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.

Well, it's not like you can't fit berserkers in a dual lash/9 oblits anyway.

Armies that rely on shooting fail when they can't use that shooting - engage multiple units in close combat using some hardcore delivery method like Landraiders or dropping directly into combat.

Armies that rely on "abusing the multiwound allocation rules" fail when confronted by volume of fire/attacks. Ditto with jetbike Seer Councils. Re-rollable Invulnerable saves are nice, but on a 4+, you'll still fail roughly 1/4 saving throws you take. Volume of fire, volume of fire, volume of fire.

Armies that rely on Lashes of Submission fail when confronted with mechanized troops and heavy armour. First you shoot up the Obliterators/Defilers/Demolishers, then you shoot up the Daemon Princes and/or assault the Chaos Sorcerers.

A Berzerker list can murder a Dual-Lash list. The Land Raiders put the Obliterators down with Lascannons in the first few turns, and then drive in to deliver shattering charges by the Berzerkers. It's pretty point and click.

Quality CC armies with some shooting abilities rule in 5th edition. Pure CC will have its problems mostly due to the low cost orcs (soon IG) and not being able to consolidate into CC. However, ask the Tau and Necrons how they like 5th edition.

When the best I can get out of shooting is a morale test out of you but in HTH the casualty difference either turns into you running or taking some bonus wounds, there is no comparison. CC rules.

The Lash + Oblits is nice but it is not all powerful, it is just almost idiot proof therefore it works. They are going to suffer against mech lists with raiders. Oblits are a lot of shots but they don't eat through landraiders unless they are up close and to do that, they are in easy charge range of the berzerkers inside.

There's no such thing as "almost idiot proof". Where there's an idiot, there's a way he'll screw things up.

I believe the better term there would be 'very forgiving.'

Regardless, I take Possessed and Lessers (as many Chaos frequenters should know by now). CC is very viable, but it always needs some range support. The delivery system is the thing you have to get down though. Try to take a Landraider where you can get away with it (Termies, Possessed, decked out Chosen).

I honestly this thread was going to be a rickroll or something

But have you been playing the same 5th edition that I have been?

Assault is far more powerful than Shooting, if only for the simple fact that you get negatives for loosing combat.

Units that used to be able to last a few turns in 4ed, are now gone in one charge. And since charging multiple units is by no means difficult to do, you can literally destroy whole sections of an army in one charge... Show me shoot armies than can match this level of destruction.


Here is hoping that the new IG codex will help balance the books

CC is much more cutthroat now 5th has come along.
It's no longer banging at each other's armour for the whole game.
It's one side wins, the other side looses, they all get slaughtered.
YAY!

I love my Zerkers, they are amazing in CC definitely my "prettiest" unit

Don't count out the value "running" has added to CC armies... instead of trudging along each turn the same 6", they can now zip across the board up to 12" in a single turn, on foot! This lent an unprecedented amount of mobility to the standard footslogging unit, such as the nefariously cheap ork hordes. It almost makes transports and mech armies obsolete, imho.

I watched 10 Bezerkers with a PF Champ charge out of a Land Raider on turn two into 4 full units of Firewarriors, and roll every single one of them with Combat Res.

Of course, a bag of marshmellows could do the same thing in CC, but the Zerkers did it with style.

The trick with CC armies is to charge multiple units at once to tie them up, the days of eating a unit and consolidating into another are gone, you've gotta reach out and grab the enemy on the charge.

Are CC armies viable in 5th because CC in 3rd was horrible? Am I reading this right?

I didn't get that coclusion from the thread. IIRC, 3rd edition was about the various types of Rhino rushes with what ever color MEQ one chose (prior to the Trial Vehicle and Assault Rules).

Shooting has drastically changed for armies in this edition. True shooting armies have become difficult to manage as the sheer amount of shooting in a list that has become necessary. It is offset somewhat because of the lack of consolidation into another unit. However, I don't feel getting into assault is difficult and that is where I've been able to do the real damage to another's army.

Personally, if an army has weak assault capability, it's a very difficult army to win with in this edition.

Sarigar wrote:
Personally, if an army has weak assault capability, it's a very difficult army to win with in this edition.

Yes, Tau for example.

Tau don't need an assault ability. They can have a very effective screen of Kroot against hardcore assault armies, to make sure that the enemy assault troops consolidate inside of a Tau kill-zone. Against shooty armies, the Kroot make pretty decent assault troops.

The tricky for firepower armies is to shoot and scoot. You systematically dismantle the opponent's army, and then run your screen in to protect your shooters from retaliation. Rinse, repeat.

Nurglitch wrote:
Armies that rely on "abusing the multiwound allocation rules" fail when confronted by volume of fire/attacks. Ditto with jetbike Seer Councils. Re-rollable Invulnerable saves are nice, but on a 4+, you'll still fail roughly 1/4 saving throws you take. Volume of fire, volume of fire, volume of fire.

80 Marines firing at 9 unique Nob Bikers + 1 Warboss

Shooting
80 shots
52.8 hits
18ish wounds

Allocation
Nobs allocate 1 wounds to 2 Bikers
Nobs allocate 2 wounds to 7 Bikers
Warboss allocates 2 wounds to himself
Total 18 wounds allocated

2 Nobs with 1 wound allocated save 4+/4+ = No Deaths, possibly 1 wound
7 Nobs with 2 wounds allocated save 4+/4+ = No Deaths, possibly 1 wound on 3 Nob Bikers
Warboss with 2 wounds save 4+/4+ = Possible 1 wound


80 Marines all in range and firing 80 bolters doesn't kill a Nob.

By way of comparison

4 LC shots kills 2 Nob Bikers

Multi-wound models with FNP warrant heavy weapons. Multitude of fire does not work against these units.



/Takes no responsibility for late night math

Your math is off... but only because you've allocated too many wounds ST4 vs. T5 is 1/3 chance to wound, so for 53 hits (rounding) you're only wounding 16 times. Since it's a minimum of 8 squads of marines firing, he's going to allocate as many wounds as possible to un-wounded models... so with 4+ with 4+ re-roll you're looking at 4 wounded bikers on average, and none dead.

Ergo, if some number of bolters causes wounds and some number of Lascannons causes wounds, firing both is better than firing either one, correct? Volume of fire doesn't mean using popguns instead of big guns, it means pouring firepower onto a unit until that unit is dead.

I believe that is pretty much true regarding shooting: shoot the unit until it is gone.

However, with many missions turning out to be holding objectives, shooting armies still have to hold or contest objectives. This is where problems can and do arise. Not saying it is impossible, but units need to at least be durable in some capacity (Stubborn, great armor saves, high toughness, high # of wounds etc...)

Nurglitch wrote:Ergo, if some number of bolters causes wounds and some number of Lascannons causes wounds, firing both is better than firing either one, correct? Volume of fire doesn't mean using popguns instead of big guns, it means pouring firepower onto a unit until that unit is dead.

It would be better to fire the bolters at a unit that they can hurt. If a unit can't fire for effect because it has no good targets for the turn, it should be maneuvering into a better position to apply pressure to the enemy.

willydstyle wrote:Your math is off... but only because you've allocated too many wounds ST4 vs. T5 is 1/3 chance to wound, so for 53 hits (rounding) you're only wounding 16 times. Since it's a minimum of 8 squads of marines firing, he's going to allocate as many wounds as possible to un-wounded models... so with 4+ with 4+ re-roll you're looking at 4 wounded bikers on average, and none dead.

Doh, goood catch...I forgot to add their toughness buff. Makes the bolters even more useless

Nurglitch wrote:Ergo, if some number of bolters causes wounds and some number of Lascannons causes wounds, firing both is better than firing either one, correct? Volume of fire doesn't mean using popguns instead of big guns, it means pouring firepower onto a unit until that unit is dead.

Of course it doesn't. The point of firing heavy weapons at Nobs is;

They won't get FNP
They will suffer insta-death

In addition, I would warn against mixing non-ap weaponry in a shooting phase with high-AP weaponry. For an example;

Plague Marines fire at two terminators, one has an assault cannon, one has a storm bolter. If the Plague Marine player chooses to shoot all of his weaponry and does 2 melta wounds and 5 bolter wounds, the marine player could;

Stack 2 Melta and one bolter on one term
Stack 2 bolter rounds on the Assault Cannon Term

Whereas, if the Plague Marine player chose to not shoot his bolters, the loyalist player would be forced to give a melta to each term. In many situations, it is to your advantage to not mix a great deal of rapid fire, low AP weaponry with your high AP weaponry against smaller squads. Nob Bikers will exemplify this, as their entire unit is complex...and as you wear them down they are able to take advantage of this more and more. Guard will especially feel this bite if they roll well with their flashlights alongside Heavy/Special weapons.

If 80 bolters will only inflict 4 wounds and not kill a single Nob, does it make sense to waste 80 bolters on the Nobs? You are playing a game with limited resources and how you spend them each turn determines if you win/lose.

wow, so many people seem to think lash is the best thing in the world at the moment 0_o
its somewhat annoying, but thats the extent of it all.

what is lash going to do to 3 units of zerkers loaded into rhino's?

a pure khornate army is not only great fun, but can do serious damage.
everything needs a transport, take a LR if you feel you need a bit of shooting, other than that units of zerkers loaded into rhino's does the job.



as for shooting being good: look at tau
they suck at the moment, shooting does not really help them.

due to cover saves, CC is miles better than shooting if you want to start bringing up a high kill total.

Hollismason wrote:They work really well it seems in large 20 plus numbers and are pretty decent with a lash as you can move troops toward you then assault them so on foot they are not to bad as they can run.

The whole idea of a Khorne beserker amy being led by daemon princes or socrerors of Slaanesh makes Trenchie cry. Two opposed chaos powers in the same army? What's the world coming to?

TR

Trench-Raider wrote:

Hollismason wrote:They work really well it seems in large 20 plus numbers and are pretty decent with a lash as you can move troops toward you then assault them so on foot they are not to bad as they can run.

The whole idea of a Khorne beserker amy being led by daemon princes or socrerors of Slaanesh makes Trenchie cry. Two opposed chaos powers in the same army? What's the world coming to?

TR

What's this about "opposed chaos powers"?

willydstyle wrote:

Trench-Raider wrote:

Hollismason wrote:They work really well it seems in large 20 plus numbers and are pretty decent with a lash as you can move troops toward you then assault them so on foot they are not to bad as they can run.

The whole idea of a Khorne beserker amy being led by daemon princes or socrerors of Slaanesh makes Trenchie cry. Two opposed chaos powers in the same army? What's the world coming to?

TR

What's this about "opposed chaos powers"?

Is that sarcasm, or are you actually asking? I don't care either way, but don't want to waste my time typing up an explanation about how the chaos powers interact in the fluff if I don't need to.

Actually the whole mindset that does not bat an eye at mixed god chaos armies any more might make for an interesting thread.

TR

I'm not really sure what 'Trenchie' was talking about because I'm tired, not because he's incompetent [watever]

Chaos always fights among itself, they are stupid (this is from my daemon knowledge, marines might be dif, anyways)

The only time Chaos goes into the materium is when there is power to be gained so they will all go there mutually aligned looking to bring more power to the warp...

Anyways, Chaos Daemons are the most badass CC army ever. Just don't be a crusher mass tool like most Daemon players, they bring a bad name to the warp.

...which is why we hired the marines to do our bidding for us. They aren't quite as good but hey, who doesn't like a 3+ armor save with the new Hellguns comin' out? ^.~

I digress, daemons are the way to go in CC

I was being sarcastic... but serious as well. There is no mention in any of the current books of the ancient enemies rules. Also... if you are too look at the 2nd ed chaos codex, while they DID mention the ancient enemies rules, there were no hard limitations written into the list, so really, we've just gone back to 2nd ed style mixed-god armies. Anyways... my point is that the fluff and rules for Ancient Enemies has been in flux over the years. Currently it doesn't exist, so to begrudge a chaos player of the tools in his codex because of fluff that doesn't exist any more is silly... especially since those limitations have been removed at times in the past as well.