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.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
I emailed the FAQ team, I'd encourage others as well. They asked us too.

I suggested:

1. Disallow the use of army specific stratagems by armies that are more then 1 factions.

2. Multifaction armies no long receive the +3 CP's for bettleforged

3. Modifiers never stack, ie. only ever -1 or +1 and opposing mods cancel eachother out

4. Smite casting cost of 7+

5. Remove supreme command, if they want more HQ;s they should use the auxiliary chart at -1 per unit penalty. Currently no one ever uses that chart because it is never needed.

6. Remove infiltration, give nurglings, scouts and rangers either deepstrike or scout moves but remove the current ability to cover the board and prevent every other faction from deploying.

Well I'll tell you why certain ones are terrible.
1. Some of those armies only care about the reroll in the first place. This punishes non-good Soup Lists, rather than fixing the actual issue of internal and external balance.
2. This one I'm okay with.
3. The only offender is Eldar for the most part, and maybe you shouldn't BE shooting at someone with a -3 to hit? Maybe supplement with melee if you want to avoid that?
4. Eh I'm fine with this. The issue is the cheap Psyker able to cast it though.
5. I'm also okay with this.
6. This is easily the worst suggestion. That's part of what these units do (Well maybe not Nurglings).

on 4. If smite was 7 then horrors will not be able to cast it as they only make psychic test with a single d6. So this is a bad suggestion as it causes an issue for this unit with how they work.

The beta smite "fix" isn't much better for pink horrors or grey knights, to be honest. The current fix is bad, and it might be better to have it manifest on a 7+ and just errata pink horrors to conform to that reality.

 Irbis wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Now look at Necrons, one book to fill your slots out. I have no problem with mixed detachments of the same faction. Like Cadia and Catachan. I have a bigger issue with guard, BA and Custodes suffering no drawbacks on top of having no weaknesses in their unit options.

Except you have that backwards. It's the cherrypicking of traits from single book that looks dumb, is unfluffy, and covers all the possible holes without drawbacks. How many times you saw 3 SM chapters in books operating in one tiny zone? And not even mixed forces, but some sort of weird amalgam with UM only supplying bikes, IF artillery, and RG infiltrating CC units in front of all that? Ditto for IG mixtures and forces from two forge worlds on the opposite ends of the galaxy suddenly operating in one spot. I'd definitely curb that nonsense somehow, say limiting detachments not sharing same chapter/regiment/forge trait to patrols and auxiliary detachments, much like ally detachment in 6th.

I have much less problem with different armies supporting each other, but to be fair to above, I suppose all allying could use same patrol nerf to prevent cherrypicking of slots. There, problem solved.

Actually for example guard it's quite normal. By fluff for example tank regiment doesnt' have infantry and infantry doesn't have tanks so if you have both those are supposed to come from two DIFFERENT regiments(which btw would mean two different colour schemes). Now you could argue it's 2 cadian regiments but then again you can't always quarantee that either and indeed the higher up's could easily decide deliberately to NOT do that to ensure they aren't too good of pal's. Whole point of such division of assets is to ensure that regiments arent' independent so having 2 regiments from same world could be seen as more likely to work together if one decides to traitor it up...

Is smite even still a thing? I play DG and Nurgle Daemons, both of those armies have each at least 4 spells that are more useful than smite most of the time. Smite on 7+ would make me not even consider it ( on the other hand, it would lead to considering the other mortal wound spells wich are often overlooked due to hardly being better than smite).

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Is smite even still a thing? I play DG and Nurgle Daemons, both of those armies have each at least 4 spells that are more useful than smite most of the time. Smite on 7+ would make me not even consider it ( on the other hand, it would lead to considering the other mortal wound spells wich are often overlooked due to hardly being better than smite).

Some units can only cast smite, or have to cast smite each turn (can cast two powers, but only knows 1 + smite). Others, like GK, have so many psykers that in matched play they often don't have a choice. And that's only in situations where the units were not necessarily taken for their smite capabilities alone, because smite spam is still a thing. It doesn't seem to win major tournaments anymore, but it's still pretty good.

tneva82 wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Now look at Necrons, one book to fill your slots out. I have no problem with mixed detachments of the same faction. Like Cadia and Catachan. I have a bigger issue with guard, BA and Custodes suffering no drawbacks on top of having no weaknesses in their unit options.

