HomeDark Eldar WikiDark Eldar ResourcesNull CityFAQUsergroupsRegisterLog in
Share | 
 

 incubi idea

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
sumguy777
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 168
Join date : 2017-01-15

PostSubject: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 06:56

so BizarreShowbiz post got me thinking....

i was thinking of an idea of using a heamonculus from the grotesquerie formation to run with them taking a webway portal. that way they come down on turn 2 in position with a 5+ feal no pain save and fear. next turn they gain ferocious assault giving you +1 more strength. and fearless as long as the heamonculus remains alive.

also a liqulifier gun might be good as a deterrent for getting attacked and some punch.

thoughts?
Back to top Go down
BetrayTheWorld
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2665
Join date : 2013-04-04

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 07:14

It's a lot of points to invest in something that isn't going to help you until turn 3 at the earliest. By turn 3, most of my games are all but decided and nearly over.

Then, when you DO finally use them, they're still just offensively a unit of Incubi. So consider the alternative points investments:

haemy + wwp and liquifier is 120. That's almost enough to get another transport and unit of incubi with a Klaivex.

So basically, instead of getting all complicated with it, you could just get twice as many incubi and transports, and have them on the table able to do things from turn 1. If you could assault after deep strike, I'd support the idea. Unfortunately, deep striking is only really useful for ranged units or units like space marines who can automatically arrive turn 1.

_________________
Back to top Go down
sumguy777
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 168
Join date : 2017-01-15

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 07:20

i am not sure if i am reading this right but in the FAQ it states
Q: In a Dark Eldar/Eldar alliance, does a webway portal allow you to use Gate of Infinity without scattering?
A: No. The webway portal only works when its unit is arriving from Deep Strike Reserve. A unit targeted by Gate of Infinity uses the rules for Deep Striking, but they are not arriving from Deep Strike Reserve when they do so.

so does a wwp not count as deepstrike? meaning you can charge?

i mean you can cut the liqufier if you want but in position you can hit probably 5-6 guys with the gun and 1/3 chance to by pass all armor saves. that seems very good.

edit sorry 1 more thing, to make grotesques useful you need the heamy (cause of the formation) so you are really spending an extra 50 points to make another insane unit with 3+ and 5+ saves.

if you were taking the DA formation spending 300+ points on one unit that wont really do anything till turn 3 is about the same.
Back to top Go down
BetrayTheWorld
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2665
Join date : 2013-04-04

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 08:07

sumguy777 wrote:

so does a wwp not count as deepstrike? meaning you can charge?

No, you're still deep striking, AND arriving from reserve. That FAQ question was asking about a psychic power that allowed you to teleport around the table, and was asking if a WWP would stop you from scattering when you teleport.

sumguy777 wrote:
i mean you can cut the liqufier if you want but in position you can hit probably 5-6 guys with the gun and 1/3 chance to by pass all armor saves. that seems very good.

Seems like it, but it's not. It's only S3, which means it only wounds T4 models on a 5+, and THEN you only have a 50% chance of it denying their armour save. So assuming you manage to hit 5 space marines(harder than you think), that'd result in 1.67 wounds, reduced to 1.25 when you account for both armour save and the possibility to deny armour saves. So for 15 points, you kill 1 space marine if you manage to get the perfect shot that can get the entire squad in your template. Not great.

sumguy777 wrote:
edit sorry 1 more thing,  to make grotesques useful you need the heamy (cause of the formation) so you are really spending an extra 50 points to make another insane unit with 3+ and 5+ saves.

Yeah, this logic doesn't fly, because nothing says you have to take the grotesquerie to begin with, OR Incubi, for that matter. The point I was trying to make was that you were applying 120 points worth of stuff to a unit that doesn't get 120 points worth of benefit from it. Other units COULD get the full benefit from those points. Incubi just isn't it. An example would be using that same Haemonculus with WWP in a unit of wraithguard with D-scythes. The pinpoint deep strike of the WWP gives them perfect position to get maximum benefit from their D-templates, most likely on turn 2. Because wraithguard's primary source of offensive output is shooting, they're able to extract at least an entire extra/earlier round of benefit from the Haemonculus + WWP than a melee-dedicated unit can.

