AoS 2 - Hedonites of Slaanesh Discussion

[Apinecone]

1 hour ago, Latty said:

They're eligible to fight within 6", meaning they don't have to charge if they end their movement within 6", and can't be selected as a target until you pile in with them.

Yes, this means you can run and "charge" 6" or even retreat run and "charge".  It gives you a lot of power to pick your fights and dictate their terms, it is very powerful.  Sadly it does end up over shadowing the rest of the book as everything else ends up a little too over priced in comparison.

[Enoby]

22 hours ago, AngryPanda said:

I can take a look at the questions soon tonight to see how I can add or try to give deeper analysis; from what I’ve read I like what’s being asked so far. It will be hard to analyze all the Daemon and mortals at once, and as mentioned it would probably be best to start with a reexamination of the mortal point costs.
 

The biggest benefit that Daemons have over mortals is that even though some may be overpriced (herald on foot), you can instead summon, effectively earning free units without having to deal with the crazy point costs; for list building you can focus on the mortal units which are unable to be summoned and then use the DP to bring in Daemons that are tailored towards what you’re fighting or the scenario. I would never spend 150 pts for a Infernal Entrapturess, but I’d gladly spend only 7 DP to summon one against a caster-heavy list. 

Thanks, it would be really helpful for you to give the questions a read through to see if there's anything missing or if you can think of a way to get a deeper analysis. One thing I've been back and forth on are any questions about specific rules within the battletome. For example, some people would like to see more combos or more uses of depravity points so summoning isn't needed or more in depth hosts. While the survey could touch on that I would worry it would dilute the message; if the message is clearly about points initially then I feel there is more of a chance of a change because points are an easy fix, but if we mention other issues we have then we may end up being too 'wish-listy' and thus brushed off. I think the reason Sylvaneth and BoC don't see a change is because the problems can't be solved as easily as a price drop, and we don't want to put ourselves in that bracket. 

10 hours ago, pnkdth said:

In addition what's been said about our mortal footsloggers I'd like to see Fiends drop in points as well. They're competing with our arguably best unit (with seeker cavalcades) and while they do add utility and their own special rules so do the Slickblades. I'd like to see them go down to 160 (-20) and have daemonettes drop down to 100 (-10)

Yeah, I would also like to see fiends move down a bit; I love the models but they're in an awkward spot at the moment where they're not quite good enough to compete with the better units in the price bracket and they're not cheap enough to just be a nice addition to round out a list. It's tricky because they're not actually terrible warscrolls; with 4 wounds and inbuilt negatives to hit and sometimes wound and casting, they're kind of a mobile debuff unit, but their poor save and total lack of defence against shooting means they're easily answered against some lists. That said, the new depravity rules means they're better than they were before. 

7 hours ago, dicebod said:

*snip*

I like the look of the list, though I'm not sure if I'm fully sold on the Karkadrak lord. He is tanky for a hero, but if you wanted something just to be tanky then 10 extra chaos warriors provide more wounds and a nearly equivalent save, as well as being battleline. What do you envision as the use for your Karkadrak Lord within a game? 

I used to use him a bit last battletome when he got EK and his damage was just okay then so I'm not sure what he'd be like to play now. 

[dicebod]

4 minutes ago, Enoby said:

I like the look of the list, though I'm not sure if I'm fully sold on the Karkadrak lord. He is tanky for a hero, but if you wanted something just to be tanky then 10 extra chaos warriors provide more wounds and a nearly equivalent save, as well as being battleline. What do you envision as the use for your Karkadrak Lord within a game? 

I used to use him a bit last battletome when he got EK and his damage was just okay then so I'm not sure what he'd be like to play now. 

Well, first off this is a bit of a personal take, just because I love the mini!

But I think that durability is something that the army otherwise doesn't have - having him run with slickblades gives them a mobile piece that has staying power and can help them with CAs, namely the +1 to save Lurid Haze one and battleshock immunity as needed.  I'm not expecting him to be super killy, but he can do decent damage if he has to and isn't able to be easily killed out leaving me with an unsupported flank.

...in theory!

[CeleFAZE]

On 4/4/2021 at 12:18 PM, Enoby said:

3) Have the points cost impacted your choice to play Hedonites of Slaanesh 

A) No, I play them regardless

B) Yes, I chose to play them because of their points cost

C) Yes, I chose not to play them because of their points cost but would have played otherwise

D) No, I do not play them regardless of points cost

E) No, something else stops me from playing Hedonites of Slaanesh but I would play with that fixed

F) I have no strong opinion

I feel like another choice may be a good idea here, something to the effect of "Yes, I do play them, however the point costs prevent me from purchasing a number of units I would otherwise like to use."

I feel that A as the only option for those who are playing in spite of the point costs may give the wrong impression.

[Enoby]

8 hours ago, CeleFAZE said:

I feel like another choice may be a good idea here, something to the effect of "Yes, I do play them, however the point costs prevent me from purchasing a number of units I would otherwise like to use."

I feel that A as the only option for those who are playing in spite of the point costs may give the wrong impression.

I think that's a really good addition. I don't know how much communication the rules team has with the finance team but even if they meet once a month it could be useful information.

