Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
As this was made for 5th ed. THIS TACTICA IS OUT OF USE UNTILL FURTHER NOTICE. I might get around to writing a new one for 5th after playing ALOT of games... Happy gaming.
Daemons Tactica 2011:
So I have seen a lot of post on this forum the last few months concerning Daemons and whether or not they're broken/imba etc. and whether or not they're a competitive army or one that does not work. Well, I'm of the opinion that Daemons are indeed a very competitive army and I have had 4 wins for every 1 loss for the last year since I changed my list to its current composition.
I started playing warhammer in 1996 and started 40k in 1999, so I've been at it for quite a while. In this time I have played 3 different chapters of space marines and still play CSM, Nids, Guard and off course Daemons. I have played daemons since they were released for 40k. This is just to underline that I've got a couple of years and armies under my belt before writing this.
This is my first tactica though so I hope you'll bear over with any minor mistakes.
My aim for this tactica is not really to guide you through your own codex. Anyone can read their codex entries and understand that. My aim is to inform the less informed/experienced of the available tactics out there along with thoughts on how to build your list, how to set the table, where to place objectives, how to deploy, how to divide waves etc.
For those of you out there who do not benefit from this tactica because you're too experienced please don't waste time on telling me this. For those of you who disagree on a certain suggestion of mine, keep in mind that this is how I do it and had success with it, not a general I win button. The paths to victory are many. Last, if I write something in direct conflict with the rules please write so with a reference to the rule/codex/book and I'll of course edit.
Well, enough of that, grab a cup of coffee/tea and sit down.
The army you play should of course reflect the play style you prefer and the units you find fun. This is true while you're playing friendly games or your level of ambition at tournaments is relatively low or when your preferred army happens to be the competitive one off course.
So first of all, when building your list, you should think of whether or not you army is meant to be competitive/hard core/not nice/etc. or meant for friendly games. If it is the former then several units of our codex are no longer up for consideration as there are better units for the same job in the codex or simply the unit just is not good enough. This is true for all codices, there will always be units in your codex you will not use when playing competitively.
The focus of this tactica will be on competitive play, as the whole gameplay is different for friendly games.
I won't go over every unit in the codex but I will give you five units you should love and five units you should avoid.
• Tzeentch heralds (Tzeralds)
• Beast of nurgle
• Flesh hounds
• Herald of khorne (you should have bought more blood crushers for his price)
Goal of the list:
When making your list envision what you want from the list. Simply sit down and think about your list, about the local game environment and local rules and what units you own, should acquire.
As this is a general tactica I will not touch upon all sorts of local rules/customs or army selection platforms (army selection is especially popular in northern Europe (my experience) and it includes further strict rules that reduces the amount of "tough" units you can field so e.g. they avoid dual lash armies and flying circus eldar). I am deeply opposed to army selection platforms as I think GW already have made the points system and that's it.
So, generally... armies in fifth have lots of armor and especially cheap transport are the name of the game for a lot of armies. Transport are faster that your units, it's something you cannot get, they protect their content while living and they're worth a kill point in annihilation and can last-second contest with tank shock in objective scenarios. Transports MUST die. So a main focus of the daemon player should be how to take out transports.
Another important thing is assault. Daemons have some of the best assault troops in the game, but we are kind of land locked once we have deep striked in. This is where we start dying as the opponent rapid fire us to hell and will generally be 2:1 in the first turn... This is not fun. So... you should also focus on how you get those elite assault troops into the fight. Fateweaver for protection, speed, so you deep strike (DS) further away or pavane so you can move his troops out of cover and closer to you.
Last, objective taking and contesting. You win 2/3 of the games you will play by holding at least one more objective than your opponent. How you do this will be covered later. For holding objectives ... two words: plague bearers. My favourite but there are other options.
Your list should include elements from all three parts, not meaning one 1/3 for each points wise, but elements from each.
By synergi I mean how the individual components of your army work together. Furthermore it is a question of how your opponent can and will react.