You have to bear in mind that when you deep strike, you're giving up board presence, and potentially extra turns. A quick example of this is deep striking scourges vs. a ravager. People will often compare 1 round of shooting from the ravager to 1 round of shooting from the deep striking scourges and come to the conclusion that deep striking heat lance scourges are far superior. But what they fail to account for is that the ravager gets an entire extra turn of time on the table with which to fire at enemies, so you have to consider the extra shots of the ravager, on top of the fact that it's not a suicide unit like the scourges are.

Raw numbers can be accurate while also misleading, as in the aforementioned case.

sumguy777 wrote:
if you were taking the DA formation spending 300+ points on one unit that wont really do anything till turn 3 is about the same.

I don't recommend the DA formation, and neither do most of the credible competitive players here. It's a 300 point unit that folds instantly to grav fire in a meta where grav spam is the most common tactic used. There is a lot of bad advice floating around out there. I used to correct a lot of it to ensure noobs didn't get bad advice, but the mods said I had to add niceties to my posts so people didn't feel bad, and I don't have that sort of time with the length and quality of my posts already. So it's basically "buyer beware" when it comes to advice around here. There are several high level competitive players here. Find one with a proven track record who's style you like and make a friend. If someone subsequently makes a claim and you want to check the veracity of their statements but don't want to be rude, PM your friend and ask them about that particular person's credentials. There are several great players on here, but there are also plenty of players who give advice, sincerely trying to help, but who sort of need help themselves.

_________________
Back to top Go down
sumguy777
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 168
Join date : 2017-01-15

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 09:15

wow, i feel like yoda just spoke. i completely see your point now. I do like the grotesquire formation though, it has never disappointed me. the heamy tax kinda sucks but you gotta do what you gotta do i guess. if there another way you would use the heamy? something with in the dark eldar codex?
Back to top Go down
Count Adhemar
Dark Lord of Granbretan
avatar

Posts : 6629
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : London

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 09:34

sumguy777 wrote:
wow, i feel like yoda just spoke. i completely see your point now.  I do like the grotesquire formation though, it has never disappointed me. the heamy tax kinda sucks but you gotta do what you gotta do i guess. if there another way you would use the heamy? something with in the dark eldar codex?

I don't really regard the Haem as a tax in the Grotesquerie formation as he bumps them to Fearless on turn 1 and Grots really need that due to their crappy Ld.

_________________

You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting. In what world could you possibly beat me?
Back to top Go down
Jimsolo
Dracon
avatar

Posts : 3028
Join date : 2013-10-31
Location : Illinois

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 13:52

He also gives them a higher LD for LD dependent effects such as Psychic Shriek or Dominate, both of which Grots are quite vulnerable to.
Back to top Go down
BizarreShowbiz
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 245
Join date : 2014-11-16

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 15:59

Jimsolo wrote:
He also gives them a higher LD for LD dependent effects such as Psychic Shriek or Dominate, both of which Grots are quite vulnerable to.

No he doesnt, at least not in the case of a psychic shriek, as it uses the  most common ld value in the unit, not the highest.

_________________
Engalie 40k - Your daily fix of spanish Dark Eldar tactica, now with 100% more Ynnari and Harlequins.
Back to top Go down
http://engalie40k.blogspot.com.es/
Count Adhemar
Dark Lord of Granbretan
avatar

Posts : 6629
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : London

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 16:18

BizarreShowbiz wrote:
Jimsolo wrote:
He also gives them a higher LD for LD dependent effects such as Psychic Shriek or Dominate, both of which Grots are quite vulnerable to.

No he doesnt, at least not in the case of a psychic shriek, as it uses the  most common ld value in the unit, not the highest.

I don't see anything either way on this in the rules or FAQ. Where are you getting that from?

_________________

You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting. In what world could you possibly beat me?
Back to top Go down
Skulnbonz
Wych
avatar

Posts : 556
Join date : 2012-07-13
Location : Tampa

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 17:24

BizarreShowbiz wrote:
Jimsolo wrote:
He also gives them a higher LD for LD dependent effects such as Psychic Shriek or Dominate, both of which Grots are quite vulnerable to.

No he doesnt, at least not in the case of a psychic shriek, as it uses the  most common ld value in the unit, not the highest.
Leadership is not like Armor saves, where the majority rules. You ALWAYS use the highest leadership available unless specifically stated otherwise.

