So everything considered, regardless of people being disappointed that Wracks cannot be troops, which is kind of not true considering there's a formation that specifically is 6 Elites. So yeah, you've got a great book with some really cool special rules , a great game mechanic for play style, seriously that chart literally changes the way you want to play the army. Units got bigger and units got special abilities they didn't have before.
The thing that I was like " Yeah, you should have been doing this all along" , is the actual GW support of Different Formations, which are excellent. All told D. Eldar have 8 solid formations, two specifically great Detachment types.
Anyway I'm sure some disagree with me but just looking at the codex and supplements it looks great to me and really interesting.
Yeah, they're interesting. But my view is that they've been interesting since the old codex, and the new one removed awesome HQs. Yes, I like the formations and changes to Wracks and Mandrakes and the like, but now my Baron is only a special looking hellion. So many unique entries, gone.
I'm a space marine player and this new codec got be VERY interested to learn about the dark eldar. Considering purchasing a 2000 point force of them. The problem is I know nothing of them at all.
The LAST codex was interesting, unique, and good. This codex removed a lot more options then it added, including reducing the army to having just 1 usable troop choice.
I like the overall design and look of the codex, but not sure about how it plays. My buddy who plays DE main says they got stronger and weaker. They're more fragile, but also got some new tools. I'm interested to see how they perform over the long run
I think the big thing to note that when people talk about the army is that I look at it all as a whole.
I think at some point we will see Vect, but maybe not for a while.
That said though, if you actually take it as a whole w/ the 3 different types and what GW was going for it's incredibly interesting.
I mean they gave the army a Murderpack. 5 Talos that scout and that's fantastic, the unit even comes standard w/ Fearless.
Then you get into the different formations for the Wracks which are all excellent. Almost every single one has something that you'd say " Oaky that is quite good".
It's just people are kind of locked into this BAO , restrictive mindset I think and can't see what's been given them.
If you play the game as intended with Multiple Cads, Formations etc.. everything opens up to being more enjoyable.
Well, I think the new codices released recently were made in a hasty manner.
Here DE is no exception. No LoW. Mediocre anti-air. Wyches had deserved a better treatment.
Clearly ment to play with eldar as ally or be eldar ally. Same thing happened with GK, where playing without SM or SW ally only limits the options to 4 units out of the whole codex.
Yes, it's true. The majority of it is even new as well, and it's great fluff, Since the End Times i think all their fluff has been a league above before.
I like the new codex, We shouldn't whine unduly about the loss of Commaragh's nobility (The Baron, Duke, Lady and Lord), special characters come and go all the time with every edition, and it's clear that these new codexes are trying to play down the amount of these characters. Orks lost quite a few, as did Grey Knights. It's just the direction they are going in, and as long as it applies to everyone (They will get to Eldar codex with it's 9 characters eventually. I foresee the Phoenix Lords becoming an Assasin like detachment) then i don't see it as a massive nerf.
The Power From Pain is leagues above what it was before, my scourges are now useable (after i convert a few more special weapons) and i can now use my Reavers and my Scourges in the same list due to an amazing detachment.Sure Wyches took the wrong end of the stick, but now we have usable Mandrakes.
We need to bring the rest of the codexes DOWN to our level to make a balanced game, not up to the proportions of Eldar and Tau. They will be redone and they will be balanced like the rest of the recent codexes. DOWN WITH THE POWER CREEP!
ALEXisAWESOME wrote: We need to bring the rest of the codexes DOWN to our level to make a balanced game, not up to the proportions of Eldar and Tau. They will be redone and they will be balanced like the rest of the recent codexes. DOWN WITH THE POWER CREEP!
implying any Eldar or Tau player will want to spend 30 quid before the end of 2016 to trade their full-color hardback for a worse full-color hardback
ALEXisAWESOME wrote: We shouldn't whine unduly about the loss of Commaragh's nobility (The Baron, Duke, Lady and Lord), special characters come and go all the time with every edition, and it's clear that these new codexes are trying to play down the amount of these characters. Orks lost quite a few, as did Grey Knights. It's just the direction they are going in, and as long as it applies to everyone (They will get to Eldar codex with it's 9 characters eventually. I foresee the Phoenix Lords becoming an Assasin like detachment) then i don't see it as a massive nerf.
I could agree with this if GW only gave the generic HQ a good and varied availability of wargear and special abilities. Most only have about 1-2weapons worth choosing and 1 "must have" defensive item with no special abilities or support choices (something to buff your squad or nearby allies).
You can ofcourse make a good HQ and in some codexes the "must take" still make them quiet powerful but its the lack of options wich i am against and with no unique characters it will be even less.
Last just to clarify i'm not talking about insane/op wargear or abilities just alot of options (worth picking) to make your lord unique and personal.
ALEXisAWESOME wrote: We need to bring the rest of the codexes DOWN to our level to make a balanced game, not up to the proportions of Eldar and Tau. They will be redone and they will be balanced like the rest of the recent codexes. DOWN WITH THE POWER CREEP!
implying any Eldar or Tau player will want to spend 30 quid before the end of 2016 to trade their full-color hardback for a worse full-color hardback
quite the opposite really, I'm Implying any Eldar or Tau player will gladly swap their horribly internally balanced books for one with a good balance. I think most Eldar players would actually like it is the Wave Serpent was nerfed, but only if footdar was viable or the Falcon could compete for dedicated transport. I think people would gladly take Crisis Suits and Stealth Suits over Riptides if the Riptide was brought down a level and the Crisis was brought to the same one. External Balance can only be achieved after Internal Balance has been, which is something eldar and tau books are terrible at.
My experience with the new book has been a roller coaster ride.
I was super excited in the period leading up to the release, expecting some rending elements, akin to the Eldar rending. After all, DE are described as being more concerned with the CQC skills, putting me in mind of finding ways through your enemies defences. But that wasn't the case and I was sad. Then the complete loss of Vect. Because he doesn't have a model. The big baddie of our Army, and he got cut because he doesn't have a model. This model company couldn't take the time to give him a model, while SW Big Baddie got a reboot with a silly Chariot!
But that wasn't the end of roller coaster decline for me. Our characters lost out on options. A lot of them. No plain jane Ghostplate armor for my Archon. I have to get the special suit that does extra stuff. That I can only have one of in the entire army, an he can't take any other Relic gear. One piece per model.
You have Space Marine Chapter Masters rolling around with Shield Eternal and The Burning blade on bikes, and I can't choose any other piece of Relic gear on my HQ because I want a 4+ armor save for when my Shadow Field breaks. That was about the end of the descent.
Then I got past my melancholy and actually started looking through the units, and man did we get buffs. Thus begins the uphill climb. Our vehicles gained DS which rocks. Them being Fast vehicles they still get to fire two weapons at full BS after moving cruising speed.
We can get 3+ jink saves for almost every boat we have. Mandrakes got the love they needed. Incubi are still doing their thing. Kabalite got better being cheaper
Succubus has the chance to get S5 ap2 attacks, if you get the right combat drug along with her Archite Glaive. Oh and the best thing I can think to do with the Archon is Soul Trap, Agonizer, Shadow Field. Agonizer is same points as Huskblade, but you can maximize the wounds you're sucking off characters an gain re-rolls because poisoned shenanigans
And I'm still finding plenty of fun things I can do with the different units.
TL/DR: No more beatstick HQs, look to your boats and other units
TL/DR: No more beatstick HQs, look to your boats and other units
You say that, but slap a haemonculus with a WWP and 4 grotesques in a deep striking raider and watch that unit just tear through stuff.
Is the haemonculus actually doing much other than buffing the grots or is it just the grots wrecking face? I admit I haven't looked into the haemonculus yet to see what he's capable o . I know he counts current turn one higher for PfP
I like the new codex, We shouldn't whine unduly about the loss of Commaragh's nobility (The Baron, Duke, Lady and Lord), special characters come and go all the time with every edition, and it's clear that these new codexes are trying to play down the amount of these characters. Orks lost quite a few, as did Grey Knights. It's just the direction they are going in
No, we absolutely should whine about the removal of these characters, because the only reason they've removed the characters is for purely financial reasons. Any character that doesn't have a model gets axed and even characters with models but are old as hell like Al'Rahem gets axed, purely because GW can't make money off of them and they want to stick it to Chapterhouse for kicking their ass in Court.
GW invalidating peoples' playstyles and removing flavor because they're butthurt about losing a lawsuit and they're too lazy to properly balance their game is deplorable behavior that should never, ever be supported or forgiven. When you shrug about it and move on, you're validating their actions.
I'm ambivalent about the army beyond that. Mostly ambivalent about all of the 7th edition codices.
How many people used Modrak and Thawn for GK? Last I checked most people loved Modrak and people like taking Thawn in fluffy lists because his gimmick was fun.
I think Al'Rahem and Chenkov were pretty popular. Meaning more than 1 in 10 IG players had one of the two in their list. More like 1 in 6 IG players, with Chenkov probably being more popular.
And Rough Riders only become worth their points with Kamir. This was already back in 5th edition mind you, when even a regular Rough Rider could impale a terminator on the charge. Now RRs are beyond useless. I feel sorry for the peeps who shelled out lots of money for the DKoK sculpts (the only mounts befitting the 40k setting).
Marbo was perhaps rarer, but a fan favorite. Nobody cared about Bastonne.
Even as a non DE player I feel for the DE players' loss of FOUR special characters. Back in the day codex releases actually meant something because they were accompanied by a huge revamp of the miniatures range. Heck, this was the case all the way upto 2014, but after the Nid release GW has been pumping out codexes with only a handful of new models to go with each release (arguably the SW one being the best after the Nid release)
TL/DR: No more beatstick HQs, look to your boats and other units
You say that, but slap a haemonculus with a WWP and 4 grotesques in a deep striking raider and watch that unit just tear through stuff.
Is the haemonculus actually doing much other than buffing the grots or is it just the grots wrecking face? I admit I haven't looked into the haemonculus yet to see what he's capable o . I know he counts current turn one higher for PfP
I've been waiting to hear results of people running large packs of Grotesques with a Haemonculus. I think the Haemy is necessary to bump up the PFP table for them to get FNP right away, and to buff their leadership unless using the Covens supplement. Have any of you used, say a 10 man Grotesque unit with Haemy and WWP yet? I'd be curious if 10 of those big fellas is overkill, or an awesome murder unit.
Sir Arun wrote: I think Al'Rahem and Chenkov were pretty popular. Meaning more than 1 in 10 IG players had one of the two in their list. More like 1 in 6 IG players, with Chenkov probably being more popular.
Al'Rahem and Chenkov were platoon upgrade characters, not HQs. They gave you a gimmick for a single Platoon.
What defined Al'Rahem is now an AM Warlord trait affecting D3 units in your primary detachment. Chenkov's gimmick is gone though, and I can't really say I am sorry to see it gone.
And Rough Riders only become worth their points with Kamir. This was already back in 5th edition mind you, when even a regular Rough Rider could impale a terminator on the charge. Now RRs are beyond useless. I feel sorry for the peeps who shelled out lots of money for the DKoK sculpts (the only mounts befitting the 40k setting).
Yeah, because people only use things that are effective right?
Rough Riders aren't "beyond useless". They just aren't great because the FA slots for AM have to compete with junk like the Vendetta or Valkyrie.
Personally I would like to see the Vendetta completely removed, period, from the AM book.
Marbo was perhaps rarer, but a fan favorite. Nobody cared about Bastonne.
I cared about Bastonne. I used him pretty regularly, but then I also fielded pretty exclusively Grenadier forces with no Vendettas or any of the normal gimmicks.
I have 9 Sentinels too that get fielded pretty regularly; 6 with Autocannons and 3 with Plasma Cannons and all as Armored.
Even as a non DE player I feel for the DE players' loss of FOUR special characters.
And pretending that somehow there is a comparison between DE players losing four HQ choices to a bunch of random Troop/FA upgrade characters is silly.
Back in the day codex releases actually meant something because they were accompanied by a huge revamp of the miniatures range.
The fact that High Elves, arguably one of their best selling Fantasy armies, has had the same Spearman and Bowman box for almost as long as I have been playing begs to differ.
There is a "huge revamp of the miniatures range" when it seems that sales can be impacted by it.
Heck, this was the case all the way upto 2014, but after the Nid release GW has been pumping out codexes with only a handful of new models to go with each release (arguably the SW one being the best after the Nid release)
What really is left to release that wouldn't require an overhaul of the entire aesthetics of a range?
Templar_Grist wrote: WWP in a big squad like that wouldn't be useful because grots are bulky.
Why would it matter if they're bulky? I don't think WWP is affected by that. If you meant because they can't fit in a raider, I was referring to dropping them in on foot.
Templar_Grist wrote: WWP in a big squad like that wouldn't be useful because grots are bulky.
Why would it matter if they're bulky? I don't think WWP is affected by that. If you meant because they can't fit in a raider, I was referring to dropping them in on foot.
My mistake, sir. I completely missed that WWP actually gives Deep Strike. I thought it just prevented scattering. So yeah, I image that unit would be the utmost killy. However, they'd be totally exposed with little in the way of shooting capabilities while they wait for the chance one turn away to assault. If you can get through that one turn of probable heavy loss in a expensive unit you'd be golden...On paper, lol. I may have to pick up some grotesques and try this out.
wuestenfux wrote: Well, I think the new codices released recently were made in a hasty manner.
Here DE is no exception. No LoW.
I'n not slating your opinion here, but posts like this just show that GW can't win as far as pleasing people like us goes. When the Ork Codex hit, people were complaining about the inclusion of the Stompa and the fact that Gaz was a LoW. Now a Codex drops without one, and we complain.
I like this Codex. GW did remove some characters in what was a rather unnecessary and disappointing move, but added in lots of good, interesting new mechanics and brought a lot of bad units up to par, whilst not hitting anything with the nerf bat too hard.
I'n not slating your opinion here, but posts like this just show that GW can't win as far as pleasing people like us goes. When the Ork Codex hit, people were complaining about the inclusion of the Stompa and the fact that Gaz was a LoW. Now a Codex drops without one, and we complain.
I like this Codex. GW did remove some characters in what was a rather unnecessary and disappointing move, but added in lots of good, interesting new mechanics and brought a lot of bad units up to par, whilst not hitting anything with the nerf bat too hard.
I would argue that Wyches got nerfed rather extensively. Hydra gauntlets lost d6 attacks, gains shred at ap5, pretty meh for 2 attacks, 3 on a charge. Lost Haywire spam, unfortunately. Thankfully kept their 4++ though. Just not enough going to want to field them.
wuestenfux wrote: Well, I think the new codices released recently were made in a hasty manner.
