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.

As in any marines, drop pod grav guns eliminate the two 'omg so op nerf!' units the eldar have, sure the bikes can get 4+ cover, but depending on how many pods it doesn't matter.

It basically comes down to "scissors are so crazy! I only beat them when I bring rock, and my paper just auto loses". Yeup, this is 40k at the moment.

Eldar can game against pods very strongly. Actually, most lists can. Namely, screen your bikes with WS and WK. The podding marines can't touch your bikes, and your beta strike wins you the game turn 2. The biggest issue being skyhammer will assault the WS and grav cannon the WK. But other pod lists just fold. As does gladius.

Cytharai wrote:It basically comes down to "scissors are so crazy! I only beat them when I bring rock, and my paper just auto loses". Yeup, this is 40k at the moment.

I'd say it's more of an indictment of the competitive scene at the moment. Everyone bar a few standout players (who usually win) just bring the same nasty lists from the same factions, so it does turn into a giant game of rock-paper-scissors-fish-glue. But at a more friendly/casual level, where people aren't bringing the same kinds of lists, the game is somewhat more balanced and a lot more fun for many people.

Martel732 wrote:Eldar can game against pods very strongly. Actually, most lists can. Namely, screen your bikes with WS and WK. The podding marines can't touch your bikes, and your beta strike wins you the game turn 2. The biggest issue being skyhammer will assault the WS and grav cannon the WK. But other pod lists just fold. As does gladius.

I'm not so sure about the full Gladius. If there's any sort of terrain the space marine player can use (in addition to their destroyed metal boxes) there will almost certainly be enough metla boxes to claim and take objective. The Admech/Skitarii War Convocation with Bloody Taxi Service also does a real number on Eldar; it's my vote for the most brutal alpha strike in the game.

I guess with gladius you are hoping for a time out victory. Pretty lame, because in a real battle, they'd be tabled eventually. I'm not used to playing that way. Too much Starcraft I guess.

 TheNewBlood wrote:
But at a more friendly/casual level, where people aren't bringing the same kinds of lists, the game is somewhat more balanced and a lot more fun for many people.

I don't know if I would quite say that. Eldar (Warhost or not) are better than most casual lists. Same thing with Necrons (I'd even go as far as saying without Decurion). I've played casual lists against other casual lists, and some armies are just that good, regardless of how you slice it.

 krodarklorr wrote:
I don't know if I would quite say that. Eldar (Warhost or not) are better than most casual lists. Same thing with Necrons (I'd even go as far as saying without Decurion). I've played casual lists against other casual lists, and some armies are just that good, regardless of how you slice it.

Exactly this. And I would even go so far as Eldar are carried by a select few units to be better than most lists. For example: we all know flyrants are good. That doesn't mean that the Tyranids have an amazing TAC, use whatever you feel like codex. We all know Imperial Knights are good... they have a 65% win rate on torrentoffire, that doesn't mean they're a good TAC codex.

I figure the point of the casual game comment is because:
1) Since it's not a serious competition, the people who have the broken stuff might not always exploit it.
1a) And in general. players might not always bring the biggest and strongest stuff anyway.
2) You can house-rule and such freely to resolve any issues.
3) You can tell WAAC TFG types to off and refuse to play against them.

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar can game against pods very strongly. Actually, most lists can. Namely, screen your bikes with WS and WK. The podding marines can't touch your bikes, and your beta strike wins you the game turn 2. The biggest issue being skyhammer will assault the WS and grav cannon the WK. But other pod lists just fold. As does gladius.

huh I must have misread somewhere then, I thought marines grav was a shooting attack, and their pods can land pretty much anywhere without worry about mishaps. I have to go reevaluate the marines then, I must have gotten a fake book

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar can game against pods very strongly. Actually, most lists can. Namely, screen your bikes with WS and WK. The podding marines can't touch your bikes, and your beta strike wins you the game turn 2. The biggest issue being skyhammer will assault the WS and grav cannon the WK. But other pod lists just fold. As does gladius.

huh I must have misread somewhere then, I thought marines grav was a shooting attack, and their pods can land pretty much anywhere without worry about mishaps. I have to go reevaluate the marines then, I must have gotten a fake book

The eldar bubbles in a corner. At first I thought this was a bad idea and that my guys would die, but so far every time I've done this it's worked to perfection.

