3 Patrols might not be best

7CP is so low it shouldn't even be considered playable with the way this army is stacking up. You're gonna need CP to make it functional let alone win.

If I do a battalion, its gonna be spiritseers and warriors. Blaster Scourges, dissie ravagers, mandrakes and reavers will be my heavy hitters

TeenageAngst wrote:

7CP is so low it shouldn't even be considered playable with the way this army is stacking up. You're gonna need CP to make it functional let alone win.

Lol, how did you reach this rationale? And why is it specific to our army?

HERO wrote:

TeenageAngst wrote:

7CP is so low it shouldn't even be considered playable with the way this army is stacking up. You're gonna need CP to make it functional let alone win.

Lol, how did you reach this rationale?  And why is it specific to our army?

For me im using a couple for DSing and the 3 for Agents of Vect, then if i need fire and fade, or shoot/attack twice etc.. It will go by fast.

HERO wrote:

TeenageAngst wrote:

7CP is so low it shouldn't even be considered playable with the way this army is stacking up. You're gonna need CP to make it functional let alone win.

Lol, how did you reach this rationale?  And why is it specific to our army?

Dark Eldar, even with the updates in the codex from what I've seen, cannot rely on their units being "good" in and of themselves. They need those command point bonuses to perform their necessary functions. Some armies do, some armies don't. Harlequins and Eldar can get along with a comparatively small pool of command points, while Ad-Mech and Space Marines stack them to the heavens. Obviously more = better but diminishing returns kick in much later for some and soon Dark Eldar will be that way.

Of course, I understand the need for CPs gentlemen.

I'm more interested in the discussion of: At what point do we sacrifice movement, damage (firepower and/or CC), and certain units being competitively viable to take additional CPs?

This might be a key difference in how we build lists. For me, CPs are a secondary concern whereas the firepower my list can bring in an alpha is a key concern. In other words, I don't let CPs dictate what kind of lists I build. I let the dust settle and then count up what my list can generate after.

Agents of Vect costs 3 which means my lits of 7 can use it twice. However, Lab Cunning gives a possibility for more, but I don't have the math behind this because obviously, it depends from army to army. I'm aware of these numbers but otherwise build my list as I intend it (which is, balanced around competitive tournament play centric to my local meta).

Quote :

I'm more interested in the discussion of: At what point do we sacrifice movement, damage (firepower and/or CC), and certain units being competitively viable to take additional CPs?

Well this wouldn't be a problem if we could take 6 Patrols or 1 Brigade.

CPs are very important. You'll still need a functioning army, ofc, but CPs are more than a little boost. They are crucial, and without them you stand no chance to defeat a list that makes good use of them.

HERO wrote:

Of course, I understand the need for CPs gentlemen.

I'm more interested in the discussion of: At what point do we sacrifice movement, damage (firepower and/or CC), and certain units being competitively viable to take additional CPs?

This might be a key difference in how we build lists.  For me, CPs are a secondary concern whereas the firepower my list can bring in an alpha is a key concern.  In other words, I don't let CPs dictate what kind of lists I build.  I let the dust settle and then count up what my list can generate after.

Agents of Vect costs 3 which means my lits of 7 can use it twice.  However, Lab Cunning gives a possibility for more, but I don't have the math behind this because obviously, it depends from army to army.  I'm aware of these numbers but otherwise build my list as I intend it (which is, balanced around competitive tournament play centric to my local meta).

This was my experience with the codex. The improved volume of firepower due to lower points costs felt like more of a bonus than the Strategems did. Some of the Strategems were very powerful, even won me more than few outright, but the basic units and their improvements contributed to my success far more than Strategems did.

Again, my and any other player's tactics/meta/unit selection will not be in total agreement. I found that farming CP instead of focusing on functionality made my armies not function the way that I play. Just my style, nothing definitive obviously. That said, calling a 7CP list unplayable is a bit hyperbolic.

And like I said, this wouldn't be an issue if we could just take 6 patrols or 1 brigade.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Quote :

I'm more interested in the discussion of: At what point do we sacrifice movement, damage (firepower and/or CC), and certain units being competitively viable to take additional CPs?

