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!
Recently, I've come to a creative wall with Daemons. I used the same list for a long while with good results. But there came a time for me when the same old list, winning or not, becomes stale and boring. Same old, same old. So, I sat down and made a couple of new lists. My normal list had Chariots of Tzeentch, Flamers, Pink Horrors, Soul Grinder, Daemon Prince etc. So I drafted a couple of new lists to try. My first list was a Nurgle themed list with a bit of a twist: I had Ku'Gath, a couple units of Plaquebears w/ Hearld, Soul Grinder, a couple of Nurgle Daemon Princes and a couple squads of Flamers. My first opponent was Blood Angels and I wiped them up with that list. Next time I used them against Eldar, I lost. So then I made a predominantly Khorne list with Bloodletters (lots of them), Bloodthirster, Princes of Khorne, Skulltaker on a Chariot, Soul grinder and some Bloodcrushers. They get shot up bad, but again, I had a good victory the first time using it against Orks. Now, I am about to run a list where I have Blue Scribes, Masque and two Princes, all with the Pavane. It is a lot like running a double Lash with CSM. I haven't run the list yet. But isn't there a time when winning isn't quite as fun as keeping your army fresh and trying new things, even if your new list fails? Do most of you try new, weird lists just for the heck of it? If you do, I'd love to hear about it.
After much procrastination I decided to give a fatecrusher list a try... Yes it's very powerful and effective, but I have an aversion to 'cheese lists'. The list just (IMHO) highlights the dichotomy that exists in the daemons codex... Whereby many of the units are largely irrelevant for 'competitive' play, and I really object to that and effectively being forced to play these fatecrusher/fateseeker lists just because they are one of the only ways that the daemons can be effective
As a result, they (daemons) are now only being used for apocalypse games and I'm concentrating on my Ork army
Current Army Status - Chaos - 15000 points, Orks (BadMoonz) - 3000 Points - Space Wolves - 4000 Points, Necrons - 2000 Points.
I've been running the same Chariot, Fiends, Horrors and DP list since I started playing daemons well over a year ago. In my opinion, it's the best list we can field and know first hand how powerful it is by the amount of games and tournaments I've won. I did try a few other lists when I first started daemons, but once I discovered this list I never looked back. The major reason why I think I've never grown bored of my daemons list is because I play 2 other armies as well. I might play one tournament with my Chaos Night Lords or with my Dark Elder. Maybe consider playing a second army to spice things up a bit rather then re-working a daemons list that works really well for you.
I just tried a couple different lists. One, I tried the somewhat Slaanesh list with four units using the Pavane. Turns out I mishapped 3 times! In fact in the last 3 games, I have mishapped a whopping 9 times, killing 3 units outright (2 in one game on the first turn...ouch!) and didn't get my preferred wave in any of the games. Just plain bad, bad rolling and the swarm armies I faced didn't help. I haven't mishapped before this in months. I did find out one thing about experimentation, Daemon Princes really work well with Fateweaver. I had a Nurgle Prince in combat with a ton of Genestealers with Fateweaver close by and my Prince killed them all and only took one, count 'em, one wound! I think I'll try 2 Nurgle Princes and Fateweaver together and see how it goes. I'm also finding out that Flamers, in groups of 3, are a tremendous asset especially against Eldar Wraithlords.
The problem I find with trying t oexperiment is that we have too few options to play around with, and too many of our units fullfill roughly the same role...
Daemonettes for example are both anti-horde and anti-MEQ at the same time thanks to their balance of hienous number of attacks + rending. Sure they're only S3, but that just means that against T4/3+ roughly half their total wounds are rending! So in the end, I find that daemonettes & 'letters kill roughly the same number of MEQ's, though the 'letters typically get an extra kill or two, while the 'nettes can rend the tougher stuff.
We're starting to become the 'new necrons' I feel with very limited choices so most daemon armies are functioning pretty much the same way most/all of the time...
Personally, I'd like to see us get;
- Exalted Daemons as a new HQ option with options similar to a prince. (ie: marks, generic gifts + a few god-specific options)
- Heralds give a bonus to the basic type of daemon. (ie: HoK gives 'prefered enemy' to 'letters?)
- Daemon engines which can be dedicated to specific gods.
- Chaos Spawn as a unit option.
- A transport of some kind.
- More options for each of the basic 4 daemon units. ('letters, pinkies, stinkers & 'nettes)
That would at least spice things up a bit more than what we have right now...
Chaos Spawn as an option? The Chaos Spawn is THE worst unit in the game! No self respecting CSM player uses them at the cost they are. Besides, the Beast of Nurgle is almost a Chaos Spawn only better. At least the Beast has an Invulnerable save with Feel No Pain. Not only that the Beast is 5 points cheaper. Also, what kind of transport would Daemons use? I personally think getting rid of the initial 2 wave deployment would go leaps and bounds toward helping Daemons. Splitting your army and then rolling for waves is a big reason why people don't play Daemons to begin with. Also, the Interceptor unit interfering with the only deployment option Daemons has needs to be fixed. A Daemon player might as well not play a Grey Knight player using three, evenly spaced Interceptors. The most ridiculous rule ever made, thanks for nothing Matt Ward.
