News: No news is good news...

Login  |  Register

Author Topic: 5th edition & new codices  (Read 3223 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MagicJuggler

  • Juggling a load of balls
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2012
  • Country: 00
  • Nobody expects the Spanish Ynquisition.
Re: 5th edition & new codices
« Reply #20 on: June 10, 2010, 04:02:09 PM »
Heck, against swarms, you don't even need to tailor. Focus fire on their fire support elements first (Hive Guard/Lootas/etc) as those are what threaten your Raiders most. Optionally get Warp Amps for some Raiders, and tankshock enemies into compacted formation before letting the Ravagers rip (you did get Disintegrators for it, right? Multiple blasts in the same unit=death to hordes; I've been increasingly using Shredder Wyches for this purpose too). Stagger your formation, sacrifice *a* Raider if need be to lock down the movement of a horde, and laugh when you remind your opponent that he cannot consolidate after attacking a vehicle...

Offline Grumpy Kwi

  • Archite
  • Ancient
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1907
  • Ask me for the DE True Type Font
Re: 5th edition & new codices
« Reply #21 on: June 10, 2010, 06:26:17 PM »
For me, I went through all this earlier with the same conclusions. 

My problem now is that I am dealing with the "Big fish in the little Pond" syndrome. I can beat most players with my Dark Eldar who I see the most at our store - when I venture out of the pond to another gaming store I suddenly lose more. So my observations and conclusions are tainted to that of the opponents and lists I see the most. I am sure this is true with most people but I at least recognize that and tailor my experiences accordingly.

One thing is for sure, the over all game (the meta game?) for me shifted like this:

Raider Rush instead of WWP
6 Troop choices over 4 troop choices
Full Mech instead of partial mech
Going 2nd over going 1st
Movement phase is more important than the Assault phase
Reserves is my friend
Nightshields on everything!

Offline Lord Malwrack

  • "Lord Malzor says...."
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 393
  • Last of the old school Archons...
Re: 5th edition & new codices
« Reply #22 on: June 10, 2010, 06:34:33 PM »

Going 2nd over going 1st

Care to elaborate?
Lord Malwrack

as seen in the short story, "A Gift for Mistress Baeda", from Black Library

Offline MagicJuggler

  • Juggling a load of balls
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2012
  • Country: 00
  • Nobody expects the Spanish Ynquisition.
Re: 5th edition & new codices
« Reply #23 on: June 10, 2010, 09:15:20 PM »
Going 2nd means you deploy second, meaning you have the option of where you wish to best concentrate your force. Against many armies, they are able to have only or 2 AT elements in range if you refuse flank, meaning you lose *a* Raider (since some Raiders can be deployed up front to provide cover saves to the rest), then you focus-fire that AT element dead before fanning out. (*this* is also why I take Nightshields, aside from the increased emphasis many armies have on melta as their AT...).

Offline Khain Mor (/kharandhil)

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2886
  • Country: be
  • <3 huskblades
    • Dark Moon Kabal
Re: 5th edition & new codices
« Reply #24 on: June 11, 2010, 08:17:48 AM »
Problem with games at the GW: table is too small, so you can only play "small games" I don't like small games, I prefer 2000-2500 pts games (though 1750 is also acceptable somewhat. I don't consider the guys I'm going to fight, my lists are always made to handle pretty much everything, though ofcourse I'm not the best fighter vs masses of orcs or IG, nids aren't a problem because I alos play the army and know it well. Any army that I can't (almost) fully massacre is a hard army to beat, even if I can pull a major victory, if he still has too many units left I'm a bit disappointed (units are useless though)

Plenty of new players at the GW, but this is a downside, because some are just 100% new, so I have no problem beating them. I don't play there often so no big fish in little pound syndrome, I'm just a guy who kicks their asses from time to time.

Quote
Raider Rush instead of WWP
Never liked wwp, tried it in previous editions for the sake of trying it.
Besides, what I really didn't like was having to split up my force.

