Gav Thorpe on Codex Chaos

[Legatus]

As a result of the overly streamlined nature of the 4.0 book (to put it nicely), the 3.5 sub lists weren't integrated into the main chaos list, but were instead dropped altogether.

I would politely disagree with that observation. Just as with Eldar, Orks and Codex Marines, some of the previously variant list traits got adopted into the basic list, but not all of them.

 

--> no 0-1 limitation and Vindicators were only available to Iron Warriors in 3.5, now they are in the basic list

 

--> no 0-1 limitation on raptors was only available to Night Lords in 3.5

 

--> more daemon troop units than the 6 troop choices permit was only possible for Word Bearers

 

 

Not that I don't think there should be some mechanical nod to the idea of like-aligned troops prefering to work together. In fact, such mechanics are downright necessary to incorporating the sublists into a single list. Such mechanics can already be seen in other factions, and would be as simple as 'berzerkers are elite, but every khorne-marked hero you take lets you take a berzerker unit as a troops choice' or the like. Chaos is almost unique among recent codeces in not employing force-org shifts to represent themed armies.

The 3rd Edition and 3.5 Codex Chaos did have such rules. The current Codex goes one step ahead and outright makes all cult units Troops, without the need for a marked Lord. In the previous two codices they were elite choices and had to be made Troops via the Lords mark.

[Drudge Dreadnought]

Or maybe its just a crappy unit and crappy move? Which is the opinion of, well, everybody but you? When was the last time you saw the sort of squad and tactic you are describing in a top tourney list? 3rd edition maybe?

Dunno, it seems that one cannot easily find a wealth of GT participant lists when one is not already deeply involved in that field. There seem to be a few lists with bikes being posted on this site (like here, here and here), but of course they are promptly advised to drop the bikes. I would have been surprised if it would have been any different. While searching I also found this list, and he seems to enjoy it, and mentions summoning daemons off the bikes as well, but it is an older blog post, so who knows, maybe he has come to realize his errors.

 

 

Yes, but we're not talking about if bikers are useable. We're talking about if they are good. I use bikers + lesser daemons myself. But thats in a fluff list.

[Legatus]

Yes, but we're not talking about if bikers are useable. We're talking about if they are good.

Are we...? :lol:

 

 

Who cares that you can take any icon[that can die] on bikers in the gav dex , if the unit itself is a dead choice for any build and any army.

They are actually not that bad.

[Brother Edwin]

Althow I agre with the removal of the appendix lists I think getting rid of the wargear options is a very bad thing.

[Drudge Dreadnought]

--> no 0-1 limitation on raptors was only available to Night Lords in 3.5

 

But raptors are no longer Raptors. Now they are just assault marines with an icon. They have lost the special rules that defined the real Raptors.

[Legatus]

What you call them is not really relevant to th epoint that they used to be limited for all except for Night Lords. In 2nd Edition Chaos had no Jump Infantry at all. In 3rd Edition they got the limited Raptor choice, since jump packs were rare during the heresy. With the Index Astartes articles and the 3.5 rules the Night Lords were given an increased number of Raptors over the other Legions. That removed limit now got included into the basic army list. Raptors are still describes as being rare in the current Codex, so if you do any other Legion then perhaps you should limit your raptor choices, while Night Lords can feel free to fill up their fast attack choices with them if they so desire.

[Drudge Dreadnought]

Yeah, now we can take as many as we want, but since they are bad nobody does. I guess thats one way to keep things fluffy without actually enforcing the fluff.

[Sception]

--> no 0-1 limitation and Vindicators were only available to Iron Warriors in 3.5, now they are in the basic list

 

--> no 0-1 limitation on raptors was only available to Night Lords in 3.5

 

--> more daemon troop units than the 6 troop choices permit was only possible for Word Bearers

 

You are of course correct here. There have been a couple nods to incorporation. That said, the lack of special rules leaves raptors feeling decidedly un-raptorlike, and daemons decidedly undaemonic. Alpha Legion loses cultists (which should have been an option for everly chaos legion to begin with, not none of them). While I indeed overstated when I said there was no effort to incorporate the legions, I still maintain that such efforts were on the whole quite insufficient. Furthermore, the almost pathological rejection of special rules undercuts several of the nods towards integration that were made, particularly the unrestricted raptors and daemons you mention.

