Poll |
|
Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced? (compared to previous editions) |
Yes, overall. Minor issues exist, but but not major ones. |
|
54% |
[ 160 ] |
No, game-breaking inequities still exist! |
|
46% |
[ 136 ] |
Total Votes : 296 |
|
|
Author |
Message |
|
|
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
|
2017/11/23 02:18:29
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Numberless Necron Warrior
|
Look, don't answer unless you've played some games in 8th. Let's be honest, a fair number of members here are keyboard jockeys and haven't picked up the dice in years. We're looking for the overall sentiment from active game PLAYERS. After you vote, please comment on why you voted the way you did. I'm interested.
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 02:26:52
Subject: Re:Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Drone without a Controller
|
I voted to say that inequalities still exist, although I think the poll puts it too strongly. Codex armies are just better than armies without a codex and there are still units that are under or overcosted. Balance is far better than seventh though. In seventh edition I felt bad playing the models I liked, which were riptides, crisis suits, ghostkeels, and fire warriors. That isn't the case in 8th. I can bring (most) of them and have an expectation of a good game. Some of them cost too much now, but it's much better than it was in seventh when I knew coming in that if I took what I liked I would blast most opponents off the table by turn two or three.
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 02:27:01
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain
Vigo. Spain.
|
Theres big differences in power level. I think this question will be better after all the codexes are out.
But at least they are TRYING to balance the game. Thats the biggest change of all of them.
They took less than a month to fix Stormraven spam, nerf Brimstones, nerf Commisars, Conscripts, buff many many units with the Codex, nerf ML with Chapter Approved, etc...
All of those things where just... unthinkable before. As much as people like to gak on GW, I think from a gameplay perspective they are trying this time. And you can see it. The Meta has changed a lot comparing the start of 8th vs how it is now.
|
Crimson Devil wrote:
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote:Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 02:31:27
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle
|
Galas wrote:Theres big differences in power level. I think this question will be better after all the codexes are out.
But at least they are TRYING to balance the game. Thats the biggest change of all of them.
They took less than a month to fix Stormraven spam, nerf Brimstones, nerf Commisars, Conscripts, buff many many units with the Codex, nerf ML with Chapter Approved, etc...
All of those things where just... unthinkable before. As much as people like to gak on GW, I think from a gameplay perspective they are trying this time. And you can see it. The Meta has changed a lot comparing the start of 8th vs how it is now.
They could be trying a LOT harder, though.
|
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! |
|
|
|
2017/11/23 02:34:28
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain
Vigo. Spain.
|
JNAProductions wrote: Galas wrote:Theres big differences in power level. I think this question will be better after all the codexes are out.
But at least they are TRYING to balance the game. Thats the biggest change of all of them.
They took less than a month to fix Stormraven spam, nerf Brimstones, nerf Commisars, Conscripts, buff many many units with the Codex, nerf ML with Chapter Approved, etc...
All of those things where just... unthinkable before. As much as people like to gak on GW, I think from a gameplay perspective they are trying this time. And you can see it. The Meta has changed a lot comparing the start of 8th vs how it is now.
They could be trying a LOT harder, though.
Yeah, is not like the bar was very high before. But I give them credit for what they are doing. And I give them gak for things like the 7-Plague Marine box. Damm, I'm still angry about that fething box for the same price as 10 rubrics...
|
Crimson Devil wrote:
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote:Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 02:39:01
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Terrifying Doombull
|
Really, obviously no.
Spot fixes to problems they overlooked in the first place don't really impress me, especially given the ease and encouragement to build early game board-wiping armies.
|
Efficiency is the highest virtue. |
|
|
|
2017/11/23 03:25:11
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Powerful Phoenix Lord
|
In a tournament setting? No.
In a casual or organized play setting? Very possible.
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 03:28:29
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle
|
Elbows wrote:In a tournament setting? No.
In a casual or organized play setting? Very possible.
That's true of pretty much ANYTHING.
|
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! |
|
|
|
2017/11/23 03:30:32
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Loyal Necron Lychguard
|
The codexes are mostly balanced with each other so far, with only AdMech as a true outlier in uselessness. Index armies are all over the place, of course, but the indexes were not intended to be balanced against the codexes.
