Daemonettes, pinks, fiends, beasts, cannons, chariots, and even hounds have been showing up in recent top 4 placings. Unfortunately every single one of those lists is propped up by 15-18 flamers. Not sure how viable any of that stuff will be after the flamer nerf.
Mad_Proctologist wrote: on another note, I can't help but think that giving nurgle deamons back their 5+ fnp would instantly make them playable again.
You really think Beasts of Nurgle need a 5+ FNP?
Sure, just nerf their regeneration a bit. Make it so they only regenerate X number of wounds a turn rather than full wounds, still tanky as hell, still not exactly dangerous and gives the other nurgle units that DON'T have such awesome abilities something to make them actually worth taking.
Mad_Proctologist wrote: on another note, I can't help but think that giving nurgle deamons back their 5+ fnp would instantly make them playable again.
You really think Beasts of Nurgle need a 5+ FNP?
Yes. what's the worst that could happen? Many things that are going to be able to kill it in one round of damage will be able to cross that hurdle, they're not obsec, and they're not exactly tearing up the board at 80 points each. Make them tough enough to be worth the points.
You can literally buy 3 flamers for the cost of one beast. and maybe flamers are not a fair metric for the rest of the army but if nurgle is going to be the durability/attrition choice it needs to do it well. in the state of 40k right now I'd argue that yes they need that fnp to do what they are trying to achieve.
artific3r wrote: Daemonettes, pinks, fiends, beasts, cannons, chariots, and even hounds have been showing up in recent top 4 placings. Unfortunately every single one of those lists is propped up by 15-18 flamers. Not sure how viable any of that stuff will be after the flamer nerf.
It doesnt really matter what else is there when the flamers do all the work.
artific3r wrote: Daemonettes, pinks, fiends, beasts, cannons, chariots, and even hounds have been showing up in recent top 4 placings. Unfortunately every single one of those lists is propped up by 15-18 flamers. Not sure how viable any of that stuff will be after the flamer nerf.
It doesnt really matter what else is there when the flamers do all the work.
Assuming that Flamers won't always be in the spot they are (Chapter Approved changing points, for example), it is a good indication as to what those players consider to be the best options in the codex. It's certainly worth keeping in the back of your mind for when Flamers are no longer as efficient as they currently are.
artific3r wrote: Daemonettes, pinks, fiends, beasts, cannons, chariots, and even hounds have been showing up in recent top 4 placings. Unfortunately every single one of those lists is propped up by 15-18 flamers. Not sure how viable any of that stuff will be after the flamer nerf.
It doesnt really matter what else is there when the flamers do all the work.
It really does feel like all of those other units are just bodies on the table with slightly different movement and defense profiles for the purpose of holding the board. Any offensive power they bring is purely incidental
Mad_Proctologist wrote: on another note, I can't help but think that giving nurgle deamons back their 5+ fnp would instantly make them playable again.
theyre priced as if they had it, it got stripped from the playtest version of the dex with no pts change
It really does feel like they just ripped something off of Nurgle then just threw them out.
I can not believe that GW still believes that a high toughness means anything significant in this edition. T5 orks means nothing and neither does T5 Plaguebearers. Nurgle has no strengths and they suffer so badly for it, I just hate that it is either going to take a new codex or a stupid supplement to bring them up to par.
After looking at the Crusade rules in the book I feel like they just ripped all of the special rules out and gave them to Crusade. Things that should just be a part of the army as core functionality are sitting in limbo in Crusade.
Thoughts on best way to make use of chariot from start collecting Slaanesh? Seems you get more bang for buck running regular chariots over exalted, and probably the hellflayer over regular seeker. Switching one to a tormenter on hellflayer is pretty easy too. Thoughts?
why would anyone play seeker chariots of any kind ? They have huge bases, cant fly, only have S4 attacks. Sure you can spam them, they are cheap, but they need huge spaces, and will block each other.
p5freak wrote: why would anyone play seeker chariots of any kind ? They have huge bases, cant fly, only have S4 attacks. Sure you can spam them, they are cheap, but they need huge spaces, and will block each other.
Honestly, because they come in the set and I’m not planning on spending a ton of money on this daemon army. Sure I can leave them off, but that means further purchases to offset. Not end of the world but not ideal.
p5freak wrote: why would anyone play seeker chariots of any kind ? They have huge bases, cant fly, only have S4 attacks. Sure you can spam them, they are cheap, but they need huge spaces, and will block each other.
Honestly, because they come in the set and I’m not planning on spending a ton of money on this daemon army. Sure I can leave them off, but that means further purchases to offset. Not end of the world but not ideal.
I think you are better off going with regular seeker chariots over the hellflayers due to the potential mortal wounds. 1 MW on 5+ on 4 dice seems a bit better to me than 6 S6 AP -2 D2 attacks on the charge. With the prevalence of AoC AP -2 just doesn't cut it and on top of that there is a decent chance you will run into -1D abilities. The best utility you can get from chariots is table control/denial, for their points there are decently resilient and can get anywhere you need to be.
p5freak wrote: why would anyone play seeker chariots of any kind ? They have huge bases, cant fly, only have S4 attacks. Sure you can spam them, they are cheap, but they need huge spaces, and will block each other.
Honestly, because they come in the set and I’m not planning on spending a ton of money on this daemon army. Sure I can leave them off, but that means further purchases to offset. Not end of the world but not ideal.
I think you are better off going with regular seeker chariots over the hellflayers due to the potential mortal wounds. 1 MW on 5+ on 4 dice seems a bit better to me than 6 S6 AP -2 D2 attacks on the charge. With the prevalence of AoC AP -2 just doesn't cut it and on top of that there is a decent chance you will run into -1D abilities. The best utility you can get from chariots is table control/denial, for their points there are decently resilient and can get anywhere you need to be.
The bladed axle is Malefic so I’m pretty sure it will ignore AOC and damage reduction abilities. Or am I wrong on that subject?
p5freak wrote: why would anyone play seeker chariots of any kind ? They have huge bases, cant fly, only have S4 attacks. Sure you can spam them, they are cheap, but they need huge spaces, and will block each other.
i'd play them BECAUSE they have huge bases and are super fast and cheap, i'd probably run 2-3 easily tbh.
Problem is that i don't own the models and GW's slaanesh doesnt really do it for me (apart from characters) and every alternative seems to skip on making chariots
Chariots as objective holders is an idea I hadn't considered... I mean, the temptation is to go, "Daemon tank rushes forward, crush kill destroy!" Only, they're not particularly good at that...
Next time I play Slaanesh, I think I'll try using the exalted chariot(s) as objective holders and/or distraction carnifexes, rather than trying to kill gak with them.
I'm with Bullyboy. I have them because of the starter boxes, so I may as well use them. I mean, $230 Australian is a lot of money for the obvious replacement in the list (Keepers).
the King of Blades relic has the ability "Each time the bearer makes a melee attack with that weapon, you can ignore any or all modifiers to that attack’s hit roll and any or all modifiers to that attack’s wound roll."
does that affect transhuman-like "always fails on a X" abilities?
tneva82 wrote: No. Modifiers are the ones that give you +-X.
Haven't have that rule actually kick up yet. The dam boost has been good enough though with axe of khorne though.
yhea, figured as much, and one of the local players has a death wing army, so i thought i'd double check before i ran into permenant transhuman. thanks.
I have about 1200-1300 points of khronate deamons, consisting of:
bloodthirster
bloodmaster
3 squads of bloodletters
3 'crushers
10 hounds.
what would be the best way to expand this towards 2,000 points? I feel like I have enough infantry for now, but not really sure how to expand form here.
I have about 1200-1300 points of khronate deamons, consisting of:
bloodthirster
bloodmaster
3 squads of bloodletters
3 'crushers
10 hounds.
what would be the best way to expand this towards 2,000 points? I feel like I have enough infantry for now, but not really sure how to expand form here.
2 more Bloodthirsters.
You should also invest in a couple of Skull Cannon.
Seriously. Sometimes even the forces of Khorne find it usefull to shoot something....
I have about 1200-1300 points of khronate deamons, consisting of:
bloodthirster
bloodmaster
3 squads of bloodletters
3 'crushers
10 hounds.
what would be the best way to expand this towards 2,000 points? I feel like I have enough infantry for now, but not really sure how to expand form here.
Skarbrand and skull cannon or two would be my go two additions.
What are people's thoughts on Bloodthirsters? Bought Kaband'ha for cheap as I'm not a fan of the derpy-looking plastic one, but as for loadout I'm thiking Axe and Bloodflail as the damage spillover is rather nice.
Valkyrie wrote: What are people's thoughts on Bloodthirsters? Bought Kaband'ha for cheap as I'm not a fan of the derpy-looking plastic one, but as for loadout I'm thiking Axe and Bloodflail as the damage spillover is rather nice.
Current top build for Bloodthirsters is Big Axe, King of Blades Relic, 5+++ FNP and The woundgate. This is featured in a ton of top performing lists.
On the other topic, from the Metawatch article I am curious how GW is going to handle Daemons. They already said they are pretty much going to bump the points for flamers, but that feels like it's going to just break the back of the whole army. They'll need to make some price adjustments elsewhere, and I am hoping they realize that.
Flamers going up by 10 points, and everything else staying the same, is not going to break the army. If they reduce other units points people might still be able to take as many flamers as before. Troop choices are overpriced by 10-20 points, plaguebearers and daemonettes for 150 and 130 is insane, those should be -20.
Daemonettes would be nice at 110 but even at 120 they are very solid. So much faster than bloodletters and weight of attacks makes them a threat to everything up to T7.
This probably isn't happening but I really hope they do something about Nurgle. The whole obsec superiority gimmick hasn't at all worked out and they would need some serious points drops to be functional.
p5freak wrote: Flamers going up by 10 points, and everything else staying the same, is not going to break the army. If they reduce other units points people might still be able to take as many flamers as before. Troop choices are overpriced by 10-20 points, plaguebearers and daemonettes for 150 and 130 is insane, those should be -20.
From a competitive point of view? Yes, the flamers going up a significant amount would pretty much break the back of the army if changes to bring up some of the more lackluster datasheets are not done. The vast majority of the datasheets in the army are mediocre to weak, and once the flamer crutch is removed it'll become even more apparent.
Like what happened with Nurgle? It feels like some rule was yanked away from them at the last minute.
p5freak wrote: Flamers going up by 10 points, and everything else staying the same, is not going to break the army. If they reduce other units points people might still be able to take as many flamers as before. Troop choices are overpriced by 10-20 points, plaguebearers and daemonettes for 150 and 130 is insane, those should be -20.
From a competitive point of view? Yes, the flamers going up a significant amount would pretty much break the back of the army if changes to bring up some of the more lackluster datasheets are not done. The vast majority of the datasheets in the army are mediocre to weak, and once the flamer crutch is removed it'll become even more apparent.
Like what happened with Nurgle? It feels like some rule was yanked away from them at the last minute.
Rumour is they had 5+ FNP until its very last iteration before being sent to print.
p5freak wrote: Flamers going up by 10 points, and everything else staying the same, is not going to break the army. If they reduce other units points people might still be able to take as many flamers as before. Troop choices are overpriced by 10-20 points, plaguebearers and daemonettes for 150 and 130 is insane, those should be -20.
From a competitive point of view? Yes, the flamers going up a significant amount would pretty much break the back of the army if changes to bring up some of the more lackluster datasheets are not done. The vast majority of the datasheets in the army are mediocre to weak, and once the flamer crutch is removed it'll become even more apparent.
No, reducing the number of flamers from 18 to 12 (~10 pt. increase ppm) wouldnt break the army. Even competitive gamers acknowledge that flamers are the best unit of the army, and are criminally undercosted.
No, reducing the number of flamers from 18 to 12 (~10 pt. increase ppm) wouldnt break the army. Even competitive gamers acknowledge that flamers are the best unit of the army, and are criminally undercosted.
And yet despite that pure Daemons lists still aren't tearing up the top tables. Almost like despite having one of the best datasheets in the game at the moment the majority of the rest of the codex is mediocre to weak, like the post you responded to was saying. Maybe work on your reading comprehension there friend.
p5freak wrote: I disagree that the rest is mediocre or weak. We will see how daemons perform once flamers get their points increase.
I play Nurgle. My section, at the very least, is pretty damn mediocre.
Edit: And if, with what's considered one of if not the best single unit in the game, Daemons are mid-ranking in competitive spheres... What do you think would happen if that datasheet is nerfed and the rest isn't buffed?
Daemons lists constructed with the best datasheets are likely upper mid tier without flamers. They are certainly not weak, unless your definition of weak is "doesn't win multiple GTs every weekend."
What is weak though, is internal balance. Most options in the elites/fast attack/heavy support slots are pretty bad. Nurgle sucks. Overall it isn't the worst book, but it's definitely a little disappointing next to most of the recent codexes (elves, clowns, bugs, custodes, both flavors of knights, dwarves probably)
Edit: And if, with what's considered one of if not the best single unit in the game, Daemons are mid-ranking in competitive spheres... What do you think would happen if that datasheet is nerfed and the rest isn't buffed?
