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.

I keep seeing everyone say how 30k is so much more balanced in comparison to 40k. After watching a lot of batreps on Youtube, really the only thing I can see balance wise is that it's Space Marines versus Space marines, which is about as balanced as it gets.

It still carries the same IGOUGO problems as 40k and some weapons are still ridiculous (looking at some of the large blast templates that are AP2/3 or some of the Iron Warriors weapons).

Am I missing something here? Because the power levels still seem about the same, it's just almost every faction has been removed.

Mostly the FoC not being circumvented so easily. Also mission structure seems stronger and more considered and focused.

From what I've seen and read (never played a game myself, but I've watch several matches online and at my FLGS as well as reading the rules), you're right about the game being primarily Marine vs. Marine. There are other factions like the Solar Auxilia and the Mechanicum, but most people play Marines. This makes the game more balanced by nature. The other major balancing factor is that all armies are built using variations of the standard FOC. I don't think that formations as a concept are unbalanced, but the existing formations in 40k are not balanced, so by not including them, 30k is more balanced.

I think it attracts players with a different mentality/philosophy to that which some 40kers seem to have.

FW also playtests many new things publically before making them final. Sometimes they mess up, but this method reduces the chance and a lot fewer kits seem to be OP just because it is new.

Army building rules are better in that they're the old rules that mostly worked. Classic FoC with a few variants, only troops can score (with exceptions), percentage limits on LoW (again, exceptions exist), and a mostly level playing field of armies. Now, that mostly level playing field of armies comes from the fact that the overwhelming majority of armies are marines.

While the Mechanicum and Solar Auxilia/Militia exist, the official 30k armies are all marines.

nareik wrote:
I think it attracts players with a different mentality/philosophy to that which some 40kers seem to have.

The fact that 30k requires a large investment, and you need to be more skilled hobbywise to work with and paint FW models properly, limits the amount of people who play it compared to those who play 40k. There are no official tournaments currently for 30k, which helps in getting rid of WAAC players, as there is no incentive for them to build completely OP list. However, I don't think there is that much scope for cheesy lists in 30k due to the buffed points cost and taxes as well as the fact it is mainly SM vs SM, and a more restrictive FOC.

Piggybacking off of this, as much as I think Formations are cool, would removing them and returning to the days of early with 6th, with a standard FoC, Troops and DTs only can score, and no Formations improve 40k?

 jreilly89 wrote:
Piggybacking off of this, as much as I think Formations are cool, would removing them and returning to the days of early with 6th, with a standard FoC, Troops and DTs only can score, and no Formations improve 40k?

Probably not. I can only think of one OP thing based on a formation or that needs a formation to work.

1. Everyone's using the same army, mostly.
2. It has missions designed for that army.
3. Only Troops score.
4. It has tighter restrictions on what people are allowed to use even within that army.

Is 30k still only imperial factions? Can Xenos join in on the fun? Probably not Tau though, as they weren't around back then.

30k ia monstrously imbalanced, it just appears balanced next to normal 40k

There's no formations, which is huge, and most of the armies are relatively similar, which also is pretty huge.

 Vaktathi wrote:
30k ia monstrously imbalanced, it just appears balanced next to normal 40k

There's no formations, which is huge, and most of the armies are relatively similar, which also is pretty huge.

How so? I noticed some stuff too but I would like your opinion =D

 jreilly89 wrote:
Piggybacking off of this, as much as I think Formations are cool, would removing them and returning to the days of early with 6th, with a standard FoC, Troops and DTs only can score, and no Formations improve 40k?

It certainly couldn't make it any worse.

It wouldn't solve all the problems, and strong codices would remain strong while some weaker ones would get weaker, but it'd help simplify the game and remove some of the more obscene balance issues.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Piggybacking off of this, as much as I think Formations are cool, would removing them and returning to the days of early with 6th, with a standard FoC, Troops and DTs only can score, and no Formations improve 40k?

oh god yes. We wouldnt have to deal with BS5 Aspect Warriors, Necron units would be possible to kill (with a naked, non Decurion, non Reclamation Legion warrior only needing 18 lasgun shots to kill instead of 29), no more armies woth several hundred points of free stuff over their opponents, etc.


It wont fix everything, but it would be one of the biggest steps to fixing 40k.

 Tiger9gamer wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
30k ia monstrously imbalanced, it just appears balanced next to normal 40k

There's no formations, which is huge, and most of the armies are relatively similar, which also is pretty huge.

How so? I noticed some stuff too but I would like your opinion =D

Formations lead to huge issues when armies get free stuff for no points investment, it fundamentally breaks the inherent concept of a points value in the first place. Likewise, when most armies are largely similar, the balancing factors are easier because they apply mostly equally to everyone.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Piggybacking off of this, as much as I think Formations are cool, would removing them and returning to the days of early with 6th, with a standard FoC, Troops and DTs only can score, and no Formations improve 40k?

I like Objective Secured and how scoring objectives work now, but removing formations would help.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
Piggybacking off of this, as much as I think Formations are cool, would removing them and returning to the days of early with 6th, with a standard FoC, Troops and DTs only can score, and no Formations improve 40k?

oh god yes. We wouldnt have to deal with BS5 Aspect Warriors, Necron units would be possible to kill (with a naked, non Decurion, non Reclamation Legion warrior only needing 18 lasgun shots to kill instead of 29), no more armies woth several hundred points of free stuff over their opponents, etc.


It wont fix everything, but it would be one of the biggest steps to fixing 40k.

 Tiger9gamer wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
30k ia monstrously imbalanced, it just appears balanced next to normal 40k

There's no formations, which is huge, and most of the armies are relatively similar, which also is pretty huge.

