Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
He's not the one tilting the model. How does that make him 'that guy'?

Nevermind me: the tilt would count as a Normal Move, so couldn't be done in this scenario.

Hangover from another edition.

Best,
Samii.

He is not cheating as he didn't count the extra movement into his calculations. As you can deploy tilted. That way it wouldn't be a move. Only when you tilt in the movement phase it is a normal move.

Still the calculations are right as you deploy 3' move 8' with MoP, advance d6+1 and then charge d6+1. That are 4 inch more movement than with a chaos lord. So you base move 13' and then go 3d6. Which is quite well and even if it might be with 11' slightly above your average of 10.5 with 3d6 if you go first it is really good. It is also a huge threat if your opponent goes first and you have some chaincannon havocs in a rhino to clear any shield infront of the heavy stuff. That way he can not move out of his deployment zone basically without giving you a very reliable charge.

Edit 2:
With a reroll it is a 64,8 % probability to hit the enemy deployment zone.

We can make those odds on scoring a turn one touchdown even better. Eye of Tzeentch gives us a solid chance of rerolling the advance and also the charge, and sometimes we’ll take second turn and be able to save a CP from the opponent’s turn. We’re probably looking at odds around 75% with that. I’m ill atm and not up to working it out in detail.

What do we reckon about Daemon allies? Nurglings seem to be a really popular filler unit, both in terms of army budgets and battlefields. Seekers are interesting me, they look like the most reliable turn one traffic jam. Bloodcrushers seem like a solid hammer unit, with potential synergy with Warp Talons. Flamers with an EF can pose as an early game overwatch machine. Horrors look okay with a Herald. Plaguebearers are a plant-the-flag unit that can deep strike and potentially have OC3 (though I haven’t played many games where high OC has outperformed outright sweeping). A Beast seems like an interesting DS tank that can gradually bully a unit that lacks high damage output.

 lindsay40k wrote:
We can make those odds on scoring a turn one touchdown even better. Eye of Tzeentch gives us a solid chance of rerolling the advance and also the charge, and sometimes we’ll take second turn and be able to save a CP from the opponent’s turn. We’re probably looking at odds around 75% with that. I’m ill atm and not up to working it out in detail.

What do we reckon about Daemon allies? Nurglings seem to be a really popular filler unit, both in terms of army budgets and battlefields. Seekers are interesting me, they look like the most reliable turn one traffic jam. Bloodcrushers seem like a solid hammer unit, with potential synergy with Warp Talons. Flamers with an EF can pose as an early game overwatch machine. Horrors look okay with a Herald. Plaguebearers are a plant-the-flag unit that can deep strike and potentially have OC3 (though I haven’t played many games where high OC has outperformed outright sweeping). A Beast seems like an interesting DS tank that can gradually bully a unit that lacks high damage output.

Oh yeah, that's super nice. With 2 times reroll of the 2 separate rolls it really improves the odds.

Nurglings for easy scoring
Syllesske with daemonetts seems nice.
And blue Scribes for scoring but don't know why they are so hyped for their scoring ability.
The Changeling for Deep Strike scoring lulz that may bind at least 2-3 units of the enemy in removing him.


You can also play Abandon, that way you get the CP also, quite expensive ofc, but with 10 Legionaires as distraction carnifex and a rhino still solid. Especially standing back by moving normally in the first round for full shooting rerolls on for example obliterators or forgefiends and then counter charging whatever killed the chosen. Popping the nurgle strat if necessary.

Hi all,

I've gone back to the Terminator brick with Abaddon, for a few reasons:

1) To include it I dropped the Legionnaire unit, bikes and some Oblits. I justify this, because I always want a unit with Abaddon. The Legionnaires are too fragile, while Oblits lack the damage output to be justifiable and are too slow. If I want the Oblits to get decent shooting they need Abaddon for the rerolls, meaning I have to expose him, in any case. The bikes are a loss, but you can't have everything.

2) The unit can be played around, sure, but I have enough damage output from other units, FF, Chosen, LR etc. and the key to CSM is having a lot of tough, cheap scoring units. Its natural predators (FF and precision Lords) can be countered with the Nurgle strat and screening. Seekers are an excellent unit for screening out the Terminator blob.

