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.

Aetherse, if you want to make another thread on this, go ahead. I've given some responses, and you've yet to give me a convincing argument for retinues being of greater tactical use than Incubi, that I couldn't use to show how awesome Ogryns are.
You've made me rethink a few of my points, and I thank you for that, and will include them in my next amendment. But please stop derailing this thread into an incubi vs archon one thank you.

My logic for rating Wyches beneath Warriors is realyl quite simple. In 5th edition, two out of every three missions is objective based. Warriors are able to hang back and shoot, or charge as desired. Not onyl that, they can squat on an objective, and with their heavy weapons, still play a meaningful role in the battle. They also have a slightly better armour save.

I can get behind this logic. I never meant to imply that they were useless, but rather were outclassed by the wyches in point for point cost and efficiency in their roles. They're certainly good for holding an objective deep in your territory and still spitting out Splinter Cannon shots or dark lances. Wyches are for dislodging units on objectives and wracks are there to hold these newly freed objectives. Also, a 5+ save over a 6+ save isn't going to come into play that often in the shooting game. Most basic sidearms are AP 5 (save a few wonky guns and the ubiquitous lasgun, and hell, if lasguns are shooting at you, there're going to be way too many of them to make all your saves) so I don't think that this is a beneficial attribute.

Wyches on the other hand, are not by their nature a stationary unit. Even with feel no pain, at toughness 3, they're very susceptible to enemy fire. They have to keep moving, keep assaulting. If you leave them standing around in the middle of the battlefield, they will get gunned down, feel no pain or no. Not only that, as they lack even blasters now, if they want to participate in the battle in any way, they have to keep moving. Added to the fact that there are far less variations in builds to limit what you can do with them, and I'd rate Warriors as the superior choice.

Of course. Wyches keep moving and assaulting, utilizing cover as much as possible. If they're standing still, they're dead. Basic tactics. I'll concede that the lack of Blasters limits variation on their potential role on the battle field. I was arguing that they will be getting a pain point very quickly as opposed to Warriors. Both will probably only get FNP against most shooting, but Wyches will get FNP much quicker, making them more likely to survive than Warriors.

I find wyches excellent in their niche field as anti-HQ, crack combat units, and monsters. This isn't to say that they can't take on regular units, but to put it bluntly, why on earth would I use wyches as standard shock troops and objective holders now I have Wracks? Wracks get liquifier guns, toughness 4, and the pain token from the word go. Not only that, they cost pretty much an identical amount of points. In any situation which calls for standard shock combat troops as opposed to ones specialising against enemy HQ's, etc, Wracks are clearly superior.

It's a good point. Now that Dark Eldar have two CC units for troop choices, DE players are going to have to differentiate between CC roles. Wyches take care of assaulty-MC-HQ's, Wracks chew up standard troops. No objections to this at all.

I actually agree with you on the use of the Shardnet and Impaler to an extent, if you are going after combat troops or monsters with them, then yes, it's better choice. I meant to say that Hydra Gauntlets were superior if you were attacking basic guard/tactical squads, whilst shardnets were better against the more specialist stuff. It all just depends on exactly what you envisage your wyches doing. I'll clarify that a bit better when I amend the whole thing.

Makes sense. But like you said above, wyches are to be used most often as anti-HQ, anti-assault, and anti-MC. Thus, Shardnets are the standard load-out for wyches in my mind. If you're trying to play the most versatile, I'd say Shardnet and Hydra Gauntlet.

To rephrase my point in the wyches are better than warriors debate:

Yes, wyches are a specialized role. But they do it well. Warriors have no specialized role. And they don't really do anything really well. They're somewhat versatile at a cost of effectiveness. Wyches are more effective at their role for the same point cost with the more than likely potential for survivability.
Wyches = great CC, meh shooting. No special weapons.
Warriors = meh CC, decent shooting. Special weapons.

Like I said before, I'll probably keep a sniper boat or a 20 man squad on the objective closest to me, then send wyches and wracks to do the rest of the work. In my mind, I'd rather have 3 units of wyches than 3 units of warriors. However, I am thrilled that we can actually have a debate now over which is better, instead of the old foregone conclusions of mono-3rd ed-DE.


That said, I'll refrain from more debate on this so you can get on with your analysis. Hope I helped you look at things a bit differently! Looking forward especially to see how you rate the HS slots. That is the biggest debate, I think.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
@ Aetherse

Please go and make a new thread on your arguments. I think you'll be in the minority in the debate, but I'd like to see how it would pan out.

