Monday, March 3, 2014

At What Point Are You The Problem?

Today I want to talk about something that will probably be unpopular too a good portion of the community, but it has something that has been bothering me and I want to get it out there.  We all love to bash on GW and recently there has been a larger and larger amount of it.  With escalation, codex's, the knights, D weapons, more and more have called the game broken and dead and GW is horrible and its all there fault for how bad things are.  But at what point is this YOUR fault?

That is a serious question too.  What was so great about the game before all this that has now been ruined by it?  Screamerstars?  Jetseers?  Yeah those are great.  But god forbid GW adds D weapons, no the line has been crossed, our fun is now gone, lament!  Yeah ok.   This has never been a balanced game and I really don't want it to be one of those types of streamlined, ulta competitive games.  Some do I'm sure, but guess what, thats not what GW wants, and if you don't agree with that, there are plenty of other options if you want that game style.  I'm not saying get out, but I also am a full believer in capitalism and if you want something, vote with your wallet.

How many of you that complain about GW, have or plan to buy a Knight?  Hmmm.  I cannot count how many people I talked too at the FLGS who complain about the game and yet they have 7 armies and 3000+ points for each of them.  And of course listen to how they think its so expensive, unbalanced, etc.  Are you high?   You keep buying the stuff you complain about and then are shocked when nothing changes.  Oh boy thats a hard one.  I wonder why prices go up, oh wait because you keep buying it.  Maybe thats why.  Somehow though thats GWs evil little fault for exploiting our weak little wills and lack of self control, your so right, thats all their fault.  Its not like your a human being with the ability to think critically and make decisions that can alter your life.  Nope your a mindless drone just waiting for your next plastic meal.

The wonderful thing nowadays is that this is a hobby and industry that has grown so much.  There is lots of great competition and different games.  You don't have to play 40k if you don't like it.  I don't want to play with someone who can't stop grumbling about GW this and GW that.  Either enjoy this HOBBY, or move on to one you like.  This is a hobby, and you get what you put into it.  The more you put in, the more that you'll get out of it.  I really do like the above quote because it is true.  Its not the problem, its your attitude. 

D weapons are unfun and make me grumpy so I'm not going to play with them, you can't make me :p.  Really?  I have played a game of escalation now, and you know what, it was fun.  My buddy had fun too, even though he was on the receiving end of the D.  He is still willing to play against my warhound.  And you know what, when one day he drops his Reaver on table, I'm going to play it and have fun doing so.  I might lose.  Which I know is just unthinkable, how could I play a game, lose and still have fun.  D weapons are unfun, so the truthsayers speak, so how dare I have fun with them.  D weapons being un fun is entirely your problem and nothing or nobody elses.  I know you may not like that, but its true, its your choice to have fun or not. 

I really find the argument silly when players, and competitive players seem to be more on this side, make the argument that D weapons are unfun and shouldn't be allowed, but well your just going to have to suck it up and face the jetseer(insert deathstar).  Yup that makes sense.  Or maybe both are things that can be abused if people choose to, but are not in and of themselves bad or "unfun".  A good example I can think of is a gun.  I can use a gun to shoot soda cans, and thats it.  Or I can kill someone.  Where is that the guns fault.  It is designed to propel a projectile through a barrel by the use of chemical accelerants.  Thats what it is.  How it is used is up to the person using it.

The same goes for 40k and the use and abuse of it.  Somehow it is GWs responsibility to create this perfectly balanced game, because if they don't, we will abuse the shit out of it and break it.  Whoa, were is that their fault or responsibility.  This start and ends with you.  YOU are responsible for your game and the fun or lack there of you have doing it.  Oh yes, we must defend the people who take these abusive lists to tournaments and win with them.  They are talented, so therefore it is excused.  No that is a cop out.  Yes these guys are talented, that is true.  But they are part of the problem.  If you are running an eldar jetseer council with the baron and wave serpents/knights for flavor, was that really your desired army that you have just been waiting years for to play? You were waiting years int he closet with the baron and your eldar, waiting for the day the two could combine. Yeah I thought not.

