More Strategy - Less Crying

amishprn86 wrote:

Round 1 and 2 I had my CtC hold up his Super unit

How did his super unit get into combat with your CtC without having force turned on?

Jimsolo wrote:

How did you deal with the ID from his death star?

This.

Sounds like your opponent majorly misplayed his deathstar. Congrats nonetheless!

Jimsolo wrote:

How did you deal with the ID from his death star?

I was trying to Deny only the ID (it was Force) and I did turn 1 and turn 2 b.c he rolled High on the Power dice and sense he only needed a 2+ he never rolled more than 2 dice on it, b.c he wanted to make sure he got the teleporting/Reroll saves.

Yes he should have rolled 3 honestly, we talked about it after words and he agreed that fighting the CtC was a a bad idea b.c it slowed him down to much.

He did ID 4 of them in later turns tho.

Anyone notice the part in the FAQ where if you make a feel no pain roll then for purposes of wargear effects it counts as saved? Shadowfield slightly better.

Only one grenade in combat makes the fact that only the champions can take haywire hurt less.

No more toe in cover for Superheavies, GCs and FMCs is mostly nice for dark eldar.

Ignoring vertical movement for Jump / Jet I think applies to Jetbikes and skimmers as their "move over freely" is the same verbage.

No more drop pods battle bro drop pods is a plus.

No more formation benefits to members outside the formation, also a plus for dark eldar in my opinion as skyhammer with attacked beat stick was painful.

Psychic deathstars toned down with the no casting the same power twice (despite the fact that it's plain in the rules everyone did it anyway)

Invisibility worse

Most important, no more moving through walls but dark eldar can go over and back with no height movement costs. Depending on what the meta does with this (we may just see less ruins in general) this might be huge.

Scourges better
Archon better
Reavers better
Razorwing much better (almost no flyers have skyfire now)
Warriors inside a raider worse

Many problem units got worse (though a slight nerf to the GCs doesn't really make them easy to deal with)

Voidshield generator and skyshield took huge hits (I personally don't see these as very usable for dark eldar).

I'm sure there are some more benefits I missed.

Seshiru wrote:

Anyone notice the part in the FAQ where if you make a feel no pain roll then for purposes of wargear effects it counts as saved? Shadowfield slightly better.

Again, this will only be true if they *also* change the DE faq.

Seshiru wrote:

Most important, no more moving through walls

Which FAQ made this the case?

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

Seshiru wrote:

Most important, no more moving through walls

Which FAQ made this the case?

Maybe he is talking about this one from the first draft?

Q: A ruin (e.g. a Shrine of the Aquila) is treated as difficult terrain, but does this mean that models can move through the walls?
A: No.

Our local is basing that Rule on fully Solid Walls, walls that are ruble or 1/2 broken is treat as difficult.

This is how I personally always played it due to "LOS" rules.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

Seshiru wrote:

Most important, no more moving through walls

Which FAQ made this the case?

Was about the ruins, I forget where.  Basically if there is a wall, you have to go around.  Windows might be arguable, but they made it clear you have to use the door.

Basically no more assaulting through walls unless you have text allowing you to move through them.

Ill try and find it for ya. Its interesting strategically with walls actually slowing some units down.

I've always seen it played as any model could move through a wall. It even said it in several past editions, describing that units of soldiers are considered to have implements necessary to blast through walls and such, but it just takes more time. Maybe this one too. It was just considered difficult.

I'm not sure about that answer...some of the answers from the FAQ seem like it was "bring your nephew to work day", and someone just let their kin who's never played before answer the questions.

If this is staying the case, I'd expect terrain used in tournaments to change wildly, or unit selection to change across the meta. No more tanks driving through walls? That's going to make metal boxes a bit unwieldy. It won't effect skimmers, jetbikes, beasts, or anything else that ignores intervening terrain.

Yeah, the new FAQ made it illegal to Kool Aid through walls.

To be far, SM Kool Aiding though walls with nades and striking 1st vs something like a Hive Tyrand (90% MC's actually) and the HT having to go at Initiative 1 is kinda silly.