By the way, for the survey, I was thinking of distributing it on Reddit, the unofficial GW FB groups, the Slaanesh part of this forum, and the Slaanesh Whatsapp group. I can also distribute it on my Instagram. I don't have any reach on Twitter so I'm not sure if someone can take it there? Are we missing any other places to post it? I'm debating whether the general forum on TGA would be appropriate if framed less like a Slaanesh issue and more like a community push and seeing how much community action has an effect on rules.

Also, sculpted Glutos's cart pullers

[EchoHavoc]

So I imagine by now my experience with the new book is very similar to everyone else’s. Over the Easter weekend I played in a mini tournament with some friends. I played against LRL, DoK, Seraphon and OBR. All playing very completive versions of these armies.

So my take aways, I think the Slaanesh book is actually pretty decent. However, due to points I feel its almost unplayable unless you go Seeker conclave (which I always do).

I feel like our book is lacking major combos which other books can create. The obvious one is the KoS double pile in. However, I find that my KoS itself is very swingy as is Sigvald. Blissbarb archers, to me seem to be the unsung heroes of this book. They generate depravity points like crazy. Both on foot and the seeker version just cause so much havoc. However, the foot versions are so overcoated they aren’t worth taking in more than one unit of 11. When I first saw the models I wanted to take like 33 of them. However, I saw the points and knew that was never going to happen ☹

I am consistently generating 8-12 DP by turn 2/3. Which is a really good number in the games I’ve played.

I also feel the book suffers from very poor saves and there aren’t many ways to boost them. While I have won games versus LRL, DoK, KO and Seraphon I have been tabled or near tabled in all of them. I feel like for competitive games (which is what I mostly play) there is a real lack of variety in this book. The models are glorious but half of them, in their current state will not seen any time on the table. Unless playing a causal game with friends.  

I also think in a meta where shooting and magic are some of the most powerful tools we are severely lacking in both defence and offence in these areas. As I said above I feel like blissbarb archers are very good. However, they don’t put out anywhere near enough damage to warrant their cost. Plus they die to a stiff breeze. In fact, I’d say this is very true for a lot of our army. Even Slickblade seekers which most people would agree are our most effective unit right now don’t output as much damage as they should for the cost. Given they also have a 5+ save and there’s not a whole lot of ways we can boost that. I understand that Slaanesh are more of a glass cannon, however, I just feel at the current points there’s not enough cannon. I also find our magic offense and defence lacking somewhat.

Right I know that all sounds like a rant/negative etc. However, I don’t think it would require much work for us to become a real powerhouse in the game while not being overpowered. A slight reduction here and there, 10-20 points off certain units and we’d be in a great spot.

I do find this army very rewarding when played well. However, it has a huge learning curve about it and requires you to focus 100% of the time. If you miss something or incorrect measure the opponent can make you pay for it. Playing this army require a great deal of finesse and its not going to smash through armies. You need to pick your battles and wait for the right moment to strike. That’s why the seeker conclave is so effective.   

[EchoHavoc]

6 minutes ago, EchoHavoc said:

So I imagine by now my experience with the new book is very similar to everyone else’s. Over the Easter weekend I played in a mini tournament with some friends. I played against LRL, DoK, Seraphon and OBR. All playing very completive versions of these armies.

So my take aways, I think the Slaanesh book is actually pretty decent. However, due to points I feel its almost unplayable unless you go Seeker conclave (which I always do).

I feel like our book is lacking major combos which other books can create. The obvious one is the KoS double pile in. However, I find that my KoS itself is very swingy as is Sigvald. Blissbarb archers, to me seem to be the unsung heroes of this book. They generate depravity points like crazy. Both on foot and the seeker version just cause so much havoc. However, the foot versions are so overcoated they aren’t worth taking in more than one unit of 11. When I first saw the models I wanted to take like 33 of them. However, I saw the points and knew that was never going to happen ☹

I am consistently generating 8-12 DP by turn 2/3. Which is a really good number in the games I’ve played.

I also feel the book suffers from very poor saves and there aren’t many ways to boost them. While I have won games versus LRL, DoK, KO and Seraphon I have been tabled or near tabled in all of them. I feel like for competitive games (which is what I mostly play) there is a real lack of variety in this book. The models are glorious but half of them, in their current state will not seen any time on the table. Unless playing a causal game with friends.  

I also think in a meta where shooting and magic are some of the most powerful tools we are severely lacking in both defence and offence in these areas. As I said above I feel like blissbarb archers are very good. However, they don’t put out anywhere near enough damage to warrant their cost. Plus they die to a stiff breeze. In fact, I’d say this is very true for a lot of our army. Even Slickblade seekers which most people would agree are our most effective unit right now don’t output as much damage as they should for the cost. Given they also have a 5+ save and there’s not a whole lot of ways we can boost that. I understand that Slaanesh are more of a glass cannon, however, I just feel at the current points there’s not enough cannon. I also find our magic offense and defence lacking somewhat.

Right I know that all sounds like a rant/negative etc. However, I don’t think it would require much work for us to become a real powerhouse in the game while not being overpowered. A slight reduction here and there, 10-20 points off certain units and we’d be in a great spot.

