AoS 2 - Hedonites of Slaanesh Discussion

[shinros]

2 hours ago, CeleFAZE said:

I'm personally hoping we get at least one or two support abilities on our new stuff that's only tied to the Slaanesh keyword, or at worst mortal Slaanesh. Or at the very least more targeted debuffs like acquiescence but non-magic, considering we really don't have the stacking + to cast that allows that go through reliably against at least 4 of the top armies that are currently in the meta.

Considering the command ability of the Lord Pain I doubt we will get a lot of this in my opinion when the update comes around, considering most of the Slaves to Darkness stuff works around that specific keyword. I expect the slaanesh book to at least give slaves some secondary addons though like the other god tomes. 

Edited December 13, 2020 by shinros

[CeleFAZE]

11 hours ago, shinros said:

Considering the command ability of the Lord Pain I doubt we will get a lot of this in my opinion when the update comes around, considering most of the Slaves to Darkness stuff works around that specific keyword. I expect the slaanesh book to at least give slaves some secondary addons though like the other god tomes. 

Yeah, what I'm really hoping for is something like the bloodsecrator, that gives us something we can use to buff S2D units and can work as a solid ally for S2D Slaanesh lists. Currently the contorted epitome is something that can sort of apply in this context, but it's basically just a solid addition regardless of the makeup of your force in a slaves army.

[Enoby]

2 hours ago, CeleFAZE said:

Yeah, what I'm really hoping for is something like the bloodsecrator, that gives us something we can use to buff S2D units and can work as a solid ally for S2D Slaanesh lists. Currently the contorted epitome is something that can sort of apply in this context, but it's basically just a solid addition regardless of the makeup of your force in a slaves army.

I agree that it would be great to have a universal buff hero - it's something that would help the army feel more interactive to play, as currently our units don't really interact with one another (e.g. a Keeper can make a unit fight twice, but it doesn't change how the unit fights so there's no combo). Having a spell or the Newborn (if we get a model) give a buff to all Slaanesh units (or all mortals) would help tie the army together more.

To be honest, if the Newborn does come out then I'm hoping it's more like Katakros than Archaon - a buff model that helps an entire army, rather than an even better combat hero. Obviously we already have Archaon and a Keeper of Secrets for combat heroes, so something that could tie our army together would be great. 

[Gorthor21]

There is also Sigvald who in his previous incarnation was a pretty decent combat chaos character.  I totally agree @Enoby slaanesh needs a character and atleast several spells or prayers that affect the main keyword and not just the sub factions.  I think this would motivate people to not just buy more daemons and mortals but to be willing to try different lists with a variety of units .  I’m of the camp that more inclusive rules would help GW sell more figures which is good in the long run for all parties included.

[Carnith]

We will need to see what Sigvlad can do for the army. I hope he has something to inspire others. Also perhaps lord of pain's warscroll was just a placeholder for his CA? We also need to see what the Shardspeaker gets as a spell, and what spell lore exists. 

Also something to note is that Hazdu is on a 25mm base.  While I definitely think 25mm bases have been pretty cancerous for the game, on an archer unit, there doesn't seem to be much in the way of feeling cheesy. 

[Gorthor21]

By 25mm do you mean skeleton warriors cheez or like freeguild guard as cheez?

[Carnith]

Like witch elf cheese or Mortek Guard where you can cram them all close together with good quality attacks. 

[Gorthor21]

What advantages  would those units have if they were on 32mm bases?  Would it help the situation if they toned down on the multiple synergies that those units get as opposed to rebasing them and making people have to go and get slightly bigger bases. 

[CeleFAZE]

2 minutes ago, Gorthor21 said:

What advantages  would those units have if they were on 32mm bases?  Would it help the situation if they toned down on the multiple synergies that those units get as opposed to rebasing them and making people have to go and get slightly bigger bases. 

More than anything, larger bases need to be factored into a unit's cost, as they directly correlate to a lower number of possible attacks. Looking at certain units (like beastman gors and chaos warriors) it really seems like that's not really taken into account.

[Klamm]

I'm using namarti reivers as proxy slaanesh marauders, though I realised after already doing a fair few that marauders are on 25mms while the namarti are on 32s.