Synergi is obtained in the easiest way imagined. Take two or more of the same thing. I am not saying that you should spam the same thing in your army, but consider your opponents army. His army will probably be balanced so as to be able to take on any kind of list. This means he will have a little of everything. So if you have a little of everything he will take each of his parts and use it correctly on the proper opposite in your army and since you DS in waves he will 2 vs 1. This is why soul grinder tend to perform under average if you only have 1. Any opponent can counter one soul grinder in the turn it arrives. Not everyone can counter two and only a very few can counter three... this is how you should be thinking. Same as taking one monstrous creature... where do you think his anti tank weaponry will go when you show no armor against him? He will just swivel his guns around to your MC's. So take more than one, preferably three or more. Same with tzeralds on chariots and units of blood crushers unless you only use them for bait. (I only use 3 blood crushers and they're mainly bait...)
Your opponent will most likely think the same way and therefore include multiple of the same unit.
At tournaments the terrain will almost always be set beforehand. So not much further you can do about it. IF you get the chance to set the battlefield along with your opponent you should get some of that tall terrain in the middle of the table. Furthermore, if you have trouble with DS get as much wood on the table as possible, where some wall or bunkers might be impassable terrain and risk your deep strike, woods will not do that, though they only grant cover and not block line of sight completely... pros and cons...
There are three scenarios in the rule book (if you did not know that, shame on you and get your rule book). Two of these concern objectives and one concerns kill points. This means that 2/3 of the time you will have to place at least one objective on the field. This part of the game is in my opinion on of the most important.
Between you and your opponent 3-5 objectives will be placed around the battlefield. This will be done before the type of deployment is set. Now is the time for you to compare your opponents forces to your own. Will he have any DS or outflanking forces, how many vehicles especially fast tanks or skimmers does he have, what are his troop choices etc. All these are things you need to consider before setting your objectives.
If he is way faster than you and can tank shock with fast skimmer tanks (eldar) or other really mobile armies or armies with really strong deep striking units that might be able to take objectives as well then you will place your objectives in one way... defensively, as in as many objectives in the middle and as close to each other as possible. This way you can sit on the objectives and he will have to come to you. Furthermore, your units can relatively quickly support any place you might want to reinforce or counter his moves as all your forces will probably be in the middle of the table.
If you are faster than him because you field winged MC's, chariots and jump infantry/cavalry/beast and he is land locked then spread out your objectives to a higher degree. Do not be afraid to set them a bit apart. This way you should be able to spread your objective takers far from your main forces, and while he will try to get to them, your whole army get to molest him... in theory.
Capture and control:
Same again, only this time you know what kind of deployment you will get and what zone on the table that will be yours even though you don't deploy. This time though, you are allowed to place the objective anywhere on the table as long it is not within 24 of the other objective.
This means that your opponent can effectively place his objective on the very edge of the table behind a wall of vehicles and ask you how you plan to get in there while he can tank shock you away from it when you get close... (bitter experience).
So again you consider his forces and what they're capable of. If you think you are able to contest/hold his without risking your own, then put your objective far from his and place a plague bearer unit on it. If on the other hand your opponent is faster than you, as he most often will be, then place your objective close as possible to him.
well... you don't really influence the game before your first turn, so not much in this part to add to annihilation...
If you win the dice roll for who goes first there are further things to consider, i.e. should you go first or second? Many daemon players react with the easy response of going second as you deny your opponent the full effect of a turn. This is in truth very effective and very simple. What it should not be though, is an automatic choice.
For instance, in a dawn of war scenario with all the objectives in the middle cause your opponent is faster than you, and he has placed two rhinos with troop choices and an HQ and you give him to go first. If he is smart, he will play aggressively and spread out in force and get his arriving troops to come as far forward as possible. Right now, he has maybe his full army on the table, protected by night fighting against your shooting and sitting on most of the middle of the table... Now where are you going to DS? around him, but as he will occupy a large amount of the table he has forced you to risky DS and denied you the ability to DS right unto the middle of the objective hub...
