Rules and 7th....

[Biasco]

GW should know by now that the key to a successful game is a BALANCED rule set. This has nothing to do with WAAC gamers. The point being people more enjoy a game that is evenly balanced all around. No one likes being tabled with no chance because the other guy brought the latest cheese. Personally I think that the games as is with codex vs. codex is not bad and a lot of fun. Allies breaks the game not even getting into super heavies and fortifications. What do you think?

[DarkLink]

Superheavies themselves aren't a big deal. Really, just play them. They're tough, but they're appropriately expensive. Str D specifically is a huge problem, though. I've played a couple games with it, and in each game model with the D has easily made back double its points or more. Str D is broken, superheavies are not. I haven't played with Gargantuan Creatures yet, though, so I can't say anything about them.

Allies, or more specifically Battle Brothers, do cause some problems, but they're a big cash cow so they're not likely going away. Virtually everyone I know who has the money has picked up some form of allies. Battle Brothers should probably go away, but otherwise allies aren't a problem, or at least not one that's going to get solved anytime soon.

Fortifications are also mostly overrated. There are some things you can do with them, but other than stupid stuff like the AV15 building that has a str D gun, and a few unclear rules complications with regards to how and where you place your fortifications and stuff like that, I wouldn't worry too much about them either.

[Kaptain Badrukk]

Nah, I'm 100% behind the new stuff.
I've played plenty of apoc games with 0 superheavies on my side and still had great fun.
Allies allows for seriously improved fluff stuff too, most people think WAAC but forget things like using allied grots and big guns as mutant crewed artillery for chaos.
Or IPG vets as Arbites.
And fortifications make for more exciting army list choices.
Or give Tyranids / Orks / Older codex armies skyfire stuff.
I'm no GW apologist, I see they make errors and screw up, but 6th and the expansions are good for my hobby.

[daboarder]

Superheavies themselves aren't a big deal. Really, just play them. They're tough, but they're appropriately expensive. Str D specifically is a huge problem, though. I've played a couple games with it, and in each game model with the D has easily made back double its points or more. Str D is broken, superheavies are not. I haven't played with Gargantuan Creatures yet, though, so I can't say anything about them.

Allies, or more specifically Battle Brothers, do cause some problems, but they're a big cash cow so they're not likely going away. Virtually everyone I know who has the money has picked up some form of allies. Battle Brothers should probably go away, but otherwise allies aren't a problem, or at least not one that's going to get solved anytime soon.

Fortifications are also mostly overrated. There are some things you can do with them, but other than stupid stuff like the AV15 building that has a str D gun, and a few unclear rules complications with regards to how and where you place your fortifications and stuff like that, I wouldn't worry too much about them either.

Darklink you always have such a way with words.

May I however add that the garg creatures aren't any worse than the superheavies.

[Biasco]

From my experience it seems like whatever your codex is lacking just take Tau! The challenge should be too male the best out of the strength of your codex while trying to mask it's weaknesses. Not cherry picking the best of everything . Tau Eldar battle brothers , hmmm.... That's broken.

[chicop76]

I haven't played since the inquisition codex release, but I seen Tau/ Elder get defeated with Tyranids, and Marines so far, me being the mid player, not sure if I could had done so with daemons however.

That being said I think 6th brings more balance to the game than other codecs way back to 3rd. I remember in 3rd and 4th for example marines seem to not do well against Eldar for example. Beck 3rd-4th edition Eldar is way worst than Eldar today.

I personally don't like allies. Greyknight and Neuron allies really? Still think Dark Eldar and regular Eldar shouldn't be battle brothers, unless you go by more current fluff. Allies do bring some balance to the game where for example Dark Angels suck by themselves, but are good allies to marines due to divination powers and twin link plasma bikes.

I find myself having a harder time making a general list due to the different possibilities I may come across. It's to a point you need anti marine, horde, MC, and tank in your armies. I generally always build my armies in that manner, but now you also have to deal with flyers. That's 5 anti elements which makes it really hard for armies to have all 5. Oh and anti psyker too. Which really makes 6.