 

 

The 3rd Edition and 3.5 Codex Chaos did have such rules. The current Codex goes one step ahead and outright makes all cult units Troops, without the need for a marked Lord. In the previous two codices they were elite choices and had to be made Troops via the Lords mark.

 

You mistake me. The point isn't whether cult units are allowed to be troops. The point is making the choices of theme made by the player constructing an army feel important by giving them noticeable mechanical effects.

 

For example, take the Ork book. Allowing them to just take Dreadnoughts as Troops choices wouldn't be unbalanced. The point of tying that access to a particular HQ choice isn't a game balance issue, but rather one specifically intended to make playing a 'mek army' feel different from playing a regular ork army, and without resorting to sub-codexes or variant lists, let alone fully separate codeces. Just making dreads core would still allow mek armies, but they would feel less distinctive then if those dreads were tied specifically to mek HQ choices.

 

For this reason, the 4.0 book isn't 'one step ahead' in making all the cult units core to begin with. Rather it has missed the boat entirely. Shifting the force org slots of units based on HQ choices is a common mechanic in recent codeces, and one that is very effective, imo, for conveying the thematic feeling of sublists without the hassle and division they entail.

[Legatus]

I agree that pretty much every Legion would be utilizing cultists in one form or another occasionally, but I do not like the idea of expensive elite CSM units advancing behind the cover of 4 point per model cannon fodder units that grant them a 4+ cover save.

[Brother Vader]

@ malisteen,

 

That is the best argued and most thought out post I have seen on the subject. You are totally spot on with your observations about how this codex could have incorporated all the fluff elements and alternative army types that were lost in 4.0 without the excessive complications of the 3.5 dex (which while uber fluffy, did require a lot of cross-referencing). I also totally agree with the point that DA and BA could be included in the main marine codex via the same character system that particular codex has and with the distinction you made with SW and BT.

 

Legatus, I think your points are valid but the main body of malisteen's post still stands up to scrutiny.

 

Not that I don't think there should be some mechanical nod to the idea of like-aligned troops prefering to work together. In fact, such mechanics are downright necessary to incorporating the sublists into a single list. Such mechanics can already be seen in other factions, and would be as simple as 'berzerkers are elite, but every khorne-marked hero you take lets you take a berzerker unit as a troops choice' or the like. Chaos is almost unique among recent codeces in not employing force-org shifts to represent themed armies.

 

I made a similar point in the topic about the worth of the Chaos Lord. This is a better mechanic than the free-for-all that exists now. It would mean that you would have to make tougher choices in army selection than just "hmm, 2 lash princes, PMs and oblits is the best build, I'll have that" while still allowing fluffy players to have a fluffy army.

 

Raptors are still describes as being rare in the current Codex, so if you do any other Legion then perhaps you should limit your raptor choices, while Night Lords can feel free to fill up their fast attack choices with them if they so desire.

 

This is an admirable sentiment. I like fluffy army selection, the fluff is why most of us play 40K, but it could be reflected in the codex in a much better way; ie the options of 3.0 and 3.5 with the some of the streamlining of 4.0.

 

You mistake me. The point isn't whether cult units are allowed to be troops. The point is making the choices of theme made by the player constructing an army feel important by giving them noticeable mechanical effects.

 

What he said. That's fluff and game mechanics combined.

[Sception]

I agree that pretty much every Legion would be utilizing cultists in one form or another occasionally, but I do not like the idea of expensive elite CSM units advancing behind the cover of 4 point per model cannon fodder units that grant them a 4+ cover save.

 

There are ways to design around that. Infiltration makes sense for chaos cultists of any loyalty, not just Alpha Legion, and forcing them to pay for the ability makes them less efficient as a screen and also encourages alternate uses of them. You could also give cultists options for cheap heavy weapons while removing the heavy weapon options from troop choice chaos marines, encouraging chaos players to field static cultist squads rather than squads that advance in front of marines.

 

On top of that, such a screen prevents the chaos marines behind from advancing in a rhino, which seems like a better, faster way of reaching combat, anyway.

 

And even with all that said, Chaos marines using cultists as expendable cannon fodder seems very in keeping with the fluff. If such tactics were assumed as one of the potential CSM formations, and pointed appropriately (slightly more expensive cultists knowing that they'd be granting saves, or slightly more expensive marines, since they could be assumed to have cover, or both), I don't think it would be a problem. And I rather like the idea of encouraging a faction that has traditionally been overwhelmingly T4, 3+ save in nature (ie, marines) to field the bulk of their army as T3, 6+ save troopers instead. Elite Marines advancing on foot behind fodder would be an enjoyable departure from the usual 'MEQs in Boxes' that are half of the armies anybody ever sees.

