Note to Self: Mission Design

There exist a wide variety of ways in which to design missions for Warhammer 40,000, Warhammer 30,000, Age of Sigmar, and all manner of other games. One of the defining features of the Games Workshop approach to mission design is that there is no "automatic win" button. In some war-games, the killing of the general might represent an automatic win condition and the game would stop at that very instant. This generally does not happen in 40k.

Indeed, the closest thing to an automatic win is usually (but not always) a complete massacre of the opposing force.

When this condition is met, the winner usually is considered to have won the "primary" mission. Arguably, they have also secured all of the secondaries and perhaps tertiaries (if they are being used) as well.

But herein is the point that I want to make. If the winner in a massacre is presumed to have achieved maximum points, what about the loser? 

In our recent tournament, we designed it so that both the winner and the loser had things to still play for even late on in the game.

For those people aiming for a massacre style victory, we awarded one additional point for achieving this goal. Hence we had some players attempting to avoid being completely massacred just for the sake of not giving away that final tournament point to their opponent if at all possible. This is a good thing and reflects not wanting to give up. Added to this, we implemented secondaries and tertiary missions that could be achieved even if a massacre victory was scored against them.

The most obvious one is "Slay the Warlord". This can be achieved even if one is massacred (and obviously happens by default if one is victorious in a massacre victory!). 

Another is "First Strike" -- this is the same as first blood, but either player can achieve it. All they have to do is kill an entire unit in the first turn of the game. This not only alleviates the bias from achieving first blood from who goes first (which is undeniably a huge contributing factor), but gives both players something to aim for.

Other examples include moving a particular unit to a particular destination during the course of a game. This can still happen for anyone who subsequently gets massacred.

Hence, when designing missions, we like to frequently include at least one or two (secondaries or tertiaries) that can be scored by someone who eventually gets massacred regardless. It still gives people something to play for. Of course, there are still aspects of the game, such as having a unit in the oppositions deployment zone at the end of the game, that cannot be achieved if one is massacred. Instead, perhaps award a secondary or tertiary for moving all of ones own units out of their deployment zone (and thus score secondaries that way) rather than depend on the state of the game on the final turn. In this way, both players have things to aim for that they can achieve tournament points for during the game, and not just at the end. Meanwhile, having that extra point for a total wipe out victory will drive the win-at-all-costs player onward, and probably to distraction (as we experienced the other week!). 

The Melta and Armoured Ceramite Conundrum in 30k

Overview.
I think there is a conundrum in 30k around Armoured Ceramite and Melta weaponry. It also connects to game theory very nicely. Let me explain.

Background.
In 30k, Armoured Ceramite is a reasonably common and very available upgrade to vehicles in legion (and other armies, such as the Solar Auxilia) armoury. In brief, it negates the special melta weapon rules that provide an extra die for amour penetration.

The Conundrum.
Let's see if I can explain this using a logical chain.
(i) Because Armoured Ceramite is available, players are going to take it to negate against melta weapons.
(ii) Because players are taking Armoured Ceramite, it logically follows that players will respond by not bothering with melta weaponry. They'll take something like lascannons to deal with heavy AV armour instead.
(iii) Because players are no longer bothering with melta weapons, it logically follows that players do not need to invest the points sink in Armoured Ceramite.
(iv) Because players are not purchasing Armoured Ceramite, one should take melta weaponry to exploit them.

And therein is the conundrum, the contradiction, and (if nothing else) a downright paradox!

In some games that I've played, its clear that the meta is somewhere in the region of step (i) or step (ii). Armoured Ceramite is very popular (and probably rightly so). And this is leading to a decrease of melta weaponry in accord. I've not heard anyone reach the logical step of (iii) just yet, but it does follow quite naturally. I just don't think folks are thinking that far along the logic chain to be honest. And that's completely understandable if everyone is still salivating over Armoured Ceramite's ability.

But, being slightly twisted, and playing the Alpha Legion in 30k, I'm totally taking melta weaponry in the form of a melta support squad. Because my Alpha Legion force is rightly already at step (iv)!

Or at least that's what I keep telling myself. The reality is far removed from this, naturally, as most folks are still at step (i). But I will keep on taking the melta just to exploit folks who are not taking the Armoured Ceramite. That, and I think that melta guns are very powerful weapons if you're able to get in range of an enemy, and can cause significant damage to even terminator squads with the right positioning (which I plan on achieving with Armillus Dynat's warlord trait).

Tactica: Castling (and Epidemius)

With the addition of allies and the ability to purchase a fortification, certain tactical options now present themselves that weren't always available in 5th edition.  

For example, if you have an important unit in the game that you need to keep alive, "Castling" is now a viable option.  There are a number of units such as these: Eldar Farseer with runes of warding for psychic defence, and Epidemius for a buff to all Nurgle units.  These guys don't really want to see the front line of combat if they can help it -- particularly if they're simply an allies choice in a force composed of other primary elements who ARE there to get to the front lines.  

So, here's the idea.  As well as your valuable allies that provide you with nifty bonuses, you're going to need somewhere for them to skulk away and hide in.  What better than a bastion?  With AV=14 at a third of the cost of a land raider, why not?  The bastion will take a bit of pounding to get at, and it is probably not going to be target number one on your enemies' hit lists.  Or at least, that's the theory.

