# Bloodletters or Daemonettes?



## Dragon2439 (Jun 6, 2009)

Alright my fellow chaos daemon players, I have a question for you all. Which is better do you think? Daemonettes or Bloodletters?


I have used both in a few battles, but I am having trouble deciding which one is better so I would like to know what the community at large believes.


----------



## Inquisitor Einar (Mar 6, 2009)

Daemonettes ofcourse! They're the Sexeh Wuns! :biggrin::so_happy:


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

Fantasy or 40k? Really can't answer properly till you answer this question. However in 40k daemonettes far outclass bloodletters for 3 reasons. Higher initiative to the point where it will be rare that anything will strike before them. 1 more attack also makes them more versatile since it adds up to a extra 10 attacks for a 10 model strong unit which makes all the difference when combined with rending, and their ability to get to the enemy faster (Charge bonus more likely). Finishing of the many reasons daemonettes out pace the new Bloodletter is the fact that daemonettes actually count as having frag, and defensive grenades this alone makes them 3X more useful then Bloodletters since the only survivability advantage Bloodletters have is +T which makes little difference considering they will loos 3+ models before they can strike in CC do to the fact that at least 25+% of the map should be covered in terrain, something a decent opponent will use to cripple any of your attacks.


----------



## ninja skills (Aug 4, 2009)

I have found it all depends who your fighting, anything in power armour gets crushed by bloodletters but when your facing numbers deamonettes are you best friend. 

if you don't know who your facing take one large unit of one type (15+) and a smaller unit of the other

but personally i prefer bloodletters


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

LukeValantine said:


> Fantasy or 40k? Really can't answer properly till you answer this question..


does the fact its in a 40k section really not give you a big giant neon signed clue?


----------



## Concrete Hero (Jun 9, 2008)

Winterous said:


> In CSM it can be gotten away with, but not in CD. (bar tally lists)


And all Tzeentch lists! Those can work really well.

As for the opening question:

Both are a little flimsy... Out of the Four troop choices available I would say these 2 are the worst. But with Bloodletters slightly above Daemonettes.

Using Daemonettes isn't easy, they're incredibly soft and will drop like flies even if Fateweaver is present. Sure they can hit pretty hard and have assault grenades (A precious commodity for the Daemons), they usually tend to get ripped to shreds and hit with painfully reduced numbers. If you're going to take them, don't take units smaller than 15.

Bloodletters again, aren't easy to use effectively. You want to deepstrike close to avoid getting stormed by fire before you can assault, but can't assault the turn you DP in. More often than not the enemy will charge them just to prevent furious charge, which is devastating.

Again, Bloodletters are soft, T4 with a 5+ inv? No thanks. And the lack of assault grenades really hurts these guys, if I knew I'd be facing Letters I'd hole up in cover and watch them struggle. 15+ Is also a great number for these guys, anything less and they'll become ineffective fast.


Honestly, I usually only ever take PB's as troops, amazing at holding objectives. Horrors are my second choice, but Flamers have proven to be much more effective and useful even at half unit size.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

Concrete Hero said:


> Using Daemonettes isn't easy, they're incredibly soft and will drop like flies even if Fateweaver is present. Sure they can hit pretty hard and have assault grenades (A precious commodity for the Daemons), they usually tend to get ripped to shreds and hit with painfully reduced numbers. If you're going to take them, don't take units smaller than 15.
> 
> Bloodletters again, aren't easy to use effectively. You want to deepstrike close to avoid getting stormed by fire before you can assault, but can't assault the turn you DP in. More often than not the enemy will charge them just to prevent furious charge, which is devastating.
> 
> Again, Bloodletters are soft, T4 with a 5+ inv? No thanks. And the lack of assault grenades really hurts these guys, if I knew I'd be facing Letters I'd hole up in cover and watch them struggle. 15+ Is also a great number for these guys, anything less and they'll become ineffective fast.


Daemonettes, I really like them.
They're an interesting unit, which is quite easy to reach combat with, and do heaps of damage for their cost.
Given, they're fragile as a china doll (kinda what they look like), but if you DS them next to cover and run in then you've got a great save for that first volley.


Bloodletters are arguably the BEST melee unit in the game.
They're ridiculously powerful, and not particularly costly.
Their only fallback is that they're fucking hard to use properly.

Given enemies clumped close together, you can put a screen of Horrors or Plaguebearers in front of them, and then charge past them once the fire is gone; but that really doesn't help their situation much.


