PDA

View Full Version : The Strongest Armies



hippyhunter5
09-09-2008, 13:34
I'm intrested in starting a second army and because I'm not hugely experienced I want to play one that is quite strong. So what do you think the strongest army/ies is/are?

You will note some armies are missing, O&G, TK and Ogres because the weakest army thread seems to lean in their direction, Warriors of Chaos because they don't have a book (yet) and Beasts because I can't stand the models.

Also note I reposted this thread because the poll is broken in the other one.

To clarify I'm not going to pick an army I think is the strongest but rather one I like the look of.

Benigno (WE)
09-09-2008, 13:39
Wood Elves rocks! ^o^ \m/

Kronos
09-09-2008, 14:08
Well I'm not too informed on strongest armies but from what I've heard the top three are daemons, vc, and high elves. But if you like woc I say wait for a month or two as the model line looks really good so far.

The Red Scourge
09-09-2008, 14:21
And the WoC looks to be an army with quite a decent potential for violence and to be beaten up by little elves with flowers in their hair ;)

Gustav Kohn
09-09-2008, 14:42
Here is an idea...play the game to get better instead of picking a powerful army. I hope that you choose something that gets destroyed by every new army that comes out. Stop caring about winning so much...have fun.

BTW...if all you care about is winning then go play chess with five year olds.

bork da basher
09-09-2008, 14:50
there is no strongest army, an army is as good as the general who commands it. pick an army and make it strong. give a strong list to a newb and he'll loose over and over with it to a vet with a average list. play and learn and have fun and worry about winng later

Condottiere
09-09-2008, 14:52
Flavour of the month until everyone figures out their weaknesses and exploits them.

Mozzamanx
09-09-2008, 14:59
The fact that only 1 Daemon player out of at least 20 came in the lower half at a recent tournament suggests that maybe this is more than 'new army syndrome'. ;)

==Me==
09-09-2008, 15:11
Every army is strong if you use it properly. Spend some time looking through the army books and the rules, watch a few games, try them out and find what works for you. Asking the internets to pick your army for you is asking for trouble.

Emeraldw
09-09-2008, 15:16
The fact that only 1 Daemon player out of at least 20 came in the lower half at a recent tournament suggests that maybe this is more than 'new army syndrome'. ;)

Vampire Counts I wouldn't disagree with, but deamons?

I don't know, I am not convinced it is as amazing as other people claim, at least overall. Maybe a full Tzeentch PD list but all armies have some lists that are broken.

I mean the army has nothing in terms of saves, a 5+ ward save is not going to carry the day. 12 pt units add up fast.

Perhaps I'm missing what part of the army is breaking the game. I've seen Daemons mentioned over and over as this super army yet I can't find the reasons. I know why I think VC's are broken and that has to do with my feelings on their magic phase.

Could someone explain to me why Daemons are perceived as so?

Mozzamanx
09-09-2008, 15:22
There is a 'critical mass', where a unit becomes so powerful that it can take on any unit and win. At this point, it doesn't matter how much you cost because there is very little which can stop you. Many units in the Daemon list have reached this point.


Bloodthirsters, Skulltaker, Kipper, Flesh Hounds, Flamers, Bloodcrushers etc. can quite happily smack into the front of any unit and expect to come out the other side.

Valaraukar
09-09-2008, 15:27
I think these people all have a point, an army is only as powerful as its general. That being said however some armies are clearly more easy to make powerful builds with and more forgiving of mistakes than others. The two most obvious examples atm being Daemons and VC followed by HE and DE.

What you need to ask yourself is whats really important to you about the hobby? I'm not going to lie to you and say winning doesn't matter I am an awful loser and always play to win. However I have been playing with my daemons and I must say it takes alot of enjoyment out of those victories when afterwards everyone says 'well what did you expect playing daemons' etc. Also I have been trying hard not to take 'cheesey' builds as it makes the games dull as hell but people still put down your victory to the army rather than your generalship.

Bearing all that in mind I think the most important thing is to pick an army you like the models and idea of rather than the one you think will do best which is what I did having been playing Chaos for over a decade now. My most enjoyable games and most rewarding have been with my beastmen as no-one can say that my wins have been down to having an unfair advantage and at ehart I know that I have had to play well to win which I can't always say when playing daemons or until recently warriors.

Darkspear
09-09-2008, 16:10
While I do not agree that you should simply choose an army for its strengths, I will answer your question anyway. It's an irony that I have a weakest army thread days ago :).

It's Daemons in my opinion. The list has an amazing flexibility especially when using Tzeentch. They have the best magicians and shooters in the game. 2nd best fighters after the rumored warriors of chaos.

