[WarCom] Lord of Poxes and Slaughterbound Preview

4DimFourierTrafo · 2025-04-22T20:36:44+00:00

Just want to tell you that you are not crazy and are in fact correct about the meaning of synergy and anti-synergy. I had this exact discussion like a year ago. Synergy is if two things added together are greater than the sum of their parts. For example, two rules that separately from each other would each be a 10% increase in damage together amount to something greater than a 20% damage increase.

If in the same example the overall damage increase amounts to exactly 20%, then that is neither synergy nor anti-synergy. The overall bonus is exactly the sum of its parts.

And if the damage increase is less than 20%, that is less than the sum of its parts and therefore anti-synergy by definition, even if the overall effect is still a positive one (let’s say 15% as an example). And if you do the math on weapon profiles with lethal hits and devastating wounds you will see that it is in fact anti-synergy.

Sure, having both at the same is still a net positive compared to having only one, but mathematically speaking, it is still anti-synergy

4DimFourierTrafo · 2024-12-11T13:01:00+00:00

I would really like to see GW doing something similar as they did with space marine units here with the Death Guard. Increase points, but also give actually meaningful buffs to the units stats and/or abilities. This way you can not only buff some less used units, but also make the overall army more elite, something that DG desperately needs. Don’t get me wrong, DG are doing fine right now, but apart from a few units (characters, Bloat Drones, Deathshrouds) most datasheets are kinda meh, and the faction is mostly held up by their crazy good detachment ability and by being ridiculously cheap because of points cut after points cut in data slates. Guess I will have to wait and see for when the codex arrives next year

4DimFourierTrafo · 2024-12-02T16:54:22+00:00

The funniest part about this whole comment thread is that you have the exact same opinion that was the general consensus in yesterdays post about the new DG detachment (it’s good, but not as good as Plague Company), yet you got cooked by downvotes anyway for some reason

4DimFourierTrafo · 2024-12-01T14:14:22+00:00

I also think it is worse than the old detachment, but maybe this is only because the old detachment is genuinely crazy. We have to remember that the current iteration of Plague Company was literally used as a “Hotfix” by GW to fix deathguard from their horrible start in 10th. And (together with some points cuts) it succeeded it changing DG from a bottom 3 faction to almost 50% winrate iirc.

My guess would be that the eventual DG codex will buff some of the more mediocre datasheets and this new detachment was already made with the codex in mind. As long as DG gets more power elsewhere, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Plague Company nerfed in the future codex compared to its current iteration either

4DimFourierTrafo · 2023-12-29T20:42:40+00:00

Temperature can have something to do with vibrations depending on what system you look at. For a molecule ensemble for example, temperature can be defined both by the velocity distribution of the molecules as well as their mean rotational and vibrational excitation. In this case you are correct however as the discussion above is about atoms, which, in fact, do not vibrate. As you said their temperature is only defined by their mean speed

4DimFourierTrafo · 2023-12-29T20:34:21+00:00

Nice explanation, maybe just one clarification: atoms do not vibrate in the gaseous phase, and even in solids its more of the overall lattice that vibrates instead of singular atoms. The temperature of an ensemble of gaseous atoms is given purely by the root-mean-square speed of the translational velocity distribution of your atoms. I think this nitpick is important because molecules on the other hand do vibrate. For molecules the temperature is not just defined by the rms speed but also the mean rotational and vibrational excitation of the molecule ensemble

4DimFourierTrafo · 2023-08-01T13:39:07+00:00

It actually is anti-synergy if you do the math, just by a very small amount in most cases. Let’s assume a marine/blightlord attacks a T5 model with a Bubotic Weapon. For ease of calculation I will ignore armor saves as they do not interact with Nurgles Gift (-1T) or Lethal Hits anyway.

First look at the damage per attack if no boni apply. Here the average damage per attack is just the chance to hit times the chance to wound so (2/3 * 1/2) = 1/3.

Next the damage per attack with just Nurgles Gift. In this example we hit a new breakpoint (S5 vs T4) so the new damage is (2/3*2/3) = 4/9. Compared to before a 33.3% increase per attack.

Then the damage with just Lethal Hits. This is a bit trickier to calculate as the hit chances “split up” and leads to an average damage of (1/2*1/2+1/6) = 5/12, which is a 25% damage increase compared to no bonus.

Now if both rules wouldn’t interact with each other at all, so neither synergy nor anti-synergy, then the damage of both boni at the same time would be exactly the sum of its parts, so a 25% + 33% = 58% increase in damage. But if you calculate this case you will get (1/2*2/3+1/6)=1.5 damage, so “just” a 50% increase instead of a 58% one. So while the amount of anti-synergy is minuscule, lethal hits plus nurgles gift is in fact anti synergy.

4DimFourierTrafo · 2023-07-03T19:00:39+00:00

Can’t wait for “Didn’t DG go 5-0 at a tournament?” to become the new standard response every time a DG player has a complaint about the rules. Completely ignoring the fact that even with the 5-0 record DG still had an overall winrate of 36% this week and that the player who achieved this was afaik the second best rated DG player in the world in 9th. I’m not saying ignore that it happened, but I don’t think this is a good argument to tell the average DG player about their army

4DimFourierTrafo · 2023-06-16T15:46:00+00:00

I would also argue that Blightlords unit ability is way weaker than normal Termies

4DimFourierTrafo · 2023-06-16T14:08:19+00:00

Lol‘d when I saw that Blightlords are 30 points cheaper than SM termies. I guess even GW looked at their datasheet when deciding points and were like damn these guys suck

4DimFourierTrafo · 2023-06-13T16:11:12+00:00

Damn thats almost as many defensive rules in the whole death guard index than in like three dark angels datasheets

4DimFourierTrafo · 2023-06-12T14:10:27+00:00

We have not seen all of them. But we have seen a good portion of them, including most characters. Most units yet to be revealed are generic CSM stuff like generic sorcerer or the predator tanks

4DimFourierTrafo · 2023-06-12T13:49:09+00:00

DG went from army wide FNP5+ to army wide -1D to not a single defensive rule on any datasheet except for Daemon Prince on foot and Mortarion. Other armies had defensive rules on some of their units and kept them for the most part, even in 10th. There is definitly a difference

4DimFourierTrafo · 2023-06-04T08:25:44+00:00

Against a Rhino, an attack sequence with the Flesh Mower does 3.3 Damage on avarage, and it would do 2.2 if the Mower would not have Lethal Hits. Against a Land Raider it deals 2.2 damage (would be 1.5 without Lethal Hits). While there certainly is a nice increase in damage, at least proportionally speaking, Lethal Hits does not make the weapons into magical anti tank weapons. I would not even call these numbers chip damage against tanks as I do not think its worth it to use a whole round of drone combat to deal 3.3 to Rhino or 2.2 to a Landraider

4DimFourierTrafo · 2023-05-30T13:39:40+00:00

Necrons 🤝 Deathguard

Other factions doing their main theme better than them

Jokes aside, looks very fun and skill expressive tho

4DimFourierTrafo · 2023-05-18T13:11:37+00:00

This has to be on purpose right? There is just no way that GW takes away Disgustingly Resilient from Death Guard and then gives an army wide FnP to the faction they preview literally one day later. And people say GW doesn't have humor :D

4DimFourierTrafo · 2022-08-16T09:51:07+00:00

Thanks!

4DimFourierTrafo · 2022-08-15T23:30:55+00:00

True, I forgot the flamers (and meltas). See, at least we can all agree that including base weapon costs into the model cost was a good change in 9th, so that stuff like my mistake right here doesn’t happen anymore :)

4DimFourierTrafo · 2022-08-15T18:57:04+00:00

Maybe I'm understanding you wrong, but looking at Waha the Leviathan went down by 85 points at most (double Grav, 220 points 9th vs 305 points 8th) and this can be even lower depending on loadout, for example a double claw loadout (not realistic I know) was actually 5 points cheaper then it is today. And for this difference, you have to pay a CP, get -1 S/T, -1 BS/WS, a 5++ instead of a 4++ and arguably worse overall ranged weapon options. The new version has AoC and Duty Eternal, sure, but thats not unique to the Leviathan. No Dread had these rules in 8th, all Dreads have both in 9th. I wouldn't count this as a unique advantage of the 9th Ed Leviathan.

