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.

Grouchoben, this whole thread frustrates me for those exact reasons. This whole thread is about unit analysis and list-building in a very uninteresting way. Most of the analysis is purely about how much something can theoretically kill, and if not, how well it can stay alive.

I'd really like to see more discussion of how units can A) be used most effectively, B) be used symbiotically or at least co-operatively with other units (either by actual rules, or simply because they complement each others roles well.) and C) to achieve victory in a range of missions, not just killing stuff. Sure, tabling your opponent is one way to win, but not the only way.

This can be about units, it can be about stratagems, it can be about. It can even be about psychic powers, warlord traits and relics. But it should be about how to use things well together, not just about which one is "best" or "trash".

For example, whilst I am sympathetic to the argument about the Avatar being gak, I'd rather see discussion about how to maximise its value. Sean, from commentary here and elsewhere, seems to have used it to shore up the morale issues of a squad of guardians, but he also got some benefit from being able to use it as a counter-attack unit. Are there other ways of achieving the same thing? For example, using an Iyanden list to limit morale losses and heaping a Phoenix Lord in the middle?

Some people in each of these conversations try to defend units, and do so by pointing out the qualities of the unit, but too often they are shouted down and instead of trying to find ways of optimising how to use things, people simply bitch and moan that they want cheaper, better toys for killing stuff with.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 grouchoben wrote:
Does Sean ever write anything, blogs or such? I'd be really interested to hear how he runs his lists, they're always swerve balls! It's funny, people are presented with evidence that this list beat a lot of very competitive lists lpayed by great players, and it dosn't compute. Should be possible. Those units are trash. Etc, etc. We need some more risk taking and building for specific tactics in our community, and it would be great to have people like Sean leading the way.

He has a dakka account. He responded in the battle report thread about this tournament.

You mean the 2 things about how good some of the units are that he took? Something many of use already been saying.

What makes a good player an amazing player is knowing when and what to do at the right times.

Like against certain armies he should DS a guardian squad or 2, other times the Wyches, other times DS nothing, maybe play hyper aggressive, or completely defensive. Strategies in playing an army are not stagnate, you need to adjust to what you are facing. Yes you need a clear goal in mind but its the movements, deployments and target priorities that players want to see ESPECIALLY at a GT level as most of us dont get to be on those top tables.

Even long time veteran players that knows all the stats/mathhammer, and are good players can always learn from others.

It would be nice to see some reports of it.

I'd love to see a real battle report from his games at this event. It would answer a lot of my questions.

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/319713172

^^A link to the Battle for Salvation twitch stream. I think the game I linked (the final vs the knight + Custodes Captains list) is the only game that he plays on stream that weekend. But then again, it’s him vs a good player playing (arguably) the best and most meta list that 40k has to offer.

It’s rather telling that the knight (house raven) lived throughout the entire game and Sean still won. I spoke to Sean after the game about how that happened and he said there was a crucial moment where he thought the bikes were out of LOS (they weren’t) and that was unfortunate for him. I think the final score was 23-19, but don’t quote me on that.

Below is a link to Sean’s blogspot from eons ago if you really want to stalk his brain, but he doesn’t update it regularly any more.

http://vectdoes.blogspot.com

Great stuff, thanks Luke! I'll take a look at that game tomorrow, looking forward to it.

IG/Castellans played terrible. He had the power to move up and overwhelm the eldar player and he didn't do it. I can't even tell you what he was doing all game. Castellan never even moved as far as I can tell.

Sometimes you shouldn't do that but against 40 gardians and 26 wyches plus maganra...yeah...you just move up and table him.

Sterling191 wrote:
Unless I'm mistaken Fortune doesn't benefit from Protect (since FnPs arent saving throws) so you're not getting a 4+++.

Oh damn it. I actually didnt know that. Thanks for the clarification!

Just wondering if anyone has run a big group of reapers buffed by protect and screened by asurman and dire avengers?
This would give you a 4+ invulnerable save plus potentially-2 to hit from alaitoc and lightning reflexes. You can go crazy and pile conceal and fortune on top but that seems too big an investment for one unit.
The avengers would be a slightly more durable screen and asurman provides great counter charging potential.
I'm going to give it a try this week at my local gw store but an curious if anyone has any experience with this combo?

It looks good on paper, but in reality a T3 4+ save is nothing to write home about, even with Alaitoc shenanigans. You need at least two RoB powers (Protect, Conceal) to make it worthwhile, at which point you're talking about investing 300 points to keep a single mediocre troop slot alive.

Against pretty much everything except units that can ignore malus to hit, Rangers in cover are better, and even then I'd probably take the Rangers purely because of the efficiency and synergy they have with other Eldar strategies.

kingheff wrote:
Just wondering if anyone has run a big group of reapers buffed by protect and screened by asurman and dire avengers?
This would give you a 4+ invulnerable save plus potentially-2 to hit from alaitoc and lightning reflexes. You can go crazy and pile conceal and fortune on top but that seems too big an investment for one unit.
The avengers would be a slightly more durable screen and asurman provides great counter charging potential.
I'm going to give it a try this week at my local gw store but an curious if anyone has any experience with this combo?

