Anyone have a beef with a certain race's benifits, or vehicle design / rule? Throw it on here if you want to hash it out. (IE: what purpose do the normal , non-enhanced Dark Eldar sails have on an Anti-grav , engine propelled skimmer, etc).

Well it depends if the sails are solid or material. If they are solid then they would act as very useful steering devises, as the anti grav only provides up and down movement along a surface and the thrusters only give forward projection they would need a way to steer.

Dante. If anyone in the Imperium should have Eternal Warrior it is him.

Actually, whether metal or fabric, the sails are the steering devices given that it's only got vertical lift and forward thrust.

I thought that'd fall upon the big ass rudder at the back. Honestly, I like them and think they should be larger somehow, yet, I don't see them as functional.
I only started this thread to direct Fluff from hitting the YMDC threads, as they often do. I find topics often stray from the original post into Fluff discussions, long after the original question has been answered.

Castiel, I agree, although I don't play Blood Angels, I know a few who do. I am surprised he isn't and Eternal Warrior too.

To be honest I was suprised Meph wasn't eternal warrior. Same goes for Swarmlord and some of the chaos lords but I'm not complaining because it's always funny watching Meph etc kill themselves when they fail mss.

worldwarme wrote:Castiel, I agree, although I don't play Blood Angels, I know a few who do. I am surprised he isn't and Eternal Warrior too.

I don't play them either, but I don't see any reason why Dante shouldn't.

Swarmlord should be Eternal Warrior.
The Avatar should be Eternal Warrior.

Castiel wrote:Dante. If anyone in the Imperium should have Eternal Warrior it is him.

word.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Personally I'm kind of tired of all the tn 4 troops out there. That's supposed to be a space marine thing. They're supposed to be elite, but in point of fact they're the baseline that most armies start from and work their way up from. Which means they aren't really elite at all.

People want eternal warrior on units with toughness higher than 5

Maybe you guys should stop jumping in front of Grey Knight squads

Its only natural when every single guy in the army has a force weapon. Really, what are people with other armies supposed to think?

That you shouldn't throw your super expensive model onto a insta-death stick

Besides, GK are the only army that give these units problems. Everyone else still has to beat them down the old fashion way.

So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing GreY Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing GreY Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

They pretty much excel at everything, what should I take then?

Shooty Vrs Punchy, Punchy Vrs Shooty: First rule I ever learned about this game. GK or anybody else are still allergic to excessive firepower.

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing Grey Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

And if I find myself facing GK in a pick-up game?

IMO they need to cut down on the Eternal Warrior on almost every single named HQ. I like that Dante Doesn't Have it.

You might be one of the oldest Space Marines and a brilliant Tactician, but that shouldn't allow you to take a railgun to the Chest and go "It was only a flesh Wound!"

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing GreY Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

So no "big, expensive, non-eternal-warriors" in tournaments? Just incase you get in fight with GKs?

I myself see no problem with swarmlord (and other unique strong HQ's with T of 5-6) being eternal warrior, it just makes him (them) a more valid to pick since GK have a way to easy time killing of "big, expensive, non-eternal-warriors". I wouldn't even have a problem with a eternal unique HQ with a T of 10 since the only real army that don't have a problem with this is GK and that don't really seem all to fair for me.

Oh and for the record I really don't think GK's are OP.

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing GreY Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

So not only are suggesting I tailor my list, but also that I leave 75% of the nid codex, nobs, anything with FNP, haemunculi armies, ogryn, every single HQ without EW which is every non-character and most characters, ect because of Grey Knights...

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing GreY Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

But that would be list tailoring, which 90% of people seem to consider double heresy. It really makes no sense that say Lucius the Eternal wouldn't have Eternal Warrior anyway.

There's a simple explanation for why Dante doesn't have eternal warrior:

He's been around so long he's already used up all of his extra lives.

Mephiston doesn't have it because, as a psyker, he can hood the enemy's force weapon activation. He's also T6 and pretty damn near invulnerable as is.

Chesh wrote:There's a simple explanation for why Dante doesn't have eternal warrior:

He's been around so long he's already used up all of his extra lives.

Hehe best explanation xD

Chesh wrote:There's a simple explanation for why Dante doesn't have eternal warrior:

He's been around so long he's already used up all of his extra lives.

Well played, sir!

If he holds on, wont that wolf have a situation with its neck being outside of its body?

Luke_Prowler wrote:That you shouldn't throw your super expensive model onto a insta-death stick

Besides, GK are the only army that give these units problems. Everyone else still has to beat them down the old fashion way.

Apparently you've missed out on lols when those guys kill themselves due to mindshackle scarabs. lol

I've suicided Mephiston twice now, thanks to perils fails. Those dice have been purged BY FIRE.

Surtur wrote:

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing GreY Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

So not only are suggesting I tailor my list, but also that I leave 75% of the nid codex, nobs, anything with FNP, haemunculi armies, ogryn, every single HQ without EW which is every non-character and most characters, ect because of Grey Knights...

I'm suggesting that tailoring your list is natural and preferable to TAC lists (tournaments aside) and you should definately leave certain things at home when playing against Grey Knights. Just as you should leave other things at home against other armies.

Kaldor wrote:

Surtur wrote:

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing GreY Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

So not only are suggesting I tailor my list, but also that I leave 75% of the nid codex, nobs, anything with FNP, haemunculi armies, ogryn, every single HQ without EW which is every non-character and most characters, ect because of Grey Knights...

I'm suggesting that tailoring your list is natural and preferable to TAC lists (tournaments aside) and you should definately leave certain things at home when playing against Grey Knights. Just as you should leave other things at home against other armies.

By "leave things at home" you mean "your army", right?

...Draigo...

...Goddam Draigo...

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:By "leave things at home" you mean "your army", right?

lol. While I agree that Nids really struggle against GK, it's by no means an auto-lose.

