Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ok I'm not following this at all.

Please explain to me this tier system and how is it calculated what army fits into what tier bracket. I'm a bit peed off that my blood angels seem to be at tier rubbish at the moment. In fact it looks like there isn't anything worse at the mo in the 40k universe

Tier is a made up term used by people to compare the relative codices by whatever measuring stick they choose. Local/regional tournament wins, ability to kill MEQ, or whatever.

Play what you like and don't get worked up over it.

As a fellow BA player I feel your pain. But, like most things in 40k; armies are cyclical depending on the rule set. In 5th we were a very viable option and a succesful one at that. 6th just isn't our cup of tea, but you know what? It's ok because for the longest time during 5th Tau were a complete joke and Tau players got the shaft. I'm ok with ebb and flow armies wise.

Tier shouldn't be a thing, but it is. It's not really official either. And regarding BA, every army will have their time of power, blood angels will get better.

It goes of how well balanced your book is, tau and eldar have good internal balance, books like chaos have terrible balance only having two decent units.

BA are a close combat army in a shooty edition, no matter what you do it will be turn two before you charge, and you spend a turn getting shot at point blank range by high ap weapons.

Your in the same boat as orks needing to melee to win but not being able to get there.

SW have an old codex but while they have no better way to get into cc they do at least have strong ranged attack thanks to runepriests and divination boosting longfangs.

hobojebus wrote:
It goes of how well balanced your book is, tau and eldar have good internal balance, books like chaos have terrible balance only having two decent units.

BA are a close combat army in a shooty edition, no matter what you do it will be turn two before you charge, and you spend a turn getting shot at point blank range by high ap weapons.

Your in the same boat as orks needing to melee to win but not being able to get there.

SW have an old codex but while they have no better way to get into cc they do at least have strong ranged attack thanks to runepriests and divination boosting longfangs.

Puppies are nice and flexible, that's why we're not terrible. If you relied on close combat in your wolves list though, bad things would happen. That's BA's problem, but they will recover and at the least they will be playable. So don't give up hope.

I forgot to mention... as if being a BA player wasn't bad enough in 6th, my other army SM wise is Chaos Thousand Sons lol so I'm doubly hammered.

I do have IG though, so that helps to soften the blow of 6th edition.

"Tiers" is a term used to talk about the relative power level an army has in comparison to other armies.

Unlike in WHFB, in 40k, you can actually compare armies and their power levels and it's possible to put them in a vaguely correct order. Some armies are inherently more powerful than others in 40k.

What is to be kept in mind, however, are two important points:

a) Power leveecifzls are heavily influenced by allies and possible combinations. There are certain combos, such as Eldar/Tau, that are far and above all other combinations in the game and therefore increase the power level of the codex in question.

b) The "power level" mainly refers to specific compositions of said army. A top tier army might still be or do bad because of poor general skills or simply because of "power level" referring to the codex as a whole: if a codex has a few extremely strong models that make up for very competitive army lists, its tier is high. It doesn't matter if the rest of the codex is bad, it's about what you can do with it.

I'm starting to get the idea of tiers. Thanks for the feedback on this and it's given me a good hoping chance that one day soon the BA Codex will pop out and bring us back to competitive level. It's pretty stupid having a close combat army trying to compete in game of shooters. Why don't they upgrade everyone's codex one time so everything is fair??

I guess they wouldn't push people to buy a new army when their fav ones get plummeted to lame level if they did that would they? Yeah I'm talking to you GW!!!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zarynterk wrote:
I forgot to mention... as if being a BA player wasn't bad enough in 6th, my other army SM wise is Chaos Thousand Sons lol so I'm doubly hammered.

I do have IG though, so that helps to soften the blow of 6th edition.

I double feel for you brother

 kerikhaos wrote:
I'm starting to get the idea of tiers. Thanks for the feedback on this and it's given me a good hoping chance that one day soon the BA Codex will pop out and bring us back to competitive level. It's pretty stupid having a close combat army trying to compete in game of shooters. Why don't they upgrade everyone's codex one time so everything is fair??

I guess they wouldn't push people to buy a new army when their fav ones get plummeted to lame level if they did that would they? Yeah I'm talking to you GW!!!

theyre in the process of updating everyones codicies. Best rumors for us BA players is a new codex out in the fall or late summer. Hopefully it adds in some goodies. Also supposed to be in the 6.5 or 7th edition box set so here's hoping to that one.

 kerikhaos wrote:
Why don't they upgrade everyone's codex one time so everything is fair??

I guess they wouldn't push people to buy a new army when their fav ones get plummeted to lame level if they did that would they? Yeah I'm talking to you GW!!!

