PDA

View Full Version : Balance 40k



GuyLeCheval
29-01-2009, 15:58
So I'm new to 40k. I just played 2 games with orks against space marines (Assault on black reach), which I both won.

But now is my question:
In warhammer fantasy I know which armies are overpowered and who need a redone. I asked myself: Is there in 40k also a problem of power creep, and so, which armies are affected?

In other words, I'd like to hear your opinnion of the balance in 40k.

linkai
29-01-2009, 16:07
Current strong armies:
Orks
Space Marines
Chaos Space Marines (lash/oblit)

Current solid armies:
Eldar
Dark Eldar
Sisters of Battle
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
Chaos Daemons
Tyranids

Current weaker armies:
Tau
Daemonhunters
Imperial Guard
Dark Angels
Black Templars
Necrons

Am I missing any big ones?

Orks were solid in 4th but got a HUGE boost in 5th. Space Marines got a bit stronger because of their new codex - drop pod armies are tough to beat. Chaos of course is still strong but Eldar (to a lesser extent Dark Eldar) got weaker because of the SMF rule.

K

Radium
29-01-2009, 16:10
You forgot Tyranids? Also solid in my opinion.

Lord Damocles
29-01-2009, 16:11
In 40K, it's more a case of power lists (eg. twin Lash Chaos) than power armies as is (or so I'm led to believe) the case in Fatasy (eg. Chaos Deamons).


On AoBR Marines beating Orks, the Marines have quite a few more points in the box than the Orks (something like 500 to 400).

Kurisu313
29-01-2009, 16:11
the balance between armies is pretty good. Orks are at the high end of the spectrum, which may explain your experience.

The balance inside the lists is not so great, where often one or two builds are much more powerful than others, for example chaos dual lash lists or ork nob bikers. Daemonhunters are an okay 'dex, but most people play them as pure grey knights which is relatively weak. These problems seem to have lessened since 5th edition though.

We don't have the level power creep that you see in the vampire or daemon army books.

The_Outsider
29-01-2009, 16:31
Yet, for all this, unlike fantasy there are very, VERY few things that cannot be beaten my tactics and strategy.

Hence why the list of army power (much like the one earlier in this thread) are meaningless - if SM are at the top, does it make DE/SoB god tier because they can annihilate SM/chaos?

Not at all, while both forces have an advantage against marines, neither auto win and can be beaten by marines much like any other force with proper strategy and tactics.

zealot!
29-01-2009, 17:11
linkai's list is about right. i'd put eldar in the powerful category too. daemons and sisters as well in the hands of a good player..

im happy w/the 5th ed books, we just need some for those that got left back in 3rd ed. and the like...

Ianos
29-01-2009, 17:22
I think that besides IG (which is hit in KP missions) and GK (bad outdated codex) all other armies stand a more or less equal chance when facing off. Sure Orks are a bit over the top right now cause people are not used to include horde control in their lists and the Ork codex is very well fitting in the 5th ed rules and environment, BUT one or two dexes and a few tournaments later things will change.

Players will need about a year to greatly adjust to the horde nature of 5th. Orks are now very good, IG will be soon, nids can always hit hard, then there is demons and DE that can include more bodies than usual and Demons are a brand new army while DE are also still VERY powerful with their WebWay portals and wyches. So mainly it is the mentality that has to mostly change now along with a couple of codices for even more balance.

As for the current balance compared to the past? There is no question GuyLeCheval, things are FAR better now than 5 years ago. Sure there will always be tournament lists, and OTT options, but what he have now is in no comparison to the 4th ed. cookie cutters, MEQ dominance and weapons spam.

