Dawn of War Codex

Agreeing generally, perhaps. It's easy to agree that "IG are too strong at the moment" for example but when you start asking people how that should be addressed, they typically have differing ideas. Sometimes wildly. There has rarely if ever been consensus on specific changes that should be made over the years.

Constructive criticism is great, but when I constantly read "broken", "just a mess" and so on it's a bit mental and not helpful. I don't think people would be playing at all if the game/mod was broken or a mess. I'm not saying everyone thinks that, but it's always thrown around at every balance lead in probably every game.

Indrid wrote:Agreeing generally, perhaps. It's easy to agree that "IG are too strong at the moment" for example but when you start asking people how that should be addressed, they typically have differing ideas. Sometimes wildly. There has rarely if ever been consensus on specific changes that should be made over the years.

Constructive criticism is great, but when I constantly read "broken", "just a mess" and so on it's a bit mental and not helpful. I don't think people would be playing at all if the game/mod was broken or a mess. I'm not saying everyone thinks that, but it's always thrown around at every balance lead in probably every game.

Okay well ive given specific ideas and elaborated on them many times but ill do it again, i guess they constantly get ignored because im not invited to the super secret balance discord where the team decides increasing rangers by 5 power is alot more of a priority than addressing things like sentinels and guardsmen

Sentinels should be 350 req - one of my biggest reasons for that is to slow down timing on double sentinel builds, which is probably the most aggresive build in the entire game, i never liked that you can build 2 sentinels back to back, as in the second starts building immediately after the first, there should be a gap time to let the opponent actually be able to field enough to contend with it, as SM on many maps the timings are so hurrendous that you can have 2 Sents GM and lord gen on your power farm before you can even field a third unit, you are fighting it with 1 scout 1 tac and your hero, not to mention the follow up abuse of things like las turrets, the momentum itself makes it super easy for the ig to mindlessly deny your power for most of t1 without sacrificing their own, theres almost no counter play to it

Guardsmen - I still honestly believe that one of the biggest problem about guardsmen is their reinforce rate, the reason chimera becomes so OP is because the units standing in front of it dont die, you never have enough to even move them they literally soak dumb amounts of damage without even having to worry about moving / retreating or even getting them inside the chimera, but i also like the idea of increasing the base cost a tad for guardsmen

Theres also the fact that 4 guardsmen squads with sergeants have the same upkeep as 2 csm or 2 tac squads

TL:DR - Be grateful there still is a mod to be angry about. Adila and the team are doing a fine job with the resources they have. People will complain about everything no matter who is in charge.

(hopefully) most people are gratefull we all know atlas and co work for free. but like bruce said constructive critisism should not be confused with whining all the time cause it simply isent. Who is in charge of balance has a major impact on eveery single player that plays this game therefore it is a concern for all.

Also Resetting the poll simply because it dident go the way "some people" wanted it makes it a waste of time writing anything more in this thread.

Suggestions aren't ignored, they are taken on as well as dozens of other suggestions and then decisions are made. I don't know where you posted these (maybe Discord?), but they don't seem to be in the 2.9.2 preview thread. I'd say that's the best place to put them when preview notes are posted. boss made a good post there but didn't advocate for more Sentinel or Guardsmen changes. Or any IG changes in general I don't think.

This probably isn't the place to address specific balance concerns, but the Sentinel and Chimera both had cost adjustments in 2.9.2. Smaller changes are better in general. Remember, they are just modders and we don't have access to deep analytics that proper devs have to help make decisions. Sentinel and Guardsmen economics and IG in general are still being looked at for 2.9.3.

Indrid wrote:Suggestions aren't ignored, they are taken on as well as dozens of other suggestions and then decisions are made. I don't know where you posted these (maybe Discord?), but they don't seem to be in the 2.9.2 preview thread. I'd say that's the best place to put them when preview notes are posted. boss made a good post there but didn't advocate for more Sentinel or Guardsmen changes. Or any IG changes in general I don't think.

This probably isn't the place to address specific balance concerns, but the Sentinel and Chimera both had cost adjustments in 2.9.2. Smaller changes are better in general. Remember, they are just modders and we don't have access to deep analytics that proper devs have to help make decisions. Sentinel and Guardsmen economics and IG in general are still being looked at for 2.9.3.

