Opinions on incubi

Scourge are already pretty good unit, i dont see the point of boosting them even more with obsession. And +6" on shredder and blaster would make them far more easier to deepstrike in a good position. And the fact Cabalite are a good choice even without their taxe role is a good thing.

Same logic apply to mandrake BTW, some obsession would benefit too much to them. Even for the incubi i'm not sure, i think they just should have made their strat work with modified 6+ and then they would be scary

Yeah - in essence the problem isn't so much that giving Mercs Obsessions would make them OP as that you'd have to increase their points to do so and/or change the Obsessions so that there wouldn't necessarily be 'One To Rule Them All'. Of course, Flayed Skull Scourges would also be terrifying ; )

I really like the fact that it doesn't seem like this community has really 'decided' on which Obsessions are 'best', which speaks to the strength of the design.

WRT Mercs though, I'd rather they stay slightly cheaper in comparison to other stuff instead of having 'access to all Obsessions'. It doesn't feel right to me to have the Mercs be just as 'Obssessed' as their current patrons: they're already super-obsessed in their own style of zany killing lol.

Cheers,

The Good Doctor.

I feel Incubi dont have a place anymore, with Grots, and Wyches, Incubi fall in the cracks. If they had the word "unmodified" removed from their rule and stratagem, then they would be worth it, this is even worst given that they dont gain obsessions for their restrictions.

I think they still have a purpose because they are quite cheap. So either take them in numbers or one small squad in a small game.

But I too, prefer grotesques.

Sent from Topic'it App

The comparaison with grotesque is a bit unfair considering how broken grotesque are now, nothing stand the comparaison in our dex, even Talos

Quauchtemoc wrote:

The comparaison with grotesque is a bit unfair considering how broken grotesque are now, nothing stand the comparaison in our dex, even Talos

Grots are broken? Seriously? I know we're used to having a load of rubbish but just because something in our codex is actually good now does not make it broken.

Count Adhemar wrote:

Quauchtemoc wrote:

The comparaison with grotesque is a bit unfair considering how broken grotesque are now, nothing stand the comparaison in our dex, even Talos

Grots are broken? Seriously? I know we're used to having a load of rubbish but just because something in our codex is actually good now does not make it broken.

How dare you have a decent, tough cc unit that is reasonably priced. Bad dark eldar!... Bad!

Sent from Topic'it App

On the internet (and spilling into the realspace, depending on how much time your local players spend in the internet subrealms) there are apparently only two modes of existence - OPAF and uplayable trash, the definitions of these terms as stable as Commorragh during a dysjunction. It is a terribly tiresome and pointless discussion to have when these are the modes people think in.

Incubi, Wyches and Grotesques are all quite different beasts because they are separated by the factions they hail from. You want the amazing Grotesques? That's great, but you also have to shell out for the Haemonculus and Wracks for a patrol (that's extra 115 points before even counting the cost of Grotesques themselves), or do something silly like three Grot squads of 3 etc. Wyches are the same, we first need to look into altering our army composition fundamentally before taking them and even they have checks and balances that determine just how potent they are due to their base attacks being AP0.

Incubi have a place in a pure Kabal force because you need some extra bodies to make those mandatory two-three Archons earn their points back, as just babysitting vehicles can be done by one of them, the other one-two go to utter waste. On their own, Archons are not that powerful to charge into units that really need dying and survive to tell the tale. The new Rule of 3 further rains on the party as we can't just take a Sslyth party bus (not a great idea to begin with) or a Lhamaean Poison Parade to accompany the Archon. So considering these factors, Incubi make a very reasonable addition to Archon's party boat.

This isn't 7E where we can simply place units next to each other and say which is the best - we now have to weigh in the added cost/benefit analysis of the various subfactions at play, and these are incredibly important factors that prevent us from simply mathammering it out 1v1 like a salty space marine player.