----------



## Concrete Hero (Jun 9, 2008)

Winterous said:


> Daemonettes, I really like them.
> They're an interesting unit, which is quite easy to reach combat with, and do heaps of damage for their cost.
> Given, they're fragile as a china doll (kinda what they look like), but if you DS them next to cover and run in then you've got a great save for that first volley.
> 
> ...



Deepstriking near or next to cover is a _lot_ harder than people give it credit for, unless your using icons (which admittedly, you should be (but even if you are, Warp Bleed can kick you in the nuts)). The chance to scatter straight into the cover or miles away can leave the unit unprotected and soft as ever. And 4+ Cover is hardly a great save especially when your T3 

I've found a pretty good way of deploying Bloodletters is behind a unit of Bloodcrushers holding an icon. The Crushers will give the Letters a cover save and provides your opponent with two targets that can both ruin his day.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

I use both, in the same list!
If people say 'you shouldn't mix from different gods because they don't like each other and it isn't fluffy' then they have totally failed to grasp the basic premis of what Chaos is! :threaten:
Think about what Chaos is for a moment.
In abstract terms then: Is it orderly? no; Is it regimented? no; Does it follow logic? no.

The most and truest Chaotic army is one that mixes all the warp entities together.

Bloodletters are great because of the power weapon attacks, but accompany them with Daemonettes and you can hurt things like Wraithlords and C'tan. The Daemonettes also almost always strike first because of their high _ score and the offensive and defensive grenade effect.
So, use them both and pair them up. Early strike from the Daemonettes to reduce numbers a bit, followed by simultanious strikes from the Bloodletters vs MEq - or in many cases hitting first as well. Generally very killy against most light and heavy infantry (even TEq can be overcome very quickly)._


----------



## Trevor Drake (Oct 25, 2008)

Okay, now that we have gone WAY off topic here people, some without contributing to the OPs original question, lets get this going in the right direction again.

Daemonettes are nice on paper, and some people know how to use them effectively. The Bloodcrusher idea is good, and works for either, but I prefer to leave the ladies at home. They are just too flimsy in the long run.

Bloodletters get a boost in CC, and thats it. They are just barely a little less squishy, but not as much, and require a finess all their own. They can be used a little easier, and it would have been nice if they retained their armour save from before, if that had been so I would always use them.

Really, Plaguebearers and Horrors are the best way to go. Plaguebearers are dead tough, and with a 5++/4+ FNP, the most surviveable of the units out there. Perfect for Icons, and can bog enemies in CC while your other units move forward.

Horrors fill a void that is shooting in the Chaos Daemon army, and can do it well, and have that nice 4+ save. They are just as squishy as daemonettes, but atleast they know how to stay out of CC.

This is my two cents on the matter, and please people, this is the Tactics Forum. If you want to discuss Fluff, take it to the Fluff Forum.

-Trevor D


----------



## TattooedGreenMan (Nov 4, 2008)

Concrete Hero said:


> Deepstriking near or next to cover is a _lot_ harder than people give it credit for, unless your using icons (which admittedly, you should be (but even if you are, Warp Bleed can kick you in the nuts)). The chance to scatter straight into the cover or miles away can leave the unit unprotected and soft as ever. And 4+ Cover is hardly a great save especially when your T3
> 
> I've found a pretty good way of deploying Bloodletters is behind a unit of Bloodcrushers holding an icon. The Crushers will give the Letters a cover save and provides your opponent with two targets that can both ruin his day.


Hey I did that yesterday with a mono-Khorne list. That tatic work very well considering that one unit of crushers was fielded with Skulltaker and the other with a Herald of Khorne all decked out. Brilliant, brilliant I tell you! (Sorry been watching the Emperor's New School on Disney). But seriously I have never used the Daemonettes but was putting together a Khorne/Slaanesh list with the fleet and higher int and extra attack the Demonettes would soften up the enemy and you could come in with the Bloodletters and clean up the mess.


----------



## Someguy (Nov 19, 2007)

A clarification: this is the tactics forum, for fuck's sake. 

If you want to whine about stuff other than tactics and tell people they should only use 25% of their army list at a time so their force matches your favorite fairy tale, then this is not the place to do that. This is the place to discuss tactics. Apologies for any confusion on this matter.

Multiple useless posts culled.

Back on topic, Daemonettes and Bloodletters aren't very good at killing the enemy and they die, so they don't claim objectives. In an army list stuffed full of units like blood crushers, greater daemons, daemon princes, soul grinders and flamers, you should have the ability to kill stuff. You need your troops to get objectives, which is something that only plague bearers really do well.

