40K: The Unbeatable List – LVO 2018

It’s all over and out of hundreds, only one list fought it’s way to the winner’s circle. Meet the current king of 40K’s Meta:

I would like to congratulate Nick Nanavati who took the 40K Championship with his list. Take a look:

Notice anything you might have seen before in competitive lists?

Say Dark Reapers? (who I bet are now on GW’s short list for a rules tweak)

or Ynarri? (who are equally destabilizing to the entire Aeldari faction)

What Makes the List Tick

Basically the list is extremely effective at ranged shooting by emphasizing Dark Reapers. The multiple Reaper units can lay down the heavy damage at range, and with 4 indirect fire Tempest Launcher Exarchs on the table, there is no hiding from them. Mixed with them is the power of Ynarri, giving them the ability to get two shooting phases with the Ynarri Reapers.

The Guardians and Shining Spears deploy via the Webway Strike strategem to come down and shoot and double move the Spears to assault and murder things.

The army is extremely flexible and can deploy everywhere with Rangers to cover any objectives encountered.

It has a potent Psychic Phase with Craftworld Eldar access to all the usual suspects such as with fortune, doom, guide, jinx, enverate etc.

It has access to al the Craftworld Strategems it needs.

The Ynarri detachment fields Shining Spears as Saim-Hann so they can advance and charge, combined with the double Ynarri move – means the unit can be across the table and assaulting what they need.

There are a pair of Wave Serpents that can hold the critical Dark Reapers to shield them from Alpha Strikes on turn 1, then disembark them and move out to cause trouble.

Fundamentally the list can do everything. Be all over the board, shoot extremely well, and counter assault as needed.

It’s an army that is extremely difficult to overcome who’s rules combos allows it to ignore many of the game’s rules.

In theory the list may have had a difficult opponent in the form of massed flamers, but it didn’t face such a list.

 

~ So what do you think of the current top list in 40K, and what will knock it off the top?

 

 

 

  • MarcoT

    “The Ynarri detachment fields Shining Spears as Saim-Hann so they can advance and charge, combined with the double Ynarri move – means the unit can be across the table and assaulting what they need.”
    Where would they get this ability from? It’s not the Saim-Hann trait.

    • PiotrekEtoo

      It’s a Saim-Hann dedicated strategem.

    • X078

      Yeah wondering the same thing, I have interpreted it that Ynnari cannot use specific Craftworld Stratagems (eg. (Saim Hann) unless there is a Pure Saim-Hann Craftworlds Detachment enabling it in the first place.
      The keyword is not just “Craftworld generic” it is specific like Alaitoc, Saim Hann etc.

      • James Allen

        Yeh I don’t see how he could legitimately be using strats for a faction of which he has no detachments to give access to those strats.

        • Gorsameth

          He has 2 full Craftworld detachments. Therefor he is allowed to use Craftworld Strategems. You don’t need a specific “Saim Han” detachment to unlock those from that specific craftworld. Just that you can only use them on units with .

          • Mandragola

            This is correct, and is among the things that probably ought to be fixed. Only units explicitly in a detachment should be allowed to have stratagems unlocked by that stratagem used on them.

            In this list at the moment, the alaitoc craftworld detachment is unlocking a stratagem to let Ynnari Saim Hann shining spears use the stratagem unique to their craftworld – which they have turned their backs on anyway. This one unit is getting the benefit of several factions at once, in other words.

            Having said all that, the ability of those bikers to advance and charge is not the problem with this list. Dark reapers are the problem. They are obviously underpriced, meaning they can be spammed very effectively. They also ought to have their unit size limited to 5 and should probably be made “bulky”, so you can’t fit them into transports so easily.

          • marxlives

            Didn’t Eldar already receive a point adjustment last year?

          • Mandragola

            No. They had their codex very close to the release of chapter approved, and that included lots of points changes. But the result is clearly unbalanced.

            In any case I’m arguing for more than points changes. Points aren’t all that’s wrong with Eldar right now, and especially with Dark Reapers.

            I think that you should have a rule across the board that faction bonuses only work on units in factions that unlock them. That’s effectively what’s been done with daemons, to prevent deep striking Magnus using the daemon strat, and I think it’s a good system.

            And Ynnari shouldn’t get to benefit from craftworld attributes at all. Otherwise they are just craftworld eldar +1.

            Part of the problem with reapers is their unit size. You can get a huge amount of efficiency from using a power like guide or the deep strike stratagem on 10 of these guys. Limiting the unit size to 5 would be a good idea. I’d probably do the same for shining spears. These guys get to field units of 3, unlike other aspects, so it makes sense to limit their maximum size to 5 (or 6 in the case of spears, since they come in sets of 3).

            Finally, even if an army had gone through points adjustments I don’t think you should assume they couldn’t be changed again in future.

          • Unit size is one thing, but the real problem is the 3 Dmg the krak missiles do. If it were d3 it would approach something like balance. Dark Reapers remove many of the balancing factors that most other heavy weapons have, and that coupled with their bargain-basement price has resulted in Codex: Yynnnnaarriii Dark Reaper. Thumbs down.

          • marxlives

            I could see the faction bonus change as good. It reminds of Warmachine’s theme forces. You get bonuses for playing within theme and it provides a new players a guide to build around without having to navigate across factions.

          • Spade McTrowel

            Dark Reapers are not the problem – the Tempest launcher is.

            It needs to lose the indirect fire. It’s not even a DR aspect.

            Though, TBH, just nixing Ynarri wouldn’t cause me any tears…

          • Muninwing

            wow. that’s brilliant on his part to exploit.

            stupid on GW’s part to allow.

            and a great reason to not play in a tournament if you actually like the game as a game.

            he knew it too… look at the comment at the bottom.

          • Manouel Tiger

            NO !
            look at the FAQ

      • D W Hawthorne

        Ynnari units with the relevant keywords can use the specific Craftworld Stratagems. This is true for all armies. While my personal opinion is that they should restrict them… they haven’t, and currently they are working as intended.

        • X078

          I have always viewed it as a quite clear restriction. But if it’s not then an FAQ to clarify the restrictions needs to come ASAP methinks.

          • OctopusVolcano

            If you read the rules the wording is pretty clear; you need a battleforged eldar detachment to get access to craftworld strategms.

            if thats not their intention: In order for them to clarify and restrict it so you need a full detachment of, for example, saim hann to use that strategm, theyre going to have to re word EVERY faction-specific strategm. because theyre all the same.

            For example they’re nothing to stop me having a full detachment of Mars admech, and a imperial keyword detachment with celestine and some marine scouts along with a couple of units of stygies Dragoons so i can use the stygies stragem to scout them and deploy yhem anywhere on the board.