Anything that's Grey Knights related.

Why do all the Imperial Guard Infantry Squad Sergeants shoot lasguns and bolters in their artwork and stories, but I can't take either in my farkin' Imperial Guard army?!?

TheRobotLol wrote:...Draigo...

...Goddam Draigo...

Yes?

Why do Dark Eldar not have a slave unit? Like 3 points a piece for some terrible guy that you can take 50 of or something.

Kaldor wrote:

Surtur wrote:

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing GreY Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

So not only are suggesting I tailor my list, but also that I leave 75% of the nid codex, nobs, anything with FNP, haemunculi armies, ogryn, every single HQ without EW which is every non-character and most characters, ect because of Grey Knights...

I'm suggesting that tailoring your list is natural and preferable to TAC lists (tournaments aside) and you should definately leave certain things at home when playing against Grey Knights. Just as you should leave other things at home against other armies.

I consider tailoring very rude towards your opponent and degrading towards yourself. It says, "I cannot beat you without an extra edge over you and I will only play with this extra edge," and "I do not trust my own acumen to play competently." That is how I view it, you may see it as a more natural way to play, but I would disagree.

Luke_Prowler wrote:People want eternal warrior on units with toughness higher than 5

Maybe you guys should stop jumping in front of Grey Knight squads

Maybe GKs should feth off

Tbh I tried to stop jumping in front of Grey Knight squads but they followed me home after last week's match. They were waiting for me in the closet - oh the horrors of purifiers dug into old jacket pockets. Nowhere is safe, I tell you, nowhere.

KplKeegan wrote:Why do all the Imperial Guard Infantry Squad Sergeants shoot lasguns and bolters in their artwork and stories, but I can't take either in my farkin' Imperial Guard army?!?

This. x100

It's absolutley my least favorite thing in the entire codex.

Surtur wrote:I consider tailoring very rude towards your opponent and degrading towards yourself. It says, "I cannot beat you without an extra edge over you and I will only play with this extra edge," and "I do not trust my own acumen to play competently." That is how I view it, you may see it as a more natural way to play, but I would disagree.

Whatever blows your hair back dude. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Personally I think the convention of only having a single TAC list that you never change is really harmful for the hobby. It relegates entire chunks of every codex to the scrapheap because they are only viable choices against certain types of enemies, leaves players with stagnant, and therefore dull lists, is the root cause of 'netlists' and causes people to cry about certain armies because their TAC list isn't as effective.

However, there is a thread on here already: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/438382.page

TheAngrySquig wrote:

If he holds on, wont that wolf have a situation with its neck being outside of its body?

We've got no references for riding Wolves, but it's certainly possible to ride a horse without using your hands. Your legs give it most of its movement cues anyway. Staying on the thing during a fight is another situation entirely though, but again - he's riding a giant wolf. Certain degrees of 'magic did it' come into play with this one.

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing GreY Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

You and your other friend "Draigo" on this forum are some of the reason why a lot of people don't like GK's and the people who play them; seriously.

whoops I'm playing GK's in a tournament, lemme whip out my other list
good thing I can tailor my list at the last second
good thing I can foresee who I am going to be playing when I am looking for a pick up game


Seriously dude, not cool.
-Vladsimpaler

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing GreY Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

Well you have to plan on facing everybody, don't you? It's bad games design to have guys who are awesome against some armies and useless against others. Like Mephiston. GW screwed the pooch. It's as simple as that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Chesh wrote:There's a simple explanation for why Dante doesn't have eternal warrior:

He's been around so long he's already used up all of his extra lives.

Mephiston doesn't have it because, as a psyker, he can hood the enemy's force weapon activation. He's also T6 and pretty damn near invulnerable as is.

With a blood angels psychich hood he has to beat the opposing roll. Since almost all psykers are ld 10 the hood only works 1/3 of the time. Against just one force weapon his toughness gives him a good chance of living through it, but against a squad full of them he's toast. It only takes one 6.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kaldor wrote:

Surtur wrote:

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing GreY Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

So not only are suggesting I tailor my list, but also that I leave 75% of the nid codex, nobs, anything with FNP, haemunculi armies, ogryn, every single HQ without EW which is every non-character and most characters, ect because of Grey Knights...

I'm suggesting that tailoring your list is natural and preferable to TAC lists (tournaments aside) and you should definately leave certain things at home when playing against Grey Knights. Just as you should leave other things at home against other armies.

Yeah this isn't exactly a revalation. We all know that we have to leave mephiston and typhus and guys like that at home. The point isn't that we need to adjust our tactics. We've already done that. The point is that GW shouldn't print unplayable crap.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TheAngrySquig wrote:Why do Dark Eldar not have a slave unit? Like 3 points a piece for some terrible guy that you can take 50 of or something.

This is an awesome idea. I'm for it.

DE have slave models up for sale. Just not a playable unit



http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440170a&prodId=prod1110275&rootCatGameStyle=

For slaves of Commorragh....Those women sure do have rock hard abs...

GreatGunz wrote:

Chesh wrote:There's a simple explanation for why Dante doesn't have eternal warrior:

He's been around so long he's already used up all of his extra lives.

Mephiston doesn't have it because, as a psyker, he can hood the enemy's force weapon activation. He's also T6 and pretty damn near invulnerable as is.

With a blood angels psychich hood he has to beat the opposing roll. Since almost all psykers are ld 10 the hood only works 1/3 of the time. Against just one force weapon his toughness gives him a good chance of living through it, but against a squad full of them he's toast. It only takes one 6.

The point is that Mephiston is vulnerable to instant death, which is exactly what activated force weapons do to a multi-wound model. And I could be wrong, but aren't GK leadership values the same as normal marines? Which means that Mephiston's LD10 has a pretty good advantage over the normal GK LD8. Against another librarian, or a force weapon equipped GK HQ with LD10, it's just a d6 dice-off.