How so? I noticed some stuff too but I would like your opinion =D

Formations lead to huge issues when armies get free stuff for no points investment, it fundamentally breaks the inherent concept of a points value in the first place. Likewise, when most armies are largely similar, the balancing factors are easier because they apply mostly equally to everyone.

nooo I ment how do you think 30k is monstrously imbalanced?

No Eldar

But seriously its because its limited to marines.

i hear that Admech and IG can get op quick though.

 Vaktathi wrote:
30k ia monstrously imbalanced, it just appears balanced next to normal 40k

Pretty much. It's not that 30k is some amazing paragon of balance, it's just that 40k's balance is so spectacularly and inexcusably awful that 30k is almost guaranteed to be better.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
30k ia monstrously imbalanced, it just appears balanced next to normal 40k

Pretty much. It's not that 30k is some amazing paragon of balance, it's just that 40k's balance is so spectacularly and inexcusably awful that 30k is almost guaranteed to be better.

Aye, 40k at this point makes just about any other game look fantastically balanced by comparison.

 Tiger9gamer wrote:

nooo I ment how do you think 30k is monstrously imbalanced?

ah, sorry, missed that. There's a ton of awful internal balance amongst unit choices, and some legions get far more functional rules than others. Its got many of the same unit level power bloat issues that 40k does with ever more powerful special rules and weapons and the like.

By 'Balanced' people mean '18 out of the twenty factions are flavour X of Marine'.

Yes, because CSM, vanilla marines and BA are just as balanced?

 Ashiraya wrote:
Yes, because CSM, vanilla marines and BA are just as balanced?

if the points cost and stats for tatical marines etc where the same across all 3 books, and the only differances where special units, they'd be pretty close yes. the big inbalance in those three 'dexes is vanilla marines who have dreadnoughts with better stats, that cost the same amount of points that and space marine formations.

One word: Centurions.

 Ashiraya wrote:
One word: Centurions.

Sometimes you need to say more than one word to make the point you're trying to make.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
One word: Centurions.

Sometimes you need to say more than one word to make the point you're trying to make.

I think he's trying to claim centurions are somehow alone resonsable for the inbalanced state of 40k.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
One word: Centurions.

Sometimes you need to say more than one word to make the point you're trying to make.

I think he's trying to claim centurions are somehow alone resonsable for the inbalanced state of 40k.

I suspect that's the case, but explaining further would do wonders to moving the discussion forward. Because its not really a good comparison to the unit differences found among the legions in 30k.

Most of the 30k custom units are simply variants of existing units (basically all the legion terminators are this) and none of them are particularly pants on head overpowered the way one marine book in 40k can take gravturions but others can't.

Why do people say 30k is balanced?

Well, that comes down to the following.

A Space Marine is a Space Marine. They have the same stats, points costs and weapon options across the board. Some Legions may allow for different weapon options but the core unit is still the same.

Compared to 40k, where, when you factor in equivalent abilities and equipment the point different between CSM, SM, BA, SW and DA is downright ridiculous....well, that's a big reason right there.

Essentially every unit in 30k has consistent stats across the board. It's not like 30k where there's 4 different versions of the same Land Raider depending on what book you use, all of which are wildly different but some of which are vastly superior. (Compare the Loyalist Land Raider to the CSM Land Raider - PotMS and a higher transport capability).

Another BIG factor in 30k?

There is no ATSKNF. That alone is one of the BIGGEST offenders of 40k, making Morale checks meaningless (auto regroup lols) and making the Fear USR useless. In 30k you can buy unit upgrades to help...BUT Morale checks and Fear checks have meaning. Dropping to WS 1 in assault against rival Marines is something to be concerned about - suddenly hitting on 5s is something to be very concerned about - as opposed to 40k where the only units likely to end up doing that already had WS Wet Paper Bag against your fear causing powerhouse.

There are no Formations - no free WS and BS upgrades, No free transport upgrades, no ability to break the core rules for free just because you played a fill in the blanks game with unit selection.

LoWs have a minimum point restriction AND award your opponent for taking them out. In addition the only RoW that ignores the minimum point restriction has a hefty tax and further restrictions.

There is no Stacking Force Orgs. Unless the mission says otherwise you can only use a SINGLE primary force org - there is variation in the different types but this restriction stops some of the shenanigans we see today in 40k.

Objectives Matter...and only Troops and a handful of other units can actually score. This, combined with the LoW penalties if they are destroyed means that the age old approach of min-max is not a valid option as it can cost you the game. If you show up with two 5 man units as your only Troops that AREN'T Terminator armoured then you will not win the objective game. If you bring a LoW to the same fight and your opponent kills it...then yeah, you may find yourself having a very bad time handing them free VPs and struggling to claw back yourself.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Tiger9gamer wrote:

nooo I ment how do you think 30k is monstrously imbalanced?

ah, sorry, missed that. There's a ton of awful internal balance amongst unit choices, and some legions get far more functional rules than others. Its got many of the same unit level power bloat issues that 40k does with ever more powerful special rules and weapons and the like.

To be fair the Legions with the worst rules recently got updated to be brought up to snuff, as did a number of the weapons. I've never been happier to be XIVth Legion.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
One word: Centurions.

Sometimes you need to say more than one word to make the point you're trying to make.

I think he's trying to claim centurions are somehow alone resonsable for the inbalanced state of 40k.

No, but they are an example that epitomises the problem. Marines =/= Marines.

Another is AA. With the new supplement nerfing flyer skyfire, compare the AA options of the 3 codices. And just compare psychic powers.

nareik wrote:
I think it attracts players with a different mentality/philosophy to that which some 40kers seem to have.

I think that's true, but it is a result of the game being more balanced rather than a cause of it.