# most unbalanced codex in 5th ed?



## xinua (Jul 2, 2008)

Hi guys, just want to get some opinions on what you think is the most unbalanced codex (most powerful/cheesy) currently in the 5th Ed. This should be from tournament point of view. 

I got friends saying that CSM is the most unbalanced codex out currently (mostly due to cheap points price of daemon princes and the cheap lash options). 

Since I play CSM and my knowledge of the other codexes is pretty limited I dont really have anything to say back to them, I try "well, if it was so unbalanced wouldn't GWs fix it in an errata or a FAQ?" to which i get the reply "GW never fix anything, they never admit to making mistakes, erratas and FAQs are only to fix spelling type of issues, they never deal with game breaking issues"

and to that I don't really got a response.

Looking at the Australian warhammer 40k ranking it looks like Chaos Daemons is the power house over there.. 

Anyway, you got an opinion on this? please voice it, but please motivate (Just because you lost to an army does not have to mean it is unbalanced)


----------



## Deneris (Jul 23, 2008)

Judging by what I've seen, people seem to think that the new SM dex is unbalanced, but in a BAD way; the SMs seem to be slipping in the standings of the last few GW tournaments.


----------



## Syko515 (Jan 22, 2008)

yea, i would agree here and add I.G. to this list of unbalance but in a bad way list. as of the 3 current mission types absolutly 0 favor them in anyway. i assume their new codex will fix this and possibly make them unbalanced in the Uber powerhouse department....leman russ squadrons....i have troubles dealing with them when there are just 3...

aside from that, the MOST unbalance things in 40k and stupidly powerful things aren't limited to single codices, i would say Eldar wave serpents of "can't kill me" ness are top of the list, followed closely by lists with 2 Lash princes.


----------



## martin4696 (Oct 30, 2007)

erm either of the chaos codex's imo 

i also think the marines are harsh but they pay for what they get, i disagree with the IG thing as bar kill points the right list can kick the hell out of most things..!!


----------



## Revelations (Mar 17, 2008)

xinua said:


> I got friends saying that CSM is the most unbalanced codex out currently (mostly due to cheap points price of daemon princes and the cheap lash options).


:rofl: I don't think anything that can be killed by Lasguns is unbalanced. For a lot of players, putting something specific on the table seems to turn them into drooling retards. For some it's Wraithlords, for others it's Lash Princes. Can never seem to kill the Prince? Stop wasting time on him and target something else. Does your opponent always bring one to the table? Plan accordingly. 

God forbid something like this happens in real life. "Shitz! They has panzer tankz! We cantz winz!" 


xinua said:


> (Just because you lost to an army does not have to mean it is unbalanced)


Now if only more people would actually understand this perfectly reasonable statement. 

As far as your question though; I'm going to say Orcs. This is only due to the point for point cost affectivness of their basic troop as well as many rules that ignore core rule sets; ramshackle, deffrollas, flashgitz, wierdboyz and the big mech gun to name a few. Don't get me wrong though, they are fun to play and to play against with a great chaotic feel to them, but that doesn't mean the rules and points aren't screwy. (That and Eldar, way too many point disparities there)


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

I realise I may not have just the right tactics, but I have a pretty balanced list, to take on most comers, but I've never won well against Demons, and twice, it's only been claiming objectives, because I reduce the countering units to none contesting, and never a straight win.

I think if something works well against all others, it's balanced. But then these Daemons come out, and I'm stuck with what to do.

Sure people say spam High Rate of Fire Weapons - try doing that in a competitive list, that doesn't suck a dick against Armoured Forces.


----------



## Grik (Jul 28, 2008)

Revelations said:


> (That and Eldar, way too many point disparities there)


What do you mean Rev?


----------



## Whizzwang (Dec 31, 2008)

cheesey from a tournament point of view does not concern the studio/design guys. 

They make a hobby not a sport, if something is game-breakingly imbalanced in a tournament environmetn they aren't going to fix it because, well, they probably don't care that much.

Take 45 lootas as an example. the "idea" behind them is to take 1 lot of 15 not 3 lots. 

Yes you CAN have 45, but you really shouldn't. Those decisions have been left to the players to figure out. I myself love the idea of 60 stormboyz, however I have a feeling it's going to be outright filth on the table so I'll have to limit myself to 20.

Remeber kiddies this game is supposed to be a social FUN hobby, not an antisocial boring sport


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Whizzwang said:


> Remember kiddies this game is supposed to be a social FUN hobby, not an antisocial boring sport


yeah, reminding people its supposed to be for fun really doesn't work anymore, most will just take it that as long as there having fun thats all that matters, allot seem to forget its a 2+ person game not made purely for there enjoyment, but for everyones.

in the end I will always stick by my thoughts, NO codex is unbalanced, only the players are, so asking what codex is unbalanced is pointless, as there all fair until the assholes get there hands on them.


