Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 skoffs wrote:

Dew wrote:

changemod wrote:
Thinking of Anrakyr, yeah he can't transport but my will be done and his own benefit work pretty well with tesla immortals in keeping with his old phyrrian eternals concept.

How so would he benefit the Immortals over say, pairing him up with Lychguard or some other assault unit?
Just curious, I WANT him to be a good pair for the Immortals. I like his old Phyrrian idea

Nono, it's still his old squad! They just got promoted from Immortals to Lychguard!
#SoProud #Phyrria4LifeEternity

(though, seriously, you really want to have him with big groups of CC guys to maximize that extra attack he gives out)

He's still useful to have with just good old Immortals and Warriors though.

8th ed does fundamentally change how Warriors and Immortals interact with Close combat.

* No more low Initative, chargers go first.
* No restrictions on charging after firing Heavy/Rapid Fire weapons.
* Universal hit modifiers - Warriors and Immortals always hit on 3+
* They're S4 which has an easier time with T6 and T7 now.
* The more damage you do the more they lose with the new morale and vehicle degradation.
* No target restriction on charging.

You should be able to take some charges when you can to max out your damage, and doubling up Warrior/Immortal attacks is useful.

@Halfpast_Yellow: Its still a bad idea to have Immortals or Warriors in cc.
They are meant for keeping the enemy at arm's length.

So which HQ really are the best to stick with which infantry?

Destroyer Lord clearly goes with Destroyers, but can be alright with CC guys, too (doesn't really buff them unless he's got a ResOrb).

Orikan is great, but because he's so slow you can't effectively stick him with Destroyers or Praetorians who would benefit most from his buffs. Sticking him with Warriors or Immortals doesn't really seem like the best application for that guy.

Anrakyr obviously wants to be with Lychguard or something else dedicated CC. Problem is he's gotta foot slog it, so there's not really anything they'll be able to contribute to most games.

(You have no idea how pissed I am they didn't make the CCB a dedicated transport again. So many of our problems could have been solved with that solution.)

Anyway, what about the other HQ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 wuestenfux wrote:
@Halfpast_Yellow: Its still a bad idea to have Immortals or Warriors in cc.
They are meant for keeping the enemy at arm's length.

Very true: a shoot guy who is not shooting is not performing to his best potential.
(exception​s are made certain circumstances present themselves, obviously)

No special HQ character models for me. They have a bad taste. I never field them in any of my armies.
So it comes down to the Destroyer Lord and/or Overlord on CCB. But I have not yet understood the rules for the latter. CCB has no character entry but the Overlord.

Orikan is 5" movement + d6 for "advancing. Add the 3" bubble of at least one model's base and he should easily be able to keep up with the Destroyers. At least, it works in my books. And Destroyers without a cryptek/orikan lack an invulnerable save or improved RP. Destroyers without Invu save sound like dead destroyers to me and them being low numbers and getting their RP negated is a real problem. I honestly think Orikan/Destroyers is going to stick for as long as we have this index.

So I noticed something that might make annihilation barges more appealing - the destructor is an assault weapon. Which means you can advance and shoot with it.
This makes the annihilation barge fairly mobile, as you can move up to 18" and still fire at 24"
Remember that it can fly as well, so if it gets charged you can just back off and shoot.

Likewise, you can move up to 40" with the scythes and still fire with their destructors.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 skoffs wrote:

 necr0n wrote:
Orikan and D.Lord are kinda scary in CC, so they're not entirely doomed if things get physical.

Is he, though?
I'm just not seeing it.
Is there actually something special that makes him good in combat, or are people still looking at him with previous edition tinted glasses?

He wasn't even that good last edition since he had a lower WS than Overlords as well, so was often hitting on 4+ against lots of things while Overlords were 3+. He was used because he had his rerolls and better durability with T6.

Now, he has +1W, +1T, +1A, rerolls 1s to hit, moves faster. He can also take a Phylactery, which Overlords can't. On the other hand, he doesn't have MWBD.

As a singular fighty unit, he's potentially better. T6 means he's rarely being wounded on 2+, and even though he's hitting on 3+, rerolling 1s and having an extra attack means he's actually better overall. The Overlord is better for the army, since it buffs dudes around it, so if you think the DLord will get in, he'll probably be better, but if you think you want someone to just hang back and support/bodyguard the rest of your army, the Overlord is better. Both are reasonable.

