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.

 Leth wrote:
Which version hits at I10, Ignores Invisibility and rends?

I would go with that version.

Well, the other one hits at initiative "movement phase", and also ignores invisibility, though I will agree it doesn't rend.

I like the new bikes better, but I do think the old bladevanes were better as a stand alone thing.
I just like the new bikes because I like assaulting bikes, and old bikes were *not* that.

That was forever and a day ago, though

I'm actually amazed that people think Wyches are better than Hellions right now. I mean...don't get me wrong, Hellions are utter dreck, but Wyches? They're dreck too, and I would dare say reasonably clearly worse dreck.

You're also citing Hellions as the worst thing in the dex with ol' Draz standing right there trying to pretend like he's relevant. I'd field a like number of Wyches or Hellions for his points and consider myself better off in the long run every time against any type of foe.

 Jimsolo wrote:
Drazhar is pretty bad, but I think I'd rather have him over Hellions. (And wyches over both.)

But taking Draz obligates you to Incubi or running him solo - neither of which is that good. I think you're overlooking his multiple levels of fail.

 Jimsolo wrote:
Any chance on you doing a tactica guide for 7th edition, Thor? Your 5th Ed one really helped me when I started the army.

I am actually considering it - there have been enough changes to warrant it paired with the wild and crazy edition/dex fluctuation finally slowing down where one could actually make some valid statements again. (there was a period of time there from basically Escalation through to Knights where the meta was just a rollercoaster of insanity and nothing was sure )

I have shared some thoughts on the podcast I'm part of now - maybe just organizing them for that is what's making me think I could type them up again

 Jimsolo wrote:
For my money, the ability to gain Objective Secured (which Hellions cannot do) is the deciding factor in the great game of 'Who Sucks More?', ending in slight favor of the wyches, who also have better equipment, as well as the possibility of bringing in a slot less Venom, which is always nice.

Ah-ah - you can't count the Venom and Objec.Sec as a benefit of the Wyches without justifying why you wouldn't take Warriors over Wyches.
I would actually say it is quite obvious that Hellions are better equipped - their base weapon is better for both assault and shooting - they only lose out on the grenades. So it's grenades vs. better assault and better shooting.

I will also add - the Succubus is also a good Cult unit. It's not just Reavers in my opinion.

mercury14 wrote:
In almost every game I play, Wyches are effective and fun. 4++ in CC, combat drugs, lightning-quick initiative, objective secured, Fell-no-Pain all for just 10 points? That sounds pretty good to me.

Well...first off, you functionally just described Warriors also - and Warriors are at least good at their efforts in the shooting phase, unlike Wyches who are weak in the assault phase. And Warriors are even cheaper.

mercury14 wrote:
When I assault my Wyches into a Hive Tyrant that's a win for me because he's likely to be tied up for a while unless he gets rescued. And Wyches will sprinkle occasional wounds on them (hydra gauntlets help). A lot of times in my lists I'll run Wych units to grab a couple enemy units in CC while multiple Reaver units subsequently charge in with bladevanes, then hit n' run out, assaulting in again the following turn. I also run disintegrators on their Raiders or put them in Venoms to soften up whatever they're hitting

To my mind the thing is - an MC I could assault with Wyches is also one I could gun down easily with poison and Blasters - which is what Warriors would have, which is what I would take instead of Wyches. The Reaver trick is okay, but it's really only saving them from Overwatch which Reavers are actually pretty resilient to in any case - and the job could be done by a better assault unit than Wyches regardless. I will agree our transports are good - but we have access to them via Warriors and even other assault units, that are also good - so I find that a non-starter as an argument for taking Wyches.

mercury14 wrote:
A lot of what they can do depends on drugs, and I feel that people don't properly take them into account then evaluating Wyches.