I have a coulple thoughts regarding some comment a couple pages back. Battle Focus is there I think because mobility in the game has increased significantly. Eldar are supposed to be about the most mobile army out there. Everyone can move so fast now that you either need to boost their foot soldiers' max speed, or take a route like Battle Focus. It may be a new feature to the Eldar army, but its purpose is to retain one of the things that has always made them unique--high mobility. Back in fourth when there wasn't running except for fleet which was mostly limited to Eldar and Nids, there was no need for Battle Focus to set Eldar mobility apart.

Someone also mentioned removing move shoot move from Eldar to have Tau be unique with that, but Eldar have been doing that as far back as 3rd at the least, or basically as long as the Tau. That was never Tau's exclusive thing.

Eldar are fast enough to start in a corner. If the opposing list has no blast weapons, it works perfectly. And even if they have a couple, who cares? You are completely neutering the alpha strike.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar can game against pods very strongly. Actually, most lists can. Namely, screen your bikes with WS and WK. The podding marines can't touch your bikes, and your beta strike wins you the game turn 2. The biggest issue being skyhammer will assault the WS and grav cannon the WK. But other pod lists just fold. As does gladius.

huh I must have misread somewhere then, I thought marines grav was a shooting attack, and their pods can land pretty much anywhere without worry about mishaps. I have to go reevaluate the marines then, I must have gotten a fake book

They can't land where they are physically not able to. I use this all the time against pod lists. Regular pod lists aren't that good, imo. Also, drop pod traps are a thing. I've instagibbed grav cents that way. I really think non-skyhammer pods are overrated.

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar are fast enough to start in a corner. If the opposing list has no blast weapons, it works perfectly. And even if they have a couple, who cares? You are completely neutering the alpha strike.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar can game against pods very strongly. Actually, most lists can. Namely, screen your bikes with WS and WK. The podding marines can't touch your bikes, and your beta strike wins you the game turn 2. The biggest issue being skyhammer will assault the WS and grav cannon the WK. But other pod lists just fold. As does gladius.

huh I must have misread somewhere then, I thought marines grav was a shooting attack, and their pods can land pretty much anywhere without worry about mishaps. I have to go reevaluate the marines then, I must have gotten a fake book

They can't land where they are physically not able to. I use this all the time against pod lists. Regular pod lists aren't that good, imo. Also, drop pod traps are a thing. I've instagibbed grav cents that way. I really think non-skyhammer pods are overrated.

Martel, you and I are agreeing a lot more these days

Sometimes people get unlucky and start off disagreeing on a few topics which turns out to be a poor sample size.


World of caution: drop pod traps make some players very angry. All I can tell them is to not be so aggressive with drop pods.

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar are fast enough to start in a corner. If the opposing list has no blast weapons, it works perfectly. And even if they have a couple, who cares? You are completely neutering the alpha strike.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar can game against pods very strongly. Actually, most lists can. Namely, screen your bikes with WS and WK. The podding marines can't touch your bikes, and your beta strike wins you the game turn 2. The biggest issue being skyhammer will assault the WS and grav cannon the WK. But other pod lists just fold. As does gladius.

huh I must have misread somewhere then, I thought marines grav was a shooting attack, and their pods can land pretty much anywhere without worry about mishaps. I have to go reevaluate the marines then, I must have gotten a fake book

They can't land where they are physically not able to. I use this all the time against pod lists. Regular pod lists aren't that good, imo. Also, drop pod traps are a thing. I've instagibbed grav cents that way. I really think non-skyhammer pods are overrated.

anyone who places drop pods near where there are traps deserve to lose. And you would be investing a stupid high amount of points just to protect them, and turn two once that bubble is gone, then the other pods would be in and pick what they want gone. Plus vs any decent army you're really fethed because blasts, depending on which army you're fighting it could be a near tabling in one attack

 Snoopdeville3 wrote:
Oh god..... everyone loves to complain... dont wry all pretty soon every army will be cheese.

I'm waiting for the IG to return to leafblower status

 Cytharai wrote:
It basically comes down to "scissors are so crazy! I only beat them when I bring rock, and my paper just auto loses". Yeup, this is 40k at the moment.

It wouldn't be so bad if this wasn't codex-split for rock / paper / scissors.

Winning is so much based on the codex you picked, it's not even funny.

 Ignatius wrote:

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
Also, they added battle focus to account for the significant range boost every other army got in 6th edition.

Before that, if you moved with rapid fire guns, you couldn't fire at full range. That meant guardians and space marines on the move had the same threat range. When 6th hit, those marines could walk away from the guardians wiping them out at max range, and there wasn't a damn thing the guardians could do about it. Now, the guardians still can't achieve the maximum threat range, but they have tactical options to make up for it.

