All hail mech, king of 6th ed.!

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.

**Ailaros**

How much are you seriously afraid that you're going to get mobbed by tac squads?

Plus, multi-assaulting transport walls just got a lot harder as well, given that you now have to assault primary targets as much as is possible before only then moving on.

Plus, assault-based armies are going to seriously wane, given how much worse assault got.

This really seems a phantom menace here.

**DarknessEternal**

Ailaros wrote:
Plus, multi-assaulting transport walls just got a lot harder as well, given that you now have to assault primary targets as much as is possible before only then moving on.

That was 5th edition. In 6th, multi-charging is easier because you DO NOT have to move as much as possible into the primary target.

On a different subject, my experience so far tells me you shoot-overwatch-shoot-overwatch isn't very worrisome. With such an increased charge range, I haven't seen any squads having trouble NOT surrounding a transport on their charge. Surrounded transport = no disembarking, just dead guys.

And lastly, Johnny BadPlayer is going to look at a thread like this and declare infantry impossible and stupid, just like they did in 5th.

**Ailaros**

On page 28 "a charging model is not permitted to move into base contact with a model in a secondary target, unless it cannot move into base contact with an unengaged model in the primary target". This restriction didn't exist in 5th ed. Back then there was only a restriction on the first model to move into each combat. Now there's a restriction on everybody.

Furthermore, if you are getting longer charge ranges than you were in 5th ed, it's because you're being really lucky. The average charge range is only slightly longer, with nearly a half chance of going shorter. Given that overwatch targets the closest models, you're even less likely to have this go off as planned.

For people who aren't lucky (like me), this is a serious problem.

I agree that people way overblew how bad foot lists were, and those who thought them inconceivable were strange to me. Certainly I'm not saying that it is impossible to win a game with a foot list at all ever, but I am saying that when foot and mech were roughly equal, now mech has a real, clear advantage over foot.

In the world of competitive play, this is going to make foot players, already a rare breed, virtually extinct.

**deggreg@yahoo.com**

Ailaros wrote:5th ed was a mech-meta rules edition, and I predict that 6th ed will be even moreso. This is because the new mech lists are roughly the same as the old ones, while foot lists got much worse. Because mech lists got relatively better compared to the alternatives, we'll be seeing more of them.

Foot lists have gone from being roughly equal to mech lists to being only borderline viable, for lots of reasons, but the main one is cover. Foot lists rely a lot on cover, which just got a lot worse:

- Cover now only applies to models, not to units. This means that you literally have to have something between whoever is getting shot and whoever is doing the shooting.

- Even if you mostly do this, your opponent can now use focus fire to pick out the models that don't have a cover save.

- Cover is now only 5+, not that it matters if you're not getting a save in the first place.

All this means that you're going to be taking a lot more casualties in those critical first couple of turns. This is doubly true given that Ap is actually going to matter somewhat now. Plus, in order to use cover properly, you're now going to have to bunch up more (now that some of the models can no longer give cover to the rest), which will make you much more vulnerable to blast and template weapons.

And then, of course, 6th ed crucified assault-based armies. Some units can still be good in assault (like certain HQ's and retinues), but assault based armies like power blobs and slugga tides are comprehensively finished. As basically everyone who wanted to play an assault army played a foot army, and assault armies are done, it necessarily will make foot lists in general much rarer.

Shooty foot lists obviously aren't so poorly off, but they're now going to be spending most of their time as a static gunline hiding in cover (especially since you can now buy them cover), which is bad given all the new objectives missions we got.

What about mech lists? Yes, transports got easier to kill, but it's still not bad relative to foot lists. The main reason for this is cover. While foot lists can now get dismantled piecemeal, if a transport is in cover 100% of the unit is in cover, defying the bane of foot lists. Moreover, you now only need 25% obstruction in order to gain a cover save, which means that while foot lists are now struggling to get cover, mech lists just got a boost here. Also, I'd note that because things like bolters and heavy bolters just got a fair bit better, the fact that transports makes the guys inside immune to small arms fire, actually matters. Even for marines, now that Ap will be sometimes used.

Moreover, you've got to look at mech killing power. While transports just got a little glassier, they also just got a little hammerier. Mech lists have always relied on delivering a strong alpha strike, and heavy weapons just got better across the board. Furthermore, while you can now be glanced to death, you no longer suffer ill effects from glances. You now no longer need to worry about shaken or stunned results stopping your firepower. This means that you're more likely to kill those things that threaten the vehicles, improving their survivability. While foot lists just lost, mech lists both lost and gained.

