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.

I'm guessing the grimoire.

Martel732 wrote:

 Wilytank wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Wilytank wrote:
I see no reason why I "need" them.

Because without the durability of the screamerstar, they'll shoot you off the table.

The combination of Iron Arm on psychic monsters, 4+ FNP on any Greater Daemons, Bloodthirster's 3+ armor, and needing 6's just to hit flying monsters has proven this to be false.

I've watched a Taudar list power through all those things you've listed. It did involve mass grounding tests, but don't forget that shuriken weapons decimate any MC on the ground, regardless of Iron Arm.

Still need 6's which doesn't help them when they roll 5's and under.

 Commander_Farsight wrote:
Yeah, Eldar are good, especially since they just won a NOVA. I think that Tau are number 3 just because Demons just have the upper hand on them, bottom line. Where do you guys think that the Tyranids will stand after their upcoming new codex release?

Imotech,

Why Daemons?

Could you share some tactics/ builds for daemons like what anonymou5 did for Eldar?

I'm sure Imotech can step in here, but as I play Daemons, I figured I'd give you some quick summaries.

First, all lists have Fateweaver. There is a lot of variety in the lists themselves, but he is a constant. The codex has above average internal balance, but Fateweaver is a must.

1) Flying Circus
This is the most common and best Daemon build. It's better than Screamerstar, both in my personal opinion and in GT results. There are actually three different type of Circus builds, and they play very different. These can be categorized with the three applicable gods "Tzeentch, Nurgle and Slaanesh" Tzeentch is the most points effecient, because it does not have to pay for a second Greater Daemon, and can use that second HQ slot to bring a different type of Prince in (as I run a Lash Prince in my Circus) or a Lord of Change (as seen in the list that just won 11th CO). Slaanesh lists feature the best overall and most versatile Prince, in the Lash Prince. Lash Princes naturally have fleet, which is huge for assaults, and also have Lash which means they can put out serious shooting damage without using Warp Charges. Contrast this to Tzeentch Princes who shoot with Flickering Fire, which means their offense can be stunted by using WC for defense (Iron Arm, Invis, Endurance). Bale Princes (the Nurgle Variety) are the best in assault because they're carrying instant death Swords. A Bale Prince can step to almost everything in the game, something that is actually not true of the other varieties. Bale Princes also have shrouded and defensive grenades, which provide a non insubstantial bonus to defense. They can also use Nurgle Powers to function as mini Heldrakes. In general, Tzeentch Circuses are generally going to play the objective game and overwhelm you weak points, Lash Princes are going to be more aggressive and pop vehicles before they kill you in assault, and Bale Princes are going to be very, very in your face. Expect a "beginner's guide to Flying Circus Daemons" on FLG sometime next week. As the list plays a lot different than a lot of people imagine. For an example, check out this article
https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2013/08/16/guest-editorial-by-anonymou5-fateweaver-versus-the-world-or-a-way-to-fight-tau-a-tournament-vignette/
This tactics vid
https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2013/10/30/tips-tricks-and-dirty-tactics-flying-monstrous-creatures/
And this batrep
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3sHCdvhXO4

2) Screamerstar
To toot my own horn, I actually invented the Screamerstar a few months back (as did a lot of other people, I'm sure). Basically it's an invincible unit that is pretty good at assault, great at multi assaults, good at shooting, and subject to variance and tarpitting.
Here's my early break down (most of it is accurate to how it developed once it hit the meta)
https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2013/07/22/guest-tactica-the-screamerstar/

3) Dogpile
45+ Hounds, 3ish Heralds, and generally 3 Grinders (usually Slaanesh). I think this list is dead because of Servo SKulls. But basically it Scouts up, applies pressure, and multi assaults

4) Rush
There are a ton of variety in Rush lists. There's the one Janthkin won Anime Expo with, which is Seekers, Fiends and an allied CSM Sorcerer/Bale Drake. There's JY2's Herald Hammer list with Screamers, Seekers, and Hounds (all with associated Heralds) pushing up. These lists I think are going to see a renaissance, as they are extremely strong in any sort of tournament with good terrain. Tournaments are adding more and more LOS blockers, and this list benefits more than most. They are excellent at controlling midfield and dictating the pace of the game. I seperated these from Dogpile styled lists as they aren't as dependent on Scout move.

5) Others
Horde lists are out there (generally 80 Daemonnettes or PBs) and can certainly ruin many Armies. The versions built around Horrors function like a slow, scoring Screamerstar that can't fight. These lists may be viable, may not be, they just aren't common. I know my few test games with the concept were good. I'm going to try 120 Daemonnetes against a solid Eldar list next time I'm in Florida. There's also Kevin Roger's bomb concept, which he has won at least one RTT with. You can find that on his blog http://daemons40k.blogspot.com (his search function isn't working for me now). Consider these "potential lists" as the concepts seem solid, but they are untested at GT level.

