I'm guessing they're pre-empting a rules sheet leak from the new boxes. Wasn't expecting +1 attack or 4+ saves.
How do splinter cannons on Venoms look vs dual splinter rifles now mathhammerers?
SV 4+ Kabalites, why, yes please, finally a unit that does not drop to plebian standards for paying it's due as soon as it is faced with a primaris boltgun.
With legends, Trueborn have 2 attacks, 5+ armor, 4 specials and 2 heavies.
I'm really excited so far by these changes. Playing a Crusade with Dark Eldar at the FLGS and running a lot of splinter cannons and warriors already. And Incubi are getting better as well.
Heavy 3 means -1 to hit on any INFANTRY carrier (Scourges, Kabalites) and 3 shots damage 2 vs 6 shots damage 1 just means it's easier for special unit abilities like DG -1 damage and necron res prots to counter them. Frankly I liked that drukhari splinter cannons were rapid fire as it played into their "high risk high reward' army plastyle of the fact that their main basic vehicle cannon had an optimal range of 18" as opposed to most armies where that was 30-36".
4+sv and 2A on warriors is kind of fun. Anyone have any images of those new statlines to share from new boxes by any chance?
-1 AP is new on splinter cannons as well.
It looks like Splinter cannons are being slotted into the new "heavy infantry killer" role instead of " horde shredder" like before. I'm going to guess big shoota will do the same for orks. It's actually nice to see it change into a mid role, as before, kabalites were basically either AP- Dam 1 poison, or S8 AP -4 Dam d6, with only the Disintegrator in the middle.
Well new Splinter Cannon is just okay but not an auto include. But better news is +1A and +1Save and as unit leader has +1 more attack then it makes it more appealing to actually arm it with something.
Now I just wonder what they are going to do with dark lance. It is supposed to be pretty powerful.
Sotahullu wrote: Well new Splinter Cannon is just okay but not an auto include. But better news is +1A and +1Save and as unit leader has +1 more attack then it makes it more appealing to actually arm it with something.
Now I just wonder what they are going to do with dark lance. It is supposed to be pretty powerful.
Honestly dark lance is fine as is. Maybe make void lance Dam d3 +3?
Gir Spirit Bane wrote: Also dont heavy weapons on infantry become assault inside of a raider for sweet sweet boat broadsides?
Not by the current rules. Only weapons mounted on drukhari vehicles become assault rather than heavy.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MajorWesJanson wrote: -1 AP is new on splinter cannons as well.
It looks like Splinter cannons are being slotted into the new "heavy infantry killer" role instead of " horde shredder" like before. I'm going to guess big shoota will do the same for orks. It's actually nice to see it change into a mid role, as before, kabalites were basically either AP- Dam 1 poison, or S8 AP -4 Dam d6, with only the Disintegrator in the middle.
That may have been a useful thing to do if they hadn't halved the shots at the range that the rest of your squad is going to be engaging at. Venoms and Kabalites are both still going to be trying to get within 12"
Marines would rather be shot at by a weapon with D2 and half the shots vs a weapon with D1, because marines have tons of W3 models as well as FNP abilities, -1 damage abilities, etc.
Eldarsif wrote: I really like these changes and making Splinter Cannon a W2 killer makes sense as it provides Drukhari with some intermediary level weapons.
All the changes listed today are making me excited for the final reveal.
Are people really missing that this change is 6 shots D1 to 3 shots D2?
Eldarsif wrote: I really like these changes and making Splinter Cannon a W2 killer makes sense as it provides Drukhari with some intermediary level weapons.
All the changes listed today are making me excited for the final reveal.
Are people really missing that this change is 6 shots D1 to 3 shots D2?
Yep almost no one seems to remember Splinter cannons are Rapid Fire 3 wich means the new version wants to stay at range and into an open topped vehicle for maximum mobilty and firepower.
Now if GW surprises us with the return of Trueborn units with melee and range choices this can be quite a impactful change.
wict01 wrote: So the new splinter cannon is just a heavy bolter that’ll never wound on a 3. Wish they’d just left it as it was.
Against T6+ it's better than a Heavy Bolter though.
+1 to wound vs T6 non-vehicle targets
-1 to wound vs T4 targets
-1 to wound vs T3 targets
-1 to wound vs T5 vehicle targets
-1 to wound vs T6+ vehicle targets
Kind of not a great combo. It needs to either be significantly less effective or, IMO, have some other rule that grants it a bonus against the kind of 'soft organic targets' that the SC is supposed to be good at killing.
I'd put forth that re-instanting the old "if your Poison Weapon has Strength equal to the T of the target, you get reroll to wound" would make the comparison slightly more equivalent, as it would effectively have "+1/2 to wound vs T3 targets" to somewhat make up for its other shortcomings.
Oh man, an extra attack on a S3 shooting unit! That's so... indifferent. I hope they don't have to pay for that.
And their signature heavy weapon now encourages the infantry units to form an immobile gunline. And worse against a lot of units it used to be good against! 100% tested against the meta-warp of 2W marines, but all other armies were apparently forgotten.
Can you tell me what the new poisoned rule for DE then please as you seem to already know.
All we know so far is poisoned(4+) and the weapon has a strength value.
This is different from existing as splinter cannon has no strength.
All we KNOW for sure is that it has poisoned(4+) and the stat line. We don't know that it only works against non vehicle models still, we don't know if it gets re-rolls if against lower strength now.
I assume we will learn these things in another warcom report later this week or next.
Glad about the better armour, they really needed that. +1A though... Far as I'm concerned, if they see melee in the first place then gak's gone badly wrong...
Eldarsif wrote: I really like these changes and making Splinter Cannon a W2 killer makes sense as it provides Drukhari with some intermediary level weapons.
All the changes listed today are making me excited for the final reveal.
Are people really missing that this change is 6 shots D1 to 3 shots D2?
3xD2 shots with Ap -1 are going to provide better usage than the current Rapid Fire 3 of S1 Poison with no AP. This way I might actually put one in a kabalite squad(unless they decide to charge too many points for them).
It is also good to remember that the Rapid 3 procced on less than 18" in range which often resulted in getting your venoms into range of stuff that could threaten them. With this change you can potentially kite your venoms better. Are you going to lose some shots against W1 things? Yes, but considering that Marines of all sorts are "the thing" in the game I think the new version is going to be more useful and allow you to fit the venom in a more dedicated ranged role.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galas wrote: Why is people ignoring the -1ap in the new version of the weapon?
Thats like... a not irrelevant change. The old weapon was useless outside the coven +1 to wound and +1 damage strat.
Exactly this.
I have ton of Splinter Cannons that have been useless for a long time now due the original Rapid 3 change. With this - depending on cost - I might actually use Splinter Cannons in 5-mans in Splinter Cannon Venoms. Damn, I am getting flashback to the 5th edition Codex army.
Galas wrote: Why is people ignoring the -1ap in the new version of the weapon?
Thats like... a not irrelevant change. The old weapon was useless outside the coven +1 to wound and +1 damage strat.
Because it comes at a cost of halving the number of shots. That's a high cost for -1 AP, especially in a world where 'nah, we don't care about -1 AP' is a contagious ability among GW codex writers..
Combined with swapping to heavy, it isn't a cut and dry change. More a lateral shift that gives too much weight to fighting marines. It isn't irrelevant, but its suddenly a very different gun. A weird snowflake heavy bolter.
Galas wrote: Why is people ignoring the -1ap in the new version of the weapon?
Thats like... a not irrelevant change. The old weapon was useless outside the coven +1 to wound and +1 damage strat.
Yeah, it's probably why people are comparing it to a Heavy Bolter, and noting that unless it gets some kind of bonus against low-strength targets, it's worse than a heavy bolter agianst most profiles in the game.
So either, it has to cost less than a heavy bolter, or it needs some kind of a bonus from Poisoned Weapon that we don't know about to keep it on par.
As of right now, it's:
Worse vs non-vehicle T3
worse vs non-vehicle T4
Equal vs non-vehicle T5
better vs non-vehicle T6+
Worse vs all T values of vehicles (which functionally exist. Theoretically equal vs T10.)
Galas wrote: Why is people ignoring the -1ap in the new version of the weapon?
Thats like... a not irrelevant change. The old weapon was useless outside the coven +1 to wound and +1 damage strat.
Because it comes at a cost of halving the number of shots. That's a high cost for -1 AP, especially in a world where 'nah, we don't care about -1 AP' is a contagious ability among GW codex writers..
Half the shoots for double the damage and +1Ap (And a change from rapid fire to heavy, thats the true nerf here).
The thing is... what did the old weapon gave drukari? They were't an army with need of more rapid fire weapons to kill low quality hordes with ease. This actually gives them something they didn't had before.
Some of the complaints about Dark Eldar weapons options was how most of them were basically... the same, specially the Homunculus ones. Lets see if they have made a better job at making them different with this new codex.
Galas wrote: Why is people ignoring the -1ap in the new version of the weapon?
Thats like... a not irrelevant change. The old weapon was useless outside the coven +1 to wound and +1 damage strat.
Yeah, it's probably why people are comparing it to a Heavy Bolter, and noting that unless it gets some kind of bonus against low-strength targets, it's worse than a heavy bolter agianst most profiles in the game.
So either, it has to cost less than a heavy bolter, or it needs some kind of a bonus from Poisoned Weapon that we don't know about to keep it on par.
As of right now, it's:
Worse vs non-vehicle T3
worse vs non-vehicle T4
Equal vs non-vehicle T5
better vs non-vehicle T6+
Worse vs all T values of vehicles (which functionally exist. Theoretically equal vs T10.)
Yes, this is true, is a worse heavy bolter with the exception of Tyranids, Demons and Custodes bikers. It will probably cost less points? Who knows. But what it does is being a new type of weapon for Drukari to use agaisnt X kind of targets. I know, I know, having dissintegrator cannons this looks unappealing but ...
Because it comes at a cost of halving the number of shots.
Those three shots - which is only applicable at sub-18" - was only netting you one damage before the save. 3 extra shots(now lost) was 2 hits, resulting in 1 wound that had no AP so everyone could save against it.
The new version is giving you the same amount of max damage potential at full 36" inch range and a -1 to AP.
I am not really seeing the "high cost" considering that Splinter Cannons are currently unimpressive unless you run some PA shenanigan.
I do feel like I need to add the caveat that I like to run glass "cannon" army that can kite so this is a net buff for me. For Coven and Cults this is only going to affect a single cannon on their venoms. Because if you are currently running Dual Cannons on a close combat army you are literally throwing away precious points.
Eldarsif wrote: I really like these changes and making Splinter Cannon a W2 killer makes sense as it provides Drukhari with some intermediary level weapons.
All the changes listed today are making me excited for the final reveal.
Are people really missing that this change is 6 shots D1 to 3 shots D2?
3xD2 shots with Ap -1 are going to provide better usage than the current Rapid Fire 3 of S1 Poison with no AP. This way I might actually put one in a kabalite squad(unless they decide to charge too many points for them).
It is also good to remember that the Rapid 3 procced on less than 18" in range which often resulted in getting your venoms into range of stuff that could threaten them. With this change you can potentially kite your venoms better. Are you going to lose some shots against W1 things? Yes, but considering that Marines of all sorts are "the thing" in the game I think the new version is going to be more useful and allow you to fit the venom in a more dedicated ranged role.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galas wrote: Why is people ignoring the -1ap in the new version of the weapon?
Thats like... a not irrelevant change. The old weapon was useless outside the coven +1 to wound and +1 damage strat.
