PDA

View Full Version : Your thoughts on Daemons...



phoenixguard09
27-03-2010, 14:09
What are your views on Daemon units?

Starting with Bloodletters, Daemonettes, Plaguebearers and Horrors.

What draws you to them? Which is your favourite? What would you like to change about them? I want to know everything. And on an unrelated note, taco or grilled cheese sandwich?

PS. I'm a taco man.

Malice&Mizery
27-03-2010, 17:10
I like Daemons, they're perfectly balanced and anyone who complains obviously sucks and needs to get good, fast.

My fave are the Daemonettes and Plaguebeaers. The girls make good little flankers. I'd rather they be S4 again, though.

'Bearers are the bottom line in anvils, with a Herald they are near impossible to kill. I wish they had Cloud of Flies again,

Oh, I like a grilled cheese sandwich, tacos give me the runs ;)

MalusCalibur
27-03-2010, 17:15
Personally I love Daemons, and it makes me very sad to see all the hate they get because a few elements of the book are not entirely balanced.
I find I'm drawn more to Bloodletters and Daemonettes as Core troops than Plaguebearers and Horrors. I want my units to be able to fight (something Horrors fail horribly at), and I want them to be nippy enough to get across the field ('letters and 'nettes having M5 and 6 respectively). Each of those units has a different specialty, too: for elite, heavily armoured troops, the Bloodletters' S5 and Killing Blow are the way to go (moreso with Herald-bestowed Hatred). Whereas hordes of rubbish troops will be shredded by Daemonettes vast number of attacks.

Can't forget the obligatory unit of Furies, either.

mrjellybeans
27-03-2010, 17:22
They are still a tough army to crack, but not as invincible as some claim. Other than plaguebearers, their core is fairly weak to killy units.

The main thing that gets players frustraited with daemons is all the saves. If the daemon player is rolling above average on ward saves, their army seems intractable. I have found if they roll average to bad(like I do all the time) then even my ogres can stomp them.

Condottiere
27-03-2010, 17:30
Considering how overpowering they are, in our neck of the woods they've become an endangered species, since no one is interested in playing them as a faction.

Kevlar
27-03-2010, 17:41
I think most people are drawn to the free 5+ ward save. Or the immune to psychology. Or maybe the whole army being unbreakable. They all have the same ridiculous abilities for a ridiculously low point cost.

Commodus Leitdorf
27-03-2010, 17:53
I have a fondness for Nurgle. I planned on making a Demonic Legion with the old SoC list till I heard they were getting their own book.

"hey I'll wait and see how that turns out first"

Needless to say I have a bunch of Plaguebearers collecting dust....not touching that army with a 10 foot pole till they fix it.

edit: also, I'm, a Pizza man through and through

MasterSparks
27-03-2010, 18:00
edit: also, I'm, a Pizza man through and through

This. :)

As for Daemons, I've always had a bit of a crush on Bloodletters painted in a deep blue colour. I can't seem to work up any enthusiasm for actually playing the army though..

Heimagoblin
27-03-2010, 18:16
I like Daemons, they're perfectly balanced and anyone who complains obviously sucks and needs to get good, fast

I just died a little inside. I thought you were being sarcastic at first. If you talk to a good warhammer player they will probably tell you something like this.

"Deamons find it very hard to make a poor list. Some of the "worst" choices would be almost staple choices of other armies. The more op deamon units which are staples of the deamon army other sides would kill for."-see gt results for why I am right.

Now deamons aren't invinvible and other armies can field competative armies that should beat a balanced deamon list. I regulaly beat them with my lizardmen but I do it using 3 engines +slann with temple guard.

On to deamons,
I like the idea's behind the units and army synergy. I like that many builds need some skill to play and I like the variety. I dislike taking more than 1 of the same magic item, flamers, and fleshounds because they are I win without skill buttons.

Malice&Mizery
27-03-2010, 18:35
I just died a little inside. I thought you were being sarcastic at first. If you talk to a good warhammer player they will probably tell you something like this.

"Deamons find it very hard to make a poor list. Some of the "worst" choices would be almost staple choices of other armies. The more op deamon units which are staples of the deamon army other sides would kill for."-see gt results for why I am right.