3) The overwatch from the unit is insane. I like it because I can overwatch, if the opponent goes first, dark pact, still get rerolls from the Terminator innate ability and then get a command point back to use on another strat that turn.

4) The unit gives me a lot of tactical play: with the res strat and advance and charge strat it can counter-attack very effectively. If I move out 5" from the deployment zone, overwatch, Nurgle strat, then in my turn if any died, I can get a charge off into my opponent's DZ and still shoot, which is a very very nasty combo.

5) The unit doesn't need Abaddon's buffs, meaning I can use him to shore up my infantry with a 4++, or give rerolls, while the unit still fights at maximum efficiency.

6) Last, but not least. The deterrence potential for this unit, is so high once an opponent understands its threat ranges and lethality, you basically control the mid board without ever having to commit.

In summary, the unit is expensive but I have access to a lot of cheap, tough heavy lifters in my list (Chosen, LR, AC, FF) that it doesn't hurt me to include it the way it might in another less point efficient faction. And when the unit can be leveraged its damage potential is just so disproportionate that there's no real counter play.

Best,
Samii.

I’ve been finding Seekers incredibly strong. Be it making a T1 traffic jam, escorting a deathstar, or zooming off to tag objective, or just bullying a fragile gunner unit, most games give them a chance to shine.

What is the best strategy against 3 x full Units acurssed cultists+ 3 demagogues?

Can Abbadon and termis kill one full Units in Shooting and another in Fight Phase or will they get tarpited and then killed by the third unit of ac?

 Fip wrote:
What is the best strategy against 3 x full Units acurssed cultists+ 3 demagogues?

Can Abbadon and termis kill one full Units in Shooting and another in Fight Phase or will they get tarpited and then killed by the third unit of ac?

Traitor Guard, Masters of Executions, and general Challenge strat. Snipe the Demagogues and the cultists die 50% faster. As a general point I think a guard squad are a very good match for MoE, all it takes is your opponent using a defensive strat or two and he can easily whiff the kill even against like a lieutenant, and they do a nice job of filling up space. (Wild that after two editions of GW waging all-out war against soup, the disloyal 32 are now simply part of our codex.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe throw in Cypher to try to stop the dead Demagogues from resurrecting with Skinshift.

 Fip wrote:
What is the best strategy against 3 x full Units acurssed cultists+ 3 demagogues?

Can Abbadon and termis kill one full Units in Shooting and another in Fight Phase or will they get tarpited and then killed by the third unit of ac?

At this point the best approach is probably wait until the new balance dataslate. I strongly suspect Accursed Cultists and/or Demagogues will be getting a fairly heavy nerf.

Some updated thoughts:

- Chosen do better than I originally gave them credit for. Even without an invulnerable save, 3 wounds is often handy and the free shoot/charge and advance is excellent. I think they were priced correctly originally but I do like their current costing.

- Possessed are still strong but they really are an elegant weapon and if pointed incorrectly will be wasted. I still feel they're costed correctly although the MOP isn't as integral as originally thought. He's a good unit but he's not a mandatory tax on them.

- Terminators: not as tough as you think, they've been cut through every game i've played. I think they'll possibly snag a slight point decrease in January (they should do). I think closer to 30pts than 40pts pm is right.

- Havocs: Just not that good for their price imho. Two las and two auto couldn't kill a single wraithtlord in two turns of shooting. I think they need a drop closer to the 100pts, i think 20 - 25pts a model rather than their present 40ish is more reasonable for what they do.

- Oblits - that 24" range and slow movement really hurts but I think they were priced right slightly lower. Every game I have played they have had a huge target on their head so even as a distraction carnifex they do well. Personally I still like running them as Tzeentch for that heal/respawn. Overall still a good unit and I think about right. If I had a wishlist here it would be for their anti-tank weapon to be 30"+ rather than 24".

- Defilers - too expensive relative to their walker peers like Wraithlords and Primaris Dreds etc. a 3+/5++ is not that good... personally I think the weakness is in their ability rather than anything else and they should have something more fitting than just being able to walk over units. Where they are now, i'd drop them more to the 150pts area or keep them the same cost and give them a better inbuilt ability, perhaps something like -1 damage akin to other dreds of that size or at least a 2+ save!