            Likewise i can include a unit of destroyers and use Ryza’s plasma strategm to allow them D6 shot str 8 +1 wound, 3dmg shots on overcharge.

          • Styrr Rayner

            In this case you get access to the stratagems but not the forgeworld dogmas. so you could scout your dragoon put they would not get the additional -1 to hit.

          • OctopusVolcano

            Precisely. Most of the dogmas for the forgeworlds with good strategms are a bit rubbish, so we don’t mind losing access to those in most cases. Stygies being the one big exception 😁

          • X078

            Doesn’t really say that as i see it. For stratagems it points out that yes you need to be Battleforged and have Craftworlds detachments but if you read the details about the craftworld keyword (Warhosts of the Asuryani) it specifically points out that you replace the keyword with the chosen Craftoworld name in question e.g. Alaitoc etc.

            It’s a bit clearer in the Custodes Codex where they point it out on the same page that to get the Special rules or abilities the detachments need to only include Custodes units.

          • Mandragola

            The limitations are different for the different bonuses.

            For Stratagems, you need a craftworld detachment. But the units you play the stratagems on don’t need to be in that detachment.

            For craftworld attributes, you need a detachment only from that craftworld (plus phoenix lords). Only units in that detachment get the bonuses.

            And for warlord traits and relics you just need a craftworld warlord.

          • Gorsameth

            Just a tiny addendum. You can get Relics from other sources then your Warlord so long as you pay the CP.
            So this list has an Ynnari Warlord but he can spend 1 CP to give a Beil-tan Relic to his Biel-tan Spirit Seer (which he did).

          • Morollan

            I think you need to read that section again. It simply says that where a datasheet has the keyword you choose which Craftworld that unit is from.

            If you want to benefit from a Craftworld trait then all units in that detachment must have the same Craftworld but there is nothing that says that other units outside of that detachment have to share the same Craftworld.

            It’s a perfectly legal tactic and if you’re not playing it that way that’s fine but it’s a houserule, not RAW.

          • Orkimedes

            What makes the interaction feel strange is that Ynnari has its own faction ability, and an Eldar unit can be both simultaneously Ynnari and something else. In your example, the Stygies dragoons lose their faction ability, because there is no “imperium” faction ability.

            The Saim-Hann jetbikes lose their Saim-Hann faction ability, but gain a (better) one by becoming Ynnari, while still being able to benefit from craftworlds stratagems.

            I’m not saying it’s not current RAW, but it’s something that’s unique to a Eldar right now and feels like a very awkward rules interaction.

          • OctopusVolcano

            Yeah I hadn’t thought about that. They’re not actually losing their trait for being in a soup list. I personally not even own on having 2 detachments of different factions anyway, but some armies don’t have a strong enough focus within a single one to not do it.

        • Spade McTrowel

          “…currently they are working as intended.”

          Well, working as written, anyway.

        • Stuarty

          I’d suggest that some of this would have been fixed if taking the Ynnari faction keyword then replaced the ,craftworld> keyword in addition to the Ayurani keyword.

          You could still pull this kind of thing with a non-Ynnari soup list, but it would feel less cheesy than doing it in a Ynnari-Asyurani crossover list

  • Dan Brugman

    It’s a tourney, so I wont harp on it too much, but I find it really hard not to roll my eyes at a list that has two different craftworlds and Ynarri in the same army let alone the same detachment…

    • J Mad

      Its in the rules, its a tournament. I would never expect anything else lol.

    • happy_inquisitor

      Ynarri are supposed to be cross-faction. That is their *thing* – along with an unhealthy love of death of course.

      That list ended up in a perfect mirror-match with a player who had copied it. Clearly both very strong players choosing the strongest list for the format but also clearly at the front of the queue for a bit of downward tweaking with the next FAQ cycle in a couple of months.

  • L1nners

    What a load of guff this article is. Yes, Dark reapers are incredibly strong, but this list gets absolutely wrecked by any mass infantry army with a combat threat, or good old 7 Flyrant Nids just take it off the table in a couple of turns.

    • Crevab

      And yet the guy that made this won with it, so….

      • ZeeLobby

        Because it either doesn’t “get absolutely wrecked by any mass infantry army with a combat threat” in the hands of a skilled player, or all the reaper-spam lists winning as of late managed to dodge all those lists (which seems hard to believe). Either way it clearly does well into the current meta.

        • Nyyppä

          The current meta does not really have actual massed infantry in torunaments, or so I believe. The masses take time to move and there’s very little of that in that kind of environment. That means less turns and since the foot sloggers are relatively slow they get comparatively less done than their more elite quicker opponents. With less than 4h time to play I would not bring 100+ models unless simply deploying them is enough….which it practically never is.

          • ZeeLobby

            IG and Tyranids definitely have a tournament presence. It’s not that long ago IG were tearing up competitive play. And most the Imperial lists have an IG component. So mass infantry is definitely present. I’d also find it hard to believe in that preparing for a tournament, all 4 of those Eldar lists (which likely contain reaper-spam at it’s core) spent no time testing into mass infantry from Orks/Tyranids. I think it’s more likely that in the hands of a skilled player, it does just fine.

          • Nyyppä

            This may all be true. I’m not too familiar with the current tournament meta, just the codex standings.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, I used to participate a lot, now I just follow. But mass infantry is definitely a lot more popular now then it ever was in 6th/7th. The ability to wound anything, etc. My guess is this list can just put out enough firepower, and severely hampers massed shooting in return (assuming they’re -1 to hit) which usually has lower BS anyway. Again, it could be that all the top Eldar players dodged all the infantry lists, but there were definitely some present, and I’m sure they had a plan for facing them. Would be great to get the full tournament spread.

          • marxlives

            Didn’t you get the memo Zee, 8th is ALL about the elite, small model count armies and builds.

          • ZeeLobby

            I’ll just chalk it up as a side effect of having 23 Custodes articles in a row on BoLS. It seems to have supplanted the previous 22 articles claiming that hordes ruled 8th XD.

          • marxlives

            That is true the custodes storm was weird. It was like “Custodes are a super elite force that can rock it in 8th” and then it became, “Custodes are a great addendum to IG”. Its always 2/3 hype 1/3 truth on any of these factions news. Basically just wait for Goatboy to release a force list article and you will git gud.

          • ZeeLobby

            It was a strange one for sure. Especially for a faction of like 8 things. They hammered it like crazy.

          • marxlives

            Ya, Custodes are really cool looking but it took Goatboy to be honest and basically say Custodes is a about make Guard Great again….again. That guy is my north star. Especially for new players. All the hype might get a new player to go all in on a pure custodes force and wonder why they are getting trounced. But with GB new players can make a competitive force and just worry about learning how to use it, not about make erroneous purchases.

