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.

Outside of Imperial Guard and a couple ugly units (Reapers, for instance), this edition is actually fairly well balanced. FW is always a problem for balance but it's not as bad as it was at the start of 8th (although FW balance is still bad).

Guard needs to go up in price, Reapers need to go up in price. Other than that, so far so good.

 Galas wrote:

fithos wrote:
7th edition: formations are so stupid. People shouldn't be getting free rules for taking arbitrary combinations of models.

8th edition: chapter tactics/doctrines/craftworlds are so fun and fluffy. Look at my catachan tank devision/aliatoc wraith list.

Call me when you find a Chapter Tactic that gives you 500 points of free tanks.

Depending on the army in question, hitmod or savemod stacking can do "equivalent" levels of harm. Guard being able to get 2++ with ease is one example.

7th edition was a better edition in my eyes, so I'm going to be a little biased, but I do think 8th edition has worse balance than 7th. It had more variety, games usually weren't decided on turn 1, and for as much hate as the Psychic phase gets from people (myself included), the 8th edition solution is probably just as bad. I also feel the solution of 'codexes are free power' is a call-back to the 7th edition 'free power' detachments in the codexes that broke balance, and the new mini-codexes are just the new supplements, which was my most hated thing in 7th edition as a whole.

 MagicJuggler wrote:

 Galas wrote:

fithos wrote:
7th edition: formations are so stupid. People shouldn't be getting free rules for taking arbitrary combinations of models.

8th edition: chapter tactics/doctrines/craftworlds are so fun and fluffy. Look at my catachan tank devision/aliatoc wraith list.

Call me when you find a Chapter Tactic that gives you 500 points of free tanks.

Depending on the army in question, hitmod or savemod stacking can do "equivalent" levels of harm. Guard being able to get 2++ with ease is one example.

Fortunately, we have mortal wounds to fix that!

methinks you are getting a wee bit too emotional about people on an internet message board for a game about plastic toy soldiers.

Calm down dude, you're not exactly swaying anyone to your position with posts like this.

meep

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Ratius wrote:
Jesus Gamegee
Thats a temporary banning if ever I saw one

See ya in a week

meep

also meep, I suppose.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:

 Galas wrote:

fithos wrote:
7th edition: formations are so stupid. People shouldn't be getting free rules for taking arbitrary combinations of models.

8th edition: chapter tactics/doctrines/craftworlds are so fun and fluffy. Look at my catachan tank devision/aliatoc wraith list.

Call me when you find a Chapter Tactic that gives you 500 points of free tanks.

Depending on the army in question, hitmod or savemod stacking can do "equivalent" levels of harm. Guard being able to get 2++ with ease is one example.

Fortunately, we have mortal wounds to fix that!

Less of them should the Smite Nerf go through. :3

 MagicJuggler wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:

 Galas wrote:

fithos wrote:
7th edition: formations are so stupid. People shouldn't be getting free rules for taking arbitrary combinations of models.

8th edition: chapter tactics/doctrines/craftworlds are so fun and fluffy. Look at my catachan tank devision/aliatoc wraith list.

Call me when you find a Chapter Tactic that gives you 500 points of free tanks.

Depending on the army in question, hitmod or savemod stacking can do "equivalent" levels of harm. Guard being able to get 2++ with ease is one example.

Fortunately, we have mortal wounds to fix that!

Less of them should the Smite Nerf go through. :3

My Dark Eldar have so many mortal wounds, man.

I think part of the biggest problem is being able to take multiple detachments and have them each get their specific benefits. There was no drawback to doing it and often there is a tangible bonus because you can maximize what each Detachment does with specific traits that helping out the most

Wayniac wrote:
I think part of the biggest problem is being able to take multiple detachments and have them each get their specific benefits. There was no drawback to doing it and often there is a tangible bonus because you can maximize what each Detachment does with specific traits that helping out the most

this is definitely an issue. As much as I can see the fluff aspect of it, at least for matched play Id really like to see only the faction bonus (doctrine, legion trait, chapter tactic, etc) of the Warlord apply to the army as a whole.

