Daemons of Chaos - Still breaking the game?

[Lord Inquisitor]

Yes, you can do twin heads (+2 to cast) and Master of Sorcery (Loremaster, any rulebook lore) on a normal Lord of Change, although it does blow the whole gift allowance to do so. That said, if you want a level 4, the total does come to 635 so you'll have to be playing more than 2500 points to fit all of this in or something has to go.

Yes, daemons are top tier. Undoubtedly. At least with low or zero comp. I found that they got pulverised by comp in 7th (to the point where I often felt they couldn't compete in many cases) and even now in 8th they still seem to get a raw deal from comp. Certainly I saw a lot of Daemon armies at the top tables in Ard Boyz final, 3K and no restrictions still leaves Daemons a prime candidate for top army.

Still, they certainly took a hit in 8th. In fact, some elements of 8th seemed specifically designed to curb daemons. Regen or Ward as a rule seemed designed purely to keep Nurgle daemons in check, which is a shame for the game if that's the case.

These days, in a moderate, normal level of restrictions, daemons are top tier but the tiers are much closer. Daemons, Dark Elves, Warriors, Skaven, Lizardmen form the top tier (plus Ogres, probably). There's not a lot of difference between them. Looking at the Rankings HQ army rankings for the USA gives reinforces this.

Certainly Daemons aren't breaking the game anymore. Indeed, Warhammer is better balanced than it has been in a very long time and it is getting better as more 8th ed books are released.

[nurgle5]

Doesn't a keeper with twin heads get an additional +2 to cast, or am I thinking of the wrong upgrade?

Daemons still make me very, very sad. They easily have the most advantageous breaktest system of the entire game short of unbreakable.

Keeper? B-but twin heads is an upgrade for the Lord of Change. Either you're thinking the wrong daemon or wrong upgrade.

[shelfunit.]

Doesn't a keeper with twin heads get an additional +2 to cast, or am I thinking of the wrong upgrade?

Daemons still make me very, very sad. They easily have the most advantageous breaktest system of the entire game short of unbreakable.

Yup, you are correct. I did get a draw out of Daemons at 1000pts playing an all close combat dwarf army including slayers in 7th ed - oh the glory.

[The bearded one]

Keeper? B-but twin heads is an upgrade for the Lord of Change. Either you're thinking the wrong daemon or wrong upgrade.

durp, lord of change. I always mix up the names despite knowing perfectly well which is which.

[Sexiest_hero]

Keeper of secrets sounds like a Tzzentchy name so much it's easy to ix them up. They arn't broken any more just top tier. They went from utter filth to, stupid bs. Life heralds can be assassinated, and bloodletters ca be beaten with buffed up fighty troops. in 7th it was Put down army look at Kairos and horror horde/Plague bearer horde. eat 211 powerdice, then rage quit. I'm not on the at ward hate train, but damn them were baaaaad days.

[Montegue]

Demons, in my opinion, are the strongest army in the game. I know a lot of folks say that Dark Elves take the cake, but I just don't see it. Locally, we generally play at 2500 points. There's a gent who plays with three hordes of 40 bloodletters each, one group of other demons that bunker his Lore of Life master, several Heralds, two groups of three flamers each, and the -2 leadership banner. Combined with fear, their break test and unbreakable, you just can't beat them.

There's literally no answer for that army, anywhere. Fear, 5s, WS5, I4, 5+ Ward, unbreakable, very low chance of them losing combat in the first place, and when they *do* lose combat it's usually no big deal. Shooting won't kill them (ward save), close combat won't kill them (ward save, hitting you before your equivalent weapons can even swing, etc etc), magic won't beat them (he's got a perfect useful level 4), and his magic will absolutely decimate you (spamming Dwellers). When you finally get into combat with them, you're making fear tests at a negative 2 just to keep your WS up. Then, when you lose combat, your break test is at an additional -2.

Demons are hideous right now.

[Lord Inquisitor]

Hmmm. You should try playing Daemons Montegue. Not vulnerable to shooting or Break tests? Try keeping your Greater daemon that costs 1/4 of the points of your army alive from cannonballs, BS shooting and static combat res. It is far from easy. The daemonic instability is a pain for single models like greater daemons. Don't take a greater daemon? Then no level 4 unless you take an unreasonable number of horrors. Those troops are almost all only T3, 5+ ward save or not. That -2 is nasty but it makes your BSB be worth an arm and a leg in VPs so it needs to be protected, which costs even more.

[Souppilgrim]

Daemons are very much top tier (almost OP) with a couple of certain builds. Without these builds, they are quite balanced. So to answer the OP's question, you should be fine taking daemons, as long as you don't go for the specific netlist nasty builds.