- Abaddon - still solid but a bit too expensive now for what he does. Yes the bubble is good but you're usually only using two of them, you need to have had your own command phase and he's VERY slow unless you're plugging in a CP that is better used elsewhere so the 4++ can sometimes be a trap, especially as it doesn't affect vehicles. 310pts is too much, mid-late 200's is probably right. I think if you're going to keep him at 310, he needs a slight boost, something like the ability to join Chosen as a leader or pump him up to T6.

Forgefiends - still excellent but VERY glass cannon to any true anti-tank. I think they're right where they are. Mix of nurgle and undivided here. I have usually used two but I may drop to one as there are possibly more flexible and cost effective units for that whopping 180pts.

Cultists - Again, exceptionally useful but I underestimated them and they've been a useful 55pt unit every time. The grenade launcher, heavy slugger and flamer plus sticky objectives is fantastic. I often use them as Tzeentch for that 5+ lethals.

Bikers - I still think they're solid but don't expect them to do too much work. They're back line grabbers and scavangers (ie picking off weak lone operative characters with no or poor invuls, very light infantry or wounded vehicles at the back). They may occasionally get lucky with those plasma/melta but don't bet on it.

I have played allot against a meta-breaking Aeldari list (basically all wraight constructs) and a couple of games against Death Watch with my CSM. A few narrow (very narrow as in a point diff) losses. I think Chaos are in a good place overall and only seem to need some slight point tweaks to get them to a point of longevity.

I think points aren't really what's driving the power of CSM at the moment. Yes, Accursed Cultists are too good and Chosen should probably have their points cut reverted, but the real power for CSM right now comes from their strats and the ability to freely mix and match Marks to get the best combos on every unit. Sadly, I think that sort of nuance is not likely to register for GW and we might see some unwarratned points increases to a lot of units.

I think you’re right, if Obscuration doesn’t get rebalanced - for instance, to only confer 12” to Nurgle infantry - then I suspect either our Land Raider will be repriced as if it were always invisible, or it’ll be priced the same as the Loyalist one and the units that tend to the most benefit from riding an invisible LR will get hit by the price hike.

Returning to Daemon allies: anyone tried using Nurglings and Seekers to cordon off a no man’s land objective and then DS Plaguebearers onto it? With a cheeky rapid insertion, they can be scoring at the start of your turn two in up to half of games. With a Herald, they can probably hold the position against heavy odds, and if they don’t get wiped out, they can potentially leave the Nurglings to block deep strikes and run off to graffiti something else.

lindsay40k wrote:I think you’re right, if Obscuration doesn’t get rebalanced - for instance, to only confer 12” to Nurgle infantry - then I suspect either our Land Raider will be repriced as if it were always invisible, or it’ll be priced the same as the Loyalist one and the units that tend to the most benefit from riding an invisible LR will get hit by the price hike.

I don't see why Obscuration is perceived to need re-balancing in that kind of way? A single nurgle unit per SP can't be targeted unless within 12". Why is that over powered or have I misunderstood the rule?

Sure, I get that it's powerful in a few cases aka on a land raider (which being honest isn't exactly a A+ unit) but, at the same time, so is the ability to plug in a 6 whenever needed on top of a free re-roll to hit and wound. Every army has a nifty ability but this is hardly a broken strat imho. It's not a 1CP = Invulnerable, it's just a 1CP = you need to get much closer to hurt me if I am nurgle and picking nurgle surrenders other benefits. It plays into our strengths whilst also eventually making itself moot because CSM are a largely melee focused army so we're getting closer. At worst it needs moving to 2 CP for a vehicle transporting 1+ units (or just straight up 2CP for a vehicle) and/or transports need changing to only being able to be allowed units with the same mark or Undivided, both of which make reasonable sense (which means GW will never do it).

lindsay40k wrote:Returning to Daemon allies: anyone tried using Nurglings and Seekers to cordon off a no man’s land objective and then DS Plaguebearers onto it? With a cheeky rapid insertion, they can be scoring at the start of your turn two in up to half of games. With a Herald, they can probably hold the position against heavy odds, and if they don’t get wiped out, they can potentially leave the Nurglings to block deep strikes and run off to graffiti something else.