----------



## Grik (Jul 28, 2008)

Stella Cadente said:


> In the end I will always stick by my thoughts, NO codex is unbalanced, only the players are, so asking what codex is unbalanced is pointless, as there all fair until the assholes get there hands on them.


This man speaks the truth. Very well put Stella. :good:


----------



## m3rr3k (Oct 14, 2008)

Grik said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Revelations
> (That and Eldar, way too many point disparities there)
> 
> What do you mean Rev?


well for one, fleeting banshees whom always strike first with power weapons for 21 pts each. In a CSM army (only one I play...) you're looking at 33pts per model to bring up to 5 PW in a squad (chosen) OR 45 pts to bring one on an aspiring champion in a troop choice.

To the OP. If your friend thinks that CSM DP's are cheap he should look at Daemon armies... their princes are 20 points cheaper, have a single stat that is 1 point lower (can't remember which...) and they can take three of them.

But... to take the wind out of my own sails, daemons (read nurgle tarpit w/ epidimus) & eldar are the only two armies I struggle against. (& The eldar player I know is proud of his cheese list...) But generally, I tend to agree with Stella


----------



## Steel Rain (Jan 14, 2008)

On the flip side, allow me to add my own quote:
Restraint does not win tournaments.

And back to the other side, friendly fun games shouldn't be played using one tourney list and one non-tourney list. It won't be friendly and it won't be fun (most likely). The most you'll hope for is a Pyrrhic victory.


----------



## Whizzwang (Dec 31, 2008)

m3rr3k said:


> well for one, fleeting banshees whom always strike first with power weapons for 21 pts each. In a CSM army (only one I play...) you're looking at 33pts per model to bring up to 5 PW in a squad (chosen) OR 45 pts to bring one on an aspiring champion in a troop choice.


i see you're blissfully ignoring the fact banshees are Str3 and CSM's are Str4


----------



## Grik (Jul 28, 2008)

Whizzwang said:


> i see you're blissfully ignoring the fact banshees are Str3 and CSM's are Str4


Exactly! And have a 4+ save instead of 3+. That's a huge advantage.


----------



## Syko515 (Jan 22, 2008)

ok, see, you SAY its a huge advantage for CSM's to have 1 more toughness, and a 3+ save but i cannot tell you the amount of times i have watched as Eldar chessy bullshit occurs on the tables in games. it starts off with the unkillable wave serpent with star engines and all the funky bells and whistles charging up to your squad, who cannot get away in time because their transport is very killable and dead at this point, holds its cargo until after your next turn where you ATTEMPT to foot slog away because well...you have no transport anymore, then at the begining of his turn where you failed to get away cause well.. not eeven jump troops can move fast enough, out pops a squad of 10 benshee's, who will automatically get the charge at this point, and well lets see...they strike first so my squad of 10 marines can't thin them out first, well grenades should even this out...wait...no....nothing takes away their always strikes first rule....ok so lets see, guess i have to take their hits and hope to return some of mine.. wait the roll HOW MANY DICE!!!!!!!!! on the charge...and oh yea...i'm ONLY T4 agest their STR3 which means of all those stupid dice rolls MORE THEN 10 end up wounding..but hey lets take that WONDERFUL 3+ never there save due to every other army being loaded to the teeth with ap3 or 2 guns and a FUCK TON of power weapons. so honestly.. i pay 15 points for marines, to get completely wiped out by something unstoppable, which in CC is pretty damned unkillable unless your an MC.....


you know what, its not even worth ranting the rest of the way.... it is simply not POSSIBLE or even LOGICAL to compair the best anti-MEQ unit to a Marine...the arguement is flawed and wrong, and i say to you, any one who disputes that this army isn't pure cheese needs to come play agesnt my store's eldar player....period.


----------



## The Wraithlord (Jan 1, 2007)

Banshees are indeed a tad over the top but I have never had a problem dealing with them in general. I would have to say that the top cheesedex in my honest opinion is Orks. Great army, fun to play against, etc, but waaaaay too much at the same time. Boyz need to be a tad more expensive to make up for their abilities. Just the sheer amount of models you can put down on the table make it nearly impossible for other armies to deal with, Guard being a notable exception. Hell, my Thousand Sons find it damn near impossible to deal with Orks, not that they can't mind you but if I make the slightest tactical error it is game over.


----------



## Fire Harte (Jan 7, 2009)

A bit of a bold statement I shall make here:

There is no such thing as overpowered, just your inability to defeat something.

Not my words but I am fine if you civilly disagree with me.


----------



## Whizzwang (Dec 31, 2008)

Syko515 said:


> emo rant


wave serpents are armour 12, even with their funky field of "max str 8" you still do damage on a 4+ unless you're a muppet and don't field str 8+ weapons in which case you deserve to be beaten by fast moving transported troops.

have back up waiting for the banshees. As a loyalist marine player I love watching the Eldar player cry like a child when I throw Ko'Sarro khan + 5TH termies at their banshee squad - goodbye ladies.