I do find this army very rewarding when played well. However, it has a huge learning curve about it and requires you to focus 100% of the time. If you miss something or incorrect measure the opponent can make you pay for it. Playing this army require a great deal of finesse and its not going to smash through armies. You need to pick your battles and wait for the right moment to strike. That’s why the seeker conclave is so effective.   

Cavalcade***

[pnkdth]

12 hours ago, Enoby said:

Yeah, I would also like to see fiends move down a bit; I love the models but they're in an awkward spot at the moment where they're not quite good enough to compete with the better units in the price bracket and they're not cheap enough to just be a nice addition to round out a list. It's tricky because they're not actually terrible warscrolls; with 4 wounds and inbuilt negatives to hit and sometimes wound and casting, they're kind of a mobile debuff unit, but their poor save and total lack of defence against shooting means they're easily answered against some lists. That said, the new depravity rules means they're better than they were before. 

It is a good unit when it hits, I just think their relative frailty warrants them becoming slightly cheaper. It is true though they do got useful modifiers and a nasty sting for multi-wound models. It is how I landed at -20 points because doesn't make the unit overly cheap and to get the full benefit of -1 to hit/wound we're still talking at minimum of 320 points for 24 wounds with a 5+ save.  Had the -1 debuffs in melee applied to a unit simply for being in contact with them it would have been a different deal (as they would be able to tag-team units and play a support role).

But like you say, they're good they're just not 60ppm good. I really like their concept and style but it is hard to look past the Slickblades, especially with seeker cavalcade which just made it more annoying that fiends doesn't get any benefit from being in the Epicurean Revellers.

[Enoby]

22 minutes ago, EchoHavoc said:

So I imagine by now my experience with the new book is very similar to everyone else’s. Over the Easter weekend I played in a mini tournament with some friends. I played against LRL, DoK, Seraphon and OBR. All playing very completive versions of these armies.

So my take aways, I think the Slaanesh book is actually pretty decent. However, due to points I feel its almost unplayable unless you go Seeker conclave (which I always do).

I feel like our book is lacking major combos which other books can create. The obvious one is the KoS double pile in. However, I find that my KoS itself is very swingy as is Sigvald. Blissbarb archers, to me seem to be the unsung heroes of this book. They generate depravity points like crazy. Both on foot and the seeker version just cause so much havoc. However, the foot versions are so overcoated they aren’t worth taking in more than one unit of 11. When I first saw the models I wanted to take like 33 of them. However, I saw the points and knew that was never going to happen ☹

I am consistently generating 8-12 DP by turn 2/3. Which is a really good number in the games I’ve played.

I also feel the book suffers from very poor saves and there aren’t many ways to boost them. While I have won games versus LRL, DoK, KO and Seraphon I have been tabled or near tabled in all of them. I feel like for competitive games (which is what I mostly play) there is a real lack of variety in this book. The models are glorious but half of them, in their current state will not seen any time on the table. Unless playing a causal game with friends.  

I also think in a meta where shooting and magic are some of the most powerful tools we are severely lacking in both defence and offence in these areas. As I said above I feel like blissbarb archers are very good. However, they don’t put out anywhere near enough damage to warrant their cost. Plus they die to a stiff breeze. In fact, I’d say this is very true for a lot of our army. Even Slickblade seekers which most people would agree are our most effective unit right now don’t output as much damage as they should for the cost. Given they also have a 5+ save and there’s not a whole lot of ways we can boost that. I understand that Slaanesh are more of a glass cannon, however, I just feel at the current points there’s not enough cannon. I also find our magic offense and defence lacking somewhat.

Right I know that all sounds like a rant/negative etc. However, I don’t think it would require much work for us to become a real powerhouse in the game while not being overpowered. A slight reduction here and there, 10-20 points off certain units and we’d be in a great spot.

I do find this army very rewarding when played well. However, it has a huge learning curve about it and requires you to focus 100% of the time. If you miss something or incorrect measure the opponent can make you pay for it. Playing this army require a great deal of finesse and its not going to smash through armies. You need to pick your battles and wait for the right moment to strike. That’s why the seeker conclave is so effective.   

Thanks for you write up

I think you bring up some really good points - our army is designed very strangely compared to others. Like you mentioned we don't have combos or big deathstars we can always rely on.

In one way, I think this leads to the army feeling more satisfying. It feels as if we can use the full extent of our toolkit and play the game on the level of the battlefield rather than on the level of the list. That's not to say combo armies are brainless (definitely not), but when I've played for combos the gameplay often feels quite samey - position deathstar combo piece, buff the deathstar combo piece, and then use it as the buff suggests. It's fine but it can force your hands in lists with needing certain support pieces and the best unit to buff. Slaanesh on the other hand feels as if you have to play the game kind of more like chess - trading pieces and forcing poor plays while you move into the correct places. A lot of people don't like this because, as you said, you have to be thinking about your plays all the time because on ****** up and it's all over - this is stressful and sometimes people just want to buff something to crazy heights and let it rip. I think it's also why some people think the army is bad, because it is when you play it like another army. 

