PDA

View Full Version : Warhammer 40k Army Rankings/Tiers



Akaiyou
10-12-2011, 07:48
If we look at the armies objectively...trying as much as possible to remove our own personal bias.
What would be the general consensus on the rankings? or tiers of the current 40k armies?

I've been playing 40k since 2005, enough to know a thing or two but not nearly enough in the hardcore scene to cast a solid opinion on the subject. Yet it comes up every now and then when discussing new codexes and such with my 40k loving friends (the handful of them anyway) We'd very much like to know what the consensus on the subject is.

Things to dismiss:
#1 - Personal Bias
#2 - Tournament results count but consider that those CAN be skewed to favor the 'army of the week' since there would be droves of players using it thus guaranting higher chances of that specific army winning any given tournament. So don't base your entire judgement on it
#3 - One trick ponies. The question is based on the entire army, avoid basing all judgement on just 1 unit that is insanely powerful to judge wether an army in particular is stronger than another.
#4 - If you have nothing to base an opinion on a particular army then just put N/A instead of judging it based on what you've heard/rumors

You can either sort your opinion by rankings or by tiers.
Example:

All 16 Current 40k Armies:
Necrons
Sisters of Battle
Grey Knights
Dark Eldar
Blood Angels
Tyranids
Space Wolves
Imperial Guard
Space Marines
Chaos Daemons
Orks
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Angels
Eldar
Tau Empire
Black Templar

IMO by Rankings
1. Space Wolves
2. Blood Angels
3. Imperial Guard
4. Tyranids
5. Space Marines
6. Necrons
7. Orks
8. Eldar
9. Tau Empire
10. Black Templar
11. Chaos Space Marines
12. Dark Angels
13. Chaos Daemons

Sister of Battle - N/A
Dark Eldar - N/A
Grey Knights - N/A

IMO by Tiers

Tier 1
SW, BA

Tier 2
IG, TY, SM, Necrons, Orks

Tier 3
Eldar

Tier 4
Tau, BT, CSM, DA, CD

N/A
SoB, DE, GK


So what do you guys think based on your own experiences and what you've seen ?

RandomThoughts
10-12-2011, 08:35
Just one question: Are you aware that there is already an active thread in the tactics section discussing army tiers?

Akaiyou
10-12-2011, 09:31
Nope, didn't think army tiers would be a part of 'army tactics' thus that explains the oversight on my part.

Seemed more like a 'general discussion' sort of thing

Thanks for the heads up nonetheless.

RandomThoughts
10-12-2011, 09:46
Thanks for the heads up nonetheless.

You're welcome :)

Akaiyou
10-12-2011, 10:35
Funnily enough while reading through that thread...I noted someone say

"Seems more like a 40k General thread"

gave me a good chuckle

I appreciate it though I got out of it exactly what I wanted to know. I guess IG are doing pretty well still, I crushed them with Nids so thought their time had passed. Everything else i more or less saw coming from the top ranks/low ranks

I'd just dispute the old necrons placement and tyranid placements...but alas those conversations are long gone now that i found this thread so late...meh, thanks anyway

LonelyPath
10-12-2011, 15:58
Sister of Battle - N/A
Dark Eldar - N/A
Grey Knights - N/A

Just a quick question about this grouping. How did you get to this decision of those army being Not Applicable in tier ranking?

Axeman1n
10-12-2011, 20:55
He probably had no idea about them as they were too new. Some can go their whole lives without playing against a Sisters or and DE army.

As for your experience, it is often the case that General > List. That being said, there is a fair amount of Rock Paper Scissors in list building.

Akaiyou
10-12-2011, 22:59
I've fought all 40k armies, I just don't feel that it's fair to rate SoB/DA/GK on games from previous editions/codexes.

I'm looking for current rankings so i'm basing things on my experience of the current ones i've played against in the context of 5th edition to keep things fair.

bocaj
10-12-2011, 23:02
Wait, why are GK classed as N/A? Also demons arent last position IMO cos they might not be winning tourneys but are still powerful in certain forms (definitely no personal bias here :angel: ).

Sami
10-12-2011, 23:10
Would rather see rankings based on army composition rather than just the codex alone, such as:

DE: Mechanized (Venom-biased spam)
GK: Corteaz henchmen DCA/Crusader spam
GK: Crowe Purifier spam
BA: Jumping with massed FnP
BA: Av13-14 spam
Orks: Battlewagon spam
Orks: Green Tide
etc

Would be far more useful to see what kind of builds work at tourneys rather than just "THIS CODEX IS GOOD", for both new players in general and those looking to get into the tourney scene.