Quote
6 Troop choices over 4 troop choices
Yep also the same here, I even used to field 2 troops only in relatively big games.

Quote
Full Mech instead of partial mech
I only had 5 raiders for a very long time, now I have enough to fill 2 FOC, so about 3 years I was able to use how many raiders I want, it's not secret that I always try put everyone in a raider.

Quote
Going 2nd over going 1st
Hasn't changed for me I still prefer going first. Move forward, ready to attack on turn 2, might suffer losses, but it's no big deal. Turn 2 arrives and the massacre starts!

Quote
Movement phase is more important than the Assault phase
mostly agree with it!Due to the fact that instead of using 2-3 wych squads I now have to use troops instead. I have less assault in 1500-1750 than I used to. I have to be a lot more careful with where I move my units to.
More troops = more shooty armies, so movement is very important with the latest LOS rules.

Quote
Reserves is my friend
Never been such a huge fan, though I always enjoy having a few unit un reserves if the game is too big.

Quote
Nightshields on everything!
Not everything for me, unless it's 2500 pts and even then...
Problem is that sometimes is just doesn't help, take the classical railgun...NS are a joke. Movement is a better way to remain alive, LOs may be worse, but you can still greatly use cover even for skimmers.

A bit off topic, but eldar and dark eldar are still my 2 best armies out of all my armies. Whenever I want to massacre somebody, I take on of these 2 armies.
Lately I use my DE a lot more because they're finally painted.

ALSO I use them a lot more because I know the codex is about the change and tactics will probably greatly change, so I'm kind of enjoying the last few months of our current codex.

btw, nobody mentioned it before, but the 5th is responsible for mech and hordes becoming stronger, not just the new codices.
You have to take more troops, mech rules just became stronger.
Mech hasn't change that much, even if you can think the vehicle rules a little bit better, a falcon with holofield and spirit stones was always a problem.
Now the horde thing only became serious in this edition, suddenly everyone started using a lot more troops, though I have to admit, me and my nids, I always enjoyed using tons of gaunts, just for the sake of seeing a huge swarm in each game.
Both combined are our worst nightmare, IG and orcs are probably the best at having lots of vehicles and lots of infantry in one army.

Vehicles always were troublesome, that's just natural, in real life a tank is hard to shoot down and it is a big threat. The horde thing became a big disadvantage ever since players started to use more swarms, wasn't as much of a problem in previous editions, because people had more elites and fast attack instead of big squads of troops.
The Dark Moon Kabal ,possibly the biggest DE army ever!
over 20k and awesome, what more do you need to click? (last updated the 02/03/2012)

Nothing better than killing a thousand slaves to wake up in the morning.

Offline Grumpy Kwi

  • Archite
  • Ancient
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1907
  • Ask me for the DE True Type Font
Re: 5th edition & new codices
« Reply #25 on: June 11, 2010, 02:14:37 PM »

Going 2nd over going 1st

Care to elaborate?

Here is my point of view but I am sure you know this already.

The benefits of my play style to opting to go 2nd is:

1.   I get to line up my units versus his – helps getting the right match ups I want (like getting the ravagers where they are needed). If I do not like what I see then I can opt to overload his weak flank or just put everything into reserves if need be.
2.   I get to see his initial game plan before deploying. Sure, a sneaky opponent could throw me off but I can usually guess how he is going to try to get to the objectives. Most people might be able to do that just by looking at the opponents list but I prefer figuring this out by seeing his deployment, knowing what is in reserves and what is outflanking.
3.   I play the “last turn grab” strategy and it benefits our army nicely. I love having several raiders in a list as they can do so much to affect the outcome of a game. An empty raider for example can contest an enemy held objective 26.5” away in a single turn on a whim and there is nothing much an opponent can do about it afterwards – even if the game goes into another turn the raider now has a cover save and assaulting it will be problematic. Heck, in timed games where I know when the game is going to end going 2nd is a huge advantage, almost game winning.

