Which are the Best Armies in 8th Edition?

Best: High Elves, Ogers, Empire, Dwarfs, Lizardmen

Middle: Orcs+Goblins, Tomb Kings, Deamons of Chaos

Worst: Wood Elves

Not sure about all the other armies.

Can anyone help with the others or suggest movement up or down?

Some say Ogres are middle, i disagree BTW. DE, WoC and skaven are deffinetly in best. Brets are supposta be in worst but they have quite a few tricks so more like a finnese army. Beasts are in worst it seems. VC seem somewhere in middle to me not quite sure.

Ok then:

Best: High Elves, Ogers, Empire, Dwarfs, Lizardmen, Dark Elves, Warriors of Chaos, Skaven

Middle: Vampire Counts, Orcs+Goblins, Tomb Kings, Deamons of Chaos

Worst: Wood Elves, Beastmen, Brettonians

As long as you're doing this you might as well have a look here http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/312390.page

Yeah there are always different builds which can make some armies alot better than they seem. I've seen some pretty gross O&G lists lately which would move them up in the top tiers, but those are also played but folks who really know what they're doing.
Beastmen - I still don't know. Been running an almost all chariot army and have alot of success with it, especially against top tier armies.
Just my two cents - I would move Empire into the middle category since there are so many different builds for them and they really vary. Ogres definately middle. Dwarves middle as well. Lizards I would also move down as well since they are hurt so much by initiative, points percentages and reliance on a Slann to have any magic phase (and temple guard really are crappy this edition). I would say:

Top: High Elves, Dark Elves, Warriors of Chaos, Skaven (being the highest)
Middle: Ogres, Empire, Dwarves, VC, Orcs&Goblins, Tomb Kings, Daemons of Chaos (being the highest of the group)
Low: Wood Elves, Brettonians, Beastmen (being the highest of the group)

I disagree on your assesment of the lizzards, but then again i also disagree stegaspam is dead and have also made a point of proving it in my area by stampeeding over some pretty scary builds

Edit: Temple guard aren't as fail with the right tool, like a cheap banner that makes hydras and HPAs have nightmares

I feel like im on a mission to put high elfs down to middle, why does everyone rate them so well, you put dwarfs and empire mid tier but they will wipe the floor with high elfs 95% of the time.

Daemons are also still top there still very powerful even without kairos.

Lizards are slow but there still combat and magic beasts, salamanders rock and so do chameleon skinks, who cares if they go last they got high toughness and armour(saurus).

Has anyone used the Iob box set? The high elfs have over 300points more than skaven and yet its an even fight.

The only reason HE are high up is Teclis... Oh wait no he isn't they also have super duper ASF as well. Altho he's still the main reason.

I have yet to lose to high elves in 8th edition, even lists with teclis.

I have fought them with lizards, daemons, and skaven....

I dont see what the big deal is.

Me neither my slann eats Teclis on regular basis.

Same i havent seen high elfs win once,i have always won easily with my empire and dwarfs.

Dwarves are good this edition, I would consider them a top 5 army. I saw Dwarves take 2nd and 1st in two of the local pre-lims. Dwarves ran through 3 vary mean DE players for the 1st in one of them.

bennyboy6189 wrote:Same i havent seen high elfs win once,i have always won easily with my empire and dwarfs.

I have seen High Elves comfortably beat skaven several times.

Also I have seen Dwarfs be crushed by Dark Elves.

I personally believe that Skaven are the top army still. I tabled my first opponent this campaign who plays WoC and next up on the list should either be Dark Elves or VC so we'll see how I fare against them. I've assumed that Dark Elves will be the tougher of the two opponents.

But as someone points out in every one of these threads, it doesn't make any sense to rank whole armies.

A really well built High Elf list with Teclis can be very competitive, but it is very easy to put together a mediocre to poor list. Beastmen are not a strong army in general but a chariot heavy build can do all kinds of ugly things to the right opponents. And while armies like Ogres, Empire and Lizardmen are generally considered quite well and are capable of building very powerful lists, it's also possible to produce average and even weak lists.

It really depends on the build. You can't just rank whole armies.

The thing about Skaven is you are hard pressed to find something in the book that isn't worth taking. So this makes it easier in general to produce a good army list, they also have every counter to another army that you can imagine and you can usually fit them into every list. What I like about Skaven is that to me they aren't a real well known or frequently played right army. Lots of people play them now but I doubt you will see them winning a high percentage of their games. A good Skaven general in my eyes will however win a high percentage of their games against the whole variety of armies and play styles. I mean your right...there are just too many variables to say this army this, that army that. BUT I will say that some armies (Lizards and WoC for example) will range from say a 6-8 out of 10 on the scale of performance where I can see Skaven ranging from 3-10 depending on army build and skill level of the player. This is what excites me about them and I cant see a whole lot of other armies that I could say have up to a 10 on the performance chart under the right conditions even. I think Empire are close as well as Dark Elves and Dwarfs. If they get rid of animosity for Orcs and Goblins I would rank them the same way as Skaven likely but then again they do have more issues with Leadership because Skaven get 'Strength in Numbers'.

There are already threads like this. Use the search bar.

Plus these threads are usually useless as they cause nothing but arguments and the list gets nowhere.

Exodus2013 wrote:The thing about Skaven is you are hard pressed to find something in the book that isn't worth taking. So this makes it easier in general to produce a good army list, they also have every counter to another army that you can imagine and you can usually fit them into every list. What I like about Skaven is that to me they aren't a real well known or frequently played right army. Lots of people play them now but I doubt you will see them winning a high percentage of their games. A good Skaven general in my eyes will however win a high percentage of their games against the whole variety of armies and play styles. I mean your right...there are just too many variables to say this army this, that army that. BUT I will say that some armies (Lizards and WoC for example) will range from say a 6-8 out of 10 on the scale of performance where I can see Skaven ranging from 3-10 depending on army build and skill level of the player. This is what excites me about them and I cant see a whole lot of other armies that I could say have up to a 10 on the performance chart under the right conditions even. I think Empire are close as well as Dark Elves and Dwarfs. If they get rid of animosity for Orcs and Goblins I would rank them the same way as Skaven likely but then again they do have more issues with Leadership because Skaven get 'Strength in Numbers'.

Yeah, that's a pretty decent summary, and a decent method for considering the more powerful armies. The problem is that there's a lot of different ways of considering army strength, such as the most powerful possible build for a current army, the number of tournament standard builds available, the knowledge needed to put a competitive army on the table in either a friendly or a tournament standard environment, and so on. The problem is the individuals thought processes often go unstated, or aren't even really considered and you get these kinds of fuzzy rankings of armies without any kind of consistant reasoning.