Let's have a look at Epidemius.  To Castle Epidemius is relatively simple. Because he is going to be deep-striking through daemonic assault on to the battlefield, all that we need to do is have an icon inside the bastion at set-up.  When Epidemius arrives (hopefully on turn 1!), he will deep-strike without scatter to the ground level of the bastion, and within 2 inches of the front door (for the rules for embarkation to work).  In the movement phase, disembark the marines (or whoever it was with the icon), or perhaps move them up to the battlements section, and then in the shooting phase, run Epidemius in to the building.  Castling move complete!  

You now have Epidemius and chums safely tucked away and are ready to take on the rest of the battlefield!

Deep Strike Mis-haps 101

The deep-strike mishap table can cause both the player and the opponent headaches when a deep-strike doesn't go the way it is supposed to.  For armies such as daemons, Death Wing and the like, this can cause even more trouble. 

As a daemons player, I often succumb to deep-strike mishaps.  But only on a few occasions has an opponent taken maximum advantage of the situation.  So for those players who do play against daemons (and other deep-strike armies), here's the key thing to punish your opponent for a poor deep-strike.

Firstly, the deep-strike mishap table has two results that you're interested in and a third that serves only a minor advantage (or potentially disadvantage).  The latter that I speak of is returning the squad back to the reserves pool.  This is probably the result that you don't want as the opposing player -- it is just delaying the inevitable return of the unit to the table somewhere, sometime.  In many cases this can be an advantage as the opposing player gets to see where would be most critical for the unit to arrive.  In late game turns, this might mean the difference between winning and losing if the sqaud materializes on top of an objective.

The mishap that destroys the squad is clearly to the opposing players avantage.  Effortless kill points are always welcome!

But the most mis-understood mishap is the one where you get to decide where to place the unit.  All too often when my opponents get this result, they simply shove my unfortunate unit in the corner of the gameboard, far away from where the action is.  This is a mistake in my opinion.  The unit that gets put in a corner will simply (slowly) slog its way to a useful position (or objective) eventually (so long as its not near the end of the game).  In order to take maximum advantage of this result, I would encourage players to put the mishap squad in some difficult terrain (just as the deep strike mishap table suggests you should do).  For a walking tank like a soul grinder, this might be devastating -- I've lost my soul grinders to this event frequently enough when facing good players.  Even for small terminator squads, it is worth considering.  Not only might they take unsavable wounds, but they'll also be slowed down by the terrain which makes for a double whammy.

[image: Warp Hornets terminators just after a deep strike]

Note to Self: Daemons against Tau

Tau vehicles can have flechette devices attached.  This means that daemons who want to charge them can get wounded by doing so.  

Right, now that I've noted that to myself, I'll hopefully stop having squads of screamers of Tzeentch all die in close combat with Tau vehicles (yes it happened: an entire squad of screamers were dead on arrival!).

Combi Termicide, A Broad Overview

Doubtless, many of you who play with (or against) chaos space marines (and Space Wolves) are aware of the concept of the termicide squad. In brief, they are a small squad of terminators whose sole duty is to perform a single task and then perish horribly. Today, I want to briefly summarize their roles.

The most used termicide squad that I see deployed is the combi-melta one. Take 3 chaos terminators, equip each one with a combi-melta and maybe add a power fist or chain fist to taste and you're done. Deep-strike the squad near a target vehicle and take it down. If there are transported infantry inside, consider assaulting them in the next turn (which is why a power fist is often taken).
The combi-plasma squad is less used, but follows the same principles. Instead of going after tanks, it'll aim to take down a monstrous creature or opposing high armour infantry like other terminators and wraith lords. They can also takle low armour vehicles in a pinch as well. Add in at least one power fist or chain fist for taste and that's it. If the rapid firing plasma volley doesn't take the target monstrous creature down, then engage is close combat as soon as feasible. Alternative combi-plasma builds focus on ranged threat and may take a reaper autocannon for additional support.

The combi-flamer squad instead focuses on anti-infantry and may arrive on board a land raider and could have a heacy flamer in the squad as well. Using the assault ramp they then proceed to flame their target (softening them up) before charging in to them with power weapons of various flavours.

This latter option is one that I have been toying around with, but minus the land raider option. I've been having some success with the following load-out:
3 or 4 chaos terminators with combi-flamers, 1 chaos terminator with heavy flamer and one chain fist somewhere in the squad.

Without the land raider, the terminators deep-strike in and flame their opponents. They then wait for the inevitable counter strike which their armour suggests they will survive. With luck, they can wipe out the enemy in their turn, leaving them free to charge in the next. The chain fist is there to declare "I am a treat to all of your units -- not just infantry! You'd better do something about me!" In this respect, the flamer termicide squad is a neat distractor unit capable of tying enemy units up, destroying them and posing a threat to all others.  In general, they don't last very long as they attract a lot of fire power.  But it is usually enough time for my winged daemon prince to come along and join the party for added distractions and disruptions.

Apocalypse: The Careful Planning Asset and Daemons

One of the assets in Apocalypse is "Careful Planning". This asset enables armies to reserve everything and be confident that half of the reserves will show up on turn 1, the other half on turn 2.

Now, for daemon armies, this is obviously going to be half wasted. If you're not familiar with daemons, this is because the daemonic assault rule with which daemon armies come on to the battlefield already specify that half of them will appear on turn 1 regardless.

However, I think that in an apocalypse game, this asset would be very useful for daemons players who are keen to get stuck in at the earliest opportunities. It is not as game defining as other assets can be (Flank March, I'm looking at you) and can be readily interpreted in an on-going narrative, or when used in conjunction with a formation such as the Warp Rift.