So is this GWs fault?  The answer really is part yes and part no.  The yes is because they do write lazy rules sometimes and fail to police their mistakes and clarify conundrums. That is their responsibility.  But its not their fault that your taking O'vesa star, or an inquisitor with as many thud guns and vendettas as you can squeeze into your list.  If you are cherry picking the most hard core units based only off of their crunch, well I'm sorry your kind of an asshole.  There is noting necessarily wrong with these unit individually.  Its how they are used in combinations with things that can break the game. 

Remember this, the game is only broken if you choose to break it.  Sure I could take sabre platforms and thud guns and a skyshield etc.  But I don't.   And no you don't have to take these things to win a tournament.  That is a cop out to shift the blame from you to the ether.  Oh I just have to, or I won't win.  Well I guess winning is more important than the integrity of the game.  Guess what, if no one took these things that are broken, there wouldn't be much of a problem.  That will only happen if each and every one of you makes the decision to do that. 

That also begs the question though, what is broken and what isn't.  That is a hard question sometimes because the answers are subjective.  Now invincible units are broken, no way to argue around that.  Got it there is tactics against it, but the same goes for a revenant.  I personally don't necessarily see spam as uber cheese.  Part of it comes from the fact that real militaries love to spam.  Spam is efficient.  Some one brings 9 leman russes, I don't see that as a bad thing.  They like armor and want to run the army they love.  I can accept that, its far from a broken army and has serious weaknesses.  Wave serpent spam.  Well that kind of is a fluffy eldar army.  Its a bitch to play against have no doubt.  But I don't see that as the most abusive and it certainly has its own weaknesses against heavy armor or fast cc builds. 

We are at a point now though were we have gods.  These invincible units that you have to rely on a dice roll going really bad to have  a good chance.  Maybe a god killer isn't that bad.  You don't have to take either though, you know that?  The option is there, but its not the game companies fault for giving you that option, its yours for taking it.  With so many subjective ideas about what is broken, can we really police it? 

So what to do?  I think thats what most people expect with article like this, I have laid out whats wrong and now will illuminate you with the path to righteousness.  Well its not  that simple.  A big part of this comes down to all of us just agreeing to have fun.  The point isn't to win, thats only part of it.  Winning is fun, but is not the point of the game.  Having fun, both of you playing, that is the point of the game.  I like a challenge and I like winning, so I don't necessarily mind fighting tough armies.  If someone wants to bring a revenant, I'll play it, I'll keep playing it till I can beat it. 

Its important to leave your egos out of this hobby.  That becomes such an issue and I have seen it many times. We all want to be right and want to win, and it can become so alluring that we lose sight that there are other people around us that feel the same and, god forbid, might actually be right too sometimes. 

And here is my thing, if I have to play with the deathstars, I want to play with everything.  I don't buy the excuse that the D is bad and unfun, cause I don't find these stars to be fun.  So lets play with everything.  Lets have some fun.  Or we can abide by a social contract and not play with the most broken things available.  Its a choice.  Decide what is important to you about this hobby.  I honestly am at the point now where I am ok with going with everything becaue why not, its the game and its cool.  I would love to see someone bring a titan to a tournament and throw things for a loop.  Some may argue that restrictions are needed to balance the game.  I think the problem is that too many changes and restrictions are needed to truly do that, and at that point are we really playing 40k after we have modified half the game and codexs to "balance" it out.  Modifying the 2++ reroll is not enough on its own, there are so many other things that need to be touched to be effective.  And a part of me chaffs at that, who is anyone to say that someone cannot play their army as it is written.  Its in their codex let them use it.  So I am ok with escalation and D weapons and fortifications and flyers and all of that. Lets go for it and play with it all.  And at the same time lets not be dicks about it.  Have fun.  Bring multiple lists to your FGLS and play them based on who is there.  If some one wants hardcore mode, go for it.  But if he wants to do a themed game with fluff armies, go for it too. 

