PDA

View Full Version : So I've been gone a while, what's up with the crying about demons



IcedCrow
30-03-2009, 16:04
Someone educate me. I have a demon army that I've had since 5th. Was wondering about playing it again. I notice epic crying about it though. What makes the demon army more powerful than the cheddar lists of the RAF Brets, VC, or SAD Skaven?

Please give specifics. Telling me a herald is broken with a unit and that's it doesn't tell me why it's broken.

Fenrir
30-03-2009, 16:26
Oh dear. Brace yerself for incoming flak!

Neknoh
30-03-2009, 16:28
Ongoing discussion allready:
http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=190519

Very same topic

Tyranno1
30-03-2009, 16:30
Well its a combination of things that makes them broken: gifts not being one use per army and can be spammed like hell, the entire army getting a 5+ ward save at least can get rather irritating, horrors actually being mages rather than lobbing bound spells around making tiher magic phase nasty, plaguebearers become unstoppable with a herald, flamers are far too cheap for the massive damage they can inflict and are no slouchs in combat either, the entire army being reliable when it comes to bogging someone in combat and flanking them afterwards because they are all unbreakable, almost all the special characters are very underpriced for what they can do like the Masque or Epidermis.

I may have missed a few things, mabye flesh hounds being underpriced, but I havent faced them personally so I dont know much about them.

IcedCrow
30-03-2009, 16:37
Hmm ok. I see where some of that can be irritating.

However you could also look at it that they are heavy armored warriors ;) The 5+ ward save thing I don't see as a big deal. I'm used to playing against things like Terminators in 40k though.

I can see spamming gifts as an issue.

Knowing GW as I do that means 8th edition demons will not even be able to fight out of a paper bag. A khorne demon will cost 29 pts lol.

Peril
30-03-2009, 16:43
Really the only thing that I think is really awful are the Flamers. They have T4, 2 wounds, a 5+ ward and are skirmishers so shooting is not effective against them. They are not particularly vulnerable to magic as the Demon army has plenty of solid anti-magic options. With their EXTREMELY effective shooting attack anything that gets close is going to get cooked (D6 BS4 S4 magic flaming each), and the stragglers will find that they are not a pushover in combat (2 S5 attacks). You can have a total of 12 of them in a 2k game for roughly 400 points. There just are very few effective counters for them.

Everything else is just tough stuff that can be dealt with through normal tactics.

Tyranno1
30-03-2009, 16:45
Knowing GW as I do that means 8th edition demons will not even be able to fight out of a paper bag. A khorne demon will cost 29 pts lol.

I hope thats a bloodletter not a thirster your talking about :p. As GW have made a pretty penny on daemons, what with the massive amount of the best stuff in there being expensive metal, and almost all the good players buying up an army of them.

I was scared witless at the Great devourer the other day, about 40% of players had them.

I can see how 5+ ward wont scare a 40K player much :p, but here in fantasy 5+ wards are not army wide, infact good ward saves seem to be becoming more and more scarce (looks at warriors of chaos and lizardmen books).

IcedCrow
30-03-2009, 16:54
Well guys I mean... really all you can do is adapt and overcome. Every edition has had cheese. You will have powergamers who will take the most powerful armies, just like MMOs have powergamers who only play the OP classes so they can win easier.

The best feeling in the world is to take someone's OP army and then piledrive it into the table. That was my hobby for years ;) I won some. I lost some.

Bingo the Fun Monkey
30-03-2009, 17:02
The best feeling in the world is to take someone's OP army and then piledrive it into the table. That was my hobby for years ;) I won some. I lost some.

QFT. It's only a game, afterall, and there's lots of players out there.

EvC
30-03-2009, 17:02
Yep, Daemons are basically the "boss battle" of our game at the moment. It is quite fitting that if you do well at a tournament then you get to face a Bloodthirster and his overpowered retinue, but then, that's just another guy at the tournament, and what has he done to deserve it, other than picked the best army available and taken it (and usually tweaked it to include all the strongest parts)? Nothing.

