Daemons.... a shift in the GK paradigm (?)

[Gentlemanloser]

My last post was supposed to highlight quite how useless annecdotal evidence really is.

 

/shrug

 

For me, the most telling annecdotal evidence is our hard core Dameon player won't touch this dex.  And that means more to me that yesthetruthurts, the B&C or any pro daemon site you'd like to point me to.

 

I faced the old dex for years.  I refused to use Sanctuary and was destroyed by them.  Now, they don't stand a chance.

 

And that's not vaccum analysis.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

So what you are saying is: What you found on the WH40K sites of your choice and what you could think of when reading the book is all there is? Thats quite the attitude you've got. I wouldn't dare to say that I thought of all the things daemons are potentially capable of, leave alone grasping their full potential. Sure units got "nerfed" but "getting nerfed" is not an indicator for the absolute effectiveness of the unit in it's new state - it only means that something gets weakened in order to balance the overall game.

Except that isn't what happened. Daemons had a brief moment in the sun, with a single mono-build born of WD stupidity (lol, lets give Flamers AP2!). All the power of those units got removed, classic bait n switch. As just one example, Bloodcrushers went from 'AP3 melee is annoying, oh well at least they don't die easily' to 'oh wait now they do'. That's not balancing the overall game by any stretch of the imagination. Bloodcrushers weren't broken last edition, in fact if anything they needed a buff (AP2 melee would've helped).

Crushers are cavalry now which is BIG but lost toughness and their armoursave. Add a herald on a juggernaut and some rewards and play the wound allocation game. Simultaniously charge with multiply units to mess up their target priority. Use Grimoire on Fateweaver to give them a 3+ invul save...

T5 and 3+ armour were the reason people took them over Fiends. Now, there is no reason to.

Flamers are now actually balanced: S4 AP4 Flamer on a 2 wounds jump unit? Yes please! It's not like the old version which imo was obviously op but it still destroys all GEQs and friends. Against MEQ and TEQ it's still better than normal flamers as warpflame has the potential to kill 1 to 3 MEQ/TEQs regardless of armour. Also a nice unit to put your Tzeentch heralds with bolt even though I would prefer screamers.

Or, you accidentally give them FNP for no reason. AP4 does matter, its a huge downgrade from AP2 in the WD version of Flamers. You may not have noticed, but Marines dominate 40k meta. 3+ armour simply doesn't care about AP4. You only wound on 4's, so unlike previously Marines have no compunction tanking your Overwatch hits to charge you.

Fiends got nerfed? I would say they have been given another role. Instead of thoughtlessly charging them into units they are now a assault support unit to let even your slowest possible units strike first or at least at the same time as pretty much everything. Oh look, they even got another wound to increase your chances of getting them into cc.

They lost EW, which makes them PsyDread/krak missile/battle cannon bait. Extra wounds don't mean anything when a single S8 wound breaking your 5++ means you lose the model. Terminators now wreck them faster as well. I still think, being Slanneshi (fast Rending attacks), they'll do alright, but you can't ignore the army-wide downgrades that affect them. They're a lot more brittle than before.

Yeah I'm sure Tau will have a real blast facing deeptstriking Horrors, Flamers, Warptstorms, Skull cannons and stuff. Actually I'm REALLY curious how those dexes would fare against each other

Tau simply ally IG or Orks to be their expendable meatshield. They hide all their shooty units behind the meatshield, and gun down the Daemons as they try to engage. Daemons actually have a pretty bad matchup against Tau. S5 base shooting is painful as hell to their Troops, railguns blow up Grinders very quickly. Princes also get exploded by railgun rounds (IIRC the Hammerhead railgun is still S10, Broadsides are now S8). Mind you, if even 2-3 units make melee range, the Tau quickly fold. However, I'd put money on Tau winning more of those matchups than Daemons.

The diversity you are talking about comes solely from taking Cotaez to open the possibilty of henchman armies (without considering allies - otherwise pretty much every single codex except for Nids could be called diverse). Without Cotaez practically every single one of our units uses the same weapons, has the same profile, can take the same special weapons (cc and shooting) and are equally versatile. 'Of course' you say - those are Grey Knights and they mostly specialize killing them godamn daemons' and you are of course right BUT I really wish they would have expanded a little more on the many options a Inquisition-army provides.

We're Codex: Grey Knights now. GW realised their mistake in trying to write an Inquisition army. You're thinking about the codex wrong. It's Knights+Inquisition stuff, not the other way around.

So your plan is to just ignore whatever argument I bring up and throw some "lol nerfed to the ground baby" at me while sticking to your point even if it seems quite obvious that you haven't paid much thought apart from reading through the codex once or twice and judging units in a vacuum. Considering that all this comes from a guy who not long ago hasn't even played a 6th edition game, leave alone played some matches with or against daemons. It's like we are playing tug-of-war only that you lashed your end to a goddamn tree

Could you please dispense with the personal attacks? He disagrees with you. Gentlemanloser is an experienced player, he doesn't just pull things out of his proverbial. Also, we're not the only ones singing this tune. Plenty in the Daemon community are seething that GW pulled a fast one on them.

I agree though, we'll only know truly how bad this codex is when Daemon players start playing with it. We can still look at the unit entries and say 'well that dies too easily' or 'that ability is too lolsorandum' and so on.

[IndigoJack]

 

 

Flamers are now actually balanced: S4 AP4 Flamer on a 2 wounds jump unit? Yes please! It's not like the old version which imo was obviously op but it still destroys all GEQs and friends. Against MEQ and TEQ it's still better than normal flamers as warpflame has the potential to kill 1 to 3 MEQ/TEQs regardless of armour. Also a nice unit to put your Tzeentch heralds with bolt even though I would prefer screamers.

Or, you accidentally give them FNP for no reason. AP4 does matter, its a huge downgrade from AP2 in the WD version of Flamers. You may not have noticed, but Marines dominate 40k meta. 3+ armour simply doesn't care about AP4. You only wound on 4's, so unlike previously Marines have no compunction tanking your Overwatch hits to charge you.

 

Here's the thing about flamers; people don't field them in groups of 3, they field them in groups of 9. That many flamer attacks will kill MEQ, and not just a few models. And I don't know about you, but I don't want to assault a unit with 9 flamers in it, even if I'm wearing PA.

[Gentlemanloser]

In groups of three, they used to murder entire 10 man Squads of Marines.

 

Now, you need to take 9 of them.

 

Thats a serious nerf.

 

Let's look at a Squad of 9 Flamers (207 points).  Assume that are arranged in a semi circle around a 5 man MSU Marine unit, and we'll assume that every flamer hits all 5 marines with thier Template.

 

That works out to be 45 hits, 22.5 wounds, 7.5 Marines dead.

 

Not too shabby.  If we assume perfect conditions for the Flamers.

 

A single Flamer is expected to kill 0.167 Marines per attack landed.  So a Flamer needs to place thier template over 6 Marines in order to be expected to kill 1.

 

For Terminators, this changes to 0.083 and 12 Terminators.

 

This also excludes any FnP the units might already have, which can now easily be more than just Bangles, due to Warpflame.

