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.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
So what do you do when you army is low tier and just not playavle/cometative at all?
I have run into a problem where the armies I have and actually care about are such hot garbage that they have gotten to the point where it's just not even worth Fielding or playing the game. Do you all just wait it out? Do you give in and just buy one of those competative armies/gimick that actually winds games even if you don't care about the armies?

I'm struggling to have any interest in the game anymore since it seems the only way I'll win is if I invest in armies don't care at all about.

I just roll dice and hope for the best. Luckily the kind of army(greentide) for the chosen army I like to play(orks) is at least the semi competive version inside it and can get at least draws and maybe eek out win with maelstrom cards so it's not quaranteed massacre loss.

If you have got codex already that sucks more since new codex will be some way away. IF you are still at index not long to see if you are going to be screwed for a long time or not

Only index left are wolves, orks, sisters, genecults...
Harlequins and knights are literally weeks away

I’m hoping for an inquisitor codex but I doubt it due to lack of models.

There also might be a random new army like world eaters with angron primarch as well.

Regardless not a whole lot of index armies left.

I really don’t see the point in spending your hard earned money and finite hobby time on models, armies, tactics, fluff, etc... that you don’t like. I tried this once in WFB but when the enthusiasm isn’t there it’s practically impossible to stay engaged.

Besides, that shiny new army you just spent the last 3 months buying, assembling, and painting could just as easily end up in the same situation.

If the meta is just not producing a good outcome for what you want to do, either seek alternate formats or take a break until things change.

My best friend plays Primaris and Tau and I play guard. Before the Tau codex I think he took between 2-300 extra points and our games were pretty fun then. We did the same with his Primaris until he got 2 flyers and they kind of balance the forces out a bit more now.

Doesnt matter.
Its a greater challenge to play it.
I usually play to fulfill the mission objectives and nothing else.
Then low tier is not so low tier as one might think.

I would rather play an army that is lower tier than one which is easy win. There's no glory in winning with a baneblade list, but when playing with low tier armies (which DA and TS are not btw lol) you've got nothing to lose and much glory to gain.

DA and TS might not be top-of-the-tables atm, but no way are they even near the bottom. Probably half the armies in the game would have a better claim. I'd say just keep working on your list building and keep working on your tactics would be all that's required.

I don't think that playing any army is a guaranteed loss. Not if the missions you're playing are varied and interesting. Not if you're willing to re-think your list and tactics.

Ksons aren't low tier. Neither are Dark Angels. If you want to play only a certain narrative style army then you need to play against other people doing the same thing.

I would suggest you look at successful builds and work towards having a competitive list and one you prefer to play more casually.

superwill wrote:
I would rather play an army that is lower tier than one which is easy win. There's no glory in winning with a baneblade list, but when playing with low tier armies (which DA and TS are not btw lol) you've got nothing to lose and much glory to gain.

DA and TS might not be top-of-the-tables atm, but no way are they even near the bottom. Probably half the armies in the game would have a better claim. I'd say just keep working on your list building and keep working on your tactics would be all that's required.

TS are probably top tier if London GT entries are any indication. Smite spam, great psychic disciplines, and a good faction keyword.

Explain to your opponent that you're army is very weak and ask them to be considerate. Send them your list and see if they can't make a list of comparable strength.

I have several lists I play; one is a list so fluffy it's a bunny wrapped in cotton candy, the other is harder than Guilliman looking at Mitt Romney's binder collection. I also working on a Narrative list with a slightly higher power level, as my bunny list is a touch too far on the soft side.

 Giantwalkingchair wrote:
Suck it up and keep playing. But us sisters playera have been long time masochists.

Sisters are not weak this edition, especially with the changes to Deep Strike in the FAQ removing their Achilles' heel. Try Dominion squads in Immolators.

Your army is great - Thousand Sons are not a low tier army whatsoever.

You may well be suffering from Tzangaphobia. Exposure therapy is the way forward! Buy yourself 2 boxes of enlightened and a shaman, and 2-3 boxes of tzaangors.

Darkmatter crystal on a brayhorn blob in round 1 is a legit opener. Your DPs are the best in the game, and Ahriman is one of the best casters in the game.

 grouchoben wrote:
Your army is great - Thousand Sons are not a low tier army whatsoever.

You may well be suffering from Tzangaphobia. Exposure therapy is the way forward! Buy yourself 2 boxes of enlightened and a shaman, and 2-3 boxes of tzaangors.

Darkmatter crystal on a brayhorn blob in round 1 is a legit opener. Your DPs are the best in the game, and Ahriman is one of the best casters in the game.

Of course that's not much of a thousand son army. So thousand sons suck, tzeentch rock.

 grouchoben wrote:
Your army is great - Thousand Sons are not a low tier army whatsoever.

You may well be suffering from Tzangaphobia. Exposure therapy is the way forward! Buy yourself 2 boxes of enlightened and a shaman, and 2-3 boxes of tzaangors.

Darkmatter crystal on a brayhorn blob in round 1 is a legit opener. Your DPs are the best in the game, and Ahriman is one of the best casters in the game.

The foot tzaangors actually aren't very good any more because they can't reliably get the charge off from webway infiltration/DMC post-faq. Enlightened and Shamans are still fine, of course.

tneva82 wrote:

 grouchoben wrote:
Your army is great - Thousand Sons are not a low tier army whatsoever.

You may well be suffering from Tzangaphobia. Exposure therapy is the way forward! Buy yourself 2 boxes of enlightened and a shaman, and 2-3 boxes of tzaangors.

Darkmatter crystal on a brayhorn blob in round 1 is a legit opener. Your DPs are the best in the game, and Ahriman is one of the best casters in the game.

Of course that's not much of a thousand son army. So thousand sons suck, tzeentch rock.

Tzaangors and and such are Thousand Sons units. There's no need to pretend like there isn't.

That's like me saying "I want to play Space Marines, so I'm not allowed to take Scouts, Scout Bikers, and any of the vehicles, because they're not actually Space Marines."

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 grouchoben wrote:
Your army is great - Thousand Sons are not a low tier army whatsoever.

You may well be suffering from Tzangaphobia. Exposure therapy is the way forward! Buy yourself 2 boxes of enlightened and a shaman, and 2-3 boxes of tzaangors.

Darkmatter crystal on a brayhorn blob in round 1 is a legit opener. Your DPs are the best in the game, and Ahriman is one of the best casters in the game.

Of course that's not much of a thousand son army. So thousand sons suck, tzeentch rock.

Tzaangors and and such are Thousand Sons units. There's no need to pretend like there isn't.

That's like me saying "I want to play Space Marines, so I'm not allowed to take Scouts, Scout Bikers, and any of the vehicles, because they're not actually Space Marines."

...Except those are Space Marines? It's more like saying "I want to play Space Marines, so I don't want to have to take any Servitors."

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 grouchoben wrote:
Your army is great - Thousand Sons are not a low tier army whatsoever.

You may well be suffering from Tzangaphobia. Exposure therapy is the way forward! Buy yourself 2 boxes of enlightened and a shaman, and 2-3 boxes of tzaangors.

Darkmatter crystal on a brayhorn blob in round 1 is a legit opener. Your DPs are the best in the game, and Ahriman is one of the best casters in the game.

Of course that's not much of a thousand son army. So thousand sons suck, tzeentch rock.

Tzaangors and and such are Thousand Sons units. There's no need to pretend like there isn't.

That's like me saying "I want to play Space Marines, so I'm not allowed to take Scouts, Scout Bikers, and any of the vehicles, because they're not actually Space Marines."

"Space marines are fine, there's Guillimann". Ok whatabout Salamanders?

 grouchoben wrote:
Your army is great - Thousand Sons are not a low tier army whatsoever.

You may well be suffering from Tzangaphobia. Exposure therapy is the way forward! Buy yourself 2 boxes of enlightened and a shaman, and 2-3 boxes of tzaangors.

Darkmatter crystal on a brayhorn blob in round 1 is a legit opener. Your DPs are the best in the game, and Ahriman is one of the best casters in the game.

Yeah how very rare they want to use rubrics instead of spam beast men, the nerve of some people.

Here are a few thoughts...
1. I don't think Ksons or RW are low-tier, but your build might be. I had the same issues with DA, honestly, and I had to mix in some competitive units and take out fluffier stuff I liked better. I didn't go full WAAC, but I compromised after getting tabled more than once.
2. Your scene has a lot to do with your perception of fun. It sounds like you have a FLGS where players do a lot of tournament matches, even if it is not a tournament day. This is just my guess, of course I have no idea. But I think playing less competitive builds vs high competitive builds will make you a better player overall. But you may need to change your perception of winning when you're up against a super competitive army.
3. I agree with other that say that you should consider playing in some less traditional matches- use the narrative missions, play apocalypse games, or just try anything other than 2K ITC mission packs-- try to recapture that bit of wonder that drew you to 40K in the first place.

hobojebus wrote:

Yeah how very rare they want to use rubrics instead of spam beast men, the nerve of some people.

"My codex has good units but I refuse to use them so my codex is low tier"

If you choose to handicap yourself then suck it up. I'm not complaining that an all-armour IG list is bad even though that's what I want to play - I play it for less competitive games and I take screens for more competitive games.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

Like a bane blade list, or a knight list.

If you think a knight list is good let alone that knights are in the same league as baneblades then I don't know what to tell you...

Depends. If I can still have fun with them, I play them but not against super competitive armies. I played wych cults and Harlequins from the release of the clowns until right now.

If they aren't fun at all - like my orks right now which are just a slog to play, I shelf them.

 Scott-S6 wrote:

hobojebus wrote:

Yeah how very rare they want to use rubrics instead of spam beast men, the nerve of some people.

"My codex has good units but I refuse to use them so my codex is low tier"

If you choose to handicap yourself then suck it up. I'm not complaining that an all-armour IG list is bad even though that's what I want to play - I play it for less competitive games and I take screens for more competitive games.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

Like a bane blade list, or a knight list.

If you think a knight list is good let alone that knights are in the same league as baneblades then I don't know what to tell you...

In the GT lists there are more rubrics than Tzaangors, just saying.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

gungo wrote:
Honestly unless you are playing the add on niche armies like sisters of silence, deathwatch, harlequins etc. or you are an army without a codex such as orks, sisters. I’d even give you a pass with greyknights. Your army is playable and can win.

Right now you have Marine players crying thier army sucks, chaos players crying thier army sucks because of the faq and eldar players saying they were nerfed as well. Everyone is saying thier army is awful right now. You need to suck it up and play better or build a better list. Ffs most clubs have people playing the same army themes just freakin list tailor against the people you play against. You are obviously not trying to win a grand tournament here. I play orks and I still win. Sometimes it means you got to change your list up and make it stronger!

Tsons, so i guess niche?

Tsons is literally holding up Chaos in the meta atm look up the London GT army lists.

IIRC those lists are not longer viable they were using "CHAOS" as a tag to create the army, but FAQ Changed that.

nope. The FAQ prevents a DETACHMENT from being "Chaos" not an ARMY. Otherwise, allies in general would be illegal.

To the THousand Son Discussion in general: The lists in the london GT show Rubric squads outnumbering Tzaangor squads 2 to 1 both in points and number of units taken. The two most viable builds for thousand sons right now appear to be Smite spam (of which the non-souped version revolves heavily around taking Ahriman on disc, optionally Magnus, Daemon Princes of Tzeentch, Tzaangor Shamans and Exalted Sorcerors) and a Daemon Engine centric list with Defilers, Contemptors and Heldrakes.

Tzaangor Spam (the footslogging kind at least) is toast, and Enlightened Spam doesn't hold up well on its own without it. Enlightened are a solid anti-horde auxiliary, Shamans contribute to a smitespam build, but the core of the army is what the strength of the thousand sons should be: Their psykers.

Hey man, don't worry about 40K. I have two armies, a full Emperor's Children list which I play for fun, and an Eldar army that will make rounds for tournaments and whatnot.

I've got armies in a lot of different systems, the 9th age, Malifaux, Bolt Action. Of all of the games I play, Warhammer 40K is probably the least balanced at a competitive level. Playing Warhammer 40K competitively is about being able to read the rules, identify what is good, and building those models that maximize the synergies thereof. Its also why really competitive players who build their entire army around a tournament competitive gimmick get so upset at a codex release or edition update- "their whole army was ruined".

Warhammer 40K is not balanced. In any Index or Codex the difference between a competitive list and a non competitive list is like night and day. It doesn't matter what faction you play, if you aren't fielding a competitive list vs someone who is you are going to have a bad day. List building is so important in 40K that many players can accurately predict the outcome of a game just by looking at the lists alone. Looking at high scoring tournament lists and comparing them to your own collection can go a long way to eeking out a bit of performance from your models.

Also don't be ashamed of asking people to tone down their list. When I bring out my Emperor's Children, I tell people to tone down their lists 100%. I could certainly build a competitive Emperor's Children List, but I don't want to because building that list would void the whole reason I started playing Chaos in the first place.

If my don't want to play a fluffy list vs my fluffy Emperor's Children, that is their prerogative. In that case they can either choke on my Eldar, or I can find someone else to play against.

I guess what I am saying, is if you want to play competitive 40K. You need to sacrifice what you love about the codex and focus on learning what works, why it works, and how it works. Most Codex's can put out a pretty competitive list. Its just a matter of figuring out what build that is and choking your pride as you put your fluffy choices in the display case and out of the army list.

Even the tournaments here are casual enough that you can easily place with an army that Dakka dismisses as trash tier, so I don't worry about it - I'm not playing at any major events anyway.

Sometimes I wonder if the people who think Baneblade armies are too good have actually played them. Shadowswords are very good, but the other superheavies? Less good by quite a margin.

As for the actual OP: I just keep playing. I've been a treadhead since I started playing, and playing tanks has been a rollercoaster ride of "OP->UP->OP" with every codex and edition change. I was kinda okay in 3rd, had a blast in 4th, plummeted to a 98% loss rate in 5th when tanks stopped being able to score, then in 6th with hull points I still was kinda bad, in 7th I played superheavy tanks in the Heresy which was rockin', but inflexible. Now in 8th the superheavies are good, but still lose out compared to their "lesser" counterparts (i.e. Leman Russes) point for point. So I just keep on keepin' on.

I got through 5th edition, especially, by accepting a loss before the game started, setting my own objectives (that weren't the mission objectives usually, like "kill big enemy tanks so I can paint kill-rings on my barrels" or "destroy the enemy mobility so they'll be pinned on this hypothetical battlefield after it is over" or whatever). That way, I could still feel like I was accomplishing things even though it was almost invariably a victory for my opponent when we shook hands at the end of the game.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
So what do you do when you army is low tier and just not playavle/cometative at all?
I have run into a problem where the armies I have and actually care about are such hot garbage that they have gotten to the point where it's just not even worth Fielding or playing the game. Do you all just wait it out? Do you give in and just buy one of those competative armies/gimick that actually winds games even if you don't care about the armies?

I'm struggling to have any interest in the game anymore since it seems the only way I'll win is if I invest in armies don't care at all about.

I don´t buy this top/low tier nonsense. It´s just whining on a grand scale. You have a very obvious low/high tier system in Blood Bowl with stunty and non-stunty teams. In 40K there are no such extremes like in this sports game.