Here DE is no exception. No LoW.
I'n not slating your opinion here, but posts like this just show that GW can't win as far as pleasing people like us goes. When the Ork Codex hit, people were complaining about the inclusion of the Stompa and the fact that Gaz was a LoW. Now a Codex drops without one, and we complain.
I like this Codex. GW did remove some characters in what was a rather unnecessary and disappointing move, but added in lots of good, interesting new mechanics and brought a lot of bad units up to par, whilst not hitting anything with the nerf bat too hard.
I think the issue is less that they necessarily want lords of war in the codex, but that GW can't seem to make up their mind as to what they want. I can understand not wanting LoWs in the codex to begin with, but if three of the four 7th edition codices have them, why doesn't the fourth? It just seems like they couldn't be bothered to put the time and effort into designing one, or adjusting any of the existing ones to fit.
I've been waiting to hear results of people running large packs of Grotesques with a Haemonculus. I think the Haemy is necessary to bump up the PFP table for them to get FNP right away, and to buff their leadership unless using the Covens supplement. Have any of you used, say a 10 man Grotesque unit with Haemy and WWP yet? I'd be curious if 10 of those big fellas is overkill, or an awesome murder unit.
Grotesques come with FNP anyway. Still wouldn't run them without an IC.
wuestenfux wrote: Well, I think the new codices released recently were made in a hasty manner.
Here DE is no exception. No LoW.
I'n not slating your opinion here, but posts like this just show that GW can't win as far as pleasing people like us goes. When the Ork Codex hit, people were complaining about the inclusion of the Stompa and the fact that Gaz was a LoW. Now a Codex drops without one, and we complain.
I like this Codex. GW did remove some characters in what was a rather unnecessary and disappointing move, but added in lots of good, interesting new mechanics and brought a lot of bad units up to par, whilst not hitting anything with the nerf bat too hard.
I think the issue is less that they necessarily want lords of war in the codex, but that GW can't seem to make up their mind as to what they want. I can understand not wanting LoWs in the codex to begin with, but if three of the four 7th edition codices have them, why doesn't the fourth? It just seems like they couldn't be bothered to put the time and effort into designing one, or adjusting any of the existing ones to fit.
I'm not sure what could even be a LOW in the new DE book. There's nothing that really fits the bill except Vect, who is (at least currently) gone.
Templar_Grist wrote: WWP in a big squad like that wouldn't be useful because grots are bulky.
Why would it matter if they're bulky? I don't think WWP is affected by that. If you meant because they can't fit in a raider, I was referring to dropping them in on foot.
My mistake, sir. I completely missed that WWP actually gives Deep Strike. I thought it just prevented scattering. So yeah, I image that unit would be the utmost killy. However, they'd be totally exposed with little in the way of shooting capabilities while they wait for the chance one turn away to assault. If you can get through that one turn of probable heavy loss in a expensive unit you'd be golden...On paper, lol. I may have to pick up some grotesques and try this out.
Yeah they really come down and just have to eat a round of shooting, that's why I'm hoping someone else gives this a run and sees how it plays out. I'd think that even with only a 6+ save and 5+ FNP, at 3 wounds and T5 they should have a lot of staying power. Emphasis "should", lol.
wuestenfux wrote: Well, I think the new codices released recently were made in a hasty manner.
Here DE is no exception. No LoW.
I'n not slating your opinion here, but posts like this just show that GW can't win as far as pleasing people like us goes. When the Ork Codex hit, people were complaining about the inclusion of the Stompa and the fact that Gaz was a LoW. Now a Codex drops without one, and we complain.
I like this Codex. GW did remove some characters in what was a rather unnecessary and disappointing move, but added in lots of good, interesting new mechanics and brought a lot of bad units up to par, whilst not hitting anything with the nerf bat too hard.
I think the issue is less that they necessarily want lords of war in the codex, but that GW can't seem to make up their mind as to what they want. I can understand not wanting LoWs in the codex to begin with, but if three of the four 7th edition codices have them, why doesn't the fourth? It just seems like they couldn't be bothered to put the time and effort into designing one, or adjusting any of the existing ones to fit.
I'm not sure what could even be a LOW in the new DE book. There's nothing that really fits the bill except Vect, who is (at least currently) gone.
Which I think is the issue here. Most people were expecting Vect to get the lord of war treatment, and possibly an updated model similar to Logan. Yet instead of doing that, and remaining fairly consistent with the 7th Ed. codices, GW said, "screw it" and just removed him.
Hollismason wrote: I'd say a ten point model that has Feel No Pain, Furious Charge, becomes Fearless, and gains Rage eventually is pretty uh.. good deal.
Not complaining, I was just curious because there was a lot of hype about it.
The problem is that unless someone wants to do a new vect sculpt, and is really enthusiastic about it, GW is a bit stuck - either they force someone to make it, and its likely horrible, or they leave it out.
Given the expense in tooling and logistics for a new character set (presumably vect+dais in a box? cant see them separately) its an awful gamble to take. And since CH its "safer" to just remove the unit entry.
Honestly, the codex feels far from unique. if anything, it feels utterly generic.
I won't argue that the items and such were good in the last codex, but they were at least interesting and suffered from a combination of overpricing and nerfs to melee weapons.
So, what did the new book bring on that front? Well, it removed the venom blade from virtually every model. Because that's original. Then it nerfed the one other good weapon (Huskblade) to the point of uselessness. The Agoniser became poisoned and more expensive (apparently GW 'forgot' that the old price was for an AP2 weapon), yet they then removed the main reason people wanted it to be poisoned. A whole host of useless weapons lost their unique abilities to be replaced with Concussive - an even worse ability. I think the only melee item that came out remotely well was Scissorhands. Oh, and wych weapons are now pointless.
Then we have the other abilities that got replaced with generic ones (Urien's regeneration, Night Shields, Clone Field etc.). Then we have the characters and wargear that was lost from the previous book (but don't worry - they got a lot of crap artefacts, so it balances out). Oh, and the Djin Blade survived - and is somehow even worse now than it was before. Shadowfields could easily have had the tagline 'this save cannot be rerolled' added to prevent a lot of ally shenanigans, but no, of course not.
In terms of weapons, liquiifier guns got worse for no adequately-explored reason, same with splinter cannons - which also got more expensive. Blasters are still overpriced, dark lances and blasters are still crap, and the codex still lacks any ground weapons that are even remotely good against fliers. There's a host of new weapons that don't work against Fearless or ATSKNF - because we all love weapons that are invalidated at the list-building stage. Hex rifles are a bit cheaper, but still terrible because only the Vindicare is allowed a good sniper rifle.
The internal balance seems appalling. It has two troop choices (while the previous book had up to 4, including FoC switches), and one of them is abysmal. Wyches lost their grenades (the only thing that made them useful before), effectively lost their weapons and gained absolutely nothing to make them useful on the battlefield. Of course, with this in mind, Bloodrides are predictably awful as well. Wracks seem entirely pointless. Oh look, they bring poison melee weapons. Oh look, our troops are cheaper and bring poisoned shooting weapons. Hellions are worse than before (and that's quite an achievement), losing both an extra attack and the HQ that made them even remotely worthwhile.
So, all in all, I find it hard to qualify the new book as either 'unique' or 'good'.
nosferatu1001 wrote: The problem is that unless someone wants to do a new vect sculpt, and is really enthusiastic about it, GW is a bit stuck - either they force someone to make it, and its likely horrible, or they leave it out.
Given the expense in tooling and logistics for a new character set (presumably vect+dais in a box? cant see them separately) its an awful gamble to take. And since CH its "safer" to just remove the unit entry.
I thought they might make a Dark Eldar Knight - to complete the set - but then they haven't done one for Chaos either......
Sir Arun wrote: How are Darklight weapons bad? S8 AP2 lance is pretty awesome and this is coming from an Eldar player
Against AV10-12, they're Lascannons with -1S and -12" range.
Against AV13 they're Lascannons with -12" range.
Against AV14, they're Lascannons with +1S and -12" range.
So, against everything below AV14, they're just inferior Lascannons. And, Lascannons aren't exactly great to begin with - especially after the chance of exploding a vehicle with AP2 was halved in 7th.
Now, that might not be so bad, if it wasn't for the fact that DE have very few other anti-vehicle weapons - about 90% of their units can only get a dark lance or a blaster (read: a short-range dark lance).
Similarly, they have no TL weapons, and not a single anti-vehicle weapon in their arsenal has multiple shots (they have nothing resembling a scatter laser, autocannon, assault cannon etc.). So, they're awful against fliers, and have nothing that can easily glance light vehicles to death.
Then why not just run eldar ally for your anti tank. Two guardian squads with melta and a firedragon unit all three in Wave Serpents. All DE are going to play eldar to get a seer anyway.
Makumba wrote: Then why not just run eldar ally for your anti tank. Two guardian squads with melta and a firedragon unit all three in Wave Serpents. All DE are going to play eldar to get a seer anyway.
Because you shouldn't have to run allies for something as basic as anti-tank.
Any codex that requires this cannot possibly be a good codex.
Brightlances are a solid part of the Eldar player's arsenal. Especially when mounted on Warwalkers or Wraithlords or Falcons or TL'ed on Wave Serpents. EMLs are worse.
Firedragons need a delivery mechanism, making them costlier than the tank they want to pop and only really useful if you know your opponent is gonna bring a parking lot or MCs to the table.
And Swooping Hawks with their haywires are effective, but fragile - T3 and 4+ will only get you so far when youre on AT duty.
Sir Arun wrote: Brightlances are a solid part of the Eldar player's arsenal. Especially when mounted on Warwalkers or Wraithlords or Falcons or TL'ed on Wave Serpents. EMLs are worse.
Emphasis mine.
But that's the thing - would you be happy taking Bright Lances as your *only* anti-vehicle weapons with Eldar?
My problem is that it's a niche weapon. It's designed to take out AV14 (maybe AV13) at range, but is inefficient at everything else. Now, if you have other weapons that are good against AV10-12 and Fliers, then Dark/Bright Lances are ok. They're still not a great weapon, because they're not great even against AV14 (AP2 is unreliable, and needing a 5+ to penetrate is very undesirable for such an expensive weapon). However, I'd be more charitable if DE had other weapons to serve against transports and the like.
My problem is that it's a niche weapon. It's designed to take out AV14 (maybe AV13) at range, but is inefficient at everything else. Now, if you have other weapons that are good against AV10-12 and Fliers, then Dark/Bright Lances are ok. They're still not a great weapon, because they're not great even against AV14 (AP2 is unreliable, and needing a 5+ to penetrate is very undesirable for such an expensive weapon).
Looks like someone forgot how to math Lance counts everything above AV 12 as 12 . Glancing AV 10 on 2+ not bad at all. Glancing AV 11 on 3+ . Still great. AV 12-14 on 4 +. Not too shabby at all if I say so myself. And for a paltry 5pt upgrade on vehicles. How is it expensive? Whereas it's what, 25pts per lascannon?
Doing this from my phone made for a very interesting mistak . I'll try to fix it when I get home
All very solid points. I did misread where I thought you mathed wrong. I read it as glance on 5+ not pen, my mistake. My prime thought is for Ravagers with two raiders with Dark Lances. Yes, they have shorter range than lascannons. Oh wel . It is what we must deal with. And running 5 lances should make up for the lack of the one TL turret predators get.
Personally, I enjoy what I find in the book, for the most part. Every book has issues people will complain about. If you want Imperial tech, play an imperial army. Comparing between the two will get you no where, except to see where the other lacks
Wyches are a pretty good tarp it especially if you play to manipulate the turn structure, with Urien or a Animus etc.. you can start off turn two coming in with Feel No Pain, Furious Charge, turn 3 charge you're fearless.
This is just an absolute sidegrade. The nerf to Wyches, the unplayability of any sort of spammed transport lists, the uselessness of Khymerae, Ravagers becoming unjustifiable point sinks, all have plenty of offset buffs mixed in the codex to make up for, but why did we need those nerfs? With the exception of Khymerae none were at all OP, and even the beasts were arguably just a touch too high... Instead of being able to use all our old models, we now have to continue playing a similarly themed list while spending a bunch of money on new models... I swear GW just pulls up lists of what models are currently doing well in tourneys and nerfs them without ever bothering to understand where the balance lies... Wyches, Ravagers, Beastpack, Venomspam, all made unplayable, Baron and Duke gone... Complete repurchase of an entire army for all DE players!
I don't get the championing of these sort of changes, its like meh, we went from one dex with a few unplayable models to another dex wit a few unplayable models... Except it costs us a gakload of money to buy the dex alone let alone a new freaking army, one with a bunch of less options and themes than before...
Oh and the people who think removing unbalanced units is GW doing a good job, as opposed to just balancing them, I don't know what to say lol... Smh
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh and "one playable troop choice" is being generous... You have one that is less crippling for its points cost than the other, that Bein said you will never see more than the minimum number of mandatory troops ever taken and if you didn't have troops you wouldn't see any. Waste of points in this dex.
SHUPPET wrote: This is just an absolute sid grade. The nerf to Wyches, the unplayability of any sort of spammed transport lists, the uselessness of Khymerae, Ravagers becoming unjustifiable point sinks, all have plenty of offset buffs mixed in the codex to make up for, but why did we need those nerfs? With the exception of Khymerae none were at all OP, and even the beasts were arguably just a touch too high...
Agreed.
I have a hard time believing anything in the old book was OP. Even with allies, the only thing that was perhaps too strong was the Shadowfield (since it could be made rerollable)... which is the one thing GW didn't fix anyway.
SHUPPET wrote: Instead of being able to use all our old models, we now have to continue playing a similarly themed list while spending a bunch of money on new models... I swear GW just pulls up lists of what models are currently doing well in tourneys and nerfs them without ever bothering to understand where the balance lies... Wyches, Ravagers, Beastpack, Venomspam, all made unplayable, Baron and Duke gone... Complete repurchase of an entire army for all DE players!
Whoops, sorry, it's year 4 in our 8 year cycle - so now units A-J are playable, and units K-U will be crap for the next 4 years. What's that? You don't own many A-J units because they've been crap for ages? Well you'd better buy some then. Hmm? What happened to V-Z? Oh, we scrapped those. Hope you didn't buy any of our expensive models to convert. You did? HA! Suckers!
I don't get the championing of these sort of changes,mits like meh, we went from one dex with a few unplayable models to another dex wit a few unplayable models... Except it costs us a gakload of money to buy the dex alone let alone a new freaking army, one with a bunch of less options and themes than before...
I don't understand the defenders either. Possibly many people just exhibit the sunk-cost fallacy, having already sunk a ton of money and effort into their DE armies.