Darsath wrote:
7th edition was a better edition in my eyes, so I'm going to be a little biased, but I do think 8th edition has worse balance than 7th. It had more variety, games usually weren't decided on turn 1, and for as much hate as the Psychic phase gets from people (myself included), the 8th edition solution is probably just as bad. I also feel the solution of 'codexes are free power' is a call-back to the 7th edition 'free power' detachments in the codexes that broke balance, and the new mini-codexes are just the new supplements, which was my most hated thing in 7th edition as a whole.

You're wrong about basically everything you said here. Not gonna sugar coat it, everything you said was backwards AF, point by point:

1. Smashing your junk with a hammer was better than 7th. Even if you don't like 8th, 7th was a dumpster fire top to bottom. And less games were decided turn one because 99% of games were decided in list building. It's not hard to make a simple excel spreadsheet that'll tell you you don't have enough shooting to in your 1850 pts of non-riptide wing Tau, to kill more than 2 Khorne Dogs in my Cabal star by the end of the game.

2. The 8th edition solution to the psychic phase is far, far better; even if you think it's bad just because of how terrible 7th psychic was. It's more interactive, doesn't actively punish you for taking 1 off psykers, doesn't have the broken crap like Invis or endurance, and doesn't take three fricken hours for a deamon player to get through set-up+ his first psychic phase. It's also more tactical because any army that actually USED the psychic phase in 7th had functionally unlimited resources to do so and deny the witch was an absolute joke.

3. Codexes are free power, but codexes have always been free power. And your whole line of argument here is completely bypassing the fact that THE BROKEN FREE FORMATIONS CAME IN THE CODEXES. Codex vs Index power is nowhere near the difference of Old Codex vs. New Codex was in 7th. One good formation could catapult an army forward MASSIVELY in powerlevel (decurion, Warcon)

4. What mini codexes? You mean Custodes? The one army that could actually qualify as a mini-dex? And how is an entirely self-contained, if small, army anywhere near what Angels of Death, or Black Legion, or Skies of Death, or Fall of Cadia, or Biel-Tan, or Rise, or Ghazkhul, or Clan Raukaan, or or or or or or or or or were? The answer is: They're not. The smaller codexes they're releasing now are self-contained factions that are available as allies and are nowhere near as mandatory or as damaging to the game as the supplements of old.

You don't like 8th that's fine. You prefer the 7th edition ruleset? You're wrong, but hey; Heresy is still around and they seem to have staved off 7th's massive problems so far so you can still play the edition you want. But do not pretend for 1 second that 7thed 40k was anything but a dumpster fire in the middle of an atomic waste disposal site, when it comes to army balance.

People look back at 7th and miss the cheese they could do that doesn't exist in 8th.

You mean you can't scout forward free rhinos with fire ports full of grav weaponry and light your opponent up turn 1?

You mean you can't fly around the board auto-winning with scatbikes, and other eldar nonsense?

You mean every list doesn't begin with, "I have a riptide wing, and..."?

You mean the psychic phase didn't produce thousands of free points and take several hours to get through?

The list goes on. 7th had a ton of problems. 8th isn't perfect but perfection is unattainable anyway. 8th is better. That's enough.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Soup is a sidegrade for Imperials and Chaos, and a flat nerf for the rest. Your army as a whole must have one common Keyword, but you can have multiple subfactions in the same detachment. The opportunity cost for staying monofaction within one detachment and souping in another isn't too far removed from how you could tradeoff between maximizing Decurion benefits or getting allies.

As far as balance, 7th versus 5th interests me, as despite the view that 5th is the most balanced...I remember that edition favoring mass light mech over most other builds. Sure, you could run a Loganwing and do reasonably well, and the Draigowing janked its way to runner-up status at Nova 2011...but the game ultimately favored a critical mass of Lasplas Razorbacks/Mechvets, and aura of choice. "Gee, do I take Smite or do I take Null Zone?"

By contrast, 7th had the Gladius, Bike armies, War Convo...at least three distinct types of army. Given more time to experiment, I believe Genestealer Cults also had the potential to be a competitive horde army.

The game did have problems of course. Too many USRs, some rules didn't work (Ex: barrage weapons were better at sniping than actual sniper weapons), and there were too many "all or nothing" scenarios. However, cover meant something, and games generally weren't decided on turn 1.