Edit: And if, with what's considered one of if not the best single unit in the game, Daemons are mid-ranking in competitive spheres... What do you think would happen if that datasheet is nerfed and the rest isn't buffed?
Im pretty sure nurgle will get point drops.
Points drops wont help Nurgle unless we get to the point where you are paying so little points per wound that they can break the game just by existing. I don't really think anything short of a complete rewrite is going to save the Nurgle portion of the dex.
I honestly think that Khorne/Tzeentch will find some success even without flamers but I don't really see Slaanesh going anywhere and Nurgle certainly will remain in the pits.
Well, after a few weekends of frantic assembly & painting, I have my 1st game with the deamons this Wednesday against blood angels. It will be a 1k game, I'm bringing a bloodthirster, bloodmaster, 2 squads of bloodletters, a trio of bloodcrushers and 2 5 hound packs to round out the points.
I'm not exactly sure what hes bringing, as it's a tourney list hes been tweaking, but should be dante, a chief apothecary, a load of death company and golden guards, either some attack bikes or melta speeders, and some assault intercessors for troop tax.
All in all, it should be a straight melee fight for the centre. Beyond trying to arrange that I get the charges and not him, what advice can you give? I'm planning on keeping one lot of letters in reserve, but not sure what else to try and deep strike.
flamers are sooo fething dumb lmao, first time i brought that many and they just killed everything they shot at, infantry, light vehicle, heavy vehicle, doesnt matter. Deepstrike and kill
Triple GUO + triple Nurgle soul grinder went 4-1 at a 65-player event. Any hardcore Nurgle players here have the models to try this list? I don't have the soul grinders unfortunately, but if I did it definitely seems like it'd be worth a try.
artific3r wrote: Triple GUO + triple Nurgle soul grinder went 4-1 at a 65-player event. Any hardcore Nurgle players here have the models to try this list? I don't have the soul grinders unfortunately, but if I did it definitely seems like it'd be worth a try.
I am only missing one GUO to run that list and I have no desire what so ever to do so. I can see why it won but it won by what I said earlier, your points per wounds and merely existing on the table. You pretty much don't have to do much other than move your units into position then challenge your opponent to chew through all the wounds.
I wonder if the first place Necron list encountered this daemon list cause I think that that particular list would chew through the 5+ save of the GUO/Soul Grinders. On that note, not to belittle anyone who played in the tournament, but it does not appear that the tournament was that cut throat. Looking at the top list it is a lot less sweaty than I am used to, so I wonder how that list would fair against a bit more powerful list. I know from my games that it is not uncommon to lose a GUO a turn as long as my opponent focuses fires.
well, FINALLY got to play my deamons into blood angels. It was a 1k game on min size board, very intense melee game.
i threw a bloodthrister (relic great axe, woundgate, 5+++ WLT), bloodmaster, 2 squads of bloodletters, a trio of crushers and 8 hounds at a blood angels force of dante, a chief apothecary, 7 sang guard, 10 death coy, a melta speeder and a quintet of assault intercessors.
I won 1st turn, bungled the move phase by blocking my crushers out of a charge with my hounds, and the thirstier failed its charge, but the hounds made a long charge into his speeder....only for his sang guard to intervene, and wipe them out for the loss a single dude who was promtly healed by the apothecary. his turn 1, he surrounds the now isolated thrister, and via a mix of melta shooting and power weapon melee, manages to hurt it badly, but the woundgate and FNP keep it alive long enough its return attacks wipe his sang guard off the table. the death coy managed at the same time to charge and curb stomp by crushers.
my turn 2, I get the thrister into his assault intercessors on his home point (and promptly removed them), and all 20 of my bloodletters, supported by the bloodmaster, were able to charge and delete the death coy for acceptable losses on his interupt. his turn 2, he charges Dante into the badly wounded (5 left) thirstier, but a combo of demonic saves, FNP and plain luck see his attacks completely bounce off the deamon...who turns him into paste on his go. at this point he concedes, at the start of my turn 3.
my thoughts:
for a first run out, I'm very happy with the results, though I recognise this was basically a perfect match up for me: a melee enemy on a small board. my hounds and crushers didn't do much, but thats partly my bad positioning (1st time playing a melee army, so getting the hang of planning the moves), and partly just the enemy getting a vote, so i will reserve judgement of them until they have done more than "die".
The bloodletters, though, really impressed me for line infantry. They are downright nasty when thrown into even elite infantry. the Thrister was a total blender of a Big Guy, and im very happy with his performance this game, though even at 1k he got mauled, and i'd be suprised if he'd lasted another round in a 2k game.
on a bigger board i'd have had a lot more problems, i think. the very compact nature suited both armies, but since he had more shooting, it was to my advantage to make it a mainly melee game. at 2k on a 4x6 board i would have to shove a lot more into deep strike to protect it.
xerxeskingofking wrote: on a bigger board i'd have had a lot more problems, i think. the very compact nature suited both armies, but since he had more shooting, it was to my advantage to make it a mainly melee game. at 2k on a 4x6 board i would have to shove a lot more into deep strike to protect it.
I find the general smaller boards and line of sight blocking terrain of 9th to generally favor assault armies, so have found general good things for my daemons (I run mono Slaanesh). The biggest advantage of deep strike, in my opinion, is helping your daemons drop in on objectives and to harass back line stuff.
My biggest struggle has been trying to fit in enough Keepers and Princes. I miss the days of princes in the heavy slots.
Not really a tactics question but anyway, I've built up my Khorne contingent a bit, now have 30x Bloodletters, 3x Bloodcrushers, 10x Hounds, a Herald and Ka'Bandha standing in as a Bloodthirster.
Anyone discovered any good painting schemes for the Khorne stuff, particularly looking for a quick and effective scheme for the Bloodletters.
I have just done the base layer on my Bloodletters: Red Basecoat and then Airbrushed a spot on each chest and face in a color that is unique to each unit: One White, one blue, one Armadillo etc.. This way I hope that it will be easier to keep track of them as each unit is visually unique within the army. I also plan to tie them together by using the same horns and blades
skrabrand's "rage embodied" aura ability, that affects EVERYONE within range, yes? The description says "While a unit is within 6" of this model: ", which i would understand to affect enemy as well as freindly. seems cool and flavoursome, just checking.
skrabrand's "rage embodied" aura ability, that affects EVERYONE within range, yes? The description says "While a unit is within 6" of this model: ", which i would understand to affect enemy as well as freindly. seems cool and flavoursome, just checking.
Correct.
2nd game with daemons I had skarbrand appear from reserves for nice easy charge of 6" to blob of 10 death guard terminators...And failed the charge.
Needless to say with extra 20 attack rolls or so(1 attack=2 hit roll) skarbrand didn't last for long
Generally it's never been issue because enemies around him tends to be quite dead but once in a while it pops up.
So with the new Arks of Omen detachment, which is just so great for the health of the game, I have been considering an army of Beast of Nurgle. I can get 18 Beast of Nurgle in a list at 1440, leaving 560 left over for a mandatory HQ and possibly some Nurglings just for some board presence. The entire point of the army would be that it exist, which is horrible unfun design but I wonder how it might do. Just plop down some Beast on objectives, use some of the HQs to remove ObSec from my opponents units.
Beast are expensive as hell but they have some damage potential with mortal wound output and 18 of them would be a task for most any army to chew through.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: So with the new Arks of Omen detachment, which is just so great for the health of the game, I have been considering an army of Beast of Nurgle. I can get 18 Beast of Nurgle in a list at 1440, leaving 560 left over for a mandatory HQ and possibly some Nurglings just for some board presence. The entire point of the army would be that it exist, which is horrible unfun design but I wonder how it might do. Just plop down some Beast on objectives, use some of the HQs to remove ObSec from my opponents units.
Beast are expensive as hell but they have some damage potential with mortal wound output and 18 of them would be a task for most any army to chew through.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: So with the new Arks of Omen detachment, which is just so great for the health of the game, I have been considering an army of Beast of Nurgle. I can get 18 Beast of Nurgle in a list at 1440, leaving 560 left over for a mandatory HQ and possibly some Nurglings just for some board presence. The entire point of the army would be that it exist, which is horrible unfun design but I wonder how it might do. Just plop down some Beast on objectives, use some of the HQs to remove ObSec from my opponents units.
Beast are expensive as hell but they have some damage potential with mortal wound output and 18 of them would be a task for most any army to chew through.
You can't play that many beasts, but you bring up a good point. The AoO detachment lets us go nuts with nurglings as objective holding troops as long as we fill the compulsory slots with something else (like beasts of nurgle). you could quite easily take 18 nurgling bases in a game of almost any size as cheap and flexible objective holders and small unit harassers.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: So with the new Arks of Omen detachment, which is just so great for the health of the game, I have been considering an army of Beast of Nurgle. I can get 18 Beast of Nurgle in a list at 1440, leaving 560 left over for a mandatory HQ and possibly some Nurglings just for some board presence. The entire point of the army would be that it exist, which is horrible unfun design but I wonder how it might do. Just plop down some Beast on objectives, use some of the HQs to remove ObSec from my opponents units.
Beast are expensive as hell but they have some damage potential with mortal wound output and 18 of them would be a task for most any army to chew through.
You can't play that many beasts, but you bring up a good point. The AoO detachment lets us go nuts with nurglings as objective holding troops as long as we fill the compulsory slots with something else (like beasts of nurgle). you could quite easily take 18 nurgling bases in a game of almost any size as cheap and flexible objective holders and small unit harassers.
Yeah, but they're not ObSec and aren't durable.
I used to love Nurglings, but with how much they've been nerfed, I think you're better off taking something fast and ObSec to snag objectives. Maybe one squad of Nurglings to block enemy Infiltrators, if you win the rolloff, but spamming them just doesn't appeal.
Edit: Notably, I still love Nurglings. Just not mechanically-I get excited whenever the little guys do damage.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: So with the new Arks of Omen detachment, which is just so great for the health of the game, I have been considering an army of Beast of Nurgle. I can get 18 Beast of Nurgle in a list at 1440, leaving 560 left over for a mandatory HQ and possibly some Nurglings just for some board presence. The entire point of the army would be that it exist, which is horrible unfun design but I wonder how it might do. Just plop down some Beast on objectives, use some of the HQs to remove ObSec from my opponents units.
Beast are expensive as hell but they have some damage potential with mortal wound output and 18 of them would be a task for most any army to chew through.
Rule of Three?
Don't lob factual statements at me. Yes, I wasn't thinking of the rule of three. Still, at 9 Beast that is a significant block to move. 720 points just leave more room for Nurgle Soulgrinders.
There appears to be a number of leaks coming out about the upcoming balance dataslate and points update. Warphammer put out a video (they have been fairly reliable in the past) What is everyone's thoughts so far on the rumours?
Overall I'm not surprised that Flamers are being nerfed, but I am surprised that GW has decided to take their auto-hits. They were the one unit worth overwatching with for Chaos Daemons. I would have preferred either a points increase or changing the number of shots. Basically your 6-man squad now works like a 4-man squad pre-nerf for damage output. That said, I think Flamers are still good.
The speculated points decrease for Nurgle sounds good. It will be interesting to see if it makes them competitive. Beasts of Nurgle are getting a 10pt drop, so are a little more tempting.
It was also suggested that Flesh Hounds are dropping to 15 points per model, which makes them very competitive.
Overall, it sounds like the strong stuff has been nerfed, and the weak stuff has been made cheaper. Hopefully this will improve list variety, and with some luck Nurgle will start to look viable.
It seems likely that they are real, but they might be only partial information and there is some small potential for changes to some of the document(s) before release.
Flamers at BS4 (part of the rumour) without auto hits is a halving of damage output without buffs.
But, they would now be able to make use of re-roll 1s to hit from DPs/LoCs and the Deluge of Fire (4 WSP for +1 BS) warp storm effect if a pure Daemon army and have a mono Tzeentch detachment (harder now with the AoO detachment although I do want to read the rules in full and see if you can get a free patrol of agents of chaos Daemons with your Daemons).
Into former AoC targets like a basic Intercessor standing outside of cover, previously 6 Flamers were doing 39 hits, 26 wounds, 13 damage through saves.
Now they will do 39 shots, 19.5 hits, 13 wounds, 8.67 damage through saves. Add in the WSP giving BS3 and you get 11.56 wounds. Or add in just rr1s instead and you get 10.11 wounds. Add in both and you get 13.48 wounds taking you above the previous output.
So an improvement vs. former AoC opponents, which means it depends what the previous meta armies were that Daemons struggled against. 4WSP is a hefty price though. And the change to overwatch output is significant, although I found in real games that good players were finding ways to avoid the overwatch.
I hadn't seen the BS 4+ rumour yet. If GW wanted to half the damage output, it would have made more sense to just half the number of shots - even going from D6 + 3 to just D6, or D3 + 2 would do the trick.
Losing the auto-hit just seems like such a departure for what the unit has historically done and makes them vulnerable to -1 penalties. At BS 4+, a -1 penalty reduces their damage output by 1/3rd from their current profile.
