After researching and thinking about it, I think I've decided what would possibly be the most powerful, cheesy army in 40k.

Primary CAD - Eldar
Allied CAD - Tau
Allied CAD - Necrons

What do you think of this?

Eldar.

At what points level? And why are you allying in Necrons of all things?

Eldar don't need allies to be number one. All you need are scat bikes, warp spiders and Wraithknights.

skycapt44 wrote:
Eldar don't need allies to be number one. All you need are scat bikes, warp spiders and Wraithknights.

True Chainz.

Do you not even know what super friends are?

This might be valid if all 3 factions weren't using CADs in the OP. If you're not using formations for Tau and Necrons, you may as well just put in more Eldar.

Simple, no-thought-required list I just made up, using 2000 points and Eldar CAD. Fairly few shenanigans, and no formations, but will beat out most other armies quite happily:

Eldar:

Farseer Skyrunner w/Singing Spear [120 pts]
Farseer Skyrunner w/Singing Spear [120 pts]

Windriders (x10) w/10x Scatterlasers [270 pts]
Windriders (x10) w/10x Scatterlasers [270 pts]

Warp Spiders [95 pts]
Wraithguard (x5) [160 pts]
Wave Serpent w/Bright Lance [115 pts]

Fire Prism [125 pts]
Fire Prism [125 pts]
Nightspinners (x2) [200 pts]

Wraithknight [295 pts]

[1,995 pts]

I feel a need to reiterate this, does op know what super friends are? Because they are more cheese than crons or tau

 Jaxler wrote:
I feel a need to reiterate this, does op know what super friends are? Because they are more cheese than crons or tau

Instead of asking twice, why not just tell him?

 Griddlelol wrote:

 Jaxler wrote:
I feel a need to reiterate this, does op know what super friends are? Because they are more cheese than crons or tau

Instead of asking twice, why not just tell him?

Because I feel obligated to highlight how wrong it is to ignore imperium/space marines when talking allies cheap wolfies + all the special universal rule characters and invisibility = best list in the game. This isn't cheese, it's worse. it straight up breaks the game when you can konga line your unkillable super Death Star down the board.

If you want to cheese it to hell and back, just go mono-eldar and take the Craftworld Detachment with a Windrider Warhost and then buy as many wraith knights as possible through auxillary choices (Wraith Constructs).

Your opponent is liable to leap across the table and gouge your eyes out. If you want even more cheese, Go to the FW Eldar Book (Doom of Mymera or something) and field the 1 titan + 2 Wraithknight formation. You know something is cheese when the big-ass titan is considered A TAX.

 d00mspire wrote:
After researching and thinking about it, I think I've decided what would possibly be the most powerful, cheesy army in 40k.

Primary CAD - Eldar
Allied CAD - Tau
Allied CAD - Necrons

What do you think of this?

Oh it is always just so funny to think people still believe that the SPESS MUREENS are not top of the top tier alongside eldar.

Primary - Space marines formations
1-2 CAD - Eldar
GG.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
If you want to cheese it to hell and back, just go mono-eldar and take the Craftworld Detachment with a Windrider Warhost and then buy as many wraith knights as possible through auxillary choices (Wraith Constructs).

Your opponent is liable to leap across the table and gouge your eyes out. If you want even more cheese, Go to the FW Eldar Book (Doom of Mymera or something) and field the 1 titan + 2 Wraithknight formation. You know something is cheese when the big-ass titan is considered A TAX.

Were I the kind of person to do that I'd go for spamming CAD's because that ends up being cheaper as you don't have as many tax units and the 6" run isn't a huge bonus anyway.

Eldar, a number of different ways, but definitely Eldar.

Space Marines are a weak army that rely on ally formation psychic power gimmicks to rise from the dust.

Eldar are pretty much OP just by opening the codex.

Space Marines are a viable answer if the question is the most powerful list, but Eldar wins this question because pretty much their entire army is incredibly strong - even their absolutely weakest links (units like storm guardians and banshees, whose equivalents in other armies are utterly horrid) are solid units that can give most units in the game a run for its money, and it only goes up from there.

>No Space Marines

fail

I'd throw some Daemons just for the 5th spot.

pm713 wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
If you want to cheese it to hell and back, just go mono-eldar and take the Craftworld Detachment with a Windrider Warhost and then buy as many wraith knights as possible through auxillary choices (Wraith Constructs).

Your opponent is liable to leap across the table and gouge your eyes out. If you want even more cheese, Go to the FW Eldar Book (Doom of Mymera or something) and field the 1 titan + 2 Wraithknight formation. You know something is cheese when the big-ass titan is considered A TAX.

Were I the kind of person to do that I'd go for spamming CAD's because that ends up being cheaper as you don't have as many tax units and the 6" run isn't a huge bonus anyway.

It's less for the 6" run and more of to spam Wraithknights.

a normal cad would require 1 farseer and 2 Jetbike squads per Wraith Knight, while the Craftworld Host is a flat rate for a single Windrider warhost and up to 12 Wraithknights.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Space Marines are a weak army

I see someone has smoked a whole lot of warp dust!

No, I have not 'snorted a lot of warp dust'.

If you set down your average Space Marine army on the table, the way the lore presents them, the way GW presents them in army displays and so on and so forth, you'd have an army with perhaps a captain, a few tactical squads (maybe with rhinos), some assault squads, devastators, a dreadnought, maybe some terminators and/or a land raider, a captain...

And that is not powerful. I'd feel fairly confident taking on those with my Chaos Space Marines, and that is saying something.

I think people are forgetting that a formation patchwork aberration stitched together from centurions, Dark Angels and Space Wolves wolf riders is not the same thing as 'Codex: Space Marines.' This is like saying CSM are good because some competetive daemon lists ally in a mace prince with min cultists.

In order to make Space Marines compete with top armies like Tau and Eldar, you not only have to pick the absolute best of the codex (bikemasters, Centurions) but you also have to buff them with allies, formations and psychic powers (standalone the bikemaster will not do much damage for his massive cost and the centurions are horrifically slow and vulnerable without transports, ICs to tank and psychic support). Without all that support, my CSM Vindicator can easily deal with the Centurions while Thousand Sons can tarpit the bikemaster nicely, and don't you realise how absurd that fact really is?

Even the dreaded Skyhammer is a onedimensional gimmick that falls flat to Rhinos.

And that is just one particular list. Again, people are looking at this thread like it asked 'The Most Powerful List in 40k'. And then the infamous list with various SM chapters becomes a strong contender. But in terms of codices as a whole, the Space Marines codex is extremely unimpressive compared to, say, Eldar, who have no dud units whatsoever. Tournament netlists are just one small part of this game, guys. Most people do not run a super-optimised list of only the best units. And as soon as you don't, the Marine codex becomes weak much faster than the Eldar or Necron codex does.

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Space Marines are a weak army

I see someone has smoked a whole lot of warp dust!

His analysis is correct. If it weren't, BA would be good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:
No, I have not 'snorted a lot of warp dust'.

If you set down your average Space Marine army on the table, the way the lore presents them, the way GW presents them in army displays and so on and so forth, you'd have an army with perhaps a captain, a few tactical squads (maybe with rhinos), some assault squads, devastators, a dreadnought, maybe some terminators and/or a land raider, a captain...

And that is not powerful. I'd feel fairly confident taking on those with my Chaos Space Marines, and that is saying something.

I think people are forgetting that a formation patchwork aberration stitched together from centurions, Dark Angels and Space Wolves wolf riders is not the same thing as 'Codex: Space Marines.' This is like saying CSM are good because some competetive daemon lists ally in a mace prince with min cultists.

In order to make Space Marines compete with top armies like Tau and Eldar, you not only have to pick the absolute best of the codex (bikemasters, Centurions) but you also have to buff them with allies, formations and psychic powers (standalone the bikemaster will not do much damage for his massive cost and the centurions are horrifically slow and vulnerable without transports, ICs to tank and psychic support). Without all that support, my CSM Vindicator can easily deal with the Centurions while Thousand Sons can tarpit the bikemaster nicely, and don't you realise how absurd that fact really is?

Even the dreaded Skyhammer is a onedimensional gimmick that falls flat to Rhinos.

And that is just one particular list. Again, people are looking at this thread like it asked 'The Most Powerful List in 40k'. And then the infamous list with various SM chapters becomes a strong contender. But in terms of codices as a whole, the Space Marines codex is extremely unimpressive compared to, say, Eldar, who have no dud units whatsoever. Tournament netlists are just one small part of this game, guys. Most people do not run a super-optimised list of only the best units. And as soon as you don't, the Marine codex becomes weak much faster than the Eldar or Necron codex does.

This. Or you get BA.

 Ashiraya wrote:
No, I have not 'snorted a lot of warp dust'.

If you set down your average Space Marine army on the table, the way the lore presents them, the way GW presents them in army displays and so on and so forth, you'd have an army with perhaps a captain, a few tactical squads (maybe with rhinos), some assault squads, devastators, a dreadnought, maybe some terminators and/or a land raider, a captain...

And that is not powerful. I'd feel fairly confident taking on those with my Chaos Space Marines, and that is saying something.

