Age of Sigmar tier list!

[Erta Wanderer]

well with no experience we can turne to stats it seems that they do about as well as we do in tournaments same win rate same podium placement

 

[Aginor]

well with no experience we can turne to stats it seems that they do about as well as we do in tournaments same win rate same podium placement

I am not sure that works well as a metric.
Imagine an army that never wins and never places top3, but consistently places in the top 8, maybe even with several players. That's a pretty good army.

But the fact that they don't even seem to appear in most tournaments at all means that they are definitely not great. If they were strong then a lot of players of all skill levels would have picked them up by now.

 

[Erta Wanderer]

I am not sure that works well as a metric.
Imagine an army that never wins and never places top3, but consistently places in the top 8, maybe even with several players. That's a pretty good army.

But the fact that they don't even seem to appear in most tournaments at all means that they are definitely not great. If they were strong then a lot of players of all skill levels would have picked them up by now.

well ya thats why i waited untill every one else said they had no idea. as a last resort it's all we have
but i don't think they aren't played because they are week i think they aren't played because they are expensive even for a expensive hobby and they have no support.

 

[Aginor]

well ya thats why i waited untill every one else said they had no idea. as a last resort it's all we have
but i don't think they aren't played because they are week i think they aren't played because they are expensive even for a expensive hobby and they have no support.

Yeah it is hard to judge.
Me gut feeling says that if they were really strong then more tournament players would buy them despite the high costs. There are pretty costly Forgeworld armies for 40k that still get played not too rarely.
But yeah, we can't really tell I guess.

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

given that chaos dwarfs are currently 1 random model in a warcry warband, nowhere I guess.

2 actually, one in the Iron Golems and another in the upcoming Spire Tyrants warband, who looks closer to the old Chaos Dwarfs but has a beard more like the bog-standard Dwarfs unusually

 

[MackiMac]

They seem to have 41,7% match wins and 0,55% of the armies are Legion of Azgorh in tournaments at the moment.

 

[Canas]

Yeah I have never seen them on the table, and I don't even know anyone who has ever seen them.
Judging by that, and by the fact they don't have allegiance abilities (AFAIK) I'd guess they are pretty weak. Probably the very bottom.

this does probably speak volumes about their ranking yeah...

2 actually, one in the Iron Golems and another in the upcoming Spire Tyrants warband, who looks closer to the old Chaos Dwarfs but has a beard more like the bog-standard Dwarfs unusually

yeah, but he doesn't exist yet, so 1 for now

well with no experience we can turne to stats it seems that they do about as well as we do in tournaments same win rate same podium placement

Winrate isn't very relevant, doubly so when you have an army with statistically insignificant representation. So meh.

 

[Erta Wanderer]

Winrate isn't very relevant, doubly so when you have an army with statistically insignificant representation. So meh.

you probably should have read the next 2 posts this has been addressed.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

given that chaos dwarfs are currently 1 random model in a warcry warband, nowhere I guess.

Legion of azgorh from forge world is a playable army

The Legion of Azgorh is what I had in mind. In WFB the terms Chaos Dwarfs and Legion of Azgorh were used interchangeably.

Yeah I have never seen them on the table, and I don't even know anyone who has ever seen them.
Judging by that, and by the fact they don't have allegiance abilities (AFAIK) I'd guess they are pretty weak. Probably the very bottom.

A shame. They have such a beautiful model range.

and another in the upcoming Spire Tyrants warband, who looks closer to the old Chaos Dwarfs but has a beard more like the bog-standard Dwarfs unusually

Do you have a link to a picture?

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

Do you have a link to a picture?

The chap on the left. Still looks a bit different to the mainstream Chaos Dwarfs we know, but at least he isn't wearing a Christmas Tree helmet

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

The chap on the left. Still looks a bit different to the mainstream Chaos Dwarfs we know, but at least he isn't wearing a Christmas Tree helmet

Thanks for the picture.

Not a big fan of that model. I like the current FW models, as well as the old school aesthetic, but this one just doesn't do it for me.

 

[DeathBringer125]

So after our battletome where do you think Seraphon places now?

 

[Erta Wanderer]

So after our battletome where do you think Seraphon places now?

it's to early to tell but probably right in the middle

 

[Canas]

eh, if I'd have to make an educated guess middle-upper tier. As a mostly theoretical based on the tome:

+ Decent combo's
+ Loads of flexibility
+ Bound spells have interesting possibilities
+ Our mortal wound output & rend is finally good enough to put a dent in armour
+ Most of our units are at least decent-ish now, even unsupported
+ Our major allegiance abilities are decent

- Synergy dependent, so killing our support heroes is a rather effective counter
- Squishy support heroes, especially the skink heroes could use an extra wound or two
- Starborne: Summoning is kind of terrible (especially if that 1 spell/slann interpretation is correct)
- Coalesced: bravery issues, possibly some mobility issues as well
- Too few faction specific endless spells to steal that have interesting effects, as well as too few neutral endless spells to use ourselves.
- Comet call & the rule of one creates some weird issues for our spellcasters depending on what you bring, at least our lores are decent enough now.

Nothing stands out as truly overpowering and there's plenty of obvious weaknesses to take advantage of.