I will guardedly agree with this, but there are actually not even that many drug effects that boost them in combat anymore.

mercury14 wrote:
I've had matches where they're charging with S5 later in the game and just wrecking all kinds of face, taking down things SM bikers. In a tournament last month I had a squad of seven - yes SEVEN Wyches (with +1a drugs) solo a full-health Hive Tyrant. How did they do it? Splinter pistols took off one wound, the Tyrant challenged the Hekatrix which accepted, no Wyches died, and the thing ate two Agonizer wounds and failed two saves. 4-attack Hydra Gauntlet Wyches FTW. And that wasn't even with furious charge.

I will agree there are moments when any unit will perform above and beyond what one expects. I disagree that these moments happening are a good way to judge the actual quality of the unit.

mercury14 wrote:
Warriors don't have combat drugs, they only have one base attack in CC, and their 5+ is substantially worse than 4++ in CC. And since their gun is rapid-fire they can't even shoot and assault, only throw the grenade.

Well, they also could just rapid fire and then receive the assault allowing them o also Overwatch - and their 5+ is substantially better than the Wych 6+ vs. Overwatch if you feel a need to assault.
Also, you ding them for only having 1 base attack...well, so do Wyches - their only win is in having an additional CCW. So while that does give them +1 attack across the board better than Warriors, that's not actually that massively intimidating I feel.
I will agree Wyches do have the invuln save and the pistol and drugs, all of which do combine to make them marginally more effective than Warriors in dealing with assault - they are vastly inferior in shooting though. So, balance wise, I would say it's quite fair to suggest that Warriors would overall do more damage across the bredth of the game, and would also serve as a speed-bump in a reasonably similar way to Wyches barring power weapons on their opponents.

mercury14 wrote:
Against Nids you can't always rely on just throwing out a lot of poison and calling it a win.

I somewhat disagree with this. Even in your own description you seem to be aware this is the way to handle Nids, you just also think a tarpit unit has value - to which I'll agree. But, yeah, massed shooting is an excellent way to deal with nids.

mercury14 wrote:
it's quite helpful to have one or more units that can hang in CC with them, and for us that means either Wyches, Grots, or Talos. Maybe Sslyths but not really for their points.

I agree that an assault/counter assault/tarpit tool is useful. Where I disagree is that Wyches are remotely the correct choice. With their Liquifier, higher toughness, and greater damage output in assault, Grots are markedly superior to Wyches in dealing with Hordes. Sslyth also, on a point to point basis, are superior. I will agree Incubi are a bit lackluster, We also do have Reavers, Lhameans, Mandrakes, Wracks, Hellions, and Beasts as assault options, though I will agree some are better than others - I would say most are superior to the Wyches.

mercury14 wrote:
+1A
+1S
+1WS
+1T

...all boost them in assault

+1Ld boosts them as tarpit units, less good but still somewhat useful

+1I is the only pretty useless one.

+1 WS and +1A are also pretty lackluster - I will agree they boost, but in a very minor way as it's really just more hits at S3 Ap- which isn't exactly anything to write home about.
+1T is a "boost" but the fearsome wall of T4 isn't actually going to slow down too many units. I will agree it helps us use our FNP more though, which is indeed a great option to have, but requires the gaming of dealing with a lot of Str 6-7 specifically. Which is not out of the realms considering the builds out there, but most of the sources of that type of shooting I think will tend to chew through Wych squads anyway if they happen to be targeted upon us. I do accept it as a boost though.

mercury14 wrote:
Thor, you realize that hellglaives lost their +1A feature in this codex, right? They now have just one attack.

I most assuredly realize that - and don't get me wrong, I am not attempting to argue that Hellions qualify as "good" i think they are terrible.
I just also think Wyches are also terrible - and in the contest of 'who sucks least' tend to think Hellions are probably the winners.

Depends what you want to build, really - the Lhamean+Venom/Raider option is a really pretty potent build to get in some extra mech for shockingly cheap.

As to the legality of it...eh, I see the argument for both directions. I would say check with the TO for any given event before going there. I can think of a few bigger events that have already ruled it as a-ok, so there appear to be people going by the RAW as opposed to the RAI of the way it is written in the codex,

mercury14 wrote:
But even against SM type armies Wyches got better because they get FnP much more easily. They survive in CC better as well as against small arms fire.