Akaiyou
11-12-2011, 00:58
N/A is when you dont have enough experience at seeing something that you can't comment.

And Sami i woudlnt go with individual builds because a lot of armies are just 1 trick ponies that doesnt necessarily mean the army is strong just that build for them

d6juggernaut
11-12-2011, 01:12
1.IG
2.GK
3.SW
4.BA, SM, DE, Necrons, nids
5.everyone else

Dark Eldar and Necrons can potentially be higher, but the top 3 are just so much easier to play to achieve to same level of result that they get overshadowed quite a bit.

Askari
11-12-2011, 14:49
1. Imperial Guard
2. Space Wolves
3. Grey Knights
4. Dark Eldar
5. Orks
6. Blood Angels
7. Chaos Space Marines
8. Tyranids
9. Black Templars
10. Space Marines
11. Eldar
12. Chaos Daemons
13. Tau
14. Sisters of Battle

N/A Necrons, Dark Angels

Although this is based on potential I see in an army, based on my actual battles of winning/losing it'd be more like;

1. Orks (still can't bloody beat that army)
2. Chaos Space Marines (i.e. Me)
3. Dark Eldar
4. The rest...

Aluinn
11-12-2011, 16:45
1.IG
2.GK
3.SW
4.BA, SM, DE, Necrons, nids
5.everyone else

Dark Eldar and Necrons can potentially be higher, but the top 3 are just so much easier to play to achieve to same level of result that they get overshadowed quite a bit.

I'm not sure you can put BA on the same level as vanilla Marines when BA can pretty much make an identical army to what any vanilla Marine player would take, except with Sanguinary Priests covering most of it in a bubble of Feel No Pain and Furious Charge, which, needless to say, is quite a buff. Oh, and then there are their Fast vehicles for a very fair increase in cost and their ability to take Assault Marines as Troops, and though neither is the biggest of deals, they're still advantages in my book.

The only substantial things I can see that basic Marines have over BA are Vulkan or Shrike's army-wide buffs, Null Zone, and, um, a 5-point discount on TH/SS Termies. I don't think those can compare to Sanguinary Priests alone, never mind everything else available to BA.

I'd also put 'Nids somewhere beneath DE and even Orks, due to their mind-blowingly horrible matchups against DE and GK (even regardless of the specific Tyranid army build, for the most part). They may be underrated but their performance is still very uneven.

But other than that I'd agree. I'm not sure listing every book in order makes sense, but I'd say it's maybe ...

Top armies: IG, GK, SW, BA

Good armies (slightly worse than the above, otherwise nothing wrong with 'em in terms of ability to compete): DE, Orks, SM, CSM, probably Necrons, DA (Deathwing or Deathwing/Ravenwing combo)

Armies with minor, but very noticeable, problems: 'Nids (inconsistency, very bad matchups against some armies), Eldar (poor Troops compared to other armies, reliance on psychic powers, excessive points costs throughout the list), Tau (poor Troops), "vanilla" DA (like vanilla SM but a bit worse across the board)

Armies with major problems: Sisters (slightly excessive points costs on most units really adds up to a major handicap), Chaos Daemons* (extreme inconsistency, lack of reliable anti-tank)

Armies that I have no clue about since I haven't seen them played since 3rd Ed.: Black Templars :), though it seems they should be alright post-FAQ.

*I realize that Fatecrusher builds specifically probably belong in the tier above, but I think evaluating an entire codex based on one specific build is a little OTT, and in any form they're partially hobbled by mandatory Deep Strike, IMO.

In the past I've said that tiers are silly but, hey, I felt like giving it a try. I do think that there's a case for (somewhat) clearly identifiable tiers in 40K as it stands now, though I hope that 6th Ed. remedies that.

LonelyPath
12-12-2011, 14:28
I've fought all 40k armies, I just don't feel that it's fair to rate SoB/DA/GK on games from previous editions/codexes.

I'm looking for current rankings so i'm basing things on my experience of the current ones i've played against in the context of 5th edition to keep things fair.

Thanks for clearing that up for me :)

Akaiyou
12-12-2011, 17:08
no worries

t-tauri
12-12-2011, 19:26
Just one question: Are you aware that there is already an active thread in the tactics section discussing army tiers?

Indeed (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=319603). Thread closed.