Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Must say I am personally really happy with what GW is doing with the powerlevels of the new codices. Certainly balance in 40K is nothing compared to other games, but the Orks, Blood Angels, Grey Knights, Dark Eldar, Space Wolves, Astra Militarum are all very well in line with eachother. You can do solid things with each, but there aren´t many absolutely broken things to be found within. Even the generally bottom tier classed codices of DA and CSM can play against these new codices just fine, aside from the classic issue of some units just being worse than others ( but really, is that new to anyone? ) I play both DA and CSM so I have firsthand experience in this.

I´m pretty sure the Necron codex will also be brought down in power, and I think it´s a good thing. The only issue with the new codices being a bit more tame is that Eldar and Tau are still in the old "spectrum" -and they will be allround better until they receive an update to bring them in line with the others. A lot of people are unhappy about their codex getting nerfs, but asfar as I´m concerned they are missing the big picture, which seems to have started taking place after the SM Codex, as all codices after that have been ironed to be largely in line with eachother.

In essence, if they made Centurions unable to go inside Drop Pods, and brought Tau and Eldar in line with the rest of the codices we would have ( on a GW scale... ) a fairly balanced game going.

This topic is probably completely irrelevant to the folk who want to play a footslogging terminator army - I´m speaking about balance in an enviroment where people like the use of decent/good units and somewhat competitive play. In short, I find the latest 4-5 codices have better balance with eachother than what has existed ever before in 40K. I don´t think the general powerlevel of codices coming down is a bad thing, it doesn´t matter if the end result is that it´s as similiar as possible to all. I play in 3 different groups and pretty much all factions have a player, and I now have 71 games played this year. Basically everyone except Tau and Eldar seem to be faring eachother in a more balanced way than ever before.

I hope having the key points underlined, bolded and in different colour is enough to deflect the first few "omg IG is so underpowered vs. Eldar" -posts, which are completely irrelevant to what I am trying to say.

What do you think?

Overall I agree but in before a derail into how crap GW is in general. Nice try for a thread though.

I think even sub builds within DAs and CSM can be very powerful which is great. Whilst I agree something abit more niche like footslogging termies, ghostwarriors or Nid horde builds dont do as well, they're still not complete write offs in a non competitive scene.
A lot of it comes down to once again, who you're playing against, you and their expectations and fun levels and whether you want to steamroll someone or just have a bit of fun without being tabled turn 3.

I'm yet to actually play with my "new" codex (orks, one you didnt mention) but I can't see any immediate problems with it. Certainly not overpowered. In fact if anything I'd say the codex is a bit underpowered. Certainly has a bit of a bland vibe to it, though the supplements have helped with that somewhat.

And if the ORK codex is looking a bit bland, I'd hate to think how utterly boring the other new codices are lol.

Yeah I forgot Orks, added those. They definetly fall into this category, a player in my hometowns group ( who´s played Orks since 3. ed ) is pretty much raving about how he now has more good options than ever before.

Do you mean "bland" in a sense that the really powerful units ( compared to the rest ) are missing ( like some folk do ) or what do you mean exactly? To me it seems a lot of people see a codex being bland if it has had it´s "spikes" cut off, even if it has a ton of different, actually usable options against the other new codices.

Sure niche builds dont do aswell, but why shouldnt they? Why are they fluffy only?

What do you mean by niche?

I dont think they are, we're just saying they wont be as powerful as the more mainstream builds (even though overall balance has improved) but niche builds in a friendly environment can certainly do well too.

kingleir wrote:
Why is it that niche builds are being excluded from the we want everything to be balanced thread?

Hmmh. This is not a "we want everything to be balanced" -thread, and because discussing the balance of the newer codices with eachother becomes pointless if you have to account for the footslogging terminator hordes and the like. I don´t think the day will ever come, when a fluffy themed niche army is going to be competitive ( there are a few exceptions ) and unless someone has noticed the newer codices making them so, then what´s the point really. They generally aren´t good, they probably never will be, not sure if there´s anything of substance to be added to it?

They can fair nicely if played in an enviroment with similiar lists. But that has nothing to do with the codices in the end, it has to do with the opponents basically agreeing to using such lists. ( Unless one day they will be generally competitive aswell, but again unfortunately I really don´t see that happening... )

I generally agree with the sentiment here- GW has done a much better job of balancing the latest string of codices against one another.

It's just unfortunate that this has come at the expense of lots of content and flavor being cut. From special characters getting dropped in droves to the systematic replacement of artwork with dull model pictures to many fluffy rules being simplified or removed altogether, it feels like the new codices are altogether very bland.

