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.

maybe 6 points but theyre awful

I always appreciate thought into under (in this case, never) used units. However, Mandrakes are very overpriced for what they do. It is hard enough making Dark Eldar work at the moment. In such a points tight army, one cannot throw 100+ points away on a very situational unit.

I've seen some solid attempts at making Dark Eldar work in 6th, mainly with Eldar allies. I'd be very interested in seeing a list that involves Mandrakes that would not be better served using the points elsewhere. Not really a "put up or shut up" challenge to the pro-Mandrake crowd, but more that I am curious. What is the synergy that almost all players seem to be missing?

I have a battle report in which I used them. Its an older report.

http://40kunorthodoxy.blogspot.com/2011/12/terror-based-dark-eldar-vs-tyranid.html

The synergy I found was in the Beautiful terror they can evoke in the enemy. Of course I had to try this list out against an army that cared little for such shinanigans in order to see if it could stand up to fearless armies. So here was the resulting report.

The marines killed 1 mandrake with pistols on the way in, and lost .98 to overwatch. I typed out the entire combat in my original reply and then realized it was probably something noone wanted to read.
If you give the hemi an agonizer then the equation changes dramatically.

Basic Tacs don't have pistols...right?

Well....yea....
It's not like the 310 points of wave serpents has to shoot at the mandrakes all game. Its one turn out of 5-7 they are focusing their firepower on. Take the wave serpent cost and divide it by 6. That's a better approximation of your opportunity cost to kill the mandrakes. As you mentioned, if I'm playing Eldar, they are significant threat to my MSU dire avengers and I'll want to address them quickly.

That's a fair point, and one I've made myself in the past, but of course not every serpent survives the whole game. Still, their will be opportunity costs, something you are not shooting at to remove the Mandrake threat.

Fair points on the rest as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 blood ravens addiction wrote:
maybe 6 points but theyre awful

LOL okay.

Basic TAC marines have a bolt gun, bolt pistol, frag and krak.
They do not have an extra CCW that the grey hunters have.

I find a lot of people just forget to shoot the pistols on the way in, or they are afraid to cause to many wounds and fail their assault.

I have a battle report in which I used them. Its an older report.

http://40kunorthodoxy.blogspot.com/2011/12/terror-based-dark-eldar-vs-tyranid.html

The synergy I found was in the Beautiful terror they can evoke in the enemy. Of course I had to try this list out against an army that cared little for such shinanigans in order to see if it could stand up to fearless armies. So here was the resulting report.

I definitely appreciate the response and use of Mandrakes in a game situation. At the same time, it is hard to draw conclusions from just this game. First, what exactly was that Nid list? I saw that at least 8 Warriors were in there, which means a big waste of points from the get-go. Second, it is DE versus Tyranids. A well crafted DE list is just about worst case scenario to Nids. I mentioned that I was interested in seeing a list that isn't better served using the points elsewhere. This battle report did little to change my mind. For the cost of the two Mandrake units, you could have added 3 Venoms with 3x Wracks in each. It is nigh impossible to argue that three Venoms (and three more scoring units) would be less effective than Mandrakes against Nids run by a competent general.

Again, I appreciate outside the box thinking, but the idea of "invoking terror" doesn't hold up against seasoned tournament vets. There is no "surprise" that Mandrakes can pull on opponents who know the rules. I'd love to see some crazy combos take on big events, but they simply don't. I was just at the ATC, which due to some ability of teams to choose opponents, allows for more crazy builds. Even among the increased variety, there are some units that do not have a place.

I think the point of the report is to show that we can think outside the box. I would not advocate a 'terror' list eother. I also noted that he did not use the infiltrate/outflank ability of the Mandrakes and he did use a WWP. But bear in mind the report is from 2011.

I don't necessarily discount a unit because it is not showing up in a tournament list. We have seen lists in the past that suddenly pop up on the tournament scene with seldom seen units and succeed - then suddenly they are accepted as possibilities.

I like the way Jancoren thinks. I also build lists outside the 'perceived' tournament box. I love including at least one or two Talos in my list ... Mushkilla has already shown that reavers are boss. I like MSU beast packs without characters Beastmasters 4 razorwing. So I'll keep an open mind until I've fully tested mandrakes against Tau, Necs,Eldar and the upcoming wave of new Smurf builds.

 JGrand wrote:

I have a battle report in which I used them. Its an older report.

http://40kunorthodoxy.blogspot.com/2011/12/terror-based-dark-eldar-vs-tyranid.html

The synergy I found was in the Beautiful terror they can evoke in the enemy. Of course I had to try this list out against an army that cared little for such shinanigans in order to see if it could stand up to fearless armies. So here was the resulting report.

