Listen, you're entitled to your opinion, but if you think the current set of books are within +/-5% of each other, you are completely delusional, and if you are satisfied with this being acceptable and that GW is doing a good job in this regard, there's really no sense in arguing with that level of ridiculousness. If you think balance is about creating "random armies" as opposed to a situation where every unit is useful and fairly priced, you're missing the point entirely. Units like Mandrakes, Tyrannofexes, Pyrovores, Whirlwinds, etc. are avoided not because they are underappreciated, but because they are over-costed and/or useless. It is a flaw with design, not some bullshit meta or sheep mentality.

As I said, "approximate" balance is the goal; perfect is unattainable. It is possible to do a significantly better job at overall balance than GW is currently doing. I don't think anyone does GW a service by pretending the status quo is anything more than tolerable and the "GW apologists" actually do the hobby a tremendous disservice.