I mean unbalanced from a negative perspective, the argument being "well they never saw play anyway!", or in the case of a Doom of Malantai, the Baron, and a select few others so far, "he was too OP it's a good thing for dex balance that he's gone!" are some of the more ridiculous statements I keep seeing used to defend GWs choice to take the lazy way out when it comes to our codex releases. Why the feth are we taking steps backwards? Why are codexes begin released with LESS units than before and no new ones? Is there any benefit for us, or for the game, and any other reason than to help line GWs pockets? As a customer why would you be OK wi this lol... And Why are we taking steps backwards in the balancing phase, nothing was OP about Wyches and Ravagers, is there any other reason for their nerf other than to further line GWs pockets?
This release is pretty goddamn terrible to be honest. "Oh anyone unhappy with this release just proves that GWs customers will never be satisfied!" Well, it's possible that the codex got stronger I'm not sure yet, but I'm not a power gamer who can be happy with this in return for all the terrible ass crap GW is serving us with this release.
vipoid wrote: Honestly, the codex feels far from unique. if anything, it feels utterly generic.
...
So, all in all, I find it hard to qualify the new book as either 'unique' or 'good'.
Couldn't agree more. I think it might still be serviceable, but they definitely took away the majority of the army's unique flair.
Just out of curiosity, what unique flair was lost?
Asdrubael Vect.
Interesting....a character that nobody used, and hasn't had an in-print model for years was the defining "flair" for the army. I would not have thought that.
Well I don't know what he was talking about, but I'll give some answers, for starters, many style of builds, including combat drugs Slicus builds, no more Wych troops (useless models), no more Wrack troops (you can spam them as Elites in the coven, a choice that costs you any possible decent AT unit), the loss of a bunch of USC's, Venom spam being nerfed (you may not like spam, and fair enough if they found something to replace it with, but instead they just made this style of play not an option and left you to mix and match units. DE being the "glass cannon" concept army, spam is important, it boils down to needing multiples of a unit to ensure it does its job. It wasn't a beneficial change at the very least, restricting the amount of viable options to win an attrition), I think that there is a lot of awesome/important stuff lost in transition. Doesn't really affect me however as I will be sticking with the 5E dex.
vipoid wrote: Honestly, the codex feels far from unique. if anything, it feels utterly generic.
...
So, all in all, I find it hard to qualify the new book as either 'unique' or 'good'.
Couldn't agree more. I think it might still be serviceable, but they definitely took away the majority of the army's unique flair.
Just out of curiosity, what unique flair was lost?
Asdrubael Vect.
Interesting....a character that nobody used, and hasn't had an in-print model for years was the defining "flair" for the army. I would not have thought that.
LOOOOL I love the turnaround here. You did not ask for "defining" flairs for starters, you asked for unique ones... on top of that, just because he wasn't commonly used in the highest competitive build doesn't make his loss not a unique option. I played competitive DE and he was definitely a playable model, definitely much more so than the new Wyches, or Ravagers, or Khymera, etc, a bunch of crap in the new dex got printed. On top of THAT, since when has not having an in-print model been relevant to ANYTHING? You think that slowed the amount of Baron's that saw play (who we also lost)? And, on top of ALL THAT... why on earth is removing a less played model not relevant as if it couldn't have just been rebalanced, as it likely would have been, had it been moved to LoW.
SHUPPET wrote: Well I don't know what he was talking about, but I'll give some answers, for starters, many style of builds, including combat drugs Slicus builds, no more Wych troops (useless models), no more Wrack troops (you can spam them as Elites in the coven, a choice that costs you any possible decent AT unit), the loss of a bunch of USC's, Venom spam being nerfed (you may not like spam, and fair enough if they found something to replace it with, but instead they just made this style of play not an option and left you to mix and match units. DE being the "glass cannon" concept army, spam is important, it boils down to needing multiples of a unit to ensure it does its job. It wasn't a beneficial change at the very least, restricting the amount of viable options to win an attrition), I think that there is a lot of awesome/important stuff lost in transition. Doesn't really affect me however as I will be sticking with the 5E dex.
vipoid wrote: Honestly, the codex feels far from unique. if anything, it feels utterly generic.
...
So, all in all, I find it hard to qualify the new book as either 'unique' or 'good'.
Couldn't agree more. I think it might still be serviceable, but they definitely took away the majority of the army's unique flair.
Just out of curiosity, what unique flair was lost?
Asdrubael Vect.
Interesting....a character that nobody used, and hasn't had an in-print model for years was the defining "flair" for the army. I would not have thought that.
LOOOOL I love the turnaround here. You did not ask for "defining" flairs for starters, you asked for unique ones... on top of that, just because he wasn't commonly used in the highest competitive build doesn't make his loss not a unique option. I played competitive DE and he was definitely a playable model, definitely much more so than the new Wyches, or Ravagers, or Khymera, etc, a bunch of crap in the new dex got printed. On top of THAT, since when has not having an in-print model been relevant to ANYTHING? You think that slowed the amount of Baron's that saw play (who we also lost)? And, on top of ALL THAT... why on earth is removing a less played model not relevant as if it couldn't have just been rebalanced, as it likely would have been, had it been moved to LoW.
Well, my question was in response to the "majority of the army's unique flair", of which the response I got was a single model that hardly saw the battlefield. So if one single model represents the "majority" of the army's unique flair, then it would be considered a "defining" flair would it not?
Now to the actual examples you provided, I don't know that I would consider spam builds a part of an army's unique flair, let alone the majority of it (unless said army is designed to be a horde style army). Wytches were only ever used for haywire grenades, so their in-game role of anti-tank completely contradicted their fluff. Removing haywire grenades actually restored their "flair" even if it did make them less than desirable. As you said yourself, Wracks as troops has a work around. I'm not sure how venom spam got nerfed since they can still be taken as dedicated transports AND fast attack, I have little experience with 5th edition DE, so maybe I'm missing something. The loss of Sliscus isn't that hard since Wytches are useless and all DE vehicles can deepstrike anyway.
I must say though, none of the things mentioned really scream "unique" about Dark Eldar.
Show me how you would take a decent amount of Venoms in a list then. It either involves terrible models in the Venoms, or good models in the Venoms but outside of them no good support for AT. Making bulk Venoms pretty terrible. This is why spammed Elite slot Wracks from a Coven list is not at all a "workaround" for just, you know, having Wracks as actual troops. Warriors inside Venoms is probably the best bet, but Warriors are not a unit really worthy of spam. Maybe this aspect is more balanced now, I don't know. However, "true to the fluff" is far from what Wyches are. The issue was not them having HWG's, its the fact that they arent a very deadly CC unit at all, so tankhunting was the only role they could do. Now they can do neither the role that their fluff suggests nor the gameplay role they could do last edition. This is an improvement from neither side of the board, at least last edition they were commonly used as tarpit units (which is somewhat fluffy) since you could justify their choice thanks to HWG, now they don't leave the shelf.
"The loss of Sliscus isn't that hard since Wytches are useless" LOL what is this logic. Wyches are useless because they were nerfed in the same codex implementation that Sliscus was removed, the same implementation that we are expressing our disappointment in, the same implementation that we are comparing to last editions dex in which Wyches were not useless. Saying that the loss of Sliscus isn't a bad thing for the codex because Wyches suck in the new codex doesn't make sense, that's just another bad thing about the dex. Two things that should not have been changed, and two reasons for people to be disappointed in the new codex.
If you don't have any experience with 5E de than I imagine you are indeed, missing a lot. Especially since this entire discussion is about the differences between the 5E and 7E books. Just because something doesn't scream DE to you, doesn't really mean it isn't a very relevant and disappointing change to everyone else.
May I ask what exactly is your stance on the new dex? Do you feel it is an improvement? What are you trying to argue here?
Hugely disappointed with the whole thing and will not be buying this Codex(s) because:
Wyches still weak at actually killing things H-t-H (you know like they are actually supposed ot be good at), still WS 4 (even the "elite versions" and thats a joke), got rid of haywire which was fine by me but gave nothing back, in fact the opposite.
Removed Characters - esp Lady Malys.
Ravagers worse
Flickerfields gone except on Venom
Change to Nightshields - weaker and less interesting
Huskblade and hence Archon nerfed
You need to buy two books to have the "full Codex".
nothing actually new...............
SHUPPET wrote: Show me how you would take a decent amount of Venoms in a list then. It either involves terrible models in the Venoms, or good models in the Venoms but outside of them no good support for AT. Making bulk Venoms pretty terrible. This is why spammed Elite slot Wracks from a Coven list is not at all a "workaround" for just, you know, having Wracks as actual troops. Warriors inside Venoms is probably the best bet, but Warriors are not a unit really worthy of spam. Maybe this aspect is more balanced now, I don't know. However, "true to the fluff" is far from what Wyches are. The issue was not them having HWG's, its the fact that they arent a very deadly CC unit at all, so tankhunting was the only role they could do. Now they can do neither the role that their fluff suggests nor the gameplay role they could do last edition. This is an improvement from neither side of the board, at least last edition they were commonly used as tarpit units (which is somewhat fluffy) since you could justify their choice thanks to HWG, now they don't leave the shelf.
"The loss of Sliscus isn't that hard since Wytches are useless"
LOL what is this logic. Wyches are useless because they were nerfed in the same codex implementation that Sliscus was removed, the same implementation that we are expressing our disappointment in, the same implementation that we are comparing to last editions dex in which Wyches were not useless. Saying that the loss of Sliscus isn't a bad thing for the codex because Wyches suck in the new codex doesn't make sense, that's just another bad thing about the dex. Two things that should not have been changed, and two reasons for people to be disappointed in the new codex.
If you don't have any experience with 5E de than I imagine you are indeed, missing a lot. Especially since this entire discussion is about the differences between the 5E and 7E books. Just because something doesn't scream DE to you, doesn't really mean it isn't a very relevant and disappointing change to everyone else.
May I ask what exactly is your stance on the new dex? Do you feel it is an improvement? What are you trying to argue here?
I don't mean to come off as a dick or anything, mate but there are a lot of things you write that makes absolutely no sense as a long time DE player.
How did Venom spam get nerfed? It got better, actually. Night Shields did nothing to help against missile launchers/auto cannons/wave serpent shields which were its major threat. The other vehicles lost their FF so they even lose out when compared to the Venom that has the same AV, but comes with an option of not being forced to jink, has an inv and is a long ranged gunboat in it self. Heck, you can even field them empty if you want.
How are Warriors a unit not worthy of spam? I've never heard anyone making that claim before. They're cheap, have good BS and poison 4+ shooting.. as a troop choice.
I can't see how Sliscus being gone is a bad thing, other than he was a bargain HQ for the special rules he brought. However, everything can DS now, you mainly used his drug power to hope for PfP but we get that on every single model automatically now, so the only thing it hurts are useless units. To be frank, I don't see the loss.
What do you mean with the differences about 5th and 7th? DE was garbage tier in 5th edition. They could pull off fancy stuff and were fun to play, but play 1 game vs Leaf Blower IG lists/BA metal bawkses spam/SW/Necrons/GK Psyback spam and you'd realize how bad they were. It really spoke for itself when you spammed 3x Blasterborns + 3 Ravagers and Dark Lances on everything else and you would still feel like your AT was atrociously lackluster. This is not even touching the fact the vast majority of the units in the codex was atrociously bad, bloated with useless war gear and how much of the codex were focused on killing an absurd amount of infantry... in a metal bawks edition.
I'm also having difficulty understanding how you ever thought Wyches weren't useless before. I remember clearly how well established the entire community was on how absolutely garbage the Wyches were and that statement was never disputed before 6th edition introduced HP stripping. You could use them to stun vehicles in 5th, if only to delay retaliatory fire a little, they were gak for anything else. If you used the gimmicky portal and had a massive unit of them to assault with, you'd overrun the assaulted unit and then get stuck in the open with a 6+ save.
Zewrath wrote: How did Venom spam get nerfed? It got better, actually. Night Shields did nothing to help against missile launchers/auto cannons/wave serpent shields which were its major threat.
Sorry, how does Stealth help against the serpent shield now?
How are Warriors a unit not worthy of spam? I've never heard anyone making that claim before. They're cheap, have good BS and poison 4+ shooting.. as a troop choice.
I imagine it depends what you face. Sometimes 4+ poison is useful, other times it's far less so. And, all their "utility" weapons and options are pretty rubbish.
They're not bad as a spammed unit, but certainly not anything to write home about either.
What do you mean with the differences about 5th and 7th? DE was garbage tier in 5th edition. They could pull off fancy stuff and were fun to play, but play 1 game vs Leaf Blower IG lists/BA metal bawkses spam/SW/Necrons/GK Psyback spam and you'd realize how bad they were.
I don't see how that's different from the current edition - it's just a different list of armies that screws them over.
Zewrath wrote: It really spoke for itself when you spammed 3x Blasterborns + 3 Ravagers and Dark Lances on everything else and you would still feel like your AT was atrociously lackluster.
And yet their anti-tank was still better than it is now, because a) there were no fliers in 5th, and b) penetrates with an AP2 weapon were actually meaningful. As opposed to now, where you might as well be throwing rotten fruit at them.
I'm also having difficulty understanding how you ever thought Wyches weren't useless before. I remember clearly how well established the entire community was on how absolutely garbage the Wyches were and that statement was never disputed before 6th edition introduced HP stripping. You could use them to stun vehicles in 5th, if only to delay retaliatory fire a little, they were gak for anything else. If you used the gimmicky portal and had a massive unit of them to assault with, you'd overrun the assaulted unit and then get stuck in the open with a 6+ save.
So, he made the mistake of thinking GW might actually improve a bad unit, as opposed to removing it's only useful role? What a fool. :
Sorry, how does Stealth help against the serpent shield now?
How would the Venom get stealth when it isn't capable of getting Night Shield? Even then, how the actual feth did minus 6" ever help against the serpent shield?
I imagine it depends what you face. Sometimes 4+ poison is useful, other times it's far less so. And, all their "utility" weapons and options are pretty rubbish.
They're not bad as a spammed unit, but certainly not anything to write home about either.
Wyches = horribly choice, always were. Hellion troops = horrible choice, always were. Wracks = horrible choice, always were, ok they were certainly the only contenders for manning the quad gun you never fielded but were outclassed against the shooty warriors, you know.. in the 3 shooty editions we've had in a row.
How is 4+ poison ever not usefull? That one time, in band camp, were you had a bolter or what ever that was S4+ and shot something AV10 and got a lucky glance?