I really like nurglings although their 0 OC is a little annoying. Plague bearers have been useful dropping in and getting back line or far objectives late game for me. They're tough enough to weather light fire and not often worth the enemy putting in enough resources at that stage to budge them.

Using Nurglings, a seeker and a unit of plague bearers is a fair commitment though, you're talking at least 10% of your points in a 2k game on units without any shooting and who would prefer to be in combat sitting stationary on an objective and they're far from indestructable. I think it might be an over-commitment unless it's the right scenario imho.

Semper wrote:

lindsay40k wrote:I think you’re right, if Obscuration doesn’t get rebalanced - for instance, to only confer 12” to Nurgle infantry - then I suspect either our Land Raider will be repriced as if it were always invisible, or it’ll be priced the same as the Loyalist one and the units that tend to the most benefit from riding an invisible LR will get hit by the price hike.

I don't see why Obscuration is perceived to need re-balancing in that kind of way? A single nurgle unit per SP can't be targeted unless within 12". Why is that over powered or have I misunderstood the rule?

Sure, I get that it's powerful in a few cases aka on a land raider (which being honest isn't exactly a A+ unit) but, at the same time, so is the ability to plug in a 6 whenever needed on top of a free re-roll to hit and wound. Every army has a nifty ability but this is hardly a broken strat imho. It's not a 1CP = Invulnerable, it's just a 1CP = you need to get much closer to hurt me if I am nurgle and picking nurgle surrenders other benefits.

In practice it basically does make the target invulnerable. It's almost always used on a transport in turn 1, or something like a Maulerfiend or supporting Helbrute throughout the game. Most armies will not be able to get more than 1 or 2 units (if any) within 12" in turn 1, so you're basically guaranteeing a unit's survival for a turn while also messing with your opponent's targeting priority. Being able to aggressively deploy a transport in turn 1 is a massive advantage for an army that likes to get in close. Additionally, Nurgle makes shooting units better, so you're not really giving up much, if anything, on a Maulerfiend or Land Raider to give it access to the strat.

Semper wrote:
It plays into our strengths whilst also eventually making itself moot because CSM are a largely melee focused army so we're getting closer. At worst it needs moving to 2 CP for a vehicle transporting 1+ units (or just straight up 2CP for a vehicle) and/or transports need changing to only being able to be allowed units with the same mark or Undivided, both of which make reasonable sense (which means GW will never do it).

CSM still have plenty of units that want to stay ack and shoot, and it just so happens Nurgle is a good option for them anyway. Even a single turn of not being shot at can be huge for your survivability. Most of the other Lone Op strats have restrictions like "infantry only", which might be the way to go. One problem is GW have this concept for the strats in the detachment to get better when used on the corresponding unit and I think they'll be reluctant to move away from that. They could completely rewrite the Nurgle bonus to just do something completely different, like give the benefit of cover or a 6+ FNP for the phase.

I think CSM need some sort of restriction on mixing Marks. At the moment it's too easy to get exactly the benefits you want on every unit. This then has an annoying knock-on effect on god-specific armies (primarily EC at this point), making them much worse than less thematic armies. Restricting transports to only carrying units with the same Mark would be a good start. I wouldn't even mind some minor penalty to Ld for being close to a differently marked unit to encourage more thought about Marks and army composition.

Slipspace wrote:

Semper wrote:

lindsay40k wrote:I think you’re right, if Obscuration doesn’t get rebalanced - for instance, to only confer 12” to Nurgle infantry - then I suspect either our Land Raider will be repriced as if it were always invisible, or it’ll be priced the same as the Loyalist one and the units that tend to the most benefit from riding an invisible LR will get hit by the price hike.

I don't see why Obscuration is perceived to need re-balancing in that kind of way? A single nurgle unit per SP can't be targeted unless within 12". Why is that over powered or have I misunderstood the rule?

Sure, I get that it's powerful in a few cases aka on a land raider (which being honest isn't exactly a A+ unit) but, at the same time, so is the ability to plug in a 6 whenever needed on top of a free re-roll to hit and wound. Every army has a nifty ability but this is hardly a broken strat imho. It's not a 1CP = Invulnerable, it's just a 1CP = you need to get much closer to hurt me if I am nurgle and picking nurgle surrenders other benefits.

