Jump to content

AoS 2 - Hedonites of Slaanesh Discussion


HERO

Recommended Posts

The thing I dislike is when people whine and kvetch without their own experience and in absolute terms, like “ohh this can’t possibly work, no one could possibly beat X with Y” and instead of reasoned points or acknowledging the limits of their own understanding, stamp their feet and pout. It’s one thing to be upset that a faction you like is having a hard time, or express disagreement. I simply loathe petulance and baseless absolutism

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Selpharia said:

The thing I dislike is when people whine and kvetch without their own experience and in absolute terms, like “ohh this can’t possibly work, no one could possibly beat X with Y” and instead of reasoned points or acknowledging the limits of their own understanding, stamp their feet and pout. It’s one thing to be upset that a faction you like is having a hard time, or express disagreement. I simply loathe petulance and baseless absolutism

Precisely this. If someone desires a list that requires no finesse or out of the box thinking, then they will not get what they're looking for with Slaanesh. However I personally like the tools we have at our disposal, and feel that they provide enough versatility and speed to do what we need to when we need to do it.

If you go into the game trying to bring an answer to every single metaphorical question your opponent can ask, you're not going to be able to do much more than tread water. If you list build and play in a way that asks questions your opponent has to answer then you have control over the situation, and that's how you have to win with Slaanesh.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Selpharia said:

The thing I dislike is when people whine and kvetch without their own experience and in absolute terms, like “ohh this can’t possibly work, no one could possibly beat X with Y” and instead of reasoned points or acknowledging the limits of their own understanding, stamp their feet and pout. It’s one thing to be upset that a faction you like is having a hard time, or express disagreement. I simply loathe petulance and baseless absolutism

I totally agree - perhaps the most frustrating thing is that when Michael posted this list and his wins, most people in the group seemed to be trying to discredit him. Rather than asking how he won, they were more in disbelief and just wanted to say why the wins didn't really count. For example, stating that Be'Lakor was the best thing in Slaanesh so it wasn't a Hedonite win, despite Michael saying that he's mostly their for double turn control and everything else did very well too. 

It reminds me of the same group were someone won a three round tournament with Slaanesh and instead of asking about details, people seemed to be in a rush to discredit their win - saying 3 round tournaments don't count or the opponents must be bad. 

I totally understand not liking our rules or thinking they're not strong (or at least not a good fit for them as a player), but there seems to be some people (though not so much on this thread - more on FB, YT, and Twitter) who wouldn't believe Slaanesh was good even if it won three tournaments in a row. 

Unfortunately, there seems to be a train of thought where "Slaanesh bad no matter what". It's almost reflexive for some people where they'll comment on a video saying "Player X lost before they set up because they brought Slaanesh", no matter how well they do in the game. Or the YouTubers who seem to play Slaanesh deliberately poorly (or are just very inexperienced with the faction) and then use that to affirm their belief that Slaanesh is a bad army. Or people on Reddit being told not to play Slaanesh because they're bad, despite the fact the commentor has no experience with the army, they're just parroting something they heard online. 

Like I said, it's totally undestandable to not like Slaanesh's rules or think they're on the weak side after playing. My problem is people who deny anyone can do well with Slaanesh even in the face of evidence, or those who parrot 'Slaanesh bad' despite never actually touching the army. 

Edited by Enoby
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • LOVE IT! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing to add other than I'll never understand the psychology of people sticking around to moan about how rubbish something is and drag everyone else down with them rather than working to try new approaches or as would be useful with a few particularly vocal negative sorts (on FB in particular) just have a rest from the faction / game / social media platform! 

As far as YouTube videos I don't think I've seen a video yet with Slaanesh that wasn't either trying to run a cookie-cutter list but from our first book or just made some pretty big errors around how the allegiance abilities or warscroll abilities of key units. Neither of these are evidence for the sweeping faction-wide decisions that are then made after the inevitable loss. 

Personally I've been really enjoying the shared lists and experiences and wondering which bits to cherry pick based on what I want to use and how I want to play and considering how people's experiences have differed to mine and why that might be. Love seeing the rationale behind choices especially with lists like Mike's that felt a little outside of the pattern that we initially saw. 

In short, please keep sharing and experimenting and sharing again. Let's also keep asking the useful and insightful questions to generate great discussion (rather than 'meh that's ****** how can you possibly deal with x with that list).

I'm still not getting as many games as I'd like at the minute as things slowly go back to a semblance of normalish here but enjoying living vicariously through everyone else! 😁

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My issue is less with the powerlevel and more with just how miserable listbuilding feels in hedonites, Feels hard to make anything feel thematic or cool looking, always run into feeling of "if I just had 200 more points". I would probably be happier if we just had one or two cheaper options, I am still holding hope for a infantry slickblade mortal unit at around  100-115 pts for a battle line.