GW still needs to find that sweet-spot where codices are as flavorful as older ones like the Tau and SM ones (the gold standard for codices, imo) while still balancing well against their peers.

On a positive note, I really like the concept of formations, even if they are basically a scam.

 Ratius wrote:
Overall I agree but in before a derail into how crap GW is in general.

Because that really helps. No seriously, its wonderful that you'd post something like that. It truly is. Shows how inviting and open you are to a discussion that may include opinions you disagree with.

Anyways.

The codices are better balanced externally, but still need a fair amount of work internally.

Randomly losing units, characters, and wargear options hurts whatever external balance was improved upon, especially with the lack of communication from GW informing us what the general plan is for the future.

It'll be nice when Eldar and Tau get updated, so we can the big picture without a crazy over the top codex tainting the view.

Ravenwing are niche and competitive, so are mechdar

 BlaxicanX wrote:
I generally agree with the sentiment here- GW has done a much better job of balancing the latest string of codices against one another.

It's just unfortunate that this has come at the expense of lots of content and flavor being cut. From special characters getting dropped in droves to the systematic replacement of artwork with dull model pictures to many fluffy rules being simplified or removed altogether, it feels like the new codices are altogether very bland.

GW still needs to find that sweet-spot where codices are as flavorful as older ones like the Tau and SM ones (the hold standard for codices, imo) while still balancing well against their peers.

On a positive note, I really like the concept of formations, even if they are basically a scam.

I agree with this.
Generally, codex to codex balance has gotten better, but the internal balance is still wonky.
But the biggest sin is that the new dexes are a bit boring. My IG dex is functional, but bland.
Now if they could add some more excitement and internal balance, then we're talking.
(It's not a good sign when people dread getting a dex updated.)
Still, it's a step in the right direction, so GW, you get a point.

 Formosa wrote:
Ravenwing are niche and competitive, so are mechdar

Yeah, they are. There are niche competitive builds around, not denying that. I´m not sure how to articulate what I mean any better. I tried to describe it few posts above, and edited that to be more accurate.

 RunicFIN wrote:
Yeah I forgot Orks, added those. They definetly fall into this category, a player in my hometowns group ( who´s played Orks since 3. ed ) is pretty much raving about how he now has more good options than ever before.

Do you mean "bland" in a sense that the really powerful units ( compared to the rest ) are missing ( like some folk do ) or what do you mean exactly? To me it seems a lot of people see a codex being bland if it has had it´s "spikes" cut off, even if it has a ton of different, actually usable options against the other new codices.

No, it was more that they lost a lot of their flavour. The ramshackle vehicle rules used to be something like (and this is a vague memory, Im at work so no cedex at hand), when destroyed, they had a chance to veer off and blow up in peoples faces. Thats orky and fun, and hardly overpowered. Now its a small chance to turn a penetrate into a glance I think? I mean thats nice... except trukks can still get glanced to death easily so its a bit pointless. And not orky. and dull.

They also dropped the fun characters. Like the guy who has the psychic power to turn an enemy character into a Squig. The enemy even gets to carry on using the squig model. Come on, thats pretty awesome. And no more overpowered than any other psychic attack.

Saying that, we do still have the shokk attack gun, but thats basically the only flavoursome bit of crazy orkiness in the codex.

Because that really helps. No seriously, its wonderful that you'd post something like that. It truly is. Shows how inviting and open you are to a discussion that may include opinions you disagree with.

Anyways.

Oh wind it in Blacksails, my posting history is about as far from the whiney whinger as can be. The point was pre empting the inevitable turn towards GW bashing which from what I can see has been a tediously recurrent theme over the last 6 months in the general discussion forum even with threads that have little to do with it.

Yes it was a sarky comment but I give the thread about 2 pages before it turns (again). If my comment makes even one person stop and say "ah, I'll leave it this time", then the sarcasm worked. Dont be so defensive.

Niiru wrote:

 RunicFIN wrote:
Yeah I forgot Orks, added those. They definetly fall into this category, a player in my hometowns group ( who´s played Orks since 3. ed ) is pretty much raving about how he now has more good options than ever before.

Do you mean "bland" in a sense that the really powerful units ( compared to the rest ) are missing ( like some folk do ) or what do you mean exactly? To me it seems a lot of people see a codex being bland if it has had it´s "spikes" cut off, even if it has a ton of different, actually usable options against the other new codices.

No, it was more that they lost a lot of their flavour. The ramshackle vehicle rules used to be something like (and this is a vague memory, Im at work so no cedex at hand), when destroyed, they had a chance to veer off and blow up in peoples faces. Thats orky and fun, and hardly overpowered. Now its a small chance to turn a penetrate into a glance I think? I mean thats nice... except trukks can still get glanced to death easily so its a bit pointless. And not orky. and dull.

They also dropped the fun characters. Like the guy who has the psychic power to turn an enemy character into a Squig. The enemy even gets to carry on using the squig model. Come on, thats pretty awesome. And no more overpowered than any other psychic attack.

Saying that, we do still have the shokk attack gun, but thats basically the only flavoursome bit of crazy orkiness in the codex.

Allright, I get what you mean. Specifically regarding the ramshackle vehicle rules though, a lot of players want less of randomness in the game and have wanted that for quite some time. Maybe GW listened, but at the expense of those who like the random stuff ( I personally found the ork random rules fun aswell. ) In the end you just can´t please everyone.

 RunicFIN wrote:


I´m thinking what Blacksails said was mostly directed at me and with the "by posting something like that" - he meant the thread. Could be wrong. Also, thanks for the pre-emptive strike Ratius.

No, its wasn't directed at you. Your post is fine. Why would I find something wrong about your post? You have a valid point; external balance is better. There are other flaws with the codices, but external balance is not chief among them with recent books.

Ratius 'pre-emptive' strike is unnecessary and acts as a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy.

Then again, I suppose fighting snark with snark isn't going to get anything anywhere.

Well I apologise if it offended anyone, it was a sarky, throw away remark and not meant to derail the thread.

So on with the original discussion.

 RunicFIN wrote:


Allright, I get what you mean. Specifically regarding the ramshackle vehicle rules though, a lot of players want less of randomness in the game and have wanted that for quite some time. Maybe GW listened, but at the expense of those who like the random stuff ( I personally found the ork random rules fun aswell. ) In the end you just can´t please everyone.

Also, thanks for the pre-emptive strike Ratius.

Removing the extra randomness from the game I approve of.

Removing the orks ability to explode and either kill the enemy or themselves? Or randomly turn the enemy leader into a pet? Pfft, might as well just paint some imperial guard green!

I'm being (slightly) facetious of course, as the orks do still have some orkiness to them... the ability for the blitzabomma to miss its bomb and crash into the target instead, for instance. But its a lot less than it should be. Orks are *the* random army.

TL;DR - Randomness in the game as a whole should be reduced. Crazy explosive randomness in the ork codex should be increased. Or at least the options for it.

As a sidenote, the supplemental codices also offer some extra flavour for your army, but asfar as I´m concerned -none- of them have been broken ( meaning the army related supplements, not IK. ) Infact they seem to just offer alternatives and themes for your army, without completely stepping on the original codex, and I think that´s great.

Asfar as I know, the supplements also seem to be fairly balanced, none of them offer an army a tool to go from tier C- to tier A+++. They just offer alternatives and options and some flavour, with the occasional slight improvements.

 Ratius wrote:
Well I apologise if it offended anyone, it was a sarky, throw away remark and not meant to derail the thread.

So on with the original discussion.

Well, personally I understand completely why you said it and I approve of your pre-emptive strike. Your agenda with it is one of goodness.

I have to echo the sentiment that the books have been better balanced lately, but that it's hard to get a good look at the group photo because tau and eldar are way up in front of the camera being photo hogs.

Makes me wonder how it will be to be a tau/eldar player when their new books hit. May have to get a friend to do a drawing of an ork and tyranid holding an eldar and tau, while a couple marines gut punch them, and some tech priests muck around under the hood of a riptide and wave serpent in the background.

I´d be suprised if an Eldar/Tau player is surprised of the inevitable nerf that´s coming their way. It would also be baffling why one would find it a bad thing if they were brought in line with the others.

Unless someone enjoys playing an army that´s above the rest ofcourse. But well... personally I think it´s okay to disappoint those specific people.

For the greater good.

I think most Eldar and Tau players fear the loss of flavor and units more than power level.
Though there are certainly some that would complain about the a nerf to their Eldar. There's one poster who thinks WS are a bit underpowered.

 MWHistorian wrote:
I think most Eldar and Tau players fear the loss of flavor and units more than power level.
Though there are certainly some that would complain about the a nerf to their Eldar. There's one poster who thinks WS are a bit underpowered.

Going by the Ork codex (I know ive already mentioned it but its the best example I know of) Eldar and Tau are guaranteed to lose a large chunk of flavour. They probably wont lose any units, but they will lose some of their special characters.

They will also lose the characters that give the ability to have certain units as troops. So no more Iyanden wraithguard armies (which I collect, and would be sad to see disappear).

 RunicFIN wrote:
Specifically regarding the ramshackle vehicle rules though, a lot of players want less of randomness in the game and have wanted that for quite some time. Maybe GW listened, but at the expense of those who like the random stuff ( I personally found the ork random rules fun aswell. ) In the end you just can´t please everyone.

So if GW is listening to complaints and removing randomness then why is 7th edition full of stupid and (mostly) unwanted randomness? Random tables for everything, a whole new type of random mission objectives, etc.

 RunicFIN wrote:
and because discussing the balance of the newer codices with eachother becomes pointless if you have to account for the footslogging terminator hordes and the like.

How does it become pointless? The fact that it leads to a conclusion of "GW still isn't very good at balance" doesn't mean that the discussion is pointless. I just means that it isn't going in the direction you wanted it to go in.

I don´t think the day will ever come, when a fluffy themed niche army is going to be competitive

And there's no excuse for this. GW doesn't deserve praise for fixing balance issues when their fluffy/narrative game comes with an implied rule like "don't build fluffy/narrative armies because they aren't balanced".

Niiru wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
I think most Eldar and Tau players fear the loss of flavor and units more than power level.
Though there are certainly some that would complain about the a nerf to their Eldar. There's one poster who thinks WS are a bit underpowered.

Going by the Ork codex (I know ive already mentioned it but its the best example I know of) Eldar and Tau are guaranteed to lose a large chunk of flavour. They probably wont lose any units, but they will lose some of their special characters.

They will also lose the characters that give the ability to have certain units as troops. So no more Iyanden wraithguard armies (which I collect, and would be sad to see disappear).

The old Chaos 3.5 dex is often lauded as the best Chaos dex ever. It wasn't due to power levels. (ok, for some, yes.) But it's looked back on as a golden age for Chaos players because it let them create the armies they wanted. Noise Marine dreadnaughts, Iron Warriors with artillery and other craziness filled the book. It was bursting with character and makes the current one seem drab and boring. Why can't GW let their imagination loose again while maintaining some semblance of balance? So many of the fixes are easy.

I like the direction things are going. I play orks and Chaos anyway, so I'm used to lower expectations than usual. But every new book that comes out, I'm always thinking to myself "That sounds fun to play against.", rather than the dread of being thrown further under the bus with every new release.

 Peregrine wrote:
So if GW is listening to complaints and removing randomness then why is 7th edition full of stupid and (mostly) unwanted randomness? Random tables for everything, a whole new type of random mission objectives, etc.

I won´t go into this with you. I was talking about the Orks codex and merely saying perhaps they listened in that instance alone. The end.

 Peregrine wrote:
How does it become pointless? The fact that it leads to a conclusion of "GW still isn't very good at balance" doesn't mean that the discussion is pointless. I just means that it isn't going in the direction you wanted it to go in.

If you didn´t understand what I ment then I cannot help you as I cannot articulate it any better. If you feel like talking about footslogging terminator hordes being useless in the new codices then by all means, do so. Personally I´ll still find it pointless.

 Peregrine wrote:
And there's no excuse for this. GW doesn't deserve praise for fixing balance issues when their fluffy/narrative game comes with an implied rule like "don't build fluffy/narrative armies because they aren't balanced".

Well, that´s your opinion. For me fluffy armies not being competitive is no issue. Would be nice if they were but I still don´t see it happening. It also doesn´t change the fact the latest codices are actually well balanced towards eachother, which was the main point anyway.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
I like the direction things are going. I play orks and Chaos anyway, so I'm used to lower expectations than usual. But every new book that comes out, I'm always thinking to myself "That sounds fun to play against.", rather than the dread of being thrown further under the bus with every new release.

Yeah, pretty much this.

 RunicFIN wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
And there's no excuse for this. GW doesn't deserve praise for fixing balance issues when their fluffy/narrative game comes with an implied rule like "don't build fluffy/narrative armies because they aren't balanced".

Well, that´s your opinion. For me fluffy armies not being competitive is no issue.

And that's YOUR opinion. I don't see why the game being balanced enough to play competitively with fluffy armies has any drawbacks at all. That would only be a positive thing.

 ImAGeek wrote:


And that's YOUR opinion. I don't see why the game being balanced enough to play competitively with fluffy armies has any drawbacks at all. That would only be a positive thing.

Umm... yeah? That´s why I wrote "For me"