Ubermensch Commander
29-01-2009, 17:47
40K really is, currently, relatively balanced. Within every book there a few toys and combos that make you just shake your head and go "Really? Was that intentional? Sheesh" but more often than not it is a case of Rock/Paper/Scissors. You also have rules issues(thouhg not generally balance issues) from old codices with some options no longer having a function and few points balances throw outta whack due to rules being changed. Even some old codices, such as Dark Eldar and Space Wolves, can match the new stuff toe to toe and have as good a chance as winning as any other codex.
The balance between codices is much better than it was 3-5 years back.

That being said, the new Ork codex is more or less the new bar against which armies are measured. They have alot of nifty toys and their basic trooper(Ork Slugga/Shoota Boy) is disgustingly good for the points you pay. While part of their current domination is people still thinking MEQ that is only a fraction of it. We shall see what the new year holds for 40K.

banik
29-01-2009, 17:48
Current strong armies:
Orks
Space Marines
Chaos Space Marines (lash/oblit)

Current solid armies:
Eldar
Dark Eldar
Sisters of Battle
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
Chaos Daemons
Tyranids

Current weaker armies:
Tau
Daemonhunters
Imperial Guard
Dark Angels
Black Templars
Necrons



I agree with this list, pretty much without reservation.

There will always be player-based exceptions, as well as misconceptions where people think a good 4th edition list is as good in 5th- people will often make this mistake about Eldar, for instance.

I think Nidzilla/stealer lists are borderline strong.

SPYDER68
29-01-2009, 17:52
Black templar isnt so much of a weak list, ive seen them do rather good alot of the time.


And guard can be a toss up on that list to, last tourny i went 3-1 with my guard, only losing to Nob biker orks, which i screwed up against and could have tied if i played it right vs them.

Johnnyfrej
29-01-2009, 17:53
If IG is so weak then why to I keep beating SMs, Chaos SMs and Orkz? (and don't say my opponents suck because I believe they are at least on par with my own skills)

And as far was the "weak" armies go, why do I have the most problems with Tau, Necrons and DE?

Chaplain Nikolai
29-01-2009, 17:54
I'd put Black Templars in the solid list due to run/righteous zeal allowing them to get across the table really quickly, but ohter than that I agree with the list.

Lungboy
29-01-2009, 17:57
I don't see how DA can be seen as weak with scoring Terms.

Blue Orphen
29-01-2009, 18:37
Because that's one of the very few benefits DA have going for them, when compared to the new SM book?

SPYDER68
29-01-2009, 18:38
Black templar can be very scary with 2-3 huge troop squads, 2x vindies a crusader all marching forward very fast.

zealot!
29-01-2009, 19:03
balance will also vary due to your metagame. cheese is prevalent in the va

Hakkapelli
29-01-2009, 19:20
Yet, for all this, unlike fantasy there are very, VERY few things that cannot be beaten my tactics and strategy.


I find it rather amusing that this really is how it works nowadays. Back when I started 40k (during the 13th black crusade campaign) I felt, and I think the consensus was, that WHFB was the more tactical of the two and 40k more about building the best list and rolling dice while being a bit short on the tactical side.

decker_cky
29-01-2009, 19:34
Fantasy has had some uneven development lately, resulting in some serious power lists standing above others, and accentuated by older lists just not having tools to deal with them. 40k on the other hand has had very characterful, mostly within pretty closely balanced books coming out, and a new edition that makes many power builds less effective. Sure, orks are a stand-out in power, and chaos has a few OP'd combos, but overall it's pretty even.

de Selby
29-01-2009, 20:04
The recent books have been good. Power imbalances currently have a lot to do with the 5th ed. rules changes, which IMO pushed the orks (up) and the tau and IG (down) out of the comfortable 'solid' portion of linkai's list. Ok, maybe IG were always weaker, but it got a lot worse.

linkai
29-01-2009, 20:37
Orks really tipped the power scales and made people rethink how you build armies. In 4th picking guns with medium Strength, low AP (like the Starcannon) was an important choice. Now it's all about how many saves you can make, or cover saves you can deny.

