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've been a little out of the loop as of late and am interested in how the game changed with the new IGs appearance and where it is going with what is rumored for the next few releases.

As for the thread, whats in the Title but with a bit more added.

How do you feel the meta-game has shifted for your army?

Where was it before(What did you consider its strengths)?

Where is it now(What has changed)?

Where is it going over the next 3-6 months(Just your speculation on what you profect as needs for your armies gamewise)?


As always, Please play nice and am looking forward to your input.

,Later

The way I see it the metagame is kind of up in the air right now. Mech-vets has proven it's worth, so meltas + transports is still popular, however, lash princes have kind of died out, as well as nob bikers. orks still use diversified nobs, but in battlewagons and sometimes in smaller groups, and chaos still plays with oblits, though they are becoming less popular in place of more specialized units (Many people still seem to think that they're the only thing in the codex worth taking though.)

Vulkan lists are becoming the new big things, with the hype about assault termies and meltaguns, it seems like vulkan was made for the current metagame, as he makes all the popular and strong stuff even more popular and stronger.

'ardboyz regionals and finals are going to be interesting, and give us some ideas about where things are headed. Theory hammer is all well and good, but it doesn't really sort things out the way the actual tournament scene does. Reports at this time tomorrow night will be interesting.

If you can point competitors towards this thread. Am interested in what is shaking out. People have been alluding to some interesting if not out right incredible in some of the forums.

Want to see where each of the armies stand at this point. What are the prevailing builds and how are they performing?

Thanks for this first bit of info. Can't wait to here more.

Locally, mechanized lists are what is played. However, with only 3 local players out of 38 players at the Ard Boyz semi finals, mech was not the norm:

1st: mech Orks
2nd: horde Orks
3rd: Tyranids

Folks travelled from Virginia, South Carolina and other parts of North Carolina for the event. It was interesting to see the various armies being played.

Here are the totals of the top 3 armies in the ‘Ard Boys:

10 Chaos space marines (All lash)
9 Orks (Good breakdown of mech, battle wagon and horde)
8 Space marines (Mostly Vulkan lists)
5 Imperial Guard
3 Chaos Demons
3 Eldar (Mech+Seer Council)
3 Dark Eldar
2 Black Templar
2 Tyranid (Godzilla)
1 Blood Angels

A few years ago the saying for tournaments was “build your army to kill MEQs”. People started to get away from MEQs after the demon and ork codexes came out, and we were seeing a lot of other armies around. At this points were again seeing a lot of MEQ armies, and you can start to go back to gearing up to play them.

Blackmoors list looks to be a nearly 50-50 split between MEQ and non-MEQ armies. Do I load up on Plasma or flamers????? In the end it is always a good idea to take a combination of weapons that force the enemy to make as many saves as possible. Even Terminators will fail their 2+ save if you make them make 12 and Orks will lose lots of guys if you make them take 12 saves also. Just take units that make the enemy make lots of saves, ap be damned.

Blackmoor wrote:Here are the totals of the top 3 armies in the ‘Ard Boys:

10 Chaos space marines (All lash)
9 Orks (Good breakdown of mech, battle wagon and horde)
8 Space marines (Mostly Vulkan lists)
5 Imperial Guard
3 Chaos Demons
3 Eldar (Mech+Seer Council)
3 Dark Eldar
2 Black Templar
2 Tyranid (Godzilla)
1 Blood Angels

I thought people were saying the latest CSM Codex sucked?

Everybody who says the CSM codex sucks says it because it doesn't fit their standards for fluffiness, not because it fails to make the grade competitively.

The regionals at Krystal Keep in Dayton, OH shook out as follows:
The field included 4 CSM, 3 C:SM, 2 Orks, 1 Guard, 1 Nidzilla, and a Necron.

Top 3 went Ork, Nid, CSM, in that order.

Signal wrote:

Blackmoor wrote:Here are the totals of the top 3 armies in the ‘Ard Boys:

10 Chaos space marines (All lash)
9 Orks (Good breakdown of mech, battle wagon and horde)
8 Space marines (Mostly Vulkan lists)
5 Imperial Guard
3 Chaos Demons
3 Eldar (Mech+Seer Council)
3 Dark Eldar
2 Black Templar
2 Tyranid (Godzilla)
1 Blood Angels

I thought people were saying the latest CSM Codex sucked?

Pretty much noone said the new CSM codex sucked in terms of power level. But it is by far the most boring book to make armies from and sucks because of that.

DarthDiggler wrote:Blackmoors list looks to be a nearly 50-50 split between MEQ and non-MEQ armies. Do I load up on Plasma or flamers????? In the end it is always a good idea to take a combination of weapons that force the enemy to make as many saves as possible. Even Terminators will fail their 2+ save if you make them make 12 and Orks will lose lots of guys if you make them take 12 saves also. Just take units that make the enemy make lots of saves, ap be damned.

