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.

Hi,

I'm tempted by 40k, but I have a few questions that google has been unable to answer. In regards to tournaments, what is the general state of 40k and the lists that are competitive? I'm aware there are balance issues, but most games do anyways so I'm not bothered by that. But is there at least a choice as to which brand of top tier lists you can bring? For example I'm aware that Eldar are one of the best competitive armies right now. Within the Eldar selection, are these top builds limited to a handful of models spammed or do Eldar players have choice on how they are competitive.

I ask mostly because I am curious how much tactical flexibility there is when it comes to competitive list building. Can unique lists do very well or have all the competitive options been mapped out already.

If you're not spamming scatter bikes and wraithknights or min-maxing gladius strike force razorbacks, you are at a considerable competitive disadvantage.

I hope there's more to it than that? It is one of the most popular sci-fi games for a reason?

In the games current state, tournament competitive lists are pretty set in stone, they don't change much between the same race/s...

Aye, keep in mind you can do damned well with necrons space wolves and tau.

40Ks popularity arises from it's lore and fluff, not it's mechanics. It's one of the most lamented aspects of the game. The models are great, the setting is great but for whatever reason, GW are loathe to make the effort to make the rules really solid or balanced.

Anathir wrote:
I hope there's more to it than that? It is one of the most popular sci-fi games for a reason?

For the visuals and background, not for solid rules. The rules are abysmal, and balance is probably worse than its ever been. GW is pretty open about this, stating in their yearly report to shareholders that they are a model company making pretty things for collectors, not a game studio, despite the name. Rules quality is a solidly tertiary issue for them.

40K is big because of its background and the inertia of yesteryear, not because GW puts out a solid gaming ruleset for it.

Anathir wrote:Hi,

I'm tempted by 40k, but I have a few questions that google has been unable to answer. In regards to tournaments, what is the general state of 40k and the lists that are competitive? I'm aware there are balance issues, but most games do anyways so I'm not bothered by that. But is there at least a choice as to which brand of top tier lists you can bring? For example I'm aware that Eldar are one of the best competitive armies right now. Within the Eldar selection, are these top builds limited to a handful of models spammed or do Eldar players have choice on how they are competitive.

I ask mostly because I am curious how much tactical flexibility there is when it comes to competitive list building. Can unique lists do very well or have all the competitive options been mapped out already.

Every edition of the game has essentially boiled down to a handful of builds from a handful of codices dominating at the expense of everyone else.

Anathir wrote:I hope there's more to it than that? It is one of the most popular sci-fi games for a reason?

Legacy effect.

It's been there since the 80s and for the longest time. It really was the only game in town. You played forty-k, or you didn't play. And the network effect (people play 40k because... People play 40k) is a big factor. It's less true these last five years, but 40k still has a lot of momentum built up.

Oh, and lore is a big thing too. Post a 'why do you play?' Thread and you'll get a hell of a lot of people pointing to the lore as the thing that hooks them and keeps them interested.

People are forgetting Daemons. Screamerstars are still a thing. To have any chance of winning a tournament you're Eldar, SMs, or Daemons. Tau might be improving and joining their ranks.

If you want tournament play and good, solid rules, don't look to 40k. It's fun, but it's not balanced.

The top lists are Eldar (bikes or warp spiders) SM (Death Stars or MSU strike force) Chaos daemon summoning and Necrons

Now people talk about Tau but they have yet to be top 8 think only one in top 16 and mostly seem to be a spoiler army.

Other flavors of SM can do well DA and SW not really looked into their lists as no one local plays them. Just don't play BA.

Ad mech combo looks good on paper but not seen them win no idea if this is do to how different they are or what.

 ChazSexington wrote:
People are forgetting Daemons. Screamerstars are still a thing. To have any chance of winning a tournament you're Eldar, SMs, or Daemons. Tau might be improving and joining their ranks.

If you want tournament play and good, solid rules, don't look to 40k. It's fun, but it's not balanced.

Right. WMH is an alternative with a much tighter rule set and tournament rules (steamroller).

Thanks for the replies.

Yeah I tried WMH. Strangely enough I hated everything about that game except the tournament support from the company.

I think I'm going to give 40k a go. Just need to decide on a faction.

Unfortunately no, right now eldar are just so broken, there is no other option to be hyper competitive, but it will get fixed at some point.

Before them it was gray knights that were OP

Before them Necrons

Also, GW no longer does official tournaments because they hate dealing with the BS of stuff like eldar bike spam.

Honestly just play for fun, its so much better then sitting there arguing over an 8th of an inch in the movement phase.

Traditio wrote:
If you're not spamming scatter bikes and wraithknights or min-maxing gladius strike force razorbacks, you are at a considerable competitive disadvantage.