          • ZeeLobby

            Too true. And what I find sad is that people give him such crap for it. Sure he never writes the best lists, but they’re good starter lists for sure. People fail to realize that people enjoy winning when they play, even non-competitive players. What no one enjoys is buying $2000 worth of models and losing continuously…

          • marxlives

            That is true, especially with the cost involved it is important to be truthful to new players. A lot of new players who jumped onto 8th have dropped off in my area with the veteran base staying strong. And a lot of it has to do with veterans telling new players that 40k 8th is a take what you want and play as you want type of game. They are not stressing the importance of characters, volume of fire, alpha strike, screening the alpha strike. People can feel one way or another bout those components but they are there. And advising new players to build their lists without those concepts in mind is just setting them up for horrific failure.

          • Muninwing

            sounds like their recurrent choices to alienate veteran players to throw a bone to attract new players is one more short-term-gain plan with unsustainable results from the business world…

          • marxlives

            It is a dangerous ground to walk on if you are an established company like GW, PP, or FFG. As your range grows it becomes more complicated and is harder to get into. I think the strength PP and FFG has in the long term is how all the factions at this point have all the tools necessary to get the job down within faction.

            In a way, the keyword mechanic hurts more than helps because as a new player navigating a faction is hard enough. Now having to have a soup and draw from 2-3 codexes is a crazy barrier to entry.

            I understand GW’s short term decision, use the keywords to bolster factions without have to invest heavily into new models for less popular factions. At the same time, in the long term it just makes the game more labyrinthine for new players.

            I think this is why you see excitement growing for Legions. Its new, limited faction, and everyone is starting from the same place when navigating the meta. It goes beyond the IP itself, though that does play a big part.

          • ZeeLobby

            Haha. Yeah. It is definitely not a “take whatever you want and you can win” gaming system. None really are, but this is worse than others, since for some factions you really need to go outside the faction to get the tool you need. At least in other systems most of the tools you need are internal to the faction. They might not be the BEST faction at doing task X, but they at least have a way to do it, and with good skills, can win.

          • marxlives

            True, I used to be a huge thousand sons fan and if someone told me it was cool to do a pure TS list, it would be a huge let down to be stomped because I should have also fielded daemons. A good example I guess is the difference between Mercs and Convergence. CoC is very self contained as a faction but man they can stomp hard and they usually place 3rd or higher in the Iron Gauntlet due to them having all the tools necessary within faction to be successful. Mercs is more difficult to figure out because you have Mercs, Partisan, and Theme allowances. I definitely would give a player more input on a Merc choice of a starter faction than a CoC. With the current soup in the 40k meta every faction is a Merc faction and it is even more important now for new players to actually get lists that work in 40k from an experienced player and grow from there.

    • J Mad

      Psshhh you need 10 Flyrants
      Meme# “You gotta pump those numbers up, those are rookie numbers’

    • marxlives

      If you are planning around winning in a couple of turns rather than just one you are playing wrong.

    • But yet 4 of the top 8, and both finalists played variants of this list, and no Nid players made it to the top 10.

    • eMtoN

      When a tournament game only lasts 2 rounds – that mass infantry army doesn’t have a chance to bring all its guns to bear before it’s over.

      Sure this list would lose but it won’t lose until T4 or T5.

  • Nyyppä

    Well, either there’s something there that we do not know about, this list didn’t work like the article claims it does OR there’s cheating involved.

    • J Mad

      The article mixed up some wording. He didnt cheap.

      • ZeeLobby

        Not shocking BoLS adds to the confusion, lol.

  • Elliott Cross

    How are the eldar allowed to basically have 2 traits? Shouldn’t it be a choice of ynaeri or Saim Hamm it be like saying when they come out deathwatch will get a specific deathwatch bonus plus the chapter tactic and straitigem for every chapter of marines u have present on the board.

    • D W Hawthorne

      You misunderstand. He loses the benefits of the Saim Hann trait in exchange for the Ynnari Keyword, but since he does not lose the Saim Hann keyword he can still use the Saim Hann specific Stratagem: Warrior of the Raging Winds. If he benefited from the Saim Hann trait: Wild Host, then he would be able to reroll failed charges, but he can’t.

      • Elliott Cross

        Then I agree with some of the people above he can’t use Saim hann stratagems as it’s not a complete Saim hann detachment. If I put guiliman in my vahallan gaurd battalion for the hell of it I should be able to use the straigems, trait and order for that regiment as it not a pure detachment. Or did I read the regiment rules incorrectly.

        • Karru

          Of course not, does Guilliman have the Keyword option? No, he doesn’t.

          Does the Eldar units have the Ynnari AND Keyword? Yes they do. In the place of that Craftworld, you can place any Craftworld you want freely.

          Meanwhile, unless the wording is completely different in the Eldar book, in the Guard book it says:

          “If your army is Battle-forged and includes any Astra Militarum Detachments (excluding Auxiliary Support Detachments), you have access to the Stratagems shown below.”

          Nowhere does it state that you can only use the Regiment specific stratagems if you have a detachment of that type in your army. If you take a mishmash detachment of various units with different regiments, you can use the stratagems, since they are meant to work only on units with that keyword.

          So back to the original point, working as intended. Remember, 8th edition is not about balance or fluff-friendly lists, it is mostly about min-maxing CP, optimising lists and coming up with broken combos.

          • Elliott Cross

            Ok so my understanding of what ynnari replaced was wrong. It replaces the aeldari key word. Would make more sense for it to replace the craftworld, cabal, troop ability.

          • Huntard

            It doesn’t replace the Aeldari, it actually -adds- the Ynnari keyword to their existing keywords.

          • Fergie0044

            same as ever edition before it then? (except for CPs)

          • Karru

            Pretty much, GW tried to sell this edition as the one where lore-friendly and themed lists would be rewarded. I still find that funny that people actually believed them.

          • Drpx

            I didn’t, but it’s not really their fault that math runs the universe.

          • Karru

            I mean, the thing is that it is stupid easy to make it so that themed lists actually get rewarded but unfortunately that doesn’t bring as many sales as the current approach so they won’t do it.

      • ZeeLobby

        Man. If anyone thought list building in 8th would be easier, I’m not seeing it, lol. Then again I haven’t tried a ton of cross-faction shenanigans.

  • el_tigre

    5 different infantry/biker units, 5 different HQs, a couple of dedicated transports. We’ve seen a lot worse. It might be a little spammy, but it looks as though it’s at least subtler than some of the point and click winners of yore.

  • Majere613

    I have to agree, though it’s not the player’s fault since I’m sure he checked with the organisers beforehand, that being Ynnari and still having Craftword-specific keywords is flat-out wrong. Stratagem abuse is one of the worst things about competitive 8th Ed at the moment and this is a particularly egregious example.

