Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 62 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

What change do you think is appropriate, if any, to Dark Eldar Barge of Pleasure/ground based AA?
Poll ended at Sat Nov 05, 2016 6:05 pm
No change to Barge of Pleasure 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Add 2x 30cm AA5+ for free 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Add 2x 30cm AA5+ for +25 points 18%  18%  [ 4 ]
Add 2x 30cm AA5+ for +50 points 18%  18%  [ 4 ]
Something else (please specify) 5%  5%  [ 1 ]
Dark Eldar shouldn't have ground based AA 59%  59%  [ 13 ]
Total votes : 22

Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure

 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 12:25 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:43 pm
Posts: 2366
Location: UK
Can we please stop talking about all the design changes needed to the 12 year old marine list, in the dark eldar thread? It's really got nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Personally I don't care where the slavebringer ends up in the list structure per se, the issue is that it doesn't make sense for it to be an upgrade. It's not really something to be debated, it is simply an error. That said I think the 1/3 section is the default choice which should be considered first. I don't see a particular reason to not have it in the 1/3 - I appreciate fighters are more imoortant for DE but it's not exactly hard to fit slavebringer and fighters into a 3k or even 2k list is it? Whereas making players choose between titans and air power seems a valid approach to me and is often the main point of having the 1/3 limit in the first place.

I think changing the theme to make it play more like a conventional army is a disappointing direction only because I don't see a reason for it in this case. In particular the logical arguments seems rather like doublethink to me: "the list needs to be a full deployment army like steel legion instead of its current objective to be a raiding list because it currently contains titans, but just because something is already one way isn't justification to keep it that way so we need to add ground based AA". The list is meant to be a raiding list even if you don't think it is a good one, and it is published in the Epic: Raiders book. So why double down on the bit you think is least fitting with the theme, why not just make sure the titans are not the most attractive option? Here's an idea, you could make them compete for points with other list goodies like slavebringers :)

Personally I don't see why ground based AA is necessary either, I think DE has a fantastic and well focussed theme and plays very well without it due to some other great capabilities, and adding AA would detract from that. The desire to add this (and more shooting) seems a little like an unwillingness to play the DE in the DE style, and it's important to resist the pressure you are always going to get from players to remove the weaknesses from "their" list. But I'm open to hear more about why, and maybe it is a meta thing. However what might be interesting to know is: what would those who feel it is too hard to win without it give up in exchange? Currently as a trade for ground based AA the DE gain the best interceptor capability in the game at a crucial 200 point price point. So I assume you will remove this option from the list?

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 1:20 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5427
Location: London, UK
Well said Kyrt. A list (any list) is defined as much by it's weaknesses as by it's strengths.
And forcing hard choices is to be desired since that often results in more thematic armies as you rightly point out.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 3:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:13 am
Posts: 361
Location: Oz
Gday gents,
Sorry ive been offline the last few days and havent been able to respond to this. I am very much in two minds about the GBAD for DE, but i think the best course of action is to test the current draft list as is, without GBAD and see how the dark eldar plays with the current adjustment (i have a sneaking suspicion that it will play very similar to the epic uk list ;) ). This draft very much aligns with Steve54 and Kyussinchains posts.

I have experimented with the executioner landing module. It is now an upgunned lander for 500 points, rather than a fearsome flying fortress support craft. But hopefully this makes it more usuable in standard tournament games and i think will nest really well with the de playstyle. It is more fragile, in keeping with dark eldar options. I am not 100% happy with it, so welcome advice on what I have done.

The point made about DE being able to have stuff off board is really relevant. As only the crons and grey knights have more teleporting appearing tricks than the DE at this stage. Especially with the addition of the mobile webway portal. So given that i think a lack of GBAD is balanced.

The draft has been reviewed by a number of learned colleagues, i thank them for that, and will be posted online shortly.

I am really pleased with the discussionso far on the de.