I would simply argue in wyches vs warriors, that Warriors are tactically better, as they can be prepped for a number of situations. Wyches do one thing, and do it well. If you take 3 units of wyches, odds are, they're not going to be as handy in as many situations as warriors would be, simply because there's less HQ choices/monsters around, as there are general infantry and tanks.

But that's about it. However, I do agree with pretty much most of your points.

Fast Attack is now up.

I disagree with the Reaver Jet-bike analysis. a unit of 6 with 2 cluster caltrops upgrades comes to a cost of 172 points, allowing one to drop 2d6 S6 and 3d4 S4 auto-hitting attacks. With a turbo-boosting range of 36 inches, they have the entire map as their range if deployed right.

Rolling it out many times, the squad will screw long-fangs and equivilants up pretty good just by moving over them.

Dracos wrote:One thing I'm not sold on is the Haemmies and the Warriors. I'm sold on Wracks, but I don't like how bad the Haemmies are in CC and therefore I have to takea haemmy to get wracks as troops, which I'm not yet sold on. I've been trying out Succubus with bloodbrides and wychs, using a squad of warriors to hold the backfield objective. Its been working quite well but it needs to be tested against some of the hardest lists around yet to try and see if it can win against those foes.

Overall I like reading your review to get other ideas and perspectives, keep up the good work Ketara!

Haemy
Liquifier Gun (or Shattershard for 5 more points)
Venom Blade
65 pts for this setup

-Gives a free pain token
-Wrecks squads with he liquifier
-4 Attacks with poison 2+ on charge, not bad concidering you only pay 65 points.

You really can't ask for more for that cheap.



As a side note, why is everyone saying that Wyches are for taking out MC's? Wyches are for handling GEQ and holding up deathstars, and can handle MEQ relitively well. However Wracks (with a Haemy) get 3 attacks on the charge at I5, Poison 4+, and the Haemy gets 4 attacks Wounding on 2+. That sounds like some solid MC killyness, as long as you take the MC down to about 4 wounds or less.

To me the major problem with Wracks as an assault unit versus Wyches is the lack of fleet. I would rather stick with the more mobile units.

Brother-Thunder wrote:I disagree with the Reaver Jet-bike analysis. a unit of 6 with 2 cluster caltrops upgrades comes to a cost of 172 points, allowing one to drop 2d6 S6 and 3d4 S4 auto-hitting attacks. With a turbo-boosting range of 36 inches, they have the entire map as their range if deployed right.

Rolling it out many times, the squad will screw long-fangs and equivilants up pretty good just by moving over them.

Bear in mind, I intend on using 30 Bikes in my 2000 point list, but the specifics of their Turbo-Boost attack limit flight runs a bit.

How do you propose to actually land the attacks on back line troops? You need around 5 things to line up before the unit is used to maximum efficiency.

A) Start your turn out of range of charges/flamers, after utilizing your 36 inch boost to close the distance first turn
B) A straight (or mostly straight) line overlapping with their target unit
C) Achieve a minimum of at least 18 inches or you lose your unit next turn
D) Space necessary to place models at the end of their flight run (vehicles, units prevent this)
E) Safe space where they won't be charged by anything capable of killing them/shot by flamers

I mean, it's going to be extremely difficult to pull off the maneuver all DE players are drooling over, hitting a unit for 30 STR 4 attacks, and fading off into the background to rely on FNP and a 3+ cover save before starting the attack all over again.

I see a lot more 10 attacks landed, and then being hit by flamers/assault/stiff breeze/tank shocked/plasma cannon/battle cannon and not being points efficient. The straight line restriction in the rules text is a fairly major balancing factor. If they could attack any one unit within their entire move, ending up anywhere - they would be the strongest unit in the book.

I guess the challenge is figuring out effective flight routes eh? I see the Reaver Jetbike unit being one of the biggest "skill test" unit in the book, scaling effectiveness based solely on the user.

It's actually not hard because they are jetbikes. The key is to position them with their initial turboboost first, then use it. You're not going to be able to use the trick every turn unless your opponent sucks at the game.

That being said, a fast 36" turboboost, access to melta, extra close combat weapons, access to agonizer, and combat drugs means that they have a lot more going for them than one little trick.

Warriors...are...underrated. They have a lot of synergy with a bunch of different units. Wyches are more of a move, disembark, assault kind of unit. Warriors are more like a driveby unit these days. I'm just sad that splinter racks don't work with splinter cannons.