I do think some parts of the book may be hidden gems (I still stand by twinsouls ) but I think the Seeker Cavalcade and Glutos are the key players in a competitive scene. But also as you've said, the issue for most of the other units is their pointe costs. It's why I see this current lack of variety as not as bad as what you can see in other armies; Seeker Cavalcade is good, but not the answer to everything, and other parts of the book hold that answer and just need a bit of a points decrease. 

Just curious, where did you place in the tournament? a lot of people have placed highly but it feels like the consensus in some communities is still that we're weak and BoC tier; to be honest, that outlook frustrates me a lot because it feels like some people want the book to be bad so they can complain more. 

29 minutes ago, pnkdth said:

It is a good unit when it hits, I just think their relative frailty warrants them becoming slightly cheaper. It is true though they do got useful modifiers and a nasty sting for multi-wound models. It is how I landed at -20 points because doesn't make the unit overly cheap and to get the full benefit of -1 to hit/wound we're still talking at minimum of 320 points for 24 wounds with a 5+ save.  Had the -1 debuffs in melee applied to a unit simply for being in contact with them it would have been a different deal (as they would be able to tag-team units and play a support role).

But like you say, they're good they're just not 60ppm good. I really like their concept and style but it is hard to look past the Slickblades, especially with seeker cavalcade which just made it more annoying that fiends doesn't get any benefit from being in the Epicurean Revellers.

Yeah, I think a 20 points decrease would help them find their space a lot. To be honest, that describes most of our unused units (sans Slaangors) - I think most units have their place but maybe not their price. If everything comes down a little bit I think Slaanesh lists will be very varied. 

[LeonBox]

Had my first game with the new tome today with a THOROUGHLY unoptimised list using only stuff I had painted. I decided to paint Glutos first out of the new stuff and, well, he's taking a while. 

My list: 

Invaders 

Leaders

1 Keeper of Secrets, general, sinistrous hand, skin-taker, realm of beasts artefact (re-roll charges), Slothful Stupor  

The Masque, general

Shalaxi Helbane, Paths of the Dark Prince 

Contorted Epitome, general, Rod of Misrule, Lash of Slaanesh 

Infernal Enrapturess 

Viceleader, Born of Damnation 

Battleline

3 x 5 Chaos Warriors, shields and hand weapons

Other 

2 x 5 seekers

Battalions 

Supreme Sybarites 

I was facing Lumineth Realm Lords, also pretty unoptimised. His list, roughly: 

1 x Stone Mage, some spell that wounds off your armour save; 

1 x named Cow Mountain guy 

[Ally] 1 x caster Mathlann Eidolon dude (big guy with watery cape) 

2 x 10 archers 

1 x 10 pikemen 

2 x 10 hammer guys 

1 x 5 Auralan Knight dudes 

1 x Spirit of Eltharion 

The scenario was focal points. This isn't great against LRL because it plays to their strengths, namely castling up and forcing you to go to them. 

Overall thoughts: 

The KoS and Shalaxi didn't perform amazingly but were useful as distraction carnifexes. The KoS ate up a lot of shooting from his archers/Eltharion/Cow Mountain and managed to kill 3-4 hammer dudes, which wasn't bad considering they ignore up to -2 rend (since when did elves become dwarfs?). Shalaxi put 6 wounds on Cow Mountain before fluffing on her second pile-in (Keeper command ability). Both then died on his turn. 

Seekers were great. My opponent always underestimates how fast they are, and they got into his backfield and tied his archers/knights up by turn 2. 

Enrapturess was fantastic at messing with LRL's extremely strong magic phase. Almost every spell they have is strong and Twinstones are obscenely strong. 

Consequently, my own magic wasn't great as he shut everything down (my opponent never seems to roll lower than an 8 on unbinds even without bonuses, and he had the re-rolls to dispel from the Mathlann guy).  Did get off a clutch Paths of the Dark Prince on Shalaxi, though. 

Poor Eltharion took 6 wounds(!) off deadly terrain, rolling two ones in consecutive turns. Keeper finally killed him. 

DP generation was way better than I expected. I summoned 30 daemonettes turn 3 and had another 15 or so points when we called it (top of his turn 3). 

My opponent conceded after he realised he wasn't going to catch me on VPs. I had 14 to his 4-5, due to my capturing and holding the middle objective and then aggressively moving up against him. Had he continued he would have shifted me off the middle, but I had enough DPs for another nasty summon and his bodies were dwindling. 

Overall -- and despite no new models -- enjoyed the new rules more than I expected. I still strongly dislike that our key abilities (locus, mirror's horrible fascination) rely on dice rolls to go off, but new DP generation worked great. This will change once my opponent realises he should focus my units down instead of putting damage across multiple units, I'm sure. 

 

[EchoHavoc]

24 minutes ago, Enoby said:

Thanks for you write up

I think you bring up some really good points - our army is designed very strangely compared to others. Like you mentioned we don't have combos or big deathstars we can always rely on.