We can all affect the game and community with our attitudes and choices.  The only person or thing responsible for you having a bad time is you.  That is a choice you have made.   You can continue down that path, or not, up to you.

I am going to have fun.  And I'm going to play with my titan whenever I can get a chance and if someone wants to play with theirs, awesome.  We spend the money on these things, why not use them.  Someone might not like it, well thats part of life.  If you are not trying to one up someone but just have fun, then it really is their problem and not yours.  Pull out another list and leave the titan to watch the battle, I'm cool doing that if someone doesn't want to take it on.  You should be too.  I hate the gotcha attitude.  The whole well the rules allow it so you have to suck it.   That is utter BS.  Its a hobby and I can take my toys wherever I want to. 

For me, my point has changed a lot over the last year.  The game has changed more than I could have imagined.  And I'm fine with it.  I'm having fun.  You should too.



  1. This post is very pointed and needed. I agree with you.
    For me, I've been tempted to try what is new or what "wins" at tournies. But in the end, I would rather be laughing and enjoying my game than "winning". One of the best games of 40k I ever played, I lost. And horribly too. But my opponent was laughing and taking risks, as was I. Because it was fun, fit some fluff, and made some sense.

    I actually put down a super heavy and told my opponent. We both wanted to see how much punishment it could take. Was it fun? Yes. Did we both have fun? Oh yeah. And I lost!

    Enjoy the game you invest the time and energy into, don't min/max because you can. Sometimes you need to put something down to laugh and have a good time.


    I have been thinking the same it seems. Although my post above was for a different purpose i touched on how much players are at fault with the game. People cant seem to blame themselves for the way they play the game and how they choose to do it.

    But yes I agree.

    Although there is a point when spam is blatantly a pain (like using heaps of the rarest weapons known to that race) but if I saw 60 space marines its different. Thats "true spam" I guess.

    Anyways good post :)

    1. I noticed yours after I posted mine :). Must be on the same wavelength right now.

      Players are the core issue, the game is just a set of guidlines with limits on how far you can go, how far you go within that is up to you. Almost all of the issues we have right now can be solved by the people that play and the choices they make.

  3. I dont take flyers, i dont unit spam (apart from chaos space marine squads) my army has no doubles of units.

    I believe that if GW play tested its codices a bit better than they would be able to detect what is broken and fix it.

  4. I own every model in the current IG codex. I own these models because, I love my army! I love building the models, and I love reading the books. I play regularly at a few local gaming shops. I do my best not to spam lists, and I love trying new things. I do not winning with spamming units.

    With that said, I also enjoy the tournament scene. I try to play a tournament about once every two months. I am hosting March Madness at our local gaming store, which is a double elimination style tourney. I know that we will see several of those "this guy is a butt hole lists". I am okay with that. I can sometimes deal with those units. I have played against the revnant titan, and I can honestly say, I did not enjoy the game. I lost two units per turn no matter what. I took off a total of 3 hull points, which did me a lot of good, since all I had left was 1 flyer and 1 troop choice by turn 5. I shook his hand and decided that I cannot compete with such a heavy hitter. Granted that is just one super heavy experience, but I do understand the frustrations from D weapons.

    What I have told the people in my group is that GW has done a beautiful thing. They allow us to forge whatever narrative we want! If we want to restrict certain weapon types, then that is what we are allowed to do. I am allowing everything but D weapons in my tournament, which has a lot of people excited. I do believe that the majority of people are accepting most of the additions: supplements, data slates, and stronghold assault. I do think we are a ways away from people fully accepting D weapons. No body wants the big D while playing 40k, well unless you have a bigger better D. :-)