The DLord can be a decent choice to tag along with a C'tan alongside Wraiths for a ministar too since they're both fast.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually, double DLord + Wraiths is only slightly more than a C'Tan. Lacks a shooting attack unless you go Staff over Warscythe, but more attacks (slightly worse, but still good), better armor (2+ in cover), faster, more wounds. Characters are better than 7th, though they don't buff the Wraiths (though Wraiths are better as well). Interesting.

How was he not good last edition? Rerolling 1's to hit and wound is better than the straight 3+ hit the regular Overlord had against different units.

Statistically, he got .1 more wounds through than an equivalent Overlord in 7th. That's not a beatstick, neither of them were. You brought the DLord to give out PE and potentially keep up with Wraiths. Now, with the extra attack, he pushes through .45 more successes, which still isn't much better, but since those successes are 2 Damage, it means he does 1 more wound on average.

So I take it back, he's not much more of a beatstick (though statistically better than 7th), but his speed and durability have gone way up comparatively. He has a higher ceiling with the extra attack, and can reliably make it into combat having double the speed.

I think both are fine choices still.

 skoffs wrote:

(You have no idea how pissed I am they didn't make the CCB a dedicated transport again. So many of our problems could have been solved with that solution.)

Honestly, the current CCB really does seem like the worst of both worlds.

- It contains a character, but doesn't actually benefit from the rules for such.
- It's an Overlord, but lacks an invulnerable save and can't be upgraded to have one.
- It's fast, but is unable to buff anything other than our footslogging infantry.
- It's supposed to be an Overlord and a vehicle, however it has no more wounds than an Annihilation Barge (which uses an identical chassis).
- It is supposed to be an Overlord and a vehicle, however, it has the same number of attacks as the Annihilation Barge (if that can attack without an overlord, why can the CCB chassis not do the same?).
- It seems to exist only to expose the Overlord on it to enemy fire, whilst ensuring that he goes down with his craft.


It still really bugs me that the Overlord can't get out if/when the barge is destroyed.

I'm actually wondering about the Tomb Stalker rules. I know we won't find them out for around a month, but I think it could patch a hole - mobility. See, where deep striking in flayed ones is dangerous to enemy back lines (and I think people here are severely underestimating them in that regard - you can silence a guard back line if they're not exceptionally careful), they're still really quite slow. Tomb Stalkers should be faster, so if they can still deep strike (and I can't see any reason why they wouldn't be able to - it's kinda their defining thing) they're a serious threat. As long as their rules are even remotely usable, I can see them becoming very good choices.

For once, because they're playtested by the same group, the FW stuff might be pretty good. That said, if they don't make the Pylon about as good as the shadowsword at killing vehicles I'm going to be very annoyed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:
Honestly, the current CCB really does seem like the worst of both worlds.

- It contains a character, but doesn't actually benefit from the rules for such.
- It's an Overlord, but lacks an invulnerable save and can't be upgraded to have one.
- It's fast, but is unable to buff anything other than our footslogging infantry.
- It's supposed to be an Overlord and a vehicle, however it has no more wounds than an Annihilation Barge (which uses an identical chassis).
- It is supposed to be an Overlord and a vehicle, however, it has the same number of attacks as the Annihilation Barge (if that can attack without an overlord, why can the CCB chassis not do the same?).
- It seems to exist only to expose the Overlord on it to enemy fire, whilst ensuring that he goes down with his craft.


It still really bugs me that the Overlord can't get out if/when the barge is destroyed.

I think part of our issue is that Quantum Shielding really doesn't help much and our vehicles are still very fragile. I would trade the Annihilation Barge for the Razorback in a heartbeat.

 skoffs wrote:
So which HQ really are the best to stick with which infantry?





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 wuestenfux wrote:
@Halfpast_Yellow: Its still a bad idea to have Immortals or Warriors in cc.
They are meant for keeping the enemy at arm's length.

Very true: a shoot guy who is not shooting is not performing to his best potential.
(exception​s are made certain circumstances present themselves, obviously)

The point is you no longer have to choose. You can shoot AND assault.

We're not Tau who hit on 5+ or Str3 guard.

If you kite all day with 5" move warriors then sure, but the nature of phalanx game and 12" rapidfire means you will have chances to assault for extra damage.

