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.
Quasistellar wrote: I mean, they’re like 8th edition impulsors but open topped. Imagine if you could have taken the shield dome AND missile for LESS points. Sure 1 less toughness but vs the weapons that target them, t6 vs t7 is not a break point that is worth much.
Oh, and you can carry blood angels inside an iron hands impulsor, and for that “inconvenience”, they give you 2 extra CP.
It just feels like there isn’t any real trade offs in the codex. You get to have your cake, eat it, and still there’s another cake.
Amazing run down.
Except for the lack of acknowledgement that the Raider has a 4+ while the Impulsor has a 3+.
More or less that part is irrelevant. The 5++ save is going to provide more or the same protection to weapons shooting at a t6+ target more often than not. Nether of these units is particularly durable though.
Just sayin. If you're going to note the difference in toughness between the two units, not mentioning the armor stands out. Small arms can make a difference when dealing with vehicles these days. My Nids can get good AT numbers by sheer volume of Devourer shots, and a point of difference in the armor counts. A squad of 30 DevilGaunts puts 9 wounds on a Raider instead of 6 because of the 4+.
\
The armor only matters against ap 0 and ap -1. Already bad profiles for shooting vehicles.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
The armor only matters against ap 0 and ap -1. Already bad profiles for shooting vehicles.
You can say that all you want but when I'm looking at a single unit of Termagants putting 18 wounds across two Raiders, I'm gonna be rethinking "good weapon profiles".
Technomancers automatically hurts if you automatically hit.
No more mixing and matching outside of Realspace Raids.
My Black Heart / Cult of Strife list is impacted by the first three changes. Here's my original list exactly at 2000pts, designed to maximize the BH reroll misses in darklight spam list:
I can literally drop all my PGL and Grisly Trophies. That 60 pts right there. So if you pointed out how powerful BH is with Raiders, this recommended change isn't going to help alot.
Let's try another list, that's a derivative of some of the top armies in that recent Dalla GT. This is a RealSpace Raider list combining good Black Heart, Dark Technomancer and Cult of Strife rules and units, with 5 points to spare:
Battle Size: 3. Strike Force (101-200 Total PL / 1001-2000 Points)
Detachment Command Cost
Obsession: Cult of Strife: The Spectacle of Murder, Kabal of the Black Heart: Thirst for Power, Realspace Raid
. *Custom Coven*: Dark Technomancers (All-Consuming)
Technomancers automatically hurts if you automatically hit.
In this list, I'm again, costing 60pts more than originally price, so I'm 55pts over...
+5 Archon
+5 Succabus
+50 for Raiders
So I'd drop the blast pistol from the Archon, and 2x Clawed Fiends.
Now, with the DT change, I probably wouldn't field Taloi with Dual-liquifier, however I don't have to enhance it everytime. But, they do get 5+ FnP and the Haemonculus can heal it a flat 3 wounds a turn. I'm not too concern for the wrack units as it's the "bearer's unit suffers 1 mortal wound after shooting this weapon". I have 3 non-liquifier wracks I can allocate the wound too AND they get a 5+ FnP, so at worst I get 3 turns of shooting before it may impact the liquifier model. The Groteques are 4 wound models that has 5+FnP as well, so I'm not too concerned about this particular recommendation by Goon.
Overall, do you see these changes affecting the roster construction, if at all?
The one thing I would absolutely hope GWFAQ, is to prohibit the razorflail succubus' Competitive Advantage rule to proc on the razorflail's "2 attacks for 1" rule.
As for the other recommendation's by Goon:
12CP for triple patrols instead of 14CP
I'm okay with this, but seems meaningless. Drukhari roster construction using patrols will leave the player with a crap load of CPs. Going from 14 to 12 isn't going to change much how these lists are constructed or how it's played on the tabletop. A more impactful change would be to make it cost 1 CP instead of refunding all of the CP and and maybe no WL refund.
No more mixing and matching outside of Realspace Raids.