Twitch chats, Discords, steam chats. Infact i rose these issues over a year ago, and everybody including Adila knew my stance on them because i became the person who QQ'd about double sents until all of a sudden a couple of months ago people realised i was correct and now everyones on board, i guess with my ability to clock on to whats broken 12 months before any of you guys even could, i should probably be balance lead

Hear hear, Atlas

Bruce for balance lead when

Red Beard B| wrote:Bruce for balance lead when

First court of order, i shall put together my team of balancing geniuses

Red Beard - Ork Balance lead
Piano - GK Balance lead
Me - Eldar Balance lead
ArcticFrenzy - Chaos Balance lead
Rambo - SM Balance lead
nids r fine

- Your argument and demands are mixed bags of various things which should be discussed separately.

boss wrote:Adila achievement so far all his league games done so far has made everyone hate ig and now half the players won't join next one unless ig gets hammed into the ground, if anything last league showed ig was very strong yet instead of nerfs he buffed them instead.....
What cycle of balance league showed ig strong buff ig then wut feedback ig very strong need some nerfs ok, I buff them instead>new patch people ask wtf you doing.
First unless you in balance discord you don't get much of a say anyways, the whole way of how changes get done is wrong hidden way in discord instead of forums where everyone can see and talk about it this worked in the past and should be returned whatever happens hiding changes make players confused and pissed off.

Demand 1 - Argue over patch notes on forums not discord
- As many people have mentioned, this is widely supported. AND THIS CAN BE DONE WITHOUT CHANGING BALANCE LEAD.

Argument 1- Adila did not achieve anything
- I don't think you read my post. I said his achievement should not be erased whether you disagree with balancing or not. League should continue and the mod team he brought together and organized should stay.
- You got no rights to delete those even if you become a balance lead. League and the new mod team bringing good influence on the mod is a matter of fact not argument.

boss wrote:You and torpid and others say I must write out my ideas about the future for the mod and stuff if I want a chance a chance to become balance head ok sure but here the thing shouldn't adila also follow this rule before he even became lead or it is just 1 rule for me?
I mean if I did become head I would give my ideas what I want to do, little point if I don't tho.

Demand 2 - Adila should write down ideas about the future of the mod to stay as the balance lead
- No, he does not need to because he does not follow that criteria you suggest. You are judged by your own criteria because you are the one proposing it. What Atlas has in mind as a criteria for balance lead is different. Look below for how yours and their criteria are different.

Atlas wrote:Tl;dr It's more important for a balance head to be trustworthy and a team player than it is for them to be some kind of balance wunderkind. That goes for any position of group authority really. Not being balance head doesn't mean your opinion is invalid. I don't find competence arguments for balance head really compelling especially when the subject matter is so .... well, subjective... in nature to start with. The balance head is more of a facilitator as able and a dictator as needed. I think this approach allows for maximum opportunity while not getting completely deadlocked by the opinions at the same time and is the best balance between the two we can achieve atm.

boss criteria
1/ Have a Vision on how balance should be
2/ Listen to others to hit middle ground when necessary
3/ Have a final say on balance
- When the vision and other opinions clash, the lead with vision can force changes without listening to others

Atlas criteria
1/ Be trustworthy and a team player who can organize mod team
2/ Listen to others for balancing
- Opinion leaders have heavy influence on balancing
3/ Have a final say on balance
- This is to mainly break the deadlock on opinions after looking at how the argument proceed

Comparison
- Caeltos fit both of those criteria. However, nowadays no one has both energy and time to fit both of the criteria so duties have to be separated. This is why Atlas' criteria became the norm in current situation. The critical reason why boss' criteria cannot be accepted is because while Atlas' criteria can assimilate boss' criteria, the vice versa cannot happen.
1/ boss is oblivious towards keeping the mod team together. Caeltos fit both categories, why should he be the lead when he only is capable of one unlike Caeltos?
2/ On the other hand, what Atlas suggests can accommodate both criteria. Needless to say, Atlas' version of the lead will retain the advantage of keeping the mod team together in an organized way. At the same time, an opinion leader with a Vision and how balance should be can heavily influence how each patch is iterated. Therefore can coexist.

