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.

So thanks to the third scenario it looks like we will either be forced to stay home or adapt a new strategy.


I guess I will start with my standard 2500 pt list that I was going to run:

2500 Pts - Dark Eldar Roster - Dark Eldar 2500, Kabal

1 Asdrubael Vect @ 277 pts ((CE, pg. 36); Independent Character; Unit Type: Vehicle (Skimmer, Fast, Open-topped); Close Combat; Dais of Destruction; Energy Field; Firepower; Dark Lance; Disintegrator x2; Splinter Pistol x3)

1 Dracon @ 295 pts (Agoniser; Splinter Pistol; Combat Drug Dispenser; Shadow Field; Trophy Rack; Haywire Grenades; Plasma Grenades)
. . 1 Retinue
. . . . 1 Warriors (Splinter Rifle x1; Plasma Grenades)
. . . . 4 Incubi (Tormentor Helm; Punisher x4; Plasma Grenades)
. . . . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

5 Wyches @ 182 pts ((CE, pg. 9); Unit Type: Infantry; Close Combat Weapon; Fleet; Splinter Pistol; Wych Weapons; Blaster x2; Combat Drugs; Dodge; Plasma Grenades)
. . 1 Succubus (Agoniser; Splinter Pistol; Wych Weapons; Plasma Grenades (Squad))
. . 1 Raider ((CE, pg. 10); Unit Type: Vehicle (Skimmer, Fast, Open-topped); Transport Capacity: 10 models; Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

5 Wyches @ 182 pts ((CE, pg. 9); Unit Type: Infantry; Close Combat Weapon; Fleet; Splinter Pistol; Wych Weapons; Blaster x2; Combat Drugs; Dodge; Plasma Grenades)
. . 1 Succubus (Agoniser; Splinter Pistol; Wych Weapons; Plasma Grenades (Squad))
. . 1 Raider ((CE, pg. 10); Unit Type: Vehicle (Skimmer, Fast, Open-topped); Transport Capacity: 10 models; Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

5 Wyches @ 182 pts ((CE, pg. 9); Unit Type: Infantry; Close Combat Weapon; Fleet; Splinter Pistol; Wych Weapons; Blaster x2; Combat Drugs; Dodge; Plasma Grenades)
. . 1 Succubus (Agoniser; Splinter Pistol; Wych Weapons; Plasma Grenades (Squad))
. . 1 Raider ((CE, pg. 10); Unit Type: Vehicle (Skimmer, Fast, Open-topped); Transport Capacity: 10 models; Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

5 Raider Squad @ 115 pts (Blaster; Splinter Rifle x3; Dark Lance)
. . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

5 Raider Squad @ 115 pts (Blaster; Splinter Rifle x3; Dark Lance)
. . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

5 Raider Squad @ 115 pts (Blaster; Splinter Rifle x3; Dark Lance)
. . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

5 Raider Squad @ 115 pts (Blaster; Splinter Rifle x3; Dark Lance)
. . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

4 Raider Squad @ 136 pts (Blaster; Splinter Rifle x2; Dark Lance)
. . 1 Sybarite (Close Combat Weapon; Nightmare Doll)
. . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1)

4 Raider Squad @ 141 pts (Blaster; Splinter Rifle x2; Dark Lance)
. . 1 Sybarite (Close Combat Weapon; Crucible of Malediction )
. . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

3 Reaver Jetbike Squad @ 95 pts (Splinter Pistol; Blaster x2; Splinter Rifle x1; Combat Drugs; Reaver Jetbike)

3 Reaver Jetbike Squad @ 95 pts (Splinter Pistol; Blaster x2; Splinter Rifle x1; Combat Drugs; Reaver Jetbike)

3 Reaver Jetbike Squad @ 95 pts (Splinter Pistol; Blaster x2; Splinter Rifle x1; Combat Drugs; Reaver Jetbike)

1 Ravager @ 120 pts (Disintegrator x3)

1 Ravager @ 120 pts (Disintegrator x3)

1 Ravager @ 120 pts (Disintegrator x3)


Total Roster Cost: 2500



So what can I change? My first Idea is to run one or two Warp Portals, and not deploy them until turn 5. This effectively drops my KPs down to 4. The only problem is keeping the one unit alive long enough to deploy it....

So what to change? And how do I keep my portal bearer alive long enough to deploy the portal in turn 5?

Shadow field and nightshields seems to be a must, and holding in reserve buys me at least 2 rounds of safety (assuming I go second)....



So any thoughts? I am open to suggestions on this tactic or any others you might think of.

I know I am not of the 3 DE players you want to respond to your list but I have questions about some of your ideas.

Clthomps wrote:So thanks to the third scenario it looks like we will either be forced to stay home or adapt a new strategy.

Although this 3rd scenario solidifies my decision to skip this tourney (I had already decided not to) I would not alter the list because of it – I think that will be a mistake.

My first Idea is to run one or two Warp Portals, and not deploy them until turn 5.

I am curious why you think WWP’s are needed.

Also, I think you will need to drop the portals ASAP (if you do decide to use them) when you are facing 2500 points of the enemy. This is the major reason I do not like them as the quicker you drop them the less strategic value they have but if you hold on to them too long you will lose your carriers (visions of mechanized IG keep blurting into my mind).

This effectively drops my KPs down to 4. The only problem is keeping the one unit alive long enough to deploy it....

Ask yourself this, will coming out of reserve (along your board edge) going to give you the same effect? I think since using reserves normally is cheaper and more reliable (and almost just as strategic) you can find something else to add to your army for 100 to 150 points.

