4713
Post by: efarrer
What is the current state of the metagame end of 2007?
As I perceive it, the top armies are
The A list
Mech Eldar and Shooty Godzillas
The B list
Twin Lash Chaos, AC and Pod Marines and Mech Tau
The C list Almost everything else but...
The D list
Sisters, Dark Eldar
4655
Post by: tegeus-Cromis
DE don't belong in the bottom spot. Also, where is stealer shock?
149
Post by: torgoch
Given it's almost impossible to lose against nidzilla with well-designed Tau or Eldar lists, you can hardly put it in the top tier of armies.
Stealer shock? By this can I assume you mean all stealers with a broodlord and winged tyrant? That's what you take down the local club for some fun.
Given twin-lash chaos won Heat 2, I think you can safely put that into the top tier grouping.
5164
Post by: Stelek
torgoch wrote:Given twin-lash chaos won Heat 2, I think you can safely put that into the top tier grouping.
Not really. The army list in question was laughable.
Not sure why Dark Eldar are in the bottom tier.
Where's the upcoming Ork horde?
Sisters aren't great all-rounders, but there are alot of tricks you can run with them.
I suspect once more players get familiarity with the 'top tier' (which for some funny reason, is always the last set of Codex creepers) they'll not be as 'top tier' as they currently appear to be.
Currently I'd say the standard Smurf codex is the best army, and will be until it's replaced by SmurfNerf.
AC should be somewhere in the realm of Sisters. Too weak to every army but...Sisters. lol
Oh, and there is no metagame in 40k.
149
Post by: torgoch
Stelek wrote:
Currently I'd say the standard Smurf codex is the best army
I think I just saw your credibility plummeting pass my window...
5164
Post by: Stelek
Here we go again.
1528
Post by: Darrian13
I can't think of a single event in the 2007 US GT circuit that marines won.
Darrian
1528
Post by: Darrian13
@Torgoch, If the current year is 2007, how have you already placed 3rd in the 2008 GT circuit? Do you have a time machine?
Darrian
149
Post by: torgoch
The GT has three Heats and a Final, running from October to March. The first is my heat position, the second my final position.
4713
Post by: efarrer
tegeus-Cromis wrote:DE don't belong in the bottom spot. Also, where is stealer shock?
As I said, it's my perception, I was wondering what other people saw.
I'm not familar with stealer shock, so I didn't include it.
Where would you place Dark Eldar? Maybe I'm not giving it enough respect, but it's an old army with few workable tricks which can bbe shut down by people who have seen the tricks before.
To Stelek:
The top tier are armies which seem to be consistantly the best. The Eldar list isn't new at this point so I think it's current position is going to stay for a long time.
Ork horde is not released, so It's not on at the moment. Unlike some others I don't have a copy (putting me in a firm minority I'm sure) therefore I'm not about to include it.
There is always a metagame in any tournament environment due to the rock>paper>Scissors effect. 
I love sisters, but they are one of the weakest armies in the game by my perception. Just about any army with an equal level player will beat the sisters. Basically Sisters<Any other army. You play them for a challlenge, not for thier strength.  If you disagree with thier placement in the bottom tier, tell me what is worse than them.
AC marines are less worthwhile then smurfs (ignoring the ability to make AC marines out of a smurf list)  Right.
To Torgoch:
I'm still kinda reserving judgement on twin lash, I think it's strong, but I haven't seen it enough yet to know for sure. A single placing makes me think it's good, but you could be good enough to turn straw into gold for all I know . Nidzilla though has placed top a number of times in recent years IRC and none of this years codexes threaten it, so I left it in tier one.
>
5164
Post by: Stelek
I think the Lash is too much of a gimmick. What happens when you run into a mechanized list? You lose.
I don't agree with you about the metagame, since you cannot know what others are bringing nor what you will play. It's a rare day when I am 'surprised' at anyone's list, or their generalship...but making one army to beat another that might show up isn't really metagaming. It's playing rock/paper/scissors. :p
About Sisters, I dunno. I ran a horde list for a long time and did very well with it. At some point, I'll redo my Sisters. Probably in 2015 when the Ordo Delayed Codex is released by Hasbro. 
246
Post by: Lemartes
Mech Tau are so very close to A IMO. Eldar and Bugs definatley. DE are no less than B and in the right hands close to A. Marines and Chaos trends/dumb down may really start to struggle in the coming year IMO.
246
Post by: Lemartes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stelek wrote:
Currently I'd say the standard Smurf codex is the best army
I think I just saw your credibility plummeting pass my window...
I don't know about the best but didn't ultramarines place a 2nd and 3rd in seperate GT's this last season.
5164
Post by: Stelek
Ultramarines...papa smurfs? Let's see.
Marines 3rd overall in Baltimore, 3 of the top 10 slots went to marines there.
Chicago, 1 marine in the top 10.
Marines took 2nd place at LV, and two spots in the top 10.
Now, the fact that it's Rick S that took the top slots with his Ultramarines at all 3 GT's says something too...
Personally I think marines are considered an 'old' army and you usually just see battleforce smurfs now with very low use of traits.
5510
Post by: gdurant
Something that you have to remember when using GT rankings is the number of people playing an army.
Marines are the most played army so it makes sense to see more high ranking marine players. Not saying marines aren't good (I still think they are top tier) but there will be some noise just looking at rankings.
5173
Post by: erfunk
efarrer wrote:I love sisters, but they are one of the weakest armies in the game by my perception. Just about any army with an equal level player will beat the sisters. Basically Sisters<Any other army. You play them for a challlenge, not for thier strength. If you disagree with thier placement in the bottom tier, tell me what is worse than them.
Grey Knights!
5164
Post by: Stelek
gdurant wrote:Something that you have to remember when using GT rankings is the number of people playing an army.
To what end? What statistic/probability are you referring to? Odds of a marine army getting into top 10 if 25% of the armies in a 80 person field, is that it?
gdurant wrote:Marines are the most played army so it makes sense to see more high ranking marine players. Not saying marines aren't good (I still think they are top tier) but there will be some noise just looking at rankings.
Oh I don't know about most played. Add in evil marines, and maybe they are. I guess I should do some research! 
5164
Post by: Stelek
47 Smurf army lists out of 439 armies for 2007.
Not overwhelming numbers.
5510
Post by: gdurant
Stelek wrote:47 Smurf army lists out of 439 armies for 2007.
