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.
So i have picked up 10 banshees but can't decide whether to do 1x10 or 2x5. The second option always seems better with the exception of fight interruption, which would just slaughter the second unit. What are your thoughts?
bullyboy wrote: So i have picked up 10 banshees but can't decide whether to do 1x10 or 2x5. The second option always seems better with the exception of fight interruption, which would just slaughter the second unit. What are your thoughts?
It depends on the unit's purpose.
Are you planning on using them as an important part of your battle plan, spearheading your assault? In that case you'll probably be casting psychic powers and using stratagems on them on a regular basis, so one large unit would be better than two smaller units since you'll get more for your investment.
Or are using them as a throw-away unit to disrupt the enemy? If so, then two small units would be better as they give you more flexibility and a second exarch.
Madness is however an affliction which in war carries with it the advantage of surprise - Winston Churchill
I'm guessing you go expert crafters, right? If so I'd strongly recommend 2x5, with the exarch picking up an executioner and piercing strike. This turns her into a character hunter and AT in a pinch - only 2 attacks, but S7 -3 3D, with a reroll to hit and wound. That normally forces two pretty tasty saving throws on the unit of your choice. ymmv.
I'd probably recommend 2x5 units of Banshees as well using the exarch loadout grouchoben said. With Expert Crafters you can do a lot and Hunters of Ancient Relics wouldn't go amiss in the off chance you charge something next to an objective.
I am personally still not sure if I would run them in my current list, or very many other lists right now as damage 1 just isn't quite enough to mow marines down. I find the inherent deep strike of Striking Scorpions very powerful in achieving secondaries which is why I will still be taking them.
Good point on trait, haven't thought about that yet as this list is part of a new eldar army for me (not my normal wraith based one). Currently sitting an a serpent, jain zar, banshees, 2 falcons, 10 dire Avengers, some scorps, 3 vibros, 3 warwalkers, 3 vypers, plus other odds and ends. My goal is to go more aspect based to match an army I had years ago.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/08 15:23:39
Argive wrote: Also D-cannon weaponry going to at least 4 damage is interesting. I wonder if they will FAQ weapon platforms to the new damage profile. Coz that would make them very interesting.
I would love this, how did you come to this conclusion though? It's the Ghostspear that changed to D3+3. The D-flail on the Warp Hunter did change from D6 damage to D3+3 but I don't see anything to suggest that the D-cannon is different.
Argive wrote: Also D-cannon weaponry going to at least 4 damage is interesting. I wonder if they will FAQ weapon platforms to the new damage profile. Coz that would make them very interesting.
I would love this, how did you come to this conclusion though? It's the Ghostspear that changed to D3+3. The D-flail on the Warp Hunter did change from D6 damage to D3+3 but I don't see anything to suggest that the D-cannon is different.
Hmm Youre right I think might have got it wrong. I was probably looking at the D-flair which seems to have same stats as D-cannon in its normal firing mode and I couldn't really see all that well on my phone. Also the ghost-spear going to same damage seems like a trend... Its just a hunch. But leaving D-Weapons at D6 would be more of travesty which even GW wouldn't do IMo.. but who knows.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
After a lot of losses trying out infantry and Harlequin/Craftworld lists, I went back to pure mechanized Craftworld armies. I just accepted that I will give up Bring It Down. I played in a local event and 3 other pick up games. All games have been against Marines (surprise). So far, 4-2 with the two losses being quite close. I found I'm not getting Primary in the early rounds, but tend to get them later. The missions requiring holding 2 just to get 5 points have been most challenging. For Secondaries, Deploy Scramblers and Engage on All Fronts net me solid points. I've varied the third objective, but I've gotten pretty good results by taking the secondary that earns points by destroying more units than your opponent each turn.
War Walkers and Hornets (updated and older rules) work well and set up great fire lanes for Forewarning (Eradicators and Terminators are popular locally).
Locally, the meta is heavy with Marines and my list is a bit tailored to face them.