Using this asset never really occurred to me until recently when I was playing a fun (friendly) game wherein we chose apocalypse assets, but used only a modest amount of points. I really suffered a lot of casualties with the orbital bombardments that whacked my early-arriving daemons that day...

Chariot of Tzeentch Options

I enjoyed creating my scratch built Chariot of Tzeentch model and I tend to want to use it in the majority of games that I play using a chaos daemons army. In fact, I like it so much, I'm intending on building another at some point. But one gaming question remains for me: what combination of upgrades should I be giving to the chariot?Heralds of Tzeentch certainly have plenty of options to choose from. So ultimately, this question (for me) is one about what battlefield role that I want my chariot of Tzeentch to play. At the basic cost, the chariot already has daemonic gaze, and is therefore reasonably good at downing space marines. But the problem is that space marines are rarely out in the open. More often, they're holed up inside transports (i.e. rhinos), as are most other troop choices in 5th edition. And the one thing that the daemons army is short on are tank-busters. So, my usual battlefield role for the chariot of Tzeentch is a dual tank busting and marine killer.

To do this, I equip the chariot with the bolt of Tzeentch. Although I could use breath of chaos instead, I prefer bolt of Tzeentch as I can then keep a distance from the tank (and other pesky troops) and shoot at things from a distance. Combined with the fast movement, this makes the chariot a very mobile tank killer. The only problem is the herald may not always hit. But then again, the breath of chaos might not always hurt a tank either, so I might as well have the range. The total cost for the chariot with the bolt is a very reasonable 95 points. (And therein is the reason why I'm considering making a second chariot).

The only downside to this build is that it really, really needs to avoid combat badly. It simply is not equipped for it. Even if the soul devourer upgrade is purchased (taking the total cost to 115 points), the chariot probably won't last long. But at least the soul devourer upgrade makes opponents think twice before assaulting the chariot. The other upgrade that I sometimes toy with is the chaos icon. Given the fast movement of the chariot, this makes some sense. Incoming troops could also supply a much needed cover save for the chariot. But then again, with a 4+ invulnerable save, the chariot is one unit that I'm often happy leaving out in the open (or on the top of the tallest building) taking pot shots at any and all tanks and power armoured troops.

Glamour of Tzeentch and the New Tyranid Codex

I'm a little behind everyone else, but I finally got the new tyranid codex this week. One thing that I immediately thought about when reading all about the new swarm was "How are my daemon and chaos marine armies going to go about tackling them". Although my answer to this question is going to be a work in progress for some time, I did have one quick thought about daemons.

In short: does the Changeling still work? I've written about the Changeling facing off against Tyranids about a year ago; but obviously under the old codex. But just to recap: this squad upgrade can force other units to take a leadership test which if failed, can cause the opposing unit to fire at their own squads. As I read the new tyrandid rules, I believe that this tactic is still valid. Hormagaunts: prepare to be glamour'd by Tzeentch! With a leadership value of 6, they make ideal targets in the Tyranid army for the Changeling to target. Gargoyles, biovores and pyrovores all have similarly low leadership.

But my new aim is to find a Tyrannofex to use the glamour against...
Or maybe even build a flying swarm army ... I really like the plastic gargoyle models!

Tactica: Summoned Lesser Daemon Threat Range

In the Chaos Space Marine codex, lesser daemons are able to assault after deep striking off an icon. The number of models in the lesser daemon squad effects the threat range of the squad. In this post (mostly aimed at the newer player), I wanted to quickly summarize what the threat range actually is for lesser daemons on standard round bases.

The lesser daemons can deep strike within 6'' of an icon. Their assault range is a standard 6'' on top of that, so their base threat range is 12 inches -- i.e. they can assault anything within 12 inches of the point they come in to play (ignoring terrain!). When they come in to play, they must be arranged in a circle around the first miniature. Hence with the minimum squad size, the maximum threat range is approx 13 inches. To get this up to 14'', the squad must be a minimum of 8 members strong -- one central model, 6 further models in the first circle around the central one, and the 8th one forming the start of a second circle (see also Order Minoris).

To get the threat range up by another inch to 15'' requires a complete second circle (12 models to complete the second circle, 6 for the first circle, plus the central miniature, making for a total of 19) plus one that starts the third circle. That means a total of 20 models in the squad (which is also the maximum squad size for summoned lesser daemons).

Although I tend to field my Nurgle daemons in squads of 7 (to be fluffy) when I have a Death Guard army running, the above suggests I probably should invest some points in an 8th model to improve their threat range!

Lastly, it is worth noting that we could employ any type of lesser daemon in chaos marine armies. So, we could field a nurgling unit for instance. With a larger base size, this improves the threat range further (as suggested by Bell of Lost Souls some time ago).


Finally, let me acknowledge the sources of inspiration for this article:
Zombie Summoned Lesser Daemons from Order Minoris;
Death Guard Triple Vindicator 2000pts List from BoLS.

Some Assorted Thoughts on Daemonettes of Slaanesh

Daemonettes of Slaanesh have some awesome plastic models and historic metal miniatures to represent them on the Warhammer 40,000 battlefield. Having played a good few games with them in a mixed Codex: Daemons army list, I felt it was time to have a look at what tactics generally worked for me and what didn't.

A Matter of Scale.
In my experience, Codex: Daemons is a matter of scale when playing mixed daemons. What works at a low points value may not be so effective at a large points value (and vice-versa).

In that regard, I've only been tempted to play daemonettes of Slannesh at larger points values in mixed daemons armies. In mono-Slaanesh armies, they will (of course) have to be there since they are the core troops. At lower points values, I find that daemonettes are not so worth while in mixed armies. Why?

