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.

Short version
I tried to look up tournament results for all 2015 40k tournaments and found that theres no place that has a listing of all named tourneys and results. So the next best thing is to ask you guys, what are the rankings based on tournament performance and overall perceived codex strength of all current factions (codices/supplements) in 40k?

Long version
recently I played a game versus my friend an Astra Militarum (so hard not to call them Imperial Guard...) player. Where I fielded my Grey Knights army (second time playing them since new codex). My friend quit 40k long ago, and as a returning player we kept it simple at 1,000 pts. His army had some infantry, a basilisk, a leman russ battle tank, a vendetta and a chimera for his command squad. My Grey Knights were 2 full units of interceptors, a 5-man strike squad bare bones and a 5-man terminator squad bare bones and a brother captain.

I figured it should be an easy win for him since to my knowledge and online research Grey Knights in power armour are the worst of the worst in the new GK codex. Considering he had a bunch of AP3 pie plates I figured it would be a short fun game to get his feet wet and a foolproof Guard victory. I got first turn, deployed my interceptors combat squads shunted turn 1 right to his door and incinerated most of his infantry. A fun little gimmick I thought and basically waited for him to crush my guys with pie plates.

Long story short, I ended up winning the game by a landslide. My friend felt that I used a tournament list for a friendly game and that it was Grey Knights cheese (to his recollection Grey Knights from 5th ed were the boogieman). I told him that it was the complete opposite and that from my perspective his army list was much more competitive than mine and that Astra Militarum is used more frequently in competitive play than Grey Knights. And is in my opinion a much stronger faction in current 40k competitive meta.

How would you guys list then in proper order. Please try to avoid basing everything off rumors or bias.

For example: I LOVE Tyranids and by all means they are my #1 favorite army, but even I know they've been shafted one too many times and the codex is not a strong one, even though I've seen tournament results that show Tyranids attending and even winning several. I still wouldn't put tyranids in the top 10 of current competitive factions.

I hear Eldar and Tau are killing it right now. But I actually own these armies aswell even if I haven't played a single game of 40k with their new codices, I read through them worked out some lists and I can def see that there's a lot of power gaming potential there. So I'd place them in top 10 because I can back what I've heard about them, with what I've read up in their new codex.

IG are pretty awful in 7E, both because of the core rules and having been overshadowed by far more powerful books.

Oldzoggy's chart actually tracks about how most people would answer pretty well. Eldar, Necrons, SM's, and Tau are rising very high, while armies like CSM's, Harlies, IG, BA's, GK's, etc are largely left in the dust.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/680065.page

This is my personal opinion, and im gonna put them in groups.

Hard not to be Broken: Eldar
Strong Baseline, hard to screw up: Necrons, Space Marines, Dark Angels, Cult Mechanicus, Skitarii
Good if you know what you're doing: Grey Knights, Imperial Guard (with their Mont'ka Formations), Harlequins, Tyranids, Sisters of Battle, Chaos Daemons, Khorne Daemonkin, Tau
Can be good, but a lot is bad: Dark Eldar, Orks, Blood Angels
Are in a really bad spot right now: Chaos Space Marines

Note that i am not speaking from a tournament perspective, im talking from a casual one that focuses on making a decent TAC list.

Most of the "Good if you know what you're doing" list has multiple decent builds that can compete with the "Strong Baseline" group. Sisters of Battle are largely the exception here, but they have such a small unit selection that making lists that seem drastically different is hard in the first place. In any case their 1 basic build is solid and is fluffy on top of it.

The Can be Good list has large, glaring issues and are very difficult to play and cant compete properly in the current meta. Orks in particular are odd, depending on your meta they could shift up or down a level.

I know some people will disagree with me on the Tau, but the Tau do actually require you to know what you are doing. Though spamming 3 Riptides is still potent, its gotten less useful.

Judging from what I've seen and played against it goes

Top tier: Eldar (Warp Spiders, Scatterbikes, Wraithknight, Tau allies), Necrons (Decurion, but may struggle in Maelstrom games), Tau (Utterly hilarious firepower), SMs (Gladius Strike Force is God in Maelstrom).
Upper mid: AdMech and Skitarii (Some of their formations are really good), Chaos Daemons (Screamerstars still work), DAs, GKs, SWs, KDK.
Lower mid: DE (not much experience with them, hear experienced players can have really good results), BAs, Harlequins, IG.
Scrub tier: Orks, Nids, CSMs.

