Dark Angels Rumors and Chaos Faildex...

[Rayray]

I have no idea what you guy's problems are. My games thus far have been equivalent to ovary headbutting women (the only horrible facestomping that happened to me was against a necron/GK army). My army is waaay far from bland (WB), and my only small complaint is that the dark apostle is rather lackluster. Chances are half of those DA rumors will be false. Just remember, its not the size of it...it's how you use it.

[Brother Ambroz]

Chances are. We'll see how the DA rank.

 

This is one of the main topics. WB are very easy to portray with the current codex unlike a fair amount of other warbands. The cults in particular are difficult to do.

 

Apostles aren't the only lackluster unit, it might be the only you use but there are others. There are also alot of werid wargear choices that are just bad. Such as these:

 

icon of despair, mark of tzeencth, Fabulous Bile, Key, Murder Sword, Scroll, Dark Apostle, Warp Smith, Possessed, Warp Talons, Rending on Slaanesh DP...

[Kol Saresk]

Anyway I do agree you do need to understand what you're bringing. We have people that have tried out most of these though.

Do we? Because some say yes and some say no so I'd say it's still thrown up in the board. Most(not all and not including you since you have played this edition) of "teh internet" say it doesn't work because it doesn't work on paper or it doesn't work in one or two limited situations. Actual experience reports are mixed on what does and doesn't work while the theoretical says none of it should ever work unless it's a hail mary.

 

And if Word Bearers are the easiest to show, then why was Smurfalypse struggling to make a Word Bearers list? That was Unmarked? Now I'm getting confused because the only list that's supposed to work is the Nurgle list when right after publication it was supposed to be the Khorne list but now an Unmarked list is easy to make and use? Is this a monobuild Codex or not?

[Hazath]

Word bearer is easy to represent because of dark apostles, demon engines, and non-cult terminators.

 

Struggle comes from that dark apostles and demon engines aren't the most competitive choice...

[Hazath]

Double post.

[Rayray]

Actually, i have found the warpsmith is a boss, fabious has always been meh, icons are slightly overrated(except for excess), and half of the chaos options/fluff is what you do with and make of it. If the codex is really that bad, then use a different book. Heck, chances are, if you hated the book upon first reading it, there isn't much that would make you think otherwise.

[Brother Ambroz]

Everything's simple with Counts As Kol. Counts as Seige Specialists = Plague Marines. Hunters with sniper rifles or some xenos weaponry = Noise Marines. Etc, etc. Smurf was struggling because he refuses to use counts as.

 

On the reports, they're kind of all over. Both from the Chaos perspective and where the author was playing against Chaos. There are a few in the Liber Victorum, a few in the Chaos Army List forum, one or two in this subforum and on random google'd sites. I love reading about batreps but I usually only read chaos ones.

 

@Rayray - You must have better luck with your Warpsmith rolls than most people. The time I proxied one it only managed one repair. I agree the IoE isn't bad, I've used that and it's saved quite a few of my guys. I didn't hate it when I read it (that took a month or so) but I'm never going to use another codex. That's just a matter of loyalty. :P

[Kol Saresk]

So without count-as, then the answer is no. With Count-as, the answer is yes, but only with "sub-par"(to use math-hammer's description) units. Okay...

 

So if the people who are actually posting their tabletop experience all over have no general consensus on what does or does not work, then wouldn't just be more logical to say no one is really sure then it does or does not?

[Rayray]

Everything's simple with Counts As Kol. Counts as Seige Specialists = Plague Marines. Hunters with sniper rifles or some xenos weaponry = Noise Marines. Etc, etc. Smurf was struggling because he refuses to use counts as.

 

On the reports, they're kind of all over. Both from the Chaos perspective and where the author was playing against Chaos. There are a few in the Liber Victorum, a few in the Chaos Army List forum, one or two in this subforum and on random google'd sites. I love reading about batreps but I usually only read chaos ones.

 

@Rayray - You must have better luck with your Warpsmith rolls than most people. The time I proxied one it only managed one repair. I agree the IoE isn't bad, I've used that and it's saved quite a few of my guys. I didn't hate it when I read it (that took a month or so) but I'm never going to use another codex. That's just a matter of loyalty. :P

Admittedly, I have had some good luck. But sitting with a daemon engine and being bubble wrapped by shooty cultists, he is one angry mofo. Now if those robed terminators would just be released...

[Brother Ambroz]

Not necessarily only with sub-par units, not sure where you're getting that from.

 

There is a consensus. From what I've read is that Helldrakes often make the game, bikes are really good and black mace DPs are very good but you need to be very careful with them. There is more but I don't really want to type it all out at the moment.