Data sheets and online books at the moment have me turned off to 40k like how I became turned off to magic when it seemed I had to buy a box every 3months to keep a good deck.

Anyway I would probably quit if 7th is over the horizon. I always hated when they switch editions without updating all the codex books.

Another problem is not all the codecs are updated as of yet. Besides CSM and DA all the 6th edition codecs on paper have the ability to defeat the other without taking allies. CSM becomes a good army when you include Daemon allies and the same with DAEMONS when you take marine or tau allies.

The biggest thing I see what causes frustration and losses in 6th is armies who like to spam all anti one element and expect to win every game. For example I see heavy anti marine/ horde in most armies with anti air. However Eldar for example does rather well against armies like that due to lack of anti tank. Any army with a decent amount of anti tank and anti MC can be able to deal with Eldar. I faced Eldar with Guard and Tau so far and done rather well against them. I don't know how well my daemons would fair against Eldar. Eldar vs Daemons in my opinion would favor Eldar simply due to the fact Eldar have a lot of movement, range, and a decent amount of armour. That being said I don't doubt I couldn't chase them down or glance hit death a serpent.

In a way I like the Inquisition codex since it seems like it's their to stop scout rushing and add more psychic powers in a game. However I wouldn't bother taking them with Tau simply due to the fact I have k root that stops scout rush anyway unless they also have infiltrators.

The main reason I think Tau is the best army out there is simply due to a few things it can do that other armies can't match.
1. Strip cover saves. Yes other armies have cover denial units, but Tau can have the whole army deny cover. Against Tau you lucky if you get a cover save. This negates trying to win by cover save alone.

2. Best anti air in the game. Not counting gear that gives any suit sky fire and a warlord trait that gives sky fire as well. You have units that can shoot at flyers as soon as they hit the board. Honestly crisis suits, broadsides, and sk yrays have really good anti air. Due to flying circus I always run a s kyray since it can wipe out a flying MC with ease with marker support. However I find myself not focusing on anti air with Tau since what I have has done rather well against flyer heavy armies. In fact I reduced my anti air when I realized unless I am playing against heavy scythe spam or vendetta spam air units is simply not an issue.

3. Over watch masters. I think some people think this is super awesome, but it does give Tau an advantage over other armies. I mean it turns a ranged army poor at assault into a ranged army that if you assault them you better have several units able to do so or withstand a whole army shooting you. When a bloodthirsty and a prince dies rather badly trying to assault it shows that you need shooting support. I noticed the heavy use of gun line tau to take advantage of this. Personally gun line tau have disadvantagess that are overlooked, can't win games standing in one spot all the time.

4. O'Shova Tau. I think this is the straw that kinda break the camel back. Besides running 5 reptiles I think the fact you can now run like 3 support commanders, why bother with pathfinders. Not only that it allows for some really annoying and hard to beat situations. I think Tau/Tau allies is worst than Tau/ Eldar simply due to Tau/ Tau help cover a lot of lose ends.

5. A.P. 2 and A.P. 1 weapons galore. I mean what other codex can field so many A.P. 1 and 2 weapons. You have a crisis suit at around 50 points that can fire 4 plasma or 2 melts shots. You have a riptides that can drop A.P. 2 pic plates, take a twin linked melta or plasma it can shoot twice for a possible 4 plasma shots or it can fire 7 A.P 2 shots if it desired. Broadsides have the option to have rail guns and plasma. Stealth suits can take melta. You can take snipers galore for rending shots. I mean why are you having problems with MC s and marines since you have an abundance of weapons that can kill them. Also going back to point one. The army can deny cover saves. Meaning no jink or hiding in bushes for you. I know Dark Eldar and Guard can probably take more, but than again they are not also stripping cover.