Halfpast_Yellow wrote:

 skoffs wrote:

Dew wrote:

changemod wrote:
Thinking of Anrakyr, yeah he can't transport but my will be done and his own benefit work pretty well with tesla immortals in keeping with his old phyrrian eternals concept.

How so would he benefit the Immortals over say, pairing him up with Lychguard or some other assault unit?
Just curious, I WANT him to be a good pair for the Immortals. I like his old Phyrrian idea

Nono, it's still his old squad! They just got promoted from Immortals to Lychguard!
#SoProud #Phyrria4LifeEternity

(though, seriously, you really want to have him with big groups of CC guys to maximize that extra attack he gives out)

He's still useful to have with just good old Immortals and Warriors though.

8th ed does fundamentally change how Warriors and Immortals interact with Close combat.

* No more low Initative, chargers go first.
* No restrictions on charging after firing Heavy/Rapid Fire weapons.
* Universal hit modifiers - Warriors and Immortals always hit on 3+
* They're S4 which has an easier time with T6 and T7 now.
* The more damage you do the more they lose with the new morale and vehicle degradation.
* No target restriction on charging.

You should be able to take some charges when you can to max out your damage, and doubling up Warrior/Immortal attacks is useful.

I'm simply saying that my will be done stacked with his own buff means a tesla immortal unit can hit on twos, tesla on fives, then get a bonus to charge range, then hit twice each on a 2+.

Hardly the same close combat output as Lychguard, but still a fairly large buff to single turn damage output if you do it where virtually guaranteed to kill the target unit before they can strike back.

And no, don't take this as some optimal super-combo, just a note that he can still make his prior fluff unit happen.

 wuestenfux wrote:
@Halfpast_Yellow: Its still a bad idea to have Immortals or Warriors in cc.
They are meant for keeping the enemy at arm's length.

The two games I have played so far have shown me that, against assault armies, your phalanx will get charged, but also that it's not that bad. A lot of the game can take place at very close quarters now with units getting repeatedly charged and falling back. Necrons seem very good at taking the charge, surviving, then falling back and letting the rest of the army shoot. Orkian really is the best HQ choice in this situation due to his 5++ buff working in CC. Any big scary monster charging a unit or Warriors or Immortals will really wiff. Swarmlord T1 charge? He will kill 3ish models, the unit will pass morale, fall back and he gets lit up. horde CC units need to be reduced in numbers before they get to you as they have a chance of wiping you.

Based on my experience I now see more value in Anrakyr or Zhandek + Obryn (spelling is hard). Anrakyrs attack buff is good on warriors and immortals if they are getting into combat (they will) and Ghostwalk mantle effectively allows a unit to fall back then act normally. eg: If you screen the rest of your phalanx with 20 warriors, and have NZ and VO in the middle of it, the Warriors can take the charge then be teleported back a few inches out of combat. They will res up, rapid fire, then charge (hitting on 2s from MWBD). I did this to a unit of genestealers and it wrecked them.

A phalanx of Warriors and immortals (maybe a small Lychguard unit) with Orikan, NZ and VO are not an easy thing to assault at all.

Halfpast_Yellow wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
So which HQ really are the best to stick with which infantry?





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 wuestenfux wrote:
@Halfpast_Yellow: Its still a bad idea to have Immortals or Warriors in cc.
They are meant for keeping the enemy at arm's length.

Very true: a shoot guy who is not shooting is not performing to his best potential.
(exception​s are made certain circumstances present themselves, obviously)

The point is you no longer have to choose. You can shoot AND assault.

We're not Tau who hit on 5+ or Str3 guard.

If you kite all day with 5" move warriors then sure, but the nature of phalanx game and 12" rapidfire means you will have chances to assault for extra damage.

Yeah, you can now assault after using a rapid fire weapon. Which means that if you want to go phalanx of death and steadily face wreck the enemy you can.
Warrior attacks are about as strong as the flayers, just without the AP, so you basically get another round of damage if you charge. You don't even have to worry about that pesky I2 and sweep anymore.

Eyjio wrote:

I think part of our issue is that Quantum Shielding really doesn't help much and our vehicles are still very fragile. I would trade the Annihilation Barge for the Razorback in a heartbeat.

Agreed. They also seem to have poor offensive abilities.

Also, there's basically no customisation. With the Annihilation Barge, for example, you can change the secondary weapon but not the primary one. So if you need anything other than a lot of S7 shots you have to look for an entirely different unit.