My experience of playing against daemons rather than with them has lead me to think that all the lesser daemons are pretty weak against a decent opponent. Daemonettes are the weakest of all for sure, but I know that plague bearers won't kill any of my guys, or even try to. I can charge horrors with any unit I own and expect to win. Blood letters should not have left their armour at home, because they are way too pricey for a model with a 5+ save.

Consequently the successful strategy seems to be to have a few units of plague bearers for troops, though not very large units, and have your HQ, elite and heavy units actually fight the battle.


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

Well considering what the two units are best at: assault, I would say of the twoDaemonettes come out on top. Eventhough the are not resilient in the least. They not only will go first before most opponents, the have a good number of attacks (that are rending), AND they have the chance to take down Wraithlords, C'Tan as stated above, but they also have the chance to take down vehicles. So taking several units with icons and thrusting them forward will serve the purpose of what they excel at quite nicely.


----------



## Dallas_Drake (Jan 26, 2009)

I agree with pretty much everything said here, especially Concrete Hero.

I want my troops to hold objectives, neither Bloodletters or Daemonettes can do this in any real way. They are both hard to use & die incredibly fast. I use Plaguebearers and Horrors, then let my elites & MCs do the HtH killing.

However, that said, I do think that large units (12+) that come down via Icons in the second wave can be really mean. The idea of bringing them down behind Crushers or Plaguebearers to get the save is a great use. In my opinion Bloodletters are stronger than Daemonettes (at this point I have to say that for me some things are fundamental in 40K - one of these is that Strength trumps Initiative any day!) plus with their Furious Charge & power weapons you're getting a born MEQ murdering unit. Daemonettes lack punch as their low strength doesn't IMO get ballanced by their high initiative & rending is meh.

Bottom line, by all means you can take either but don't use them as troops, use them as 2nd wave mopping up units. Remember, cover saves are fundamental to their survival, I see too many players drop them down in the open & get murdered by rapid fire etc.

Dallas


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

Since the topic is either Bloodletters or Daemonettes I thought Id point folks to a very clearly explaining post...
Skcuzzlebumm has a very good explanation on the fact here http://www.heresy-online.net/forums/showthread.php?t=44170
which defo is something folks should read!

I must say I agree fully with him. Sure them babes are a bit weaker, but that really doesnt matter much if you dont get shot more then 1 time, right?:grin:

Then there is the small detail called "looks", and specially the 6th ed Daemonettes(which is the ones I use) win that race by aeons:good:


----------



## Dallas_Drake (Jan 26, 2009)

MaidenManiac said:


> Since the topic is either Bloodletters or Daemonettes I thought Id point folks to a very clearly explaining post...
> Skcuzzlebumm has a very good explanation on the fact here http://www.heresy-online.net/forums/showthread.php?t=44170
> which defo is something folks should read!
> 
> ...


Some good points made (especially the overkill aspect). However, when would Tactical Marines ever charge Daemonettes? I think it's useful to crunch the maths on these things & it does look like Daemonettes have the edge when they're charged, but Skcuzzlebumm should also factor in which of the two units would be more likely to survive being double tapped by bolters too as that's more likely against C:SMs.

Dallas


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Hrm. For once on a topic on Daemons, I have nothing to say. In fact, I'm still trying to work out which unit works best for myself. 

It does appear that Scuz is on the right track though. Daemonettes have multiple advantages over Bloodletters and really only one large disadvantage - a low Toughness value. Fortunately enough though, T3 sucks a lot less when you have a cover save. Try to avoid getting hit by flamers or massed amounts of bolters and you should do okay. A lot of people are more worried about the multiple angry Monstrous Creatures rampaging about anyway, so it's entirely possible that you'll be able to sneak your Daemonettes into combat with a juicy target.

Katie D


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

Dallas_Drake said:


> Some good points made (especially the overkill aspect). However, when would Tactical Marines ever charge Daemonettes? I think it's useful to crunch the maths on these things & it does look like Daemonettes have the edge when they're charged, but Skcuzzlebumm should also factor in which of the two units would be more likely to survive being double tapped by bolters too as that's more likely against C:SMs.
> 
> Dallas


Lets pretend you play against CSMs instead and the Marines happen to be Berzerkers instead? They will charge(since they really cant do much other things) and end up with roughly the same results. Or Assault Marines. Or that its turn 5 and them babes sits on an objective, cleverly placed so you must charge them in order to contest it?

