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.

 Barnie25 wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:

ArikTaranis wrote:
Has anyone got experience running a Khorne Lord of Skulls? I was thinking of converting one to go with a khornate daemon army (skullreaver DP, bloodletters, maybe some skull cannons...).

It was hilariously bad last edition but seems much improved in 8th. Combined with the daemon forge strategem, it looks like both the shooting and the melee are very powerful, plus it's fairly resilient on paper. I guess it's a comparable price to an IK valliant or castellan, with similar resilience (no rotate shields/WT for 4++ but a permanent 5++ and regen), far superior melee (especially when in the middle or bottom wounds degredation) but inferior shooting. I haven't seen many people either endorse the lord of skulls or denounce it, so am curious.

Ive played it at least a dozen times and I can safely say always go Gatling Cannon. The Lord of Skulls is Primaris's worst nightmare, as all of its guns are 2 damage 8 strength (as far as I know.)

But yes, it is far better than any knight in melee, is suprisingly hard to kill and attracts a tooon of fire. Be ready to lose ot by turn 2 if your opponent builds around it, but that also means they will have to ignore the rest of your army. At best its unstoppable in shooting and melee. At worst, its a massively durable distraction.

Have you seen the Kytan in action? It is roughly 130 points cheaper and just as killy in close combat. Would make a nice partner with Magnus to build around together and smash face.

Dont trust that points drop, the normal LoS is still a bit better. Its roughly the same melee but your ranged firepower is FAR superior.

 vaklor4 wrote:

 Barnie25 wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:

ArikTaranis wrote:
Has anyone got experience running a Khorne Lord of Skulls? I was thinking of converting one to go with a khornate daemon army (skullreaver DP, bloodletters, maybe some skull cannons...).

It was hilariously bad last edition but seems much improved in 8th. Combined with the daemon forge strategem, it looks like both the shooting and the melee are very powerful, plus it's fairly resilient on paper. I guess it's a comparable price to an IK valliant or castellan, with similar resilience (no rotate shields/WT for 4++ but a permanent 5++ and regen), far superior melee (especially when in the middle or bottom wounds degredation) but inferior shooting. I haven't seen many people either endorse the lord of skulls or denounce it, so am curious.

Ive played it at least a dozen times and I can safely say always go Gatling Cannon. The Lord of Skulls is Primaris's worst nightmare, as all of its guns are 2 damage 8 strength (as far as I know.)

But yes, it is far better than any knight in melee, is suprisingly hard to kill and attracts a tooon of fire. Be ready to lose ot by turn 2 if your opponent builds around it, but that also means they will have to ignore the rest of your army. At best its unstoppable in shooting and melee. At worst, its a massively durable distraction.

Have you seen the Kytan in action? It is roughly 130 points cheaper and just as killy in close combat. Would make a nice partner with Magnus to build around together and smash face.

Dont trust that points drop, the normal LoS is still a bit better. Its roughly the same melee but your ranged firepower is FAR superior.

The model is so damn hideous though.. I am probably getting a Kytan so I can mangetize the axe with a Thermal Cannon so I can run it as a knight as well. Will probably run it as a counts as Lord of Skulls at local events as well. I am not getting the regular base model, haha. I am going to remove the Khorne emblem from the helmet and convert it a little anyways.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:

 Raichase wrote:
As a Word Bearer player, I was very disappointed that we didn't end up with a better legion or warlord trait in this codex. I feel that the Iron Warriors warlord trait is better suited to a Word Bearers army, but what can you do? I am lucky that I just play for the sheer thrill of chucking dice around and yelling at models. Morale is such a non-starter these days - you either have a big blob of cultists in which the re-roll is only affecting HOW MANY of them fall off the table at the end of the turn, or you just don't need to take morale because you're using reasonably sized squads that will be entirely wiped out before they'd be able to fail a morale test on anything other than a 6...

I do agree that the legion trait is sorta ass, and so is their stratagem, but I particularly enjoy their warlord trait quite a bit. Can make for some funny combos.