Not overwhelming numbers.
fair enough, I can't argue with that.
246
Post by: Lemartes
Something that you have to remember when using GT rankings is the number of people playing an army.
I personally just look at the top placers regardless.
4713
Post by: efarrer
Stelek wrote:47 Smurf army lists out of 439 armies for 2007.
Not overwhelming numbers.
Not exactly underwhelming. How many armies are there in 40K?
Just taking a look at the top of the Hard Boyz tourney in the states marines represented 11 of 52 slots still (21%) Note that this figure jumps to 22 of 52 slots if you include Chaos and non codex marines (42%).
4713
Post by: efarrer
Lemartes wrote:Something that you have to remember when using GT rankings is the number of people playing an army.
I personally just look at the top placers regardless.
I agree, the top of the field tells you what works. The bottom 1/3 can be written off as mostly meaningless, but I'd say the top 20 are worth looking at, in a large tournament.
I used to play the L5R ccg and it was worth seeing the top of the field to know which clans were top teir for the same reason, and like that most of the true top tier armies emerge by the time you are at the top 20. You'll get a couple of brilliant players who can make anything work in the top 5 and then the strong trends emerge the rest of the way through the top 20. Generally if you can kill the most common or best known varients of these you should be okish. Keep in mind a bad player will lose with the best army to a good player with the worst.
246
Post by: Lemartes
Just taking a look at the top of the Hard Boyz tourney in the states marines represented 11 of 52 slots still (21%) Note that this figure jumps to 22 of 52 slots if you include Chaos and non codex marines (42%).
"Ardboys is a completely different category. Apples/oranges and all that because of such a high points limit various builds can maximize thier efficiency. Marines, (Assault cannon spam) Necrons, and IG can really take builds they never could before. I think MC, Tau, and mech Eldar diminish a little 3 Falcon/Railheads are still 3 and have filled thier allotment in HS and at lower points limits. The same with 8 MC being at capacity already. Marines being the dominant selection for 'Ardboys also makes sense because everyone has extra marines floating around but not as much with other armies.
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
You can't just ask "Huh, what's the bestest army out ther?" without letting us know what pointcap you are thinking of.
Lemartes puts it right. For the 1500-1850 point range Eldar might be the army to beat. But they are easy harvest to Necrons in higher point games...plus the game gets overall more balanced, as you can't stick with onetrickponyriding while Necrons can max out their stuff. (Maybe I'd pull those 'Crons from under my bed when tourney point limit is increased...)
Sadly the army of my choice isn't the best one. I love the Inquisition fluff and the SoB minis, but they can't max out like Eldar or 'Nids can. Still I wouldn't but them in bottom tier. They and DE should go up one, if not two steps - both got some decent matchups and it comes down to what army you are tied to. (With Orks Sisters probably gets even better...those hordes don't like a lot of flaming stuff and Exorzist are pretty good against anything else in the 'dex.)
The bottom line should be represented by the Grey Knights. They suck. Hard.
5164
Post by: Stelek
Actually I'd say the pure carnival army the sisters can field is the worst. You know, all the crap Andy Hoare added to the list instead of more Sisters.
Inquisitorial crap FTL. :(
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
The Canoness, Phim, assassins and the Exorcists are pretty awsome.
And fielding the army is a lot of fun. 
But the inquisitorial part of the codex...other than the assassins? No thank you.
The problem is Sisters scale with their matchups. And they are pretty bad against mech-Eldar.
3934
Post by: grizgrin
I LOVE my sisters, it's always been a fun army to play. Hard to get a win against a proper mobile army, but I've eaten up some hordes. Sigh. Not sure what "Phim" is but then I haven't had a chance to play with the "holy trinity" for quite some time. "Carnival", either. Yeah, I been out a while. Care to enlighten me?
4655
Post by: tegeus-Cromis
"Phim" are Seraphim. "Carnival" isn't a standard term, but I gather Stelek's referring to the menagerie-effect you get when a WH army contains all kinds of offbeat units like Arcos etc.
3934
Post by: grizgrin
thanks, appreciate it. I'll start looking for a good location for my "Village Idiot" tatoo.
4229
Post by: dornsfist
For the number of DE players that scored 80+ (or its equivalent) in battle points compared to the number of DE players in the 2007 GT's, the DE should be considered top tier. I don't know why more people don't play that army. Maybe it is too difficult to paint or something.
What about necron destroyer lists? At least B range, IMO.
I remember when the ork speed freaks were the top dog in tourney play, but that was a whole edition ago. Don't call the new orks a comeback! 
5164
Post by: Stelek
tegeus-Cromis wrote:"Phim" are Seraphim. "Carnival" isn't a standard term, but I gather Stelek's referring to the menagerie-effect you get when a WH army contains all kinds of offbeat units like Arcos etc.
For Sisters players, Carnival is indeed 'standard'. Most of us hate that part of the list.
It's why I sold my Sisters.
Arcos, Stormtroops, Penitents, utter crap. WTB more Sisters sculpts, less butch Canoness' please.
5164
Post by: Stelek
dornsfist wrote:For the number of DE players that scored 80+ (or its equivalent) in battle points compared to the number of DE players in the 2007 GT's, the DE should be considered top tier. I don't know why more people don't play that army. Maybe it is too difficult to paint or something.
What about necron destroyer lists? At least B range, IMO.
I remember when the ork speed freaks were the top dog in tourney play, but that was a whole edition ago. Don't call the new orks a comeback!
DE are relatively expensive. And a pain to build. And a pain to paint. And a pain to transport.
Necron destroyer lists are easy to beat, sadly. Immortal lists, on the other hand, can be a real PITA.
4655
Post by: tegeus-Cromis
Not too sure why the presence of units you don't have to use (and why would you when they're all, let's be frank, rubbish on the battlefield?) in the codex would cause you to sell your Sisters, but I know what you mean.
3618
Post by: fourganger88
Stelek wrote:dornsfist wrote:For the number of DE players that scored 80+ (or its equivalent) in battle points compared to the number of DE players in the 2007 GT's, the DE should be considered top tier. I don't know why more people don't play that army. Maybe it is too difficult to paint or something.
What about necron destroyer lists? At least B range, IMO.
I remember when the ork speed freaks were the top dog in tourney play, but that was a whole edition ago. Don't call the new orks a comeback!