Learn to sacrifice units. GIVE him a squad to eat wirth the banshees then make him pay with his T3 and 4+ save. 

I have never... NEVER... lost a game to a banshee assault. I have however destroyed every banshee unit I've come across, and yeah sometimes it costs me 10 men, but they did their job by holding the coneheads in place for a turn while I bring my big hitty stick into range.

Learn to adapt to the situation. NOTHING is unbeatable.

Not double lash
Not 45 Lootas
and most certainly not banshees

in fact the post above this is spot on. It's not them that cannot be beaten, it's you that cannot figure out how.


----------



## comrade (Jun 30, 2008)

I play IG so lets see... hmm.. what are my choices, super armoured super humans, cazy fast aliens, really shooty aliens, big ugly green things, those robots that just will not fucking die.. hmmm...

Joking, Personally I find it depends on what tactics your using, if one army beats you over and over and over and over agian, change what you do, surprise your opponents, bash his armies face in with your armoured gauntlet/bayonet/forehead when your supposed to be a shooty force.

Drop troops behind his main line to fuck things up.

Damn it, shoot, stab, punch, crawl, bite, chew your way to victory.

I definitely should play world eaters.
definitely.


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

Gonna fall in in the "vote for Orks line"
Awsome "grunts" in the Ork boys, insane Nobs and the retarded Trukk damage table is a bit too much:alcoholic:


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Steel Rain said:


> On the flip side, allow me to add my own quote:
> Restraint does not win tournaments.


another quote:why in the name of all gods and devils go to tournaments


Syko515 said:


> any one who disputes that this army isn't pure cheese needs to come play agesnt my store's eldar player....period.


this army is NOT pure cheese, your opponent on the other hand maybe cheesy, although considering your only mentioning 1 unit (2 if you include a VERY expensive transport) it sounds more like whinging, especially since if that unit wipes out a unit, its suddenly left out in the open

and Orks cheesy?, sure if your opponents an asshole they can be, but people are claiming (once again) the entire codex to be cheesy, if someone sets up 30000 orks on the table against you 50, that ain't cheesy, thats as fluffy as can be.


----------



## m3rr3k (Oct 14, 2008)

Alright,

lets do a quick breakdown here: WITHOUT doom or guide...

14 CSM & 10 Howling banshees both cost 210 points.

Because I don't know if Banshees are fearless or not, I'm going to completely disregard moral for the purpose of this analysis:

Eldar Assault
... I'm not going to type out all the numbers, but after 7 rounds of combat, the banshees statistically will move on with 4 units left after turning the marines to paste._ Though, on the very first turn, the eldar can expect to win the combat by 4 wounds, causing the CSM to take a morale check at 5. They will fail._

CSM Assault
...again, not typing the numbers, but the CSM will actually manage to win this one after 2 rounds of combat, losing only 3.

But really, with a 13-19" charge its very difficult for the CSM to get that charge.

Anyways, all I said about banshees was in response to someone asking about how the eldar points were out of whack. I feel that Banshees points are a little low. Not that the eldar codex is cheese. But with PW costing 15pts a pop, that means each banshee is worth 6. I think that is low considering their _other_ bonuses. Orcs get 1 13-19" charge per game, have 6+ saves & strike at initiative 2. They cost 6 points. (for comparison, given the choice between T4/6+ vs T3/4+, a marine has a 20.83% chance of inficting a wound vs a 16.67% chance per attack respectively)


----------



## Deneris (Jul 23, 2008)

The Wraithlord said:


> Banshees are indeed a tad over the top but I have never had a problem dealing with them in general...


Of course WE don't, Wraith- Tsons have that lovely 4+ Invuln to fall back on. OTHER CSMs though, tend to ground up by them.

And can I change my vote to "Eldar"? Those pointy-headed gits have TOO much going for them, especially those blasted Runes of Warding...:ireful2:


----------



## dwarflord17404 (Jul 14, 2008)

*Just rember*

No list is balanced or unbalanced. I feel it is ease of writing winable lists. It has almost become rock, paper, scissors in atournemnt setting. I play Witch hunters and can match up against most lists well but if I draw orks or Tau I know Iam playing for a draw. Sun Tsu once said to defeat your enemy you must first know yourself and your own weakness. I think the important thing to rember in all this is if you fight on your own terms and dicate the battle any list can beat any list. As an example I watched a player with a vanilla space marine army based around 6 tact squads(no tornado spam or anything) wipe the floor with sevreal uber lists and win a tournemnet. Often when gamers get frustrated they blame the book for a cheesy list but rather they should go back to theirs and practice tactics. Just my 2 cents


----------



## Ztrain (Oct 26, 2008)

comrade said:


> ......those robots that just will not fucking die..........


That's the best!!

