Most Comptetetive Lists

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.

**phoenixrisin**

tmarichards wrote:
Phoenixrisin, I think you're in danger of letting the debate cloud your judgement. Even though it wasn't directed at me, I'd be very hesitant about making statements like "I'm going to ignore you, you just don't get it". Just because you think one thing about the game, and someone else thinks another, doesn't necessarily mean you are right and they are wrong so it'd be worth keeping an open mind. For example, you make the argument that every army has access to better 25pt magic items than Daemons yet provide no comparisons- this isn't accurate, and illustrates that you maybe don't know as much about the game as you think you do? Siren Song, Master of Sorcery, Armour of Khorne, Firestorm Blade , Icon of Endless War, Immortal Fury and Collar of Khorne are amongst the best items in the game on their respective units and all weigh in at 25pts or less- I would be extremely interested to see which 25pt or less magic items you would consider better than these- I'm struggling, for example, to come up with an armour that is better than a 3+ for 15pts when the models also has a 5++ built into their statline.

The best thing about the Daemon book, and what is often being overlooked, is that is has insane internal synergy. Yes, Daemonettes don't do that much without magic- but you have access to a Loremaster Shadow Herald (for less than 150pts, making them one of the most cost-efficient and flexible casters in the game) so you're guaranteed to have access to magic support they need, and Siren Song is a cheap ability that can control your opponent's deployment and offers a whole new dimension to the defensive Mindrazor.

The units you say are awful also have uses which people don't seem to recognise- yes, Furies are ld2 so will die after any combat they lose. This isn't their role though, they're cheap ItP flyers who can redirect or support a greater daemon/war machine weak army to make sure you get to engage on favourable terms- there's no shooting 2 off and panicking the rest away as you can with other units of a similar pts cost (harpies, for example). Bloodcrushers might not make for a great stand-alone unit, but single Crushers are some of the best chaff in the game as they require a fair bit of fire to put them down, and can happily clean up smaller units and other chaff if left unchecked. Try running 2 singles of them as champions to support a greater daemon, or run them as musicians so they can take on smaller units and not auto-lose on a draw.

Giving a Bloodthirster 5/10 is an odd choice, especially rating the Kipper and GUO higher. Yes, it is vulnerable to war machines. Have you considered building a list around that weakness? The DoC book has access to multiple flying units who will make short work of war machines in the first 2/3 turns, at which point Billy can come out and wreak havoc in the late game. Alternatively, create a rush list with fewer chaff deployments so you're more likely to get the first turn and push it all forwards. If he dies, so be it but the rest of the army is left unchecked. If not, he gets into combat and wrecks stuff. Simply because something can die because you're not careful with it doesn't mean it's a bad unit. You're also overstating the presence of cannons and other war machines, only 4-5 armies are likely to have enough to really worry him (Skaven if they have a Doomwheel, Ogres, O&G, Empire and Dwarfs). In my opinion, the main reason you don't see them more is because they can turn tournament games into a rock-paper-scissors match- if you run into an army that can kill Billy you go down hard, which can damage your long term chances of doing well in the event.

Describing a Herald of Khorne as "well costed" doesn't make a great deal of sense. For 115pts you get a model who gives Hatred to his unit, is WS7 with 3S6 attacks (with hatred), I6, T4, 3+ armour and 5++. He may only have 2W, but there's simply no way that is a reasonable cost- there is no other combat character in the game who does so much on their own for a similar number of points, nor adds such great synergy to an already strong unit. For 25pts extra, he can go up +1S and strip regen away before his unit swings, and has a whole unit behind him with S5 Killing Blow to focus on any 2+ vs flaming characters who try to hold him up.

Describing Horrors as "overcosted by at least 2 points" makes no sense. Why are they undercosted, because they don't have awesome combat stats? If so, you're trying to put them into a role that they're not meant to fulfill. They babysit your Herald, have a 4++ and have a very respectable spell deck of their own.