  5. The problem stems from GW's business model. Yes, I know they have profit margins they need to keep up, but they're shooting themselves (or rather us) in the foot. In order to move more product, they need to add incentive to a product. Yes, the Tau Riptide is an awesome, fluffy model, but it's $90 (yeeesh). If the Riptide was balanced, quite a few Tau players would still buy them because they are a cool unit they like to field, but not everyone. Some people would hold off on getting them and buy something else because they think $90 is a little much; but then GW got the fabulous idea to under price the Riptide in game. Now nearly every active Tau player owns at least one. Yes, winning isn't everything, but I'm tired of facing Riptide spam because GW is more interested in lining its pockets than maintaining some semblance of balance. I don't think asking GW to raise the point cost just a little bit on units like this is all that demanding. Even though 40k's scale will never allow the game to be perfectly balanced, the least GW could do is end the codex creep (In regards to GW's release of OP units with every new dex).

    Now, I don't hate GW. I'm actually getting more and more excited about the progress of the 40k/Fantasy as GW starts to release higher detailed and more customizable models. Yes, prices have been raising steadily, but I've long since come to the realization that a hobby like this is expensive (No shit, Sherlock?). I can't wait to build an IG list when the update comes out (YEEES, ONE MONTH).

    In closing, I have high hopes for GW, but I resent the codex creep. They release OP units on purpose, and they need to be called on it. Happy gaming!

    1. That comes back to the players though, which is the point being made. If players didnt effectively show mass support and buy these models in mass, instead sticking to balanced models and units, then we wouldnt have a problem.

      Its easy to blame the company, but at the end of the day the fault lies with us. We buy the units, the books and so on. We choose how to use it. GW is simply being sensible and using this to their advantage. If you where making that kind of money im sure you would too.

      Its time to stop complaining and fix it ourselves. (thats always been the time) So lets not shift the blame, just move on and work on your group and getting this to work. Other groups will follow. Make a new trend. Joining the masses in whining will solve nothing.

    2. But that's the thing, GW is hurting financially. Many veteran players are selling or storing away their models and new players are daunted by high prices. People are realizing GW's insidious business practices and calling it quits. It's horrible, but where the rubber meets the road, GW needs to make some decisions. Are they going to cut prices to invite new players? Are they going to cater to the vets and give them a somewhat competitive gaming experience? Are they going to close many of thier brick-and-mortar stores? I don't know, but whatever it is it needs to happen fast or GW isn't going to survive into the next few decades.

    3. it is easy to blame where blame is placed. it is warranted. in the nearing 20 years i've been involved this has been the common message & the bottom line has been the same. blaming consumers generally is a bad idea even when fault is theirs is a good way to alienate would be consumers and drives away existing ones. as has been witnessed...

  6. The main frustration with everything stated here came with the introduction of 6th edition rulesets, and while I enjoy the flexibility and excitement the new Allied rules offer I do hate them at the same time. In 5th and 4th, allied formations such as Eldar and Dark Eldar where unthinkable, simply because it didn't make sense fluff wise...and because the rules simply didn't allow them.

    I totally agree with everything you have said above, and I am a player who plays to simply have fun. I enjoy seeing my painted models on the table, representing my pride in my hobby. Sure I want to be competitive sometimes, but it is still a game not a matter of life and death, and that's how many many people treat it.

    What I miss about this edition is that it completely eliminates the idea of learning how to play with your army. Hell, I haven't played all to much ever, but I do remember when I played 5th, and 4th edition, I had to learn every aspect of my army, the weaknesses and the strength. With the knowledge acquired I would build a list that could win against certain threads of other armies.....

    But now, I am able to fill my weaknesses through bringing units of other armies. IG lacks CC capabilities? I will bring Blood Raves. Re-roll-able Invuln? I will bring Eldar, Dark Eldar. Lacking long range fire support in your Necron list? Bring Tau allies (WTF?!) This angers me, I enjoy the game fluff wise so much that many of these alliances simple don't make a lick of sense, but the rules allow you to do it.

