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.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

Niexist wrote:
The only thing that is a bit discouraging to me is when I look at tournament results. It seems to always be the same 2 or 3 armies in the top 25.

Until the next book comes out, then the new dexes rule. When the books came out slower, there was a little more.spread in the results because the new shininess had time to wear off and people had time.to learn how to counter new threats.

This is true, but then again I am very happy at the speed they have been putting out codices in 6th. It means that older dex's will not languish so long in obscurity. Once more armies make it into 6th then we should see some kind of leveling off at the top competitive levels (hopefully). Until then, each new codex will be the flavour (and most likely the top contender) of the month.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

Niexist wrote:
The only thing that is a bit discouraging to me is when I look at tournament results. It seems to always be the same 2 or 3 armies in the top 25.

Until the next book comes out, then the new dexes rule. When the books came out slower, there was a little more.spread in the results because the new shininess had time to wear off and people had time.to learn how to counter new threats.

Not to say your wrong about your point of new codexes being better, but let's look at the results from NOVA open.

Top 30
Eldar
Tau
Tau
Eldar
Tau
IG
DA
Tau
Grey Knights
Tau
Tau
Necrons
Daemons
Necrons
Eldar
Daemons
Eldar
Daemons
Eldar
Eldar
Eldar
Daemons
Daemons
Daemons
Tau
Blood Angels
Daemons
Daemons
Eldar
Tau

Now, the two most recently released codexes prior to this tournament if I'm not mistaken were Dark Angels, and Chaos Space Marines, yet you can clearly see only 1 Dark Angel player made it to the top 30. There are only 6 players TOTAL that are not using Eldar, Daemons, or Tau. Those are NOT the most recent codexes, so perhaps you'd like to rephase your statement?

Niexist wrote:
There are only 6 players TOTAL that are not using Eldar, Daemons, or Tau. Those are NOT the most recent codexes, so perhaps you'd like to rephase your statement?

Err, what are you talking about? Eldar/Tau/Demons are the most recent codices (C:SM was not out yet). And I'm sure it's a complete coincidence that those were the most common armies.

And Dark Angels still made it into the top 10. And the newer dexes (Eldar, Tau, Daemons) seem to dominate in numbers and rankings. FotM players?

 Peregrine wrote:

Niexist wrote:
There are only 6 players TOTAL that are not using Eldar, Daemons, or Tau. Those are NOT the most recent codexes, so perhaps you'd like to rephase your statement?

Err, what are you talking about? Eldar/Tau/Demons are the most recent codices (C:SM was not out yet). And I'm sure it's a complete coincidence that those were the most common armies.

Well, guess I'm wrong then, I thought Dark Angel, and Chaos Space Marine were the most recent.

Why is this becoming so off-topic?

And yes, I realize I'm just being pessimistic and everything about 'Nids right now but even if not as a whole, in my group's meta the army is fairly underpowered compared to the others, most of which by now have been updated (only 3 other players still have 5th edition codices and they barely play) and I don't remember who but I saw someone talking about how good flyrant lists are (they are don't get me wrong they're actually really solid lists) and then saying that Tyranids have so many competitive lists, that's one not many.

And to the more recent posters saying that the more recent dexes were so 'flavor of the month' and while that was definitely not true during the start of 6th it's much more true with these last three dexes. Even with that being said, Eldar especially have been getting their weaknesses make public and have had their shortcomings noticed (Howling Banshees for one have been somewhat nerfed which makes me happy). Tau I still haven't seen many new weaknesses which is disappointing since the person I can play against most is a Tau player who tends to be WAAC.

One of the reasons I don't know 'Nid strengths and weaknesses as well as I should is just because I don't have a BRB because I have been spending most of my money on my computer, video games, or hobbying supplies/models.

I've definitely learned two lessons from this: don't post negative topics and don't ever mention GW because a lot of people (including me sometimes) hate GW for no reason.

 darthnatus wrote:


I've definitely learned two lessons from this: don't post negative topics and don't ever mention GW because a lot of people (including me sometimes) hate GW for no reason.

Oh, you're absolutely correct; we should praise GW at every opportunity for being given the chance to even play their game.

Because discussing openly and objectively the pros and cons and balance issues of 40k means we hate GW for no reason.

 Blacksails wrote:

 darthnatus wrote:


I've definitely learned two lessons from this: don't post negative topics and don't ever mention GW because a lot of people (including me sometimes) hate GW for no reason.

Oh, you're absolutely correct; we should praise GW at every opportunity for being given the chance to even play their game.

Because discussing openly and objectively the pros and cons and balance issues of 40k means we hate GW for no reason.

How about when people (and yes, including me because I complain a ton) want to complain about how imbalanced and unfair (obviously and it's complicated) 40k is, they just stop playing for a while and try to work around the things that aren't in their favor. And I just focus more on the hobby part of it because like most people who are fans of 40k (at least I hope) I love the hobby and my feelings about the game are mixed because when I lose I'm not exactly enjoying it a ton compared to when I'm winning. And let's start by not having these topics anymore, I didn't realize what I was doing when I started this topic because you shouldn't have huge discussions about something like 40k balance issues that clearly won't be fixed anytime soon. And after that, we can stop attacking other posting and making snarky comments like a dirty shizno.

so you don't own a copy of the rules and admit you don't have a firm grasp of the main rules or the rules for your army, and you're complaining about how your army is underperforming?

I think your argument just got a lot weaker. Familiarity with the rules does help.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
so you don't own a copy of the rules and admit you don't have a firm grasp of the main rules or the rules for your army, and you're complaining about how your army is underperforming?

I think your argument just got a lot weaker. Familiarity with the rules does help.

I just said that, and I have read through the rules before I just don't own a rulebook and am therefore unable to use the full extent of the army. Can this topic end? I know that familiarity with the rules helps I'm not mentally ill I just don't own a BRB and complain when I get my ass kicked repeatedly by freaking Eldar. Although it's really easy to wreck their gak with Ymgarls which is always fun. I have been finding more ways to effectively field 'Nids and I will keep searching for new ways to use them until the new 'Dex comes out in January(?) and I start collecting again (right now I'm working on my BA army, they're around 1000 or 1250 because proxy ICs)

Being unfamiliar with the rules doesn't make the game out of balance. No where did we claim you were mentally ill or anything like that. However, starting another GW sucks thread based on a weak understanding of the game and your specific rules makes this 3 page thread moot.

Thanks for playing, have a nice day!

Niexist wrote:
The only thing that is a bit discouraging to me is when I look at tournament results. It seems to always be the same 2 or 3 armies in the top 25.

We can probably thank the interwebz for that. Once a list wins a major tourney, its up online for all to copy. The problem is, this copy-cat mentality has reduced the number of different builds, as who wants to waste time experimenting when they can just copy the last big winner, tweak a single unit, and call it their own.

Legitimate complaints =/= whining.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
We can probably thank the interwebz for that. Once a list wins a major tourney, its up online for all to copy. The problem is, this copy-cat mentality has reduced the number of different builds, as who wants to waste time experimenting when they can just copy the last big winner, tweak a single unit, and call it their own.

This is a bad argument. If making your own list was a successful strategy then people would do it and win prizes. We don't see that happening very much because 40k is a very shallow game and the community very quickly figures out the best units and lists. Doing anything but copying a netlist is just lowering your chances of winning.