ITC ruling poll is up!

[Chappy]

Striking at the same time as your opponent is not an advantage when you're t3 and wearing cruddy armor.

This.

[fluger]

No grenades...? really, that's the complaint? What about those banshee masks? -5 to enemy initiative means that banshees strike at the same time as most enemies, even while charging through cover.

 

No, that's only one of the complaints.  The biggest continues to be being T3 and S3.  

 

Seriously, just take any number of units that are melee oriented out for a statistical spin and see how they compare to Banshees.  

 

And it's not even one of those "You just don't know how to use Howling Banshees" arguments because I have seen how shoddy they are in the field compared to the other two Eldar melee options (Harlies and Scorps).  Scorpions end up being better for a couple of reasons, but mostly because they hit harder and have a better save and infiltrate.  Harlies are better because of rending and furious charge and WS5 and having an invul save.  

 

Seriously, look at Blood Angel Scouts vs Howling Banshees.  Have them charge a variety of infantry units and see which one does the most damage time and time again.  About the only place that the Banshees seemingly have an edge is against MEq, but, again, the lack of grenades is critical issue.  And if you think it isn't, I can assure you that anytime I'm playing against units without grenades, I make them pay for it, ESPECIALLY if they have high I and are counting on it to help them (this really hampers Genestealers as well).  Even in their best case scenario of facing a unit with 3+ saves (basically getting the most bang for their buck) they perform basically the same as the Scouts.  

 

10 scouts on the charge do about 3 casualties and take 1 casualty in return (when facing 8 marines)

7 banshees (same points as the scouts!) take 1 casualty and deal out 3.5 casualties.  

 

That's almost identical damage, and, while in subsequent rounds the banshees will probably start to do better than the scouts (as they lose FC and the banshees now go first instead of at the same time), I'm talking about their best case target and the scouts are doing about the same.  Oh, and scouts are troops and banshees are elite.  

 

Seriously, they are rubbish for their points.   

[Guest]

No, that's only one of the complaints.  The biggest continues to be being T3 and S3.  

 

Seriously, just take any number of units that are melee oriented out for a statistical spin and see how they compare to Banshees.  

 

And it's not even one of those "You just don't know how to use Howling Banshees" arguments because I have seen how shoddy they are in the field compared to the other two Eldar melee options (Harlies and Scorps).  Scorpions end up being better for a couple of reasons, but mostly because they hit harder and have a better save and infiltrate.  Harlies are better because of rending and furious charge and WS5 and having an invul save.  

 

Seriously, look at Blood Angel Scouts vs Howling Banshees.  Have them charge a variety of infantry units and see which one does the most damage time and time again.  About the only place that the Banshees seemingly have an edge is against MEq, but, again, the lack of grenades is critical issue.  And if you think it isn't, I can assure you that anytime I'm playing against units without grenades, I make them pay for it, ESPECIALLY if they have high I and are counting on it to help them (this really hampers Genestealers as well).  Even in their best case scenario of facing a unit with 3+ saves (basically getting the most bang for their buck) they perform basically the same as the Scouts.  

 

10 scouts on the charge do about 3 casualties and take 1 casualty in return (when facing 8 marines)

7 banshees (same points as the scouts!) take 1 casualty and deal out 3.5 casualties.  

 

That's almost identical damage, and, while in subsequent rounds the banshees will probably start to do better than the scouts (as they lose FC and the banshees now go first instead of at the same time), I'm talking about their best case target and the scouts are doing about the same.  Oh, and scouts are troops and banshees are elite.  

 

Seriously, they are rubbish for their points.  

@ underlined section: Are you really talking about only the 10-man squads? I'm talking about a meager 5 banshees. I think 5 banshees can kill 75pts worth of models, I'm not certain that 150+pts banshees can kill a like number of points in models. Have you really only done testing at the 10-man level? At 150pts, opponent will start directing legitimate AP weapons at them. At 75pts, it would waste their shooting most of the time. I'd keep them in cover, advancing with their awesome run move (with battle focus too).