And the very last point is Bihar possible ballistic skill. No other army can have multiple units with a b.s. 10 in the game. Not only that a support commanders can strip cover, offer twin link, and provide tank or mc hunter. If this wasn't enough they can easily take allies that can give them prescience love. I would the a Fastener with Tau is a no brainer with 3 divination rolls, cuts down on having to take as many pathfinders when you have deny cover and twin link shooting. Not that Tau don't have enough of that though.

Oh an Tau at base is anti horde. Which means they cover all the ends they need to cover. No other army can be anti horde, MC, Marine, flyer, tank, etc all at the same time, except guard. With the added bonus of cover denial, increased b.s., an a better over watch. Only weakness they have is ironically is long ranged combat outside of 36" and melee. I would say armour 13 and 14 spam, but the strength 9 and 10 shooting with fusion and strength 10 smash attacks I would say is not a serious problem for Tau to deal with. Another weakness is Tau have a lot of concentrated accurate fire power. Meaning unlike leaf blower guard it is doubtful they wipe out whole armies in one turn or even in the second. Although specialist armies ranging 40 models that try to win with being hard to kill may be exempt to that last statement.

[Denzark]

I find myself having a harder time making a general list due to the different possibilities I may come across. It's to a point you need anti marine, horde, MC, and tank in your armies. I generally always build my armies in that manner, but now you also have to deal with flyers. That's 5 anti elements which makes it really hard for armies to have all 5. Oh and anti psyker too. Which really makes 6.



I think Chico here has summed up the key issue with 6th including supplements - an all comers list needs a lot of aspects to cover all bases. Whether this causes problems because some armies have a head start - or whether it is this very thing that brings balance - I think is the central issues to all the debates we are having about 6th.

[Auticus]

I don't think "all-comers lists" need to be the default to be honest. That's probably why I like this edition so much, the default "all comers lists" have been weeded out and you see a lot more variation on the table now than pretty much ever (since at least 3rd edition for me, I don't know what 2nd edition or before looked like)

I do agree the people that hate the edition so much tend to be the competitive, tournament-minded, or people that want to build a list that can take on all other lists, and that they are having a hard time now.

[DarkLink]

We only dislike certain, specific aspects of 6th that felt like they were specifically included for no other reason than to skew the game's balance in a negative way as an open 'f*** you' to anyone who wanted to play the game sober. It's still pretty fun overall, though.

[Katharon]

The AV15 thing has people's undies in a bunch, much to my confusion. I mean, come on, we already have plenty of stuff that can easily take out AV15. How often have you rolled high against AV14 (getting a total of 15+)? Same thing, just a little more durable. Or would you rather have it that they give out more void shields?

[Bigred]

Funny you mention AV:15

How I love the Aquila Strongpoint.

What gets Tau players undies in a bunch (as you say) is that they have to penetrate it to roll on the table, getting a 16+ really limits the weapons most armies can use. The ones that matter get Macro-cannon attention on turn 1.

But really, it's totally killable, and folks don't realize that once you get within about 6" its defenseless. You can freely assault it, deep-strike atop it, get up on the battlements, and the owner can't dare fire the D-weapons at that range from fear of destroying himself with an unlucky scatter.

But the Aquila is about shock value. It's 600pts (with upgrades), it should be good. That 2 1/2 Land Raiders! It's hated not because its an auto-win (it's not, and I have lost them). Its that it is a hard counter for the current meta's "auto-win" builds such at Riptide spam, and deathstars. And folks howl at the moon then their uber netlists have to think to win.

Some think AV:15 is totally broken. I think it's mere existence helps to reign in some of the other zaniness we have seen of late so I'm happy to see it.

[Biasco]

Remember it's only a 5 to 7 turn game. How much can you really fit in (escalation,stronghold). Like I said codex vs. codex with nothing else added is probably easiest way to keep the game balanced for tourney play. For all the other stuff it's all fun and fine but works better in a casual game.

[Captain Antivas]

Allies do bring some balance to the game where for example Dark Angels suck by themselves, but are good allies to marines due to divination powers and twin link plasma bikes.