And then you have to take into consideration all that stuff that made mech lists popular in the first place. Mech lists are still cheaper to build, and faster to play, and still dovetail best with the way tournaments alter 40k. As go tournament lists, as go the masses. Also importantly, if you're a mech commander, you don't have to learn anything new, or play your list in any way different to the way you were playing it before. It's still the same army, it just got a little more extreme in its strengths and weaknesses.

Meanwhile, many foot commanders are going to have to seriously rework how they play, and adapt to being made weaker over all. Static foot gunlines haven't been all that particularly powerful since the eclipse of 3rd ed by 4th, but they're now what dedicated foot commanders are going to have to figure out how to work with. Likely, we're going to see a lot of foot commanders go back to the hybrid lists of 4th ed, wherein there was a foot component more from a desire to not have to spend points on transports than anything else.

As such, 6th ed is going to be mechier than 5th. All hail the new mech.

Just from what I've seen so far, must disagree. I've played 6 6th ed games....4 as a secondary attachement to buddies' armies, and 2 with my own allied set up. There has been no game where ANY transport has made it past turn 4, and only 1 where ANY transport or tank or anything mech made it past turn 3 (it was a land raider, vs. Necron Guass....we were all surprised...only 2 6's in like 35-40 shots).

If you have significant str7+ shooting in your army, tanks are made of paper. My rhinos....gone by early game even with popping smoke first turn. The two things that convinced me of this occured in my 2 solo victories

1) Vs. Orks....bottom of turn 2..with 8 ML's and 4 PCs I wrecked 3 killa kans and 1 Ork Truk....that NEVER happens. Killa Kans used to always make it to mid game and usually, late game

2) Vs. Eldar with Eldrad. Dude deployed transport with Eldrar in the skyshield landing pad.....same Long fang set up as above. TURN 1 Took 2 hull points off it first turn with MLs, split fired other ML set...wrecked that + did some other damage to different squad. Cleaned up almost entire squad inside with PC's. Only eldrad was left due to 2+ LOS's.

I think if anything, Meta is going to go deep strike/flyer/long range immobile shooting.

Most effective setups so far that I've seen have been long range hard hitting shooting in back, all troops come in via deep strike/outflank. Yes, you take one round of shooting before you can charge....but better then being stuck at 18" downfield at best outside of your wrecked rhino and maybe pinned.

As time goes on and people have more time/money to do the flier thing..it'll get popular, but honestly...ML with flakk are going to tear that up. JMHO

**Ailaros**

deggreg@yahoo.com wrote: I've played 6 6th ed games....There has been no game where ANY transport has made it past turn 4

Firstly, 6 isn't exactly a large sample size. In a dice game like 40k, there's a lot of margin for error here.

Secondly, how do you know you would have been better off by fielding a foot list instead? Perhaps that's just as much survivability as you're going to get in 6th ed. Less, but still the best.

**tuebor**

Ailaros wrote:Perhaps that's just as much survivability as you're going to get in 6th ed. Less, but still the best.

I'm not 100% convinced that mech is going to dominate 6th, I'll wait for the first couple of 6th ed codexes to come out to really see how that goes. The rush to mech didn't really happen until Chaos got the Lash, there might be something equally game-changing in the next couple of books. Of course, it could be argued that Necrons already fill this role with gauss being what it is but it's possible that Chaos or DA will have something especially effective against lots of low-mid AV vehicles.

**imweasel**

Ailsros,

I dont know where you are getting your assertion that foot and mech were equal in 5th and mech is better in 6th.

In 5th, you could score while in a vehicle. You could assault out of your non assault vehicle if you got out before it moved. You could assault after your vehicle was wrecked. You could shoot after you got out of your stunned/shaken vehicle. You could move farther than 6" and disembark. You got 4+ cover saves when popping smoke.

You get none of that now. Do you honestly believe that foot lists got that hosed by simply dropping cover saves from 4+ to 5+? Even when you can bring a substantial amount of 4+/2+ cover for 50pts?

I just dont see the logic in that assertion...

**Lothar**

imweasel wrote:
Do you honestly believe that foot lists got that hosed by simply dropping cover saves from 4+ to 5+? Even when you can bring a substantial amount of 4+/2+ cover for 50pts?