DE are relatively expensive. And a pain to build. And a pain to paint. And a pain to transport.
Don't forget the general poor sculpt quality, and the slightly dull nature of the list. DE Troop, Fast Attack, and Heavy Support sections may as well contain one entry each.
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
Necrons are clearly A above 2000 points. But they fall, as soon as you drop the pointlimit.
DE are ugly btw, did you ever look at those models? Ok...the Wyches are nice, so are the Raiders/Wyvern.
But those Lords and Warriors make my eyes bleed.
And their Codex is a bit out of date and not the easiest one to use, so no new players start them.
246
Post by: Lemartes
For the number of DE players that scored 80+ (or its equivalent) in battle points compared to the number of DE players in the 2007 GT's, the DE should be considered top tier. I don't know why more people don't play that army. Maybe it is too difficult to paint or something.
I second or third the ugliest, transport, and assemble part. Just gluing those spiked out buggers together poses serious health risks to oneself. If you do a raider airforce you need to make multiple trips to your car to carry in the boxes you have them in.
195
Post by: Blackmoor
#1. I think that the Necons are a very strong army, but at low points it is a juggling act between the fancy stuff and Necrons. To many times I have played against them with Monoliths, C'tan and Destroyers, and very few Necrons to protect from Phase out. But at the higher points they get the toys and can take enough Necrons to keep them from phasing out.
#2. Dark Eldar are a top army, but since they took them off of the shelf no one has started them, so they are a dying codex.
#3. To get a good understanding of the top tier armies, you have to look at battle points. The ones that can score 80+ in the USGTs are the ones at the top (Only for Las Vegas and Chicago though, because they had a weird scoring system in Baltimore). You see Rick at the top with his Ultramarines, but it was mostly his paint score, not the play of that army.
#4. If you do that, you will see that Eldar, Tyranids and Chaos (Old Codex) did the best by far.
5164
Post by: Stelek
tegeus-Cromis wrote:Not too sure why the presence of units you don't have to use (and why would you when they're all, let's be frank, rubbish on the battlefield?) in the codex would cause you to sell your Sisters, but I know what you mean.
Sisters in the CA book were [as a pure army] much better than Codex: Carnival [pure Sisters force].
I was pretty pissed about the whole thing, and sent them out. Then paypal tried to stiff me on my money, so...never gonna sell an army across the net again.
5164
Post by: Stelek
Blackmoor wrote:#4. If you do that, you will see that Eldar, Tyranids and Chaos (Old Codex) did the best by far.
I don't know about that. I'm going to do some research on battle points for armies at Chicago and Las Vegas.
FYI, it's my opinion that all the Eldar armies (including my own) were not very competitive at Las Vegas.
I've since corrected my list having only played it at the LV GT. More later.
Edit: Ok counting top 25 battle points at Chicago and Las Vegas (discounting Baltimore because scoring was slowed).
Las Vegas:
Eldar-7
Marines-5
Chaos-3
Tau-1
Necrons-1
Tyranids-1
Orks-1
Sisters-1
Imperial Guard-2
Dark Eldar-2
Chicago:
Tyranids -7
Chaos-6
Marines- 3
Necrons- 1
Tau-2
Eldar-5
I don't see any clear patterns. Older Codexes not used as much as newer ones. Eldar are the newest, highly represented...nothing new in that.
*shrug*
64
Post by: Longshot
I don't honestly thing Gt standings reflect the power of lists. Most lists played in tourneys are sub-optimal at least from what I have seen.
You'd need a tourney where everyone played the optimal version of their list to make it accurate.
My personal opinion is:
Top tier:
Mechanized Eldar, Necrons, Tyranids, C:SM
I'd say no particular order there except in my experience, Nidzilla beats more of the top tier lists than the other top tiers do. It spanks almost all C:SM builds, Necrons have a helluva time with it, and Mecha Eldar has no picnic.
Middle tier:
Tau, IG, New Orks, Dark Eldar
Reasoning here is: Tau does not beat Necrons or Godzilla (despite what Torg thinks, Godzilla is a very very hard army for Tau), but it is a tough matchup for Eldar and C:SM. Dark Eldar is a tough matchup for C:SM and Tyranids, but not so much against Eldar, and at best 50/50 against Crons.
New Orks look like they will beat Eldar pretty handily and Godzilla, but not so much against C:SM and Necrons.
IG can simply beat anyone any given Sunday. It's not that they are going to take home massacres, but any list can lose to the better IG armies given a one of several conditions (deepstrike available for drop troops, no escalation for mechanized, et cetera).
Bottom Tier:
Everyone else.
Most of the other lists in 40k are simply not capable of beating the top or even most of the middle tier lists without exceptional circumstances (poor players, ridiculous table, broken mission, etc).
That's just my opinion and I don't play a lot anymore, so it could be outdated, but I think it's a pretty accurate assessment of raw codex power.
Most of the rest of t
5164
Post by: Stelek
Tau are inferior to Eldar.
S5 instead of S6 on the mobility weapons, and no extra armor on vehicles.
New Orks won't beat Eldar. Orks are slow and no save.
Even fast Orks can be neutralized. Everyone is all a ga-ga about grabbers. It's a gimmick, and not hard to avoid.
IG are very powerful, as are Space marines. You can customize (just like Tyranids can). Eldar and Tau have inherently powerful/good units (Falcons, Jetbikes/Crisis Suits, Hammerheads) but lack flexibility.
Or as Jervis calls it, 'complexity'. Wish his son was smarter, really. Making my favorite game quite dull with these cookie cutter lists. What makes my DA different? My paintjob. Sigh. Thought those days were behind us.
Anyway, I'd like to point out that my friend John is an excellent player and scored only 7 points below me in battle points with Sisters of Battle. He was in the top 25, something I don't think I've seen any Sisters player do barring myself years and years ago with my CA: 2002 list. Grats to his dumb army and his excellent generalship. Now go hide in the corner, Nidzillas' comin!
5510
Post by: gdurant
Why is everyone saying that orks are going to rock ot world?
Foot hordes are too slow to do much damage. And if they do reach there strength 3 let the nob do all the work attacks aren't that bad.
if the take trucks, you can take those out with bolter fire.
the most solid part of there list is the leman russ equivs. Just in a maximised envirment I don't see orks doing too much harm.
5164
Post by: Stelek
Shooty Orks like I plan on running will be in my view dangerous despite the BS2.