Oh, and while skaven are very strong they are extremely vulnerable to flanking, because they lose their LD bonus if they lose their rank bonus. You can be steadfast all you like, but if you're testing on base 5 or 6, you're going to fail a lot. The trick then comes from successfully flanking those big skaven blocks.

I wouldn't say ogres are top.

ogres are probably between the Middle and top tiers.

Bretonnians are the best army

UNREALPwnage wrote:Bretonnians are the best army

i suppose everything is subjective at this point

sebster wrote:Oh, and while skaven are very strong they are extremely vulnerable to flanking, because they lose their LD bonus if they lose their rank bonus. You can be steadfast all you like, but if you're testing on base 5 or 6, you're going to fail a lot. The trick then comes from successfully flanking those big skaven blocks.

The problem here is, especially if the Skaven player takes a Screaming Bell, that you have an 18" bubble where the units can use the grey seers LD of 7 as well as a 12" bubble for BSB generated re-rolls. So even if I get flanked you are stubborn 7 with re-rolls as I usually run a castle formation to take advantage of this. To add to this as a Skaven player you army will most certainly have more units then the other so it will make it real hard to get a flank charge in.

I like debates like this with intelligent folk such as sebster. I do not understand why people have to come into threads like this and whine and cry and talk about how pointless threads like this are. If you don't like it don't post, simple as that. Find another thread that interests you in a more positive light.

Exodus2013 wrote:The problem here is, especially if the Skaven player takes a Screaming Bell, that you have an 18" bubble where the units can use the grey seers LD of 7 as well as a 12" bubble for BSB generated re-rolls. So even if I get flanked you are stubborn 7 with re-rolls as I usually run a castle formation to take advantage of this. To add to this as a Skaven player you army will most certainly have more units then the other so it will make it real hard to get a flank charge in.

That definitely true. I never said it was easy to get the flank charges in, just that it was a bigger threat to the skaven than to other armies

And as I've argued elsewhere, if you're facing a horde army then objective #1 should be to kill the BSB. Do that and suddenly any LD value looks a little suspect, and a skaven unit that's been flanked looks downright flaky, steadfast or not. It's isn't necessarily easy to do, but it's certainly possible.

Most definitely. What army do ya play again? What combo's work good for you against horde type armies?

Exodus2013 wrote:Most definitely. What army do ya play again? What combo's work good for you against horde type armies?

I play Empire, without any real theme. I've got a load of everything, really, and in any given game I'll look to build an army around whatever I've recently painted or something I haven't used in a while.

I generally go with a core of big blocks of infantry, each with full size ranged detachments. Generally their crossbowmen because I really like the added range, but sometimes I go for hangunners to take long rifles so I can snipe BSBs and mages. With minimum war machines it's hardly an optimum load out, so if I'm expecting a more competitive game I normally have to adjust to include more war machines.

For counterpunch I'm taking knights with great weapons - they're working a whole lot better than lances in this edition. I know a lot of people don't like knights but I think they have a really good role to serve to break units that have been anchored by an infantry unit.

Typically I pick one enemy unit and pound hell out of it, some people fire until they've forced a panic test - I keep going until there's so few guys left I can break them with my knights. The point is to collapse that flank, then turn on the rest of his army. That's the plan, anyway, things rarely go to plan.

sebster wrote:

I play Empire, without any real theme. I've got a load of everything, really, and in any given game I'll look to build an army around whatever I've recently painted or something I haven't used in a while.

I generally go with a core of big blocks of infantry, each with full size ranged detachments. Generally their crossbowmen because I really like the added range, but sometimes I go for hangunners to take long rifles so I can snipe BSBs and mages. With minimum war machines it's hardly an optimum load out, so if I'm expecting a more competitive game I normally have to adjust to include more war machines.

For counterpunch I'm taking knights with great weapons - they're working a whole lot better than lances in this edition. I know a lot of people don't like knights but I think they have a really good role to serve to break units that have been anchored by an infantry unit.

Typically I pick one enemy unit and pound hell out of it, some people fire until they've forced a panic test - I keep going until there's so few guys left I can break them with my knights. The point is to collapse that flank, then turn on the rest of his army. That's the plan, anyway, things rarely go to plan.

Thats where I plan to be with my Skaven, to have 10k worth of models so I can make whatever style army I feel like for whatever campaign, tourney or friendly battle. Currently I have enough for basically the same 2k list which is ok because my list seems to work exceptionally well (possibly aided by my gameplay style?). As for your knights with great weapons...I totally agree cause lances suck. I also agree that knights do have a purpose in your army and I couldn't see leaving home without one good unit of Knights for an empire list. Whats your thoughts so far on the Steam tank?

Exodus2013 wrote:Thats where I plan to be with my Skaven, to have 10k worth of models so I can make whatever style army I feel like for whatever campaign, tourney or friendly battle. Currently I have enough for basically the same 2k list which is ok because my list seems to work exceptionally well (possibly aided by my gameplay style?). As for your knights with great weapons...I totally agree cause lances suck. I also agree that knights do have a purpose in your army and I couldn't see leaving home without one good unit of Knights for an empire list. Whats your thoughts so far on the Steam tank?

I don't have a steam tank. I haven't really been keen to get one, as I've mostly played games around 1,500 and it just seemed a little goofy to put one on the field in games of that scale. It looks like a fun painting project though, so as I get towards fielding 3,000 I'll probably add one.

10,000 is a whole lot of skaven. Don't think I'll ever get near that, I'll likely get to around 4,000 or 5,000 points, that's normally enough to have a lot of flexibility with anything up to 3,000 point games.

I've played two games with my empire in 8th, both at 2k and both with one steam tank. Works pretty well. Used it to play mop up duties against lizardmen (after shooting thinned his lines down). Then lost it to a pit of shades (I didn't read in the FAQ where it says PoS doesn't work in it at the times.)

Also wiped the floor with a beastmen army with it.

My favorite empire unit in 8th though, even over the stank, is flagellants. A unit of 30 (same price as a stank) is just nuts, and tons of fun to play with. So far their kill total from those two games include an entire unit of temple guard (only 12 strong I think) plus the slann inside, and a unit of 6 minotaurs (in one turn I might add). I didn't get to finish the beastmen game, my brother finished it for me, so I don't know what else they took out.

Sorry, OT from what you were talking about, but just wanted to add my 2 cents.

