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.
2015/10/22 02:54:12
Subject: The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Bharring wrote: If everyone is BA, or new Tau, then things aren't unbalanced.
It's too late for that. Codex Eldar, Necrons, DA, and Vanilla marine exist.
Then the solution is to tone down those armies until they fit the mean of the power curve, and boost the armies that don't.
Make Scatbikers only take one heavy weapon per three models, go back to 6th edition Distort rules, and make the Wraithknight either a MC or 150 points more expensive. Increase the base cost of Canoptek Wraiths to 50 ppm. Make people have to pay for transports in the Gladius/Demi-Company.
We don't have enough concrete information available yet to judge the power of the new Tau. Any speculation as to their upcoming power level is completely unfounded and not worth talking about.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Because it is better for the money investment that w40k is and for fun one can get out of it when ones codex is like the eldar codex. What were the bad times for people playing eldar through the history? Some parts of one edition where they were only good, and not the best. I could live with 20+years of having great fun and 2-3 years of just having fun, compering to having fun for a year and then having 0 fun for 2+years.
It is like school or a job, as soon as someone reachs a high goal, it stops being a high end goal and becomes the norm that everyone now has to reach.
2015/10/22 12:04:23
Subject: Re:The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Because it is better for the money investment that w40k is and for fun one can get out of it when ones codex is like the eldar codex. What were the bad times for people playing eldar through the history? Some parts of one edition where they were only good, and not the best. I could live with 20+years of having great fun and 2-3 years of just having fun, compering to having fun for a year and then having 0 fun for 2+years.
It is like school or a job, as soon as someone reachs a high goal, it stops being a high end goal and becomes the norm that everyone now has to reach.
So lets completely throw balance out of the window, because I get salty when I lose!
Either deal with the fact that not every army is balanced equally, and everyone wants Eldar nerfs, and that the odds are stacked HEAVILY against you when you play them - or just don't play them. It is NOT a good thing if the rest of the game has to deal with multiple Eldar level dexes while there is dexes like CSM, SoB, Nids, Orks, Puppies, DE, hell even Daemons, GK and BA, are completely outclassed by a dex at that power level. God even Crons DA and SM are underpowered incomparison. Balancing Tau towards Eldars level instead of the rest of is ridiculous and it shouldn't even take explanation why.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/22 12:05:07
P.S.A. I won't read your posts if you break it into a million separate quotes and make an eyesore of it.
2015/10/22 12:08:15
Subject: The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Well of course he wants it buffed, he plays BA! But seriously, there are a few armies that are too strong right now, and the vast majority of them have newer codexes. Have you seen the Tau changes? They are incredibly minor, with a few units being added on and some formations being added. While Tau weren't OP, they were top of middle tier, or bottom of high tier depending on matchups.
This strongly suggests that other codexes strong codexes will not get nerfs.
Bharring wrote: If everyone is BA, or new Tau, then things aren't unbalanced.
It's too late for that. Codex Eldar, Necrons, DA, and Vanilla marine exist.
The other 3 are slightly above the majority while Eldar is outlandishly so. What they are to the rest of the game, Eldar is to them.
Well, slightly is kind of a subjective term. I guess it depends on who you consider to be the middle of the pack.
From my point of view, those armies are far and away too strong. Some of them is due to formations, and some are due to deathstars, but all of them are not fun games for my Chaos Marines to play in. I'm at the point now where I tend to leave them at home and play my space wolves instead. Not that CSM being shelved for SW is anything new in their history....
The point is, the new codexes, for the most part, are very very strong. Eldar, Necrons, DA, Marines, the Skitarri are all stronger dexes capable of amazing builds. Tau was a newish dex, and was strong (though not as strong as those, it can still play the game) and nothing got worse with them. They got a few units, and are getting a book of formations, and that is about it.
The odds that Eldar, Necrons, or any of the other armies that just got a codex are going to get nerfed are incredibly small. Heck, two of those armies, necrons and eldar, were incredibly strong already and got buffed!
You're much better off hoping that the weaker armies get massive buffs so everyone can play the game. It's not about what is good game design (because yes, nerfing eldar and the others would be the right move) its about what has at least a chance of happening.
You have to be realistic about these things.
