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.

Hey guys, just been rummaging through a through threads and people talking about tournament play and I was just wanting to see if I could gather a consenses of the top, sorry I should say most competitive lists or armies rather, out there. Not looking for armies or lists based on cheese as in: "you can't place at a tournament because you didn't take one fo these three lists" or "this particular army" like it is in MtG. From what I've been reading it seems that this isn't the case due to the way the lists need to be structured anyway (lists built on percentages etc., and changes to the phases in 8th ed.).
In anycase if you poll, please keep it in regard to 8th ed and the current edition of the army book. Thanks!

I'd have to say Dark Elves, but Lizards and Skaven are right up there- they have incredibly good army books, and can make up for the slight weaknesses through magic choice (Shadow for Dark Elves, Light for Lizards). Skaven less so, but they already have an insanely good book.

I do well with woc.
Um most armies can be competitive.
Ogres seem pretty good the only thing that isn't that powerful would be WE and brets maybe beastmen.

They all have good builds in them. It's more how you play them that they start to very in strength. I'm a fan of Dwarves Ogre's and VC. But Woodelves are fun to lol as is the rest <ok so I like them all but hey there all good>.

Empire, they have basically every style of play open to them, if that doesn't make them the most competitive army, than I don't know what does.

depends on what exactly you are looking for and what build you would use. I voted for everything except chaos dwarfs as they have no army book, wood elves (much as they can be competetive its really only 1 or 2 specific builds) and beastmen (who are a really nice army and "can" be competetive but they are a bit trickier than most to get right)

what sort of playstyles do you want (magic heavy, shooty, combat, manoeverable etc)

Empire, Skaven and Dark elves in the lead

interesting.

I hope some of those other votes were misclicks!

Marlo wrote:I hope some of those other votes were misclicks!

Agreed. I can't believe some people actually voted for Wood Elves, Bretonnia and Beastmen....

I have a friend the uses beasts and is really good. I can use brets and win alot. Honestly most armies are good now some a bit better but not like 7th where you couldn't use dwarfs.

Well Wood elves is right under Dark elves, a sneeze could change it at all

Haha why would you even include Chaos Dwarves?

alex87 wrote:Haha why would you even include Chaos Dwarves?

And why not? They appear to have been given the full on seal of approval from GW with the release of Tarmukan

Beastmen. *pauses for laughter*

Ahem... Ok so they are looked over greatly. Herdstone Spam and Minobus is viable, isn't really hurt in comped environment and I've seen some tourneys give the Beastmen a 5% or 10% increase in points over the cap because they are so overlooked.