I'm starting to think that Daemons should be an "NPC" army. Give the Daemon army to a decent player that's not part of the tournament, and let the players see if they can beat it. Otherwise you just get the lame situation where 33% or more of tournament players have taken Daemons (assuming no comp or any attempt at rectifying the situation).

IcedCrow
30-03-2009, 17:05
There will always be armies like that I suppose. I'm blessed. I don't do tournaments anymore. Tournaments really turned me off to the hobby. Watching grown 30+ year old men get red faces and spout obscenities, accuse people of cheating, throw tantrums, throw models, the desire to win became more important than the hobby and the company you were keeping.

Wolfden
30-03-2009, 17:13
Ultimately it is all relative. If half the armies in fantasy are seen as being "broken" (Daemons, VC, DE, Bret. RAF, Skaven, etc.) then being "broken" really loses its impact as a credible analysis of a particular army. Personally I like nothing more than massacring an army that is supposedly unbeatable!

Ixquic
30-03-2009, 17:25
Basically all these broken armies force everyone else to take them or risk having boring 2 turn pickup games where you are curshed by deathstar unit after deathstar. It becomes a rock-paper-scissors game where list A beats List B which beats List C and all three beat lists D-Z.

IcedCrow
30-03-2009, 17:31
Yeah. That complaint is as ageless as the game. When I started playing back in 1998, people were saying the same thing. When sixth edition cameo ut in 2000, when this place was portent.net... it was full of threads saying the same thing.

I don't suppose it will ever change either. *shrug* Play more campaigns! :D

Ixquic
30-03-2009, 18:06
When I got back into the hobby at the end of 6th edition and the beginning of 7th after missing 5th generally there was a lot of different army types showing up. The occasional Skaven SAD list (or other similar power list) showed up but it wasn't that hard to get through compared to the "hard" lists that show up now. The current situation seems that everyone is encouraged to make as broken a list as possible since if you don't your opponent is going to wipe you off the table. The balancing of the army books in 7th edition is atrocious and requires the players to arbitrarily agree on a power level if you don't want to play against the super regen graveyard unit, ASF blackguard with unkillable lord, anything in the demon army, 5 stegadons, etc. People with underpowered armies just don't bother bringing them out or at worst quit playing altogether since it's a waste of time.

"Cool factor" has gotten out of control and they need to seriously scale it back since it's becoming a requirement to powergame.

IcedCrow
30-03-2009, 18:12
I think that started largely with the older lizardman book, the introduction to the RAF in the bretonian book, the WOod Elf book, and then ultimately the new Vampire Count book.

They seem to be beefing the power up of all armies whereas in 6th edition it was mostly the nerf bat from the 5th edtiion lists... which were grossly OP to the point that it was like playing D&D ... you had your unkilly lord and his buddies fighting your opponents' unkilly lord and his buddies.

EvC
30-03-2009, 18:31
But all those years ago, you could still bring a moderate or even *whispers* a themed list, and you probably wouldn't have to worry about your opponent bringing out the most busted army list he had. I've played against 6th edition Lizardmen at least 30 times, and only a half-dozen of those were 2nd Gen Slann lists, and I did groan when I faced them, and had about a 40-60 winrate there. Against Bretonnians probably only a dozen or so games so far, but never an RAF player*. Against Daemons? Almost every Daemon list I've faced has seemingly been specifically designed to get a massacre by turn 3 and suck the fun out of the game. There is a huge qualitative difference.