Except you have that backwards. It's the cherrypicking of traits from single book that looks dumb, is unfluffy, and covers all the possible holes without drawbacks. How many times you saw 3 SM chapters in books operating in one tiny zone? And not even mixed forces, but some sort of weird amalgam with UM only supplying bikes, IF artillery, and RG infiltrating CC units in front of all that? Ditto for IG mixtures and forces from two forge worlds on the opposite ends of the galaxy suddenly operating in one spot. I'd definitely curb that nonsense somehow, say limiting detachments not sharing same chapter/regiment/forge trait to patrols and auxiliary detachments, much like ally detachment in 6th.

I have much less problem with different armies supporting each other, but to be fair to above, I suppose all allying could use same patrol nerf to prevent cherrypicking of slots. There, problem solved.

Actually for example guard it's quite normal. By fluff for example tank regiment doesnt' have infantry and infantry doesn't have tanks so if you have both those are supposed to come from two DIFFERENT regiments(which btw would mean two different colour schemes). Now you could argue it's 2 cadian regiments but then again you can't always quarantee that either and indeed the higher up's could easily decide deliberately to NOT do that to ensure they aren't too good of pal's. Whole point of such division of assets is to ensure that regiments arent' independent so having 2 regiments from same world could be seen as more likely to work together if one decides to traitor it up...

Erm, there are mechanized regiments. I can recall at least two examples from the books that had both armour and infantry in one regiment, and it takes a really primitive world to not have at least some combined arms elements. Even so, you can still represent two regiments (or combined regiment) by adding patrol or two. It's way more fluffy (and frankly, logical, given the fact cherrypick spam always foregoes 'tax' units without which such unit would be useless) than having, using RL example, third world war unit consisting of Peruvian tanks, US infantry, and Nepalese artillery rolled into one mass fighting on Siberian front.

But that's not my point. The point is, traits do encourage different armies, say Black Templars focus on melee (or indeed that new Necron dynasty with same). The trait has opportunity cost - you might for example neglect artillery because your CC units are better than what other marines field, while your artillery is slightly worse - but then it goes flying out of the window as soon as HS spam detachment with five Imperial Fist vindicators (or whatever dynasty annihilation barges) materializes right behind your CC units. Any character (and downside you had in your trait balancing the bonuses) is suddenly gone, as now you can perfectly cherrypick units that only care about bonus detachment gives them, never caring about downsides as they simply won't apply to them. This makes the whole traits thing pointless - they might as well be inbuilt bonuses to certain units in 'tournament' army, almost functioning as mini-soup that puts whoever sticks to a single regiment/chapter/dynasty/whatever at a big disadvantage.

This is also why I said I have less problems with different armies on the field - with detachment limits, these at least are more likely to stick to a single trait each and thus have some non-trivial opportunity costs, instead of being Codex++ multi-trait spam lists have. Sure, sometimes you can cover holes in one army with units of another, especially if you go for best unit spam - it's why I said I'd like allies limited to patrol-like detachment, as then at least such cherrypicking would be curbed to a large degree, while at least nominally looking like legit army, not random hodgepodge.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/03/28/codex-drukhari-preview-haemonculus-covensgw-homepage-post-3/

The amount of LD-stacking you can do in an eldar soup list is just awesome.

With the new coven, you can get:

-3 from proximity
-1 from Phantasm launchers
-2 from Hemlock
-1 from Terrify (which the Hemlock can cast)
-1 from the new Harlequin relic
-1 from the kill the WL strat
-1 from Spookmode on the PFP table (turn 4 if you take Black Heart)

Also, its pretty danged easy to stack to something like a -5. One Raider with 2 units of wracks or 3 grotesques and a haemie pop out to deliver that -3, and then you fly a Hemlock over and you've got definitely -5, maybe -6 to LD, on everything in a bubble.

I think we've found our horde-clearing dark eldar subfaction.

I'm all about the 4+ Insensate to Pain. 4+ Invul on pain engines? Yes please. Of course, now I'll have to break down and buy some Wracks.

I'm thinking of turning Bride of Khaine Blood Sisters into Grotesques. I think they're big enough. Just add on some Coven bits and good to go.

 docdoom77 wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/03/28/codex-drukhari-preview-haemonculus-covensgw-homepage-post-3/

As I usually do(was working yesterday so apologies...), here's image links for those who want to see not read:

Haemonculus Coven-specific Obsessions, Stratagems, and Warlord Traits:


Generic Drukhari Stratagem:

the_scotsman wrote:
The amount of LD-stacking you can do in an eldar soup list is just awesome.