3934
Post by: grizgrin
Played against a proxied up new ork army a few weeks back. He was trying his new codex, I was experimenting with the new BA. The firepower involved with the army he brought was downright scary. Thank GOD they were only BS 2. He beat me pretty fair. gdurant is right, slo hordes are bad. However, a slow horde with ranged weapons en masse and writ large is another animal altogether. Anyway, he seemed happy with the list, for a change. THat was good to see since his beloved feral orcs got the ax.
5046
Post by: Orock
Stelek wrote:Tau are inferior to Eldar.
S5 instead of S6 on the mobility weapons, and no extra armor on vehicles.
New Orks won't beat Eldar. Orks are slow and no save.
Even fast Orks can be neutralized. Everyone is all a ga-ga about grabbers. It's a gimmick, and not hard to avoid.
IG are very powerful, as are Space marines. You can customize (just like Tyranids can). Eldar and Tau have inherently powerful/good units (Falcons, Jetbikes/Crisis Suits, Hammerheads) but lack flexibility.
Or as Jervis calls it, 'complexity'. Wish his son was smarter, really. Making my favorite game quite dull with these cookie cutter lists. What makes my DA different? My paintjob. Sigh. Thought those days were behind us.
Anyway, I'd like to point out that my friend John is an excellent player and scored only 7 points below me in battle points with Sisters of Battle. He was in the top 25, something I don't think I've seen any Sisters player do barring myself years and years ago with my CA: 2002 list. Grats to his dumb army and his excellent generalship. Now go hide in the corner, Nidzillas' comin!
Im sorry I think your wayyy off on the orks not beating eldar. I have played 4 trial games against eldar, 2 against clones of GT finalists, and womped them badly. My list is:
Ork warboss on bike
Big Mek with KFF
2x 22 strong units of shoota boys, nob, p klaw
2x trukk boy units, sluggas and choppas, nob. p klaw, bosspole
15x stormboyz including zagstuck
2x 15 strong units of lootas
4x deff koptas
2x grot lobbas
Since they have no way to remove the mekboy, the lootas always have a 5+ cover save, and can take advantage of the best firing lanes on the board, even if not in cover. 15x stormboyz, 2 full trukk boy units, and a warboss on a bike are extremely deadly, and have the potential to win the game for you by themselves vs tau or other weak cc armies. My lootas can reliably shake 2 falcons a turn, if not outright destroy. 30 shots average, 10 hits average, 3 glances average. 3 glancing hits on any vehicle av 13 or under is nothing to scoff at. And as for their "dedicated" close combat support, well I easily trump an avatar, wraithlord, and a bunch of harlies not even killing there value in points. Until you have seen an optamized new ork list, you should hold your reservations. The only loss I have suffered since trying the new codex is against a SM army with 3 whirlwinds laying mines, but I seriously doubt many marines are going to give up 3 heavy support choices in a tourney environment on the chance they fight orks.
5164
Post by: Stelek
I've been playtesting Orks for what, 8 months? I've seen alot of configs.
My Gunzilla list trumps this list of yours (most Ork lists btw).
My current Eldar do not rely on the strategy others use. You have a relatively small Ork army. Moving in and assaulting your storm boys/truck boys then your regular boyz...isn't difficult to do with my Eldar army. Yes, I really can take down lots and lots of Orks. Having a 5+ cover save doesn't mean a whole lot with small Ork units--trust me. 30 orks or no orks! I say.
Please note I don't run an avatar, wraithlords, or harlies...and I have a Fire Prism for fun mass killing of cheap troops.
Also, my current planned Ork army would slice yours to kibibble as would my HB Smurfs and Tau would really depend on stopping the rear assault. The version of my Tau I plan on going to at some point would essentially be immune to the rear assault, but that's probably a year away. Wife says I can't buy 2 grand worth of models on a whim. Can't see the problem, really....
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
Orks will be top tier, Eldar will go down a bit and Nidzilla up. Just because Orks>Eldar & Nidzilla>Orks. At GT point level.
If we want to discuss metagame ranking, there should be a consensus about the point level first off. Also see Blackmoor's post.
CSM are good btw, drop off at higher point levels and are hurt by escalation alot. The only reason to go CSM and not SM are the Kyborgs.
5164
Post by: Stelek
Orks are very good now.
Eldar > Orks. Nidzilla > Eldar.
CSM are hurt by escalation? In my CSM army, only my DP are affected by Escalation.
Which is a D U M B rule and needs to be removed from 40k tournaments anyway.
1321
Post by: Asmodai
Stelek wrote:Which is a D U M B rule and needs to be removed from 40k tournaments anyway.
Word is it'll be gone by summer with 5th ed. Good riddance.
5046
Post by: Orock
Stelek wrote:I've been playtesting Orks for what, 8 months? I've seen alot of configs.
My Gunzilla list trumps this list of yours (most Ork lists btw).
My current Eldar do not rely on the strategy others use. You have a relatively small Ork army. Moving in and assaulting your storm boys/truck boys then your regular boyz...isn't difficult to do with my Eldar army. Yes, I really can take down lots and lots of Orks. Having a 5+ cover save doesn't mean a whole lot with small Ork units--trust me. 30 orks or no orks! I say.
Please note I don't run an avatar, wraithlords, or harlies...and I have a Fire Prism for fun mass killing of cheap troops.
Also, my current planned Ork army would slice yours to kibibble as would my HB Smurfs and Tau would really depend on stopping the rear assault. The version of my Tau I plan on going to at some point would essentially be immune to the rear assault, but that's probably a year away. Wife says I can't buy 2 grand worth of models on a whim. Can't see the problem, really....
I dont think you can just look at someones list like that and say "yeah I'd beat ya pretty easy" thats assuming alot, there IS skill and tactics involved as well as army composition. It kind of comes off as arogant. And my whole list was to show orks now have very viable counters to top tier, and dont deserve to be written off as strong B rank armies.
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
Stelek wrote:CSM are hurt by escalation? In my CSM army, only my DP are affected by Escalation.
You are not only affected by your own units startig in reserves.
Your oponent can run a fully mechanised army and then deploy his stuff wherever it hurts you most.
Stelek wrote:Which is a D U M B rule and needs to be removed from 40k tournaments anyway.
qft.
The idea isn't bad, but the actual rule is total  .