Siticus the Ancient wrote:

You want the amazing Grotesques? That's great, but you also have to shell out for the Haemonculus and Wracks for a patrol (that's extra 115 points before even counting the cost of Grotesques themselves), or do something silly like three Grot squads of 3 etc. Wyches are the same, we first need to look into altering our army composition fundamentally before taking them and even they have checks and balances that determine just how potent they are due to their base attacks being AP0.

For my Grots I just throw them in a Vanguard with 2x5 Mandrakes and be done with it... Not a huge fan of Wracks; rather have another Kabalite Venom... Similarly, my one unit of wyches show up as a secondary choice in my Scourge Outrider detachment... sometimes with a unit of Reavers.

Cheers,

The Good Doctor.

Sure, Vanguard with two squads of Mandrakes works, but you're looking at an even greater investment of 160 for the ten Mandrakes and 70 for the Haemonculus, totaling up to 230 without factoring in the Grotesques themselves. And if you're going for Mandrakes, you can as well go for Incubi (the topic of this discussion!), depending on what your approach to the battle is, how much transports you got et cetera. It's hardly a simple choice, which is what my point is.

The Mandrakes themselves are quite similar to Incubi with same amount of CC attacks at worse S and AP, they have a solid ranged attack and a delivery mechanism, but they are quite a bit more fragile, even with that -1 to hit - 5++ does little against massed fire. But each unit does something different - where Incubi rather go for MEQ with a reasonable chance to deal some damage, the Mandrakes are more of an area denial and harassment unit. Even just placed one against the other for the same points they do very different things.

It's the invisible cost of giving up something in order to take something that needs to be taken into account. Our new codex has a lot of depth to it in this regard and is very different from the lesser races and their simple ways of forming an army. This ain't no Eldar where everything's Alaitoc and then you just take whatever shooting or melee that catches your eye the most.

Exept that mandrake are not a tax like Wracks, and we get 1 more Cp too

Siticus the Ancient wrote:

Sure, Vanguard with two squads of Mandrakes works, but you're looking at an even greater investment of 160 for the ten Mandrakes and 70 for the Haemonculus, totaling up to 230 without factoring in the Grotesques themselves. And if you're going for Mandrakes, you can as well go for Incubi (the topic of this discussion!), depending on what your approach to the battle is, how much transports you got et cetera. It's hardly a simple choice, which is what my point is.

The Mandrakes themselves are quite similar to Incubi with same amount of CC attacks at worse S and AP, they have a solid ranged attack and a delivery mechanism, but they are quite a bit more fragile, even with that -1 to hit - 5++ does little against massed fire. But each unit does something different - where Incubi rather go for MEQ with a reasonable chance to deal some damage, the Mandrakes are more of an area denial and harassment unit. Even just placed one against the other for the same points they do very different things.

It's the invisible cost of giving up something in order to take something that needs to be taken into account. Our new codex has a lot of depth to it in this regard and is very different from the lesser races and their simple ways of forming an army. This ain't no Eldar where everything's Alaitoc and then you just take whatever shooting or melee that catches your eye the most.

Its not an investment if you already are taking 2 Mandrakes and you need another detachment anyways, so the HQ isnt a tax for taking Grots.

I'd rather take Mandrakes as well, at least mandrakes can hurt throgh Invuls and are good infantry killers as well. I dont think i'm ever going to play Incubi in their current state.

Between Mandrakes, Scourge, Grots, Court, Incubi, etc.. someone has to give and Incubi fall short IMO.

The Best use for Incubi are for freakshow amries, they give basically a -1 (they count the LD as instead of over), if you are going a Aoup for LD with harlequins and CWE, you can kill something like Mortarion in 1 go between the LD powers, PGL's, Incubi and Coven near, its easy to get -7 LD then cast powers to force MWs on said LD.

And finally, there is also "invisible" costs to Incubi, they NEED a transport, where Mandrakes, Scourges, and Grots do not. If you have the need for the 3/4th HQ anyways then Grots dont have an HQ tax, DE in general already are forcing HQ tax's, if you build you list correctly you can minimize the HQ tax.

