HomeDark Eldar WikiDark Eldar ResourcesNull CityFAQUsergroupsRegisterLog in
Share | 
 

 Warrior Spam an option?

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2  Next
AuthorMessage
Squidmaster
Incubi
avatar

Posts : 1502
Join date : 2013-12-18
Location : Hampshire, England

PostSubject: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 12:14

Based on what I'm seeing at tournaments, Infantry spam seems to be the growing trend with horde armies doing especially well. And with Objective Secured on the way for Troops choices, this will likely become even more prevelant.

So considering we CAN have unit sizes up to 20 Kabalite Warriors, is spamming our basic Warriors an option? Perhaps with a couple of light Fortifications (Aegis?) for controlled cover?

Pros? Cons? Other thoughts?

_________________
Kabal of the Eternal NightModelling Blog
The Squidmaster DistractathonNotes on being an RPG Gamesmaster
Back to top Go down
http://www.escelionfilms.com
Count Adhemar
Dark Lord of Granbretan
avatar

Posts : 6622
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : London

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 12:19

Even in cover a unit of Kabalites is T3, 4+ save.

_________________

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
|Meavar
Wych
avatar

Posts : 538
Join date : 2017-01-26

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 13:22

While kabalite spam is possible, and in some matchups not that bad.
Against most targets it is a veteran (possibly with a bolter) without support, and less special weapon options. So against t4 units it might be ok.
Against most other horde armies you lose since you paid more for practically the same stats but the biggest issue is we lack supports. We do not have the ork/ nid/ guard ld ignore options. We do not have the guard extra shooting phase/rerolls, we do not have the extra attack/rerolls if our units are big from orks and nids.
Frankly speaking we get a minor stat increase for a price increase which might be ok if we had similar support, but the lack thereoff just makes it very difficult.

Good thing is we are slightly faster, thus we can better choose our targets, but this is not significant enough to save us. In a noncompetetive field it might work out pretty ok though.


Last edited by |Meavar on Wed Aug 16 2017, 13:23; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Jimsolo
Dracon
avatar

Posts : 3015
Join date : 2013-10-31
Location : Illinois

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 13:22

Plus, a 20 man squad has no way to mitigate Morale.
Back to top Go down
FuelDrop
Wych
avatar

Posts : 577
Join date : 2015-06-21

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 13:33

We lack the force multipliers to make it work, and cannot spam anti-vehicle options on foot like other armies.

Also, leadership.

TLDR: Not a great option.

_________________
My homebrew codex is really coming along. Check it out here, and feel free to post a comment!
Back to top Go down
Jimsolo
Dracon
avatar

Posts : 3015
Join date : 2013-10-31
Location : Illinois

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 14:05

I've personally tried spamming 5 man squads with blasters on foot. It did not end well.
Back to top Go down
The Shredder
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2695
Join date : 2013-04-11

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 14:11

As I see it, there are 4 main issues:
1) Kablites are 7pts per model - which is really pushing it for a horde army (as a comparison, my guardsmen are a mere 4pts per model).
2) No long-range special weapons. The aforementioned guardsmen have 24" range Plsamaguns, yet the best Kabalites can get are 18" Blasters.
3) Lack of buffs. My guardsmen can get Orders, which can give them rerolls, can double the firepower of their lasguns, can give them more movement, can let them shoot after falling back etc. Then you have auras - like Yarrick/Harker's reroll 1s aura, St. Celestine's 6++ aura and such.
4) Finally, lack of Ld bonuses. The +1Ld from an Archon isn't going to do much to mitigate casualties. Especially when comparred to Commissars (who cost half as much, often hand out larger Ld buffs, and limit casualties from failed morale tests to 1 per unit per turn).

Basically, we just lack the tools we'd need to form a good horde army.
Back to top Go down
dumpeal
Sybarite
avatar

Posts : 474
Join date : 2015-02-13
Location : Québec

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 14:19

In a regular Dark Eldar army, it may not works, but on a Ynnari list, they are good.
Back to top Go down
|Meavar
Wych
avatar

Posts : 538
Join date : 2017-01-26

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 14:21

The Shredder wrote:
As I see it, there are 4 main issues:
1) Kablites are 7pts per model - which is really pushing it for a horde army (as a comparison, my guardsmen are a mere 4pts per model).

Basically, we just lack the tools we'd need to form a good horde army.

I think those 7 points are not that bad. We just get very little extra for those points. And guards are 5 points each, orks/ hormagaunts etc are 6, our 7 is reaching the top of the spectrum but would be ok if the other points you mentioned were not so bad.

