Good! It's what I was going for.
CliffNotes: Brent does a pretentious and media-poor Part II 'cause he's gotta get ready to drive to the Comic-Con today!
Okay, if you don't know what we're gonna be talking about, back up and read the last post. It's worth your time, regardless of the army you play. Let me know when you're back.
I'm waiting.
Finally. How long does it take you to read, man? Not you guys - THAT dude. Yes, you. Put both hands on the keyboard and pay attention.
The key to understanding my new motto, Competitive is Consistent is we don't care about winning one game, we wanna win them all.
Your army has to have a shot against any list out there. I don't care if you call it an All-Comers or a Best Of, the idea is the same - I just want you to think about it as you're problem-solving your way through an army build.
Tom's building Daemons... scratch that - HAS built... he's already posted his list in the comment's section and I don't know how amendable he is to changing the whole thing for little ol' me! I'll ask him if he minds if we break down his list for Part III, so you guys can have an example of problem-solving and critical thinking as it applies to his idea.
Tom, do you mind? I promise to be good!
I called the idea a gimmick but said it had merit. I also asked for feedback and got some good comments.
It'd make sense to drop heralds in a 2x2 group utilizing 2 groups of screamers. 2 in wave one, 2 in wave two. So if you're intent on dropping them with screamers - this would give you a more reliable way to do so.
Good call, and the way we want to be thinking.
The issue is that good ideas such as these can be effective once, twice, maybe a few more times due to sheer surprise. After that, the space marines (and others) wise up and figure out how to nullify the edge we daemon players have constructed.
He said it, so I won't have to. That's absolutely 100% true. The moment your buddies figure out what you're doing, they WILL find a way to put the kibosh to it.
The answer is redundancy for consistency for reliability's sake?
Wait a second... only I can do the clever wordplay 'round here! I'll let it pass (because I wouldn't have come up with it). And it's a genius line.
I wanted more time for this post, but I've got to head out to start picking up the guys. Hopefully, I'll get some interesting pictures from the ComicCon to show you fine folks. I leave you with this, 'fore we chat again tomorrow.
The idea is hiding your Heralds in units with the same mark, giving you survivability and flexibility. We need to expand on that idea and increase our options, so we can play shell games regardless of the way the dice roll and what our opponent does.
Keep your eyes peeled for Ultramarines the movie promos at the con. Inquiring minds want to know!
ReplyDeleteI've no problem tearing the list apart. I know there's some holes in it from experience, but I've got experience with these units, so that adds some extra oomph to the slightly unoptimised components.
ReplyDeleteSaying that, I love trying to find new uses for old units. One of my favourite is using Bloodletters as Plague Bearer replacements. Sitting 5+ on an objective in cover, going to ground when needed, is pretty effective. You still need Plaguebearers, but not as many as you'd think.
Skulltaker in a unit of letters is something different. It basically tells deathstar units to keep away - any tyranid MC will never try and charge into cover to take on Skulltaker, mainly because he will die. And I can always drop him danger close near something horrible so he instantly becomes priority number one.
Just some thoughts
Hrm. Wait a minute. What if we do the opposite of your idea and attach our heralds with bolt to a resilient unit like plague bearers - or if we attach our heralds to something choppy - just on the turn on the drop, in case they get assaulted?
ReplyDeleteYou can only have hearalds in units of the same mark, so heralds of tzeentch can only go in tzeentch units. Would be awesome to put tzeentch bolts in a unit like bloodcrushers, but you unfortunetly can't.
ReplyDeleteTom: I don't want to tear the list apart - that's not my style. I do want to take it apart and see what makes it tick though, and if I make some suggestions they're just that.
ReplyDeleteBrent
aw, shame on me.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I didn't mean tear apart in a bad way, nust dismantle the list and talk about the units that work and what doesn't.
ReplyDelete