Count Adhemar wrote:

Quauchtemoc wrote:

The comparaison with grotesque is a bit unfair considering how broken grotesque are now, nothing stand the comparaison in our dex, even Talos

Grots are broken? Seriously? I know we're used to having a load of rubbish but just because something in our codex is actually good now does not make it broken.

They are doing quite obnoxiously well in many a battle report. I don't know if I would call them broken, but they definitely punch (and take a punch) well above what you'd expect. I wouldn't be surprised if they got nerfed in September.

withershadow wrote:

Count Adhemar wrote:

Quauchtemoc wrote:

The comparaison with grotesque is a bit unfair considering how broken grotesque are now, nothing stand the comparaison in our dex, even Talos

Grots are broken? Seriously? I know we're used to having a load of rubbish but just because something in our codex is actually good now does not make it broken.

They are doing quite obnoxiously well in many a battle report.  I don't know if I would call them broken, but they definitely punch (and take a punch) well above what you'd expect.  I wouldn't be surprised if they got nerfed in September.

Bull Ogryns (spelling?) are bascially the same thing and many are taking them and havent see any nerfs, i dont think Grots are to much stronger, they are better at different things for sure, but nothing OP about them. They are a good unit, equal to Talos and Wraiths IMO.

Siticus the Ancient wrote:

It's the invisible cost of giving up something in order to take something that needs to be taken into account.

I get it, yeah... I think the term you're looking for there is 'opportunity cost'. Mandrakes are efficient and flexible damage dealers and harassers. Wracks are... tough.

As the poster following you suggested: yes, it's more expensive to get the Mandrake Vanguard over the Patrol, but for me Mandrakes are a core unit - they can do a tonne of work for their price and don't need any buffs to be a solid threat thanks to their mortal wounds ability. I take 2x5 in basically any list over 1500, so leveraging them to get a CP in a Prophets Vanguard detachment makes more sense to me than does taking a unit that I don't want in the first place (wracks).

For the shining moment before the FAQ, patrol lists made sense. Now 9 times out of 10 you're better of with a Battalion + 1 or 2 other +1CP detachments (for me it's a Vanguard and an Outrider - I play Merc-heavy).

Cheers,

The Good Doctor.

amishprn86 wrote:

withershadow wrote:

Count Adhemar wrote:

Quauchtemoc wrote:

The comparaison with grotesque is a bit unfair considering how broken grotesque are now, nothing stand the comparaison in our dex, even Talos

Grots are broken? Seriously? I know we're used to having a load of rubbish but just because something in our codex is actually good now does not make it broken.

They are doing quite obnoxiously well in many a battle report.  I don't know if I would call them broken, but they definitely punch (and take a punch) well above what you'd expect.  I wouldn't be surprised if they got nerfed in September.

Bull Ogryns (spelling?) are bascially the same thing and many are taking them and havent see any nerfs, i dont think Grots are to much stronger, they are better at different things for sure, but nothing OP about them. They are a good unit, equal to Talos and Wraiths IMO.

Grots are far stronger than BullGryns, they have more Hp , More Attack , They hit on 2+ on turn 3 , move faster and reroll the charge, have more T if a haemy is close, have the 6+++ and cost less. The only advantage of bullgryn is strength but i dont think thats enough

The last time I took an Incubi unit was with the Index. I charged and slaughtered a 5 man plague marine unit but then they instantly got wiped off the board by counter shooting.

There were def some things I may have been able to do to mitigate the counter shooting at them but I can't really remember. It was probably the first game of 8th I had played and while I was happy with what they did, it was followed by deep, depressing sadness as I watched them get turned into red mist.

I am going to bust them out again to test out some more in the future. Do you guys think five is a decent sized unit for them to do what they need to do? That's what I'm currently running with them and I really haven't felt the desire or need to get another five of them.

[quote="amishprn86"]

withershadow wrote:

Bull Ogryns (spelling?) are bascially the same thing and many are taking them and havent see any nerfs, i dont think Grots are to much stronger, they are better at different things for sure, but nothing OP about them. They are a good unit, equal to Talos and Wraiths IMO.

