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.

The Dragons did get the opportunity to soak the Paladins with some hot melta love but jy2's cover saves were smoking. What can you do?

This game is full of fail.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But anyway Red Corsair, I am looking forward to see YOUR battle report

-666- wrote:The Dragons did get the opportunity to soak the Paladins with some hot melta love but jy2's cover saves were smoking. What can you do?

Yeah, what can you do? No matter what tactic you apply, when your dice fails (or your opponent's dice succeeds), it just makes your tactic look worse than how it really is.

Isseyfaran wrote:This game is full of fail.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But anyway Red Corsair, I am looking forward to see YOUR battle report

As in dice? Or tactics? Or both?

Everything. Dice, tactics, rules. So much that it almost has no value in it anymore, except for its entertainment value maybe.

Isseyfaran wrote:Everything. Dice, tactics, rules. So much that it almost has no value in it anymore, except for its entertainment value maybe.

Sorry to hear.

Rules, we can improve on.

Tactics is subjective.

Dice, we just have no control over.

But at least you enjoyed it.

-666- wrote:The Dragons did get the opportunity to soak the Paladins with some hot melta love but jy2's cover saves were smoking. What can you do?

Weigh that dude's dice!

~.~

Actually, obvious bad tactics are bad tactics. There is almost no subjectivity in it.

But, I will correct myself on one aspect. This BatRep actually has value in it apart from entertainment. It showcases the bad tactics and what should or should not be done.

Red Corsair was a jerk anyway.

Isseyfaran wrote:Actually, obvious bad tactics are bad tactics. There is almost no subjectivity in it.

But, I will correct myself on one aspect. This BatRep actually has value in it apart from entertainment. It showcases the bad tactics and what should or should not be done.

Red Corsair was a jerk anyway.

Thank you for providing such insightful commentary in an aggressive manner towards someone who volunteered their time to share an experience. I know their contribution to the community pales in comparison to your own, extensive work writing up battle reports, tactica articles and sharing your experience.

Your post does have one redeeming trait. It showcases how to express yourself in an unnecessarily negative and slightly offensive manner.

calypso2ts wrote:

Isseyfaran wrote:Actually, obvious bad tactics are bad tactics. There is almost no subjectivity in it.

But, I will correct myself on one aspect. This BatRep actually has value in it apart from entertainment. It showcases the bad tactics and what should or should not be done.

Red Corsair was a jerk anyway.

Thank you for providing such insightful commentary in an aggressive manner towards someone who volunteered their time to share an experience. I know their contribution to the community pales in comparison to your own, extensive work writing up battle reports, tactica articles and sharing your experience.

Your post does have one redeeming trait. It showcases how to express yourself in an unnecessarily negative and slightly offensive manner.

I am like the one out of 10 or so here who said the same thing?

So, did you even bother reading the whole thread, or was just trolling?

The part about the bad tactics and what should or should not be done was a genuine comment. It is useful sometimes to learn from other's mistake. You need to learn to see things from a broader perspective.

Ohh so what you meant to say was...

"Thank you for sharing this battle report. It is interesting to see that Fire Dragons really cannot take on a Draigo Wing army head on. I tend to use FD's (and Eldar in general)as a scalpel, although I appreciate SabrX's aggressive approach. I think with Eldar a direct assault can, predictably, lead to this kind of result.

If faced with a direct confrontation I probably would have tried to use one FD to screen the others in this case. Did your opponent consider that, and what limitations were there to that strategy?"

I read the whole thread, you just happened to decide to pile on in a manner that was rude. People who receive that kind of treatment may decide it is not worth sharing with the rest of us. I am sure that means you intend to share to keep the community rich and vibrant? If this is not the case, learn to critique and have a constructive discussion rather than provide excessively negative statements.

This is also a good life skill in general to have.

calypso2ts wrote:Ohh so what you meant to say was...

"Thank you for sharing this battle report. It is interesting to see that Fire Dragons really cannot take on a Draigo Wing army head on. I tend to use FD's (and Eldar in general)as a scalpel, although I appreciate SabrX's aggressive approach. I think with Eldar a direct assault can, predictably, lead to this kind of result.

If faced with a direct confrontation I probably would have tried to use one FD to screen the others in this case. Did your opponent consider that, and what limitations were there to that strategy?"
I read the whole thread, you just happened to decide to pile on in a manner that was rude. People who receive that kind of treatment may decide it is not worth sharing with the rest of us. I am sure that means you intend to share to keep the community rich and vibrant? If this is not the case, learn to critique and have a constructive discussion rather than provide excessively negative statements.

This is also a good life skill in general to have.

Well if you read the whole thread and what others have contributed, then typing the above in bold shows that you obviously could not comprehend what people are saying.

Reading/comprehension skill is also a good life skill to have . Pick it up. But if you are just trying to pick a fight, i m always prepared to make you a fool of yourself .

You can lead a horse to water, but sometimes it drowns itself.