With the new coven, you can get:

-3 from proximity
-1 from Phantasm launchers
-2 from Hemlock
-1 from Terrify (which the Hemlock can cast)
-1 from the new Harlequin relic
-1 from the kill the WL strat
-1 from Spookmode on the PFP table (turn 4 if you take Black Heart)

Also, its pretty danged easy to stack to something like a -5. One Raider with 2 units of wracks or 3 grotesques and a haemie pop out to deliver that -3, and then you fly a Hemlock over and you've got definitely -5, maybe -6 to LD, on everything in a bubble.

I think we've found our horde-clearing dark eldar subfaction.

Never mind horde clearance. What I think is scariest from all those debuffs is the effect they have on Mind War. It's entirely possible to drop key characters down to Ld1 and drop enough mortal wounds to kill most units outright.

Diabolical Soothsayer negates the cost of the "multiple warlords" stratagem.

This is the best preview! I'm really excited for my Dark Eldar!

 xttz wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
The amount of LD-stacking you can do in an eldar soup list is just awesome.

With the new coven, you can get:

-3 from proximity
-1 from Phantasm launchers
-2 from Hemlock
-1 from Terrify (which the Hemlock can cast)
-1 from the new Harlequin relic
-1 from the kill the WL strat
-1 from Spookmode on the PFP table (turn 4 if you take Black Heart)

Also, its pretty danged easy to stack to something like a -5. One Raider with 2 units of wracks or 3 grotesques and a haemie pop out to deliver that -3, and then you fly a Hemlock over and you've got definitely -5, maybe -6 to LD, on everything in a bubble.

I think we've found our horde-clearing dark eldar subfaction.

Never mind horde clearance. What I think is scariest from all those debuffs is the effect they have on Mind War. It's entirely possible to drop key characters down to Ld1 and drop enough mortal wounds to kill most units outright.

Here's a question that it delights me to ask: Does it say in the rules that LD can't be reduced below 1?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 docdoom77 wrote:
I'm all about the 4+ Insensate to Pain. 4+ Invul on pain engines? Yes please. Of course, now I'll have to break down and buy some Wracks.

I'm thinking of turning Bride of Khaine Blood Sisters into Grotesques. I think they're big enough. Just add on some Coven bits and good to go.

I love the trait but the strat is crap. Bringing back a maximum of 9 wracks for 2cp? No thanks. I think its a good army trait, and the WL trait is fine if a bit boring. But I am curious to see the rest of the info before I make the call on which is the best.

I think Creed may prove to be the strongest if the army is constructed around it (Eldar soup list feat. Mind War, Hemlocks, Harlequins with their LD shenanigan stuff, etc) but in general the other two are just if you prefer offense or defense. -1AP is pretty nice on all the coven stuff because most of it is Ap0 or AP-1.

Yea I don't think any of those are bad. I mean, an additional ap is awesome, increased durability, awesome and that LD debuff certainly begs for a list to be tailored to but by no means is bad if you don't. Still not sure how great it is for clearing cheap GEQ though, since there are plenty of ways to auto pass moral and even with a -4 bubble your going to need to damage a ton of small units but it certainly helps a lot lol.

This just has me even more excited for wych cults, I am guessing the biggest improvement was saved for last, or I hope at least.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@the_scotsman I wouldn't call it crap. I thought the same thing as you at first until I realized your probably toughness 5 and have a 4++ 6+++ which if you math it out makes you the equivalent of triple or more guardsmen. Tide of traitors is good on a 30-40 man blob of cultists, 30 is price equivalent to 10 wracks from the index. So 29 cultists that are t3 6+ compared to 9 wracks at t5 4++ 6+++ can't do the math at the moment but I am positive your taking more flack then the cultists to remove those 9.

the_scotsman wrote:

 xttz wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
The amount of LD-stacking you can do in an eldar soup list is just awesome.

With the new coven, you can get:

-3 from proximity
-1 from Phantasm launchers
-2 from Hemlock
-1 from Terrify (which the Hemlock can cast)
-1 from the new Harlequin relic
-1 from the kill the WL strat
-1 from Spookmode on the PFP table (turn 4 if you take Black Heart)

Also, its pretty danged easy to stack to something like a -5. One Raider with 2 units of wracks or 3 grotesques and a haemie pop out to deliver that -3, and then you fly a Hemlock over and you've got definitely -5, maybe -6 to LD, on everything in a bubble.