The main problem with daemonettes is their general frailness to points value ratio. With toughness 3 and a 5+ save, they will be toasted by most armies. That, and coupled with the fact that they cost 14 points each; compare that points cost to a standard ork or chaos space marine and their overall frailness is obvious.

In larger armies (i.e. bigger points value games), daemonettes can be much more deadly. The principle reason for this is that any opposing general should be targetting other parts of the daemonic army in preference to daemonettes if they know what they're doing. Bloodletters of Khorne, Screamers of Tzeentch and Daemon Princes all seem to get prioritized over daemonettes for various reasons (e.g. hellblades; the ability to melta bomb tanks; simply being big and bad monstrous creatures respectively). Hence in a larger points value game, daemonettes can readily be over-looked. However, by not paying attention to them, the daemonettes can more readily get stuck in to their opposition.

Advantages of Daemonettes.
There are benefits to spending 14 points on a daemonette. Principle amongst them are the sheer number of attacks each (3 base; 4 on the charge), high initiative, rending attacks, fleet special rule and sheer other-worldly mind-altering beauty aura (variously known as Aura of Acquiescence, or assault and defensive grenades).

On top of that, they can take icons (probably not worth it outside of mono-Slaanesh armies); instruments of chaos (again, probably not worth while - see my previous discussion on this matter); and transfixing gaze.

Let's have a brief look at transfixing gaze. Mechanically, it reduces the number of attacks from an opponent in base-to-base contact with the daemon by one. This can be useful with a carefully positioned charge (e.g. against a power fist space marine) or against a monstrous creature / independent character. But otherwise might not be worthwhile. It is cheap though, so if you have the spare points and can't find another valuable place to spend them, then I think its better than spending the points on an instrument for the daemonettes.

An example combat.
A unit of 10 chaos space marines is facing off against 10 daemonettes (with transfixing gaze and an instrument - to make it equal points value).

The daemonettes have the charge (which they should always be aiming to have regardless given their fleet special rule). That means they have an impressive 40 attacks. Statistically, 20 of them will hit their mark.

Of the 20 hits, 3.33 will result in a rending wound and 3.33 ordinary wounds will be scored. That results in 4.44 dead chaos space marines on average (only a third of the chaos marines will fail their power armour 3+ save against the ordinary wounds).

The chaos marines now strike back at lower initiative. Each has two attacks apart from one of them in base-to-base contact with the transfixing gaze daemonette. That yields approximately 10 attacks back in total. That results in 6.67 hits and 4.44 wounds. About 1.5 daemonettes pass their saving throws which result in about 3 daemonettes fleeing back to the Immaterium. The daemonettes have won, but only by 1.44 wounds.

In the next round of combat, things get tougher for the daemonettes. They get a mere shadow of their previous number of attack: 21 from 7 surviving daemonettes. Of these, 10.5 will hit and 1.75 will rend alongside 1.75 ordinary wounds. That means there will be 2.33 more dead chaos space marines.

They're probably going to need some help in the next round to finish off these pesky chaos space marines in their shiny power armour.

Making best use of daemonettes.
Okay, daemonettes do very well in the first round of combat on the charge. No doubt about that. But later on, they will struggle as their numbers get whittled down very fast. So the first rule of thumb that I discovered about using daemonettes is that they need to be supported or they should be the support unit of something else. Bloodletters of Khorne spring to mind - they make a remarkably good tag team together regardless of whether the daemonettes get stuck in first (the most likely scenario) or the bloodletters do.

Heralds of Slaanesh can also help out somewhat, but are expensive (compared to the sheer number of attacks you could have purchased for the same points value of daemonettes).

Depending on the exact points value of the game that is being played, having large squads of daemonettes can be a boon or a draw-back. The boon is that they really optimize the first turn number of attacks they get (especially when charging). The draw back to a large squad size is that they get more noticeable and are more likely to be targeted. In a number of my army lists, I've tried running a single unit of about 10 daemonettes to provide extra support for other units (bloodletters and plaguebearers). They've been deadly when deployed as the bloodletters usually come in for the rapid fire bolters rather than the daemonettes. Opponents are often surprised by 4 rending attacks by charging daemonettes.

Daemonettes also have to make the most of cover saves and terrain to make them more survivable. Deep strike nearby to cover. Use turn 1 to run in to (or behind of line of sight blocking) cover. And then use said cover to get in to combat as quickly as possible on the next turn. Either that, or hide behind a bunch of (cover save providing) bloodletters.

Tank Busting?
I should note that daemonettes can also be used for a little bit of light-tank busting in a pinch. But this should only be attempted if desperate and there are still a good number of daemonettes in a squad since they only have strength=3. Here's an example:

Ten daemonettes charge a rhino (rear armour value=10) that moved in the previous turn. Of their 40 attacks, 20 will hit. Out of these hits, only armour penetration rolls of a 6 will have any effect -- there will be 3.33 of these. Thanks to rending, these 3.33 hits add an extra d3 to their armour penetration value. That means there will be an average of 1.11 glancing hits and 2.22 penetrating hits from the 40 attack! I'll let you figure out if you think that result is worthwhile or not. It might work out well!

A Small Nod to Planetstrike.
With planetstrike, I think I've also rediscovered a new love of daemonettes. With a fortunate deep strike in followed by an assault, these daemons are looking wickedly good, first-choice first-wave troops.

