Gistradagis
-
Posts
288 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Gistradagis
-
-
6 minutes ago, misthv said:
Knights of the Empty Throne! A damned legion “alliance” from Wrath of the Everchosen.
Ooh, the bloodmarked part made me think of the mortal Khorne warband in the StD tome.
-
34 minutes ago, Snakeb1te said:
Also could someone post the Bloodmarked KotET list? I'm trying to make one myself.
The what? The warband? Was that an odd mistype/autocorrect, or is it simply an acronym I don't know?
-
1 hour ago, NJohansson said:
An average of 2 wounds per attack - but the illustration is that the two weapons are fairly equal. Yes the sword will be slightly better a majority of times but on average - take what you like from fluff/model point of view and it will affect your gaming once in a blue moon.
Honestly, if I have to run him with a sword, it'll probably be to do the hero-hunting strat with Sword of Judgement, which is a list I'm considering. It might be a bit suicidal since he'd be my general, and I'd be giving him an aggressive artefact, but that would give him the chance to make enemy heroes explode. Plus, I can always wait to engage the enemy mainline before going kamikaze.
-
17 minutes ago, NJohansson said:
This is basic math:
Axe 3*2/3*2/3*2 will be 2.6 wounds before saves
Sword 4*2/4*2/3*2 will also be 2.6 wounds before saves
The Axe has a better rend while the sword has a higher spike for damage. Really up to your preference and what you will be facing.
Not really. if you're counting the +1 to hit with charge (which you shouldn't), Sword would be 4*3, and I'm not sure what do you mean with the 3*2 at the end. You're also forgetting that each attack has a 1/6 chance of doing 0 dmg but 2 MWs, which makes the equation a bit more difficult.
-
Just now, Grimrock said:
Exactly, and the output for the sword is higher than the axe against almost every opponent when you have the mark of khorne. The reason I said a little less consistent is the d3 damage can make it swing up or down per hit and the mortal wounds are inherently dicey, but on average it should do more damage making it the better choice if you're willing to risk the inconsistency.
Well, guess I'll have to check it again, then. Since I remember discussing it shortly after the tome release and people agreeing that the sword only made sense if coupled with smth such as the Sword of Judgement due to slightly lower damage across the table.
-
8 minutes ago, Magnus The Blue said:
I think your miss understanding the word consistent. Which means likely to produce the same result repeatedly. I talked about total chance of doing damage rather than chance of hitting etc, to simplify the argument. I will try another example:
Unit 1 has an ability that automatically does one mortal wound every combat phase. It is perfectly consistent, always 1 mortal wound.
Unit two has an ability to cause d6 mortal wounds, but only if you roll a 4+ first (so works 50% of the time). Less consistent (only works half the time) but much higher average damage (average 1.75 mortal wounds a turn).
If you know you only need to do one wound say to kill a character) unit one is better as it is more consistent but in many situations unit two is better as it averages a better damage output.
Oh, I know, but that's why I spoke of damage output being what truly interests us. A DP has to choose either weapon, meaning you want the better output no matter what. Meaning that, yes, in your examples the first weapon is more "reliable" or consistent. But in profile comparing in AoS, specifically for a unit that has to choose only 1 weapon, that becomes a secondary concern to the total output. Since what we care for the DP is final damage (as it's either weapon, not both), you need to choose which one is more useful in general, for most situations; that is, which weapon is more consistent in doing what we want: damage.
When comparing profiles, you never need one wound to kill a character, you need as many as possible (especially since in AoS extra damage just moves to the next model in a unit). Consequently, you're interested in damage consistency, which is what profiles calculators will show you. So while you're lexically correct in calling the first weapon more consistent, it's not what you'll usually look for when comparing weapon profiles, where consistency will refer to damage. A consistent weapon will be one you can trust to dish reliable damage on average.
4 minutes ago, Enoby said:To hit and damage are intrinsically linked in AoS - if an attack is 1 attack 6/6/-/100, then it's great when it goes off, but it has such a high chance of doing 0 damage that it's not particularly useful compared to 3 attacks at 3/2/-3/3. The consistency of an attack is very important to how much damage you can expect it to do, and if those two attack profiles were weapon choices on a model, I'm certain that the 3 damage weapon would be taken over the 100 damage weapon the vast majority of the time (if buffs couldn't make the 100 damage weapon more consistent).
