Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 183 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

Death Guard v0.3

 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 2:44 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:43 pm
Posts: 1431
Location: Devon, UK
EDIT - my previous response was less diplomatic than it should have been, so I removed it.

atension - I disagree with almost all your points, in some cases drastically.

Could you please expand on your points? Especially for Festers and Contagions, because 'mediocre' is very different from my experiences, and i need to see how other people are seeing/using the army.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 4:20 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:00 pm
Posts: 984
Location: Toronto
IJW Wartrader wrote:
atension - I disagree with almost every point you made. :(

Like mordoten, I think the Thousand Sons are a bit too powerful (notably the Greater Spires), but I also think you're glossing over several substantial weaknesses.
  • Multiple formations (including the core formation) have no built-in ranged weaponry, it's only in add-on units. This makes it very easy to suppress the ranged part of the formation.
  • They struggle with activations as much or even more than Death Guard. While the Neophytes are cheap at 175pt it's a bunch of 6+ armour troops with no ranged weapons and no ability to get any, and mediocre assault ability unless you make them more expensive via deamons.
  • 1k Sons don't have great AA, it's generally worse than the Death Guard. Deceivers are 2xAA6+ compared to the Desecrators' 2xAA5+ and when added to other formations they suffer from the first point in that they'll usually be the only ranged unit in the formation. They're therefore painfully easy to suppress - there are no Havocs here to take the BMs. Firelords theoretically have good AA with a 45cm AA4+, but with all their other weapons being 15cm and being relatively fragile for their cost they usually get shredded by enemy AA cover. They're widely considered weak both in NetEA and EpicUK lists.


That list makes up for its shortfalls (and then some) though, this list doesn't.

IJW Wartrader wrote:
On to other stuff.

Plagueship - the original version was broken, and one of the most complained about entries in the list. 175pt got you 8BP Disrupt and four activations on the turn it came in, and three activations in subsequent turns. It didn't even have Slow and Purposeful as a drawback.

I can't deny the original original was way too much! I think it was working well with the 4BP Disrupt one formation 2D6+3. True you are getting the 4BP disrupt shot at the cost of 25 points but don't under estimate the difficulty of hitting things when designating the drop pre-deployment, not to mention the zombies are also stuck with where ever it lands rather than being able to teleport exactly where they want to go.

IJW Wartrader wrote:
Plaguereapers - they're also cheap, and mince anyone that gets close. While Decimators are generally better, they're also more expensive. That said, they're better in EpicUK where they're a Support Formation and can take Contagion and Walker upgrades.


They are cheap but oh so avoidable. I think they are fine the way they are though. Difficult to use effectively but valuable for restricting enemy movement options. I've found they almost never kill their points worth as I can almost never get them into range to shoot at something more than once a match.

IJW Wartrader wrote:
Fester Titan - now this is where I really struggle. Plaguehounds as the EpicUK version are flat-out the most feared unit I field, and Festers are overall better - they swap 4xAP3+ Disrupt for 3xAP3/AT5 Disrupt, making them roughly twice as effective against AV. +1DC compared to a Warhound also makes them noticeably harder to break as the usual 'two attacks and a point of damage' leaves them still active.

Mine are used to obliterate broken formations and relatively often end up taking the enemy Blitz. Don't forget that Ignore Cover on the barrage means that even when Doubling to get an 80cm threat range they're still hitting infantry in cover on 5+ with the Disrupt barrage and 3x5+ Disrupt with the second gun, 4+ if they're in the open.

Only used the Fester twice, I'll give them a try again.

IJW Wartrader wrote:
Contagion Towers[/b] - what makes them mediocre? That's not the experience of my opponents or myself at all. What are you comparing them to?

