PDA

View Full Version : Anything as broken as the khorne cannon in the old book?



GrandmasterWang
07-03-2013, 06:52
topic?

I think the masque was far worse but actual units? it's tough, especially in a vacuum

Nubl0
07-03-2013, 06:59
Depends... The new cannon doesn't have the same impact as the masque did really. I mean yes its very undercosted, but broken? I don't think it's going to dominate the game or crush armies like say... A kdai destroyer. At the end of the day it's just another ironblaster, shoot it with your own war machines or make it pop with combat ress.

ftayl5
07-03-2013, 07:24
Yes. So yes. It's a rather under priced flaming cannon and chariot. Annoying? Yes. Game breaking? No.
The Masque was ridiculous; for 90pts you automatically lowered a LD by D3 which combines with the other pretty crazy slaanesh abilities and powers to make the LD bomb army. And she had a 3+ ward.
Skulltaker was pretty OP for 150pts for WS9, I9, hatred and 5+ killing blow. Crazy good.
Everything else was just generally too cheap.

Artinam
07-03-2013, 07:32
I agree with ftayl5, the chariot is simply a cheap cannon that can move. If you employ a lot of monsters it may seem a tad powerful.
In 7th many things were simply to cheap for what they did. (Bloodletter Hordes with a herald fe.).

Kalandros
07-03-2013, 07:54
Its not that broken, I'm not having it in all my lists. Its nice yes, but not broken.

IcedCrow
07-03-2013, 12:46
I'm not seeing anything broken about the khorne cannon. It's a mobile flaming cannon that can charge things like a chariot. Yay. Hardly going to break the game and win games just by its presence on the table.

Havock
07-03-2013, 12:48
Yes. So yes. It's a rather under priced flaming cannon and chariot. Annoying? Yes. Game breaking? No.
The Masque was ridiculous; for 90pts you automatically lowered a LD by D3 which combines with the other pretty crazy slaanesh abilities and powers to make the LD bomb army. And she had a 3+ ward.


She was 90 points and could pound heroes twice her points cost into the dirt when they caught her.

Spiney Norman
07-03-2013, 12:56
I think the most confusing thing about the Skull cannon is how far off the points value is. Its not like its even a particularly hard unit to cost, there are plenty of comparable units in the game which should have given Mr Ward a clue how to cost it. The skull cannon isn't a weird unit with loads of crazy rules which they just got wrong, its virtually the same as the ogre contraption with a few plus points counter-balanced by a few negative ones. For some reason it just came out at approx 2/3 the points cost of what it is actually worth.

Fear Ghoul
07-03-2013, 13:01
The Khorne cannon is underpriced by about 25 pts. It is definitely not as good as an Ironblaster.

HalfBlood
07-03-2013, 13:10
So this is a thread to complain about a past book?

Its time to move on. The skullcannon is underpriced by 20ish points yet I don't think your gonna lose because the daemon player brought a skullcannon.

Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk 2

IcedCrow
07-03-2013, 13:32
They've also (the devs) have commented as much as they've commented that they don't build the game for tournaments that they don't cross compare books for point costing their units. So complaining that the cannon is undercosted by X points compared with an empire cannon is fruitless because they don't design the game with that comparison in mind, they cost the unit according to the army list and where it sits, so they may intentionally inflate or deflate points values artificially within the army list to achieve whatever internal balance the dev has in mind.

Complaining that it is undercosted or overcosted by X compared to unit Y in army book Z is pointless as GW does not make every unit in the game perfectly point costed with other similar units across the army books. That comes from the horse's mouth, year after year after year (because if you go to a games day and ask a developer, you will get that answer, which is the same answer that has been given since the 90s and maybe before but i wasn't in the hobby then). Allessio stated his dislike for this and in his books in 6th edition some of his units are costed the same across books, but that was one dev.

And again, even if its "undercosted by 20 points" compared to an empire cannon or whatever is being used as a cross-comparison, it still isn't breaking the game or will win games by its presence.

N1AK
07-03-2013, 13:38
The skullcannon is underpriced by 20ish points yet I don't think your gonna lose because the daemon player brought a skullcannon.


Obviously there isn't a single definitive 'right' price but I don't think I'm alone in thinking that the skullcannon is considerably more under-costed (~40-50pts for me)than you claim it is. As it stands the only reason I can see people not taking two of them is because the other rare choices are also very good in certain army builds. It's frustrating that games workshop managed to appreciate that the bog standard Empire cannon was arguably under-priced and increased it while books on either side of it good extremely effective mobile fighty cannons for very competitive points values.

That said, I thought the point of this thread was more to point out that apart from one model the new book generally doesn't have anything too problematic while the old book was virtually entirely wrong :|

Fear Ghoul
07-03-2013, 13:47
They've also (the devs) have commented as much as they've commented that they don't build the game for tournaments that they don't cross compare books for point costing their units. So complaining that the cannon is undercosted by X points compared with an empire cannon is fruitless because they don't design the game with that comparison in mind, they cost the unit according to the army list and where it sits, so they may intentionally inflate or deflate points values artificially within the army list to achieve whatever internal balance the dev has in mind.

Complaining that it is undercosted or overcosted by X compared to unit Y in army book Z is pointless as GW does not make every unit in the game perfectly point costed with other similar units across the army books. That comes from the horse's mouth, year after year after year (because if you go to a games day and ask a developer, you will get that answer, which is the same answer that has been given since the 90s and maybe before but i wasn't in the hobby then). Allessio stated his dislike for this and in his books in 6th edition some of his units are costed the same across books, but that was one dev.

And again, even if its "undercosted by 20 points" compared to an empire cannon or whatever is being used as a cross-comparison, it still isn't breaking the game or will win games by its presence.

The designers have actually stated that they compare points costs across books. In Fantasy Empire is used as the standard and in 40k Space Marines are used as the standard. But otherwise I agree that being undercosted by 25 (even 50) pts for a rare choice that can't fight ranked units isn't going to break the game.

IcedCrow
07-03-2013, 13:49
The designers have actually stated that they compare points costs across books. In Fantasy Empire is used as the standard and in 40k Space Marines are used as the standard. But otherwise I agree that being undercosted by 25 (even 50) pts for a rare choice that can't fight ranked units isn't going to break the game.

Hmmm. Last year mr. kelly stated otherwise. Perhaps its that they don't know what they are doing then outside of their own cubicle ;)

Fear Ghoul
07-03-2013, 13:56
Hmmm. Last year mr. kelly stated otherwise. Perhaps its that they don't know what they are doing then outside of their own cubicle ;)

The way I heard it was that they used a mathematical formula for points costs and then fiddled with them for "flavour".

decker_cky
07-03-2013, 14:02
It's probably underpriced by about 50 pts - all they pay for is the chariot right now, and they get a good price on the chariot at that.

Lots of worse units last book too. Blue scribes were filthy cheap too. The fact that you could have the Blue scribes, the Masque and Skulltaker on juggernaut for under 375 pts is ridiculous.

IcedCrow
07-03-2013, 14:06
The way I heard it was that they used a mathematical formula for points costs and then fiddled with them for "flavour".

Yes I've heard that too. They start (they've said, I'm not a dev so I don't know what they really do) with the base formula and then they inflate or deflate it based on the internal army balance they are aiming for. The end result may be that two identical cannons with two identical stat lines are not costed the same, one may be 100 pts, the other 125 pts, and they have said this is intentional as they may want the cheaper cannon in an army that has no other shooting support, for example.

HalfBlood
07-03-2013, 16:53
Then you compare the skullcannon + 50 pts approximately equals the same as an ironblaster yet the ironblaster is far superior. But I guess people have to find something good that daemons have to complain about.

Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk 2

Surgency
07-03-2013, 17:01
Obviously there isn't a single definitive 'right' price but I don't think I'm alone in thinking that the skullcannon is considerably more under-costed (~40-50pts for me)than you claim it is. As it stands the only reason I can see people not taking two of them is because the other rare choices are also very good in certain army builds.

Maybe its safe to say that its appropriately costed to make it an option that people will consider taking in their armies? If it had been costed 20 (or more) points more then the other rare choices are obviously superior, and the cannon would never see play.

Jind_Singh
07-03-2013, 17:01
It's probably underpriced by about 50 pts - all they pay for is the chariot right now, and they get a good price on the chariot at that.

Lots of worse units last book too. Blue scribes were filthy cheap too. The fact that you could have the Blue scribes, the Masque and Skulltaker on juggernaut for under 375 pts is ridiculous.

THIS

The Slaanesh chariot is almost on par for cost = has little or no saves, lower strength, doesn't regain wounds with damage caused - the Skull Cannon used as a heavy chariot is good enough for 135pts,....and then someone thought

"Hold on, this is missing something"

And another developer sagely nodded his head...

"Yes. Yes your right, I can see that now - what this needs is...hold on...I got it! It needs a flaming strength 10 cannon doing D6 wounds"

GW developer team put down their text books on "Dummy's guide to working out points costs for new units" and shout out...

"YES, YES, AND YES!!!"

Spiney Norman
07-03-2013, 18:27
The Khorne cannon is underpriced by about 25 pts. It is definitely not as good as an Ironblaster.

Lol, just no.
Stop comparing the skull cannon to the iron blaster, which is, itself undercosted.what you're effectively saying is if it cost 25pts more it would only be as undercosted as the second most overpowered unit in the game.

Start with the base cost of an empire great cannon
Make it flaming & magical
Give its crew stats that actually enable them to do something in combat
Allows it to move 7" a turn and fire
Add impact hits

Now decide how much you would pay for each of those advantages and add them to the base cost of a great cannon.

The skull cannon would be fairly costed if it were EITHER a flaming magical cannon (without the ability to move and fire) OR a chariot with its current stats, a move or fire cannon should be worth 170+ before you consider upgrades like magical, flaming or blood letters to crew it.

Lord Inquisitor
07-03-2013, 18:38
THIS

The Slaanesh chariot is almost on par for cost = has little or no saves, lower strength, doesn't regain wounds with damage caused
Urgh. The Slaanesh chariots are all horribly overcosted. I was defending them right up until someone on the Legion forum pointed out the comparison with goblin wolf chariots. While the Slaanesh chariot has daemonette crew, a 5+ ward, immune to psych and an extra movement and wound, the goblin chariot has more armour and higher strength impact hits and costs under half the cost. Slaanesh chariots are at least 30% overcosted probably more. About the same amount the Khorne cannons are undercosted really.

decker_cky
07-03-2013, 18:41
You forgot to add solid armour and ward saves to the value too.

@LI: Need to playtest them, but I think burning chariots are roughly the right price.

Lord Inquisitor
07-03-2013, 18:49
The Khorne cannon is underpriced by about 25 pts. It is definitely not as good as an Ironblaster.

Well lets do a comparsion shall we?

Compared with an Ironblaster you get:
+1 M
+2 WS
+2 BS (hey, not bad for grapeshot)
-1 T
-1 W
+1 I
+1 AS

Cannon
+ 12" range
- double bounce
- S10 grapeshot

Daemonic
+ Instability
+ 5+ ward
+ Immune to Psych
+ Flaming

So overall you lose a toughness, a wound and the double bounce, and you gain +1 armour, 5+ ward save, immune to psych (amazing!) better fighting ability, better mobility and flaming attacks for those pesky regen saves. For 35 points cheaper.

Go ask some Ogre players which they'd rather have. I'd drop my two ironblasters for two khannons in a heartbeat. For 70 cheaper? I'd take it if Khannons were the same cost just for flaming and immune to psych, which is a real issue for ironblasters.

Bear in mind that the Ironblaster is already a strong contender for "best artillery unit in the game". It's widely considered underpriced for what it does, one of the most "no brainer" units in 8th. And you're using this as your basis for comparison?

DaemonReign
07-03-2013, 18:53
Skullcannon 'undercostedness' compared to the previous book:
There are some things but on different levels of cost (i.e. there was nothing this expensive that should have cost that much more).
Also it's a changing Picture whether we're talking about 7th Ed Daemons in 7th Edition or in 8th Edition.
Aaanyway..
I would compare the cost of the Skullcannon to the cost of Master of Sorcery in the old book. If MoS had been 50pts (not 25..) then you'd still 'concider it' without it being a no-brainer. (Of course, other meaningfull Gifts for the TzHerald would have helped too..)
Not saying the Skullcannon's cost should be twice what it is - but nearly, and honestly if it was doubled you'd still 'concider' taking it (although most players would just take one, not two, of course).
That model and the SoulGrinder are still in the waiting-room for joining my Collection btw.. Still haven't made up my mind on that one..

EDIT
The only thing I'll add to Lord Inq's comparative study above is that the IronBlaster (afaik!) does not have the ability to regain lost wounds when acting as a force multiplyer...

Terrenord
07-03-2013, 21:26
They've also (the devs) have commented as much as they've commented that they don't build the game for tournaments that they don't cross compare books for point costing their units. So complaining that the cannon is undercosted by X points compared with an empire cannon is fruitless because they don't design the game with that comparison in mind, they cost the unit according to the army list and where it sits, so they may intentionally inflate or deflate points values artificially within the army list to achieve whatever internal balance the dev has in mind.

Complaining that it is undercosted or overcosted by X compared to unit Y in army book Z is pointless as GW does not make every unit in the game perfectly point costed with other similar units across the army books.

You see this with WoC and Saurus which cost 14 points, but are miles apart in quality. Saurus are costed for the buffs that a Slann can give them while WoC don't have access to the same range of magic.

HalfBlood
07-03-2013, 21:32
And then their is the mighty Bloodletter (sarcasm) who is a tiny shadow compared to a Chaos Warrior....

DaemonReign
07-03-2013, 21:53
... yeah they were pretty pounded..
Paying for synergy buffs? Nope, those are overpriced too.. What then? Ahem, nothing! We just figured you peeps had enough of them on the shelves already! :)

Fear Ghoul
08-03-2013, 09:09
Well lets do a comparsion shall we?

Compared with an Ironblaster you get:
+1 M
+2 WS
+2 BS (hey, not bad for grapeshot)
-1 T
-1 W
+1 I
+1 AS

Cannon
+ 12" range
- double bounce
- S10 grapeshot

Daemonic
+ Instability
+ 5+ ward
+ Immune to Psych
+ Flaming

So overall you lose a toughness, a wound and the double bounce, and you gain +1 armour, 5+ ward save, immune to psych (amazing!) better fighting ability, better mobility and flaming attacks for those pesky regen saves. For 35 points cheaper.

Go ask some Ogre players which they'd rather have. I'd drop my two ironblasters for two khannons in a heartbeat. For 70 cheaper? I'd take it if Khannons were the same cost just for flaming and immune to psych, which is a real issue for ironblasters.