I mean a 18' 3 Ton MC with 5' 300+ lbs Talons has to slow down and a SM doesnt...

Many things dont make sense in 40k for the sake of making something not to powerful (or fear of)

Does this mean Gargantuan Creatures have to be 25% obscured to get a cover save? Even if they are inside of those imperial area terrain ruins?

CptMetal wrote:

Does this mean Gargantuan Creatures have to be 25% obscured to get a cover save? Even if they are inside of those imperial area terrain ruins?

No idea! GW helpfully 'answered' the question but the question itself was ambiguous so the answer is too. Does the Gargantuan Creature bit apply only to flying ones or to any Gargantuan? It could be read either way although I lean towards any GC.

Q: Do Flyers, Super-heavy vehicles, Swooping Flying Monstrous Creatures and Gargantuan Creatures gain cover while standing on the ‘base’ of a terrain piece, e.g. ruins or dense thickets, or do they need to be at least 25% obscured by the scenery for cover to apply?
A: The 25% rule applies in all types of terrain if the target is a Flyer, Super-heavy Vehicle, Flying Monstrous Creature or Gargantuan Creature. All other targets count as being in cover if they are in or on the terrain’s base, even if not 25% obsured.

They also foolishly included the phrase "all other targets" so now people are claiming that vehicles get cover for being in 'area terrain' (to use 5e terms) even though the rulebook says they need 25% cover.

The Shredder wrote:

Seshiru wrote:

Anyone notice the part in the FAQ where if you make a feel no pain roll then for purposes of wargear effects it counts as saved? Shadowfield slightly better.

Again, this will only be true if they *also* change the DE faq.

Right was thinking this FAQ / errata would trump the other, in any case hopefully we will see all the army specific FAQs get updated / replaced.

Seshiru wrote:

Only one grenade in combat makes the fact that only the champions can take haywire hurt less.

People continue to state this, but they are not being accurate. Wyches for example have plasma greneades, plasma grenades are s4 sp4 in combat with MC's and vehicles, this means wyches are WORSE then they were 2 weeks ago since they cannot attach plasma grenades in addition to the single haywire etc. I know it is nit picky but apparently next to no one ever used a plasma grenade in combat

All in all I think we made a lateral movement power wise. Nothing gained without something else lost. Other armies lost out much bigger then DE did. We never needed to jink with units that were not important in ctc besides raider gunboats.

I freely admit I am biased against gunboats, I think they suck and always have. We do MSU best, venoms do that better then raiders, period. Gunboats were way to pricey for the lack of durability and the consolidation of points into one easily destroyed unit. Heck, they only worked by investing more points into a single target to maximize SR, something requiring you to remain on board.

I feel some sympathy for those that used it, but to too much. Playing DE since they came in the starter has taught me never to become too attached to a single strategy, and that with each passing year since our book hits the army will get harder to play. Just keep expanding your collection and be prepared to constantly alter your game plan. Or, play marines and enjoy the easier road

Seshiru wrote:

Only one grenade in combat makes the fact that only the champions can take haywire hurt less.

No, not at all.

-Champions are still overcosted garbage.
-Grenades on champions are still overcosted garbage.
-Single haywire grenade attacks are still garbage.

At best, some other armies might come a little closer to our level of suck.


I think the best we can take from this is that our champions will remain as useful and popular as ever.

Red Corsair wrote:

I freely admit I am biased against gunboats, I think they suck and always have. We do MSU best, venoms do that better then raiders, period. Gunboats were way to pricey for the lack of durability and the consolidation of points into one easily destroyed unit.

They sucked for you because you obviously used them wrong. They're cheaper than venoms if you do them with an MSU strategy. Like this list:

2 CADS

2x1 Lhamean in Venom w/Dual Splinter Cannons 150
10x 5 Kabalite Warriors in Raiders w/Disintegrators 950
6x Ravagers w/3 Dark Lances 750
TOTAL: 1850

This list gives you 18 vehicles, putting out up to 124 poison AP5 shots, 30 S5 AP2 shots, and 18 S8 AP2 lance shots per turn. Pre-FAQ, you could move all the raiders towards the enemy to maximize your use of rapid fire, and plan on jinking if any were targetted while still firing at BS4, only having to snapfire the 30 S5 AP2 shots.