There are _lots_ of scenarios where (insert random type of) Marines needs to charge Daemonettes if you play properly:shok:


----------



## Le Sinistre (May 9, 2008)

All this said is true. I use both of them. Daemonettes at 10-12 unit sizes, and letters at 14-15. Why? Your enemy likes to ignore the fact, that nettes are dying faster.  He thinks: ooo, big size of letters, once they come in, they will kill me! And then, they usually total ignore the nettes.  
The two units can be also used in sinergy. Let the nettes come in, and get stuck in CC (usually, I use this tactic against SM bikers, who go in cover...). Then the letters come in. So, you have lost maybe 2-3 nettes in cc (since you need 6-s to wound, but this is also a rending), but your letters can kill the rest, since it's no more the first round of combat, and even they went through terrain, they won't loose the high I. 
This works with all small unit sizes with high T. Played it against nurgle marines and plague marines in cover sitting in an objective. My opponent didn't liked it. 
What also can be used with letters: you give them an icon, and set them in the second wave. If the dice gods get angry, and you roll a 1 or 2 to your preferred wave, then drop the letters in the face of the enemy. Sure thing, he will try to kill them, but so he won't shoot your other things. If even only one of them will survive (try to get the icon holder alive!), then you can drop your MC-s, or your elites next to them. So, you get lost mostly 1 squad (exept the icon holder, who can still get the objective, or move on, and act as icon tansporting squad), you still have an ignored troop... And after a run in the lust turn, look at your opponents face, when he remembers: yes, there was one troop left... And now, he is claiming an objective...


----------



## maniclurker (Jun 12, 2008)

@Concrete Hero:
A 4+ save is better than a 5+ save... deep striking and running into cover is a fantastic idea if the situation is beneficial for that.

@darklove:
Noone was talking about fluff, but since you brought it up... no, regardless of what chaos is, it's not really chaos when seperated by the 4 gods. Hate/war, death/decay, change/magic, sex/extremism... that seems pretty clear cut to me. And no, the Gods have never, ever, EVER, worked together well. They all pretty much HATE each other with a passion, some more than others. GW dumbed things all up with the daemon dex. Bringing a mixed force really isn't fluffy in any classic sense.

@OP:
Well, seeing as how you want it to be between thirsters and nettes... thirsters. 2 words... power - weapon.


----------



## Wolf_Lord_Skoll (Jun 9, 2008)

I'd honestly say I'd use Deamonettes. They are simply a far more flexible unit. They don't have to worry about cover or getting charged by alot of units, they strike before pretty much anything and have more attacks. Sure they lose the power weapons, but Rending kinda makes up for some of that.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

maniclurker said:


> @darklove:
> Noone was talking about fluff, but since you brought it up... no, regardless of what chaos is, it's not really chaos when seperated by the 4 gods. Hate/war, death/decay, change/magic, sex/extremism... that seems pretty clear cut to me. And no, the Gods have never, ever, EVER, worked together well. They all pretty much HATE each other with a passion, some more than others. GW dumbed things all up with the daemon dex. Bringing a mixed force really isn't fluffy in any classic sense.


You're crazy.
OF COURSE they work together, just because they hate each other doesn't mean they're stupid.
Tzeench especially, they try and use the armies of the other gods to their advantage, as a tool with which to batter the enemy over the head.
There's even fluff in the codex where multi-god armies exist!


----------



## maniclurker (Jun 12, 2008)

Yeah... that's new dex. You're correct that Tzeetch very frequently MANIPULATED others into doing his bidding, but that's nothing similar to COOPERATING with others. There are very, very few times when the gods would COOPERATE with each other. Regardless of how much the new daemon dex retconned fluff, I think it even mentions that in there.


----------



## Le Sinistre (May 9, 2008)

maniclurker said:


> Yeah... that's new dex. You're correct that Tzeetch very frequently MANIPULATED others into doing his bidding, but that's nothing similar to COOPERATING with others. There are very, very few times when the gods would COOPERATE with each other. Regardless of how much the new daemon dex retconned fluff, I think it even mentions that in there.


I opened a new thread in the fluff area, and also put my thougths in the first post.

http://www.heresy-online.net/forums/showthread.php?p=472637#post472637

Better, then spam the tactica section...