    • ZeeLobby

      Yeah. Some tighter restrictions or better wording/explanation would help.

    • BaronSnakPak

      The list was actually created by the head organizer, Reece.

      • Nathaniel Wright

        appeal to authority, doesn’t make it any less wrong.

        • BaronSnakPak

          I think it makes it worse, personally. The guy who wrote the tournament and had the most time to think about it, wrote the winning list for someone else. Leaves a bad taste.

          • marxlives

            I could see that, it is one of the reasons I don’t like the person running the tournament participating in it. It is more of an optics thing than a malice thing.

      • and wasn’t he one of the playtesters for 8th?

        • BaronSnakPak

          Yes

    • They gain the Ynnari Keyword, it doesnt replace anything so I am not sure why you are saying its wrong.

  • Antoine Henry

    Its been like day 1 we ask for a Dark Reaper nerf…They release codex and make them cheaper… This version with Stratagems, specific rules and inter-codex alliance is already getting worse than 7th…

    • Nyyppä

      It’s eldar. They do not nerf SM or eldar….

    • J Mad

      Yes 20 S8 shots or 50 S5 is worst tham 160 S6 and D-weapons. This list is only 17 Dark Reapers, it has more Troops in it than Reapers…..

      • ZeeLobby

        Sucks for those who can’t soup, lol. I’d also argue that the reaper spam definitely doesn’t hurt. 8th rebalanced the whole field. You can’t really compare them to the scatbikes of old as many things have been dialed down from 7th.

        • Muninwing

          soup is such a huge detriment to the game, whether it be an imperium stew or a sparse eldar broth.

          i have wanted since 6th to see a penalty for each extra detachment, and each added faction. now it’s pretty obvious what happens when we do not have one.

          • ZeeLobby

            Agreed, and now that people have bought those models to use together, I just don’t see GW having the balls to go the other way.

          • Muninwing

            if GW had the intent and the balls to create a game that played well competitively, they’d have been spot-patching with FAQs every three months for the last decade.

            instead, they’ve only just remembered that FAQs are a thing…

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah. That’s true. Even then, FAQing doesn’t cost them players or sales, hence requires mini balls. At most you might alienate a small group that loves one OP unit. Now changing force org to drastically reduce allies and unit choices, and you’re invalidating entire armies almost. Def requires big balls, but it’s what the game needs.

      • Antoine Henry

        17 Dark Reapers is still strong enough. In a meta where many armies have -1 to hit and buffs, those are cheap as hell for what they do. They do need to count at least more than a devastator, at least more than 37 points.

  • Fergie0044

    Here’s a way to curb abusive lists, with two new beta rules;

    -the number of detachments allowed in matched play is now limited. So 0-1000pts is 1, 1001-2000pts is 2 etc.

    -In matched play you must select one detachment as your primary detachment. This doesn’t have to be your largest but it must contain your warlord. You can only use strats from the codex of your primary detachment. Other interaction still apply (i.e. nurgle daemon auras and abilities effecting possessed DG marines etc) but now there’s no more mixing and matching strats.

    • Ordones

      Well, right now we have 1001-2000 pts – 3 detachments max. I dont like one less. Hard to get CP.

      So, in this case, Player will not be able to use any stratagems? Cuz, Warlord is Yannari and we don’t have codex for them. Pretty bad rule for Eldars.

      • J Mad

        Agree, detachments isnt the problem. Honestly this lists isnt very spam at all. Many different units, only 17 Dark Reaper models actually. When 10 is the normal anyways, 7 isnt much more.

        He had more in HQ’s than anything (Something Eldar is good at).

        I would like to see Dark Reapers points change but not to stop them from being used, but to give the chance of other units being played.

      • Fergie0044

        Hard to get CPs is the point. Although I suppose this will make the easy to build brigade factions too powerful.
        And yeah, will work better in 6 months time when everyone has a codex.

    • J Mad

      Dont agree at all. this hurts to many armies. A better fix would be Comp scores for CP. Or max CP to 10 or something, thats if CP is the problem (and its not)

      • Fergie0044

        Hurts who? (Genuinely asking btw)
        I guess I just like to see ‘pure’ armies better than the soup lists and whatnot.

        • ZeeLobby

          Yeah. Sadly competitively pure is gone. At least in the top ranks. GW will never limit buying and combining multiple armies, and allies will never be restricted or go away. The days of owning a single faction are just over in that regard. One of the reasons I play other systems now for the competitive itch.

          • Fergie0044

            Yeah, sad times. I don’t even know why I follow all this ‘top tier list’ stuff. Its so far removed from the 40k i play it might as well be a different game!
            Morbid curiosity i guess.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah. I used to play at many major events up until 5th. I kind of continued through 6th/7th, but got more into events with fun restrictions as super friends and allies filling weaknesses became a thing. Now I just do narrative events.

            I’m hoping all this changes with their updates/FAQs/etc. There would be less incentive to make soup lists if factions had greater balance. I’m also not a fan of some factions having much more soup than others. But those things definitely drive me away from wanting to play at these major events. I get a lot more enjoyment out of playing my Orks-4-Life friend than playing the best units cherry picked from 4 Imperial factions.

        • J Mad

          Remember i’m talking about CP, these armies either need multi detachment or soup

          Custodes (they dont get CP easily).
          DE (currently many units are so under powered you need to spam certain ones)
          SoB (literally no reason to use Troops when for 1pt more your Fast and Heavy units all can take weapons, so you dont have the CP of 1 Detachment)

          I have had games as pure DE where i only have 5 CP (2 Detachments) I won the game (against Razorback Gman Spam, but i was lucky b.c i has Paper and he was Rock) but if i have stratagems i wouldnt be able to use them, i used 1+ per turn for a re-roll.

          I mean 6 CP really isnt a lot at all.

          You can do Battalion DE for me CP, but then your force to take another worthless HQ. DE doesnt have units like Dark Reapers or Farseers and Spirit/warlocks, or Shiny Spears, they need every point into the few good units they have.

          • Fergie0044

            Fair enough. Hopefully things will get better for you with a new codex.

          • euansmith

            Aren’t DE always scissors?

          • J Mad

            Coven is their hammer, but coven are extremely over costed. 120pts for a worst carnifex as an example

    • 1000 points for a detachment isn’t even a good idea either. It forces “fluffy” lists to degrade into stuff like commander spam. Imo the only very solid solution to all this crap is to go back to % used as in 2nd Edition. 25% max heavy, 25% max hq, 50%+ standard, max 50% elite/FA.

      • Fergie0044

        How so? I would hope that a single detachment would ‘force’ most people to use the standard battalion detachment, which is at least more balanced.
        I’m too young in the hobby to know about that, but yeah % sound good!

  • Gorsameth

    Is it the unbeatable list when it had to beat itself twice to win?