 

75pt banshee units are for attacking heavy weapon teams, combat squads of marines, artillery crews, and so forth. Yeah, they aren't going to cut it against several times their point value in dedicated melee units. You can certainly take out scout marines with these, as well as light assault units. They are not designed, nor equipped for tank hunting or MC slaying.

 

Perhaps you mean they are rubbish for their slot? Points wise, they are just fine at the 5-man level.

 

As for BA scouts as troops, they are troops, but not objective secured ones if you take that pretty awesome BA detachment option. You can still make them objective secured. Scouts in general, tend to win combat only at high cost. Even against vehicles, the explosions can cause pretty major damage to scout units. This is true with banshees as well.

 

I'm the wrong one to advocate against scouts, as they are one of my favorite units in the SM codex and constantly underrated. That said, banshees, for points, make for a much stronger dedicated AP melee unit (ap as in anti-personnel). You are completely correct, that scouts excel over the banshees in just about every other area, especially with the right build. In particular, scouts are better as a dedicated AT melee unit.

[pretre]

Points wise, I'm pretty sure you can buy pretty much anything else in the codex and do better.

[Guest]

Math, huh...? And you were commenting about them being troops. Okay, scouts see some tactical marines in cover on an objective and attempt assault, if only to contest the objective for a turn.

 

5 BA melee scouts (CCW+BP) assault 10 tactical marines with bolters.

 

Scouts start with shooting attacks, hitting with 2 bolt pistols and 2/3 of a krak grenade (from the higher BS sarge)

Marines take 1 wound from the pistols and another 5/9 wounds from the grenade. and 14/27 unsaved wounds.

Marines overwatch with 18 bolter shots and a krak grenade. 3 bolter wounds and 1/6 of a krak grenade.

Scouts take 3/2 bolter wounds and 5/36 krak grenade wounds. 8/9 unsaved wounds.

In assault, both units swing at the same time. Scouts feature 15 attacks the charge, as their nineth of a model is still hanging onto life.

They hit 15/2 times, and wound 5 times. Marines suffer 5/3 unsaved wounds, which adds to their exist total for 59/27, or just over 2 deaths.

Marines at the same initiative return with 10 attacks. 20/3 hit. 10/3 unsaved. Scouts have now taken 38/9, or just over 4 deaths.

 

Congrats, scouts have successfully contested the objective for a single turn.

 

Points wise, I'm pretty sure you can buy pretty much anything else in the codex and do better.

With 75pts? Be my guest. What is the better buy?

[pretre]

3 jet bikes.

[Guest]

3 jet bikes.

Not even going to attempt to compare similar units, eh?

 

If not comparing objective secured via certain detachment special rules, I think 3 jetbikes are probably worse, but only by a hair. If objective secured is factoring into this, yeah, they hands down more useful.

 

That said, jet bike unit is really just as fragile as banshees, with considerably less offensive power. They do have considerably more mobility, so it all depends on the rest of the list and terrain and the mission. Really, though, these are two units that fill such very different roles that they are difficult to compare. Jetbikes make worse melee units and banshees are much worse in an objective holding role...

[pretre]

3 t4 3+ models with jink are more survivable than 5 t3 models with 4 or 5+ (I forget).

[fluger]

Pax. How are those banshees getting anywhere?

[fluger]

For similar pts I'll take swooping hawks.

[VonVilkee]

For similar pts I'll take swooping hawks.

Which still isn't saying much! But at least their niche comes into play more with the current meta... Watch out knights!

[fluger]

Actually, swooping hawks are boss in the new dex.  Heck, even Tony Kopach used them in his Eldar list.  A little 6 strong unit is ace at going after little infantry units and also scoring/contesting objectives.  The haywire grenades are just gravy. 