I think people are forgetting that a formation patchwork aberration stitched together from centurions, Dark Angels and Space Wolves wolf riders is not the same thing as 'Codex: Space Marines.' This is like saying CSM are good because some competetive daemon lists ally in a mace prince with min cultists.

In order to make Space Marines compete with top armies like Tau and Eldar, you not only have to pick the absolute best of the codex (bikemasters, Centurions) but you also have to buff them with allies, formations and psychic powers (standalone the bikemaster will not do much damage for his massive cost and the centurions are horrifically slow and vulnerable without transports, ICs to tank and psychic support). Without all that support, my CSM Vindicator can easily deal with the Centurions while Thousand Sons can tarpit the bikemaster nicely, and don't you realise how absurd that fact really is?

Even the dreaded Skyhammer is a onedimensional gimmick that falls flat to Rhinos.

And that is just one particular list. Again, people are looking at this thread like it asked 'The Most Powerful List in 40k'. And then the infamous list with various SM chapters becomes a strong contender. But in terms of codices as a whole, the Space Marines codex is extremely unimpressive compared to, say, Eldar, who have no dud units whatsoever. Tournament netlists are just one small part of this game, guys. Most people do not run a super-optimised list of only the best units. And as soon as you don't, the Marine codex becomes weak much faster than the Eldar or Necron codex does.

I would have to say I agree with you. Space Marines are a weak codex until you take a number of squads equipped for different things. A stereotypical SM army at my FLGS would be two tactical squads, a captain, terminators, and a land raider. All the time. They simply aren't that powerful. In psychic powers the Eldar can beat them; in shooting the Tau severely outshoot them (and any other army for that matter). Space Marines are overrated, in my opinion. Let's be serious, SM and their equivalents (BA, DA, SW, GK...) are played because Space Marines are put across as superhuman and virtually invincible in the fluff, whilst in the crunch they are quite bad. You would have to play them quite well for them to be considered decent.

 Ashiraya wrote:
No, I have not 'snorted a lot of warp dust'.

If you set down your average Space Marine army on the table, the way the lore presents them, the way GW presents them in army displays and so on and so forth, you'd have an army with perhaps a captain, a few tactical squads (maybe with rhinos), some assault squads, devastators, a dreadnought, maybe some terminators and/or a land raider, a captain...

And eldar power level gets cut down if you take fluffy mix&match list.

But thing is when you consider strength of codex you go for MAX and ignore the fluff...

As a standalone codex, unit for unit and disregarding formations, Eldar are the strongest army.

When you incorporate the very best of the top 3 (Eldar, Marines, Tau) formations and all, it becomes a rock/paper/scissors match up.

However the vast discrepancy in power level when you compare an average Eldar list to one that incorporates a lot of allies to mathematically butcher it's opponents is extraordinary (Bark stars, Riptide wings supported by 30-60 Warp spiders, superfriends etc) .

Space Marine/Space WOlves/Imperium deathstars crush anything now with the insane buffs from the psychic powers they recently got.

The Eldar are now outclassed. Other than that Eldar and then Chaos Deamons and Necrons.

Tau is nearly irrelevant int he tournament scene due to the insane power creep.

Necrons are best without allies, since every ally prevents you from taking even more undercosted units with 4+++ or Wraiths.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Necrons are best without allies, since every ally prevents you from taking even more undercosted units with 4+++ or Wraiths.

Well it's pretty pointless to start comparing current rules to multi-edition backward...

Comparing "no allies" is pointless since allies are in the game. Might just as well "this would be most powerful if there wasn't WK's, librarian conclaves, taunars etc".

tneva82 wrote:

Well it's pretty pointless to start comparing current rules to multi-edition backward...

Comparing "no allies" is pointless since allies are in the game. Might just as well "this would be most powerful if there wasn't WK's, librarian conclaves, taunars etc".

Many gaming stores and groups do not allow the use of allies by a single player, and tournament rules place heavy restrictions on the use of allies and multiple detachments.

The players I've met don't use allies because it looks bad on the table and results in the game being less fun.

tneva82 wrote:
And eldar power level gets cut down if you take fluffy mix&match list.

Is that so? Run the kind of Space Marine list I talked about above against a fluffy Saim-Hann or Iyanden list and see how you fare.

The Eldar have no weaknesses. Even their weakest links are good and useful units. The Space Marine codex is a weak book with a few exploitable things, but those few things make up a small part of the whole codex.

tneva82 wrote:
But thing is when you consider strength of codex you go for MAX and ignore the fluff...

No, you rate the codex as a whole. Most people do not fight or use the minmaxed power lists people are fearing.

 Ashiraya wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
And eldar power level gets cut down if you take fluffy mix&match list.

Is that so? Run the kind of Space Marine list I talked about above against a fluffy Saim-Hann or Iyanden list and see how you fare.

The Eldar have no weaknesses. Even their weakest links are good and useful units. The Space Marine codex is a weak book with a few exploitable things, but those few things make up a small part of the whole codex.

tneva82 wrote:
But thing is when you consider strength of codex you go for MAX and ignore the fluff...

No, you rate the codex as a whole. Most people do not fight or use the minmaxed power lists people are fearing.

I'm not sure if you can count full blown allies anyway. A lot of tournaments seem to cap allies, which limits the space marines but doesn't do much to the eldar.
I play a relatively competitive marine force (I only use GK as allies for their SC though) and while they are strong, it's hard to argue with my eldar being stronger. I can field a diverse force and still have a game against any of the other stronger armies while still feeling fluffy. BS 5 Aspect Warriors if I run Biel-Tan, WG with flamers in transports backed up by WK and cheap support platforms from guardians if I want Iyanden. Skimmers and scat bikes for saim-hann. Alaitoic might be the only one not doable anymore without their special ranger table, and tbh, I'm fine with that. They were annoying.

It's hard to decide a codex strength if the codex relies on questionable strategies since those are flagged during some tournaments or local games. FW, FW SH, Allies...for some reason I don't see formations getting banned often, not sure why.

 Ashiraya wrote:

The Eldar have no weaknesses. Even their weakest links are good and useful units.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. All the Eldar units are better points-for-points than equivalent units almost anywhere.

The Space Marine codex is a weak book with a few exploitable things, but those few things make up a small part of the whole codex.

I seriously disagree with this though. Against Eldar, sure, you'd get trashed without superfwends, but have you even seen the IG, CSM, BA and Tyranid codexes?

I have. I have a fairly large CSM army, an actual CSM army with no Heldrakes at all. You have listed four of the worst codices in a game with 23 codices, and SM can easily be better than those without being anywhere near good.

Tactical Marines are really not all that much better than my equivalent, Chaos Space Marines. Sure, they get a few things in exchange for 1ppm, but in the grand scheme of things it is not a huge deal - your average close combat or fire fight is close enough to be almost entirely down to luck. The same with most of the codex. Raptors vs assault marines, Rhinos vs Rhinos, Land Raiders vs Land Raiders, Captains vs Chaos Lords - CSM stuff tend to be a bit worse, but not to any extreme degree, and while CSM is absolute bottom SM are certainly not strong in and of themselves either.

The average SM army I see with foot tactical marines and the like is utterly destroyed by leman russ tanks, and I would not claim IG are top tier either.

Who brings footspam in 7E? That's just asking to fail. Unless you are eldar...

You can say marines in rhinos without gladius if you want. A fluffly marine army gets stomped, hard.

Terminators? Awful
Assault Marines? Awful
Basic Marines? Bad, not quite awful.
Devastators? Mediocre

A good marine list plays like White Scars or Iron Hands. TFC, Cents, and Bikes. Its hard to play fluffy from the other chapters. Its not hard to play the craftworlds.

This is a similar problem with Tau. If you play Tau because you love Tau, you're golden. If you play Tau because you like the idea of an alien mixed empire, which is how they were originally sold (I remember rumors they were getting new aliens like the hrud for a while) you're going to have a bad time currently.

 Selym wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

The Eldar have no weaknesses. Even their weakest links are good and useful units.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. All the Eldar units are better points-for-points than equivalent units almost anywhere.

The Space Marine codex is a weak book with a few exploitable things, but those few things make up a small part of the whole codex.

I seriously disagree with this though. Against Eldar, sure, you'd get trashed without superfwends, but have you even seen the IG, CSM, BA and Tyranid codexes?

I think what Ash was saying is that without incorporating the Super friends the SM codex isn't nearly on the same power lvl as Necrons/Daemons/Tau or Eldar. I would agree with that.

I have faced all of those armies listed above and generally with my orks I lose to necrons/daemons/tau and Eldar regularly because they literally evaporate my Ork units with minimal effort. Necrons/Daemons games are close, Eldar/Tau games are usually me getting tabled. Against a regular SM army though? without Allied shenanigans? I would say its about 50/50 depending on skill of the player. In my last tourny I lost 1 game, and it was against a SM player, and ironically I came very close to beating him. He got very lucky in the 1st turn, killing off almost my entire warboss Bikestar w/ Painboy. If he hadn't gotten so many lucky rolls on that first turn I would have evaporated him. He went on to place 2nd in the tournament behind me. I won based on points across the board.

So yeah, if Orks can stand against a SM army that doesn't do ally shenanigans or Gladius whatever they are probably not a top tier codex.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

The Eldar have no weaknesses. Even their weakest links are good and useful units.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. All the Eldar units are better points-for-points than equivalent units almost anywhere.