This is just one of several scenarios where it might be smart for you to go first instead of the automatic second.
When that is said and done, one should of course remember that it is still very often is a good idea to go second as he loses a turn of shooting and assaulting and you go last when it comes to objectives so you can respond if he tries to last turn deny you one of yours...
Your waves for your daemonic assault are pretty dependant on your army composition. It is pretty hard to say something about this though I will mention a couple of general things.
Choosing your waves. First of all remember that you do not have to choose your waves before you get your first turn. This is an advantage that you should always use. It is always nice to have an idea of how you plan to divide your army, but you should not really decide before your first turn starts. Now that you know your opponent's army and his deployment you should divide your army into waves.
The division of your waves is pretty individual. Some suggest an aggressive bet on getting the right wave, I myself divide a bit defensively but still with a strong and a less strong wave reflecting the better chance of getting your 1st wave.
Well, it is your game and you will be the one playing it and everything will be too individual and different from person to person, area to area and game to game...
I hope you will have learned something or at least been reminded of a thing or two.
Last edited by Sirholy; July 2nd, 2012 at 08:30.
Like to see this tactica added to, with a section on dealing with the GKs.
Sorry about the late answer. I am usually online on LO every two-three days, but easter has taken up the last week+...
A special section for dealing with GK is not going to happen for several reasons.
- jy2 is allready compiling a list of pros and cons of fighting GK and the best way to beat them. jy2 seems like a competent player/writer and a nice/helpful person. I am confident that his thread will be a piece worth reading. I see no reason to double post.
- This is a general tactica, I will not include army specific tactics, these can be made in different threads.
- While i think GK have some lame advantages and unpaid for abilities that are really insane against daemons I do not think it really changes what i wrote above. The above is just even more important against GK as you cannot really make a single mistake without being punished for it even more than usual. You should still think about your setup, waves, placement of objectives, going first/second ect. all of which is covered above.
Hope you understand. jy2's post is: http://www.librarium-online.com/foru...y-knights.html
Mordos brought to my attention a really fine format for how we should outline our tacticas. I'm including a linked example (see first post for details):
http://www.librarium-online.com/foru...e-tactica.html (Karl Franz's Book of War - WiP Empire tactica)
Spambot kill tally. . .337
I looked into the format used now and given it some thought, and while i think it is cool enough i think the unit by unit and item by item walkthrough is a bit over the top. You'll end up with a list no new player will ever get through. And while you use alot of effort on walkthrough of the independent units and items (here daemonic gifts) you'll underprioritize real tactics as in how to DS, build your list, move, shoot assault and so on as i think a tactica should be. What the above link is is a list/walkthrough of a codex.
If the community is up for it though, sure lets venture into it and see how far we can get.
Dont think the index from 2008 should be copy pasted in though, since i think alot of the assesments, while well-written, are out of date for the current game situation.
Sorry but i must disagree with saying that people should stay away from Daemonettes in their army lists. I played a game vs space wolves last night and won because of them! only had a 15man(daemon?) squad, but they killed 5 thunder wolves(over 2 turns of combat) and blew up 3 rhinos. Daemonettes have 4 epic advantages:
2. Assault grenades
what i mean by "ignored" is that people rightly fear my 15 bloodletters over my 15 daemonettes, and so shoot at the bloodletters. Usually the opponent doesn't even register the daemonettes until it's already too late. You listed Fiends as a desired unit, but why Fiends and not Daemonettes? Fiends are good no doubt, but the problem is that people knowthat they are good, but they don't think Daemonettes are. I can never think of a game where when my 15 letters and 15 daemonettes came down the opponent shot at the daemonettes, they aren't as good. However, you can't take more then 1 15 man unit or else the opponent WILL fire on them, and they WILL die.Speaking from experience.
Sorry but just can't letcha say that everyone should avoid them... they have assault grenades and defensive grenades Fiends don't
Sorry for that late reply, but been kinda busy lately.