[AbusePuppy]

Banshees are a failure on every possible level as a melee unit. They are slow, and thus unlikely to get to their target. They are fragile, and thus unlikely to be alive long enough to get to their target. They have mediocre damage output against T4+ models, making it unlikely that they will kill their target. Unless you are playing on a table that is lousy with BLOS terrain, they are an awful unit- and if you are, there are still plenty of better units.

 

I'm not sure what you think throwing 55pts (not 75pts) of melee scouts into 140pts of Tactical Marines proves, Pax. It's not news to anyone that fighting something three times your point value generally works out poorly- that Tactical squad, charged by a ten-man Terminator unit, also dies pretty badly it turns out. And Banshees, in that situation, also perform poorly (one Banshee dies to Overwatch, the others kill two Marines while losing one of their own- that makes it eight Marines against three Banshees, a fight they will almost inevitably lose.)

[Guest]

3 t4 3+ models with jink are more survivable than 5 t3 models with 4 or 5+ (I forget).

Didn't think they'd have a 3+, but I still think the banshees, barring objective secured, are more useful to the army. Jetbikers basically deal no damage and won't last even a round of combat against most opponents at that point level. 

 

Banshees are a failure on every possible level as a melee unit. They are slow, and thus unlikely to get to their target. They are fragile, and thus unlikely to be alive long enough to get to their target. They have mediocre damage output against T4+ models, making it unlikely that they will kill their target. Unless you are playing on a table that is lousy with BLOS terrain, they are an awful unit- and if you are, there are still plenty of better units.

Why are they slow? They have fleet+acrobatic, so through terrain, unit is moving 2d6+3" per turn, and d6+9" in open terrain. Fleet gives some re-rolls there. Makes them about as fast as any vehicle and they don't give up the option to shoot (weak weapons, but they do have that bladestorm rule and BS4)

 

 

I'm not sure what you think throwing 55pts (not 75pts) of melee scouts into 140pts of Tactical Marines proves, Pax. It's not news to anyone that fighting something three times your point value generally works out poorly- that Tactical squad, charged by a ten-man Terminator unit, also dies pretty badly it turns out. And Banshees, in that situation, also perform poorly (one Banshee dies to Overwatch, the others kill two Marines while losing one of their own- that makes it eight Marines against three Banshees, a fight they will almost inevitably lose.)

One of those ones where I pick the situation prior to doing the math. Fluger, I think, was saying that scouts were great objective secured units and were better in a melee capacity, but I found his situation lacking for the example, as he had a full squad of scouts attacking an even sized, but lacking in melee weapon unit. Scouts don't get that lucky, most games. Attacking a larger force with the intention of holding them off for a turn or 2 is a common application of scouts. Fluger's didn't include scout initial shooting, and didn't convey the concept of using the scouts as an objective secured unit.

 

I did do the math for the banshees, but I screwed up around combat round 6 which got me frustrated and I deleted the whole thing. Basically, banshees do a bit worse than scouts on round 1, but still manage to kill the same number marines (despite losing a model to overwatch). Turn 2+ has them at higher intiative, so they start dishing out damage prior to the marines, which helps a bit. My combat had the banshees conclusively wiped at combat round 7, but I think I may have screwed up the math for the marine to-wound rolls on rounds 5-7, so they may have been wiped sooner. By my faulty math, banshees killed 5 complete marines before getting wiped. Not bad for tying up a larger unit for several turns, but not as good as I'd hoped. I did this one for more rounds because it seemed like banshees would survive longer, while scouts were clearly finish in the next melee round.

 

Still, reinforces the idea that my ideal enemy for banshees is a 5-man unit of marines, or a slightly larger unit of something with lower toughness. Those aren't exactly an uncommon enemy, as that's every combat squad of marines pouring out of a drop pod. Their role is either counter assault, or backfield unit hunters via jungling in terrain.