    And this is why I don't understand the argument that D weapons are overpowered, when the game allows you already to do all these crazy (stupid) things. Just roll with it and let the stupidity continue and enjoy what you got.

    I for once like the challenge of trying multiple lists to finally beat these authorities that
    are the subject of so much bitching and moaning. I will try and learn until I found a way to beat whats threatening me, that's where I find my calling in this game, and that's where I have the most fun.

    So yeah...thanks... lol

  7. I was just thinking about writing a similar post but the emphasis is a little more forgiving of the players. The players are very much caught in a catch 22 type of thing. Once you have been playing a little while you are heavily invested in the game. This investment is both time and money. I personally have like 250+ space marine models so if you assume an average cost of like 5 dollars per model that is 1250 dollars plus many hours of assembly and such just for the space marines. I do not think that anyone can argue that GW has not been intentionally writing in new things with badly balanced rules to sell models. Not all models but it just seems to much that the new things just always workout to be a little better than the old stuff.

    Now if you have a good group of friends that you play with you can all get along well with gentlemans agreement about beardyness but 40K was not the top game recently because it had the best rules, fluff, or models. It was the top game because it was what people were playing at the local shop already. If you showed up looking for a game that was the one to be playing. If you are in the group of people in the pick up or local event type of stuff you really have no control over what other people bring. And while losing tight games can be very fun getting curb stomped game after game is not really going to be very fun.

    The rules are so out of balance now that it pretty much leaves you with two choices. You either bow to the bad rules and update your forces to keep up or your are forced to walk away from those games. If you walk away then you invested money and time is being wasted. Mercer (Imperitus Dominatus) used to always say things like "What are you going to do? Quit and Go Home." People have been doing that. You can see it in GW sales as the same or even less money comes in from products whose prices keep going up.

    You are still mentally invested though so at this point you become either a GW apologist or a disgruntled veteran with respect to your response to GW decisions. People who keep buying are getting the GW they deserve but a lot of the other voices out there have essentially quit buying or reduced their buying significantly and are trying to convince others to do the same so we can all get a better GW. The GW we all want with well written fun rules for reasonably priced models which use the point system to make everyones collections able to meet on the table where you is the best commander decides the outcome and not the person who spends his money the best finding every conceivable advantage to be had in the system. If I wanted that game I would play Magic or Pokemon.

    1. THIS guy deserves a medal. seriously. it is this power creep similar to F2P games online, you are free to play but at a high disadvantage over those whom choose to pay to play. it is a tactic to drive out certain elements in the hobby [not hard to guess what/who]

  8. While I agree with most of what is being said here, there is one thing I see alittle differently. As far as i see it you attent a tournement for two reasons, either to have fun or to win. If you go for fun, then take the fluffiest list you can and have fun doing it, but if you go to win then why not take the best list you can with the sole intention to win reguardless of what others think. If the list is there, be it through the codex, suppliments, dataslates or formation why not.

    Ok, i think D weapons are a little OP, but i dont see many people bringing them and as a guard player i feel its a bit harsh to just ban escalation as there is only one of the six or so superheavies that is acually a D weapon. If you look back over the last 5 editions i bet you'll find there were people whining about some aspect of the game or another. Maybe it wasn't as obvious as it is today with the internet and its forums, but i'm sure that it was there, this edition may have its faults but so will the next.

    As for changing GW, the only way it will happen, as has been said, is through our wallets. GW is a company, it has shareholders and the likes, it needs to make money. If people want to object to rules, models or prices then don't buy and GW will have to do something.

    Personally, I will continue to play, with my 100+ guardsmen spam list, and continue to have fun with it. I've faced Superheavies and MC's and I've both one and lost, but I've enjoyed every game.