Yeah, no, I'm not buying that. The dominance of T4 models, toughness increasing war gear (bikes), monstrous creatures and flying monstrous creatures makes 4+ poison absurdly good on a troop choice, meaning that when you shoot with them, their shots almost always matters. Add in the fact that you would mostly use them on fast vehicles that spewed out 12 poisoned shots along with your Warriors and that they complemented the Venom, made them an excellent unit to spam.
Because it means we're paying double the price for less content?
Not sure why that's a question, but I just stated how the new codex still kept his good features and they made the codex better. I'm not saying the price isn't high but it's certainly an improvement.
And yet their anti-tank was still better than it is now, because a) there were no fliers in 5th, and b) penetrates with an AP2 weapon were actually meaningful. As opposed to now, where you might as well be throwing rotten fruit at them.
I'm quite puzzled at why anyone would mention flyers when you talk about anti-tank, but no, they weren't better actually.
Sure, that odd explosion due to lucky dice was more frequent than now, I'll give you that, but most of the time the DE just "stunned" tanks/transports and little else, which usually mattered little.
Also, with the option of spamming the same amount of lances AND an fuckton of haywire on top of that, I must question your logic when you state that their AT is worse than before.
Not true - used to use them alot in the initial codex. They were made rubbish except for tanki killing in 5th - which was rubbish and then made even owrse in the new Codex.
But then GW seems to hate dedicated Assault units - look at what they did to Genestealers - ignore the fluff, sodd the narrative and make all rubbish.
Not true - used to use them alot in the initial codex. They were made rubbish except for tanki killing in 5th - which was rubbish and then made even owrse in the new Codex.
But then GW seems to hate dedicated Assault units - look at what they did to Genestealers - ignore the fluff, sodd the narrative and make all rubbish.
I used Hellions a lot, that doesn't change the fact that they are horrible. How were you killing vehicles with glancing Wyches in 5th edition?
"They were made rubbish except for tanki killing in 5th - which was rubbish and then made even owrse in the new Codex."
That sentence contradicts itself. They were rubbish except for killing tanks, but they were rubbish at that too and now they're worse?
How would the Venom get stealth when it isn't capable of getting Night Shield? Even then, how the actual feth did minus 6" ever help against the serpent shield?
So why did you bring it up at all? You seemed to be saying that the new book helped against those weapons, if you're saying it doesn't then how does that further your argument?
Wyches = horribly choice, always were. Hellion troops = horrible choice, always were. Wracks = horrible choice, always were, ok they were certainly the only contenders for manning the quad gun you never fielded but were outclassed against the shooty warriors, you know.. in the 3 shooty editions we've had in a row.
Wracks were ok as troops in the last book. Not to do anything in combat - just to be a cheap troop choice to unlock a venom, and then sit on an objective. At the very least, locking them in Elites didn't help their predicament.
Likewise, stripping Hellions of an attack, and removing the only character who could make them even remotely useful hasn't exactly helped their situation.
Wyches could actually do well before as anti-vehicle with haywire grenades. The new book removed that and replaced it with... nothing.
In any case, I agree that warriors are the best troops. But, I'm wondering what makes them worth spamming - as opposed to just taking them as min troops? If you see what I mean.
How is 4+ poison ever not usefull? That one time, in band camp, were you had a bolter or what ever that was S4+ and shot something AV10 and got a lucky glance?
Yeah, no, I'm not buying that. The dominance of T4 models, toughness increasing war gear (bikes), monstrous creatures and flying monstrous creatures makes 4+ poison absurdly good on a troop choice, meaning that when you shoot with them, their shots almost always matters. Add in the fact that you would mostly use them on fast vehicles that spewed out 12 poisoned shots along with your Warriors and that they complemented the Venom, made them an excellent unit to spam.
And, what are you paying for that poison? Warriors have 4 special/heavy weapons - two of them are virtually identical, the third is an overpriced version of the gun they already have and the last is just plain awful. Yes, 4+ poison is useful, but so is a good selection of Special weapons - with Plasma being very good against MCs, bikes etc. as well. Or, perhaps it would be nice to have an anti-vehicle weapon on them with a bit more reliability. e.g. one that doesn't cost 50% more than a melta, yet requires about 9 shots to kill a rhino.
Not sure why that's a question, but I just stated how the new codex still kept his good features and they made the codex better. I'm not saying the price isn't high but it's certainly an improvement.
Really? To me it seems like all you've described is how the new book has removed content that *you* didn't like, and failed to make any improvements to bad units.
I'm quite puzzled at why anyone would mention flyers when you talk about anti-tank, but no, they weren't better actually.
Why? Are fliers not vehicles now?
Sure, that odd explosion due to lucky dice was more frequent than now, I'll give you that, but most of the time the DE just "stunned" tanks/transports and little else, which usually mattered little.
Also, with the option of spamming the same amount of lances AND an fuckton of haywire on top of that, I must question your logic when you state that their AT is worse than before.
Except that the amount of haywire you can field has, if anything, gone down - since wyches can no longer take haywire grenades.
Also, one might expect a 7th edition book to recieve weapons more appropriate to it's edition. How many skyfire weapons did DE get? Is the answer 'none'? Hell, name a single anti-vehicle weapon they got that's either twin-linked or has a rate of fire greater than 1.
Touché but the basis of his argument were that Wyches were ever usefull, which I really just needed to dispute.
Well, they were at least good at anti-vehicle in 6th. Now they're good at absolutely nothing.
My responses in red.
I guess I just find it odd that people praise the new codex, whilst saying "well, no, it didn't fix V, W, X, Y or Z... but they were bad before so that's alight then." I mean, it seems like a genuinely good book would actually fix all the bad units in the last one - rather than just leaving them to rot.
I don't mean to come off as a dick or anything, mate but there are a lot of things you write that makes absolutely no sense as a long time DE player.
How did Venom spam get nerfed? It got better, actually. Night Shields did nothing to help against missile launchers/auto cannons/wave serpent shields which were its major threat. The other vehicles lost their FF so they even lose out when compared to the Venom that has the same AV, but comes with an option of not being forced to jink, has an inv and is a long ranged gunboat in it self. Heck, you can even field them empty if you want.
Show me your Venomspam list then, and please explain to me how it got better with the option of no longer being able to spam HWG Wyches and being forced to take Warriors.
Zewrath wrote: How are Warriors a unit not worthy of spam? I've never heard anyone making that claim before. They're cheap, have good BS and poison 4+ shooting.. as a troop choice.
They offer zero utility and provide the exact same role as a Venom except at shorter range and less cost efficient shooting, they also can't sink themselves into combat and destroy a tank, CC with a blob, or tarpit something with an excellent armour save (basically all the things that Venoms struggle/become far less efficient against) like Wyches could. There is almost zero synergy between Warriors and Venoms, Wracks are a fair better choice for Venoms than Warriors because they are cheaper, more durable, and can actually make SOME gak happen in CC, however they now force you into the DLC book. If you think Venomspam didn't take a resounding, possibly crippling blow I don't know what to tell you, except that I think you should consider the possibility that you may have been playing the 5E codex wrong.
I can't see how Sliscus being gone is a bad thing, other than he was a bargain HQ for the special rules he brought. However, everything can DS now, you mainly used his drug power to hope for PfP but we get that on every single model automatically now, so the only thing it hurts are useless units. To be frank, I don't see the loss.
That's because you are incapable of seeing the differences between the two PfP rules and how this isn't necessarily an improvement. That being said, the Duke in 7th could easily have had his drugs rule changed to someone more relevant (speeding it up a turn) to keep a cool, synergistic leader for Wych cults. and as stated earlier - HIS SPECIAL RULES NO LONGER BEING RELEVANT ARE A RESULT OF OTHER CHANGES IN THE SAME BOOK. Transports feel more balanced to the designers if they all have DS? Sure, if we are keeping the Dule we now remove that special rule and drop him some points, or replace it with something new for the same cost. This is what "balancing" is, finding the balance where units are playable and not too strong to make the auto include and not too weak to make them useless. There is a definite lack of balance in 7th ED codex.
Zewrath wrote: What do you mean with the differences about 5th and 7th? DE was garbage tier in 5th edition. They could pull off fancy stuff and were fun to play, but play 1 game vs Leaf Blower IG lists/BA metal bawkses spam/SW/Necrons/GK Psyback spam and you'd realize how bad they were. It really spoke for itself when you spammed 3x Blasterborns + 3 Ravagers and Dark Lances on everything else and you would still feel like your AT was atrociously lackluster. This is not even touching the fact the vast majority of the units in the codex was atrociously bad, bloated with useless war gear and how much of the codex were focused on killing an absurd amount of infantry... in a metal bawks edition.
I'm also having difficulty understanding how you ever thought Wyches weren't useless before. I remember clearly how well established the entire community was on how absolutely garbage the Wyches were and that statement was never disputed before 6th edition introduced HP stripping. You could use them to stun vehicles in 5th, if only to delay retaliatory fire a little, they were gak for anything else. If you used the gimmicky portal and had a massive unit of them to assault with, you'd overrun the assaulted unit and then get stuck in the open with a 6+ save.
Oh. I really wish I had read these two paragraphs first, before wasting time typing out my earlier response. You thought Blasterborn were playable :/ you thought Wyches only stunned vehicles :/ you thought Wyches were widely regarded as bad :/ you are using a perception of other peoples opinions as a basis for your argument instead of actually knowing anything yourself :/ Yep, so to sum things up you spammed Venoms, but took Warriors in them, while complaining you had an absurd amount of anti-infantry and a severe lack of AT, all the while touting that Wyches are useless units. Great. I can see you fully grasped the 5E codex. At least, about as well as you seem to be doing with this new one.
Automatically Appended Next Post: How the 5E codex performed in the 5E to 6E 40k edition switch is irrelevant to me, that happened 2 years ago, this entire thread is quite clearly about the 6th Ed to 7th ed codex switch. Yes Wyches were trash before 6th but if you kept attaching that stigma to them in 6th without reassessing the unit, well... Then you are probably the type of player still taking Blasterborns lol :p
Not true - used to use them alot in the initial codex. They were made rubbish except for tanki killing in 5th - which was rubbish and then made even owrse in the new Codex.
But then GW seems to hate dedicated Assault units - look at what they did to Genestealers - ignore the fluff, sodd the narrative and make all rubbish.
I used Hellions a lot, that doesn't change the fact that they are horrible. How were you killing vehicles with glancing Wyches in 5th edition?
"They were made rubbish except for tanki killing in 5th - which was rubbish and then made even owrse in the new Codex."
That sentence contradicts itself. They were rubbish except for killing tanks, but they were rubbish at that too and now they're worse?
Haywire Grenades are effective against vehicles and were so in 6th.
I meant that their only role was tanking killing - which was "rubbish" considering the fluff and now they are rubbish at that too - so now they are worse - simple really? are you seriously syaing they are better now than previously.
They were awesome in 6th and were the core of Venomspam. They were far better suited to the ideals than Blasterborn, with a bunch of paper thin transports flying around, 4 with Warriors and 3 with Blasterborn, sorry but the Trueborn are getting aced every time, stretching your AT much more thin. 6 Wyches however is a different beast. Half of them WILL make it to do their role, be it tank busting, tarpitting, or CCing with a blob, they really covered all the gaps in mass Venom, while not having an "eggs in the basket" affect that you do NOT want for DE, and having a cheaper overall cost. If you weren't running them in Venomspam, then you were one of the people who had to google everything to know what to take and kept getting all the 5th ed info Arguing what it was capable of in 5E warhammer is pretty irrelevant Zewrath.
SHUPPET wrote: Oh. I really wish I had read these two paragraphs first, before wasting time typing out my earlier response. You thought Blasterborn were playable :/ you thought Wyches only stunned vehicles :/ you thought Wyches were widely regarded as bad :/ you are using a perception of other peoples opinions as a basis for your argument instead of actually knowing anything yourself :/ Yep, so to sum things up you spammed Venoms, but took Warriors in them, while complaining you had an absurd amount of anti-infantry and a severe lack of AT, all the while touting that Wyches are useless units. Great. I can see you fully grasped the 5E codex. At least, about as well as you seem to be doing with this new one.
How the 5E codex performed in the 5E to 6E 40k edition switch is irrelevant to me, that happened 2 years ago, this entire thread is quite clearly about the 6th Ed to 7th ed codex switch. Yes Wyches were trash before 6th but if you kept attaching that stigma to them in 6th without reassessing the unit, well... Then you are probably the type of player still taking Blasterborns lol :p
No personal attacks
You thought Blasterborn were playable :/
No personal attacks In an edition of vehicle spam you resorted to what, Splinterborn? Mandrakes? Grots? Bloodbrides? Incubi? Hell, HARLEQUINS?
you thought Wyches only stunned vehicles :/
I never made that claim, I said they were gak and that's mathematically and practically proven. Furthermore, if you thought it was a sound tactic to use 5 Wyches against vehicles they needed 3+ to hit, 2+ to glance and then needed to roll with a -3 modifier on a damage table AND THEN needed to cause enough weapon destroyed and immobilized to cause a wreck, then you're beyond stupid.
you thought Wyches were widely regarded as bad :/
They were, they still are. It was cemented on the release of 5th edition.
you are using a perception of other peoples opinions as a basis for your argument instead of actually knowing anything yourself :/
No, I played competitively throughout the entire 5th edition, I know exactly what their faults were. You, on the other hand, played in a meta were apparently you did well with Wyches... No personal attacks
If you don't have any experience with 5E de than I imagine you are indeed, missing a lot. Especially since this entire discussion is about the differences between the 5E and 7E books.
Arguing what it was capable of in 5E warhammer is pretty irrelevant Zewrath
bs, again.
Half of them WILL make it to do their role, be it tank busting, tarpitting, or CCing with a blob, they really covered all the gaps in mass Venom, while not having an "eggs in the basket" affect that you do NOT want for DE, and having a cheaper overall cost. If you weren't running them in Venomspam, then you were one of the people who had to google everything to know what to take and kept getting all the 5th ed info
And what the feth kind of bs is this?
Wyches NEVER made it to their role since the release of 6th edition. Using a Venom to deliver 5 paper thin models up close in an edition that was flooded with infantry, long range fast skimmers you couldn't reach was a piss poor waste of points.
Overwatch and wall of death made sure that the legend of Wyches tarpitting blobs never ever happened.
And what cheaper overall cost? Have you even read the codex? The Wyches were more expensive and with HWG they were even further expensive.
The Warriors, in 6th edition, had a 30" threat range when mounted on a Venom, added to its poison shooting and could hang back, claim cover and shoot from distances and deal with the massed infantry and monstrous creatures that dominated the 6th edition.