Bladestorm is to counteract the eldar survivability issues and allow them to combat the wraith construct armies effectively.

They priced scatterlasers as though they weren't all on relentless platforms, which was wrong to do.

The issue is the survivability level on jet bikes is too high. Give them a 4+ save and you won't see as much bitterness.

Again, this isn't all about Marines. That said your point is still a good one.

Eldar Shuriken catapults are assault however. It's a different role they are filling with a different weapon. In a vacuum sure, the marines are going to win hands down, but generally speaking you're not going to try and take on tacticals with Guardians. Eldar have other weapons to deal with the marines walking away, and let the Guardians focus on the advancing Close Combat units. But I digress.

Bladestorm is still too good. There is plenty of weapons in the game now a days that take on the "anti-MEQ/TEQ" fine. The normal 10 point troop of any faction shouldn't be a tool as effective at it as they currently are.

I also do agree on the jetbike armor save and scatter lasers.

The thing of it is, they are also out ranged by every other rapid fire weapon in the game, barring hotshot lasguns. And the close combat units that aren't closing? The fact is twenty guardians may get two 6's to wound on average and have to get within 12" to do so doesn't scream over powered to me, especially when they are 9 points with the same survivability as 3-4 point conscripts.

Guardians are only effective if they are advancing danger close to enemy that in the hope of rolling 6's, or staying WAY back not using any gun other than the weapon platform they have to pay extra for.

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:

The thing of it is, they are also out ranged by every other rapid fire weapon in the game, barring hotshot lasguns. And the close combat units that aren't closing? The fact is twenty guardians may get two 6's to wound on average and have to get within 12" to do so doesn't scream over powered to me, especially when they are 9 points with the same survivability as 3-4 point conscripts.

Guardians are only effective if they are advancing danger close to enemy that in the hope of rolling 6's, or staying WAY back not using any gun other than the weapon platform they have to pay extra for.

Right, but if your 10 guardians are rolling 2 6s thats 2 Terminators dead. you literally just made your points back for that squad without factoring in the Terminators failing any other armor saves.

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar are fast enough to start in a corner. If the opposing list has no blast weapons, it works perfectly. And even if they have a couple, who cares? You are completely neutering the alpha strike.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar can game against pods very strongly. Actually, most lists can. Namely, screen your bikes with WS and WK. The podding marines can't touch your bikes, and your beta strike wins you the game turn 2. The biggest issue being skyhammer will assault the WS and grav cannon the WK. But other pod lists just fold. As does gladius.

huh I must have misread somewhere then, I thought marines grav was a shooting attack, and their pods can land pretty much anywhere without worry about mishaps. I have to go reevaluate the marines then, I must have gotten a fake book

They can't land where they are physically not able to. I use this all the time against pod lists. Regular pod lists aren't that good, imo. Also, drop pod traps are a thing. I've instagibbed grav cents that way. I really think non-skyhammer pods are overrated.

anyone who places drop pods near where there are traps deserve to lose. And you would be investing a stupid high amount of points just to protect them, and turn two once that bubble is gone, then the other pods would be in and pick what they want gone. Plus vs any decent army you're really fethed because blasts, depending on which army you're fighting it could be a near tabling in one attack

I haven't seen a marine list with any scary blasts in quite some time. Most blasts can't be made to ignore cover, so no one bothers anymore. A TFC is not going to stop me from screening my units. I'm also not above not moving on turn one. Eldar and BA are fast. We can get away with that.

Also, one can force a choice between risking the trap and being outside the 9" grav range for regular grav guns. Again, non-skyhammer pod lists are kinda old hat at this point.

Cytharai wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
I don't know if I would quite say that. Eldar (Warhost or not) are better than most casual lists. Same thing with Necrons (I'd even go as far as saying without Decurion). I've played casual lists against other casual lists, and some armies are just that good, regardless of how you slice it.

Exactly this. And I would even go so far as Eldar are carried by a select few units to be better than most lists. For example: we all know flyrants are good. That doesn't mean that the Tyranids have an amazing TAC, use whatever you feel like codex. We all know Imperial Knights are good... they have a 65% win rate on torrentoffire, that doesn't mean they're a good TAC codex.

If you remove/tone down the problematic units (Scatbikers, Wraithknight/D-weapons) Eldar are still quite powerful due to their internal balance. Unfortunately, not every codex has the same level of internal balance, which means that while some armies have to be very specific with their units the Eldar player can be a lot more flexible in what they bring. Formations just make this more powerful, to the point where pre-Necron books struggle to keep up.

