Hello Brent,
I like your articles, especially about Daemons and I think, you are
experienced with Daemons strategies. I'm relatively newcomer to
daemos.
This is the way to get someone's attention! Flattery will get you everywhere. By the way, this dude is from the Czech Republic, so let's not hear any bullshit about his language skills.
You don't know another language, do you?
And no, I don't self-edit - I'll leave that to Brent.
My core composition on 1800pts is:
4x Herald of Tzeentch, chariot, bolt, we are legion, master of sorcery
3x 4 flamers of tzeentch
2x 4 screamers
2x 5 plaguebearers
2x 5 pink horrors, one unit with bolt
2x daemon prince, mark of tzeentch, bolt, daemonic gaze
Soulgrinder, phlegm
It's not what I'd do, but it's okay. There's a pretty major problem though.
On 1750pts I'll drop one screamers unit (propably)
That's best.
Army is designed as anti meq and light vehicle which can be utilized
on ETC like tournaments.
For a Daemon army, it has about what you'd expect for anti-vehicle firepower. I'd make sure both Horror units had Bolt if I was going to run them. If I was going to run 3 units of Flamers, they'd have the Bolt upgrade too. Take it where you can.
My units stragegy:
Heralds and Daemon Princes, Soulgrinder
This units provides miidle range fire support.Deal with light vehicles
and meq units - "And They Shall Know No Armor save". This units will
charge only if necessarily, or when can assault undestroyed vehicle
after firing.
Pink horrors
As disturbing factor, and light infantry killers
I don't dislike Horrors. 'Bearers are best, but Horrors can accomplish more if properly used. Thing is, nothing in the game holds objectives like Plague Bearers.
Screamers
Only one stuff which can deal with land raiders, but still good
aganist light vehicles. If oponent have not any vehlicles, then counts
as disturbing factor.
Screamers... I'm not sure what to say about them. Personally I don't use them, but lately I've realized that folks with Land Raiders worry overmuch about them. In fairness, they have the potential to do them dirty. While the Daemon Princes and Soul Grinders, plus all those Bolts, can potentially destroy Land Raiders, I like sure things so I rarely even try to take out the Raider.
Land Raiders will always be a huge weakness for Daemons. I believe trying too hard to overcome this deficit weakens the army in other ways.
Back to Screamers, I may test them in the future, primarily because they can add to my unit count on the cheap and that gives me tactical options.
Flamers
Suicide units. Usually drops close to enemy as possible and use breath
of chaos.Primary targets are devastators, lootas, long fangs and
similar shooty units, usually sits in cover. Four flamers is little
bit expensive for suicide unit, but with this number I can use 3
flamer teplates after they arrives via deep strikes (three man units
means only two templates, becouse I have to make circle about first
model)
Yes, yes, yes! Always go with 4! This is one of my pet peeves in net lists, all those 3-man Flamers. On the drop, only two of the templates can come into play. The only way around this is the Bolt upgrade; drop this model first and ring the other two models around him, then they use Breath and the first model uses Bolt.
Four is better.
What's better than that? Fiends.
Plaguebearers
Surprisingly objective sitters :)
I know, mix of DP and Grinders is not good idea, but Grinder can stop
some dangerous units, like outflanking scouts, kommandos or hard to
kill units for rest of my army, like Ogryns...
...what?
I don't use fiends of slaneesh becouse I haven't enough models which
are too expensive for me and my play tests with their proxies were
inconclusive.
...what?
I have 13 games with that or very similar list. I win 8 games (three
wipes), 4 tied and 1 lose.
I have 13 games with that or very similar list. I win 8 games (three
wipes), 4 tied and 1 lose.
Very good record. I also didn't miss the comments on the environment you play in; the ETC requires a different sort of play. I'm not being critical of your list - I'd consider it a B- in most situations.
My presumption was been thath army have problems with hard close
combat and horde armies. Only one loose aganist Orks. Tied games
aganist Tyranids, 2xSW, Termies SM, usually anihilation scenario.
I can't comment. I don't know what they're playing. I do know my toughest game are against Vulcan-variants and Space Wolves.
Can you give me some tips, hints, thought?
Thanks
Jirka - Czech Republic 40k player :)
www.40dice.cz
Thanks for writing in, and I apologize it's taken so long for Brent to reply... he's all mopey and stuff right now.
I can see how your army does well. It's much more optimized than most players use, though not quite what you'd expect to see at a top-flight tournaments here in the States. That's a generalization though, because plenty of folks change things up to suit their style - and those are usually the dudes to watch out for.
Like I said, it's not always a negative. Knowing your army and developing a strategy which suits it is (in most cases) better than the benefits of a completely tuned list.
There are obvious exceptions, and some armies have an easy button (Guard and Wolves).
Frankly, to improve your army appreciably you'll have to change the way you play. Right now you can stay at a distance and play counter-attacking games. While I personally don't like the idea of suicide Flamers, it is a tool you have access to and should use when the board dictates, but keep in mind they can turn the tide of an assault all by themselves. Losing them in the first half of the game is probably why you lost to Orks.