Besides CSM and DA all the 6th edition codecs on paper have the ability to defeat the other without taking allies.
I really don't think DA are as bad as everyone seems to think. At first I was getting my butt handed to me (I.e. Getting tabled 2 games in a row, by DE and Tyranids), but then I re-evaluated my strategy and destroyed a Blood Angels player next game. People are trying to play DA wrong and that is why they are not successful. Let's be honest, DA are not superior shooting, nor are they superior at assaulting. Their strength lies in patiently waiting for your enemies to advance and strike in CC from a position of strength. In the game against BA my Knights saw action in the last turn because they didn't need to before then. I stayed back in cover in LRs and waited. DWA should be used to fill holes in your flank. The DA are a great army, if you are patient enough to use their strengths.

[chicop76]

I guess saying they suck is strong. I would say Dark Angels suck compared to other 6th edition codecs out there. They o lying good thing going for them is anti CSM. With the marine codex it's a wonder why anyone bothers to play with them. On the plus size they have good elite bikes and divination psykers. Also if you like terminator you can mix up your options and have better options. However I see people play dark angels as raven guard or white scars than as Dark Angels.

Armour 15??? I must've miss something. Well that is why I my riptides and crisis suits can deep strike with melta guns. I'll laugh hard if you think that messes up my Tau army. Riptides smash is also my trade mark move. That might make me take O#Shova though.

[DarkLink]

It's also a building, not a vehicle, for which the damage rules are pretty dumb. But again, it's the D that makes it a figurative pain.

[chicop76]

It's also a building, not a vehicle, for which the damage rules are pretty dumb. But again, it's the D that makes it a figurative pain.

That's even better. Do it have interceptor. If it does I guess it will be trouble some. However I done the two crisis suit and two riptides deep strike before and that is hard to intercept all four. Especially if I get the two crisis suits in first and have the luxury of deep striking my tides at a safe distance. I done this before which is funny since the tides come in out of range and the interceptor becomes wasted since they didn't shoot at the deep striking suits.

I am thinking strongly of playing with O'Shova Tau so I can have more deep striking solo crisis suits. I can easily have 5 which can deep strike near buildings and tanks and just double melta away. For 50 points they are easily cheap throw away units. I did thought about using Flanders ad well with them, but I don't see the point due to smart missiles and tau standard weapons being used with deny cover.

[Mr Mystery]

To the OP.....

Gonna give us a definition of balanced?

Because you know, given the number of armies in the game (15), the number of units within each army (variable), and how you build an army, how exactly do you propose that you get a perfect balance?

Here's a hint. It's called Chess. Or Chequers. And that's about it. Even ancient Chess like games such as King's Table are inherently unbalanced, yet proved very popular at the time (and indeed today if you meet the right people) due to the tactical considerations they bring.

Balance is possible. But it would mean either drastically reducing the number of options and variety in the game, or slowing down the release schedule to a snail's pace.

Oh you might go on about playtesting, but face it. Playtesting is a finite resource for a games design team. Product has to go out on the shelf eventually. And as soon as it's on the shelf, the actual amount of playtest hours pales into insignificance next to the number of game hours that product will be subjected to in it's first week. It's the nature of the beast. And it's unavoidable.

[chicop76]

To the OP.....

Gonna give us a definition of balanced?

Because you know, given the number of armies in the game (15), the number of units within each army (variable), and how you build an army, how exactly do you propose that you get a perfect balance?

Here's a hint. It's called Chess. Or Chequers. And that's about it. Even ancient Chess like games such as King's Table are inherently unbalanced, yet proved very popular at the time (and indeed today if you meet the right people) due to the tactical considerations they bring.

Balance is possible. But it would mean either drastically reducing the number of options and variety in the game, or slowing down the release schedule to a snail's pace.

Oh you might go on about playtesting, but face it. Playtesting is a finite resource for a games design team. Product has to go out on the shelf eventually. And as soon as it's on the shelf, the actual amount of playtest hours pales into insignificance next to the number of game hours that product will be subjected to in it's first week. It's the nature of the beast. And it's unavoidable.