Na there are lots of other options.
You could also bring Grav Bikers, Screamer stars, 50+ warp spiders or all sorts of other lists you would never want to face yourselves

 Vaktathi wrote:

Anathir wrote:
I hope there's more to it than that? It is one of the most popular sci-fi games for a reason?

For the visuals and background, not for solid rules. The rules are abysmal, and balance is probably worse than its ever been. GW is pretty open about this, stating in their yearly report to shareholders that they are a model company making pretty things for collectors, not a game studio, despite the name. Rules quality is a solidly tertiary issue for them.

40K is big because of its background and the inertia of yesteryear, not because GW puts out a solid gaming ruleset for it.

They are changing the name of their GW stores to Warhammer to avoid this whole 'gaming' thing haha. It's more to do with staff continually being asked if they sell COD, Super Mario, etc etc..

@OP What you might experience (particulary in this edition) is called Listhammer. This is basically where you make a list and it's good enough to play itself. Examples include Scatterbike spam, Flyrant spam, Gladius and Thunderdome, amongst others. Skill is the thing that separates the top players from the net-listers (people who just go out and buy the latest winning list, which they can do well with because of the list, but wouldn't do nearly as well without the skill and knowledge behind it).

In regards to tournament lists themselves, most players opt for spamming over balancing a list to deal with everything. Essentially, it's like bringing a whole lot of Scissors and having too much for their Rock to deal with, which makes it easy pickings and leaves you free to rip apart the Paper the opponent brought. This is fine, until you meet the spammed Rock to your Scissors.

I'd go as far to argue that lists aren't the most important thing in a tournament, your attitude, BO and amount of beer you brought for your opponent are far, far more important.

"Honestly just play for fun, its so much better then sitting there arguing over an 8th of an inch in the movement phase. "

Personally I've found that in fantasy most of the arguments happen in "fun" games... In tournaments there is an etiquette that exists (and sports scores) (and referees) that prevents that sort of nonsense.

I read an article a while back, that pointed out that Lictor Shame, and Scout spam placed extraordinarily high at LVO 2015, despite the conventional wisdom being that both those units are garbage. It went on to argue that playing netlists/spamming over powered units will only get you so far, the guys at the very top are there because of skill.

It may be a little outdated with Gladius and Aspect Host now dominating, but I'd like to think it still holds at least partially true.

 Frozocrone wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Anathir wrote:
I hope there's more to it than that? It is one of the most popular sci-fi games for a reason?

For the visuals and background, not for solid rules. The rules are abysmal, and balance is probably worse than its ever been. GW is pretty open about this, stating in their yearly report to shareholders that they are a model company making pretty things for collectors, not a game studio, despite the name. Rules quality is a solidly tertiary issue for them.

40K is big because of its background and the inertia of yesteryear, not because GW puts out a solid gaming ruleset for it.

They are changing the name of their GW stores to Warhammer to avoid this whole 'gaming' thing haha. It's more to do with staff continually being asked if they sell COD, Super Mario, etc etc..

@OP What you might experience (particulary in this edition) is called Listhammer. This is basically where you make a list and it's good enough to play itself. Examples include Scatterbike spam, Flyrant spam, Gladius and Thunderdome, amongst others. Skill is the thing that separates the top players from the net-listers (people who just go out and buy the latest winning list, which they can do well with because of the list, but wouldn't do nearly as well without the skill and knowledge behind it).

In regards to tournament lists themselves, most players opt for spamming over balancing a list to deal with everything. Essentially, it's like bringing a whole lot of Scissors and having too much for their Rock to deal with, which makes it easy pickings and leaves you free to rip apart the Paper the opponent brought. This is fine, until you meet the spammed Rock to your Scissors.

I'd go as far to argue that lists aren't the most important thing in a tournament, your attitude, BO and amount of beer you brought for your opponent are far, far more important.

Can confirm the GW thing, my store used to get calls for pinball machines lol

But honestly take this advice that one of the old players gave me.

"It does not matter if you win or loose, just make a good movie out of it, just look like a bad ass at what ever you are doing."

And thats the point, whats more fun? Exchanging shots between tau and SM units? Or saying screw it FOR THE EMPEROR! using your HQ to lead a head on charge against a tau gun line, probably going to die, but call in either a deep strike terminator squad on them, or a drop pod with a dread and taking the chance of it breaking their line, and introducing them to power mauls and hammers.

Fun is subjective. OP may enjoy making hard lists and fighting other hard lists to determine a winner.

Different strokes and all that.

That said, 40k is quite possible the worst game for doing that, but then again, its also a terrible game for fluffy, casual gaming too.

