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.

I'm trying to stick to mono Dark Eldar for the time being so Banshee Masks are a no go. But a very tempting offer. Weakening the line sounds like a good option. My Reavers really outpaced everybody else so I couldn't really whittle them down before I assaulted. As I play them more I'll get used to how the army moves. I'm used to the slow as gak Imperium.

 Gamerely wrote:
I'm trying to stick to mono Dark Eldar for the time being so Banshee Masks are a no go. But a very tempting offer. Weakening the line sounds like a good option. My Reavers really outpaced everybody else so I couldn't really whittle them down before I assaulted. As I play them more I'll get used to how the army moves. I'm used to the slow as gak Imperium.

Boost an empty raider along side them to block line of sight. Other units can only overwatch if they can see

How many bike squads are you using? 3x6? and are you using the RSR detachment?

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Gamerely wrote:
I'm trying to stick to mono Dark Eldar for the time being so Banshee Masks are a no go. But a very tempting offer. Weakening the line sounds like a good option. My Reavers really outpaced everybody else so I couldn't really whittle them down before I assaulted. As I play them more I'll get used to how the army moves. I'm used to the slow as gak Imperium.

Boost an empty raider along side them to block line of sight. Other units can only overwatch if they can see

Oh wow, I never even considered that! And to DaKKaLAnce, in that game I had 2 units of 6. That was my first time using them in a larger capacity. Just a 750 point game so I was trying some new things.

 Gamerely wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Gamerely wrote:
I'm trying to stick to mono Dark Eldar for the time being so Banshee Masks are a no go. But a very tempting offer. Weakening the line sounds like a good option. My Reavers really outpaced everybody else so I couldn't really whittle them down before I assaulted. As I play them more I'll get used to how the army moves. I'm used to the slow as gak Imperium.

Boost an empty raider along side them to block line of sight. Other units can only overwatch if they can see

Oh wow, I never even considered that! And to DaKKaLAnce, in that game I had 2 units of 6. That was my first time using them in a larger capacity. Just a 750 point game so I was trying some new things.

Ah gotcha. Well that is a good amount at 750. Maybe add another 3 man squad to take the hit? with the jink and Fnp, you shouldn't really have any issues with over watch.

 Gamerely wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Gamerely wrote:
I'm trying to stick to mono Dark Eldar for the time being so Banshee Masks are a no go. But a very tempting offer. Weakening the line sounds like a good option. My Reavers really outpaced everybody else so I couldn't really whittle them down before I assaulted. As I play them more I'll get used to how the army moves. I'm used to the slow as gak Imperium.

Boost an empty raider along side them to block line of sight. Other units can only overwatch if they can see

Oh wow, I never even considered that! And to DaKKaLAnce, in that game I had 2 units of 6. That was my first time using them in a larger capacity. Just a 750 point game so I was trying some new things.

Empty raiders are your friend

If you position your attackers correctly, against Tau you can often make charges from a position out of LOS of some of the supporting units.

Control the weapon ranges, too. Overwatch doesn't negate weapon ranges, and since most of our units are Fleet, we can charge from further back with a greater degree of safety from failed charges. This can prevent some supporting fire, and can at least mitigate Rapid Fire from the models in the target or supporting units.

Our greater mobility makes these tactics much easier for us than for slower armies.

For fans of Mush's Repugnant Ramblers, I wrote up a batrep using a revised list using the Grotesquerie formation with some kabalites in venoms as the troop tax:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/648535.page#7831852

lustigjh wrote:
For fans of Mush's Repugnant Ramblers, I wrote up a batrep using a revised list using the Grotesquerie formation with some kabalites in venoms as the troop tax:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/648535.page#7831852

Great report Lustigjh and grats on the solid win! Im trying to build a similar coven/kabalite list but my issue is two of my main opponents play mech IG. I read Mush's batrep vs the Imperial knights where his lack of anti armor was mitigated by board presence but against IG with obsec its seemingly not really an option.

My last game i was able to hobble his transports turn 2 with caltrop/vane reavers I couldn't capitalize due to incredibly poor reserve rolls. By the time i had ground my way back on the board. He was so far ahead in points i needed to table to (arguably) win. I feel i could have had we gone to T7 but alas we did not so i got crushed.