Actually, IMO Orks are undercosted a little bit right now. Why would you pay 8 points for a Guardian or 6 points for a Guardsman when you could pay 6 points for an Ork (2 attacks base? :wtf: were they thinking)? Especially when Orks get Fleet of Foot (mostly Turn 2). Nobs are also a tough nut to crack.

Other than that, as others have said before 40K is a pretty balanced game. Eldar used to be the IWIN button, but not anymore. Chaos and Orks are the strong ones with SM with a close second.

There are a couple "weaker" armies in the list above that aren't really all that weak - I just put them there because four categories is usually one too many.

ReveredChaplainDrake
29-01-2009, 22:07
Current strong armies:
Orks
Space Marines
Chaos Space Marines (lash/oblit)

Current solid armies:
Eldar
Dark Eldar
Sisters of Battle
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
Chaos Daemons
Tyranids

Current weaker armies:
Tau
Daemonhunters
Imperial Guard
Dark Angels
Black Templars
Necrons

Am I missing any big ones?

Orks were solid in 4th but got a HUGE boost in 5th. Space Marines got a bit stronger because of their new codex - drop pod armies are tough to beat. Chaos of course is still strong but Eldar (to a lesser extent Dark Eldar) got weaker because of the SMF rule.

K

I wouldn't agree totally with that list. First of all, Space Marines are decent, but not obnoxiously good as Orks are. Instead, I would put Nidzilla up there with Orks. When you have horde Orks and Nidzilla as common features in the exact same meta, tourney-style gaming (i.e. no list tailoring) really sucks because if you take anti-horde the Nidzilla bulldozes you, but take anti-monster and Ork hordess bulldoze you. The irony is that the best army to take out either threat is IG, who have numerous templates and high volumes of strong guns to take down either threat. When the IG codex comes out, Orks are going to find out very swiftly that green is not necessarily best... :evilgrin:

Don't underestimate Tau. They're not as sucky as people think they are. The only real problem with Tau is they lost their gimmicky-ness with 5th edition. The JSJ gimmick was the most obvious loss, but the change to Skimmers and Defensive Weapons was also very painful. (I never played Tau in 4th, but couldn't Devilfish move 18" before?) In exchange, Tau's new gimmick is wound allocation through drone spam and Disruption Pods on all their tanks. (However, it must be said that when you're hoping for Immobilization results over Crew Shaken, something is wrong.) The Ethereal can be gimmicked, but it's not as easy. Tau are probably on equal power level with Dark Eldar, but they're just not as well known for being powerful because (1) their goody-two-shoes fluff attracts a lot of noobs who frankly don't know what they're doing, (2) Dark Eldar are much more rare and exotic, and thus harder for the average army to cope with, and (3) Tau were designed in the same time span as the Tyranids, in a meta where the philosophy of MSU (multiple small units) was the tactic to beat. However, in the 5th ed meta of 1/3 of all missions being kill points, the new winning formula is FBSU (few big scoring units).

Probably the toughest list to win with in the game is pure Grey Knights, while the easiest build to win with is Horde Orks. Chaos Marines are still pretty powerful, enough to warrant being on the higher end of the spectrum, and they're rightfully the benchmark as far as power-armored armies go. Though personally I rate the Chaos Marine codex very poorly on account of atrocious internal balance. You can win with them just fine, but if you want to do so, the cookie-cutterness is about as obvious as a frying pan to the face.
GW: "So you want to use a Chaos Lord, hm? *WHAM!* Now, what have we learned today?"
CSM Player: "Always use a Lashprince."
GW: *WHAM!*
CSM Player: "...two Lashprinces..."
GW: "Much better!"

Marshal Augustine
29-01-2009, 22:18
Black templars are higher on the scale than that... The BT's can lay out the hurt!

Vedar
29-01-2009, 23:03
How did necrons get on the bottom of this list? I don't think the changing of the glancing chart overides the brokeness of mololiths and WBB. I dread necrons more than any other army. Maybe I just play against good necron players.