So what to change? And how do I keep my portal bearer alive long enough to deploy the portal in turn 5?

I think skipping the WWP idea and just Raider Rush would be more effective. Even if you do use reserves I would probably not put more than 25% in it, probably 2 or 3 raider squads.

Shadow field and nightshields seems to be a must,

Shadowfield, of course.

Nightshields? You have mentioned in the past that you do not like nightshields so I am interested why you would want them now. Personally, I use them 100% all the time and 100% on every skimmer but I am not sure what would make someone who doesn’t support them decide they need them now.

and holding in reserve buys me at least 2 rounds of safety (assuming I go second)....

Units coming out of reserve also have the advantage that the enemy will be busy with what is on the table first and practically leave your units entering the game alone. However, this will only work as long as the units that are on the table to start with are drawing fire or threatening to assault. This will can be catastrophic if units carrying the portal are not durable enough to endure focus fire.

If those starting units that are facing the enemy on the opening turns have a portal, they will be annihilated without prejudice and not only will they get the benefit of killing off that unit but will get a bonus gift of possibly destroying the units in the portal.

I know you know this but perhaps you have left out another part of your strategy? Were you thinking of putting the WWP carriers into reserve?

Now that would be something to think about…hmmm

This list will do great in the 2nd mission and pretty good in the 1st, but the 3rd is going to be win big or lose big.

your army has 68 Kill points for the 3rd mission.


I reccomend Raider rush as you have a bizillion units, all of which are extreamly fast.


If you get first turn, charge forward and do what DE do,

if you go second i would reserve as much as possable as the instant someone points so much as a bolter at you then you will be giving KPs left and right.


the list is a glass dagger, but looks nice. don't change it. I would go to the tournament just to see this list on the table, a thing of stunning wonder.

Kwi wrote:I know I am not of the 3 DE players you want to respond to your list but I have questions about some of your ideas.

Touched quite a nerve huh? If you stick around the forums and offer decent advice you to could join the ranks of people I consider valid contributors, but at the time I wrote the quote you refer to, you had under 30 posts and only one of which was a DE post.

I am curious why you think WWP’s are needed.

Also, I think you will need to drop the portals ASAP (if you do decide to use them) when you are facing 2500 points of the enemy. This is the major reason I do not like them as the quicker you drop them the less strategic value they have but if you hold on to them too long you will lose your carriers (visions of mechanized IG keep blurting into my mind).

I only feel they are needed in the third scenario, as a form of KP denial, dropping them early would defeat the purpose of using to that end. As for mech IG or any other mech, if they make it to my table on mission three I wouldn't use the portal at all. In essence the WWP is a 50 pt meta choice to deny hordes an instant win.

Ask yourself this, will coming out of reserve (along your board edge) going to give you the same effect? I think since using reserves normally is cheaper and more reliable (and almost just as strategic) you can find something else to add to your army for 100 to 150 points.

Coming out of normal reserves is not going to stop my 60+ KP from being available, by popping the WWP on turn 5 I deny my opponent the ability to grab more than 4 KP. At the price of 50 points I think its worth a shot, sure I lose if my one unit dies before I drop the portal but if I play the mission normally I am going to lose anyway so I might as well go balls to the wall.

I think skipping the WWP idea and just Raider Rush would be more effective. Even if you do use reserves I would probably not put more than 25% in it, probably 2 or 3 raider squads.

The problem is that 1 raider is worth 3 KP and so is 90 Orks.... If i raider rush I guarantee I will lose at least 4-5 raiders and more than likely the squads in them. Thats at minimum 12-15 KP on the first turn, which is more than some ork and nid armies have all together.

Shadow field and nightshields seems to be a must,

Shadowfield, of course.

Nightshields? You have mentioned in the past that you do not like nightshields so I am interested why you would want them now. Personally, I use them 100% all the time and 100% on every skimmer but I am not sure what would make someone who doesn’t support them decide they need them now.

I believe my quote is in games under 1500 nightshields are a waste, and I believe that even in larger games. I was only proposing 1 nighshield on the WWP boat, and I am only taking that because I plan to use a weird tactic on the 3rd scenario.

and holding in reserve buys me at least 2 rounds of safety (assuming I go second)....

Units coming out of reserve also have the advantage that the enemy will be busy with what is on the table first and practically leave your units entering the game alone. However, this will only work as long as the units that are on the table to start with are drawing fire or threatening to assault. This will can be catastrophic if units carrying the portal are not durable enough to endure focus fire.

If those starting units that are facing the enemy on the opening turns have a portal, they will be annihilated without prejudice and not only will they get the benefit of killing off that unit but will get a bonus gift of possibly destroying the units in the portal.

I know you know this but perhaps you have left out another part of your strategy? Were you thinking of putting the WWP carriers into reserve?

Now that would be something to think about…hmmm

That is what I was trying to say, if I put the WWP unit in reserve I get a couple rounds that I do not have to worry about dying. When he does arrive I jet 24" away and hopefully out of LoS.


I feel this is a viable strategy for dealing with horde armies on the third scenario, again if I happen to roll a mech army I will play as normal.




Any other thoughts?

You are overthinking the last scenario. At first I thought portal hiding was a good plan but then remembered tabling my opponent is easier than hidding as DE. By round 3 virtually all armies with enough points to win the tournament will probably be mech anyway due to scenarios 1 and 2. And past round one opponents should be matched on points. So all you need to do is table a mech army in round 3 which as a DE player you should have no problem doing.