----------



## Grimskul25 (Feb 17, 2009)

IMO I'd lean more towards BL than Daemonettes because not only do I think their models look a lot better but the fact they ALL have power weapons and WS5 make them a level higher than Daemonettes since they'll likely hit most foes on 3's and can reliably wound most enemy units on 3's thanks to having Furious Charge, which in turn allows them to hit before most opponents. This added along with ignoring your opponent's armour saves makes them one hell of a killer unit. In comparison to Daemonettes who are only 2 points cheaper, a lot more fragile with only T3 and S3, along with the unreliability of rending; means that the only major thing going for them are their mass amount of attacks and high initiative (oh and frag grenades). But honestly is a huge amount of S3 attacks really going to make be that good? The majority of the units we face now have T4 or higher, baiscally making their attacks like lasguns, which admittedly need a LOT of shots to make a difference. Overall at least to me Bloodletters seem to have more of an advantage over Daemonettes in most terms especially since their points aren't that far apart I say go Bloodletters.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Le Sinistre said:


> Better, then spam the tactica section...


Thank you for taking the initiative to do that. I'm sure Someguy was just hovering over this thread waiting to smite us all.


----------



## maniclurker (Jun 12, 2008)

I think the only situation in which Daemonettes are better than Bloodletters is against monstrous creatures that are T9 or above. The rending would allow them to hurt it, while the bloodletters just clattered their power weapons against the beastie for no effect. However, there's just one problem with that... there are no T9 monstrous creatures. Maybe in Apoc you'd run into a situation such as this.


----------



## Le Sinistre (May 9, 2008)

So, you never have to assault into cover?  Good for you... This is the main problem, where letters have no answer... They can come only as second wave into a combat which takes part in cover, or they will strike at I 1...


----------



## Someguy (Nov 19, 2007)

Realistically, bloodletters can certainly assault into cover. They just lose some of their guys doing so. They can't assault totally freely into cover, but very few units can do that.

Last turn of the game, zerkers on an objective and you have to charge, you charge. You lost a bunch of guys but it needs to be done. The daemonettes would probably do about the same in the end, striking first but less effectively, and being more vulnerable to the reply attacks.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

The funny thing about this argument is the fact that in one to one combat statistically Daemonettes own Bloodletters, especially since fleet means they are far more likly to get the charge.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

LukeValantine said:


> The funny thing about this argument is the fact that in one to one combat statistically Daemonettes own Bloodletters, especially since fleet means they are far more likly to get the charge.


Daemonettes are better at combat in general, with higher WS and I than most units in the game; they also have 3 attacks each, which kicks ass.
Bloodletters hit really really hard, but aren't too good unless they charge, they tend to have a medium-ish model count but fall like flies, so they NEED to charge if they want to win with good numbers, that extra I helps a lot.


----------



## Le Sinistre (May 9, 2008)

Daemonettes have better I only... They have WS 4... Compared to marines, what you will face at most times, it's only normal... Greater problem is the S3...


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

Le Sinistre said:


> Daemonettes have better I only... They have WS 4... Compared to marines, what you will face at most times, it's only normal... Greater problem is the S3...


Oh, I thought it was 5 or something.
Anyway, the point is they are generally a magnificent unit.
But Bloodletters are ridiculously fucking powerful in their niche.


----------



## maniclurker (Jun 12, 2008)

It's all rock-paper-scissors... daemonettes might be able to own bloodletters in combat, but not SM, which the bloodletters will do easily.

A nightbring will own a squad of 5 TH/SS termies in combat, but will go down hard to a squad of sternguard. Those same sternguard will get raped by the termies.

Rock-paper-scissors...


----------



## Dallas_Drake (Jan 26, 2009)

I can see why people like Daemonettes but their T3 5+ & S3 often means they struggle when I personally use them. I know it's paper scissors stone but my opponents will target my Bloodletters over my Daemonettes, no matter what. I think in the end it's all about utility, sure both units have their pros and cons, but it's the fact that furious charging power weapons are going to be nasty to pretty much anything (GEQs, MEQs, TEQs), where as S3 rending is only really going to worry GEQs & slightly worry MEQs. Initiative is nice but Strength and Toughness are the stats that matter. 

Dallas


----------



## maniclurker (Jun 12, 2008)

Dallas_Drake said:


> Initiative is nice but Strength and Toughness are the stats that matter.


And don't forget about the power weapons!


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Dallas_Drake said:


> Initiative is nice but Strength and Toughness are the stats that matter.
> 
> Dallas


You try telling that to a Necron player and they'll wipe your face off! Initiative is more than just 'nice' to have. If you can get your hits in first and kill the enemy unit then they can't hit back. With around 40+ attacks on the charge that can all rend you are going to mash up most things and can even hurt things like Wraithlords and C'tan, which the Bloodletters can't normally do.