Soupcat
29-01-2009, 23:16
Mainly due to them almost being worse then Tau in CC now Im guessing, they are still solid IMO, but really all you have to do is charge multiple units and the necron player is sol. That and while they can take a beating they really don't pack a punch like they used to because everyone else is much faster. Basically we are still good against non-oblit lash shooty armies but really have a hard time against CC now.

Creeping Dementia
29-01-2009, 23:20
I personally think that most of the balance issues are pretty minor in 40k. Granted Deamonhunters need some help and Orks are a little OP mainly due to their basic boyz are a little too cheap IMO, but not nearly enough to break the game.

And why does everyone keep saying the Tau are a weaker army? I have had absolutely no problems since 5th came into effect. The Disruption pods are fantastic and cheap, and the no consolidation CC rules mean that because we suck so bad in CC no enemy CC unit will ever kill more than one of our units before being shot to hell. JSJ isn't quite as good, and kill points suck because of free gun drones... and thats about it.

I guess the main reason is, Tau don't have an Uber army list that we all can take to the GTs and automatically score well just by showing up.

I have seen some pretty bad Tau players but the Space Commies are still playing great for me.

Koryphaus
29-01-2009, 23:20
Well, here (http://www.wargamerau.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=66445&st=0) are the results from CanCon 2009 - 8 games of 1750 points. The tournament special rule was that only troops units could score - or even contest (no transports, nothing. Only scoring units could contest). No killpoints missions were played.

Check out the armies being used by the top 20.. (I came in 12th). Obviously, Space Marines have an advantage with Combat Squads and the lack of KP missions, but it looks a lot like people are starting to learn how to use the new codex quite effectively.

The winner played a hoard of 187 Orks, got 4 Victorious Slaughters, 3 rushing Victories, and in one game got wiped out in turn 4 by the Khorne Bezerkers that came 19th (after his Big Mek launched himself 60" at Kharn the Betrayer by rolling a 12 on the SAG table lol)..

Creeping Dementia
29-01-2009, 23:25
Sort of makes you wonder why people would gear away from taking out MeQ, considering like 15 of the top 16 were MeQ armies (and a Sisters which are close enough to MeQ).

Bloodknight
29-01-2009, 23:27
@Vedar: Necs can't sit out close combat anymore to teleport away. I play against Necs sometimes and as far as I can see it, it's by far not as annoying to play against them as used it to be, but the frustration factor has changed the player - from opponent to owner. I'd actually say they are one of the more difficult armies nowadays because even small errors can turn a solid game on the winning side into a phase out in one turn. I'd actually say that if they are to stay that way they should not suffer from PO anymore.

Koryphaus
29-01-2009, 23:28
Sort of makes you wonder why people would gear away from taking out MeQ, considering like 15 of the top 16 were MeQ armies (and a Sisters which are close enough to MeQ).

Actually, no sisters. Some Inq Storm Troopers with Inducted Space Marines and Grey Knight Terminator allies.. That army was pretty hard.

Remoah
30-01-2009, 00:41
It all depends on the skills of the opponent, who you're facing, ect.
However, with run, horde CC armies get a decent chance at pushing into CC now. At least there is no more unbeatable Eldar Falcon Spam... though there's alot of Drop Pod Spam coming out now.

But i'm sure once IG is release there's going to be alot more spam...

whitewolfmxc
30-01-2009, 00:48
Space wolves are pretty solid and can beat other armies , just dont use the over priced units and units that have rules that dont work at all

Orkeosaurus
30-01-2009, 00:55
I'd say:

Current strong armies:
Orks
Black Templars
Chaos Space Marines (lash/oblit)
Eldar
Sisters of Battle

Current solid armies:
Space Marines
Dark Eldar
Space Wolves
Chaos Daemons
Tyranids

Current weaker armies:
Blood Angels
Tau
Daemonhunters
Imperial Guard
Dark Angels
Necrons

Black Templars reroll all their hits in close combat, Sisters have meltaguns, flamers, and transports that are safer and harder to kill.

