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.

Hi all
after reading (and studying and discussing about) the new BA codex i found it very balanced: not uber powerful, not "broken" but with some advantages, some disadvantages and a bit of reddish flavour. An "average" codex well balanced
talking with friends who plays SW, orks, and tyranid they all found the new codices balanced in the same way
so i'm guessing: are all the new codices balanced? maybe is a deliberated choice GW made to make all the armies playable and funny in the same manner (different from previous "the new codex of $thisarmy$ make them the most powerful force ever made... until next codex come out, of course")
or it's i'm wrong and some of the new codices are way more powerful than other ones?

which codex came out for 7th edition? SW, Orks, BA, Dark Eldar, Grey Knight and Necrons? Tyranids and AM are for 6th or 7th?

Chaos and Daemons were 6th as well as SM, Orks D elder.

Crons haven't come out afaik

Externally they're better, but still some margin from where I'd call them balanced.

Internally they still show some flaws where some units are obviously better than others.

Overall, I'd be hard pressed to call them balanced, but they're moving - partly anyways - in the right direction, as far as balancing the most powerful combinations against one another.

However, that comes at the cost that most new books have been stripped of flavour and content, either never to be seen again or sold back as a supplement (for double the cost) or as some sort of dataslate/formation/DLC nonsense.

There are still codices more powerful than others in most respects; Eldar stick out the most with a few very strong units supported by more solid units.

The 7th Edition Codexes definitely have better internal balance their previous incarnations, and don't seem to suffer from either power creep or gimpness.

The newest books have been panned as they came out but honestly just took some time to figure out. Orks were pretty reviled on release (a friend of mine who has played orks since 3rd shelved his for a while after release but fell in love with the new book a couple weeks ago), but have since been accepted as a strong and fun book.

Grey knights are probably the most "unbalanced" book internally, followed by dark eldar, but both books have several powerful strategies to take advantage of, which is a sign of a well balanced book.

Blood angels and space wolves are probably the best books of 7th so far, with great internal balance, solid external balance and very fun and flavorful play styles.

 th3maninblak wrote:
Blood angels and ................ are probably the best books of 7th so far, with great internal balance, solid external balance and very fun and flavorful play styles.

Its like deja vu, all over again.

Though i agree with you, Blood Angels to me doesn't have a attention grabbing unit, but lots of units are pretty good (exception to Space Wolves being TWC, but that was good in the last codex too).

 th3maninblak wrote:
The newest books have been panned as they came out but honestly just took some time to figure out. Orks were pretty reviled on release (a friend of mine who has played orks since 3rd shelved his for a while after release but fell in love with the new book a couple weeks ago), but have since been accepted as a strong and fun book.

Grey knights are probably the most "unbalanced" book internally, followed by dark eldar, but both books have several powerful strategies to take advantage of, which is a sign of a well balanced book.

Blood angels and space wolves are probably the best books of 7th so far, with great internal balance, solid external balance and very fun and flavorful play styles.

Dark eldar is the most internally balanced. There are only 2 unplayable units...

Kavik_Whitescar wrote:
Chaos and Daemons were 6th as well as SM, Orks D elder.

Crons haven't come out afaik

Orks was the first codex in 7th and Dark eldar is even more recent

I'm definitely looking forward to Daemons getting some of the detachment/formation/dataslate love that the new releases are seeing.

Since the old power builds (Flying Circus/ScreamerStar) saw some nerfing with the release of 7th ed., we're already seeing some more variation and hybridization of Daemons lists. Hopefully that continues with their new release. I'm sure a lot of people would like to see khorne units more usable in the new book as well. Maybe a detachment that gives khorne units 5th ed Furious Charge rules ala Blood Angels? That would be sweet.

AM and 'nids are 6th ed codexes but where designed so late in the 6th ed cycle they, IMHO feel more like 7th ed books

Really, if you ignore Eldar, Tau, and formations... 40k is about as balanced as it has ever been.

Leave tau alone already, the days of tau supremacy have passed once 7th hit.

Deamons are far stronger, and take far more top spots in turnies (heck, tau rarely even appear on top spots anymore, even codex marines show up more!) yet nobody seems to mind them.


I wont claim tau are perfect externally, they are still over the curve due to a pair of guns who are too good, but they suffer from abyssal inner balance as half the units/guns/gear are outright pointless or only useful for very specific gimmiks.
Honestly I hope our 7th codex will be soon, and I would gladly take a nerf to IA and HYMP in exchange of fixing vespid, stealths, HRR, hammerheads, drone teams (basic and sniper), sharks, special weapon squads,etc.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Leave tau alone already, the days of tau supremacy have passed once 7th hit.

Deamons are far stronger, and take far more top spots in turnies (heck, tau rarely even appear on top spots anymore, even codex marines show up more!) yet nobody seems to mind them.


