Cover and Incubi - not the end of the world with the right build

Klaivex Charondyr wrote:

Quote :

The reason I take Incubi (usually 5, but will be trying a 10 now), is not to deal with 2+ armour, but to deal with 3+.
Whilst the AP2 is possibly useful, it's the AP3 that makes it. My Incubi don't chase the scary nasty Terminators, MCs etc, they go after the troops, and they smash them. This thread has excited me, as I normally expect them to remove one troop unit, and present a little end-game distraction, whereas with the OP's proposal, they might double that.

But thats exactly what im talking about.
You pay a TAX for AP2 just to... never actually use it. And we have a lot of tools to deal with 3+ saves that can also be applied to "scary terminators" or MCs instead of avoiding them.

Use it on the Centurions. They don't have invuls, and you can expect to tie them up in combat for a very long time.

Honestly, I just don't think S4 is enough to justify their inclusion, even with AP2. And, yes, I'm well aware that they have PfP, but that doesn't give them FC until turn 4. And, I really don't want a combat unit that needs to hang back for 3 turns until its finished psyching itself up. Especially when I can have a Ravager with 3 disintegrators for about half the cost. Yeah, cover is a problem, but it's a problem for Incubi too (albiet for different reasons).

I'd rather just use Coven Grotesques (preferably with the Grotesquerie), with an attached Haemonculus. They just seem like a far better melee unit - compensating for a lack of AP2 by being able to force a ton of saves on most enemies. They also stand a much better chance of destroying a vehicle in melee, should the need arise. I don't know, they just seem like a more versatile unit - since they have the weight of attacks to bring down both hordes and elite units (as well as many MCs), and also the stats to whether most return attacks.

Incubi to me just feel like a suicide unit - something you aim and fire at your opponent, pretty certain that you won't be seeing it again afterwards. And, I just think they're too many points for that.

Alternatively, a Grotesque/Wraithblades (with Axes or Swords) Combo may be quite devastating and tie up units for multiple turns, which is ultimately what you want with assaults.

The Grotesques and Wraithblades charge into the enemy lines, tanking overwatch (the former with T5 and FNP, and the latter with T6 and 3+ armor saves / 4++ if axes), and then slowly crush the unit they charged with, and win through CR rather than direct kills.

Backed up with a small unit of Incubi and Reavers...

You can do a lot of damage, issue plenty of challenges as well for Hunter of Glory.

PainReaver wrote:

Klaivex Charondyr wrote:

Quote :

The reason I take Incubi (usually 5, but will be trying a 10 now), is not to deal with 2+ armour, but to deal with 3+.
Whilst the AP2 is possibly useful, it's the AP3 that makes it. My Incubi don't chase the scary nasty Terminators, MCs etc, they go after the troops, and they smash them. This thread has excited me, as I normally expect them to remove one troop unit, and present a little end-game distraction, whereas with the OP's proposal, they might double that.

But thats exactly what im talking about.
You pay a TAX for AP2 just to... never actually use it. And we have a lot of tools to deal with 3+ saves that can also be applied to "scary terminators" or MCs instead of avoiding them.

Use it on the Centurions. They don't have invuls, and you can expect to tie them up in combat for a very long time.

You mean the 15 grav shots centurions with shred and concussive?
Grots and even Wracks or Reavers will tie them up MUCH longer while costing less...

Im not arguing that sometimes in a very few games Incubi can be remotely useful to you. But they are not useful to the point where you include 10 of them... worst of all in a single unit where the Klaivex doesnt even get the added benefit of his Rampage trait.

More of an aside, but there's something delightful about running grotesques and finding that my opponent has brought a pile of grav guns.

Wound on my armour save you say?



Have fun with that.

I think Massaen makes a good argument for >5 Incubi squads, specifically that the unit should not get under effective size after the first won combat.
Buy as already mentioned, I think that the Klaivex is a must have even in a unit of 10.
For a half incubi more(points wise) you get better WS, INI and attacks and best of all, rampage, that even in a Max size incubi squad will kick in eventually to boost combat effectiveness.
If it is wise to use such a squad or maybe two five incubus squads, each with a Klaivex is a question of tactics and FOC.

I usually ran around 6 or 7, including a Klaivex, precisely to still be combat effective after some losses.
Once I had a unit of 4 against sisters. Lost 3 in the first round of combat (including the Klaivex). One Incubus isn't that big of a thread (no one could have known, that he would go on killing 3x5 sisters on his own... )

And as regards to the task of incubi. I usually try to take out targets that annoy me, often some shooty unit, that then stops to shoot me. The centurions that where mentioned are an example. Soak up their overwatch worth a CC-support unit like wyches/beasts/Hellion's and then charge with the incubi to hit them so that it hurts.

What I like about incubi is that they need synergy in the army, a reason I'm not a huge fan of grotesques, as with them you pick a spot with enemy units that can't get away fast enough and let them rampage away. Sure it's a save way and thus very reliable, but when it's not save, it's more exciting.

Quote :

What I like about incubi is that they need synergy in the army, a reason I'm not a huge fan of grotesques, as with them you pick a spot with enemy units that can't get away fast enough and let them rampage away.

