Pinned Important News! Freezing the Rules!

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • lawgnome wrote:

    We are still working on building v2.0. That isn't going to change, with or without the freeze
    I am not worried about that :) but telling people "Nothing is going to change in your army book in the next 8-9 months, and magic for that sake,", is not really motivating people to come up with ideas and suggestigions to their army books
    I don't say, that you don't read it, and note down some of it. But knowing you have to wait more that a half year, before something can happen ...

    Christoffer
    Banned for posting memes - twice :D

    Herminard wrote:

    *nerfs are so 2016
  • Omarcomin wrote:

    The people currently playing your game are not offput by the pace of change
    How sure are you about that? Most ETC players I know have this as main complain, as there is not enough time to prepare even for local tournaments.

    Even so, this announcement shows that the staff tries to find some middle ground.
    Players worried about sudden changes? Rules freeze!
    Players not satisfied with current rules? beta versions!

    Moreover, it's impossible to update all the rules and armybooks every 2 months or so. Currently we're working our ar$es off to fox things needing fixing(for whatever reason) and give players some reason to play a fun game. I really fail to understand why these are bad news.

    Army Design Team

    Rules Team Support

    Lexicon Team

    Oceanborn

  • Kpl.blutch wrote:

    I am not worried about that but telling people "Nothing is going to change in your army book in the next 8-9 months, and magic for that sake,", is not really motivating people to come up with ideas and suggestigions to their army books
    I don't say, that you don't read it, and note down some of it. But knowing you have to wait more that a half year, before something can happen ...
    "Change" is not an incident or an instant act. It's a continuous process that invloves god knows how many hours of work to produce something that looks like an armybook/rulebook, before we start working on the details.

    So people will still have motivation to make their points and suggestions. The fact that their ideas will not be released a day or a week after they make them does not mean hey aren't used at all.

    The ACS are making an amazing work trying to transfer all these info and keep community awake.

    Army Design Team

    Rules Team Support

    Lexicon Team

    Oceanborn

  • There Is No Spoon wrote:

    Kpl.blutch wrote:

    Question -> Is it still the plan, with 4 new books around 1. of may ?
    Tough question that nobody wants to answer.
    In short: no

    I wish I could share some specifics, but it's still being hammered out.

    Freezing the core rules and other armies was not news, but it's good to have in a public release.

    Delaying the new AB's, otoh, is concerning. 1.2 and 1.3 were rough reconfigurations, and even 1.0 was mostly a smoothing release. There's been no chance for a substantive redesign of non-functional elements since before the last ETC. 15-18 months is a long wait... but delaying the new army books pushes that out to a time-frame of (as people are extrapolating) 2-5 years stuck with the same problems (often involving quick-fixes that don't really work but no one ever had the time to do better).

    OTOH, the first four Army Books in theory benchmark where the next ones to come. When writing DE, you also half-write HBE and SE, because you need to know what has to be left for them. When writing ID, you half-write DH, because you need to compare to them.

    OTOOH, you can never get everything done to the deadline.

    OTGH, pencils down you're done. You will never get things done perfectly.


    Also... I'm worried. NOTHING new for that long a time frame is scary. A drip feed of a little bit of periodic new keeps people paying attention. Redoing every single book constantly was unsustainable, but turning the faucet off altogether...
  • This is a great idea. The constant changes in the rules have been somewhat toxic to the 9th GT community in the US. Waiting a few months longer will help a great deal. The army I play at Red River Rumble will be the same as that for Buckeye Battles.
    Fun Fact: The reason we use the term "Dwarves" and not "Dwarfs" is the works of J.R.R Tolkien. tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Dwarves
  • setrius wrote:

    I'm confused... ETC is in August and the release of DE, ID, DL and WDG is supposed to be on 1st of May. That means this release are not legal in ETC
    According to the first post, those updates aren't happening anymore. NO DE, ID, DL, WDG army books on the 1st of May. No army books before August.

    So now ED, DL, ID, WDG are coming out August at the earliest.

    Pellegrim wrote:

    Maybe T9A can actually level the tiers (hi BH, OK, WotDG who haul in over 50% of podiums on large tournies).
    Where is the average placement? what is the standard deviation? What percentage of all armies taken do those 3 represent? You can't make blanket statements on highly skewed analysis.


    WhammeWhamme wrote:

    Also... I'm worried. NOTHING new for that long a time frame is scary. A drip feed of a little bit of periodic new keeps people paying attention. Redoing every single book constantly was unsustainable, but turning the faucet off altogether...
    Yep, it stinks because now we are stuck with the same crappy issues for god knows how long. (stares at forced evocation in UD / the inability to drop the crap spells in evocation)

    The post was edited 1 time, last by nicreap ().

  • This is great news in the US. The feedback we get is many people are STILL on the fence because they want to play the game and not have to make new rule books, print new magic cards and buy and paint new units every few months because something changed that made a big difference to their army. Those players are beginning to get invested in other games or hobbies. KoW, AoS, Malifaux, and Warmachine are all taking many of our old players. The lack of a stable rulebook legitimizes the game in many fence sitters opinions. We are used to imperfect rules and played some armies 10+yrs without a significant change. Editions were 4-5yrs. I think a 2yr cycle of updates and revisions would be fine, but no one wants to keep investing in units and printing only to have it blown up again and again.