Exactly this.
I have ton of Splinter Cannons that have been useless for a long time now due the original Rapid 3 change. With this - depending on cost - I might actually use Splinter Cannons in 5-mans in Splinter Cannon Venoms. Damn, I am getting flashback to the 5th edition Codex army.
I am well and truly curious why you believe a Heavy 36" range weapon better synergizes with kabalite warriors than a Rapid Fire 36" weapon with double the shots does.
Assuming both weapon types were properly costed, the functional use case of Venoms, Kabalites, and Scourges makes the old version better than the new version, who will either be taking a -1 to hit for moving and firing it or who will want to be 18" or closer most of the time anyway. The new version may be worth more of a look on Talos pain engines.
in the new Microboard 40kTM I rarely find an occasion where I want my venoms to be hanging out farther than 18" away from their targets. If they're carrying wyches, I want them closer than that. if they're carrying Kabalites, I want them within 12" or at least 18" for the blaster.
yes, the new version may be better than the currently overcosted version if it's properly costed. As can any weapon - as evidenced by the fact that the hilariously non-synergistic sniper rifle available on the otherwise all-melee Wrack unit is currently a competitive choice.
Galas wrote: Why is people ignoring the -1ap in the new version of the weapon?
Thats like... a not irrelevant change. The old weapon was useless outside the coven +1 to wound and +1 damage strat.
Because it comes at a cost of halving the number of shots. That's a high cost for -1 AP, especially in a world where 'nah, we don't care about -1 AP' is a contagious ability among GW codex writers..
Half the shoots for double the damage and +1Ap (And a change from rapid fire to heavy, thats the true nerf here).
The thing is... what did the old weapon gave drukari? They were't an army with need of more rapid fire weapons to kill low quality hordes with ease. This actually gives them something they didn't had before.
Some of the complaints about Dark Eldar weapons options was how most of them were basically... the same, specially the Homunculus ones. Lets see if they have made a better job at making them different with this new codex.
Galas wrote: Why is people ignoring the -1ap in the new version of the weapon?
Thats like... a not irrelevant change. The old weapon was useless outside the coven +1 to wound and +1 damage strat.
Yeah, it's probably why people are comparing it to a Heavy Bolter, and noting that unless it gets some kind of bonus against low-strength targets, it's worse than a heavy bolter agianst most profiles in the game.
So either, it has to cost less than a heavy bolter, or it needs some kind of a bonus from Poisoned Weapon that we don't know about to keep it on par.
As of right now, it's:
Worse vs non-vehicle T3
worse vs non-vehicle T4
Equal vs non-vehicle T5
better vs non-vehicle T6+
Worse vs all T values of vehicles (which functionally exist. Theoretically equal vs T10.)
Yes, this is true, is a worse heavy bolter with the exception of Tyranids, Demons and Custodes bikers. It will probably cost less points? Who knows. But what it does is being a new type of weapon for Drukari to use agaisnt X kind of targets. I know, I know, having dissintegrator cannons this looks unappealing but ...
[/spoiler]
Current drukhari actually have no ranged weapon that is particularly efficient at clearing out hordes. Kabalites are functionally armed with lasguns vs GEQ. A version that is actually good at clearing out hordes would actually provide a new tool drukhari currently don't have - this change simply moves the SC from inefficient anti-GEQ to inefficient Disintegrator.
It's also doubly hilarious coming right on the heels of the new DG and 'Crons, against whom you'd actually really like to have the old splinter cannon profile thanks to having something to shoot that's high toughness and not weak to multidamage weapons.
The new version is giving you the same amount of max damage potential at full 36" inch range and a -1 to AP.
This is exactly the kind of SM meta-warp I mentioned. It doesn't. At all. The max damage potential is absolutely gutted when facing anything without multiple wounds.
Its dark eldar. Why are you worried about 'max range?'
---
Think of it this way, do Dark Eldar really need to try to ape the Imperial Guard to win? Does it actually help them win?
The new version is giving you the same amount of max damage potential at full 36" inch range and a -1 to AP.
This is exactly the kind of SM meta-warp I mentioned. It doesn't. At all. The max damage potential is absolutely gutted when facing anything without multiple wounds.
Its dark eldar. Why are you worried about 'max range?'
---
Think of it this way, do Dark Eldar really need to try to ape the Imperial Guard to win? Does it actually help them win?
maybe drukhari will have crusade rules that allow them to steal the cheap, mass produced heavy bolters from their imperial guard victims and bolt them to their tanks for an improvement in firepower like british commandos chucking out their sten guns for MP40s the first chance they got in WW2.
I can understand the unappeal of the weapon changing "thematically" to something that doesnt feel very "dark eldary". Probably an assault 4 weapon would have been better.
But if 9th codex have done something for their armies is making the actually fun to play, and in the way those armies are supposed to play, necrons, death guard, etc... so I'm hopefull for dark eldar.
I am well and truly curious why you believe a Heavy 36" range weapon better synergizes with kabalite warriors than a Rapid Fire 36" weapon with double the shots does.
Assuming both weapon types were properly costed, the functional use case of Venoms, Kabalites, and Scourges makes the old version better than the new version, who will either be taking a -1 to hit for moving and firing it or who will want to be 18" or closer most of the time anyway. The new version may be worth more of a look on Talos pain engines.
in the new Microboard 40kTM I rarely find an occasion where I want my venoms to be hanging out farther than 18" away from their targets. If they're carrying wyches, I want them closer than that. if they're carrying Kabalites, I want them within 12" or at least 18" for the blaster.
Because that's how they performed admirably in before the 7th edition codex.
As I added in my previous post, if you are running a cult or a coven you are not going to even be running that many Splinter Cannons so your net loss on shots isn't that much as you should never be running dual Splinter Cannons on Venoms, plus the new damage potential is still not far from the current one(it is the same technically and even higher if you count the higher range for that damage). The current change actually makes it more viable to run dual SC on Venoms so you can use it as a gunboat along with SC Warriors in it with Cannonlites. Blasterlites are different and you will only be running one SC on your venom either and if you do run dual SC then congratulations your max potential damage went from 6 at short range to 6 at all range and a -1AP.
For naked Venoms(no crew) I consider this a net bonus.
Scourges are perhaps the weirdest unit in the book as nothing really fits them currently due to the rules. However, who knows, maybe they'll get a Retributor ruling which will make them more viable.
I just can't imagine this is worse than the 8th edition and 7th edition SC as they were pretty much garbage(I ended up buying a lot of new Venoms so I could run them with only one SC as all my older were dual SC).
Eventually the big question is whether SC will stay at 10 points or not.
The new version is giving you the same amount of max damage potential at full 36" inch range and a -1 to AP.
Its dark eldar. Why are you worried about 'max range?'
Because when you were playing them in 5th and 6th you wanted to have the range on your enemies? Covens weren't always the go to troops? Because the max damage potential at max range for SC used to be 6 but got nerfed after 5th edition?
I don't know about any of you, but this change is giving me the old Dark Eldar vibe that got me into the army in 5th edition where you enjoyed having range for your ranged units. Where you ran Trueborns(now bring them back GW) with Splinter Cannons inside a dual SC Venom.
This is exactly the kind of SM meta-warp I mentioned. It doesn't. At all. The max damage potential is absolutely gutted when facing anything without multiple wounds.
The thing is we don't even know how far the new "2 wound" era is going to take us. We will have Space Marines, Chaos Space Marines(already two huge factions), and probably a ton of other elite units get boosted wounds.
I am just going to say it again: Splinter Cannons have been garbage for a long time and this change(depending on points) is actually making them attractive again.
I mean, I agree that if this SC is properly costed then it's better than the current version, which is overcosted. I just wish it didn't need to become a gakky heavy bolter to get reconsidered in terms of the cost. I'll most likely be running venoms with splinter rifles and sc still 100% of the time. If it's a free swap, then maybe if you're running shooty wracks then it could be worthwhile, but otherwise, nah.
It will take some mathing and practical experience to figure out since Splinter Cannons are being changed in roles from splinter rifle + to effectively a new weapon.
Yes, it is similar to the Heavy Bolter, but has different optimal targets just like how the Disintegrator is similar to a heavy bolter (Heavy 3 shots, Dam 2) but the -3 AP makes it better to use vs more elite units without invuls.
wict01 wrote: So the new splinter cannon is just a heavy bolter that’ll never wound on a 3. Wish they’d just left it as it was.
Against T6+ it's better than a Heavy Bolter though.
+1 to wound vs T6 non-vehicle targets
-1 to wound vs T4 targets
-1 to wound vs T3 targets
-1 to wound vs T5 vehicle targets
-1 to wound vs T6+ vehicle targets
Kind of not a great combo. It needs to either be significantly less effective or, IMO, have some other rule that grants it a bonus against the kind of 'soft organic targets' that the SC is supposed to be good at killing.
I'd put forth that re-instanting the old "if your Poison Weapon has Strength equal to the T of the target, you get reroll to wound" would make the comparison slightly more equivalent, as it would effectively have "+1/2 to wound vs T3 targets" to somewhat make up for its other shortcomings.
It also wounds gretchins (T2) on 3s now!!! OP splinter cannons!!!
Hm. My guess is that there will be some rules available to make the splinter cannon not count as heavy (either in the SC itself, or maybe through being embarked on a raider, maybe?), since speed has been an intrinsic part of the dark eldar-experience and the 9th codexes (so far) seems to have been good at focusing on, and getting, the feel/theme of the armies.
If they would work with splinter racks in the new codex, that would also help set them apart from the heavy bolter (and it would be cooool)
I do feel like I need to add the caveat that I like to run glass "cannon" army that can kite so this is a net buff for me. For Coven and Cults this is only going to affect a single cannon on their venoms. Because if you are currently running Dual Cannons on a close combat army you are literally throwing away precious points.
Talos can also take splinter cannons, so Coven stuff might be affected actually.
That may have been a useful thing to do if they hadn't halved the shots at the range that the rest of your squad is going to be engaging at. Venoms and Kabalites are both still going to be trying to get within 12"
Marines would rather be shot at by a weapon with D2 and half the shots vs a weapon with D1, because marines have tons of W3 models as well as FNP abilities, -1 damage abilities, etc.
-1 pretty much doubles damage output vs marines though. Then d2.
I do feel like I need to add the caveat that I like to run glass "cannon" army that can kite so this is a net buff for me. For Coven and Cults this is only going to affect a single cannon on their venoms. Because if you are currently running Dual Cannons on a close combat army you are literally throwing away precious points.
Talos can also take splinter cannons, so Coven stuff might be affected actually.
Depends on whether Haywire remains as useful as before.
chaos0xomega wrote: So ummm... I've recently come into possession of 10 Venoms which I haven't yet built... should I be tooling them up with Splinter Cannons now?
I mean I would wait a couple weeks. IIRC the bottom weapon is just assembled separately, so you could always just assemble them 90% of the way and leave off the gun for a couple weeks until ZE NOOMBER CRUNCHINATORS let you know whether you get a +.005% mechanical benefit with one over the other.
chaos0xomega wrote: So ummm... I've recently come into possession of 10 Venoms which I haven't yet built... should I be tooling them up with Splinter Cannons now?
As we don't know the point cost of the SC and the rest of the rules I suggest either waiting or magnetizing. I magnetize all my venoms now.
Obviously this is a small piece of the picture. A splinter cannon cannon is now a heavy hitter, not a horde clearer. That role will likely fall to the shredder.
