Isn't 3++ the blog where the guy spends more time whining about internet forums than talking about 40K? Yeah, seems pretty much the standard egotistical tupenny shuffle fest that sadly characterises most the 40K blogs.
I don't want to derail this discussion too much, but it is a blog that spends a lot of time analyzing units and army types with the perspective of around 7 authors, most of which win many local tournaments. They may each have some egos, but they aren't as pretentious as many other bloggers are.
They also aren't necessarily the greatest 40k players, but recently they've spent a lot of time justifying their assertions, which helps players at least see where they're coming from, even if they don't necessarily agree that one unit is good/bad/etc.
Also their articles are useful when trying to anticipate armies that you have never played before. Reading their articles/army reviews helped me play against many very difficult builds with my CSM's back in 5th edition. Not everything they said turned out relevant, but a lot of it was informative in one way or another.
I think writing this hopefully helps someone besides Hymirl. Its good to search around the internet, even if it only trains you to discern who actually knows what they're talking about and who doesn't. If there is a lot of explanation behind someone's analysis, they probably have done at least some research (or game playing, or course).