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.

Hmm, probably just my experience with flamers that makes me biased against them, but the few times I've used them they either get shot to death by lasguns, or assaulted and killed by guardsmen. In KP missions against Guard, they aren't as good as I thought they'd be. But I like the idea of 'trading' the flamers for a problem enemy unit. Again, having Guard as one of my opponents doesn't help me in that department.

Observation: The invulnerable saves appear to make Daemons very luck-reliant, which is probably also why I suck when using them. I'm just hoping for the game where my Daemonettes make all of their invulnerable saves, and actually survive a shooting phase.

I figure I'll either run 3 princes or 2 grinders, since they're roughly the same points.

Oops, shoulda said 3 Grinders. Anyway, I went with 2 grinders and 1 prince, since I figured going all one would be boring and ultra-cheese, and I want some variety.

On the note of naked princes, is it ever useful to take one or two of them?

I don't think naked princes are worth their points. At the very least, give it iron hide for a 3+ save, and it will survive considerably longer.

But, I also think other upgrades have their place. Consider what you're paying for with a daemon prince - it's basically a statline + eternal warrior, it doesn't have anything. That statline includes the best BS in the codex, so it seems like a bit of a waste not to give it something to shoot. At WS7, you have a better fighter than even the HQs of most codexes, so bumping your S up to six isn't a bad idea either.


As for the invul save thing. - they don't make you more luck-reliant, they actually make you less luck reliant. Just assume you'll lose 2/3rds of any wounds you take.

CatPeeler wrote:

jsullivanlaw wrote:I don't like horrors, they seem to underperform for me.

How have you been running them? I run them in squads of 10 with bolt That's 27 warpfire dice plus the bolt, which absolutely chews through anything with AV10 or armor 4+. They're a great tag-team unit against bikes, too. The Changeling is just gravy...

I've tried running units of 10 with bolt and 2 units of 5 with bolt. The problem i have is the BS3. They get lots of shots but also miss a lot, what usually happens is they shoot and maybe kill some guardsman or a couple marines and then get hosed down with return fire. At 17 points each the trade off is never in my favor.

Hmm, I was thinking an 80pt MC with 4 wounds and eternal warrior could be worth running around as a distraction or something, just since I think they end up costing a little more than they're worth with upgrades.

RE: Invulnerable saves, aren't we paying to make the save invulnerable though? I'd rather have a 4+ regular than a 5++, or a regular 5+ and not pay the premium (on evercosted Daemonettes... yep, I'm bitter).

Does anyone know if GW is even planning a new Daemons codex? I'd like to see them make special mini-dexes for each Chaos god, with a named GD each (ie. a SLAANESH one as well). Emperor knows there are enough Chapter specific ones out there (each different coloured marine MUST have his own codex; 'Ooo, my shoulder pad has a mauve trim instead of a purple one, I'm part of the Mauve Angels Chapter, complete with Codex, and I exist so Space Marines can reach 99% of total sales. The Polka Dot Marines will be released next week to snag that extra 1%.')

I like hyperbole.

jsullivanlaw wrote:I've tried running units of 10 with bolt and 2 units of 5 with bolt. The problem i have is the BS3. They get lots of shots but also miss a lot, what usually happens is they shoot and maybe kill some guardsman or a couple marines and then get hosed down with return fire. At 17 points each the trade off is never in my favor.

Hmm. 10 w/bolt is my standard, and I'm having great luck with them. Are you dropping them aggressively? I typically place them so that they're only facing off against one enemy unit, which usually makes the return fire a non-issue (against armor 4+, AV10, or a small squad size, anyway). If you keep them supported with a unit of bloodletters or daemonettes, you should be able to drop them near MEQ's without much worry, too.

Helmann wrote:Does anyone know if GW is even planning a new Daemons codex?

The current version came out right before 5th, right? I wouldn't hold your breath. 6th or even 7th edition (!) will probably come sooner.

I think alot of people get into the habit of "i'm playing this god so I can't use the other units in this codex no matter what" what you need to do is move away from the idea of a mono-god list and start mixing them together.

However Tzeentch is the exception to the rule as far as mono-god lists go as unlike the other units in the codex Tzeentch units can start wreaking utter havoc with shooting attacks while the other gods need to wait a turn to do most of their fancy tricks.

First things first most of the codex art is awful! It makes me cringe!(Exepct for the pieces of, "proper", artwork like the plague bearers fighting cadian guardsmen.)

Playwise I agree with the others.

1) Daemonettes are to expensive
2) Bloodletters are awesome combat monsters
3) Plaguebearers and Horrors are great for holding for holding objectives while your MC move in for the kill
4) Soul Grinders!!

CatPeeler wrote:

jsullivanlaw wrote:I've tried running units of 10 with bolt and 2 units of 5 with bolt. The problem i have is the BS3. They get lots of shots but also miss a lot, what usually happens is they shoot and maybe kill some guardsman or a couple marines and then get hosed down with return fire. At 17 points each the trade off is never in my favor.