The fact that makes them strictly worse I hope will make my opponents more forgiving of that ****** up

[Gorthor21]

I heard the same arguments from my friends back in the fantasy battles days who both used 20mm base unit hordes which got 3 ranks of attacks and every time I used the 25mm base saurus warriors, chaos daemons or chaos warriors I never really ran into a problem where I felt that the units were unfairly priced.  I understand when it is something like mortek guard that have the 2” range but how many more models do the 20mm bases really get into combat especially when they have the 1” range ?  Like 3 models to every 2 32mm base models?

[CeleFAZE]

2 hours ago, Gorthor21 said:

I heard the same arguments from my friends back in the fantasy battles days who both used 20mm base unit hordes which got 3 ranks of attacks and every time I used the 25mm base saurus warriors, chaos daemons or chaos warriors I never really ran into a problem where I felt that the units were unfairly priced.  I understand when it is something like mortek guard that have the 2” range but how many more models do the 20mm bases really get into combat especially when they have the 1” range ?  Like 3 models to every 2 32mm base models?

It's the equivalent of an additional rank for 25 mm units (as 25mm is just barely less than 1"), which is far more noticeable in a game where units are not locked into formation. In addition, 25mm base units in fantasy usually had higher strength and toughness or ward saves, which don't translate into AoS in any meaningful way. Also the buffs in AoS are frequently "wholly within", which makes larger bases a liability for making that happen.

[Silphid]

Nice models @Klamm, thats a great conversion, very thematic. As larger bases are  a disadvantage is most situations, and you didn’t just use genestealers as stand-in marauders, anyone objecting to this is not someone worth playing with/against.

Edited December 15, 2020 by Silphid

[Gorthor21]

1 hour ago, CeleFAZE said:

It's the equivalent of an additional rank for 25 mm units (as 25mm is just barely less than 1"), which is far more noticeable in a game where units are not locked into formation. In addition, 25mm base units in fantasy usually had higher strength and toughness or ward saves, which don't translate into AoS in any meaningful way. Also the buffs in AoS are frequently "wholly within", which makes larger bases a liability for making that happen.

I understand what you all are getting at I just don’t see how it is that much of a disadvantage for the bigger models.  After setting up 10 32mm against 10 20mm it really doesn’t seem like it’s a game changing dynamic to force units like witch elves(that have a nil save outside the alter giving the ward save) or mortek(which have a fairly generic stat line and access to the same buffs as most units as rerolls and +1 to hit and attacks are fairly common across the game) I just don’t see how that should force the ones that can pull 4-5 4+ to wound attacks at a disadvantage because of the daunting number of attacks that unit can generate.  If every unit was on 32mm like it was warmachine the weaker units like these chainrasps wouldn’t even need to both existing as they would be the same as any other basic unit in their faction.  I get how it could be frustrating to have to face that in a game I just don’t see why it is that big of a deal.  
In all honesty I hope that the blissbarb archers get two shots with the -1 rend as it is something that chaos is sorely missing all across the faction and other than horrors, ungor, and marauders I can’t really think of anything that has a 25mm base.   
if I am still missing the point please let me know.

also the proportions for the square to circle bases are nearly the same so the comparison is still well enough to be made.

[CeleFAZE]

13 hours ago, Gorthor21 said:

I understand what you all are getting at I just don’t see how it is that much of a disadvantage for the bigger models.  After setting up 10 32mm against 10 20mm it really doesn’t seem like it’s a game changing dynamic to force units like witch elves(that have a nil save outside the alter giving the ward save) or mortek(which have a fairly generic stat line and access to the same buffs as most units as rerolls and +1 to hit and attacks are fairly common across the game) I just don’t see how that should force the ones that can pull 4-5 4+ to wound attacks at a disadvantage because of the daunting number of attacks that unit can generate.  If every unit was on 32mm like it was warmachine the weaker units like these chainrasps wouldn’t even need to both existing as they would be the same as any other basic unit in their faction.  I get how it could be frustrating to have to face that in a game I just don’t see why it is that big of a deal.  
In all honesty I hope that the blissbarb archers get two shots with the -1 rend as it is something that chaos is sorely missing all across the faction and other than horrors, ungor, and marauders I can’t really think of anything that has a 25mm base.   
if I am still missing the point please let me know.

also the proportions for the square to circle bases are nearly the same so the comparison is still well enough to be made.