Well this wouldn't be a problem if we could take 6 Patrols or 1 Brigade.

We can take one Brigade

Well, i tried to diagnosis my needs for CP with this new codex :

- I'll need 3 CP to deepstrike vehicles.

- I'd like 1 CP to have extra WL traits.



So with only 7 CP, i'd have to play the game with 3 CP, which is really scarce.

Quote :

We can take one Brigade>

But then you either get no obsession, or you have to play full Kabalite/Coven/Cult (one of the three).

Quauchtemoc wrote:

TeenageAngst wrote:

Quote :

I'm more interested in the discussion of: At what point do we sacrifice movement, damage (firepower and/or CC), and certain units being competitively viable to take additional CPs?

Well this wouldn't be a problem if we could take 6 Patrols or 1 Brigade.

We can take one Brigade

We can take one Brigade if we want to lose exactly all of our benefits. We cannot take one Brigade.

? No you juste need to fill elite and Fast attack with scourge and mandrake/Incubi.

Considering scourge and mandrake get a great imrovement thats seems ok to me

But then you play exactly 1/3 of your army. For a thematical list, why not. But i like having more than 6 unit entries to fill a Briguade.

Quauchtemoc wrote:

? No you juste need to fill elite and Fast attack with scourge and mandrake/Incubi.

Considering scourge and mandrake get a great imrovement thats seems ok to me

So you'd have an entire Brigade limited to only 1/3rd of the codex? Yeah that's not functional. You hit a brick wall the moment you encounter something that is good against that particular third of your army.

Being able to take 6 patrols would be the better option. Or, you know, NOT losing obsessions for daring to run your army as one army.

You can run 2-3 Battalions, which isn't that bad.

But I hope the 6 patrols get legalized in matched play.

Mppqlmd wrote:

But then you play exactly 1/3 of your army. For a thematical list, why not. But i like having more than 6 unit entries to fill a Briguade.

well me too but considering cabal spam is probably the best competitive option i'm not sure its a bad choice for competitive lis

I think Cult spam is going to be very popular, and i'm not sure Kabal is better.

Mppqlmd wrote:

I think Cult spam is going to be very popular, and i'm not sure Kabal is better.

I would like thats but i'm not sure about this

Mppqlmd wrote:

You can run 2-3 Battalions, which isn't that bad.

But I hope the 6 patrols get legalized in matched play.

It is if you want to include, say, one Talos or one Chronos but need to have an entire detachment dedicated to having it not screw up your army.

Considering the mentality of this edition (that is all about blitzkriek and alpha striking), I think many are going to run 2*12 bikes to first-turn charge the heck out of the enemy.

T. A. : what's your point anyway ? Everyone agrees that the best thing to hope for it the 6 patrols things to become legal in matched play. I'm only stating that the army is playable with battalions. Sure, it restrains your freedom, and that's why we should hope for the intended rule (6 patrols being legal) to become authorized. But just because you can't do whatever you fancy without having to plan accordingly doesn't mean your army is garbage and your whole life is a lie.

@Mppqlmd I think Kabal have better troops, but Cult has better Fast Attack and their HQ is a lot cheaper.

By the way, is it me or does Kabal really not have much? With the removal of Trueborn and with Scourges and Incubi not being Kabal, it seems all you've really got is the Archon and Kabalites.

Oh, and the court, I guess. Seems weird to me that Sslyth and Ur-Ghuls are more Kabal-y than actual Dark Eldar. :/

Ravagers That's the only thing that makes Kabal really shine.

Quote :

T. A. : what's your point anyway ? Everyone agrees that the best thing to hope for it the 6 patrols things to become legal in matched play. I'm only stating that the army is playable with battalions. Sure, it restrains your freedom, and that's why we should hope for the intended rule (6 patrols being legal) to become authorized. But just because you can't do whatever you fancy without having to plan accordingly doesn't mean your army is garbage and your whole life is a lie.

I'm just pointing out the glaringly obvious flaw our army has that no other army in the game currently has: that being we're now 3 incompatible pieces thrown together in a mess. When I figure out a way to properly compensate for this handicap I will settle down.