Way too early to pass judgement
bullyboy wrote: Obviously this is a small piece of the picture. A splinter cannon cannon is now a heavy hitter, not a horde clearer. That role will likely fall to the shredder.
Way too early to pass judgement
It's kind of a tiresome chestnut to trot out that people are 'passing judgement' when it's pretty clear the discussion has just been limited to people reacting to the specific details that we have at this time - i.e. this new splinter cannon's performance vs its closest analogue from another 'dex and its previous incarnation.
For all those asking about points, it's worth remembering that the Munitorium Field Manual 2021 was released after Codex Drukhari went to print (and would have been released) and the points in it are almost certainly the ones in the book.
Do we have any rumors as to if this book continues the weird 9th Ed Codex arms race? To date it seems as if every new book isn't just better than the one before, but like frightfully so.
After the clearly, instantly problematic Dark Angels Codex, I am wondering if that is just the way we're moving forward... thus creating... a pseudo-balance, I guess?
NewTruthNeomaxim wrote: Do we have any rumors as to if this book continues the weird 9th Ed Codex arms race? To date it seems as if every new book isn't just better than the one before, but like frightfully so.
After the clearly, instantly problematic Dark Angels Codex, I am wondering if that is just the way we're moving forward... thus creating... a pseudo-balance, I guess?
You mean "is GW likely to continue the well-worn marketing technique of Manufactured Discontent ensuring that consumers are most dissatisfied with their current product when the company delivers an update to that product"?
I think it's safe to say, in the era of "I guess you'll just have to play your W1 chaos marines into your buddy's W2 space marines" the answer to that is "yes." and also, "obviously."
If GW could do something to ensure that their models slowly melt over time so you had to buy new ones every couple of years oh wait that was finecast wasn't it. *checks harlequins on shelf who have slowly turned into droopy noodles* yep, it was.
NewTruthNeomaxim wrote: Do we have any rumors as to if this book continues the weird 9th Ed Codex arms race? To date it seems as if every new book isn't just better than the one before, but like frightfully so.
After the clearly, instantly problematic Dark Angels Codex, I am wondering if that is just the way we're moving forward... thus creating... a pseudo-balance, I guess?
Are we talking about being stronger than their 8th edition dexes or do you mean each 9th edition dexes? If we're talking about 8th editions, yeah, they are going to stronger for sure, no question there.
As far as the 9th edition dexes against each other, with the exception of DA and Morty, they've been pretty well balanced against the others, IMO.
If the points on the field manual are the costs we will be seeing then a 2 splinter cannon vyvern would cost 75 points. (Or 85. I just asumed the first splinter cannon was baked into the price. Excuse me if I am wrong.)
Those points for a '2 heavy bolter razorback' is not bad is it? Not good either, but certanly in the ball park. A twin bolter razorback is 110.
Niiai wrote: If the points on the field manual are the costs we will be seeing then a 2 splinter cannon vyvern would cost 75 points. (Or 85. I just asumed the first splinter cannon was baked into the price. Excuse me if I am wrong.)
Those points for a '2 heavy bolter razorback' is not bad is it? Not good either, but certanly in the ball park. A twin bolter razorback is 110.
Depends on what extra ruling Venoms have. If they keep their invuln save and -1 to hit them I'll be a happy a gal with quite a few venoms.
Currently we just need more data. The current info is so little that we can at best compare it to existing rules.
Niiai wrote: If the points on the field manual are the costs we will be seeing then a 2 splinter cannon vyvern would cost 75 points. (Or 85. I just asumed the first splinter cannon was baked into the price. Excuse me if I am wrong.)
Those points for a '2 heavy bolter razorback' is not bad is it? Not good either, but certanly in the ball park. A twin bolter razorback is 110.
It's 85. You have to pay for both Splinter cannons.
Argive wrote: Man i think that article is a sign of things to come... One word springs to mind: Uninspired.
Sums up every Drukhari codex for a decade. 5th edition saw a complete reinvention of the army, but since then the rules designers haven't really known what to do.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Is nobody else really bothered by the fact Kabalites went to a 4+?
Kabalite Warrior
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Guardian
Spoiler:
Banshee
Please explain to me, visually, why these units don't have the same save? Then we can discuss why the Eldar send their warriors out to fight in bad armor.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Is nobody else really bothered by the fact Kabalites went to a 4+?
Kabalite Warrior
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Guardian
Spoiler:
Banshee
Please explain to me, visually, why these units don't have the same save? Then we can discuss why the Eldar send their warriors out to fight in bad armor.
Because not all armor is created equal, duh. This isn't some esoteric reasoning. Guard Infantry really aren't that less armored compared to Scions but there ya go, two different saves.
The point of Dark Eldar is the gakky armor and relying on the open topped transports for shooting and ease of assault. It's literally against the theme.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Is nobody else really bothered by the fact Kabalites went to a 4+?
Kabalite Warrior
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Guardian
Spoiler:
Banshee
Please explain to me, visually, why these units don't have the same save? Then we can discuss why the Eldar send their warriors out to fight in bad armor.
Because not all armor is created equal, duh. This isn't some esoteric reasoning. Guard Infantry really aren't that less armored compared to Scions but there ya go, two different saves.
The point of Dark Eldar is the gakky armor and relying on the open topped transports for shooting and ease of assault. It's literally against the theme.
Not all armour is created equal, some is just superior because it's built by more advanced aliens.
Just because you have your own personal definition of what dark eldar are, doesn't mean you're the arbiter of what their 'theme' is.
We don't know what their power through pain rules are going to be either, but somehow being able to tank lascannons is ok so long as their armour is crap?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Is nobody else really bothered by the fact Kabalites went to a 4+?
Kabalite Warrior
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Guardian
Spoiler:
Banshee
Please explain to me, visually, why these units don't have the same save? Then we can discuss why the Eldar send their warriors out to fight in bad armor.
Because not all armor is created equal, duh. This isn't some esoteric reasoning. Guard Infantry really aren't that less armored compared to Scions but there ya go, two different saves.
Really? I'm pretty sure one of these suits of armor provide a lot more protection than the other.
Tempestus Scion
Spoiler:
Infantry Squad
Spoiler:
The point of Dark Eldar is the gakky armor and relying on the open topped transports for shooting and ease of assault. It's literally against the theme.
Was. I think you are missing the word was. Kinda like how Guardians used to have a worst WS/BS than Aspect Warrior until they didn't. Or how Scouts used to have worst WS/BS than full Marines. Or how Space Marines used to have 1 Wound. I could go on, but I think I've made my point.
I really hope that the +1 attack bonus really is across the board for all infantry. It would go a long way to making Wyches, Incubi, and the Archon viable (although I think they could all use an always-strikes-first ability too). I know that Incubi won't get better saves, and doubt Wyches will either, but I'm fairly certain the Archon will.
What do you guys think the chances are that they will bring back lesser HQ's? Also, I know expanding the weapons options for Dark Eldar is little more than a pipe dream, but it would be nice.
cuda1179 wrote: I really hope that the +1 attack bonus really is across the board for all infantry. It would go a long way to making Wyches, Incubi, and the Archon viable (although I think they could all use an always-strikes-first ability too). I know that Incubi won't get better saves, and doubt Wyches will either, but I'm fairly certain the Archon will.
What do you guys think the chances are that they will bring back lesser HQ's? Also, I know expanding the weapons options for Dark Eldar is little more than a pipe dream, but it would be nice.
None. We'd have seen models by this point, even if only by potato cam or rumour engine. And without models... nope, not happening.
I actually like the change to the splinter canon mostly for being different. Personally I wanted splinter weapons to gain strength and AP back, which they did, unfortunately I didn't get my wish that poison would work like deathwatch as just add 1 to the wound roll, thus allowing for splinter canons to be higher strength out the gate.
However, had they remained 12 max shots at ap -1 with some sort of poison bonus, they would have just bullied the worst units in the game which are not even a problem for the army to begin with. Seriously who the hell has a problem mulching through GEQ with DE?
What always has been a pain in the arse is killing power armor out from cover. Even when marines were single wound. With the second wound this task became slapstick comedy.
So at least now splinter canons make some sense. Nobody ever bothered taking them even back in 5th when they were good except on units where they had no other choice really (venoms).
If splinter rifles and pistols are all functionally the same as they are now except -1 AP that will more adequately mulch chaf.
I'm curious what they did to the disintegrator canon personally, because they must have done something, and my gut tells me it will be S6 in order to make it more in line with star canons. They could also be blast now considering thats what they originally were way back.
Either way at least they seem to be bold about changing up gear for a change. Makes me hopeful for wych and wrack weapons and heaven forbid the poor bastard Cronos.
I was curious about the new Splinter Cannon versus the Old Splinter Cannon, so I ran the numbers for a few scenarios, assuming Poison does what it does now:
Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 3+: 0.33 Wounds, Double within 18"
New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 3+: 1 Wound, 0.75 if you moved
Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 4+: 0.5 Wounds, Double within 18"
New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 4+: 1.33 Wounds, 1 if you moved
Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 5+: 0.67 Wounds, Double within 18"
New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 5+: 1.67 Wounds, 1.25 if you moved
You also have to half the wounds done by the New Splinter Cannon vs W1 (or -1 Damage) targets. Even then, the new splinter cannon is at worst a side grade if not a flat out buff to the weapon.
Sometimes it seems that GW does know what they are doing, at least twice a day
H.B.M.C. wrote: Really looking forward to seeing the weapon options for Scourges.
"One in 5 Scourges may take a Dark Lance. One in 5 Scourges may take a Haywire Blaster... etc."
You would have to assume that would even remotely be a surprise to most DE players. DE were the first faction ground into the dirt by box options 7 years ago, apparently nobody was paying attention to see the writing on the wall.
Alright, cool we got info but I have to ask, why make the splinter cannon heavy when your troops want to be mobile ? I get perhaps they put themselves into a corner as they didn't want to make it seem like just a better Heavy bolter but it just feels wrong to me.
Granted I also think its wrong scourges can't move and shoot heavies without penalty as they feel like such a strange unit otherwise maybe that'll be seen to ? I wouldn't hold my breath of course.
I don't know just feels bad the SC being a heavy, to me personally. Like the hot shot volley gun being a heavy for scions, makes it just feel out of place in the squad considering what they are supposed to do, stay mobile.
Got to be honest here, the pun in the title is of excellent grade quality, and not a single mention... You nerds to preoccupied with theory hammer.... This place has changed...
I wouldn't be surprised to see Scourges pick up a rule that allows them to move and shoot Heavy weapons without penalty.
Having said that, the Ugliest Primaris Unit in the Game also has Heavy weapons and a jump pack, but no rule getting around the penalty, so who knows...
Dysartes wrote: I wouldn't be surprised to see Scourges pick up a rule that allows them to move and shoot Heavy weapons without penalty.
Having said that, the Ugliest Primaris Unit in the Game also has Heavy weapons and a jump pack, but no rule getting around the penalty, so who knows...
I really would like to see someyhing like that. Back in the old days (around pre 4th edition) many of the codexes had very limited design space, and that made units very unique. The Dark Eldar got heavy weapon jump infantery. That was cool as hell! The model was also very rough and menacing. These days I think only SM have taken up that design space, and some of the obscure eldar aspect warriors. I would like to see the return of scourges.
Also, look at that old illustration picture. So cool.
Also, look at that old illustration picture. So cool.
Thats a bloodletter with wings. Change my mind.
vipoid wrote: I've said this elsewhere but I think it bears repeating:
Venom with 2 old Splinter Cannons in RF vs. Old Marines: 1.33 dead Marines.