 Blacksails wrote:
Fun is subjective. OP may enjoy making hard lists and fighting other hard lists to determine a winner.

Different strokes and all that.

That said, 40k is quite possible the worst game for doing that, but then again, its also a terrible game for fluffy, casual gaming too.

This is true, but hopefully you can just get lucky, people at my store are all about just making a bad ass battle. For example we had a zone mortalas game, and we had one player, pop his head around a corner and shoot a wall sucking an enemy out, ended up costing him like 3 units in the next turn, but it was totally awesome.

Hunam0001 wrote:
I read an article a while back, that pointed out that Lictor Shame, and Scout spam placed extraordinarily high at LVO 2015, despite the conventional wisdom being that both those units are garbage. It went on to argue that playing netlists/spamming over powered units will only get you so far, the guys at the very top are there because of skill.

It may be a little outdated with Gladius and Aspect Host now dominating, but I'd like to think it still holds at least partially true.

Indeed, they were 1st and 2nd respectively. They were great null deployment lists that caught people off guard. The guys behind them were extremely skilled. The LictorShame list general came second in LVO 2016 with Eldar/Corpsethief Claw, only losing to another Eldar list with 45 Warp Spiders - and I'm fairly sure that the Scout list general placed high as well.

I think it is outdated though, because the power level was considerably lower (IIRC, the Necron 2015 Codex was released after LVO 2015). Still, skill > lists.

The tournament environment of 40K is in shambles. No two tournaments will be the same re.: Tournament Rules, but you will face the same lists in every tournament because they are that good. Every tournament has different rules: some follow 100% the IFC rules set, others pick and choose what house rules to use. Basically, the only difference between a casual game and a tournament is that you'll have to pay money to play in a tournament. They will both have house rules depending on where you are playing.

A big question: Do you want to have fun, or do you want to win? There is this mindset called "Win at All Costs" WAAC Player. These guys spam 40 Scatterbikes and two Wraithknights. They bend the rules almost to the breaking point to win. If you play to have fun and play WAAC players, you will lose. If you go casual, then your W/L record will depend on how "casual" you play.

Echoing all the other comments here: 40K has fantastic models and fluff, but horrible, horrible rules. It's too bad you didn't like Warmachine/Hordes, as that tournament system (Steamroller) is pretty much the Gold Standard of tournament play. If you want progressive rules, look at Infinity. Infinity is a great game, but it's a skirmish game of around 5 models.

It's actually a great time to be a Table Top Gamer. We are in something of a Golden Age right now, with so many choices available. Warhammer 40K, Age of Sigmar, Warmachine, Hordes, Infinity, Flames of War, X-Wing, Star Wars Armada, Dropzone Commander, Dropfleet Commander, Firestorm Armada, Halo Fleet Wars, Star Trek Attack Wing, Dungeons and Dragons Attack Wing, Kings of War, Malifaux... I know I'm missing about a dozen more games.

Your best bet is to get along to shop or club near you, and sit through a game. Ask the locals.
As, if you are going to play against anyone, you'll be playing in their meta, and that can make a lot of difference.

Most armies have a few effective builds, based on the most effective models and units. Usually, if you like a unit, there'll be a build. If not, wait for next version, or use them anyway.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Fun is subjective. OP may enjoy making hard lists and fighting other hard lists to determine a winner.

Different strokes and all that.

That said, 40k is quite possible the worst game for doing that, but then again, its also a terrible game for fluffy, casual gaming too.

This is true, but hopefully you can just get lucky, people at my store are all about just making a bad ass battle. For example we had a zone mortalas game, and we had one player, pop his head around a corner and shoot a wall sucking an enemy out, ended up costing him like 3 units in the next turn, but it was totally awesome.

Well sure, but having good people will make watching paint dry seem enjoyable (and a 24, but ya know).

Thanks for all the replies.. I think I'm going to go with Sisters as the main force with likely Militarum Tempestus as allies/2nd CAD. I'm aware its not super competitive, but I have my reasons:

-I like the sisters theme and models but can't afford a whole army of them, nor want to paint that many of the same infantry model/tank model that many times.
-I don't want to be another space marine player, but want imperial allies that fit a logical theme.
-Between the two I'm hoping to have enough choice to build a competitive army. I'm sure everyone knows AS lacks choice.
-MT give me some AP3 shooting and that seems to be the magic number when it comes to shooting jetbikes/warpspiders/marines. Sisters seem to have the AP1 (exorcist/dominions) and the anti horde stuff.

I know this is basically a new thread but I'm interested in any related comments. If I am sounding newbish don't be harsh. I've never played or even written a list and all the information above is what I've acquired from my google-fu.