 

As for Overwatch, with just 1d3 attacks, they cannot generate enough hits to really worry any 3+/2+ save units.  At least not to outwieght the massive benefit from charging they lousy CC abilities.

 

Flamers were in my top 3, if not the top one, of ZOMG rediculously broken GW unit list.  Now, they don't bear worth mentioning.

[Aethernitas]

Except that isn't what happened. Daemons had a brief moment in the sun, with a single mono-build born of WD stupidity (lol, lets give Flamers AP2!). All the power of those units got removed, classic bait n switch. As just one example, Bloodcrushers went from 'AP3 melee is annoying, oh well at least they don't die easily' to 'oh wait now they do'. That's not balancing the overall game by any stretch of the imagination. Bloodcrushers weren't broken last edition, in fact if anything they needed a buff (AP2 melee would've helped).

Agree with the "single mono-build born of WD stupidity" line. In hindsight it seems they wanted to boost the popularity of daemons through shortsighted means to sell more miniatures when the new dex arrived.

Bloodcrushers are the better choice against almost everything with either WS4 and/or T4 when comparing 4 vanilla Crushers (180pts) to 5 vanilla Fiends (175pts) both charging. Against MEQ Crushers (~10 MEQ dead) are so far ahead of fiends (~3,34 MEQ dead) it's not even funny tough of course they only hit at Ini 4 simultaniously with Marines. Fiends only reach a comparable killing power against GEQ against whom Crushers already instant-death everything cuz of the S6 on the charge.

Or, you accidentally give them FNP for no reason. AP4 does matter, its a huge downgrade from AP2 in the WD version of Flamers. You may not have noticed, but Marines dominate 40k meta. 3+ armour simply doesn't care about AP4. You only wound on 4's, so unlike previously Marines have no compunction tanking your Overwatch hits to charge you.

You said it yourself - AP2 on flamers was insane. In our area we have a lot of xenos players as well and against most of them the actual Strengh value of the flamers now is a buff as they wound on 3+ instead of 4+ and still ignore cover and most of the armoursaves. The previous "50% of whatever your unit consists of is dead" was just ridiculously good.

They lost EW, which makes them PsyDread/krak missile/battle cannon bait. Extra wounds don't mean anything when a single S8 wound breaking your 5++ means you lose the model. Terminators now wreck them faster as well. I still think, being Slanneshi (fast Rending attacks), they'll do alright, but you can't ignore the army-wide downgrades that affect them. They're a lot more brittle than before.

Thats one of the points I'm trying to get across: It's totally useless to always compare units to their former incarnation. GW could give a preexisting unit a completely new task in the races new dex which makes a comparison totally redundant. Still thats what happens with every new release. It's like you get a new toolbox to replace your old outworn tools. The clue is that in the new toolbox all the tools were given different names so the screwdriver is now named "hammer" and you freak the **** out cuz your hammer seems totally unsuitable for driving in nails...

Tau simply ally IG or Orks to be their expendable meatshield. They hide all their shooty units behind the meatshield, and gun down the Daemons as they try to engage. Daemons actually have a pretty bad matchup against Tau. S5 base shooting is painful as hell to their Troops, railguns blow up Grinders very quickly. Princes also get exploded by railgun rounds (IIRC the Hammerhead railgun is still S10, Broadsides are now S8). Mind you, if even 2-3 units make melee range, the Tau quickly fold. However, I'd put money on Tau winning more of those matchups than Daemons.

I don't really dig your analysis but from what we know of the new Tau right now I would agree with Tau leading in wins. There is of course a lot of speculation involved.

We're Codex: Grey Knights now. GW realised their mistake in trying to write an Inquisition army. You're thinking about the codex wrong. It's Knights+Inquisition stuff, not the other way around.

Telling me "You're thinking about the codex wrong" is very telling for the last few posts I exchanged with you and GL as I always got the feeling that I'm confronted with axiometic facts from the "daemons suck" camp while trying to point out the possibility of a different perspective.

I for one think it was a mistake to focus on the GKs as it takes away a lot of the flair and mysteries surrounding them. As a Daemonhunter player of the first hour of course I wished for more options to field a more diverse and authentic Inquisition force instead of the artificially puffed-up mess our spiritual liege pulled out of his posteriors to even get enough unit entries to fill a codex. If you started playing GKs with the current codex thats totally fine and there are a LOT of good ideas in the GK dex which I hope make it into the next codex too. I just petition you to also accept the desire of oldschool Daemonhunter players for other options besides the shining grey wall of mary-sues.

Could you please dispense with the personal attacks? He disagrees with you. Gentlemanloser is an experienced player, he doesn't just pull things out of his proverbial. Also, we're not the only ones singing this tune. Plenty in the Daemon community are seething that GW pulled a fast one on them.

I agree though, we'll only know truly how bad this codex is when Daemon players start playing with it. We can still look at the unit entries and say 'well that dies too easily' or 'that ability is too lolsorandum' and so on.

GL himself pointed out that he hadn't played a single game of 6th edition not too long ago - don't pin me down on the exact thread and date - if thats what you mean with "personal attack".

I'm aware that you are not the only two "singing that tune" and that just makes more people I accuse of unwarranted pessimissm induced by lack of perspectives.

Otherwise we could have agreed on waiting for players to fully utilize the Daemon codex to see how GOOD it is

[IndigoJack]

In groups of three, they used to murder entire 10 man Squads of Marines.

 

Now, you need to take 9 of them.

 

Thats a serious nerf.

 

Let's look at a Squad of 9 Flamers (207 points).  Assume that are arranged in a semi circle around a 5 man MSU Marine unit, and we'll assume that every flamer hits all 5 marines with thier Template.

 

That works out to be 45 hits, 22.5 wounds, 7.5 Marines dead.

 

Not too shabby.  If we assume perfect conditions for the Flamers.

 

A single Flamer is expected to kill 0.167 Marines per attack landed.  So a Flamer needs to place thier template over 6 Marines in order to be expected to kill 1.

 

For Terminators, this changes to 0.083 and 12 Terminators.

 

This also excludes any FnP the units might already have, which can now easily be more than just Bangles, due to Warpflame.

 

As for Overwatch, with just 1d3 attacks, they cannot generate enough hits to really worry any 3+/2+ save units.  At least not to outwieght the massive benefit from charging they lousy CC abilities.

 

Flamers were in my top 3, if not the top one, of ZOMG rediculously broken GW unit list.  Now, they don't bear worth mentioning.

 

I never really saw them at less than 6 before (and usually it was 9), but that could have been my meta.

 

I agree that terminators aren't really going to be bothered by flamers anymore, and really puts the pressure on screamers for anti-TEQ. However, flamers don't have much to worry about TEQ, since they can just scoot around any threat they're faced with. Rather than fighting TEQ, they'll just avoid it.

 

As far as overwatch goes, It's actually a bit scarier than you may realize. If taking the unit of 9, you're given 9d3 overwatch attack. for 9d3, you're looking at an average of 18 hits. That's 9 wounds, 3 dead marines. That should be enough to make you think twice about charging in. This is of course looking at this unit completely in a vacuum. All I'm really trying to say is: yes, they got worse. But they're not bad, just not broken anymore.

