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.

So I played a game recently where my 2 barebones cultists squads managed to kill a Lictor each and continue on to do greater things, while my Bloodletters deepstriked turn 3, can't shoot, and then were charged and only got 1 attack each.

So, is it just me or are KDK cultists way better than bloodletters?

Cultists get 1 attack base +1 for 2 CCW +1 for counter charge = 3 attacks if they are charged + they get overwatch (and up to 5 each if they charge with rage and you give them +1 attack from blood table) ... and in slaughtercult they usually have feel no pain as well.

Bloodletters have 1 attack base +1 IF they get to charge (which apparently isn't likely if you deepstrike them)

And for me anyway, the bloodletters die just as easily as cultists.

Thoughts? Is it just me, or is anywone else getting much more mileage out of their cultists.

I think cultists have the potential to be more effective if taken in the right formations. Just as barebones CSM vanilla codex, not so much. The FNP and Blood tithe bonus' seem to be pretty crucial in making them comparable to Bloodletters.

Plus, cultists lack any invlun save and only have paper t-shirt +6 save stock.

Although, I've actually had a great time running shooty cultists lately. +1 point for an autogun, within 12" you can force tons of saves on termies and the like.

It really depends on the target. Cultists will do well vs Xenos armies with low saves and toughness. Also against IG. They will drown the enemy in attacks. They don't work as well against MEQ. Sure they get 4 attacks in the first round, provided they charged, but you're still hitting on 4s, wounding on 5s, with a 3+ save. The MEQ will also hit first and cultists die like flies. If you charge 15 cultists into 10 tacticals. Math-hammer says overwatch will kill 2, CC will kill 4. Your 9 cultists left will kill 2 marines. Not bad but you lose combat with a LD check on a 5. Even if you pass, it only goes down from there, your cultists only get 2 attacks after.

Bloodletters on the other hand will shred a tactical squad. ap3 swords, i4, and FC will pretty much wipe out a tactical squad.If you charge 12 bloodletters into 10 tacticals. Math-hammer says overwatch will kill 1. Both swing at the same time. WS5 means you're hitting on 3s, and wounding on 3s with FC. No saves, statistically you will kill the squad. Marines attack back though but only kill 2.

Of course that is mathhammer, you will get variations on the table. The general rule of thumb for me though is Bloodletters vs Marines and Cultists vs Xenos. I bring both in an army most times though.

Bloodletters benefit nicely from a herald in the squad. Everyone swears by the hatred locus, but i like the rage locus because it mitigates early squad losses and their low attack count. I feel like the math would prove the hatred locus better, but i usually only have 6-10 bloodletters left when they get into combat, so i feel like more attacks helps more in that situation. Also, they benefit from banners of blood and chaos icons. Deepstriking them and watching them die sucks, but your opponent was shooting them and not the rest of your list.

Honestly, i thought they would be moved back to T4 and given a slight price hike. But i guess their current models are kinda squishy looking.

When DS, bloodletters won't do more than get shot. I have found that I can reliably get 1 charge per game for every 2 units of bloodletters. If I attach a herald, hatred loci for DS bloodletters or rage loci for Land Raider/ rhino bloodletters.

Were you not aware that Bloodletters were bad? KDK didn't make them better.

KDK actually did make bloodletters better, they no longer have demonic instability.

It did but not by much. Fearless > Daemonic Instability. Blood Tithe > Warp Storm

They can get pretty nasty with Rage, hatred, and FNP.

Point for point cultists seem better. In the scenarios suggested above points arnt taken into account for some reason. Are bloodletters obsec in KDK?

And yeah, deep strike without any tweaks is a trap usr. It seems useful, but that unit instantly becomes a magnet for any template or blast weapons.

 Red Marine wrote:
Point for point cultists seem better. In the scenarios suggested above points arnt taken into account for some reason. Are bloodletters obsec in KDK?

And yeah, deep strike without any tweaks is a trap usr. It seems useful, but that unit instantly becomes a magnet for any template or blast weapons.

Nothing is obsec in a KDK Blood Host Detachment. In a CA Detachment bloodletters are troops and get obsec, same with cultists, marines, and berzerkers.

I only use bloodletters deep strike to lure enemies out of cover to shoot or charge them or to soak up some shooting for a turn, they're really not doing anything otherwise. In a Blood Host you can't choose cultists over them otherwise I would every time.