So why did you bring it up at all? You seemed to be saying that the new book helped against those weapons, if you're saying it doesn't then how does that further your argument?Please refrain from using red text needlessly
Because screaming "WAVE SERPENT!" doesn't invalidate the Night Shield. With Jink, the paper thin vehicles now have a 3+ cover save and they can even claim 4+/3+ cover in normal cover/ruins and that's nothing to scoff at. High strength shots that are abundantly available are the bane of DE vehicles and forcing your opponent to dedicate either orders/psychic buffs/buffs to ignore cover, rather than just deleting the vehicle that relies on a 5+/5++ is a massive improvement.
Wracks were ok as troops in the last book. Not to do anything in combat - just to be a cheap troop choice to unlock a venom, and then sit on an objective. At the very least, locking them in Elites didn't help their predicament.
Likewise, stripping Hellions of an attack, and removing the only character who could make them even remotely useful hasn't exactly helped their situation.
Wyches could actually do well before as anti-vehicle with haywire grenades. The new book removed that and replaced it with... nothing.
Wracks unlocking venoms in that matter might as well not existed and now the codex offers a way to get a venom without ever spending anything on wracks.
In any case, I agree that warriors are the best troops. But, I'm wondering what makes them worth spamming - as opposed to just taking them as min troops? If you see what I mean.
Ah, well I agree partially with that sentiment. I won't defend the DE's lack of troops though.
And, what are you paying for that poison? Warriors have 4 special/heavy weapons - two of them are virtually identical, the third is an overpriced version of the gun they already have and the last is just plain awful. Yes, 4+ poison is useful, but so is a good selection of Special weapons - with Plasma being very good against MCs, bikes etc. as well. Or, perhaps it would be nice to have an anti-vehicle weapon on them with a bit more reliability. e.g. one that doesn't cost 50% more than a melta, yet requires about 9 shots to kill a rhino.
While I agree with some the point you're making, I'm not honestly convinced.
Special weapons on Tactical Squads are over priced and lack luster and it's much more reliable to have specialized squads like Sternguards/Grav Bikes. As a primary IG player though, who has extremely flexible troop choices I know were your mentality comes from.
Really? To me it seems like all you've described is how the new book has removed content that *you* didn't like, and failed to make any improvements to bad units.
They made a lot of good improvements in war gear and costs, along with a detachment that is really super good for DE.
Why? Are fliers not vehicles now?
Not in the sense of AT. Usually when people talk about AA, they refer to skyfire weapons, high torrent of high S weapons. It's not unlike AT but low AP high S weapons are much more valued as AT weapons but rarely as an AA weapon. Melta-guns and lascanons aren't good and reliable AA unless they have skyfire and/or TL.
Except that the amount of haywire you can field has, if anything, gone down - since wyches can no longer take haywire grenades.
So we are ignoring the option to massively spam 30" threat range Haywire blasters? Versus what, an abominable bad CC unit that sat in a paper thin vehicle and needed to rely on random charge distance and overwatch.
Also, one might expect a 7th edition book to recieve weapons more appropriate to it's edition. How many skyfire weapons did DE get? Is the answer 'none'? Hell, name a single anti-vehicle weapon they got that's either twin-linked or has a rate of fire greater than 1.
True this. I literally laughed my ass off when I saw the "new" dark lance with a blast profile. It's like, the least necessary weapon ever introduced in a codex.
I guess I just find it odd that people praise the new codex, whilst saying "well, no, it didn't fix V, W, X, Y or Z... but they were bad before so that's alight then." I mean, it seems like a genuinely good book would actually fix all the bad units in the last one - rather than just leaving them to rot.
I didn't directly state this, however, I will agree that some of the units deserved a far better treatment than they got.
Please refrain from using red text needlessly, and don't use personal attacks
I like the new codex, We shouldn't whine unduly about the loss of Commaragh's nobility (The Baron, Duke, Lady and Lord), special characters come and go all the time with every edition, and it's clear that these new codexes are trying to play down the amount of these characters. Orks lost quite a few, as did Grey Knights. It's just the direction they are going in
No, we absolutely should whine about the removal of these characters, because the only reason they've removed the characters is for purely financial reasons. Any character that doesn't have a model gets axed and even characters with models but are old as hell like Al'Rahem gets axed, purely because GW can't make money off of them and they want to stick it to Chapterhouse for kicking their ass in Court.
GW invalidating peoples' playstyles and removing flavor because they're butthurt about losing a lawsuit and they're too lazy to properly balance their game is deplorable behavior that should never, ever be supported or forgiven. When you shrug about it and move on, you're validating their actions.
I'm ambivalent about the army beyond that. Mostly ambivalent about all of the 7th edition codices.
It's not about being "butthurt", it's about trying to stop people from making even more money off their IP. They would be stupid to do anything else.
So this new book is pretty awesome. My partner Saturday at the doubles even was also dark eldar. So with dark eldar/dark eldar, we placed 3rd at this tourney.
Round one we beat sky blight nids/ white scars
Round two we beat eldar serpents / AM tank spam with wyverns
It's not about being "butthurt", it's about trying to stop people from making even more money off their IP. They would be stupid to do anything else.
No, the only stupid decision was the one they made. Shall we go through the problems?
1) Rules cost money. So, even if they weren't making money on the models (which they were anyway, but I'll get to that), they were still making money off the rules for those characters. Now, they're charging double the price of the previous codices, yet the overall content has been reduced. This is not a good way to endear yourself to your customers.
2) People still bought GW models to convert to those characters. And, even if some other company made a model for a GW character, it's likely that most people would still convert their own - or use the ones they already converted. By removing the models, GW has both stopped any possibility of people buying extra kits to convert, *and* pissed off anyone who already put money and effort into converting those characters. Remind me again why this is the best option.
3) They could have just made the bloody models. They're a model company - it's literally what they do for a living. And, in most cases, they've had years to get it done. And, please don't give me any of this crap about 'not having the resources', because they've been releasing tons of new models. The DE codex alone got, what, 3 character models for units that already had up-to-date models. There is absolutely no reason why they couldn't have made models for 3 of the SCs instead. And, of course, they've also been releasing a ton of new models for other stuff - like the ridiculous fantasy models. Again, they could have instead made models for 40k characters rather than remove them.
Now, perhaps you're going to say that GW decided to breath some life into fantasy instead, or that they decided that it just wasn't viable to make models for 40k characters (possibly out of a crippling fear of money and success). Regardless, I agree, that's their choice. But, why should their customers be made to suffer just because they don't want to (or can't be bothered) making models for those characters?
No, the only stupid decision was the one they made. Shall we go through the problems?
1) Rules cost money. So, even if they weren't making money on the models (which they were anyway, but I'll get to that), they were still making money off the rules for those characters. Now, they're charging double the price of the previous codices, yet the overall content has been reduced. This is not a good way to endear yourself to your customers.
2) People still bought GW models to convert to those characters. And, even if some other company made a model for a GW character, it's likely that most people would still convert their own - or use the ones they already converted. By removing the models, GW has both stopped any possibility of people buying extra kits to convert, *and* pissed off anyone who already put money and effort into converting those characters. Remind me again why this is the best option.
3) They could have just made the bloody models. They're a model company - it's literally what they do for a living. And, in most cases, they've had years to get it done. And, please don't give me any of this crap about 'not having the resources', because they've been releasing tons of new models. The DE codex alone got, what, 3 character models for units that already had up-to-date models. There is absolutely no reason why they couldn't have made models for 3 of the SCs instead. And, of course, they've also been releasing a ton of new models for other stuff - like the ridiculous fantasy models. Again, they could have instead made models for 40k characters rather than remove them.
Now, perhaps you're going to say that GW decided to breath some life into fantasy instead, or that they decided that it just wasn't viable to make models for 40k characters (possibly out of a crippling fear of money and success). Regardless, I agree, that's their choice. But, why should their customers be made to suffer just because they don't want to (or can't be bothered) making models for those characters?
I hate the Chapter House Studios case. I don't care about who people think was right in that case and who won, because ultimately it was us, the customers who lost.
There's absolutely no logic to why the only 2 units in the DE codex who don't want the Venomblade are the only one able to purchase them as upgrades. There's absolutely no logic in stripping away Shardcarbines for the unit who wants to sit in a gunboat that could TL their weapons, nor is their any logic in why DE cannot select any other power weapons other than Power Swords, it's stupid even by GW logic. It's glaringly obvious that the only reason that those decisions were made was that the units with those options in the package you could buy. Just in case someone would ever make a Dark Eldar power maul/axe and make a profit. It's mindbogglingly stupid and it was the same kind of reasoning that made the atrocious abomination that is the Tyranid codex.
What I find most annoying is that GW never even acknowledged the praise they got for making the Chaos Terminator Lord / Space Marine captain/IG command boxes (which kindda' just proves they don't listen to their fans, regardless of positive feedback or not). I mean seriously, they should be mandatory on every single army. Not some gakky mono pose HQ model with little to no options for customization, which also happens to cost the equivalent of a tactical squad box.
I hate the Chapter House Studios case. I don't care about who people think was right in that case and who won, because ultimately it was us, the customers who lost.
There's absolutely no logic to why the only 2 units in the DE codex who don't want the Venomblade are the only one able to purchase them as upgrades. There's absolutely no logic in stripping away Shardcarbines for the unit who wants to sit in a gunboat that could TL their weapons, nor is their any logic in why DE cannot select any other power weapons other than Power Swords, it's stupid even by GW logic. It's glaringly obvious that the only reason that those decisions were made was that the units with those options in the package you could buy. Just in case someone would ever make a Dark Eldar power maul/axe and make a profit. It's mindbogglingly stupid and it was the same kind of reasoning that made the atrocious abomination that is the Tyranid codex.
What I find most annoying is that GW never even acknowledged the praise they got for making the Chaos Terminator Lord / Space Marine captain/IG command boxes (which kindda' just proves they don't listen to their fans, regardless of positive feedback or not). I mean seriously, they should be mandatory on every single army. Not some gakky mono pose HQ model with little to no options for customization, which also happens to cost the equivalent of a tactical squad box.
OT but just a quick word. GW declining to produce models or rules for units in the game is exactly like Ford refusing to make cars from the fear that someone will create an add-on for their product that they don't make; at the end of the day it's asininely stupid and will inevitably hurt the company. Someone on their first day in business school can answer this question, "What do consumers like?", options and a quality product at a reasonable price...barring that a shoddy product at a cheap price (see Mantic for this, the Dollar General corp of the miniature world). GW continues to fail at business 101 and it is starting to hurt them, possibly (we'll see with the next report; 2 bad half-years may be a blip but 3 is a trend).
It would be the easiest thing in the world for GW to make a single spru power weapon upgrade kit for each faction that has them; they'd probably sell like hotcakes for many reasons but they'll continue to ignore potential cash-flow staring them in the face.
agnosto wrote: OT but just a quick word. GW declining to produce models or rules for units in the game is exactly like Ford refusing to make cars from the fear that someone will create an add-on for their product that they don't make; at the end of the day it's asininely stupid and will inevitably hurt the company. Someone on their first day in business school can answer this question, "What do consumers like?", options and a quality product at a reasonable price...barring that a shoddy product at a cheap price (see Mantic for this, the Dollar General corp of the miniature world). GW continues to fail at business 101 and it is starting to hurt them, possibly (we'll see with the next report; 2 bad half-years may be a blip but 3 is a trend).
It would be the easiest thing in the world for GW to make a single spru power weapon upgrade kit for each faction that has them; they'd probably sell like hotcakes for many reasons but they'll continue to ignore potential cash-flow staring them in the face.
Well, in all fairness I do believe I was OT too.
I used to love GW in that weird kind of way, like: "Hehe, oh GW, you do make some quirky things and expensive prices but at least you guys made a game that looks like it was made by nerds for nerds"
Now, the 40k setting has grown into such a state that it's essentially something that will persist even beyond GW. I mean, it has reached a point now that GW can retcon stuff or make fluff and if enough people hate it, it's just actively ignored. So really, 40k is past the point of needing GW and I would love to see someone else take the IP, someone who are just even remotely competent.
So really, 40k is past the point of needing GW and I would love to see someone else take the IP, someone who are just even remotely competent.
I agree with this so much, and can't wait for the inevitable to take its course. I think the chapterhouse lawsuit is a good thing. I mean you can't blame the constant imbalances of 40k, the terrible pricing, the DLC money grabs, even the removal of some units entirely on the chapterhouse lawsuit. I mean, they release new models for old units with models in these coming dexes when they could have held on to models. Regardless you definitely can't hold the lawsuit responsible for all the other stuff. The lawsuit is good imo because while it hurts us the customers, anything that hurts the customers is just one more thing hurting GW, and I'd rather a bit of extra pain now than having this entire painful situation delayed even longer. The less revenue they have coming in the sooner they will be gone. And good riddance!
I hate the Chapter House Studios case. I don't care about who people think was right in that case and who won, because ultimately it was us, the customers who lost.
There's absolutely no logic to why the only 2 units in the DE codex who don't want the Venomblade are the only one able to purchase them as upgrades. There's absolutely no logic in stripping away Shardcarbines for the unit who wants to sit in a gunboat that could TL their weapons, nor is their any logic in why DE cannot select any other power weapons other than Power Swords, it's stupid even by GW logic. It's glaringly obvious that the only reason that those decisions were made was that the units with those options in the package you could buy. Just in case someone would ever make a Dark Eldar power maul/axe and make a profit. It's mindbogglingly stupid and it was the same kind of reasoning that made the atrocious abomination that is the Tyranid codex.
What I find most annoying is that GW never even acknowledged the praise they got for making the Chaos Terminator Lord / Space Marine captain/IG command boxes (which kindda' just proves they don't listen to their fans, regardless of positive feedback or not). I mean seriously, they should be mandatory on every single army. Not some gakky mono pose HQ model with little to no options for customization, which also happens to cost the equivalent of a tactical squad box.
Indeed.
On that subject, the other thing I like about, say, the IG command squad is that the commander has a nice, simple design that still looks very good.
In contrast, I find that many HQs just have far too much 'bling' for my liking. The IG ones aren't too bad in this regard, but many of the others look like coral reefs on legs.
I also like the new Codex. I think they try to create maintanable armies (from the supplier's point of view) and maybe this will help them to fix some of the problems we've been complaining about. Less special models might be a price we have to pay for more balance.
At first I was dreading the changes that leaked out. Everything seemed to point towards the ultimate Codex of Not Doom. I decried the change to things that I regularly used. My "army" would no longer work like it once did and I had moments of cursing GW for daring to make me rethink my approach.