I feel put off by fully picking up the force because even outside of issues with core army in order to play to factions strength id need to haul around like an extra 2-3000 points of daemons just so I can take advantage of summoning. Amusingly I feel my gloomspite gitz army might actually require me to bring less models to a tournament to play optimally.

For summoning pool id want

30-60 daemonettes

3 normal chariots

1 exalted chariot

1 keeper

3-6 fiends

10-15 seekers

enrapturess, epitome

For me armies issues have never been in "are they strong" I play CSM in 40k im used to playing weaker armies, my issues are with the army doesnt play fluffy, and outside of that to have it play optimally and lean into its toolbox requires a silly amount of models to bring. I can cut the summoning pool out but will feel bad when I get to those fights where I could take advantage of the mechanic but dont have it due to physical tansport issues. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MothmanDraws said:

My issue is less with the powerlevel and more with just how miserable listbuilding feels in hedonites, Feels hard to make anything feel thematic or cool looking, always run into feeling of "if I just had 200 more points". I would probably be happier if we just had one or two cheaper options, I am still holding hope for a infantry slickblade mortal unit at around  100-115 pts for a battle line.

I feel put off by fully picking up the force because even outside of issues with core army in order to play to factions strength id need to haul around like an extra 2-3000 points of daemons just so I can take advantage of summoning. Amusingly I feel my gloomspite gitz army might actually require me to bring less models to a tournament to play optimally.

 

I hear you and I agree it is annoying.

I plan my summonings ahead of time and not care much about what my opponent is doing. Essentially use it to enhance my plans/list as opposed to a reactive simply because optimising summoning can go way out of hand (and I don't feel particularly excited about getting a massive daemon horde in addition simply to get the most out of summoning either).

While you could optimise it more I'm also of the opinion that you should stick to your plan because otherwise you might end up playing catch-up and trying to put out fires as opposed to having your opponent react to you. Especially in an objective heavy edition.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, from what I’ve read here and on the Hedonites of Slaanesh discord, and from what I’ve seen, it’s seems like we’re actually in a pretty ok place that’s in the middle. A lot of units that I thought were bad (Synessa the biggest example) are actually pretty decent once you throw on command abilities. I’m not much of a tournament player, I’ve always played more for fun at my local FLGS. Although we can use a few buffs (Slaangors!), I’m happy with what we have; just make sure GW doesn’t change anything again. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MothmanDraws said:

My issue is less with the powerlevel and more with just how miserable listbuilding feels in hedonites, Feels hard to make anything feel thematic or cool looking, always run into feeling of "if I just had 200 more points". I would probably be happier if we just had one or two cheaper options, I am still holding hope for a infantry slickblade mortal unit at around  100-115 pts for a battle line.

I feel put off by fully picking up the force because even outside of issues with core army in order to play to factions strength id need to haul around like an extra 2-3000 points of daemons just so I can take advantage of summoning. Amusingly I feel my gloomspite gitz army might actually require me to bring less models to a tournament to play optimally.

For summoning pool id want

30-60 daemonettes

3 normal chariots

1 exalted chariot

1 keeper

3-6 fiends

10-15 seekers

enrapturess, epitome

For me armies issues have never been in "are they strong" I play CSM in 40k im used to playing weaker armies, my issues are with the army doesnt play fluffy, and outside of that to have it play optimally and lean into its toolbox requires a silly amount of models to bring. I can cut the summoning pool out but will feel bad when I get to those fights where I could take advantage of the mechanic but dont have it due to physical tansport issues. 

We actually have one infantry Slickblade model. She’s in the Dread Pagent!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really enjoy this thread, especially that people staying positive and try to find solutions amidst a lot of pessimism, and return to it often.

When I first started warhammer I bought the soul wars box. I was really excited to join the community and discuss all the awesome nighthaunt models and how to build a cool and thematic army. Instead I found negativity and a pretty hostile environment. It was not good introduction to the hobby, and I took a few months off reading warhammer content online to regain some of the initial excitement. So thank you for being positive and awesome.

On that note, are Slaangors truly that bad? Are the warscroll that irredeemable or do they have a use? Could it be a case of them just being meme-material and that they could actually be decent if they were fielded? You guys are probably right and they are bad, but maybe it could be a fun discussion?

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Panacea said:

I really enjoy this thread, especially that people staying positive and try to find solutions amidst a lot of pessimism, and return to it often.

When I first started warhammer I bought the soul wars box. I was really excited to join the community and discuss all the awesome nighthaunt models and how to build a cool and thematic army. Instead I found negativity and a pretty hostile environment. It was not good introduction to the hobby, and I took a few months off reading warhammer content online to regain some of the initial excitement. So thank you for being positive and awesome.

