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.

Is there a listing of army rankings in Warmachine (i.e. tier list), that lists armies from strongest to weakest in a competitive sense?
I would think that tournament winnings could help define this.

If not, is there a general consensus in the community about the rankings of the armies?

There are a lot of strong opinions on that matter. I don't want to list out armies in tiers of competitiveness because i haven't been playing all that long. How ever, i believe there is a good contingent that believe the Cryx is very strong. Not broken, but very strong. I think a better question to ask is if there are casters that are considered OP.


This said, warmahordes is a very well balanced game. Even with the least competitive faction (if there is one), you can still easily go toe to toe with the supposed best.

Top 8 at Gencon Masters

1. Jeremy Miller (Cryx)
2. Jake VanMeter (Legion of Everblight)
3. Scott Egan (Khador)
4. Chuck Elswick (Skorne)
5. Billy Robinett (Legion of Everblight)
6. Will Pagani (Circle Orboros)
7. Jason Flanzer (Protectorate of Menoth)
8. Shane Phillipi (Skorne)

Masters final at lock and load
1st Place: Will Pagani (Circle)
2nd Place: Danny Modesto (Protectorate)
3rd Place: Ryan Tomlinson (Cryx)


Templecon 2011

Top 16 finalists
Khador 1
Cygnar 2
Cryx 4
Menoth 1
Mercs 0
Retribution 0

Trolls 2
Legion 2
Skorne 2
Circle 2
Minions 0


Warmachine Weekend Invitational Results 2011
Circle: 2 Players

Matt Kotovsky with Kromac and Kreuger
Will Pagani with Baldur and Kromac
Cryx: 5 Players

Brian Giese with eGoreshade and eDenegrha
Erik Nelson with Terminus and eDeneghra
Josh Russel with Terminus and eDenegrha
Keith Christianson with pDenegrha and eAsphyxious
Matt O'Reilly with Skarre and Coven
Cygnar: 1 Player

Chuck Elswick with Sloan and pHaley
Legion: 1 Player

Jacob Van Meter with Vayl and Saeryn
Menoth: 2 Players

Ben Rislove with pSeverius and eFeora
Brian White with pSeverius and Harbinger
Retribution: 1 Player

Steven Garcia with Rahn and Kaelyssa
Skorne: 2 Players

Benesh Gillan with pMakeda and Hexeris
Jason Watt with eMakeda and Xerxis
Trolls: 2 Players

Chad Shonkwiler with Grissel and Grim Angus
Jason Flanzer with pDoomshaper and Borka

I think the main reason about Cryx is that they are in fact rather unorthodox. If you don't know what you are doing, they can bite your head off. But at a more competitive level and with more experience or if you have done a lot of research and found some nasty combos. Tournaments normally have a few more pros and hardcore lists in them unlike friendly games.

That is my theory from what I have gathered. But I am relatively a novice. This theory derives from the fact that I had a period of time that I struggled with Cryx even with people at relatively low levels. You could call this bias. I call this experience.

http://wmdm2011.blogspot.com/2012/01/overpowered-definitive-answer.html

Legion are up there at the top, Mercenaries, Minions and Menoth(WTF?) at the bottom.

The general consensus is that Cryx and the Legion of Everblight are the most powerful, Minions and Mercenaries (and maybe Retribution) are the weakest, and everyone else is in the middle. Maybe Khador and the Circle are a bit towards the top of the pile while Skorne and Cygnar are towards the bottom, but the other factions are pretty equal. This opinion is based on the facts that Cryx has the best warcasters, and warcasters are the most important piece in any army, while the Legion has good beasts and warlocks coupled with an ability to ignore many basic elements of the game with Eyeless Sight and Pathfinder.

Of course, this is the public opinion, which is nearly almost always wrong. I will point out that it was fashionable a few months ago to claim that Trolls were a top faction and that Skorne were worthless. Nowadays it's Cygnar players who hate themselves and their faction despite the fact that Cygnar is (in my opinion) quite strong against Cryx and the Legion, the big boys on the block. So these opinions change quite frequently.

