Wednesday, November 24, 2010

The Problem With Al'Rahem

by SandWyrm


I've never been a big fan of Captain Al Rahem as a Platoon Command Squad upgrade for the IG. But Marnepup over on Librarium Online really summed it up nicely today.

From this thread:

The more I think about it, though, Al Rahem isn't very good. He doesn't cost too much for what he does, the problem is opportunity cost. Besides the question of "what else could I do with 70 points," there's the question of "what could Rahem's platoon be doing instead of cooling its heels in reserve for a turn or three?" 

The earlier in the game a shot is fired, the more valuable that shot is, because if the shot kills, then everything the target might otherwise have achieved during the rest of the game is negated. And that's obviously going to have a greater impact when you're taking away five turns of the dead unit's potential impact than if you only take away two turns. All else being equal, I'd rather have Rahem's squads hunkered in cover, laying down some dakka, oh, and throw in an additional squad for the cost of Rahem, on turns one and two, than have them come on a random table edge on turn three. 

As SW said in another time and place, Rahem would be more worthwile if he gave you options. He doesn't, he takes options away!
Perfectly said. :)

11 comments:

  1. am I also correct in thinking that although the whole platoon arrives as one unit from reserve you still have to role individually for each platoon section for the purposes of which flank they arrive on?

    If I am correct then Al'Rahem is even more useless

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe that's not correct, Smurf...but I wouldn't swear to it. That may just have been a touney clarification.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes you have to roll for each platoon seperately. As I understand it.

    His sword is cool!

    ReplyDelete
  4. As I understand it, you make one reserve roll for the platoon, but each squad rolls for it's side separately when it comes on.

    So yes, even more useless. :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. INAT says you do it all as one roll. The RAW for platoons are ambiguous at best, but I think RAI was to have them come in as one. Al'Rahem only really makes sense as an upgrade if you play him that way.

    @ MP's idea, Al'Rahem can pack a lot of close ranged firepower. I figure coming in from outflanking deploys his platoon closer to the enemy and at 100% fighting strength.

    When I finally get around to playing the list I'll try to put together a batrep and we can put the theory to the test..!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Since the 1.1 FAQ it is, at least for the rulebook queries :P

    ReplyDelete
  7. You are correct Korona but you can find the rulling on top of page 96 in the IG codex. It states "Each infantry platoon counts as a single troops choice on the force organization chart WHEN DEPLOYING, and is ROLLED COLLECTIVELY when rolling FOR RESERVES."

    ReplyDelete
  8. http://www.librarium-online.com/forums/40k-battle-reports/204484-1500-alrahem-vs-necrons-bad-photos.html#post1769489http://www.librarium-online.com/forums/40k-battle-reports/204484-1500-alrahem-vs-necrons-bad-photos.html#post1769489

    As promised, my 1st outing with Al (vs Necrons). Lots of lessons learned. Next week - Orks!

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete

Recent Favorites

All-Time Favorites