Yeah, that's why... I said it. Hit chance is part of the process when calculating damage outputs; you consider how likely a weapon is to deal damage, and take that into account for an example of a number of attacks against an imaginary target, together with other elements such as likeliness to wound, rerolls, extra MWs, etc.
When you speak of damage consistency, it 100% includes all the other types of consistency that let to that result. That 100 damage is only consistent if it has a profile that makes these 100 damage happen much more often on average than the 3 damage weapon. That's basically the idea behind comparing weapon profiles.
-
1 minute ago, Magnus The Blue said:
Nope,
E.g.: If one attack does 5 damage 50% of the time (and none the rest of the time), and another does 50 damage 10% of the time (and none the rest of the time).
The first attack is more consistent (more likely to cause some damage) but the second is much better on average (average 2.5 damage for first attach Vs average 5 damage for second attack) .
You compare weapons by seeing the total output, not likeliness to hit (which is a part of the process itself to see the dmg output), because doing damage is what you're interested in. In your example, the first attack is more consistent to hit, but less consistent in dealing damage. Consequently, it's a less consistent weapon for what we're interested in, which is damage.
-
7 hours ago, Grimrock said:
Actually I did a little math before building my prince and I found that for the mark of khorne the sword was better on average against almost all opponents. Less consistent for sure, but on average better.
If it's less consistent, then it's worse on average. That's kind of the point of consistency.
-
1 hour ago, Vestrial said:
Thanks a lots for the advices. After considering few of them, a kick the mounted dudes and focus more on Despoiler traits.
I dont even know if that list is better or worst but I want my cool viking in big armor XD.
The Chaos Warshrine might be erase from that list, but I dont know by what I replace it if I do.
I wouldn't recommend the sword on your DP unless you're doing smth like giving him the Sword of Judgement. On the vanilla profile, the axe is objectively better.
The Chaos Sorcerer should be Tzeentch mark, too. Undivided gives him auto-success in battleshock, which I doubt you'll use for a single model unit. Same case for the Shrine.
Btw, do realize that your bloodsecrator is gonna ****** you once in a while unless you play him really far from your magic guys.
-
30 minutes ago, Charleston said:
Thanks a lot! I am always a bit afraid that my DP´s wont make the move or get charged and bound into meele before I get them where I need them for such a task. Nevertheless I will give it a shot! Mask of Darkness and Marauders sound currently like the autopick in most cases. I already noticed how great Mask is to get thoose sweet objectives later in the game
I hope GW announces some not-ugly-marauders soon.
If I may bother you guys with another quastion: How do you play your Warriors in terms of equipment and unit size? Is it worth to take 20+ for the reroll?
You can always run the DP right behind your frontline. Then, on your turn, move with his 12" very close to the support hero, and get an easy charge off.
With Warriors, it depends on their purpose. A "static" line that's meant to exist only as an anvil, usually requires 15+ to make sure you don't lose the reroll for saves the moment one of them dies. 20 is usually not needed. If you're hurting for points, however, you can have a unit of 10 and have them protect your Sorcerer, who can then use their Oracular Visions on them every turn, giving them save rerolls despite losing their size.
PD: Personally, I run Kairic Acolytes as a conversion for Marauders (with the appropriate bases).
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, NJohansson said:
You can also go for heavy magic - OBR don’t like mortal wounds at all. Gaunt Summoner (or two), sorcerer lord (or two - especially the manticore one) under the cabal with a couple of endless spells could really be a problem for them (depending on Nagash or not).
Well, to one-shot an enemy hero, I'm not 100% sure. StD has cool spells, but not it's that great at sniping, I feel. We have tools for hordes, with whispers of chaos and the sorc on manticore (as you say), but I wonder if we're reliable enough to kill heroes.
-
On 2/29/2020 at 1:00 PM, Hannibal said:
I agree.
On the other hand I pretty like the GUO with bell. That +2" to movement is golden. With all shenanigans pulled out of your hat you´re able to alpha strike first turn with a lot of models right now (Daemon Princes, Knights, Varanguard, Soulgrinders, Marauders,...). Over there on the beastmen topic they often talk about how crucial movement and board control is for your beastmen playstyle. They also talk about lack of damage potential with beastmen. IMO it´s the same with Nurgle. I guess we have to use our movement shenanigans and all tools to improve resilience to win battles.