Daemon Prince Distraction

To some greater or lesser extent, every codex has a monstrous creature or unit combo that screams "Deal with me or suffer!", ranging from Ork Nob Bikers, and Assault Terminators, through to C'Tan (etc.). In Chaos Space Marine Armies, Daemon Princes do that screaming role very well. Having played a number of games where the daemon prince in my Death Guard army has been used for this distracting purpose alone, I wanted to share a few thoughts on it.

Daemon Prince Build.
One of my regular Death Guard army lists can be found here. In that list, I've built my Daemon Prince of Nurgle with wings and Nurgle's Rot for a grand total of 165 points. This is my default build when I don't know what opponent or army I'll be facing off against. Sometimes, I favour switching Nurgle's Rot for either Doombolt (making the total = 160 points) or Warp Time (for a total of 175 points). Occasionally, wind of chaos.

I tend to use Doombolt against armies that have a good number of high armour save troops that are out in the open (e.g. Space Marines on foot) and Warp Time when he needs to go toe-to-toe with other "Deal with me or suffer" units (e.g. Lysander!).

The Plan.
Almost regardless of the build, I now like to try to play the daemon prince slightly dangerously: I like to deep-strike him in to the heart of my enemy (or, at the very least, near the outskirts of a large number of them that have "castled up" in a corner). This is not always an option - sometimes I just need the daemon prince as a support unit to come and help out some bogged down plague marines. But when I have the initiative and he's in reserve, then taking a risk is not so bad. Even if a dangerous terrain test is needed, it generally doesn't bother me too much. Only the "mishap table" can be problematic for the plan!

If the daemon prince has a suitable shooting attack, then I start to pick off a likely looking target -- not necessarily the toughest looking target though. All I want to do is frighten, scare and draw attention to the daemon prince, thereby building a feeling of "this thing can slaughter lots of stuff easily!". I tend to look toward space marines in the open (in the case of doombolt), or just activating Nurgle's Rot near a whole bunch of tyranid gaunts. Sadly, warptime (along with Gift of Chaos) doesn't help with this part of the plan. Conceivably, Wind of Chaos would work very well (as well as Tzeentch's Bolt of Change).

What's the upshot of this? Well, the daemon prince gets noticed. It gets prioritized as a target. Everything (especially with more inexperienced players) nearby decides to target the daemon prince. That's the point. It's going to be a sacrificial and expendable unit. It takes firepower away from other real threats in my army such as the vindicators, thereby allowing everything in my army an extra turn to move forward or otherwise maneuver in to a superior position. (The younger opponents I sometimes play also get a real kick out of killing my HQ!)

Survivability.
With an extra point of toughness (T=6), the Nurgle Daemon Prince stands a good chance of surviving against small arms fire. Rapid firing plasma guns, meltas and twin-linked las cannons are not so much fun for him though. But that's all good. Other-aligned daemon princes are not as survivable for obvious reasons.

If he survives, I then use him in my next turn to activate the shooting psychic ability again before charging at a tank or some unluky unit that is still out in the open. If he's already dead, then he's done his job.

In the turn that the daemon prince has bought me, my threats are already looming very large and I've (hopefully) managed to put a severe dint in the opposition. In short then, I often feel that this tactic can purchase me 1 game turn. That might be all that is required (late game) to contest or take objectives, or keep multiple other kill-points alive.

Daemons Armies.
Of course, this action can also be pulled in a codex: daemons army list. But here, you don't even need the wings (given that everything will deep-strike in regardless)! In my builds where I use three daemon princes, I regularly use one or more of them as "distractions" whilst the other two get in to position for an alpha strike.

Army List: 1500 points of Death Guard

This list tries to absorb the lessons that I've learnt from playing Death Guard over the past few years, updated for 5th edition. It has plenty of template weapons to make up for the Death Guard's general lack of fire-power and is fundamentally a mechanized list with an impressive 7 miniatures sporting armour values (and 7 models per troops squad - just to be fluffy). It is not as fast as (e.g.) Saim Hann, so care must be taken when playing it against intrinsically faster lists. But it is strong enough to take on many other lists and have a good probability of a win.

HQ: Daemon Prince with mark of Nurgle, wings and Nurgle's Rot (165 pts)

Elites: Dreadnought with plasma cannon (105 pts)

Troops 1: Plague champion with power fist along with 6 other plague marines (1 melta gun, 1 flamer) in a rhino with a havoc launcher (266 pts)

Troops 2: (Identical to above): Plague champion with power fist along with 6 other plague marines (1 melta gun, 1 flamer) in a rhino with a havoc launcher (266 pts)

Troops 3: Plague champion with power fist along with 6 other plague marines (2 plasma guns) in a rhino with a havoc launcher (281 pts)

Heavy Support 1: Vindicator with daemonic possession (145 pts)

Heavy Support 2: Vindicator with daemonic possession (145 pts)

Heavy Support 3: Predator with autocannon, heavy bolter sponsons, havoc launcher and dozer blade (120 pts)

Total = 1493.

That leaves a few points left over. Sometimes I swap out Nurgle's Rot on the daemon prince for warp time; depending if I know what I'll be facing or not (e.g. to face Death Wing, I'd make the swap; against tyranids and orks, I'd keep the Rot). In extensions to 1750 or 1850, I tend to add in summoned lesser daemons (along with giving my troops some icons to summon them with).

The only thing I feel that it misses are "obvious concessions". Some chaos spawn would be cool instead of the dreadnaught perhaps? Perhaps its percieved as a "hard core" army list? However, this list does allow me to field miniatures that I like / think I've painted well.

Your thoughts and criticisms welcome!

