Chaos Daemon Notes

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.

**H.B.M.C.**

Bloodcrushers were 'decidedly unbalanced' were they? And where am I expousing conspiratory views about being forced to buy things?

**ShadarLogoth**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Bloodcrushers were 'decidedly unbalanced' were they? And where am I expousing conspiratory views about being forced to buy things?

The comment wasn't directed at you, and yes, before the Flamers/Screemers explosion, Bloodcrushers were by far one of the most popular selections.

**H.B.M.C.**

Popular doesn't mean 'decidedly unbalanced'.

**Puscifer**

The whole argument about Crushers being rubbish is a moot point in my opinion after seeing them in game last night.

Try deepstriking them off an icon on the turn before assault behind your Bloodletters and see your opponent brick it as he'll either have to shoot the twenty strong letter unit or the destructive Crusher unit.

I have a new found respect for the new Crusher rules after seeing a Mono Khorne army tear through a SW army with ease.

**ShadarLogoth**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Popular doesn't mean 'decidedly unbalanced'.

Okay, and why were they more popular then? Because of the pretty models? Because they came with a free package of gum? Jesus.

The whole argument about Crushers being rubbish is a moot point in my opinion after seeing them in game last night.

Try deepstriking them off an icon on the turn before assault behind your Bloodletters and see your opponent brick it as he'll either have to shoot the twenty strong letter unit or the destructive Crusher unit.

I have a new found respect for the new Crusher rules after seeing a Mono Khorne army tear through a SW army with ease.

Shhhh. We'll have none of that here. This thread is clearly for people appraising units they have never seen in an actual game once and calling them trash with 0 evidence. Of course, that's pretty much along the lines of most threads on Dakka?

**H.B.M.C.**

And you're up to the "getting angry and insulting people" phase of your posts. Congratulations.

**ShadarLogoth**

Oh boy. Please tell me where I insulted anyone. Dismissive and a little incredulous maybe, but certainly not angry or insulting.

Do you want to actually address the question or are you going to hide behind you ad hominems? Why were they so popular if they weren't considered the best units in their slot? I'll hang up and listen.

**Ajroo**

I use them as allies for CSM and now have a dilemma.

Troops need a herald really, but that means not taking a GD, which is the whole point of taking them as allies.

So apart from needing 2 HQ units on CD codex, if i switch them to my primary detachment i lose the option of taking my heavy support option in my usual CSM primary detachment.
Also now you need 10man units i dont have enough troops.

looks like i need a re-jig and some new models #playingintotheirhands

**BryllCream**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
I know I keep going on about this, but I am just totally mistified by this decision.

I want everyone to cast their minds back to 2001. In 2001 GW released the 3rd Ed Tyranid Codex (can you believe we've had 3 Tyranid Codices in 12 years?). On page 8 of that book we saw the rules for the Venom Cannon; a fearsome weapon that anyone who played Tyranids in 2nd Ed knew was the staple of our heavy-weapon barrage. We didn't do much shooting, us Tyranid players, but we made that silly mutli-barrage template thingy count!

Anyway, on that page it had the following fluff:

"A target struck by the venom cannon is either killed by the impact of by corrosive fragments from the poison crystals when they shatter. Even vehicle armour can be penetrated by the crystals, leading poisoned crew members and shattered equipment, although the lack of explosive impact reduces lethality."

Two lines later it says the following:

"Note: A venom cannon can only achieve glancing hits against vehicles”

So much for penetrating vehicle armour, as the fluff tells us.

Now I laughed at this, but it was a singular instance of fluff directly contradicting rules within a paragraph. I didn't think we'd get something so blatantly silly ever again.

I just got the Daemon Codex, and it appears that even in 2001 I was speaking too soon.

Codex: Daemons (6th Edition), page 30:

"Small arms fire patters harmlessly from its hide, only serving to enrage the daemonic beast further. Only the heaviest weapons have a chance of piercing its armoured skin and by the time such weapons are brought to bear, it is usually too late."

No, you're wrong; this isn't the entry for the Soul Grinder. It's the entry for the Bloodcrusher, the unit that just went from having a 3+ save to having a 6+ save. I'm sorry, but this has to be a mistake. This does not compute.

You'd prefer fluff that mentions how easily a lasgun will punch through power armour, and how a melta gun can zap a flyer going at 200mph? Yeah, no. Fluff != rules.

**Red Corsair**

Yea bloodcrushers should not have ever had a 3+ IMO considering a chaos lord in full power armor on the back of a jugger got plus what added to his save?

**Exergy**

Red Corsair wrote:
Yea bloodcrushers should not have ever had a 3+ IMO considering a chaos lord in full power armor on the back of a jugger got plus what added to his save?

dam, that is a tough question...can I phone a friend?