(*closest was a guy with Lord on Peg, BSB on Peg, and 2 x3 Pegasus Knights. He had spent the first 10 minutes of our setting-up process telling me how rubbish Pegasus Knights are, before he whipped out two units of them, plus the characters. This was at a tournament where triple specials were banned [Not that Daemons give a fig about that, of course], and I have little doubt that if there hadn't been those limitations, he'd have got out another 1 or 2 units of the blighters. Plus he was a cheating bastid, which is all too often the case with those types of powergamers)

AmBlam
30-03-2009, 18:32
So I've been gone a while, what's up with the crying about demons

Another classic

IcedCrow
30-03-2009, 18:44
But all those years ago, you could still bring a moderate or even *whispers* a themed list

Eh....

The group locally that did tournaments for the most part had members surfing the net for the most broken OP combos and would take them. Themed lists would always get shut down hard.

To the point where I became a comp nazi and tried to enforce comp.

Those days are long gone. I think themed list vs tournament list is usually always going to end bad for the themed player unless they are really really good.

Army comp has always been IMO 75% of the battle before the first plastic cube is even rolled.

EvC
30-03-2009, 18:54
Well, that is true for everyone that goes ahead and does that, sure. I've only ever run semi-competitive lists myself (i.e. themed but taking the hard stuff if I can get it in, but never simply going "oh look a broken OP combo, butter shovel it in"), and you can pretty much divide my games into two groups:
1) Games against normal players.
2) Games against Daemons, gunlines, Chariots of Sigmar and 15PD+ magic lists.
It is getting to the stage where at a tournament, most armies will be in group (2), sadly. But I meant in general, if I have a game, if I know the person in advance and we have some kind of "don't be a nobber" agreement, then we can afford to bring balanced armies and have a good game. Those days don't have to be gone- but the people who will only ever play as group (2), well... they're welcome to each other.

As I mentioned in another thread, big UK tournament hold yesterday. About 33% Daemons, about 75% of people brought the most bent lists they could manage, an at seemingly least 50% had a Dragon or a similar kind of beastie. I've heard nothing but complaints about the quality of that tournament- horrible organisation, poor terrain, horrible armies, bent lists, poor rules knowledge, attempts at bending the rules, throwing tantrums, the full works.

I went over someone else's place for a couple of games instead and we had a great time. We used themed armies, and the games were nicely back-and-forth. I think I know who had the better Sunday.

Ixquic
30-03-2009, 19:07
Yeah most of the people I know don't play pick up games at all anymore since you know that the other guy is just going to bring out whatever broken stuff he can fit in. I'm not sure what it is but really the demon book was the start of this mentality since even with VC most people were just using their 6th edition lists with tweaks. It wasn't until demons hit where I had to really cheese up my list to even compete in local tournies and at that point I really lost interest. Now every VC list I see is the best stuff with no theme and it's just super lame.

I have to admit I ran the super hard VC lists for a while but but really it got super boring and it was obviously not fun to play against (I wiped some poor guy off the table by the 3rd turn with a maxed out Zombie Dragon Lord) so really if one person isn't having fun what's the point?

IcedCrow
30-03-2009, 19:12
For me, if I go to a tournament I *know* that I'm going to be facing strong, unthemed, powerful mega hard armies. So if I choose to go, I know what I'm getting myself into.

That being said I have little fun doing that. Back in the day I'd even bash that kind of playstyle. I've grown up a little since then and realize that a lot of people have fun doing it that way so hats of to them.

Most of the players here in my area are 100% league/tournament players. They don't do campaigns and their pick up games are designed to test their latest tournament/league build out.

I tend to find that even the most OP armies in the hands of a casual campaign gamer are not that bad.

And yeah I ran broken armies in the past too to compete, and yes I also got bored along the way since it was the same game each time. I even had my little W/L sig on the forums.

Tyranno1
30-03-2009, 19:47
As I mentioned in another thread, big UK tournament hold yesterday. About 33% Daemons, about 75% of people brought the most bent lists they could manage, an at seemingly least 50% had a Dragon or a similar kind of beastie. I've heard nothing but complaints about the quality of that tournament- horrible organisation, poor terrain, horrible armies, bent lists, poor rules knowledge, attempts at bending the rules, throwing tantrums, the full works.