Bear in mind that the Ironblaster is already a strong contender for "best artillery unit in the game". It's widely considered underpriced for what it does, one of the most "no brainer" units in 8th. And you're using this as your basis for comparison?

I disagree with your analysis of the Khorne Cannons capabilities, as several of the supposed benefits of the Khorne Cannon aren't really positives at all, or at least they have negligible effect on the game:

12" range - given the fact that the chariot can move and fire, and that nearly all viable targets will be much closer than the maximum range, the increased range of the Skull Cannon is rendered mostly pointless.

Instability - this is actually a negative as where the Ironblaster may break and run away to fight another day the Skull Cannon will simply be destroyed. Instability is really good on units that can generate decent amounts of combat resolution, but the Skull Cannon isn't one of those things.

Immune to Psychology - not really a positive as psychology means so little in the current edition.

Flaming - situational and certainly against most viable targets completely pointless.

I do believe also that the Skull Cannon has several less attacks than the Ironblaster, although I may be misremembering the Skull Cannon profile. Given the choice of the two, the ability of the Ironblaster to reroll dice seems far better than the Skull Cannon's ability to fire flaming shots with an extra 12" range. Certainly the S10 is a big bonus but it isn't exactly going to be helping you against large ranked units that will destroy you without thinking too hard. Can the Ironblaster also not choose to flee from enemy chargers?

Artinam
08-03-2013, 09:42
The Khore cannon can basicly fire at enemy warmachines turn 1, which is a big advantage in my book. It also allows it to stay more out of combat which you indicate is its weakpoint.
Also the immune to psychology bit is more important then you think. It means it can stay away from the BSB and not care at all if nearby chaff gets killed off. Panic can be very disrupting and I have seen Ogres running away after one of those cats was to nearby and caused panic.

Flaming and magical attacks are huge, hellpit abomination, Hydra, the new Chaos beasties. All have regeneration, there are also plenty of spells that give regeneration. Yes if your fighting dragonprinces or trying to snipe a characters with a dragonbane gem your in trouble, but I'd dare say that encountering monsters, units with regeneration is more common then models who have a wardsave against it. I'd say both models are equally viable, and that both are a bit undercosted for what they do.

Lord Inquisitor
08-03-2013, 14:50
12" range - given the fact that the chariot can move and fire, and that nearly all viable targets will be much closer than the maximum range, the increased range of the Skull Cannon is rendered mostly pointless.
Have you played with Steam Tanks or Ironblasters? Sometimes that range limit really comes into play. Particularly since they're best deployed on flanks and you can find yourself firing down the long edge of the table.

It's not a huge plus for the Skullcannon, but it's a plus.


Instability - this is actually a negative as where the Ironblaster may break and run away to fight another day the Skull Cannon will simply be destroyed. Instability is really good on units that can generate decent amounts of combat resolution, but the Skull Cannon isn't one of those things.
On the flip side a chariot/cannon can get charged in the flank and lose just to static res. An ironblaster that fails by one will usually be run down or flee of the board but a skullcannon that fails by 1 is fine and may be able to reform. I play both Ogres and Daemons and I certainly don't see the instability as a negative here, but I concede that it isn't much of a bonus.


Immune to Psychology - not really a positive as psychology means so little in the current edition.
I take it you don't play ogres? Panic is the single biggest threat to Ironblasters when they're away from the general/BSB (which they typically are as they work best on the flanks). Not being able to flee is a downside, admittedly, although not much of one. I rarely flee with my Ironblasters and when I do it's usually dead anyway.


Flaming - situational and certainly against most viable targets completely pointless.
Except chimerae, hydra, abombs, trolls, ogres with trollguts and that sort of thing. You know, the stuff cannons are useful for. I won't say it doesn't have its downsides (WoC Daemon Princes and Destroyers) but for the most part it's a pretty sweet thing to have on your cannon to negate the main defence most popular monsters have against cannons.


I do believe also that the Skull Cannon has several less attacks than the Ironblaster, although I may be misremembering the Skull Cannon profile. Given the choice of the two, the ability of the Ironblaster to reroll dice seems far better than the Skull Cannon's ability to fire flaming shots with an extra 12" range. Certainly the S10 is a big bonus but it isn't exactly going to be helping you against large ranked units that will destroy you without thinking too hard.
The point here remains the Skull Cannon stacks up rather well against the Ironblaster. I'm not going to say just on the basis of stats that the Skull Cannon is outright better than an Ironblaster. Sure, you want to say the Ironblaster is better - fine. Slightly.

Remember the Ironblaster is widely considered underpriced and the skull cannon is thirty-five points cheaper. That's absurdly cheap.

Xerkics
10-03-2013, 04:38
So how many point do you think the actual cannon on it costs? The Khorne chariot is closer to the woc chariot stat wise. Thats just over 100 points . Surely a more reasonable pricing should be like 200 points for some thing like this ? I dont quite follow the logic here? Something like hellcannon is little over 200 points and thats considered to be good for the points. I always thought ironblaster is undercosted by like 15-25 points easily for what it does. DOes this mean we going to see dwarf cannons for 25 points and 100 point steam tanks in the future if cannons are clearly so worthless as they have been consistently undercosted by the design team?

Gaargod
10-03-2013, 06:06
So how many point do you think the actual cannon on it costs? The Khorne chariot is closer to the woc chariot stat wise. Thats just over 100 points . Surely a more reasonable pricing should be like 200 points for some thing like this ? I dont quite follow the logic here? Something like hellcannon is little over 200 points and thats considered to be good for the points. I always thought ironblaster is undercosted by like 15-25 points easily for what it does. DOes this mean we going to see dwarf cannons for 25 points and 100 point steam tanks in the future if cannons are clearly so worthless as they have been consistently undercosted by the design team?

No, it appears that the dev team are underestimating how powerful mobile cannons are. That, or forgetting that giving something an alternate role should, you know, cost points.
As people have pointed out, the costs for the Skannon are actually quite fair - in either of its two roles. A flaming magical cannon (admittedly, one with a lesser range) could well come out at about 135pts, whilst a chariot with that statline could be similar (its pretty damn tough for a start). But for no apparent reason they decided a combination of the above should not cost any additional points.

Interestingly, I'd heard similar comments about 40k being balanced 'versus' space marines. This is a remarkably stupid tactic. Marines do not represent all kinds of armies, so you're get a very odd view of the game - for a start, Ap3 weapons would be obviously amazing, whilst Ap4-6 are all meh (which would explain the hefty price tag on Ap3). You'd end up with armies that are reasonably balanced against marines, but woefully unbalanced versus other races (for example, Dark Eldar versus Tyranids as opposed to DE versus marines).
Now, if you took Empire as your baseline, you'd end up with interesting things happening. For a start, Empire isn't massive on big monsters - sure, they have their Griffon and Wagons of various kinds (and now demigryphs probably count), but these aren't perhaps as common, as opposed to cheap infantry. Now, cannons are wasted on cheap infantry - but they're actually cost efficient versus expensive infantry. Interesting, eh?

And don't give me that crap about balancing stuff 'within' an army. There are very few examples where that is actually the case - stuff like buff-wagons is one example (where what the wagon has to buff makes a big difference). But costing the actual troops higher because of theoretical synergistic boosts is utterly bonkers and assbackwards logic. E.g.
I have unit of infantry with equal stats and rules to an Empire spearmen. They cost 12pts each. They are clearly not worth it, and I will not take them.
I also have a buff-wagon who will make those infantry into mini-gods, the equal of WoC Chosen, but affects nothing else. It costs 50pts.
Now, the only reason to take the infantry is because you have the buff-wagon - then a large squad of the bastards will be efficient. A much better solution would have to have ~6pts infantry, with a much more expensive buff-wagon, because then I have both options.

The problem also comes up in with, let's say, Imperial Guard in 40k. Now, they have a huge variety of heavy guns and tanks to put on the field. Let's say I want to add another one - do I charge them extra, because they already have lots of options (therefore this may let their shooting dominate), or less, because they already have lots of options (and they already have access to all those guns, so this is a less valuable addition)?
Answer? You charge them what they're fricking worth. Arbitrarily fiddling with the points values due to what the rest of the army already has should be necessary only very rarely - off-hand, about the only one I can think of as vaguely justified would be WoC, to whom the Hellcannon makes a massive difference in the shooting phase (in an army which is almost solely combat). And even then, it shouldn't be a high price rise.

Anyways, I hate to say it, but the Skannon presents one of the following options:

> The Dev team, specifically here as Mat Ward, (but, as frequently pointed out, they often collaborate) have no real idea of balance, either internal or external. If they use a formula, the formula is wrong or their tweaks are wrong.
> The Dev team simply does not care about balance. Either they think it of little importance, or actively don't care about balance in their own game.
> The Dev team is being heavily leaned upon by Sales in some cases to make kits sell more - not all the time, as people have pointed out. But there are several instances of '(not-so) shiny new model' syndrome.

Those problems will be exacerbated by any lack of playtesting, both internal and external, and any tight deadlines.

Kahadras
10-03-2013, 11:10
> The Dev team is being heavily leaned upon by Sales in some cases to make kits sell more - not all the time, as people have pointed out. But there are several instances of '(not-so) shiny new model' syndrome.

I feel this is probably the most likely senario. Somebody has probably said something along the lines of "We need to have a new unit that nearly everybody who owns a Daemon will want to take two of. We'll then price the model at 25 and that's going to be at least 80 we'll get from every Daemon player once the new book is out."

The Dev team has then had a look around for inspiration. As the Daemons already have super heavy cavalry (which people will have bought) they've probably settled on a unit that nearly every Ogre player went out and bought two of. Give it a solid set of rules and then undercost it. So now you have something in the new book that is almost going to gurantee sales. The last thing GW want is for people to go out, buy the rulebook and to feel they don't have to alter anything in their army.

Kahadras

OllieOllieOllie
10-03-2013, 12:32
You're all crying about the cost of a single unit entry. Have you read the rest of the book? Most everything else is overcosted. 75 pts for hatred when it used to be free? Cheap skull cannons just about make up for that. I'd give up my skull cannons in a flash for things like master of sorcery, I like the LoC but lore of metal? Meh, I wouldn't mind if the tzeenth lore was any good. Hell, we can't even get a damn dispel scroll and if we want a level 4 we have to pay about 500 points. Even then we have to hope for decent luck with rewards. I'm really frustrated with the book. Those damn cannons are the only saving grace.

sninsch
10-03-2013, 13:53
You're all crying about the cost of a single unit entry. Have you read the rest of the book? Most everything else is overcosted. 75 pts for hatred when it used to be free? Cheap skull cannons just about make up for that. I'd give up my skull cannons in a flash for things like master of sorcery, I like the LoC but lore of metal? Meh, I wouldn't mind if the tzeenth lore was any good. Hell, we can't even get a damn dispel scroll and if we want a level 4 we have to pay about 500 points. Even then we have to hope for decent luck with rewards. I'm really frustrated with the book. Those damn cannons are the only saving grace.

You are fighting on a lost front. I agree with you that a lot of the units in the new dex are overcosted and all the random tables and some special rules are very frustrating. Pay points and get a roll on a table where some results are useless for the char is unfair. I would understand the randomness if it gives a point reduction but thats not going to happen.
So all the haters of daemons focus on the ONE broken thing of the army book(cannon)....
The daemon players in our group would gladly never use the cannon for some army fixes.

Von Wibble
10-03-2013, 14:11
Maybe its safe to say that its appropriately costed to make it an option that people will consider taking in their armies? If it had been costed 20 (or more) points more then the other rare choices are obviously superior, and the cannon would never see play.

Well, it hits harder and is harder to kill than the Slaanesh chariot, plus it has a cannon. I don't see how that makes the Slaanesh choice obviously superior?? I think its a close call between 2 slaaneshi chariots vs 1 Khannon myself, with the chariots just about needing to cost more.

Edit - OllieOllieOllie, you seem to be complainnig about removal of originally overpowered aspects of the book. This hardly puts you in a strong position. Of course master of sorcery is gone - can you name an 8th edition book with anything close to it? You do however have access to pretty much any decent spell through glean magic, not to mention 3 very effective rulebook lores (and I tihnk you underrate Tzeentch magic - the random S means every spell is scary to the opponent, whereas facing a guaranteed set of S4 hits, most people let it through). Free hatred was clearly a mistake which has been corrected, now it has been slightly overpriced (I'd say 50 points is about fair). Given you should kill most enemy charcters in a challenge before they strike (fighty characters are rare in most armies) you are pretty safe from being attacked too. Relying on a dispel scroll? Most armies haven't been doing that since 7th now, and the don't have the ability to be immune to the scariest spells out there. As to a level 4, you pay 500 for a level 4 that is much harder to kill and can fight in combats with fair safety.

The random tables favour you more often than not in magic, and as long as you have a decent magic weapon in mind the gifts are fine too. 25 points for a chance of an IAS breath weapon, or D3 impact hits, with +1S if this doesn't work (pretty much any herald can use this). 75 pts for the ability to deploy any unit you like behind the enemy (a considerably better Banner of the Hidden Dead) - this one a guaranteed result? Fencers blades on a GUO - this is worth more than 50pts imo even if the item doesn't officially cost that much.

The way I see it, bloodletters are about 1 point too much, slaaneshi chariots need to come down in cost by about 30-40 points (70 for the exalted chariot), flamers need to come down by 7 or so points, and a few heralds' loci could come down in points. Compared to most army books that is incredibly good balance. Fancy facing a Tomb King force based around horsemen (without bows), Ushabti and Collossi?

To the OP - the answer is

Bluescribes, Masque, Herald led foot units (especially bloodletters), Master of Sorcery spammage, immune to magic weapon bloodthirsters with armour (basically immune to damage except cannonfire), Flesh Hounds.

DaemonReign
10-03-2013, 14:23
So how many point do you think the actual cannon on it costs?
Somewhere just over 200pts would make it an interesting choice, assuming that the rest of the book wasn't a haphazard heap of seemingly "randomized" Point-costs. It could swap cost with the Exalted Slaanesh Chariot, actually - they'd be more or less balanced if you did that. :)


The Dev team is being heavily leaned upon by Sales in some cases to make kits sell more - not all the time, as people have pointed out. But there are several instances of '(not-so) shiny new model' syndrome.
Those problems will be exacerbated by any lack of playtesting, both internal and external, and any tight deadlines.

