Of course you want a balanced table, but you don't always get one. And in ITS events you don't get to reset your terrain so you deal with it. That's why your whole point of talking out how to deploy terrain with your opponent doesn't matter, not because terrain doesn't matter. They really need to add guidelines and an idea of how they expect tables to be setup as far as density, lanes, etc. For pitchers it just becomes more order intensive, you plop it on the building and call it done. The problem with big inaccessible terrain is it means you quickly get the game locked down into 2-3 lanes.
I think this is the entire issue. CB is willing to change things but seems unable to determine what things should be changed, so they just do whatever.
There isn't really a good explanation for this, but it won't stop PS and others from defending CB and saying people are wrong to complain about it.
The quote you mentioned includes the phrase “I jest”. This means it’s a joke. You seem to be looking for an argument here. You won’t find it with me. Go elsewhere.
Of course you jested, it was sarcasm. I understand what you were trying to say, that everyone who disagreed with Mao was being illogical and unreasonable.
I don't understand CB's approach to sudden changes like these without explaining why. Take a game like League of Legends, which pumps out patches like every other month or so (compared to CB, who makes changes way less frequently), and look at how they explain the changes: Like, it's two sentences and it would go a long way to quell the butthurt.
One can read it the other way around, but it is neither here or there, I suggest this stops, it has gone for longer than it was necessary already.
They replied in social media, I know not the best place, that the Buleteers broke the formula somehow and was fixed because the formula produced result was incorrect, in any case the feedback for that was noted and hopefully next update will include it.
I’d be quite interested to see the formula for myself. It’d give a much better understanding of how things are costed and in certain cases there may be mistakes. CB are after all only human. One Page Rules supply their formula as part of their game system so you can make up your own units and sometimes you can see that they’ve over/under costed a unit. If the Infinity cost system were supplied it’d let us see how things were costed and why. I understand though that this may be a far more complex system than that given by OPR and so getting it may be a larger task, but I’m just curious. It’s always fun to see how the minutiae of a game system functions.
I think this will be fixed allowing more lists for the event. I will go for at least many list as missions, but to me, the desired number is amount of missions +1,this will allow to create a bunch of options. Flexibles armies still will have advantage, but the rigid ones, like Pano, still could have a chance to fight. Tables will affect less the outcome of a game. Sometimes you have to scarified a lot to have a list prepare to "close combat" (not cc, but short distances) and other for long range combat. Some armies are more multitool, so they suffer less and can adapt to the table without touch anything on the list. But, all of this is a different topic to the main one here, the nerf. Could you please share where they answered? Facebook? Do you have the link to the topic? Please. About the nerf, is pretty that whatever the reason to do it aren't right or properly set or calibrated.
@Gwynbleidd The formula is considered company secret and trying to figure it out in the forum is prohibited, I am sorry if this is not a satisfactory answer, but it is the official line. @Urobros I cannot share it because I go by what @Vaulsc has said in his latest video discussing the formula, @Vaulsc is a credible source and I have no reason doubting what he said.
No problem. Other companies are much the same in this regard and OPR is literally a page of rules and initially done to garner support from the 40k community. It would have been nice to know though. Especially as I could then tailor make profiles that no longer exist. Oh well. Another nefarious scheme foiled.
Well, the less we understand - the more we think by ourselves. And it is a way to get to the point, where reptiloids conspiracy have place and etc. All this topics are growing more intensively because we are not understanding some things.
I'd love to see you chastize somebody using open and vulgar insults like this, like A Mao Esquerda does, at least once. But we both know this doesn't and won't happen.
As opposed to the ton of other units that do this all day? What about the profiles where they blatantly cheat the formula to produce a cheaper result by adding Frenzy in? How can a unit break the formula when they make it using the formula?
You can start figuring stuff out by just paying attention to the profiles. For example, the latest update with Bakunin with the change to Moiras it points towards the Frenzy discount being 7 points
I have been looking over the army builder and I think I’ve worked out some costs but there’s a lot to go through. It’d just have been nice to see the actual calculations from CB instead of having to speculate ourselves. Oh well. Thanks for the potential cost of Frenzy, I’ll keep looking at the army builder as well as what other people have noted about points costs.