2015/10/22 12:34:45
Subject: The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Simple: because the "outlier" is not OP, it is just filled with really cool options and choices that allows the player to field a massive variety of different (and roughly equally powerful) armies that represent their full well; on the other hand, the "balanced" codices are bland and mediocre, they are mostly featless, lack options and flavor, and only have a few powerful armies while any other build range from "meh" to "sh*t".
Now, place your hand on your heart and tell me that you want all codices to be like the latter, rather than the former .
My armies:
14000 points
2015/10/22 13:11:14
Subject: The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Well of course he wants it buffed, he plays BA! But seriously, there are a few armies that are too strong right now, and the vast majority of them have newer codexes. Have you seen the Tau changes? They are incredibly minor, with a few units being added on and some formations being added. While Tau weren't OP, they were top of middle tier, or bottom of high tier depending on matchups.
This strongly suggests that other codexes strong codexes will not get nerfs.
Bharring wrote: If everyone is BA, or new Tau, then things aren't unbalanced.
It's too late for that. Codex Eldar, Necrons, DA, and Vanilla marine exist.
The other 3 are slightly above the majority while Eldar is outlandishly so. What they are to the rest of the game, Eldar is to them.
Well, slightly is kind of a subjective term. I guess it depends on who you consider to be the middle of the pack.
From my point of view, those armies are far and away too strong. Some of them is due to formations, and some are due to deathstars, but all of them are not fun games for my Chaos Marines to play in. I'm at the point now where I tend to leave them at home and play my space wolves instead. Not that CSM being shelved for SW is anything new in their history....
The point is, the new codexes, for the most part, are very very strong. Eldar, Necrons, DA, Marines, the Skitarri are all stronger dexes capable of amazing builds. Tau was a newish dex, and was strong (though not as strong as those, it can still play the game) and nothing got worse with them. They got a few units, and are getting a book of formations, and that is about it.
The odds that Eldar, Necrons, or any of the other armies that just got a codex are going to get nerfed are incredibly small. Heck, two of those armies, necrons and eldar, were incredibly strong already and got buffed!
You're much better off hoping that the weaker armies get massive buffs so everyone can play the game. It's not about what is good game design (because yes, nerfing eldar and the others would be the right move) its about what has at least a chance of happening.
You have to be realistic about these things.
I play DE, Nids and CSM there is no excuse for throwing balance out the window.
Also, I'm looking at the problem realistically. Way more so than you guys. What do you think the chances are of THE ENTIRE REST OF THE GAME being brought up to Eldars level? Equally as unlikely, if not WAY more unlikely than Eldar ever being nerfed. And then, assuming everyone was up there - Eldar sits where it does for one of two reasons, the person writing the Dex either thinks that this is currently balanced with the rest of the game, or they quite simply want Eldar to be stronger than the rest of the game. Whichever one it is, there is absolutely zero reason to believe that if the entire rest of the game was buffed, that Eldar wouldn't just be raised above them as well. Putting us right back to square one.
Regardless, it's beside the point. There is absolutely no reason to believe that Tau being made super OP like Eldar would have been any indication as to whether or not the rest of the cast will be turned up to that level as well. In fact, history tells us that it isnt.
So forgive if I'm not at all upset that we don't have two of these ridiculous dexes throwing out balance to a stupid extreme.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Simple: because the "outlier" is not OP, it is just filled with really cool options and choices that allows the player to field a massive variety of different (and roughly equally powerful) armies that represent their full well; on the other hand, the "balanced" codices are bland and mediocre, they are mostly featless, lack options and flavor, and only have a few powerful armies while any other build range from "meh" to "sh*t".
Now, place your hand on your heart and tell me that you want all codices to be like the latter, rather than the former .
Internal balance is a very different thing to external balance. This thread and the people in it aren't complaining that the units aren't balanced amongst themselves. They are complaining that the Dex isn't balanced in comparison to Eldar, while ignoring how it's balanced in regards to the rest of the game.
Besides, as said by the poster above me, these two things are not mutually exclusive. Can have all this without completely breaking the game for every other Dex.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/22 13:44:49
P.S.A. I won't read your posts if you break it into a million separate quotes and make an eyesore of it.
2015/10/22 14:16:17
Subject: The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Well of course he wants it buffed, he plays BA! But seriously, there are a few armies that are too strong right now, and the vast majority of them have newer codexes. Have you seen the Tau changes? They are incredibly minor, with a few units being added on and some formations being added. While Tau weren't OP, they were top of middle tier, or bottom of high tier depending on matchups.