TBF, you couldn't change the primary weapon before either.
I'd be more irritated at the lack of customization of our HQ choices.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
TBF, you couldn't change the primary weapon before either.

Yeah, but before it was an excellent all-rounder weapon - being an excellent way to strip hp from transports and a good way to put wounds on infantry.

With the various changes, it now sucks at virtually every role. The changes to the to-wound table mean that its weapon is rarely better than S5 against most infantry, and the changes to vehicles mean that it struggles to wound them, they still get their full save and they have vastly more wounds for it to try and strip off.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I'd be more irritated at the lack of customization of our HQ choices.

Don't worry - I am.

Halfpast_Yellow wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
So which HQ really are the best to stick with which infantry?





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 wuestenfux wrote:
@Halfpast_Yellow: Its still a bad idea to have Immortals or Warriors in cc.
They are meant for keeping the enemy at arm's length.

Very true: a shoot guy who is not shooting is not performing to his best potential.
(exception​s are made certain circumstances present themselves, obviously)

The point is you no longer have to choose. You can shoot AND assault.

We're not Tau who hit on 5+ or Str3 guard.

If you kite all day with 5" move warriors then sure, but the nature of phalanx game and 12" rapidfire means you will have chances to assault for extra damage.

Okay I understand.

But assaulting (for extra damage) has a downside for non-cc specialists. If they charge, they might be wiped out iimmediately and then the enemy can move freely in his turn. In this case, it is better to stay outside of cc and receive the charge.

Anyone seen any FW leaks yet?

 skoffs wrote:

Orikan is great, but because he's so slow you can't effectively stick him with Destroyers or Praetorians who would benefit most from his buffs. Sticking him with Warriors or Immortals doesn't really seem like the best application for that guy.

Unfortunately, Orikan does nothing for Praetorians. Praetorians lack the "SAUTEKH" or "<DYNASTY>" keyword, which are present in both of Orikan's abilities. Even Overlords and Crypteks state "<DYNASTY>" in their abilities. This is the main reason why I feel that Praets are way overpriced for their value. They can't be buffed by anything. They just ARE. I hope in the Codex they get a <DYNASTY> keyword.

 wuestenfux wrote:

Halfpast_Yellow wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
So which HQ really are the best to stick with which infantry?





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 wuestenfux wrote:
@Halfpast_Yellow: Its still a bad idea to have Immortals or Warriors in cc.
They are meant for keeping the enemy at arm's length.

Very true: a shoot guy who is not shooting is not performing to his best potential.
(exception​s are made certain circumstances present themselves, obviously)

The point is you no longer have to choose. You can shoot AND assault.

We're not Tau who hit on 5+ or Str3 guard.

If you kite all day with 5" move warriors then sure, but the nature of phalanx game and 12" rapidfire means you will have chances to assault for extra damage.

Okay I understand.

But assaulting (for extra damage) has a downside for non-cc specialists. If they charge, they might be wiped out iimmediately and then the enemy can move freely in his turn. In this case, it is better to stay outside of cc and receive the charge.

No you charge when you have a clear mathematical advantage, not willy-nilly. It's a tactical tool to remember you have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SHADOWSTRIKE1 wrote:

 skoffs wrote:

Orikan is great, but because he's so slow you can't effectively stick him with Destroyers or Praetorians who would benefit most from his buffs. Sticking him with Warriors or Immortals doesn't really seem like the best application for that guy.

Unfortunately, Orikan does nothing for Praetorians. Praetorians lack the "SAUTEKH" or "<DYNASTY>" keyword, which are present in both of Orikan's abilities. Even Overlords and Crypteks state "<DYNASTY>" in their abilities. This is the main reason why I feel that Praets are way overpriced for their value. They can't be buffed by anything. They just ARE. I hope in the Codex they get a <DYNASTY> keyword.

The way things are going, I'd half expect that we get a Silent King model down the line.

If so, I hope they have the sense to make him jump, so he can keep up with his own personal guard/cia.

No you charge when you have a clear mathematical advantage, not willy-nilly. It's a tactical tool to remember you have.

Of course.
But with Immortals or Warriors charging brings hardly a tactical advantage. If they charge guardsmen, the enemy must have made something wrong.