Now that I've played a few games and began the process of adapting, there is a LOT here that I'm really excited about. The makeup of my army has changed, units that I rarely - or never - took before now have a place such as mandrakes, scourges and even a succubus.
Yes, several models/units that I have will no longer make regular appearances in my games; I even said "see ya" to my wyches as I put them into long term storage.
Yes, I wanted (still do) an actual Vect model. I had converted my own; however, if I'm completely honest, I never fielded it as Vect. Most of my games are 1500 or less and he was just too costly to bother with. Yes, I wish lelith had a warlord trait that actually did *something*. However, she has sat on my shelf for almost 4 years; I suspect she'll be there another 4.
To me the biggest "flavor" of the Dark Eldar was summed up in 3 major items. 4+ Poison available to pretty much everything, the concept of getting better as the game progresses (Power from Pain) and having a random bonus (combat drugs) for at least part of the army. Poison is still there, Power from Pain is much better and Combat Drugs are much more useful - +1T is my favorite.
Quite frankly, the loss of the Duke and Baron haven't bothered me one bit. Those were abused by regular Eldar players much more often than those whose primary was the Dark Kin. Hellions were just never that good and the beast pack just seemed too much like using Khorne Dogs. Their removal honestly helped shore up the flavor of DE rather than let them be a copy cat.
The one major buff we did get was to deep strike. I never saw the point to deep striking before. Now, I plan on keeping 4 or more units in reserve to take advantage of this play style.
The tldr version is simply: yes things have absolutely changed. They helped bring down some of the power of Eldar by removing Duke/Baron. While increasing those things that make DE what they are. Over the next couple of months DE players will evolve and numerous armies will have to shift to deal with them.
Yes, several models/units that I have will no longer make regular appearances in my games; I even said "see ya" to my wyches as I put them into long term storage.
Yes, I wish Lelith had a warlord trait that actually did *something*. However, she has sat on my shelf for almost 4 years; I suspect she'll be there another 4
Considering that the Wych Cult is a central part of the Dark Eldar world, has quite a bit of fluff dedicated to it and some nice new pics - is that not a damming indictment of the new Codex.
At first I was dreading the changes that leaked out. Everything seemed to point towards the ultimate Codex of Not Doom. I decried the change to things that I regularly used. My "army" would no longer work like it once did and I had moments of cursing GW for daring to make me rethink my approach.
Now that I've played a few games and began the process of adapting, there is a LOT here that I'm really excited about. The makeup of my army has changed, units that I rarely - or never - took before now have a place such as mandrakes, scourges and even a succubus.
Yes, several models/units that I have will no longer make regular appearances in my games; I even said "see ya" to my wyches as I put them into long term storage.
Yes, I wanted (still do) an actual Vect model. I had converted my own; however, if I'm completely honest, I never fielded it as Vect. Most of my games are 1500 or less and he was just too costly to bother with. Yes, I wish lelith had a warlord trait that actually did *something*. However, she has sat on my shelf for almost 4 years; I suspect she'll be there another 4.
To me the biggest "flavor" of the Dark Eldar was summed up in 3 major items. 4+ Poison available to pretty much everything, the concept of getting better as the game progresses (Power from Pain) and having a random bonus (combat drugs) for at least part of the army. Poison is still there, Power from Pain is much better and Combat Drugs are much more useful - +1T is my favorite.
Quite frankly, the loss of the Duke and Baron haven't bothered me one bit. Those were abused by regular Eldar players much more often than those whose primary was the Dark Kin. Hellions were just never that good and the beast pack just seemed too much like using Khorne Dogs. Their removal honestly helped shore up the flavor of DE rather than let them be a copy cat.
The one major buff we did get was to deep strike. I never saw the point to deep striking before. Now, I plan on keeping 4 or more units in reserve to take advantage of this play style.
The tldr version is simply: yes things have absolutely changed. They helped bring down some of the power of Eldar by removing Duke/Baron. While increasing those things that make DE what they are. Over the next couple of months DE players will evolve and numerous armies will have to shift to deal with them.
While I enjoy your enthusiasm towards the codex, I just want to point out that DSDE armies isn't something new and we could always do this although it was almost always quite a lack luster strategy. It should be pointed out though, that the DE heavily focused on Alpha Striking back then and the new codex seems to favor beta striking a lot more, with both improved cover saves, WWP, new PfP mechanic and even a detachment that insures you have a decent cover, even out in the open, making it far more easy to survive turn 1.
quite the opposite really, I'm Implying any Eldar or Tau player will gladly swap their horribly internally balanced books for one with a good balance. I think most Eldar players would actually like it is the Wave Serpent was nerfed, but only if footdar was viable or the Falcon could compete for dedicated transport. I think people would gladly take Crisis Suits and Stealth Suits over Riptides if the Riptide was brought down a level and the Crisis was brought to the same one. External Balance can only be achieved after Internal Balance has been, which is something eldar and tau books are terrible at.
but take a look at the DE codex. Venoms are unchaged; wyches, archons, ravagers, got nerfed; while scourges reavers, and grotesques got buffed.
What if the new CWE codex left wave serpents completely unchanged, but nerfed all the units that people usually put in them while buffing units that people do not take. What if the new Tau dex leaves riptides the same, nerfs fire warriors and broadsides while buffing hammerheads and vespids?
The new DE codex is not balanced. It is very gimmicy. It requires a change is play style, but it isnt internally balance or externally balanced.
Venom has been changed massively in the state that the best units to put in it (Wyches, regardless of what nonsense Zewrath chooses to say about them being terrible) were nerfed into unplayability. The question of spamming Venoms (the most cost efficient source of Splinter weaponry in the dex) is now a hard one as it involves spamming units you probably don't want to be spamming. That being said I think I understand that your point was the model itself hasn't changed merely the units around it have, and you are correct in saying that this has done nothing for our internal balance. They improved some units ruined others. Internal balance remains shot, just means we have to buy a bunch of new models if we want to continue to play with the favourably balanced half of the dex. GG.
I've been waiting to hear results of people running large packs of Grotesques with a Haemonculus. I think the Haemy is necessary to bump up the PFP table for them to get FNP right away, and to buff their leadership unless using the Covens supplement. Have any of you used, say a 10 man Grotesque unit with Haemy and WWP yet? I'd be curious if 10 of those big fellas is overkill, or an awesome murder unit.
Grotesques come with FNP anyway. Still wouldn't run them without an IC.
In the coven book they get Fearless turn 2, which might be worth it alone.
I'm not sure what could even be a LOW in the new DE book. There's nothing that really fits the bill except Vect, who is (at least currently) gone.
The voidraven sucked in the 5th edition codex. They could have made it a super heavy flyer, upped it's damage and points and made it a LOW. Instead they just left it as suck and gave it a new model, which no one will buy.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hollismason wrote: I'd say a ten point model that has Feel No Pain, Furious Charge, becomes Fearless, and gains Rage eventually is pretty uh.. good deal.
The voidraven sucked in the 5th edition codex. They could have made it a super heavy flyer, upped it's damage and points and made it a LOW. Instead they just left it as suck and gave it a new model, which no one will buy.
Hmm I am buying cos I like the model - probably house rule it or something for our 40K 6.5 games
My problem is that it's a niche weapon. It's designed to take out AV14 (maybe AV13) at range, but is inefficient at everything else. Now, if you have other weapons that are good against AV10-12 and Fliers, then Dark/Bright Lances are ok. They're still not a great weapon, because they're not great even against AV14 (AP2 is unreliable, and needing a 5+ to penetrate is very undesirable for such an expensive weapon).
Looks like someone forgot how to math Lance counts everything above AV 12 as 12 . Glancing AV 10 on 2+ not bad at all. Glancing AV 11 on 3+ . Still great. AV 12-14 on 4 +. Not too shabby at all if I say so myself. And for a paltry 5pt upgrade on vehicles. How is it expensive? Whereas it's what, 25pts per lascannon?
Lascannons are 20points for marines and guard. Dark lances are 20points for DE. They are a 5 point upgrade over what is essentially a plasmacannon.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hollismason wrote: Wyches are a pretty good tarp it especially if you play to manipulate the turn structure, with Urien or a Animus etc.. you can start off turn two coming in with Feel No Pain, Furious Charge, turn 3 charge you're fearless.
That's pretty damn good.
bringing 2 HQs that are gonna cost a minimum of 300 points, one that needs to be closeby and one that needs to hit, then wound something with a one shot weapon and sure you get some buffs. It isnt like there are other armies out there that have HQs that can buff things.
Animus is great for the points. But when you have to WWP in range you cannot count it's buffs turn 1. More likely you have a less than 50% chance to buff your turn number to 4 on turn 3. Or turn 5 on turn 4.
SHUPPET wrote: Venom has been changed massively in the state that the best units to put in it (Wyches, regardless of what nonsense Zewrath chooses to say about them being terrible) were nerfed into unplayability. The question of spamming Venoms (the most cost efficient source of Splinter weaponry in the dex) is now a hard one as it involves spamming units you probably don't want to be spamming. That being said I think I understand that your point was the model itself hasn't changed merely the units around it have, and you are correct in saying that this has done nothing for our internal balance. They improved some units ruined others. Internal balance remains shot, just means we have to buy a bunch of new models if we want to continue to play with the favourably balanced half of the dex. GG.
And what nonsense was that exactly? Please, please educate me in how Wyches were good in an edition were the best result they could get was multiple weapon destroyed on a roll of 6+.
Please educate me in how you justified spending extra points on haywire, in a later edition that was flooded with infantry, monstrous creatures, and skimmers that had 60" range which you would never ever catch. Explain to me those haywire grenades were ever useful against daemons, Eldar, bike/cent/drop pod marines, helldrakes or tau who never brought any vehicles except for perhaps the skyray. Versus taking a unit that had a 30" threath range and could threaten virtually anything in the meta.
Explain to me how they were ever useful as tarpit units when using only 5 models a time, because anything that is capable of overwatch would spell their doom. Please elaborate on why you believe it's harder to spam the venom, when the venom with warriors is now 20 points cheaper than 5th Wyches with haywire, because that's like saying water is dry.
Please, give me a full list and tactica about your venom spam with Wyches, how you somehow made them cheaper and "easier" to spam when they where one of the most expensive options to spam.
I refuted every single point in your previous post and now you just seem to go into denial.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And please, drop the "GG" "LOOOOL" attitude in discussions, it makes it even harder for people to take your claims seriously.
SHUPPET wrote: Venom has been changed massively in the state that the best units to put in it (Wyches, regardless of what nonsense Zewrath chooses to say about them being terrible) were nerfed into unplayability. The question of spamming Venoms (the most cost efficient source of Splinter weaponry in the dex) is now a hard one as it involves spamming units you probably don't want to be spamming. That being said I think I understand that your point was the model itself hasn't changed merely the units around it have, and you are correct in saying that this has done nothing for our internal balance. They improved some units ruined others. Internal balance remains shot, just means we have to buy a bunch of new models if we want to continue to play with the favourably balanced half of the dex. GG.
And what nonsense was that exactly? Please, please educate me in how Wyches were good in an edition were the best result they could get was multiple weapon destroyed on a roll of 6+.
Please educate me in how you justified spending extra points on haywire, in a later edition that was flooded with infantry, monstrous creatures, and skimmers that had 60" range which you would never ever catch. Explain to me those haywire grenades were ever useful against daemons, Eldar, bike/cent/drop pod marines, helldrakes or tau who never brought any vehicles except for perhaps the skyray. Versus taking a unit that had a 30" threath range and could threaten virtually anything in the meta.
Explain to me how they were ever useful as tarpit units when using only 5 models a time, because anything that is capable of overwatch would spell their doom. Please elaborate on why you believe it's harder to spam the venom, when the venom with warriors is now 20 points cheaper than 5th Wyches with haywire, because that's like saying water is dry.
Please, give me a full list and tactica about your venom spam with Wyches, how you somehow made them cheaper and "easier" to spam when they where one of the most expensive options to spam.
I refuted every single point in your previous post and now you just seem to go into denial.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And please, drop the "GG" "LOOOOL" attitude in discussions, it makes it even harder for people to take your claims seriously.
I decided not to respond to your post as it felt as though you were fishing for a flame war and I didn't feel it was going to continue into a productive discussion, not least of which due to your lack of an open minded approach to different opinions. Also, before you talk about my attitude being a hard one to take seriously (GG'ing a terrible decision from GW as though it affects you personally), perhaps you should take a look at improving at your own. All from the one post:
Zewrath wrote: Okay, that's the most pretentious amount of bs I've heard in a long time, so allow me to educate you in your borderline slowed notions.
Zewrath wrote: Sit the feth down and let the grown ups talk instead of spouting nonsense
EDIT: It's all been red-texted out of your post by a mod since I made this reply, but I guess that is point and case.
Nice. And to valid points such as me saying "arguing the merits and failings of how a unit performed in 40k 5th ed 5 years ago before the changes to Haywire, is pretty irrelevant to 7th edition balance discussion" you responded with nothing more than
All around your post added very little of intellectual value and did not really justify a response, especially since with your attitude I highly doubt you would be willing to admit a misconception of a good unit even if God himself appeared to you, gave you 10 commandments, and the first one was "#thou shalt admit Wyches were not a terrible unit in 6th ed"
That being said, a couple of further mistakes in your statements - I never said Wyches with HWG were cheaper than Wyches without HWG (how does that make sense) I quite clearly said that they were cheaper than the option of taking Blasterborn. Your response that Warriors have 30" threat range when mounted on a Venom is erroneous to the statement that Warriors restrict the threat range of a Venom as you are including the move speed of the Venom on it, Warriors at the end of the day have 2/3 the range of a Venom (even assuming you want to be on the long half of rapid fire range) and the exact same role, hence either neutering one or the other in the same objective, whereas Wyches needing to disembark at close range was for the delivery of an extremely hard hitting AT unit, a completely different role making the range sacrifice more justifiable, and often not even one at all because of the different positioning between the two completely different targets, and also a unique role that Wyches perform cost-effectively in comparison to any other unit in the dex, unlike Warriors who have less splinter shots than Venom when taken in the same number of points even in rapid fire range, 1/3 the damage projection, and not even comparable mobility, making them completely cost inefficient for this role.
