Rumor Discussion Thread

[Rugi]

A guy from Croatia just posted on our slovenian forum that dark elves completely annihilated his daemon army. His level 4 and level 2 sorceresses made about 16 PD per turn and his assassin destroyed a 550 pts greater daemon (don`t know which one and how yet)
So I`m really loking forward to the new book.

[Colonel]

Say you are facing a nurgle demon list with loads of tough as nails infantry.. they have a banner giving a -2 to all your casting from whatever lore your best sorceress takes.. You use your RBTs to take out plague riders and faster stuff maybe, but the core infantry is too numerous.
-Dragon flys to the flank, march blocks and breaths on large blocks, hitting a dozen T3 models at a time.

high elves, enough magic to shut yours down, about even on the shootyness maybe, dragon flies up on a flank turn 2 as harpies charge bolt throwers, breath weapon on swordmasters or whatever.. game over man!

wood elves with loads of wild riders and casters, again BBQ them.

Having an entire army that only engages in combat when and where you want is nasty, throw in more flyers than HE or WE can get for warmachine hunting and woohoo!

Hhh, Black Dragon - breath weapon S3 with additional effect, provided that unit takes at least 1 wound. I think I will use the dragon now as much as I used it in the 6th ed. Like... none. At all. It's too expensive, too predictable and not so tough to kill after all. Especially if played against gunline or heavy magic list >.< The breath weapon seems rather weak to me. S3 isn't going to harm anything expensive...

Care to share some good tactics for the dragon? And the breath weapon in particular.

[Decker_cky]

Blacknark: Yes. Assassins have ASF.

Rugi: 16 power dice isn't too hard to believe, particularly if the dagger was used. As to the assassins taking out GDs....it's definitely possible with either Venom Sword or Manbane + Rune of Khaine, but both require pretty spectacular rolling. I don't think we should expect easy match-ups with daemon armies, but I think we'll be very competitive with them.

[Mordru]

@ Colonel

That hard as nails nurgle infantry will be T4 not T3 but your point is noted. Everybody is having a tough time with Daemons and we will too. We will just not be in the same proverbial small boat up the proverbial foul smelling creek.

Our speed means we can march block like nobodie's business and even with core furies (only Ld2) we should still be able to get round and behind most daemon armies and dictate play. Flying Tzeentch heralds and bloodthirsters are tough but they are tough for everone.

[Decker_cky]

Dragons, hydras, lore of fire sorceresses and anything with Killing Blow will be great against plaguebearer blocks. Nothing makes them 'soft', but dark elves look like they'll have as many tools for dealing with Nurgle Daemons (or regenerating grave guard) as anyone.

[Silverheimdall]

Dragons & Hydras? Only if their Breath is a Flaming Attack.

[Decker_cky]

Sorry....going by the current book, Hydras have a flaming breath weapon but Dragons don't.

[Bernh]

Or you meant how it was it up to now. I know it was S4 before, but rumors indicate it's going S3. However, you're the one to say.

S4 in the new book.

[Thanee]

A guy from Croatia just posted on our slovenian forum that dark elves completely annihilated his daemon army.

Quite possible. Every army can annihilate every other army, sometimes a bit of luck is needed, of course.

But that Assassin must have had the fight of his life.

Bye
Thanee

[Haplo]

The assassin could be great for finishing up the GD(unless nurgle) as our shooting should be able to give it a wound or 2 and then a flying charge by the assassin to finish it off. Heck you could even reveal the assassin let fly with the shurikens and then charge to finish him off.

[Khel]

I believe the Daemon would of been wounded already, so the assassin could of easily (and luckily) finished it off. If not then wow! I'll be taking assassins more often.

[Sulla]

@ Colonel

That hard as nails nurgle infantry will be T4 not T3 but your point is noted. Everybody is having a tough time with Daemons and we will too. We will just not be in the same proverbial small boat up the proverbial foul smelling creek.

Do you really have a tough time vs daemons? Their core troops are so poor (yes even the plaguebearer bunkers), the heralds are so vulnerable... really, the only threats are those big guys and we have more than a few counters to them now. Ring of hotek looks like being the perfect defense vs the potent daemon magic and a dreadlord kitted for defense with either the black amulet or reverse ward save will blunt the charge of a thirster. Assassins can even take a few wounds off. Any greater daemon other than the thirster will probably not even make it into combat as our crossbows are more than capable of dealing with them.

