I'll cede to Tim on this but I'd imagine
Cultists/daemon engine - pretty far gone/very corrupted Cultists with very little trace of IG
Cultist/guard - less corrupted/more recently turned IG who retain much of IG structure+gear. Sort of traitor steel legion
Vraks -specifically represent traitor forces on Vraks
Bloody hand - IIRC represent traitors in Gaunts ghosts series

IMO each of these allows at least as many differences and more defined niches as the myriad of SM lists and follows the multiple lists design of EA

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

I'm guessing

- cultist + demon engine = Super heavy monstrosities and runts (the chaos war engine list)
- cultist + traitor guard = light mechanized cultists, chaos av and demons
- Vraks = siege waves plus old armour - it's one of forgeworld's more famous creations.
- Bloody hand = classic traitor guard, with slight assault leanings.

If my guessess are right, the main difficulty will be finding separate niches for the cultist+traitor guard vs bloody hand

That's why i asked the question. From the above the 1st 3 do look clearly defined. What does the 4th offer that 2nd one does nt?

Or to put it another way, why would we need to have a new cultist + traitor guard list when work has already been done on developing Bloody hand list?

That would mean that simply need to trim the traitor guard elements from current bloated L&TD list, and we would then have 3 separate clearly defined lists to focus playtesting:
- cultist + demon engine
- Vraks
- Bloody hand

Cheers

James

IMO the Bloody hand have their own niche covering forces like the Blood pact ie Human traitor forces with a structure rather than the rabble of mutants and daemonic structures of the Daemon engine list. While the Latd derived traitor guard will be more of a traitor guard list with the vehicles more in common with IG rather than like the bloody hand . Looking at the bllody hand they aren't a recently turned traitor guard force but a traitor force with their own military structure and distinct vehicles.

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

I agree with Steve, the Bloody Hand list is much more of a disciplined, regimented version of long-time chaos adherents. A traitor guard list would be in between that and a regular Guard list (I'm assuming Steel Legion traitors is the general intent, correct? combined-arms mechanized, as opposed to a Minervan or Baran-style traitor list?)

Daemon World list: What it says on the tin. Haven't been in the imperium for millenia.
Cultist list: New insurgency, have some captured IG assets along with daemonic support summoned by cult leaders and demagogues, lots of rabble and mutants coming out of the wood work
Vraks and Bloody Hand: longtime Traitor Guard, still disciplined. Two lists because they both have a strong background (and the Vraks list is siegefocused?). Can also represent entire regiments turning traitor and keeping their structure, where the Cultist list is more along a cult taking over a world or sector.

edit: if the Vraks and Blood Pact forces actually have their own vehicles, this leaves room for a fifth list - the newly turned IG regiment. I'm not saying this should be made, I'm just pointing it out to show that four lists is pretty reasonable

Cool- so long as we are clear on what each list's focus is and sub-ac's bear that in mind when developing each list.

just a thought - is the demon world list a fifth / sixth one?

actual stable demons as formations, warp rrfts, soul grinders ect

The current daemon world list mentioned in the thread wouldn't be one fighting on a daemon world, would it? It would be an army raised on such a planet, but invading the imperium. So daemon engines, mutants and daemon princes, but no stable daemons.

The Daemon World list I've put together has actual formations of daemons running amok... they're not completely stable, but they aren't in play using the Summoning rules.

I can't say I'm particularly thrilled at the prospect of altering the list. Yes, it has a lot of units, but it allows players to tailor it to their own preferences, so it's actually quite flexible. On that basis, I don't see the need to alter anything. It just seems like change for the sake of change to me.

_________________

The argument for splitting is that the list is too flexible. Two issues with it:

- If focusing on gameplay while making an army you're likely to have a mishmash of traitor guard, demon engines and cultists in the list, with no real focus or 'theme'.

- If you try to make a more 'themed' list you risk having to use the "wrong" units, as they are the only ones fulfilling a role you need (hydras or thunderbolts for AA in a daemon world list, daemon engines if you want any war engines at all in a traitor guard list).

Isn't that intrinsically what Lost and the Damned is though? A mish mash of cultists, traitors, and daemons? To me, this is what this army has always been, so I don't view this as an issue myself.



How does splitting the list up help though? You're not going to get any air cover for a daemon army, or war engines for a traitor list, by dividing the army into separate armies, unless I'm missing something obvious?

_________________

It allows each army to have it's own units that fit thematically - captured old superheavy tanks, daemonic aircraft etc.

war engines for the traitor guard - i'm wondering if the baneblade variants could fit: decimator, pluage reaper, cauldrom of blood, thingy-siren-thingy ect.