I've seen another rumour countering the BS4 thing, so we'll see.
Flamers if they stay at 25 points would still be good at other things:
75 point move 12 banners unit
75 point engage unit
8.33 pts per wound for soaking MWs
It does look like a few non Flamer units are getting points drops (but unclear which) so there might be a new datsheet to spam in there place.
EightFoldPath wrote: It seems likely that they are real, but they might be only partial information and there is some small potential for changes to some of the document(s) before release.
Flamers at BS4 (part of the rumour) without auto hits is a halving of damage output without buffs.
But, they would now be able to make use of re-roll 1s to hit from DPs/LoCs and the Deluge of Fire (4 WSP for +1 BS) warp storm effect if a pure Daemon army and have a mono Tzeentch detachment (harder now with the AoO detachment although I do want to read the rules in full and see if you can get a free patrol of agents of chaos Daemons with your Daemons).
Into former AoC targets like a basic Intercessor standing outside of cover, previously 6 Flamers were doing 39 hits, 26 wounds, 13 damage through saves.
Now they will do 39 shots, 19.5 hits, 13 wounds, 8.67 damage through saves. Add in the WSP giving BS3 and you get 11.56 wounds. Or add in just rr1s instead and you get 10.11 wounds. Add in both and you get 13.48 wounds taking you above the previous output.
So an improvement vs. former AoC opponents, which means it depends what the previous meta armies were that Daemons struggled against. 4WSP is a hefty price though. And the change to overwatch output is significant, although I found in real games that good players were finding ways to avoid the overwatch.
Check your math because it is literally impossible for 39 BS4+ shots to ever equal much less surpass 39 shots that autohit because, shockingly, if there is even a chance of missing then you are going to average lower than 39 attacks that will always hit. It could be BS2+ rerolling everything and this would still apply.
I did the math and 39 BS3+ shots that are rerolling 1s to hit average 10.11 damage.
I think the argument is that Flamers rolling to hit but ignoring AoC is a net benefit against Marines, given the ease of buffing BS back up to reasonable levels. The assumption is that post-Dataslate Flamers will potentially be dealing more damage than at present because AoC is such a strong buff.
Of course a points revision is also fairly likely for both parties.
You are right, so I didn't bother looking at the basic use case. Against Eldar/Tau/Necrons/Knights/etc the Flamers will be worse for sure. If you need that number, then un-nerfed Flamers going into nerfed power armour would be, 6 Flamers, 39 hits, 26 wounds, 17.33 wounds, which the nerfed Flamers can't catch.
This was comparing:
Autohitting but with AoC into a 3+ save (so 4+ save).
Not autohitting but now they have a 5+ save due to losing AoC.
Power armour factions still tend to make up the majority of players you face in tournaments, so I thought it was interesting to note that damage could be flat or going up against them.
For a quick guess at what is hard to beat for a faction I use https://www.stat-check.com/the-meta and it isn't clear who the top Daemons predators were, so was hoping people would chime in and tell me I was wrong because Nids/Harlequins were smashing Daemons and the output loss on the Flamers was going to make it even worse.
Losing the overwatch is a pretty big deal. It doesn’t matter if your opponent can get around it, the threat of it forces them to commit specific resources or position weirdly to deal with it. You get a ton of mileage out of it even if you never fire it. BS4 is actually a huge double nerf.
artific3r wrote: Losing the overwatch is a pretty big deal. It doesn’t matter if your opponent can get around it, the threat of it forces them to commit specific resources or position weirdly to deal with it. You get a ton of mileage out of it even if you never fire it. BS4 is actually a huge double nerf.
Bs4 isn't confirmed. One youtuber said but could be misremembering stat line. Not much reason to remember bs when you autohit.
With aoc gone if bs3+ then just rr1 and you perform better than now. Unless points also go up.
Add in +1 bs from warpstorm and def more killy than now though god specicic storms will be harder depending on how ally det rule works.
Either way, losing overwatch is big. People tend to underestimate how powerful it is to be able to control your opponent’s positioning. Flamers will still be solid at BS3/BS4 but will definitely lose a huge chunk of their utility. The movement phase is the most important phase in the game and the ability to influence it in your opponent’s turn cannot really be overstated.
I just want to take a minute to muse about the fact that a unit called Flamers of Tzeentch do not in fact have flamer weapons if these rumors are true.
I really don't think that these changes will kill Flamers, they will still be by far one of the best units in the codex but they will no longer be a meta defining unit like they are now.
I know it has been said many times but it just goes to show how terrible this codex is when you have something like Flamers compared to almost the entire Nurgle line. I am sure that the competitive scene will take the flamer nerf in stride and come out with new strong list that might use other units that are good but not flamer good.
15ppm flesh hounds sound fun if those rumors are true. PersonalIy I've got a large enough collection that balance changes don't affect me much. Really just looking forward to putting some new models on the table.
I couldn't find the secondary objectives in the Daemon codex. I was playing with my friend's Tzeentch, and neither of us could find the secondaries. (This was their second game with the new codex.)
I couldn't find the secondary objectives in the Daemon codex. I was playing with my friend's Tzeentch, and neither of us could find the secondaries. (This was their second game with the new codex.)
Help! Am I just an idiot?
They are in the Nephilim book. Going forward, it looks like the faction secondaries are to be primarily confined to the GT books instead of the dexes.
I couldn't find the secondary objectives in the Daemon codex. I was playing with my friend's Tzeentch, and neither of us could find the secondaries. (This was their second game with the new codex.)
Help! Am I just an idiot?
No, your not idiots, GW have decided to remove faction secondaries form the codexes, and centralise them all in the matched play books (ie neliphim, the arks of omen GT pack, etc), in the same location as the "generic" secondary objectives are. This is a change form previous practice of including them in the codexes
I THINK this is a move towards a "Single Source of Truth" type arrangement, wherein they bring all potential selections under a single book which might make it easier to adjust if a given secondary is too powerful or weak, and make it slightly easier as all possible choices are now in the same location, not spread out over 2 or even 3 books (for space marines with a supplement).
Or it may be an effort to force yet more sales of dead tree books......or both. They are not mutually exclusive.
if you dont have access to the Nephilim rules, then wahapedia has then online here
Check your math because it is literally impossible for 39 BS4+ shots to ever equal much less surpass 39 shots that autohit because, shockingly, if there is even a chance of missing then you are going to average lower than 39 attacks that will always hit. It could be BS2+ rerolling everything and this would still apply.
No, it's not literally impossible for it to ever equal. Just unlikely. Unlikely =/= imopssible. One could roll all successes you know.
Check your math because it is literally impossible for 39 BS4+ shots to ever equal much less surpass 39 shots that autohit because, shockingly, if there is even a chance of missing then you are going to average lower than 39 attacks that will always hit. It could be BS2+ rerolling everything and this would still apply.
No, it's not literally impossible for it to ever equal. Just unlikely. Unlikely =/= imopssible. One could roll all successes you know.
not in the context of calculating average damage output
Flamers at BS 3+ and no auto-hit. No points change. I"'ll take it! Nurgle got some points changes that make me happy and horrors are more affordable. I think they did alright with this change. Not amazing, but not terrible.
Does anyone think Nurgle might be playable with the new point drops? Plagebearers at 13 seem decent enough
BS3+ isn't so bad. I already don't really play Flamers so even if they were gutted it wouldn't affect me but glad they weren't overnerfed (unlike Tyranids holy gak).
My monster mash action figures took some nerfs which sucks but oh well.
JakeSiren wrote: Yeah, you are basically limit to 1/4 of the codex, or say bye bye to god specific warp storm.
Given that Tzeentch doesn't have staying power in close combat and no threatening overwatch, I don't think a pure Tzeentch force will be competitive.
100% won't but thats my main god so i'll be playing it anyway. i play exclusively casually now.
I Hadnt thought of the effect of the new detachment on warpstorm, so is it impossible to get any of the god-specific ones now? (unless youre playing mono god)
JakeSiren wrote: Yeah, you are basically limit to 1/4 of the codex, or say bye bye to god specific warp storm.
Given that Tzeentch doesn't have staying power in close combat and no threatening overwatch, I don't think a pure Tzeentch force will be competitive.
100% won't but thats my main god so i'll be playing it anyway. i play exclusively casually now.
I Hadnt thought of the effect of the new detachment on warpstorm, so is it impossible to get any of the god-specific ones now? (unless youre playing mono god)
Basically, as you can't bring a second detachment of a second God due to the wording of the "battle brothers " allies rules, which limits you to the options they specify and are entirely about allies from different books.
We COULD take a knight with us, but not (say) a Khorne patrol alongside a tzeentch main
Obviously this only applies to games played with the arks of Omen GT pack. If your not playing that, then feel free to play multiple patrols as previously
Hecate wrote: So, I could run Slaanesh and CSM, but not Slaanesh and Tzeentch?
basically, yes. IF your playing under the arks of omen rules, you can't have a patrol of Slannesh and a patrol of Tzeentch. you could still run a "undivided" detachment made of units form both gods, though that would cost you access to the god specific warp storm abilites.
bear in mind, chaos deamons were basically the only codex still able to run multiple subfactions, as everyone else has been barred by the "only one selectable <SUBFACTION> keyword per army" rule that been around for like a year now. We were able to sidestep it as all the daemons had fixed keywords, not selectable, but now we either go pure one god, run the belakor AOR, or go undivided and loose access to godly powers.
*shrug* like i said, this is purely a restriction relating to the Arks of Omen GT rules, it doesnt stop you form playing any other format with multiple monogod patrols if you still want.
Mmm. My group is considering Omen. We're not competitive, but we're slowly ramping things up a bit. Had my first game with points instead of power today.
The only good warp storm I was able to use was Slaanesh-specific. Don't want to lose that. I'm fine with mono Slaanesh, but I might branch out and get some CSM. Basically a tank, defiler, havocs, sorcerer and mandatory 1 squad of marines. It'd give me some shooting AND distraction carnifexes, plus extra psychic with the sorcerer.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Hell, wouldn't even need the marines if I took a Spearhead.
Hecate wrote: Mmm. My group is considering Omen. We're not competitive, but we're slowly ramping things up a bit. Had my first game with points instead of power today.
The only good warp storm I was able to use was Slaanesh-specific. Don't want to lose that. I'm fine with mono Slaanesh, but I might branch out and get some CSM. Basically a tank, defiler, havocs, sorcerer and mandatory 1 squad of marines. It'd give me some shooting AND distraction carnifexes, plus extra psychic with the sorcerer.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Hell, wouldn't even need the marines if I took a Spearhead.
under ARks, your allied detachment MUST be a patrol, unfortunately.
Hecate wrote: Ah, damn! I'd need marines then, and could only take 2 heavies! :(
actually you can't take chaos marines as allies at all.
Arks of Omen limits you to strictly the lists in the "battle brothers" rules section, and the only option for daemons is CK. no CSM unless you're running belakor's AoR
Hecate wrote: Ah, damn! I'd need marines then, and could only take 2 heavies! :(
actually you can't take chaos marines as allies at all.
Arks of Omen limits you to strictly the lists in the "battle brothers" rules section, and the only option for daemons is CK. no CSM unless you're running belakor's AoR
really? thats a bummer, i completely missed it was a one way street. god dammit.
You can play daemons with CSM, the other way around. You pick a CSM AoO detachment, but with the minimal number of units. Then you max your daemon patrol detachment. The AoO rules dont say that your AoO detachment has to have the most points, or the most units.
So then perhaps the next thing we can hope for is that god-specific warp storm tables are linked to Greater Daemons, rather than detachments. Have a LoC? You get the Tzeentch table!
Seems to solve a problem and be relatively fluffy.
thats a option, though i can see people complaining about linking the powers to a expensive (both in points and real money) model as GW being predatory and trying to force sales.
in the meantime, though, do people feel we should be running mostly monogod lists or just sack the godly warp storms off and go undivided?
ive got about 1300ish points of khorne, and while my next purchase is pretty solidly going to Belakor (becuase why not?), im debating wether i want to just keep buying more khornate stuff, or diversify into Tzneetch, slaneesh or Nurgle for funsies.
Elric Greywolf wrote: So then perhaps the next thing we can hope for is that god-specific warp storm tables are linked to Greater Daemons, rather than detachments. Have a LoC? You get the Tzeentch table!
Seems to solve a problem and be relatively fluffy.
Just have all warpstorm available to any demon list.
And add back in a real monodemon bonus
Elric Greywolf wrote: So then perhaps the next thing we can hope for is that god-specific warp storm tables are linked to Greater Daemons, rather than detachments. Have a LoC? You get the Tzeentch table!
Seems to solve a problem and be relatively fluffy.
The only Warp Storm effects I've found useful have been god-specific. That was Slaanesh and Tzeentch in 2 different games. I personally think all you should need for the god-specific Warp stuff is a battle-forged detachment of that god. I agree that linking it to greater daemons is a bit... expensive.
What bugs me more is the stratagems. There was like 1 strat for Slaanesh that I liked. I wound up finishing a small 12 CP game with like 10 CP left...
