The Lists From Adepticon!

Greetings all.  SeerK here with another after report from Adepticon 2016.  This time we are bringing you the top 5 lists from The Schaumburg Prime Offensive.  We had Aquans in the top three spots this year.  This was a major change from last year, as we had no Aquans in the field in the inaugural tournament.  This year we upped the points from 900 to 1000.  We are looking at the data, the feedback from the players and  feedback from the community at large to evaluate what effects this had on the tournament if any.  Initial discussions and data is pointing to possibly going down to 900 points.  This of course does not take into account the new Task Force ships or the new fleet entries for them.  The Task Force ships as escort vessels is also a factor that will come into play.

I plan on talking about the Task Force vessels in FSA more in depth once the rules are 90% stable and I get the chance to play with them a lot more.  The new escort rules, especially with the Relthoza, really change things for me.  I have many more tools and avenues in my fleet construction.  I digress though.  Lets take a look at the lists!

The Clash At Epsilon Indy: Sunday Tournament Results

This past Sunday at Evolution games The Clash At Epsilon Indy went down.  Spellduckwrong once again was our T.O. and Uber Vanguard. We had 10 players this time around and again we had a decent mix of Kurak Alliance and Zenian League fleets. If you are curious as to how the battle log went and any trends popping up I am pretty sure Spellduckwrong has the full statistical work up over at the Spartan Games Community, or will be putting it up soon if he has not posted it.  I am sure you are a bit curious as to who our top finishers are though.

So this time around the winners were....

1st. Dave Wangen aka "SMD_Vogrin", Directorate
2nd.  Austin  Proux aka "Demomaster", Sorylians
3rd Josh Linde aka "SeerK" , Rense System Navy

That is right I placed this time round.  Booya!  I played Demomaster in round three and it was rough.  We had hold the Waygate for a mission and he had almost maxed out his tier three choices.  I had so many small ships to deal with it was borderline ridiculous.  I ran two different lists, as is customary when tournaments take place in this particular area.  I ran the same list in round one and round three, both times against Sorylians.  I am still confused with why many on the interwebs hate on the Sorylians.  They are a solid faction with a lot of variety and killing power.  In fact, the frigates have earned my number 2 spot in most hated ship in the Kurak Alliance.  Right behind the Hawker light cruiser....I mean Frigate.

Those of you curious about what I ran , here you go.  The tournament, and me thinks our future ones, was 900 points.  you can bring two lists.  Both lists must use the same primary Fleet.  I, of course, ran RSN.

List 1

Spectre Battleship x1
-1 turn
Special Forces
+2AP


Cerberus Heavy Cruisers x3

Cerberus Heavy Cruisers x3

Bulwark Frigates x3

Bulwark Frigates x3

List 2

Banshee Dreadnought x1
-1 turn
+1 shield
Special Forces

Spook Cruisers x3

Spook Cruisers x3

Bulwark Frigates x3

Bulwark Frigates x3


I was trying to go for a balance between number of activation's and fire power.  This can prove difficult for RSN fleets.  Many Kurak Factions outnumber and our gun you .  The real weak points in both lists were the three ship squadrons of Bulwarks.  In groups of three they loose effectiveness for some reason.  I think I may do two minimal squadrons and use the tac card that allows you to combine like ships to make one uni then have a squadron of Works Raptor corvettes to add some scout to the list.

I am finding it is very handy to have scout to redeploy units.  You can use a valuable unit to bait your opponent into bringing his big guns into whatever location you want basically.  The real trick is not to make it to obvious that is what you are doing.

I am also finding it very annoying that Sorylian frigate squadrons can contain 5 frigates and have pack hunter as an option.  This seems a little unnecessary to me.  The dice pool is pretty big and not duplicated by any small ships in the Zenian League that I am aware of.  Makes the Frigate squadrons very deadly to cruiser sized vessels, in fact it makes them kind of deadly to larger vessels as well.

