Audustum wrote: It's actual 14 and then 2 for each one of those 14 that's doesn't make it to the damage step. So if they all missed/failed to wound/were saved you'd get an additional 28 ontop of the 14 for 42 total.
Edited.
RAW I feel you are correct because you get to make 2 hits - but this is kind of stupid.
So I feel its going to get hard FAQed.
I'd expect either a cap (like 6/7 attacks), or you can't run with flails. Or something.
Octovol wrote: Interesting, competitive edge instead of precision blows on DLT razorflails? Anyone done the math for that? Seems like with 14 attacks 4-5 MW average + 2-3 regular would do more than just getting more attacks that inevitably get saved or dont wound.
If I remember correctly you get an average of 28 attacks with the combo. I've already seen it kill Gman, a 10man vet squad, and a Riptide.
It's actual 14 and then 2 for each one of those 14 that's doesn't make it to the damage step. So if they all missed/failed to wound/were saved you'd get an additional 28 ontop of the 14 for 42 total.
Im talking in a real world average where you hit on a 2+ wound on a 4+ etc.. not "if you miss blah blah"
Played my first game since codex drop against SM. While I have all the bells and Whistles I kept the relearning process simple 2 Archons 2 Succubi 50 Kabs 20 Wyches 7 Raiders 5 Mandrakes in 3 Patrols BH OR and CB Wyches. ( Raiders with 6 S8 attacks are sweet ) PGLs everywhere. I went first removing the only vehicle an Impulsor 5 Inceptors? Deployed as scouts and 3 eradicators in my first turn. =400pts. Game was called at the end of my second turn after the Wyches characters and boats all charged in. We have become the Necrons. We can take almost anything in our list and make a decent fight off it. SM no longer seem so fierce.
warmaster21 wrote: Is it ever worth sticking black lotus toxin on the shardnet/impailer to get a D3 succubus, if your most commenly playing against death guard?
It's definitely an option. If you were looking mostly at getting a weapon to D3 though, a Red Grief Succubus with the Blood Glaive might be better vs Death Guard. It's less restrictive in terms of detachment, and is +2 Str rather than the +1 you'd have with a Dark Lotus Toxin Shardnet.
Death Guard having a fair amount of T5 bodies, Str 5 possibly starts to look better than Str 4.
That said, nothing stopping you taking one of each!
Gotta love this codex. All aboard the Succu-Bus before GW take the wheels off!
warmaster21 wrote: Is it ever worth sticking black lotus toxin on the shardnet/impailer to get a D3 succubus, if your most commenly playing against death guard?
It's definitely an option. If you were looking mostly at getting a weapon to D3 though, a Red Grief Succubus with the Blood Glaive might be better vs Death Guard. It's less restrictive in terms of detachment, and is +2 Str rather than the +1 you'd have with a Dark Lotus Toxin Shardnet.
Death Guard having a fair amount of T5 bodies, Str 5 possibly starts to look better than Str 4.
That said, nothing stopping you taking one of each!
Gotta love this codex. All aboard the Succu-Bus before GW take the wheels off!
I was more in with just keeping with cult of strife as iv never really liked red grief, though their relic glaive is definitely a nice weapon. S5 on the shardnet is possible with +1 strength drug though the much weaker AP does hurt, not sure how useful the -1 no escape would be in comparison.
Cursed blade has caught me eye recently the more iv been looking at it, the loss of the supplment advantage for cult of strife would hurt but it has a nice daughters of khaine vibe to it which is nice (with the possible mortal wounds in melee)
Lots for me to think about. I used to run my DE the few times i played them with the last dex with a 1/1/1 of kabal (rose), cult (strife), and coven (custom), but with the homunculus no longer being able to take hex rifles has dampened my enthusiasm for playing cult. Been toying around with the new book of going either 1 detachment of obsidian rose and 2 of strife or trying out a pure wych force with lots of hellions and bikes...
Ah yes i forgot we're still abusing the absence of the word 'roll' in the description of competitive edge. Enjoy it while it lasts is all I'll say. Eventually it will become what it's supposed to be, which is 14 attacks, 9 don't damage so 9 more attack rolls, not attacks.
So lets say the inevitable FAQ has already hit, is razorflails, precision blows, adrenalight better than with competitive edge? 4.5 MW from 14 attacks, then another 2 from the re-rolls + any regular damage.
cursed blade is quite solid particularly when used with the units that really like to have strength drugs just getting that extra bump (hellions and wyches mainly). I think CB is one of the best wych cults for 'minimal investment wyching' - small squads, HQs without a ton of relic or trait consumption, random drugs on top of the strength boost that's guaranteed.
warmaster21 wrote: Is it ever worth sticking black lotus toxin on the shardnet/impailer to get a D3 succubus, if your most commenly playing against death guard?
It's definitely an option. If you were looking mostly at getting a weapon to D3 though, a Red Grief Succubus with the Blood Glaive might be better vs Death Guard. It's less restrictive in terms of detachment, and is +2 Str rather than the +1 you'd have with a Dark Lotus Toxin Shardnet.
Death Guard having a fair amount of T5 bodies, Str 5 possibly starts to look better than Str 4.
That said, nothing stopping you taking one of each!
Gotta love this codex. All aboard the Succu-Bus before GW take the wheels off!
As a non Drukhari player, going through all you guys have (reading the cdoex, reading the articles, etc.), and reflecting on how "anti meta" it all seems -you need lots of low strengh attacks for the infantry, as well as a way to destroy cheap transports from a distance, like tyranid Hive guads or smasha guns (if you can get LoSight), I can certainly see why GW would hit this codex with the nerf bat.
1- 2000 points lists seem like they are 2500 in terms of offensive projection.
2- cheap but efficient vehicules, cheap but efficient infantry, both useful in many aspects of the game (scoring engage, scoring primary, preventing fallback, anti tank weapons, lots of s4-s5 attacks, some 2 damage also, some MW stuff)
3- so many attacks for each infantry model...
4- glasscanon what ? 5++ on stuff that is relatively cheap, can hide in the desne 9th ed tables very EZ, come on...
5- Drazhar, who can single handedly deal with many high resistance threats, and can ride ina transport safely, then disembark and kill whatever needs killing. The boosted Succubi that can do more than 15 attacks once all is said and done
I really am not looking forward to face them, it doesn't seem fun at all, and this is the fist time a 9th ed codex does this to me... Perhaps it isn't as strong as it looks, we will see. We already see tourney results where 1st place and 5th place were taken by drukhari though, so... Sisters and ad mech and then supposedly orks are coming, so perhaps we will see counters to drukhari there. Of course I admit this is all very therotical, and I hope I am wrong about this.
warmaster21 wrote: Is it ever worth sticking black lotus toxin on the shardnet/impailer to get a D3 succubus, if your most commenly playing against death guard?
It's definitely an option. If you were looking mostly at getting a weapon to D3 though, a Red Grief Succubus with the Blood Glaive might be better vs Death Guard. It's less restrictive in terms of detachment, and is +2 Str rather than the +1 you'd have with a Dark Lotus Toxin Shardnet.
Death Guard having a fair amount of T5 bodies, Str 5 possibly starts to look better than Str 4.
That said, nothing stopping you taking one of each!
Gotta love this codex. All aboard the Succu-Bus before GW take the wheels off!
As a non Drukhari player, going through all you guys have (reading the cdoex, reading the articles, etc.), and reflecting on how "anti meta" it all seems -you need lots of low strengh attacks for the infantry, as well as a way to destroy cheap transports from a distance, like tyranid Hive guads or smasha guns (if you can get LoSight), I can certainly see why GW would hit this codex with the nerf bat.
1- 2000 points lists seem like they are 2500 in terms of offensive projection.
2- cheap but efficient vehicules, cheap but efficient infantry, both useful in many aspects of the game (scoring engage, scoring primary, preventing fallback, anti tank weapons, lots of s4-s5 attacks, some 2 damage also, some MW stuff)
3- so many attacks for each infantry model...
4- glasscanon what ? 5++ on stuff that is relatively cheap, can hide in the desne 9th ed tables very EZ, come on...
5- Drazhar, who can single handedly deal with many high resistance threats, and can ride ina transport safely, then disembark and kill whatever needs killing. The boosted Succubi that can do more than 15 attacks once all is said and done
I really am not looking forward to face them, it doesn't seem fun at all, and this is the fist time a 9th ed codex does this to me... Perhaps it isn't as strong as it looks, we will see. We already see tourney results where 1st place and 5th place were taken by drukhari though, so... Sisters and ad mech and then supposedly orks are coming, so perhaps we will see counters to drukhari there. Of course I admit this is all very therotical, and I hope I am wrong about this.
AdMech will already hit Drukhari like a ton of bricks and is well positioned to excel in a Drukhari age. We'll see if their Codex changes that. Deathwatch is also in good shape, among the Space Marines. GK seem fairly strong against them too based on preliminary results. No data yet but Drukhari likely fear heavy artillery that doesn't need LoS, so certain Imperial Guard lists have room to expand.
The big shift in most armies will be in loadout. Anti-elite infantry stuff was the go-to. When you're bringing that, your points efficiency against Drukhari is wasted. Elite infantry are a bad idea too as Drukhari trade up very well. Storm Bolters, Hurricane Bolters, high volume weapons are ideal here. Elite infantry will likely see a net benefit as TAC lists adjust to deal with a threat that isn't exclusively them.
As a former drukhari player I don't see anything OP in this codex actually.
I get they might be flavour of the month as drukhari are quite uncommon and people need to learn how to face them properly, but this codex looks pretty balanced compared to other 9th stuff. Drukhari were considered OP even in 8th when their codex dropped and then turned into oblivion pretty soon, as in fact they were never OP, just something new.
The "boosted succubi" is a perfect example of glasscannon as it's a melee-only unit that can unleash havoc but se can also be easily killed by 10 boyz. The same 10 boyz that will just scratch any SMHQ with some invuln. Take 10 bloodbrides, they have tons of attacks but in the end they're 120 points + upgrades for 10W T3 with 6++(4++ in combat). Super easy to wipe out.
warmaster21 wrote: Is it ever worth sticking black lotus toxin on the shardnet/impailer to get a D3 succubus, if your most commenly playing against death guard?
It's definitely an option. If you were looking mostly at getting a weapon to D3 though, a Red Grief Succubus with the Blood Glaive might be better vs Death Guard. It's less restrictive in terms of detachment, and is +2 Str rather than the +1 you'd have with a Dark Lotus Toxin Shardnet.
Death Guard having a fair amount of T5 bodies, Str 5 possibly starts to look better than Str 4.
That said, nothing stopping you taking one of each!
Gotta love this codex. All aboard the Succu-Bus before GW take the wheels off!
As a non Drukhari player, going through all you guys have (reading the cdoex, reading the articles, etc.), and reflecting on how "anti meta" it all seems -you need lots of low strengh attacks for the infantry, as well as a way to destroy cheap transports from a distance, like tyranid Hive guads or smasha guns (if you can get LoSight), I can certainly see why GW would hit this codex with the nerf bat.
1- 2000 points lists seem like they are 2500 in terms of offensive projection.
2- cheap but efficient vehicules, cheap but efficient infantry, both useful in many aspects of the game (scoring engage, scoring primary, preventing fallback, anti tank weapons, lots of s4-s5 attacks, some 2 damage also, some MW stuff)
3- so many attacks for each infantry model...
4- glasscanon what ? 5++ on stuff that is relatively cheap, can hide in the desne 9th ed tables very EZ, come on...
5- Drazhar, who can single handedly deal with many high resistance threats, and can ride ina transport safely, then disembark and kill whatever needs killing. The boosted Succubi that can do more than 15 attacks once all is said and done
I really am not looking forward to face them, it doesn't seem fun at all, and this is the fist time a 9th ed codex does this to me... Perhaps it isn't as strong as it looks, we will see. We already see tourney results where 1st place and 5th place were taken by drukhari though, so... Sisters and ad mech and then supposedly orks are coming, so perhaps we will see counters to drukhari there. Of course I admit this is all very therotical, and I hope I am wrong about this.
IMO, the biggest obstacles drukhari face currently in the meta are admech, Death Guard, and strangely Tau.
Death Guard have high toughness that Cult of Strife wych cult units with their masses of S3-S4 attacks will just bounce off of, hard-counter Dark Technomancers with Disgustingly Resilient, and also hard counter emerging meta units like Incubi and Hellions that have tons of D2 attacks. Fight last and autohitting overwatch are also Drukhari's least favorite two abilities.
with Tau, simply put drukhari do not like Overwatch at all and the current tau meta of FSE features many units that can just wipe drukhari units out with overwatch. Velocity Trackers as a standard upgrade for basically everything allows tau shooting to be quite deadly against the masses of units that FLY, and the fact that AP-1 is optimal against many Drukhari targets makes Tau weapon lists extremely happy - missile pods, ion weapons and pulse weapons are all extremely nasty against drukhari vehicles.
warmaster21 wrote: Is it ever worth sticking black lotus toxin on the shardnet/impailer to get a D3 succubus, if your most commenly playing against death guard?
It's definitely an option. If you were looking mostly at getting a weapon to D3 though, a Red Grief Succubus with the Blood Glaive might be better vs Death Guard. It's less restrictive in terms of detachment, and is +2 Str rather than the +1 you'd have with a Dark Lotus Toxin Shardnet.
Death Guard having a fair amount of T5 bodies, Str 5 possibly starts to look better than Str 4.
That said, nothing stopping you taking one of each!
Gotta love this codex. All aboard the Succu-Bus before GW take the wheels off!
As a non Drukhari player, going through all you guys have (reading the cdoex, reading the articles, etc.), and reflecting on how "anti meta" it all seems -you need lots of low strengh attacks for the infantry, as well as a way to destroy cheap transports from a distance, like tyranid Hive guads or smasha guns (if you can get LoSight), I can certainly see why GW would hit this codex with the nerf bat.
1- 2000 points lists seem like they are 2500 in terms of offensive projection.
2- cheap but efficient vehicules, cheap but efficient infantry, both useful in many aspects of the game (scoring engage, scoring primary, preventing fallback, anti tank weapons, lots of s4-s5 attacks, some 2 damage also, some MW stuff)
3- so many attacks for each infantry model...
4- glasscanon what ? 5++ on stuff that is relatively cheap, can hide in the desne 9th ed tables very EZ, come on...
5- Drazhar, who can single handedly deal with many high resistance threats, and can ride ina transport safely, then disembark and kill whatever needs killing. The boosted Succubi that can do more than 15 attacks once all is said and done
I really am not looking forward to face them, it doesn't seem fun at all, and this is the fist time a 9th ed codex does this to me... Perhaps it isn't as strong as it looks, we will see. We already see tourney results where 1st place and 5th place were taken by drukhari though, so... Sisters and ad mech and then supposedly orks are coming, so perhaps we will see counters to drukhari there. Of course I admit this is all very therotical, and I hope I am wrong about this.
We are glass, i am 100% know we are more glass now than we are before. We had 4++/6+++ and 6+++ on vehicles as well have other things that ALREADY HAS A 5++, we also only get the 5++ on turn 4 for non invul units like Incubi. Losing a FnP roll for a Invul hurt more than it helped, now it does help a late game, but units like Talos and Grotesques are boned. I don't even want to play those 2 units anymore at all, i have shelved them unless they go down 15% in points at least.
Drazhar is good but he comes at a heavy cost, he can no longer take a WL trait unless he is your WL, he also went up in points and without the WL trait for the points you are better off taking a Archon and Succubus.
I like us being a real Glass Cannon army again, i'm not complaining, it is what we should be.
Also we are not that cheap, a Venom is 75pts with 1 cannon, a Land Speeder Storm is 55pts, for 20pts more we get a -1/5++ but the LSS is also +1W and +1T that can also move 18" to our 16" and the Scouts can get out after it moves.
The Raider is 85pts base, many are taking it for a Transport first and Lance second, a Rhino will be 80pts, sure no fly and no 5++ but it is T7 and a 3+. While I do take 5-7 transports, almost every game no matter what 3 dies turn 1, b.c its still only 10 wounds with a 5++, it dies just as fast as Rhinos do. How do I know? B.c my SoB takes 3 Rhinos every game and if someone wants them dead, they die (its why I don't like Immolators, way to costly for too little use)
I also play Sisters and I can tell you they are as killy as DE, they just lack the speed, but they also have tougher units with a 4++/5++/6++ as well. Some of the BR Canoness can be as strong as most DEHQ's (No Competitive edge that is) I have killed a unit of 3 Outriders like it was nothing with a BR Canoness before for example.
DE are extremely good right now honestly b.c of Run and charge with fight last, and Wych Stratagems. You don't really even need HQ's if you have enough Reavers, Hellions, Wyches, and Incubi.
My over all experience and moving forward with DE as more of a comp setting; - My Comp lists are more and more just Wych detachments with Incubi and some Mandrakes. I like the Idea of DT for flamers and painful Lances (wounding a 2+ or 3+ vs T8 is really good), but I find myself only needing 3 units of them with 3 vehicles and the other 3-4 as Wych too is fine. I see no point in Kabals right now.
- I am also finding more and more I don't need Drazhar, with 2 Succubi, and 3 units of Incubi as well as all the Wyches and Hellions, i really don't see a point in Drazhar, I mean he is 135pts, that is 8 more Hellions i can get, thats 4 more MW's and 16 more 4++/-1 to hit wounds if I needed a tanky unit b.c CoS stratagems are insane. The first time you charge and kill a unit with 15 Hellions, give them a 4++, and -1 to hit, your opponent is going to hate shooting them with anything less than 2D, with the easy ability to multi charge and not take overwatch too. Super insane.
- My Problem is I want too many Wych things now, i want CoS but also a small Red Grief, and i want 20 CP to use on both lol. Taking Raiding Force for 14CP to start I feel is a must. 1 Free WL trait and relic, -2CP for another Relic/WL trait, start with 12CP, gain 1 start of turn and that feels comfortable.
- Finnaly, IDK what would be better for me yet, DT detachment or Dark Creed to make sure I always fight first and take away ObSec. With DT I have more reliable anti-tank and I can have extremely good OW, even a 5man Intercessor squad won't charge 2 DTLG's. So DT gives me counter charge protection, -2ap with 2D at range, its hard to pick. If Wych wasn't so good I would take both, but I can not sadly as I need 2 detachments for Wyches.
....but....talos and grotesques didnt lose their FNP. They traded a 5++ and 6+FNP for a 6++ (that later turns into a 5++ or turns into a 5++ as soon as you dunk on something with a cronos nearby) and a 5+FNP.
The breakdown of the math showing that Artists of the Flesh is ALWAYS more durable than old PoF and new PoF is usually more durable than old PoF is on a previous page of this tactica, I believe.
I would encourage you to give at least Talos a try. Grots are more of a coven version of Beefy Incubi now than the Brick unit they used to be, but Talos with new heat lances play amazingly well.
They used to be 4++/6+++ since turn 1 with PoF though, now they're much easier to kill without being cheaper, basically just 6++/5+++ for the most part of the game.
I think both Grotesques and Talos (especially them) are still legit units to consider since they're far from being bad, and the Cronos has been massively improved with the new codex.
Blackie wrote: They used to be 4++/6+++ since turn 1 with PoF though, now they're much easier to kill without being cheaper, basically just 6++/5+++ for the most part of the game.
I think both Grotesques and Talos (especially them) are still legit units to consider since they're far from being bad, and the Cronos has been massively improved with the new codex.
Haemonculus and Wracks are also arguably better.
Again, this is not true. You're applying old PoF to one side of your comparison without applying either new PoF or Artists of the Flesh to the new comparison.
There is a breakdown of this either in this thread or in the later pages of the previous thread showing all the mathhammer - old PoF is less durable against every weapons profile than new Artists of the Flesh, and is only more durable than new PoF against strength 8+ weapons. For obvious reasons. And either is better against all weapons once you get that 5++/5+FNP, which you can do early if you bring a cronos.
The only situations in which old PoF outperforms new Artists of Flesh and new PoF is weird unusual weapon profiles like S8 AP-3 damage 1 which I'm sure exists somewhere in some form but certainly isn't a normal weapon you'd expect to see fired at you.
@the Scotsman: what’s so strange about dark eldar having issues with tau? Our army has often had its hardest fights against a ridiculous gunline. You should’ve seen how laughably one sided it was in 7th. In those days it wasn’t a matter of beating tau but losing less badly against them.
flamingkillamajig wrote: @the Scotsman: what’s so strange about dark eldar having issues with tau? Our army has often had its hardest fights against a ridiculous gunline. You should’ve seen how laughably one sided it was in 7th. In those days it wasn’t a matter of beating tau but losing less badly against them.
I don't think the point was so much our history with Tau, more that in 9th, Tau have been performing poorly on the whole. They're an army that's perceived as needing help?
flamingkillamajig wrote: @the Scotsman: what’s so strange about dark eldar having issues with tau? Our army has often had its hardest fights against a ridiculous gunline. You should’ve seen how laughably one sided it was in 7th. In those days it wasn’t a matter of beating tau but losing less badly against them.
I don't think the point was so much our history with Tau, more that in 9th, Tau have been performing poorly on the whole. They're an army that's perceived as needing help?
That was my take anyway.
^this. Tau is basically the army that's solidly third or second from the bottom right now, generaly vying for that position with Guard, an army that is also a gunline but which 9th drukhari essentially shatters with no trouble.
Guard weapons trend towards being in the S8-S9 range with high AP and lower volume of fire, they have no way to improve hit rolls, and have no way to fall back and shoot, while Tau have the new Montka, retain army-wide overwatch, and have many more weapons in the S6-S7 AP-1 multidamage range. Theres also the fact that tau can field fairly few of the types of units that we can easily prey on (a typical tau list construction can have as few as 15 fire warriors) and really stack into unit profiles that we just hate facing up against, like W3 and W6 battlesuit units. Drones also work really really well against our usual ranged antitank weapons, except for Haywire, which doesn't work on Battlesuits anyway.
If drukhari became a common meta staple army (Which given the depth of their roster now and their historical popularity with competitive players, they very well could be) then I'd expect to see Tau rise up to at least midtier, if not see an unexpected spike in winrate if few people play them except for those who plan on piloting them to counter drukhari.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Denegaar wrote: Shooty armies are going to receive stupidly powerful guns, we'll have to adapt to them.
A couple days ago, we saw the improved Arc Rifle from AdMech. That thing is going to melt Raiders and Venoms. We can expect something similar to Tau.
Edit: For the ones of you that didn't see it
Spoiler:
interestingly, the only part of the improvement that either raiders or venoms have to care about is the improvement from d3 damage to 3. I guess the 6" of range too.
We're already T6, we don't care about AP greater than -1, and we don't have any units this thing wants to shoot that have a toughness higher than 6 so the "always 4+" rule doesn't do anything at all.
A plasma caliver with its current profile is a more threatening gun to drukhari - if my opponent fields the new improved arc weaponry, that's a good thing in my eyes.
I feel there are problems with Tau if you can't bring your whole army into them together. So if you throw 10 Incubi/Wyches in and they all die on overwatch... and then next turn you throw another 10 in and they all die on overwatch, you are sort of doing it wrong. Throw the raiders in first, have everything else follow.
I think if you go second its a game - like all matchups arguably - but if you go first, you really should dictate.
Its a similar story with Deathguard really. Incubi I feel still do a decent number on Terminators - even at damage 1 - but you need a lot of them to get a sort of critical impact. If they've got a unit of 5 Blightlords or Deathshroud (200-250 points) you can't run 5 Incubi (80) in and expect to do very much (or anything really). But if you run a 10 man squad with Drazhar's buff they should leave a considerable dent. The problem is big squads are expensive, and will tend to just be deleted like 5 man squads if ever caught out in the open. Exactly what the optimal size of a squad is probably still in flux.
Tyel wrote: I feel there are problems with Tau if you can't bring your whole army into them together. So if you throw 10 Incubi/Wyches in and they all die on overwatch... and then next turn you throw another 10 in and they all die on overwatch, you are sort of doing it wrong. Throw the raiders in first, have everything else follow.
I think if you go second its a game - like all matchups arguably - but if you go first, you really should dictate.
Its a similar story with Deathguard really. Incubi I feel still do a decent number on Terminators - even at damage 1 - but you need a lot of them to get a sort of critical impact. If they've got a unit of 5 Blightlords or Deathshroud (200-250 points) you can't run 5 Incubi (80) in and expect to do very much (or anything really). But if you run a 10 man squad with Drazhar's buff they should leave a considerable dent. The problem is big squads are expensive, and will tend to just be deleted like 5 man squads if ever caught out in the open. Exactly what the optimal size of a squad is probably still in flux.
yeah, and hopefully they don't have one of those dudes they always take with the guaranteed fight last ability, or those incubi/drazar are going to get put in the dumpster and be a wasted 130/160 points.
incubi dont do nothing in a death guard matchup, but they're going to be generally a liability.
Someone's posted up some more Tournament results that it seems Drukhari have done well in (First and Second places).
Looks like it was smaller event - 25 players or so, but definitely had some very solid players in attendance (TJ Lanigan took 3rd with a Chaos list for example).
the_scotsman wrote: Cool list. Wonder why only 1 dark creed transport though, seems worth to include 2.
My guess would be that that Dark Creed Venom is a delivery vehicle for Drazhar. The extra - LD penalty will obviously help with Tormentors.
Presumably then, he's gone for every transport where possible as Black Hand, as really Raiders are quickly becoming as much mobile gunships as transports for us now - BH's obsession will give that innate reroll they have on each of the Raiders Dark Lances.
My suspicion is he was looking to really exhaustively build around that - he's got very little else in the way of substantial shooting.
Tyel wrote: I feel there are problems with Tau if you can't bring your whole army into them together. So if you throw 10 Incubi/Wyches in and they all die on overwatch... and then next turn you throw another 10 in and they all die on overwatch, you are sort of doing it wrong. Throw the raiders in first, have everything else follow.
I think if you go second its a game - like all matchups arguably - but if you go first, you really should dictate.
Its a similar story with Deathguard really. Incubi I feel still do a decent number on Terminators - even at damage 1 - but you need a lot of them to get a sort of critical impact. If they've got a unit of 5 Blightlords or Deathshroud (200-250 points) you can't run 5 Incubi (80) in and expect to do very much (or anything really). But if you run a 10 man squad with Drazhar's buff they should leave a considerable dent. The problem is big squads are expensive, and will tend to just be deleted like 5 man squads if ever caught out in the open. Exactly what the optimal size of a squad is probably still in flux.
Nah, just Multi charge with reavers/hellions and use the CoS stratagem to make it so you can't OW against that unit. Even just Tying in 2 units stops a lot of OW as they have to be within 6" of each other.
Taus problem is they are 100% built with 8th in mind and has no help going into 9th, they need a 9th book, until then they are trash against us.
I've played against both Tau and Grey Knights and both were brutal games for me.
A single unit of broadsides was killing 3-4 units every turn. Tau may not be great against other armies, but if they bring a lot of sms, you're going to have a bad time. The high-yield missiles are perfect against our transports in terms of strength and not wasting ap while the sms just scoop up infantry squads left and right. If they keep them well protected, it's not easy to charge anything even if you can turn off overwatch for one charge.
lessthanjeff wrote: I've played against both Tau and Grey Knights and both were brutal games for me.