I just dont see the logic in that assertion...

You have to open your eyes properly then. The cover saves are rebuild. It is not as simply as "4+ is 5+ now". Read the rules. For an assault blob (shooty with plasmas or power blob), which needs to move and can not sit behind Aegis, you now have hard time to get ANY cover (or armoure save) at all. Do you realize, that from those 30-man unit (casual blob size) every one of the MODELS needs to have cover for the unit to have cover like in 5th edition? Do you realize that without cover every marine will deny your armour save? It is not "from 4+ to 5+". It is more likely "from 4+ to nothing". Infantry on foot will die much more than before. Twice as fast on many (not all) occasions.

Yes, you can buy aegis. But you can not use aegis for non-static blob. And you can not use Aegis for blob based army (Aegis is very long, but with proper spacing, you will not get more then 2 blobs with command squads inside, which is basically nothing for 1850 points foot list). And you have to pay for something you had free back in 5th ed. And you can only take one aegis, which makes smaller, more elite, units better (devastators, long fangs...you can cover every one of them behind aegis without any problems with spacing an the like, even if you spam them).

Guard foot players are going to play hybrid lists, that is quite certain imho. That change can help a lot. I am not saying it is the end of the world. We have to addapt to new rules. But foot units (GEQ) will be weaker than in 5th edition, thats for sure. I am building my new Leman and will probably need more than one, even for 1000 game...

**imweasel**

Competitve GEQ hardly ever took foot slogging lists in 5th. While that might not change foe geq, I strongly believe it will change for meq.

Now if you want to start a thread about how 6th is going to be the horus heresy edition, fine.

**Lothar**

imweasel wrote:Competitve GEQ hardly ever took foot slogging lists in 5th. While that might not change foe geq, I strongly believe it will change for meq.

Now if you want to start a thread about how 6th is going to be the horus heresy edition, fine.

If you have read first post from Ailaros in this thread, you should have noticed, that he is in fact speaking about guard. He was a power blob player in 5th edition. And quite a competitive one.

**AlmightyWalrus**

imweasel wrote:Competitve GEQ hardly ever took foot slogging lists in 5th.

Which is, arguably, because you'd be unable to finish games within the time limits of tournaments.

**Ricter**

Ailaros wrote:How much are you seriously afraid that you're going to get mobbed by tac squads?

Plus, multi-assaulting transport walls just got a lot harder as well, given that you now have to assault primary targets as much as is possible before only then moving on.

Plus, assault-based armies are going to seriously wane, given how much worse assault got.

This really seems a phantom menace here.

It's not just that some squads can now destroy vehicles in assault from the front where they couldn't before. How many units now have the capability to destroy vehicles in assault easier than they did before? Unless your ride is a land raider, you're going down significantly easier, especially in the case of the battle tanks (preds, russes, vinds, etc). Sure, it didn't happen in 5E as much, but that's the whole point - in 5E it was much harder to take down a vehicle in assault. Skimmers and walkers got hit hard by this especially. Now that vehicles don't get overwatch either, they're even more tempting assault targets.

And c'mon now, this coming from the guy preaching about doom for commisars in blobs because of the sniper changes? How many codices even field snipers on a regular basis in competitive play? Eldar, and maybe C:SM? Everyone running marines, orks, necrons and most nids got significantly better against vehicles in the assault phase, and you can see this popping up in games and battle reports. Phantom menance indeed.

It's hard to take you seriously when you make such sweeping generalizations and ignore everything negative as "insignificant" when it suits you but it hype it up when it doesn't.

**DarknessEternal**

Ailaros wrote:On page 28 "a charging model is not permitted to move into base contact with a model in a secondary target, unless it cannot move into base contact with an unengaged model in the primary target". This restriction didn't exist in 5th ed. Back then there was only a restriction on the first model to move into each combat. Now there's a restriction on everybody.

You're skipping over that word. Once one of your models had touched the only model in the target unit (since we're talking about multi-charging vehicles), the primary target has all of its models engaged. In 5th you had to keep piling on if you could reach it, now you only have to get one model on it, then you can go anywhere else.

**FifteenHours**

Ailaros wrote:But why include inferior foot units? How does diluting a mech list with worse stuff make the list better as a whole?