I think we've found our horde-clearing dark eldar subfaction.

Never mind horde clearance. What I think is scariest from all those debuffs is the effect they have on Mind War. It's entirely possible to drop key characters down to Ld1 and drop enough mortal wounds to kill most units outright.

Here's a question that it delights me to ask: Does it say in the rules that LD can't be reduced below 1?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 docdoom77 wrote:
I'm all about the 4+ Insensate to Pain. 4+ Invul on pain engines? Yes please. Of course, now I'll have to break down and buy some Wracks.

I'm thinking of turning Bride of Khaine Blood Sisters into Grotesques. I think they're big enough. Just add on some Coven bits and good to go.

I love the trait but the strat is crap. Bringing back a maximum of 9 wracks for 2cp? No thanks. I think its a good army trait, and the WL trait is fine if a bit boring. But I am curious to see the rest of the info before I make the call on which is the best.

I think Creed may prove to be the strongest if the army is constructed around it (Eldar soup list feat. Mind War, Hemlocks, Harlequins with their LD shenanigan stuff, etc) but in general the other two are just if you prefer offense or defense. -1AP is pretty nice on all the coven stuff because most of it is Ap0 or AP-1.

The AP one is nice. But as a pure DE player, I really like the Warlord Trait for Prophets of Flesh. It synergizes with the multiple warlord stratagem and the multiple Patrol Detachments really well.

Whats even better is thats sure to be Uriens trait and I am banking on him making a bit of a comeback.

I don't know how good they'll be but damn if this isn't the most creative and cool book so far.

Yeah, I wish they'd retroactively work on CSM with stuff like this. Very creative and interesting stuff.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Yea I don't think any of those are bad. I mean, an additional ap is awesome, increased durability, awesome and that LD debuff certainly begs for a list to be tailored to but by no means is bad if you don't. Still not sure how great it is for clearing cheap GEQ though, since there are plenty of ways to auto pass moral and even with a -4 bubble your going to need to damage a ton of small units but it certainly helps a lot lol.

This just has me even more excited for wych cults, I am guessing the biggest improvement was saved for last, or I hope at least.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@the_scotsman I wouldn't call it crap. I thought the same thing as you at first until I realized your probably toughness 5 and have a 4++ 6+++ which if you math it out makes you the equivalent of triple or more guardsmen. Tide of traitors is good on a 30-40 man blob of cultists, 30 is price equivalent to 10 wracks from the index. So 29 cultists that are t3 6+ compared to 9 wracks at t5 4++ 6+++ can't do the math at the moment but I am positive your taking more flack then the cultists to remove those 9.

I guess. I think I'm just looking at it in comparison to how I'm going to be setting up my army (Non-Ynnari Eldar Soup with LD debuffs for days, a Reaper which can go into Sniper Mode and pick off characters, mind wars critting units for tons of mortal wounds, etc) and the PoF just seem boring. Not bad, but a bit boring. "I have 7-9 more wracks! Wooo!"

Well, remember it can be any edge. So it's more like you can go on offense or use them as a disposable screen, grab that suicidal objective and if they survive burn 2 CP's and walk them on from any edge onto another objective or grab line breaker. It won't be great every game, but it's the threat of such an ability that will make your opponent either focus them down at the expense of a lot of fire power, or simply ignore them.

I can see what you mean about it being less interesting, but I think it's mainly a result of other armies getting the same ability already. Remember thats just a stratagem, the other two are way lewss useful since they utilize shooting for COVEN units only, and coven isn't really about shooting. You pretty much are leaning on the Talos at that point. Will be interesting if ravagers and raiders can continue to take the coven key word, if thats the case then hot damn will An Esoteric Kill, Delivered From Afar be busted as hell. Imagine a ravager sniping out all the backfield characters... Yea, no way ravagers can do it, but man even a raider hitting a character with a dark lance is pretty hilarious lol.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Generic Drukhari Stratagem:

That's both ultra fluffy and terrifying to think about

 Red Corsair wrote:
Well, remember it can be any edge. So it's more like you can go on offense or use them as a disposable screen, grab that suicidal objective and if they survive burn 2 CP's and walk them on from any edge onto another objective or grab line breaker. It won't be great every game, but it's the threat of such an ability that will make your opponent either focus them down at the expense of a lot of fire power, or simply ignore them.