- This is the most important difference and where those 2 criteria clash.
Atlas
> The lead balancer have the final say BUT
- An opinion leader with a Vision and how balance should be can heavily influence how each patch is iterated. That person do not have a final say but the lead balance cannot override whatever is suggested in the community. Thus, opinion leaders can have huge impacts on patches.
boss
> The lead balancer have the final say
- Other opinion leaders can have influence on patches but the lead balancer with Vision can override whenever he or she wants to fit the Vision.
- The lead will listen to others but Vision takes absolute priority.

- In boss' criteria, other people with Vision cannot be accepted. Everyone is at the mercy of the lead balancer's good will in regards to patches. Opinions can be ignored by saying it doesn't fit the Vision when the lead sees it fit. On the contrary, Atlas's lead have the final say just for the purpose of breaking the deadlock on opinions only thus do not need overriding Vision and certainly can coexist with someone else being the opinion leader with Vision.
- Atlas' version has also the advantage of making the feedback environment friendly and not oppressive. When people get the notion that the lead balance will do whatever he or she wants, they will not bother to post their feedback seeing as how he gets the final say no matter what is suggested. The gist is Opinion Leader with Vision should not have the right to have final say on balance. The balance lead with final say should not be the same person who is the Opinion Leader with Vision. Those two roles should be separate.

boss wrote:You and torpid and others say I must write out my ideas about the future for the mod and stuff if I want a chance a chance to become balance head ok sure but here the thing shouldn't adila also follow this rule before he even became lead or it is just 1 rule for me?
I mean if I did become head I would give my ideas what I want to do, little point if I don't tho.

-This shows that unless you have the final say right on balance, you will not post your Vision or ideas. This is where the fundamental disagreement is. It is a matter of agreeing or disagreeing on what a balance lead should do. You got two options.
1) Keep arguing trying to get both the role of final say and being opinion leader and achieve nothing as not all of the community support you.
2) Accept the fact that you cannot have final say but get a compromise of heavily influencing patches by being the number 1 supported Opinion Leader.

Other arguments that have nothing to do with Demand 1,2 and Argument 1
Argument 2 - Do not stir up meta because Caeltos did not

boss wrote:And my arguments are fine, caeltos got this mod going for a long time before he left and even tho a lot of people disagree with a lot of this stuff he least found a mid ground for a lot of it and the mod.
Meta should not be fucked around with much I say cos it just ends up having to change units to broken levels take one look as tcsm atm the new plasma gun breaks chaos vs sm match up. Its fine for soft buffs but not changing how a unit works unless it was not viable in games.

- You are self contradicting yourself here. Caeltos certainly did stir up meta. Why? because he wanted to make things fit his vision. Having the Vision and not stirring up meta way of balancing cannot coexist.
- A Vision is not a matter of argument. It is whether one agree or disagree. Thus, when the meta do not fit the Vision. Meta has to change to fit the Vision. This leads to stirring up of meta without the need of balance. Caeltos wanted Eldar to be more mobile faction but meta was that Eldar is a static faction with set ups. His vision clashed with meta and he stirred it up to change Eldar to fit his Vision.
- This also means Vision can be forced upon others when the opinions clashes without searching middle ground. A lot of times, opinions of others cannot be compromised with Vision and this is when Caeltos forced it through ignoring others. When the compromise can be made, it will be made but if it cannot be made, the Vision takes absolute priority no matter the cost.
- This is why if you think not stirring up the meta is the way Caeltos did things is wrong. He was not afraid to stir up meta for his Vision when the compromise cannot be made.
- You cannot argue to not stir up the meta while saying you follow Caeltos' step. His way and your way are different. Either you keep meta stable or have the Vision. Either you are acting same as Caeltos or you are not. There is no middle ground.

boss wrote:Atm I don't agree with any new units being added before Grey was even added the first changes caeltos did was rebalancing retail units which was overpowed in elite before he added in grey knights which was bold but he did de a decent job at it and they has fun mostly to play as and vs. As of right now our last new unit was Operatives back in 2.4 and they are still having a hard time fitting into gk builds I would say let alone gk as a whole are all over the place. First fix the mess we are in before we add new stuff let alone a race.

