40K Battle Report: Chaos Epidemus Combo Vs. Fatecrusher Daemons

Frankie and Will battle it out in one of our first 6th ed test games.

Frankie is using what will most likely become one of th emost powerful combos of early 6th ed: Plague Marines and Epidemus, while Will tries out his Fatecrusher Daemons in 6th ed.


About Reecius

The fearless leader of the intrepid group of gamers gone retailers at Frontline Gaming!

18 Responses to “40K Battle Report: Chaos Epidemus Combo Vs. Fatecrusher Daemons”

  1. Avatar
    Son Of Dorn July 5, 2012 7:02 pm #

    Since Wound Allocation seems to be a continual speedbump, check this out. Hopefully it helps out a bit. 🙂


    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 7:32 pm #

      Yeah, I read that, good stuff! I liked it a lot.

      • Avatar
        Son Of Dorn July 5, 2012 11:03 pm #

        I play my first game tomorrow and I know it’s everyone’s number one concern for pacing. Gonna try and implement what Hulksmash says and see how I do 🙂 Though, being without a rulebook, I might be spending time looking up other things 😛

        • Reecius
          Reecius July 6, 2012 11:22 am #

          Let us know how Hulk’s system works, I am curious as I have not gotten to try it, yet.

  2. Avatar
    Shinkaze July 5, 2012 8:07 pm #

    What kind of beer was that on the right?

    And what kind of beer was the terrain made out of? : )

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 8:15 pm #

      Haha, you notice a trend!

      The Keg Terrain is made out of Heineken mini kegs, the drink the guy is holding, I don’t know what type of beer it is, actually (if it even is beer, looks like it, though).

  3. Avatar
    Benji July 6, 2012 1:37 am #

    I know it doesn’t really fit with the theme of the list but with closest allocation I wonder if a lash prince/sorcerer would be a better tool these days.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 6, 2012 10:30 pm #

      I think that is a very good argument. Lash is going to be such a useful tool, especially with all of the infantry I think we will be seeing.

  4. Avatar
    mercutioh July 6, 2012 5:00 am #

    6th has layered in some interesting tactical decisions that weren’t there in 5th. Not that I am the gaming expert by any stretch but I found myself thinking….Why didn’t Frankie zoom that DP all the way to the backlines and drop a template and vector strike on the crushers as he went overhead?

    • Avatar
      hyv3mynd July 6, 2012 8:30 am #

      CSM DP’s aren’t FMC’s as per the CSM FAQ, just jump MC’s so no vector strike. This is because CSM wings are significantly cheaper than other wings.

      • Reecius
        Reecius July 6, 2012 11:20 am #

        Yeah, we noticed that too, after the fact. Thanks for pointing that out.

  5. Avatar
    D-ManA July 6, 2012 11:40 am #

    Was this the first time the two guys playing 6th ed.? We played 1750 for our first and it took us a little under 2hrs to play with going back and forth with the rulebook. Wound allocation didn’t take that much longer than before for us.

    For the nurgle list maybe he should think about taking the DP from the Daemon codex so it can be a flying monsterous creature.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 6, 2012 1:56 pm #

      Yeah, we caught that, too. The CSM DP doesn’t actually fly.

      I think that was WIll and Frankie’s second or third game? Plus we were tired, had been up late going through the new rules.

  6. jy2
    jy2 July 7, 2012 12:59 pm #

    We thing to note here is that by RAW, while the Tally can give every follower of Nurgle Noxious Touch, CSM Nurgle troops and plaguemarines cannot benefit from it as they are not daemons. The only units able to benefit from Noxious Touch in the CSM codex are DP’s, Possessed CSM, obliterators, summoned daemons and any chaos vehicle with the daemonic possession upgrades (as defined by the GK FAQ).

    • Avatar
      joe drache July 7, 2012 1:15 pm #

      shut it down jy2, get that s#$@ outta this dojo frankie.

    • Avatar
      white925 July 7, 2012 5:35 pm #

      That is a good point I agree with you and disagree at the same time. The question becomes what is noxious touch? is it wounding on a 2+ or is it a deamon wounding on a 2+?

      I agree with you because of the wording in the chaos deamon codex saying that the Deamons close combat attacks wound on a 2+ i mean its pretty straight forward but something that needs to be addressed because everyone with mark of nurgle gains noxious touch so again I ask what is noxious touch?

      • jy2
        jy2 July 8, 2012 5:21 am #

        The discrepancy is due to the authors not having to worry about chaos daemons and CSM allying at all in 5th edition. Well, 6e just brought a whole new dynamic in playstyle with allies and they probably didn’t forsee this happening (or maybe they did but decided not to do anything about it). In any case, it’s probably better to discuss with your opponent beforehand on how you guys want to play it.

        But yeah, it’s weird that every unit gains the power but not all have the ability to use it. It reminds me of the whole nemesis doomfist for the dreadknight back in 5th edition. Back then, the NDF was supposed to double his strength but because the dreadknight was not a dreadnought, then he didn’t benefit from it. RAI they were probably meant to be able to use the special rule, but RAW-ise is a grey area.

        • Reecius
          Reecius July 8, 2012 12:40 pm #

          Good point, Jim. I think you are right in this case although it is a really muddled rule. I think, as you said, it will come down to individual TO’s and the INAT FAQ to settle this.

Leave a Reply