Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Low charlemagne additions to Tzeentch roster

MadDemiurgMadDemiurg Registered Users Posts: 4,738
edited October 2021 in General Discussion
I agree that Tzeentch roster is pretty tiny, but the main reason is the complete lack of unit variants. Skaven had 4 types of clanrats for example: spears, swords, shield + spear, shield + sword, 3 slaves, 2 nightrunners. 2 gutter runners, 2 stormvermin. Now, I do think this is a bit of a bloat at this point, but at the same time, I don't get the "variants are bad" crowd, they're an easy cheap way to add some tactical flexibility without requiring a completely new unit.

So in this regard, the complete lack of variants is a bit questionable to me, especially since the knights are using an existing model that did have a variant.

Here's a list of easy additions that would not require much work but would help with unit variety:

-Knights (lances)
-Doom knights (swords) - current model looks like it's the halberd variant
-Horrors on disks - kind of like terradon riders for LM, flying skirmish cav, new unit
-Flamers on disks (that's an actual unit, changebringers)
-Giant screamer (single entity) - new unit, same logic as Ancient Salamander, I like the idea of a giant flying manta ray
-Lord of Change (warpfire blade) - anti infantry specialization
-Soulgrinder (flamer) - seems like the current one is shooting some long range magical spears, I'm not a fan of the unit, but if it's already in the game, why not

That's 7 potential units that should be relatively cheap to make.

Comments

  • EmeraldThanatosEmeraldThanatos Registered Users Posts: 2,906
    I agree on the Lance knights and Changebringers, but all the others just feel wied. Having variants of LoC or Soulgrinders especially.
    Ranking of all Total War games I've played:
    1. Three kingdoms
    2. Attila
    3. Warhammer (1, 2 & 3)
    4. Medieval 2
    5. Shogun 2
    6. Thrones
    7. Rome 2
    8. Napoleon
    9. Empire


  • MadDemiurgMadDemiurg Registered Users Posts: 4,738

    I agree on the Lance knights and Changebringers, but all the others just feel wied. Having variants of LoC or Soulgrinders especially.

    What's wrong with the sword LoC? They had swords in a lot of their iterations and official artwork:



  • AxiosXiphosAxiosXiphos Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 8,220
    Literally make 1 tzeentch warrior model; add Chaos Warriors with 3 weapon variants and use that model for the Knights and the Doom Knights.

    Fixes maybe 60-70% of the roster issues; and makes it actually a vaguely acceptable standard...
  • EmeraldThanatosEmeraldThanatos Registered Users Posts: 2,906

    I agree on the Lance knights and Changebringers, but all the others just feel wied. Having variants of LoC or Soulgrinders especially.

    What's wrong with the sword LoC? They had swords in a lot of their iterations and official artwork:


    Conceptually there's nothing wrong with it. It's just that having 2 variants of a LoC would be strange when all the other gods just get one variant.
    Ranking of all Total War games I've played:
    1. Three kingdoms
    2. Attila
    3. Warhammer (1, 2 & 3)
    4. Medieval 2
    5. Shogun 2
    6. Thrones
    7. Rome 2
    8. Napoleon
    9. Empire


  • GreenColouredGreenColoured Registered Users Posts: 5,829

    I agree on the Lance knights and Changebringers, but all the others just feel wied. Having variants of LoC or Soulgrinders especially.

    What's wrong with the sword LoC? They had swords in a lot of their iterations and official artwork:


    Conceptually there's nothing wrong with it. It's just that having 2 variants of a LoC would be strange when all the other gods just get one variant.
    I'd say one of the LoC, be it unit or generic Lord, should come with a sword then


    Preferably the generic SEM, that way they can be distinguished from Sarthoreal who also uses their model, but carries a staff instead
  • MarcusLiviusMarcusLivius Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,287

    Literally make 1 tzeentch warrior model; add Chaos Warriors with 3 weapon variants and use that model for the Knights and the Doom Knights.

    Fixes maybe 60-70% of the roster issues; and makes it actually a vaguely acceptable standard...

    If CA added Chaos Warriors, that would be fine.

