Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hello all,

Daemon noob: I just got an offer from a friend to sell me daemonettes instead of bloodletters. Now I had built a sample army with the 'letters, but the deal is good enough I am wondering if tactically I could replace the 'letters with 'ettes? Are these two interchangable enough that I wouldn't notice a huge difference CC wise?

well...

Daemonettes: More Attacks, Lower Strength, Lower Toughness, Same Save, Higher Intiative, Fleet, Rending.

Bloodletter: Less Attacks, Furious Charge, Higher Strength, strength 5 on the charge, Higher Toughness, Same Save, Lower Intiative even on Charge and Power Weapons which will rip through all Space marines, even Terminators!

Letters.

I think that you can replace the letters with nets. The letters are better against MEQs, and there is always lots of MEQs. However the nets are more versatile. They have grenades, and more attacks. Thus they do better against hordes. With their rending they are still dangerous to MEQs and they also have a chance to damage dreadnaughts.

Mind you, Daemonettes are also pretty good a killing tanks. That was what swung me when I was building daemon lists.

Nets have Grenades?!

Both offensive and defensive grenades, thanks to Aura of Acquiescence.

Overall Bloodletters are more killy against a wider range of targets and slightly more durable.
Where Daemonettes really shine is the added mobility of fleet and in taking out armor thanks to Rending as you can penetrate AV10-11 rear armor which is almost everything.

So are you looking for max killing power or increased movement and options?

Str 5 on the charge can Penetrate/Glance AV10 and AV11 rear as well, so Letters can take out vehicles as much as nets

but nets can get a maximum AV of 12

So they can Pen AV 11 with some luck

Tavitin wrote:Str 5 on the charge can Penetrate/Glance AV10 and AV11 rear as well, so Letters can take out vehicles as much as nets

'Letters can do quite well against armor but they can only glance AV11 whereas 'Nettes can penetrate it.

I haven't run the numbers for the two against AV10 and AV11 to see who has the better average though, that would be interesting but my feeling is that the 'Nettes higher A and Rending would win the day.

7 Bloodletters = 112 pts.

8 Daemonettes = 112 pts.


Charge a tank, hit on a 4+, Rear AV10

Bloodletters
Glances: 1.75
Pens: 1.75

Daemonettes
Glances: .89
Pens: 1.78

----

Charge a tank, hit on a 4+, Rear AV11

Bloodletters
Glances: 1.75
Pens: 0

Daemonettes
Glances: .89
Pens: .89

----



Results:
Against AV10 The bloodletters win by dealing nearly the same amout of pens, but a lot more glances.
Against AV11 Daemonettes win. They caused .1 less results total, but they scored some penetrating results.

There are only a couple of thing I know of that have Rear AV 11 (a couple of the Leman Russ Variants).

Nettes are good for specific situations such as charging units in cover, dealing with a lot of low armor low toughness opponents, and charging av 11 vehicles.

Letters are good for more general assault. They take out anything armored better and are generally better against t 3-5.

Interesting. Overall I'd call it about even, at least close enough that I wouldn't take one or the other because of anti-armor abilities.

One thing I did forget though is that Daemonettes will fair better against walkers up to AV12. After that both are useless.

Take both?

So they're pretty equal against armor.

I think the bigger factors are T3 v. T4, and grenades. Daemonettes die significantly faster to antipersonnel fire- flamers, bolters, lasguns, heavy bolters, etc. Point: Bloodletters.

OTOH, not a lot of units in the C codex get grenades; often enemies can get a significant advantage on you in HtH just by moving a few models into cover, such that to assault them you'll have to pass through it, and drop to I1. Point: Daemonettes.

Fleet is also nice. Having an improved assault threat range really helps in an army without transports.

I think it's really close, honestly. You need bigger units of daemonettes to really make them worth it, IMO, due to the greater fragility, but they are a bit cheaper, which helps.

Like i said, Letters fare as good as Nettes against armor.

Now taking that aside:

you prefer denying Armor Saves all the time or just on 6s?

You rather wound on 5+ or on 3+?

Fleet for a Deepstriking army? Overrated.

Take Letters, you'll be happier 80% of the time because they're a more solid choice.

Well for Armour pen you want glances not pens. NO exploding daemons then. And you have plenty of attacks on the charge with both but rending gives more the possible pen results. So letters are better overall because they are worst V armour.

I like Daemonettes with Skarbrand. You get so many more attacks and all those rerolls to hit, and you're going before the enemy gets his (hopefully).

I miss Bloodletters with armor.

I use both, but Daemonettes are great and I'd leave the 'letters in the box before I dropped my girls.

Fleet for a Deepstriking army is not overrated - you can drop outside of the average enemy's 12" move/assault range and still threaten them. Fleet is useless when you're outside of assault range, and every inch counts for Daemons.

Grenades are also invaluable in an assault-based army where they're otherwise practically nonexistent. Every hit they take will translate into a wound 16% more often than for Bloodletters, but that's it - otherwise they're both very fragile units. When charged by the enemy, I6 and defensive grenades ensure that they'll get their attacks and suffer a lot less potential wounds anyway - this puts them on par with 'letters for survivability in assaults.

Against heavy armour 'letters are great and very powerful, but they simply aren't as flexible overall.