A single unit of broadsides was killing 3-4 units every turn. Tau may not be great against other armies, but if they bring a lot of sms, you're going to have a bad time. The high-yield missiles are perfect against our transports in terms of strength and not wasting ap while the sms just scoop up infantry squads left and right. If they keep them well protected, it's not easy to charge anything even if you can turn off overwatch for one charge.
We have a stratagem to turn off OW for 1 of our units, with Reavers, Hellions, and Wyches amble to turn 2 charge easily, its not hard. If you are taking limited vehicles and too much foot sure might be harder.
lessthanjeff wrote: I've played against both Tau and Grey Knights and both were brutal games for me.
A single unit of broadsides was killing 3-4 units every turn. Tau may not be great against other armies, but if they bring a lot of sms, you're going to have a bad time. The high-yield missiles are perfect against our transports in terms of strength and not wasting ap while the sms just scoop up infantry squads left and right. If they keep them well protected, it's not easy to charge anything even if you can turn off overwatch for one charge.
We have a stratagem to turn off OW for 1 of our units, with Reavers, Hellions, and Wyches amble to turn 2 charge easily, its not hard. If you are taking limited vehicles and too much foot sure might be harder.
I think it's pretty clear that he's not given that he mentioned how optimal missile pods are against our transports...which they are.
I would rather see basically any marine army across the table from me as drukhari in a competitive setting than tau, overwatch-ignoring stratagem notwithstanding. Just because I can have 1 unit in 1 area of the board ignore what is an army-wide benefit does not mitigate it entirely.
Worth remembering too, that the 'Overwatch ignoring' stratagem, is restricted. Pure CoS detachment required. So a good many Drukhari armies (probably mostly RSR flavours given how good CoS is), won't have access to it.
lessthanjeff wrote: I've played against both Tau and Grey Knights and both were brutal games for me.
A single unit of broadsides was killing 3-4 units every turn. Tau may not be great against other armies, but if they bring a lot of sms, you're going to have a bad time. The high-yield missiles are perfect against our transports in terms of strength and not wasting ap while the sms just scoop up infantry squads left and right. If they keep them well protected, it's not easy to charge anything even if you can turn off overwatch for one charge.
We have a stratagem to turn off OW for 1 of our units, with Reavers, Hellions, and Wyches amble to turn 2 charge easily, its not hard. If you are taking limited vehicles and too much foot sure might be harder.
I think it's pretty clear that he's not given that he mentioned how optimal missile pods are against our transports...which they are.
I would rather see basically any marine army across the table from me as drukhari in a competitive setting than tau, overwatch-ignoring stratagem notwithstanding. Just because I can have 1 unit in 1 area of the board ignore what is an army-wide benefit does not mitigate it entirely.
I literally just play Tau this week and a few weeks ago, had zero problems with them. Sure they will hurt but you only need 1 tun to shut down 2-3 units.
FYI the local "that guy" plays Tau and he 100% hates no escape and the CoS relic Agoniser, he was fluming at the mouth about how his large suits can't fly away b.c of a little net and whip lol.
lessthanjeff wrote: I've played against both Tau and Grey Knights and both were brutal games for me.
A single unit of broadsides was killing 3-4 units every turn. Tau may not be great against other armies, but if they bring a lot of sms, you're going to have a bad time. The high-yield missiles are perfect against our transports in terms of strength and not wasting ap while the sms just scoop up infantry squads left and right. If they keep them well protected, it's not easy to charge anything even if you can turn off overwatch for one charge.
We have a stratagem to turn off OW for 1 of our units, with Reavers, Hellions, and Wyches amble to turn 2 charge easily, its not hard. If you are taking limited vehicles and too much foot sure might be harder.
I think it's pretty clear that he's not given that he mentioned how optimal missile pods are against our transports...which they are.
I would rather see basically any marine army across the table from me as drukhari in a competitive setting than tau, overwatch-ignoring stratagem notwithstanding. Just because I can have 1 unit in 1 area of the board ignore what is an army-wide benefit does not mitigate it entirely.
I literally just play Tau this week and a few weeks ago, had zero problems with them. Sure they will hurt but you only need 1 tun to shut down 2-3 units.
FYI the local "that guy" plays Tau and he 100% hates no escape and the CoS relic Agoniser, he was fluming at the mouth about how his large suits can't fly away b.c of a little net and whip lol.
Trouble with a single anecdotal example like this though, is that you can't tell much from it other than you had a (no doubt well deserved) easy win.
There's a good chance you're a significantly better player than him (given we're dealing with 'that guy'), you could be rolling hot, while he cold, his list could have been awful that day, etc etc.
Likely what we need to do, is look at data from events as it comes in and just see how Tau vs Drukhari matches up as an average. It's still not perfect, but probably the best we're going do outside of our perceptions as individuals.
(I love that he got upset regarding No Escape though - that ticked me )
It cuts both ways doesn't it really? As much as we don't like to be shot by them, the one place Tau don't want to be is in melee - where we do our best work!
I figure (and this is just my opinion - I'm far from an expert), once we do get a couple of charges off (which is dangerous, more so than usual given their overwatch), the little fishies start to eaten alive quite rapidly.
But we have ways to stop OW and to use up their OW, it also might be b.c I play with 8 transports. But on turn 2 every game I have transports charging first. or a large hellion/Reaver/wych units using the stratagem to turn off OW. Sometimes (well almost always) I do both.
If you are playing minimum transports (3-4) i can see it being more of a problem. But when you have something like (spoiler) i had no problems.
OW and killing 1-2 transports is northing, then when they know you can re-ds a raider and get out of the raider with +1" re-rolling charges Wyches with Shardnets it also forces them to play differently as well.
PS the Wrack LG flamers with DT and DT Dis raiders wrecks.
IDK If i like DC or Lances better yet, the Lance wounding on 2+ is insane, but he made a couple invuls were the Discannon i took a MW or 2 sometimes but I got more wounds through. Its hard to say what i like better right now.
StrayIight wrote: Worth remembering too, that the 'Overwatch ignoring' stratagem, is restricted. Pure CoS detachment required. So a good many Drukhari armies (probably mostly RSR flavours given how good CoS is), won't have access to it.
Also Prophets of Flesh Relic (Vexator Mask) removes OW from one unit
StrayIight wrote: Worth remembering too, that the 'Overwatch ignoring' stratagem, is restricted. Pure CoS detachment required. So a good many Drukhari armies (probably mostly RSR flavours given how good CoS is), won't have access to it.
Also Prophets of Flesh Relic (Vexator Mask) removes OW from one unit
True! Good catch!
Though you're braver than me if you use a Haemonculi that way
so, for a wrackspam build - Prophets of Flesh or Obsessive Collectors custom coven?
Prophets gives you a solid second layer of protection that actually works fairly well against wracks (protecting them against S5 (so you don't have to all be clustered around the haemonculus) S6 and S7, and gives you Urien's nice +ld+S aura. Plus he counts as a master haemie letting you bring haemoxytes.
However, Obsessive Collectors allows you tremendous meme potential with the Wrack Streets Back Alright setup of multiple Cronos, Obsessive, and Twisted Reanimator warlord trait
The obvious pairing if going custom would be an offensive trait to add a bit more bite to your wracks, who do only wound vehicles on 6s and that is a slight problem.
Masters of Mutagens is technically the most powerful but doesn't help your vehicle problem. a big ol squad of wracks with experimental creations can flail their way through a vehicle using Torturer's Craft but being S4 doesn't help much in other contexts. Splinterblades is kind of between the two - not quite as good as MM against non-vehicles, not quite as good as Experimental vs vehicles, so maybe a good compromise.
I love the 'Wrack streets back' concept. No idea what would be the best in practice, but I think that certainly sounds the most fun!
For me, I see them more as a really useful group of 'anchor' units for us - they certainly lack killing power compared to Cults. But then the game isn't won in 9th simply by being able to hurt the other guys units more, staying power can be just as effective.
I'd love to see how a list like that plays.
I'd guess MM is your best offensive option, while using Raiders for anti vehicle duty? That latter aspect certainly seems to be showing up as a pattern in many of these winning lists, which makes perfect sense as we're taking them anyway in almost any conceivable list, alongside the considerable upgrade to Lances.
We have a stratagem to turn off OW for 1 of our units, with Reavers, Hellions, and Wyches amble to turn 2 charge easily, its not hard. If you are taking limited vehicles and too much foot sure might be harder.
I did have 3 cult of strife units for turning off overwatch and 6 vehicles, but since I went second you can guess which transports were killed before I got to move in the first turn. That meant the only surviving cult of strife unit in my first turn was a single succubus. Took her a couple turns to get up the field on foot. She was able to charge turn 3 and tie up the broadsides and a character who was too close to them which meant the end for them. At that point the broadsides had already had 3 turns to fire and killed several times their points worth though. Worse still, I tried to support the succ in the combat with some other units and was told that even if I charge a unit that's already in combat then they can still supporting fire with the nearby units. So yes, the succ made it in but I still lost another unit in the attempt.
I think it's broadsides in particular that will be the tough matchup when they use Tau. I was not as concerned or impressed with the other units he fielded like the riptides. The player I was up against is planning on going up to 2 units of broadsides now after seeing their performance. There's no hiding from 24 sms shots and 24 hymp shots coming from a single unit that can get reroll to hit and reroll to wound.
The issue with these discussion often revolves around two massive factors that get glossed over.
1. Mission deployment
2. Terrain
If T'au are drawing range and beads on that much of your army turn 1, you probably are not using what I would consider a properly terrained table OR you really got called out and caught misdeploying.
I have to agree with Amish here. It's not that T'au weapons are not good for downing our things, they are. But those units are very slow or immobile and HYMP and the like require LOS.
In order for them to bring a list with enough of the weapons your mentioning they really do end up with a slow as feth army that is garbage on mission objectives.
The DE army should be out maneuvering ans scoring and when engaging ti should be on their terms, or sacrificing units they expect to lose already.
Playing DE is like a knife fight, you have to expect to get cut somewhere in order to deliver your own blows, so feed them none vital parts while you play the mission.
I also agree with him admech is a much bigger issue. They basically auto hit with more hits then shots they started across much of the army and they have incredible bombers (seriously broken at 130 pts) as well as auto detonation which REALLY punishes MSU builds. With their book just around the corner I have a feeling the codex creep trend is going to cast a shadow on are army (I'm actually fine with that, I hate playing the popular army lol)
Playing DE is like a knife fight, you have to expect to get cut somewhere in order to deliver your own blows, so feed them none vital parts while you play the mission.
I like this as an example of how we play. Colourful and insightful
Honestly, many of these discussions are somewhat moot right now. This very moment in time, we're almost certainly the army to beat and the matchup that most other people are likely to dread. There really isn't a situation that we don't have the tools to deal with, and frankly many of our units are so good at what they do, it may be somewhat more challenging to build a list that didn't have a good chance of winning a given game.
Saying that, it only takes for a heavy handed FAQ to drop, codex creep enhancing other factions, or simply the community starting to get used to how we play and building to counter us, for things to change rapidly. And none of those are necessarily bad things.
I think even the most optimistic among us are expecting the imminent FAQ to tone things down in several areas. Especially a certain Succu-build.
Yeah, I saw a person post a conversion on reddit of the new 35$ drazar miniature into a razorflail succubus and I'm just thinking 'man, wait for the FAQ at least..."
Playing DE is like a knife fight, you have to expect to get cut somewhere in order to deliver your own blows, so feed them none vital parts while you play the mission.
I like this as an example of how we play. Colourful and insightful
Honestly, many of these discussions are somewhat moot right now. This very moment in time, we're almost certainly the army to beat and the matchup that most other people are likely to dread. There really isn't a situation that we don't have the tools to deal with, and frankly many of our units are so good at what they do, it may be somewhat more challenging to build a list that didn't have a good chance of winning a given game.
Saying that, it only takes for a heavy handed FAQ to drop, codex creep enhancing other factions, or simply the community starting to get used to how we play and building to counter us, for things to change rapidly. And none of those are necessarily bad things.
I think even the most optimistic among us are expecting the imminent FAQ to tone things down in several areas. Especially a certain Succu-build.
It is always nice to read post like these, where a player acknowledges the OPness of his new shiny rules. I did the same when DA rules came out, anyway kudos to you. I think however GW hasn’t much used the nerf bat lately on new releases, drukari might be left off the hook until next CA or something. Perhaps indeed just the razorflail succubus will get FAQed because that thing is just total nonsense in terms of balance
In general I think were probably going to see points nerfs to
-wyches, back up to 12ppm provably as theyre actually worth that now
-incubi+drazar, both pretty nutty, I can see 18-20ppm incubi
-Hellions, feels very strange that a solid side-grade to reaver
-bump raider body up 5pts, bump dissie down 5pts
-succubus up 10-15, seems like shes at least as good as the other hqs if not better, weird to see her so cheap
I like how deadly everything is now, we actually feel like the glass cannons we should be, but some point nerfs are definitely warranted.
Nah they will not get any point changes. We are pretty glass, once other books gets updates and people learn how to play against us we will be solid but not dominating. Players needs time to learn our book to counter us.
It is always nice to read post like these, where a player acknowledges the OPness of his new shiny rules. I did the same when DA rules came out, anyway kudos to you. I think however GW hasn’t much used the nerf bat lately on new releases, drukari might be left off the hook until next CA or something. Perhaps indeed just the razorflail succubus will get FAQed because that thing is just total nonsense in terms of balance
Thank you.
I think discussion becomes pointless if we're not able to be honest within it. While there's a lot of elements of 40K debate that boil down to opinion there's much that doesn't also. A fair chunk we can look at data or the pure mathematics of how a given unit does in situation x or y.
That said, I'm still often wrong (as can be seen in this thread on more than one occasion )
GW being a little 'reluctant' of late to hand out adjustments (the DAFAQ is a good example of people having expected a range of balance changes, and actually there being very little), is a concern somewhat. I think most of us want an army that sits around that 50% win rate, where we feel like it was us, that caused a win or loss, not simply a set of rules that may also have made our opponents experience miserable.
Fingers crossed for an FAQ that makes the whole community happy
The FAQ's aren't really for balancing so besides Reavers no point changes.
Competitive Edge may or may not get changed. In 8th, they specifically did FAQ that DttFE works the 'broken' way Competitive is used now. Could go either way.
I'm more curious for the Book of Rust FAQ because I want to know if I can have Drazhar as a warlord and still enjoy my Dark Lotus Toxin.
Audustum wrote: The FAQ's aren't really for balancing so besides Reavers no point changes.
Competitive Edge may or may not get changed. In 8th, they specifically did FAQ that DttFE works the 'broken' way Competitive is used now. Could go either way.
I'm more curious for the Book of Rust FAQ because I want to know if I can have Drazhar as a warlord and still enjoy my Dark Lotus Toxin.
I'm very curious as to how they'll approach competitive edge. It's an incredible warlord trait, but arguably in and of itself simply 'strong' (very strong really - it's essentially a trait that allows you to re-roll everything that wasn't in your favour - even the opposing players saving throw). Still, it's very much the interaction of a particular weapon alongside it that becomes truly problematic, but that weapon is actually quite lacklustre on it's own. It needs Dark Lotus Toxin to really start to shine - so which end of the combo do you balance?
I'd guess none, and just go after the specific interaction? 'Extra attacks just apply to the initial hit rolls'.
Even then, you have a 60 pt character that can potentially swing between 14 and 28 times a turn.
Red Corsair wrote: The issue with these discussion often revolves around two massive factors that get glossed over.
1. Mission deployment
2. Terrain
If T'au are drawing range and beads on that much of your army turn 1, you probably are not using what I would consider a properly terrained table OR you really got called out and caught misdeploying.
I have to agree with Amish here. It's not that T'au weapons are not good for downing our things, they are. But those units are very slow or immobile and HYMP and the like require LOS.
In order for them to bring a list with enough of the weapons your mentioning they really do end up with a slow as feth army that is garbage on mission objectives.
The DE army should be out maneuvering ans scoring and when engaging ti should be on their terms, or sacrificing units they expect to lose already.
Playing DE is like a knife fight, you have to expect to get cut somewhere in order to deliver your own blows, so feed them none vital parts while you play the mission.
I also agree with him admech is a much bigger issue. They basically auto hit with more hits then shots they started across much of the army and they have incredible bombers (seriously broken at 130 pts) as well as auto detonation which REALLY punishes MSU builds. With their book just around the corner I have a feeling the codex creep trend is going to cast a shadow on are army (I'm actually fine with that, I hate playing the popular army lol)
There was a decent amount of terrain. The hymp only had line of sight to my one voidraven bomber because the terrain didn't block los on that no matter where it was. Two riptides on the flanks were the ones that were able to move up and crack a couple more transports. Then the sms from the broadsides didn't care about the LOS so they picked up passengers. I was about as well deployed out of LOS as I could be. Also don't forget that once a game they can advance up and shoot without penalty, so it's not as easy to dodge the hymp and such as it may seem on paper. So far I've won an 8 player event and a 22 player one, so I don't think it's that I'm deploying or playing poorly. The tau have been the hardest game for me of all the ones I've played so far.
Red Corsair wrote: The issue with these discussion often revolves around two massive factors that get glossed over.
1. Mission deployment
2. Terrain
If T'au are drawing range and beads on that much of your army turn 1, you probably are not using what I would consider a properly terrained table OR you really got called out and caught misdeploying.
I have to agree with Amish here. It's not that T'au weapons are not good for downing our things, they are. But those units are very slow or immobile and HYMP and the like require LOS.
In order for them to bring a list with enough of the weapons your mentioning they really do end up with a slow as feth army that is garbage on mission objectives.
The DE army should be out maneuvering ans scoring and when engaging ti should be on their terms, or sacrificing units they expect to lose already.
Playing DE is like a knife fight, you have to expect to get cut somewhere in order to deliver your own blows, so feed them none vital parts while you play the mission.
I also agree with him admech is a much bigger issue. They basically auto hit with more hits then shots they started across much of the army and they have incredible bombers (seriously broken at 130 pts) as well as auto detonation which REALLY punishes MSU builds. With their book just around the corner I have a feeling the codex creep trend is going to cast a shadow on are army (I'm actually fine with that, I hate playing the popular army lol)
There was a decent amount of terrain. The hymp only had line of sight to my one voidraven bomber because the terrain didn't block los on that no matter where it was. Two riptides on the flanks were the ones that were able to move up and crack a couple more transports. Then the sms from the broadsides didn't care about the LOS so they picked up passengers. I was about as well deployed out of LOS as I could be. Also don't forget that once a game they can advance up and shoot without penalty, so it's not as easy to dodge the hymp and such as it may seem on paper. So far I've won an 8 player event and a 22 player one, so I don't think it's that I'm deploying or playing poorly. The tau have been the hardest game for me of all the ones I've played so far.
I also think Tau are by far the current best counters to Druka (as they were in the past editions actually). Also, I play in a very comp environment, and Tau never were that bad, because only the very good players still play with them, the rest fell off the bandwagon. Tau just need better players ATM. The Tau player in my team has one of the best TTS national rankings (for France), so that should say quite a lot all by itself.
Of course, in terms of absolutes, the Druk codex is "better" than the Tau codex, and by far, don't get me wrong here
And tau will struggle against DG, DA, etc. unlike Druka
well, had a second test game that just demonstrated how absolutely crazy hard we can dumpster on space marines. Was up against a semi-casual blood angel setup with 2x incursor squads plus an invictor suit, a squad of heavy rifle eradicators with a MM, plasma inceptors, sang guard, a small unit of death company, a dakka redemptor, jump chaplain, blood priest, and a BA character who I think may have been the chapter master. Plus one of the storm speeders, the build that has BS2+ and long range antitank weaponry.
I brought cults+covens. Dark Tech+Cursed Blade with 3x heat lance+claw talos, 2 wych squads, liquifier wracks, 5x incubi, 15x hellions, 5x mandrakes for scoring, and a Voidraven. Succubus with the triptch whip precision build, all the transports in dark tech.
I got first turn, opponent deployed pretty cautiously to avoid the voidraven so my best target point had 4 units, 2 of which were characters. Hit the dreadnought only, but did 6mws, and was able to finish it off with dark lances and the voidraven's guns. Talos moved up, dark tech melta'd the invictor suit, down to one wound and I finished it off with Dark Tech boosted venom fire. the Hellions killed an incursor squad midboard and I bumped them up to T5 PFP in anticipation of making them super irritating to kill.
On his turn, I basically just popped Lightning Reactions 2 phases in a row on the hellions to make them super irritating, did 4mw to Sanguinary Guard with Cursed Blade trait and interrupted to kill 4/5 of the death company, then they failed morale and every one of the remaining 4 ran away ,the absolute madlads. All his antitank shooting was required to take down the Voidraven.
Basically it was over turn 2. Incubi, Wyches, Bloodbrides, Succubus, Talos and Cronos all in super easy charge range of almost anything left of value in his army. On his turn he just deep struck in the inceptors to kill 1 talos and conceded.
What does an opponent do if they lose turn 1 to Drukhari? Like what's the play? Even if he'd totally ignored my Voidraven, say for the sake of argument he puts his eradicators and Storm Speeder into a Raider and the Venom (which had damaged itself down to 3HP) he could have killed the Incubi and maybe some wyches, but they still would have easily crashed his line and its not like the plane ain't gak after it's bomb is dropped - 6+d3 high Ap 2 damage shots is enough to clear out a 5-man marine squad no problem.
Basically I'm just not seeing any good options on the microboard to avoid combat, and if you do opt for combat you gotta be DAMN SURE you kill whatever you're fighting in one round or the attacks back are BRUTAL. 4 hellions just decimated a whole death company squad and they didn't even roll any melee offensive drugs, they rolled +T and +Move.
Blood Angels are probably the opponent I'm most familiar with (they have significant presence locally).I think we're an exceptionally tough match up for them.
They're a relative elite army who wants to be in the melee. Drukhari have assault units which are a match for theirs, probably will have significantly more of them on the board in a given game, have better mobility and so are more likely to be able to dictate the charge, and when they don't, have multiple ways to ensure the Marines fight last.
They're fairly reliant on characters too, which again we can delete quite handily - Eviscerating Flyby etc.
It sounds like your play was really solid during the game, and without a mistake to try and capitalise on... yup, turn two concession sounds about right
You're utterly right though, we're an army with an overwhelming amount of threat. If you can't find a way to take the initiative vs a Drukhari army, they will control the game in a very one sided manner. As you say, that's harder still if you go second.
I don't really know what you do about that. Something in the meta will likely have to evolve, or toning down of some of our tools will probably be needed. We're not unbeatable, we're fragile enough to deal with on paper, but we trade units so well that a Drukhari player on his/her game is an uphill struggle for many right now.
Fought my first battle vs sisters on saturday. I won but later on in the game they were a bit tough to face. Faith dice can be insanely obnoxious for damage dice. I wish I could force an enemy to take like 5 or 6 wounds when I wounded them rather than having to roll.
I may take out the incubi next time. Hard to say as it doesn't work well with my current setup.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Fought my first battle vs sisters on saturday. I won but later on in the game they were a bit tough to face. Faith dice can be insanely obnoxious for damage dice. I wish I could force an enemy to take like 5 or 6 wounds when I wounded them rather than having to roll.
I may take out the incubi next time. Hard to say as it doesn't work well with my current setup.
To be fair, if you want to go dark techno lances, then you can force at least 5 damage through with your shots. I prefer lances in the black heart kabal if you have the choice though and those still average 5 damage.
I am considering a list that doubles up on dark techno patrols instead of the black heart to get more liquifiers, so in that case I plan on disintegrators for my raiders. I love having reliable damage 2 or 3 weapons in the army because it makes it very easy to direct weapons into units efficiently. In the 7-8 games I've played with the new codex so far, I would have been plenty happy keeping them at the damage 2 profile in most cases anyways to avoid taking too much damage on myself. It would usually only be one or two turns a game where you need to enhance them and probably not all of them.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Fought my first battle vs sisters on saturday. I won but later on in the game they were a bit tough to face. Faith dice can be insanely obnoxious for damage dice. I wish I could force an enemy to take like 5 or 6 wounds when I wounded them rather than having to roll.
I may take out the incubi next time. Hard to say as it doesn't work well with my current setup.
Yeah I was gonna say, you can, just play Dark Technomancers and have 4+D3 damage dark lances and 3+D6 damage heat lances. That was a big hit with my opponent especially given the one turn his eradicators were on the board and not tied up by Wyches they attacked my plane and rolled all of 2 hits. Everyone spends a year and a half bitching about how busted eradicators are and now drukhari have a super-melta mounted on every single transport, lol.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
StrayIight wrote: Blood Angels are probably the opponent I'm most familiar with (they have significant presence locally).I think we're an exceptionally tough match up for them.
They're a relative elite army who wants to be in the melee. Drukhari have assault units which are a match for theirs, probably will have significantly more of them on the board in a given game, have better mobility and so are more likely to be able to dictate the charge, and when they don't, have multiple ways to ensure the Marines fight last.
They're fairly reliant on characters too, which again we can delete quite handily - Eviscerating Flyby etc.
It sounds like your play was really solid during the game, and without a mistake to try and capitalise on... yup, turn two concession sounds about right
You're utterly right though, we're an army with an overwhelming amount of threat. If you can't find a way to take the initiative vs a Drukhari army, they will control the game in a very one sided manner. As you say, that's harder still if you go second.
I don't really know what you do about that. Something in the meta will likely have to evolve, or toning down of some of our tools will probably be needed.
We're not unbeatable, we're fragile enough to deal with on paper, but we trade units so well that a Drukhari player on his/her game is an uphill struggle for many right now.
Putting myself in my opponent's shoes for a moment, and given the benefit of hindsight, he did make a couple of mistakes that allowed me to set up an easy win.
1) he respected the threat range of the wyches and bloodbrides on one side of the board with his incursors but didn't do so with the Hellions, which did essentially enable me to use them as approximately 10" of extra movement and a free kill
2) he chose to deep strike the Inceptors rather than having them on the board and behind Obscuring terrain (there was a ton of that floating around in this game, and everything in his army was behind obscuring or dense for almost everything in my army except for my plane which obviously flew right into his backline) which meant that unit essentially didnt exist in the game. In hindsight, if he'd dropped the chapter master's buff on them they would have been the 100% ideal thing to blow away the Hellions with that would not have committed his main assault force. If the Sanguinary Guard, chapter Master and Death Company had chopped the Voidraven apart, the inceptors had wiped the hellions, and the anti-vehicle shooting had taken the transports for the Incubi and Wyches out, that would have put him into a VASTLY better spot going into top of 2.
We both ended up removing a similar number of points from each others list turn 1 - if anything, he killed slightly more by taking out the Voidraven and the maxed out Hellion squad. The main reason that was an insta-gg was the fact that it forced his whole 700-ish point assault bomb right into the midboard in easy range of a squad of incubi and 3 talos+Cronos that just took them apart the next turn. They were even so extended that he had sanguinaries daisy-chaining back to be in the Chaplain auras, which meant I didn't even have to fight the chaplain - I shot him right in the face with Talos meltaguns.