 

Entire army being so rock-paper-scissors is very much an Eldar concept, so having a very focused role for the banshees isn't that unfluffy. Face it, eldar players, the codex fluff is that their empire is dying. Why do empires die?...because they don't work anymore.

 

Banshees' focused role is the issue with the banshees, as there target is getting less common in the 40k meta (all SM biker armies, centurions, and so forth really make these obsolete). They'd be amazing against Sisters....

 

For balance while retaining their role, I think banshees should get 1 more base attack each, and their swords should be master crafted. It wouldn't change their role, as they'd still struggle against the higher toughness units, but they'd be able to do more damage, even if going at the same time, and it should boost their odds against their intended opponents. That said, GW will probably just change the Eldar fluff to give them an entirely new role (and give them a more copyright-able name).

 

I do hope eldar get assault vehicle ramps for their vehicles in the next edition. Having rear AV10 mounted assault ramps is a crutch enough for eldar...

[AbusePuppy]

Didn't think they'd have a 3+, but I still think the banshees, barring objective secured, are more useful to the army. Jetbikers basically deal no damage and won't last even a round of combat against most opponents at that point level. 

 

They have a 3+; all models on an Eldar Jetbike do. And discounting Objective Secured and the ability to move 48" per turn on a unit whose only purpose is to bring those two things together is absurd.

 

 

Why are they slow? They have fleet+acrobatic, so through terrain, unit is moving 2d6+3" per turn, and d6+9" in open terrain. Fleet gives some re-rolls there. Makes them about as fast as any vehicle and they don't give up the option to shoot (weak weapons, but they do have that bladestorm rule and BS4)

 

The problem is that normal infantry movement + Run is the speed that EVERY unit in the game can move at- it is essentially the absolute lowest speed (barring Immobile or Slow and Purposeful units.) Banshees are only barely faster than that- compare them to something like a Jump Pack (12+d6" per turn, averaging 16"), Jet Pack (6+3d6" per turn, averaging 16.5"), Bike (24" per turn), or multitude of other units, the Banshees 9+d6" (averaging 13") is not really all that fast- especially when you remember that they can't assault after Running, meaning that their "real" movement speed on any turn they want to participate in the game is actually only 6".

 

 

Basically, banshees do a bit worse than scouts on round 1, but still manage to kill the same number marines (despite losing a model to overwatch).

 

Keep in mind that while Banshees slightly outperform Scouts, that is assuming both units make it to combat with equal casualties, which ignores the Scouts' vastly superior deployment options. Starting 12" from the enemy on the first turn, as opposed to 24" or more, is a massive difference. Scouts are also less hindered by the terrain that both units need to cling to to mitigate their 4+ armor saves, as they have Move Through Cover whereas the Banshees do not.

 

Still, reinforces the idea that my ideal enemy for banshees is a 5-man unit of marines, or a slightly larger unit of something with lower toughness. Those aren't exactly an uncommon enemy, as that's every combat squad of marines pouring out of a drop pod. Their role is either counter assault, or backfield unit hunters via jungling in terrain.

 

Sure, but a 5man unit of Marines will almost always kill Banshees because it will get one or more turns of Rapid Fire with their Boltguns at them before they get to charge. They'll kill almost half of the Banshees in a single volley of fire- not to even be looking at Overwatch shots or the damage the Marines do in combat with the Banshees. If Banshees actually were good at clearing out Combat Squads of dudes, it would be a whole other matter to talk about them- but they aren't.

 

 

Entire army being so rock-paper-scissors is very much an Eldar concept, so having a very focused role for the banshees isn't that unfluffy. Face it, eldar players, the codex fluff is that their empire is dying. Why do empires die?...because they don't work anymore.

 

Their problem is not their focused role- their problem is that they are not very good at their focused role.