In practice it basically does make the target invulnerable. It's almost always used on a transport in turn 1, or something like a Maulerfiend or supporting Helbrute throughout the game. Most armies will not be able to get more than 1 or 2 units (if any) within 12" in turn 1, so you're basically guaranteeing a unit's survival for a turn while also messing with your opponent's targeting priority. Being able to aggressively deploy a transport in turn 1 is a massive advantage for an army that likes to get in close. Additionally, Nurgle makes shooting units better, so you're not really giving up much, if anything, on a Maulerfiend or Land Raider to give it access to the strat.

I still don't understand what's wrong with this on a single unit though? Seems like an issue my opponent needs to strategically and tactically overcome... is this not a strategy game?

Semper wrote:
It plays into our strengths whilst also eventually making itself moot because CSM are a largely melee focused army so we're getting closer. At worst it needs moving to 2 CP for a vehicle transporting 1+ units (or just straight up 2CP for a vehicle) and/or transports need changing to only being able to be allowed units with the same mark or Undivided, both of which make reasonable sense (which means GW will never do it).

CSM still have plenty of units that want to stay ack and shoot, and it just so happens Nurgle is a good option for them anyway. Even a single turn of not being shot at can be huge for your survivability. Most of the other Lone Op strats have restrictions like "infantry only", which might be the way to go. One problem is GW have this concept for the strats in the detachment to get better when used on the corresponding unit and I think they'll be reluctant to move away from that. They could completely rewrite the Nurgle bonus to just do something completely different, like give the benefit of cover or a 6+ FNP for the phase.

I think CSM need some sort of restriction on mixing Marks. At the moment it's too easy to get exactly the benefits you want on every unit. This then has an annoying knock-on effect on god-specific armies (primarily EC at this point), making them much worse than less thematic armies. Restricting transports to only carrying units with the same Mark would be a good start. I wouldn't even mind some minor penalty to Ld for being close to a differently marked unit to encourage more thought about Marks and army composition.

Well... again, i don't understand why it needs that restriction when it's good? Why can't we have something nice!? Okay, I do think there's a fluff based argument that perhaps a mixed-mark list should only be led by a undivided lord but really, mixed marked units work together all the time.

This is only one detachment, there may likely be more coming that benefit being a mono mark and we're pretty confident EC are getting their own codex. Don't throw baby out with the bath water to wish list, i'd say! Or, perhaps the God specific armies work in specific ways and you just need to be more open minded.

If you want a fully marked nurgle army, then aim for Death Guard or perhaps understand you'll only be getting lethal hits on 6's whatever but you still get some form of benefit and build around that. If that's not good enough, then really you can play a 'nurgle' themed army that's - on paper - marked as khorne because that's how you want to play. No one is going to care or stop you because your army is green but playing mean. The only unit in the codex that's locked in that way are noise marines who have to be slaanesh and then the no-psyker khorne bits.

Semper wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

Semper wrote:

lindsay40k wrote:I think you’re right, if Obscuration doesn’t get rebalanced - for instance, to only confer 12” to Nurgle infantry - then I suspect either our Land Raider will be repriced as if it were always invisible, or it’ll be priced the same as the Loyalist one and the units that tend to the most benefit from riding an invisible LR will get hit by the price hike.

I don't see why Obscuration is perceived to need re-balancing in that kind of way? A single nurgle unit per SP can't be targeted unless within 12". Why is that over powered or have I misunderstood the rule?

Sure, I get that it's powerful in a few cases aka on a land raider (which being honest isn't exactly a A+ unit) but, at the same time, so is the ability to plug in a 6 whenever needed on top of a free re-roll to hit and wound. Every army has a nifty ability but this is hardly a broken strat imho. It's not a 1CP = Invulnerable, it's just a 1CP = you need to get much closer to hurt me if I am nurgle and picking nurgle surrenders other benefits.

