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!
I have 2 questions for you Chaos Horde,
1. How do you think/feel, average size of Warriors and Beastmen armies is much bigger than average size of Daemons army? I mean not rosters but how many models(points) single player has.
2. If yes - how do you think, Games Workshop realizes that interesting armybook means more models selling per single player?
Somehow I am interested in daemons too, but every time I open daemons armybook I can't find anything interesting there, single core, single special, single rare, and only one lord. I hate to collect army for roster, for me it works backwards, and somehow I blame author for doing interesting or boring armybook. Of course in my tiny world of Chaos, it must be obvious to GW that they must write interesting armybooks to raise sales, it would be both good for me and for them, but it looks like they think that models are more important than rulebooks for that models.
So, tell me how world looks there where you're looking from.
1. It depends on what kind of units we want to field - if Marauders, then we have more, if Warriors, probably fewer. As a collection, most WoC players I know have a HUGE number of models to mix and match their armies, giving us something most Daemon players lack, variety.
2. I think most people pick army books because they like how the armies looks or plays; the amount of models is usually more related to competitive play - I have over 100 marauders, but very few others bother with them at all because of the time needed to assemble and paint a single crappy Marauder is longer than a mighty Chaos Warrior!
Daemons look very boring to me in terms of play style, convertibility, painting schemes. That said they have some great units, amazingly strong individual models, some heavy damage ranged, and are very forgiving if you make a mistake.
At the end of the day though, Warriors still reign supreme with our godly Core units and far more versatile heroes.
“If you’re in the penalty area and don’t know what to do with the ball, put it in the net and we’ll discuss the options later.” – Bob Paisley
First, let me preface that I'm not trying to be a jerk right now- tone doesn't carry well through the net. What your question seems to be asking- at the root- is why is GW doing the Warriors book before Daemons? It seems that somewhere, you've heard that it is because Warriors have gained "more interest" and will therefore sell more models.
To answer your first question- Warriors armies with a focus on plate tend to field about 40-60 Warriors, with around 3-5 characters, and some kind of chaff numbering around maybe 20 more models with the exception of possibly a 30-50 strong Marauder unit. Marauder armies can easily reach the ballpark of 200 models. This is just in my experience, mind you.
2. The reason you see Warriors with more models in their armies than Daemons probably has a lot to do with the quality of our Core, in comparison to the quality and price of their Characters, Specials, and Rare. Daemons don't like their Core, of anything in that book, their Core are the fairest priced. This, combined with clearly superior choices in the rest of their list (choices which are expensive but still somehow a hair underpriced) leads them to create smaller, more "top heavy" lists.
Warriors are the opposed situation. Our specials are narrowed down to Trolls, Knights, and Chosen (at the most powerful) and our rare is dominated by the Cannon and Shrine. Our only truly viable character options are casters, since our combat-characters are overpriced and fill the same roll as a block of troops. We stand by our troops section, and for what we're offered, we actually get them a tad cheaper than we should- leading to larger armies.
Now, why does GW think Warriors will sell more models? Wait until the new VC book comes out and I'll show you. VC and WoC have very large and loyal player-bases. If GW takes our book and flips the dynamic, or adds newer, better, units, we will naturally all rush out to buy new goods. Even if each of us only invests $200 to update our army, that's a huge multiplier for GW, on top of the usual "new book hype".
Daemons on the otherhand are a victim of their own power. The book is so slandered, and we've all taken (consciously or not) so many opportunities to steer new players clear of the army because "it's cheesy," that we actually destroyed their playerbase by comparison. Daemons never got a large following, so whenever GW alters their list and everyone picks up their $200 update, there won't be a large multiplier. And face it, everyone wants the DoC book toned down, so GW won't be marketing a potentially stronger army, they'll be offering a much weaker one. Who's going to look at that book and say "wow, back when these nice models had awesome rules to match, I didn't want to hand over my cash, but now that they actually suck a little, I guess I'll make an investment"?
In GW's logic, it's not because WoC has larger model counts, its because Warriors have a larger playerbase who will buy new models. It happens every edition change- popular armies get higher update priority, this is just the first time that Warriors have been popular.
You see, I like interesting armies and armybooks. And I am ready to play army with good armybook but lousy models. Of course I will be more than happy with good looking models, but I can't make myself play with lousy armybook or codex. And of course being arrogant self-confident Khornate jerk I am blaming authors for all my problems.
Currently, WoC armybook is absolutely awesome, I like almost every aspect of it, especially after trying to collect themed army with Codex CSM and stopping on 5000pts without a possibility to field a single themed roster, had to move to CSM 3.5. Also I really like ideas of Beastmen and Daemons armies, but quality of Daemons armybook stops me completely.
And after that I see that most of WoC players have huge armies, while Daemons players I see or know as usual have exact number of models for 1-2 rosters for 1500-2500 pts. They are collecting roster, not army.
And of course I like things I like (obviously, isn't it?), and I really hope that GW can see this connection between quality of armybook and size of average army, and write more good armybooks in future and there will be more interesting armies around. So I asked this question, to see your opinions, may be the time has come for me to take off my pink opaque glasses?...
I think the background fluff of an army has to be solid for the army to really appeal. For me, the strongest "feel" for the fluff - perhaps the most characterised army books - are Warriors of Chaos, Vampire Counts, Wood Elves and Lizardmen.