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 03:41:53
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Steadfast Ultramarine Sergeant
|
I feel like space marines could be better but whatever
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 03:43:34
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
Elbows wrote:In a tournament setting? No.
In a casual or organized play setting? Very possible.
That could be said of any edition though. Automatically Appended Next Post: Arachnofiend wrote:The codexes are mostly balanced with each other so far, with only AdMech as a true outlier in uselessness. Index armies are all over the place, of course, but the indexes were not intended to be balanced against the codexes.
Which just tells GW\s attitude to balancing. "Naah we don't want to balance things out". When there's actually no reason index couldn't be as balanced as it's possible toward codex than another codex.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/23 03:45:24
2024 painted/bought: 109/109 |
|
|
|
2017/11/23 03:47:27
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Drone without a Controller
|
tneva82 wrote:
Which just tells GW\s attitude to balancing. "Naah we don't want to balance things out". When there's actually no reason index couldn't be as balanced as it's possible toward codex than another codex.
Not with the design philosophy of 8th. A codex means more options and more options almost always equals more power, even if it's just power derived from synergy.
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 03:51:30
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Loyal Necron Lychguard
|
tneva82 wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arachnofiend wrote:The codexes are mostly balanced with each other so far, with only AdMech as a true outlier in uselessness. Index armies are all over the place, of course, but the indexes were not intended to be balanced against the codexes.
Which just tells GW\s attitude to balancing. "Naah we don't want to balance things out". When there's actually no reason index couldn't be as balanced as it's possible toward codex than another codex.
I'm not sure how you expect the Indexes to be balanced against the Codexes; stratagems alone make the codex version of an army intrinsically more powerful than an index version, unless the stratagems just suck. Do you want the stratagems to all suck, tneva?
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 04:28:30
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Overall I feel like they're trying harder yet somehow still just making a mess of it all.
The balance issues with 8th seem more complicated because of all the "soup" lists now. Different than before certainly, but I couldn't say better at this point, just seen too many games effectively over on turn 1 to consider voting "yes" in a poll like this.
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 04:29:47
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
Arachnofiend wrote:tneva82 wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arachnofiend wrote:The codexes are mostly balanced with each other so far, with only AdMech as a true outlier in uselessness. Index armies are all over the place, of course, but the indexes were not intended to be balanced against the codexes.
Which just tells GW\s attitude to balancing. "Naah we don't want to balance things out". When there's actually no reason index couldn't be as balanced as it's possible toward codex than another codex.
I'm not sure how you expect the Indexes to be balanced against the Codexes; stratagems alone make the codex version of an army intrinsically more powerful than an index version, unless the stratagems just suck. Do you want the stratagems to all suck, tneva?
If strategems makes army more powerful howabout upping point costs of codex entries then compared to index?
Power can be balanced(to a degree anyway) with points. That's the whole point of them. Codex army is more powerful than index, reflect that on points.
Of course that leads to less models sold which GW abhors.
|
2024 painted/bought: 109/109 |
|
|
|
2017/11/23 04:35:07
Subject: Re:Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Loyal Necron Lychguard
|
Right. Completely retune every model in an army when its codex comes out in order to compensate for the increase in power over what was quite explicitly given as a temporary stopgap. Because that makes sense.
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 04:43:01
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
War Walker Pilot with Withering Fire
|
I'd say it's not balanced-balanced yet, but it's getting closer and closer. Some nerfs to SM and CSM are pending, which will help. I'm sure we'll always have people crying about Tau and Eldar, though.
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 05:23:16
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord
|
This depends on how far you wanna go back. If you wanna compare it to early 3rd edition, nope. It's nowhere near as balanced as that. But (like I keep saying) 3rd is only balanced because it basically had no extra frills whatsoever (A marine is a lot easier to balance when all he had was ATSKNF, rather than the slew of special rules they have nowadays, and marines aren't even up there in terms of broken-ness).