Bretonnians are a mid army, they are good but dont have access to all the lores, but we are a 2+ armor save army with good heroes and lords. We usually have a 5+ ward so we are very hard to kill. Bretonnians also get some of the cheapest troops out there. At 5 points each Men at Arms are a force to be reckoned with. They have light armor, shield, and a halberd or spear. Bretonnians are not one of the worse armies. I would put wood elves at dead last followed by Beastmen.

UNREALPwnage wrote:Bretonnians are a mid army, they are good but dont have access to all the lores, but we are a 2+ armor save army with good heroes and lords. We usually have a 5+ ward so we are very hard to kill. Bretonnians also get some of the cheapest troops out there. At 5 points each Men at Arms are a force to be reckoned with. They have light armor, shield, and a halberd or spear. Bretonnians are not one of the worse armies. I would put wood elves at dead last followed by Beastmen.

The recent FAQs have also given the brets a boost as it confirms that it's 3 model wide lance formation counts as a full rank, with all the benefits thereof. Thus, if the knight unit is deep enough it can negate steadfast enemies while in a lance formation...

IIRC: the deepest they could get is 4 deep(12 knights in 3x4)

most infantry will be 5 deep(in horde formation) and could be even deeper if just 5 wide.


Bretts do have the most 2+ armor of any army, but that is protecting T3 which is very easy to wound. they get taken down through forcing saves.

True, but steadfast is tested for after casualties, so if you hit them hard with a lance, you still might take away steadfast.

If it's a really big block, brets can just run circles around it and try to hit it in the flank, or just avoid it altogether and take down the weaker targets.

Not always valid / going to work, of course, but the clarification of lance formation did give brets a huge boost towards dealing with steadfast! Now at least if they hit a flank, their enemy definitely won't be steadfast (assuming they still have 6 knight alive after the charge)

Bretonnians can go 5 deep, the basic core units max out at 15

yes, however you will be facing Hordes that are at least 5 deep(10x5) and often 5 wide units that simply want to keep steadfast.

Slaves 5 wide and 10 deep will rarely lose steadfast against anything charging them. those Brets would have to kill 30 slaves and take no casualities in return to negate steadfast.


yes you could flank them, but when those units are that cheap there could easily be 4-6 of these units.

You forget, 2+ save, 5+ ward, a block of 15 bretonnian knights would have 13 attacks hitting on 3s killing on 2s, so that is 8 dead there, then you have horse attacks which should kill 5 more. Now you have killed 13, you will not lose anyone against the 11 attacks back. So the bretts are now up 13, +1 for charging, and +4 for ranks, then you throw in a unit banner. The bretts just won combat by 18. Plus bretts have to take a mandatory banner, so against skaven any good bretonnian player will take the banner of the lady and put it in his big block. Now those skaven don't have ranks and don't count as steadfast because the banner takes away the units ranks, so in essence that 5*10 block of skaven is only 5*1. So now their not steadfast and need to pass their leadership of double ones. I like the bretonnians chances.

We've been through this the banner of the lady removes combat resplution for ranks not steadfast.

Care to show working people?

I highly rate Vampire's in 8th Edition, as not only does the Horde rule help them a lot (especially with the Hat of Weapon Skill) but thanks to 'dead or fled' it can be a nasty war of attrition to grind them down. Distinct edge is also held in 'Watchtower' and 'Blood and Glory' by dint of being nigh-on immovable when they need to be.

Big unit of Skelly spears in Horde formation, couple of Vamps, BSB and that unit is ready to go. And if you're really paranoid, just keep a Necromancer on hand for raisey nonsense. Simples.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and 'ditto' to those pointing out Steadfast has to hold up to a round of combat or two. Take my Ogres. 16 Ironguts, Tyrant and Butcher. Time I'm done with you (and the lads are souped up via Gut Magic) do you really, honestly believe you'll still have more ranks than I?

@Pwnage: mounts don't get to make supporting attacks so it's only 3 horse attacks.


Vamps arn't as good because their magic got weaker(can't spam 1 dice spells as the 33% chance of wizard ending his phase isn't worth it)

Grey Templar wrote:@Pwnage: mounts don't get to make supporting attacks so it's only 3 horse attacks.

The guys on the outside don't make supporting attacks, they actually get to attack normally

Mr Mystery wrote:Oh, and 'ditto' to those pointing out Steadfast has to hold up to a round of combat or two. Take my Ogres. 16 Ironguts, Tyrant and Butcher. Time I'm done with you (and the lads are souped up via Gut Magic) do you really, honestly believe you'll still have more ranks than I?

Yeah, there’s all kinds of outrageously powerful units that can actually smash through the average number of ranks taken by your average block of infantry. But this relies on the deadly unit having vastly more points invested.

Thing is, ultimately it costs more points to buy the power needed to kill a rank of troops than it does to just buy another rank of troops. That’s a basic reality of the game.

It’s all good and well to build powerful units, but you have to factor in the idea that they are likely to face a sufficiently large block of infantry that they won’t be able to deny steadfast after a single turn.

When i use my bretonnians i will go through a unit every 2 turns, one to charge and overrun, and one to reform to face my next target.

UNREALPwnage wrote:When i use my bretonnians i will go through a unit every 2 turns, one to charge and overrun, and one to reform to face my next target.

Which is a wonderful, grand plan for having a totally awesome army, assuming you can confidently break any other unit in the game in a single turn… which is a ludicrous assumption.

Here’s a simple test for anyone claiming they can build a unit that can kill enough troops to deny any unit steadfast. Total the points of your super deadly unit, then figure out how many Empire Swordsmen those points will buy (they’re six points a pop). Figure out how many ranks that’ll be if they deploy five wide. Think about how many troops you’d have to kill to deny steadfast.

Then consider that Empire Swordsmen are not even the cheapest rank and file troops around, not by a long shot.

Grey Templar wrote:Vamps arn't as good because their magic got weaker(can't spam 1 dice spells as the 33% chance of wizard ending his phase isn't worth it)

Answer to this one is the much maligned Necromancer. A cheap and fairly competent caster, which can have exactly the spell you want to force through. Add in a couple, and points denial becomes a very real prospect once more. And I have to say, claiming they aren't as good because Spam Raising is gone seems a little harsh. You just have to exploit the other regions where they are highly competent.

sebster wrote:Thing is, ultimately it costs more points to buy the power needed to kill a rank of troops than it does to just buy another rank of troops. That’s a basic reality of the game.

Yet with 'Dead or Fled' there is a certain amount of wisdom to the big hard unit these days. Sure, there is always the risk of losing the unit to a particularly devious opponent (more on that later!) but if I have 1,200+ points tied up in a single unit (I'm playing 3,000 btw, to give a better image!) then my opponent HAS to deal with it. And unless he is capable of organising a multiple charge, it's a real uphill struggle and which thus far my opponents haven't quite figured out how to smash up.

sebster wrote:
[quote=UNREALPwnage
When i use my bretonnians i will go through a unit every 2 turns, one to charge and overrun, and one to reform to face my next target.