Also, I agree. It sucks that one marine that costs about 1/10th of what Mephiston costs can instakill him pretty much at will.

GreatGunz wrote:Well you have to plan on facing everybody, don't you?

No, you don't. It's a horrible player convention that you have to make a single list and stick to it no matter what. People should mix up their armies constantly, and build their forces with regards to the enemy they expect to face. Of course everyone is free to play how they want, but placing artificial restrictions on your army by building only a single 'take-all-comers' list lessens the relative value of certain units.

It's bad games design to have guys who are awesome against some armies and useless against others. Like Mephiston. GW screwed the pooch. It's as simple as that.

No, it's good games design. It's bad player convention to seek a single list that can take all comers.

In theory, any army should perform equally well against any other army. Unfortunately, 40k is too complicated and bloated to even begin to be possible to balance. Not to mention power creep/power seep issues, what with some codexes taking years to put out. I'm beginning to seriously doubt whether or not Eldar and Tau will even get a 5th edition codex, since it seems as though 6th edition is already right around the corner, for instance.

It seems like GW is rather childish and unprofessional when it comes to updating their material - every codex that comes out seems to be trying to "outdo" the previously released codex. Right now, it's the GK that are ridiculous - before them, IG was THE list to play (leafblowers). So this too shall pass - the next 'dex released for 5th edition will blow GKs out of the water, and they'll join the long list of players that sit there thinking "but I USED to be good!"

As far as the "all comers" list fallacy. What with the rules bloat (seriously, if the rules were clear and had less exceptions, games would go SO MUCH FASTER, since people wouldn't have to argue/look up special rules so often), it's pretty much impossible to have any army list that's truly capable of taking on "all comers". So people take the options with the highest chance of being able to defeat "all comers" - which, sadly, tends not to work unless the player has an excellent grasp of tabletop tactics and a fairly encyclopedic knowledge of the rules. In which case, they probably would've won with ANY units and it didn't really matter what they took or what they called it.

Chesh wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:

Chesh wrote:There's a simple explanation for why Dante doesn't have eternal warrior:

He's been around so long he's already used up all of his extra lives.

Mephiston doesn't have it because, as a psyker, he can hood the enemy's force weapon activation. He's also T6 and pretty damn near invulnerable as is.

With a blood angels psychich hood he has to beat the opposing roll. Since almost all psykers are ld 10 the hood only works 1/3 of the time. Against just one force weapon his toughness gives him a good chance of living through it, but against a squad full of them he's toast. It only takes one 6.

The point is that Mephiston is vulnerable to instant death, which is exactly what activated force weapons do to a multi-wound model. And I could be wrong, but aren't GK leadership values the same as normal marines? Which means that Mephiston's LD10 has a pretty good advantage over the normal GK LD8. Against another librarian, or a force weapon equipped GK HQ with LD10, it's just a d6 dice-off.

Also, I agree. It sucks that one marine that costs about 1/10th of what Mephiston costs can instakill him pretty much at will.

GK are leadership 9 with their sergeant, so that makes mephiston's odds of shutting it down a little better. Since blood angels have to beat the other psyker with their hood roll the advantage will normally go to the guy whose casting the power. I was never that hot on mephiston to begin with so it doesn't upset me too much that he was invalidated so fast. It's just bad writing in general.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:Well you have to plan on facing everybody, don't you?

No, you don't. It's a horrible player convention that you have to make a single list and stick to it no matter what. People should mix up their armies constantly, and build their forces with regards to the enemy they expect to face. Of course everyone is free to play how they want, but placing artificial restrictions on your army by building only a single 'take-all-comers' list lessens the relative value of certain units.

It seems to me that you're the one advocating a restriction. If you don't plan on facing everyone, you plan on not facing some people. You basically say "if I fight armies a b and c I'm solid, but against x y and z I'm screwed." What's the point of that? Keep your money and go play rock paper scissors.

It's bad games design to have guys who are awesome against some armies and useless against others. Like Mephiston. GW screwed the pooch. It's as simple as that.

No, it's good games design. It's bad player convention to seek a single list that can take all comers.

As a bunch of other people have pointed out to you, it's rude to tailor your list. Which is what you're advocating without actually using the word. I don't have foreknowledge of who I'm playing against as a general rule, nor do I have the luxury of transporting my entire force to the store when I play. That doesn't make me a bad player. It just means that I'm polite and realistic.

GreatGunz wrote: As a bunch of other people have pointed out to you, it's rude to tailor your list. Which is what you're advocating without actually using the word.

It's not rude at all, and I think you'll find most people are ok with it. It's sensible, it's the way GW staff write their lists for battle reports, it's more in line with the bakground of the game, and it gives better balance to all the codexes.

It's only a player convention to NOT tailor your lists, and it's a stupid one at that.

If you're going to tailor your lists to hard counter mine, then I have a simple solution for that problem.

I just won't play you anymore. I think you'll find that most people feel the same way.

Player conventions are much harder to defy than GW rules. The main rule in ANY game is "have fun" - and if you break that rule, then you'll be shunned and not welcome to play the game. Any GW rule in any codex, or even the BRB can be overwritten by a house rule, but "player conventions" are absolute and unbreakable.

At least, not more than once or twice, anyway.

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote: As a bunch of other people have pointed out to you, it's rude to tailor your list. Which is what you're advocating without actually using the word.

It's not rude at all, and I think you'll find most people are ok with it. It's sensible, it's the way GW staff write their lists for battle reports, it's more in line with the bakground of the game, and it gives better balance to all the codexes.

It's only a player convention to NOT tailor your lists, and it's a stupid one at that.

Plenty of people on this thread think it's rude. I guess we're stupid for following that stupid convention. Yes?

Chesh wrote:If you're going to tailor your lists to hard counter mine...

Of course, thats a dick move. But soft tailoring should be encouraged.