To win the game, I was going to come to him. The assault troops staying at a safe distance would have made my job harder, but I think he felt like if he attacked the plane with them he'd be on the back foot when it came to board position.
Audustum wrote: The FAQ's aren't really for balancing so besides Reavers no point changes.
Competitive Edge may or may not get changed. In 8th, they specifically did FAQ that DttFE works the 'broken' way Competitive is used now. Could go either way.
I'm more curious for the Book of Rust FAQ because I want to know if I can have Drazhar as a warlord and still enjoy my Dark Lotus Toxin.
I'm very curious as to how they'll approach competitive edge. It's an incredible warlord trait, but arguably in and of itself simply 'strong' (very strong really - it's essentially a trait that allows you to re-roll everything that wasn't in your favour - even the opposing players saving throw). Still, it's very much the interaction of a particular weapon alongside it that becomes truly problematic, but that weapon is actually quite lacklustre on it's own. It needs Dark Lotus Toxin to really start to shine - so which end of the combo do you balance?
I'd guess none, and just go after the specific interaction? 'Extra attacks just apply to the initial hit rolls'.
Even then, you have a 60 pt character that can potentially swing between 14 and 28 times a turn.
Someone will need time and coffee...
It's pretty straightforward if you ask me, just the addition of the word 'rolls' after attacks in the wording. Basically anything that doesn't damage you get to make a number of 'attack rolls' equivalent to the ones that didn't damage. 7 attacks becomes 14 attack rolls with razorflails, 9 of those don't damage so you get to make 9 more 'attack rolls' using the same weapon profile to distinguish it between starting an entire attack sequence again. They may not change competitive edge at all and just re-word razorflails so that attack re-rolls cant generate any more as a result or something.
Audustum wrote: The FAQ's aren't really for balancing so besides Reavers no point changes.
Competitive Edge may or may not get changed. In 8th, they specifically did FAQ that DttFE works the 'broken' way Competitive is used now. Could go either way.
I'm more curious for the Book of Rust FAQ because I want to know if I can have Drazhar as a warlord and still enjoy my Dark Lotus Toxin.
I'm very curious as to how they'll approach competitive edge. It's an incredible warlord trait, but arguably in and of itself simply 'strong' (very strong really - it's essentially a trait that allows you to re-roll everything that wasn't in your favour - even the opposing players saving throw). Still, it's very much the interaction of a particular weapon alongside it that becomes truly problematic, but that weapon is actually quite lacklustre on it's own. It needs Dark Lotus Toxin to really start to shine - so which end of the combo do you balance?
I'd guess none, and just go after the specific interaction? 'Extra attacks just apply to the initial hit rolls'.
Even then, you have a 60 pt character that can potentially swing between 14 and 28 times a turn.
Someone will need time and coffee...
It's pretty straightforward if you ask me, just the addition of the word 'rolls' after attacks in the wording. Basically anything that doesn't damage you get to make a number of 'attack rolls' equivalent to the ones that didn't damage. 7 attacks becomes 14 attack rolls with razorflails, 9 of those don't damage so you get to make 9 more 'attack rolls' using the same weapon profile to distinguish it between starting an entire attack sequence again. They may not change competitive edge at all and just re-word razorflails so that attack re-rolls cant generate any more as a result or something.
That definitely helps and is the same conclusion I reached as the likely change. I don't know if it quite goes far enough given how cheap and potent a Succubus remains after that.
I kinda feel 40K is crying out for experienced, professional QA at this point. People who are going to catch problematic interactions and balance issues like these before new rules go to print. What we have right now is a volunteer system, which seems more often to be a reward for 'influential' members of the community.
If those individuals happen to be prominent competitive players (as many of the ones I can think of are), they then have early access to new rules, more time to play test and compile lists, potential influence on the rules themselves... That's a problem for anyone trying to say 'competitive 40K' with a straight face really (I can think of an example toward the end of 8th, where a play tester went on to win a major event with an army whose Codex had just dropped).
I wouldn't be surprised if "the fix" turns out to be "you can't take competitive edge with razorflails". Its the simplest solution - upsetting for some undoubtedly - but I don't see how else you do it. A model shouldn't get 42 attacks, minus some for actually doing damage. I don't really buy "well 28 would be okay". By comparison to most other things in the game its clearly ludicrous. Jain Zar has 4. (Yes, I'm sure it will go up when the CWE codex comes out.)
(Brutally why the Succubus is allowed to take Wych weapons at all remains something of a mystery - the model explicitly without them is after all standing right there - but hopefully they wouldn't go that far. Say's the blaster-carrying Archon...)
1) Cant take Razorflails, this one is the knee jerk reaction one
2) Additional attacks do not generate more attacks, this is what i think will happen
3) Pre damage step is going to change and it will be "Hits missed" instead
4) Could have added rules like "No modifiers or additional generated hits"
5) Could be limited to "can not gain more than attack characteristic" so no more than 6 attacks (or 7, or 8 with drugs, etc..)
Its honestly very interesting to me to see how GW is going to handle this.
Tyel wrote: I wouldn't be surprised if "the fix" turns out to be "you can't take competitive edge with razorflails". Its the simplest solution - upsetting for some undoubtedly - but I don't see how else you do it. A model shouldn't get 42 attacks, minus some for actually doing damage. I don't really buy "well 28 would be okay". By comparison to most other things in the game its clearly ludicrous. Jain Zar has 4. (Yes, I'm sure it will go up when the CWE codex comes out.)
(Brutally why the Succubus is allowed to take Wych weapons at all remains something of a mystery - the model explicitly without them is after all standing right there - but hopefully they wouldn't go that far. Say's the blaster-carrying Archon...)
I think it depends on the model. Disregarding 42 attacks specifically, one of the earlier instances of making multiple hit rolls for each attack is the Knights tap-dance attacks. Pretty acceptable on a 400+ point model, and arguably required for them to be viable in certain situations. Even then, you're getting around 15 swings/stomps tops usually.
But 24-48 (excuse the potentially inaccurate number range here, you understand the point I'm sure) attacks for 60 points? Even at Str 4, -1 AP, weight of numbers means very little is getting away while still breathing. I cannot imagine how any more thought was put into that than a writer simply typing something that sounded good.
I don't have an issue with a Succubus having access to Wych weapons hypothetically. In fact I'd like to see the options expanded for each of The HQ types in the book - it's flavourful, and it makes sense in terms of the fluff. But you're quite right, mechanically it expands the potential for problematic interactions, and said interactions are not being looked for in a meaningful and diligent way within GW'S current way of doing things.
Easy fix is to re-word the extra generated attacks into hit rolls, so they can't be doubled by the razorflails rules. Simple.
Example: a succubus fights with 7 A aka 14 hit rolls. Now competitive edge should create additional hit rolls out of those 14 attacks. Say 11 of them don't reach the damage phase, then the succubus gains 11 hit rolls to be resolved with the same weapon's profile. Not 11 attacks that become 22 hit rolls.
Blackie wrote: Easy fix is to re-word the extra generated attacks into hit rolls, so they can't be doubled by the razorflails rules. Simple.
Example: a succubus fights with 7 A aka 14 hit rolls. Now competitive edge should create additional hit rolls out of those 14 attacks. Say 11 of them don't reach the damage phase, then the succubus gains 11 hit rolls to be resolved with the same weapon's profile. Not 11 attacks that become 22 hit rolls.
There's Rare Rule text in the CRB partially to this effect already (multiple hit rolls are treated as individual attacks). All that needs added is a specific FAQ saying it doesnt get to double dip with flails to create an exponential growth of attacks.
Automatically Appended Next Post: New Competitive Innovations from Goonhammer this week is highlighting some more post-Codex placings. The same Cult + DT list shows up again, but with a new Kabal + Cult (including a madlad using a 20-man Hellion block) showing.
Major caveat is that these are team events and that some skew should be potentially accepted due to the nature of the shindig.
I don't think "okay you can only theoretically max out on 28 swings" is the answer.
The problem is that competitive edge is busted. Razorflails take it to extremes - but really the Succubus punches massively above her weight class with this warlord trait and almost any vaguely sensible weapon combo.
A Wych warlord trait should seemingly be "worth" about 2 extra attacks (see Quicksilver fighter/Blood Dancer). Competitive Edge is clearly superior to this in every situation where you haven't annihilated whatever you ran into (and even in a 2s to hit, 2s to kill scenario it probably works out about the same). Remove the Flail and its still the case with the relic whip, or one of the relic glaives, or maybe dark lotus and an impaler for 3 damage etc.
But I guess "this warlord trait is the best." has been standard in 40k forever, so maybe its a feature not a bug.
Tyel wrote: I don't think "okay you can only theoretically max out on 28 swings" is the answer.
The problem is that competitive edge is busted. Razorflails take it to extremes - but really the Succubus punches massively above her weight class with this warlord trait and almost any vaguely sensible weapon combo.
A Wych warlord trait should seemingly be "worth" about 2 extra attacks (see Quicksilver fighter/Blood Dancer). Competitive Edge is clearly superior to this in every situation where you haven't annihilated whatever you ran into (and even in a 2s to hit, 2s to kill scenario it probably works out about the same). Remove the Flail and its still the case with the relic whip, or one of the relic glaives, or maybe dark lotus and an impaler for 3 damage etc.
But I guess "this warlord trait is the best." has been standard in 40k forever, so maybe its a feature not a bug.
Yeah, I think I'm onboard here.
We know what a Warlord Trait usually looks like, we have one as an option sitting in print that would normally be pretty good, but you'd never take over Competitive Edge: Re-roll wound rolls.
Competitive Edge lets you: Re-roll your failed hit rolls, re-roll your failed wound rolls, re-roll your opponents successful saving throw (effectively), but words things in such a way, that these aren't actually re-rolls, but completely new attacks, thus allowing additional rules like those present on Razor Flails to 'double dip'.
Why on earth would you ever give a 're-roll your wound rolls' trait so much as a second glance over this?
It's a ludicrously good ability. On a close-combat based unit like a Succubus it's pretty much as good as it gets.
I think you probably *do* have to target the specific interaction between Flails and CE as the easiest fix now, but it doesn't get away from the idea that this Warlord trait was incredibly poorly thought through.
Vs Guardsmen - 6.42 dead
Vs MEQ - 3.97 dead
Vs Terminators - 3.14 dead
Vs Standard Tank - 8.55 wounds
Slightly better vs very heavy/elite targets, about the same vs normal elites, worse vs W1 infantry because precision lets you make use of that D3 in a way that edge doesn't. I haven't mathed it out for the triptch whip, but I suspect that due to the fact its poison 2+ as opposed to just strength 4 it's going to be more reliable on the first round of swings and you'll get less benefit out of the edge trait.
Took on 1500pts of Blood Angels with 55 Wyches 5 Raiders 3 Succubi in Strife and CB Patrols. His shooting and Death Company charge against 2 Raider was ineffective due to LFR in both phases. 1Raider stayed in combat and a Dancers Edge Precision Blows Succubus and 10 Wyches carved them up. Meanwhile my other Raiders destroyed a Predator and a few Hellblasters to reduce his ranged antitank. Captain and3 Hellblasters charged one Raider destroying it but Sanguinary Guard forced to deep strike in his deployment zone failed their charge. A Flying Psyker Dread and intercessors charged and destroyed another Raider in the centre. Corbulo and Intercessors charged another Raider but it remained. Oddly he was not interested in following up into the wych squads that tumbled out of the two destroyed Raiders. In my turn 2 Every unit in my army engaged except the limping Raider that tangled with the Death Company. The Sanguinary Guard were not contacted so they survived the turn alone. This is my third game against Marines or Custodes ending on turn 2. And I do not use Razorflail Succubi. How the mighty SM cadres have fallen!
Venger6 wrote: Took on 1500pts of Blood Angels with 55 Wyches 5 Raiders 3 Succubi in Strife and CB Patrols. His shooting and Death Company charge against 2 Raider was ineffective due to LFR in both phases. 1Raider stayed in combat and a Dancers Edge Precision Blows Succubus and 10 Wyches carved them up. Meanwhile my other Raiders destroyed a Predator and a few Hellblasters to reduce his ranged antitank. Captain and3 Hellblasters charged one Raider destroying it but Sanguinary Guard forced to deep strike in his deployment zone failed their charge. A Flying Psyker Dread and intercessors charged and destroyed another Raider in the centre. Corbulo and Intercessors charged another Raider but it remained. Oddly he was not interested in following up into the wych squads that tumbled out of the two destroyed Raiders. In my turn 2 Every unit in my army engaged except the limping Raider that tangled with the Death Company. The Sanguinary Guard were not contacted so they survived the turn alone. This is my third game against Marines or Custodes ending on turn 2. And I do not use Razorflail Succubi. How the mighty SM cadres have fallen!
Do they still want to play Drukari ? Or are they already asking you if you would kindly consider bringing another army ?
Vs Guardsmen - 6.42 dead
Vs MEQ - 3.97 dead
Vs Terminators - 3.14 dead
Vs Standard Tank - 8.55 wounds
Slightly better vs very heavy/elite targets, about the same vs normal elites, worse vs W1 infantry because precision lets you make use of that D3 in a way that edge doesn't. I haven't mathed it out for the triptch whip, but I suspect that due to the fact its poison 2+ as opposed to just strength 4 it's going to be more reliable on the first round of swings and you'll get less benefit out of the edge trait.
Hands up I hadn't thought of the Precision Blows 3 damage Impaler build.
Friendship ended with Souped Up Shokka... (and its more reliable.)
My numbers are slightly different to the ones you posted above - but not that different, and I think given how weird the results are, you'd really need to work out the curves rather than using averages. (I.E. Precision Blows isn't ever going to do 4 mortal wounds - but 8/6*3=4. Competitive Edge can't give you 6.33 extra attacks on a T7/3+ tank - but thats how many I calculate won't go through on average.) Fair enough if you've done that and averaged back.
Yep, I always use averages rather than rounding, as it gives you a more accurate picture of expected performance in my opinion. I mostly just wanted to highlight that competitive edge doesn't *seem to be* head and shoulders above competing builds when you take out the current grave lotus razorflail silliness. If you start looking at other cults as well, you can start looking at things like Cursed Blade's inherent +1 strength and the Blood Glaive out of Red Grief.
Fundamentally, I just...don't know if the succubus is actually a 60-point HQ. The damage she puts out is head and shoulders above basically any other combat oriented HQ in that sort of weight class, and it isn't like she doesn't bring at least a bit of utility to the table as well what with no escape and her aura. You could make her 80-90pts base and she would still be more than fine at making back her value in casualties in a single swing.
Fundamentally, I just...don't know if the succubus is actually a 60-point HQ. The damage she puts out is head and shoulders above basically any other combat oriented HQ in that sort of weight class, and it isn't like she doesn't bring at least a bit of utility to the table as well what with no escape and her aura. You could make her 80-90pts base and she would still be more than fine at making back her value in casualties in a single swing.
That's definitely the real take away here isn't it?
At 60 points... It's wonderful to have an HQ as good as this and that is so aggressively costed available, but I can't (and I suspect we all feel the same way) hand on heart say 'Yes, 60 points is fair and appropriate for what this unit can do'. Any grumbling from players outside the DE player base is a little warranted.
The cost is particularly bizarre when you look at the various Succu-builds alongside Lelith. ...She's certainly not exactly looking like the 'Queen of Blades' or 'greatest of all Succubi' next to some of the custom HQ builds is she? Especially at her significantly higher cost.
It reminds me a little of the Malefic Lord issue at the start of 8th. Another super cheap HQ that punched significantly above it's points cost.
Fundamentally, I just...don't know if the succubus is actually a 60-point HQ. The damage she puts out is head and shoulders above basically any other combat oriented HQ in that sort of weight class, and it isn't like she doesn't bring at least a bit of utility to the table as well what with no escape and her aura. You could make her 80-90pts base and she would still be more than fine at making back her value in casualties in a single swing.
That's definitely the real take away here isn't it?
At 60 points... It's wonderful to have an HQ as good as this and that is so aggressively costed available, but I can't (and I suspect we all feel the same way) hand on heart say 'Yes, 60 points is fair and appropriate for what this unit can do'. Any grumbling from players outside the DE player base is a little warranted.
The cost is particularly bizarre when you look at the various Succu-builds alongside Lelith. ...She's certainly not exactly looking like the 'Queen of Blades' or 'greatest of all Succubi' next to some of the custom HQ builds is she? Especially at her significantly higher cost.
It reminds me a little of the Malefic Lord issue at the start of 8th. Another super cheap HQ that punched significantly above it's points cost.
It's not the base cost of the model that is the issue. It is the relics and WL traits. Now - that isn't necessarily an issue for an army to have "really powerful relics" as kind of a signature of the army. Every army should have a signature strength and weakness. I mean....Snipers do exist. My crons bring 10 Deathmarks in almost every list now. I could easily fit 20 by just exchanging them out for 10 points and 10 immortals. It's not like the succubus can't be handled - and raiders are FAR from indestructable.
Fundamentally, I just...don't know if the succubus is actually a 60-point HQ. The damage she puts out is head and shoulders above basically any other combat oriented HQ in that sort of weight class, and it isn't like she doesn't bring at least a bit of utility to the table as well what with no escape and her aura. You could make her 80-90pts base and she would still be more than fine at making back her value in casualties in a single swing.
That's definitely the real take away here isn't it?
At 60 points... It's wonderful to have an HQ as good as this and that is so aggressively costed available, but I can't (and I suspect we all feel the same way) hand on heart say 'Yes, 60 points is fair and appropriate for what this unit can do'. Any grumbling from players outside the DE player base is a little warranted.
The cost is particularly bizarre when you look at the various Succu-builds alongside Lelith. ...She's certainly not exactly looking like the 'Queen of Blades' or 'greatest of all Succubi' next to some of the custom HQ builds is she? Especially at her significantly higher cost.
It reminds me a little of the Malefic Lord issue at the start of 8th. Another super cheap HQ that punched significantly above it's points cost.
It's not the base cost of the model that is the issue. It is the relics and WL traits. Now - that isn't necessarily an issue for an army to have "really powerful relics" as kind of a signature of the army. Every army should have a signature strength and weakness. I mean....Snipers do exist. My crons bring 10 Deathmarks in almost every list now. I could easily fit 20 by just exchanging them out for 10 points and 10 immortals. It's not like the succubus can't be handled - and raiders are FAR from indestructable.
You are right, 60 points if perfectly fine, move on people, there is nothing to see here.
Itd be cool if you didnt take up a third of a page in the drukhari tactica thread with a huge quote walk of text to passive aggressively snipe about how you think the faction is op.
There's a 2 minute hate thread in general, just go there please.
It's not the base cost of the model that is the issue. It is the relics and WL traits. Now - that isn't necessarily an issue for an army to have "really powerful relics" as kind of a signature of the army. Every army should have a signature strength and weakness. I mean....Snipers do exist. My crons bring 10 Deathmarks in almost every list now. I could easily fit 20 by just exchanging them out for 10 points and 10 immortals. It's not like the succubus can't be handled - and raiders are FAR from indestructable.
In a vacuum I agree. A succubus without a Warlord trait or relic looks far more like a 60 point model. But that 60 point model does have access to those traits and relics... which absolutely transform them into something well beyond what we expect a 60 point model to look like? It's an interesting counter point - do you pay more for the potential that a unit has when relics/traits are added, at the cost of the naked unit being less points efficient? Certainly I can't see a relic-less, trait-less Succubus being taken by anyone with any real enthusiasm, except to fill a slot cheaply, even at the current cost.
Probably this starts to get into something that's more at the core of 40K's current mechanics than the unit itself at a certain point.
It is the Relics/WL - but there's an argument no one's ever going to run a naked Succubus so its a bit meaningless. Admittedly you could say you are spending some CP to unlock these things but... eh.
I think they have to remove the Razorflail/Competitive edge situation and then we see. But yeah, 80-90 points probably isn't breaking the bank.
I'm not sure its the same as Malefic Lords - there the problem was no rule of 3 and smite change. Okay at 30 points they were criminally undercosted and almost every chaos army would possibly be tempted to chuck 3 in (or would be if secondaries were not a thing), but it wouldn't be the same as people bringing 8+ or whatever they did for that period of the game. (Primaris Psykers had the same issue.)
In a vacuum I agree. A succubus without a Warlord trait or relic looks far more like a 60 point model. But that 60 point model does have access to those traits and relics... which absolutely transform them into something well beyond what we expect a 60 point model to look like?
It's an interesting counter point - do you pay more for the potential that a unit has when relics/traits are added, at the cost of the naked unit being less points efficient? Certainly I can't see a relic-less, trait-less Succubus being taken by anyone with any real enthusiasm, except to fill a slot cheaply, even at the current cost.
Probably this starts to get into something that's more at the core of 40K's current mechanics than the unit itself at a certain point.
It's an interesting thought, particularly when compared to the Archon who IMO really needs both Warlord trait and Relic to avoid being embarrassing.
It's not the base cost of the model that is the issue. It is the relics and WL traits. Now - that isn't necessarily an issue for an army to have "really powerful relics" as kind of a signature of the army. Every army should have a signature strength and weakness. I mean....Snipers do exist. My crons bring 10 Deathmarks in almost every list now. I could easily fit 20 by just exchanging them out for 10 points and 10 immortals. It's not like the succubus can't be handled - and raiders are FAR from indestructable.
In a vacuum I agree. A succubus without a Warlord trait or relic looks far more like a 60 point model. But that 60 point model does have access to those traits and relics... which absolutely transform them into something well beyond what we expect a 60 point model to look like?
It's an interesting counter point - do you pay more for the potential that a unit has when relics/traits are added, at the cost of the naked unit being less points efficient? Certainly I can't see a relic-less, trait-less Succubus being taken by anyone with any real enthusiasm, except to fill a slot cheaply, even at the current cost.
Probably this starts to get into something that's more at the core of 40K's current mechanics than the unit itself at a certain point.
Relics vary wildly across armies in terms of power but they all cost exactly the same. This is a fundamental issue.
You could argue that a portion of a characters cost should be incorporating the addition of a relic but that is supposed to be what CP is for. IMO certain relic WL trait interactions are off for DE but at the same time they specifically nerfed certain ones to not interact - like the +1 damage to weapons trait not working on relics. This shows intent to balance but then at the same time we have things like precision blows stacking with relics that give you tons of additional attacks...doing mortal wounds even!
Personally I think it's okay because it has a serious limiting factor that you can only take so many relics. Perhaps a few of the top options (relics) could be tapped down a bit or clarified. I think the points on the model is okay though.
It's not the base cost of the model that is the issue. It is the relics and WL traits. Now - that isn't necessarily an issue for an army to have "really powerful relics" as kind of a signature of the army. Every army should have a signature strength and weakness. I mean....Snipers do exist. My crons bring 10 Deathmarks in almost every list now. I could easily fit 20 by just exchanging them out for 10 points and 10 immortals. It's not like the succubus can't be handled - and raiders are FAR from indestructable.
In a vacuum I agree. A succubus without a Warlord trait or relic looks far more like a 60 point model. But that 60 point model does have access to those traits and relics... which absolutely transform them into something well beyond what we expect a 60 point model to look like?
It's an interesting counter point - do you pay more for the potential that a unit has when relics/traits are added, at the cost of the naked unit being less points efficient? Certainly I can't see a relic-less, trait-less Succubus being taken by anyone with any real enthusiasm, except to fill a slot cheaply, even at the current cost.
Probably this starts to get into something that's more at the core of 40K's current mechanics than the unit itself at a certain point.
Yeah, even if you had two Succubi if you’re CoS you’d probably have flails/venom/competitive edge plus whip/precision blows before you start taking relic/trait less ones
I don’t see a problem with Succubi beyond the Competitive Edge/Razorflail interaction (and I mean everyone here seems to agree that it’s a *bit* OTT). Sure she punches over her points cost but lots of factions have some sort of character that when combined with the right WL trait/relic combo become a bit bonkers. But isn’t that the whole point of WL traits and relics? There’s a trade off there in terms of CP and whether or not there are other traits or relics available that could buff other units but instead solely turn your character into a killing machine.
Some other HQs that seemingly compare that come to mind are:
Frozen Stars Troupe Master w/ Twilight Fang and Darkness’ Bite role
Bloody Rose Cannoness w/ Beneficence and some WL trait I forget
Primaris Chaplain on bike or jump pack w/ either relic crozius or Teeth of Terra plus one of a multitude of WL traits.
The first two are most comparable because of points to killiness to durability, but I still think the Chaplain belongs on the conversation because it’s still really killy, a lot more tanky than the others, AND still provides some serious buffs for other units.
Its funny when DE gets a good 60/75pt HQ everyone is mad, but when Sisters for 1.5+ years has them no one screams this loud.
I also play Sisters, and a 60-70pt Canoness is just as good as most of our Succubi options (Yes there are some better builds). Sure Sisters can't run and charge more than a couple units of turn, but they can force a 9+" charge without trying (normally for other units than a canoness lol). I play Bloody Rose and i have 2 melee Canoness every game, they have done as much work as any of our new Succubi other than Competitive Edge+Razorflail (Im not counting that as it is getting nerf). A basic Blessed Blade Canoness with Inferno pistol is 65pts, Str 5, -3, 3D, that a lone makes our Basic Archon and Succubi not so good. Ours are only better b.c our WL/Relics are slight better but what really makes them better is the Bonus attacks with always run and charge. If a Canoness has 6 base attack it would always be better.
For those that don't know here are the 2 builds (you can change the WL trait with the relic some like the +atks on even more +atks to help kill marines or hordes better) both are 65pts b.c they can have an Inferno pistol.
Canoness are 2+ to hit in melee and shooting, re-roll all 1's (this will change) Str3 with 4 attacks, 3+/4++
Bloody Rose: +1atk if charge, charged, or HI, add an addition AP to pistols and Melee weapons
Sacred Rite: Hits on a 6 generate 1 more hit
Set up 1
WL trait +1 attacks, can run and charge in the same turn
Relic, Blade - +2str, -3ap, 3D
Total of 6(7) str 5 attacks with -4ap for 3D
Set up 2 (this one can get a once per game on a 2+ D3 MW's option)
WL trait - Re-roll charges and if made a charge re-roll all wounds
Relic, Beneficence - +3atks, +1str, -2, 2D (think teeth of terror)
Total 8(9.3) attacks for Str 4, -3ap, 2D
Both has killed full units of marines before, both has done number of damage to vehicles and even killed Rhinos before.
Tl:dr I also play SOB and I have been complaining our/DE characters need to be on the same level, we are now slightly better and everyone is crying we are too good but never said anything about Sisters other than "Repentia are OP, Rets are OP, Mortifiers are OP" when I had Canoness 1/3 the cost of any other unit kill the same amount of stuff as a Repentia unit has.
I don't think anyone here is 'crying' that we are too good. My impression is that we were all just having a discussion about the potency we percieve in a particular character, because while we wait for our FAQ, it's a pertinent discussion.