I see an unusual use for the court. Ur-Ghul are strength 4 and come with furious charge. If you go first or steal the initiative, they are really good at killing transports. Move 12", disembark 3", fleet d6", assault 6. 5 urghuls put out 20 strength 5 attacks on rear armor. If you went first, those are autohits. And it doesn't take a force org slot or cost very many points.

On Beastmasters: They are underrated. Why? Because unlike most of the other hth units in Dark Eldar, they are very resilient to shooting. You actually want to take all 3 and do wound allocation shennanigans. Basic non-ID shots? Place on the razorwings or clawed fiends. As you run low on wounds, you can place wounds on khymera's with their 4+i save. The clawed fiends are also surprisingly good at taking out transports. They are beasts, so move 6, fleet, assault 12. Also, as the clawed fiend takes wounds he gains attacks. The main sadness is a lack of grenades. As good as incubi and wyches are, they still need a transport.

Defiler wrote:

Brother-Thunder wrote:I disagree with the Reaver Jet-bike analysis. a unit of 6 with 2 cluster caltrops upgrades comes to a cost of 172 points, allowing one to drop 2d6 S6 and 3d4 S4 auto-hitting attacks. With a turbo-boosting range of 36 inches, they have the entire map as their range if deployed right.

Rolling it out many times, the squad will screw long-fangs and equivilants up pretty good just by moving over them.

Bear in mind, I intend on using 30 Bikes in my 2000 point list, but the specifics of their Turbo-Boost attack limit flight runs a bit.

How do you propose to actually land the attacks on back line troops? You need around 5 things to line up before the unit is used to maximum efficiency.

A) Start your turn out of range of charges/flamers, after utilizing your 36 inch boost to close the distance first turn
B) A straight (or mostly straight) line overlapping with their target unit
C) Achieve a minimum of at least 18 inches or you lose your unit next turn
D) Space necessary to place models at the end of their flight run (vehicles, units prevent this)
E) Safe space where they won't be charged by anything capable of killing them/shot by flamers

I mean, it's going to be extremely difficult to pull off the maneuver all DE players are drooling over, hitting a unit for 30 STR 4 attacks, and fading off into the background to rely on FNP and a 3+ cover save before starting the attack all over again.

I see a lot more 10 attacks landed, and then being hit by flamers/assault/stiff breeze/tank shocked/plasma cannon/battle cannon and not being points efficient. The straight line restriction in the rules text is a fairly major balancing factor. If they could attack any one unit within their entire move, ending up anywhere - they would be the strongest unit in the book.

I guess the challenge is figuring out effective flight routes eh? I see the Reaver Jetbike unit being one of the biggest "skill test" unit in the book, scaling effectiveness based solely on the user.

This is basically my reasoning in a bit more detail. To use Reavers in this way can be difficult, and depending on the layout of battle, impossible. Now when I can take a unit of ten scourges with 4 splinter cannons capable of 42 guaranteed poisoned shots for the same price, why would I take the Reavers? Purely from a tactical and competitive point of view, I'd rather have a unit which isn't highly situational and randomised, especially when I'm spending this quantity of points on a single unit.

As a side note, why is everyone saying that Wyches are for taking out MC's? Wyches are for handling GEQ and holding up deathstars, and can handle MEQ relitively well. However Wracks (with a Haemy) get 3 attacks on the charge at I5, Poison 4+, and the Haemy gets 4 attacks Wounding on 2+. That sounds like some solid MC killyness, as long as you take the MC down to about 4 wounds or les

Because power fists and high strength attacks that ignore feel no pain make Wracks sad. With a 4+ Invulnerable save and Shardnets, wyches are far more long lasting, and won't get curbstomped by the first Carnifex with a 2+ save, or Daemon prince that comes along.

I see an unusual use for the court. Ur-Ghul are strength 4 and come with furious charge. If you go first or steal the initiative, they are really good at killing transports. Move 12", disembark 3", fleet d6", assault 6. 5 urghuls put out 20 strength 5 attacks on rear armor. If you went first, those are autohits. And it doesn't take a force org slot or cost very many points.

I like it. However, to take that step an idea forward, rather than an expensive retinue, using Khymaerae in that function may actually be a decent use for them. Haveg a squad of 10 for 120 points plus 24 points for Beastmasters? That's 144 points for a dedicated light vehicle/transport hunting unit, that has a 4+ Invulnerable save. I don't think its such an idea for a retinue, but for Beastmasters? That's the first tactically sound use I've heard or thought of for them. Thanks for the inspiration, I'll include that in the amendment.