1. A Beastmen army will have tons more models than a Daemons army. We quite literally live by our masses of infantry. As for Warriors... it can range from about the same (if you're going for a full-plate-heavy sort of army), to a few more (a more balanced force), to a heck of a lot more (Marauder spam).
2. I'm actually confused as to what you're saying here. In terms of raw power, the Daemons book is arguably better than either WoC or Beastmen. That said, the power builds aren't very high on the mono-god theme, though, because of the limited amount of daemons associated with one god. If you don't like the "feel" of that, all I can say is don't collect a competitive Daemons list - try a fluffier one instead.
I think there seems to be some confusion with the terminology here, looks like the OP is making a distinction between the term ARMY and the term LIST.
From what I can tell he is asking why is it that WoC Armies (as in, all the models you own) are bigger than demons, which the captain touched on. The fact is that there are many options that WoC can play with and do well with, and we have enough variety to match our style to best suit our opponent. Deamons, on the otherhand, do not have as many viable options/combos and so they are generally restricted to a more limited choices for units and builds ect.
It's an assumed fact that Deamons will get the hose when their book comes out, but that doesn't mean that the army will get suckier. I actually hope that while they do water down the rules enough to make them a little more balanced, they also tweak with the costs and rules of the units to give them more variety and thus able to field different types of armies. I know plenty of people who would love to collect deamons, the only thing stopping them is the fact they don't want to be "that guy".
If you run a mono-god list, Daemons are positively tame. It's when you start dipping into all the toys that the book has to offer that they become a strong army.
Mono Slaanesh is also pretty bad due to the Ld-bomb you can pull with it combined with ASF/high initiative troops. Sure they bounce off of 2+ saves and are only T3, but as HE's show us, ASF combined with sky-high initiative can cripple pretty much anything short of a true deathstar unit.
Khorne & Nurgle mono lists are pretty pants though!
I think what makes Daemons seem so stale is two-fold;
a) They broke 7th edition because Ward has no clue how to balance anything... You could blindly poke at random entries & upgrades in that book and roflstomp almost anyone in 7th. Add to this insult the fact that every single WAAC tourny-frothing nutter went out and bought the army and then savagely dominated the local scene.
So, as a community, every non-daemon player went out of their way to incourage newer players to steer well clear of what was known to be the "Wardhammer 'I-win' button" army.
b) GW as a whole couldn't come up with a single new unit entry for the fantasy book. Every other army was getting at least a new unit or two, sometimes more completely new units added to their book. Daemons got new characters and a vastly expanded range of gifts which are always limited to begin with!
So, it leads to the army feeling rushed and incomplete as a whole. I mean even now it's easy to think of older units we could have had at the time of release;
- Exalted Daemon as a buff'ed Hero choice or else as a non-400+ pts Lord option!
- Plagueriders of Nurgle
- Pleasureseekers of Slaanesh
- Changebringers or Tzeentch
- Daemon Engines
That's not even contemplating perhaps adding in a brand new unit or introducing the idea of more non-marked daemons! These are all units that once existed at some time but were left out of the final product.
In order for daemons to gain some decent appeal, GW really needs to bulk out the list, almost doubling the current choices! Only Brets currently share the same lack of variety that daemons suffer with, since VC's, TK's & Ogres have now been taken care of. It's really hard to stay enthused about your army when you're so limited in terms of overall unit numbers... I mean, there's only so many different ways to play with a bare-bones book that offers just 2 Lord types, 1 Hero type, 5 core, 4 Special and 4 Rares. That's just 16 actual entrie in the entire book! (not including special characters who tend to be widely hated by alot of groups and banned anyways)
Now as for Daemons not being re-done anytime soon? I think it boils down to;
a) GW has no one to champion the army at the moment. I'd bet money Phil Kelly would, but he's rumored to be writing Templars currently, with the likelyhood of also being 'the Eldar guy', all the while getting the (un)enviable task of cleaning up the utter shitefest that is VC's & Chaos Marines! (poor bloke indeed!)
Ward is out of the question IMHO. He's proven he's a screw-up at Fantasy. First by ruining O&G's with one of most under-powered books in GW history, then destroying the entirety of 7th with the Daemons debacle before wholely screwing up the book lores in 8th!!! The guy sucks at fantasy plain and simple - please keep him well away from this game!
b) There's few ideas of 'new' units to add that aren't simply spaming one or two unit types. (I mean really, how many 'monstrous' units do we really need?!)
c) Other books have bigger problem right now than a simple lack of overall choices. WE's have had their whole skirmishing combat mechanic ruined, HE's are a one-trick poney, Skaven are an ungodly mess with a 10 page faq!O.O WoC were perfect untill 8th made the MoT godly by combining with better ward saves, Empire & Dwarfs don't fit the current magic phase at all being far too good defensively...
These things need fixing first, so the poor daemons get to wait it out unfortunately.
I still enjoy my Daemon army, but I agree with the OP that there just isn't the 'wow excitement!' factor anymore and instead it's becoming rather 'blandhammer'
At least they're not bland AND useless.
But even Tz Daemons aren't all that scary. You just have to be on your game with regards to magic defense - Heralds are only L2 casters and units of Horrors can't take Forbidden Lore, so he's going to have to choose whether he wants to get WS10 or T7, because you're not going to let him have both. Secondly, once you get them into combat, Horrors just melt, because they're WS3/S3/T3. I'm not scared or even apprehensive of any mono-Daemon army.