Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Daemons- not bad, just the worst.

I was talking to my brother the other day about the situation Daemons are in. When I  stated they were awful, and Grey Knights were amazing, he replied "oh yeah? Then how come you haven't lost a game for 6 months?" (I've been playing for a year, btw)
"well... I don't know."
"And you shouldn't complain about anti-tank! You kill every vehicle the other person puts on the board!"
"Because I HATE vehicles! And my entire army's focus is destroying them and getting to the people inside!"
"So is everyone's army."

In short, the discussion, and some recent battles, brought some stuff to the front of my mind. Namely- Maybe daemons aren't terrible. Maybe they're just the worst.
There is a big difference- they don't suck, they're just the worst. It's not that they're bad, it's that everyone else is better. They're average, with clear strengths and weaknesses, but that's not enough. To be competitive, a codex needs to be amazing, with mind-boggling strengths and difficult-to-exploit weaknesses.

I can make a mediocre codex work, but I can make an amazing codex work wonders.

And I think that's a problem with the way current codices are "balanced": if just "good" isn't good enough, if a codex needs to ignore every rule and make up their own in order to be on a level playing field, there's a problem. Codices shouldn't be an arms race of who can have the most insanely effective, undercosted units.

I hope 6th doesn't continue their current philosophy, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did. And if they do, I'm going with Project Biomorph, after giving 6th a try.

Because Sirbiscuit and friends respect Xenos, and the players. To quote, they don't enforce GW's "mushroom strategy: keep us in the dark and feed us crap."

We'll wait. And see. But I want to face Space Wolves across the table and enjoy the game, as a contest between equals- codex, list, and general.