@kryt, i get what you are saying, but you may still consider what i have done a raiding list as the epic uk could still be described as a raider list. The description of the list as an army list was made for my own development benefit to justify the inclusion of the tormentor. But in the end the list will be a matter of interpretation and not necessarily an army style list. Just because i said thats what i had in my mind when considering changes. But as with all lists some will be dissapointed and others will be stoked, but i doubt anyone will be happy.

I hope to make de an interesting and challenging choice for any prospective player. And do the new and upcoming models justice.

Cheers
Jim


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 7:58 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 3:19 am
Posts: 41
Quote:
Can we please stop talking about all the design changes needed to the 12 year old marine list, in the dark eldar thread? It's really got nothing to do with the topic at hand.


Kyrt speaks sense.

Quote:
Personally I don't care where the slavebringer ends up in the list structure per se, the issue is that it doesn't make sense for it to be an upgrade.


Oh, there he goes again....


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 8:44 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2016 2:30 am
Posts: 472
Location: (Sydney) NSW
Quote "You've said this repeatedly but with no reasoning beyond Thunderhawks not being in the 1/3 section."

Well I did give a reason other than space marines not having Thunderhawks in their 1/3 maximum section in a previous reply to someone. See Below:

"The Slavebringer should not be put into the 1/3 allotment as this makes Dark Eldar then have less points available to get their much needed AA/CAP fighters and Fighter Bombers. If it has to be moved, then in the Partisan section."

Since everyone thinks Dark Eldar should not get ground based AA units, then you should not make it harder for them to field those air units that can be used in the intercept and CAP role, which SlaveBringers can not do as they are a W/E Bomber transport.

Other Armies that do have Bombers, and even Bomber W/E Transports in their 1/3 allotment, also get ground based AA units.

Yes Feral Orks do not get Aircraft, but they get a large availability of ground based AA. Eldar get ground AA which can be part of their formations, as can Guard and traitor Guard.

The Dark Eldar are quite balanced right now, with a few great weaknesses: most of their vehicles are Light Vehicles. Their infantry have very little in the way of ranged weaponry. They have no ground based AA units. They can not place formations on garrison. Any War Engines they get as transports and tanks cost an arm and a leg to buy, so these are not taken as much in order to stop being out activated. The few units they get that are fearless who could sit on objectives, are Partisans which have an initiative of 2 rather than the Kalabites 1. Other decent units they get like Reaver Jetbikes are support/Partisans.

What advantages do they get? Well : Their expensive War Engines get TK MW, or AT Lance weapons at a decent range (not as good as Imperial Titans, Shadowswords, etc but decent). They use mainly skimmers, so can jump terrain if needed rather than go around, and can "Pop-Up". They can move-shoot-move, which is about the only way to keep your units alive as the enemy generally have longer ranges, better weapons (for the most part), and have either more units in their formations or have units with better saves. Dark Eldar can shoot from some of their vehicles, but with a range of only 15cm, they have to get in close leaving them open to enemy counter attack/sniping. Their Aircraft have a 4+ save and weapons that allow them to take on enemy units like Titans, or Shadowswords and hopefully hurt them a little, but you have to keep some on CAP to stop the enemy from killing off your own forces.

What advantages they have are barely enough to keep them in the battle a bit longer against certain armies. They can not use hit and run tactics on map boards with a lot of open terrain. They have to close in for the kill in close combat, and then they have to survive the hail of fire coming their way on the approach. When they do arrive, they have smaller formations which normally only have 6 infantry, and most of those units do not get an armour saves.

I see no reason to move them from their current slot. If you must whinge about it until you force the list moderator to change things, do not make it harder for Dark Eldar to field their much needed fighters and Fighter bombers for their air support/Cap.

_________________
6mm wargaming is just like 25mm wargaming with more units fitting on the same size table. Thus bigger games to get lost in and avoid the hassles of everyday living, and offerings for the dice gods.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 9:13 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 1:05 am
Posts: 921
Next time a Dark Eldar army needs to take the full one-third points worth of aircraft for support then your argument might hold water. As was already said, what they REALLY compete with is taking a titan or landing module and I think that is entirely fine. There's almost certainly room for Slavebringers and CAP aircraft in one 1000 point allotment.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 10:40 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 1392
Doomkitten wrote:
Next time a Dark Eldar army needs to take the full one-third points worth of aircraft for support then your argument might hold water. As was already said, what they REALLY compete with is taking a titan or landing module and I think that is entirely fine. There's almost certainly room for Slavebringers and CAP aircraft in one 1000 point allotment.