This strongly suggests that other codexes strong codexes will not get nerfs.
Bharring wrote: If everyone is BA, or new Tau, then things aren't unbalanced.
It's too late for that. Codex Eldar, Necrons, DA, and Vanilla marine exist.
The other 3 are slightly above the majority while Eldar is outlandishly so. What they are to the rest of the game, Eldar is to them.
Well, slightly is kind of a subjective term. I guess it depends on who you consider to be the middle of the pack.
From my point of view, those armies are far and away too strong. Some of them is due to formations, and some are due to deathstars, but all of them are not fun games for my Chaos Marines to play in. I'm at the point now where I tend to leave them at home and play my space wolves instead. Not that CSM being shelved for SW is anything new in their history....
The point is, the new codexes, for the most part, are very very strong. Eldar, Necrons, DA, Marines, the Skitarri are all stronger dexes capable of amazing builds. Tau was a newish dex, and was strong (though not as strong as those, it can still play the game) and nothing got worse with them. They got a few units, and are getting a book of formations, and that is about it.
The odds that Eldar, Necrons, or any of the other armies that just got a codex are going to get nerfed are incredibly small. Heck, two of those armies, necrons and eldar, were incredibly strong already and got buffed!
You're much better off hoping that the weaker armies get massive buffs so everyone can play the game. It's not about what is good game design (because yes, nerfing eldar and the others would be the right move) its about what has at least a chance of happening.
You have to be realistic about these things.
I play DE, Nids and CSM there is no excuse for throwing balance out the window.
This is a straw man, as no one is suggesting that balance get thrown out the window.
As for armies, I own most of the armies in this game (except the multiple marine armies). I own Eldar, CSM, Nids, Orks, Tau, SW, UM, Necrons, etc etc. I don't own Skitarri, IG, and De.
What do you think the chances are of THE ENTIRE REST OF THE GAME being brought up to Eldars level? Equally as unlikely, if not WAY more unlikely than Eldar ever being nerfed.
Considering that Eldar have, never as an army, been nerfed even once by a new codex, while most armies in the game have, at one point in their career, been good/fun to build lists with?
Yeah, I think IG going back to having platoon selection and Chaos getting legion rules is much more likely than Eldar ever getting nerfed.
And yes, again, this is a strawman. No one is suggesting that the other Dexes be brought up to Eldar levels (at least I'm not, the person you quoted). I'm suggesting that it's more likely that the older codexes will get buffs rather than the new codexes get nerfs.
I'd be happy if everyone was about Tau strong. While the Tau are, currently, slightly boring to face, they are fun to build lists with and aren't too op unless your army is bottom tier.
And then, assuming everyone was up there - Eldar sits where it does for one of two reasons, the person writing the Dex either thinks that this is currently balanced with the rest of the game, or they quite simply want Eldar to be stronger than the rest of the game. Whichever one it is, there is absolutely zero reason to believe that if the entire rest of the game was buffed, that Eldar wouldn't just be raised above them as well. Putting us right back to square one.
I doubt eldar will be changed at all. Tau have an older dex then they do, and got very minor changes, some new units, and new formations. Eldar already have new units and new formations.
Any changes to eldar or necrons will be small, if there are any at all. Really, the other codexes being buffed is the only chance of a good change happening at this point.
Perhaps you do not recall but, right before the Eldar dex was released (and the necron one) most people thought the eldar/necrons would mainly get nerfed a bit and that GW would release balanced codexes. They were claiming GW wanted a low powered game, basing it on the Chaos book, among other. At best, they hoped the bad units in the dex would get buffed.
Instead, the Waveserpent was slightly nerfed and every other unit was buffed, with amazing formations. Necrons got wraiths with possibly the best formation in the game. Much "I told you so" was had by all.
Regardless, it's beside the point. There is absolutely no reason to believe that Tau being made super OP like Eldar would have been any indication as to whether or not the rest of the cast will be turned up to that level as well. In fact, history tells us that it isnt.
Again, strawman. Tau didn't get many buffs. Most of the new units are good and offer options, but aren't absurdly powerful like the eldar new releases were.
