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.

On the MSU/Morale debate one thing of interest might be that with Black Heart you are immune to morale by turn 3.

On one hand this isn't that great - games have often been decided by then (but that may change slightly with the nerf to deepstriking) - but on the other that means if they don't shoot down your kabalites early on (and they are not typically the most important/attractive target) morale isn't going to be a problem.

Going Black Heart on a battalion also means you don't need the extra archon & save a detachment slot if you don't want to take that Ravager spearhead separately. You miss out on a potentially more useful buff for warriors though - but it depends on the trade offs.

Still - not going to point this out exactly, but 2 archons, 60 warriors with 6 splinter cannons & 3 ravagers with disis is under 1000 points. Sprinkle in some blasters if you want more anti-multi wound firepower.

This seems like a good base to me. For pure DE I'd add a cult outrider with reavers (for locking stuff down - its a bit predictable, but 36" expected charge range on the first turn is good) and a coven list. Not sure on Talos or Grots. Suspect Grots may be better - it depends on whether the Talos guns are a useful addition. Both are almost impossible to deal with efficiently with a 4++, potentially rerolling 1s/6+++.

Tyel wrote:
On the MSU/Morale debate one thing of interest might be that with Black Heart you are immune to morale by turn 3.

On one hand this isn't that great - games have often been decided by then (but that may change slightly with the nerf to deepstriking) - but on the other that means if they don't shoot down your kabalites early on (and they are not typically the most important/attractive target) morale isn't going to be a problem.

Going Black Heart on a battalion also means you don't need the extra archon & save a detachment slot if you don't want to take that Ravager spearhead separately. You miss out on a potentially more useful buff for warriors though - but it depends on the trade offs.

Still - not going to point this out exactly, but 2 archons, 60 warriors with 6 splinter cannons & 3 ravagers with disis is under 1000 points. Sprinkle in some blasters if you want more anti-multi wound firepower.

This seems like a good base to me. For pure DE I'd add a cult outrider with reavers (for locking stuff down - its a bit predictable, but 36" expected charge range on the first turn is good) and a coven list. Not sure on Talos or Grots. Suspect Grots may be better - it depends on whether the Talos guns are a useful addition. Both are almost impossible to deal with efficiently with a 4++, potentially rerolling 1s/6+++.

If I'm talking about a pure competitive list, taking every advantage possible, I don't think I'm taking Black Heart for that spearhead, I think I'm taking Ynnari with Yvraine as the HQ+Warlord. Gives me agents of Vect, gives me the ability to take anything Drukhari that I want to have Soulburst (hello Reaver Jetbikes) and avoids me having to take an Archon with them at all.

Lithanial wrote:

A word on Morale however - Splinter cannons, like all special and heavy weapons make the casualties taken early worth less than the final casualties. While you can avoid morale casualties by taking MSU, the same affect can also be achieved by taking larger squads of 15-20 who still have great functionality when reduced to low model count thanks to all the extra weapons - then you ignore morale through use of CP. Sure it has a cost, but it's an alternative approach to the one you are thinking of that is also viable. (e.g. Ork tactics)

I think there's probably a place for a single huge squad that's fully kitted out and is hiding in cover. Taking both heavy and special weapons seems a bit awkward though, since they mostly want to be at different ranges.

I'm also not a fan of splinter cannons in general. A Warrior with a splinter cannon costs almost 3 times as much as a Warrior with a splinter rifle, and at many ranges only gets 3 times as many shots. It's true that they get double output from 12" to 18" (or 15" to 21"), but of course you have a lot of reason to spend as little time as possible in that range band so that the rest of your guys can maximize their firepower. On the other hand, I'm pretty tempted by shredders. With Obsidian Rose they've got 18" range and are almost twice as efficient as rapid-firing splinter rifles vs GEQs and MEQs. I could definitely see adding a shredder to each squad, and possibly going to 10-man squads with 2 shredders each. I want to see how often I end up within 18" on turn 1, though. A lot of people put GEQ screens right at the front of their deployment zone, especially if they're also staring down a bunch of Spears, so this might work out pretty often.

the_scotsman wrote:
I did get a chance to test out some dismounted Kabalites in a game yesterday against a half armored/half militarum tempestus guard list, and I can attest to being pleasantly surprised by their durability, though I have to say I would not have been had I not had Raiders to protect them early.

That's interesting. I'm surprised he couldn't kill a Raider on turn 1. Like, that's my big fear about using the normal sort of Venom/Raider spam -- with the right sort of firepower mix you're not really protecting your guys at all, since your opponent can open up a transport with guns that are good for that and then kill the guys inside with other guns that are good for that. In general battle cannons are pretty great vs Raiders -- you kill about twice as many points' worth of Raider with a battle cannon shot than Warriors. Warriors are only a tiny bit less durable than Raiders even against a Punisher cannon, since Raiders are only T5. It's bolters and lasguns where you really benefit from having a transport. Though obviously giving blasters to your Warriors makes the squad more fragile and makes transports more desirable, if they're not just going to get blown up immediately. That said, the big appeal of transports is probably that then your opponent has to decide whether to shoot the transports or shoot your other vehicles (but the right answer is probably to shoot the transports).