  9. I agree with a certain ammount of what you are saying, but I come from the perspective of a guy that has just one army, Dark Eldar. 6th ED hit my army hard, and escalation/stronghold worse. I want to play the army I have the way the fluff dictates, as a pirate raider force. Super heavies don't fit into that model and neither do fortifications. But wait you say (as does GW apparently), you can ally with Eldar and/or bring a revnant! I don't want to ally with Eldar and Dark Eldar could never really use a revnant (no pyschers to pilot no bonesingers to repair it). It makes no sense fluffwise. Long story short, super heavies and D weapons are something I have no answer for, and essentially ruin the game for me.

    1. The option is always yours, and the point of this article is not everyone should take super heavies but that it is the attitude of the players that make the game. If you have issues with de taking theses things on, then let your opponent know.

      I disagree that de have no answer to super heavies(haywire, blasters, lances, ravagers, void raven bombers, etc). DE have a tough time but it's hardly more then other armies do.

      Have fun, just remember it's a two way street and your opponent may not want to play what your bringing, even if you don't thunk it is that bad

    2. You may wish to try using your fliers against the superheavies. Most due not have skyfire and the darklances can strip one down fast. With the new chart, if you roll a 6's on penetration you remove more hullpoints.

    3. DE flyers are nice and all, but A) rely on reserve rolls B) are easily countered by better valued Imperial/Eldar flyers and/or aegis defense line and C) occupy our valuable Heavy Slot which holds our best anti-armor option, the ravager (which gets pwned by the D). Haywire is a great option, probably our best, but it turns out to be an unrealiable suicide unit which, by the way, depends on getting in close to assault with. Essentially what I am getting at is that we MAY be able to counter the D, but we have to dedicate every ounce of our army to do it. In a tournament setting thats suicided. Conversely look at an example imperial guard army taking a warhound, banblade, or now Imperial Knight. You add a vendetta or two, an aegis defense line just to be mean, and you have the makings of a well-rounded force that can challenge all comers. I don't mean to sound whiny and I know our codex is outdated (so is Nercron's but the seem to perform very, not to mention they got some fluff accurate D of their own) but I shouldn't have to rely on the stars aligning and his rolls being awful and mine being amazing to win a game...

    4. Hate to break it to you, but for the big super heavies, most armies have to dedicate every ounce to beat them. They are tough for a reason and cost so much for the same reason. Ravagers are your counter to super heavies. Don't put them in LoS turn one though be shocked when they die. ravager jetbikes are another great option, you can move so fast and then assault move out of LoS after shooting. Scourges (the wigned guys) are another great choice with haywire blasters and grenades.

      And what I am getting at, is that it always is a MAY counter scenario, its never guaranteed. You are not walking away with all of your models. If an imperial knight catches you, I'm sorry that has everything to do with your tactics and nothing to do with your codex. Can you kill two leman russes? you can deal with a knight. Other super heavies have significant weakeness and are hard to hide and manuever. If you are facing D weapons, you have to play a different game. I've played these games. You have to hide, especially if you are not going first. Use the DE maneverability to your advantage. You don't have to rely on rolls, you have to play differently. And the key to that is actually playing against it, you will never learn until you play it. And yes, you will probably lose more than a few times. I know thats not an answer people like to hear, but when I started playing I lost a lot, then I got better. And that still happens when i play against units and combos I haven't, I lose, then I change and adapt and figure out how I can win. i cannot think of a time where I have been able to find the tools in a codex, tactics are the number one reason for victory, not lists

    5. I'm sorry, but killing a titan or imperial knight IS NOT analogous to killing two russes. Even if i get one pen on a russ, I am going to degrade its combat effectiveness in some way via the damage table. A super heavy is 100% cobat effective until you remove it last HP, which is ludacris on its face. I have played with a revenant just to see how bad these rules are. I tabled a tau player by turn 3. You say 'hide your stuff', but thats assuming you even can. You may not have much control over the terrain you are playing on. I viewed your battle report and you tabled those space marines pretty quickly even with LOADS of cover. Sure tactics may be at issue sometimes, but simply put, the good 'ole mathhammer determines that these units are straight broken against a force not using escalation or stronghold assualt units, neither of which fit in my army. That won't change no matter how many games get played.