Which is a wonderful, grand plan for having a totally awesome army, assuming you can confidently break any other unit in the game in a single turn… which is a ludicrous assumption.

Here’s a simple test for anyone claiming they can build a unit that can kill enough troops to deny any unit steadfast. Total the points of your super deadly unit, then figure out how many Empire Swordsmen those points will buy (they’re six points a pop). Figure out how many ranks that’ll be if they deploy five wide. Think about how many troops you’d have to kill to deny steadfast.

Then consider that Empire Swordsmen are not even the cheapest rank and file troops around, not by a long shot.

I take 15 Kotr, 4 paladins, and the fey enchantress in my big block of knights. SO i am 7 ranks deep. That unit is expensive as hell, around 1000 points for how i kit our my guys. But that is 12 s6 attacks hitting on 3, 2 s5 attacks hitting on 2(the fey enchantress lets you pick someone to give +1 to hit to. 2 s6 hitting on 3s, 11s6 hitting on 3s, 16 s3 hitting on 4. That is a gak ton of attacks from a lance. No reasonable unit can stand up against it. 2+ armor, 2+ ward against magic, 5+ ward against everything else. Ogers especially hate that unit. The fey enchantress has spitefull glance. so when she is in base with your ogers they have to pass an initiative test or take a wound, so we are going to kill all your ogers.

you can be 100% sure those IGs have the Runemaw so on a 2+ they will bounce your glance onto the gnoblars sitting nearby.


those ironguts are just as likely to get the charge as you(which if they do you're dead)


even if you charge it takes 3 wounds to drop each ogre. you will average 9 Str 6 hits and 8 Str 3 hits. assuming a not unreasable Trollguts and Toothcracker buffs.

you will get 6 Str6 wounds and 2 Str 3 wounds vs T5


3 of the Str6 wounds are regenerated, and 1/3 of a Str3 wound(5+ armor, 4+ regen)


so on average charging KotR will kill 1 Irongut.


then the IGs swing assuming 3 wide. 6 Guts get to attack. 18 attacks. 4+ to hit. 9 hits, 2+ to wound. 8 wounds.

at -3 to your armor. 5+ armor save. rounding up to 3 saves = 5 dead knights.


if a Tyrant and/or a bruiser gets added that will result in about 2 more dead knights depending on armament.

Knights will not be stubborn as the ogres have 5 ranks with 1 extra(that got killed) and will be -1 to -2 to their Ld.

not to mention the chance of them failing their fear test at the start of combat and becoming WS1


how many points is that unit of KotR? the ironguts are 788 with a Bellower.

Less than 1000, but you also forget that I'm wounding you one a 2 with all my paladins and the fey enchantress' mount. I am also hurting you on 3s with my other troops. Your front rank will more than likely loose one wound per model for the fey enchantresses special rule. You are also attempting to cast against the fey enchantress who gets +6 to dispel, so i like my chances. I'm also not counting all my buffs and other virtues i take. SO you iron guts would kill 3 Knights top, Ill out rank you and cause more wounds. Then you will try to pass your leadership test at double 1s. When you fail i will run you down and kill the unit. If you get the charge i am screwed, but i should be able to get the charge because i am charging 3d6, because i have a virtue that gives me an additional d6 to my charge distance. So i am charging over 20 inches. SO i will be getting the charge on you, and you will all die

So uhm UNREAL, not to be rude or anything but... Are you undefeated?
Just askin.

UNREALPwnage wrote:Less than 1000, but you also forget that I'm wounding you one a 2 with all my paladins and the fey enchantress' mount. I am also hurting you on 3s with my other troops. Your front rank will more than likely loose one wound per model for the fey enchantresses special rule. You are also attempting to cast against the fey enchantress who gets +6 to dispel, so i like my chances. I'm also not counting all my buffs and other virtues i take. SO you iron guts would kill 3 Knights top, Ill out rank you and cause more wounds. Then you will try to pass your leadership test at double 1s. When you fail i will run you down and kill the unit. If you get the charge i am screwed, but i should be able to get the charge because i am charging 3d6, because i have a virtue that gives me an additional d6 to my charge distance. So i am charging over 20 inches. SO i will be getting the charge on you, and you will all die

the ogres are T5 with toothcracker so its 3+ to wound.

and i am being nice assuming only 1 toothcracker. i could easily have 2 or more.

UNREALPwnage wrote:Less than 1000, but you also forget that I'm wounding you one a 2 with all my paladins and the fey enchantress' mount. I am also hurting you on 3s with my other troops. Your front rank will more than likely loose one wound per model for the fey enchantresses special rule. You are also attempting to cast against the fey enchantress who gets +6 to dispel, so i like my chances. I'm also not counting all my buffs and other virtues i take. SO you iron guts would kill 3 Knights top, Ill out rank you and cause more wounds. Then you will try to pass your leadership test at double 1s. When you fail i will run you down and kill the unit. If you get the charge i am screwed, but i should be able to get the charge because i am charging 3d6, because i have a virtue that gives me an additional d6 to my charge distance. So i am charging over 20 inches. SO i will be getting the charge on you, and you will all die

Unless, of course, he has a gnoblar screen to absorb your charge.

And I really doubt the gutbunker isn't going to have the stubborn crown, which means he's probably going to stick around, and then you're locked in combat and hosed.

Seems like a weird place to discuss 2 of the lowest tier armies this edition? Isnt the thread title Which are the Best Armies in 8th Edition?

Grey, you're forgetting that many Brets are immune to fear and that against s5+ their ward is going to get better. You are also striking last. I have yet to see gut magic stay in play or get in play often enough to do anything you describe. Brets will get the charge off on you, they're faster and essentially get to reroll a charge die to do otherwise, you need good luck or they need bad luck. Brets may not like greatweapons, but they can deal with it.

Brets are the most survivable army out there. When i play ogers i always give one or two paladins heroic killing blow (i dont remember the virtue at the moment). As for my record it is 13-3, my losses are against my friend who plays orks and goblins. I hate fanatics.

bennyboy6189 wrote:Seems like a weird place to discuss 2 of the lowest tier armies this edition? Isnt the thread title Which are the Best Armies in 8th Edition?

I doubt Brets are lowest tier now with the new lance rules, they hit really hard. Against a huge horde I have this thing here called the trebuchet. Combined with peasant bowmen and maybe a dwellers below and that horde isn't looking so hot.