Hmm. 10 w/bolt is my standard, and I'm having great luck with them. Are you dropping them aggressively? I typically place them so that they're only facing off against one enemy unit, which usually makes the return fire a non-issue (against armor 4+, AV10, or a small squad size, anyway). If you keep them supported with a unit of bloodletters or daemonettes, you should be able to drop them near MEQ's without much worry, too.

Helmann wrote:Does anyone know if GW is even planning a new Daemons codex?

The current version came out right before 5th, right? I wouldn't hold your breath. 6th or even 7th edition (!) will probably come sooner.

I try to be smart about deploying the horrors, trying to keep them in range of the target and avoiding a lot of fire from other units. My most common opponents are guard though and a 50 man blob squad will soak up the fire from 10 horrors without flinching and will proceed to destroy the horrors in the return volley. Maybe i will kill 10 guardsman if i am lucky but then the 10 horrors will die to return fire and the horrors cost 3 times that of a guardsman.

jsullivanlaw wrote:I try to be smart about deploying the horrors, trying to keep them in range of the target and avoiding a lot of fire from other units. My most common opponents are guard though and a 50 man blob squad will soak up the fire from 10 horrors without flinching and will proceed to destroy the horrors in the return volley. Maybe i will kill 10 guardsman if i am lucky but then the 10 horrors will die to return fire and the horrors cost 3 times that of a guardsman.

Oh, well sure. 50 guardsmen won't die by 10 of *any* infantry's shooting. Even if you hit and wound with every shot, that's still 20 guardsmen to frf/srf back.

If you're going to drop 10 horrors and shoot them at a 50-man blob squad, you have one of two choices: direct a bunch of other shooting at them as well (phlegm, for example), or make damned sure you're able to assault them that same turn.

CatPeeler wrote:

jsullivanlaw wrote:I try to be smart about deploying the horrors, trying to keep them in range of the target and avoiding a lot of fire from other units. My most common opponents are guard though and a 50 man blob squad will soak up the fire from 10 horrors without flinching and will proceed to destroy the horrors in the return volley. Maybe i will kill 10 guardsman if i am lucky but then the 10 horrors will die to return fire and the horrors cost 3 times that of a guardsman.

Oh, well sure. 50 guardsmen won't die by 10 of *any* infantry's shooting. Even if you hit and wound with every shot, that's still 20 guardsmen to frf/srf back.

If you're going to drop 10 horrors and shoot them at a 50-man blob squad, you have one of two choices: direct a bunch of other shooting at them as well (phlegm, for example), or make damned sure you're able to assault them that same turn.

The orders really get me here. The guardsman can double tap at 24 range with orders so its hard to stay out of their line of fire. While this can be avoided by having multiple targets, the 20/30 man guard squads are more a problem.

The current version came out right before 5th, right? I wouldn't hold your breath. 6th or even 7th edition (!) will probably come sooner.

Graah! If they knew they were gonna release 5th ed. right after, why did they nerf rending, thus making Daemonettes overpriced/crap? You're right, I'll have to wait for 6th/7th ed. before they correct Slaanesh.

I'm probably be testing out my maxed out Fiends/Grinders list next weekend... if it doesn't work, I'm going back to my Guard, and my Slaanesh daemons probably won't see light 'til next edition/codex. Sure, I'd probably do a lot better mixing other gods in, but I really don't like their style.

I agree with jsullivanlaw about Guardsmen (I started another rant about them here http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/251054.page). Orders suck/are awesome. Why can't my Black Templars use 'orders' to get an extra bolter shot. Surely they're equally if not more disciplined than a lowly Guardsmen. Although I tend to think massing them into a giant blob is just asking for my fiends to get in there and run the whole lot down. In the games I've played so far, my 10-thing squads of Daemonettes usually get shot down to 1-2 by the time they reach CC, but then they end up chasing down/killing a whole squad of 10 by themselves. Same goes for Seekers, except there's usually only one left after shooting. This is alright against Guard, but I shudder to think what would happen against decent enemy CC troops.

Helmann, Slaanesh can't be overpowered in 40k because it's overpowered in WHFB, and only $50 models are allowed to be overpowered in both games.

On the other hand, think about it this way: When the codex came out, rending was overpowered and that lead some people to stock up on rending. Then 5th edition came out, and rending wasn't overpowered anymore, so the people looking for overpowered armies had to go get new figures. Imagine the codex writer rushing into the GW office and breathlessly reporting that problem, and then try to imagine the response.

Not really after an overpowered army, just one that isn't crap, and has pretty, naked female daemons. I do realise that I've chosen a 'glass cannon' army with mono-Slaanesh, but I'm hoping to make a viable army out of them with lots of advice from you guys.

At the moment it seems the Soul Grinders are the core of my army. In two of my games, all I had left were my Grinders, and they end up doing the most damage too. I'm disappointed that all my Slaanesh units actually rarely survive a battle at all, and it's my uber non-god-aligned mechanical monstrosities that do (are they non-aligned?).

About rending, there will always be people who will max out there armies to take advantage of one aspect of the game (CheeseHammer), so I think it's silly if they changed the rule just because of that. I imagine that the issue of Daemonettes and rending just fell through the cracks, which seems to happen a lot with GW, however there seems to be a cycle when it comes to what's 'overpowered' in 40k. I just have to bide my time in the Warp...

Overpowerd in in WHFB, you say? I gotta get me some movement trays...

Are you running Skarbrand? He makes slaaneshi units a hell of a lot more effective.

Hmm, Rage Embodied DOES sound really good (I'm guessing that's why Skarbrand is good), but 300pts? Plus he let's the ENEMY re-roll as well? Why does everything cost so much, dammit! Had a game recently against Eldar, KoS vs Avatar. Pretty even fight... except avatar is 45pts less, comes with a shooting attack, has a 3+ in addition to a 4++ Sv, WS10, makes everyone Fearless etc etc.

Is it even reasonable to play Daemons at low points levels? My gaming group rarely plays above 1250-1500pts, but usually we play 1000pt games, and paying 200pts for a naked KoS really hurts (esp. in situation mentioned above).

Also, would it be considered cheese to run 3 Soul Grinders at 1000pts? I don't think it would, given the fragile and expensive nature of the rest of my army. Soul Grinders seem to be one of the few things that are decent points-for-killyness wise (although I'm still annoyed over I, WS AND BS 3. C'mon, one of those stats should be a 4).

Why is Skarbrand so good?
Daemonettes versus Marines without rerolls: 1 in every 12 attacks rends, and an additional 1 in 12 attacks wounds.
Daemonettes versus Marines with rerolls: 1 in every 8 attacks rends and an additional 1 in 8 attacks wounds.

The enemy only gets to benefit if they're still alive at their initiative step. Sure, Skarbrand's re-rolls might be a liability against some foes, but keep in mind that Skarbrand is also a monstrous creature with S9 on the charge, and that re-roll to hit works against vehicles, too.

A Space Marine player may not want to take multiple land raiders at 1000 points, but Space Marines are still viable. The same principle applies to Chaos Daemons and greater daemons.

Daemons can be really ugly at 1000 points and below, in the same way that landraiders can be overpowering at that level. You'll hear fewer complaints at 1500 and above, I should think.

Personally, I prefer using my Tau at 1000-1500, and my daemons at anything above that.

1500 eh? That's probably part of my problem then. Playing a fragile, overcosted mono-god army at a points level that doesn't do them any favours. I like making things difficult for myself, don't I?

I think it's time I insist that my opponents get bigger armies then

So what's the minimum points level I should be playing at to use Skarbrand then? I'd like to give him a go, but at 1000-1250pts, I'd rather have more troops.

P.S. Don't be surprised when my next thread is a rant about how my themed mono-Gretchin army is overcosted, totally crap, doesn't perform well at the 500pts level, and GW should re-write me an entire Codex

CatPeeler wrote:Daemons can be really ugly at 1000 points and below, in the same way that landraiders can be overpowering at that level. You'll hear fewer complaints at 1500 and above, I should think.

Personally, I prefer using my Tau at 1000-1500, and my daemons at anything above that.

Surprisingly our local player here claims that daemons only win at high point games (close to 2000)...and recently has been refusing to play at 1250 below games.....just an excuse maybe?

He wins a lot though close to that higher pointage, and he fights mostly marines, which for me the daemon codex is really built against.....

I've played about a dozen games with my Daemons so far (at 1000 and 1250pts), with mixed results. Seem to win a little over half the time, and it's always a really close game whether I win or lose. Everything with a shooting attack owns my poor little Daemonettes, even Orks, so I tend to try and drop them all in my second wave, and even then few survive. Slaanesh help me if they show up first...

Funnily, I've never played against Marines with them, and I've read in a few places that Daemons are meant to be Marine killers.

There's probably a thread on anti-Daemon tactics already, and I did a quick search but couldn't find anything (please direct me there if anyone knows). I'd just like to ask what the preferred deployment method for Daemon opponents is.

My regular opponent likes to spread with guys out inside his deployment zone as much as possible, the idea being to prevent me from dropping in amongst his guys.

My counter to this is just to drop as much as possible on one flank to overload it, and then just roll down the line. I've read that a lot of people deploy everything in one corner when facing Daemons, in order to focus all their firepower. Seems fair enough, but doesn't that just make them extremely vulnerable to templates? My grinders would have a field day with an entire army lumped together in a corner.

How, then, do people deploy? Does it depend what army they're using?

I find my daemons do bets at the 1.5K to 1.75K area.

Helmann wrote:There's probably a thread on anti-Daemon tactics already, and I did a quick search but couldn't find anything (please direct me there if anyone knows). I'd just like to ask what the preferred deployment method for Daemon opponents is.

The two general rules when playing against Daemons are 1) if you win the roll, make the Daemons go first, and 2) don't deploy anything. This is how my regular opponents deal with my list, in any case. I find that if my opponent does anything else, my job is a lot easier.

Another defense which can work if you're playing a fast mechanized army is to try and blanket the field to deny the daemon player any safe deployment. This is easiest with an 10+ raider DE army, though mixed orks or eldar may also be able to pull it off. The basic goal is to force the daemons to rely on 'hit' results or deploy near a table edge.