Our friends from the warp

[howardmonsoonmoon]

Got my daemon book this morning, still digesting it, but importantly it would seem that Heralds are for your primray attachment only so as far as allies go, you can only have the daemon prince or any greater daemon as an HQ in the seconday attachment, which at the 1500 points I play is a smidge limiting. Not saying that those units are bad but if you had a 900 -1000 of a core CSM list and then thought you would top out with some daemons you would have to adjust too a chunky HQ in there. Of course the flip to that is that lots of their stuff has gone done in points ( and often down in terms of survability also)

[Rakarsis]

Got my daemon book this morning, still digesting it, but importantly it would seem that Heralds are for your primray attachment only so as far as allies go, you can only have the daemon prince or any greater daemon as an HQ in the seconday attachment, which at the 1500 points I play is a smidge limiting. Not saying that those units are bad but if you had a 900 -1000 of a core CSM list and then thought you would top out with some daemons you would have to adjust too a chunky HQ in there. Of course the flip to that is that lots of their stuff has gone done in points ( and often down in terms of survability also)

 

It does say you can only have heralds in your primary attachment, but it doesnt say in your "daemons" primary attachment. You could argue that if you ran CSM primary and daemons secondary, you could use 4 heralds as a primary CSM HQ. Probably shenanigans, but hopefully they FAQ being able to use them in an daemons allied detachment.

[Nehekhare]

trolling

 

I miss the point of reserving judgement until 40k has become a balanced game in 378th edition, yet judging that others miss the point.

we all go along here having fun. maybe you should just open your own thread and hand things differently there?

[Blood Shadow]

 

Got my daemon book this morning, still digesting it, but importantly it would seem that Heralds are for your primray attachment only so as far as allies go, you can only have the daemon prince or any greater daemon as an HQ in the seconday attachment, which at the 1500 points I play is a smidge limiting. Not saying that those units are bad but if you had a 900 -1000 of a core CSM list and then thought you would top out with some daemons you would have to adjust too a chunky HQ in there. Of course the flip to that is that lots of their stuff has gone done in points ( and often down in terms of survability also)

 

It does say you can only have heralds in your primary attachment, but it doesnt say in your "daemons" primary attachment. You could argue that if you ran CSM primary and daemons secondary, you could use 4 heralds as a primary CSM HQ. Probably shenanigans, but hopefully they FAQ being able to use them in an daemons allied detachment.

It says you can have up to four heralds in one HQ slot in a Daemon primary detachment, it doesn't say you cant use heralds in secondary detachments, you would just have to use them as one per HQ slot. Thats how i would read it anyway though i know for some people out there they will swear you cant use heralds in anything but a Daemon army, that would make no sense even for GW as most of the HQ choices are heralds 

[Rakarsis]

 

 

Got my daemon book this morning, still digesting it, but importantly it would seem that Heralds are for your primray attachment only so as far as allies go, you can only have the daemon prince or any greater daemon as an HQ in the seconday attachment, which at the 1500 points I play is a smidge limiting. Not saying that those units are bad but if you had a 900 -1000 of a core CSM list and then thought you would top out with some daemons you would have to adjust too a chunky HQ in there. Of course the flip to that is that lots of their stuff has gone done in points ( and often down in terms of survability also)

 

It does say you can only have heralds in your primary attachment, but it doesnt say in your "daemons" primary attachment. You could argue that if you ran CSM primary and daemons secondary, you could use 4 heralds as a primary CSM HQ. Probably shenanigans, but hopefully they FAQ being able to use them in an daemons allied detachment.

It says you can have up to four heralds in one HQ slot in a Daemon primary detachment, it doesn't say you cant use heralds in secondary detachments, you would just have to use them as one per HQ slot. Thats how i would read it anyway though i know for some people out there they will swear you cant use heralds in anything but a Daemon army, that would make no sense even for GW as most of the HQ choices are heralds 

Read it again. It does not say a "Daemon" primary attachment. Is the word daemon intended to be there? Most likely. But not written. GW really needs to hire a technical writer to screen their codexes. Even 1-2 hours of editing before printing a codex would clarify most rules. 

