Yep, generally Dashat won't see much more than five or six irregular orders, all on models that have activation flexibility. It can necessitate some aggressive command token expenditure, but it's below a 'critical mass' that might produce tactical inflexibility. Meanwhile a Haqq list will typically have four mutts, and often a monstrucker, and often daylami, and often hunzakuts, and a warcor, before you add the libertos. Most of my current Haqq lists have about seven irregulars and I intentionally don't play daylami often. Relative to Dashat, Haqq's soft defence is much more resilient (mutts being the pre-eminent element in the game for asymmetric defence and one of the reasons I slightly prefer Haqq to Dashat), but they don't have the easy order pools Dashat does, and Haqq can end up with combat groups that activate more like a 40k army. This can actually be totally fine in some circumstances, but it's a layer of management for the player that needs to be considered after you've added a libertos in because libertos are great even just as speedbumps and you should still take them because damn. Edit: for example, here's a report by one of Australia's better Haqq players (now in Germany) using the libertos. You can see it's basically present in a second combat group dedicated to mostly irregular units just operating in a speedbump and area control role. Very effective, but it's not viable to pivot to an offensive role in that kind of a combat group except under extraordinary circumstances, and most of the offensive lifting will be done by funelling the orders through a mutt that's impetuoused forward aggressively instead: https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threa...t-power-or-how-to-win-without-big-guns.27154/
By the time Dashat runs out of orders it is taking in pretty much every list (BH wildcards, Fanous, and the other bits and pieces) it easily has 10-12 regular orders.
Concur - beyond a certain point, Dashat is limited only by how blase the player is about employment zone real estate and how capable cheerleaders should be of defending themselves. Either way they have an easier time compensating for irregular elements than an equivalent Haqq list.
This is why I always liked 4 daylami 4 mutts and a regular or two in a second group. Not as super optimised maybe, but it kind of plays itself while I focus on specific stuff that needs doing with group 1.
Alot of people assume right off the bat that more mutts is more better. But the cost to benefit ratio goes down as a you increase them in numbers. Tables will have less space to conveniently place them, their Impetuous becomes more of a liability since you are exceedingly unlikely to want to restrain more than 1. Not to mention that overlapping their effective ranges has less minimal stacking benefit. I've long held the opinion that the optimal number of mutts is actually 2-3 depending on table density. So this begs the question, does swapping 1-2 Mutts for a Libertos increase list efficiency consistently for Haqq?
Why would you swap the Mutts and not something else? Mutts are generally an amazing investment for the points.
Well I made the following assumptions: Infinity is complex and the efficiency of Units as the AVA Is expended is non-linear. Haqq players have expressed that the issue facing the Libertos is the lack of cheap and irregular slots. We're considering players that are looking to optimize their lists for tournament play. The Libertos roughly equivalent (likely just below) value per slot as Daylami and Mutts. If we look at other options in the subset of units we're talking about we have: Mutts Kum Bashi Bazouks Daylami Warcor Hunzakut Monstrucker Of all these units there are only 3 that we can take a large number of Mutts, Kum & Daylami. Based on nothing more than arbitrary instincts I would guess that Kum are not the unit that will see a large number of them on the tabletop for most players. And we know that many players currently aim to take 4 Mutts specifically because they are very good. So most players will be running a number of Daylami comparable to or under the number of mutts. Based on my experiences against Mutts my general feeling is that 2-3 is where you reach 'saturation' and the value added by additional mutts is no longer as high as the value added by the initial 1-3. I think we can infer this is often the case in that many units will see at most 3 hit the table top before players start reaching for other options*. I'm also going to guess that where players take a unit that isn't a Daylami or a Mutt they're doing so because that specific unit fills a role otherwise unavailable to those two units. So we're left with the following problem Most "Highly Competitive" Haqq lists will be running: 4 Mutts 1-3 Daylami. What unit do we cut to most efficiently open the slot up for the Libertos? Well we expect Daylami 1-3 to not yet have reached a point of inflection on the graph that is their Value/Order Group Slot And we expect Mutts to already be on the down swing. While still very effective, they are no longer optimal. QED. Cutting Mutts to make slots for Libertos may be the most Optimal build for Haqq. *A Major exception being Link Team Members who's expected value goes up in value as the link is filled.
