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.

It not changing that rapidly.

O sorry some one hit the fast forward button

That WS list is just convenient. No offense intended here but he was in a rush to min max the best units as fast as possible without much testing. There are MUCH harder lists waiting to be built out of that book. Dire Avengers are the way to go for at least half those squads too. Cheaper for 5, better LD, better range, better AS and utilize battle focus MUCH better. Being able to shoot an assault unit then run outside of 18" is HUGE.

His list is actually really bad at objective games since it will take him 2 turns per objective to claim them. If the game goes on those guardians won't last. Heck half his GDS ran off against minimal damage in this game.

Had GTKA not taken the bait and wasted his crimson hunter and WK on jy2's WK I think he wins the game. CH takes out a 3rd WS, gold member jumps back and prevents that very obvious Warp spider deep strike he pulled.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
jy2 there are plenty of GTs this year... you have cited a few winners to support your position on spam. Sure it is something that can win a GT but I think if we wait until the end of the year and see the final results for all the major events you will see that more balanced armies will do better overall.

I don't consider SW drop pod armies very competitive either in any events that have five or more rounds... again due to the very RPS type of build it is.

Also Heldrakes are losing their edge in my opinion. They are good but three is not worth it in the current meta.

Finally a fast melee army like daemon cav rush and rip those serpents like tin foil... I have seen it happen too.

Spam is strong because you are running multiples of the best and most efficient units in the codex. Now spam isn't necessarily balanced among all the codices, but more often than not, it will give most armies problems (assuming you are spamming the "good" unit choices and not the mediocre or bad ones in your codex). One thing you will notice among the GT winners is that most of them use multiples of some of the most cost-effective units in their respective codices. Not everyone does but then again, winners with non-spam lists are much less frequent.

No, not all the lists I mentioned are tournament winners. However, all of them are competitive lists that will give many armies problems.

Sure, super fast rush armies like daemons will give many of these lists problems. Daemons are an exception that will give most gunline armies problems, even the top-tier ones. However, it is by no means an autowin for daemons as well. A shooty spam list like mechdar has the tools to give even daemons problems depending on their rolls. The wraith knight is perhaps the ultimate counter-assault unit and can lock up many units in combat. Serpent shield can ignore the cover save of invisible units. The only answer they don't have is daemons with re-rollable 2++ saves....and even then, Misfortune if the farseer gets it can help.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
The best thing to do is:

1) Study the meta - you will see some winning net lists
2) Build a very balanced army that exploits the weaknesses of the net lists
3) Profit!

The larger the tournament (i.e. as in a GT), the harder it will be to exploit the meta. In smaller tournaments, you can anticipate the meta to a certain degree. In a large tournament, it is almost impossible to do so because of all the variations and combinations armies (and with allies) can bring nowadays, not to mention some people may be bringing spoiler (or anti-meta) lists.

Bringing a balanced army is still the best way to go in a tournament, but balanced lists are hardly the type of lists which would exploit the weaknesses of other lists. They have to tools to hang with many different types of army builds but usually aren't designed to overpower the opposition (with some exceptions).

 Red Corsair wrote:
That WS list is just convenient. No offense intended here but he was in a rush to min max the best units as fast as possible without much testing. There are MUCH harder lists waiting to be built out of that book. Dire Avengers are the way to go for at least half those squads too. Cheaper for 5, better LD, better range, better AS and utilize battle focus MUCH better. Being able to shoot an assault unit then run outside of 18" is HUGE.

His list is actually really bad at objective games since it will take him 2 turns per objective to claim them. If the game goes on those guardians won't last. Heck half his GDS ran off against minimal damage in this game.

Had GTKA not taken the bait and wasted his crimson hunter and WK on jy2's WK I think he wins the game. CH takes out a 3rd WS, gold member jumps back and prevents that very obvious Warp spider deep strike he pulled.

The testing comes with these battle reports.

If I truly wanted to min-max, I would go 6x5 DA in serpents, 3 units of warp spiders and 3 units of war walkers. That's probably as competitive an eldar army that you will get IMO. Instead, I wanted to add a little personal touch to my list, using the sub-optimal guardians because I wanted more bodies and the wraithknight because I liked the model. Now my list will probably change with more play-testing, but I think that is a normal evolution of the list (changing through experimentation).

With serpent-spam currently, it isn't as point-&-click as most people think. You actually have to plan for how you will take objectives. Thus, even though the list is strong, if you don't plan accordingly, you can still lose if you aren't careful.

Had GTKA not went after my WK, his underlying problem would still have been the same - my farseer and 2 warpspiders (1 with Forewarning) in his deployment zone and me killing his crimson hunter on my turn (only needed 3 out of my 4 serpents to do so).

Sixth edition has been a tough transition for many veteran players. Spam lists have been very popular amongst a significant portion of the competitive crowd for as long as I have been playing. What I have concluded so far is sixth edition lends itself more than any other edition to rock paper scissor (RPS) builds. Note I started playing around the beginning of third edition. The major drawback to a RPS build in a large event with five or more rounds is that these types of lists will eventually come against an army played by a competent opponent that counters it... This is invariably the game that will make or break you. I am an advocate of totally balanced armies - equally strong in terms of mobility, shooting and hand-to-hand combat... They can beat any army if played well. I think in this edition it's much easier to design a RPS list and do okay as opposed to a totally balanced list. Sure the meta changes with each new codex that is released but the balanced armies will continue to do well as opposed to the latest greatest. It will probably require a few tweaks here and there to keep a balanced army competitive while RPS armies are more likely to fall to the side.

I agree with the RPS aspect of 6E. With the new Psychic powers and allies now involved, there is almost an unlimited number of combinations in the game people can pull off. No one is immune. Whether a balanced list or a balanced spam list, there is almost a counter for any type of army. Hence the RPS effect. Both types of lists have their advantages and disadvantages. Both types of lists have weaknesses that can be exploited by a counter army. Spam-lists tend to overload certain aspects of the game. For example, shooty MSU armies tend to overload the shooting phase whereas the seer council deldar army tends to overload the movement phase. Their counter lies in an army that can really take advantage of their weaknesses. For example, MTO fast daemons would be a counter list to shooty MSU builds and the ultra-resilient Draigowing a counter to the seer council. As for balanced lists, they are better equipped to deal with a wider range of armies. Balanced TAC armies don't do anything particularly great. However, they normally will have a tool for almost any type of build they face. What is their counter? Ironically, it is the more extreme lists, which actually also includes some of the spam-lists. For example, they may have the tools to deal with 1 or 2 flyers, but can be overwhelmed by a flyer army with 5-6 flyers or an eldar army. That's the real 6E meta nowadays and no army is immune, not the balanced lists, not the spam lists and not the hammer deathstar lists.

My next game will give a demonstration of this. It pits a balanced list against an really unbalanced one.