Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm looking to start another fantasy army, vampire counts being my first, and i was just wondering which army was the most competitive. Please vote and leave a comment about how the army you picked should be run.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
After coming back i realize that almost all of the people have voted dark elves now the only thing i don't get is what makes them so good? is there any specific build that makes them amazing or is everything just undercosted like the daemons armybook?

I would have said VCs, but their most annoying units are wraiths and they get hammered with all the magical attacks in skaven and daemons

Played right I'd have thought Dark Elves pose a problem for most races more so as so many of their units are just plain great.

A wood elf points denial army is also a great winner, but you will win by small amounts, not get crushing victories in most cases.

But there are certain builds that are great 'all comers' lists for almost every army.

Empire:
War alter
3 Level 2 mages
3 Knight units
4 cannons
2 steam tanks.

O&G:
Black orc on wyvern with shaggas.
2 giants
2 squig hopper units
4 bolt throwers
Troops for flavour

Dark Elves get a top slot because they don't have one really good competitive army build; they have a lot of good competitive army builds, making it much easier for one to find an army list that best fits your gaming style.

Let's face it, even Corsairs and Executioners (the weakest DE units) can kick much ass when used right. Just don't expect them to do well in anything other than an optimum situation.

Another factor in player preferance is that DE very much reward a good tactical player. Some other armies are very much 'point-and-click', in that you just wade in and attack and you'll do fine. DE requires a plan to work, so when you win, it really was you that won and not just your army.

Edit: Vampire Counts do well primarily because they ignore psychology and can bolster units mid-game. So your tarpits don't evaporate or run away as you use and abuse them, in fact they can actually get bigger!

Sorry if this sound like a stupid question, but can't tomb kings also ignore psychology and can bolster units mid-game

My vote went to VC because when played a person who knows to layer the cheese on, they are unbeatable. I'd say more so than Dark Elves. The difference in VC and Dark Elves is that when you make a ridiculous VC list and win you feel less like a human being because of what you just did. Dark Elves are an amazing army. I think of them as the Space Marines of Fantasy. There isn't anything they can't do and most things they can do very well. Their shooting is very solid, their magic and magic defense is amazing as well. Their troops are capable of doing almost anything you need them to do, short of taking a charges. And then there's the Hydra.

Forgot to comment on Tomb Kings. Tomb Kings aren't bad, but their "competitive" list is very boring to play. Giant line of archers just shooting. Kinda like dwarves.

Thanks for clearing that up for me stormtrooper. but there's still one thing you forgot to answer and that's what kind of list is the most competitive ex: star dragon spam.

anyways here's one of the lists i run and i was just wondering what you guys think http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/285863.page

LOL at 2 votes for Ogres, who did that?

I voted dark elves. Lizards would be my second choice.

The reason why I rate dark elves is they can do all types of armies very well. Balanced list? Solid choices for every role. Cav army? Great core and special cavalry. Monster list? More terror causing monsters than anybody other than Lizards can bring. (and unlike lizards actually have a good army after bringing 4 monsters, stegs are too expensive to bring 5) Shooty army of death? It is possible to field every model in the DE army with some sort of ranged weapon, and some that can still be good in combat. (shades, nobles, and dark riders) I have personally even made block hammer work for dark elves, with multiple stubborn or better units that are ItP. (and unlike most block armies, dark elf blocks have killing power) Their magic items do have a large variance from crap to gold, but the gold is pretty much some of the best items in the game.

I rate lizards high since they have units that can compete very well in all aspects of the game, and they have some of the best core choices in the game with saurus warriors and skink skirmishers. Their only down side is lack of speed (initiative and movement) and mediocre WS. The cost of their blocks is pretty high, so their support elements need to be up to the task. Other than lack of range, lizard support is pretty good. Slaan and EoT skink priests of course make for a devastating magic phase, with very strong anti magic abilities.