In one way, I think this leads to the army feeling more satisfying. It feels as if we can use the full extent of our toolkit and play the game on the level of the battlefield rather than on the level of the list. That's not to say combo armies are brainless (definitely not), but when I've played for combos the gameplay often feels quite samey - position deathstar combo piece, buff the deathstar combo piece, and then use it as the buff suggests. It's fine but it can force your hands in lists with needing certain support pieces and the best unit to buff. Slaanesh on the other hand feels as if you have to play the game kind of more like chess - trading pieces and forcing poor plays while you move into the correct places. A lot of people don't like this because, as you said, you have to be thinking about your plays all the time because on ****** up and it's all over - this is stressful and sometimes people just want to buff something to crazy heights and let it rip. I think it's also why some people think the army is bad, because it is when you play it like another army. 

I do think some parts of the book may be hidden gems (I still stand by twinsouls ) but I think the Seeker Cavalcade and Glutos are the key players in a competitive scene. But also as you've said, the issue for most of the other units is their pointe costs. It's why I see this current lack of variety as not as bad as what you can see in other armies; Seeker Cavalcade is good, but not the answer to everything, and other parts of the book hold that answer and just need a bit of a points decrease. 

Just curious, where did you place in the tournament? a lot of people have placed highly but it feels like the consensus in some communities is still that we're weak and BoC tier; to be honest, that outlook frustrates me a lot because it feels like some people want the book to be bad so they can complain more. 

Yeah, I think a 20 points decrease would help them find their space a lot. To be honest, that describes most of our unused units (sans Slaangors) - I think most units have their place but maybe not their price. If everything comes down a little bit I think Slaanesh lists will be very varied. 

 

 

You are welcome! Just wanted to give me 2 cents as it were 😊

Having played Fyreslayers since they came out, Slaanesh is defiantly a change of pace. It does seem a strange design compared with most armies. Which did confuse me at first.

I think I have played around 20-25 games with the new book and it has taken me till now to get used to it. However, even now I find myself making simple mistakes which I wouldn’t with another book. As like you said I am (like many others) used to my deathstar of (in my case) HGB running around (albeit slowly) killing everything they touch and not dying for the whole game. Whereas with Slaanesh you must be careful with everything.

I have a friend who plays Skaven and has done since the start of Age of Sigmar and this army always reminds me of him and his hype concentrated face. He gets so worked up at events as he focuses so much on every single movement. Slaanesh reminds me of that. Every move counts and like you said, its like chess working out the best trades and taking the key pieces while waiting to strike.

Twinsouls I’m not completely sold on yet. I have 10 of them and just haven’t found there use yet. Glutos is an absolute boss and has performed very well in all my games so far. Hes pretty much an auto include for me.

I agree with a point decrease I can see other things in our book getting use. However, as things stand my list is pretty much set, unless something changes.

I can see why people think the book is bad. I don’t think its bad, I do however, think that the average player picking up the book might struggle to see its full power as those combos don’t just jump out. When I first looked through it I almost felt like each unit was an individual and not part of the book as a whole because I couldn’t see the combos and tricks. However, as I went over it more and played with the army I do feel like there is real strength.

So, it was a 6 player tournament (outside as our rules allow, we pitched a gazebo in a field was actually really fun!) I came 2^nd in the first tournament we played. Then 4^th in the second tournament we played. I really dislike army tiers and brackets etc. However, if I had to rate Slaanesh as it stands now. I think we are somewhere in the A tier.

I still feel like the main problem with this book is that Slaanesh are still paying for the mistake of the first book and GW didn’t want a repeat performance.

[Enoby]

On 4/6/2021 at 11:39 AM, EchoHavoc said:

 

 

You are welcome! Just wanted to give me 2 cents as it were 😊

Having played Fyreslayers since they came out, Slaanesh is defiantly a change of pace. It does seem a strange design compared with most armies. Which did confuse me at first.

I think I have played around 20-25 games with the new book and it has taken me till now to get used to it. However, even now I find myself making simple mistakes which I wouldn’t with another book. As like you said I am (like many others) used to my deathstar of (in my case) HGB running around (albeit slowly) killing everything they touch and not dying for the whole game. Whereas with Slaanesh you must be careful with everything.

I have a friend who plays Skaven and has done since the start of Age of Sigmar and this army always reminds me of him and his hype concentrated face. He gets so worked up at events as he focuses so much on every single movement. Slaanesh reminds me of that. Every move counts and like you said, its like chess working out the best trades and taking the key pieces while waiting to strike.

Twinsouls I’m not completely sold on yet. I have 10 of them and just haven’t found there use yet. Glutos is an absolute boss and has performed very well in all my games so far. Hes pretty much an auto include for me.

I agree with a point decrease I can see other things in our book getting use. However, as things stand my list is pretty much set, unless something changes.

I can see why people think the book is bad. I don’t think its bad, I do however, think that the average player picking up the book might struggle to see its full power as those combos don’t just jump out. When I first looked through it I almost felt like each unit was an individual and not part of the book as a whole because I couldn’t see the combos and tricks. However, as I went over it more and played with the army I do feel like there is real strength.

So, it was a 6 player tournament (outside as our rules allow, we pitched a gazebo in a field was actually really fun!) I came 2^nd in the first tournament we played. Then 4^th in the second tournament we played. I really dislike army tiers and brackets etc. However, if I had to rate Slaanesh as it stands now. I think we are somewhere in the A tier.