Pretty much completely agree with you again Ketara. I think Wyches are great but shouldn't form the core of your troop choices, as you said.
I completely agree with what you and Defiler have both said for Reavers, they have A LOT of potential, but it will be hard to grasp unless you're a particularly good general and I'm pleased that someone has finally pointed out the quality of Scourges.

Great Review again. I also agree with what you said about Beast-masters, they are a good unit but lack mobility which be provided by Wyches, Incubi or others. Good work man.

If Scourges will be wiped out when within 18" of the enemy, why does the fact that they have shardcarbines matter at all?

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with your take on the beastmasters simply because of the reading of power from pain is that the beasts would indeed benefit from pain tokens and having that 290 point unit with fnp takes them from being mediocre to almost amazing in my opinion.

It's a rules thing that does need to be FAQed by GW before a final verdict but in my gaming group we have discussed it and have arrived at the same conclusion that the beasts would indeed benefit from the rule.

Also it's what I think would really allow Dark Footdar to be a viable build with the amount of speed at which they can reach the enemy and the pain that can be delivered.

Re: Beastmasters:

"Want to take out special characters and beasts with rending? Why not just take squad of wyches to effectively do the same thing?"

Because Wyches don't do that. They harmlessly bounce attacks off characters.

Defiler wrote:

Brother-Thunder wrote:I disagree with the Reaver Jet-bike analysis. a unit of 6 with 2 cluster caltrops upgrades comes to a cost of 172 points, allowing one to drop 2d6 S6 and 3d4 S4 auto-hitting attacks. With a turbo-boosting range of 36 inches, they have the entire map as their range if deployed right.

Rolling it out many times, the squad will screw long-fangs and equivilants up pretty good just by moving over them.

Bear in mind, I intend on using 30 Bikes in my 2000 point list, but the specifics of their Turbo-Boost attack limit flight runs a bit.

How do you propose to actually land the attacks on back line troops? You need around 5 things to line up before the unit is used to maximum efficiency.

A) Start your turn out of range of charges/flamers, after utilizing your 36 inch boost to close the distance first turn
B) A straight (or mostly straight) line overlapping with their target unit
C) Achieve a minimum of at least 18 inches or you lose your unit next turn
D) Space necessary to place models at the end of their flight run (vehicles, units prevent this)
E) Safe space where they won't be charged by anything capable of killing them/shot by flamers

I mean, it's going to be extremely difficult to pull off the maneuver all DE players are drooling over, hitting a unit for 30 STR 4 attacks, and fading off into the background to rely on FNP and a 3+ cover save before starting the attack all over again.

I see a lot more 10 attacks landed, and then being hit by flamers/assault/stiff breeze/tank shocked/plasma cannon/battle cannon and not being points efficient. The straight line restriction in the rules text is a fairly major balancing factor. If they could attack any one unit within their entire move, ending up anywhere - they would be the strongest unit in the book.

I guess the challenge is figuring out effective flight routes eh? I see the Reaver Jetbike unit being one of the biggest "skill test" unit in the book, scaling effectiveness based solely on the user.

Indeed, pulling off the straight line thing is hard. but also remember that they can be pivoted and shot in any direction of your choosing. Allignment is not that hard to pull off. Size is also a problem, which is why I want to limit my squads to 6, so placing them is not too much of a to pull off.

You do bring in the aspect of how dufficult this can be to pull off at times, but a skilled player should be able to do it with at least some reliability.

Also consider this: if they just cherry bombed a unit of long fangs or lootas off the map, what kind of threat do they pose to the enemy as a whole? and if they are no longer dedicating fire to your raiders, then you win, yes? or they can, and just be bombed yet again by another run.

As a unit alone, they do seem lackluster. But, when combined with the rest of the army, they can do well in taking some of that flak fire from your raiders, especially if the enemy is lacking flamers of any kind.

Fetterkey wrote:If Scourges will be wiped out when within 18" of the enemy, why does the fact that they have shardcarbines matter at all?

Because a squad of 10 Scourges is hardy and survivable enough to venture to the 18" range. A squad of 5? Not really.

DarknessEternal wrote:Re: Beastmasters:

"Want to take out special characters and beasts with rending? Why not just take squad of wyches to effectively do the same thing?"

Because Wyches don't do that. They harmlessly bounce attacks off characters.

