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 now that with the new book, would it be more favorable to put MoT or MoN on their tanking Chaos Warriors?
Personally I find Nurgle to be very appealing, especially with the lore of nurgle buffs and you can add Festus to give them Regen and Poison attack.

I like Tzeentch for the 3+/5+ in CC, though Nurgle makes super awesome Halberd warriors (there's some discussion in WoC circles of them taking over Khorne halberd warriors). I also hear Tzeentch does well for sword and board marauders.

 PinkSpaceHippy wrote:
I like Tzeentch for the 3+/5+ in CC, though Nurgle makes super awesome Halberd warriors (there's some discussion in WoC circles of them taking over Khorne halberd warriors). I also hear Tzeentch does well for sword and board marauders.

5+ parry is nice, but so is making most people hit you on 5s, tough decision IMO. Throw in a a Miasma from Shadow and they probably hit you on 6s.
Marauders... man, I just dont like them at the price of a DE spear.

Hmmm, lets run a little math at this one.

Ok, lets say you are fighting Empire Halberdiers in horde formation.

Thats 31 Str4 attacks.


Against MoT shield warriors. 31(1/2)(1/2)(1/2)(2/3)=2.58 unsaved wounds

Against MoN warriors. 31(1/3)(1/2)(2/3)=3.44 unsaved wounds

Against MoK warriors. 31(1/2)(1/2)(2/3)=5.16 unsaved wounds


The Nurgle Warriors take almost 50% more wounds than the Tzeentch warriors. And the Khorne warriors take nearely double the wounds.

Now lets see what the tradeoff with damage output is. Assuming a block of 18 that are 6 wide for each.


Tzeentch Shield Warriors. 19(2/3)(2/3)=8.44 unsaved wounds

Nurgle Halberds. 19(2/3)(5/6)=10.55 unsaved wounds.

Khorne Halberds. 25(2/3)(5/6)=13.88 unsaved wounds.

So, taking MoN halberds nets you 25% more wounds against the Halberdiers, but you take 50% more wounds in return.

The MoK halberds do 65% more wounds, while taking almost double the wounds in return.


So overall I would say the MoN halberds are a decent compromise between the MoK and MoT warriors in terms of durability and killing power.

Nurgle is also awesome on Ogres!

 Grey Templar wrote:
Hmmm, lets run a little math at this one.

Ok, lets say you are fighting Empire Halberdiers in horde formation.

Thats 31 Str4 attacks.


Against MoT shield warriors. 31(1/2)(1/2)(1/2)(2/3)=2.58 unsaved wounds
Against MoN warriors. 31(1/3)(1/2)(2/3)=3.44 unsaved wounds
Against MoK warriors. 31(1/2)(1/2)(2/3)=5.16 unsaved wounds


The Nurgle Warriors take almost 50% more wounds than the Tzeentch warriors. And the Khorne warriors take nearely double the wounds.
Now lets see what the tradeoff with damage output is. Assuming a block of 18 that are 6 wide for each.
Tzeentch Shield Warriors. 19(2/3)(2/3)=8.44 unsaved wounds
Nurgle Halberds. 19(2/3)(5/6)=10.55 unsaved wounds.
Khorne Halberds. 25(2/3)(5/6)=13.88 unsaved wounds.
So, taking MoN halberds nets you 25% more wounds against the Halberdiers, but you take 50% more wounds in return.
The MoK halberds do 65% more wounds, while taking almost double the wounds in return.
So overall I would say the MoN halberds are a decent compromise between the MoK and MoT warriors in terms of durability and killing power.

If you compare kills vs losses, khorne wins by the largest margin, and does so much damage that unless the halberds are 45+ strong, they are unlikely to be swinging back at full horde attacks.

But I believe the question the poster posed was nurgle vs tzeench, both sword and board.
Sword and Board Nurgle:
Getting hit: 31 attacks (1/3 hit)(1/2wound)(1/2fail armor)(5/6fail parry)=2.15 wounds suffered.
They hit just like sword and board tzeench, doing 8.44

-Matt

 Grey Templar wrote:
Hmmm, lets run a little math at this one.