Actually that is why I dislike them. They don't need units to synergize with, they need units that do their job for them allowing them to finish.
Grots are exactly the other way round. Either they do their job on their own (as you should expect from a pricy melee unit) or they call in for Reaver, Wych,.. support to do their job FASTER. Thats actual synergy where the grots offer some utility and get some in return.
The Incubi are just parasites just needing and taking all the time just to say "look how we did that all alone thanks to our superior skills!" at the end.
If you need another 100 points to make your 200 points unit work there is a design issue.

I prefer incubi in raiders, rather than venoms. Raiders are more durable and can take night shields. And your incubi should be booking it up the table towards enemy lines. Also, something to consider as well. Incubi cut through broadsides and riptides nicely.

django_unchained wrote:

I prefer incubi in raiders, rather than venoms. Raiders are more durable and can take night shields. And your incubi should be booking it up the table towards enemy lines. Also, something to consider as well. Incubi cut through broadsides and riptides nicely.

Riptides are T6.

PainReaver wrote:

django_unchained wrote:

I prefer incubi in raiders, rather than venoms. Raiders are more durable and can take night shields. And your incubi should be booking it up the table towards enemy lines. Also, something to consider as well. Incubi cut through broadsides and riptides nicely.

Riptides are T6.

That's fine, with haemy in the unit, they'll have Furious Charge on turn 3! Also, even if they're wounding on 6's, with weight of attacks and hitting on 3s, you're bound to get a few 6's. Also, prob won't kill it the turn you charge, this is nice because you can finish it on the Tau player's turn, then charge another backfield unit! Not to mention the Riptide is hitting you on 5's because you double +1 it's weapon skill...

django_unchained wrote:

PainReaver wrote:

django_unchained wrote:

I prefer incubi in raiders, rather than venoms. Raiders are more durable and can take night shields. And your incubi should be booking it up the table towards enemy lines. Also, something to consider as well. Incubi cut through broadsides and riptides nicely.

Riptides are T6.

That's fine, with haemy in the unit, they'll have Furious Charge on turn 3! Also, even if they're wounding on 6's, with weight of attacks and hitting on 3s, you're bound to get a few 6's. Also, prob won't kill it the turn you charge, this is nice because you can finish it on the Tau player's turn, then charge another backfield unit! Not to mention the Riptide is hitting you on 5's because you double +1 it's weapon skill...

Mind the fact that everytime it hits you, its most likely to wound, and being AP2 Monstrous creature, will probably kill one of the Incubi each round.

3 attacks hitting on 5s? I like the odds in the incubi's favor...

django_unchained wrote:

3 attacks hitting on 5s? I like the odds in the incubi's favor...

1 smash attack hitting on 5. Low likelihood, but if it does hit, you do lose an incubi for sure.

PainReaver wrote:

django_unchained wrote:

3 attacks hitting on 5s? I like the odds in the incubi's favor...

1 smash attack hitting on 5. Low likelihood, but if it does hit, you do lose an incubi for sure.

I'm okay with those odds... lol

django_unchained wrote:

PainReaver wrote:

django_unchained wrote:

3 attacks hitting on 5s? I like the odds in the incubi's favor...

1 smash attack hitting on 5. Low likelihood, but if it does hit, you do lose an incubi for sure.

I'm okay with those odds... lol

Then wins CR and then sweeps the unit (low odds again).

PainReaver wrote:

django_unchained wrote:

PainReaver wrote:

django_unchained wrote:

3 attacks hitting on 5s? I like the odds in the incubi's favor...

1 smash attack hitting on 5. Low likelihood, but if it does hit, you do lose an incubi for sure.

I'm okay with those odds... lol

Then wins CR and then sweeps the unit (low odds again).

That's not gonna happen, and when it does I'll play AND win the lottery... lol.

It'll have to do the 1 wound, have the incubi do none, have the incubi fail a ld8 test, then beat their i5 roll off for the sweet with it's i2...

django_unchained wrote:

It'll have to do the 1 wound, have the incubi do none, have the incubi fail a ld8 test, then beat their i5 roll off for the sweet with it's i2...

Also ld7, due to losing CR by 1, but everything else is on the money.

PainReaver wrote:

django_unchained wrote:

It'll have to do the 1 wound, have the incubi do none, have the incubi fail a ld8 test, then beat their i5 roll off for the sweet with it's i2...

Also ld7, due to losing CR by 1, but everything else is on the money.

Incubi are base Ld9... So losing CR by 1 would make the test an 8.

I run grots every game and love them... Besides all mentioned arguments I want to add the I experienced their injector gauntlet as very useful for fighting multiple wound enemies as it adds extra wounds.

Generally I would not evaluate a unit's capabilities based on killing standard marines, as this is an easy task. When I evaluate on our codex I try to build an allrounder list thus looking at our toughest enemy line ups. For me that is Tau and eldar still, and therefore I don't see added value in incubi over grots. Incubi are just too fragile for an assault unit to take all that shooting. Even my grots struggle to survive to reach combat, but at least they regularly sustain

@Klaivex Charondyr just trying out the new tag feature ;-)

Klaivex Charondyr wrote:

Quote :

What I like about incubi is that they need synergy in the army, a reason I'm not a huge fan of grotesques, as with them you pick a spot with enemy units that can't get away fast enough and let them rampage away.