Spot on, you should get 4-5 aircraft out of that 1000 points. Really not an issue. If you want to take a titan then yes, that will and should affect your ability to take aircraft.

Also, there seem to be a lot of comments about dark eldar shooting etc - but this does leave out the fact they've got some of the best assault units in the game and can actually deploy close assaults effectively. If you're adding the portable webway the ability to march out of one gate, throw down the portable gate and assault something with support fire is fantastic. I'd certainly trade that for ground based aa in a few armies I run!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 6:25 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 12:03 pm
Posts: 6111
Location: Leicester UK
have to agree with DK and SteveCole above.... 1000 points should be more than enough to pay for air cover AND air transports and even a spaceship if you're feeling like it.... the tradeoff has to come from somewhere.... 2 formations of 2 Raven fighters is more than sufficient air cover, which leaves you 600 points to splurge on other stuff

AA defence in E:A is not always (in fact it's pretty much never) about shooting down everything, while it's nice to blast the occasional landing craft stuffed to the gills with 1200 points of stuff out of the sky, much more often you just need to put that blast marker on something to tip the odds and make the air-assaulter change their mind.... I've already said that a single unit of raven fighters in the list would disrupt my entire plan as an air-assault marine player, especially as there is no easy way to knock them out like there is with ground based AA.....

_________________
NetEA Space Marine, Imperial Fists and Blood Angels Army Champion

NetEA Red Corsairs Army Champion

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:12 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2016 2:30 am
Posts: 472
Location: (Sydney) NSW
My experience with Raven fighters is that my opponents seem to roll well enough to make me roll at least 2 saves from their AA or their interceptors. I inevitably lose 1 raven, and have found that a squadron of 3 is always better.

Razorwings are better to have as you need the extra punch with a MW to make enemy threats who are nearly broken, break. Usually tanks or heavy infantry. Plus my rolling to activate can be really bad at times, so I need enough air units to ensure I get at least 1 squadron on CAP.

Most aircraft have the ability to Jink to get a 4+ cover save. They just have to lose their ground attack in order to make the doge roll. If you are leaving at the end of the turn, you can afford to use this save. Unfortunately aircraft who have intercepted via CAP or making an intercept attack, can not target enemy aircraft leaving the table at the end of the turn. Only ground based AA can shoot at them.

_________________
6mm wargaming is just like 25mm wargaming with more units fitting on the same size table. Thus bigger games to get lost in and avoid the hassles of everyday living, and offerings for the dice gods.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:43 am 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 12:03 pm
Posts: 6111
Location: Leicester UK
then that is an issue with your ground pounders not dealing effectively with enemy ground flak.....

I'm not sure about your local meta, but I believe it is usually played that you cannot CAP a CAP, so your interceptors are reasonably safe, also with 30cm range on all their AA weapons they can normally avoid defensive flak by attacking from the side or rear

precision placement of aircraft is key, take the time to make sure you're in exactly the right location, against marines you're unlikely to be taking more than 2 AA shots from the ground anyway

_________________
NetEA Space Marine, Imperial Fists and Blood Angels Army Champion

NetEA Red Corsairs Army Champion

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Wed Nov 02, 2016 12:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2016 2:30 am
Posts: 472
Location: (Sydney) NSW
I usually face Guard who have 45cm range, and have enough vehicles (Leman Russes) to protect the Hydras. Hydras have 2 attacks, and some can take hydra formations. I usually have to deal with a large amount of Artillery, super heavy tanks, and large infantry formations in ruins and cover on overwatch. One opponent normally moves his Hydras enough to put them in the path of my aircraft. Even with the -1 to hit he then gets, he has hit my aircraft quite consistently.