As far as your list I dont really like vect he never gets his points when I use him. I take the standard archon with pun,th,cdd,sf,animus add 5 incubi in a raider they usually perform better.Loose a wych from each of the squads for some extra points along with the sf, hwg on the dracon.

I'm in the same boat, although I'm at 52 kill points. I don't have much experience at 2500, and have never used Vect [local is strictly 1850].

It seems like the WWP trick is just playing defensively and reactively, and is trying to limit how badly you lose. Even in the ultimate best case scenario you would be limiting your ability to win more than a minor victory, with few bonus points. If your goal is to place in the upper half, fine, but I think it eliminates your chance to place in the top 3 and advance to the next round.

I don't see how you can keep a lonely WWP carrier alive for two or more turns, particularly if spotting the opponent a couple of turns to rush your deployment zone. It looks to me like you would just be handing your opponent a free massacre.

I'm not sure how your WWP strategy would limit your opponent to 4 KP. Is this simply the KP of the WWP carrier (raider squad with sybarite) if you don't deploy the WWP? Units still in reserve at the end of the game would be considered destroyed and thus give up their KPs.

Or is this just the scenario where you go second, carrier lives to deploy WWP turn 5, carrier dies to shooting/assault enemy turn 6, and the rest of your army comes in the second half of the final turn 6? And your opponent isn't smart enough to spread his units out around the portal to deny you legal places to deploy/move your units out of the portal? This seems extremely unlikely.

IMO you're better off hoping for a crippling alpha strike and try to table him. And hope the TO rules that table=massacre. This is DE's only path to the next round.

If you are concerned about the KPs in the 3rd scenario, the most obvious suggestion is to convert some of the Raider Squads to 2DL Warrior Squads, particularly since you are already doing Raider Squads with a DL. The Warrior squad will have the same or better firepower, give up only 1 KP instead of 4 and have more bodies to soak wounds, but obviously you lose the mobility of the Raider. Personally, I like a couple of sniper squads simply because I usually get those 2 DL shots every turn, whereas I only get maybe 3 shots average on my fleet of Raiders.

I'm a fan of neither Reavers nor Reaver Lords, but if you are going to use Reavers it might make an argument for a jetbike Lord instead of the retinue Lord to shave 4 KPs [assuming TO rules that 12" assault option on Drugs makes a foot Lord 3 KPs].

I'm also not a fan of WWP, but if you did a more conventional WWP approach then you might consider Talos instead of Ravagers. Frankly, I think this would be gimping your list only for the sake of the 3rd scenario.

Good luck @ 'Ard Boyz to you and the rest of us DE players. We'll need it.

LMoE

LastManOnEarth wrote:

Or is this just the scenario where you go second, carrier lives to deploy WWP turn 5, carrier dies to shooting/assault enemy turn 6, and the rest of your army comes in the second half of the final turn 6? And your opponent isn't smart enough to spread his units out around the portal to deny you legal places to deploy/move your units out of the portal? This seems extremely unlikely.

The entire army is mounted in fast skimmers, I doubt the opponent will be able to spread our far enough to deny anything.


As I mentioned earlier I think its inclusion is only a meta choice if I play against a foot slogging horde.



Really I don't see any other options. If I get paired up against an army that has 12 KP and I have 60+ even if I get the best alpha strike in the world I will still lose. Also any horde player will just play really slowly and force a time out before I have a chance to wipe the table. It seems like a lose, lose situation. I am open to any other suggestions?


For the sake of argument lets say your playing against the green tide with a kan wall.

Clthomps wrote:

2500 Pts - Dark Eldar Roster - Dark Eldar 2500, Kabal

1 Asdrubael Vect @ 277 pts ((CE, pg. 36); Independent Character; Unit Type: Vehicle (Skimmer, Fast, Open-topped); Close Combat; Dais of Destruction; Energy Field; Firepower; Dark Lance; Disintegrator x2; Splinter Pistol x3)


1 Dracon[/b] @ 295 pts (Agoniser; Splinter Pistol; Combat Drug Dispenser; Shadow Field; Trophy Rack; Haywire Grenades; Plasma Grenades)
. . 1 Retinue
. . . . 1 Warriors (Splinter Rifle x1; Plasma Grenades)
. . . . 4 Incubi (Tormentor Helm; Punisher x4; Plasma Grenades)
. . . . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)


5 Wyches @ 182 pts ((CE, pg. 9); Unit Type: Infantry; Close Combat Weapon; Fleet; Splinter Pistol; Wych Weapons; Blaster x2; Combat Drugs; Dodge; Plasma Grenades)
. . 1 Succubus (Agoniser; Splinter Pistol; Wych Weapons; Plasma Grenades (Squad))
. . 1 Raider ((CE, pg. 10); Unit Type: Vehicle (Skimmer, Fast, Open-topped); Transport Capacity: 10 models; Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

5 Wyches @ 182 pts ((CE, pg. 9); Unit Type: Infantry; Close Combat Weapon; Fleet; Splinter Pistol; Wych Weapons; Blaster x2; Combat Drugs; Dodge; Plasma Grenades)
. . 1 Succubus (Agoniser; Splinter Pistol; Wych Weapons; Plasma Grenades (Squad))
. . 1 Raider ((CE, pg. 10); Unit Type: Vehicle (Skimmer, Fast, Open-topped); Transport Capacity: 10 models; Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

5 Wyches @ 182 pts ((CE, pg. 9); Unit Type: Infantry; Close Combat Weapon; Fleet; Splinter Pistol; Wych Weapons; Blaster x2; Combat Drugs; Dodge; Plasma Grenades)
. . 1 Succubus (Agoniser; Splinter Pistol; Wych Weapons; Plasma Grenades (Squad))
. . 1 Raider ((CE, pg. 10); Unit Type: Vehicle (Skimmer, Fast, Open-topped); Transport Capacity: 10 models; Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)