Yup. And this Daemon book is the first instance in 8th where they didn't even pretend to try for any higher standards. It's a crap painted gold [yeah, nice layout it 'looks' like the real thing for sure!] but it's really, objectively, honestly, and quite reluctantly too - a joke compared to any and all AB's in this Edition. Here I was hoping this was the release that would make Daemons a 'serious' part of the WHFB universe, but no.. We're still stuck on the most extreme ends of the integrity-lacking 'pendulum', every tiny problem of 'casual design' present in other AB's is simply amplified. No internal balance, no coherence, no hollistic analysis. Period. Just field as much as you're allowed of the 'brand new' models and adopt the 'tactics' that this grants you - you'll do better than you ever did with the oh-so-broken 7th Ed rendition... But it's still an insult on both your behalf and your opponant's.


You're all crying about the cost of a single unit entry.

It's virtually every unit entry. Except maybe the base-cost of Daemonettes and possibly FleshHounds.


The daemon players in our group would gladly never use the cannon for some army fixes.

Most of us didn't even want more ranged capabilities.
Most of us just wanted an AB that did justice to our Collections (i.e. internal balance) and, if at all possible, free from must-take crap that just compounds the rep we already have from the last Edition.
A bit of nerfing we could have lived with, if it was done with taste and Thought - this book (probably) failed on the first account and (definately) didn't even touch the ball on the second one.

I know it's a beer&pretzels game but I want to be able to do that for many hours Before my gag-reflexes are triggered. ;)

Minsc
10-03-2013, 15:12
You're all crying about the cost of a single unit entry. Have you read the rest of the book? Most everything else is overcosted. 75 pts for hatred when it used to be free? Cheap skull cannons just about make up for that. I'd give up my skull cannons in a flash for things like master of sorcery, I like the LoC but lore of metal? Meh, I wouldn't mind if the tzeenth lore was any good. Hell, we can't even get a damn dispel scroll and if we want a level 4 we have to pay about 500 points. Even then we have to hope for decent luck with rewards. I'm really frustrated with the book. Those damn cannons are the only saving grace.

You're barking up the wrong tree mate.

By the day the internet (warseer) is ready to comfort Daemonplayers and acknowledge their complaints, humans have been living on Mars for decades. ;)

Xerkics
10-03-2013, 16:07
What i meant is how much is the skull chariot paying for its cannon? it cant be just 25 points can it? My theory is that they made it so cheap not out of incompetence but because they sculpt is just so mind shatteringly ugly. They had nothing else to replace it by deadline so they decide to make it ridiculously undercosted to make it sell despite the horrible sculpt. I always thought hellcannon was ugly well it has nothing on how ugly this thing is. I can only sympathize with people who play slaanesh and tzeentch as their chariots are nowhere near as good and cost more i think?

DaemonReign
10-03-2013, 16:49
As others have demonstrated the Skullcannon is paying pretty much exactly zero points for the cannon-part of the model. ;)

I don't Think it's that ugly. If I was playing 40k I'd be happy (with the Soulgrinder too, incidentally).
I guess we can Always say that it 'balances out in the end' - some units too expensive, some too cheap, fair&square at the end of the day right?? - but why a designer would opt to go that way rather than making each entry as balanced as possible is.. weird. We've seen the tendency in other books (Mangler-Squigs, Hurricaniums, Mournfangs..) but nothing as extreme as this imo.

HalfBlood
10-03-2013, 17:28
You're all crying about the cost of a single unit entry. Have you read the rest of the book? Most everything else is overcosted. 75 pts for hatred when it used to be free? Cheap skull cannons just about make up for that. I'd give up my skull cannons in a flash for things like master of sorcery, I like the LoC but lore of metal? Meh, I wouldn't mind if the tzeenth lore was any good. Hell, we can't even get a damn dispel scroll and if we want a level 4 we have to pay about 500 points. Even then we have to hope for decent luck with rewards. I'm really frustrated with the book. Those damn cannons are the only saving grace.

You have to remember that Daemons shouldnt be allowed to have anything that is Undercosted (sarcasm LOL). I would say that majority of Fantasy players are Daemon haters/ still ******** from 7th. Just live with the new book nothing can be changed. The book has grown on me, but I dont take gifts because they are way overcosted for the random bonus. Play Nurgle with Khorne cannons, just the way GW wanted Daemons to be in a comp environment....

Lord Inquisitor
10-03-2013, 18:04
I guess we can Always say that it 'balances out in the end' - some units too expensive, some too cheap, fair&square at the end of the day right?? - but why a designer would opt to go that way rather than making each entry as balanced as possible is.. weird. We've seen the tendency in other books (Mangler-Squigs, Hurricaniums, Mournfangs..) but nothing as extreme as this imo.

It depends on the army and it depends on how much you actually have to buy the overpriced stuff to what degree it balances out. With the Empire for example the very cheap buffs they have access to like the wizardmobiles is much less noticeable because of the overpriced core (and all their core is overpriced, which is important or players will gravitate to the most efficient core). It feels like with Empire the cost of the buffs is built into the troops themselves.

Mournfang on the other hand just seem overly good because OK have decent core and unit that are naff like yhetees compete with mournfang for points and therefore you can just take more mournfang and no yhetees! But you can just chalk that up to it being the first heavy MC in the edition and I don't think anyone saw just how potent they would be in the metagame dominated by infantry.

The khorne cannon is just ... odd. I don't know what they were thinking. Matt can't have been ignorant of the rep Ironblasters carry. In the last book I always suspected Masque's points value was off and they never corrected it (being the same as the herald of slaanesh's points looked like a copy-paste error). I get the same feeling with this one, it seems so off it just looks like an error somewhere.

It's really not all that much of a problem. Sure, two Khorne cannons in every competitive army. They're not going to break the game and there are enough disadvantages with the army rules (e.g. no general Ld, particularly with the risk of Slaanesh's ire) to mean it's just a no-brainer choice but it isn't a game-changer.

DaemonReign
10-03-2013, 19:23
the wizardmobiles is much less noticeable because of the overpriced core (and all their core is overpriced, which is important or players will gravitate to the most efficient core).
Yeah whether one likes Cruddace's thinking on that one at least he was concise.
The Daemonic Core section looks some units are priced "for possible buffs" while also paying more than their fair share to actually get those buffs [Bloodletters, Horrors] while others pay a 'fair' per-model price ['Nettes] and yet others are just too cheap [PB's] any way you cut it.
So Nurgle-heavy, with Epidemius in a giant unit of extremely cheap Beasts (assuming SC's are allowed), sprinkle with a Khorne-cannon and some Burning Chariots:
Apart from the off-chance that you get screwed by the Random Tables (which, in fairness, could happen regardless of composition) I'm quite certain we're looking at a tougher list here compared to the two mandatory blocks of 'Letters trailed by a TzHerald.
Configure your list any other way and Daemons have been nerfed.
Isn't that a pretty fair synopsis?

The khorne cannon is just ... odd. I don't know what they were thinking. Matt can't have been ignorant of the rep Ironblasters carry. In the last book I always suspected Masque's points value was off and they never corrected it (being the same as the herald of slaanesh's points looked like a copy-paste error). I get the same feeling with this one, it seems so off it just looks like an error somewhere.
Maybe... And that would be the top of a pretty big pile by my reckoning.
Things that 'look like Errors': (too expensive in red, too cheap in blue)
Cost of; -Bloodletters, -Plaguebearers, -Horrors, - Majority of the Loci, -Flamers, -Furies, -Beasts, -Crushers,- All Slaanesh Chariots, -Fiends, -Nurglings, -Skullcannon, -Bloodthrone.
Things that appear 'fairly' costed:
Daemonettes, FleshHounds (with upgrade!), Screamers, Burning Chariot, SoulGrinder, Seekers (possibly a bit too cheap but it's negligable).

That doesn't look like someone trying his best to me.

What's good is we get re-acquiant ourselves with the Army. Always healthy to get some fresh oxygen blowing the dust off our storage-shelves. Would have been really cool, of course, to have that Wind of Change blow in equal measure on each and every model.. But yeah I'm a hopeless romantic I know.. :angel:

HalfBlood
10-03-2013, 20:45
Pretty funny how majority of the undercosted units are nurgle.... I just think Ward wanted the Daemon meta to change in this fashion. The skullcannon just fits the empty slot for killing other War machines and Monsters.

The bearded one
10-03-2013, 22:48
Maybe... And that would be the top of a pretty big pile by my reckoning.

Not much in that pile seems off by possibly 75+ points though.

Vipoid
10-03-2013, 22:59
With regard to the cannon, yeah it's an example of terrible design, and atrocious costing.

But, at least it's only one unit - there was far worse in the old book.


The Daemonic Core section looks some units are priced "for possible buffs" while also paying more than their fair share to actually get those buffs [Bloodletters, Horrors] while others pay a 'fair' per-model price ['Nettes] and yet others are just too cheap [PB's] any way you cut it.

Bloodletters do seem to have been over-nerfed in this edition. It's depressing, because all they really needed to lose was killing blow (which could even have been one of the herald-auras), and have heralds either cost more base, or pay for the Hatred upgrade (not both). They didn't need to go up in price, and lose a point of strength, and have herald base-cost increased, and have them pay an extortionate amount for hatred, and also lose access to flaming attacks, 3+ armour save etc.



Pretty funny how majority of the undercosted units are nurgle....

I think it's mainly because the nurgle ability is very strong. -1 to hit in combat is an amazing ability to have as standard.

The bearded one
10-03-2013, 23:24
Bloodletters do seem to have been over-nerfed in this edition. It's depressing, because all they really needed to lose was killing blow (which could even have been one of the herald-auras), and have heralds either cost more base, or pay for the Hatred upgrade (not both). They didn't need to go up in price, and lose a point of strength, and have herald base-cost increased, and have them pay an extortionate amount for hatred, and also lose access to flaming attacks, 3+ armour save etc.

The loss of a point of strength alone was probably enough to actually warrent a pointsdrop.

Lord Inquisitor
10-03-2013, 23:40
Classic GW response to anything that's over/underpowered: think of three ways to fix a problem and implement them all. We've seen it so many times.

The bearded one
11-03-2013, 00:11
Classic GW response to anything that's over/underpowered: think of three ways to fix a problem and implement them all. We've seen it so many times.

Precisely, it really happens all the time. The mortar for example. And also almost constantly even just one of the fixes would've been enough. It makes you wonder wether it's deliberate (nerf the previously popular one, buff the previously unpopular one) or a chronic overreaction. I hope at some point they finally learn to stop. doing. that.

IcedCrow
11-03-2013, 00:15
You won't see that until math-hammer guys and competitive players also run the design team.

JWhex
11-03-2013, 00:25
Precisely, it really happens all the time. The mortar for example. And also almost constantly even just one of the fixes would've been enough. It makes you wonder wether it's deliberate (nerf the previously popular one, buff the previously unpopular one) or a chronic overreaction. I hope at some point they finally learn to stop. doing. that.

It has been going on so long, I think they just dont care. Because they live in their inbred isolated little world and dont care much about other approaches to the game they dont need to be very good at their job (designing rules) and it shows. WHFB at this stage should be a much more refined product than it is. The design studio has just become a joke. They dont have any of the passion or vision that was present in the past and they are very unsophisticated in their rule design. They dont even pretend like they are striving to improve the game.

The GW design method is by trial and error, after the trial they pick the error.

DaemonReign
11-03-2013, 05:28
Not much in that pile seems off by possibly 75+ points though.

Well... Not in straight POINTS perhaps. I relative terms though there's (sadly) nothing unique about the Skullcannon in this book in my humble opinion. It just happens to be the 'most expensive' example - and the most flagrant example in terms of general undercostedness.

I hear my fellow Daemon-players are having fun with the new book though. If it wasn't for that I wouldn't bother at this point.
I'll give it a try. Maybe there's some hidden beauty in this oh-so-fluffy "chaos and confusion" that one just doesn't grasp when reading the dead letter..
Let's hope so.. Or I'll go down in history as that dork who refuses to play anything but his own self-made book.. Not really something I've been striving for, in all honesty..

Vipoid
11-03-2013, 10:38
Classic GW response to anything that's over/underpowered: think of three ways to fix a problem and implement them all. We've seen it so many times.

Yeah, that sounds about right.


I hear my fellow Daemon-players are having fun with the new book though. If it wasn't for that I wouldn't bother at this point.

If it makes you feel any better, you're not alone in disliking the book. My daemon-playing friend really hates it.

Losing his Bloodthirster turn 1 to the chaos table, and then his herald the turn after, in our last game didn't improve matters.

Sh4d0w
11-03-2013, 11:43
Yeah, that sounds about right.



If it makes you feel any better, you're not alone in disliking the book. My daemon-playing friend really hates it.

Losing his Bloodthirster turn 1 to the chaos table, and then his herald the turn after, in our last game didn't improve matters.

i've been fortunate to have been invited to 2 home tournies in the past week and so i've played about 10 games with the new book trying out several different lists. I think your mate is just damn unlucky, the worst i've rolled is a double 1 which removed some bloodletters and my furies. If you are really unlucky this book will be horrible for you.

DaemonReign
11-03-2013, 18:01
If it makes you feel any better, you're not alone in disliking the book. My daemon-playing friend really hates it.

Funny you should say that.. What really makes me 'feel good' (or at least somewhat 'better') is that fact that my opponants so far appear to be deriding the book beyond the moderated criticism I've aired myself so far.
In a nutshell: The guys in my Group are of the opinion that this book would be fun as a "Campaign add-on", i.e. all beer&pretzels for a game or two on specific occassions or at a given juncture in a bigger Campaign-setting..
Do do not, however, appear to even be looking at this book as a serious 'Army Book' suitable for use every time I break out my Daemons.

Partly this is likely to be a testament to the complete houserule revamp I've been 'forcing' them to play for the last year. I wasn't surpriced they'd let me do that compared to the previous book (as these houserules were an obvious toning down of all the Sharp edges in the 7th Ed DoC Book) but I have to say I'm a bit surpriced they're not taking the opportunity to embrace this new official release.


If you are really unlucky this book will be horrible for you.

Which is true for any game of Warhammer. Rolling snake-eyes for Winds and boxcars on Instability wasn't particularly 'competative' even with the previous book.
What I'm saying is that the Reign of Chaos table is rather peripheral in importance. The book is hurting much more in other places in my opinion.

HalfBlood
11-03-2013, 19:20
Like random protection for your expensive Lords and another book pushed into taking cannons... Bad combination...

SlaaneshSlave
12-03-2013, 01:17
It's really not all that much of a problem. Sure, two Khorne cannons in every competitive army. They're not going to break the game and there are enough disadvantages with the army rules (e.g. no general Ld, particularly with the risk of Slaanesh's ire) to mean it's just a no-brainer choice but it isn't a game-changer.
This. Demon opponents shouldn't be that bothered with the Khorne Cannon as it will not break games.

It is demon players who should be pissed. It is the best chariot in the army. And it has a free cannon. I am tempted to use its rules for my Hellflayer model and just never shoot the cannon.