The Space Marine codex is a weak book with a few exploitable things, but those few things make up a small part of the whole codex.

I seriously disagree with this though. Against Eldar, sure, you'd get trashed without superfwends, but have you even seen the IG, CSM, BA and Tyranid codexes?

I think what Ash was saying is that without incorporating the Super friends the SM codex isn't nearly on the same power lvl as Necrons/Daemons/Tau or Eldar. I would agree with that.

I have faced all of those armies listed above and generally with my orks I lose to necrons/daemons/tau and Eldar regularly because they literally evaporate my Ork units with minimal effort. Necrons/Daemons games are close, Eldar/Tau games are usually me getting tabled. Against a regular SM army though? without Allied shenanigans? I would say its about 50/50 depending on skill of the player. In my last tourny I lost 1 game, and it was against a SM player, and ironically I came very close to beating him. He got very lucky in the 1st turn, killing off almost my entire warboss Bikestar w/ Painboy. If he hadn't gotten so many lucky rolls on that first turn I would have evaporated him. He went on to place 2nd in the tournament behind me. I won based on points across the board.

So yeah, if Orks can stand against a SM army that doesn't do ally shenanigans or Gladius whatever they are probably not a top tier codex.

I think Orks are underrated. They are pretty decent at their job, even if I am a Tau player and stereotypically hate them.

This would be a worse army than any army composed of any single codex of any of those.

They don't work better together. They would be worse.

Superfriends or Eldar, no doubt.

For example, take this one-source battleforged Eldar 1735p army:

Core: Pale Courts Battlehost (Aspect Lord Shrine, Halls of Martial Splendour)

Autarch, Banshee Mask, Jetbike
Aspect Lord Shrine
5 Warp Spiders with Exarch
5 Warp Spiders with Exarch
5 Warp Spiders with Exarch

AUxiliary 1: Aspect Host
5 Warp Spiders with Exarch
5 Warp Spiders with Exarch
10 Warp Spiders with Exarch

Aux 2: Aspect Host:
5 Warp Spiders with Exarch
5 Warp Spiders with Exarch
5 Warp Spiders with Exarch

Wraith Construct:
Wraithknight, 2 Scatterlasers

Support:
Lynx, Pulsar Ghostwalk Matrix, Holo Fields

That momet when you literally have the Eldar codex right next to you, but you don't want to look up how that army plays.

 Selym wrote:
That momet when you literally have the Eldar codex right next to you, but you don't want to look up how that army plays.

Considering there's only 4 different models in it, I think you can guess

GrafWattenburg wrote:
Superfriends or Eldar, no doubt.

For example, take this one-source battleforged Eldar 1735p army:

Core: Pale Courts Battlehost (Aspect Lord Shrine, Halls of Martial Splendour)

So by "one source" you mean two sources.

 Ashiraya wrote:
No, I have not 'snorted a lot of warp dust'.

If you set down your average Space Marine army on the table, the way the lore presents them, the way GW presents them in army displays and so on and so forth, you'd have an army with perhaps a captain, a few tactical squads (maybe with rhinos), some assault squads, devastators, a dreadnought, maybe some terminators and/or a land raider, a captain...

And that is not powerful. I'd feel fairly confident taking on those with my Chaos Space Marines, and that is saying something.

I think people are forgetting that a formation patchwork aberration stitched together from centurions, Dark Angels and Space Wolves wolf riders is not the same thing as 'Codex: Space Marines.' This is like saying CSM are good because some competetive daemon lists ally in a mace prince with min cultists.

In order to make Space Marines compete with top armies like Tau and Eldar, you not only have to pick the absolute best of the codex (bikemasters, Centurions) but you also have to buff them with allies, formations and psychic powers (standalone the bikemaster will not do much damage for his massive cost and the centurions are horrifically slow and vulnerable without transports, ICs to tank and psychic support). Without all that support, my CSM Vindicator can easily deal with the Centurions while Thousand Sons can tarpit the bikemaster nicely, and don't you realise how absurd that fact really is?

Even the dreaded Skyhammer is a onedimensional gimmick that falls flat to Rhinos.

And that is just one particular list. Again, people are looking at this thread like it asked 'The Most Powerful List in 40k'. And then the infamous list with various SM chapters becomes a strong contender. But in terms of codices as a whole, the Space Marines codex is extremely unimpressive compared to, say, Eldar, who have no dud units whatsoever. Tournament netlists are just one small part of this game, guys. Most people do not run a super-optimised list of only the best units. And as soon as you don't, the Marine codex becomes weak much faster than the Eldar or Necron codex does.

I wasn't aware that the op was about what is the strongest *fluffy* list. What the 'lore and gw present' doesn't matter, at all, when determining an armies power. The space marine codex and supplement are undeniably top tier (not first, but top) and to say otherwise is rather ignorant of your own rules, armies like CSM would *KILL* to be able to literally move terrain around the table as they please, teleport around and buff their saves to a stupid level.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Space Marines are a weak army

I see someone has smoked a whole lot of warp dust!

His analysis is correct. If it weren't, BA would be good.

No, BA are bad because they are a melee army in a shooting focused edition, that and they don't have nearly the cheddar that the SM has.

I like how this quickly devolved into a competition of "who has the shorter wang" among the top three armies (Tau, Eldar and Marines).

They're all equally cheese. Eldar is just more equally cheese than the others, cuz they can't be bothered to be lowered to the level of the mon-keigh (and whatever they call the Tau).

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I like how this quickly devolved into a competition of "who has the shorter wang" among the top three armies (Tau, Eldar and Marines).

They're all equally cheese. Eldar is just more equally cheese than the others, cuz they can't be bothered to be lowered to the level of the mon-keigh (and whatever they call the Tau).

The lower limit of Eldar power is higher than the upper limit of several codexes, and certainly higher than the lower limit of any...

 DarknessEternal wrote:

GrafWattenburg wrote:
Superfriends or Eldar, no doubt.

For example, take this one-source battleforged Eldar 1735p army:

Core: Pale Courts Battlehost (Aspect Lord Shrine, Halls of Martial Splendour)

So by "one source" you mean two sources.

what? No its a single Eldar decurion detachment, how is it two sources?

Nvm

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
No, I have not 'snorted a lot of warp dust'.

If you set down your average Space Marine army on the table, the way the lore presents them, the way GW presents them in army displays and so on and so forth, you'd have an army with perhaps a captain, a few tactical squads (maybe with rhinos), some assault squads, devastators, a dreadnought, maybe some terminators and/or a land raider, a captain...

And that is not powerful. I'd feel fairly confident taking on those with my Chaos Space Marines, and that is saying something.

I think people are forgetting that a formation patchwork aberration stitched together from centurions, Dark Angels and Space Wolves wolf riders is not the same thing as 'Codex: Space Marines.' This is like saying CSM are good because some competetive daemon lists ally in a mace prince with min cultists.

In order to make Space Marines compete with top armies like Tau and Eldar, you not only have to pick the absolute best of the codex (bikemasters, Centurions) but you also have to buff them with allies, formations and psychic powers (standalone the bikemaster will not do much damage for his massive cost and the centurions are horrifically slow and vulnerable without transports, ICs to tank and psychic support). Without all that support, my CSM Vindicator can easily deal with the Centurions while Thousand Sons can tarpit the bikemaster nicely, and don't you realise how absurd that fact really is?

Even the dreaded Skyhammer is a onedimensional gimmick that falls flat to Rhinos.

And that is just one particular list. Again, people are looking at this thread like it asked 'The Most Powerful List in 40k'. And then the infamous list with various SM chapters becomes a strong contender. But in terms of codices as a whole, the Space Marines codex is extremely unimpressive compared to, say, Eldar, who have no dud units whatsoever. Tournament netlists are just one small part of this game, guys. Most people do not run a super-optimised list of only the best units. And as soon as you don't, the Marine codex becomes weak much faster than the Eldar or Necron codex does.

I wasn't aware that the op was about what is the strongest *fluffy* list. What the 'lore and gw present' doesn't matter, at all, when determining an armies power. The space marine codex and supplement are undeniably top tier (not first, but top) and to say otherwise is rather ignorant of your own rules, armies like CSM would *KILL* to be able to literally move terrain around the table as they please, teleport around and buff their saves to a stupid level.

I wasn't on about the strongest fluffy list. Nowhere do I state the list must be fluffy.

The strongest of the SM codex can compete with the strongest of the Eldar codex... If we use allies, psychic powers and other niche combos, that is.

The rest of the SM codex does not stand a chance against the rest of the Eldar codex, so the Eldar codex is much stronger as a whole.

To illustrate my point, take a SM army with no bikes, pods, librarians (including tiggy) or centurions against an Eldar army with no farseers, (including eldrad), wraithguard, jetbikes or wraithknights.

The SM army is hampered a lot more.

Why no Drop Pods? Stehl Reihn has been an integral part of SM strategy for ages.

And so have Jetbikes for Eldar. I just excluded the very top of each army to illustrate my point that the body of the Eldar codex is better.

We already knew that. And given that Eldar are more powerful than anyone else, it does not really prove anything.

 Selym wrote:
We already knew that.

Given the responses in this thread, evidently not everybody does!

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Selym wrote:
We already knew that.

Given the responses in this thread, evidently not everybody does!

No one is saying eldar are not top tier, you just, for some ungodly reason, think space marines are NOT top tier.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 d00mspire wrote:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
No, I have not 'snorted a lot of warp dust'.

If you set down your average Space Marine army on the table, the way the lore presents them, the way GW presents them in army displays and so on and so forth, you'd have an army with perhaps a captain, a few tactical squads (maybe with rhinos), some assault squads, devastators, a dreadnought, maybe some terminators and/or a land raider, a captain...

And that is not powerful. I'd feel fairly confident taking on those with my Chaos Space Marines, and that is saying something.

I think people are forgetting that a formation patchwork aberration stitched together from centurions, Dark Angels and Space Wolves wolf riders is not the same thing as 'Codex: Space Marines.' This is like saying CSM are good because some competetive daemon lists ally in a mace prince with min cultists.

In order to make Space Marines compete with top armies like Tau and Eldar, you not only have to pick the absolute best of the codex (bikemasters, Centurions) but you also have to buff them with allies, formations and psychic powers (standalone the bikemaster will not do much damage for his massive cost and the centurions are horrifically slow and vulnerable without transports, ICs to tank and psychic support). Without all that support, my CSM Vindicator can easily deal with the Centurions while Thousand Sons can tarpit the bikemaster nicely, and don't you realise how absurd that fact really is?

Even the dreaded Skyhammer is a onedimensional gimmick that falls flat to Rhinos.

And that is just one particular list. Again, people are looking at this thread like it asked 'The Most Powerful List in 40k'. And then the infamous list with various SM chapters becomes a strong contender. But in terms of codices as a whole, the Space Marines codex is extremely unimpressive compared to, say, Eldar, who have no dud units whatsoever. Tournament netlists are just one small part of this game, guys. Most people do not run a super-optimised list of only the best units. And as soon as you don't, the Marine codex becomes weak much faster than the Eldar or Necron codex does.

I wasn't aware that the op was about what is the strongest *fluffy* list. What the 'lore and gw present' doesn't matter, at all, when determining an armies power. The space marine codex and supplement are undeniably top tier (not first, but top) and to say otherwise is rather ignorant of your own rules, armies like CSM would *KILL* to be able to literally move terrain around the table as they please, teleport around and buff their saves to a stupid level.

I wasn't on about the strongest fluffy list. Nowhere do I state the list must be fluffy.

Which is why I didn't quote you saying that you did, this other guy, ashiraya is talking about how the lore-based space marines is weaker than an eldar lore based list, which is completely irrelevant in your post.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Selym wrote:
We already knew that.

Given the responses in this thread, evidently not everybody does!

Quote an opposing opinion?

The thread asked for most powerful army, not lists. The marine army isnt that good, it has a few specific lists that are good.

Martel732 wrote:
The thread asked for most powerful army, not lists. The marine army isnt that good, it has a few specific lists that are good.

By that logic Tau and necrons are not that good as well, since their power is from formations and synergy.

Not exactly. The average tau or necron unit is still much better than the averagd marine unit. Marinez need very specific builds to be good, tau and necrons have way more options.

Hmm, marines have quite a few options available

Build wise they have

Alpha strike:
Scouting bikers + White scar shenanigans
Drop pod spam + Skyhammers

Objective/ defensive:
Gladius Strike force

Deathstars builds (even without allies can be fairly nasty)

Options wise they have

Grav weaponry

The most utility out of Psychic powers

Easy access to 2+ armour saves via for certain units: Centurion/ C -terminator/artificer armour types

In anycase, with shooting being such a massive part of the game, and Alpha strikes being so potent and the versatility marines have, you're damn right I think are top tier.

GrafWattenburg wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

GrafWattenburg wrote:
Superfriends or Eldar, no doubt.

For example, take this one-source battleforged Eldar 1735p army:

Core: Pale Courts Battlehost (Aspect Lord Shrine, Halls of Martial Splendour)

So by "one source" you mean two sources.

what? No its a single Eldar decurion detachment, how is it two sources?

Because Pale Courts Battlehost isn't in the Eldar Codex, you need the IA book as well as the codex to run it. One army, one faction, two sources

That was the first thing that ran through my head seeing your post, at least. IDK if that's how "one-source" is commonly defined within the community, though, so I didn't comment on it. But I see that list as having two sources.

 Torus wrote:
Hmm, marines have quite a few options available

Build wise they have

Alpha strike:
Scouting bikers + White scar shenanigans
Drop pod spam + Skyhammers

Objective/ defensive:
Gladius Strike force

Deathstars builds (even without allies can be fairly nasty)

Options wise they have

Grav weaponry

The most utility out of Psychic powers

Easy access to 2+ armour saves via for certain units: Centurion/ C -terminator/artificer armour types

In anycase, with shooting being such a massive part of the game, and Alpha strikes being so potent and the versatility marines have, you're damn right I think are top tier.

I think alpha strikes are rather easy to blunt. And you are cherry picking the marine codex again. Go unit by unit in the codex (the ones everyone skips over!) and it's not that good of an army.

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The thread asked for most powerful army, not lists. The marine army isnt that good, it has a few specific lists that are good.

By that logic Tau and necrons are not that good as well, since their power is from formations and synergy.

Tau are pretty decent without formations, but I would agree that they work with synergy. Markerlight synergy is the best way to make the Tau a good faction. They are brilliant.

 d00mspire wrote:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The thread asked for most powerful army, not lists. The marine army isnt that good, it has a few specific lists that are good.

By that logic Tau and necrons are not that good as well, since their power is from formations and synergy.

Tau are pretty decent without formations, but I would agree that they work with synergy. Markerlight synergy is the best way to make the Tau a good faction. They are brilliant.

Marines have zero synergy other than psychic buffs. Each unit is its own little island of fail without being abusive.

Marines undoubtedly have the best superfriends. Or maybe that's SW? Either way, the fall off from abusive super friends lists is pretty large. Even the gladius suffers against a good number of lists in comparison.

Martel732 wrote:
Not exactly. The average tau or necron unit is still much better than the averagd marine unit. Marinez need very specific builds to be good, tau and necrons have way more options.

I wouldn't say that. Wraiths and stormsurges work without synergy and formations, but anything else is not over the top in a usual CAD. I say that as a fluffy CSM player. Things become unbalanced once you factor in markerlights and formations for Tau and Decurion/ Harvest for necrons. Without those they are okay.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Not exactly. The average tau or necron unit is still much better than the averagd marine unit. Marinez need very specific builds to be good, tau and necrons have way more options.

I wouldn't say that. Wraiths and stormsurges work without synergy and formations, but anything else is not over the top in a usual CAD. I say that as a fluffy CSM player. Things become unbalanced once you factor in markerlights and formations for Tau and Decurion/ Harvest for necrons. Without those they are okay.

Tau have how many sources of markerlights? Non-OP sources, even. Wraiths are still quite good with no buffs, as are Stormsurges. Marines? Not so much.

BossJakadakk wrote:

GrafWattenburg wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

GrafWattenburg wrote:
Superfriends or Eldar, no doubt.

For example, take this one-source battleforged Eldar 1735p army:

Core: Pale Courts Battlehost (Aspect Lord Shrine, Halls of Martial Splendour)

So by "one source" you mean two sources.

what? No its a single Eldar decurion detachment, how is it two sources?

Because Pale Courts Battlehost isn't in the Eldar Codex, you need the IA book as well as the codex to run it. One army, one faction, two sources

That was the first thing that ran through my head seeing your post, at least. IDK if that's how "one-source" is commonly defined within the community, though, so I didn't comment on it. But I see that list as having two sources.

Ah, I meant as in formations/detachments, in the way most tournaments say i.e "3 source limit" meaning you can bring up to three different formations/detachments, not more. Didn't even think of number of books as I typically have to bring IA:13, IA:5 2nd edition, the CSM codex, the Daemons codex and Crimson Slaughter + perhaps a dataslate or three to play my army, lol.

I wouldn't call Marines the most powerful army. They epitomize the "Jack of all trades, Master of none" which tends to keep them very high on the list, but prevents them from preforming well against very specialized armies (like Eldar and Tau).

If you were trying to get the overall most powerful army "list", an Eldar CAD is where you need to start. Scaterbikes and WK list only have fewer weaknesses that any other units in the game.
2 of those weaknessed are:
A) Drop Pod Grav, and LOTS of it and
B) Flyer Spam, whether it be Dakka Flyrants or loads of HelDrakes.

So now that we have or CAD and know it's weaknesses, what powerful addition could we add? What formation isn't weak against those threats and can, in fact, out Alpha-Strike an Alpha-Strike?
Oh yeah, Riptide-Wing.

I'm actually surprised that this list isn't more common:

Eldar CAD:
Farseer on bike
5 Scatter bikes
3 Scatter bikes
3 Scatter bikes
3 Scatter bikes
3 Scatter bikes

WK (Wraithcannons or Glaive/Shiled, take your pick) w/ 2 Scatter lasers

Void Shield Generator w/ 3 Shields

Riptide-Wing:
Riptide with Ion A, EWO & VT
Riptide with Ion A, EWO & VT
Riptide with Ion A, EWO & VT

------------------------------------and that a good few points under 1850

-

To me Necrons are the most powerful, I think it's because a newbie could pick up Necrons and do well. A beginner I think would have trouble with Eldar if they weren't sure what to take.
I would much rather take my chances against an Eldar army than a Necron one. Scatbikes don't scare me, wraiths do.

 cox.dan2 wrote:
To me Necrons are the most powerful, I think it's because a newbie could pick up Necrons and do well. A beginner I think would have trouble with Eldar if they weren't sure what to take.
I would much rather take my chances against an Eldar army than a Necron one. Scatbikes don't scare me, wraiths do.

I've seen people without a clue what they're doing smash their way through games with the crutches of scatbikes and wraithknights. That's how op they are. Can't do that with Necrons.

pm713 wrote:

 cox.dan2 wrote:
To me Necrons are the most powerful, I think it's because a newbie could pick up Necrons and do well. A beginner I think would have trouble with Eldar if they weren't sure what to take.
I would much rather take my chances against an Eldar army than a Necron one. Scatbikes don't scare me, wraiths do.

I've seen people without a clue what they're doing smash their way through games with the crutches of scatbikes and wraithknights. That's how op they are. Can't do that with Necrons.

Of course you can. Build Decurion and everything in your army is so hardy it doesn't really matter what you use, anyone that isn't very skilled will have trouble taking it down as you march forward. If we're talking a total noob against an experienced top tier player, then honestly, there is no army that can smash their way through. while the armies are incredibly unbalanced, a top tier competitive player will still be able to take on anything a new player can throw at him.

 Purifier wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 cox.dan2 wrote:
To me Necrons are the most powerful, I think it's because a newbie could pick up Necrons and do well. A beginner I think would have trouble with Eldar if they weren't sure what to take.
I would much rather take my chances against an Eldar army than a Necron one. Scatbikes don't scare me, wraiths do.

I've seen people without a clue what they're doing smash their way through games with the crutches of scatbikes and wraithknights. That's how op they are. Can't do that with Necrons.

Of course you can. Build Decurion and everything in your army is so hardy it doesn't really matter what you use, anyone that isn't very skilled will have trouble taking it down as you march forward. If we're talking a total noob against an experienced top tier player, then honestly, there is no army that can smash their way through. while the armies are incredibly unbalanced, a top tier competitive player will still be able to take on anything a new player can throw at him.

Last I checked Necrons have to move toward the enemy to do damage and don't have any unit that will literally wipe units out by aiming at them.

pm713 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 cox.dan2 wrote:
To me Necrons are the most powerful, I think it's because a newbie could pick up Necrons and do well. A beginner I think would have trouble with Eldar if they weren't sure what to take.
I would much rather take my chances against an Eldar army than a Necron one. Scatbikes don't scare me, wraiths do.

I've seen people without a clue what they're doing smash their way through games with the crutches of scatbikes and wraithknights. That's how op they are. Can't do that with Necrons.

Of course you can. Build Decurion and everything in your army is so hardy it doesn't really matter what you use, anyone that isn't very skilled will have trouble taking it down as you march forward. If we're talking a total noob against an experienced top tier player, then honestly, there is no army that can smash their way through. while the armies are incredibly unbalanced, a top tier competitive player will still be able to take on anything a new player can throw at him.

Last I checked Necrons have to move toward the enemy to do damage and don't have any unit that will literally wipe units out by aiming at them.

Guess it has been a long time since you checked.

Necrons have to move toward the enemy to do damage

I know. I said that.

anyone that isn't very skilled will have trouble taking it down as you march forward.

The thing about Necrons is they don't die, they won't blast you off the table turn 1, but they'll keeping coming like robotic cockroaches. They'll reanimate, make 3+ invuls, and Gauss the crap out of armies.
I'm not saying Eldar aren't elite/OP because they definitely are and have OP weapons.

 Galef wrote:

Spoiler:

I wouldn't call Marines the most powerful army. They epitomize the "Jack of all trades, Master of none" which tends to keep them very high on the list, but prevents them from preforming well against very specialized armies (like Eldar and Tau).

If you were trying to get the overall most powerful army "list", an Eldar CAD is where you need to start. Scaterbikes and WK list only have fewer weaknesses that any other units in the game.
2 of those weaknessed are:
A) Drop Pod Grav, and LOTS of it and
B) Flyer Spam, whether it be Dakka Flyrants or loads of HelDrakes.

So now that we have or CAD and know it's weaknesses, what powerful addition could we add? What formation isn't weak against those threats and can, in fact, out Alpha-Strike an Alpha-Strike?
Oh yeah, Riptide-Wing.

I'm actually surprised that this list isn't more common:

Spoiler:

Eldar CAD:
Farseer on bike
5 Scatter bikes
3 Scatter bikes
3 Scatter bikes
3 Scatter bikes
3 Scatter bikes

WK (Wraithcannons or Glaive/Shiled, take your pick) w/ 2 Scatter lasers

Void Shield Generator w/ 3 Shields

Riptide-Wing:
Riptide with Ion A, EWO & VT
Riptide with Ion A, EWO & VT
Riptide with Ion A, EWO & VT

------------------------------------and that a good few points under 1850

-

It's not more common because paying for scatbike models is a pain in the bank, and the list would get one pickup game before the group exiled whoever brought it.

 Selym wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Spoiler:

I wouldn't call Marines the most powerful army. They epitomize the "Jack of all trades, Master of none" which tends to keep them very high on the list, but prevents them from preforming well against very specialized armies (like Eldar and Tau).

If you were trying to get the overall most powerful army "list", an Eldar CAD is where you need to start. Scaterbikes and WK list only have fewer weaknesses that any other units in the game.
2 of those weaknessed are:
A) Drop Pod Grav, and LOTS of it and
B) Flyer Spam, whether it be Dakka Flyrants or loads of HelDrakes.

So now that we have or CAD and know it's weaknesses, what powerful addition could we add? What formation isn't weak against those threats and can, in fact, out Alpha-Strike an Alpha-Strike?
Oh yeah, Riptide-Wing.

I'm actually surprised that this list isn't more common:

Spoiler:

Eldar CAD:
Farseer on bike
5 Scatter bikes
3 Scatter bikes
3 Scatter bikes
3 Scatter bikes
3 Scatter bikes

WK (Wraithcannons or Glaive/Shiled, take your pick) w/ 2 Scatter lasers

Void Shield Generator w/ 3 Shields

Riptide-Wing:
Riptide with Ion A, EWO & VT
Riptide with Ion A, EWO & VT
Riptide with Ion A, EWO & VT

------------------------------------and that a good few points under 1850

-

It's not more common because paying for scatbike models is a pain in the bank, and the list would get one pickup game before the group exiled whoever brought it.

I feel the need to burn all knowledge of that list before the local TFG sees it. It looks nasty.

 Selym wrote:
Simple, no-thought-required list I just made up, using 2000 points and Eldar CAD. Fairly few shenanigans, and no formations, but will beat out most other armies quite happily:

Eldar:

Farseer Skyrunner w/Singing Spear [120 pts]
Farseer Skyrunner w/Singing Spear [120 pts]

Windriders (x10) w/10x Scatterlasers [270 pts]
Windriders (x10) w/10x Scatterlasers [270 pts]

Warp Spiders [95 pts]
Wraithguard (x5) [160 pts]
Wave Serpent w/Bright Lance [115 pts]

Fire Prism [125 pts]
Fire Prism [125 pts]
Nightspinners (x2) [200 pts]

Wraithknight [295 pts]

[1,995 pts]

This list is garbage. 10 man scat packs? What a joke, thier footprint is huge and its a complete waste/overkill to use 40 s6 shots at a single target. Wraithknight with no scatterlazer so you can use D cannons on real threats but still shoot the lazers at what you want to charge. Non FW eldar tanks including fire prisms and night spinners are simply not good. Relatively low armor and when you jink you cant even fire thier main guns, no thanks.

You did say you slapped this list together and it shows. You clearly dont play eldar and just think you can field anything and win games. This is as mediocre an eldar list (with no formations) as ive ever seen. You really shouldnt just buy the hype that any eldar units can be thrown on a table and the game is won.

Tis true, only played one game of eldar, but it's better than the crap you can put together in the other armies I have played.

Split up the scatbikes a bit, works better.

 cox.dan2 wrote:
To me Necrons are the most powerful, I think it's because a newbie could pick up Necrons and do well. A beginner I think would have trouble with Eldar if they weren't sure what to take.
I would much rather take my chances against an Eldar army than a Necron one. Scatbikes don't scare me, wraiths do.

Necrons lack dakka to an extent, they lack a lot of abilities. They only really excel in durability. 4+ armor saves with 4+ RP makes it hard to kill them.

Eldar on the other hand are the Easy mode of Warhammer 40k. Scat Bikes, Wraithknights, Spiders...these are idiot proof units. It doesn't take much skill to put 12 bikes on the table, say "I am going to shoot that unit" and then wipe it out in a single turn.

While we're discussing what various armies are good at...

What are Sisters of Battle good at?

My general lack of being able to have an army on the table after turn 3 in recent years has made me wonder whether I haven't been playing to their strengths, but that would require me to know what their strengths are.

So far all I can think of is that they're less-durable Space Marines who are worse in melee but have a potent DPS cooldown they can use sometimes.

 Pouncey wrote:
While we're discussing what various armies are good at...

What are Sisters of Battle good at?

My general lack of being able to have an army on the table after turn 3 in recent years has made me wonder whether I haven't been playing to their strengths, but that would require me to know what their strengths are.

So far all I can think of is that they're less-durable Space Marines who are worse in melee but have a potent DPS cooldown they can use sometimes.

Fielding mass bolters. Points per bolter, they have an amazing ratio... but what good is that when the bolter gets left further and further behind with every passing day?

Their main strength right now is that they are IoM, so they can ally in most anything. And that's not really an amazing strength. The Sisters, like many of the smaller codex (skitarii, tempestus, gk, etc) are mainly a source for an ally detachment now. They're missing too many parts to be a full army on their own.

If I were you (or if I were still playing Sisters,) I'd start by allying in some Grav Cents. Paint them like your sisters and do a headswap to some cool female head. After that, you've already started to get your mits into the SM codex and you can start looking at what is in there that will help you against whatever is in your local meta. Modifying stuff can be a lot of fun.

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
While we're discussing what various armies are good at...

What are Sisters of Battle good at?

My general lack of being able to have an army on the table after turn 3 in recent years has made me wonder whether I haven't been playing to their strengths, but that would require me to know what their strengths are.

So far all I can think of is that they're less-durable Space Marines who are worse in melee but have a potent DPS cooldown they can use sometimes.

Fielding mass bolters. Points per bolter, they have an amazing ratio... but what good is that when the bolter gets left further and further behind with every passing day?

Their main strength right now is that they are IoM, so they can ally in most anything. And that's not really an amazing strength. The Sisters, like many of the smaller codex (skitarii, tempestus, gk, etc) are mainly a source for an ally detachment now. They're missing too many parts to be a full army on their own.

Uhh, given that my only opponent fields a lot of foot horde armies without anything heavier than a light dreadnought, I think that "mass bolters" thing is sounding pretty good for my local "meta".

That said, I do really, REALLY like the concept of a combined IoM army that bulks out most of its stuff with IG, has a couple of squads of Sororitas, and one or two small squads of Marines. Just from a fluff perspective it sounds almost perfect.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
While we're discussing what various armies are good at...

What are Sisters of Battle good at?

My general lack of being able to have an army on the table after turn 3 in recent years has made me wonder whether I haven't been playing to their strengths, but that would require me to know what their strengths are.

So far all I can think of is that they're less-durable Space Marines who are worse in melee but have a potent DPS cooldown they can use sometimes.

Fielding mass bolters. Points per bolter, they have an amazing ratio... but what good is that when the bolter gets left further and further behind with every passing day?

Their main strength right now is that they are IoM, so they can ally in most anything. And that's not really an amazing strength. The Sisters, like many of the smaller codex (skitarii, tempestus, gk, etc) are mainly a source for an ally detachment now. They're missing too many parts to be a full army on their own.

Uhh, given that my only opponent fields a lot of foot horde armies without anything heavier than a light dreadnought, I think that "mass bolters" thing is sounding pretty good for my local "meta".

Well, with that in mind, you're probably just wasting too many points getting the shiny toys. You'll want to drop off a lot and replace it with more bolters... an expensive prospect when all there is is metal models, though. A cheaper alternative is allying in some pie-plates from IG or SM.

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
While we're discussing what various armies are good at...

What are Sisters of Battle good at?

My general lack of being able to have an army on the table after turn 3 in recent years has made me wonder whether I haven't been playing to their strengths, but that would require me to know what their strengths are.

So far all I can think of is that they're less-durable Space Marines who are worse in melee but have a potent DPS cooldown they can use sometimes.

Fielding mass bolters. Points per bolter, they have an amazing ratio... but what good is that when the bolter gets left further and further behind with every passing day?

Their main strength right now is that they are IoM, so they can ally in most anything. And that's not really an amazing strength. The Sisters, like many of the smaller codex (skitarii, tempestus, gk, etc) are mainly a source for an ally detachment now. They're missing too many parts to be a full army on their own.

Uhh, given that my only opponent fields a lot of foot horde armies without anything heavier than a light dreadnought, I think that "mass bolters" thing is sounding pretty good for my local "meta".

Well, with that in mind, you're probably just wasting too many points getting the shiny toys. You'll want to drop off a lot and replace it with more bolters... an expensive prospect when all there is is metal models, though. A cheaper alternative is allying in some pie-plates from IG or SM.

I have enough bolter ladies to field a decent army. Though I might take a flamer in each squad purely for a bit of anti-charge protection. Oh, and I found a use a couple of years ago for the stormbolter ladies that came with the old boxed 10-woman squads they sold in their stores - cheap Superiors! : D

And now that you mention it, spending the points on an Exorcist when my opponent's highest AV is 11 seems silly. Particularly in 1,000 point games.

SIsters are not a bad army. You can spam flamers and melta very nicely.

It's just that if you want to win tournaments with them, they are horribly monobuild, and as such not a particularly interesting army to play on a competetive level.

This is another reason people often play Eldar. Not only are they strongest, just about their entire codex is viable competetively, offering massive freedom in experimenting with your own army lists and tactics.

 Ashiraya wrote:
SIsters are not a bad army. You can spam flamers and melta very nicely.

It's just that if you want to win tournaments with them, they are horribly monobuild, and as such not a particularly interesting army to play on a competetive level.

This is another reason people often play Eldar. Not only are they strongest, just about their entire codex is viable competetively, offering massive freedom in experimenting with your own army lists and tactics.

They also have exactly 0 answers to fliers, which is mostly a problem against necron of all people, and they have the double whammy of getting hit hard by both pie plates and grav guns. Sisters as a pure army are a bad army. They are the perfect example of a bad army, but since they are iom, they have the option of fixing what they lack. What they do have are fairly solid base choices. It would be like calling necrons a good army if they were a single sheet with just warriors, immortals and the ghost ark. Very solid base for something else, but you'd hardly call that a "good army."

 Ashiraya wrote:
SIsters are not a bad army. You can spam flamers and melta very nicely.

It's just that if you want to win tournaments with them, they are horribly monobuild, and as such not a particularly interesting army to play on a competetive level.

This is another reason people often play Eldar. Not only are they strongest, just about their entire codex is viable competetively, offering massive freedom in experimenting with your own army lists and tactics.

Tournaments aren't a problem for me. I've got no interest in even entering one.

I think my problem with getting tabled is that my opponent uses a semi-competitive list and has stuck to it long enough to get good with it, whereas I rewrite my list for every game and choose a ton of vaguely fluffy choices each time. Stuff like a Scout Squad with one sniper rifle, one heavy bolter, the Sergeant with a pistol and CCW, and everyone else with a bolter.

 Ashiraya wrote:
SIsters are not a bad army. You can spam flamers and melta very nicely.

It's just that if you want to win tournaments with them, they are horribly monobuild, and as such not a particularly interesting army to play on a competetive level.

This is another reason people often play Eldar. Not only are they strongest, just about their entire codex is viable competetively, offering massive freedom in experimenting with your own army lists and tactics.

Sisters = good army
Space marines = weak




No way, no way at all you can not just be trolling here.

I'm going to change the list I originally posted. I am going to remove Necrons. This means I think that Tau and Eldar are now the strongest armies.

When claiming an army is good, please provide evidence in the form of a list.

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
SIsters are not a bad army. You can spam flamers and melta very nicely.

It's just that if you want to win tournaments with them, they are horribly monobuild, and as such not a particularly interesting army to play on a competetive level.

This is another reason people often play Eldar. Not only are they strongest, just about their entire codex is viable competetively, offering massive freedom in experimenting with your own army lists and tactics.

Sisters = good army
Space marines = weak




No way, no way at all you can not just be trolling here.

I believe I have made my points rather clear. Perhaps saying that SoB is a good army is unclear (they are certainly not well designed) and it is more correct to say that they are a good list (since from a competetive standpoint they are just one list really.)

When I say 'good' I naturally say in comparison to the average. SoB will never challenge Necrons or Eldar, but they can deal massive hurt on even decent armies like Orks, putting them firmly around mid tier - which qualifies as 'good' as far as I can tell.

Also, superfriends is still not the same thing as the overall strength of Codex: Space Marines, and it is getting somewhat tiring to have to repeat that.

 Ashiraya wrote:


they can deal massive hurt on even decent armies like Orks, putting them firmly around mid tier - which qualifies as 'good' as far as I can tell.

Right, because space marines can't obliterate orks. SoB also have no real anti flyer, magic, assault units, are lower toughness, less choice of weapons, lack of units overall, no non-apoc formations, no way to deal with high toughness monsters aside from lucky melta/exorcist shots to name a few things. But yeah, space marines, a codex babyed by GW with awnsers to everything and anything are weaker. For sure, no doubt.

Obviously, Dark eldar is the most powerful army.

They have many Str D weapons and a lot of differents ways to spam invisibility.

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:


they can deal massive hurt on even decent armies like Orks, putting them firmly around mid tier - which qualifies as 'good' as far as I can tell.

Right, because space marines can't obliterate orks. SoB also have no real anti flyer, magic, assault units, are lower toughness, less choice of weapons, lack of units overall, no non-apoc formations, no way to deal with high toughness monsters aside from lucky melta/exorcist shots to name a few things. But yeah, space marines, a codex babyed by GW with awnsers to everything and anything are weaker. For sure, no doubt.

While I don't agree with him, you're either wilfully misunderstanding him, or just don't care to actually read what you're responding to.

He has said SM is the bottom of top tier, and Sisters is solid mid tier. I don't agree for one second, as Sisters are clearly stuck in bottom tier because, as both you and I have stated, they are lacking... basically everything except ground to ground shooting, and even that is very very limited, and is lacking any of the weapons introduced into the power creep after the mid 90s.

But he still hasn't said that SM is weaker than Sisters as you claim. Attack his arguments, but don't attack things you're making up that he said.

 Purifier wrote:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:


they can deal massive hurt on even decent armies like Orks, putting them firmly around mid tier - which qualifies as 'good' as far as I can tell.

Right, because space marines can't obliterate orks. SoB also have no real anti flyer, magic, assault units, are lower toughness, less choice of weapons, lack of units overall, no non-apoc formations, no way to deal with high toughness monsters aside from lucky melta/exorcist shots to name a few things. But yeah, space marines, a codex babyed by GW with awnsers to everything and anything are weaker. For sure, no doubt.

While I don't agree with him, you're either wilfully misunderstanding him, or just don't care to actually read what you're responding to.

He has said SM is the bottom of top tier, and Sisters is solid mid tier. I don't agree for one second, as Sisters are clearly stuck in bottom tier because, as both you and I have stated, they are lacking... basically everything except ground to ground shooting, and even that is very very limited, and is lacking any of the weapons introduced into the power creep after the mid 90s.

But he still hasn't said that SM is weaker than Sisters as you claim. Attack his arguments, but don't attack things you're making up that he said.

Can you directly quote him, im being completely honest here I can't find where he agreed that "space marines are top tier, just not the best". That's literally this entire argument, is that he SPECIFICALLY says they are weak, while saying sisters are good. He mentions no 'tier' regarding space marines in at least 2 pages of his previous posts, nor has he mentioned sm being powerful outside of the superfriends.

The enitre argument is based around him thinking that space marine codex is weak, comparing them to CSM: "SM are certainly not strong in and of themselves either."

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:


they can deal massive hurt on even decent armies like Orks, putting them firmly around mid tier - which qualifies as 'good' as far as I can tell.

Right, because space marines can't obliterate orks. SoB also have no real anti flyer, magic, assault units, are lower toughness, less choice of weapons, lack of units overall, no non-apoc formations, no way to deal with high toughness monsters aside from lucky melta/exorcist shots to name a few things. But yeah, space marines, a codex babyed by GW with awnsers to everything and anything are weaker. For sure, no doubt.

While I don't agree with him, you're either wilfully misunderstanding him, or just don't care to actually read what you're responding to.

He has said SM is the bottom of top tier, and Sisters is solid mid tier. I don't agree for one second, as Sisters are clearly stuck in bottom tier because, as both you and I have stated, they are lacking... basically everything except ground to ground shooting, and even that is very very limited, and is lacking any of the weapons introduced into the power creep after the mid 90s.

But he still hasn't said that SM is weaker than Sisters as you claim. Attack his arguments, but don't attack things you're making up that he said.

Can you directly quote him, im being completely honest here I can't find where he agreed that "space marines are top tier, just not the best". That's literally this entire argument, is that he SPECIFICALLY says they are weak, while saying sisters are good. He mentions no 'tier' regarding space marines in at least 2 pages of his previous posts, nor has he mentioned sm being powerful outside of the superfriends.

The enitre argument is based around him thinking that space marine codex is weak, comparing them to CSM: "SM are certainly not strong in and of themselves either."

the Space Marines codex is extremely unimpressive compared to, say, Eldar

He's comparing it to Eldar when he's calling it weak.

He's comparing SoB to Orks when he's calling them strong.

Look, I think he has a completely skewed image of the strengths of the armies that exist (he also refers to Orks as a decent codex...) and he's trying too hard to make it that there is one special list that's strong, when there are several. It's not helping that he's also using the words "weak" and "strong" really arbitrarily, comparing to different things only mentioned in footnotes. But it's there if you care to read it.

I agree, he has no concept of codex power levels, but what I am tlaking about Purifier is where he said: "The Space Marine codex is a weak book with a few exploitable things, but those few things make up a small part of the whole codex."

To me, I see him as saying the SM codex is mid tier at best, if he did mean they are bottom of the top tier, I would still STRONGLY disagree, but at least thats more acceptable.

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:


they can deal massive hurt on even decent armies like Orks, putting them firmly around mid tier - which qualifies as 'good' as far as I can tell.

Right, because space marines can't obliterate orks. SoB also have no real anti flyer, magic, assault units, are lower toughness, less choice of weapons, lack of units overall, no non-apoc formations, no way to deal with high toughness monsters aside from lucky melta/exorcist shots to name a few things. But yeah, space marines, a codex babyed by GW with awnsers to everything and anything are weaker. For sure, no doubt.

Sisters of Battle have too few choices to what they can field to be a good take-all-comers list on their own, it's true. But the units they do have access to are generally good enough at what they do that there is one particular build that Sororitas can put together which is capable of wrecking a lot of armies out there. It can't hurt some of the most top-tier armies too much, but against most armies it does just fine.

The lack of choices doesn't mean much in regards to how powerful you are when the things you do have are generally pretty powerful. It just means that every competitive Sororitas army looks almost exactly the same, because there's only one way to play them competitively.

Sisters of Battle aren't a weak army at all. The reason you don't see more Sororitas armies around has everything to do with how expensive and hard to find the models are and nothing to do with how effective they actually are. Numerous people over the years on this forum have made a post starting with something like, "I finally faced my first Sisters of Battle army," and continuing with something like, "They were way stronger than I thought they'd be," and often mentions the Sororitas winning the game.

And in regards to assault units, Death-Cult Assassins wreck any Marines that don't have a 2+ save or Storm Shield. The level of butchery is beyond belief, and they do it for around the cost of a Tactical Marine per DCA with only a single Priest needed as a tax.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:
He's comparing it to Eldar when he's calling it weak.

He's comparing SoB to Orks when he's calling them strong.

Look, I think he has a completely skewed image of the strengths of the armies that exist (he also refers to Orks as a decent codex...) and he's trying too hard to make it that there is one special list that's strong, when there are several. It's not helping that he's also using the words "weak" and "strong" really arbitrarily, comparing to different things only mentioned in footnotes. But it's there if you care to read it.

His comparisons aren't arbitrary, they're relative.

Sisters of Battle ARE strong compared to Orks. Space Marines ARE weak compared to Eldar.

Strong and weak are relative to begin with when it comes to power rankings. How Eldar currently are would be weak in a game where most of the armies are even more powerful than that, but that doesn't stop them from being really strong in the current game.

His comparisons aren't actually wrong, they're just choosing a reference point that suits his point. Saying that Sisters of Battle are weak compared to Eldar also wouldn't be wrong, it's just choosing a different reference point.

 Pouncey wrote:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:


they can deal massive hurt on even decent armies like Orks, putting them firmly around mid tier - which qualifies as 'good' as far as I can tell.

Right, because space marines can't obliterate orks. SoB also have no real anti flyer, magic, assault units, are lower toughness, less choice of weapons, lack of units overall, no non-apoc formations, no way to deal with high toughness monsters aside from lucky melta/exorcist shots to name a few things. But yeah, space marines, a codex babyed by GW with awnsers to everything and anything are weaker. For sure, no doubt.

Sisters of Battle have too few choices to what they can field to be a good take-all-comers list on their own, it's true. But the units they do have access to are generally good enough at what they do that there is one particular build that Sororitas can put together which is capable of wrecking a lot of armies out there. It can't hurt some of the most top-tier armies too much, but against most armies it does just fine.

The lack of choices doesn't mean much in regards to how powerful you are when the things you do have are generally pretty powerful. It just means that every competitive Sororitas army looks almost exactly the same, because there's only one way to play them competitively.

Sisters of Battle aren't a weak army at all. The reason you don't see more Sororitas armies around has everything to do with how expensive and hard to find the models are and nothing to do with how effective they actually are. Numerous people over the years on this forum have made a post starting with something like, "I finally faced my first Sisters of Battle army," and continuing with something like, "They were way stronger than I thought they'd be," and often mentions the Sororitas winning the game.

That also helps sisters a lot, the unknown. Not many people know you can be jumping around with 5 flamers in a jumppack-star unit so they don't plan their moves accordingly. As a fairly decent sisters player I know know they can be quite good, but when people know what each of your units is capable of, they melt really fast. T3 space marines with no real toys to play with hurts them unfortunately.

alex0911 wrote:
Obviously, Dark eldar is the most powerful army.

They have many Str D weapons and a lot of differents ways to spam invisibility.

Just wait until we can get Vect's Castigators.... Then they'll see. They'll all see!

I think people just have a very skewed idea of what 'good' actually means.

When I said Space Marines, as an entirety of a codex, are not good, this was in the context of the top codices - Tau, Necrons, Eldar - which were the ones being discussed at that point.

