How bad is dual lash?

[elrodogg]

Hi all, I am primarily a fantasy player and wanted to get back into 40k. I am going through my old noise marine army and have a pair of demon princes.

From what I recall of 40k comp/gaminess in that it's out the window compared to fantasy comp/gaminess, basically you can bring what you want. Is that still the case with regards to the lash? It seems rather awesome especially alongside a 4 blastmasters elsewhere in the army. Is it considered bad form to use it? What about 2?

[Denzark]

I think if, of all the possible tools, tricks, and toys across all the different armies, something has caused you to particularly single out double lash to ask about the ettiquete of, you've probably answered your own question.

having said that a single psychic hood does all right for dispels so I don't worry about it.

[Lerra]

Dual lash in a Slaanesh-based list is completely fair and fluffy.

Dual lash in a mixed list is standard tournament fare, and some people will complain about it, but really it's expected in tournament play. If you play against CSM at a tournament, probably 50% of the lists will have dual lash. At 'ard Boyz it's more like 90%.

For casual play, you should probably stick to a single lash unless you're running Slaanesh.

[elrodogg]

Excellent. Casual play and dual lash FTW!

Thanks!

[Chumbalaya]

Lash is massively overrated. It's a good power, but not the be-all end-all it's made out to be. Something as simply as meching up nullifies its effectiveness, and taking down a T5 MC isn't that difficult either. Psychic defense is readily available for some armies as well: Psychic Hoods, Shadow in the Warp, Runes of Warding, Runic Weapons, Collars of Khorne, and so on.

Go nuts.

[Yhcrana]

I never saw the problem with dual lash, yes it is a good psychic power, just like how land raiders are good tanks/transports.

If it is the book as a standard option then no one can ever really have a problem with it. Thats why the army books are play tested. If it wasn't balanced then it would have a 0-1 limit or something similar.

Take 2 lashes if thats what you want then go have fun.

[MajorSoB]

Its at best a gimmick that is somewhat affective. Some armies get owned by it, others like Marines with hoods, Sisters who ignore it on a 5+ and Eldar with Ruins of Warding laugh at it. Its on the same lines as putting all your eggs in one basket. It does infuriate some people and if you get known as "that guy" there will be people who will not play you because of it. Do what you want but if you are looking for someone to tell you it isn't cheesy, look elsewhere.

[Denzark]

Excellent. Casual play and dual lash FTW!

Thanks!

thats why people don't like it - because some people use it FTW(AAC).

[Nikephoros]

I never saw the problem with dual lash, yes it is a good psychic power, just like how land raiders are good tanks/transports.

How fair it is comes down to how effective the rest of the list is at popping transports. By itself the power is ok to good. But the synergy of the list with Obliterators or Vindicators is what makes it so competitive and borderline broken.

So yeah, in a vacuum the power isnt going to make you tremble, but when the guy puts down 9 Obliterators, and 4 units of Plague Marines in Rhinos with dual melta guns each you have a mean list that isnt worried about enemy transports, really.

I think saying "mech armies auto-win vs dual lash" is probably a very drastic overstatement that would cost you games in a 'Ard Boyz type tournament.

[elrodogg]

Hearing alot of debate here. On one hand people are saying that a balanced list will have psychic defense and can mech up to avoid the lash therefore it's not that bad to take two. On the other hand, people are saying it's cheddar.

If psychic defense via the psychic hood really is that effective, then even going for psychic powers at all necessitate taking two? I would think that it's similar to fantasy in that people have found medium magic to be ineffective since there is such a high tendency to take lots of magic defense.