Power level is all relative. Every faction is "powerful". Tier rankings don't have much to do with raw power, rather than the number of possible bad matchups.

Mercenaries and Minions are usually near the bottom of the heap because they have few options to draw upon, and as such, often end up with a poor matchup. Cygnar is very strong, and has powerful (but situational) units. Within their specialized niche, they are very strong, but as specialists, they suffer from having many bad matchups. Their winning strategies center around a few lynchpin models - and if these are destroyed, their army loses a lot of function.

And, of course, remember that HoMachine truly depends on the skill and ability of the players.

I have never found (in my limited experience) that Warmahordes has a tiered system of power. Many would contend that Cryx and Legion are OP, but I think they are manageable if you have played against them enough. It's not that I CAN'T beat them, it's that if I don't know what I am doing they will assassinate my caster and I WON'T beat them.

Having played as and against
Cryx
Legion
Mercs
Khador
Circle
Trollbloods
Skorne
Cygnar

and played against the rest except for Retribution,

I'd say that Cryx really is, from my experience, the nastiest. I've had the most easy wins from them, and the most struggles against them (and, no, I don't play as/against them a disproportionate amount).

I'd say Mercs are a couple solid releases away from being on par (as in, only slightly weaker than average), and that goes for a couple others, too, but, after the seeming inequity of Cryx, I'd say the rest are close enough that you're not shooting yourself in the foot playing anything.

Are there differences in power between armies? Most likely, its hard to ever achieve perfect balance in a game.

Are these differences generally subjective and heavily influenced by meta and playstyle? Absolutely - OP to one person is often UP or useless in another area of the country or even in a different gaming group.

Are the armies so different in power that I can WTFPWN anyone I take the overpowered army against?

And this is the big difference from other games right here - the answer is pretty much 'no'. There's no 'Ezmode' army in Warmachine and Hordes - while you can argue that overall balance makes a difference, player skill overshadows army balance to such a significant degree that the actual differences between armies only show up at the absolute highest levels of play. I know from first person experience that Will Pagani, the Lock and Load Masters Champion, plays daily and generally gets in several games a day - the other high level players most likely do much the same thing. If you're willing to say that you put in the amount of effort that a top level player does, then discussing the overall weakness and strengths of armies relative to one another has merit.

If not, its generally water cooler talk - you're better off honing your mechanics, skills, and strategies with your current faction and army than switching factions entirely if you want better results.

I'm a Legion player who at the moment is playing against a lot of Cryx, and I'll say its always a great game because its a struggle from turn to turn for both players.

I don't think either is OP, they are just unique in play style, and the basic rules and principles of defenses and how to engage them are completely different from the rest of the game. This difference is what throws people for a loop. If you don't adapt when you play, and just do your standard style of play you will lose almost every time.

My suggestion is to play against them and learn their tricks and combos, once you understand how they function its a lot easier to break their back.

Kairos wrote:Is there a listing of army rankings in Warmachine (i.e. tier list), that lists armies from strongest to weakest in a competitive sense?
I would think that tournament winnings could help define this.

If not, is there a general consensus in the community about the rankings of the armies?

the internet echo chamber would have you believe cryx and legion are roflstompingly over the top. then again, the same echo chamber says circle are the bottom of the heap, and khador arent tough enough. my experience? well, ive lost to both, and smashed both. with khador. it depends sometimes on match up, but overall, esecially with a 2-list format, i always feel in the game. i remember last year when a player won a gencon hardcore with Kraye iirc, (regarded by the webs as a substandard caster) and it shook things up to a huge degree. and thats just warmachine. there are no "builds" or factions that auto-win in the 40k sense.

honestly, factions dont win. players do. I took an eButcher tier3 list to a local tourney and came third in it. won3. lost1. against eDeneghra, after her feat shut down my army. internet savvy says eButcher isnt competitive by ny stretch of the imagination. and yes, it has some severe match up issues (hence the switch to list2 if they turn up) . and for all that, no end of players shuddered at the sight of *that many* damned doom reavers.