Demand 3 - Do not add new things before fixing current factions
- The current Mod team agrees on this one. There will be no new factions or units until current ones are fixed. However, cannot agree on one matter.
- Fixing OM is included in fixing current factions. 2 more heroes have to be added and UI need to be separate from SM. OM won't be fixed without having 3 heroes.

why would a race need 3 commanders to be balanced? gk are broken due to their units so i doubt any other commander is trash enough to make them weak in certain matchups

PianoMan wrote:why would a race need 3 commanders to be balanced? gk are broken due to their units so i doubt any other commander is trash enough to make them weak in certain matchups

- It is because MU are extremely hero dependent. Having 3 heroes allows for assigning weaknesses to OM units without making OM unplayably weak.

Bruce Campbell wrote:

Red Beard B| wrote:Bruce for balance lead when

First court of order, i shall put together my team of balancing geniuses

Red Beard - Ork Balance lead
Piano - GK Balance lead
Me - Eldar Balance lead
ArcticFrenzy - Chaos Balance lead
Rambo - SM Balance lead
nids r fine

Who is IG balance lead? Or are you proposing on deleting the race altogether?

Red Beard B| wrote:

Bruce Campbell wrote:

Red Beard B| wrote:Bruce for balance lead when

First court of order, i shall put together my team of balancing geniuses

Red Beard - Ork Balance lead
Piano - GK Balance lead
Me - Eldar Balance lead
ArcticFrenzy - Chaos Balance lead
Rambo - SM Balance lead
nids r fine

Who is IG balance lead? Or are you proposing on deleting the race altogether?

Yah ig dont exist in my patch

Impregnable wrote:

PianoMan wrote:why would a race need 3 commanders to be balanced? gk are broken due to their units so i doubt any other commander is trash enough to make them weak in certain matchups

- It is because MU are extremely hero dependent. Having 3 heroes allows for assigning weaknesses to OM units without making OM unplayably weak.

well that's something new lul
also bc is like 5 commanders in 1, he's basically LA CL FC LC and WB in 1

Wow so many long post's about why adila should be head lead eta I just get to the points and not write out long ass posts,

Atlas
Yea you don't need to be lead to give ideas, problem is lead should already know what alot changes are for the next patch especially when you host your own league without being told what they should be. I made a 20 min post of ideas for next patch for units and such so far most are agreed upon without much of a problem why can't adila our lead do this simply cos he don't know what he want's to do and has to have other people do it for him, just like how I have to give you most of next patch for yous.


Adeptus Noobus
You say its funny how people complaining when opportune funny when you complained so much about what adila done so far or "lack of what he's done so far" your quote. We played a lot of games already on voice chat and the amount of times you bitch about the change's he done so far I guess that why you want me to join with him to sort him out.


Indrid
I wanted to be lead since the same time Cyris got even tho he was not even around and did nothing. Then adila got put in change without much of anyone saying so idk where you get this nobody wanted to step up. Who's on this small team then that a lot of people praise him on?

You use 2.9.2 as an example for his good changes and that he listens,here the thing tho chimera and sent costing more did nothing Lets look at why he did both of theses changes and why he was wrong with both of them
Chimera:
Cost increased from 300/60 to 300/65.
Mobile Base upgrade cost reduced from 85/25 to 50/10.
We see too many Chimera rushes but we also don't see any Mobile Bases at the same time.

So he said we see too many chimera rushes so lets increase power cost to slow that down great... one problem tho it don't stop rush for it cos you have to look to why it can be rushed. Lets look at t1 atm mostly seen build is 3 gm and sent or 2 sents and 2gm, so unless you get stomp no power build and with the "overbearing t1" torpid quote you can reach t2 in about 6 min or so and then get your chimera for your rush and there your problem ig don't need to invest into power if anything in t1 atm.
So the power cost increase did next to nothing he did not spot the problem so the change did not solve anything and why it did nothing.

So now lets look at sents
Sentinels:
Cost increased from 300/0 to 330/0.
Ground Pound upgrade now grants + 50 hp in addition to its other effects.
We still had plenty of complain last patch about double Sents esp in T1, this changes should address the issue

Sentinels are prob the most toxic unit and why mostly everyone hates them but as for the changes he started with a nerf which good players wanted a cost change.. then he went and added more hp for the stomp upgrade for some reason who the hell ask for this? This just add more issue's more than anything
So this time you spot the problem this time, did the change and then added a pointless change why

And theses are just 2 of the points about last patch if you go through the whole thing there plenty more where you wonder why the hell he done this stuff and this is just one of the reasons I have no faith in adila as lead.