Venom with 2 new Splinter Cannons vs. New Marines: 1 dead Marine.
Boy, I sure am glad Splinter Cannons have been "upgraded" to be "Marine-killing weapons".
Thats a stretch of logic. Nu-marines are here to stay with their 2 wounds, its a new design paradigm, complaining about this is just pointless and dumb.
chaos0xomega wrote: Thats a stretch of logic. Nu-marines are here to stay with their 2 wounds, its a new design paradigm, complaining about this is just pointless and dumb.
I don't recall saying otherwise but you go right ahead and burn that straw man.
vipoid wrote: I've said this elsewhere but I think it bears repeating:
Venom with 2 old Splinter Cannons in RF vs. Old Marines: 1.33 dead Marines.
Venom with 2 new Splinter Cannons vs. New Marines: 1 dead Marine.
Boy, I sure am glad Splinter Cannons have been "upgraded" to be "Marine-killing weapons".
1.33 old marines, 18.6pts
1 new marine, 18pts
and that was kind of the problem with old marines, wasn't it. You never needed weaponry with any kind of AP to kill them efficiently, basic anti-infantry weaponry could just as efficiently grind through them because they were easy to wound and would eventually just fail enough 3+ saves.
Almost any weapon was effective when aimed at space marines. Elite infantry units should definitely be more durable than they previously were.
chaos0xomega wrote: Thats a stretch of logic. Nu-marines are here to stay with their 2 wounds, its a new design paradigm, complaining about this is just pointless and dumb.
I don't recall saying otherwise but you go right ahead and burn that straw man.
And yet you saw fit to compare an old design paradigm to a new one. Hardly a straw man.
"Why are you complaining? The new Splinter Cannon is specifically designed to kill the new Marines!"
"But its worse at killing new Marines than the old one was at killing old marines, and you've also traded functionality against 1- and 3-wound infantry, whilst also being worse when used by infantry..."
"Old marines don't exist anymore, therefore your argument is invalid! It doesn't matter if Marines have gotten better, yet your already-bad weapons are just treading water!"
GW offers DE a platter of sewage, and the response from the 40k community is to gobble it up as quickly as possible and ask for seconds, whilst berating anyone with the temerity to decline the rancid offering and maybe ask for some actual food instead.
vipoid wrote: And this is why Dark Eldar are destined to suck.
"Why are you complaining? The new Splinter Cannon is specifically designed to kill the new Marines!"
"But its worse at killing new Marines than the old one was at killing old marines, and you've also traded functionality against 1- and 3-wound infantry, whilst also being worse when used by infantry..."
"Old marines don't exist anymore, therefore your argument is invalid! It doesn't matter if Marines have gotten better, yet your already-bad weapons are just treading water!"
GW offers DE a platter of sewage, and the response from the 40k community is to gobble it up as quickly as possible and ask for seconds, whilst berating anyone with the temerity to decline the rancid offering and maybe ask for some actual food instead.
God, this attitude is if anything MORE irritating than the people rping that everyone is whining that the sky is falling.It's like when someone who is agreeing with you politically is doing it by shrieking and whining like a child.
MOST reactions to this specific weapon reveal were not positive. your characterization of everyone 'eagerly gobbling it up as quickly as possible' is the raving of a delusional madman just DESPERATE to portray everyone not you as brainless sheep.
Take a step back. Actually read the responses. You've got a mixture of people going "well, it's nice that my Venoms will get to play safer now, because this allows me the same firepower vs common targets at max range (which it does, as I've pointed out, it returns nearly an identical points return vs nu-marines as it did vs old marines and it does it at max range) and others like myself saying regardless of how comparatively strong it is, it annoys me that the weapon I used to take as anti-infantry is being shifted into more of a heavy bolter role, when Kabals already have a perfectly functional dedicated anti-MEQ tool and I rarely wish I had more of a weapon like this one in my list, and that the reward for playing in a higher risk style was removed from the supposedly glass cannon army.
And then you have Xeno and Slayer bitching about how kabalite warriors will be 8ppm models with a 4+ now because how dare anything that's not a marine not instantly evaporate to any firepower regardless of their points value.
vipoid wrote: And this is why Dark Eldar are destined to suck.
"Why are you complaining? The new Splinter Cannon is specifically designed to kill the new Marines!"
"But its worse at killing new Marines than the old one was at killing old marines, and you've also traded functionality against 1- and 3-wound infantry, whilst also being worse when used by infantry..."
"Old marines don't exist anymore, therefore your argument is invalid! It doesn't matter if Marines have gotten better, yet your already-bad weapons are just treading water!"
GW offers DE a platter of sewage, and the response from the 40k community is to gobble it up as quickly as possible and ask for seconds, whilst berating anyone with the temerity to decline the rancid offering and maybe ask for some actual food instead.
Old marines and venom cannons also played on a board that was 25% larger, had entirely different points values, etc. etc. etc. Its effectively a different game and the comparison is meaningless.
Honestly, I recently had my first game against drukhari in a looooong time (last time they were still called dark eldar ), and I was completely shocked to find out that those fully armored dudes didn't have a 4+ save.
Why argue with them? Just mute vipoid instead, the button is to the right. I mutet vipoid. It will increase your dakka experience tremendusly, and vipoid is free to enjoy their dakka as well.
Edit: Updated for promouns. I try to not use the masculine pronoun as default.
Niiai wrote: Why argue with them? Just mute vipoid instead, the button is to the right. I mutet vipoid. It will increase your dakka experience tremendusly, and vipoid is free to enjoy their dakka as well.
Edit: Updated for promouns. I try to not use the masculine pronoun as default.
Yes, at some point you do not get any signal. But there is such a great sweet spot where you have blocked out all the noice and what is left is just pure signal. :-)
vipoid wrote:I've said this elsewhere but I think it bears repeating:
Venom with 2 old Splinter Cannons in RF vs. Old Marines: 1.33 dead Marines.
Venom with 2 new Splinter Cannons vs. New Marines: 1 dead Marine.
Boy, I sure am glad Splinter Cannons have been "upgraded" to be "Marine-killing weapons".
It's like someone missed my post. For your edification vipod.
alextroy wrote:I was curious about the new Splinter Cannon versus the Old Splinter Cannon, so I ran the numbers for a few scenarios, assuming Poison does what it does now:
Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 3+: 0.33 Wounds, Double within 18"
New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 3+: 1 Wound, 0.75 if you moved
Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 4+: 0.5 Wounds, Double within 18"
New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 4+: 1.33 Wounds, 1 if you moved
Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 5+: 0.67 Wounds, Double within 18"
New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 5+: 1.67 Wounds, 1.25 if you moved
You also have to half the wounds done by the New Splinter Cannon vs W1 (or -1 Damage) targets. Even then, the new splinter cannon is at worst a side grade if not a flat out buff to the weapon.
Sometimes it seems that GW does know what they are doing, at least twice a day
Niiai wrote: Yes, at some point you do not get any signal. But there is such a great sweet spot where you have blocked out all the noice and what is left is just pure signal. :-)
Different things annoy different people.
Vipoid's going to be bitter until that day in 2035 where GW release an Archon/Succubus on a bike/hoverboard/cloud of tortured souls with M 14".
Then you have other people for who Dark Eldar are essentially 3 Ravagers, 2 flyers and the rest into kabalites in Venoms. And so if that army's effective then all is right in the world. And if it isn't, then doom and gloom.
vipoid wrote:I've said this elsewhere but I think it bears repeating:
Venom with 2 old Splinter Cannons in RF vs. Old Marines: 1.33 dead Marines.
Venom with 2 new Splinter Cannons vs. New Marines: 1 dead Marine.
Boy, I sure am glad Splinter Cannons have been "upgraded" to be "Marine-killing weapons".
It's like someone missed my post. For your edification vipod.
alextroy wrote:I was curious about the new Splinter Cannon versus the Old Splinter Cannon, so I ran the numbers for a few scenarios, assuming Poison does what it does now:
Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 3+: 0.33 Wounds, Double within 18"
New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 3+: 1 Wound, 0.75 if you moved
Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 4+: 0.5 Wounds, Double within 18"
New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 4+: 1.33 Wounds, 1 if you moved
Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 5+: 0.67 Wounds, Double within 18"
New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 5+: 1.67 Wounds, 1.25 if you moved
You also have to half the wounds done by the New Splinter Cannon vs W1 (or -1 Damage) targets. Even then, the new splinter cannon is at worst a side grade if not a flat out buff to the weapon.
Sometimes it seems that GW does know what they are doing, at least twice a day
You might have noticed already, but in case you haven't (because this tripped me up at first when I read his post), his stats are based on "dead marines" whereas your stats are based on wounds caused. Likewise he is comparing old cannons vs old marines against new cannons vs new marines, whereas you compare old cannons vs new marines against new cannons vs new marines. Subtly different datasets with slightly different results.
Niiai wrote: Why argue with them? Just mute vipoid instead, the button is to the right. I mutet vipoid. It will increase your dakka experience tremendusly, and vipoid is free to enjoy their dakka as well.
Edit: Updated for promouns. I try to not use the masculine pronoun as default.
I just have to say that I like you. Good poster that I have nothing but positive things to say about.
I also agree that muting people is always a good choice.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Niiai wrote: Last time I rocked the DEldars in a tournament setting it was Baron Satonyx featuring the furius five beastmasters and the zoo.
But the way it looked through 8th I instead focused on my Nids and GSC.
The old HQs of yore were truly wonderful things. I only hope one day we will see them come back in full force.
You might have noticed already, but in case you haven't (because this tripped me up at first when I read his post), his stats are based on "dead marines" whereas your stats are based on wounds caused. Likewise he is comparing old cannons vs old marines against new cannons vs new marines, whereas you compare old cannons vs new marines against new cannons vs new marines. Subtly different datasets with slightly different results.
Seems it would still outperform versus the most numerous units around(2 wounds or more) as the new cannon has a -1 to AP which means worse saves in general. .
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Got to be honest here, the pun in the title is of excellent grade quality, and not a single mention... You nerds to preoccupied with theory hammer.... This place has changed...
I love it <3 !
Thank you, endlesswaltz, for giving us a great title to the thread. Makes my day everytime I see it ^_^
vipoid wrote: And this is why Dark Eldar are destined to suck.
"Why are you complaining? The new Splinter Cannon is specifically designed to kill the new Marines!"
"But its worse at killing new Marines than the old one was at killing old marines, and you've also traded functionality against 1- and 3-wound infantry, whilst also being worse when used by infantry..."
"Old marines don't exist anymore, therefore your argument is invalid! It doesn't matter if Marines have gotten better, yet your already-bad weapons are just treading water!"
GW offers DE a platter of sewage, and the response from the 40k community is to gobble it up as quickly as possible and ask for seconds, whilst berating anyone with the temerity to decline the rancid offering and maybe ask for some actual food instead.
And then you have Xeno and Slayer bitching about how kabalite warriors will be 8ppm models with a 4+ now because how dare anything that's not a marine not instantly evaporate to any firepower regardless of their points value.
Probably because it goes against the fluff and the playstyle of glass cannon but go off, forgetting that I've had numerous complaints about Marines to begin with.
Probably because it goes against the fluff and the playstyle of glass cannon but go off, forgetting that I've had numerous complaints about Marines to begin with.
Doesn't really go against the fluff as A) Aeldari armor is advanced high-tech armor and B) the save is also taking into account that the Aeldari is a lithe race with superhuman reflexes. Considering that the game design space is limited and more rolls do not a better game make I think this is a nice touch and solution. I predict that 4+ is going to be the standard armor value of all Aeldari going forward who wear standard Guardian-esque armor, and as I don't like playing elite horde armies I think this is a welcome change.
