Hello, I was atension's opponent controlling the DG, I agree with his comments along with some of my general thoughts:
- I think the list overall feels pretty well balanced, they are very strong in some things but not overly cheesy and it feels Death Guardy.
- The match was very close against the Tau and really could’ve gone either way with a few roles so that attests to the balance of the list.
- I think the DG need access to better AA, only one unit with AA5+ at 75pts, makes it difficult to protect against any air attacks.
- Agree that the contagion towers are 25 points too expensive, 300 seems like the right point cost.
- The 5.3 list is confusing with all the new units, I don’t think the we really need all the new fluff stuff, but if you do want to chase the current 40K fluff then incorporate the ames/stats into existing units.
- Agree with too many characters, I think 4 is the right number.
- I like the buff to the Blightlord Termies plaguespewer, makes the 400 points more justified. Although I think RA with regular Invul save is good enough. I didn’t see any reason to take the Deathshroud termies, with a 15cm it’s very hard to get into base contact.
- I like the new Nurgle’s rot and the existing plague zombies, both very fluffy.

If I come up with more thoughts I'll post them. Thanks.

Thanks a lot for the feedback all of you. I'll respond more fully later, but for now...

There are definitely a few places where the special rules can be streamlined a bit, for example Nurgling transport could be simplified to text saying that all AVs can carry one unit and all WE can carry any number, with much the same effect as now.

The 'extra' Biologus Putrifier character could be dropped again with the current version of Nurgle's Rot, which would take it back down to 'four' characters - while the other CSM lists combine the CC Lords and FF Lords into a single entry I find it easier to keep track of them separately.

For Contagions and Plague Towers that's likely to mean another bump in price for the Plague Towers rather than a drop in price in for the Contagions, given the long track record of Contagions at 325pt.

JJ - the new fluff stuff is purely for informal games, I'd better move it onto a separate page to prevent confusion.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion

From my experience the issue is that contagion engines just don't have value at 325. Boosting the Plague Tower even higher won't solve this issue.

I do understand that Contagion Engines have a history of being 325. But Plague Towers are also approved in the Chaos Cultist list at 325 as well, already 25 less that the DG list. If we're concerned with consistency across lists, I'd ask we just keep that in mind also.

All that said, Plague Towers are hands down a better choice. That might be a discussion to bounce up to the Chaos AC to have it revisited? I'd guess the points bump comes from having indirect disrupt barrage.

Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk

_________________
Grey Knights AC: viewtopic.php?f=130&t=33750

Tau AC: viewforum.php?

Net EA Chair

The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.

Oh my. I can picture my regular opponents' brains exploding if I suggest reducing the price of the Contagions.

As far as points across lists go, both Contagions and Plague Towers appear to more powerful in the context of a Death Guard army than a LatD army due to better synergies and the impact of high Strategy on Disrupt barrage.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion

Yeah I would agree with Gunslinger and JJmicro, don't need to increase the tower. The contagion should come down to 300 at least. I've tried them a few time also but they just aren't worth it at their current cost. I could be playing them completely wrong I suppose. Interested to know what synergies you are exploiting, maybe I can be using the contagions to better effect. Their range is only 90cm on a sustained so getting alpha strike on deployment zone is dependant on garrisoning them and your opponent can really mitigate that with their objective placement.

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

Contagions are usually the first thing I add to a list after two Retinues, so we're definitely seeing a difference of opinion in their usefulness.

I'll typically garrison off the Blitz if my opponent places the other objectives in awkward positions, usually with a 'Blitz guard' Retinue or these days some Chosen also garrisoning around them for mutual support. That typically covers a third or so of the enemy DZ. If the target formation is at the front of their DZ you don't even lose a BP for the rear-most Contagion, although I often add a Desecrator anyway for some AA by the Blitz objective.

If the opponent has teleporting formations then I'll usually start the Contagions in Overwatch as their secondary guns are also a nasty surprise on top of the barrage.

For synergies, it's partly massed Disrupt and good Engagement ability meaning that there tend to be plenty of broken enemy formations around, and they then have to make sure they end up out of range of the Contagions and range/LoF of any Plague Towers and range/LoF of any Fester Titans, or they're going to get shredded by Disrupt hits.

The higher Strategy rating compared to LatD kicks in when you're using the artillery to prepare enemy formations for assaults from Terminators, or even from Plague Zombies, a tactic which is much more unreliable in LatD. So a mix of higher reliability in getting the first activation combined with prepping for much more effective formations.


It might just be that my regular opponents have developed a hatred for Contagions and Indirect Disrupt barrages, but the contagions are usually target priority one. On the other hand, the Contagions get targeted with high priority when I go to (EpicUK) tournaments outside my local meta.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion

But your opponent can place their forward objectives and units with contagion garronsoning in mind and completely avoid being in the radius. Garrisoning off the blitz doesn't work.... The blitz is on your deployment table edge so garronsoning them there means you can't hit the enemy DZ unless you stretch them off the objective but that will not be even close to 1/3 of your opponents DZ, Maybe 10%... The DG army has rather crappy AA and the contagion have not great armour. Fairly easy to neutralize them with a basic aircraft. Broken units and disrupt indirect hits is true of any army not unique to DG. Like you say your opponent will neutralize first them first. This is easy to do and they shouldn't be able to do much damage even going first if your opponent deploys properly. A formation of contagion plus only 1 AA unit is 400 points! That's s huge investment and DG already suffer from activation count inferiority. I respectfully completely disagree with your assessment on their usefulness at their current price.

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

Regarding the Plague Towers, I think they are very well priced for what they do, however, they compensate for the DG's other weaknesses mainly; lack of range, limited Titan killing & RA. Therefore you have to take it in context of the entire list and what it brings. As I said in my post the game with the Tau felt well balanced. But if I could go back I would take another Plague Tower versus Contagion Towers.

You have to think about the list being both internally and externally balanced, the DG don't have many cheap activation options and are a slow army with limited weapon range. I don't think they need a nerf in the form of a Plague Tower cost increase. How often are DG armies killing it in tournaments? In this context a 300pt Contagion towers make more sense than bumping the cost of a Plague Tower.

For garrisoned Contagions:

The back of one unit (25mm base) being within 15cm of the table edge plus 5cm coherency plus 25mm bases on the rest of the formation gets you 25cm into the table with a single unit used for stretching:



So no it's not a third by area, but it's about half the leading edge of the enemy DZ where you're forcing the opponent to deploy in reaction to the Contagions.

On the other hand, if I look at the EpicUK Death Guard lists, I'm pretty much the only person who takes Contagions so they're certainly not popular.


As far as competitiveness goes, DG (or at least those two players) appear to have done pretty well in the US:

However I've not had any information about their lists or tactics.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion

Would be very interested in seeing the list and rule set used for those tournament winners! I don't disagree with the list being effective in general I just don't think the contagion are close to a top or a even mid tier formation in terms of effectiveness. I'm guessing those tournament lists likely spam towers.

Deploying stretched like that will really make them easy targets to destroy. Generally terrain won't be set up to optimally let you both obstruct view and deploy even close to the way you are suggesting in the diagram. In which case once again the tower is the no brainer choice.

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

Polite request - please assume that I'm making these points from practical experience of doing this across multiple games, it's not just theoretical ideas. Because it's the Blitz objective I have full control over where it goes, which means it gets placed with garrisons in mind, which means that I manage to deploy like that in around 3/4 of the games where I use Contagions, with the Contagions almost always in cover and outside LoF from the far side.

Having a single unit from the formation at maximum coherency is hardly stretched out, that would be when I put down a Plague Zombie formation covering nearly a metre of the opponent's flank.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion

Polite responce: not trying to attack you at all (text can sometimes be misleading because you (anyone) can't read tone well) Really just trying to understand your rational for your decisions. I've also played the list many times, likely not as many as you granted but enough to understand. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying I'm right and you are wrong, I'm saying that I don't understand your decision based on my own experience.

It's bad practice to assume anything that's how misunderstandings happen in an open form, all points need to be backed up with proof that's how this is supposed to work.

Once again no disrespect but the AC job to manage the list from everyones play testing evidence and show the proof rather than dictate and have everyone assume they are doing their due diligence.

Yes you can place your Blitz anywhere but the diagram shows it in the center. Terrain won't generally be perfectly placed in the center. Yes you can move left or right but get close to the edge and once again the coverage drops. I think its a stretch to assume you can pull this off with cover and have valuable targets worth hitting in the small covered space. Thats a lot of things that need to line up and i believe (also having some experience having tried deploying the contagions as youve segested prevuously) it may work occationally but not something you can count on and even much less likely to pull off once your opponent is wise to it. As a result I don't believe it justifies the cost requirement.

You dont have to take my opinion soley but I'm hardly alone. From your own mouth "Contagionsare rarely used". If this is a specific design limitation that's fine too but I'm just looking at the formation in isolation.

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

As one of IJW's regularpunching-bags opponents, I have to say I do find the CTs a right pain. It is interesting and surprising to have such a different experience. I also find the assertion that DG AA is poor to be odd - the Defilers seem to be solid, not only as AA, but the fact that they are a full unit of AA, tough AF to shoot (plus often in cover) and dish it out in assaults, therefore hard to neutralize.

Haven't got a lot of time to write but some quick thoughts.

Does the opponent's army make a big difference? I generally play eldar and they seem particularly vulnerable to the constant disrupt/death by BMs which DG seems to dish out. Then again i find IG still seem to feel it pretty hard. Maybe we should play a few more games with BL to see if they are still as effective?

What armies do you regularly play against Asention? I'm wondering if you play a lot of air assault armies (or Necrons) - a small number of units on the board plus air power to spare might make avoiding the CT range and then assaulting them in FF easier than for large footprint/conventional forces like guard?

That said, the fact that your opponents do target the CTs with air or other means is proof of their threat. If they were poor for their points you would expect them to be ignored till later.

Likewise, its not as easy as you make out to place objectives such that they are out of range. Obviously you are already placing 30cm into the board, and as per your argument about the blitz, rarely are there two places where you can place objectives out in the open and a good place for capturing yourself once you take into account terrain etc.

In general, they seem to synergise really well with the other DG blast marker tricks - both to dish out damage and defend their retinues from un-prepped assaults - as an effective force multiplier.

Thanks for the tactical overview on how you is CE IJW. I'll have to see if I can make them work in that context.

I can't speak for the DG list that won NEAT, but my list won Fall In back in November. I brought:

Retinue + Supreme Commander + mark
Retinue + Champion + mark
Retinue + mark
Blight Drones
Terminators + mark
Plague Tower
Plague Ship
Fester Titan
Vidicators + Nurglings

The games were:
DG v Squats. Won 5-0 turn 4.
DG v 3rd sphere Tau. Won 3-0
DG v iyanden. Lost after turn 4 on points to a 320 pts. 0-0 on objectives.

Fall In gave points for the number of objectives you captured plus if you win, lost or tied. So even though I had a minor loss in the third game, I still had enough points overall for first.

Ironically, I also had DG at NEAT and had a lot more trouble. I think part of that was due to playing AMTL and Knights. Since the DG have limited AT, these were more difficult match ups.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

_________________
Grey Knights AC: viewtopic.php?f=130&t=33750

Tau AC: viewforum.php?

Net EA Chair

The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.

Hey Blip,

Yeah, the list your opponent is playing does have an impact for sure. When playing DG I played against Marines both drop lists and non drop lists. I've found that the drop type list generally has a tough time facing DG because DG being designed to be quite hardy in assaults (though the strike cruisers can do some significant damage when they get good placement). Standard marines and the one variant (blood angels) I played against did reasonably well.
Played two games against an ork Ghaz list and got just destroyed due to zap spam and fightabomas. Played against eldar several times and was generally on the losing side. Mainly because they both badly out activated me and because they are so fast. Getting favourable assaults seemed very easy for them. On top the void spinners were painful. This was before the current incarnation of nurgles rot though. Played against tyranids also but this wasn't using the tournament senario. When Playing against DG I used Tau third phase and won. Having got about a dozen games under my belt prior I had a good feel for how to defeat them. Played against Dkok and got tabled, shadowswords plus alpha strike artillery against a slow slow force was rough. The plagueship helped but I had bad roles for zombie numbers and they were handily wiped out by the hordes of troops in the gorgons.

In my experience armies that are assault based generally are at a disadvantage when facing DG, with the exception of elder and Necrons. Armies that are fast and or have really good range shooting are at an advantage. But that's a very big generalization.

Admittedly i used the contageons only a few times (roughly 5) I had the contagion used against me also. I found they were easy to neutralize with the Tau. I was playing a far from optimal list with the Tau. Using the Manta and no fliers (mostly because that's what was available).

Don't misunderstand about the contagion. They can be effective. The point wartrader was making was that the point cost was justified because they could cause damage in the opponent deployment combined with their slightly higher chance of going first. Look at manticores 250 points 120cm range BP 6 disrupt. Similar armour. Night spinners 175 points 3bp 45cm disrupt yes they have the same range but they are 175 points. Void spinners 275 points 3bp 60cm disrupt, WE and better armour. My point is there is cheaper stuff that can actually do alpha strike the opponent DZ under any circumstance.

Saying that because your opponent targets them they that's proof of their threat is a little misleading. Indirect barrage is generally at the top of the list to be destroyed especially when it has disrupt also. My point is because the DG list suffers from lower activation combined with slow speed, not great AA and the contagion as far as indirect barrage goes is one of the highest cost, shortest range examples makes them over costed.

Looking at the list as a whole it's exceedingly hard to get a good activation count. It's almost a given that your opponent will out activate you. Combine that with their slow nature and it can be a really tough army to use effectively. The AA by itself is fine I didn't mean to suggest that desicrators aren't good. What I meant was that trying to get enough of them to have a good AA screen is a little harder in this list than most others. Walker hordes compete with the low cost activation slots and as 75 point upgrades with a 15cm move they aren't the most versatile an upgrade. I always feel like I'm trying to make the most of a bad situation when generating lists. So many very hard choices to get the power you want and have the support you need and still have a fighting chance with the number of activations.

Hoping you guys can post some more bat reps. I'd be very interested to read them. Also do you have an example of the elder list you are using and Wartrader whats the list you most often use? I mean each group has big differences in meta and I'm curious if that's a big factor.

I'm definitely going to see if I can get some more details on these tournament winning DG lists.

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