I think it's good that we can discuss honestly about potential imbalances, especially when we see them in our own armies. I think that's all people have been trying to do really.
40K is a competitive game that generally has a winner and a loser - and at times I think that brings that aspect of us out in discussion around it. But at the same time as a hobby, played for enjoyment, it's also very much a co-operative experience where both players should be seeking to have a good time within a shared game.
I couldn't tell you whether or not a given SoB unit is over or under powered - I've never played as or against them in truth. We're talking about Succubus's, because as Drukhari players on a Drukhari thread, it's a common point of reference and interest for us all.
That said, maybe both units are problematic? More knowledgeable people than me would have to determine that. I'm here to learn, offer my impressions, have my preconceptions challenged, and generally chew the fat mostly.
Hello sneaky internet! I have finished another battle report against the new Dark Eldar. I hope this aids in your discussion of DE tactics!
Read all about it here:
StrayIight wrote: I don't think anyone here is 'crying' that we are too good. My impression is that we were all just having a discussion about the potency we percieve in a particular character, because while we wait for our FAQ, it's a pertinent discussion.
I think it's good that we can discuss honestly about potential imbalances, especially when we see them in our own armies. I think that's all people have been trying to do really.
40K is a competitive game that generally has a winner and a loser - and at times I think that brings that aspect of us out in discussion around it. But at the same time as a hobby, played for enjoyment, it's also very much a co-operative experience where both players should be seeking to have a good time within a shared game.
I couldn't tell you whether or not a given SoB unit is over or under powered - I've never played as or against them in truth. We're talking about Succubus's, because as Drukhari players on a Drukhari thread, it's a common point of reference and interest for us all.
That said, maybe both units are problematic? More knowledgeable people than me would have to determine that. I'm here to learn, offer my impressions, have my preconceptions challenged, and generally chew the fat mostly.
I've been seeing it a lot and I gave the Canoness as a reference point for the Succubus b.c its the same points and about equal in power.
RandomHeretic wrote: Hello sneaky internet! I have finished another battle report against the new Dark Eldar. I hope this aids in your discussion of DE tactics!
Read all about it here:
Please let me know what you think and good luck in your future games.
I think DT liquifiers are going to get nerfed in some way.
As an edit - interesting to see the massed units of Cronos. DT also serves to make their flamer equivalent quite respectable - and they are reasonably hard to shift for the points.
I tell you now as an Admech player starting a DE crusade force...I would take a naked succubus over any of my Admech HQ units. In fact, I'd take one at 70-80 pts as well lol.
In the context of this discussion obviously, nobody would CHOOSE to not take WT and relics but I'd wager a succubus without any of those still outperforms most other HQs without theirs, regardless of points cost.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Incidentally, this razorflails business could all be avoided if melee weapons had the number of attacks in their profile like AoS instead of on the character profile! That's another dicussion entirely though
Im curious what you think has changed significantly on DT liqiifiers since the change to it - is the fact that they now do not MW themselves on a 1 to wound really change the ball game so much that it makes up for the loss of a second trait? Or is it the boost from S3 to S4 and R8 to R12 on liquifiers do it?
Because this build basically save for the Cronos essentially existed before the new codex.
the_scotsman wrote: Im curious what you think has changed significantly on DT liqiifiers since the change to it - is the fact that they now do not MW themselves on a 1 to wound really change the ball game so much that it makes up for the loss of a second trait? Or is it the boost from S3 to S4 and R8 to R12 on liquifiers do it?
Because this build basically save for the Cronos essentially existed before the new codex.
My guess would be that it's all three of these stacked together. The same weapon got a s boost, and s3 vs s4 is a breakpoint against a lot of profiles. That same weapon got a range boost on a shorter board where people move to the middle. That same weapon lost any downsides it had previously as it doesn't do mortal wounds. Put together that is a lot of buffs. Did it get any price boost to go along with all the buffs? Or was the weapon just made much easier to use and more effective across the board for free?
Edit: So the +1 strength basically gave it a free +1 to wound against T3, T4, T6 and T7. Now that is only as powerful as the amount of T3, T4, T6 and T7 in the game. But if those are common toughness profiles, along with the range boost, along with the smaller boards, along with the need to get in close to score primaries, along with losing all downsides....
Double Edit: The change to range 12" also means that they can be used out of deepstrike. A lot of the power of the spam list is the two units of grotesques coming out of the webway. Especially for armies that already struggle to screen once you destroy their frontline, that means you can very dependably hit what you want to anywhere on the board. At only 8" I don't think the grots with liquifiers were such a game changer.
the_scotsman wrote: Im curious what you think has changed significantly on DT liqiifiers since the change to it - is the fact that they now do not MW themselves on a 1 to wound really change the ball game so much that it makes up for the loss of a second trait? Or is it the boost from S3 to S4 and R8 to R12 on liquifiers do it?
Because this build basically save for the Cronos essentially existed before the new codex.
S4 versus S3 makes a difference versus T3, T4, T6 and T7. Range 12 versus 8 is also quite a jump.
Points are also a potential issue. Your 5 wracks two liquifiers cost 67 points (I think?) in 8th, rising to 80 in 9th? Now its 60. That's a considerable decrease multiplied over a reasonable number of units.
Grots went from 46 to 55(?) back down to 45.
So for shooting something like Intercessors - and averaging out the random AP - you have a unit which costs 75% of what it did before the January update, doing 33% more damage than it did before the codex came out (and with 4" extra range). So for the points you are doing 77% more damage.
True. DT being all cobsuming and granting +1D seems like a mistake.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Should probably be +1 to wound only and not all consuming. Then itd ve a bit more in line with other traits. The single mw you might get is not really a meaningful offset even if they "fixed" that.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Damn shame because outside of DT liquifiers are finally a reasonable, good gun upgrade.
I tend to think if you removed +1 damage DT would fall out of the running as anything competitive since halving the damage of the build in exchange for...mostly nothing...is probably a bit much. It's also the only meaningful mono-covens build. It is probably too strong, but it is pretty much the only use for cronos and grots at the moment. Talos also probably fall in that boat (they'd probably have some play with double liquifers)
Raising liquifer guns to 15 points or wracks to 9-10 would be a lot more nuanced approach. If DT didn't add to damage, it would just not be used and nor would mono-covens; they'd just be a little add on for some utility at most. Their profound drop in durability lost them the role; comparing similarly costed DA termies/deathshroud (a bit more)/Bladeguard (a bit less) and Grots is laughable in terms of the meat-body on objective.
drakerocket wrote: I tend to think if you removed +1 damage DT would fall out of the running as anything competitive since halving the damage of the build in exchange for...mostly nothing...is probably a bit much. It's also the only meaningful mono-covens build. It is probably too strong, but it is pretty much the only use for cronos and grots at the moment. Talos also probably fall in that boat (they'd probably have some play with double liquifers)
Raising liquifer guns to 15 points or wracks to 9-10 would be a lot more nuanced approach. If DT didn't add to damage, it would just not be used and nor would mono-covens; they'd just be a little add on for some utility at most. Their profound drop in durability lost them the role; comparing similarly costed DA termies/deathshroud (a bit more)/Bladeguard (a bit less) and Grots is laughable in terms of the meat-body on objective.
An easier solution might just be to change the DT trait thus:
If a model is firing a weapon that automatically hits while using this ability, have the model roll a separate 1D6. On an unmodified result of a 1, this model suffers one mortal wound after resolving all of its shooting attacks. This roll has no effect on the number of hits or wounds.
the_scotsman wrote: True. DT being all cobsuming and granting +1D seems like a mistake.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Should probably be +1 to wound only and not all consuming. Then itd ve a bit more in line with other traits. The single mw you might get is not really a meaningful offset even if they "fixed" that.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Damn shame because outside of DT liquifiers are finally a reasonable, good gun upgrade.
You say this but liquifiers are the only thing that seem OP and it was a design mistake. Think instead to to 1d3 damage that DT can cause on monsters or vehicles. Suddenly venoms and even talos might question whether it's really worthwhile to use DT. Meanwhile things like raiders are fine with it. It's really just questionable with liquifiers and honestly it's something that could be fixed if they make you roll for each shot during number of shots. For instance you get 4 shots and now have to make 4 rolls not getting a one and if you do a wracks bites it or something similar.
The one good thing to all of this is 5+++ FNP makes DT more survivable unless they reworked that part of DT. I'm a bit lazy and my book isn't in front of me.
I've said it in the 2-minutes hate drukhari thread and I'll say it again here: A DT liquifier is a more effective anti-tank weapon than an unbuffed Dark Lance.
Also, you could change the rule to 'if you fire a weapon that automatically hits, you ALWAYS suffer the mortal wound(s) to the unit afterwards" and it wouldn't matter. a single mortal wound that you get a 5++ against that won't even remove a single liquifier from the squad if it goes through is a microscopic price to pay for making a liqufier into (effectively) a S7 Ap-2 d2 gun.
If you made the trait only +1 to wound and removed the All-Consuming portion of the trait, it would still be the most powerful damage-increasing trait available, one of only 2 available that affects ranged weaponry, and you would make it stackable with Masters of Mutagens if you want powerful Venoms/Taloi or Splinterblades if you want offensively powerful Wracks/Grotesques.
I sincerely doubt pure covens would not be viable without this crutch rule as it currently stands. Grotesques and Incubi are still extremely good anti-elite units and Taloi with Heat Lances and Raiders are highly effective anti-tank units.
drakerocket wrote: I tend to think if you removed +1 damage DT would fall out of the running as anything competitive since halving the damage of the build in exchange for...mostly nothing...is probably a bit much. It's also the only meaningful mono-covens build. It is probably too strong, but it is pretty much the only use for cronos and grots at the moment. Talos also probably fall in that boat (they'd probably have some play with double liquifers)
Raising liquifer guns to 15 points or wracks to 9-10 would be a lot more nuanced approach. If DT didn't add to damage, it would just not be used and nor would mono-covens; they'd just be a little add on for some utility at most. Their profound drop in durability lost them the role; comparing similarly costed DA termies/deathshroud (a bit more)/Bladeguard (a bit less) and Grots is laughable in terms of the meat-body on objective.
An easier solution might just be to change the DT trait thus:
If a model is firing a weapon that automatically hits while using this ability, have the model roll a separate 1D6. On an unmodified result of a 1, this model suffers one mortal wound after resolving all of its shooting attacks. This roll has no effect on the number of hits or wounds.
This is the most laughably limp slap on the wrist I can possibly imagine lol. The problem here is not that you can avoid taking a MW on your mounted wracks. Most opponents will be plenty tabled before you ever get round to removing liquifiers from the mortal wounds even if you guarantee the MW upon using an autohitting weapon.
the_scotsman wrote: I've said it in the 2-minutes hate drukhari thread and I'll say it again here: A DT liquifier is a more effective anti-tank weapon than an unbuffed Dark Lance.
Also, you could change the rule to 'if you fire a weapon that automatically hits, you ALWAYS suffer the mortal wound(s) to the unit afterwards" and it wouldn't matter. a single mortal wound that you get a 5++ against that won't even remove a single liquifier from the squad if it goes through is a microscopic price to pay for making a liqufier into (effectively) a S7 Ap-2 d2 gun.
If you made the trait only +1 to wound and removed the All-Consuming portion of the trait, it would still be the most powerful damage-increasing trait available, one of only 2 available that affects ranged weaponry, and you would make it stackable with Masters of Mutagens if you want powerful Venoms/Taloi or Splinterblades if you want offensively powerful Wracks/Grotesques.
I sincerely doubt pure covens would not be viable without this crutch rule as it currently stands. Grotesques and Incubi are still extremely good anti-elite units and Taloi with Heat Lances and Raiders are highly effective anti-tank units.
drakerocket wrote: I tend to think if you removed +1 damage DT would fall out of the running as anything competitive since halving the damage of the build in exchange for...mostly nothing...is probably a bit much. It's also the only meaningful mono-covens build. It is probably too strong, but it is pretty much the only use for cronos and grots at the moment. Talos also probably fall in that boat (they'd probably have some play with double liquifers)
Raising liquifer guns to 15 points or wracks to 9-10 would be a lot more nuanced approach. If DT didn't add to damage, it would just not be used and nor would mono-covens; they'd just be a little add on for some utility at most. Their profound drop in durability lost them the role; comparing similarly costed DA termies/deathshroud (a bit more)/Bladeguard (a bit less) and Grots is laughable in terms of the meat-body on objective.
An easier solution might just be to change the DT trait thus:
If a model is firing a weapon that automatically hits while using this ability, have the model roll a separate 1D6. On an unmodified result of a 1, this model suffers one mortal wound after resolving all of its shooting attacks. This roll has no effect on the number of hits or wounds.
This is the most laughably limp slap on the wrist I can possibly imagine lol. The problem here is not that you can avoid taking a MW on your mounted wracks. Most opponents will be plenty tabled before you ever get round to removing liquifiers from the mortal wounds even if you guarantee the MW upon using an autohitting weapon.
I guess you and I just disagree that liquifiers are that much of an issue. They're strong but I wouldn't call them broken by any means.
Since you mentioned anti-tank, the Liquifier averages 2.35 wounds with a variance of 2.10 against a 3+ T7 vehicle. A BS3 (Raider) platform for a Dark Lance with no re-rolls averages 1.85 with a variance of 2.41. With the Black Heart or Obsidian re-roll, the Dark Lance will be slightly better. On a Trueborn squad the Dark Lance is also better (2.31 variance of 2.49). So on Trueborn and Black Heart/Obsidian they're about equal. A Trueborn squad in a Black Heart/Obsidian detachment will likely out perform the Liquifier.
This is not accounting for range (12" vs. 36"). It also does not account for using the Dark Technomancer trait to boost a Dark Laser (making it outperform the boosted Liquifier I believe). The gist is that yeah, a Liquifier, benefitting from a faction trait outperforms a Dark Lance that is not in anti-tank. When you give them both faction traits though, they're about equal (and I didn't even look at Scourge's by an Archon in a Realspace Raid with Writ of the Living Muse, which might outperform everyone).
But the problem is that a anti horde and anti elite weapon is also better agaisnt vehicles than a specifically anti vehicle weapon. And in the best case for the dark lance they are just equal. And Dark Lances are not bad weapons after the buffs.
Would anybody say SM flamers outperforming multimeltas and lasscannons at everything because they are Salamanders is fine? I doubt it.
Even with the difference in range thats absurd specially when dark eldar have the fastest transports in the game and they can shoot from them.
Galas wrote: But the problem is that a anti horde and anti elite weapon is also better agaisnt vehicles than a specifically anti vehicle weapon. And in the best case for the dark lance they are just equal. And Dark Lances are not bad weapons after the buffs.
Would anybody say SM flamers outperforming multimeltas and lasscannons at everything because they are Salamanders is fine? I doubt it.
Even with the difference in range thats absurd specially when dark eldar have the fastest transports in the game and they can shoot from them.
^this.
A jump from an average of .8 damage to an average of 2.3 just based on a flat, always-on subfaction trait is absolutely buck wild particularly given that the weapons that it's competing against that barely edge it out, like a dark lance fired by a Trueborn or a dark lance in Obrose are generally
1) more limited
2) more expensive per shot
3) don't do NEARLY as much when pointed at any other target.
Dark Tech has been defining what covens do in annoying ways since PA, and to be honest, I'd just like to get rid of it. But if I can't have that, I'd like to at least make it just another offensive trait. Like, are people seriously of the opinion that something like, say, Splinterblades+Masters of Mutagens is in the same league as DT?
I'd much rather DT was gutted than say Liquifiers were - or Wracks/Grotesques/literally everything because it *could* benefit from DT trait.
Tend to agree the +1 to wound no damage increase and you can take another trait is a reasonable tweak. If you want to kill it off (it is GW) you make the tweak and leave it as allconsuming.
On *that thread* - I used to scoff at Marine players saying the same - but I do think we need a bit more actual evidence before going nuts on DE in general. The situation is confused at the moment - because I'm sure Razorflail/Competitive edge will be nerfed/cut. Some people are using 10 point reavers which is just stupid. And DT may be breaking friendly games, but competitively people seem to be focusing on only bringing a few units of wracks rather than spamming 30+ liquifiers of them.
People do need some time to learn how to deal with the DE codex. I also think people forget how when IH came out, the next weekend pretty much every tournament was
1st place: IH 2nd place: IH 3rd place: IH
We don't seem to be seeing that - even if DE are doing well.
Or you guys could do what I said earlier. Roll for shots on a 1d6 and take the shots and roll a d6 for each shot and on a one a wrack takes a mortal wound. For instance 4 shots equals 4 1d6 rolls. Let's say you roll a 1, 3, 3 and a 6 in this scenario so then you take 1 mortal wound but with wracks you get a 5+ fnp and this time you roll a 4 so you lose one wrack.
If we change what DT does I'd rather it keep damage and take away +1 to wound. It'd make it different enough to the wych cults test of skill ability.
Another option to "fix" DT - if necessary - might be making it so Wracks can't take 2 Liquifiers in a unit of 5. Could I guess induce massive outcry - but you can't do it from the contents of the box.
This would perhaps be bad because it impacts other obsessions - but I'm not sure its an obvious loadout without the DT boost.
So, out of curiosity I did some comparisons of the Weapons of Torture (i.e. the Wrack's "melee" special weapons). This is all without including Blade Artists (complicated math, fairly even changes) or considering any upgrades from Covens. It also doesn't inherently include Damage. Here's what I got:
Electrocorrosive Whip is broken, relatively speaking. It's 5 points, and better than literally every other weapon in literally every other situation. No idea what the logic was. It can't be a typo, because even at 10 points it's still just Scissorhands with +1A.
Scissorhands are garbage. I don't get why they even exist. They're the exact same stats as an Electrocorrosive Whip, but with -1A... for an extra 5 points. Huh?
Mindphase Gauntlet isn't as bad as I thought, and will scale quite well with Coven/Stratagem combat buffs, but still feels pretty dubious even in a world of 2-wound Marines. I'd give it more of a chance if the Whip didn't exist.
Flesh Gauntlet is consistently a little better than Wrack Blades against everything except high Toughness, low Save targets. It's most noticeably better against T3 targets with an okay save.
Venom Blade is better than Flesh Gauntlet against almost everything, but would lose out against a T3 model with a 5+ or better invulnerable save. It's better than the Agonizer against literally everything but Terminators, and even there the advantage is slight.[/list]
So to rank them...
1) Electrocorrosive Whip: Utterly broken, always the best.
2) Venom Blade: Highest consistent damage after the Electrocorrosive Whip. Only really loses out to Flesh Gauntlet against T3 invulnerable saves.
3) Flesh Gauntlet/Mindphase Gauntlet: Useful if you have combat buffs to burn, but otherwise mostly worse than the Venom Blade except against specialty targets.
4) Agoniser: Worse than Venom Blade against everything but Terminators, and even there it's not much.
5) Scissorhand: It's not bad in a vacuum. It's just worse and more expensive than the Electrocorrosive Whip in literally every situation.
I suspect the whip was meant to be 10 points and GW just missed it.
Really its a bit academic - as I don't think people are bothering with weapons at all, and if they were probably only the whip is worth bothering with - and you wouldn't bother at 10 points.
For example the venom blade is a 66% damage output - for a 62.5% increase in cost. Which is just generally a bad trade as you are getting no "resilience" stats for the points.
Tyel wrote: I suspect the whip was meant to be 10 points and GW just missed it.
Yeah, but even then it just goes from being cheaper than Scissorhands for directly better stats to... the same cost as Scissorhands for directly better stats. It's just odd. The 9e codex clearly wanted to give Wrack weapons an overall facelift, and succeeded, but the Wrack special melee weapons are still just not quite there.
Tyel wrote: Really its a bit academic - as I don't think people are bothering with weapons at all, and if they were probably only the whip is worth bothering with - and you wouldn't bother at 10 points.
For example the venom blade is a 66% damage output - for a 62.5% increase in cost. Which is just generally a bad trade as you are getting no "resilience" stats for the points.
Yeah, it's a bit of a shame. A box of 5 Wracks comes with 6 alternate weapons and 4 guns, but can only use 2 of those guns and 1 of those alternate weapons, tops.
I feel like Wrack special melee weapons should either be a bit better and available to multiple models so they scale up more effectively (since the box comes with the bits anyway...) or stay one-per-unit, but be reworked to have more impressive/unique mechanical effects that help the whole unit, rather than being stat-tweaks. The Mindphase Gauntlet used to be Concussive, for example; it could do something like give your Acothyst a free attack at the start of each Fight phase, and if it hits/wounds, the target unit has to fight last in that phase. Something like that.
I don't think they are worth 10pts at all, i actually would 100% stop taking them at 10pts now how bad Wracks are at surviving pre turn 4, a 5+++ only goes so far for a 10pt weapon on a "meh" melee unit. They are objective sitters now, not tarpit combat units anymore. Also I wouldn't say its broken at all, compare it to any of the Wych weapons for same points.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Or you guys could do what I said earlier. Roll for shots on a 1d6 and take the shots and roll a d6 for each shot and on a one a wrack takes a mortal wound. For instance 4 shots equals 4 1d6 rolls. Let's say you roll a 1, 3, 3 and a 6 in this scenario so then you take 1 mortal wound but with wracks you get a 5+ fnp and this time you roll a 4 so you lose one wrack.
If we change what DT does I'd rather it keep damage and take away +1 to wound. It'd make it different enough to the wych cults test of skill ability.
Are people missing that DT currently CAPS the mortal wounds at 1 instance of either 1 or d3? the 'downside' to it is a hilariously light slap on the wrist for basically any unit. I can fire 6d6 stinger pod shots out of my unit of 6 talos and even if i roll 6 1's i take 1d3 MWs and then I get a FNP against those mw's.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Or you guys could do what I said earlier. Roll for shots on a 1d6 and take the shots and roll a d6 for each shot and on a one a wrack takes a mortal wound. For instance 4 shots equals 4 1d6 rolls. Let's say you roll a 1, 3, 3 and a 6 in this scenario so then you take 1 mortal wound but with wracks you get a 5+ fnp and this time you roll a 4 so you lose one wrack.
If we change what DT does I'd rather it keep damage and take away +1 to wound. It'd make it different enough to the wych cults test of skill ability.
Are people missing that DT currently CAPS the mortal wounds at 1 instance of either 1 or d3? the 'downside' to it is a hilariously light slap on the wrist for basically any unit. I can fire 6d6 stinger pod shots out of my unit of 6 talos and even if i roll 6 1's i take 1d3 MWs and then I get a FNP against those mw's.
No it does not, its for AN ENHANCED WEAPON not A MODEL. If a model has 2 guns and rolls a 1 to hit on each gun then they take 2 instances of MW's.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Or you guys could do what I said earlier. Roll for shots on a 1d6 and take the shots and roll a d6 for each shot and on a one a wrack takes a mortal wound. For instance 4 shots equals 4 1d6 rolls. Let's say you roll a 1, 3, 3 and a 6 in this scenario so then you take 1 mortal wound but with wracks you get a 5+ fnp and this time you roll a 4 so you lose one wrack.
If we change what DT does I'd rather it keep damage and take away +1 to wound. It'd make it different enough to the wych cults test of skill ability.
Are people missing that DT currently CAPS the mortal wounds at 1 instance of either 1 or d3? the 'downside' to it is a hilariously light slap on the wrist for basically any unit. I can fire 6d6 stinger pod shots out of my unit of 6 talos and even if i roll 6 1's i take 1d3 MWs and then I get a FNP against those mw's.
No it does not, its for AN ENHANCED WEAPON not A MODEL. If a model has 2 guns and rolls a 1 to hit on each gun then they take 2 instances of MW's.
Which made it not so fun on my Dark Lance, Dark Technomancer Ravagers. Potential 3D3 MW :(
flamingkillamajig wrote: Or you guys could do what I said earlier. Roll for shots on a 1d6 and take the shots and roll a d6 for each shot and on a one a wrack takes a mortal wound. For instance 4 shots equals 4 1d6 rolls. Let's say you roll a 1, 3, 3 and a 6 in this scenario so then you take 1 mortal wound but with wracks you get a 5+ fnp and this time you roll a 4 so you lose one wrack.
If we change what DT does I'd rather it keep damage and take away +1 to wound. It'd make it different enough to the wych cults test of skill ability.
Are people missing that DT currently CAPS the mortal wounds at 1 instance of either 1 or d3? the 'downside' to it is a hilariously light slap on the wrist for basically any unit. I can fire 6d6 stinger pod shots out of my unit of 6 talos and even if i roll 6 1's i take 1d3 MWs and then I get a FNP against those mw's.
No it does not, its for AN ENHANCED WEAPON not A MODEL. If a model has 2 guns and rolls a 1 to hit on each gun then they take 2 instances of MW's.
Ah - OK, you are correct reading it over a second time. Per weapon in the unit.
Luckily in the game I've used that, I did not end up cheating - all six of my heat lances fired and didnt roll a single 1, but then all my Raiders hit themselves for 3MWs just off the single dark lance shot, lol.
If they're really committed to DT being what it is, they could also just make it so that in addition to being unable to reroll the hit roll for weapons that roll to hit, it also causes auto-hitting weapons to not auto-hit any more, so you have to roll to hit as normal.
That would lower the output by 1/3 on average plus allow the mortal wounds on self to trigger, which might be enough to make it not an issue.
I have a question in regards to dark technomancers. If dark lances are worse how do the troops in the transport factor in? For instance warriors and true born with blasters and dark lance vs wracks with double liquified spam. Not doubting the firepower of liquifiers but you have to get really close to do a drive-by with liquifiers and in some cases there might be plenty of bubble wrap units along the way. Warriors with blasters, poison and a dark lance on the other hand can max fire at 24” provided you go for obsidian rose. I get liquifiers can kill the bubble wrap but I feel like it’s possible for the bubble wrap to eat up our firepower instead of more important targets like leman Russ or other tanks or monster gun platforms. Also liquifiers getting that close means you’re likely to get your raiders tied up in melee or shot with lots of return fire.
Anyway I’ve had to deal with lots of return fire before and I’d rather not be in range of every enemy’s gun, melee weapon or line of sight. Maybe we hit hard enough that it’s not such a big deal now though.
Considering our issues with speedy tau riptides however I think liquifier drive-by’s will be hard and that is one of our tougher opponents right now.
12" range on a platform that can auto-advance 22" (not to mention the extra few inches you can sometimes get with appropriate pointy schnoz alignment) is not particularly difficult to land a DT haymaker with, especially if you've got first turn. With fly in the picture, it's extremely hard to screen that out.
Sterling191 wrote: 12" range on a platform that can auto-advance 22" (not to mention the extra few inches you can sometimes get with appropriate pointy schnoz alignment) is not particularly difficult to land a DT haymaker with, especially if you've got first turn. With fly in the picture, it's extremely hard to screen that out.
With just one boat though. If you have 3 or more that becomes much harder for big gains. I'd rather it for some important unit in a raider like incubi or grotesques or something. I'm not saying it couldn't have a decent impact but it's just one boat. Maybe in a small game it'd be scarier but not in a 2k points or larger game.
yukishiro1 wrote: If they're really committed to DT being what it is, they could also just make it so that in addition to being unable to reroll the hit roll for weapons that roll to hit, it also causes auto-hitting weapons to not auto-hit any more, so you have to roll to hit as normal.