It doesn't make sense to knee-jerk away from the best option just because it got slightly worse, absolutely speaking, than it was before.

As I have said a billion times....

Because not everyone wants to play Mech, for various reasons...My reason is and always has been because I don't think mechanised Imperial Guard is in spirit of the fluff and I enjoy playing with infantry platoons alongside tanks, chimeras etc. People have there reasons, and not everyone is WAAC.

As I said, what about those people who had foot lists but don't want to change to a pure mechanised list, so opt to go hyrbid?

Also, I don't think you can prove Mech lists are better than Hybrid lists without more playtesting of both in this edition. It comes across as slightly conceited.

**deggreg@yahoo.com**

Ailaros wrote:
deggreg@yahoo.com wrote: I've played 6 6th ed games....There has been no game where ANY transport has made it past turn 4

Firstly, 6 isn't exactly a large sample size. In a dice game like 40k, there's a lot of margin for error here.

Secondly, how do you know you would have been better off by fielding a foot list instead? Perhaps that's just as much survivability as you're going to get in 6th ed. Less, but still the best.

true. My point being, even after 6 games I can...with moderate confidence state...that this edition does not heavily favor mech to the point of justifying a thread about it being "king". that's all

**tetrisphreak**

Ailaros wrote:
deggreg@yahoo.com wrote: I've played 6 6th ed games....There has been no game where ANY transport has made it past turn 4

Firstly, 6 isn't exactly a large sample size. In a dice game like 40k, there's a lot of margin for error here.

Secondly, how do you know you would have been better off by fielding a foot list instead? Perhaps that's just as much survivability as you're going to get in 6th ed. Less, but still the best.

Ailaros,

How many games of 6th did YOU play before making this thread and proclaiming "mech the king of 6th ed..!" ?

Possibly more than 6 but i highly doubt it's over 20, which is still a pitifully small sample size as well.

**Testify**

FifteenHours wrote:
Because not everyone wants to play Mech, for various reasons...My reason is and always has been because I don't think mechanised Imperial Guard is in spirit of the fluff and I enjoy playing with infantry platoons alongside tanks, chimeras etc. People have there reasons, and not everyone is WAAC.

Not everyone who collects mech guard is WAAC. Some of us barely manage to win at all

**Ailaros**

tuebor wrote:The rush to mech didn't really happen until Chaos got the Lash, there might be something equally game-changing in the next couple of books.

Certainly. I won't pretend to have a crystal ball, of course, but am making projections based on current information.

I think that people found something strong with mech lists that, for whatever reason, they hadn't noticed before (probably because the current guard codex hadn't come out yet, and marine armies weren't able to razorspam yet). As it is, though, I think something extremely major will have to happen to push people back in the direction of foot lists, given how much the core rules made foot lists relatively worse.

I do agree, though, that if there's going to be a big swing away from mech, it will be because of what happens in the codices over the next few years.

imweasel wrote:I dont know where you are getting your assertion that foot and mech were equal in 5th and mech is better in 6th.

Ugh, I don't want to get in yet ANOTHER 10-page fight over why foot and mech were equal in 5th, given that it's now pointless now that we're in 6th.

5th was an era of mech madness, where people became literally incapable about thinking of the rules that would point to mech being anything but lordly overdominant. You'll just have to trust that they were roughly equal then, as I won't bother now that they are no longer.

Ricter wrote:How many units now have the capability to destroy vehicles in assault easier than they did before?

Fewer, now that frag grenades can't hurt them anymore.

Plus, keep it real here. How often did your opponents mob your transports to destroy them? How often are they now?

Ricter wrote:And c'mon now, this coming from the guy preaching about doom for commisars in blobs because of the sniper changes? How many codices even field snipers on a regular basis in competitive play?

Snipers (and plasma and bolt pistols, etc.) are only ONE of the many reasons that blobs are dead. If you don't think it's the biggest reason, then fine (I don't either). Having one relatively insignificant reason amongst another dozen is still doom. One insignificant reason amongst no other reasons seems like a fabricated problem.

FifteenHours wrote:Because not everyone wants to play Mech, for various reasons...My reason is and always has been because I don't think mechanised Imperial Guard is in spirit of the fluff and I enjoy playing with infantry platoons alongside tanks, chimeras etc.

Sure, and I probably won't start playing mech either, but that's for reasons that have nothing to do with a discussion on a tactics board.