I definitely appreciate the response and use of Mandrakes in a game situation. At the same time, it is hard to draw conclusions from just this game. First, what exactly was that Nid list? I saw that at least 8 Warriors were in there, which means a big waste of points from the get-go. Second, it is DE versus Tyranids. A well crafted DE list is just about worst case scenario to Nids. I mentioned that I was interested in seeing a list that isn't better served using the points elsewhere. This battle report did little to change my mind. For the cost of the two Mandrake units, you could have added 3 Venoms with 3x Wracks in each. It is nigh impossible to argue that three Venoms (and three more scoring units) would be less effective than Mandrakes against Nids run by a competent general.

Again, I appreciate outside the box thinking, but the idea of "invoking terror" doesn't hold up against seasoned tournament vets. There is no "surprise" that Mandrakes can pull on opponents who know the rules. I'd love to see some crazy combos take on big events, but they simply don't. I was just at the ATC, which due to some ability of teams to choose opponents, allows for more crazy builds. Even among the increased variety, there are some units that do not have a place.

I went 5-0 at the OFCC recently playing a pretty unorthodox Tau list. People like me are out there and winning with, as you say, "out of the box" things. Out of the box things are disruptive to enemy tactics and often disallow the enemy from executing their own plan and when that happens, you have an edge that a list on paper cant show you.

Proof is proof. The point of this particular battle report was to show that it could take on an enemy that was effectively immune to its tricks. Against a more traditional enemy, it did better yet. It was 6-1 before i altered course on my Dark Eldar builds.

And no, Venoms are NOT necessarily better, in OR out of a veteran Generals hands. Let me tell you why. In my last game at OFCC (96 players, pretty good turn out) which is billed as a "fair fun tournament" but is in fact festooned with competitive ForgeWorld filled lists this year, the dude had SIX Venoms. I one shot'd three of them in one round, which wasn't particularly a rare occurrence when you think about it and the last THREE venoms he had went away in round 2. Collectively the venoms killed a single Riptide in two turns.

So while I appreciate the firepower potential of Venoms, the reality is, this guy came armed for bear and got his incredibly useful Venoms demolished in record time on not particularly unlikely rolling and with most of my army starting in reserve. Try to do the same thing to two or three mandrake units. You cant. They dont die as fast by a long shot. And they deliver assault/shooting to the enemy just as fast as venoms do. They can fire 20 shots instead of 24 (two venoms) and they Pin, they assault and they have GREAT cover saves.

Im not suggesting you throw everything you know out the window and hop on the crazy train. I'm just telling you to allow for the idea that, indeed, this unit has a place in competitive play and its survivability over, say, a Venom which you hold up as an excellent alternative use of the points is PRONOUNCED. There is literally no comparison between the two in that regard. And that survivability and flexibility in deploying is what veteran generals like ME find appealing. I can FIND a way to use them in almost any situation.

What would you consider the hardest list for a mandrake list to try and defeat? I will play a Mandrake list and do a Batrep for you against it. Win or lose, the unit itself should show you some value.

Again, I appreciate outside the box thinking, but the idea of "invoking terror" doesn't hold up against seasoned tournament vets. There is no "surprise" that Mandrakes can pull on opponents who know the rules. I'd love to see some crazy combos take on big events, but they simply don't. I was just at the ATC, which due to some ability of teams to choose opponents, allows for more crazy builds. Even among the increased variety, there are some units that do not have a place.

I think you are over selling the upper tier players a bit. I do think they make less mistakes, but particularly when facing units they don't see often, you can definitely catch them off guard with unorthodox tactics. You've been to more large tournaments recently then I have so you have more exposure to them then I do, but just based off of what I've experienced and battle reports I've read, I can say I seldom see even the best generals go through an entire game without a few mistakes. I feel the Infiltrate/Outflank units are a great way to encourage these mistakes, because again, most people have limited amounts of exposure to them.

ShadarLogoth wrote:
I think you are over selling the upper tier players a bit. I do think they make less mistakes, but particularly when facing units they don't see often, you can definitely catch them off guard with unorthodox tactics.

I want to see more mistakes from them. I'm 'lucky' enough to have Sean Nadan, Alex Finnell, Mannahnin and play in local RTTs at my FLGS. I keep waiting for those 'mistakes' to manifest
On the plus side, playing those guys at RTT regularly has improved the quality of my game immensely.

Good players inevitably raise the play of other players. I think its how the meta grows up.