The WB warlord trait actually is fairly usefull. If you make it a gunline, doubleing the 6" radius to a 12 " is fairly usefull, especially if you intend to footslog, problem is what good longrange dakka options do we have? (dakkafieds are expensive, Havocs are good but i'd rather ignore cover then get a morale buff or get the -1 to hit trait, preds are still too expensive, Dakka brutes are the same as Havocs, LR's are terrible to put it mildly, regular CSM are like any tac marine and wannabee tac marine ovepriced by around 2 pts, Cultmarines would profit from it though, bunch of noise marines could do really well but so could they with virtually all other traits then the EC trait, etc.

Point of order - WB Warlord Trait gives auras +3”, not x2”.

Which in some cases is still better. It makes Warpsmiths pretty wild with how far away they can heal, for instance.

 Barnie25 wrote:

 blackmage wrote:

 Barnie25 wrote:
For a doubles tournament I am teaming up with a necron player. Both a 1000 points. I am bringing Ahriman on Disk, cultists and renegade knights. The necron player will spam Tomb Blades and Destroyers.

I need to provide the AT. The Daemon Prince is a good anti tank tool in combat. What would then be better?

-a Renegade Knight with either double gatling gun

-3 Helverines.

The Gaze of Faith power gives me a free reroll each turn, this would improve the thermal cannon quite a bit I think. Double Gatling is more general ofcourse however also more expensive. The 3 Helverines have strong shooting but can be locked in combat and have no melee as well as T7 instead of T8.

What would you guys advice?

i would go for a double gatling, with the re roll stratagem it delivers a crazy amount of bullets, or you can use two rapid fire battlecannons, 2x thermal cannon are just 2d6 shots bit too few for my taste, double gatling has just str 6 but 24 re rollable hits ap -2 d 2 is enough to handle average tanks, then if you afraid to meet IK then yes go for 2x thermal cannons and stormspear rocket pod, the double gatling+double flamer makes IK hard to charge, light units can get lot of wounds before get into base contact. Helverins are a nice support for IK but ap-1 is an handicap and lack of melee power another.

I think I will go for a setup with a Thermal Cannon, Gatling Cannon and Stormspear rocket pod. I will only have 5 CP for the game so I will onlt be reliably using the reroll strat once. This way I have good dedicated antitank while still having enough dakka overal.

usually is not a good idea mix weapons like that, btw your choice.

 vaklor4 wrote:
Which in some cases is still better. It makes Warpsmiths pretty wild with how far away they can heal, for instance.

Anyone not choosing a Lord for that Warlord Trait is wrong about everything.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:
Which in some cases is still better. It makes Warpsmiths pretty wild with how far away they can heal, for instance.

Anyone not choosing a Lord for that Warlord Trait is wrong about everything.

Wouldn't a Dark Apostle also be pretty nice for that 9" morale boost? Giving everything in a wide area 9 morale is pretty handy.

 vaklor4 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Anyone not choosing a Lord for that Warlord Trait is wrong about everything.

Wouldn't a Dark Apostle also be pretty nice for that 9" morale boost? Giving everything in a wide area 9 morale is pretty handy.

I've been thinking of running it on a Dark Apostle if I use it at all to be honest. On one hand, Morale is such a non-issue in this edition (in my experience anyway) because if they're going to smash apart Cultists, you're just rolling to see how many of them shirk off the battlefield in the morale phase, and most of our other units are small enough that if they're in a position to fail a morale test, they're likely neutered anyway or have been wiped out. That being said, he's giving Cultists +3 (or even +4 if the Champ is dead) to morale, which might help keep that single cultist on the field to use Tide of Traitors next turn.

I'm more interested in the re-rolls in the fight phase to be honest, giving it a range of 9" means he can realistically affect two combats (or more if you're lucky) in a single fight phase.

I'd be far happier if the Dark Apostle just made everyone within 6" pass morale tests automatically as it's far more in theme for the character and the Word Bearers army, but I suspect this "sharing leadership" ability is a cookie-cutter line from the Space Marine Chaplain entry?

I'm a huge fan of the Word Bearers trilogy by Anthony Reynolds (it's how I'm building my army) and it fits the fluff so nicely to have the Dark Apostle inspiring everyone around him to fight harder and not run away.

 Raichase wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Anyone not choosing a Lord for that Warlord Trait is wrong about everything.

Wouldn't a Dark Apostle also be pretty nice for that 9" morale boost? Giving everything in a wide area 9 morale is pretty handy.