5 Raider Squad @ 115 pts (Blaster; Splinter Rifle x3; Dark Lance)
. . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

5 Raider Squad @ 115 pts (Blaster; Splinter Rifle x3; Dark Lance)
. . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

5 Raider Squad @ 115 pts (Blaster; Splinter Rifle x3; Dark Lance)
. . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

5 Raider Squad @ 115 pts (Blaster; Splinter Rifle x3; Dark Lance)
. . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

4 Raider Squad @ 136 pts (Blaster; Splinter Rifle x2; Dark Lance)
. . 1 Sybarite (Close Combat Weapon; Nightmare Doll)
. . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1)

4 Raider Squad @ 141 pts (Blaster; Splinter Rifle x2; Dark Lance)
. . 1 Sybarite (Close Combat Weapon; Crucible of Malediction )
. . 1 Raider (Dark Lance x1; Horrorfex)

3 Reaver Jetbike Squad @ 95 pts (Splinter Pistol; Blaster x2; Splinter Rifle x1; Combat Drugs; Reaver Jetbike)

3 Reaver Jetbike Squad @ 95 pts (Splinter Pistol; Blaster x2; Splinter Rifle x1; Combat Drugs; Reaver Jetbike)

3 Reaver Jetbike Squad @ 95 pts (Splinter Pistol; Blaster x2; Splinter Rifle x1; Combat Drugs; Reaver Jetbike)


1 Ravager @ 120 pts (Disintegrator x3)

1 Ravager @ 120 pts (Disintegrator x3)

1 Ravager @ 120 pts (Disintegrator x3)



Total Roster Cost: 2500

I like your list but heres some changes I would do to it and some suggestions maybe?

1.Vect isn't worth the points in 2500 one lucky shot means hes doomed and your potentially losing 277 points and 5 KPs if I understand the rules right.

2. I really don't like your kit for your dracon, trophy rack is a waist, and agonisers are best used elsewhere. Your retinue is kind of over kill, with so many incubi you have a high chance of accidently killing your opponent on the turn you charge BAD idea IMO. Whats the point of the lone warrior? You should atleast take advantage of the two heavy weapons options and either take two dls or more perfably two SC's.

3. Your wyches are going for CC? Eh I dunno I've had bad luck in the past trying to make Wych CC work and its always failed. I plan on running them with no WW's two blasters and hay wire grenades. Everyones going mech might as well kit them out to it and if I need something locked up they can fulfill that role as well.

4.Your fast attack slot is probably your worst section! I was digging the list till I saw this and almost cried. RJBs just cost too many points to be viable and their too low of a model count to be able to survive at all. These are basically even more free KPs than the raiders are, I would drop them from the list and use the points to beef up your raider squads.

5. On your Ravagers, I like them maybe add in NS from the left over points from your RJBs?

6. I've been seeing this a lot why all the horrorfexes? What I understand of the fexe is that it cannot cause pinning tests to fearless units, though I may be wrong about this. Even if you don't go up against mech the only horde you would be able to stop is imp guard and maybe nids? And seeing as it doesn't count as a defensive weapon your giving up a turn of not shooting your raiders DL. Most raider upgrades are kind of pointless, the main upgrade I would even consider is the NS and possibly Torture amps.

I've been seeing some people use the nightmare doll again I would defenitely get in contact with your TO and get his/her permission on it. I won't be using it till it is completely confirmed that it is usable. I so want to use a crucible but ld 10/9 is still hard to fail.

Well there was my rather long list of suggestions, though I don't think I'm the true expert of DE anywhere I'd like to think my input could help you in ard boyz.

Luthon1234 wrote:
1.Vect isn't worth the points in 2500 one lucky shot means hes doomed and your potentially losing 277 points and 5 KPs if I understand the rules right.

2. I really don't like your kit for your dracon, trophy rack is a waist, and agonisers are best used elsewhere. Your retinue is kind of over kill, with so many incubi you have a high chance of accidently killing your opponent on the turn you charge BAD idea IMO. Whats the point of the lone warrior? You should atleast take advantage of the two heavy weapons options and either take two dls or more perfably two SC's.

3. Your wyches are going for CC? Eh I dunno I've had bad luck in the past trying to make Wych CC work and its always failed. I plan on running them with no WW's two blasters and hay wire grenades. Everyones going mech might as well kit them out to it and if I need something locked up they can fulfill that role as well.

4.Your fast attack slot is probably your worst section! I was digging the list till I saw this and almost cried. RJBs just cost too many points to be viable and their too low of a model count to be able to survive at all. These are basically even more free KPs than the raiders are, I would drop them from the list and use the points to beef up your raider squads.

6. I've been seeing this a lot why all the horrorfexes? What I understand of the fexe is that it cannot cause pinning tests to fearless units, though I may be wrong about this. Even if you don't go up against mech the only horde you would be able to stop is imp guard and maybe nids? And seeing as it doesn't count as a defensive weapon your giving up a turn of not shooting your raiders DL. Most raider upgrades are kind of pointless, the main upgrade I would even consider is the NS and possibly Torture amps.

I've been seeing some people use the nightmare doll again I would defenitely get in contact with your TO and get his/her permission on it. I won't be using it till it is completely confirmed that it is usable. I so want to use a crucible but ld 10/9 is still hard to fail.