Basically, it is so undercosted that not taking it practically not trying. It is such a no-brainer that I feel like my army selection has been taken out of my hands. It makes me mad.

DaemonReign
12-03-2013, 03:00
Basically, it is so undercosted that not taking it practically not trying. It is such a no-brainer that I feel like my army selection has been taken out of my hands. It makes me mad.

A lot of stuff has been taken out of our hands in that regard.
And some of the things that have been put in our hands are a bit questionable - like being 'allowed/able' to kit our characters at the start of every game for example.. I'm not a tourney-player but it could cause concerns down the road, no?

Above all it's not the change itself that bothers me - because the devil is in the details.. Just can't shake the impression that scratching the surface of this shiny new book we are looking at something rather scetchy.. Like; a bit incomplete somehow, like a first draft that somehow skipped second-thoughts.. Which is why a lot of things read like your average wishlist-thread.. "135pts for that mobile cannon?" - Sure, just throw a number out there why don't you!
Sort of like that.

Still.. Let's see what we all think in a few months from now.

Don Zeko
12-03-2013, 04:07
This. Demon opponents shouldn't be that bothered with the Khorne Cannon as it will not break games.

It is demon players who should be pissed. It is the best chariot in the army. And it has a free cannon. I am tempted to use its rules for my Hellflayer model and just never shoot the cannon.

Basically, it is so undercosted that not taking it practically not trying. It is such a no-brainer that I feel like my army selection has been taken out of my hands. It makes me mad.

I think all of the complaints about the skullcannon stem from two things. You're right that people playing against daemons don't need to worry too much; 2 of them in every army is hardly game breaking. The trouble is that A) after the 7th edition book, obviously undercosted Daemon units are really grating and B) it is just soooo obvious that the points cost is off. After all, you can compare it's points to either the Ironblaster OR the Empire great cannon OR a chaos chariot and get obvious, facepalm WTF responses. 75 points undercosted is hardly the end of the world, but I don't know how GW can put stuff out that's off by that much and expect us to keep taking this seriously.

GrandmasterWang
12-03-2013, 04:26
Interesting opinions. Besides the masque I can't think of a unit that has been this obviously broken in... ever?

I am predominantly a daemon opponent but do play them sometimes. I don't think the cannon breaks the game or anything but it's a damn shame. Ward has done it again. Worst army book of 8th. I just pray he doesn't get my beloved dwarfs. The worst part of the broken cannon is how bad it makes the slaanesh chariot s look by comparison. I seriously think the cannon is probably better than the Exalted chariot and a lot easier to use. When I play with my main group we might have to take points off the slaanesh options and add them to the broken cannon. I just don't know what they were thinking. The internal balance of this book is horrid!!! Much worse than the 7th abortion which I hated (external balance is that books big failing).

How is the cannon cheaper than the throne mount option? ??? Wth

I quite want to get an exalted chariot but seeing the cannon right there next to it sours me completely.

I actually like some of the random stuff but overall the book fails hard imo. This coming from someone who likes!!! The tomb king book.

Mat Ward had some good ideas but fails again. I certainly don't think he deserves to write any more Fantasy army books. 40k can keep him, not that they want him.

MLP
12-03-2013, 04:34
Interesting opinions. Besides the masque I can't think of a unit that has been this obviously broken in... ever?

I am predominantly a daemon opponent but do play them sometimes. I don't think the cannon breaks the game or anything but it's a damn shame. Ward has done it again. Worst army book of 8th. I just pray he doesn't get my beloved dwarfs. The worst part of the broken cannon is how bad it makes the slaanesh chariot s look by comparison. I seriously think the cannon is probably better than the Exalted chariot and a lot easier to use. When I play with my main group we might have to take points off the slaanesh options and add them to the broken cannon. I just don't know what they were thinking. The internal balance of this book is horrid!!! Much worse than the 7th abortion which I hated (external balance is that books big failing).

How is the cannon cheaper than the throne mount option? ??? Wth

I quite want to get an exalted chariot but seeing the cannon right there next to it sours me completely.

I actually like some of the random stuff but overall the book fails hard imo. This coming from someone who likes!!! The tomb king book.

Mat Ward had some good ideas but fails again. I certainly don't think he deserves to write any more Fantasy army books. 40k can keep him, not that they want him.

As much as I am unsure about Mat Ward's army book writing ability I imagine the reason the skull cannon is under priced purely because it will push people to buy it by making people see it as such a good choice points wise. This would likely be the Director's influence and probably not what the writer wanted. I think every one of the new books has large new models that are undercosted in points.

However although cheap I don't think the cannon is game breaking, and outside of the Internet it probably won't cause many issues. Unless some **** has too much spare cash and buys the maximum he can field just to win.

Don Zeko
12-03-2013, 04:52
As much as I am unsure about Mat Ward's army book writing ability I imagine the reason the skull cannon is under priced purely because it will push people to buy it by making people see it as such a good choice points wise. This would likely be the Director's influence and probably not what the writer wanted. I think every one of the new books has large new models that are undercosted in points.

However although cheap I don't think the cannon is game breaking, and outside of the Internet it probably won't cause many issues. Unless some **** has too much spare cash and buys the maximum he can field just to win.

Maybe your scene is different, but I fully expect to see two of these in the majority of the DoC tournament armies I face. So the real victims here are the Daemon players, who would like to have choices and options in their competitive lists. Instead, Ward is basically requiring them to shell out $80 on a pair of the ugliest models in warhammer.

Lord Inquisitor
12-03-2013, 04:59
This doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Sure, if the new models had kick ass rules to encourage old players to buy them that would make sense ... but then why are the slaanesh chariots so massively overpriced? After all you could prompt me to buy half a dozen of them if they were good rather than just two khorne chariots. Or worse, looking afield for something non-GW to use instead to proxy the khorne cannon.

I could get the idea that the sulk cannon is cheap as a base marketing ploy but there's just too many units that just don't fit the pattern that I just can't accept it. The big WoC monsters are awful yet the hellcannon, already a good choice, got better. Certainly GW could have made the cannon underpriced to sell it, but why not the other new releases?

I think there's a big variance in power level of new units and some are winners and some are losers. There's no malicious price gouging here, just lack of playtesting.

GrandmasterWang
12-03-2013, 06:16
I'm kind of with lord inquisitor here. The slaanesh chariots are new plastic kits.... are they brutal in 40k or something?

Also, what about the new tzeentch chariot?

If gw wanted to exploit to the max then surely the throne option should also have been very op.

Maybe it's that the slaanesh and tzeentch chariots look cool so gw think they will sell despite crappy rules (I think they look awesome) meanwhile they all agree the cannon looks teh suck so needed a helping hand....

MLP
12-03-2013, 06:59
Well the slaanesh chariots have been out 6 months already so they've sold enough to keep them happy. And with the WoC they have Skullcrushers which fit the profile.

I'm probably wrong but this is just the image I see. I do hate the skull cannon model so I may be blinded by that!

Jind_Singh
12-03-2013, 07:08
Old book is thankfully dead!

But the new book...the cannon is not broken like anything in the old book - can't say for the life of me that a cannon is better than -2 leadership banner, D3 ld Masque, siren song, cheap as chips lore master, etc, etc, awful gifts, and all round army that broke not just the armybook but warhammer as we know it!

So comparing this to a slightly underpriced cannon...

Nu-uh, not in my watch!

But as for the new book...

Totally epic fail compared to the new 8th ed books...

Here's what was RIGHT

1) Got rid of broken crap from old book
2) Gave the Daemons a nice sense of character with that chart that depends on the winds of magic roll, lore attributes are good (missed boat with Khorne, they needed something that if 'x' number of wounds caused the daemons get hatred every round or some such as they claim skulls for Khorne to offset the fact they are only power who won't gain models as the game goes on)
3) Added a BUNCH of new units
4) Locus rules was neat concept
5) Made me pick up my army and want to play them again
6) Power level is middle of the pack - they will give all other 8th ed books a run for their money but won't be broken again

BUT all at the same time there was some epic fails...

1) SAME STUPID CUT AND PASTE STORIES! Soooo lazy! Come on, did I really just read the SAME description (word for word) between 2 army books? That's lame LAME!
2) Points costing that even the master of mystery, Tzeentch, wouldn't be able to fathom! He's got a better chance of understanding eternity than the points costs of this new book!
The points values just don't make sense - some stuff (Khorne cannon) are way to cheap, Nurgle falls into there too with the locus being so cheap, and yet then they decided to randomly make some stuff so expensive! Flamers, Slaanesh chariots..

Oh - here's two rare choice chariots...

6+ save vs 3+ save, enough said!
D6 strength 4 impact hits (with armor piercing) and when you cause wounds you get more crappy strength 4 hits with armor piercing vs D6 strength SIX impact hits that give wounds back on a 4+
T4 vs mighty T5
8 str 3 attacks and 2 str 3 poison attacks vs 4 strength 5 on the charge and 3 strength 6 attacks

Oh - actually the Khorne one also has a strength 10 flaming D6 wounds cannon on it for giggles...


THE SLAANESH CHARIOT IS JUST FIVE POINTS CHEAPER! How does that ever make sense?

There are far too many strangely pointed units to make them viable - your making a sacrifice to take certain units over others - this is a shame as it only cuts down diversity.

Look at Warriors, Empire, Greenskins, etc, I hardly see any 2 8th ed armies look the same - yet the Daemons have much less to choose from unless you take very sup-par choices.

That's my beef - right there!

Ratarsed
12-03-2013, 07:46
Does the Slaanesh chariot move faster?

overall I like what I have heard and look forward to playing against the new daemons as opposed to dreading to play against the old ones. I'm not too bothered by the cost of the Khorne cannon, even if it is about 50 points too cheap for what it does. I have lived with stupidly cheap hydras and still had fun playing against Dark Elves so I'm hopeful to still have fun playing against daemons. Besides as an Empire player I know how misfires can ruin your day!

GrandmasterWang
12-03-2013, 09:04
I think I misnamed the topic. I meant unit's (stand alone) not options when talking about the brokenness. Characters but not special characters. Basically anything you can take multiples of.

There are things like the hydra and destroyer that stand out but I think the cannon beats even them out.

Great post Jindh.

I mean I don't mind handicapping myself a little by taking sub optimal choices but looking at the Daemon rare section and choosing Slaanesh over Khorne feels like crippling myself.

Ratarsed
12-03-2013, 10:33
I think I misnamed the topic. I meant unit's (stand alone) not options when talking about the brokenness. Characters but not special characters. Basically anything you can take multiples of.

when talking about brokenness you are nearly always talking about combos. The Khorne cannon in itself is not broken. You are just granting the army about another 50 points of troops over and above you would expect from the effectiveness of the cannon in comparison to other similar units.
charging it has a very good chance of destroying it so positioning the thing in game is going to be vitally important. Making the right decision to shoot or charge is also going to be vitally important. If you shoot you may leave yourself open to be charged on the enemies turn and there's no fleeing the charge. If you charge you are not shooting and again open yourself up to be killed. On the other hand if you stay back and just be a mobile cannon platform, you are paying about the fair price for that.


There are things like the hydra and destroyer that stand out but I think the cannon beats even them out.
I don't.


I mean I don't mind handicapping myself a little by taking sub optimal choices but looking at the Daemon rare section and choosing Slaanesh over Khorne feels like crippling myself.
Again movement values are very important to chariots! Movement 9 goblin chariots are amazing for their long range threat potential. Doesn't the Slaaneshi chariot have a significant movement advantage over the Khorne cannon?

BooMeRLiNSKi
12-03-2013, 10:47
when talking about brokenness you are nearly always talking about combos.

Nonsense, this is simply not true at all.

Another cannon chariot underpriced, hurrah. The big problem with cannon-chariots is their ability to eat most war machine hunters. Setting up for a charge is often just feeding points to them.

The bearded one
12-03-2013, 10:56
charging it has a very good chance of destroying it

With chaos knights maybe :P and even then it has killing blow so is dangerous.

In fact it can either countercharge (with str 6 hits) and has the same speed as those knights, or it moves backwards 7 inches to escape you and still cannon you, or sideways 7 inches so maybe it rolls a cannon through your flank, or alternatively simply a grapeshot, because inexplicably the damned thing has ballistic skill 5 too.


Again movement values are very important to chariots! Movement 9 goblin chariots are amazing for their long range threat potential. Doesn't the Slaaneshi chariot have a significant movement advantage over the Khorne cannon?

M10 to m7, which is the only saving grace whatsoever the hellflayer has compared to the skullcannonchariot, as it loses out on toughness, saves, durability (the cannon regenerates wounds by charging!) and strength of crew&impacthits. In fact, even if you remove the cannon from the top, the mere 5pt difference in cost is still suspect. Slaanesh's chariot loses out to something that isnt even a dedicated chariot, but has a sidejob as one!

Lord Inquisitor
12-03-2013, 11:37
Well the slaanesh chariots have been out 6 months already so they've sold enough to keep them happy. And with the WoC they have Skullcrushers which fit the profile.
Because their rules were so amazing in the WD update? :eyebrows: They don't just look bad compared with the sulk cannon, they look bad just on their own merits. I don't know anyone who ran out and bought six. They look bad compared with goblin chariots. A point of movement, an attack or two and a few pips of WS along with the daemon rules (5+ ward) but less armour and lower strength on the chariot - for over double the points.

I was rather hoping they'd have got feedback from the WD rules and reduced the points of the slaanesh chariots for the book. I'd really like a chariot-heavy slaanesh list.

Ratarsed
12-03-2013, 13:17
M10 to m7, which is the only saving grace whatsoever the hellflayer has compared to the skullcannonchariot, as it loses out on toughness, saves, durability (the cannon regenerates wounds by charging!) and strength of crew&impacthits. In fact, even if you remove the cannon from the top, the mere 5pt difference in cost is still suspect. Slaanesh's chariot loses out to something that isnt even a dedicated chariot, but has a sidejob as one!
I'm not saying I don't think the Khorne cannon is underpriced. I'm saying being underpriced does not make it broken, nor break the game. It's just another chariot or cannon depending on what you want at the time. M10 over M7 is pretty significant when you look at the sort of uses the chariots are going to be put to. M8 or 9 fast cavalry needs to show much greater respect to a M10 chariot. Approach to within 18 and your M7 needs 11s to make the charge. Your movement 10 only needs 8. When positioning your troops this is having a significant impact on the choices you make. I think that both units are fairly costed as chariots, the Khorne one gets a pretty good shooting attack for free, that's all.

BooMeRLiNSKi
12-03-2013, 13:59
I'm saying being underpriced does not make it broken, nor break the game.

That's only true because essentially nothing ever has "broken" the game, but it is about as bad as it is possible to get without going silly.