Only thing it goes against is the traditional stats from the old codexes but those were designed for a completely different system and old systems should in no way condemn future systems. 4+ still makes Drukhari a glasshammer due to the proliferation of AP in recent years. If anything this is a course correction due to the increase in AP.
I also predict our FnP will be going away so slightly more durability is a welcome change in return.
"Mesh armour is commonly worn by Eldar Guardians. It is formed of tens of thousands of individual pieces of thermoplas interwoven to produce a dense material resembling reptile scales or chainmail. It becomes momentarily rigid when hit, spreading force across a larger area, thereby reducing the damage. The thermoplas also disperses heat rapidly, giving reasonable protection against energy weapons.The material is psychically sensitive, automatically reacting to the wearer's movements and thoughts to maintain a glove-tight fit as they move and fight."
"Flak Armour is a light and relatively simple form of body armour used by the military forces of the Imperium of Man.
It is used as standard issue body armour for the countless millions of Imperial Guardsmen and Planetary Defence Force members across the galaxy."
Yeah, it's definitely "going against the fluff" for these two armor descriptions to not be reflected by exactly the same save value
The idea that a 'glass hammer' style precludes a 4+ save seems pretty narrow-minded.
The perception of 'glassiness' is based on durability versus cost; Marine players have complained for literally decades that their T4/3+ models felt vulnerable because they were too expensive relative to their durability. A 4+ save is nice for Kabalites, but at T3/W1, bolt rifles are still going to tear through them.
And even if Kabalites become fairly durable for their cost, 'glass hammer' is an army trait for Eldar, not an individual one. Is anyone here going to argue that Eldar aren't a glass hammer army because Striking Scorpions get a 3+? Unless Wyches, Reavers, Hellions, Scourges, Raiders, Ravagers, and all the other fast-glass-hammer units are also getting massive buffs to durability, I don't think the flavor of the army is at risk.
I, for one, am glad to see a xenos race defined by its smug sense of innate superiority become a little more elite on the table. There's a lot of room to play in in terms of eliteness between Guardsmen and Marines, and historically they've always been a lot closer to the former.
catbarf wrote: The idea that a 'glass hammer' style precludes a 4+ save seems pretty narrow-minded.
The perception of 'glassiness' is based on durability versus cost; Marine players have complained for literally decades that their T4/3+ models felt vulnerable because they were too expensive relative to their durability. A 4+ save is nice for Kabalites, but at T3/W1, bolt rifles are still going to tear through them.
And even if Kabalites become fairly durable for their cost, 'glass hammer' is an army trait for Eldar, not an individual one. Is anyone here going to argue that Eldar aren't a glass hammer army because Striking Scorpions get a 3+? Unless Wyches, Reavers, Hellions, Scourges, Raiders, Ravagers, and all the other fast-glass-hammer units are also getting massive buffs to durability, I don't think the flavor of the army is at risk.
I, for one, am glad to see a xenos race defined by its smug sense of innate superiority become a little more elite on the table. There's a lot of room to play in in terms of eliteness between Guardsmen and Marines, and historically they've always been a lot closer to the former.
Agreed. Eldar infantry should be tougher than guardsmen. And their elites should be able to go toe to toe with marines. I see no problem with Incubi absolutely shredding marines in melee, but being less durable in general. That feels "fluffy" to me.
The only problem I see is exactly the same one we currently have with loyalists compared to CSM: "Good Eldar" will seem comparatively week compared to Dark Eldar until they get their own 9th edition codex. But that's the consequence of GW's method for updating the rules for each faction.
Umbros wrote: Incredible how much complaining people have got out of what isn't even a full single datasheet.
Bravo chaps
So you decided to complain about complaints?
Bravo!
But seriously, it's not anything new. People spend thousands of dollars and hours and by nature are change adverse. The armor save and the splinter canon profile have been largely unchanged for over a decade now, makes perfect sense to me that some folks are going to push back. At least it's a discussion revolving around a faction that usually gets little or no time at the fore front.
Instead of labeling either side as complainers folks should just have a calm collected and fun discussion and realize not everyone has to agree either way. If your at an impasse, just agree to disagree. And if your not involved in certain posters discussions, it's probably not a good idea to start off by labeling their views as worthless complaining
A CSM Berserker squad is T4 with a 3+ save and it is widely regarded as a glasscannon unit. They die to pretty much anything except lasguns (and still, it depends on the available number of lasguns).
Thinking that a T3 W1 4+ save is too resilient is downright stupid.
vipoid wrote: And this is why Dark Eldar are destined to suck.
"Why are you complaining? The new Splinter Cannon is specifically designed to kill the new Marines!"
"But its worse at killing new Marines than the old one was at killing old marines, and you've also traded functionality against 1- and 3-wound infantry, whilst also being worse when used by infantry..."
"Old marines don't exist anymore, therefore your argument is invalid! It doesn't matter if Marines have gotten better, yet your already-bad weapons are just treading water!"
GW offers DE a platter of sewage, and the response from the 40k community is to gobble it up as quickly as possible and ask for seconds, whilst berating anyone with the temerity to decline the rancid offering and maybe ask for some actual food instead.
If you want to do stupid comparisons comparing to non existant rules and pretend it's relevant how about this: lascannons suck! Just d6 damage? They used to have 2d6!
the_scotsman wrote: "Mesh armour is commonly worn by Eldar Guardians. It is formed of tens of thousands of individual pieces of thermoplas interwoven to produce a dense material resembling reptile scales or chainmail. It becomes momentarily rigid when hit, spreading force across a larger area, thereby reducing the damage. The thermoplas also disperses heat rapidly, giving reasonable protection against energy weapons.The material is psychically sensitive, automatically reacting to the wearer's movements and thoughts to maintain a glove-tight fit as they move and fight."
"Flak Armour is a light and relatively simple form of body armour used by the military forces of the Imperium of Man.
It is used as standard issue body armour for the countless millions of Imperial Guardsmen and Planetary Defence Force members across the galaxy."
Yeah, it's definitely "going against the fluff" for these two armor descriptions to not be reflected by exactly the same save value
That doesn't sound terribly protective to be honest. So what's really your point?
And yeah, if you hadn't noticed, Ork shirts and Tyranid chitin have entirely different descriptions and they have the same value.
catbarf wrote: The idea that a 'glass hammer' style precludes a 4+ save seems pretty narrow-minded.
The perception of 'glassiness' is based on durability versus cost; Marine players have complained for literally decades that their T4/3+ models felt vulnerable because they were too expensive relative to their durability. A 4+ save is nice for Kabalites, but at T3/W1, bolt rifles are still going to tear through them.
And even if Kabalites become fairly durable for their cost, 'glass hammer' is an army trait for Eldar, not an individual one. Is anyone here going to argue that Eldar aren't a glass hammer army because Striking Scorpions get a 3+? Unless Wyches, Reavers, Hellions, Scourges, Raiders, Ravagers, and all the other fast-glass-hammer units are also getting massive buffs to durability, I don't think the flavor of the army is at risk.
I, for one, am glad to see a xenos race defined by its smug sense of innate superiority become a little more elite on the table. There's a lot of room to play in in terms of eliteness between Guardsmen and Marines, and historically they've always been a lot closer to the former.
Agreed. Eldar infantry should be tougher than guardsmen. And their elites should be able to go toe to toe with marines. I see no problem with Incubi absolutely shredding marines in melee, but being less durable in general. That feels "fluffy" to me.
The only problem I see is exactly the same one we currently have with loyalists compared to CSM: "Good Eldar" will seem comparatively week compared to Dark Eldar until they get their own 9th edition codex. But that's the consequence of GW's method for updating the rules for each faction.
It's almost like in nearly every avenue of the world, a small number of really simple psychological magic tricks that produce predictable emotional responses in peoples brains drive what the most profitable course of action is for any given business, and we've structured everything such that the most profitable course of action is rewarded in the hopes that that is also coincidentally the best or most effective course of action.
And since we're collectively hanging out in the bargaining stage we have to keep rationalizing that disconnect between the thing that's most profitable and the thing that's the best quality instead of acknowledging that everyone is working with pretty similar brain chemistry and it's pretty easy to trick that chemistry.
In this circumstance the best course of action for the game might be to roll out paradigm-shifting updates that break longstanding norms to bring units to closer parity with their narrative roots all at once to maintain balance, but the most profitable course of action might be to roll it out one faction at a time to create a buzz of excitement about that faction and manufacture discontentment with the rules that the neglected factions have.
tneva82 wrote: If you want to do stupid comparisons comparing to non existant rules and pretend it's relevant how about this: lascannons suck! Just d6 damage? They used to have 2d6!
Ah yes, I forgot, it's always perfectly fine for Marines to get infinite buffs. It's never reasonable for already crap xeno weapons to do anything other than tread water.
tneva82 wrote: If you want to do stupid comparisons comparing to non existant rules and pretend it's relevant how about this: lascannons suck! Just d6 damage? They used to have 2d6!
Ah yes, I forgot, it's always perfectly fine for Marines to get infinite buffs. It's never reasonable for already crap xeno weapons to do anything other than tread water.
Lascannons DO suck though, and part of that reason is randumb.
That doesn't sound terribly protective to be honest. So what's really your point?
This kind of proves my point that fluff is highly subjective. When I read the description of Aeldari armor I am reading a passage on high-tech equipment that should surpass standard human armor.
Plus I find it highly unfluffy to run Aeldari as a horde army which it has been slowly devolving towards. If I wanted to play Imperial Guard I'd play Imperial Guard.
That doesn't sound terribly protective to be honest. So what's really your point?
This kind of proves my point that fluff is highly subjective. When I read the description of Aeldari armor I am reading a passage on high-tech equipment that should surpass standard human armor.
Plus I find it highly unfluffy to run Aeldari as a horde army which it has been slowly devolving towards. If I wanted to play Imperial Guard I'd play Imperial Guard.
^This. The trillions upon trillions of seemingly infinite human soldiers, most common force in the galaxy - 5.5pts per model
The last embers of a dying, hyper-advanced race less numerous than Space Marines - 7pts per model?
That doesn't sound terribly protective to be honest. So what's really your point?
This kind of proves my point that fluff is highly subjective. When I read the description of Aeldari armor I am reading a passage on high-tech equipment that should surpass standard human armor.
Plus I find it highly unfluffy to run Aeldari as a horde army which it has been slowly devolving towards. If I wanted to play Imperial Guard I'd play Imperial Guard.
^This. The trillions upon trillions of seemingly infinite human soldiers, most common force in the galaxy - 5.5pts per model
The last embers of a dying, hyper-advanced race less numerous than Space Marines - 7pts per model?
And the most numerous race in the whole galaxy is 8 points per model
Also, let me remind you that we can always just go back to modeling Eldar's "Speed rather than durability" through alternative channels in the combat process, like to-hit modifiers, like we did in 8th - I remember that was super popular with everyone.
catbarf wrote: The idea that a 'glass hammer' style precludes a 4+ save seems pretty narrow-minded.
The perception of 'glassiness' is based on durability versus cost; Marine players have complained for literally decades that their T4/3+ models felt vulnerable because they were too expensive relative to their durability. A 4+ save is nice for Kabalites, but at T3/W1, bolt rifles are still going to tear through them.