Z


----------



## Chaosftw (Oct 20, 2008)

I think I am going to have to go with Orks as far as OP goes. I think i can arguably say Nids also. They at first may not seem OP but looking at the point cost and then looking at the upgrades they can get for next to no points the whole "Horde" concept is hard to deal with provided the horde player is good and knows what the hell they are doing.

Cheers,

Chaosftw


----------



## sooch (Nov 25, 2008)

Whizzwang said:


> wave serpents are armour 12, even with their funky field of "max str 8" you still do damage on a 4+ unless you're a muppet and don't field str 8+ weapons in which case you deserve to be beaten by fast moving transported troops.
> 
> have back up waiting for the banshees. As a loyalist marine player I love watching the Eldar player cry like a child when I throw Ko'Sarro khan + 5TH termies at their banshee squad - goodbye ladies.
> 
> ...


I've said it many times before, crying cheese is just a way of avoiding being creative and coming up with a list that can take on random extreme lists, as well as the generic competitive builds. In other words, stop being lazy and learn to write lists. 2x lash can be beaten, 45 lootas can be beaten, 180 boyz can be beated, land raiders can be beaten, and eldar can be beaten.


----------



## Deneris (Jul 23, 2008)

sooch said:


> I've said it many times before, crying cheese is just a way of avoiding being creative and coming up with a list that can take on random extreme lists, as well as the generic competitive builds. In other words, stop being lazy and learn to write lists. 2x lash can be beaten, 45 lootas can be beaten, 180 boyz can be beated, land raiders can be beaten, and eldar can be beaten.


Of COURSE Eldar can be beaten... But when my Tsons have to resort to guns and brute force, instead of psychic powers, a bit of the reason for TAKING the Tsons dies; Why take Tsons versus Eldar when you could just take vanilla CSMs and avoid the Runes of Warding?


----------



## neilbatte (Jan 2, 2008)

I'm not one for crying cheese, if something beats me I'll have a think and try something different until I work out its weakness, The only real problems arise between gamers who have a different outlook on the game( For a fluff gamer to face a tourney list is not fun, unless you grind a win and the otherway round in not much of a challenge) 

I have played against many armies and have used most of them at some point. They all have some weaknesses and if played wrong will be smashed. The only army I ever used that I consider overpowered was an Orc speedfreek army that I never lost with but I like to think I embraced my inner Orc rather than used an overpowered list.


----------



## martin4696 (Oct 30, 2007)

i think some people are answering the wrong question... the question is what codex is unbalanced rather than what armies cant be beaten.. (as well all know every list can be beaten by another list)

and just to put sail in your wounds about banshees there 16 points each not 21 that you seem to think they are... and waveserpents arnt actualy that hard anymore just charge them (10 marines, champ with claw and it will go down) or just use a rhino to cover the hatch ect there are lots of ways to get round it.

x


----------



## sooch (Nov 25, 2008)

Deneris said:


> Of COURSE Eldar can be beaten... But when my Tsons have to resort to guns and brute force, instead of psychic powers, a bit of the reason for TAKING the Tsons dies; Why take Tsons versus Eldar when you could just take vanilla CSMs and avoid the Runes of Warding?


Everything has a counter...get used to it. I suppose you get pissed off at librarians with null zone too?


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

I think the SM codex is unbalanced compared to the other armys. The points are far to low on most units for how effective they are.


----------



## sooch (Nov 25, 2008)

darklove said:


> I think the SM codex is unbalanced compared to the other armys. The points are far to low on most units for how effective they are.


Funny, most people think it's the opposite.


----------



## Revelations (Mar 17, 2008)

Sometimes when I put in a reply and then it starts a huge argument, I twiddle my fingers together and murmur; "Dance puppets dance!", and then laugh diabolically. 


Grik said:


> What do you mean Rev?





m3rr3k said:


> well for one, fleeting banshees whom always strike first with power weapons for 21 pts each. In a CSM army (only one I play...) you're looking at 33pts per model to bring up to 5 PW in a squad (chosen) OR 45 pts to bring one on an aspiring champion in a troop choice.


Not actually what I was saying, but when you compare any codex's point values to any other codex's like units, there are HUGE problems. It's the perfect example of why Orc boys are entirely too cheap for what they are and what they can do. 

Other examples would be the Apocalypse Titan Lords. There 2500 a piece, but one may not shoot for a turn and may shoot your own troops. You can compare a great deal of Chaos Vs Marine units the same way. In that respect, I'd feel a cheaper cost to Chaos is in order due to the uncontrollable nature of the unit. Kind of why I balk at the costs of the Daemon Weapon. 

BUT, my original point in regards to point disparities... take a standard Farseer, load him out with everything that Eldrad has... Eldrad will still be cheaper and have more special rules. THAT, is a problem. You can also compare the Banshees to the Harlequins, point for point the Harlequins are far ahead of the Banshees in cost affectiveness. 