How would you build or play a list like this against mech anything really without going full tailoring min/max cheese? Replace venoms with DL raiders?

Edit:
The game was 1500 pts and roughly:

Haemy - WWP, in dark artisan
Talos -Heat lance, chain flails
Chronos - siphon

RSR
Archon - WWP, blast pistol
5 blasterborn
2 X 5 warriors in venoms with SC upgrade
2 Razorwings - DLs
4 X 3 Reavers - Caltrops

Guard
3 chimeras - 2 with vets and Comissar, 1 with priest and ogryns
Vindicator
LR Exterminator
Wyvern (? the multiple barrage anti infantry ?)
Vendetta with special weapon vets

I know my list was a mess but i was just trying to get a feel for some different units since its been a while since i played.

My 1500 coven/kabalite list includes 2 units of Haywire Scourges so that's how I'd do anti armor. I make up for it by taking one less plane and one less Reaver unit - that's a lot of extra anti-infantry if you ask me.

I haven't had the chance yet, but my current build has an autarch with a banshee mask in a squad of 10 grotesques... I already warned my local tau player that I'll be gunnin' for his gunline. >

DirtyDeeds wrote:
I haven't had the chance yet, but my current build has an autarch with a banshee mask in a squad of 10 grotesques... I already warned my local tau player that I'll be gunnin' for his gunline. >

Tau overwatch is 90% why I bought Eldar allies with the new dex. I'm so sick of watching all my stuff die to free shooting attacks.

lustigjh wrote:
My 1500 coven/kabalite list includes 2 units of Haywire Scourges so that's how I'd do anti armor. I make up for it by taking one less plane and one less Reaver unit - that's a lot of extra anti-infantry if you ask me.

Do you find Haywire Scourges useful? I know it's allying in, which you may not want to do, but if you're going with Haywire, you may as well use Swooping Hawks instead. The way I see it, the advantages of Scourges is being able to take a ridiculous amount of heavy weaponry on a small squad, i.e. 4 heat lances. This will give you anti-tank (and anti TEQ/MEQ) capabilities through shooting - i.e. on the turn you deep strike, if you choose to do so - and hence allows them to fulfil a role that swooping hawks can't.

 The Shadow wrote:

lustigjh wrote:
My 1500 coven/kabalite list includes 2 units of Haywire Scourges so that's how I'd do anti armor. I make up for it by taking one less plane and one less Reaver unit - that's a lot of extra anti-infantry if you ask me.

Do you find Haywire Scourges useful? I know it's allying in, which you may not want to do, but if you're going with Haywire, you may as well use Swooping Hawks instead. The way I see it, the advantages of Scourges is being able to take a ridiculous amount of heavy weaponry on a small squad, i.e. 4 heat lances. This will give you anti-tank (and anti TEQ/MEQ) capabilities through shooting - i.e. on the turn you deep strike, if you choose to do so - and hence allows them to fulfil a role that swooping hawks can't.

When it comes to Scourges, that debate will rage forever. The greater range (and greater effective range) of the Haywire Blaster vs the greater utility against non-vehicle targets is a question with no 'one right answer.'

Agreed. I tend to play the range and LOS game so I need mine to stay as far away as possible and strip away hull points which means haywire blasters are the right answer for me. If I used heat lances they would be the only unit in range of the enemy and they'd get obliterated after landing (assuming they didn't mishap in the first place). If you took a different style of list with other threats in the enemy's face then I could see the argument for heat lances, but they don't work in my list.

If your allying in Eldar then their is no point in scourge IMO. Swooping hawks are better at everything for the same cost. With an 18" move and fleet they assault an average of 27"!!! No vehicle in the game can hide from them, and with battle focus and longer ranged AI weapons (plus hawk bombs that ignore cover) it gets annoying how much better they are. Oh, and battle focus to hide after a volley in case they weren't good enough lol. Thanks to having every grenade in the world there is no need to specialize these blokes, they do it all.