That being said, Deepstriking anything with no reserve manipulation is asking for trouble. Your Incubi may not be in until turn 4, and can't charge or do anything but absorb bullets until turn 5!
As betray said- Most of my games are over by turn 3, or i already know the outcome. I would rather my models die on the field than me regret them not coming in when i need them. There are times when reserves are a smart play, but almost never with a HTH based unit, and NEVER without some reserve modifier, be it through allies or warlord trait.

_________________
ATTITUDE: It is the difference between an ORDEAL and an ADVENTURE!
Back to top Go down
http://www.fantasybattles.com
BizarreShowbiz
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 245
Join date : 2014-11-16

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 18:14

You would be right if Psychic Shriek was a Leadership test, as per this rules:



But it is not a Leadership check, or any kind of check for that matter. You roll 3D6 and substract the enemy leadership, as you can see here.


Thus, you are using leadership as an atribute, and when an unit has different attributes against wich you have to roll, you do so against the mayority value, as exemplified by the WSattribute in the to hit roll, T attribute in the to wound roll, Armor Save attribute in the to wound roll vs grav weaponry and Initiative attribute vs warp spiders.

TL;DR: Psychich shriek is not a check of any kind and thus doesnt follow the rules for them. Becouse it isnt one

Also, I've expent more time that I dare to admit trying to make servimg not to show the images sideways for some reason. I gave up, so I guess you'll have to tilt your head. Sorry.

_________________
Engalie 40k - Your daily fix of spanish Dark Eldar tactica, now with 100% more Ynnari and Harlequins.
Back to top Go down
http://engalie40k.blogspot.com.es/
BetrayTheWorld
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2665
Join date : 2013-04-04

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 18:17

sumguy777 wrote:
wow, i feel like yoda just spoke. i completely see your point now.  I do like the grotesquire formation though, it has never disappointed me. the heamy tax kinda sucks but you gotta do what you gotta do i guess. if there another way you would use the heamy? something with in the dark eldar codex?

Haha, thanks. Yeah, the grotesquerie haemy improves both it's own power from pain by 1 level(granting fearless), and that of any unit they join, on top of projecting the -1 leadership bubble gained from the grotesquerie detachment. So basically ANY unit is improved by the haemy joining them. The haemy starts by giving any unit they join fearless, and if the non-covens unit they join has power from pain, they also get FnP 6+ on turn 1. Unfortunately, the best ways to utilize the haemonculus require eldar allies, because eldar have more capable shooting infantry, and shooting get's the greatest benefit from using a WWP.

Skulnbonz wrote:

Leadership is not like Armor saves, where the majority rules. You ALWAYS use the highest leadership available unless specifically stated otherwise

This is actually debateable, leaning towards BizareShowBiz's interpretation because the rulebook only says you use the highest leadership in the unit for leadershp tests. Since psychic shriek doesn't trigger a leadership test, and instead just has a wound system based on the leadership stat, it stands to reason that it would use the majority stat, just like normal wounds, or wounds from other weapons that damage based on a stat, like monofilament weapons that wound against initiative.

EDIT: @BizarreShowbiz You beat me in the fastest finger competition to post in your defense, but I typed all of it before I knew that, so I posted it anyhow. Wink

_________________
Back to top Go down
Jimsolo
Dracon
avatar

Posts : 3028
Join date : 2013-10-31
Location : Illinois

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 18:22

I agree with your interpretation, but I've literally never encountered a TO who ruled it that way.

The method in which Psychic Shriek interacts with mixed-LD units is not covered explicitly anywhere. The rules for taking Ld tests could be used as a shaky precedent, but they don't fit. The rules for mixed Toughness units getting wounded could be as well, but they don't fit either. I'd prefer the latter, where majority rules, but literally every event I've ever been in has ruled the reverse. Every event that I've ever emailed ahead to because I was considering going to has said the same. Since the Haemonculus Covens supplement has come out and I started doing Freakshows, literally not one single judge has seen it the opposite way.

So I don't think it's unreasonable to think that trend will continue.
Back to top Go down
BizarreShowbiz
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 245
Join date : 2014-11-16

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 18:28

@Jimsolo Thats weird, in Spain everyone applies it this way.