Dionysodorus wrote:

Lithanial wrote:

A word on Morale however - Splinter cannons, like all special and heavy weapons make the casualties taken early worth less than the final casualties. While you can avoid morale casualties by taking MSU, the same affect can also be achieved by taking larger squads of 15-20 who still have great functionality when reduced to low model count thanks to all the extra weapons - then you ignore morale through use of CP. Sure it has a cost, but it's an alternative approach to the one you are thinking of that is also viable. (e.g. Ork tactics)

I think there's probably a place for a single huge squad that's fully kitted out and is hiding in cover. Taking both heavy and special weapons seems a bit awkward though, since they mostly want to be at different ranges.

I'm also not a fan of splinter cannons in general. A Warrior with a splinter cannon costs almost 3 times as much as a Warrior with a splinter rifle, and at many ranges only gets 3 times as many shots. It's true that they get double output from 12" to 18" (or 15" to 21"), but of course you have a lot of reason to spend as little time as possible in that range band so that the rest of your guys can maximize their firepower. On the other hand, I'm pretty tempted by shredders. With Obsidian Rose they've got 18" range and are almost twice as efficient as rapid-firing splinter rifles vs GEQs and MEQs. I could definitely see adding a shredder to each squad, and possibly going to 10-man squads with 2 shredders each. I want to see how often I end up within 18" on turn 1, though. A lot of people put GEQ screens right at the front of their deployment zone, especially if they're also staring down a bunch of Spears, so this might work out pretty often.

the_scotsman wrote:
I did get a chance to test out some dismounted Kabalites in a game yesterday against a half armored/half militarum tempestus guard list, and I can attest to being pleasantly surprised by their durability, though I have to say I would not have been had I not had Raiders to protect them early.

That's interesting. I'm surprised he couldn't kill a Raider on turn 1. Like, that's my big fear about using the normal sort of Venom/Raider spam -- with the right sort of firepower mix you're not really protecting your guys at all, since your opponent can open up a transport with guns that are good for that and then kill the guys inside with other guns that are good for that. In general battle cannons are pretty great vs Raiders -- you kill about twice as many points' worth of Raider with a battle cannon shot than Warriors. Warriors are only a tiny bit less durable than Raiders even against a Punisher cannon, since Raiders are only T5. It's bolters and lasguns where you really benefit from having a transport. Though obviously giving blasters to your Warriors makes the squad more fragile and makes transports more desirable, if they're not just going to get blown up immediately. That said, the big appeal of transports is probably that then your opponent has to decide whether to shoot the transports or shoot your other vehicles (but the right answer is probably to shoot the transports).

The first battlecannon (the commander, who also had plasma cannons and a lascannon) opted to shoot at the venom containing my warlord archon+court. I used the -1 to hit stratagem, he only managed to do 2 wounds. The second (which was battlecannon+3 heavy bolters) took 7 wounds off a raider, but didn't kill it. The majority of everything else tried to take out Hellions or Reavers that were charging at him, but both were in Ruins and proved a pain in the ass to take down with small arms fire (both had a 3+ save, thanks to strike from shadows on the hellions. He focused them and his whole army pretty much took them out).

here's why I like Raiders/Venoms: If they take damage, they don't lose hardly any effectiveness until they're completely dead, because their effectiveness is contained in getting your warriors within rapid firing range turn 1. Sure, on a wound per wound basis, warriors are as durable, but they take two turns to actually get up to rapid fire range to start doing real damage, even if you take them as Obrose. With raiders, I'm there, turn 1, and I don't even need to take obrose, I have the luxury of going Flayed Skull and getting a good deal more damage shooting out of my transport or Poison Tongue for more longevity for my firepower bonus.

I can definitely see the perks of twin Shredder Kabalite squads as the rank & file if using Obsidian Rose for the 18" range. Assuming you are under Archon aura, you put out 6.5 GEQ kills per squad vs the 4.5 GEQ of a Poison Tongue 10 man squad with Splinter Rifle. MEQ it's 3.46 to the Shredder squad vs 2.27 on the splinter fire team. That's just how good Shredders are; probably the best weapon Drukhari have access to so I can see it being perfect for your approach of a cheap anti-infantry swarm Dio.

You then also have the "Failure is not an option" stratagem to get some better plays vs any morale checks you do have to take which further fits your views.

I know this is Dark Eldar discussion, but I'm curious how people are feeling Ynnari fit into DE post-FAQ.

Personally, the more I'm thinking about them, the more I'm feeling like Ynnari might solve "The HQ problem".

Imagine a list structured like this:

Detachment 1: Drukhari Ynnari Battalion

HQ: Yvraine, Warlord
HQ: Writ Archon

Kabalite Squads in Venoms (All Black Heart, to get you access to Agents of Vect)

Possibly a big blobbo squad of warriors/Wyches sitting in reserve for use of Word of the Pheonix in later turns

12 Cult of Strife Reavers (your turn 1 Word of the Pheonix target)

Ravagers (probably Flayed Skull to access their strat)

Possibly Scourges, good targets for Soulbursting.