Eldar aren't the top army anymore, but they're still second, or third at the very least. It's all around a very powerful codex.

Hicks
30-01-2009, 01:03
I really don't think the game is well balanced at all. First, most of the codices aren't designed for 5th edition, some are even 2 editions late. This means lots of armies pay points for rules that don't do anything anymore, or some abilities became costed inapropriatly. The BT vow or the genestealers feeder tendrills are a good exemple of this. They get a super strong bonus for a ridiculous price in points.

Other than that, some lists are super strong against some armies and weak against others. DE laugh at marines, but Orks laugh at the DE etc (ok, it's not an autowin, but a really uphill battle). This can lead to pretty boring matches where only one of the 2 players is actually playing.

There are also codices that are just plain much better than others. Currently Orks are probably the strongest army, while the Daemon Hunters are laughably weak in comparison.

Then there are the new missions. One of them punishes you for having too many easily killable armies (yeah guards!), while the other punishes you if you have a slow, but tough elite force. For some armies, rolling the right mission means the difference between having good chances of winning or hoping for a draw. You might think this would force people to build more balanced lists, but again, some armies are penalized by their very nature (specifically their troop choices).

hawo0313
30-01-2009, 03:20
Well something about the arder list that I've noticed is that SM CSM and Orks are at the top in them Im not saying the game is perfectly balanced but maybe the number have something to do with it I mean why play as average humans when you can play say humanities greatest warriors or a relentless horde of orks who can shout WAAAAGHH!!!!!!! as shamble/march across the table and lets not forget chaos whos wide array of demonic tranks and infantry can really suck you in and then you get the Eldar (who get some of the coolest models in the game) though I admit playing guard gives you huge tanks and guns (baneblade FTW) :)

so dont always base winning and losing on how some teams are broken because the SM may sound strong seeing how many wins they have but when you see how many players they have that win to loss factor isn't as big Orks are similar to a lesser extent but the game is rather balanced IMO

zoodog
30-01-2009, 03:48
The issue to some extent is 40K can put out alot of rock-paper-scissors lists where things like massing heavy armor, hard to kill troups, or cheep troops can put you ahead of an opponent who can't handle them and get crushed by an opponent who can. Orks have an advantage in that they can set up a list for any of them and still cover some of their weaknesses.

Orkeosaurus
30-01-2009, 04:14
The issue to some extent is 40K can put out alot of rock-paper-scissors lists where things like massing heavy armor, hard to kill troups, or cheep troops can put you ahead of an opponent who can't handle them and get crushed by an opponent who can.That's probably the bread and butter of power lists.

Nidzilla, Mech Eldar, Green Tide, Biker Nobs, Armored Company, Plague Marine filled Chaos...

Koryphaus
30-01-2009, 05:03
The other thing is that too many people are still playing 5th ed as if it were 4th ed + Run!, which basically = Fail against a good opponent.

willydstyle
30-01-2009, 06:44
I'd say:

Current strong armies:
Orks
Black Templars
Chaos Space Marines (lash/oblit)
Eldar
Sisters of Battle

Current solid armies:
Space Marines
Dark Eldar
Space Wolves
Chaos Daemons
Tyranids

Current weaker armies:
Blood Angels
Tau
Daemonhunters
Imperial Guard
Dark Angels
Necrons

Black Templars reroll all their hits in close combat, Sisters have meltaguns, flamers, and transports that are safer and harder to kill.

Eldar aren't the top army anymore, but they're still second, or third at the very least. It's all around a very powerful codex.

I think this list is closer to right, but I've seen both Blood Angels and Daemons do better at a lot of national-level tournaments, maybe not quite as good as Orks or CSM, but better than Eldar and Space Marines.

