Drukhari 1997 pts, my first game!

*Patrol BlackHeart*
Drazhar (warlord)
5 Kabal
7 Incubi
5 Incubi
Ravager (lance, pgl)
Ravager (lance, pgl)

*Patrol DarkCreed*
Master Haemounculus (FearIncarnate, Poisoner's Ampulee)
5 Wracks
5 Mandrakes
Raider (lance, pgl, trophies)
Raider (lance, pgl, trophies)
Venom (1 cannon, trophies)

*Patrol CultofStrife*
Master Succubus (tryphtych whip, precise blows, +1A)
10 Bloodbrides (1shardnet, pgl, +1Str)
20 Hellions (pgl, +1T)
12 Reavers (4 heatlances, 4 gravtalons, +1WS)

1997 pti. 14(-3, 2 WL traits , 1 relic) CP.




That is my first list with the new Codex! Finally I was able to try it yesterday against Orks and it was amazing.
Damn I LOVE this book ahah!

I'm not sold on BH tho, in this list it is here just for the rerolls to hit and Vect. But I don't like new Vect at all, we need to strike fast, I don't care if it will works on T3-4-5 if I'm going to strike on T1. So I was thinking about swap it with Obsidian Roses. I keep 1 reroll (to wound tho, a little worse) and +6" range which is pretty good for Ravagers and PGLs.

PGLs are AMAZING. I've done like 10 MWs in just 2 turns, and I run only 6 of them. DT+Trophies makes PGLs scary for real, it is a surprisingly amount of nearly free MWs.

Eviscerating flyby is dope. I'll never cut Reavers or Hellions for them. 12 and 20 are the sizes to run, I don't care about blast, we're just fast enough to pass from No-Los to Melee directly. And when the oppo wants to focus one of them, the other one is free to work freely.
Invigorated By Evisceration is broken with these guys. I got 20 Hellions runs out from Obscuring, flying by 14+D6", charge, slaughter a unit and then pop in 4++ on them. Good luck killing them now, 40 Wounds T5.
They're just obnoxious. Too fast, too many wounds, amazing.

Then you add Succubus, BBrides and Incubi and you're done.

Looks solid. Hard to build a bad list with this book. I recommend Obsidian Rose as well. It's not worse at shooting than BH though. The only time BH lances are mathematically better are when they're shooting a T4 or less (we don't need lances for that) or when shooting at T5-7 with -1 to hit. If it doesn't have -1 to hit, OR has the same math with their lances, but an extra 6" to play the range game. At T8, OR is better.

sekac wrote:

Looks solid. Hard to build a bad list with this book. I recommend Obsidian Rose as well. It's not worse at shooting than BH though. The only time BH lances are mathematically better are when they're shooting a T4 or less (we don't need lances for that) or when shooting at T5-7 with -1 to hit. If it doesn't have -1 to hit, OR has the same math with their lances, but an extra 6" to play the range game. At T8, OR is better.

The problem comes when you consider that wounds rolls always happens after hit rolls. With BH you will always have 1 reroll over 3 dice. With OR you will have 1 reroll on both 1, 2 or 3 dice, depends how many of them hits.
So BH is always more solid.

But I can exchange this with a +6". I would definitely try it.

Cerve wrote:

sekac wrote:

Looks solid. Hard to build a bad list with this book. I recommend Obsidian Rose as well. It's not worse at shooting than BH though. The only time BH lances are mathematically better are when they're shooting a T4 or less (we don't need lances for that) or when shooting at T5-7 with -1 to hit. If it doesn't have -1 to hit, OR has the same math with their lances, but an extra 6" to play the range game. At T8, OR is better.

The problem comes when you consider that wounds rolls always happens after hit rolls. With BH you will always have 1 reroll over 3 dice. With OR you will have 1 reroll on both 1, 2 or 3 dice, depends how many of them hits.
So BH is always more solid.

But I can exchange this with a +6". I would definitely try it.

I understand that it feels like the math is different, but it is not. You have to both hit AND wound for the lance to matter. If you re-roll your 3+ to hit, but then fail your 3+ to wound, it is not "more solid". It is equally ineffective as failing to hit in the first place.

Having the re-roll at the first step makes you feel like BH matters more, because the ability to re-roll comes up more often. But it averages out on the 2nd step which is every bit as important for causing damage as the first step.

If you have a 3+ to hit and a 3+ to wound, it does NOT matter at all which one has a re-roll, the results are identical.

sekac wrote:

Cerve wrote:

sekac wrote:

Looks solid. Hard to build a bad list with this book. I recommend Obsidian Rose as well. It's not worse at shooting than BH though. The only time BH lances are mathematically better are when they're shooting a T4 or less (we don't need lances for that) or when shooting at T5-7 with -1 to hit. If it doesn't have -1 to hit, OR has the same math with their lances, but an extra 6" to play the range game. At T8, OR is better.

The problem comes when you consider that wounds rolls always happens after hit rolls. With BH you will always have 1 reroll over 3 dice. With OR you will have 1 reroll on both 1, 2 or 3 dice, depends how many of them hits.
So BH is always more solid.

But I can exchange this with a +6". I would definitely try it.

I understand that it feels like the math is different, but it is not. You have to both hit AND wound for the lance to matter. If you re-roll your 3+ to hit, but then fail your 3+ to wound, it is not "more solid". It is equally ineffective as failing to hit in the first place.