The thing is: Daemons don't have to invest on fleet units, they can take HQs that can move whatever unit 1d6"

So you can take a unit OUT of cover so grenades aren't necessary, you can move YOUR units 1d6, so they don't need Fleet.

The Daemons list i'll go is The Masque + some Bloodletters in one wave and in the other Great Unclean and Flamers. Everything else you just split between this two major groups.

Looking at it another way, are you planning on taking Fiends or Bloodcrushers? Because either of those units will accomplish the same basic task as the troops (besides scoring) better.

But then again that logic is what leads to MSU Plaguebearer squads.

Situational.

All depends on armour and toughness really.

against anything T4-6 letters will slaughter it with ease, even better if they are 2+ or 3+

However, for your average eldar / guard killing units nettes beat the letters with ease simply due to the sheer number of attacks.


So both really do have different CC roles.
I do however run letters instead since i run into PA alot.
Still run as unit of seekers though for good measure.

I just don't use deammonettes at all. Bloodletters are a lot better to me, and I can rely on other troop units to fill other roles for me. If I want something to do something to armor, I'll just use a deamon prince or herald. But if I need to fill a rending multi-wound attack slot, seekers and fiends can do it a lot better.

You can't just look at the army in a single dimension, dismissing fleet because of the Pavane ability. They're both great and even better in concert. You can't always reliably pull a unit out of cover (you can roll low, or simply miss!), and fleet doesn't always pay off with a big roll (although it's statistically more reliable than Pavane - Pavane has more uses though).

Fiends are used very differently to Daemonettes. They have a lower initiative and no access to grenades. They cannot climb ruins, which is a bit of a pain!

Even my 1500 casual list (the one I use when I can't be bothered writing one) uses Daemonettes, Bloodletters, Fiends and Bloodcrushers. They're all very dangerous in different ways, will typically be dropped in different positions, and prioritised toward their applicable strengths.

If I was going to take one of the close combat lesser daemons (which I prefer not to), I would take daemonettes over bloodletters.

Bloodletters have the power weapons yes... but daemonettes have rending to make up for it. The real gem that makes me like daemonettes more is the fact of the grenades, which means that they get to hit first EVEN IF your opponent is hiding behind a bush (or in terrain in general)... and they have fleet.

That said... I can't stand either of them. That is just me though. Daemonettes are to flimsy, bloodletters are to slow and underwhelming.

Pink horrors are a little more expensive, but act as anti-infantry and hit and miss anti-transport, where plaguebearers are tough scoring units, debatable to the toughest in the game point for point.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:You can't just look at the army in a single dimension, dismissing fleet because of the Pavane ability. They're both great and even better in concert. You can't always reliably pull a unit out of cover (you can roll low, or simply miss!), and fleet doesn't always pay off with a big roll (although it's statistically more reliable than Pavane - Pavane has more uses though).

Fiends are used very differently to Daemonettes. They have a lower initiative and no access to grenades. They cannot climb ruins, which is a bit of a pain!

Even my 1500 casual list (the one I use when I can't be bothered writing one) uses Daemonettes, Bloodletters, Fiends and Bloodcrushers. They're all very dangerous in different ways, will typically be dropped in different positions, and prioritised toward their applicable strengths.

+1. Daemonettes have a purpose (GEQ type things) Letters have a purpose (TEQ) both are great at MEQ killing, but both have different roles within the army. By picking just one you limit yourself immensely in what tools you have to kill opponents in cc.

wisdomseyes1 wrote:If I was going to take one of the close combat lesser daemons (which I prefer not to), I would take daemonettes over bloodletters.

Bloodletters have the power weapons yes... but daemonettes have rending to make up for it. The real gem that makes me like daemonettes more is the fact of the grenades, which means that they get to hit first EVEN IF your opponent is hiding behind a bush (or in terrain in general)... and they have fleet.

That said... I can't stand either of them. That is just me though. Daemonettes are to flimsy, bloodletters are to slow and underwhelming.

Pink horrors are a little more expensive, but act as anti-infantry and hit and miss anti-transport, where plaguebearers are tough scoring units, debatable to the toughest in the game point for point.

But that's just how deamons work. Every different chaos god unit has they're own strength and weaknesses, the trick is to finding a good combination of them. I usually only have 1 big pink horror squad for massive shooting and changeling shenanigans. Then I have Plaguebearer squads with Icons to survive heavy fire to bring in other stuff. Bloodletters form a powerhouse wall to chew up everything. But as for horde Fiends and Seekers are the way to go. I almost never use deamonettes.

I hate to turn the dicussion a tad, but I had decided to use Bloodcrushers supported by 'bearers and my ever important cc edge (either 'ettes or 'letters)

After hearing fiends and seekers brought up repeatedly with no mention of bloodcrushers I am curious if I was wrong in assuming that crushers were a must have and the addition of seekers and fiends a fun unit but not as consistent.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:

Fleet for a Deepstriking army is not overrated - you can drop outside of the average enemy's 12" move/assault range and still threaten them. Fleet is useless when you're outside of assault range, and every inch counts for Daemons.

Sincerely, i'll be delighted if a Chaos Daemon oponent deepstriked CC oriented units 12+ away from me.