Detachment 2: Battalion of your choice Wych Cult/Prophets of Flesh

Stuff goes here, probably either buckets of Red Grief wyches and more turn 1 charging reavers or Grotesques and Taloi with minimal wracks.

Detachment 3: Alaitoc Eldar if you want any of the good Craftworlder stuff.

the_scotsman wrote:
I know this is Dark Eldar discussion, but I'm curious how people are feeling Ynnari fit into DE post-FAQ.

They might be good, but I'm personally not a fan. Not in their current incarnation at least.

I don't want to have to use a special character *and* have said character be my warlord (thus locking me out of Alliance of Agony as well all our fun warlord traits) just to unlock the army.

 vipoid wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I know this is Dark Eldar discussion, but I'm curious how people are feeling Ynnari fit into DE post-FAQ.

They might be good, but I'm personally not a fan. Not in their current incarnation at least.

I don't want to have to use a special character *and* have said character be my warlord (thus locking me out of Alliance of Agony as well all our fun warlord traits) just to unlock the army.

True, I'm talking on more of a "I want to win this tournament" level here - where we're already factoring in soup and taking a slightly more soulless version of our list anyway. the only warlord trait I'd be sad about losing is Labyrinthine Cunning.

Though I suppose besides forcing your opponent to deal with them or risk eating soulbursts to the face the turn afterwards, Ynnari reavers don't do much that Red Grief Reavers can't. Both cross the board hilariously easily, then need a little help to deal a lot of damage. The only reason I like the ynnari version is I can take them with the Strife stratagem, which actually makes them do good burst damage the turn they hit (hyperstimm them with +attack drugs and they attack 96 times, rerolling 1s thanks to ancestors grace...its pretty hilarious.)

the_scotsman wrote:

True, I'm talking on more of a "I want to win this tournament" level here - where we're already factoring in soup and taking a slightly more soulless version of our list anyway.

Fair enough.

Quite honestly, the Ynnari rules have been messed with and changed so much that I don't think I could be bothered doing the paperwork even if I did want to play them.

the_scotsman wrote:
The only reason I like the ynnari version is I can take them with the Strife stratagem, which actually makes them do good burst damage the turn they hit (hyperstimm them with +attack drugs and they attack 96 times, rerolling 1s thanks to ancestors grace...its pretty hilarious.)

How are you getting the Strife stratagem with them? Doesn't being Ynnari prevent that?

Nope. The FAQ changed how Ynnari detachments work: you unlock relics and Stratagems to all relevant models in the detachment.

And each unit can choose a subfaction, though they don't gain an obsession they can use the strat and take the applicable relic.

Nice if you want access to a bunch of different strats plus soulburst.

the_scotsman wrote:
Nope. The FAQ changed how Ynnari detachments work: you unlock relics and Stratagems to all relevant models in the detachment.

And each unit can choose a subfaction, though they don't gain an obsession they can use the strat and take the applicable relic.

Nice if you want access to a bunch of different strats plus soulburst.

That's useful, but I find myself wishing that they'd written that in the first place.

I just want a Ynnari codex that they put in the datasheets Ynnari can use (they can even tailor them for Ynnari, like ABC only can take 0-1 per detachments) give them their own stratagems, relics, and WL traits, change the points to better fit Ynnari and take away some of the nerfs of the Ynnari SFD rule.

I currently dont like how Ynnari plays (not about being good, just the feel how you build the army).

it is basically powergaming: The Army at this point. There's nothing there but ways to try and abuse the strength from death rule. I agree, they need their own units/costs and an un-nerf of SFD letting it trigger more often so you don't have to resort to super gamey tricks to get mileage out of it.

I thought the regular visitors to this thread might like a heads up:

I currently maintain the drukhari datafile for Battlescribe, and some backend logic changes coming soon may break army lists. (ripping out some workarounds for a longstanding bug that was recently fixed).

Since it may have breaking changes, I thought it might be a good time to gather a little feedback on any changes that might help end users of the datafile. Are there any major changes to the way certain units are configured, or things that could be added (like the combat drugs selector) that are desired? I don't play DE myself except a tiny patrol with my few corsairs, so I might not see annoyances that people who play the army fully might.

Given the new FAQ it would be useful to allow us to select "Ynnari" as a subfaction, enabling Yvraine Yncarne and Visarch and disabling any Coven units and Mandrakes.