Cover never meant anything if you knew how to read your army rules(more than 1 army had blanket 2+ rerollable cover saves that still didn't make them any good) And games weren't decided on turn 1 because they were decided in list building.

Never played 7th. From the rulebook I was given it looked extremely complicated. I'm an avid 2nd ed fan and played more games in the dumbed down 3rd than any other edition.

So that should say something about glancing at 7th and how inviting it looked.

8th took a lot to get used to. It is not a skirmish game. In fact there may be too many models on the table for a quick game....but they made the rules so that you can play a quick game with a whole lot of models.

The problem with that fix is Dice Hammer. Too many freaking dice and rerolls. Too many Auras.

Hey I like to play a big army.
I like to play a fast game.

Making cover and terrain better at nerfing turn 1 alpha strike/shooting would be nice

Limiting the dice would be nice. At least add more modifiers to hit. Less hits mean less saves which means less FNP rolls, etc.

Bring back targeters, Overwatch as an either or not everyone gets it.
Tone down what a unit can do.
Boom my guys can:
Run across the board.
Turn models to dust with psychic mortal wounds
Then shoot a unit off the table.
Charge the other half of the board.
Wipe a lot of dudes out in close combat
And then consolidate into even more mayhem.

It is a bit much. When you can kill off multiple opponents, move the length of the table and still have weapons that can only shoot as far as 1/4 of your movement rate on foot.
Tanks that stay stationary are as easy to hit as those 20+ fast moving flying jetbikes????
2nd edition had a lot of good stuff. 8th has a lot of good stuff.
3rd had some good stuff to make it an army game instead of a million hour long small skirmish 2nd game.
4th thru 7th sounded just limited imagination on top of the 3 big editions that have defined 40k.
Merge the best of 2nd, 3rd and 8th and you wont ever have to look back at the others.

For me it's that gw hasn't really learnt from previous editions, we are already seeing the same issues rear their ugly heads, the biggest difference I have seen is the willingness to at least try to fix these issues, but as I said before, they have not learnt the mistakes of the previous eds so are likely to keep repeating them and go around in circles.

The psychic phase is a good example, it lacks depth and favours the caster too much, it also demands you have a psyker to try and stop it.

Personally I would have taken the 8th fantasy magic phase, refined it, removed the irresistible force but kept miscasts, messed around with the spell lores to make them fit into 40k and removed the super spells entirely, then we would have non psychic armies able to at least try to dispel, a flat bonus of +1 to dispel for tau, +2 for necrons to fit the fluff, thousand sons, grey knights etc. Would have a lot more spells to choose from and it would make the psy phase feel more interactive, right now it's just so dull.

 Formosa wrote:
For me it's that gw hasn't really learnt from previous editions, we are already seeing the same issues rear their ugly heads, the biggest difference I have seen is the willingness to at least try to fix these issues, but as I said before, they have not learnt the mistakes of the previous eds so are likely to keep repeating them and go around in circles.

The psychic phase is a good example, it lacks depth and favours the caster too much, it also demands you have a psyker to try and stop it.

Personally I would have taken the 8th fantasy magic phase, refined it, removed the irresistible force but kept miscasts, messed around with the spell lores to make them fit into 40k and removed the super spells entirely, then we would have non psychic armies able to at least try to dispel, a flat bonus of +1 to dispel for tau, +2 for necrons to fit the fluff, thousand sons, grey knights etc. Would have a lot more spells to choose from and it would make the psy phase feel more interactive, right now it's just so dull.

The problem is that it makes it harder to cost a psyker. Casters in WHFB were upwards of 400 points or more and so rarely made their points back.

So, yea, it's "less fun" than WHFB magic, but it's also way more balanced and way less frustrating. So, pick your poison.

ERJAK wrote:

Darsath wrote:
7th edition was a better edition in my eyes, so I'm going to be a little biased, but I do think 8th edition has worse balance than 7th. It had more variety, games usually weren't decided on turn 1, and for as much hate as the Psychic phase gets from people (myself included), the 8th edition solution is probably just as bad. I also feel the solution of 'codexes are free power' is a call-back to the 7th edition 'free power' detachments in the codexes that broke balance, and the new mini-codexes are just the new supplements, which was my most hated thing in 7th edition as a whole.