    However, is it possible that their roster functions just fine without the Chaos Warriors? That potentially CA did not add them for a reason?
  • brago90brago90 Registered Users Posts: 1,286
    Perhaps the Lord of Change who uses a sword will be the RoR version, focusing more on physical combat than magic.
  • GreenColouredGreenColoured Registered Users Posts: 5,829

    Literally make 1 tzeentch warrior model; add Chaos Warriors with 3 weapon variants and use that model for the Knights and the Doom Knights.

    Fixes maybe 60-70% of the roster issues; and makes it actually a vaguely acceptable standard...

    If CA added Chaos Warriors, that would be fine.

    However, is it possible that their roster functions just fine without the Chaos Warriors? That potentially CA did not add them for a reason?
    Sure a roster can function without the entire franchise's mascot, it's most iconic unit.


    But why shouldn't they have it?

    -they had it in the lore
    -they had it in the TT
    -they were there in nearly any Warhammer game where Tzeentch is there
    -Tzeentch have the smallest roster by a pretty margin
    -CW would serve a role no other unit there can fill
    -its model can retroactively then be used to fix Doom Knights and Chaos Knights of Tzeentch
  • Spellbound55Spellbound55 Registered Users Posts: 1,311
    When determining whether a new unit or variant is a good use of resources I like to ask whether this is filling an existing hole, or just providing the same option at a different price. After that I like to ask, does filling this hole add to the rosters game plan. If a unit is filling a new hole and filling that hole adds to the rosters game plan rather than expanding or hampering it then ti's a good unit variant. It's easy to say tactical flexibility but quite often you just get a tuskgor chariot to your razorgor chariot. One is objectively better than the other based solely on how much you can afford to spend.

    I don't think any of these proposed units meet both of those standards, with the exception of the horrors on discs. Mid range flying skirmishers meaningfully adds to the roster. I imagine that slot is being saved for a different unit planned to fill the mid range flying poke slot, one that is more suited to the roster and would get a more consistent missile profile for the role. Still I want to highlight a good suggestion when I see it and this is a solid option for expansion. Most of the other units are just shuffling existing roles to new units. Soulgrinder with Exalted Flamer missile, flying flamethrower like burning chariots, transplanting the elements of the cav to their less effective mounts, these don't really add they just fill space.

    If CA had planned to bloat the roster by shuffling unit abilities they could have fairly easily. They didn't for a reason and whether we like it or not point out that they could have doesn't change that decision.

  • AsamuAsamu Registered Users Posts: 1,394

    I agree on the Lance knights and Changebringers, but all the others just feel wied. Having variants of LoC or Soulgrinders especially.

    Before 6th Ed, changebringers were Horrors on discs, so that one is actually fine. There’s also nothing wrong with some disc knights with swords.

    Literally make 1 tzeentch warrior model; add Chaos Warriors with 3 weapon variants and use that model for the Knights and the Doom Knights.

    Fixes maybe 60-70% of the roster issues; and makes it actually a vaguely acceptable standard...

    If CA added Chaos Warriors, that would be fine.

    However, is it possible that their roster functions just fine without the Chaos Warriors? That potentially CA did not add them for a reason?
    I mean, their roster will function fine, but not having warriors is kind of dumb, even if there’s an understandable reasoning behind it, like ensuring that it plays very differently from other factions.
  • MarcusLiviusMarcusLivius Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,287

    Literally make 1 tzeentch warrior model; add Chaos Warriors with 3 weapon variants and use that model for the Knights and the Doom Knights.

    Fixes maybe 60-70% of the roster issues; and makes it actually a vaguely acceptable standard...

    If CA added Chaos Warriors, that would be fine.

    However, is it possible that their roster functions just fine without the Chaos Warriors? That potentially CA did not add them for a reason?
    Sure a roster can function without the entire franchise's mascot, it's most iconic unit.


    But why shouldn't they have it?

    -they had it in the lore
    -they had it in the TT
    -they were there in nearly any Warhammer game where Tzeentch is there
    -Tzeentch have the smallest roster by a pretty margin
    -CW would serve a role no other unit there can fill
    -its model can retroactively then be used to fix Doom Knights and Chaos Knights of Tzeentch
    Well, maybe they should not have it, because they don't fit the theme of the factions they are trying to build. Maybe they don't have it because there will be a mortal focused DLC down the line

    So, below is couple of supposedly competitive army list for Disciples of Tzeentch AoS TT. Just thehe first list I found in searching. I get it's not Warhammer Fantasy, but most the units are the same or translate well. Not seeing any Chaos Warriors. Seems that Tzeentch can survive without the Chaos Warriors after all.