I found the -1 to hit becoming more common in games, and adjusted my list a bit to take advantage. If I am likely to be -1 to hit, then utilize CTM and Vectored Engines to then ensure some of my units are hard to hit. Creating multiple hard to hit/wound units has had some success. I tried Masters of Concealment, but found it very situational. I prefer the Masterful Shots and Expert Crafters combo as it will always be in play regardless of my opponent'sactions.
I've got a small event this upcoming weekend. Ive tracked my games so far in 9th and have gone 6 wins and 8 losses. The mechanized lists have fared much better of those games. While I dont think I will win overall, I believe I can provide quite challenging games. I think I can get to a solid 50% win ratio until an updated Craftworld codex is released.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
Nice to see another person choosing Warp Spiders, 90 points for that kind of mobility is very hard to pass up and I rate that you've gone for web of deceit as well.
As an alternative to engage on all fronts, it may be worth having a look at Linebreaker as well. It might even be easier to max out than Engage in some situations.
Let me know how you find the foot farseer, I found the lack of mobility a challenge in my list, and the jetbike helped a lot in that regard.
The foot Farseer has worked fine. In a lot of games, it stays close to Hornets and possibly War Walkers for Forewarning. I've not found the Farseer to need more than move + advance. He also stays close to the Warlock Conclave for the potential Seer Council stratagem. Lists and playstyle definitely have an impact here, for sure
I'll look at Line Breaker. The challenge I've found In some games is that the deployment zones are fairly small and my opponent zones me out. Engage has proven easier for me to pull off over the course of the game.
No earth shattering, thought provoking quote. I'm just someone who was introduced to 40K in the late 80's and it's become a lifelong hobby.
I was wondering something. Among the new exarch abilities for dark reapers was a melee oriented one. Do you think that there's a chance that GW is going to give the reaper exarch the option to take a flail of skulls again? If not, then why would they bother with a melee option for a ranged unit?
Leo_the_Rat wrote: I was wondering something. Among the new exarch abilities for dark reapers was a melee oriented one. Do you think that there's a chance that GW is going to give the reaper exarch the option to take a flail of skulls again? If not, then why would they bother with a melee option for a ranged unit?
Because rules people at GW are marine fanboys and they don't care about eldar?
Seriously though they had to give each exarch 6 powers so 1-2 are useful and the rest trash coz thats how they designed things..
Some people just want to do fun/funny games so it will suit them. Especialy with things like crusade play. Taking the most efficient choice is not always the most fun choice.
For example the fire dragon ones where the exarch gets burning fists!! How ridiculous is that ! You'll never take it to a tourney but if you decide to run msu fire dragons that wana go full Eldar-Fu? Why not see what happens haha.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
I've been having some more games on TTS and thought I'd bring them up here. Nothing relevatory I'm afraid, I still can't get away from being it down! But one of the most important aspects of building your list, if possible, is to try and keep the possibility of scoring secondaries on your own terms built in to your army. Relying on your opponent to give you a secondary can leave you with some issues. So with my current list I've built in engage on all fronts, while we stand we fight and deploy scramblers. I must admit I haven't put too much resources into scramblers, just the avengers, but it's there if I need it and with the webway strat it's been ok but if I get a kill secondary option I'll often drop scramblers. But overall I'm winning more than losing, the list is still pretty tough for most armies to take down and still hits very hard.
That looks depressingly similar to what I was playing just before the UK locked down again. There really isn't very much wiggle room for designing eldar lists that can tangle with marines is there?
I was previously loving Falcons, but a few experiences with Eradicators made me look again. Wave serpents fare little better and eat more points. I'm intrigued to see what GW do with CWE for their 9e codex. Expressed as a ratio between number of units in roster and number of viable 9e competitive lists, I think they currently sit rock bottom.
It seems with the prevalence of eradicators shaping how we play games and build lists, is it worth dropping grav tanks entirely in favour of Vypers and War Walker spam?
It's not an idea I'm particularly keen on as I have always loved a mechanised force with said tanks but maybe is it time to rethink that and go with something kingheff is using? Or, do you just accept that you've got a bad match-up against said eradicators and build a mechanised list that can utilise cheap falcons and some wave serpents to protect squishier infantry?