Games Workshop is not interested in creating a well-balanced, competitive game. An arms race with new releases is much more profitable to them. 6th introduced flyers as a new concept to the game and they were purposefully given extremely strong rules in order to boost sales. This applies to new models, released at the same time, and older models that suddenly received a considerable power boost and became blatantly overpowered, such as the Vendetta. GW refused to react properly, although a chance would have been very simple and appreciated by the community as a whole.

Have a look at the recent Adepticon lists - they show a huge balance problem 40k currently has and although it would be simple to fix on GW's side, e.g. by a mere FAQ addition, they are not interested in doing so.

Their marketing concept is the same as the one of most F2P MMO game companies - they want to sell you their goods by purposefully creating a power surge or not reacting to an existent one. The game's become an arms race and the decision whether you want to keep up or not it's yours.

This being said, this merely applies to the "competitive" part of 40k. If you only play with your friends, it should not be much of a problem. Blood Angels are far from being bad, they are pretty mediocre and can do well against most friendly lists. If your friends decide to go for netlists or min/max lists on purpose - well, that's a different case one cannot solve on an internet forum

Thatguyhsagun wrote:

 kerikhaos wrote:
I'm starting to get the idea of tiers. Thanks for the feedback on this and it's given me a good hoping chance that one day soon the BA Codex will pop out and bring us back to competitive level. It's pretty stupid having a close combat army trying to compete in game of shooters. Why don't they upgrade everyone's codex one time so everything is fair??

I guess they wouldn't push people to buy a new army when their fav ones get plummeted to lame level if they did that would they? Yeah I'm talking to you GW!!!

theyre in the process of updating everyones codicies. Best rumors for us BA players is a new codex out in the fall or late summer. Hopefully it adds in some goodies. Also supposed to be in the 6.5 or 7th edition box set so here's hoping to that one.

I can see blood angels getting a lot of fast stuff, stuff that gets up into your face before you can say 'overwatch'
One glorious day will come when the game is more balanced, it's on it's way. Financial pressure is already on, Gw will have to make their game even better than it is now

If I was running Games Workshop for pure profit motives, I would identify the armies that are selling the least models, and release a Codex that makes that army much more attractive to the consumer...

Yeah, tiers aren't a real thing. They don't exist.

They are figments of the imaginations of WAAC players and GW conspiracy theorists. Unfortunately, everyone else seems to get drug along with the delusion.

 kerikhaos wrote:
Their marketing concept is the same as the one of most F2P MMO game companies - they want to sell you their goods by purposefully creating a power surge or not reacting to an existent one. The game's become an arms race and the decision whether you want to keep up or not it's yours.

I agree with you for the most part, but this is said for a reason...

 Zarynterk wrote:
As a fellow BA player I feel your pain. But, like most things in 40k; armies are cyclical depending on the rule set. In 5th we were a very viable option and a succesful one at that. 6th just isn't our cup of tea, but you know what? It's ok because for the longest time during 5th Tau were a complete joke and Tau players got the shaft. I'm ok with ebb and flow armies wise.

You sir deserve an exalt! So have one!!!

 Ailaros wrote:
Yeah, tiers aren't a real thing. They don't exist.

They are figments of the imaginations of WAAC players and GW conspiracy theorists. Unfortunately, everyone else seems to get drug along with the delusion.

What a thoughtless thing to say.

The concept of tiers is a reaction to imbalance. If things are imbalanced (which they are) and players attempt to rank them in order (which they do), then tiers unequivocally exist.

As an intangible concept created at will by anyone who believes in them, I really can't imagine how anyone could argue that tiers don't exist. The only way to actually argue against their existence would be to argue that everything in 40k is perfectly balanced. Anyone who makes that argument is about as perceptive as a rock.

I think what Ailaros wanted to say was that there isn't anything like "official" tiers set in stone as at the same time, he mentioned there actually being tiers as of them being player-made constructs.

Nobody doubts that there are power levels in regards to the different armies and their respective army books. In WHFB, it's harder to actually put armies into certain tiers though, as the game is more balanced than its cousin 40k and it your individual skill is taken more into regard. There are some power spikes, though, although those mainly stem from older army books such as Dark Elves and Skaven, armies that were released pre-8th and immensely profit from its newly introduced rules (especially the latter).

In 40k, an army's strength stems mostly from its army book, lack of formations plays a good part in it, along with considerably worse army books for some parts.

Well I for it's not enough to push me to getting a new army because they are more powerful thanks to the 6th edition. That's like switching football clubs because my team loses all the time. It shouldn't have that much of an effect but it seems it does for them to do it. Oh well

I play BA, daemons and necrons, so ive been hammered a bit in 2/3 of my armies since i used to run mono khorne daemons.
Had to change the entire army to make it possible to work now.