    Leaders

    Fateskimmer [general] (140) Aether-tether, Wellspring of Arcane Might, Spell: Fold Reality

    Changecaster (110) Spell: Bolt of Tzeentch

    Battleline

    10 Pink Horrors (220)

    10 Pink Horrors (220)

    Other

    Exalted Flamers of Tzeentch (100)

    Flamers of Tzeentch (140)

    10 Brimstone Horrors (60)

    990/1000

    The alternative list I have come up with includes a Lord of Change:

    Leaders

    Lord of Change [general] (380) Rod of Sorcery, Aether-tether, Aura of Mutability, Spell: Fold Reality

    Battleline

    10 Pink Horrors (220)

    10 Pink Horrors (220)

    Other

    Exalted Flamers of Tzeentch (100)

    Screamers of Tzeentch (80)
  • Rubz2293Rubz2293 Registered Users Posts: 550
    Tzeentch tiny roster doesn't matter, his army is just gonna nuke the enemy front line before they can barely get close with spells. And all his flying units will just waste the enemy ammunition by zig zagging around.

    Just like Legend taught us.
  • MadDemiurgMadDemiurg Registered Users Posts: 4,738

    When determining whether a new unit or variant is a good use of resources I like to ask whether this is filling an existing hole, or just providing the same option at a different price. After that I like to ask, does filling this hole add to the rosters game plan. If a unit is filling a new hole and filling that hole adds to the rosters game plan rather than expanding or hampering it then ti's a good unit variant. It's easy to say tactical flexibility but quite often you just get a tuskgor chariot to your razorgor chariot. One is objectively better than the other based solely on how much you can afford to spend.

    I don't think any of these proposed units meet both of those standards, with the exception of the horrors on discs. Mid range flying skirmishers meaningfully adds to the roster. I imagine that slot is being saved for a different unit planned to fill the mid range flying poke slot, one that is more suited to the roster and would get a more consistent missile profile for the role. Still I want to highlight a good suggestion when I see it and this is a solid option for expansion. Most of the other units are just shuffling existing roles to new units. Soulgrinder with Exalted Flamer missile, flying flamethrower like burning chariots, transplanting the elements of the cav to their less effective mounts, these don't really add they just fill space.

    If CA had planned to bloat the roster by shuffling unit abilities they could have fairly easily. They didn't for a reason and whether we like it or not point out that they could have doesn't change that decision.

    To elaborate on the roles of suggested units:

    Knights (lances) - shock cav (versus melee cav which is the sword version), I think they will actually be more useful in the roster
    Doom knights (swords) - anti infantry armored flying cav (I assume halberds will be anti large)
    Horrors on disks - flying skirmish cav with decent range
    Flamers on disks - will have the same difference between them and burning chariot as between flamers and exalted flamers, but flying. I assume one will be anti infantry and the other will potentially have a more focused anti single entity attack, but that's my speculation
    Giant screamer - flying anti large single entity monster
    LoC (sword) - you can make one LoC version more melee focused, perhaps with an anti infantry bonus and the other will have some boosts to magic
    Soul grinder (flamer) - similar to the existing Necrofex RoR. It will most likely have drastic gameplay differences with flamers and exalted flamers which are likely to be glasscannons

    I think all of these can offer something new and potentially fit the overall playstyle.

    And, btw, I'm not suggesting to add all of them, just listing potential options.

  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 19,253
    I think they’ll just add more Chaos Warrior variants in a mortal LL DLC. I’d like as much as possible but I’ll probably enjoy a Tzeentch play through so I’m not overly concerned.
  • DjauDjau Registered Users Posts: 9,954

    Literally make 1 tzeentch warrior model; add Chaos Warriors with 3 weapon variants and use that model for the Knights and the Doom Knights.

    Fixes maybe 60-70% of the roster issues; and makes it actually a vaguely acceptable standard...

    If CA added Chaos Warriors, that would be fine.

    However, is it possible that their roster functions just fine without the Chaos Warriors? That potentially CA did not add them for a reason?
    Bigger question is...did CA leave them out for the Lord Packs as a way of letting the player decide if they want to use Warriors or not.