The price it was set at classify as "the ravings of a madman", obviously well under what it should be to anybody who has played the game. To me it is laughable that it has made it to the public at that points cost, it is lunatic.

No I don't think it is a deliberate marketing ploy... never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity; cock-up before conspiracy.

Bladelord
12-03-2013, 14:14
topic?

I think the masque was far worse but actual units? it's tough, especially in a vacuum

Anything in the old book was broken, 7th ed. Daemons was just as silly as the current Druchii one, but atleast the Druchii one is interesting and just underpriced.

Ratarsed
12-03-2013, 14:20
That's only true because essentially nothing ever has "broken" the game, but it is about as bad as it is possible to get without going silly.

The price it was set at classify as "the ravings of a madman", obviously well under what it should be to anybody who has played the game. To me it is laughable that it has made it to the public at that points cost, it is lunatic.

No I don't think it is a deliberate marketing ploy... never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity; cock-up before conspiracy.
If you want something in the Daemon codex that is properly broken, try Epidemius. The cannons are just underpriced, but not by so much that it falls outside the general imbalance that exists all the time.

BooMeRLiNSKi
12-03-2013, 14:42
If you want something in the Daemon codex that is properly broken, try Epidemius. The cannons are just underpriced, but not by so much that it falls outside the general imbalance that exists all the time.

I agree but special characters bother me less, their balance is so out of wack (either way) that I consider permission/warning prior to the game as essential in any gaming group (even if using a fluffy SC... then hopefully you'll both run a more fluffy list). At tournaments you will know the score beforehand.

Yes things across warhammer are over or under priced. However, this is one of those cases where it is a huge stack of plates being dropped in the middle of the warhammer kitchen. I'm not actually sure I can think of a worse example of obvious undercosting.

Ratarsed
12-03-2013, 16:50
Yes things across warhammer are over or under priced. However, this is one of those cases where it is a huge stack of plates being dropped in the middle of the warhammer kitchen. I'm not actually sure I can think of a worse example of obvious undercosting.
I think what is really bothering you is that it is SO obviously underpriced that you can't imagine how they failed to see the mistake! A unit of 40 infantry troops underpriced by just 1 point a model is 40 points under costed. If the Khorne cannon was costed at 175 points per model would there be all this Internet forum outrage over it?
My guess is they have priced it as if it was either just a cannon, or just a chariot, and for each of those roles it is fairly costed I think. And I can understand why. After all in any one turn it is either shooting, charging or fighting a round of combat, but never doing both. What they have not taken into account is that the sum of all these functions is greater than each individual one and I suspect that that has a lot to do with how the designers approach the game.

HalfBlood
12-03-2013, 17:01
What I never understand about forums is that people post threads.like these. Threads that complain about a specific unit when in reality you have 0 control of what gw prices units. Yes the cannon is underpriced but no matter how many pages,or how many complaints we make it wont change the cost of the cannon.


Obvious reasons for the cost being so low is that gw wants to sell more models.

Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk 2

IcedCrow
12-03-2013, 18:04
I think what is really bothering you is that it is SO obviously underpriced that you can't imagine how they failed to see the mistake! A unit of 40 infantry troops underpriced by just 1 point a model is 40 points under costed. If the Khorne cannon was costed at 175 points per model would there be all this Internet forum outrage over it?
My guess is they have priced it as if it was either just a cannon, or just a chariot, and for each of those roles it is fairly costed I think. And I can understand why. After all in any one turn it is either shooting, charging or fighting a round of combat, but never doing both. What they have not taken into account is that the sum of all these functions is greater than each individual one and I suspect that that has a lot to do with how the designers approach the game.

That is how I look at it as well, and why it doesn't phase me. As a chariot or as a cannon the points are pretty much what they need to be. It will only ever be doing one or the other. Making it 300 points would mean that it would never get taken because no one is going to spend 300 points on a cannon or a normal chariot just because it can do both, it never will be doing both at the same time. At 200 points I probably also wouldn't bother with it as again I'd be paying 200 points for a cannon that happens to have flaming attacks which is only good against certain things. If I knew I was up against skaven I'd take it so I had something to deal with the HPAx2 attack that seems popular but other then that... in an army where everything costs so much as it is I'd rather have more bodies on the field.

The bearded one
12-03-2013, 18:10
Obvious reasons for the cost being so low is that gw wants to sell more models.

Yeah, for precisely the same reason the slaughterbrute, mutalith vortex beast and the beastmen rares are vastly underpri... Hang on :wtf:

Muad'Dib
12-03-2013, 21:05
I think what is really bothering you is that it is SO obviously underpriced that you can't imagine how they failed to see the mistake! A unit of 40 infantry troops underpriced by just 1 point a model is 40 points under costed. If the Khorne cannon was costed at 175 points per model would there be all this Internet forum outrage over it?
My guess is they have priced it as if it was either just a cannon, or just a chariot, and for each of those roles it is fairly costed I think. And I can understand why. After all in any one turn it is either shooting, charging or fighting a round of combat, but never doing both.
Large part of why I think it's so undercosted so much is because the tough profile gives it survivability (far) beyond that of a warmachine. Also, it's not even that it will get to use it's CC stats every turn or even at all - it's the CC stats combined with move-and-shoot that enable it to project a presence on the battlefield, influencing how your opponent moves and picks fights without actually needing to fight.

Yeah, for precisely the same reason the slaughterbrute, mutalith vortex beast and the beastmen rares are vastly underpri... Hang on :wtf:
Yeah, it would be comforting if it was just corporate greed influencing rules design...as opposed to either 1) lack of thinking, right attitude and planning in the rules making process 2) purposefully creating unbalanced rules due to some deluded scheme ("keeping metagame fresh"? I dunno, since Blizzard crippled Starcraft 2 with few top-down design 'philosophies' I'd consider anything possible. The wishy-washy content** of Standard Bearer article in White Dwarf I once skimmed through helped nothing to quell such suspicion(s) )

**It was something about "When designing, you have a vision of how players might use the rules that can be quite different from how players use them...and that's why things might be over or underpowered"...That's not even an excuse, it's an euphemism for "We are not skilled enough in design to create balanced rulesets." and/or "We don't playtest our books."

HalfBlood
12-03-2013, 21:33
Yeah, for precisely the same reason the slaughterbrute, mutalith vortex beast and the beastmen rares are vastly underpri... Hang on :wtf:

The difference is The Slaughterbrute/ Mutilator are more appealing. Well for me it is. The Skull cannon is just hideous

Xerkics
12-03-2013, 21:39
Someone was saying they got d6 attacks isnt it d6 +1 for scythes?

The bearded one
12-03-2013, 22:24
The difference is The Slaughterbrute/ Mutilator are more appealing. Well for me it is. The Skull cannon is just hideous

Looks are subjective. I dislike the slaughterbrute almost entirely except for the head, but find the mutalith more fun to look at. If GW undercosted models based on wether they think they're too ugly to sell, the costs of plenty of models should raise eyebrows as to why they're not cheaper. Pumbagor? Basically there seems to be little rhime and reason to models being under- and overpowered, no catch-all rule of corporate greed or formula of doom. Poor design or lack of playtesting seems a better suspect. Hanlon's razor.

DaemonReign
12-03-2013, 23:00
**It was something about "When designing, you have a vision of how players might use the rules that can be quite different from how players use them...and that's why things might be over or underpowered"...That's not even an excuse, it's an euphemism for "We are not skilled enough in design to create balanced rulesets." and/or "We don't playtest our books."

Good post. And I agree *something* definately appears to be 'rotten in Denmark' as the old saying goes.
It's such a shame this book got such non-existant internal balance (because external balance is probably all right, the other minor idiocies we could have abided).
What hurts is this book doesn't look like a serious effort on the designer's part. It's like they spent more time on the layout than the actual rules.
The only reason we're even discussing it is because it's 'official' - because an Army List like this being posted in a wishlist thread would just have us shaking our heads and scrolling to the next post.

But this is what we've got now so let's make the best of it! I'm so abyssmally tired of being dissappointed now I'm just gonna try and enjoy 'playtesting' this stuff. This hobby is supposed to be fun for crist's sake.

Ratarsed
12-03-2013, 23:03
It would be fascinating to have witnessed the play testing process, because there was certainly bound to be some, if not as extensive as it was in 6th edition. I wonder if it started out higher then went down in cost as games showed it to be less effective than its simple stat line suggested. Of course the desire to maintain tight security has limited the play testing to in house only which in turn affects the quality of that play testing. Whilst the competitive mindset may well find the most efficient use for the cannon a more relaxed "we are just here to have fun" mindset probably does not get the most out of it. From my experience of GW staff they are more about the latter than the former.
ultimately it will not matter that the Khorne cannon has been poorly costed because any error can easily be fixed with comp systems, or local group peer pressure.

It's costing errors in core troops and characters that really cause problems because they are less easy to fix and its the combos of special characters or magic items that break the game.

The bearded one
13-03-2013, 00:20
One cannot help but wonder what the effect would be of inviting half a dozen warseer members (of various motives of play, even if with a half-decent competitive streak) over for as little as a weekend of playtesting at the end ;) I know I would be keen, even if I'd have to cross the channel every other month :p

GrandmasterWang
13-03-2013, 00:39
I can imagine someone like gav t in the playtesting misfiring and blowing the things up repeatedly causing ward and co. To drop 100 pts off the thing despite the miniscule chance of this happening.

I joke with my friends with the chaos dwarf destroyer that they only tested it vs chaos dwarfs who all have a ward vs fire and it must have self destructed for them a lot.

Basically, mistakes like the cannon take it hard to take the daemon book seriously. It is certainly the most unbalanced unit in 8th in comparison to its section rivals

IcedCrow
13-03-2013, 00:45
One cannot help but wonder what the effect would be of inviting half a dozen warseer members (of various motives of play, even if with a half-decent competitive streak) over for as little as a weekend of playtesting at the end ;) I know I would be keen, even if I'd have to cross the channel every other month :p

It'd be costed at 450 points and never taken :D

DaemonReign
13-03-2013, 02:56
Basically, mistakes like the cannon take it hard to take the daemon book seriously.

Yes, sadly.

HalfBlood
13-03-2013, 03:00
Basically, mistakes like the cannon take it hard to take the daemon book seriously.


With no Dispel scroll
Reign of Chaos
and Random Items (with no reliable armor for important Lords/ Heros

I really don't think anyone can actually take this book seriously

The bearded one
13-03-2013, 04:50
It'd be costed at 450 points and never taken :D

That depends on you, because I'd put members of your disposition (and me, obviously, 'cause I'm so much fun) in this playtesting group ;) Really the kind of people that can think constructively and importantly think in a very competitive mindset even if they have the grace not to constantly be a powermaxer (new word!). They might not go WAAC on you, but they will at least be able to recognise when certain things in the army are way off.

Ratarsed
13-03-2013, 07:46
One cannot help but wonder what the effect would be of inviting half a dozen warseer members (of various motives of play, even if with a half-decent competitive streak) over for as little as a weekend of playtesting at the end ;) I know I would be keen, even if I'd have to cross the channel every other month :p
The effect would be a great deal of disagreement with what they had done so far and the whole book leaked all over the net by the end of the following Monday.

Ratarsed
13-03-2013, 07:55
With no Dispel scroll
Reign of Chaos
and Random Items (with no reliable armor for important Lords/ Heros

I really don't think anyone can actually take this book seriously
All of these are positives in the book. I don't use scrolls and would not mind having them removed from the game entirely.
reign of Chaos is a wonderfully evocative system that links the daemons (an army of magic) to the winds of magic.
Random items are not as random as you think. My main concern with this would be remembering what items I had that game!
The book is a serious as any of the others. I feel the only ones who won't like it will be those that jumped onto the 7th edition Daemon bandwagon because it was a powerhouse army head and shoulders above all the rest.

BooMeRLiNSKi
13-03-2013, 09:01
I think what is really bothering you is that it is SO obviously underpriced that you can't imagine how they failed to see the mistake!

Bingo.

It's a no brainer choice that obsoletes other things in the list merely by existing.

The bearded one
13-03-2013, 09:10
The effect would be a great deal of disagreement with what they had done so far and the whole book leaked all over the net by the end of the following Monday.

Loving the confidence

IcedCrow
13-03-2013, 12:27
What does the cannon obsolete out of curiosity?

HalfBlood
13-03-2013, 13:02
All of these are positives in the book. I don't use scrolls and would not mind having them removed from the game entirely.
reign of Chaos is a wonderfully evocative system that links the daemons (an army of magic) to the winds of magic.
Random items are not as random as you think. My main concern with this would be remembering what items I had that game!
The book is a serious as any of the others. I feel the only ones who won't like it will be those that jumped onto the 7th edition Daemon bandwagon because it was a powerhouse army head and shoulders above all the rest.

Oh you are so wrong. I jumped on playing daemons as my first fantasy army at the start of 8th.

All because you don't take a scroll doesn't make it irrelevant. Many players need them especially when you play in a comp environment like myself. When someone casts plague and it goes off on a 25 I actually have to hope I roll it off or I'm doomed.

Lack of protection for gds just makes the book seem even more sour.

Now I still like.the book and will.run a nurgle list against people, but Ward really failed with this book.

Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk 2

IcedCrow
13-03-2013, 13:23
I don't often take dispel scrolls with my non-demon armies (or level 4s) and its not the end of the world for my armies. Not having one with demons is also not the end of the world. Makes killing the enemy wizards more of a priority.

BigbyWolf
13-03-2013, 15:08
Bingo.

It's a no brainer choice that obsoletes other things in the list merely by existing.

So we may (ok, probably will) see an increase in "Bile Cannons of Nurgle", "Warpfire Cannons of Tzeentch" and "*insert disturbing image here* Cannons of Slaanesh" then. Pity.

Lord Inquisitor
13-03-2013, 15:25
So we may (ok, probably will) see an increase in "Bile Cannons of Nurgle", "Warpfire Cannons of Tzeentch" and "*insert disturbing image here* Cannons of Slaanesh" then. Pity.

I was thinking something like the daemon knights of slaanesh from Epic as my slaanesh-themed skullcannon. But clearly I'm not thinking disturbing enough...

BigbyWolf
13-03-2013, 15:51
I was thinking something like the daemon knights of slaanesh from Epic as my slaanesh-themed skullcannon. But clearly I'm not thinking disturbing enough...

I would have thought that someone who posts in pink would have a better imagination then that! :p

Xerkics
13-03-2013, 19:58
and "*insert disturbing image here* Cannons of Slaanesh" then. Pity.


You mean the pyrovore ? :p

Trustey
13-03-2013, 20:24
They just released a FAQ for the DoC book, the Khorne cannon is a special choice now, same point cost.