I will stop diverting Jy2's thread for the discussion, if you would like to continue then we can do so in PM's.

I recognize there were also rules mistakes made in the game, I chose to grab one particular point (engaging aggressively versus using Eldar mobility to dictate the conditions of battle), but I am sure a reasonably polite critique could be developed for other tactical and rules based scenarios as well.

I would love to see the Eldar have something reliably solid that can crack Draigo Wing and GK. Sadll with an old codex and our squishy T3 I do not think we can do this. The GK are more build for anti-psy or xenos vs demons now, which is interesting since they are supposed to be demon hunters (elite ordo-Malleus, not ordo-xenos). But that aside. I liked the idea of trying to use fire dragons full squad of 10 x3, but I do not think they can reliably kill them all in 1 turn or enough to stop them. After that one chance it is pretty much all over. I have often wondered about a squad of 10 fire Dragons + Eldrad with a squad of 10 Harlies (2 fusion pistols, kisses, pw with troope master, SS). Shoot the heck out of the squad doomed, fortune the harlies and if can pull off guide the dragons. I bet that would put more of a dent in the palidins that 3 squads of dragons and it would tie up the palidans so potentially the dragons could load up and go after those darn psyflemen. Just a thought. I still think using tank shock is important too and I think the GK player got lucky on the first DOG. Also if can help it try to not land on difficult terrain on your turn to avoid those DTT, I always seem to roll 1'2 too..... Good luck

I think lots of readers here wrote off GK as auto losing this game now there is an involuntary acerbic kick back much like the death rattle of an Eldrad when he was sucked through the warp hole by Chaos.

calypso2ts wrote:
I will stop diverting Jy2's thread for the discussion, if you would like to continue then we can do so in PM's.

You shouldnt have even started. None of your comments was the least bit constructive So I m not sure you should even preach about constructive comments

Eiluj The Farseer wrote:I would love to see the Eldar have something reliably solid that can crack Draigo Wing and GK. Sadll with an old codex and our squishy T3 I do not think we can do this. The GK are more build for anti-psy or xenos vs demons now, which is interesting since they are supposed to be demon hunters (elite ordo-Malleus, not ordo-xenos). But that aside. I liked the idea of trying to use fire dragons full squad of 10 x3, but I do not think they can reliably kill them all in 1 turn or enough to stop them. After that one chance it is pretty much all over. I have often wondered about a squad of 10 fire Dragons + Eldrad with a squad of 10 Harlies (2 fusion pistols, kisses, pw with troope master, SS). Shoot the heck out of the squad doomed, fortune the harlies and if can pull off guide the dragons. I bet that would put more of a dent in the palidins that 3 squads of dragons and it would tie up the palidans so potentially the dragons could load up and go after those darn psyflemen. Just a thought. I still think using tank shock is important too and I think the GK player got lucky on the first DOG. Also if can help it try to not land on difficult terrain on your turn to avoid those DTT, I always seem to roll 1'2 too..... Good luck

In an objectives-based game, I still think that eldar (or more specifically, mechdar) can compete with any army. And in the case of foot armies like my Draigowing, IMO mechdar actually has the upper hand. Honestly, they don't have to literally crack Draigowing. Denial, as Aldarionn endorses, and then a last-minute contest is also a great strategy against them. It's just that in this battle, my opponent wanted to try to break my paladins so he took a gamble. And IMO, he had a reasonably good chance to. If anyone could do it, I would put my money on 30 fire dragons backed up by Guide/Doom. As for shooting the heck out of paladins, it could also work, though I wouldn't say it is a reliable strategy. I've seen (and played) paladins that have just absorbed a ridiculous amount of shots.

As for anti-xenos, I actually feel that eldar is a very difficult army for the grey knights to deal with thanks to Runes of Warding. Both eldar and tau usually give me a lot of problems, and their normally weak troops/infantry don't really care about GK deathstars.

-666- wrote:I think lots of readers here wrote off GK as auto losing this game now there is an involuntary acerbic kick back much like the death rattle of an Eldrad when he was sucked through the warp hole by Chaos.

Lol.

You owned Eldrad. Let the haters be hating. You a very bad man.

I have had a lot of luck annihilating terminators with Harlequins and a Farseerwith doom and fortune. In this case I wonder what 10-20 Fire Dragons and 10 harlequins with Eldrad and Yriel would do. I bet they would have a better chance at killing Draigo and his pompous paladins . I like fire dragons, don't get me wrong, but I do not think 30 fire dragons can reliably kill off a Draigo wing. I think with a CC unit like Harlies, I bet they would stand a much better chance. Harlies by themselves with paladins not so much, with their wound alocation and 2 wound shenanigans. Just my opinion, wish you guys were closer would love to get in a game. Cheers and thanks for the battle report great work

I don't think that Harlequins can generate enough attacks to wipe the squad on the charge let alone reduce them in number by a significant margin.

I have found that Harlequins do poorly against Paladins but Doom and Fortune might well help.

