Put the Codexs in order of strongest to weakest from your 6th edition purposes! I have seen it done for 5th, and I'm curious what the landscape is like now that everyone has a good amount of time with 6th and the new Chaos Codex.

Black Templars
Blood Angels
Chaos Daemons
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Angels
Dark Eldar
Eldar
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Necrons
Orks
Sisters of Battle
Space Marines
Space Wolves
Tau Empire
Tyranids

(Not my order, just Alphabetical for your Copy-Paste use).

Necrons
Imperial Guard
Grey Knights
Orks
Tau Empire
Space Marines
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Blood Angels
Eldar
Chaos Space Marines
Tyranids
Chaos Daemons
Sisters of Battle
Dark Angels


Listed by group, so same color are roughly same power level.

My list, OP forgot space wolves so I added them, I play sisters mainly and they are a fun army to run. i probably got a few out of place, but generally this is how I see the armies stack up.

Blood Angels
Space Wolves
Imperial Guard
Necrons
Chaos Space Marines
Grey Knights
Space Marines
Sisters of Battle
Chaos Daemons
Orks
Dark Angels
Eldar
Dark Eldar
Tau Empire
Tyranids
Black Templars

Necron
Grey Knights
Blood Angels
Imperial Guard
Space Wolves
Orks
Dark Eldar
CSM
SM
Tau
Tyranid
Eldar
Demons
Sisters
Black Templar

Necrons
Imperial Guard
Space Wolves
Grey Knights
Blood Angels
Dark Eldar
Daemons
Chaos Space Marines
Space Marines
Orks
Sisters of Battle
Tau
Tyranid
Dark Angels
Eldar
Black Templars

Daemons
Imperial Guard
Space Wolves
Grey Knights
Blood Angels
Necrons
Dark Eldar
Chaos Space Marines
Tau
Space Marines
Eldar
Tyranid
Orks
Dark Angels
Sisters of Battle
Black Templars

Necrons
Grey knights
Imperial guard
Space wolves
Deamons
Blood angels
Dark eldar
Tyranids
Chaos space marines
Orks
Tau
Eldar
Space marines
Dark angels
Sisters of battle
Black templars

Imperial Guard
Space Wolves
Necrons
Grey Knights
Blood Angels
Chaos Space Marines
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Space Marines
Orks
Eldar
Chaos Daemons
Sisters of Battle
Dark Angels
Tau Empire
Tyranids

May I ask why DA are bottom 3 in almost every single one?

 riverhawks32 wrote:
May I ask why DA are bottom 3 in almost every single one?

Hmm 10% overcost on most 30% overcost on bikes. Idiot librarians. As a whole they suck. Deathwing - if separated is a fair to middling army choice but suffers from small numbers and slow. Still 30 termies is pretty impressive.

TOURNAMENT WINNERS
Necrons
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Chaos Daemons

STRONGLY COMPETITIVE
Space Wolves
Orks
Blood Angels

COMPETITIVE
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Angels
Space Marines
Sisters of Battle
Tyranids

Almost might have a chance maybe?
Tau Empire
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Eldar

Why are people rating SoB so low? I have made SoB my primary 6th Ed army and have been able to win or draw to just about every army. The only armies my SoB really have trouble with are Necron Flying Circus and Daemons. While they may not be top tier, they are FAR from bottom.

 riverhawks32 wrote:
May I ask why DA are bottom 3 in almost every single one?

Dark Angels offer exactly one thing that you can't get a better version of in another codex: Scoring TH/SS Terminators. While impressive, I feel that between GK, Codex Marines, and Space Wolves, almost anything you could want from DA can be offered by other codices in a better package. As somebody else said, Deathwing is decent but altogether mediocre.

 Salted Diamond wrote:
Why are people rating SoB so low? I have made SoB my primary 6th Ed army and have been able to win or draw to just about every army. The only armies my SoB really have trouble with are Necron Flying Circus and Daemons. While they may not be top tier, they are FAR from bottom.

My guess is that they may not know how to rate them, as most people honestly have never played them. I find it surprising that Eldar are being rated so low. I expected Black Templars to be rated pretty low on the board, IDK about dead last though.

 DarkCorsair wrote:

TOURNAMENT WINNERS
Necrons
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Chaos Daemons

STRONGLY COMPETITIVE
Space Wolves
Orks
Blood Angels

COMPETITIVE
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Angels
Space Marines
Sisters of Battle
Tyranids

Almost might have a chance maybe?
Tau Empire
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Eldar

This guy gets it.

Necrons
Imperial Guard
Knights/Wolves
Chaos Daemons
Dark Eldar
Blood Angels
Orks
Eldar
Space Marines
Sisters of Battle
Tau
Dark Angels
Tyranids
Black Templars

Hmm using the general consensus from the tiers thread I made.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/481945.page


Necrons - Flying Circus

Imperial Guard
Necrons
Space Wolves
Grey Knights
Blood Angels

Chaos Daemons
Orks
Space Marines
Dark Eldar

Chaos Space Marines
Tau
Dark Angels - Death Wing
Tyranids
Sisters of Battle

Eldar
Black Templars
Dark Angels

Tier rankings considering the codex as a whole, not just the dominance of single units (for example, DA are garbage because the book consists of exactly two units: Belial and Deathwing terminators).



Top-tier:
Imperial Guard
Grey Knights
Necrons

Mid-tier:
Blood Angels
Dark Eldar
Orks
Space Marines
Space Wolves

Garbage in need of updating:
Eldar
Tau Empire


GW's shameful errors that need to be removed from the game:
Black Templars
Dark Angels
Sisters of Battle
Tyranids

Haven't seen enough of in 6th to say:
Chaos Daemons
Chaos Space Marines

Peregrine wrote:GW's shameful errors that need to be removed from the game:

lol



You know who you are, GW game designers.

 Zande4 wrote:
Hmm using the general consensus from the tiers thread I made.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/481945.page


Necrons - Flying Circus

Imperial Guard
Necrons
Space Wolves
Grey Knights
Blood Angels

Chaos Daemons
Orks
Space Marines
Dark Eldar

Chaos Space Marines
Tau
Dark Angels - Death Wing
Tyranids
Sisters of Battle

Eldar
Black Templars
Dark Angels

Perfect list. The thread can end now, guys.

I'm going to do two lists here, potential and typical rankings, with potential being "how strong is this at it's strongest" not including allies or Imperial Armour, and typical being what would you expect to see from most players not running netlists/fluffbunnies/beer & pretzels players.

Bold=Highly competitive
Italic=Moderate
Underline=Have issues/very reliant on specific matchups and can win big/lose big.

Potential

Necrons
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
Chaos Daemons
Dark Eldar
Tau Empire
Space Marines
Chaos Space Marines
Tyranids
Dark Angels
Orks
Eldar
Black Templars
Sisters of Battle


Typical:

Necrons
Grey Knights
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
Imperial Guard
Dark Eldar
Space Marines
Chaos Space Marines
Orks
Tyranids
Tau Empire
Dark Angels
Chaos Daemons
Eldar
Black Templars
Sisters of Battle

 Peregrine wrote:

GW's shameful errors that need to be removed from the game:

You can pry my Sisters from my cold, dead hands!

 Salted Diamond wrote:
Why are people rating SoB so low? I have made SoB my primary 6th Ed army and have been able to win or draw to just about every army. The only armies my SoB really have trouble with are Necron Flying Circus and Daemons. While they may not be top tier, they are FAR from bottom.

Agreed to the fullest, 6th has helped them out a lot. They are my primary army and so far my only loss in 6th edition was long fang rune priest spam.

God Tier:
Necrons

Top Tier:
Space Wolves
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Blood Angels


Nothing else really matters. If you're worried about the competitiveness of your army, you won't be picking from any of the other armies, and if you're thinking of playing any of the other armies, you have no reason to worry about tier placement.

Its funny Chaos daemons are ranked hire as they've been running rampant since the WD update. Surprised to see DE rated low they're actually a good army. Venom spam can be quite scary!

ianj253 wrote:
Its funny Chaos daemons are ranked hire as they've been running rampant since the WD update. Surprised to see DE rated low they're actually a good army. Venom spam can be quite scary!

The problem with DE is that they're pretty much a one-trick-pony right now. Yeah, venom spam is scary, but that's all they can really do. Dark Eldar were among the best back in 5th edition when they could crush an army in a huge variety of ways. Now that there's really only one viable playstyle that works for them, they'll work really well against a few poorly prepared armies, but are extremely easily countered otherwise.

I havent played against DE at all nor Eldar enough to rate them, only had two games against 'crons as well, now demons can rank up near the top

- OP-as-hell-tier
Grey Knights
Necrons w/ flyer spam
Imperial Guard w/ flyer spam

- Top Tier
Imperial Guard
Necrons

- Mid Tier
Blood Angels
Chaos Daemons
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Eldar
Space Marines
Tau
DA ORKZ

Bottom Tier
Black Templars
Dark Angels
Eldar
Tyranids

Wait-these-are-still-an-army? Tier
Sisters of Battle

 Sigvatr wrote:
- OP-as-hell-tier
Grey Knights
Necrons w/ flyer spam
Imperial Guard w/ flyer spam

- Top Tier
Imperial Guard
Necrons

- Mid Tier
Blood Angels
Chaos Daemons
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Eldar
Space Marines
Tau

Bottom Tier
Black Templars
Dark Angels
Eldar
Tyranids

Wait-these-are-still-an-army? Tier
Sisters of Battle

Orks apparently transcend tiers and have reached a competitive nirvana

 Sigvatr wrote:
- OP-as-hell-tier
Grey Knights
Necrons w/ flyer spam
Imperial Guard w/ flyer spam

- Top Tier
Imperial Guard
Necrons

- Mid Tier
Blood Angels
Chaos Daemons
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Eldar
Space Marines
Tau

Bottom Tier
Black Templars
Dark Angels
Eldar
Tyranids

Wait-these-are-still-an-army? Tier
Sisters of Battle

Do you even play grey knights?

They are far from OP in 6th edition now, top tier yes, but not OP

This thread get me so angry! Not you dakka fans!
Im a tyranid player and i feel the need to defend the bugs!

I personally find that tyranids aren't that low, In 6th i think they went up from bottom tier. I find i win more games, but against some armys im tabled quicker.

Unfortunatly, the codex is nearly impossible to work with. The only units that are good in the codex, every army has. Flyrants, Terivgons, hive guard, Every single list has them and so everyone knows what to expect. so its now becoming boring to play!

Overwatch and flyers killed nids assualt lists but hull points was a plus for us. Nidzilla lists are as good as ever. Even critters with Furious Charge can handle tanks now.

All my local meta is OP codex's though

Top-tier (And my local meta)
Necrons
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
Grey Knights

Orks went down! I used to have a good game with orks. But now there assualt lists suffered. Sticking burners in a wagon used to be my bane but now i can glance the wagon to death before they get to me.

Thats my bit...

tuiman wrote:

Do you even play grey knights?

They are far from OP in 6th edition now, top tier yes, but not OP

About 2/3 of my local meta are Grey Knights.

And yes, paying nothing or close-to-nothing for very strong upgrades / powers is overpowered.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

Orks apparently transcend tiers and have reached a competitive nirvana

Corrected.

 Hollowman wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

GW's shameful errors that need to be removed from the game:

You can pry my Sisters from my cold, dead hands!

QFT

 Sigvatr wrote:

tuiman wrote:

Do you even play grey knights?

They are far from OP in 6th edition now, top tier yes, but not OP

About 2/3 of my local meta are Grey Knights.

And yes, paying nothing or close-to-nothing for very strong upgrades / powers is overpowered.

I agree, bolters AC's storm bolters heavy bolters flamers h flamers etc are balanced across the game, then GK's come along and for next to nothing adds +1 to the str of all of those and more

 TheCaptain wrote:

 DarkCorsair wrote:

TOURNAMENT WINNERS
Necrons
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Chaos Daemons

STRONGLY COMPETITIVE
Space Wolves
Orks
Blood Angels

COMPETITIVE
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Angels
Space Marines
Sisters of Battle
Tyranids

Almost might have a chance maybe?
Tau Empire
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Eldar

This guy gets it.

Yeah Corsair what about Tau you've seen phoenix play them it can be made to work even if the margin for eroor is tiny.

 captain collius wrote:


Yeah Corsair what about Tau you've seen phoenix play them it can be made to work even if the margin for eroor is tiny.

Not sure what your issue is.

No army in 40K is unbeatable. Every army has a chance. If you can make Tau work, props to you.

All the list is saying is that Tau have usually slightly more uphill battle before them than ... say ... Necrons or Space Wolves do.

I don't know what DA you guys have been playing then
In a tournament recently, I ran through a Vulkan player like butter with my Dualwing combo. Yes they may be overpriced, but they are still a strong book. DarkCorsair's list makes perfect sense to me.

Necrons
Imperial Guard
Grey Knights
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
Dark Eldar
Chaos Space Marines
Tyranids
Tau Empire
Space Marines
Orks
Chaos Daemons
Eldar
Dark Angels
Sisters of Battle
Black Templars

 riverhawks32 wrote:
I don't know what DA you guys have been playing then
In a tournament recently, I ran through a Vulkan player like butter with my Dualwing combo. Yes they may be overpriced, but they are still a strong book. DarkCorsair's list makes perfect sense to me.

Again. Fallacy of the sample of 1.

You can win with ANY army against ANY other army in 40K.

Rankings like the above, however, are based on the assumption (right or wrong) that on average (say.. across a representative sample of 1000 games with players from all walks of life and experience-levels) the Space Marines Codex will win more often than the Dark Angels Codex... say 600:400. That would put the Space Marines Codex ahead of the Dark Angels Codex, notwithstanding the fact that Dark Angels still won 400 times.

Imperial Guard
Necrons
Grey Knights
Space Wolves
Chaos Daemons
Blood Angels
Orks
Chaos Space Marines (?)
Dark Eldar
Space Marines
Tyranids
Tau
Eldar
Dark Angels
Sisters of Battle
Black Templars

Essentially the Red are the prize winners. Strong/Agressive units Mobility etc. They have what you need to win readily available.

The OJ guys they've got stuff some of it's not the "right" stuff though, points costs are high here typically or they can't handle things like flyers too reliably.

Green, Sisters imo have never been truly competitive, I'd say theyre on the high end of the Green borderline OJ, however Tau,BT,DA they need some lovin.


Chaos Daemons
Imperial Guard
Necrons
Space Wolves
Grey Knights
Tyranids
Blood Angels
Orks
Chaos Space Marines
Space Marines
Dark Eldar
Eldar
Tau Empire
Dark Angels
Sisters of Battle
Black Templars

DAaddict wrote:

 riverhawks32 wrote:
May I ask why DA are bottom 3 in almost every single one?

Hmm 10% overcost on most 30% overcost on bikes. Idiot librarians. As a whole they suck. Deathwing - if separated is a fair to middling army choice but suffers from small numbers and slow. Still 30 termies is pretty impressive.

I wouldn't put them in the bottom three; they're not bad at the same level as 'Nids are bad, the advantages of Deathwing Assault (half your Terminators drop on turn one) and teleport homers on the bikes are significant, even if everything's overpriced.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 captain collius wrote:


Yeah Corsair what about Tau you've seen phoenix play them it can be made to work even if the margin for eroor is tiny.

Not sure what your issue is.

No army in 40K is unbeatable. Every army has a chance. If you can make Tau work, props to you.

All the list is saying is that Tau have usually slightly more uphill battle before them than ... say ... Necrons or Space Wolves do.

I'm simply saying Tau are niot as bad as people are making them out they are simply limited in their choice of builds.

Winners:
-Necrons
-Grey Knights
-Blood Angels
-Space Wolves
-Space Marines
-Imperial Guard

Competitive:
-Chaos Space Marines
-Daemons
-Dark Eldar
-Eldar
-Orks
-Dark Angels

Weak:
-Tau
-Tyranids
-Sisters of Battle

BlaxicanX wrote:

 Zande4 wrote:
Hmm using the general consensus from the tiers thread I made.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/481945.page


Necrons - Flying Circus

Imperial Guard
Necrons
Space Wolves
Grey Knights
Blood Angels

Chaos Daemons
Orks
Space Marines
Dark Eldar

Chaos Space Marines
Tau
Dark Angels - Death Wing
Tyranids
Sisters of Battle

Eldar
Black Templars
Dark Angels

Perfect list. The thread can end now, guys.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

DAaddict wrote:

 riverhawks32 wrote:
May I ask why DA are bottom 3 in almost every single one?

Hmm 10% overcost on most 30% overcost on bikes. Idiot librarians. As a whole they suck. Deathwing - if separated is a fair to middling army choice but suffers from small numbers and slow. Still 30 termies is pretty impressive.

I wouldn't put them in the bottom three; they're not bad at the same level as 'Nids are bad, the advantages of Deathwing Assault (half your Terminators drop on turn one) and teleport homers on the bikes are significant, even if everything's overpriced.

I have seen Nid lists dominate tournaments filled with Deathwing, Space Wolve, IG and Grey Knights. I am not saying that Dark Angels or Tyranids are horrible. Just that they either have limited builds or built-iin limitations. Nothing DA or any lower tier army has approaches the idiot proof of taking 2 or 3 long fangs or a santa claus grenade throwing idiot with grey knights.

Might as well throw my hat in on this one. Armies are ranked by 3 power levels, and in order imho. For the record, I have done better and had an easier time in 6th so far with my Nids than I have with my Wolves (and all those games with the Nids were vs high-to-mid-tier level armies, whereas I have struggled with my Wolves vs some low-tier armies). Also, all of the Low-Tier armies (except for BT) are great allies, because they have some good choices, but don't jive so well as a cohesive army, due largely to outdated points costs:

High-Tier
Necrons
Imperial Guard
Space Wolves
Grey Knights

Mid-Tier
Chaos Space Marines
Blood Angels
Space Marines
Dark Eldar
Chaos Daemons
Tyranids
Orks
Sisters of Battle

Low-Tier
Dark Angels
Eldar
Tau Empire
Black Templar

DAaddict wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

DAaddict wrote:

 riverhawks32 wrote:
May I ask why DA are bottom 3 in almost every single one?

Hmm 10% overcost on most 30% overcost on bikes. Idiot librarians. As a whole they suck. Deathwing - if separated is a fair to middling army choice but suffers from small numbers and slow. Still 30 termies is pretty impressive.

I wouldn't put them in the bottom three; they're not bad at the same level as 'Nids are bad, the advantages of Deathwing Assault (half your Terminators drop on turn one) and teleport homers on the bikes are significant, even if everything's overpriced.

I have seen Nid lists dominate tournaments filled with Deathwing, Space Wolve, IG and Grey Knights. I am not saying that Dark Angels or Tyranids are horrible. Just that they either have limited builds or built-iin limitations. Nothing DA or any lower tier army has approaches the idiot proof of taking 2 or 3 long fangs or a santa claus grenade throwing idiot with grey knights.

They don't have as many fancy options, true, but Ravenwing scout move/Deathwing Assault a couple of squads/start shooting/charge and rip faces off in turn 2 does seem pretty idiot-proof to me...

Sigvatr wrote:About 2/3 of my local meta are Grey Knights.

Right, and this is what is important. 6th ed made some things of all armies worse, and some things of all armies better. It's easy to look at your army in a vacuum and only see the better or worse parts, depending on your disposition.

What's important is the relative difference between the armies. A great, if anecdotal way of seeing this is by looking at what the local powergamers do. My FLGS is pretty competitive, so I've seen plenty of examples already.

In the case of my store, one player played BA and switched over to vendetta guard once 6th came out. One player played DE and just switched to GK. Another played SW and just switched to GK. Another played fzorgle/nurgle CSM and switched to necron.

Now, when I look around my store (not including me), I see:

5 GK players
2 vendetta guard players
2 BA players
2 necron players
1 tau player

And then another crazy coot who plays foot guard and looses all the time. In any case, this list is pretty telling to me. When 11 out of 14 players play flier spam, BA, or GK...

Blah! That much flyer spam? I'm pretty lucky in that my FLGS has every army represented. And I mean every army. We have BT, Tau, Deamons, DE, Eldar, my SoB. We also don't have many WAAC or TFG (maybe 2 at most)

I think it should be like this

Competitive.

Necrons
Imperial Guard
Space Wolves
Grey Knights
Chaos Space Marines
Blood Angels
Space Marines
Dark Eldar
Chaos Daemons
Tyranids
Orks
Sisters of Battle
Dark Angels
Eldar
Tau Empire
Black Templar

Obviously some are more competitive than others, but I find the biggest difference maker in a game is skill/knowledge of the players. Any army can beat any other (if the situation is right). Especially now with the points being frugal in a lot of missions.

Eg - First blood. If both players are cautious and make sure to hold on to the objectives they start with then first blood can decide a match.
For Example
In my last game I took a wraithlord, A wraithseer, A farseer with10 wraithguard and a warlock and some jetbikes I kept in reserve. To get first blood against me on turn 1, my opponant needed to drop a wraithlord that was in cover, the wraithseer with T8 and 5++ or 10 t6 wraithguard with a farseer and a cover save. Some armies would munch that in 2 turns but in that specific game my opponant hadn't enough fire power to do it at 36"+. He took a razorback. I had first blood. That was about it for the game. Could've been a good result for me but for the fact it was late and we both forgot so many rules we decided on a draw.

Although it's hard to argue against necrons being the 'best' at the moment because of the availability of fliers. When all the armies have caught up, it'll balance itself out..
And it will change. GW will probably make 7th ed and nerf fliers but bring in mole pods for everyone. And then whoever can take those as DT's can take a turn at winning. And GW will sell a whole bunch more of kits...

Another "What You Like Sucks" thread. Dakka you are getting predictable. Everybody here is perfectly aware of which codecies are old already; seems a smart move to search for the 15,000 other threads that have already gone over this.

 captain collius wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:

 DarkCorsair wrote:

TOURNAMENT WINNERS
Necrons
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Chaos Daemons

STRONGLY COMPETITIVE
Space Wolves
Orks
Blood Angels

COMPETITIVE
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Angels
Space Marines
Sisters of Battle
Tyranids

Almost might have a chance maybe?
Tau Empire
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Eldar

This guy gets it.

Yeah Corsair what about Tau you've seen phoenix play them it can be made to work even if the margin for eroor is tiny.

In the hands of Pheonix and several other players I know, Tau can be quite strong. However, I have found that Tau certainly aren't tournament winners and that, aside from a 99% optimized list in the hands of a skilled player, they rarely perform consistently well in a competitive environment. While people like Pheonix are very good, if you're saying "Tau played by Pheonix" you would then have to compare it to things like "Necrons played by Alex Fennel" or "Space Wolves played by Tony". You have to view this from a consistent point of view without variables such as players added in if you're going with pure power rankings.

MarkyMark wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

tuiman wrote:

Do you even play grey knights?

They are far from OP in 6th edition now, top tier yes, but not OP

About 2/3 of my local meta are Grey Knights.

And yes, paying nothing or close-to-nothing for very strong upgrades / powers is overpowered.

I agree, bolters AC's storm bolters heavy bolters flamers h flamers etc are balanced across the game, then GK's come along and for next to nothing adds +1 to the str of all of those and more

24 inch range, die like any other marines but cost way more?

Psyfleman dreads, are still strong but can now be glanced to death easy, drago-wing is dead, and purifier spam is not as good becasue of the nerf to transport rules, and the msu thing not really working to well anymore,

So if thats what make overpowered, then guard are OP becasue of the vendetta, wolves because of long fangs.

tuiman wrote:
guard are OP becasue of the vendetta, wolves because of long fangs.

One undercosted unit does not make an entire Codex OP.

 d3m01iti0n wrote:
Another "What You Like Sucks" thread. Dakka you are getting predictable. Everybody here is perfectly aware of which codecies are old already; seems a smart move to search for the 15,000 other threads that have already gone over this.

People may be aware of which codices are old, but it's still entertaining for some to talk about it. Also, you can see who's still living in 5th Edition by which people put Daemons on the bottom.

Top
Necrons
Imperial Guard

Mid
Grey Knights
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
Space Marines
Chaos Daemons
Orks
Chaos Space Marines
Eldar
Dark Eldar
Tyranids


Bottom
Tau
Black Templar's
Sisters of Battle

 Rampage wrote:

tuiman wrote:
guard are OP becasue of the vendetta, wolves because of long fangs.

One undercosted unit does not make an entire Codex OP.

Sigh, that was the point I was trying to make Rampage, also if you are going to quote me please quote the whole lot rather than the parts that change my argument completely

Grey knights has psyfleman dreads, maybe purifier halberds as the two OP units

Everything else is pretty balanced, so they are not OP.

tuiman wrote:

 Rampage wrote:

tuiman wrote:
guard are OP becasue of the vendetta, wolves because of long fangs.

One undercosted unit does not make an entire Codex OP.

Sigh, that was the point I was trying to make Rampage, also if you are going to quote me please quote the whole lot rather than the parts that change my argument completely

...oh yeah..

Still that's my fail done for today.

This is how I see it for primary detachments. Go allies, and Eldar rise a lot for example, while Nids become... well, yeah. Three groups, in order, and based on my experience (I've never played Sisters, but I'd love to see some competetive Nuns. I know a few exist)

Necrons
IG
GK
Wolves
Daemons

Tyranids
Blood Angels
Deldar
CHaos Marines
Space Marines
Orks

Dark Angels
Eldar
Tau
Templars
Sisters

tuiman wrote:

 Rampage wrote:

tuiman wrote:
guard are OP becasue of the vendetta, wolves because of long fangs.

One undercosted unit does not make an entire Codex OP.

Sigh, that was the point I was trying to make Rampage, also if you are going to quote me please quote the whole lot rather than the parts that change my argument completely

Grey knights has psyfleman dreads, maybe purifier halberds as the two OP units

Everything else is pretty balanced, so they are not OP.

Sure, everything bar;
- Silly 'nades & Rad 'nades.
- Warp Quake.
- Henchman spam
- 5pts psybolt upgrades
- the ability to spam the new psychic powers

Clearly you haven't yet seen what a unit of 4x power axe Crusaders + 5x power maul Deathcults can do to things when acompanied by a Techmarine equiped with Rads & Psychos.
Any multi-wound T4 unit simply explodes.

And don't get me started on how beyond broken Warp Quake is now that more and more GK players/GK allies are flocking back to the basic Strikes & speedier Interceptors now that Pallies & Purifyers have taken a small hit.

Warp Quake is almost useless against all but 2 armies, and one of those is a very specific build.

Nobody beyond Daemons, DoA, and Drop Pod armies would deep strike in 5th edition.

DoA got neutered for unrelated reasons once late 5th rolled around.

Drop Pod armies really arn't that common.

And daemons are only once codex.


Warp Quake is not something GKs can use competitivly to win, because 90% of competitive armies don't deep strike anything.

Thanks for helping me Grey Templar

Also the 4 crusader, 5 death-cults.Thats a dedicated cc unit, so I would expect them to win in combat, with the nerf to power weapons, there not all that good and T3 across the board. If they are making it all the way across the board and in to comabt then you are doing something wrong.

Again as I said before, 5 point psybolt is the dreadnoughts and transports only, on a raven and normal squads its a 20 point upgrade. Yes the psyfleman in maybe OP, but fortitude to a nerf as did vehicles overall, they can be glanced easily now.

Not being able to score in transports killed henchman spam, enough said.

The only psykers are in the HQ slot, so 2 psykers is not exactly spamming.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Warp Quake is almost useless against all but 2 armies, and one of those is a very specific build.

Nobody beyond Daemons, DoA, and Drop Pod armies would deep strike in 5th edition.

DoA got neutered for unrelated reasons once late 5th rolled around.

Drop Pod armies really arn't that common.

And daemons are only once codex.


Warp Quake is not something GKs can use competitivly to win, because 90% of competitive armies don't deep strike anything.

And as a Daemon player, I'm still butthurt and peeved that games vs GK's pretty much come down to 'can I win a dice roll-off?'

With the supposed 'nerf' to Purifyers and the wound allocation shinanigans gone from Pallies, Strikes are looking alot better since they're cost effective and do the job. They're the cheapest option for getting your scoring units, and don't require an HQ slot to unlock as Troops.
Likewise with the riegning in of transports, Interceptors are a more reliable unit since they're constantly mobile and can't be glanced to death.

Both of whom of corse, allow a GK player to be competitive and screw over every single Daemons player...

Experiment 626 wrote:

And as a Daemon player, I'm still butthurt and peeved that games vs GK's pretty much come down to 'can I win a dice roll-off?'

It doesn't. You can always Deep Strike away from his strike squads. And chances of opponent having enough Strikes to completely neuter you are low. This doesn't mean that Daemon player isn't at very large disadvantage if he doesn't get the first turn against Warp Quake spam army, but

Experiment 626 wrote:
With the supposed 'nerf' to Purifyers and the wound allocation shinanigans gone from Pallies, Strikes are looking alot better since they're cost effective and do the job. They're the cheapest option for getting your scoring units, and don't require an HQ slot to unlock as Troops.

Strikes are looking better for two reasons: No assault out of Rhinos means purifier CC abilities went down a bit and because the Crowe tax got lot worse. Before, you paid 150 points for unit you threw at enemy and hoped it would make at least some of its points back, but you did get the mandatory HQ. Now, using Crowe as your Warlord means you're either not using 150 points of your army or you're giving free Victory Point to the enemy.

Experiment 626 wrote:
Likewise with the riegning in of transports, Interceptors are a more reliable unit since they're constantly mobile and can't be glanced to death.

But interceptors aren't scoring, and are extremely expensive. Especially when you consider that Interceptors pay for fast-to-CC mobility, but are not a CC unit.
To get enough Interceptors to cover opponents side of the board, you need to spend at least 390 points to do it. Realistically, we're talking about around 620 points (2x 10 men Interceptor squads with psybolt ammo, and 2x psycannon).

If you face that kind of army and you don't get first turn, as a Daemon player you're pretty much screwed assuming opponent makes all the critical Warp Quake rolls. If he doesn't, there's large spot where you can drop your army and then kill the enemy.

edit: failquote

Why are we followers of the dark gods so low?!

it's hilarious how many people still think Blood Angels are top tier. I'll tell you right now, they're not...

FNP=sideways nerf. more survivable against somethings and much less against most.

Furious Charge=pure nerf.

most of our SCs have axes that hit at I1 now...

random assault ranges.

overwatch.

stormravens are pointless as a transport now.
.
you can't assault if you start a turn in a nonopentopped transport.

plasma on vehicles getting hot now.

cover has been nerfed.

some of these things i've listed affect all armies but i don't think they affect one army all at once like they do Blood angels.

Blood Angels sound all scary untill you build a 2000 point list that is 40 non terminator models that are nnow no better than any other marine codex in assault. blood angels are lower mid tier at best now and there is only one way to play them now.

Blood Angels are still high/top because they can spam Vindicators and Baal Predators better than any other army, and the changes to vehicle damage in 6th edition make it harder to actually lock down these vehicles.

Blood angels lost a lot of depth and variety with 6th edition, but their signature mainstay in 5th remained just as deadly as before, trading in some overall durability for more reliability, and packing so much brute force to keep it from dropping in the standings like the Dark Eldar did.

They're more boring to play, that's for sure, but their core list is just as powerful, if not moreso (depending on the army you're fighting against).

 Ailaros wrote:

Sigvatr wrote:About 2/3 of my local meta are Grey Knights.

Now, when I look around my store (not including me), I see:

5 GK players
2 vendetta guard players
2 BA players
2 necron players
1 tau player

My condolences, that sounds awful!

phoenixrisin wrote:
it's hilarious how many people still think Blood Angels are top tier. I'll tell you right now, they're not...

FNP=sideways nerf. more survivable against somethings and much less against most.

Furious Charge=pure nerf.

most of our SCs have axes that hit at I1 now...

random assault ranges.

overwatch.

stormravens are pointless as a transport now.
.
you can't assault if you start a turn in a nonopentopped transport.

cover has been nerfed.

You post comes down to "assault based armies have been nerfed" well yeah...The thing is, BA can very easily play as a ranged heavy list with fast vehicles giving great moving fire-power and cheaper devs than regular marines. These aren't weaknesses in the codex that you're listing, they're weaknesses in players' abilities to switch their lists around.

phoenixrisin wrote:
it's hilarious how many people still think Blood Angels are top tier. I'll tell you right now, they're not...

FNP=sideways nerf. more survivable against somethings and much less against most.

Classifying it as a nerf at all is silly, it's less of a consistent crutch, but applicaple in a wider variety is situations.

Furious Charge=pure nerf.

Yes but BA's are probably one of the least reliant on it of armies that have access to it.

most of our SCs have axes that hit at I1 now...

Two? Out of what, 6 or 8?

random assault ranges.

overwatch.

And Orks, Tau, Demons, anything dealing with CC doesn't have these issues?

stormravens are pointless as a transport now.

Only as a turn 1 assault skateboard.

you can't assault if you start a turn in a nonopentopped transport.


plasma on vehicles getting hot now.


cover has been nerfed.

And these apply pretty much equally to most MEQ armies and many others.

some of these things i've listed affect all armies but i don't think they affect one army all at once like they do Blood angels.

BA's are certainly not as unique in regards to these issues as you think they are here

Blood Angels sound all scary untill you build a 2000 point list that is 40 non terminator models that are nnow no better than any other marine codex in assault.

Aside from the fact that they still get a major benefit from Furious Charge and FNP that most other marine armies don't even have access to, can take assault marines as troops...I'm not seeing where BA's are at any disadvantage, especially as they don't pay anything meaningful for a lot of these abilities

blood angels are lower mid tier at best now and there is only one way to play them now.

Are you sure you're not using the 4E WD BA book?

BA aren't amazing but they're not bad either. Their a mid tier army.

FC affected BA the most though. They are defiantly were heavily reliant on it. The +1 to I let them hit before normal marines could hit them back and now that's all changed. Assault marines used to fair much better in assault, but now they lose some on overwatch and will lose a lot from fighting at the same Initiative as MEQ.

ianj253 wrote:
BA aren't amazing but they're not bad either. Their a mid tier army.

FC affected BA the most though. They are defiantly were heavily reliant on it. The +1 to I let them hit before normal marines could hit them back and now that's all changed. Assault marines used to fair much better in assault, but now they lose some on overwatch and will lose a lot from fighting at the same Initiative as MEQ.

The top BA army in 5th was Lasplas/Vindi/Baal spam. That hasn't changed at all in 6th. What's more, the list happens to be just as destructive as before, all while being more reliable. The top BA list is just as lethal as it was before, and is more capable of guaranteeing that that payload gets delivered.
What's more, the Lasplas/Vindi/Baal spam standard benefited hugely from the increase in reliability. No longer can you just glance a Vindicator and keep it out of the game for a whole turn (a strategy that I and countless others relied upon to counter the build). Unless you penetrate or kill it, a Vindicator simply doesn't care anymore, which means you have to concentrate a lot more firepower, be it small arms or special weapons, just to ensure that a single tank doesn't devastate your army.

All things considered, BA were probably the army to benefit most from the vehicle damage changes. So much so that, despite all the heavy nerfs that their assault-based side suffered, their mech heavy side is still considered one of the top armies in the game, even if it is fairly 1-dimensional.

For my local area, things look a lot different than normal and it may just be player skill, but here's how things shake out around here.

TOP
IG
SoB
Dark Eldar
Eldar

MID
GK
Wolves
SM
Necron
CSM
Daemon
BA

BOTTOM
Orks
Tau
DA
BT
Nids

I have never heard BA be proclaimed as the best mech list nor have i seen may list the spam Lasplas/Vindi/Baal. People play BA for the assault specialty. Assault marine troops is their signature and when your signature gets nerfed it hurts.

Hull points hurt mech as a whole now you can glance any vehicle to death. Sure my payload can get there but now it has to get out, stand there, and get shot for a turn. Must analysis I have seen have deemed BA mech the most ineffective as all the other space marine chapters can do it better. This is because of the contents of the Razorback, nit the vehicle itself.

ianj253 wrote:
Assault marine troops is their signature and when your signature gets nerfed it hurts.

Based on what? The fluff? That has nothing to do with the gameplay. Assault in general was nerfed, and is hardly worth concentrating on, and this certainly applies to BA assault lists. But the top competitive BA lists were never primarily assault based in the first place.

Hull points hurt mech as a whole now you can glance any vehicle to death. Sure my payload can get there but now it has to get out, stand there, and get shot for a turn. Must analysis I have seen have deemed BA mech the most ineffective as all the other space marine chapters can do it better. This is because of the contents of the Razorback, nit the vehicle itself.

Who's analysis? BA razor/baal/vindi spam rarely relied on the firepower/combat potential of the guys inside. Its all about mobile firepower, which BA tanks deliver in better volume and quality than any other codex.

What's more, hull points make it harder to pin down a Baal or Vindicator with a cheap glance or two. Now you have to focus your firepower just to kill one reliably at long range. If an army has 2-3 vindicators (in addition to 2-3 Baal Predators harassing enemy lines), it's now much easier to get your firepower into the enemy's face. You may lose a tank getting them to the front line to fire, but they'll actually be firing once they get up there, as opposed to just sitting there and unable to do anything (simply put, you can't just glance a Vindicator each turn and ignore it for the rest of the game). This improved reliability, combined with the higher mobility that the BA codex brings (and the fact that you can take 3 Baal Predators alongside your vindicators) makes the BA mech spam one of the hardest armies in the game. There are very few armies that can deliver so much raw firepower so quickly.

Blood angels are a mid tier army at the best.The mech list that you just presented doesnt have a single answer to scythes,deamons,tyranid mcs and so i dont think that it stnads a chance in a tournament.Their assault options are also pretty much nerfed.SW fall in the same category as they just cant stand alone in a competitive environment without their IG buddies.GK are by no means the overpowered army that they were back in 5th.The reign of MEQ is over.Actually, i find 6th edition to be pretty well balanced with the addition of allies.For example we got DE/Eldar , SW/IG , CSM/Deamons,armies that without their allies they would have serious problems.IMO top tier armies are(randoms order):
Necrons(scythewing,wraithwing,scarab farm,av 13 spam)
IG(vendettas,platoons,russes,artillery)
SW/IG(grey hunters + infantry platoon with ATSKNF)
Deamons(27 flamers, 27 screamers, Fateweaver)
DE/Eldar(in any combination,from the crazy eldar deathstars to splinter spam,the reduction of mech really helped de while their assault is dead)
Nids(psyckers MCS)
Orks(horde type army)
Gk(coteaz and friends)
Sob(sisters with flamers,melta and the likes in metal boxes,we dont see them a lot due to the difficulty to gather them)
CSM(i can only be sure for epidemius list atm)


Codexes like tau,vanilla marines,BT,DA(with the exception of deathwing mb) just need an update

An entire thread for this topic? The answer is pretty simple-- Dæmons (well Flamers and Screamers, really), Necrons, and Grey Knights are the newest armies and therefore the "flavors of the month." However, they certainly aren't necessarily the best armies. At this point I'm confident saying that every Codex in the game can make very strong, competitive lists, although obviously you have to play to your strengths when doing so. The only book that I really even have doubts about is Eldar.

A lot of people say Sisters are terrible, but they have a fair number of things going for them, including the completely broken St. Celestine (best Warlord choice in game, probably underpriced by 100 points) and the always-effective Exorcist tank, as well as strong synergy with Codex: Imperial Guard.

Strong Competitive:
Necrons
Imperial Guard

Competitive:
Grey Knights
Space Wolves
Chaos Daemons
Chaos Space Marines
Space Marines
Blood Angels

Bottom Competitive:
Sisters of Battle
Tyranids
Eldar
Orks

Weak (If you win, especially without allies, you're outplaying your opponent, plain and simple.)
Tau Empire
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Dark Angels

Tinsil I think the two of us must have been playing a different game.DE in the bottom,vanilla marines and csm over nids and orks and in the same league as sw,gk is just a crime ;P.
Kingsley The problem with SOB imo is that they are the most expensive and difficult army to gather in the whole game.As a result none is playing them and everyone assumes they suck.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm just wondering why Blood Angels are below Vanilla Marines? Blood Angels are Marines with more shiny special rules and units.

archonisthebesthqever wrote:

Kingsley The problem with SOB imo is that they are the most expensive and difficult army to gather in the whole game.As a result none is playing them and everyone assumes they suck.

This is a good point. Sisters models are not sold in many stores, and they don't even have a boxed set for their basic units anymore. I once considered starting a Sisters army... until I saw it would cost >1000 dollars to make. The barriers to entry associated with Sisters armies, as well as the age of the models as a whole, definitely mean that we don't see as many Sisters armies as we would see otherwise.

 Kingsley wrote:

archonisthebesthqever wrote:

Kingsley The problem with SOB imo is that they are the most expensive and difficult army to gather in the whole game.As a result none is playing them and everyone assumes they suck.

This is a good point. Sisters models are not sold in many stores, and they don't even have a boxed set for their basic units anymore. I once considered starting a Sisters army... until I saw it would cost >1000 dollars to make. The barriers to entry associated with Sisters armies, as well as the age of the models as a whole, definitely mean that we don't see as many Sisters armies as we would see otherwise.

It really sounds like they're being slowly phased out. No Hard codex, just a WD update one that's nearly impossible to find now. Models that are getting harder and harder to get, both to find and monetarily.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:


It really sounds like they're being slowly phased out. No Hard codex, just a WD update one that's nearly impossible to find now. Models that are getting harder and harder to get, both to find and monetarily.

Phased out? Doubt it.

The GW release list for 2013 that leaked in August actually had some new Sisters stuff on it. I would say it was more about getting a quick-fix in to clear the last Codex with "old" allies rules before 6th Edition and to tide them over until they go their turn. Blood Angels ran on a pdf for quite some years too.

280002330140207 Sisters of Battle Canoness with Power Axe RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280000211440200 Sisters of Battle Seraphim / Patronica Squad PL a14 Len_A 02 cc
280000111440201 Sisters of Battle Battle Sisters PL a14 Len_A 02 cc
280000411840206 Sisters of Battle Exorcist / Catafalque of Sins PL a18 Len_A 02 cc
500061211470209 Dwarves: Kili & Fili & Longbeard Archers PL a14 Sou_A 02 cc
500062630170206 Dwarves: Bombur with Kettle RE c01 Sou_A 02 cc
504018730770200 Wargs: Dire Warg RE c01 Sou_A 02 cc
505007311470201 Dol Guldur: Leaping Spiders / Shiverfang Spiders PL a14 Sou_A 02 cc
505007630170202 Dol Guldur: Spiderlings RE c01 Sou_A 02 cc
281047530110208 Imperial Agents Obsideo Assassin RE c01 Len_B 02 cc
281049111440209 Imperial Agents Deathwatch Kill Team PL a14 Len_A 02 cc
281049230140202 Imperial Agents Deathwatch Librarian RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280002430140206 Sisters of Battle Prioress Lazarea Verata RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280002230140208 Sisters of Battle Sister Superior Magdalenia RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280000330740205 Sisters of Battle Repentia Squad RE b07 Len_A 02 cc

 Zweischneid wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:


It really sounds like they're being slowly phased out. No Hard codex, just a WD update one that's nearly impossible to find now. Models that are getting harder and harder to get, both to find and monetarily.

Phased out? Doubt it.

The GW release list for 2013 that leaked in August actually had some new Sisters stuff on it. I would say it was more about getting a quick-fix in to clear the last Codex with "old" allies rules before 6th Edition and to tide them over until they go their turn. Blood Angels ran on a pdf for quite some years too.

280002330140207 Sisters of Battle Canoness with Power Axe RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280000211440200 Sisters of Battle Seraphim / Patronica Squad PL a14 Len_A 02 cc
280000111440201 Sisters of Battle Battle Sisters PL a14 Len_A 02 cc
280000411840206 Sisters of Battle Exorcist / Catafalque of Sins PL a18 Len_A 02 cc
500061211470209 Dwarves: Kili & Fili & Longbeard Archers PL a14 Sou_A 02 cc
500062630170206 Dwarves: Bombur with Kettle RE c01 Sou_A 02 cc
504018730770200 Wargs: Dire Warg RE c01 Sou_A 02 cc
505007311470201 Dol Guldur: Leaping Spiders / Shiverfang Spiders PL a14 Sou_A 02 cc
505007630170202 Dol Guldur: Spiderlings RE c01 Sou_A 02 cc
281047530110208 Imperial Agents Obsideo Assassin RE c01 Len_B 02 cc
281049111440209 Imperial Agents Deathwatch Kill Team PL a14 Len_A 02 cc
281049230140202 Imperial Agents Deathwatch Librarian RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280002430140206 Sisters of Battle Prioress Lazarea Verata RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280002230140208 Sisters of Battle Sister Superior Magdalenia RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280000330740205 Sisters of Battle Repentia Squad RE b07 Len_A 02 cc

Wasn't that the one confirmed fake by GW? Along with all the Hobbit stuff?

http://www.madison40k.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3157&sid=f25deaa77f8514e8a5f557b335399bdd

phoenixrisin wrote:
it's hilarious how many people still think Blood Angels are top tier. I'll tell you right now, they're not...
FNP=sideways nerf. more survivable against somethings and much less against most.
Furious Charge=pure nerf.
most of our SCs have axes that hit at I1 now...
random assault ranges.
overwatch.
stormravens are pointless as a transport now.
you can't assault if you start a turn in a nonopentopped transport.
plasma on vehicles getting hot now.
cover has been nerfed.
some of these things i've listed affect all armies but i don't think they affect one army all at once like they do Blood angels.
Blood Angels sound all scary untill you build a 2000 point list that is 40 non terminator models that are nnow no better than any other marine codex in assault. blood angels are lower mid tier at best now and there is only one way to play them now.

- Random assault ranges is something to work with, also with the rerollable HoW we can pull it useful.
- Stormraven is still one of the best anti-air flyers and solid way to get a CC unit into combat
- Our SCs with axes where never our 'competitve' choices.
- Devestators are still cheaper then other marines
- We have tactical squads
- We have corbulo

You cant run BA as the pure DOA or pure razorspam of 5th edition (which was boring IMO) but if you run mixed infantry/av13+ or pure infantry there are little other MEQs (save GKs) that can match the range of scoring troops and survivability. The one army/list that has proven to be my bane in 6th has been teezech chaos demons, get your head out of 5th and embrace the many strengths BA have


Strong Competitive:
Necrons - shooters and flyers in spades, not the weight of fire of the IG but can take more hits.
Imperial Guard - a tool for every job a body for every task
Chaos Deamons - Flamers, Screamers and flying MCs

Competitive:
Grey Knights - still able to prove more then a match up to MEQs
Space Wolves - Longfangs, lone wolves, rune priests and thunderwolves
Chaos Space Marines - A nice solid codex
Space Marines - Still a solid choice, bike troops and some SCs even more potent.
Blood Angels - save the thunderfury cannon (sp?), bike troops and SCs anything the Space Marines can do the BA can do it just a little better.

Bottom Competitive:
Sisters of Battle - One round of shooting can make or break this army still, potential for dmg but fragile.
Tyranids - When done right they can break anything with pressure, but also can loose their steam quite quickly.
Eldar - Psykers got a nerd, Eldar got a little better.
Orks - Snap shot, wuts that?

Can work but the cards and rules are stacked against them
Tau Empire - Broadsides are fun, but they need help in all other areas to be comparable.
Black Templars - Fluffy, but have nothing to set them apart atm
Dark Eldar - Vechile rules have hurt them, I still see them win but the reserve rules and hull points really hurt them.
Dark Angels - need their new codex asap.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

archonisthebesthqever wrote:

Kingsley The problem with SOB imo is that they are the most expensive and difficult army to gather in the whole game.As a result none is playing them and everyone assumes they suck.

This is a good point. Sisters models are not sold in many stores, and they don't even have a boxed set for their basic units anymore. I once considered starting a Sisters army... until I saw it would cost >1000 dollars to make. The barriers to entry associated with Sisters armies, as well as the age of the models as a whole, definitely mean that we don't see as many Sisters armies as we would see otherwise.

It really sounds like they're being slowly phased out. No Hard codex, just a WD update one that's nearly impossible to find now. Models that are getting harder and harder to get, both to find and monetarily.

 Hollowman wrote:

You can pry my Sisters from my cold, dead hands!

This

Oh I agree, however I'm not forking out an insane amount of $$ for an army that's slowly going the way of the Do-Do

 blood reaper wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:


It really sounds like they're being slowly phased out. No Hard codex, just a WD update one that's nearly impossible to find now. Models that are getting harder and harder to get, both to find and monetarily.

Phased out? Doubt it.

The GW release list for 2013 that leaked in August actually had some new Sisters stuff on it. I would say it was more about getting a quick-fix in to clear the last Codex with "old" allies rules before 6th Edition and to tide them over until they go their turn. Blood Angels ran on a pdf for quite some years too.

280002330140207 Sisters of Battle Canoness with Power Axe RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280000211440200 Sisters of Battle Seraphim / Patronica Squad PL a14 Len_A 02 cc
280000111440201 Sisters of Battle Battle Sisters PL a14 Len_A 02 cc
280000411840206 Sisters of Battle Exorcist / Catafalque of Sins PL a18 Len_A 02 cc
500061211470209 Dwarves: Kili & Fili & Longbeard Archers PL a14 Sou_A 02 cc
500062630170206 Dwarves: Bombur with Kettle RE c01 Sou_A 02 cc
504018730770200 Wargs: Dire Warg RE c01 Sou_A 02 cc
505007311470201 Dol Guldur: Leaping Spiders / Shiverfang Spiders PL a14 Sou_A 02 cc
505007630170202 Dol Guldur: Spiderlings RE c01 Sou_A 02 cc
281047530110208 Imperial Agents Obsideo Assassin RE c01 Len_B 02 cc
281049111440209 Imperial Agents Deathwatch Kill Team PL a14 Len_A 02 cc
281049230140202 Imperial Agents Deathwatch Librarian RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280002430140206 Sisters of Battle Prioress Lazarea Verata RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280002230140208 Sisters of Battle Sister Superior Magdalenia RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280000330740205 Sisters of Battle Repentia Squad RE b07 Len_A 02 cc

Wasn't that the one confirmed fake by GW? Along with all the Hobbit stuff?

http://www.madison40k.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3157&sid=f25deaa77f8514e8a5f557b335399bdd

Please. Do you really think GW would say anything besides that its a fake?

Just like how if you ask the FBI about anything thats still classified. They'll simply deny its existance.

 Zweischneid wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:


It really sounds like they're being slowly phased out. No Hard codex, just a WD update one that's nearly impossible to find now. Models that are getting harder and harder to get, both to find and monetarily.

Phased out? Doubt it.

The GW release list for 2013 that leaked in August actually had some new Sisters stuff on it. I would say it was more about getting a quick-fix in to clear the last Codex with "old" allies rules before 6th Edition and to tide them over until they go their turn. Blood Angels ran on a pdf for quite some years too.

280002330140207 Sisters of Battle Canoness with Power Axe RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280000211440200 Sisters of Battle Seraphim / Patronica Squad PL a14 Len_A 02 cc
280000111440201 Sisters of Battle Battle Sisters PL a14 Len_A 02 cc
280000411840206 Sisters of Battle Exorcist / Catafalque of Sins PL a18 Len_A 02 cc
500061211470209 Dwarves: Kili & Fili & Longbeard Archers PL a14 Sou_A 02 cc
500062630170206 Dwarves: Bombur with Kettle RE c01 Sou_A 02 cc
504018730770200 Wargs: Dire Warg RE c01 Sou_A 02 cc
505007311470201 Dol Guldur: Leaping Spiders / Shiverfang Spiders PL a14 Sou_A 02 cc
505007630170202 Dol Guldur: Spiderlings RE c01 Sou_A 02 cc
281047530110208 Imperial Agents Obsideo Assassin RE c01 Len_B 02 cc
281049111440209 Imperial Agents Deathwatch Kill Team PL a14 Len_A 02 cc
281049230140202 Imperial Agents Deathwatch Librarian RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280002430140206 Sisters of Battle Prioress Lazarea Verata RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280002230140208 Sisters of Battle Sister Superior Magdalenia RE c01 Len_A 02 cc
280000330740205 Sisters of Battle Repentia Squad RE b07 Len_A 02 cc

Right maybe they'll get a codex too. Instead of pages in 2 editions of a magazine. If that was in there it might be believable.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
Oh I agree, however I'm not forking out an insane amount of $$ for an army that's slowly going the way of the Do-Do

I can understand the financial cost. I built my SoB when the box sets were still available for Sisters and Seraphim, and did quite well on Ebay so I didn't pay what it would cost now.

I will have to argue with them going the way of the Dodo. It should be noted that Blood Angels were a PDF only codex for quite awhile. Now look at them. Daemon Hunter were just as rare as Witch Hunters before they got a new codex and went plastic.

I'm the only sob player here in my area. But through swap shop and ebay I kept my army under 300$ with around 3500 points. They are a lot of fun and competitive. Having every unit with a 6+ invuln minimum is great. We may lack eternal warrior but the faith system is great when used right. Some of my games were luck but tabling your opponent with a "weak" army is a blast.

Same here. Only 1 person at my FLGS had even played a SoB before me. While they may not be top tier, they are far from bottom rung.

 Salted Diamond wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
Oh I agree, however I'm not forking out an insane amount of $$ for an army that's slowly going the way of the Do-Do

I can understand the financial cost. I built my SoB when the box sets were still available for Sisters and Seraphim, and did quite well on Ebay so I didn't pay what it would cost now.

I will have to argue with them going the way of the Dodo. It should be noted that Blood Angels were a PDF only codex for quite awhile. Now look at them. Daemon Hunter were just as rare as Witch Hunters before they got a new codex and went plastic.

I'm sure people thought that about squats too. I actually used Witch Hunters/GK back in the day. Just the GK stuff though.
If they were to get new stuff (doubtful), however if they were to. As well as a printed codex I'll gladly agree with you.

Gw promised(har har) that they will never "squat" an army out again. hoping that stays true since sisters are great, although expensive,

To be fair, GW's reasons for a hive fleet on the squats had nothing to do with their sales. It was a combination of factors, mainly 1. When the tone of 40k changed from campy to grimdark, they found that they couldn't adjust the squats so that they fit in with the rest of the game, and 2. They had a hard time figuring out where they could go, mechanically speaking, with Squats as a race. With Sisters they don't really have that kind of reason to do so, and after the resounding successes that were GK, Necrons, and DE, I wouldn't be surprised if they realized there was an amazing potential for Sisters to become massive sellers if brought back (well, that and Sisters might help them expand their appeal to female gamers, an emerging segment of the market).

That, and if Sister's were gone from the game, who would the Grey Knights use to coat their armour in blood to fight daemons?

RegalPhantom wrote:
To be fair, GW's reasons for a hive fleet on the squats had nothing to do with their sales. It was a combination of factors, mainly 1. When the tone of 40k changed from campy to grimdark, they found that they couldn't adjust the squats so that they fit in with the rest of the game, and 2. They had a hard time figuring out where they could go, mechanically speaking, with Squats as a race. With Sisters they don't really have that kind of reason to do so, and after the resounding successes that were GK, Necrons, and DE, I wouldn't be surprised if they realized there was an amazing potential for Sisters to become massive sellers if brought back (well, that and Sisters might help them expand their appeal to female gamers, an emerging segment of the market).

That, and if Sister's were gone from the game, who would the Grey Knights use to coat their armour in blood to fight daemons?

Eh there's enough female guardsmen for the GK's to round up.

The Guardsmen men would whip the Grey Knights' asses if they tried to take the Guardsmen women.

SoB are indepensible for that reason.

 Salted Diamond wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
Oh I agree, however I'm not forking out an insane amount of $$ for an army that's slowly going the way of the Do-Do

I can understand the financial cost. I built my SoB when the box sets were still available for Sisters and Seraphim, and did quite well on Ebay so I didn't pay what it would cost now.

I will have to argue with them going the way of the Dodo. It should be noted that Blood Angels were a PDF only codex for quite awhile. Now look at them.

Being Space Marines to begin with, this was a given.

Daemon Hunter were just as rare as Witch Hunters before they got a new codex and went plastic.

Sure, but in doing so, they lost much of the Inquisitional flavour that defined the army, in favour of fitting more in line with the standard Space Marine blueprint. Remember, it's no longer a "Daemonhunters" codex, but a "Grey Knights" codex. Furthermore, it's a "Grey Knights as Space Marines" codex.

They said they do regret getting rid of the squats, but their reasoning also included in their creation they were the comic relief. space dwarf viking bikers, they didnt do justice to the hearty dwarves lineiage in fantasy and lore, to the space version.

You can hardly say the sisters are being phased out when the entire range is available for sale still (albeit it direct-only).

It's very suspicious though that the entire range is still metal only, with no Finecast re-issues (I won't count the death-cult assassins/crusaders/flagellants because they are shared with Grey Knights).

Either sales are so low that they won't bother or have enough stock still or something else is afoot.

I did not include daemons or DA because I've not played them and I don't know their dexes.

Necrons
Nids
Dark Eldar
GK
BT
orks
BA
SW
SM
IG
Tau
CSM
eldar
sisters


I find that people rate IG too high. They don't bring THAT many guns and everyone gets their stuff now.

Blood Angels is da bestest.

archonisthebesthqever wrote:
Blood angels are a mid tier army at the best.The mech list that you just presented doesnt have a single answer to scythes,deamons,tyranid mcs

Baal Predators and Vindicators do just fine against Tyranid MCs and Daemons, and Razorbacks in combination with Baal Predators can do a number on flying stuff through sheer number of rending shots. With every Rhino-chassi vehicle being fast you've also got the ability to get close enough to the enemy fast enough to force the enemy fliers to overshoot you when moving.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
- OP-as-hell-tier
Grey Knights
Necrons w/ flyer spam
Imperial Guard w/ flyer spam

- Top Tier
Imperial Guard
Necrons

- Mid Tier
Blood Angels
Chaos Daemons
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Eldar
Space Marines
Tau

Bottom Tier
Black Templars
Dark Angels
Eldar
Tyranids

Wait-these-are-still-an-army? Tier
Sisters of Battle

Orks apparently transcend tiers and have reached a competitive nirvana

Awsome! Grots ftw!

In 6th ed Grey Knights took a nerf, and while they are still very strong, I must agree with the above post. They're no longer "God" tier. Necrons have that for the moment.

I was going to run Nids, but this list makes me want to start SoB a lot more. Raping face with the underdog = cooler than being "top tier". Plus my local shop stocks them for some bizarre reason.

For people who keep putting Tyranids at the bottom, I'm wondering if they've actually fought a Tyranid army to take advantage of 6th editions advantageous changes for them, or just the usual Hive Guard spamfests from 5th edition. Because Tyranids definitely aren't bottom teir anymore. They're not top, but they're in the upper mid teir.

RegalPhantom wrote:
Necrons
Imperial Guard
Space Wolves
Grey Knights
Blood Angels

For the top 5 codex's that is pretty much the order.
Though perhaps gk are above sw, it is very close
Though, i'm not really enveloped in the 6th edition meta, as i kinda am taking a break from 40k

Maybe it's a dumb question, considering how rarely they see play, but where do you guys think the Forgeworld lists rank on this tier listing? With FW stuff becoming increasingly acceptable for competitive play, I think they might be worth consideration.

 TurtleFlop wrote:
Maybe it's a dumb question, considering how rarely they see play, but where do you guys think the Forgeworld lists rank on this tier listing? With FW stuff becoming increasingly acceptable for competitive play, I think they might be worth consideration.

Krieg - bottom tier. The only thing it did better than codex IG with FW units was powerblobs, and 6th edition killed powerblobs leaving a list that's just codex IG with all the best units removed.

Armored Battlegroup - bottom tier. 9999999999 Leman Russes looks cool until you realize your only scoring units are basic IG infantry squads in Chimeras and your chances of winning an objective mission without tabling your opponent are nonexistent.

Elysians - mid-tier, will be top-tier if/when FW gives them an exception to the 6th edition reserve rules (IMO, something like drop pods get where reserves arrive turn 1) so you can actually make a pure Elysian list with Valkyries and deep striking infantry without needing a "standard" IG element to start the game on the table. Even so they're still a solid army, and good as allies.

Traitor IG - bottom tier. Same problem as Krieg, it's just codex IG with all the good stuff removed.

Siege Assault Vanguard - mid-tier. It's a C:SM army (mid-tier) with some advantages (squadrons of tanks, siege shields, etc) and some disadvantages (the "must capture to win" objective), which pretty much average out to "not better or worse, just different" compared to C:SM.

Tyrant's Legion - mid-tier. Good concept made redundant by allies, but still a good combination. Like the other marine-based army, it isn't really better or worse than anything an IG/C:SM list could do, it's just different.

Eldar Corsairs - mid-tier. Better than standard Eldar, but probably not better enough to get them out of mid-tier and competitive with the top armies.

Dread Mob - mid-tier. Worth looking at as an Ork player, but probably not enough of an upgrade to change their mid-tier status. Also, like the Armored Battlegroup, suffers from a lack of scoring units if you emphasize the list's purpose of "lots of vehicles".

 -Loki- wrote:
For people who keep putting Tyranids at the bottom, I'm wondering if they've actually fought a Tyranid army to take advantage of 6th editions advantageous changes for them, or just the usual Hive Guard spamfests from 5th edition. Because Tyranids definitely aren't bottom teir anymore. They're not top, but they're in the upper mid teir.

I tabled a Hive spam a couple of weeks ago with my SoB. Exorcists, rending Retributors, and Saint Celestibe (auto wound on 4+ in CC) are effective counters to them come to find out.

 TurtleFlop wrote:
Elysians - mid-tier, will be top-tier if/when FW gives them an exception to the 6th edition reserve rules (IMO, something like drop pods get where reserves arrive turn 1) so you can actually make a pure Elysian list with Valkyries and deep striking infantry without needing a "standard" IG element to start the game on the table. Even so they're still a solid army, and good as allies.

I would love to get an exception to the reserve rules, but I have adapted my Elysians to use 2 CCS with beacons and a ground sensor hidden on the board. That allows the 2 platoons and sentinels to reserve. Everything else has changed to ride in a flyer.

 Salted Diamond wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
For people who keep putting Tyranids at the bottom, I'm wondering if they've actually fought a Tyranid army to take advantage of 6th editions advantageous changes for them, or just the usual Hive Guard spamfests from 5th edition. Because Tyranids definitely aren't bottom teir anymore. They're not top, but they're in the upper mid teir.

I tabled a Hive spam a couple of weeks ago with my SoB. Exorcists, rending Retributors, and Saint Celestibe (auto wound on 4+ in CC) are effective counters to them come to find out.

Like I said - something that takes advantage of 6th, not Hivespam. Because it's pretty bad in 6th. Psychic choir Tyranids, for example, which people have been saying have been wrecking tournaments.

 -Loki- wrote:
For people who keep putting Tyranids at the bottom, I'm wondering if they've actually fought a Tyranid army to take advantage of 6th editions advantageous changes for them, or just the usual Hive Guard spamfests from 5th edition. Because Tyranids definitely aren't bottom teir anymore. They're not top, but they're in the upper mid teir.

^ This. Every time I see nids in the bottom tier it makes me wish i could challenge that person to a game.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Salted Diamond wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
For people who keep putting Tyranids at the bottom, I'm wondering if they've actually fought a Tyranid army to take advantage of 6th editions advantageous changes for them, or just the usual Hive Guard spamfests from 5th edition. Because Tyranids definitely aren't bottom teir anymore. They're not top, but they're in the upper mid teir.

I tabled a Hive spam a couple of weeks ago with my SoB. Exorcists, rending Retributors, and Saint Celestibe (auto wound on 4+ in CC) are effective counters to them come to find out.

Like I said - something that takes advantage of 6th, not Hivespam. Because it's pretty bad in 6th. Psychic choir Tyranids, for example, which people have been saying have been wrecking tournaments.

I have to ask though, are the psyker powers being used in the codex, or the ones in the 6th rulebook?

I run Biomancy on all of my MCs. A S9/T9 Swarmlord with Eternal warrior and either FnP/IWND or with D3 extra attacks and initiative. MEAN.

Think about a Tervigon with CC and Warp speed. If you charge and use Smash then you've got potential for 9 S10 AP2 attacks that reroll armour pen. MEAN

And that is pretty scary, but when determining the strength of a codex it should be by it's own feet, not using allies/fortifications/the generic powers as a crutch.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
And that is pretty scary, but when determining the strength of a codex it should be by it's own feet, not using allies/fortifications/the generic powers as a crutch.

Have to disagree. Like I said, built for 6th edition. Ignoring the new psychic powers is not building for 6th edition. Tyranids got a huge boost, particularly massed psyker lists. If people are still playing Hivespam, then they're not building for 6th edition, and it's going to show, because they're not taking advantage of changes that were beneficial to Tyranids. The fact that Tyranids are now mid to upper mid teir, from bottom teir, shows just how little they need allies and fortifications. They're still not playing with the top dogs when built for 6th, but I never claimed they were.

I agree 100% on the allies and fortifications. I'm not as sure I agree about the psychic powers, but I see what you're saying.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
And that is pretty scary, but when determining the strength of a codex it should be by it's own feet, not using allies/fortifications/the generic powers as a crutch.

It is using the strength of the codex - the codex allows that many psykers with access to the tables needed.

It isn't something all armies can do, so I think this is a valid point.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
And that is pretty scary, but when determining the strength of a codex it should be by it's own feet, not using allies/fortifications/the generic powers as a crutch.

This is the stupidest thing I ever heard. Fortifications and generic powers are not a crutch. For all intents and purposes every codex may as well have been reprinted with them in the back.
Why would you even want to gauge the power of codices without taking into account all they could do, unless you're houseruling against all of the 6th ed stuff? It makes the whole discussion pointless.

It's my philosophy that a product should be judge by it's own merits. Even if you take the added stuff into consideration, it doesn't remove the problem, just covers it up. Can anyone honestly say the tyranid psyker powers get used anymore when the biomancy ones just completely trump them?

It's a fair point - but the strength of the codex is on how many psykers they can take. All psykers got better overall (apart from eldar - If people try to take guide or fortune off me then there will be tears...probably mine... )
Should we only count eldar as psykers as everyone else uses the brb?

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
Can anyone honestly say the tyranid psyker powers get used anymore when the biomancy ones just completely trump them?

Irrelevant. It's an option they are allowed to take. As someone already said, these options might as well be added into every codex. It's just in the BRB for simplicity.

can someone explain something to me? I've heard, on this thread and others, that 6th killed the Iguard Powerblob. I don't get it. I've been playing them in 6th and have only lost 1 game, and narrowly that time. Is there something i'm missing here that makes my masses of DOODZZ suck?

androcles138 wrote:
can someone explain something to me? I've heard, on this thread and others, that 6th killed the Iguard Powerblob. I don't get it. I've been playing them in 6th and have only lost 1 game, and narrowly that time. Is there something i'm missing here that makes my masses of DOODZZ suck?

Cover save nerf, focus fire, can't hide sergeants in assault. There's workarounds but blobs took it pretty hard.

Almarine wrote:

androcles138 wrote:
can someone explain something to me? I've heard, on this thread and others, that 6th killed the Iguard Powerblob. I don't get it. I've been playing them in 6th and have only lost 1 game, and narrowly that time. Is there something i'm missing here that makes my masses of DOODZZ suck?

Cover save nerf, focus fire, can't hide sergeants in assault. There's workarounds but blobs took it pretty hard.

Which is of course why a variant on a power blob army won both the NOVA Open and the Invitational.

Why is everyone rating Blood Angels so highly? 6th Edition really nerfed us BA players. =(

The things that affected blood angels affected everyone. There were no redmarine specific nerfs. (IMO)

You still have assault vehicles and fnp - what more do you want?
Compared to eldar who now cannot charge at all unless on foot.
And fnp went to 5+ - but now you get it a lot more, eg power weapons don't negate it now.
Dante's axe makes him 2+ 4++ and ap1. And I6 for sweeping advance, so you just don't charge terminators and you're fine

The new rule set really changed the balances of a lot of armies. I for one am glad to see this change. Except to my poor poor Wyches

PredaKhaine wrote:
The things that affected blood angels affected everyone. There were no redmarine specific nerfs. (IMO)

You still have assault vehicles and fnp - what more do you want?
Compared to eldar who now cannot charge at all unless on foot.
And fnp went to 5+ - but now you get it a lot more, eg power weapons don't negate it now.
Dante's axe makes him 2+ 4++ and ap1. And I6 for sweeping advance, so you just don't charge terminators and you're fine

That's great, but what I'm looking for is someone to actually prove this. I'm looking at the GT results post-6th, and tournaments will typically have BA players in the bottom, or in some cases, none at all. So my claim is that BA are an awful codex right now and while we can disagree all we want, they're just not showing up as a top codex in tournaments.

 Red Comet wrote:
Why is everyone rating Blood Angels so highly? 6th Edition really nerfed us BA players. =(

BA's didn't come off significantly worse than anyone else, it's very difficult to see where they lost out so much.

 Stoffer wrote:

PredaKhaine wrote:
The things that affected blood angels affected everyone. There were no redmarine specific nerfs. (IMO)

You still have assault vehicles and fnp - what more do you want?
Compared to eldar who now cannot charge at all unless on foot.
And fnp went to 5+ - but now you get it a lot more, eg power weapons don't negate it now.
Dante's axe makes him 2+ 4++ and ap1. And I6 for sweeping advance, so you just don't charge terminators and you're fine

That's great, but what I'm looking for is someone to actually prove this. I'm looking at the GT results post-6th, and tournaments will typically have BA players in the bottom, or in some cases, none at all. So my claim is that BA are an awful codex right now and while we can disagree all we want, they're just not showing up as a top codex in tournaments.

While you have a point and I completely agree, GT's skew the results a bit so its not certain at the moment, but I do feel that BA really fell out of the limelight.

Edit: The rest of this post isn't aimed at you Stoffer, but at people saying BA are amazing. BA's best choices for troops were either Jump Infantry with or without Jump Packs. Jump Pack Marines just don't cut it anymore and DoA is gone. The mobility from Jump Packs is nice, but with most people going to foot lists and staying away from MSU it hampers us a bit. The loss of +1 initiative is a huge blow because now we can't strike first.

FNP going to 5+ is about the same, but I have a horrible luck with dice so getting those 5+ is like trying to roll a 7 on a d6 for me (and I use perfect cubes as dice).

Going back to our troops, transports got nerfed hard. BA were great because of cheap transport spam and fast vehicles. Vehicles aren't as relevant anymore and while a fast vindicator is now better it competes with the Stormraven with the same slot. And before anyone mentions Double FOC just look at how ready and willing most tournaments are to allow Double FOC.

Dante was never great. He's still meh. Sanguinary Guard still are meh too, even though having a 2+ is great. I'm sure Dark Angels will put a stop to 2+ armor in general once they are released. BA came out of things pretty bad. GK got nerfed, but its still competitive. BA just cannot compete how they used to.

 DarkCorsair wrote:

TOURNAMENT WINNERS
Necrons
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Chaos Daemons

STRONGLY COMPETITIVE
Space Wolves
Orks
Blood Angels

COMPETITIVE
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Angels
Space Marines
Sisters of Battle
Tyranids

Almost might have a chance maybe?
Tau Empire
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Eldar

This.

I'm really suprised to see Chaos Daemons at the bottom of many peoples lists. I guess they have not felt how good the WD updates yet.

 labmouse42 wrote:

 DarkCorsair wrote:

TOURNAMENT WINNERS
Necrons
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Chaos Daemons

STRONGLY COMPETITIVE
Space Wolves
Orks
Blood Angels

COMPETITIVE
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Angels
Space Marines
Sisters of Battle
Tyranids

Almost might have a chance maybe?
Tau Empire
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Eldar

This.

I'm really suprised to see Chaos Daemons at the bottom of many peoples lists. I guess they have not felt how good the WD updates yet.

Indeed. Last game I played I had one third of my army destroyed on turn one by the Daemon preferred wave. We were playing a 2v1 with me 2000pts and them at 1000+1000pts. The Chaos Space Marine dude never made it into combat since the Daemon player single handedly destroyed everything but my two flyers. The new Flamers and FMC are absolutely horrible to face, and the Screamers aren't nice, either...
On a lighter note, Phoenix is absolutely fun-tastic against power armour bikers. Gleeeeeee.

Red Comet wrote:
While you have a point and I completely agree, GT's skew the results a bit so its not certain at the moment, but I do feel that BA really fell out of the limelight.

Edit: The rest of this post isn't aimed at you Stoffer, but at people saying BA are amazing. BA's best choices for troops were either Jump Infantry with or without Jump Packs. Jump Pack Marines just don't cut it anymore and DoA is gone.

what's wrong with jump pack marines? You can also still make use of DoA, you just can't throw *everything* in reserve.

The mobility from Jump Packs is nice, but with most people going to foot lists and staying away from MSU it hampers us a bit.

I fail to see why, use full sized squads, they're faster than their footslogging counterparts, not all that much more expensive than footslogging troops, wayyy faster, and get an extra attack on the charge.

The loss of +1 initiative is a huge blow because now we can't strike first.

While noticeable, it was never necessary by any means for BA's to function well (it was part of that whole "marines+1" thing) and the extra Hammer of Wrath attack should mitigate that.

FNP going to 5+ is about the same, but I have a horrible luck with dice so getting those 5+ is like trying to roll a 7 on a d6 for me (and I use perfect cubes as dice).

It's less reliable on an individual basis but you get to take it against a far larger array of attacks so it's more consistently available. Functionally it makes them less effective against high RoF units and more effective against elite CC units and low AP firepower, in most cases for weapons S7 and lower being identical to a stacking 5+ invul save.

Going back to our troops, transports got nerfed hard. BA were great because of cheap transport spam and fast vehicles.

So was every strong army in 5th. BA's, SW's, IG, GK, etc. All those armies very heavily relied on transport utility, and all took big hits in that regard.

Dante was never great. He's still meh. Sanguinary Guard still are meh too, even though having a 2+ is great. I'm sure Dark Angels will put a stop to 2+ armor in general once they are released. BA came out of things pretty bad. GK got nerfed, but its still competitive. BA just cannot compete how they used to.

I'm finding it difficult to see where BA's lost out so much more than GK's here, almost everything here applies just as much to them.

No way are Space Wolves anything less than number two, if not arguably tied with Guard for the top spot. They combo better with Guard than any other force, bring the most cost effiecient psychic defense/offense to the table, and still have the most woefully undercosted troop and shooting units in the entire game. The ludicrous stuff they can do when added to an IG power blob alone makes them superior to every other MEQ that might ally with guard. The only thing that sets them back from IG at all is a dependance on Allies for a strong air defense.

You guys are also succumbing to emotion by putting Crons in the top tier, at least assuming you are playing actual book missions instead of 5th editionish stuff. Daemons I can agree with being much better, thanks to the buff to fearless units in general and GKs are certainly the next best MEQ book after Wolves. Almost all those lower end armies you are touting as competitive have the "when paired with IG in one build" qualifier to them, while the true power lists (SW, IG, Crons, GK) have several viable builds available to them and can funtion well without resorting to allies or even sometimes fortifications. Any army book that can work on its own is going to be inherantly much stronger than one that needs another book to be competitive.

 Vaktathi wrote:
what's wrong with jump pack marines? You can also still make use of DoA, you just can't throw *everything* in reserve.

I fail to see why, use full sized squads, they're faster than their footslogging counterparts, not all that much more expensive than footslogging troops, wayyy faster, and get an extra attack on the charge.

While noticeable, it was never necessary by any means for BA's to function well (it was part of that whole "marines+1" thing) and the extra Hammer of Wrath attack should mitigate that.

It's less reliable on an individual basis but you get to take it against a far larger array of attacks so it's more consistently available. Functionally it makes them less effective against high RoF units and more effective against elite CC units and low AP firepower, in most cases for weapons S7 and lower being identical to a stacking 5+ invul save.

So was every strong army in 5th. BA's, SW's, IG, GK, etc. All those armies very heavily relied on transport utility, and all took big hits in that regard.

I'm finding it difficult to see where BA's lost out so much more than GK's here, almost everything here applies just as much to them.

Yes DoA can still be used but is splitting up your forces like that really worth it? Yes reserves are more reliable now, but having half of your army on the board and then Deep Striking the rest in just isn't that great as it was before. Anti Infantry is more prevalent than before and the Deep Strike rules force you to bunch up making it easy for you to be one Plasma Cannon shot away from losing most of your squad. DoA was really good against mech in 5th Edition. The meta trends now have completely shifted making DoA as it was used before meh even if there was no half reserves.

I do use full sized squads. Yes they are faster, but they lost a lot of tools. Let's look at the new flamers as an example. How does BA counter that? How do Assault Marines deal with flamers? We can't assault them since they destroy us, and screamers is even worse. A lot of the good codices have nerfed us. Losing that +1 initiative hit us a lot harder than you think. Hammer of Wrath barely comes into play and here's why. If you want Hammer of Wrath attacks you can only move 6 inches in the movement phase. Essentially you trade mobility for a reroll on charge distance and an extra S4 attack. WOW! An extra S4 attack. AND its only on guys that touch enemies in base to base on the initial move up. That doesn't sway the battle alone, but if all my Assault Marines swung before other marines now we'd be talking.

I agree with you on FNP.

All of those armies you listed still do well though even though their mechanized 5th Ed lists no longer function as well. Look at SW, IG, and GK. They can all function well in a competitive environment, but BA cannot any longer. On paper they are small changes, but in play its tactically huge.

Best at bottom worst at top-
Dark Angels
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Sisters of Battle
Eldar
Space Marines
Chaos Space Marines
Orks
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
Chaos Daemons
Tyranids- 3rd place
Tau Empire- 2nd place
Necrons- winner

 Vaktathi wrote:

Red Comet wrote:
While you have a point and I completely agree, GT's skew the results a bit so its not certain at the moment, but I do feel that BA really fell out of the limelight.

Edit: The rest of this post isn't aimed at you Stoffer, but at people saying BA are amazing. BA's best choices for troops were either Jump Infantry with or without Jump Packs. Jump Pack Marines just don't cut it anymore and DoA is gone.

what's wrong with jump pack marines? You can also still make use of DoA, you just can't throw *everything* in reserve.

The mobility from Jump Packs is nice, but with most people going to foot lists and staying away from MSU it hampers us a bit.

I fail to see why, use full sized squads, they're faster than their footslogging counterparts, not all that much more expensive than footslogging troops, wayyy faster, and get an extra attack on the charge.

The loss of +1 initiative is a huge blow because now we can't strike first.

While noticeable, it was never necessary by any means for BA's to function well (it was part of that whole "marines+1" thing) and the extra Hammer of Wrath attack should mitigate that.

FNP going to 5+ is about the same, but I have a horrible luck with dice so getting those 5+ is like trying to roll a 7 on a d6 for me (and I use perfect cubes as dice).

It's less reliable on an individual basis but you get to take it against a far larger array of attacks so it's more consistently available. Functionally it makes them less effective against high RoF units and more effective against elite CC units and low AP firepower, in most cases for weapons S7 and lower being identical to a stacking 5+ invul save.

Going back to our troops, transports got nerfed hard. BA were great because of cheap transport spam and fast vehicles.

So was every strong army in 5th. BA's, SW's, IG, GK, etc. All those armies very heavily relied on transport utility, and all took big hits in that regard.

Dante was never great. He's still meh. Sanguinary Guard still are meh too, even though having a 2+ is great. I'm sure Dark Angels will put a stop to 2+ armor in general once they are released. BA came out of things pretty bad. GK got nerfed, but its still competitive. BA just cannot compete how they used to.

I'm finding it difficult to see where BA's lost out so much more than GK's here, almost everything here applies just as much to them.

Again, if BA were a competitive army now, you'd see top players using them and winning, which isn't the case. I'd love it if people would top telling me BA are great and start showing me.

The way I see it, there were two good builds, one was mass JP infantry (either starting on the board or DoA) and vehicle spam (typically Rbacks).

Challenges, overwatch, nerfing FnP, furious charge, random charge length and removing the wounds off fearless all hurt assault marines and they pretty much got nothing in return. Oh yeah, HoW, right. That wonderful str4 hit for models in base to base. That's a terrible trade in 6th edition where people are massing small arms fire; plasma and power weapons were never the issue, you'd account for losing one or two models from that, but the mass amount of regular wounds were the ones you needed to shed. Small expensive specialized assault units in large numbers won't cut it anymore and that sadly hits BA where it hurts.

Then the other builds. Razorback spam? Sure, but why would I do that when GK does it much better? BA are just at the point where all their good lists are done better by other armies.

Anyway, go to a GT and prove me wrong, but till you do that, the fact is that BA is not a competitive list looking at current tournament results.

I haven't seen it in tourneys, but BA sure seem to screw me over with some of their drop pod or sanguinary guard lists. I actually thing BA are quite competitive in 6th in my opinion.

 Stoffer wrote:
Again, if BA were a competitive army now, you'd see top players using them and winning, which isn't the case.

Just a quick question as a non-BA player. I don't recall Blood Angels winning very many tournaments in 5th edition either, and yet they were still considered a strong Codex then. Tournament results have not changed for BA through the transition between 5th and 6th. Could you enlighten me as to which big GTs Blood Angels won and when during 5th?

Stoffer wrote:Again, if BA were a competitive army now, you'd see top players using them and winning.

Not true. A tournament is only a couple of games of 40k, it's pretty easy for a lot of uncontrollable factors to determine the outcome of a tournament.

BA got a bit worse, yes, but that was just because the main way people play them got worse. The codex itself is still very, very solid. I'm sure once the 6th ed shakes wear off, and we see more BA players again, they'll be back towards the top.

Rampage wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Again, if BA were a competitive army now, you'd see top players using them and winning, which isn't the case.

Just a quick question as a non-BA player. I don't recall Blood Angels winning very many tournaments in 5th edition either, and yet they were still considered a strong Codex then. Tournament results have not changed for BA through the transition between 5th and 6th. Could you enlighten me as to which big GTs Blood Angels won and when during 5th?

Have you never heard of Jawaballs?

Ailaros wrote:

Stoffer wrote:Again, if BA were a competitive army now, you'd see top players using them and winning.

Not true. A tournament is only a couple of games of 40k, it's pretty easy for a lot of uncontrollable factors to determine the outcome of a tournament.

BA got a bit worse, yes, but that was just because the main way people play them got worse. The codex itself is still very, very solid. I'm sure once the 6th ed shakes wear off, and we see more BA players again, they'll be back towards the top.

Also if that were truly the case then every single BA player has had a lot of bad luck.

People played them that way because those were the viable builds. Blood Angels don't have the answers to a lot of the new questions that 6th Edition poses to them and from a lot of games that I've played I can see just how much power Blood Angels lost from one day to another. I reserved my judgment until about a week ago when I was deciding what army to take to a tournament and honestly BA has lost a lot of its luster. If you don't play the codex you just don't understand the power its lost.

 Red Comet wrote:

Rampage wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Again, if BA were a competitive army now, you'd see top players using them and winning, which isn't the case.

Just a quick question as a non-BA player. I don't recall Blood Angels winning very many tournaments in 5th edition either, and yet they were still considered a strong Codex then. Tournament results have not changed for BA through the transition between 5th and 6th. Could you enlighten me as to which big GTs Blood Angels won and when during 5th?

Have you never heard of Jawaballs?

Of course, I don't live in a cave. Could you please fill me in on exactly which major GTs he won with his Blood Angels in 5th?

 Rampage wrote:

 Red Comet wrote:

Rampage wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Again, if BA were a competitive army now, you'd see top players using them and winning, which isn't the case.

Just a quick question as a non-BA player. I don't recall Blood Angels winning very many tournaments in 5th edition either, and yet they were still considered a strong Codex then. Tournament results have not changed for BA through the transition between 5th and 6th. Could you enlighten me as to which big GTs Blood Angels won and when during 5th?

Have you never heard of Jawaballs?

Of course, I don't live in a cave. Could you please fill me in on exactly which major GTs he won with his Blood Angels in 5th?

I don't think he's won any GT's
If I'm wrong, my mistake.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Rampage wrote:

 Red Comet wrote:

Rampage wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Again, if BA were a competitive army now, you'd see top players using them and winning, which isn't the case.

Just a quick question as a non-BA player. I don't recall Blood Angels winning very many tournaments in 5th edition either, and yet they were still considered a strong Codex then. Tournament results have not changed for BA through the transition between 5th and 6th. Could you enlighten me as to which big GTs Blood Angels won and when during 5th?

Have you never heard of Jawaballs?

Of course, I don't live in a cave. Could you please fill me in on exactly which major GTs he won with his Blood Angels in 5th?

I don't think he's won any GT's
If I'm wrong, my mistake.

That's exactly what I think. I've had a look at his blog too and couldn't find reference to him winning a GT with Blood Angels anywhere. Tournament results have not changed for BA between 5th and 6th as far as I can see, although there may be a GT somewhere that I've missed.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Rampage wrote:

 Red Comet wrote:

Rampage wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Again, if BA were a competitive army now, you'd see top players using them and winning, which isn't the case.

Just a quick question as a non-BA player. I don't recall Blood Angels winning very many tournaments in 5th edition either, and yet they were still considered a strong Codex then. Tournament results have not changed for BA through the transition between 5th and 6th. Could you enlighten me as to which big GTs Blood Angels won and when during 5th?

Have you never heard of Jawaballs?

Of course, I don't live in a cave. Could you please fill me in on exactly which major GTs he won with his Blood Angels in 5th?

I don't think he's won any GT's
If I'm wrong, my mistake.

He won Mechanicon 2010 as well as placing 6th overall at NOVA Open 2011. I'm sure he probably has some other notable achievements, I just don't know them. He seems to be "famous" more for painting than gaming though.

Tournament results are overblown in terms of determining what armies are good. Why? You have to consider the base rates of what armies are seen in tournaments.

More people play new armies. This isn't thanks to "Codex Creep" (which has not existed throughout 5th/6th edition) but because new armies are shiny and cool, so people are more likely to be interested in them.

This in turn causes tournaments to have more new armies than old armies. A good example of this is Black Templars. In many respects, Black Templars are broken, with options that no other Codex can compete with-- for instance, they can take 5 man Terminator Squads with two heavy weapons and Tank Hunters. However, they don't win very many events. Is this because they are bad? No, it's because they are very old and as a result not many people play them.

In simple terms, if there is an event with 20 Marine players, only one of which is playing Black Templars, all else being equal one would expect such armies to win only one in twenty events. The real-world rates are typically more extreme than that. So when you evaluate what's good based on what wins, keep in mind that you need to look at what the overall makeup of the event was as well.

 Kingsley wrote:
Tournament results are overblown in terms of determining what armies are good. Why? You have to consider the base rates of what armies are seen in tournaments.

More people play new armies. This isn't thanks to "Codex Creep" (which has not existed throughout 5th/6th edition) but because new armies are shiny and cool, so people are more likely to be interested in them.

This in turn causes tournaments to have more new armies than old armies. A good example of this is Black Templars. In many respects, Black Templars are broken, with options that no other Codex can compete with-- for instance, they can take 5 man Terminator Squads with two heavy weapons and Tank Hunters. However, they don't win very many events. Is this because they are bad? No, it's because they are very old and as a result not many people play them.

In simple terms, if there is an event with 20 Marine players, only one of which is playing Black Templars, all else being equal one would expect such armies to win only one in twenty events. The real-world rates are typically more extreme than that. So when you evaluate what's good based on what wins, keep in mind that you need to look at what the overall makeup of the event was as well.

In 5th edition it had alot to do with Codex Creep.

SW's came out, we saw missile spam/ T-wolves with Las/plas razors. Blood Angels came out, we saw 5 man assault squads w/ cheap las/plas razor backs. GK came out we saw str 8 Psyfleman spam, w/ Coteaz and friends.

Another thing that makes tournament results less than meaningful is your local meta probably doesn't run tournament lists. The global tournament scene has it's own, as does every local group. Something that dominates a tournament might cet destroyed in a local setting because the person played against a list perfectly designed to take it apart - but not an all rounder list, so not something you'd see at a tournament.

It's worthwhile rating these teirs as tournament teirs, because they're definitely not local teirs.

 DarkCorsair wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Rampage wrote:

 Red Comet wrote:

Rampage wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Again, if BA were a competitive army now, you'd see top players using them and winning, which isn't the case.

Just a quick question as a non-BA player. I don't recall Blood Angels winning very many tournaments in 5th edition either, and yet they were still considered a strong Codex then. Tournament results have not changed for BA through the transition between 5th and 6th. Could you enlighten me as to which big GTs Blood Angels won and when during 5th?

Have you never heard of Jawaballs?

Of course, I don't live in a cave. Could you please fill me in on exactly which major GTs he won with his Blood Angels in 5th?

I don't think he's won any GT's
If I'm wrong, my mistake.

He won Mechanicon 2010 as well as placing 6th overall at NOVA Open 2011. I'm sure he probably has some other notable achievements, I just don't know them. He seems to be "famous" more for painting than gaming though.

Pretty much this.

 Red Comet wrote:

You're leaving out the fact he's more full of himself than a politician.
Pretty much this.

Fixed it for ya ^^

IMO - once 6th is settled BA will still be good.

Blood Angels are my main army to fight against.
Things my eldar hate are

Drop podding AV13 furiosos's
Furiosos's that keep hitting till the squads dead.
All Fast vehicles
Storm Ravens that fly up and drop off hammernators and dreadnoughts. The dreadnoughts can't be killed by a crash either.
Death company
Corbulo tanking wounds
Dante - descent of angels, melta pistol and a 2+ 4++. While nerfing an enemy character.
Feel no pain across the board (seems like it )
Furious charge giving +1 strength - good in marine on marine. They aren't going first anymore, but they still hit harder.
Did I mention Storm Ravens?
The Sanguinor

There are still good builds for the BA.

Things I consider significantly nerfed
In 3rd ed, I ran an eldar biel tan army. In 4th, there were no more specific craftworld builds so my army was illegal. In 5th I also ran chaos undivided. Now I need more troops because my army is illegal again, what with the foc changes for cult marines. In 2nd, the wolves had ws5 across the board. In 3rd, blood claws became ws3 and thus worse for the same cost as grey hunters.
Those are specific army nerfs.
The BA have been affected more than most by FNP, but the general rules changed for everybody.
For Example - the transport nerf didn't hit BA as bad as eldar. Eldar have no assault vehicles so banshee's are now unusable - they have to foot slog with t3 and a 4+ and as soon as they get in range, one tac squad worth of shooting will drop them.
There's a reason all the eldar players on the net seem to be running wraith/foot lists at the moment - it's because the eldar now have a grand total of 1 (arguably) viable cc squad.
I'm enjoying playing against BA more as there's no more turn 1 charge and auto win, but they are a hell of a long way from the bottom of the army tiers.
They are still a good army. What mainly got hit in 6th was the vehicle spam from all armies.

In case you didn't guess I still rate the BA.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
In 5th edition it had alot to do with Codex Creep.

SW's came out, we saw missile spam/ T-wolves with Las/plas razors. Blood Angels came out, we saw 5 man assault squads w/ cheap las/plas razor backs. GK came out we saw str 8 Psyfleman spam, w/ Coteaz and friends.

I don't think Codex Creep is real. To cite the example most commonly used, Space Wolves indeed do some things better than Space Marines-- but they also do some things worse. Their Devastators are better, but their Terminators are worse. Their Grey Hunters are better in assault, but they can't use Combat Squads to split up and park a heavy weapon on your rear objective. They have Counter-Attack, but they lose Combat Tactics. It's a series of tradeoffs-- and each book can still play to its comparative advantage.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Red Comet wrote:

You're leaving out the fact he's more full of himself than a politician.
Pretty much this.

Fixed it for ya ^^

I've met him and he's a pretty nice dude...please give me an example of him being full of himself? Blatantly insulting someone for no reason where they can't defend themselves is generally frowned upon.

 Red Comet wrote:

 DarkCorsair wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Rampage wrote:

 Red Comet wrote:

Rampage wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Again, if BA were a competitive army now, you'd see top players using them and winning, which isn't the case.

Just a quick question as a non-BA player. I don't recall Blood Angels winning very many tournaments in 5th edition either, and yet they were still considered a strong Codex then. Tournament results have not changed for BA through the transition between 5th and 6th. Could you enlighten me as to which big GTs Blood Angels won and when during 5th?

Have you never heard of Jawaballs?

Of course, I don't live in a cave. Could you please fill me in on exactly which major GTs he won with his Blood Angels in 5th?

I don't think he's won any GT's
If I'm wrong, my mistake.

He won Mechanicon 2010 as well as placing 6th overall at NOVA Open 2011. I'm sure he probably has some other notable achievements, I just don't know them. He seems to be "famous" more for painting than gaming though.

Pretty much this.

1 GT in the same year that the Codex dropped. Yeah, BA were a real tournament powerhouse in 5th.

 Kingsley wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
In 5th edition it had alot to do with Codex Creep.

SW's came out, we saw missile spam/ T-wolves with Las/plas razors. Blood Angels came out, we saw 5 man assault squads w/ cheap las/plas razor backs. GK came out we saw str 8 Psyfleman spam, w/ Coteaz and friends.

I don't think Codex Creep is real. To cite the example most commonly used, Space Wolves indeed do some things better than Space Marines-- but they also do some things worse. Their Devastators are better, but their Terminators are worse. Their Grey Hunters are better in assault, but they can't use Combat Squads to split up and park a heavy weapon on your rear objective. They have Counter-Attack, but they lose Combat Tactics. It's a series of tradeoffs-- and each book can still play to its comparative advantage.

Yes, SW's are not the sheer level of Codex Creep that most claim them to be, since every advantage they get over Vanilla Marines is offset by a disadvantage. Even amongst their two most bemoaned units, it's pretty major buffs AND drawbacks;
a) Grey Hunters to Tactical Marines. GH's will stand up better to assaults & are more mobile, but lose out on the ability to Combat Squad, Combat Tactics, no heavy weapon slot AND they pay a crapload extra for their Sergeant equivalent. (which also prevents them from having their character + 2 weapon upgrades while still fitting into their Rhino!)
Tacticals on the other hand are just that - far more flexible but will fold alot eaiser in combat.

b) Long Fangs can split fire and get cheaper weapon upgrades, but have 0 ablaitve wounds, meaning each casulty is very costly and seriously reduces the unit's effectiveness.
Devastators cost more, but can use Combat Squads to effectively do the same thing, (target 2 seperate units), but that ability can't be one-shoted out of the unit! And while they don't have as many heavy weapons, it's takes longer to remove those big guns due to the potential for upto 6 ablative wounds.



However, there is noticable Codex Creep once the BA's hit. Everything Vanilla Marines can do, Codex: BA's does it at +1.
Just compare the Assault Squad between the too books; Codex Marines can take a Flamer or Plasma Pistol + Sergeant equipment. They have Combat Squads & Combat Tactics and they can remove their Jump Packs for a 'free' transport.
Now, Codex BA's can take an Assault Squad that also gets a Plasma Gun or Meltagun on top of the Flamer/Plasma Pistol, their Sergeant gets the added Inferno pistol, they still have Combat Squads and in place of Combat Tactics, they instead pick-up DoA, Red Thirst AND are a scoring unit! However, the biggest advantage is that these guys can also remove their jump packs and instead get a -35pts discount on their now 'Fast' type transports!

Considering how the game worked when this book came out, BA's had a massively distinct advantage since they got the absolute best of the GH's & Tactical Squads;
- cheap transport to mech-up, which is also faster.
- ability to take the minimum number of men while still packing special weapons. (always a Meltagun since 5th was so dominated by vehicles)
- scoring unit.

Then on top of that, they also got cheaper Devastators, cheap ability to gain army-wide FnP, better Dreadnoughts, and most contentious of all, having the Baal Predator moved into the Fast Attack slot so BA's could still load up on the main Space Marine mainstay of preds & vindies.
And just to cover all the bases, BA's could still out-dreadnought Codex Marine's dreadnought army since they didn't require a mediocre HQ to unlock the ability AND gained both Libby Dreads and the 'Blendernaught' for the loss of the Ironclade.

And seriously, how can you not consider Codex: Grey Knights to be the epitome of codex creep? It had easy hard-counters for everything, while also being everything Marines are but this time jacked upto +11!
- Hordes giving you problems? Take a 140pts 'tax' IC and now you have the game's best anti-horde unit as Troops for endless spamability... Oh, and we also gave them additional special weapon upgrades so they can min/max better than anyone else AND toss in better and cheaper vehicle upgrades too so you can out-mech everyone as well!

- Tired of getting punked by Deep Strikers? Okay, here's 2 different squads that can make deep Striking 100% impossible, thereby forcing all those Drop Pods & DoA armies to walk.
Oh, soory Daemon players, you guys are just completely screwed so please shelve your armies now!

- IG mech-Vets causing you pain? Take another 100'ish pts 'tax' and now you can insanely cheap 3-man Meltagun teams racing around in Chimeras or Psybacks, but we also threw in an insanely awsome assault unit option as well!

- Don't like seeing your prescious models killed? Just want to put all those nasty Deathwing players in their place and make them cry their mantears?! Here's multi-wound Termies that can also get a FnP upgrade, and just to make things even better, we'll let you guys pull those same wound-allocation shinanigans that those filthy Ork players have been cheating with too!



Codex Creep did, (and likely will continue), to exist. The only thing we can hope for is that it doesn't go as insanely overboard as it did in 5th edition when it does happen!

 Red Comet wrote:

 DarkCorsair wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Rampage wrote:

 Red Comet wrote:

Rampage wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Again, if BA were a competitive army now, you'd see top players using them and winning, which isn't the case.

Just a quick question as a non-BA player. I don't recall Blood Angels winning very many tournaments in 5th edition either, and yet they were still considered a strong Codex then. Tournament results have not changed for BA through the transition between 5th and 6th. Could you enlighten me as to which big GTs Blood Angels won and when during 5th?

Have you never heard of Jawaballs?

Of course, I don't live in a cave. Could you please fill me in on exactly which major GTs he won with his Blood Angels in 5th?

I don't think he's won any GT's
If I'm wrong, my mistake.

He won Mechanicon 2010 as well as placing 6th overall at NOVA Open 2011. I'm sure he probably has some other notable achievements, I just don't know them. He seems to be "famous" more for painting than gaming though.

Pretty much this.

I had no beef with BA in 5th. I think a lot of the infantry builds were underrated towards the end of the edition and you could string a lot of cool lists together. They did also win a tournaments after they were released, but it tapered off slowly until finally getting killed by 6th. I put my BA army in boxes and I would love to pick them up someday, but for now they're just not worth bringing to tournaments.

Experiment 626 wrote:
However, there is noticable Codex Creep once the BA's hit. Everything Vanilla Marines can do, Codex: BA's does it at +1.
Just compare the Assault Squad between the too books; Codex Marines can take a Flamer or Plasma Pistol + Sergeant equipment. They have Combat Squads & Combat Tactics and they can remove their Jump Packs for a 'free' transport.
Now, Codex BA's can take an Assault Squad that also gets a Plasma Gun or Meltagun on top of the Flamer/Plasma Pistol, their Sergeant gets the added Inferno pistol, they still have Combat Squads and in place of Combat Tactics, they instead pick-up DoA, Red Thirst AND are a scoring unit! However, the biggest advantage is that these guys can also remove their jump packs and instead get a -35pts discount on their now 'Fast' type transports!

Blood Angels Assault Squads are indeed better than Space Marine Assault Squads. But that doesn't mean Blood Angels are always better. For instance, TH/SS Terminators are 5 ppm cheaper in Codex: Space Marines, and can acquire Fleet or Master-Crafted. Further, Space Marines have better psychic powers, the extremely powerful and flexible Combat Tactics/Chapter Tactics ability, they don't have to pay points for Fast vehicles (not always something you want), they have access to Thunderfire Cannons (great in 6th edition!), they can take bikes as troops, their Whirlwinds are better, etc.

Each Codex has advantages and disadvantages-- I play Space Marines and have not wanted to switch my Codex to Blood Angels, simply because Codex: Space Marines better fits my playstyle.

Experiment 626 wrote:
Then on top of that, they also got cheaper Devastators, cheap ability to gain army-wide FnP, better Dreadnoughts, and most contentious of all, having the Baal Predator moved into the Fast Attack slot so BA's could still load up on the main Space Marine mainstay of preds & vindies.
And just to cover all the bases, BA's could still out-dreadnought Codex Marine's dreadnought army since they didn't require a mediocre HQ to unlock the ability AND gained both Libby Dreads and the 'Blendernaught' for the loss of the Ironclade.

Blood Angel Dreadnoughts are actually very inferior to Space Marine Dreadnoughts, because they take Heavy Support slots instead of Elites slots. SM shooty Dreadnoughts can be taken alongside other Heavy Support units, while Blood Angel Dreadnoughts cannot. Further, the Furioso and Furioso Librarian are IMO inferior to the Ironclad.

Experiment 626 wrote:
And seriously, how can you not consider Codex: Grey Knights to be the epitome of codex creep? It had easy hard-counters for everything, while also being everything Marines are but this time jacked upto +11!

Grey Knights are better than Marines, but they pay for their upgrades. What you get is generally fair for what you pay. This wasn't the case in 5th edition, but it's evident that Grey Knights were designed for 6th edition, and once it came out the problems with Grey Knights essentially went away. Fortitude, for instance, is fairly costed now-- I probably wouldn't pay 5 points for it most of the time-- and storm bolters lose a lot of their luster when normal bolters can move and shoot at 24" as well.

 Kingsley wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
In 5th edition it had alot to do with Codex Creep.

SW's came out, we saw missile spam/ T-wolves with Las/plas razors. Blood Angels came out, we saw 5 man assault squads w/ cheap las/plas razor backs. GK came out we saw str 8 Psyfleman spam, w/ Coteaz and friends.

I don't think Codex Creep is real. To cite the example most commonly used, Space Wolves indeed do some things better than Space Marines-- but they also do some things worse. Their Devastators are better, but their Terminators are worse. Their Grey Hunters are better in assault, but they can't use Combat Squads to split up and park a heavy weapon on your rear objective. They have Counter-Attack, but they lose Combat Tactics. It's a series of tradeoffs-- and each book can still play to its comparative advantage.

Excuse me? I run a loganwing and I will take them any day over deathwing or vanilla. If you don't go nuts, you have access to cheap termies with wolfclaws and combi-weapons... 215 points of death. Sure you cannot afford to buy stormshields but it is not as necessary. Face off against terminators? Fine I can shoot them to death. Frankly the only thing I don't like facing is SoB.

Counter-attack is superior in every way to combat tactics... Hello I can unload from a rhino or drop pod and fire and if you are foolish enough to charge me now I get to snapfire at you and then get +1 attack. Add to that cheap special weapons the banner and wolfkin and you should be able to dominate any vanilla marine.

I was under the impression that the first U.S. Major after 6th edition (as in used 6th rules) was won by a sisters of battle player. However I can't remember his name I thought he was a dakka regular too.

DAaddict wrote:

Excuse me? I run a loganwing and I will take them any day over deathwing or vanilla. If you don't go nuts, you have access to cheap termies with wolfclaws and combi-weapons... 215 points of death. Sure you cannot afford to buy stormshields but it is not as necessary. Face off against terminators? Fine I can shoot them to death. Frankly the only thing I don't like facing is SoB.

Counter-attack is superior in every way to combat tactics... Hello I can unload from a rhino or drop pod and fire and if you are foolish enough to charge me now I get to snapfire at you and then get +1 attack. Add to that cheap special weapons the banner and wolfkin and you should be able to dominate any vanilla marine.

Space Wolves are evil if you play right into the Puppies' hands.

Yes, trying to assault a Grey Hunter squad with Tactical Marines is beyond stupid and the Hunters will simply laugh while roflstomping those silly Tacticals. However, weathering the first round of shooting, then shooting back with your Tacticals while bringing up proper combat support from the likes of Termies or even a large Assault Squad will see those same Grey Hunters get their collective faces kicked in. They'll still do some damage, but they will lose as now numbers and/or specialisation is on the Vanilla's side.
Combat Tactics is also a big shift towards the Vanilla Marines since they can always try to basically just up and leave combat when they so choose. Against an intelligent Codex Marines player, SW's will have a hard time keeping the enemy locked up in combat when Combat Tactics kicks in.

Codex Marines are overall shootier than the SW's and at longer range. SW's are a far superior mid-ranged shooting army that has strong counter abilities. That's not 'Codex Creep', but rather most players just thinking SW's are simply 'blue-grey marines that die like any other marine'.

Codex Creep is more like the BA's being Codex Marines +1 in every aspect but a biker army!
Anything else Vanilla Marines can do, BA's do it better and/or for cheaper.

Experiment 626 wrote:
Codex Marines are overall shootier than the SW's and at longer range.

Although I completely agree with you regarding the longer range, and most of your points in general actually. I'm not really seeing how Vanilla Marines shoot better than Space Wolves. For 420pts Space Wolves can pick up 18 Long Fangs with 15 missile launchers. Just wondering how much shooting Vanilla Marines can pack for that many points? Not trying to argue just curious, I rarely get to play against Space Marines, as odd as that sounds.

 Rampage wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
Codex Marines are overall shootier than the SW's and at longer range.

Although I completely agree with you regarding the longer range, and most of your points in general actually. I'm not really seeing how Vanilla Marines shoot better than Space Wolves. For 420pts Space Wolves can pick up 18 Long Fangs with 15 missile launchers. Just wondering how much shooting Vanilla Marines can pack for that many points? Not trying to argue just curious, I rarely get to play against Space Marines, as odd as that sounds.

Sure SW's get the cheaper long ranged power, but it's made of glass compared to Vanilla Marines. For 140pts you get just 6 guys and each one is an upgraded specialist, thus each time you lose a model you're losing 23.3 pts, whereas a 10-man Vanilla Dev squad with 4x rocket launchers only loses 23pts per casulty.
The Dev squad costs more up front, however, the first 5 casulties from the Dev Squad don't diminish their threat level at all! And they can still technically pull the same multi-targeting tactics through Combat Squads, (which also can't be countered by a single kill), AND one of those Missile Launchers will get BS5 thanks to the Sergeant's Signum.

Devastators are also overcosted in the Vanilla book - if you use the BA Codex costs, the pts lost per kill swing even further in favour of the Devs. However, Vanilla Marines can also choose options such as Mortis Dreads, Thunderfire Cannon, Tac Squad heavies, Sniper Scouts, Master of the Forge, dakka Predators, etc...
Most SW lists will simply stick to Longfangs and a combo of Speeders & Razorbacks to spam their heavy weapons. Vanilla Marines have 'oodles of options for spaming 36"+ guns and aren't relying on easy to kill 6-man squads or av10/11 vehicles.

Going first, the SW's will most likely earn their pts back before the Longfangs bite it. But if the Vanilla Marines go first, well, there's some nice 'free' kill points as 6 MEQ's in cover aren't hard to remove in 6th edition.

Heck, I'd say that even GK's have a better long ranged game than SW's since they get super cheap Psyflemen and mobile 30"+ psycannons on top of the standard transport options! People just get seriously butthurt because SW's get a deep discount on their one and only main heavy weapon group.

Experiment 626 wrote:

 Rampage wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
Codex Marines are overall shootier than the SW's and at longer range.

Although I completely agree with you regarding the longer range, and most of your points in general actually. I'm not really seeing how Vanilla Marines shoot better than Space Wolves. For 420pts Space Wolves can pick up 18 Long Fangs with 15 missile launchers. Just wondering how much shooting Vanilla Marines can pack for that many points? Not trying to argue just curious, I rarely get to play against Space Marines, as odd as that sounds.

Sure SW's get the cheaper long ranged power, but it's made of glass compared to Vanilla Marines. For 140pts you get just 6 guys and each one is an upgraded specialist, thus each time you lose a model you're losing 23.3 pts, whereas a 10-man Vanilla Dev squad with 4x rocket launchers only loses 23pts per casulty.
The Dev squad costs more up front, however, the first 5 casulties from the Dev Squad don't diminish their threat level at all! And they can still technically pull the same multi-targeting tactics through Combat Squads, (which also can't be countered by a single kill), AND one of those Missile Launchers will get BS5 thanks to the Sergeant's Signum.

Devastators are also overcosted in the Vanilla book - if you use the BA Codex costs, the pts lost per kill swing even further in favour of the Devs. However, Vanilla Marines can also choose options such as Mortis Dreads, Thunderfire Cannon, Tac Squad heavies, Sniper Scouts, Master of the Forge, dakka Predators, etc...
Most SW lists will simply stick to Longfangs and a combo of Speeders & Razorbacks to spam their heavy weapons. Vanilla Marines have 'oodles of options for spaming 36"+ guns and aren't relying on easy to kill 6-man squads or av10/11 vehicles.

Going first, the SW's will most likely earn their pts back before the Longfangs bite it. But if the Vanilla Marines go first, well, there's some nice 'free' kill points as 6 MEQ's in cover aren't hard to remove in 6th edition.

Heck, I'd say that even GK's have a better long ranged game than SW's since they get super cheap Psyflemen and mobile 30"+ psycannons on top of the standard transport options! People just get seriously butthurt because SW's get a deep discount on their one and only main heavy weapon group.

I agree with you for the most part, you make some good points, but +.3 points isn't really that much in order to be able to split fire without having to split up the squad.

As a Space Wolves player, I can say that Long Fangs are much more points efficient than Tac Squads, Sniper Scouts, Dakka Predators, etc. Not really sure about the Mortis Dread, as I don't get to play against Forge World much, but at least you are always allowed to field Long Fangs in tournaments. Most Space Wolf players also stick their sergeants at the front of squads to preserve the missiles, plus we have the option of putting Terminators at the front too to eat bullets for us. I played against Vanilla Marines with a Spartan Land Raider at 2,000pts tonight, at the end of the game, which ended on turn 7, I still had 2 of my Long Fang packs remaining, in kill points going second.

In short, if you were to make a mainly shooty Vanilla Marines list, and then you were to make a mainly shooty Space Wolves list, I would have to say the Wolves would probably be better.

Plus the Long Wangs actually still have all the assault benefits of Grey Hunters. And thats not even getting into the whole ide of putting terminator Wolf Guard in the unit as further bullet shielding/extra missiles. Honestly, does anyone by tactical marines from any book for their shooting ability?

I do find it interesting that a lot of these tier discussion threads always involve heated discussions from BA players. Its like the Rhino Rush age BA players want that level of power back and no one else can understand why they are unhappy having to alter their book to the new edition in every one of these threads. I think BA do have some issues, being the most assault dependant MEQ army, but they have ways of getting armor into the game that other books lack (outflanking Baal Preds, DSing LRs, access to Storm Ravens) and I think the BA community as a whole has been slow to adjust to the new edition.

who are these people putting BT in mid-tier/semi-competitive positions?????

People who have played Dave Fey mostly, but that guy can polish any turd when he puts his mind to it.

My 2 cents.

I don't necessarily feel that Templars are the worst codex kicking around at the moment (yeah I may be a bit biased), but they definately have their strengths. Double special weapons in terminator and tactical squads is immensely useful, and they still have access to things like cheaper typhoons. Land raider crusaders with blessed hulls are still a pain to kill. Losing preferred enemy sucked, but I reckon that actually made playing templars more tactical, as you now have to rely on getting the charge to benefit from rage.

Personal Judgment of things as they stand now:

Group 1
Chaos Daemons
Necrons
Imperial Guard
Grey Knights

Group 2
Space Wolves
Chaos Marines
Orks

Group 3
Space Marines
Blood Angels
Tau
Dark Eldar
Sisters of Battle
Eldar

Group 4
Tyranids
Dark Angels
Black Templars

Sort of interchangeable within groups, but not completely; as listed would be generally where I think each army stands if played well with as solid a list as can be built, given Fortifications ans Allies. For instance, Sisters with Guard Allies are considerably more competitive than Sisters w/o Guard Allies. Naturally, assumes the most competitive builds available.

Group 1: Daemons wreck your meta, don't give a damn about flyer-spam and bring not a single vehicle if they're smart; re-rollable invuls all over the place. Crazy Alpha strike puts them on top. Guard are the most versatile and have the most potent flyers around, really. GK are still very good. Necron Flying Circus would dominate, but....

Group 2: These armies, properly built, can actually beat the crap out of flyer-heavy lists, and with these same builds can wreck a lot of other armies out there. Lots of trouble with things like Daemons, though. Nurgle Chaos Marines with Epidemius allied in might be top tier, except for vulnerability of the Epi lynch-pin, and also of Typhus/DP (gets smashed by smartly positioned warbosses).

Group 3: Some of these are very close to Group 2; built right they are highly competitive against top tier armies, but unfortunately this frequently requires access to Forge World (Mortis Pattern Contemptors with Kheres Assault Cannons, and those tower things for Tau). DE are excellent Alpha Strike but fall apart too easily later on; again, Sisters absolutely require Allies to be truly competitive, and also need to be very well played; the lower end of this group has little to no room for error in list-building or play.

Group 4: Basically left in the dust by the new edition; DA have just been bad for a long time, although there is something to be said for Deathwing, so perhaps that belongs to Group 3? Bug Air Force could do well against some, but is hit or miss at best. Templars have just been completely left behind in this edition.

orkdom wrote:
Sisters absolutely require Allies to be truly competitive, and also need to be very well played; the lower end of this group has little to no room for error in list-building or play.

I would argue about them needing allies to be "truly competitive", but you are correct in that they do require a player who knows what to do with them for SoB to be effective.

 riverhawks32 wrote:
May I ask why DA are bottom 3 in almost every single one?

Because over costed proboly...
Atleast in my opinion, I run pure ravenwing and its useless playing under 1200-1500pts because your almost guaranteed to lose lol

The guy who said that Necron flying circus was first then IG then Necrons is right.

 Rampage wrote:
You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm just wondering why Blood Angels are below Vanilla Marines? Blood Angels are Marines with more shiny special rules and units.

because they're expensive. for example. a BA vindie is 40% more expensive that a vanilla vindie. a lot of internet commandos on here will tell you that the fast USR is worth a 40% upcharge. they're wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Phazael wrote:
Plus the Long Wangs actually still have all the assault benefits of Grey Hunters. And thats not even getting into the whole ide of putting terminator Wolf Guard in the unit as further bullet shielding/extra missiles. Honestly, does anyone by tactical marines from any book for their shooting ability?

I do find it interesting that a lot of these tier discussion threads always involve heated discussions from BA players. Its like the Rhino Rush age BA players want that level of power back and no one else can understand why they are unhappy having to alter their book to the new edition in every one of these threads. I think BA do have some issues, being the most assault dependant MEQ army, but they have ways of getting armor into the game that other books lack (outflanking Baal Preds, DSing LRs, access to Storm Ravens) and I think the BA community as a whole has been slow to adjust to the new edition.

"deep striking land raiders"

yeah, being able to DS a tank the size of a shoe box is really useful and smart.

phoenixrisin wrote:

 Rampage wrote:
You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm just wondering why Blood Angels are below Vanilla Marines? Blood Angels are Marines with more shiny special rules and units.

because they're expensive. for example. a BA vindie is 40% more expensive that a vanilla vindie. a lot of internet commandos on here will tell you that the fast USR is worth a 40% upcharge. they're wrong.

If I were you I wouldn't insult people who disagree with you just because they disagree with you. Especially when you're necroing a thread. It kinda makes you look silly.

 Red Comet wrote:
Why is everyone rating Blood Angels so highly? 6th Edition really nerfed us BA players. =(

because they don't actually play the game and they just sit online and theory hammer all day. anyone who has actually attempted to make a list with BA would never defend them. plus, look at the tourney rosters out there. the drop off of BA players is insane. that is not a coincidence.

the generic response here has been "but deep striking land raiders! fast vindies!" you can take 4 vindies in a vanilla list for LESS than three BA vindies. BA have to pay for TH/SS, they rely on small numbers of elite units with special rules. ALL of which have been nerfed FC, FNP...death co perform about as good as plague marines and they are more expensive and non scoring. mech heavy lists are terrible now. anyone who says different is just simply not playing games against competitive lists.

Necrons
Imperial Guard
Grey Knights
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
Dark Eldar
Chaos Space Marines
Orks
Space Marines
Black Templar
Dark Angels
Tyranids
Eldar
Chaos Daemons
Tau
Sisters

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

phoenixrisin wrote:

 Rampage wrote:
You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm just wondering why Blood Angels are below Vanilla Marines? Blood Angels are Marines with more shiny special rules and units.

because they're expensive. for example. a BA vindie is 40% more expensive that a vanilla vindie. a lot of internet commandos on here will tell you that the fast USR is worth a 40% upcharge. they're wrong.

If I were you I wouldn't insult people who disagree with you just because they disagree with you. Especially when you're necroing a thread. It kinda makes you look silly.

how is voicing my opinion insulting? does the truth hurt?

PS: very hypocritical of you to slap my hand for insulting while you call me silly. powertrip much?

phoenixrisin wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

phoenixrisin wrote:

 Rampage wrote:
You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm just wondering why Blood Angels are below Vanilla Marines? Blood Angels are Marines with more shiny special rules and units.

because they're expensive. for example. a BA vindie is 40% more expensive that a vanilla vindie. a lot of internet commandos on here will tell you that the fast USR is worth a 40% upcharge. they're wrong.

If I were you I wouldn't insult people who disagree with you just because they disagree with you. Especially when you're necroing a thread. It kinda makes you look silly.

how is voicing my opinion insulting? does the truth hurt?

PS: very hypocritical of you to slap my hand for insulting while you call me silly. powertrip much?

No, I think you'll find that calling people "internet commandos [sic]" without anyone being remotely hostile to you is really rude, without any reason. Hence it makes you look silly. Your response to me, which is way more hostile than I feel is merited, is also silly. Seriously, calm down. I agree with you that BA aren't super-powerful, but they're at least on par with Vanilla IMO.

phoenixrisin wrote:
anyone who says different is just simply not playing games against competitive lists.

And again with the silly arguments. Do you have anything backing this up or is this just true because you say so and we should take your word for it? Stop being a bully and start arguing with sound argumentative techniques or this isn't going to go anywhere.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Necrons
Imperial Guard
Grey Knights
Orks
Tau Empire
Space Marines
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Blood Angels
Eldar
Chaos Space Marines
Tyranids
Chaos Daemons
Sisters of Battle
Dark Angels


Listed by group, so same color are roughly same power level.

Yeah, this list makes sense. But I would rate Eldar lower and Chaos Daemons higher.

 wuestenfux wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Necrons
Imperial Guard
Grey Knights
Orks
Tau Empire
Space Marines
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Blood Angels
Eldar
Chaos Space Marines
Tyranids
Chaos Daemons
Sisters of Battle
Dark Angels


Listed by group, so same color are roughly same power level.

Yeah, this list makes sense. But I would rate Eldar lower and Chaos Daemons higher.

Can't agree with Templars being that high though; it's the only army in the game where the enemy gets to move your stuff. Righteous Zeal makes ADLs, Bastions and upper floors of ruins much less useful, which sucks when the best units in the book are shooting based.

 wuestenfux wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Necrons
Imperial Guard
Grey Knights
Orks
Tau Empire
Space Marines
Black Templars
Dark Eldar
Blood Angels
Eldar
Chaos Space Marines
Tyranids
Chaos Daemons
Sisters of Battle
Dark Angels


Listed by group, so same color are roughly same power level.

Yeah, this list makes sense. But I would rate Eldar lower and Chaos Daemons higher.

Daemons should be solidly mid-tier.

Yes we have 1 gimmicky list that can rape the unprepared in Flamer/Screamer spam, but almost everyone can easily defend against it by allying in a 10-man Strike and/or Interceptor squad if they really want to.

Warp Quake alone keeps Daemons from being a tier 1 army, as does intelligent deployment which can really limit the alpha-strike damage of Flamer/Screamer spam.
Plus, Daemons have limited answers to enemy fliers and make far worse use of fortifications unless you take allies.

If Deamons didn't have to deep-strike EVERYTHING (thus meaning a bad first turn could screw over your entire army) and Warp Quake didn't exist then Deamons would absolutely be in the upper tier chilling with Necrons, Imperial Guard, and Grey Knights. An example of this is in Fantasy. In WHFB, Deamons are easily one of the best armies in the game (so much so, they had to re-write the rulebook because Deamons broke 8th edition. Dammit Ward.). Since 40k and Fantasy Deamons are basically identical (they can be interchanged between the games just by simply exchanging bases), this shows they could have promise in 40k. But the 40k codex is old, and not written by Ward, and thus has faults like Warp Quake (which, to be honest, makes sense because the Grey Knights sole purpose in life is to kill Deamons so it makes sense they can do that)

Black Templars have potential, but they are just so so old that they have so many obsolete rules.

 washout77 wrote:
If Deamons didn't have to deep-strike EVERYTHING (thus meaning a bad first turn could screw over your entire army) and Warp Quake didn't exist then Deamons would absolutely be in the upper tier chilling with Necrons, Imperial Guard, and Grey Knights. An example of this is in Fantasy. In WHFB, Deamons are easily one of the best armies in the game (so much so, they had to re-write the rulebook because Deamons broke 8th edition. Dammit Ward.). Since 40k and Fantasy Deamons are basically identical (they can be interchanged between the games just by simply exchanging bases), this shows they could have promise in 40k. But the 40k codex is old, and not written by Ward, and thus has faults like Warp Quake (which, to be honest, makes sense because the Grey Knights sole purpose in life is to kill Deamons so it makes sense they can do that)

Black Templars have potential, but they are just so so old that they have so many obsolete rules.

Deep Strike isn't the problem. Anyone who thinks Daemons are low tier because of Deep Strike doesn't know what they're talking about...
Without Deep Strike, Daemons would suck monkeyballs as we've got no transports and almost no armour saves on an almost purely infantry army. Being able to Deep Strike is what gives Daemons the tactical edge over opponents, since we get to pick and choose where the battle takes place.

And Daemons broke 7th edition because their rules were simply OP.

Warp Quake is stupidly OP at 12". It could be a 6" radius like the almost identicle Necron ability and it would still do it's job just as effectively.
Yes Grey Knights are Daemonhunters and thus they should be better at combating us than regular Imperial armies. They don't deserve half the OTT crap they do have, like 'Derp Quake' which can auto-win games or Dark Ex which makes Daemon Princes forget which bloody God spawned them!

Experiment 626 wrote:

 washout77 wrote:
If Deamons didn't have to deep-strike EVERYTHING (thus meaning a bad first turn could screw over your entire army) and Warp Quake didn't exist then Deamons would absolutely be in the upper tier chilling with Necrons, Imperial Guard, and Grey Knights. An example of this is in Fantasy. In WHFB, Deamons are easily one of the best armies in the game (so much so, they had to re-write the rulebook because Deamons broke 8th edition. Dammit Ward.). Since 40k and Fantasy Deamons are basically identical (they can be interchanged between the games just by simply exchanging bases), this shows they could have promise in 40k. But the 40k codex is old, and not written by Ward, and thus has faults like Warp Quake (which, to be honest, makes sense because the Grey Knights sole purpose in life is to kill Deamons so it makes sense they can do that)

Black Templars have potential, but they are just so so old that they have so many obsolete rules.

Deep Strike isn't the problem. Anyone who thinks Daemons are low tier because of Deep Strike doesn't know what they're talking about...
Without Deep Strike, Daemons would suck monkeyballs as we've got no transports and almost no armour saves on an almost purely infantry army. Being able to Deep Strike is what gives Daemons the tactical edge over opponents, since we get to pick and choose where the battle takes place.

And Daemons broke 7th edition because their rules were simply OP.

Warp Quake is stupidly OP at 12". It could be a 6" radius like the almost identicle Necron ability and it would still do it's job just as effectively.
Yes Grey Knights are Daemonhunters and thus they should be better at combating us than regular Imperial armies. They don't deserve half the OTT crap they do have, like 'Derp Quake' which can auto-win games or Dark Ex which makes Daemon Princes forget which bloody God spawned them!

7th edition was it! Sorry, I get my Fantasy editions screwed up sometimes...

And I didn't mean Deep Strike is true problem, it's just the way it works right now. Thanks to Warp Quake, and the fact you need to start with nothing on the board, I have seen Deamon players lose by default after the first turn. In the last tourny near me, we had 3 Daemons players. One had an allied Chaos army. The two without lost because of failing at scatter rolls and one because of Warp Quake, honestly some really stupid reasons (both lost basically first turn), the one with the Chaos ended up getting in the top 4 because he couldn't be tabled first turn (and giving him time to get the Daemons into play).

And I honestly don't see why people rate GK as highly anymore. 5th Edition they were REALLY OP to be honest, but now they aren't that kind of powerhouse they were anymore thanks to people learning to beat them. Sure, they do have some pretty OTT rules and things but they aren't as strong as they once were. And I play Grey Knights too hahaha

Experiment 626 wrote:

 washout77 wrote:
If Deamons didn't have to deep-strike EVERYTHING (thus meaning a bad first turn could screw over your entire army) and Warp Quake didn't exist then Deamons would absolutely be in the upper tier chilling with Necrons, Imperial Guard, and Grey Knights. An example of this is in Fantasy. In WHFB, Deamons are easily one of the best armies in the game (so much so, they had to re-write the rulebook because Deamons broke 8th edition. Dammit Ward.). Since 40k and Fantasy Deamons are basically identical (they can be interchanged between the games just by simply exchanging bases), this shows they could have promise in 40k. But the 40k codex is old, and not written by Ward, and thus has faults like Warp Quake (which, to be honest, makes sense because the Grey Knights sole purpose in life is to kill Deamons so it makes sense they can do that)

Black Templars have potential, but they are just so so old that they have so many obsolete rules.

Deep Strike isn't the problem. Anyone who thinks Daemons are low tier because of Deep Strike doesn't know what they're talking about...
Without Deep Strike, Daemons would suck monkeyballs as we've got no transports and almost no armour saves on an almost purely infantry army. Being able to Deep Strike is what gives Daemons the tactical edge over opponents, since we get to pick and choose where the battle takes place.

And Daemons broke 7th edition because their rules were simply OP.

Warp Quake is stupidly OP at 12". It could be a 6" radius like the almost identicle Necron ability and it would still do it's job just as effectively.
Yes Grey Knights are Daemonhunters and thus they should be better at combating us than regular Imperial armies. They don't deserve half the OTT crap they do have, like 'Derp Quake' which can auto-win games or Dark Ex which makes Daemon Princes forget which bloody God spawned them!

Really, the answer then is to eliminate both Grey Knights and Chaos Daemons from the game as they were factions that needed to remain more as background material than armies on the tabletop.

I disagree that Sisters are so far down the list. I'd place them firmly mid table.

 Still Standing wrote:
I disagree that Sisters are so far down the list. I'd place them firmly mid table.

I'd tend to agree here. Although the sample size is small, my only experience with Sisters is watching someone go 5-0 with them at a GT at the local Battle Bunker.

We feth You Up Tier

Croissont Necrons
Screamer/Flamer Spam Daemons
Imperial Guard Flyer Spam

Top Tier - Codex as whole
Necrons
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Space Wolves
Blood Angels

Please Sir, don't hurt me tier

Eldar
Tau
Tyranids

Tyrands have to rely on a very small number of tactics to survive, but actually do relatively well in Apoc, Tau have kickass skimmers, but again, they're stuck to one really viable tactic, and Eldar without Forgeworld are just garbage. FW makes them able to survive, but again, limited choices.

I'd say Daemons outside of spamming WD update units are a middle power, but screamers are just slowed, and flamers are very, very good. Only thing they can't obliterate is very tailored builds or Grey Knights.

Everything not mentioned falls somewhere in between, there's a lot of obsolete or redundant codexes though; Black Templars are basically useless, Vanilla Marines are not really worthwhile from a power standpoint when Marine +1 codexes exist like SW and BA, and the DA shouldn't have their own codex; they're no more divergent than Salamanders or Imperial Fists or Raven Guard, and should just be optional special army rules inside of the normal codex. We don't need more MEQ codexes.

Sisters, however, are not useless. The "codex" they have isn't very good, but there's enough effective units and army powers to keep them relevant. If GW actually took them seriously, perhaps revamped their ancient and largely bad-looking models, and produced a more internally balanced codex they'd have some decent promise.

 MajorStoffer wrote:

...I'd say Daemons outside of spamming WD update units are a middle power, but screamers are just slowed, and flamers are very, very good. Only thing they can't obliterate is very tailored builds or Grey Knights.

You'd be wrong then...

every single army has easy access to solid counters for Flamer/Screamer spam;
- Intelligent deployment to limit the 1st wave damage is a biggie.

- MSU spam

- Transport/vehicle spam

- Hordes of any flavour

- Grey Knights

- Anyone who can take GK allies and thus also us Warp Quake


Flamer/Screamer spam excells at one thing; killing elite armies like tooled up MEQ's/TEQ's. And since the early 6th ed meta shift has been away from those vehicles that give Daemons the most headachs and into 2+ saves & plasma spam, well, we've been having a field day!

But seriously, you want to beat Flamer/Screamer spam? Bring a few transports to hide in and pack some flamers/template weapons of your own. Massed smalls arms fire & hordes especially laugh at this list.

 undertow wrote:

 Still Standing wrote:
I disagree that Sisters are so far down the list. I'd place them firmly mid table.

I'd tend to agree here. Although the sample size is small, my only experience with Sisters is watching someone go 5-0 with them at a GT at the local Battle Bunker.

Most people rate them so low IMHO due to (for lack of a better word) ignorance. If a codex is powerful, it tends to have a larger player base, and fewer players with a weaker codex. SoB have probably the smallest player base, and therefore people assume small number of players = weak codex. This along with the codex being difficult at best to get, means most players unfairly rate them at the bottom of the food chain without ever even learning their strengths/weaknesses.