Your friends should understand army tiers and play appropriate tiers against each other. That is the best advice I can give. If all you have is low tier armies - maybe find one competitive army you like or just make an imperial soup addition to your DA.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Strg Alt wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
So what do you do when you army is low tier and just not playavle/cometative at all?
I have run into a problem where the armies I have and actually care about are such hot garbage that they have gotten to the point where it's just not even worth Fielding or playing the game. Do you all just wait it out? Do you give in and just buy one of those competative armies/gimick that actually winds games even if you don't care about the armies?

I'm struggling to have any interest in the game anymore since it seems the only way I'll win is if I invest in armies don't care at all about.

I don´t buy this top/low tier nonsense. It´s just whining on a grand scale. You have a very obvious low/high tier system in Blood Bowl with stunty and non-stunty teams. In 40K there are no such extremes like in this sports game.

Nah - high tier armies blow low tier armies off the table in a single turn or at worst 2 turns. It's kind of fun for the guy winning but not really. It's totally unfun for the guy getting waxed.

Was going to mimic what xeno said, there are clear cut differences between low and high teir armies. IG being the worst offenders with their criminally low cost for the basalisk and Russ platforms.

Personally I'm in a rock and a hard place, after spending several hours yesterday looking up lists reading more strats, I either have to play cheeky build or fluff crap. Really it's more of a, "I'm annoyed by the fact that in order for this army to be useable you are shoe horned into a few units." Ultimately I'll keep playing it just makes painting harder to want to do.

Narrative games are the way to go.

I played CSM in 6th/7th edition, where they were one of the worst armies in the game, my opponents fielded Tau and Necrons - 2 of the best armies.
We solved the problem by not taking the decurion detachment so Necrons got toned down, also playing maelstrom or our own scenarios helped a lot.

8th edition has a much better balance than those two prior editions, it should be possible for you to adapt. There are more armies than IG out there.

Nah - high tier armies blow low tier armies off the table in a single turn or at worst 2 turns. It's kind of fun for the guy winning but not really. It's totally unfun for the guy getting waxed.

I don't understand why people are still playing games with such little terrain that armies are dying turn 1 or 2. I play Tau and I prefer for there to be 1-2 large LOS blocking pieces (usually ruins) in the middle and then more LOS blocking pieces (ruins/hills) scattered around the map with woods/other cover available too. It makes the game more interesting when both teams have to actually move and figure out how they're going to cover objectives based on the opponents army.

Part of your strategy should be giving gunlines targets that they aren't effective at shooting. Example: Put your terminators where there are only 0 to low AP D1 weapons shooting at them so they laugh with their 2+ save. Or put your devestators squads with a few ablative bolter wounds in range of their Las-preds or equivalent so that they can't even get to the juicy heavy weapons on the team for at least a turn.

Pieceocake wrote:

Nah - high tier armies blow low tier armies off the table in a single turn or at worst 2 turns. It's kind of fun for the guy winning but not really. It's totally unfun for the guy getting waxed.

I don't understand why people are still playing games with such little terrain that armies are dying turn 1 or 2. I play Tau and I prefer for there to be 1-2 large LOS blocking pieces (usually ruins) in the middle and then more LOS blocking pieces (ruins/hills) scattered around the map with woods/other cover available too. It makes the game more interesting when both teams have to actually move and figure out how they're going to cover objectives based on the opponents army.

Part of your strategy should be giving gunlines targets that they aren't effective at shooting. Example: Put your terminators where there are only 0 to low AP D1 weapons shooting at them so they laugh with their 2+ save. Or put your devestators squads with a few ablative bolter wounds in range of their Las-preds or equivalent so that they can't even get to the juicy heavy weapons on the team for at least a turn.

That can be atested to the horrible terrain rules this Ed. I actually had a conversation with one of the guys I play, he was saying man our terrain looks great, but it sucks game wise. He was saying if you look at tournaments they have really ugly terrain but it blocks full LoS