All the talk about the kabalites on foot being comparable to guardsmen and how the drukhari can do a good imitation of a guard army, why would you want to?
The main strengths of the drukhari army to me is the ability to throw down a huge amount of fast moving, cheap, decently survivable threats that hit like a truck. Why put down 60 kabalite warriors and run them forward when you can throw down 20 in raiders which moves up and are effective turn one? With the ability to put down 10+ 10 wound raider shells on the field, it's almost inconsequential that the enemy will take out one, maybe 2 first turn. When the army is going to be in their face it overwhelms their target priority.
A 2000 point list can fit in 5 raiders full of dudes, 3 ravagers, a flier, a unit or 2 of reavers, and maybe some hellions or wyches in deep strike for turn 2. Your opponent might have enough anti tank to drop 2 first turn. What do they shoot?
The ravagers that will kill them from afar? The raiders full of wyches that will be in their face turn 2? The raiders with blaster kabalites that will just drive around popping tanks? Or the flier that will prove a thorn in the side and punish any mismovement of characters?
The fact that all their weapons are assault as well on the vehicles means they can dance in and out of threat ranges while still shooting at full efficiency.

Or do you want to just advance across the field giving the threats in piecemeal? Have guys on the ground that give ranged anti infantry some tasty targets?

Guard armies play how they play because they have to. Do you think guard would have a static gunline approach if they could move their tanks and fire at full efficiency? Hell no.
Do you think infantry squads would be standing around or foot slogging around the board if they could get a ride they could all shoot out of while they are ferried up into optimum range for the low low price of 80 points? No way they would.

 WindstormSCR wrote:
I thought the regular visitors to this thread might like a heads up:

I currently maintain the drukhari datafile for Battlescribe, and some backend logic changes coming soon may break army lists. (ripping out some workarounds for a longstanding bug that was recently fixed).

Since it may have breaking changes, I thought it might be a good time to gather a little feedback on any changes that might help end users of the datafile. Are there any major changes to the way certain units are configured, or things that could be added (like the combat drugs selector) that are desired? I don't play DE myself except a tiny patrol with my few corsairs, so I might not see annoyances that people who play the army fully might.

A Haemonculus' tools being switched for other weapons is annoying (I think this also applies to Wracks). If you pick a weapon, it still keeps the Haemonculus Tools box ticked, which then pings the configuration as illegal. Since the tools get subbed out anyway, there's no point in keeping them as a separate on-off box.

I don't know if it's possible, but a way to duplicate talos loadouts within a single unit would be nice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wyldcarde wrote:
All the talk about the kabalites on foot being comparable to guardsmen and how the drukhari can do a good imitation of a guard army, why would you want to?
The main strengths of the drukhari army to me is the ability to throw down a huge amount of fast moving, cheap, decently survivable threats that hit like a truck. Why put down 60 kabalite warriors and run them forward when you can throw down 20 in raiders which moves up and are effective turn one? With the ability to put down 10+ 10 wound raider shells on the field, it's almost inconsequential that the enemy will take out one, maybe 2 first turn. When the army is going to be in their face it overwhelms their target priority.
A 2000 point list can fit in 5 raiders full of dudes, 3 ravagers, a flier, a unit or 2 of reavers, and maybe some hellions or wyches in deep strike for turn 2. Your opponent might have enough anti tank to drop 2 first turn. What do they shoot?
The ravagers that will kill them from afar? The raiders full of wyches that will be in their face turn 2? The raiders with blaster kabalites that will just drive around popping tanks? Or the flier that will prove a thorn in the side and punish any mismovement of characters?
The fact that all their weapons are assault as well on the vehicles means they can dance in and out of threat ranges while still shooting at full efficiency.

Or do you want to just advance across the field giving the threats in piecemeal? Have guys on the ground that give ranged anti infantry some tasty targets?

Guard armies play how they play because they have to. Do you think guard would have a static gunline approach if they could move their tanks and fire at full efficiency? Hell no.
Do you think infantry squads would be standing around or foot slogging around the board if they could get a ride they could all shoot out of while they are ferried up into optimum range for the low low price of 80 points? No way they would.

With Obsidian Rose giving +6" to your kabalites' weapons and the slightly higher movement range of the kabalites themselves (effective range 37"/22") combined with a significant nerf to alpha strikes, the need for a delivery system becomes much less important for an on-foot fetish army. Moreover, many cheap, single wound bodies are far more efficient than a single 10W one. 8th edition is the horde edition, and kabalites are one of the most well equipped and generously statlined units for their cost in the game in this regard.

In a game with no such thing as anti-horde measures, a sea of bodies is simply going to be better than what a traditional raiderspam can bring to the table. If they fix morale/leadership to actually be meaningful, or even introduce some units which are properly built to handle hordes (as in, they actively punish weak statlines and large model counts, rather than just having a high number of attacks that are still more efficient against elites and armour), then we might see a change. But until then, the best way to the top for near anything will be more bodies.

the_scotsman wrote:Given the new FAQ it would be useful to allow us to select "Ynnari" as a subfaction, enabling Yvraine Yncarne and Visarch and disabling any Coven units and Mandrakes.

That's already in, just select ynnari under detachment attribute and it'll hide all invalid options (and the rules that no longer apply, swapping for SfD)

Fafnir wrote:

A Haemonculus' tools being switched for other weapons is annoying (I think this also applies to Wracks). If you pick a weapon, it still keeps the Haemonculus Tools box ticked, which then pings the configuration as illegal. Since the tools get subbed out anyway, there's no point in keeping them as a separate on-off box.