I like the idea of some large squads of kabalites in a ynnari, maybe I will try it once as well as a fun alternative.
Back to top Go down
Count Adhemar
Dark Lord of Granbretan
avatar

Posts : 6622
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : London

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 14:33

It was discussed elsewhere but GW really need to decide if we're a Horde army or an Elite army. At the moment we are falling between two stools and aren't really managing to do either.

_________________

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
FuelDrop
Wych
avatar

Posts : 577
Join date : 2015-06-21

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 14:39

We cannot be an infantry horde army. Open topped transports are our only real force multiplier, and their limited transport capacity ist the main limiting factor for our squad sizes.
On the ground pounder front we lack range and durability. We have to mount up to get close enough to be effective.

_________________
My homebrew codex is really coming along. Check it out here, and feel free to post a comment!
Back to top Go down
Count Adhemar
Dark Lord of Granbretan
avatar

Posts : 6622
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : London

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 14:51

I'm not really seeing the benefits of open-topped transports in 8e.

_________________

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
|Meavar
Wych
avatar

Posts : 538
Join date : 2017-01-26

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 15:02

Count Adhemar wrote:
It was discussed elsewhere but GW really need to decide if we're a Horde army or an Elite army. At the moment we are falling between two stools and aren't really managing to do either.

I do not think the problem is that we fall in between horde and elite, I kinda like it. If we become more elite we become to expensive for our fragility, and if we get become more horde like we should lose some of our punch because lose our adaptation.

The main problem I think it that while our normal troops are priced quite ok, we only have our vehicles as a bonus. Inside vehicles we do not have aura bonusses but since we barely have them anyway it does not matter. But it means we are shoehorned into a raider/venom force for our normal guys.

People were debating about the hellions as quite an ok option (not great but usable), but when they lost the transport option nearly everyone considered them bad afterwards.
Our vehicles are quite nice, but our speed/durability is laughable for the cost of our units. Thus we either need to punch hard enough that a lot can die and we can still do the work, or we need some aura's to help us in moving (possibly aura's to make us more durable could also be considered but that would take away from the essense of dark eldar in my mind, and we already have the heamy for the units that might have it).
Thus what we need is a boost for foot troops that has little impact on our vehicles, because right now we act like an elite army (relatively few models on the table) since everything is mounted in vehicles (thus effectively doubling the cost of our units) just so it will not die when a flashlight is pointed at them. And the units that can survive without are pretty much limited to scourges/mandrakes who can deep strike and thus can at least shoot once.

@ count adhemar
Consider not being able to shoot from our vehicles. Open topped is the one reason we are playable.
Back to top Go down
The Strange Dark One
Sybarite
avatar

Posts : 393
Join date : 2014-08-22

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 15:10

I think 7pts would be more than fine for a T3 5+ model if we had enough powerful weapons to make up for it.

We should have powerful special weapons that are more than a match for the CWE equivalents and have them handed to us like candy. After all, we are frigging dark-elf space vampire pirates with lovecraftian subtones that still have access to technologies from before the fall.

I think much of the problem with our codex is that we only have a handful of viable weapons and out of all these they mostly come at onlny two categories: Splinter and Darklight type weapons.

I'm glad the Lance is finally a good weapon, but in turn our Splinter fire took a hit and there is no other weapon we can amass. There are a lot of other choices, but many of them are simply bad and we can't take many of them to begin with. Why can't GW finally fix that?

Is it really unreasonable to have 2 special weapons for each 5 Kabalites, like 7th edition Corsairs? And why are Trueborn not allowed to field as many heavy weapons as Scourges? A lot in the codex could be fixed just by introducing more choice and fixing some of our weapons:
- Heat Lances: S7
- Haywire Blaster: 2D on 4+, 2D3 on 6+
- Disintegrator Carbine: Assault 3, AP-3, S5, D1, 18" (I think we really need this weapon)
- Shredder: Assault D6, S3, re-roll wounds (we have splinter fire against high-T)
- Liquifier: Why is it so difficult to make this weapon S4?

Looking at what other armies have, nothing of this is unreasonable and after all we are the ones who suffer from being fragile and are required to buy expensive transports. I would be more than happy to pay a premium price for a fragile unit that packs some serious firepower.

_________________
Discontinued: Dark Eldar 7th Codex Redux
A pragmatic custom codex for pragmatic realspace raiders.


Last edited by The Strange Dark One on Wed Aug 16 2017, 15:13; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Count Adhemar
Dark Lord of Granbretan
avatar

Posts : 6622
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : London

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 15:12

|Meavar wrote:
@ count adhemar
Consider not being able to shoot from our vehicles. Open topped is the one reason we are playable.