I guess the closest thing to compare them to would be Night spinners. Spinners are 175 points for nearly the same stats the are more than twice as fast and cost 175pts for three. When looking at the contagions the extra vomit cannon would almost never be used except if added to a garrisoning formation. It seems to have these extra things added in that are (for lack of a better word) vestigial to the base formations main function. They may make sense being used when added to other formations as an upgrade but they make the stand alone formation kinda crappy due to cost/effectiveness.

IJW Wartrader wrote:
Larger Titans - I've not used either of these to be able to comment fully, but I've heard the same complaint made about all Titans bigger than Scout class, with the exception of Eldar. I don't think this is specific to the DG Titans.

Fair enough

IJW Wartrader wrote:
Terminators - what would you do instead?

go a similar route to the TS, reduce their stat line and consequently points. Make them more similar to wraithguard. If you move towers to elites terminators will never be fielded in their current state, towers are just so much better and necessary.

IJW Wartrader wrote:
Blight Drones - for the second time, as far as I'm aware they've gone back to Initiative 2+, and are matched to the ones in the Red Corsairs list. The only difference between their current state and how they were in Frogbear's list is that they improved from Armour 5+ to 4+ and lost the 15cm gun.

I know the changes, I'm just protective of them since I have 3 formations worth and I really really like them. I would not like to see the plague towers competing for slots with the drones. As I've mentioned both are critical for the success of the list. Pitting them against one another for inclusion would be very detrimental. I would also be very happy if they got the "scout" ability, makes sense fluff wise. If you need to move the towers to elites that makes sense, reduce tower spam but move the drones to support then.


IJW Wartrader wrote:
Plague Hulks - if you wanted to engagement heavy and take a formation of Plague Hulks you can add three Assault Dreads to gain 6 FF attacks, and three Chaos Spawn to gain 3+3d3 CC attacks and a total formation size of ten units, albeit at the cost of being slower and having mixed INF/AV

However I think that's taking a unit and trying to force it into a role rather than looking at what the unit is good at. A case in point being Plague Hulks as an upgrade - they're the same speed as the Vindicators in the Armoured Assault Company and turn a formation that's very vulnerable in CC into one that CC-oriented troops will actively avoid. Similarly, adding one to a Retinue with Daemonic Pact gives that Hulk a 30+cm CC threat range (Daemons come in in 5cm coherency + 4cm strip base length + move forward 15cm + 5cm coherency to the Plague Hulk + 3-4cm base width for the Hulk itself).

Once again I agree with your assessment to a point but you are missing the point I've been trying to make several times. As upgrades many units make sense the way they are but as solid formations they make no sense. You are forcing the only strategy to large garrisoning formations. Pigeon holing a list like that isn't good, it makes it predictable. Predictable isn't fun and often less effective. Looking at the Walker formation..... as I said 4 hulks is too easy to break to be effective and adding spawns yes makes it harder to break but a very very slow assault force is next to useless. Defilers are good at 4 because the range shooting and the good assault effectiveness. Yeah you can break them easily but you have to reach them first and they will get lots of use out of the battle cannons first.

IJW Wartrader wrote:
Alternative Death Guard list - obviously there's nothing I can do to stop you starting another, but it's already a niche list as it is - having development and playtest efforts split across two lists is just going to slow down an already glacial pace of playtesting.


I completely agree that it would be bad for approval. I would only do it with your approval. I don't want to circumvent the champion role, that doesn't make sense. Mainly I was thinking of making it to play test ideas then use them to sway your direction with the main list rather than posting it as a competing list.

The point I'm desperately trying to make is for you to look at the list as whole rather than nitpicking each and every formation/unit. Is this list effective as a whole, is it overly predictable, is it fun to play? Will the changes you propose make the individual formations more balanced at the cost of making the list as a whole worse? I'm looking at it saying YES, the list as a whole is getting worse, and it was already not particularly powerful. No marching and being slow and large formations with few activations is hugely detrimental. What are the balancing factors?

_________________
Necron AC (click to see current Necron list threads)
Toronto Wargaming Group


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 8:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:43 pm
Posts: 1431
Location: Devon, UK
Thanks very much for the expanded explanations!