But I´m still new to that faction and the game overall, maybe I´m wrong.
Btw, I used a Soulgrinder in my last match and it is a cool piece, thgough I´m somewhat dissapointed by it´s damage output. Casted the Chaos Sorcerer Lords signature spell on it (rerolls to wounds and to hit) and GUOs CA, but it couldn´t impress me less. On the other hand, watching a big monster flying across the table in turn 1 to pin parts of the opposing forces was nice. Really liked it.
Well, after the game I did the math and 20 Marauders (150 pts) will be better in this role than the soulgrinder (210). REasons are:
- small based => easier to manoeuvre
- better resilience (both offer 4+ save, but Marauders offer more wounds), except for mass destruction spells. And can be buffed by Chaos Sorcerer Lord (rerolls to save)
- way higher damage output
It seems to be the bane of almost all chaos units right now: Marauders simply buffed by a Chaos Sorcerer Lord outshine almost every single chaos unit out there.
Aren't Marauders 5+, with their shield? They can run away, too.
-
36 minutes ago, Charleston said:
'Hi guys,
I need your help. I have heavy problems to adjust and find a way how to utilise my StD. Currently most games I get are either against NH or OBR which are both able to simply tank all my damage and heal with their backline. As StD have no real access to ranged damage, I fail to pick out their Support Heroes. Therefore my Question: What Tactics work for you the best with StD? I always feel like I am forced to rush into my enemy as I otherwise get too much ranged damage by spells and some weird catapults, while charging them also feels like a big issue because thex are all buffed so my units simply bounce and die.
Both Daemon Princes and marauders can technically do it. A Daemon Prince can move/charge across lines thanks to flying and rush an enemy support hero, possibly killing them in one turn (for added damage, could do the classic Sword of Judgement build).
The second style is also very common across all STD styles. Get a caster with Mask of Darkness, then teleport a unit of 20/40 Marauders behind enemy lines, get the almost-certain charge off and obliterate the enemy hero and as many more units as possible before exploding the following turn.
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, rosa said:
Again, maybe it is you who have no clue what Slaves actually are, and not the authors (I just recited your words). A lot of people have fun with this army. Who are you and whom do you speak for?
I am out of this discussion now (ignore).
Good luck.
Maybe you shouldn't have come at all, honestly... you've been majorly irrational and uncommunicative, cherry picking the things you wanted to discuss and ignoring everything else in favour of straw manning us as StD-haters.
It's one thing to disagree, as some have, but another to outright misrepresent other people's words and lack any politeness at all.
-
6 minutes ago, Cambot1231 said:
I've been having a great time with this list
3 sources of threat
You have to play without any mistakes against the top tier stuff but overall the double fighting Archaon can be pretty brutal. The list does struggle a bit against slaanesh summoning. There are extra saves against magic with Chaos Rune Sheilds, and Archaon's Tzeentch head dispells. If facing against shooting I go full nurgle Keyword, but otherwise I've had great success with the slaanesh Keyword so that I can reroll the charges on the Varangaurd. The Chosen in a block of ten can ussually take a punch and still do great at half capacity and amazing if they are all allowed to charge in. Also they are a great unit to deepstrike in with Mask of Darkness spell.
Is the list complete? There's no faction (although I can guess it), and half your army doesn't have a mark.
Good idea to bring the Chosen as 10, though, and double-fight.
-
49 minutes ago, NJohansson said:
But that is actually what all armies should strive for. If the game would be fully balanced then all armies would have 50 percent win rate (+- minor variations for skill/list matchup). If an army has a win rate of 60-70 percent then another must have a win rate of just 40-30 (naturally it can be deluded among several armies) so the best armies (for the game) are those with an even win/loss rate. STD statistic is therefore really great - the armies that need to be changed are the ones with a 55+ win rate or less than high 40.
Disclaimer - The above is very simplified.
You're ignoring a bit of an important detail, here. Most armies that sit above average, like you said, tend to have a couple winning lists that obliterate most competition, while armies lower on the tables tend to be just not all that strong overall (tends to be populated by armies in dire need of generalized updates or the yearly points changes). StD, however, does have these 1-2 lists that are kind of strong/cheese, but still sits at a vert average win ratio. What this tells us, is that the army itself is actually nowhere close to the 50% mark, while a couple of strong lists bumps it up there. This is why looking at % and statistics can be really misleading.