    (3 out of the top 4 lists were (almost) direct copies. The 4th being an Imperial Soup.

    • ZeeLobby

      If he went in with dodging in mind (along with those others) I’d say he was very gutsy. Tournament metas have been anything but consistent lately with massed codex releases. I find it hard to believe they only practiced into mirror matches prior to the event as well. So while “unbeatable” is always a silly term, it’s definitely strong.

    • SacTownBrian

      And the Soup list lost on a technicality. This is more play than list however it is hyper efficient in the meta for the ITC missions.

  • I_am_Alpharius

    People may perhaps disagree, but I have to say it is generally difficult to judge the true competitiveness of a list on the wider game, based on the outcome of tournaments. Obviously, they are good for a broad overview. I say this for a couple of reasons.

    Firstly, tournaments generally have a skew distribution of Factions and style of list. This means that are not a broad enough range to really test a list. In addition, players tend to approach their list building in such a way to push the rules as far as they can; which, leads to armies or extremes.

    Secondly, often tournaments adopt various house rules. This will be for one reason or another (and there is nothing wrong with that), but it does mean Factions/List are being tested under a light that is not a true reflection of how the rules are intended to work. Case in point: At the LVO the missions being played are tweaked from the ones found in the Core Rules and the way VP are earned are different, – these changes will small influence outcomes. Also they apply a change to the way Ruins work – in that they make it so the bottom level walls of all ruins are considered to block LoS even if they do not actually do so, this will have a huge impact on the ability of you opponent to target and attack units, and therefore the effectiveness of some play styles.

    Now let me be clear, I am not saying there is anything particularly wrong with this as the organiser, for whatever reason feel it makes for a “better” tournament they wish to run. At the end of the day house rules are a thing, even in friendly games. However, it does colour the full picture and reality of thing on the everyday friendly day. As such, it does not mean a particular Faction is “broken” or needs “nerfing”.

    • ZeeLobby

      Could mean that other factions need buffing though. I mean if they don’t plan on curbing reaper-spam in some way, other factions will need something as lethal to compete. Some have that already, but many don’t. And as those factions are buffed, the likelihood of something dropping that’s even more powerful is higher. So then you start an arms race. I think people need to get over the perception that negative/positive changes to a factions power is somehow a bad/good thing. In the end it’s just better for the game as a whole, though it definitely stings those who went out and bought 40x unit X.

    • Snord

      My experience of tournaments is you can wrong-foot tournament-obsessed players by taking unconventional lists. Players who develop or copy lists like this are focused on defeating a narrow range of other supposed killer lusts. A list like this will work against other players who are slaves to the “meta”.

      • Drpx

        Watched a tourney player almost go to tears once because he did a practice match the day before with someone and their list stomped him. At the point all his friends could do to reassure him was say that he probably wouldn’t be matched with that guy the next day and his list would still hard counter everyone else.

        • ZeeLobby

          Just like when narrative players go to tears when I destroy their puny hand-crafted character with my unstoppable WAAC force. MuahahahaHaHaHAHAHA!

          • Drpx

            Difference is that they have to play you in tourney.

          • ZeeLobby

            Why, I trick them, and then feed off their tears!!! The tears of the other side, there is no better, muahahaHaHaHAHA

      • My experience matches yours as well. There are players that go to tournaments knowing their list won’t win the tournament but are counters to some of the more gregariously busted lists, and they go to wreck people’s overall standings.

        Kind of like goblins in blood bowl lol

      • ZeeLobby

        True to a degree. There’s still a ton of skill that goes in at the top though. Anyone whose been at top tables, or has seen top games play out can vouch for that.

        • There is to a point yes. I finished top 10 in a few GTs “back in the day” as did several local members when we did GTs.

          I’m not going to tell you I have great skill. I got super lucky in my matchups.

          My eldar list (3rd ed) was a terror but only because I never encountered orks or nids.

          My vampire count list was a terror but only because I got super lucky in my matchups.

          My 5th ed chaos whfb army was a terror for the same reasons.

          Against my counter, I would regularly lose.

          So I question – was I really good at the game, or just really lucky in who I drew to face in those days?

          • ZeeLobby

            It was a combination of both, for sure. I really doubt your as “poor” of a player as you wish you were to make this argument, haha. I honestly think you probably do have good/great skill.

            That aside, luck is always involved in any tournament. But we can clearly look at the results throughout a year and notice the same people rising to the top. All players at every event have access to the internet, and have probably seen or practiced against the lists those players use to win.

            While I normally only made it to the top 10-30 for most events, I played many of those lists as well, and in the hands of a bad player, you can still pull out a victory against them. Usually bad players ignore objectives, or don’t know your opponent’s armies, can’t prioritize threats (which is 40K in a nuttshell), etc. These are all things you probably do well, and which top players perfect, regardless of their lists.

          • Yeah I agree. Bad players wiill always be bad. WAAC lists in my hands I do great. Non waac lists (not bad lists, just casual friendly lists) I usually do 50/50 but can never beat a waac list without my own.

          • ZeeLobby

            Well of course. You’re manually balancing GW’s imbalanced playing field. Doesn’t mean you don’t have skill though. And I imagine if you played a casual list into a different community your win rate would be well above 50/50. It’s that your playing casual lists into other equally skilled players playing casual lists.

            I’ve definitely thrashed casual players with casual lists and lower skills. I’m sure you have as well, it just might not be common because your community finds itself on an equal skill level.

          • Muninwing

            one local tournament at the tail end of 6th was a great illustrator of this.

            i brought my DA, and built around the Dakkabanner (all units in 6″ turned their bolters into salvo 2/4… meaning that when i stood still, every bolter was 24″ and 4 shots… and hurricane bolters too, so my LRC and my Darktalon counted too).

            my first round was against Nids. i crushed him in 3 rounds by weight of fire. it was no context.

            my third round was against IG, and the player knew what he was doing. i took him apart, and got some lucky rolls in, but he used cover well and took out some key units. all in all it was the most fun of the day, and i pulled off a late-turn victory after almost losing.

            but the second round… it was short-end deployment against Tau. nothing i did was going to let me win a game where i had to footslog across a board against long-range shooters in the shootiest edition of the game. i was lucky that i didn’t take a major hit.

            i’ve run armored company against massed IG infantry and won ridiculously fast, then encountered a quick Eldar list that outstripped me to objectives in the following round. and it’s been entirely about the matchup. that’s not skill, that’s luck.

          • That is precisely it. Its not about skill but about luck of the matchup.

          • Muninwing

            i’d love to see a larger 5-round tournament have the first three games against high-count, low-count, and balanced armies.
            then, compile score, and pair by score for the last two.

            the people on the cusps of the categories (because it’d have to be done evenly more or less) might skew the intention, but it’d at least give some sort of consideration to what seem to be the biggest concerns right now. later, that might change, and could be adjusted for differently.