Tau are probably not going to go up or down in the rankings, just get more options. Considering where they currently rest, this is fine.
So forgive if I'm not at all upset that we don't have two of these ridiculous dexes throwing out balance to a stupid extreme.
That's fine, though I'd ask you to please stop using the strawman argument so much.
2015/10/22 14:38:07
Subject: The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
"Equally as unlikely, if not WAY more unlikely than Eldar ever being nerfed."
Eldar have never been nerfed, but there have been codices in the past that were as good or almost as good as Eldar. Your point is refuted.
The debate over balance seems silly to me. You pick an accessible point in the power scale and choose that as your balancing point. It doesn't matter where that point is. What matters, though is accessibility. Since Codex Eldar can't be balanced around Sisters, the only choice I see is to go up.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/22 14:40:10
2015/10/22 14:47:56
Subject: The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
How the hell is it subpar
Fire warriors got better (already the best standard troop in the game) with added towers and new swanky gun if you want it
New stealth suit that you can't hit and nice guns and drones
The storm suit giving tau d weapon or away to kill mass troops and light vehicles and both these can be taken in 3's
Tau commander becomes a flying monsters creature if you like
Add all the cool op stuff they have just now tau are one of the best army's in the game and this release has added more to this.
Anyone who doesn't see this is an ork higher up
2015/10/22 14:53:33
Subject: Re:The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
pm713 wrote: Or you could pick a level and make everything go to that level. So buff bad armies like CSM and nerf OP armies.
We can't make Eldar go down. Eldar have never gone down and there's no reason to think they are getting a new codex anytime soon. In theory I agree with you, but I'm factoring in practicality here as well.
2015/10/22 14:56:14
Subject: The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Simple: because the "outlier" is not OP, it is just filled with really cool options and choices that allows the player to field a massive variety of different (and roughly equally powerful) armies that represent their full well; on the other hand, the "balanced" codices are bland and mediocre, they are mostly featless, lack options and flavor, and only have a few powerful armies while any other build range from "meh" to "sh*t".
Now, place your hand on your heart and tell me that you want all codices to be like the latter, rather than the former .
When I was talking about bringing armies into a balanced state, I didn't mean that everything should be brought down in power. There are plenty of armies with blandexes that equally need to be brought up in power so that the game is more balanced.
Bharring wrote:Its not either/or.
Outside WKs and Serpent Spam, the 6e CWE book had a lot of fun and balanced options.
The Necron book, outside Decurion and Wraiths, has a lot of fun and balanced options.
The SM book, outside Grav and Formations, has a lot of fun and balanced options.
It doesn't need to be OP to have a lot of valid options and be fun.
Are we talking about the same 6th edition Eldar codex? Where Howling Banshees are one of the worst units in the game, Striking Scorpions aren't much better, Swooping Hawks are useless, Fire Dragons and Dark Reapers are simply outclassed, Falcons and Vaul's Wrath aren't even worth fielding, and all the special characters are either ridiculously overpriced or useless.
For better or worse, the 7th edition Eldar codex mas given Eldar players a lot more option sin terms of how to play their army. The problem is that some units were made so absurdly overpowered in the new codex that they make all other armies, including Eldar armies, obsolete.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/22 15:00:53
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Eh, semantics I guess. They are in noway comparable to the more powerful armies.
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2015/10/22 15:03:50
Subject: Re:The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Eh, semantics I guess. They are in noway comparable to the more powerful armies.
They do just fine against those armies, provided the other person isn't just running the power units.
And the next person who makes an argument that brings up "Gladius gets free vehicles" is going to get roundly mocked.
Roundly mocked.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/22 15:04:34
2015/10/22 15:06:53
Subject: Re:The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Eh, semantics I guess. They are in noway comparable to the more powerful armies.
They do just fine against those armies, provided the other person isn't just running the power units.
And the next person who makes an argument that brings up "Gladius gets free vehicles" is going to get roundly mocked.
Roundly mocked.
Well, yes, but I find that to be the case with pretty much all armies. A lot of OPness seems to come down to the other players power-gaming. Maybe it's just my area?
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2015/10/22 15:12:35
Subject: Re:The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Eh, semantics I guess. They are in noway comparable to the more powerful armies.
They do just fine against those armies, provided the other person isn't just running the power units.