Plagueship - yes, that's been my justification of the formation as well, along with the Zombies starting clumped up instead of spread out to get in the way. I'll leave it at 4BP, 3+2d6 for now and see how playtests go.


Plaguereapers - 'almost never kill their points worth' is a sign that we think about the game very differently. ;D The Grand Tournament Scenario is almost purely an objective-based mission, so what matters to me is achieving those objectives. If my opponent is actively avoiding the area the Plaguereaper(s) are in, the formation has already done it's job, even if it never gets to fire or assault. >:D


Fester Titan - I highly recommend them, my record so far for a single activation with a Plaguehound is wiping a broken eleven-strong Kult of Speed BTS at the GT last weekend, and that was with rolls only slightly above average - 5-6xAP3 Disrupt from the barrage and 4xAP2 Disrupt from the other gun resulted in eight hits and nine BMs. A Fester would only have had 3xAP2 Disrupt on the second gun, but with the ability to use it on AV.


Contagions - yes, Night Spinners are the obvious comparison, and I think Contagions do well in that comparison. The first big difference is formation size giving them a second template, and requiring more than a single casualty to break.I regard the speed difference as mostly irrelevant because both formations want to Sustain to get Indirect Fire - the only time I ever see Night Spinners move is when they break. Then add in Fearless and they can't be wiped just by being shot at.

For garrisoning Contagions, coming forwards off the Blitz gets the formation into position to fire into the enemy Deployment Zone if need be, without being dependant on where the opponent places objectives and without leaving them so exposed. Plus you can start them in Overwatch which can help dissuade over-aggressive teleporters or air assault into your lines, and this is also when the secondary gun really kicks in.

However, I think they should have a wider variety of upgrades beyond just the Plague Tower - in EpicUK they can take Contagions and Defilers (Desecrators in NetEA terms) which makes them a lot more self-contained as a formation. Looking back at Frogbear's list they could take Walkers there as well, so Walkers will go back in in 0.3.2. Contagions could also be added (for a potential 7 in the formation), but I'm wary of simply pulling stuff wholesale from the EpicUK list as this one is already mostly a super-set of it.


Terminators - note that moving Plague Towers to Elites was still up in the air and not a confirmed change! Currently I still have them as Support but with the upgrade using up a Support slot. So the Terminators aren't competing with Plague Towers, and neither are Blight Drones.

Going back to 40k for inspiration:

Deathshroud Terminators have whopping great Deathshroud Scythes and not much in the way of ranged weapons. Going from various attempts at Close Assault Terminators in Epic we could look at CC2+, FF-, CC EA+1 MW.

Grave Warden Terminators still have Powerfists but then have lots of short-range alchemical weapons rather than things like Reaper Autocannon. Tweaking the existing profile slightly we could look at CC4+, FF3+, FF EA+1 Ignore Cover, CC EA+1 MW, 1 x 15cm AP4+ Ignore Cover.

Drop the Invulnerable Save and we could maybe justify starting them at 4 and a Lord for 350pt.

Please note that I think the Thousand Sons Terminators are too cheap, so 'a similar route' is going to be tricky... :(


Plague Hulks - this seems to be another fundamental disagreement about list construction and what makes for a useful formation. Four Plague Hulks by themselves doesn't have to be a viable formation, period, because they're a single option out of three. You can take four Defilers. I can take four Desecrators. Matty_C can take three Desecrators and a Plague Hulk. You could take three Defilers and a Plague Hulk. A mix of Plague Hulks, Desecrators and Assault Dreadnoughts could be a Blitz guard, especially in Overwatch, while providing a decent-range AA bubble across your back lines.


Overall feedback

Is this list effective overall? From my EpicUK experience and from my NetEA games so far, hell yes. This list outstrips the EpicUK one in almost every regard, and I have a 50% win rate with EpicUK DG, including the sub-optimal list I took to the GT.