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
@Halfpast_Yellow: Its still a bad idea to have Immortals or Warriors in cc.
They are meant for keeping the enemy at arm's length.

The two games I have played so far have shown me that, against assault armies, your phalanx will get charged, but also that it's not that bad. A lot of the game can take place at very close quarters now with units getting repeatedly charged and falling back. Necrons seem very good at taking the charge, surviving, then falling back and letting the rest of the army shoot. Orkian really is the best HQ choice in this situation due to his 5++ buff working in CC. Any big scary monster charging a unit or Warriors or Immortals will really wiff. Swarmlord T1 charge? He will kill 3ish models, the unit will pass morale, fall back and he gets lit up. horde CC units need to be reduced in numbers before they get to you as they have a chance of wiping you.

Based on my experience I now see more value in Anrakyr or Zhandek + Obryn (spelling is hard). Anrakyrs attack buff is good on warriors and immortals if they are getting into combat (they will) and Ghostwalk mantle effectively allows a unit to fall back then act normally. eg: If you screen the rest of your phalanx with 20 warriors, and have NZ and VO in the middle of it, the Warriors can take the charge then be teleported back a few inches out of combat. They will res up, rapid fire, then charge (hitting on 2s from MWBD). I did this to a unit of genestealers and it wrecked them.

A phalanx of Warriors and immortals (maybe a small Lychguard unit) with Orikan, NZ and VO are not an easy thing to assault at all.

Yeah that's the big thing I noticed with NZ and VO after parsing the new mechanics more you basically get the free action fallback for a block of Warriors or the like, which is most of the time way better than the 'slingshot' stuff with dedicated CC units we were talking about originally with the Ghostwalk mantle.

It's really good, but it should be, because the pair of them are 331 points and as you say you really want Orikan for the whole +1 to res and 5+ Invul in CC schtick. So it ends up 1/4 of an army as HQ. But those three with Warriors, Immortals, Ghost Ark for rerolls, you have a super hard nut phalanx. The problem is points are so stretched for everything else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 wuestenfux wrote:

No you charge when you have a clear mathematical advantage, not willy-nilly. It's a tactical tool to remember you have.

Of course.
But with Immortals or Warriors charging brings hardly a tactical advantage. If they charge guardsmen, the enemy must have made something wrong.

There's no point reaching for the extreme example when there is a wealth of possibilities in the middleground that prove the point.

Think a 10 strong Space Marine Assault squad without cover in 12" range of 10 Gauss Blaster Immortals . The Immortals kill ~6 of them with their rapidfire guns. That leaves 4 left with special weapons, powerweapon sergeant, etc.

They have what, LD8 with a reroll? They can easily pass it, lose 1 guy on a 3, etc. On their turn it's an easy shoot weapons, charge and go first with the powersword, etc.

Or, you charge, kill two more, they're testing straight D6 extra casualties on 2 guys left. He has to roll a 1 with a reroll to not lose the whole unit.

 SHADOWSTRIKE1 wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
Orikan is great, but because he's so slow you can't effectively stick him with Destroyers or Praetorians who would benefit most from his buffs. Sticking him with Warriors or Immortals doesn't really seem like the best application for that guy.

Unfortunately, Orikan does nothing for Praetorians. Praetorians lack the "SAUTEKH" or "<DYNASTY>" keyword, which are present in both of Orikan's abilities. Even Overlords and Crypteks state "<DYNASTY>" in their abilities. This is the main reason why I feel that Praets are way overpriced for their value. They can't be buffed by anything. They just ARE. I hope in the Codex they get a <DYNASTY> keyword.

Oh, yeah, sorry, my mistake: no Orikan (OtD*) for Praets.
Though they do have a few (exactly three) HQ who can help them: Anrakyr (AtT*), Imotekh (ItS*) and Szeras (I.S*).
Problem still, though, is that the Praets are fast, and those three are not.

*Let's just abbreviate all the special characters from now on.

 skoffs wrote:

Though they do have a few (exactly three) HQ who can help them: Anrakyr (AtT*), Imotekh (ItS*) and Szeras (I.S*).
Problem still, though, is that the Praets are fast, and those three are not.

*Let's just abbreviate all the special characters from now on.

How on earth did you get to those abbreviation?

Also, pretty sure IS is taken.