UNREALPwnage wrote:Brets are the most survivable army out there. When i play ogers i always give one or two paladins heroic killing blow (i dont remember the virtue at the moment). As for my record it is 13-3, my losses are against my friend who plays orks and goblins. I hate fanatics.

Define survivable? I've played against Brets, they are a tough nut to crack indeed. At the same time, however, there's numerous ways to drop them fast...Lore of Metal for starters, dwellers, pit of shades and sun even have a 50% casualty rate against them. Massed shooting armies also, tomb kings with their million shots a turn, dark elves with AP crossbows.

Anyway, point I'm trying to make is they are regarded where they are for a reason, lots of rocks to their paper. Granted, that unit you described sounds like something I would have to see across the table...

I also want to say I'm glad to see them competitive, in 7th they were such an afterthought, I never played against a list I was afraid of.


Anyway, to discuss the most POWERFUL armies...from personal experience, my Dark Elves have been awesome, if it wasn't for me having only 3 turns a game in tournies (damn time limit!) my record would be better than now. Skaven scare, though I've never played against them. Just the sheer volume of cheap models on the table "great! I took out your 50 strong slave unit! how many points was that?"...."100"

Allow me to add a preface to my post: I'm more or less a newb to both warhammer and dakka(first post ever).

With that said I have an idea for creating a more stable tier list for the hobby. Someone might have already devised the idea but I didn't come across it in this thread or the other that was linked earlier in this one.
My idea is that we build the tier list based on matchups between every army and every other army e.g HE v.s Skaven, HE v.s Dwarves, etc.
We examine and somehow figure out how likely one army is to beat another army given their options and then rank them according to who has the greatest number of favorable matchups.

To my admittedly limited knowledge this is how tiers are formed for fighting games. They're all based on individual matchups between characters only in this case individual matchups between armies. However, due to the vast gameplay differences and mechanics it may not work so well.

Ex:
Say Skaven will on average beat TK 7/10 times and Dwarves 5/10 times but DEs only get a 5/10 against TK and 5/10 against dwarve, well then Skaven would be higher tier due to having more favorable matchups. Keep in mind these example numbers are 100% BS but you get the idea.

Dark elves are deadly, their magic is impressive. The only problem is that their t 3

NateMurdah wrote:Allow me to add a preface to my post: I'm more or less a newb to both warhammer and dakka(first post ever).

With that said I have an idea for creating a more stable tier list for the hobby. Someone might have already devised the idea but I didn't come across it in this thread or the other that was linked earlier in this one.
My idea is that we build the tier list based on matchups between every army and every other army e.g HE v.s Skaven, HE v.s Dwarves, etc.
We examine and somehow figure out how likely one army is to beat another army given their options and then rank them according to who has the greatest number of favorable matchups.

To my admittedly limited knowledge this is how tiers are formed for fighting games. They're all based on individual matchups between characters only in this case individual matchups between armies. However, due to the vast gameplay differences and mechanics it may not work so well.

Ex:
Say Skaven will on average beat TK 7/10 times and Dwarves 5/10 times but DEs only get a 5/10 against TK and 5/10 against dwarve, well then Skaven would be higher tier due to having more favorable matchups. Keep in mind these example numbers are 100% BS but you get the idea.

Tiers are actually set up with Tourny results.

this favors popular armies like Empire, DE, and Dwarves.


One of the reasons these are popular armies is they are fairly easy to use and win with. this makes the generals that choose these armies generally better with their army then a general who chose a difficult one. howevver the general who chose the more difficult army is actually the better general because he has to think more about his tactics. and when this general does master his army he will blow the generals who chose the easy button out of the water.


this is why you usually see the more difficult armies at the bottom and the Easier armies at the middle to top, but the winners are generally a good sampling of all the different armies.

naturally all results are averaged so the extranious example of a TK player winning is drowned by all those TK players who lost.

Kinda harsh there GT.
I for one choose lizardmen because i liked the models, it was over a week till i found out that they're actually considered a good one.
So whailing on all those dwarven/empire/WoC players who like the fluff/models and aren't power gamers by calling them stupid seems kinda mean.

UNREALPwnage wrote:I take 15 Kotr, 4 paladins, and the fey enchantress in my big block of knights. SO i am 7 ranks deep. That unit is expensive as hell, around 1000 points for how i kit our my guys. But that is 12 s6 attacks hitting on 3, 2 s5 attacks hitting on 2(the fey enchantress lets you pick someone to give +1 to hit to. 2 s6 hitting on 3s, 11s6 hitting on 3s, 16 s3 hitting on 4. That is a gak ton of attacks from a lance. No reasonable unit can stand up against it. 2+ armor, 2+ ward against magic, 5+ ward against everything else. Ogers especially hate that unit. The fey enchantress has spitefull glance. so when she is in base with your ogers they have to pass an initiative test or take a wound, so we are going to kill all your ogers.

How many characters? Why thank the Great Maw I invested in the Sword of Anti-Heroes. 10 attacks, S10. Hitting your unit on a 3+. That's rather a lot of dead and dying Knights. And of course that's before the Ironguts weigh in with the Gut Charge (rack up another 6 S6 autohits...).

And I can so totally take that unit. Gnoblars out in front, oblique angle, to absorb and redirect your charge, then jump you in the flank. One unit shredded in double quick time, minimum of fuss. You ranks won't last long at all at that rate. And even if they do, I'm happy sitting in combat cracking skulls!

Oh yeah, and don't forget the spells. Extra S, T and Regeneration, plus being Stubborn tends to ensure my Gutbunker laughs in the face of fear, and tweaks the nose of terror. Hell, in both their outings today they postively wedgied Death!

Seems like a big argument between 2 armies now.

I have played oger kingdoms five times and won all five times with my list. the fact is that i am going to win combat and run you down

UNREALPwnage wrote:I have played oger kingdoms five times and won all five times with my list. the fact is that i am going to win combat and run you down

5 and 0? Holy crap... Do they award medals for being undefeated for so long?!?! I wouldn't know, I only go 1 game undefeated at a time... That's almost a whole tournament of undefeatedness!!!

That's hardly a fact. That's only a fact if your opponent is low str, low t, crap save, and few attacks, AND few models. Chaos wrecks ogres face in H2H. Lizardmen have attrition characteristics. when Ogres are charged by cavalry they really struggle, Elves don't get into combat unless they know they can wreck you in one to two turns. Ogres are a good army... but they struggle mightily against well played armies that compete in all phases. Something they don't do. I have no idea how they are top tier consideration.