Sure, there are times where I would want to go first and I do take that opportunity when I get the choice in special circumstances but since 66 percent of the games are objective based I am most likely going to be going 2nd either by choice or not. “Annihilation” games for example, I wouldn’t mind going first and if it’s “Dawn of War” I would absolutely want to go first.

So nothing wrong with wanting to go first – I see its merit and there’s nothing wrong with it, it’s just not how I prefer to play. Perhaps I will try going first more often to really compare the differences but going 2nd is something I have been doing since the beginning of 5th and have been quite happy with it (which is a huge difference than what I wanted in 4th edition).

Offline Serfax

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 549
Re: 5th edition & new codices
« Reply #26 on: June 11, 2010, 04:07:49 PM »
@Grumpy, i had a similar evolution of tactics to your list

You know what's crazy? I haven't won first turn in 3 months (probably 12-15 games). My prob/stat teacher taught me that "it wouldn't be random if there weren't streaks". But this is getting ridiculous.

However, I have found several merits to going second, the best of which is the overload tactic. This works especially well when playing a wych cult that I want to get into 12" range ASAP. Lately however, against the rash of mechanized BA lists, I find that 20 lances a turn can't even pop covered transports and I have nothing to assault once I get there. I'm probably going to try out some more kabal lance spam in the mean time...

Offline Khain Mor (/kharandhil)

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2886
  • Country: be
  • <3 huskblades
    • Dark Moon Kabal
Re: 5th edition & new codices
« Reply #27 on: June 11, 2010, 04:12:12 PM »
Quote
I play the “last turn grab” strategy and it benefits our army nicely. I love having several raiders in a list as they can do so much to affect the outcome of a game. An empty raider for example can contest an enemy held objective 26.5” away in a single turn on a whim and there is nothing much an opponent can do about it afterwards – even if the game goes into another turn the raider now has a cover save and assaulting it will be problematic. Heck, in timed games where I know when the game is going to end going 2nd is a huge advantage, almost game winning.
Any smart player will do the same, we have poor armor, we can't afford to go stand next to an objective early in the game and expect to survive, this is why we have to grab the objective later in the game.

Sniper squads are bad objective capturers because they're slow and even when they reach the objective, they can be easily disposed of.
SO a raider squad is the natural best way to capture an objective. It doesn't even have to be near the end, the squad can go if you eliminated everything in that flanc.

Quote
2.   I get to see his initial game plan before deploying. Sure, a sneaky opponent could throw me off but I can usually guess how he is going to try to get to the objectives. Most people might be able to do that just by looking at the opponents list but I prefer figuring this out by seeing his deployment, knowing what is in reserves and what is outflanking.

I kind of do use my old experience to attack fast and hard. If you have reserves you have an even greater advantage, dark eldar as you know excell at taking out isolated units. If the guy has too many reserves I can kill most of his army before his backup arrives, at this point he's just outnumbered and doomed.
First few turns are always the ones who tell how th efight is going to end, I make sure I kill as much as I can early in the game. Besides, some players need to gt into position, I just don't let them to that.

Quote
1.   I get to line up my units versus his – helps getting the right match ups I want (like getting the ravagers where they are needed). If I do not like what I see then I can opt to overload his weak flank or just put everything into reserves if need be.
I rarely use reserves, certainly almost never put almost everything in reserves.
I need all my units to hit hard and fast.
Deep strike and such just a free giveaway, a termie squad deploying in the middle of my lines, or a dread dropping down is just killed very fast as tons of blasters will be in range. I usually keep my blasters for last few turns, but if you get too close I'll gladly use them.

I do see why you may enjoy beginning second, though you have to admit you don't always need it, marine lists often have the same tactics. If you play against the same guy you tend to know how he fights.

In some battles I don't really care who's going first, but going first is part of my aggressive tactics, I just like to massacre as fast as possible.
The Dark Moon Kabal ,possibly the biggest DE army ever!
over 20k and awesome, what more do you need to click? (last updated the 02/03/2012)

Nothing better than killing a thousand slaves to wake up in the morning.

 


Powered by EzPortal