They are different units and fulfill different things.
But grots are for their points much better.
move 6 or 7 (grots are better)
3 attacks ap -1 s7 d2 (with 1 extra on the charge) or 5 attacks ap -2 s5 (hit on 2+ from tunr 3+)
(hard to judge, I would say there is little difference, possibly a minor advantage for bulgryns)
3 wounds and a 3++ or 4 wounds and a 4++ 6+++(grots better)
35 points or 42 points (grots better)

Now compare them with ogryns
move 6 or 7 (grots are better)
3 attacks ap -1 s5 (with 1 extra on the charge) or 5 attacks ap -2 s5 (hit on 2+ from tunr 3+)
(nearly double the damage for the grots)
3 wounds and a 5+ or 4 wounds and a 4++ 6+++(grots are over 1.6-3.1 times more durable depending on what is shooting at them)
3 range 12" s5 ap0 shots (jeah ogryns found the reason for their cost)
35 points or 30 points (this is closer together than the bulgryns)

Has anyone found a good use for Incubi yet? I really want to use some. The only use I can see is as a bullet-sponge bodyguard for characters in a transport that can add enough power to wipe squads on the charge. I'm a returning neophyte though so don't know if that's competitive.

I think GW made Incubi suck on purpose because they look so cool that people will buy them even if not using them in tournaments, so it's more sales.

I wrecked face with them when 8th ed started. They were pretty damn lethal.

I've been using a unit of 5 as an escort for my djinn blade archon and I've been enjoying using them. Don't expect them to last long or go toe to toe with any elite combat unit with an invul save, but I find they do well wiping out small squads and clearing objectives, and I tend to use the onslaught stratagem the first time they hit melee because after that they are likely to start losing models. Definitely not a competitive choice, but since our army is solid these days unless you're going into a super competitive game you can afford to drop the 80pts on a unit that isn't the most optimal choice.

Also a word of advice, if you do use them don't forget that the klaivex is much stronger than your standard unit sergeant with +1ws, attack and wounds. Always forget a unit of 5 is 6 wounds, not 5.

as everyone said if you wanna take them for fun they are amazing and one of the best looking models of the game...
but realistically they should be flat 2 damage imo OR they should all have the lethal precision rule of the Klaivex

Another nice buff would be if they gained the Kabal keyword to futher cement them as the Archon's bodyguard (rerolling 1s to hit) and provide some nice synergy with Poisoned Tongue (reroll 1s to wound) or +1 to PfP with BH for hitting on 2s on turn 2 & inflicting fear faster.

But they are not Body Guards.....

They should not have Kabal key word, that would completely counter their fluff.

They just need their 6 rule to be able to be buff, with Drahzar and PFP turn 3 would be on 4+ instead of 6+.

They are absolutely bodyguards. It's often brought up in their fluff that they are used as such. Some of their earliest art is them bodyguarding Vect, heck even DoW used Incubi as bodyguards for the Archon in that (and yes I know video games aren't canon but it's very consistent with their representation). In Path of the Archon Morr is in fact a bodyguard to an Archon. He's an Incubus. His contract is with a kabal and his job is to protect the Archon. When he kills him because said Archon is chaos tainted other Incubi from his shrine go to KILL HIM to clear their name.

I also disagree with it not fitting their fluff because they are often associated with kabals, and more importantly IMO it would give them synergy that they currently lack and would greatly appreciate. Incubi rerolling 1s to hit and wound (which having an Archon + BH or PT could give) would vastly improve their combat ability I mean hitting on 2s rerolling 1s for an entire unit sounds awesome.

I'd say a new detachment type like the Vigilus defiant book that gives Incubi the Kabal keyword, another as well and a strat or two would improve them greatly. If we want to improve Drazhar further I'd say give him the troupe master ability and allow all Incubi to reroll wounds (probably within 6 inches). Combine it with the changes above and I feel people would gladly use Incubi (although I will say Drazhar should not have any way of gaining the kabal keyword. Just generic Incubi)