Having the re-roll at the first step makes you feel like BH matters more, because the ability to re-roll comes up more often. But it averages out on the 2nd step which is every bit as important for causing damage as the first step.

If you have a 3+ to hit and a 3+ to wound, it does NOT matter at all which one has a re-roll, the results are identical.

It's not the math about wounding.

With BH, you always have 1 reroll on 3 dice.
With OR, you have:
-1 reroll on 3 dice, when all 3 hits;
-1 reroll on 2 dice, with just 2 hits;
-1 reroll on 1 dice, with just 1 hit.

You have 3 different scenarios, which makes OR less solid that BH. Of course you hit and wound on 3+, but the number of times when you actually benefit of that single reroll are more on BH than OR. Because you ALWAYS have it on 3 dices.

For Raiders, which brings 1 single shot, are the same and I agree.
But for Ravagers, that shoot 3 shots, BH is more solid than OR because OR is better only in 1 single scenario: when you hit with all the 3 shots (so you "waste" your BH reroll, and in this case OR is obviously better).
But on 2 hits, BH is better (1 reroll on 3 dice vs 1 reroll on 2)
On 1 hits, BH is better (1 reroll on 3 vs 1 on 1).

It's about wounding, it's about how many times you will likely benefit from both the single rolls. BH is silghtly better (and that's why OR have +6" range).

You have me intrigued with PGL and how well they seemed to work for you. I'm worried that the large unit of Hellions gets targeted quickly because of how many MWs it can put out with the stratagem, but if you have PGL scattered throughout the army then the opponent cannot eliminate them as a MW threat.

I think there would even be a case for having two 5-man Wyches instead of a 10-man with the special weapons if you want to fit in even more PGL. I'd have to look at the math comparing two hekatrix with PGL and weapons with one hekatrix and 1-3 wych weapons at around the same points cost.

Cerve wrote:

sekac wrote:

Cerve wrote:

sekac wrote:

Looks solid. Hard to build a bad list with this book. I recommend Obsidian Rose as well. It's not worse at shooting than BH though. The only time BH lances are mathematically better are when they're shooting a T4 or less (we don't need lances for that) or when shooting at T5-7 with -1 to hit. If it doesn't have -1 to hit, OR has the same math with their lances, but an extra 6" to play the range game. At T8, OR is better.

The problem comes when you consider that wounds rolls always happens after hit rolls. With BH you will always have 1 reroll over 3 dice. With OR you will have 1 reroll on both 1, 2 or 3 dice, depends how many of them hits.
So BH is always more solid.

But I can exchange this with a +6". I would definitely try it.

I understand that it feels like the math is different, but it is not. You have to both hit AND wound for the lance to matter. If you re-roll your 3+ to hit, but then fail your 3+ to wound, it is not "more solid". It is equally ineffective as failing to hit in the first place.

Having the re-roll at the first step makes you feel like BH matters more, because the ability to re-roll comes up more often. But it averages out on the 2nd step which is every bit as important for causing damage as the first step.

If you have a 3+ to hit and a 3+ to wound, it does NOT matter at all which one has a re-roll, the results are identical.

It's not the math about wounding.

With BH, you always have 1 reroll on 3 dice.
With OR, you have:
-1 reroll on 3 dice, when all 3 hits;
-1 reroll on 2 dice, with just 2 hits;
-1 reroll on 1 dice, with just 1 hit.

You have 3 different scenarios, which makes OR less solid that BH. Of course you hit and wound on 3+, but the number of times when you actually benefit of that single reroll are more on BH than OR. Because you ALWAYS have it on 3 dices.

For Raiders, which brings 1 single shot, are the same and I agree.
But for Ravagers, that shoot 3 shots, BH is more solid than OR because OR is better only in 1 single scenario: when you hit with all the 3 shots (so you "waste" your BH reroll, and in this case OR is obviously better).
But on 2 hits, BH is better (1 reroll on 3 dice vs 1 reroll on 2)
On 1 hits, BH is better (1 reroll on 3 vs 1 on 1).

It's about wounding, it's about how many times you will likely benefit from both the single rolls. BH is silghtly better (and that's why OR have +6" range).

Again, you are focusing exclusively on hits. Hits do not matter if you fail to wound. Both are needed to do damage. Your "one single scenario" completely overlooks wounds.

Yes, with 3 dice it is more likely that 1 misses and thus BH comes up. You are right that (on the HIT role alone) OR is better if and only if you hit with all 3.

On the other hand, BH is only better in one single scenario when it comes to wound rolls: if they wound with every lance. If they wound with only 2 of 3, OR is better. If they wound with only 1, OR is better. If they wound with 0, OR is better.

That's why you average the rolls. The math is the same.

I think BH has a use for this list, since there are PGLs on each vehicle. If you hit with the dark lance, you can still reroll a miss from the PGL, which doesn't have a wound roll.

I don't want Ravagers within 18" of anything to use those PGLs, however, so that extra 6" range seems more appealing. On Raiders, though, BH looks like the better choice.

Dont underestimate Vect. In both my games played, the opponent was basically limited to just using CP for re-rolls. They dont want to pop their important double shoot/attack/extra toughness strats early, because they will be too expensive when they actually need it.

Something to keep in mind.

IMO, I feel like my hit-rolls are generally more-unlucky than my wound-rolls. The BH reroll really helped me last game, and I was able to take out a Levi Dreadnought in 1 round of shooting as a direct result

How are you holding mid-field objectives in the early game?