Coming from a position of not have played enough games to feel confident with my DE weilding.
I won't tackle the Vect choice.

The Dracon - Trophy rack is there as a 5pt sink for horrofex tricks right? Agonisers best used else where, so your suggesting to not give one of your strongets CC unit a power weapon while everyone else has one who can? The DL is the point of the lone warrior, the one and only, and to suck up a wound for the incubi.

You've had bad luck with wyches in CC, you mean the guys with a 4+ invu in CC right?... riiiight... I don't understand what your saying... your running wyches but aren't planning on sending them to CC?

RJB squad I've liked them in the un-numerous games I've used them - shrug. What would you spend the points on? Another boat of wyches?

I thought the whole point of the fex was it could and you sat back and shot them turn after turn after turn....


And my breaks over so that light skimming will have to do... dammit. wanted to ask more questions.... argue more points..... arrrgh

ChrisCP wrote:
Coming from a position of not have played enough games to feel confident with my DE weilding.
I won't tackle the Vect choice.

The Dracon - Trophy rack is there as a 5pt sink for horrofex tricks right? Agonisers best used else where, so your suggesting to not give one of your strongets CC unit a power weapon while everyone else has one who can? The DL is the point of the lone warrior, the one and only, and to suck up a wound for the incubi.

You've had bad luck with wyches in CC, you mean the guys with a 4+ invu in CC right?... riiiight... I don't understand what your saying... your running wyches but aren't planning on sending them to CC?

RJB squad I've liked them in the un-numerous games I've used them - shrug. What would you spend the points on? Another boat of wyches?

I thought the whole point of the fex was it could and you sat back and shot them turn after turn after turn....


And my breaks over so that light skimming will have to do... dammit. wanted to ask more questions.... argue more points..... arrrgh

Ah my bad on the dracon I meant that a Agoniser is a poor choice for him when a punisher would be a lot better. A 5pt sink could still be use else. Ok he soaks up a wound... not really seeing the point, and if your gonna give him a DL he wouldn't be shooting it at all talk about a waist of 10pts where a SC would benefit the incubi.

Yes wyches are surprisngly not that great in combat its weird right? They actually perform pretty well as tarpits, and tank busta's.

Well like I said the points are better spent beefing up your raider squads giving them NS etc..

Well yea thats the desired effect. Problem is most units are fearless and or mech so fexes become a moot point. If you pop a chimera for instance theres a good chance that the guardsmen inside could be pinned, so thats another strike for the fexe. Sure I could sit there and keep plopping pinning templates on them but now I'm doing nothing with my raider and its becoming a tasty target.

It just ain't worth it. My bad, good luck and happy hunting.

With the Fex it runs down like this
"Morale checks are a specific kind of Leadership test." pg. 43 BRB

"Fearless troops automatically pass all Morale and
Pinning tests they are required to take," pg. 75 BRB

"or more models are hit then the unit they belong to must pass a Leadership test or become pinned" DE 'dex pg. 15

As you can see a Fearless unit does not automatically pass LD tests only Morale & Pinning tests. The 'fex makes one take a LD test - a vaild test for a fearless unit and one becomes pinned as a result of failure. Thus it is possible to pin a Fearless unit with a 'fex.

****

Mmm, I really like the NS as well have caused more than a few headaches - haven't had the opportunitys to play them against lot's of 48"+ stuff yet thou.

When I field the Wychs I usually take them in 7's and they win combat against boys squads (for examples sake) eventually - so I can't say I have the experience there (again), but I find it strange using them as can-openers, that's a DL job right but Dash at last check favored Haywires as well...

1. First off Vect is only worth 3 KP. Second he is a great shield for the 3 other ravagers, and any sniper boats that want to hide behind him. Third he will only be on the board for 1 round if I decide to try the Ninja WWP.

2. I don't think you are getting the idea of this style of list. It is basically a mobile gunline, I shoot for 2-3 turns, assault anything that gets close to tie it up while all the guns jet 24" to safety and continue firing.

3. Again I think you are not understanding how wyches work. They are not met to kll anything per say. They are one of the best tar pit units in the game. If I am going to charge with them I only want them to kill just enough to draw combat.

4. While they are not that cost effective, I have every other FoC filled. At 2000 pts and up they are manditory...

5. In a game were 80% of the anti tank weapons have 48" (see 15 missile launchers in every SW army) or more NS are rather lack luster.

6. Read ChrisCP's post. Horrorfex are auto win unpgrades vs some armies.






Now back to the topic, does anyone have ideas for solutions to the third scenario?

Clthomps wrote:

The entire army is mounted in fast skimmers, I doubt the opponent will be able to spread our far enough to deny anything.

I don't know. If you are giving him 5 turns to spread across the field @ max coherency distance he could limit then number of parking spots that have room for a Raider/Ravager/ReaverSquad footprint plus 1" buffer from enemy models. He might not block all of them, but he might block some of them, and when you can't legally deploy them from reserves they will be destroyed. If your big worry is a footslogging horde, it should be able to clog a lot of the board around the carrier. Of course I don't think you could keep the carrier alive anyhow, so its kind of a moot point.

Clthomps wrote:
As I mentioned earlier I think its inclusion is only a meta choice if I play against a foot slogging horde.

Really I don't see any other options. If I get paired up against an army that has 12 KP and I have 60+ even if I get the best alpha strike in the world I will still lose. Also any horde player will just play really slowly and force a time out before I have a chance to wipe the table. It seems like a lose, lose situation. I am open to any other suggestions?