 

Let's look at something else for a moment; Warp Spiders. Warp Spiders are a flexible backfield hunter unit; they Deep Strike into enemy territory, bounce around shooting at things and causing havoc and generally make a nuisance of themselves. They are good at this because their guns have an effective statline (S6 with Monofilament), they come with 3+ armor and Hit and Run natively, and the combination of Battle Focus and their Warp Generators gives them exceptional ability to go where needed and avoid threats they don't like. They are a focused unit, but one that is good at their job.

 

Banshees are also a focused unit, but they are not a good one. Their job is the hunt MEQs and other medium-to-heavy infantry in close combat. But they lack the ability to effectively get close to their targets (since they do not have Deep Strike, Infiltrate, or accelerated movement), lack the ability to absorb punishment on the way in, lack a transport to effectively shore up either of those weaknesses, and even once they finally reach combat are still only mediocre in a fight- compare them to Incubi, who have WS5 and S4 (as well as AP2) and they are utterly outclassed.

[fluger]

Also, my point about them being troops has less to do with Ob Sec and more to do with not taking up elite slots.  You HAVE to bring troops, so bringing 2 units of scouts isn't much of an opportunity cost. 

[Guest]

Too many quotes...

 

1 They have a 3+; all models on an Eldar Jetbike do. And discounting Objective Secured and the ability to move 48" per turn on a unit whose only purpose is to bring those two things together is absurd.

 

 

2 The problem is that normal infantry movement + Run is the speed that EVERY unit in the game can move at- it is essentially the absolute lowest speed (barring Immobile or Slow and Purposeful units.) Banshees are only barely faster than that- compare them to something like a Jump Pack (12+d6" per turn, averaging 16"), Jet Pack (6+3d6" per turn, averaging 16.5"), Bike (24" per turn), or multitude of other units, the Banshees 9+d6" (averaging 13") is not really all that fast- especially when you remember that they can't assault after Running, meaning that their "real" movement speed on any turn they want to participate in the game is actually only 6".

 

 

3 Keep in mind that while Banshees slightly outperform Scouts, that is assuming both units make it to combat with equal casualties, which ignores the Scouts' vastly superior deployment options. Starting 12" from the enemy on the first turn, as opposed to 24" or more, is a massive difference. Scouts are also less hindered by the terrain that both units need to cling to to mitigate their 4+ armor saves, as they have Move Through Cover whereas the Banshees do not.

 

 

4 Sure, but a 5man unit of Marines will almost always kill Banshees because it will get one or more turns of Rapid Fire with their Boltguns at them before they get to charge. They'll kill almost half of the Banshees in a single volley of fire- not to even be looking at Overwatch shots or the damage the Marines do in combat with the Banshees. If Banshees actually were good at clearing out Combat Squads of dudes, it would be a whole other matter to talk about them- but they aren't.

 

 

5 Their problem is not their focused role- their problem is that they are not very good at their focused role.

 

6 Let's look at something else for a moment; Warp Spiders. Warp Spiders are a flexible backfield hunter unit; they Deep Strike into enemy territory, bounce around shooting at things and causing havoc and generally make a nuisance of themselves. They are good at this because their guns have an effective statline (S6 with Monofilament), they come with 3+ armor and Hit and Run natively, and the combination of Battle Focus and their Warp Generators gives them exceptional ability to go where needed and avoid threats they don't like. They are a focused unit, but one that is good at their job.

 

7 Banshees are also a focused unit, but they are not a good one. Their job is the hunt MEQs and other medium-to-heavy infantry in close combat. But they lack the ability to effectively get close to their targets (since they do not have Deep Strike, Infiltrate, or accelerated movement), lack the ability to absorb punishment on the way in, lack a transport to effectively shore up either of those weaknesses, and even once they finally reach combat are still only mediocre in a fight- compare them to Incubi, who have WS5 and S4 (as well as AP2) and they are utterly outclassed.

1: Eldar Jetbikes don't inherently have objective secured in 7th edition. They are troops, yes, but being troops does not mean objective secured in 7th. In a combined arms detachment or allied detachment, yes, troops gain objective secured, but it is no longer part of their rules. So when comparing units without the rest of the army, adding detachment special rules is somewhat unreasonable. I am comparing the two units in an unbound capacity.