Better strats, please! (That ain't happening.)
Also, I'm a non-competitive casual player, so grain of salt etc.
Okay Daemon players, I have a 1500 point game coming up against guard and idk what to do. is it crazy to spam plaguebearers, and I mean like play 90 of them spam? back up with a d prince and a beast to round out the points? I know nurgle is in a tough spot right now but I have hoards of bearers from when they were passable In previous editions.
the general plan would be swarm objectives, clog up gun lines and deny points so that even if by T4 I'm blown off the board I already have the lead for the win.
Mad_Proctologist wrote: Okay Daemon players, I have a 1500 point game coming up against guard and idk what to do. is it crazy to spam plaguebearers, and I mean like play 90 of them spam? back up with a d prince and a beast to round out the points? I know nurgle is in a tough spot right now but I have hoards of bearers from when they were passable In previous editions.
the general plan would be swarm objectives, clog up gun lines and deny points so that even if by T4 I'm blown off the board I already have the lead for the win.
A smart guard player would probably just move up the board against such a list, you're not gonna get through their tanks in a realistic manner with the damage output of a plaguebearer horde. And you're far from tanky enough to warrant not killing them
Mad_Proctologist wrote: Okay Daemon players, I have a 1500 point game coming up against guard and idk what to do. is it crazy to spam plaguebearers, and I mean like play 90 of them spam? back up with a d prince and a beast to round out the points? I know nurgle is in a tough spot right now but I have hoards of bearers from when they were passable In previous editions.
the general plan would be swarm objectives, clog up gun lines and deny points so that even if by T4 I'm blown off the board I already have the lead for the win.
maybe? im not sure. 90 odd t5 w2 4++ bodies is a LOT for him to try and shoot off the table, but im not sure it how well it will work agianst the sheer volumne he might be able to put out. i haven't faced the new guard yet so i cant really comment on what thats going to be like.
also, ive seen a few point camper lists before, and while they can be effective, they are boring, both to play and to fight. its just an endless stream of whittling, chip chip chipping away at you, and you more or less just sitting their because that was your gameplan.
by all means though, go for it if you have the models.
Mad_Proctologist wrote: Okay Daemon players, I have a 1500 point game coming up against guard and idk what to do. is it crazy to spam plaguebearers, and I mean like play 90 of them spam? back up with a d prince and a beast to round out the points? I know nurgle is in a tough spot right now but I have hoards of bearers from when they were passable In previous editions.
the general plan would be swarm objectives, clog up gun lines and deny points so that even if by T4 I'm blown off the board I already have the lead for the win.
maybe? im not sure. 90 odd t5 w2 4++ bodies is a LOT for him to try and shoot off the table, but im not sure it how well it will work agianst the sheer volumne he might be able to put out. i haven't faced the new guard yet so i cant really comment on what thats going to be like.
also, ive seen a few point camper lists before, and while they can be effective, they are boring, both to play and to fight. its just an endless stream of whittling, chip chip chipping away at you, and you more or less just sitting their because that was your gameplan.
by all means though, go for it if you have the models.
Keep in mind they will be auto wounding you a lot and have plenty of S6+ shots so amount of gain you get from T5. w2 is better except that firepower will have ungodly amount of plasma etc dam2 shots...
Myself I would rather go for slaanesh(get to combat ASAP) or tzeentch(3+ save they can't touch) if I were tooling up toward guard. Albeit haven't faced new guard yet with daemons. Just with thousand sons(won by getting 1st turn and boxing him inside deployment zone long enough that won on primaries. Might be worse if opponent pushes in more aggressively. This was his first game with new book)
Mad_Proctologist wrote: Okay Daemon players, I have a 1500 point game coming up against guard and idk what to do. is it crazy to spam plaguebearers, and I mean like play 90 of them spam? back up with a d prince and a beast to round out the points? I know nurgle is in a tough spot right now but I have hoards of bearers from when they were passable In previous editions.
the general plan would be swarm objectives, clog up gun lines and deny points so that even if by T4 I'm blown off the board I already have the lead for the win.
As someone who primarily plays Nurgle and my primary opponent most often plays guard, it is going to be a bad game for you. Nurgle does not have the toughness to stick around for very long under the firepower of new guard. Even without D2 weapons he will have more than enough shots with D1 weapons that most if not all of your plaguebearers will be gone first turn.
Beast will be okay but again, they have enough firepower to take them off the table without much issue. If they are unfamiliar with Beast they might also make the mistake of leaving them alive, but that trick will only last one turn and they have the rest of the game to correct that issue.
New guard are really dangerous, they can put out an insane amount of damage and their secondaries are tailored well enough that they can get a decent amount of points. Infantry backed by a commisar are great at holding objectives but they still fold like wet paper bags.
Can someone explain why en exalted flamer has move 10 and regular flamers move 12
and why a skulmaster has move 8 while skullcrushers have move 10???
Isn't it the exact same beast they're on?
Also they should have given the flamers more range when they took away the flamer ability.
Krull wrote: Can someone explain why en exalted flamer has move 10 and regular flamers move 12
and why a skulmaster has move 8 while skullcrushers have move 10???
Isn't it the exact same beast they're on?
Also they should have given the flamers more range when they took away the flamer ability.
exalted flamer is bigger
idk gak about khorne
nah, flamers still do more than enough damage as it is, giving them a weakness is perfectly fine (and needed) (i play mono tzeentch btw)
if anything, GW shouldve given the burning chariot the <character> keyword
Krull wrote: Can someone explain why en exalted flamer has move 10 and regular flamers move 12
and why a skulmaster has move 8 while skullcrushers have move 10???
Isn't it the exact same beast they're on?
Also they should have given the flamers more range when they took away the flamer ability.
exalted flamer is bigger
idk gak about khorne
nah, flamers still do more than enough damage as it is, giving them a weakness is perfectly fine (and needed) (i play mono tzeentch btw)
if anything, GW shouldve given the burning chariot the <character> keyword
What characters do you bring and what is their loadout (of relic or WLT)
Do you prefer a fluxmaster over a fateskimmer?
Do you have a army list floating around somewhere so i can have a look?
I just started, have some khorne en a bit of tzeentch, but dont know how to expand/use them properly
HS1: Burning Chariot: Fire of Tzeentch, Screamer bites [120 pts, 6 PL]
HS2: Burning Chariot: Fire of Tzeentch, Screamer bites [120 pts, 6 PL]
HS3: Burning Chariot: Fire of Tzeentch, Screamer bites [120 pts, 6 PL]
Similar to what I'm currently running, but with some interesting choices. Gives up 14 on no prisoners before any splits which I don't like.
In general I think you could give that Tzeentch list to 10 different players and get very different results, as knowing how to play your army, your opponent and the terrain is very important because the datasheets are very straight forward.
I've seen a lot of Khorne only daemon lists in the bottom half of tournaments. So probably equally straight forward and depending on player skill but just worse datasheets.
You can score 15 on reality rebels without leaving your "half" of the table, 5 for one quarter, 5 for another quarter, 5 for being wholly within 6" of the centre. Easy to go 2 - 2 - 2 - 4 - 4 as well if winning by the end.
Against melee, that list has 1 DP, 15 Screamers and 4 Screamer Chariots that can do some light melee.
You can also "peel" one unit of 5 MEQ off a unit with the MW output of all your characters.
I need to play it myself more to understand it, but I could easily see someone score a 20 with it by pushing up too fast.
p5freak wrote: How do you avoid melee with such a list ? You have no screens, and you want to spread out to score for rr.
honestly, you don't ? i've been lucky and havnt faced any hard melee army yet as post-nerf mono tzeentch.
use a few squads of blues if you're facing some heavy melee stuff, otherwise burning chariots aren't terrible in melee i found.
Flamers in the active turn will melt anything that gets close (and by close i mean 25", so half the board)
That's where you lure them out with easy to charge targets. Or also known as "screens". For a pure Tzeentch force, Blue Horrors would do the trick nicely. Alternatively 3-man screamer units also work well.
Expecting no combats in 40k is pretty hopeless anyway in proper board.
You are going to have to deal with combat. Idea of shooting enemy off board without them ever reaching combat works vs noobs and in planet bowling ball.
Oh, I agree. The point is that you have the enemy charge expendable units so that you can trade up in value. As long as that is happening then you should come out on top.
Quick question - would the corruption relic ignore abilities which change the first failed save to damage zero? Eg. Abaddon, helix gauntlet, impossible robe, etc.
I'm thinking it probably doesn't, but thought I'd ask here.
Very simple. It only works when damage is reduced by a certain amount. There is even an example, duty eternal, which reduces damage by 1. Compare that to the wording of the corruption relic. There is no certain amount mentioned, and there is no reduction. The damage is changed to 0, very different from the wording of duty eternal.
IGNORING WOUNDS VS RULES THAT PREVENT MODELS FROM IGNORING WOUNDS
Some models have a rule that says that they cannot lose more than a specified number of wounds in the same phase/turn/battle round, and that any wounds that would be lost after that point are not lost. Similarly, some models have a rule that reduces damage suffered by a stated amount (e.g. Duty Eternal). In any of these cases, when such a model is attacked by a weapon or model with a rule that says that enemy models cannot use rules to ignore the wounds it loses, that rule takes precedence over the previous rule, and if that attack inflicts any damage on that model, it loses a number of wounds equal to the Damage characteristic of that attack, even if it has already lost the specified number of wounds already this phase/turn/battle round.
I know i've asked a few times, but im currently sat at about 1750 points of deamons and im not really sure what i want for that final 250 to get me to a 2k list.
I have the basics of a monster mash list, mainly cos i'd never played anything like it so i wanted to be the Big Stick wielder for once. I have:
Bela'kor
Bloodthrister (great axe)
bloodmaster
30 bloodletters
a trio of bloodcrushers
10 flesh hounds
and a Soul Grinder.
part of me wants to go full Khorne, but i'm considering options outside that as well. Im not so enamoured by the khorne Warpstorm abilites that going undivided would be Bad, per se, and honestly im not really enamoured by yet more bloody red on the table.
so, what would you guys recommend as a finisher? ive got about 250 points of wiggle room and im looking for something to add a little verity to a mostly straight melee list.
Well for monster mash howabout LOC? Gives you nice way to delete stuff outside melee. Particularly handy when facing stuff with "no deep strike within 12" which really hinders daemon army.
Skarbrand is the other consideration, if you are happy with how much Belakor and the Bloodthirster cost and fancy spending the same amount again.
He is probably the most interesting pure Khorne unit in the codex from a gameplay perspective with his fall back prevention and warp locus (which Belakor also has).
I dont like skarbrand. He is slow with 8", no FLY, no exalted upgrade. You cant deepstrike him and use his warp locus, because he has to be on the table at the start of your turn. And he buffs enemy units in melee. All of this for 330 is meh.
The Keepers are the worst monster option of the four.
Fiends and Daemonettes are good. Chariots are too big based. Seekers aren't as good as Daemonettes. Most of their HQs are overpriced.
if i owned them, i'd be really curious as to how the cheapest chariots could play as move blockers, run 1-2 up the board and force your opponent to kill them to get out of their DZ (terrain permitting)
I've played a couple of games of Slaanesh with the new codex now. One mono vs. Votann, one with some Chaos Knights as well, vs. Votann and Blood Angels.
Both times the Votann kicked my arse. The Blood Angels were okay.
Honestly, the Exalted Chariot achieved nothing, my one Keeper drew too much fire, and the rest was hit-or-miss. The Enrapturess was great for locus when Blood Angels deep striked behind me. (I then deep striked some Daemonettes and took care of them.) Otherwise, she just sat on an objective. In game 1, my Seekers took out 3 Votann bikes in turn 1. Game 2, they took out 2 bikes in 3 turns. So... Not reliable.
The Fiends were great when they got into combat, but got wiped by the Votann reserves overwatch strat in game 1. Daemonettes were solid performers, but not great-great. The Masque got owned by the Votann melee tank person. Would've been better against a squad.
Going forward, I think I need a second Keeper, more Fiends, and *possibly* some extra Seekers. Got enough Daemonettes for now.
The Slaanesh strats and warp storm things aren't great. But there was 1 that gave me extra charge distance (if memory serves), and it meant I got like 6 of 7 things into melee in the turn they deep striked. Definitely a good use of points!
There aren't many other options. Possibly a Prince? I want to keep it mono Slaanesh. My friend has Tzeentch and Knights I can borrow for variety. So my money is going into Slaanesh and my other army, Necrons.
I'll have to play more games to figure out better tactics, but I think Slaanesh is pretty easy to figure out. Both good and bad, I guess. Easy to play, easy to counter...
I'm a masochist and want to play nurgle daemons as competitively as possible (I know, I know). Does anyone have any sleeper hits in the nurgle roster? I get the sense that nurgle got the short end of the stick in this codex, being slow, not actually that tough, and not overly powerful in damage dealing. I guess there is some obsec manipulation.