I have no idea where the SoBs go.

Tier 1: Eldar, Necrons, SM, DA, Tau
Tier 2: Chaos Demons, Admech/Skitarii, Knights, SWs, Nids
Tier 3: GKs, IG, DE, Harlequins
Tier 4: Orks, CSM

Asura Varuna wrote:
Tier 1: Eldar, Necrons, SM, DA, Tau
Tier 2: Chaos Demons, Admech/Skitarii, Knights, SWs, Nids
Tier 3: GKs, IG, DE, Harlequins
Tier 4: Orks, CSM

I agree with this list. Plus at this point, the armies that I feel need to be fixed first are Tau (too powerful), Orks and CSM (needs buffing). And SM could do with a little bit of a nerf, though they're generally pretty good at the moment.

 IllumiNini wrote:

Asura Varuna wrote:
Tier 1: Eldar, Necrons, SM, DA, Tau
Tier 2: Chaos Demons, Admech/Skitarii, Knights, SWs, Nids
Tier 3: GKs, IG, DE, Harlequins
Tier 4: Orks, CSM

I agree with this list. Plus at this point, the armies that I feel need to be fixed first are Tau (too powerful), Orks and CSM (needs buffing). And SM could do with a little bit of a nerf, though they're generally pretty good at the moment.

The list also reads most powerful - least powerful left to right as well as in the actual tiers. Seems odd that you'd want to nerf the Tau and not the Eldar or Necrons, who have both been more broken and for longer. I'm basing these power ratings with ITC FAQ taken into account. I just realised I forgot to include KDK, but they'd sit at the top of Tier 3. CSM simply need a complete and utter overhaul to bring them into the meta. It's not even just a matter of a few points breaks or a few special rules from formations - the whole design paradigm of the codex is clunky and dated and needs to be reworked from the ground up. I think Orks are probably in the same boat there.

Asura Varuna wrote:
The list also reads most powerful - least powerful left to right as well as in the actual tiers. Seems odd that you'd want to nerf the Tau and not the Eldar or Necrons, who have both been more broken and for longer. I'm basing these power ratings with ITC FAQ taken into account. I just realised I forgot to include KDK, but they'd sit at the top of Tier 3. CSM simply need a complete and utter overhaul to bring them into the meta. It's not even just a matter of a few points breaks or a few special rules from formations - the whole design paradigm of the codex is clunky and dated and needs to be reworked from the ground up. I think Orks are probably in the same boat there.

Well I can't speak to Eldar since I haven't read their codex, seen them played or played against them. As for Tau, I've been tabled by Tau in a 2,000 point game and only destroyed 1x Riptide and 2x Pathfinder models (not squads - models). The half a dozen other games I've played against Tau have yielded similar results. As for Necrons, I've been on roughly par with them (using my BT army), the Necrons usually having a slight advantage. So based on my experience with Necrons, I don't think they need to be nerfed, though I could put that down to my opponents not using particularly OP lists.

And I definitely agree with you in regards to the CSM codex. As far as KDK, I can't speak to them because, like the Eldar, I know nothing about them.

Eldar, Necrons, Deamons, and Space Marines are the big 4. With Tau coming in a far 5th as an upper mid tier as of the last year of ITC and other tournaments data. Even newer data suggests this and the gap between higher armies and mid tier armies is widening with all of their updates. Consequently Tau is in a weird spot where it can stomp anything lower than it but doesn't have much of a chance to win an ITC tournament.

The Tau are almost in their own weird tier at his point. Tier 1.5 compared to Tier 1. Admech/Skitarri lists would be in the 1.5 tier as well.

 IllumiNini wrote:
Well I can't speak to Eldar since I haven't read their codex, seen them played or played against them. As for Tau, I've been tabled by Tau in a 2,000 point game and only destroyed 1x Riptide and 2x Pathfinder models (not squads - models). The half a dozen other games I've played against Tau have yielded similar results. As for Necrons, I've been on roughly par with them (using my BT army), the Necrons usually having a slight advantage. So based on my experience with Necrons, I don't think they need to be nerfed, though I could put that down to my opponents not using particularly OP lists.

And I definitely agree with you in regards to the CSM codex. As far as KDK, I can't speak to them because, like the Eldar, I know nothing about them.

This is largely my findings. Ive never had a problem with Necrons as their entire shtick is "really durable". On top of this none of their units stand out as OMGWTFBBQ Op like the Wraithnight or Scatbikes. Tau i just hate fighting cuz i play Orks and Orks have always hated Tau, my Tzeentch Daemons on the other hand didnt mind and my SoB dont care all that much either.

 Gamgee wrote:
The Tau are almost in their own weird tier at his point. Tier 1.5 compared to Tier 1. Admech/Skitarri lists would be in the 1.5 tier as well.

Agreed the Ad Mech armies bounce around depending on how they're built.

Most of the Necron hate I see is due to people wanting to remove models from the table with a snow shovel and it just doesn't happen against Necrons. Plus the big meta weapons (grav, etc) tend to be far less effective against their multiple saves. You're much better off playing to the scenario than trying to table them, but a lot of people don't seem to cope well with this idea.

prrety similar thread pops up regularly. Accepted rankings are
1: eldar
2-4: SM/Tau/Necrons, depending on which army the person ranking them plays
5: Deamons

See similar post http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/680678.page#8468655

As for stuff bellow the top 5, in no particular order (because you'll get a different answer based on the poster bias to their own army)
upper mid: DA, SWs, Nids(flying circus barely keeps them here), Admech/Skitarii, Knights, KDK
lower mid: DE, IG, GK, Harliquins, Sisters
Bottom Teir: BA, Orks
OMFG help us: CSM

I'm not ranking oddities such as Tempestus or random supplements such as Assassins.

Of course every other person you ask with probably have a slight change to this.

 pwntallica wrote:
prrety similar thread pops up regularly. Accepted rankings are
1: eldar
2-4: SM/Tau/Necrons, depending on which army the person ranking them plays
5: Deamons

See similar post http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/680678.page#8468655

As for stuff bellow the top 5, in no particular order (because you'll get a different answer based on the poster bias to their own army)
upper mid: DA, SWs, Nids(flying circus barely keeps them here), Admech/Skitarii, Knights, KDK
lower mid: DE, IG, GK, Harliquins, Sisters
Bottom Teir: BA, Orks
OMFG help us: CSM

I'm not ranking oddities such as Tempestus or random supplements such as Assassins.

Of course every other person you ask with probably have a slight change to this.

Well, it's pretty much a near universally held truth that Chaos Marines are the game's weakest army.

BA players can try to claim CSM's are better off, but they're completely wrong... BA's at least work solidly in non-competitive metas. Chaos Marines don't even get to do that, unless you stick entirely to Codex: Nurgle + Drakes.

 RuneGrey wrote:
Most of the Necron hate I see is due to people wanting to remove models from the table with a snow shovel and it just doesn't happen against Necrons.

It's more not being able to do *anything* and then having their entire army in your deployment zone turn 2.

There's a difference between not being able to wipe them off the table with a snow shovel, and not being able to do anything meaningful at all against them. When you get something like a basic 13pt Necron Warrior being nearly as resilient against small arms fire as a 40pt Terminator and actually more resilient against stuff like plasma guns or demolisher cannons, and Wraith units that take more S10 fire to kill than a Titan (or literally enough Lasgun fire to slay half a company of Space Marines), it's hard for that army *not* to be extraordinarily powerful when an opponent just can't do anything meaningful to such a force, and playing to the scenario only does so much good when the Necron army can largely do whatever it wants without your actions being able to affect them because they just shrug off everything thrown at them.

When you can't interact with the opponent's army, you can't play to the scenario well either.

My meta doesn't have any Eldar players, so I won't speak to them based only on speculation, but Necrons, SM, Tau, and Demons are pretty well-balanced against each other. I haven't played our SW player since their new supplement dropped, but the rules looked promising to me. DA can hold their own when played well. Everything else struggles mightily against the top-tier armies.

Nothing beats data analysis.

Here is a great analysis from LVO 2016, its VERY clear who are competitive and who are not.

"...top spots are the domain of Eldar, Space Marine, Necron and Daemon players – all others need not apply, or are at the very least facing a very uphill battle."

http://variancehammer.com/2016/02/19/number-crunching-the-lvo/

Great work by Variancehammer

That data analysis is awesome!! thanks

Some updated analysis from Warzone Atlanta. There will also be new stuff from LVO next year: http://variancehammer.com/2016/12/10/warzone-atlanta-crunching-the-numbers/

 VarianceHammer wrote:
Some updated analysis from Warzone Atlanta. There will also be new stuff from LVO next year: http://variancehammer.com/2016/12/10/warzone-atlanta-crunching-the-numbers/

Thanks for sharing that. It was an interesting read, and I had not previously heard of your site.