Most "strong" lists tend to be so due to some impactful combination or some units that are sitting really strong in the meta. StD only achieves this through a very particular combo, and smth like the Gaunt Summoner cheese list, meaning it's not a result of certain units or tactics being strong. Hence, most complaints you see here; it feels like the StD book itself doesn't play well with its own units. A very much repeated example are the Marks of Chaos, which somehow are designed to work only with a hero around. This is the one, true common theme across the different factions in the book, and it doesn't even affect the units, only the heroes. This means that in a game, if you lose a hero or have problems of positioning (due to objectives or whatever), your basic units basically work like an allied unit, as if they didn't quite belong, which is kind of a bizarre design, even more so for Chaos.
Or a different example, one I've pointed out a couple times: why does the Despoiler faction synergize so horribly with its own army? I believe there's literally only one warband that takes in DPs and none for monsters (the book really wants you to play mortals), and the faction abilities of Despoilers contain almost no synergy: 50% chance for D3 heal in your turn, better aura and FNP for your general, and blocking los with rare MWs. A faction such as this would usually either work for synergy or brute force. Synergy is a clear no-no; the improvements are sort of "selfish" buffs for DPs and monsters. Brute force, then? Well, here's the problem. If would make sense for the Despoilers faction to push through daemonic force, but you don't really get that. If the FNP was for all your DPs and/or monsters, then we would have a good case for a faction that invests on brute force as its backbone, then surrounds itself with some mortal units for objectives and the like; works both mechanically and for fluff (and explains why so many reviewers just took for granted that the FNP was generalized, because it made for sense). And yet, we don't get any such thing. It's another case where it feels like the design sort of stopped halfway through. Why is there literally nothing in Despoilers that makes me want to play on their strengths (a statistical heal of 4-6 wounds in the entire game is not impressive), or to synergize with any single unit in the book?
Also, as an extra note: I'm seeing people come and say "well I've tried it and they don't feel all that weak!" That's not something we've said. We've said that the design is faulty, and that a number of units are overcosted, which together create a feeling of our lists aaaalmost managing to compete head-to-head with others, but falling short here and there. Of always thinking "if only I had 5 more Knights" or "if only the Warriors that a bit of damage", "if only the cultists had a mark", etc. Most of these things are not us saying "we reject StD, GW!", but things easily fixed with some tweaks to either mechanics or points. If StD managed to afford some more units (and truly be the Chaos HORDE), most problems would be fixed, and the same can be said if instead we got some changes to the marks and abilities (like the Despoilers, or Knights getting an effect on charge like most cavalry units and then using only ensorcelled weapons). It's actually hilarious how some units (like Knights) work better in other armies than their own...
Sorry for the long post, but most "counter-complains" I've been reading kind of either ignore the points we were making, or use faulty logic to not tackle the actual complaints.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, whispersofblood said:
Honestly I think the DP is a bit garbage, it somehow got less useful despite being buffed. I think it's the interactions with the marks. CMD abilities was not the way to go. And, it can't go into any battalions so 9/10 you should just take Bel'lakor if you are going to 2 drops.
Despoilers is interesting, I just don't think it's that good a subfaction overall due the limited flexibility and utility inside the book. Maybe if we had access to those LoCA warscroll battalions. It just doesn't come together despite having so great pieces.
That's the book and battalion's fault, not the DP. The unit itself is great, and I'd say one of the very few StD units that feel both strong and appropriately priced. DP with Nurgle is decent if you're aiming for the plagetouched warband and want some extra effect, although the CP was nerfed to being almost worthless. But a DP with Khorne mark is such a monster, both for hitting (fights first, basically on 2s 2s, rerolling 1s for hit) and for control (the Khorne CP can be huge, well-positioned).
It is true, however, that the faction is fairly uninspired. The scenery effect is interesting, but rarely does much since most stuff in the game except for shooting and some spells requires vision and the mortals don't come by often, and the healing and 5+ FNP for the general hint at monster-heavy lists, but then the tome goes and makes it extremely inefficient and unwise to play anything other than mortal-heavy lists, making all 3 big monsters a waste of points.