----------



## maniclurker (Jun 12, 2008)

Blood letters can hurt C'tan and wraithlords on the charge... I just wouldn't advise doing so.


----------



## Le Sinistre (May 9, 2008)

When they are charging... I don't know, why people think, letters will always charge... Since they come via DS, you need at least one turn till you can charge... In this turn, many things can happen. They can be charged easily...


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

It's best to just assume that you're going to get assaulted when using Bloodletters, I find. I think I've managed to assault with mine once in a meaningful way, and they still only managed to give as good as they got since they were fighting 13th Company Wulfen.


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

Skcuzzlebumm said:


> 16 Letters charging marines (assuming 10 basic marines + sergeant with BP/CCW) = 21 Kills
> 
> For the same points 18 Daemonettes charging marines = 8 Kills and then loose 0.66, say 1 Demonette in return.
> 
> ...


I supplied a link to this earlier in the post, but Im not sure that people actually red it. It seems like there are alot of guessing of lately here. These numbers more or less tells that Daemonettes will out-live Bloodletters most days of the week. And since they are troops that counts, very much infact:good:


----------



## Le Sinistre (May 9, 2008)

I only have and still have one problem with this... Most times, there won't be 10 marines.  I have read it, and would like to write the following to it:
At battles, where you try to controll objectives, the marine player will split the troops at 5 marines. So, you charge with 16 letters: overkill. You charge with 18 daemonettes: also overkill... You are standing there, and must take the returning fire. Here, the T4 is better, then the T3...

Being attacked by a marine player: he will never attack with ten marines. In most cases, ha either attacks with at least 20 marines (after a time, ha will know, what a letter and a nettes is stat wise). So, nettes are here a better choice. But let's see, what a clever marine player will do: he attacks with terminators... Most times, with assault terminators. So, he will have something with a 3+ invul save... Here, the nettes have some serious problem, and the letters are becoming better. 

I would still suggest to use both of them.  They work together very well.


----------



## Wolf_Lord_Skoll (Jun 9, 2008)

With the Terminators, I would say Deamonettes are better.
If he's charging, he will be using Assualt Terminators, and chances are, they are TH/SS Terminators. Against these guys volume of attacks is the key. Deamonettes do this better. Also, there might be some LC termies as well, in which case the high I pays off. Besides against S8, T4 is meaningless and against LC is not much better, if at all, than the higher I. Grenades and Fleet are wonderful bonuses as well.

To me, Nettes are the best choice for all-comers, with Bloodletters being better in a specific field, though with no assualt after deepstrike it makes it hard to pull this off.


----------



## Le Sinistre (May 9, 2008)

The T4 is only better against shooting.
The problem with termies is, that they are T4. So, nettes wound only at 5 or 6. Against 5, you have the normal save with termies. 
With letters, you have S4, so, you wound on 4+. And you "only" have the 3+ invul. The nettes may have the better I, but have not so good S... Would they have S4... But it's only a dream...


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

Le Sinistre said:


> The T4 is only better against shooting.
> The problem with termies is, that they are T4. So, nettes wound only at 5 or 6. Against 5, you have the normal save with termies.
> With letters, you have S4, so, you wound on 4+. And you "only" have the 3+ invul. The nettes may have the better I, but have not so good S... Would they have S4... But it's only a dream...


Remember that Letters have furious charge, so S5.
The difference between 2+ and 3+ though is 50%, a 3+ save is twice as likely to fail as a 2+.
So against TH/SS Terminators, the difference between Letters and Daemonettes is blurred a bit.


----------



## Le Sinistre (May 9, 2008)

Being charged, i ment. :wink: Bloodletters are mainly prior targets, just as crushers, or berzerkers in CSM. Everybody knows, that they have FC. So, it's better to charge them, then to be charged by them. :wink: But, obviusly, the best answer is to shoot them to hell.:grin:


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

Le Sinistre said:


> Being charged, i ment. :wink: Bloodletters are mainly prior targets, just as crushers, or berzerkers in CSM. Everybody knows, that they have FC. So, it's better to charge them, then to be charged by them. :wink: But, obviusly, the best answer is to shoot them to hell.:grin:


The Daemonettes are MUCH better off when you charge them.
Especially with S8, the toughness difference means nothing.
They have Defensive Grenades, don't have FC so the charge isn't essential, and 3 attacks each so the charge bonus is also less significant; charging with them increases their power by 1/3, whereas with Bloodletters it's probably closer to 4/5, it's hard to calculate because of FC.


----------