I wont claim tau are perfect externally, they are still over the curve due to a pair of guns who are too good, but they suffer from abyssal inner balance as half the units/guns/gear are outright pointless or only useful for very specific gimmiks.
Honestly I hope our 7th codex will be soon, and I would gladly take a nerf to IA and HYMP in exchange of fixing vespid, stealths, HRR, hammerheads, drone teams (basic and sniper), sharks, special weapon squads,etc.

you still have FSE and can take crisis suits as troops choices making pathfinders and fw's the things that used to be your achillies heel irrelevant. you can be silent. the base tau codex i agree is a lot worse than it used to be but FSE tau is still incredibly powerful and hard to find faults in beyond being horrible on board control

 ionusx wrote:
hard to find faults in beyond being horrible on board control

I find that is also a part of "balance". Even Tau Uber armies might loose to Objective Cards. That means there is balance, even if it's down to the mission, objectives, and cards (usually Luck) rather than Army Composition.

Less tactics and more "Draw the right Card", not a good version of 40K, but at least "Balanced".

The issue with Tau is that even a midway army will wipe the floor with other midway armies. Top Tau army can't hold a candle anymore to the top Eldar, Daemons and SM lists, but with the exception of Eldar mech, it's the most unfun to play against. Simply because if your unit isn't 2+ or 3/4++ Tau just remove your units without any saves allowed. Tau still has the greatest ability to cheat through a lot of features from the BRB, like LOS, for instance. Also, Tau are almost always 100% shooting based and from what I've read online, a lot of metas don't play Maelstrom, so gunlines still reign supreme in their areas. And Tau is still the king of gunlines (again, Eldar mech notwithstanding).

Balanced to a certain degree.
But changing things back and forth from one to next codex edition is not really helpful.
Look at BA ASM.

"I found it very balanced"-each-uisage hahahahahahahahahahahah yes if they don't take Dante in a unit of 20 sanguinary guard with Libran and s- priest.

 e.earnshaw wrote:
"I found it very balanced"-each-uisage hahahahahahahahahahahah yes if they don't take Dante in a unit of 20 sanguinary guard with Libran and s- priest.

Well, if they did that they would be cheating.

Sanguinary Guard have a maximum squad size of 10

Orks have good internal balance, can be powerfull and funy. Space wolves also have a great codex, every unit can be used in a list and do well. Blood Angels also seem to have good internal and external balance. Can,t say anything about Dark Eldar, haven't faced them yet.

 astro_nomicon wrote:
I'm definitely looking forward to Daemons getting some of the detachment/formation/dataslate love that the new releases are seeing.

This. But what I really want are plastic Greater Daemons.

 Araenion wrote:
The issue with Tau is that even a midway army will wipe the floor with other midway armies. Top Tau army can't hold a candle anymore to the top Eldar, Daemons and SM lists, but with the exception of Eldar mech, it's the most unfun to play against. Simply because if your unit isn't 2+ or 3/4++ Tau just remove your units without any saves allowed. Tau still has the greatest ability to cheat through a lot of features from the BRB, like LOS, for instance. Also, Tau are almost always 100% shooting based and from what I've read online, a lot of metas don't play Maelstrom, so gunlines still reign supreme in their areas. And Tau is still the king of gunlines (again, Eldar mech notwithstanding).

Cheat the LOS rules, always brought up and always makes me laugh.
Given that half the armies i the game cheat the LOS rules better than tau does as they got indirect fire guns, while tau only have SMS as "indirect fire"
Some factions feature said inderict fire as multi-blasts, or pie plates with S up to 8 and AP up to 3. or having both.
The gods of "I dont care for line of sight" are the IG, tau are not eve close to them in that.


And yes, tau are 100% shooting base, because they got ZERO melee units outside farsight (a named HQ)
Centurionstar is also practically 100% shooting based, even if it technically CAN assault. so are necron bakery armies who don't even allow you to properly shoot back. I'd rate them both as far more annoying.


But the main point I had, is that for some reason even though C:SM and deamons are ranked higher than tau constantly in turnies, for some reason tau are the ones getting the flak as the OP ones along with eldar.
They are OBVIOUSLY not. if they were they would still be taking top turny spots.
Its just a classic case of "If its not EoM or chaos-it should not be on par with these two and god be in the spotlight for even a second forbids ever" mentality that plauges half this community.
And given that even with the OLD tau codex at late 5th I got the "this army is OP" comments, I know that the factual power level is not even relevant to some complaints.
Maybe its the fact that mindessly walking up to the opponent does not work very well and some players are used to the fact any minimal thinking is no longer required beyond list building against most armies so they get stunned when an actual tactical fight comes up (and I can tell between my opponents, some excel at making premature counters to my JSJ manuvers, while others utterly fail to realize I can even repeat my last turn's actions)

I feel like the Grey Knights are very role specific and are more for allies... with big weaknesses in anti-armor.

 undertow wrote:

 astro_nomicon wrote:
I'm definitely looking forward to Daemons getting some of the detachment/formation/dataslate love that the new releases are seeing.

This. But what I really want are plastic Greater Daemons.

I second this notion. I stopped building my Lord of Change partially because he simply didn't fit together right due to finecast weirdness. He looks like he's doing some weird dance with his left leg