10 months? Seems like we have an epic-level Thread Necromancer here.

Dude's trying to build a numerical model for analysing tournament results. Seems like a worthy necro to me.

EnTyme wrote:10 months? Seems like we have an epic-level Thread Necromancer here.

I thought it was likely more useful in an old thread that was on topic than a new thread every time I come up with something.

BBAP wrote:Dude's trying to build a numerical model for analysing tournament results. Seems like a worthy necro to me.

adamsouza wrote:

 VarianceHammer wrote:
Some updated analysis from Warzone Atlanta. There will also be new stuff from LVO next year: http://variancehammer.com/2016/12/10/warzone-atlanta-crunching-the-numbers/

Thanks for sharing that. It was an interesting read, and I had not previously heard of your site.

My pleasure. Glad it was useful to you.

I always find it funny that people rank DA so high when I have so much trouble with them, but then I realize I'm doing it wrong because I use terminators. All the good DA list either use Lion's blade or a gimmicky deathstar bike list, often pairing with space wolves.

Well, looks now CSM will have their revenge on said powerlevel lists!

For Daemons, isnt the upper-tier ranking only for Tzeench psyker spam, with the other factions being much weaker?

 Colonel17 wrote:
For Daemons, isnt the upper-tier ranking only for Tzeench psyker spam, with the other factions being much weaker?

Generally, although I've had some success with the other units.

 Gamgee wrote:
Eldar, Necrons, Deamons, and Space Marines are the big 4. With Tau coming in a far 5th as an upper mid tier as of the last year of ITC and other tournaments data. Even newer data suggests this and the gap between higher armies and mid tier armies is widening with all of their updates. Consequently Tau is in a weird spot where it can stomp anything lower than it but doesn't have much of a chance to win an ITC tournament.

The Tau are almost in their own weird tier at his point. Tier 1.5 compared to Tier 1. Admech/Skitarri lists would be in the 1.5 tier as well.

Agreed 100%. Tau's inability to deal with psychic shenanigans keeps them from being a top tier army. They end up being glass cannons that can't kill things. ITC also gimps tau deliberately by not allowing them to use their best formation (heavy retribution Cadre).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Colonel17 wrote:
For Daemons, isnt the upper-tier ranking only for Tzeench psyker spam, with the other factions being much weaker?

yeah but Tzeench incusrions warpflame host with fly circus is easily the most powerful army in the game.

kingbobbito wrote:I always find it funny that people rank DA so high when I have so much trouble with them, but then I realize I'm doing it wrong because I use terminators. All the good DA list either use Lion's blade or a gimmicky deathstar bike list, often pairing with space wolves.

If it helps any, in 100% of the tournaments I have played in this year, I am The Worst Eldar Player. And it should be noted that this went off primary faction, so a DA Bikestar list with Space Wolves, Saint Celestine and a Imperial Knight (as a hypothetical) count as "Dark Angels".

Colonel17 wrote:For Daemons, isnt the upper-tier ranking only for Tzeench psyker spam, with the other factions being much weaker?

Likely, but there isn't the data (or really enough data even if I had it) to sub-divide most factions.

Forgive raising this thread from the grave once more, but it feels more appropriate to occasionally bump it than to start this anew...

I've done the number crunching for 2017's LVO. There's been some *significant* shakeups: http://variancehammer.com/2017/02/19/lvo-2017-analysis-doom-of-the-eldar/

Eldar and SM are by far the most powerful armies in 40k, followed by Tau, Necrons and Daemons.

Then there are some mid tiers like SW, IK, Genestealers, Ravenwing and probably Ad Mech/Skitarii.

The rest of the armies are on the same level.

If you take competitive lists orks, tyrandis and dark eldars for example can defeat some mid tiers armies without relying on an insane amount of luck. I think grey knights, sisters and blood angels are among the worst, but I'm not considering the new celestine, probably I can include the Astra Militarum too.

The problem is that many bottom tier armies are played with completely fluffy list so you can have a wrong perception of them. Orks can be tough with bullyboyz and troop bikers, dark eldar with many reavers and the corpsethief claw can surprise everyone, tyranids with lots of flyers are hard to deal with.