The winning armies are like an iceberg where you only see a small portion at the top.

What you don't see is the disproportionate amount of armies at the bottom that were MEQs.


But you do need to be able to kill orks.

Hmm, This is interesting. I'm surprised at the low number of Eldar.
Now, There is of course the clear connection between recent codex and success, with the obvious exception of DE but the BRB gave them a big boost.

What is interesting is that it appears that the longer people have one of newer codices the stronger they seem to be. This begs some questions.

Is this due to how many people have completed their armies(Have had time to buy them)?

Or, Is this representing people just getting familiar with their tactics?

Also, some variables.

What type of Imperial Guard builds were used?

Were the BT lists standard or were they unusual?

Could this be used as an indication of which armies need an update or is the Meta-game still in flux and armies thought non-competitive going to start reappearing?

Thanks guys, Please keep the posts coming. Feel free to add your own comments about where you feel the Meta-game is going. How do you think you will have to adjust your armies, where do they stand, and are any armies considered non-competitive going to start becoming competitive?

Ard boyz is a bad indication of where the game is at in my opinion. Between the 2500 point level and the silly scenarios you get a lot of mixed results.

The GT circuit is a much better indicator.

I look forward to the day when the pendulum hits vehicles again and all these mech lists are fethed.

Eh, I love where the meta is headed as far as mech-- I play horde orks!

But, more broadly, I think everyone overreacts to new codices. All I heard leading up to 'ard boyz (yes, wonky scenarios, yes, huge points) was how awesome IG valks and mech vets were. Round 1 saw a fair number advance, but round 2 is nothing but crickets as far as IG goes.

The reverse is also true- Orks and Chaos SM were lamented as the old and busted armies at a competitive level-- and I think they're the top 2 placers in round 2.

As far as 'regular' tourneys go, our local meta has gone mech, but Space Wolves, Orks, and Vulkan/Terminator
"horde" (is 20+ models a horde?) consistently take top spots. Granted, Columbia, SC has a limited tourney scene...

Were there any SoB, Tau, or Necrons at the 'Ard Boyz Tournament?

Where do these amies stand in the game currently?

kartofelkopf wrote:(is 20+ models a horde?)

No.
100+ is

Signal wrote:

Blackmoor wrote:Here are the totals of the top 3 armies in the ‘Ard Boys:

10 Chaos space marines (All lash)
9 Orks (Good breakdown of mech, battle wagon and horde)
8 Space marines (Mostly Vulkan lists)
5 Imperial Guard
3 Chaos Demons
3 Eldar (Mech+Seer Council)
3 Dark Eldar
2 Black Templar
2 Tyranid (Godzilla)
1 Blood Angels

I thought people were saying the latest CSM Codex sucked?

There must be a problem with the data because I'm not seeing evidence of the "power creep" that people are talking about. Guard, Marines, Orks and Daemons are *all* newer than Chaos so they should be winning more. In fact the order of CSM, Orks, SM, and IG seems to be in the reverse order of their release dates.

Plus, the ancient Dark Eldar Codex outplaced much newer 4E & 5E Templars, Nids and Blood Angels Codices.

No, there must be something wrong with the data.

Well, as the IG goes, we must remember that the round 2 scenarios heavily favored CC armies. The guard had an uphill battle before the fist dice were dropped because of that. It seemed that many guard players opted to play another army in round 2, as it was a bit too up hill for the guard. So that tells us nothing about how they effect the current meta game, at this time. Gun lines had hard times lately with the scenarios that have been chosen at ard boys. Not knocking the scenarios, I play guard and I like the Ard boys scenarios better than the ones in the book. Even if they are harder for me. So sadly guard and the meta game are even more obscure than before. Based on the missions played at finals will tell what armies will show up. Don't be surprised if 5 guard qualify but 10 show up to play. People play the missions, some armies are better. Lots of obscure factors to conciser. I have a feeling if all missions were standard ones, the guard would be having a hay day at the finals. More would have qualified, i would be willing to bet. Just my 2 cents...

focusedfire wrote:Were there any SoB, Tau, or Necrons at the 'Ard Boyz Tournament?

Where do these amies stand in the game currently?

Sisters can still be competitive.

Tau is very good but the person actually needs to be competent to play it. And a lot of people think its bad, so there aren't many people using it.

Necrons are terrible.

JohnHwangDD wrote:There must be a problem with the data because I'm not seeing evidence of the "power creep" that people are talking about. Guard, Marines, Orks and Daemons are *all* newer than Chaos so they should be winning more. In fact the order of CSM, Orks, SM, and IG seems to be in the reverse order of their release dates.

Plus, the ancient Dark Eldar Codex outplaced much newer 4E & 5E Templars, Nids and Blood Angels Codices.

No, there must be something wrong with the data.

A good wine is not good before it has aged.
Power creeps do obviously happen but it takes a while for effective lists and combinations to form.

corpsesarefun wrote:Power creeps do obviously happen but it takes a while for effective lists and combinations to form.

This is what I was alluding to up thread. The top 4 armies are the last 4 releases in exact order of their release. This may be a good sign that all 5th ed codices will be competitive rather than being made obsolete with the latest codex release. That we may be heading towards a game where the only true advantage will be familiarity with the army and its tactics. Just an idea and one can hope.

If it is true that this was a HtH heavy environment and the IG placed this well then I can't wait to see how they come along with a few more months of list developement.

Problem is focusedfire, as I see it, GW will likely be on 6th edition before all the Codexes are updated to 5th edition. If you are one to keep to one army that isn't space marines, you'll probably see a wax and wane for your army over the lifespan of an edition.

I don't mind buying new units for an army when a new codex comes out, what bothers me is the wait.

Speaking for Tau specifically, a good player can win with them, but a small mistake can be the difference between a minor victory and a massacre. Three minor victories are not going to cut it in the tourney scene, but they will often suffice in a non-competitive environment.

Thanks Dal'yth Dude.

I agree about the 6th ed and think the Tau may not get a new dex until it is ready foor release.

I already understood about how Tau don't do well in the Tourney min/max scoring system over here. Just been hearing some tourny players alluding to the more favorable enviroment in the meta-game.

Got me to wondering where the game is now and where it seems to be headed. At the current rate, Could GW be breaking the pendulum? I ask this because each new codex allowing its army to do what it does well and to be competitive while doing so.(Not saying that I beleive this is the case, just postulating the idea.)

Is the game going Mech,MEQ,Hoard, or Gun-line?

What seems to be the prevailing builds for each army?

Are we going to end up with several builds per army that roll according to tourny trends?

Dal'yth Dude wrote:Problem is focusedfire, as I see it, GW will likely be on 6th edition before all the Codexes are updated to 5th edition.

That isn't a problem. Starting with 4th, GW has placed the Rulebook on a fixed 4-year schedule of updates, and Codices on a 4 to 6 year update schedule, with minor books on a 5-10 year cycle, depending on sales.

From what I see, GW has *NO* intention of updating all Codices to 5th Edition before moving on to 6th, but presumably, they will continue to update the oldest 3rd Codices (e.g. Woofs, BA, Inquisition).

Holding up the Rulebook for Codices as they did for the 4E RB only lets the rules get out of date for everyone.

focusedfire wrote:Were there any SoB, Tau, or Necrons at the 'Ard Boyz Tournament?

Where do these armies stand in the game currently?

Here is the problem with those armies:
If you are in a tournament that has graded wins (Massacres, Major wins, Minor wins, ties, etc) they will not do very well because the top tier lists are massacring. What the 'Ard Boyz winners list really shows is what army can massacre at 2500 points.

That is why I like the UK standard of only win/loss/tie because it rewards armies that can win, but not massacre, but you do not get enough separation of points in a 3 round tournament.


And for the record, the chaos codex would be down with the other marine armies if you took away Lash. It has one way over powered ability that makes it able to mask it's inadequacy.

JohnHwangDD wrote:From what I see, GW has *NO* intention of updating all Codices to 5th Edition before moving on to 6th, but presumably, they will continue to update the oldest 3rd Codices (e.g. Woofs, BA, Inquisition).

Holding up the Rulebook for Codices as they did for the 4E RB only lets the rules get out of date for everyone.

And that's one of the reasons why veterans don't bother to stick around. Of course, Space marines or spiky space marines have no issues with waiting multiple editions for a Codex.

Releasing the Codexes in a faster fashion would solve most of that. However, it seems to be too much for GW to do. We've gone through this before and I'll let it go.

As a Veteran, I'm glad I'm not on a faster cycle of having to buy more and more Codices more and more often.

Maybe you should get a 2nd army for when your primary army falls by the side.

I think john has a good point here. This is a hobby. It should change and should not get stagnant. That means more money spent as time goes on. At present pace this can be a cheap hobby over a long period of time. A second army keeps you getting new stuff and on the edge. I think lots do this. I am a veteran as well. I love the fact the game changes. If it did not, it would be a board game. I would lose interest. I love when my army is the new kid and king of the block. Like it when it is weaker as well, bragging rights if I beat a newer better list. Times always change. 2nd army is always a smart move. Just keep them seperated. Guard and SW would be a bad combo as they are coming out back to back. Just my 2 cents...

I've had up to 4 armies at any one time. I mostly play Tau and Eldar, which were back to back Codexes in 4th. I can't control which armies GW deigns to publish in any edition.

I rarely purchase anything the past few years, but I would like to *play* an army on a fairly consistent basis throughout an edition.

Basically, you're telling me to buy more rather than have GW have a release schedule where all players can have a Codex release in an edition.

Edit: Honestly you fear buying more Codexes? Do you buy every Codex? I don't know anybody who buys every one, although I know the competitive types do. Codexes are cheaper than new armies.