POLISHed
Faction Focus: Harlequins with Typhus
Welcome to the third
interview in the ‘POLISHed Faction Focus’ series. The intention of this article
and the ones to follow is to provide additional insight into the army in
question on top of what Games Workshop teases in their Faction Focuses. Here, we
take a look back at how the armies fared in 9th and previous
editions and we search for trends and hints towards what might come in 10th.
These articles are aimed both at new players trying to get more information
about specific armies before they choose the one to main in 10th,
as well as to provide food for thought for more experienced players who,
perhaps, have never given the army a go and are looking for some incentive.
Once 10th edition drops we will invite our interviewees to Contact Lost Podcast LIVE interviews to check how their armies have changed!
This time I had the
privilege of interviewing a staple of the Polish National Team both as a
captain and player, an international referee, a contributor at Goonhammer and a
coach and team event MASTERMIND at Stat Check – Typhus.
Contact Lost (CL): For
those who still might not have heard of you: who is Typhus?
Typhus (T): I picked up
40k around 2008 purely for fun and went to my first event in 2009. In 2012 I
played at the ETC as a mercenary and since 2013 I have always been somehow
involved in the Polish National Team either as a player (both sword and shield)
or coach, captain etc. I was there when we took the top spot, two times when we
finished 2nd and another two times when we finished 3rd.
CL: Quite the story… Did
you stick to one army through all those years?
T: Nah, regarding armies
and styles I have pretty much played everything bar a gunline at the World Team
Championships. Even hordes. Personally I like to pilot armies that are not top
of the meta, armies that require you to put on your thinking cap in order to
succeed. I like to feel it was my piloting and not the army itself which won me
the game.
CL: What made top players
like yourself, Majson, UK’s Mike Porter or Germany’s Fred Otto choose Harlies in
9th edition? Has their playstyle changed much between 8th and 9th editions?
T: I’d say Harlequins have always been an army that just ignored half of the rules in the basic rulebook.
Out of phase activations, ignoring terrain, models and such. We all know Harlequins
from this edition by their obnoxious episode of 9 Voidweavers, and very
powerful 8-9 boats Light list. Harlequins after the codex release in 9th, were
more of a mobile shooting army, with few punchy units, that relied on denying
primary, whilst scoring insanely well on their secondaries. This army has been
dominating both at the very beginning of the edition, and in the middle of the
edition, but played very differently in those timespans. Early edition Harlies
had way less durability, and relied on very good Command Point resourcing to
steal objectives. Later on they got a significant uptick in their defensive
capabilities, which made the army more forgiving. I’d say they were the most
mobile army of the edition, deciding where the fights would take place, and
dictating the tempo of the game.
Compared to 8th it was
definitely a change. In 8th we’ve seen mostly Haywire Skyweavers in skewed
lists, or the late edition 60 players + 80 wracks list, that relied on a lot of
command points. Playstyle between editions has definitely changed, in my
opinion for the worse. I genuinely dislike the latest codex for how forgiving
it was, and how much it pushed the army into more of a shooty variant (even
with the occasional Twilight popping up at times).
CL: This army functions
well as an individual pick as well as mixed up with other Aeldari factions.
What are its strengths and what makes Asuryani or Drukhari players take them as
well?
T: As I’ve said earlier.
They are very mobile, and provide good mission scoring via fast Objective Secured
units (ones that control objectives better – CL) that can score Behind Enemy
Lines, do Retrieve Data or deny opponents objectives. Asuryani lists have no
real access to mobile ObSec outside of Will of Asuryan, and harlequins provide
just that. Also there’s the obnoxious Death Jester that is always useful to
snipe out key units.
Drukhari on the other
hand are pretty good at denying primary already, however what it they lack is
reliable shooting, so in the times of Voidweavers, you could bring in a 6
Voidweaver patrol, or bring a patrol with 2 Shadowseers to fill in any Psychic
Secondary if needed.
Overall I’d say they
complement Asuryani way better, and fill the gaps there, compared to Drukhari.
CL: Harlequins were dominant
for a longer portion of 9th. Does such a powerful faction have any downsides?
T: I’d say the problem lies
in the datasheets count. You have 2 HQs, 2 Elites, 1 Fast Attack, 1 Heavy
Support, 1 Troops and 1 Transport choice. If one of them is broken, you end up
spamming them, which you could see in the lists from the middle of the edition.
Both Voidweavers and Troupes in Starweavers, were under costed. You could even
say that GW didn’t have any clue what made Harlequins good throughout this
edition - I think the nerf to 5++ is a proof of this.
We have seen a few armies
that rely on small amounts of datasheets - like Grey Knights or Thousand Sons.
Those armies were at the top once, and small nerfs were enough to make them
nearly unplayable.
CL: The codex does not have a plethora of units to choose from, but are there any extraordinary tech pieces?
T: To follow up on what
I’ve written answering previous question. The army has such limited choices,
that talking about tech pieces isn’t really feasible. You can take a few units
that perform slightly better into given units (such as Solitaire into
Desolation Squad meta), or choice of Psychic Powers on Shadowseer (fog of
dreams for example), or choose Twilight over Light for better damage output in
melee. In more character heavy meta you could field 3 Death Jesters, but the
amount of choices is very much limited.
CL: It seems that
Harlequins were able to dominate on all continents and in all kinds of terrain
packs. Does that mean the army is terrain-agnostic?