And even if Kabalites become fairly durable for their cost, 'glass hammer' is an army trait for Eldar, not an individual one. Is anyone here going to argue that Eldar aren't a glass hammer army because Striking Scorpions get a 3+? Unless Wyches, Reavers, Hellions, Scourges, Raiders, Ravagers, and all the other fast-glass-hammer units are also getting massive buffs to durability, I don't think the flavor of the army is at risk.
I, for one, am glad to see a xenos race defined by its smug sense of innate superiority become a little more elite on the table. There's a lot of room to play in in terms of eliteness between Guardsmen and Marines, and historically they've always been a lot closer to the former.
Agreed. Eldar infantry should be tougher than guardsmen. And their elites should be able to go toe to toe with marines. I see no problem with Incubi absolutely shredding marines in melee, but being less durable in general. That feels "fluffy" to me.
The only problem I see is exactly the same one we currently have with loyalists compared to CSM: "Good Eldar" will seem comparatively week compared to Dark Eldar until they get their own 9th edition codex. But that's the consequence of GW's method for updating the rules for each faction.
It's almost like in nearly every avenue of the world, a small number of really simple psychological magic tricks that produce predictable emotional responses in peoples brains drive what the most profitable course of action is for any given business, and we've structured everything such that the most profitable course of action is rewarded in the hopes that that is also coincidentally the best or most effective course of action.
And since we're collectively hanging out in the bargaining stage we have to keep rationalizing that disconnect between the thing that's most profitable and the thing that's the best quality instead of acknowledging that everyone is working with pretty similar brain chemistry and it's pretty easy to trick that chemistry.
In this circumstance the best course of action for the game might be to roll out paradigm-shifting updates that break longstanding norms to bring units to closer parity with their narrative roots all at once to maintain balance, but the most profitable course of action might be to roll it out one faction at a time to create a buzz of excitement about that faction and manufacture discontentment with the rules that the neglected factions have.
Yes, gw is using manufactured discontent to maximum effect to gain maximum profits. Well said, if a bit wordy. Put some effort into that one didn't you?
the_scotsman wrote: Also, let me remind you that we can always just go back to modeling Eldar's "Speed rather than durability" through alternative channels in the combat process, like to-hit modifiers, like we did in 8th - I remember that was super popular with everyone.
In an ideal world we'd remove the caps on hit modifiers, increase granularity in the BS system, and let Eldar have a natural -1 to hit so, while not game breaking, it's fluffy and can be felt. However we live in a world where GW makes rules. So there you go.
That doesn't sound terribly protective to be honest. So what's really your point?
This kind of proves my point that fluff is highly subjective. When I read the description of Aeldari armor I am reading a passage on high-tech equipment that should surpass standard human armor.
Plus I find it highly unfluffy to run Aeldari as a horde army which it has been slowly devolving towards. If I wanted to play Imperial Guard I'd play Imperial Guard.
Is literally the description of Black Panther super suit. Yeah all kind of armours are put in the same "save" value but full eldar armour as a 5+ save never made sense. A 4+ save with an inbuilt -1 to hit would be much fluffier.
And yes, one can arguee about Kabalites being semi horde (They are vault-born eldars at the end of the day) but eldar guardians? They are militias, ok, but most of them are ex-path walkers and have decades or centuries of military experience (And I know eldar tend to "forgot" the stuff they know about a path they walked before but...). They should not be chaff.
And the comparison of ork t-shirt and tyranid chitting is flawed. Look at the ork boyz in the GW store. Nearly all of them have metal plates and scraps for protection. Like human cultists. The only tyranids with a 6+ save are the lowly bugs. I know a elephant skin is thick but a rifle pierces it no problem.
Galas wrote: It was always strange to me that kabalites saved at 5+ with that full eldar armor. 4+ save looks better for them.
Always seemed odd to me that the dying race kept sending people to war with such low armor capacity. But then again, without some scientific tomfoolery, armor will only go so far with a plasma bolt to the face.
Just to help beat a dead horse as another underwhelmed drukhari player but I'm not sure I'd take the splinter cannon over a dark lance now, for killing marines. The dark lance averages a dead marine at 0.42 to the new cannons 0.50, hits about just under .3 for Gravis and Plague marines to the new cannons live marine.... Maybe if Orks get 2 wounds and star swarming tables I'd reach for it? Think it's fine on Venoms and maybe everything else gets the change up but right now I'm struggling to like this change....
I think that's the biggest issue with the Drukari leaks it seems very uninspired bluntly. Like GW has spent soo long trying to make 101 versions of marines and has forgotten how do NOT marines.
a_typical_hero wrote: I think you have to wait for special rules to get the hype started.
Marines don't have exciting stats, either.
I really hope we are not about to decend off down the you get AP for free and so do you, you and you rabbit hole.
So that 4+ Sv yeah doesn't mean jack.
The way marines are designed is terrible and just No.
Other codex's deserve better, it shouldn't take layer after layer of rules to make an army play right.
a_typical_hero wrote: I think you have to wait for special rules to get the hype started.
Marines don't have exciting stats, either.
Minimum 2W troops.... 3W T5 basic troops ATV? Sword mateys ? 100+ data sheets to pick from
*Looks at kabalite leaked stat as comparison* LOLS and walks off..
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ice_can wrote:I think that's the biggest issue with the Drukari leaks it seems very uninspired bluntly. Like GW has spent soo long trying to make 101 versions of marines and has forgotten how do NOT marines.
Aye.. I am very very sceptical the codex wont amount to a couple tweaks, some options being lost and overall nerf just because people forgot what things do or taht some models exist.....
a_typical_hero wrote: I think you have to wait for special rules to get the hype started.
Marines don't have exciting stats, either.
I really hope we are not about to decend off down the you get AP for free and so do you, you and you rabbit hole.
So that 4+ Sv yeah doesn't mean jack.
The way marines are designed is terrible and just No. Other codex's deserve better, it shouldn't take layer after layer of rules to make an army play right.
Yeah that 4+ means nothing. My Dire avengers already have T3 4+ 1W and without an extra wound it makes diddily squat difefrence when getting hosed down with storm bolters or even lassrifless..
I know you Drukari players are all used to getting the short end of the stick, but has the 9th Edition track record really been that bad?
Codex Space Marines: First Born Marines gain a wound. Revamped status for numerous weapons. Updated rules and overhauled Stratagems.
Codex Necrons: Overhauled Reanimation Protocols. Updated statlines and additional rules for many models. Revamped status for numerous weapons. Stratagems. New anti-soup rule.
Codex Deathguard: Additional Wound to Infantry models. New and updated rules. Revamped status for numerous weapons. Overhaul of stratagems. New anti-soup rule.
Seems pretty consistent to me. Drukari aren't going to get an extra wound, but the two hints we have indicate there may be a widespread increase in the Attack characteristic. We are seeing updated weapons stats. I expect the update to Drukari will be very similar to Deathguard, who also got minimal model support but still had big changes.
alextroy wrote: I know you Drukari players are all used to getting the short end of the stick, but has the 9th Edition track record really been that bad?
Codex Space Marines: First Born Marines gain a wound. Revamped status for numerous weapons. Updated rules and overhauled Stratagems.
Codex Necrons: Overhauled Reanimation Protocols. Updated statlines and additional rules for many models. Revamped status for numerous weapons. Stratagems. New anti-soup rule.
Codex Deathguard: Additional Wound to Infantry models. New and updated rules. Revamped status for numerous weapons. Overhaul of stratagems. New anti-soup rule.
Seems pretty consistent to me. Drukari aren't going to get an extra wound, but the two hints we have indicate there may be a widespread increase in the Attack characteristic. We are seeing updated weapons stats. I expect the update to Drukari will be very similar to Deathguard, who also got minimal model support but still had big changes.
Okay, how about this - GW showed they were serious about Necrons (a faction that has lost all of 1 model since 3rd edition) with a wave of releases almost unprecedented for a Xenos faction.
Meanwhile, Dark Eldar have haemorrhaged units and options since as far back as 5rd edition. And GW have demonstrated their sincerity by giving them . . . nothing. Oh no, I'm sorry, we got yet another remake of an existing character, whilst the 5 special characters and 6 other HQ options we've lost don't even exist in Legends.
You'll have to forgive me if I'm not sold on GW's commitment towards putting some actual thought and effort into the newest Dark Eldar book.
alextroy wrote: I know you Drukari players are all used to getting the short end of the stick, but has the 9th Edition track record really been that bad?
Codex Space Marines: First Born Marines gain a wound. Revamped status for numerous weapons. Updated rules and overhauled Stratagems.
Codex Necrons: Overhauled Reanimation Protocols. Updated statlines and additional rules for many models. Revamped status for numerous weapons. Stratagems. New anti-soup rule.
Codex Deathguard: Additional Wound to Infantry models. New and updated rules. Revamped status for numerous weapons. Overhaul of stratagems. New anti-soup rule.
Seems pretty consistent to me. Drukari aren't going to get an extra wound, but the two hints we have indicate there may be a widespread increase in the Attack characteristic. We are seeing updated weapons stats. I expect the update to Drukari will be very similar to Deathguard, who also got minimal model support but still had big changes.
Okay, how about this - GW showed they were serious about Necrons (a faction that has lost all of 1 model since 3rd edition) with a wave of releases almost unprecedented for a Xenos faction.
Meanwhile, Dark Eldar have haemorrhaged units and options since as far back as 5rd edition. And GW have demonstrated their sincerity by giving them . . . nothing. Oh no, I'm sorry, we got yet another remake of an existing character, whilst the 5 special characters and 6 other HQ options we've lost don't even exist in Legends.
You'll have to forgive me if I'm not sold on GW's commitment towards putting some actual thought and effort into the newest Dark Eldar book.
Definitely the Necron update set a certain expectation that other xenos factions should expect and it will be a shame it we don't see it transfer across all of them.
The dark eldar definitely need more kits to cover lost units. They still have plenty of failcast units and HQ models that should be plastic.
It would be nice to see GW visibly put even this small commitment to their product lines out and not just for marines.
I'm reasonably confident the "codex" will be fine. By and large GW have got the points right in new books except for things they clearly don't want you running.
But yeah. If Lelith is the kit to sell a thousand books, she needs to be Ragnar as an Aeldari. Unfortunately if we believe the FAQ show's the future she's 90 points.
Or... 75% of Jain Zar. So... yeah.
vipoid wrote: GW showed they were serious about Necrons /.../ with a wave of releases almost unprecedented for a Xenos faction.
That’s not factual. The kind of release necrons got is comparable to what was standard for major releases for at least two editions (5th - 6th), regardless of whether it was for xenos, chaos, or imperial factions. (Of course back then we only got 2 or 3 major/codex releases per year, so that might be part of it).
vipoid wrote: GW showed they were serious about Necrons /.../ with a wave of releases almost unprecedented for a Xenos faction.
That’s not factual. The kind of release necrons got is comparable to what was standard for major releases for at least two editions (5th - 6th), regardless of whether it was for xenos, chaos, or imperial factions. (Of course back then we only got 2 or 3 major/codex releases per year, so that might be part of it).
*THAT* is not factual. The Necron release (including the contents of Indomitus Crusade) totaled 23 new or resculpted units by my count, the next biggest release that I was able to find going back several editions was the last time Dark Eldar were updated which was 20 new or resculpted units. Indomitus + the Necron Codex wave brought Necrons more new and resculpted units than there were Primaris units prior to the launch of 9th edition - thats certainly not something to shrug off or ignore. After Dark Eldar/Drukhari, the average update was in the teens, forget the exact number I came up with but it was not more than about 15/16.
a_typical_hero wrote: I think you have to wait for special rules to get the hype started.
