|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on Mar 26, 2019 16:35:55 GMT
I would take that poll with a big grain of salt  I would tend to agree. The poll is based off of the opinions of only 14 members of the Chaos Dwarfs forum. That is a pretty small sample size and there was a fair degree of discrepancy even among those. So while to poll does offer some insight, it is far from an absolute. It is a fun bit of information though! Also the power level ratings will always in some part be intermixed with an individual's own play style, opposition, army composition and preferences. |
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on Mar 27, 2019 1:58:22 GMT
I would tend to agree. The poll is based off of the opinions of only 14 members of the Chaos Dwarfs forum. That is a pretty small sample size and there was a fair degree of discrepancy even among those. So while to poll does offer some insight, it is far from an absolute. It is a fun bit of information though! Also the power level ratings will always in some part be intermixed with an individual's own play style, opposition, army composition and preferences. Also I would guess very few games were played after the release of the faq and a lot of the opinions already acquired before it It shouldn't make too much of a difference though. The K'daai (Fireborn and Destroyer) got a bit better. The Hellcannon got a bit better. The Chalice of Blood and Darkness got a whole lot better. The Iron Daemon had a whole lot of clarifications, it might have gotten a bit worse. |
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Mar 27, 2019 12:51:07 GMT
I would tend to agree. The poll is based off of the opinions of only 14 members of the Chaos Dwarfs forum. That is a pretty small sample size and there was a fair degree of discrepancy even among those. So while to poll does offer some insight, it is far from an absolute. It is a fun bit of information though! Also the power level ratings will always in some part be intermixed with an individual's own play style, opposition, army composition and preferences. That is very true. In an elite army where more or less everything costs a bunch you choose what you like and stick to it. Also I would guess very few games were played after the release of the faq and a lot of the opinions already acquired before it I have in my, need to get queue, some ironsworn and then test them. I think stats are impressive just their points a little too much on the deep side 1 or 2 points less and they would have been staple in every CD army. I would have been happy with 18 point Ironsworn if they came with a 6+ Ward Save and a rule like Ironbreakers that they got a 5+ parry save to the front. That would have been awesome and helped protect them from artillery and stomps/thunderstomps. That would have been my ideal Ironsworn, truly elite and more durable than all forms of Infernal Guard to all attacks. |
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on Mar 28, 2019 5:56:15 GMT
Destroyer got a lot worse not better :/ think you underestimate how silly broken -1 to wound and T6 is. This is the sole reason people hates it as it made S4 and less didn’t even roll their hits as it was pointless. I have not seen this in another unit so far as minus to wound should not be a thing in the game. Fireborn got better though. Remember the to wound roll has no automatic wounds on natural 6s(as the to hit has) it checks a chart after modifiers been added. I think you are correct. For some reason I was sure that natural 6's counted as a successful wound no matter what, but I've looked through the BRB + FAQ and can't find any mention of it. Maybe that was from a previous edition or I just got some rules mixed up, in any event it looks like the pre-FAQ Destroyer would have been immune to attacks of S4 or less, as you pointed out. Lets take a look at how the pre and post FAQ Destroyer matches up.
Pre-FAQ Destroyer - mundane attacks suffer -1 penalty to wound
Post-FAQ Destroyer - successful mundane wounds must be re-rolled
Strength 1, 2, 3 or 4Pre-FAQ Destroyer: chance of a successful hit causing an unsaved wound = 0.0% (fully immune)
Post-FAQ Destroyer: chance of a successful hit causing an unsaved wound = 1.4% (71.4 hits to cause 1 unsaved wound)
Strength 5
Pre-FAQ Destroyer: chance of a successful hit causing an unsaved wound = 8.3% (12.0 hits to cause 1 unsaved wound)
Post-FAQ Destroyer: chance of a successful hit causing an unsaved wound = 5.6% (17.9 hits to cause 1 unsaved wound)
Strength 6
Pre-FAQ Destroyer: chance of a successful hit causing an unsaved wound = 16.7% (6.0 hits to cause 1 unsaved wound)
Post-FAQ Destroyer: chance of a successful hit causing an unsaved wound = 12.5% (8.0 hits to cause 1 unsaved wound)
Strength 7Pre-FAQ Destroyer: chance of a successful hit causing an unsaved wound = 25% (4.0 hits to cause 1 unsaved wound) Post-FAQ Destroyer: chance of a successful hit causing an unsaved wound = 22.2% (4.5 hits to cause 1 unsaved wound) Strength 8, 9 or 10
Pre-FAQ Destroyer: chance of a successful hit causing an unsaved wound = 33.3% (3.0 hits to cause 1 unsaved wound) Post-FAQ Destroyer: chance of a successful hit causing an unsaved wound = 34.7% (2.9 hits to cause 1 unsaved wound) So looking at the numbers, FAQ change was both good and bad. The current Destroyer actually does better against attacks made at S5, S6 and S7. The pre-FAQ Destroyer does better against attacks made at S1, S2, S3, S4, S8, S9 and S10. Of course being fully immune to S1-S4 attacks is pretty awesome (and a huge psychological advantage), but at those strengths you need on average 71.4 successful hits (that's hits mind you, not attacks) to cause an unsaved wound. So in reality, even the current Destroyer isn't too worried about such attacks... not as good as being immune, but still pretty negligible. The differences at all other strength levels are pretty close (one way or another). Keep in mind, that wasn't the only thing clarified by the FAQ. The Burning Bright toughness test was confirmed to occur only once every game turn (from turn 2 and onward) as opposed to potentially occurring every player turn. That is a fairly substantial advantage for the Post-FAQ destroyer, as it statistically cuts the chance of causing self inflicted wounds by half. As a result, I don't think that the overall effectiveness of the Destroyer changed that much due to the release of the FAQ. It made a difference in terms of player psychology, but little in terms of actual statistical difference. |
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on Mar 28, 2019 6:00:47 GMT
That is very true. In an elite army where more or less everything costs a bunch you choose what you like and stick to it. Also I would guess very few games were played after the release of the faq and a lot of the opinions already acquired before it I have in my, need to get queue, some ironsworn and then test them. I think stats are impressive just their points a little too much on the deep side 1 or 2 points less and they would have been staple in every CD army. I would have been happy with 18 point Ironsworn if they came with a 6+ Ward Save and a rule like Ironbreakers that they got a 5+ parry save to the front. That would have been awesome and helped protect them from artillery and stomps/thunderstomps. That would have been my ideal Ironsworn, truly elite and more durable than all forms of Infernal Guard to all attacks. I like that idea! That feels more in line with Ironsworn being a Special selection and better differentiates them from core Infernal Guard. As it stands, the Ironsworn don't feel particularly more elite, but rather just another option of standard Infernal Guard. |
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on Mar 28, 2019 14:14:27 GMT
I think that not being able to roll back affect the general idea and hate to it a lot. I also admit I am a little biased as my opponents always have magical weapons and magical cannons(Skaven and dwarfs) to totally nullify the reroll. Although those magical attacks would disable the pre-FAQ Destroyer's -1 penalty to wound just the same. The magical cannons are definitely a pain. At least your Destroyer still has the ward save to rely on (most monsters are not nearly so fortunate). |
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on May 25, 2021 5:27:42 GMT
The question is, does the presence of frenzy completely nullify all the many advantages the Destroyer enjoys over the Fireborn? Other great units in the game also have Frenzy and can still function quite well. Who would argue that WoC Skullcrushers are not a super potent unit? And Skullcrushers belong to an army with far less shooting than the LoA has. Well I think neither compare at all in power level of skull crushers True, but not in the direction that we (myself included) might have thought. Turns out, the K'daai Destroyer is far more lethal than the Skullcrushers. Over on the Lustria Online forum, we ran a tournament style math-hammer experiment pitting some of the best close combat units against one another, link here (the first post has a detailed explanation of our experimental model and a hyperlink to the final results, for those that wish to skip to the end). In short, each of the following 16 units were matched up against every other unit in the tournament: Skullcrushers of Khorne [Ensorcelled weapons]
K'daai Destroyer
White Lions of Chrace [Banner of the World Dragon]
Chaos Warriors [MoN, Halberds]
Arachnarok Spider
Demigryph Knights
Mournfang Cavalry [Ironfist, Heavy Armour]
Black Guard of Naggarond
Witch Elves
Har Ganeth Executioners
Hell Pit Abomination
Beasts of Nurgle
Savage Orc Big'Uns [AHW]
Chaos Trolls
Soul Grinder [MoN, Daemonbone Claw]
Hammers
A few of us picked the Skullcrushers as the favourites to win first place... 120 matches later, it turned out that we were wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by Horace on May 25, 2021 8:26:10 GMT
Poor Arachnarok Chaos Trolls huh? *takes notes* |
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on May 25, 2021 14:18:08 GMT
Nice! Don’t get me wrong, destroyer does massive damage IF it gets into combat. I just find that against a good player it will very seldom enter combat that often unless it is to make it overrun into the wrong direction. Perhaps, but then the exact same thing can be said of the Skullcrushers, Witch Elves and Savage Orcs, who all suffer from the same Frenzy. There are many fantastic frenzied units in the game that people deem to be very competitive choices. The Destroyer is as deadly or deadlier than them all, so Frenzy should not be considered to be a disqualifying feature. |
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on May 25, 2021 14:19:37 GMT
Poor Arachnarok Chaos Trolls huh? *takes notes* If you can mitigate the Trolls' stupidity and keep them away from flaming attacks, they are one of the single most cost effective units in the game. |
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on May 26, 2021 4:13:21 GMT
Perhaps, but then the exact same thing can be said of the Skullcrushers, Witch Elves and Savage Orcs, who all suffer from the same Frenzy. There are many fantastic frenzied units in the game that people deem to be very competitive choices. The Destroyer is as deadly or deadlier than them all, so Frenzy should not be considered to be a disqualifying feature. I do think that is army dependent though. In WoC you have 5-10 pushing units where all do massive damage and compete for attention. In LoA you have only the destroyer as the dorfs will “stand still” most of the time. So all redirects will be targeting the destroyer. I can only speak from my experience, against my good opponents it is not so good. 300p that is 50/50. Against average club “fluff” player is massively good and they more or less quit the game when it kills their whole army. Fireborns on the other hand are never broken good but always decent. It will need a larger amount of models though. I have not fielded two destroyers though. Probably together with a bale taurus prophet. WoC are pretty expensive, they rarely have anywhere close to 10 significant threats pushing forward. Plus, WoC have to push forward, Chaos Dwarfs rarely do (unless facing something like a shooty dwarf list). Also, Chaos Dwarfs can field several fast moving threats themselves. Between Destroyers, Fireborn and Bull Centaur (especially with Taur'ruk) they have so good mobile options. So we can play that game too. Overall, I think there are many ways of using it: - a pair of Destroyers as you mentioned (beautiful, beautiful carnage)
- with significant artillery fire you can force the enemy to come to you, use the Destroyer to protect your lines (every once in a while the burning bright rule will sting you, but it is fairly rare on the Destroyer)
- using a combination Destroyer, Fireborn and/or Bull Centaurs
- chaff clearing (Hobgoblin bow fire, Infernal Guard ranged fire, magic, small unit of bull centaurs, etc)
- mess with your opponent's battle lines/plans by taking advantage of the Destroyer's very impressive 18" march move
- pull your opponent's focus away from the rest of your army
I've seen quite a few YouTube battle reports, and the Destroyer is rarely included. The Chaos Dwarf player usually struggles, and when I look at the games, a Destroyer often could have turned the tides. Chaos Dwarfs need a good hammer unit or two just like most armies. Infernal Guard/Sworn are too slow and ineffective in many matchups to adequately fulfill the role. That leaves us with the two K'daai units and the Bull Centaurs. Of these three, only the Destroyer and Bull Centaurs can deal with armour. I'll ask you this, what other non-character units hit as hard as the Destroyer? |
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on May 26, 2021 14:50:10 GMT
WoC are pretty expensive, they rarely have anywhere close to 10 significant threats pushing forward. Plus, WoC have to push forward, Chaos Dwarfs rarely do (unless facing something like a shooty dwarf list). Also, Chaos Dwarfs can field several fast moving threats themselves. Between Destroyers, Fireborn and Bull Centaur (especially with Taur'ruk) they have so good mobile options. So we can play that game too. Overall, I think there are many ways of using it: - a pair of Destroyers as you mentioned (beautiful, beautiful carnage)
- with significant artillery fire you can force the enemy to come to you, use the Destroyer to protect your lines (every once in a while the burning bright rule will sting you, but it is fairly rare on the Destroyer)
- using a combination Destroyer, Fireborn and/or Bull Centaurs
- chaff clearing (Hobgoblin bow fire, Infernal Guard ranged fire, magic, small unit of bull centaurs, etc)
- mess with your opponent's battle lines/plans by taking advantage of the Destroyer's very impressive 18" march move
- pull your opponent's focus away from the rest of your army
I've seen quite a few YouTube battle reports, and the Destroyer is rarely included. The Chaos Dwarf player usually struggles, and when I look at the games, a Destroyer often could have turned the tides. Chaos Dwarfs need a good hammer unit or two just like most armies. Infernal Guard/Sworn are too slow and ineffective in many matchups to adequately fulfill the role. That leaves us with the two K'daai units and the Bull Centaurs. Of these three, only the Destroyer and Bull Centaurs can deal with armour. I'll ask you this, what other non-character units hit as hard as the Destroyer? Regarding woc? Yes that is my point, they have to push. Dp, bsb, 3 chariot, warriors, 2 chimera, 2 krushers = 10 great pushing units in 2500p  Regarding LoA Well there is the little problem. Points. You can’t field all that. I also missed you can’t field two destroyer either in normal game of 2500p. Bull renders are not a good unit point wise. They are over priced by at least 5-10p each. To bad because they look awesome. You want to field a lot of stuff but forget LoA is the most expensive army out there. It just is no room for everything you list. Regarding youtube I am not a big fan of what ifs as the whole game changes. So instead look at great players fielding destroyer against great players. Think there is almost none and that should make you question why at least. Regarding your last question let me answer with a question: how good is 330p chaffed away by a 30p kittycat? I said you can't field 10 significant threats. Your 3 chariots are good and useful, but not enough to draw the chaff redirection away from the Skullcrushers. In regards to LoA, I was simply listing a broad range of options and strategies; the combination of which will obviously depend on your points allowance. If you play at 2500 points, then obviously the 2 Destroyer build is not for you. I've virtually never played a game at anything other than 3000 points. That was the norm for my area, so my strategies and list building will differ accordingly. I've only run a few preliminary numbers on the Bull Centaurs, so there is much to learn about their effectiveness. From what I have read, reviews on them are mixed. Some people feel as you do, and others quite like them. However, if you are opposed to playing both Bull Centaurs and Destroyers, then you've really cut down your close combat options for dealing with enemy armour. GW Infernal Guard simply don't cut it in my humble opinion. Overcosted, too slow and not effective enough. In regards to battle reports, to each their own I suppose. I like to break apart and analyze actual games. Seeing a list that a "great player" fields is less useful for me unless I can speak with them about their choices and see how their decisions play out on the battlefield. Also, who are these "great players" and where are they found? One can only use the resources that are available to them. "Regarding your last question let me answer with a question: how good is 330p chaffed away by a 30p kittycat?" That's like saying how good is your 30p kittycat after a couple of Hobgoblins have shot it down and my Destroyer is neatly carving up your entire army? Everything can be redirected (Frenzied units admittedly more so than others), but that does not invalidate every non-chaff unit. Overall, after running the tournament/experiment, we've seen the Destroyer rise above other other 15 units as the clear and decisive winner (something none of us had predicted). Everyone over on Lustria Online was pretty damn impressed with its prowess. Like any other unit, it has weaknesses and counters. Everything in the game has a counter. To liken it to chess, in the LoA army the Destroyer is the queen. Sure she will be a big target, but damn she's beautifully destructive. All in all though, that's what makes this game of ours so interesting, fun and unique. If we all picked the same setups and strategies things would get pretty dull. |
|
|
|
Post by wilsonthenarc on Aug 15, 2021 17:41:06 GMT
I am preparing to start my Chaos Dwarf army in a few weeks.
This thread is great reading material. Thanks for sharing.
I feel like I need to read, re-read, and read again...
This is my homework before I start assembling anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on Sept 2, 2021 3:22:20 GMT
I am preparing to start my Chaos Dwarf army in a few weeks. This thread is great reading material. Thanks for sharing. I feel like I need to read, re-read, and read again... This is my homework before I start assembling anything. Welcome to the Chaos Dwarf club! Hashut's blessings upon you. I'm glad you are finding the thread of value. I should have some more data to add soon... data which should finally put this Destroyer vs. Fireborn issue to rest. Then the goal is to return to the thread topic at hand, and explore the relative performances of the Fireborn and Bull Centaurs. |
|
|
|
Post by NIGHTBRINGER on Sept 25, 2021 5:07:17 GMT
As promised, here is a breakdown of how the Destroyer and the Fireborn matchup against a field of the best close combat units in Warhammer.   The mathematical matchup breakdowns for each of our two units can be found here:  The Destroyer matchups can be sorted through via a hyperlinked index on the first page of the thread. The Fireborn matchups are scattered throughout and must be searched manually (although they will be found in the first few pages of the thread) Looking at the results, there is a very clear distinction in terms of performance, with the Destroyer easily coming out on top. The Fireborn simply have too much difficulty getting past high toughness and armour. Strength 5 just isn't enough with such a low attack count. Additionally, the Fireborn are also much more vulnerable to enemy high strength attacks than the Destroyer is with its T6. This difference is additionally magnified as both units force successful non-magical attacks that wound to be re-rolled. Lastly, the Fireborn's offense really begins to suffer as they take on casualties (which occurs fairly frequently as they only have 2 wounds each), while Destroyer remains consistent throughout. If the scores are tallied up according to the legend provided above, the final score works out as follows: - Destroyer = +24
- Fireborn = -3
This is not to say that the Fireborn are a bad unit, as this lineup is filled with some of the very best close combat units in the game. The Fireborn with their score of -3, end up somewhere in the middle of the pack, while the Destroyer sits comfortably in first place.
While the Destroyer's Frenzy can be used against it, the results clearly shows that it makes up for that weakness. There are far more ways to counter the Fireborn than the Destroyer.
![]() |
|