Daemonic Possession on Vindicators

One way in which chaos players can make up for the deficiencies of Death Guard (see here, or more generally these other posts: 1, 2, 3, 4) is to take vehicles, tanks and all things with armour values. Tanks are the way forward in 5th edition, until someone figures out a (land-)speedy anti-tank list that can also be a generalist army at the same time and everyone adopts such lists (i.e. until the meta-game changes to the Way of Saim Hann!).

Today, I want to talk about an upgrade that Death Guard (and chaos space marines in general) are able to have, that other armies generally are not. Or more specifically: a competitive edge or advantage that chaos marines have.

Daemonic Possession.
At 20 odd points, it is not a cheap option and is not for every tank. BUT! it gives the chaos player the ability to ignore shaken and stunned results altogether. The hidden cost is that it also reduced the ballistic skill (BS) of you marines from 4 down to 3. Is this worth it?

Let's have a look firstly at how tanks are destroyed. After getting hit with a suitably high strength weapon, your opponent (or never-to-be-again doubles team mate!) rolls on the vehicle damage chart. In the case of an unmodified glancing hit, that means your tank is going to ignore the result two thirds of the time!

That is awesome - especially when combined with cover saves or smoke launchers. It is also part of the reason I don't mind equipping a potentially crazy dreadnought to go alongside daemonically possessed AV=13 armour. Even in the case of an unmodified penetrating hit, the vehicle is going to ingore one third of the hits! That's just amazing.

On the negative side, the BS of 3 (instead of 4) is going to harm shooty tanks like predators. However, for one type of tank, daemonic possession is perfect. That tank is the vindicator. Frankly, so what if it has a BS of 3?! It's going to scatter 1 inch more than it used to? That doesn't make me too bothered. The benefits of daemonic possession far out-weigh the drawbacks here. Moreover, 20 extra points doesn't add terrifically to the overall cost of the vindicator. As for a rhino - 20 points is simply too much to pay considering what a rhino is worth in the first place.

So, if you're a chaos player looking to take a vindicator, you should also be thinking about taking daemonic possession.

Tactica: Instruments of Chaos

Instruments of chaos appear to be a rather good idea on paper. For a very modest points value investment, it is possible to turn a drawn close combat round in to a victory. Are they worthwhile? If so, then on which daemons?

As long term readers will know, I've been playing daemons since the codex came out. In that time, I've been experimenting with various army lists (fully mixed daemons right down to mono-chaos power lists).

What have I discovered? Well, I've come to the conclusion that instruments of chaos are only to be used with one type of daemon: plaguebearers. Let me explain.

First up, bloodletters of Khorne are superb close combat exponents. So long as they don't get shot up too badly on their way in to close combat, they're usually going to win. And they're going to win by a healthy and large margin thanks to all of those hell blades in unison with their furious charge. Bloodletters generally win big, or not at all. They hardly ever draw. Because of that, I find that instruments are a waste of points on bloodletters.

Greater daemons, daemon princes and bloodcrushers of Khorne are in a similar category - they shouldn't need instruments.

Daemonettes of Slaanesh are not quite as good as bloodletters. Yet, with their rending ability and sheer number of high initiative attacks on the charge, they are also likely to win big on close combats; or not at all. They just don't tend to draw combats much - just like bloodletters, but to a lesser extent. Hence, I find daemonettes shouldn't be taking instruments either. By extension, seekers of Slaanesh are also in the same category.

Horrors of Tzeentch are not built for close combat. They are shooty combined with a reasonably high invulnerable save. But their low toughness, low initiative and low number of attacks each (cf. daemonettes who have 3 base attacks, very high initiative, but low toughness) means that horrors are bound to lose close combats most of the time. Even imperial guard will find it okay to take horrors on in close combat. They simply lose big time unless facing isolated troops or small numbers of guard or tau. Therefore, they're unlikely to draw - they mostly lose in close combat.

That brings me to plaguebearers of Nurgle. Now, these are the daemons that can really exploit those instruments. Why is that? Well, plaguebearers have only one attack (base), but they have an incredibly good toughness for troops, coupled with the feel no pain special rule and poisoned attacks. These factors combined mean that they can often dish out as good as they get in close combat. Indeed, I've used them in battles to tie up everything ranging from dreadnoughts (which they cannot hurt!) to tyranid carnifexes for three or more turns. In numbers they can hold out against many other units in the game and, with a little luck, be deadly. But if they've not charged and have got in to their usual "tar pit" situation with an opponent, they can often cause tied combats. This is exactly where instruments come in to their own.

There's one other case that should be mentioned: that of an Epidemius mono-Nurgle army list. I haven't quite made up my mind about this situation. The thing is, plaguebearers steadily (hopefully rapidly!) become uber-troops with Epidemius present. They should, in theory, rapidly outgrow the need for instruments. Hence instruments are only useful in the first couple of turns and/or if Epidemius fails to make an early appearance and the plagebearers accidentally get in to an early combat.

Some Notes on Special Weapons for Plague Marines

Plague marines get to choose between 3 special weapons: melta guns, flamers and plasma guns. I've made some semi-random notes about the pro's and con's of each for use with my Death Guard forces that I wanted to share with you.

Flamers.
Positives: Cheap, Template Weapon, No cover saves.
Negatives: Uses a slot that could be a melta gun(?)