    Cause Tzeentch is unlikely to get any new Daemons added beyond the Changebringers and thats just one unit. Tzaangors can push a single DLC; which means we have one LP where we essentially have to go to Mortals. I doubt more variants of Pink or Blue Horrors would be looked on kindly. We already have the Horrors, Screamers, Flamers, etc.

    Tzeentch in 40k or AoS has no new non-Hero/Lord/LL level Daemons barring Brimstone Horrors but thats a swarm unit anyway.

  • Spellbound55Spellbound55 Registered Users Posts: 1,311
    Djau said:

    Literally make 1 tzeentch warrior model; add Chaos Warriors with 3 weapon variants and use that model for the Knights and the Doom Knights.

    Fixes maybe 60-70% of the roster issues; and makes it actually a vaguely acceptable standard...

    If CA added Chaos Warriors, that would be fine.

    However, is it possible that their roster functions just fine without the Chaos Warriors? That potentially CA did not add them for a reason?
    Bigger question is...did CA leave them out for the Lord Packs as a way of letting the player decide if they want to use Warriors or not.

    Cause Tzeentch is unlikely to get any new Daemons added beyond the Changebringers and thats just one unit. Tzaangors can push a single DLC; which means we have one LP where we essentially have to go to Mortals. I doubt more variants of Pink or Blue Horrors would be looked on kindly. We already have the Horrors, Screamers, Flamers, etc.

    Tzeentch in 40k or AoS has no new non-Hero/Lord/LL level Daemons barring Brimstone Horrors but thats a swarm unit anyway.
    I do think people are really tunneling on warriors implemented as mass infantry here. At most you need 2 DLC per monogod (8 halves of a DLC, before including things like WoC, Empire, Kislev, and Cathay is a substantial amount of additions) and representing mortals in forms other than line infantry is quite doable. We know mortals are on the table, just that GW and CA were not interested in heavily armored plodding infantry being in the list. Going mortals and adding WoC infantry are not necessarily the same thing.
  • DjauDjau Registered Users Posts: 9,954

    Djau said:

    Literally make 1 tzeentch warrior model; add Chaos Warriors with 3 weapon variants and use that model for the Knights and the Doom Knights.

    Fixes maybe 60-70% of the roster issues; and makes it actually a vaguely acceptable standard...

    If CA added Chaos Warriors, that would be fine.

    However, is it possible that their roster functions just fine without the Chaos Warriors? That potentially CA did not add them for a reason?
    Bigger question is...did CA leave them out for the Lord Packs as a way of letting the player decide if they want to use Warriors or not.

    Cause Tzeentch is unlikely to get any new Daemons added beyond the Changebringers and thats just one unit. Tzaangors can push a single DLC; which means we have one LP where we essentially have to go to Mortals. I doubt more variants of Pink or Blue Horrors would be looked on kindly. We already have the Horrors, Screamers, Flamers, etc.

    Tzeentch in 40k or AoS has no new non-Hero/Lord/LL level Daemons barring Brimstone Horrors but thats a swarm unit anyway.
    I do think people are really tunneling on warriors implemented as mass infantry here. At most you need 2 DLC per monogod (8 halves of a DLC, before including things like WoC, Empire, Kislev, and Cathay is a substantial amount of additions) and representing mortals in forms other than line infantry is quite doable. We know mortals are on the table, just that GW and CA were not interested in heavily armored plodding infantry being in the list. Going mortals and adding WoC infantry are not necessarily the same thing.
    The other options are Tzaangors and Cultists; that at most takes up two slots in one lord pack or one in two lord packs. Tzeentch already has two kinds of knights.

    Basically, at LP1 or LP2 they're going to have to make Warriors and Chosen. Probably one-handed weapon, no shield and with bound spells.

  • MarcusLiviusMarcusLivius Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,287
    Djau said:

    Literally make 1 tzeentch warrior model; add Chaos Warriors with 3 weapon variants and use that model for the Knights and the Doom Knights.

    Fixes maybe 60-70% of the roster issues; and makes it actually a vaguely acceptable standard...

    If CA added Chaos Warriors, that would be fine.