FifteenHours wrote:Also, I don't think you can prove Mech lists are better than Hybrid lists without more playtesting of both in this edition. It comes across as slightly conceited.

tetrisphreak wrote:How many games of 6th did YOU play before making this thread and proclaiming "mech the king of 6th ed..!" ?

Possibly more than 6 but i highly doubt it's over 20, which is still a pitifully small sample size as well.

Relying on tiny data sets to inductively attempt to divine truths when things are already spelled out for you plain as day is foolish. You have a brain. Use it.

**imweasel**

Look, its all theory hammer at this point regardless of table time.

So in brief summary, let me see if I got this straight.

For geq, regardless if mech is king or not, they are going to HAVE to mech up, because they simply cannot survive in the 6th ed 'environs'. Those 'environs' being the outrageous amount of heavy weapons that people WILL be taking and the huge downgrade of cover. Plus its harder to disable a vehicle than it is to reliably wreck it, so they can maintain a higher volume of fire easier/longer.

For meq, same regards, may not mech up as before because the downgrade to cover does not mean as much AND they can take pods, etc when combined with the harsh penalties imposed on transport passengers along with the silly amount of teq they can and will take. MEQ foot slogging gun lines with aegis cover and podded/deep strike 'close in' units will probably be the 'norm'.

That an accurate brief summary?

**Ailaros**

Sure.

A more succinct one is: "Mech lists only got a little worse, while most foot lists got much more worse, so the already very popular mech list will become even more popular".

If mech was king of 5th ed, it will continue (if not moreso) to be the kind of 6th.

Barring, of course, some major, systematic reworking of 6th edition codices, of the magnitude which made mech lists popular in the first place.

**jcress410**

DarknessEternal wrote:
Ailaros wrote:On page 28 "a charging model is not permitted to move into base contact with a model in a secondary target, unless it cannot move into base contact with an unengaged model in the primary target". This restriction didn't exist in 5th ed. Back then there was only a restriction on the first model to move into each combat. Now there's a restriction on everybody.

You're skipping over that word. Once one of your models had touched the only model in the target unit (since we're talking about multi-charging vehicles), the primary target has all of its models engaged. In 5th you had to keep piling on if you could reach it, now you only have to get one model on it, then you can go anywhere else.

I guess its' pointless to have a rules debate about 5e, but I never played "you had to keep piling on if you could reach"

The rules just required each model to base if it could, be coherent, et cetera..

**FifteenHours**

Testify wrote:
FifteenHours wrote:
Because not everyone wants to play Mech, for various reasons...My reason is and always has been because I don't think mechanised Imperial Guard is in spirit of the fluff and I enjoy playing with infantry platoons alongside tanks, chimeras etc. People have there reasons, and not everyone is WAAC.

Not everyone who collects mech guard is WAAC. Some of us barely manage to win at all

Which is why I said "for various reasons..." But thanks for pointing that out nonetheless.

Basically, there is little point in discussing it with Ailaros because he seems to be infinitely smarter than all of us and seems to have so much free time he can write endless amounts of blogs on the subject (which I enjoy btw so that WASN'T an insult or anything...I wish I had that much free time to dedicate to the hobby sometimes tbh). It's just a shame it just ends up in comments such as "You have a brain. Use it." . Bit harsh. But I guess at the end of the day I don't take 40k quite as seriously to take the time to write a serious refute.
All the theory and mathhammer may be fun for some (for those who are just far far more intelligent than us mere mortals and/or for those of us who simply don't have the time) but in reality games don't really pan out like a long list of equations. Maybe it's just the alcohol. I dunno.

**ObliviousBlueCaboose**

I've found it quite easy to get my guardsmen in cover, since only 25% of the model needs to be in cover to get cover. Can't see my arm,leg, half torso, ect, I get cover. I've stopped using power blobs and switched to MSU, essentually just dropping the commissars.

Side note, was I the only one to run 21man blobs standard?

**Ailaros**

FifteenHours wrote:Basically, there is little point in discussing it with Ailaros because he seems to be infinitely smarter than all of us

Induction is useful for when you have to figure out the rules when there are none given (Isaac Newton working out how physics works, for example). In this case, though, it's not very useful, because we have rules given to us... in the rulebook.