And the next person who makes an argument that brings up "Gladius gets free vehicles" is going to get roundly mocked.
Roundly mocked.
Well, yes, but I find that to be the case with pretty much all armies. A lot of OPness seems to come down to the other players power-gaming. Maybe it's just my area?
The point I was making is that when we're talking about the "new hotness" top tier stuff, it isn't broken in and of itself. It's a combination of factors that make stuff broken.
In the Space Marine book, for example, you kind of have to actively try to make a broken list.
Nobody is going to accuse my 1st and 10th Company Task Forces with Raptor Chapter Tactics broken. But I start mixing and matching Chapter Tactics among the different formations to get the 'best' perks, start throwing in Allied stuff that is the best from its various Codices.
For Eldar, I don't think I've heard anyone complain that the Guardian Warhosts are broken--but when we start talking about the Windrider Warhost? Different story again.
When we talk about Tau though? It's not the units themselves that are powerful--and that's good! It really is! The only thing that makes Tau an army that I hate fighting is the way Markerlights behave. I would put Tau up higher than a lot of Tau players would, I think. But that's coming from the fact that they can completely shut down my best defense(Cover) with absolutely minimal effort.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/22 15:15:00
2015/10/22 15:14:12
Subject: The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
The OPness of a codex is directly tied to said codex's ACCESS to OP builds. Not every build has to be OP. Although the 7th ed Eldar codex can field viable lists of random units...
2015/10/22 15:14:58
Subject: Re:The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Eh, semantics I guess. They are in noway comparable to the more powerful armies.
They do just fine against those armies, provided the other person isn't just running the power units.
And the next person who makes an argument that brings up "Gladius gets free vehicles" is going to get roundly mocked.
Roundly mocked.
Well, yes, but I find that to be the case with pretty much all armies. A lot of OPness seems to come down to the other players power-gaming. Maybe it's just my area?
It's most likely your area.
There are...maybe 4-5 armies in the game that can't really face Eldar, Crons, or Marines unless the power armies spam their worst unit. A balanced force will wipe out a "Op" force of Chaos Marines, Dark Eldar, Blood Angels, or the other weak armies. Many Eldar cron or marine players don't own spammable levels of crap units (except marines, cause tacticals), so you're essentially asking them to spend money to handicap themselves. I say this as someone who owns armies in every tier.
There are also, in addition to the weak armies, another 3 or so armies that are forced to rip out 70% of their dex to remain competitive. IG, Nids, and a few others belong here. They can play with the big boys, but only if they only spam a few units that are very good, because the vast majority of their dex is awful. Sometimes this units are thematic or were good, so a lot of players own a lot of these bad units (genestealers, wyches, LRBT).
Compare that to Eldar, Necrons, or Marines. They can freely pick units and still go up against any of the other dexes if they bring a balanced force and expect a game. Very few (maybe 1-3) units in those dexes are just awful and unplayable, if there are any at all.
Granted, if the power level is brought up, Eldar, Necrons, and Marines might see themselves with 2-4 units that aren't very good instead of 0/1-3 like it is now. However, you'll see every other dex go from ripping out 70%+ of their dexes to including 70%+ of their dexes, which would be a great thing.
Honestly, if that happened, I'd drop WMH and go back into 40k with a smile. I like the universe more, but in WMH most factions only have a few crap units so I know my collection is still playable.
2015/10/22 15:16:02
Subject: The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Eh, semantics I guess. They are in noway comparable to the more powerful armies.
They do just fine against those armies, provided the other person isn't just running the power units.
And the next person who makes an argument that brings up "Gladius gets free vehicles" is going to get roundly mocked. Roundly mocked.
Well, yes, but I find that to be the case with pretty much all armies. A lot of OPness seems to come down to the other players power-gaming. Maybe it's just my area?
The point I was making is that when we're talking about the "new hotness" top tier stuff, it isn't broken in and of itself. It's a combination of factors that make stuff broken.
In the Space Marine book, for example, you kind of have to actively try to make a broken list. Nobody is going to accuse my 1st and 10th Company Task Forces with Raptor Chapter Tactics broken. But I start mixing and matching Chapter Tactics among the different formations to get the 'best' perks, start throwing in Allied stuff that is the best from its various Codices. For Eldar, I don't think I've heard anyone complain that the Guardian Warhosts are broken--but when we start talking about the Windrider Warhost? Different story again.