Then there are fire dragons for metla. Melta guns AND melta bombs on every model, +1 to damage. Again, annoying when you realize a heatlance scourge is 26ppm to a fire dragons 22 and thanks to battle focus a fire dragon moves ~10" compared to our 12"....

That said I love the models and will continue to field my scourge because I like a challenge in my games lol. I think that's the number one reason to continue using the DE versions, they make for a more challenging game and at least for me, a much more gratifying victory because it was hard fought.

The number of slot/detachments available in some events may necessitate using Scourges, as well as collection limitations. After all, we're discussing DE primary armies here, so Eldar are usually going to be the allies, not the main event.

Not sure about Swooping Hawks, but compared to Fire Dragons, the Scourges are dirt cheap.

I love me Heat Lance Scourges. They're good at blowing up Vehicles. I also used their mobility/DS to grab remote objectives many times, or score Linebreaker for instance.

Can't wait to start casting Guide on them.

 Jimsolo wrote:
The number of slot/detachments available in some events may necessitate using Scourges, as well as collection limitations. After all, we're discussing DE primary armies here, so Eldar are usually going to be the allies, not the main event.

Not sure about Swooping Hawks, but compared to Fire Dragons, the Scourges are dirt cheap.

5 scourge with heavy weapons is 120pts
5 firdragons are 110

Not seeing where your coming from, and in an allied detachment you can get hawks and fragons. I also haven't seen a recent event that didn't allow formations, the aspect shrine gets you 3 in any combo with BS 5 to boot.

Collection limitations don't merit much weight in a tactics discussion IMHO. We are discussing unit merits not what everyone owns.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
The number of slot/detachments available in some events may necessitate using Scourges, as well as collection limitations. After all, we're discussing DE primary armies here, so Eldar are usually going to be the allies, not the main event.

Not sure about Swooping Hawks, but compared to Fire Dragons, the Scourges are dirt cheap.

5 scourge with heavy weapons is 120pts
5 firdragons are 110

Not seeing where your coming from, and in an allied detachment you can get hawks and fragons. I also haven't seen a recent event that didn't allow formations, the aspect shrine gets you 3 in any combo with BS 5 to boot.

Collection limitations don't merit much weight in a tactics discussion IMHO. We are discussing unit merits not what everyone owns.

Fire Dragons need a good delivery method, whether it's a Wave Serpent or a Falcon or something more unusual like a Webway Portal. I'm not saying that Scourges are better or that Fire Dragons are bad, because that's not the case, it's just that Scourges are something you can stick in a list that's nearing the limit to add a bit more anti-armour firepower and are something that can operate well on their own. Not as well as Fire Dragons operate with a Wave Serpent, but well nonetheless.

Thats a great point shadow, fire dragons are typically going to cost around 220 once all is said and done because without a transport their use is quite limited. That's not to say you're not getting good use out of the firepower of the transport, and the protection for the dragons inside, but it is something to consider when looking at the overall investment required to make good use of either unit.

I make no assumptions of either unit being better than one or the other either, they both have their uses and are good in their own right. Another thing I like about scourges is that running either the HWB or the heat lance are both viable options with pros and cons, its not like there is one clear choice that one is better than the other. To me that speaks to a unit being fairly well balanced, I like seeing this sort of thing within a codex. It's a far cry from some units from other armies that you look at and think "wow, they have 4 weapon options but 3 of them suck so why would I ever load them out differently?".

SoB dominions come to mind in this regard, the storm bolter is quite a laughable choice, the flamer gets no benefit from their AoF and the melta jives so perfectly with them that you'd be daft not to take it. They might as well have just made their codex entry with the melta already equipped.

 Inevitable_Faith wrote:
Thats a great point shadow, fire dragons are typically going to cost around 220 once all is said and done because without a transport their use is quite limited. That's not to say you're not getting good use out of the firepower of the transport, and the protection for the dragons inside, but it is something to consider when looking at the overall investment required to make good use of either unit.

That's true, and part of the reason why Fire Dragons are good. Yes, they do need a transport to function but that transport is hardly a tax and functions well in its own right. That said, that transport still costs and hence it's easier to fit Scourges in any old list.

Scourges also have a slightly larger Melta Range which gets them out of Explosion range and gives them a slightly larger threat threshold.

