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.

So out of the top 50 armies at nova, 13 were non Imperium/chaos, with mostly ynnari/asuryani, a couple orks, couple tau and a nids player. Xenos are seriously lacking ATM. I realise that the imperium/chaos represent a lot of armies, but it's a bit frustrating as a xenos player.

Codices are coming... until then, Ave Imperator...

That's really strange, because people on the internet have been telling me how broken Necrons are with their RP. Maybe none of us Necron players have learned how to play yet.

Sarcasm aside, we got Eldar and Tyranids coming up soon. The 3 Codices so far are excellent barring some few bizarre internal balance issues though. I have optimism, though with a modicum of skepticism, for those Codices.

Also here's hoping AM get fixed real fast.

Imperium favored faction of GW, for forever? Check.

Imperium+Chaos getting their codecii before anyone else? Check.

Imperium+Chaos being able to soup their way across multiple different armies (more Imperium then Chaos (Chaos just has demons))? Check.

It's no wonder that the favored factions of forever, the ones who got their codecii first, the ones who can cherry pick the units from innumerable different army lists are beating out armies that only have a 1/3 of an Index (mainly Orks/Tau; Eldar have 2.5/3 and Tyranids have 2/3+1/3 (the best 1/3, AM)) avaliable to them. Imperium alone as 2 whole indexes, Chaos has one index, a couple Xenos get 3/3 (Eldar/Tyranids) total of an index; meanwhile a few are lucky if they have 1/3rd of an index.

We'll see what happens when the codecii land, but you can't expect much - some Xenos armies have significant issues as it currently stands.

zerosignal wrote:
Codices are coming... until then, Ave Imperator...

Until Conscripts, Celestine, and Guilliman are nerfed Imperium Soup will be top, codices or not.

Arachnofiend wrote:

zerosignal wrote:
Codices are coming... until then, Ave Imperator...

Until Conscripts, Celestine, and Guilliman are nerfed Imperium Soup will be top, codices or not.

This as much as anything else.

To be fair, we'll see what happens when Chapter Approved comes out - it's GW one opportunity to save their game (once per year; but the first one is critically important, to see if they have any idea what they're doing and re-balance as appropriate.).

Well, some of the things people want changed (guard) will have a codex out before chapter approved so that'll be a good gauge of if its getting fixed.

But yeah, codices aren't a huge part of it weirdly. They certainly help, it's the only reason chaos soup is using CSM rather than heretics and renegades+demons, but I'm honestly not sure how some of the more isolated xenos armies will be able to compete with the sheer variety present in the imperium and even chaos factions.

Yeah soup armies really benefit the two biggest factions, hell even asurani placed pretty highly, due to having a large well of models to draw from.

Ork's, tau and tyranids rounded out the xenos, and are all mono faction (nids could have a soupy army if they included GSC/IG)

But I feel that until soup gets looked at, or if xenos codex's become very powerful, we are going to be bottom of the pack for quite some time.

13/50 is pretty bad. (25% or so).

Any data on the whole tournament? If only 25% of all attendees were playing Xenos, then the 13/50 is a symptom of low popularity rather than low effectiveness.

fe40k wrote:

Imperium+Chaos getting their codecii before anyone else? Check.
.

I would actually put this as a good thing for Xenos. Traditionally books released at the beginning of an edition cycle don't hold up as well competitively as those released near the middle/end (charitably because the writers are more comfortable with the quirks of the edition, less charitably due to power creep).

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
13/50 is pretty bad. (25% or so).

Any data on the whole tournament? If only 25% of all attendees were playing Xenos, then the 13/50 is a symptom of low popularity rather than low effectiveness.

31% if my maths serves me correctly, so I suppose xenos just are under represented, but still 53/66 xenos players were the lower 162 players, skewing towards the bottom

I'm not surprised. Xenos are in a terrible spot right now. Even the Tau people in the top no doubt had 5+ commanders just like the last tournament maybe a Y'vahrah here and there.

Also when I say commander spam list they usually have a lot of troops so before the anti-tau force comes out thinking they gained an advantage over me.

Tau is doing so poor outside the Commander spam build most people are shelving them.

Also I was right about this in the lead up to 8th and told everyone exactly what was going to happen with Tau before I even played the game because I'm not an idiot and I can run the numbers in my head.

None of my detractors can ever just once admit they are wrong. Of course they couldn't. It hurts them inside to know they can make a mistake. They put on these false pretence of superiority when they in reality know nothing. When proven wrong scamper away rather than face their mistake and learn from it.

I sure hope we get some balance changes into the game soon.

We have frontline gaming to thank for such great balance and fairness because Reece thinks everything not Imperium is way too strong. He actually said crisis suits were really good with a straight face. -_- WHY would you ever take their opinions on balance seriously at this point. Almost every call they made as contested with the ITC voters themselves so GW giving them high priority in testing id ridiculous.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
13/50 is pretty bad. (25% or so).

