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.

Hey all!

I've got a quick question, which one of the 2 armies in the subject are more competitive? I've got Mortarion and some Deathshroud for Death Guard and I'd like to go from there but I also really like the idea of Death Company with Lemartes and Astorath supported by AM tanks and artillery with Guardsmen to hold objectives. Based around this I'm trying to determine which army I should buy into in a competitive FLGS meta, it's gotta be one or the other. I really like the idea of the Blight Grenade build for DG, 40d6 grenades is really nasty to most things. But I also like the Alpha Strike style of Blood Angels even though more than likely DC will wipe their unit and then get shot off the table afterwards.

Death Guard. Tough and killy beats fast and killy right now.

<Anything>+AM allies will be competitive, to be honest.

That list doesn't sound bad. BA Melee units supported by a strong AM detachment.
People will tell you "But at that point why play BA? Go pure AM" Ignore them. If you want to play that small BA force play it. Is your army and you'll be fine in a competitive enviroment.

I actually prefer BA to Death guard for prowess at Maelstrom objectives. But both pale compared to the IG. I'd go with IG+BA helpers.

 Galas wrote:
<Anything>+AM allies will be competitive, to be honest.

That list doesn't sound bad. BA Melee units supported by a strong AM detachment.
People will tell you "But at that point why play BA? Go pure AM" Ignore them. If you want to play that small BA force play it. Is your army and you'll be fine in a competitive enviroment.

Well I wouldn't say it's small lol. If I decide to go BA then I'm going to be running 2 15 man DC with Chainswords and Power Swords to engage any target and take it out. Comes out to 720 points though for 2 squads, which more than likely will get retaliated on after turn 1 and get shot off the table. That's my biggest issue with the list, I think it would be mad fun but losing 720 points after wiping out a few units, maybe a knight or Magnus at best, is going to suck. I am way closer to finishing the BA and AM list though but I don't want to get screwed by who gets turn 1 and the way the opponent deploys.

If I were to take BA/AM i would be running:
Pask in Executioner
1x Leman Russ Battle Tank with Commander
1x Leman Russ Battle Tank

3x Guardsmen Squads

2x Wyverns
1x Basilisk

That many DC is an insane waste. I'm not even sure DC are the best CC to even use from C:BA. DC are glass cannons and easily countered by effective screening.

Martel732 wrote:
That many DC is an insane waste. I'm not even sure DC are the best CC to even use from C:BA. DC are glass cannons and easily countered by effective screening.

What would you recommend? I was thinking a full 15 so the opponent has to shoot at them even more to completely remove them. Also, we don't use Maelstrom objectives I don't believe, the TO creates them himself.

I'm using mostly shooting to clear chaff and then drop in vanguards and sanguinary guard. I like their advantages over DC at this time.

I'm playing most ITC, so I have maelstrom and eternal war considerations.

Don't forget 15 strong-DC units are susceptible to battleshock that marines can't afford.

If I had to pick between those two, I'd go with BA with AM allies, because Death Gaurd are boring as feth in comparison to the wide range of possibilities of those two armies allied together.

Martel732 wrote:
I'm using mostly shooting to clear chaff and then drop in vanguards and sanguinary guard. I like their advantages over DC at this time.

I'm playing most ITC, so I have maelstrom and eternal war considerations.

Don't forget 15 strong-DC units are susceptible to battleshock that marines can't afford.

That's true, that's why I'm running Astorath as well for the Fearless and Reroll Hits buff, even though he's going to have to babysit them the entire time. Lemartes for the Charge Reroll, and I'm debating between a Sanguinary Priest with Jump Pack or Mephiston. What loadout are you running your Vanguards and Sanguinary Guards?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:
If I had to pick between those two, I'd go with BA with AM allies, because Death Gaurd are boring as feth in comparison to the wide range of possibilities of those two armies allied together.

What makes the Death Guard boring in your opinion? I know alot of people don't like the super slow tough guy playstyle, but I also play Necrons too. There's a part of me that doesn't want another super slow waddle across the table army. Deceiver tricks can only do so much before everyone learns you're a one trick pony.

Vanguards = mix of ss/plasma pistol, ss/power weapon, lightning claws

SG = mostly boltguns and swords; a few fists and a couple infernus pistols

It's all a matter of taste, but I don't like DC's defenses compared to VV or SG. And I can use a greater variety of characters with VV and SG.

spacemarine542 wrote:
What makes the Death Guard boring in your opinion?

Their aesthetics I find to be dull and samey, and their backstory doesn't interest me at all; those being the only two reasons I'd ever consider playing any particular army.

There's also the sheer size of the BA+AM unit options as well. Disregarding any single book's playstyle, drawing units from multiple books allows for a wider variety of workable lists to be made, regardless of whether or not your intent is to be numba wun tourney winna TFG or casual nerd having fun and relaxing, you just have more options of how you're going to play and build your lists.

 Melissia wrote:

Their aesthetics I find to be dull and samey, and their backstory doesn't interest me at all; those being the only two reasons I'd ever consider playing any particular army.

There's also the sheer size of the BA+AM unit options as well. Disregarding any single book's playstyle, drawing units from multiple books allows for a wider variety of workable lists to be made, regardless of whether or not your intent is to be numba wun tourney winna TFG or casual nerd having fun and relaxing, you just have more options of how you're going to play and build your lists.

Now I know we are all just giving opinions but I really don't get what you mean here. The very nature of chaos and their models allows for such a wide variety of customization compared to their imperial counterparts, who are designed to be samey. Do you actually mean the posing options? If so I think that can be overcome with a little creativity just like any army.

Also by playing Death Guard you have the option to take things from the new Daemons codex, Death Guard codex, and Heretic Astartes codex and still remain Death Guard. You can even take it a step further and run Renegades and Heretics if you really want to run some of the goodies from the AM book as Death Guard so I don't see it as less options at all.

To OP: the good thing is that both options are strong enough to hold their own against most lists so you aren't gimping yourself with either one. Death Guard call to me more because you can really make a chaos army your own compared to an imperial army aesthetically and I really like their playstyle with the extra durability they bring and synergy the book has with itself and other chaos units. The other big bonus point there is that if you actually like the aesthetics of Death Guard you have access to all of the Nurgle range which is some of the best that GW has made to date.

If you haven't already I'd do some practice games with proxies and see how you like the feel of different lists with each army but as andysonic1 said "Tough and killy beats fast and killy right now."

 Raphael the Raven wrote:
The very nature of chaos and their models allows for such a wide variety of customization compared to their imperial counterparts

Death guard all look like pustulated grodyness incarnate, and frankly it's a bother to tell one death guard from the next. While you say "chaos allows more freedom!" ultimately I see a lot more variety in how Imperial players modify their models than I've ever seen amongst Chaos players. Orks are the best in this regard of course, but Imperials are second place.

DG, for one character alone, the standard "Chaos Lord".
Chaos Lord. Warlord with arch contaminator and Fugaris Helmet. (And if point allow it Combi-Melta and plaguebringer).
Then you make sure that everything around him got "Plague weapons", (this even includes plagueburst crawlers mortars).
Everyone inside his 10 in every direction got reroll 1's to hit, and everyone with a Plague weapon get to reroll fail to wound. Combined with 5man units of plaguemarines with 2xblightlaunchers, puking foetide-bloatdrones and plagueburst crawlers.. that is hard for anyone to deal with.
(also get the prince with plate)