Your army can close combat but doesn't do it well. It's better suited for survival and tactical shootouts.
Your army can close combat but doesn't do it well. It's better suited for survival and tactical shootouts.
My game is different. My army is aggressive and in your face.
We both use Heralds, but mine trades the ability to shoot at two different units in order to shoot Breath of Chaos. Frankly, Breath is the difference between my army and the others you'll see on the 'net...
...but I'm right.
You do have it with Flamers, but if you choose to change your style you'll need Fiends. I can't understand why they didn't work out; they are quite simply the best option in the Daemons book. You don't have to give up your Flamers, but you'll need two units of full-sized Fiends.
I don't hate the one Soul Grinder. Personally I wouldn't mix-n-match, but I don't think it's that big a negative - especially if you've developed a strategy around it.
I've already talked about Screamers and Horrors.
I love Daemons. I've been contemplating a new army for almost a year now but still nothing excites me as much as Daemons, even now. They have the tools necessary to beat any list and every game I play is exciting.
Okay folks - check out this dude's blog. I can't read it, but the pictures are sweet! Judging from the armies, the tournament games are competitive.
(What's happening here?)
Time to go - Not Brent
17 comments:
Hello, thank you for your comment to my daemons army. After last Czech tournament (5th overall from 38 players). I did some changes to my list. At first exchange grinder by next DP and equip them with breath of chaos for cost of one horros unit. Last games experinece says, so breath on DP is very useful and may be missing.
I have bad experience with fiends, for my bad luck. my fiends doesn't inflict serious damage. They need more play test which will be take out bad luck.
After some games with screamers I have to say, they are great fire magnet mainly when oponent have some raider or many transports like IG. Best score for my screamers in single game is Leman Russ, chimera and hellhound.
If you like pics from 40dice website (czech 40k players blog), you can check some pics from last czech tournament: OC Klarach
Thanks for sending the email and thanks for commenting - it's very cool to hear from fellow hobbyists around the world.
My sister-in-law is Czech and I've developed a fondness for your culture, so it was that much cooler hearing from you.
The pictures are great. Do you mind if I use some of them? I'm going to anyway, but I thought I'd ask permission!
5th from 38 is great stuff, so it doesn't sound like you need much help. I think dropping the Soul Grinder and adding Breath is a great start.
I'd like to see what you think about Heralds of Tzeentch with Master, Bolt, and Breath. That's the loadout I use, allowing me to use Gaze and Breath against infantry and Breath and Bolt against vehicles.
And of course Fiends! Let me know when you get to use them again. Trust me, you'll love 'em!
Brent
Both of your comments about suicide flamer units are wrong.
In 4th edition your models had to form a ring around the center model, and every model had to be in base to base.
In 5th edition the only requirement is that you must complete a ring before starting a second ring.
So having 3 flamers in a line is a legal way and gives you the 3 flamer templates. Fielding 4 you can sometimes get 4 templates on the same target but you end up with some less than optimal placements.
Horde Ork is the bane of this type of list, and to a lesser extent horde nid or even horde guard. The reason is that their large units can survive losing 10-15 models from your flamer templates, and your shooting attacks and still make it into hth. For you to truly make it more balanced you would need to add either fiends or fleshhounds/seekers preferrable fiends. Also a lot of the things you are having problems against will suffer if you drop your daemon princes and take all soul grinders. You should really go all one way or the other.
Warmaster: I think you are wrong. Deep strike wording is same in both 4th and 5th edition. "models must be placed in base contact with the original model in a circle around it." Place models in line is not a circle. Circle means one model touching another one and original - center - model. If you have another opinion, well, but czech players respect my DS interpretation.
I am a little surprised that this is a successful list. I find you need more troops (larger units) to make them effective. 4 Heralds, 3 Flamer units and 3 DP's are a little spammy for my liking, have you thought about a greater daemon?
Also I agree with Warmaster about the flamer deployment. Yes, it says deploy in a circle but you can start building a circle from both sides of the center model.
Bigdobbo: ok, I will check "circle" issue with czech community. Make it seem correct. I had never seen line after deep strike, propably another players deep striking larger units.
Yes, it is spammy list and I don't count with greater daemons. Mayby in future. Me and potential ETC team mates speculate about daemons defensive list based on crushers and plaguebearers spam with nurgle greater daemon, but I'm not sure, if that list can works fine.
I don't agree about the deepstrike deployment... but I can't say I'm sure.
It could be an example of regionalism. Everyone I know requires you to build a ring - literally models touching - but I don't know everyone.
It's an interesting question - I'm sure more folks will weigh in.
Bigdobbo... you don't need bigger units if you're using Plague Bearers and Horrors. They're survivable - especially the former - and their role is usually to camp objectives. Considering the deficits the army has, spending extra points is unnecessary.