I don't know if it's possible, but a way to duplicate talos loadouts within a single unit would be nice.

the tools is a function of how shared option lists work, where the tools are a direct link on the model and the rest of the list is a shared one. there might be a solution to that, but it would only work if all units that can take from the weapons of torture list have haem tools as a default option. the splinter pistol and not the stinger pistol is the default for a similar reason.

example of the unit logic:
Haemonculus: http://puu.sh/A9nM7/fd57bc39f9.png
Wracks: http://puu.sh/A9nO8/eda1179a72.png

I'll see what I can do about Talos units, but I don't think there is a way for BS to allow duplication inside units. I'll check and see if there is a feature request out to the developer on that if I can't make it work.

I'm not trusting relying on big blobs of Drukhari on foot just because Kastelan Robots and Hurricane Bolters exist. 2 Robots in Protector mode pump out 36 S6 AP-2 shots that ignores cover. I once destroyed a unit of 20 Guardians just with that + morale. Against the same Robots if you have them in a Raider however, for starters it wounds on 3s instead of 2s, and you actually have an invulnerable save against it.

But it's a matter of preference I guess, I'm into this army for fast raiding attacks from fast transports, not to live a footslogging army again :p

 Aaranis wrote:
I'm not trusting relying on big blobs of Drukhari on foot just because Kastelan Robots and Hurricane Bolters exist. 2 Robots in Protector mode pump out 36 S6 AP-2 shots that ignores cover. I once destroyed a unit of 20 Guardians just with that + morale. Against the same Robots if you have them in a Raider however, for starters it wounds on 3s instead of 2s, and you actually have an invulnerable save against it.

But it's a matter of preference I guess, I'm into this army for fast raiding attacks from fast transports, not to live a footslogging army again :p

In this case though, failing morale can actually be a benefit. Let the kastelans nuke what they want, it'll give your blasters/lances/shredders an extra shooting phase. 20 guardians/however many warriors is not that big a loss to take considering cost of those kastelans and Cawl.

 WindstormSCR wrote:
I thought the regular visitors to this thread might like a heads up:

I currently maintain the drukhari datafile for Battlescribe, and some backend logic changes coming soon may break army lists. (ripping out some workarounds for a longstanding bug that was recently fixed).

Since it may have breaking changes, I thought it might be a good time to gather a little feedback on any changes that might help end users of the datafile. Are there any major changes to the way certain units are configured, or things that could be added (like the combat drugs selector) that are desired? I don't play DE myself except a tiny patrol with my few corsairs, so I might not see annoyances that people who play the army fully might.

Talos weapons swap has a error saying you have you one to many

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 WindstormSCR wrote:
I thought the regular visitors to this thread might like a heads up:

I currently maintain the drukhari datafile for Battlescribe, and some backend logic changes coming soon may break army lists. (ripping out some workarounds for a longstanding bug that was recently fixed).

Since it may have breaking changes, I thought it might be a good time to gather a little feedback on any changes that might help end users of the datafile. Are there any major changes to the way certain units are configured, or things that could be added (like the combat drugs selector) that are desired? I don't play DE myself except a tiny patrol with my few corsairs, so I might not see annoyances that people who play the army fully might.

Talos weapons swap has a error saying you have you one to many

Sounds like you're a release or two behind, current is v29

So interestingly, there is a way to duplicate inside units. There is no context menu item, but the button at the top of the roster selections pane WILL work. Sadly I don't work on the application itself so this will annoy me to no end forever.

Wyldcarde wrote:
All the talk about the kabalites on foot being comparable to guardsmen and how the drukhari can do a good imitation of a guard army, why would you want to?
The main strengths of the drukhari army to me is the ability to throw down a huge amount of fast moving, cheap, decently survivable threats that hit like a truck. Why put down 60 kabalite warriors and run them forward when you can throw down 20 in raiders which moves up and are effective turn one?

I mean, the reason you might want to do this is that 60 Warriors shoot a lot better from 24" than 20 Warriors do from 12", and 40 Warriors are harder to kill than 2 Raiders. I don't think those points are quite right, but it works out even with real points -- for the cost of a Raider and 10 Warriors you can just get 20 Warriors and a blaster. You shoot just as well at long range as the Raider squad does in close, and of course you can get in close on turn 2. What's not effective about that? And if you replace a few Raiders in this way you quickly overwhelm ranged anti-infantry shooting.

 Aaranis wrote:
I'm not trusting relying on big blobs of Drukhari on foot just because Kastelan Robots and Hurricane Bolters exist. 2 Robots in Protector mode pump out 36 S6 AP-2 shots that ignores cover. I once destroyed a unit of 20 Guardians just with that + morale. Against the same Robots if you have them in a Raider however, for starters it wounds on 3s instead of 2s, and you actually have an invulnerable save against it.