I still feel like the main problem with this book is that Slaanesh are still paying for the mistake of the first book and GW didn’t want a repeat performance.

Yeah, I very much agree with you here. I can definitely understand why people think our book is bad - as you said, it plays so differently to most books that any inexperienced player using it is almost certain to lose. While I enjoy the playstyle I'd hesitate to call it good design as AoS isn't meant to be a a highly complex game to get into, whereas Slaanesh is a complex army to even do okay  with (and, as you said, even harder to do well with). Unfortunately I don't know if there's a good compromise between finesse, easy to play, and balanced. Maybe DoK? But I'm not 100% sure on the 'balanced' part of that? 

Good job on the placing Did you find any particular army very hard for us to counter? 

Also, I was thinking of an Archaon list. Tbh, I think it'll struggle to be competitive due to such a massive points sink, but it would probably be oppressive against casual lists. 

Lurid Haze (I've found this is my go to for the save)

Archaon - daemon healing spell

Glutos - battleshock spell

Chaos Sorcerer Lord (mostly for that rr save on Archaon - he's too valuable to not spend an extra 110 points on nearly doubling survivability) 

3×5 chaos warriors (sit on the points)

5x2 Slickblades (here's the part I'm struggling with the most; they're good for a flank, but they're costly and no battalion. Archaon's +2 bravery will help, and I didn't want to use Twinsouls as they're a bit slow in this list)

The biggest weakness, as you can probably tell, is the objective game and board coverage. Archaon will destroy anything he comes into contact with and, with Glutos, is practically immortal. However Glutos doesn't have the damage himself to take a strong unit down in one go unless he was very lucky on claws. Screens would also be an issue and I'm still not 100% sold on the seekers in this list.

 

[Carnith]

On 4/4/2021 at 2:18 PM, Enoby said:

So, how are these for some questions:

1) Generally, how do you feel about the points cost in the Hedonites of Slaanesh battletome 2021?

A) A significant number of units are overcosted

B) Most units are correctly pointed

C) A significant number of units are undercosted 

D) I don't have a strong opinion either way

2*) Do you feel "X unit" is correctly pointed?

A) Yes I feel they are correctly pointed

B) No I think they are too highly costed 

C) No I think they are too cheaply costed 

D) I don't have a strong opinion either way

3) Have the points cost impacted your choice to play Hedonites of Slaanesh 

A) No, I play them regardless

B) Yes, I chose to play them because of their points cost

C) Yes, I chose not to play them because of their points cost but would have played otherwise

D) No, I do not play them regardless of points cost

E) No, something else stops me from playing Hedonites of Slaanesh but I would play with that fixed

F) I have no strong opinion

4) How do you feel about the rules of the book regardless of the points cost

A) I strongly like the rules

B) I like the rules

C) I have no opinion either way

D) I dislike the rules

E) I strongly dislike the rules

5) Would you like to see a Warscroll rewrite for the Slaangors, or do you believe a points cost would suffice

A) I would like to see a warscroll rewrite

B) I think posts changes would suffice

C) I think the warscroll and points for the Slaangor are good

D) I have no strong opinion

---

The question is then what units we should include; I think the easiest way would probably be just to include all of the new mortal models. It's not that all daemons are perfect, but rather people seem to have more issue with the mortals. 

* this question would be repeated for the 10 mortal warscrolls

I feel like a way to expand on the why for some answers might be helpful. 

Me and someone else can say we dislike rules, but we reasons may be different. I dislike how anti-syngergistic the rules feel at times. Our mortal buffing guy is a foot slogger who wants to really buff our fastest unit. That won't happen much, so the Lord of Pain is kind of a non-starter. 

Someone else might dislike the rules for other reasons, like the keeper and epitome nerf, but might not care too much about the mortal side of things, so perhaps an area to expand upon their opinion would be great. 

Also, perhaps a question on how do we feel the book is compared to the last one. With choices probably being
A) It's the best book
B) It's a good book, but not perfect
C) It's marginally better and still a long ways to go
D) It doesn't feel any different
E) It feels worse than the last book in many regards
F) It's the worst book.

[Enoby]

6 hours ago, Carnith said:

Me and someone else can say we dislike rules, but we reasons may be different. I dislike how anti-syngergistic the rules feel at times. Our mortal buffing guy is a foot slogger who wants to really buff our fastest unit. That won't happen much, so the Lord of Pain is kind of a non-starter. 

Yeah, it's a good point - I'd probably have a section to put notes under each questions so that anyone who wants to leave comments can if they feel their answer is unusual. 

6 hours ago, Carnith said:

Also, perhaps a question on how do we feel the book is compared to the last one. With choices probably being
A) It's the best book
B) It's a good book, but not perfect
C) It's marginally better and still a long ways to go
D) It doesn't feel any different
E) It feels worse than the last book in many regards
F) It's the worst book.

I think a question like that would be useful, though I'm not sure if it would end up getting mixed responses from people who just miss a more powerful book rather than the quality of the book. We might also send too many messages to the rules team - it may be better to send a concise message which focusses as much as we can on points. What do you think?

[PiotrW]

Hello there, guys!

