What are Thousand Sons hoping for from Chapter Approved?

[Skerr]

You will def find two groups who prefer sorcerers as a budget option or the exalted option for all the reasons listed. I remember some passionate discussion on exalted or regular sorcerers when the dex came out. It really comes down to point allocation. I agree that exalted stat lines are worth the points but some folks do not.

 

Bordering on withlisting here but it still silly to me that only termie sorcerers get familiar access. I know a familiar mini came with the termie lord pack though i dont really see the model used as a prerequisite.

[Prot]

Poking through my codex and Battlescribe a bit tonight, and something occurred to me that might be nice to help - Sorcerers. As in normal ones. Does anyone use them? Why would you when you have the Exalted option? The extra hitting skill and re-roll aura seems useful to me, but it's also a theme thing.

 

A Sorcerer who is the same as any other CSM spell flinger doesn't seem fitting for the Thousand Sons :confused: It seems a bit odd that Exalted Champions in C:CSM are a nice extra option for sub-commanders yet there's no equivalent here - a Sorcerer is simply a budget option?

 

I don't expect a change in CA of course, but this bugs me now :P

The Champion thing is a punishment for being ‘special’. That’s how I’ve always looked at it. Lol

What I mean by that is I play Deathwatch but can’t access a simple Astartes Lieutenant. Or a simple Techpriest.

 

But I do agree it’s a weird thing that we don’t really fill that gap with anything. But I’m in the group that thinks Exalted Sorcs need a bit of a reduction. As mentioned you just get so much more mileage out of some other options.

 

As a result I find in my attempt to be flavourful I usually hurt myself by taking too many HQs, and too many over costed units like Scarabs and Rubrics. Yet I look across the table and the other side often can do the same thing and get away with it.

 

A good example of what I’m talking about would be Dark Eldar. I played in an ITC event where one of my last games was against a very good DE list with a lot of powerful support characters. How can they do that? Just because everything is so much cheaper.

 

Even Deathguard have fantastic support characters ranging from mediocre to amazing in ability. Again the difference is cost and ability. When I take 4 characters (that aren’t DPs) I’m seriously handicapping myself.

 

So there’s my soap box for giving us more for less compared to our current choices in that area. Also I believe that Thousand Sons actually embody that support structure more than most armies do. ( don’t get me started on how a Sorc Dread could have easily been one of these solutions! I have to believe GW has seen us mention that request 9.99 billion times on this forum!!)

[Ahzek451]

I would be surprised if we don't see a reduction in points for rubrics. At the very least.

Please please please change the icon of flame.

And exalted def need some tweaks. By themselves, they are ok. But as others have said, it's the other options. It would be nice to have a reason to NOT take Ahriman in a list. Give exalts a little more uniqueness. 

And for the love of Tzeentch, fix the heldrake. The fluff says we love to use these in the current codex...would be nice to want to.

 

Since aspiring sorcerers on our rubrics and scarabs can cast other spells besides smite, and suffer from mini-smite.... I don't think it would be too far-fetched to let them ignore perils when casting mini-smite. 

 

The following pushes into wishlisting territory, but it would be nice to have a system that felt more fluffy for the sons when it comes to psy powers. In the psychic phase, we should be masters. Capable of casting normal spells with ease, but from time to time...we can push things too far and pay the consequences. I would suggest a system where we have powers like normal, but every power would have a secondary option that would cost more WC to use and if you choose this method you would perils on any double.

 

For example:
Weaver of fates is the same as it is now. But you can choose to up the WC to 7 and it will affect all units within 9"(and not just one, and I just threw in a number for range). Any roll of a double is a perils.

 

Tzeentch's firestorm:
Add a warp charge and perils on double once again, but it goes off on a 4+ instead of 6+.

 

Just an idea. 

[Tyriks]

No perils on mini smite would be cool. Then I might actually use it sometimes.

[Paladin777]

Honestly, if they could faq AS perils rolls, drop a couple points off rubrics, a few points off SOT’s and give them a native 4++ I’d be ecstatic.

[BoomWolf]

Making firestorm not utterly useless would be nice too.

Actually, many of the TS spells need fixing given that they are an outright inferior versions of spells others got.

Unlikely that would happen though.

 

 

 

As for the sorcerer question-its cheap HQs and its useful for spell spamming if you are somehow not covering all the spells you want.

 

Having our "legion tactics" do something, ANYTHING for our non-psyker units would also be nice. its a bit silly how there is currently no reason to use tzaangors in an actual TS detachment over a random heretic astardes detachment. (or a tzeentch one), also our helbrutes/cultists are identical to legionless ones. its even worse than then normal marine "all tanks are the same regardless of chapter/legion" issue.

 

 

 

The only thing we'll probably get though is a minor point reduction to rubrics, and probably a bigger one for scarabs (judgeing by the fact other termies are said to drop a LOT, it makes sense so will ours.)

[Paladin777]

Ok, fair enough on those points too.

[Skerr]

Aw man, cheaper termies has me drooling. We shall see what happens.