But it's a matter of preference I guess, I'm into this army for fast raiding attacks from fast transports, not to live a footslogging army again :p

Likewise here, it's important to recognize that Raiders aren't actually much more durable in the face of this kind of firepower, especially not if the Raider is within half range of rapid fire weapons whereas the Warrior blob wouldn't be. An S6 AP-2 hit expects to knock 1.78 points' worth of wounds off of an 80 point Raider vs 2.08 off of a Warrior. That's not even considering that you expect one or two free kills on the unit inside when you pop a Raider. If the shots are AP-1 (as from an assault cannon) then the Warriors are outright more durable. The only thing Warriors are genuinely scared of is hurricane bolters, which you mention, but even here it's worth noting that the Raiders' advantage disappears if they're getting rapid-fired upon. And this will often be the case -- you mostly see hurricane bolters on Aggressors and Custodes bike Captains. Aggressors are never going to be within 12" of foot Warriors, but probably will be that close to Raiders, and even bike Captains are going to have a hard time. There used to be a lot of faster S4 AP0 firepower but GW seems intent on nerfing flyers with hurricane bolters as soon as people find them, and the new deep strike rule keeps you safe from storm bolter squads.

So being a curious soul I thought i'd compare the Obsidian Rose shredder teams you are looking at Dio with Scourges. For the sake of this exercise I assume the Kabalites are with Archon aura while the Scourge unit is not.

10 Obsidian Rose Kabalites + 2 Shredders = 76 points
Durability = 10 wounds, 15 wounds after save, 18 after FNP = 4.22 PPW
Durability in Cover = 10 Wounds, 15 wounds after save, 24 after FNP = 3.46 PPW
Durability in Cover + Hunt from the Shadows = 10 Wounds, 30 wounds after save, 36 after FNP = 2.11 PPW
Damage output = 6.49 GEQ, 3.46 MEQ = 11.71 PP-GEQ, 21.96 PP-MEQ

10 Scourge Team + 4 Shredders = 152 points
Durability = 10 wounds, 20 wounds after save, 24 after FNP = 6.33 PPW
Durability in Cover = 10 wounds, 30 after save, 36 after FNP = 4.22 PPW
Durability in Cover + Hunt from the Shadows = 10 Wounds, 60 wounds after save, 72 after FNP = 2.11 PPW
Damage output = 11.56 GEQ, 6.15 MEQ = 13.15 PP-GEQ, 24.71 PP-MEQ

My conclusions from this are that, so long as you are careful in your maneuvering so that you adequately use cover, Scourges only fall behind a fraction due to the lack of Archon aura buffs; though I believe they more than make up for it with the free deep-strike to ensure they get at least one volley of max firepower, and their high move speed. I think it's great that Obsidian Rose Kabalites can put out that kind of firepower, but i'd rather the choices other obsessions give and there is a limit to the amount of concentrated Shredder firepower you would really need.

Blaster Kabalites feels the better choice from an overall tactical perspective to me, since I prefer my objective holding units to be able to also take down light vehicles and transports as they try to close in.

Dio I think you are underselling the raiders maneuverability. The fact they can move 16 inches and still fire effectively, up to 24 with only a -1 to hit when advancing puts them over the top imo. They are a lot better at overloading a flank than warriors, for one.

You compare their survivability to the warriors in the face of hurricane bolters. In theory this might be the case, but in reality the custodes bikes never catch the fully mounted dark eldar list. They move up and maybe get some shots off at 24 inches with their bolters before all the raiders move out to 36 and just bomb them with disintegrstor cannons and dark lance shots.

The kabalite warriors dont have that maneuverability to avoid the damage. The extra 6" helps to at least give them a turn, but then they are shooting non rapid fire splinter rifle shots only.

Anyway, I'm keen to see your list utilising the kabalite flood. Care to share your take?

Yeah. The whole "A swarm of kabalite warriors is superior at X and Y and Z so therefore kabalites will be meta!" kind of smacks of over-theorized, heavily mathhammered concept.

Sure, if you spend all your points on infantry, you'll probably end up with a more durable force that does more damage...if you ignore the fact that your range directly correlates to your damage, and you ignore the extra flexibility you gain by units being able to embark/disembark, transports with Fly being able to engage enemy units to stop them shooting, your models without fly being susceptible to getting charged and enemy units stopping your shooting, objectives occasionally being open but 20+ inches away where you just can't get to them with a horde... all these things that really don't turn up in the math but definitely do the second you test things on the table. When winning the game is not just a simulation of "ok all my units walk forward, all your units walk forward, all our guns shoot at each other when they come in range and lets simulate the dice rolls to see whose guys die first" armies that are heavily just based on theoretical mathhammer rather than flexibility tend to perform far under expectations.

This might be why despite all the talk of 8th being a pure horde edition, where no anti-infantry option is ever effective and nothing but hordes of faceless dudes matter, we've seen a ton of metas and on top tournament tables, hordes are really only a single element of a successful force. You could much more accurately describe 8th as either "The Character Edition" or "The Fly Edition" with how much more we tend to see those rules appear as a major element of the points spent on lists.