To me, it looks as if DE have gotten better but their strengths and weaknesses remain the same. They will be great vs combat armies, passable vs gunlines and weak(er) vs knights and undead. They look capable of winning vs anybody though.

[Kheirakh]

@ Colonel

That hard as nails nurgle infantry will be T4 not T3 but your point is noted. Everybody is having a tough time with Daemons and we will too. We will just not be in the same proverbial small boat up the proverbial foul smelling creek.

Do you really have a tough time vs daemons? Their core troops are so poor (yes even the plaguebearer bunkers), the heralds are so vulnerable... really, the only threats are those big guys and we have more than a few counters to them now. Ring of hotek looks like being the perfect defense vs the potent daemon magic and a dreadlord kitted for defense with either the black amulet or reverse ward save will blunt the charge of a thirster. Assassins can even take a few wounds off. Any greater daemon other than the thirster will probably not even make it into combat as our crossbows are more than capable of dealing with them.

To me, it looks as if DE have gotten better but their strengths and weaknesses remain the same. They will be great vs combat armies, passable vs gunlines and weak(er) vs knights and undead. They look capable of winning vs anybody though.

Weaker against knights and undead? Against knights: how about execs and hag with ASF banner? Lore of metal for the sorceresses? Multiple harpy units to lure the knights away?
Against undead: BG, Corsairs with frenzy, Immune to psychology item, Ring of hotek, witch elves... The options are almost limitless.

[Mordru]

Anybody that has no trouble with daemons must not be facing siren song very often.

Then there is the standard that allows only hold as a charge reaction ...very bad for elves.

Flesh hounds are also good medicine for dealing with just about anything with high MV, S5 W2 magic resistance and a ward save. Flamers don't exactly suck. Daemonettes with a Herald munch a lot of elves as well. The heralds are relatively cheap and pretty extensivley customizable and an excellent mesh with outher units of the same mark.

[Sulla]

Anybody that has no trouble with daemons must not be facing siren song very often.

Then there is the standard that allows only hold as a charge reaction ...very bad for elves.

Flesh hounds are also good medicine for dealing with just about anything with high MV, S5 W2 magic resistance and a ward save. Flamers don't exactly suck. Daemonettes with a Herald munch a lot of elves as well. The heralds are relatively cheap and pretty extensivley customizable and an excellent mesh with outher units of the same mark.

Siren vs dark elves..."You must charge me or flee." "OK, I flee."

Besides, put it on a keeper of secrets and it's awesome. Put it on a herald and you'd better hope her and her unit don't whiff their first turn of combat because every surviving attack possible will be coming right back at her and with her awesome combo of bugger all toughness and at best a 6+ armour save and 5+ ward, she falls over quite quickly.

Sure the special and rare stuff is pretty good in the daemon book, but first you have to pay the core tax of at least 3 fairly unimpressive infantry units and also bear in mind that the heralds don't always enhance the special and rare choices at all.

Daemons are a solid list, but I can get far more competitive builds out of HE and VC personally.

[Mordru]

You flee with furies, seekers, etc... behind you and your gone. You flee from too close to the table edge and you are gone. On the keeper it is definitely awesome in a unit of daemonettes with herald the whole unit has ASF due to the locus ability of the herald. Siren song is a one use only item and the daemon player has to have a clue about when to use it.

I am not saying daemons are unbeatable but I have yet to hear anybody else say they have no problems with them.

Any entire army made up of fear causing Itp models with a ward save that has to be crumbled/melted in combat is going to create problems for most armies and certainly for toughness 3 elves. Most of the mixed daemon lists you can come up with are hard simply due to the nature of the army.

[Plasmapuff]

Is it just me or is the Cauldron horribly vulnerable to be taken out in close combat?

It can't hide as it needs to be within 12" of a front line infantry unit which will be advancing/pursuing. Against shooting I'm not that worried, but against tunnelling scorpions, 18" moving characters, fliers etc... the T3, 2 wound hag is going to go down fast. She does not have ASF and cannot join units as originally touted.

Most people will make the cauldron also their BSB, so thats a min 225 points of highly fragile elf meat (+100 again for the BSB). Yes you can screen her with harpies etc, but to get the most out of the cauldron you need to keep it close and I can't see how its going to survive a 6 turn game (esp. considering the battleline is dynamic, so gaps and opportunities WILL open up despite best efforts). If I was playing against a cauldron army, taking it out would be a top priority- much like taking out liche priests against Tk, salamanders from lizzies etc). Has anyone taken out a necromancer on a corpse cart?