I feel like we needed something similar to the summoning powers we've seen in Wrath of the Everchosen, with the faction's focus being on demons, or to make the abilities good enough to play the faction as it's supposed to fluff-wise (for example, the 5+ FNP being for all DPs and monsters, not only your general). I think it's fine we don't really get access to warbands in Despoilers, but we needed something in exchange... and gota half-assed focus on units you can't really play.
-
2 minutes ago, Midjithero said:
Marauders, marauders, and marauders
But that's one! Or three! Not two! 😛
-
11 minutes ago, sharang2 said:
@GistradagisThe highest ranked nurgle list at cancon (29/~220) likewise runs only a single unit of PBKs. I don't know enough to make any further judgements, although it bears mentioning that the army needs to be structured a little oddly due to being a Plaguetouched Warband and thus there is little incentive to field any PBKs.
https://downunderpairings.com/ArmyList.php?ArmyID=15800Huh, what an odd list. Haven't played Nurgle in a while, but it feels oddly... brittle? Like contact with the enemy will kill most of those units, but perhaps that's me having lost my touch with Nurgle lists.
-
12 hours ago, whispersofblood said:
I think we need to carefully seperate two sets of facts here.
S2D has probably 2 extremely competitive archetypes, like oppression tier if played by a good enough player.
That being?
-
On 2/23/2020 at 8:44 PM, schwabbele said:
I lost against him
was a awesome match though
Allegiance: Nurgle
Leaders
Festus the Leechlord (140)
- Lore of Foulness: Plague Squall
Lord of Afflictions (200)
- General
- Command Trait: Grandfather's Blessing
- Artefact: Rustfang
Plague Priest on Plague Furnace (200)
The Glottkin (420)
- Lore of Malignance: Blades of Putrefaction
Battleline
30 x Plaguebearers (320)
2 x Pusgoyle Blightlords (200)
5 x Putrid Blightkings (160)
Units
40 x Plague Monks (280)
- Woe-stave
- 02x Standard Bearers
- 02x Plague Harbingers
Endless Spells / Terrain / CPs
Extra Command Point (50)
Prismatic Palisade (30)
Total: 2000 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 1
Allies: 0 / 400
Wounds: 149How did he play the list? I usually see more Blightkings than a lonely unit of 5.
-
5 minutes ago, NJohansson said:
I seem to be in the minority on this forum - but I like the book. I think it has lots of strong units in Archaon, Be’lakor, Sorcer Lord on Manticore, Sorcerer Lord, Daemon Prince of Khorne, Gaunt Summoners, shrines and Marauders. There are probably other good units (pending on army comp) but these are the ones that stand out to me.
The sub factions are also interesting with ravages, despoilers and cabalists all having something that I can play around with. Yes both the Slaanesh and Tzeentch faction books are on a higher level of competitive play (but they are so compared to almost any other faction) but the StD offers a solid book that definitely can provide builds that can match most armies.
You misunderstand us. It's because we like it too, that it bothers us so much. Reading the book and warscrolls, it feels like GW intentionally held back to make sure the army wasn't too strong, and rolled back certain features/ideas. It's why some stuff feels really weird, such as the Warriors and Knights not feeling like elite units whatsoever, or the marks system pushing you, the "Chaos united army", into mono-god lists.
Another curious thing: the new Chaos Knight models do not give you a choice when putting them together, they wield the cursed lance and then have the ensorcelled weapon on their back or hips, as if the initial idea with the design had been for knights to use the lances on charge, then automatically switch to ensorcelled weapons. Instead, you're a cavalry unit that either does nothing especial on a charge, or wields a weapon that's dead weight after the charge.
Being a fan of Despoilers, for example, I'm bothered by how much it lacks synergy with its own army. Despoilers has a terrible time fitting in any battalions, and then has a couple elements that benefit your DPs/monsters, that's literally it. And yet, the monsters don't really synergize with each other, nor are they strong enough alone to make you run a list with them.
I've been playing them now almost every week after their release, and I constantly feel like the army lacks that extra oomph. StD has cool units, but its core is wobbly; most games leave me thinking "if only I could afford units of 10 Knights (or they packed a bit more damage), or some more marauders, or an extra monster..." While I do win games, it's usually due to points and always by a hair. I do less damage and resist less damage than most armies, and it shows.
-
1
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, begleysm said:
Where is that page from?
His imagination. Pretty sure it's just something he created to test, as an alternative to the underwhelming faction abilities you get.
11 hours ago, JackStreicher said:What bothers me most however is that when they announced StD I planned on playing 3-6 boxes of spire tyrants, since I expected them to be at least 1A,3+,4+,-,1 with some special dmg2 weapons for the champion. Well, look how far from any senseful Integration all those warbands except Iron Golems are.
at this Point I am considering to go Disciples of Tzeentch or Slaanesh, though I don‘t want to
I used to play Nurgle and decided to come back to AoS due to StD looking dang fine with the new models. Didn't expect GW to hold back so much with the updated battletome though... I laugh every time I'm told StD is an elite army. Where are those elite units though¿?¿?¿
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 2/19/2020 at 12:53 AM, Agent of Chaos said:
Looking for advice on a Despoilers List I'm crafting; trying to maximise the benefits by taking 3 x DP (one being B'elakor).
Theory is Belakor and 20 warriors hold an objective, hopefully the centre, and should be really hard to shift with reroll saves, 6+ shrug and battleshock immunity (and if anyone wants to target Belakor he has 4+ ethereal, 5++, 6++ and Look Out Sir, plus two potential ways to heal!). Any unit that comes close to him risks being made to fight last with -1 to wound rolls. The Mask of Darkness sorcerer will be nearby in case someone needs teleporting and to give Belakor reroll saves.
Prince with sword of judgement goes hero/monster hunting with a screen of marauder horsemen. Before charging in I'll hopefully get the Call to Glory spell off on him (having observed that Daemonic Power only works on Mortals, I now see the point of the Call to Glory spell). This DP is the hero from the Godsworn battalion so he might even get to fight in my hero phase.
The other Prince will be screened by the knights and are there to generally make a nuisance of themselves. Both khorne princes will be popping their command ability at every opportunity to really frustrate my opponent.
Chaos Lord and the marauders will hang back as a second wave / counter strike. Decided to go Undivided mark with these guys as I figured battleshock immunity and potential 6+ shrug would be more useful then rerolling 1's to hit, especially since they will hopefully be fighting twice.
I know the battalion is average but as Diabolic Mantle is my second artifact its essentially giving 2 CP, possibly 3 or 4 CP. and takes me from 10+ drops to 6.
Allegiance: Slaves to Darkness
- Damned Legion: Despoilers
Mortal Realm: Ulgu
Leaders
Be'Lakor (240)
- General
- Spell: Binding Damnation
Slaves to Darkness Daemon Prince (210)
- Axe
- Artefact: Diabolic Mantle
- Mark of Chaos: Khorne
Slaves to Darkness Daemon Prince (210)
- Sword
- Artefact: Sword of Judgement
- Mark of Chaos: Khorne
Chaos Sorcerer Lord (110)
- Mark of Chaos: Undivided
- Spell: Mask of Darkness
Chaos Sorcerer Lord (110)
- Mark of Chaos: Undivided
- Spell: Call to Glory
Chaos Lord (110)
- Reaperblade & Daemonbound Steel
- Mark of Chaos: Undivided
Battleline
20 x Chaos Warriors (400)
- Hand Weapon & Shield
- Mark of Chaos: Undivided
20 x Chaos Marauders (150)
- Axes & Shields
- Mark of Chaos: Undivided
5 x Chaos Knights (180)
- Ensorcelled Weapons
- Mark of Chaos: Khorne
5 x Chaos Marauder Horsemen (90)
- Javelin & Shield
- Mark of Chaos: Undivided
Battalions
Godsworn Champions of Ruin (180)
Total: 1990 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 1
Wounds: 125Ok, so it's been a few days, but I'll give you my two cents if you're interested in them. Coming from someone who has been playing a couple Despoilers lists this past month:
- Be'lakor as a general is usually a problem. The Chaos Undivided mark is kinda "bad": 6+ FNP sounds tempting as heck, but it's too unreliable and defensive to be efficient. More on this later. While it works, I'd call it weaker than Khorne/Slaanesh's marks for the intents and purposes of a match. You also get no General trait, which hurts.
- Two Sorcerers is a bit redundant. While Oracular Visions is great, as is Daemonic Power, you don't really need to Sorcerers at once. I'd also recommend giving Be'lakor the Mask of Darkness spell. He'll be in "the thick of it" much more often, meaning he can surprise the oponent by suddenly teleporting a unit (or himself) to any other place of the battlefield, while the sorcerer will usually be out of range of any units in need of teleport. The sorcerer would also benefit more from a mark of Tzeentch, rerolling 1s on save rolls to give him some extra survival power.