You're wrong about basically everything you said here. Not gonna sugar coat it, everything you said was backwards AF, point by point:

1. Smashing your junk with a hammer was better than 7th. Even if you don't like 8th, 7th was a dumpster fire top to bottom. And less games were decided turn one because 99% of games were decided in list building. It's not hard to make a simple excel spreadsheet that'll tell you you don't have enough shooting to in your 1850 pts of non-riptide wing Tau, to kill more than 2 Khorne Dogs in my Cabal star by the end of the game.

Horribly comparison as its just extreme hyperbole. A good portion of games in 7th played to a mission conclusion unlike 8th which is generally an alpha strike blood bath. List building is important in any game of 40k but movement, deployment, and tactics i feel played a much bigger role in 7th than it does in 8th. Codex imbalance was a huge issue so i won't ignore that aspect of things but its far from just being list auto wins.

2. The 8th edition solution to the psychic phase is far, far better; even if you think it's bad just because of how terrible 7th psychic was. It's more interactive, doesn't actively punish you for taking 1 off psykers, doesn't have the broken crap like Invis or endurance, and doesn't take three fricken hours for a deamon player to get through set-up+ his first psychic phase. It's also more tactical because any army that actually USED the psychic phase in 7th had functionally unlimited resources to do so and deny the witch was an absolute joke.

Daemon players spamming psykers was another relatively uncommon thing and yes 7th had a lot more book keeping and didn't scale as well. More interactive is a bit of a stretch where as now the caster just rolls 2 dice while the defender does nothing unless they have a nearby psyker. No risk/reward for the amount of dice used or making that big push to deny that critical power. 7th worked best with relatively even number of psykers but the system broke with psyker spam. Psyker spam in 8th is just spamming smite which is just boring.

3. Codexes are free power, but codexes have always been free power. And your whole line of argument here is completely bypassing the fact that THE BROKEN FREE FORMATIONS CAME IN THE CODEXES. Codex vs Index power is nowhere near the difference of Old Codex vs. New Codex was in 7th. One good formation could catapult an army forward MASSIVELY in powerlevel (decurion, Warcon)

Not really anything wrong with this bit but i will say that 8th's mechanics are so simplistic by comparison to the variables in 7th that small power differences in 8th have bigger impacts on games than similar differences in 7th. That said GW really let the power creep train go full speed with no brakes in the 2nd half of 7th's lifespan.

4. What mini codexes? You mean Custodes? The one army that could actually qualify as a mini-dex? And how is an entirely self-contained, if small, army anywhere near what Angels of Death, or Black Legion, or Skies of Death, or Fall of Cadia, or Biel-Tan, or Rise, or Ghazkhul, or Clan Raukaan, or or or or or or or or or were? The answer is: They're not. The smaller codexes they're releasing now are self-contained factions that are available as allies and are nowhere near as mandatory or as damaging to the game as the supplements of old.

We are just at the begining of the 8th cycle. The supplement spam will be coming once the codexes are caught up.

You don't like 8th that's fine. You prefer the 7th edition ruleset? You're wrong, but hey; Heresy is still around and they seem to have staved off 7th's massive problems so far so you can still play the edition you want. But do not pretend for 1 second that 7thed 40k was anything but a dumpster fire in the middle of an atomic waste disposal site, when it comes to army balance.

"You prefer the 7th edition rule set? You're wrong" ok so we are now saying that people's preferences are right and wrong? Some high and mighty attitude here. 7th had terrible balance sure but in my opinion it is/was a more fun game than 8th. I still stand by my opinion that I would rather play a game of 7th with my Orks vs Eldar than play a game of 8th with any faction.

Formosa did you ever play 2nd edition Psychic Phase that came out in Dark Millenium?

It came after shooting but prior to close combat.
There was a deck of cards. 6 specials and a lot of power and nullify cards.

Any race could try to use a Nullify card. Generally the stronger the caster the better your chances to get your spell off. And better to Nullify. It was a mini-game within the game.

I think it would be nice to incorporate something like that into the Battle Round....and not a players Turn. And the Morale/Rally phase should also be incorporated into the Battle Round and not a turn.

Something like:

1st player Move, Shoot, Assault then Fight
2nd player Move, Shoot, Assault, then Fight
1 common Psychic Phase, then Moral

Or anything that ties more phases together to limit redundancy.

IF I was putting my own 40K together it would be like this.

Battle Round:

Player 1 Declares FallBack and Charges
Player 2 Declares FallBack and Charges

Roll for Fallback and Charges alternating x dice movement.

Player 1 Move phase (plus advancing)
Player 1 Shooting phase
Player 2 Move Phase (plus advancing)
Player 2 shooting phase

Common Psychic Phase

Assault Phase

Morale Phase/Compulsaries/Order Overwatch

end

You can only Fallback on a die roll and only if in close combat
You can only Charge if within range.
Only certain units can be put in overwatch based on the number of highest level characters to issue those Orders and perhaps within a certain distance. (normal to hit and anytime prior to the next psychic phase)

Cover adds to armor saves (soft, hard, and dug in)
stationary units get bonus to shoot
moving units are harder to hit based on combat and fast speed
Ranges are increased 50% for most guns.(The extra range is penalty to shoot)
Smoke/blind/etc can give negative to hit modifiers
Heavy Anti-Tank weapons have negative to hit a normal trooper.
If you need 7+ to hit you need to roll a 6 followed by a 4+. I fyou need an 8+ then you need to roll a 6 followed by a 6+. That way you can always hit/wound
If you need a 1+ to hit or wound and miss you can still hit on a 4+ on a second roll

Get rid of most auras and rerolls.
If you shoot a vehicle from behind perhaps you get +1 to wound. ( I know the tank is spinning around and blasting away, but then positioning will matter)

Terrain rules Terrain Rules....lots of them. And Simple and easy to get..I like the 1/3 or 50% rule.

Ok, since you think you're genuinely trying to defend 7th, I'll be a bit less glib, though the edition doesn't deserve it.

Counterpoint 1. Revionist history on both sides of the aisle on this one. 7th edition had far more brutal alphastrike than 8th does. Any drop pod space marine or eldar list had enough shots that could hit anywhere on the board that any normal army would die in it's entirety. The thing that made it SEEM like missions were actually important were getting hundreds of free points worth of models and the incredible prevelance of 2++ rerollable deathstars. Movement played a bigger role in 7th than it does in 8th because deathstars made the shooting and assault phases totally irrelevant, unless you were eldar or riptide wing which made the assault phase irrelevant. And there weren't ANY tactics in 7th. You buffed up a deathstar and facerolled it around the board and that was it. And finally, lists autowon all the time, except at the very very high end where relative power of list flattened out. There was not a single thing BA, Orkz, DE, SoB, or Space wolves could do to beat a Centurion star without going full superfriends. It was completely impossible. Same with Screamerstar. Both of which could be done with just combines arms detachments.

Counterpoint 2: You really didn't play 7th at any reasonably competitive level did you? Daemon players spamming psykers was the single most prevalent chaos style of play. By the end of the edition Chaos Daemons racked up more GT wins than every other army in the game except Eldar and every single daemon list spammed psykers like crazy. It got so bad that other armies started spamming THEIR psykers just for the chance to summon in daemons. You're defending a psychic system that only existed at a theoretical level. If you brought psykers you brought TONS of them or exceptionally powerful ones like tiggy. No one brought just a librarian or w/e because they were actively detrimental against real psychic armies. You can't praise the systems theoretical value when the truth was that it was built to HEAVILY incentivize spam. Careful allocation of resources was a myth.

Counterpoint 3. The mechanics aren't really that simplistic, they just cut out things that didn't matter or were stupid. AV was largely irrelevant, the old assault phase was a spreadsheet that hated you and didn't offer a single tactical decision despite taking upwards of an hour with larger combats, Dangerous terrain was pointless, USRs were a huge pile of unnecessary bookwork, the ap system was bad, the BS, WS charts were bloated and silly, the ST chart completely broke down with T1,2 or T9,10, characters joining units was so problematic they just tossed it, vehicle rules made vehicles useless and on and on and on. The only thing 8th lost mechanically that MATTERED relative to 7th is the cover system, which in 8th is ABYSMAL admittedly.