    6. Your right, comparing two russes to a titan is not comparable, thats why I only compared it to a knight. A super heavy is combat effective till the end, it also is suceptable to losing multiple hull points in a single shot. It is hard to hide and maneuver into position. Using the extreme example of a revenant does not prove your point, other than the revenant being extremely powerful.

      Oh and btw, I only "tabled" the marines, because half his army was in reserve and he didn't feel like playing it out. Note that three flyers with anti tank was in reserve. And actually his tactics were poor, the vehicles were out in the open on turn one, knowing I had the first turn. He did not hide. Terrain is extremely important when playing, and yes you are going to have times where your stuff is going to have minimal cover. You also have reserves, which is a wonderful place to hide units. You will have times where that backfires, but statistically it is in your favor. You also ahve units like vect and the baron that increase your odds of going first. 90% of super heavies are meh, they are good but expensive, with the downside of you losing flexiblity of having multiple units to having one tough one. You generalize in comparing one super heavy to all. There are a few that are certianly amazingly powerful like the revenant, reaver, and dual turbo warhound, however the rest are not in that category, they either lack mobility, firepower, or durability. To whitewash the whole class as unbeatable is misleading

    7. What you say is true, but it is the value you get for the points in question. An Imperial knight is just more effective per point than two russes, and a revenant even more so than a knight. It being suceptable to losing multiple hull points to a single shot is not a disadvantage or even a balance as you make it sound, as the alternative is outright destruction. Hell you dont even lose a weapon when with the two russ example you at least lose a battle cannon to one of them being destroyed by a 6 on the table.There are good an bad units. There are underpowered and overpowered units. All superheavies may not be created equal and I don't have play experience with all of them, but any of them that can use the D are superpowered beyond balance. The only question is how much. The revenant (which I have access to as DE but refuse to use) is the most extreme example, but I think time will show that the new Imperial knights, especially because they can be fielded as an army in their own right, are equally imbalanced. Just think about it. You bring 5 knights and I bring a standard well rounded 40k army. Anything I field that does not have anti tank shooting or haywire might as well sit out. Yet 5 knights can deal with everything besides aircraft (possibly even aircraft with the stubbers).

    8. I disagree that simply having D weapons makes them unbalanced. For the non titans, such as the baneblade variant, it still has to SEE the target to shoot it. In the case of the baneblade, it must move and get LoS in order to use its D. In the same respect, you can manuever to stay out of its main guns arc. This is similar for many D weapons on superheavies. And the Close combat D is more than manageable, the super heavy has to actually get into combat, and is only able to make a limited number of attacks and still has to hit and still has to roll on the D table. It is not automatic.

      Knights are very well balanced. They don't have heavy armor, are slow in terrain, limited shooting, small number of attacks. Yes it has stomp, but its only D3 small blasts, with only a 6 being D. A knight can certainly get through blobs faster than other single models, but when compared to CC units of comparable cost, it is not as good at removing large numbers of models. It has significant weaknesses.

      And a well balanced army struggles against many other armies as well. The same problem would be found if you faced a Land Raider heavy army or any army that brings lots of high AV. Besides your thinking about it wrong, its not about killing your opponents models, its about winning the game. That useless squad can hold up the knight for a turn or two in CC, preventing it from shooting, or moving up into positions to take objectives. Only one scenario is based on killing models, the rest are objectives. Don't think of those units as useless, they buy you time and space to win the game. You tie up the few in combat to allow your anti tank to focus on only a few knights at a time and also reduce the return fire to your anti tank. Is it going to be hard, yes. But so will any good match up. You just seem to have given up with out adequete play testing, you have deemed it impossible and thus it is so. Play against a single knight, then a couple, then maybe a different superheavy. Jumping straight to a revenant is not the answer. The only way you can arrieve to an accurate conclusion is to test your theory with an open mind, if you are convinced you will lose, well you will.