On that note, are Slaangors truly that bad? Are the warscroll that irredeemable or do they have a use? Could it be a case of them just being meme-material and that they could actually be decent if they were fielded? You guys are probably right and they are bad, but maybe it could be a fun discussion?

 

Well, with a 5+ save and 8 movement, the nearest analogue unit for comparison seems to be daemonettes (5+ save, 6 movement but run and charge).

And I struggle to find any metric by which they compare really favorably, except for very very expensive MWs.  

If I were going to try them, it'd definitely be MSU to improve the ratio of slightly ok gilded weapons.  

But its hard to imagine doing so when for 10 points less I could have a battleline unit of daemonettes. 

For 10 points more, I could have a tougher and scarier squad of painbringers.  

I think the issue though, ultimately, is that their warscroll doesn't do anything interesting or unique enough to justify inclusion at really any cost they're likely to have, currently.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah Slaangor. They were the one thing I wanted out of a Hedonites release more than anything else as it combined my loves of Slaanesh and Beasts of  Chaos...

The unit I see them competing with in my lists is The Dread Pageant. They're a small model-count irritant unit. They have an extra wound than the Pageant but 1 less model for sneaking objectives. The Pageant can tank wounds through Vasillac and have shooting through Hadzu and if ignored can ping a few mortal wounds through in both melee and shooting over the course of a game. I want to unlock the secret of Slaangors but... The Dread Pageant provide my only Slaangor for now. Desperate for someone to suss them out though! 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slaangor definitely win out aesthetically, for me at least, so that's something 🙂 At the very least I will try the warband.

Aa Krispy wrote, having only 3 might be best to maximize the gilded claw attack and to avoid losing excessive points to battleshock, but would lose on mortal wounds (but that is probably neglible).

They have 2" range though and can attack in two rows. A unit of 6 might be hard-hitting, but expensive..

Compared to Daemonettes they are mortals. Could something good be made of that? A Lord of Pain could allow them to re-roll hits for example.

It's a shame that they don't have the Brayherd keyword. I'm not familiar with Beasts of Chaos, but is there some potential there?

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Panacea said:

Slaangor definitely win out aesthetically, for me at least, so that's something 🙂 a shame that they don't have the Brayherd keyword. I'm not familiar with Beasts of Chaos, but is there some potential there?

Hypothetically, there'd be some synergy at least, if they had Brayherd. Shamans could boost their move by 3". A Beastlord could potentially give them +1 to wound and even +1 to hit and wound. So with a Lord of Pain too and putting a lot of eggs in one basket you could then be hitting on 3s with rerolls and 2s to wound which could be interesting on a unit of 6 I suppose...

 

@Enoby that looks awesome! Hope you can work it out to make it fit again! 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Panacea said:

On that note, are Slaangors truly that bad? Are the warscroll that irredeemable or do they have a use? Could it be a case of them just being meme-material and that they could actually be decent if they were fielded? You guys are probably right and they are bad, but maybe it could be a fun discussion?

I've used them twice and on both occasions they've been blessed by the dice gods, but I still found them lacking. Unfortunately their issue is they don't have a true place in a Slaanesh list. We have five Hedonite foot troops:

- Slaangors (150)

- Painbringers (160)

- Twinsouls (185)

- Blissbarbs (180)

- Daemonettes (140)

Two of these are unconditional battleline in a Hedonite army, and two are conditional. Slaangors are neither.

Blissbarbs are ranged so don't really compare. The others, however:

- Twinsouls do much much more damage (potentially triple or quadruple iirc), have a better save, are just as fast, have more wounds in a unit, can be battleline, and have better bravery. Slaangors are 35 points cheaper, have rend (which doesn't really help their damage much in comparison unless against a 2+ save, and even then it's tight, and potential mortal wounds (which is not reliable in the slightest) 

So if you want some elite melee troops, twinsouls are better

- But what if you want something cheaper or that does MWs? Well Painbringers are 10 points more, but for that price they have slightly better attacks (Painbringers do more even vs a Slaangor charge), a much better save in combat, better bravery, better mortal wound generation, and are only a little bit slower, and conditional battleline. Slaangors just have movement and are 10 points less.

- So maybe it's best not to compare them to elites, but the daemonettes are really the only comparison. Daemonettes do more damage, have much better bravery, the same save, are cheaper, are usually faster, have better objective control, have rerolling charges, and have more wounds. All Slaangors have is MW generation, which is unfortunately poor due to them dying before it can trigger.

Overall, they just don't have a place in the army - they don't excel where they should, and are outdone by all other similar units.

They're the one unit I think is inarguably poor - though more power to those who want to use them :) They do attract good luck! 

Personally I'd like a redesign where they can switch their profile to slovenly beasts who the other Hedonites dote on (for buffs), and then to ferocious shock troops (-1 save, +1 damage, +1 attack, MWs on a charge like current ability). Would give them a role :) 

Edited by Enoby
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fontixxx said:

Guys how belakor perform in HoS? I wonder how his survivability with only hero action heal and 4+ save?

