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.

JakeSiren wrote:

ntin wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:
The Herald of Nurgle/Tzeentch/Khorne are much murkier waters than Slaanesh. The designers commentary talk about what to do if your model doesn't have a data sheet in the codex. Your Herald of Nurgle model does in the form of the Poxbringer data sheet.

So in answer to the question, no, you can't bring a Herald of Nurgle and a poxbringer as the poxbringer datasheet is the updated version for the model.

Do have any reference or rule precedent to back up that statement?

There is no data card in Codex: Chaos Daemons called for an HQ unit called “Herald of Nurgle”. I can say that my model analog for the “Herald of Nurgle” data card and not the “Poxbringer” data card. As “Herald of Nurgle” is not present in Codex: Chaos Daemons.

The first box in the flow chart in the developer commentary asks "DOES YOUR MODEL HAVE A DATASHEET IN A CODEX?". My "Herald of Nurgle" does not have a data sheet, so I default to the index.

RAI we can infer that the “Poxbringer” is the replacement data card for the “Herald of Nurgle” but there is no rule or faq/errata that symbolically links these two data cards from the index and codex. We are just making well-informed assumption that is what GW intended.

If you have a way to show that your Herald was different from the Poxbringer, i.e through conversions, or use of a different model, then there should be no issue. I have seen many reports where people use the nurgle dude with the huge axe from AoS as poxbringers. Of course, if you have two heralds, and say "this one is this, this one is that" then it becomes an issue.
Which part? Rules about which datasheet to use for a model are in the designers commentary. The models are the same, ergo you use the updated data sheet.

On the other side, I can always deny you from using Poxbringers by disallowing proxies and insisting that you use the correct models to represent your army. As the "Poxbringer" is the same sculpt as the "Herald of Nurgle", you have no way to demonstrate that that specific model is a poxbringer, and not a Herald of Nurgle.

JakeSiren wrote:

Which part? Rules about which datasheet to use for a model are in the designers commentary. The models are the same, ergo you use the updated data sheet.

What I am getting at is “Just Because Fallacy” isn’t a valid argument.

To reiterate my point. The data cards for both “Poxbringer” and “Herald of Nurgle” are both valid because “Poxbringer” is a new unit in Codex: Chaos Daemons and does not replace “Herald of Nurgle”. Where the data card for “Herald of Slaanesh” from Index: Chaos is invalidated by the new data card “Herald of Slaanesh” in Codex: Chaos Daemons. As both data cards share the same name. GW has not published errata stating X “index herald” is replaced by Y “codex herald”. That is the missing rule that is causing this problem.

This becomes the problem. These models represent two different data cards now. The first box in the flowchart in the Developer’s commentary has “DOES YOUR MODEL HAVE A DATASHEET IN A CODEX?”. My model “Herald of Nurgle” does not have a datasheet in the codex. Which flows to “NO” and “USE THE INDEX VERSION OF YOUR MODEL’S DATASHEET”. Where my model “Poxbringer” flows to “YES”.

JakeSiren wrote:

On the other side, I can always deny you from using Poxbringers by disallowing proxies and insisting that you use the correct models to represent your army. As the "Poxbringer" is the same sculpt as the "Herald of Nurgle", you have no way to demonstrate that that specific model is a poxbringer, and not a Herald of Nurgle.

The model is the correct model to represent both the “Herald of Nurgle” and “Poxbringer” data card? Even under WYSIWYG this isn’t breaking the rule. Conversely, you have no way to tell me that this “Poxbringer” isn’t a “Herald of Nurgle”. Even in a tournament setting if I point out what models are what and those models are a reasonable approximation, it is fine.

Generally, as a courtesy I point out to my opponents that Herald 1 has psychic power a, Herald 2 has psychic power b, etc. Though this is more of a matter of good sportsmanship.

ntin wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:

Which part? Rules about which datasheet to use for a model are in the designers commentary. The models are the same, ergo you use the updated data sheet.

What I am getting at is “Just Because Fallacy” isn’t a valid argument.

To reiterate my point. The data cards for both “Poxbringer” and “Herald of Nurgle” are both valid because “Poxbringer” is a new unit in Codex: Chaos Daemons and does not replace “Herald of Nurgle”. Where the data card for “Herald of Slaanesh” from Index: Chaos is invalidated by the new data card “Herald of Slaanesh” in Codex: Chaos Daemons. As both data cards share the same name. GW has not published errata stating X “index herald” is replaced by Y “codex herald”. That is the missing rule that is causing this problem.

This becomes the problem. These models represent two different data cards now. The first box in the flowchart in the Developer’s commentary has “DOES YOUR MODEL HAVE A DATASHEET IN A CODEX?”. My model “Herald of Nurgle” does not have a datasheet in the codex. Which flows to “NO” and “USE THE INDEX VERSION OF YOUR MODEL’S DATASHEET”. Where my model “Poxbringer” flows to “YES”.