Actually that is why I dislike them. They don't need units to synergize with, they need units that do their job for them allowing them to finish.
Grots are exactly the other way round. Either they do their job on their own (as you should expect from a pricy melee unit) or they call in for Reaver, Wych,.. support to do their job FASTER. Thats actual synergy where the grots offer some utility and get some in return.
The Incubi are just parasites just needing and taking all the time just to say "look how we did that all alone thanks to our superior skills!" at the end.
If you need another 100 points to make your 200 points unit work there is a design issue.

If I call in some unit to take the overwatch for me, then it is not doing my job for me. My job is to waste the enemy unit in combat. Beasts or wyches can't do that like incubi. That is synergy, one takes the beating, while the other gives it.

@Aroban

Aroban wrote:

Generally I would not evaluate a unit's capabilities based on killing standard marines, as this is an easy task. When I evaluate on our codex I try to build an allrounder list thus looking at our toughest enemy line ups. For me that is Tau and eldar still, and therefore I don't see added value in incubi over grots. Incubi are just too fragile for an assault unit to take all that shooting. Even my grots struggle to survive to reach combat, but at least they regularly sustain

So you say that killing standard marines is an easy task, but Tau and Eldar unit that are generally -1T and often -1(or2)So worse are harder to kill?
The shooting I can understand, but as mentioned Incubi need synergy and I like synergy. ;-)

Sláinte

Quote :

If I call in some unit to take the overwatch for me, then it is not doing my job for me.

You call in a unit taking overwatch for you that is even less suited to take overwatch. Thats what your precious 3+ armor is for.
You basically waste 100+ points to make Incubi shine. Thats no synergy, thats wasting points.

Even if we would like to call that synergy, which I can see the argument for wanting to call it as such, the question then becomes whether Incubi even yet remain the top choice. At the end of the day Grots don't need that synergy. So then it becomes - what is the relative value?

4 Incubi + 1 Klaivex = 110 Points.

3 Grots + 1 Aberration w. Scissorhand = 150

vs. MEQ the Incubi and Grots will each do some killing, no doubt (all Rampages presumed at '2');
Incubi will have 12 attacks, plus 6 from the Klaivex - that means 6 dead MEQ
The Grots will have 18 attacks plus 7 from the Aberration - that means 4.14 (accounting for rends) dead Marines.

That means, they are killing at a point to kill ratio of;
Incubi - 18.3
Grots - 36.23

Which means the Incubi can afford to spend 100 points on a 'synergy' unit and still cost less per kill than the Grots, even if all the 'synergy' unit does is stumble forward and die. They shouldn't, however, spend any more than that, as then the Grots would be more viable. This also doesn't take into account cover and if the Marines decided to swing on the assaulting unit first (which would make the Grots look better) nor does it work in the numbers for whatever the synergy unit does (which would help the Incubi).

Now, I will note those numbers fail to hold true against a lot of other targets - as Grots are a better overall TAC choice they perform better than Incubi against anything with a higher toughness, multiple wounds, higher weapon skill, lower weapon skill, or anything with a worse armor save. Which is really why I take Grots - it has nothing to do with synergy or not, and everything to do with 'Grots are better in assault versus more things' since Incubi are derpy specialists only really good at assaulting specific things.

That said, if the basic idea is 'pay for a sacrificial unit to allow an assault unit to assault MEQ' - the Incubi can be pretty useful in that situation, as they kill MEQ quite well.

I totally agree with what you say Thor, Grotesques are a better all-around unit that can threaten many kind of foe and do that without needing much help. So I can very much understand the reason to take Grotesques over Incubi.

The reason I prefer incubi is, I like them more rule/model/game-wise.
And as they can do their job pretty well, I have no problem using them.

Klaivex Charondyr wrote:

You call in a unit taking overwatch for you that is even less suited to take overwatch. Thats what your precious 3+ armor is for.
You basically waste 100+ points to make Incubi shine. Thats no synergy, thats wasting points.

I could just put an archon with a 2+ save into the incubi, but I do not want to waste points by putting my precious 3+ armour in danger ;-) I would rather use a sacrificial unit to keep my important units out of harms way and that is what beasts where and are for. ;-)

Quote :

I could just put an archon with a 2+ save into the incubi, but I do not want to waste points by putting my precious 3+ armour in danger ;-) I would rather use a sacrificial unit to keep my important units out of harms way and that is what beasts where and are for. ;-)

You and also put the Archon in a unit of Grots (real synergy here as they gain even more durability from his Shadowfield while he gains more durability from majority T5)...
The incubi are not an "important" unit. They are stylish, fluffy, pretty, all that I grant them. But "important"? If they all die your army lost basically nothing except a few 100 points. Its not like losing your AT when fighting an Imperial Tank List/Adamantine Lance, THAT would be losing "important" units.