Asurman is really expensive. That is his biggest problem. His buff is awesome though. 4++ dire avengers are almost worth their 12 point cost. The asurman tax is too high though.

Umm, the plan is to buff a squad of ten dark reapers with asurman and protect for a 4+ invulnerable save. The dire avengers are only there to screen, sorry if I was unclear, it's what I get for posting from my phone at work.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asurman is really expensive. That is his biggest problem. His buff is awesome though. 4++ dire avengers are almost worth their 12 point cost. The asurman tax is too high though.

Amusingly enough I find Asurmen is a terrifying beatstick if supported correctly. It's a massive opportunity cost to pull of, but a >50% chance to drop d3 mortal wounds per hit on a target carves right through things. The whole package (Asurmen + Autarch + Farseer + Warlock/Spiritseer) is pushing 500 points, but damn can it do some scary things if it manages to connect.

kingheff wrote:
Umm, the plan is to buff a squad of ten dark reapers with asurman and protect for a 4+ invulnerable save. The dire avengers are only there to screen, sorry if I was unclear, it's what I get for posting from my phone at work.

No I understood you. The reapers will also get a 4++ if you protect them. It seems decent enough for a causal game. I find the best way to protect reapers is just to keep them out of LOS using fire and fade. Move up - shoot - fire and fade behind wall.

Another point to make is that if you protect reapers and they are in cover - they have a 1+ save. Realistically this will give you a 4++ against ap -3. I don't think you need asurman to make this work.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asurman is really expensive. That is his biggest problem. His buff is awesome though. 4++ dire avengers are almost worth their 12 point cost. The asurman tax is too high though.

Amusingly enough I find Asurmen is a terrifying beatstick if supported correctly. It's a massive opportunity cost to pull of, but a >50% chance to drop d3 mortal wounds per hit on a target carves right through things. The whole package (Asurmen + Autarch + Farseer + Warlock/Spiritseer) is pushing 500 points, but damn can it do some scary things if it manages to connect.

He certainly is a killer with +1 to wound. Also just looking at him now. 175 is not a terrible price for him. It really is a shame though that dire avengers are so expensive - it would be fun to run them together.

I find the 5++ on other Aspects more impactful than the 4++ on DAs. DAs are already cheap, have a 4+, and a third of their wounds already have a 4++. If they're hitting your DAs with good AP, they aren't hitting something more important. Fire Dragons, Scorpions, Banshees, etc all want to get close, costs too much per model, and have no invuln. A 5++ means they dont' fall over to moderate AP.

That said, I use Asurmen because I enjoy him. You're better off with a Farseer. Too many points.

(He *did* oneround a 4-man Custodes squad once. And did 15 unsaved wounds to a Termie squad another game. But those are anomolies - he doesn't reliably do that kind of damage.)

Cover works great but tends to work best with small units, same with fire and fade. The theory I had was that to get the most out of the buffs like guide was to lump in on a max sized unit which is going to be tricky to keep in cover or fire and fade back out of sight.
Plus the invulnerable works in melee too if you do get charged by something with reasonable ap. Having asurman, who seems, avatar aside, to be our best beat stick, standing by for a counter attack is pretty decent. If the reapers do get taken down, stick protect on asurman to give him a 2+ invulnerable instead!

Problem is that if you're looking for a counter-charge unit, an Autarch does almost as well as Asurmen for half the price while still providing synergy with their reroll aura.

And that's before discussing your options if you go soupy and use say a Red Grief Succubus or Obsidian Rose Blasterchon to open up even more options.

But the autarch doesn't supply an invulnerable save which is the point of this plan, reapers are awesome but pretty fragile. Especially against bigger guns which tend to be the ones with the range to hit them.

Reapers have a 3+ standard save. You need melee of better than AP -2, or ranged of better than AP-3 (you are keeping them in cover right?) to actually benefit from Asurmen's 5++.

The biggest threat to Reapers are Autocannon type weapons with high weight of fire but minimal AP that exploit their T3 nature. If an enemy is pointing their Lascannons at Reapers, they're not pointing them at Prisms or other grav tanks. Which is a net win.

If you're really dedicated to keeping your Reapers alive, task a Warlock/Spiritseer to Conceal them. -2 to hit, alongside a countercharge Auarch, gives them far more of a boost for less points than Asurmen.

Well, that's why I factored in protect for a 4++. At worst a 50% chance of ignoring any wounds, on top of minuses to hit, seems to be enough of a deterrent to hopefully keep my opponent from targeting the reapers at all.
Maybe it's just me but I find reapers die pretty quickly even in cover and at 34 pts each every one that dies is very painful both in terms of cost and loss of firepower.

You need to look at the whole casualty equation, not just the save. Yes, you can achieve a 4++, but with a smaller point investment you can achieve the equivalent of a 1+++ (with the potential for a 0+++ or -1+++ depending on your opponent and CP supply) while also providing an offensive boost.

I understand what you’re trying to pull off, and it can work, but from an end efficiency standpoint there are other, better options.