    Dont get me wrong, I love the effort in getting balance and clarity into the rules. I know many of you have put weeks of man hours into this. It shows. But at least in the US, I hear a collective GROAN every time a new change is announced and it seems like we lose another 5-10% of the players.
    Beast Herds Army Support
    US Masters Representative for the Midwest

    buckeyebattles.com
  • @Truckeye
    The issue is it's still not stable, and won't be for what looks to be 4-5 years now. So you will still have to worry about units being invalidated, particularly with the stated goal of making army playstyles more unique. It's been stated the hell cannon won't be a shooting unit anymore. But now you have to wait between 6 months and 4 years to find out if you need to buy new models.
  • Pace of change is to many players the number one complaint about 9. age - at least the one we as staff have heard most often.
    Among active members on this forum the change of pace is much wider accepted than overall.

    I think all players will have an opinion on the Freeze. But I can try to explain the upside to the freeze from a designers viewpoint.

    First of there is newer a good time to freeze the rules - there wont be a time where freezing the rules for a period of time is not delaying something you would like to do right away. The Good thing about doing it now from my viewpoint is that it gives us a more stable platform to evaluate and base 2.0 on

    Speaking as a balance team member the biggest problem right now is that the frequent changes is constantly blowing up the meta.
    IMO we have been on the brink of traveling down the wrong road when it comes to balancing.

    If we want 9. age to be a very complex an immersive game we cant solve all balance issues with point tweaks an streamlining.
    We need a working and evolving metagame to do part of the heavy lifting when it comes to balance. Balancing the game in the long run should be just as much securing that an AB have the inner capabilities to evolve and is not left behind when the meta changes as getting the scales on some balance problem just right.

    From a balance perspective we need to give the meta time to evolve.

    From a rules design perspective a freeze until after ETC gives us time to take a step back and address some issues in a more rounded way.

    A couple of posters in this thread complained about freezing the game now when the past couple of updates had only been quickfixes and it was a long time since we had real changes. But that is the thing, if we had done a 1.4 in april together with working on full books and 2.0 - 1.4 was bound to be another round of quick fixes.

    Cheers
  • WhammeWhamme wrote:

    Also... I'm worried. NOTHING new for that long a time frame is scary. A drip feed of a little bit of periodic new keeps people paying attention. Redoing every single book constantly was unsustainable, but turning the faucet off altogether...
    There will be content in the time period, just not rules related.

    Background Team

    Conceptual Design

    Rules Advisors

    The Saucy Quill Inn - Runecraft - 1415/71
  • Vazalaar wrote:

    The very long rule freeze especially no real armybooks to get excited about will cause the player base to decline.

    All this for the Etc nonsenses.
    The freeze isn't happening because of the ETC. That just happens to be the biggest tournament that happens late enough in the year, so it works as a good milestone. This freeze is being announced so that people know that their armies are not going to be invalidated next week.
  • By trying to please everyone you please no one. @KeyserSoze

    People who have not yet adopted 9th won't now suddenly begin to play it because it's "Stable-but-notstable" for the next 8 months. For developers of a strategy game you guys seems to to be at least a little bit deficient in strategic thinking where people and their motivations are concerned.... But that probably makes sense given the key demographic.
    8=D
    @Dan 's Roomate
    Epic Poster
    8,000th and 9,000th forum member
  • lawgnome wrote:

    Vazalaar wrote:

    The very long rule freeze especially no real armybooks to get excited about will cause the player base to decline.

    All this for the Etc nonsenses.
    The freeze isn't happening because of the ETC. That just happens to be the biggest tournament that happens late enough in the year, so it works as a good milestone. This freeze is being announced so that people know that their armies are not going to be invalidated next week.
    suuuure, just like they didn't rush out a faux 1.0 for the ETC.
  • Vazalaar wrote:

    The very long rule freeze especially no real armybooks to get excited about will cause the player base to decline.
    I hope thats not true, I believe the effect will be oposite. We have a lot of players on the fence about jumping in that are scared about the pace of change. - This is only my belief we will have to see


    All this for the Etc nonsenses.
    on this you are wrong ETC is not the reason we want a freeze. See my post above about why I think a break is needed
  • Omarcomin wrote:

    By trying to please everyone you please no one. @KeyserSoze

    People who have not yet adopted 9th won't now suddenly begin to play it because it's "Stable-but-notstable" for the next 8 months. For developers of a strategy game you guys seems to to be at least a little bit deficient in strategic thinking where people and their motivations are concerned.... But that's probably makes sense given the key demographic for these games.
    I know several people who stopped playing in my own Circle of friends untill we had another freeze. Other who were waiting to try it out untill we had a freeze.

    Anecdotal evidence ofcourse, but thats the basis of much wargaming discussion. Reactions outside this forum are also way more positive then the average off this topic, but that is not really a suprise tbh.