You're probably right about intentional slow play; other than working the judge I'm not sure what can be done about it. Even without slow play (intentional or not) I don't think they allocate enough time per game to go the full 6 rounds.

I guess my opinion is that the WWP trick you are suggesting has a small chance of working, and the upside if does work doesn't earn you the kinds of points you would need to place in the tournament.

If you draw a bad matchup, you're doomed one way or the other, so you're better served bringing a list that has the best chance if you are lucky to get a good (or less bad) matchup for the final pairing. Go for broke and prepare for the best case scenario, since it's probably our only chance anyhow.

----

re: Luthon1234's points:

1. My theoryhammer says no to Vect, but I've never played him. If you've found him to be worth the points and effective, OK.

2. Dracon+Retinue is good. My general theory is Agonizer for Dracon and Punisher/THelm for Archon, simply due to the fact that the extra wound lets you be more aggressive on combat drugs with the Archon. Trophy racks are fine if you have spare points to spend; they sort of come and go out of my lists, although I do like them better with Wyche Succubi given the choice. 4 Incubi retinues are not too powerful against worthy foes: fine as is. 1 bullet catcher Warrior is an easy ablative wound. I like 2, but 1 is good. I disagree about weapon upgrades for retinue Warriors; I'd rather have 2 bullet catchers than 1 with a SCannon.

3. If Wyches aren't for CC, I don't know *what* they're for. Agree w/ clthomps on tar pit; they don't need to kill, they need to not die and stay locked in combat [thus why I like Trophy Racks on Succubi]. I can't image a *worse* wyche build than w/o Wyche Weapons and Haywire grenades. Haywires are too expensive to give to a squad.

4. I generally hate Reavers too, but at 2500 you gotta spend points. Beefing up the Raider and Wyche squad sizes is one way. Putting more units on the table is another, and well, 6 blasters is 6 blasters. Yes they die easily, but if the alternative is more SRifle shots from gunboats and/or adding sybarites with expensive weapons/gear and a whopping 2A, Reavers don't look so bad in comparison.

5. Agreed w/ clthomps re: too much long range anti-armor to bother with Nightshields, and too expensive.

6. The effect of Horrorfexes versus Fearless etc. is at the mercy of your judge. They are cheap, so not much lost if you get a bad matchup. In a good matchup they can be your ticket to massacres and thus big tourney points. Under the theory that you'll need some luck with matchups to place in top 3, you might as well optimize for good matchups. And they are cheap. At most I might drop them from the Ravagers if I really needed to reclaim points to buy something significant, since you'd expect Ravagers to be out of Horrorfex range much of the time. But they're cheap.

LMoE


LMoE


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Clthomps wrote:
Now back to the topic, does anyone have ideas for solutions to the third scenario?

If you don't try the WWP trick, I've already suggested:

1. swapping 2 Raider Squads for 2 sniper Warrior Squads to cut 6 KPs. Not enough, but something I guess.
2. jetbike Lord instead of retinue lord to cut 4 KPs.

3. Perhaps consider 2 larger Reaver squads instead of 3 min sized ones. -3 KPs. You lose 2 blasters, but you gain bullet catchers to keep your blaster Reavers alive a bit longer. Otherwise you start losing blasters (and probably the squad) to the first round of enemy shooting. With a little luck you pass morale tests and live another turn. My thinking is that you may have the same or better chance of getting 4 blasters into blaster range this way than with 3x 3 Reaver squads. Bigger squads would also be desirable to hide the Reaver Lord.

Together that's 13 fewer KPs, although it loses some punch from a Reaver Dracon, which can't be as aggressive with the Drugs and loses the Raider DL and the Incubi hitting power without anywhere effective to put the points saved from the retinue. I'm not going to work out the points, but I suspect that you're probably better off sticking with the retinue Lord, KPs be damned.

I wish I had better suggestions. I'm stuck in the same boat.

LMoE

Clthomps wrote:1. First off Vect is only worth 3 KP. Second he is a great shield for the 3 other ravagers, and any sniper boats that want to hide behind him. Third he will only be on the board for 1 round if I decide to try the Ninja WWP.

2. I don't think you are getting the idea of this style of list. It is basically a mobile gunline, I shoot for 2-3 turns, assault anything that gets close to tie it up while all the guns jet 24" to safety and continue firing.

3. Again I think you are not understanding how wyches work. They are not met to kll anything per say. They are one of the best tar pit units in the game. If I am going to charge with them I only want them to kill just enough to draw combat.

4. While they are not that cost effective, I have every other FoC filled. At 2000 pts and up they are manditory...

5. In a game were 80% of the anti tank weapons have 48" (see 15 missile launchers in every SW army) or more NS are rather lack luster.

6. Read ChrisCP's post. Horrorfex are auto win unpgrades vs some armies.






Now back to the topic, does anyone have ideas for solutions to the third scenario?

1. I may have read the 3rd mission wrong but he is a HQ and can move over 6 so wouldn't he count as 4 KPs? I could be totally wrong though but even if its not hes still not worth the points when you can get another Dracon+retinue.

2. Your really not gonna tie anything up (ok if it happens to be something big maybe) with this unit. By making your incubi the minimum rather than the maximum you give your dracon and incubi several wounds and still give out enough attacks to keep you in the combat til your opponents combat phase.

3. Actually you misunderstood me and I didn't type it out right for you to understand me . I was saying they aren't monstrous CC units but they serve as tarpits very well. I agree with what you said but I would consider dropping the wyche weapons in favor of haywire.

