Post FAQ Tournament Tactica - AKA How to Win More

Ragnos wrote:

Rashkasha wrote:

Raiding force should be +2 CP if  you bring at least one detatchment of <Kabal>, one of <Cult> and one of <Coven> that qualify for an obsession.

Corollax would then get 9 CP from his list.

That's also what I think. The whole problem is that we have Raiding Party to allow us to use all three factions. But after the CP changes for battalion Raiding Party got useless. If we would get more CPs from it, everything would be fine.

Seriously, we need 3 HQs and 3 Troops to form a Raiding Party. This is (or should be) something very special only available to us! But for a batallion consisting of 2 HQs and 3 Troops you get 5 CPs, and everybody can do this. Raiding party has no reason to exist after the FAQ.

*

Its true but honestly even befor the faq raiding party was generally not our best option

Burnage wrote:

Cerve wrote:

One Farseer is nearly useless

This is completely untrue, and even after the Codex I'd argue that they're still a better force multiplier than all of our native HQs.

Doom is just too good.

I like Warlocks aslo, Jinx is so good. Jinx+Doom means you can kill anything in game without trying.

Before the codex i was using 2 Warlocks on bikes and 1 Farseer as my DE HQ's lol, its night and day when you can cast those powers.

amishprn86 wrote:

Burnage wrote:

Cerve wrote:

One Farseer is nearly useless

This is completely untrue, and even after the Codex I'd argue that they're still a better force multiplier than all of our native HQs.

Doom is just too good.

I like Warlocks aslo, Jinx is so good.  Jinx+Doom means you can kill anything in game without trying.

Before the codex i was using 2 Warlocks on bikes and 1 Farseer as my DE HQ's lol, its night and day when you can cast those powers.

I can see something like a Patrol Detachment containing a Farseer Skyrunner, a small unit of Rangers and a Jinx Hemlock Wraithfighter being an incredibly powerful addition to a 2k list. It's just over 400 points but the additional damage multiplication, firepower and board control that just those three units give is pretty incredible.

Burnage wrote:

Cerve wrote:

One Farseer is nearly useless

This is completely untrue, and even after the Codex I'd argue that they're still a better force multiplier than all of our native HQs.

Doom is just too good.

You still don't play around 1 Farseer if you want to play on psichic phase. If you have only one Doom, your opponent will just block you.
If you play around more valuable psychic powers, you can put a solid game on the table.

Ok it's not completely useless of course, but far from being a must. In fact all the Eldar/Ynnari lists that I had seen plays around Yvraine+1-3 psykers.

So back on topic, a single Farseer+1 Shining Spear unit it's not usefull. Both are pieces that needs a list around.
Reavers otherwise are fillers, not bases for a list.

Cerve wrote:

Anyway your playstile seems fitting more with Craftworlds than Drukhari. DE plays different from other armies, if you get amused from hammer units like Spears and others, you would prefer other armies with 360' well-rounded units (Eldar, Chaos, SM etc). Dark Reapers, Shining Spears, Wave Serpents, Obliterators etc are all costly, strong and well rounded units that can works alone. Where alle the DE choices works together as a choir. I know that sounds fluffy but just like Tyranids, Orks etc, Drukhari are amazing when their units cooperate together. Other than Talos, there are no choices that works alone in this Codex.

I prefer Dark Eldar to the others, I know how they play, I make them dance on the tabletop but I would have more fun with them if I didn't need to cut off a leg to use both my arms. That isn't a difference in gameplay style it's a bonkers limitation introduced for god only knows what reason. You're not going to convince me that it was a good gameplay design and that it doesn't hamstring our effectiveness. That is unless you have some kinda list idea hidden up your sleeve which bypasses this tax.

Quote :

Also if you take 2 battalions instead of 1 brigade you lose 2 command points and 1 character. You pay 450-550 points for 10 command points (+3 for the army makes 13). Here you "waste" 1 HQ compared to a brigade, but you do not have to "waste" the mandatory 3 heavy 3 elite and 3 fast attack slots. You apparently like to play with a lot of those and yes that is harder without giving up command points.

3 Scourges are borderline mandatory. 3 Heavy Support are in almost every list because our HS slots are so good. 3 Elites, well, I need Grotesques and a Beastmaster already, and who is going to balk at 1 more?

Quote :

I don't consider us a bad army at all and the fact that you have trouble breaking the system right now sort of makes me smile and think that balance for dark eldar is not that bad right now.

Playing the army as one army is me trying to break the system? I'm just trying to cobble together the forces I had not one edition ago. I would prefer us in 7th edition to this crap because at least we were one army.