 

Are nobs advancing behind gretchin so terrible a thing? Are genestealers advancing behind gaunts a detriment to the game? were chaos terminators screened by cultists so evil back in 3.0? Maybe so, I don't know. I didn't own cultists back in the day, and I've more or less stopped playing 40k for the past year or so, due in no small part to how dull I find the current chaos codex (not weak, mind you, I still won more then half the games I played with it, even without resorting to lash/plague/oblit spam, just dull), and my lack of desire to play another army.

[satanaka]

but what does that have to do with game play and playabilty of units . techniclly every legal unit...

Huh? Sorry, I was dozing off there. I was tinking about how much fun it was dropping a swarm of 10 daemons next to a unit of my opponent and then picking up 30 dice for their attacks. Ah, they did well supporting a single Sorcerer against an enemy tactical squad, or blocking a dread for 3 turns. Of course, at that time I did not know that a single unit of daemons is not very useful. If I had known I would probably have lost properly as I should have. :)

 

Edit: But I assume you already know that I have no idea how to play Chaos since I have mentioned before that I do not play the one and only list that works.

 

LOL drop them next to a full unit of Wyches and see what happens.

 

Nevermind, I'll tell you. The Daemons get punched. Badly.

[the jeske]

Are we...?

yes we are m8 . who cares that you have an overpriced unit with no synergy with the rest of the army and generally sub par in every aspect ? I didnt play a demon bomb in 3.5 [what didnt mean I did not test it. only it was not MY army] , it was not auto win , save maybe against mini max spaming tacs , but bikes made sense in the 3.5 dex . they had their use , tactics that were usable . There is nothing like that in gav dex. they are not a good base for an army , they are not a good single unit [no matter if we try to do counter attack, anti tank or "demon/termicid bomb" with it] .

--> no 0-1 limitation and Vindicators were only available to Iron Warriors in 3.5, now they are in the basic list

that has nothing to do woth actuall codex desinging of lists . It happnened only because of the apo kits and to boost sales of the new plastic vindicators.

 

--> no 0-1 limitation on raptors was only available to Night Lords in 3.5

cool and in the sm dex you can take units of vanguard ...only no one does because both units are rather sub par . Also remember that a lot of the 0-1 thing was due to desing team forgetting that something like that exist. We got 2 DP not because desing wanted it[they said people wouldnt use 2 ]. And even if they did that on purpous , its logical . they kill all legion lists , so there is no need for the NL more raptors everyone else 1 raptor merc unit .

while Night Lords can feel free to fill up their fast attack choices with them if they so desire.

with non scoring overcosted , not better then csm units ;) So in the end playing an undivided legion is using sub par choices and gimping your own army by self limiting of choices . And what do we get in return ?? ..... a way to paint models . Now in the 3.5 we got a way to play .

I also totally agree with the point that DA and BA could be included in the main marine codex via the same character system that particular codex has and with the distinction you made with SW and BT.

yeah only overcharged rhinos, baals , DC, RW and DW , attack bike squads for BA and no for DA . if you put DA/BA in to the sm dex you would end up with a 3.5 like sub list for some of the named chapters.

 

 

I agree that pretty much every Legion would be utilizing cultists in one form or another occasionally, but I do not like the idea of expensive elite CSM units advancing behind the cover of 4 point per model cannon fodder units that grant them a 4+ cover save.

even if that ment that that sm build couldnt use cult units or demons [and that mecha doesnt really work well with slogging screen in front unless it has fleet] ? Also cultists are something specials for WB and AL . yes other legions use cultists too sometimes, but WB and AL use them always . And in a different way too , because WB have those huge cultists armies joining their masters , while AL has cultitsts and non csm or non full csm implanted agents.

Again I dont get the philosphy of desing,as it caused the drop of chaos sales . cut tons of options and give nothing in return [play BL is not an option . If I played BL before I get nothing , If I didnt play BL before I wouldnt want to play with BL].

[Iron-Daemon Forge]

Time for a little Service Announcement,

 

With reference to Kurgan's original post in this thread, the next time I have to purge this thread of off-topic/insulting posts (you know who you are) there will be given warnings.

 

Keep it constructive, keep it civil, keep it on-topic.

 

 

And now, back to the topic at hand.

 

Just though I'd give people a little reminder here, some post have been a little heated. Keep to the topic that hand, after all we are all on this fourm for a commen hobby being Games Workshop/Warhammer 40k, no need to be a bit heated toward other, we all have our own views.

 

IP

[Legatus]

Are nobs advancing behind gretchin so terrible a thing? Are genestealers advancing behind gaunts a detriment to the game? were chaos terminators screened by cultists so evil back in 3.0? Maybe so, I don't know. I didn't own cultists back in the day, and I've more or less stopped playing 40k for the past year or so, due in no small part to how dull I find the current chaos codex (not weak, mind you, I still won more then half the games I played with it, even without resorting to lash/plague/oblit spam, just dull), and my lack of desire to play another army.

Maybe I am still scarred by 3rd Edtion, where enemy unist did not just grant a cover save but blocked LOS alltogether. I was quite frustrated that it was almost impossible to ever shoot at Genestealers (which had powerweapons prior to their first 3rd Ed Codex...) as they were allways moving behind a large screen of Gaunts. Eldar Guardians were used as screens for Dark Reapers, who were themselves untouchable by enemy fire as long as teh guardians lived. A cover save is not that bad, but stil I think Marine armies should not have cheap screening units and instead rely on their armour save.

 

LOL drop them next to a full unit of Wyches and see what happens.

 

Nevermind, I'll tell you. The Daemons get punched. Badly.

Then maybe don't do that? :P

[Sception]

I remember the black codex days as well. Genestealers invulnerable behind a wall of termagants. Hive Tyrants at the front, because they were independent characters and that made them untargetable by shooting when they joined the termagants. Scary days.

 

I even remember hearing stories about a chaos player who showed up to a tournament with cultists mounted on CD trays as bases to increase their los blocking abilities, since there were no rules at the time about maximum base sizes.

 

But those aren't the days we're in anymore. Screening only gets you cover now, and cover isn't that hard to get with the recommended terrain amounts. Worse, it restricts the infantry behind to the slowest of two dice of run move, since they can't pass through the screening unit without defeating the point of having it in the first place. It also makes it harder to bring your bolters to bare, since by the time you're in rapid fire range your screening cultists are probably in melee. And since short range fire is pretty good these days...

 

Not that screening with cultists shouldn't be a viable strategy. As I said, to me it sounds fluffy, not to mention a pleasant change of pace from standard MEQ fare.

 

 

As for what legions use cultists/mutants/feral warriors - they all do. All of them. As fodder. As potential stock for the creation of new marines via stolen geneseed or other more esoteric methods (read, Bile). As slaves to perform more degrading tasks. As sacrifices. All the Chaos Marine legions use cultists. I don't want cultists to be a required part of Chaos armies - there should be options for power armored troop squads, even before you count shifting force slot HQ rules. But still, some unit or units representing cultists, mutants, or feral warriors should be available to any Chaos Marine faction.

[Castlerook]

What seems extremely unfluffy to me is the fact that it seems that Chaos Space Marines are at the forefront of every assault on an Imperial world. I'm sorry, but any type of Space Marine might survive some weapons fired at them, but come on, taking a planet without any help? Its ridiculous. It takes how much time, resources and energy to create new Chaos Space Marines? Wouldn't it be easier to have cultists form some sort of (in)human shield for the guys doing the actual fighting? I did some maths last night, if a Chaos Sorcerer corrupted 5 people on an Imperial world, and sent them out to corrupt 5 more people each, in seven steps they'd have close to a quarter of a million followers, followers that would gladly die for their master. How is that unfluffy?

 

Also, I can't actually see any Chaos Space Marine standing around summoning Daemons while theres a battle going on (well...maybe Word Bearers). Nor can I see a Chaos Marine sacrificing himself to summon a Greater Daemon. And does anyone seriously believe that a Chaos Marine would do any building shrines to their Daemonic Patron? Nope, they have slaves/cultists/traitors for that.

 

Look at the force dispositions during the 13th Black Crusade event, the biggest influence might have been the Chaos Marines, but it was the traitor Guard and Cultists who made up the bulk of Abaddon's force. Look at the Black Library Novels, theres rarely a battle where Chaos Marines didn't have a meatshield made up of slaves or cultists. Why risk the life of a Chaos Marine when you could just send some slaves instead? It seems that Games Workshop really did miss an opportunity by dropping cultists from the list.

 

Just my thoughts.

[Legatus]

Of course any engagement with "Chaos" would be mainly about cultists or traitor guard. But you are not playing traitor guard, you are playing Chaos Space Marines. The majority (like 95%) of all imperial battles are fought by the Imperial Guard. That does not mean you want to include Guardsmen in your Space Marine force. Chaos Marines will often join forces with cultsist and traitor milita, but how often will they march side by side? Traitor Marines are still elite shock troops, and are doing assaults and raids where mere humans would only slow them down.

 

Imperium --> Imperial Guard + Space Marines + Inquisition

 

Chaos --> Cults/Traitor Militia + Chaos Space Marines + Daemons

 

You are not playing one of those factions. You are playing one particular type of force of the faction. 2nd Edition had "Codex Chaos". Since 3rd Edition it has been retiteled "Codex Chaos Space Marines", though at that time it still included all the daemons.

 

 

Like 90% of all 40K battles are without any Marine participation, and perhaps 99.9% without any Chaos Marines. The majority of the battles will be Imperial Guard (or PDF) against Orks. Then there are battles between Imperial Guard, Orks, ELdar and other Xenos. Only a tiny fraction of the battles will ever include Chaos Marines. That does not mean that in order for it to be a fluffy game of 40K you cannot include any Chaos Marines. You decided to play that army, even though they are not among the most common forces. Similarly when you are playing your Chaos Space Marines, tehy do not need a ratio of 100 cultists per single Marine to make it a fluffy list, or really any cultists at all. You are not playing "Chaos", you are playing "Chaos Space Marines".

[Castlerook]

Why do they have to be mutually exclusive? The Imperial Guard, Navy and the Space Marines are all seperate entities because of the events of the Horus Heresy, no one man could command all three branches of the Emperor's Army, so fair enough their all seperated. But Chaos is under no such compunction.

 

You said perhaps 99.9% of the battles fought do not involve Chaos Marines. Well, that 0.1% doesn't necessarily mean it would be Chaos Marines, infact were you to scale it up to, lets say 1 in 10 planets in the Imperium that are actually being fought over, thats 100,000 for the sake of arguement. So, 0.1% means 100 planets possibly under attack from Chaos. What are the odds there that Chaos Marines will be in force on any of those planets, again for the sake of arguement, we'll say 10% (After all, Chaos Marines can't be everywhere), thats 10 planets being attacked by Chaos Marines, the other 90 planets being attacked by Cultists or Traitor Guard.

 

Yet, from the respective codecii, you would imagine large scale deployment of Chaos Marines on hundreds of Imperial planets. Chaos Marines are numerous, but that much. Like, I said, the Studio really missed an opportunity by dropping Cultists.

[Legatus]

You said perhaps 99.9% of the battles fought do not involve Chaos Marines. Well, that 0.1% doesn't necessarily mean it would be Chaos Marines

Er... :huh:

 

(that is exactly what it means)

 

The point I was trying to get across is that only a tiny number of conflicts will involve Chaos Marines. More will at least involve renegade PDF or cultists. That does not in any way mean that if you play a "Chaos Space Marine force" that it should therefor include renegade PDF or cultists.

 

Why even Chaos Marines would operate as distinct foces and not be combined at tatical level with human forces is because forces of Marines and forces of humans operate drastically different.

 

Human forces are massed armies, used to fight battles of attrition against pretty much every enemy and xenos since those are either similarly numerous or much more elite. Such massed armies are slow and unwieldy. A lot of logistics is involved, and the goal usually is to achieve dominance over an area and claim it, usually over a longer and drawn out period of time.

 

Marine forces are much smaller than human forces (1/10 or even 1/100). They are very elite, very mobile, and used as shock troops or strike forces. They strike at a position and overwhelm it, and promptly disengage to move to the next position.

 

Human soldiers are not as reliable and less capable. A mass of human soldiers would slow a marine force down. A small number of human soldiers would not be of much benefit and only get in the way.

 

When "Chaos" is attacking a world at large scale, there are going to be armies of cultists or traitor guard involved. And it is going to take weeks or months of fighting to defeat the defenders. If the Word Bearers were involved, they would order vast armies of cultists to drown the defenders. The Word Bearers themselves, however, are Space Marines, and will strike at crucial enemy positions and undertake operations at key locations, while cultists all over the world are herded to their deaths as a distraction or just to fatigue the enemy. If you were playing a large scale global campaign your force might consist of 3,000,000 Cultists, 200,000 Traitor Guard and 500 Word bearers. However, in a game of 40K you would be playing the Word Bearers as they are undertaking one of their missions.

 

See the first battle for armageddon. It included hordes of Cultists and traitor Guard led by the World Eaters, and on the imperial Sider there was Armageddon PDF and Imperial Guard (I think) as well as the Space Wolves involved. The Chaos Marines had humans on their side, as had the loyalist Space Marines. The renegade humans were under direct command by the Traitor Marines, while the imperial PDF and guard were not under Marine command, but still all those foces were fighting alongside each other during that campaign. That the traitor humans are commanded by the World Eaters does not mean that they would distribute their Berserker units and spread them thin evenly among the cultist forces.

[Castlerook]

So why have 2 seperate lists (Actually one list and an obsolete list) for the same force? Obviously Cultists would be the main source of manpower, with Chaos Marines providing the killer blow. Its likely there are thousands of Cultists for every Chaos Marine, yet there is nothing rule wise to support that. Multiple detachments and Apocalypse aren't really useful options, it takes time and a lot of effort to set up a decent Apocalypse game and some people have no interest in playing Apocalypse games all the time (in fact it would be quite boring). And using the Imperial Guard as Count As cultists isn't the same, I'm sure people would prefer to have Mutants, Big Mutants and the occassional hound unit (Veterans, Ogryns and Rough Riders just don't really fit)

 

As it is, the only place Cultists and Traitor Guard get any sort of support is from Forge World with the Vraks list. You look at the list there and it seems to be more representative of a Chaos army then Chaos Marines alone. And yet, if someone wanted to bring a competitive Vrak army to a tournament, they can't, many tournaments don't allow Forge World lists.

 

So, again, I ask, why have a mutually exclusive list, when the demand for Cultist is so great? Codex Chaos may have been overly packed with excess units but it may have had the right idea. Perhaps we should be seeing more Chaos armies rather then the same old Chaos Space Marine armies.

[Legatus]

So, again, I ask, why have a mutually exclusive list, when the demand for Cultist is so great?

I doubt that it is. Sure, people are asking for cultist choices for their Chaos Space Marine army, but as I tried to argue, Cultists and Chaos Marines should be different armies. And how much demand is there for an army where the individual models are compareable to IG conscripts? Where you would need 200 models where Marine players field forces of 50 and IG/Tyranids about 100? At least with Guard you have the whole "contemporary/ww2 military" theme going. Cultists are just crazed mobs with pointy sticks or handguns. A "cultist army" would probably not be among the most successful Codices. Also GW would have to do a whole range of models for them. They would have to invest a lot of capacity into a force that would not be very popular.

[Sovereign]

So, again, I ask, why have a mutually exclusive list, when the demand for Cultist is so great?

I doubt that it is. Sure, people are asking for cultist choices for their Chaos Space Marine army, but as I tried to argue, Cultists and Chaos Marines should be different armies.

 

Also GW would have to do a whole range of models for them. They would have to invest a lot of capacity into a force that would not be very popular.

A "Cultist Army" would probably be along the lines of the EoT LatD list - mostly Cultists & Mutants, with Markable CSM as Elite, and perhaps even Markable Daemons.

 

GW would have to do new sprues for Cultists and Mutants, that's a given and the reason they're not back as an army. But popularity wouldn't be worse than, say, Dark Eldar.

[Legatus]

LatD did not include any cultists, they were traitor guard. The difference being that traitro guard has equipment and training, while cultists are mainly crazed fanatics that grabbed the best weapon they could come up with by themselves. There are of course traitor guard forces, but they can easily be done by using guard with different iconography. Cultists would be different from a professional army.

[satanaka]

Nevermind, I'll tell you. The Daemons get punched. Badly.

Then maybe don't do that? :lol:

 

LOL dropping anything CC next to a full unit of Wyches is usually a bad idea. (They half your WS AND subtract the add. attack for two CCW's. You need S6 or more to ignore the Halving of WS.)