4. In my opinion you are waisting points and offering your opponent free KP's to do whatever he likes with.

5. Right but people still take 36 inch weapons and its often saved my butt from rapid fire plenty of times.

6. I'd rather not be at the mercy of the TO on a ruling like that. Is there a FAQ stating that this does in fact work against Fearless units?

Max KP for any unit is 3 in Mission 3. Fast moving HQs are 3.

Ard Boyz wrote:If an HQ unit has the potential to move over 6” it counts
for 3 kill points. Kill points are not cumulative for the
sake of killing one unit.

Luthon1234 wrote:

Clthomps wrote:
6. Read ChrisCP's post. Horrorfex are auto win unpgrades vs some armies.

6. I'd rather not be at the mercy of the TO on a ruling like that. Is there a FAQ stating that this does in fact work against Fearless units?

It works. There's no need for an FAQ because it makes the unit take a valid test and the consiquences are clear - people may not be happy with it happening to them for the first time but if you show them three relevent quotes once they recover from the shock I'm sure they will understand.


Between WWP and the hiding honestly the only solution I can see for you problem is to not take the 'exact' list you're running as people have said having two sniper squads etc.
Your best hope is doing the WWP confusing the hell out of whomever you're playing because they never had it done before and eating them.
But yeah "Win more." aint an answer.

ChrisCP wrote:
It works. There's no need for an FAQ because it makes the unit take a valid test and the consiquences are clear - people may not be happy with it happening to them for the first time but if you show them three relevent quotes once they recover from the shock I'm sure they will understand.

Actually if and I say if ard' boyz is being subjected to the INAT FAQ, then no Fexes do not pin fearless units. It would be great if it did and make them worth taking but not knowing how each TO will handle this and if ard' boyz is going to be mainly using the INAT FAQ, its probably gonna be not usable. Now I did ask my TO about it today and his opinion while he isn't a rules lawyer and often makes fair judgment calls he did say he wouldn't allow me or any DE players to use fexes because how he saw it as rules intended was that Fearless units pass all pinning checks and leadership checks or something to the lines of that.

I don't know how valid the INAT FAQ is I only kind of looked at very recently so I don't know if its a reliable FAQ. I think I may ask Gwar about it he seems to be in the know about all rulings and such.

Ok, I'm a loooong time DE player, and I just have to interject on this, 'cuz I see a lot of people making these assertions.

To use the Nightmare Doll in such a fashion that it works in 5th edition requires a loose reading of the rules that equate the roll for side as the roll for who goes first.

To use the Horrorfex in such a fashion that it is effective against fearless units requires a very tight reading of the rules that refuses to equate a failed leadership test resulting in being pinned with being an actual pinning test.

Why are some DE players comfortable with having a loose rules interpretation in one case and a tight interpretation in another when both interpretations result in being to the benefit of the DE player.

Remember, I'm a DE player myself, so I'm not casting unwarranted aspersions. I believe that one should either interpret the rules strictly or loosely all the time, rather that in whichever fashion benefits us the most at the time.

My personal opinion is "tight interpretation" in both cases: Horrorfexes work against fearless units, but the Nightmare Doll does nothing.

I feel they are both tight reading of the rules.

There is one roll in the beginning, the winner chooses who will go first, and pick sides.

I still think for scenario three you're going to have to hope and pray, you could reserve your whole army and try to pin and shoot one thing at a time? The more I think about the portals the more I worry about you losing the whole army to them from whirlwinds or something as horrible... or a lack of terrain etc.

I think maybe trying to play from reserves and sticking to the 'best' corner for cover could slow your bleeding down enough to make a fist of the situation - as we've all noted 'everything' in your list is 3KP... I'm sure you're three times as good ^_^


*Rules stuff*

I'm saying the whole point of writing the rules for Terrorfex is such a way was so that it does pin fearless units. Why else would it not say "Takes a pinning test" or a "morale check" and instead use the most obscure test using LD an actual LD test?
For my proof I point to 'Mask of the Damned', 'Hell Mask' and 'Archangel of Pain' the first two I mentioned refer to the LD test - thus will work against fearless units - The Archangel however say the take a pinning test, so obviously won't work against fearlessness. If they were intended to not work on fealess units then they would have written it the same way as the Angel.


Nightmare doll ""re-roll the dice when ascertaining who may choose table edge or quarter.
As Clthomps said if you win that roll your able to choose a side or quater so why can't one make the opponent re-roll? The draw back of this is you must declare the re-roll before you knew what your opponent would do ie. I'm going first so I'll take this edge.

RAI: i think the terror and horrorfexs don't work on Fearless units.

its the wording and age of the DE code that allows a (apparent) loophole to exist.



Moral and Ld tests are the exact same thing IIRC.

besides a models that is Fearless "may not be pinned" so i would say that while you may force a moral test with a terrorfex, nothing happens if the units fails.

Since the terrorfex rules says the a unit that fails the moral/Ld test is pinned and the rule for Fearless units says they "May not be pinned" suggests that a fearless unit will simply ignore anything that makes it be pinned. Therefore they may fail the test, but they simply don't suffer the effects of the failed test.

Morale tests and LD tests are not the same. A failed morale test has a specific result: the unit flees. A LD test is simply a test against LD, and the rule causing the LD test will specify what happens if it is failed [or passed].

The rules for the Horrorfex etc. describe a LD test and the result if the test is failed: the unit is pinned. However, test and consequence are the same as the BRB pinning test.

One interpretation is that Codex overrides BRB, and the fact that the DE Codex is describing a core rule is an interesting but otherwise irrelevant coincidence. The Codex says exactly what to do, and it does NOT say to take a Pinning test, nor does the weapon have the Pinning attribute. RAW and Codex>Core.