Now deamons aren't invinvible and other armies can field competative armies that should beat a balanced deamon list. I regulaly beat them with my lizardmen but I do it using 3 engines +slann with temple guard.

On to deamons,
I like the idea's behind the units and army synergy. I like that many builds need some skill to play and I like the variety. I dislike taking more than 1 of the same magic item, flamers, and fleshounds because they are I win without skill buttons.

I was being sarcastic, just wanted to see who would bite though :p

babyberg31
27-03-2010, 18:42
I was being sarcastic, just wanted to see who would bite though :p


Ok, great thing you make a precision... You would stay low in my personnal ranking if not ;)

Personally, I'm a Slannesh player alllllll the way. Love fast unit and great lookin' unit. Can seem to get out of my head the Fiend... With their big puffy tail, they keep remind me of multi-mutated puppy...

And I'm more a ''poutine'' man... For those how don't know what it is, come make a vacation in Qc, Canada, we will have great times:p

Alltaken
27-03-2010, 19:06
It's so horrible beacause I love Nurgle so much, and allways wanted to do a mono nurgle army so time, but it allways seemed to be not worth it. Then some time after daemons come from :cheese: planet and plaguebearers got so broken it's too unsportsman to have a go

puppetmaster24
27-03-2010, 19:17
the whole book is one massive balance ****up.

it is reason #2 why i will punch matt ward in the face when i see him next.

Voss
27-03-2010, 19:29
the whole book is one massive balance ****up.

it is reason #2 why i will punch matt ward in the face when i see him next.

What is reason #1?

Tymell
27-03-2010, 19:32
I've rarely experienced the army first-hand, but certainly from all I've heard/read, they are over-powered as an army, yes. I couldn't comment on specific units due to that lack of personal experience though.

I -do- like the idea of daemons being an army to be feared, but I'd rather that were due to being a well-rounded force that's very dangerous in the right hands rather than something that's just too powerful for the points paid.

Gaargod
27-03-2010, 19:38
Oh please. Daemons are unbalanced, fine. But they're hardly unbeatable - i have on several occasions hammered standard cheese lists with sub-optimum armies. Although i do love MalusCalibur's "they're not entirely balanced".

Basically, horrors are the most competitive choice because they are wizards - either magic defense, so you can focus more on hitty characters (BT, non tzeentch heralds) or assisting magic offense (tzeentch magic bullet line). End of the day, good as the core choices are... the other stuff is better. Horrors don't need a lot of support, they just do their thing.

Next on the list would be plaguebearers, as deathstars of them take a long while to kill. Once the herald is down though, they're actually really not that strong.

Daemonettes can be annoying, as small units are effective by themselves and cheap, whereas bloodletters really need the herald to be effective - at which stage the unit is death, but can be redirected via hatred happily enough. Still T3 infantry blocks, even at M5 and 5++, so not too hard to deal with either.

Grimstonefire
27-03-2010, 20:05
Is this actually about daemons, or is it just an excuse to ask us about tacos? :confused:

My favourite unit has to be Plaguebearers. I love them from a fluff POV, but I think they had much more characterful rules in HoC. As it is their regeneration makes them unuseable without a herald to give something to break the SCR.


Edit: Or are we comparing DoC to a grilled sandwich? ;)

Gimp
27-03-2010, 20:17
Whats a Taco?

As for Daemons it is sad due to the imbalancing issues because they have huge conversion and fluff potential and seem very fun to play.

Just people tend to abuse all the cool pieces.

rodmillard
27-03-2010, 20:32
I don't tend to face daemons often - partly because it was deemed "unsportsmanlike" at my uni club to play anything other than mono-god, no SCs (although we still allow mono-god mixed book armies), and partly because when they came out, everyone at my LGS started bringing tailored anti-daemon lists instead of all-comers (which was entertaining in and of itself - have you ever watched anti-daemon empire try and slug it out with anti-daemon HE? Priceless)

puppetmaster24
27-03-2010, 20:47
What is reason #1?

The balance ****up that is the Orc and Goblin book.

Hicks
27-03-2010, 20:52
Poutine FTW.

Also, I never played against daemons (I'm just coming back to the game), but after all I read, I certainly don't want to.