In practice it basically does make the target invulnerable. It's almost always used on a transport in turn 1, or something like a Maulerfiend or supporting Helbrute throughout the game. Most armies will not be able to get more than 1 or 2 units (if any) within 12" in turn 1, so you're basically guaranteeing a unit's survival for a turn while also messing with your opponent's targeting priority. Being able to aggressively deploy a transport in turn 1 is a massive advantage for an army that likes to get in close. Additionally, Nurgle makes shooting units better, so you're not really giving up much, if anything, on a Maulerfiend or Land Raider to give it access to the strat.

I still don't understand what's wrong with this on a single unit though? Seems like an issue my opponent needs to strategically and tactically overcome... is this not a strategy game?

It's the same reason Dark Eldar or Nids were nerfed in 9th, or Iron Hands in 8th - at a certain point the power of a rule/unit/strat/army is simply too high and needs to be adjusted. You can't just say "you should adjust and play around it" without practical examples of how that might actually work. (Note, I'm not saying CSM are overpowered to the same extent as those armies were, but it serves to illustrate the point).

I'm not saying the Nurgle strat definitely will get nerfed, but I think the problem CSM have from a design perspective right now is the lack of restrictions on how Marks interact makes costing strats, abilities and units very difficult. Take the Nurgle strat, for example. As suggested by someone above, do you now have to assume every transport and shooting unit will be Nurgle and cost them according to that assumption, thereby basically forcing people to give them that Mark or end up with overpriced units. That's a bad approach to game design because it severely restricts options. The appropriate solution assuming you've identified that strat as an issue is to adjust the strat so as not to interfere with balance elsewhere.

Well... again, i don't understand why it needs that restriction when it's good? Why can't we have something nice!?

It depends entirely on how good something is. It's not about saying you're not allowed nice things, its about determining whether the things you have are too nice. In the case of CSM I think most of the problems are multi-faceted, which will make coming up with solutions quite difficult.

Ahhh, I guess that's where the crux of our opinions differ. I don't see this as a problem. It's a single unit, for one phase of roughly 10 in a battleround, that becomes more difficult to attack for the cost of 1CP, a resource that we don't exactly have an abundance of.

I'd say if an opponent's whole battleplan is reliant on that one specific unit dying in specifically the shooting phase and if this isn't accomplished they're automatically considering it an unbalanced or unfair game, they probably should be considering that approach before considering how to create or alter a game.

I've played 40k for over 20years. Even without strats and special rules, there are vanilla moments where you will be unable to stop things from happening because you're ill prepared, have mis-moved or you have a good opponent. It's part of the game and just part of life. Sometimes there isn't anything you can do to stop something, it's about how you handle it when it arrives. Should we change the Grey Knights because they can move out of range and hide? Eldar and sisters because they can auto-pass saves? Should we change cover because it can be LOS blocking? Lone Operatives because they get the Obscuration rules for free built in? Where does it end?

I would agree with you if this strat could be played multiple times per turn or affect multiple units but it doesn't.

The issue you give for CSM is a universal one in 40k or any gaming system that isn't played with a carbon copy opponent (al la Chess). The moment you introduce special and fluffy rules you're off the balance wagon unless everyone has the exact same, at which point there are no fluffy rules in practice. I am not saying we shouldn't strive for balance but this multi-faceted issue isn't unique to CSM.

Ultimately, CSM are sitting at 55% win ratio. As a pure numbers exercise, they're where GW want them to be. This will change as GW boost other armies and nerf Aeldari a little (which is their normal approach). That may then reduce our 55% win ratio in which case the days of hiding a single transport for a single phase might become moot.

Pleasure discussing the matter with you, if you're even in and around Blackpool or Manchester, let me know and can maybe catch a game. For the sake and sanctity of the thread i'll refrain from responding further though.

So, I played a 2000 point game on Saturday, my first in a while, and used an interesting list. It was basically mostly armor with 3 x vindicators, a land raider, a predator, 2 x hellbrute, 10 chosen lead by a lord, 10 terminators lead by a sorcerer out of deep strike. It is my "classic" CSM list with no daemon units, and is not really "competitive" but more of a fun list. However there were some insights that might be helpful.....