Quote :

But I do agree with Cerve, maybe consider building an eldar army if you cannot field the dark eldar army you wanted, and keep considering the craftworld units over ours?

After Dark Reapers shot up 7 points each and Farseers/Warlocks/Spiritseers also got more expensive, Eldar are a sinking ship. Ynnari took a bat to the shins, Eldar are squarely in GW's nerfing sights, and I'm not going to waste my time practicing combos with an army that probably is going to lose its magic soon. That being said, I'm upset about the army structure of the Dark Eldar because I like playing Dark Eldar and it's frustrating as hell trying to get a coherent force out of my favorite army. And I've played netlist Eldar in 7th, it was boring.

Quote :

I can see something like a Patrol Detachment containing a Farseer Skyrunner, a small unit of Rangers and a Jinx Hemlock Wraithfighter being an incredibly powerful addition to a 2k list. It's just over 400 points but the additional damage multiplication, firepower and board control that just those three units give is pretty incredible.

Psychic powers are good but they aren't the end all be all people make them out to be.

My Brigade army works, whether the list is actually good or the result is of my sheer determination to not run pointless units idk. Being able to slap Agents of Vect on people and respawn my Wracks at will gives me a tactical advantage that has won me several games against Ynnari/Eldar and Space Marines. But if I was to chop everything up and run them as independent factions there's no way in hell I'd bring Wych Cults over Shining Spears Ynnari Eldar. It's not apples and oranges either. On the one hand you have useless harassing bikers, and on the other hand you have bikers that are even faster with Soulburst, hit even harder, and get a 3+ invul save from psychic powers with a 5+ FNP from Protect. One is just categorically better.

But how would this one detachment thing work? The only way I'd see it possible is:

1) You can mix Kabal, Cult & Coven and they all get to keep their obsessions. This is crazy strong! Way stronger than any other codex. You'd have melee units with a melee chapter tactic, shooty units with a shooty chapter tactic, and your durable units with a toughness chapter tactic ... all in one detachment. You could have 9x obsessions in the same army list. Even if they had of done this, what would have been the reaction of players of other armies? There would be on big pile of internet hate and this would have already been nerfed to hell in the FAQ.

2) All units in this mixed detachment share the same obsession. So you have a detachment where your Cult guys are getting a useless shooty-bonus, or your Kabal are getting advance and charge or +1 attacks. How useful is that? Otherwise they would have had to give some really generic obsessions that work for both melee and shooting, and are likely to be far less powerful than what we have now.

3) You're allowed to build a Kabal (for e.g.), with a Kabal obsession, and take any units from the other two just without their obsession. (This is what happens if you take Tempestus in a Catachan detachment). This is actually not unreasonable, has precedent, and wouldn't be ridiculously OP. However, now I have to think do I want to take my Cult units in this Kabal detachment if it loses me the obsession. Would I take Reavers if they don't have advance + charge? Maybe, but its lost me a big chunk of their effectiveness. If I do its more just a throw-away thing not a game-changing thing. Would I take Wyches? They also lose a huge amount, and they also lose a lot without a Succubus ... so I still may as well just build a separate detachment. (Note: I don't play Coven so maybe this would be less of an issue for them, but I can't imagine this would be an auto-pick over a separate detachment + obsession by any stretch).

In short, other than the ridiculous option (1) which never would have stood, none of these seem much better.

Is it better to take a Farseer and Spears? Of course. That is arguably the best HQ in the game, and post-FAQ possibly the best single unit in the game. Name a codex out there that wouldn't be improved taking a Farseer and Spears (if they were allowed to).

This is a really good codex, top 3, maybe even top 2. Apparently huge numbers of top players are starting DEldar now (Matt Root, Sean Nayden) ... when has that ever happened? Honestly I really don't understand all the butthurt on this one.

TheMortician wrote:

3) You're allowed to build a Kabal (for e.g.), with a Kabal obsession, and take any units from the other two just without their obsession. (This is what happens if you take Tempestus in a Catachan detachment). This is actually not unreasonable, has precedent, and wouldn't be ridiculously OP.

This is exactly what the system should be. It would still lead to trade-offs, as you say, but it also wouldn't severely hamper our list building in the same way that the current system does.

Eldar may have got nerfs in the FAQ, but overall I think they are stronger now than they were before. They still get first-turn charges (Spears + Quicken), they kept their stacking -1s to hit which is now a lot more powerful when they can't be deepstriked in t1, they have a deep codex so aren't hurt too much by the rule of 3. Eldar is still definitely #1 (for now at least).