I have enough bad memories of unkillable GDs devastating my army back in 5th ed.

MalusCalibur
27-03-2010, 21:17
Although i do love MalusCalibur's "they're not entirely balanced"

And so you should, given that its an accurate statement. The book as a whole is not the unbalanced, unbeatable-monster-regardless-of-choices that the internet whiners brigade have made it out to be. However, there are elements of it that are clearly overpowered: Flamers, Flesh Hounds, and Horrors spring to mind.


I think most people are drawn to the free 5+ ward save. Or the immune to psychology. Or maybe the whole army being unbreakable. They all have the same ridiculous abilities for a ridiculously low point cost.

Except they arn't Unbreakable. They are almost identical to Undead in terms of Break tests, and I don't see too many people whining about them being 'Unbreakable'. The only difference is a random element: sure, you might lose less models (or even none) than the amount you lost by. But on the flip side, you might lose far MORE. It's just a slightly different version of 'Undead', and there is nothing unbalanced about that in itself.

Immunity to Psychology has to happen. They're Daemons. Nuff said.

And as for the 5+ Ward, this is the complaint that annoys me the most. Anti-Daemons insist that it be taken down to the 'negated by magic' version again. Oh really? And did ANYONE take Daemon infantry back when it had that? Nope, didn't think so (And lord knows I tried). Since the 5+ Ward is the only protection that most Daemons get, I think it's only fair that it be allowed against everything!

Sure, they should have to pay for these abilities, so an across-the-board points increase on most of their units would be perfectly reasonable, and IMO a far better way to reel them in than spitefully taking away the special rules they should have. Kill Flamer combat stats stone dead, take Flesh Hounds back down to 1 Wound (reduce points as appropriate), and sort out the rules for Horrors as well, and we're off to a good start.

I despise the Wood Elf ability to surf units/monsters in trees, as it makes them super hard to deal with. Would I take that ability away from them? Absolutely not. And the Daemons' special rules are the same. Sure, they're powerful (5+ ward, ItP, Fear, Instability), but no one should want to take away those rules (that are intrinsically part of Daemons) out of petty retaliation for a book with some mistakes.

And stop making personal attacks against Matt Ward, people. Yes, he wrote the two most problematic books this edition. But I'm fairly sure he didn't do so just to annoy you all personally, or to foster an environment where Orcs lose all the time because an Orc killed his dog when he was 5.

phoenixguard09
27-03-2010, 22:23
But I'm fairly sure he didn't do so just to annoy you all personally, or to foster an environment where Orcs lose all the time because an Orc killed his dog when he was 5.

Are you sure? :D

@Grimstonefire: Of course thats the reason for this thread. I wanted to make my taco question look more official. ;)

So what do people think of the Lesser Daemon models. Do they compare favourably with the old ones? And why is there a dancing goblin on my Warseer sign on the top of my screen?

Heimagoblin
27-03-2010, 22:58
I was being sarcastic, just wanted to see who would bite though :p

Hook, line and sinker m8

scipunk
27-03-2010, 23:05
Grilled Cheese FTW :D!!

Tzeentch and Slaanesh for me....I like their fluff and models and that I find that they are the more tactical of the 4 marks of Daemons

Dungeon_Lawyer
28-03-2010, 00:45
Sure, they should have to pay for these abilities, so an across-the-board points increase on most of their units would be perfectly reasonable, and IMO a far better way to reel them in than spitefully taking away the special rules they should have. Kill Flamer combat stats stone dead, take Flesh Hounds back down to 1 Wound (reduce points as appropriate), and sort out the rules for Horrors as well, and we're off to a good start.


Yup-I wouldnt want their deamony abilities taken away either, but paying more for them would be nice.

Its their first stand alone book--They always have issues that come up. Warriors and Beast have issues too. (Beasts have the opposite problem and are overcosted)


The real problem is that GW should have never seperated the chaotic chaoness that was chaos when it was HorDes of CHaos. Such a dam shame....:cries:

Sygerrik
28-03-2010, 03:11
Except they arn't Unbreakable. They are almost identical to Undead in terms of Break tests, and I don't see too many people whining about them being 'Unbreakable'. The only difference is a random element: sure, you might lose less models (or even none) than the amount you lost by. But on the flip side, you might lose far MORE. It's just a slightly different version of 'Undead', and there is nothing unbalanced about that in itself.


