when you summon them



I can't say definitively but I would assume it should have two claws, each of which grants EA+1 for a total of 2 extra attacks



again, can't say for sure, but NetEA wants to harmonise stats so this is probably a yes



....you don't wanna know....



probably because they are an option in the knight formation and it makes most sense to keep it in the WE section



I'd say testing probably supports this..... but as ever, more is needed!



more testing.... I'm down to help, but I think there are quite a few contentious bits of the list (knights, thunderhawks) which need lots of intensive tests before we head down the path of approval.... *pokes CaptPiett*

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

Thanks a lot kyussinchains! I plan to take this list for a spin as soon as I get a chance (probably late April at this stage) and want to be on the right page before then.

_________________
Emperors Children Log

Battle Reports Thread

Thanks for taking a look at the list, moridin. Kyuss has given you good gouge on almost everything. The purpose of the list was to put together a EC/Slaanesh themed army that followed the general framework of BL. I stripped out a lot of the EC-only units of 3.xx and focused mostly on EC-themed AVs (LR/Preds/dreads, and 1 flavor of knights), WE knights, T-hawks, and noise marine FM/upgrades. Units that this list has in common with the BL should be all harmonized/standardized with that list. I can't comment on EUK. However, if there is a unit that isn't specifically "Emperor's Children", it's stats should mirror that of the latest NetEA BL list.

Major additions: Thunderhawks, 2DC WE knights
Major subtractions: Reaver- and Warlord-class titans

Given that the knight list has 2DC knights and this list limits them to 0-1 formation, I don't think these are as controversial as when I first wrote the 4.0. To give some granularity to knights I wanted to make variants based on SM/TL Slaanesh Knights, so that's where the stats for those come from. With the addition of two more WE, and wanting to make the list fast/"in your face", I deleted the larger titans.

Thunderhawks with fearless have remained contentious. I have used them in a bunch of games and found them to be useful, but if I max out on them (typically 3 with cargoes of retinues and/or noise marines), one of them dies and the air assault plan falls apart. This is of course based on our local gaming environment, where AAA/air is a prominent component. I have not been able to test them with bikes. Due to the summoning rules, FM's can't summon in the T-hawk unless there's space left (i.e. there has to be room for the daemons to appear). That's IIRC - it may have been determined that you can't summon in a t-hawk altogether. I added fearless as the result of watching extensive play with the Red Corsairs list. Invariably they ended up as one-use weapons (hacked down soon after they landed) and nowhere near worth the cost.

Kyuss is also right about testing. I'd really like to get batreps from other groups. I've played WE-heavy, with a FM of knights and two scout titans. I've also played T-hawk heavy. I, of course, don't think these elements of the list are all that problematic, but that's from my point of view playing with/against them within my group.

So have at it! (please )

_________________
Let us playtest like the Greeks of old... You know the ones I mean

just so happens I took delivery of 25 chaos bikes, they rule in the EUK list, happy to test them out in this version!



pretty sure this can't happen as when air-assaulting it is the aircraft taking the action rather than the transported formation



EC are up next on my painting table definitely looking to get some games in, although it may not be till after the EEC (end of may) but the flipside is that I may well be fully painted by then!

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

On daemon summoning, only the formation that is activating may summon. As Kyuss says, it is the THawk that is activating to perform a ground assault, so it is the only FM permitted to summon - and obviously it cannot.

ok building lists as I've started painting the Children. Question regarding Noise Marines:

Comparing them to the Red Corsair version they are 25pts more expensive and don't get a Lord. They are the same price they were in the compendium version but have lost their Lord and Daemonic Pact. Was this done for a reason?

_________________
Emperors Children Log

Battle Reports Thread

2x EA+1 (2 TK attacks) or 2x EA+2 (4 TK attacks)? I only ask as the compendium version is the latter for the same points.

_________________
Emperors Children Log

Battle Reports Thread

Given the rarity of the models I think allowing people to play what they have is preferable to enforcing a thematic number.

The Subjugator has 2x Tk(d3) attacks.

On yhe Noisemarines, balance. They're still quite good.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

What Dave said. Plus, an all-fearless formation that has added ability to remove BMs is a little too powerful for this list.

In addition, if you want a lord with your noise marines, the way to go is to purchase a retinue and upgrade 2 or 4 of the CSM to noise marines. In this way, you can make a lot (if not most) of your infantry noise marines. Coupled with the slaanesh-flavored dreads, preds, land raiders, terminators, and daemon selection, I don't really see how the list is not thematic. Formations can be customized to have a lot of EC upgrades, using the number 6 if one so desires. You could represent a non-standard, post-heresy EC war band rather well with this list.

Slaanesh Knights are not EC. Really they are "allies" from House Devine, or some other corrupted knight house. Loyal knight houses are rare as it is; slaanesh-affiliated ones are rarer still. Having more Knights on the table would not be representative of this. The 0-1 restriction reflects that, while leaving some extra space in the WE limit to take the scout Titans and t-Hawks.

_________________
Let us playtest like the Greeks of old... You know the ones I mean

Yes Noise Marines are powerful, but 50pts a stand powerful? That seems a bit extreme, especially in the army famous for them. To me 250pts for the initial 6 then 35pts for each additional stand would be more suitable without a Lord.

As it stands I cannot imagine ever taking dedicated noise marine units when the option you described of taking them in normal warbands is so much cheaper.



The problem I have with this is the 0-1 restriction really hurts in larger games. While in smaller games being in the WE section should limit them sufficiently anyway.

IMHO Now that the knight list has been approved I feel that the stats and points costs for the House Devine knights should be reviewed using the knight list as a base line. They don't quite "feel right" to me, but that is without in game testing to support my thoughts. Hopefully the game I have next week will shed some light on them for me.

_________________
Emperors Children Log

Battle Reports Thread

Any and all play tests are welcome.
I have found the Knights to be underwhelming, but that's just one dude in one group. If it turns out that playtesting reveals they're a truly subpar formation, we'll revisit their characteristics.

_________________
Let us playtest like the Greeks of old... You know the ones I mean

Maybe, but that certainly hasn't been the case from our games. And given that we haven't seen any other reports I'm inclined to trust those over the TacCom standard issue "this seems wrong to me" post. If you think they should be cheaper contribute to the playtesting.

They're priced on par with th BL list, assuming a 25 point surcharge for a separate formation and another 25 points for the THawk option.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

I've played 3 games with the list. I did batreps versus nids and black legion and I had another game against Steve54's codex marines although didn't batrep that for some reason.... I found the knights (castigator cannon version) to be very potent against the infantry horde of nids, both at shooting and in engagements, against black legion they were positioned badly and didn't get a chance to do much, same story against marines, they were avoided until they could be safely dealt with, I found them to be very much worth the points and for my group they would be an auto-include formation, given they were very hard to deal with and never got wiped out completely

I've got the same concerns about noise marine formations, sometimes it's hard to squeeze even one into an army, which seems a shame, on the other hand they make a perfect loadout for a thunderhawk

Personally I'm not sold on the list having air assault capability, especially when they have several formations which excel at it, (noise marines, terminators, enlarged retinues, bikes, enlarged raptor cult) but that's a difference of opinion on theme rather than something that is neccessarily unbalanced from a rules PoV.....

to me it really feels like slaanesh-themed black legion rather than its own distinct list, it loses access to deathwheels and decimators, but gains the knights and two flavours of scout titan, as well as thunderhawks, it also doesn't lose access to most black legion formations like raptors and chosen, while they may be fielded in different proportions due to a differing list structure, having said that however I'm aware that is pretty much the intent of the list so I can't complain really!

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

You're right, I have not played this list yet and therefore don't get an opinion. But I have played the Red Corsair list and have never encountered an issue with it's noise marine formation that is both cheaper and contains a lord. I was merely commenting that its odd that the list that should contain the most noise from a fluff perspective has the less cost effective version.

No one in my group own a thunderhawk and therefore Ive not experienced the air assault with fearless transport issue. (To be honest I don't think Emperors Children would be sane enough to pull off an air assault!) However, I feel its odd to penalize an armies signature unit because of one of its transport options. Surely it is the transport that should be changed rather than the unit?

_________________
Emperors Children Log

Battle Reports Thread