Each greater daemon has a different playing style and through it a different way to field the troops.

Finally, daemonic tests are in my opinion the best "break" tests in the game

Ward.
09-09-2008, 16:14
There is a 'critical mass', where a unit becomes so powerful that it can take on any unit and win. At this point, it doesn't matter how much you cost because there is very little which can stop you. Many units in the Daemon list have reached this point.


Bloodthirsters, Skulltaker, Kipper, Flesh Hounds, Flamers, Bloodcrushers etc. can quite happily smack into the front of any unit and expect to come out the other side.

My sentiments exactly, the bloodthirster is the main offender really. While the bloodthrister has always been powerful it can now reliably hit a fully ranked unit in the front and win combat on that turn or the next, with almost no fear of dying unlike the HE star dragon (something that was a bit heinous to start with), some units are also really too cheap for what they do.
Whining aside I do enjoy playing against them :p


Op: I say go for brettonians, as you seem to give off a brettonian players vibe as well as they're easy to use while having room to expand your tactics.

Ozorik
09-09-2008, 16:15
I would suggest you play O&G as they are probably the weakest army at the moment.

Of course you'll lose a lot, but then you will anyway when your starting out. As O&G are currently underpowered it means that you will be forced to get to know how the game works extremely well and will be a much better player in the long run. Also when the O&G book is redone to make them on a par with the newer books then you will have the experience to reap the benefits.

If you want to play an advantaged list, deamons seem to fit this pretty well, then do so but it will take you longer to appreciate some of the nuances of the game.

Weldo Rubin
09-09-2008, 18:00
Daemons of Chaos, without the shadow of doubt!

40kdhs
09-09-2008, 22:05
Daemons and VC are the strongest armies right now. Regen and the ability to raise models back are really good.

If you don't kill the whole unit in 1 turn and shut down their magic phase, you loose the game.

Shamfrit
09-09-2008, 22:08
Who on earth voted for Skaven??

BEEGfrog
10-09-2008, 00:19
One more voted for Skaven than Lizardmen!

Lizardmen is the army I would go for now, not just because the current book is one of the best, most balanced army books every produced by GW. But because they are producing a new book at the start of the new year. By the time you have got some of the core units built & painted the new book will be available.

As far as relative strength goes, the cold blooded ones have slipped from the high side of average back to average with the last year's set of army books. It also involves the general more than most armies without generalship being quite the knife edge as some. The army can still produce lists that are competitive, but don't expect many tournament podiums until the new book restores a bit of balance.

If the Lizards get the kind of boost that recent army books have seen, without losing the current book's set of choices you will have a competitive army that you can adapt to a variety of playing styles.

And it has lots of dinosaurs...

Dead Man Walking
10-09-2008, 00:44
This is a fine example on how the internet has ruined warhammer. It use to be that you had to examine the uses of armies yourself and you had a small pool of people to talk to about what makes an army work. A lot of it had to be determined by thinking for yourself.

Now you can look online and get a bah-freak'n-jillion people telling you how to field the butt kicking army of your dreams. You still have to learn how to use it, But half of the fun of the journey is over after spending 15 mins on a website like this.

Ozorik
10-09-2008, 01:26
Well if new players are deliberately seeking imbalanced armies the chances are that they wont REALLY know what they are doing past simplistic point and click tactics and lists.
Therefore they are welcome to them, as long as they understand that someone with an 'inferior' army who has taken the codex creep knocks but stuck with their race of choice will probably be a better player. This more than compensates for any army book power issues.

Conotor
10-09-2008, 01:45
You will note some armies are missing, O&G, TK and Ogres because the weakest army thread seems to lean in their direction, Warriors of Chaos because they don't have a book (yet) and Beasts because I can't stand the models.



O&G are a powerfull army. IMO they are 6th, after VC, Demons, Bretts, HE and DE.

AlmightyNocturnus
10-09-2008, 01:51
I voted for High Elves because they do just about everything well right now. I think the full-on cannon+steam tank Empire gunline is about as powerfull as they get, though. But why would you want to make such an army. I have two armies: Nurgle Daemons and Ogres. Now that the new Daemons Armies Book came out, my daemon army is too powerful, too one-dimensional, and doesn`t require much in the way of tactics to win with. My Ogres on the other hand, I need a plan (a very good plan AND some luck from the Great Maw) to pull off the win. It`s more challenging and fun to use. I use my Ogres almost every time and the victories are all the sweeter because people can`t believe they lost to the "weak-a$$ Ogre Kingdoms". I only use my Daemon army to lay the smack down on smug, powergaming VC players (once in a while). My two yen...