That would lower the output by 1/3 on average plus allow the mortal wounds on self to trigger, which might be enough to make it not an issue.
The defeats the entire purpose of the weapon, just make it on a wound roll of 1 again....
Sterling191 wrote: 12" range on a platform that can auto-advance 22" (not to mention the extra few inches you can sometimes get with appropriate pointy schnoz alignment) is not particularly difficult to land a DT haymaker with, especially if you've got first turn. With fly in the picture, it's extremely hard to screen that out.
With just one boat though. If you have 3 or more that becomes much harder for big gains. I'd rather it for some important unit in a raider like incubi or grotesques or something. I'm not saying it couldn't have a decent impact but it's just one boat. Maybe in a small game it'd be scarier but not in a 2k points or larger game.
It depends if you go first or second, going second means they are closer, and you dont "need" them in range turn one.
My Lists has only taken 1 Patrol of them, 1 Haemonculus with Relic, 3 Wracks x5 with 2 LG's in 3 Raiders with DC or DL's (going back and forth on what i like better).
The rest of my list is 2x10 wyches, 2 Succubi, Reavers, Hellions, 3x5 Incubi, 5 more Raiders, etc..
I use the 3 DT wracks as more of supporting fire unit and not as the "main damage" its great for me b.c EVERYONE HATES THEM so they go after them almost right away, i can use them to out position my opponent, and if they do not go after them then I have a hella fun turn 2 and 3 with them killing units.
When you take 6-9 of them for raw damage you really need a to play it with a different mind set, they are your damage and target priority is way more important than having a single patrol of them for back up damage.
yukishiro1 wrote: If they're really committed to DT being what it is, they could also just make it so that in addition to being unable to reroll the hit roll for weapons that roll to hit, it also causes auto-hitting weapons to not auto-hit any more, so you have to roll to hit as normal.
That would lower the output by 1/3 on average plus allow the mortal wounds on self to trigger, which might be enough to make it not an issue.
The defeats the entire purpose of the weapon, just make it on a wound roll of 1 again....
No, it doesn't. But what it does show is how stupid DT is: I suggest that maybe it should only improve super-flamers by ~50%, not by 150%, and somebody's like "then what's the point?"
DT is meh on anything except flamers, but on flamers, it's completely insane. That's the mark of really bad design.
yukishiro1 wrote: If they're really committed to DT being what it is, they could also just make it so that in addition to being unable to reroll the hit roll for weapons that roll to hit, it also causes auto-hitting weapons to not auto-hit any more, so you have to roll to hit as normal.
That would lower the output by 1/3 on average plus allow the mortal wounds on self to trigger, which might be enough to make it not an issue.
The defeats the entire purpose of the weapon, just make it on a wound roll of 1 again....
No, it doesn't. But what it does show is how stupid DT is: I suggest that maybe it should only improve super-flamers by ~50%, not by 150%, and somebody's like "then what's the point?"
DT is meh on anything except flamers, but on flamers, it's completely insane. That's the mark of really bad design.
The point of flamers is to auto hit, so yes it would. And not DT is not just meh on other weapons its insanely good on DC still.
Tyel wrote: Another option to "fix" DT - if necessary - might be making it so Wracks can't take 2 Liquifiers in a unit of 5. Could I guess induce massive outcry - but you can't do it from the contents of the box.
This would perhaps be bad because it impacts other obsessions - but I'm not sure its an obvious loadout without the DT boost.
That just punishes folks that aren't playing DT though. Which is the very valid concern here. Nerfs should not be aimed at wracks or the liquifier itself. Honestly they should remove the silly gets hot rule entirely IMO. Just make DT a flat +1 to wound. It's the +1 damage that is insanely over the top. +1 to wound is strong for sure but remember it's the only trait they would get on units that are more heavily geared for assault.
That just punishes folks that aren't playing DT though. Which is the very valid concern here. Nerfs should not be aimed at wracks or the liquifier itself. Honestly they should remove the silly gets hot rule entirely IMO. Just make DT a flat +1 to wound. It's the +1 damage that is insanely over the top. +1 to wound is strong for sure but remember it's the only trait they would get on units that are more heavily geared for assault.
This. DT is the root cause, therefore the solution needs to address DT. Playing downstream whack-a-mole isn't a viable, or equitable, approach to take.
yukishiro1 wrote:If they're really committed to DT being what it is, they could also just make it so that in addition to being unable to reroll the hit roll for weapons that roll to hit, it also causes auto-hitting weapons to not auto-hit any more, so you have to roll to hit as normal.
That would lower the output by 1/3 on average plus allow the mortal wounds on self to trigger, which might be enough to make it not an issue.
It's interesting but super clunky.
So if I don't power up my flamer auto hits, but when I power up it suddenly misses?
Good luck wrapping your head around that one. Especially when the unit decides to overwatch an goes from 100% accuracy down to 16%.
Sterling191 wrote: Am I missing something obvious? There's no FAQ upload on WarCom, nor does there appear to be any leak (or discussion) from the usual suspects.
Where's this coming from?
I think the official GW app updated.
CORRECTION: The app sent some kind of message saying it updated but there's nothing there currently. No idea where this came from.
That fixes nothing. The problem with DT and liqs isn't that you get to ignore the MW bit, that's almost totally irrelevant. Liq wracks are still just as broken even if they lose an average of one member of the squad each time they fire.
That fixes nothing. The problem with DT and liqs isn't that you get to ignore the MW bit, that's almost totally irrelevant. Liq wracks are still just as broken even if they lose an average of one member of the squad each time they fire.
It means you have a risk to use DT, right now there is literally no risk. With a risk and other players learning they need to actually take a TAC list instead of a anti-marine and DG only list it will do wonders.
That fixes nothing. The problem with DT and liqs isn't that you get to ignore the MW bit, that's almost totally irrelevant. Liq wracks are still just as broken even if they lose an average of one member of the squad each time they fire.
It means you have a risk to use DT, right now there is literally no risk. With a risk and other players learning they need to actually take a TAC list instead of a anti-marine and DG only list it will do wonders.
The risk is essentially microscopic. an average of 1 dead per squad of wracks, zero risk of losing a liquifier - it only takes a single shot to pay for a DT wrack squad against most units. I dont' give a single feth if my wrack squad goes into the turn after they delete 100 points of enemy models as a 4-man instead of a 5-man squad. it literally could not matter to me less.
Yeah, the problem with DT on liqs is how much it improves the profile; it has nothing to do with the auto-hitting per se. If liqs didn't auto-hit DT would still improve them by the same amount, just from a lower base.
The fundamental issue is how +1 to wound and +1 damage interacts with a S4 -2AP 1D profile, boosting the damage by almost 150%. The damage boost to a DL is miniscule by comparison, even without figuring in the limitation on rerolling to-hit rolls.
tl;dr +to wound and +to damage are much better on lowish S, low D weapons than on high S, high D weapons.
god dammit gw you can keep fifty seven bolt weapons straight but you cant take five seconds to have someone who knows the FIVE weapon options available for a non-marine unit correct the points values?
Looks like DT Liquifiers and mixed detachments stay on the menu (Cult of Strife crazy options still pending but outlook now changed to optimistic for those lovers of Competitive Edge and Razorflails).
This is why we cant have nice things. The FAQ is for things that changed...if it hasn't changed, it stayed the same. Simple.
And yet, Grav Talons and Caltrops are in there unchanged.
I understand the argument (and frankly I agree with it, just like we all knew Reavers were 20ppm post-MFM-FAQ but pre-Codex-FAQ), but GW needs to get its house in order when it comes to pointing nomenclature so gak like this doesn't keep recurring. If they don't want ambiguity in rules interpretations, they need to stop introducing ambiguity with simple fixes.
Sterling191 wrote: Incidentally...they just made Heat Lance Reavers 20ppm.
the more reasonable assumption is simply that their points did not change.
This is why we cant have nice things. The FAQ is for things that changed...if it hasn't changed, it stayed the same. Simple.
But they did reprint things that stayed the same. Obviously they didn't mean to make heat lances zero points, but they have created the implication they are by what they chose to reprint. At best it's lazy and inconsistent and you have to read between the lines to figure it out.
Someone on Reddit pointed out that something similar occurred in the Death Watch FAQ. Apparently the precedent was set there that the prior entry persists unless the FAQ specifically states that the entry is deleted or replaced.
Thus (sensibly) Heat Lances remain +10 points over base.
"If your army is lead by a Cult of Strife Warlord, you can, when mustering your army, give one of the following Artefacts of Cruelty Relics to a Cult of Strife Character model from your army." (this is above the section describing the relics including Dark Lotus Toxin)
Are people (and tournaments) just saying, "If Battlescribe allows it, it's legal"? Or is there something I'm missing?
I don't think you're reading too much into anything unfortunately.
The wording is clear insomuch as your Warlord must be from CoS in order to access the supplement relics.
Draz is clearly not a CoS Warlord, so the list is invalid. I don't think it's enough to simply have a restricted CoS detachment - though that does work for the strats.
Battlescribe is great, but not without errors. An individual recently had to drop out of a tournament after it turned out his Drukhari list was illegal due to a Battlescribe points error. Innocent mistake, but likely cost him the tournament from what I hear. A really useful tool, but it's not an authority - nor should it ever be viewed as one.
StrayIight wrote: I don't think you're reading too much into anything unfortunately.
The wording is clear insomuch as your Warlord must be from CoS in order to access the supplement relics.
Draz is clearly not a CoS Warlord, so the list is invalid. I don't think it's enough to simply have a restricted CoS detachment - though that does work for the strats.
Battlescribe is great, but not without errors. An individual recently had to drop out of a tournament after it turned out his Drukhari list was illegal due to a Battlescribe points error. Innocent mistake, but likely cost him the tournament from what I hear. A really useful tool, but it's not an authority - nor should it ever be viewed as one.
I read it clear as day that you only need your WL to get the "FREE" relic and its just another detachment that acts as normal so the stratagems to unlock more WL traits and Relics works. There is no rule to say you need a CoSWL other than the free relic.
The very first rule for CoS is
"Over the following pages you will find Warlord Traits, Relics and Stratagems for Drukhari units that are drawn from the Cult of Strife" then goes to say "Codes: Drukhari describes how certain Drukhari units belong to a Wych Cult, and how you can use <Wych Cult> keywords to specify where such a unit is drawn from. The following rules section are for units drawn from the Wych Cult of the Cult of Strife"
So to me this doesn't say you need a WL in CoS to unlock any of the rules just to have a CoS detachment. This includes relics, Next is the relic part.
"If your army is led by a Cult of Strife Warlord, you can, when mustering your army, give one of the following Artefacts of Cruelty Relics to a Cult of Strife Character model from your army. Name characters cannot be given any of the following Relics."
So That part says when mustering your army for the free relic I don't see anything that says you have to have a CoSWL to unlock the relics as the first 2 rules already said it unlocks them.
Edit: PS the free CoS relic is worded the same as the Free Drukhari relics
"If your army is led by a Drukhari Warlord, you can, when mustering your army, give one of the following Artefacts of Cruelty to a Drukhari Character model in your army. Named characters cannot be give any of the following Relics."
Which makes it even more clear its only the free relic for CoS that you need a CoS warlord.
I think that's an interesting take, but I don't believe that's the intention at all here. I think we're getting hung up on standard wording also.
This context of this entire rules section is clearly designed only to apply to CoS. I don't think because they used the standard template wording for warlord traits, the intent is that the rules only apply to the 'free' relic. If that's actually the case, why not specifically call that out?
Goonhammer agree:
'The warlord traits can be stuck on a Cult of Strife Character in a Raid, but you still need a full Cult of Strife detachment to unlock the Stratagems, and the Relics need you to take a Cult of Strife Warlord, which removes your ability to use a Raid at all.'
I'm open to being wrong, but I think your argument hangs on legalese and is in no way what the writer is intending in the wider context of these rules. I would not take these relics in good conscience without having a primary warlord from CoS.
You do you in your games though. And a TO is free to make any ruling they wish for their event.
The "buy an extra relic" stratagems have always allowed you to get the respective relics regardless of your warlord and the relic blurp has always talked about how you need an X warlord to get a free X relic.
How is this situation different from every other codex in 8th and 9th?
Ordana wrote: The "buy an extra relic" stratagems have always allowed you to get the respective relics regardless of your warlord and the relic blurp has always talked about how you need an X warlord to get a free X relic.
How is this situation different from every other codex in 8th and 9th?
Because we're not generally talking about content from a completely separate book, designed to support a very specific sub-faction of an army - not the complete army itself.
You could make a similar argument to yours regarding stratagems too, but that isn't the case here. You cannot use them outside of an accompanying restricted detachment.
Again, though we can certainly be wrong, I'm not alone in this interpretation - some of the best rules and theory analysts in the community apparently see it the same way. At the end of the day, I won't play it without this restriction, you probably will, and in both cases no one is hurt right?
Hopefully a Charadon FAQ references it in a manner which satisfies everyone.
StrayIight wrote: I think that's an interesting take, but I don't believe that's the intention at all here. I think we're getting hung up on standard wording also.
This context of this entire rules section is clearly designed only to apply to CoS. I don't think because they used the standard template wording for warlord traits, the intent is that the rules only apply to the 'free' relic. If that's actually the case, why not specifically call that out?
Goonhammer agree:
'The warlord traits can be stuck on a Cult of Strife Character in a Raid, but you still need a full Cult of Strife detachment to unlock the Stratagems, and the Relics need you to take a Cult of Strife Warlord, which removes your ability to use a Raid at all.'
I'm open to being wrong, but I think your argument hangs on legalese and is in no way what the writer is intending in the wider context of these rules. I would not take these relics in good conscience without having a primary warlord from CoS.
You do you in your games though. And a TO is free to make any ruling they wish for their event.
Point where it says you need a CoSWL, i literally gave the rules and it says its a normal detachment in the same way as other DE detachments.
Ordana wrote: The "buy an extra relic" stratagems have always allowed you to get the respective relics regardless of your warlord and the relic blurp has always talked about how you need an X warlord to get a free X relic.
How is this situation different from every other codex in 8th and 9th?
Because we're not generally talking about content from a completely separate book, designed to support a very specific sub-faction of an army - not the complete army itself.
You could make a similar argument to yours regarding stratagems too, but that isn't the case here. You cannot use them outside of an accompanying restricted detachment.
Again, though we can certainly be wrong, I'm not alone in this interpretation - some of the best rules and theory analysts in the community apparently see it the same way.
At the end of the day, I won't play it without this restriction, you probably will, and in both cases no one is hurt right?
Hopefully a Charadon FAQ references it in a manner which satisfies everyone.
PA worked like that, we could take Relics from PA too, that was an supplement as well.
PS: I don't care what Goon says, i have read many rules from him that he has gotten wrong. I also only care if someone points out the rules like how I did, he can say "it works this way" but he gave no reasoning, i did. I literally laid out the rules and they are black and white clear.
I have completely stopped reading goon for his miss understandings of rules, army tactics, and stupidity for certain things hatred, i actually tell new players now to avoid him. But I play AOS and 40k and his AoS is 10x worst than 40k he literally tells people to play some of the worst units in the game saying they are great, or to play armies completely wrong.
I'll be honest, it's a bit tiring seeing folks point to Goonhammer or similar articles like they are the authority. If anything I see more issues coming from the competitive media circle due to the fact they are always trying to lead everyone and in their haste often get things wrong, which irritatingly leads so many others to follow suit.
Goonhammer is a them, not a him. I'd allow some latitude too around reading them - you're free not to of course - but you'll stop reading everything in time if you drop a source because you find mistakes or things you disagree with. Everyone eventually makes them, and avoiding disagreement is going to make your worldview incredibly narrow.
We disagree, and that's ok! I'm not convinced, but I wouldn't worry about that - I'm not particularly important! I actually don't fault your literal reading of the wording used, I think it's a reasonable black and white reading, I just don't trust it as the correct intent within the context of the book, so do not want to use it personally. Others apparently feel the same. I don't think that requires further justification - I've deliberately said I'm prepared to be wrong.
I'm not prepared to play it in the way you describe in case I'm right. I don't feel that's fair to an opponent.
In a competitive setting, it doesn't matter. The TO's ruling stands anyway, so everyone plays by that.
Finally, remember too, 'Black and white' readings are where we've got 10 point Reavers and 40+ attack Razorflail Succubus's. We need to temper them with common sense, and be unafraid to ask questions where there is ambiguity - there are enough people with different ideas here that ambiguity does exist.
Anyway. You do you, I'll do me, and fingers crossed for clarity down the line eh?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Red Corsair wrote: I'll be honest, it's a bit tiring seeing folks point to Goonhammer or similar articles like they are the authority. If anything I see more issues coming from the competitive media circle due to the fact they are always trying to lead everyone and in their haste often get things wrong, which irritatingly leads so many others to follow suit.
It's not necessary to see them as an authority. They may or may not be one. Here, they're a useful example of how another group of people, with good knowledge of the rules, also make the same interpretation. That's important because it's evidence of things not necessarily being absolutely clear when there are obviously multiple opinions around a given rule.
We knew Reavers are not 10pt b.c of the last faq and we knew the book was already printed when the Munitorum Field Manual was printed, it was only WAAC players that wanted them at 10pts so that is a poor example.
Also again I quoted the rules and showed other rules that do the same thing. If you want to show me why you don't think that is the case then i'll be fine with you believing it that why, but don't say he cheated or its an "illegal" list when for many thats not cheat b.c it is clear you don't need a WL to use CoS relics/wl traits.
Amishprn86 wrote: We knew Reavers are not 10pt b.c of the last faq and we knew the book was already printed when the Munitorum Field Manual was printed, it was only WAAC players that wanted them at 10pts so that is a poor example.
Also again I quoted the rules and showed other rules that do the same thing. If you want to show me why you don't think that is the case then i'll be fine with you believing it that why, but don't say he cheated or its an "illegal" list when for many thats not cheat b.c it is clear you don't need a WL to use CoS relics/wl traits.
Oh boy, why are we still discussing this?.. I did tell you why I don't think it's the case. I'm not alone in my opinion. I'm not convinced that - based on the context of all the elements in that book - the intent is for you to have access to those relics without a CoS Warlord. I also said I may be wrong. What more are you looking for here?
Thank you for offering to 'be fine' with me believing something different to you. That's most generous...
We disagree. That's all. We really can move on, I promise!
Amishprn86 wrote: We knew Reavers are not 10pt b.c of the last faq and we knew the book was already printed when the Munitorum Field Manual was printed, it was only WAAC players that wanted them at 10pts so that is a poor example.
Also again I quoted the rules and showed other rules that do the same thing. If you want to show me why you don't think that is the case then i'll be fine with you believing it that why, but don't say he cheated or its an "illegal" list when for many thats not cheat b.c it is clear you don't need a WL to use CoS relics/wl traits.
Oh boy, why are we still discussing this?.. I did tell you why I don't think it's the case. I'm not alone in my opinion. I'm not convinced that - based on the context of all the elements in that book - the intent is for you to have access to those relics without a CoS Warlord. I also said I may be wrong. What more are you looking for here?
Thank you for offering to 'be fine' with me believing something different to you. That's most generous...
We disagree. That's all. We really can move on, I promise!
We don't know the intent so we can not say that it is the intent....
I still can't get my head around why DT was left completely untouched.
While it's cool in concept, shooting isn't really a core part of Coven functionality, and then on top of that the effect is REALLY strong and what limitation was built into the rule is totally obviated by it's most common application.
harlokin wrote: I still can't get my head around why DT was left completely untouched.
While it's cool in concept, shooting isn't really a core part of Coven functionality, and then on top of that the effect is REALLY strong and what limitation was built into the rule is totally obviated by it's most common application.
....I think I need a lie-down.
The same answer as always.
GWdevs don't really have a clue and the generally don't use faq's to nerf rules.
harlokin wrote: I still can't get my head around why DT was left completely untouched.
While it's cool in concept, shooting isn't really a core part of Coven functionality, and then on top of that the effect is REALLY strong and what limitation was built into the rule is totally obviated by it's most common application.
....I think I need a lie-down.
Only two things I can think of:
A) GW wants to sell more wracks--maybe they have a warehouse that has a sizeable percentage of them. Who knows.
B) GW wants to see how the most broken DE combos stack up to their upcoming released codices, which like DE aren't small, elite, relatively tough armies. If rumors are true, we should see Admech, Orks, and SoB in pretty short order.
harlokin wrote: I still can't get my head around why DT was left completely untouched.
While it's cool in concept, shooting isn't really a core part of Coven functionality, and then on top of that the effect is REALLY strong and what limitation was built into the rule is totally obviated by it's most common application.
....I think I need a lie-down.
Only two things I can think of:
A) GW wants to sell more wracks--maybe they have a warehouse that has a sizeable percentage of them. Who knows.
B) GW wants to see how the most broken DE combos stack up to their upcoming released codices, which like DE aren't small, elite, relatively tough armies. If rumors are true, we should see Admech, Orks, and SoB in pretty short order.
Almost everything drukhari has been sold out, even before the full codex rules were known. I believe when we finally got the leaks I went to look into buying some drukhari and everything was out of stock save for Drazar.
I know there are issues with the rules but since this is a tactis topic I have questions. Please keep in mind that I am not a competitive player.
5 strong wych squads in venoms. Venoms with two splinter cannons and chain snares. Hekatrix with either a power sword or an agoniser. Yes they cannot take any special weapons at that unit size but are they useful?
Beastmaster and Khymerae. I personally love the models so I use them. I've been thinking of harassing units or blocking infantry movement with them but is that really the best use for them?
gaovinni wrote: I know there are issues with the rules but since this is a tactis topic I have questions. Please keep in mind that I am not a competitive player.
5 strong wych squads in venoms. Venoms with two splinter cannons and chain snares. Hekatrix with either a power sword or an agoniser. Yes they cannot take any special weapons at that unit size but are they useful?
Beastmaster and Khymerae. I personally love the models so I use them. I've been thinking of harassing units or blocking infantry movement with them but is that really the best use for them?
personally Im not a fan of 5-strong wyches, I like them in 10 because I like the special weapons, but I don't think they're all that bad. in a 5-squad I'd rate the blast pistol as more important than the power sword/agonizer, just because I like to give them that one shot that can have a lot of threat, so the're not completely ignorable.
Khymerae are essentially faster wyches that don't get drugs or traits. whatever you'd use a wych for, you can use a khymera for. Personally the beasts don't really excite me in the new book, theyre not that bad but they're not really anthing special particularly Razorwing Flocks. Khymerae I'd run in sufficient numbers to overwhelm a 1W chaff unit, and use them as either chaff clearing or a blocker. They're cheap, which is nice.
Clawed Fiends id run solo and task with holding primary objectives. Tough enough that they can't be simply removed by incidental firepower, cheap enough that you're not giving up much to have them hanging back and not fighting.
MSU wyches are absolutely useful, but you need to pick your targets and your fights. You cant just sling them into a 10-man Intercessor squad alone and expect them to carry the day.
Venoms...are okay. They're overcosted for what they do, and run into serious competition from the very aggressively priced Raider. For non-bleeding edge play though, you're probably fine. Like the wyches though, you're going to want a plan for them, and try to setup your list to support that plan.
But what do you think about Venoms instead of Raiders?
6 shots at 3D apiece is kinda sassy, innit?
Or, is Poison Tongue the only way to go with venoms?
People are afraid of the 1d3 mortal wounds for a each weapon rolling a 1 to wound for splinter cannons on the venom. It sounds nice but the venom only has 6 wounds and you're getting hot at least once per venom shooting in a phase. If it had a 5+ fnp like talos do then it wouldn't be quite so scary but considering your wracks are probably riding in the back it'd be a ridiculously dangerous endeavour.
I only played 1 game with the new 9th ed dark eldar codex so I'm no expert. Venoms are ok for the -1 ap. For my only game with 9th I used enhanced sensory organs for the boost. It's probably not worth it but I figured anything with power armor or better in cover would need the extra -1 ap as well as something that negated cover saves.
@thread: Looking at the RealSpaceRaider detachment rule, I understand that the only those able to get the obsession rules/relic that has that <obssesion>. What I'm not super duper clear, and I think I'm right, that by virtue of this RSR (and not other detachment) I'm locked out of obssession specific strategems. Right?
Sidebar: I dunno why, but I find massed Clawed Fiends in a RSR detachment (plus BH archon) intriguing:
1-6 M10' S5 T5 5A 4W model with claws being -2AP 2D that gains the Power from Pain ability? Almost a poor-man Grotesques that can be cheaply spammed.
FWIW: I also pay demon armies, and I've been digging big, multiple Spawn units. They provide distractions, buffer and mission objectives. I think clawed fiend in RSR w/ BH Archon can fill the role admirably. Thought?
Here's some rationale with the construction of this list and please comment if my rules are wrong or strategy is whacked.
9 Dark Lance shots, that eachcan be re-rolled for any misses (BH Obsession). Each kabal DL-Raider will have 2 units of Warriors where each unit has a Blaster. So, they become a "mini-me" Ravager with obj secured troops that can also dish out some poison shots.
6 Ravager DL shots, 2 of which can be re-rolled for any misses (BH Obsession).
Another way to look at this, is that I have 11 DL with rerolls to hit doing potentially 44-68 total wound damage. I know some of these wounds would be lost on some infantry units, but against elite units like a big block of blade guard, on average that's 5-6 dead blade guard (assuming inv is 4++). This isn't including 5 non-rerollable DL shots.
9 Disintegrator shots, 1 of which can be re-rolled for any misses (BH Obession).
Since my "mini-me" ravagers-like-raiders need to be within 18" of the target due to the 2x 18" ranged blasters in the warrior squads. I figured, adding PGL to the Raider and 2 warrior squad is intriguing. That's 3D3 blast shots for potential mortal wounds for "only" 15 points. Yeah, leadership can be high for some armies but I think its worth trying it for 15pts in this setup (Raider + 2x warrior squad). I put Grisly Trophies, -2 Ld, on the two Venoms (Incubi/Drazer's ride) and the Wych's Raider to help with the PGL shots. So, 3 vehicles who's only job is to get close to enemy to deliver payloads, all the while helping the PGL's shots.
All in all, a total 10d3 PGL shots in this army.
9 Disintegrators shots, sadly only one can be re-rolled, but I intend to keep the Writ Archon close by for reroll 1s of hit/wounds.
Obviously the Drazer + 2x Incubi squad + Succubus + Bloodbride jobs is to engage.
The Clawed fiend + beastmaster is on backline objective duty or if I feel the Ravagers can hold the objective, then their job is to distract.
Well, Drukhari seems to perform well in the tournament scene atm.
As can be seen in 40states.com, Drukhari dominates the top tables.
Do this army lists at the top tables provide some general insight into the strengths of Drukhari?
I'm too busy these days so that I leave the answer to the community. But seems interesting to know.
A complete analysis of the Drukhari lists at the top tables would be welcome, but I cannot give any credits.