 

Tzeentch still seems to have the random stigma to it with Firestorm a good example. Feast or famine. Has anyone had any consistent success with Firestorm?

[Quixus]

Aw man, cheaper termies has me drooling. We shall see what happens.

Hmm unless the rubrics get a similar or bigger cost reduction, it armies will be even more goats and the occasional terminator but no rubrics.

[The Yncarne]

I’ve used firestorm a handful of times. Rolled really well against a knight and 1-2 other times, but it is more of a could have than must have for me.

[Sonoftherubric21]

Aw man, cheaper termies has me drooling. We shall see what happens.

 

Tzeentch still seems to have the random stigma to it with Firestorm a good example. Feast or famine. Has anyone had any consistent success with Firestorm?

 

I use it consistently as part of a combo. 

 

It is definitely *INCREDIBLY* swingy. 

 

I have had games where multiple casts flub and barely do any damage. 

 

I have also had 1 cost nailed a character in a bunkers back line or hiding among a horde. 

 

Most casts you can reasonably expect 1-2 damage, usually I build off of that and toss out a firestorm as my second or third spell (after gaze of fate) and that gives you a great swingy damage spell that many of my opponents are fairly scared of due to the potential.  I had a game where firestorm did 5 wounds to a daemon prince. I also have "sniper" builds for Ahriman that have consistently netted me good results. Leave an Exalted with +1 to cast warlord trait in the back with buff spells like Prescience/Weaver. 

 

Ahriman with doombolt, infernal gaze, and firestorm. Usually can output on average somewhere between 4 and 6 mortals on one specific target. I don't use it often as my friends and local meta *HATE* this build because its fairly mean.... any basic character with 4-5 wounds is in real danger of dieing in a single turn without you being able to react and you can't hide them barring a vehicle.  If ANY of the spells spike or go above-average your sitting at 5 or so. Enough to kill most characters.  Since each of those spells has a 24 inch threat + ahrimans 12 inch + running movement its got a very solid threat range and you can't really get away. 

 

I have also on occasion combo'd it with a Warp-time from a sorcerer or prince within 9 to pull Ahriman back into the line if he needs to over-extend (though that is rare) and you give up Ahrimans consistent reliability in spell casting our buffs for damage output, so it is a trade off. 

[Skerr]

Great insight Son. I always enjoy reading about your experiences.

 

Nice kill strategy with Ahri.

[Prot]

I also use the buff Sorc in the back to bolster my Sicaran tank and Decimator a lot. Sometimes I question the wisdom of it but the odd time it actually discourages a deep strike attack to have an Exalted Sorc back there.

 

The Termies though... they need an across the board fix then there’s ours.

[Skerr]

I have lists with exalteds baby sitting and buffing tanks or forges as well, with killy psykers flying around the board.

[Prot]

I was doing an exercise in more list making and really think the daemon engines in the Chaos line need some help.

 

I think if you compare today's strats and how potent many of them are, the Daemonforge one does a nice job of helping the unit however it's not inherently potent enough in my experience. So I do have Exalteds babysitting (again I'm not sure how bright this is to do) and I don't really use Forgefiends and/or Defilers anymore.

 

I just find them too expensive, and there's more mileage out of something like Soul Burner Decimator or Sicaran tank. I don't bother with Helbrutes at all anymore. It would be a different story if we had a similar "Tzeentcy" version of the Plagueburst Crawler for approximately that point level.

 

I also find (and have posted my testing in games) that the Armigers are far superior to this category of tank/damon engine. The big problem for me is I prefer using real "chaos" stuff and our Psychic phase and interact with that Tzeentch Daemon Engine stuff a lot better... it's fluffier as well I imagine. But most importantly I find the Armigers just flat out better.

 

So I'm throwing in a bid on the Daemon Engines seeing some retooling to some degree. I have multiples from my World Eaters that I just don't use. (I sold off the Thousand Sons Fiends). I just can't get them back into the rotation for a game or two before just finding the alternative is simply much better.

[WarriorFish]

The Daemonforge Stratagem is nice, but it's basically so because it covers for the weaker stats... Given that Thousand Sons are a bit short on AT they could fill this gap with some improvements.

 

I love my Maulerfiendshrimp for my CSM and they'd look cool with Sons too, but they're not amazing and need other armour to help them out or they'll get hammered quickly by enemy AT and achieve nothing. With Sons being as expensive as they are, that's easier said than done I think. There's a lot CA could do if we're lucky.

[Quixus]

I hope they fix predators loyalist and traitor ones. Giving ours a daemon engine, making them eligible for the daemonforge stratagem, would also help.

[Ahzek451]

Fix the vindicator along with the heldrake. I want to use more drakes, seeing our new fluff states we favor this unit.

[GreaterChickenofTzeentch]

I was doing an exercise in more list making and really think the daemon engines in the Chaos line need some help.