@TheRedZealot I'd disagree with your assessment because unlike Daylami the Liberto will have active turn orders spent on it, thus obviating the "problem" with its irregular order.
Im not sure I follow. I think you're saying that replacing a Daylami with a Libertos offers a more optimal improvement on value/slot? Remember that the basic mechanics that make Daylami good generally rely on a critical mass to make them effective. I'm pretty convinced that the net lose in expected value for 4 > 3 Mutts is less than any number of Daylami over 1. Perhaps specifically in lists running 4 mutts and 1 daylami dropping the daylami would have benefit. But even then I'd wager that going to 3 Mutts 2 Daylami is a better over all package. (2-2-1 is a possibility as well but you'd likely need to be playing on very open boards in general) Ie: Inferior Infiltrate is unlikely to succeed so you need a few to ensure success and Panzerfaust based Coordinated orders benefit from up to 4 full participants. But this is all just idle theorycraft. We'd need some concrete data sets and testing to really generate a proper assessment.
I'm saying that since a Liberto receives active turn orders very well it avoids the problems with a lot of other irregular troops. Instead of taking a regular camo state infiltrator with a shotgun, you take a Liberto and a cheerleader.
Well then I'd say that the Haqq players in this thread generally disagree with you. Won't try and make any claims about the validity one way or the other. Last time I really seriously played haqq the Azra'il was S2.
The Libertos receives active turn orders well, but so do mutts, hunzakuts and monstruckers (in this instance I'm considering their own irregular orders as relevant active turn orders). Daylamis' capacity to spend active turn orders well depends mostly on infiltration rolls or willingness to coordinate, but it isn't awful. But each irregular model in turn means fewer of those orders will be spent in a tactically focused way. For myself I'm happy to cut Daylamis and often Hunzakuts to fit Libertos and more orders and active elements. But it represents only a marginal improvement in the list compared to say Tohaa where the Libertos is a totally unique capability. In short a libertos is good in Haqq but it's only good in a way they can already be. It's worth taking, because the profile is highly optimised, but doesn't have transformative properties like it does in some other vanilla armies (and dashat). NB this is a totally milquetoast opinion.
That all makes sense, and as quite possibly the most optimized non-specialist infiltrator, it does add a bit of power to the lists that have it available, at the minimum.
Pretty sure I don't know a lot of players who'd rate the reliability of 2 Midfield Camo Markers a Liberto provides anywhere close to Daylami who are just... cheap and kinda there. Sure they're annoying and sometimes hit something with their Panzerfausts, but that's about it. Dropping a Daylami to add a Liberto is a very easy choice to make. Why would you ever drop more than one Mutt from your lists though? The 4th can be cut to make something more important fit in. But otherwise there isn't much of a logical reason.
If you are relying on the non infiltrating PF Daylami as order drains, then switching one for a Libertos is a nobrainer for me, because it does it so much better with a DTW, Camo, Dogged and Hyperdynamics. The only reason for me not to use them, is that I dont like MERCs in my Haqq save for QK which is about them.
They fill different modes of order hogs and are both decent. They kind of complement each other. Personally I wouldn't rate the regular Libertos as very problematic in terms of performance, btw. They're sufficiently close to okay that I don't feel disadvantaged for not using them nor disadvantaged for facing them.
When running these types of lists, I almost always prefer Daylami over Liberto because of the mental strain they put on an opponent. Even good players tend to spend more thought on a Daylami w/panzerfaust then not. Additionally, the Daylami who don't land can still make use of long lanes and coordinated orders to contend against common threats like a Kamau Sniper. This pretty much sums up how I feel about the Liberto: But I'll add that getting cheap shotguns into the midfield is something Haqq already excels at. This tends to make me shy away from spending a whole 1 SWC on that Liberto and, if I take one at all, its usually the SMG profile.
