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.

Ouch, Stelek. The hidden downside of all-metal horde armies.

Hordes can hammer it, but will they find it an easier fight than against most lists? If so, why?

Since the LA GT will use 5th ed rules, and daemons are essentially a 5th ed book judging by its wording, I would take daemons.
Not because you will have the best chance with them, but because we can see how well a 5th ed codex and a 5th ed rules will fare against 4th ed codecies using 5th ed rules.

After looking at the Daemons codex today - I'd go with your Tzeentch daemons idea. I think that one has some serious potential.

There are a couple of things that worry me about Demons

#1. Viability. No one knows if they can match up to top tier lists or not, or if they are really as bad as some people think they are.

#2. They have such a unique play style that I do no know if I can get in enough practice games with them to get accustom to the army. In is not like Witchhunters where they play like a lot of Imperial armies+ faith points. There so much about the tactics of that army that no one has even scratched the surface of them yet.


It does seem to be a bit of a challenge though, so I might do it just for that.

Seriously, give Janthkin a call and talk to him about how he used to play his Lustwing. There's a lot of parallels there. I think you'd have fun with that.

Also, if you're planning to run all-foot sisters, I think that you're not going to find them nearly as simple as you think. Just using faith is an art form...when there was a sisters player locally, it took a while before he figured out the tricks to doing so. And throwing down 120 sisters with 3 exorcists is going to be a bit problematic, because the strongest Sisters build is a Mech one, and I'd don't see that changing in 40K 5.

I was joking about foot sisters.

My plan was to take a lot of Inqs for Emperor's Tarot and the Sisters book of deployment zone and a lot of heavy bolters+Exorcists.

tegeus-Cromis wrote:Ouch, Stelek. The hidden downside of all-metal horde armies.

Hordes can hammer it, but will they find it an easier fight than against most lists? If so, why?

Which fight where? I had more problems with tanks in the old days, but if you play to ignore them and have heavy B rets, you can destroy most hordes (and anything else).

I'm not sure what you mean by easier fight--do you mean hordes vs most lists? Or foot sisters vs most lists?

Foot sisters took a back seat in 4th, but in 5th...I hope not to run into it.

While I love Sisters of Battle, it would be really cool to see how Daemons will play. Having an experienced player using such an army would allow us dakka folks to see how it runs.

Besides...Isn't fun to do something different?

The problem with demons is immediately evident in it's concept. You basically have half of a drop pod marine army, without the armor saves and general toughness to keep you alive through the round of shooting you're going to take the turn you deep strike. Couple that with half of your army having a chance at not showing up for 4 turns (I'm assuming the pdf is still correct and reserves show automatically on turn 5) and you get something that has the potential to work, but only when everything goes your way. As a tournament army, you generally want something more reliable.

Blackmoor wrote:I was joking about foot sisters.

My plan was to take a lot of Inqs for Emperor's Tarot and the Sisters book of deployment zone and a lot of heavy bolters+Exorcists.

Oh...ha ha...er...

How are you getting the HBs? Retributors means less Exorcists, and Celestians means less troops...

Centurian99 wrote:

Blackmoor wrote:I was joking about foot sisters.

My plan was to take a lot of Inqs for Emperor's Tarot and the Sisters book of deployment zone and a lot of heavy bolters+Exorcists.

Oh...ha ha...er...

How are you getting the HBs? Retributors means less Exorcists, and Celestians means less troops...

I was going to take 2-3 Inqs with Gun servitors. That makes for a lot of fire power you can send down range. It has the added benefit of being a part of the army that you can convert, and you can make interesting models for them without trying to hack you way through metal models.

I was thinking about one squad of Retributors because they can use faith points where the Inqs can't, but it is better to have more Exorcists (and they are cheaper too).

Sounds interesting. Kyoto-pattern inquisitors return!

Don't forget that celestians also gain a massive boost with preferred enemy. Plus having Init 4 and WS 4 helps as well. In my list I run 3 celestian squads. A big counter assault one, and 2 small shooty ones. My list always has an 8 man retributor squad. With divine guidance, they are awesome. Now that horde orks are really making a showing in tournies, you will need them. I'd make the kyoto pattern =I= an HQ one. Give him the Book of deployment zone choosing. With 5th edition Tarot isn't as useful since the way the missions/ setup works now. The celestians will be needed for faith and also they are way more durable over the course of a game. Light of the Emperor will be most useful when the unit gets below scoring...it will serve as a VP denial device for you.

Capt K

Tarot isn't as useful? Are you on crack? Gimme some!

Tarot still helps you. Going first or second does matter, especially to a shooty army.

Umm, doesn't Tarot give a bonus to a roll that no longer exists in 5ed? Or are we assuming an FAQ will rectify that? Or am I missing something?

In 4th edition it works great. In 5th edition, the way you take the first turn isn't a straight D6 roll anymore...at least not in the 5th ed PDF version I have...so no Tarot doesn't work anymore in 5th. The Liber though, should still work.

Capt K

Stelek wrote:Tarot isn't as useful? Are you on crack? Gimme some!

Tarot still helps you. Going first or second does matter, especially to a shooty army.

Until it's FAQ'd nobody knows if the Tarot works or not.

Hey Blackmoor,
I was looking at your "Blackmoor goes to the Las Vegas GT" article, which is a great read by the way, and one thing you said caught my attention. In the "Army Tiers" section of "Selecting an Army", you say:

"All armies are not created equal. There are good armies, ok armies and bad armies. Since the GTs have abandoned comp scoring, there is no longer affirmative action for bad armies. If you are looking to win, you would be better served to take one of the hardest/cheesiest armies available to you."

I wouldn't say that the GTs have abandoned comp scoring... I would say nearly abandoned, but not completely.

In the "Sportsmanship" points category under "Game Play", it says:

"Do you think your opponent built an army based on the theme of the relevant gaming universe and supplied background for that army (as opposed to a force built purely for winning with little or no regard to that army’s established background)? 1 Point "

So, certain army builds that are "unfluffy" or cheesy could lose a point here. Thoughts?

EpilepticMoose wrote:
I wouldn't say that the GTs have abandoned comp scoring... I would say nearly abandoned, but not completely.

In the "Sportsmanship" points category under "Game Play", it says:

"Do you think your opponent built an army based on the theme of the relevant gaming universe and supplied background for that army (as opposed to a force built purely for winning with little or no regard to that army’s established background)? 1 Point "

So, certain army builds that are "unfluffy" or cheesy could lose a point here. Thoughts?

There are 2 sportsmanship scores that are subjective and can be classified as “comp”:

Do you think your opponent built an army based on the theme of the relevant gaming universe and supplied background for that army (as opposed to a force built purely for winning with little or no regard to that army’s established background)? 1 Point

Win or lose, was this person the type of opponent you look forward to playing again? 1 Point

So, in theory you can lose 2 points a game from sportsmanship by bring a hard army that is way over the top. What you need to remember is how many battle points you can win by getting massacres. When you compare the risk vs. reward of losing 2 points to bettering your odds of getting a much larger victory, it is well worth it to ignore the comp scores.

Even then you might not get knocked down if you are a fun guy to play, and can put a good spin on your army.

The poll closes in about 24 hours.

It looks like it will come down to Witch Hunters vs. Demons.

I have to pick up my Demon codex tomorrow, and see if there is anything that blows me away.

I think the Witch Hunters army is a good all around list that can win games vs hordes and elite armies.

I haven't read through the whole thread cause I'm in a hurry, so forgive me if you've already discounted the pre-heresy sons army, but I think you could model the oblits based on the old, smaller RT era dreadnoughts and have them fit the theme.