Compared to 5th? 5th was sort of a mess unless you ignored the BAs and every codex that came after it, but 5th is more balanced than 8th, if only because allies weren't a thing. 5th had a different balance issue in that vehicles were much more durable and cheaper than they had any right to be, but army against army it was decent (with some weirdness, like Tyranids).
Compared to ones in recent memory? 8th is a lot more balanced than the mess that was 6th and 7th. 8th currently has two main issues:
1.) Allies. Since doing away with the allies chart in favour of the Keywords thing, balance has been a big issue for anything imperium related. They're essentially one giant codex if you're happy to lose out on the regiment doctrines. chapter tactics and so forth. The end result is that they have more options in just special characters than some other armies have in units in total (which is why soup and superfriends are so popular).
2.) 8th is still young, and the lack of a codex for a lot of armies is really hurting them. Relics, Stratagems, and advanced rules not present in the indexes really hurt index-only armies.
That said, i wouldn't take anything said online seriously. Due to GW's poor rule balancing in the past and a lot of people starting flavour of the month armies during 7th, we have quite a huge number of self-entitled people who think that just because they bought the flavour of the month two years ago their army should still be able to curbstomp everyone else effortlessly (basically every single person complaining about Grey Knights and Blood Angels, but Eldar and Tau to a lesser extent).
Another thing that most people on the internet aren't aware of is that 40k, during 3rd edition, was balanced for 1500 points (2000 was suppose to be "pushing it" while 1000 points would be "barebones"). With the scale creep that has happened (a marine with the same equipment back then would be 18 points. A termagant would be 9 points) since then, this would mean that 40k, in it's current incarnation, is more balanced for 1000 points, not the comically huge 1750/1800-3000 points people are frequently playing at. This is why you see people complaining about losing on the first turn so often; the larger the armies the bigger the potential casualties on the first turn. Smaller it is, there is much less. I've been playing at 1000 points and lower and found that the things people fear are a lot less of a problem at these levels (it also cuts down on spam).
|
Gwar! wrote:Huh, I had no idea Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines posted on Dakka. Hi Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can I have an Autograph!
Kanluwen wrote:
Hell, I'm not that bothered by the Stormraven. Why? Because, as it stands right now, it's "limited use".When it's shoehorned in to the Codex: Space Marines, then yeah. I'll be irked.
When I'm editing alot, you know I have a gakload of homework to (not) do. |
|
|
|
2017/11/23 07:14:56
Subject: Re:Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
Arachnofiend wrote:Right. Completely retune every model in an army when its codex comes out in order to compensate for the increase in power over what was quite explicitly given as a temporary stopgap. Because that makes sense.
If they can't balance these why should I believe they are capable of balancing ANYTHING?
Incapable fellow can't balance anything.
|
2024 painted/bought: 109/109 |
|
|
|
2017/11/23 08:02:57
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Waaagh! Ork Warboss
Italy
|
GW is clearly trying to balance the game.
But the truth is: those armies that don't have a codex have currently even fewer viable options than in 7th edition. And I'm talking about friendly metas.
With orks, drukhari and SW I had way more choices in 7th edition, now even in casual settings I must bench a lot of units/characters that were viable before and only added a few ones that were garbage and now viable or good.
This is reality, I prefer the 8th edition core rules, but I have been forced to used the index so far and I'll probably have to use it for months. At the moment my armies are completely unbalanced, internally speaking and considering a game against a factions that already has a codex.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/23 08:14:22
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 08:10:27
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
W40k is an inherently difficult game to balance, because it is so assymetric by design. GW is really improving their effort at game-balance though. Including Forge World units in the Chapter Approved re-pointification is a huge step in the right direction.
And the game will never be "balanced", as re-balancing is a never ending process. But with GW it used to be a never-starting process, so I am pretty optimistic.
We are also beginning to see the advantage of the separation of point-costs from unit entries. This separation is pretty annoying for listbuilding purposes, but it is really what makes it possible to issue an annual (and pricey) rebalance patch.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/23 08:17:00
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 08:43:57
Subject: Re:Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Battleship Captain
|
I think they're doing a good job for those of us not looking to be hyper-competitive. I can't comment on the early books because no one here plays normal CSM and our only SM player uses Guilliman in every game.