GreatGunz wrote:Plenty of people on this thread think it's rude

While plenty of people on the actual list tailoring thread I linked to earlier think it's fine.

The only time tailoring your list crosses the line is when you look at the opponents list, and deliberately construct a hard counter for it.

Like I said before, you can do whatever blows your hair back. But to complain that a unit is poor because its efficacy is limited by a portion of commonly faced enemies is a false dilemma. YOU have created that problem by deliberately taking that unit, when you knew before-hand that it would not be a good choice.

Tournaments and random pick-up games present other problems, of course, but with a little imagination it's easy to overcome. Sideboard tournaments are still quite popular, and a similar convention can be applied to pick-up games.

When I arrange a game for the weekend and I know I am going to face Orks, then I am going to choose units useful for fighting Orks. I expect my opponent to do the same and find that in no way rude, but in fact think constructing lists based on a rough idea of what kind of force you are going to face is actually part of the fun in this game.

It really seems to me that it is an idea from the tournament scene to always bring all-comers lists and not tailor to your opponent.

But as for fluff justifications that just don't make sense... well, one thing would be deep striking Land Raiders.

Oh, they drop them via Thunderhawk Transporter directly into the action? Check the chapter organisation list in C:BA: they have a grand total of 3 (three) Thunderhawk Transporters. I guess those are always all attached to that one single task force that is actually fighting while the rest just hang around on Baal.

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:Plenty of people on this thread think it's rude

While plenty of people on the actual list tailoring thread I linked to earlier think it's fine.

The only time tailoring your list crosses the line is when you look at the opponents list, and deliberately construct a hard counter for it.

Like I said before, you can do whatever blows your hair back. But to complain that a unit is poor because its efficacy is limited by a portion of commonly faced enemies is a false dilemma. YOU have created that problem by deliberately taking that unit, when you knew before-hand that it would not be a good choice.

Tournaments and random pick-up games present other problems, of course, but with a little imagination it's easy to overcome. Sideboard tournaments are still quite popular, and a similar convention can be applied to pick-up games.

Hey check it out. I already responded to all these points.

GreatGunz wrote:I don't have foreknowledge of who I'm playing against as a general rule, nor do I have the luxury of transporting my entire force to the store when I play. That doesn't make me a bad player. It just means that I'm polite and realistic.

GreatGunz wrote:Yeah this isn't exactly a revalation. We all know that we have to leave mephiston and typhus and guys like that at home. The point isn't that we need to adjust our tactics. We've already done that. The point is that GW shouldn't print unplayable crap.

It's almost like we aren't even having the same conversation.

GreatGunz wrote: It's almost like we aren't even having the same conversation.

I think the point where we disagree is that you believe a unit loses value if it is only effective against certain armies AND you believe this because you should not swap out units depending on what you're facing.

I disagree, because units SHOULD be swapped out depending on what youre facing. When you say a unit is 'unplayable crap' because it needs to be left at home against certain armies, you've created a false dilemma. You're upset because of a limitation you've placed on yourself, not because of anything out of your control.

Essentially, YOU are the problem.

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote: As a bunch of other people have pointed out to you, it's rude to tailor your list. Which is what you're advocating without actually using the word.

It's not rude at all, and I think you'll find most people are ok with it. It's sensible, it's the way GW staff write their lists for battle reports, it's more in line with the bakground of the game, and it gives better balance to all the codexes.

It's only a player convention to NOT tailor your lists, and it's a stupid one at that.

If battle reports were tailored lists, then they are by far the worst tailoring I've ever seen done.

The idea is that you shouldn't stomp all over your opponent because you took the tools you needed to destroy his army, but you will get your butt handed to you by anything else. That if you played a 1500 point game against one army, you can set up and immediately play against another and still fare well. This doesn't mean as you said before, that you have one unchanging list. I have a huge collection and I'm always trying different styles to get the most well rounded results out of it. I have yet to strike that balance that will let me fight horde armies then go toe to toe with space marines right after.

I fail to see how tailoring balances anything. If anything, it stresses rock paper scissors and codex imbalances. A well rounded grey knight army will do solid against daemons, but a tailored one will destroy them without hope. Knowing you're fighting a draigowing you know to spam S8+ and Ap 1 or 2. Fighting orks you know to spam templates and blasts and anti light tank and to bring high AV vehicles as they have trouble dealing with them. These are the sorts of ramifications that come from list tailoring.

Kaldor wrote:Essentially, YOU are the problem.

There's no call for that, man.

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote: It's almost like we aren't even having the same conversation.

I think the point where we disagree is that you believe a unit loses value if it is only effective against certain armies AND you believe this because you should not swap out units depending on what you're facing.

You think that because you aren't reading.

GreatGunz wrote:I don't have foreknowledge of who I'm playing against as a general rule, nor do I have the luxury of transporting my entire force to the store when I play. That doesn't make me a bad player. It just means that I'm polite and realistic.

Kaldor wrote:Essentially, YOU are the problem.

sigh....

GreatGunz wrote:I don't have foreknowledge of who I'm playing against as a general rule, nor do I have the luxury of transporting my entire force to the store when I play. That doesn't make me a bad player. It just means that I'm polite and realistic.

If you don't know who you are playing you obviously can't tailor (at most if you know your meta you can do somethings) but if you know who you are going up against it is only natural to take the units that will work best, there is no "honor" in the fact that if you and your enemy know each others army bringing things that you just won't use.

I think it goes without saying that if you go for a pick-up game at a gaming store or attend a tournament, that is a different matter then in an arranged game. If you go to a store, most people can be assumed to bring only the models for one single list, maybe for two lists with different points values at most.

Quickly changing your list on the spot when you know what you will face will be shoddy (my handwriting is certainly unreadable to many others, especially when I am in a hurry) and the options will be very limited based on what models you brought.
And it would certainly annoy me to have an opponent at the store do a quick handwritten armylist that's tailored to fight me when all I have brought is my all-comers list.