[Rain]

Do you actually even play the game Kol? I mean you are constantly sarcastic and condescending toward "math-hammer" and it's true that sometimes unusual things happen or a suboptimal unit happens to perform well, but honestly most of the time things do fall out as "math hammer" expects them to. And when you actually play and realize that the guy across the table has units of each specialization that are just plain better than your equivalent units of that specialization an that therefore he better either A.) be dumb or B.) have bad luck it's a rather depressing feeling and makes you lose heart in your army. So it's not just about having the best crunchiest list for the sake of it, it's about feeling like your army can do something that others cannot or at least has some interesting combos or tricks up its sleeve that can counter your opponent's combos and tricks, instead of just feeling like you're playing with a handicap.

[Rayray]

Do you actually even play the game Kol? I mean you are constantly sarcastic and condescending toward "math-hammer" and it's true that sometimes unusual things happen or a suboptimal unit happens to perform well, but honestly most of the time things do fall out as "math hammer" expects them to. And when you actually play and realize that the guy across the table has units of each specialization that are just plain better than your equivalent units of that specialization an that therefore he better either A.) be dumb or B.) have bad luck it's a rather depressing feeling and makes you lose heart in your army. So it's not just about having the best crunchiest list for the sake of it, it's about feeling like your army can do something that others cannot or at least has some interesting combos or tricks up its sleeve that can counter your opponent's combos and tricks, instead of just feeling like you're playing with a handicap.

I'm not taking up for kol, but math hammer is only part of the total equation. Tactics has a lot to do with the game as well. Those "sub-par" warp talons work great against power armor if you position them right. Sure, they're no GKs, but nothing is in our dex. And it's nice that csm weren't Ward's love-child. If they were, i'd shelve chaos because the auto-win button is for console gamers.

[Agent Purple]

So without count-as, then the answer is no. With Count-as, the answer is yes, but only with "sub-par"(to use math-hammer's description) units. Okay...

 

So if the people who are actually posting their tabletop experience all over have no general consensus on what does or does not work, then wouldn't just be more logical to say no one is really sure then it does or does not?

 

An army with subpar units (or that is based on a build that another codex would do better) can work, through player skill, or, if you are not playing against a mirror build, by playing to your build's strengths against the opponent. This does not mean that you couldn't have made essentially the same army, but better, using another MEQ codex if you hadn't decided to use faildex at list selection stage after you had pinned down your build concept, which again, brings up the question, why choose chaos?

 

There is a difference from making a 'working' army vs. making an army that is optimized for its build. Viable isn't the same as competitive. As I have stated several times, I do not feel the chaos book offers much to go with in terms of build strengths that aren't trumped by other codexes. When choosing an army and deciding upon a build, the chaos dex offers very little incentive for selection if you are not using the mono build.

 

You can build a GH clone based army with khorne marines, havocs, and biker lord / bikes (in lieu of T wolves) and make the build work on the table in the same way you could have made the SW army work. But at the end of the day, your army would be better overall if you had just played them as wolves.

 

In summary: Its not that the other builds don't work, it that you could use the same build with a different dex and have it work better.

[Polaria]

Do you actually even play the game Kol? I mean you are constantly sarcastic and condescending toward "math-hammer" and it's true that sometimes unusual things happen or a suboptimal unit happens to perform well, but honestly most of the time things do fall out as "math hammer" expects them to.

 

Well, to be honest, there are things that math-hammer can do and there are things it can't do. Mathhammer is great for predicting the average results of assaults once the combat in joined. For everything else its not so great to be honest. Once you put real models on a real table with real terrain its really hard to predict the real results just by counting. This is especially true in current edition where the LOS rules, model-by-model cover rules, not being able to kill stuff you can't see rules, concentrating fire, random assault distances and such come to play.

 

Fliers are actually a very good example of this. On a basic "math-hammer" model where you always have targets at range and in arc and your fliers are always on table it looks like they are so far overpowered its not even fun. Once you actually PLAY with them (without cheating) you will quickly realize their limitations and see how few shots per game you actually get from them in a real game. Believe me, I've done quite a lot of math-hammering myself and there are very clear limits to how far that method can predict the outcome of anything.

[Kol Saresk]

Do I realize probable is most likely to happen? Yes. Is it what will always happen? No. That's where I get my problem. AP3 doesn't work against Terminators. That's common sense as much as it is math hammer. But it is useable against more than a few other units. However, nobody counts AP 3 as viable because of its ineffectiveness against a specific type of unit that will only be common in two lists. That's the math-hammer I am sarcastic against. The math-hammer that counts the game as though it were counting a deck of cards even though every roll of the die is a new deck. The math-hammer that says something is completely useless because it doesn't work against one unit that is the "number one unit" in a specific build. That is the math-hammer I don't like and that is the math-hammer I don't do. Do I prefer factual over theoretical? Yes. Is there something wrong with that? Not that I am aware of because factual says "This is what happened" while theoretical says "this is what might happen." The problem is, I see very few people who say "might" when it comes to showing math-hammer results. They say it will or it won't. They say that every time you play you will without a do 2/3 of this or 1/8 of that and that is why you should or shouldn't take it. Some people even come and say "You are doing this and you will be doing that because this is what your opponent will be doing something else." That is the math-hammer I don't like. That is the math-hammer I am sarcastic about. nothing can predict what will happen, only what might.