This is the only one that I really disagree with. I'm not sure what problems this solves and it only unnecessarily restricts roster construction.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/10 20:32:03
You’re right in that it doesn’t change MUCH. But it does shave off those little extras that DE really shouldn’t be getting. It would be interesting at that point to at least see results. I also agree on there being almost no good solution to Dark Technomancers without a significant rewrite. Even 1 mortal wound the way it’s worded (to the unit, and not the shooting model) isn’t likely enough to stop people taking them. They’d have to always give mortal wound to the model that fires to even start to be a real nerf in a 5 turn game. Again, that trait is just bad for the game IMO.
The MW from DT needs to go on THE BEARER, not THE BEARER'S UNIT. Same as overcharged plasma. You're already getting a better benefit, because you're wounding better against all toughness, whereas overcharged plasma is only benefiting against T4, T7, and T8. The risk should match the reward.
whembly wrote: FWIW, bias warning here, long time DE player.
I played a typical tournament DT list with liquifiers against a mono-DeathGuard list with Morty (a good tourny player) and barely lost the game on points. While the +1 dmg from DT's rule helped my rolls to wound on 4+, it's the -2AP on the liquifier that did the heavy lifting forcing DG units to take their invulnerable saves. Obviously the disgusting resilient neutered the dmg down to just a regular flamer.
The dice gods were interesting here in that each time I shot at a tough unit like blightlords or deathshrouds, it took 4 flamer to do an average of 5 wounds. One shooting round I was able to kill 3 of those models getting great rolls and my opponent's rolls failed him a bit, but most of the time it's just one base plus residual wounds to another base just from the liquifier shots.
Tried two units of 5man flamers against Morty. Don't do it. Dark Lance/Blasters all the way with splinter shots to chip at him (I still couldn't kill him as my list was geared towards spamming DT liquifiers, not enough dark light shots and splinter shots just generally tickles Morty).
Sidebar: I really need to pick better secondary in this game. I had assassinate/WWSWF/linebreaker. Assassinate was my weakest one as he only had 3 characters (including Morty). Mandrakes for teleport homer???? (if I can even FIND mandrakes!).
I'm just not convinced Drukhari are OP. (exceptions to Succubus's Competitive Edge + Razorflail interaction... that's just plain dumb and its obvious that this is broken as all get out).
Hear me out please.
I certainly would agree that the current DT obsession + liquifier is super strong, but they're only super strong against things like multi-wound, power armored elite armies.
Against armies that can field a ton of 1 wound models, they don't care if the liquifier is 2D or 1D. It's just another flamer weapon.
My DG opponent also has a DeathSkull Ork army with massed smasha cannons. I can certainly see this army being a hard counter to bust open the Raiders. (smasha wounding on 6 on 2d6? < shudders > ). We're planning a Ork v. DE game soon, so I may update this post with the results.
The meta still need to work itself out too, and maybe shift away from the pre-Drukhari elite-space low model-count marine armies. I dunno...maybe not. Could a Deathwing inner-circle list be of a counter to DT Drukhari list? (I'm spitballing here, that's the one you can't even wound the model on 1, 2 or 3...right?).
Even if GW takes on the Goonhammer's recommendations, I'm not sure that's going to have much impact at the top tables in this current meta. These guys are good generals too.
From my perspective, Drukhari is ironically the first army in 9ed that has the potential to field a robust TAC list with a Triple Patrol or a RSR detachment (hell maybe even a RSR brigade!), as evidenced by the top table winners in recent tournaments.
-Two or three black heart Raiders with 2 units of warriors each with blaster. Each raider setup rerolling misses for 1 DL and 2 blasters. An almost ravager unit.
-Two DT Raiders with one wrack (2 liquifier) and one 3x Liquifier-Grots.
-decide going DT liquifier Taloi and/or Ravagers
-spice rest of army with wych cult units for close combat goodness.
EVEN with the desired changes this thread has asked for comes into fruition, where the DE generals may have to drop a unit or so... it's still going to look very much like the above.