Ultimately, Eldar are in a weird position in that they can be balanced against the post-Necron books, but are in a league of their own against the 6th and early 7th edition books. But I feel that the solution is to get those books up to the new level of power, not bring Eldar down.

Ghazkuul wrote:

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:

The thing of it is, they are also out ranged by every other rapid fire weapon in the game, barring hotshot lasguns. And the close combat units that aren't closing? The fact is twenty guardians may get two 6's to wound on average and have to get within 12" to do so doesn't scream over powered to me, especially when they are 9 points with the same survivability as 3-4 point conscripts.

Guardians are only effective if they are advancing danger close to enemy that in the hope of rolling 6's, or staying WAY back not using any gun other than the weapon platform they have to pay extra for.

Right, but if your 10 guardians are rolling 2 6s thats 2 Terminators dead. you literally just made your points back for that squad without factoring in the Terminators failing any other armor saves.

That's not entirely accurate. If they're assault Terminators, they have the 3++ save to fall back upon. If you factor in any sort of cover, only one Terminator dies. It should also be pointed out that Guardians are also very vulnerable to the shooting of vanilla Terminators.

 Ghazkuul wrote:

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:

The thing of it is, they are also out ranged by every other rapid fire weapon in the game, barring hotshot lasguns. And the close combat units that aren't closing? The fact is twenty guardians may get two 6's to wound on average and have to get within 12" to do so doesn't scream over powered to me, especially when they are 9 points with the same survivability as 3-4 point conscripts.

Guardians are only effective if they are advancing danger close to enemy that in the hope of rolling 6's, or staying WAY back not using any gun other than the weapon platform they have to pay extra for.

Right, but if your 10 guardians are rolling 2 6s thats 2 Terminators dead. you literally just made your points back for that squad without factoring in the Terminators failing any other armor saves.

Those terminators have a 12" range advantage on a weapon that also negates the guardians armor save and wounds on a 2+, terminators are known to be "bad" over all for points, AND they would both have to fail their 5+ or 3+ invuln save. I may kill 1-3 terminators, but I still am using a 90 point to maybe kill 105 points of models that would have to be in my prime threat range. (Which is at lest 6" shorter than theirs)

 krodarklorr wrote:

 TheNewBlood wrote:
But at a more friendly/casual level, where people aren't bringing the same kinds of lists, the game is somewhat more balanced and a lot more fun for many people.

I don't know if I would quite say that. Eldar (Warhost or not) are better than most casual lists. Same thing with Necrons (I'd even go as far as saying without Decurion). I've played casual lists against other casual lists, and some armies are just that good, regardless of how you slice it.

I dont know. Casual Crons arent to bad. I fought some the other day with my Sisters. Ok granted it wasn't Wraith spam, but it was still a Decurion. The only unit that i couldnt really handle was the Nightbringer, but that was because i couldnt get a decent shot with my Exorcist (stupid LOS blocking building). Idk, maybe Sisters just have the odd collection of tools where Necrons arent that terrible for them? I mean i can have a ton of boots on the ground if i choose to, and all of them have Acts of Faith (granted its max of twice per game) to boost their killing power.

Personally i feel that RP are overhyped, i mean its FNP+. Then again im coming from a place where i rarely get to take away FNP so i just shoot them a ton and hope they fail, so Iron Hands and Necrons are very similar to me

 Grimmor wrote:

Personally i feel that RP are overhyped, i mean its FNP+. Then again im coming from a place where i rarely get to take away FNP so i just shoot them a ton and hope they fail, so Iron Hands and Necrons are very similar to me

more akin to FNP++. Not only can it still be taken against ID wounds, but between Decurion & Reclamation Legion bonuses, can be 76% more effective (when we're talking 4+ & rerolling 1's) than 5+ FNP.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Grimmor wrote:

Personally i feel that RP are overhyped, i mean its FNP+. Then again im coming from a place where i rarely get to take away FNP so i just shoot them a ton and hope they fail, so Iron Hands and Necrons are very similar to me

more akin to FNP++. Not only can it still be taken against ID wounds, but between Decurion & Reclamation Legion bonuses, can be 76% more effective (when we're talking 4+ & rerolling 1's) than 5+ FNP.