There are parts of the Daemon book that are average to poor, yes. But this isn't enough to neuter the strong choices, which are just too cost-efficient.

first of all, i can choose to ignore anyone who takes a page long post and writes a 2 sentence response that ignores most of it.

yes horrors are way overcosted. they cost the same as a bloodletter. makes no sense. they should either be cheaper or bloodletters should be more. the was it currently stands makes no sense. a 140 point vampire lord will kill as much or more than a herald of khorne and it is also a wizard. killing blow is not as hot as people think it is. furies are terrible when you can take single fiends and bloodcrushers. the fact that you can take one bloodcrusher doesn't change the fact that a skullcrusher from the WoC has a better armor save, higher toughness, AND it's 11 points cheaper, so obviously even GW agree with me on that point.

a unit that NEEDS magic support is not a good unit. a unit that benefits from magic, like plaguebearers, however is pretty decent.

i would take the 15+ flaming banner over 1d6 extra charge range anytime.

what you're not understanding is two or three OP items do not an OP codex make. i win with daemons a lot, but not because they're "auto-win" as many in this thread have suggested.

the keeper is MUCH better than a bloodthirster. MUCH MUCH BETTER, a keeper with spirit swallower charged into the proper unit will NEVER die. EVER. bonus:it's also a wizard. the fact that you think a BT is better makes me think YOU'VE never really even played against one. 6x ASF I10 AP S6 attacks with a wound gained back for every wound caused make them very survivable even if you take a nonlethal cannon ball on the way there. it's a no brainer.

master of sorcery is a good gift, but you can't get it on a lvl 4 for under 550 points. is that really that good? look at the cost of a lvl 4 slaan or high mage andget back to me.

daemons are not a bad book but to say they're OP or autowin is ignorant

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Acardia wrote:
One of the top players on Rankings HQ used a DP in a mono Khorne list, he won tonnes.

I do pretty well, winning events and placing high often with either a BT or GUO. Only 1 unit of Letters, 1 horrors, 1 slannesh, and spam 2--4 lvl 2's. Everything has a target. Daemonettes do well vs low T stuff, including bloodletters.

I generally take Life on my BSB and follow the GUO around, healing, and charging with static rez is needed.

I've also ran Light as a good lore, low casting values, cannon protection, and if pha's is up on a failed fear test then hello to 6's to hit. My last lore I take in a solo mage build is beasts, this allows the Herald to go all TOK if things get out of hand. Curse + siren song is nasty.

If I run a secondary mage, I've had great success with Life BSB+ Metal- Took 4th at Blood in the Sun last year with this, 1 Battle Point from best general. The GUO never died.

Life/light solid synergyl very defensive but it works.

I would like to run Life (BSB) Beasts now that I have ran beasts.

Basically Light unless GUO then Life.

However I also play TK and you are right the GD are over costed, I can get a warsphnix, necro sphnix, and even a Tomb scorpion at 1k. They don't have any power lists, but I'm taking them to all events in 2013.

tomb kings have no power lists??? wow, dude. they have some awesomely broken combos. i would tell you them, but i don't like to condone them. one hint...kalida, and princes/kings.

if you're trying to tell me a monokhorne list won a tourney, that must have been the most uncompetitive tourney of ALL TIME. zero magic defense? lol. try playing a high elf army that's getting mind razors off at whim. or tomb kings debuffing your str and T and buffing their number of attacks with light. your post is full of so much bad info.

**tmarichards**

"your post is full of so much bad info" The same could be said for you.

n the nicest way possible, people like you are the reason Dakka is generally seen as the least knowledgeable Warhammer forum- you have some extremely blinkered views, your arguments don't really make sense and you refuse to accept any argument to the contrary. Yet, you spout outdated and misguided opinions as if they were fact- your argument of "if this list that I don't think is any good did well, therefore the whole tournament must've been awful" is a pretty simple viewpoint to take, whether with regards to Warhammer or anything else.

It's a simple numbers game. The vast majority of any competitive Warhammer scene (and tbh, this scene is the only one that has a view that really matters- they may be perfectly nice people, but casual garage gamers who play maybe 40-50 games over the course of a year against the same handful of opponents just don't have a broad enough experience of the game and metagame to make arguments on balance) agrees that Daemons are an overpowered army. So, you can either read the game better than an awful lot of people who play upwards of 150 high-level tournament games against a variety of opponents, or you're talking nonsense.

I understand that considering your army book overpowered is never an easy view to take, as to a certain extent it devalues your successes with it (not completely, as you still have to win those games) hence why Ogre players are often adamant their book is balanced. However, you're simply wrong in this regard and I would encourage you to try and broaden your gaming.

**DukeRustfield**

Grey Templar wrote:
Daemons were horribly OP in 7th edition. Now they are just a fairly strong book. They have some of the best magic in the game and their core are solid.