T: I’d say so. It has a
small footprint, but it would still suffer from very open tables like those you
could at times see in Player Placed Terrain events. It surely benefits more
from terrain packs like the WTC one, where you have more hidden staging
positions. Starweavers hide very well behind some of the smaller ruins, and can
force opponents to overcommit to kill a boat with Troupe and character inside.
More close combat builds like Twilight, require more dense boards, and more
trading game plan, that’s why they worked better on GW terrain.
CL: Were Harlequins as
popular in team events as they were in singles?
T: I’d say the army’s
performance in teams and singles is pretty much heavily correlated. As
mentioned earlier - low amount of choices makes it harder for this army to
adapt into specific roles that teams might require. It’s also worth noting that
in this case Harlequins fight for the same spot as Asuryani. So their place in
teams is also dependent on how well Asuryani fit into the meta, and whether
they have their own niche. It could be seen at WTC in 2022. Some teams decided
to bring Asuryani and some decided to go for Harlequins, and both had a role.
CL: How hard is this army
to pick up?
T: It’s a rather more
elite army. I’ve fielded 65 players at most in 9th edition. If you were to get
3 of every unit in the army, and assuming 6 troupes of 12 models, it requires
total of:
3 Troupe Masters
3 Shadowseers
Solitaire
3 Death Jesters
72 Troupes
18 Skyweavers
6 Starweavers
9 Voidweavers
And that includes
everything you’d ever field. Realistically if magnetized you are fine with 12
Star/Void Weavers. If you are not a psychopath that wants to do rhomboid
patterns, this army has relatively low amount of detail on the models, and has
a lot of larger surfaces, which allows you to use Airbrush/Spray Cans or other
quick painting methods to get it done. Compared to armies like
Asuryani/Admech/Space Marines, I’d say they are easier to paint.
CL: Who will enjoy ‘the Clowns’ in 10th?
T: I’d say this army is
great as a secondary hobby and competitive project. Low amount of datasheets
makes this army susceptible to nerfs and meta changes. However since I can
remember some harlequin models have always found their place in the meta lists.
This army tends to be more tricky, and relying on non-conventional rules that
you might even describe as rules breaking. It’s more of a glass cannon - high
damage, high mobility, but quite frail. If you like playing armies that dictate
your opponent how they play their game it will surely be a good choice.
Especially if you ever thought about extending your collection to Drukhari and
Asuryani, in that case harlequins will find their place in your collection as
well.
CL: Overall difficulty of
the army from 1 - 10 where 1 is dead easy and 10 is really difficult to pilot. How
demanding are followers of Cegorach?
T: It very much depends
on the codex. Early 9th I’d consider this army to be the hardest in that
metagame, and very rewarding. Somewhere around 10. Middle of the edition during
the Voidweavers era, I would mark them as 1, afterwards the Light Boat spam,
I’d mark around 5-6. Easy to learn, hard to master. Now it dropped in power,
and I’d rate it more around 7-8, as it doesn’t forgive any mistakes.
CL: Could we see your 2k points list?
T: For the 9th edition, I’d still play Light boat spam.
Something like this:
AOO Harlies Light
HQ1: Shadowseer [160, -1CP]
—— PIvotal: Mirror Architect
—— Relic: Shadow stone
—— Powers: Twilight Pathways, Shards of Light
HQ2: Shadowseer [100]
—— Powers: Mirror of Minds, Fog of Dreams
HQ3: Troupe Master [100, -3cp]
—— Pivotal: Veiled King
—— Relic: Storied Sword
—— Traits: Player of the Light, Foot in the Future
EL1: Death Jester [110, -1CP]
—— Pivotal: Harvester of Torment
—— Trait: Favour of Cegorach
EL2: Death Jester [90]
—— Pivotal: Rift Ghoul
TR1: 5 Troupes [95]
—— Lead Player: Neuro, Sword
—— Player: Shuriken, Sword
—— Player: Neuro, Sword
—— Player: Fusion, Kiss
—— Player: Fusion, Embrace
TR2: 5 Troupes [95]
—— Lead Player: Neuro, Sword
—— Player: Shuriken, Sword
—— Player: Neuro, Sword
—— Player: Fusion, Kiss
—— Player: Fusion, Embrace
TR3: 5 Troupes [90]
—— Lead Player: Neuro, Sword
—— Player: Shuriken, Sword
—— Player: Neuro, Sword
—— Player: Fusion, Kiss
—— Player: Fusion
TR4: 5 Troupes [90]
—— Lead Player: Neuro, Sword
—— Player: Shuriken, Sword
—— Player: Neuro, Sword
—— Player: Fusion, Kiss
—— Player: Fusion
TR5: 5 Troupes [85]
—— Lead Player: Neuro, Sword
—— Player: Shuriken, Sword
—— Player: Neuro, Sword
—— Player: Fusion
—— Player: Fusion
TR6: 5 Troupes [85]
—— Lead Player: Neuro, Sword
—— Player: Shuriken, Sword
—— Player: Neuro, Sword
—— Player: Fusion
—— Player:
Fusion
TR7: 5 Troupes [65]
TR8: 5 Troupes [65]
FA1: 2 Skyweavers, Star Bolas, Haywire [100]
FA2: 2 Skyweavers, Star Bolas, Haywire [100]
TR1: Starweaver [95]
TR2: Starweaver [95]
TR3: Starweaver [95]
TR4: Starweaver [95]
TR5: Starweaver [95]
TR6: Starweaver [95]
CL: Thanks a lot buddy, fingers crossed that the army remains potent in 10th and I reserve the right for a live interview once the indexes are out!
T: My pleasure and we shall find out soon!
Comments
Post a Comment