 

I think if you compare today's strats and how potent many of them are, the Daemonforge one does a nice job of helping the unit however it's not inherently potent enough in my experience. So I do have Exalteds babysitting (again I'm not sure how bright this is to do) and I don't really use Forgefiends and/or Defilers anymore.

 

I just find them too expensive, and there's more mileage out of something like Soul Burner Decimator or Sicaran tank. I don't bother with Helbrutes at all anymore. It would be a different story if we had a similar "Tzeentcy" version of the Plagueburst Crawler for approximately that point level.

 

I also find (and have posted my testing in games) that the Armigers are far superior to this category of tank/damon engine. The big problem for me is I prefer using real "chaos" stuff and our Psychic phase and interact with that Tzeentch Daemon Engine stuff a lot better... it's fluffier as well I imagine. But most importantly I find the Armigers just flat out better.

 

So I'm throwing in a bid on the Daemon Engines seeing some retooling to some degree. I have multiples from my World Eaters that I just don't use. (I sold off the Thousand Sons Fiends). I just can't get them back into the rotation for a game or two before just finding the alternative is simply much better.

 

Armiger Helverins are better than a lot of things. They are more points efficient than a good chunk of the other units in the game.

 

Hilariously, if you could equip a Predator with two Predator Autocannons, it would actually be 170 to an Armiger's 174 w/Stubber and 2 cannons.

 

4 points more for a unit that is faster, can move and fire with no penalty AND has greater range on those guns, plus an Invuln save, a 3+ WS, one more Wound, and the ability to deploy in squadrons to reduce drops and get around Rule of 3.

 

As it is, you end up trying to do similar things with an Auto/Dual Las Predator for 180.....and often not doing them as well.

 

I've seen quite a bit of complaining online that they're undercosted, and I'm thinking that they might be in for a nerf.

 

Armigers have been replacing various tanks and dreads in Imperial armies all over the place. It's not just us, and I expect GW will do something about that.

[Prot]

Good point about the fantasy armi-predator.

 

I honestly don’t think the Armiger Helverin is overcosted. I really believe the other tanks and dreads are just really lacking. If an armiger helverin went up it would be massively offset (I’m hoping) by the other discounts comin.

[GreaterChickenofTzeentch]

Good point about the fantasy armi-predator.

 

I honestly don’t think the Armiger Helverin is overcosted. I really believe the other tanks and dreads are just really lacking. If an armiger helverin went up it would be massively offset (I’m hoping) by the other discounts comin.

There are many armies taking Helverins instead of their own Heavy Support Choices. The issue is quite broad, which tells me, personally, that it's a problem with the unit. 

 

Its weapons alone outperform a lot of choices available to other armies. 60 in range, 4d3 shots, Str 7 -1AP, 3 flat damage. That has the potential to outperform quite a few things because any individual hit is so telling if it gets through and the damage is a reliable 3 instead of a random number. Couple that with an average of 8 shots being fired, and you have enough weight of fire to make it very likely that you're inflicting at least 3 wounds against anything every time you pull the trigger. 60 inches allows it to reach a significant part of the table.

 

Now let's add that it's also firing with a 3+ BS with no move penalties and the platform moves 14 inches. The result tends to be more points efficient than a Leman Russ Tank Commander, for example. There are quite a few other choices that lose this comparison, and on the Imperial side, the Helverins come with their own Stratagems and House traits that enhance their performance further if you build correctly.

 

To me, that argues quite convincingly for a broad problem, though I imagine there are counter-arguments out there.

 

To bring it back on topic, I agree that Daemon Engines and SM/CSM tanks should ALSO get help. For example, give the tanks their Squadrons back so that Killshot and Linebreaker Bombardment can actually be used if you don't get first turn.

[Raven1]

My meta didnt have any knights. So i cant speak much about Helvrins. What i do know is they are flat out better point for point against many Heavy Support choices. So Helvrin either needs to go up in points which i might be pointed appropriately. I think for sure things like Predators need to go down in points.

 

I would personally like to see daemon engines at BS 3+

[BolterZorro]

It has been leaked that the little knights (armigers) will go up in points. And big knights won't be touched (almost)

[antique_nova]

Although I can't find the source, I'm pretty sure that in this year's chapter approved GWS said there will be NO POINTS CHANGES. Most of the changes would be in the stratagems themselves and other stuff.

 

Even if I am wrong, I agree that the marines need to be heavily tweaked because right now, it's a no brainer to choose birdmen over the marines every single time. The only marine I field in my TS GT army is Ahriman for his +1 and ability to spam spells and deny them too.

 

However, even if the changes that the OP suggested were implemented. I still wouldn't bat an eyelash at the marines, because the birdmen are far too strong in every aspect except survivability, but that's not much of the problem when you can teleport and deepstrike them. As a unit of 30x birdmen can quite easily murder a 10 man rubric marine unit in one assault phase and the marines won't be able to do much. Plus, they're only a 10 point difference, before you factor in special weapons.

[Skerr]

I had thought they meant no point changes for Fall FAQ though CA still might be on the table. I could be wrong.