I don't want to belabor the point, as I can easily see this becoming a drawn out argument. However, your example supports what I'm saying.

If you had two units with identical stats and costs, except one has a 32mm base and the other has a 25mm, it's a distinct disadvantage. Going by your image there, let's increase the number of 32 mm bases to the same as the 25mm shown (20). Presuming they have the same movement speed, they'll reach each other at roughly the same time, so we'll go with the formation above (with an additional rank of 32mm bases behind those tzaangors). Presuming both units have 1" weapons, the 25mm unit has double the offensive power of the 32mm unit. In addition, you can fit more of those 25mm bases on an objective, providing each model an additional unpointed advantage of being able to contribute more towards capturing objectives, which is arguably more effective than killing power alone. This offsets the only advantage to a larger base of having more blocking presence on the board.

If every 32mm model was roughly doubly effective compared to those on 25mm, there'd be no issues. You'd take larger models for more punch, and smaller models for numbers and maneuverability. However, you mention mortek guard as having a generic statline, but let's compare them to a chaos warrior. For the benefit of a better comparison I'll use greatblades for the warriors to give them a lift, since we're not caring about mortal wounds here, and we'll assume they're in our allegiance so they have the same exploding 6's as the morteks:

Mortek Guard With Nadirite Blades (13 points/model):

Mv 4" W 1 B 10 Sv 4+

Rng 1" Atks 2 To Hit 3+ To Wound 4+ Rend -1 Dmg 1

 

Chaos Warriors (18 points/model):

Mv5" W 2 B 7 Sv 4+

Rng 1" Atks 2 To Hit 4+ To Wound 3+ Rend -1 Dmg 1

 

The chaos warriors are doubly survivable with 2 wounds each, but the mortek are doubly offensive at a lower cost.

Let's do a bit of math-hammer:

15 chaos warriors get the charge on 20 mortek guard. Let's use your above example where both units manage a frontage of 10.

32mm bases are larger than 1", so we only swing with the front 10.

Turn 1 Chaos Warriors (15 remaining) : 21 attacks, 13.99 hits, 9.33 wounds, 5.18 unsaved, rounding to 5 casualties for the mortek.

Turn 1 Mortek Guard (15 remaining) : 31 attacks, 25.83 hits, 12.92 wounds, 5.74  unsaved, which rounds to killing 3 warriors.

Turn 2 Mortek Guard (15 remaining) : 31 attacks, 25.83 hits, 12.92 wounds, 5.74  unsaved, which rounds to killing 3 warriors, however for the sake of keeping fractional kills from adversely affecting things let's say it's 2.5 dead warriors.

Turn 2 Chaos Warriors (10 remaining) : 21 attacks, 13.99 hits, 9.33 wounds,  5.18 unsaved, and let's be charitable and round to 6 casualties for the mortek.

Turn 3 Chaos Warriors (10 remaining) : 21 attacks, 13.99 hits, 9.33 wounds,  5.18 unsaved, 5 casualties on the mortek.

Turn 3 Mortek Guard (10 remaining) : 21 attacks, 17.5 hits, 8.75 wounds, 3.89 unsaved, rounding to 2 more dead warriors.

Turn 4 Mortek Guard (10 remaining) : 21 attacks, 17.5 hits, 8.75 wounds, 4.375 go through due to the warriors losing their rerolls. For the warrior's sake will round this down to 4 wounds.

Turn 4 Chaos Warriors (6 remaining) : 13 attacks, 7.37 hits, 4.91 wounds, 2.047 unsaved and kill 2 more mortek guard.

Turn 5 Chaos Warriors (6 remaining) : 13 attacks, 7.37 hits, 4.91 wounds, 2.047 unsaved and kill 2 more mortek guard.

Turn 5 Mortek Guard (6 remaining) : 13 attacks, 10.83 hits, 5.42 wounds, 2.71 wounds, rounding to 2 dead warriors (one full and one half-wounded).