Metacarpi
13-03-2013, 20:34
They just released a FAQ for the DoC book, the Khorne cannon is a special choice now, same point cost.

Where's that then? I can't see it on the GW site and my digital army book still says Rare - I assume they update those automatically?

Minsc
13-03-2013, 20:35
They just released a FAQ for the DoC book, the Khorne cannon is a special choice now, same point cost.

Source? I see nothing on GW's website.

The bearded one
13-03-2013, 20:38
I think we're being trolled :p

Metacarpi
13-03-2013, 20:42
I think we're being trolled :p


*sings*

Trolling me softly, with his post! Trolling me softly, with his post! Changing my army, with his post. Trolling me softly with his post

Trustey
13-03-2013, 21:54
*sings*

Trolling me softly, with his post! Trolling me softly, with his post! Changing my army, with his post. Trolling me softly with his post

Did I forget the smiley? :angel:

IcedCrow
13-03-2013, 22:14
Did I forget the smiley? :angel:

(in the best Mr. Slave voice I can muster) oh you...

Ratarsed
14-03-2013, 09:40
Oh you are so wrong. I jumped on playing daemons as my first fantasy army at the start of 8th.

All because you don't take a scroll doesn't make it irrelevant. Many players need them especially when you play in a comp environment like myself. When someone casts plague and it goes off on a 25 I actually have to hope I roll it off or I'm doomed.

Lack of protection for gds just makes the book seem even more sour.

Now I still like.the book and will.run a nurgle list against people, but Ward really failed with this book.

Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk 2
So this is the first army revision you have had to deal with? Well all I can say is you will adapt and as your army collection grows subsequent new army books have less and less impact. I find the trick to surfing the changes is to play armies with a little bit of everything and not load up on just what is good. That way when what was good gets reigned back and what was bad gets boosted the effectiveness of your armies stay much the same.
In the case of the dispel scroll your reaction to the prospect of having Plague cast on you reveals you have a good deal of adapting to do. Plague is in the group of spells that get more powerful as their target unit gets bigger. Don't take hordes of 30+ models and straight away you will stop being "doomed" when it is successfully cast against you.

HalfBlood
14-03-2013, 16:28
Plague was just an example that could be exchanged with any other critical spell that normal players would just dispel using their scroll. Like if my opponent drops mindrazor on a unit. goes off on a 25. I have to hope to dispel it or I'm doomed in combat.

Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk 2

The bearded one
14-03-2013, 17:23
Plague was just an example that could be exchanged with any other critical spell that normal players would just dispel using their scroll. Like if my opponent drops mindrazor on a unit. goes off on a 25. I have to hope to dispel it or I'm doomed in combat.

Let's be honest though, you're less doomed in combat vs mindrazor that pretty much everyone else ;) its not like your daemons have an armoursave to lose, and most dont have a lot of toughness anyway. Heck, if he has enough dice for mindrazor it might mean the reign of chaos gave you +1 on your ward ;)

Its annoying to be sure, though.

IcedCrow
14-03-2013, 17:24
That and, correct me if I'm wrong, an army can only have one dispel scroll. Not being able to take that *one* dispel scroll does not break the army.

The bearded one
14-03-2013, 17:30
Dwarfs are superior to your pettty manling 1-scroll restriction :p

underscore
14-03-2013, 17:35
Heck, if he has enough dice for mindrazor it might mean the reign of chaos gave you +1 on your ward ;)

Alas, RoC Table is just for your turn (from what I can tell anyway, it only refers to when 'you' throw the dice in the book).

Lord Inquisitor
14-03-2013, 17:38
Dwarfs are superior to your pettty manling 1-scroll restriction :p

So daemons used to be... We went from unlimited scrolls to zero. Wonder how the dwarfs will respond when the same happens to them... :p

The bearded one
14-03-2013, 17:47
It would be miffing if they removed all other magic defence with it, because strong anti-magic is a fluffpoint frequently hammered in and dwarfs have no offensive magic to balance it out either. Being limited to 1 scroll like others would be fair.

Urgat
14-03-2013, 17:53
That is how I look at it as well, and why it doesn't phase me. As a chariot or as a cannon the points are pretty much what they need to be. It will only ever be doing one or the other. Making it 300 points would mean that it would never get taken because no one is going to spend 300 points on a cannon or a normal chariot just because it can do both, it never will be doing both at the same time. At 200 points I probably also wouldn't bother with it as again I'd be paying 200 points for a cannon that happens to have flaming attacks which is only good against certain things. If I knew I was up against skaven I'd take it so I had something to deal with the HPAx2 attack that seems popular but other then that... in an army where everything costs so much as it is I'd rather have more bodies on the field.

I wonder how people would like it if GW gave move&shoot spearchukkas to my wolf chariots for free. After all, it's not like it's saving special slots or points or that it matters that I could position my spearchukkas wherever I please for maximum efficiency, then charge whenever I can't shoot anymore, because they can only do one or the other at the time, right? :p In fact I should then proceed to complaining because at that price those would be some seriously overcosted spearchukkas I suppose.
Sarcasms aside, I don't know if that cannon is really underscosted or not, and, quite frankly, I don't really care, I'm unlikely to ever face one, but that kind of reasoning is silly, because it applies to everything, right? You take any shooting unit that also has melee attacks (so basically every unit), you pick whatever facet of the unit is more expensive, and the rest is ignored, given for free. If it works for that khorne chariot/canon, why not for a maneater, or a flamer, or a dwarf cannon, because all if them can only do either function at a given time too, aftert all. My goblins should get their bows for free,because they won't be shooting if they're in melee. I'm sorry but no, it's not a valid reason. And even if it can't charge if it wants to shoot, I can think of a few perfectly good reasons why a cannon that can move before shooting is a good thing and deserves to be paid at a premium.

Lord Inquisitor
14-03-2013, 18:16
If you allow me to field Slaanesh chariots costed in line with the goblin wolf chariots then you've got yourself a deal!

The bearded one
14-03-2013, 18:22
Back to the case at hand; the skullcannon is undercosted as its both a good chariot and a good cannon and is only adequately priced for one of them, not together. Sure, it's not greater than the sum of its parts because it cannot both fight and shoot at the same time, but by being a good chariot with a cannon on top it can usefully act at a stage where no other chariot (bar the ironblaster) can do anything other than slowly move forwards. Even if you use it purely with the intent of using it as a chariot, it can still fire its cannon a couple times before getting stuck in.

Urgat
14-03-2013, 18:25
If you allow me to field Slaanesh chariots costed in line with the goblin wolf chariots then you've got yourself a deal!

If your slaanesh chariot gets the same stats and rules, sure, go ahead :p

Ronin[XiC]
14-03-2013, 18:44
Goblin Chariots for 50 points are a bargain. Speed 9 +3d6 always surprises people.

Urgat
14-03-2013, 18:48
Ld6 w/o ITP also often surprises people considering the proliferation of fear these days. I think we're moving OT there, though.

Lord Inquisitor
14-03-2013, 18:55
If your slaanesh chariot gets the same stats and rules, sure, go ahead :p

Obviously it should be more points than the goblin chariot... just maybe not over double for +1M, -1S, -1AS, +1W slightly better crew and daemonic.

The bearded one
14-03-2013, 19:01
Similar to how the skullcannon is underpriced, the slaanesh chariots (all) seem rather overpriced. A real shame to have 3 variations of slaanesh chariots, which all look pretty neat and excessive, and then have them all be rather meh.

Grupax
14-03-2013, 19:56
Obviously it should be more points than the goblin chariot... just maybe not over double for +1M, -1S, -1AS, +1W slightly better crew and daemonic.

isn't deamonic = 1/3 to survive a cannonball? that's major
the cause fear, 'unstable + impact hits', a ward and armoursave and the additional wound, give the chariot the option of actually holding a unit in place untill your next turn, I really don't see a goblin chariot doing that.
also the crew is ItP so you CAN put them on your flank (as opposed to goblins)

compared to the unscyted tyrranoc or beastmen chariot the upsides are getting more clear.

ah well, every book has it's lesser competitive choises that you still use becouse they look awsome. and reaping the rewards from using them taste way sweeter.
anyway, while a slaanesh chariot heavy list might not be /viable. One slaanesh chariot can definatly be justified in an armylist as tactical choice (mainly for its speed/wardsave/itp).

Lord Inquisitor
14-03-2013, 20:30
isn't deamonic = 1/3 to survive a cannonball? that's major
So is only S4 rather than S5 impacts :p Yes, the slaanesh chariots are much tougher against cannons although they're pretty poor against conventional shooting.

Ask yourself if you'd take two wolf chariots or one slaanesh chariot? ItP is nice but the flip side is you can't flee if you get out of position.

I don't think Slaanesh chariots should be more than about 75 points. That's a good 50% more than a wolf chariot. You can take the 35 points that would get cheaper and like TBO says, stick that cost onto the Khorne chariot-cannon.

IcedCrow
14-03-2013, 21:02
I wonder how people would like it if GW gave move&shoot spearchukkas to my wolf chariots for free. After all, it's not like it's saving special slots or points or that it matters that I could position my spearchukkas wherever I please for maximum efficiency, then charge whenever I can't shoot anymore, because they can only do one or the other at the time, right? In fact I should then proceed to complaining because at that price those would be some seriously overcosted spearchukkas I suppose.
Sarcasms aside, I don't know if that cannon is really underscosted or not, and, quite frankly, I don't really care, I'm unlikely to ever face one, but that kind of reasoning is silly, because it applies to everything, right? You take any shooting unit that also has melee attacks (so basically every unit), you pick whatever facet of the unit is more expensive, and the rest is ignored, given for free. If it works for that khorne chariot/canon, why not for a maneater, or a flamer, or a dwarf cannon, because all if them can only do either function at a given time too, aftert all. My goblins should get their bows for free,because they won't be shooting if they're in melee. I'm sorry but no, it's not a valid reason. And even if it can't charge if it wants to shoot, I can think of a few perfectly good reasons why a cannon that can move before shooting is a good thing and deserves to be paid at a premium.

A cannon that can move before shooting isn't double a normal cannon's cost good. Making the thing cost 270 - 300 or more points would be a surefire way of guaranteeing that it never sees the table. I know there is no way I'd ever pay that much for a chariot or a cannon and that's basically what you are getting here. A model that can do both but will only ever do one thing at a time. Is it undercosted? Sure. Is it grossly undercosted that its breaking the game? Not hardly. Is it worth double its points cost like some people want to make it because they want it to fit the mould of cannon + chariot = total sum of the points you should pay for it? Make it double its points and it will never get used at all.

The bearded one
14-03-2013, 21:10
I dont think everyone wants to make it double its points, but ideally it ought to have quite a hike in price, in the vicinity of +50 so that it becomes comparable to the ironblaster. The fact that it is not greater than the sum of its parts is something I mentioned a handful of posts higher up this very page. It cant do both at the same time so shouldnt cost twice as much as it does now, but it has the variety available to do both and can perform the other role when one isnt available yet (not to mention being a lot hardier than other cannons). My tuskgor chariots tend to be rumbling forward slowly for a turn or 2-3. Wouldnt mind paying a couple more points and add a cannon.

Urgat
14-03-2013, 21:28
A cannon that can move before shooting isn't double a normal cannon's cost good

Nobody's saying it should cost the double of what it costs, but you're arguing it shouldn't cost more than either use because it can't use both at the same time, and that's ignoring quite a few advantages, like versatility, saving rare spots, being able to move the cannon on the flank of a knight unit before shooting, or, quite simply, saving a lot of points. besides, the "can't use both at the same time" argument doesn't work: I don't know about you, but when my units are in melee (that includes the chariots) my artillery doesn't have much targets to shoot at anyway, so it's most likely not shooting either (not gonna mention the other way around because my chariots have bows, so they do shoot while plowing forward... well, kindda... 3 or 4 short bows, you see :p). If my doom divers could charge stuff like chariots, maybe they wouldn't worry so much about mounted marauders and the likes, as well. There's so many advantages to having them both mixed it's not even funny, so your argument doesn't sit well at all with me. Usually I agree with your opinions, but not this time I'm afraid :p

Von Wibble
14-03-2013, 21:34
So is only S4 rather than S5 impacts :p Yes, the slaanesh chariots are much tougher against cannons although they're pretty poor against conventional shooting.

Ask yourself if you'd take two wolf chariots or one slaanesh chariot? ItP is nice but the flip side is you can't flee if you get out of position.

I don't think Slaanesh chariots should be more than about 75 points. That's a good 50% more than a wolf chariot. You can take the 35 points that would get cheaper and like TBO says, stick that cost onto the Khorne chariot-cannon.

I have to agree with this. S5 on impact hits compared to S4AP equates to about twice as many kills vs T3 troops, which is significant. However, I wouldn't price it cheaper than a Tiranoc Chariot since in all respects except S of impact hits and bows it is superior (well, ASF as well I suppose). I'd say 80 points, with the Tiranoc reduced to 70 when the high elf book hits.

I completely agree with the bearded one as far as pricing on the Khannon goes.

Maoriboy007
14-03-2013, 22:01
A cannon that can move before shooting isn't double a normal cannon's cost good. Making the thing cost 270 - 300 or more points would be a surefire way of guaranteeing that it never sees the table. I know there is no way I'd ever pay that much for a chariot or a cannon and that's basically what you are getting here. A model that can do both but will only ever do one thing at a time. Is it undercosted? Sure. Is it grossly undercosted that its breaking the game? Not hardly. Is it worth double its points cost like some people want to make it because they want it to fit the mould of cannon + chariot = total sum of the points you should pay for it? Make it double its points and it will never get used at all.Ask any Undead, Lizardman or Elf player how much they'd pay to have access to a plain cannon, even at 200 points you'd probably still see one fielded more often than not. Then a cannon usually needs some unit assigned to protect it (granted in dwarf and empire armies thats usually another cannon) but ironblasters and skullcannons dont need to spend those extra points,so at an already reduced price thats more than a pretty good deal right there.
Its grossly undercosted TBH, breaking the game? we'll have to see, although I get the feeling we'll see a digusting amount on the tables over the next edition.

Lord Inquisitor
14-03-2013, 22:22
With regard to the Ironblasters and the Sulk Cannon, the question really is "at what points value would you consider not taking one?" This is a good rule of thumb for game balance.

How much would I pay for an Ironblaster? Probably not much more than about 200. For the daemonic cannon, I'd say about the same, maybe a little less. 170 or 180 is probably enough to at least put me off buying two.

IcedCrow
14-03-2013, 22:24
Anything more than 160-180 and id never bother.

IcedCrow
14-03-2013, 23:04
And my undead armies would never field a 200 point cannon either.

Vipoid
14-03-2013, 23:28
And my undead armies would never field a 200 point cannon either.