You don't say? I meant that Wyches take out Special characters and beasts, not necessarily with rending.

MrDrumMachine wrote:I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with your take on the beastmasters simply because of the reading of power from pain is that the beasts would indeed benefit from pain tokens and having that 290 point unit with fnp takes them from being mediocre to almost amazing in my opinion.

It's a rules thing that does need to be FAQed by GW before a final verdict but in my gaming group we have discussed it and have arrived at the same conclusion that the beasts would indeed benefit from the rule.

I'd like to point out that the Beast-Master entry specifically, in no uncertain terms describes that the beasts do NOT have power from pain.

I don't understand where this sort of wishful thinking is originating from?

Can you care to quote where the entry states they do have the ability? Because my book says "BEASTMASTER ONLY" in like, 4000 million point font.

If you read the power from pain rules, it uses the word "unit". Not model...UNIT

Also, having the rule power from pain means you can get pain tokens from destroying nonvehicle units. It has nothing to do with the effects of the tokens themselves. The rules even mention that there are other ways to get pain tokens besides the rule power from pain. (e.g. An independent character with 1 joining a unit.)

Having Pain tokens grants units USRs.

Having Power From Pain allows a unit to generate Pain tokens. So does attaching a Haemonculous, or standing near Chronos Parasite Engines.

Doesn't matter how something gets Pain tokens, they still get USRs from them.

I feel like the Power From Pain issue needs to be cleared up. Gwar's unofficial FAQ clears it up perfectly. To quote him:

"Units without the “Power from Pain” special rule which have been joined by an Independent Character with the “Power from Pain” special
rule are unable to generate Pain Tokens on their own from the destruction of enemy units unless all models in the unit somehow have the
“Power from Pain” special rule. This is because the “Power from Pain” special rule requires “a Dark Eldar unit with this rule” to do the
destroying, which the unit as a whole does not have. However, should they somehow get a Pain Token from another source “the entire unit”,
including models without the “Power from Pain” rule, will benefit from any effects granted by the Pain Tokens so long as at least one model
with the “Power from Pain” rule is still alive in the unit. If the Independent Character leaves the unit, the Pain Tokens must be split evenly, as
per the “Power from Pain” special rule, even though the unit does not have the “Power from Pain” special rule. If the Independent Character is
killed, the Pain Tokens are not lost, they simply remain with the unit."

Pretty clear, pretty simple.

Can the unit generate tokens from killing units? If every model in the unit has PfP, then yes. If not, then no.

Can the unit gain the special rules from PfP? If there is at least one model in the unit with PfP, then yes. If not, then no.

As stated above, tokens can be gained through means other than killing a unit. Urien Rakarth's Father of Pain rule, Chronos Parasite Engine, and attached Haemonculus all come to mind.

A unit of Beastmasters coming out of a webway portal with a pain token gained from Rakarth doesn't seem like too bad of a strategy at all, if you're running Rakarth.

Edit: I just realized Rakarth can only give tokens to Wracks or Grotesques, so nevermind that.

Even so, I feel like I should add this in as well...

5 Beastmasters with 2 Razorwing Flocks apiece put out 60 I5, WS4, Rending attacks on the charge. Oh, it also has 50 wounds worth of Razorwings. Granted, these are T3 with a 5+ save, and can be ID'd by strength 6... but still... 50 wounds. That's a unit that is never leaveing close combat if you can somehow make it fearless.

This:

post, before I edited it

was absurd.

Forgot an important footnote.
Now corrected.
Post edited.

That'll teach me to respond without my codex handy.

Eric

The codex explicitly states that when an IC joins a unit the tokens are pooled, and if the IC leaves they are divided up as evenly as possible.

Once the token owner is determined, the IC and unit he's joined get to enjoy the benefit of combined tokens but, when they split, each unit takes their own tokens with them.

In the case of a unit that can't get the PFP token being joined by an IC, they can never generate PHP tokens, so it would never be assigned to them. it would always go to the attached IC, presuming he was in the combat that generated the PFP token.

I think you need to read PfP and Sharing the Pain again, as virtually none of the above follows the rules.

Thanks Ketara, I absolutely love unit-by-unit breakdowns like this when I'm getting into a new army I don't understand well. Looking forward to the rest of the units!

Yep.
My bad.
I was simply going by the "randomly assign the tokens" from PFP. Hadn't taken "Sharing the pain" into account. My bad.

Post has been edited.