I can see what you mean about it being less interesting, but I think it's mainly a result of other armies getting the same ability already. Remember thats just a stratagem, the other two are way lewss useful since they utilize shooting for COVEN units only, and coven isn't really about shooting. You pretty much are leaning on the Talos at that point. Will be interesting if ravagers and raiders can continue to take the coven key word, if thats the case then hot damn will An Esoteric Kill, Delivered From Afar be busted as hell. Imagine a ravager sniping out all the backfield characters... Yea, no way ravagers can do it, but man even a raider hitting a character with a dark lance is pretty hilarious lol.

Ravagers can't, but Reapers, from Forgeworld, can take the Coven keyword.

Theyre pretty much a Ravager "But slightly different" - they have a D6 shot gun instead of 3 shots, and its actually got the Heavy type. But it has an alt fire mode that's Heavy 2D6 S6 AP- D1 which can be useful in some niche circumstances.

THAT thing can snipe a character all day long.

Also keep in mind that the wrack unit size might be larger now than before. We'll only know when the codex hits.

They even say "horde of wracks" which I would find a weird description for a 10 unit squad.

 Irbis wrote:

Erm, there are mechanized regiments. I can recall at least two examples from the books that had both armour and infantry in one regiment, and it takes a really primitive world to not have at least some combined arms elements. Even so, you can still represent two regiments (or combined regiment) by adding patrol or two. It's way more fluffy (and frankly, logical, given the fact cherrypick spam always foregoes 'tax' units without which such unit would be useless) than having, using RL example, third world war unit consisting of Peruvian tanks, US infantry, and Nepalese artillery rolled into one mass fighting on Siberian front.

And those combined arm regiments are generally described as oddballs out there and often result of ad-hoc joints by casualties(and even then often not even from same world!).

But that's not my point. The point is, traits do encourage different armies, say Black Templars focus on melee (or indeed that new Necron dynasty with same). The trait has opportunity cost - you might for example neglect artillery because your CC units are better than what other marines field, while your artillery is slightly worse - but then it goes flying out of the window as soon as HS spam detachment with five Imperial Fist vindicators (or whatever dynasty annihilation barges) materializes right behind your CC units. Any character (and downside you had in your trait balancing the bonuses) is suddenly gone, as now you can perfectly cherrypick units that only care about bonus detachment gives them, never caring about downsides as they simply won't apply to them. This makes the whole traits thing pointless - they might as well be inbuilt bonuses to certain units in 'tournament' army, almost functioning as mini-soup that puts whoever sticks to a single regiment/chapter/dynasty/whatever at a big disadvantage.

Picking from different codexes actually allows more effective cherry picking so is bigger issue. What CC you want to bring from another IG regiment? Nothing. For CC you bring in marines or custodes. Cross codex has always resulted in MORE cherry picking.

LOL, did anyone notice that prophets of flesh-logo has SIX fingers in hand?

 Spreelock wrote:
LOL, did anyone notice that prophets of flesh-logo has SIX fingers in hand?

Yes, because it's supposed to have six fingers.

tneva82 wrote:
And those combined arm regiments are generally described as oddballs out there and often result of ad-hoc joints by casualties(and even then often not even from same world!).

Last time I checked, Valhallan 597th (light infantry + armoured cavalry) or Valhallan 12th (mechanized artillery + air defence/infantry contingents for artillery protection) weren't oddballs. Add another Valhallan regiment, tank one, that served alongside them (but had a lot less focus as Cain wasn't attached to it) and you have full gamut of forces from the same world. And that is just one book. You can find more examples in other IG book series, but really, modern army doesn't work that way. Last time completely non-combined arms regiments were a thing was long before Napoleon.

Picking from different codexes actually allows more effective cherry picking so is bigger issue. What CC you want to bring from another IG regiment? Nothing. For CC you bring in marines or custodes. Cross codex has always resulted in MORE cherry picking.

Catachans for one. They are easily better point for point in CC than vast majority of SM units. Or Ogryns. They work too with right buffs, which IG can provide in abundance for cheap.

Do tell me, in how many books you saw blob of Cadian mortars protected by blob of Catachan meatshields which is in turn protected by blob of Valhallan conscripts meant to absorb first charges to give Catachans protection/charge bonus against infiltrators/deep strikers? I'd rather see IG supported by SM and SoB as this at least has some pretense to being fluffy (and how actual armies work) than cherrypicked joke minmaxing all balance and character away.