5164
Post by: Stelek
Well my Chaos army isn't affected by anyones deployment but my own, honestly.
Everything is move and fire. What do I care where you are or what you do? (Answer: I don't. It's quite nice.)
5164
Post by: Stelek
I never wrote Orks off. I think Orks are (now and very soon) dead hard.
I just think I can handle most lists but my Nidzilla with my Orks, including most of the Ork lists being posted here since they ignore the basic strength of Orks: 6 points.
Adding alot of other stuff isn't necessarily needed as basic Orks are so good.
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
Stelek wrote:Well my Chaos army isn't affected by anyones deployment but my own, honestly.
Everything is move and fire. What do I care where you are or what you do? (Answer: I don't. It's quite nice.)
I'm starting to wonder how your list would look like then...
411
Post by: whitedragon
dornsfist wrote:I don't know why more people don't play that army. (In reference to Dark Eldar)
The models are atrocious and the fluff is even worse. If you thought codex Bad Spiky Marines was bland, don't even bother opening codex Bad Spiky Eldar, with less pages to boot!
Not to mention that the only way you'll ever get your hands on DE models is through mail order, because they are on the shelves, and you pretty much see the result.
And how can you say Sisters suck?? Faith points (AP1 bolters and flamers and INV saves) 'Phim, Leadership book, and 3x Exorcists sounds like a damn fine list to me.
5164
Post by: Stelek
Sisters were more fun before Andy Hoare broke the Codex with alot of incredibly crappy units.
It was better in CA than it is now.
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
whitedragon wrote:
Not to mention that the only way you'll ever get your hands on DE models is through mail order, because they are on the shelves, and you pretty much see the result.
Relly? I know 2 LGS around who sell anything you need to field a DE army. Including that piece of codex...The Fluff part isn't even worth the paper printed on.
whitedragon wrote:
And how can you say Sisters suck?? Faith points (AP1 bolters and flamers and INV saves) 'Phim, Leadership book, and 3x Exorcists sounds like a damn fine list to me.
They don't suck. They just can't keep up with Nidzilla and mech Eldar. Thus they are not competetive and above 1500 points you lack of longrange firepower a lot.
They once were one of the armies to beat.
Maybe when they're redone with the Codex:Inquisition.
PS: Yes, I love living in daydreams....Codex:Inquisition next year...
5164
Post by: Stelek
Sisters don't work in the shooty tournament scene currently.
I'd love to see them with 36" range multimeltas. That change alone would make Sisters viable.
Call them organs of love if you don't want everyone to have them, but for goodness sake...24" anti-tank power just doesn't cut it.
Having to replace my rets with exorcrap? Please!
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
Exorzist are one of the best tanks ingame.
Being able to move and shoot at full power. For 135 points.
The only downside is that it is close to useless once the weapon is destroyed. But same is true for the Hammerhead Gunship.
5164
Post by: Stelek
Indeed. Unfortunately, my Retributors were and are better units when given heavy bolters. I loved them better?
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
No, they are inferior to the Exorcist. Why?
Because of the rest of the list. Sisters can't pack any high S long range shooting other than the Exorcist...
The major problem for Sisters above 1500 points is, that they cannot field more longe range firepower other than inducted guard.
I agree, that in some matchups those hvy bolter Retributors (Does anyone really consider taking them with meltas? *lol*) would be better. Maybe against horde orks or the like. But then you wouldn't need the act of faith and could field elite Inquistors who are pretty resilient.
5164
Post by: Stelek
I know.
And now you know why I sold my Sisters.
Thanks for catching up. lol
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
Your welcome...I just wanted to remind you why you don't want Andy Hoare to write a 'dex for your army.
1321
Post by: Asmodai
vogelfrei wrote:I agree, that in some matchups those hvy bolter Retributors (Does anyone really consider taking them with meltas? *lol*) would be better. Maybe against horde orks or the like. But then you wouldn't need the act of faith and could field elite Inquistors who are pretty resilient.
Meltas need to be either 36" or Assault 1. As they are they're pointless. Everyone agrees on that.
I'm a fan of the Heavy Bolter Retributors. They look awesome and fulfill the need for dakka. With 12 shots they'll also get a ton of Torrents of Fire against things like Guard. Being able to pick off the Lascannon and Plasma Gunner out of a Guard squad removes most of its threat.
They're not as important as Exorcists - but if you've already taken 2 Exorcists, they make a fine backup.
5164
Post by: Stelek
vogelfrei wrote:Your welcome...I just wanted to remind you why you don't want Andy Hoare to write a 'dex for your army.
Dude I'm telling you I know. I argued with him enough about the 'Dex before release.
Sales proved my point, but does that really help the game?
Sometimes, having a 'vision' is pointless if you are the only one that sees it.
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
You argued with Andy Hoare? Well, maybe then they should have the 'dex done by you next time.
5164
Post by: Stelek
I love the Rets for killing Marines with divine guidance.
I agree with you on the multimeltas. I think Assault 1 would be better across the board, 36" might lead to some abuse.
I'd give anything to have even 36" portable exorcist ML's, move or fire. Be fluffy and not bug people...Sisters were different than everything else (except for the Power armor/Boltguns) and that's what their appeal for me always was. I miss 'em.
5164
Post by: Stelek
vogelfrei wrote:You argued with Andy Hoare? Well, maybe they should have the 'dex done by you next time.
Dude I've argued with <insert GW Developer here>. Pleaded, begged. Makes no difference in the end. I think I've influenced maybe half a dozen changes in various 'dexes over the past decade. When wholesale changes were needed, not pick the biggest complaint and fix it then release.
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
The models are still as sexy as before and a pure sister army is fun to play at 1000 points.
That idea with portable exorcistlaunchers is great...I thought about it a lot. But it would be like a monolith without the 'slow' rule, especially if you can field 4 of them in a single squad - up to 24 shots with that thing?
But I like the fluff and it would be nice and fluffy to have it for an hvy weapon option for your troop choices.
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
Stelek wrote:vogelfrei wrote:You argued with Andy Hoare? Well, maybe they should have the 'dex done by you next time.
Dude I've argued with <insert GW Developer here>. Pleaded, begged. Makes no difference in the end. I think I've influenced maybe half a dozen changes in various 'dexes over the past decade. When wholesale changes were needed, not pick the biggest complaint and fix it then release.
Yeah, I think there are enough people who could/would update any old Codex for GW. They just don't listen.