Isn't that more of an indication that this current codex simply has effective tools against the current meta? Rather that the army is too powerful? I will concede though, if by the end of summer Drukhari is still curb stomping tournaments after seeing additional codex releases (next are Mechanicus, Orks and Thousand suns???), then yeah I'd be onboard with GW apply the nerf bats.
I think this might be too narrow of a consideration since not everyone has the benefits of DG.
At DAO #4 DE beat #14 DG ( no Morty ) - 72 to 67
He also lost to #1 DE - 85 to 78
#16 DG lost to #5 DE ( almost all vehicles ) - 72 to 44
#49 DG lost to #51 DE - to 78 to 68
The DG player who took all vehicles benefitted from disgustingly resilient less and so functioned less like other DG armies who had some wins and some very close losses to DE. QED perhaps?
Insectum7 wrote: You can say that all you want but when I'm looking at a single unit of Termagants putting 18 wounds across two Raiders, I'm gonna be rethinking "good weapon profiles".
Yes, 210 points of models can almost but not quite kill an 85 point model with average rolls. Clearly, this is a reliable winning strategy...
Also, how are those 90 shots dealing 18 wounds across 2 T6 4+ armor models?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/10 20:50:46
Gadzilla666 wrote: The MW from DT needs to go on THE BEARER, not THE BEARER'S UNIT. Same as overcharged plasma. You're already getting a better benefit, because you're wounding better against all toughness, whereas overcharged plasma is only benefiting against T4, T7, and T8. The risk should match the reward.
Becomes a problem in units with grots that are already wounded.
Gadzilla666 wrote: The MW from DT needs to go on THE BEARER, not THE BEARER'S UNIT. Same as overcharged plasma. You're already getting a better benefit, because you're wounding better against all toughness, whereas overcharged plasma is only benefiting against T4, T7, and T8. The risk should match the reward.
That violates one of the basic rules of the game, though, in that you can't have multiple models in a unit all wounded. It works for wracks, but not for any of the multi-wound, multi-model units that can take DT weapons (grots, talos).
Gadzilla666 wrote: The MW from DT needs to go on THE BEARER, not THE BEARER'S UNIT. Same as overcharged plasma. You're already getting a better benefit, because you're wounding better against all toughness, whereas overcharged plasma is only benefiting against T4, T7, and T8. The risk should match the reward.
I'd be okay with it functioning like overcharged plasma (where you'd have to roll a 1 in order to blow up). So, for Liquifiers, if you choose to enhance it roll a D6 and on a 1 the firing model suffers a MW. (or is it the model is just removed? If so, then Taloi would need a different tweak).
Gadzilla666 wrote: The MW from DT needs to go on THE BEARER, not THE BEARER'S UNIT. Same as overcharged plasma. You're already getting a better benefit, because you're wounding better against all toughness, whereas overcharged plasma is only benefiting against T4, T7, and T8. The risk should match the reward.
Becomes a problem in units with grots that are already wounded.
yukishiro1 wrote:That violates one of the basic rules of the game, though, in that you can't have multiple models in a unit all wounded. It works for wracks, but not for any of the multi-wound, multi-model units that can take DT weapons (grots, talos).
Right, both of you. Switch it to UNMODIFIED WOUND ROLLS OF 1 then. And instead of MWs, just THE BEARER IS DESTROYED. Again, same risk/reward as plasma.
whembly wrote: FWIW, bias warning here, long time DE player.
I played a typical tournament DT list with liquifiers against a mono-DeathGuard list with Morty (a good tourny player) and barely lost the game on points. While the +1 dmg from DT's rule helped my rolls to wound on 4+, it's the -2AP on the liquifier that did the heavy lifting forcing DG units to take their invulnerable saves. Obviously the disgusting resilient neutered the dmg down to just a regular flamer.
The dice gods were interesting here in that each time I shot at a tough unit like blightlords or deathshrouds, it took 4 flamer to do an average of 5 wounds. One shooting round I was able to kill 3 of those models getting great rolls and my opponent's rolls failed him a bit, but most of the time it's just one base plus residual wounds to another base just from the liquifier shots.