Also when the abilities it confers are factored in to the units cost, I don't think its cost effective unless you're running a themed army with witch elves and executioners to take advantage of stubborn. IMO taking it just for the 24" aura abilities is not worth it.

Thoughts? Am I missing something? Perhaps in a defensive army it might have merits (where you can hide it to a degree).

This would be my ideal 2250 army if the cauldron could somehow be protected:
Dreadlord on Manticore
Lvl 1 Caddy or Noble BSB on Chariot (depends on whether I can squeeze in the seal and ring somewhere)
Cauldron +Hag
20 Warriors
2 x 10 Rxbs
3 x 5 harpies
2 Dark Rider units
15 Black Guard
Unit of COKs or 1 Chariot
2x 6 Shades with GW
1 Hydra
2 x RBT

[Zeth]

but against tunnelling scorpions, 18" moving characters, fliers etc... the T3, 2 wound hag is going to go down fast. She does not have ASF and cannot join units as originally touted.

I had very little trouble dealing with the chargers that could make it there in 6th edition. Most fast cav and fliers couldn't kill all the crew, and with their high init and lots of attacks they generally killed enough to not die the second round of CC.

Now its quite a bit sturdier. The Death Hag will allow then crew to take on even stronger things and survive, plus the crew now has a 4+ ward save it CC as well as against shooting. Terror is also a pretty big deterrent for most warmachine hunters.

Even the scorpion is going to struggle at taking out the crew, averaging less then one wound. Its best chance is going to be dumping all its attacks into the hero and hoping a KB makes it through. The hero alone should do 1.8 wounds back to the scorpion on the first round.

The 12" range is only going to matter if you plan on taking advantage of stubborn.
While its great for a lone assassin (unless against fear causers), I really don't see planning an army around stubborn witches or Execs to be effective.

Also when the abilities it confers are factored in to the units cost, I don't think its cost effective unless you're running a themed army with witch elves and executioners to take advantage of stubborn. IMO taking it just for the 24" aura abilities is not worth it.

I think that the +1 A and giving a unit KB are going to be worth the cost.
It is certainly not as strong offensively in general as the old CoB, but the versatility it offers giving a large boost to any one unit I imagine is going to be quite useful. Specifically shades and CoK's. Allowing both units to break most anything they charge alone.
I suppose we shall see when we get to play with the new rules.

I really think the stubborn is a lame duck option.

[Silverheimdall]

4+ Ward, Terror and Unbreakable.. the Cauldron's Crew is solid, but yeah, its a 50/50 chance when something nasty runs through it ;o

[Moonblade]

I see that you guys undertake the CoB debate.

Also when the abilities it confers are factored in to the units cost, I don't think its cost effective unless you're running a themed army with witch elves and executioners to take advantage of stubborn. IMO taking it just for the 24" aura abilities is not worth it.

- I totally agree. In order for the CoB to fully earn it cost back, one should expand his army around the "stubborn khaine units" rule and design a slowly advancing army of witch elves and executioners. I don't like it, it may be just me but I don't really like executioners and I can't imagine what's the big deal with stubborn witch elves anyway. I must say I simply love the new 24" aura that grants +1A/KB/5+WS - it opens up a broad range of tactical possibilities to me. And it ain't no bound spell or something that really helps if you're running a non-magic army. HOWEVER, I don't believe +1A/KB/5+WS to ONE unit to be worth of 200+ pts and a Hero slot. Especially if mounts do not contribute from it. Yes, we can choose a different target each turn which is a very good thing non-the-less, yet a banner that would normally confer the same ability would cost 3-4 times less... and won't use up a Hero slot. I agree that we DON'T have such banners or if we do (Hydra Banner) they usually can't be taken by a regular unit without the help of BSB which we basically evens out the situation a bit. So I can't really say the CoB is useless or something - it's just that there are more cost-effective choices in the book. And warhammer after all is all about finding out the best possible army configuration Still I feel uneasy with the new Cauldron. If only GW have made the Cauldron as it is now but without the "stubborn khaine units" rule and with the old aura I would have been soooo happy. Even if the price was bigger. As it is now I would rather buy a brand-new unit or 2 assassins than having +1A/KB/WS5+ to one unit.