Followed up with a 1750 point game last night. New rules are awesome! My friend and I play slow and we would have NEVER finished a game of that size on a week night previously. My list:

Mono
Warrior (20)
Destroyer (5) HD (1)
Orikan
Deathmarks (5)
Scarabs (3)
Anni barge (Tesla)
Doomsday Ark
Stalker (Heat Ray)

Doomsday ark was MVP again, that thing is a beast.
Anni barge was lack luster. It feels like it has a place but I can't seem to figure out its role.
Deathmarks were a surprise, I never got a good feel from them but the 6+ automatic mortal wound is great at taking down characters with invuln.
Warriors + Orikan are obnoxious. I have been using them as a web to capture units, then I retreat and blast them with the ark.
Stalker isn't much different, the new targeting relay works well with the ark. I want to change heat ray for Gauss next game for the extra range but I couldn't squeeze the points.
Scarabs are scarabs, 39 points to hold a far off objective. Didn't do anything else.
Mono was a lot of fun. Disclaimer: I am not a big tourny player, I do some local ones here and there and mostly play pickup games or games with friends. That being said, Mono seems fierce at this level of play. It drops in from the sky and blasts everything around it. I dropped my behind enemy lines one the second half of turn 1. On the start of turn 2 I dropped 5 destroyers and a HD on top of him. Now I have 5D1HD and a monolith on one side, an a doomsday ark, stalker, anni barge on the other. Warrior blob tying up units in the middle (encircle and hold). It was awesome.

Quantum shielding seems broken. I probably ignored 20+ wounds from that alone. Its fun to watch the enemy hope for a 2 or 3 on a D6 damage roll.

Couple unresolved issues we had:
Can units coming from a monolith move? In other words do they follow transport rules for disembark or rules for coming in off the board?
Can anyone attack the monolith? You have to be within 1" to attack something, but monolith is measured from the hull not the base. I haven't based my monolith yet but I think it will put him more than 1" off the table, does that mean he can't be assaulted by ground units?
Flying units can put themselves in the 2nd floor of ruins (I think...) but certain units / vehicles can not anymore. Does this mean my Doomsday ark can fly on floor 2 and be immune to assault from those units? We had an issue with Deathwatch bikers sitting on the first floor getting blasted. Felt like cheating but seemed legal.

 vipoid wrote:

 skoffs wrote:

Though they do have a few (exactly three) HQ who can help them: Anrakyr (AtT*), Imotekh (ItS*) and Szeras (I.S*).
Problem still, though, is that the Praets are fast, and those three are not.

*Let's just abbreviate all the special characters from now on.

How on earth did you get to those abbreviation?

Also, pretty sure IS is taken.

"IS" might already be a thing, but "I.S" is probably easy enough of a distinction.
(got tired of typing out long semi difficult to spell names. Simple abbreviations should be easy enough for people to follow. I'll change my sig so it'll be easier for new folks to know what I might be talking abou if they stumble across any of my posts where I use them)

Morris782 wrote:
Quantum shielding seems broken. I probably ignored 20+ wounds from that alone. Its fun to watch the enemy hope for a 2 or 3 on a D6 damage roll.

Couple unresolved issues we had:
Can units coming from a monolith move? In other words do they follow transport rules for disembark or rules for coming in off the board?
Can anyone attack the monolith? You have to be within 1" to attack something, but monolith is measured from the hull not the base. I haven't based my monolith yet but I think it will put him more than 1" off the table, does that mean he can't be assaulted by ground units?
Flying units can put themselves in the 2nd floor of ruins (I think...) but certain units / vehicles can not anymore. Does this mean my Doomsday ark can fly on floor 2 and be immune to assault from those units? We had an issue with Deathwatch bikers sitting on the first floor getting blasted. Felt like cheating but seemed legal.

Interesting, I'm yet to see QS do much at all. Seems very list dependent - lots of autocannons/assault cannons/plasma seems to melt them, and I haven't seen that many lascannons yet.

1) Units from a Monolith cannot move after they arrive as per the reserve unit rules on the movement phase page.
2) Not sure I understand? The hull means the entire thing - it's quite easy to get within 1" of a Monolith. You can't model for advantage to raise it higher than that - you count it as the height it should be if modeled normally.
3) Yes, that's exactly how flying units work. Yes, it's a bit cheesy.

 skoffs wrote:
"IS" might already be a thing, but "I.S" is probably easy enough of a distinction.
(got tired of typing out long semi difficult to spell names. Simple abbreviations should be easy enough for people to follow. I'll change my sig so it'll be easier for new folks to know what I might be talking abou if they stumble across any of my posts where I use them)

I get that. What puzzled me was the abbreviations didn't seem to bear any resemblance to the names they were supposed to be abbreviating.

e.g. I'd have thought a better abbreviation for Szeras would be something like 'Sz' or 'Szs', rather than 'I.S'.