**StarHunter25**

I'm surprised no-one has really said anything on the pure murder which bloodthirsters are. give him a greater reward and take the blade of blood.

Use his lash to hit things with a s6 ap2 on 2+ twin linked, then get a minimum of 8 attacks if you charge into a unit with more than 1 model. At WS10/I9 there isnt much that can contend with that. Granted, this is 270 points out of your army... if you're smart you ignore the swooping part and basically use him as a jump mc giving him a possible turn 1 charge.

**Evileyes**

ShadarLogoth wrote:
Oh boy. Please tell me where I insulted anyone. Dismissive and a little incredulous maybe, but certainly not angry or insulting.

Do you want to actually address the question or are you going to hide behind you ad hominems? Why were they so popular if they weren't considered the best units in their slot? I'll hang up and listen.

I think it's fairly obvious what he was getting at. Bloodcrushers were popular, because they were good, in a book of not so good.

Not overpowered. But good, by comparison to other daemon unit's of the time.

I'd call terminator's good, but not overpowered. Same with bloodcrushers of that book.

**ShadarLogoth**

Evileyes wrote:
ShadarLogoth wrote:
Oh boy. Please tell me where I insulted anyone. Dismissive and a little incredulous maybe, but certainly not angry or insulting.

Do you want to actually address the question or are you going to hide behind you ad hominems? Why were they so popular if they weren't considered the best units in their slot? I'll hang up and listen.

I think it's fairly obvious what he was getting at. Bloodcrushers were popular, because they were good, in a book of not so good.

Not overpowered. But good, by comparison to other daemon unit's of the time.

I'd call terminator's good, but not overpowered. Same with bloodcrushers of that book.

Actually he did get at any of that. He just dodged the question. So they were imbalanced in respect to their own codex? Which was my point? Word.

**Slaanesh-Devotee**

Ajroo wrote:
I use them as allies for CSM and now have a dilemma.

Troops need a herald really, but that means not taking a GD, which is the whole point of taking them as allies.

So apart from needing 2 HQ units on CD codex, if i switch them to my primary detachment i lose the option of taking my heavy support option in my usual CSM primary detachment.
Also now you need 10man units i dont have enough troops.

looks like i need a re-jig and some new models #playingintotheirhands

Yeah, this made me sad too. Suddenly the options for summoning daemons in to join my Slaaneshi troops just doesn't seem anything like as appealing. Still, it's been a long time since I could possess my own troops once a big nasty got close to them. A mob of Genestealers taking on my last few Noisemarines found the daemonettes that suddenly appeared in thier place much harder to deal with back in 2nd Ed!

Still, I like the look of the new rules enough that I'm investing for the first time in over a decade and building up enough Daemons to use them as a primary detachment. Should be fun!

**McNinja**

BryllCream wrote:

You'd prefer fluff that mentions how easily a lasgun will punch through power armour, and how a melta gun can zap a flyer going at 200mph? Yeah, no. Fluff != rules.

Then they shouldn't write fluff like that. Seriously, the fluff could equal the rules exactly if the fluff was written to be normal and not hilariously OTT.

**Ferrum_Sanguinis**

McNinja wrote:
BryllCream wrote:

You'd prefer fluff that mentions how easily a lasgun will punch through power armour, and how a melta gun can zap a flyer going at 200mph? Yeah, no. Fluff != rules.
Then they shouldn't write fluff like that. Seriously, the fluff could equal the rules exactly if the fluff was written to be normal and not hilariously OTT.

You haven't been playing 40k long have you?

**Fayric**

Its funny how you hear absolutely no one talking about the blood throne of khorne. To bad the Khorne loci are so onesided, or you could have Princes and Thirsters benefit from loci via the throne; now you can get the loci poweres easily enough from rewards so you dont have to stay close to a throne.

The throne could easily have been made as a nice boosting substitute for the lack of psychic power on the khorne side, but it turned out to be a compleat lackluster.

**McNinja**

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
McNinja wrote:
BryllCream wrote:

You'd prefer fluff that mentions how easily a lasgun will punch through power armour, and how a melta gun can zap a flyer going at 200mph? Yeah, no. Fluff != rules.
Then they shouldn't write fluff like that. Seriously, the fluff could equal the rules exactly if the fluff was written to be normal and not hilariously OTT.

You haven't been playing 40k long have you?

Eh, only a few years. I haven't minded the OTT fluff, but it is interesting when writing my own material, like codices, and I try to make sure that everything in the fluff can be represented by the rules. If it can't, I generally scrap it or tone it down so the rules are balanced. To me, they're one and the same.