He's worth it for his ability to counter a God model for 1-2 turns on its own.  This will win games. 

The fact that he's decent in combat is a big bonus.

He survives alright unless focused, at which point his defenses are swingy to bad.  

He can heal and recover well though.

Edited by KrispyXIV
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Enoby said:

I've used them twice and on both occasions they've been blessed by the dice gods, but I still found them lacking. Unfortunately their issue is they don't have a true place in a Slaanesh list. We have five Hedonite foot troops:

- Slaangors (150)

- Painbringers (160)

- Twinsouls (185)

- Blissbarbs (180)

- Daemonettes (140)

Two of these are unconditional battleline in a Hedonite army, and two are conditional. Slaangors are neither.

Blissbarbs are ranged so don't really compare. The others, however:

- Twinsouls do much much more damage (potentially triple or quadruple iirc), have a better save, are just as fast, have more wounds in a unit, can be battleline, and have better bravery. Slaangors are 35 points cheaper, have rend (which doesn't really help their damage much in comparison unless against a 2+ save, and even then it's tight, and potential mortal wounds (which is not reliable in the slightest) 

So if you want some elite melee troops, twinsouls are better

- But what if you want something cheaper or that does MWs? Well Painbringers are 10 points more, but for that price they have slightly better attacks (Painbringers do more even vs a Slaangor charge), a much better save in combat, better bravery, better mortal wound generation, and are only a little bit slower, and conditional battleline. Slaangors just have movement and are 10 points less.

- So maybe it's best not to compare them to elites, but the daemonettes are really the only comparison. Daemonettes do more damage, have much better bravery, the same save, are cheaper, are usually faster, have better objective control, have rerolling charges, and have more wounds. All Slaangors have is MW generation, which is unfortunately poor due to them dying before it can trigger.

Overall, they just don't have a place in the army - they don't excel where they should, and are outdone by all other similar units.

They're the one unit I think is inarguably poor - though more power to those who want to use them :) They do attract good luck! 

Personally I'd like a redesign where they can switch their profile to slovenly beasts who the other Hedonites dote on (for buffs), and then to ferocious shock troops (-1 save, +1 damage, +1 attack, MWs on a charge like current ability). Would give them a role :) 

Though they were released back in February, I’m still a bit in shock at how bad their profile is, and that they received a 10 point bump. It’s such a shame, considering how beautiful the models are; Slaangors next to Painbringers are probably my favorite sculpts. Really makes me wonder what’s happening behind the scenes with play testing and how they write the warscrolls. 

Edited by AngryPanda
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the very least they should do their MWs on the charge rather than at the end of the combat phase, given how fragile they are. Something to represent their sudden bloodlust, like a plus to charge, would also be nice. 

Edited by LeonBox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO they should have made the Slaangor more equivalent to a bullgor/ogor stat-line, 4w linebreakers with damage 2/3 attacks at either a decent rend or with some mortal wound gimmick, that would have filled a niche better I think, and Slaanesh already has a bit of a bull/minotaur aesthetic sprinkled in.  Also whilst the models are nice they're kind of disappointingly small for their price tag, so scaling them up onto 40/50mm bases would've made them more appealing to me.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Lucentia said:

IMO they should have made the Slaangor more equivalent to a bullgor/ogor stat-line, 4w linebreakers with damage 2/3 attacks at either a decent rend or with some mortal wound gimmick, that would have filled a niche better I think, and Slaanesh already has a bit of a bull/minotaur aesthetic sprinkled in.  Also whilst the models are nice they're kind of disappointingly small for their price tag, so scaling them up onto 40/50mm bases would've made them more appealing to me.

Yep this sounds great and absolutely fills a role that we can't fill right now -- glass cannon shock troops that do massive damage on the charge and could realistically pose a threat to big enemy monsters. We absolutely suck for rend and have very little above -1 (the only things that spring to mind are Keeper claws at -2, Glutos' buddy's greatsword at -2 and Shalaxi's spear at -3). This is doubly bad news because we don't really have much in the way of mortal wound output either, so I find myself consistently bouncing off high-armour rend-ignoring enemies (and in 3.0, everything and its mother is +1 save ignoring -1 rend). 

Edited by LeonBox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can Bullgor not fill that Bullgor role for us? They have -2 rend on their Great Axes and 3 damage plus the potential of a mortal wounds on their Bloodgreed rule. At 155pts for 3 with their command (which beyond the extra attack adds +1 charge and helps boost their bravery) they seem like they could have a place? 

I have a game tomorrow that I already had a list planned for but now I might have to see how Bullgor feel this edition...

Edited by Elazar The Glorified
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...