Eric

Hey Ketara. I've been enjoying reading your opinions on the Dark Eldar stuff. I'm just wondering, and I'm sorry if you've answered this and I've not seen, but when will you have the Heavy Support and Special Characters stuff up?

zonino wrote:Hey Ketara. I've been enjoying reading your opinions on the Dark Eldar stuff. I'm just wondering, and I'm sorry if you've answered this and I've not seen, but when will you have the Heavy Support and Special Characters stuff up?

I'm currently away from home, and will be for another few days. I'll do the Heavy Support and Special characters updates, and overall amendment when I get back.Sorry for the wait, family commitments.

I really like the write up - thanks for the effort.

I do disagree with your opinions on Beasts and Grotesquest, though. Either of these units used in conjuction of a WWP allows you to declare a 12-24 in area around the center of the table and say "This is my area."

I think both units will also be very effective in taking out mass light armor - the biggest threat to DE. Mass speeders, razorbacks, or chimeras will out shoot the DE and while dark lances can take them out, there will likely be more vehicles than lances. Grotesques with Str 6 on the charge (with an attached hammy) will do brutal things to rear armor ten. They should provide more penetrating hits - which you need since only 1/3 of the rolls on the chart will wreck/exlpode a vehicle.

I agree with the classification of Hellions as "usable competitively" instead of "Very competitive." There has been a lot of excitement over them in other threads, and I fail to see why. They are definitely better in their new incarnation, but they are still just decent, not amazing. I think most of the hype stems from the idea of the Baron making a unit of Hellions stealth.

As for the Fast Attack evaluation, I personally see Reavers as a better FA choice than scourges for multiple reasons. What I think is ignored most about Reavers is there ability to move 6" in the assault phase and their skilled rider ability. With 2 Blasters on them, they are one of the ultimate hit and fade units in the game. A 36" turbo boost up the sidelines to a comfortable hiding space behind area terrain or the like, next turn 12" over the terrain piece and blaster any vehicle in range, Move 6" back into the area terrain in the assault phase, rerolling failed dangerous terrain tests (or better yet, move behind LOS blocking terrain. Then, if the vehicle you popped was a transport, next turn you have a unit to turbo boost over. Or if they enemy starts moving towards your reavers, they can turboboost the hell out of there, probably inflicting some wounds while they do it. *Note, I'd probably only take Anti-tank weapons OR cluster caltrops. Choosing both will inflate costs and it confuses their role.

Scourges on the other hand are problematical for me. I can definitely see the appeal of taking a "sniper" squad of DL scourges. I'd much rather take them over a Trueborn Sniper squad of 3-5, for the simple fact of the scourges' mobility. But beyond that, they are only adding expensive and vulnerable models whose function could be done much better by warriors. I think this comes down to play style, but I still envision this to be a very very finesse unit in a finesse army that will get shredded quickly by twin-linked Assault cannon or Heavy bolter fire.

Also, I'm happy to see you didn't follow the trend of "Beastmasters = win because of wound allocation." I'd field them in a WWP focused army, but other than that, no thanks.


Looking forward to the HS slot analysis !!

I'm surprised the Beastmasters don't have a higher rating in points efficiency. I can understand how they don't immediately jump into a competitive list because most hardcore lists are running transport spam and wracks/warriors/trueborn.

However no unit benefits from the effects of FNP as well, because they have the most amount of wounds. In addition, the following unit has 34 wounds for 228 points and should be able to benefit from cover or a 4++ and then FNP. 7 Points for a wound that has a 4++/FNP is great, and even without a transport they are the most efficient way to absorb fire in the army book.

228 4 Beastmasters + 10 Kymera + 4 Razorfang

The downside I see is that you need to start a Haemy in the unit on turn one, then have him leave to jump into a raider where he can use his Liquifier. The beast unit can then make use of his FNP and advance up the board for a turn 2-3 assault, and is more vulnerable to powerful blast templates than most of the army in this part of the game.

The usage of the unit with a WWP hasn't been covered either. They have a huge range of a assault coming out of the portal, but can't use FNP. Witches are obvious WWP units, but with a higher range and more attacks I do think we should look at these beasts. Terminator TH/SS are a better unit for witches, but I think the beasts are the better tarpit against everything else.

Well, the Beastmaster combo can be decent vs. shooty units deployed in the backfield,
like Havocs or Devastators.

If it gets shot down before it reaches its target, then it would be fine, too.
Every shot less against the skimmers is a wasted shot.