Before the report was posted, I made a comment about the lack of star engines/stones on the WS's. I feel the result here supports that argument. Losing the 2 fragons (still using this phrase) per squad to get those upgrades would have A) bought more movement for Saber to force the confrontation where he wanted it, meaning away from area terrain B) allowed him to block off the fire path after the shots had been made, allowing a second turn of shooting.

Had Saber done one or the other of those, this is a very different game. In fairness, had the serpents pilots not been hitting the sauce early that game (immobilized/run over a hammer), Saber could have achieved B) with the one Star engine serpent he had. Still, relying on one unit to do something crucial makes me uncomfortable, as I feel one of the primary strengths of Eldar is redundancy. Also, as already noted, the game was a "for fun" match up to see what would happen when 30 Fragons go up against Draigowing. It was not a serious comp., thus all we can really say is that the outcome is most likely not representative.

Still, if the points had been found for the upgrades even this game may have gone differently. Having 5 fully upgraded serpents as opposed to 6 bare bones would have allowed more control over the battle via one of the primary strengths of Eldar: redundancy.

Eiluj The Farseer wrote:I have had a lot of luck annihilating terminators with Harlequins and a Farseerwith doom and fortune. In this case I wonder what 10-20 Fire Dragons and 10 harlequins with Eldrad and Yriel would do. I bet they would have a better chance at killing Draigo and his pompous paladins . I like fire dragons, don't get me wrong, but I do not think 30 fire dragons can reliably kill off a Draigo wing. I think with a CC unit like Harlies, I bet they would stand a much better chance. Harlies by themselves with paladins not so much, with their wound alocation and 2 wound shenanigans. Just my opinion, wish you guys were closer would love to get in a game. Cheers and thanks for the battle report great work

Basically, it would require a team effort of multiple units, whether dragons or harlequins, to take them down. Any 1 single unit in a vacuum won't be able to do much by themselves. Paladins are quite resilient in combat due to 2++ wardings staves and 4++ swords they can allocate upon. I once took out 20 assault terminators with Draigo, libbie and 20 paladins....and I only lost 2 guys!

And if all else fails, tankshock!

Dash2021 wrote:Before the report was posted, I made a comment about the lack of star engines/stones on the WS's. I feel the result here supports that argument. Losing the 2 fragons (still using this phrase) per squad to get those upgrades would have A) bought more movement for Saber to force the confrontation where he wanted it, meaning away from area terrain B) allowed him to block off the fire path after the shots had been made, allowing a second turn of shooting.

Had Saber done one or the other of those, this is a very different game. In fairness, had the serpents pilots not been hitting the sauce early that game (immobilized/run over a hammer), Saber could have achieved B) with the one Star engine serpent he had. Still, relying on one unit to do something crucial makes me uncomfortable, as I feel one of the primary strengths of Eldar is redundancy. Also, as already noted, the game was a "for fun" match up to see what would happen when 30 Fragons go up against Draigowing. It was not a serious comp., thus all we can really say is that the outcome is most likely not representative.

Still, if the points had been found for the upgrades even this game may have gone differently. Having 5 fully upgraded serpents as opposed to 6 bare bones would have allowed more control over the battle via one of the primary strengths of Eldar: redundancy.

I agree. Star engines would let them tankshocked twice per their turn as well as other move shenanigans! I would have had a heart attack had I have to take that many LD tests!

But I guess my opponent didn't spam them because:

1) He wanted 30 fire dragons, not 24-26, just like I wanted 10 paladins, not 8-9. It's a preference thing and what he wanted to try out.

2) More units - skimmers and firepower - and less upgrades.

3) People have a tendency to use what they are familiar with. My opponent doesn't normally run star engines in his normal lists, just as I don't normally use incinerators in my Draigowing list, even if I am facing a large horde army. It's an instinctive thing.

Maybe if we have a future Draigowing-vs-mechdar battle, he may swap out some FD's for some star engines, especially now that he's already experimented with his 30 fragon build.

Just one question about the initial setup.

In Dawn of War you can only set up 2 troops and 1 HQ. So you would not have been able to have Draigo, Libby, and 10 man paladin squad would you?

I don't even think this is the first battle rep I have seen where people do this, but no one catches it.

Oopsies. Good catch. Lol.

I can't believe I didn't catch that mistake, even when I was writing the report.

I agree without multiple units working together we can not take out paladins. That is how Eldar work most of the time though. Nice bat rep

Frothmog wrote:Just one question about the initial setup.

In Dawn of War you can only set up 2 troops and 1 HQ. So you would not have been able to have Draigo, Libby, and 10 man paladin squad would you?

I don't even think this is the first battle rep I have seen where people do this, but no one catches it.

Wow, four pages, and no one caught that mistake! This calls for a rematch!

SabrX wrote:
Wow, four pages, and no one caught that mistake! This calls for a rematch!

Anytime, buddy, anytime.

Just don't expect me to repeat the performance that I did in this game.