 

2: I do see your points, but I still see them as plenty fast, especially given that in 7th, deployed is 24" apart in every mission. That means that if I can move 13" on turn 1, I'm lined up for a turn 2 charge against enemies on the edge of their own deployment zone. An infiltrating, deep striking, or scouting unit is unable to do better if I go first, as they can't do better than a turn 2 charge, even with that extra movement. If the enemy comes to me (like with infiltrate or scout), banshees can potentially assault turn 1, while an infitrating, scouting, or deep striking unit can not.

 

3: As #2. Move through cover is certainly slick, but the additional run movement and rerolls to run remain effective, especially as the unit can run and shoot within the same turn.

 

4: Okay, but your 10 marines get out of a drop pod in combat squads armed with bolters and special weapons, do you shoot the 75pt banshees with a squad, or do direct your shots at more valuable targets? No different using scouts as a counter assault unit. I agree that the banshees, like most eldar units, are quite vulnerable to bolters and thrown krak grenades. Barring wraiths, none of the eldar units really have much durability. I suggest banshees as a counter assault unit, and as a backfield unit hunter, because in both cases, distracting the unit's shooting for a turn or two can be close to as valuable as killing them off - opponent will have to decide if that missile dev squad is better spend on the banshees or against the wraith knight.

 

5: I think banshees are good at 75pts of power sword based melee units can be. Obviously, situations where powerswords aren't very practical are going to make them less useful.

 

6: I like the warp spiders. They certainly do their job well. I definitely think they were given a less focused role with the current codex.

 

7: Incubi, huh? Seems like a funny unit to mention, as these guys are pretty able to slash to death incubi. Yeah, incubi are better against many things, but banshees seem very well kitted to beat Incubi. Banshee unit is 5pts cheaper per model. They swing first on the charge, hit on 4s with 3 swings each, wound on 4s, and deny armor. With charge not through cover, banshees should be able to destroy an equal number of incubi without taking any damage themselves. A charge though cover would still swing at the same time, so both units would likely kill eachother.

[AbusePuppy]

1: Eldar Jetbikes don't inherently have objective secured in 7th edition. They are troops, yes, but being troops does not mean objective secured in 7th.

 

Since there is no way to take Windrider Jetbikes that isn't giving them Objective Secured (other than Unbound, which no one uses) then I don't think it's unfair to assume it.

 

 

2: I do see your points, but I still see them as plenty fast, especially given that in 7th, deployed is 24" apart in every mission. That means that if I can move 13" on turn 1, I'm lined up for a turn 2 charge against enemies on the edge of their own deployment zone. An infiltrating, deep striking, or scouting unit is unable to do better if I go first, as they can't do better than a turn 2 charge, even with that extra movement. If the enemy comes to me (like with infiltrate or scout), banshees can potentially assault turn 1, while an infitrating, scouting, or deep striking unit can not.

 

That is assuming you are the bare minimum distance away, which is unlikely even under the best of circumstances. Lacking Move Through Cover, you are also going to have "longer" charges to make than the Scouts by that amount as well.

 

If your opponent allows you a turn 1 assault, they are either baiting you into it or they're a complete idiot. You may very well, for example, be able to assault that Knight or those twenty Necron Warriors that moved forward, but doing so is pure folly.

 

Units that move at foot speed do not get turn 2 charges. They usually don't get turn 3 charges, either, because the enemy is also allowed to move their units and will typically back away from you if they feel at all threatened.

 

 

 Incubi, huh? Seems like a funny unit to mention, as these guys are pretty able to slash to death incubi. Yeah, incubi are better against many things, but banshees seem very well kitted to beat Incubi. Banshee unit is 5pts cheaper per model. They swing first on the charge, hit on 4s with 3 swings each, wound on 4s, and deny armor. With charge not through cover, banshees should be able to destroy an equal number of incubi without taking any damage themselves. A charge though cover would still swing at the same time, so both units would likely kill eachother.