Consider instead that open-topped could allow you to disembark AFTER the vehicle moves. And suddenly the melee army that GW seems to think we should be is about 10,000% more viable.

_________________

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
The Strange Dark One
Sybarite
avatar

Posts : 393
Join date : 2014-08-22

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 15:23

Count Adhemar wrote:
|Meavar wrote:
@ count adhemar
Consider not being able to shoot from our vehicles. Open topped is the one reason we are playable.

Consider instead that open-topped could allow you to disembark AFTER the vehicle moves. And suddenly the melee army that GW seems to think we should be is about 10,000% more viable.

This sounds like a fitting and elegant solution that would be amazing for Incubi (and maybe Grotesques). But Wyches/Bloodbrides first need to be able to kill anything to begin with. And in this case, the same thing applies to Wyches that apply to Kabalites: they need better weapons. There is no way around this.

Oh, don't forget:
"Dark Eldar are now Blisteringly Fast" *Cough*

_________________
Discontinued: Dark Eldar 7th Codex Redux
A pragmatic custom codex for pragmatic realspace raiders.
Back to top Go down
The Shredder
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2695
Join date : 2013-04-11

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 15:31

|Meavar wrote:
I think those 7 points are not that bad. We just get very little extra for those points.

That's the point though. Razz

Count Adhemar wrote:
It was discussed elsewhere but GW really need to decide if we're a Horde army or an Elite army. At the moment we are falling between two stools and aren't really managing to do either.

I'd actually say that we seem to end up with the worst of both worlds - we have the poor stats and fragility of a horde army but the cost of an elite army.

Count Adhemar wrote:
I'm not really seeing the benefits of open-topped transports in 8e.

I think the issue is that our army's strategy/philosophy is a complete mess.

- We're supposedly fast, yet all we really have in terms of mobility is 2 Transports. I guess my IG must be even faster because they have three transports.
- Our PfP chart wants us to focus on melee, yet the aforementioned transports only help shooting units.
- What's more, the entire PfP chart includes all of one offensive buff (maybe 2 if you count the Ld penalty). The first buff we get is a pathetic 6+ save for one of the most fragile armies in the game.
- As an added bonus, the single buff in out PfP chart doesn't work on any of our characters (because they already hit on a 2+ in melee).
- We're supposed to be a glass cannon army, yet 2 of our 3 auras focus on survival/attrition rather than offensive output.
- Our HQs have no choice but to ride in transports, and yet their buffs are all auras - i.e. completely nonfunctional for as long as they stay in their transports.
- The only aura that does focus on offensive output affects maybe 25% of or army (at best) and is melee only (so it doesn't gel at all with our transports).
- Our army is supposed to function as a whole, yet our HQs can only buff a fraction of it and often not even the most useful faction. For example, a Haemonculus buffing Warriors to T4 would probably make a lot more difference than buffing Grotesques from T5 to T6.
- The Venom is suposed to be the Archon's personal transport, which he rides into battle with his favoured Trueborn or Incubi. Except that he can't because those both have a minimum squad size of 5 and so putting them in a Venom means there is no longer any room for the Archon in his own personal transport.

The Strange Dark One wrote:
"Dark Eldar are now Blisteringly Fast" *Cough*

And they are. Really fast. Their HQs have got wings and everything. Not a single model moves less than 10" per turn.

Unfortunately, GW instead released an army called 'Drukhari' instead. And they're not fast at all.
Back to top Go down
|Meavar
Wych
avatar

Posts : 538
Join date : 2017-01-26

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 16:00

Count Adhemar wrote:
|Meavar wrote:
@ count adhemar
Consider not being able to shoot from our vehicles. Open topped is the one reason we are playable.

Consider instead that open-topped could allow you to disembark AFTER the vehicle moves. And suddenly the melee army that GW seems to think we should be is about 10,000% more viable.

I think this would actually be to much. Since we already lost rear etc, it means that we now do not need to think ahead at all. I think it would be better for the army overal if the raider movement is not lowered when damaged and we get an additional 3 inch run and charge, this would have less impact I know, but I think it might be enough to make us fast again, but not fast enough that you do not have to think ahead, it also means that we will have a healthy chance of charging from deep strike to get those alpha strikes in. And it means that a unit on foot becomes more viable, for while most people like the transports I think it is stupid that we have no other option then to be inside those transports

And yes we need more options then the dark lance + dissy and splinter rifle for all our units.