So in those circumstances I agree, tailoring on the spot would be not really sportsmanlike and may be considered rude. Tailoring for an arranged game where both parties involved know who and what they are facing is absolutely fine, because both players can do it and nobody is disadvantaged. Also, it adds another dimension to the game.

I would even venture as far as to say that if you do design a new army list for an arranged game where you know what codex your opponent will be using, it will be almost impossible to not at least subconsciously tailor the list.

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

Oh, I understand why the situation irritates people, it's no different than having my nobs melta'd by a skinny humie. But here's the thing: These guys that have +5 toughness are still completely viable when facing every other army, were as other multi wound unit is a massive target for every meltagun and missile launcher in the game. Force weapons are only common in one army (an overused army, but that's beside the point). It's the same as people who complain about poison weapons killing MCs too easily. Heaven forbid that your super powered wrecking ball has an Achilles' heel.

Maybe if your nobs were staring down an army full of meltaguns. Don't you think that would be a more apt analogy? And suddenly every third 40k player was playing that army. Then you'd look at your nobs and say "hey. These things are crap. Why does GW do this?" And you'd be right. You can say "just don't play that unit" and that's basically what we're already doing. Problem solved. It's still a bad way to design a game.

Units countering units is great. That's the strategy. Whole armies countering units is another issue all together. It's basically playing 2000 points against 1800 or 1750 or however many depending on how many points the countered unit costs. Since that unit is worthless to the player who fields it, it unbalances the entire game.

Hey, you guys remember when this game used to be fun before d-bags got hardcore into this game? When i go to a free play night i don't like seeing an army that is designed to kick me in the balls. I had a friend who played bugs, and yet every person who tailored a list brought about 15 flamers. Talk about fun. You can't play a game because some d-bag playing grey knights plays to win and nothing else. And hate to tell every one fighting in this thread. This thread was made for another reason. Not just to fight with one another over why a guy with grey knights (who started playing this codex ed) is a d-bag.

Why can't i upgrade a rhino with a ramp to assault out of it? Is it that hard to use the back hatch as a ramp? Every army's transports that are closed top come with a ramp on the model besides the land raider, and yet its the only tank (storm raven aside) that you can assault out of. Bugs need to go back to 4th ed rules when it comes to instant kill.

plague marines shouldn't have feel no pain, noise marines should. Its just fluff. Noise marines don't feel any pain. They get hurt and free pleasure. Plague marines get hurt and can't with stand damage but feel pain.

There needs to be a pre hersey codex to come out for all space marine legions.

And ork players should only be able to call a waaaagh if they yell it, and have a war boss who's model is bigger than every other model.

I agree on the Waaaagh! rule. In fact, instead of d6", it should be based on how loud and proud they shout their WAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!

GreatGunz wrote:You think that because you aren't reading

Genuine apology, I thought you'd read the part where I mentioned there are work-arounds for that too

You can easily take sideboard lists, or have a couple of 'standard' lists that you flick through.

Surtur wrote:If battle reports were tailored lists, then they are by far the worst tailoring I've ever seen done.

The idea is that you shouldn't stomp all over your opponent because you took the tools you needed to destroy his army, but you will get your butt handed to you by anything else. That if you played a 1500 point game against one army, you can set up and immediately play against another and still fare well. This doesn't mean as you said before, that you have one unchanging list. I have a huge collection and I'm always trying different styles to get the most well rounded results out of it. I have yet to strike that balance that will let me fight horde armies then go toe to toe with space marines right after.

I fail to see how tailoring balances anything. If anything, it stresses rock paper scissors and codex imbalances. A well rounded grey knight army will do solid against daemons, but a tailored one will destroy them without hope. Knowing you're fighting a draigowing you know to spam S8+ and Ap 1 or 2. Fighting orks you know to spam templates and blasts and anti light tank and to bring high AV vehicles as they have trouble dealing with them. These are the sorts of ramifications that come from list tailoring.

Read the pre-battle commentaries. They're loaded with "Well, I'll be facing X, so a big squad of Y should come in handy" and similar comments.

And while list tailoring can exacerbate existing disparities, it also gives players a chance to do some role-reversal. If somone loads up on flamers and anti-light tank against Orks, the Ork player could just throw down a mega-nob/nob biker list and blow them out of the water. Thats why it's so interesting, because of the double-blind nature of it. You have to anticipate the way he's going to build his list, and the way he's going to build his list depends on how he anticipates you will build your list.

GreatGunz wrote:Maybe if your nobs were staring down an army full of meltaguns. Don't you think that would be a more apt analogy? And suddenly every third 40k player was playing that army. Then you'd look at your nobs and say "hey. These things are crap. Why does GW do this?" And you'd be right. You can say "just don't play that unit" and that's basically what we're already doing. Problem solved. It's still a bad way to design a game.

Or, you could say don't play that unit against an army full of meltas. Or whatever.

GreatGunz wrote:Maybe if your nobs were staring down an army full of meltaguns. Don't you think that would be a more apt analogy? And suddenly every third 40k player was playing that army. Then you'd look at your nobs and say "hey. These things are crap. Why does GW do this?" And you'd be right.

Dude. IMPERIAL GUARD. Getting s8 weaponry is like breathing to them. And I still take my Nobz, because I overcome their weaknesses with the rest of my army and clever thinking

You can say "just don't play that unit" and that's basically what we're already doing. Problem solved. It's still a bad way to design a game. Units countering units is great. That's the strategy. Whole armies countering units is another issue all together. It's basically playing 2000 points against 1800 or 1750 or however many depending on how many points the countered unit costs. Since that unit is worthless to the player who fields it, it unbalances the entire game.