- Why the Chaos Lord? It's a bit of an odd choice on a Despoilers list. Leaving him behind with the Marauders is a bit too passive, something you never want to do with an aggressive army, and an intensely aggressive unit such as Marauders. I'd rather switch him for a Chaos Lord on Karkadrak if possible, and send it with the Knights. Speaking of Marauders though...
- A unit of 20 Marauders is usually not worth it. It can work, particularly if you're short on points, though. However, leaving them behind for a second wave/counterstrike is a cardinal sin. Marauders are your best unit, possible of the entire StD allegiance. Your plan with the Marauders, 9 games out of 10, should be to buff them (if possible) and teleport with Mask of Darkness to the opponent's weak point, then wreck havoc. A well-placed unit of Marauders wins games. Just to give you an example, I always use 40 Marauders and teleport them. The ensuing (almost guaranteed) charge and combat has very rarely not completely destroyed whichever unit it attacked, usually doing far more than that (if you buffed it with something such as Daemonic Power, which is just nuts). To be fair, 20 Marauders can still hurt, since you'll get both the Hit and Rend benefit, before the unit inevitably gets destroyed on the return swing/turn.
- Call to Glory is terrible; one of the worst spells we have, as it's basically a downgraded Daemonic Power. While it's somewhat functional with your plan (for hero-hunting), you inevitably tie your hands and marry yourself to an idea that might be sub-optimal much too often.ç
- Your idea with the warriors is half-right, half-wrong. While a unit of 20 will survive almost anything you're dedicating A LOT of points to a slow, unimpactful unit. You'll sit them, together with Be'lakor, on an objective? Most maps have around 3-4 objectives, meaning your opponent will ignore that one, making 1/3 of your entire army do almost nothing at all. And since Warriors are so slow, it'll be difficult to properly reposition them (and they don't even do that much damage). I'd recommend downsizing it to 15, then using those points on more Marauders, or getting the aforementioned Chaos Lord on Karkadrak. Or having a separate unit of 5 Warriors to more around, screen, or throw to an enemy objective and force their hand to defend it.
- The battalion is pretty neat. Despoilers has a hard time deploying, almost always going second, so this might help. A second CP and artefact is really great, too...
- I'd recommend having everything on Khorne, except Be'lakor and the Sorcerer, who can't have it and will be Undivided and (probably) Tzeentch. A Khorne DP also makes a far better general. With its own buff, it'll always hit on 3+, 2+, or 2+ 2+ if it charged, always rerolling 1s on Hit. For more fuckery, you could make your army from Shyish rather than Ulgu, and give it the Ethereal Amulet, making it invulnerable to Rend. So, a DP with all of that, a 3+ ethereal save, and a 5+ FNP. Healing D3 on every one of your turns on a 4+. With 10 Wounds rather than 8 if you give him the Bolstered by Hate trait (although Paragon of Ruin can be useful for your army and battalion). Come get him.
- The problem with this list is that you'll usually get overwhelmed. You are banking on a strong flank (with the DPs hunting enemy heroes and the Knights), but you do not have enough strength of units for that. The Warriors will either be back or too slow, same for the Sorcerers and Chaos Lord. Same with the Marauders if they are a reserve/counterattack unit, or you wanna teleport them somewhere else. You're left with 2 Daemon Princes and a suicidal unit of 5 Knights (as the horsemen won't charge, I guess). Even if the enemy somehow takes the bait and brings the fight to you, your units with the Undivided mark and the 6+ FNP don't have any damage. Those Warriors and Sorcerers are not killing many enemy units, no matter what. The Chaos Lord can do a bit, but he's fragile.
Well, in the end, this is all my opinion, obviously. And I'm trying to give useful tips from personal experience, so hopefully it won't sound like I'm being preachy or just shooting down your idea for no reason other than to be an ass 😛
-
1
-
2
I hope GW announces some not-ugly-marauders soon.
AoS 2 - Slaves to Darkness 2 Discussion
in Chaos
Posted
Ah. Ironically, it seems I was half-correct in thinking you meant the bloodmarked warband haha.