    However, is it possible that their roster functions just fine without the Chaos Warriors? That potentially CA did not add them for a reason?
    Bigger question is...did CA leave them out for the Lord Packs as a way of letting the player decide if they want to use Warriors or not.

    Cause Tzeentch is unlikely to get any new Daemons added beyond the Changebringers and thats just one unit. Tzaangors can push a single DLC; which means we have one LP where we essentially have to go to Mortals. I doubt more variants of Pink or Blue Horrors would be looked on kindly. We already have the Horrors, Screamers, Flamers, etc.

    Tzeentch in 40k or AoS has no new non-Hero/Lord/LL level Daemons barring Brimstone Horrors but thats a swarm unit anyway.
    As you say, CA has already made the majority of Daemon units for Khorne and Tzeentch. Unless they make new Daemons, then it largely has to be mortals for future LPs. That being said, if they had Chaos Warriors to each faction, then I would want their behavior and use to be varied. Not just the same unit in a different wrapper.
  • MadDemiurgMadDemiurg Registered Users Posts: 4,738
    edited October 2021
    This is not about LPs btw, I consider the stuff I listed to be flc tier additions to make the roster a bit more varied than what it is.

    LP worthy stuff would be things like:

    -Mutalith Vortex Beast
    -Gigantic Chaos Spawn (which actually has a unique FW model):

    -Daemon Prince of Tzeentch
    -Tzaangors (if they are not deemed AoS and thus not an option, which I feel could be the case)
    -Great Winged Terror:

    -Bane tower of Tzeentch (redesigned as a crystaline flying tower similar to 40k silver towers):


  • Spellbound55Spellbound55 Registered Users Posts: 1,311
    Djau said:

    Djau said:

    Literally make 1 tzeentch warrior model; add Chaos Warriors with 3 weapon variants and use that model for the Knights and the Doom Knights.

    Fixes maybe 60-70% of the roster issues; and makes it actually a vaguely acceptable standard...

    If CA added Chaos Warriors, that would be fine.

    However, is it possible that their roster functions just fine without the Chaos Warriors? That potentially CA did not add them for a reason?
    Bigger question is...did CA leave them out for the Lord Packs as a way of letting the player decide if they want to use Warriors or not.

    Cause Tzeentch is unlikely to get any new Daemons added beyond the Changebringers and thats just one unit. Tzaangors can push a single DLC; which means we have one LP where we essentially have to go to Mortals. I doubt more variants of Pink or Blue Horrors would be looked on kindly. We already have the Horrors, Screamers, Flamers, etc.

    Tzeentch in 40k or AoS has no new non-Hero/Lord/LL level Daemons barring Brimstone Horrors but thats a swarm unit anyway.
    I do think people are really tunneling on warriors implemented as mass infantry here. At most you need 2 DLC per monogod (8 halves of a DLC, before including things like WoC, Empire, Kislev, and Cathay is a substantial amount of additions) and representing mortals in forms other than line infantry is quite doable. We know mortals are on the table, just that GW and CA were not interested in heavily armored plodding infantry being in the list. Going mortals and adding WoC infantry are not necessarily the same thing.
    The other options are Tzaangors and Cultists; that at most takes up two slots in one lord pack or one in two lord packs. Tzeentch already has two kinds of knights.

    Basically, at LP1 or LP2 they're going to have to make Warriors and Chosen. Probably one-handed weapon, no shield and with bound spells.
    What are you defining as a slot? Tzaangor units could take 3 to 4 if we're also including hero and lord options. Infantry, airborne ranged and then a single entity as a hero or lord feels like we haven't hit any redundancy.

    From WoC you could pull a unit of Aspiring Champions as a base for a small super elite unit of Mortal Warriors with bound spells and auras (Sorcerer Coven as a name, though you could just call them Chosen I suppose), a Fatemaster (basically doomknight hero which acts as a body guard, name is just a placeholder), the MVB, and a Sorcerer lord for another 4 options without having to make things up or dig particularly deep.

    I don't see how warriors and chosen as they are implemented in the WoC roster would be necessary to fill a second lord pack. Target number is 5 generic units plus a lord and out of 10 units around 8 are pretty easy pulls. If legendary heroes are on the table then characters like Galrauch fits nicely in a DLC slot as well. Given that GW and CA can just make new units I don't think there is any need for melee infantry chaos mortals on the roster.
  • DjauDjau Registered Users Posts: 9,954

    Djau said:

    Djau said:

    Literally make 1 tzeentch warrior model; add Chaos Warriors with 3 weapon variants and use that model for the Knights and the Doom Knights.