If I may jump in with a quick question: I got myself a Keeper of Secrets and I'm wondering how to assemble it. Meaning: what weapons? I'm torn between the ritual dagger and the whip. The whip seems more interesting, but I'm wondering whether it's actually useful? It's main bonus is tied to fighting Monster units, but it's not like they are that common... Not every enemy army is going to have even a single one...

Any advice?

[Jaskier]

The best weapon to give a Keeper is the Sinistrous Hand, at least for gameplay reasons. Aesthetically? I'm partial to the Shining Aegis myself 

[CeleFAZE]

14 hours ago, Enoby said:

Yeah, I very much agree with you here. I can definitely understand why people think our book is bad - as you said, it plays so differently to most books that any inexperienced player using it is almost certain to lose. While I enjoy the playstyle I'd hesitate to call it good design as AoS isn't meant to be a a highly complex game to get into, whereas Slaanesh is a complex army to even do okay  with (and, as you said, even harder to do well with). Unfortunately I don't know if there's a good compromise between finesse, easy to play, and balanced. Maybe DoK? But I'm not 100% sure on the 'balanced' part of that? 

Good job on the placing Did you find any particular army very hard for us to counter? 

Also, I was thinking of an Archaon list. Tbh, I think it'll struggle to be competitive due to such a massive points sink, but it would probably be oppressive against casual lists. 

Lurid Haze (I've found this is my go to for the save)

Archaon - daemon healing spell

Glutos - battleshock spell

Chaos Sorcerer Lord (mostly for that rr save on Archaon - he's too valuable to not spend an extra 110 points on nearly doubling survivability) 

3×5 chaos warriors (sit on the points)

5x2 Slickblades (here's the part I'm struggling with the most; they're good for a flank, but they're costly and no battalion. Archaon's +2 bravery will help, and I didn't want to use Twinsouls as they're a bit slow in this list)

The biggest weakness, as you can probably tell, is the objective game and board coverage. Archaon will destroy anything he comes into contact with and, with Glutos, is practically immortal. However Glutos doesn't have the damage himself to take a strong unit down in one go unless he was very lucky on claws. Screens would also be an issue and I'm still not 100% sold on the seekers in this list.

 

An Archaon list is one of those situations where I'd think it might not be a bad idea to use our ranged options for depravity generation, as Archie will probably delete most things he attacks, and with so few other units we'll want to be summoning as early as possible.

[CeleFAZE]

Would anyone with Glutos be willing to measure his height for me? I have a conversion planned but I don't want to end up too far off the height so there's no hard feelings of modeling for advantage in either direction.

[PiotrW]

6 hours ago, Jaskier said:

The best weapon to give a Keeper is the Sinistrous Hand, at least for gameplay reasons. Aesthetically? I'm partial to the Shining Aegis myself 

I dislike the Hand due to fluff reasons. It doesn't fit my Keeper's personality

And I've been wondering how useful the Aegis is?

[LeonBox]

6 minutes ago, PiotrW said:

I dislike the Hand due to fluff reasons. It doesn't fit my Keeper's personality

And I've been wondering how useful the Aegis is?

The Aegis isn't reliable enough in my opinion. If it were 5++ it would be worth it, but a 6++ is nothing to write home about at all (and certanily not worth taking over the Sinistrous Hand). 

 

3 hours ago, CeleFAZE said:

Would anyone with Glutos be willing to measure his height for me? I have a conversion planned but I don't want to end up too far off the height so there's no hard feelings of modeling for advantage in either direction.

Just measured him, he's about 13cm/5in at his tallest point. 

[Enoby]

4 hours ago, CeleFAZE said:

An Archaon list is one of those situations where I'd think it might not be a bad idea to use our ranged options for depravity generation, as Archie will probably delete most things he attacks, and with so few other units we'll want to be summoning as early as possible.

Thanks, you raise a good point. I've swapped around the slickblades for blissbarbs, and used the spare points to buy Wheels of Excruciation; mostly so they don't backfire on me like the gemnids could with so few models. They're also there to generate DP but they put out a decent amount of hurt. Blissbarbs would also be in charge of screen clearing, which the list lacked before. If I had the points, I'd have traded some chaos warriors for blissbarbs on foot but unfortunately can't - let's hope for a points drop there. 

8 hours ago, PiotrW said:

Hello there, guys!

If I may jump in with a quick question: I got myself a Keeper of Secrets and I'm wondering how to assemble it. Meaning: what weapons? I'm torn between the ritual dagger and the whip. The whip seems more interesting, but I'm wondering whether it's actually useful? It's main bonus is tied to fighting Monster units, but it's not like they are that common... Not every enemy army is going to have even a single one...

Any advice?

As others have said, the hand is by far the best (shame they didn't bring the others up to snuff), but the shield looks the coolest. If you don't like the hand, the shield can be useful but it really depends on how lucky you are as it's unreliable. I think the whip could have some use if you plan with it correctly and against the right lists.

 

Also, unrelated, but here's another conspiracy theory. Some have said that they're disappointed that many rules haven't changed in our battletome (things like hosts not having updated rules or some QoL changes to some daemons and battalions), or we lack synergy, or that they feel the mortal rules are uncreative; while I may not agree with the latter and I think the lack of synergy was a design choice as we debuff, there is the chance their was some internal upset as our book was being written. I'm not sure what (could just be perfectly normal moving on), but GW are looking for a new lead game designer. Again, it could have had no effect at all on us, or they could be wanting an additional designer, but it's interesting to note.