Tried two units of 5man flamers against Morty. Don't do it. Dark Lance/Blasters all the way with splinter shots to chip at him (I still couldn't kill him as my list was geared towards spamming DT liquifiers, not enough dark light shots and splinter shots just generally tickles Morty).
Sidebar: I really need to pick better secondary in this game. I had assassinate/WWSWF/linebreaker. Assassinate was my weakest one as he only had 3 characters (including Morty). Mandrakes for teleport homer???? (if I can even FIND mandrakes!).
I'm just not convinced Drukhari are OP. (exceptions to Succubus's Competitive Edge + Razorflail interaction... that's just plain dumb and its obvious that this is broken as all get out).
Hear me out please.
I certainly would agree that the current DT obsession + liquifier is super strong, but they're only super strong against things like multi-wound, power armored elite armies.
Against armies that can field a ton of 1 wound models, they don't care if the liquifier is 2D or 1D. It's just another flamer weapon.
My DG opponent also has a DeathSkull Ork army with massed smasha cannons. I can certainly see this army being a hard counter to bust open the Raiders. (smasha wounding on 6 on 2d6? < shudders > ). We're planning a Ork v. DE game soon, so I may update this post with the results.
The meta still need to work itself out too, and maybe shift away from the pre-Drukhari elite-space low model-count marine armies. I dunno...maybe not. Could a Deathwing inner-circle list be of a counter to DT Drukhari list? (I'm spitballing here, that's the one you can't even wound the model on 1, 2 or 3...right?).
Even if GW takes on the Goonhammer's recommendations, I'm not sure that's going to have much impact at the top tables in this current meta. These guys are good generals too.
From my perspective, Drukhari is ironically the first army in 9ed that has the potential to field a robust TAC list with a Triple Patrol or a RSR detachment (hell maybe even a RSR brigade!), as evidenced by the top table winners in recent tournaments.
-Two or three black heart Raiders with 2 units of warriors each with blaster. Each raider setup rerolling misses for 1 DL and 2 blasters. An almost ravager unit.
-Two DT Raiders with one wrack (2 liquifier) and one 3x Liquifier-Grots.
-decide going DT liquifier Taloi and/or Ravagers
-spice rest of army with wych cult units for close combat goodness.
EVEN with the desired changes this thread has asked for comes into fruition, where the DE generals may have to drop a unit or so... it's still going to look very much like the above.
Isn't that more of an indication that this current codex simply has effective tools against the current meta? Rather that the army is too powerful? I will concede though, if by the end of summer Drukhari is still curb stomping tournaments after seeing additional codex releases (next are Mechanicus, Orks and Thousand suns???), then yeah I'd be onboard with GW apply the nerf bats.
I think this might be too narrow of a consideration since not everyone has the benefits of DG.
At DAO #4 DE beat #14 DG ( no Morty ) - 72 to 67
He also lost to #1 DE - 85 to 78
#16 DG lost to #5 DE ( almost all vehicles ) - 72 to 44
#49 DG lost to #51 DE - to 78 to 68
The DG player who took all vehicles benefitted from disgustingly resilient less and so functioned less like other DG armies who had some wins and some very close losses to DE. QED perhaps?
Yeah, my DG opponent had zero vehicles. All Blightlords (10man unit and 2x 5man unit), Deathshrouds(2x 5man unit? Maybe one was 3man unit), 3 big unit of poxbringers, Morty and 2 other characters. A DG vehicle list wouldn't fair good against DE. I did recommend to him to some how get 3 volkite contemptors lol. I tried to ignore morty and that was a mistake (I thought I could whittle down his blightlords and deathshroud in one turn before I turn my attention to him).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/10 20:59:52
Insectum7 wrote: You can say that all you want but when I'm looking at a single unit of Termagants putting 18 wounds across two Raiders, I'm gonna be rethinking "good weapon profiles".