The only losers of the book are Plague Bearers because its now Ward Save or Regen.

What you mean by some "of the best magic in the game" is some of the best magic in a ~1K game. They have no lord casters worth a damn. And yes, that matters. Their "best" casters are +2 to cast and dispel with no bonus PD. Having access to Loremasters is cool and all but they have basic winds of magic. You can't remotely say they are the best magic. They are great at really low points because of that, but you can't mention them in the same breath as Lizardmen, HE, DE, TK, et al. If you roll bad and you built your army with the idea you were going to be dropping magic to save yourself, you just lost. Even if you roll so-so because the enemy will just shut you down. That's not good magic.

And yes, their core is very solid. Their non-core isn't.

**phoenixrisin**

in the nicest way possible...you have no idea what you're talking about.

kairos is OP. everything else in the book is awful to great.

you gloss over every point i make. and you don't address any of them, yet you make a blanket statement like "your arguments make no sense" which ones?

am i lying when i say the cheapest lvl 4 in the book is almost 550 points when every other army can take one that's under 250?

daemons may have some OP builds like triple horde+ kairos and magic dice spam + kairos, but the book is not OP. you're stuck in 7th ed. come on over to 8th ed, the water is fine...

i'm providing numbers and real world examples and you're making unsubstantiated comments like "tourney players say daemons are OP". where is the proof of that?

i contend that people like you are making this forum lose cred. when you defend the guy that said "daemons are auto-win".

Automatically Appended Next Post:

DukeRustfield wrote:
Grey Templar wrote:
Daemons were horribly OP in 7th edition. Now they are just a fairly strong book. They have some of the best magic in the game and their core are solid.

The only losers of the book are Plague Bearers because its now Ward Save or Regen.

What you mean by some "of the best magic in the game" is some of the best magic in a ~1K game. They have no lord casters worth a damn. And yes, that matters. Their "best" casters are +2 to cast and dispel with no bonus PD. Having access to Loremasters is cool and all but they have basic winds of magic. You can't remotely say they are the best magic. They are great at really low points because of that, but you can't mention them in the same breath as Lizardmen, HE, DE, TK, et al. If you roll bad and you built your army with the idea you were going to be dropping magic to save yourself, you just lost. Even if you roll so-so because the enemy will just shut you down. That's not good magic.

And yes, their core is very solid. Their non-core isn't.

but but but...loremaster! jk. i totally agree with you. there are so many people in this thread stuck in 7th ed. someone so stuck that he is actually condoning a mono-khorne list for a tourney LMAO!

**riverhawks32**

This thread escalated quickly 0.o
I merely remarked that in my experience I find demons VERY difficult to beat (All the lists I've played were tournament ones) bordering on OP. I don't think we need to trash each others thinking capacity *I'm looking at you public schools remark!* I think we can all calm down and actually think about and CONSIDER the opinions of others .For what right do you have to tell others they are wrong? In what I have seen, demons have never lost. Pheonix you're taking this thread wayyyyy to far to the extreme.

**Niiai**

To the OP.

If you have narowed it down to high/dark elfes, WoC or one of the undeads:

High elfs curently have very strong character/character items. Some good fighting gimmics, but many of the choises play into a small elite army that hopes it can kill you before you strike back. It is OK, but a bit bland once you look on the army book. Also, teclic is banned on most turnaments and most friendly games.

Dark elves are silly good to the point that people do not like to meet them. To good magic, to good shooting, to good hydra etc.

WoC is funn and solid. You will be doing a lott of leg work until you hit mellee where you shine.

Vampiers...vampiers has the best characters in the game, and you need to use that to boost the rest of your army. It is a really cool army. Personaly I play tomb kings....and tomb kings is a very funn but odd army. A lott of the things vampiers does better then TK. Their marching conditions is better, their skeletons can have a cool banner, their graveguard are better then TK tomb guard and their generals are kick ass. TK on the other hand...TK is all about stacking many effects on top of each other. Tomb Guards with a prince that gives all of them WS5 (or a king that gives 6) is very good, also you always have a lott of good/fun magic thanks to the casket and the lore of nechrahal. Also, some people love the sphinxes (T8) and the serpent riders who are rather good. SSC is awsome and funn. I would recomend Vampiers or TK, there are so many funn unique things going on compered to the other armies. Also, they can be played in many diferent ways.