 

Except that they won't get the charge, because Incubi can be inside a transport and Banshees can't. And when Incubi charge Banshees, the Incubi win quite handily (as they hit on 3s wound on 3s compared to hit on 4s, wound on 4s.) But we're not talking about Incubi fighting Banshees- we're talking about Incubi fighting Marines, and Banshees fighting Marines. Incubi kill MEQs effectively; Banshees do not. Incubi have Assault Transports; Banshees do not. Incubi have good enough armor (and sometimes FNP) to survive at least limited shooting; Banshees do not.

[Guest]

Except that they won't get the charge, because Incubi can be inside a transport and Banshees can't. And when Incubi charge Banshees, the Incubi win quite handily (as they hit on 3s wound on 3s compared to hit on 4s, wound on 4s.) But we're not talking about Incubi fighting Banshees- we're talking about Incubi fighting Marines, and Banshees fighting Marines. Incubi kill MEQs effectively; Banshees do not. Incubi have Assault Transports; Banshees do not. Incubi have good enough armor (and sometimes FNP) to survive at least limited shooting; Banshees do not.

If incubi charge banshees, it is no different from banshees charging incubi through cover, they swing at the same initiative (5 in this case) and melt each other. Only exception to this is if banshees have an exarch, which is actually swinging at higher intiative (6), so could potentially tip the battle in favor of the banshees.

 

It is true that DE power from pain would play a major role in this fight, making the turn number be pretty decisive factor. Banshees do not have any option to deny FNP.

 

Very much agree that Eldar really need assault transports, thought that really isn't a fault in the banshees, but the entire Eldar codex. Though on that front, it isn't exactly like DE have any "durable" assault transports....Banshees could technically wreck it with lucky pistols prior to a charge.

 

If seriously debating the better unit between incubi in a DE transport and banshees in a wave serpent, I think banshees win, though they probably never leave the transport .

[pretre]

Better to take DA in a Ws. You at least get obsec and shooting.

[AbusePuppy]

If incubi charge banshees, it is no different from banshees charging incubi through cover, they swing at the same initiative (5 in this case) and melt each other.

 

Not quite- the Incubi end up with more attacks and the Banshees fewer. 5 Banshees getting charged by 4 Incubi results in 2.5 dead Incubi and all of the Banshees (~5.5) dying. But again- it's not about whether Banshees beat Incubi in a fight, it's about whether either of those respective units are good at killing their intended targets, I.E. heavy infantry. And, as it turns out, Incubi are decent at it and Banshees are not.

[Lord Hanaur]

The majority voted for 3 or more detachments being allowed and their conclusion was to go with two?  Thats weird and also isnt what the data told them to do.

[von hammer]

Thank you LH for getting back on track... Listening to the podcast today Reece explains what they did. Totally agree with your logic though as I voted for 3 detachments.

[Lord Hanaur]

I also read that they were even going to extend that to within the Decurion and things like it.  Also seemingly not what the data really suggested, though I feel less strong about that opinion.

 

They needed to think their poll through a bit better perhaps.

[PourSpelur]

The majority voted for 3 or more detachments being allowed and their conclusion was to go with two?  Thats weird and also isnt what the data told them to do.

I'm not jumping on your back so take this with the smile it's intended with;)

If you want 3 or more detachment that's fine, please don't say they didn't follow the data though. More people voted 2 detachment limit than any other choice. Period.

Could the poll have been done better? Yes

Won't argue against that but the "more people voted for 3 plus" argument is simply bananas. You can't in good faith change the "unlimited detachment" votes into "3 detachment" votes simply because neither group wanted 2 as their first choice. Sorry if I seem confrontational but it gets my nerd up;)