JakeSiren wrote:

On the other side, I can always deny you from using Poxbringers by disallowing proxies and insisting that you use the correct models to represent your army. As the "Poxbringer" is the same sculpt as the "Herald of Nurgle", you have no way to demonstrate that that specific model is a poxbringer, and not a Herald of Nurgle.

The model is the correct model to represent both the “Herald of Nurgle” and “Poxbringer” data card? Even under WYSIWYG this isn’t breaking the rule. Conversely, you have no way to tell me that this “Poxbringer” isn’t a “Herald of Nurgle”. Even in a tournament setting if I point out what models are what and those models are a reasonable approximation, it is fine.

Generally, as a courtesy I point out to my opponents that Herald 1 has psychic power a, Herald 2 has psychic power b, etc. Though this is more of a matter of good sportsmanship.

Models are not data sheets. Models are models. If your model that formerly represented a Herald of Nurgle now represents a Poxbringer in the codex then your model has a data sheet and you do not get to use the index.

ntin wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:

Which part? Rules about which datasheet to use for a model are in the designers commentary. The models are the same, ergo you use the updated data sheet.

What I am getting at is “Just Because Fallacy” isn’t a valid argument.

To reiterate my point. The data cards for both “Poxbringer” and “Herald of Nurgle” are both valid because “Poxbringer” is a new unit in Codex: Chaos Daemons and does not replace “Herald of Nurgle”. Where the data card for “Herald of Slaanesh” from Index: Chaos is invalidated by the new data card “Herald of Slaanesh” in Codex: Chaos Daemons. As both data cards share the same name. GW has not published errata stating X “index herald” is replaced by Y “codex herald”. That is the missing rule that is causing this problem.

This becomes the problem. These models represent two different data cards now. The first box in the flowchart in the Developer’s commentary has “DOES YOUR MODEL HAVE A DATASHEET IN A CODEX?”. My model “Herald of Nurgle” does not have a datasheet in the codex. Which flows to “NO” and “USE THE INDEX VERSION OF YOUR MODEL’S DATASHEET”. Where my model “Poxbringer” flows to “YES”.

JakeSiren wrote:

On the other side, I can always deny you from using Poxbringers by disallowing proxies and insisting that you use the correct models to represent your army. As the "Poxbringer" is the same sculpt as the "Herald of Nurgle", you have no way to demonstrate that that specific model is a poxbringer, and not a Herald of Nurgle.

The model is the correct model to represent both the “Herald of Nurgle” and “Poxbringer” data card? Even under WYSIWYG this isn’t breaking the rule. Conversely, you have no way to tell me that this “Poxbringer” isn’t a “Herald of Nurgle”. Even in a tournament setting if I point out what models are what and those models are a reasonable approximation, it is fine.

Generally, as a courtesy I point out to my opponents that Herald 1 has psychic power a, Herald 2 has psychic power b, etc. Though this is more of a matter of good sportsmanship.

Yeah if agree woth other commenta. I think your abit wrong as the designer notes care about "models" not names. Meaning that the poxbringer model is the same model for Herald of nurgle. Which means the poxbringer datasheet replaces the Herald datasheet. I think this is as clear as rules can be. No where does it say we care about datasheet titles Or the name of things. We care about models and that's it. So the name doesn't matter.

Darksteve wrote:

Models are not data sheets. Models are models. If your model that formerly represented a Herald of Nurgle now represents a Poxbringer in the codex then your model has a data sheet and you do not get to use the index.

That is the crux of what I am arguing. A model can be used to represents two data cards, the “Poxbringer” and the “Herald of Nurgle”. The actual physical doesn’t matter, I can convert my own or use a proxy. The reason I can do this is because both datacards have different between names in each book they are not the same unit. So, the Codex’s datacard for “Poxbringer” does not invalidate the Index’s datacard for “Herald of Nurgle”.

If GW made some errata to Index: Chaos saying “Herald of Nurgle” is now named “Poxbringer” I have no argument at that point

It is this same logic that says I cannot take the Index: Chaos version of “Keeper of Secrets” because there is a datacard with that same name in Codex: Chaos Daemons, even though the datacards themselves are not the same. But I can still take the “Herald of Slaanesh on Steed” from Index: Chaos because that datacard is not in Codex: Chaos Daemons. There is no datacard for “Herald of Nurgle” in Codex: Chaos Daemons therefore it is not invalidated by the presence of the “Poxbringer” datacard.

mmimzie wrote:

Yeah if agree woth other commenta. I think your abit wrong as the designer notes care about "models" not names. Meaning that the poxbringer model is the same model for Herald of nurgle. Which means the poxbringer datasheet replaces the Herald datasheet. I think this is as clear as rules can be. No where does it say we care about datasheet titles Or the name of things. We care about models and that's it. So the name doesn't matter.