To be honest, hang in there.
Updates are swings and roundabouts.
I love my BA army so no matter what, its staying.
Will just need a few tweaks when a new book comes out or 7th hits.

Again: it depends on what you want to do with your army. If you absolutely love an army, you don't care for its power level. I started playing Necrons back when they were absolute garbage and everyone laughed at your face, but I carried on because I love their story, looks and fluff.

Today, while rejecting the new fluff and only accepting the old one, I still play Necrons without a single flyer. Sure, that makes it impossible to win any bigger tournaments, but I'm having fun because I don't play an army for its strength, but for its "feel". I have a concept for my army and stick to it - and to me, that's worth a ton more than being "that guy" who always goes with the flow to win any tournament by any means. Like those Seer Council guys. I mean...really.

And if all comes down to the worst: you can still play your BA as a regular Space Marine chapter with the SM codex

 Sigvatr wrote:
Again: it depends on what you want to do with your army. If you absolutely love an army, you don't care for its power level. I started playing Necrons back when they were absolute garbage and everyone laughed at your face, but I carried on because I love their story, looks and fluff.

Today, while rejecting the new fluff and only accepting the old one, I still play Necrons without a single flyer. Sure, that makes it impossible to win any bigger tournaments, but I'm having fun because I don't play an army for its strength, but for its "feel". I have a concept for my army and stick to it - and to me, that's worth a ton more than being "that guy" who always goes with the flow to win any tournament by any means. Like those Seer Council guys. I mean...really.

And if all comes down to the worst: you can still play your BA as a regular Space Marine chapter with the SM codex

And I respect this philosophy more than any other. My friends and I are the same exact way; I would rather play a fun fluff list over a flavor of the month list any day of the week. My buddy has had a Tau army for 7 years, has had to deal with a horrible codex all through 5th edition; now all he sees is new Tau players on every table... but its the nature of the beast and I'm sure I will see a sea of red once the BA codex comes out or 7th edition.

 Ailaros wrote:
Yeah, tiers aren't a real thing. They don't exist.

They are figments of the imaginations of WAAC players and GW conspiracy theorists. Unfortunately, everyone else seems to get drug along with the delusion.

I disagree. They do exist. They are, at the very least, mathematical constructs that approximate list efficacy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sigvatr wrote:
I think what Ailaros wanted to say was that there isn't anything like "official" tiers set in stone as at the same time, he mentioned there actually being tiers as of them being player-made constructs.

Nobody doubts that there are power levels in regards to the different armies and their respective army books. In WHFB, it's harder to actually put armies into certain tiers though, as the game is more balanced than its cousin 40k and it your individual skill is taken more into regard. There are some power spikes, though, although those mainly stem from older army books such as Dark Elves and Skaven, armies that were released pre-8th and immensely profit from its newly introduced rules (especially the latter).

In 40k, an army's strength stems mostly from its army book, lack of formations plays a good part in it, along with considerably worse army books for some parts.

No, pretty sure he was dismissing the idea. That's okay.

Rapture wrote:As an intangible concept created at will by anyone who believes in them, I really can't imagine how anyone could argue that tiers don't exist.

Exactly. They're an intangible concept fabricated by belief. That's pretty much the definition of "not real".

On the one hand, just because there are a lot of people who bicker and argue about the nature of God doesn't mean God exists. On the other, if any figment of my imagination is considered to be real, then you had better bow down and worship the invisible pink unicorn, or else he will cause you to bleed out your rectum to death. That's what I believe will happen anyway, so it must be true...

Ork teknology might work on nothing but force of will, but reality doesn't.

The problem with this thread is that an army can only be classified as a "Tier X" army if all the other armies a person is playing against fit absolutely with the other builds that make each respective army a "Tier Y" army, and the original army also fits exactly with the builds for that army, too.

It's basically impossible to quantify such a thing.

MY Eldar are not top-tier like others' Eldar might be, as I only generally use one Wave Serpent with a Falcon or two, so my foot troops can keep up with the rest of my army which is Saim-Hann themed. And there are no allied-in Tau.

 Ailaros wrote:

Rapture wrote:As an intangible concept created at will by anyone who believes in them, I really can't imagine how anyone could argue that tiers don't exist.

Exactly. They're an intangible concept fabricated by belief. That's pretty much the definition of "not real".

On the one hand, just because there are a lot of people who bicker and argue about the nature of God doesn't mean God exists. On the other, if any figment of my imagination is considered to be real, then you had better bow down and worship the invisible pink unicorn, or else he will cause you to bleed out your rectum to death. That's what I believe will happen anyway, so it must be true...

Ork teknology might work on nothing but force of will, but reality doesn't.