    Fixes maybe 60-70% of the roster issues; and makes it actually a vaguely acceptable standard...

    If CA added Chaos Warriors, that would be fine.

    However, is it possible that their roster functions just fine without the Chaos Warriors? That potentially CA did not add them for a reason?
    Bigger question is...did CA leave them out for the Lord Packs as a way of letting the player decide if they want to use Warriors or not.

    Cause Tzeentch is unlikely to get any new Daemons added beyond the Changebringers and thats just one unit. Tzaangors can push a single DLC; which means we have one LP where we essentially have to go to Mortals. I doubt more variants of Pink or Blue Horrors would be looked on kindly. We already have the Horrors, Screamers, Flamers, etc.

    Tzeentch in 40k or AoS has no new non-Hero/Lord/LL level Daemons barring Brimstone Horrors but thats a swarm unit anyway.
    I do think people are really tunneling on warriors implemented as mass infantry here. At most you need 2 DLC per monogod (8 halves of a DLC, before including things like WoC, Empire, Kislev, and Cathay is a substantial amount of additions) and representing mortals in forms other than line infantry is quite doable. We know mortals are on the table, just that GW and CA were not interested in heavily armored plodding infantry being in the list. Going mortals and adding WoC infantry are not necessarily the same thing.
    The other options are Tzaangors and Cultists; that at most takes up two slots in one lord pack or one in two lord packs. Tzeentch already has two kinds of knights.

    Basically, at LP1 or LP2 they're going to have to make Warriors and Chosen. Probably one-handed weapon, no shield and with bound spells.
    What are you defining as a slot? Tzaangor units could take 3 to 4 if we're also including hero and lord options. Infantry, airborne ranged and then a single entity as a hero or lord feels like we haven't hit any redundancy.

    From WoC you could pull a unit of Aspiring Champions as a base for a small super elite unit of Mortal Warriors with bound spells and auras (Sorcerer Coven as a name, though you could just call them Chosen I suppose), a Fatemaster (basically doomknight hero which acts as a body guard, name is just a placeholder), the MVB, and a Sorcerer lord for another 4 options without having to make things up or dig particularly deep.

    I don't see how warriors and chosen as they are implemented in the WoC roster would be necessary to fill a second lord pack. Target number is 5 generic units plus a lord and out of 10 units around 8 are pretty easy pulls. If legendary heroes are on the table then characters like Galrauch fits nicely in a DLC slot as well. Given that GW and CA can just make new units I don't think there is any need for melee infantry chaos mortals on the roster.
    A full LP with nothing but Tzaangors may be called 'cheap'. Something like this looks more viable.

    LP1:
    LL: Vilitch
    Lord: Daemon Prince
    Hero: Champion
    LH: Changeling
    Unit1: Acolytes
    Unit2: Chaos Warriors
    Unit3: Changebringers
    Unit4: Firewyrm
    Unit5: Giant Chaos Spawn

    LP2:
    LL: Engrim
    Lord: Chaos Lord
    Hero: Tzaangor Shaman
    Unit1: Tzaangors
    Unit2: Chosen
    Unit3: Warpfire Dragon
    Unit4: Mutalith Vortex Beast

  • Spellbound55Spellbound55 Registered Users Posts: 1,311
    Djau said:

    Djau said:

    Djau said:

    Literally make 1 tzeentch warrior model; add Chaos Warriors with 3 weapon variants and use that model for the Knights and the Doom Knights.

    Fixes maybe 60-70% of the roster issues; and makes it actually a vaguely acceptable standard...

    If CA added Chaos Warriors, that would be fine.

    However, is it possible that their roster functions just fine without the Chaos Warriors? That potentially CA did not add them for a reason?
    Bigger question is...did CA leave them out for the Lord Packs as a way of letting the player decide if they want to use Warriors or not.

    Cause Tzeentch is unlikely to get any new Daemons added beyond the Changebringers and thats just one unit. Tzaangors can push a single DLC; which means we have one LP where we essentially have to go to Mortals. I doubt more variants of Pink or Blue Horrors would be looked on kindly. We already have the Horrors, Screamers, Flamers, etc.