Ok granted, but Iron Hands can pull off 2+ (technically 1+) on, i believe, a T5 unit, so we are talking about similar levels of durable. Now im not saying RP isnt awesome, it is, its just that Necrons dont have the same offensive punch as Iron Hands, so they get to be more durable.

 Grimmor wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Grimmor wrote:

Personally i feel that RP are overhyped, i mean its FNP+. Then again im coming from a place where i rarely get to take away FNP so i just shoot them a ton and hope they fail, so Iron Hands and Necrons are very similar to me

more akin to FNP++. Not only can it still be taken against ID wounds, but between Decurion & Reclamation Legion bonuses, can be 76% more effective (when we're talking 4+ & rerolling 1's) than 5+ FNP.

Ok granted, but Iron Hands can pull off 2+ (technically 1+) on, i believe, a T5 unit, so we are talking about similar levels of durable.

Which many see as something of an unintended loophole, and is still only on one model IIRC, not across the entire army

Now im not saying RP isnt awesome, it is, its just that Necrons dont have the same offensive punch as Iron Hands, so they get to be more durable.

They're significantly more durable, and don't really lack offensive punch. They don't have gobs of things like lascannons or grav guns or the like, but they generate a large volume of fire (and can generate absurd numbers of CC attacks with many units, or, in the case of Reclamation legion units, shoot and assault without pause), can have incredible amounts of speed, and the bulk of their weapons can be put to effective use against both infantry and vehicles.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Grimmor wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Grimmor wrote:

Personally i feel that RP are overhyped, i mean its FNP+. Then again im coming from a place where i rarely get to take away FNP so i just shoot them a ton and hope they fail, so Iron Hands and Necrons are very similar to me

more akin to FNP++. Not only can it still be taken against ID wounds, but between Decurion & Reclamation Legion bonuses, can be 76% more effective (when we're talking 4+ & rerolling 1's) than 5+ FNP.

Ok granted, but Iron Hands can pull off 2+ (technically 1+) on, i believe, a T5 unit, so we are talking about similar levels of durable.

Which many see as something of an unintended loophole, and is still only on one model IIRC, not across the entire army

Now im not saying RP isnt awesome, it is, its just that Necrons dont have the same offensive punch as Iron Hands, so they get to be more durable.

They're significantly more durable, and don't really lack offensive punch. They don't have gobs of things like lascannons or grav guns or the like, but they generate a large volume of fire (and can generate absurd numbers of CC attacks with many units, or, in the case of Reclamation legion units, shoot and assault without pause), can have incredible amounts of speed, and the bulk of their weapons can be put to effective use against both infantry and vehicles.

I should note im talking as a Sisters player, so i actually get my saves against the bulk of their stuff. I can see how IG would despise them. though Necrons do have a range problem, as most of their army is hanging out around 24" range. Again, not saying thye aint good, i just dont see them as this unstoppable juggernaut. Also their only Str D weapon is on a random chart, so that sucks.

The core of these 'competitive balance' issues is that GW doesn't track the meta and adjust it accordingly. It's also become clear that's not where their interests lie. Look at Sigmar, no points in army construction and "the most important rule" is that both players cooperate to resolve rules disputes amicably. A lot of people do not like those two ideas, but it's a proper fix for both Codex imbalance and rules lawyering. These are the biggest chronic complaints about 40k, excluding soaring model prices.

I think that's a far more realistic than to expect GW to suddenly turn around, embrace the tournament scene, and manage the meta. It would also give TOs far more freedom to decide how they want the game to be played within their events -- with points adjusted on an ongoing basis for balance, or with emphasis on soft scores to reinforce sportsmanship, diversity, and aesthetics.

Eldar are balanced without points, one Wraithknight is worth exactly one Wraithknight. After that, deciding what counter is appropriate from each codex, is left to the common agreement of the players involved. There's a lot more nuance in army versus army (qualitative) than points versus points (quantitative).

The real pros here aren't balance, though, it's refocusing 40k on storytelling and the social contract between players. Things like random tables are great for this ("wow look what happened!") but they're awful for competition. This would go down a lot better if GW supported it's community and encouraged that style of play -- as it is, non-participation has resulted in the competitive scene being the shiniest and most attractive thing new players see.

No wonder it all seems a little dysfunctional, eh?

Yoyoyo wrote:
The core of these 'competitive balance' issues is that GW doesn't track the meta and adjust it accordingly. It's also become clear that's not where their interests lie. Look at Sigmar, no points in army construction and "the most important rule" is that both players cooperate to resolve rules disputes amicably. A lot of people do not like those two ideas, but it's a proper fix for both Codex imbalance and rules lawyering. These are the biggest chronic complaints about 40k, excluding soaring model prices.