The Tau/imperial guard boogeyman that's constantly whined about on Dakka appears so incredibly infrequently at top tournament tables that "gunlines so broken" has become a running joke among high level players.

Lithanial wrote:
So being a curious soul I thought i'd compare the Obsidian Rose shredder teams you are looking at Dio with Scourges. For the sake of this exercise I assume the Kabalites are with Archon aura while the Scourge unit is not.

...

My conclusions from this are that, so long as you are careful in your maneuvering so that you adequately use cover, Scourges only fall behind a fraction due to the lack of Archon aura buffs; though I believe they more than make up for it with the free deep-strike to ensure they get at least one volley of max firepower, and their high move speed. I think it's great that Obsidian Rose Kabalites can put out that kind of firepower, but i'd rather the choices other obsessions give and there is a limit to the amount of concentrated Shredder firepower you would really need.

Blaster Kabalites feels the better choice from an overall tactical perspective to me, since I prefer my objective holding units to be able to also take down light vehicles and transports as they try to close in.

I think you're assuming that the Warriors are between 15" and 18" from the enemy. If they also get to rapid fire with their splinter rifles then I believe the PPW numbers are 8.88 and 16.9 for GEQs and MEQs, respectively. That would make the Warriors about 50% more efficient on offense when they're at 15" and 50% more durable vs AP0 outside of cover (which is commonly going to be the case when you're trying to pick a target for 12" guns). You do not often see that kind of efficiency gap. I feel like at minimum you would want to consider spending a CP to deep-strike 20 Warriors before bringing shredder Scourges (and if you're doing this they can obviously be any Kabal).

I also don't think that the ability to guarantee a turn of full power shooting is a huge deal. It matters for Scourges, sure, because if they had to deploy on the table at an average of 15 points per model they'd get blown away immediately, and with decent AP weapons that they're even more vulnerable to relative to Warriors. But just in general you should only feel bad about things taking fire before they get to shoot if they're the best target for some of the other side's weapons. You're deploying something on the table, and your opponent's going to get to shoot at it; what does the rest of your army look like that you're unhappy that your opponent is shooting 24"+ guns at cheap Warrior units? Though this is why I'm leaning towards 0-1 special weapon per squad of 7-9 guys. The other issue here is that your Scourges don't get to do anything until turn 2. You can go second and lose a third of your Warriors before your turn 1 and another third before your turn 2 and the Warriors will still put out more firepower by the end of your second turn (and these are insane losses that I think are only likely with now-illegal mortar spam or deep striking).

I think blasters are a fine choice too, as is just running them naked. With blasters I think you definitely want just one per squad on foot to keep the average cost down as much as possible, and even moreso than with shredders you want Obsidian Rose so that you can shoot behind the front lines on turn 1. I've seen Infantry Squads with just a single plasma gun put in some work -- it feels really bad having to kill through a bunch of Guardsmen to shut up a single special weapon, but you can't just ignore it either.

Wyldcarde wrote:
Dio I think you are underselling the raiders maneuverability. The fact they can move 16 inches and still fire effectively, up to 24 with only a -1 to hit when advancing puts them over the top imo. They are a lot better at overloading a flank than warriors, for one.

You compare their survivability to the warriors in the face of hurricane bolters. In theory this might be the case, but in reality the custodes bikes never catch the fully mounted dark eldar list. They move up and maybe get some shots off at 24 inches with their bolters before all the raiders move out to 36 and just bomb them with disintegrstor cannons and dark lance shots.

The kabalite warriors dont have that maneuverability to avoid the damage. The extra 6" helps to at least give them a turn, but then they are shooting non rapid fire splinter rifle shots only.

Anyway, I'm keen to see your list utilising the kabalite flood. Care to share your take?

I don't think I'm understanding the scenarios you're describing -- I'm having trouble envisioning them. You have Raiders full of Warriors which are frequently moving so that the Warriors' guns are out of range, except for maybe a splinter cannon? This is paying 140 points minimum for 1 disintegrator cannon volley. This doesn't seem to be a great use of your capabilities, especially since the Custodes bikers are Characters -- you're going to have to clear a bunch of Guardsmen to get at them. Meanwhile they might have some much longer-ranged shooting of their own which is likely to be effective against your vehicles, or at least some deep-strikers that you'll have a hard time dealing with without allowing the main force to catch you. In your last post I took you to be endorsing a "hit them hard and fast" game plan where the Raiders would get the Warriors into rapid-fire range immediately, which is a solid strategy. I was saying that Warriors on foot shoot just about as well but from 24" away instead of 12" away, and so you get the same offensive output and then even if on paper the Warriors are more vulnerable to small arms the Raiders are likely to take a lot more hits because the Raiders moved a lot closer to the enemy to do their shooting (plus you still have the issue that if a Raider dies the Warriors inside are going to get shot next). And then I don't understand why the foot Warriors are shooting "non rapid fire splinter rifle shots only" after the first turn. Is the enemy running away from them?