Some of the needed changes are very obvious...it isn't that hard to come up with new & balanced rules and they would raise their overall sales if people wouldn't be forced to stick with outdated rules or have to fear, that there will be no update for 2,5 editions when starting orcs.
5164
Post by: Stelek
Oh well, by portable I meant it would be a Heavy 1 not D6.
Essentially a fluffy version of what they need, some kind of S8 Ap1 weapon for dealing with tanks. Making it reduced range because it isn't being launched from a tank wouldn't hurt so long as it was 36".
Not making it available to anyone but Retributors or Celestians also makes sense to me.
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
If you go with the Heavy 1 version it would be great on Retributors.
My post was about the original exorcistlauncher with decreased range.
1954
Post by: DarkHellion
As was said earlier, there is no real Metagame to speak of in Warhammer 40k. The tournament scene of 40K seems to exist to discourage the development of a uniform and stable metagame such as seen in M:TG or Pokemon. Instead, things like composition scores and Painting scores encourage random janky tech, things that look really pretty or look funky on paper that are effective in game. Units that are efficient without being over powerful. Units that are fun to play against, but don't take up many points to distract from good units. Such things are frivilous wastes of examination if looking for an objective state of the game metagame, but are necessary for tournament performance.
However, if one where to impose a strict metagame, it would probably appear somewhat like this. Note this is opinionary, subjective and based on theoryhammer and very rough maths.
Tier 0
Mech Eldar: This list is capable of nearly everything. It has the falcon, which is nearly unkillable in any effective fashion, has token AT firepower, great firepower against hordes and medium/light vehicles, slightly better than token Anti-MEq firepower, extreme mobility, and transport capablity. This transport capability combines with Harlequins, which are one of the true CC monsters of the game. Harlequins are little more than a list of CC related abilities given a cheap price. With the power of CC allowing you to redefine many shooting rules, LOS, as well as inflicting asymmetric casualties and odd out of phase movement, a unit that is so purely based on it, for so cheap a price is exellent. Firedragons are one of the best AT weapons against all non-monolith vehicles, and the flamer makes them useful against hordes as well. Jetbikes with shuricannon and Singing Spear/Destructor 'lock do something almost no other troop choice does. It provides a troop unit that is fast, mobile, JSJs, is as survivable as marines and can shoot at any target with relevant (if sometimes poor) firepower. While many units can do some of these, few can do all, and none can do it for the points. Combined with competent support choices in the HQ and fast attack sections Mech Eldar wins on simple point efficiency, accomplishing a massive number of tasks per platform with admirable competence, said platforms being normally more mobile than the opponents and of comparable (and in the falcons case far exceeding) durability. However, it generally needs to utilize all its units so as to accomplish its goals, and as such is coordination intensive and disruptable in comparison to many other top lists. However, the sheer power of many of the choices can render this disruptability advantage null.
Godzilla: A good deal has been written about godzilla from a removed strategic perspective. However, godzilla utilizes numerous immensely difficult to kill platforms with all have relevant weapons which fire large numbers of shots. These platforms are also highly points efficient for their durability and game impact. The list also has powerful CC/countercharge that can efficiently remove problem units, and importantly a simple game plan that requires the opponent to fight on your terms often. Your gun platforms can win many slugging matches against opponents similarly tasked units.
Note- Tier 0 has been chosen as these two list types seem to have a number of strategic advantages that are unmatched by other lists. That is not to say these lists should always win, nor that these lists are always inherently better in every match-up, but more to say that these lists get to play with an unfair arsenal of abilities to utilize. We can think of these lists with different terminologies than we can think of many other lists, and as such, the lists deserve mentioning. They also achieve victory differently than many other lists, with game plans that care little about the actual content of the opponents army, and more about the role content of specific units.
I am a bit too tired to go on with this, but I may update tomorrow.
1528
Post by: Darrian13
I like where you are going with your post DarkHellion, please continue.
Darrian
5671
Post by: vogelfrei
Darrian13 wrote:I like where you are going with your post DarkHellion, please continue.
Darrian
I agree. It's a well written roundup and misses nearly no fact.
@DarkHellion:
I assume you consider 1500 to 1750 point limit for your rankting, is that right?
5369
Post by: Black Blow Fly
I agree there is no true metagame and I believe the Ard Boyz tournament proved this. Sure there were some flaky missions and the winner got the matchups he needed but he did win and it was not with an army most people would consider top tiered.
What do often tend to see are cookie cutter lists that circulate around the internet... for example:
Eldar
Eldrad, Yriel
3x loaded out Falcon
2 - 3x Harlequins
Fire Dragons
- G
5675
Post by: Kettu
Stelek wrote:
Sometimes, having a 'vision' is pointless if you are the only one that sees it.
What 'Vision' though, the codex reads like an oversized joke at points.
It seems like they were making a 'upgrade' codex like EoT or all the old chapter specific codexes but changed their minds at the last moment.
4932
Post by: 40kenthusiast
Here's how it shakes out in my experience. Non-listed armies are below both lists, a Tier 3 if you will. This is considering only the lists ability to score a victory. Tournament tiers would look differently, with the need for VS's shaking things up.
Tier 1 (That is, the most competitive armies):
Nidzilla (Fexes, Tyrants, Zoeys and Stealers)
Holo-Harlies (3 Falcons and 3 Harlequin units)
Offensive Crons (Immortals or Destroyers, some manner of assault protection)
Crisis/Mech Tau (Crisis Suits, Devilfish, some railguns)
New Chaos (Twin lashers, Obliterators, Plague Marines)
**New Orks (Not sure what it'll look like, but probably storm boys and a wave of sloggers, with rokkits and klaws sprinkled throughout, 2 bike Warbosses?)
Tier 2 (Next most competitive armies)
Shooty Space Marines (6 man las/plas, assault cannons, some kind of counterattack unit)
Shooty/Dropping IG (Bassie, lascannons that start on board, plasma squads drop)
VP Denial Necrons (Liths, Orbs, that jazz)
Drop Pod Marines (Drop pods, plasma, Fear The Darkness)
Blitz Blood Angels (Big Death Co, other fast moving PFist bearers)
Dark Eldar (Warriors w/lances, wych assaulters, lots of skimmers with lances)
5510
Post by: gdurant
I don't see how people can claim there is no meta game. Just because 'Ard Boys has a different rules mission and point limits doesn't mean there is no meta game. Just that 'Ard Boyz meta is different from what you would encounter in a GT. Most of the killer lists you see
these days are the more balanced armies. Armies that balance mobility , shooting, assault (not tau) and overall hardiness. Part of this balance is anticipating what other armies you'll encounter. Part of the current meta game is to make a balanced army that is competitive
against nidzilla and mech eldar. Just because it's possible for any army to win doesn't mean that you're going to be desinging your tourney list via dart board. If it's local your going to consider what type of armies your frined are likly to bring. And if we're talking about GT's
and "ardboys your going to consider how to deal with some of the killer lists out there.