 

Contrary to popular belief, I have bowed down to math-hammer on more than a few occasions because it was presented as "this is what is most likely to happen in this situation which is a likely situation." I do not respond well to "You will be doing X because your opponent will be doing Y with Unit 1 so taking Unit 2 will lose you the game because Unit 2 can never beat Unit 1 when you do X in response to Y." Absolutes are only absolute in the past and to treat the probable as absolute is the math-hammer I don't like. I'd be nicer about it depending on the people who presented it and on how they presented it.

 

But very few people do that. Tanith is one of the few. Zhukov looks like he might be one of the few. Don't know because I've never seen his work. And there are others. Excessus, and Polaria fit in that number. However, the number of people who fit in the category I just showed in my first is much larger than the group who shows what is likely to happen as what is likely to happen. Does that help you understand my opinion better?

[Rayray]

Think the Inquisition might be banning this thread. Quickly, brothers.... chaosify it and talk about the green dresswearers.

[Kol Saresk]

Think the Inquisition might be banning this thread. Quickly, brothers.... chaosify it and talk about the green dresswearers.

The Frock-wearing Dark Angels are going to be so awesome! I can't decide if I want the white ones, the black ones or the green ones! Maybe I'll even go for the pink ones!

[Rayray]

Think the Inquisition might be banning this thread. Quickly, brothers.... chaosify it and talk about the green dresswearers.

The Frock-wearing Dark Angels are going to be so awesome! I can't decide if I want the white ones, the black ones or the green ones! Maybe I'll even go for the pink ones!

So....what do we all complain about if the DA end up more "bland" than us?

[Kol Saresk]

The MREs. Although the one with spaghetti and meatballs isn't half bad.

[Rain]

I think you guys are kind of missing my point. Sure it's possible to win even against theoretically better armies and outlier results do occur, and tactics obviously matter a lot, but your opponents uses tactics too. And the usefulness of mathhammer is that it gives ceteris paribus results, so I mean sure you won't always have that unit in position etc, but let's for example take Khorne CSM vs berzerkers (a question close to my heart). Now, when are berzerkers really better? Point for point it's really just when they get the charge off against a single enemy unit without taking any losses from shooting or overwatch. So--never. Do I still use them? Yes, because I play World Eaters and WE are a berzerker army, but come on, it just feels cheap.

 

And that's kind of the thing, various Chaos factions have iconic units, especially so with the cult Legions and their corresponding units, and in the case of Tz and Khorne those cult units are just objectively worse. Loyalists tend to not have this problem, it's not like you can't play Imperial Fists without scout bikers or something, but you really can't play WE without zerks or 1k Sons without rubrics. Oh and by the way, ironically enough the "perfect scenario that never actually happens" is the best matchup of Khorne CSM vs zerk, and the more you move toward "realistic actual game" the worse off zerks are comparatively because of all of the BS that CC units have to deal with in 6th and not having plasma guns to fall back on.

[Rayray]

I think you guys are kind of missing my point. Sure it's possible to win even against theoretically better armies and outlier results do occur, and tactics obviously matter a lot, but your opponents uses tactics too. And the usefulness of mathhammer is that it gives ceteris paribus results, so I mean sure you won't always have that unit in position etc, but let's for example take Khorne CSM vs berzerkers (a question close to my heart). Now, when are berzerkers really better? Point for point it's really just when they get the charge off against a single enemy unit without taking any losses from shooting or overwatch. So--never. Do I still use them? Yes, because I play World Eaters and WE are a berzerker army, but come on, it just feels cheap.

 

And that's kind of the thing, various Chaos factions have iconic units, especially so with the cult Legions and their corresponding units, and in the case of Tz and Khorne those cult units are just objectively worse. Loyalists tend to not have this problem, it's not like you can't play Imperial Fists without scout bikers or something, but you really can't play WE without zerks or 1k Sons without rubrics. Oh and by the way, ironically enough the "perfect scenario that never actually happens" is the best matchup of Khorne CSM vs zerk, and the more you move toward "realistic actual game" the worse off zerks are comparatively because of all of the BS that CC units have to deal with in 6th and not having plasma guns to fall back on.