Is it overly predictable? Depends. Players can predict that there's going to be Disrupt Barrages and tough slow-moving formations. Beyond that, not particularly. Big garrisoning formations is something I frequently use, but viewtopic.php?f=84&t=31050 had three mounted Retinues and only a formation of Desecrators garrisoning. If your opponent is expecting big garrisons, then a couple of Contagion formations forcing them to spread out followed by Terminators and Blight Drones doing clipping assaults is going to be a nasty shock.

Is it fun to play? I've had a lot of fun using it, my opponents not so much. Looking back through the thread you've said repeatedly that you enjoyed using it.


Balancing factors include formations that are very hard to shift (especially when they auto-Marshal) and Disrupting any broken formations to death before they get a chance to rally. I find when I face higher activation lists they have an advantage in the early game but by the end-game I'm usually out-activating them because my formations are still going while many of theirs don't exist any more. DG formations that break in the late game will usually spread out across the routes to objectives and force the opponent to assault them, 'waste' an activation shooting them or try to detour round them if there's even a route through. Fearless is a huge part of the strength of the DG list - I've lost my BTS once in the last dozen or so games and that was due to making really bad decisions against Steve54's Ulthwe.


In summary, I fundamentally disagree with your evaluation of the power level of the list. If you think I'm wrong, show me I'm wrong. Give me a batrep. So far there have been two? batreps from outside my group across the whole of 0.2-0.3.1.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 10:30 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 8:54 pm
Posts: 2279
Location: Cornwall
Having played IJW 4/5 times over the last few years - admittedly using the UK list all but once, mostly at tournaments - I can vouch for their success rate I've not won once yet ! Now in fairness this is in large part because IJW is a much better player than me! but even so I think the list certainly doesn't feel weak.

As for predictable - well only as much as most lists are. If i'm facing Codex Marines I know I'm going to see plenty of Thawk assaults, etc. I think this may be a problem of local meta if playing in a small group where others can list tailor. Against an all comers list the UK DG feel middle to top end.

I've only played twice against 1kSons, both times against one of the top UK players - but i would echo general feeling above, they feel better than most lists out there. I am unqualified to comment on the NetEA list, but it does seem to be even more OP. Comparisons to 1kSons is not a good idea if power creep is to be avoided.

Surely the Black Legion list should be the "baseline" for all chaos marine lists? And comparisons there are a lot more favorable to the DG. In fact, as a recent convert to the black side, i am often in envy of the resilience and fire power of the DG. Added to that the NetEA version seems to be the UK list on steroids, with more variety (Defilers, Blight Drones, Vindicator formations, Specialist Terminators) plus upgraded units (fester titan etc).

Compared to Black legion, pros :

* Fearless everywhere - for a modest cost increase.

* Disrupt on pretty much everything.

* Tough, mobile ground AA in the Desacrator

* Top flight artillery which can garrison ! Significantly better than the paper-thin night spinner formations. NSs look good on paper, but cant reach deployment zones, therefore have to wait till opponent has advanced and by the time something juicy is in range they are usually suppressed, broken or dead.

* Zombies ! I call shenanigans ! Its a great unit, very fluffy, but man its a PITA :-) I think IJW is right to want to test spamming several units of them.

And against :

* Ok no weapons on plague marines, but adding havocs is only 25pnts, and being a swap rather than an add meaning retinues don't become massive points sinks.

* No havoc formations - but with standard defilers and contagion engines who cares ? you have all the long range prepping you will ever need.

* No Deathwheels for speedy clipping and prepping, though festers are fine for this, and the addition of Blight Drones seems more than adequate.

* No Dreadclaws - but Terminators and zombies so who cares ? That is surely all the alpha strike, BTS assassination and general back line shenanigans anyone needs ? All Chaos terminators are glass cannons, the DG ones already have fearless and invulnerable over BL. Down grading the grave wardens to make them cheaper i can live with (no invulnerable, 10cm move?) but needs heavy testing given the advantages above.