[brother_maynard]

Demons, in my opinion, are the strongest army in the game. I know a lot of folks say that Dark Elves take the cake, but I just don't see it. Locally, we generally play at 2500 points. There's a gent who plays with three hordes of 40 bloodletters each, one group of other demons that bunker his Lore of Life master, several Heralds, two groups of three flamers each, and the -2 leadership banner. Combined with fear, their break test and unbreakable, you just can't beat them.

There's literally no answer for that army, anywhere. Fear, 5s, WS5, I4, 5+ Ward, unbreakable, very low chance of them losing combat in the first place, and when they *do* lose combat it's usually no big deal. Shooting won't kill them (ward save), close combat won't kill them (ward save, hitting you before your equivalent weapons can even swing, etc etc), magic won't beat them (he's got a perfect useful level 4), and his magic will absolutely decimate you (spamming Dwellers). When you finally get into combat with them, you're making fear tests at a negative 2 just to keep your WS up. Then, when you lose combat, your break test is at an additional -2.

Demons are hideous right now.

don't you guys play with chaff or redirectors? or do you just build armies of huge blocks and run them at each other? i'm also curious as to what army you play that has such difficulty killing T3 5+ save models.

[The bearded one]

My chaff always gets outchaffed by daemon furies, who are horrendously fast, have str4 attacks and a wardsave, and all the time I find that they don't poof far enough and one bastard is left after daemonic instabilty.

[brother_maynard]

My chaff always gets outchaffed by daemon furies, who are horrendously fast, have str4 attacks and a wardsave, and all the time I find that they don't poof far enough and one bastard is left after daemonic instabilty.

i was asking montegue specifically because the army that seems to be causing him such heartache has 2 units of 3 flamers and thats it. and your opponent must be pretty lucky on those instability tests as furies are LD 2.

[Awilla the Hun]

As far as I can tell from reading some warseer posts, most battles seem to be some sort of war by timetable with infantry waves robotically marching into each other and every single close combat being fought by about 50 elite troops per side with Marquess of Queensbury rules (apart from buffs and a few shooting/magic casualties on either side.) Which is odd, because that's never happened in any of the games I've taken part in. Most of them involve some element of manouvere and misdirection. But I live in a sheltered part of the warhammer world.

[The bearded one]

i was asking montegue specifically because the army that seems to be causing him such heartache has 2 units of 3 flamers and thats it. and your opponent must be pretty lucky on those instability tests as furies are LD 2.

not with an 18" inspiring presence.

I remeber one time when a unit of furies charged my organ gun, and in doing so had to clip a unit of longbeards AND hammerers as well. The furies killed the crew, and survived the instability test with minimal damage, so in total they nt only killed a warmachine twice their cost, but prevented 2 entire units from moving as well.

You'll start hating daemons if that's your average fare in any game against daemons..

[brother_maynard]

You'll start hating daemons if that's your average fare in any game against daemons..

sounds like operator error to me...

...in doing so had to clip a unit of longbeards AND hammerers as well

perhaps i'm not giving you enough credit, but it seems to me that its a slightly irrational hate stemming from both a poor deployment choice on your part and a bit of luck on his part. furies got lucky to kill the crew, or so lady averages says.

[The bearded one]

It may have been only 1 of those 2 units, it was a 7th edition game so quite a while ago, but that encounter does not differ from 8th edition rules except for getting 1 supporting attack more from the block, and the furies getting combat res for charging.

Other average encounters include ~15-18 bloodletters with herald methodically butchering through 28 templeguard.. twice, in both cases killing the scar veteran in the unit in the first round with a 1-2 attacks being allocated onto him and at least one resulting in killing blow. Another is a unit of flamers from long range destroying in one volley an organ gun in hard cover and under the protection of a 5+ wardsave (6's to hit, 6's to wound, 5+ saves). Or the BSB failing 2 out of 3 3+ rerollable armoursaves and thus the dwarflord with hammerers directly next to them failing their breaktest and being run down, with the game ending in a lovely challenge of skulltaker vs thane with 2+ ward against flaming, who dies regardles from the killing blow. In about half a dozen different occasions has a unit of flamers been engaged by a fullsized unit (at least twice a horde of 30'ish dwarfs with great weapons), but survived the round and combat resolution with plenty of wounds to spare. One of my most recent games against daemons was a meeting engagement where fully 1/3 of the army ran off the table in turn 1.

Call me biased, but in just about every single game against daemons horrendously unlucky things happen, when they're no picknick of a matchup anyway, and the players generally aren't that much fun to play against either.