But, regardless, part of the point of running a ton of GEQ bodies is that you don't care if they get caught. Naked Warriors will win just about any slugging match out there. They are not even terrible against most vehicles (they shoot them as if they have lasguns, which still put in work when you have enough of them). I only brought up Custodes bikers because they're one of the only examples of mass S4 AP0 firepower you're still likely to run into a bunch of, but even with their hurricane bolters foot Warriors crush them. Splinter fire (on foot or mounted) also benefits more than most other DE weapons from Doom and Jinx (and on foot or non-Flayed Skull from Reveal).

I tossed around some more detailed list ideas on the last page, but I've mostly been toying with a battalion with 2 Archons and 40-50 Warriors, currently just with splinter rifles, and then two detachments of Craftworld good stuff -- some psykers, a big unit of Spears, some Rangers to zone, a unit of Guardians to deep strike, and some Hemlocks. I suspect a more competitive list would bring in Ynnari and maybe drop the Hemlocks in favor of presenting no vehicles at all. If you want more DE flavor in the list you could bring Ravagers instead, and you could replace the Guardians with deep-striking Warriors and even the Spears with Cult units (though I don't think this would be nearly as good). The Rangers and Warriors lock down my side of the table and still put out very respectable shooting to clear screens in support of the Spears and deep-striking Guardians. The main change I'm tempted to make is to add a blaster to each squad since my impression is that with the new FAQ you can keep a GEQ horde alive a lot longer (because there are fewer turn 1 deep-strikers and fewer mortars).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

This might be why despite all the talk of 8th being a pure horde edition, where no anti-infantry option is ever effective and nothing but hordes of faceless dudes matter, we've seen a ton of metas and on top tournament tables, hordes are really only a single element of a successful force. You could much more accurately describe 8th as either "The Character Edition" or "The Fly Edition" with how much more we tend to see those rules appear as a major element of the points spent on lists.

The Tau/imperial guard boogeyman that's constantly whined about on Dakka appears so incredibly infrequently at top tournament tables that "gunlines so broken" has become a running joke among high level players.

To be clear, this is what I'm saying. I've only ever been presenting a Warrior horde as one part of a larger force, which can fill a role very similar to Guardsmen in top-tier Imperium lists. I mean, you can't run a list of nothing but Warriors, really -- I don't think Kabals have enough valid HQ choices to take enough of them.

Dio when you were talking custode bikes with hurricane bolters j was envisioning a pure bike force. Hence my answer.
But that doesn't seem to be the case.
A full mounted army can fulfill both ideas you mentioned. It can be full in your face assault, or if the circumstances dictate sit at range and let their big guns soften up the enemy before committing.
I'm definitely not advocating sitting at range the whole game and losing, but having the option to outrage am opponent is handy. The mounted seem good at hitting the sweat range. Being able to shift gear from hitting out at 36, closing to 18 to blaster range, in to 12 for rapid fire, then back out to 36 if required. Or rapidly shifting point of attack to overwhelm a flank.

The no vehicles at all definitely is interesting, especially when combined with craftworlds. The I dont know how long the shining spears will last with all the anti tank weapons pointing at them.

I'd be keen to hear your results tho.
The games I have played with and against the mech heavy drukhari list have been overwhelming.

Hey, guys, I'm looking for a little advice. I'd like to run a Poison Tongue Kabal Battalion (a Ravager, some Scourges and lots of Warriors in Raiders/Venoms).

I'd like to add either a Wych or a Coven detachment to the mix.
- The Wych one would be an outrider with 3 units of 3 Reavers and maybe some Wyches to accompany the Succubus.
- The Coven one would be a Vanguard with 2 units of 3 Grotesques in Raiders (maybe a unit of Mandrakes to make up the 3 Elites). The Haemonculi can accompany one unit, whilst one of the Archons from the Battalion goes with the other.

Does either one of these stand out to you as being the better choice?

 TheFleshIsWeak wrote:
Hey, guys, I'm looking for a little advice. I'd like to run a Poison Tongue Kabal Battalion (a Ravager, some Scourges and lots of Warriors in Raiders/Venoms).

I'd like to add either a Wych or a Coven detachment to the mix.
- The Wych one would be an outrider with 3 units of 3 Reavers and maybe some Wyches to accompany the Succubus.
- The Coven one would be a Vanguard with 2 units of 3 Grotesques in Raiders (maybe a unit of Mandrakes to make up the 3 Elites). The Haemonculi can accompany one unit, whilst one of the Archons from the Battalion goes with the other.

Does either one of these stand out to you as being the better choice?

The more i play Coven the more i like them, i really enjoy the Grots and Talos, ive been playing with 9 Grots and 3 Talos with Urien (for the +1S), 3x3 Grot units and 1 Talos unit of 3 (for stratagems like Fire and Fade, and The Torturer's Craft) b.c stratagems works better on larger units.

I dont like Wracks unless im taking 40+ of them and 0 Kabals, they just dont do any damage, they are just tough guys that gets in the way, if you have Kabals i dont see the need for Wracks.