Burnage wrote:

TheMortician wrote:

3) You're allowed to build a Kabal (for e.g.), with a Kabal obsession, and take any units from the other two just without their obsession. (This is what happens if you take Tempestus in a Catachan detachment). This is actually not unreasonable, has precedent, and wouldn't be ridiculously OP.

This is exactly what the system should be. It would still lead to trade-offs, as you say, but it also wouldn't severely hamper our list building in the same way that the current system does.

I don't disagree that this could/should have been done. I'm just not sure it would be changing my list design in any substantial way. At most I'd be taking 1 or 2 non-obsession units in a mixed detachment, but probably I wouldn't even do that. It is not game changing by any definition

amishprn86 wrote:

Burnage wrote:

Cerve wrote:

One Farseer is nearly useless

This is completely untrue, and even after the Codex I'd argue that they're still a better force multiplier than all of our native HQs.

Doom is just too good.

I like Warlocks aslo, Jinx is so good.  Jinx+Doom means you can kill anything in game without trying.

Before the codex i was using 2 Warlocks on bikes and 1 Farseer as my DE HQ's lol, its night and day when you can cast those powers.

Yup! Jinx and doom make life soooo much easier. I want pure DE, but taking a command detachment for CWE psychers is solid. Jetseer, jetlock and either a warlock or spiritseer on foot. Items to like the spirit seer as he/she gets full smite. Which is solid.

Burnage wrote:

TheMortician wrote:

3) You're allowed to build a Kabal (for e.g.), with a Kabal obsession, and take any units from the other two just without their obsession. (This is what happens if you take Tempestus in a Catachan detachment). This is actually not unreasonable, has precedent, and wouldn't be ridiculously OP.

This is exactly what the system should be. It would still lead to trade-offs, as you say, but it also wouldn't severely hamper our list building in the same way that the current system does.

This is such a good and straightforward idea.

TheMortician wrote:

Burnage wrote:

TheMortician wrote:

3) You're allowed to build a Kabal (for e.g.), with a Kabal obsession, and take any units from the other two just without their obsession. (This is what happens if you take Tempestus in a Catachan detachment). This is actually not unreasonable, has precedent, and wouldn't be ridiculously OP.

This is exactly what the system should be. It would still lead to trade-offs, as you say, but it also wouldn't severely hamper our list building in the same way that the current system does.

I don't disagree that this could/should have been done. I'm just not sure it would be changing my list design in any substantial way. At most I'd be taking 1 or 2 non-obsession units in a mixed detachment, but probably I wouldn't even do that. It is not game changing by any definition

Number 3 is definitely the best solution. Although my list wouldn't change much either. But it would give us more flexibility over all. That's how it should have been implemented. Can somebody tell GW to bring this in the next FAQ? ^^

Sorry for my ignorance, but what’s stopping us from doing that? I don’t think units are locked behind a tax wall like Beasts are...

Barrywise wrote:

Sorry for my ignorance, but what’s stopping us from doing that? I don’t think units are locked behind a tax wall like Beasts are...

You CAN build a detachment like that in terms of units but you would lose ALL the obsessions. What's being suggested is that only the non-Kabal (in the example given) units would lose their obsession. So you could take a Black Heart detachment and all Kabal units would gain the BH obsession. If you then added say, some Wyches, you would not gain any Cult obsession on those models but would also not lose the BH obsession on the Kabal units.

Burnage wrote:

Cerve wrote:

One Farseer is nearly useless

This is completely untrue, and even after the Codex I'd argue that they're still a better force multiplier than all of our native HQs.

Doom is just too good.

Yeah, and access to Jinx.

How can anyone say a Farseer is useless? Doom is the best spell in the game, and Jinx would be my vote for the second, outside of any movement shenanigans, oh wait, we have Quicken as well.

Mind blown.

Anyways, I understand TA's frustration here. List building for DE seems segmented for sure, and I do see the frustration for having to build a list with what seems like taxes. However, I also agree with the notion that our Obsessions are some of the best "traits" in the game.

HERO wrote:

Burnage wrote:

Cerve wrote:

One Farseer is nearly useless

This is completely untrue, and even after the Codex I'd argue that they're still a better force multiplier than all of our native HQs.

Doom is just too good.

Yeah, and access to Jinx.

Not with a Farseer, they have a different psychic discipline. You'd need either a Warlock, Spiritseer or Hemlock for Jinx and Quicken.

This is also why you do see a lot of Ynnari/Eldar lists with multiple different psykers - not for redundancy, but because Yvraine, a Farseer and a couple of Warlocks will all be bringing different tools to the table.

Count Adhemar wrote:

Barrywise wrote:

Sorry for my ignorance, but what’s stopping us from doing that? I don’t think units are locked behind a tax wall like Beasts are...