If you look at this thread there is three pages of discussion. Obviously it not as cut and dried a topic as some would make it out to be. The 'net wisdom' - mandrakes are the worst unit in the codex - does not seem to be holding up entirely.

In response to Jancorn, I appreciate that you have local success with some strange combinations. I like thinking of different combos as well. However, I plan for GTs and major events. I play a good deal in the northern VA area, and can tell you that the competition is fierce. Local events often feature multiple GT winners and accomplished players. Even the "noobs" are packing relatively tight lists. Taking things like Mandrakes is asking to play with a handicap. Good players aren't afraid of things like Mandrakes--40k is a transparent game. At best, you are hoping to mess with target priority. Again, I'll speak from experience and echo Labmouse here--I'm still waiting to see these glaring mistakes from the 40k heavy weights. They don't get flustered when you bring a sub par unit, they merely breahe a sigh of relief.

As for the bat rep, I hate to say it, but playing some unknown player proves nothing. I'd love to see you rock Mandrakes in the top 16 of a major GT. You can also take Jy2s lead and put together some reps versus some heavy and accomplished challengers. Is that a high bar to set? I tend to think not. My (and many other peoples) definition of "competitive" 40k is the major tourney circuit. Local wins mean very little. I can drive about an hour to a store I know is soft and whip up on people with all sorts of bad units. If something really holds water, it should be able to stand tests from the best


Automatically Appended Next Post:

If you look at this thread there is three pages of discussion. Obviously it not as cut and dried a topic as some would make it out to be. The 'net wisdom' - mandrakes are the worst unit in the codex - does not seem to be holding up entirely.

Thread length and disagreement is meaningless. I can find people who think that vaccinations cause autism. Just because someone is entitled to have that opinion, it doesn't mean that they have proof, backing, ethos, or any kind of validity behind them. I can't empirically prove Mandrakes are bad, just like the other side can't empirically prove they are good. However, I have yet to see them run in successful lists in what are commonly considered competitive events. House hammer and local wins mean little.

 JGrand wrote:
I can't empirically prove Mandrakes are bad, just like the other side can't empirically prove they are good.

What we can do (and have done) is prove that their damage-per-point and resilience-per-point ratios are sub-par when compared to other units.

That begs the question, what value do you place on their special abilities and where subjective opinions take over. I do not think they are worth it, but others do.

 JGrand wrote:
In response to Jancorn, I appreciate that you have local success with some strange combinations. I like thinking of different combos as well. However, I plan for GTs and major events. I play a good deal in the northern VA area, and can tell you that the competition is fierce. Local events often feature multiple GT winners and accomplished players. Even the "noobs" are packing relatively tight lists. Taking things like Mandrakes is asking to play with a handicap. Good players aren't afraid of things like Mandrakes--40k is a transparent game. At best, you are hoping to mess with target priority. Again, I'll speak from experience and echo Labmouse here--I'm still waiting to see these glaring mistakes from the 40k heavy weights. They don't get flustered when you bring a sub par unit, they merely breahe a sigh of relief.

As for the bat rep, I hate to say it, but playing some unknown player proves nothing. I'd love to see you rock Mandrakes in the top 16 of a major GT. You can also take Jy2s lead and put together some reps versus some heavy and accomplished challengers. Is that a high bar to set? I tend to think not. My (and many other peoples) definition of "competitive" 40k is the major tourney circuit. Local wins mean very little. I can drive about an hour to a store I know is soft and whip up on people with all sorts of bad units. If something really holds water, it should be able to stand tests from the best


Automatically Appended Next Post:

If you look at this thread there is three pages of discussion. Obviously it not as cut and dried a topic as some would make it out to be. The 'net wisdom' - mandrakes are the worst unit in the codex - does not seem to be holding up entirely.

Thread length and disagreement is meaningless. I can find people who think that vaccinations cause autism. Just because someone is entitled to have that opinion, it doesn't mean that they have proof, backing, ethos, or any kind of validity behind them. I can't empirically prove Mandrakes are bad, just like the other side can't empirically prove they are good. However, I have yet to see them run in successful lists in what are commonly considered competitive events. House hammer and local wins mean little.

So... In essence your argument is that because you dont KNOW the players I fight on a first name basis, that any results are suspect. Lol. Why are you on an INTERNET forum if that's your feeling?

Let me just say that if i go to NOVA or Adepticon, with any army, I am confident of a top 16 finish. Very confident. But no matter how many people I beat and no matter what their name is, if I win with an unorthodox approach, you'll tell me it was luck (even though its a dice game). Or you'll tell me its terrain (even though I dont place it). Or you'll tell me that it wasn't the Mandrakes who won it for me. or you'll tell me some other minimizing thing. Because thats what people who play the "meta card" do.

Its disappointing honestly.

So... In essence your argument is that because you dont KNOW the players I fight on a first name basis, that any results are suspect. Lol. Why are you on an INTERNET forum if that's your feeling?

No. Just no.

I am SKEPTICAL of your results because I do not know anything about who you play with or the events you play in.

Let me just say that if i go to NOVA or Adepticon, with any army, I am confident of a top 16 finish. Very confident. But no matter how many people I beat and no matter what their name is, if I win with an unorthodox approach, you'll tell me it was luck (even though its a dice game). Or you'll tell me its terrain (even though I dont place it). Or you'll tell me that it wasn't the Mandrakes who won it for me. or you'll tell me some other minimizing thing. Because thats what people who play the "meta card" do.

Then do it. I'll be rooting for you. I would never disparage your results at a major event. That would be incredibly petty. Like I said, I fully accept the results of major events. I am skeptical of local games and house hammer. I could make a battle rep in which I cream a local noob with just about anything in the game. It proves nothing.

No need to ride in on a high horse here. Just prove your claims against the big dogs is all I said. If you are so confident, make the trip and show the 40k world a thing or two. I mentioned before, I'd be rooting for you, as I do like unorthodox lists.

In addition, I just took a look at the event you just mentioned doing well in while using an unorthodox Tau list. It was a comp-heavy event for gaming clubs. To each their own I suppose, but when you play in events like NOVA, Adepticon, ATC, ect, you don't get to look across the table and tell an opponent that their list is "too competitive" and not allowed. The game is MUCH different when no holds are barred. That may go a long way explaining the disconnect we seem to have here.

 JGrand wrote:

So... In essence your argument is that because you dont KNOW the players I fight on a first name basis, that any results are suspect. Lol. Why are you on an INTERNET forum if that's your feeling?

No. Just no.

I am SKEPTICAL of your results because I do not know anything about who you play with or the events you play in.

Let me just say that if i go to NOVA or Adepticon, with any army, I am confident of a top 16 finish. Very confident. But no matter how many people I beat and no matter what their name is, if I win with an unorthodox approach, you'll tell me it was luck (even though its a dice game). Or you'll tell me its terrain (even though I dont place it). Or you'll tell me that it wasn't the Mandrakes who won it for me. or you'll tell me some other minimizing thing. Because thats what people who play the "meta card" do.

Then do it. I'll be rooting for you. I would never disparage your results at a major event. That would be incredibly petty. Like I said, I fully accept the results of major events. I am skeptical of local games and house hammer. I could make a battle rep in which I cream a local noob with just about anything in the game. It proves nothing.

No need to ride in on a high horse here. Just prove your claims against the big dogs is all I said. If you are so confident, make the trip and show the 40k world a thing or two. I mentioned before, I'd be rooting for you, as I do like unorthodox lists.

In addition, I just took a look at the event you just mentioned doing well in while using an unorthodox Tau list. It was a comp-heavy event for gaming clubs. To each their own I suppose, but when you play in events like NOVA, Adepticon, ATC, ect, you don't get to look across the table and tell an opponent that their list is "too competitive" and not allowed. The game is MUCH different when no holds are barred. That may go a long way explaining the disconnect we seem to have here.

The OFCC is. TSHFT (Grey Knights) and the GT's (Sisters of Battle) weren't compd. But when I faced TWO MechDar lists, a Venomspam list with WraithKNight and a CronAir list with ChaosAir attached.... Sorry, but those lists at OFCC weren't anything but a normal competitive tourney list. I only faced one army the whole tourney that I would say was truly comp'd. Not that this will made a dent in your perception. But this might: The guy whose team took Best General also is the guy who took 3rd at NOVA. Jeremy V. Sadly I didn't get to play him.

 JGrand wrote:


In addition, I just took a look at the event you just mentioned doing well in while using an unorthodox Tau list. It was a comp-heavy event for gaming clubs. To each their own I suppose, but when you play in events like NOVA, Adepticon, ATC, ect, you don't get to look across the table and tell an opponent that their list is "too competitive" and not allowed. The game is MUCH different when no holds are barred. That may go a long way explaining the disconnect we seem to have here.

Just to back up your point a bit... I played Steven Brooks, who won best Dark Eldar at the ATC, at the "First Loser's Table" at Nashcon (ie the table for people who went undefeated, but didn't have enough Battle Points to make the Final Table. Steven and I also met at the First Loser's Table at Stones River), and he was running some Mandrakes. Notice, they weren't on his ATC list.

http://www.whatc.org/40kteams.php

So there's one top DE player who tried Mandrakes, and quickly retired them. In our game at Nashcon, they did nothing.