That is the thing though. There is no formal rule for how datacards override between the Codex and Index. Rule precedence set by GW have shown that if the datacard has the same name then the Codex then that datacard overrides the Index’s datacard. We know this to be true because the Codex: Chaos Daemon, “Daemon Prince” datacard has the weapon option “warp bolter” because Index: Chaos has a datacard called “Daemon Prince” has a weapon option called “warp bolter”. Using that flow chart allows us to inherit extra rules from Index: Chaos.

We only make a logical assumption that “Poxbringer” is the replacement to “Herald of Nurgle” there is no rule by GW saying that is the case.

ntin wrote:

Darksteve wrote:

Models are not data sheets. Models are models. If your model that formerly represented a Herald of Nurgle now represents a Poxbringer in the codex then your model has a data sheet and you do not get to use the index.

That is the crux of what I am arguing. A model can be used to represents two data cards, the “Poxbringer” and the “Herald of Nurgle”. The actual physical doesn’t matter, I can convert my own or use a proxy. The reason I can do this is because both datacards have different between names in each book they are not the same unit. So, the Codex’s datacard for “Poxbringer” does not invalidate the Index’s datacard for “Herald of Nurgle”.

If GW made some errata to Index: Chaos saying “Herald of Nurgle” is now named “Poxbringer” I have no argument at that point

It is this same logic that says I cannot take the Index: Chaos version of “Keeper of Secrets” because there is a datacard with that same name in Codex: Chaos Daemons, even though the datacards themselves are not the same. But I can still take the “Herald of Slaanesh on Steed” from Index: Chaos because that datacard is not in Codex: Chaos Daemons. There is no datacard for “Herald of Nurgle” in Codex: Chaos Daemons therefore it is not invalidated by the presence of the “Poxbringer” datacard.

mmimzie wrote:

Yeah if agree woth other commenta. I think your abit wrong as the designer notes care about "models" not names. Meaning that the poxbringer model is the same model for Herald of nurgle. Which means the poxbringer datasheet replaces the Herald datasheet. I think this is as clear as rules can be. No where does it say we care about datasheet titles Or the name of things. We care about models and that's it. So the name doesn't matter.

That is the thing though. There is no formal rule for how datacards override between the Codex and Index. Rule precedence set by GW have shown that if the datacard has the same name then the Codex then that datacard overrides the Index’s datacard. We know this to be true because the Codex: Chaos Daemon, “Daemon Prince” datacard has the weapon option “warp bolter” because Index: Chaos has a datacard called “Daemon Prince” has a weapon option called “warp bolter”. Using that flow chart allows us to inherit extra rules from Index: Chaos.

We only make a logical assumption that “Poxbringer” is the replacement to “Herald of Nurgle” there is no rule by GW saying that is the case.

By that logic I can use any model to represent any data card as there is no formal rule tying the physical model to a datacard.

Ergo my daemon price will now be represented by the Lord of Skulls

It's the players responsibility to assign the appropriate datasheet to the model.
If you have read the codex, you will know that a Poxbringer is a Herald of nurgle. That model now has a datasheet in a codex. And cannot use a datasheet from an index.

Against my better judgement I tried flamers. They're even worse than I thought, you can't hide them ever as they have 12'' range so they shoot and die when anyone as much as looks at them. Their damage is nothing to write home about. They can't even pick their targets. A competant opponent doesn't let you kill those elites that you want to kill by just placing a screen 3''+ in front of them...

Just bloodletters... More damage, more survivability, more close combat BS you can pull, more disruption. Flamers - back to the shelf.

Tried Eflamers too. Wow 18'' heavy bites. They didn't appear as bad as flamers but definitelly not top tier. I'll try them later maybe. Screamers I don't even bother with tbh. Flesh hounds exist, which while don't hit as hard - have the insane(for their cost) deny rule.

bloodletter has same issue you said with flamers, a competent player wont let you charge their precious elite units, if you dont have a way to rid of screens you are fethed up and if you have you can use flamers as well, i agree that 30 letters usually are more dangersous btw.

Flamers work best when comboed with a bnig splitting horror unit. The flamers let you convert the reinforcement points you don't use after the first turn of recieving fire, into good damage that doesn't require a unit strength bonus.

I still think bloodletters are abit unrealistic

 blackmage wrote:
bloodletter has same issue you said with flamers, a competent player wont let you charge their precious elite units, if you dont have a way to rid of screens you are fethed up and if you have you can use flamers as well, i agree that 30 letters usually are more dangersous btw.

There are almost always 2 units within charge range. If so - Letters are INSANE. Charge 1, but charge both instead. Kill 1, surround 2. Opponent can't shoot, can't retreat, he can just cry. On their turn you mop up the other unit or get charged. In the first case, you're free to charge again on turn 2 and you've basically won.
And if he has a blob of 30 as a single unit screen. Guess what, you have 3 turns to bomb AND you have pinks to kill it just in case. ALSO, if push comes to shove, you can crack the screen by fighting twice. Like seriously, if your opponent can shoot the letters after they deepstruck - you fkd up or failed the charge roll.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mmimzie wrote:
Flamers work best when comboed with a bnig splitting horror unit. The flamers let you convert the reinforcement points you don't use after the first turn of recieving fire, into good damage that doesn't require a unit strength bonus.