That's not really true at all. That might be true from a statistical standpoint if nothing in the list had Ld above 7 and there was no Stubborn-ness; after all, the most likely statistical outcome on two dice is a 7, so on average, if they were all Ld 7, a losing unit would take as many wounds as the number by which it lost combat.

However, add in the Battle Standard and the entire probability curve is thrown off. It's no wonder that various permutations of Daemonic BSB are one of the most frequently complained-about thing. Then you add higher Ld (Ld 8 heralds mean that all Daemonic units effectively take -1 casualty when losing combat relative to undead, just as if they had a BSB in range, PLUS the real BSB; and Ld 9 just makes it worse), and several options to get stubborn (which, on Daemons, is as close to "true" unbreakability as it gets in this game) and you have a mechanic that is qualitatively different from undead crumbling. Add to that the fact that Undead use this mechanic because they use hordes of cheap troops that can barely ever kill anything in combat and Daemons are as elite as any other army out there. Beating Undead in combat is easy. Beating Daemons in combat is much, much harder, and when you DO, they're much less likely to vanish.

You might lose more. But when you factor in high Ld, and the option to selectively reroll your results (nobody rerolls snake eyes) they are far more likely to lose less. And your characterization of "some" elements of the book as unbalanced is equally flawed. I would go so far as to say that every single thing in the book is undercosted. The lackluster options, such as Daemon Princes, would be a steal in any other army. The Daemonic Gifts not only break the rules on magic items that every other army has to follow, they are mostly better than what everyone else gets! The crowning glory of the book is Siren Song, a gift that is a direct wad of spit in the eye of Dwarf players everywhere. It's an exact word-for-word copy of a Dwarf power with the same points cost, but with the major, glaring weakness of the Dwarf rune removed-- thus make it far, far more powerful (especially since the FAQ).

I agree with you that the mechanics of Daemonic are ok, but no solution will be complete without completely repointing everything and stripping all Daemonic Gifts out of the book to start over. You can't put a bandaid on a severed artery; and if Dark Elves and Vampire Counts are two stabs to the heart of game balance, the current Daemons of Chaos book is a sucking chest wound with a side of decapitation and third-degree burns.

Agnar the Howler
28-03-2010, 04:02
To all those who posted that they don't care about snacks... SHAME ON YOU!


You can't put a bandaid on a severed artery

You probably can, but it's effectiveness is debatable at best :p

*Ahem* Now, to the topic...

I prefer Bloodletters, but that's probably because i'm a Khorne fan, with tzeentch and nurgle drawing second and slaanesh a far last. The models are pretty menacing and daemonic, and the rules are also nice to use (but not to play against). But anything that involves spilling blood in Khorne's name is good enough for me!

(Plus, snacks are not unrelated! They are never unrelated! Where there are topics there are also related snacks! In this case, Khorneflakes, or Plague Puffs, or even Viagra-Nut Muffins)

kaubin
28-03-2010, 05:32
I've had positive experiences facing Daemons, they were very mild...but the only greater daemon I ever faced was the Lord of Change, and I was always packing enough magic resistance to not get too over whelmed by him.

Other than that, I really enjoy the low troop numbers that comes with Daemons.

ftayl5
28-03-2010, 07:20
Ahh ofcourse, the weekly daemons are/aren't overpowered thread. Yay.

Personally, I think they are coz people use them as GW advertizes. GW say use all the gods, that way you have no weaknesses. If you don't use all the gods, the list is slightly softer.

Still no matter what you do, the core choices are insanely under priced, and Flesh Hounds and Flamers are just awesome.

I'm not complaining, I like a challenge.

Lordsaradain
28-03-2010, 09:10
The daemon book is good in the way of internal balance, every option has its uses and is viable. Compared to the rest of the WHFB armybooks though, the whole army could do with a point increase.