I'm thinking of spamming 9 beasts, 3 soul grinders, 4-5 plaguebearer squads, and a bunch of herald-type characters. I really would like to run a GUO or Rotigus, but I just can't bring myself to.
In fact, is there a decent way to even run a GUO?
When I look at combinations they just don't seem that tough, or powerful , and they're just so slow. Initially I thought corruption (with sword), virulent touch, and revoltingly resilient would be good for a close combat monster, but I have my doubts now, particularly with the punishing damage table. I'd love to be proven wrong though, if anyone's has success with GUOs or Rotigus.
In fact, is there a decent way to even run a GUO?
When I look at combinations they just don't seem that tough, or powerful , and they're just so slow. Initially I thought corruption (with sword), virulent touch, and revoltingly resilient would be good for a close combat monster, but I have my doubts now, particularly with the punishing damage table. I'd love to be proven wrong though, if anyone's has success with GUOs or Rotigus.
What makes you think they're so slow? They start with a 7" move. That's 1" faster than a lot of things - SM, orks, etc. You can also put them in reserve or deep strike out of the warp in order to close the gap quicker.
As for being tough enough? True, their Melee save of 5+ is poor. But they're still T9 & 22wounds....
In fact, is there a decent way to even run a GUO?
When I look at combinations they just don't seem that tough, or powerful , and they're just so slow. Initially I thought corruption (with sword), virulent touch, and revoltingly resilient would be good for a close combat monster, but I have my doubts now, particularly with the punishing damage table. I'd love to be proven wrong though, if anyone's has success with GUOs or Rotigus.
What makes you think they're so slow? They start with a 7" move. That's 1" faster than a lot of things - SM, orks, etc. You can also put them in reserve or deep strike out of the warp in order to close the gap quicker.
As for being tough enough? True, their Melee save of 5+ is poor. But they're still T9 & 22wounds....
7" isn't that impressive. +1" faster than infantry while having god damn big base and unable to go through walls. It will take lots of time to go around terrain.
Numbers aren't always so obvious. People went nuts when on AOS side I said mawkrusha isn't as fast/mobile as it might appear. "But but but 36" in a turn!". Well yeah. Split on 3 moves on big honking base, flying only ignoring vertical distance in AOS if you go over(not top) of terrain and 3" no-go meaning that the 6" base actually can't move through enemy unit means mawkrusha can sure sprint fast on open lane...but in practice it's surprisingly hard to move around due to enemy positioning and terrain. 6" wide terrain piece will take 2 turns generally to go over, can't go past enemy without foregoing charges(advance) etc.
7" might look faster than infantry but as it's not infantry it's lot slower on real board
Yeah it's really the base size that it means you have to move through channels between terrain features, albeit dependent on the terrain setup.
Fair point re: deepstriking, although again the 130mm base works against you and the charge is unreliable.
The toughness is match up dependent I suppose. I frequently face Imperial Guard and Votann and find their auto wounding mechanics really punishing.
I guess the trouble is that they seem so poor in comparison to be'lakor, even at 100 odd points cheaper, and even with customisation with relics and WTs.
ArikTaranis wrote: Yeah it's really the base size that it means you have to move through channels between terrain features, albeit dependent on the terrain setup.
Fair point re: deepstriking, although again the 130mm base works against you and the charge is unreliable.
The toughness is match up dependent I suppose. I frequently face Imperial Guard and Votann and find their auto wounding mechanics really punishing.
I guess the trouble is that they seem so poor in comparison to be'lakor, even at 100 odd points cheaper, and even with customisation with relics and WTs.
Ah, i see. You're not actually looking for advice/ideas on how to play the thing. What you really want is for people to agree with you that they're unplayable. To tell you that it's OK not to use the model.
There's plenty of posters around here who'll oblige you on that.
And you just don't want to admit you might be wrong.
Maybe you play without terrain but others don't and big base no fly monster isn't fast. Skarbrand moves 8"(faster than guo) and has 100mm(smaller than guo) base and still slow and clumsy.
8" monster on 100mm base without fly loses to 6" infantry in getting from a to b faster. And guo loses even worse
Terrain also means not even 9" charge from deep strike is quaranteed vs average+ player
Both of these things are true. I'd love to hear about it if someone's had success with a Guo in a particular role or configuration. Maybe one for support with the doomsday bell and accompanied by plague drones instead of an assault monster, for instance. I'm all ears for good suggestions, if they exist.
However I fear the Guo (and nurgle in general) has been absolutely shafted this edition. Its not a problem for most daemon players but I've built quite a large nurgle collection and still want to use it as effectively as possible. I also enjoy the challenge of using sub-par factions.
I used to enjoy running one with endless gift and revoltingly resilient prior to the new codex. It was stupidly tough, even if the damage wasn't quite there. But the addtion of toughness, a few wounds and an extra point of save vs shooting doesn't nearly make up for the loss of 4+ FNP. Particularly when GUOs can't use psychic powers to buff themselves anymore.
I guess I'm saying I'm hoping there's a way to make them work, but I'm pretty doubtful. Which is a shame because the model is great. My nurgle daemons are a labour of love but there are limits to how much Im willing to handicap myself in a game.
One nurgle army did 4-1 or was it 5-1. 4 GUO's(one being named) and as many soul grinders as he was able to fit(might have been full 3). Skew army with idea if you can't handle that many T9 16+ wound models you are screwed.
Of course there's some serious hard counters for that...Which is why going for clean sheet is hard. Too many tough match ups.
This may be dense, but what tactics can Slaanesh do other than charging into combat?
There's the Warp Storm thing that lets me fight first, which is great if I have 4 points. Other than that, it's basically just melee, melee, melee... Strats to give bonuses in melee, plus a few things for anti-psykers and anti-Aeldari.
Are there any other tactics for Slaanesh? Am I missing anything?
And with such a melee-based army, is there a good way to hold objectives or achieve secondaries without taking a unit out of combat?
I know someone mentioned using Chariots to sit on objectives, but they're still pretty easy to shift.
I put most units in the warp, which helps, and use the +1" charge strat thing when most of them come in. Where I fall down is in points. I'm usually leading after turn 3, but lose at the end. The 1 game I won on points, it was 40-39 and super tight.
I love the Slaanesh minis, but they seem to be 1-trick ponies.
I mean, everyone but tzneetch is melee focused, so its really a case of using the tools you have to make that melee pressure work. You have a few limited range options like the infernal entraptress with her musical attacks, and the soulstain discipline has a few Witchfore powers.
But yhea, you need to leverage your speed advantages to hem the enemy into his deployment zone for long enough to create a unassailable lead on primaries by the time he's cut himself free.
Speaking of Slannesh, a friend was able to get me a cheap box of Seekers, but not sure what else to get to support them. I have Tzeench and Khorne, but would it be worth delving into Slannesh as well?
Hecate wrote: This may be dense, but what tactics can Slaanesh do other than charging into combat?
There's the Warp Storm thing that lets me fight first, which is great if I have 4 points. Other than that, it's basically just melee, melee, melee... Strats to give bonuses in melee, plus a few things for anti-psykers and anti-Aeldari.
Are there any other tactics for Slaanesh? Am I missing anything?
And with such a melee-based army, is there a good way to hold objectives or achieve secondaries without taking a unit out of combat?
I know someone mentioned using Chariots to sit on objectives, but they're still pretty easy to shift.
I put most units in the warp, which helps, and use the +1" charge strat thing when most of them come in. Where I fall down is in points. I'm usually leading after turn 3, but lose at the end. The 1 game I won on points, it was 40-39 and super tight.
I love the Slaanesh minis, but they seem to be 1-trick ponies.
Hey slaanesh got trick more than khorne. Khorne is melee and sporadic shooting. Slaanesh melee, sporadgc shooting and casting.
If you want non-melee daemons tzeentch is only god to use. Others are all various flavour of melee. It's tzeentch, melee or different army.
Mmm. I think the next thing I'll try is having first turn and coming in fast from the warp, try to keep the enemy pinned in their deployment zone as Xerxes suggests.
But then, how do I hold my own objectives without automatically having too few units in the enemy's face and getting totally destroyed / overpowered?
Automatically Appended Next Post: I guess I'd really only need to keep 2 units back...
If I have 1 unit each on 2 objectives, plus can keep the enemy with just their deployment zone objective, then I can get:
Hold 1 objective
Hold 2 objectives
Hold more objectives than your opponent
That maxes me out. Just need to keep 2 units back, which might be feasible...
Both of these things are true. I'd love to hear about it if someone's had success with a Guo in a particular role or configuration. Maybe one for support with the doomsday bell and accompanied by plague drones instead of an assault monster, for instance. I'm all ears for good suggestions, if they exist.
However I fear the Guo (and nurgle in general) has been absolutely shafted this edition. Its not a problem for most daemon players but I've built quite a large nurgle collection and still want to use it as effectively as possible. I also enjoy the challenge of using sub-par factions.
I used to enjoy running one with endless gift and revoltingly resilient prior to the new codex. It was stupidly tough, even if the damage wasn't quite there. But the addtion of toughness, a few wounds and an extra point of save vs shooting doesn't nearly make up for the loss of 4+ FNP. Particularly when GUOs can't use psychic powers to buff themselves anymore.
I guess I'm saying I'm hoping there's a way to make them work, but I'm pretty doubtful. Which is a shame because the model is great. My nurgle daemons are a labour of love but there are limits to how much Im willing to handicap myself in a game.
I have played countless games with my Nurgle Daemons and I have yet to feel like a GUO is a welcome addition to the army. They don't hit hard, they aren't all that tough considering all of the auto-wound abilities in the game and they really don't buff much. Existing is their strongest ability in that they can be a distraction or hold a table quarter for some VP.
Even when resurrecting Plague Drones it is so lack luster. Plague Drones are much more resilient but it really isn't that hard to move them in this edition anyway and the ability to get one back a turn isn't exactly game changing. I tried to get a regenerative list working with 2x GUO with Bells, lots of Plague Drones and Plaguebearers, finished with some Beast but I was still tabled by about turn 4 without really killing anything of note.
The best thing you can do with Nurgle really seems to be just taking as many Soulgrinders as you can then taking other gods Daemons cause giving up the Warpstorm specific abilities for Nurgle doesn't really lose you anything.
Thanks for the input re: nurgle. I'm thinking I will run a GUO with corruption and virulent touch, even if it's sub par. At least the sweep attack with 12 attacks at damage 2 will be decent, if not amazing.
Another quick question - would the virulent touch warlord trait affect the nurglihg attacks? Initially I thought no, but reading the malefic rules it doesn't seem to modify the characteristic, so I'm now thinking it does. In which case, 7 additional auto wounding attacks isn't too shabby.
I'm a little confused about what rules we get and don't get if we bring an allied super heavy detachment, specifically some wardogs, in Arks of Omen. Does it ruin some of our army special rules?
Mad_Proctologist wrote: I'm a little confused about what rules we get and don't get if we bring an allied super heavy detachment, specifically some wardogs, in Arks of Omen. Does it ruin some of our army special rules?
I believe not, as both Deamons and Knights have rules wording to the effect that AGENT OF CHAOS units dont break "faction purity bonus" rules, and rules for allying with another CHAOS faction that grants the attachment AGENT OF CHAOS.
so a single super heavy unit (like a wardog squad) would NOT break any of our rules, though they wouldnt be affected by most of our own rules, as most auras and such as locked to LEGIONES DAEMONICA, so CHAOS KNIGHTS units wouldn't get any bonuses or be eligible for demonic strats, etc. however, they WOULD be eligible for their own strats if their was one you wanted to use.
Mad_Proctologist wrote: I'm a little confused about what rules we get and don't get if we bring an allied super heavy detachment, specifically some wardogs, in Arks of Omen. Does it ruin some of our army special rules?
I believe not, as both Deamons and Knights have rules wording to the effect that AGENT OF CHAOS units dont break "faction purity bonus" rules, and rules for allying with another CHAOS faction that grants the attachment AGENT OF CHAOS.
so a single super heavy unit (like a wardog squad) would NOT break any of our rules, though they wouldnt be affected by most of our own rules, as most auras and such as locked to LEGIONES DAEMONICA, so CHAOS KNIGHTS units wouldn't get any bonuses or be eligible for demonic strats, etc. however, they WOULD be eligible for their own strats if their was one you wanted to use.
Returning player from fantasy/previous editions. Am I right in thinking that musicians and standards don't have a native effect currently, they just allow certain stratagems, warp storm results and possibly psychic powers to add effects, or have I missed something? And if so, what page?
Pilum wrote: Returning player from fantasy/previous editions. Am I right in thinking that musicians and standards don't have a native effect currently, they just allow certain stratagems, warp storm results and possibly psychic powers to add effects, or have I missed something? And if so, what page?
You are correct. In previous editions they cost extra points, but this time around there is absolutely no reason to not take them.
EightFoldPath wrote: They do have minor effects in addition to strategem support, they are right there on the datasheet.
... So they are. I was so convinced I'd seen it in the faction rules pages my eyes must have just skipped past that bit. What a gibbon! (In my defence, it WAS mid-game and I was under a bit of time pressure - and possibly another case of old-rules-itis!)
Thoughts on blood crushers? point for point they seem to hit harder than blood letters and more wound per model. obviously they lack obsec and have more trouble with terrain but does that discount them?
Mad_Proctologist wrote: Thoughts on blood crushers? point for point they seem to hit harder than blood letters and more wound per model. obviously they lack obsec and have more trouble with terrain but does that discount them?
i use mine trio i got in the vanguard box. Ive found the terrain issue is pretty significant, purely becuase of the sheer SIZE of those bases. I really stuggled to get them into combat except out of deep strike (thanks to deamonic deepstrike and the khorne 3d6 charge strat).
yes they hit a little harder, but i'm not in any hurry to buy more, honestly.
How many Blue Horrors are people generally having to use to account for Pinks splitting? I have 30 Pinks but only 10 Blues, so even though I don't plan to use the Blues, I feel this isn't enough to cover the Pinks.
I used 10 pinks in a game, and only had 5 blues available. (Was borrowing friend's stuff.) Technically it was fine, but only because not every pink split, and I was doing the whole "pink dies, blue dies, brimstone dies, blue dies, brimstone dies, repeat" thing.
Planning on buying friend a box of blues for their birthday.
Automatically Appended Next Post: 30 pinks will require 3 squads of 10. This could mean 10 blues aren't enough, if all 3 squads are taking damage in the same turn.
Honestly, I'd get another box just in case. But I'm a Slaanesh player, only borrowed some Tzeentch a couple times.
Also 10 might not be enough if 7-8 pinks die and you get lucky with splits. Can't split blue's to brim's here then.
With 30 pinks would get 20 blue's.
At least 40k doesn't have as bad as aos where 10 automatically splits to 20 blues and can summon blue's also. I have 10 pinks and def need 30 blues in aos.
It depends on what your meta is like, but I wouldn't bother with more than 20 Blues regardless of how many Pinks you take. I found that Pink Horrors are a unit that either get completely ignored because the opponent has more pressing threats, or simply get slaughtered in close combat. They do have their uses in performing actions and deep strike denial. They can also be used to make pile in / consolidate a problem for an enemy and can bog down shooting units in pointless combat.
I've splurged out on around 1000pts of Slannesh stuff to go with my Tzeench and Khorne (around 1.5-2k each), I'm struggling to put together a list that feels a little balanced between the gods. By the time I've added the GD and a couple of Troop choices for each god (even if it's only two chosen) I'm running low on points for Elites/FA.
Anyone have any tips on running multiple gods in a list? I've seen examples where they have 3x GD plus Be'lakor, and it just seems to light on the ground in terms of numbers.
EightFoldPath wrote: I think you have to lean in to going one way or the other, either:
4~5 big lumps and not much else. Score some points but win by killing and preventing their scoring.
Carpet of troops/elites daemons. Kill some stuff but win by getting lots and lots of points.
Yup. Pretty much that.
I would go with 1 GD, and cram as much troops/elites as much as possible.
One list I'd wanna try is bringing 3 nurgle Soul Grinders. I proxied 2 of them in 3 games, and they just have staying power. My only loss was from a SoB army, (miracle dice pulling in 5, 6s) but it was a chore for my opponent to bring 'em down.
I think the rules look fun and interactive. The biggest challenge IMO is that the Keeper won't be able to kill tanks. I hope mono-Slaanesh get a way to deal with them. I am a little sad that the save vs shooting and save vs melee is gone though. I was also hoping to see how troops looked, but I guess we will have to wait until closer to release.
Overall, I think there are some fun mechanics for Daemons.
i aggree the removal of the demonic split save is a little loss, but on the other hand i understand it was a bit of a "special snowflake" save, only brought in to mitigate how free they'd been with ignores invuls weaponry, and invuls in general. hopefully it doesn't translate into a loss of survivability this edition.
the removal of the physic phase and transformation of witchfire powers to shooting attack might actaully increase our effective ranged ability, if they give them to enough units. i'll be intrested to see who gets what, or even if the new powers line up at all with out current selections.
the placement of a regen mechanic into the new battleshock test is an intresting one. assuming units stay alive long enough to get it, it might significantly increase our regen ability and thus staying power. of coruse, this also incentvises alpha strikes to overkill units and prevent regen, but it might still work in our favour.
Deep striking at 6" away in the corrupted zones seems nice. Like having Warp Locus in entire zones, rather than centred on, say, the Infernal Enrapturess. I'm optimistic. Daemons seem to have better rules so far than my other army, Necrons. Still, there's still far too little info to have a strong opinion.
The highlights,
1) He's still good in close combat. He can deal with both hoards and bigger targets.
2) He has two psychic abilities. Betraying shades looks useful against a number of targets, and his shadow form abilities look like they all have their uses - Wreathed in Shadows is great if the opponent gets T1, and Pall of Dispair combos nicely with Shadow of Chaos (which Be'lakor projects)
3) Be'lakor's durability should be reasonable at T10, 18 wounds, a 4++, and Stealth (which is likely a -1 to hit)
So he can deal damage, survive hits, and buffs friendlies? Sounds good to me.
Obviously points will be something that can make or breaks him, but without that information his datasheet wholistically looks good.
Void__Dragon wrote: Rules look good, the datasheets for the Keeper of Secrets and Be'lakor look like utter gak.
The Keeper bounces off of rhinos now. This is a 300+ points model that can not destroy the weakest tank Marines have.
"But maybe they will make them cheape-" no, feth off and eat a bag of bearshit.
At least the KoC appears to be way tankier.
Yeah, greater daemons should be able to be tank killers, though who knows, there might be ways for daemons to crank out mortal wounds for that. Also, Nurgle daemons might get the Death Guard ability of reducing the toughness of any enemy units within a particular range. Bloodthirsters should most definitely be able to take down large targets, as that's one of their chief purposes. The Insensate Wrath BT should be able to cleave Knights in half with ease.
The highlights,
1) He's still good in close combat. He can deal with both hoards and bigger targets.
2) He has two psychic abilities. Betraying shades looks useful against a number of targets, and his shadow form abilities look like they all have their uses - Wreathed in Shadows is great if the opponent gets T1, and Pall of Dispair combos nicely with Shadow of Chaos (which Be'lakor projects)
3) Be'lakor's durability should be reasonable at T10, 18 wounds, a 4++, and Stealth (which is likely a -1 to hit)
So he can deal damage, survive hits, and buffs friendlies? Sounds good to me.
Obviously points will be something that can make or breaks him, but without that information his datasheet wholistically looks good.
Belakor lost all four chaos god keywords, he cant be buffed by anything which require god specific keywords. Belakor lost his ignore inv., his shadow form got replaced by stealth, which is most likely worse. He lost his reroll 1s aura, D6+1 damage is worse that D3+3 in my opinion.
The highlights,
1) He's still good in close combat. He can deal with both hoards and bigger targets.
2) He has two psychic abilities. Betraying shades looks useful against a number of targets, and his shadow form abilities look like they all have their uses - Wreathed in Shadows is great if the opponent gets T1, and Pall of Dispair combos nicely with Shadow of Chaos (which Be'lakor projects)
3) Be'lakor's durability should be reasonable at T10, 18 wounds, a 4++, and Stealth (which is likely a -1 to hit)
So he can deal damage, survive hits, and buffs friendlies? Sounds good to me.
Obviously points will be something that can make or breaks him, but without that information his datasheet wholistically looks good.
Belakor lost all four chaos god keywords, he cant be buffed by anything which require god specific keywords. Belakor lost his ignore inv., his shadow form got replaced by stealth, which is most likely worse. He lost his reroll 1s aura, D6+1 damage is worse that D3+3 in my opinion.
Losing god keywords feels a bit naff and bad.
But "He got less lethal" isn't a bad thing, when that's the GOAL of this reset. He got less lethal-so did just about everything else.
We dont know if 10th will be less lethal. GWs claims that, but i doubt it. Marines get to "autodelete" two enemy units with girlyman, if they delete the first one. So far we have only seen tiny bits of all the army rules.
The highlights,
1) He's still good in close combat. He can deal with both hoards and bigger targets.
2) He has two psychic abilities. Betraying shades looks useful against a number of targets, and his shadow form abilities look like they all have their uses - Wreathed in Shadows is great if the opponent gets T1, and Pall of Dispair combos nicely with Shadow of Chaos (which Be'lakor projects)
3) Be'lakor's durability should be reasonable at T10, 18 wounds, a 4++, and Stealth (which is likely a -1 to hit)
So he can deal damage, survive hits, and buffs friendlies? Sounds good to me.
Obviously points will be something that can make or breaks him, but without that information his datasheet wholistically looks good.
Guilliman is better at close combat while buffing his army better due to the second oath of moment. And can hide from shooting with the Lone Operative rule. And although Be'lakor is tankier, Guilliman's profile never degrades and he has a chance to get up.
And at least judging by 9e points Be'lakor is 120 points cheaper. I sincerely doubt they are going to bump Guilliman up over 100 points, so if we're very lucky they will drop the points of Be'lakor, but that blows.
The Keeper of Secrets looks even more pathetic. Like I said: it can't kill a fething rhino. Who here thinks rhinos will suddenly be 300 points? I seriously doubt it. And as for what it can do to a land raider? Lol. And the Land Raider has the same OC as the KoC does, while also presumably having a crew of terminators inside of it.
Our greater daemons save the bloodthirster are going to be hard stopped by anything vehicle or monster tier in durability and the best case scenario is that they will be made cheaper to compensate. I can't wait to see how awe-inspiringly tepid the Lord of Change's psychic rules will be by the way looking at all of the psychic datasheets so far.
It's no surprise though, Daemons are the biggest NPC faction in the game, meant to just be an amusing sideshow to the real villains, the CSM. It is telling that in the so-called "Chaos Daemons faction focus" one of the things they decided to showcase was how to ally Daemons in with CSM. Because that's all Daemons are, a fun second detachment to tack onto your CSM list to add a bit of spice.
To be fair, in turn 1 belakor and anything within 6" of him cant be targeted by the opponent with anything outside of 18", when you pick wreathed in shades at the start of the battleround.
Agree about the keeper, put a rhino in front of him, and he is disabled.
Void__Dragon wrote: Rules look good, the datasheets for the Keeper of Secrets and Be'lakor look like utter gak.
The Keeper bounces off of rhinos now. This is a 300+ points model that can not destroy the weakest tank Marines have.
"But maybe they will make them cheape-" no, feth off and eat a bag of bearshit.
At least the KoC appears to be way tankier.
Yeah, greater daemons should be able to be tank killers, though who knows, there might be ways for daemons to crank out mortal wounds for that. Also, Nurgle daemons might get the Death Guard ability of reducing the toughness of any enemy units within a particular range. Bloodthirsters should most definitely be able to take down large targets, as that's one of their chief purposes. The Insensate Wrath BT should be able to cleave Knights in half with ease.
You can't have both durable tanks/vehicles and then have factloe that doesn't get harder time.
Guess you prefered game where tanks etc got trivially one shotted?
You have trouble with tanks, others will struggle with your gd
Void__Dragon wrote: Rules look good, the datasheets for the Keeper of Secrets and Be'lakor look like utter gak.
The Keeper bounces off of rhinos now. This is a 300+ points model that can not destroy the weakest tank Marines have.
"But maybe they will make them cheape-" no, feth off and eat a bag of bearshit.
At least the KoC appears to be way tankier.
Yeah, greater daemons should be able to be tank killers, though who knows, there might be ways for daemons to crank out mortal wounds for that. Also, Nurgle daemons might get the Death Guard ability of reducing the toughness of any enemy units within a particular range. Bloodthirsters should most definitely be able to take down large targets, as that's one of their chief purposes. The Insensate Wrath BT should be able to cleave Knights in half with ease.
You can't have both durable tanks/vehicles and then have factloe that doesn't get harder time.
Guess you prefered game where tanks etc got trivially one shotted?
You have trouble with tanks, others will struggle with your gd
No, I don't want tanks to be one-shotted, but I do think that greater daemons should be big and strong enough to take them on.
I'm wondering if chaos daemons will be pushed even further in the direction of needing to field units from different chaos gods in the same force. I love mono-god for fluff and visual reasons but I guess that might need to take a backseat in the new edition. I suppose it means I can do some conversions to have faux mono-god models.
Im a bit disappointed with Belakors strike attacks, d6+1 is just so unreliable, especially with the probable lack of rerolls. His buffs seem powerful though. I'm interested to see how the greater daemons compare to him. It's probably better for internal balance if there is a genuine case to take GDs over be'lakor. Anyway just my 2cents.
You can't have both durable tanks/vehicles and then have factloe that doesn't get harder time.
Except marines, guard, and other factions dont have a harder time against tanks. They can kill them from a distance, daemons cant. Maybe a skull cannon will be able to do so. Guard can even autowound tanks from a distance on hits of 5s with flashlights. Daemons cant do that.
ArikTaranis wrote: I'm wondering if chaos daemons will be pushed even further in the direction of needing to field units from different chaos gods in the same force. I love mono-god for fluff and visual reasons but I guess that might need to take a backseat in the new edition. I suppose it means I can do some conversions to have faux mono-god models.
Im a bit disappointed with Belakors strike attacks, d6+1 is just so unreliable, especially with the probable lack of rerolls. His buffs seem powerful though. I'm interested to see how the greater daemons compare to him. It's probably better for internal balance if there is a genuine case to take GDs over be'lakor. Anyway just my 2cents.
From what i can see, thier will be no mechanical BONUS to being mono-god, as they are deliberatly going away form a "subfaction" model, where bonuses are tied to specific lore entites like Chapters, Legions, Godly Alignments, Forge Worlds, etc, towards a lore-agnostic "detachment" model. Whatever new detactments we will get when our codex drops, they will not be "godly" detachments, focused around a single gods forces. I think they will focus more on a "style" of demonic invasion, so maybe a new form of the Disciples of Belakor mixed deamon/CSM detachment, or things along that line.
Void__Dragon wrote: Rules look good, the datasheets for the Keeper of Secrets and Be'lakor look like utter gak.
The Keeper bounces off of rhinos now. This is a 300+ points model that can not destroy the weakest tank Marines have.
"But maybe they will make them cheape-" no, feth off and eat a bag of bearshit.
At least the KoC appears to be way tankier.
Yeah, greater daemons should be able to be tank killers, though who knows, there might be ways for daemons to crank out mortal wounds for that. Also, Nurgle daemons might get the Death Guard ability of reducing the toughness of any enemy units within a particular range. Bloodthirsters should most definitely be able to take down large targets, as that's one of their chief purposes. The Insensate Wrath BT should be able to cleave Knights in half with ease.
You can't have both durable tanks/vehicles and then have factloe that doesn't get harder time.
Guess you prefered game where tanks etc got trivially one shotted?
You have trouble with tanks, others will struggle with your gd
No, I don't want tanks to be one-shotted, but I do think that greater daemons should be big and strong enough to take them on.
And then others want their tanks be big and strong enough to take on gd's. And we are back at tanks and gd's being 1 shottable chaff.
Or you think gd's should be able to take tanks but not reverse? Lol
And then others want their tanks be big and strong enough to take on gd's. And we are back at tanks and gd's being 1 shottable chaff.
Or you think gd's should be able to take tanks but not reverse? Lol
Greater Daemons are priced at like twice the value of a Leman Russ, much less a rhino. The idea that a close combat model over three times the price of a rhino shouldn't be able to kill a rhino in close combat is really idiotic my friend.
And then others want their tanks be big and strong enough to take on gd's. And we are back at tanks and gd's being 1 shottable chaff.
Or you think gd's should be able to take tanks but not reverse? Lol
Greater Daemons are priced at like twice the value of a Leman Russ, much less a rhino. The idea that a close combat model over three times the price of a rhino shouldn't be able to kill a rhino in close combat is really idiotic my friend.
Let's actually look at that though. Let's take a Rhino vs a Keeper of Secrets.
Assumption: The wounding chart is the same.
Assumption: There are no offensive or defensive buffs applied outside of what's on the datasheets.
Assumption: Both models are at full health.
The Rhino defensive profile is T9, 3+, and 10 wounds.
Keeper attacks with Phantasmagoria (witchfire). 6 attacks, 5 hit. Wounding on a 5+, and a 6+ causes a devastating wound (1 mortal). So for simplicity we call it 1 unsaved wound, bringing the Rhino down to 9 wounds.
The Keeper gets into close combat.
Whitstealer sword gets 5 hits, ~2 wounds at AP-3. The Rhino gets a 6+ save. We would expect 2 unsaved wounds causing 6 damage. The total is 7 damage.
You then have the snapping claws. 4 attacks, lets say 3 hits. Wounding on a 5+, and a 6+ causes a devastating wound (3 mortals). It wouldn't be unexpected for the wound to go through (rhino gets a 6+ at best), causing an additional 3 damage, totalling to 10. So dead Rhino.
If you give the Keeper either the whip or ritual knife then it becomes more reliable in killing the Rhino. You can also use the focused version of Phantasmagoria for more attempts at wounding the Rhino.
Will the Keeper kill the Rhino every time? No, but it has around 50/50 chance of killing it out right. We don't know how things like Battle Shock might apply in this case, where the Rhino wouldn't be allowed to fall back, allowing you to kill it in your opponents turn if you didn't do so in your turn.
A 50/50 chance is bad for a model costing three times as much as a rhino, assuming points stay roughly the same. You also assume that you can use ranged (psychic) attacks in close combat, we dont know if thats possible, or not.
He was probably assuming the Keeper did its psychic attacks as it walked up to the Rhino before charging it.
A Leman Russ armed with a Battlecannon, 2 Heavy Bolters and 1 Lascannon with the Take Aim order looks like it should do 3.9 wounds to a Keeper or 2.6 to an Aegis Keeper.
My own figures give an Aegis Keeper doing 5.3 wounds to a T12 2+ Leman Russ and 6.25 (edited) wounds to a T9 3+ Rhino (which will give it a battleshock test to take).
But we don't know full rules for the:
Command phase
Movement phase
Shooting phase
Charge phase
Fight phase
All of which could be vital to assessing the relative strength of these units.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Some extra figures and I'll be amazed if I've kept it down to just one error.
Land Raider does 5.2 to Keeper in shooting with Oath, Keeper does 5.3 in shooting/melee (always letting the Keeper shoot as she should get the drop on most targets).
Angron does 10.9 to Keeper (gave him full re-rolls and sustained hits 1), Keeper does 5.4 back.
Berzerkers do 2.1 (sus hits 1), Keeper does 11.8 back.
Abaddon does 7.4 (re-rolls and sus hits 1), Keeper does 10.4 back.
Roboute does 7.6 (oath), Keeper does 5.4 back.
Swarmlord does 3.7 (no buffs), Keeper does 5.4 back.
Just going back to Be'lakor's datasheet. His focussed witchfire is actually pretty formidable, now that we know what Hazardous does from the recent leaks. Instead of 1s to hit cause a mortal wound, it's just a separate dice roll per Hazardous weapon, and on a 1 it'll cause 3mw to Be'lakor.
12 shots at S6 AP3 D1 with ignores cover and devastating wounds is deadly against the right targets. Given the actual effects of Hazardous, I'm probably pretty happy to use this focussed profile most of the time, and if I do roll a 1, I can use a command reroll on it if I really want to.
Belakor's anti shooting outside 18" aura looks really good now we've seen so many solid long range guns. Especially looking at how FLY doesn't grant as much maneuverability (less hiding behind a big L shaped ruin, although maybe we'll see 1" high ruins suddenly become very popular) and re-branded obscuring doesn't work on TOWERING units like Knights.
And finally, the Dark Eldar seem to have a lot less access to easy ways to wound monsters in 10th (poison now being ANTI INFANTRY) which is good news for all monster mash lovers.
Yeah I think that aura of Be'lakors will be a critical way to protect our units from alpha strike. I can't quite figure out how useful shadow of chaos will be for us, but if nothing else be'lakor can reliably pass his own battleshock tests and heal himself. Maybe spook a few enemies too.
Another thing I'm wondering about is what our enhancements will be - maybe only one or two from our detachment? I'm thinking they won't want to tie relics to specific gods, as they seem to be moving away from mono-God stuff. Based on the leaks I've seen, it looks like named characters will no longer get a warlord trait, a bit like AoS.
ArikTaranis wrote: Yeah I think that aura of Be'lakors will be a critical way to protect our units from alpha strike. I can't quite figure out how useful shadow of chaos will be for us, but if nothing else be'lakor can reliably pass his own battleshock tests and heal himself. Maybe spook a few enemies too.
Another thing I'm wondering about is what our enhancements will be - maybe only one or two from our detachment? I'm thinking they won't want to tie relics to specific gods, as they seem to be moving away from mono-God stuff. Based on the leaks I've seen, it looks like named characters will no longer get a warlord trait, a bit like AoS.
bear in mind "enhancements" covers WLT as well as relics. they could just go with all WLT.
then again, it would be easy enough to keep the relics generic enough. "Demon-bound blade" or "Talisman of Fear", etc.
also, while the basic detachment form the index might be undivided, theirs nothing stopping them doing godly detachments in the full codex (or at least, detachments that grant an extra bonus to KHORNE/NURGLE/SLANNESH/TZNEETCH units, etc). We dont know exactly how full codex detachments will function, but something like that would be fine.
I wouldn't be surprised if, for example, the marine codex had a "vanguard company" detachment that gave all PHOBOS armoured units a bonus, or a "1st company" with bonuses to terminator units. They stated that they didn't want to lock the good bonuses behind colour schemes, but that seemed more aimed at the imperial factions than anything else.
tneva82 wrote: Yea equilavent for khorne(bonuses by paint colour) would be different bonus to red khorne than black khorne
Separate detachments favouring specific god makes sense. Question is are you forced to go mono or are other gods just without bonus.
i mean, for the answer to that, we will have to look how the Marine 'dex does things.
my guess would be a preferential detachment bonus to a single god type, along with the strats and enhancements being tied more towards that god, as that encourages a mono-god army but doesn't prohibit use of other gods stuff to plug a weakness.
What I'm thinking is that our codex is a long way off judging by the road map GW published, at least a year I think. So that means we'll have to make do with probably a fairly basic (but hopefully decent) set of rules for quite a while. We just get what we get and have to play with it for the forseeable future.
Personally, I'd be happy with a bonus for mono-god detachments that don't break the army if you mix-and-match. Perhaps, "This is a Slaanesh detachment. All Slaanesh models get X bonus, even if the detachment includes non-Slaanesh units."
Then there can be specific detachments per god, allowing for hopefully interesting rules, but you don't lose it if you plug a hole with a different god's unit.
Automatically Appended Next Post: But the non-Slaanesh units would be without a bonus. Like, punish the non-god units rather than the entire detachment.
That makes sense to me, and it'd add some interesting decisions to make when list-building.
It depends how many detachments we get in the codex. If it is just 5 then 4 mono god and 1 Belakor detachment is a bit yawn. If it is 9 detachments, then 4 mono god, 1 Belakor and 4 mixed god detachments (maybe - all big lads, all little lads, all the fast stuff and say a great game/aniomsity one) would give some stuff to play around with.
Not gonna lie, I feel pretty disheartened looking at those tzeentch datasheets.
Was expecting a big antitank psychic attack on the LoC, but his power seems a bit anemic. Maybe it's not too bad with the choice of added special rule. Flamers look terrible, I was expecting them to be nerfed but not that hard. Loss of strength hurts their attacks badly. Exalted flamer looks a bit weak sauce. To add insult to injury, flamers and exalteds have psychic attacks, which is a big liability. Screamers look dreadful other than the super speed. Their close combat punch is feeble, thought they would get anti vehicle.
I guess if you're running tzeentch you'll need a LoC for that +1 strength aura for shooting. Maybe several lords of change.
Edit: On the positive side, at least they're looking fairly resilient now that they don't fold immediately against melee attacks. Also, LoC benefits from his own aura, so his shooting is a little better than I first thought. Also flamers falling back and shooting is decent.
Edit 2: OK lords of change are growing on me, and soul grinders and daemon princes look decent.
The LoC can also get a relic staff that adds another strength to ranged attacks, so with that the Bolt of Change is a plenty respectable S11, 12 in the Shadow of Chaos.
Yeah the vanilla lord of change with relic staff and rod of sorcery looks good. I think you'd pretty much always choose sustained hits (d3) as the bonus. His aura is powerful too.
I think the regular LoC is probably better than fateweaver, as he doesn't have the buffing aura. His shooting attack could be clutch with indirect fire, but I'm not sure the total package gets there. Might net 2-3 cp with his abiliity, and the extra cp cost for an enemy strat could be excellent for cp rerolls or insane bravery. Overall I'm not convinced though.
So, running the math on my collection, my force is about 100 points cheaper than its late 9th values. the line troops generally seem more expensive, but the big monsters are cheaper, which roughly evens out with a little bit of spare for something new.
The Keeper is sooooo expensive! For the price of 1 Keeper, I could instead get 10 Daemonettes and 10 Seekers. Sure, the Keeper has its place. Just... sticker shock over the Keeper being the most expensive greater daemon.
The Keeper looks like a piece of gak at that price point, whereas the Lord of Change is comically cheap at over 100 points less expensive.
Shalaxi meanwhile is swinging her big 400 point futa pecker and honestly might even be worth it. There is almost nothing that is a vehicle, monster, or hero who is surviving her rolling up on them and penetrating them with her big throbbing spear that rerolls all hits, wounds, and even the damage roll.
She actually is probably the only unit I've seen that can probably kill Lion El'Jonson in a fight. He does less than half of her wounds and she will nearly kill him with just the spear, if not kill him entirely (the math is a little finicky for me to do).
Did people spot from rule glossary change vs 9e how fly works. Slows fliers around terrain. Greater daemons might hide better behind ruins but lot less mobile
Is the buff for Nurgle Daemon Princes good or not? It seems a little unfair that they get only an addition of one to their toughness while the others get plus two to stats that are increased for them. Is T11 good or not?