Sisters of Battle are good in that they have at least a decent chance of victory against most codices in the game. I cannot say where exactly in the mid tier they are, but the fact that they are decisively stronger than true bottom tier codices - such as CSM - means that I am loath to place them there as well.

SoB are not literally monolist, they just have an utterly tiny unit roster and so very little in the way of options in their list building, and a few of the units that are there are absolute duds (Celestians for example).

 cosmicsoybean wrote:
That also helps sisters a lot, the unknown. Not many people know you can be jumping around with 5 flamers in a jumppack-star unit so they don't plan their moves accordingly. As a fairly decent sisters player I know know they can be quite good, but when people know what each of your units is capable of, they melt really fast. T3 space marines with no real toys to play with hurts them unfortunately.

That's a good point. Probably a great deal of the success Sororitas have in those situations is their capabilities being unknown, rather than being powerful.

I'm reminded of a character called Bastion in the video game called Overwatch. He's a rare case, where he becomes more effective at lower skill levels and weaker at higher skill levels, to the point where the top players in the world never use him because he's too easy to take out. Yet one particular player in a top-level tournament chose to use Bastion at one point and actually did very well with him, specifically because all the players at that skill level hadn't fought against him in months and hadn't kept up the skills to deal with him effectively. However, that didn't last long, as the opponents adapted within a few minutes and began to obliterate Bastion.

In short, it's valid to attribute the Sororitas' success more to unpreparedness on the enemy's part than any sort of strength the Sororitas themselves have.

If "marines"were good, ba would be good. They're not. There's a lot of terrible units in c:sm that lose to sisters and ig.

Martel732 wrote:
If "marines"were good, ba would be good. They're not. There's a lot of terrible units in c:sm that lose to sisters and ig.

Sisters of Battle have some very weird wargear options. Like taking a Stormbolter as a special weapon. I get that it factors into the holy trinity of bolter-melta-flamer, but it's so utterly pointless as a squad's special weapon that even players who love the army's lore more than they do making a powerful army avoid it because the rest of the squad fulfills the "bolter" portion of the holy trinity just fine. The only thing it offers over not taking a special weapon at all is an extra shot from 12-24", another extra shot at that range when moving, and the ability to fire it before charging. For the price, it's not terrible, but you could also take a meltagun or flamer for not too much more.

To be fair, Sternguard Veterans can also take stormbolters, for whom it is an outright downgrade.

 Ashiraya wrote:
To be fair, Sternguard Veterans can also take stormbolters, for whom it is an outright downgrade.

...Yup. That's WAY dumber.

Who's writing these Codexes and do they actually play the game they're writing rules for?

 Pouncey wrote:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:
That also helps sisters a lot, the unknown. Not many people know you can be jumping around with 5 flamers in a jumppack-star unit so they don't plan their moves accordingly. As a fairly decent sisters player I know know they can be quite good, but when people know what each of your units is capable of, they melt really fast. T3 space marines with no real toys to play with hurts them unfortunately.

That's a good point. Probably a great deal of the success Sororitas have in those situations is their capabilities being unknown, rather than being powerful.

I'm reminded of a character called Bastion in the video game called Overwatch. He's a rare case, where he becomes more effective at lower skill levels and weaker at higher skill levels, to the point where the top players in the world never use him because he's too easy to take out. Yet one particular player in a top-level tournament chose to use Bastion at one point and actually did very well with him, specifically because all the players at that skill level hadn't fought against him in months and hadn't kept up the skills to deal with him effectively. However, that didn't last long, as the opponents adapted within a few minutes and began to obliterate Bastion.

In short, it's valid to attribute the Sororitas' success more to unpreparedness on the enemy's part than any sort of strength the Sororitas themselves have.

Precisely. I play overwatch and use bastion quite a bit, the amount of people who cry overpowered even when he gets wrecked by 3/4 of the hero roster is just amazingly funny to me, their tears fuel me! On a different note once I figure out a decent colour scheme ill get to play with them more and get more 'tactical' but there isn't a lot we can do without allys, and I absolutely refuse to play other imperium.

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:
That also helps sisters a lot, the unknown. Not many people know you can be jumping around with 5 flamers in a jumppack-star unit so they don't plan their moves accordingly. As a fairly decent sisters player I know know they can be quite good, but when people know what each of your units is capable of, they melt really fast. T3 space marines with no real toys to play with hurts them unfortunately.

That's a good point. Probably a great deal of the success Sororitas have in those situations is their capabilities being unknown, rather than being powerful.

I'm reminded of a character called Bastion in the video game called Overwatch. He's a rare case, where he becomes more effective at lower skill levels and weaker at higher skill levels, to the point where the top players in the world never use him because he's too easy to take out. Yet one particular player in a top-level tournament chose to use Bastion at one point and actually did very well with him, specifically because all the players at that skill level hadn't fought against him in months and hadn't kept up the skills to deal with him effectively. However, that didn't last long, as the opponents adapted within a few minutes and began to obliterate Bastion.

In short, it's valid to attribute the Sororitas' success more to unpreparedness on the enemy's part than any sort of strength the Sororitas themselves have.

Precisely. I play overwatch and use bastion quite a bit, the amount of people who cry overpowered even when he gets wrecked by 3/4 of the hero roster is just amazingly funny to me, their tears fuel me! On a different note once I figure out a decent colour scheme ill get to play with them more and get more 'tactical' but there isn't a lot we can do without allys, and I absolutely refuse to play other imperium.

The thing about that is, because Quick Play in Overwatch uses an MMR system that actually succeeds very very well in pairing opponents of equal skill together, complaints of Bastion being overpowered in the lower-end MMR brackets are actually legitimate complaints. Players at those skill levels aren't good enough to actually counter him effectively. The fact that more skilled players can deal with him fairly easily is irrelevant, because the complaints are coming from players in a skill bracket where NO ONE is that good. It's not a matter of an individual player or team being unwilling to deal with him properly, it's that at that skill level, everyone is too bad at the game to deal with him. If someone in the bracket actually gets good enough to beat Bastion, they're moved out of the bracket to an MMR range where everyone can beat him.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I think people just have a very skewed idea of what 'good' actually means.

When I said Space Marines, as an entirety of a codex, are not good, this was in the context of the top codices - Tau, Necrons, Eldar - which were the ones being discussed at that point.

Sisters of Battle are good in that they have at least a decent chance of victory against most codices in the game. I cannot say where exactly in the mid tier they are, but the fact that they are decisively stronger than true bottom tier codices - such as CSM - means that I am loath to place them there as well.

SoB are not literally monolist, they just have an utterly tiny unit roster and so very little in the way of options in their list building, and a few of the units that are there are absolute duds (Celestians for example).

And this is also completely false, since typically you're only comparing the Vanilla codex as a whole, to only the most powerful lists of the other top books...
Take an Eldar army that includes no Wraithknight/D-scythes, and only 0-1 Scatbike/Warp Spider units, and suddenly even a basic CAD Marine list is more than competitive against it. Likewise, non-Gladius or Superfriends/formation abuse Marines are only junk vs. Necrons when the Necron player is still playing a full-on Decurion. Against a basic CAD 'Cron force, the majority of the Marine codex is perfectly viable.

Tau are simply an outlier. Their whole schtick of being a mobile gunline in an edition that massively favours shooting vs. chopping, on top of a couple awful mechanics (*cough*markerlights&interceptorspam*cough*) makes them unfair to most of the game.

Marines are definitely able to play on-par with Eldar & especially Necrons/other Marines for the most part, and with a variety of list types as well. (granted, a fully gouda'ed Wraithknight + MSU Scatbike & Warp Spider + Riptide wing army will murder pretty much anything Marines can come up with!)

But they are in no way the lowest rung of the top tier! Marines like Eldar, are the go-to army when aiming to outright win at tournaments. Tau, Necrons & Daemons are almost entirely just spoiler armies, who tend to determine which Marine or Eldar army gets the top spot over the others.

"Take an Eldar army that includes no Wraithknight/D-scythes, and only 0-1 Scatbike/Warp Spider units, and suddenly even a basic CAD Marine list is more than competitive against it. "

It really isn't. The majority of the marine codex isn't viable in a general sense. As in, can't do their jobs at all. I know this, because all those units are in C:BA. And none of the good units/combos.

Experiment 626 wrote:

And this is also completely false

No, it is not. The core of the Space Marine codex - units like predators, whirlwinds, tactical marines, rhinos, assault marines, devastators, scouts, captains, chaplains, sternguard veterans, vanguard veterans, terminators, assault terminators, land raiders, and so on are decisively mediocre and really not all that much better than their CSM counterparts. They have small advantages (chapter tactics and POTMS in exchange for a few extra points, etc) but in context the difference is minimal. Even with only Wraithcannon WGs, and without WKs/scatterbikes/warpspiders, Eldar are considerably more powerful overall - the SM codex has a few gimmicks that drags it up from the dirt (skyhammer, psychic powers, superfriends, etc) that are able to compete with Eldar, but if we exclude those gimmicks (and exclude the top Eldar picks too like you suggest, for fairness) the result is still that a fairly normal Eldar army with, say, a Farseer, some Dire Avengers in Wave Serpents, Shuricannon Jetbikes, War Walkers, maybe a couple of Hornets, Crimson Hunters and a couple of Fire Prisms will have the odds firmly in its favour.