Looked at https://www.40kstats.com/ for the first time, saw GSC has a 62% win rate and closed the tab. They are not counting a large amount of the events it seems. DE lots a lot of events this weekend and no one is talking about that, why?
But thats another topic I can rant about for hours, so lets move on.
Your List looks fine for a Kabal list, Kabals thought, Im not sure if BH or OR is better yet, both gets a free re-roll but OR gets better range, BH has the better other things like stratagem WL trait, etc... it just depends if you value range more.
Just played a game again with my DG opponent with my kabal listed above.
I think Obsidian Rose would work best for me than Black Heart. I found that if I had that extra 6" my boats would've survived a little better at range. Plus, I'd have to think that the free rerolls at the wound stage is a bit better than rerolls at the to-hit stage.
whembly wrote: Just played a game again with my DG opponent with my kabal listed above.
I think Obsidian Rose would work best for me than Black Heart. I found that if I had that extra 6" my boats would've survived a little better at range. Plus, I'd have to think that the free rerolls at the wound stage is a bit better than rerolls at the to-hit stage.
Exactly. Keep in mind anything that isn't at least 24" away will likely be charged or shot at by lots of close ranged weapons. Also if you're wielding anti tank you may want more room than 24" due to infantry bubble wrapping vehicles. This is why I like dark lances but I'm sure people still swear by dark technomancers disintegrator raiders.
Interestingly enough I'm finding transport and vehicle spam my best 8th ed build and it helps with durability but maybe other things can be useful here. I feel like splinter cannon range for venoms, raiders getting tougher and splinter racks and other boosts will make this build still effective.
I don't know enough about large amounts of melee units outside of grotesques but I'd say we are ok but not great at melee. This may have changed with 9th however.
Most of our infantry squished easily in 8th (outside of covens mostly but they tended to be more shields than dedicated killy units) so I tend to think about cost effectiveness and likelihood of being squished too quickly. The main issue being we lacked the cannon part of being glass cannons with our 8th ed codex but 9th has us hitting harder (except with shredders and blasters sadly for some reason).
whembly wrote: Just played a game again with my DG opponent with my kabal listed above.
I think Obsidian Rose would work best for me than Black Heart. I found that if I had that extra 6" my boats would've survived a little better at range. Plus, I'd have to think that the free rerolls at the wound stage is a bit better than rerolls at the to-hit stage.
Exactly. Keep in mind anything that isn't at least 24" away will likely be charged or shot at by lots of close ranged weapons.
Interestingly enough I'm finding transport and vehicle spam my best 8th ed build and it helps with durability but maybe other things can be useful here. I feel like splinter cannon range for venoms, raiders getting tougher and splinter racks and other boosts will make this build still effective.
I don't know enough about large amounts of melee units outside of grotesques but I'd say we are ok but not great at melee. This may have changed with 9th however.
Most of our infantry squished easily in 8th (outside of covens mostly but they tended to be more shields than dedicated killy units) so I tend to think about cost effectiveness and likelihood of being squished too quickly. The main issue being we lacked the cannon part of being glass cannons with our 8th ed codex but 9th has us hitting harder (except with shredders and blasters sadly for some reason).
Our melee hits really, really HARD. But, still very much a glass cannon. (outside of covens of course)
Drazer, Succabus, Wyches and Incubi(s) all hit hard, but all are squishy when a good melee attacker is able to respond. The key is to wipe them out. Then, you're out in the open, but it forces your opponent to pick and choose: Do I keep shooting at your boats? Or, do I shoot at the squishy targets moving to assault my units? DE works best by over saturating targets on the table.
Faq'd the interaction with competitive edge and razorflails (and all such interactions on the future with extra attacks and weapons/rules that make multiple hit rolls per attack)
Page 65 - Dark Technomancers
Change the first sentence to:‘Each time a unit with this Obsession is selected to shoot, you can choose to enhance any or all of the ranged weapons models in that unit are equipped with (liquifier guns and twin liquifier guns can never be enhanced).’
Yup, the eggregious stuff got nuked from orbit, but the rest of the Codex went relatively untouched. Still a little irked that Venoms didn't see some small tweaks downward to further differentiate them from Raiders, but it is what it is.
Be interesting to see what the post-FAQ armies start looking like. I think the RSR might be back on the menu now for lists that don't want to double-dip into Bloodbrides or Trueborn.
I was expecting a 10pt drop on venoms, but considering how well Drukhari are doing in tournament, a 10pt increase in raiders amounts to much the same thing.
MrPieChee wrote: I was expecting a 10pt drop on venoms, but considering how well Drukhari are doing in tournament, a 10pt increase in raiders amounts to much the same thing.
Not really, you want Raiders b.c of the 10 slots, 10 man Wyches, 5 kabals to support Incubi when it dies (and they do die contrary to popular belief) and they are toughness even without the -1 to be hit, and you can give them -1 to be hit as well.
Also Venoms don't really have a large spot when you take Incubi, Hellions, Succubi, etc...
With that said you can still make use out of them, just still not really worth the points. Players would rather take Incubi, wyches, hellions to take and hold objectives, range anti-infantry with so few shots is... meh in an objective base game.
Has anyone tried a small cadre of Dark Creed units with that -1 Ld debuff obsession?
You can kit out a couple of raiders, with just 5-man wracks and equip the raiders with grisly trophies for total of -3 Ld within 3".
Then, take a Black Heart or Obsidian Rose detachment and cram as many Raiders with 2 units of warriors and equip the sybarites with Phantasm Grenade Launchers (PGL). Then add a PGL on the raiders.
That's 3d3 PGL shots at, potentially a unit debuffed at -3...
I'm I insane thinking that's a lot of mortal wounds???
We could easily field 4 Raiders with this setup, not to mention the 2 Dark Creed Raiders also equipped PGL.
I have, it didn't do much. If you take Grisly Trophies you save points and that extra -1 doesn't really make or break it. I either was still needing an 8+ or a 4+ even with -3, so the -2 didn't stop the high LD's or LD's with buffs and it make it moot against lower LD's as well. EDIT: B.c you need to roll higher to, so LD 9 and 10 it didn't seem to matter you have to roll higher than average even with -3.
Yeah, a Raider and 2x5-Kabalites with PGL comes in at 190. The PGL's do 2 mortal wounds vs ld7, and to get a higher conversation rate it requires more investment. I think Dark Creed + Poison Tounge is better - rely on a net -2 to attrition tests (except vs Space Marines)
I had a game today vs scion. He got first turn and hit reasonably hard but due to auras and bunching up taurox I took my 2 void ravens and dropped void mines on them in my turn. This killed the invulnerable save aura character he deployed on turn 1 which was his warlord as well as did some decent damage on a taurox. Then I killed off all 3 taurox in my first turn. I also killed a significant amount of the scions he dropped from his valkyries.
All he really had left for the remaining turns was 2 valkyries, limited scions, a couple characters and a bullgryns unit. By end of turn 4 the bullgryns died and only the priest remained so he conceded.
I think the points were sorta closer than he thought due to me choosing a really bad secondary and getting second turn but I crushed him pretty hard. He did kill all my vehicles barring one void raven at almost full health but I had most of my infantry intact and full board control at the end of turn 4 and probably even turn 3.
Guys I'm telling you 3 kabals with 3 master archons each with wargear and warlord traits can be pretty strong when they all fight the same powerful enemy at once and you activate their once per game double melee phase on that unit. The 3 archons mostly wiped out a full unit of bullgryns by themselves and one archon still had yet to fight twice. He was pretty pissed.
3 trueborn units are also ridiculously potent. Always hitting on 2s with no negative modifiers to shooting ever is great. I can move my transports with heavy weapons without issue and intervening terrain never bothers them with negative modifiers. It also works really well in a full vehicle mounted force.
Sounds like you took a ridiculously casual list and crushed another ridiculously casual list (assuming your opponent was like full scions with bullgryns and tauroxes)
Scotsman is there a reason you always have to be so insulting to multiple people on this board. Seriously what's your problem dude?
This is like the 3rd time at least where you just insult me out of nowhere. The last post isn't even referring to you. It's just a random list. This is the 2nd Dark Eldar list i've made and the 2nd game i've had with the 9th edition dark eldar codex.
We don't all have the money to keep up with the meta and the amount of time to play every game possible against ultra competitive people. It's just a semi-casual game with a friend.
the_scotsman wrote: Sounds like you took a ridiculously casual list and crushed another ridiculously casual list (assuming your opponent was like full scions with bullgryns and tauroxes)
WTF is the point of your comment? You trying to say its too casual? or not causal enough? You are coming off as a
He has flyers, Ravagers, and No Cult, his list is themed and not that strong for 9th (no way to take and hold objectives), its a causal list for sure.
the_scotsman wrote: Sounds like you took a ridiculously casual list and crushed another ridiculously casual list (assuming your opponent was like full scions with bullgryns and tauroxes)
WTF is the point of your comment? You trying to say its too casual? or not causal enough? You are coming off as a
He has flyers, Ravagers, and No Cult, his list is themed and not that strong for 9th (no way to take and hold objectives), its a causal list for sure.
I have 10 grotesques and only 10 incubi but getting more incubi is tough right now. I've been basically priced out of the hobby anyway.
I agree I need more melee again. Before my last couple games it'd been a month or more easily before my last game.
As far as games go I prefer to stay in my boats where possible because once we hit land on foot we tend to squish pretty hard.
I want to change my list but it took me weeks to scrounge up enough just to buy a raider while I had other expenses to pay.
Yeah I suppose it depends who gets to the points first and who can defend them. As I said it was the first time I ran the list. If nothing else I usually have board control and usually have the points these days.
Wych cult do sound good since the covens invulnerable saves mostly went away.
I was actually aiming for several things in either current or future lists. If I use venoms at all maybe take them to block deep strike units if I have that to worry about. Stay in boats where possible if your not durable since raiders are stupidly durable compared to previous iterations. Take weapons that are maybe 24" at least where possible to avoid being charged or facing every gun possible
I'm a little worried for durability of reavers and somewhat hellions given their profiles and the range of their guns. Perhaps just better to use them a really tough minor units for board control and sneakiness. The points per model is really high too though.
I sort of want to try a chronos or maybe 2 and see if I can use the stratagem where if a unit kill something nearby a chronos it can give the full unit all of the power from pain smilies and that sounds really good for a couple things.
Trueborn x10; 2 shredders, 1 dark lance - raider; 1 dark lance, grisly trophies, splinter racks
Scourge x5
Scourge x5
Scourge x5
-----------
2,000 pts
One thing occurs to me - wouldn't an Agoniser be better than a Huskblade on the Poison Tongue Archon?
Each to their own but I'd rather be wounding on a 3+ with AP-3 D2 than have S3 AP-2 Dd3+1
As a semi-related aside, it really bothers me how much anti-synergy Poison Tongue has with other poison units and equipment.
Venom Blades seem like they should be perfect for the theme (The Duke even used a version of one!), yet they get zero benefit because PT provides no bonus whatsoever to weapons that are already Poison 2+. Why? Could they not have at least been given a pip of AP instead? Or maybe just let them auto-wound or something?
And the Lhamaean (a unit that seems perfectly in-theme for Poison Tongue) gets a double-whammy of anti-synergy. Firstly, her weapon is also Poison 2+, so again no benefit whatsoever from the bonus. But then her ability lets Archons and Trueborn auto-wound on rolls of 6s to hit . . . thus making the extra wounding bonus from PT utterly irrelevant on all such rolls.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Yeah I suppose it depends who gets to the points first and who can defend them. As I said it was the first time I ran the list. If nothing else I usually have board control and usually have the points these days.
Wych cult do sound good since the covens invulnerable saves mostly went away.
I was actually aiming for several things in either current or future lists. If I use venoms at all maybe take them to block deep strike units if I have that to worry about. Stay in boats where possible if your not durable since raiders are stupidly durable compared to previous iterations. Take weapons that are maybe 24" at least where possible to avoid being charged or facing every gun possible
I'm a little worried for durability of reavers and somewhat hellions given their profiles and the range of their guns. Perhaps just better to use them a really tough minor units for board control and sneakiness. The points per model is really high too though.
I sort of want to try a chronos or maybe 2 and see if I can use the stratagem where if a unit kill something nearby a chronos it can give the full unit all of the power from pain smilies and that sounds really good for a couple things.
If you're looking to stay pure Kabalite, Mandrakes are your choice for melee (as well as deployment and redeployment shenanigans). They're not as insanely killy as Bloodbrides, but they have reasonable duality and can be a royal nuisance if used correctly. Plus, with innate forward deployment and the ability to boop around the table at will once per game they're great for Secondaries.
And the Lhamaean (a unit that seems perfectly in-theme for Poison Tongue) gets a double-whammy of anti-synergy. Firstly, her weapon is also Poison 2+, so again no benefit whatsoever from the bonus. But then her ability lets Archons and Trueborn auto-wound on rolls of 6s to hit . . . thus making the extra wounding bonus from PT utterly irrelevant on all such rolls.
Sadly outside of cheesing WWSWF in the pre-MFM2021 days, I dont see a real role for the court. Theyre just...not compatible with the way the army wants to play.
Sadly outside of cheesing WWSWF in the pre-MFM2021 days, I dont see a real role for the court. Theyre just...not compatible with the way the army wants to play.
No, I know exactly what you mean.
Ur-Ghuls remain perpetually uninspiring.
Medusae could maybe see use if you're not using Coven and want some Liquifier guns (since DT no longer have vastly superior flamers). Though I'm not sure they're substantially better than Shredders (plus you can get 5 Scourges with Shredders for less than 4 Medusae, and the Scourges don't need a transport).
Lhamaeans are a neat idea but I remain utterly baffled as to how GW expects them to be used. There's now a slot for one to ride with 10 Trueborn in a Raider . . . but doing so cancels out their aura. Otherwise, I guess you could pay 16pts to have one join an Archon and improve whichever piece of faeces he has the misfortune to be wielding. Except if you do that then you can't, for example, include 5 Incubi unless you take a Raider (with 4 wasted seats). And lets be honest - do you really expect that 5/6th of a single attack auto-wounding to make an actual difference, compared to the entire Incubi squad?
Really, the only court members I could see myself using would be Sslyth in a PT detachment. Their stats have been cut to the bone but at 18ppm they're pretty cheap for 3-wound models with 3 S5 AP-2 attacks, a 5+++ (plus all the benefits of FNP), Bodyguard, and a Shardcarbine. And because I'm a masochist I'd give the Archon the Soul Seeker so that he could join in their 18" shooting.
Probably not super-competitive by any stretch of the imagination but it's still 12 Poison 3+ shots at 18", plus another 2 at Poison 2+ AP-2 Dd3 from the Archon. And then in melee you've got 12 S5 AP-2 Sslyth attacks, plus whatever the Archon is armed with.
I'm sure Incubi + a Djin Blade Archon will be better, but if I'm using one of those already I think this could make for a fun secondary unit.
Biggest issue with Medusae Eye Bursts is that they're Pistol, not assault. If a transport zooms, they flat out can't shoot.
I can maaaaaaybe see the PT Sslyth gunboat, but I don't know that the duality and wound sponge nature is enough to justify the cost over simply taking more Warriors, plus the added vulnerability to No Prisoners (an MSU Sslyth court is 1.2 VP by itself). It's an interesting thought though, and possibly worth looking at if Venoms ever come back into style (or if you're just tossing together a fun game).
the_scotsman wrote: Sounds like you took a ridiculously casual list and crushed another ridiculously casual list (assuming your opponent was like full scions with bullgryns and tauroxes)
WTF is the point of your comment? You trying to say its too casual? or not causal enough? You are coming off as a
He has flyers, Ravagers, and No Cult, his list is themed and not that strong for 9th (no way to take and hold objectives), its a causal list for sure.
Not intended to be a dunk or anything - sorry if it was taken as that, that's totally a fair reading.
Mostly, I was just responding to "Guys I'm telling you 3 kabals with 3 master archons each with wargear and warlord traits can be pretty strong when they all fight the same powerful enemy at once and you activate their once per game double melee phase on that unit. The 3 archons mostly wiped out a full unit of bullgryns by themselves and one archon still had yet to fight twice. He was pretty pissed."
I don't think the performance of a trio of master archons against bullgryns objectively proves their worth given the amount of stuff you have to expend to get them on the board all equipped like that, that's all. In a casual game, you can make basically any faction and subfaction and whatever work - and that's all good, by all means if you enjoy having 3 archons on the board as a way to kill elites in melee, that's fine, good on you.
The limiting factor here is just going to be your model collection, though. Presumably you have 3 archons, and you don't have...whatever equivalent points of Incubi+drazar, which would do the exact same job with less resource expenditure, just to throw an example out there.
Sorry. I was unnecessarily harsh. I have a great time with incredibly casual lists all the time, I just probably wouldnt say "guys I'm telling you 3 squads of storm guardians with meltaguns and the avatar of khaine can be really strong" even though I know that for me that group of generally totally underestimated, objectively underpowered models quite often surprises my opponents with how much value they can return/what they can do. Often, in casual games, something being a thing that nobody really sees all that often can be a big game-swinger, and triple master archons DEFINITELY fits that bill, because theyre little unassuming infantry models with a once-per-game double fight and super wonky defenses, so its really easy for an opponent to over or undercommit to countering them, which is a lot similar to my experience with how people take on the avatar, where the 5++/5+FNP+Pheonix Gem throws them for a loop and they expect to commit some marginal resources to taking him and and instead end up allowing him 2-3 turns of rampaging thru their army melta swording things to death.
Mostly, just because I dont want to be taken as an authority by newer players who might make a purchase that is, objectively, a worse choice than other options for the role/slot.
Sterling191 wrote: Biggest issue with Medusae Eye Bursts is that they're Pistol, not assault. If a transport zooms, they flat out can't shoot.
Ah, well caught. I'd overlooked the pistol part.
It's kinda funny because in 8th they probably would have benefitted from it being a Pistol (back when Eyeblasts didn't auto-hit and they wanted to hang out by the Archon in order to reroll hit rolls), but now they really want them to be Assault as they have zero synergy with the Archon and so they want to be riding around, doing their own thing.
I can maaaaaaybe see the PT Sslyth gunboat, but I don't know that the duality and wound sponge nature is enough to justify the cost over simply taking more Warriors, plus the added vulnerability to No Prisoners (an MSU Sslyth court is 1.2 VP by itself). It's an interesting thought though, and possibly worth looking at if Venoms ever come back into style (or if you're just tossing together a fun game).
I was thinking in terms of a semi-competitive list but that's a good point regarding Take No Prisoners.
Out of interest, how would you rate this idea against putting the same Archon with a unit of Mandrakes in a Venom (which was my alternative plan )?
Out of interest, how would you rate this idea against putting the same Archon with a unit of Mandrakes in a Venom (which was my alternative plan )?
Mandrakes in vehicles is a tough one. Their shooting is the wild card since the mortals can be exceptionally swingy. Their melee is solid against T3 and T4, and will generally ruin the day of something like Guard, Tau or even Sisters if they get into smaller non-fighty units (-1 to hit versus WS4 / WS5 is just brutal).
For 3 points more you get less than half the wounds, but IMO better shooting (S4 means you can plink any T7 or lower vehicle on 5s, and that's before taking into account the mortals) and a wash on melee (sneks have better quality attacks but at smaller volume, and Mandrakes have Blade Artists to help close the AP gap with their weight of dice).
Where the real difference comes in is how you use them after they pop out of the transport. Mandrakes really want to play the area denial and secondary game, whereas the Sslyth are pure bully units. Using the former as just a beatstick (while they can certainly do the job) feels like a waste of their rules.
Out of interest, how would you rate this idea against putting the same Archon with a unit of Mandrakes in a Venom (which was my alternative plan )?
Mandrakes in vehicles is a tough one. Their shooting is the wild card since the mortals can be exceptionally swingy. Their melee is solid against T3 and T4, and will generally ruin the day of something like Guard, Tau or even Sisters if they get into smaller non-fighty units (-1 to hit versus WS4 / WS5 is just brutal).
For 3 points more you get less than half the wounds, but IMO better shooting (S4 means you can plink any T7 or lower vehicle on 5s, and that's before taking into account the mortals) and a wash on melee (sneks have better quality attacks but at smaller volume, and Mandrakes have Blade Artists to help close the AP gap with their weight of dice).
Where the real difference comes in is how you use them after they pop out of the transport. Mandrakes really want to play the area denial and secondary game, whereas the Sslyth are pure bully units. Using the former as just a beatstick (while they can certainly do the job) feels like a waste of their rules.
That's fair. Okay, in that case I'll lean towards the Sslyth and use my Mandrake units for other tasks.
To be clear, Mandrakes can absolutely do the hybrid infantry role well, either in supplement to Wyches and Warriors or as a substitute for the former from inside transports. They're legitimate threats (albeit somewhat pricey from a Drukhari perspective), especially if you commit and go for 10-man squads. There's definitely play in that kind of a list and I'd be very curious to see how it works.
I personally just value their infiltration and redeployment shenanigans for non-killy tactical play, and expect to use other units for dedicated assault and shooting roles.
Now that liquifiers don't totally outshine the eyeburst, I could see a venom with 4 medusa flying around sweeping objectives as being pretty solid.
The pistol profile means you can't advance and flame, but makes them a decent enough melee threat to the things they would hunt as well since you could always overwatch (after losing the venom) as well as fire into melee on your shooting phase.
Red Corsair wrote: Now that liquifiers don't totally outshine the eyeburst, I could see a venom with 4 medusa flying around sweeping objectives as being pretty solid.
The pistol profile means you can't advance and flame, but makes them a decent enough melee threat to the things they would hunt as well since you could always overwatch (after losing the venom) as well as fire into melee on your shooting phase.
And, more pertinently in my eyes, if something tags the venom you are not required to exit in order to continue shooting with your unit of medusae.
Red Corsair wrote: Now that liquifiers don't totally outshine the eyeburst, I could see a venom with 4 medusa flying around sweeping objectives as being pretty solid.
The pistol profile means you can't advance and flame, but makes them a decent enough melee threat to the things they would hunt as well since you could always overwatch (after losing the venom) as well as fire into melee on your shooting phase.
And, more pertinently in my eyes, if something tags the venom you are not required to exit in order to continue shooting with your unit of medusae.
Thats true. Could even be useful to charge the venom at certain units for this reason.
If I can buy them after everything is done being sold out i may buy 2 boxes of incubi so i have 20 total after combining with what I already have. Im not sure an archon and drazhar are good here. I think theyre supposed to be. Anti horde is probably best left with wych armies in melee. I wonder how the other wych units do.
Are covens units more back to holding up big nasty blobs of enemies rather than killing them..it could make a lot of sense honestly.
-----
Wow this is creepy. I kinda forgot about writing this message. Maybe I was tired.
Sterling191 wrote: If you're going that hard into Incubi, not taking their force multipliers (RR1s and +1 to wound) seems a bit of an odd choice.
In my (admittedly limited experience), 5 Incubi will tend to delete most things they attack, and they then get shot to pieces. Bigger units, or adding Drazhar, results in overkill, and present an obvious and very tempting target for enemy focus fire from the start.
Sterling191 wrote: If you're going that hard into Incubi, not taking their force multipliers (RR1s and +1 to wound) seems a bit of an odd choice.
Honestly for 20 or more it wouldn’t be a bad idea. I just don’t know how expensive it’ll be to take all that. Also may be an issue of too many eggs in one basket. I’m also not thrilled by how slow transports are. I may take a flayed skull detachment or similar with them just so the transport moves a bit quicker.
As I said I don’t mind melee but I suppose I’m still shifting from the 8th ed mindset and I thought our old shoot and scoot style did well in earlier editions.
Other issue I have is buying models. I may want to try 40k on tabletop simulator a little before I commit to new units. I just don’t want to throw down 200 dollars or more down on something only for it to not mesh well with what I have or to suck outright.
I’m not sure what you guys hated flyers over. I really enjoy my double void ravens right now. I don’t use forgeworld tho due to lack of money.
Honestly for 20 or more it wouldn’t be a bad idea. I just don’t know how expensive it’ll be to take all that.
Drazhar plus a barebones Archon is 210 points. I'd personally soup the Archon up a lil bit (either to unlock a cadre of Trueborn or to make him an actual melee threat, which would synergize well with supporting the Incubi), but that's the floor.
I’m also not thrilled by how slow transports are. I may take a flayed skull detachment or similar with them just so the transport moves a bit quicker.
This is almost entirely unnecessary. Unless you're deliberately backlining your Raiders at deployment you're almost guaranteed a Turn 2 charge if the enemy comes out of their DZ more than a few milimeters..
I’m not sure what you guys hated flyers over. I really enjoy my double void ravens right now. I don’t use forgeworld tho due to lack of money.
Drukhari flyers are IMO the best in the game right now. Unfortunately, it's not quite enough to overcome the inherent drawbacks of the Flyer rules in the context of the units they compete against. Yes, the Void Raven can meme something fierce with the bomb...but each of those is a Raider filled to the brim with a 10-pack of Wyches or Kabalites you're not bringing.
Remember, Flyers cannot be hidden, and for the most part cannot score any non-killy objectives. That's a huge handicap.
Frankly I really don't care of the guns, it's an after thought in my list. I use 'em to deliver incubi(s) and be the first model to assault a unit to eat up a potential overwatch. Or, send it to objective duty.
Preface: I still think the Venom hull and their associated Cannon costs are too high to make them viable competition for Raiders for battleline duty.
They have a role, especially in a PT splash in. But its not for super poison (though it's certainly not a drawback).
It's for the combination of being easy to hide (relatively, as far as Drukhari boats go), decent delivery vectors for Grisly Trophies and 5-man Incubi / Kabalite action monkey squads / Wyches, and (most importantly) the PT redeploy. They're utility pieces, not bits to rely on to do significant damage.
yea its really hard for me to consider splinter cannon venoms. They cost way too much for very little gain, being heavy three kinda sucks while damage 2 is ok I feel like it should have been more shots instead of more damage.
Oh, another transport related question - are there any Wych Cults that offer good bonuses for transports?
I ask because I've noticed that the main reason I'm taking Kabals at all is for a single Trueborn unit and because they're the only subfaction that seems to get decent bonuses for transports (e.g. better poison for Venoms from PT, rerolls to hit or wound for Dark Lances from BH/OR).
Just wondered if there's a Wych Cult that gives useful transport bonuses (or useful stratagem access or such) that I'm forgetting about?
Luthon1234 wrote: yea its really hard for me to consider splinter cannon venoms. They cost way too much for very little gain, being heavy three kinda sucks while damage 2 is ok I feel like it should have been more shots instead of more damage.
I think Venoms just need to be cheaper. Even with Raiders getting a price increase, 75pts for a Venom (and that's without the extra cannon) seems like way too much for a vehicle with almost half the wounds and transport capacity, along with a far less useful gun. It seems like 75pts would be a reasonable price for the double-cannon version (so 65 base).
The +1Str and MW bounceback from Cursed Blade is fun, but realistically you're not going to have anything that can compare to the Kabal bonuses or the Dark Creed spooktacular aura.