For the positives, the points cost should be self-explanatory. The second positive is about the weapon being a template weapon. Typically, I find that Death Guard cannot pump out the sheer number of shots that other armies are capable of (see a previous discussion here). Hence taking template or blast weaponry makes up for this short-coming ... somewhat. The third positive is more about the meta-game: 5th edition has lots more cover saves, so flamers have become the tool of choice for digging out entrenched troops from fortifications, ruins, woodland and craters. The singular (debatable) negative point brings me around to:

Melta Guns.
Positives: Its a Melta Gun!, AP 1, Tank Busting.
Negatives: Short Range, Single Shot.

In the present environment, or meta-game if you like, tanks and mechanized army lists are very strong. Therefore, the modern plague marine should be carrying some melta guns to at least threaten opposing tanks and elite troops / monstrous creatures. With AP 1 and the extra die for penetration, the melta gun does all that. It transforms an ordinary plague marine squad in to something more deadly. But, this has to be weighed against the comparatively short range of the weapon and the fact that it is only going to hit two-thirds of the time. The first negative shouldn't be too much of a negative for plague marines - they're fundamentally a 24" army since they can't carry any other weapons. Moreover, they're also likely to be (nay: should be!) vehicle mounted for maximum mobility in the current meta-game. The second negative can be offset by having more than 1 melta gun in the squad (2 meltas and perhaps a combi-melta on a plague champion). Some of them should hit. But a squad with 3 meltas needs to be very mobile and pick its targets with care and speed.

Plasma Guns.
Positives: Plague marines feel no pain, 24" range and rapid fire, good strength and AP.
Negatives: Gets Hot!, Expensive, Uses a slot that could be a melta gun(?).

The first point in both positives and negatives almost balance out. I don't mind taking plasma guns on plague marines since they're less likely to dies from a gets hot! roll compared to "normal" marines. But when one does perish, it is a big loss for the team: 38 points worth of loss to be exact. The range of the gun (24") perfectly matches the bolters in the rest of the squad and the weapon has a reasonable strength and AP that can be used against terminators and light vehicles. However, they're expensive compared to the other two special weapons. When I field them, I usually do so in pairs (and perhaps with a combi-plasma on a plague champion) and tend to sit them on an objective. They can be rather fearful for even bikes to get close to.

Death Guard Firepower

This post follows on from my previous thoughts on running Death Guard armies. It is part of my developing philosophy of playing this unique army - not necessarily the best or worst way of playing; simply an opinion.

I've talked extensively about the advantages of Death Guard marines. Hence today, I'm going to start to have a look at what they're lacking, and their negatives in general. The first one of these is sheer firepower.

Reasons for the deficiency.
Simply put, Death Guard (i.e. mainly plague marines, but also other chaos space marines with a small squad size and an icon of Nurgle) are expensive troop choices. Death Guard players simply won't be fielding as many troops as Imperial Guard players or Ork players, or even "normal" chaos space marines tend to. In that respect, they are a little bit like the Death Wing of the Dark Angels. However, unlike Death Wing, they don't have storm bolters: simply the humble run-of-the-mill bolt gun. They get out-shot by loyalist marines and other chaos marine factions with ease. Sure, their toughness makes up for it. But they just won't have the sheer number of shots per turn that nearly all of their adversaries are likely to.

Making up for it.
(1) Manoeuvre.
Death Guard have awesome staying power, but large amounts of incoming fire and a smaller amount of outgoing fire mean they need to be used strategically. When playing with Death Guard, I often ask myself if I need to expose them. e.g.: Do they really need to get out of that rhino? Do they truly need to poke their heads around the blocks-line-of-sight terrain feature? Is the turn clock approaching turn 5 when I need to keep my eye firmly on objectives? Why should I place my plague marines in the line of return fire?

In many respects, much of what Fritz practices with Saim-Hann is applicable here. The Death Guard player must choose targets carefully and not unnecessarily expose his or her own troops to return heavy fire power. Knowing when to go out in to the open to bait or engage a particular unit is half of the trick.

(2) Blasts and Templates.
Re-rolling die to hit or die to wound would make Death Guard much more deadly (perhaps along with Epidemius on the table in an Apocalypse game as well). But that situation is hard to arrange in a standard game using the present chaos marine codex.

Instead, I have moved toward the line of thought that templates and blasts can help to make up for the lack of fire-power. Why? Basically because they are likely to hit more than one target. A well placed flamer can easily account for 3 or more enemy troops - i.e. 3+ hits from one weapon. It seems a simple concept, and it is. I've taken to designing my Death Guard army lists around it. I regularly take flamers in plague marine squads (if not taking meltas for other purposes); I use vindicators (plural) in most standard games; my dreadnought has a plasma cannon (I wish I'd also purchased a missile launcher as well to be honest!); I always take havoc launchers on my rhinos and predators given the option and available points; etc.

I sometimes get an incredible gasp of un-belief from opponents when a single plague marine unit unleashes 3 flamer templates upon a terrain-entrenched enemy unit (2 flamers and one combi-flamer on a plague champion). Havoc launchers are twin-linked making them (quietly) rather good indeed in my opinion. And what's not to like about vindicators? (perhaps they're not as good as they were in 4th edition, but they're still very good!!). Adding the havoc launcher to a predator creates an impressive rate of fire combined with heavy bolter sponsons and auto-cannon for 115 points (that equals less than the cost of 8 chaos marines).

Finally, there's Nurgle's Rot for the psykers and sorcerers in the army. With a 6 inch radius, just get in to a nicely crowded close combat and watch the unlikely casualties mount without rolling to hit in the slightest. I know some folks swear by this ability. I often take warp time on a daemon prince instead for the re-roll benefits, but Nurgle's Rot is (ummm) "growing" on me. Think of it this way: even with warp time, the daemon prince is getting 4 attacks. With Nurgle's Rot, the daemon prince gets the equivalent of more attacks (potentially many more if it is a big combat), but less are going to wound.

