First, I generally agree with the recent nerfs. When a couple things dominate the meta in any game, it should make those items suspect.

Nobody is going to get playtesting right all the time. But if FFG decides that "X" is broken enough to require an alteration, why not keep the rules as written and simply adjust the cost of the card? Now folks have to unlearn mechanics.

In a game where lists are balance via point cost, why not just use that as the agent of rebalancing?

I can think of several reasons FFG (and doubtless people below me in this thread) will cite, but the truth is that none of them holds any validity.

So I honestly have no idea.

I'm not totally sure on this, but I think maybe because point adjustments usually allow less fine tuning?

Like, you can make Zuckuss (at least) 100% more expensive by increasing his cost 1 or more pts or you can change how he works which constitutes a much more subtle adjustment in value.

This does not hold true so much with Palp who could have had a meaningful point adjustment, still less for Manaroo. I think that they altered those cards because (from my reading of the new article) they felt that they were simply too straight forward to use at maximal efficiency.

I believe it's all about not wanting people to show up to play with an illegal list because of cost increases. You can still show up with the same list after the FAQ and still play but your combos may be broken.

8 minutes ago, MenaceNsobriety said:

I believe it's all about not wanting people to show up to play with an illegal list because of cost increases. You can still show up with the same list after the FAQ and still play but your combos may be broken.

I stand corrected. This is a valid reason.

6 minutes ago, MenaceNsobriety said:

I believe it's all about not wanting people to show up to play with an illegal list because of cost increases. You can still show up with the same list after the FAQ and still play but your combos may be broken.

Pretty much this logic right here - there are very few places that they've actively made a list item illegal, and those have all been restrictions - if you show up to a tournament with triple U-boats and Deadeye, having just emerged from being frozen in ice in time for the latest store championship, the upgrades are legal, but the ships aren't - and you could simply remove the upgrade card and then play the list anyway.

...I mean, it'll be terrible, but you can play it.

I suspect it's also, to a certain point, historical - this document was originally a FAQ. The only stuff they fixed was the text on the cards, not the fundamental statistics of the cards themselves (cost, slot, general purpose). They're thus willing to stretch out and start applying much more heavy-handed errata to the card text, but they're still sticking to the card text.

15 minutes ago, MenaceNsobriety said:

I believe it's all about not wanting people to show up to play with an illegal list because of cost increases. You can still show up with the same list after the FAQ and still play but your combos may be broken.

Probably also why the same situation has carried through in Imperial Assault, and why so many "fix" cards involve a point reduction instead of an errata to the original ship.

Maths is harde. Moast peeple R bettor wuth anglish.