Any data on the whole tournament? If only 25% of all attendees were playing Xenos, then the 13/50 is a symptom of low popularity rather than low effectiveness.

The assumption here is that most people at tournaments like Nova own multiple armies, and bring the one they think is the most competitive. So low popularity is equal to low (perceived) effectiveness.
Especially since there was no shortage of CWE players at big tournaments last year.

There also used to be plenty of Tau players in 7th as well.

I still think my Nids are very competitive and would pit them against most armies. I only really struggle with G-man currently because of the new stratagem that lets him kill my Swarmlord even after I kill him.
The Xenos armies will get their own unique flavors and rules but I sadly don't foresee many new units on the horizon for them.

 Gamgee wrote:


Also I was right about this in the lead up to 8th and told everyone exactly what was going to happen with Tau before I even played the game because I'm not an idiot and I can run the numbers in my head.

None of my detractors can ever just once admit they are wrong. Of course they couldn't. It hurts them inside to know they can make a mistake. They put on these false pretence of superiority when they in reality know nothing. When proven wrong scamper away rather than face their mistake and learn from it.

Um. O..... Kay.

fresus wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
13/50 is pretty bad. (25% or so).

Any data on the whole tournament? If only 25% of all attendees were playing Xenos, then the 13/50 is a symptom of low popularity rather than low effectiveness.

The assumption here is that most people at tournaments like Nova own multiple armies, and bring the one they think is the most competitive. So low popularity is equal to low (perceived) effectiveness.
Especially since there was no shortage of CWE players at big tournaments last year.

Low popularity is low perceived effectiveness, sure, but of those that did come, a reasonable representation made it into the top 50. If only 25% of all armies that showed were Xenos, and then 25% of the top 50 were Xenos, then that shows that Xenos are doing about as well as one could expect (i.e. are balanced).

So in this case, perception != reality, as the people that did bring xenos fit right in with the people who didn't, proportionally.

The people with multiple armies probably aim higher than top 50, look at top 10 or top 20 for a better metric

Sadly I lost access to the data on BCP, but were there 2 lists in the top 10 that had Xenos?

SilverAlien wrote:
Well, some of the things people want changed (guard) will have a codex out before chapter approved so that'll be a good gauge of if its getting fixed.

But yeah, codices aren't a huge part of it weirdly. They certainly help, it's the only reason chaos soup is using CSM rather than heretics and renegades+demons, but I'm honestly not sure how some of the more isolated xenos armies will be able to compete with the sheer variety present in the imperium and even chaos factions.

Well... the reason people are using CSM instead of Heretics + Daemons is because the Heretics forgeworld codex isn't very good.

Chaos have a good selection, and being able to bring daemons is good and fluffy and in no way OP as you actually need to pay points for them now. I'd say Chaos are in a good place - Not crazy overpowered and not full of pointless choices. Future codex releases should aim to be such.


Imperium, however, is a big soup of overpowered mess. Being able to have a detachment of Gulliman, alongside a detachment of Celeste, with a bunch of Tempestus scions and taurox primes, all in one "battleforged" army, is... stupid.

 Cuz05 wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:


Also I was right about this in the lead up to 8th and told everyone exactly what was going to happen with Tau before I even played the game because I'm not an idiot and I can run the numbers in my head.

None of my detractors can ever just once admit they are wrong. Of course they couldn't. It hurts them inside to know they can make a mistake. They put on these false pretence of superiority when they in reality know nothing. When proven wrong scamper away rather than face their mistake and learn from it.

Um. O..... Kay.

Want me to get my posts friendo? I'll do it. I'm crazy enough and lifeless enough to search every post I've made leading up to 8th edition launch with the Tau previews. I'll show you them.

Tau is really good right now, but your basically playing only a couple entries if you want to be good. The internal balance is awful. Compare to the Nids list and see that damn near every option is viable and playable in a number of ways.

Don't worry, Gamgee. Anyone who's been on dakka for any amount of time to click on any Tau post knows exactly how much of a Doomsayer you are. No need to threaten to dig any of it up.

Which is what I want. I want more diversity in the Tau army right now. Tau isn't "good" in a casual sense they are really terrible for most casual players right now.

At the comp level spamming commanders is weirder and less fluffy to see than Riptide Wing and Stormsurge. Also Farsight Enclaves armies are neutered to hell and back this edition with the units the way they currently are. Being an FSE player this edition has hurt hard since all I had was mostly tons of suits.

Except the "Doomsayer" was right in regards to Tau being weak instead of being balanced in 8th... so is it doom saying? Or being correct? I guess you wouldn't have much experience with the later. I was also right about 8th having some serious alpha strike problems people are now having to fix. I was wrong about how powerful commanders were though. I didn't expect them to be keeping Tau placing but they truly are crazy good right now.

Calm down. I never said you were wrong. You literally just jammed your own foot in your mouth with an attack on my "experience being correct" when you inferred a statement that doesn't exist.

Let's enjoy rule #1, shall we?

Alright I'll back off. Sorry for getting snippy there too.