Top tier armies?

[Luke Von Carstein]

Now the vampire counts are down what would everyone consider the new top tier armies to be for 8th edition?

 

[Tamodan Varison]

My personal shot? Dark Elves, Empire and Dwarfs.

 

[Didymus13]

BoLS has just that article here: http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2010/07/wfb-how-mighty-have-fallen.html

and a VC rebuttle: http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2010/07/wfb-rebuttal-vampire-counts-are-top.html

 

[Capt Rubber Ducky]

Dark elves and High elves are near the top in my opinion, with warriors of chaos and deamons somewhere nearby, I haven't had a lot of time to look at deamons but they've still got to be up there.

Thinking about it this isn't nearly as clear cut as it used to be.

 

[witchking1980]

With the 8th edition I have played against High Elves and Empire so I cannot say a thing about other armies.

High Elves go to the top, White Lions and Swordmasters are OUCH in one on one situations, their magic is strong, their chariots are also very good.
Empire has many and very cheap choices. So, prepare yourselves for many troops in horde formations. Warrior Priests give Dispel dice and they can be annoying, their artillery especially mortars are very dangerous especially for us.

 

[Gneisenau]

Empire got a massive boost thanks to "steadfast" and the new artillery rules. Their cheap heroes are not to be sneered at, either. Their arguably best unit (War Altar) has become better since autokilling of chariots is gone. I think the new psychology rules benefit Empire as well, since they were on the receiving end in 7th edition.

I'm not quite sure about VC yet. My first thought was that they were seriously downgraded, thanks to the loss of Invocation-spamming. But it might be that the balance has just shifted within the army. For example, "Forbidden Lore" is much better now in my opinion.

 

[Angel]

I think it's a bit early to establish any tiers just yet. The rules haven't been out a week yet, and are tiers really that important?

 

[Count Lasombra]

I like that VC is no longer considered a "top tier" army.I guess it's the underdog thing--makes victory sweeter.That's why it's great playing O&G.
I also think that O&G is gonna surprise some people this edition.

 

[Count Darvaleth]

Definitely High Elves. I just watched a Horde of Swordmasters muller a huge Horde of Chaos warriors, which had loads of upgrades. ASF and GW and 3 ranks of attacks means enemy=dead.

Also their spearmen are now nigh-on unkillable in hordes.


Whereas VCs..... right down near the bottom, if not the very bottom.

 

[Gneisenau]

I'm withholding final judgment until I've seen the effects of three Purple Suns of Xereus being cast in a single turn.

 

[Santawraith]

With just reading the rules and no play testing high elves and empire get my vote. But that is without playtesting and anything can look good on paper.

 

[Count Darvaleth]

I'm withholding final judgment until I've seen the effects of three Purple Suns of Xereus being cast in a single turn.

Good luck with that. I've played three games using Death, and I didn't manage to get a single sun off.

 

[HERO]

BoLS has just that article here: http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2010/07/wfb-how-mighty-have-fallen.html

and a VC rebuttle: http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2010/07/wfb-rebuttal-vampire-counts-are-top.html

Looks like you guys found my article!

Anyways, check out the newest ones..
http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2010/07/wfb-8th-ed-army-reviews-part-13.html

and... Part 2 should be out sometime around noon tomorrow...

And if you guys want to see what the new tier list looks like after the FAQs, check it out on my blog:

http://lkhero.blogspot.com/2010/07/new-8th-ed-army-predictions.html

Believe it or not, VC aren't that bad
(those armies are not in order)

 

[Onikaigo]

I honestly think the entire 'Tier' system is over rated. Sure, there are some armies that can function better than others given the circumstances, but I think Generalship counts a lot more toward victory than anything else.

I've lost against some very, very poorly designed armies simply because I got overconfident, or my opponent was simply that much better than I was. So, my Tier is simple:

Good General + Rounded list= Tier one
Good General + One trick Pony= Tier Two
Ok General + Good Army = Tier Three
Ok General + Bad Army = Tier Four
Bad General + Anything = Tier Five

The armies themselves (Minus the standout 7'th edition Daemons) only matter as much as the general telling them what to do.

My two cents anyways, it's a bit hard to really explain my point of view on this topic concisely.

 

[Brian Mage]

Not sure why i'm saying this, i'm sure to get shot down...
but here goes.

I still think Vamps will be top tier
Vargulf and Black Coach Buff
Stepping up (esp against HE's etc)
Forbidden Lore - Massive boost
Controlable Blood Knights
35pt 4+ ward with rerollable stupid test on 10 (bsb bubble)
Helm of commandment Hordes (WS6 Zombies with 30 attacks for 120pts?)

i do think the bound items are nerfed, but thats only my view of bound items as a whole, and its the same for everyone (VC's just had access to lots of awesome ones)

yeah, VC's did not get as many boosts as other armies, but i'm pretty sure they'll be fine

General consensus from my pals so far is that HE's are up there

all above was wrote without the 99th FAQ info

 

[Gladius Rex]

I think until we start seeing army books come out, we are in the limbo land of cross edition rules, with only mild errata pages to patch them. I suspect when our army book comes out, we will return to high/mid tier.

i think the O&G got substantially better. I think the HE are now the elite army of choice since as ussual, they get to ignore every rule ever made and ASF with GW and high Init score now grants a reroll? Its like Hatred only better... OMG!

if I had to rank em based on what Ive seen

1. High Elf
2. Demons
3. Empire
4. Dwarf
5. Dark Elf
6. Wood Elf
7. Skaven
8. Orcs and Gobbos
9. Vampire Counts
10.Brettonia
11. Ogre Kingdom
12. Tomb Kings

Now this is based mostly off seeing 2000-3000 pt games. I am sure at higher and lower pt values that things change a bit.