**Ferrum_Sanguinis**

McNinja wrote:
Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
McNinja wrote:
BryllCream wrote:

You'd prefer fluff that mentions how easily a lasgun will punch through power armour, and how a melta gun can zap a flyer going at 200mph? Yeah, no. Fluff != rules.
Then they shouldn't write fluff like that. Seriously, the fluff could equal the rules exactly if the fluff was written to be normal and not hilariously OTT.

You haven't been playing 40k long have you?
Eh, only a few years. I haven't minded the OTT fluff, but it is interesting when writing my own material, like codices, and I try to make sure that everything in the fluff can be represented by the rules. If it can't, I generally scrap it or tone it down so the rules are balanced. To me, they're one and the same.

But OTT fluff is half the fun of 40k dude!

**pepe5454**

ShadarLogoth wrote:
Evileyes wrote:
ShadarLogoth wrote:
Oh boy. Please tell me where I insulted anyone. Dismissive and a little incredulous maybe, but certainly not angry or insulting.

Do you want to actually address the question or are you going to hide behind you ad hominems? Why were they so popular if they weren't considered the best units in their slot? I'll hang up and listen.

I think it's fairly obvious what he was getting at. Bloodcrushers were popular, because they were good, in a book of not so good.

Not overpowered. But good, by comparison to other daemon unit's of the time.

I'd call terminator's good, but not overpowered. Same with bloodcrushers of that book.

Actually he did get at any of that. He just dodged the question. So they were imbalanced in respect to their own codex? Which was my point? Word.

Wait so are you saying that if a codex that is viewed as under powered has a unit in it that is viewed as fairly in balance with the other armies out there that the one unit should be brought down to be inline with the rest of the underpowered units in that codex? I never faced them so don't know if they were OP or balanced or even weak but from your posts that sounds like what you are arguing. I did face the flamers and screamers and can say the flamers did need adjusting but IMO they went one step to far with granting your opponent FNP half the time but I never even heard anyone complain about the crushers.

**ShadarLogoth**

Wait so are you saying that if a codex that is viewed as under powered has a unit in it that is viewed as fairly in balance with the other armies out there that the one unit should be brought down to be inline with the rest of the underpowered units in that codex? I never faced them so don't know if they were OP or balanced or even weak but from your posts that sounds like what you are arguing. I did face the flamers and screamers and can say the flamers did need adjusting but IMO they went one step to far with granting your opponent FNP half the time but I never even heard anyone complain about the crushers.

I'm merely saying they were going to be brought inline with the units they are competing against, which they were. The viability of the entire old codex Demons had very little do with the power of Bloodcrushers.

**pepe5454**

So by decidedly over powered did you mean compared to other elites in demon codex or just elites from all books?

**ShadarLogoth**

pepe5454 wrote:
So by decidedly over powered did you mean compared to other elites in demon codex or just elites from all books?

Considering Demon players can't choose elites from other codexes....

**pepe5454**

So ignoring that flamers are in there as the WD really buffed them. You are saying that if a codex has say a bunch of elites that are considered under powered by most and one that is considered to be good compared to other books that the one that is good is over powered?

**H.B.M.C.**

Stop it pepe! You'll give him an aneurysm.

**pepe5454**

I really can't say if they were OP or not as over the years I can't remember facing them so if I did they didn't stand out to me at all. But if when he thinks something is OP he is thinking of just that one codex it would explain the disagreement as a matter of perspective.

**H.B.M.C.**

"Useful" or "Powerful" is a far cry from "OP". All OP units are useful. Not all useful units are OP.

Bloodcrushers got hit with the biggest pendulum swing I've seen in quite some time, and the fluff that talks up their toughness and thick armour just makes it all the more hilarious.

**ShadarLogoth**

pepe5454 wrote:
So ignoring that flamers are in there as the WD really buffed them. You are saying that if a codex has say a bunch of elites that are considered under powered by most and one that is considered to be good compared to other books that the one that is good is over powered?

Not always, and yes I'm speaking of Demons prior to the WD release, so ignoring flamers. Sometimes it really is the case that every other unit is just horrible, but that is rarely a reality. More often then not one unit just sticks out as obviously stronger then the rest. In those cases, instead of bringing everything up to that point, the unit is changed to bring it more in line with the rest of the units. Bloodcrushers are quite in line with the other Elite units now, and if this was the first Demon Codex ever people wouldn't even think to bitch about them. They just aren't anything like the unit that they were.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Stop it pepe! You'll give him an aneurysm.

One of us is using logic and rationalizing their reasoning, the other is throwing out baseless nonsense and ad hominems. My cognitive features are functioning quite fine, thank you.

**pepe5454**

The thick armor fluff is a bit odd since the change got to give you that =P. And I tend to view balance in a general sense as well. Crushers to me look pretty dang strong but also damn expensive which seems to be the norm. I can see using them with their current stats but it would depend on the situation not sure about a TAC list would have to plan around them.