Start Collecting! Dark Eldar incoming!

@nerdelemental wrote:

Does the P.E. stack with twin link (from Splinter Rack)? Or do you have to choose one or the other?

Can't reroll a dice twice, so one or the other.

@Kantalla wrote:

@nerdelemental wrote:

Does the P.E. stack with twin link (from Splinter Rack)? Or do you have to choose one or the other?

Can't reroll a dice twice, so one or the other.

You could however reroll all misses from the splinter racks and still re-roll 1's to wound from PE.

Nice.

@nerdelemental wrote:

Does the P.E. stack with twin link (from Splinter Rack)? Or do you have to choose one or the other?

They both rerolls Ones to Hit (so those dont stack), but PE rerolls 1's to wound also.

@amishprn86 wrote:

@nerdelemental wrote:

Does the P.E. stack with twin link (from Splinter Rack)? Or do you have to choose one or the other?

They both rerolls Ones to Hit (so those dont stack), but PE rerolls 1's to wound also.

Not quite, sorry.
Twin linked re-rolls al failed to hit rolls, not just ones.
So you can re-roll all failed to hit, and all ones to wound, if you have splinter racks and marked for death.

Edit:
What Count Adhemar said.

@Marrath wrote:

@amishprn86 wrote:

@nerdelemental wrote:

Does the P.E. stack with twin link (from Splinter Rack)? Or do you have to choose one or the other?

They both rerolls Ones to Hit (so those dont stack), but PE rerolls 1's to wound also.

Not quite, sorry.
Twin linked re-rolls al failed to hit rolls, not just ones.
So you can re-roll all failed to hit, and all ones to wound, if you have splinter racks and marked for death.

Edit:
What Count Adhemar said.

Oops yeah You are 100% right I wasnt thinking SR was TL, for some reason I was thinking they reroll 1's.

Edit for spelling.

Assuming we can get a Court in this formation, what would be the optimal load out? Lhameans wounding on 2s, resolving 1s? A whack of sslyth to protect the archon (who appears to need to be on foot to activate PE)? Medusae who will be *basically* wounding on 3s?

Doing a quick list it looks like about 500 puts for all the transports, blaster borne and the court

At 500 points I can't find a way to afford the court.

Above that points total it would depend upon what I want to do with it. If I am trying to get some utility out of my archon by deepstriking or whatever it would be sslyths, otherwise a venom full of medusae if I can afford them, otherwise venom full of lhameans is probably my go-to.

To be sure, I talked to GW store employees this week. They meant that; yes, it would be possible to add a Venom for the Archon and another Raider/Venom for the Kabalite Warriors as dedicated transports - not a Court though, because it is a seperate unit, not an upgrade for the Archon, and the Retainers special rule only means it does not take up a FOC slot if an Archon is part of the same detachment, not that every detachment that includes an Archon may also include a Court.

P.S.
I am still most sorry about my earlier misinterpretation.

@Rokuro wrote:

To be sure, I talked to GW store employees this week.

GW store employees are fairly notorious for being incorrect with rules interpretations. Just an FYI.

@BetrayTheWorld wrote:

@Rokuro wrote:

To be sure, I talked to GW store employees this week.

GW store employees are fairly notorious for being incorrect with rules interpretations. Just an FYI.

Since my own interpretations are now invalid by defaulf, I had to ask someone who is supposed to know the rules.
At least I have confirmation now that my fault also extends to whatever outside sources I try to bring into arguments.

If not even they can see through the mess that is their rulework consistently (my gw for example says everything goes, court, trueborn, los) how can it be expected of customers like you and me?
Chill man!

@Rokuro wrote:

@BetrayTheWorld wrote:

@Rokuro wrote:

To be sure, I talked to GW store employees this week.

GW store employees are fairly notorious for being incorrect with rules interpretations. Just an FYI.

Since my own interpretations are now invalid by defaulf, I had to ask someone who is supposed to know the rules.
At least I have confirmation now that my fault also extends to whatever outside sources I try to bring into arguments.

Yeah, relax, man. I think GW store employees SHOULD know the rules well. They just often don't, and routinely disagree, just like players. So basically they're not an authority on rules is all I was saying. It had everything to do with your argument, and nothing to do with you.

It's good to know, so that you know not to bother using some GW store guy as your supporting argument in the future. Now that you know, you'll be better prepared for your next debate.

@BetrayTheWorld wrote:

It's good to know, so that you know not to bother using some GW store guy as your supporting argument in the future. Now that you know, you'll be better prepared for your next debate.

I'm prepared for you to be there and dismiss everything I say. Hence there won't be a next debate.
Congrats, you win by default.

@Rokuro wrote:

@BetrayTheWorld wrote:

It's good to know, so that you know not to bother using some GW store guy as your supporting argument in the future. Now that you know, you'll be better prepared for your next debate.

I'm prepared for you to be there and dismiss everything I say. Hence there won't be a next debate.
Congrats, you win by default.

You're debating with me right now about whether there will be another debate. And you lost again, haha. So at least you were right about that last part!

All you've really demonstrated is that you've found a Gw employee who doesn't understand that formations are detachments and needs to reread the brb.

I have a Start Collecting in the mail. Really looking forward to the formation, even if there are difficulties getting the PE off every turn

I honestly don't even care about the PE. I feel like the most useful application of this unit is as an allied detachment without obsec or troops and an extra FA.

Do the Warriors of this formation and their transport even have objective secured?
As they are not part of a combined arms detachment?

Sorry that's a typo I will fix when I get to an actual computer. They DO NOT have obsec

So I made use of this formation today against Grey Knights. Ran 6 Reavers with 2 CC, 10 Trueborn (4 Blasters, 2 Splinter Cannons, 4 rifles) in the Raider (Nightshields, Splinter Racks), Archon (Blaster and Shadowfield), Court of the Archon (4 Sslyth, Lhamaen) and a Venom. Comes out at 701pts, so not a small detachment. (My opponent seemed surprised that I'd ask him if taking the Court was OK, as far as he was concerned the Retainer rule made it pretty obvious you coul take a Court in a formation as long as there's an Archon.)

PE made a difference, turn 1 my Trueborn destroyed the first Dreadknight thanks to the extra hits and wounds the re-rolls gave them and later on my Reavers ran over the second thanks to PE. Definitely going to be running this formation again.

What does this formation do?

The thread is fairly large and I don't have lots of free time to scan

@colinsherlow wrote:

What does this formation do?

The thread is fairly large and I don't have lots of free time to scan

Basically - it's an archon, a unit of kabalites, a raider, and a unit of reavers.  The bonus is that at the beginning of each turn... if the archon is on the table he gets to "point" at one enemy unit in his line of sight, and everything in the formation gets preferred enemy against it (re-rolling 1s to hit and wound).

It's underwhelming at first glance, especially if the archon is deep striking or depending on your interpenetration of whether he can actually "point" from within a transport, but it gets better when you realize you can buy add-ons like a seperate transport for the archon and the kabalites that fall in to the same formation/rule set (the raider isn't taken as a dedicated transport), and that the kabalites themselves can be upgraded to trueborn.  Some argue that the rules for the court of the archon even allow for one to be included.  

Overall it's better than most of the "get started" bonuses, excluding some of the recent ones (like scions). I've long been an advocate of preferred enemy as a quick, fluffy fix to our mediocre book though so I was a little excited.  Not excited enough to go to the storage unit and dig my dark eldar army out to try it... but almost.