I don't rate VC highly like other people do, but mostly since they really don't have much going for them than their one obvious trick and a few somewhat effective sneaky tricks. Easy to kill core that cant kill anything, character that dies and brings army with him, but cant invest in protection for him since he needs to be magic oriented to support army, and complete lack of real shooting makes for a pretty poor army. That it still does well has more to do with the power of fear, bad books/lists being played, and the fact they do reasonably well against daemons. Against good players with decent to good armies, they really don't do all that well. I fear TKs more than I fear VC TBH.

legion of bugs wrote:Sorry if this sound like a stupid question, but can't tomb kings also ignore psychology and can bolster units mid-game

Yes, they can. They can't raise past starting strength, and can be quite powerful but have to be played very well. Their troops are generally even worse than VC, and the characters aren't as customizable. Arguably the most difficult army to play right, but a real mind blower when used by a good general.

RZ

Arheiner wrote:LOL at 2 votes for Ogres, who did that?

This is exactly what I wanted to say!


I voted Dark Elves, for all the reasons that have already been mentioned by others.

The thing i'm actually surprised at is that WoC haven't gotten any votes yet. Personnally i actually think their pretty good with there 2+ save core units, 6 point warhounds, and their fantastic knights, is there any reason they haven't been mentioned at all?

I was wondering the same thing with WoC. There are only a couple people who play them at my FLGS and they aren't the greatest players. They go mostly for the Khorne smash your face or Nurgle smash my face less while I smash yours lists. However, I sat down with one of our best and he started explaining to me some of the things WoC can do with Slaanesh and Tzeench. Absolutely terrifying. There are some builds that revolve around a strong magic phase that I think would be pretty hard to beat. Not to mention that Chaos Warriors are kindy scary no matter which god you're working for.

@notabot187 - Why do you rate VC so low? I don't mean anything personal or to sound like a troll, but do the VC players in your area just suck? Ghouls are kinda amazing for core troops and Blood Knights destroy the world. Granted, there are some builds with VC that are bad or just fun to play, but when put in the hands of someone who wants to win at all costs they are almost impossible to beat. The owner of my FLGS refuses to play his VC anymore because he's tabled everyone he's come up against, and not in a fun way. Again, nothing personal, but I honestly find VC to be broken when played that way.

Just wondering Stormtrooper, could you give me a basic outline of his list? Because although i win about 70% of my games i still don't table them every time.

Stormtrooper X wrote: @notabot187 - Why do you rate VC so low? I don't mean anything personal or to sound like a troll, but do the VC players in your area just suck? Ghouls are kinda amazing for core troops and Blood Knights destroy the world. Granted, there are some builds with VC that are bad or just fun to play, but when put in the hands of someone who wants to win at all costs they are almost impossible to beat. The owner of my FLGS refuses to play his VC anymore because he's tabled everyone he's come up against, and not in a fun way. Again, nothing personal, but I honestly find VC to be broken when played that way.

The VC players in my area aren't actually that bad, they have a very good grasp of the game, and bring solid to WAAC lists to pretty much every game. The problem lies in the fact they are bringing an army that doesn't deal at all well with my lists and play style. I owned ogres and Tomb kings, I own slaanesh daemons, empire, dark elves, and lizards. Only my empire has a losing record vs VC. I usually use MSU and MSE style of play, which VC don't do well against.

Ghouls aren't amazing. 3/4 that has no armor is good? compare to saurus warriors please. Heck orcs have a better statline than that. Blood knights are deadly, but are easy to shoot/magic down, and are easily led around the board if need be. WAAC VC lists come down usually to invocations spam, or unit combination deathstars. Both are very predictable, and both really aren't that hard for an experience player to deal with (after all, how many people are still complaining about the brets...)

Part of my opinion might be colored by the fact that my regular army is Dark elves, but I was beating good players with ogres before I started playing dark elves. If you can deal with VC magic (by bringing enough DD and scrolls) and can deal with fear (by being ItP, fear causing yourself, or good leadership with good combat ability). Being able to pretty much move around without worrying about fire lanes means it is relatively easy to take out VC once their primary trick is neutralized.

Movement is the most important phase in the game.

Any army that abuses movement stands the chance of being an extremely powerful army.

The tomb kings are not only the fastest army in the game, they are also the most versatile in the movement phase.. That's what makes them the most powerful army out there behind daemons.

The big reason that most people would choose another army out there is two fold. 1) There's only a couple of competitive loadouts, and any other immune to psych army that competes against the Tomb Kings is decidedly advantage other guy. 2) The Tomb Kings require very sharp tactical play in order to be the best army out there.

In light of #1 some players might ask why I wouldn't rank the VC higher than the TK's? Well while the VC may be better in a heads up match you can still win (chase that general all over the board) and there are several armies out there that the VC really struggle with, that TK openly clean off the board routinely.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stormtrooper X wrote:

Forgot to comment on Tomb Kings. Tomb Kings aren't bad, but their "competitive" list is very boring to play. Giant line of archers just shooting. Kinda like dwarves.

Why do people keep saying this? Chariot spam is competitive, balanced is competitive, the daul skullchukka bowline is the least competitive of the 3 builds out there...

notabot187 wrote:I usually use MSU and MSE style of play, which VC don't do well against.

I know MSU. MSE?

notabot's a ytth poster and he's repeating one of stelek's arguments. stelek also rates beastmen as one of the strongest whfb books. take that for what it's worth

Now you guys are just messing with me. What is MSE and ytth? Who is stelek?

I voted for DE, mainly for their versatility. IMHO I feel they have the best chance of being competitve with any type of build.

yesthetruthhurts.com is a 40k powergaming website. The crap that they disseminate about Warhammer is horrible. I haven't seen one list or one piece of advice that would be considered "sort of good" let alone good.

Stelek is an acid tounged 40k player. From what I understand he's a decent 40k player too, but he believes in the allmighty power of the list, suggesting that tactics can only come into play when 2 top end lists are brought to the table.

He also thinks that 40k is superior to Warhammer suggesting that 40k is chess to Warhammers Checkers. He makes a compelling argument. I think he's wrong. But whatev, opionions are like buttholes, everyone has one, and his stinks to high heaven.

I have no idea what MSE is, MSU is now a blase` tactic and spawned the "deathstar" counter measure. Balanced lists rock Deathstar lists pretty reliably, but really have to bring their a-game for MSU.

dumbuket wrote:notabot's a ytth poster and he's repeating one of stelek's arguments. stelek also rates beastmen as one of the strongest whfb books. take that for what it's worth

I have posted twice on steleks blog, if that makes me a ytth poster, well, that is just funny.

My opinion is based on the fact that I have played against vampire more than any other army, and have won 80-90 percent of those games. I am not repeating one of his opinions, I am stating my experience as a WHFB player, who has played almost 200 games in the last 2 years.

I don't know how good beastmen are, the current book looks like it has all of the tools to play well. It certainly is better than most of the older books, so I guess that puts it as one of the top books by default? Not absolutely sure about that, since I haven't played with or against the new book, but on paper they look fine.

MSE = multiple small elite. As opposed to MSU which is supposed to be bare bones units, MSE gives the unit upgrades and such to make them concentrated units of death. 12-14 black guard with ASF and Crimson death or a small unit of chaos warriors with appropriate gear/marks would be an example of a small elite unit, where 5 naked empire knights or min sized ogre bulls units with no upgrades would be part of a MSU list. Unlike a MSU list, a MSE can with multi charges take down a deathstar unit. MSE are more prone to being shot to death.

Ragnar4: I like how you rate TKs highly, my GF just picked them up and she has a balanced list and it really gives my dark elves fits. Even though she is a bit of Newb when it comes to the game, she has given me some of the closest games I've had all year, even winning 2 out of 5 against dark elves. (and she is 1 out of 3 against lizards) Not really bad at all.

@ Notabot

HAH! As soon as she figures out that she never has to charge in the movmennt phase, and instead starts to focus on only getting charges off in the magic phase, you'll be lucky to win 1/3rd of your games against her.

My ratings come from an absolute boatload of games played in prep for multiple GT's. I'm a little bit out of the loop, as I'm not on the GT circuit any more, but I'd like to think that I'd even stand a decent chance with a streamlined Khemri army against a point and click daemon army. I just "accept" that daemons might be unbeatable because I haven't played against them yet.

MSE is an interesting concept. Just about all High Elves armies end up being MSE by defnition.

That goofy 6 units of swordmasters at 7 strong each list is a MSE.

Ragnar, someone has ever fielded units of 6 Sword Masters? I would be tempted to laugh at them, and then obliterate them. . .

I currently play Magic Heavy High Elves, and I voted for WoC, however that is due to my own encounters versus those damn Marauder Cavalry.