    • SacTownBrian

      They also house ruled vehicle cover rules.

      • oh, magoo…

        Do you happen to know how they houseruled it?

  • orionburn III

    Buddy of mine watched the live stream of the games. From what I gather the guy that won called out another player in an earlier game about a rules issues (something with deep striking or reserves). Not sure if that had led to a heated exchange on rules or what happened. Anyone have an idea on what that was about?

    Honestly the list doesn’t look that bad outside of spamming the reapers. This edition will be about abusing the stratagems/keywords as much as possible. It’s a tourney so I get that it’s a no holds barred deal.

    • ZeeLobby

      Yeah, definitely can’t fault the players, though I feel like it’s quickly falling back into the haves vs have-nots of earlier editions. If your faction can soup, and has good stratagems, you’re a large leg up, just as having the right detachments/formations and their buffs boosted factions in 6th/7th.

      • orionburn III

        Yep. Don’t get me wrong, you can still have a helluva lot of fun in this edition. Tourneys are going to be spamming & abusing as usual, but that’s to be expected. Even locally abuse will still happen. I got a good chuckle watching friends argue online with a few crying fould that they could not longer deep strike Morty & Magnus now. Never mind that they were deep striking 2 LOWs/Primarchs in a single list where my Nids don’t even have a freaking LOW (yes I’m exclusing FW models). Our group is at least good at players saying they’re looking for a game and they plan on bringing Morty. If I set up a game and I’m playing my Nids then I’ll ask that those guys not make it to the table.

        • ZeeLobby

          Oh no doubt. Liking the competitive side I was kind of hoping this edition would be different, though deep down I knew it probably wouldn’t. But yeah, for fun/narrative games this edition works fine. Same pre-game discussion needed as in 6th and 7th, but you can find players out there who will usually abide.

      • As someone who has lots of options, the three detachments really limit the benefits of being able to soup. If I want strategems I need pure detachments.

        Eldar get to avoid this with Ynnari not replacing the craftworld keyword.

        • ZeeLobby

          I mean 3/4 of the imperial lists in the top 10 were soup lists, so clearly it’s not that hard for Imperials at least. Chaos in general suffers from just not having that many good options. And everyone else has no options.

          • What I mean is that what you are seeing with 3 detachments is just a taste of what is truly possible for soup lists. I play chaos and only having three can really hamstring what you want to do

          • ZeeLobby

            OHHHHH. I get it, I thought you meant 3 was a limitation. I got you. Yeah. I’ve seen the Guilliman, Celestine, IG, + more lists.

    • So one of my friends lost to the BA player in an early round because he used the 3d6 stratagem when he couldn’t. Not sure which BA player it was, but that is most likely what they are referring to. So the other player learned he couldnt do it and then called him out when he tried. No intentional cheating, just a misunderstanding which happens.

    • That whole exchange was caught on camera… https://clips.twitch.tv/JollyFragileCheetahPeteZarollTie

  • Jose Luis Camarasa

    Shouldn’t all units from a batallion share the same “chapter” keyword? For example, i’m usung tyranids, and I have a behemoth detachment, all my bugs should be behemoth, isn’t? I find kind of confusing that you are allowed to mix all the “chapters” that you want but only able to use one trait.

    For example, I understand that chaos can mix chaos marks, that doesn’t have anything to do with the trait itself. But when it comes to keywords that can, or not, be asociated with a trait rules depending of your choice for the detachment, it starts to get messy…

    • Kabal1te

      You don’t get trait rules if you mix s but you can still use appropriate strats. Since ynarri don’t get trait rules anyway there is no reason to not get creative. What’s more since ynarri are made up of eldar from all over the place it is technically actually fluffy… Not that saying that makes this list less cheese.

    • Gorsameth

      For your trait you need to be ‘pure’. (like the 2 Allaitoc detachments are, they get the -1 to hit outside of 12″).

      To be legal you just need to share a faction keyword. In this case all units in all detachments share the keyword.

      The units in the Ynnari detachment do not gain the trait bonuses but they can be the target of Craftworld Eldar Stratagems, providing the have the correct trait.
      These stratagems are unlocked to be used by the Allaitoc detachments.

  • Huntard

    The lack of basic rules knowledge for 8th edition in this thread is staggering. I highly recommend for everyone claiming he couldn’t use the Saim Hann stratagems re-read their rulebook and their codex thoroughly. Warhammer 40k is a relatively rules-dense game and you do a disservice to yourself and any potential opponents by not grasping the interactions that can happen on the tabletop.

  • Locomotive breath

    I watched the final match at LVO which was a mirror match of this list. It was one of the most disappointing things I’ve ever seen in 40K. The losing opponent (Tony Grippando) who was apparently the #1 play in the world did not know this list or any of the rules associated with it and asked his opponent “whats the rules for this?” throughout the game, because he had copied it from his opponent 2 weeks prior to the event. He acted like a complete child and pouted the whole game after being corrected in his use of a stratagem. He “pretended” not to know a wave serpent couldn’t land on top of a building. His opponent was a class act the entire time and it made me sick to hear him constantly ” apologize” to Tony for beating him. It was basically a microcosm of whats wrong with the entire ITC scence

    • I_am_Alpharius

      Maybe I am being dim here, yet where exactly in the rules does it say a Wave Serpent type Vehicle, i.e. one with FLY, can’t finish its movement on top of a build? Was it a tournament rule?

      • Locomotive breath

        Not sure where it is but i know i saw him do it and the judge came over and corrected him and he moved it back to its original position

        • I_am_Alpharius

          Hmmm odd.

    • Drpx

      Kind of sad to think that’s who GW designed 8th edition for. Kids and 30+ year old men who act like kids.

  • Defenestratus

    Ahh so we’re all back to hating the Eldar again.

    All systems nominal. Glad I’m sitting this edition out.

    • orionburn III

      Give it a few more weeks until the Tau codex comes out, then it’ll be back to hating them more than anyway else…lol

    • ZeeLobby

      Haha. Doesn’t help that GW just can’t help but make Eldar good, and then once good, better.

  • Hrudian

    To be honest this doesn’t seem as spammy cheesy as I’d imagine. It’s a quite flexible list with different kind of units. Yes it’s strong and yes there a more than e few Dark Reapers but it’s not a one trick pony.

    I have seen worse.

