Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
this came from karantalsis army post
i was also toying with the idea of a retinue of 3 incubi, 2 Sc warriors and 4 regular warriors as meat shields to the punch, any thoughts?
an idea of the squad costing would be
dracon w Ag. SP PG CD SF
3 incubi PG
2 warriors with SC
totaling around about 310 points
Last edited by Lost Nemesis; June 1st, 2007 at 16:56.
I cant do it - I know we play a "risky" style army but that is just beyond me.
Understand that there are certain members of this forum that really embrace the Warriors and feel the more the better. Its all good but but I feel our army was designed a certain way in that the Warriors were made to shoot and can sometimes support CC. To dedicate warriors as a bodyguard is to try to take advantage of their shooty-ness somehow - our lords are designed to be CC so I dont see how the two can work together well.
I got no problem with placing a Lord in a Raider Squad that has a Sybarite, blaster and cannon. The lord can separate whenever he wants and has an extra power weapon from the sybarite - this makes good sense. Giving a lord a 2 warrior retinue with splinter cannons is just dangereous to me - you cant fleet if you want to shoot and if you do shoot then you are taking away the targets that you need to charge 6" with (I havent met a player yet that wont take the closest models away and if you have failed charges by 1/8 of inch as much as I have then you wont even want to fire a silly pistol).
Now if the Haemoculus had the Warrior retinue option then I would definitely take them with the 2 splinter cannons and the Haemy with a destructor (now the Haemy is a shooty lord and needs the warriors shooty-ness as well as a meat-shield) - I get goose bumps thinking about a warrior retinue for a Haemy (a great idea actually).
Nope, for a CC Lord I would rather have a Grotesque retinue than a warrior one.
ok, in that case, let me re-phrase, as much as i like the splinter cannons i know where you are coming from. SO i am dropping the splinter cannons and just taking
1 dracon w wargear as before
now the majority save is 5+ so you would remove these units first. Bascially the warriors are designed never to fire and only be meat sheilds for the incubi.
Not a horrendous idea, but... sort of a waste, at least to me.
However, I have rarely ever played with DE, much less with Incubi, so I have to ask first:
How often are your Incubi actually caught in shooting? If a lot, a Warrior meatshield may not be a bad idea. However, if it's not very often, why bother?
Also, if/when their Raider is shot down, the Warriors are the most likely ones to die from it due to their shoddy armour save, so there's a chance that you won't even be able to use the meatshield against shooting.
Why would the unit ever be forced to take 9 saves? Mine always get into combat. >.< The warriors are there to maybe soften up the enemy a little, or help the incubi not get overwhelmed by thinning out the enemy (incubi can't take on hordes for example). Warriors being removed as the first casualties helps a lot.
Tenozuma - The Burninator... I came, I saw, I posted.Originally Posted by Aussie Bogan
Dark Eldar player.
Feel free to PM if you want any advice or help with anything.
Assume everything I say has a "what I think" disclaimer.
Hang out with all the other Aussie and NZ members at The ANZAC Clan.
Need advice, want to talk warhammer or just want a laugh? Come on LO Chat. http://www.librarium-chat.com/
I'm just offering another view, shooting from a unit that needs to be in CC makes no sense to me.
Again, it depends on how often your squad of Incubi gets shot up. If it isn't very often, don't do it. If it is, it wouldn't be a bad idea. By the time you hit CC, most of the Warriors should be downed, at least enough to make it even or at least have more Incubi in the end.
So, the first wounds would have to be applied to the Warriors, who would get their 5+ saves. Further wounds could be placed upon the Incubi, who would make 3+ saves.
It's all explained on page 76 of the BGB.
exactly caluin. so you have more chance of taking losses, but by the same token, if oyu are hit with a mixture of powerweapon attacks and normal attacks, you can take the powers on your warriors and the normal attacks on your incubi, where they still get to use their good save.
kwi, i'm not talking about actually shooting with the warriors, they are a simple meatshield. if there is ANY chance of making combat then there is no point in shooting i agree. i just won't, they are simply a meat shield that is worth 1/3 of an incubi.
the problem with using them against shooting, is that you can get below 50% VERY easily. I will still be avoiding shooting like the plague, it really is only combat that i'm thinking of taking them as shields in. Kind of like the hidden powerfist ideal, except hidden 3 powerweapons instead, not quite as powerful, still good vs MEQ.
does the chance of loosing combat and them running below 50% outway the ablative wounds? i'm not entirly sold, interested in hearing other peoples ideas