 

[Tamodan Varison]

1. High Elf
2. Demons
3. Empire
4. Dwarf
5. Dark Elf
6. Wood Elf
7. Skaven
8. Orcs and Gobbos
9. Vampire Counts
10.Brettonia
11. Ogre Kingdom
12. Tomb Kings

Tiers and stuff are very dificult, but one thing is sure (for me), wood elves are definately the worst army out there at the moment...

 

[Yanda]

Tier 0
1. Skaven

Tier 1
2. WoC
3. Empire
4. Lizardmen

Tier 2
5. Dark Elves
6. High Elves
7. Dwarves
8. DoC

Tier 3
9. Beastmen
10. Chaos Dwarves
11. Orcs and Goblins
12. Vampire Counts
13. Ogre

Tier 4
14. Tomb Kings
15. Brettonia
16. Wood Elves

 

[Danceman]

I honestly think the entire 'Tier' system is over rated. Sure, there are some armies that can function better than others given the circumstances, but I think Generalship counts a lot more toward victory than anything else.

I agree on the latter part.

However, putting armies into a tier system means we put the armies in the hands of experienced players far and wide and distinguish the armies which needs very little "skill" while on the oppsite side an army who require a very good understanding of movement and such.
So on that account I am not sure if I'd use the word overrated and instead just think of it as a generalised tiering of power level of army book as far as curning out the toughest lists they can.

Generalship matters but sometimes you quite simply do not have the tools for the task at hand.

That said I think it is way too soon to tier the armies in 8th edition as I write this. Not enough games and players are still adjusting to the new edition... Well, I am

 

[Chunky Von Waffles]

I honestly doubt that Vampire Counts got hit that hard to be thrown to the bottom of tier 3.
Especially BEHIND O&G, Beastmen, and...Chaos Dwarfs?

I really don't think Tiers are an appropriate way to measure armies.

Tiers came from GW's inability to properly playtest the armies and units.
Resulting in armies...

Going from to o.o

Going from :'( to

Going from to :grave:

Going from to or :mad2:


Which then resulted in forums/groups making a chart based off of how unhappy/happy the players were of the changes to their army.

Happy in that case would relate to being boosted and unhappy would relate to being nerfed.

In conclusion...Tiers should not exist and measuring "armies" should only be based upon the player (General) and army composition.

However, poor playtesting, and more thoughts on money than the game concludes with the creation of Tiers.
All in all, it's GW's fault

 

[Gneisenau]

Tiers came from GW's inability to properly playtest the armies and units.
Resulting in armies...

Going from to o.o

Going from :'( to

Going from to :grave:

Going from to or :mad2:

Well put!

Armies have always been rising and falling, from butt monkey to overpowered and back. I guess most people would agree that VC were the third or second most powerfull army in 7th edition, leading to the the proverb of the "big three". Just because we've dropped in power doesn't mean we aren't competitive any more.

 

[Chunky Von Waffles]

Indeed, no army is never "non-viable".

It's simply a matter of learning the ins and outs of your army and especially your enemy.
And of course, a new edition means taking a step back, take a deep breath, and start thinking about how the rules will affect you, how it will effect your enemy, and how it will effect the entire game itself.

It is a new Rulebook after all, not just an Errata.

 

[Gladius Rex]

I dont know if I totally agree that tiers do not exist. Ive seen very skilled players try winning games with O&G in 7th ed and it just rarely rarely happened, yet when they fielded their DE army, they would win about every time.

I know playing VCs in 7th ed, I felt like I had two lists that would beat almost any list i came across, and i had about 10 other lists that would put up a good fight against anything, and of course a few bad idea lists that I did for fun, but even those werent completely hopeless. (like the time I fielded all my Heros and Lord with the Scout power and launched them all into the same enemy artillery the first round)

I think that any given rules set causes a bit of imbalance, in fact, i sort of expect it. sometimes you get the better end of things and you move up, other times, you get a shaft and you move down. I don't think any army is hopeless (I did see O&G lauch 25 fanatacs at a HE army once... didnt go so well for the HE that time) but I would say that some armies will have an easier time against most foes, and other armies will really have to struggle to keep their nose above water. We may have become the latter of the two, where before we were the former.

 

[Disciple of Nagash]

I actually think the armies do fit into tiers. If the same person plays with different armies some do have more potent combinations than others, there is no doubt about that. Can anyone deny how powerful DoC were in the last edition.

Currently I think we have gone to about mid-tier, now as powerful (over powered?) as we were, but still have the potential to win. e just to need adjust our tactics and thinking.

 

[N.I.B]

Tiers. There are many different kinds of Warhammer. Which one is this discussion referring to? With or without composition points? With or without restrictions? With or without Special Characters?