The one game I used the list two in was actually against another RSN player.  It was very informative match though.  I think from now on my spooks will be traveling in packs of 6.  Operating in concert, my two squadrons manged to inflict quite a bit of damage despite my lackluster rolls in the first two turns with the torpedoes.  I hammered a squadron of Cerberus Cruisers with the torpedoes until I reached beam range and then dropped the cloaks and went full bore.  One heavy did manage to survive until the bitter end though.  I always for get what its like to be on the receiving end of a Cerberus squadron.  Spooks on their own are not bad but lack the one two punch when you have just one squadron.  The two squadrons ganging up on one target really was effective, especially once I reached beam range.

I have to say I am never running my big ships without escorts of some kind ever again.  It really never occurred to me how much fire they actually draw.  The Siren is also pretty robust for an escort so that helps.  My big ships took a fair bit of fire being all by themselves.

I am still working with good ways of taking down point defense to really make my torpedo attacks count.  Since there is a lot of cloaking shield equipped ships out there.  I have not been using a lot of SRS craft for the same reason, at least when on the attack.  That will be the experiment for the coming weeks until the next tournament.  Well that does it for my current thoughts post tournament

Next time I will be continuing with the Ships Of The Rense.  The Argus is up as our first Tier 1 vessel.  I also plan on doing an unboxing of Rivet Wars.  Evolution games gave me their demo copy to open up and read up on so Farseer Re-rolls and I can give the game a whirl.  More on that next week.


Until then crush the alliance and as always



REMEMBER DRAMOS!!!!!!!!

Terrans: Making Long-Range Work

It's Dreadbeard with a alternative way to play your favorite rock'em sock'em spaceships.

Wave Serpent Down: Revenge of the Jetbikes!

I had a grudge match last night against the five Wave Serpent list that massacred the previous incarnation of my Jetbike army. SeerK rolled it out again so that I could test my new retooled Jetbike list as I viewed this as my worst matchup. The new list was utterly victorious. The Wave Serpents went down fast and SeerK took the gentleman's way out and conceded at the top of Turn 3, as he only had seven infantry models and a Crimson Hunter left and I had only given up two kill points.
The new list hits like a freight train and I am inspired enough to actually get everything finished from the hobby side of things. I have been in a bit of a hobby slump because I wasn't motivated to do anything. As I reflect on my tendencies, I usually am only able to muster sustained hobby progress for models I am actually going to use and enjoy in the near future. During my search for non-Wave Serpent lists, I was unable to commit to anything. Now I have purpose.

So can my Jetbikes beat Serpents? Oh, yes. Now I just need to start hunting the other normal tournament lists.

Since "Serpent Spam" is crossed off my list, what other builds should I seek to test my Jetbikes?

Perhaps There Just Weren't Enough Jetbikes Last Time...

Well, if I am really going to try this Jetbike thing, then it's time to go all in and get nearly every variation I can out of the codex. Sorry, Autarch, you're sitting the bench on this one. So here's the new retooled list I am going to try running. Other than my trusty Rangers (who are ridiculously good sometimes and compliment Jetbikes very well actually) and the often late but clutch Crimson Hunter, (somebody has to pop Heldrakes with a quickness) its all bikes. Dropped the Vypers and the Fire Prisms, they just didn't add what I was looking for in the list.

Eldar 1848

Farseer (Jetbike, Singing Spear)
Farseer (Jetbike, Singing Spear)

Warlock x4 (Jetbike, Singing Spear)
Warlock x5 (Jetbike, Witchblade)

Shining Spears x8
Shining Spear Exarch x1 (Star Lance, Hit and Run, Monster Hunter)

Windrider Jetbikes x9 (3x Shuriken Cannons)
Windrider Jetbikes x9 (3x Shuriken Cannons)
Windrider Jetbikes x9 (3x Shuriken Cannons)

Rangers x6
Rangers x6

Crimson Hunter Exarch (2x Brightlances, Pulse Laser)

If nothing else, playing this list is going to get me VERY familiar with the intricacies of the Eldar Jetbike (since there will be 47 of them now) which may lead to more adept choices for list changes in the future. I'm fairly excited, because even though the bikes have been so-so in play tests thus far, these guys are blast to run on the table. And there's some assault in there too, which I think should add an extra layer of fun.