Marines don't have exciting stats, either.
I really hope we are not about to decend off down the you get AP for free and so do you, you and you rabbit hole.
So that 4+ Sv yeah doesn't mean jack.
The way marines are designed is terrible and just No.
Other codex's deserve better, it shouldn't take layer after layer of rules to make an army play right.
Gw has yet to release 9e codex without tons of special rules. If de don't have then it is indeed lights out, de sucks.
9e you either have tons of special rules or you suck.
alextroy wrote: I know you Drukari players are all used to getting the short end of the stick, but has the 9th Edition track record really been that bad?
Codex Space Marines: First Born Marines gain a wound. Revamped status for numerous weapons. Updated rules and overhauled Stratagems.
Codex Necrons: Overhauled Reanimation Protocols. Updated statlines and additional rules for many models. Revamped status for numerous weapons. Stratagems. New anti-soup rule.
Codex Deathguard: Additional Wound to Infantry models. New and updated rules. Revamped status for numerous weapons. Overhaul of stratagems. New anti-soup rule.
Seems pretty consistent to me. Drukari aren't going to get an extra wound, but the two hints we have indicate there may be a widespread increase in the Attack characteristic. We are seeing updated weapons stats. I expect the update to Drukari will be very similar to Deathguard, who also got minimal model support but still had big changes.
Okay, how about this - GW showed they were serious about Necrons (a faction that has lost all of 1 model since 3rd edition) with a wave of releases almost unprecedented for a Xenos faction.
Meanwhile, Dark Eldar have haemorrhaged units and options since as far back as 5rd edition. And GW have demonstrated their sincerity by giving them . . . nothing. Oh no, I'm sorry, we got yet another remake of an existing character, whilst the 5 special characters and 6 other HQ options we've lost don't even exist in Legends.
You'll have to forgive me if I'm not sold on GW's commitment towards putting some actual thought and effort into the newest Dark Eldar book.
Definitely the Necron update set a certain expectation that other xenos factions should expect and it will be a shame it we don't see it transfer across all of them.
The dark eldar definitely need more kits to cover lost units. They still have plenty of failcast units and HQ models that should be plastic.
It would be nice to see GW visibly put even this small commitment to their product lines out and not just for marines.
Model support and codex quality are two different things. You can easily have one without the other.
Definitely the Necron update set a certain expectation that other xenos factions should expect and it will be a shame it we don't see it transfer across all of them.
The dark eldar definitely need more kits to cover lost units. They still have plenty of failcast units and HQ models that should be plastic.
It would be nice to see GW visibly put even this small commitment to their product lines out and not just for marines.
Necrons got big release as it was 1 of the 2 armies in start set. Those get big release. Most of codexes in 8e came with just codex and maybe token model. De are hardly being singled out.
Expecting necron release be norm is ignoring facts. That was starter set bonus. Last time i checked new starter set isn't around the corner
Yeah, I think people expecting further releases to be anywhere on the Necron scale are setting themselves up for dissapointment.
I commented on some other thread a while back that the releases may follow the AoS style 2.0 releases, and it looks more and more like it. These generally included a hero + Sometimes Terrain + sometimes a boxset of two armies getting an update squaring off.
It seems to be following that pattern as of right now, and I suspect some releases with a larger range release will be sprinkled in as well (Sisters maybe, Nids, hopefully Eldar).
Definitely the Necron update set a certain expectation that other xenos factions should expect and it will be a shame it we don't see it transfer across all of them.
The dark eldar definitely need more kits to cover lost units. They still have plenty of failcast units and HQ models that should be plastic.
It would be nice to see GW visibly put even this small commitment to their product lines out and not just for marines.
Necrons got big release as it was 1 of the 2 armies in start set. Those get big release. Most of codexes in 8e came with just codex and maybe token model. De are hardly being singled out.
Expecting necron release be norm is ignoring facts. That was starter set bonus. Last time i checked new starter set isn't around the corner
What you are saying is that Craftworlds, Harlequins and Tau will never EVER get a release that big, because GW will never put them in a starter box (I'm not counting Kill team starters as 40k starters). DE might be lucky enough to be the eeevilll faction fighting marines in the next one (as they were for 3rd ed), but craftworlds, Harlies and Tau are all too 'good' to be in a box against marines.
The size of a release with a codex isn't dependent on being in a starter set.
The previous DE reboot? The Sisters? Ad Mech?
Chaos got a bunch of stuff recently, but Shadowspear wasn't a traditional 'starter set.' And if it was, the upcoming Sisters vs Dark Eldar box is one as well, as was Blood of the Phoenix...
Definitely the Necron update set a certain expectation that other xenos factions should expect and it will be a shame it we don't see it transfer across all of them.
The dark eldar definitely need more kits to cover lost units. They still have plenty of failcast units and HQ models that should be plastic.
It would be nice to see GW visibly put even this small commitment to their product lines out and not just for marines.
Necrons got big release as it was 1 of the 2 armies in start set. Those get big release. Most of codexes in 8e came with just codex and maybe token model. De are hardly being singled out.
Expecting necron release be norm is ignoring facts. That was starter set bonus. Last time i checked new starter set isn't around the corner
What you are saying is that Craftworlds, Harlequins and Tau will never EVER get a release that big, because GW will never put them in a starter box (I'm not counting Kill team starters as 40k starters). DE might be lucky enough to be the eeevilll faction fighting marines in the next one (as they were for 3rd ed), but craftworlds, Harlies and Tau are all too 'good' to be in a box against marines.
Uh... Wake the Dead? Death Masque? CWE and Harlequins have absolutely been in boxes versus Marines before, there's no reason they couldn't feature in a full starter set for an edition.
Uh... Wake the Dead? Death Masque? CWE and Harlequins have absolutely been in boxes versus Marines before, there's no reason they couldn't feature in a full starter set for an edition.
Between the two of them, don't those two boxes have one single new Eldar sculpt in them? Hardly a ringing endorsement of GW's willingness to expand the Eldar ranges via a starter box.
Also I remember part of the fuss about Wake the dead being it was barely any better value than just 2 start collecting boxes.
The big selling point was the new models that were exclusive to the boxset. Ie fairly poor value compaired to just you know like indomitous or the 8th edition starter set.
Ketara wrote: Was that Drukhari/Sister combo box ever actually released?
It hasn't been released yet, though I wouldn't be surprised to see it released alongside - or at worst, shortly after - the DE codex.
Which will, of course, mean we see certain DE players complaining even more about Lilith3, as she is unlikely to be available individually when the book drops.
a_typical_hero wrote: I think you have to wait for special rules to get the hype started.
Marines don't have exciting stats, either.
Minimum 2W troops....
3W T5 basic troops
ATV?
Sword mateys ?
100+ data sheets to pick from
*Looks at kabalite leaked stat as comparison*
LOLS and walks off..
1. As was possible since 8th edition. Exciting? For those who like their Firstborn armies and assumed GW would put them into Legends. Quite a different situation to Dark Eldar.
2. S4 T5 W3 A2 Sv3+. Exciting?
3. A Primaris Attack Bike with twice the wounds and attacks for twice the price of an Attack Bike. Exciting?
4. S4 T4 W3 A3 Sv3+. Exciting?
5. 100+ data sheets were not previewed, so there is nothing to get excited about.
I'll throw another one in:
S3 T3 W1 A4 Sv6+
Exciting statline, right? Belongs to one of the, if not the strongest armies right now and is their only Troupe choice.
But it can get better:
M6" S3 T3 W1 A2 Sv7+
Statline of one of the hardest hitting melee units right now.
A statline alone is nothing to get excited about.
Mind giving me a realistic example statline for Kabalites that would excite you?
Uh... Wake the Dead? Death Masque? CWE and Harlequins have absolutely been in boxes versus Marines before, there's no reason they couldn't feature in a full starter set for an edition.
Between the two of them, don't those two boxes have one single new Eldar sculpt in them? Hardly a ringing endorsement of GW's willingness to expand the Eldar ranges via a starter box.
I honestly think that Craftworlds are suffering from the original plan with the Ynnari and all that was scrapped when Kirby left. I remember reading that a large line update are 2-3 years(if not more) in the making so if they scrapped some of the original plans it might have taken backseat for the Necrons and Primaris and other larger releases(many in AoS).
We also see that when they make a line revamp the new line gets their months in the sun(Necrons are still being released) if not longer(Primaris). Add on top of that that GW is also supporting several product lines with AoS(that is doing aelf and Slaanesh releases right now), as well as Underworlds, AT, Necromunda, BB, and more.
The thing is, if we see a proper update to Aeldari(most specifically CW) we should expect some sunsetting units and/or loadout changes. GW seems more keen on selling things that are new or provide alternatives to existing units so us who own gazillion of the resin/metal models feel compelled to buy more. We've seen it now with Primaris(entirely new range of models, an army in of itself), Necrons(new options to Warriors and mostly new units), and Sisters of Battle.
I just wish they'd use some of the smaller release windows to release plastic grotesques. Sadly I think the conversion options available are limiting their interest in making this unit in plastic.
alextroy wrote: Model support and codex quality are two different things. You can easily have one without the other.
It's possible, sure, but is it likely?
Again, Dark Eldar has lost (just off the top of my head):
Skyboard Archons
Jetbike Archons
Skyboard Haemonculi
Jetbike Haemonculi
Dracons
Haemonculus Ancients
The Decapitator
The Duke
Baron Sathonyx
Lady Malys
Vect
Trueborn (Legends)
Bloodbrides (Legends)
And in spite of that, it's been over 10 years now since DE were last given a model for a new unit (not just a replacement sculpt).
So when yet another release offers us zero new models (just a single replacement sculpt for an existing character), you'll forgive me if struggle to believe that they have any real interest or commitment towards Dark Eldar as a faction. And I fully expect this apathy to manifest itself in the upcoming codex.
From a player perspective we, or me at least, are looking for a balanced game.
We are not looking for over powered things. Or stong codexes. Adequate codexes. If all the codexes are adequate you are close to some game balance. If you get a strong codex later codexes need to be stronger to keep up and you get a power creep. A powerreep in a game like warhammer means customers are stuck with bad units not worth much.
I just hope that the DE codex is adequate. Preferably somewhere around the powerlevel of the current tyranid codex, because that one is very good for gameplay.
It'd be also nice if it wasn't horde army codex, but since GW doesn't want to make other races comparable to marines, that's what it's going to be. You either have the wounds and saves to soak damage or the bodies to soak it.
Considering that de are like the third or fourth worst performing faction, and nids arent doing much better while plsying with mostly index 8th statlines im hoping we see somethung better than that.
Codex nids is miserably boring and lazy. It failed to establish any kind of distinct roles for the various big monsters and had all the dull early 8th crutches of leaning heavily on mortal wounds, double fight strats, etc
Niiai wrote: From a player perspective we, or me at least, are looking for a balanced game.
We are not looking for over powered things. Or stong codexes. Adequate codexes. If all the codexes are adequate you are close to some game balance. If you get a strong codex later codexes need to be stronger to keep up and you get a power creep. A powerreep in a game like warhammer means customers are stuck with bad units not worth much.
I just hope that the DE codex is adequate. Preferably somewhere around the powerlevel of the current tyranid codex, because that one is very good for gameplay.
Unfortunately that doesn't show in balance sheets of GW. Opposite does though.
Cronch wrote: It'd be also nice if it wasn't horde army codex, but since GW doesn't want to make other races comparable to marines, that's what it's going to be. You either have the wounds and saves to soak damage or the bodies to soak it.