Guilliman, incidentally basically needs an overhaul and is a black spot on the edition. I don't think he's massivly overpowered but he overshadows every other option in the book as hes such an incredibly good force multiplier. I don't think they'll be able to balance the rest of the SM book while Guilliman is as strong as he is. He props up the rest of the army. Which means SM players are stuck with Papa Smurf polishing turds until their next codex.
The problem with the topic is that the early book suffered from being rushed and no everyone has a codex yet. IG, CWE and Tyranids all feel like complete, well thought out books. Maybe Death Guard as well, I dunno I've not looked at their book. SM, CSM, GK and AdMech are servicable but don't feel underpowered, they just suffer from being the first books of the edition so they're a bit on the wonky side and its clear they were playing it safe with the rules by sticking close to the Index.
|
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 08:47:00
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Courageous Beastmaster
|
Voted both, the options are equally true. The issues are more minor when compared to 7th but they can still be game-breaking.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/23 08:49:40
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 08:50:00
Subject: Re:Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Sadistic Inquisitorial Excruciator
|
I'd say there's a pretty big balence gap between Codex AM and Codex Grey Knights, yes.
|
Disclaimer - I am a Games Workshop Shareholder. |
|
|
|
2017/11/23 17:07:12
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot
On moon miranda.
|
TL;DR way better than 7th, not really any better than 4E/5E.
The game is better than 7th. Way better.
That said, 7th was probably the biggest cluster feth GW ever put out and the worst balanced edition of 40k ever. 7th is gone and lets hope it stays gone, dead, and buried. That edition wrought more havoc on gaming groups and drops in local event attendance than I'd ever thought possible.
I'd say we're back to about 4E/5E balance level issues. Hardly perfect, we've got a handful of massive glaring issues and some clearly "winner" and "loser" codex books, but better than anything we've seen in the last 5 years or so since the introduction of 6th and the crazy train that started through into 7th.
|
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts. |
|
|
|
2017/11/23 17:12:50
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain
|
Is it better than 7th, No, is it different, yes, this Ed is more of a side shift of 40k than a straight upgrade.
The Balance issue will always be there, its just different offenders at the moment, the biggest difference this Ed has is GW's willingness to actually try to resolve these issues.
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 17:44:22
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Norn Queen
|
Voted yes, mostly balanced but only in the context of taking the new codices against each other and then the battletomes as another. Any crossover matches is a no no at this stage.
|
Dman137 wrote:
goobs is all you guys will ever be
By 1-irt: Still as long as Hissy keeps showing up this is one of the most entertaining threads ever.
"Feelin' goods, good enough". |
|
|
|
2017/11/23 17:58:39
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Stern Iron Priest with Thrall Bodyguard
UK
|
Well none of my armies have a codex but my friends do so I'm turning down games because I just can't compete.
My last hope for 8th was ynnari which I'd just finished painting when they nerfed it to the ground before I'd got a single game in.
So I've gone back to x-wing as my main game, its not even been six months and I'm out.
|
|
|
|
2017/11/23 18:28:58
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot
|
I wonder how well chapter approved will do to improve balance. Retuning the entire game in one go probably will help balance more than releasing isolated codexes.
I voted yes because 8th is just so ridiculously superior to 7th in terms of army balance. They are trying to make a more diverse and balanced game and I think we should encourage them to continue down this path.
|
Fully Painted Armies: 2200pts Orks 1000pts Space Marines 1200pts Tau 2500pts Blood Angels 3500pts Imperial Guard/Renegades and 1700pts Daemons 450pts Imperial Knights |
|
|
|
2017/11/23 22:55:04
Subject: Are the armies in 8th fairly well balanced?
|
|
Fresh-Faced New User
South Wales
|
I voted that things are balanced, but that's not to say there are no problems. I think that the factions still using indexes are at a major disadvantage compared to codex factions, but hopefully that'll be sorted in next six months.
Also if GW keep altering things as they are with faqs then this hopefully wil shape up to be the best edition yet.
|
|
|
|
|