I went over someone else's place for a couple of games instead and we had a great time. We used themed armies, and the games were nicely back-and-forth. I think I know who had the better Sunday.

Sorry to be a little off topic, but do you know where these opinions of the devourer are posted? (if they are in one thread) Because I too was shocked by the bent list ratio and want to know what other fantasy players thought of it.

Shamfrit
30-03-2009, 19:59
It doesn't matter what opinions were festering about Warseer or any forum for that matter; a tournament, in any for, that does not tone down or cater for the metagame or attempt to temper it in anyway will always be a show of net-decked lists and people who will do anything to, heaven forbid, win.

This has been discussed time and time again and the fault is more to blame with the Great Devourer Tournament Format than the state of army books in the game as a whole at the minute. Look at any tournament and you'll see the same happening, over and over again. The Yu-Gi-Oh! Nationals had such a high concentration if Cookie Cutter format decks that UDE adapted their balance list to try and shift it from X to Y, and even went as far as banning a card, the day before the Regionals/Nationals, simply because it was abused to the point of blind idiocy (Cyber-stein, a card which in many people's opinions, should never have been released.)

However, the different here is that you can't ban certain parts of books, because you've sold not only a supplement but a very expensive model set to accompany it. Errata are few and far between exactly because they can't afford to replace every book and because players arn't going to buy new material just because errors were made or rules clarifications (on sometimes perfectly clear rules) were needed to settle community wide issues. The only way the tournament scene can change is either: restrictions on certain lists, namely, Daemons (although several other builds will be required,) or to outright remove Daemons from competative tournaments.

Personally, The Great Devourer and the Big GTS should be heavily scenario based, always. Where a tournament has no restrictions on army book usage and little composition scoring, it needs to do something to force the Daemon player to adapt his 'tactics' and not go for the kill - what good is it to have 90% massacre ration when the only way you can win is to claim an objective that makes a unit standing on it stubborn, for example? (And for once, the answer is not 'Gateway it!')

But, as it stands, these tournaments stand as an example of how the metagame can go sour, or, in my words, how it can be focused into a single tournament and reflect on the community to see where the lists go wrong (we'd have a discussion on whatever army book was dominating the tournament scene, wherever or not it was Daemons,) and hopefully, to learn and adapt to this in case we ever want to go to tournaments or if we wanted to up our game in our own gaming groups.

So, I re-iterate: the fault is as much with the Tournament Organisers as the Army Book writers. Somebody could spend a few weeks carefully evalutaing Daemon/Vampire/Dark Elf strengths and weaknesses and take a very abusive counter list to a tournament, sweep, it'd be copied, and suddenly, that list would become the next Daemons, and then the meta-game would change and adapt and suddenly, we'd have 300 'Oh my god George Sampson's Tree Hugger List' from the 2009 GT Tournament is cheese, ban Ogres! Ban Greenskins! You get the picture...

Tyranno1
30-03-2009, 20:14
Lol, ok I only wanted to hear the accounts of others. Because I never saw or heard any tantrams so I wondered what was up (altohugh one guy did scream WAAAAARGH, which was heard by the 40K players :p).

But yeah they should do something to stop the daemon spam, I saw almost no daemon army with units people had considered "weak" it was just bloodthirsters,flamers,flesh hounds, horrors all round. And I saw at least 3 Blue scribes (then again I did see 3 Kohleks). Mabye they could do what the Yu-gi-Oh tournamant organisrers did, bam certain units, just a few like flamers or something, and watch the effects.

IcedCrow
30-03-2009, 20:19
Enforcing comp is always a sticky thing because it's always based off of opinion.

isidril93
30-03-2009, 20:25
what list woul you use?
taking slaanesh/khorne doesnt seem too hard to beat

Tyranno1
30-03-2009, 20:55
Enforcing comp is always a sticky thing because it's always based off of opinion.