ArcaneHorror wrote: Is the buff for Nurgle Daemon Princes good or not? It seems a little unfair that they get only an addition of one to their toughness while the others get plus two to stats that are increased for them. Is T11 good or not?
Battlecannons are strength 10. T11 makes a big difference.
Castigator too. There's plenty of S10 weapons out there but is it common enough in game that you really see it or does opponent have enough S12/S9- weapons to deal with that he doesn't see remains to be seen. That's the kind of thing that's hard to predict early up.
+1T has a different value on the Winged vs Foot versions, as T10 over T9 on the winged feels more impactful (S5, S9, S10, S18) compared to T11 over T10 (S10, S11, S20).
But you also have to account for the possible synergies, each Greater Daemon has an aura buff and the 6+++ seems relevant.
Potentially in the future there may also be strategems that have a second bonus depending on the god (like CSM).
Watched a game of Tzeentch vs. Gladius Marines today. Oath of Moment dominated. It was a 1k size game (learning rules), so there was only 1 Lord of Change. It got Oathed in turn 2 - dead. There was really no coming back from that. The Marines were purely infantry, and with the Lord dead, Tzeentch didn't stand a chance. Tabled on turn 4.
The best unit was Screamers, which were way better than in 9th. They did the most damage and lasted the longest. Still... Oath just deletes something each turn. Kind of makes lots of small units the best option. When I play my first game with Slaanesh, I'm gonna avoid taking the ridiculously expensive Keeper. It'll probably be at 1000 points, at first.
Is it just me or does Belakor dictate the pace of the battle extremely well? If you take him with a bunch of other greater daemons he can make them immune to shooting turn one, then turn two you fly in and deep strike a bloodthirster in Belakor's aura and you'll get an easy charge without having to worry about winning the mid objectives.
Arachnofiend wrote: Is it just me or does Belakor dictate the pace of the battle extremely well? If you take him with a bunch of other greater daemons he can make them immune to shooting turn one, then turn two you fly in and deep strike a bloodthirster in Belakor's aura and you'll get an easy charge without having to worry about winning the mid objectives.
eh, considering that combo is in the 600 points plus range, i would very much HOPE its very effective.
but your right, he does seem to be good for ensuring asset delivery. he forces the enemy to push forward to deal with him, which makes it easier for the rest of our melee oriented army to attack them, then also allows you to push closer and punish them for coming into range.
They were already crazy fast. This should mean a turn 1 charge most of the time. But then they're on their own, with the rest of your army lagging behind (whether deep striking on turn 2 or just running up)...
Very good chance they can delete something turn 1 (if you take 10 of them), but then they're toast. Would need a good target to make the swap worthwhile.
I haven't had a chance to play Daemons in 10th yet. Probably not until 15th July... Game group is busy and only once per week usually. When I do, I'm probably gonna run 10 Seekers, turn 1 charge, unit swap - assuming there's something worth the trade. If not, I'll hold 'em back a turn. Maybe just hide on an objective in turn 1...
Automatically Appended Next Post: S4 attacks isn't particularly strong, but is decent. Maybe standard Marine killers? I reckon 10 Seekers could take out 10 Intercessors in 2 Fight phases. Get the charge, kill half, get the rest in the opponent's turn.
Managed to get my first game of 10th, opponent was playing Tau, the seekers preformed very well they managed to seize the midfield which allowed me to deep strike most of my army forward by using the stratagem that lets you reserve 1-2 units at end of opponents turn, then deep strike them.
I’ll probably take 2 units of 5 next game instead of 1 unit of 10, makes hiding them easier as they advance up
Hecate wrote: Did the Seekers simply tank a lot of hits, or did they get into melee and dominate?
I'll be running 10 of them on Saturday, in my first Slaanesh game of 10th ed. Hoping they do well.
They didn’t get shot much to the line of sight blocking terrain, on turn 2 they got off a multi charge on a group of fire warriors and pathfinders where they reduced the pathfinders squad to 3 models and the fire warriors down to 5.
(We where playing long table deployment hence why no turn 1 charge)
On turn 3 they recharged the path finders + a broadside which they killed both units of (the fire warriors where finished off by deep striking daemonettes)
Played a 1000 point game today against Genestealer Cults. My first game with 10th Slaanesh. I got annihilated.
I screwed up early on by Scouting my Seekers too far forward, and my opponent got the first turn. Bye bye 10 Seekers.
The only unit that really did anything was my 3 Fiends, but they still didn't achieve much. Certainly not enough to justify costing 150 points.
The Exalted Chariot was sturdier than my Daemon Prince, but did no real damage. I wound up conceding at the end of turn 2. Not even a gambit would've saved me.
Next time I take Daemons, I'll run Slaanesh and Tzeentch together. And try to be a bit more tactical.
GSC can put out a lot of damage, though. 2 Goliaths and 5 bikes ruined me... And Slaanesh has nothing great for anti-tank. Even the Prince was wounding on 5+.
Automatically Appended Next Post: To be fair, I watched the GSC player take on Marines, and not even Oath of Moment was able to delete the Goliaths. They did better, only losing on points from the primary mission, but still...
You mean shalaxi isnt great against vehicles in melee with 6 attacks, hitting on 2s, at S14 AP-3 DD6+2, rerolling charges, rerolling to hit, rerolling to wound and rerolling damage ?
If you need more anti tank with daemons go with chaos knights. War dog brigands are nice.
p5freak wrote: You mean shalaxi isnt great against vehicles in melee with 6 attacks, hitting on 2s, at S14 AP-3 DD6+2, rerolling charges, rerolling to hit, rerolling to wound and rerolling damage ?
If you need more anti tank with daemons go with chaos knights. War dog brigands are nice.
That's one model, for one faction of Daemons, at 400 points.
Yeah, at 400 points, I'm not taking Shalaxi in anything less than a 1500-point game. Even then, 1 model for anti-big-stuff is a bit... not good.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm gonna try Kairos first, though. Cheaper, and the indirect fire means he can hide and thus is less likely to get blasted off the board in turns 1 and 2.
At 2000, I'd take both Kairos and Shalaxi for sure. The standard greater daemons just seem underwhelming to me.
I won the game by quite allot on primaries by controlling 3 - 4 objectives most of the game with the sticky objective stratagems.
I had the soul grinders and keeper, move within 6 inch of the prince to provide them with stealth, and I used the seekers to get a first turn charge off on a unit of death marks which they slaughtered, a mistake I made was consolidating them into a unit of scarabs which proceeded to beat them up in the next few turns.
The Daemonettes + Syll'Esse came down on an objective on my turn 2 and stayed their until I redeployed them on the last turn, there wasn't any safe charges for them since the only unit left on turn 3 was a huge unit of warriors with 2 characters + extra body guards, they contributed to killing this unit on the final turn when I redeployed them with The realm of chaos.
Soul grinders of Tzeentch, and slaanesh are good at anti tank, they have respectable shooting and the Iron Claw is really powerful in melee they are also rather durable only slightly less durable than greater daemons due to having 4 less wounds.
I wish Herald of slaanesh on steed of slaanesh wasn't legends, they are really good giving +1 AP to seekers makes them so much better, they also have the reroll to wound vs battle shocked enemies that the foot herald has while only being 70pts
Rydria wrote: I wish Herald of slaanesh on steed of slaanesh wasn't legends, they are really good giving +1 AP to seekers makes them so much better, they also have the reroll to wound vs battle shocked enemies that the foot herald has while only being 70pts
Legends are playable everywhere except "Official tournaments" according to GW themselves
Rydria wrote: I wish Herald of slaanesh on steed of slaanesh wasn't legends, they are really good giving +1 AP to seekers makes them so much better, they also have the reroll to wound vs battle shocked enemies that the foot herald has while only being 70pts
Legends are playable everywhere except "Official tournaments" according to GW themselves
Officially yes but you must understand how some people can be, if it isn't tournament legal they will refuse to let you play it against them
Rydria wrote: I wish Herald of slaanesh on steed of slaanesh wasn't legends, they are really good giving +1 AP to seekers makes them so much better, they also have the reroll to wound vs battle shocked enemies that the foot herald has while only being 70pts
Legends are playable everywhere except "Official tournaments" according to GW themselves
Officially yes but you must understand how some people can be, if it isn't tournament legal they will refuse to let you play it against them
Then dont play against those people who refuse to play with legal rules.
Played a 1000 point game against Blood Angels today.
Kairos
6 Fiends
6 Screamers
6 Flamers
5 Seekers
Kairos did well with indirect fire, corrupted 2 objectives, got 1 CP back, and held up a big nasty squad in melee for a couple turns. Flamers were okay, but not great. Seekers were underwhelming. The best units were Screamers and Fiends, though. Fiends chewed through the worst stuff, Screamers took out more than they cost and held my enemy up enough.
I was going to win on points anyway, but I tabled my opponent on turn 5. I had 2 Fiends remaining. Total bloodbath of a game.
I think next time I might drop the Seekers. I've played 1 other game with them before today, where they were deleted in turn 1.
Will play around with some other options, including maybe taking a Wardog Knight for some extra anti-heavy, while I wait on finances to get a Soul Grinder.
Definitely loving the Fiends, though. That first game, they were also the last unit standing (but I lost).
But sure. Not playing against 99/100 is option always. Hopefully your area has lots of players.
This is wrong, there are a few dozen regular players in my area and only 2 use any legends but we never play them and the rest won't field what isn't tourney legal so the thought of running legends would actually lose me most of my opponents as they don't want to deal with it
Fiends ARE expensive, yes, but I think they might be worth it.
I used a squad of 3 fiends in my most recent game, they killed a unit of infiltrators and helped kill a unit of thunder hammer termies with help from a soul grinder, their -1 to hit prevented a notable number of thunder hammers from landing blows. I was impressed with them.
Yeah. I've had 2 and a half games with them, and they were the best unit every time. (The half game ended early due to time constraints, but the Fiends were my only real hope of winning that one, as nearly everything else crumbled.)
Incidentally, I tried using the strat that lets you reroll 1s for saves against shooting, and it was very underwhelming. I think I saved like 1 wound from 2 uses of the strat... 1 in 6 is a 1, then most saves are 5+, so 2 in 6. So it's a 2/36 = 1/18 chance of saving a wound. Just very underwhelming.
Hecate wrote: Yeah. I've had 2 and a half games with them, and they were the best unit every time. (The half game ended early due to time constraints, but the Fiends were my only real hope of winning that one, as nearly everything else crumbled.)
Incidentally, I tried using the strat that lets you reroll 1s for saves against shooting, and it was very underwhelming. I think I saved like 1 wound from 2 uses of the strat... 1 in 6 is a 1, then most saves are 5+, so 2 in 6. So it's a 2/36 = 1/18 chance of saving a wound. Just very underwhelming.
That strat is very good with the daemon prince on foot when he activates his 3++, it's rather poor on things with a 5++ save though
Hello, Thousand Sons player here, I’ve been seeing a lot of daemon lists and 1ksons lists using blue horrors over pink. I just can’t figure out why outside of the points cost(which I feel 30 more points is negligible for theoretically way more bodies) can someone explain why?
Okay, so, how do you play this army these days? Just deep strike blood letters 6" away and hope for the best? are we playing plague bearers for sticky objectives? monster mash? spam LoCs?
Drdotts wrote: Hello, Thousand Sons player here, I’ve been seeing a lot of daemon lists and 1ksons lists using blue horrors over pink. I just can’t figure out why outside of the points cost(which I feel 30 more points is negligible for theoretically way more bodies) can someone explain why?
It's actually only 15pts more, and the Pinks average out an extra 15 bodies, while the Blues average an extra 5. Still too expensive for what they do, compared to other Infantry Battleline choices.
Consider you own Rubrics. You can take 5 Rubrics for 95pts. That's 10 wounds and OC 10, Sv3+ T4, with a Sv2+ in cover. Given them flamers and they do an average of 14 S4 AP-1 and -2 +3.5 S3 AP-2 hits from the pistol, plus Smite. They do this same amount of dmg in Overwatch, minus the Smite. Pinks are 140. That's on average 25 wounds and OC 20 base, Sv 4++ T3. They do an average of 13 S4 AP-1 hits, but they are much worse in OW.
So you're paying an extra 50pts for quite a few more bodies/wounds and better OC, but WAAAAAAY worse damage output. If we bump the Rubrics to a 10 man and add a Changecaster to the Horrors (to keep the points roughly equal), you can really see the discrepancy.
Rubrics are now 20 wounds and OC 20, doing 28 flamer hits. Pinks are same OC and same wounds, but remember that the bodies are more fragile with a worse save most of the time. Horrors are doing 16 hits if we calculate the Tzerald's Sustained Hits 1, plus a Fireball.
I have the Changeling in my TSons list, but I can't justify sticking in Horrors. Bad synergy as an ally without the support they need, and especially bad when compared to choices in the TSons book that could be generating Cabal Points!
)