The Vindicators: So I think these units do have some potential, especially if other units go up in points and these have a slight chance of coming down. MoN on them with the 5+ [sustained] on their massive gun really adds a major boost and makes them pretty deadly against most targets. I paired them with the hellbrutes giving them [lethal] and [sustained] but I think it was probably overkill as with S14 they are wounding everything on at least a 3+, and most infantry on a 2+. They are pretty hard to take down for anything other than the most dedicated AT weapons as they have T11 and 2+ save. At 190 they are probably still a bit to expensive for real consideration in competitive lists against the ridiculous forgefiend (which is 10 points cheaper for some reason), but I think if they got a healthy points cut to say 175 (and I assume forgefiends will probably get hit with nerf to at least points) I think their might be a place for them them.

Actually I think all of the classic CSM vehicles could probably use at least a small points cut (and the TS versions a major points cut). It would make the fire support options more interesting then just bring more forgefiends.

The 10 man terminator squad with the sorcerer was cool, but felt a bit to many eggs in one basket, especially as they got counter charged by Deathwing Knights lead by whatever the terminator character is, and so got stomped.

Also the Nurgle strat is mad good, especially against SM. Since all my vehicles were MoN, when he put Oath on a unit, I would use the strat, so basically eliminated Oath for all but one unit, which was a big deal. Preventing a unit from effectively being shot for one turn is pretty powerful (don't forget the -1 to hit against the original unit shooting as well). I don't know if it needs to be nerfed down to only infantry etc., it is kind of on the boardline (the re-roll all hits and wounds strat probably needs nerfing like every other rule in the game that is re-roll all hits and wounds).

I can't wait for the CSM codex, I really want more detachments.

What are our best units and tactics against Orks? I find that it's difficult to take objectives as they always outnumber me in both number of units and unit size. And without MoK it's hard to hurt their toughness 5 and 6 units for legionaries and the like. All of my games so far have been at 1000 points, but we are going up to 1500 on Monday. The only vehicles I have are 1 land raider, 1 forgefiend, and a helldrake. I have about 40 legionaries, 10 terminators, 5 chosen, 2 oblits, 5 raptors, Abbadon, Haarken, and all unnamed charactors except the cutlists and apostle. I do not play with cultists of any kind, and have no demons. I do have a few knights and 2 wardogs. Any advice would be great.

 Lord Blackscale wrote:
What are our best units and tactics against Orks? I find that it's difficult to take objectives as they always outnumber me in both number of units and unit size. And without MoK it's hard to hurt their toughness 5 and 6 units for legionaries and the like. All of my games so far have been at 1000 points, but we are going up to 1500 on Monday. The only vehicles I have are 1 land raider, 1 forgefiend, and a helldrake. I have about 40 legionaries, 10 terminators, 5 chosen, 2 oblits, 5 raptors, Abbadon, Haarken, and all unnamed charactors except the cutlists and apostle. I do not play with cultists of any kind, and have no demons. I do have a few knights and 2 wardogs. Any advice would be great.

I usually build all comers lists, so usually include a unit or two for hoard clearing. If you are building to kill Orks then you can probably just focus on most of these. I assume since you say he outnumbers you that he is using big mobs of 20 or so. The forgefied with 3 ectoplasma gets +12 shots against a 20 man unit, so 15 to 21 shots. Combine that with the re-roll hits/wounds broken ass strat on undivided and you are probably killings most of that unit.

The obliterators can also do some work against hoards with their blast shot (+8 shots for two against 20 man so 10-20 shots) which is better against a 20 man than the warp hail (D6+4 st 8 -2 v D6+3 st 5 -1).

ten terminators with the accursed weapons and [Sustained] on 5+ with slannesh or undivided to use the strat would be good, with all the extra hits, but do wound on 4's.

Legionaries with Khrone could work, but you would want 10.

The 5 chosen all with accursed weapons and slannesh for [Sustained] on 5+ or undivided to use the strat could probably do some good damage, but again, 10 would be better.

For things that you might want to pick up to fight Orks particularly I would suggest

Daemon Prince w/wings: I used him sometimes and he is fast and good a bullying units (don't fight him against any heavy armor units). His 14 attacks having ap0 doesn't really matter to much against Orks.

Flamers of tzeentch could be good, but only wound on 5's (but can put out a bunch of shots from deep strike)

Possessed are also really good (not just against Orks either) and can throw out a whole heep of attacks.