Also, you thinking that Haywire in general is bad because it doesn't affect Daemons or other MCs is a pretty good indicator of why you aren't grasping why Wyches were amazing and the synergy between our strengths and their supporting roles. Tell me, with 6-9 Venoms on the field, is it really at all relevant what our AT can do to MCs, when our anti-infantry can just shred them? You mention Cents as though Warriors can do anything here, and talk as tho Wyches could not tarpit them amazingly because overwatch. Now sorry, but that deserves a "lol". Overwatch in general isn't going to stop them tarpitting, not against Cents but ESPECIALLY not vs an MC who you act as though Warriors will completely outclass Wyches against, when Wyches can fully knock out a Riptide or Wraithknights shooting for at least a few turns. Only time overwatch is going to possibly cripple a unit is vs GEQ blobs, whom Wyches actually can trade well with in CC and whom you obviously need multiple squads for anyway, but admittedly this isn't a role they do perfectly, however nor is it one Warriors can chew threw and is a little issue for our army in general that we take other units to deal with. However just because blobs don't trade as well with our Splintershooting as MCs do, it often doesn't matter too much as the amount of anti-infantry shooting we have is often enough to drown anything out once the core threats are down, and acting as though taking Haywire is going to open up a bunch of anti-infantry holes in your list as Dark Eldar is ridiculous. Our anti infantry capabilities are the reason why Haywire synergies so well with us possibly better than any other army. But whatever core army concepts are a bother trying to wrap our heads around, let's just say Wyches suck because Haywire doesn't affect MCs and skimmers are hard to catch (as though DL is a more cost effective solution for skimmers, or as though everyone didn't just end assault skimmers with beastpacks or using our skimmers board control and number advantage to push them into a position where one could get an assault of with Wyches, or as though Warriors are going to be so much better in a match up against an army with skimmers, or should we say Eldar Necron and The mirror match, in all of which they are absolutely useless firepower after your Venoms).
You seem highly stuck in the 5th mind state, when Blasterborn WERE a necessary choice for extra AT, even though in current 40k they paint a target on 3 paper thin Venoms and are rarely going to make their points back, this was an edition with less long ranged above average strength weaponry, Venoms were harder to kill due to game mechanics, and also there was simply no other decent AT option - I ran Blasterborn in 5th, you had to. 6th however changes that and gave us the excellent tool of Wyches, who hits tanks just as hard as Blasterborn, except doing it without such a "all eggs in 3 Venoms" approach, 6 squads of whom coming to a cheaper prices than taking 3 Blasterborn/3warriors in Venoms as well,. The changes in 7th to chances of vehicle explosion and the reliance of glancing something to death further secured Wyches strengths over Blasterborn. Arguing this with statements like
They were [bad], they still are. It was cemented on the release of 5th edition.
Is not only illogical, it's also extremely shortsighted and not contributing much to strategical discussion. They were not cemented as anything by their original release. As editions changes how rules work, so do models who interact with these rules change. I know you aren't going to admit any mistake here as you are quite clearly invested in this a little too much on an emotional level, but it's something for you to maybe mull over, that maybe your interpretation of a unit here isn't infallible. I doubt you will, but it's whatever though. Point proven that at the very least, Wyches are not the useless units you make them out to be, just because they cost a little extra points.
SHUPPET wrote: Venom has been changed massively in the state that the best units to put in it (Wyches, regardless of what nonsense Zewrath chooses to say about them being terrible) were nerfed into unplayability. The question of spamming Venoms (the most cost efficient source of Splinter weaponry in the dex) is now a hard one as it involves spamming units you probably don't want to be spamming. That being said I think I understand that your point was the model itself hasn't changed merely the units around it have, and you are correct in saying that this has done nothing for our internal balance. They improved some units ruined others. Internal balance remains shot, just means we have to buy a bunch of new models if we want to continue to play with the favourably balanced half of the dex. GG.
And what nonsense was that exactly? Please, please educate me in how Wyches were good in an edition were the best result they could get was multiple weapon destroyed on a roll of 6+.
Please educate me in how you justified spending extra points on haywire, in a later edition that was flooded with infantry, monstrous creatures, and skimmers that had 60" range which you would never ever catch. Explain to me those haywire grenades were ever useful against daemons, Eldar, bike/cent/drop pod marines, helldrakes or tau who never brought any vehicles except for perhaps the skyray. Versus taking a unit that had a 30" threath range and could threaten virtually anything in the meta.
Explain to me how they were ever useful as tarpit units when using only 5 models a time, because anything that is capable of overwatch would spell their doom. Please elaborate on why you believe it's harder to spam the venom, when the venom with warriors is now 20 points cheaper than 5th Wyches with haywire, because that's like saying water is dry.
Please, give me a full list and tactica about your venom spam with Wyches, how you somehow made them cheaper and "easier" to spam when they where one of the most expensive options to spam.
I refuted every single point in your previous post and now you just seem to go into denial.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And please, drop the "GG" "LOOOOL" attitude in discussions, it makes it even harder for people to take your claims seriously.
I decided not to respond to your post as it felt as though you were fishing for a flame war and I didn't feel it was going to continue into a productive discussion, not least of which due to your lack of an open minded approach to different opinions. Also, before you talk about my attitude being a hard one to take seriously (GG'ing a terrible decision from GW as though it affects you personally), perhaps you should take a look at improving at your own. All from the one post:
Zewrath wrote: Okay, that's the most pretentious amount of bs I've heard in a long time, so allow me to educate you in your borderline slowed notions.
Zewrath wrote: Sit the feth down and let the grown ups talk instead of spouting nonsense
EDIT: It's all been red-texted out of your post by a mod since I made this reply, but I guess that is point and case.
Nice. And to valid points such as me saying "arguing the merits and failings of how a unit performed in 40k 5th ed 5 years ago before the changes to Haywire, is pretty irrelevant to 7th edition balance discussion" you responded with nothing more than
All around your post added very little of intellectual value and did not really justify a response, especially since with your attitude I highly doubt you would be willing to admit a misconception of a good unit even if God himself appeared to you, gave you 10 commandments, and the first one was "#thou shalt admit Wyches were not a terrible unit in 6th ed"
That being said, a couple of further mistakes in your statements - I never said Wyches with HWG were cheaper than Wyches without HWG (how does that make sense) I quite clearly said that they were cheaper than the option of taking Blasterborn. Your response that Warriors have 30" threat range when mounted on a Venom is erroneous to the statement that Warriors restrict the threat range of a Venom as you are including the move speed of the Venom on it, Warriors at the end of the day have 2/3 the range of a Venom (even assuming you want to be on the long half of rapid fire range) and the exact same role, hence either neutering one or the other in the same objective, whereas Wyches needing to disembark at close range was for the delivery of an extremely hard hitting AT unit, a completely different role making the range sacrifice more justifiable, and often not even one at all because of the different positioning between the two completely different targets, and also a unique role that Wyches perform cost-effectively in comparison to any other unit in the dex, unlike Warriors who have less splinter shots than Venom when taken in the same number of points even in rapid fire range, 1/3 the damage projection, and not even comparable mobility, making them completely cost inefficient for this role.
Also, you thinking that Haywire in general is bad because it doesn't affect Daemons or other MCs is a pretty good indicator of why you aren't grasping why Wyches were amazing and the synergy between our strengths and their supporting roles. Tell me, with 6-9 Venoms on the field, is it really at all relevant what our AT can do to MCs, when our anti-infantry can just shred them? You mention Cents as though Warriors can do anything here, and talk as tho Wyches could not tarpit them amazingly because overwatch. Now sorry, but that deserves a "lol". Overwatch in general isn't going to stop them tarpitting, not against Cents but ESPECIALLY not vs an MC who you act as though Warriors will completely outclass Wyches against, when Wyches can fully knock out a Riptide or Wraithknights shooting for at least a few turns. Only time overwatch is going to possibly cripple a unit is vs GEQ blobs, whom Wyches actually can trade well with in CC and whom you obviously need multiple squads for anyway, but admittedly this isn't a role they do perfectly, however nor is it one Warriors can chew threw and is a little issue for our army in general that we take other units to deal with. However just because blobs don't trade as well with our Splintershooting as MCs do, it often doesn't matter too much as the amount of anti-infantry shooting we have is often enough to drown anything out once the core threats are down, and acting as though taking Haywire is going to open up a bunch of anti-infantry holes in your list as Dark Eldar is ridiculous. Our anti infantry capabilities are the reason why Haywire synergies so well with us possibly better than any other army. But whatever core army concepts are a bother trying to wrap our heads around, let's just say Wyches suck because Haywire doesn't affect MCs and skimmers are hard to catch (as though DL is a more cost effective solution for skimmers, or as though everyone didn't just end assault skimmers with beastpacks or using our skimmers board control and number advantage to push them into a position where one could get an assault of with Wyches, or as though Warriors are going to be so much better in a match up against an army with skimmers, or should we say Eldar Necron and The mirror match, in all of which they are absolutely useless firepower after your Venoms).
You seem highly stuck in the 5th mind state, when Blasterborn WERE a necessary choice for extra AT, even though in current 40k they paint a target on 3 paper thin Venoms and are rarely going to make their points back, this was an edition with less long ranged above average strength weaponry, Venoms were harder to kill due to game mechanics, and also there was simply no other decent AT option - I ran Blasterborn in 5th, you had to. 6th however changes that and gave us the excellent tool of Wyches, who hits tanks just as hard as Blasterborn, except doing it without such a "all eggs in 3 Venoms" approach, 6 squads of whom coming to a cheaper prices than taking 3 Blasterborn/3warriors in Venoms as well,. The changes in 7th to chances of vehicle explosion and the reliance of glancing something to death further secured Wyches strengths over Blasterborn. Arguing this with statements like
They were [bad], they still are. It was cemented on the release of 5th edition.
Is not only illogical, it's also extremely shortsighted and not contributing much to strategical discussion. They were not cemented as anything by their original release. As editions changes how rules work, so do models who interact with these rules change. I know you aren't going to admit any mistake here as you are quite clearly invested in this a little too much on an emotional level, but it's something for you to maybe mull over, that maybe your interpretation of a unit here isn't infallible. I doubt you will, but it's whatever though. Point proven that at the very least, Wyches are not the useless units you make them out to be, just because they cost a little extra points.
Yawn, what a massive wall of text that didn't disprove anything I said. You were acting condescending from the start and you were even contradicting yourself several times. Now you're even retracting some of your claims in your post also. I'm not even stuck in the 5th edition mind state and again, you're making pretentious post about how I ran my trueborns. Whatever, your last post was at least better written than the others, even if it was a massive waste of time.
Furthermore, to add to the growing fallacious claims, you somehow interpreted my post in a way so you think I ever said Wyches with haywire are cheaper than those without? Yeah, no.. You're not only ignorant, you're also fishing.
not tarpit them amazingly because overwatch. Now sorry, but that deserves a "lol".
Really? You think because there's that 1 special snowflake unit that you can assault, suddenly overwatch suddenly stops mattering at all? How do you even reach cents with Wyches? Why even bother and not hang back and pump them with poisoned shots? How well do you think your Wyches will fare against 4 cents, a chapter master and/or a librarian? You seem to not be aware of what the term "tarpiting" means
Overwatch in general isn't going to stop them tarpitting, not against Cents but ESPECIALLY not vs an MC who you act as though Warriors will completely outclass Wyches against, when Wyches can fully knock out a Riptide or Wraithknights shooting for at least a few turns.
I'm sorry, what? How will you ever catch a Riptide that moves 12" and can move up to 4d6 afterwards? And overwatch not being a problem? Dude.. Do you even know Tau and how their overwatch operate?
Same with Wraith Knights, how would your Wyches ever catch them? Especially versus an army that can lay waste to over half your venoms in a single turn of fire. And yes, the Warriors outclassed the Wyches against both these MC, actually they do with just about any MC ever conceived. Forcing saves on the Wraith Knight is infinitely better than trying to melee with the monster and hope you could tie them up.
SHUPPET wrote: Agree to disagree then. Have fun with the new codex.
Oh, sure. Also, do me the favor of never discussing competetive, or indeed any level of 40k since going by how you think overwatch works and the examples you provided above, you clearly don't know much about that subject.
SHUPPET wrote: Agree to disagree then. Have fun with the new codex.
Oh, sure. Also, do me the favor of never discussing competetive, or indeed any level of 40k since going by how you think overwatch works and the examples you provided above, you clearly don't know much about that subject.
Considering how you've been analyzing wyches using 5th edition rules as though that's in any way relevant, I dunno if you should be trying either.
Wyches in 6th/7th clearly filled a cost-effective AT role via haywire grenades, in an army that struggled to bring AT to bear. It was a bit stupid and unfluffy that this was all they were good for, but whatever, 40k is a stupid and unfluffy game. They were also a cheap way to unlock a Venom, which brought more than enough highly mobile poisoned shooting in a small package, so it's not really important that wyches couldn't tackle MCs on their own. The two units played together well, covering lots of bases for a low points cost, and now wyches may as well not be taken. SHUPPET already covered all this.
Anyway since this is all getting very off-topic, I have to disagree completely with the OP. I remember when the last DE dex dropped - now THAT was a truly unique and fairly good codex at the time. Internal balance was still pants, but Dark Eldar had a very distinct feel and playstyle. Coupled with an absolutely amazing range of new models, it's no wonder everyone went crazy for them.
This codex looks like the old codex with some rules re-worded and flavor removed. Maybe internal balance is a little better, looks like external balance is a sidegrade at best. This has been par for the course for a long time now. I would hardly call anything about it unique or good.
Dark Eldar were always different, that is the reason i have them.
And i personally liked the previous codex less and the one before a lot more (the first version of the web portal).
But the new one seems to be good.
I don't care much for all those non-Dark-Eldar aliens in the retinue, the regular Dark Eldar being an interesting army is the best thing about the codex.
And yes, Wyches (i have 3 units) are not as good now, but they still have their use and are better then they used to be when used later on in the game.
Dark Eldar do not have psykers, but in the current rules a few Eldar psykers are not a problem and they can add A LOT of value to the regular Dark Eldar units.
Just 5 Wyches can tarpit Centurions, Wraithknights, Riptides, a bunch of TMCs, actually to be honest, almost anything if you throw enough at it I mean you pack 6 squads.
How well do you think your Wyches will fare against 4 cents, a chapter master and/or a librarian?
Well, they can overwatch 1 squad out of 3 and still likely be tarpitted by 13-14 Wyches... those 15 Wyches costed half the price of the 4 Centurions ALONE... Even two squads would probably take a lot of firepower out of the game for at least 2 turns, for just 120 pts... this strikes me as one of the best units you could run across to get a decent tarpit against, but meh whatever. You know how to tarpit best right.
SHUPPET wrote: Agree to disagree then. Have fun with the new codex.
Oh, sure. Also, do me the favor of never discussing competetive, or indeed any level of 40k since going by how you think overwatch works and the examples you provided above, you clearly don't know much about that subject.