Almight Nocturnus

General Squeek Squeek
10-09-2008, 02:07
The skaven horde is almost unbeatable in the hands of the right general. It takes a lot of patience, money, time, and strategy but its worth it. I'm not talking about the SAD army which is pretty worthless, but a true horde led by a warlord and bsb w/ storm banner (watch any gunline cry as you take there only ability out for a couple of turns).

The Inspector
10-09-2008, 02:10
Daemons. They are, quite simply, the 'most powerful' army at the moment.

However, don't pick an army to play based on power as the only merit. You are new and want to learn the game with a strong army, fair enough, no one wants to start something new only to be met with a string of losses. But that is part of starting something new.

If you want to learn the game, play with an army that actually makes use of most of the game's rules. VC and DoC, although powerful, do not play the game in a conventional manner and you may find it more confusing than what is necessary.

Go on the GW website. Read some of the army fluff and look at a few models. Narrow down what you like and maybe visit a faction-specific forum or two and read a few battle reports and take in the general banter.

Picking an army that is powerful but actually don't like will see you quitting the hobby faster than picking an army that is weak [/balanced] but you love.

EDIT:

Wait, you want a second army? Stick it out with what army you picked with initially and gain experience with that. Jumping ship to scrape a few wins is kinda pathetic :/

Used Car Salesman
10-09-2008, 03:27
This is kinda pathetic. This seems to me like "I can't win at all and am really desperate." The only way this could be more pathetic is if you asked us to make an army list for you.

Nukem
10-09-2008, 04:13
While I don't disagree that the demons are a powerful list, I must say that only having the 5+ wardsave and marginal armor is not that spectacular. It really sucks because I choose to play demons and vampire counts when I started warhammer over 10 years ago and now if I win its always chalked up to the army choice and not the fact you did something wrong, or your rolls were bad its always blamed on the army.

My advice to you, play what you like and ignore everyone elses opinion. Any army can be an unstoppable juggernaut if played right. So be that unstoppable general and crush people under your boot.

Good Game

Cheers,
Colin

hippyhunter5
10-09-2008, 05:44
Here is an idea...play the game to get better instead of picking a powerful army. I hope that you choose something that gets destroyed by every new army that comes out. Stop caring about winning so much...have fun.

BTW...if all you care about is winning then go play chess with five year olds.

I should note winning is not my main concern. As I am fairly new to the game I would like to play an army that is able to hold it's own against other armies.

I am not going to pick an army because it is the strongest, instead I will pick one I like.

gary0044187
10-09-2008, 05:57
a lot of the stronger armies require unfun builds to play. I consider Empire fun right now, because of how I have to play a psychology game to win. Consider what do you want to do with your army? consider how you want it to play. Then go from there.

The Red Scourge
10-09-2008, 06:03
This is a fine example on how the internet has ruined warhammer. It use to be that you had to examine the uses of armies yourself and you had a small pool of people to talk to about what makes an army work. A lot of it had to be determined by thinking for yourself.

Now you can look online and get a bah-freak'n-jillion people telling you how to field the butt kicking army of your dreams. You still have to learn how to use it, But half of the fun of the journey is over after spending 15 mins on a website like this.

Calm yourself. The internet can't be all about downloading porn and breaching copyrights.

But I agree. The easy sharing of information and ideas that the internet has brought to the world will be the one thing to bring about the apocalypse better start working on having the thing shut down :rolleyes:

Condottiere
10-09-2008, 07:38
Wouldn't be ironic if the birthplace of the internet, CERN, would be the instrument to end it? Creating a black hole on a planetary surface should eliminate the telecommunications infrastructure required, not to mention the rest of the planet. ;)

march10k
10-09-2008, 10:15
Yeah...that's going to happen :rolleyes:

Not that any of us would be around to care if it did. ;)

Anyway, I'd take the internet back before CERN put their grubby paws on it (those fools even tried to resist the adoption of TCP/IP as a standard!!!). It started with ARPANet. You have the U.S. Army to thank for downloadable bestiality videos :D , not to mention your Garmin and a host of other nice things.

Mullitron
10-09-2008, 10:59
All armies are viable, deamons are a strong army but no stronger than some of the others, they have a new list tho with slightly different style than that of the other more conventional lists. People are already starting to identify weaknesses with the list such as the tougness 3 5+ save 12 point infantry. I agree the greater daemons are great and each bring their own unique strengths to the army but i think they should do their greater daemons!