Personally? if im going to a tournament, i take an offensive caster, and a control/denial caster. Kromac and Krueger work well. Butcher and Old Witch as well, for an example. Or Strakhov and Irusk. just examples, now. these arent "OMFG the listz you need to w1Nzz!" beyond that, practice.

All comes down to the player.

In my opinion these are my rambling thoughts followed by a list from best to worst:

Warcaster/playstyle/faction/points/skill level dictate a lot of things.

Regarding Skill: The game isn't close to figured out so high skill can allow a lot of warcasters/factions/playstyles to win at a variety of point levels where they really shouldn't.

Warcasters effectiveness is quite different depending on the points level. So some warcasters(Caine2, barnabas, karchev, etc) are just broken at like 15 points, while others(Irusk2, Zaal, Severius) aren't that good at 15. Increase to like 50 and karchev is considerably worse, if not terrible, but severius, zaal, and irusk2 are just monsters. Units are also affected by this also(taking Bastions at like 15-25 can be hard because errants are so good, but get to 35-50 and Bastions become way more viable as errants UA is only FA-1, thus point competition is lessened.

Faction can be a big deal, but the bigger deal is Warmachine/Hordes. At 15 points Hordes are pretty sweet, but Warmachine can cope as warcasters can run enough jacks to effectively combat. Get to 50 points, well a hordes army can have 3 heavies and a light and can run them dandy, but very few warmachine casters can get close to running 2 heavies effectively, let alone more then that(menoth is the only faction that can really run jack heavy due to the choir and a variety of abilities(Eye of Menoth, sacrificial lamb, vassal, etc). Add in the fact that alpha-striking is way more important and fury management is a joke(so many ways to get fury off beasts) at higher levels and killing those fury managing units is almost impossible and all these beasts are going to get a turn going all out. So 3 beasts at full fury hitting your jacks, say 1 jack dies, and 1 is slightly cripplied at the best case, worst case you lose 2-3 jacks. You retaliate, kill a single beast(you are helping their fury management in many cases as they can just not reave the fury and LoL) and cripple another(crippling warbeasts without grievous wounds means nothing, unlike a jack). Then you lose your other jacks, games probably over. The sheer ridiculousness of fury in many cases means you just can't go jack to beast toe to toe, hordes will almost always win. This is one of the reasons for Cryx's success, look at how many heavy/light jacks are in a typical cryx list, then compare it to other warmachine factions. Cryx run's a lot less, they run troop heavy, which is the only way to deal with a lot of hordes beast heavier lists because Warbeasts will just eat Warjacks. A lot of people are realising this though, so the more troop heavy lists for the rest of the warmachine factions will be interesting this year.

Overall the game is new, skill is really the most important factor atm. This newness also means a lot of playstyles haven't been tested in tournaments(35 or 50 points usually) so its hard to make a tier, but minions and retribution are almost certainly the worst(due to a lack of models/options). In newbie games and at low points certain warcasters/warlocks seem OP, but really arent at higher levels.

In general Legion blows to play against since they are a beast heavy faction, thus good at lower points, but still great at higher points, they also ignore a ton of rules and certain warcasters(Lylyth2) are just game ending vs a lot of other armies. Essentially they have a lower learning curve, thus are so good for new players.

Overall for newer players I would give the faction rankings like so:
Legion - ignores a ton of rules, beast strong faction
Cygnar- A lot of powerful warcasters(caine1 and 2, haily1 and 2, siege, stryker2)which can win games themselves, also ATGM and jacks are quite solid/easy to use at low points and with newer players
Trolls- Solid beasts/infantry can easily do a lot of solid beatstick
Khador-Lots of solid beatstick casters(vlad1 and 2, butcher1, karchev) combined with strong jacks(most people don't realise how to play against them that quickly) and solid infantry(even man-o-wars at this level are frustrating to play against).
Menoth- The ability to say No is just so good when people don't know how to combat it
Circle- kaya1 and 2, along with kromac are just so good starting out, allows for rather solid beastplay, hard to use infantry
Cryx- solid casters and game enders, but none are very beatstick. Not very good with jacks(skarre2 and mortenebra aside) means you need to learn infantry fast, has a high learning curve essentially.
Retribution- the raveyn combo is great and simple, as are mage hunter strike teams and assassins, but really I feel they lack
Skorne- beatstick army overall, fairly simple, but can be beaten by a lot
Minions- limited options
Mercs- extremely complex for beginners