Coping with Chaos Dreadnoughts

For a long time, I have deployed plasma cannon armed chaos dreadnought on flanks, usually in isolation, to protect the more expensive components of my chaos marine armies from being hit (twice) when it goes crazy. In reality, this event only happens about once every game (1 in 6 chance each turn, assuming a 6 turn game).

However, after playing a good number of games with dreadnoughts, I feel that I'm going to experiment with changing that tactic of isolated deployment. The simple reason is that dreadnoughts, much like their imperial counterparts, require support to be fully effective. This means they should be close to other units.

So, what units could go alongside them? My standard armament with my Death Guard dreadnought is a plasma cannon - that means reasonably high strength with low AP. My precious and expensive plague marines don't want to be anywhere near this dreadnought; but they'd probably take the risk if the armament was a heavy bolter or a frag missile launcher. The plasma cannon is there intentionally to cause damage to terminators and pesky marines like plague marines!

Moreover, the plasma cannon can also do significant damage to my humble rhinos and even stands a chance of glancing the front of a vindicator or predator. If I regularly ran a land raider, it would be a different tale - no problems there. I'm left wondering what unit(s) I can place next to the dreadnought to minimize the risk and support it.

If I deployed it with a daemonically possessed vindicator directly behind it, the probability of causing crippling damage to the vindicator is low - 1 in 6 to go crazy, 1 in 6 to glance, and if it does glance, the vindicator is safe for crew stunned or crew shaken results. There's still a finite risk of a bad outcome though, but it has been minimized. On the plus side, the dreadnought and vindicator combined provide an awesome amount of fire power to take out pesky elite units like terminators.

With a rhino, the advantage is that it's comparatively cheap, so I don't mind too much if it gets blown away. Moreover, if this happens, the rhino becomes a static piece of scenery which can also be helpful.

Other units that I might consider deploying dreadnoughts with (for melee support primarily) include a Nurgle daemon prince (high toughness, invulnerable save, multiple-wounds); chaos spawn (toughness 5, expendable). However, I'm more inclined to place it in front of a vindicator and therefore provide a screen for the other vehicle.

Another tactic would be simply to arm the dreadnought with a different weapon combination. Perhaps two close combat arms, or a heavy bolter which cannot harm the front armour of a predator or vindicator ... or the side armour of a second dreadnought.

Related Article: Death Guard Dreadnought.

The Mirror Match

I'd like to introduce you to a concept that I picked up from my mates who play Magic: The Gathering (collectible card game). It is called the "Mirror Match". The essential core of this idea is something like this: what do you have in your card deck (army list) that could tackle an identical card deck (army list) effectively?

This situation occurs very regularly for space marine players - there are lots of space marine players out there since they're so popular. The likelihood of coming up against a self-similar army is high for such players. Less so for rarer armies.

I originally got thinking about this question back at GT2007 where there were plenty of other chaos space marine players. The havoc squads of my opponents really thwacked my 100% infantry army there. Why -- probably because they didn't have vehicles to preferentially aim at and it was escalation (my heavier weapons hadn't arrived yet).

So, I got thinking about some of my usual Death Guard lists (e.g. see GT2008). I figured in GT2008, I would be able to handle plague marines given I had two vindications and a reasonable amount of plasma to deny other plague marines their 3+ power armour save and their feel no pain special rule. All I had to do was manoeuvre to ensure that I got in range during my shooting turn.

I'll pose this question for my readers: how would you handle an identical army list to your own favourite, or most used list? Are there any special units that you have, or tactics that you'd play to beat your own army list? I'm looking forward to hearing about your thoughts on this!

1000 points of Holiday Daemons

Here's one version of the list of daemons that I used over the vaction period recently. I don't think it is terribly optimized, but it has fared incredibly well, much to my surprise.

HQ:
Herald of Khorne on Juggernaut, blessings of the blood god (110)

Troops:
7 Bloodletters; deployed with the Herald (112)
8 Bloodletters (128)
7 Plaguebearers, icon, instrument (135)
10 Horrors, icon, Changeling, instrument (205)

Fast Attack:
3 Screamers (48)

Heavy Support:
Daemon Prince, daemonic gaze, iron hide (130)
Daemon Prince, daemonic gaze, iron hide (130)

Primary wave: Herald with 7 bloodletters, Horrors, Screamers, 1 Prince
Secondary wave: Plaguebearers, 8 bloodletters, 1 Prince

The idea behind the waves is that whichever one winds up being deployed first, there will be one icon lodged in a tough squad (horrors with a 4+ invulnerable save or plaguebearers with high toughness and feel no pain) and a daemon prince to be a fire magnet.

On turn 2, if the bloodletters can charge multiple units then the tactic that I use is to break off the herald from the squad (as an independent character) to engage as many opposing squads as possible. The screamers meanwhile will move to engage tanks or armoured walkers.

Later in the game, I will try to deep strike or maneouver either the plaguebearers or the horrors on to an objective (if required) and then (a la Saim-Hann) contest any other objectives with whatever miniatures I happen to have left over.

The real "hit" of this army is that an opponent will often perceive the daemon princes and the icons are the things they should go after. They should really be shooting up and charging the bloodletters if at all possible - they are the ones that will take apart any infantry they encounter. This list will, and has struggled against pure horde armies and pure mechanized armies however. But that's alright for an all-round army for casual, fun games.