I understand that there may be better solutions via other means but one nice thing about this plan is that it's not dependent on CP's or much of anything, it's pretty much a passive ability, barring the warlock casting protect. Plus it doesn't just affect the reapers. Getting three small squads of avengers into asurman's buff range should be pretty easy and should make for a reasonably tough and effective little screen.

1 CP per turn is a reasonable investment to keep a centerpiece unit alive IMO.

Sterling191 wrote:
1 CP per turn is a reasonable investment to keep a centerpiece unit alive IMO.

Absolutely, but CP's have a nasty habit of disappearing all too quickly!

 Xenomancers wrote:
IG/Castellans played terrible. He had the power to move up and overwhelm the eldar player and he didn't do it. I can't even tell you what he was doing all game. Castellan never even moved as far as I can tell.

Sometimes you shouldn't do that but against 40 gardians and 26 wyches plus maganra...yeah...you just move up and table him.

Respectfully disagree. I’m not sure what you think was going to move up and table the guardians and wyches. That would have been an awful move for the knights player. Getting up close and personal is exactly what all of those Eldar models want. Also the Castellan moved on turn 1?

 luke1705 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
IG/Castellans played terrible. He had the power to move up and overwhelm the eldar player and he didn't do it. I can't even tell you what he was doing all game. Castellan never even moved as far as I can tell.

Sometimes you shouldn't do that but against 40 gardians and 26 wyches plus maganra...yeah...you just move up and table him.

Respectfully disagree. I’m not sure what you think was going to move up and table the guardians and wyches. That would have been an awful move for the knights player. Getting up close and personal is exactly what all of those Eldar models want. Also the Castellan moved on turn 1?

Getting up close and personal is exactly what straken buffed infantry want too. LOL. Not to mention the sheild captain and hell hounds.

The guy played his lists like crap and he lost to a vastly inferior list. Like...did you see how many people criticized the list straight away?

everyone is saying "how did that list not get tabled?" well the answer is simple - his opponent didn't even try.

The Eldar list needs to be within 12" for almost all of it's killiness. The IK list needs to be within 12" for maybe half it's killiness. Sure, Straken, Shield Captain, Knight etc want to get close. But moreso than Guardians, Wyches, and Avatars?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What cause, beyond the list winning not fitting your current model, do you have to suggest the IK player didn't even try?

Bharring wrote:
The Eldar list needs to be within 12" for almost all of it's killiness. The IK list needs to be within 12" for maybe half it's killiness. Sure, Straken, Shield Captain, Knight etc want to get close. But moreso than Guardians, Wyches, and Avatars?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What cause, beyond the list winning not fitting your current model, do you have to suggest the IK player didn't even try?

straken catachans beat all of those units with relative ease. You are acting like he should be scared of gardians...uhhh - no. those units can't hang point for point with anything in the imperial list which is a fully optimized list.

Plus I didn't say that the guy didn't try to win (in whatever way he was trying) I said he didn't try to table his opponent which he could have done very easily.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I play a lot of games - it's not uncommon in the "competitive scene" of games for the game to devolve into a passive camp fest. Almost all games do this. Thing is - there is a reason for that. In most games passive wins. In 40k aggression almost always wins.

I also play a lot of games. Guardians aren't afraid of IG infantry. They'll kill them by platoons.

Catachans advance to get close. Guardians and wytches move up, guardians advancing. Guardians shoot most of the IG, then wytches clean up the survivors.

I play a medium amount of games. Guardians land shoot kill guardsmen. Can stand with them in assault for a bit.

You really think the castellan which our ranges the entire eldar army should have advanced into charge range of the avatar? The avatar was mid board turn two. Move up and the castellan gets rocked into combat.

If I hadn’t been so lazy with my bikes in this game and used terrain correctly the game would not have been close. As it was close of turn 4 I had gained the lead in the game and was in dominant board position. Most of the guard infantry was dead and all of the shield captains as well.

Guardians are a gold standard unit. Backbone of great eldar lists. Hard to kill. Great at killing anything in the game with doom.

Not the correct thread but wyches are also amazing.

The IG player played the game about as well as he could have. He has a lot of experience with his list vs competitive players and is himself a good player. However, as Sean said, the matchup was not a good one for the knight player, and Sean played well enough to win.

Just because you don’t understand how Sean’s list works doesn’t mean that it’s not good. For example, not understanding that every guardian squad has 2 gun platforms in them to give them a 3+ save (or 2+ if in cover or buffed with a spell). It might not seem like a big deal, but that save variety means the squad has an enormous amount of durability because they can take lascannons shots on guardians, and no AP shots on the platforms, saving 70-90% of the time. You could even give the guardians a 4++, buff it to a 3++ with protect, and then conceal them to make them -1 to hit. Don’t forget the Ulthwe 6+++. Are you seeing now how maybe you don’t quite see the entire picture about how a unit works when you try to analyze it in a vacuum? @Xenomancers

Perfect example of how forums devolve into list building and mathhammer, even when presented with serious arguments that positioning and synergies might outweigh what is arithmetically the best pick.