You're wrong on both accounts.

"tier" in this context describes the competitiveness of a codex. Even if a game is not meant to be competitive, you can still look at it in a competitive way. Just, like you can look at your TV upside down, even though it's not meant to be looked at like that. Being of a higher tier expresses no more than an army has a higher chance of winning than another army. The armies which are either of equal or higher strength compared to all others make up tier 1. All armies which still have decent chance of winning, but are more likely to lose than the top tier, are tier two. Those armies which are likely to lose without exceptional luck or generalship make up the tier 3 or "tier rubbish".

This a general concept that can be applied to any game that allows pick your playing pieces, be it wargaming, trading card games or computer games. The most competitive choices will always be tier one, slightly less competitive choices will always be tier two, everything else will be tier whatever. Saying it doesn't apply to Warhammer40k is like claiming statistics doesn't apply to it, which is basically on par with believing in said pink unicorn.

The second thing is that ork technology does gerneally work, even in the hands of non-humans. It just works a little better when the orks believe in it, like not jamming, having more impact, or not running out of ammunition when it should . There is absolutely no trace of the often repeated "ork technology doesn't work by itself" in any part of the fluff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
The problem with this thread is that an army can only be classified as a "Tier X" army if all the other armies a person is playing against fit absolutely with the other builds that make each respective army a "Tier Y" army, and the original army also fits exactly with the builds for that army, too.

It's basically impossible to quantify such a thing.

MY Eldar are not top-tier like others' Eldar might be, as I only generally use one Wave Serpent with a Falcon or two, so my foot troops can keep up with the rest of my army which is Saim-Hann themed. And there are no allied-in Tau.

When people compare codices, they usually just compare the top tier army of each codex. It's perfectly possible to create an army from a top tier codex that doesn't hold a stick to an army from a low tier codex.

I think I'm back to where I started with my original question of this thread. Tiers are based on the current powers and abilities of a codex plus the skills and abilities of a player. Therefor a good player playing a (at the moment) cack blood angel army against a cack player with a tau army the battle should be a fairly balanced one. 2 good players however ( one playing tau and the other blood angels) would leave the BA wiping the cack off his face at the end of the battle.

This sound about right???

 Ailaros wrote:

Rapture wrote:As an intangible concept created at will by anyone who believes in them, I really can't imagine how anyone could argue that tiers don't exist.

Exactly. They're an intangible concept fabricated by belief. That's pretty much the definition of "not real".

On the one hand, just because there are a lot of people who bicker and argue about the nature of God doesn't mean God exists. On the other, if any figment of my imagination is considered to be real, then you had better bow down and worship the invisible pink unicorn, or else he will cause you to bleed out your rectum to death. That's what I believe will happen anyway, so it must be true...

Ork teknology might work on nothing but force of will, but reality doesn't.

I am having a hard time understanding your point despite me really trying to get it. "Tiers" are man-made construct, invented to categorize the relative strength of, in this case, different armies. They therefore automatically exist, as people made them up. There isn't any sort of "official" tier list, that's for sure, but there seems to be a vague general consensus on relative strengths and in order to talk about strength comparisons, people decided to make up "tiers" and sort armies in those.

It's the very same thing with any construct you encounter in languages - "intelligence", for example, doesn't "exist" in a regular form, it's a man-made construct to describe different cognitive abilities.

 Jidmah wrote:


The second thing is that ork technology does gerneally work, even in the hands of non-humans. It just works a little better when the orks believe in it, like not jamming, having more impact, or not running out of ammunition when it should . There is absolutely no trace of the often repeated "ork technology doesn't work by itself" in any part of the fluff.

I do remember reading that some ork weapons do not even have trigger mechanisms inside yet still work when used in battle though and it seems to be a very common rumor when talking about ork lore.

Because it's an easily repeated internet meme, not because it's got any actual fluff basis.

 Ailaros wrote:

Rapture wrote:As an intangible concept created at will by anyone who believes in them, I really can't imagine how anyone could argue that tiers don't exist.

Exactly. They're an intangible concept fabricated by belief. That's pretty much the definition of "not real".

On the one hand, just because there are a lot of people who bicker and argue about the nature of God doesn't mean God exists. On the other, if any figment of my imagination is considered to be real, then you had better bow down and worship the invisible pink unicorn, or else he will cause you to bleed out your rectum to death. That's what I believe will happen anyway, so it must be true...

Ork teknology might work on nothing but force of will, but reality doesn't.

So numbers are not real? Neither are countries or emotions? Come on.

That is a terrible example. God as a concept is real - no one can prove otherwise. He simply is not real as a being. Do you see the difference?

This is silly. Tiers are real. It is really that simple.