PianoMan wrote:

Impregnable wrote:

PianoMan wrote:why would a race need 3 commanders to be balanced? gk are broken due to their units so i doubt any other commander is trash enough to make them weak in certain matchups

- It is because MU are extremely hero dependent. Having 3 heroes allows for assigning weaknesses to OM units without making OM unplayably weak.

well that's something new lul
also bc is like 5 commanders in 1, he's basically LA CL FC LC and WB in 1

- That is the point. BC should not be jack of all trades. OM should have different weakness and strength depending on what hero they choose.

Adila is the best. All who did not vote for Adila are PIDRS!!!

Since Adilas turned a new ''Transparent'' leaf, can he start off by telling us who this ''team'' of balancers are?
Im going to make an educated guess on things ive heard and assume (i know right, never assume) it's Torpid, Toil, Swift, Noobus & Adila.

How about, since you are so opposed against budging your own position even if it is for the greater good, the community atleast gets a vote or a say on who the team members should be, as no offense but if that teams correct it doesn't give me any faith, but ill refrain from picking apart each member because im such a nice guy

Impregnable wrote:

PianoMan wrote:

Impregnable wrote:- It is because MU are extremely hero dependent. Having 3 heroes allows for assigning weaknesses to OM units without making OM unplayably weak.

well that's something new lul
also bc is like 5 commanders in 1, he's basically LA CL FC LC and WB in 1

- That is the point. BC should not be jack of all trades. OM should have different weakness and strength depending on what hero they choose.

examples of other races going by this?

Bruce Campbell wrote:

Red Beard B| wrote:

Bruce Campbell wrote:
First court of order, i shall put together my team of balancing geniuses

Red Beard - Ork Balance lead
Piano - GK Balance lead
Me - Eldar Balance lead
ArcticFrenzy - Chaos Balance lead
Rambo - SM Balance lead
nids r fine

Who is IG balance lead? Or are you proposing on deleting the race altogether?

Yah ig dont exist in my patch

What a beautiful patch that is. BRUCEY MOD

PianoMan wrote:

Impregnable wrote:

PianoMan wrote:well that's something new lul
also bc is like 5 commanders in 1, he's basically LA CL FC LC and WB in 1

- That is the point. BC should not be jack of all trades. OM should have different weakness and strength depending on what hero they choose.

examples of other races going by this?

- Are you suggesting a faction can be balanced when it has only 1 hero?
- Picking infiltrating hero completely changes what other faction has to do. You think that ranger problem with eldar would have happened if we didn't have any infiltrating hero? Eldar vs Orks MU would be really different if Orks had only WB and no other heroes.

Impregnable
First stop putting words into your chats to fit your theory's about me that are not true. I always taken balance and changes very strongly cos they shape how the new patch will be for a mod I enjoyed playing and if im wrong about a change I shut up about it. But stop making shit up about me.

Metas gets made by the players though there games, back then its was the best players in this Mod's time Noisy, Tex, Toil and so and so,they made the metas and spoke about changes and ideas to caeltos, then with his ideas and such made patchs according to what the player base mostly wanted or least found a mid ground too.

He did not try and force a meta or stirr it up as you call it,he followed the metas as they formed each patch and slowly added his visions for each race but most of the time found a mid ground for them and he did this very well, de did this the right way.

And lastly I was right then I get 1 ruled by my own criteria Yet adila gets given the mod without anyone getting a say, least we know how you guys give balance head then.

Impregnable wrote:

PianoMan wrote:

Impregnable wrote:- That is the point. BC should not be jack of all trades. OM should have different weakness and strength depending on what hero they choose.

examples of other races going by this?