Don't get me wrong, I think Atension has some fair points about giving some flexibility in list building. It is good to give the player options, but it is a feature of these "variant" lists that they give some powerful toys compared to the "baseline" versions and as IJW says something has to give to avoid OP synergies. I think there is an argument to allow some higher activation builds to be possible (though baring in mind it is difficult to get a decent Black Legion build with more than 10 activation) but to do so IMHO, the unit stats needs a nurf. Only slight, but i would look at the areas where this goes above and beyond the UK list :

* Prevalence of invulnerable. I get that DG are tough but this combined with fearless is just frustrating.

* Toning down the blight drones ( i know they have been already). Again, looking back to the "baseline" lists, they just seem too good compared to the obvious comparison - landspeeders - for their cost. Personally, i'd prefer to see them a fair bit less resistant, but a little cheaper. Again helping the activation count. Could also drop their speed to 30cm?

And comments on a few of the suggestions above :

* Bikes - Would nullify much of the intentional theme and difficult to balance with other advantages. Can always play DG as BL if a player wants to use bikes.

* Adding desecrators to Contagions - would be almost the only artillery in the game that could self AA. With garrison too it feels OP. My guard would love it !

* And, a suggestion of my own a little more radical - could one of the other middling formations be made core to allow variation with higher activation / less static / less resistant list - plus unlock support and elites more easily? Perhaps the Armoured Co or Vindicators ? After all, possessed DG vehicles have been a golden daemon staple since forever ! :-)

Just my 2p.

Hopefully IJW and i will be able to get in some serious play testing in the new year.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 10:53 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2015 1:42 pm
Posts: 286
I think making Deathshrouds more 40k-esque in giving them better CC is a good move. If this were to happen would you be able to also have a formation of 4 grave wardens rather than 2 and 2?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 10:55 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:43 pm
Posts: 1431
Location: Devon, UK
For self-AAing artillery, the EpicUK DG list already allows it. Although looking back through the DG Tournament lists I've somehow never taken that combo to a tournament, so it must just have been in club games.

I'm currently typing up atension's DG Chosen idea for the next release, but with my tweak of adding a Lord. Although I have concerns about the Land Raiders upgrade, the thought of four Land Raiders starting on the midline is pretty nasty. I'm not sure how that was justified in the World Eater list, especially considering they have a slightly improved Land Raider with CC5+...

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:43 pm
Posts: 1431
Location: Devon, UK
LeCacty wrote:
I think making Deathshrouds more 40k-esque in giving them better CC is a good move. If this were to happen would you be able to also have a formation of 4 grave wardens rather than 2 and 2?

The easiest would be to allow any combination in pairs. So 4 Deathshrouds or 2+2 or 4 Grave Wardens.

Although I'm starting to think that the only way they could go below 400pt is by dropping the built-in Lord - if you're going for CC then revised Deathshrouds would have better damage output than the current version against anything but Skimmers, while revised Grave Wardens in a set of four would start with nine FF dice, one of them being MW. And dropping the built-in Lord isn't really an option for Chaos Terminators.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:46 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2015 1:42 pm
Posts: 286
What I meant was 2 deathshrouds and 2 gws because as of now its limited to 2 grave wardens. What I was asking was would that limit be removed? Sorry for the poor wording :P


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:53 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 8:54 pm
Posts: 2279
Location: Cornwall
IJW Wartrader wrote:
For self-AAing artillery, the EpicUK DG list already allows it. Although looking back through the DG Tournament lists I've somehow never taken that combo to a tournament, so it must just have been in club games.


Good point. Ouch - that's a bit good !


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2016 12:46 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 8:54 pm
Posts: 2279
Location: Cornwall
Chosen sound ok. Though being fearless / A +3 it's going to be a pig of a scout screen to shift. With the chance to garrison contagions already, being able to shield them with a rock solid scout screen seems pretty OP. Imho it should be a support formation rather than core like black legion to avoid over prevalence.

As for LRs, should only be 2 landraiders (transport 2) but even then this option seems OTT for a scout formation.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:01 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:43 pm
Posts: 1431
Location: Devon, UK
LeCacty - no worries, I did understand what you meant, I just didn't answer very well! I need to have a deep think about DG Terminators before adding any options to a PDF, because the different unit profiles are going to control what combinations of Deathshrouds and Grave Wardens would be OK.

Blip - Yes, and given how much nastier the EUK Defiler is compared to the NetEA Desecrator, it adds a lot of close-quarters deterrent as well.

For Bikes, I think a 25cm speed version could work as they'd be as 'slow' as a Rhino-mounted Retinue. But they're also not really needed. Plus it's possible to just run a different list if you want Bikes.

For an additional Core Formation I think the Armoured Company or Armoured Assault Company might be stepping on the shoes of the Iron Warrors list too much, especially as that's where I 'stole' the Armoured Assault Company from in the first place. ;)


A note to everyone, including atension and myself - although the list has been pretty stable over the last year, it's still definitely in the experimental stage so if you have ideas and suggestions, please let me know! I'll do my best to give all suggestions a proper analysis, and not just dismiss them.

A reminder of the overall design and background concepts I'm trying to keep to:
Death Guard are overall a slow army implacably rolling forwards.
They excel in siege tactics.
They make extensive use of chemical weapons.
Historically they had a small number of large Great Companies.
Mortarion didn't go in much for specialised troops such as Assault Squads, Bikes or Devastators.
In the Heresy era they specialised in Terminator actions.
Most of their vehicles are supposed to have fallen to bits by now, or be completely possessed by daemons.
They make extensive use of daemons.
Grave Wardens are masters of chemical weapons and make extensive use of them.
Destroyer Marines were the non-Terminator equivalent.
Low cost activations are vanishingly unlikely to happen, unless they are as 'disposable' as Plague Zombies.
Plague Hulks are basically the only god-specific Defiler variant that comes from GW rather than being invented by Epic players, so are an absolute must for the list.
Nurgle forces make use of plenty of gribbly monsters like giant toads, but smaller ones are covered fairly well by Plague Zombies and medium size ones by Chaos Spawn.

Plus a bunch of blue-sky ideas inspired by writing that list:
Represent the ramshackle possessed nature of their vehicles by making the Armoured Company and Armoured Assault Company Initiative 2+ and/or giving them CC EA+1 Disrupt, similar to Tzeentch vehicles getting Warp Flame.
Represent the implacable advance by not just having +1 to Marshall but by giving the Supreme Commander re-roll a +1 to rally. Possibly even adding this army-wide, but that would make the 'yeah I know the formation broke, but they're Fearless so they're just going to run past you towards the Blitz' even more annoying and powerful.
Grave Wardens really need to have ranged Disrupt weapons if we want to keep to the background, but this then causes price issues again.
Some kind of Giant Chaos Spawn could be fun.

EDIT and more:
A unit whose Zone of Control counts as Dangerous Terrain for all non-Nurgle units (maybe the Beast of Nurgle, who used to leave poisonous slime trails back in Realms of Chaos times). For a less lethal version, it inflicts Blast Markers instead of kills. Hmm... >:D
Armoured Companies/Assault Companies that can get Daemonic Pact, but can only summon Nurgling Swarms.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion


Last edited by IJW Wartrader on Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:12 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:43 pm
Posts: 1431
Location: Devon, UK
Blip wrote:
Chosen sound ok. Though being fearless / A +3 it's going to be a pig of a scout screen to shift. With the chance to garrison contagions already, being able to shield them with a rock solid scout screen seems pretty OP. Imho it should be a support formation rather than core like black legion to avoid over prevalence.