Units having advantage over other units is a part of this game. Sometime a whole army has that advantage, just like Dark Eldar with poison weapons, or grey knights and, well, everything. But rather than getting mad, one simply needs to think about what other advantages that unit can use. I mean, seriously? Meph and the Swarmlord? Their mere presence gives GKs a hard time.

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:You think that because you aren't reading

Genuine apology, I thought you'd read the part where I mentioned there are work-arounds for that too

You can easily take sideboard lists, or have a couple of 'standard' lists that you flick through.

There's something we can agree on. I think sideboarding would resolve the issue nicely. It does in m:tg in any case, and adds extra depth to the game.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Luke_Prowler wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:
You can say "just don't play that unit" and that's basically what we're already doing. Problem solved. It's still a bad way to design a game. Units countering units is great. That's the strategy. Whole armies countering units is another issue all together. It's basically playing 2000 points against 1800 or 1750 or however many depending on how many points the countered unit costs. Since that unit is worthless to the player who fields it, it unbalances the entire game.

Units having advantage over other units is a part of this game. Sometime a whole army has that advantage, just like Dark Eldar with poison weapons, or grey knights and, well, everything. But rather than getting mad, one simply needs to think about what other advantages that unit can use. I mean, seriously? Meph and the Swarmlord? Their mere presence gives GKs a hard time.

I can't imagine why any gk player would find mephiston intimidating. What you're talking is more like rock-paper-scissors than "strategy." Strategy is what it takes to win when forces are roughly evenly matched, as in chess. Playing iyandin against dark eldar (for example) is more like gambling. It's not strategy at all.

Did you actually read my post? My whole point was that unit countering can be over come by strategy. YOU are the one going "X is useless against Y, why bother"

I did.

Lukeprowler wrote:"I use my strategy because I'm extra smart. You don't cause you're dupid."

What do you want me to say to that? You'll have to be more specific about your cunnin plans if you want me to comment on them.

GreatGunz wrote:

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:You think that because you aren't reading

Genuine apology, I thought you'd read the part where I mentioned there are work-arounds for that too

You can easily take sideboard lists, or have a couple of 'standard' lists that you flick through.

There's something we can agree on. I think sideboarding would resolve the issue nicely. It does in m:tg in any case, and adds extra depth to the game.

I'm glad we finally found some common ground

Oh, we're playing that game now? Fine then.

Having several threats in a list forces a player to either focus on one treat at a time, allowing the unfazed unit to run rampant, or split their fire, making it ineffective. At the same time, consider what targets to take out first
Speed is the best defense and offence. An enemy that can not catch you is powerless. I'm sure staying out of range of assault is easy even for a simple guy like you
Denying an army it's resources makes it weaker. If it can't use what make a unit "useless" then it becomes strong again.
Screening units keeps your expensive stuff safe.. And I don't just mean that +4 save, tying a powerful shooting unit with assault keep them from shooting. Cover too
The power of a unit is not just it's potential as a beat stick, but also it's ability as a force multipliers. Aura effects, powers that increase another unit's power, or decrease an enemy's strength. Use these and you don't even have to risk losing that unit.
Not EVERY squad in an army has an advantage over you. I mean, those Psyfle dreads don't have force weapons, so they're a good target for your multi wound units. And If they have another squad protecting that, then that's good, because it's now out of your hair (see tactic 3).

You can ask for specific examples if you want, but I bet you can figure them out with a little time.

Oh yeah, one I missed:
Don't mock your opponent.

Okay, so, there's this guy. His name is Lord Castellan Usarkar E. Creed. . .



Jokes aside, how can you really justify scouting a titan or a baneblade? I understand scouting a unit of infantry or some light vehicles, but this rule can get ridiculous.

Edit: I can't grammar. I have the dumb.

Luke_Prowler wrote:Oh, we're playing that game now? Fine then.

Having several threats in a list forces a player to either focus on one treat at a time, allowing the unfazed unit to run rampant, or split their fire, making it ineffective. At the same time, consider what targets to take out first
Speed is the best defense and offence. An enemy that can not catch you is powerless. I'm sure staying out of range of assault is easy even for a simple guy like you
Denying an army it's resources makes it weaker. If it can't use what make a unit "useless" then it becomes strong again.
Screening units keeps your expensive stuff safe.. And I don't just mean that +4 save, tying a powerful shooting unit with assault keep them from shooting. Cover too
The power of a unit is not just it's potential as a beat stick, but also it's ability as a force multipliers. Aura effects, powers that increase another unit's power, or decrease an enemy's strength. Use these and you don't even have to risk losing that unit.
Not EVERY squad in an army has an advantage over you. I mean, those Psyfle dreads don't have force weapons, so they're a good target for your multi wound units. And If they have another squad protecting that, then that's good, because it's now out of your hair (see tactic 3).

You can ask for specific examples if you want, but I bet you can figure them out with a little time.

Oh yeah, one I missed:
Don't mock your opponent.

Vladsimpaler wrote:

Kaldor wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

They could maybe leave their big, expensive, non-eternal-warrior at home?

I mean, if you're planning on facing GreY Knights, who excel at killing expensive multi-wound models, why would you take expensive, multi-wound models?

You and your other friend "Draigo" on this forum are some of the reason why a lot of people don't like GK's and the people who play them; seriously.

whoops I'm playing GK's in a tournament, lemme whip out my other list
good thing I can tailor my list at the last second
good thing I can foresee who I am going to be playing when I am looking for a pick up game


Seriously dude, not cool.
-Vladsimpaler

Interesting that I'm a reason not to like GK. I have advocated for other armies against them in discussions and tactics. I also seldom have agreed with kaldor on things. Such as I am not a fan of list tailoring and will play my deathwing, eldar, csm, daemons or gk lists because i like them. I see no reason to change the list just because of who i'm facing. I have played too many tournaments to have the mindset. I play against too many varieties of IG, Eldar, SM, Nids, etc to just build for that one guy. I also play pick up games with that in mind so I just use the list I plan to use in a tourney. So I think you really need to save statements like that to yourself. They are uneeded.