[Sexiest_hero]

Flamers are filth, Blood letters are no better at killing blow than any other killing blow troops. That lore master is only lvl 2 unless they take a GD. More Daemon players than not are not fun to play against, I still would face them over double slann skaven or Chosenstar and tzeentch lvl 4. If you can out buff bloodletters they are chumps. Killing the life mage is also a goal.

[HalfBlood]

Jeez people need to grow up and learn to play the game. I would post quotes from several people, but I will just sum it all together so read if you troll daemons!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Ok im a Daemon player who started playing at the start of 8th. I was given so many comments about OP OP daemons. Yes their are things to look out for, but I have played this army so much, over 200 games now (yes I play alot)

My idea is that since Daemon were extremely overpowered in 7th edition, people tended not to play against them. Because of this decline, nowwdays people who try to play daemons are extremely considered chessy, or unfair. And are discriminated from playing daemons. This lowers the amount of players who play daemons. Now people have so little experience against daemons (since they always refused to play daemons) and whenever Daemons do anthing its immediately considered chessy.


If you read through several people's quotes you can see people claiming that daemons are OP, but i gurantee this person has never even played against daemons.


Ok so now im actually going to talk about the army book, some things that make daemons stand out.



They have very versatile magic, basically they can take Lores for extremely low points, which several people claim is OP. I claim its underpriced however this book was made about 5 years ago so its understandable.

Another thing people consider OP about daemons is Flamers. Flamers are extremely good at their job, and are seen as one of few units that stick out of the book.


These are the only things that I feel are OP about the book. Now their are several other things that people claim are OP all the time and here is my response that is extremely logical and poses a perfect counter to daemon units.


We will start with Lords.
-People consider Greater Daemons as insanely over-powered. My counter is these guys can die my a cannon turn 1. Is that fair for a daemon player to lose 1/4 his army turn 1?
-This leads me into my next point. Imagine not taking a Lord until 2,000 points. Daemons cant take a Lord until this point cost (excluding DP). In a 2,000 point game most greater Daemons can barely add any gifts of chaos.
-This also shows that Daemons can't even take a Level 4 Wizard until a 2,200+(this excludes Pink Horrors). Not to mention its like spending more points on a fragile Lord that can die to a cannon turn 1.

-Then we got Fateweaver. A personal favorite, and is hated by most players.
-My comments to him are......
-He costs 1/4 my army in a 2,500 point game. He is also I 1 which makes him vulranable to Purple Sun/Pit of Shades. Lastly what happens when I roll poorly for magic? Its like wasting 1/4 of my army that turn...



Now we go to Core
-Daemons have only 1 viable Core which should be discussed.
-This shows how outdated the book is, PlagueBearers, Horrors, and Daemonettes are not really good at all.)
-Bloodletters are considered the most valuable Core. They work well against heavily armored units.
+Bloodletters flaws are their lack of attacks, lack of I, and T3, thats right they are T3.
+This means Bloodletters are extremely weak to shooting, thats their counter, not to mention hordes of units can easily school bloodletters in what bloodletters are considered awsome at.


We now hit special, however their is nothing OP about their special.


We hit rare.
-Flamers are consider pretty good, and they are I cant really decline this. You got me on this.


Now lets analyze how OP daemons are right??

So we got fragile Lords that can die by a cannon turn 1, also they can only be valuable in games over 2,200 points.
Only 1 valuable Core unit that is T3
No scary Special
1 Strong Rare choice.

They sound OP right?


learn to play the game.

[The bearded one]

All I know is I'm getting statistical BS whenever I fight daemons, so I'm biased, but there are certain things I find I'm still justified in thinking it to be utter filth, most notably bloodletters.

+Bloodletters flaws are their lack of attacks, lack of I, and T3, thats right they are T3.

1 attack at I4 is not a lack of attacks and I. Not everybody has the stats of a chaos warrior. If T3 were that simple, dark elves would be a cakewalk.. who generally don't have a wardsave either.

For their cost, bloodletters are still outrageously underpriced. Compare them to other units in that pricerange.

learn to play the game.

In that case it is not required to repeat several times that a greater daemon can die turn 1 to a cannonball (my HPA can do so too, but is still broken as hell), because by 'playing the game' you can shelter him/it/her behind terrain. 3 out of 4 greater daemons can move 20" per turn, so can hop to shelter untill furies have incapacitaded the omnipresent cannon, and the 4th has 10 wounds, regeneration and a wardsave, and wounds can of course be restored to him using the lore of life attribute.

[brother_maynard]

For their cost, bloodletters are still outrageously underpriced.

no, they're like 3 pts a model underpriced.

[The bearded one]

no, they're like 3-4 pts a model underpriced.

I think 3-4 points underpriced qualifies as 'outrageously' underpriced