- Are you suggesting a faction can be balanced when it has only 1 hero?
- Picking infiltrating hero completely changes what other faction has to do. You think that ranger problem with eldar would have happened if we didn't have any infiltrating hero? Eldar vs Orks MU would be really different if Orks had only WB and no other heroes.

yes
what ranger problem
don't bring orks into this when they're such a global-heavy faction

boss wrote:Impregnable
First stop putting words into your chats to fit your theory's about me that are not true. I always taken balance and changes very strongly cos they shape how the new patch will be for a mod I enjoyed playing and if im wrong about a change I shut up about it. But stop making shit up about me.

Metas gets made by the players though there games, back then its was the best players in this Mod's time Noisy, Tex, Toil and so and so,they made the metas and spoke about changes and ideas to caeltos, then with his ideas and such made patchs according to what the player base mostly wanted or least found a mid ground too.

He did not try and force a meta or stirr it up as you call it,he followed the metas as they formed each patch and slowly added his visions for each race but most of the time found a mid ground for them and he did this very well, de did this the right way.

And lastly I was right then I get 1 ruled by my own criteria Yet adila gets given the mod without anyone getting a say, least we know how you guys give balance head then.

That sounds like a very romanticised history to me. I remember absolutely outrage on the forums and elsewhere about Caeltos' changes. Never nerfing eldar enough, and over-buffing chaos. I suppose it's nice he's been romanticised historically now he's dead to the community, but I don't think it's a very realistic assessment of the situation and in many ways you are wanting things that are simply not possible.

PianoMan wrote:

Impregnable wrote:

PianoMan wrote:examples of other races going by this?

- Are you suggesting a faction can be balanced when it has only 1 hero?
- Picking infiltrating hero completely changes what other faction has to do. You think that ranger problem with eldar would have happened if we didn't have any infiltrating hero? Eldar vs Orks MU would be really different if Orks had only WB and no other heroes.

yes
what ranger problem
don't bring orks into this when they're such a global-heavy faction

- Ok. good to know your position on this one. OM should be balanced with one hero and should not have 2 other heroes like other faction.

#Antforbalancelead

If you think about it he's the only logical choice, he might be a retard but he's a retard with a method, the rest of you live off of guesswork and pretending skill means something.

Impregnable wrote:

PianoMan wrote:

Impregnable wrote:- Are you suggesting a faction can be balanced when it has only 1 hero?
- Picking infiltrating hero completely changes what other faction has to do. You think that ranger problem with eldar would have happened if we didn't have any infiltrating hero? Eldar vs Orks MU would be really different if Orks had only WB and no other heroes.

yes
what ranger problem
don't bring orks into this when they're such a global-heavy faction

- Ok. good to know your position on this one. OM should be balanced with one hero and should not have 2 other heroes like other faction.

the units are broken, the hero isn't so fix the units instead of trying to add new fucking heroes?

boss wrote: First stop putting words into your chats to fit your theory's about me that are not true. I always taken balance and changes very strongly cos they shape how the new patch will be for a mod I enjoyed playing and if im wrong about a change I shut up about it. But stop making shit up about me.

Metas gets made by the players though there games, back then its was the best players in this Mod's time Noisy, Tex, Toil and so and so,they made the metas and spoke about changes and ideas to caeltos, then with his ideas and such made patchs according to what the player base mostly wanted or least found a mid ground too.

He did not try and force a meta or stirr it up as you call it,he followed the metas as they formed each patch and slowly added his visions for each race but most of the time found a mid ground for them and he did this very well, de did this the right way.

And lastly I was right then I get 1 ruled by my own criteria Yet adila gets given the mod without anyone getting a say, least we know how you guys give balance head then.

- Long posts seem to confuse you so let me summarize the most important issues here. If you don't want people putting words into you, you need to state your position clearly. You need to state your positions for below matters.

Demand 1 - Hand over the balance lead
Question 1 - You need to be specific on this. Do you want to have a Final Say right? If the answer is yes, so in what form?
- In a sense, there are two types of Final Say right
1/ HAVE FINAL SAY ON THE PATCH NOTES like Caeltos. The right to force others to accept patch notes. Right to override with Vision even if there are more supported alternatives
- If your answer is this one, this is going to be the most controversial thing. Those who don't support you are saying even if compromise can be reached and you get the position of making patch notes, YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE RIGHT OF THIS VERSION OF A FINAL SAY.

