PDA

View Full Version : Suggestions for Slaanesh?



loveless
16-01-2009, 00:36
Alright, I want to make a primarily Slaaneshi army - but I don't see a lot of them in Fantasy (though I think there's one member here that has a Slaaneshi Daemon force).

I have the Warriors of Chaos book - while the models are pretty (save the marauders on foot), the rules are a bit underwhelming.

I do not have the Daemons of Chaos book - however, T3 S3 worries me, despite the superior movement and initiative.

My question to you, WarSeer, is which version of Slaanesh would feel more rewarding? Warriors or Daemons? I'm not considering Beasts at this time since they don't fit with the image of Slaanesh I have in my mind.

Don't worry about Daemons being used in 40K as well - I really don't care, I already have some 40K armies, so I'm not at a huge loss in that department.

Now, Slaaneshi Warriors...
- I enjoy the Lore - although it's troubling that I'd be at such a loss against Vampires and Daemons with it (imo).
- I enjoy the "cheapness" - the Mark of Slaanesh is quite affordable in points terms
- The Sigvald model - perfect for a Slaaneshi lord on foot
- Tough Cavalry - Knights are impeccable, and Marauder Horsemen with MoS seem like a solid idea
- The Warshrine - I have a few ideas for a decent version of a Slaaneshi one
- They're slow - I'd be worried about getting across the bored
- I feel I have to go magic heavy, which is a bit of a shame
- Mostly plastic, which is good

Slaaneshi Daemons...
- Monster Lord - the Keeper of Secrets - I've always loved the model with the crazy bondage head, and the thought of having a massive lord is appealing
- Daemonettes - I'm one of the few that likes the new models, and if I remember right, they're movement 6, which just sounds fun on core units
- Metal - the KoS doesn't bug me - I prefer metal Lords - but the Fiends are pricey, and I'd want a handful of them just because they look like fun.
- The "Daemon Stigma" could be annoying, if I get groans from my opponents
- Plastic Seekers are coming, which is a benefit to the army
- _Really_ limiting myself if I go mono-God, so I may have to add in some Tzeentch or Nurgle (Not going to put Khorne in Daemons), which massively adds to the monetary cost of the army.

Anyway, I was just wonder if anyone has any experience with mono (or primarily) Slaaneshi lists. Barring that, does anyone have opinions on them? I've glanced at the various Tacticas, but I'd like to get a bit more focused if we could.

Note: If it's a bad idea, I am willing to take suggestions on what other mark/god would go well with Slaanesh - though I'd like to try to avoid it. Anyway, I'm just mulling over different armies in my mind before I go off to throw more money at GW, so...suggestions? :p

Thanks folks.

Nabeshin1106
16-01-2009, 01:06
I've played a mono-Slaanesh Daemon list pretty much since they were released, and I love it. My typical 2k-2250 list is a Keeper (lvl 4 wizard), Masque, 2 Heralds (1 BSB, 1 Normal, both lvl1 Wizards), 2x15 Daemonettes (Standard & Champ) 1x10-15 Daemonettes, 2x 5 Seekers and 1-3 Fiends.

I really don't find the limited choice to be a bad thing. Seekers w/ Siren Standard are impossible to get away from, and the ward goes a long way to saving your Daemonettes. The speed of your Fiends, Keeper and Seekers makes it easy to get an early charge on a unit and hold them in place for your Daemonettes to get in. I find the Etherblade on a Herald invaluable for going up against Heavy Cav.

They take some getting used to, but mono-Slaanesh Daemons are my all time favorite army.

Anvilbrow
16-01-2009, 04:15
I too play a mono Slaanesh demon list. I have for years and they are better now than ever. My typical list is very similar to the previous poster except that I never use the Masque (one of the silliest special characters out there for the cost).

In my experience (including last night- a loss to Dark Elves) the speed and initiative are the big advantage. Choosing your fights and outmaneuvering your opponent are child's play. However, actually beating anything with decent toughness and/or armor save can be difficult. As for the lore of Slaanesh, Phantasmagoria is one of the scariest spells out there for armies subject to psychology as is Acquiescence.

