9th age Khorne Daemons

[Guest]

And thanks for the help. Opens some options for me.

[Guest]

Hmm...looks like Daemons got a new update. Not sure what's changed. Updated as of the 4th.

[TheBeninator]

16 hours ago, paxmiles said:

Hmm...looks like Daemons got a new update. Not sure what's changed. Updated as of the 4th.

Looks like it was all just point balances. Changes to books are always highlighted in blue text within the AB. In addition, there is a change log at the bottom which has a summary of changes. Some of the blue text in the book is normally changed for clarification, there were very few examples during the last update of actual rules changes.

There will likely be 1 or 2 more minor point tweaks before they call this set of balance updates done.

It's an interesting process they use. The team gathers as much tournament data as they can together and looks at win/loss with certain armies and army composition. They then apply point changes to try and balance out the favoring of one unit over another. The team appears to want to try and do this once a year, since they can gather a decent amount of tournament data in a 1 year period. The data is by no means "all telling", but they use this as a chance to address over performing units/lists/combinations as well as help mix up the meta.

For instance, if everyone takes Myrmidons in a list, then Myrmidons will see a point hike OR all other choices will see a point decrease, or something in between. Its a tenuous process as you are trying to internally balance books at the same time as maintaining external balance. The point changes are all a little here, a little there, typically never enough to "invalidate" a list, but sometimes it means you have to take a couple fewer R&F models, or drop a magic item / upgrade.

[Guest]

Still can't get battlescribe to mimick the harbingers getting access to the mark of the general, but battlescribe also isn't current with the update.

Is there a more preferred 9age army builder?

 

[Andrewgeddon]

1 hour ago, paxmiles said:

Still can't get battlescribe to mimick the harbingers getting access to the mark of the general, but battlescribe also isn't current with the update.

Is there a more preferred 9age army builder?

 

I find Army Builder is much more consistent / more often updated than Battlescribe, but it does cost money to get it. There is a website, "New Recruit" as well, but I would say that it's about reliable on BS, or possibly less so.

https://www.newrecruit.eu/

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Andrewgeddon said:

I find Army Builder is much more consistent / more often updated than Battlescribe, but it does cost money to get it.

Nice, a legitmate reason to reinstall army builder. I like army builder, but was having reoccuring issues with it's 40k files and eventually ditched it for battlescribe.

And in the brief time typing this post, have reinstalled army builder and have a fully activated account for nothing (because I bought it quite a while ago).

[valourunbound]

I just tried it in Battlescribe with a Miser general and it seemed to work. However, I had to select Greed General on the Miser instead of Army General.

 

That said, Army Builder is the best, so keep using it 🙂 I only use Battlescribe because there's a mobile app and I can use it on the toilet. That's where my best lists seem to come from 🙂

[Guest]

Just now, valourunbound said:

That said, Army Builder is the best, so keep using it 🙂 I only use Battlescribe because there's a mobile app and I can use it on the toilet. That's where my best lists seem to come from 🙂

Cell phones really have increased the number of things I do on the toilet.

[Guest]

Thanks for all the help. Between armybuilder and all your help, starting to understand the army better. Tricky thing. Definitely can't go proper khorne with this, but also grants me more options. Though another consideration is that without fixed models for my daemons, I don't have to adhere to the limitations a khorne would normally have and could even mix and match daemons under one paint scheme or even make some khorne daemons with alternate weapons.

So by leading the army with a Harbinger of Chaos, I lose out on the General's Greater Dominion, and on sharing the manifestations of the general with my other harbingers. Which explains why my non-harbinger models have to pay an upgrade cost to be the general (was wondering).

I have 3 options of non-harbinger generals without taking a gigantic general. Kuulima's Deciever, Omen of Savar, and Sentinel of Nukuja. That's Envy, Pride, and Sloth.

On the other hand, Harbinger has great stats and low cost. So there is merit to ditching the Dominions and shared manifestations.

Another approach is that I could ditch one of the siege towers. Not sure if they are overpowered in game, so maybe two is too many anyway. Then I could take any of the character general options.

And yet another approach, Daemons may be the wrong army altogether. Warriors of the Dark Gods have a "Wasteland Behemoth" mount option for characters that could work quite well as a Siege Tower.

And then the other end is that I could just be trying too hard to make something fit that just won't work.

[valourunbound]

I don't recall exactly what siege tower model you're working with, but a Vermin Swarm list with a Plague Pendulum (Plague Furnace) and a Doom Bell (Screaming Bell) might work to get two siege towers on the table. The list isn't the flavor of the month but it is pretty popular.

Unless of course, you're attached to Daemon models.

[Guest]

Warhammer Siege Tower (Plastic GUO for scale)

That's a 150mm x 100 mm base.

Model isn't glued to base or fully glued. Need to find all the parts. I plan to repaint.

But as you can see, definitely gigantic and barely fits on that base.

[Guest]

Assembled model has a ramp on the 3rd level to disembark on walls, and rear enterance ramp on first level. There are ladders going up to each level. It really is an awesome model.

Finished model should have guys on 3 levels, plus cannons or something on the parapet, depending on what it's suppose to represent. And, if hope harvester, should have have a banner that says something like "So walls give you hope?"