King Vyper
10-09-2008, 11:34
All armies are viable, deamons are a strong army but no stronger than some of the others, they have a new list tho with slightly different style than that of the other more conventional lists. People are already starting to identify weaknesses with the list such as the tougness 3 5+ save 12 point infantry. I agree the greater daemons are great and each bring their own unique strengths to the army but i think they should do their greater daemons!

I think there a few people who are going to disagree with that statement. Not all armies are viable and there a number of armies that are stronger then others. The impact of the Daemons and Vampire counts at the LV GT proves that.


Best Finish by Army and Number of Top 30 Finishes

1. Daemons of Chaos - 3rd (11)
2. Vampire Counts - 6th (7)
3. Dark Elves - 2nd (4)
4. High Elves - 1st (2)
5. Brettonnians - 10th (2)
6. Empire - 7th (1)
7. Wood Elves - 9th (1)
8. Tomb Kings - 18th (1)
9. Lizardmen - 25th (1)
10. Orc & Goblins - 32nd (0)
11. Skaven - 33rd (0)
12. Ogre Kingdoms - 60th (0)
13. Beasts of Chaos - 43rd (0)
14. Dwarves - 45th (0)
15. Warriors of Chaos - 66th (0)
16. Chaos Dwarfs - DNP (0)
17. Dogs of War - DNP (0)


The Battle Points alone shows the power disparity.



1. Daemons of Chaos - 73.64
2. Vampire Counts - 68
3. Dark Elves - 72.75
4. High Elves - 80.5
5. Brettonnians - 70.5
6. Empire - 54
7. Wood Elves - 66
8. Tomb Kings - 57
9. Lizardmen - 57

Ozorik
10-09-2008, 11:37
All armies ARE viable, some are more powerful than others but that doesnt mean that army X is pointless, particulary if winning is only a secondary objective.

Velsharoon
10-09-2008, 12:40
Never in my life have I heard the absurdity of collecting an army just cos it has more liklihood of winning, sure if you have looked at playstyles, models, paint schemes etc and you need to break a tie then consider it but right out the outset?

Just pick an army you like and go for it ;)

hippyhunter5
10-09-2008, 12:47
Never in my life have I heard the absurdity of collecting an army just cos it has more liklihood of winning, sure if you have looked at playstyles, models, paint schemes etc and you need to break a tie then consider it but right out the outset?

Just pick an army you like and go for it ;)

That's more or less what I'm doing. I like the look of the Dark and High elves, the daemons, the dwarves, and both human armies. I can't make up my mind so I'm intrested in knowing how strong they are.

DeathlessDraich
10-09-2008, 15:25
I'm glad that DEs are still not considered to be very or too strong.

The strongest? Impossible to ascertain since luck is an important element in the game

blackjack
10-09-2008, 15:51
Look I started to collect Daemons before the Army book came out. I wanted a transition army from 40k to fantasy. I hated the 40k rules for daemons because I hate the utter randomness of it, but now every time I field my daemons i practically get booed off the table. The only races that have been competive have been VC and to a lesser extent DE.

I tried makeing huge usless infantry blocks but they are boring to play with.

I'm switching to lizards til the new book comes out so I can keep trying to make the best army I can and still not cake walk over everyone else.

King Vyper
11-09-2008, 06:09
All armies ARE viable, some are more powerful than others but that doesn't mean that army X is pointless, particularly if winning is only a secondary objective.

I agree with you no army is pointless, but I don't consider that the same thing as viable. I also agree that winning shouldn't always be the first consideration.

However with the recent army books power level jumping the shark, It has gotten to the point that certain armies are really going to struggle now.

Where once people who might not have fielded no-fluff, poor comp, special character, power gamer army lists, some are going to seriously consider going this route.

No one is going to want to play a game if they are going to get massacred every time they put there army on the table.

King Vyper
11-09-2008, 06:10
Look I started to collect Daemons before the Army book came out. I wanted a transition army from 40k to fantasy. I hated the 40k rules for daemons because I hate the utter randomness of it, but now every time I field my daemons i practically get booed off the table.

Wow, really? Even in freindly games?

Ozorik
11-09-2008, 09:00
I agree with you no army is pointless, but I don't consider that the same thing as viable.

Well the dictionary definition of viable is;

Capable of success or continuing effectiveness; practicable:

I stand by my comments. Powergamers have always existed, they just have better tools these days. In a competative enviroment some builds have a lot more power than others, this has always been the case. Unless you intend to only play in such an environment (and why on earth would you, I certainly wouldnt) then any army is viable.

Harwammer
11-09-2008, 18:02
You say you are reluctant to try beastmen because of their models.