  • Mike Zoghby

    I’m a long-time Eldar player that has never given the competitive thing a chance but I want to chime in on the reaper thing. I’ve loved Dark Reapers and Ra since 3rd and always thought they were the most dope Aspect. I’m bummed to see them used this way – I personally run 5 and my Exarch is the old metal exarch with a Shuriken cannon so… that’s what he has. I think instead of doing something knee-jerk like we all know GW is capable of (wazzup Conscripts, Blue Horrors, insert unit name that is now worthless because of knee-jerk nerfing) they should look at what makes the unit problematic. It’s pretty obvious that 3-man units with a “free” Exarch and a tempest launcher is a far departure from the economy of previous codices where the Exarch was a paid upgrade and Tempest Launchers didn’t exist AND you had to have 5 men to buy one. Why don’t they just control the unit size? Force a 5-man buy to get an Exarch. Pay for him. Make them 8 pts a model before guns instead of 5. The spammy-ness is the problem – not the unit. And maybe it’s just my crew’s meta but… the strength 4 on the tempest launcher makes it kindof a downer. Anyone shot plague marines with plague surgeon with that launcher? It doesn’t kill anything…

    • I think a combination of Ynnari adding instead of replacing a keyword, and strategems not being detachment limited, cause most of the problems we are seeing.

  • vodswyld

    I watched the finals match live. What the article does not tell you is that it ended up being a mirror match. This list ended up on top TWICE. The controversial Saim-Hann strategem actually ended up being pivotal. The other guy (Tony I think was his name) didn’t declare he was using it in such a way it was understood, which caused him not to be able to do a critical charge and lost him the game.

  • Randy Randalman

    It has a lot more to do with the player; I mean, I have an Astra Militarum list, a Tyranids list, and an Orks list (yes, Orks), that routinely beat this Eldar ones.

    That said, GW is already working on tweaking the ol’ Dark Reaper.

    • ZeeLobby

      No doubt. I mean any bloke off the street with lacking skills can’t just hop on this train to victory. That said most good players can use a list like this to mitigate luck to their winning advantage against most others. Most people aren’t playing this calibre of player at their local shop.

    • The issue is that in a tournament environment, the lists that beat this cant be played in the time frame. So you got entire lists designed around the fact that they know they will only play elite armies.

      The first streamed game was a horde versus an eldar list like this. Only got like three real turns in the time frame with the eldar losing even though they did most of the casualties.

  • Bradley Macduff

    imo articles like these should never be put up in the first place, they paint the community at large as comp nutbags from outerspace devoid of hearts. and that just isnt true

    • John Bennett

      Full agreement. BOLS seems to be content to just spread mass 40k hate. Probably bc GW tried shutting their site down a few years ago. Hurt feelings I guess.

  • marlowc

    I think it’s going a bit far to say that this list is unbeatable, just because it won a tournament? I’ve never played in a tournament, but they do still use dice don’t they 😉

    • Also, by using the same logic applied to the list, one could also assume that Dark Eldar Warriors and Guardians (who are pretty equal anyway) are unbeatable…

      • Dan Brugman

        I would not say they’re equal. I’d take shruiken over splinter any day. And with the right craftworld guardians are a fantastic troop choice. Warriors on the other hand are saddled with a mediocre gun and at the moment not very many buff choices. Splinter just isn’t as useful in a vehicle heavy edition. While shruiken weapons still wound based on toughness and have the possibility of a mean AP on the wound roll.

        • “guardians are a fantastic troop choice” – I think the last time I heard someone saying that was back in 2nd Edition.

    • ZeeLobby

      Some armies mitigate dice WAY better than others though. Unbeatable is clearly not possible, but almost never beatable is probably true for some factions.

  • Ronin

    What I’ve noticed is we can discuss about lists all day long, but there’s a reason why we consistently see the same top players in many major tournaments and it’s not just because of the list.

    • No, it’s because they are able to constantly find the most powerful WAAC combinations.

      • ZeeLobby

        Ehhhhhhhh…. Nick Nanavati has played almost demons religiously and was closing out events in some of their weaker periods. I think it’s foolish to assume that its just one or the other.

        • You’re probably right. As always in life, there’s all kind of people.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, I mean the imbalances of GW games definitely makes list building/choice way more important than in other systems. It’s def never 50/50 skill/list.

    • Drpx

      Meanwhile, Tom Brady is going to the Super Bowl for the umpteenth time.

      • ZeeLobby

        Because he is actually a good quarterback. That doesn’t make me not hate him with all my soul… (or throw up a little saying it)

        • Commissar Molotov

          The cheating helps, of course.

          • ZeeLobby

            Sure it helps, but a horrible quarterback with semi-cheating does not win superbowls, lol.

    • What would be awesome is a tournament format where you have to use the same basic lists. See who wins those. If those same top players can win without waac lists, they’d definitely be proven as the best of the best.

      • ZeeLobby

        Having met some of the top players, or watched them play, they are just really good at the game. Put a broken list in their hands, and they win events.

        • I have no doubt. However, from my experiience, in twenty years or so I’ve seen our really good players absolutely flounder when they couldn’t take their waac lists.

          This is what makes me desire to see another format that highlights skill at the table over the ability to rock up with a waac list.

          • ZeeLobby

            Well that’s not a commentary on how good they are as players, it’s how massively imbalanced the game is. If I give you a brick, and tell you to use it to compose a symphony, any man, regardless of skill, would struggle, lol.

            Metas basically consist of the best lists, playing into the best lists. If you rise to the top of a meta, it’s never just the list that got you there, other people are also playing the best lists, and in many cases your list. It’s your skill.

            Warmachine/Hordes is a great example. Most of the meta-lists are pretty well known, and sure, occasionally a meta-breaking list will show up, but you still see the same players at the top of many events. It’s simply that they’re good at the game. They can pick up factions they rarely play, and place high as well (which they’ve done).

  • Erich Schoenholtz

    Yawn. Oh look, someone is clever in using strategems with mixed faction units that share keywords. This game is less about maneuver now and more about combos provided by stratagems. Plays like a 3D card game. Why is everyone so pissed at tempest launchers. Mine never kill anything. They aren’t that great. Maybe my dice just suck or my opponents roll well. I’ve not been that impressed with tempest launchers in my games.

  • BaronSnakPak

    Year of the Xenos

  • SacTownBrian

    The author forgot to mention that the championship match was a mirror match of this list.

    • ZeeLobby

      Always the most snoring games ever, lol. At least to play for me. I could see how some would enjoy it though.

    • BaronSnakPak

      There were tweaks to the opponent’s list, but the funny thing is that the winner wrote his opponent’s list for him like a week before LVO.

      • lol. Just lol smh

      • Erich Schoenholtz

        BWAHAHAHAHAHAAH! Lazy. Talk about just running a list with no motivation other than to win. Where’s the passion and dedication one has to their army? The pride invested in painstakingly choosing to commit to a faction and building said faction out of the love for that faction? Christ…anyone can hand someone a list to play. Sad.

        • BaronSnakPak

          He had quite a few questionable moments during the tournament, so it was karma that he lost.