**riverhawks32**

Niiai wrote:
To the OP.

If you have narowed it down to high/dark elfes, WoC or one of the undeads:

High elfs curently have very strong character/character items. Some good fighting gimmics, but many of the choises play into a small elite army that hopes it can kill you before you strike back. It is OK, but a bit bland once you look on the army book. Also, teclic is banned on most turnaments and most friendly games.

Dark elves are silly good to the point that people do not like to meet them. To good magic, to good shooting, to good hydra etc.

WoC is funn and solid. You will be doing a lott of leg work until you hit mellee where you shine.

Vampiers...vampiers has the best characters in the game, and you need to use that to boost the rest of your army. It is a really cool army. Personaly I play tomb kings....and tomb kings is a very funn but odd army. A lott of the things vampiers does better then TK. Their marching conditions is better, their skeletons can have a cool banner, their graveguard are better then TK tomb guard and their generals are kick ass. TK on the other hand...TK is all about stacking many effects on top of each other. Tomb Guards with a prince that gives all of them WS5 (or a king that gives 6) is very good, also you always have a lott of good/fun magic thanks to the casket and the lore of nechrahal. Also, some people love the sphinxes (T8) and the serpent riders who are rather good. SSC is awsome and funn. I would recomend Vampiers or TK, there are so many funn unique things going on compered to the other armies. Also, they can be played in many diferent ways.

Thank you. Niiai has it all right. The only thing that should be added here is that all of these except vamps and TK will be getting a new book *hopefully* in the next year. The thing to remember in this game that you could honestly go with any of those and once you learn the army be able to play competitively.

**phoenixrisin**

riverhawks32 wrote:
This thread escalated quickly 0.o
I merely remarked that in my experience I find demons VERY difficult to beat (All the lists I've played were tournament ones) bordering on OP. I don't think we need to trash each others thinking capacity *I'm looking at you public schools remark!* I think we can all calm down and actually think about and CONSIDER the opinions of others .For what right do you have to tell others they are wrong? In what I have seen, demons have never lost. Pheonix you're taking this thread wayyyyy to far to the extreme.

misinformation pisses me off.

secondly, show me the list of tournaments since 8th ed that daemons have won. i'm waiting with baited breath.

**riverhawks32**

phoenixrisin wrote:
riverhawks32 wrote:
This thread escalated quickly 0.o
I merely remarked that in my experience I find demons VERY difficult to beat (All the lists I've played were tournament ones) bordering on OP. I don't think we need to trash each others thinking capacity *I'm looking at you public schools remark!* I think we can all calm down and actually think about and CONSIDER the opinions of others .For what right do you have to tell others they are wrong? In what I have seen, demons have never lost. Pheonix you're taking this thread wayyyyy to far to the extreme.

misinformation pisses me off.

secondly, show me the list of tournaments since 8th ed that daemons have won. i'm waiting with baited breath.

I could care less. Not an excuse to be rude. Now please, either be constructive to the OP and quit arguing over demons or leave

**japehlio**

Im halfway between both camps here. The overall Daemon book? Sure, has a bunch of weak units that have little to no reason to be in anything other than fluffy lists.
( In fact, of the list, the only thing I (personally) disagree with is the appraisal of nurglings. Scouting can help them tie up mage bunkers and the like on turn 2 if you are lucky. )
Yes Greater Daemons are hugely expensive for a lord choice, even without taking wizard levels into it. Mainly because 8th has made monsters much more killable than they used to be. But at the same time, they are better than most monsters out there, barring few exceptions. Thats a 'Game Change effect', rather than a failing of the army book.
((Also, this is the fluff nut in me showing, but complaining that no daemon (except maybe Kairos) can stand up to HE/DE/LM in terms of magic power, well tough, no body should be able to))

In terms of OP, how do you define it? For me, one element is cheap but effective units. Not REALLY rife in the DoC book. But the other is 'can it be easily countered'. Spells like Dwellers, PoS and the like are less effective against DoC core, which is obviously in their favour.
In my own opinion I think that DoC have the ABILITY to be OP, more so than many other army books out there. Again, not a sign of a broken book per se. The most annoying thing is that it is less affected by certain 'checks and balances' that 8th has (looking at mass removal spells and sniping cannons). In terms of OP armies, I would rather fight the dirty Daemon list than the Slann-Spam, and the Elves...

But phoenixrisin, climb down off your high horse, because the "this is my opinion, its right, everyone else is wrong because its different to mine" act gives you no right to be a child in a pram, throwing a wee tantrum. Also, personal attacks in the form of insulting someones education when your own posts have spelling and grammar mistakes throughout is deliciously ironic, no? Glass houses and stones...

(In b4 welc0me 2 the internetz comment)

**phoenixrisin**

riverhawks32 wrote:
phoenixrisin wrote:
riverhawks32 wrote:
This thread escalated quickly 0.o
I merely remarked that in my experience I find demons VERY difficult to beat (All the lists I've played were tournament ones) bordering on OP. I don't think we need to trash each others thinking capacity *I'm looking at you public schools remark!* I think we can all calm down and actually think about and CONSIDER the opinions of others .For what right do you have to tell others they are wrong? In what I have seen, demons have never lost. Pheonix you're taking this thread wayyyyy to far to the extreme.

misinformation pisses me off.

secondly, show me the list of tournaments since 8th ed that daemons have won. i'm waiting with baited breath.

I could care less. Not an excuse to be rude. Now please, either be constructive to the OP and quit arguing over demons or leave

If you COULD care less that means you care. so thank you. i, however, COULDN'T care less about you since you've added nothing to this debate. so run along, kid. you bother me.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

japehlio wrote:
Im halfway between both camps here. The overall Daemon book? Sure, has a bunch of weak units that have little to no reason to be in anything other than fluffy lists.
( In fact, of the list, the only thing I (personally) disagree with is the appraisal of nurglings. Scouting can help them tie up mage bunkers and the like on turn 2 if you are lucky. )
Yes Greater Daemons are hugely expensive for a lord choice, even without taking wizard levels into it. Mainly because 8th has made monsters much more killable than they used to be. But at the same time, they are better than most monsters out there, barring few exceptions. Thats a 'Game Change effect', rather than a failing of the army book.
((Also, this is the fluff nut in me showing, but complaining that no daemon (except maybe Kairos) can stand up to HE/DE/LM in terms of magic power, well tough, no body should be able to))

In terms of OP, how do you define it? For me, one element is cheap but effective units. Not REALLY rife in the DoC book. But the other is 'can it be easily countered'. Spells like Dwellers, PoS and the like are less effective against DoC core, which is obviously in their favour.
In my own opinion I think that DoC have the ABILITY to be OP, more so than many other army books out there. Again, not a sign of a broken book per se. The most annoying thing is that it is less affected by certain 'checks and balances' that 8th has (looking at mass removal spells and sniping cannons). In terms of OP armies, I would rather fight the dirty Daemon list than the Slann-Spam, and the Elves...

But phoenixrisin, climb down off your high horse, because the "this is my opinion, its right, everyone else is wrong because its different to mine" act gives you no right to be a child in a pram, throwing a wee tantrum. Also, personal attacks in the form of insulting someones education when your own posts have spelling and grammar mistakes throughout is deliciously ironic, no? Glass houses and stones...

(In b4 welc0me 2 the internetz comment)

first of all, i don't think daemons are a bad book. i like them. they are my main army and they rock. they are not, however, "auto-win" or unbeatable super OP as many here have suggested.

secondly, i'm very calm and not flustered at all. i'm just blunt and i don't give a feth about your sensitive feelings. so put on your big boy pants and turn off the my little pony.

thirdly, i'm not writing a paper and i'm not going to spell check and capitalize when my post is plenty readable. notice i use proper punctuation? that's enough. i'm not getting graded or published. besides grammar=/=intelligence. i'm well aware that proper nouns should be capped and the like, i just really don't care. but the OP asked a question that is getting straight up mangled by flat out WRONG responses.

**Acardia**

phoenixrisin wrote:
tmarichards wrote:

if you're trying to tell me a monokhorne list won a tourney, that must have been the most uncompetitive tourney of ALL TIME. zero magic defense? lol. try playing a high elf army that's getting mind razors off at whim. or tomb kings debuffing your str and T and buffing their number of attacks with light. your post is full of so much bad info.

Yes Waaagh! Paca 2012. No comp, with SC if you wanted them. 80ish players.

http://pointhammered.com/episodeComplete.php Episode 54 will even give you the run down.

**reds8n**

let's dial it back a bit please folks. No need to be rude or hostile.

Thanks

**Sigvatr**

Already reported phoenix' post(s), but for the sake of the discussion - it's a terrible ,terrible idea to discuss balance by cross-referencing other codices. You can't just pick 1 model and compare it to another one from any other codex to "prove" that it's overpowered. It shows a lack of proper reasoning.

On another point, nobody in this thread stated that Demons were unbeatable or "super OP". You're exaggerating a lot while at the same time, losing yourself in ad hominem instead of making proper points. You need to step back and get and objective view on the issue. You're making out foes when there are none. Try to calm down and think about the points others made. You made some good ones too, it's just that people might not consider them good points because in the very same sentence you insult / provoke them.

Just as every other codex, Demons have good and bad models. Some things are terrible, some are definitely OP (looking at you, Bloodletters!). Overall, DoC easily remain top tier, along with Lizardmen, Dark Elves and "Look, I suck at Warhammer but can still win!"-Teclis.

**Saldiven**

Sigvatr wrote:

On another point, nobody in this thread stated that Demons were unbeatable or "super OP".

Actually, Riverhawk called Daemons "autowin" on page one of the thread. I think that's what got Phoenix and Duke up in arms.

I've played Daemons for a while now, and I would never call them "autowin."

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the quote below:

riverhawks32 wrote:

How? Ogres are not OP. Tomb Kings obviously not. Empire middle of the road usually.OnG can be countered. ETC.
Tzeentch WoC is nasty, demons are practically autowin, need I go on?

**Sigvatr**

Thanks for the heads-up. Riverhawks32's statement is downright wrong then.

Tzeentch DoC lists in 40k are autowins. In Fantasy, however, that's different, as with 8th, the game now greatly relies on luck aka magic - whoever gets the game-breaking spells off first, wins thus there really isn't any "auto-win" lists.

As I said before, some elements are OP, some are UP, overall, DoC remain top tier.

**riverhawks32**

And as I also said later, as far as I have experienced/seen they have won every time.

**Sigvatr**

riverhawks32 wrote:
And as I also said later, as far as I have experienced/seen they have won every time.

You either haven't played many games then or played at a very basic level. The results that actually matter are tournament results as those players know what they're doing and judging by that, they are far from being an auto-win. Top tier.

It's the same with WoC. They are a super noob-stomp army but a good player only has to worry about their magic.

**Saldiven**

Just as some advice for dealing with Daemons, the toughest core they have are Bloodletters, but you can beat them if you get the right situation.

If you can tie them up in front with a reasonably tough to destroy unit that has stubborn/steadfast, then hit them in a flank on a subsequent turn with a more offensive unit, you can really wreck face on the 'Letters. Because 'Letters are only T3 with the 5+ ward, hitting them in the flank where they don't get many attacks back can really tear them up.

**DukeRustfield**

There are counters to everything just about.

Bloodletters are one of the best units per cost in the game. Because they are Core that makes DoC a really powerful army.

Armies with sucky Core have to work a lot harder as it's 25% you must take. Saying, "hey, you have to take at least 25% of the best units points can buy" isn't exactly a penalty.

**riverhawks32**

Sigvatr wrote:
riverhawks32 wrote:
And as I also said later, as far as I have experienced/seen they have won every time.

You either haven't played many games then or played at a very basic level. The results that actually matter are tournament results as those players know what they're doing and judging by that, they are far from being an auto-win. Top tier.

It's the same with WoC. They are a super noob-stomp army but a good player only has to worry about their magic.

I am going to pretend that there wasn't an intended slight there. The tournaments I have seen, demons have crushed competition. Now. BACK TO THE OP

**Sigvatr**

No, I did not intend to offend you in any way and I apologize if you felt this way.

I just said that in a tournament with decent players, people know what to expect. Especially demons are very one-dimensional and while still being a tough nut to crack, they can be countered.

Have you ever played vs a double Slann list? That's just ridiculous. You can only win by luck i.e. hoping your enemy doesn't get his stuff off before you get a chance to strike back.

**riverhawks32**

Ah, okay, accepted. Ewww double Slann list makes me cringe. Touche

**DukeRustfield**

I don't think DoC is actually that great in tourneys because you have to make all-comers lists. If you're going to really go crazy with DoC and try and make them OP you have to use one of the super synergistic strategies like LD bombs or Kairos or poison stacking. But all-comers means just that and there's going to be some armies that simply don't care about those strategies and will shut them down completely.