2/ Right to make a decision when the deadlock on argument last for months with 1 or 2 alternatives
- Adila's grip on this final say in the current system is extremely weak. This right can only be exercised when the opinion over all is dead locked even after a long period of discussion. He cannot have a final say and override the decision if patch notes like you made recently are agreed upon by most people in general.
- If you agree on this version of FINAL SAY RIGHT, I doubt people will oppose you in becoming the balancing lead and making patch notes.

boss wrote:Metas gets made by the players though there games, back then its was the best players in this Mod's time Noisy, Tex, Toil and so and so,they made the metas and spoke about changes and ideas to caeltos, then with his ideas and such made patchs according to what the player base mostly wanted or least found a mid ground too.

He did not try and force a meta or stirr it up as you call it,he followed the metas as they formed each patch and slowly added his visions for each race but most of the time found a mid ground for them and he did this very well, de did this the right way.

- This is where you err the most. How would you explain below post?
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2354
- Caeltos is saying his vision of Eldar should be more of a mobile faction not static and defensive.
- He would listen to ideas from others on how the eldar should move in this direction. However, he decided THE DIRECTION AND DESIGN OF ELDAR as a faction. This is what a Vision is. I am questioning how would you rationale this move? It is not the need of balance that made him make this change. High tier people played Eldar and formed up meta already with STATIC AND DEFENSIVE ELDAR. Caeltos is trying to make it more mobile BECAUSE IT IS HIS VISION NOT BECAUSE IT CANNOT BE BALANCED WITHOUT MAKING IT MOBILE. Look at how many times he says fun and not fun to play as. Fun has nothing to do with making changes for balancing. By trying to make Eldar more mobile, the meta high tier players formed are broken.
- According to your logic, if enough people are against this making Eldar more mobile design by Caeltos, he should have abandoned this idea which did not happen. Caeltos did not compromise DESIGN AND DIRECTION once he set his mind upon it.

- This raises below question that requires your clear answer.
Question 2 - Does balance lead have right to decide on the direction and design and not back down when others oppose the decision?
- By making this kind of decision, balance lead ultimately changes meta formed by high tier players. Will you make that kind of post and dictate the design and direction of a faction?
- You keep saying Caeltos did not change meta in any possible way but as I am keep telling you if you have a Vision, you set a direction. When setting a direction, compromise can be made on details on how to move in that direction but direction itself cannot be changed by other opinion. This leads to change in meta. And this act of setting a direction is based on personal subjective view and is a matter of agreement not argument.

Your view of balancing can be summarized as no change if there is no problem balance wise. You should know what it means.
Question 3 - This means a faction design and direction cannot be decided = No Vision allowed. What will you do if your design of a faction and meta are different?
- High tier players are playing fine by setting meta and there are no glaring balance needs but it is different from how MU should work. In this case, Caeltos' answer on this one is if it is different from the Vision, it should be changed but will listen to others on how it should change and do change slowly.
- What you ultimately do not understand about Caeltos is that he will make listen to others but not when they are against his DESIGN HE ENVISIONED. This is why he is different from your way of balancing. He will certainly make change of how things work according to his vision even if there is no glaring balance problems.

Ayy Eye wrote:#Antforbalancelead

If you think about it he's the only logical choice, he might be a retard but he's a retard with a method, the rest of you live off of guesswork and pretending skill means something.

If you want attention this badly, get a dog.

@Boss

I never go double sents and still win games as IG. Also, I can destroy double sent builds with Plague Champ. So no, double sent is not the most cancerous build, as there are ways to deal with it. As a matter of fact, double sents is terrible against many match ups as you're sacraficing the capping power. You just gotta know what the fk your doing, which most players don't so they just complain. Overwhleming range fire will always win against IG in t1. GM cost needs nerfs I agree and as well as reinforce times but sents are totally fine. You are also forgetting that the only skilled players can micro the two sents. So you are literally just basing your opinions on the top ig players: Toil, Torpid & me which is super bias. Yes, good players can actually be good with races that requires micro. When lower players play IG and lose no one says anything but once a good player starts winning with IG everyone loses their shit. Like c'mon people.

Also, so let's say we nerf the shit out of IG. Who will become op next? It's a never ending cycle. One gets buffs, the other gets nerfs. You are confident you can end this infinite cycle Boss?