I still wonder if they really play test some stuff before it goes out. Anyway I think the game is more balanced than it has ever been to be honest. If you go flying circus you will get wasted by Tau. If you go white scars against krootless tau you will do well, etc.

It's at a point you have to pretty much just play with what you like and be aware of what is out there. Flying Circus, Tau/ Eldar, serpent spam, neuron air force are just a few armies out there doing really well. Amazingly all those mention either have heavy flyers, vehicles, or MC s. Which I suggest building your army to deal with such threats. Although White scars/ iron warriors add another dimension to where you also have to deal with bike spam.

I love Daemons, but without CSM I really don't see them doing as well as Tau. I am revamping my list heavily to where I am adding oblits, hellturkey, etc. My issue with CSM is that they troop options rather suck or rather expensive. With the edition of Belakor. I can have decent CSM options. However daemons are rather expensive to field so running all you want is rather hard. I may drop Fateweaver due to the fact I think for all he does he takes up a lot of points. I am also debating on not really using Belakor for the same reason.

I just find over the year quantity tends to be better than quality. I also stating to favor using heralds again like I did early 6th. I just find dumping 300 points in multiple models not really a good move. Against Tau for example they can easily punish you for that decision making. I admit having multiple buffs is a good thing, which taking heralds you can technically get more buffs delivered to your army.

Once I figure out CSM as an allied force I will probably start using them.

[biffster666]

I would dig it if GW put out a 'collected', 'omnibus' type rulebook that included 40k, Apoc, Escalation/Stronghold, Strategic Asset/Psychic Cards, Dataslates...and make it all interactive...and then let's start talking about all the Codices collected together once updated...and of course all interactive with force requisition. aaaallllll rrrriiiiggghhhtttt!!!!

AV15 is THE BOMB!!!! Mr. Necron wanted to shoot my Strongpoint with a bunch of Dark Reapers. I said 'kewl dude, and what's that going to do?' There's that tightening of the cheek bones and slight grinding of the teeth I was looking for!

[Biasco]

The best indicator regarding balance is to simply log in game hours. To be honest from my experience codex vs. codex without anything else isn't bad at all. From my experience those games have been competitive. Nothing will ever be spot on . Overall I'm very happy with the game. I don't even mind allies for a friendly game but for a tourney they are just broken. Also that is from personal experience.

[chicop76]

Honestly allies as of yet haven't really been broken since it takes away from some armies. However with some armies it actually helps.

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

i will say allies were a good concept but one that was poorly developed and poorly implimented. i get that after a few crap pieces of fluff people suddenly can ally just about anything but seriously some armies should not be bro on bro love and should more or less be allies or convienence if not even desperate allies. like tau dar... seriously the eldar think mankind is nothing more then a monkey and yet they have a bro mance with man? tau should be even less honestly allies or conveience seriously not that hard to wrap your head around it. so if they do anything i hope they fix the allies chart. like seriously keep allies but make it so they aren't just there to fill gaps in your army. and if your usinmg them to fill gaps they should't be battle brothers. they shouldn't in the grim dark of the 41st everyone is your enemy.

[chicop76]

I can actually see a tau and eldar alliance. I just don't see a tau and marine alliance or a necron and grey knight alliance or grey knight and tau. I can see IG and Tau due to fluff. Better yet how the Orcs can ally with Tau is beyond me.

[Mr Mystery]

I can actually see a tau and eldar alliance. I just don't see a tau and marine alliance or a necron and grey knight alliance or grey knight and tau. I can see IG and Tau due to fluff. Better yet how the Orcs can ally with Tau is beyond me.

Freebooterz. They'll fight for anyone with the teef to pay them.

[chicop76]

Freebooterz. They'll fight for anyone with the teef to pay them.

I don't see a problem with orcs working with anyone. I just see a problem with Tau working with Orcs. Especially a Tau list with O'Shova in it. Tau hate Orcs more than humanity.