The fact is with OK that unless you're some super killy unit you won't cut down their sheer number of attacks while they stomp you in the ground. It's not fun to fight a huge unit of 9+ bulls, especially when (as O&G) I basically have to run it over with units/fanatics.

UNREALPwnage wrote:I have played oger kingdoms five times and won all five times with my list. the fact is that i am going to win combat and run you down

Then again I would question the competence of your opponents. Lots of Eggs in one basket, when using Cavalry, is a risk. Sure, it hits like a tonne of bricks, but it's all too easily drawn off, redirected, flanked etc. And with the (IMHO infinitely improved) charge Rules, Brets simply cannot guarantee the charge more pretty much ever again. There are aways to improve your chance, but when your entire strategy essentially hinges on a single roll of 3 dice (no matter the modifiers) you asking for the Dice Gods to give you an atomic Wedgie.

Would Brets be a significant challenge? I guess. Certainly the Lance is food for thought. But automatic win, or even 'uphill struggle'. Absolutely not. That belongs to Witch Elves with Okkam's Mind Razor on them, after he's Shadowed my 18 Bulls down to S1 and T1. That combat sucked. Made me piss my pants with laughter, but it still sucked. Bits of Ogre EVERYWHERE!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And should I ever make it to the States, or you find yourself in South East England, do bring your army and we can put things to the test ya?

Mr Mystery wrote:Yet with 'Dead or Fled' there is a certain amount of wisdom to the big hard unit these days. Sure, there is always the risk of losing the unit to a particularly devious opponent (more on that later!) but if I have 1,200+ points tied up in a single unit (I'm playing 3,000 btw, to give a better image!) then my opponent HAS to deal with it. And unless he is capable of organising a multiple charge, it's a real uphill struggle and which thus far my opponents haven't quite figured out how to smash up.

Sure, really big units of elite troops are a valuable tool. I’m not arguing steadfast is unbeatable (see my post in the other thread) I’m just saying the posts here that you can defeat steadfast by simply killing enough troops to deny ranks is very dubious.

Slightly false representation there matey, as large units of cheap troops can be dealt with in more ways that just shredding them.

No, my representation was fine. I didn’t make any comment on dealing with steadfast, which as you noted can be done in all kinds of ways. My point was that people claiming there are sufficiently lethal units in the game that can just smash through any anvil unit is just wrong, and is only possible if the elite unit has vastly greater numbers of points invested in it.

My point is not ‘steadfast is awesome’ – it’s a good rule that allows large units of cheap troops to stay in the fight, but it has significant drawbacks. My point is that people claiming elite units can just smash through large blocks of infantry with pure killing power are wrong.

I think we're still in the learning curve stage of 8th Edition, with several 'rules du jour' receiving too much focus when determining 'who are besterest' in terms of armies. Give it another 6 months, particularly as FAQ's are still being updated we might see more reliable results creeping in.

Absolutely.

Steadfast is rough, it took 4 rounds (2 turns) for two of my hydras to munch through 60 goblins with a bsb inside, previous edition they would have been gone first turn to a possible flee/pursue.

So far I really like steadfast, adds a new dynamic to combat, it's no longer which side has the best killing power will win, it adds something the previous "outnumbering" combat res couldn't.

BUT this is the wrong thread to keep discussing it.

@UNREAL - that's a pretty cocky statement to make about winning combat and running down. I have no doubts it works great for you, but there's quite a few ways to handle deathstars in this edition

I think that's where ogre kingdoms fails on taking the next step towards being a dominant army, they are much better this edition to be sure, but imho they are a one trick pony: being good at melee. Two other armies are like that as well, WoC and LM, but unlike ogres they both have much higher survivability, only way for ogres to get it is if their butchers can get some +T or regen buffs on them.

From personal experience, the way I would rank them is (and I will only rank armies I have played, or played against):

Dark Elves, Empire, Dwarfs
Ogres, Daemons, Vampire Counts, Brettonians
Orcs and Goblins
Wood Elves

And the gap between them is small, I mean like, so small it's almost not even worth separating them tbh.

WIth 8th being so new, right now if you're a good general, you can win with any army outside of wood elves, as I think they did get pretty hosed.

greenbay924 wrote:

WIth 8th being so new, right now if you're a good general, you can win with any army outside of wood elves, as I think they did get pretty hosed.

Funny thing is that I heard WE can still shoot people to pieces. A dwarf player said he lost 60 dwarves in one match against them.

Was he doing it wrong?

Yes lmao dwarfs laugh at bows, yeah they hit on 4's including long range but then need 5's to wound and then they get a 4+save combined maybe with a 5+ ward if the dwarf players doing the right thing.

Quarrellers are on 5's to hit then 3's to kill, thunderers are on 4's then 3's to kill.

If he lost 60 it must of been a 10k point game or something, the only thing thats a problem are waywatchers because of killing blow.
And point an organ gun at the waywatchers and watch them all go bye bye, theres no way a dwarf general should loose to a shooty wood elf list unless he was drunk?

bennyboy6189 wrote:Yes lmao dwarfs laugh at bows, yeah they hit on 4's including long range but then need 5's to wound and then they get a 4+save combined maybe with a 5+ ward if the dwarf players doing the right thing.

Quarrellers are on 5's to hit then 3's to kill, thunderers are on 4's then 3's to kill.

If he lost 60 it must of been a 10k point game or something, the only thing thats a problem are waywatchers because of killing blow.
And point an organ gun at the waywatchers and watch them all go bye bye, theres no way a dwarf general should loose to a shooty wood elf list unless he was drunk?

Wait WE bows aren't S4?

Someone was pulling the wool over his eyes then.

They are once there within half range i believe but then they would be moving and shooting so 5's to hit and 5's to wound for the 1st 2 turns of shooting. Not many would make it within half range, and even then they will still be outshot.

bennyboy6189 wrote:They are once there within half range i believe but then they would be moving and shooting so 5's to hit and 5's to wound for the 1st 2 turns of shooting. Not many would make it within half range, and even then they will still be outshot.

I'll have to ask him what exactly went wrong. Maybe he lacked dwarf shooting (distinct possibility)

bennyboy6189 wrote:They are once there within half range i believe but then they would be moving and shooting so 5's to hit and 5's to wound for the 1st 2 turns of shooting. Not many would make it within half range, and even then they will still be outshot.

Wood Elves don't take penalties for either mooving and shooting, or long range.. I can't remember which. But I know that one of them doesn't hurt them. They are also str 4 within half or have killing blow within half depending on the unit. (90% sure it's move/shoot)

Since Woodelves outrange and have a better BS than Dwarfs, only the war-machines will be hitting the elves. A well played, well deployed elven army is only ever losing 1-2 models to cannons and 3-5 models to stone throwers. While the Welves are a bad army. They absolutely rape gunlines.