I recommend you use lizard theme beastmen (instead of the default farmy theme).

This would be very easy to with minimal work using lizardmen models (saurus as gor, skink as ungor, kroxigor as minotaurs, etc).


My other piece of advice is you should probably choose an average or below power army if you struggle with warhammer. The pressure will be on to think of ways to use your units well instead of just surging forwards unthinkingly or sitting still and blasting away.

If you are set on using a powerful army then I recommend Warriors of Chaos; they've a new book coming out and they are supposed to be powerful but fairly easy to play.

By the time you've painted up a couple of boxes of marauders, a box of knights and a few characters the book should be released (until then the temporary list should do fine).

I do realise new knights are coming out, but I think the current range's beefier look better suits these monsters!

PARTYCHICORITA
12-09-2008, 17:56
Who on earth voted for Skaven??

I did; with VC and DoC wrestling for the second place.

Supreme Archon Orlok
12-09-2008, 21:32
Daemons are quite strong halbeit very expensive but the hero's and lords are very strong especially when combined with the daemonic gifts:D

Defender of Ulthuan
12-09-2008, 23:28
Although I would have to agree that daemons have the most promising list available, many peole seem to forget that as the new books come out, they are better suited to the 7th ed. rulebook, and better altogether, because the balance grade in 7th ed. is slightly higher.

Anyway, I'd put daemons in first with VC and Empire as strong second and third, respectively.

And against daemons, Empire certainly have the most tools :D

hooventut
13-09-2008, 00:15
its true, going on msg boards kills the fun of trying your own army sometimes. but the ideas help if you want to make your own list more competitive rather than overhauling the whole thing. i dont think the internet is ruining warhammer, but its proliferating a lot of different information to more people. a lot of that info might not be correct, however.

its making the game more general-based than composition-based. nilla lists will be more common i believe. but who cares, warhammer is fun anyways.

Iskiab
13-09-2008, 17:30
I'm perplexed by some of the statements in this thread. Of course the viability of the army is important.

I wanted to start a DE army, but knew they were underpowered so put it off. Now with the new army list I'm going to build myself an army. So... with buliding an army, I want to make sure it will play well, so of course I'm going to come on the internet to check people's opinions... why would I drop $200 painting models just to find out I won't like playing the army, or find out little details like giving DR's shields will make them not fast cavalry. You can miss things like that so having people look over the list is a good idea.

It's just outright stupid not to, not the other way around.

Drayken
14-09-2008, 04:44
I agree that lizardmen are a strong and balanced force, but this fact has been overlooked recently because of the surge of overpowered forces over thast year(mainly HE,VC and Deamons).

I would argue that every army can kick @ss if fielded or used in a certain way.

Prince of Caledor
14-09-2008, 11:55
whoever thought it was a good idea to let the daemon powers mix with no restrictions should be forced to play against tournament daemon lists with an army of all gnoblars seven times a day. the fluff clearly states that each of the chaos gods has a particular dislike for one of the others. this should be reflected in the rules. they could have at least had a sort of "slot rotation" system where your general's mark makes troops that share his mark core, troops with a neutral mark special, and troops with an opposing mark rare. of course, this would make the army require some thought, and we can't have that, can we? ;)

on the bright side, the cries of cheese i get for playing high elves have died down considerably.

veilwalker
14-09-2008, 13:04
As others have said, Daemonic Animosity. They used to have it back in the first couple of editions. They should have put more thought in to the army list and how powerful the builds can be. Animosity would have greatly reduced the killing power of the mixed list.

Games Workshop really needs to either playtest more or have a system in place to accept feedback from the community and fix the most egregious problems that arise from their new lists.

Perhaps they should use the tournaments by preparing a Beta List for upcoming armies and allow the tournament players to come out and abuse the proposed lists and rules. Put the tournament system to good use. Then they could reward players for finding the most abusive and cheesiest army lists, rather than having to dock them for doing the same.

Storak
14-09-2008, 16:33
whoever thought it was a good idea to let the daemon powers mix with no restrictions should be forced to play against tournament daemon lists with an army of all gnoblars seven times a day.

well, the guy who wrote the book, is responsible for the O&G fiasco as well...

the solution to the problems of BOTH armies is so obvious:

1. reward mono god/race armies, by allowing them extra troop/hero choices

2. reward healthy mixtures of troop types from different races/gods.

3. punish unfluffy power mixes.

a real problem with the daemon list are clear slaneesh banners on tough nurgle heralds or bloodthirster bringing flamer fire support...
i support daemons mixing gods (3 troop types is a little bit too few..), but a sensible version of daemon animosity might have helped the list...