Turn 6 Mortek Guard (6 remaining) : 13 attacks, 10.83 hits, 5.42 wounds, 2.71 wounds, which we'll again alternate the rounding in the warrior's favor to 1 dead warrior.

Turn 6 Chaos Warriors (3 remaining) : 7 attacks, 4.67 wounds, 1.56 wounds, which we'll say is 2 dead mortek.

 

We'll call it there since that's the turn limit for most games. This leaves us with 52 points of mortek left on the table, and 54 points of warriors, out of a starting 260 and 270 respectively, both 20% of their points. This was with generous rounding and giving the warriors the charge, had the mortek charged they would have definitely won by the math. Base size matters, and unless a larger base size consistently comes with a far better profile a larger base is always going to be a statistically significant disadvantage.

Edited December 15, 2020 by CeleFAZE
Had the wrong Mv stat for chaos warriors. Doesn't really affect the numbers, but still.

[Gorthor21]

Thank you for the thought out reply.  My apologies for coming across as an wsshole.  You didn’t factor in battleshock which would have put the warriors at a disadvantage as well.  The way it seems there is no real way to fix disparity other than chalking it up to either bad rules writing or a bad matchup.  Sorry again I got heated thinking of folks having to rebase their entire are for slightly bigger bases just for the sake of balance.  
even if the rules for these units were adjusted to fit the difference between base size advantage I feel as though it wouldn’t necessarily make a difference.  I know the models come before the game and selling more is important to the hobby, I just don’t want to have to see people suffer another big issue like when they decided that square bases had to be replaced by rounds.

perhaps the blissbarb archers will come in twenty man units and they can function as well at holding objectives as you say smaller bases do.

[CeleFAZE]

3 minutes ago, Gorthor21 said:

Thank you for the thought out reply.  My apologies for coming across as an wsshole.  You didn’t factor in battleshock which would have put the warriors at a disadvantage as well.  The way it seems there is no real way to fix disparity other than chalking it up to either bad rules writing or a bad matchup.  Sorry again I got heated thinking of folks having to rebase their entire are for slightly bigger bases just for the sake of balance.  
even if the rules for these units were adjusted to fit the difference between base size advantage I feel as though it wouldn’t necessarily make a difference.  I know the models come before the game and selling more is important to the hobby, I just don’t want to have to see people suffer another big issue like when they decided that square bases had to be replaced by rounds.

perhaps the blissbarb archers will come in twenty man units and they can function as well at holding objectives as you say smaller bases do.

I appreciate that, and I apologize as well if any of my comments read aggressively. I'd also hate to see base sizes changed, as that really puts the onus of the work on the hobbyists for GW's oversight. My distant hope is that future point and warscroll changes recognize the disparity, and can rebalance things to where there's a good reason for bigger bases (which I personally think look better on the tabletop anyhow).

As for the blissbarb archers, I think they'll provide something we really needed, which as you mentioned is a dedicated objective holder (hopefully battleline) that can still contribute to the battle without being in the thick of it. Our other three options in that regard either waste a lot of their potential by not charging in as soon as possible (marauders and daemonettes), or are buried under a major commitment to a battalion (ungors).

[Enoby]

I wonder if a change to base size disparity could be made by having some sort of general reach rule. E.g. when attacking through another model in this unit, this model can reach over X models that belong to its own unit. You'd still have inch reach for things like piling in and just reaching a weapon in, or attacking over a different unit, but it would mean base size was less of an issue for ranks of the same unit.

Edited December 15, 2020 by Enoby

[CeleFAZE]

51 minutes ago, Enoby said:

I wonder if a change to base size disparity could be made by having some sort of general reach rule. E.g. when attacking through another model in this unit, this model can reach over X models that belong to its own unit. You'd still have inch reach for things like piling in and just reaching a weapon in, or attacking over a different unit, but it would mean base size was less of an issue for ranks of the same unit.

That would function similarly to previous editions of 40k, and I remember it working quite well to make hordes viable.

[Overread]

Just a heads up all, if you like too ( or want to ) use a 3rd party Keeper of Secrets alternative model from Creature Caster then their Spider Demon is being withdrawn from sale on the 31st of December.

NSFW slightly https://creaturecaster.com/uk/product/spider-demon/
(note that's the UK site, USA and such have other regional sites to order from)

[CeleFAZE]

8 minutes ago, Overread said:

Just a heads up all, if you like too ( or want to ) use a 3rd party Keeper of Secrets alternative model from Creature Caster then their Spider Demon is being withdrawn from sale on the 31st of December.

NSFW slightly https://creaturecaster.com/uk/product/spider-demon/
(note that's the UK site, USA and such have other regional sites to order from)

Thank you for the heads up, I'd been considering one of those for awhile.

[Enoby]

6 minutes ago, CeleFAZE said:

That would function similarly to previous editions of 40k, and I remember it working quite well to make hordes viable.

It's good to hear they've tried it successfully before. I think it would also reduce dodgy measuring - for example, when you're playing against someone and they try angle their models in such a way that the distance is less than 1" so they can reach, but it's very difficult to tell if they do fall within distance and it's time consuming for them to set up their models like that.

I think, with such a 'messy' way to set up units, it's very hard to tell what is and isn't within range, and this is combined with the disadvantage large bases have,  so it would be for the best to just do away with a lot of the needless complexity. 

[AngryPanda]

On 12/15/2020 at 7:45 AM, CeleFAZE said:

I don't want to belabor the point, as I can easily see this becoming a drawn out argument. However, your example supports what I'm saying.

If you had two units with identical stats and costs, except one has a 32mm base and the other has a 25mm, it's a distinct disadvantage. Going by your image there, let's increase the number of 32 mm bases to the same as the 25mm shown (20). Presuming they have the same movement speed, they'll reach each other at roughly the same time, so we'll go with the formation above (with an additional rank of 32mm bases behind those tzaangors). Presuming both units have 1" weapons, the 25mm unit has double the offensive power of the 32mm unit. In addition, you can fit more of those 25mm bases on an objective, providing each model an additional unpointed advantage of being able to contribute more towards capturing objectives, which is arguably more effective than killing power alone. This offsets the only advantage to a larger base of having more blocking presence on the board.

If every 32mm model was roughly doubly effective compared to those on 25mm, there'd be no issues. You'd take larger models for more punch, and smaller models for numbers and maneuverability. However, you mention mortek guard as having a generic statline, but let's compare them to a chaos warrior. For the benefit of a better comparison I'll use greatblades for the warriors to give them a lift, since we're not caring about mortal wounds here, and we'll assume they're in our allegiance so they have the same exploding 6's as the morteks:

Mortek Guard With Nadirite Blades (13 points/model):

Mv 4" W 1 B 10 Sv 4+

Rng 1" Atks 2 To Hit 3+ To Wound 4+ Rend -1 Dmg 1

 

Chaos Warriors (18 points/model):

Mv5" W 2 B 7 Sv 4+

Rng 1" Atks 2 To Hit 4+ To Wound 3+ Rend -1 Dmg 1

 

The chaos warriors are doubly survivable with 2 wounds each, but the mortek are doubly offensive at a lower cost.

Let's do a bit of math-hammer:

15 chaos warriors get the charge on 20 mortek guard. Let's use your above example where both units manage a frontage of 10.

32mm bases are larger than 1", so we only swing with the front 10.

Turn 1 Chaos Warriors (15 remaining) : 21 attacks, 13.99 hits, 9.33 wounds, 5.18 unsaved, rounding to 5 casualties for the mortek.

Turn 1 Mortek Guard (15 remaining) : 31 attacks, 25.83 hits, 12.92 wounds, 5.74  unsaved, which rounds to killing 3 warriors.

Turn 2 Mortek Guard (15 remaining) : 31 attacks, 25.83 hits, 12.92 wounds, 5.74  unsaved, which rounds to killing 3 warriors, however for the sake of keeping fractional kills from adversely affecting things let's say it's 2.5 dead warriors.

Turn 2 Chaos Warriors (10 remaining) : 21 attacks, 13.99 hits, 9.33 wounds,  5.18 unsaved, and let's be charitable and round to 6 casualties for the mortek.

Turn 3 Chaos Warriors (10 remaining) : 21 attacks, 13.99 hits, 9.33 wounds,  5.18 unsaved, 5 casualties on the mortek.

Turn 3 Mortek Guard (10 remaining) : 21 attacks, 17.5 hits, 8.75 wounds, 3.89 unsaved, rounding to 2 more dead warriors.

Turn 4 Mortek Guard (10 remaining) : 21 attacks, 17.5 hits, 8.75 wounds, 4.375 go through due to the warriors losing their rerolls. For the warrior's sake will round this down to 4 wounds.

Turn 4 Chaos Warriors (6 remaining) : 13 attacks, 7.37 hits, 4.91 wounds, 2.047 unsaved and kill 2 more mortek guard.

Turn 5 Chaos Warriors (6 remaining) : 13 attacks, 7.37 hits, 4.91 wounds, 2.047 unsaved and kill 2 more mortek guard.

Turn 5 Mortek Guard (6 remaining) : 13 attacks, 10.83 hits, 5.42 wounds, 2.71 wounds, rounding to 2 dead warriors (one full and one half-wounded).

Turn 6 Mortek Guard (6 remaining) : 13 attacks, 10.83 hits, 5.42 wounds, 2.71 wounds, which we'll again alternate the rounding in the warrior's favor to 1 dead warrior.

Turn 6 Chaos Warriors (3 remaining) : 7 attacks, 4.67 wounds, 1.56 wounds, which we'll say is 2 dead mortek.

 

We'll call it there since that's the turn limit for most games. This leaves us with 52 points of mortek left on the table, and 54 points of warriors, out of a starting 260 and 270 respectively, both 20% of their points. This was with generous rounding and giving the warriors the charge, had the mortek charged they would have definitely won by the math. Base size matters, and unless a larger base size consistently comes with a far better profile a larger base is always going to be a statistically significant disadvantage.

AoS has nailed a lot of concepts, but personally I’ve found the game’s approach to designing StD/Warriors of chaos to be underwhelming. Back in Warhammer Fantasy chaos warriors were melee powerhouses that could go toe-to-toe with other armies, even elite units. It made sense, as the lore described them as armored warriors who’s lives have been dedicated to war and carnage in the pursuit of personal power. When you played against them, you were suppose to feel intimidated. 
 

The lore for chaos warriors hasn’t really changed in this regard, but the rules are very underwhelming and are not reflective of the fluff. No longer do I feel that chaos warriors have the dominating presence they used to; they’re more akin to an armored wall that tickles its opponent. Other units like Mortek Guard, Saurus warriors/guard, Ardboyz, and some of the stormcast range have the ability to take hits and deal them back. 
 

Granted, these armies are very different, but they still incorporate “elite” units that have high saves and potential damage outputs. To bring warriors back into the spectrum of units that should be feared, I think their attacks should receive a point of rend , and maybe receive an additional attack or other buffs. 

[Frowny]

Yes. I'd go big and think a point of rend and a third attack would do them well. And then return them to 100 points/5. Would make them proper scary, which I'd appreciate. Its sad when proper scary in this game is the horrible marauder models instead of the gorgeous new chaos warrior sculpts. I'd excitedly lose to a chaos warrior wall. It seems more fitting than losing to a mortek or fireslayer wall, at least in terms of lore and how much I like their model. They are also pretty slow and would still require buffs, so there would be counterplay to them.

[CeleFAZE]

2 hours ago, Frowny said:

Yes. I'd go big and think a point of rend and a third attack would do them well. And then return them to 100 points/5. Would make them proper scary, which I'd appreciate. Its sad when proper scary in this game is the horrible marauder models instead of the gorgeous new chaos warrior sculpts. I'd excitedly lose to a chaos warrior wall. It seems more fitting than losing to a mortek or fireslayer wall, at least in terms of lore and how much I like their model. They are also pretty slow and would still require buffs, so there would be counterplay to them.

I'd go with those changes, as well as chosen, varanguard, the champions for warriors and knights counting as heroes for the purposes of the aura of chaos for S2D armies, like how you have it for mortek guard. This doesn't really change things for us, but gives them a larger purpose for their army of origin, and showcases their elevation in the eyes of the gods.