Now, if you do the same thing and jink, you have to snapfire not only the 30 S5 AP2 shots, but also the 124 poison shots.

The Shredder wrote:

Seshiru wrote:

Only one grenade in combat makes the fact that only the champions can take haywire hurt less.

No, not at all.

-Champions are still overcosted garbage.
-Grenades on champions are still overcosted garbage.
-Single haywire grenade attacks are still garbage.

At best, some other armies might come a little closer to our level of suck.


I think the best we can take from this is that our champions will remain as useful and popular as ever.

I agree with most of this. Vehicles, particularly super-heavy walkers, will have a major power boost if this ruling sticks. Plan to see a major resurgence of imperial knights.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

They sucked for you because you obviously used them wrong. They're cheaper than venoms if you do them with an MSU strategy. Like this list:

2 CADS

2x1 Lhamean in Venom w/Dual Splinter Cannons 150
10x 5 Kabalite Warriors in Raiders w/Disintegrators 950
6x Ravagers w/3 Dark Lances 750
TOTAL: 1850

This list gives you 18 vehicles, putting out up to 124 poison AP5 shots, 30 S5 AP2 shots, and 18 S8 AP2 lance shots per turn. Pre-FAQ, you could move all the raiders towards the enemy to maximize your use of rapid fire, and plan on jinking if any were targetted while still firing at BS4, only having to snapfire the 30 S5 AP2 shots.

The same list with venoms offer 17 vehicles that do not need to jink ever and puts out 222 poison shots. So yes they are cheaper but have way less firepower while providing a bigger footprint on the table, go down to 74 poison shots over 12" (while venom spam sits at 177). Raiders never were more effective than venoms and never will be. They only got worse.

A jinking raider has 3 HP with a 4+ save, compared to a non-jinking venom that gets 2 hp with a 5+ save. And against MEQ or better the dissies do the same ammount of damage as all those splinter shots. Math it out. Against light mech, the splinter shots can't even work, where the dissies can.

There are/were definitely tradeoffs to doing it with more raiders than venoms. The guy who won best DE at either LVO or Adepticon used a bunch of raiders.

Taking conventional advice puts you in a conventional position, which has been last place for DE this past year.

Quote :

Taking conventional advice puts you in a conventional position, which has been last place for DE this past year.

And going the unconventional route most often ends up behind the conventional position.
The problem with the tournament approach is, that it is not standard rules and spawns different metas due to different houserules.
A good example here would be lictor shame which was created to beat the tournement meta but would not be as effective in an unrestricted game that featured different armies than Eldar and SM.

Besides, the Dissi shots are quite even. Worse if you factor in 5+ cover or the meta bike lists.
If you argue tourney meta you should also realize that "light mech" is basically dead thanks to Eldar S6 spam and it is pretty likely that a light mech list WILL run into Eldar (given their popularity at events) and even if not, there is still Crons and Tau.
The only "light mech" list that you will face occasionally is a full gladius but even then the dissis wont save you.

Klaivex Charondyr wrote:

And going the unconventional route most often ends up behind the conventional position.

How would you know?

Preach some more mediocrity! In truth, unconventional lists will tend to gather at both ends of the spectrum, being both the best and the worst of a group. But one thing is clear: going with the exact same thing that everyone else is doing won't seperate you from the pack, for better or for worse.

Klaivex Charondyr wrote:

The only "light mech" list that you will face occasionally is a full gladius but even then the dissis wont save you.

Not occasionally. The full gladius formation was the single most popular list at adepticon. I played against 2 nearly identical full gladius with grav spam lists in the first 2 matches I played.

Quote :

Preach some more mediocrity! In truth, unconventional lists will tend to gather at both ends of the spectrum, being both the best and the worst of a group. But one thing is clear: going with the exact same thing that everyone else is doing won't seperate you from the pack, for better or for worse.