[CeleFAZE]

2 hours ago, Enoby said:

Thanks, you raise a good point. I've swapped around the slickblades for blissbarbs, and used the spare points to buy Wheels of Excruciation; mostly so they don't backfire on me like the gemnids could with so few models. They're also there to generate DP but they put out a decent amount of hurt. Blissbarbs would also be in charge of screen clearing, which the list lacked before. If I had the points, I'd have traded some chaos warriors for blissbarbs on foot but unfortunately can't - let's hope for a points drop there. 

As others have said, the hand is by far the best (shame they didn't bring the others up to snuff), but the shield looks the coolest. If you don't like the hand, the shield can be useful but it really depends on how lucky you are as it's unreliable. I think the whip could have some use if you plan with it correctly and against the right lists.

 

Also, unrelated, but here's another conspiracy theory. Some have said that they're disappointed that many rules haven't changed in our battletome (things like hosts not having updated rules or some QoL changes to some daemons and battalions), or we lack synergy, or that they feel the mortal rules are uncreative; while I may not agree with the latter and I think the lack of synergy was a design choice as we debuff, there is the chance their was some internal upset as our book was being written. I'm not sure what (could just be perfectly normal moving on), but GW are looking for a new lead game designer. Again, it could have had no effect at all on us, or they could be wanting an additional designer, but it's interesting to note.

In light of that job posting I had wondered myself if the disparity in power levels between the recent books was due to a designer that ended up leaving shortly after development or was let go.

Here's hoping if there were significant differences of opinion that we at least might see a point rebalancing out of the aftermath, if not a warscroll revision or two (like plague monks received after the Skaven book).

[Enoby]

1 hour ago, CeleFAZE said:

In light of that job posting I had wondered myself if the disparity in power levels between the recent books was due to a designer that ended up leaving shortly after development or was let go.

Here's hoping if there were significant differences of opinion that we at least might see a point rebalancing out of the aftermath, if not a warscroll revision or two (like plague monks received after the Skaven book).

I wonder this too - it's pretty obvious, reading through the books that there are at least two different design philosophies when it comes to battletomes. Also, I highly doubt the rules writers are incompetent, and I think examples of super OP units or abilities (e.g. 2019 Slaanesh) are on purpose in that the designer wrote that with the intention to be powerful - though perhaps not as powerful as it ended up being. 

I really hope this new design lead can reign in the designers - either by saying "let your imagination go wild" and then having a heavy tone-down edit, or giving strict rules to follow and a small edit afterwards. Regardless, at the moment AoS's balance is a bit all over the place, and internal balance is usually worse; this is caused by many reasons (such as lacking defined roles in AoS), but partially poorly balanced units are to blame. AoS has fantasic models, but the ruleset can feel bloated - as if the simple rules framework is collapsing under the bloat of 'extra' stuff that it was never designed to support. I'm hoping the new rules team will be able to help out here.

Edited April 8, 2021 by Enoby

[pnkdth]

Power level being a rollercoaster has been true since I joined the hobby back in 1999. AFAIK they've never had single team working on all the books but a good mix of writers.

Had HoS been released with a points reduction I think the overall reception of the book would have been much much better. Suddenly battalions wouldn't be such a pain to include, units wouldn't be taking up too much space in a lists, our more squishier leaders wouldn't feel like such a gamble, and you could more easily work with the new DP system (which is a huge improvement IMO).

Furthermore, when we see a release it has long since been finalised and sent to print (I've heard up to 6 months). A lot of moving parts from books to models to be ready. 

The most likely scenario is they overcompensated for the previous book. We've seen it happen in WHFB/40K/AoS before.

[Yoid]

The discomfort is increased by the way they released HoS with massive point ups along with DoK with massive point reductions. And now BR:Teclis confirms that the point cost is not a tendency. Plus Warhammer community advertising the units as something they aren't (Twinsouls are not good vs big centerpieces, Slickblades are not the faster unit in AoS, Slaangors are not monstrous blenders...). HoS battletome is not that bad, but the HoS marketing and hype campaign was a disaster. I can easily see the guy that was in charge being fired because they are hurting their own fanbase, maybe that is why there are new jobs available now. GW is a business after all.

About the unsatisfying design of certain battletomes. Yeah. Just look at DoK or the new Lumineth, they are full of "Oh cool i get that in addition"  moments and feelings. Then you look at some of the Slaanesh things, and they are clearly design in a "Oh ******, i don't get that half of the time but is being considered in the point cost of the unit anyway"

As an example, im sure Syl'Eskke in other armies would simply give RR1s all the time, and this would be increased to rerolling everything when the same number of Daemons and Mortals are nearby. Slaangors would probably deal the mortal wounds on the charge, and maybe in a 2+, or if they keep the 4+ then it would be D3 MWs instead to justify all the other crapiness of the warscroll. But even more simple and obvious, in other armies Twinsouls would be able to freely choose stances every turn instead of having to alternate.