If I thought I didn't have enough troops I'd buy another unit, not add models to the ones I had.
Re: Spammy... okay, I own that too. Still, nobody talks about MEQ who own the board with Rhinos or Razorbacks, or Guard in their Chimeras. Point is there are only so many units worth the points in the Daemons list and in order to compete against more efficient 'dexes you have to purchase wisely.
Re: Defensive Daemons... we've talked about that here. Big units of Blood Crushers and Plague Bearers camping objectives and waiting until the enemy comes to them. It could work, especially in the ETC format.
Brent
i live in china.i was thinking about starting daemons but decided eldar, can i send my list to to you when i finish it?
Zachary,
Sure - if I don't know a build or idea I know those who do. I'm always willing to help.
Brent
Funny thing is, I do speak two languages :) I've found that in a fun setting as in a hobby like 40k for instance I have a high tolerance for language issues from non-native speakers. It's about having fun together and I think it's awesome how different parts of the world is connecting these days.
Language issues is also the number one reason why GW needs to start writing their rules far better than they are doing now. Their HQ is not far away from some very major universities that could go over their rules for both logic AND language so they are easy to understand and not open to interpretation.
The circle around the one model and can only start a new circle after the first is finished is a prime example.
First you put one model down. Easy. Number two is easy too (unless you deep struck in an area that can fit one model but no more). For number three the rule is that it must fit in the first circle around the first model. Let's assume that there is no impassible terrain to complicate things. Now the question is, is the rule that model two and three *forms* a circle or that they form the *start* of a circle?
My interpretation right here and now is that you can put them anywhere as long as they form a circle.
Which translation of the rules is used in the Czech republic btw?
You are right with language and translations issue. As I can see on net, sometimes native speakers have problems with understanding rules and their logic - RAW vs RAI.
Circle problem propably have origin on some old accepted myth.
Czech community have official Czech translation in PDF format (provided on CD included to starter set with Bulgarian, Chinese and Czech translations). We have close to germany, but english language isextended in excess of german language. Czech players mainly use english rules version. Czech translation is used by newcommers and by young players, 10-12 years old and players who don't know english. Before year 1990 in communism era, czech people MUST learn russian in school. English rules take precedence for czech players.
Flekkzo: There was bound to be someone out there who spoke more than one language!
Not Brent's comment was aimed at all those uni-lingual critics who jump on the slightest mistake. That needed to be nipped in the bud!
The few times I've had guests in my articles, here or elsewhere, I've tried to shield them from the worst of the internet's assholes.
Let 'em continue to go after me and my hair!
Hej, sem rád, že vidim internacionální (bad pun, I know) 40k komunikaci. Sám sem nedávno kontaktoval Fritze z Way of Saim-Hann pro nějakou tu radu ;)
Hey, I'm glad to see international 40k communication. I have myself not a long time ago talked to Fritz of the Way of Saim-Hann for some opinions ;)
Ratmamahatma
@Brent There are plenty but I know what you mean about the uni-language people. There are also levels. If you are in a professional situation a less than stellar grasp of the language communicating in can be a real problem, or if you publish your work (books, rules, major websites) you should make sure the language in it is well written. Not only for the grammar-nazis but also because a well written text is easier to read for everyone, especially if it isn't your own mother tongue you are reading.
*puh* Enough of that stuff for a while now :) And to get back to the hobby I think it's cool how completely differently you guys seem to play daemons yet both ways work well. I am of the opinion that there are more in the codexes than what internet-wisdom thinks. That or I like to build wonky lists :)
Flekkzo: I couldn't agree more! We had many of the same units, but the Flamers over Fiends and the use or lack of Breath changed the entire working strategy of the army.
I love that kind of stuff.
It's always why I think sometimes an ill-considered change destroys an army's focus. I was guilty of quite a bit of that in the past.
I am in the states but locally here people don't follow the you have to do one complete circle, I think either way IMHO that a fourth flamer may not be worth it. I think its better to have the much needed bolt shot and to take them in a unit of three. A fourth flamer is pretty costly just so when you suicide them in you have three templates instead of two. This is a semi high risk move most games which can pay off big but you can lose the unit. So you are buying a extra model for something that your not going to use every game and something that may not work out. The fourth member doesn't really add to the durability of the fragile unit either. So it seems like a gamble and points possibly wasted most games. Flamers bring a threat range of avoid this area for the enemy which is nice, and bolt. The flamer is feared though so they are a high priority target so sinking more points seems bad from my experience running them.
Also if you test fiends again, I would suggest trying to drop them in cover whenever possible or close enough to run into cover after the drop. Keep in mind they have a huge reach so you can normally still reach out and touch what you want. With your list they are some needed hth or even counter assault units that could be helpful while drawing fire from other units in your army.
@Brent My list has changed some since the last time we spoke and I have been very very pleased with the results so far. I did drop the letters as suggested and changed up the list with the points. I am running some screamers now and while I am still testing (only a few games so far with them) They so far are a great addition.
Post a Comment