Back in the day Wyches got FNP Turn 1 for the cost of including a Haem (or for just rolling a certain drug result - meaning sometimes they started with FC as well as FNP depending on what you did)

Nowadays it is FNP on Turn 2 at the earliest really, and it's a much more expensive/risky loadout to do that and potentially costs them fleet in the bargain depending how you did it.

I am of the opinion that it is harder to give them FNP than it used to be. I suppose it is easier/cheaper if your goal was to field 3+ Wych units but it also becomes slower at that stage, which is tough as the optimal times to have it are the early rounds, not the later ones.

Also, what utility do you think people are overlooking about wyches? I will happily agree that they are tarpitters. What other role do they have? Maybe 'light infantry harassment' I suppose, but that's risky for them if the light infantry is a shooty infantry. Beyond that I have to admit I can't think of much they do that well. What am I missing?

mercury14 wrote:
Kabalites are solid units, yeah, however they lack the utility of Wyches and die just as easily to bolt gun fire.

Arguably they die slower since they'll almost never assault something and thus take no Overwatch fire.

I also have no idea why people keep using the word 'utility' when discussing the Wyches. Since this conversation started the 'utility' appear to be 'tarpit'. That has been expanded on to list what units they can tarpit and what units they cannot. That is not actually utility to my mind, what you are saying is they are limited tarpits, who are only good at tarpitting certain things and are bad at tarpitting others. So, basically they have one job (tarpit) but can't tarpit most enemy units, only a handful of units (specifically, they tarpit things with low to no shooting that have strong but limited in number attacks in assault). I will agree that's something that they can do, but they don't actually do it with much 'utility' ecause that's actually a very specific thing.

Then we have the warrior unit who, if given a blaster, has the ability to damage basically any unit in the game with its shooting. That's actually utility because no matter what army my opponent is playing, no matter what units he does or does not bring, I know that my Warriors will be able to shoot at and hurt his army.

Meanwhile, if there is no Wraithknight or Cent/Termie shooty squad or non-flamer Dread (so, y'know, just for starters, if I'm playing against Crons, Orks, Nids, Dark Eldar, or Imperial Guard - or any Space Marine or Eldar army not fielding the list noted here) then my Wyches are just derping around doing...nothing. That is not utility to my mind, that is a specialist unit with a limited number of optimal targets.

So Wyches do 1 thing well against limited targets and Warriors do 1 thing well against basically any target. I do not understand how you call Wyches as the one with utility from that pair.

The basic Knights most assuredly can shield rear arc. Maybe one/some of the Forgeworld ones cannot, but I certainly haven't faced all of them, so I dunno.

@Jimsolo - also, yes, they most assuredly get to face them at the start of the opponent's shooting phase.

mercury14 wrote:
Ravagers are better at hurting AV13 and much better against AV14 than Hornets.

Agreed - and even at the price point it's 125 v. 125, right? So it's not even a savings for army construction.
I guess it depends on how much AV 10-12 and how much AV 13+ you see in your meta, and also whether you are already taking Eldar as a flavor to your army, really.

Hollismason wrote:
The ravager to me is just like pointless, it's to expensive for what it brings, I'd rather go with a Dark Eldar Raider list and take 3 Razorwings with more fire power and 3 less Dark Lance shot than a Ravager.

Ravager Load out = 3 Dark Lances, Night Shields = 140

Razorwing Dark Lances, 4 Missiles, Splinter cannon , Night shields = 165

I know which one I'd rather take. It's just not a contest.

I take both, personally.

Doesn't look cheesy to me - it will do well versus some lists and eat it hard against others. Same as most 1000 point lists, really.

It's actually Patrick Stewart from the Star Trek movie - First Contact, in the holodeck, fighting Borg.

And then Goonies.

It is most assuredly not Temple of Doom.