As for LRs, should only be 2 landraiders (transport 2) but even then this option seems OTT for a scout formation.

Land Raiders for Death Guard is just 'up to four', with only Rhinos being limited by transport numbers. Obviously that could be tweaked, but it gets fiddly compared to just removing the option.

I think atension's suggestion as having them as a Core Formation that doesn't unlock anything else has possibilities, but also makes them infinitely spammable within the limits of points. :-\ You could cover a lot of table with scout screens at 275pt for a 60cm (plus base lengths) line of Plague Marines with a bunch of three Chaos Spawn at the end nearest the enemy.

Or one Chosen back near the Blitz and the other three in a diamond pattern going forwards, with a garrison of Contagions in the middle, immune to assault and not even intermingled.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2016 10:28 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 8:54 pm
Posts: 2279
Location: Cornwall
Yep, thats the issue. With most scouts you can assume they will be easy enough to break and move off to get at the meaty unit beyond if you put your mind (and activations) to it. With fearless its much too difficult. Esp if hiding behind 4++inv landraiders...

I was thinking a double layer of 2 chosen, both with pacts would hold up an entire flank for most of the game if you wanted.

Dare i suggest they should be Elites ? (As Black Legion)

As for armoured Cos. Again, they are core in BL. Being not fearless they probably feel fragile compared to other DG, but they are in fact tougher than BL vehicles for same points. Arguably the inv save is a good value trade off for -5cm move.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2016 11:01 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:43 pm
Posts: 1431
Location: Devon, UK
I think they'll start as Support and without Land Raiders, and we can see how they do in batreps.


Turning some of the blue sky ideas into a concrete profile, here's a (very) provisional 'Non-lethal Beasts of Nurgle' unit, although it's a bit rules-heavy:

Death Guard Beast of Nurgle (non-lethal test version)
Speed 10cm Armour 3+ CC4+ FF6+
Notes: INV Save, Expendable, Mounted, Walker
Nurgle's Rot - CC and FF hits by Beasts of Nurgle do not cause Armour saves, but instead inflict a BM after Combat Resolution.
Pestilential Slime Trail - the area within 5cm of a Beast of Nurgle counts as Dangerous Terrain for all non-Nurgle units. Any unit failing the Dangerous Terrain Test is not destroyed, but suffers a BM.

Designer's Notes
  • This is partly inspired by going back to the original source material (see http://wfrp1e.wikia.com/wiki/Beast_Of_Nurgle) where Beasts were deadly enough that small creatures would die from their presence, but rather than actually trying to kill things they bounded around the battlefield, getting sad as their new playmates sickened and stopped moving. Before getting bored and heading off to find a new playmate to lick enthusiastically...
  • In game terms this means that Beasts are going to make almost no difference to combat res (apart from potentially helping with outnumbering), but in a winning assault the enemy formation is going to suffer BM hackdowns and now-lethal Dangerous Terrain tests, while in a losing assault the enemy are much more likely to break, and may suffer additonal BMs if they try to consolidate.
  • A less fiddly version would be to make the Dangerous Terrain be just normal DT tests instead of causing BMs, but given the potential for mass kills with bad dice the Beasts' CC would need to go to 5+ or 6+.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Death Guard v0.3
PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:49 pm
Posts: 487
Location: Hobart, Australia
A lot here to digest :)

IJW, the heresy Death Guard have grave wardens and Deathshroud in their list, so it might be worth your while having a little look while you are thinking about them.

Deathshroud are traditionally the bodyguard of officers, so perhaps if you want a termie lord he must be on a Deathshroud unit. *shrugs*

I like the idea of the chosen. Not sold on land raiders for them though. Seems abusable.

Wish listing:
Heavy Flamer Havocs with Chemical weapons. :D

_________________
.'.
http://ragged-they-kill.blogspot.com.au/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 183 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net