Now switch to higher levels and take the new releases into account for this 2012 year:
Skorne/Legion/Circle - all got some nice upgrades from beasts to solo's, i really expect these 3 factions to do great and be above the rest
Cryx- they are still strong, really got nothing out of wrath though and a lot of people just make anti-cryx lists because so many people play cryx, I expect them to do worse this year, but they could still remain the best warmachine faction
Khador- I think they are on the up and up and people are finally realising that khador jacks just really blow
Menoth- Thyra is going to be huge against the hordes players as a list option
Mercs- my darkhorse faction, damiano and rociante added a lot, character restrictions shouldn't be a big deal, gonna have to see how it goes
Trolls- felt like they didn't get that much, they are solid, but eh they didn't get that much imo
Cygnar- strong casters, but they rely on mercs so much at 50 points, I am just not expecting much once again
Retribution - they got some upgrades, but I don't think it was enough
minions- limited options

Barring Mercs and Minions, there really is no tiers between the factions.

Any Faction can comfortably go toe to toe against another and it will always come down to player skill and dice

with that in mind, I feel that within factions there are power level discrepancies between locks and casters that may give the illusion of tiers.

Bring pKaya(Circle) against a Darius (Cygnar) or eThagrosh(Legion) list and youd be fine. Bring a pKaya against a Terminus(Cryx) or eMadrak (trolls) list and youll be sweating bullets the whole time

There are definitely bad match-ups out there, but that is why the Steam Roller system uses at least two lists. Everything is competitive and competent with the right synergies. There is no "best faction" in my opinion, but there are "best choices" to take depending on the situation.

More important then all of this, it will take a really really long time before you see the affects of faction power. Only at the top of the heap, not at the bottom or in between.

A quick answer:

Warmahordes tries hard not to balance armies against each other, or more accurately make all armies equally broken.

This cannot truly succeed but there are enough strengths in each army to trump any unit in every other army, thus while some lists may have more problems than others no army lacks the tools to convincingly win against any other.

Possibly this answer does not truly satisfy but its basically true. If you want a better army make up better combos for attack and resisting the attacks of others.

Honestly don't understand how people even rank Mercs and Minions based upon experience.

They are so rarely played. Sure you have the odd merc warcaster player Mag1/2 is popular, Searforge players are vocal, or the person that plays "just" Blindwater. But these people are neither Merc players nor Minion Players. It's like calling yourself a Blood Angels player when you only ever run a Dante DoA list occationally and spend most of you game time playing Orks. You are an Ork then not a BA.

People that play the Mercenary FACTION are rare, Minion players even more so.

I will say that Merc's are probably the most expensive faction to get into esspecially under FA:C restrictions, much like Trollblood are physically the heaviest.

dripwelquest wrote:Honestly don't understand how people even rank Mercs and Minions based upon experience.

They are so rarely played. Sure you have the odd merc warcaster player Mag1/2 is popular, Searforge players are vocal, or the person that plays "just" Blindwater. But these people are neither Merc players nor Minion Players. It's like calling yourself a Blood Angels player when you only ever run a Dante DoA list occationally and spend most of you game time playing Orks. You are an Ork then not a BA.

People that play the Mercenary FACTION are rare, Minion players even more so.

I will say that Merc's are probably the most expensive faction to get into esspecially under FA:C restrictions, much like Trollblood are physically the heaviest.

Mercs are going to be more expensive, but your "they are so rarely played" sounds like "I don't play them a lot."

Of the people I've more frequently played, I've seen:
pMagnus, both Dwarves
Magnuses, Highborn, the Pirates
Pirates, Gators, Pigs

and there are at least 3 other merc players, who I haven't played recently, of a pool of maybe 25 from two different stores.

I play Magnuses, Dwarves, Ashlynn, and a few others infrequently.