I still think bloodletters are abit unrealistic

I literally have no idea what you just said. How do flamers use reserve points?

Also bloodletter bomb is a proven concept as it does well in tournaments.

 rvd1ofakind wrote:

 blackmage wrote:
bloodletter has same issue you said with flamers, a competent player wont let you charge their precious elite units, if you dont have a way to rid of screens you are fethed up and if you have you can use flamers as well, i agree that 30 letters usually are more dangersous btw.

There are almost always 2 units within charge range. If so - Letters are INSANE. Charge 1, but charge both instead. Kill 1, surround 2. Opponent can't shoot, can't retreat, he can just cry. On their turn you mop up the other unit or get charged. In the first case, you're free to charge again on turn 2 and you've basically won.
And if he has a blob of 30 as a single unit screen. Guess what, you have 3 turns to bomb AND you have pinks to kill it just in case. ALSO, if push comes to shove, you can crack the screen by fighting twice. Like seriously, if your opponent can shoot the letters after they deepstruck - you fkd up or failed the charge roll.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mmimzie wrote:
Flamers work best when comboed with a bnig splitting horror unit. The flamers let you convert the reinforcement points you don't use after the first turn of recieving fire, into good damage that doesn't require a unit strength bonus.

I still think bloodletters are abit unrealistic

I literally have no idea what you just said. How do flamers use reserve points?

Also bloodletter bomb is a proven concept as it does well in tournaments.

If you are using spliting horrors. You need reinforcement points to bring blues and brimstones. Which is a rather good strategy and is also preforming well. However, some times they ignore your horrors thus wasting all those nice reinforcement pts. Flamers are the ideal unit to summoning turn 2-6. As they don't need a number bonus to do extra damage, and at those pts odds are you don't have to worry about screens.


Also we haven't had any big tournaments, and in my book the only tournament data that really matters is the big ones. Only because in 40k you don't do any best of 3s or play enough opponents. So success in small tournaments can come down to silly things. For instance in alot of small tournaments the top 3 or 4 plays are just the 1st place guy from round 2 that won round 3, and then the 2nd place guy could be some one who lost his first game, and got paired against two not quite so good list in rounds 2 and 3. As such only big events or leagueswhere you get a good number of games to make a big difference between winning list and losing list. Currently, have seen anything that meets either of those criteria.

I was actually wondering if a good play would be to drop in a 30-man Pink Horror squad to clear out screen units, followed by one or more Bloodletter bombs the following turn that can then charge the stuff that was behind the screens. Obviously to ensure killing the screen you'd want a Changecaster (or whatever the TzHerald is called now) casting Flickering Fire on them. Perhaps Flamers could be used instead of Horrors for screen-busting, but it seems like their damage output is way too swingy for their cost. At the same time, 30 Pinks is probably too many points for a unit that will kill cheap chaff and then get slaughtered by return fire (235 points for 30 with banner and instrument).

mmimzie wrote:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:

 blackmage wrote:
bloodletter has same issue you said with flamers, a competent player wont let you charge their precious elite units, if you dont have a way to rid of screens you are fethed up and if you have you can use flamers as well, i agree that 30 letters usually are more dangersous btw.

There are almost always 2 units within charge range. If so - Letters are INSANE. Charge 1, but charge both instead. Kill 1, surround 2. Opponent can't shoot, can't retreat, he can just cry. On their turn you mop up the other unit or get charged. In the first case, you're free to charge again on turn 2 and you've basically won.
And if he has a blob of 30 as a single unit screen. Guess what, you have 3 turns to bomb AND you have pinks to kill it just in case. ALSO, if push comes to shove, you can crack the screen by fighting twice. Like seriously, if your opponent can shoot the letters after they deepstruck - you fkd up or failed the charge roll.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mmimzie wrote:
Flamers work best when comboed with a bnig splitting horror unit. The flamers let you convert the reinforcement points you don't use after the first turn of recieving fire, into good damage that doesn't require a unit strength bonus.

I still think bloodletters are abit unrealistic

I literally have no idea what you just said. How do flamers use reserve points?

Also bloodletter bomb is a proven concept as it does well in tournaments.

If you are using spliting horrors. You need reinforcement points to bring blues and brimstones. Which is a rather good strategy and is also preforming well. However, some times they ignore your horrors thus wasting all those nice reinforcement pts. Flamers are the ideal unit to summoning turn 2-6. As they don't need a number bonus to do extra damage, and at those pts odds are you don't have to worry about screens.


Also we haven't had any big tournaments, and in my book the only tournament data that really matters is the big ones. Only because in 40k you don't do any best of 3s or play enough opponents. So success in small tournaments can come down to silly things. For instance in alot of small tournaments the top 3 or 4 plays are just the 1st place guy from round 2 that won round 3, and then the 2nd place guy could be some one who lost his first game, and got paired against two not quite so good list in rounds 2 and 3. As such only big events or leagueswhere you get a good number of games to make a big difference between winning list and losing list. Currently, have seen anything that meets either of those criteria.

Well first you have to use the split rule, which is questionable already. I used it last time as I presented horrors as the only valid target with:
split, morale autopass, +1 to invul strat, 6+++ with changeling... and it was still just "pretty good". For 4 CP... eh... Summoning is dead to me. Why risk summoning something when you can just put it in the list to gain CP. Also summoning is the same as Deepstrike but worse so what's the point. Flamers suck with deepstrike, they'll suck even more when summoned due to limited range.

And who's this "we". We just had the LVO. Plenty of experimental lists in top 50 (that's just 1 loss and 5 wins) with bloodletter bombs. It's the biggest tournament in the history of 40, right? 500 people. With the most experienced competition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I was actually wondering if a good play would be to drop in a 30-man Pink Horror squad to clear out screen units, followed by one or more Bloodletter bombs the following turn that can then charge the stuff that was behind the screens. Obviously to ensure killing the screen you'd want a Changecaster (or whatever the TzHerald is called now) casting Flickering Fire on them. Perhaps Flamers could be used instead of Horrors for screen-busting, but it seems like their damage output is way too swingy for their cost. At the same time, 30 Pinks is probably too many points for a unit that will kill cheap chaff and then get slaughtered by return fire (235 points for 30 with banner and instrument).

That's literally the strat I used to crush an RTT. No idea why you'd give pinks the instrument or even the banner as you'd probably want to autopass anyway. Also, 4++ is really annoying to kill

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I was actually wondering if a good play would be to drop in a 30-man Pink Horror squad to clear out screen units, followed by one or more Bloodletter bombs the following turn that can then charge the stuff that was behind the screens. Obviously to ensure killing the screen you'd want a Changecaster (or whatever the TzHerald is called now) casting Flickering Fire on them. Perhaps Flamers could be used instead of Horrors for screen-busting, but it seems like their damage output is way too swingy for their cost. At the same time, 30 Pinks is probably too many points for a unit that will kill cheap chaff and then get slaughtered by return fire (235 points for 30 with banner and instrument).

Also pinks are also just killy <.< why not drop 2 units of pinks and then shoot twice with your two units of pinks would probably end up being more damage.

That or you clear the screen ,but your oponent can move more screen in the way or move what they are screening back. It's not like your fighting a stationary target. Not to mention layered screens are definitly a thing.

For instaqnce the UK GT's winning list had 60 models worth of screen. One pink horror squad is gonna average just about 30 dead cultist. You still ahve more cultist in front of those oblits. This also isn't considering that the rhinos in the list couldn't also be appart of that screen, and you are definitely gonna struggle to take that rhino out of the picture with just 1 squad of pink horrors.

The bloodletter suck only because they don't let you be a good player, they let your opponent be a bad player. There's little you as a player can do to bring them to bare, but your opponent can do lots of things to stop the bloodletter, and many of those things aren't giving your opponent to much of a hard time.

I think beserkers/blood angel jet pack stuff/shining spears/nid stuff/ ork mobs are the current champs when it comes to doing melee damage. This is because you can get them more reliably where you want them to go. Nothing hits harder than bloodletter, but getting them there takes so much work that you suffer because of it, and assuming you do actualy get them there offs are the blood letters are dead on your opponent turn because the are basicly guardmen that cost almost twice as much against no ap weapons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:


And who's this "we". We just had the LVO. Plenty of experimental lists in top 50 (that's just 1 loss and 5 wins) with bloodletter bombs. It's the biggest tournament in the history of 40, right? 500 people. With the most experienced competition.

How many??? and list for the highest rank. As i recall i didn't see any in the top 25.

In LVO it's acceptable to be top 50 as it is SO many people. 1 loss is still top 50. 27, 28, 38, 42 had bombs

Top 25 only had 3 chaos players anyway.

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
In LVO it's acceptable to be top 50 as it is SO many people. 1 loss is still top 50. 27, 28, 38, 42 had bombs

Top 25 only had 3 chaos players anyway.

A couple of those eother can't or don't use the blood letter bomb due to not having eother a banner or even a chaps daemons detachment. . However one does exist so there's that.

Reguardless I think the lack of control woth the blood letter bomb makes it less favorable when compared to stuff like daemon Prince or greater daemon spam. Or things like multiple pink horror drop. Or other melee armies as they just give you more control on your ability to connect in combat.

I can most certainly see the bloodletters bomb being good when you hit, but I still contend that it I don't like that ypur opponent has more control over your blood letter bomb than you do.

I'm sorry, Greater Daemon spam?????
Whuaaaaat.
Also everyone used the Letter bomb.. what else did they do - footslog them? rofl The banner is probably not written or whatever.
Anywho, I have no idea why is it so hard to drop the bomb. All you need is 2 units within charge range. Done and done. If you can't make that happen in 3 turns by killing your opponent's screen with pinks then I don't even.

mmimzie wrote:

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I was actually wondering if a good play would be to drop in a 30-man Pink Horror squad to clear out screen units, followed by one or more Bloodletter bombs the following turn that can then charge the stuff that was behind the screens. Obviously to ensure killing the screen you'd want a Changecaster (or whatever the TzHerald is called now) casting Flickering Fire on them. Perhaps Flamers could be used instead of Horrors for screen-busting, but it seems like their damage output is way too swingy for their cost. At the same time, 30 Pinks is probably too many points for a unit that will kill cheap chaff and then get slaughtered by return fire (235 points for 30 with banner and instrument).

Also pinks are also just killy <.< why not drop 2 units of pinks and then shoot twice with your two units of pinks would probably end up being more damage.

That or you clear the screen ,but your oponent can move more screen in the way or move what they are screening back. It's not like your fighting a stationary target. Not to mention layered screens are definitly a thing.

For instaqnce the UK GT's winning list had 60 models worth of screen. One pink horror squad is gonna average just about 30 dead cultist. You still ahve more cultist in front of those oblits. This also isn't considering that the rhinos in the list couldn't also be appart of that screen, and you are definitely gonna struggle to take that rhino out of the picture with just 1 squad of pink horrors.

The bloodletter suck only because they don't let you be a good player, they let your opponent be a bad player. There's little you as a player can do to bring them to bare, but your opponent can do lots of things to stop the bloodletter, and many of those things aren't giving your opponent to much of a hard time.

I think beserkers/blood angel jet pack stuff/shining spears/nid stuff/ ork mobs are the current champs when it comes to doing melee damage. This is because you can get them more reliably where you want them to go. Nothing hits harder than bloodletter, but getting them there takes so much work that you suffer because of it, and assuming you do actualy get them there offs are the blood letters are dead on your opponent turn because the are basicly guardmen that cost almost twice as much against no ap weapons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:


And who's this "we". We just had the LVO. Plenty of experimental lists in top 50 (that's just 1 loss and 5 wins) with bloodletter bombs. It's the biggest tournament in the history of 40, right? 500 people. With the most experienced competition.

How many??? and list for the highest rank. As i recall i didn't see any in the top 25.

I love massed pinks... if I wasn't trying to be a Nurgle purist... I'd probably try a Horror Bomb!

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
I'm sorry, Greater Daemon spam?????
Whuaaaaat.
Also everyone used the Letter bomb.. what else did they do - footslog them? rofl The banner is probably not written or whatever.
Anywho, I have no idea why is it so hard to drop the bomb. All you need is 2 units within charge range. Done and done. If you can't make that happen in 3 turns by killing your opponent's screen with pinks then I don't even.

That's what I'm saying 1-3 turn turns making space. Sitting on you hands eith almost 300pts waiting doing nothing, while you could just be scoring more kills with consistant damage out put from units actualy doing stuff. For instance an extra 30man pink horror unit putting out shooting for that 1-3 extra turns would likely get you further than more bloodletters.

As for the greater daemons. They are pretty kills. Between an Loc, GUO, and Bloodthirster. Most armies struggle to kill one let alone two when given the proper armor and spells (incaporiale, robes, armor of scorn, miasma of pestilance). Then after that one turn of shooting you kill so much of there army the greater daemons can't be stopped. Combo that with a thick unit of reinforced splitting horrors, and you have alot to cut through and not enough time to do it, and nurgling coverage.

In ITC folks struggle to grab secondaries. At best they go for kingslayer. Then they struggle for much or anything else, while i snatch up recon, and whatever else. In none ITC its just a tough but to crack.

I'm headed to a small local event in about 2 weeks time. It's going to be 2k points with 8 players using the BRB missions, no forgeworld. The meta consists mainly of Space Marines, Space Wolves, Admech, and Orks. I just wanted to see what people think I will struggle the most with.

This is my list:

Batallion:
DP w/wings of Tzeentch - Daemon Spark / Impossible Robe / Malefic Talon / Flickering Flames
The Changling

20 pink horrors + Daemonic Icon
30 pink horrors + Daemonic Icon
10 brimstone horrors

Spearhead:
Fluxmaster - Boon of Change / Flickering Flames

5 x Burning Chariots of Tzeentch - Chanting Horrors

Spearhead:
The Blue Scribes

4 x Burning Chariots of Tzeentch - Chanting Horrors

JakeSiren wrote:
I'm headed to a small local event in about 2 weeks time. It's going to be 2k points with 8 players using the BRB missions, no forgeworld. The meta consists mainly of Space Marines, Space Wolves, Admech, and Orks. I just wanted to see what people think I will struggle the most with.

This is my list:

Batallion:
DP w/wings of Tzeentch - Daemon Spark / Impossible Robe / Malefic Talon / Flickering Flames
The Changling

20 pink horrors + Daemonic Icon
30 pink horrors + Daemonic Icon
10 brimstone horrors

Spearhead:
Fluxmaster - Boon of Change / Flickering Flames

5 x Burning Chariots of Tzeentch - Chanting Horrors

Spearhead:
The Blue Scribes

4 x Burning Chariots of Tzeentch - Chanting Horrors

Looks hillarious. I dont know if it will destroy the beta, but you'd do decently well at best with the pink horrors carrying you. i'd consider swaping the tzneetch dp into one one of the other detachments and making it TSons. It can know most the same spells at about the same casting value (mostly harder to cast). But you get two spells isntead of one. Give all the warlord traits and such to the fluxmaster instead.

So my first game went quite well! It was a fun 2v2 at 1500 points for each player. I didn't use any DPs or KOS. I actually used an herald on an exalted seeker chariot as my warlord. I gave it the Fatal Caress trait since it has so many attacks and it worked out quite well. She brought down some giant flying Tyranid thing, my Seekers destroyed a big blob of Genestealers. Sadly my two blobs Daemonettes were annihilated by a first turn death company charge but I have to say, Quicksilver Swiftness was definitely underestimated. It let my second daemonette squad attack first against the second death company squad so they were able to contribute and made them easier to clean up. Even though they had a 4+ invuln they really did some work.



The hellflayers did some real work as well, as did my regular heralds on seeker chariots. Secondary to performing well.. it was a lot of fun and easy to crack jokes about how my psychic powers worked and what was happening when my chariots crashed into people. I managed to kill 3 death company marines from my seeker chariot on the charge from the mortal wounds it deals out, almost 4 but he saved with a FNP. I also brought along 2 solo Fiends. They seemed so insignificant next to everything else they were ignored but with Quicksilver Swiftness again coming into play, one of them got to murder 2 out of 3 Raveners that had charged it! Then I killed the third with the tail next turn. They got us a couple points because they were so quick (the fiends) as well as helping in shutting down a psychic power with their -1 bubble.



Slaanesh is a lot of fun! Now I'm even more inspired to finish modeling my DPs and my Forgeworld KOS.

Tzeentch newbie looking for some tips:
I've been having some trouble dealing with an Biel-Tan Eldar player.

The guy is drafting mostly infantry and elites. Lots of Swooping Hawks, Dark Reapers, Dire Avengers and Warp Spiders make up the bulk of his army.

The high amount of shots he's able to output wears down my 4++ dudes quickly, and his high mobility makes target saturation hard to achieve. I find I spend a lot of the game chasing after his blob as it retreats into terrain that's harder for me to maneuver.

He uses a warlock + Farseer combo who are able to shut down a large part of my casting as well while easily get off their own spells with the full re-rolls, getting my juicy targets taken down by doom.

He deploys 50% of his army in DS, only puts down stuff like Dire Avengers and dark reapers on the board.

--

So really my question is: What troops should I focus on when fighting stuff like this? I usually deploy 1-3 DP's + 1-3 Exalted Flamers, with 20xPinks and 50xbrims being the bulk of my army, supported by staff heralds where the +1 STR is needed.

I'm considering getting another group of 20xpinks + maybe going with Blue Scribes & Chariot Herald to counter his spellcasting.

But maybe the problem lies in how I'm playing. I never know when to Hide and grab objectives and when to attack :p

I would suggest investing in some Nurglings - their deployment rules mean they are super effective at blocking deep strikers.

Otherwise as you have already suggested, add more Pinks to increase your Dakka. Make a 30 man unit and deep strike them in. If you can't get close enough to fight then shooting is your only other option.
Also look at using spells that you can cast while keeping your caster outside of 24" of the enemy psyker if you are having difficulties with denial. For example, casting Flickering Flames on your pink horrors. And don't forget you can always add +1 to the Horror's invulnerable save. It would reduce your casualties by 1/3rd.
Depending on how lucky you feel you can always try for the crapshoot - Treason of Tzeentch on one of his characters. You can back it up with Gaze of Fate and a command point reroll.

The Blue Scribes and Chariots are unlikely to reduce spellcasting. They have a 12" and 9" range respectively. However, they can force your opponent to manoeuvre into unfavourable positions if they need to get spells off.


As to what to focus on, I find whatever will reduce the most shooting from the enemy. So have a look at his army and work out which units put out the most pain, and how likely you are to kill them.
Pink Horrors with a +1 str will wound Eldar infantry on a 3+. With Flickering Flames they are now wounding on a 2+

The other thing you can do is avoid being shot in the first place. Have a read of this. It might give you some ideas on what you can do.


*re-reads post* Sorry for the stream of consciousness, but hopefully that gives you some ideas.

JakeSiren wrote:
I would suggest investing in some Nurglings - their deployment rules mean they are super effective at blocking deep strikers.

Otherwise as you have already suggested, add more Pinks to increase your Dakka. Make a 30 man unit and deep strike them in. If you can't get close enough to fight then shooting is your only other option.
Also look at using spells that you can cast while keeping your caster outside of 24" of the enemy psyker if you are having difficulties with denial. For example, casting Flickering Flames on your pink horrors. And don't forget you can always add +1 to the Horror's invulnerable save. It would reduce your casualties by 1/3rd.
Depending on how lucky you feel you can always try for the crapshoot - Treason of Tzeentch on one of his characters. You can back it up with Gaze of Fate and a command point reroll.

The Blue Scribes and Chariots are unlikely to reduce spellcasting. They have a 12" and 9" range respectively. However, they can force your opponent to manoeuvre into unfavourable positions if they need to get spells off.


As to what to focus on, I find whatever will reduce the most shooting from the enemy. So have a look at his army and work out which units put out the most pain, and how likely you are to kill them.
Pink Horrors with a +1 str will wound Eldar infantry on a 3+. With Flickering Flames they are now wounding on a 2+

The other thing you can do is avoid being shot in the first place. Have a read of this. It might give you some ideas on what you can do.


*re-reads post* Sorry for the stream of consciousness, but hopefully that gives you some ideas.

Thanks a lot, these tips are very helpful to me!

 knas wrote:
Tzeentch newbie looking for some tips:
I've been having some trouble dealing with an Biel-Tan Eldar player.

The guy is drafting mostly infantry and elites. Lots of Swooping Hawks, Dark Reapers, Dire Avengers and Warp Spiders make up the bulk of his army.

The high amount of shots he's able to output wears down my 4++ dudes quickly, and his high mobility makes target saturation hard to achieve. I find I spend a lot of the game chasing after his blob as it retreats into terrain that's harder for me to maneuver.

He uses a warlock + Farseer combo who are able to shut down a large part of my casting as well while easily get off their own spells with the full re-rolls, getting my juicy targets taken down by doom.

He deploys 50% of his army in DS, only puts down stuff like Dire Avengers and dark reapers on the board.

--

So really my question is: What troops should I focus on when fighting stuff like this? I usually deploy 1-3 DP's + 1-3 Exalted Flamers, with 20xPinks and 50xbrims being the bulk of my army, supported by staff heralds where the +1 STR is needed.

I'm considering getting another group of 20xpinks + maybe going with Blue Scribes & Chariot Herald to counter his spellcasting.

But maybe the problem lies in how I'm playing. I never know when to Hide and grab objectives and when to attack :p

Using the brims as area denial is a good start for sure. Nurglings however would work better in this instance, especially in the numbers your talking about taking.

Follow that up with target saturation. He has dark reapers and avengers on the board. If that's all he has and you cover the board in nurglings he won't be able to drop his other stuff anywhere other than his own area.

Now reapers will have long range but avengers are only 18", you should be able to easily drop your own squad of 20 pinks into range of them. Drop a tzeentch Herald (forget it's new name) with Flickering flames you should be able to wipe a bunch of avengers out, don't forget you can split fire.

I also like taking flamers, in small squads of 3 they are cheap and fast but can really hurt base infantry, but if your opponent wants to waste reaper shots on flamers more power to them. They may only get one round of shooting, but it should be one really good round.

Other than that, I would basic troop spam him. Multiple squads of seekers, or bloodletters, anything that has speed and hitting power so you can make him hurt once he hits would be how I would go about it. Deamons are glass cannons, but you can really do a lot of damage if things get there.

Alternatively you could go super pack, deamon princes, skull cannons, maybe a greater deamon of tzeench with the impossible robe and the -1 wound taken warlord trait for survivability and psychic shenanigans.

Quick rules check needed to make sure I'm not missing anything. I know the CD stratagems were FAQ'd to only work on Daemon faction keyword units, but what about the Daemonic Loci that CD Characters get as a CD Detachment bonus?

As an example, as far as I can see, if I have a Nurgle CD detachment, the Locus of Virulence would also affect Death Guard and CSM Nurgle Daemon units including things like bloat drones and oblits to give their attacks +1 damage on a 6+ to wound. Could work well for units with a high volume of shots or attacks.

Only the stratagems are faction restricted.
Everything else works as written.

Yeah, if you’re dropping an Obliterator bomb then a DS Poxbringer is a nice investment of a CP. (You’ve got your two Nurgling units and Plaguebearers to screen, and Epidemius to troll, right?)

Bonus: tag in a tri-lobe of Blight-haulers and a Bloat-drone or two. And a DP (or a teleporting Terminator Lord) for more hits.

Also works on Mortarion. (What’s the exact flow when you’ve got Virulent Blessing and Blades of Putrefaction and a Locus active?)