I refuse to be goaded into making an argument form authority fallacy. Were I to be arguing that I've played certain games which gives me special knowledge and you're wrong because you've not played as many games as me, then you could chastise me for making myself look superior and using that as the basis of my arguments.

In this case, though, I'm just reasoning things through with the information that we all have in common, which is something anybody can do. It doesn't make sense to take an insulting tone when I'm being more egalitarian.

ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:Side note, was I the only one to run 21man blobs standard?

I did as well.

**Jihallah**

I love ailaros threads.

As much as there is a sense of bruised egos because the Internet man didn't agree with you, he makes some really good points. These threads I find much more informative and useful than 90% of the threads in tactics, because it really gets a debate going instead of the usual circle jerk and pedestal construction for Internet popular units. I see many tears of rage/frustration at ailaros' arguments... Because he argues back If you disagree! But there's some dumb stuff that gets posted.... And no one cares, some even agree. Sometimes a bunch of scrubs who play via the holy book of the Internet circlejerk in the silly ideas until someone comes along (like ailaros

) and goes "you know it's not like that because of x/y/z?"

I see lots of talking but little thinking. So it's good to see it every now and then on the form of a ailaros thread with lots of pages full of big posts

**Ricter**

Ailaros wrote:
Ricter wrote:How many units now have the capability to destroy vehicles in assault easier than they did before?

Fewer, now that frag grenades can't hurt them anymore.

Plus, keep it real here. How often did your opponents mob your transports to destroy them? How often are they now?

"Keep it real" and you're talking about frag grenades, killing vehicles? And you think that's more significant than getting to attack rear armor?

Ailaros wrote:
Ricter wrote:And c'mon now, this coming from the guy preaching about doom for commisars in blobs because of the sniper changes? How many codices even field snipers on a regular basis in competitive play?

Snipers (and plasma and bolt pistols, etc.) are only ONE of the many reasons that blobs are dead. If you don't think it's the biggest reason, then fine (I don't either). Having one relatively insignificant reason amongst another dozen is still doom. One insignificant reason amongst no other reasons seems like a fabricated problem.

Relying on tiny data sets to inductively attempt to divine truths when things are already spelled out for you plain as day is foolish. You have a brain. Use it.

Of course, you're the only one that's allowed to bring up "insignificant" points and they only matter when they support you. And no data is obviously better than some data, and everyone who doesn't agree with you isn't using their brain.

Ailaros wrote:In this case, though, I'm just reasoning things through with the information that we all have in common, which is something anybody can do. It doesn't make sense to take an insulting tone when I'm being more egalitarian.

Except so far you've gotten several rules wrong, and judging from your dodging of the questions you've not actually played any 6E. So, you're theory-hammering from a top of your high horse in a conceited manner with no experience and a flawed perspective of the rules. You consistently dismiss every counterpoint to yours as insignificant, but everything you bring up is somehow a big deal. You may want to look up the word egalitarian, because you are coming across as someone who came here to preach, not discuss.

Anyways, this seems more like ego-stroking than anything else at this point. Enjoy it, if that's what you're into - if that aspect changes, some useful discourse may actually occur.

**Jihallah**

R-r-rage!

Cursed insomnia. If I wasn't in bed on my phone I'd write more

**imweasel**

Ailaros wrote:Sure.

A more succinct one is: "Mech lists only got a little worse, while most foot lists got much more worse, so the already very popular mech list will become even more popular".

If mech was king of 5th ed, it will continue (if not moreso) to be the kind of 6th.

Barring, of course, some major, systematic reworking of 6th edition codices, of the magnitude which made mech lists popular in the first place.

But mech isnt the king that it was in 5th ed due to all of the penalties that are imposed on passengers. Those penalties are quite severe...

**Hulksmash**

::sigh::

So many incorrect conclusions drawn from incorrect or limited information. Play some games, the blob is not dead by a long shot and infantry heavy armies are going to be even nastier in 6th than they were in 5th (where they were plenty nasty).

Everyone take a deep breath, step back, and go play some actual games.

**Biophysical**

I get the point about deduction, certain truths can be reasoned out as long as the rules are know. The thing is, the more complicated the truth, the less likely one is taking into account and correctly weighting all factors involved. This is why a lot of people, myself included, value in game experience when evaluating units and builds. We miss stuff in our theoryhammer, and while a few games can't prove us absolutely right or wrong, a few games can show if ideas are extremely off-base.