Model count comes in at an even sixty, and some of those the opponent is really going to have to earn. I think the rework really confronts some of the glaring weaknesses of the last version. Namely Daemon Princes en-mass and Wave Serpents in any large quantity. I should be alright to make Riptides cry as well.

What do you think?

Retooling the Jetbike Army

Well, I got another game in with my Jetbike army. SeerK was kind enough to take a five Wave Serpent list against me at my request. I eventually conceded around Turn 4. I learned a ton about my list in the course of the slaughter. There's no way I can make the Jetbike list competitive in its current form, not tournament competitive anyway. Since getting a list that is capable of winning at least at the RTT level is the goal, I must take my lessons and return to the drawing board.
I've got some things cooking in my mind. The big thing that I feel like I was lacking was staying power with my Jetbikes. Thirty bikes spread across five units just doesn't work. The scoring elements are just too fragile when I roll a solid string of 2's for armor saves. The bikes are ok. But they suffer the same way that any elite, low-model count list does when the dice turn slightly sour.
Fundamental lesson learned. Check.
Now to retool, rework, and relaunch the army. I WILL make Jetbikes work in some fashion, but unsurprisingly, the first draft wasn't a keeper. No problem, this is a fun challenge.
Anyone have any suggestions? I'm back to the brainstorming phase.

More Jet Bike Adventures

I played another game last night with my fledgling Jetbike army. My opponent had a mostly foot Marine army (Black Templars allied with Dark Angels) and the mission was Relic. The Jetbikes successfully managed to grab the Relic and scoot away with it. Jetbikes are great at The Relic.

So this is the third game I've played now with my new Jetbike obsession. Unfortunately, the data leaves me a little wanting. All three of my opponents have played very slow lists and while it confirms my assertions about mobility being a weapon in its own right, I haven't been able to test the list against anything where I don't have a severe advantage in that respect. We have a White Scars player at the shop, and I will corner him eventually to get a game in. I also need to get someone to bring one of the cookie cutter style tournament Tau lists.

But for now, I am learning how to move the Jetbikes around so they aren't competing with each other for space and to most effectively get their weapons on target. They actually produce a pretty good volley of fire. The Bladestorm rule for them really gave them some teeth, not to mention the Ballistic Skill 4 upgrade from the last Codex.

What do you think would be a bad/difficult matchup for this list? These are the types of games that I am going to be seeking because rough games teach me the most about an army.

My Jetbike Army So Far...

Well, I figured I would post up the army list I am working with currently. I would like to preface this list with the explanation that I am performing an experiment that is not necessarily tied to the jetbikes. Basically, I am trying out a new idea I had for building a list. My idea was to start with a very low variety list. A list that probably has a ton of bad matchups, but whose composition was very different than what I had been playing before. Through practice games, I will gain experience using the units in the list, as well as learning where it really falls down. Once I identify the weak points in the army, I can then begin to switch out units to fill those gaps. My hope is that I will develop a list that performs very well because it grew organically over time. So here it is:

Eldar 1850

Farseer [Runes of Warding, Singing Spear, Jetbike]
Farseer [Singing Spear, Jetbike]

Windrider Jetbikes x6 [2x Shuriken Cannons]
Windrider Jetbikes x6 [2x Shuriken Cannons]
Windrider Jetbikes x6 [2x Shuriken Cannons]
Windrider Jetbikes x6 [2x Shuriken Cannons]
Windrider Jetbikes x6 [2x Shuriken Cannons]
Rangers x5

Vypers x3 [3x Star Cannons]
Vypers x3 [3x Star Cannons]
Crimson Hunter [Exarch, Pulse Laser, 2x Brightlances]

Fire Prism [Holofields]
Fire Prism [Holofields]
Fire Prism [Holofields]

This list has the basic tools required to have a chance in most games. That chance can go to the "slim" part of the spectrum pretty fast, but it's still there. The very original version of the list had a sixth squad of jetbikes instead of Rangers and a third squadron of Vypers instead of the Crimson Hunter. I made a command decision and made the switch because I knew I would need the Rangers for sitting on back objectives, and I wanted NEEDED to gain skill with the Crimson Hunter. Though, admittedly, I weep silently for the loss of utter uniformity.