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, valourunbound said:

I don't recall exactly what siege tower model you're working with, but a Vermin Swarm list with a Plague Pendulum (Plague Furnace) and a Doom Bell (Screaming Bell) might work to get two siege towers on the table. The list isn't the flavor of the month but it is pretty popular.

Unless of course, you're attached to Daemon models.

I looked at it. Skaven stuff has too small bases (that base size is killing me, but I just love these models).

I have considered running as gigantic spiders filled with goblins. Though, hope harvester seems like the best fit, so far. Plus, it's easy to think of siege towers as a bane against hope.

[Guest]

Oh, the other possibility, is that I could just plan on the two siege towers being something for "Grand Army" and just plan for a single siege tower in normal games of 4500pts. That might be the easiest and most practical solution.

[TheBeninator]

You could also just use the towers as a big unit filler. It’d look pretty cool!

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, TheBeninator said:

You could also just use the towers as a big unit filler. It’d look pretty cool!

Would that work? You can tell, they barely fit (ramps retracted) on a 150x100 base. That's the space of 4x6 of 25mm square models. I don't know that they'd really work as unit fillers, kinda need something smaller than the unit itself to be a unit filler.

Looked around at the other army options. I do think this is the best fit. Though I'm also thinking that I might be trying too hard to force these models into the game and maybe it's a mistake.

[Guest]

Dunno what I'm doing for generals and characters and other such, but my mind has decided that I'm going the daemon route and I've started converting models and painting stuff. Gears are turning in my head.

[TheBeninator]

On 11/10/2019 at 9:41 PM, paxmiles said:

Would that work? You can tell, they barely fit (ramps retracted) on a 150x100 base. That's the space of 4x6 of 25mm square models. I don't know that they'd really work as unit fillers, kinda need something smaller than the unit itself to be a unit filler.

Looked around at the other army options. I do think this is the best fit. Though I'm also thinking that I might be trying too hard to force these models into the game and maybe it's a mistake.

Ah wow, yeah that's bigger than I was thinking.

[Guest]

Okay, looking at this Incendiary Ichor. Sort of a double edged sword upgrade. It's cheap and it gives strong resistances to fire, but makes my own attacks flaming whether I want them flaming or not.

So sake of arguement, if the entire army had only flaming attacks, how impaired would I be? Like is outright immunity to flaming attacks a thing? Or would just be an uphill battle?

[Andrewgeddon]

7 hours ago, paxmiles said:

Okay, looking at this Incendiary Ichor. Sort of a double edged sword upgrade. It's cheap and it gives strong resistances to fire, but makes my own attacks flaming whether I want them flaming or not.

So sake of arguement, if the entire army had only flaming attacks, how impaired would I be? Like is outright immunity to flaming attacks a thing? Or would just be an uphill battle?

Depends against the army you face; Some armies / units have innate fire resistance built in (Infernal Dwarves come to mind), while some are weak against it (models with flaming like Treemen / Treekin, Trolls w/ regen). There are also basic magic items that grant 2+ / 3+ ward saves vs flaming attacks. Unless you are set on having your whole army having flaming attacks for thematic reasons, I think usually the best practice would be to have 1 unit that has it, for the utility that flaming attacks or resistance against them brings.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Andrewgeddon said:

Depends against the army you face; Some armies / units have innate fire resistance built in (Infernal Dwarves come to mind), while some are weak against it (models with flaming like Treemen / Treekin, Trolls w/ regen). There are also basic magic items that grant 2+ / 3+ ward saves vs flaming attacks. Unless you are set on having your whole army having flaming attacks for thematic reasons, I think usually the best practice would be to have 1 unit that has it, for the utility that flaming attacks or resistance against them brings.

But it's not immunity, just a 2+Ward, or something like that? Definitely annoying and an uphill battle, but not impossible.

Any who, just tinkering with ideas.

[Andrewgeddon]

58 minutes ago, paxmiles said:

But it's not immunity, just a 2+Ward, or something like that? Definitely annoying and an uphill battle, but not impossible.

Correct, there is no immunity to flaming attacks in the game.

[Guest]

Another rule question: how does base "facing" work with regard to custom models on rectangular bases?

Like some of my characters have 50x100mm bases. Is 50mm side the front/back, or side, or can it be either? Same question arises with the siege towers/hope harvesters - obviously the front of my model is the shorter end, but is that how it would function in-game, or would it move from longer end?

[Andrewgeddon]

41 minutes ago, paxmiles said:

Another rule question: how does base "facing" work with regard to custom models on rectangular bases?

Like some of my characters have 50x100mm bases. Is 50mm side the front/back, or side, or can it be either? Same question arises with the siege towers/hope harvesters - obviously the front of my model is the shorter end, but is that how it would function in-game, or would it move from longer end?

The first number mentioned regarding the base size is the front facing. Usually, the shorter end is the front facing, like these Feldraks (previously Dragon Ogres)

But there are exceptions. Treefathers for Sylvan Elves have the larger side on their front facing, for example.

[Guest]

Well, that's the end of this project...looks like the siege engine is wide base first. Or rather, the normal size is narrow front, the upgraded size is wider front...annoying.