Back to top Go down
The Shredder
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2695
Join date : 2013-04-11

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 16:04

To my mind, having to disembark before the transport moves defeats the whole purpose of a transport.

It would be like investing in a torch that only worked in bright sunlight.
Back to top Go down
Jimsolo
Dracon
avatar

Posts : 3015
Join date : 2013-10-31
Location : Illinois

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 16:09

That seems like a bit of an exaggeration, but yes, I also think we should be able to disembark AFTER moving. (It would be nice if there was a rule that let you do that. You could even have a universal name for it like 'Assault Vehicle' or something.)
Back to top Go down
Count Adhemar
Dark Lord of Granbretan
avatar

Posts : 6622
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : London

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 16:27

|Meavar wrote:
Count Adhemar wrote:
|Meavar wrote:
@ count adhemar
Consider not being able to shoot from our vehicles. Open topped is the one reason we are playable.

Consider instead that open-topped could allow you to disembark AFTER the vehicle moves. And suddenly the melee army that GW seems to think we should be is about 10,000% more viable.

I think this would actually be to much. Since we already lost rear etc, it means that we now do not need to think ahead at all. I think it would be better for the army overal if the raider movement is not lowered when damaged and we get an additional 3 inch run and charge, this would have less impact I know, but I think it might be enough to make us fast again, but not fast enough that you do not have to think ahead, it also means that we will have a healthy chance of charging from deep strike to get those alpha strikes in.

I disagree. If you allow the vehicle to move (but not advance) and the unit to disembark (but not move or advance) and then charge it actually gives us a fighting chance of getting our units into combat in sufficient numbers to actually be a threat whilst also being a unique and fluffy way to represent the DE way of war. You could even tie the ability to a keyword, such as only working on Cult and Kabal units but not Coven.

_________________

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
Lyceus
Hellion
avatar

Posts : 53
Join date : 2017-07-10

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 17:05

I see we clearly lack tools to be a good horde army outself but how about having just enough warriors to not get instantly overwhelmed by horde?

Is there any chance or is it always an auto-loss on tournaments when facing a dedicated horde army as dark eldar?

I see reapers could prevent horde units from advancing. Maybe it buys you a turn or two of shooting. Keeping an 18"-24" distance.

Going ynnari you lose all melee benefit of fnp but you could get a leadership bubble with yncarne...

Any hope for us on the horde front?
Back to top Go down
Chippen
Hellion
avatar

Posts : 77
Join date : 2016-12-18

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 17:12

Following the open-topped skimmer theme, we can shoot but are subject to the penalties of the vehicle. So, extend that to disembarking after vehicle moves (can't move if you disembarked, you can charge, but not if the vehicle advanced) and you've got a nice balance. Failing that, either a reliable 4"-6" advance or some DE equivalent of smoke launchers would be nice.

That said, turn 2 charge are fairly reliable on most deployment maps.

Back on topic - other than ObSec, I don't see much merit to our troop choices as they are. The transport tax for the old 5 kab with blaster in a venom is just too much with the low offensive power in the Venom. If the double cannon came for free then maybe? But for now I'm taking down my Battalion to a Vanguard and Spearhead.

_________________
Can I get a Roll Tide?
Back to top Go down
Seshiru
Sybarite


Posts : 405
Join date : 2012-07-03

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 21:30

Currently Warriors in raiders has been really good for me, I run squads of 10 with blaster, dark lance, agoniser, PGL in a raider with Dissie.

Running 2- 3 squads has been pretty good for me and they are generally pretty good for most tasks.
I've considered running more but I find I need specialized units to do specific tasks with dark eldar (like incubi and blasterborn) where it seems that other armies can more easily do all tasks with a single unit.

I would also point out that horde armies are doing well at the moment but it's still pretty early in 8th and even the ones doing well right now have hard counters.

_________________
The worst sort of protection is confidence. The best defense is suspicion.
Back to top Go down
Archon_91
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 248
Join date : 2017-01-03

PostSubject: Re: Warrior Spam an option?   Wed Aug 16 2017, 22:03

I'm pretty sure a 20 strong unit of warriors can take 2 dark lances ... But honestly it isn't worth it. However it would be greatly fun to run something like this
Back to top Go down
 
Warrior Spam an option?
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 2Go to page : 1, 2  Next

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

COMMORRAGH TACTICA

 :: Dark Eldar Tactics
-
Jump to: