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.

Afternoon Dakkites.

I was reading a post in the tactics forum about how CSM are now a tier 2 army, and I was thinking the discussion is sort of pointless.

I personally don’t like the tier 1,2,3 mindset. I think it isn’t representative of how the game really works.

I think the measure of a codex is in its ability to let the better player win (luck being equal). If a better player loses to a worse player (something which is hard to measure) because of inherent inferiorities in his codex (which is sort of relative to the matchup) than there is a problem. And by match I mean more than just army list pairings, certain marines builds would get squashed by orks, other marine builds would squash orks. You sort of have to take the codex as a whole. But I can’t think of any codex matchups (except maybe those involving necrons, tau, or pure DH) where the codex would prevent the better player from bringing a good list and using it effectively to beat the worse player.

To me that means the game, with the exception of the three mentioned codices, is actually in a pretty good state of balance right now. And the constant tier 1,2,3 topics are really meaningless. I would ask, “Is this particular codex going to keep me from beating inferior players?” And there are only three maybe codices that I think most people agree on. Otherwise I’m starting to think the tier 1,2,3 discussions are really a trap for mediocre players who think that the right ‘dex or the right list are enough to win games.

I totally and 100% agree with you

So you're saying there are two tiers only?

Tier one everything except tier two

Tier two: necrons, tau, DH?

For the most part I do agree with you. In fun games every codex does stand up to the next just fine. But when it comes to the people who play to win there are tiers of codexs were some have better cheese then others.

But really playing casually and playing competitvly are to totally diffrent games. Both are still 40k and they both use the same models and books but they are both two totally diffrent games.

Surely the point is whether a codex is strong or weak enough to affect games between players of equal level.

The game is supposed in theory to be balanced, whether for casual or serious play.

I don't think anyone, regardless of ideas about tiers or what is in them, believes that they don't exist in some sense.

@ MR. Burning

I guess. But again I don’t like grouping books likes that.

@ Eos Rahh

I say cheese is relative. The same cheesy list in your hands could suck in mine, and vice versa. I think in general I’m trying to say people are overstating the effect the book writers have and understating the effect the player has. And the tier 1,2,3 thing is a big part of that.


@ Killrazy

That’s pretty much what I mean. But I think the effect of strong/weak codices is really at a low since I have been in the game and generally very overblown. And I think the never ending this army is better than others feeds into that. And I think I do believe that with the three exception noted no other codex would prevent the superior player from beating any other codex. Just my opinion though.

I kinda feel like the premise is flawed here.

Balance isn't determined by a good player beating a bad player.

Balance is determined by a good player playing against a good player. If the two of them will continually have very close games against each other, then the codexes are balanced. If one good player can continually beat the snot out of another good player using a certain codex, then its unbalanced.

Tiers exist in a stable sense for games that have stable metagames. 40k doesn't, so it's not really possible to make a true tier listing. That said, it's obvious some armies (Necrons, Dæmonhunters) are worse than the rest.

What is a "stable metagame" and how does Warhammer 40K not have it? Seriously, I'm curious; I don't know much about game theory.

Kilkrazy wrote:The game is supposed in theory to be balanced, whether for casual or serious play.

I'll have you know that I take casual play very seriously.

A stable metagame is a set of constants in a game (Like lets say noone uses vehicles because they sucked in the edition of the rules) The thing about 40k is the metagame always seems to change. Currently the metagame IS mech-heavy....and then we've got Blackmor winning with his foot list, somewhat before that new bugs come out, and pod wolves show up, and suddenly there isn't quite as much 'mech' anymore.

Necrons and Daemonhunters have very VERY old codexes, but even when DH were new they didn't do so hot (so I've read), but as allies in another list they are quite good. Necrons can still summon some very strong shooting from their Gauss guns, and the C'tan/Monoliths are a pain to try and kill. The necron players have learned how to keep from getting phased in 5th, but the army still relies on glances a lot, and glances got downgraded, therefore they are not as strong as they once were.

Didn't a Daemonhunters player make it into the top 10 at the Baltimore GT a few years ago? I think the DH book is simply a case of people dismissing it and not coming up with a good list. Or simply all the good players ignore this book.....

thunderingjove wrote:What is a "stable metagame" and how does Warhammer 40K not have it? Seriously, I'm curious; I don't know much about game theory.

In a game with a stable metagame, most if not all things about the game have been tested through competition and the pros and cons of different selections are generally known by the playerbase. Super Smash Bros. Melee, for example, has a stable metagame-- people have played for long enough that the best characters and so on are generally known, and a fairly solid tier list can be established. Most competitive Smash players agree that Falco, Fox, Marth, and Sheik are the "top tier" of competitive Smash, with some adding Peach to the top tier as well. "Tier" in this case refers to a particular choice's metagame strength, or in other words, how well competitive players expect it to do. A "high tier" choice is strong; a "low tier" choice is weak. For a true tier list to be established, though, a lot of testing under controlled conditions is required.

40k doesn't have a stable metagame for two main reasons. First, conditions vary widely from event to event and game to game, making it difficult to truly do a controlled test of what is and isn't good. Second, new things are constantly added to the game, which shake up the balance significantly and make any conclusions short-lived at best.

@sormbomber109

Why are the monoliths and C'tan hard to deal with?

Just ignore them and go for phase out. If your taking both of those you are losing out on a lot of possible necron models.

Dashofpepper wrote:Balance is determined by a good player playing against a good player. If the two of them will continually have very close games against each other, then the codexes are balanced. If one good player can continually beat the snot out of another good player using a certain codex, then its unbalanced.

Sort of, the reality is that even balanced codices will have favourable and unfavourable match ups against other codices. It would be alright for a skilled player using, say, the Ork codex to be somewhat favoured against, say, the Imperial Guard, provided the Orks suffered a disadvantage against another codex and the Imperial Guard scored a slight advantage somewhere else.

Trying to balance the game perfectly on a codex by codex comparison wouldn’t be possible with stripping out most of the options and unique units in the game, leaving a very boring playing experience.