 

Also, what happens when Fiends of Slaneesh successfully charge a unit and reduce their initiative by 5? Most units would become initiative 0, thereby technically preventing them from striking back at all (you only go through initiative phases 1 through 10, therefore 0 does not exist). Is it intended for the enemy to be able to strike back on the charge, or does the Fiend's "disruptive song" ability essentially stunlock them for an entire attack phase? I am not sure what they intended in this case.

[the jeske]

you now that If you had to roll warp storm for every one of your units and everyone one of your opponents , you would almost automaticly make demons very unfriendly for tournament gaming . their turns would take ages , people wouldnt even have to stal[wellnot hard at least , not hard enough for judges to be forced to do something about it] to have games end on turn 3-4. So you would just spam cavalery and the pms in medium sized units , you wouldnt care about what stuff that kills . you want just resilient tar pits and fast tar pits , with most games being obejctive based you would just ignor trying to win the game in the usual manner[beating opposing army , getting seconderies etc] , you would put your warlords in big ass units and do everythig so they dont die . no DP and no GD[tough or not they can die and we dont want to give firstblood or slay the warlord] .

 

 

 

Also, what happens when Fiends of Slaneesh successfully charge a unit
and reduce their initiative by 5? Most units would become initiative 0,
thereby technically preventing them from striking back at all (you only
go through initiative phases 1 through 10, therefore 0 does not exist).

yeah that one is fun . no minimum of 1 means dudes drop to 0 and the rule book says you cant use stats that are 0 , so when melee starts the game crashes , because you cant move the dudes and at the same time you cant do anything about the charge actualy conecting :D

[Blood Shadow]

 

 

 

Got my daemon book this morning, still digesting it, but importantly it would seem that Heralds are for your primray attachment only so as far as allies go, you can only have the daemon prince or any greater daemon as an HQ in the seconday attachment, which at the 1500 points I play is a smidge limiting. Not saying that those units are bad but if you had a 900 -1000 of a core CSM list and then thought you would top out with some daemons you would have to adjust too a chunky HQ in there. Of course the flip to that is that lots of their stuff has gone done in points ( and often down in terms of survability also)

 

It does say you can only have heralds in your primary attachment, but it doesnt say in your "daemons" primary attachment. You could argue that if you ran CSM primary and daemons secondary, you could use 4 heralds as a primary CSM HQ. Probably shenanigans, but hopefully they FAQ being able to use them in an daemons allied detachment.

It says you can have up to four heralds in one HQ slot in a Daemon primary detachment, it doesn't say you cant use heralds in secondary detachments, you would just have to use them as one per HQ slot. Thats how i would read it anyway though i know for some people out there they will swear you cant use heralds in anything but a Daemon army, that would make no sense even for GW as most of the HQ choices are heralds 

Read it again. It does not say a "Daemon" primary attachment. Is the word daemon intended to be there? Most likely. But not written. GW really needs to hire a technical writer to screen their codexes. Even 1-2 hours of editing before printing a codex would clarify most rules. 

 

Also, what happens when Fiends of Slaneesh successfully charge a unit and reduce their initiative by 5? Most units would become initiative 0, thereby technically preventing them from striking back at all (you only go through initiative phases 1 through 10, therefore 0 does not exist). Is it intended for the enemy to be able to strike back on the charge, or does the Fiend's "disruptive song" ability essentially stunlock them for an entire attack phase? I am not sure what they intended in this case.

yeah it doesn't say Daemon, it says each primary detachment in your army, being in the Daemon book i wrote Daemon, sorry for the confusion. I still think it stands though, it says you can have 4 heralds in each primary detachment (so you could have 8 if you wanted) it doesn't say heralds are for primary Daemon use only, though i can see how it could be interpreted the other way i still think they can be used in secondary detachments. They really do need to write these things properly so there is no confusion

[Rayray]

It looks as if the icon can affect Warp talons. I wonder if the skull cannon's dreadskull rule affects them as well...

[Nehekhare]

first looks are up.

this one I found particularily funny

quoted from from 3++, courtesy of abuse puppy:

I swear to god, the first time some :cuss rolls snake eyes twice in a
row to keep repeatedly getting a free Bloodthirster back despite my
managing to have dragged it down, I am going to reach across the table
and strangle that before going on a death hunt to find GW
HQ and stab the face off each and every one of their game devs (except
Matt Ward, because that dude doesn’t deserve the hate and is a bro.)

Careful of swearing, even in a direct quote.

[Azekai]

I swear to god, the first time some :cuss rolls snake eyes twice in a

 

row to keep repeatedly getting a free Bloodthirster back despite my

 

managing to have dragged it down, I am going to reach across the table

 

and strangle that son of a bitch before going on a death hunt to find GW

 

HQ and stab the face off each and every one of their game devs (except

 

Matt Ward, because that dude doesn’t deserve the hate and is a bro.)

 

Gotta agree with this- the unbalanced random rules are the antithesis of fun. Dark Gods help me, I am wishing that ol' Ward was writing our stuff. Then we could have Angron writing his favorite goulash recipe on teh Emprah's heart and maybe some rules that wouldn't suck.

 

[Zhorzh]

My god, is the new codex THAT bad?

 

So, Matt Ward is the only person in the design studio that knows what he's doing?

[Iron Sage]

Meh. Seems half of the net thinks it looks awesome, while the other half thinks it looks as if it sucks.

 

IMO to me it looks as if its in between those two extremes. Certainly, some stuff is beyonbd doubt better than before, while some stuff has been nerfed (some units, arguably too much).

 

But yes, there is ...too much random in this codex, albeit statistically the random rolls should be okay, it will be a bit too much  dice rolling IMO.

 

But the chances of something bad happening to your own units is hardly that high (as one might be conned into thinking if one reads this thread). Someone had done the maths and it was 2.8 percent chance or something like that (that something bad happens to YOUR units during 6 turns). The chance of something bad happening to the enemy is certainly a lot higher.

 

No, its not the table that sucks per se (it really doesnt suck half as much as some here apparantly thinks...), the problem is that you have to remember to roll those :cussing dice every bloody turn and so playing daemons as Primary will be a bit iffy until you get very much used to it.

 

Me? I am just damn happy I am going to use them as allies, because sure as hell is hot, there are some very good HQs and units available to us CSM players ;)

[Gumo9]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v205/KaguraHakubi/Forum%20Comments/MikoAnga.png There's a lot of bad blood in here, so just to diffuse things, here's a cute land raider with a pink fluffy girl.

 

 

http://www.diefestung.com/forum/galerie/bilder/bild-1569.jpg

 

 

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v205/KaguraHakubi/Forum%20Comments/MikoEek.png%5D%C2%A0Oops, Oops, did I get that the wrong way round?

 

Spilt my cup of tea and scared the cat when I saw the pic. Arigato gozaimasu Furyou Miko, kawai ne !

 

G

[Rayray]

Meh. Seems half of the net thinks it looks awesome, while the other half thinks it looks as if it sucks.

IMO to me it looks as if its in between those two extremes. Certainly, some stuff is beyonbd doubt better than before, while some stuff has been nerfed (some units, arguably too much).

But yes, there is ...too much random in this codex, albeit statistically the random rolls should be okay, it will be a bit too much dice rolling IMO.

But the chances of something bad happening to your own units is hardly that high (as one might be conned into thinking if one reads this thread). Someone had done the maths and it was 2.8 percent chance or something like that (that something bad happens to YOUR units during 6 turns). The chance of something bad happening to the enemy is certainly a lot higher.

No, its not the table that sucks per se (it really doesnt suck half as much as some here apparantly thinks...), the problem is that you have to remember to roll those :cussing dice every bloody turn and so playing daemons as Primary will be a bit iffy until you get very much used to it.

Me? I am just damn happy I am going to use them as allies, because sure as hell is hot, there are some very good HQs and units available to us CSM players

Yep. Daemons as allies seems like a valid deal. Now to get some hands on those crazy plague drones....

[Iron Sage]

Meh. Seems half of the net thinks it looks awesome, while the other half thinks it looks as if it sucks.

IMO to me it looks as if its in between those two extremes. Certainly, some stuff is beyonbd doubt better than before, while some stuff has been nerfed (some units, arguably too much).

But yes, there is ...too much random in this codex, albeit statistically the random rolls should be okay, it will be a bit too much dice rolling IMO.

But the chances of something bad happening to your own units is hardly that high (as one might be conned into thinking if one reads this thread). Someone had done the maths and it was 2.8 percent chance or something like that (that something bad happens to YOUR units during 6 turns). The chance of something bad happening to the enemy is certainly a lot higher.

No, its not the table that sucks per se (it really doesnt suck half as much as some here apparantly thinks...), the problem is that you have to remember to roll those :cussing dice every bloody turn and so playing daemons as Primary will be a bit iffy until you get very much used to it.

Me? I am just damn happy I am going to use them as allies, because sure as hell is hot, there are some very good HQs and units available to us CSM players

Yep. Daemons as allies seems like a valid deal. Now to get some hands on those crazy plague drones....

Yeah. Heh, kind of want a few of those "tar-pit" drones myself :)

Not that they are very killy...But...freakishly irritating to kill I reckon :) buzz, buzz is all I have to say ;D

[Rayray]

I figured the proboscis 3+ poisoned attacks would do some damage in cc.... my biggest disappointment is that a herald ant get a fly-bee, which would have been sweet!

[Iron Sage]

I figured the proboscis 3+ poisoned attacks would do some damage in cc.... my biggest disappointment is that a herald ant get a fly-bee, which would have been sweet!

Oh, sure they will do some damage no doubt there. Worth remembering that they do not penetrate armour however, so despite their several attacks, one should not be conned into thinking they will wreck havock in HtH. However, they ARE undoubtly a good unit. But primarilly because of their speed and resillience (worth noting that both the drones and ordinary cheap 9 points bearers now have DE FACTO Gauss HtH weapons ^^) more than their killing power

Edit: They will undoubtly however wreck havock against units with low armour (not that they are so shabby against MEQ either, albeit as I said, not having P weapons will limit their killyness for sure, along with their Nurglish low Init.

[Rakarsis]

I figured the proboscis 3+ poisoned attacks would do some damage in cc.... my biggest disappointment is that a herald ant get a fly-bee, which would have been sweet!

Oh, sure they will do some damage no doubt there. Worth remembering that they do not penetrate armour however, so despite their several attacks, one should not be conned into thinking they will wreck havock in HtH. However, they ARE undoubtly a good unit. But primarilly because of their speed and resillience (worth noting that both the drones and ordinary cheap 9 points bearers now have DE FACTO Gauss HtH weapons ^^) more than their killing power

Edit: They will undoubtly however wreck havock against units with low armour (not that they are so shabby against MEQ either, albeit as I said, not having P weapons will limit their killyness for sure, along with their Nurglish low Init.

Incorrect on not penetrating armor.

Look at the new entry for the plaguesword, the rule "touch of rust" specifically. Auto-glances any vehicle on the roll of a 6, similar to necron gauss.

[Rune Priest Ridcully]

I'm so glad I've started infinity.......

There goes my idea for tzeentch daemon allies (okay, so the codex prices kind of did that as well) and I am now praying my Iyanden eldar don't get trashed when they get redone... There is a reason all my painting has been last alliance/Infinity/Call to arms:Starfleet/BFG whilst my 40k stuff gathers dust...

[Rayray]

I wish that i could say something positive of tzeetch.....but aside from screamers, i can't. Phil Kelly hates tzeetch, even though everything else doesn't seem so horrible when using them as allies. Except bloodcrushers.....they seem way too pricey for no save

[Iron Sage]

I figured the proboscis 3+ poisoned attacks would do some damage in cc.... my biggest disappointment is that a herald ant get a fly-bee, which would have been sweet!

Oh, sure they will do some damage no doubt there. Worth remembering that they do not penetrate armour however, so despite their several attacks, one should not be conned into thinking they will wreck havock in HtH. However, they ARE undoubtly a good unit. But primarilly because of their speed and resillience (worth noting that both the drones and ordinary cheap 9 points bearers now have DE FACTO Gauss HtH weapons ^^) more than their killing power

Edit: They will undoubtly however wreck havock against units with low armour (not that they are so shabby against MEQ either, albeit as I said, not having P weapons will limit their killyness for sure, along with their Nurglish low Init.

Incorrect on not penetrating armor.

Look at the new entry for the plaguesword, the rule "touch of rust" specifically. Auto-glances any vehicle on the roll of a 6, similar to necron gauss.

heh, you`ll have to forgive me for pointing it out, but thats actually what I did write above if you look a tad closer. By not penetrating armour I was obviously referring to infantry such as Meq and Teq ;)

[Shuggnuggath]

I don't think its a complete train-smash. Lords of Change look pretty decent. Horrors might turn out okay. 

 

I think screamers could have got 'hit n run' to mitigate the nerf a bit. Flamers really got a beating with the nerf bat but I guess they could still be useful against hordes.

[Iron Sage]

Positive about tzeentch? Lord of Change is going to be a nice bird despite the low saves. Herald might be seen a lot. Flamers would have been jolly good despite the nerf and might still be very much okay , except even I cry out loud when i read the warpflame rules.

 

Sure Screamers lose the multiple lampreys attacks, but is still a decent unit.

 

Eh...Daemon prince of tzeentch is okay.

 

 

As for the rest...Sigh...Yeah...I try to be positive, and the change dicipline would have been splendid, except....every power has Warpflame :/ (cries a bit inside). On the pluss side, it doesnt outright suck, but yeah, seems the weakest of them and I cant argue that...

 

horrors...Well...Situational. Can be very good, and versitile, but anty psyk gimps it, and :cussing Warpflame (dont get me started again).

 

Now, I am a Kelly fan and I actually LIKED the CSM dex, but seriously Phil...Why Warpflame, why? Even Magnus who wants to say nice things about you must confess that this is an outrageously bad idea.

 

Buy yeah...Apart from....Tzeentch, the codex is quite likable for CSM players who wants to use it as allies as I personally would find it some what Meh...to make all those rolls if I used daemons as primary, despite most of them being actually beneficial...

[Iron Sage]

I don't think its a complete train-smash. Lords of Change look pretty decent. Horrors might turn out okay. 

 

I think screamers could have got 'hit n run' to mitigate the nerf a bit. Flamers really got a beating with the nerf bat but I guess they could still be useful against hordes.

well, technically, flamers are actually now better against hordes than they were in their previous incarnation. Only that warpflame rule that makes them a tad iffy to tell the truth.

[Nehekhare]

fun fact about the burning chariot of tzeentch: its weapons are both heavy, so the transported exalted flamer can't shoot them if the chariot moved LOL

 

warpflame: now we know why nurgle "lost" FnP - no need for friends with tzeentch as an enemy...

 

so far, all daemons of nurgle (exept epidemius) and the soulgrinder seem okay (yet pricy) with shrouded, AP3 template primaris power (and AP2 large blast), beast move, 4+ poison/gauss CC.