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!
Well its not my "first" battle, but really my second. My first battle consist of half my stuff gone by third turn <.< so I simply quit :thumbsdown: (so not much of a "battle").
I played a lot point game of 1500, against a DM army of 3 units of hounds 2 units of screamers, 1 unit of bearers with herald, and 1 tzeentch herald on a flying chariot.
Game actually went well until 5th turn (looked like I was winning), when my alter kindred died from trying up the tzeentch herald for 3 pointless battles. Only saving grace was me denying his flanking. Ultimately it didn't matter though.
Honestly the army is too good and I know exactly why people complain (you can say don't complain, but whats the point of playing if you really can't win). Some of the options they can take are too cheap or too strong. Like the hounds. 165 pts for the wounds, attacks, high strength, and absurd magic resistance. Not to forget that they have a save they always get. Frankly the unit should be 7-10 point more a piece.
And the cost of a herald ( any or them), period should be more, especially the tzeentch, see that he is a lvl 2 caster automatically yet he cheaper than most lvl 2 upgrade wizards.
There's more I can comment on, but is anyone with me on this?
Yeah, I think the vast majority of folks agree that daemons are quite overpowered. You're lucky he didn't take any flamers!
I meant pink horrors not screamers.
but yeah, flamers are pretty nasty.
Daemons are a very bad match up for woodelves for several reasons.
1. They don't take panic checks, so shooting is limited in effect.
2. Have a true ward save, very nasty
3. Negate forest spirit saves, sucks!
4. Have great MR (as opposed to token MR)
Mirage Arcana Podcast
The "A Smart Player Will..." theory is a complete paradox. If we make an assumption that everything we do is outsmarted, then theoretically we can never win.
The only time I do well against Daemons is when I play them at 2k points. And arm a big block of eternal guard with a lord, bsb with Ariels banner, warbanner. Just run them straight into combat with anything close and youll more than likely beat thier unit with static res and make them phase out quickly.
The best is running it into the Great Unclean One challengeing with the lord (with annoyance ) and doing a wound he loses combat by 8 and rolled a 12 for his leadership test, and blink.
Every time I have faced the new Demons, it was against very sporting opponents who play relatively tame, but very fun lists.
I womped em with my Tomb Kings, and was massacred and later tied with my Wood Elves.
I can't comment on the overpowered/undercost of items, as, like I said, my opponents play very 'tame' lists. I do have a gripe with several of the units that have two wounds for no apparent reason - specifically Khorne Dogs and Tzeench Flamers. No other army that I am aware of has skirmishing missile troops, or 'cavalry' that are basic two wounds a piece. In all fairness, I think these units should each be about two thirds their current point cost per model and simply be one wound a piece. I think that would fix that major problem with the list.
Only somewhat fix the problem. The problem lies in cost of items and power of greater daemons too.
I like that suggestion mobius. Along with that, I'd suggest the following to fix daemons:
1. Army wide ward save functions like forest spirit save.
2. Daemonic gifts are one per army like magic items, possible cost increases on a few gifts as well but I'm less sure about that. I'd want to playtest it first.
3. Slight increase in cost of horrors.
4. Modest increase in cost of tzeentch herald, Masque, Skulltaker, Blue Scribes, and maybe Epidimius.
5. Slight decrease in cost of bloodletters, daemonetts, seekers, and bloodcrushers.
I think that would give a little bit of a buff to the weakest units in the army, tone down the strongest units, and eliminate spamming the same gift multiple times.
#2. Most other armies heavy calvary is around 35pts has a +1-2 amour save. Hounds only have +5 ward...I think it is fairly reasonable that they have 2 wounds, the whole unit would fall over and dead from one round of regular missile troop shooting otherwise. Also every other army has the ability to take standards and champions to boost the effectiveness of their calvary on the charge...Hounds can't take a standard and their champ costs 75pts.
The only honorable options left to we combatants is seppuku or semantics...which amount to the same thing really.
I agree with you shrubs about the skirmishing missile troops point. There are plenty of those out there, so that isn't the issue. The problem with flamers is more the sheer volume of fire they put out for their points cost coupled with the fact that they actually hit hard in close combat as well. If they were S3 or A1 (or both), I think there would be a lot less complaining.
As far as flesh hounds go, while you make some good points it's also important to remember that flesh hounds have a bunch of advantages over conventional heavy cavalry. The 5+ ward save vs 1+ armor save is an advantage for conventional heavies in most situations, yes. But also remember that flesh hounds have huge magic resist and get the full 8" move, while (most) heavy cavalry only moves 7". Also, and this is a huge deal, flesh hounds are always S5 rather than only on the charge and they are unbreakable and ITP. Usually heavy cavalry can't stand up to large amounts of SCR after the charge, but flesh hounds can because they retain their killing power AND don't break. If it were just the straight stat line for 35 points I wouldn't have any problem with flesh hounds -- they'd be better after the charge and faster but more vulnerable to missile fire than standard heavy cav. Fair trade. The problem is that they basically get MR 3, ItP, and unbreakable for free.