Ok, lets say you are fighting Empire Halberdiers in horde formation.

Thats 31 Str4 attacks.


Against MoT shield warriors. 31(1/2)(1/2)(1/2)(2/3)=2.58 unsaved wounds

Against MoN warriors. 31(1/3)(1/2)(2/3)=3.44 unsaved wounds

Against MoK warriors. 31(1/2)(1/2)(2/3)=5.16 unsaved wounds


The Nurgle Warriors take almost 50% more wounds than the Tzeentch warriors. And the Khorne warriors take nearely double the wounds.

Now lets see what the tradeoff with damage output is. Assuming a block of 18 that are 6 wide for each.


Tzeentch Shield Warriors. 19(2/3)(2/3)=8.44 unsaved wounds

Nurgle Halberds. 19(2/3)(5/6)=10.55 unsaved wounds.

Khorne Halberds. 25(2/3)(5/6)=13.88 unsaved wounds.

So, taking MoN halberds nets you 25% more wounds against the Halberdiers, but you take 50% more wounds in return.

The MoK halberds do 65% more wounds, while taking almost double the wounds in return.


So overall I would say the MoN halberds are a decent compromise between the MoK and MoT warriors in terms of durability and killing power.

You didn't do anything for the Nurgle Shield Warriors the OP is talking about. They'll offensively be identical to the Tzeentch (8.44) but in taking the 31 hits it's 31(1/3)(1/2)(1/2)(2/3)=1.72 wounds, making take only two-thirds the wounds of the Tzeentch Shield warriors and at the same cost.

So you'd again be getting the least offense but even better defense, which is fairly decent if what you want is a heavy anvil for CC.

But, if you're looking for a bunker against magic and shooting. For sake of having sufficiently large numbers, let's look at 30 S4 hits, 30 S6 hits, and 30 LoM hits.

Since costs are drastically different (being the main argument of MoT marauders that numbers makes up for it), I'll multiply unsaved wounds by points per model (17 for the warriors, 9 for the marauders) to give you points lost and the % of MoT Warrior losses MoN Warriors and MoT Marauders suffer.

S4:
MoT Warriors: (1/2)(1/2)(5/6)=6.25 unsaved=106.25 points lost (100%)
MoN Warriors: (1/2)(1/2)=7.50 unsaved=127.5 points lost (120%)
MoT Marauders: (2/3)(5/6)=16.67 unsaved=150 points lost (141%)

S6:
MoT Warriors: (5/6)(5/6)(5/6)=17.36 unsaved=295.14 points lost (100%)
MoN Warriors: (5/6)(5/6)=20.83 unsaved=354.17 points lost (120%)
MoT Marauders: (5/6)(5/6)=20.83 unsaved=187.5 points lost (63.5%)

LoM:
MoT Warriors: (2/3)(5/6)=16.67 unsaved=283.33 points lost (100%)
MoN Warriors: (2/3)=20 unsaved=340 points lost (120%)
MoT Marauders: (1/6)(5/6)=4.17 unsaved=37.5 points lost. (13.2%)

So the deal for using them as a bunker is asking yourself what you need them to eat for you. If you're worried about lots of little shots. If you're worried about shooting Strength 5 and above (more numbers says the marauders win at strength 5, too) or anything where your armor isn't a factor or if a lot of people you play against take LoM, taking MoT marauders are going to be a significant win. And, of course, if you're worried about getting into CC, MoN Warriors with Shields are your best bet. Naturally, this doesn't account for any magic items, magic banners, or mutations/powers the character in the unit gets.

I get shot at alot so I'm running mine

18 Chaos warriors,
sheilds, halberds, Full Command, Blasted Standard, Mark of Tzeentch 415

Also need to take into consideration that if you want your BSB to be on the tough as nail tzeentch config 1+/3++ with rerolls on the 1++ you need him to go with a tzeentch unit :/

I'll be running Chaos ogres tomorrow first time this year with mark of nurgle ^^

And ofcourse as iv'e allways done, warriors with Tzeentch.

 Lord Yayula wrote:
Also need to take into consideration that if you want your BSB to be on the tough as nail tzeentch config 1+/3++ with rerolls on the 1++ you need him to go with a tzeentch unit :/

I think this might be the answer.
The warriors pick up whatever mark you want on the character. Nurgle/tzeench is pretty even in effectiveness for the warriors, so decide on characters first and build the bodyguard to match.

Sword and board MoT are preferable, but GW MoN with festus is a borderline death star

I like MoT on my Warriors but then again I am runninga entirely tzeench army :3. One thing I would say is Tzeench Warriors with Halberds Great Weapons or Additional Hand Weapons can be just as good as their nurgle cousins. Infact I would say they are better for the simple fact of yes -1 to hit in close combat is nice but if that attack is high enough strength to ignore your armour when they hit you your getting no save where as with Tzeench your atleast getting a 6+ save. Also Tzeench can protect you against shooting where as Nurgle cant and btw before people mention putting Festus in the unit yeah thats all good and well until you realise that he can only join one unit and then that unit is gonna be worth alot of points

Captaintyrius wrote:
I like MoT on my Warriors but then again I am runninga entirely tzeench army :3. One thing I would say is Tzeench Warriors with Halberds Great Weapons or Additional Hand Weapons can be just as good as their nurgle cousins. Infact I would say they are better for the simple fact of yes -1 to hit in close combat is nice but if that attack is high enough strength to ignore your armour when they hit you your getting no save where as with Tzeench your atleast getting a 6+ save. Also Tzeench can protect you against shooting where as Nurgle cant and btw before people mention putting Festus in the unit yeah thats all good and well until you realise that he can only join one unit and then that unit is gonna be worth alot of points

Tzeentch vs Nurgle on sword and board doesn't care about armor save. Nurgle affects hit, Tzeentch affects parry. Even with zero armor save, Nurgle is slightly better in close combat. With 2+ armor save, Nurgle is still just slightly better.

Where Tzeentch shines is against ranged attacks, magic, and autohits. Then you're getting at least some of a save whereas Nurgle does not. Magic missiles? Tzeentch has your back. Bolt thrower? 1/6 chance to say 'nope'. Getting 80 crossbow bolts coming in? ~16% of them are negated.

In a vacuum, the question becomes which you value more. Do you think you can get into close combat fast? Nurgle is better. Do you think you're going to be under heavy fire? Tzeentch is better. The differences are slight either way, and it will probably come down to if you're putting a marked character in the unit. Me? I'm going Tzeentch with what I have just because I have warrior models painted with Tzeentch symbols already, and I'm not going to stress about it.

 Evertras wrote:
Even with zero armor save, Nurgle is slightly better in close combat.

Totally depends on what you're fighting.

 PinkSpaceHippy wrote:

 Evertras wrote:
Even with zero armor save, Nurgle is slightly better in close combat.

Totally depends on what you're fighting.

To clarify then, a simple, straightforward close combat where two units are smacking each other in the face. Anything that autohits, like impact hits, Tzeentch is more useful.

So yes, it's a lot of 'it depends'.

@Captaintyrius: it might seem like no save is worse than less hits, but see below.

@PinkSpaceHippy: not really. I mean, yes, as Evertras said, things that don't have to roll to Hit and such, but when it comes to WS and S versus WS, T, and armour/Ward saves, Nurgle is better. See below.

It took me a while to actually figure out how to say this clearly:
Both Marks modify a die by the same amount (approx. 17%), but the number of dice rolled to determine Hits is greater than or equal to the number of dice rolled for Ward saves. Thus, Nurgle's -1 to Hit influences more dice, and thus, it is the better of the two Marks. In close combat.

Unless you're facing an army of chariots or Fanatics. Stomp attacks, too, I guess, but I think Nurgle will usually win out in that department anyway, because of the Stomp-ing monster's normal attacks.