I am kind of excited to be trying this list growing idea out. The mostly one-dimensional aspects of this list should make it pretty easy to isolate trouble areas and remove them. In addition, as I gain practice playing it, I will be able to more effectively use the units that remain so that I can hopefully get a solid feel for what the changes are actually doing.

What do you think?

Adventures in List Building

I've been trying to quit Wave Serpents cold turkey. Currently, I have been experimenting with Windrider Jetbikes, lots of 'em. Past two games I have had 32 (counting the twin Farseers) flying around the board. I'm not sure how I feel about them, honestly. I'm giving my opinion some salt because much of my trouble probably stems from my trek over their learning curve. So far, they seem to be getting in each others' way. I'm also still learning how I want to deploy them, they have such a huge footprint that getting them behind stuff can be challenging, so I tend to keep a squad or two or three in reserve for better or for worse.
Anyone have any anecdotes about Jetbikes that I can digest to quicken my mastery of them?

Path of the Autarch: Critical Mass 2.0 - Part 1

So, first of, thanks to all of you that have been participating in the discussion on the previous Critical Mass post. I have been analyzing and trying to get a more solid framework in which to house this, for me, elusive concept of Critical Mass in army lists.
We seemed to be a little fuzzy on a word definition for the phenomenon, prob
ably because it can take many forms. Basically, it is just that momentum that your list gains on the battlefield that propels you toward victory.
What ended up being a little easier to chew on, however, were key elements of a list that can result in gaining Critical Mass.
There were anecdotes and comments made that involve player skill, game philosophy, and other things but I am totally focused on the list, just letters and numbers on the paper kind of list. Player ability/temperment are a whole separate topic. Perhaps in a future post.
At this point of concept development, I have decided to evaluate Critical Mass potential based on three metrics, with the intention that a list which has high marks in all three will be able to get serious Critical Mass. The three metrics I have chosen are:

1) Offensive Capability

2) Resiliency

3) Viability

Now that opening statements are over, let's dive into part one, the first metric.

Offensive Capability

Abstract: The Offensive Capability metric involves not just units, weapons, and general firepower, but also the presence of delivery mechanisms (or lack thereof) to get list elements into proper position. Powerful weapons/units mean little if they are unable to be used effectively. And while each aspect needs to be looked at separately, they all feed into each other to produce a "score" for this metric.

 Aspect 1:

The first aspect of the Offensive Capability metric is the ability to do meaningful damage to the enemy.

By meaningful, I mean being able to remove the enemy's valuable units.

Whether a unit would be deemed "valuable" is completely subjective, but I define a unit as valuable if it can greatly benefit the controlling player over the course of a game because of either the mission, the terrain, or the matchup (i.e. what two armies are squaring off).

A part of doing meaningful damage also incorporates the need to produce wounds en masse should the situation require it. Either by sheer number of shots, special tricks, or truck loads of blast templates. Sometimes you just need to kill models, lots of them. Your list should be able to do and more. But perhaps I am getting ahead of myself.

For example, if I am running an infantry based list, am I able to remove the opponent's threatening anti-infantry units? Because those just became very valuable to the opponent. If the opponent is running many monstrous creatures, that makes them valuable to the opponent for a different reason, am I able to effectively remove these?

What is "valuable" can vary wildly. You are still going to want to kill things with "value" though.

Aspect 2:

The second aspect of the Offensive Capability metric is Versatile Firepower**.

I put asterisks next to Firepower because I wanted to refer to not only guns/ranged weapons but also special abilities, close combat prowess, basically whatever the list uses to make the opponent's models go away.

Having Versatile Firepower generally represents a lists ability to do damage at useful ranges, having the necessary weapon strengths, AP values and special abilities to engage the opponent throughout the battle regardless of the build that the opponent has. Versatile Firepower gives a list the ability to leverage its strengths on the opponent's weaknesses. Having a "firing solution" for most or any problem you encounter is a huge boon.