Oh, I agree completely, it's just that I tend to measure maximum army strength at the maximum power level they can achieve (so, as broken as possible), although I dislike that way of playing. The maximum tau brokenness is far less than the most powerful armies. It did use to be extremely high before 7th hit, but 7th removed most of the shenanigans that powered them up to that level (joining riptides, eldar BB, ect.).
Edit: Oh, and I definitely agree on markerlights, I really wish they were brought back to how they were in 4th. -1 cover worked well withouth being OP, and the -ld was fun to go after high-value units, possibly killing them outright, and if not, then reducing their effectiveness.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/22 15:21:58
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2015/10/22 15:24:17
Subject: Re:The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Well, yes, but I find that to be the case with pretty much all armies. A lot of OPness seems to come down to the other players power-gaming. Maybe it's just my area?
I play Eldar, I don't use Wraithknights or Wraithguard and I don't spam Scatterlaser jetbikes. I'm 0/5 in terms of wins against new Necrons. My Necron friend doesn't even use too many "OP" combos, and he tends to throw different armies at me each time we play. In the end it doesn't really matter, it's so hard to kill all of his stuff that I can't seem to pull out a win. Personally my experience is that Eldar have a few OP tools in their toolbox, like D Weapons from Wraithguard and the Wraithknight who is an under-costed Gargantuan. But if you don't use those specific models? Eldar seems to pale in comparison to the power of the Necron codex by a pretty large margin.
When I see SOO much hate against Eldar it leads me to believe that most Eldar players powergame a hell of a lot more than I do. Granted though, using Wraithguard or a Wraithknight is a pretty low bar for defining "powergaming". They're just units in the codex.
I was chatting with my Necron friend the other day, and discussing the un-assembled Wraithknight I have and how I might want to use it someday. I mentioned that maybe we'd houserule the Wraithknight to only be a Monstrous Creature instead of Gargantuan to balance it out, or change the D Weapons to be what they were in the 6th Edition codex. Then after we talked about it I thought to myself, "He beats me every game! Maybe I shouldn't be houseruling my own units to be less powerful!"
2015/10/22 15:29:03
Subject: Re:The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Oh, I agree completely, it's just that I tend to measure maximum army strength at the maximum power level they can achieve (so, as broken as possible), although I dislike that way of playing. The maximum tau brokenness is far less than the most powerful armies. It did use to be extremely high before 7th hit, but 7th removed most of the shenanigans that powered them up to that level (joining riptides, eldar BB, ect.).
Edit: Oh, and I definitely agree on markerlights, I really wish they were brought back to how they were in 4th. -1 cover worked well withouth being OP, and the -ld was fun to go after high-value units, possibly killing them outright, and if not, then reducing their effectiveness.
You've seen my ideas for Markerlights, right?
2015/10/22 15:30:48
Subject: Re:The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
Oh, I agree completely, it's just that I tend to measure maximum army strength at the maximum power level they can achieve (so, as broken as possible), although I dislike that way of playing. The maximum tau brokenness is far less than the most powerful armies. It did use to be extremely high before 7th hit, but 7th removed most of the shenanigans that powered them up to that level (joining riptides, eldar BB, ect.).
Edit: Oh, and I definitely agree on markerlights, I really wish they were brought back to how they were in 4th. -1 cover worked well withouth being OP, and the -ld was fun to go after high-value units, possibly killing them outright, and if not, then reducing their effectiveness.
You've seen my ideas for Markerlights, right?
I'm not sure, I may have missed/forgot them.
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2015/10/22 15:35:11
Subject: The new tau so far are pretty disappointing.
What the hell are you arguing dude? I have no idea what you've devolved this into, but your fallback of strawman, strawman, strawman every couple of lines is hilarious - you didn't get it right once, it's wildly ironic.
For example, why is your argument against me, to point out Tau didn't get buffed to Eldars level? I've said multiple times that I don't think that they were, you are quoting RESPONSES to the argument put forward in the OP and by further posters, that Tau SHOULD have been buffed to Eldars level. See how ironic it is when you quote me saying "if they WERE buffed it would have been no indication of anything" and respond to it with this, and have the hypocrisy to use the word "strawman" ?