Counterpoint 4. You have to realize how silly this one is right? You're literally complaining that 8th might eventually end up as bad as 7th sometime in the future. When the supplement spam happens, by all means tear into it. Supplements are stupid. But until then that's still a big checkmark in 8th's favor.

And finally: that's you right as a gamer I guess. I guess I can understand wanting a ten minute game of scat bikes decimating your army down to two or three nob bikers; people lead busy lives, but this thread isn't about preference, it's about balance. At the end of the day, if you play an Eldar player of equal skill, as an ork player in 7th edition, and the eldar player doesn't absolutely bend over backwards making his army as weak as he possibly can, he won't even have the tools necessary to throw the game.

Both 7-th and 8-th are decided by the lists and who goes first. You instantly know it's no longer a tactical game when someone asks: i have ork bikers and a trukk full of boyz, how can i get a chance vs dark reaper spam, and the answer is not:
- use cover
- reserve stuff
- use positioning and maneuvre
- use other tools like ld
No, the only answer is: ditch your bikers and trukks and get a ton of boyz.

And it's not only about orks. There are really a ton of examples where one army concept can't do anything against another army concept and the game doesn't provide ANY real tactical possibilities to mitigate the initial disadvantage of collecting a certain army.
People like variety but the system once again does not provide many possibilities of a balanced list based around different elements. If you take infantry and want to support it with a tank, you're at a disadvantage over taking more infantry or more tanks. Because the enemy has free reign of what he can target and he chooses best weapons to deal with best targets avaliable. And you can do NOTHING about it. The only 'mixed' concept that works is a long ranged gunline + bauble wrap. And that's only because certain bauble wraps are too good for the price. It's boring to play with and against but it works, i guess.

 koooaei wrote:
Both 7-th and 8-th are decided by the lists and who goes first. You instantly know it's no longer a tactical game when someone asks: i have ork bikers and a trukk full of boyz, how can i get a chance vs dark reaper spam, and the answer is not:
- use cover
- reserve stuff
- use positioning and maneuvre
- use other tools like ld
No, the only answer is: ditch your bikers and trukks and get a ton of boyz.

Funny how you ""forgot"" that A) orks are Index army, so of course they have less options, B) that in 7th edition the answer was "trash your orks in nearest garbage bin, you'll never win against Eldar, go buy Tau or Necrons and even then it's uphill fight", C) while dark reapers are bad (gee, yes, Phil Kelly is incompetent and will never not make his pet army broken) it's NOWHERE near 7th edition Eldar vomiting D-shots from every orifice and getting 2+ to hit on every unit for just existing, rerollable with every frakking peanut-cheap support model. That sure sounds more balanced than 8th, eh?

People like variety but the system once again does not provide many possibilities of a balanced list based around different elements. If you take infantry and want to support it with a tank, you're at a disadvantage over taking more infantry or more tanks. Because the enemy has free reign of what he can target and he chooses best weapons to deal with best targets avaliable. And you can do NOTHING about it. The only 'mixed' concept that works is a long ranged gunline + bauble wrap. And that's only because certain bauble wraps are too good for the price. It's boring to play with and against but it works, i guess.

I like how you ""forgot"" vehicles, outside of free gladius and/or war convocation didn't exist at all in 7th, it was endless tide or MCs and GMCs, with eldar and tau having them nonsensically slapped on what was clearly walkers, making what was supposed to be slow, unwieldy vehicle with cockpit melee unit killer to negate any weakness they had in fluff. Gee, that sure was so much more balanced and realistic than 8th, where every SM/AM/IG/Tau army are balanced infantry / vehicle mix, and it's only the Eldar reaper spam that bucks the trend. That sure is 8th ed fault, not Kelly messing up as usual!

Ummm...what exactly is this "balanced infantry/vehicle mix" you're talking about for Marines, Tai or Guard? I don"t believe I've seen a single Rhino, Chimera, or non-Commander Crisis Suit since this edition came out, and those weren't even "tier 1" choices in the first place.