**phoenixrisin**

Sigvatr wrote:
Already reported phoenix' post(s), but for the sake of the discussion - it's a terrible ,terrible idea to discuss balance by cross-referencing other codices. You can't just pick 1 model and compare it to another one from any other codex to "prove" that it's overpowered. It shows a lack of proper reasoning.

On another point, nobody in this thread stated that Demons were unbeatable or "super OP". You're exaggerating a lot while at the same time, losing yourself in ad hominem instead of making proper points. You need to step back and get and objective view on the issue. You're making out foes when there are none. Try to calm down and think about the points others made. You made some good ones too, it's just that people might not consider them good points because in the very same sentence you insult / provoke them.

Just as every other codex, Demons have good and bad models. Some things are terrible, some are definitely OP (looking at you, Bloodletters!). Overall, DoC easily remain top tier, along with Lizardmen, Dark Elves and "Look, I suck at Warhammer but can still win!"-Teclis.

first of all, some said that daemons were autowin. a few others said they were OP. secondly. you're just talking in generalities. WHAT am i exaggerating about? it's hard to defend my statements when you make blanket statements. i'm calm. i'm also blunt.

bloodletters are NOT OP. they are good. they might be a point undercosted. but OP? no. i never said daemons weren't good.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

DukeRustfield wrote:
I don't think DoC is actually that great in tourneys because you have to make all-comers lists. If you're going to really go crazy with DoC and try and make them OP you have to use one of the super synergistic strategies like LD bombs or Kairos or poison stacking. But all-comers means just that and there's going to be some armies that simply don't care about those strategies and will shut them down completely.

they haven't won a major tourney in 8th that i know of.

i don't think any army is "OP". there are some cheesy lists for sure like double shrine chosen, or double slaan, teclis, kairos, ld bomb, sack dagger, double hellpit slave, kalida 100 archer blocks.

**tmarichards**

phoenixrisin wrote:

they haven't won a major tourney in 8th that i know of.

Given that your knowledge and experience of the game is quite limited, this doesn't surprise me.

2011 UK Masters- 1st place, Daemons of Chaos. 16 players (top 16 ranked players in the country at the end of the year, however).

2012 Mansfield Maul- 1st place, Daemons of Chaos. 53 players.

2012 Brothers in Arms- 1st place. Daemons of Chaos. 64 players (team event).

2012 Northern Warlords GT- 1st place. Daemons of Chaos. 90 players.

2012 Pompey Pillage- 2nd place. Daemons of Chaos. 74 players.

2012 Tempest VI- 1st place. Daemons of Chaos. 48 players.

2nd at Winter Incurion 2012 with a Bloodthirster, 56 players.

2nd place at the 2012 UK Masters (1st place went to 1 of the 4 Ogre players that was there. 5 qualified, but only 4 chose to attend).

A fairly brief look over RHQ should yield similar results for other countries.

**phoenixrisin**

tmarichards wrote:
phoenixrisin wrote:

they haven't won a major tourney in 8th that i know of.

Given that your knowledge and experience of the game is quite limited, this doesn't surprise me.

that's a cute little jab, mr.brony.

1st of all. 2nd place=/=winning. maybe it is in the UK but here, no one cares who lost the super bowl, only who won.

2nd. those are not MAJOR tournaments except maybe the first one. Have they won ETC or anything of value? no.

stay gold, ponyboy.

**Red_Zeke**

Look, I don't especially have a dog in this fight, but how are those *not* major tournaments? 90 players is bigger than anything offered in the whole of Texas.

How would someone win the ETC with Daemons? (Edit: For that matter, @tmarichards, how do Daemons win a team tournament, Brothers in Arms?) Are you talking about ETC singles? I don't think that's really supposed to be that big a deal- more of a side event at best, right?

And I think people *do* care who lost the Super Bowl. Ask the '90-'93 Buffalo Bills. You don't speak for the whole U.S. man.

I know you guys are both taking jabs at each other, but this last post is really getting a little overboard with hostility and kinda inaccurate to boot.

**AgeOfEgos**

Let's calm down and remember we are discussing a miniature tabletop game. Last warning for the thread--keep it objective, not personal. Thanks.

**riverhawks32**

I don't see the point in this thread anymore. May as well just lock/close, as Pheonixrisin is just going to keep it going/provoking the rest of us.