Are we talking about a 200pt cannon along the lines of the Skullcannon, or just a regular cannon for 200pts?


If my VCs suddenly gained access to a standard cannon, I'd at least give it a try. It can fulfil a similar role to that of a terrorgheist (taking out monsters, elite units), but from across the battlefield. And, it could open new tactical possibilities, by forcing some armies to come to me, instead of me having to be the aggressor in virtually every game.

I might decide in the end that it isn't worth it, but I'd definitely try it.

If I instead gained access to a 200pt Skullcannon for VCs (presumably with instability, instead of demonic instability), I could easily imagine it becoming a permanent part of my list. It needs little protection, can move and shoot (so can shot while still remaining near my general and wizards), is a source of flaming attacks, and, as above, can force enemies to come to me. I'd exchange the Black Coach for it any day. ;)

Maoriboy007
14-03-2013, 23:59
Are we talking about a 200pt cannon along the lines of the Skullcannon, or just a regular cannon for 200pts?


If my VCs suddenly gained access to a standard cannon, I'd at least give it a try. It can fulfil a similar role to that of a terrorgheist (taking out monsters, elite units), but from across the battlefield. And, it could open new tactical possibilities, by forcing some armies to come to me, instead of me having to be the aggressor in virtually every game.

I might decide in the end that it isn't worth it, but I'd definitely try it.

If I instead gained access to a 200pt Skullcannon for VCs (presumably with instability, instead of demonic instability), I could easily imagine it becoming a permanent part of my list. It needs little protection, can move and shoot (so can shot while still remaining near my general and wizards), is a source of flaming attacks, and, as above, can force enemies to come to me. I'd exchange the Black Coach for it any day. ;)This, and for a skullcannon (or Ironblaster) I'd happily pay 250 points, for the simple reason that for the first couple of turns it can pick off expensive models from a safe distance like all cannons and then in turns 3+ (where most cannons lose effectiveness) it can either pick off stragglers or actually support units by charging into combats.
Its not going to panic off the board like an ordinary chariot, and any units small and fast enough to get past your battle lines that would take out a normal cannon are more than likely to get their @$$#$ handed to them instead.

GrandmasterWang
15-03-2013, 01:45
I think it is stupid that the khannon is as accurate a grapeshotter as a normal cannon with a master engineer.

It's also stupid that a slaanesh daemon chario t hits softer than a goblin one. I mean it looks sturdy enough.

I would pay 200 pts for a khannon in all my armies bar dwarfs. I'd only take 1 though most probably. I think 185 pts is a fair price for the khannon and the blaster. At that price you need to think about taking them and it would reduce spam.

IcedCrow
15-03-2013, 12:47
Well good here's a suggestion. Houserule that it costs 200-250 points and then see how often it is taken. Better yet, convince a tournament organizer in your area to rule that it costs 200-250 points and see how often it is taken and how wonderful it does.

Ratarsed
15-03-2013, 13:42
I wonder how many people realise the chances a cannon will wound a model with 1 shot is about 2/3. I know my personal experience of rolling 1s to wound or 1 for the number of wounds has me questioning if 120 points is too much for an empire cannon.

Vipoid
15-03-2013, 14:27
I wonder how many people realise the chances a cannon will wound a model with 1 shot is about 2/3. I know my personal experience of rolling 1s to wound or 1 for the number of wounds has me questioning if 120 points is too much for an empire cannon.

But, don't forget that that one model can be virtually anything in the game. Being able to wound just about anything 2/3 of the time, ignoring its armour save and (in the case of the khorne cannon) regeneration is pretty damn good.


Well good here's a suggestion. Houserule that it costs 200-250 points and then see how often it is taken. Better yet, convince a tournament organizer in your area to rule that it costs 200-250 points and see how often it is taken and how wonderful it does.

250 would definitely be too much, but I'm not sure 200 would be that unreasonable. If you were going to change its cost, I'd be inclined to put 200 as the upper limit (I'd say its worth somewhere between 175 and 200pts).

I'd be impressed if you could persuade a TO to change the cost to ~200pts. Although, if you did manage to, I'd actually be interested to see the results - if people still took it, and how well they (and it) did.

DaemonReign
15-03-2013, 16:19
Recosting the Skullcannon - great idea! How about the rest of this abortion of a book?.
Bloodletters - Down >2pts base, Loci generally overcosted.
Plaguebearers - Up at least 1pt, probably more.
Horrors - See Bloodletters.
Furies - Down >3pts base, double cost of Marks.
Fiends - Down >10pts base.
Crushers - What's this unit meant to bring to the list again? Re-configure it.
Nurglings - Up ~5pts.
Seekers Chariot - Conciderably overcosted.
Flamers - See Crushers, but for the sake of argument let's start by dropping them 15pts.
Beasts - At least 20pts undercosted.
Exalted Chariot - 'Swap cost' with Skullcannon?
And the list goes on of course..
But then sure after such Little 'edits' are administered the Skullcannon would still be a perfectly reasonable choice at just above 200pts afaic. Not a no-brain spam-unit but definately a common sight for opponants. :)

Scammel
15-03-2013, 16:24
I think some but not all of the apparent discrepancies with, say, units like Bloodletters can be explained through the Reign of Chaos table. Whilst it's not always a boon, most of the results will be hitting the enemy a lot more frequently than your own troops. The only way to price such a thing is to include a tiny premium on everything.

HalfBlood
15-03-2013, 16:34
While were at it how about making gds worth the hefty price. Give them some protection...

How about that absent scroll?



Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk 2

Vipoid
15-03-2013, 16:40
Recosting the Skullcannon - great idea! How about the rest of this abortion of a book?.

Thing is, if I was redoing this book, I wouldn't want to stop at just recosting stuff. A lot of the core rules of the book seem either bad, poorly thought-out or downright unnecessary.

DaemonReign
15-03-2013, 17:26
A lot of the core rules of the book seem either bad, poorly thought-out or downright unnecessary.

QFT.
This book simply does not live up the standards we've gotten used to in this Edition.
'Because they're Daemons!' is no excuse for that, just as Little as it was a good excuse for their Power-level in 7th.

IcedCrow
15-03-2013, 17:31
The book has just come out. There's no way to really see how the army list plays out until its actually played out.

The bearded one
15-03-2013, 17:40
Im still not terribly excited about this book nonetheless. At least it's nurgle's time in the spotlight.. He's always my favourite.

underscore
15-03-2013, 17:59
Unfortunately some of the models got me excited about the book. So I got it. Then I read it. Then I realised that the models I liked were the Tzeentch ones.

Oddly enough this has actually made me a little bit more excited to actually play with the book. It seems like a nice counterpart to my Skaven: low model count, still has the... err... 'reactive' part of Skaven (read: the dice ARE going to mess with me at some point, so better roll with the punches) I like and no one is going to think less of me for playing as them! Well, they'll think less of me for entirely different reasons.

Starblind
15-03-2013, 19:47
"Random is good because they're demons."

Yeah, a nice sentiment. Unfortunately, "random" means not-too-steep odds of instantly blowing up an enemy's level-4 wizard before they even get a turn. Or doing the same to your own characters. Add in the fact that Chaos Daemons no longer have access to their own set of magic standards/icons, forcing them to pick from the incredibly limited selection in the rulebook (several of which are pointless), can't select individual pieces of wargear to fill a desired role, and took a point-increase in many areas, most notably core choices. Getting the impression GW thought "hang on, Ward really dropped the ball with the last book. Lets make sure he tones things down a bit, surely there will be no backlash from the community if we nerf things."

IcedCrow
15-03-2013, 20:06
Or they thought "this seems fun in playtesting and we're having a blast playing with this army, let's put it out because that's the direction we've been going the past three years".

underscore
15-03-2013, 20:40
"Random is good because they're demons."

Wait, is that someone's position you're arguing with, or just a strawman?

GrandmasterWang
16-03-2013, 07:48
My gaming group often house rules so something along these lines will happen. For now though th book is still brand new so besides our warpflame adjustment we will try it a lot more before bringing in any extreme measures like adjusting points. Unless their is a great case for it (hydra uses the SOM cost), we are loath to actually fiddle points values. Hydra is the only actual point adjustment we have made.

If we were to fiddle the chariot costs it would be to take 20 pts off each slaanesh chariot and add them to the khorne one. This seems more fair than the current prices but extensive play testing with the daemon book as is needs to be done.

Our warplane adjustment was for the sake of mono tzeentch. ..... which looks absolutely brilliant on the tatabletop I must say.

The book is just frustrating to me because it has so much potential. I think with a bit more time to cook in the gw oven it could have been great. I know you like the book IcedCrow and I agree it's much more (daemon like) than the last.

Vipoid
16-03-2013, 10:25
Wait, is that someone's position you're arguing with, or just a strawman?

It would be more accurate for him to say "Random is good because they're Chaos."

I'm not sure if anyone has made this argument on this thread, but a lot of people certainly made it in the 'what do you think of the new daemon book' thread.

underscore
16-03-2013, 10:44
Ah, no problem. I got confused wasn't sure if you were trying to argue with me!

Grupax
16-03-2013, 10:46
just a little question to put things in perspective, is the khorne chariot cannon better then the cygor stone thrower?

Starblind
16-03-2013, 13:44
Wait, is that someone's position you're arguing with, or just a strawman?

Referring to the design philosophy that GW seem to have run with while designing the two new Daemon books.

underscore
16-03-2013, 13:52
So.... strawman then.

The bearded one
16-03-2013, 13:52
just a little question to put things in perspective, is the khorne chariot cannon better then the cygor stone thrower?

It's a cannon.

A flaming cannon.

With move & fire.

It's like a million times better, especially because it doesnt need to sacrifice marching to shoot it because chariots dont have marching anyway.

Nubl0
16-03-2013, 15:00
The sad thing is the skull cannon is probably more survivable and potent in combat that the cygor, but I think that's more the cygor problem.

Gillburg
16-03-2013, 18:49
I just cant get around how 40k it looks. Does it work with daemonbinding like Chaos Dwarf stuff?

Metacarpi
16-03-2013, 19:39
So what are people using as a stand in for the Khorne cannon? That model really doesn't appeal to me aesthetically, and was wondering what would be an acceptable stand in? I'm thinking one of the chaos dwarf engines, and swap the crew for a few Bloodletters

decker_cky
16-03-2013, 19:55
The sad thing is the skull cannon is probably more survivable and potent in combat that the cygor, but I think that's more the cygor problem.

Probably? It's absolutely better in combat, both offensively and defensively (aside from some very specific circumstances). Cygor is double the price. Would anyone choose a cygor over a skull cannon if they were the same price? Doubt it, unless you knew you were going to be facing a k'dai destroyer. I think fair prices would have the Cygor somewhere around 160, and the skull cannon at close to 200 pts.

Urgat
16-03-2013, 19:57
So what are people using as a stand in for the Khorne cannon? That model really doesn't appeal to me aesthetically, and was wondering what would be an acceptable stand in? I'm thinking one of the chaos dwarf engines, and swap the crew for a few Bloodletters

If I had the cash for that and were playing Khorne, I'd make a conversion with a chaos warrior chariot, a juggernaut, a couple letters, and a hellcanon.

Lord Solar Plexus
16-03-2013, 20:07
Wait, is that someone's position you're arguing with, or just a strawman?

That's a particularly beautiful rock you're hiding under. Yes, that's been the overarching notion in the past three weeks and threads "(It's Chaos, dude").

underscore
16-03-2013, 20:11
Edit: Actually retracting that, nevermind. I'll leave it with my original reply:

Ah, no problem. I got confused wasn't sure if you were trying to argue with me!

DaemonReign
16-03-2013, 20:38
So out of curiosity, what do you guys Think the Skullcannon should cost 'in a serious book'.. I mean, assume for a second that all the other costs in this Daemon Book was 'fair & square', how much would you charge for the Skullcannon?
Personally I'd say just over 200pts. 205-210 there-about.
Am I being rash?
Maybe 175 is a better cost but I can't help feeling it's still too Little not to make it a no-brain choice...

The bearded one
16-03-2013, 20:41
Your suggested cost is actually higher than I thought you'd cost it. I think in the bracket of 180-200 is about right. Any higher and it does indeed become costly at both its functions.

DaemonReign
16-03-2013, 20:43
Ok, right smack inbetween my two extremes then.
Beautifull TBO. Thanks. :)

EDIT
Furthermore, and just out of curiosity:
Did you Think I'd cost it lower due to being some kind of math wizkid (which I am not, I assure you) - or was it due to me being a 'Daemon-fanboy'? *haha*

Scammel
16-03-2013, 20:44
180pts seems fine. It seems on par with the Ironblaster in effectiveness, and the 'Blaster is widely regarded as being very good for the points. I imagine most people would still take a pair at that price but it would hopefully seem much more sensible for the cost.

The bearded one
16-03-2013, 20:52
Ok, right smack inbetween my two extremes then.
Beautifull TBO. Thanks. :)

EDIT
Furthermore, and just out of curiosity:
Did you Think I'd cost it lower due to being some kind of math wizkid (which I am not, I assure you) - or was it due to me being a 'Daemon-fanboy'? *haha*

A mixture maybe, I was expecting something like 160-175 ;)

DaemonReign
16-03-2013, 21:24
@ TBO: *haha* Well thanks for the input anyway!


180pts seems fine. It seems on par with the Ironblaster in effectiveness, and the 'Blaster is widely regarded as being very good for the points. I imagine most people would still take a pair at that price but it would hopefully seem much more sensible for the cost.

Right. But that right there is why I initially said ~200pts.
Shouldn't a 'balanced' cost mean that you'll strongly concider taking one but only very rarely even look at taking two?
Isn't any pricing where the standard is to "take a pair" by definition a tad off its mark? It's "sensible" and yet "most people" still maxes out their allowance?
I'm seriously interested in your views on this matter - these questions are not as rhethorical as they may appear..
So 190pts then? Just to be on the right side of the fence?

Scammel
16-03-2013, 21:48
I think the nature of it as a semi-reliable warmachine means it'll be taken in pairs or not at all. I'm of the opinion that most OK players take two IBs not because of their inherent power but because of the need for redundancy. A cannon ultimately has to go through quite a few rolls to kill even monsters, the supposed prime target. Initial overshoot, bounce, wound and wound multiplication; there's plenty of scope for something to go wrong. If people can only justify fitting one in at, say, >200pts, they might not be able to justify it all in light of other more reliable, if less potent, choices.

Urgat
16-03-2013, 22:08
So out of curiosity, what do you guys Think the Skullcannon should cost 'in a serious book'.. I mean, assume for a second that all the other costs in this Daemon Book was 'fair & square', how much would you charge for the Skullcannon?
Personally I'd say just over 200pts. 205-210 there-about.
Am I being rash?
Maybe 175 is a better cost but I can't help feeling it's still too Little not to make it a no-brain choice...