I have had great success against all human armies, OnG, Beasts, and mixed results against elves (except Dark Elves- stupid ASF banner and assassins). I have had almost no success against new Warriors, Demons and Vampires.

Stick with it though, I detest the new nature of Demon armies, (mortals less so, although I refuse to mix marks in my WOC armies as well and don't get me started on the magic items) and I field all four powers, but always alone in keeping with the fluff from Realms of Chaos back in the day.

Briohmar
16-01-2009, 08:52
Slaanesh Daemons can be pretty monotonous, and with Daemons, I find I need to mix things up a bit to be successful, but I have been playing a mono-Slaanesh WOC list, and have been meeting with some relative success (See http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=178278 http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=172162 and http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=171587 )
Your ideas about the Warrior list are spot on. The most recent report uses a Sorcerer Lord and a Lvl 2, and can be quite effective, though costs a lot of points. The all CAV list seems to fit my style a lot more than the mixed cav and infantry list however. The mixed list did well against VC, but not as well as I would have liked against Dwarves. Against a shooty opponent, you definitely need speed with Slaanesh, and you always require tactical flexibility. The mark on marauders (and horse) enhances their use considerably, and the ability to frenzy your knights through magic is not to be underestimated, especially since you can end the Frenzy at will now. I have had my knights hit with 4 attacks each (three from steeds) through the application of Frenzy and Warshrine (this can be an extremely nasty combination.) So give it a try, but remember with Slaanesh you must finesse the battle, not just rush in.

loveless
16-01-2009, 13:18
Thanks for the posts so far, folks. Some interesting links there, too, Briohmar - your lists are somewhat similar to some test lists I'd been jotting down.

Ethlorien
16-01-2009, 13:23
Well, depending on who you play with and what your finances are - you could always go with a mix of the two, like in 6th edition. Swap out cores and specials and rares as you go. A lot of people might disagree with that, but it depends on your preferences and your gaming group.

loveless
16-01-2009, 13:28
Well, depending on who you play with and what your finances are - you could always go with a mix of the two, like in 6th edition. Swap out cores and specials and rares as you go. A lot of people might disagree with that, but it depends on your preferences and your gaming group.

I see that suggestion every once in awhile in regards to Chaos. However, I am strictly one Army Book - I worry a bit about balance issues otherwise. That and I feel that Daemons and Mortals work better (from an aethestic approach) separately.

Thanks for the thought, though. :)

==Me==
16-01-2009, 13:34
I'd say they both work well.

A WoC army with all Slaanesh is great. They don't get anything flashy like Frenzy or Ward saves, but the Mark of Slaanesh gives you immunity to Fear, Terror, and Panic. Note that it is not ITP, so you can still flee. It's the best mark in the book and the cheapest. The points you save on marks can go towards a whole extra unit. VCs and Daemons lose their biggest advantage and you have more models on the table.

Slaanesh Daemons are also extremely good. They're fast and have a ton of nasty effects against Ld and movement. The mono-Slaanesh powerbuild (Kipper, Masque, Icon of Despair) is stupidly powerful for a reason. When enemy units are taking Ld tests (Terror, panic, slicing shards, temptator, anything) at -2 and up to -5 to their Ld armies simply disappear without a blow being landed. Daemonettes are soft, but extremely fasy and potent with Heralds in the mix.

They both work really well, WoC are more durable and have a ton more options, while Daemons have the Keeper and more speed.

sroblin
16-01-2009, 13:35
I too play a mono Slaanesh demon list. I have for years and they are better now than ever.

This is interesting (and encouraging to here), because my take looking down at Slaanesh units in the DoC of book was that they did not promise to be very effective. I've long thought daemonettes were cool, but it doesn't seem to me that their high movement would compensate for their lack of defense and their lack of hitting power. It's not like it's cost effective to field them in large numbers for big rank bonuses and casualty absorption. The ASF with a herald present is undeniably cool, though the results would seem to be a lot less effective on a unit with S3. The heralds in general seem like they are fine characters with the appropriate upgrades.