Considering how you've been analyzing wyches using 5th edition rules as though that's in any way relevant, I dunno if you should be trying either.
Wyches in 6th/7th clearly filled a cost-effective AT role via haywire grenades, in an army that struggled to bring AT to bear. It was a bit stupid and unfluffy that this was all they were good for, but whatever, 40k is a stupid and unfluffy game. They were also a cheap way to unlock a Venom, which brought more than enough highly mobile poisoned shooting in a small package, so it's not really important that wyches couldn't tackle MCs on their own. The two units played together well, covering lots of bases for a low points cost, and now wyches may as well not be taken. SHUPPET already covered all this.
Anyway since this is all getting very off-topic, I have to disagree completely with the OP. I remember when the last DE dex dropped - now THAT was a truly unique and fairly good codex at the time. Internal balance was still pants, but Dark Eldar had a very distinct feel and playstyle. Coupled with an absolutely amazing range of new models, it's no wonder everyone went crazy for them.
This codex looks like the old codex with some rules re-worded and flavor removed. Maybe internal balance is a little better, looks like external balance is a sidegrade at best. This has been par for the course for a long time now. I would hardly call anything about it unique or good.
I compared them from 5th to 6th and pre update 7th.
Learn to read. You're also wrong.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SHUPPET wrote: Just 5 Wyches can tarpit Centurions, Wraithknights, Riptides, a bunch of TMCs, actually to be honest, almost anything if you throw enough at it I mean you pack 6 squads.
How well do you think your Wyches will fare against 4 cents, a chapter master and/or a librarian?
Well, they can overwatch 1 squad out of 3 and still likely be tarpitted by 13-14 Wyches... those 15 Wyches costed half the price of the 4 Centurions ALONE... Even two squads would probably take a lot of firepower out of the game for at least 2 turns, for just 120 pts... this strikes me as one of the best units you could run across to get a decent tarpit against, but meh whatever. You know how to tarpit best right.
You keep avoiding the question of how you think you're able to bring multiple squads to combat, when realistically your Wyches will never reach anything before getting shot to pieces.
SHUPPET wrote: Yet you think Blasterborn are a good choice?
Let me know when you've caught up to 6th ed, we can help ease the transition to 7th, it'll help make this whole unit strategy discussion a lot easier.
I'm not responding to any further posts as it's quite clear you are pretty close minded and really just interested in trolling and flaming.
Have a nice day.
When did I ever claim that they were the best choice? Did I ever claim that they were mandatory in any other edition than 5th?
You're the troll here. You're making outrageous strawman arguments and have no idea how DE works in any other place than your beer and pretzel meta.
You never answered how you realistically ever got to dig in your Wyches in combat. Your optimistic ideas of how they can easily assault MC are ludicrous and beyond unrealistic. You never answered how haywire was worthwhile in a edition that was dominated by all the armies I mentioned above, in 6th edition. You're the one who needs to catch up to 6th edition, because those armies I mentioned were absurdly dominant and neither of them EVER had any Vehicles or anything Wyches could hope to combat.
SHUPPET wrote: Venom has been changed massively in the state that the best units to put in it (Wyches, regardless of what nonsense Zewrath chooses to say about them being terrible) were nerfed into unplayability. The question of spamming Venoms (the most cost efficient source of Splinter weaponry in the dex) is now a hard one as it involves spamming units you probably don't want to be spamming. That being said I think I understand that your point was the model itself hasn't changed merely the units around it have, and you are correct in saying that this has done nothing for our internal balance. They improved some units ruined others. Internal balance remains shot, just means we have to buy a bunch of new models if we want to continue to play with the favourably balanced half of the dex. GG.
You can take a double CAD realspace raiders detachment and have access to 12 fast slots. Venoms are easier to spam and cheaper because now you don't have to take a troop tax to unlock them.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: You can take a double CAD realspace raiders detachment and have access to 12 fast slots. Venoms are easier to spam and cheaper because now you don't have to take a troop tax to unlock them.
I'm glad that 7th edition has made troops taxes again.
I thought 5th edition making them an integral part of the missions was very tiresome - especially since it restricted people's abilities to just spam the most broken units possible.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: You can take a double CAD realspace raiders detachment and have access to 12 fast slots. Venoms are easier to spam and cheaper because now you don't have to take a troop tax to unlock them.
I'm glad that 7th edition has made troops taxes again.
I thought 5th edition making them an integral part of the missions was very tiresome - especially since it restricted people's abilities to just spam the most broken units possible.
I thought it was dumb that only troops could score. You're meaning to tell me those trueborn who are better than warriors fluff wise couldn't hold onto a relic? Gimme a break.
Secondly, we were discussing venom spam, and its clearly more viable than it was in the previous edition. Thanks in part to it being fast attack, and now cheaper due to no troops.
SHUPPET wrote: Venom has been changed massively in the state that the best units to put in it (Wyches, regardless of what nonsense Zewrath chooses to say about them being terrible) were nerfed into unplayability. The question of spamming Venoms (the most cost efficient source of Splinter weaponry in the dex) is now a hard one as it involves spamming units you probably don't want to be spamming. That being said I think I understand that your point was the model itself hasn't changed merely the units around it have, and you are correct in saying that this has done nothing for our internal balance. They improved some units ruined others. Internal balance remains shot, just means we have to buy a bunch of new models if we want to continue to play with the favourably balanced half of the dex. GG.
You can take a double CAD realspace raiders detachment and have access to 12 fast slots. Venoms are easier to spam and cheaper because now you don't have to take a troop tax to unlock them.
This is actually an interesting concept... Dual CADs are generally not allowed in Australian tourneys or events, however if I was in a different country I'd strongly consider doing something like this... But at the end of the day it still takes 4 units of Warriors and extra HQ as opposed to 6 warriors to spam venoms, so the savings are small but is a decent way to get more Venoms than 6
I think a good way of getting two more in is the Firstblood Wrack formation if I read that right. At least Wracks in Venoms are justifiable.
I thought it was dumb that only troops could score. You're meaning to tell me those trueborn who are better than warriors fluff wise couldn't hold onto a relic? Gimme a break.
It was certainly arbitrary, but it was far better than the current mess - where even empty transports and immobile drop pods can somehow score objectives.
Making troops scoring added an important tactical element to the game - it made troops the core of armies for all objective missions and also gave you a sort of alternate win scenario. i.e. even if you couldn't kill your opponent's army, you could focus on his troops - thus preventing his ability to score. When everything can score - including any death stars, MCs, Wave Serpents, Super Heavies etc. that the opponent is using, that tactical element simply doesn't exist.
Secondly, we were discussing venom spam, and its clearly more viable than it was in the previous edition. Thanks in part to it being fast, and now cheaper due to no troops.
No, we're discussing the whole codex. And, if troops are nothing more than a tax, then it doesn't speak well of said codex.
Viroid you are right, I think the set up was theoretically better last edition
However I say theoretically, as in a world in which every army has playable troops
Now when SM had Biker troops, you know actual really good models from their dex, and on the flip side of the coin Tyranids have Hormagants and Genestealers, basically minimum size minimum mandatory troop tax units, it can kind of unlevel the playing field the just having one side scoring by nature and the other side either havin nothing nor a completely ridiculous list that is going to lose regardless of scoring.
That is however a problem of the codexes, not the core rule set. I think if all the codexes were balanced properly, the old way is better, however in this stupid 40k that GW has built, the current way helps a little.
Regardless of all that, the troop changes to DE are really really bad.
SHUPPET wrote: Viroid you are right, I think the set up was theoretically better last edition
However I say theoretically, as in a world in which every army has playable troops
Now when SM had Biker troops, you know actual really good models from their dex, and on the flip side of the coin Tyranids have Hormagants and Genestealers, basically minimum size minimum mandatory troop tax units, it can kind of unlevel the playing field the just having one side scoring by nature and the other side either havin nothing nor a completely ridiculous list that is going to lose regardless of scoring.
That is however a problem of the codexes, not the core rule set. I think if all the codexes were balanced properly, the old way is better, however in this stupid 40k that GW has built, the current way helps a little.
Regardless of all that, the troop changes to DE are really really bad.
I know what you mean, but I think the current rules actually cause at least some of the major issues associated with troops. After all, the main concern with a lot of troops is that basic weapons just don't have a great impact on the game (and most troops can only take a very limited number of special/heavy weapons). It's often better to take other units (frequently vehicles or MCs) that are both more durable and carry more high-calibre weapons. This, of course, makes basic troops even worse - because there are now even fewer infantry units around (so basic guns have even fewer viable targets). So, what do people do? Well, the most likely answer is that they look to other units - like vehicles or MCs - since their weapons are better at dealing with the other spammed MCs and Vehicles around.
So, what we end up with is a cycle that encourages people to take fewer and fewer infantry.
I certainly could, it's hard not to when people make strawman fallacies, condescending assumptions, purposely misinterprets what I write and answers to none of my questions, while having all his own refuted. What ever, I'm done with this. I can't make blind people see.
I think the Dark Eldar codex is fairly well done and represents a army theme well, I however disagree with the OP, I think all of the 7th edition codexes represent the armies very well in a unique way.
blaktoof wrote: I think the Dark Eldar codex is fairly well done and represents a army theme well, I however disagree with the OP, I think all of the 7th edition codexes represent the armies very well in a unique way.
Sadly I don't think it covers all the basic army types of army a Dark Eldar player would run - so a full Wych Cult - as described and highlighted at length in the Codex fluff is heavily penalised by what should be their standout models - the Wyches.
Does a Hormulclus themed cult work without the expensive supplement?
Does a Wraith Army work without the expensive supplement? Yes, of course it ''can work'', but it's not playing at the full effect. And for the record, compare what you get the in Covens supplement to what you got in the Iyanden supplement and you will see a massive improvement. The Coven supplement got 5 (?) new formations, all of which are good enough for gaming, some of which could be considered competitive. You get new Warlord Traits, army wide special rules, Relics and a massive amount of fluff and artwork.
So yes, Coven armies work, just throw some Grots in a Webway Portal and you can't go to far wrong, but if you are playing a Coven army and not using the Supplement, you are handicapping yourself. I guess it's expensive, but at least it contains more then the Knight Codex or the Scions one...
ALEXisAWESOME wrote: Does a Wraith Army work without the expensive supplement? Yes, of course it ''can work'', but it's not playing at the full effect. And for the record, compare what you get the in Covens supplement to what you got in the Iyanden supplement and you will see a massive improvement. The Coven supplement got 5 (?) new formations, all of which are good enough for gaming, some of which could be considered competitive. You get new Warlord Traits, army wide special rules, Relics and a massive amount of fluff and artwork.
So yes, Coven armies work, just throw some Grots in a Webway Portal and you can't go to far wrong, but if you are playing a Coven army and not using the Supplement, you are handicapping yourself. I guess it's expensive, but at least it contains more then the Knight Codex or the Scions one...
Yeah I have the Iyanden Supplement - that was pretty poor considering the opporunities for actual content - the fluff wasn't good at all, no Iyanna SC rules or model, no unique units, esp when compared to the Farsight one - you get Warlord Traits, relics and army rules in Iyanden...........
I also have the Knights Codex and was much happier wiht this - at least it was new interesting fluff....................
Not read the Covens Codex hence my question - but seriously resent having to play an extra £30 for it.............and still no decent Wych Cult army?
I'll wait and see. The 'dataslate' format allows for GW to revisit each race and release new units/characters for them without the need for a brand new codex revision. So when Necrons and BA are done and out the way, I hope to see more Krom Dragongazes and Gruk Face-Rippas.
AlexRae wrote: I'll wait and see. The 'dataslate' format allows for GW to revisit each race and release new units/characters for them without the need for a brand new codex revision. So when Necrons and BA are done and out the way, I hope to see more Krom Dragongazes and Gruk Face-Rippas.
or make you pay even more money for stuff that should have been in the intial Codex (like the Supplement) :( )
AlexRae wrote: I'll wait and see. The 'dataslate' format allows for GW to revisit each race and release new units/characters for them without the need for a brand new codex revision. So when Necrons and BA are done and out the way, I hope to see more Krom Dragongazes and Gruk Face-Rippas.
or make you pay even more money for stuff that should have been in the intial Codex (like the Supplement) :( )
Is it not the Model for any company to get people to buy their stuff ?
I think future buying on products is a must for any company. I might be in the wrong crowd. I think GW is paving the way for future exspansions of the industry yet again. Lot easier to update with data slates giving the customer instant access then printing up codexes every few months.
Is it not the Model for any company to get people to buy their stuff ?
I think future buying on products is a must for any company. I might be in the wrong crowd. I think GW is paving the way for future exspansions of the industry yet again. Lot easier to update with data slates giving the customer instant access then printing up codexes every few months.
If anything, GW is behind the curve.
Other companies already offer free versions of the rules online, that are updated regularly with new stuff, FAQs, and Erratas.
ALEXisAWESOME wrote: Does a Wraith Army work without the expensive supplement? Yes, of course it ''can work'', but it's not playing at the full effect. And for the record, compare what you get the in Covens supplement to what you got in the Iyanden supplement and you will see a massive improvement. The Coven supplement got 5 (?) new formations, all of which are good enough for gaming, some of which could be considered competitive. You get new Warlord Traits, army wide special rules, Relics and a massive amount of fluff and artwork.
So yes, Coven armies work, just throw some Grots in a Webway Portal and you can't go to far wrong, but if you are playing a Coven army and not using the Supplement, you are handicapping yourself. I guess it's expensive, but at least it contains more then the Knight Codex or the Scions one...
but the Coven Suppliment also limits ones ability to take any reliable ranged anti tank. It pars down the codex signifigantly and limits you to 4 units and 1 HQ.
ALEXisAWESOME wrote: Does a Wraith Army work without the expensive supplement? Yes, of course it ''can work'', but it's not playing at the full effect. And for the record, compare what you get the in Covens supplement to what you got in the Iyanden supplement and you will see a massive improvement. The Coven supplement got 5 (?) new formations, all of which are good enough for gaming, some of which could be considered competitive. You get new Warlord Traits, army wide special rules, Relics and a massive amount of fluff and artwork.
So yes, Coven armies work, just throw some Grots in a Webway Portal and you can't go to far wrong, but if you are playing a Coven army and not using the Supplement, you are handicapping yourself. I guess it's expensive, but at least it contains more then the Knight Codex or the Scions one...
but the Coven Suppliment also limits ones ability to take any reliable ranged anti tank. It pars down the codex signifigantly and limits you to 4 units and 1 HQ.
But its also fun as hell. Besides, nothing is stopping you from taking blasterborn in raiders, or even another CAD
Lance counts everything above 