This is my thoughts hope it helps.

Deathwing Assault box art depicts multiple Chaos Terminators with Thunder Hammers! We could be getting some exciting new options in the coming months

Balance Dataslate is out.
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/01/30/metawatch-warhammer-40000-the-first-balance-dataslate-and-points-update-of-2024/

Accursed cultists revive in your Command phase now instead of both command phases and the OC got dropped to 1.

Profane Zeal is Chaos Undivided only now, and reroll the wound only.

Dark Obscuration is changed to 18"

The balance patch was basically what was expected. It sucks that they still have not realized how overcosted the classic CSM vehicles are, or some other units like the Lord Discordant, and just handed out nerfs without some point decreases in under preforming units to encourage diversity (personally I don't think these point adjustments are going to really change the lists most people play).

Also the nerf to the daemon allies sucks hard. I mean I understand they needed to do something about the nurglings issue, but it just stinks that now I can't just bring my bloodcrushers or some other daemon unit but have to bring the troops too, which I don't even have for Khrone.

The daemons restriction does nothing about Nurglings, they’re battleline and you can still take six units, you just pay 30pts more for it. I don’t understand what problem they were even trying to correct with this. I’ve just finished painting the Changeling and having to take a unit of Horrors with no hero in order to field him has completely killed my interest in him, especially since I play smaller games where that basically accounts for my entire daemonic quota. Chunkier things like Bloodcrushers are pretty much unusable.

They massively over-corrected as usual.

Forgefiends and Obliterators did not need to go up further.

The undivided strat didn't need hitting as hard as it did and imho it should have just been changed to full re-roll wounds and then everyone else can re-roll 1's to hit and wound.

The demon restrictions are silly but are the same as previous editions once they were split.

They completely overlooked units that are over-costed.

Chosen and Warp Talons, I get and agree with.

Dark Obscuration I disagree needed hitting but I can accept what has happened as a reasonable middle ground.

The vehicle's needing to have the same mark as their transported units.. I fully agree with and it should have been that way from day 1.

Yeah it's too bad since the previous Daemon addition rules were nice and convenient and their current solution doesn't fix the problem while making everyone else's life harder.

Points wise the Obliterators, Forgefiend, Accursed Cultists and Dark Commune all went up. No surprise there and I got A LOT of good usage out of them the last couple months.

My last game in January was:
Dark Commune (Eye of Tzeentch) + Max Accursed Cultists
MOP + 10 Possessed
Warpsmith
2x Forgefiend
2x Helbrute
Heldrake
10x Warp Talons
Cultist Mob

Virtually everything on that list got a points hike
Will be fun to figure out how I'm going to change up my Brazen Beasts for the next non-Crusade match.

 lindsay40k wrote:
The daemons restriction does nothing about Nurglings, they’re battleline and you can still take six units, you just pay 30pts more for it. I don’t understand what problem they were even trying to correct with this. I’ve just finished painting the Changeling and having to take a unit of Horrors with no hero in order to field him has completely killed my interest in him, especially since I play smaller games where that basically accounts for my entire daemonic quota. Chunkier things like Bloodcrushers are pretty much unusable.

I did not know nurglings were battleline I don't use them as I don't like them. So this patch did not even fix the worst abuse of the ally system. I mean, other than the lone operatives/nurglings for secondaries, daemon allies weren't really breaking the game were they?

I'm not understanding...what happened with daemonic allies now? I have been using Nurglings, Changeling and Scribes.

Let me see if I have it right... If you want to include a non-battleline daemonic ally (such as a scribe or or Changeling) you must also have an equal proportion of battleline units. 1 scribe, 1 battleline unit, 1 changeling one *more* battleline unit...and with the same keyword. In this case Tzeentch

Kangarupe wrote:
I'm not understanding...what happened with daemonic allies now? I have been using Nurglings, Changeling and Scribes.

Let me see if I have it right... If you want to include a non-battleline daemonic ally (such as a scribe or or Changeling) you must also have an equal proportion of battleline units. 1 scribe, 1 battleline unit, 1 changeling one *more* battleline unit...and with the same keyword. In this case Tzeentch

You have it correct.