The Seekers and Fiends are cool and M10 is very useful, but again they seem to be more support units, because I can't see them having the hitting power or survivability to fight a serious combat unit. (I suppose 3 fiends ganged up on an average infantry block might do well...) Still I can see them being useful. Obviously the lore is very good, and the Great Daemons are very dangerous...

I'm curious, where am I failing in my appraisal of a mono-Slaanesh list? I would be interested in learning how it is done effectively.

Nabeshin1106
16-01-2009, 13:57
My typical block of Daemonettes is 15 (5x3) w/ Alluress + Standard Bearer w/ Siren Standard accompanied by a Herald (I'll say she has Many Armed Monstrosity in this example)

When this unit charges, the enemy can do nothing but hold in place, and if they get charged, they have ASF due to the Herald.

This unit is dishing out 9 WS5 Attacks from the Ladies, with Armor Piercing, and 6 WS7 S4 Attacks w/ Armor Piercing from the Herald, all before the enemy can strike them.

Against a lot of enemy units, you'll knock out the front rank (minus Champion and/or Heroes), and assuming you had the full unit at the start of the round, you have 2 ranks, your Standard, and any kills you made. They may look weak on paper, but they are quite strong on the table.

Seekers are just as effective as Daemonettes since they can have the same loadout, plus they move quicker and get their Steed's attacks thrown in. Due to low unit size, they're best off outflanking and going War Machine Hunting or charging at the same time as something else.

Fiends are kinda lackluster in my experience, but there's usually some task you can throw them at, like tying up an enemy unit or flank charging. I find them to be less useful than Seekers, but can still find something to do. A lone Fiend is pretty handy for taking out pesky War Machines (although liable to die quickly).

sroblin
16-01-2009, 14:56
This unit is dishing out 9 WS5 Attacks from the Ladies, with Armor Piercing, and 6 WS7 S4 Attacks w/ Armor Piercing from the Herald, all before the enemy can strike them.


This does ok against a low toughness, low-armor save units (4 killed on average) but fairly poorly against T4 and good armor saves. Against cheap T4 orks with shields, 4 daemonettes will kill 1.3 on average. The many-armed slaaneshi herald kills on average as many orcs w/shields (1.64) as a 54 point Empire hero with a great sword. The Daemonettes overall do have somewhat above-average damage output by virtue of 2 attacks and all that, and it especially pays off against low toughness and armor opponents such as elves and empire infantry, but their cost is more than above average for a unit which will really struggle many average units as well as most elite ones.

The ASF must be awesome against high elves, though (but don't charge the spears!)

==Me==
16-01-2009, 15:45
That's what you have chariots, Etherblade Heralds and the Kipper for.

Also, Knights aren't very scary when they're running off the board :p

loveless
16-01-2009, 18:13
It looks like the Slaaneshi Daemon game is running up and making the enemy dance off the board with all the ridiculous leadership modifiers, while the Slaaneshi Warriors game is to march forward undaunted by psychology (i.e. laugh in the enemy's face) and then cut them to pieces.

The other thing I've noticed is how delightful the name of Slaaneshi daemonic gifts/spell/what-have-you are..."Slicing Shards" "Acquiesence" "Many-Armed Monstrosity" "Phantasmagoria" "Temptator"...

If nothing else, it'd be fun to announce your moves with a Slaanesh Daemon list :p

OldMaster
16-01-2009, 18:40
I'd say, go WoC ;)
I think Slaaneshi mortals would be pretty interesting to run. I'd max out on Marauder Horsemen because with the mark of Slaanesh, they are one of the most reliable (and cheapest) fast cavalry unit there is. Just stick them in with flails or maybe throwing axes and use them as you would use any other fast cavalry.

Mark of Slaanesh is horrible for your Knights, but I wouldn't really care. Be sure to have one with your Standart of Rage - can't miss Frenzy, even if you're going Slaanesh :)

Maxing out on magic should work, after all Slaaneshi magic can buff your own units, too and the Lash of Slaanesh works regardless of Itp or not. If you're worried and not a complete purist, take some Sorcs with the Lore of Death. If you do this and you happen to stumble on a non-Itp army, they're going to have problems.

Giant and perhaps Spawn are best with the Mark of Slaanesh. Always Jump Up and Down First is awesome.