Again, strawman. Tau didn't get many buffs. Most of the new units are good and offer options, but aren't absurdly powerful like the eldar new releases were.
Tau are probably not going to go up or down in the rankings, just get more options. Considering where they currently rest, this is fine.
Lol the word isn't just a universal fallback and if you were aware the meaning of the term you are throwing around at every opportunity you might become AWARE of some serious irony going on in your messages.
And yes, again, this is a strawman. No one is suggesting that the other Dexes be brought up to Eldar levels (at least I'm not, the person you quoted). I'm suggesting that it's more likely that the older codexes will get buffs rather than the new codexes get nerfs.
Ahhhh then you'll have to forgive me for coming to the outlandish conclusion, that when you quoted me saying nothing other than "Armies shouldn't be brought up to ELDARS level" (this post: 8206340) and you saying "your expectations are unrealistic and I disagree" (this post: 8206748), that your argument was armies SHOULD be buffed to Eldars level. And that instead, what you were actually disagreeing with was the statement that weaker armies shouldn't be buffed at all (or not to Tau's level), a statement that I never made, and a statement I entirely disagree with myself. Got it.
I'd be happy if everyone was about Tau strong. While the Tau are, currently, slightly boring to face, they are fun to build lists with and aren't too op unless your army is bottom tier.
For someone who uses the term strawman as liberally as you do, in good conscience I have no other option than recommending you research the meaning of the term. I never once said otherwise. In fact I fully agree, this would be excellent, putting dexes on this power level (at least as far as I can judge it at this stage, slightly weaker than the last Dex but with more options) could get all the dexes a lot closer in power level and wouldn't destroy the game in a Dex to dex meantime. My only statement / argument this entire time has been that buffing Tau up to Eldars level WOULD have been a bad change for balance because then we just have double as many Eldar level dexes destroying the games balance for literally every other race. Why is my argument suddenly that not to buff the weaker dexes at all? My argument is specifically and only this, a Dex of 6th ed TAU's level getting buffed to 7th ed ELDAR's level would be making the game less balanced, and that this thread and anyone agreeing with it are silly for being disappointed that it wasn't. The mention of codexes below Tau was to point repercussions another Eldar level Dex could have, not saying that none of them should be buffed. Seriously though. You gotta research that word strawman if you gunna throw it around like this. Cause this is incredible.
Now, getting past this silliness and giving you a second chance to actually compose a response and explain your perspective, I'm having trouble understanding what you mean by this:
I doubt eldar will be changed at all. Tau have an older dex then they do, and got very minor changes, some new units, and new formations. Eldar already have new units and new formations.
Any changes to eldar or necrons will be small, if there are any at all. Really, the other codexes being buffed is the only chance of a good change happening at this point.
I don't understand what you are saying. So Tau having an older dex receiving minor changes this Dex means other dexes will receive minor changes... I don't get it, now all the other codexes are older than the Eldar Dex as well, why does this blanket logic only apply to the armies that support your argument but not to the ones that don't? And don't *eyeroll* accuse me of strawmanning here because I'm not saying you said anything I'm asking for clarification on your statement because I just don't understand it.
Perhaps you do not recall but, right before the Eldar dex was released (and the necron one) most people thought the eldar/necrons would mainly get nerfed a bit and that GW would release balanced codexes. They were claiming GW wanted a low powered game, basing it on the Chaos book, among other. At best, they hoped the bad units in the dex would get buffed.
Instead, the Waveserpent was slightly nerfed and every other unit was buffed, with amazing formations. Necrons got wraiths with possibly the best formation in the game. Much "I told you so" was had by all.
I also don't understand this one. If the statement that you responded to here with your quote, was made predicting that IF every Dex was buffed to Eldars current level that it would go hand in hand with Eldar being buffed more as well, because gw has clearly decided that them sitting where they CURRENTLY do in regards to the rest of the game is where they WANT them to sit... Than how is what you just said disproving it, and not supporting it? You are arguing that when they were ALREADY well ahead of the majority, they were buffed further slightly to re-cement their spot well above everyone elses.. So exactly why is it that this happening, disproves it happening for a third time in a row if the rest of the game was buffed to Eldars level?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/10/22 16:02:58
P.S.A. I won't read your posts if you break it into a million separate quotes and make an eyesore of it.