From what I know of it, if the rest of the book was priced correctly, and w/o having seen it ingame, I'd tentatively put it at 180, 190pts.


I think the nature of it as a semi-reliable warmachine means it'll be taken in pairs or not at all. I'm of the opinion that most OK players take two IBs not because of their inherent power but because of the need for redundancy.

I'm not sure why there should be a need for redundancy, especially not for ogres, they're hardly the army that lacks stuff that can kill monsters and co. Seriously, i'm playing OK, I haven't bought an ironblaster (yet), but I cant tell you why I would get two if I planed to: because one is great for the points, so two are just as great for the points. That's it. Anything that is too good for its point cost, one will take as many as he can, especially if he's into min-maxing.

Kalandros
16-03-2013, 23:11
Its price tag is fine due to how the rest of the book is horribly priced all over the place.

Scammel
16-03-2013, 23:31
I'm not sure why there should be a need for redundancy, especially not for ogres, they're hardly the army that lacks stuff that can kill monsters and co.

Monsters themselves aren't so much the issue, it's other stuff such as monstrous cav and warmachines. The former usually will get the charge on the fatties, deny you your impacts and stomps, take advantage of your low WS and saves and soak up your incoming damge with their own saves (some of which also applies to other, more elite MI). Warmachines are pretty much always an issue for Ogres, for obvious reasons, and 'Tusks can only go so far with that.


because one is great for the points, so two are just as great for the points. That's it.

I disagree. Just one is awfully prone to mucking up any of the aforementioned rolls (though bounce is clearly much less of an issue) and is also much more liable to be picked off by enemy WMs. It just never seems to accomplish much. I don't think I can ever remember a single list ever that advocated just taking a single warmachine, it's always multiple or none.

Piercefierce
16-03-2013, 23:40
I had a game today against some lizardmen. I had 3 cannons. I killed a total of 3 Saurus cavalry with the shooting. However I killed about 40-50 skinks with blowpipes with ease just by charging them. Regrew every wound i took, which wasn't many. these things are tough! I struggled so much with skinks before this model was around. I think this factor should probably get chucked in there as well. Not just skinks but chaff. Flamers can't handle the skirmish rule. These things are perfect, large charge range, high armour and toughness, crazy damage output. Oh and just for laughs, one of the blood letter crew killing blowed gor rok in round 5. Pretty awesome. It really is one of the most undercosted things in the game right now and it's in the latest book haha.

Xerkics
17-03-2013, 01:49
Id make ironblaster about 200 points and the khorne cannon 185 , i play woc and dwarfsand i think hellcannon might still be good at 5-10 more points and its like 215 and its still good like i said before 135 is just rediculous from dwarf player view considering how much we have to pay for a flaming cannon that cant move and fire or fight back.

IcedCrow
17-03-2013, 02:00
The dwarf book hasn't been rewritten yet. The points values in the dwarf book are not for this edition...

Xerkics
17-03-2013, 02:05
The dwarf book hasn't been rewritten yet. The points values in the dwarf book are not for this edition...
And the empire cannons and mortars are for 8th edition. So ?

DaemonReign
17-03-2013, 09:18
Id make the khorne cannon 185

Yes I'm thinking along the lines of 185-190pts too after surveying the input I got from you guys (thx again).

Incidentally, and on a related note although off-topic, what about the Exalted Chariot of Slaanesh.. (?)
How much cheaper would you have to make it in order for it to be viable?
Or is it just 'hopeless' and in need of re-configured rules rather than merely a Point-drop?

Urgat
17-03-2013, 09:31
Incidentally, and on a related note although off-topic, what about the Exalted Chariot of Slaanesh.. (?)

Couldn't say :p I know plenty about the Khorne chariot because everybdy's whinning about it and the demon players are too busy discussing it back, nobody's giving a flying kick about poor Slaanesh. What does it do exactly, how many skaven slaves does it cost? :p

The bearded one
17-03-2013, 09:49
I think the exalted chariot should swoop down in the direction of 180 or lower, but I havent studied it indepth either as its pretty overcosted at the moment to not be worth the look. 110 slaves for a t4 6+ save chariot at str4 and a lot of str3 attacks afterwards.

DaemonReign
17-03-2013, 09:59
Yeah:
S4, T4, W8, Armour save 6+, armour piercing, 4 Daemonettes (so 8 S3 attacks) + four Steeds of Slaanesh and an Exalted Allures (slightly better than a champ, slightly worse than a Herald) that gains an extra attack per every wound caused by the (2d6+1) impact hits (Soulscent Special Rule).
Model goes on an a-rock base.

Pretty big and unweildy in base-footprint. You obviously try to connect 'corner to corner' with the enemy in a combi-charge, and then 6-dice Mindrazor (or whatever) to get your bang for the buck.
Still, and pretty much as TBO is also saying, it's just a poor deal both in terms of nominal damage-output and durability.
180pts sounds reasonable. Something like that ought to do it.
[Lovely model! That I happen to be painted atm.. hehe]

Urgat
17-03-2013, 10:15
That's the megabig one right? I'd keep it as it is but add one or two D6 impact hits. It would do what it looks like it should do, that way. It's like a big lawn mower, well it should act as one.

underscore
17-03-2013, 10:41
I'm kinda confused about the various Slaneesh Chariots - from what I can tell the Exhalted one only has the two steeds.

There's this (http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2470553a_99129915012_SeekerChariotWH360_445x319.j pg) single one. The 'normal' Chariot, I presume.
This (http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2470806a_99129915012_SeekerChariot40k02_445x319.j pg) one which is wider. The Exhalted one?
This (http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3061330a_99029915001_ExaltedSeekerChariot40k01_44 5x319.jpg) with four steeds - this must be the Hell-Flayer, no?

Or is the Hell-Flayer the wide one with the 2 steeds? The website is pretty unclear on it. :/

Edit: Had a brain wave and checked the pictures in the book. The Hellflayer is indeed the 2 Steed, wide build and the Exhalted is the 4 steed one.

The bearded one
17-03-2013, 10:54
The exalted has roughly twice the stuff (wounds, attacks, impact hits) of the normal chariot, so in a way the cost makes sense looking at the regularone's cost. That one is a bit pricey too though, the exalted misses out slightly compared to having the regular one twice too (unable to split up in multiple directions, only 1 extra impact hit from scythes. 2 chariots would be 2x d6+1 after all) but makes up with some extra attacks from the alluress,mso I suppose double the regular chariot's cost makes sense. Lets reduce the regular chariot's cost first ;)

Kayosiv
17-03-2013, 11:15
just a little question to put things in perspective, is the khorne chariot cannon better then the cygor stone thrower?

It is significantly better because it has both an armor save and a ward save. With that said, it also costs barely over half the points.


Oh and just for laughs, one of the blood letter crew killing blowed gor rok in round 5. Pretty awesome. It really is one of the most undercosted things in the game right now and it's in the latest book haha.

Gor'Rok is immune to killing blow, so the lizardmen player gets the last laugh there.

Lord Inquisitor
17-03-2013, 17:06
I did have a thought about the Khorne cannon's points cost. Suppose ... for a second ... Mat Ward isn't an idiot nor are they trying to push this particular kit above the others.

Next edition is not too far off now. Maybe a year off? Given the lifespan of this book is at least 4 years, you could argue that it is going to be more of a 9th ed book than an 8th ed one.

In any discussion of the flaws of 8th edition, cannons are going to come up pretty quickly. Excessively accurate, sniping capability, etc. Perhaps we're heading towards a major downgrade of cannons? Although if cannons move in anyway towards a BS system the Khorne cannon still looks very good...

The bearded one
17-03-2013, 18:16
Although if cannons move in anyway towards a BS system the Khorne cannon still looks very good...

Thats a mark of Wards design as well. He did it with necrons, where he had not only prepared stuff to be strong in 6th edition, but also had some things in place combatting their downsides, like where passengers are not actually inside their flyers but come in using a teleporter on the flyer's underside instead, so that their flyer can fly around instead of hover to drop its passengers, and the passengers wouldnst suffer str10 ap1 hits if the flyer crashed with them inside because due to the teleporting portal theyre no actually inside, but go back to reserves outside the board instead.

'Gee, we will change cannons to a more ballistic skill format, ill give my cannons bs 5 then, for no really explicable reason :p

yorch
17-03-2013, 18:21
Yeah:
S4, T4, W8, Armour save 6+, armour piercing, 4 Daemonettes (so 8 S3 attacks) + four Steeds of Slaanesh and an Exalted Allures (slightly better than a champ, slightly worse than a Herald) that gains an extra attack per every wound caused by the (2d6+1) impact hits (Soulscent Special Rule).
Model goes on an a-rock base.

Pretty big and unweildy in base-footprint. You obviously try to connect 'corner to corner' with the enemy in a combi-charge, and then 6-dice Mindrazor (or whatever) to get your bang for the buck.
Still, and pretty much as TBO is also saying, it's just a poor deal both in terms of nominal damage-output and durability.
180pts sounds reasonable. Something like that ought to do it.
[Lovely model! That I happen to be painted atm.. hehe]

Exalted does not have soulscent, only hellflayer, so no additional attacks. It would be a good rule to have since it does more impact hits, but no, maybe the charriot could become OP :shifty:. Exalted is just 2 normal put together, with one less impact hit (2D6+2 vs 2d6+1) and 4 str 3 attacks from the exalted alluress.

Krish
17-03-2013, 18:22
Really? 200 pts? Well im playing woc and paying 210 for hellcannon with m3 and not much of accuracy i would happily pay extra 50 points to exchange it for skullcannon. Damn sniping enemy generals and biggie monsters, screaming bells, aboms would be something game changing for woc.

Xerkics
17-03-2013, 18:24
Really? 200 pts? Well im playing woc and paying 210 for hellcannon with m3 and not much of accuracy i would happily pay extra 50 points to exchange it for skullcannon. Damn sniping enemy generals and biggie monsters, screaming bells, aboms would be something game changing for woc.

Hellcannon does cause panic checks at -1LD though.

DaemonReign
17-03-2013, 18:29
Suppose ... for a second ... Mat Ward isn't an idiot nor are they trying to push this particular kit above the others.

He may well be 'preparing for the next edition' as you theorize in your post - which would at least be an explanation (not, however, a valid excuse) for taking a crap on every notion of internal balance in this book.
The second postulation, though, well what's to say they can't sell a disproportionate number of these kits now (?) I mean it's not like people can ask for refunds when 9th Ed rolls around..

Kayosiv
17-03-2013, 19:55
I did have a thought about the Khorne cannon's points cost. Suppose ... for a second ... Mat Ward isn't an idiot nor are they trying to push this particular kit above the others.

Next edition is not too far off now. Maybe a year off? Given the lifespan of this book is at least 4 years, you could argue that it is going to be more of a 9th ed book than an 8th ed one.

But if that's true, at ballistic skill 5, it will still likely be the best cannon in the game.

Accuracy of cannons is a poor way to balance them, because it's just so hard to find that perfect spot where monsters don't auto-die from them but they are still a threat to monsters with the current system. And by the current system I mean strength 10, d6 wounds. For the most part in this game, nothing is higher than toughness 8 and nothing has more than 6 wounds, with a few notable exceptions. This means that a cannon is just as likely to kill something tough as something weak. Somewhat frail Griffon vs hard as rocks war sphinx? Cannon's don't care, wound on 2's. Also dealing d6 wounds in a game where most things have between 2-5 life is REALLY stupid.

You can't really fix skull cannon's by changing regular cannons because the stupid and inherently broken part about cannons, strength 10 and d6 wounds, is in it's inherent rules. Also the fact remains that for the price it is a pretty decent chariot if the cannon were to be ignored altogether, so it is still viable for the price no matter how bad cannons get because it is worth fielding if you never fire a shot. No matter the change to cannons, it is still going to be a decent chariot with effectively a free cannon on top.

sulla
17-03-2013, 20:25
Yeah:
S4, T4, W8, Armour save 6+, armour piercing, 4 Daemonettes (so 8 S3 attacks) + four Steeds of Slaanesh and an Exalted Allures (slightly better than a champ, slightly worse than a Herald) that gains an extra attack per every wound caused by the (2d6+1) impact hits (Soulscent Special Rule).
Model goes on an a-rock base.

Pretty big and unweildy in base-footprint. You obviously try to connect 'corner to corner' with the enemy in a combi-charge, and then 6-dice Mindrazor (or whatever) to get your bang for the buck.
Still, and pretty much as TBO is also saying, it's just a poor deal both in terms of nominal damage-output and durability.
180pts sounds reasonable. Something like that ought to do it.
[Lovely model! That I happen to be painted atm.. hehe]I'd put the exalted chariot as slightly less points than a nurgle gorebeast chariot and then reduce points further for the other 2 slaaneshi chariots.

Krish
19-03-2013, 07:24
But if that's true, at ballistic skill 5, it will still likely be the best cannon in the game.

Accuracy of cannons is a poor way to balance them, because it's just so hard to find that perfect spot where monsters don't auto-die from them but they are still a threat to monsters with the current system. And by the current system I mean strength 10, d6 wounds. For the most part in this game, nothing is higher than toughness 8 and nothing has more than 6 wounds, with a few notable exceptions. This means that a cannon is just as likely to kill something tough as something weak. Somewhat frail Griffon vs hard as rocks war sphinx? Cannon's don't care, wound on 2's. Also dealing d6 wounds in a game where most things have between 2-5 life is REALLY stupid.

You can't really fix skull cannon's by changing regular cannons because the stupid and inherently broken part about cannons, strength 10 and d6 wounds, is in it's inherent rules. Also the fact remains that for the price it is a pretty decent chariot if the cannon were to be ignored altogether, so it is still viable for the price no matter how bad cannons get because it is worth fielding if you never fire a shot. No matter the change to cannons, it is still going to be a decent chariot with effectively a free cannon on top.


Yes i can agree with that, maybe 9th will change cannons so they are not as accurate, cause d3 wounds and cannot shoot flying units. ( still as good against ranked troops, and units- juest cant kill single models with satelite guided missle shot ) Then skullcacnnon would be ok. But with cannons as they are... its just something too good.

Kayosiv
19-03-2013, 20:37
Ah but see, the d6 and strength 10 was baked into the rules for the cannon itself. I can think of no way to make regular cannons reasonable while also effectively toning down the skull cannon because like I said, if it didn't have a cannon at all and was just a chariot, it is still reasonably costed. It is by far the best chariot in the book, and not for the price, it is just the best chariot. When the other chariots cost the same or more, you start to see the problem.