The Red Scourge
28-03-2010, 09:26
Except they arn't Unbreakable. They are almost identical to Undead in terms of Break tests, and I don't see too many people whining about them being 'Unbreakable'. The only difference is a random element: sure, you might lose less models (or even none) than the amount you lost by. But on the flip side, you might lose far MORE. It's just a slightly different version of 'Undead', and there is nothing unbalanced about that in itself.

Sorry, but people do whine a lot about unbreakable undead too ;)


And as for the 5+ Ward, this is the complaint that annoys me the most. Anti-Daemons insist that it be taken down to the 'negated by magic' version again. Oh really? And did ANYONE take Daemon infantry back when it had that? Nope, didn't think so (And lord knows I tried). Since the 5+ Ward is the only protection that most Daemons get, I think it's only fair that it be allowed against everything!

Really? Well wood elves get the fake 5+ ward too, and I can only say that it is a lot better than most mundane version of armor out there. Magical attacks aren't really that common to be feared, sure there are spells, but you can defend against those with dispel dies and scrolls. Also having the negated by magical attacks effect, gave magical attacks a quality in themselves. Should forest spirits end up with a similar mechanic (and why shouldn't they, their fluffwise identical beings), the only thing magical attacks will be good for is hitting ethereals - and there really aren't too many of those around :rolleyes: - in fairness DoC characters should get the chance to upgrade to proper ward saves, as characters needs a decent defense against other characters :)

Kevlar
28-03-2010, 15:59
Yep, changing demons back to the way wood elves work would fix most of the imbalance in the list. All it would take is one simple line of errata.

MalusCalibur
28-03-2010, 16:11
Really? Well wood elves get the fake 5+ ward too, and I can only say that it is a lot better than most mundane version of armor out there. Magical attacks aren't really that common to be feared, sure there are spells, but you can defend against those with dispel dies and scrolls. Also having the negated by magical attacks effect, gave magical attacks a quality in themselves. Should forest spirits end up with a similar mechanic (and why shouldn't they, their fluffwise identical beings), the only thing magical attacks will be good for is hitting ethereals - and there really aren't too many of those around :rolleyes: - in fairness DoC characters should get the chance to upgrade to proper ward saves, as characters needs a decent defense against other characters :)

The Forest Spirits get other methods to help them survive, though. Dryads are Skirmished and T4 (as well as having 2 S4 Attacks as a 12pt Core choice, though thats a seperate matter), Treekin are T5, get armour (4+), and 3 Wounds each, and Treemen are T6, with even more armour (3+), and 6 Wounds. Giving them 'proper' Ward saves as well would increase their already formidable survivability to somewhat silly levels.
On the contrary, all Daemon Core except Plaguebearers are T3, none of them have any armour at all, and they're all ranked units (less manoueverable). There are some units that have armour, Toughness and/or Wounds to add to that Ward, but nothing quite matches the resilience of the Forest Sprits, IMO.
So, in short, no, I don't think Forest Spirits should get the same true Ward that Daemons do.

jesusjohn
28-03-2010, 16:29
Army wide rules are ok and make them scary and i don't know a bit Damonic! I agree the main problem is that a few units are broken, problem is that people being people those are the units they use too many of and thus people wont play against any DoC player.

TsukeFox
28-03-2010, 18:18
Deamons? Some higher up and his chummy buddy Matt ward giggled as they made the deamon book. What is their weakness? A bit costly? The exchange CHEESe! Dwarves and elves are costly too but do not rack up the pure amount of CHEesy power that deamons recieve. 90 point special character? Hmm. Armour that makes anything I take invincible to almost anything short of a dragon or good cannon shot, and poor rolls on the deamons part. Bump the Big bird deamon and that smelly book that reeks of BS
booo to deamons!

blackstork
28-03-2010, 18:53
I sometimes play Daemons and I wish the one thing - make Daemonettes skirmishers!

About the army in general view - I think in each world the evil is and should be strong.

Maoriboy007
28-03-2010, 19:01
and if Dark Elves and Vampire Counts are two stabs to the heart of game balance, the current Daemons of Chaos book is a sucking chest wound with a side of decapitation and third-degree burns.

LOL! Do you mind if I steal this for my sig? :)

NightAngel
29-03-2010, 17:36
I have never played demons but I think tzeentch is the coolist because he makes all these epic plans that last for thousands of years