Also, while I can't see myself ever building that kind of list in real life, it is a cool one and feels like it could be a fluffy Saim Hann list in some capacity.
I must admit that I do miss my falcons and wraithlords but it's not just eradicators, it's also the while we stand factor that lead me to drop the more expensive units. Because I set myself the target of having three characters as the "We stand" units it forced me to look at the cheaper end of the available choices.
I must admit that this is very much a me style list, I've been on the vypers as screen/mobility core of my army for over a year. Same with vibros as backfield firepower/deepstrike denial.
I'm sure other options can work but I like this style of solid backfield artillery and fast moving firepower, mech based to minimise small arms, style lists and I'm probably not trying out other stuff that could work just as well.
bullyboy wrote: So i have picked up 10 banshees but can't decide whether to do 1x10 or 2x5. The second option always seems better with the exception of fight interruption, which would just slaughter the second unit. What are your thoughts?
I’ve run banshees for a loooong time and run them as often as I can. Right now they’re more of a utility unit than an actual combat threat to anything more than cultists or guardsmen. I like 2x5 because you can get 2 executioners in there for pretty cheap which combos well with expert crafters. The main bonus of having one unit is it makes it easier to wrap your opponents unit but that’s still a more difficult maneuver in this edition. Stick to the 2x5 with executioners and really your choice of exarch power. I like the 4+ to deal d3 mortal wounds since units will try to fall back from you or do the piercing strike to push some damage 3 wounds on to them. Back them up with shining spears to do the real damage in close combat.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
Argive wrote: honestly I hope a single one of our units gets more than 4 attacks.. The fact jain zar gets the same amount of attacks as a charging rhino is stupid..
This is one of my biggest frustrations with the rules as they sit, I know it’s not forever but it’s annoying for the time.
I can see aspect warriors going up to an effective 3 attacks between charging, wargear, or just a straight attribute bump for attacks to 3 since harlies are base 4 currently
Banshees are supposed to be efficient, if there was a way to up their weapons damage any more enervate might be worth considering, but right now it wouldn’t improve the output enough for a whole warlock power to be casted
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/21 05:19:01
With wraithseers taking runes of battle we might see more buffing spells.
You'll still probably smite 80% of the time but you'd never take enrevate on a warlock. With extra psychic slots i think i will sprinkle in some aditional buffs nit as clutch powes but to give a bump.
The main issue trouble is runes of battle being infantry/biker locked. But the debuffs might become more common.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
Seeing the teaser they showed for Incubi in the DE codex announcement, I think there is some hope for aspect warriors getting equivalent buffs... hopefully
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/21 19:29:42
"If you are forced to use your trump card, then the battle is already lost"
warmaster21 wrote: Seeing the teaser they showed for Incubi in the DE codex announcement, I think there is some hope for aspect warriors getting equivalent buffs... hopefully
I am not sure what to hope for here.
The Drukhari got more damage. And one more WS. Right?
I feel like most of our elites and weapons need more things that make them different from each other.
Scorpions. Better infiltrate and make them hitting harder. While banchees are faster and have more attacks.
The same with our heavy weapon choices. Right now they feel too similar. Make one with 6 shots. But ST 3 and -1 ap. or something. While a star cannon is 2 shots at st6 and -3 ap 2 dam. Or some such.
We should be able to have the ultimate weapon vs the chosen foe. But they shouldn't work against everyone.
The same with our troops.
Ok. Just hope they don't give us ws 2+ and call us done.
I agree in that I don't know what to hope for but BS 2+ avengers, reapers and dragons would be tasty.
I still think we'll gt D2 shuricannons and that'll be about it for the heavy weapon changes. Maybe fixed damage on the starcannons but that's it.
My hope is for battle focus on our vehicles and all the heavy weapons to become assault. That'll really lean in to mobility being our strong point IMHO.
Eldar- 4436 pts
Craftworlds Eldar: 8500
Harlequins: 1000
Raven Guard: 1500