Sure, your khorne berzerkers got worse. But use something like cultists to tie down a unit for the coupe de gras(however it is spelled), and you should be peaches. It won't be viable for every game, but then again, every amazing codex isn't going to win every game either. If you really want to get down to it, my army includes lots of things that "aren't viable" in 6th edition or our codex. Like 4 rhinos with csm units, possessed...the list goes on. So learn something new, stay depressed, or just use another codex to better represent your faction.

[LordRoY]

My initial intent here was to just complain about the fact that DA seem to, at least in the rumors, be headed for a much better list than our CSM codex.

 

I see that many people feel the same, and a few want to argue about mathammer and actual board play.

 

I still contend that everything in our codex is sub-par in comparison to others, and we have no real core to focus our army on. I love the idea of nurgle bikers, but they are not my first choice. My 1st and 2nd edition chaos army was mostly termi-cide (I had over 100 terminators ready to field at any time) and didnt always do well, but at least I felt like I had a chance against anything someone could throw at me.

 

Between the meta of 6th edition, the lack of my beloved cult-terminators, and the gloom that might be the DA codex upcoming (and then the possible nerf to the daemon codex behind it)... I just dont even want to put the effort into making a list, checking it twice, packing it up, taking it to play, and then getting my ass handed to me. I would rather leave them on the shelf, or in a box, or in a box on a shelf in a closet, and dream about having an army of crazy CSM to beat back the loyalist scum and kill the false emperor.

 

Oh well.

[Rayray]

My initial intent here was to just complain about the fact that DA seem to, at least in the rumors, be headed for a much better list than our CSM codex.

 

I see that many people feel the same, and a few want to argue about mathammer and actual board play.

 

I still contend that everything in our codex is sub-par in comparison to others, and we have no real core to focus our army on. I love the idea of nurgle bikers, but they are not my first choice. My 1st and 2nd edition chaos army was mostly termi-cide (I had over 100 terminators ready to field at any time) and didnt always do well, but at least I felt like I had a chance against anything someone could throw at me.

 

Between the meta of 6th edition, the lack of my beloved cult-terminators, and the gloom that might be the DA codex upcoming (and then the possible nerf to the daemon codex behind it)... I just dont even want to put the effort into making a list, checking it twice, packing it up, taking it to play, and then getting my ass handed to me. I would rather leave them on the shelf, or in a box, or in a box on a shelf in a closet, and dream about having an army of crazy CSM to beat back the loyalist scum and kill the false emperor.

 

Oh well.

What armies are beating the snot out of your chaos?

[Polaria]

I think you guys are kind of missing my point. Sure it's possible to win even against theoretically better armies and outlier results do occur, and tactics obviously matter a lot, but your opponents uses tactics too. And the usefulness of mathhammer is that it gives ceteris paribus results, so I mean sure you won't always have that unit in position etc, but let's for example take Khorne CSM vs berzerkers (a question close to my heart). Now, when are berzerkers really better? Point for point it's really just when they get the charge off against a single enemy unit without taking any losses from shooting or overwatch. So--never. Do I still use them? Yes, because I play World Eaters and WE are a berzerker army, but come on, it just feels cheap.

 

And that's kind of the thing, various Chaos factions have iconic units, especially so with the cult Legions and their corresponding units, and in the case of Tz and Khorne those cult units are just objectively worse. Loyalists tend to not have this problem, it's not like you can't play Imperial Fists without scout bikers or something, but you really can't play WE without zerks or 1k Sons without rubrics. Oh and by the way, ironically enough the "perfect scenario that never actually happens" is the best matchup of Khorne CSM vs zerk, and the more you move toward "realistic actual game" the worse off zerks are comparatively because of all of the BS that CC units have to deal with in 6th and not having plasma guns to fall back on.

 

Now this is a PERFECT example why you can't use math-hammer to make too far-going conclusions... Yes, everyone can calculate that Khorne CSM put out 21 attacks on a charge for 85 points while Zerkers put out the same 21 attacks for 105 points. However, most forget that Zerkers have WS5 (which means a lot if your local meta has a lot of marines) and very few people are actually capable of math-hammering the value of Fearless that Zerkers have built-in. What you just said that zerkers are better than CSM only when they charge a single enemy and don't get losses from Overwatch... Well, that actually happens surprisingly often and the CSM would actually take the same losses. However, the CSM might also have broken and ran away before ever getting to assault distance (remember, no ATSKNF here). Or the opponent might just have WS4 in the actual combat...

[Brother Ambroz]

Most people just try to gear their army or lists so that it'll be able to take on anything without tailoring specifically for it. At least that's my view on why I don't like talons.

 

Think the Inquisition might be banning this thread. Quickly, brothers.... chaosify it and talk about the green dresswearers.

 

I'm suprised it hasn't happened yet. These threads always devolve into the same debates.

 

Edit: Polaria that's true that sometimes happens but at the same time it can also go the other way. My zerks charged and lost 3-4 guys in overwatch to a squad not much larger than their own.