When you do not have enough terrain to hide behind, and then get shot up by indirect fire when you aare behind the only cover there is, your light vehicles get blown away, your war engines lose their shields, and then the enemy shoots volcano cannons at them. I have to move shoot at -1 and move as much as I can, as the enemy try to corral my forces. Keeping away from enemy who can get decent lines of fire, and weapon ranges ranging from 45cm up to 90cm or more i(indirect), means it is a war of attrition, and often I have to employ flank denial tactics, and grab objectives on turns 3 and 4.

Even with concentrating fire on a single enemy formation, can leave my units exposed to counter fire. AMTL armies have proven to be the hardest to deal with. Even when I out activate them. In one tournament game, where there was very little terrain for cover, I lost 1.5 to 2 formations a turn. My opponent lost 2 robot maniples and a single warhound. I had a shot up bike gang, 2 raven fighters, and a single Talos Pain engine left from 11 formations. Every time I had nearly taken their shields down or broken a Titan, he Marshalled and was then set upon by his counter fire. I only had 2 raven squadrons of 2, and they performed poorly.

I prefer to take 3 formations of 3 Razorwings if I can (750 Points). The remaining 250 points is usually spent on a Vessel of Pain to add to the Ravagers. When I do have tactics for the Slavebringer, such as deploying Talos Pain engines, I only take 1. However I sometimes think 2 would be better.

_________________
6mm wargaming is just like 25mm wargaming with more units fitting on the same size table. Thus bigger games to get lost in and avoid the hassles of everyday living, and offerings for the dice gods.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Wed Nov 02, 2016 12:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 8558
Location: Manalapan, FL
Sounds like a problem with parking lot terrain tables to me

_________________
The Artist Formerly Known As Marine Army Champion

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Wed Nov 02, 2016 1:58 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5427
Location: London, UK
Agreed Jimmy. In a 'tournament' game you should have 12 terrain pieces, each a minimum of 6" x 6" giving a coverage of ~25% or greater, and a number of locations to hide in or behind. Suppressing IG AA embedded in formations is always difficult, though IG air-power is much less potent as they have no air transports.

Also DE need to 'raid' against IG forces using their mobility to hit-and-run. They absolutely cannot fight an attritional war. But this is part of the list's design philosophy, especially using March moves to switch formations rapidly to concentrate on enemy weak points.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Wed Nov 02, 2016 2:15 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 8558
Location: Manalapan, FL
fixed that for you
Quote:
In a 'tournament' game you should have AT LEAST 12 terrain pieces, each a minimum of 6" x 6" giving a coverage of ~25% or greater
:D

We also would throw in a new LOS blocking smaller bits and bobs to further break things up as well, not just large area terrain. Watch out for inadvertent "grid-patterns" as well, especially if they orientation to the table.

I find it no surprise that a hit and run themed force is having trouble on an open-ish table. Codex Marines have similar experiences, though for different reasons, needing to play cat-and-mouse, especially against guard and titan armies, when they are on tables with clear LOS/LOF lanes. I don't think you're holding it wrong Deb, I think you're in a situation where you're getting the shaft with the tables you're playing on.

_________________
The Artist Formerly Known As Marine Army Champion

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dark Eldar Lets Poll 2: Barge of Pleasure
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:10 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:13 am
Posts: 361
Location: Oz
Thanks for the posts Deb and generating some discussion. Its good to see some different points of view.
The terrain issue has been discussed heavily - especially in the Oz meta, where the different interpretations and play styles can really impact list builds. I know on some tables the volcano cannon was king for a little while there, because it was always on a warengine that could 'see over' most terrain pieces it could just engage most targets easily. This really tipped the balance in favour of shooty, long range armies over aslt focussed armies.

Personally I love the high speed, high risk play style of the DE. You need to be using hit and run and fleet of foot effectively to inflict damage where you can and then get far enough away so that you are out of reprisal range. That is definitely a key aspect of the list that I would like to retain, and I think is worthwhile.

Cheers,
Jim


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 62 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net