 

Does C:CD have problems? Sure. Any assault army in a game about shooting is. I certainly don't think it's a bad army. I say we all relax, give it time, and wait to it does after people have had a chance to play them for a bit.

[Gentlemanloser]

Our Daemon Player just used to drop units of three (prior to the WD uber buff) in the second wave off icons. It was all he needed, as the three would murder any Squad they DSed next to (with no scatter) and you cold position them to get all three templates off, even placing them in a circle.

On average, you'd happily take 3 dead to overwatch (and gain free FnP!) to lock up and destory the 9 Flamer Squad in CC. It's not a deterent. I'd *never* charge the uber buffed unit, that was sucicide.

One other seriosuly large nerf Flamers have taken (which isn't mentioned often) is the inability to glance any Vehicle with thier Template now. Flamers could eat any unit. From Terminators to Land Raiders. Now they're really just IG Blob (or equivalent) killers.

Does C:CD have problems? Sure. Any assault army in a game about shooting is.

It's not just that. Bangles do ok as an Assault orientated army, becuase they have speed and durability.

The Daemons don't. No Transports is a massive penalty (which should have been highlighted by the current 'nid dex), and with even more ways of blocking Assaults and slowing units down now (even if it's just Skulls to stop Scout, and moving your rhinos in the shooting phase to block assaults *after* you've shot said units to bits with the rest of your army anyway...) they don't have the durability to withstand other armies shooting.

And they realisitically lack a shooting phase themselves.

Can't shoot you, FMC get grounded, and the army has a hard time getting into assault.

Really, what's good about the dex?

I'm aware that you are not the only two "singing that tune" and that
just makes more people I accuse of unwarranted pessimissm induced by
lack of perspectives.

Honesly, I played against the old dex for years.

[IndigoJack]

Our Daemon Player just used to drop units of three (prior to the WD uber buff) in the second wave off icons. It was all he needed, as the three would murder any Squad they DSed next to (with no scatter) and you cold position them to get all three templates off, even placing them in a circle.

That's a risky move, and probably the reason people took them in large squad sizes. Now they could deep strike them safely, run to spread out, then hit them in the next turn, since clearing out 9 flamers would take some dedicated firepower.

On average, you'd happily take 3 dead to overwatch (and gain free FnP!) to lock up and destory the 9 Flamer Squad in CC. It's not a deterent. I'd *never* charge the uber buffed unit, that was sucicide.

One other seriosuly large nerf Flamers have taken (which isn't mentioned often) is the inability to glance any Vehicle with thier Template now. Flamers could eat any unit. From Terminators to Land Raiders. Now they're really just IG Blob (or equivalent) killers.

Again, you're looking at the unit in a vacuum. Remember, unless the dice are unlucky for the daemon player, you're also locked in combat with them. Who's to say that I don't have a unit of screamers shadowing the flamers to counter charge without fear of overwatch? This is all just theoryhammer, but a smart player really isn't going to let you assault them while they write them off as a loss.

For vehicles there's still screamers and MCs, so it's not like they're at a loss.

Flamers are still a viable unit if they were AP3 people would still be crying cheese. They're not even expensive, when you consider the fact that they're T4, W2, with a 5++ jump infantry unit with a flamer. Flamers are not the overpowered unit they once were. This is a good thing, it helps promote game balance.

Does C:CD have problems? Sure. Any assault army in a game about shooting is.

It's not just that. Bangles do ok as an Assault orientated army, becuase they have speed and durability.

BA were great in 5th edition, but it wasn't because they were an assault army. It mainly stemed from the fact that they had fast razorbacks that you could assault from if it was destroyed. 6th removed that, and changing furious charge didn't help them. FWIW, I've never lost to jump pack BA, whether that's me, my opponent, or BA in general, is up in the air.

The Daemons don't. No Transports is a massive penalty (which should have been highlighted by the current 'nid dex), and with even more ways of blocking Assaults and slowing units down now (even if it's just Skulls to stop Scout, and moving your rhinos in the shooting phase to block assaults *after* you've shot said units to bits with the rest of your army anyway...) they don't have the durability to withstand other armies shooting.

And they realisitically lack a shooting phase themselves.

Can't shoot you, FMC get grounded, and the army has a hard time getting into assault.

Really, what's good about the dex?

I'd definitely say daemons have mobility, as turn 2 assaults are a thing they're capable of. (seeker cavalcade, screamers...). Yes, a lack of transport hurts, but it's not insurmountable, especially when you consider the amount of people that are winning games with out transports these days. What daemons lack in durability, they can make up for in numbers. 100 plaguebearers/daemonette/pink horrors will only set you back 900 pts. You now have the basis of a horde, with plenty of room for other goodies. You might have the firepower to remove them over 6 turns at turn 1, but will the same be true by turn 4? turn 5? Remember, as you're wearing down their army, they're wearing down yours. Can you honestly say that you could, without looking at daemons in a vacuum? I know I can't.

FMCs work if you can bring a lot of them. Good thing daemons can. even if you've grounded them, do you have the guns remaining to kill them? I've played quite a few games against FMCs in 6th, and I can honestly say they're a bit scarier than you're really giving them credit for.

Yes, the army has a hard time getting into assault. All assault armies do. Like I said, this is a shooting game. Assault is inferior, I'm not denying that. But is it so inferior that C:CD is the worst codex out there, not to mention completely uncompetitive? Definitely not.

Daemons are much more comparable to tyranids, than any other codex. Almost everyone would agree; last edition, tyranids were one of the worst armies out there. 6th has breathed new life into them, and they're actually winning tournaments, even though they face many of the same obstacles as C:CD.

Looking at this army in a vacuum really isn't going to work. Nor is comparing it to the last codex, since it fundamentally works differently now. Like I said before, let's give it time. I for one am anxious to see some batreps, and see how they do at adepticon this year.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Here's the thing about flamers; people don't field them in groups of 3, they field them in groups of 9. That many flamer attacks will kill MEQ, and not just a few models. And I don't know about you, but I don't want to assault a unit with 9 flamers in it, even if I'm wearing PA.

Yeah, so will that many Burna Boyz. Doesn't mean you should field them, or that they'll reach flamer range with enough dudes to make a difference. Loss of EW, loss of AP2...there is just no point to them anymore. If they had AP3 at least you'd scare Marines and they'd make a decent sub for a Heldrake. Now though, a Heldrake is always a better investment.

Bloodcrushers are the better choice against almost everything with either WS4 and/or T4 when comparing 4 vanilla Crushers (180pts) to 5 vanilla Fiends (175pts) both charging. Against MEQ Crushers (~10 MEQ dead) are so far ahead of fiends (~3,34 MEQ dead) it's not even funny tough of course they only hit at Ini 4 simultaniously with Marines. Fiends only reach a comparable killing power against GEQ against whom Crushers already instant-death everything cuz of the S6 on the charge.

No, they go last, as they have no frags and Marines will be in cover invariably. This is why I reckon Fiends will be a bit better, as they have Musk to strike at the same time. I'm not saying either unit is especially relevant, they're both weaker than before.

You said it yourself - AP2 on flamers was insane. In our area we have a lot of xenos players as well and against most of them the actual Strengh value of the flamers now is a buff as they wound on 3+ instead of 4+ and still ignore cover and most of the armoursaves. The previous "50% of whatever your unit consists of is dead" was just ridiculously good.

If they had kept them at the same price, AP2 wouldn't have been so obnoxious. The price reduction and the retention of EW (at the time) made the unit stupid good. Xenos players will hate AP4 templates, but that's nothing new. My point is, this game is dominated by Marines, and they save everytime against those wounds. Worse, if they pass the Toughness test, you give them FNP.

Quite honestly, remove the stupid warpflame rule, give them back EW army-wide, and give Flamers AP3. They'd be balanced then, and worth their price.

Thats one of the points I'm trying to get across: It's totally useless to always compare units to their former incarnation. GW could give a preexisting unit a completely new task in the races new dex which makes a comparison totally redundant. Still thats what happens with every new release. It's like you get a new toolbox to replace your old outworn tools. The clue is that in the new toolbox all the tools were given different names so the screwdriver is now named "hammer" and you freak the **** out cuz your hammer seems totally unsuitable for driving in nails...

Except the new hammer is weaker, cost more to buy and I can't get nails into anything except plywood.

I don't really dig your analysis but from what we know of the new Tau right now I would agree with Tau leading in wins. There is of course a lot of speculation involved.

Unless Tau are complete garbage, they'll still be strong in shooting. Daemons hate shooting. It's not a hard thing to analyse. Likewise, Tau will suck in melee, so if you make melee range, they're screwed. Riptide looks like Prince/GD bait though, so if anyone fields them, free kill I guess.

Telling me "You're thinking about the codex wrong" is very telling for the last few posts I exchanged with you and GL as I always got the feeling that I'm confronted with axiometic facts from the "daemons suck" camp while trying to point out the possibility of a different perspective.

Your perspective is wrong. On both accounts.

I for one think it was a mistake to focus on the GKs as it takes away a lot of the flair and mysteries surrounding them. As a Daemonhunter player of the first hour of course I wished for more options to field a more diverse and authentic Inquisition force instead of the artificially puffed-up mess our spiritual liege pulled out of his posteriors to even get enough unit entries to fill a codex. If you started playing GKs with the current codex thats totally fine and there are a LOT of good ideas in the GK dex which I hope make it into the next codex too. I just petition you to also accept the desire of oldschool Daemonhunter players for other options besides the shining grey wall of mary-sues.

I did play the old DH codex in 4th, and it sucked. A lot. So, I have zero desire to return to the days when we all had to pretend that the 'Water Tactica' meant anything, or tri-Raider lists were good.

You seem to have a lot of angst about the new codex. That's fine. However, I don't share that opinion.

GL himself pointed out that he hadn't played a single game of 6th edition not too long ago - don't pin me down on the exact thread and date - if thats what you mean with "personal attack".

I was pointing out that you were attacking him on the basis he hadn't played a game of 6th yet. Which is a largely irrelevant point to make, and thus constituted more of mud-slinging than relevant criticism of his arguments. There aren't any magical hidden aspects to 6th which suddenly invalidate his or my points. Instant Death works exactly the same, to-wound rolls work exactly the same, granting Feel No Pain to enemy units is still terrible rules design etc.

I'm aware that you are not the only two "singing that tune" and that just makes more people I accuse of unwarranted pessimissm induced by lack of perspectives.

Lol. Okay then

Otherwise we could have agreed on waiting for players to fully utilize the Daemon codex to see how GOOD it is

Stop. My sides can only take so much

I agree that terminators aren't really going to be bothered by flamers anymore, and really puts the pressure on screamers for anti-TEQ. However, flamers don't have much to worry about TEQ, since they can just scoot around any threat they're faced with. Rather than fighting TEQ, they'll just avoid it.

I guess. Your problem is though, something has to engage those Terminators at some point. Otherwise, they're just going to sit on objectives and laugh at you (in the case of Deathwing/Knight Terminators), or wipe out your Troops and contest objectives (all other Terminators). So, Flamers end up being deadweight to some extent if they can only kill things your Troops already kill just fine (ie chaff infantry).

Again, you're looking at the unit in a vacuum. Remember, unless the dice are unlucky for the daemon player, you're also locked in combat with them. Who's to say that I don't have a unit of screamers shadowing the flamers to counter charge without fear of overwatch? This is all just theoryhammer, but a smart player really isn't going to let you assault them while they write them off as a loss.

That's fine. If we're locked in combat with Flamers, we're gonna win eventually (barring some terrible rolls), and it means you can't kill us with Soulgrinder blasts or Heldrakes in the meantime (can't shoot in melee). Flamers can threaten Knight stuff (locking up PsyDreads and Strikes in melee, burninating Allies and Henchmen), so shutting down their shooting is good for us too.

Flamers are still a viable unit if they were AP3 people would still be crying cheese. They're not even expensive, when you consider the fact that they're T4, W2, with a 5++ jump infantry unit with a flamer. Flamers are not the overpowered unit they once were. This is a good thing, it helps promote game balance.

AP3 would make them relevant. I wouldn't cry cheese, I'd be happy Daemons have a hard-counter to Marines that isn't an Allied unit or another Soulgrinder.

As I mentioned before, loss of EW is huge for them (it really doesn't matter on 1-wound infantry, but on multi-wound its amazing). PsyDreads will rip apart a unit of Flamers, as will IG battlecannons etc. It doesn't promote game balance, it just nerfs an otherwise functional unit harder and weakens an army that already lacks much of a Shooting phase (its basically Soul Grinders now).

I'd definitely say daemons have mobility, as turn 2 assaults are a thing they're capable of. (seeker cavalcade, screamers...). Yes, a lack of transport hurts, but it's not insurmountable, especially when you consider the amount of people that are winning games with out transports these days. What daemons lack in durability, they can make up for in numbers. 100 plaguebearers/daemonette/pink horrors will only set you back 900 pts. You now have the basis of a horde, with plenty of room for other goodies. You might have the firepower to remove them over 6 turns at turn 1, but will the same be true by turn 4? turn 5? Remember, as you're wearing down their army, they're wearing down yours. Can you honestly say that you could, without looking at daemons in a vacuum? I know I can't.

You're making the Green Tide argument, with Daemons. It doesn't add up. I've fought the two actually powerful horde lists in the game (Shoota Boyz heavy Orks, Blob Guard), and the way they get you is their support units. The actual core is a mirage, you don't actually need to worry about 1/3rd of the enemy, because they're prevented from shooting or assaulting you (depending on the list) by all their friends being in the way. If you can handle the first wave of 30-50 models, and still take on their support units, you can win. Knights actually have superb anti-horde options (incinerators, massed shots with psycannon+storm bolter, Purifiers, Terminators with Banner, heavy psycannon/incinerator on DK's, plasma cannon servitors and Acolyte storm bolter etc).

Daemons don't have the kinda support Orks and IG have. Orks can Ally IG, or Necrons, or Tau even, plus they have Lootaz and the SAG for lulz. IG have amazing built in support, and bringing Wolves to make their blobs uber (ie Rune Priests) it gets even more disgusting. Daemons have...Soulgrinders for ranged and melee, and Princes/GD for mobile assault units. Oh, and the new Khorneflakes Cannon. If you include CSM Allies (I do, they'll be in most lists invariably), Daemons start to get good, but I still wouldn't worry about a horde Daemon list. 9pts per model is still expensive, 5-6pts is where it makes more sense.

FMCs work if you can bring a lot of them. Good thing daemons can. even if you've grounded them, do you have the guns remaining to kill them? I've played quite a few games against FMCs in 6th, and I can honestly say they're a bit scarier than you're really giving them credit for.

Agreed. Prince/GD spam backed up with Grinders is a real pain for many armies to deal with. Knights aren't one of them, neither are IG, but a lot of xenos and Marine armies will have issues with it.

Yes, the army has a hard time getting into assault. All assault armies do. Like I said, this is a shooting game. Assault is inferior, I'm not denying that. But is it so inferior that C:CD is the worst codex out there, not to mention completely uncompetitive? Definitely not.

Assault isn't inferior, just different. If anything, 2D6 charge range has made assault more likely. Daemons don't suck because they're slow (they're not especially slow really), they suck for a whole host of reasons.

Daemons are much more comparable to tyranids, than any other codex. Almost everyone would agree; last edition, tyranids were one of the worst armies out there. 6th has breathed new life into them, and they're actually winning tournaments, even though they face many of the same obstacles as C:CD.

Nope. Tyranids are the same as last edition, they're mid-tier. The people whining about the codex being underpowered were the old-school Nid players used to Carnifex spam lists. Properly built Nids can and do place in top 3's, sometimes they even win. Daemons never did either of those things, and I very much doubt a weaker codex will allow them to this edition.

Nids are pretty screwed against Knights, but nowhere near as much as Daemons. Nids can at least print scoring units every turn (Tervigons) and jam you up before you can force weapon their big stuff.

Looking at this army in a vacuum really isn't going to work. Nor is comparing it to the last codex, since it fundamentally works differently now. Like I said before, let's give it time. I for one am anxious to see some batreps, and see how they do at adepticon this year.

As a pure list? Not even top 10. With CSM (either as primary), I think they'll place, but they won't win.

[thade]

Folks, let's please keep the personal judgement and attacks (however mild) out of the conversation. Disagreement is only natural, but there's no need for things to get heated here.

[IndigoJack]

Here's the thing about flamers; people don't field them in groups of 3, they field them in groups of 9. That many flamer attacks will kill MEQ, and not just a few models. And I don't know about you, but I don't want to assault a unit with 9 flamers in it, even if I'm wearing PA.

 

Yeah, so will that many Burna Boyz. Doesn't mean you should field them, or that they'll reach flamer range with enough dudes to make a difference. Loss of EW, loss of AP2...there is just no point to them anymore. If they had AP3 at least you'd scare Marines and they'd make a decent sub for a Heldrake. Now though, a Heldrake is always a better investment.

 

Not really a good comparison, since really, the only thing they have in common is that they both use the flame template. Flamers are jump infantry, and not really going to have a problem arriving at their destination. The heldrake doesn't really apply here, since it ins't in C:CD (though of course it's a better investment.)

 

 

 

You said it yourself - AP2 on flamers was insane. In our area we have a lot of xenos players as well and against most of them the actual Strengh value of the flamers now is a buff as they wound on 3+ instead of 4+ and still ignore cover and most of the armoursaves. The previous "50% of whatever your unit consists of is dead" was just ridiculously good.

If they had kept them at the same price, AP2 wouldn't have been so obnoxious. The price reduction and the retention of EW (at the time) made the unit stupid good. Xenos players will hate AP4 templates, but that's nothing new. My point is, this game is dominated by Marines, and they save everytime against those wounds. Worse, if they pass the Toughness test, you give them FNP. 

Quite honestly, remove the stupid warpflame rule, give them back EW army-wide, and give Flamers AP3. They'd be balanced then, and worth their price.

 

 

 

Statistics would like to have a word with you. Unless you're using "magic dice," you're not going to make every save. Marines will fail saves, especially if you make them take a lot of them (something template weapons are good at.)

  

 

 

I agree that terminators aren't really going to be bothered by flamers anymore, and really puts the pressure on screamers for anti-TEQ. However, flamers don't have much to worry about TEQ, since they can just scoot around any threat they're faced with. Rather than fighting TEQ, they'll just avoid it.

I guess. Your problem is though, something has to engage those Terminators at some point. Otherwise, they're just going to sit on objectives and laugh at you (in the case of Deathwing/Knight Terminators), or wipe out your Troops and contest objectives (all other Terminators). So, Flamers end up being deadweight to some extent if they can only kill things your Troops already kill just fine (ie chaff infantry).

 

 

 

Most armies are not made up of terminators. In fact, most GK and DA armies aren't even made up of just terminators. I'm sure the flamers will find something to do. As far as something to engage terminators, there are always screamers. S5 AP2 at I4 is going to hurt, especially with 3 attacks. 4 attacks if they charge. Which they'll likely do, because they're jetbikes, not slow terminators. Then there are all those rending daemons of slaanesh, daemon princes, GDs, heralds with lesser gifts... the army really isn't lacking in the AP2 department.

 

 

 

Again, you're looking at the unit in a vacuum. Remember, unless the dice are unlucky for the daemon player, you're also locked in combat with them. Who's to say that I don't have a unit of screamers shadowing the flamers to counter charge without fear of overwatch? This is all just theoryhammer, but a smart player really isn't going to let you assault them while they write them off as a loss.

That's fine. If we're locked in combat with Flamers, we're gonna win eventually (barring some terrible rolls), and it means you can't kill us with Soulgrinder blasts or Heldrakes in the meantime (can't shoot in melee). Flamers can threaten Knight stuff (locking up PsyDreads and Strikes in melee, burninating Allies and Henchmen), so shutting down their shooting is good for us too.

 

 

 

Or someone bails them out. Besides, I'm sure the daemon player isn't crying because his flamer squad is locked up with a GKSS that can no longer shoot the rest of his army. 

 

 

 

AP3 would make them relevant. I wouldn't cry cheese, I'd be happy Daemons have a hard-counter to Marines that isn't an Allied unit or another Soulgrinder. 

As I mentioned before, loss of EW is huge for them (it really doesn't matter on 1-wound infantry, but on multi-wound its amazing). PsyDreads will rip apart a unit of Flamers, as will IG battlecannons etc. It doesn't promote game balance, it just nerfs an otherwise functional unit harder and weakens an army that already lacks much of a Shooting phase (its basically Soul Grinders now).

 

 

 

 I would. AP3 template weapon that can deep strike? No thanks, the heldrake cheese already has my cholesterol high. Even if it didn't deep strike, it's still jump infantry. giving it back EW would make it as bad as it ever was against PA. I'm not against AP3 weapons, but I'm not a fan of them denying cover and being on fast units. 

I'd definitely say daemons have mobility, as turn 2 assaults are a thing they're capable of. (seeker cavalcade, screamers...). Yes, a lack of transport hurts, but it's not insurmountable, especially when you consider the amount of people that are winning games with out transports these days. What daemons lack in durability, they can make up for in numbers. 100 plaguebearers/daemonette/pink horrors will only set you back 900 pts. You now have the basis of a horde, with plenty of room for other goodies. You might have the firepower to remove them over 6 turns at turn 1, but will the same be true by turn 4? turn 5? Remember, as you're wearing down their army, they're wearing down yours. Can you honestly say that you could, without looking at daemons in a vacuum? I know I can't.

You're making the Green Tide argument, with Daemons. It doesn't add up. I've fought the two actually powerful horde lists in the game (Shoota Boyz heavy Orks, Blob Guard), and the way they get you is their support units. The actual core is a mirage, you don't actually need to worry about 1/3rd of the enemy, because they're prevented from shooting or assaulting you (depending on the list) by all their friends being in the way. If you can handle the first wave of 30-50 models, and still take on their support units, you can win. Knights actually have superb anti-horde options (incinerators, massed shots with psycannon+storm bolter, Purifiers, Terminators with Banner, heavy psycannon/incinerator on DK's, plasma cannon servitors and Acolyte storm bolter etc). 

 

Daemons don't have the kinda support Orks and IG have. Orks can Ally IG, or Necrons, or Tau even, plus they have Lootaz and the SAG for lulz. IG have amazing built in support, and bringing Wolves to make their blobs uber (ie Rune Priests) it gets even more disgusting. Daemons have...Soulgrinders for ranged and melee, and Princes/GD for mobile assault units. Oh, and the new Khorneflakes Cannon. If you include CSM Allies (I do, they'll be in most lists invariably), Daemons start to get good, but I still wouldn't worry about a horde Daemon list. 9pts per model is still expensive, 5-6pts is where it makes more sense.

 

 

It's closer to tyranids than orks really. Lots of slower moving small things supported by bigger, faster moving things, with some shooting sprinkled in (less so for daemons of course.) They may cost a few more points, but they have one thing other hordes don't; invul saves. Sure, it's only a 5++, but it's better than nothing, and there isn't anything that can remove it anymore. And if we're talking allies, C:CD is battle brothers with both CSM and tau, and allies of convenience with IG. So if they need shooting, there are easily ways for them to get it.

 

 

Yes, the army has a hard time getting into assault. All assault armies do. Like I said, this is a shooting game. Assault is inferior, I'm not denying that. But is it so inferior that C:CD is the worst codex out there, not to mention completely uncompetitive? Definitely not.

Assault isn't inferior, just different. If anything, 2D6 charge range has made assault more likely. Daemons don't suck because they're slow (they're not especially slow really), they suck for a whole host of reasons.

 

 

Assault is definitely inferior. First, you have to roll to see if you can even get into combat. Meanwhile, you're opponent gets to shoot at you. Then if you make it in, your opponent may get to attack you before you even get to attack, during your turn! Then there's the chance you may lose combat, and some units in non-marine armies may even be wiped out from it. None of this even takes into account getting close enough to even declare an assault, where you may have to weather a turn or two of shooting first. Granted, I'm playing up the bad parts, but in shooting, it's just, declare target, roll to hit, roll to wound, opponent rolls saves (maybe.) Really, range is the biggest reason shooting trumps assault. I have weapons that can hit you from 48" away.

I agree that lack of shooting hurts daemons. and it really is the thing that hurts them the most. However, it's not like they were ever not an assault army. Daemon players should be used to it.

 

 

Daemons are much more comparable to tyranids, than any other codex. Almost everyone would agree; last edition, tyranids were one of the worst armies out there. 6th has breathed new life into them, and they're actually winning tournaments, even though they face many of the same obstacles as C:CD.

Nope. Tyranids are the same as last edition, they're mid-tier. The people whining about the codex being underpowered were the old-school Nid players used to Carnifex spam lists. Properly built Nids can and do place in top 3's, sometimes they even win. Daemons never did either of those things, and I very much doubt a weaker codex will allow them to this edition. 

 

Nids are pretty screwed against Knights, but nowhere near as much as Daemons. Nids can at least print scoring units every turn (Tervigons) and jam you up before you can force weapon their big stuff.

 

 

This isn't really the place to discuss the changes to nids, but they definitely got a huge help with 6th ed. GKs are pretty much good against most armies. In a game dominated by shooting, the shooting armies usually do well. GKs are definitely one of the shootiest.

 

 

 

Looking at this army in a vacuum really isn't going to work. Nor is comparing it to the last codex, since it fundamentally works differently now. Like I said before, let's give it time. I for one am anxious to see some batreps, and see how they do at adepticon this year.

As a pure list? Not even top 10. With CSM (either as primary), I think they'll place, but they won't win.

 

 

This is pretty much speculation on your part. You have no data to back up your claim. I'm not saying daemons are the bestest codex ever, just that time will tell how they play out. Adepticon is right around the corner, I'll be waiting to see how they play out there, then maybe wait until after a few more GTs and get some real play time against them before I make any judgement. I encourage everyone to do the same.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

 

Not really a good comparison, since really, the only thing they have in common is that they both use the flame template. Flamers are jump infantry, and not really going to have a problem arriving at their destination. The heldrake doesn't really apply here, since it ins't in C:CD (though of course it's a better investment.)

Lol, I would've thought that would be the primary way to compare them ie they both burninate infantry. The Heldrak doesn't have problems reaching its targets either, its a Flyer. Heldrake is a valid comparison, its your primary Ally and I can't think of many lists where Daemons won't want CSM Allies.Within the codex? Erm...I think Tzeentch lore has a flamer power, and I think Soulgrinders still have theirs as an upgrade option. 

 

 

Statistics would like to have a word with you. Unless you're using "magic dice," you're not going to make every save. Marines will fail saves, especially if you make them take a lot of them (something template weapons are good at.)

Clever, but not what I said. I said 3+ armour doesn't care about S4 AP4 templates. Which is perfectly true, they'll happily eat Overwatch auto-hits to lock you up in melee. Of course you'll get kills, they're templates. If you wanna talk statistics though, per Flamer template, you need to consistently hit 6 Marines everytime to get a kill. That jumps to 12 hits (or one dead Terminator for every two templates you apply, assuming again 6 hits per template) against TDA. Seeing as templates are resolved entirely one after the other (you can't stack hits like in 4th), you actually get diminishing returns against Marines and Terminators, as you may not generate enough hits then wounds to force enough saves. 

 

 

Most armies are not made up of terminators. In fact, most GK and DA armies aren't even made up of just terminators. I'm sure the flamers will find something to do. As far as something to engage terminators, there are always screamers. S5 AP2 at I4 is going to hurt, especially with 3 attacks. 4 attacks if they charge. Which they'll likely do, because they're jetbikes, not slow terminators. Then there are all those rending daemons of slaanesh, daemon princes, GDs, heralds with lesser gifts... the army really isn't lacking in the AP2 department.

No, but Terminators were already strong choices for Marines, and now that Deathwing are back and our Grandmaster can hand out scoring to Allied Terminators (yes I know it'll get FAQ'd, but for now its legit), you are very likely to see them when fighting Marines. Hell, even armies like Tau and IG like to bring in Terminators to give them some melee and durability. Seeing as this thread is about Knights vs Daemons, I can tell you now plenty of lists bring TDA blob and Paladin combat squads. 

 

Screamers are a complete joke now. The S5 AP2 is a single attack per Screamer now, or you can flub with their regular S4 attacks. They also go second in melee, due to halberds and/or terrain. There is also 'Sanctuary', which will nerf them to I1. 

Rending is an issue, but you have to reach the Terminators with enough manz to spam it out. Fiends get exploded by PsyDreads, Daemonettes get obliterated by incinerators and massed fire. Princes/GD's do eat Terminators, but we can force weapon the big stuff now, so that ends up being a trade. Heralds are screwed unless they can somehow get I7, as otherwise halberds will ID them before they can swing. Slanneshi stuff suffers from being the squishiest God choice, so you better screen them or shove other stuff in the face of Knights to distract while you make your approach. Soul Grinders and cheap Princes would work I guess. 

 

 

Or someone bails them out. Besides, I'm sure the daemon player isn't crying because his flamer squad is locked up with a GKSS that can no longer shoot the rest of his army. 

I would. That Flamer squad is dead, and it can't contribute to killing off other stuff like Henchmen or Allied Guard. One Strike squad isn't a lot of firepower for Knights, if they were jamming up Purifiers I'd be more concerned (as I want my psycannon/incinerator spam working). 

 

 

 I would. AP3 template weapon that can deep strike? No thanks, the heldrake cheese already has my cholesterol high. Even if it didn't deep strike, it's still jump infantry. giving it back EW would make it as bad as it ever was against PA. I'm not against AP3 weapons, but I'm not a fan of them denying cover and being on fast units. 

So what? Heldrakes aren't broken, if you have anti-Flyer tech you can kill them. EW means the Flamers get to their target intact, or at least don't lose so many that they are rendered ineffectual. They can still die to massed fire though, and they still suck in melee (shrug), I really don't see how that's not balanced. Your Elites choices should be powerful and make your Troops look weak, thats the point. 

 

 

It's closer to tyranids than orks really. Lots of slower moving small things supported by bigger, faster moving things, with some shooting sprinkled in (less so for daemons of course.) They may cost a few more points, but they have one thing other hordes don't; invul saves. Sure, it's only a 5++, but it's better than nothing, and there isn't anything that can remove it anymore. And if we're talking allies, C:CD is battle brothers with both CSM and tau, and allies of convenience with IG. So if they need shooting, there are easily ways for them to get it.

Nids have relevant shooting, Daemons have barely any (Grinders are just about it, the rest are psychic powers now). Invulnerable saves don't mean anything when they are 5++, they're too easily broken by massed fire. 

You're not BB with Tau, only Allies of Convenience. 

As I said, pure Daemons are terrible. With CSM though, your stakes improve, because CSM got a pretty solid book (it has issues too, but nothing like Daemons). With IG, well its IG so nuff said. Tau I dunno about, but at face value it's a pretty good tag team (they shoot, you score+melee stuff). 

 

 

Assault is definitely inferior. First, you have to roll to see if you can even get into combat. Meanwhile, you're opponent gets to shoot at you. Then if you make it in, your opponent may get to attack you before you even get to attack, during your turn! Then there's the chance you may lose combat, and some units in non-marine armies may even be wiped out from it. None of this even takes into account getting close enough to even declare an assault, where you may have to weather a turn or two of shooting first. Granted, I'm playing up the bad parts, but in shooting, it's just, declare target, roll to hit, roll to wound, opponent rolls saves (maybe.) Really, range is the biggest reason shooting trumps assault. I have weapons that can hit you from 48" away.

Overwatch only matters if they have a lot of shots, or template weapons. If you are committing to a charge, you shouldn't be relying on 1-2 dudes making it in first. 

Weathering shooting is part of the game. If your assault unit isn't fast enough or tough enough to make, you should probably try something else. 

Shooting is more complex than you make out. Firstly, you have to be in range. Secondly, some models may be in range but others may not be. Third, some models have have LOS but others may not. Cover saves are almost always a factor (unless you ignore them), so generally the enemy does get a save. I'd actually rate shooting as having more points of failure than melee. In melee, unless your opponent kills you first, you always get your attacks back straight away. Shooting means you have to wait until it is your turn to fight back. 

 

 

This isn't really the place to discuss the changes to nids, but they definitely got a huge help with 6th ed. GKs are pretty much good against most armies. In a game dominated by shooting, the shooting armies usually do well. GKs are definitely one of the shooties

No, I think Knights can have bad matchups, its just people don't field them much. Nids get screwed, because like Daemons they lost EW on their big stuff (which makes force weapons such a hard counter). They also like their horde infantry, which we eat with impunity in both melee and shooting. That leaves them with shooting, where they struggle to break our PA or TDA from range without focusing a lot into single targets. 

 

 

This is pretty much speculation on your part. You have no data to back up your claim. I'm not saying daemons are the bestest codex ever, just that time will tell how they play out. Adepticon is right around the corner, I'll be waiting to see how they play out there, then maybe wait until after a few more GTs and get some real play time against them before I make any judgement. I encourage everyone to do the same.

Name one tournament where Daemons won, prior to WD buff. Actually, I'll go one better. Name one tournament where Daemons placed in top 3, prior to WD buff. 5th edition onwards, Daemons have consistently been the worst army in 40k (Sisters and until recently Tau were down there, but not quite as bad). This new codex is functionally weaker in every respect than the prior incarnation. It will take really good matchups and amazing generals to pull wins out of it. 

[Gentlemanloser]

 

Agreed. Prince/GD spam backed up with Grinders is a real pain for many
armies to deal with. Knights aren't one of them, neither are IG, but a
lot of xenos and Marine armies will have issues with it.

 

Yeah, bring 5 GD/DP lists and you will roll over armies that can't;

 

Make the GD/DP I1 on Assault

ID them

Bring a load of shooting to ground them

 

 

Assault isn't inferior, just different. If anything, 2D6 charge range
has made assault more likely. Daemons don't suck because they're slow
(they're not especially slow really), they suck for a whole host of
reasons.

 

Less likely.  Random charge range over fixed.  On average, you gain 1" charge range.  But now Overwatch deaths can also stop you charging.

 

 

Who's to say that I don't have a unit of screamers shadowing the flamers to counter charge without fear of overwatch?

 

Who's to say I don't have a unit of Terminators ready to eat both units...

 

 

So what? Heldrakes aren't broken

 

Until all armies get 'enough anti flier', which a Quad Gun (or relying on twin linking) isn't, Heldrakes are OP.  Assaults before shooting wasn't balanced for a core rule change, yet Heldrakes get to do it.  /cheese (So can CCB, but they don't have a Torrent AP3 Flamer)

 

 

This new codex is functionally weaker in every respect than the prior incarnation

 

This.

 

Just to reiterate;

 

Global loss of EW

Global change of 'powers' into Psychic Powers

 

Are *massive* nerfs over the old dex, that weren't recompensed by anything.

 

And that's before you look at individual units nerfs and introduction of new global ways to nerf yourself by Warpflame and Instability.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

 

Make the GD/DP I1 on Assault

ID them

Bring a load of shooting to ground them

Eh, the thing is, S10 is pretty rare at range, so ID'ing them relies on force weapons in melee. With the GD's and Nurgle Pringes, only specific ID weapons like force weapons can gib them. The strength of the list is the same as Nid Monster Mash, they bring too many wounds to remove with your heavy weapons. Even if you make them I1, they still eat face in combat. I'd say its one of their better builds really, same as last edition. 

 

Less likely.  Random charge range over fixed.  On average, you gain 1" charge range.  But now Overwatch deaths can also stop you charging.

 

 

Oh I'm not a fan, just saying, Daemons aren't especially slow really, and the 2D6 charge range means you can roll insane distances. Overwatch can be leverage by getting enough models within charge distance to prevent them zoning you out with lucky kills.  

 

Until all armies get 'enough anti flier', which a Quad Gun (or relying on twin linking) isn't, Heldrakes are OP.  Assaults before shooting wasn't balanced for a core rule change, yet Heldrakes get to do it.  /cheese (So can CCB, but they don't have a Torrent AP3 Flamer)

Allies bring good Flyers. Nids are screwed I agree, but almost everyone else has IG Vendettas, or their own Flyers. Heldrake isn't OP, I view it more as the wakeup call to start including anti-Flyer tech in your army lists. 

 

And that's before you look at individual units nerfs and introduction of new global ways to nerf yourself by Warpflame and Instability.

 

 

Don't forget the massive 'Random Stuff Happens' table for every turn. That looks like so much fun to roll for every turn...

/sarcasm

[Gentlemanloser]

BT Vindi's with PotMS, or Railguns (till they get nerfed this weekend).  All good ally candidates as well.

 

True, there's more Assault based ID (also indlucing the non Force/S based IDs, like Skulltaker, Husk Blades, Callidus 'sin, etc), but Force Weapons are gravy when coupled with;

 

Making the Daemons go at I1

No Psychic Defense to stop FW activation

 

 

 

Don't forget the massive 'Random Stuff Happens' table for every turn. That looks like so much fun to roll for every turn...

/sarcasm

 

Forge that narative!  4+ You lose anyway.  Why not include more random dice rolling?

[Aethernitas]

the discussion is over - I win!

 

Ok seriously - Thade is right - we are getting nowhere with this. Moving on.

[IndigoJack]

the discussion is over - I win!

 

Ok seriously - Thade is right - we are getting nowhere with this. Moving on.

 

Agreed. There's far too much theory hammer and "my X will beat your Y" going on (I'm guilty of that too.) The codex is fairly new, and as other codexes get updated, it's power level in relation to others will become more apparent.

[Gentlemanloser]

Just like the 'nids did in 5th?  Where all the dexes that came after them were of the same power level...

 

Why do we think it's going to be any different in 6th, especially as Daemons are hampered by global system failings.

 

Like no shooting phase in a game dominated by shooting.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

 

the discussion is over - I win!

 

Ok seriously - Thade is right - we are getting nowhere with this. Moving on.

If by nowhere you mean 'I'm getting my arguments torn apart because they're equal parts blind optimism and wilful ignorance of the codex/other armies rules', then yeah. The Daemon forum might be more receptive though. From an opponents perspective though, its a trash codex with very little redeeming qualities. Worst of all, its a downgrade from the mediocre codex that preceded it. 

 

 

Agreed. There's far too much theory hammer and "my X will beat your Y" going on (I'm guilty of that too.) The codex is fairly new, and as other codexes get updated, it's power level in relation to others will become more apparent.

I agree. It might be even worse than I originally thought. Have you seen the new Tau? Broadsides ground your MC's and chip away their wounds, Riptides obliterate your multi-wound units and infantry. Not to mention the insane amount of pulse rounds they can spit out by stacking Ethereals with Fireblades on Fire Warrior squads. Oh, and SMS now ignores cover and is twin-linked....urgh. 

 

 

Just like the 'nids did in 5th?  Where all the dexes that came after them were of the same power level...

 

Why do we think it's going to be any different in 6th, especially as Daemons are hampered by global system failings.

 

Like no shooting phase in a game dominated by shooting.

 

Well, to be fair, if you have other advantages that push melee and speed, you can get by with low shooting. No shooting though, I agree, very much an uphill battle. Daemons aren't especially slow or fast though, and a lot of their better stuff lacks durability. As I mentioned before, Soul Grinders do so much work for the army in the shooting phase, and you can only get 3 prior to 2k battles. MC spam is strong though, it does speed+melee quite well. 

[Captain Idaho]

Let's hope you never lose to a Daemon player then, since the Codex is such trash... ;)

[Gentlemanloser]

I once lost a GKGM to 5 Pathfinders in a crater.

 

I once had a Pathfinder shoot a Dread through his eyeslit, penetrate, and destroy him.

 

Random FTW. ;)

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Let's hope you never lose to a Daemon player then, since the Codex is such trash...

Pure Daemons yes, as new Tau (my other army) are so OP in the shooting phase its insane. As I mentioned, I think CSM+Daemons will make for a powerful combo though. Heldrakes+MC spam+Grinders is tough to deal with.

I once lost a GKGM to 5 Pathfinders in a crater.

I once had a Pathfinder shoot a Dread through his eyeslit, penetrate, and destroy him.

Random FTW.

I once slapped down a Terminator Rune Priest in melee with Fire Warriors after getting charged. No frags haha

[Aethernitas]

I know I'm gravedigging here but I HAVE to post this here as illustrates what I was trying to say all along in this thread: Don't write of a codex based on biased opinion and without having anything to back you statments.

 

These are the wargamescon Top 4 placing from yesterday:

 

1st: Necrons (Ork allies - no forgeworld)
2nd: Chaos Daemons - (no forgeworld)
3rd: IG (forgeworld)
4th: Chaos Daemons (CSM allies - no forgeworld)

I don't want to say "I was right all along" just now but it seems a good indicator that Daemons are here to stay and are anything but a weak codex. The new Tau weren't qualified afaik so we have to see how they fare against daemons.

 

Anyhow - the full article on BOLS can be found here: http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2013/06/40k-army-meta-1-year-into-6th-edition.html

 

It also includes nice charts and a little write up about the most popular tournament armies and I love that GKs are confortably sitting in the mid-field. Thats how i like my codizes - strong but fair.

[Gentlemanloser]

Yes, Flying MC roll over unprepared armies that don't have the capability to stop them.  Said that since day 1.

 

Sadly, it's *very* easy to cater for stopping them.  I guess those lists that got roflstomped "were not prepared".

 

Don't you just love Rock - Paper - Scissors.

[Aethernitas]

fair enough

Still - everybody knows that rock is imba and paper is balanced perfectly fine. At least thats what scissors tells me