So trying to use that as an example is a poor one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
as an aside: Welf arrow line, versus any gunline is the most boring.... game.... ever....

greenbay924 wrote:
Dark Elves, Empire, Dwarfs
Ogres, Daemons, Vampire Counts, Brettonians
Orcs and Goblins
Wood Elves

O&G's are middle tier with ogres because they can handle anything if they have got the right units.

greenbay924 wrote:
1Dark Elves, Empire, Dwarfs
2Ogres, Daemons, Vampire Counts, Brettonians,Orcs and Goblins
3Wood Elves

i like this tier system Greenbay has, and i agree that the distance between the tiers is very small.


Warhammer looks to be heading towards being a well balanced game with no army having a massive advantage over the others. certaintly there are certain builds that are strong, but no "I win" buttons.

Ragnar4 wrote:

bennyboy6189 wrote:They are once there within half range i believe but then they would be moving and shooting so 5's to hit and 5's to wound for the 1st 2 turns of shooting. Not many would make it within half range, and even then they will still be outshot.

Wood Elves don't take penalties for either mooving and shooting, or long range.. I can't remember which. But I know that one of them doesn't hurt them. They are also str 4 within half or have killing blow within half depending on the unit. (90% sure it's move/shoot)

Since Woodelves outrange and have a better BS than Dwarfs, only the war-machines will be hitting the elves. A well played, well deployed elven army is only ever losing 1-2 models to cannons and 3-5 models to stone throwers. While the Welves are a bad army. They absolutely rape gunlines.

So trying to use that as an example is a poor one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
as an aside: Welf arrow line, versus any gunline is the most boring.... game.... ever....

Meh quarrellers then they dont outrange so your 5's then 3's to kill, there 4's then 5's and you get a nice 5+save. And your around the same points wood elfs cannont beat a dwarf gunline, bows are a joke on overpriced weak elves. If hes mean and use organ guns or an anvil or even worse thorek then its even worse for the poor welves player=(. Welves raping gunlines gotta be the worst thing ive read since reading posts on this forum.

Your quarrellers are move or fire, so the wood elf bows simply dance around you all game. More so if they simply bounce a tree in front of your gunline to give another -1 or, potentially, block LOS entirely.

Dont really want to start an argument but move 5 and can still shoot hardly going to stay out of my arc till maybe turn 4 unless you march.

Hawk riders can as they can fly but come on archers dancing around over exxaggerated, anyway like i said pointless argument as we all know wood elfs struggle vs high armoured armies as bows bounce off and they do get totally out shot vs dwarfs.(not talking about a full dryacha/tree army)

yeah, the dwarves will be gitting full benifit from their armor save and that's if you make the 5+ to wound T4 with Str3 bow fire.


Dwarf quarrallers have the same range as the Welves, better strength, and can actually stand being hit. every Welf hit is a Welf down. and now those Dwarf artillery pieces can pick out Welf characters even easier with only Buildings and hills blocking LoS.

Move 5 + D3+2" tree sing move for the wood theyre in giving them a soft cover penalty when you fire at them. Very easy to leave you with only 1 unit able to draw LOS. Plus they ahve skirmishers that can march and shoot quite effectively.

They lack in warmachines, but a good WE player will still put the hurt on dwarves. A good thing that dwarves will now occasionally get a charge off at least...

The 'best' army is one that does not require this thread to crown it so.

IMO.

syanticraven wrote:Seems like a big argument between 2 armies now.

It's not so much a "big argument" as more like two guys each claiming they have more junk than the other one...

Valete,

JohnS

While I'm happy to see TK move from the dustbin of history to the middle tier...I'm not sure they're not still underrated when built properly. I haven't lost with them in 8th, and in 7th, I only won about 40% of the time. With step up for the TG's tomb blades, volley fire allowing the archers to form into melee blocks without losing many shots, and the ability to throw off 20+ d6 worth of magic against 4-6 DD (okay, +3ish for an empire army with priests), and (finally!) some really good armor for fighty characters (TK with ASS, dawnstone, and GW is naaaaasty) my skellies have been rolling over everything in their path without much fuss. Next week, they'll face an undefeated khorne daemon army...I don't expect to trounce the list (I had to ask the guy to bring it off the shelf, it's so strong that he doesn't play it any more), but I'll almost certainly give it a good run.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

EmilCrane wrote:no way a dwarf general should loose to a shooty wood elf list unless he was drunk?

well...they are dwarves...so it is quite possible that he was, in fact, drunk...

@march - I've been wanting to play against TK in 8th with my dark elves ever since I finished the army. It's hard to find TK players, I wanted to see how well their shooting/magic benefited from the changes. Looking on here and else where, I hear lots of people's winning % increasing.

Thought I would chime in here with my thoughts. I started with what greenbay had and added my changes in bold

Dark Elves, Empire, Dwarfs Vampire Counts;
Daemons, Brettonians, High elves, Orcs and Goblins, scaven
Tomb kings, Ogres;
Wood Elves

I moved up vamps because if they really want to they can dominate the magic phase while maintaining combat potential and numbers. The ability to have multiple extra dice and knowing all of any lore is very powerful.

Orcs and goblins moved up because their shooting is decent, their numbers are incredible, and they have a tool for everything. Str4,T4 in the first round of combat for 40 savage orcs isnt anything to sneer at either.

High elves arent quite as good as people make them out to be because in the end they are expensive T3 guys with no armor (dark elves are noticeably cheaper). The prevelance of shooting in the higher tier and the advent of step up (a great rule in general) really hurts them and their massive combat output cant always counter it.

Ogres go down and tomb kings join them because they are really one trick ponies and if you can beat that they are doomed. Ogres fall to pokes in the eye over time (lack toughness), and tomb kings are just desperately in need of a new codex. Getting off all of the magic you want doesn't help that much when all you can do is fire that stone thrower once more.

I put scaven in the second tier but could be convinced they should go up one level. It really depends on what build you go with.

cypher wrote:
Dark Elves, Empire, Dwarfs Vampire Counts;
Daemons, Brettonians, High elves, Orcs and Goblins, scaven
Tomb kings, Ogres;
Wood Elves

I have seen Scaven I think their top/middle tier border line and warriors of chaos are the same but the thing I think lets WOC down is their lack of range.

greenbay924 wrote:@march - I've been wanting to play against TK in 8th with my dark elves ever since I finished the army. It's hard to find TK players, I wanted to see how well their shooting/magic benefited from the changes. Looking on here and else where, I hear lots of people's winning % increasing.