 Wilytank wrote:
Still need 6's which doesn't help them when they roll 5's and under.

Given enough dice rolls, 6s will come up.
Lets say you have 10 guardians that hopped out and are shooting at a wraithknight. The eldar player was smart and casted 'guide' on the guardians, and 'doom' on the wraithknight.

Each shot has an 8/9 chance of hitting, a 30% chance of wounding, and no saves are allowed when wounded. (This is because every wound is a psudo-rend)
This means we can expect the following.
8/9 (hit) * 3/10 (wound) * 20 (shots) = 80/15 or 5.33 wounds on the wraithknight!!

You can swap out wraithknight with iron arm DP, Riptide, etc. Anything with a T6 or greater is bait for shrunken if they have been doomed.
And now...the doom song.

I can honestly say that with my Sisters/Vanilla Marines hybrid army, I've won every single game I've played in the past year. And the amount of mental thought that it required from me was roughly the same as is used watching TV.

 labmouse42 wrote:

 Wilytank wrote:
Still need 6's which doesn't help them when they roll 5's and under.

Given enough dice rolls, 6s will come up.
Lets say you have 10 guardians that hopped out and are shooting at a wraithknight. The eldar player was smart and casted 'guide' on the guardians, and 'doom' on the wraithknight.

Each shot has an 8/9 chance of hitting, a 30% chance of wounding, and no saves are allowed when wounded. (This is because every wound is a psudo-rend)
This means we can expect the following.
8/9 (hit) * 3/10 (wound) * 20 (shots) = 80/15 or 5.33 wounds on the wraithknight!!

You can swap out wraithknight with iron arm DP, Riptide, etc. Anything with a T6 or greater is bait for shrunken if they have been doomed.
And now...the doom song.

I was hoping you'd show up. The math fail of that statement was too much for me to coherently respond.

They have just as much of a chance to get Doom as I do getting Iron Arm. And as long as we're talking about random rolls, there's also greater rewards to take into consideration like re-roll invulnerable save and 4+ FNP. 5.33 gets taken down to about 1 if they get both.

Another thing I like about Daemons is how much Warp Storm can mess things up. Not reliable at all, but I wouldn't count out the possibility of A) the invulnerable save being boosted, B) the guardian squad being bombed by the god specific attacks, or C) the Farseer exploding on the roll of 11. If I do take Fateweaver, then it becomes a little more reliable.

Also, everything about Invader Zim was terrible.

 Wilytank wrote:
They have just as much of a chance to get Doom as I do getting Iron Arm.

Doom only illustrates what a bad example the "Need to roll 6s argument is". As I am sure you are aware, Eldar armies easily bring more than one squad of guardians.

 Wilytank wrote:
Also, everything about Invader Zim was terrible.

Were are all allowed to our opinion.

 Pouncey wrote:
I can honestly say that with my Sisters/Vanilla Marines hybrid army, I've won every single game I've played in the past year. And the amount of mental thought that it required from me was roughly the same as is used watching TV.

I'm sorry, but I must call shenanigans... Do you go to tournaments, like ever? Take out tournaments and sure, I'm pretty much undefeated in the last year (one draw against basically the worst possible list for my army). But Sisters/SM aren't a broken combo. And they do go together decently, but it would require some thought at least, they aren't a point/click army like Serpent Spam.... So, what list/opponents are we talking here?

 jifel wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
I can honestly say that with my Sisters/Vanilla Marines hybrid army, I've won every single game I've played in the past year. And the amount of mental thought that it required from me was roughly the same as is used watching TV.

I'm sorry, but I must call shenanigans... Do you go to tournaments, like ever? Take out tournaments and sure, I'm pretty much undefeated in the last year (one draw against basically the worst possible list for my army). But Sisters/SM aren't a broken combo. And they do go together decently, but it would require some thought at least, they aren't a point/click army like Serpent Spam.... So, what list/opponents are we talking here?

I was just gonna let that one ride.

 Pouncey wrote:
I can honestly say that with my Sisters/Vanilla Marines hybrid army, I've won every single game I've played in the past year. And the amount of mental thought that it required from me was roughly the same as is used watching TV.

Do you live in Canada? Could you get down to the states for some major events.

Sisters is under-represented at large events like Adepticon. A highly skilled sisters player who has never lost a single game in either the latest codex or the white dwarf codex would be a valuable addition. If you sweep the event and get first place, I can only imagine what dakka posts would look like. They would be something akin to this.
...Did........Sisters..... ...Just.......Sweep.... .Adepticon?!?!?!..

Yeah, if you look at the most recent results, Eldar have surpassed tau (the excellent break down on the first page).

However, I have to say;

You should NEVER EVER learn the game with "the best army".
Ever.

Its a crutch - you will not learn anything and are cheating yourself the opportunity to learn how to play well.

I have seen it over and over again - new players start the "power" army of the moment, then once that list is no longer top dog, they think "that army sucks, I need a new army" when clearly its that have not learned the game.

Don't get me wrong - army matters - a lot, and when EVERYTHING ELSE is close (mission, terrain, players, dice) then the army will decide the game.
However, in my experience, everything else being the same, rarely happens.

OP armies will hide your mistakes, prop up poor list design, and overall rob you of the satisfaction of being a good player.

The most important unit in the army is you - never underestimate that.

Pick any recent codex that you like the style, fluff and appearance of - and play that.

"Don't get me wrong - army matters - a lot, and when EVERYTHING ELSE is close (mission, terrain, players, dice) then the army will decide the game.
However, in my experience, everything else being the same, rarely happens."

Power codices in the hand of an above average player can crush poor codices played by experts. Seen it, and been on both sides of it. Math is a harsh mistress.

davethepak wrote:
Don't get me wrong - army matters - a lot, and when EVERYTHING ELSE is close (mission, terrain, players, dice) then the army will decide the game.
However, in my experience, everything else being the same, rarely happens.

A good player will win more often with an average army than an average player will win with a good army.

Martel732 wrote:
Math is a harsh mistress.

Is that an obscure Robert Heinlein reference?

 labmouse42 wrote:

davethepak wrote:
Don't get me wrong - army matters - a lot, and when EVERYTHING ELSE is close (mission, terrain, players, dice) then the army will decide the game.
However, in my experience, everything else being the same, rarely happens.

A good player will win more often with an average army than an average player will win with a good army.

Maybe, but does that hold true for a good player with a power list and an excellent player with only a good list? If the excellent player rolls dice, and the other guy's army book makes it so nothing happens, or far less than normally would, I don't see how that's skill related.

Martel732 wrote:
Maybe, but does that hold true for a good player with a power list and an excellent player with only a good list? If the excellent player rolls dice, and the other guy's army book makes it so nothing happens, or far less than normally would, I don't see how that's skill related.

I think your reading to much into it
It does not 'hold true' when applied to a different statement, as by definition that would make it a different statement.

Just ponder it for the next time you see some average players talking about bringing good armies. I am sure you know many average players -- they are often found at your FLGS.

 labmouse42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Maybe, but does that hold true for a good player with a power list and an excellent player with only a good list? If the excellent player rolls dice, and the other guy's army book makes it so nothing happens, or far less than normally would, I don't see how that's skill related.

I think your reading to much into it
It does not 'hold true' when applied to a different statement, as by definition that would make it a different statement.

Just ponder it for the next time you see some average players talking about bringing good armies. I am sure you know many average players -- they are often found at your FLGS.

Yeah, you're probably right. Most people I play fall into two groups: average to below average that have no concept of meta at all. I can beat them about 66% of the time with the BA codex. Then we have above average guys who use the internets to get the power lists. As I am not expert, I have a dismal 30ish win rate even after going "counts as C:SM" against these types. Also, as I am not expert, I'd like to see if or how they can get wins vs these lists.

Martel732 wrote:
I'm guessing the grimoire.

That's the only thing I could think of as well. But I don't see how it is in any way likely to be invalidated by a FAQ. It's not as if the Grimoire is ambiguous at all.

 anonymou5 wrote:
2) Screamerstar
To toot my own horn, I actually invented the Screamerstar a few months back (as did a lot of other people, I'm sure).

If you invented it a few months back, you invented it quite a few months after everyone else, mate.

 labmouse42 wrote:

 Commander_Farsight wrote:
So what do people think is the "top tier"?

There is no need to guess. Simply research. There is this tool available now called 'Torrent of Fire' which provides exactly what your looking for. This is the top 10 winning armies ranked by winning percentages.
Eldar Tau Empire 191 71.20% Tau Empire Eldar 160 68.13% Eldar Dark Eldar 140 63.57% Chaos Daemons CSM 230 63.48% Tau Empire Tau Empire 200 63.00% Necrons Tau Empire 52 61.54% Eldar -none- 371 59.84% Tau Empire Space Marines 67 59.70% Grey Knights Tau Empire 44 59.09% Chaos Daemons -none- 351 58.40% --------------------------------------------------------- Army Allies Players Win Percent ---------------------------------------------------------Anyone who plays in GTs and see the top tables should not be surprised by this list at all.

The ToF chart is hardly decisive. A 3% Deviation between Tau and Eldar is not exactly a massive margin.

Thud wrote:

 anonymou5 wrote:
2) Screamerstar
To toot my own horn, I actually invented the Screamerstar a few months back (as did a lot of other people, I'm sure).

If you invented it a few months back, you invented it quite a few months after everyone else, mate.

Haha, well the meta data on the Word Doc in that argument is from June (although not published on FLG until July). As far as I know it hadn't been played in a major tourney or talked about on a big blog by then. So while I'm sure others were first, I think I was amongst the first to publicly talk about how stupid it is. lol

So I can take some of the blame/credit ha

 ImotekhTheStormlord wrote:
The ToF chart is hardly decisive. A 3% Deviation between Tau and Eldar is not exactly a massive margin.

If you were going to make a critique, I would think a better one is the lack of data points. There are just not enough matches to really provide a valid data point (500-1000).
However, you can get some decent trends. None of those trends should be very shocking. Tau and Eldar dominate the meta, followed closely by seer councils.

I'm a but ....well.... disappointed that's what you picked up on though. There is a lot to get out of the stats, and you gravitated to a 3% difference between the first and second place. Your a smart guy ImotekhTheStormlord. There is a lot more of interesting things to be gleamed.

 undertow wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I'd go with Tau or Eldar (or allied Tau + Eldar). Demons are powerful, but rely entirely on a single gimmick that is one FAQ away from making the entire army obsolete.

What gimmick is that?

The re-rollable 2++. It's based on assuming a favorable interpretation of the rules, so one FAQ from GW kills that army. And given how frustrating it is to play against it would not be at all surprising if GW ruled it that way.

 Peregrine wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I'd go with Tau or Eldar (or allied Tau + Eldar). Demons are powerful, but rely entirely on a single gimmick that is one FAQ away from making the entire army obsolete.

What gimmick is that?

The re-rollable 2++. It's based on assuming a favorable interpretation of the rules, so one FAQ from GW kills that army. And given how frustrating it is to play against it would not be at all surprising if GW ruled it that way.

What interpretation? It seems pretty clear cut to me, and I've never seen anyone as much as question it until now.

Even if they nerf the 2++ from the Grimoire, the Flying Circus is the stronger Daemon build, and it's not reliant on it (I'll admit it's a useful tool on the Fateweaver, but not required)

Thud wrote:
What interpretation? It seems pretty clear cut to me, and I've never seen anyone as much as question it until now.

Here's a nice argument about it: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/560960.page

And before you try to argue RAW just remember that GW is perfectly happy to make FAQ rulings that go against RAW if they feel that something "shouldn't work that way". A whole unit with a re-rollable 2++ is incredibly frustrating to play against, so GW has a very good reason to nerf it if there's any ambiguity in the rules that would let them do it.

GW have to be bothered to actually redact that wording that says "+2 to invulnerable save" and change it to "+2 to their Daemonic Save".

And that is supremely unlikely.

 Peregrine wrote:

Thud wrote:
What interpretation? It seems pretty clear cut to me, and I've never seen anyone as much as question it until now.

Here's a nice argument about it: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/560960.page

And before you try to argue RAW just remember that GW is perfectly happy to make FAQ rulings that go against RAW if they feel that something "shouldn't work that way". A whole unit with a re-rollable 2++ is incredibly frustrating to play against, so GW has a very good reason to nerf it if there's any ambiguity in the rules that would let them do it.

That's about units from the CSM book, which maxes it to 3+, though, and not about the Daemons book, which, as far as I know, has no such restriction.

I'm not trying to argue for or against anything, and I am no big fan of the Screamerstar, but I'm just genuinely curious about what you think is open to interpretation about it.

Thud wrote:
That's about units from the CSM book, which maxes it to 3+, though, and not about the Daemons book, which, as far as I know, has no such restriction.

Oops, never mind then. I didn't realize the wording on the mark was different in the demon codex.

 Peregrine wrote:

Thud wrote:
That's about units from the CSM book, which maxes it to 3+, though, and not about the Daemons book, which, as far as I know, has no such restriction.

Oops, never mind then. I didn't realize the wording on the mark was different in the demon codex.

Cool, I was worried that I was missing something, as the wording for Daemon of Tzeentch (there are no 'Mark of ..' in the Daemon codex) is just for rerolling 1s. The interaction between that and the Grimoire is pretty unambiguous.