You CAN build a detachment like that in terms of units but you would lose ALL the obsessions. What's being suggested is that only the non-Kabal (in the example given) units would lose their obsession. So you could take a Black Heart detachment and all Kabal units would gain the BH obsession. If you then added say, some Wyches, you would not gain any Cult obsession on those models but would also not lose the BH obsession on the Kabal units.

OHHHH! Gotcha.

Thank you for the clarification.

Burnage wrote:

HERO wrote:

Burnage wrote:

Cerve wrote:

One Farseer is nearly useless

This is completely untrue, and even after the Codex I'd argue that they're still a better force multiplier than all of our native HQs.

Doom is just too good.

Yeah, and access to Jinx.

Not with a Farseer, they have a different psychic discipline. You'd need either a Warlock, Spiritseer or Hemlock for Jinx and Quicken.

This is also why you do see a lot of Ynnari/Eldar lists with multiple different psykers - not for redundancy, but because Yvraine, a Farseer and a couple of Warlocks will all be bringing different tools to the table.

I'm not talking about the Farseer. I'm talking about having access to CW, period.

LOUD NOISES!

Lol. I agree completely with whoever said Drukhari are top 3 - This is going to be the year if Dark Eldar friendos. What's awesome is that most Codexes have already come out and only really the Orks should be the biggest shake up (unless I'm forgettting someone big...). Maybe Harlies will be amazing and no one will ever run a Drukhari army w/out a Patrol of 'em.

You gotta remember we're Aeldari, we're *not* locked to only 3 HQs but like... 20 or whatever. It sucks in a sense but yeah, we're set I'd argue.

I guess we'll find out next month though - I've got two tournaments (one being a GT) to see how we REALLY do <3 I'll be sure to bitch and moan if I lose and blame the Rule of 3 lolol

FattimusMcGee wrote:

LOUD NOISES!

Lol. I agree completely with whoever said Drukhari are top 3 - This is going to be the year if Dark Eldar friendos. What's awesome is that most Codexes have already come out and only really the Orks should be the biggest shake up (unless I'm forgettting someone big...). Maybe Harlies will be amazing and no one will ever run a Drukhari army w/out a Patrol of 'em.

You gotta remember we're Aeldari, we're *not* locked to only 3 HQs but like... 20 or whatever. It sucks in a sense but yeah, we're set I'd argue.

I guess we'll find out next month though - I've got two tournaments (one being a GT) to see how we REALLY do <3 I'll be sure to bitch and moan if I lose and blame the Rule of 3 lolol

What GT tournament is next month?

https://www.40kambassadors.com/

Already full-up for Drukhari though

AH ok, thats Westside, im Eastside so i tend to just look around me. thanks.

TheMortician wrote:

This is a really good codex, top 3, maybe even top 2. Apparently huge numbers of top players are starting DEldar now (Matt Root, Sean Nayden) ... when has that ever happened? Honestly I really don't understand all the butthurt on this one.

Bringing up my name shall conjure me from the warp. I have not merely just started dark eldar I have dark eldar models that date back to 2001. Dark eldar is not a new beast to me. I have not bandwagoned like some foolish monkeigh. The darkness is inside and I unleash all the aelderi races upon an unsuspecting tournament universe.

Also yeah new de are awesome!1!!!1

Brought to you from the playful mind of Sean Nayden.

ordosean wrote:

TheMortician wrote:

This is a really good codex, top 3, maybe even top 2. Apparently huge numbers of top players are starting DEldar now (Matt Root, Sean Nayden) ... when has that ever happened? Honestly I really don't understand all the butthurt on this one.

Bringing up my name shall conjure me from the warp. I have not merely just started dark eldar I have dark eldar models that date back to 2001. Dark eldar is not a new beast to me. I have not bandwagoned like some foolish monkeigh. The darkness is inside and I unleash all the aelderi races upon an unsuspecting tournament universe.

Also yeah new de are awesome!1!!!1

Brought to you from the playful mind of Sean Nayden.

If you only bring the army out when it's good then it's still bandwagoning. Not saying that's a bad thing, I bandwagoned Eldar towards the end of 7th when I wanted to win at all costs, but I also ran DE competitively when I wanted to actually have fun.

Not that I have to justify anything. But I played them at events in 7th and pre codex in 8th. But obviously more at local levels. I’m a raging psychopath who’s down to do the crazy, but let’s all be real index talos were worse than rhinos, only so much one can do. But that doesn’t stop me from being distracted by their shiny spikes selves in the case and dragging them to the local game store.

But you can go back to whatever opinion you wish now.