          • Erich Schoenholtz

            Oh? do tell.

          • BaronSnakPak

            In the semifinals he (Tony) slow rolled his opponent, he took over an hour for his first turn. Then when the opponent tried to speed up the game by accidentally deepstriking a unit at the start of the movement phase Tony had a fit and made him forfeit his entire move phase. Both of which were big factors in him winning.

            He also was using Wave Serpents, landing them on ruins, and then telling Nick (the winner) that he couldnt land his jetbikes on ruins. When Nick corrected him, he said he “forgot about the fly rule”. He was also casting Protect on the wave serpents, which is infantry and bikers only, he was consistantly forgetting important rules, and kept telling the winner “Tell me what my army does, you know it better than me”.

            It got to the point where a judge had to watch the entire final match, and use a stop watch to keep both players at 20 minute turns, and correct Tony. It was just awkward to watch all around.

          • That right there was a common encounter for me at GTs as well and a big reason I don’t touch tournaments anymore. I have no patience for the cretinous.

          • BaronSnakPak

            At adepticon last year, my team faced an IG team that took an hour for their first shooting phase alone. I was about to strangle someone.

          • ZeeLobby

            I mean I used to go to 3/4 a year, and while there was 1 or 2 of these idiots stumbling around, the majority of encounters were pretty great. Still, these are the ones you tend to remember well into the future.

          • I had on average one of my six games each tournament was that guy. I had a couple tournaments where I had two of that guy. It wore me down.

          • ZeeLobby

            Damn, 1 is bad enough, 2 would downright kill me.

          • 😀 now you can see how my experience colors my attitude towards that part of the hobby lol.

          • ZeeLobby

            Haha, it all seems so clear now :D. My luck in dodging those games definitely leaves me with a cheery outlook on events. Though lately I mostly frequent fun competitive events at cons.

          • I’m going to adepticon this year. It’ll be my first public event since 2007.

          • ZeeLobby

            Nice! I wish I could go, but i’m busy that weekend sadly. I am heading to GenCon though. Already bought tickets. Haven’t decided if I want to go 40K/AoS route, or WMH, been having a lot of fun with WMH locally so that’ll probably be it.

          • ZeeLobby

            Sigh. And this is why we can’t have nice events, haha.

          • Warrior24_7

            The guy was cheating…period!

          • Erich Schoenholtz

            Wow. So dickish behavior on public display.

        • Warrior24_7

          ZeeLobby is that you?

          • ZeeLobby

            LoL. I am nothing like this person. I really think you might be losing it.

          • Warrior24_7

            Nah, you’ve been exposed, you’ve given yourself away. You long for the days of “banhammer”! When ALL special characters were banned from tournament and casual play! You needed your opponent’s permission to use one, and it was actually written in the rulebook. Days when you were hated if you had a powerful army and nobody would play you, or if the army wasn’t “fluffy” enough! A player could actually be marked down in a tournament if his opponent didn’t have fun playing him!

            When Orks were winning tournaments and anything that killed something in your army was “overpowered”. The terms “meta” didn’t exist so it couldn’t be constantly abused. No allies, no Ynarri, in fact, the Eldar were considered the good guys and hated the Tyranids more than Slaanesh!

            Yep, Zeeban!

          • ZeeLobby

            lol. Just epic!

          • Erich Schoenholtz

            It’s your mom.

  • becizzle

    Ynarri are lame.

  • Warrior24_7

    So no Guilliman or Custodes w/guardsman making up 95% of the army? It’s a good day, a VERY good day indeed!

    • BaronSnakPak

      Custodes and Daemon codices werent allowed, they were released too soon before the tournament.

      • Warrior24_7

        Good for the Custodes, it would’ve been over by turn two.

        • BaronSnakPak

          Thats just conjecture. The codex has been out for 2 days, we havent seen what they are and aren’t capable of yet.

          • Warrior24_7

            Honestly, I actually like them. Somebody will find a way to play them well, but it will be in name only though.

          • Warrior24_7

            Seriously? Under “that” kind of withering firepower? Nothing else has stood up to it.

          • BaronSnakPak

            4+ invuln on t5 multi-wound models is a lot to chew through. Not to mention the wardens that have a 5+ fnp against all unsaved wounds.

    • ZeeLobby

      Should problem nerf them anyway.

  • marxlives

    I very phew phew list but I like it. In modern warfare and I suspect in the future phew will continue to rule the day, not fixing bayonets.

    • Adam Marshall

      That makes perfect sence.

  • Doug Crawford

    A same list won Cancon in Australia this weekend show how people love netlist.

    • yep netlists have been a solid crutch for people since the internet allowed netlists to propagate so easiily.

  • Manouel Tiger

    WHAT !
    Ynarri can’t use eldar stratagems
    In LVO the best lists are cheaters list as usual !

  • Bigalmoney666

    If the Chapter Tactics/Legion/Craftworld rules haven’t been FAQ’d yet, they’re surely going to be really soon.

  • Carey_Mahoney

    Nanavati again? This man sure knows what he’s doing!

  • fenrisful2

    Why aren’t the guardians Ulthwé and the big Dark Reaper unit Biel-Tan?
    Also why would you waste +2CP on deepstriking the shining spears, when they can move 22″ beore shooting or assaulting.

    Counter tactic:
    Kill 3-4 ynnari reapers turn one and assault the shining spears and this list is in big dodo.

  • jordan stein

    My Outlook on the ynnari thing is you can soulburst. and thats it.
    pg 116 of codex clearly stats that if your ynnari you do not gain craftworld attributes. i guess writing them next to your list makes it legal to do so. that east coast style of 40k.

  • Faye_Valentine88

    Wow, lots of butthurt people in here including the author of the article. Yeah the Eldar are strong, yeah the Ynnari are strong, and I agree there should be some slight changes but c’mon, the best players are optimally using these lists. Of course they are going to win. I guarantee this is not the case in your local stores or at home. In fact, any auto hit weapons en mass are going to devastate this list.
    I run Eldar/Ynnari/Harlequin but not with this type of cheese list and I get regularly get beat by Sisters. Nerfing the hell out of these factions are just going to hurt the casual players that like to play Matched play at their local FLGS or at home.
    I’m already on the fence about continuing to play 40K as every time I buy something it gets nerfed to hell because of some tournament. I don’t want to have to keep chasing models trying to get one that doesn’t get nerfed in a few months. That or having to switch factions entirely as it seems some factions never get the nerf bat. I shouldn’t have to keep buying models or changing factions just for a chance to win because something got neutered to death..

  • Rasheed Jones

    Cat Lady (Warlord) LOL

  • Nate Goodfellow

    The simple change is that being in a Ynarri detachment REPLACES your keyword instead of adding to it