Of course play-testing will bestow the final judgment. Hope I will be proved wrong


And btw I am frustrated with the concept of Death Hag without ASF that is stuck to a unit of Cauldron. Not that anyone is going after the CoB really... It is already hard enough to be taken down with shooting/magic and it causes terror which helps a lot against units that wish to engage the cauldron in CC. Still I just feel there's something very wrong about the whole idea of Death hag protecting it. Maybe if the Cauldron was more powerful (and costing more) it would have represented a greater pain to the enemy who in such case would want more eagerly to eliminate the cauldron thus tooled-up Death Hag would have been more important. And there would have provided a tactical issue of even better protection for the Cauldron like adding an Assassin to the whole unit for example. Right now as I see it Death Hag will be left aside from the whole action and that's a hero potential wasted. And I hate wasted potentials

[Plasmapuff]

So the cauldron works even if the death hag is dead? This is crucial in making the cauldron more survivable.

Along with the 4+ ward save IF it also works in close combat and unbreakable, then its not too bad.

I really think the stubborn is a lame duck option.

I agree, although this is very unfortunate. Execs which receive the charge are going to be stuffed, so stubborn doesn't really matter. You could add in an assasin for some ASF kills, but IMO the cost is going to be way too prohibitive.

On the other hand, a block of stubborn witch elves (15-21) have the potential to be good (esp. with the points cut), however with hatred forcing pursue, this is yet another unit to babysit. Still a decent choice IMO if you were inclined to go infantry heavy, as they're cheap enough to get a few ranks and generate healthy kills (~4 on a 4+ save unit) at I6.

I think that the +1 A and giving a unit KB are going to be worth the cost.

We really need a few games first to test it. Problem is that GW have already factored in the cost of the stubborn aura into its cost.

[Decker_cky]

:S Why are stubborn witch elves somehow better than stubborn executioners? Witch elves lose a round of combat and they lose frenzy and are pretty much just as hopeless as executioners in the next round. Executioners will take some wounds, but the witch elves lose 1/3 of their attacks before a blow is landed.

The reason for both of those units gaining stubborn isn't for them to win out in the long run, it's to stop your line from breaking down. Even fighting through T3 elves will take a while if they have stubborn, and it allows you to set up mismatches in different ways.

I do think that the option to either hold a unit or flee with executioners makes them nice and versatile, whereas witches just hold. On the other hand, witches will limit damage against them in later rounds because they don't have great weapons (though I think most of the time, you'll try to only take charges when you can spring them free at the start of the next round).

[Plasmapuff]

So I can't really say the CoB is useless or something - it's just that there are more cost-effective choices in the book.

Exactly my thoughts, except we don't know what is more cost effective at the moment. So the question is- what else would you take to form your hard hitting specials without a CoB?

Shades without CoB are suddenly not that great (1 unit max if at all). Another unit of BG? Or would you go a small flanking unit of either execs/WE? CoKs are Ok having been brought up to the standard of other heavy cav, but are not exeptional themselves.

In a non CoB army I'd probably go with something like:
Dreadlord on Manticore
(Cheap and with hatred and KB, this combo hits harder than our current dragon lord. Admittedly a bit more vulnerable to missiles, but chill wind and harpies/DR should deal with the worst of it)

Lvl 2 Sorceress
Lvl 2 Sorceress
Noble BSB on Chariot or Peg
20 Warriors
2 x 10 Rxbs
3 x 5 harpies
2 Dark Rider units
15 Black Guard
6 COKs with Banner
2 Chariots
1 Hydra
2 x RBT

So in this example, the question is whether the addition of a decent magic phase and multiple Cold One hitters is more cost effective compared with Cauldron boosted shades and knights.

The problem with having multiple units which can be made "awesome" by the cauldron is that only 1 can benefit each turn, so by taking units which are average otherwise, you restrict yourself to 1 "awesome" unit and a bunch of average ones.

And then what happens if the cauldron gets taken out or engaged? (does it still work when its engaged in hth? The anvil and casket don't....)

Personally I'd go with the more stable option.

[Lethalis]

Now I'll admit straight up that I haven't read through all 49 pages but I'm going to take the chance and say that you probably still won't be able to take a BSB on pegasus.

[Moonblade]

Why would you consider witch elves and executioners to halt the enemy since there are warriors and black guard units for that very reason. Executioners with stubborn I don't understand. Witch Elves may do some damage because they will likely strike 1st in subsequent rounds due to high Initiative and are cheap somehow. Yet these units are hardly meant to hold their ground. Why adding a defensive skill as stubborn to an outright offensive units >.< Doh. +1A or fear or re-rolling to wound or +1 to the resolution on the 1st round of close combat or anything like that would have been much more worthy.