_________________
Engalie 40k - Your daily fix of spanish Dark Eldar tactica, now with 100% more Ynnari and Harlequins.
Back to top Go down
http://engalie40k.blogspot.com.es/
sumguy777
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 168
Join date : 2017-01-15

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 18:45

Skulnbonz wrote:
BizarreShowbiz wrote:
Jimsolo wrote:
He also gives them a higher LD for LD dependent effects such as Psychic Shriek or Dominate, both of which Grots are quite vulnerable to.

No he doesnt, at least not in the case of a psychic shriek, as it uses the  most common ld value in the unit, not the highest.
Leadership is not like Armor saves, where the majority rules. You ALWAYS use the highest leadership available unless specifically stated otherwise.

That being said, Deepstriking anything with no reserve manipulation is asking for trouble. Your Incubi may not be in until turn 4, and can't charge or do anything but absorb bullets until turn 5!
As betray said- Most of my games are over by turn 3, or i already know the outcome.  I would rather my models die on the field than me regret them not coming in when i need them.  There are times when reserves are a smart play, but almost never with a HTH based unit, and NEVER without some reserve modifier, be it through allies or warlord trait.

i had another thought about a minimum deployment strategy with it. this would certainly reduce the hurt of having to wait a turn and giving you position. thoughts?
Back to top Go down
Jimsolo
Dracon
avatar

Posts : 3028
Join date : 2013-10-31
Location : Illinois

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 18:46

Between this and your terrain, it sounds like Spain is very friendly to Eldar/DE. Smile Wish I could play there. (For real.)
Back to top Go down
BetrayTheWorld
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2665
Join date : 2013-04-04

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 19:05

Jimsolo wrote:
I agree with your interpretation, but I've literally never encountered a TO who ruled it that way.

The method in which Psychic Shriek interacts with mixed-LD units is not covered explicitly anywhere.  The rules for taking Ld tests could be used as a shaky precedent, but they don't fit. The rules for mixed Toughness units getting wounded could be as well, but they don't fit either.  I'd prefer the latter, where majority rules, but literally every event I've ever been in has ruled the reverse. Every event that I've ever emailed ahead to because I was considering going to has said the same.  Since the Haemonculus Covens supplement has come out and I started doing Freakshows, literally not one single judge has seen it the opposite way.

So I don't think it's unreasonable to think that trend will continue.

I wonder if they have ever had the argument well made against doing so, because the book clearly only gives permission to use the highest leadership for leadership tests. Most psychic powers that do damage related to leadership do so through a test. Shriek is unique among them in that it does not. I think it's possible that most TOs you've dealt with have not fully realized this, and if they were shown the sections from the rulebook regarding this, might reverse their decision.

I'm in the midwest, same as you, and I've never had a TO rule against me on something that is this clear, with several precedents such as using majority stats to determine wounds.

To be fair, though, most of the time we're talking about the difference of between 8 and 9 leadership, not 3 and 9, so most people don't put up a huge fight about it.

_________________
Back to top Go down
BizarreShowbiz
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 245
Join date : 2014-11-16

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Thu Feb 02 2017, 21:38

@Jimsolo wrote:
Between this and your terrain, it sounds like Spain is very friendly to Eldar/DE. Smile Wish I could play there. (For real.)

You would be very welcome to do so! cheers

_________________
Engalie 40k - Your daily fix of spanish Dark Eldar tactica, now with 100% more Ynnari and Harlequins.
Back to top Go down
http://engalie40k.blogspot.com.es/
BetrayTheWorld
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2665
Join date : 2013-04-04

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Fri Feb 03 2017, 00:24

sumguy777 wrote:
Skulnbonz wrote:
BizarreShowbiz wrote:
Jimsolo wrote:
He also gives them a higher LD for LD dependent effects such as Psychic Shriek or Dominate, both of which Grots are quite vulnerable to.

No he doesnt, at least not in the case of a psychic shriek, as it uses the  most common ld value in the unit, not the highest.
Leadership is not like Armor saves, where the majority rules. You ALWAYS use the highest leadership available unless specifically stated otherwise.

That being said, Deepstriking anything with no reserve manipulation is asking for trouble. Your Incubi may not be in until turn 4, and can't charge or do anything but absorb bullets until turn 5!
As betray said- Most of my games are over by turn 3, or i already know the outcome.  I would rather my models die on the field than me regret them not coming in when i need them.  There are times when reserves are a smart play, but almost never with a HTH based unit, and NEVER without some reserve modifier, be it through allies or warlord trait.

i had another thought about a minimum deployment strategy with it.  this would certainly reduce the hurt of having to wait a turn and giving you position. thoughts?