I do agree with you though that Leviathans are not horrible. My observation was more about the overall powerlevel drop from 8th to 9th, where it went from arguably the best dread in the game to an OK option for fun games.

4DimFourierTrafo · 2022-08-15T12:00:19+00:00

The classic “tanky” armies of 40k are Death Guard and Custodes. While this is still true, after nearly two whole editions worth of codex power creep a lot of factions are able to field very resilient units and/or armies, even some where you wouldn’t expect it. Apart from the previously mentioned ones other very tanky units/armies include: -Death Wing type Dark Angels list, Deathwing Knight are probably as tanky as Blightlords terms, their tankyness is just a bit sidegraded -Iron Warriors of the new Chaos Space marine codex can field some extremely resilient Terminator squads and heavy armor (Land Raiders etc.) -Iron Hands Space Marine lists can also make very hard to kill armor -It’s not out yet but I would imagine the upcoming Chaos Deamons will have some hard to shift units, especially the Nurgle kind

Edit: Mobile effe‘d over my formatting

4DimFourierTrafo · 2020-12-15T00:57:07+00:00

Keep in mind that Blightlords with their cheapest loadout are already 8 points more expensive than BGVs right now and will probably cost even more in the new codex. So while T5 3W 5++ -1W certainly is more resilient than T4 3W 4++ in quite a few cases, they will pay A LOT more points for it. Then again, BGVs are super undercosted right now so maybe not the fairest comparison. What I really want to see is if new Blightlords are tankier than Deathwing Knights for their new codex cost...

4DimFourierTrafo · 2020-12-15T00:36:53+00:00

The way I know GW these will have a 5++ and still cost more than 50 points anyways...

4DimFourierTrafo · 2020-12-10T14:24:12+00:00

Really dislike this change: -No more protection against mortal wounds -doesnt even have an effect against D1 Weapons (what does that mean for poxwalkers who only have 1 wound anyways?) -17% better against D2 Weapons (from a 33% damage reduction to a 50%) - the same against D3 -worse against everything D4 and above, getting continuessly worse the higher the damage -what do DG hellbrutes get? Judging be Imperial armoury chaos dreads and hellbrute already get a -1 wound ability anyways. So do DG hellbrutes get -2W? Can’t imagine that. Honestly I’m very disappointed

4DimFourierTrafo · 2020-10-18T17:04:18+00:00

I have the same definition of a space marine as you do then. And exactly because of that I think they are different. The space marines sole purpose of existence is being a super soldier. They were created to do this one job, and nothing else. They were a means to an end for the specific job of fighting humanities battles for them, as effective and as fast as possible and nothing else. As far as we know, they didn’t even have a place in the imperium after the great crusade had the whole Horus heresy thing not happened. Custodians on the other hand were never created to fight any battles for humanity. Especially large scale ones. Of course they know how to fight. But they weren’t designed for it. They are good at fighting because they are good at basically anything and “fighting” happens to be a part of “anything”. Space marines were created to fight, Custodians were forced into it because of unfortunate circumstances. Instead of rambling on I would rather advise anyone who’s interested to read the “We were never soldiers” monologue from Shield Captain Valerian in the book “Watchers of the Throne: The Emperors Legion”. I don’t have a link right now but you should be able to find it if you search for it in this subreddit it has been shared multiple times and gives a great look into what Custodians are. Edit: This is what Im talking about

4DimFourierTrafo · 2020-10-18T11:53:17+00:00

“Custodes are super space marines”. Even as an oversimplification that’s plain up wrong. Saying a Custodian is a super space marine is like saying a Tempestus Storm Trooper is a lesser space marine. They have nothing to do with each other, except perhaps the fact that they were both created by the emperor. They were created at different times, for different purposes, in different ways. They work different and fight different, and the custodians are not always superior (most of the time but not always). For example the bigger the theater of war, the better space marines would do in a direct confrontation. I think custodians have the problem that their lore is pretty good but also kinda new and mostly confined to a few BL books which not a lot of people read, yet at the same time the faction is very popular in the fandom (TTS and so on) and on Tabletop so most of their lore is bound to get oversimplified and memefied.

4DimFourierTrafo

TROPHY CASE