I've been thinking of running it on a Dark Apostle if I use it at all to be honest. On one hand, Morale is such a non-issue in this edition (in my experience anyway) because if they're going to smash apart Cultists, you're just rolling to see how many of them shirk off the battlefield in the morale phase, and most of our other units are small enough that if they're in a position to fail a morale test, they're likely neutered anyway or have been wiped out. That being said, he's giving Cultists +3 (or even +4 if the Champ is dead) to morale, which might help keep that single cultist on the field to use Tide of Traitors next turn.

I'm more interested in the re-rolls in the fight phase to be honest, giving it a range of 9" means he can realistically affect two combats (or more if you're lucky) in a single fight phase.

I'd be far happier if the Dark Apostle just made everyone within 6" pass morale tests automatically as it's far more in theme for the character and the Word Bearers army, but I suspect this "sharing leadership" ability is a cookie-cutter line from the Space Marine Chaplain entry?

I'm a huge fan of the Word Bearers trilogy by Anthony Reynolds (it's how I'm building my army) and it fits the fluff so nicely to have the Dark Apostle inspiring everyone around him to fight harder and not run away.

You only have to care about that if you bring 30-40 cultists. But if you bring 10 cultists for MSU CP farming, it makes them almost immune to morale. Heck, even 20 man units of Cultists become quite good at passing with low losses on a 9+ LD. They'd have to lose half their unit to even get auto-failure.

 vaklor4 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:
Which in some cases is still better. It makes Warpsmiths pretty wild with how far away they can heal, for instance.

Anyone not choosing a Lord for that Warlord Trait is wrong about everything.

Wouldn't a Dark Apostle also be pretty nice for that 9" morale boost? Giving everything in a wide area 9 morale is pretty handy.

LD is high enough on the good units and Word Bearers already have reroll for it. It seems more nice for the rerolls for everything in melee but you'll get more a balance from a Lord, and he's got more options too.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:
Which in some cases is still better. It makes Warpsmiths pretty wild with how far away they can heal, for instance.

Anyone not choosing a Lord for that Warlord Trait is wrong about everything.

Wouldn't a Dark Apostle also be pretty nice for that 9" morale boost? Giving everything in a wide area 9 morale is pretty handy.

LD is high enough on the good units and Word Bearers already have reroll for it. It seems more nice for the rerolls for everything in melee but you'll get more a balance from a Lord, and he's got more options too.

It all depends on what ya bring tbh. If you bring lots of stuff with lower-end hit rolls (cultists, daemon engines, power fists, etc.) then rerolling EVERYTHING is way better. Rerolling 1s globally is nice, but only edges them out if you go heavy into shooting. In my experience, a dark apostle usually holds his weight far more obviously than a chaos lord. It's also weirdly deceptively tough to take down, with a wicked 4++ invuln save, just like the Lord.

 Barnie25 wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:

ArikTaranis wrote:
Has anyone got experience running a Khorne Lord of Skulls? I was thinking of converting one to go with a khornate daemon army (skullreaver DP, bloodletters, maybe some skull cannons...).

It was hilariously bad last edition but seems much improved in 8th. Combined with the daemon forge strategem, it looks like both the shooting and the melee are very powerful, plus it's fairly resilient on paper. I guess it's a comparable price to an IK valliant or castellan, with similar resilience (no rotate shields/WT for 4++ but a permanent 5++ and regen), far superior melee (especially when in the middle or bottom wounds degredation) but inferior shooting. I haven't seen many people either endorse the lord of skulls or denounce it, so am curious.

Ive played it at least a dozen times and I can safely say always go Gatling Cannon. The Lord of Skulls is Primaris's worst nightmare, as all of its guns are 2 damage 8 strength (as far as I know.)

But yes, it is far better than any knight in melee, is suprisingly hard to kill and attracts a tooon of fire. Be ready to lose ot by turn 2 if your opponent builds around it, but that also means they will have to ignore the rest of your army. At best its unstoppable in shooting and melee. At worst, its a massively durable distraction.

Have you seen the Kytan in action? It is roughly 130 points cheaper and just as killy in close combat. Would make a nice partner with Magnus to build around together and smash face.

Kytan is worse for a few reasons.

1. It has 6 less wounds. This is massive.
2. It has less gun
3. It gets worse as it gets hurt whereas the LoS gets better in combat.
4. Probably the single most important difference, the LoS lacks a base meaning you measure all melee range from it's hull, this means it can actually charge and kill sh*t on the upper floors of ruins, or heck, even standing on a pile of crates. The Kytan gets absolutely games because of this and he has less guns, making him IMHO terrible. I\d take a renegade knight over the kytan every single time. LoS on the other hand fills all the hole I just pointed out.

It's biggest drawback is the same with all super heavies, it's a lot of eggs in one basket and has issues moving around terrain dense tables.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Barnie25 wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:

 Barnie25 wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:

ArikTaranis wrote:
Has anyone got experience running a Khorne Lord of Skulls? I was thinking of converting one to go with a khornate daemon army (skullreaver DP, bloodletters, maybe some skull cannons...).

It was hilariously bad last edition but seems much improved in 8th. Combined with the daemon forge strategem, it looks like both the shooting and the melee are very powerful, plus it's fairly resilient on paper. I guess it's a comparable price to an IK valliant or castellan, with similar resilience (no rotate shields/WT for 4++ but a permanent 5++ and regen), far superior melee (especially when in the middle or bottom wounds degredation) but inferior shooting. I haven't seen many people either endorse the lord of skulls or denounce it, so am curious.

Ive played it at least a dozen times and I can safely say always go Gatling Cannon. The Lord of Skulls is Primaris's worst nightmare, as all of its guns are 2 damage 8 strength (as far as I know.)

But yes, it is far better than any knight in melee, is suprisingly hard to kill and attracts a tooon of fire. Be ready to lose ot by turn 2 if your opponent builds around it, but that also means they will have to ignore the rest of your army. At best its unstoppable in shooting and melee. At worst, its a massively durable distraction.

Have you seen the Kytan in action? It is roughly 130 points cheaper and just as killy in close combat. Would make a nice partner with Magnus to build around together and smash face.

Dont trust that points drop, the normal LoS is still a bit better. Its roughly the same melee but your ranged firepower is FAR superior.

The model is so damn hideous though.. I am probably getting a Kytan so I can mangetize the axe with a Thermal Cannon so I can run it as a knight as well. Will probably run it as a counts as Lord of Skulls at local events as well. I am not getting the regular base model, haha. I am going to remove the Khorne emblem from the helmet and convert it a little anyways.

I think the box paintjob lets it down often. I know it's merely a matter of differing taste but I think the Kytan looks WAY sillier. It has some of the weakest spindliest legs ever. There is a reason people always snap photos of it head on, it's legs suck. I like the idea of a tank tracked lower body so much more, it reminds me of bonecrusher from Marvel. Your taste is your taste, but I have never understood how skinny emaciated chicken legs are better then 4 sets of thick aggressive tracks and a train plow to some people.

I think the tracks are fine, it's the dick gun and all the skulls built into the model that look silly to me. We get it, he's the lord of skulls stop beating the horse before it turns to dust.

I have to agree that the LoS is an awful model. To me, it's always looked like a children's toy with a pullback motor, the sort that swings its axe arm up and down as it rattles forward about a foot before running out of energy, hitting a table, or falling over. That's before the rest of it desperately trying to cling to the "big is best" idea that makes it look even more like Khorne Berzerker's First Toy.

But again thats the paint job. Everything in chaos has too much crap on it, you need to tone it down when you paint the model, GW paints everything up to 11 so you can see all the details your purchasing.


Take for example, the raptor kit. That kmit is awesome so long as you don't over do it with the hilighting on the trim. They quickly become silly.

BTW the skull thing you just said is not really fair. Most of the skulls are built into a few armor plates and the plow while the majority of the model lacks skulls. Apart from the plow, the Kytan and LoS have the same amount of skull design.

Of course this is all just difference of opinion, and maybe any level of skulls is silly to you which is fine. For me, a game set in the 41 millennia where one faction makes a possessed tank man with a massive chain cleaver and vomits blood bile on everything needs to be taken lightly anyway. If you play chaos you should already be embracing the metal nature of the army or you will find it uphill when it comes to the models in the first place.


Automatically Appended Next Post:


IDK, I hate the legs on the Kytan so much lol. BTW these paintjobs kit nothing to but praise on the modeling done by the owners of these.
Just throwing shade on the FW legs is all lol.

 Red Corsair wrote:
But again thats the paint job.

It's really, really not.

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
But again thats the paint job.

It's really, really not.

Agree to disagree mate. painting anything that large bright orange red with Ghotty gold trim and it looks bad.


Automatically Appended Next Post:


Again, you don't have to like the concept, but it's hard to disagree that the box scheme looks aweful.

 Barnie25 wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:

ArikTaranis wrote:
Has anyone got experience running a Khorne Lord of Skulls? I was thinking of converting one to go with a khornate daemon army (skullreaver DP, bloodletters, maybe some skull cannons...).

It was hilariously bad last edition but seems much improved in 8th. Combined with the daemon forge strategem, it looks like both the shooting and the melee are very powerful, plus it's fairly resilient on paper. I guess it's a comparable price to an IK valliant or castellan, with similar resilience (no rotate shields/WT for 4++ but a permanent 5++ and regen), far superior melee (especially when in the middle or bottom wounds degredation) but inferior shooting. I haven't seen many people either endorse the lord of skulls or denounce it, so am curious.

Ive played it at least a dozen times and I can safely say always go Gatling Cannon. The Lord of Skulls is Primaris's worst nightmare, as all of its guns are 2 damage 8 strength (as far as I know.)

But yes, it is far better than any knight in melee, is suprisingly hard to kill and attracts a tooon of fire. Be ready to lose ot by turn 2 if your opponent builds around it, but that also means they will have to ignore the rest of your army. At best its unstoppable in shooting and melee. At worst, its a massively durable distraction.

Have you seen the Kytan in action? It is roughly 130 points cheaper and just as killy in close combat. Would make a nice partner with Magnus to build around together and smash face.

My fifteen hundred list (on paper) is Magnus, a Kytan and Mortarion. Three LoWs for a command point, plus some random stuff to fill in the last few points. Dunno how well it plays, but I threw down the gauntlet to my friends with it. Lol

I personally enjoy the overly crazy style of the Lord of Skulls. I don't play Warhammer 40,000 to have realistic tanks and down to earth design. I want my planes to have zero aerodynamics, and my guns to be the width of my entire torso!

I feel like Renegade Knights are generally better than a Lord of Skulls. Not as much synergy with other CSM stuff, but cheaper, with similar or better firepower, depending on loadout. And a CC Renegade is probably better in combat.

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I feel like Renegade Knights are generally better than a Lord of Skulls. Not as much synergy with other CSM stuff, but cheaper, with similar or better firepower, depending on loadout. And a CC Renegade is probably better in combat.

Trust me, a CC renegade is not. It has no invuln in combat, while the lord of skull has a general 5++ at all times. Additionally, it costs 1 CP to reroll the hits and wounds for every attack on a LoS, while it takes 2 to just reroll the hits om a knight.

Comparing stats id still say thr LoS is better, but its daemonforged strat puts it FAR beyond a renegade.

I am looking at starting a Chaos army, mix of both CSM and Daemons. I am leaning toward World Eaters because I want to go heavy assault and also really like Khorne.
Here is what I have come up with. Forgive me if it is improper/illegal and if so please point out what is wrong. Unsure on who should be warlord, probably the DP, what trait though?



Daemon Prince hunts knights. The Decimators are anti tank with mortal wound output. Bloodletters have bomb and if needed buffed by the sorcerer. THe 2 bezerkers squads, the Dark Apostle and Exalted champion go in the rhinos to rush in. Big unit of 36 cultist for tide of traitors, the 2 small 10 man squads are for objective grabbers. The idea of this list is obviously to commit as much to the assault as possible? C&C

Well your taking world eaters so the berserkers are troops not elites. It's in the FAQ for reference. Not sure I'd take a lump of 36 cultists in WE. You can't delightful agony or endless cacophony them and you lack the auto pass moral so you probably burning 2cp for insane courage then 2 cp to tide and the only benefit you get in world eaters in in the assault where your autoguns aren't best suited. Sure you can fight twice if you make it in with any meaningful numbers and verterans of the LW but hot damn thats all your CP's for the entire army basically going into a chaf unit.

If you want to keep the cultists, do your self a favor and change legions since you don't need the berserkers as troops anyway. That way at least you can switch marks up and for example if Iron warriors take cold and bitter for the cultists or in AL you still can redeploy forward and at least have -1 to hit. Heck or be contravercial and go Renegades and advance and charge.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Well your taking world eaters so the berserkers are troops not elites. It's in the FAQ for reference. Not sure I'd take a lump of 36 cultists in WE. You can't delightful agony or endless cacophony them and you lack the auto pass moral so you probably burning 2cp for insane courage then 2 cp to tide and the only benefit you get in world eaters in in the assault where your autoguns aren't best suited. Sure you can fight twice if you make it in with any meaningful numbers and verterans of the LW but hot damn thats all your CP's for the entire army basically going into a chaf unit.

If you want to keep the cultists, do your self a favor and change legions since you don't need the berserkers as troops anyway. That way at least you can switch marks up and for example if Iron warriors take cold and bitter for the cultists or in AL you still can redeploy forward and at least have -1 to hit. Heck or be contravercial and go Renegades and advance and charge.

I like advance and charge, I main nids and am used to that with my Genestealers. I'll have to look further into the legions. If I don't take 36 since I don't have the fearless, which I can look into, just splitting into 3 equal groups for cheap chaff/objective grabbers may be the way to go. Thoughts on mixing Bloodletter bomb and Bezerkers in the same list, I don't think I have personally ever seen that, normally its one or the other.

It's decent, but not optimal. Your basically holding the bomb back until turn 2 while they can deal with your Berserkers, and then you have the issue of finding room for everything. Remember your own chargers can get in the way of eachother. Biggest issue your going to have is getting the berserkers across the table now that alpha legion took a hit. It isn't THAT bad compared to before but it wasn't a sure bet then. Essentially your getting 9" out your deployment then your moving another 6 which puts you another 9" from their DZ which then requires them being morons for letting you pull a 9" charge. I think now the better option is going in rhinos or a termite and popping smoke and preping for a turn 2 assault. That would sink well with your letters arriving, and assaulting with renegades out of a rhino is actually pretty fast. The issue then become screen removal. Your going to get blocked by anyone with any decent skill so you then need some quad HB rapiers or butcher canons or both. I don't mind blood letter but you generally don't see them and berserkers because they fight for the same job and require additional HQ's as a tax since summoning is not good.

I know there are other more experienced world eater focused guys in here so I'll let them chime in. It's also worth filtering the thread by certain khorne players just to focus on their feedback.

vaklor4
Lindsay40k

come to the top of my mind but I know there are others.

 Dynas wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Well your taking world eaters so the berserkers are troops not elites. It's in the FAQ for reference. Not sure I'd take a lump of 36 cultists in WE. You can't delightful agony or endless cacophony them and you lack the auto pass moral so you probably burning 2cp for insane courage then 2 cp to tide and the only benefit you get in world eaters in in the assault where your autoguns aren't best suited. Sure you can fight twice if you make it in with any meaningful numbers and verterans of the LW but hot damn thats all your CP's for the entire army basically going into a chaf unit.

If you want to keep the cultists, do your self a favor and change legions since you don't need the berserkers as troops anyway. That way at least you can switch marks up and for example if Iron warriors take cold and bitter for the cultists or in AL you still can redeploy forward and at least have -1 to hit. Heck or be contravercial and go Renegades and advance and charge.

I like advance and charge, I main nids and am used to that with my Genestealers. I'll have to look further into the legions. If I don't take 36 since I don't have the fearless, which I can look into, just splitting into 3 equal groups for cheap chaff/objective grabbers may be the way to go. Thoughts on mixing Bloodletter bomb and Bezerkers in the same list, I don't think I have personally ever seen that, normally its one or the other.

Just take more berserkers and forget the cultists.
BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and my plan with a similar list is to take some terminators to teleport in and just be a distraction.

Welllllllllll, the Talisman relic exists, give it to a jumppack Lord kitted for rip and tear and watch as your Lord removes stuff.

For distraction terminators. Actually why not take multilators?
Tougher, better equiped and msu of 3 with far less pts.

 Red Corsair wrote:
It's decent, but not optimal. Your basically holding the bomb back until turn 2 while they can deal with your Berserkers, and then you have the issue of finding room for everything. Remember your own chargers can get in the way of eachother. Biggest issue your going to have is getting the berserkers across the table now that alpha legion took a hit. It isn't THAT bad compared to before but it wasn't a sure bet then. Essentially your getting 9" out your deployment then your moving another 6 which puts you another 9" from their DZ which then requires them being morons for letting you pull a 9" charge. I think now the better option is going in rhinos or a termite and popping smoke and preping for a turn 2 assault. That would sink well with your letters arriving, and assaulting with renegades out of a rhino is actually pretty fast. The issue then become screen removal. Your going to get blocked by anyone with any decent skill so you then need some quad HB rapiers or butcher canons or both. I don't mind blood letter but you generally don't see them and berserkers because they fight for the same job and require additional HQ's as a tax since summoning is not good.

I know there are other more experienced world eater focused guys in here so I'll let them chime in. It's also worth filtering the thread by certain khorne players just to focus on their feedback.

vaklor4
Lindsay40k

come to the top of my mind but I know there are others.

Good feedback. I am researching more. Now I am looking at the Rhinos (2) and taking one unit of 10 Bezerkers and 1 unit of 8. They have an exalted champion and dark apostle with them for reroll hits and wounds. Still stay khorne world eaters. if I did the math right it comes out to 72 attacks, 18 with chainsword, 54 with axe, and then do that twice (or even 3 times with the Fury of khorne). I was looking at getting a sorcerer to warp time the rhino which will move and advance, but I could only get one up there then.

For the Bloodletters I planned to take a Khorne DP kitted out and use Dark Pact for the Summoning. This would work well for a turn 2 in strike as you mentioned.

 Dynas wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
It's decent, but not optimal. Your basically holding the bomb back until turn 2 while they can deal with your Berserkers, and then you have the issue of finding room for everything. Remember your own chargers can get in the way of eachother. Biggest issue your going to have is getting the berserkers across the table now that alpha legion took a hit. It isn't THAT bad compared to before but it wasn't a sure bet then. Essentially your getting 9" out your deployment then your moving another 6 which puts you another 9" from their DZ which then requires them being morons for letting you pull a 9" charge. I think now the better option is going in rhinos or a termite and popping smoke and preping for a turn 2 assault. That would sink well with your letters arriving, and assaulting with renegades out of a rhino is actually pretty fast. The issue then become screen removal. Your going to get blocked by anyone with any decent skill so you then need some quad HB rapiers or butcher canons or both. I don't mind blood letter but you generally don't see them and berserkers because they fight for the same job and require additional HQ's as a tax since summoning is not good.

I know there are other more experienced world eater focused guys in here so I'll let them chime in. It's also worth filtering the thread by certain khorne players just to focus on their feedback.

vaklor4
Lindsay40k

come to the top of my mind but I know there are others.

Good feedback. I am researching more. Now I am looking at the Rhinos (2) and taking one unit of 10 Bezerkers and 1 unit of 8. They have an exalted champion and dark apostle with them for reroll hits and wounds. Still stay khorne world eaters. if I did the math right it comes out to 72 attacks, 18 with chainsword, 54 with axe, and then do that twice (or even 3 times with the Fury of khorne). I was looking at getting a sorcerer to warp time the rhino which will move and advance, but I could only get one up there then.

For the Bloodletters I planned to take a Khorne DP kitted out and use Dark Pact for the Summoning. This would work well for a turn 2 in strike as you mentioned.

In my experience, go 9 and 9 instead of 10 and 8. In some situations you'll need to split off your Zerkers into two groups seperate from eachother, and when that happens you're better off with 9 of them each having at least some sort of buff, instead of 10 of your 18 being left bare, and only a smaller amount getting buffed.

Yeah, if you’re running two busses of Berzerkers with DA+EC, don’t give your opponent an easyish chance to take out the transport for both characters. Two squads of nine makes it a lot harder to prevent all of them from making contact. Two squads of eight is not only fluffy but also means that, if one bus pops on the first turn, the character that was in it can jump aboard the other.