If you go to tourney's whith theme lsits ignor everythign I just said.
As far as deciding what lists should be 1st 2nd and red head step child tier, you really need a more objective method than "I think this army is roxxors" ( I'm not sure what roxxors means either.) Since player ability is always going to be a nasty torn in your side you'll probably have to look ag who won GT"s and the like, account for the player to win ratio, and and organize by army composition and the amount of wins.
1954
Post by: DarkHellion
Gdurant, you obviously don't understand the concept of a metagame. Your final statement proves it. I will explain later if someone doesn't do so first, but you aren't getting it.
5510
Post by: gdurant
DarkHellion wrote:Gdurant, you obviously don't understand the concept of a metagame. Your final statement proves it. I will explain later if someone doesn't do so first, but you aren't getting it.
Oh well my bad
Wikipiedia wrote:Metagaming is a broad term usually used to define any strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset, uses external factors to affect the game, or goes beyond the supposed limits or environment set by the game.
Maybe not the most definitive source but I proved my point.
Your Humble Narrator wrote:As far as deciding what lists should be 1st 2nd and red head step child tier, you really need a more objective method than "I think this army is roxxors" ( I'm not sure what roxxors means either.) Since player ability is always going to be a nasty torn in your side you'll probably have to look ag who won GT"s and the like, account for the player to win ratio, and and organize by army composition and the amount of wins.
This was just part of the epistemology. People keep posting their own subject teir standards. I was just offering a more objective way to figure it out with out resorting 'yes-huh' and 'nuh-uh's.'
1954
Post by: DarkHellion
You aren't though. The skill of the pilots is irrelevant to the strength of the army lists itself, which is what we are attempting to provide with a tier list. We are assuming that the players do not make play errors and that dice roll randomly, otherwise my lone guardsman can be tier 1 because you will never decide to fire upon it, I will always roll 6's and you will always roll ones.
5510
Post by: gdurant
DarkHellion wrote:You aren't though. The skill of the pilots is irrelevant to the strength of the army lists itself, which is what we are attempting to provide with a tier list. We are assuming that the players do not make play errors and that dice roll randomly, otherwise my lone guardsman can be tier 1 because you will never decide to fire upon it, I will always roll 6's and you will always roll ones.
Again your putting words in my mouth. First off my comment on generalship was to allow for the fact the non teir 1 amies can can win tournements. I'm not saying that if army x roll all sixes and your army y rolls all ones that I'll win. I was saying that armies that people agree aren't top tier like swarm nids or Dark Angles can and have one tournements. But thats neither here nor there.
We can assume that armies that win tournaments, for the most part, work well with the meta game. I didnt' say that a lone guardsmen could win so much that if we noticed that 90% of mech guard armies started winning tournaments that they are probably one of the higher tired armies. This was in reference to the debate on whether or not safh marines and mech tau were worth of tier one.
Again my original post was to offer a counter point to people who don't think that 40k has a meta game. I said that the meta game chenges depending on the type of tournement your in (ie 'ardboys or GT)
Either way I'm done debating the meaning of meta game and re explaing myself.
That said I'm curious what a top tier ork army world to the current metagame.
4472
Post by: corinth
i've been thinking about the ork factor in the upcoming metagame. there could be all sorts of ramifications.
for instance, players will need to consider hordes when building lists. this may lead to marine players re-evaluating missile launchers as a way to force ork mobs to spread out. increased missile launcher use combined with all the rokkits ork armies like to use might put enough AP 3 weapons into the metagame that tyranid players start putting extended carapace on their gunfexes. or, alternatively, none of that will happen.
60
Post by: yakface
Most tournament still contain a high amount of armies comprised of a 3+ armor save (MEQ). So regardless of whether these armies finish high in the tournament if you are looking to 'tune' your army list to play in a tournament you still need to factor in plenty of weapons that will negate a 3+ armor save.
Beyond that, if you are trying to get the maximum amount of battle points you know that you will likely be facing some of the more common powerful builds such as Godzilla bugs, Falcon-heavy Eldar, twin-lash Chaos, etc. As such you when building and testing your list you would want to plan and practice schemes to handle these types of threats.
In this way, I would say there is very much a "meta-game". Since initial tournament pairings are random, the most common type of army played is important to consider and the common types of armies played by players who finish with the top battle points are also imporant to consider because if you are aiming to be up there at the top you will inevitably face those army types.
Ork armies will only affect the meta-game if they either:
A) become a signifigant number of the total armies played at a tournament (unlikely).
B) become a staple army type played by players with top battle points (more likely).
4884
Post by: Therion
powerful builds such as Godzilla bugs, Falcon-heavy Eldar, twin-lash Chaos
I think Orks have the capability to beat all three dominant meta-game armies. They just have to be able to get a right balance of all the necessary units into the same army. Lootas against Falcons, Kommandos and Storm Boyz against Chaos, and very large numbers of both Boyz and invisible Power Klaws against Tyranids. Orks will definately become massively more popular than before but because of the sheer expense and task of building an army they will never become as played as say Chaos Space Marines.
ork factor in the upcoming metagame. there could be all sorts of ramifications.
I've adapted my three Falcon Eldar because of the upcoming Orks. Previously they would be heavy underdogs against a properly built Ork army, but after taking plenty of Destructors and using tank shocks to bunch the Ork units up I think I've shifted the balance back to atleast 50/50.
3550
Post by: IntoTheRain
Write this down kids, cause I'm sick of defining it. (make it a highlighted word please!)
A metagame (or meta for short) is the breakdown of various lists that would appear at a given time. By analyzing the expected spread of lists, it is possible to 'metagame' against your opponents by bringing a list designed with an inherent advantage over the expected field.
