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.

Just curious on views relating to the current 6th ed tourney scene.
Been doing a bit of reading around blog sites and other 40k sites and a recurring theme is that, currently, there is no real meta.
With so many Codicies getting redone of late to bring them up to speed with 6th, people still adjusting (somewhat) to flyers and the allies rule, things are still quite mixed and varied.

A certain thread I read, stated that in their opinion, the tourney scene had never been healthier and more interesting because of the above (and with redos supposedly upcoming for Orks, IG and Nids), it would only get better.
People are having to adapt all the time due to new ally combos and newer dexes and no one seems to have found a consistenly winning selection. Or have they?

What are your guys views?

I think there definitely is a meta, but it may not be quite as fixed. For example, in some areas (mine, I believe, which is MD / VA) blob squads seem to really be king. Tony Kopach just keeps on winning Nova with them (although he wins other things, too, of course!).

But I feel like it might not be quite so "blobby" in other areas.

Just my impression from reading, but I definitely don't think there's one universal meta for 6th edition... except perhaps that vehicles kind of suck

I like it as it means there is no "Netlist X" that usually dominates the whole tourney making it a misery for all other players, and it also means that all players have a chance of getting in the chance of winning

6th edition has been the most balanced edition yet, as said by multiple people .

My opinion will be given with only 6th edition tournaments as experience. Since I only started playing again last year. But I'm loving 6th edition as compared to the end of 5th. It's much more varied, and doesn't feel like your in a sea of marines. The meta is there. It's just very regional at the moment, and there are certain top builds people are starting to discover, as we haven't had a codex in a month. Eldar and tau are scary as heck right now, with daemons and necrons right behind them. Which is amazing! The meta shifting is happening super frequent and that is soo good for the game and tournament scene as a whole.

So I think 6th has been a huge breath of fresh air for 40k and the tournament scene.

Non biased nor trolling question:
Why do you think the shifting meta / non standard build is good for the game?
I know - its an obvious answer but want to drill down a bit further into this. Bear with me.

I think it's good because it allows non standard lists to stand a chance. With power builds getting countered rapidly it allows for more diversity which is a good thing because its harder to get into a stale environment where everything starts becoming the same.

 Ratius wrote:
Non biased nor trolling question:
Why do you think the shifting meta / non standard build is good for the game?
I know - its an obvious answer but want to drill down a bit further into this. Bear with me.

I suggest that you should look at the bigger Tournaments and see what the current meta is.

Well there are multiple issues here. Firstly the way the armies that are good are set up now, you can't just bring one thing and expect to steamroll every game. There are going to be some matchups that are tougher than others.

For example, unless you are daemons (or possibly necrons, not sure about that one), tau is a very tough match up. However if you're daemons, you're going to most likely get your teeth kicked in by eldar/de, because they are mobile enough to somewhat kite you, while still putting out massive amounts of dakka. If you're playing anything with 3+ armor...well helldrakes.

This means that no one list or even 2/3 lists can dominate the tourney scene such as what was happening with crons/GK/SW back in the tail end of 5th and beginning of 6th.

Now why shifting meta is good for A GAME not just 40k.

http://www.reignofgaming.net/blogs/a-different-view/gentleman-gustaf/24441-what-is-competitive-balance

it is an article on League of Legends, but does a great job explaining why shifting meta is healthy and fun. It also explains how codexes having internal balance (or choices as the article refers to them) makes for a more satisfying and competitive game.

IMO, we are seeing 2 predominat trends in 6th edition tournament lists.

The first is the use of allies to address certain weaknesses of some armies.

The 2nd is the shift towards force-multipliers. Currently, some of the best lists are ones that rely most on force-multipliers. The newer armies are really good at this - Tau, eldar and daemons. Force-multipliers are seen predominantly in 2 ways. First is the introduction of allies to create certain "power combos". The second is the proliferation of psychic powers. Yes, the trend right now in competitive is a migration to more psychic-heavy armies. Even armies that are non-psychic (i.e. Tau) can use allies to bring them in (i.e. Taudar).


Honestly, while there is more diversity in tournament play, the introduction of the force-multipliers are also breaking the game. Now you're not talking about just 2+ saves, you're talking about re-rollable 2++ invuln's/armor/cover and nigh invincible armies. S8 shots which are twin-linked, ignore covers and re-roll's vs tanks/monstrous creatures, hordes of troops that just won't break or auto-rallies when they do, armies of flyers/flying monstrous creatures, etc., etc. Although I am a competitive person in nature, I really don't like the direction that the game is going in terms of how it is affecting some of the newer gamers. Sometimes, it is just downright discouraging to face these types of armies and being not able to do anything about them.

I don't believe Tau are as scary as the internet would have you believe. The relic is a tough mission for Tau without allies regardless of opponent.

Daemons have already settled into a couple of competitive spam builds. With flying circus of 5 FMCs being cheap on the wallet and easy to use.

DA haven't won a major tournament and I think are being dismissed as a strong but not competitive army.

Chaos is full steam ahead with heldrakes, plaguemarines, and noisemarines leading the way as a popular army choice, but despite much complaining on the internet I've yet to see a 3 heldrake army win a major tournament.

Eldar is too new and min maxers are still working out the builds. I predict they will have the same power level as Tau and DA in being a strong but not a take all comers tournament winner.

My DA with IG allies have taken Best Overall at two 60+ person GT's this year and Second Best Overall at another. 60+ person GT. I'd say DA are plenty competitive

But that being said I think the game is healthier now than in the end of 5th. I'm seeing a greater diversity at events I attend. I think a large part of the problem is the speed of things coming out has increased the pressure on painting up items or adjusting lists. The current break of 3-4 months between a codexes is actually an excellent thing as it allows things to settle a bit.

The constant updating has caused information overload in a lot of players and actually enhanced the perceived power level of new codexes as people aren't having time to adjust or are just dismissing previous books because they are 1-2 codexes old.

I think the comment earlier about Meta's being regional is pretty spot on too. I'm one of the few blob players in the midwest where it's all over on the east coast and flyer heavy seemed to be the norm on the west coast which pushed the inclusion of FW there. It's an interesting time and I'm really enjoying it even if my painting and modeling can't 100% keep up with the codex releases

 Hulksmash wrote:
My DA with IG allies have taken Best Overall at two 60+ person GT's this year and Second Best Overall at another. 60+ person GT. I'd say DA are plenty competitive

While I agree with you that DA are competitive, these are literally the only two instances of ANYONE using DA (as primary detachment or allies) taking one of the top five spots in a GT since 6th edition was released.*

*From a review of all GTs with publicly available results consisting of at least 30 players and at least 5 games as of May ~10. I'm assuming that, having placed highly in the overall ranking, you were also in the top five in terms of competitive scoring (e.g., battle points).

I can't speak to others but I was pretty sure that Gonyo did something similar but maybe I was wrong. And I was just pointing out that DA's have won Not my fault if I'm the only to do it with them

And battle was weird for the Indy. I was 6-1 for the weekend but wasn't number two in general because of the elimination format. I was number 2 at the bugeater for general and was number 1 at the Darkstar for general as well as overall.

 Danny Internets wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
My DA with IG allies have taken Best Overall at two 60+ person GT's this year and Second Best Overall at another. 60+ person GT. I'd say DA are plenty competitive

While I agree with you that DA are competitive, these are literally the only two instances of ANYONE using DA (as primary detachment or allies) taking one of the top five spots in a GT since 6th edition was released.*

*From a review of all GTs with publicly available results consisting of at least 30 players and at least 5 games as of May ~10. I'm assuming that, having placed highly in the overall ranking, you were also in the top five in terms of competitive scoring (e.g., battle points).

I believe TSHFT was won by a Ravenwing bolter banner army pretty recently as well.

Overall the meta seems very much in flux-- I see many reports of contradictory things from different areas. For instance, many people say that 6e Tau are weak to 6e Daemons. In practice my Tau have never lost to Daemons and I consider it one of the most favorable matchups in the game. While it's certainly possible to lose in that situation, I feel like it would generally require very good luck on the part of the Daemon player to "make it a game." I don't say this as a boast but merely to indicate that obviously people are using very different Tau armies, very different Daemon armies, or very different tactics elsewhere!

One piece of advice that I can definitely give is that most players seem to be switching away from melta and onto plasma, perhaps to deal with the increased number of normal guys and MCs relative to vehicles in 6th edition. Higher AV vehicles are thus very effective. AV13+ has become very difficult for many armies to deal with in time.

 Kingsley wrote:

 Danny Internets wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
My DA with IG allies have taken Best Overall at two 60+ person GT's this year and Second Best Overall at another. 60+ person GT. I'd say DA are plenty competitive

While I agree with you that DA are competitive, these are literally the only two instances of ANYONE using DA (as primary detachment or allies) taking one of the top five spots in a GT since 6th edition was released.*

*From a review of all GTs with publicly available results consisting of at least 30 players and at least 5 games as of May ~10. I'm assuming that, having placed highly in the overall ranking, you were also in the top five in terms of competitive scoring (e.g., battle points).

I believe TSHFT was won by a Ravenwing bolter banner army pretty recently as well.

Overall the meta seems very much in flux-- I see many reports of contradictory things from different areas. For instance, many people say that 6e Tau are weak to 6e Daemons. In practice my Tau have never lost to Daemons and I consider it one of the most favorable matchups in the game. While it's certainly possible to lose in that situation, I feel like it would generally require very good luck on the part of the Daemon player to "make it a game." I don't say this as a boast but merely to indicate that obviously people are using very different Tau armies, very different Daemon armies, or very different tactics elsewhere!

One piece of advice that I can definitely give is that most players seem to be switching away from melta and onto plasma, perhaps to deal with the increased number of normal guys and MCs relative to vehicles in 6th edition. Higher AV vehicles are thus very effective. AV13+ has become very difficult for many armies to deal with in time.

Heh, obviously you need to play against Janthkin's or my daemons. We'll be more than happy to give you your first daemon loss.

 Danny Internets wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
My DA with IG allies have taken Best Overall at two 60+ person GT's this year and Second Best Overall at another. 60+ person GT. I'd say DA are plenty competitive

While I agree with you that DA are competitive, these are literally the only two instances of ANYONE using DA (as primary detachment or allies) taking one of the top five spots in a GT since 6th edition was released.*

*From a review of all GTs with publicly available results consisting of at least 30 players and at least 5 games as of May ~10. I'm assuming that, having placed highly in the overall ranking, you were also in the top five in terms of competitive scoring (e.g., battle points).

I took DA IG and got 3rd and 2nd, respectively at SVDM and Colonial this year, both had more than that in players, and 5 games

The increased pace of codex releases have obviously helped contribute to a much more "in flux" metagame than previous editions, where we'd have had one codex release in the same timespan as we've had 5 releases in 6E.

There are however some clear trends, cover save advantage/shrouding tends to be huge, psykers are more and more common, allies are of course used to plug gaps in capabilities and exploit synergistic combos, AV12 and lower non-Eldar/non-Tau vehicles (and especially combat walkers) are becoming more and more rare as a result of HP's while heavier tanks don't seem to be having as many issues and/or Eldar/Tau skimmers which can benefit from up to 3+ cover routinely are common, Flakk missiles tend to be ignored even when available, and Aegis lines are very commonplace.

That's what I thought Target.

Because US tourneys dictate codex strength :p?