Daemons are depicted as being 'nigh invulnerable' in the fluff.

My Bloodletters disagree.

Luke_Prowler wrote:

GreatGunz wrote:So..... if the whole army is full of instant-death sticks.... the other guy should.... go screw himself? Do you really not understand why this situation irritates people?

Oh, I understand why the situation irritates people, it's no different than having my nobs melta'd by a skinny humie. But here's the thing: These guys that have +5 toughness are still completely viable when facing every other army, were as other multi wound unit is a massive target for every meltagun and missile launcher in the game. Force weapons are only common in one army (an overused army, but that's beside the point). It's the same as people who complain about poison weapons killing MCs too easily. Heaven forbid that your super powered wrecking ball has an Achilles' heel.

That'd be great if they had an Achilles' heel as long as there was an ounce of opportunity cost attached to that counter.

If you've got something like a Warboss, T5, that's great, but he has no psychic defense and he has to be in close quarters to be viable. Same thing with Nobz. That means they simply aren't sensible choices against Grey Knights. That's stupid. Why should they be countered by every unit in the codex in the one place where they're supposed to be strongest? It's not like a Warboss is strong at ranged attacks and can just choose to sit back and snipe Grey Knights for the entire game.

And considering Cleansing Flame, what else am I supposed to use against Purifiers?

Well, of course there are some options, key among them being Kan Wall, but even then, why should I be excluded from otherwise perfectly viable troop choices (sluggas, slugga trukks), merely because a certain popular codex carries the counter to all of them? Orks are supposed to be a close combat army for feth's sake.

It's not that it's impossible to negotiate, the obvious answer is just to take your Warboss and throw him in the garbage can and vow never to buy any Slugga Boyz if you're planning on winning against Grey Knights, but perhaps if you think about it you'll see why that isn't a perfectly satisfactory answer to everyone. I want to use Slugga Boyz. I want to use Meganobz.

@Ted

This sounds the same as nids players who have had to for go a lot of their MCs because of popular codexes like DE, SW, GK etc. Orkz aren't the only codex like that.

Orkz and horde armies force players to use templates. It's just the nature of the beast as the meta swings with each new book.

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:
And if I find myself facing GK in a pick-up game?

Get better friends? Seriously, friends don't let friends play GK. Or Daemons of Chaos in WHFB.

^^^this^^^

There's really no justification why Kroot are terrible in game, when their badass in stories or in general fluuf/background. Going toe to toe with Orks on Pech is no small feat considering their just as armored as Orks...

Just a nice little page break from the Grey Knight whinge fest that's almost taken over this topic...

-Loki- wrote:

TheAngrySquig wrote:

If he holds on, wont that wolf have a situation with its neck being outside of its body?

We've got no references for riding Wolves, but it's certainly possible to ride a horse without using your hands. Your legs give it most of its movement cues anyway. Staying on the thing during a fight is another situation entirely though, but again - he's riding a giant wolf. Certain degrees of 'magic did it' come into play with this one.

I think its easier on a horse because of the differences in how they move

GreatGunz wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:Oh, we're playing that game now? Fine then.

Having several threats in a list forces a player to either focus on one treat at a time, allowing the unfazed unit to run rampant, or split their fire, making it ineffective. At the same time, consider what targets to take out first
Speed is the best defense and offence. An enemy that can not catch you is powerless. I'm sure staying out of range of assault is easy even for a simple guy like you
Denying an army it's resources makes it weaker. If it can't use what make a unit "useless" then it becomes strong again.
Screening units keeps your expensive stuff safe.. And I don't just mean that +4 save, tying a powerful shooting unit with assault keep them from shooting. Cover too
The power of a unit is not just it's potential as a beat stick, but also it's ability as a force multipliers. Aura effects, powers that increase another unit's power, or decrease an enemy's strength. Use these and you don't even have to risk losing that unit.
Not EVERY squad in an army has an advantage over you. I mean, those Psyfle dreads don't have force weapons, so they're a good target for your multi wound units. And If they have another squad protecting that, then that's good, because it's now out of your hair (see tactic 3).

You can ask for specific examples if you want, but I bet you can figure them out with a little time.

Oh yeah, one I missed:
Don't mock your opponent.

Thank you for confirming that you have no intention of actually listening to anything i say. On the ignore list you go

Tl;dr
None of the DE characters have eternal wariors, and that has always bothered me.

NOm

nomsheep wrote:Tl;dr
None of the DE characters have eternal wariors, and that has always bothered me.

NOm

Drazhar.

I didn't realise the Drazhar had eternal warrior now. O.o


Nom

nomsheep wrote:I didn't realise the Drazhar had eternal warrior now. O.o


Nom

Yeah, though I think he should also have an Invulnerable save for his price.

blood reaper wrote:

nomsheep wrote:I didn't realise the Drazhar had eternal warrior now. O.o


Nom

Yeah, though I think he should also have an Invulnerable save for his price.

A lot of the De characters could use a bit of love to make them worth taking.

Nom

Luke_Prowler wrote:Thank you for confirming that you have no intention of actually listening to anything i say. On the ignore list you go

That took long enough. What a relief.

Luke_Prowler wrote:Oh, we're playing that game now? Fine then.
.I'm sure staying out of range of assault is easy even for a simple guy like you

Having just read this thread all the way through. I'm pretty sure his interest in what you have to say waned around this point. I know it's where mine did.

Nom

Is it just me or is this thread going way off track?

For me this is about fluff that does not make sense. I think there are other threads to complain about EW and how a lot of characters should have it while a lot of units need it in the current meta. For me fluffwise it should only be given to Daemons and characters that just keep coming back from death like the phonex lords but GW has this idea that every codex should have 1 EW special character so you have Yarik, Draigo, the Sangiuor etc.

Fluffwise just dont understand the new necrons. They are a timeless race of machines that never ages, but they went to sleep long ago for no good reason. If you dont age why wouldnt you just stay awake forever? They now quest to regain their flesh and souls but have no clue how to accomplish that.

DE mandrakes dont make sense to me. Now according to the GK FAQ they are daemons, in a soceity that hates daemons and is afraid of them.

Exergy wrote:Is it just me or is this thread going way off track?

For me this is about fluff that does not make sense. I think there are other threads to complain about EW and how a lot of characters should have it while a lot of units need it in the current meta. For me fluffwise it should only be given to Daemons and characters that just keep coming back from death like the phonex lords but GW has this idea that every codex should have 1 EW special character so you have Yarik, Draigo, the Sangiuor etc.

Fluffwise just dont understand the new necrons. They are a timeless race of machines that never ages, but they went to sleep long ago for no good reason. If you dont age why wouldnt you just stay awake forever? They now quest to regain their flesh and souls but have no clue how to accomplish that.

DE mandrakes dont make sense to me. Now according to the GK FAQ they are daemons, in a soceity that hates daemons and is afraid of them.

Thats just GW tomfoolery, they are from a province of Commorragh

Castiel wrote:Dante. If anyone in the Imperium should have Eternal Warrior it is him.

I AGREE SO MUCH.

Why must one of the Imperium's oldest and most skilled warriors be cleaved in two by some crazy sergeant waving round a power fist who got lucky?

Although, another thing I would justify is Sanguinary Guard. The codex describes them as elite warriors, yet they're the same skill as a terminator. I'd also probably give them a Storm Shield type thing, dispose of the Boltgun, replace Glaive with Relic Blade then Bump up 50 or 75pts. That's what I call game balancing. However, I know an army that can counter GK quite well... hehehe...

Seriously though, STOP WHINGING ABOUT OP CODEXES, LIST TAILORING AND GET BACK ON TOPIC.

BlapBlapBlap wrote:

Castiel wrote:Dante. If anyone in the Imperium should have Eternal Warrior it is him.

I AGREE SO MUCH.

Why must one of the Imperium's oldest and most skilled warriors be cleaved in two by some crazy sergeant waving round a power fist who got lucky?

Skilled, maybe, but the only reason why he's old is because he only ever goes into battle when the opposing leader/general has the flu and isn't fighting at 100%.

Jayden63 wrote:

BlapBlapBlap wrote:

Castiel wrote:Dante. If anyone in the Imperium should have Eternal Warrior it is him.

I AGREE SO MUCH.

Why must one of the Imperium's oldest and most skilled warriors be cleaved in two by some crazy sergeant waving round a power fist who got lucky?

Skilled, maybe, but the only reason why he's old is because he only ever goes into battle when the opposing leader/general has the flu and isn't fighting at 100%.

But notice how Draigo can randomly perils and take a wound, whilst mighty heroes that have been around for ages that aren't GK can get insta-gibbed by one of the easiest to spam weapons in the game, the ML.

Dante is one of those special cases where you pay his points for his gifts not for his stats.

By the time Dante gets insta-gibbed he already has performed everything he needs to do on the table top, so him not having EW really isn't a game changer.

1 - The other guys HQ is still gimped for the rest of the game.
2 - Your sanginary guard are still scoring for the rest of the game
4 - Him and his unit (what ever they may be) have already hit the table without scattering.
3 - He has already had at least 1 round of HTH in which to swing his axe. (I can only think of two armies that would even have the chance of taking him and his squad down with S8 shooting on the turn he deepstrikes, because why would you ever put a S8 shot onto him unless you had too)

So if he gets gibbed in turn 2 (the soonest it could possibly happen) and if you are playing to his strengths it wont matter. In most cases the soonest it will realistically happen is on turn 3 and if it does happen until turns 5-7 all is golden. If he has stayed alive that long, chances are the damage has already been done.

TheAngrySquig wrote:Why do Dark Eldar not have a slave unit? Like 3 points a piece for some terrible guy that you can take 50 of or something.

They torture their slaves to death so they can live. Taking them along on a raid wouldn't make much sense to me IMO.

Can I advocate for more invulnerable saves for nids, especially the big ones? Not for free, perhaps an upgrade at say 50pts or something.

Yes there is a fluff point - the fluff suggests that nids are able to breed organisms to meet specific threats, but they don't seem to be able to do so in the case of high S and low AP heavy weapons. OK carnies and hive tyrants are tough but their puny saves mean they can be carved apart by heavy weapons fire and render the value of things like the flyrant very questionable indeed.

Also why bother to breed such hugely biomass heavy creatures and not give them decent protection? I'd happily see it just as a 6+ but they need some sort of invulnerable save, it just fits the fluff better.

The fact that ANY human even HAS Eternal Warrior is kind of weird but whatever.

I also like the point about Guardsmen Sergeants not having access to Lasguns for some reason even though in the fluff they have plenty of them.

Well, I am at least glad that a few folks caught on that this wasn't a dedicated page to the Grey Knights and those who play them. Thanks to Exergy and others who understood that, and to those GK players who were so heated a way back there, I am glad you found some common ground.

DE have one slave unit which is the Medussae, or at least thats what I thought.

I can't help but feel that Chaos Sorcerors should get immunity from Perils of the Warp. They've bargained with daemons for their powers, why can't they use those bargains for protection as well?

Tzeentch Sorcerors should get something akin to the Ghosthlem, perhaps a Warp Affinity rule that allows them to ignore perils on a 4+. Nurgle and Slaanesh should be affected as usual, because Daemons are fickle and they're neither trained in, nor have the knowledge to, deal with daemons to the same extent as a Tzeentch Sorceror.

If a Sorceror targets a Khornate unit, however, then he should succumb to perils on any roll of a double, to showcase Khorne's distate for sorcery.