Which is your goal, to kill the Hawk or to negate his effect on the field? If you zig zag, you don't die, the hawk does nothing. You go about your business of killing his teammates. Or you get to a position where, if he wants to kill you, he gets closer to you where he has less of an advantage. You could also build your bolter so that you can fire better on the move, with the recoil barrels and certain grips.

Again, this is another instance I see of people math-hammering, and not looking at the actual application in game. If you're standing out on the open aiming down your sights walking slowly trying to return fire, OF COURSE YOU ARE GOING TO DIE! That's not a balance issue. Revolutionary War era tactics don't work here. This isn't pistols at high noon.

And how many of those had shitty CPUs? Phenoms, Q6600, FX4000, etc? And of course if you have below 2G of VRAM, you're going to have a shitty experience.

UE4 is highly scalable, but it is still entirely dependent on what the game developers are trying to show on screen. We have large detailed maps, particle effects, a fairly large amount of players, vehicles, etc. That's not something that can easily work on shitty hardware. It's not something that a Best Buy Budget Box can handle easily, nor should it.

There is flaw in this logic.

If I zig-zag, my aim is reduced by a wide margin (even with the attachment). Which not only makes it hard for me to hit the swooping hawk, but also the rest of his team. So, if a swooping hawk forces me to zig-zag, he has not "done nothing", as you put it. He has reduced my damage output tremendously.

Now you're talking to me like I'm some sort of idiot who stands still in the middle of the open. I've never said anything that alluded to this. Please don't go down this road of assuming the person who is talking to you was born yesterday. It's only one step away from name calling and I've seen it devolve into that plenty of times.

That type of attitude doesn't get anyone anywhere.

Not really, as if he is engaging you at long range, you're not really going to be able to apply pressure to him anyway, so the greater benefit is saving your own skin. If you're zig-zagging, he won't even break through your armor, so he will have zero net gain once you're in cover and recharging. If you have a stalker bolter or HB/Autocannon, then you could out-dps him easily. So balance wise, what you're proposing is the equivalent of a devestator fighting a JPA in melee. That's not a balance issue, that's a tactics and kit issue.

Eldar seem horrifically overpowered. I've never seen games lost so quickly.

Issues I've noticed:

Banshees are obscene. They're faster than Space Marines yet are as resilient. They can also OHK you. OHKs are not good game mechanics.

The stock shuriken rifles seem to fire as fast and do similar damage to bolter, but their fire is far more accurate.

Generally speaking they're smaller, faster yet are as durable and hit harder - it's just unfun to play against them.

If I'm zig-zagging, my aim is reduced dramatically. Space Marines are not designed to be a mobile race when firing in this game. So your zig-zagging tactic doesn't apply to this race very well, even though it works perfectly for Eldar.

OHK, smaller hitboxes, and really fast enemies are all bad game-design when packaged into one race. You simply can not have that much in one package and call it "balanced" or "fun to play against".

As an ork. I'm leaving ques against eldar. It's just not worth the aggravation. It IS asymmetrical, but it's not balance.

HAHAHA

no.

Please use it yourself first.

These are the real advantages.
We pay with 10% increased damage on core classes.