Threads like this should be devoted to HOW to use such a thing, not using failures as examples. What do we learn from someone who couldn't figure out how to use them in enough time to matter, at a tourney somewhere? Anything?

Shall I stop taking Kroot because they didn't do something in a couple games? Probably not. If my Riptide gets doused in flames and burned to the ground before it kills a thing, shall I drop it from my list?

Just saying. Lots of my units are "useless" against a flyer. should I not take anything but antiair? You see the point hopefully. No unit can do everything. Im more interested in what they CAN do.

Have you read the entire thread or just the first few and last few posts.

There is quite a bit of discussion on the use of mandrakes

Yup, been readfing. Obviously, my response is to the suggestion that a guy at the ATC doing poorly isn't going to persuade me to ignore my own experience. Some of whats here (and the links to other forums) have been very interesting to me.

If you're up for playing a casual game with some House Rules, I've been testing out lists where we allow The Decapitator to take Mandrakes as Troops choices. It's actually a lot of fun being able to build an army around scoring Mandrakes.

Otherwise, Dark Eldar with Tau allies have been working out reasonably well for me where a unit of Kroot snipers can support a unit of Mandrakes on one flank. Get them that pain token, and it's a nice little pillbox if you can keep them all in area terrain, and gains a little bit of assault deterrent.

I find they're not bad if you pair them up with kheradruak and use them as ambush units. Since he comes with a pain token they can start shooting right away which was their biggest issue

bigginhouse wrote:
I find they're not bad if you pair them up with kheradruak and use them as ambush units. Since he comes with a pain token they can start shooting right away which was their biggest issue

Except he's not an Independent Character. Yes, his rules are simply that bad.

What about Deep Striking Raiders with a Haemonculus and Mandrakes (of course with Nightshields to reduce enemy rapid fire range). Wouldn't 20 AP4 shots do decent damage against Tau or Eldar? Thoughts?

Also, the T4 makes them slightly more survivable against your boats blowing up (and they will blow up).

I'm reaching here cuz' I'm in the camp of They're not good but they might be useful. Not useless like Mutilators, Khedukerah, Tau Flyers or...Banshees (shudders WTF!)

 RancidHate wrote:
What about Deep Striking Raiders with a Haemonculus and Mandrakes (of course with Nightshields to reduce enemy rapid fire range). Wouldn't 20 AP4 shots do decent damage against Tau or Eldar? Thoughts?

It's all a matter of Damage Per Point . How much do those mandrakes + raider + Haemonculus cost. How much damage do they do for their actual cost?
Also mandrakes cant take a raider as a dedicated transport.

 RancidHate wrote:
Also, the T4 makes them slightly more survivable against your boats blowing up (and they will blow up).

Are you thinking mandrakes or wracks?

And mandrakes can't take raiders as transports...

Ugh, it's obvious this codex was written before sixth edition because having an infiltrating unit seemed to be so powerful for Dark Eldar until you could just ally it in.

 labmouse42 wrote:

 RancidHate wrote:
What about Deep Striking Raiders with a Haemonculus and Mandrakes (of course with Nightshields to reduce enemy rapid fire range). Wouldn't 20 AP4 shots do decent damage against Tau or Eldar? Thoughts?

It's all a matter of Damage Per Point . How much do those mandrakes + raider + Haemonculus cost. How much damage do they do for their actual cost?
Also mandrakes cant take a raider as a dedicated transport.

 RancidHate wrote:
Also, the T4 makes them slightly more survivable against your boats blowing up (and they will blow up).

Are you thinking mandrakes or wracks?

Darn, I'm just tore-up from the floor-up as far as the rules go. Yer right I confused Wracks T4 with Mandrakes as well. But you know what if they can't even take a Raider then yea any argument I tried to make in their favor is void... but that means. Mandrakes, even with cool models ...are...trash...

At that point you need to pay webway portal and Haemoculus tax, then expose another HQ to drop the portal for like ...maybe.. 6 AP4 wounds? That is ...stunningly bad, like srsly worse than Mutilator bad ZOMG.

For the argument that they are a distraction unit, there's other units that can distract And actually pose a threat for less points (and I'm not even touching allies here). What a shame...

Hyperbole central here guys.

This unit is noit the cure to cancer...NOR its cause.

Let me ask its detractors this: what are three good things you CAN do with Mandrakes? Because if you aren't willing to consider the possibilities, you cannot speak to the negative. and vice versa as well.