So, I don't know what you're talking about, the smallest section was three, and all were from at least 2 mini-factions. Maybe different metas, but around here (Oregon), I see a lot of diversity in Mercs

spiralingcadaver wrote:

So, I don't know what you're talking about, the smallest section was three, and all were from at least 2 mini-factions. Maybe different metas, but around here (Oregon), I see a lot of diversity in Mercs

I have to agree here...Mercs really are a faction within a faction. List diversity is more difficult to achieve sense you have to stay in a commission or tier list.

Honestly this whole talk of tiers or power really doesn't matter; right now (as others have said) it comes down to player skill and experience. If your know what you are doing it is possible to win with everyone... including Zarkova.

Casper wrote:
Honestly this whole talk of tiers or power really doesn't matter; right now (as others have said) it comes down to player skill and experience. If your know what you are doing it is possible to win with everyone... including Zarkova.

The NQ theme list helped her ALOT so I wouldn't consider her in the tank anymore. Besides that, Zerkova is a victim of her faction. She would be a terror in any other faction. Why? They have arc nodes.

Power-armored Mario (Darius) on the other hand...

spiralingcadaver wrote:

dripwelquest wrote:Honestly don't understand how people even rank Mercs and Minions based upon experience.

They are so rarely played. Sure you have the odd merc warcaster player Mag1/2 is popular, Searforge players are vocal, or the person that plays "just" Blindwater. But these people are neither Merc players nor Minion Players. It's like calling yourself a Blood Angels player when you only ever run a Dante DoA list occationally and spend most of you game time playing Orks. You are an Ork then not a BA.

People that play the Mercenary FACTION are rare, Minion players even more so.

I will say that Merc's are probably the most expensive faction to get into esspecially under FA:C restrictions, much like Trollblood are physically the heaviest.

Mercs are going to be more expensive, but your "they are so rarely played" sounds like "I don't play them a lot."

Of the people I've more frequently played, I've seen:
pMagnus, both Dwarves
Magnuses, Highborn, the Pirates
Pirates, Gators, Pigs

and there are at least 3 other merc players, who I haven't played recently, of a pool of maybe 25 from two different stores.

I play Magnuses, Dwarves, Ashlynn, and a few others infrequently.

So, I don't know what you're talking about, the smallest section was three, and all were from at least 2 mini-factions. Maybe different metas, but around here (Oregon), I see a lot of diversity in Mercs

I see a lot of merc casters also (except Bart, never seen him) but never from a single person committed to the faction. It's always along the lines of, for example, our Cygnar player runs Mags1/2 every so often, he is not a Merc players. That's what I meant.

Merc casters are popular enough, I'd go so far to say if everyone that ran at least one merc list was a merc player then it would be the most popular warmachine faction. But that's a pretty weak definition of Merc Faction player and you just won't see any faction played at their strongest without it being played by a person that puts most of the thier game time into it.

Silver that was an amazing summary, as a new player, I thank you.

Emerett wrote:Silver that was an amazing summary, as a new player, I thank you.

If you want any more detail on a single faction let me know(though for hordes I really only know Skorne quite well). My general advice is to simply get a rulebook, then a battlebox or do the following instead of a battlebox: choose a warlock/warcaster you like the look/lore of, then do the same for a beast/jack or 2(for hordes you will need 2-3 beasts, while warmachine can get away with 1 jack), then for a unit and a solo and ignore their viability really(a lot of people say immortals are worthless compared to nihilators, but I really like the look/feel of the immortals and they are completely viable imo. This gives you a decent basic army of roughly 15-25 pts and tbh even if you choose completely worthless stuff competitive wise(like worst case is zerkova w/ kodiak, a unit of kossites, and a man-o-war kovnik) it costs you $70 and this is like one of the worst combinations ever(chances are what a new player will choose just from looks/lore will be somewhat viable to great...ex: most newbies for cygnar choose caine or siege, khador vlad or butcher seem popular, anything for cryx and thats just some factions warcasters, the chance of choosing a complete terrible set of stuff is almost impossible.

Overall when you start playing looks/lore are more important then real viability imo as you are trying to get into the game and get excited about it, not win a tournament.