True, but then again Flamers are considered by just about everyone to be broken.

EvC
30-03-2009, 21:02
Bloodthirster
Masque
BSB -2LD, Siren Song
Skulltaker
10 Daemonettes, Stubborn standard
11 Bloodletters
10 Bloodletters
3 x 5 Flesh Hounds
4 Fiends
Sorted. If I can find anyone to play against me with this list, I'll let you know how easy a game it is ;)

Incidentally, I have played a good 20 or so games against Daemons, and I have never suffered too badly against Flamers. The thing is, you CAN stop them and mitigate their damage. Sure they've killed plenty of Skeletons in their time, and more than a few Gnoblars, and once destroyed a Bolt Thrower... but just put weak throwaway stuff in front of them and they're stuck. Course, let them get into a building and you're &#@$ed, and I have found them to be ridiculously nasty in combat too, which is a huge fault in the unit's design.

IcedCrow
30-03-2009, 21:02
I think the best bet is for tournaments to use scenarios. And introduce scenarios like magic flux where magic heavy armies get the hammer of nerfdom, or a scenario where it rains or a scenario where you have to hold an objective. Mix em up.

That way if you decide to overload on something chances are you are going to have a match where you get the everliving snot kicked out of you. Makes people think "man... I'd love to take 18 power dice but I don't want to get screwed by a scenario..."

Scenarios I have found are the best ways to enforce comp.

Souppilgrim
30-03-2009, 21:14
As a Dwarf player I'm very leery of scenarios. There are some that, balanced composition or not, are impossible for my army to win.

I think that tournaments that are full on competition will ultimately help the balance of the game in the long run. G-dub can't ignore the Daemon problem forever (they can ignore it for a long time...but not forever).

The carebear tourneys where you get points for painting and how nice your shoes look are great and all but they dont do anything to help the balance of the game.

EvC
30-03-2009, 21:16
I do agree with that- although there is the problem of the organisers not seeing the problems themselves. For example at the GT, some of the games weren't about kills- but were solely about table quarters, and they decided that raised undead units could claim quarters, which made for rubbish games against Vampire Counts players, who understandably spammed magic. If your scenarios are making games even worse, what's the point...

IcedCrow
30-03-2009, 21:28
Scenarios like that have no place in a tournament either.

isidril93
30-03-2009, 21:41
since units cant move 360 degress objectives like defending places are harder

leave objectives for 40k...we want bloodshed

IcedCrow
30-03-2009, 21:47
You and I will just have to agree to disagree then. 100% pitched battles all the time births the OP monstrosities people see. If you know you're going to play pitched battles all the time, why not overload your army?

I do't think there will ever be any peace on tournament issues though.

Scenarios have always been a part of warhammer up until the latest edition (which kind of startled me when i picked up the book)

Shamfrit
30-03-2009, 22:14
Well, here goes, about to play EvC's Daemons.

Hope I can put my money where my little Skinky Mouth is :D

nosferatu1001
31-03-2009, 12:48
Scenarios / Objectives are the way forward - it has led to some very very good changes in 40K. Why everyone has this mentaltiy of "fantasy is about 2 armies facing off" when theyre not 2 armies - they're two small parts of the army, esp at 2k. 15k points aside? thats an army - and maybe not even then.

As for Devourer - scenery was a huge crime, they didnt ask Spiky club (big club in next town over) for any tables or scenery, which meant you had rubbish old battle mats that made the terrain look like someones face with green acne, and a couple of tables had to nick some scenery from another!

They also don't seem to trust computers; trying to get 150 FB players ranked in half an hour AND make the list is crazy to do by hand. Just put the scorecards onto Excel, hit the randomiser button and BANG you have you full list, sorted by tournament and VP for the big final game. 10 minutes max. I hate to think what the poor 400k players (300+) had to face....