Although It does look like Marines did very well at Cancon, I would say that the house rule you posted (only troops can score OR contest) heavily biases the results towards armies with durable troops units. A non-Iyanden (or equivalent) Eldar player is almost an instant-lose in that scenario. I think you can also see this by looking at how poorly the Eldar did in that tourney. It's one of the reasons why I dislike house rules, it always biases things against one army or another.

Reaver83
30-01-2009, 07:15
I think there's a difference between balanced codecies and balanced lists. Every codex has a good smattering of usefull, ok and less usefull units. It's just some lists can work better to not have anything but the usefull ones.

Ianos
03-02-2009, 03:21
I think there's a difference between balanced codecies and balanced lists. Every codex has a good smattering of usefull, ok and less usefull units. It's just some lists can work better to not have anything but the usefull ones.

Or at least this depends on how players perceive what makes a list/army work better. From my observations, first comes toughness. Most feel safe with as many, as tough units, as possible.

Then damage output of the steady variety is prefered, i.e. units/weapons/armies that have a lot of re-rolls, high to-hit averages, cause they again make players feel safe that they will deal relatively good damage. Especially since most people feel unlucky anyway.

Finally comes the possible elimination of all other random factors like morale, save denial weapons, psychic powers.

This is why we end up with biker nobs, flying councils, nidzilla, etc.

Players are afraid of the dice and do not want to get into the real math or other ways to circumvent their possible ill effect and in the end are not ready to shake the meta. It is this majority, that will fall victim to the players that are willing to try smth different and exotic, both in terms of race and list. Players who will in turn use the above way of thinking of their foes, to their advantage.

That said, i strongly think that almost all races stand a good chance to win if they are piloted by a good general with an open mind and an all-comers list, slightly adapted to the meta. Bar of course, things that seriously need reworking like KPs and guard or a whatever DH codex, and those can also show notable exceptions depending on the environment and the player.

fluffstalker
03-02-2009, 03:38
While I disagree that all codices are balanced, for example Necrons are utterly pathetic no matter how well played. Even if your opponent is a retarded monkey its tough because of their weakness at long range shooting, close combat, and high cost plus phase out.

However, that being said, compared to warhammer fantasy 40k is practically chess. Orcs are tough customers but by no means unbeatable, compare this to Daemons and youll see what I mean. 40k relies less on powerful spells, characters and units and so most lists can be countered. Opponents can of course run Land RAider termies with 50% of the points in the unit, but a good armour pen roll and he will be in trouble. Look at a Fantasy shadestar unit for example, and with - to hit, various saves and powerful banners and characters, its far more dificult to deal with. In both cases you have to get lucky, but in 40k there is a greater chance.

ZOMGBBQ
03-02-2009, 10:06
While I disagree that all codices are balanced, for example Necrons are utterly pathetic no matter how well played. Even if your opponent is a retarded monkey its tough because of their weakness at long range shooting, close combat, and high cost plus phase out.


Well that just shows how much you know about anything then.

Theres no such thing as a "Better" army, its how you play with them.

I have 2 people in my Gaming Group, One guy who plays Pure Grey Knights and one girl who plays Dark Eldar, not the most "efficient" armies some would say.

They however consistently win about 80% of games they play jere at the club, and the amount of games played is enough to blame it on poor opponents or lucky dice.

As a great man said ones "It aint how big it is, its how you use it"

willydstyle
03-02-2009, 10:11
But the gauge of an army should not be how well it does when a very skilled player plays a less skilled one, it should be how things turn out when players of equal skill levels match up.

ZOMGBBQ
03-02-2009, 10:33
But the gauge of an army should not be how well it does when a very skilled player plays a less skilled one, it should be how things turn out when players of equal skill levels match up.
Yes, and when they play each other its about 50/50, same as when 2 nub players play Spaec Mareenz 40k against each other.