I'd need to know more details about how you intended to do minimum deployment. Those strategies don't typically work pure DE in competitive play because we're not really good at pulling off minimum deployment without the possibility of getting tabled.

Without allies, we don't have any tough units that can guarantee survival for a round without numbers. And with numbers, it's not much of a null deployment strategy. Our only way to have units arrive on turn 1 is the rather small scalpel squadron formation, which isn't very effective in the current tournament meta where they limit the number of detachments/formations you can take.

If you aren't limited in the number of detachments you can take, I could see some viable null deployment strategies using multiple scalpel squadrons. Using allies also makes it viable. Here is a link to a discussion where I was helping a member here put together just such a list for an upcoming tournament, and I believe he's been undefeated in about 3 practice games with it so far: http://www.thedarkcity.net/t14669-1850pts-tournament-ctc-with-eldar-allies-now-featuring-grotesqurie

_________________
Back to top Go down
amorrowlyday
Hekatrix
avatar

Posts : 1249
Join date : 2015-03-15
Location : Massachusetts

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Fri Feb 03 2017, 02:20

I want to pop in and return to the original point of this conversation: Fearless haemonculi in a unit of Incubi and I want to steer the conversation back to a central conceit that was taken for granted but I think need not be, and is a central point of consternation with dark eldar play: Turn 3.

As betray pointed out generally games are well decided before turn 3 as the vast majority of lists are designed to maximize offensive output in a single stroke. A game may last five turns but the pacing and framing is generally solidly established by the end of round 2. Even 1 turn of delay in the arrival of reserves can completely negate their utility.

The reason I want to retread this ground is something I pointed out in the wyches thread: We are designed to be at our strongest turn 4, but a Haemonculus, specifically a covens haemonculus, provides us the ability to perfectly align CC units' special abilities with their first charge if you can ensure they will deepstrike turn 2. By including a Haemonculus A deepstriking vanilla codex unit can deep strike anywhere on the map turn 2 and charge turn 3 with furious charge. A haemonculus quite literally align 2 negative attributes, inability to charge after deep strike, and an army that isn't at it's peak before turn 4, and align them like lens to create an even more potent beta strike then we should be capable of.

To be perfectly frank a unit that charges before this moment is never going to see a full strength furious charge and a unit fielded without a haemonculus will only get to swing twice if the game needs to continue past turn 5 which should never be counted on.

I am firmly in the boat that putting a covens haemonculus in a covens unit is a waste as a point of disclosure.

I'm building my argument this way because the only way this is going to work is if the central premise of ones approach becomes extreme beta-striking. It's one thing to survive one round of viable alpha strike, it's quite another to survive 2, and even more unfortunately our most viable unit for this delay role, mandrakes, take up the very elite slot you care about. Once you figure out how to survive until turn 2 it gets significantly easier as you simply need to ensure that you have so many targets within 16" that your incubi, or vanilla grotesques, sslyths, or clawed fiends (no furious charge on these two tho so almost equivalent waste) can not be deemed the principle threat. And which ever type of unit your deep striking in is going to radically change the components around it.

Is a turn 3 army viable? Definitely, but as always there is a caveat: It will need to be played extremely differently in a wide variety of matchups, and not to eek out advantages but instead because you will get tabled if you don't.
Back to top Go down
BetrayTheWorld
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2665
Join date : 2013-04-04

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Fri Feb 03 2017, 02:34

Good points Amorrowlyday. @sumguy777 Remember when I told you to keep an eye out for the players with a proven track record of intelligent opinions based on sound logic, math, and experience?

It just so happens that this thread is basically full of those people. Some moreso than others, obviously, and metas vary by location, but you won't get any terrible advice from anyone who's posted here so far.

_________________
Back to top Go down
sumguy777
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 168
Join date : 2017-01-15

PostSubject: Re: incubi idea   Fri Feb 03 2017, 05:46

thanks, i appreciate the help and tips. still trying to piece together the way i want to play DE. experience is a huge advantage and if i can soak up just a little from you guys i feel i can progress as a player.
Back to top Go down
 
incubi idea
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
THE DARK CITY :: 

COMMORRAGH TACTICA

 :: Dark Eldar Tactics
-
Jump to: