I hated wracks when I first went through the codex, and I still hate them, but I cannot deny all that they bring to the table. It stands the possibility of leaving a poor taste in my mouth, but I've been toying with some wrack lists. Generally speaking, here are the two core lists I'm working with:
| HQ 1 Haemonculus ELT 4 Trueborn - 4 Blasters - Venom 4 Trueborn - 4 Blasters - Venom TRPS 10 Warriors - Splinter Cannon - Raider 10 Warriors - Splinter Cannon - Raider 10 Warriors - Splinter Cannon - Raider FST 5 Scourge - 2 Heat Lances 5 Scourge - 2 Heat Lances HVY Ravager Ravager Ravager |
Here is the warrior variant. The first core I came up with. I still like this one the most. There's some wargear I'd like to take, but didn't include just because it's mostly optional stuff. Some sort of shields on the raiders would be nice, extra cannons on the venoms, stuff like that. As is, it has 12 dark lances, 8 blasters, 4 heat lances, 88 SX (on average) shots, 49 bodies, and 8 platforms. Considering it also leaves me with 561 points to spare, this is pretty not bad, if you ask me.
No CC presence whatsoever, but I do plan to use some of whatever points are left over for harlies and probably at least 1 unit of wyches. Wyches are great at tying up dangerous units in CC, and harlies are just good at killing stuff in general.
Part 2:
| HQ 1 Haemonculus ELT 4 Trueborn - 4 Blasters - Venom 4 Trueborn - 4 Blasters - Venom TRPS 5 Wracks - Liquifier - Venom + Splinter Cannon 5 Wracks - Liquifier - Venom + Splinter Cannon 5 Wracks - Liquifier - Venom + Splinter Cannon 5 Wracks - Liquifier - Venom + Splinter Cannon FST 5 Scourge - 2 Heat Lances 5 Scourge - 2 Heat Lances HVY Ravager Ravager Ravager |
The only difference here is obviously in the troops. Total, this is 20 points more so it leaves me with 541 to play with. I'm trading 3 dark lances and 6 SX shots (on average*) for 4 liquifiers and more durable troops. Worth it? I don't know. I have 10 less bodies with the wracks, how much more durable are we talking here? Are 9 dark lances with 8 blasters and 4 heat lances enough? Would those 3 extra really make that big a difference? I'll have to do some thinking on it. Maybe run some numbers, see what happens. Not now, though, there's more to be discussed.
My main gripe with the second list is that it has wracks instead of warriors. Firstly, I still think that DE warriors are some of the best units in the book. Maybe they fold like an already-folded paper bag in CC, and don't have much durability at range either, but they're pretty cheap, can take decent weapons, and splinter rifles are potentially the strongest standard guns in the game. Basically, my point is that they are Dark Eldar.
Wracks, on the other hand, are marines. Their roles (as I see it) are to:
1) sit in their transport and shoot stuff until they get de-boxed
2) sit in cover and shoot stuff until they get charged (not quite as good at this as marines)
3) ride up in their transport and shoot all assault weapons before charging into CC
4) hold objectives
That's obviously a gross over-simplification, but generally speaking these are the things that wracks do; eerily similar to the things that marines do. Perhaps that is why the internet is so in love with them.
"Wyches, so they're weaker ASM? No thanks."
"Warriors, these guys look like Tau statlines. No thanks."
"Wracks? Now here is something I can work with."
Everyone already knows how to use them because they play like marines. Marines have a paradigm that is comfortable and effective. This is the "safe" option. I don't want "safe". If I wanted to play marines, I would. I want to play DE. I want speed and I want death.
Maybe wracks are good, maybe they're even fun to play, they just don't seem very characterful to me. I've said before that I'm not a competitive gamer, but that's only mostly true. I don't care how much I love blood claws, I'd never use them instead of grey hunters. If there is something that I like better that is at least pretty close to being as viable, though, then I will use that instead. I feel like warriors are very viable, so more than likely I will be running with them. Only time will tell for sure, though.
Well, time and Excel, perhaps...
============================================
* - By the way, when I say on average, I'm referring to variable rate of fire weapons. Rapid fire becomes 1.5 shots, and infantry-bound cannons become 5 shots. I know it isn't 100% accurate, but it's at least better than assuming always max or always min shots.
No comments:
Post a Comment