It's not fair to compare them to Chosen; they have a better stat line, can infiltrate and be loaded out with various forms of equipment. I could throw a Tzeentch Icon on the squad, some power weapons and special weapon, infiltrate them in and then make mince meet of the Banshees. Comparing them to their Eldar counterparts is the better way to go. 

In my group, the only time most of us complain is when we see massive point dissparities like that. I'll ask; "How much does that cost?" If I have something in my army that does the same thing, I get a little pissy when I have to pay more points for it. If they're different, then there's some wiggle room. (Like Chaos Dreadclaws, sure they're more then drop pods, but I can reuse them in play, etc)

So to the point, the most unbalanced codex has the most affective units for the cheapest price... so I'd still go with Orcs followed by Eldar. Then it's fair game at that point. In 4th it was certainly Eldar, but 5th has changed the game (but I still don't like skimmers... damn gingerbread men...).


----------



## Captain Galus (Jan 2, 2008)

Revelations said:


> As far as your question though; I'm going to say Orcs. This is only due to the point for point cost affectivness of their basic troop as well as many rules that ignore core rule sets; ramshackle, deffrollas, flashgitz, wierdboyz and the big mech gun to name a few. Don't get me wrong though, they are fun to play and to play against with a great chaotic feel to them, but that doesn't mean the rules and points aren't screwy.


Agreed. k:

I think the Eldar are very well balanced actually; they have the right mix of expensiveness and effectiveness. Marines, on the other hand...

That's why I use the Dark Angel Codex again


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

darklove said:


> I think the SM codex is unbalanced compared to the other armys. The points are far to low on most units for how effective they are.


shouldn't that be for how ineffective they are


----------



## Chaosftw (Oct 20, 2008)

Deneris said:


> Of COURSE Eldar can be beaten... But when my Tsons have to resort to guns and brute force, instead of psychic powers, a bit of the reason for TAKING the Tsons dies; Why take Tsons versus Eldar when you could just take vanilla CSMs and avoid the Runes of Warding?


Exactly why DG pwns all! we eliminate all elements that effect us. The only way to down us are damn good dice, and STR 8 guns or higher 

cheers,

Chaosftw


----------



## Ordo Xeno Commander (Jan 17, 2007)

I'm just going to add one little thing. Now I know that we said current codexs in 5th, but we can hardly do this fairly when we have 1 5th ed codex that's been released. thats 1 out of 8. Sure we have 4.5ed codexs, but honestly guys, be patient. We cannot fairly judge without the right information, and that requires us to wait for at least the majority of the 5th ed codexs to be released.

Sure, we can judge the codexs now, but remember that most of them are built off an edition we no longer play, and GW's new goals (whatever they are) for the new ed don't apply to any of the codexs except Marines.


----------



## beenburned (May 15, 2008)

Now, I'm biased since I play 'em, but eldar aren't unbalanced by a a long stretch.

Very expensive everything. Yes Howling banshees are undrepriced at 16 points, but the point remains that for a t3 4+ save model...well it's about right if you take it alone (as in not taking tactics into account) and really they're still not all that incredible versus MEQs any way, barring some nice lucky rolls. 4+ to hit and 5+ to wound means statistically only 5 are going to do anything (from 30 attacks which is what 10 get when they charge). Now I'm not one for mathhammer, but it's a very lucky player who removes your 10 man squad entirely.

In fact, the entire army really is t3 and expensive. What's more, the codex is weakened significantly by only allowing squad sizes up to a very limited amount. No matter how broken a squad may or maynot be, it's limited to 10 or even 5 men which significantly reduces it's survivability, if not it's killyness. Comparing this to the likes of CSM...well 20 CSM with mark of nurgle is one of the toughest unit's I've ever had to face (despite being very well balanced points wise IMO).

Our tanks are easily manageable with current ed. changes and our transport is as expensive as a battle tank while retaining a half of it's combat effectivenes. Our HQs are perfect I'd say in terms of balance (Ignoring Eldrad who is by far one of the most broken characters in the game) and when it comes to it, our incredible bunch of 16 point banshees and fire dragons and whatnot...well we can only ever take 30 of them in any army and for any of them to be effective, you need to be taking our transport, which as said, is incredibly expensive. 

Stop with the eldar hate and try rearanging your anti MEQ/horde army to be a bit more ubiquitous.

Orks are the most unbalanced, if only for the fact the boyz are the same points cost as a guardsman. What.The.Fuck.


----------



## Captain Mike (Dec 24, 2008)

Some good debate here, not over what is unbalanced but whether there is such a thing as an unbalanced codex! Okay lets list what could be up/down with the codexes:

Codex: Daemons- deep strike first turn seems rough, but so can space marines. And they can't assualt, and if they get ready to assualt next turn the will be in rapid fire range (except daemonettes). This mainly screws up your deployment. Taking a few 'surprise' units of your own can help beat these guys, I guess. Don't know about points, but I do know there's quie a few power/ rending weapons. People have also said about Lashes, but I've seen elsewhere that they are not that reliable. Verdict: Probably not unbalanced

Codex: Chaos Space Marines- A very good basic trooper, with similar leadership qualities to a loyal marine. The only difference is that when Chaos breaks, they break for good. Bit miffed about the bolt pistol/bolter and chainsword, but then I am a loyalist and we don't get those lovely things. We get other stuff. Verdict: Not unbalanced

Codex: Witchhunters- Expensive troops and outdated. No way

Codex: Daemonhunters- no longer any good agaisnt daemons, expensive and outdated. No way.

Codex: Necrons- New assualt rules really screwed the poor necrons over, so I've heard. Sure they're tough at range, but now weak in combat, giving them a disadvantage. They also have quite an expensive troops choice and the gauss weapons aren't as good as they used to be. Verdict: Not unbalanced

Codex: Space Marines- Lots of lovely gimics and a few morale tricks. Special Characters that change the army may be deemed a little over-powered, but when you see the points cost you should re-think that. Verdict: Not Unbalanced, simply gimicky

Codex: Imperial Guard: Outdated, but still packing quite a punch. The only disadvantage for them is how many kill points they can give the enemy in an annhilation mission. Verdict: not unbalanced

Codex: Eldar- So many special rules their own players can't remember them all, and some aformentioned points issues. Some units are a bit over-powered, but as a whole the army isn't as such. Quite fragile still, as they should be, and a Farseer can die easily. Verdict: Not really the unbalanced as a whole. Banshees can't take objectives, after all.

Codex: Dark Eldar- Nice basic troop, but no way over-powered. That said, I've never faced them.

Codex: Orks- Plenty of scope for extreme power-gaming. Slightly annoyed that an ork boy is the same cost as a guardsman (but slightly biased as well because of my Catachans) Lots of toys, but thats msotly for fluff reasons. If we are going to choose the one with the msot scope for extreme cheese, this is it. But cheese is an illusion, its just a way of saying you're bored. Verdict: the codex has a scope for being over-powered, but it depends on the gamer. 


So, Codex: Orks is what you could define as over-powered, because it has the most scope for over-poweredness ( is that even a word?). But again, hate the gamer not the game ( or the codex). And don't hate people for simply getting the most out of your list. Think: am I angry at losing, or am I simply bored? If you're bored, pack up your miniatures and go. If you're angry, lighten up and see it through. 

Just a thought.


----------



## Pauly55 (Sep 16, 2008)

To me, and I think a lot of other people as well, Overpowered in 40k is defined as:

A unit or model whose effectiveness on the table is not well scaled with the points cost, in favor of the player fielding the Model/unit.

Overpowered units can obviously always be beaten, I don't think anyone is suggesting the opposite, but the units required to beat them far outstrip the points cost of the "overpowered" unit.

Want an example?
Eldrad. Here is a guy who is going to require an intense amount of attention from your enemy to kill, plus the damage he causes will cause your enemy to lose at least as many points as you invested in Eldrad.

Look at Black Templars smoke launchers for instance. They pay 3 points for an upgrade which renders your vehicle invincible for a turn. Overpowered? 'fraid so.

So all you people who are saying "there's no such thing as overpowered, you just don't know how to play" Wake up.


----------



## The Son of Horus (Dec 30, 2006)

I don't believe in overpowered units or upgrades, as described above. Problems in armies, I think, are when people rely on explotation of a given ability the army has to the expense of everything else. 

In Pauly55's post, Eldrad is labelled overpowered. The thing about Eldrad, and other characters like him, is that his abilities tend to dictate the composition of the rest of the army. Certain units interact with certain named characters better than others. However, when you remove the element that makes the different proportion of a certain type of unit from the table, you are left with a very unbalanced, and generally very non-threatening army to clean up. The reason characters like Eldrad are inexpensive is because people don't bring named characters for a little added flavor, but for their abilities, and tailor their army to maximize them. To lose Eldrad, for example, is a crippling loss to an army whose tactics rely entirely on timed combinations using Eldrad's psychic might. It'd be far too easy a game if all you had to do was kill Eldrad, so he's relatively inexpensive so that in such an army, you still can put up a decent fight even if you lose the farseer. 

Note that I never said that anything was overpowered about it-- just that the mentality of exploiting abilities and relying on them to the extent where you let it dictate what the rest of the army is creates some problems.

Also, for the sake of reference, smoke launchers make a vehicle count as being in 4+ cover for a turn-- that's a 50-50 shot at best...hardly what I'd call invincible. Before, the "glancing hits only" for three points was quite reasonable-- you could still destroy the vehicle, or render it useless as a transport from that point on, but you greatly reduced the odds for a single turn. The same logic in the argument that says that smoke launchers are broken would say that the heavy bolter is a fundamentally broken weapon, because it is universally inexpensive where it's allowed, and combines a high rate of fire with superior armor penetration value. But a heavy bolter is hardly considered broken, and it's the staple anti-infantry weapon of most Imperial armies.