Yes, 210 points of models can almost but not quite kill an 85 point model with average rolls. Clearly, this is a reliable winning strategy...
Also, how are those 90 shots dealing 18 wounds across 2 T6 4+ armor models?
Single minded annihilation for 180 shots.
If you add Kronos then it gets up to 20.4 wounds, with Symbiostorm 27.
addnid wrote: It makes a lot more sense to just say DT simply doesn’t work on Liquefiers.
What other weapons would we enhance it then in a wrack obsession?
I think possible fix is to give the player a choice, choose the +1 wound or +1 to damage. Either that, or simply raise the cost to liquifiers.
Shaving 2 cp and 60-80 points is really not going to be enough. Not against Drukari players who know what they are doing
Yeah, I echo this sentiment.
One thing for sure, GW will nuke raiders, liquefiers, etc... to orbit in the next CA points adjustment, that's for sure.
I like your idea of choosing +1 to wound or +1 damage on DT liquiefiers, but then we have a points issue. Raising the cost of liquiefiers just for DT seems heavy handed, but perhaps that is what needs to be done.
Otherwise make it a real suicide weapon, two mortal wounds after firing a liquiefier
So wracks get 4 mortals after shooting two of them, 3 grots each shooting one take a whooping 6 mortals, now that is dark tech for you
Otherwise you will be getting 30 point liquiefiers my Drukari friends in the next point cost update. Something is going to give. I agree with whembley it is potentially going to be nasty… I am a GSC player, I remember… your nerf bat beating will be twice as hard as what we got, if it is proportionate…
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/05/10 21:16:26
Ere we go ere we go ere we go
Corona Givin’ Umies Da good ol Krulpin they deserve huh huh
Insectum7 wrote: You can say that all you want but when I'm looking at a single unit of Termagants putting 18 wounds across two Raiders, I'm gonna be rethinking "good weapon profiles".
Yes, 210 points of models can almost but not quite kill an 85 point model with average rolls. Clearly, this is a reliable winning strategy...
A full unit of Hive Guard with Impaler Cannons with "good weapon profiles" averages 7 wounds to the Termagants 9 and costs 60 points more.
The anti-raider go-to for Nids would be Shock Cannons, which are absolutely ideal against Raiders, having only a -1 save (An AP Xeno poo-pooed) and still wounding on .666 with their S7, plus Mortal Wound bonuses against Vehicles. They get 11 wounds average and also cost 210. So the ideal weapon only gets 20%ish more wounds for the same cost.
The Exocrine if it fires twice nets 8.2 wounds, costing 170
So the Termagants with their Devourers are landing right in the area of major AT options for the Nids, while also being exquisite for anti-light-infantry work. A major reason why they are so effective is because the Raider only has a 4+ save.
Insectum7 wrote: You can say that all you want but when I'm looking at a single unit of Termagants putting 18 wounds across two Raiders, I'm gonna be rethinking "good weapon profiles".
Yes, 210 points of models can almost but not quite kill an 85 point model with average rolls. Clearly, this is a reliable winning strategy...
Also, how are those 90 shots dealing 18 wounds across 2 T6 4+ armor models?
Single minded annihilation for 180 shots.
If you add Kronos then it gets up to 20.4 wounds, with Symbiostorm 27.
^What he said. Although I don't know Symbiostorm, which must be in PA?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/05/10 21:27:38
Insectum7 wrote: You can say that all you want but when I'm looking at a single unit of Termagants putting 18 wounds across two Raiders, I'm gonna be rethinking "good weapon profiles".
Yes, 210 points of models can almost but not quite kill an 85 point model with average rolls. Clearly, this is a reliable winning strategy...
Also, how are those 90 shots dealing 18 wounds across 2 T6 4+ armor models?
Single minded annihilation for 180 shots.
If you add Kronos then it gets up to 20.4 wounds, with Symbiostorm 27.