 Red Corsair wrote:
I emailed the FAQ team, I'd encourage others as well. They asked us too.

I suggested:

1. Disallow the use of army specific stratagems by armies that are more then 1 factions.

2. Multifaction armies no long receive the +3 CP's for bettleforged

3. Modifiers never stack, ie. only ever -1 or +1 and opposing mods cancel eachother out

4. Smite casting cost of 7+

5. Remove supreme command, if they want more HQ;s they should use the auxiliary chart at -1 per unit penalty. Currently no one ever uses that chart because it is never needed.

6. Remove infiltration, give nurglings, scouts and rangers either deepstrike or scout moves but remove the current ability to cover the board and prevent every other faction from deploying.

Much of this is highly flawed, here's a simple rundown of why:

1-Define "faction". is "daemons" a faction, or each of the gods? are word bearers a different faciton from black legion? if not, why are thousand sons different from death guard? there is no clear line in 8th except "share at least one faction keyword"

2-see 1

3-except that breaks alot of abilities and weapons in the game. even something as simple as +1 S from a warlord trait and a power axe.

4-you broke horrors and anyone else casting on one dice, also smite is not nearly good enough to justify this. a few sources were too good, but they got nerfed already.

5-why? does anything actually break if I want to have a whole bunch of librarians? is this fixing anything that isn't fixed by managing the point-costs of said HQs properly? (and making them actually lead rather than being individual powerhouses, *cough*taucommanderlimitismoronicandtheworstfixeveer*cough*

6-so...now they show out of nowhere mid-fight? yea, giving cheap troops the ability to deepstrike at will, what can POSSIBLY go wrong.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Well, remember it can be any edge. So it's more like you can go on offense or use them as a disposable screen, grab that suicidal objective and if they survive burn 2 CP's and walk them on from any edge onto another objective or grab line breaker. It won't be great every game, but it's the threat of such an ability that will make your opponent either focus them down at the expense of a lot of fire power, or simply ignore them.

I can see what you mean about it being less interesting, but I think it's mainly a result of other armies getting the same ability already. Remember thats just a stratagem, the other two are way lewss useful since they utilize shooting for COVEN units only, and coven isn't really about shooting. You pretty much are leaning on the Talos at that point. Will be interesting if ravagers and raiders can continue to take the coven key word, if thats the case then hot damn will An Esoteric Kill, Delivered From Afar be busted as hell. Imagine a ravager sniping out all the backfield characters... Yea, no way ravagers can do it, but man even a raider hitting a character with a dark lance is pretty hilarious lol.

Ravagers can't, but Reapers, from Forgeworld, can take the Coven keyword.

Theyre pretty much a Ravager "But slightly different" - they have a D6 shot gun instead of 3 shots, and its actually got the Heavy type. But it has an alt fire mode that's Heavy 2D6 S6 AP- D1 which can be useful in some niche circumstances.

THAT thing can snipe a character all day long.

Reaper?Try a Tantalus, two guns with 6 S8, AP-3 D2 shots have a good chance of removing two characters per turn with this strat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 xttz wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
The amount of LD-stacking you can do in an eldar soup list is just awesome.

With the new coven, you can get:

-3 from proximity
-1 from Phantasm launchers
-2 from Hemlock
-1 from Terrify (which the Hemlock can cast)
-1 from the new Harlequin relic
-1 from the kill the WL strat
-1 from Spookmode on the PFP table (turn 4 if you take Black Heart)

Also, its pretty danged easy to stack to something like a -5. One Raider with 2 units of wracks or 3 grotesques and a haemie pop out to deliver that -3, and then you fly a Hemlock over and you've got definitely -5, maybe -6 to LD, on everything in a bubble.

I think we've found our horde-clearing dark eldar subfaction.

Never mind horde clearance. What I think is scariest from all those debuffs is the effect they have on Mind War. It's entirely possible to drop key characters down to Ld1 and drop enough mortal wounds to kill most units outright.

Add in the Harly psychic power Mirror of Minds which works a bit like Mind War.

Biggest problem I have with this is that DE no longer have any weapons that deal damage based on the Leadership stat, which I think would be an absolute requirement for the 8th ed version of the Freakshow list to actually work. PGL's don't help with the Psychic Powers either, since they do damage before the PGL is fired.

If my LD drops to -1 do I start to gain troops?