I think that's a far more realistic than to expect GW to suddenly turn around, embrace the tournament scene, and manage the meta. It would also give TOs far more freedom to decide how they want the game to be played within their events -- with points adjusted on an ongoing basis for balance, or with emphasis on soft scores to reinforce sportsmanship, diversity, and aesthetics.

Eldar are balanced without points, one Wraithknight is worth exactly one Wraithknight. After that, deciding what counter is appropriate from each codex, is left to the common agreement of the players involved. There's a lot more nuance in army versus army (qualitative) than points versus points (quantitative).

The real pros here aren't balance, though, it's refocusing 40k on storytelling and the social contract between players. Things like random tables are great for this ("wow look what happened!") but they're awful for competition. This would go down a lot better if GW supported it's community and encouraged that style of play -- as it is, non-participation has resulted in the competitive scene being the shiniest and most attractive thing new players see.

No wonder it all seems a little dysfunctional, eh?

I'm afraid that I'm going to have to disagree. GW has made it clear that they don't make a tournament-quality game, and that's perfectly fine; most of those players are beginning to move over to other game systems.

Age of Sigmar has all the balancing issues of 40k and then some. Without any sort of points and having only a framework ruleset, AoS has no inherent means of balance. Shifting the burden onto players doesn't make it any better; game systems should provide a framework for the players, not force them to make up the rules as they go along. Warhammer 40k does this currently, which is why its players can employ the game's framework to resolve some of the balance issues.

Poor rules writing only encourages rules-lawyering, not discourages it. I rarely hear about rules disputes between Warmahordes and X-Wing players at my FLGS (Disclaimer: I don't play those games, so I don't know the full depth of their rules). You can have a qualitative balancing in your games, i.e. "I won't bring my Wraithknight if you don't bring Skyhammer", but there at least needs to be some quantitative framework within which the players can resolve disputes and balance issues. And as a side note, the painting points should be left to a painting competition, and any problems with sportsmanship should be resolved by a TO rather than an ambiguous score.

Eldar can be balanced against other armies, but it require a mutual toning down and detante in terms of OP units.

Alternative view time. Force-on-force balance is garbage. Overrated and in truth undesirable.

Wargaming doesn't need points at all. It needs objectives and victory conditions that correspond to the nature of the forces.

Let's say a fictional army in 40k finds itself against 5x Wraithknights. They're going to warn higher command, delay it, disengage, and consolidate for orders or reinforcements. They're not going to complain it was cheesy, that D-Weapons need nerfing, that GW is unfair. That's war. Suck it up buttercup. That's a lot more accurate to the prosecution of warfare. You don't always get to pick your engagements.

Victory conditions and terrain are always part of wargaming. Balance is not. It's not all about who has too much S6/S7, or what flavor of the month is undercosted or overcosted. Thermopylae is the most famous tabling in history, and we consider the defeated force to have won. This is as much a part of 40k's "balance" problems as anything in the Eldar codex.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
We should add that GW has done themselves no favors by more or less abandoning promotion for wargame-style narrative play, which has allowed the GT scene to carry the banner for how 40k is supposed to be played.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Alternative view time. Force-on-force balance is garbage. Overrated and in truth undesirable.

Wargaming doesn't need points at all. It needs objectives and victory conditions that correspond to the nature of the forces.

I actually agree with you. Balancing in GW is really hard, because of the number of armies involved. Also, the fact that points per unit are small, making up a huge point total of 1500, magnifies any imbalances. Also, 40k units tend to be troops with some variation on the standard marine statline, rather than the utility functions of warmahordes. Combine all of these with people like cruddace of phil kelly who write books based entirely on their personal feelings, and you get abominations like the nids codex (abominably weak) or eldar (abominably overpowered)

I actually hope rumours are true and 40k goes the way of AoS. 20 years on, they have not balanced anything in a single edition. eldar has been grossly overpowered 7 editions straight. you get aberrations like rhino-rush from blood angels in 3rd, to becoming one of the weakest codexes today. You get codexes like nids, which has been underpowered for years, or even orks, who has been underpowered (save for biker-nobs) 7 editions straight.

I think the combination of hiring lousy writers, having a hard system to balance, and an emphasis on being a "modelling company" has led GW down this path.

If they want good balance, they need to scrap the entire system, change units to be much more utility-based, or scrap the whole thing and go AoS