I just wish my beloved Scourge got +1 to vehicle damage...that's probably why I consider Fire Dragons to be equal to/better than Scourge with their weapons.

@ Red Corsair

You also need to consider the range on the weapons. Scourges can plink away hull points at 24" while Fire Dragons need at least 12".

@ Jimsolo

Swooping Hawks fill the same role as Scourges, but in a different way. While Scourges would like to shoot their targets from a distance, Swooping Hawks have Haywire Grenades so they would much rather assault their targets. What makes them cool is that if equipped with an Exarch, they do not scatter, and any unit that they move over with their 18" movement gets hit with a Haywire Grenade or a str 4 ap4 hit for each model in the unit. This attack can be made against fliers. THEN they can shoot another Haywire grenade.

Swooping Hawks might be able to double down.
6 attempts on a 4+ for a S4 AP4 haywire, then another haywire toss in the shooting phase, followed by 6 more haywires in the assault phase.

Think of it this way. Wyches with haywire used to be awesome. Swooping hawks now fill that role, only doing it better, due to moving a full 12" further than the wyches could; and having 4+ armor too.

 The Shadow wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
The number of slot/detachments available in some events may necessitate using Scourges, as well as collection limitations. After all, we're discussing DE primary armies here, so Eldar are usually going to be the allies, not the main event.

Not sure about Swooping Hawks, but compared to Fire Dragons, the Scourges are dirt cheap.

5 scourge with heavy weapons is 120pts
5 firdragons are 110

Not seeing where your coming from, and in an allied detachment you can get hawks and fragons. I also haven't seen a recent event that didn't allow formations, the aspect shrine gets you 3 in any combo with BS 5 to boot.

Collection limitations don't merit much weight in a tactics discussion IMHO. We are discussing unit merits not what everyone owns.

Fire Dragons need a good delivery method, whether it's a Wave Serpent or a Falcon or something more unusual like a Webway Portal. I'm not saying that Scourges are better or that Fire Dragons are bad, because that's not the case, it's just that Scourges are something you can stick in a list that's nearing the limit to add a bit more anti-armour firepower and are something that can operate well on their own. Not as well as Fire Dragons operate with a Wave Serpent, but well nonetheless.

Exactly. Footslogging FDs are cheaper, but virtually useless without a ride. After necessary upgrades, the Scourges are cheaper. The FDs in a transport are better, IMO, but the Scourges cost less to field effectively.

@Redcorsair- Of course collection limitations have a place in such discussions. Finding secondary or tertiary solutions which can be achieved with the models people have access to is one of the primary purposes of in depth tactical discussions. It's why people spend pages upon pages trying in vain to figure out how to make Hellions or Wyches not blow in this edition.

A tactical discussion isn't a unit guide. More than just reaching a communal agreement on three or four 'best' units, a good tactical discussion considers broader strategies for a wider variety of units.

Not to sound snippy but coming from a guy with a thread revolving around leadership shenanigans using up to 4 sources I think suggesting limitations based on models is a flawed stance. I respect the freak show stratagem despite how many sources and models it requires. I don't see how a few aspect warriors is a problem by comparison for example.

I look at what tactics are the most practical, not at what I own necessarily, doing this allows me to make informed future purchases. I'd personally rather own a unit of hawks and dragons along with a couple scourge units then rely on spamming several more scourge units.

Back on topic in regard to fire dragons, they really don't have bad range on foot when you factor in battle focus. 6" move with a 3.5" average battle focus (fleet) and a 12" range is 21.5" total. We are looking at heat lance scourgeas a direct comparison, so 12" move that needs to be within 9" for 21" total. Hlances may say 18" range but they might as well say 9". So as you can see, fire dragons actually out range heat lances on foot overall since they threaten armor at 12" there is no requirement for them to be in melta range unlike heat lances. Obviously they perform best inside a venom or raider, but I felt it was worth displaying just how wide their threat range is even on foot.

I'd suggest an aspect shrine for any DE list as a cheap highly efficient AT section. Go fir +1 BS and take hawks, dragons and even Dreapers. It allows us to relax a bit on AT and focus on the fun AI shenanigans we can pull.

@Red Corsair

If you're going to limit the Scourge to the range of the melta effect, why not do the same for the Fire Dragons?

DirtyDeeds wrote:
@Red Corsair

If you're going to limit the Scourge to the range of the melta effect, why not do the same for the Fire Dragons?

Exactly. When you factor in melta ranges, even with fleet dragons have an effective range of 15.5 vs the 21 of Scourges. That's assuming you're using lances vs HWBs of course, which have an effective range of 36".

Again, (and this keeps getting lost for some reason) I would also prefer Fire Dragons to Scourges, but circumstances don't always allow their inclusion. (Model collections, points values, or event restrictions on number of detachments, sources, and units can all contribute to making the scourges more feasible.)

The Freakshow threads do indeed address a large array of armies, but I think you're mistaken. Freakshows do not require four sources to function. Two will often be sufficient. I talk about such a wide variety of units and options in order to address more possibilities than a single formulaic list. I have mentioned a unit performing in a secondary role when collection limitations force them to be fielded on more than one occasion.

If the tactics we discuss and come up with aren't able to be applied because virtually no one has the models to do so, then those tactics are functionally worthless, and the time spent discussing them a waste.

DirtyDeeds wrote:
@Red Corsair

If you're going to limit the Scourge to the range of the melta effect, why not do the same for the Fire Dragons?

Because I have used scourge exhaustively in 5th, 6th and 7th and heatlances may as well be ranged 9" when regarding vehicle penetration. S6 struggles to even pop rhinos. OTOH a melta gun is an AP1 blaster, there is no need to be in melta range when your shooting at rhinos, especially now that fire dragons from an aspect shrine are BS5 and explode that rhino on a 4+. 5 dragons will hit 4 times, pen twice and get the explode from 12" which actually means they are further away then scourge, ie safer.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jimsolo wrote:

DirtyDeeds wrote:
@Red Corsair

If you're going to limit the Scourge to the range of the melta effect, why not do the same for the Fire Dragons?

Exactly. When you factor in melta ranges, even with fleet dragons have an effective range of 15.5 vs the 21 of Scourges. That's assuming you're using lances vs HWBs of course, which have an effective range of 36".

Again, (and this keeps getting lost for some reason) I would also prefer Fire Dragons to Scourges, but circumstances don't always allow their inclusion. (Model collections, points values, or event restrictions on number of detachments, sources, and units can all contribute to making the scourges more feasible.)

The Freakshow threads do indeed address a large array of armies, but I think you're mistaken. Freakshows do not require four sources to function. Two will often be sufficient. I talk about such a wide variety of units and options in order to address more possibilities than a single formulaic list. I have mentioned a unit performing in a secondary role when collection limitations force them to be fielded on more than one occasion.

See the above, thats just flat false in practice.

Also, don't move the post. If we are talking haywire then I am going with hawks over scourge EVERY time. With a 27" average assault and the ability to rape fliers there is no contest that hawks are the winner in the haywire debate. They also keep their anti infantry capability and are WAY more mobile. 120 pts gets you 5 scourge with 4 haywire blasters 122pts get you 7 hawks including the exarch. That's 7 haywire attempts at heavy armor that ignore cover because of melee. And if I draw tyranids or demons I am not stuck with a 120pt handicap.

 Jimsolo wrote:
If the tactics we discuss and come up with aren't able to be applied because virtually no one has the models to do so, then those tactics are functionally worthless, and the time spent discussing them a waste.

Honestly you think your being fair here? I suggested fielding an aspect shrine which btw can be as small as 9 models and your biggest opposition is "virtually no one has the models to do so?" Again, I feel like your being hypocritical when your advocating for 3-5 books and factions in your freakshow discussion, a tactic that is hyper specialized and rock, paper, scissors along with needing more costly models. A general tactics thread can't be about what models each players owns, that's just a silly argument. We aren't going to inventory everyones collections reading this. I think you need to stop hammering on about model restrictions.

btw I am not trying to be rude, but it is frustrating as I respect your opinion in regard to strategy and your hung up on something that's strictly hobby/collector related. I want to hear your stance on the tactics.