For example, if you were to go to an RTT tomorrow, you would probably guess that the most common lists would be Mech Eldar and Zilla Nids. Therefor, it would obviously behoove you to make a list that has strong chances of beating them. Or, failing to find a list that does, take one of the two lists 'metagamed' against itself. That is, designed to win the mirror match.
5164
Post by: Stelek
I think my Orks as planned will be a real pain in the azz to beat.
But, must do other nifty things first like build my craptastic DA list, finish upteen other things, and then maybe start the work on that.
195
Post by: Blackmoor
IntoTheRain wrote:
For example, if you were to go to an RTT tomorrow, you would probably guess that the most common lists would be Mech Eldar and Zilla Nids. Therefor, it would obviously behoove you to make a list that has strong chances of beating them. Or, failing to find a list that does, take one of the two lists 'metagamed' against itself. That is, designed to win the mirror match.
I don't know where you play your RTTs at, but I have played in RTTs across the country, and you will see maybe one of each of Mech Eldar and Godzilla nids, and the rest will be a ton of Marines.
In the past month I have played in 3 RTTs and I have played Crimson Fists, Eldar, Black Templars, Necrons, Imperial Guard, Chaos x2 and Dark Angels. So that is 6 out if 8 armies being MEQs.
5164
Post by: Stelek
Tons.....and tons...and tons of marines.
Every now and then, there's like 1 marine player vs all non-marines, and boy those tournaments are something else!
3550
Post by: IntoTheRain
Blackmoor wrote: So that is 6 out if 8 armies being MEQs.
My condolences.
On second thought it may actually be more fun than facing non stop T6 critters for 3 months straight (sigh)
105
Post by: Sarigar
Locally, there are no Godzilla lists. But, there is a reasonable number of different armies. It's nice to not have to face of against red marines, black marines or blue marines. On our given game day, I can typically get in a game against, Chaos, Eldar, Necron, Marine, Demonhunter, Dark Angel, Blood Angel, Tau or Ork. It's nice to get some different games in.
I went to an RTT outside of my local area last weekend and was suprised to see it's make up. Eldar were the majority and not a single Chaos army. Out of 4 Eldar players, 3 were fielding Eldrad and an Avatar. It was interesting to see what others outside my area were playing.
5369
Post by: Black Blow Fly
I have been saying eldar are the new Space Marine for quite some time now. At the Necro this year there were more eldar than any other single race.
- G
5369
Post by: Black Blow Fly
Here are the armies I faced in my last two RTTs:
Necron x3
Chaos
IG
Tyranids
- G
195
Post by: Blackmoor
I have seen an increase of Necons in the past year or so.
You still need to tool up to beat MEQs, but with the new Chaos codex I think you will start to see less of them.
I think you also need to tool up to fight Eldar. They are bigger threats and a nastier codex than Space Marines, and you should face at least face one of them in most RTTs.
185
Post by: Ebon
Blackmoor wrote:I think you also need to tool up to fight Eldar. They are bigger threats and a nastier codex than Space Marines, and you should face at least face one of them in most RTTs.
Especially in the later rounds. The last tournament I went to had over 75% MeQ (mostly Chaos), but the top three places went to Eldar and Dark Eldar.
5164
Post by: Stelek
If you run a good balanced army, and are a good general; you can do well against any army.
Until you face a GW scenario or escalation.
Then it's back to a dice toss to determine the winner.
Woo!
195
Post by: Blackmoor
Stelek wrote:If you run a good balanced army, and are a good general; you can do well against any army.
Until you face a GW scenario or escalation.
Then it's back to a dice toss to determine the winner.
Woo!
That's funny.
I am 4-2 over my last 2 RTTs, Both of my losses have been the "Scouting Mission" scenario where you start with only your 2 compulsory troop choices on the board.
Walking Havocs and infantry on the board is not that much fun when you can't get into good cover, have bad lines of sight, are hanging out on the board edge (on the last game both my havocs ran off from shooting even with IoCG), and don't get to shoot until turn 3 or 4.
734
Post by: Dal'yth Dude
My last 2 RTT opponents
generic eldar (major loss)
drop pod marines (major win)
armored company (minor win)
godzilla (major loss)
raven guard (major loss)
daemon hunters (slaughter)
That's some variety, but the first place finisher in both RTTs was the same Black Templar player. So I'm still tooling to beat marines.
5164
Post by: Stelek
So Blackmoor, you lost the dice off then?
;p
1986
Post by: thehod
the old RTT missions are slowed and quite frankly outdated. Not to mention very boring. Probably most of us have played those same missions since 2004/2003 and would like a welcome change of mission or even rulebook stuff.
195
Post by: Blackmoor
Stelek wrote:So Blackmoor, you lost the dice off then?
;p
Not quite, but I had a bad army build for that mission.
I am trying some pre-heresy ideas, and I am trying to play without Oblits. Mobile heavy weapons are very important, and besides oblits, chaos really has poor options.
That mission screws people who take Havocs and Devastators, and rewards mech armies.
I can make the argument that any mission that cripples an army is not a fair mission. (For another example: the mission "This is heavy Doc" is a shooting army’s paradise).
4395
Post by: Deadshane1
efarrer wrote:
I love sisters, but they are one of the weakest armies in the game by my perception. Just about any army with an equal level player will beat the sisters. Basically Sisters<Any other army. You play them for a challlenge, not for thier strength. If you disagree with thier placement in the bottom tier, tell me what is worse than them.
I hate it when people say this, I cant even finish reading this thread first.
http://www.adepticon.org/modules.php?name=Sections&op=viewarticle&artid=54
...6th out of over 100, and my army wasnt even fully painted. This was no fluke since I frequently wreck shop with them. Most sisters rely on faith and dump tons of points into useless seraphim though, hence, crappy army.
LOTS of armies are worse.
5164
Post by: Stelek
Read the missions I posted in the Mind Games thread under 'looking for a game', Blackmoor. I wanted more feedback but only Lemartes provided any. Got lots of local feedback that was positive from actual players, but I'm open to more.
105
Post by: Sarigar
I gave our local shop the missions from this year's Baltimore GT. While I didn't think they were perfect, they are a lot better and competitive to play than the old RTT missions. He's going to adapt the GT missions for a tourney in a couple months. If I understand it correctly, the Baltimore GT missions were heavily influenced by Adepticon's missions.
I believe the missions really enhanced the enjoyment of each game.
|
|