Personally i do have a few gripes with 8th compared to 7th
For example in 8th chaos marks do sweet f all. As someone who likes to play Mono God armies would it of killed them to allow the chaos mark to do more than just allow you to use a certain icon or be effected by a certain stratagem?
Relics again they seem to vary wildly to chaos.
The fact that daemon princes are so much better than lords and sorcerors would it kill gw to fix this? At least the sorceror has something going for him the chaos lord not so much.
Why did csm and chosen lose their option for true grit yet space wolves kept theirs?
Overall these might seem like small things buy they add up to quite a annoying problem

I'd like to actually do the math on this. Is there anywhere I can find a good set of data to use? I'd need total player count, total number of players by faction, and number by faction in the top whatever (8, 16, 10%, etc) for as many tournaments as possible for 8th so far and the last 6-12 months of 7th.

 Irbis wrote:

Funny how you ""forgot"" that A) orks are Index army, so of course they have less options, B) that in 7th edition the answer was "trash your orks in nearest garbage bin, you'll never win against Eldar

Ok, how would you win a dark reaper spam with white scar bikers?

In 7-th orks sure were at a disadvantage vs eldar and tau but i constantly won games with my tac ork list that had: boyz, grots, koptas, meganobz, trukks, lobbas. Part of the reason was that i could mitigate the damage because cover ACTUALLY WORKED vs stuff that didn't get ignore cover. Sure, eldar serpent spam had half the list in serpents that ignored cover with half the shots but than serpent spam phased out, even scatbike spam was possible to handle. I could even hide from them because they could only kill what they could see.

I'm in no way saying that 7-th was more balanced. In fact, it was probably worse. But it felt more like a game. Because there were things other than listbuilding and rolling 1-st turn that you could do. Now it's just a listbuilding mishmash. Not very interesting one to boot. There is just so little tactics involved that it sometimes starts feeling as if you're just there to throw dice.

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
I'd like to actually do the math on this. Is there anywhere I can find a good set of data to use? I'd need total player count, total number of players by faction, and number by faction in the top whatever (8, 16, 10%, etc) for as many tournaments as possible for 8th so far and the last 6-12 months of 7th.

Well there was one interesting graph posted on this forum that showed gap between top and bottom was actually increasing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 koooaei wrote:
I'm in no way saying that 7-th was more balanced. In fact, it was probably worse. But it felt more like a game. Because there were things other than listbuilding and rolling 1-st turn that you could do. Now it's just a listbuilding mishmash. Not very interesting one to boot. There is just so little tactics involved that it sometimes starts feeling as if you're just there to throw dice.

Well on flip side 8th ed might become the cheapest edition ever. It's so much alpha striking that models are actually basically wound counters. Wonder how long before tournaments realize they get same effect with faster games by removing miniatures out of the equation.

There used to be a thread here. Unfortunately it stopped getting updated around the time of csm codex release.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/730601.page

The win rate of top army at that moment (sororitas) was ~80% while the win rate of bottom army (death guard) was ~30%.

Now things have shifted a bit but i dn't think it's shifted towards the 50% mark. It's quite the opposite.

 koooaei wrote:
There used to be a thread here. Unfortunately it stopped getting updated around the time of csm codex release.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/730601.page

The win rate of top army at that moment (sororitas) was ~80% while the win rate of bottom army (death guard) was ~30%.

Now things have shifted a bit but i dn't think it's shifted towards the 50% mark. It's quite the opposite.

I dont think any of that matters unitl all codex's are out and we get 1 more balance patch for them. To me 8th isnt fully released yet and we are still in the process of getting it released.

By the time all codexes are out it will be time for 9th edition. I mean, if rumours that say orks will receive their codex in december are true it means that they'll get their rules 1 year and a half after the release of the current edition, which is a lot considering that 40k editions usually last 3 years. We'll only have 1 year, maybe 1 and a half with all codexes out.

In the prevoius editions you could play with older codexes, now you must use the index which is a mess: no special rules and overpriced stuff. I think 8th edition is the playtest for 9th, which maybe will be balanced. So far I miss 7th edition, but just because my armies had more viable units and different styles to use.