As for army composition however - meh. I was lucky and faced only 1 daemon army (1 DE, single hydra and 1 WOC with vilitch) and my opopnent was great fun (although eh was a GW manager in Essex i think!) so I didnt mind - plus he a) used fiends and b) didnt have flamers. I did however see lots of blue scribes / kairos lists, losts of Masque / -2Ld banner screw you i wanna win big lists, etc. I was fortunate.

The final game atmosphere was great - i heard the WAAAGH! as well, almost shook the floor :)

ashc
31-03-2009, 13:51
One of the things I have always said is that if you get players facing one another with different mentalities (for example, tournament player against a person who enjoys themed armies, etc.) about the game then it will pretty much always leave both parties with a sour taste in their mouth.

What is concerning about the daemons is how much other tournament-minded players dislike them (unless you are WAAC, where you pretty much have the 'if you can't beat em, join em' mentality :P )

Chicago Slim
01-04-2009, 03:30
True, but then again Flamers are considered by just about everyone to be broken.

Meh. Flamers are an expensive way to strongly discourage me from moving through a few small parts of the field. I think of them as the new Hellblaster (which, for over a decade, was so ridiculously potent at close range that it was absolute suicide for most things to get near it).

Flamers are most effective when they don't move and fire at things within 9" of them (that gives them 2/3 hit, unless the target skirmishes, is large, or has cover). If I get within 18", they can fire at long, or move and fire at close, which is 1/2 hit either way. If I get within 24", they're down to 1/3 hit, which is frankly not that bad: a 210 point unit is most likely to fire 21 shots, which at this greatest band is 7 expected hits at S4.

By way of comparison, 200 points of RBTs firing at 24" expect 8 hits at S4 AP, and the RBTs have the capability of firing at much longer range, or of single-shooting a S6 penetrating no AS bolt-- though RBTs lack the devastating close-range firepower of Flamers.

Granted, RBT crews are easier to kill than Flamers-- but as a whole, it's a pretty reasonable tradeoff... Flamers are just a solidly good shooting unit, one that you'll want to avoid with anything less sturdy than heavy cavalry. They're mobile, which can make it hard for static things to avoid them, but where's the fun in a static army, anyway?

*shrug*.

nosferatu1001
01-04-2009, 10:00
Chciago slim - they do not suffer penalties for long range either.

Dungeon_Lawyer
01-04-2009, 11:18
Well, that is true for everyone that goes ahead and does that, sure. I've only ever run semi-competitive lists myself (i.e. themed but taking the hard stuff if I can get it in, but never simply going "oh look a broken OP combo, butter shovel it in"), and you can pretty much divide my games into two groups:
1) Games against normal players.
2) Games against Daemons, gunlines, Chariots of Sigmar and 15PD+ magic lists.
It is getting to the stage where at a tournament, most armies will be in group (2), sadly. But I meant in general, if I have a game, if I know the person in advance and we have some kind of "don't be a nobber" agreement, then we can afford to bring balanced armies and have a good game. Those days don't have to be gone- but the people who will only ever play as group (2), well... they're welcome to each other.

As I mentioned in another thread, big UK tournament hold yesterday. About 33% Daemons, about 75% of people brought the most bent lists they could manage, an at seemingly least 50% had a Dragon or a similar kind of beastie. I've heard nothing but complaints about the quality of that tournament- horrible organisation, poor terrain, horrible armies, bent lists, poor rules knowledge, attempts at bending the rules, throwing tantrums, the full works.

I went over someone else's place for a couple of games instead and we had a great time. We used themed armies, and the games were nicely back-and-forth. I think I know who had the better Sunday.