As for a transport option, GW could always give us a generic 'slaughter engine', kinda half-beastial daemon/half-semi-organic chariot-convayance?!! Doesn't need steeds persay, but something big, angry, gribbly & spiky would fit! (and could be a war machine option for fantasy daemons at the same time?!?)
Overall, I don't mind too much the 2 waves thing, just how badly it's been implimented... If we had the option of simply dividing up the army how we see fit, (meaning if we want, we can keep just a mandetory 1 unit 'must' in reserve), and get rid of the stupid roll for which half, we'd be alot better off overall and able to adapt better to different missions and/or opponents.
Of corse, then GK's had to go and break us competely because Daemons ruined all of 7th edition by being the most ungodly, OP pile of steaming cheddar GW's ever produced! Of corse, Ward figured that to fix the problems, the only solution was to break daemons the other way in the wrong game...
And don't forget, Strike Squads get warp quake too, so only 9 possible units which can turn into 18 combat squads to worry about! On top of the various grenades, daemonbane, purifyers, paladins, draigo, banishers, truesilver armour, fortitude, dark ex, sanctuary, MoT, hammerhand, psybolts, psyfleman dreads...
Our gaming group talked about why people aren't playing Daemons and here's our discussion synapses: 1) people dislike the 2 wave split. Having only access to half an army is a problem for a lot of people. Only if you get good reserve rolls can one get their army in in time to make a good game of it. Also, people don't want the hassle of such a deployment when they could play any other army and get better, more easier deployments. 2) Deep Strikes. Look, deep striking can be great, it give you a better position on the board. However, if you mishap it can be an absolute game changer. Last 3 games I played, I mishapped a whopping 9 times. In one game I lost 300 points of my 1000 points in mishaps. Before this, I went months without a mishap. For what it's worth, I didn't get my preferred wave in any of those games either. No one likes to lose a high point model to a mishap and there is no such thing as a "safe" position to deep strike unless you have absolutely no terrain and no enemies on the board. If you roll lousy, there's nothing you can do. My close friend had 3000 points of Daemons and sold the entire army after less than a year because of mishaps. Also with deep strikes, you come down in a nice, tight group just ripe for the blast templates, then those that survive cannot attack the round they come down anyway. 3) Unit choices. It can be tough to figure out the right mix of Daemons to play. For the most part, only Tzeentch units have ranged weapons. In almost every other army, even Orks, most of their units can both fight and shoot to some degree. 3 of 4 Daemon troop choices cannot shoot at all. People I talked to see that Daemons are hard to figure out as far as units are concerned; MEQ's are much easier to play. 4) Grey Knights. So you got your new Daemons and here comes what seems like every other person playing Grey Knights. You get a GK player and he employs the good ole Interceptors. You may as well pack it in because Daemons aren't particularly mobile and deep striking on the table edges is no fun. Not to mention the mishaps; I mean you'll scatter either into the no drop zone or off the table for time to time. Even if you do drop safe, the GK have perk after perk to mess with you. One tournament player added that from the people he talked to on the tournament scene, next to Necrons, Daemons were the worst army. I disagree. They are a strong army in the right hands. But they are difficult to figure out and play.
We're simply the 'new 3rd ed dark eldar'. By that I mean;
- competitively we have very few list variations, but those couple lists are top-notch. Few armies for example can deal with a proper Fatecrusher or Fatefiend build and having the bulk of an army re-roll all their failed saves is plain rude! Tzeentch is king in tournaments, with 'bearers for objective holding & princes for mopping up what the elites don't take out.
Outside of these 'cookie-cutter' builds though, daemons really suffer on the competitive scale.
- we're the hardest army to learn how to use well. Too many built-in weaknesses on top of our army not meshing well in the current mech-mania means few people have the ability or willpower to stick with it and learn how to get the most out of the army.
Our wonky deployment, no way to improve reserve rolls, no psychic defense, no transports and lack of options to deal with mech are a too much of a challenge for most players when there's easier options out there.
- no fix anytime soon! sadly I don't see us getting any help for at least another 12-18 months, meaning we'll continue to be the new bottom-feeders.
The fact that Ward *#%!ed us over so harshly with GK's is beside the point, just another nail in our perverbial coffin for alot of potential players who will instead go and choose an easier army.
Still, GW has a habbit of making the long-suffering-under-preforming-laughingstalk-you-suck armies outright 'uber when they eventually do get a new army book/codex, so I have a feeling that while we'll suffer now, Tzeentch will reward us well in the future and we'll get a kick-ass army that's rightly feared in our next book! (it's simply all part of his grand scheme you know?!)