Today's Reqcron Tactica: Comparing Flayed Ones and Wraiths.

Comparing 11 Flayed Ones (231) to 6 Wraiths (228) [3 point difference was most negligible I could make it]:

Damage output


As you can see, FOs are better than or equal to Wraiths at every level except T8 or higher, at which point they're only very slightly behind (and the Wraiths aren't even that good anyway).

This also doesn't take into account MWBD or Imotkeh/Anrakyr being able to buff them, but honestly if you're using FOs the way they're meant to be, those characters won't be nearby for at least a few turns unless you do some sort of shenaniganry.

Durability:

Flayed Ones: 11 Wounds, 4+ (can benefit from cover)
Wraiths: 18 Wounds, 3++ (cannot benefit from cover)

Flayed Ones obviously lose out here. Except when it comes to multi-damage weapons, FOs will take 11 Lascannons minimum to kill, Wraiths could potentially take as little as 6. And FOs can stand up via RP.

However, the biggest advantage that FOs have is their pocket dimension. Wraiths are more durable, for sure, but they still have to endure likely 1 or 2 rounds of shooting before they can reach combat (if they get there). FOs aren't even on the board and can come in when and where you want (mostly, proper positioning can counter to an extent).

Mobility:

Flayed Ones move 5" and can start in a pocket dimension.
Wraiths move 12" and must start on the board.

Wraiths in general have the advantage, but FOs technically can be in the opponent's face faster, and are safer to get to charge distances. A 9" charge isn't reliable, but with a Command Point it can be made slightly more so. As said above, not only does this make them more durable by dint of not being able to be targeted, it also limits the opponent's movement (have to be wary of FO placement) and gives you board presence instantly without having to cross the intervening distance.

Req's thoughts:

For the price of 18 Wraiths (probably the most you'll put on the table), you can get 31 Flayed Ones. That's easily 3 units of 10, or 4 units of 7~8. While they won't all make those 9" charge, you can fairly well threaten most of the board, or even just use them to come onto objectives that are out of LOS, or go for Linebreaker. The point jump and change to RP was harsh on these guys, but honestly the fixed WS and Haunting Horrors special rule have made them stronger and more flexible than ever before.

Wraiths are obviously no slouches, but as we all know the low number of attacks for their point cost has always been their weakness, along with the fact that they get lit up as they walk across the table - not as bad as previously since Eldar took the nerf bat and Tau are different now, but still likely to lose a handful as they go forward.

I think Flayed Ones are being quite undervalued. They will singlehandedly wreck most Infantry or even Bikes in the game, and influencing Morale might even be stronger in some cases. Yes, they're pretty expensive for 1W models, but their power has jumped significantly as well.

3-4 mid-sized units of them backed with DDArks or HDestroyers and some Silver Tide style infantry will give you lots of board presence and damage output. If the opponent stays in their DZ, the Arks or Heavies will blast them to paste. If they come out, they open themselves to FO assaults. I think there's some potential for a decent list involving these guys.

 vipoid wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
"IS" might already be a thing, but "I.S" is probably easy enough of a distinction.
(got tired of typing out long semi difficult to spell names. Simple abbreviations should be easy enough for people to follow. I'll change my sig so it'll be easier for new folks to know what I might be talking abou if they stumble across any of my posts where I use them)

I get that. What puzzled me was the abbreviations didn't seem to bear any resemblance to the names they were supposed to be abbreviating.

e.g. I'd have thought a better abbreviation for Szeras would be something like 'Sz' or 'Szs', rather than 'I.S'.

I was going for their full "codex" names, but I guess their more commonly known ones wouldn't be bad.
Only issue for me is, some people call certain special characters by their title instead of their name, eg. "Nemesor" instead of "Zahndrekh". Not normally a problem at the moment, but if they start releasing other Nemesor characters, ie. Nemesor Azderon, that's gonna start confusing people (... really it's more of a personal pet peeve)