HA Ha absolutly

---European tourneys sound like they suck bad--Here in the states, on the indy GT circuit anyways: Special Characters are banned , each round has a scenario of some sort(which has always been part of the game 7th ed is an abberation and I GURANTEE you scenarios/objectives will be back in 8th)& comp scoring prevents deathstar/op lists from winning the tourney (and rightly so), You boys on the other side of the lake need to seriously overhaul your tournies.
I mean who wound not want to play scenarios like these?- they add to the game and make it more about your generalship than your list

http://www.leadership2.org/scenario_coastal_fog.jpg

http://www.leadership2.org/scenario_heat_wave.jpg

http://www.leadership2.org/scenario_earthquake.jpg

http://www.leadership2.org/scenario_governator.jpg

http://www.leadership2.org/scenario_tectonic_flux.jpg



I read posts/batreps about "hey I won this tourney the other night my list was DOC, I had 3 heralds, the masque, and ahh 30 flamers"... I just stop right there.....

ashc
01-04-2009, 11:23
Genuine question: Do people think that there is heavier backlash towards the DOC list from tournament goers, or the more casual player?

IcedCrow
01-04-2009, 13:06
I would say the "casual tournament goers". Those being the ones that enjoy tournaments but don't take the most bent army list they can get their hands on.

Casual players in general don't usually make obscene lists. So casual players would also probably have their feathers ruffled at such a one sided contest.

EvC
01-04-2009, 13:06
Chciago slim - they do not suffer penalties for long range either.

They certainly do- although I've seen plenty of Daemon players conveniently forget this fact.

Fenrir
01-04-2009, 14:01
Genuine question: Do people think that there is heavier backlash towards the DOC list from tournament goers, or the more casual player?

Combination of word getting out from tournaments, combined with internet wisdom & the weeping of geeks.

PaddyF
01-04-2009, 14:02
Geek tears are the sweetest. It must be a global conspiracy.

Ultimo ninja
01-04-2009, 15:53
Against demons, I change my list to spam gateway, and throw in a chaos lord on dragon meant to take down greater demons.......If people want to powergame thats fine, just up the ante and smash them!

Vinsanity
01-04-2009, 15:59
If people dont cheese out daemons it usually a good game, its just when they spam SC and flesh hounds, flamers, bloodthirsters that the game becomes very much one sided. That said, if you are looking for a competitive game, this sort of list is the norm and will own most others. From a balanced as well as fluff point of view, its totally a WAAC and unfluffy army, which will mostly come across on Warseer forums or in GT tournements.

My two and a half cents.

Shamfrit
01-04-2009, 16:37
They certainly do- although I've seen plenty of Daemon players conveniently forget this fact.

I thought that's what he meant as well, but read the thread again, he's not talking about the Flamers :p

LrdPan
01-04-2009, 20:42
Speaking of tournaments that handled comp and scenarios well, I strongly recommend that you check out the Marauder's card-based system; it seemed to work very well (My Slann list played 3/5 "Magic Flux" games, which didn't surprise me in the least). The rules are located at http://www.marauders-inc.com/~marauder/index.php/page/8.html. It's also nice to have a TO that will flat-out deny ridiculously OTT lists.

Back on topic, I'll second what players have mentioned already. Particularly abused units are most definitely Flesh Hounds (and who gave them MR3?!?) and flamers. Both have few good counters and are terribly potent units when used en masse. Combine that with the crazy bonuses that Heralds grant to already-powerful troops and add in the loss of the "Demonic Ward" in lieu of them having a normal ward, and you've got a very tough army all around.

Personally, my biggest gripe is actually with their banners. Always march for the price of a dispel scroll? Yes please. Stubborn to all units in range of the BSB? Who wouldn't take it? Standard of Sundering that absolutely bones the one lore that's most useful against demons? Why not!?!

Also, as a member of your (Crow's) local group, I think your opinions and conceptions of the group are about three years outdated. True, most of the guys around here are playing and testing tournament lists, but, having just been to the Marauder and seen the current state of lists, I can say that no one's running a WAAC list here. You might try coming around and playing a few games if you're willing to leave bitterness from previous years behind.

Your favorite Wood Elf antagonist,
Pan