You know i feel like i liked my old list you guys called "casual" before. I had a decent run vs necrons. That said i need more melee or overall anti-infantry weaponry. I did kill the leader of the necrons by the end of my turn 2 which was also his warlord and got the 10 pts for it. I think i either need shredder scourge units or incubi. I'm not sure what to think of the void ravens at this point. They're still fun for the bombs tho.
I've been told by someone that the chapter approved changed so little it's not even really worth buying it.
@sterling191: Yeah i should probably try out cursed blade. Thing is i've been a bit negatively impacted by wych cults in the past. I've never used any of the hellions i got from the old reavers+hellions box set because they were bad until our latest codex. I also feel like even though reavers are fast they were expensive in points. I might try hellions or reavers again but i just don't know. Now that bladevanes aren't a set str 4 i suppose they could be fun.
Honestly if i have to go melee i might just prefer incubi. I have to buff bloodbrides hardcore to approach being as good as incubi and incubi don't need any sub-faction to be used.
It's hard to say as i could use the speed of reavers or hellions to reach melee quickly but i don't imagine they do enough while in it.
Wyches do their work by weight of dice and rerolls, while also being excruciatingly useful disruptor units. Incubi are largely pure blenders, unless you're going MSU plus leadership debuffs to tee up their Tormentors.
I personally find there's a place for both in lists, but if you're going hard into Kabals then Incubi are what you bring.
Likewise, both Reavers and Hellions are great. They're perhaps not as point efficient as Incubi or Wyches, but their mobility, quality shooting (Reavers w/ special weapons) and hellaciously choppy anti-elite melee (Hellions) will do right by you. Plus the ability to snipe out characters with Eviscerating Flyby. They're fragile, and will likely die the turn after they go in, but if done correctly you can tie up the bulk of an opponents force for a turn because they're a threat that just have to be dealt with.
Honestly i wanted to make a CB warlord trait succubus but im just not sure its worth what id want. I suppose the 6++ bounce works for all wych cult since we start turn 1 with the 6++ armywide now.
I also kind of want to use a cronos or 2 for that stratagem that boosts a unit near a cronos to turn 5 power from pain on a unit of incubi or reavers or something. I'm not sure how well it'd work but it sounds fairly costly in points. Maybe I'll try it out eventually.
-----
Btw vipoid are ya going to reply to my dm or should I write a shorter one. I tend to write way too much in forums.
flamingkillamajig wrote: I also kind of want to use a cronos or 2 for that stratagem that boosts a unit near a cronos to turn 5 power from pain on a unit of incubi or reavers or something. I'm not sure how well it'd work but it sounds fairly costly in points. Maybe I'll try it out eventually.
IMO the Cronos stratagem is going to be most effective with Talos and Grotesques. Getting them to 5++/5+++ early on (especially if you can combine it with -1 damage) will make them pretty hard to shift.
That said, Cronos are pretty cheap and you can put them into non-Coven detachments, so there's probably not much harm shoving one into a list with Reavers or Incubi if you've got ~80pts spare.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Btw vipoid are ya going to reply to my dm or should I write a shorter
one. I tend to write way too much in forums.
I haven't forgotten, just kept getting tied up with other stuff (and there's quite a bit to reply to ). I'll try and write back soon.
vipoid wrote: Out of interest, how much mileage to you guys get out of the Cursed Blade Mortal Wound bounce ability?
Or, if anyone uses it, the CB Warlord trait that bounces Mortal Wounds on a 4+.
Surprisingly a lot. I use a succubus with shardnet/impaler, precision blows, and traitor's embrace relic (cause D3+3 mortals to unit that killed her in close combat on a 2+) to snipe enemy characters. She has become my go-to anti-Drukhari model too. She wipes out Drazhar and incubi with ease, while the mortal wounds blast right through archons, succubi, and haemonculi. Rolling a couple 6's before she dies just helps assure that she kills the enemy character/incubi.
The 6's mortal wounds come up a lot on wyches, making an already cost-effective model even more beneficial. The warlord trait on a 4+ is less useful, mostly because if you are taking hits in close combat, you are probably dead. But it isn't bad on a 2nd suicide succubus.
vipoid wrote: Out of interest, how much mileage to you guys get out of the Cursed Blade Mortal Wound bounce ability?
Or, if anyone uses it, the CB Warlord trait that bounces Mortal Wounds on a 4+.
Surprisingly a lot. I use a succubus with shardnet/impaler, precision blows, and traitor's embrace relic (cause D3+3 mortals to unit that killed her in close combat on a 2+) to snipe enemy characters. She has become my go-to anti-Drukhari model too. She wipes out Drazhar and incubi with ease, while the mortal wounds blast right through archons, succubi, and haemonculi. Rolling a couple 6's before she dies just helps assure that she kills the enemy character/incubi.
The 6's mortal wounds come up a lot on wyches, making an already cost-effective model even more beneficial. The warlord trait on a 4+ is less useful, mostly because if you are taking hits in close combat, you are probably dead. But it isn't bad on a 2nd suicide succubus.
Oh that's very interesting.
I've certainly toyed with the idea of a suicide-Succubus but wondered if the Traitor's Embrace was more of a gimmick. Great to know that it not only works but is very effective.
Also good advice about Treacherous Deceiver probably not being worth it. I'd been toying with the idea and wondering if it could be made to work - maybe using Parasite's Kiss to regain some of the wounds she'd inevitably lose - but I imagine I'd just end up throwing good points after bad.
That said, it's interesting that you suggest it might be decent on a second suicide-Succubus . . . mainly because I regard *all* my characters as being suicide units.
Couldn't you just not make the succubus the warlord but do that stratagem that gives a warlord trait to like one hq in every detachment so she reflects on a 4+. Then combine it with the final wounds finisher with treacherous deceiver. Sure she'll go down fast but everything important is gonna die with her.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Couldn't you just not make the succubus the warlord but do that stratagem that gives a warlord trait to like one hq in every detachment so she reflects on a 4+. Then combine it with the final wounds finisher with treacherous deceiver. Sure she'll go down fast but everything important is gonna die with her.
Yeah, I use the suicide succubus all the time (with shardnet+impaler obviously) she's fun but builds that allow her to just...kill her target are usually easier.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Couldn't you just not make the succubus the warlord but do that stratagem that gives a warlord trait to like one hq in every detachment so she reflects on a 4+. Then combine it with the final wounds finisher with treacherous deceiver. Sure she'll go down fast but everything important is gonna die with her.
Maybe I'm just looking at it weirdly but I see it as two different strategies:
With Treacherous Deceiver, you want her to succeed saves so that she can dish out more Mortal Wounds. On average, you'd expect her to inflict 1 mortal wound for every wound she takes. So if she loses all 5 wounds, you can expect her to have inflicted 4-5 Mortal Wounds on the enemy. However, if she takes 3 wounds (dealing 3 Mortal Wounds in the process) and then you regain them with Parasite's Kiss or something, you can potentially deal another 3 Mortal Wounds as the enemy whittles her back down to 2. Similarly, there's a great deal of value in rerolling failed saves with her as this also opens up the potential for more Mortal Wounds.
In contrast, with the Traitor's Embrace, you want her to fail saves so that she can take out the enemy along with herself. You could maybe argue that there's value in keeping her alive for a bit, so that she can try and inflict more melee damage, but to my mind that just increases the risk of an opponent dealing with her outside of combat (and thus completely negating the risk of mortal wounds when she dies).
Just to be clear, I'm not saying that the above Succubus with Parasite's Kiss is a good strategy. Maybe it could be fun if you want to try something a little different (they're only 60pts, after all). My point is more that a Treacherous Deceiver Succubus benefits from regaining lost wounds, whilst a Traitor's Embrace Succubus probably wants to expedite her death.
Actually, a thought occurs to me. You get to pick which save you use, right? So if you have a Traitor's Embrace Succubus and you want to make sure she dies at the right time, could you choose to use her 6+ armour save (even against weapons that would negate it entirely)?
We played one of the new CA2021 missions where all the objectives were in no man's land. Which put him at a disadvantage as he was hoofing it across the board. Needless to say, it didn't go well for him.
But, I want to point out a strategy that I think its worth discussing and to see if there are some optimization opportunities. Remember I want to try to build my list as Take All Comers as possible.
It's the Dark Creed Obsession + Grisly Trophies for -3LD debuff and stacking mortal wounds via Phantasm Grenade Launcher. (note, PGL need to beat the target's LD to mortal wound)
I have 9 PGL units in this list and in this game I lost one unit to morty(the raider), I got one venom within 3" of morty to bring his leadership down to 9 via the dark creed obsession (his aura shuts off the grisly trophy). The rest of PGL unit (8 left at the time) was in range and that weapon did 7 mortal wounds (he fnp 2 of them). Not too shabby, right?
Against his 10 man blight lord unit, I did get another venom within 3", but had only 6 units I believe in PGL range, which brought down that unit's leadership to 6. I rolled for decent number of shots, and was able to do 6 mortal wounds (2 models worth) before my other shooting were brought to bear. I think that's pretty dang good against deathguard.
My question to you all, my dark cohorts, is what is going to be the best delivery method to reduce leaderships in Dark Creed detachment? Do you think my use of venoms (three in this list) is good idea?
What about groteques? I nearly lost the whole squad due to combined shooting... is it worth having them as a liquifier threat and the -1 LD debuff? (I'm on the fence, but man, liquifiers are still pretty good despite the Technomancer nerf).
Venoms seem like a good idea in terms of getting those Ld debuffs where you need them (especially since they also want to get close to make use of Grizzly trophies). Not sure I'd take the second Splinter Cannon on them, though.
Another unit you could consider is the Cronos. It's quite cheap, relative to its toughness, and one of the few Coven units that benefits from the +1 to hit even after turn 3.
As for Grotesques, IMO Liquifiers aren't worth it after the DT nerf (they're okay on Wracks but I wouldn't take them elsewhere).
Also, might it be worth splitting them into 2 units of 3? That way you can spread the Ld debuff further.
In terms of other stuff in your list:
- It's weird seeing an Archon without Trueborn. Don't know if I'm in the minority here but IMO Trueborn are the sole purpose of Archons in 9th. If I'm not taking Trueborn I wouldn't even take a Kabal detachment at all. Hence, I'd highly recommend combining two Kabalite squads into one Trueborn squad and adding a Dark Lance (especially in Obsidian Rose).
- Following on from the above, I'm not sure about the Kabalite spam. Again, each to their own, but for me (and I say this as someone who endlessly spammed Kabalites throughout 8th) Kabalites just seem a bit . . . crap. Our other troops received significant buffs in 9th, yet Kabalites are still wielding the same piss-poor water pistols they were in 8th (and bear in mind that this is after the mainline troops had their survivability doubled against basic weapons).
5 OR Kabalite Warriors with a Blaster and PGL is 55pts. You get one Blaster shot with a reroll to wound (which is nice) and then 8 S2 AP0 D1 Poison 4+ shots at 15" (4 shots at 30"). The range is nice, sure, but even in optimum range those poison shots aren't averaging even a single wound on a Marine.
In contrast:
5 CB Wyches with Grave Lotus, a Blast Pistol and PGL is 60pts. You get one Blast Pistol shot (with a much shorter range and no reroll) but then you get 4 S2 AP0 D1 Poison 4+ pistol shots and then 21 S5 AP-1 D1 melee attacks plus the potential for Mortal Wounds plus the potential to trap enemies in melee.
It's up to you, of course, but I know which option I'd want to spam.
Keep in mind that Wych PGLs *must* go on the same model that carries a Blast Pistol. That means you can only ever fire one each round. Shave the points and keep the pistol back at the spire. You're rarely going to shoot it on foot (since you're almost certainly advancing to optimize charges), and with a 6" range you're unlikely to be cooking it off from the deck of a transport.
Sterling191 wrote: Keep in mind that Wych PGLs *must* go on the same model that carries a Blast Pistol. That means you can only ever fire one each round. Shave the points and keep the pistol back at the spire. You're rarely going to shoot it on foot (since you're almost certainly advancing to optimize charges), and with a 6" range you're unlikely to be cooking it off from the deck of a transport.
That's a fair point. I was trying to go for the closest comparison but you're right, if you're taking a PGL it might be worth leaving the Blast Pistols (though I suppose it also depends whether you've got anything else to spend those points on).
True, having a 5 point per MSU Wych squad refund isn't necessarily going to redefine a list, but it may be the difference between putting another special weapon onto a squad or slotting another vehicle upgrade onto a Raider / Venom.
Absolutely right that it'll be list dependent though.
@vipoid: I get your mindset and i don't really disagree when it comes to trueborn. I still use dark lance ravagers myself and the void ravens dark scythes and meme void mine (which in multiples is actually really solid against enemy units spread around hero auras and for character killing) but haven't really been using warriors if i can go with trueborn. The 2+ to hit and no modifiers ever is quite insane.
flamingkillamajig wrote: @vipoid: I get your mindset and i don't really disagree when it comes to trueborn. I still use dark lance ravagers myself and the void ravens dark scythes and meme void mine (which in multiples is actually really solid against enemy units spread around hero auras and for character killing) but haven't really been using warriors if i can go with trueborn. The 2+ to hit and no modifiers ever is quite insane.
That's fair. Kabal seems to bring by far the best vehicle buffs, so if you're leaning towards our tanks or fliers I can see them being worth it for those purposes (if I'm taking a Kabal detachment, I'll try and get all the dedicated transports for my entire list into it ).
Regarding Trueborn, BS2+ is nice but for me the real kicker is the Dark Lance. It used to be that Blasters and Dark Lances were equal but now the latter is vastly better, and so the ability to take one and fire it without the movement penalty is (IMO) what really makes Trueborn shine.
vipoid wrote: Venoms seem like a good idea in terms of getting those Ld debuffs where you need them (especially since they also want to get close to make use of Grizzly trophies). Not sure I'd take the second Splinter Cannon on them, though.
Yeah, it's their speed is why I chosen them. I think you're right about the 2nd splinter cannon though, just really doesn't seem like it's worth it.
Another unit you could consider is the Cronos. It's quite cheap, relative to its toughness, and one of the few Coven units that benefits from the +1 to hit even after turn 3.
Okay, I'm intrigued.
As for Grotesques, IMO Liquifiers aren't worth it after the DT nerf (they're okay on Wracks but I wouldn't take them elsewhere).
Also, might it be worth splitting them into 2 units of 3? That way you can spread the Ld debuff further.
Even w/o the old DT buff, liquifiers are probably the best cheap flamer-type weapon on the game.
It's value now is the -2AP. It's cheap enough to spam AND it's a counter to certain horde lists. Remember I'm trying to build out a TAC list...
But to your point, splitting them into 2 units is definitely worth considering.
In terms of other stuff in your list:
- It's weird seeing an Archon without Trueborn. Don't know if I'm in the minority here but IMO Trueborn are the sole purpose of Archons in 9th. If I'm not taking Trueborn I wouldn't even take a Kabal detachment at all. Hence, I'd highly recommend combining two Kabalite squads into one Trueborn squad and adding a Dark Lance (especially in Obsidian Rose).
I was trying to maximize the number of PGL shots, hence why I opted for 2x warriors in Raider for a 3D3 PGL unit. However, 1 less PGL in favor of a Truborn unit is definitely worth considering.
- Following on from the above, I'm not sure about the Kabalite spam. Again, each to their own, but for me (and I say this as someone who endlessly spammed Kabalites throughout 8th) Kabalites just seem a bit . . . crap. Our other troops received significant buffs in 9th, yet Kabalites are still wielding the same piss-poor water pistols they were in 8th (and bear in mind that this is after the mainline troops had their survivability doubled against basic weapons).
5 OR Kabalite Warriors with a Blaster and PGL is 55pts. You get one Blaster shot with a reroll to wound (which is nice) and then 8 S2 AP0 D1 Poison 4+ shots at 15" (4 shots at 30"). The range is nice, sure, but even in optimum range those poison shots aren't averaging even a single wound on a Marine.
In contrast:
5 CB Wyches with Grave Lotus, a Blast Pistol and PGL is 60pts. You get one Blast Pistol shot (with a much shorter range and no reroll) but then you get 4 S2 AP0 D1 Poison 4+ pistol shots and then 21 S5 AP-1 D1 melee attacks plus the potential for Mortal Wounds plus the potential to trap enemies in melee.
It's up to you, of course, but I know which option I'd want to spam.
The way I look at it, is that a 2x 5-man warrior squad with 2x blasters and PGL in a Raider+PGL is a unique "mini-me" Ravager, especially with the Obsidian Rose obsession. I'd have 3 chances to reroll the wound die in that "unit".
I do like your points regarding CB Wyches. I can either drop the incubis for wyches and/or swap out a Raider w/ warriors with a Raider w/ wyches.
Sorry, I think I phrased my comments about the Liquifier Gun a little poorly.
It's not that I think it's a bad gun, it's that I think it's a bad gun on Grotesques. Mainly because of the opportunity cost.
On Wracks it's a fantastic gun as you're getting it in addition to your melee weapons. However, on Grotesques, you have to give up your best melee weapon to get the gun. I'd much rather keep the D2 melee attacks and leave the liquifier gun for Wracks.
As for Warriors, I totally get what you're saying. Hell, I used the same tactic back in 8th as I liked having pseudo-Ravagers that turned into 10-man squads (with 2/3 the firepower plus poison weapons) when killed.
The issue is that Warriors are no longer packing comparable firepower to the Ravager. The Ravager's lances do d6+2 damage but the Warriors are still stuck doing d6 damage. I see that as a marked difference in damage.
Regarding the Wyches, I'd definitely replace Warriors instead of Incubi. IMO Incubi are one of the best units in the book, plus they benefit from the Ld debuffs (as they can force units to fight last if they fail Ld tests).
Concur on the Incubi. They may look like they do a similar thing to Wyches, but they're tooled up for very different roles. Incubi are what Drukhari have that can go toe to toe with elite targets. Wyches (even with their ludicrous weight of dice) can and will struggle against higher Toughness and good save targets. Incubi (ideally boosted to the 9s with Drazhar) will outright cleave through most things that Wyches would bounce right off of.
Likewise Wyches are faaaaaar better suited to horde-blending, which the Incubi can struggle with. They're supplementary units, not competitive ones.
I've taken all that you've discussed (can't really argue against) and came up with another list, one that I didn't see until now.
So, if I really wanted to leverage the PGL in shots, and be able to stack the mortal wounds, I need units that has both the grisly trophy and use the Dark Creed obsession.
I think a RSR detachment is effectively the best way to accomplish that.
Spoiler:
Obsession:
Cult of the Cursed Blade
The Dark Creed
Kabal of Black Heart
This is a pretty significant change from my previous list.
There's 10x PGL in this list (as opposed to just 9x PGL)
There's 5 units of Dark Creed + Grisly Trophy (as opposed to just 3x units)
Still plenty of dark light and poison weapons in this army, including the Truborns.
I've taking your incubi suggestions to heart and kept the two 5x incubi units for elite hunting.
I have 2 units of wyches for horde control or keep things in close combat (dishing PGL as well). I only have 10 wyches. If I had 10 more, I think I'd swap out the two warriors for wyches. This might be on my next purchase depending on how my game goes.
I swapped out the grots for two Talois. I think the talos works better for center control and counter-assault duty.
Finally, in a black heart RSR, Claw Fiends with PtP is sorta spicy, getting 6++ beginning the game and assault after running (5++ by turn 4!). They're effectively WS3 by turn 2, so they pack a bit more punch than csm spawns. These guys are pedal to the medal for no man's land to be that cheap distraction carnifex role. (in a pinch obj duty too).
I'm digging this list... but, my only hesitation is the Black Heart obsession.
I may swap it for the Obsidian Rose for the extra 6" and re-roll wounds (lose out PtP for Clawed Fiends). In fact, I'm probably leaning towards 60% Obsidian Rose, 40% Black Heart.
Keep in mind that Clawed Fiends don't get PfP, even in an RSR. I'm personally not sold on their utility, especially when for the points you're laying down on the Fiends and their handler you can deny your opponent 3 points on Assasinate and bring either a half dozen fully tooled up Reavers, or ten Hellions (you'd need to shave a few points to fit the Hellions, but you'll also be able to potentially bring two more PGLs), both of which can serve in a very similar role but with faaaaaar better output. The Hellions can even do most actions since they're Infantry (Characters and Beasts generally can't interact with the action secondaries barring one or two mission specific picks IIRC).
You're already taking Cursed Blade as your Cult, which is what both Reavers and Hellions desperately want to be.
With regards to Obsidian Rose versus Black Heart, since you're taking an RSR the Black Heart bonuses win out IMO. Yes, the range boost on OR is amazing (it's my preferred non-RSR Kabal, full disclosure), but with your Archon able to hand out RR1s to hit for anything CORE in the detachment, plus allowing your Incubi to count PfP one tier higher, it's just no contest. You're bringing a lot of spicy CORE Coven and Cult units plus your Blades for Hire.
@Sterling191: to your point about Clawed Fiends not getting PfP, I'm not sure I'm seeing that restriction. In the book I see the fiends as the "Blades for Hires" keyword, and the Black Heart RSR rule does give "Blades for Hire" the PtP.
However, I really do like your idea about swapping the Clawed Fiends for Hellions. I was able to add 2x 5 man Hellions with PGL, by dropping wrack liquifiers, beast master and clawed fiends (giving me 12 units of PGL!).
Updated list:
Spoiler:
Obsession:
Cult of the Cursed Blade
The Dark Creed
Kabal of Black Heart
I like your revised list a lot more. Hope it serves you well.
whembly wrote: @Sterling191: to your point about Clawed Fiends not getting PfP, I'm not sure I'm seeing that restriction. In the book I see the fiends as the "Blades for Hires" keyword, and the Black Heart RSR rule does give "Blades for Hire" the PtP.
Blades for Hire do benefit from Black heart's +1 to PfP in a RSR detachment.
The issue for Beasts is that they don't have PfP to begin with (and neither BH nor the RSR gives it to them).
Power from Pain is a datasheet ability. If a datasheet doesnt have it, it doesnt get the bonuses. And Clawed Fiends don't have PfP (none of the beasts do).
It's why for instance the Reaper didn't get any benefit from actually being in a Drukhari army until a recent FAQ: Forge World didn't include the ability on its datasheet so despite being for all intents and purposes a bigger, pointier Ravager it wasn't affected by the ability.
Okay guys, here's my update with the latest build I've used up thread.
I played against infantry spammed necrons. (no vehicles and only one monster).
When playing against an army-wide leadership 10... the PGL really didn't do too much.
However, since I was able to pull of assaults with both my incubi and wych squads, he couldn't compete against how well Drukhari is able to "trade up" against his expense units.
I expected my kabalites and coven units to do what they did, but the surprise for me were the wyches and hellions.
Getting the charge off with my wyches... man, they're dangerous. (and don't forget the AP value gets better on 6s!)
And Hellions! I used to think they're overpriced, but really they're just about right or even under priced! 2w models that pack quite a bit of punch. Yes, they're squishy as all get out, but Drukhari has other units on the table opponents usually focuses on... and hellions are sneaky fast and can smash face.
Question about secondaries.
What is better? Engage on All fronts? Or Herd the Prey?
It’s matchup dependent. Slower armies will almost certainly max you out on Herd, while against quicker armies Engage may be better. That said, there is absolutely a case for Herd as a means to dictate what your opponent has to do by putting bodies on the firing line.
Sterling191 wrote: It’s matchup dependent. Slower armies will almost certainly max you out on Herd, while against quicker armies Engage may be better. That said, there is absolutely a case for Herd as a means to dictate what your opponent has to do by putting bodies on the firing line.
Herd is basically always better. Goons has it as the highest average scoring secondary in the game I believe. Remember, if you tabled your opponent on T5 you score 8 points just for that turn. Keep 2 quarters clear for 3 rounds and it's 12 points. It's amazing.
What is better? Engage on All fronts? Or Herd the Prey?
For me it also depents on the mission:
- any mission (11,12, 21, 22, 23, 31) where the opponents needs to move >=12" to reach the 3rd and 4th quarter => consider taking herd - any mission (13, 32, 33) where the opponent can start in 3 quarters or can reach 3 quarters 1st turn => re-consider taking herd
Another question/scenarios by Drukhari brothers and sisters...
I played a game yesterday wanting to try something and I hope it's legit.
A 2nd turn deep striking charge by wyches in a Raider.
Here's the setup:
-I had a Raider loaded with two 5x wych squad and a tricked-out succubus (Cult of Strife) and put it in reserve.
-My opponent had a 20x sisters of battle unit with base equipment to hold one obj in his backline and be one of the WWSWF high priced unit.
Reinforcement step in turn 2 (earliest I can DS)::
-I place my Raider 9" away from SoB unit.
-I pop the 1CP for 'Murderous Descent' to disembark my two wych units and succubus not closer than 9" to SoB.
-Picture this: 1 wych unit to left of Raider and other wych unit is on the right of the Raider with Succubus also 9" away.
See if this is tactically sound....
I want to charge with the Raider first because:
A) to soak up any overwatch
and importantly B) provide an easier way for the wyches/succubus to make it in combat
Because of Cult of Strife, there's a good chance that this is the first assault for my army so the Raider is getting +1 to the charge.
I'll need a roll of an 8 or better on 2d6 and have the ability to re-roll the charge via the strategem (right?). Pretty decent odds to make it in combat.
Here's the $64,000 question: Let's say I make combat. The Raider is measured approximately 7" from nose to rear fin and the rear is 2" away from my wych units. In order for my units to make it in combat, my units only need to roll at least a 2 on a 2d6 right? They just need to be within 0.5" of any of your own unit in engagement range of the enemy. Right?
JNAProductions wrote: Nope. You gotta make it to Engagement Range of the enemy unit.
Ooooh... so the 0.5" requirement is only for the same unit (usually because you have a big squad).
Okay. I played that wrong.
In addition, the Strife rule isn't +1 to charge if it's your first charge, it's +1 to charge if all the enemy units being targeted by the charge are unengaged. So if you have Strife units X and Y and your opponent has targets 1 and 2, X charges 1 and Y charges 2, then both X and Y get +1 to charge.
JNAProductions wrote: Nope. You gotta make it to Engagement Range of the enemy unit.
Ooooh... so the 0.5" requirement is only for the same unit (usually because you have a big squad).
Okay. I played that wrong.
In addition, the Strife rule isn't +1 to charge if it's your first charge, it's +1 to charge if all the enemy units being targeted by the charge are unengaged. So if you have Strife units X and Y and your opponent has targets 1 and 2, X charges 1 and Y charges 2, then both X and Y get +1 to charge.
Oh, great point! Thanks for that breakdown.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Another question: I'm currently converting the AoS Namarti Reavers into Mandrakes.
Has anyone have success with this unit?
I'm thinking of using them to ensure they're on the no-man zone's objective by turn 1 and plan on taking on the following Secondaries:
1) Herd the Prey or Engage on All Fronts. (if opponent is mobile I'll probably stick with EOAF but otherwise HTP)
2) Raise the Banners High or Retrieve Octarius Data. (what's your preference?)