You in Green Bay? Come down to La Crosse, I'll play you...or maybe we could set up a side game at next year's Adepticon.

As for shooting, our shooting didn't get better per se, what happened was that our shooty units, because of the ability to volley fire, were able to mob up into blocks that make decent melee combatants. Three units of ten bowmen in 7th edition, one unit of 30 in 8th. Very little difference in shooting efficiency, but a block of 30 skeletal bowmen is a far more credible melee mudpit than a line of ten or a 5x2 block.

On the magic front, OMG!!! Everyone gets the same PD and DD from winds of magic. The difference is that, since incantations don't use PD, TK players can effectively have an unlimited number of spells. Those spells are, of course, individually weaker than most college magic, but quantity has a quality all its own, and even fighty characters are tossing off (weak) incantations. The inevitable consequence is that the larger the game, the more dice worth of spells a TK player has every turn...while the DD on the other side of the table doesn't scale at all. Throw in the fact that TK do use PD for bound spells and a TK with wizard hat, and it's not hard for a TK player to use all of the PD available to him AND his incantations, completely overwhelming the enemy's magic defense. In a 2k point game, I usually have a king, a prince, a priest, a high priest, the casket, the ruby ring, and the banner of the undying legion. Effectively, my spell dice outnumber my opponent's dispel dice two or three to one...and he's always going to hold back three dice off the top to dispel the light of death. Realistically, that means 1-3 dispel dice are left to oppose a blizzard of incantations and two bound spells, with the consequence that my bowmen and catapult are going to shoot twice a turn, every turn, and there's nothing my opponent can do to stop it. Once my 7x4 block of TG is stuck in, They're getting 15 extra killing blow attacks per turn, which can be as devastating as any college of magic spell. My TK bretheren like to complain that 8 points is overpriced for a skeletal bowman, but when he's virtually guaranteed to shoot twice a turn, he's about as good as if he only cost 5 or 6 points.

@march - Sadly I'm in California, I'm just a cheesehead at heart! I was thinking of going to Adepticon, as it's like the holy grail of US tournies, I just have to talk some friends into going with me. If I do, we're definitely getting in a side game...

AS to your TK stuff, that sounds about right to what I was thinking when I read the book. The fact they are not winds of magic reliant means they can forgo the "nerf" it put on the magic phase.

As far as cost goes...8 points seems like a lot when they have the stat line of a 3 point goblin. But how much do you add in points for something that ALWAYS hits on 5s, is unbreakable, and ItP? Even if you value each one at 1 points, it comes to 6, so not too overcosted imho.

My brother just got a TK army in trade for his Hordes army, I'll have to pass some of this on to him.

@cypher - after further play test, even with Teclis I think High Elves should be where you moved them to. They are just way too expensive.

I don't think OnG should be moved up, they are my main army and main love of the game, but they lack any punch to go with their numbers. (you either give up numbers for some punch, in which case you take away our advantage, or you go for numbers and don't have any punch behind it). That and animosity can single handedly lose you games. As for VC moving up, it takes a lot of points in a very niche build to do what you're saying, though the potential for 6 extra power dice is scary! They should really fall in between the top two, so I guess it's just user's pick on where they go.

The rest I pretty much agree with.

Yea, i probably didn't give anomosity as much weight as it should get. Without it they currently have a good codex. With it they randomly lose game based on on or two throws every few games.

It's actually even more than that. With the generally low LD of the army, and the high numbers, you have to keep your army bunched up, and if you fail a roll with one of your units in front, it affects both it, and the unit behind it.

the op asked which are the best armies of 8th. well every army has improved though at the bottom of the list i think are the bretonions. those that go clear to the top i think are:
WOC
Skaven
DE
and finally Deamons

every other army seems to fall in the middle though.

O&G recived a huge push, they are still falling flat on the animosity.
HE? na ya, not much has changed for then, a tweek here and there.
TK? dont know yet new AB coming very soon.
Empire? all around improvements. shooting, combat, and magic. the all rounders keep their place. best army for beginners IMO.
WE? id rate them an ok army but not that well improved by 8th (yesalot of small things but nothing that screams use me.)
ogre kingdoms? absolutely improved, but are those improvements going to be enough against a halfway skilled opponent? they still lack numbers and armour.
BoC? not to sure here, id place them in with theh empire in hardness now, so a well grounded army thats flexabe and fits in well and recives TLC from the new rules.
Vamps?hard to say, they loose out on some things. gain in others. all in all i think they stay hard, but loose flexability.
dwarves? they were hard in 7th (though crackable) in 8th they are just sick for what they can do. mind ther are a few things where they are going to get eaten, thats the huge elite infantry blocks, compitant shooting and quicker charges from foes. heading the other way it wil be OMG artillery, realls really hard to shift units, and ugly counter magic. Remember, a dispell scroll is now limited to one per army, but those pesky garden gnomes can buy rune after rune. so they go to the head of the anti magic. (again)

EmilCrane wrote:

greenbay924 wrote:

WIth 8th being so new, right now if you're a good general, you can win with any army outside of wood elves, as I think they did get pretty hosed.

Funny thing is that I heard WE can still shoot people to pieces. A dwarf player said he lost 60 dwarves in one match against them.

Was he doing it wrong?

I agree..WE can still win. It WILL take a skilled player though to do so...

The gap between armies is pretty small as compared to 7th ed. Of course some armies will take more skill to win (WE for ex) BUT these armies CAN win. The new army books are of course more efficient points wise as the model costs have gone down vs 6th ed, but the 6th ed armies played to their strengths can still have a good showing.

So call me crazy but I think its still too early in 8th to say what armies are the best. The reason behind my thinking is that all books are currently from 7th edition still (Skaven and Beastmen have an edge being released with 8th in mind).

Unit we see what power level the new 8th edition books are at we can't really be sure. Hopefully nothing as drastic as the VC, DE and Daemons releases for 7th will happen. I really enjoy going into a game and knowing that I have good chance of either winning or losing (I enjoy close games unless its a tournament).

After 3 tourneys, none with comp...

Lizards with super slaan come in at 1.
Skaven with a Greyseer + doom bell, + Plague priest + plague furnage + 2 HPA a close second

Then miles down to everyone else.

Ogres are really struggling, and beastmen desperately need their book redone (which is truely sad) as they are pitiful baring minotaur unit and ghorgor and chariot spam.

From what I have seen ogers are doing quite well.

Yes they are.

mostly because the new rules just gave them a massive boost and people are still in the mindset that "ogres suck, this game will be easy hurr" and then they get roflstomped and are like "what just happened"