sort of outlet is fine.
I'm just joking to point out they would need to roll back to keep up an even update. MO could go NA2 to keep PanO down to 3.
I honestly think that if MO were conceived today it would be. "Expensive LI (but with a bland option), mixed links, character focussed, limited list design space and exists primarily for fun/fluff/character" smells a lot like StarCo. It doesn't fit the fluff though: MO is fully integrated into PanO's military structure.
A valid concern, but not one that's particularly vindicated as of yet... The important thing changes based on many factors. Right now it's updating the starter sets that really need it, and filling out the sectorials that have been promised for years so that when the story advances there won't be a lot of new actors suddenly becoming important... MRRF needed an update, but I think the actual goal is to have them representing a reactive elite professional force, who plug the gap until more numerous but maybe less extensively trained forces can arrive. Once that's done they won't resemble the current list much at all, but it won't be quick, and finding the groove has been more difficult than CB thought, and as a result they can't update the models because they might get them totally wrong, eg they may decide the Metros all carry SMGs at some point but oops all the new models had shotguns...
Don't forget; Closed Battle Lists are a thing now. Can easily plug some "old sectorial" gaps with the inclusion of 3-5 lists that cater for what these were. Mil'Ord could easily do this - just phase out the oldest knights that never see use (Sepulchre and Teutonic) and create a few lists around the good ones.
Given that generally only 1 CBL from each set is even somewhat playable, I doubt most competitive players would like this. I sure wouldn't, and I'm not very good at all.
Depends on how much effort gets put into them moving forward - and how much they use their vast volume of digital analytics to pick out lists that work. Mil'Ord are probably a prime example of where it would work because there's so few configurations for them that do actually work. They're pretty 1 dimensional. Joan pain train. De Fersen pain train. Joan and De Fersen pain train. TO Order Serg spam.
About Corregidor, sure, he has the nuts and bolts, but it could be much more than just the Kiddy Wheels. Sure, the Moran is good... but has little sinergy (that goes UP TO ELEVEN in Vanilla), I have asked before about a non-repeater profile exclusive to Corregidor, for example. Also, asking for SOME use for the Tomcat box aside from using 2 models at most, I don't see how is it so reprehensive. @inane.imp I go for the inflaming role, since it looks like anything tamer gets drowned, ignored, or bashed in the forum. It helps little when the community I play in considers the forum something worst than Mos Eisley... (I got a player calling on me "not all of us check the forums" because of the Marionetist and the Puppetbots, I had to explain those 3 times in a single gaming turn... the second was my fault, essentially, but the third... ugh). Please do read the whole post. I mentioned the Haris and Duos in that post you cited a part of... ¬¬U