While I am happy for you that daemonettes work for you, I'll argue that is due to your opponents, your local environment, terrain and general metagame. The above guide is meant in a more general way, and one that's meant to work in a competitive environment AND it is more than a year old.
It is based on my own experience and several very competent and experienced 40k daemon players, madcat, ericsmyname, jy2 among others and generally not been met with alot of critic despite rather many views.
So for the number crushing: fiends cost just above the cost of two daemonettes.
Minus for fiends:
they have less than double attacks, they dont have grenades, they're not troops, they will get one bonus attack on charge where two daemonettes will get two (combined ofc.)
they have equal ws 4, no shooting attack, leadership and initiative (or are daemonettes actually one higher? (lack of codex at lunchbreak strikes again)), a fiend has two wound like two daemonettes so equal in terms of wound/points.
plus for fiends:
they have str 5, they have t4, hit and run and a threat range of 24 instead of 18.
So first of all, 15 daemonettes charging 10 marines get: 30 hits, of these 6 kills due to rending and further two gets through the armour.
Same points value amount of fiends charge in (7 fiends (i know its more than max, pray indulge me...)): 21 hits: 3,5 kills due to rending and further 3,5 dies from failed armour saves.
So... youre right, daemonettes trumphs the fiends... BUT the threath range is a mayor factor and so is toughness and wounds. Fiends deep strike really really far from the enemy and can still be a threat. most importantly, they can charge from outside normal rapid fire range... daemonettes will never be able to charge from outside rapid range (unless terrain plays in, at which point terrain might favour either side). This means your whooping 210 pts daemonette unit is decimated due to t3, 1w (i.e. one wound = loss of 4 attacks on the charge the following turn). Now your effectiveness is severely hampered. In the above example, approx 6 daemonettes would die to rapidfire, whereas i'd lose one fiend (IF i was in rapid fire range)...
And after combat I can even slingshot my fiends through the opponents lines...
But the major factor here is the threat range. Which is why seekers are generally your go to unit as alternative to fiends if your elite is maxed or you dont like fiends, or you really really need does grenades...
Next up is based on my individual experience:
fiends/seekers are not that crazy a combat unit compare to some other choices out there (since rending is crap) BUT theyre damn cheap (pts/stats wise) and they can mince any non closecombat-specialist unit out there. So they (imo) dont really need grenades that much, cause you use them to kill your opponents hive guard/long fangs/heavy weapon squadron etc who wont bother you if they strike first OR support another closecombat unit which is allready engaged(winged daemon prince etc.). So with fiends/seekers it is YOU who choose your battles, while with daemonettes it is your oppenent...
Your last argument is that your opponent fear your bloodletters more... i can understand that. But the above guide does not take into acount an opponent who's stupid enough to not take that one single turn of "maglite" fire it takes to halve a daemonettes unit's effectiveness... sorry, it is really not meant in any arrogant way, but daemonettes are so easy to deal with. theyre troops and since you have 210 pts of them, who can lose so much effectiveness if a single unit spares some time to shoot a them. A skilled opponents will allways have the time to wipe a glasscannon 210 pts troop choice, no matter the scenario...
My one last reason is slightly better and probably should have been included, but you can stick the Masque with daemonettes and not hamper their effectiveness. If you stick the Masque with Seekers, they lose 6" of assualt range. The Masque is epic and next to Skulltaker or a Tzherald is one of the better HQ's for daemons. 3 Lash attacks in an army that has Breath? sweet. Shoots at different targets? sweet. oh yeh and for some reason the Masque has a 3++, so is hard to kill as well. Anywho, we'll have to agree to disagree, as I never leave home without a unit of Daemonettes, while you obviously never leave home with them difference of opinions, but there's always multiple ways to run an army. I think the Lord of Change should be added to the don't take column, but that's cause I can't justify spending 300+ points on a single model whereas my Tzheralds have the same shooting abilities, and an icon, and 5 wounds, and i get nearly 2 for every 1 Lord of Change. Anways, rant has ended
The Masque does not have the independent character rule so she should never be in a unit to begin with.