So that's 210 points, 2CP, and it assumes that your opponent doesn't use a -1 to hit strategy. It also requires you to be within 18" of the raider so it gives them an entire turn to move where they like.
Yeah, this isn't exactly a winning move.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/10 21:49:35
So that's 210 points, 2CP, and it assumes that your opponent doesn't use a -1 to hit strategy. It also requires you to be within 18" of the raider so it gives them an entire turn to move where they like.
Yeah, this isn't exactly a winning move.
It is not a reliable way to do it, but it is going to be hilarious when it happens.
Moreover it is a way to point the opportunity that T6 4+ is somewhat vulnerable to bolter fire. Traditional AT may not very efficient vs Raiders, but having your Marines fire at a wounded Raider does have a better chance of taking those few remaining wounds than if they were firing at a more traditional T7 Sv3+ profile.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/10 22:04:25
Insectum7 wrote: You can say that all you want but when I'm looking at a single unit of Termagants putting 18 wounds across two Raiders, I'm gonna be rethinking "good weapon profiles".
Yes, 210 points of models can almost but not quite kill an 85 point model with average rolls. Clearly, this is a reliable winning strategy...
Also, how are those 90 shots dealing 18 wounds across 2 T6 4+ armor models?
Single minded annihilation for 180 shots.
If you add Kronos then it gets up to 20.4 wounds, with Symbiostorm 27.
So that's 210 points, 2CP, and it assumes that your opponent doesn't use a -1 to hit strategy. It also requires you to be within 18" of the raider so it gives them an entire turn to move where they like.
Yeah, this isn't exactly a winning move.
Canadian 5th strikes again!
Considering it takes three Attack Bikes (165) to kill one Raider I'm not seeing any problems here if it takes 210 point to nearly kill two.
I'm shooting multiple Raiders with multiple units in a single turn. The Devilgaunts coming up from tunnels via Trygon or Jormangunder (which I play), so happily able to get in range of multiple Raiders. I fire Hive Guard at one Raider, which the opponent pops the -1 Strat on, and then the Devilgaunts fire at other ones. The Fire Twice strat is used at the end of the round so I just figure where to put it later. Easy peasy.
I'm sure you're just blowing the doors off of DE with this tournament-viable TAC list. What does this do against DG or DA? How does it tackle Necrons? Harlequins? Sisters?
I'm sure you're just blowing the doors off of DE with this tournament-viable TAC list. What does this do against DG or DA? How does it tackle Necrons? Harlequins? Sisters?
I'm sure you're just blowing the doors off of DE with this tournament-viable TAC list. What does this do against DG or DA? How does it tackle Necrons? Harlequins? Sisters?
Blah blah blah. No point engaging further.
Does your list actually beat a competitive DE list or is this all worthless theory crafting?
I don't think you've ever played DE if you think you can use deep strike to deliver 30 devilgaunts into a place where they can shoot more than one raider. Sounds a lot like theorycrafting that hasn't seen the real table. It just doesn't work, the thing about DE that is so strong is they just have so many piles of stuff that they will easily screen you out from DSing a 30-blob anywhere useful.
yukishiro1 wrote: I don't think you've ever played DE if you think you can use deep strike to deliver 30 devilgaunts into a place where they can shoot more than one raider. Sounds a lot like theorycrafting that hasn't seen the real table. It just doesn't work, the thing about DE that is so strong is they just have so many piles of stuff that they will easily screen you out from DSing a 30-blob anywhere useful.
Insectum just plays with his same casual meta year in and year out so he knows which opponents will make positioning errors to be exploited before he even sits down to play the game. His ideas simply don't work against a wider pool of highly skilled players.
yukishiro1 wrote: I don't think you've ever played DE if you think you can use deep strike to deliver 30 devilgaunts into a place where they can shoot more than one raider. Sounds a lot like theorycrafting that hasn't seen the real table. It just doesn't work, the thing about DE that is so strong is they just have so many piles of stuff that they will easily screen you out from DSing a 30-blob anywhere useful.