----------



## KharnageofKhorne (Jan 8, 2009)

*I understand!*



comrade said:


> I definitely should play world eaters.
> definitely.


I play world eaters for exactly that reason... I actually RARELY care if I win... I just want to have fun and make a mess of my opponents "sane" tactics... My favorite opponent ( a Dark Angels Space Marine guy) even stopped asking me "WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD YOU DO THAT!!!" because he knows I like to throw caution to the wind (or the dice). 

JUST PLAY (and paint your models, dammit!)

KOFK


----------



## Pauly55 (Sep 16, 2008)

The Son of Horus said:


> Also, for the sake of reference, smoke launchers make a vehicle count as being in 4+ cover for a turn-- that's a 50-50 shot at best...hardly what I'd call invincible. Before, the "glancing hits only" for three points was quite reasonable-- you could still destroy the vehicle, or render it useless as a transport from that point on, but you greatly reduced the odds for a single turn. The same logic in the argument that says that smoke launchers are broken would say that the heavy bolter is a fundamentally broken weapon, because it is universally inexpensive where it's allowed, and combines a high rate of fire with superior armor penetration value. But a heavy bolter is hardly considered broken, and it's the staple anti-infantry weapon of most Imperial armies.


I did specify Black Templars smoke launchers, which still work in the old manner "glancing hits only". With the new damage charts, a BT vehicle that uses smoke is impossible to kill with any non AP 1 shooting attacks. You really think 3 points should be able to buy that ability?

I do however agree that Eldrad dictates the comp of the army he occupies. But I respectfully disagree that this is a disadvantage. Losing him isn't a massive disadvantage to the player since the amount of effort required to do so has occupied a large portion of your enemies attention. An amount which is not reflected by his points value. All this attention allows the rest of the army to run scot free.

The bottom line is that the mechanics of the game work off of powerful models having high points cost. This should be followed as closely as possible.


----------



## comrade (Jun 30, 2008)

KharnageofKhorne said:


> I play world eaters for exactly that reason... I actually RARELY care if I win... I just want to have fun and make a mess of my opponents "sane" tactics... My favorite opponent ( a Dark Angels Space Marine guy) even stopped asking me "WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD YOU DO THAT!!!" because he knows I like to throw caution to the wind (or the dice).
> 
> JUST PLAY (and paint your models, dammit!)
> 
> KOFK


lol, if only everyone else played that way. when they ask why I charged the frontline of his super CC combat monsters/marine with Conscripts.

I smile, look at him and reply, "Cause I felt like it"


----------



## Wraithian (Jul 23, 2008)

On a unit by unit basis, I don't think there are too many things that are horribly overpowered/broken, nor do I think the same regarding each individual codex. I do, however, feel that there are some codex vs codex comparisons that end up pretty one sided, or an uphill battle for most list constructions from one of the mentioned codecis versus the other. Here's an example or two to give you an idea where I'm coming from. Keep in mind that these examples are given with two players of equal or comparable skill. And, as everyone knows (or should know, if you've read any of my posts regarding army strengths, etc), I base these on my demographic, unless otherwise noted.

Tau vs Necrons. Tau, most of the time, will lose against Necrons. This one is not just my demographic, but from conversations I've had with friends from around the globe, as well as internet wanderings. The premier Tau website (credited with the creation of the, "Fish of Fury," tactic), ATT, are even at an understanding with this and have went in greater detail than I ever could.

Daemons vs Daemonhunters: Most of the time, surprise surprise, Daemons eat a bootheel. This one, again, is not just my demographic (to be honest, I'm the only daemons player in my LGS, and my dealings with daemonhunters has been limited--and even then, I pulled a draw or a hair thin loss). With so much in the way of ignoring invulerable saves, daemons are at a serious disadvantage from the start. 

Grey Knights vs 'nids. Nids generally win, as they can field more models for less points. Grey Knights generally lose due to numbers alone.

Again, as I said... Unit by individual unit, or codex by individual codex, I don't view as overpowered. It's when we start looking into the, "versus," comparisons that distinctions, advantages, and disadvantages become more apparent.


----------



## H0RRIDF0RM (Mar 6, 2008)

I'm going to go with the "Its the Driver behind the wheel route." I know plenty of players who make damn good use of weak armies and win against players that use net lists.

I think the bigger question to ask is. "What armies can produce wins with less thought."

As an Eldar player I can honestly say we have the best assortment of units/weapons/wargear to choose from to conquer all, but what I do with Eldar requires planning and thought. 

When I play my home boys LOS lists I can afford to not crunch my brain quite as much. 

