Generic Daemons only for Undivided formations.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Poo

No pact for them

hello again, I've another question perplexing me.

Support formations, do they need to be of the same markings as your core formations? i.e. If i buy a khorne coven can I then purchase a formation of doomwings, or, am i stuck with Khorne/Undivided support?

Aligned Daemon Engines require a Coven of the same alignment. Undivided Daemon Engine formations can go with any core formation, regardless of alignment.

I'm fairly certain that non-Daemon Engine support formations are not restricted by any sort of core formation alignments.  So, a Tzeentch Coven could be used to provide a support slot filled by a Khorne Traitor Rough Rider formation.  However, I don't have it handy to confirm and might be mistaken.

_________________
Neal

A quick question (as this thread jogged my memory) - Factions. Is it basically that the LaTD all have an initiative of 2+ unless there are hated enemy within 30cm? So, if I had an all Nurgle LaTD they would all be 2+ initiative?
If this is the case, then surely it would be easier to give them a 2+ initiative and a -1 if hated?
Or have I got this ALL wrong (possible)?  

alakazam: Correct, they effectively all have a 2+ initiative most of the time, but it was deliberately phrased in the awkward manner due to Jervis' insistence that all special rules should be phrased as an advantage rather than a disadvantage if possible, so that if the player forgets to use the rule ingame he doesn't gain an unfair advantage.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

No, you've got it pretty much right. That's long been a point of controversy. The idea is that rules should be expressed in terms of bonuses rather than penalties if possible: that way players are penalised if they forget how their own army works rather than benefiting from forgetting the penalty. This is only sensible; knowing the rules for your own army is your responsibility and your opponent shouldn't lose out because you forgot something about your own troops.

However, although a good idea in general, it does make for a very odd and awkward rule in this particular case, and I gather quite a few people feel it would be a lot better if an exception were made.

_________________
"Good ale, the true and proper drink of Englishmen. He is not deserving of the name of Englishman who speaketh against ale, that is good ale."
- George Borrow

I agree with the idea behind the rule but I think it's been pretty clearly shown that it doesn't work.  It's a roundabout way of getting where you want to be and more importantly, doesn't really stop people from "forgetting a penalty."  You get used to it and just assume all your chaos troops are 1+/2+ (depending on whether you're CSM or Cultist) and then you "forget the penalty" anyway.

_________________
Neal