It is also worth noting at this point that having units or weapons that are dual purpose help increase this aspect as being able to satisfactorily engage a variety of targets builds in additional flexibility and versatility.

For example, if a list relies almost completely on a high volume of low strength, short ranged weapons, then it will struggle to engage targets that are far away or are hard to wound. Whereas a list that has all the major categories of attacks in its toolbox will be able to lay down fire where and at what it needs to in order to be the most efficient.

Aspect 3:

The third aspect of the Offensive Capability is Force Delivery.

Force Delivery is a critical part of a list. Having amazing weapons, special abilities and units are all well and good but they won't help you in the least if they cannot get where they need to be in order to engage the targets they are best at.

If your unit has a weapon that has a silly-long range, then delivering the firing model probably isn't too important, but ensuring it has proper lanes of fire is crucial to the model delivering its contribution to the war effort.

Transports, jump packs, movement special perks (looking at you, Fast Skimmers), lanes of fire, Deep Strike, Infiltrate, or anything else that can get your army into the fight are going to increase the list's value for this aspect.

An army that can't bring its forces to bear upon the enemy is at a RIDICULOUS disadvantage compared to one that can. Ever played a game where you just get mercilessly taken apart no matter what you do? You opponent's list probably scored high in this aspect whereas your score was likely abysmal.

**As a personal aside, I will tend to weight this aspect a little heavier than the others for my own lists because I like mobile armies. 

*************************************************************************************

Well, that does it for the basic framework of the first metric I propose for metering critical mass potential in lists 40K is a wargame, so offensive ability is generally going to be the foremost concern when really developing a list. It is the rock you anchor your victory to.

Do you have any changes you would make to this metric? I think I hit the main cornerstones for quality, quantity, flexibility, and usability.

List Building: Critical Mass?

One of the online dictionary definitions for critical mass are as follows:
"an amount necessary or sufficient to have a significant effect or to achieve a result."

I've been thinking quite a bit about army lists. Much of it probably has to do with the amount of tournaments I have been to recently, the upcoming Michigan GT, and the not so distant one at U-Con.
I've been pondering today about"critical mass" in a list. The other day I was playing against one of SeerK's experimental builds. After the game, one of my criticisms of the list was that I felt like it was unable to attain "critical mass". Now, unfortunately, I haven't distilled exactly what I think gives this critical mass, what it actually is, or even if that is the best term to describe it. I can, however, notice when it isn't there. It's absence tends be most glaring when facing an opponent that has a list that just seems to be a bunch of units running around doing something rather than a cohesive force. There is some interplay I can't quite put my finger on between units doing useful damage, units taking/holding important ground, and a general momentum towards mission victory.

Part of the impetus for writing this post is to kind of think "out loud" and maybe get some feedback from you.
Perhaps the phenomenon that eludes me is based off of the general ability to reliably swing the battle in a positive manner. The force required to do this may be what I am meaning by critical mass, but also the ability to keep it from swinging back easily. Anyone can have a really good turn, but a good player with a good list will nearly always be doing well overall through both good turns and bad ones.

So let's look at the generalities that a good list can do reliably.

1. It can deal sufficient catastrophic damage to the things that can deal catastrophic damage to it.

**For example, a tank list that is adept at removing the enemies anti-tank assets.

2. It can run a quality damage surplus. In that it deals more quality damage than it receives.

* I would define quality damage as either succeeding against a target with the right weapons (Lascannons that actually kill a tank, Flamers on weak support troops in cover, etc.) or significant damage to very important units of the enemies (generally just making something roll a lot of saves and forcing wounds. While it lacks in efficiency, if every wound is particularly valuable, it's worth it).

3. Has enough resiliency built into the most important elements of the list as not to be crippled easily.

I think that a list that can reliably accomplish these three things should be able to attain a "critical mass".

What do you think? Am I close but missing it? Do you have a better term? General thoughts?