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.

Gotta laugh at the people that seriously Voted Tau and Daemons OP.

Every army has one thing in it that can be seen as cheesy if you dig deep enough for it.

These kinds of threads always go slightly off topic as people talk about how general matters more, or how every race has a strong unit comp...It's usually wise to state conditions at the beginning of a thread to sort through the riffraff.

Of course general matters more than army, as skill level is much more relevant to outcome than army statistics alone.

All balance discussions assume that two generals, of equal skill level, equal game knowledge, and equal familiarity with their armies, are facing off in a vacuum. They both are using the strongest (or cheesiest) TAC lists they can field (minimal meta gaming). Their approximate skill level is top-tournament worthy, though not skill capped (as skill cap is impossible to actually reach).

In conditions such as these, OP can definitely be more easily defined. Assuming all of the above, who would come out on top over thousands of games? It is from this that we can acquire statistically significant data on how races fare in terms of strength.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:To me, an army is only ever OP if its extremely point and click and requires no brain power at all.
So far, no army seems to truly match this criteria. Yes, even GK as they can be defeated, and the so called instawin armies (such as draigowing) have some serious flaws.

Couldnt have said it better myself.

Clearly, CSM, Tau, SoB and Tyranids are OP and should be nerfed out of existence.

Durza wrote:Clearly, CSM, Tau, SoB and Tyranids are OP and should be nerfed out of existence.

Oh, and 3rd necrons. Those guys were ott. I mean, they can get back up on a 4+ AND their vehicle ignores melta and lances! WTF!

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Durza wrote:Clearly, CSM, Tau, SoB and Tyranids are OP and should be nerfed out of existence.

Oh, and 3rd necrons. Those guys were ott. I mean, they can get back up on a 4+ AND their vehicle ignores melta and lances! WTF!

And the Avatar. I mean, ignoring flamers and melta weapons?

Durza wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Durza wrote:Clearly, CSM, Tau, SoB and Tyranids are OP and should be nerfed out of existence.

Oh, and 3rd necrons. Those guys were ott. I mean, they can get back up on a 4+ AND their vehicle ignores melta and lances! WTF!

And the Avatar. I mean, ignoring flamers and melta weapons?

There's nothing you can do to the Avatar.

I mean everyone with 10 Tac Marines gets a Free Flamer and Melta, but they don't work on the Avatar! And bolters only wound it on a six! I call cheese.

Ive had a few people tell me flamers of tzeentch are op, right after wiping out an entire squad on arrival. This was before I started bringing the masque along..
Would definately agree that all armies have their own cheesy tricks, certain ones just have more

Iur_tae_mont wrote:

Durza wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Durza wrote:Clearly, CSM, Tau, SoB and Tyranids are OP and should be nerfed out of existence.

Oh, and 3rd necrons. Those guys were ott. I mean, they can get back up on a 4+ AND their vehicle ignores melta and lances! WTF!

And the Avatar. I mean, ignoring flamers and melta weapons?

There's nothing you can do to the Avatar.

I mean everyone with 10 Tac Marines gets a Free Flamer and Melta, but they don't work on the Avatar! And bolters only wound it on a six! I call cheese.

Here's a nutty idea, use a Missile Launcher.

TedNugent wrote:

Iur_tae_mont wrote:

Durza wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Durza wrote:Clearly, CSM, Tau, SoB and Tyranids are OP and should be nerfed out of existence.

Oh, and 3rd necrons. Those guys were ott. I mean, they can get back up on a 4+ AND their vehicle ignores melta and lances! WTF!

And the Avatar. I mean, ignoring flamers and melta weapons?

There's nothing you can do to the Avatar.

I mean everyone with 10 Tac Marines gets a Free Flamer and Melta, but they don't work on the Avatar! And bolters only wound it on a six! I call cheese.

Here's a nutty idea, use a Missile Launcher.

That's the joke...look at the other posts.

You're a silly guy!

There are no OP armies, all have counters and can be beaten if you know how to. Althou some gamers find joy in simpel spamming

No army is OP IMO, Any army has the potential to have you on your knees every game... Even Tau... Er well maybe not them.

Trondheim wrote:There are no OP armies, all have counters and can be beaten if you know how to. Althou some gamers find joy in simpel spamming

Should tell that to the Tryanid player I know who gets destroyed religiously to Valkyries because he cannot close the distance and lacks invulnerability saves.

Iur_tae_mont wrote:Gotta laugh at the people that seriously Voted Tau and Daemons OP.

Every army has one thing in it that can be seen as cheesy if you dig deep enough for it.

I am shocked Tau were voted higher than SoBs, SoBs d6 str 8 ap 1 missile launching tank from hell is definitely annoying.

I voted for all of them. Every army can have over and underpowered builds and units. The key to them is using them in the proper proportions, its called army building. If you expect to open ip a book and the answers are beamed down from heaven, this game, like many other games may disappoint. Instead of complaining about how OP this or that codex is, try and learn from your games. Its called experience...

I'll first start by saying it all comes down how you play YOUR army. What's tragic is older codex's MUST build around fighting certain armies in order to compete, let alone survive competitive META communities. These same lists then suffer versus their polar opposites.

Sorry but I threw my hat on the GK...but a second close is Blood Angels and having just now started Necrons, I can see the wicked potential.

I have six regular GK players, all pretty much have the same lists (Purifiers, Riflemen, Vindcares, and Razorbacks) with maybe a few randoms here and there, and are always uphill battles for everyone else in our gaming community to fight. They're not unbeatable but they definitely have some advantages that are excessive (S5/I6 force weapon troops?!?).

Older armies just don't have the tactical flexibility built into their lists to fight against such an effective, utilitarian, and economic army.

Seriously, who voted Tau?

some people hate Tau because when you play a good player they can mow you down.

BUt having played deamons anyone who says they are overpowered is foolish

GK's.

No such thing as OP. Some people need to man up, or not play with their man dollies.

Jstncloud wrote:

Trondheim wrote:There are no OP armies, all have counters and can be beaten if you know how to. Althou some gamers find joy in simpel spamming

Should tell that to the Tryanid player I know who gets destroyed religiously to Valkyries because he cannot close the distance and lacks invulnerability saves.

Right. Then I should tell that to my Guard friend who just had his two thirty man blobs utterly melted by outflanking Genestealers that turn everything into a fine red mulch when they touch it. Or tell him that those Ymgarl Genestealers just happened to pop out and assault his Leman Russ Squadron in the same turn and this scrap a 500 point list in one fell swoop with no idealogical counter.

That poor, poor Tyranid player.

JstnCloud wrote:

Iur_tae_mont wrote:Gotta laugh at the people that seriously Voted Tau and Daemons OP.

Every army has one thing in it that can be seen as cheesy if you dig deep enough for it.

I am shocked Tau were voted higher than SoBs, SoBs d6 str 8 ap 1 missile launching tank from hell is definitely annoying.

No army is overpowered. Cries of OP usually stem from player error or poor luck. Player might wonder why thier Nobs w/ power claws get completely pasted by Halbred toting Grey Knights, expecting a totally different outcome when you throw Strike-Last 2W Models at units with Force Weapons that strike at Initiavtive order. Overpowered. Obviously.

Or when an Imperial Guard player watches as his Autocannon/GL Blob gets cleaned through by a group of screaming-deranged Death Company in a fit of chainswords and power weapons. Or when the Guard player fails to somehow kill a single blood talon dreadnaught with all the god forsaken weapons at his disposal and watches another blob get mowed down with impunity in almost one turn of Combat. Overpowered. Obviously.

5th Edition is getting stale.

I think certain units can be very OP. And when people spam them, their list becomes fairly OP and hard to compete with. For example, a guy in my gaming circle runs 3 Dreadknights for his HS. Now, yes they can be easy to defeat if you're expecting to fight them and can tailor your list to deal with them, but when you've got 7 other vastly different armies to worry about, you can't focus on just the one opponent. Thus, he wins much more often than anyone else. I've built several lists that beat him consistently, but those same lists lose to everyone else for various reasons. It's things like that that make me feel certain armies can be OP. I voted for GK, BA, IG, and SW.

You can't say that there isn't an OP army. The game is made that way. There always seems to be one codex that is stronger then the rest. Its called codex creep. but for the GK players who said there isnt an overpowered army, we believe you. dont worry. Personally the army that has the most cheesy builds is the over powered army. Sisters of battle doing so well is kinda funny but makes a little bit of sense. Grey knights being the highest, that makes total sense. But then again i voted for necrons.

Honestly, I really don't think any army is overpowered. Just many are not updated enough or are left to drift in the time when Dinosaurs walked the earth while races that really don't need it are in the future. These threads always pop up with raging Grey Knight haters and such. When someone plays someone in the overly waac way it's makes an army seem overpowered, when new codex's are released, they are full of competitive builds while armies such as Tau are left with only one or two builds that are vaguely competitive left.

No army is OP some are just more powerful.

SEE my belial and 25 scoring terminators with TH/SS, 5 cyclones a banner and a apothecary plus 3 Landspeeder tornados and 3 AC/LC pred (for 2000 pts)

now i do have armies i have trouble with mixed guard, Tau, My friends hide in cover pew-pew GK termies who thanks to a techamrine have a 2++ cover.

EVery army has a counter stealer spam can rock GKS

Protip - numbers are variables. If you're claiming that no army is over-powered, it means they're all statistically the same.
I can only assume the "there are no over-powered armies" crowd have analysed the damage-per-point values of every single unit in every single codex; and found them identical.
I voted BA, GK and SW; because they are.

I want to vote none of the above. I mean come on, there's a always a way to beat any list out there. Problem is that most people(most, not all) will play an army, get tabled, get pissed and go online to yell about it, then find other people yelling about it, then get whipped into a frenzy and refuse to play that type of list again, never learning how to play against that type of list. I refuse to believe any army is "unbeatable."

I haven't played GK yet, so maybe my opinion will change someday.

beigeknight wrote:I want to vote none of the above. I mean come on, there's a always a way to beat any list out there.

OP!=unplayable.
If I pay 15 points for a unit, and another army gets the same army for 15 points but with a couple of special rules, that army is overpowered.
Fact is some armies are capable of getting a lot more killing power than others.

Testify wrote:

beigeknight wrote:I want to vote none of the above. I mean come on, there's a always a way to beat any list out there.

OP!=unplayable.
If I pay 15 points for a unit, and another army gets the same army for 15 points but with a couple of special rules, that army is overpowered.
Fact is some armies are capable of getting a lot more killing power than others.

If that's the case then like every codex has something OP compared to something else in a different codex. I think this game is too complex to be able to say that one unit is overpowered, it's kind of subjective. Everything has strenghts and weaknesses, even something that has a ton of strenghts. I think the real fact is that some armies are older than others. Someone said above, it's not an issue of being overpowered, it's an issue of being underpowered.

I always laugh when people say "You're only saying the army is OP because you lost" because that's kinda the point. How does one determined that an army is OP but by how often it wins?