There's also some important stuff that needs to be F.A.Q-ed; afforementioned summoning, scaly skin and it's interaction with abilities/spells (the distinction of what is and isn't an "attack" is arbitrary and gamey at best, is this intended?), cold-blooded (bravery reducing mechanics are rare so really what's the point?), realmshape engine issues. And probably some other things as well which might have an impact.

Though I'd expect it to not change too much.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

@Canas : Where do the new KO fit in? How strong or weak are they?

 

[Canas]

@Canas : Where do the new KO fit in? How strong or weak are they?

from what I remember they're fairly mediocre (I don't play em, so not too sure)

Anyways:
+ great shooting
+ Loads of rend
+ fairly sturdy & elite troops with high saves & good stats
+ loads of high damage attacks, basicly every unit has some weapon option that does D3 damage or better.
+ Healing ships
+ Great mobility since you can hitch rides on your ship and/or garrison them, plus like 90% of your list flies anyway.
+ Surprisingly decent amount of unbinds given the lack of wizards
+ A disturbing amount of special weapons with odd effects (does make building a good unit a bit confusing at times though.. especially when you're just starting)

- No proper dedicated melee troops to protect your gunline (unless you bring allies, or are that one port that can take fyreslayers or dispossed)
- No magic
- "Look out sir" puts a damper on all that shooting
- Low number of attacks, 1 or 2 bad rolls will have an high impact if it causes that D3 damage attack to miss...
- Low model count so capturing objectives can be difficult and losses will hurt
- Ships degrade quickly as they get damaged
- Rend protection screws them over
- Very few mortal wounds
- Lacks defensive buffs and/or cannonfodder (e.g. skinks/zombies) to throw in the meatgrinder so their important stuff stays safe.

especially their low model count & quick degradation of their ships is something that holds them back. Also, the lack of defensive options does mean they're relativly easy to kill even if they do have high base saves. It seems like they're intended to rely on the fact that they outrange most opponents as their main form of "defense", after all can't get hurt if you shoot your opponent before he reaches your lines . But this does mean they can be difficult to use at times, especially without dedicated melee troops/cannonfodder to stand in front of yourgunline and eat the initial charge. Admittadly, if you're good I can imagine you can be extremely succesfull if you make neat killboxes with your gunline and constantly skirt around the enemy at max range.

 

[DeathBringer125]

from what I remember they're fairly mediocre (I don't play em, so not too sure)

Anyways:
+ great shooting
+ Loads of rend
+ fairly sturdy & elite troops with high saves & good stats
+ loads of high damage attacks, basicly every unit has some weapon option that does D3 damage or better.
+ Healing ships
+ Great mobility since you can hitch rides on your ship and/or garrison them, plus like 90% of your list flies anyway.
+ Surprisingly decent amount of unbinds given the lack of wizards
+ A disturbing amount of special weapons with odd effects (does make building a good unit a bit confusing at times though.. especially when you're just starting)

- No proper dedicated melee troops to protect your gunline (unless you bring allies, or are that one port that can take fyreslayers or dispossed)
- No magic
- "Look out sir" puts a damper on all that shooting
- Low number of attacks, 1 or 2 bad rolls will have an high impact if it causes that D3 damage attack to miss...
- Low model count so capturing objectives can be difficult and losses will hurt
- Ships degrade quickly as they get damaged
- Rend protection screws them over
- Very few mortal wounds
- Lacks defensive buffs and/or cannonfodder (e.g. skinks/zombies) to throw in the meatgrinder so their important stuff stays safe.

especially their low model count & quick degradation of their ships is something that holds them back. Also, the lack of defensive options does mean they're relativly easy to kill even if they do have high base saves. It seems like they're intended to rely on the fact that they outrange most opponents as their main form of "defense", after all can't get hurt if you shoot your opponent before he reaches your lines . But this does mean they can be difficult to use at times, especially without dedicated melee troops/cannonfodder to stand in front of yourgunline and eat the initial charge. Admittadly, if you're good I can imagine you can be extremely succesfull if you make neat killboxes with your gunline and constantly skirt around the enemy at max range.

Or like I did, teleport your entire army behind Nagash on turn 2 and kill him in 1 turn. My friend was very depressed. Nagash (his brand new model btw) got to do nothing but cast mystic shield.

 

[Canas]

Or like I did, teleport your entire army behind Nagash on turn 2 and kill him in 1 turn. My friend was very depressed. Nagash (his brand new model btw) got to do nothing but cast mystic shield.

yup, that works well with their ridiculous movement + shooting

Not sure how well that'd work as a general tactic though, most opponents won't give you the room to teleport your entire army, and generally won't be bringing such an obvious target as Nagash

 

[ILKAIN]

KO are in a weird spot. they aren't great, but they are the perfect counter to the current meta dominators (minus DoT of which GW just needs to nerf the absolute hell out of)

 

[DeathBringer125]

Yeah I definitely like them alot but they suffer from low models and almost no melee. The only good melee we have are some of our heroes (Brokk being prime example). Lol the list I ran was a fun list with everything being a Hitcher model (or skyship) aside from 2 squads of 10 arkanaut company.