I took DA IG and got 3rd and 2nd, respectively at SVDM and Colonial this year, both had more than that in players, and 5 games

 Hulksmash wrote:
That's what I thought Target.

Brad, which tournaments did you place in with your DA+IG? Definitely had one of Andrew's wins in there (from Colonial), but I didn't include SVDM because I couldn't find results showing what armies the winners played. I want to update what I have now that 6th edition has been out a full year.

Dark Star in Minneapolis, 60+ people, 5 Rounds, Best Overall and 1 of 2 undefeated's.

Indy Open in Indianapolis, 60+ people (I'm pretty sure, could have been just under 60 with drops), 7 Rounds, 2nd Best Overall, 6-1 Finish

Bugeater in Omaha, 60+ people, Best Overall and 2nd Best General.

All with DA/IG.

Thanks and congratulations!

KillswitchUK wrote:
Because US tourneys dictate codex strength :p?

Care to add some info about the UK scene or were you just trying to win the prize for "most useless post"?

KillswitchUK wrote:
Because US tourneys dictate codex strength :p?

They do if they're the only source of data we have!

KillswitchUK wrote:
Because US tourneys dictate codex strength :p?

I think more than anything else, one could dictate that there is a shift between what 40k is for between US and UK players. From my experiences tournaments seem to be the "norm" here in America, whereas clubs, campaigns, and leagues seem to be the norm in the UK. Now I can't do detail work with the brushes I own, and I realize I'm painting both countries with wide brushes, but if you also take into account the number of "large number" tournaments, the US is probably going to be a better gauge of a codex's strength simply because more games at a competitive level are being played more often. Not to mention the coverage some of the major tournaments seem to get (with AdeptiCon and NoVA being broadcast the past few years). People are able to see the ideal(s) of the American tournament scene and gather a rough idea of what codex has strength and where it's strength(s) lie.

Don't get me wrong, the size in tournaments is nothing to sniff at, but in terms of competitive tournaments, Europe still has it's fair share.

In the uk we use warhammer.org.uk for most of our tournaments, including bat reps, pictures, updates & info. We also have 40global.com and multiple blogs. I don't see how that is a lack of updates :p!

Info from the UK scene is as you state, consistantly shifting,

There is not top codex, since each and every tourney seems to be won by a different player with a different codex. Sure theres similar players up the top but nothing consistent.

I just thought I'd chime and and say at least when making these statements, refer the original post to "USA meta" as it comes across as fairly arrogant, and thats the brits jobs right? haha

And all this crap about UK being mostly campaign base? Where did that come from haha. I guess it's true we do have a fair few capaign weekends etc on the callender, but when there is also at least 2 tourneys a month across the UK, it's certainly got something going.

Lets not forget what Josh Roberts managed to achieve at Adepticon

So what is the UK meta?

Necron warith spam
Triple helldrakes wirh fmc support
Mephiaton plus storm ravens
Occasional blob which is dying off now
Screamer council dawmons
Fmc daemons
Gunline tau
Eldar and de combos
Ravenwing

Tbh theres 3 tourneys across the uk over the next 2 weeks so i can report back the top 3 of them to give a rough indication whats doing well

I've heard that wraith wing is still a big thing in UK but I just don't really understand how, especially now with how easily Tau & Eldar can dakka away T4 models with 3+'s.

When you say Mephiston plus storm ravens, is that really so common it's a main meta list? Can't even remember the last time I saw blood angels over here.

People meta shift to deal with the next big thing..storm ravens are very durable and although that specific build might not be common..gk storm ravens etc are.

They might no win tourneys but come in the top 10 played by good players so you have to be aware of them.

Wraithwing is still doing well if they hit the right matches and even against tau..if they face a bad player they will win. You cantell a bad tau player by their deployment and there are plenty to see on this forum alone.

Eldar we have yet to see but they did win a recent small dtourney..nothing to go by but the player wss good so we wil see in the big tourneys coming up