That longsword damage looks like an error, right?  Should be 1d8 +1.

Nope. Looks accurate. Savage bastards are gonna cleave through many unfortunate players moving forward.

I feel like they didn't catch that the basic Hobgoblin has always hit way above its CR. With their high AC combined with their damage output insta-gibbing level 1 and 2 party members, they don't have a lot of usability, which sucks because they are relatively common in encounter tables and adventures. Their weakness of low HP can only be exploited by spellcasters targeting saves. Now it's even less conditional, they just get to do a bunch of damage at once, without spreading it on multiple fail points like those that reach ~10 with multiattack. In fact, because of pack tactics they reach higher damage per round, as they didn't have a passive accuracy boost before. This one shouldn't even have that damage die for its sword if the implication is that it's using a shield, if it isn't it should have lower AC or allowed note that it could be switched. 
For the Hobgoblin group, they could have focused on the traits of the Hobgoblin in Monsters of the Multiverse, but focusing on a war tactician/trooper aspect of using help as a bonus action with special effects, or to reach the higher damage output instead of passively doubling the die.

Quote from Lord_Baphomet >>

Nope. Looks accurate. Savage bastards are gonna cleave through many unfortunate players moving forward.

 Look at the AC, the Hobgoblin is supposed to be wielding a shield, so it shouldn't have the two-handed Longsword damage, or at least state that it can be switched.

I feel both their ranged and melee damage should be lowered a bit. It also feels weird that the Hobgoblin Captain and Warlord don't hit as hard as them. 

They do hit harder. Captain has extra poison damage (for some reason) and two attacks. Warlord makes three attacks

Can PCs pick up a Hobgoblin's longsword??

Quote from DavidMedley >>

Can PCs pick up a Hobgoblin's longsword??

 Yes but it just becomes a regular longsword. It doesn't stay as a 2d10 weapon.

Quote from JazzyBassy >>

Quote from Lord_Baphomet >>

Nope. Looks accurate. Savage bastards are gonna cleave through many unfortunate players moving forward.

 Look at the AC, the Hobgoblin is supposed to be wielding a shield, so it shouldn't have the two-handed Longsword damage, or at least state that it can be switched.

 Monsters don't use player rules. Damage numbers are completely arbitrary so it could have a dagger attack that says 5d10, but if anyone but the hobgoblin uses it then its just a regular dagger. Two-handed doesn't matter anymore because again all monster numbers be that AC or damage are arbitrary now.

So two CR 1/2 hobgoblin warriors wielding soup spoons surprise a level 4 character and likely end him with Advantage on all their attacks and their new whopping 2d10+1 damage regardless of what weapon they wield. Not sure which bothers me more, the CR being so off or the lack of even a whiff of consistency with weapon damage in the new MM. And "just cuz they says so" is a pretty weak reason to accept that the beefy Hobgoblin Captain wielding a greatsword vs a party of PCs with poison resistance only causes 2d6+2 damage while his underlings do 2d10+1 with their spoons.

Been playing our favorite game since 1979 and this Monster Manual is the worst by far in the 46 years I've played with so much sloppy "just cuz" inconsistencies. There are far easier and more creative ways to create punchier monsters than abandoning base weapon damage consistency. 

Really not a big deal if you don't like it make your own monsters with regular weapon damage and all your punchier methods. No one is forcing you to use newer stuff.

The Hobgoblin Captain on average is doing the same amount of damage with its greatsword plus its poison (9 from sword and 3 from Poison), has two attacks, higher to hit, more health, and can grant advantage within 10 feet. It's an objectively better monster in all regards damage isn't the only factor here.

I feel like any monsters that use pack tactics also should be subject to morale failure. If they see their compatriots die all around them, they should be intelligent enough to flee and fight another day. I'm trying to come up with some easy-to-use morale rules for my campaigns.

Seriously? The Hobgoblin warrior does more damage(2d10+1) with a longsword than a Hobgoblin captain does with his Greatsword(2d8+#). also, the warrior deals +3d4 poison damage with his arrows and the Captain deals +2d4 poison damage.

The total lack of consistency tells me the developers care about some sort of weird balance ethos than making things coherent, logical and consistent. 

I designed more balanced monsters when i was 8.

Sorry, but the "if you dont like it make your own" is a pretty feeble defence of "professional designers" creating sloppy lazy work. 

the balance methodology you prescribe is inconsistent and lazy and has no progressive consistency. a Hobgoblin Captain SHOULD do more damage than the Hobgoblin warrior.

it is order of magnitudes higher CR and logically why would it pick up a great sword and give up a decent AC to do less damage than use the same longsword stats for his minions? It should wield the same longsword with multiple attacks and a shield for better damage and AC, and wield the same poisoned arrows, scaling the damage down per attack due to multiple attacks is illogical and lazy. balance for the sake of balance with no basis in reality or logic.

And beyond that what happens when the players kill one and you have to explain to them "oh- now it only does regular D8 damage" and destroy any immersion in the mechanics you present to your players. - Inconsistent, Lazy and Bad design. no excuses.

which is ********.

I think hobgoblin captains dealing less damage per attack makes sense - normal hobgoblins are thugs who hit like a truck, while their captains are more refined and can engage with multiple enemies at once and dish out more overall damage, even if their individual swings aren’t as strong. I do think their AC is too high. Even if it’s counterbalanced by them having low HP, missing attacks is not fun, and they really should have a 16 for both AC and HP.

AC 18, 11 hp, 12 damage on average... every stat for these seems wildly off for CR 1/2. I would not use these as printed.

There should only be 1 d10 (unless they give the HobGoblin an ability like Bug Bears have) and it should be a d8 (as long as they use a shield).

Hobbos are supposed to be scary, but these dudebros slice through low level parties too quickly.

Honestly I have given every other stat block the benefit of the doubt and some of them seem fine but the Guard ones and the Hobgoblin ones are so ass.