This tells me that the Chaos specific LOS list is like driving standard while the Eldar is like operating stick shift. Not everyone will get it.


----------



## newsun (Oct 6, 2008)

rock...paper...scissors. If you play like Bart Simpson in this game you will always see there being overpowered things.

_Lisa: Look, there's only one way to settle this. Rock-paper-scissors.
Lisa's brain: Poor predictable Bart. Always takes `rock'.
Bart's brain: Good ol' `rock'. Nuthin' beats that!
Bart: Rock!
Lisa: Paper.
Bart: D'oh!_

And for the record I have never tried balancing any of my codices so I don't really know. Now juggling them in the air is a whole nother story...


----------



## Darkseer (Dec 2, 2008)

Some armies are always powerful, regardless of whatever edition we're playing.
Eldar have been kings (more like queens if you ask me!) of 40K ever since 2nd edition due to their relatively cheap and highly specialised units.


----------



## Steve the mediocer (Dec 27, 2008)

i say chaos, because you only score i point per unit killed, i played a kid who only fielded abbout hallf of the units i fielded, light infantry armies like nids ig and eldar are disadvantaged because its way easier to destroy 15 gaunts and 3 warriors than it is to destroy 10 khorne berzerkers and and oblterator squad, this would be okay because it used to be point based so the hard to destroy things gave alot of points, here they only give 1 no matter what


----------



## Ascendant (Dec 11, 2008)

I haven't seen a codex that seems totally wrong, just some minor rules that need to be shifted. Camoline cloaks seem pretty nasty now what with the lovely 4+ wood saves.

Also disruption pods for 5 points? they went from neat and sort of useful to "half your shots turn to dust". Good God I hate these things now.


----------



## EricR (Feb 27, 2009)

eldar and nids, just because they have such a wide range of statlines that it is difficult to tailor a list to play them unless your opponent always takes the same thing.

also eldar have one of the most unkillable units in the game - eldrad with wraithguard and a warlock with conceal. eldrad fortunes them then they have 3+ rerollable armour and 5+ rerollable cover (all the time) and eldrad gets a 3+ rerollable invulnerable save. oh and enemy shooting wounds against toughness 6. :shok:


----------



## harrytheschmuck (Nov 4, 2008)

i woud have to go with orks now as they have changed the way 40k is done when they made an ork boy 6pts! now there having to make everyone cheeper to compensate.


----------



## Chaosftw (Oct 20, 2008)

EricR said:


> eldar and nids, just because they have such a wide range of statlines that it is difficult to tailor a list to play them unless your opponent always takes the same thing.
> 
> also eldar have one of the most unkillable units in the game - eldrad with wraithguard and a warlock with conceal. eldrad fortunes them then they have 3+ rerollable armour and 5+ rerollable cover (all the time) and eldrad gets a 3+ rerollable invulnerable save. oh and enemy shooting wounds against toughness 6. :shok:


Which is why Take all comers list tend to fix that problem to some extent.

Chaosftw


----------



## KarlFranz40k (Jan 30, 2009)

Not so much unbalanced compared to other lists as their own, terminators with shields!

How in hell is that of equal value to claw termies!!!????

Twas bad enough last codex, now 3+ ALL THE TIME!!! With a big hammer to boot.
For just 40pnts! Should be 45 to be fair.


----------



## anarchyfever (May 24, 2008)

Syko515 said:


> well grenades should even this out...wait...no....nothing takes away their always strikes first rule....ok so lets see, guess i have to take their hits and hope to return some of mine.. wait the roll HOW MANY DICE!!!!!!!!! on the charge..
> .


actually you can breath a bit now. Becuase marines come with frag and krak grenades which count as assault and defensive grenades. 

which means...hahahahahahah they lose the charge bonus hahahahahahah stupid nids, orks and every other close combat specialist will feel just how much better they are now when we rapid fire their asses and don't need to worry about it


----------



## m3rr3k (Oct 14, 2008)

anarchyfever said:


> actually you can breath a bit now. Becuase marines come with frag and krak grenades which count as assault and defensive grenades.
> 
> which means...hahahahahahah they lose the charge bonus hahahahahahah stupid nids, orks and every other close combat specialist will feel just how much better they are now when we rapid fire their asses and don't need to worry about it


frag and krak grenades do not count as defensive grenades. If you're charged they still get the extra attack. Versus orcs you're probably going to want to charge them - unless they've already WAAAAAGH'd and you're 12" away and behind cover...


----------



## anarchyfever (May 24, 2008)

m3rr3k said:


> frag and krak grenades do not count as defensive grenades. If you're charged they still get the extra attack. Versus orcs you're probably going to want to charge them - unless they've already WAAAAAGH'd and you're 12" away and behind cover...


frag grenades act as assault grenades sry pg 36 small rule book

ah no your right pg 63 of the small rule book states krak and defensive grenades are different. sry for the mishap


----------