The WoC list of death I encounter usually fields 2 or 3 units of Marauder Fast Cavalry with Throwing Axes, 3 units of 5 wide Heavy Cavalry, 2 units of Dogs, 2 Mounted Mages with a dispel scroll each, 2 other characters as needed. Either Nurgle or Khorne Marks. I have only beaten this list twice in a tournament environment, with some good rolls on White Lions.

The WoC player above is our GT winner for the area and recently has started a Vampire army, and hasn't faired to well, but just picked up a unit of Blood Knights with the Ward Save Banner, and an Army Standard Bearer with the Regen Banner, This made me groan as soon as I heard about it.

citadel97501 wrote:Ragnar, someone has ever fielded units of 6 Sword Masters? I would be tempted to laugh at them, and then obliterate them. . .

I currently play Magic Heavy High Elves, and I voted for WoC, however that is due to my own encounters versus those damn Marauder Cavalry.

The WoC list of death I encounter usually fields 2 or 3 units of Marauder Fast Cavalry with Throwing Axes, 3 units of 5 wide Heavy Cavalry, 2 units of Dogs, 2 Mounted Mages with a dispel scroll each, 2 other characters as needed. Either Nurgle or Khorne Marks. I have only beaten this list twice in a tournament environment, with some good rolls on White Lions.

The WoC player above is our GT winner for the area and recently has started a Vampire army, and hasn't faired to well, but just picked up a unit of Blood Knights with the Ward Save Banner, and an Army Standard Bearer with the Regen Banner, This made me groan as soon as I heard about it.

Good for you. The problem is their points mitigation. They aren't worth that much points wise, and most people try to static res them to death, You flat out can't. Shooting them to death is obviously the best way to do it, but then they are only worth a handfull of points and he's got other big nasties rampaging around. That list destroyed the circuit when it first came out, it's a real pain to deal with.

How does one field 6 units of swordmasters? I thought they were specials? (Confirmed by a quick check at GW's website...)

No, wait, let me guess, there is a special character that makes swordmasters core, right?

No the High Elves can take 2 more specials in 2k points and 1 more rare in 2k points than a normal Force Organization Chart might allow. Their minimum core is one less than normal also.

Vulcan wrote:
No, wait, let me guess, there is a special character that makes swordmasters core, right?

Try the entire High Elf army list. The elite nature of their armies allows a 2250 list to take 2+ core, 0-6 special, 0-4 rare.

It's interesting, I'd like to run up against it, give it a go. Not sure what else is in the list after 42 swordmasters.

RZ

Glad I don't face any HE players around here. 6 Specials and 4 Rare at 2K, with ASF armywide! Youch!

How are HE not one of the leaders for most competitive? How does anyone else deal with that? Give that many special and rare choices to the Dark Elves and we'd be able to take that top spot from DoC, even without an armywide ASF!

I think its because of the fact that all of the HE specials are at least 15 points each for infantry and about 3 points over costed for each of their calvary. Making their specials relatively expensive. 4 Repeater bolt throwers with arrow attraction is amazing though.

to be honest, it depends what sort of army you want, if you want a compact elite closer combat army, then woc, bretonnoians are the best, dark elves can pach a mean punch in close combat aswell. if your looking for a magic based army, then any of the elves and lizards would work, though high elves and dark elves stand as better magic armies than wood elves do. long ranged armies are mainly dwarfs and wood elves, though empire could potentially have a devastating gunline. Most armies can field "balanced armies, but armies like empire are the most versitile because they can field a varitey of units excelling in most areas. Then you get horde army's. Armies like orcs and goblins, beastmen and skaven, these can all feild much more troops than most other armies, but there units generally less powerfull than other amries. Then thers undead, it's fair to say, mot undead are fairly good armies, but some of there units ( such as vc ghouls) have fairly bad stats, ghoulds have ws 2! btw ogres fit into the compact close combat section, but there also in a catogrey of there own, ogre armies, being much smaller than others generally cant handle against much larger armies, but if you like 3 wounds in you basic core units then look to ogres.

i'm not going to vote beacuse no 1 army ( execpt daemons prehaps...) execcls above another.

Beastmen can be as horde-related as Empire can, but not quite as competitive as a middle-of-the-road army with a cygor and jabber