~~ this is where I struggle and obviously opponent dependent ~~
3) a pick between Grind Them Down or Assassinate/Bring It down or Abhor the Witch. (I'm not digging To The Last anymore, as my most expensive units ie, Drahzar and Ravagers are opponent's top priority no matter what and I'm not interested in having a court play hide-n-seek).
Oddly been finding full squads of barebones reavers to be ok. They strike first and can hold down problem shooting units and such.
I decided to take cursed blade so I got +1S for cult alone making the reavers hit at STR 5. I also chose for more attacks but probably should've chosen toughness instead. I never got to see how the incubi did but I held him back and would have scored a lot.
He said I wiped out a quarter of his necrons or quarter of his points in my first turn alone.
Oddly after turn 1 he conceded. I got to go first but I felt that gave up way too easily. Eh whatever.
------
I played at this guys house and he drove me there and nice as it was to do that for somebody his place must've had roaches and it was probably 2 floors up from the ground floor. Like I get my cleaning habits are a little wanting but Jesus I'm shocked some dudes have a heap of trash for a home with how poorly they clean everything. Whatever if nothing else their loss is my win. Next time a lady I like sees my place she'll be impressed and pleased it won't smell or nothing like the other dudes might.
One of my local opponents is hoping to get some tournament prep games in against drukhari with his death guard. I haven't been tuned in to the competitive scene in a while. What sort of units should I field to give him a rough idea of what to expect in a tournament?
I generally field Poisoned Tongue, some incubi and cursed blade wyches, and lots of dark light. Seems like those are pretty standard and also good examples of the sort of thing to give Death Guard a hard time?
I've seen lots of talk about the Void Raven, but I don't own any of those. Though I could proxy my hemlock as one. Not sure if a single voidraven is really representative of a tournament list though.
You're not likely to see a Voidraven on the higher end of a tournament. Mostly what your colleague is going to need to learn how to handle is the Cult of Strife strats from Book of Rust, Drazhar and some of his lads, plus a wall of darklight. The rest will vary based on player preference.
Poisoned Tongue seems to be creeping up in prevalence with the advent of AdMech dominance, but that may just be some statistical noise in who shows up where. Likewise DT Cronos plus or minus Wracks with souped up Hexrifles/Ossefactors show up not infrequently.
I played dark eldar vs eldar earlier at 2000 pts. I went first and he conceded bu end of turn 2. I suppose its better than my last opponent before which played necrons where i went first and he conceded after turn 1. Funny thing is I think the necron player just let the battle get to him though I did take my sweet time making my list which was actually a take all comers list. He didnt mind and sorta wanted me to cater to him even though i didnt.
My current list has dark lance ravagers and a couple kabal trueborn units with 1 dark lance and 2 shredders per unit in dark lance raiders. I also have a dark lance raider with 10 incubi. Finally 2 units of cursed blade reavers which I run bare bones right now. The first time i ran them with one extra attack combat drug but this time i ran them with +1 toughness. The remaining cult units had toughness boost as well.
Getting ready to play a big tournament next weekend.
I've converted the AoS Namarti Reavers into Mandrakes.
Has anyone have success with this unit?
I'm thinking of using them to ensure they're on the no-man zone's objective by turn 1 and plan on taking on the following Secondaries:
1) Herd the Prey or Engage on All Fronts. (if opponent is mobile I'll probably stick with EOAF but otherwise HTP)
2) Raise the Banners High or Retrieve Octarius Data. (what's your preference? I plan on using Mandrakes a lot for these sorts of actions)
~~ this is where I struggle and obviously opponent dependent ~~ 3) a pick between Grind Them Down or Assassinate/Bring It down or Abhor the Witch. (I'm not digging To The Last anymore, as my most expensive units ie, Drahzar and Ravagers are opponent's top priority no matter what and I'm not interested in having a court play hide-n-seek).
Can I get some recommendations for secondaries in 1,000 point games? The FLGS has been doing a lot of 1k games lately, but I can't seem to find a good third secondary for my army. I've been doing:
Herd the Prey
While We Stand
Raise Banners
Herd the Prey is usually easy points. While We stand isn't great, but it works. Raise Banners is starting to feel like a trap. Often times, it seems like I'd be better off keeping the units that perform the actions focused on killing things.
I was somewhat convinced by a friend to take reavers as I have been but with heat lances instead of bare bones. Also using the +1 to hit BS drug and maybe the obsession that improves shooting against flyers so I’m almost always hitting with 2s at all times.
It could be fun and it’d be easy to do. All I gotta do is downgraded trueborn and bloodbrides into their worse crappier forms and I may have the points for it.
Heard people were doing this anyway since 9th ed codex came out.
Honestly my advice is to ask some other dakka people esp. people that use them. It was never really my thing personally.
I’ve generally not used talos but back in the day they were good. I heard when dark technomancers was semi nerfed (but mostly for liquifiers) the haemonculus coven stuff wasn’t as good. I also wasn’t a huge fan of nerfing inv. saves for good FnP saves but for talos the good armor might make it much better.
I'm noticing that Drukhari these days (especially Kabalites) are pretty strong against Orks. Their splinter weapons make a mockery of Toughness 5, while their Venoms can only be hit on 6's by most Ork shooting.
-Guardsman- wrote: I'm noticing that Drukhari these days (especially Kabalites) are pretty strong against Orks. Their splinter weapons make a mockery of Toughness 5, while their Venoms can only be hit on 6's by most Ork shooting.
.
Sadly no "good" ork list has boys in it. Its just Outriders and Spearheads, if they did take a Patrol then its 1 throw away troop.
How are heat lances on bikes? I've been thinking of taking them with the +1 BS combat drug and maybe the cult that gives +1 to hit vs flying units. I heard someone say flyers are real big right now for some reason so i'm gonna try it. I was planning to use that build anyway.
Drdotts wrote: I’m brand new to the army, what is everyone’s opinion on Talos units?
Wanted to note, now that Admech and Orks flyers are insane, Gauntlets are better.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Drdotts wrote: What do we lose exactly when taking a RSR? I was thinking about a RSR brigade
Brigades are insanely hard to complete and still have a strong list, but if you go MSU troops, 2x3 Cronos , 3x5 Incubi, a combo of any Hellions, Reavers, or Scourges.
Its a mix of MSU and DT/BH/CoS, CoS is there for the small boost of anti-OW, fight first, etc.. DT for damage, BL to give Incubi boost, Drazhar to do so also. Should be 2k. Secondaries anything for actions, bc Wracks and Wyches can do that, Reavers/Hellions for Engage or long range movement suppoer.
In short, we coven now with a small wych supplement.
But also Ravager seem nicer too. With Trueborn going up and the Raider, together with a basic load out its 250pts (maybe even 260 if you want some extras) 2 Ravagers are 260pts.....
Talos and Grots being cheaper is nice, Haemonculus is -10pt tax now at least
Archon didn't need +5pts... wtf Bloodbrides are now unplayable.... thanks GW Flyers are a little cheaper, still not cheap enough, they just don't do enough, especially when the Ravager is 130pts
Raider got hit a little to hard IMO.
Succubus before players were taking 3 a 3rd one with nothing on it or just a small relic, now that will never happen, she wasn't worth her points without a relic/wlt combo, now you must take the combos to even want her... so sad.
Beasts still not touched
BSF Ur-ghoul not touched
Court not touched
Trueborn are meh now
Tyel wrote: Succubus: +20 (probably fair-- but oof)
Bleh. I don't run wyches, but I was under the impression that Succubi were already pretty mediocre at what their fluff says they're supposed to be good at (dueling), given their lack of non-relic Damage 2 or Damage D3 melee weapons.
Tyel wrote: Succubus: +20 (probably fair-- but oof)
Bleh. I don't run wyches, but I was under the impression that Succubi were already pretty mediocre at what their fluff says they're supposed to be good at (dueling), given their lack of non-relic Damage 2 or Damage D3 melee weapons.
Succubi on the table are for sure equal to their fluff IF given a WLT and Relic, the pure datasheet is pretty bad.
Tyel wrote: Succubus: +20 (probably fair-- but oof)
Bleh. I don't run wyches, but I was under the impression that Succubi were already pretty mediocre at what their fluff says they're supposed to be good at (dueling), given their lack of non-relic Damage 2 or Damage D3 melee weapons.
Can't help but agree with this.
I'd been playing around with some fluffy-but-suboptimal Succubus builds. They probably wouldn't have achieved a whole lot (especially compared to the 'good' builds), but at least I could console myself that they were only 60pts. Now they're still just as bad but cost 80pts apiece. Thanks, GW.
Would it really have been so hard to just make their basic wargear less crap? Same goes for the Archon (who inexplicably went up in points). That way there wouldn't have been a massive leap in effectiveness if you took one of the melee artefacts.
But no, now you have to take a very specific combination of warlord trait and artefact if you want your HQ to even be worth its base cost.
Also, anyone know why Bloodbrides and Trueborn went up in cost? Trueborn were good, sure, but I'm not convinced they were that good. Personally, I was already struggling to justify them after the mandatory Archon-tax (plus the fact that there wasn't a whole lot else I even wanted from Kabal, since non-Trueborn Kabalites just suck). And Bloodbrides were a unit I was already struggling to justify at the best of times.
vipoid wrote: Came back in the last few days after hearing about a big balance update. Turns out it's just the usual 'unit X is in now, unit Y is out'.
Shall we actually fix the problems with units? No, just randomly rearrange their point costs and call it a day.
Tyel wrote: Succubus: +20 (probably fair-- but oof)
Bleh. I don't run wyches, but I was under the impression that Succubi were already pretty mediocre at what their fluff says they're supposed to be good at (dueling), given their lack of non-relic Damage 2 or Damage D3 melee weapons.
Can't help but agree with this.
I'd been playing around with some fluffy-but-suboptimal Succubus builds. They probably wouldn't have achieved a whole lot (especially compared to the 'good' builds), but at least I could console myself that they were only 60pts. Now they're still just as bad but cost 80pts apiece. Thanks, GW.
Would it really have been so hard to just make their basic wargear less crap? Same goes for the Archon (who inexplicably went up in points). That way there wouldn't have been a massive leap in effectiveness if you took one of the melee artefacts.
But no, now you have to take a very specific combination of warlord trait and artefact if you want your HQ to even be worth its base cost.
Also, anyone know why Bloodbrides and Trueborn went up in cost? Trueborn were good, sure, but I'm not convinced they were that good. Personally, I was already struggling to justify them after the mandatory Archon-tax (plus the fact that there wasn't a whole lot else I even wanted from Kabal, since non-Trueborn Kabalites just suck). And Bloodbrides were a unit I was already struggling to justify at the best of times.
Trueborn with 2 blasters, a DL, and a Raider is now 10pts less than 2 Ravagers. So I dropped my Trueborn for 1 Ravager, my list can ot stay the same as before just I lose 10 wounds on the table. But I then dropped BB's for normal Wyches and picked up a 5man Wrack units to throw on objectives. Over all I lost maybe 2% of power.
This update honestly didn't help tone DE down in a good way at all, just in a bad way that frustrates DE players, but I guess the SM community is happy and that is all that matters to GW.....
I'm looking at starting a crusade army soon, and I know I want to build up into a real space raid over time, but I don't know which aspect of Commaragh to begin with.
We're playing 25 power level, going up 25 each month, so essentially over the first 3 months I'll add Kabal, coven and cult patrols into the mix.
I'm leaning towards a poison tongue Kabal, coven of 12 and cursed blade cult.
Do you think each of the lists has a distinct advantage at lower points vs at higher points?
Kabal: archon + incubi in venom, 10 warriors in a raider
Cult: Succubus + 10 wyches in raider, 5 wyches in venom, 3 reavers
ALEXisAWESOME wrote: I'm looking at starting a crusade army soon, and I know I want to build up into a real space raid over time, but I don't know which aspect of Commaragh to begin with.
We're playing 25 power level, going up 25 each month, so essentially over the first 3 months I'll add Kabal, coven and cult patrols into the mix.
I'm leaning towards a poison tongue Kabal, coven of 12 and cursed blade cult.
Do you think each of the lists has a distinct advantage at lower points vs at higher points?
Kabal: archon + incubi in venom, 10 warriors in a raider
Cult: Succubus + 10 wyches in raider, 5 wyches in venom, 3 reavers
So for Crusade there is something to watch out for and that is transports, you have to declare where they go when you get them, this might change the order you want things.
Honestly At 25-50pl games being on small tables its going to be a rock, paper, scissor match anyways, Coven will be the best to hit the middle ground, yes coven are S tier in general for us right now but at 25/50 PL 1 succubus can win you the game, 1 Hellion unit can lock down their key unit, etc... Kabal over all is more of utility now, Archon with Court are still great with some transports, but at lower point level that is equal to Coven and can be stronger bc of the Archon not being able to be shot at, can HI,a nd fights them last, and Incubi punch above their weight easily too.
Coven will give you some tank and killing power but at the same time just slow enough for a turn or 2 to have your opponents given a real game. You also don't need transports right away.
I know it's a bit early to speculate much but how do you think we'll handle tau again. Tau are always such a tough match-up for us. You get too close and you die and yet if they're anything like previous editions that's exactly how they'll be. That said the railgun hits so hard i dunno what we can do with our vehicles except spam em.
Also where are dark eldar as far as army tiers are considered right now.
flamingkillamajig wrote: I know it's a bit early to speculate much but how do you think we'll handle tau again. Tau are always such a tough match-up for us. You get too close and you die and yet if they're anything like previous editions that's exactly how they'll be. That said the railgun hits so hard i dunno what we can do with our vehicles except spam em.
Also where are dark eldar as far as army tiers are considered right now.
My most feared match up for anything not Coven sadly. With Suits able to shoot in melee there are no safe places anymore. But hopefully they are not as shooty as they are and instead of more shots their shots are just better (they have way to many right now if they get buffs, they need staying power buffs not more shooting buffs).
If you're seeing lots of Tau in your meta... I'm tempted to go full-bore triple-patrol of wyches and swarm the table with many, many wyches. No vehicles. In place of vehicles, use hellions, scourges and bikers.
Resurrect the old DE Footdar armies.
Max out using the Webway portals to incur pressure early.
Consider Mandrakes to hold objects, center tables.
On a decent tourny table, DE can bounce from obscuring terrain to obscuring terrain to pull of successful charges.
We still need more info on baseline suit stats and how markerlights will function. Expect the tanks to be BS4 base (educated inference from FW Hammerhead variants).
I genuinely expect accuracy maluses to really hurt Tau, but getting in their face is still looking to be a successful tactic. Especially if the enemy goes hard on railgun platforms.
whembly wrote: If you're seeing lots of Tau in your meta... I'm tempted to go full-bore triple-patrol of wyches and swarm the table with many, many wyches. No vehicles. In place of vehicles, use hellions, scourges and bikers.
Resurrect the old DE Footdar armies.
Max out using the Webway portals to incur pressure early.
Consider Mandrakes to hold objects, center tables.
On a decent tourny table, DE can bounce from obscuring terrain to obscuring terrain to pull of successful charges.
whembly wrote: If you're seeing lots of Tau in your meta... I'm tempted to go full-bore triple-patrol of wyches and swarm the table with many, many wyches. No vehicles. In place of vehicles, use hellions, scourges and bikers.
Resurrect the old DE Footdar armies.
Max out using the Webway portals to incur pressure early.
Consider Mandrakes to hold objects, center tables.
On a decent tourny table, DE can bounce from obscuring terrain to obscuring terrain to pull of successful charges.
I was thinking of using bikers and maybe hellions but i'm not sure about scourge. I've always had bad experience with scourge doing too little and dying. Maybe that's changed but i wouldn't know.
I agree that negative aim modifiers would be great though vs tau and maybe that's good with mandrakes. Are venoms also a possibility? They have negative modifiers to be shot at but usually they can be spammed pretty easily. Sadly not much worthwhile can be put in them so maybe venoms are a waste of time.
I haven't played in a while due to 40k hobby fatigue but how are venoms in points vs raiders? If i recall an old tactic in WHFB 8th ed when cannons were used is using lots of large targets or none at all and no in between. Perhaps spammed transports or cheap vehicles will be like a sniper rifle vs a swarm.
Obsession
. *Custom Coven*: Artists of the Flesh (All-Consuming)
+ Stratagems +
Stratagem: Prizes from the Dark City [-1CP]
+ No Force Org Slot +
Court of the Archon [10 PL, 158pts]: Kabal of the Black Heart
. Medusae
. Sslyth
. Sslyth
. Sslyth
. Sslyth
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
+ HQ +
Archon [5 PL, 90pts, -1CP]: Ancient Evil, Huskblade, Kabal of the Black Heart, Overlord, Splinter Pistol, Stratagem: Tolerated Ambition, The Djin Blade
. Splintered Genius (Black Heart): Splintered Genius
Haemonculus [4 PL, 70pts]: As Detachment (Coven), The Animus Vitae
vipoid wrote: Why Artists of Flesh in an army of 1-wound models?
You roll less dice on FNP verse multi damage weapons.
It's a boring spamy list which is par for the course with Cheema. He got nuked by a Nid list anyway and appeared to be getting pretty salty. I mention that last part because it highlights some of the behavior that occurs behind these lists, and what helps with their success, luckily the other guy didn't put up with his crap.
It's silly builds like this that end up getting units nerfed. Not many people are going to buy 165 wracks. Thats 33 boxes and like $1,500 on just wracks...
wuestenfux wrote: Well, Mani's Wrack spam list with about 170 Wracks is ruling. Won the latest Nottingham event and is in top 4 of the first day at LVO.
Obsession . *Custom Coven*: Artists of the Flesh (All-Consuming)
+ Stratagems +
Stratagem: Prizes from the Dark City [-1CP]
+ No Force Org Slot +
Court of the Archon [10 PL, 158pts]: Kabal of the Black Heart . Medusae . Sslyth . Sslyth . Sslyth . Sslyth . Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal) . Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal) . Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal) . Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
+ HQ +
Archon [5 PL, 90pts, -1CP]: Ancient Evil, Huskblade, Kabal of the Black Heart, Overlord, Splinter Pistol, Stratagem: Tolerated Ambition, The Djin Blade . Splintered Genius (Black Heart): Splintered Genius
Haemonculus [4 PL, 70pts]: As Detachment (Coven), The Animus Vitae
Yeah this list has been talked about a lot, just no one wanted to put it together, Mani however will put any and every list together no matter the cost lol.
Wracks will get a 1 or 2 (most likely 2 at this point) points increase soon.
Wait so one competitive player ruins a thing in a way most couldn't even attempt at because it costs 1500 USD and is spammy and boring and yet that's enough reason for GW to nerf it?
That's like nerfing beasts because one guy managed to afford making almost an entire beasts list and it ended up cheesy. The difference in this case is wracks are that bad looking. Sometimes i almost forget we even have beasts in our army because i never see anybody take em. At least some people like wracks.
-------
Btw was i the only one salty about that Eldar getting so much new stuff and not just re-vamped units but whole brand new units. Reminds me of a chaos player i know that got so upset his army was always snubbed for space marines or some other faction. That's honestly one of the reasons i barely play dark eldar anymore. They're cool and all but most of the old armies don't get new units which is why i was making the switch to Admech since they're new enough and GW cares about em enough. I just feel sorry for custodes and to a lesser extent ynnari or some others. They have like 5 units before GW couldn't be bothered to give them new stuff because they stopped caring about em. God imagine having to play forgeworld just so you have access to more than 5 units.
Sure maybe dark eldar have a lot as is but at least one or two new units every 5 years. That isn't asking a lot.
wuestenfux wrote: Well, Mani's Wrack spam list with about 170 Wracks is ruling. Won the latest Nottingham event and is in top 4 of the first day at LVO.
Obsession
. *Custom Coven*: Artists of the Flesh (All-Consuming)
+ Stratagems +
Stratagem: Prizes from the Dark City [-1CP]
+ No Force Org Slot +
Court of the Archon [10 PL, 158pts]: Kabal of the Black Heart
. Medusae
. Sslyth
. Sslyth
. Sslyth
. Sslyth
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
+ HQ +
Archon [5 PL, 90pts, -1CP]: Ancient Evil, Huskblade, Kabal of the Black Heart, Overlord, Splinter Pistol, Stratagem: Tolerated Ambition, The Djin Blade
. Splintered Genius (Black Heart): Splintered Genius
Haemonculus [4 PL, 70pts]: As Detachment (Coven), The Animus Vitae
Yeah this list has been talked about a lot, just no one wanted to put it together, Mani however will put any and every list together no matter the cost lol.
Wracks will get a 1 or 2 (most likely 2 at this point) points increase soon.
Yea and meanwhile veteran skitarii and rustalkers crush the LVO, both of which are still criminally under cost.
wuestenfux wrote: Well, Mani's Wrack spam list with about 170 Wracks is ruling. Won the latest Nottingham event and is in top 4 of the first day at LVO.
Obsession
. *Custom Coven*: Artists of the Flesh (All-Consuming)
+ Stratagems +
Stratagem: Prizes from the Dark City [-1CP]
+ No Force Org Slot +
Court of the Archon [10 PL, 158pts]: Kabal of the Black Heart
. Medusae
. Sslyth
. Sslyth
. Sslyth
. Sslyth
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
+ HQ +
Archon [5 PL, 90pts, -1CP]: Ancient Evil, Huskblade, Kabal of the Black Heart, Overlord, Splinter Pistol, Stratagem: Tolerated Ambition, The Djin Blade
. Splintered Genius (Black Heart): Splintered Genius
Haemonculus [4 PL, 70pts]: As Detachment (Coven), The Animus Vitae
Yeah this list has been talked about a lot, just no one wanted to put it together, Mani however will put any and every list together no matter the cost lol.
Wracks will get a 1 or 2 (most likely 2 at this point) points increase soon.
List with 33x5 Wracks is about 900 Euro.
It needs not only assembling if you go to a top event. Then painting is mandatory for getting the additional 10 pts.
Not sure if Wracks get nerfed due to large Wracks armies out there. We may see more Thin City armies in the future.
It's silly builds like this that end up getting units nerfed. Not many people are going to buy 165 wracks. Thats 33 boxes and like $1,500 on just wracks...
Do you think he actually bought them?
The cow goes 'moo', the dog goes 'woof', the 3D printer goes 'brrrrrrr'.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Wait so one competitive player ruins a thing in a way most couldn't even attempt at because it costs 1500 USD and is spammy and boring and yet that's enough reason for GW to nerf it?
That's like nerfing beasts because one guy managed to afford making almost an entire beasts list and it ended up cheesy. The difference in this case is wracks are that bad looking. Sometimes i almost forget we even have beasts in our army because i never see anybody take em. At least some people like wracks.
Judging by the rules, I think GW also forgets that we have beasts in our army.
Btw was i the only one salty about that Eldar getting so much new stuff and not just re-vamped units but whole brand new units. .
Tbh, I don't mind Eldar getting a bunch of redone models because I think they do actually need them - their range is ancient.
If anything, I was far more irritated when Necrons were just handed a pile of new units. As a Necron player myself, I felt that most of them were unnecessary (and just fulfilled the same roles as existing models). However, it bothered me because Necrons and Dark Eldar both had 5 or so characters in 5th edition that lacked models. When 7th rolled around, Dark Eldar lost every single one of those characters. Necrons, meanwhile, kept every single one of their characters and got shiny, new models for them. Why, then, were they the ones to get a bunch of new models and not the faction that lost most of their HQ section?
Anyway, going back to Eldar, I will say that the mechanical discrepancies annoy me. Dark Eldar now lost PfP if they ally, and the faction rule that replaced it isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Meanwhile, Eldar are not only keeping Battle Focus as their faction rule, they're also getting a far better loyalty rule to go with it. Oh and now Ynnari armies must be Eldar-centric, you can no longer run a DE army as Ynnari or even just lean towards Ynnari. Because the Eldar faction with the most units and options was clearly the one most in need of more. Oh and, despite Corsairs and Harlequins apparently being usable by both Eldar and Dark Eldar, their rules are only being printed in the Eldar codex. I guess the DE book was just too full already.
Mani's Wrack spam army didn’t get to top 8 at LVO. But his skew list may help GW to make changes to such an army, say allowing only 6 troop slots. But beating such a spam list usually requires tailoring an army to just such an opponent.
They're not going to nerf the FoC for the unit type GW has been trying desperately to get players to focus on and actually use because Mani is an unmitigated cheese addict. They're going to nerf Wracks.
Sterling191 wrote: They're not going to nerf the FoC for the unit type GW has been trying desperately to get players to focus on and actually use because Mani is an unmitigated cheese addict. They're going to nerf Wracks.
Maybe pt adjustment.
Thick City is still a viable approach to play in the top bracket.
wuestenfux wrote: Well, Mani's Wrack spam list with about 170 Wracks is ruling. Won the latest Nottingham event and is in top 4 of the first day at LVO.
Obsession
. *Custom Coven*: Artists of the Flesh (All-Consuming)
+ Stratagems +
Stratagem: Prizes from the Dark City [-1CP]
+ No Force Org Slot +
Court of the Archon [10 PL, 158pts]: Kabal of the Black Heart
. Medusae
. Sslyth
. Sslyth
. Sslyth
. Sslyth
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
. Ur-Ghul: As Detachment (Kabal)
+ HQ +
Archon [5 PL, 90pts, -1CP]: Ancient Evil, Huskblade, Kabal of the Black Heart, Overlord, Splinter Pistol, Stratagem: Tolerated Ambition, The Djin Blade
. Splintered Genius (Black Heart): Splintered Genius
Haemonculus [4 PL, 70pts]: As Detachment (Coven), The Animus Vitae
Yeah this list has been talked about a lot, just no one wanted to put it together, Mani however will put any and every list together no matter the cost lol.
Wracks will get a 1 or 2 (most likely 2 at this point) points increase soon.
Yea and meanwhile veteran skitarii and rustalkers crush the LVO, both of which are still criminally under cost.
I agree, i've said (maybe not on here?) many times Wracks needs a point or 2 increase but also Kabals needs to go down a point.
I've also said HL's on Talos needs to be 10pts, WTF is a twin Metal the same points as a crappy HWB and Splinter Pods?
I'm sorry if i haven't really kept up but i was sick with shingles (very bad skin pains) for over a week and i heard we got updated points and a new chapter approved. My question is what's been changed since i've been away?
Also what have updated custodes, updated gsc and soon to be updated tau gotten and what threats do they pose to our faction now?
270 pts vs 260 pts
6 strength 12 shots vs 6 strength 8 shots
18 wounds vs 22 wounds
I know you can give Ravagers more upgrades but with the -1 to hit, 4++, enemy cant re roll to hit Voidweavers seem much better than Ravagers. VW's also have anti infantry weapon mode rather than an either or and you could field 9 VWs if you wanted.
Given that Harlequins can be taken in Drukhari again, as well as corsairs and the webway gate, I think Drukhari might be bigger winners out of this release than Craftworlds. Covens are what Harlies/CE are missing, particularly Wracks, Nd many of our other units outperform their craftworld counterparts pound for pound. I think DE/Harlies will be stronger than CE/Harlies and either wil be stronger than pure of any. We also make better use of the gate than CE.
I'd say on the whole the CE book is weaker than we were pre nerf.
)