Logarithm Udgaur
03-02-2009, 11:22
IMO the change to 5th basically made any army that is CC based better and any that is shooting based worse. Examples being; running allowing models to get stuck in faster, better cover saves ensuring less troops are killed on the way in, no more outnumbering in CC, probably more but that is all I can think of ATM.

willydstyle
03-02-2009, 11:29
IMO the change to 5th basically made any army that is CC based better and any that is shooting based worse. Examples being; running allowing models to get stuck in faster, better cover saves ensuring less troops are killed on the way in, no more outnumbering in CC, probably more but that is all I can think of ATM.

But it's also more difficult to hide completely behind area terrain, and you can't consolidate into new units after a successful CC. I personally would say this aspect of the game is fairly balanced.

Look at the top-two commonly-perceived-as-overpowered lists out there:

Biker Nobs

and

Lash-Prince-with-Obliterators.

One is CC heavy, and the other is shooting heavy.

The_Outsider
03-02-2009, 11:37
Or at least this depends on how players perceive what makes a list/army work better. From my observations, first comes toughness. Most feel safe with as many, as tough units, as possible.

Then damage output of the steady variety is prefered, i.e. units/weapons/armies that have a lot of re-rolls, high to-hit averages, cause they again make players feel safe that they will deal relatively good damage. Especially since most people feel unlucky anyway.

Finally comes the possible elimination of all other random factors like morale, save denial weapons, psychic powers.

This is why we end up with biker nobs, flying councils, nidzilla, etc.

Players are afraid of the dice and do not want to get into the real math or other ways to circumvent their possible ill effect and in the end are not ready to shake the meta. It is this majority, that will fall victim to the players that are willing to try smth different and exotic, both in terms of race and list. Players who will in turn use the above way of thinking of their foes, to their advantage.

That said, i strongly think that almost all races stand a good chance to win if they are piloted by a good general with an open mind and an all-comers list, slightly adapted to the meta. Bar of course, things that seriously need reworking like KPs and guard or a whatever DH codex, and those can also show notable exceptions depending on the environment and the player.

I'm quoting this for the fact that it is 100% on the money.

A player who thinks outside the box or changes their priorities in a list (say one who builds a list that favours damage output and speed before durability) will always have the advantage because they will shift the metagame (both the list internally and the force as a whole externally).

I also suspect that the truly powerful forces in the game are the ones that build lists that simply do not factor in certain aspects of the race's abilities (like there is no point in building a durable SM list - the inherent 3+ save is good enough, you should focus on damage output).

Balance is ultimately what the players in your group make it - no army is "weak", they just have their strengths in areas that few people exploit.

Logarithm Udgaur
03-02-2009, 11:38
The only reason a lash list works a shooting based is the lash into range/back out of range trick. Actual shooting based armies such as Tau, IG, and Necrons have taken a hit. The no more consolidating into close combat does not really feel like any kind of bonus, as it was fairly easy to avoid in 4th.

Also, outflanking (forgot that one in my last post) helps CC a lot more than it does shooting.

Ianos
03-02-2009, 15:08
Eldar and Tau pathfinders, warwalkers, shooting deathkoptas and a lot of other shooting units can also outflank.

In 5th, no consolidation, no target priority, line of sight to virtually everything, much stronger blasts-templates, see/reach one-kill all rules and even wound allocation (which can eliminate assault advantages like p-fists, p-weapons etc.) make a shooting army much more effective.

Lets not also forget that run and melee morale modifiers can be a double edged knife, as the shooter you are trying to catch may move away or leave you open to incoming respectively.

And sure one could say Necrons have taken a hit with melee (though i have seen them work when players finally go more balanced) and IG are hurt by KPs (when again they are VERY well and able in objectives) but Tau?

Wanna start with vehicles always covered and no cover to the enemy for 5 points? I mean the Tau virtually got boosts to all their strengths and sure they got even more weak in cc, yeah they went from -3 to -5 which in the end is also a boost cause once they got stuck in what they always wanted is a a way out, even in death.