The other interpretation is that the DE Codex is describing the basic, core pinning test, presumably because the 3rd ed rules did not include the Pinning test as a standard, reference-able game term [also see Hellion's Hit and Run]. Subsequent game editions simply formalized the Pinning test as a standard game term so that the Pinning and Barrage attributes and special wargear/unit rules could simply refer to rather than laboriously redescribe the mechanic. RAI (probably).

Of course, as Grey Templar points out, it is a moot point for units that may not be pinned. It would only matter for units whose rules included "ignores Pinning tests" but not "may not be Pinned" or "may not Go To Ground" [arguable: may not choose to GTG OR may not be caused to GTG by any means...?]

I think the first is correct, simply because there does not exist a meta-rule for converting a special rule to a standard rule if they have the same wording, whereas Codex>Core IS an established meta-rule.

As always, you are at the mercy of the judge, and your best argument is that the rule says exactly what to do.

If I were a judge, I'd rule the first. Anyone who doesn't like it can take it up with GW for not updating the Codex to reflect the last two game editions.

----

The Nightmare Doll question is trickier.

IF it references a particular dice roll found in the 3rd ed rules ("THE roll to choose table edge or quarter", then it should only apply to that specific roll, and not any dice roll that might have the same effect (directly or indirectly). As long as the scenario called for rolling the dice to pick edge or quarter using 3rd scenario boilerplate, it would work.

But if the scenario boilerplate describes a different roll (e.g. first turn plus pick of side/quarter), the wording no longer references a existing dice roll. In other words, the gear wording references a roll with a specific result (choose edge/quarter); it does not reference any roll that merely includes this as one of multiple effects. That's a different roll that isn't referenced by the wargear rule.

I don't think its reasonable, or RAI, that a wargear rule that allows you to re-roll for table edge/quarter (per 3rd ed scenario boilerplate) would NOW let you re-roll for first turn (a much more important roll, usually).

Again, you are at the mercy of the judge.

I would agree with Saldiven in that a judge will proably either adhere to a strict RAW approach [no Pinning test, no "choose edge/quarter" roll to re-roll] OR will take the liberal RAI "means the same thing" approach [Pinning test, any roll that includes edge/quarter].

LMoE

Grey Templar wrote:

A Moral and Ld tests are the exact same thing IIRC.

Bthe rule for Fearless units says they "May not be pinned" suggests that a fearless unit will simply ignore anything that makes it be pinned. Therefore they may fail the test, but they simply don't suffer the effects of the failed test.

A) No they are not.
B) The fearless rule does not say that.


And on top of all that I just gave you an example from the DE codex that says "take a pinning test" not "take a LD test" Look at "Archangel of Pain" if your still disbelieving that the 'Fexs were made to pin fearless units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LastManOnEarth wrote:
The other interpretation is that the DE Codex is describing the basic, core pinning test, presumably because the 3rd ed rules did not include the Pinning test as a standard, reference-able game term.

Yes they did.

@ ChrisCP

My bad. I didn't have my 3rd ed book in front of me @ work and was assuming Pinning tests weren't a standard rule at the time.

IMO that makes a much stronger case than I had thought.

I guess I'll need a copy of the books @ work, lol.

LMoE

No worries man.

ChrisCP wrote:


And on top of all that I just gave you an example from the DE codex that says "take a pinning test" not "take a LD test" Look at "Archangel of Pain" if your still disbelieving that the 'Fexs were made to pin fearless units.


.

the problem is that the doll doesn't say that fearless units aren't immune to its effects.

Whether it says "take a Ld test and if it is failed the units is pinned" or "take a pinning test" i say a ferarless unit isn't effected.

Fearless units are immune to being pinned and as such by my interpretation would ignore the effects, even if they are actually forced to take a Ld test.


i am worried about people doing this to units that are supposed to be immune to this kind of stuff.

I am not worried about my GKs being pinned as it(DH codex) specifically says they may not be pinned.

Edited so as not to sound like a jerk:

My basic premise is that I disagree with any decision to always take the most favorable interpretation when looking at rules debates.

Also, one cannot claim writer's intention when comparing a rule written under third edition when applying that rule to fifth edition.

Grey Templar wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:


And on top of all that I just gave you an example from the DE codex that says "take a pinning test" not "take a LD test" Look at "Archangel of Pain" if your still disbelieving that the 'Fexs were made to pin fearless units.


.

the problem is that the doll doesn't say that fearless units aren't immune to its effects.

Whether it says "take a Ld test and if it is failed the units is pinned" or "take a pinning test" i say a ferarless unit isn't effected.

Fearless units are immune to being pinned and as such by my interpretation would ignore the effects, even if they are actually forced to take a Ld test.

i am worried about people doing this to units that are supposed to be immune to this kind of stuff.
I am not worried about my GKs being pinned as it(DH codex) specifically says they may not be pinned.

They wrote it in a fashion to that it worked, They are not immune to being pinned the automatically pass all pinning tests that's what the rule says.
The DE codex itself uses pinning tests at points instead of the Leadership tests asked for by the Fexes.
sit down have a look at well the literature yourself and you'll understand.
And yes your GK say they 'can't be pinned' as you said which would stop a Fex

I think its just abusing a loop hole until GW comes out with a FAQ or some ruling that yes fexes do indeed pin fearless units then you would be safe from a TO. As it is now I hardly doubt any TO especially ones that follow the INAT FAQ will allow you to take it. So I hope you bring two different lists just in case.