    Tzeentch in 40k or AoS has no new non-Hero/Lord/LL level Daemons barring Brimstone Horrors but thats a swarm unit anyway.
    I do think people are really tunneling on warriors implemented as mass infantry here. At most you need 2 DLC per monogod (8 halves of a DLC, before including things like WoC, Empire, Kislev, and Cathay is a substantial amount of additions) and representing mortals in forms other than line infantry is quite doable. We know mortals are on the table, just that GW and CA were not interested in heavily armored plodding infantry being in the list. Going mortals and adding WoC infantry are not necessarily the same thing.
    The other options are Tzaangors and Cultists; that at most takes up two slots in one lord pack or one in two lord packs. Tzeentch already has two kinds of knights.

    Basically, at LP1 or LP2 they're going to have to make Warriors and Chosen. Probably one-handed weapon, no shield and with bound spells.
    What are you defining as a slot? Tzaangor units could take 3 to 4 if we're also including hero and lord options. Infantry, airborne ranged and then a single entity as a hero or lord feels like we haven't hit any redundancy.

    From WoC you could pull a unit of Aspiring Champions as a base for a small super elite unit of Mortal Warriors with bound spells and auras (Sorcerer Coven as a name, though you could just call them Chosen I suppose), a Fatemaster (basically doomknight hero which acts as a body guard, name is just a placeholder), the MVB, and a Sorcerer lord for another 4 options without having to make things up or dig particularly deep.

    I don't see how warriors and chosen as they are implemented in the WoC roster would be necessary to fill a second lord pack. Target number is 5 generic units plus a lord and out of 10 units around 8 are pretty easy pulls. If legendary heroes are on the table then characters like Galrauch fits nicely in a DLC slot as well. Given that GW and CA can just make new units I don't think there is any need for melee infantry chaos mortals on the roster.
    A full LP with nothing but Tzaangors may be called 'cheap'. Something like this looks more viable.

    LP1:
    LL: Vilitch
    Lord: Daemon Prince
    Hero: Champion
    LH: Changeling
    Unit1: Acolytes
    Unit2: Chaos Warriors
    Unit3: Changebringers
    Unit4: Firewyrm
    Unit5: Giant Chaos Spawn

    LP2:
    LL: Engrim
    Lord: Chaos Lord
    Hero: Tzaangor Shaman
    Unit1: Tzaangors
    Unit2: Chosen
    Unit3: Warpfire Dragon
    Unit4: Mutalith Vortex Beast
    You're lord packs are too large at 8 and 7 there. You can cut Chosen and Chaos Warriors from that while still being over the expected numbers. I'll agree that an entire pack of Tzaangor would be cheap (though you not including Skyfires is very strange given they serve a role important to the roster than none of the other units you selected cover), but my point is that there isn't a dearth of units to draw from while passing over the mortal infantry.

    Personally I doubt we'll see units like changebringers and firewyrms (redundant to my mind). Giant Chaos Spawn I'm also a bit iffy on with the MVB being present, but even cutting 5 units from your lists we're only 2 short, with an easy slot for Skyfires and meaning we'd need a grand total of one new unit. The idea that monogod lord packs are going to be hard to fill with units doesn't seem well supported. GW and CA can be picky with their choices and aim to support the initial rosters play style rather than moving in a hordes of chaos direction.
  • DjauDjau Registered Users Posts: 9,954
    edited October 2021
    Skyfires are an AoS unit; so I didn't include them. 4/5 is fairly normal units wise for LPs.

  • Spellbound55Spellbound55 Registered Users Posts: 1,311
    I guess I can see the logic there but I doubt a unit in AoS and 40k would be off limits. They'll get a different name no doubt but if we get bird Tzaangors we're getting some on discs with bows. Regardless the point stands, though I actually under counted your first LP putting the number at 9 and 7. Avoiding CW and Chosen would be easy if GW wanted it and the lack of warriors at launch suggests GW doesn't view them as important to the monogod faction.
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USARegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 23,133
    There are no charlemagnes in Warhammer. Thread closed.
    "The two most common things in the universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
    "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin/Mark Twain
    “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”–George Santayana, The Life of Reason, 1905.

This discussion has been closed.