I mean, if they want to screen out to protect their Raiders from Devilgaunts. . . so I can shoot their infantry with Devilgaunts, that seems perfectly fine by me. It doesn't matter, the point is that because Raiders have only a 4+ they become more susceptible to small arms fire. A five man Tac squad with a Lascannon will average more damage to the Raider by rapid-firing their Bolters in Tactical Doctrine than with the Lascannon.
Insectum just plays with his same casual meta year in and year out so he knows which opponents will make positioning errors to be exploited before he even sits down to play the game. His ideas simply don't work against a wider pool of highly skilled players.
Canadian 5th has neither an argument, nor a point, so he resorts to asking for personal tourney results. I'll call it a victory.
Well he missed both DevilGaunts and Shock Cannons, both of which appear to get better results. The Shock Cannons because they get bonus MWs and the DevilGaunts because they spit a badjillion shots.
yukishiro1 wrote: I don't think you've ever played DE if you think you can use deep strike to deliver 30 devilgaunts into a place where they can shoot more than one raider. Sounds a lot like theorycrafting that hasn't seen the real table. It just doesn't work, the thing about DE that is so strong is they just have so many piles of stuff that they will easily screen you out from DSing a 30-blob anywhere useful.
I mean, if they want to screen out to protect their Raiders from Devilgaunts. . . so I can shoot their infantry with Devilgaunts, that seems perfectly fine by me. It doesn't matter, the point is that because Raiders have only a 4+ they become more susceptible to small arms fire. A five man Tac squad with a Lascannon will average more damage to the Raider by rapid-firing their Bolters in Tactical Doctrine than with the Lascannon.
I'm not trying to be rude, but it is super obvious from these comments that you haven't actually played vs a competitive DE list played by a competent player. What you wrote re: your plan to kill a bunch of raiders with deepstruck devilgaunts was just downright silly and a really prime example of theorycrafting that doesn't take into account how the game is actually played. If you put 210 points of gaunts in deepstrike they will absolutely screen you out so all you can shoot them at is one unit of crap, so conrgatulations, you just used 210 points of gaunts to kill...some mandrakes? An empty raider that's already delivered its dudes?
And then 10 wyches kills like 20 of your gaunts and traps the rest in combat to use as a shield.
This is what makes DE so strong - they have have piles and piles of cheap but extremely lethal junk they can afford to just toss away because they've got, well, pile and piles of it.
yukishiro1 wrote: I don't think you've ever played DE if you think you can use deep strike to deliver 30 devilgaunts into a place where they can shoot more than one raider. Sounds a lot like theorycrafting that hasn't seen the real table. It just doesn't work, the thing about DE that is so strong is they just have so many piles of stuff that they will easily screen you out from DSing a 30-blob anywhere useful.
I mean, if they want to screen out to protect their Raiders from Devilgaunts. . . so I can shoot their infantry with Devilgaunts, that seems perfectly fine by me. It doesn't matter, the point is that because Raiders have only a 4+ they become more susceptible to small arms fire. A five man Tac squad with a Lascannon will average more damage to the Raider by rapid-firing their Bolters in Tactical Doctrine than with the Lascannon.
Insectum just plays with his same casual meta year in and year out so he knows which opponents will make positioning errors to be exploited before he even sits down to play the game. His ideas simply don't work against a wider pool of highly skilled players.
Canadian 5th has neither an argument, nor a point, so he resorts to asking for personal tourney results. I'll call it a victory.
Well he missed both DevilGaunts and Shock Cannons, both of which appear to get better results. The Shock Cannons because they get bonus MWs and the DevilGaunts because they spit a badjillion shots.
Your answer to Raiders is not the 36" no LOS gun, but the 24" gun because it can do a MW on a 4+? Your either not going to be in range, not have LoS or have moved so far forward the rest of the DE will wipe you off the table.
And Devilgaunt deepstrike requires you to get first turn, them not to screen with anything, kill 2 Raiders and then die to the contents of those raiders, who make their points back on your gaunts regardless.