No. You wont get seperated but you are in a "safe" zone. Because no matter the meta or the house rule, this "average approach" will yield solid results. There is a reason why a given meta exists ans why you occasionally see high risk "anti-meta" lists.
And as long as you don't know anyones local meta to promote "unconventional lists" you will have a hard time identifying issues or balance out risk vs reward.

Quote :

Not occasionally. The full gladius formation was the single most popular list at adepticon. I played against 2 nearly identical full gladius with grav spam lists in the first 2 matches I played.

So 2 out of how many games?
Besides, did conventinal or unconventional lists prevail at adepticon?
Superfriends, Scat/Warpspider spam and Screamerstar do not seem highly unconventional to me.

Klaivex Charondyr wrote:

No. You wont get seperated but you are in a "safe" zone. Because no matter the meta or the house rule, this "average approach" will yield solidaverage results.

Fixed that for you.

Klaivex Charondyr wrote:

There is a reason why a given meta exists ans why you occasionally see high risk "anti-meta" lists.

Not every unconventional list is "anti-meta". An example of this is my old "freakshow" list that I made before the new DE codex came out. I used negative leadership modifiers from various DE and eldar sources to get a -5 to leadership, and used psychic shriek, basic damage, and tank shocks to force people off the table. It wasn't "Anti-Meta". It was a unique way of playing an army that was "Unconventional", and worked well.

Now, "freakshow" lists are very conventional, because it seems like the new codex was built to do it, but I think it did it better/easier in our previous codex...but that's a whole other can of worms.

Klaivex Charondyr wrote:

Quote :

Not occasionally. The full gladius formation was the single most popular list at adepticon. I played against 2 nearly identical full gladius with grav spam lists in the first 2 matches I played.

So 2 out of how many games?
Besides, did conventinal or unconventional lists prevail at adepticon?
Superfriends, Scat/Warpspider spam and Screamerstar do not seem highly unconventional to me.

It was out of 4 games. 1 Days worth of matches. So half. If you look at the actual lists, you'll find that it was actually fairly close to half the people playing, out of like 200 people. Because, if you play space marines, why wouldn't you take the gladius?

As for unconventional lists winning...the warpspider spam list was unconventional when it was used at LVO only about 1 month before adepticon, and I'm pretty sure that's what won. But of course you're going to have people copy your new, unconventional list, making it conventional in the future. That doesn't take anything away from the one who initially pioneered the idea. Further, if unconventional lists win only 30% of tournaments, but 90% of players play conventional lists, does that not reflect positively for unconventional lists?(This is even with no house rules. House rules are just another facet of the game for a true tournament player. It doesn't matter whether there are house rules or not, the cream will always rise to the top.)

I find value in unique thoughts and ideas, and those who come up with them. I am loath to accept anything simply because the majority of people do so. Nothing is more frightening to me than a majority of people who have incorrectly convinced themselves that they're right. It seems like you're a champion of correctness by commitee. You will never win this argument, and I will never change your mind because you'll resort to "well X number of people disagree with you", so let's just agree to disagree.

Good talk. No hard feelings. Have a great night!

@betraytheworld  you talking about the warp spider / CTC list?


That was nasty.  If only I had that many warp spiders (or talos)... lmao  I would make that list so conventional it would hurt!



GW sold out of warp spiders by the end of that week.

WhysoSully wrote:

@betraytheworld  you talking about the warp spider / CTC list?


That was nasty.  If only I had that many warp spiders (or talos)... lmao  I would make that list so conventional it would hurt!



GW sold out of warp spiders by the end of that week.

I'm not 100% on the exact composition of his list, except that I heard he had 9 units of warp spiders in a single detachment, presumably from the Craftworld Warhost, using the Pale Courts Warhost and 2x Aspect Hosts. I mostly heard about his list from other players coming by and chatting about it while I was playing in the tournament.

I think that was also before the ITC ruling limiting warp spiders to 1 flickerjump per opponent shooting phase too. If so, subsequent copycat lists wouldn't be quite so effective, though still good.