I doubt that dog gon hunt unfortunately. Part of the way GW tries to make the lower-selling armies work is by forcing them to buy more minis to make a full army.
...which of course drives down the playerbase, because if you can get 1000pts of marines for 250$ or 300pts of something else for 250$ guess which you're likely to go for...
Uh... Wake the Dead? Death Masque? CWE and Harlequins have absolutely been in boxes versus Marines before, there's no reason they couldn't feature in a full starter set for an edition.
Between the two of them, don't those two boxes have one single new Eldar sculpt in them? Hardly a ringing endorsement of GW's willingness to expand the Eldar ranges via a starter box.
I honestly think that Craftworlds are suffering from the original plan with the Ynnari and all that was scrapped when Kirby left. I remember reading that a large line update are 2-3 years(if not more) in the making so if they scrapped some of the original plans it might have taken backseat for the Necrons and Primaris and other larger releases(many in AoS).
On average the studio works about 5 years in advance, not 2-3. I very much doubt whatever plans that were in the works were scrapped, its just been a slow trickle of releases for Eldar so far.
I have to admit, I expected both Eldar armies to end up joining together into the Ynnari a long time ago. That seemed to be where the lore was going, what with major figures like Lelith and Jain Zar both joining up in that little death cult. But then the story stopped moving again. It feels like someone at GW got cold feet.
On average the studio works about 5 years in advance, not 2-3.
I stand corrected. Even then the point stands that all the plans have been long in the making.
I think the 2-3 years comes from the SoB range which had one of the shorter dev time.
5 years was purportedly pre-CAD modeling/design. 2-3 years is supposed to be 'the average' now, assuming they do not have to rework large chunks of the book.
The shortest development time so far was Knights when it first dropped, and that was supposedly because the model designers had mocked up the Warden kit and its variants in advance but they played it safe by releasing the two model variant box to start.
Uh... Wake the Dead? Death Masque? CWE and Harlequins have absolutely been in boxes versus Marines before, there's no reason they couldn't feature in a full starter set for an edition.
Between the two of them, don't those two boxes have one single new Eldar sculpt in them? Hardly a ringing endorsement of GW's willingness to expand the Eldar ranges via a starter box.
I honestly think that Craftworlds are suffering from the original plan with the Ynnari and all that was scrapped when Kirby left. I remember reading that a large line update are 2-3 years(if not more) in the making so if they scrapped some of the original plans it might have taken backseat for the Necrons and Primaris and other larger releases(many in AoS).
On average the studio works about 5 years in advance, not 2-3. I very much doubt whatever plans that were in the works were scrapped, its just been a slow trickle of releases for Eldar so far.
5? quotes for that? That means they would already be working for 40k 11th edition. AOS design work started 2012 summer. 3 years before release. There's plenty of examples of moulds being ready for production year before release. Doubt it takes 4 years for design.
They have a lot of concepts that they never create miniature for.
Maybe in that case, they judged that it would be better, saleswise, to release other things before (like the eldar jetbikes, which were sitting in the warehouse for years allegedly). I,m not saying that it never happens, but I sincerly doubt the average development time of large releases is 5 years
Having a sketch doesn't mean something is in development. I mean, the new Titan for AT had a sketch from Jes decades ago. Does that mean that that model has been "in development" that entire time?
What's far more likely is that they have a specific budget/allotment of new frames that they can make, they do tons of design work, and pick which makes the most sense to do now, saving the rest for later if there is an opportunity to come back to it.
it was said in the past that it takes 4-5 years from 1st concept to producing enough stock for a world wide release
so for everything were concepts already exists it should be shorter
only needing to update exiting work, instead of creating something new will decrease the time as well
so something like the current Necron release would have startet 3-4 years ago
Uh... Wake the Dead? Death Masque? CWE and Harlequins have absolutely been in boxes versus Marines before, there's no reason they couldn't feature in a full starter set for an edition.
Between the two of them, don't those two boxes have one single new Eldar sculpt in them? Hardly a ringing endorsement of GW's willingness to expand the Eldar ranges via a starter box.
I honestly think that Craftworlds are suffering from the original plan with the Ynnari and all that was scrapped when Kirby left.
Oh I don't doubt that. In fact I suspect its part of the problem with Dark Eldar too.
Ynnari initially looked like it was going to involve a massive range overhaul and reorganization, but the shift at the top as well as the reactions to squatting WFB factions for AoS gave them pause. Unfortunately it also seems to have left eldar in general in a state of abandonment. Which is unfortunate because they're still the factions most in need of updating.
Ketara wrote: Was that Drukhari/Sister combo box ever actually released?
It hasn't been released yet, though I wouldn't be surprised to see it released alongside - or at worst, shortly after - the DE codex.
Which will, of course, mean we see certain DE players complaining even more about Lilith3, as she is unlikely to be available individually when the book drops.
I don't think that's much of a concern considering her re-sculpt impression on a large portion of the DE community
I know it's probably not realistic, but I am hoping there are at least a couple minor models out there they haven't shown us yet. Preferably something new.
Agamemnon2 wrote: I have to admit, I expected both Eldar armies to end up joining together into the Ynnari a long time ago. That seemed to be where the lore was going, what with major figures like Lelith and Jain Zar both joining up in that little death cult. But then the story stopped moving again. It feels like someone at GW got cold feet.
I suspected it was only an instrument in order to reintroduce Bobby G and Cawl, and facilitate the updates to marines. Now, that pretty clearly appears to be the case.
Personally I dislike Ynnari on every level.
The models? Are strange mash ups of two similar but distinct designs, imagine a new marine faction that merged the look of chaos space marines and normal marines lol it just ends up looking like less busy chaos marines or slightly edgy goodies. And that avatar of Ynnead id such a fugly model, yikes. Swirly crap and rubble for days.
The rules? Are just a rip off of Drukhari. They such souls and gain power eh? Hmmm, where have I heard that one? Oh but they are OK with psychic powers lol. It basically is a faction where a designer looked at an eldar soup list in 6th/7th and decided to make it canon.
cuda1179 wrote: I know it's probably not realistic, but I am hoping there are at least a couple minor models out there they haven't shown us yet. Preferably something new.
Yeah, it would be pretty weird if there was no models besides a character in a battlebox!
Uh... Wake the Dead? Death Masque? CWE and Harlequins have absolutely been in boxes versus Marines before, there's no reason they couldn't feature in a full starter set for an edition.
Between the two of them, don't those two boxes have one single new Eldar sculpt in them? Hardly a ringing endorsement of GW's willingness to expand the Eldar ranges via a starter box.
I honestly think that Craftworlds are suffering from the original plan with the Ynnari and all that was scrapped when Kirby left. I remember reading that a large line update are 2-3 years(if not more) in the making so if they scrapped some of the original plans it might have taken backseat for the Necrons and Primaris and other larger releases(many in AoS).
On average the studio works about 5 years in advance, not 2-3. I very much doubt whatever plans that were in the works were scrapped, its just been a slow trickle of releases for Eldar so far.
5? quotes for that? That means they would already be working for 40k 11th edition. AOS design work started 2012 summer. 3 years before release. There's plenty of examples of moulds being ready for production year before release. Doubt it takes 4 years for design.
It is known. Its been mentioned at Warhammer Fest panels or whatever in years past that the design studio begins work on new products, and specifically new miniatures, 5 years in advance, there is a lot of 2D artwork, concept development, etc. that goes on on the front end well before the CAD work even starts - GWs artists and designers have said the studio has significantly more artwork for unreleased models, units, armies, and characters, etc. than what has actually been released to date by GW. All of that artwork is done up before anything ever goes to the sculptors and CAD artists to begin working on models.
The general production timeline from start of CAD to release of a finished miniature product is itself about a ~2-3 year pipeline (though a lot of it is idle time as the CAD work doesn't lead directly into production, that only happens as you approach the products release window), of which the CAD piece itself is only really about a 6-12 month long process (a lot of which is less design and more editing and mold engineering before they can proceed to cutting the tools, itself a timely process but a lot of it is also just waiting time in the production queue, etc.). Keep in mind the GW process is artwork -> miniatures -> fluff -> rules, the rules team doesn't really start working on the rules until the miniature designs are relatively finalized in CAD form, in large part because the rules policy is more or less "if its on the miniature then it needs to be represented in the rules somehow". Generally speaking, by the time the rules team starts working on things theres already been a couple years of work done on it beforehand, if it takes another ~3 years from when the rules team starts working it, then you're about 5 years out.
WIthin the context of Ynnari, their first appearance was in early 2017 and Blood of the Phoenix brought us "Ynnari" versions of a couple units in 2019. While its possible that some of the plans for Ynnari may have been changed, they have not been scrapped entirely, these things just take time.
As far as your AoS example is concerned, editions are a slightly different case as they are primarily a rules product rather than a miniatures product - but technically it started work even before Summer of 2012 - the Sigmarines were supposedly originally intended to release for WHFB and concept development for them started in ~2010 before they decided to recast the setting and rework them into the front and center product line. The first test molds for Sigmarines were cut in 2013, which means they were already a couple years deep into design work on them at that point.
WIthin the context of Ynnari, their first appearance was in early 2017 and Blood of the Phoenix brought us "Ynnari" versions of a couple units in 2019. While its possible that some of the plans for Ynnari may have been changed, they have not been scrapped entirely, these things just take time.
If by Ynnari versions, you mean the Banshee Exarch without the full helmet? That's not unique to the Ynnari and a concept sketch by Jes Goodwin of a Banshee Exarch from one of the previous edition's Eldar Codex release showed the same. This was the same time that the Dire Avenger Exarch with open helmet was released. GW just went lazy and called it a Ynnari option but I don't see anything specifically Ynnari about it. To really expand the Ynnari as a faction, they need to have a unique selection of units that doesn't just borrow from other lists. Right now the only thing uniquely Ynnari are their special characters and the Yncarne.
Frankly though I like the different Eldar viewpoints. We have Craftworlds, Dark Eldar, Ynnari, Harlequins, and rumors of Exodites. Up to 5 different major branches of the Eldar, all with their own philosophy of how best to survive. I'm all for more differentiation and exploration of non-Imperial factions.
If by Ynnari versions, you mean the Banshee Exarch without the full helmet?
Wait was that really the only difference? Wow. I thought it was more than that.
To really expand the Ynnari as a faction, they need to have a unique selection of units that doesn't just borrow from other lists. Right now the only thing uniquely Ynnari are their special characters and the Yncarne.
I agree. I guess time will tell. I honestly thought the Ynnari Incubi and Howling Banshees were more than just a headswap but I guess not.
Frankly though I like the different Eldar viewpoints. We have Craftworlds, Dark Eldar, Ynnari, Harlequins, and rumors of Exodites. Up to 5 different major branches of the Eldar, all with their own philosophy of how best to survive. I'm all for more differentiation and exploration of non-Imperial factions.
6 Different major branches - you can't discount the Crone World Aeldari.
cuda1179 wrote: I know it's probably not realistic, but I am hoping there are at least a couple minor models out there they haven't shown us yet. Preferably something new.
I find it telling that in the course of 4 months the only thing they teased us with is Lelith (the video that teased her and the various 'lieutenants' was around the SM/Necron release). And many things were delayed, so they needed to fill space, and yet still nothing, just an Incubi profile in November, and now warriors and the heavy poison bolter. At this point, not showing things off (if they exist) would be bad call.
a_typical_hero wrote: I think you have to wait for special rules to get the hype started.
Marines don't have exciting stats, either.
Minimum 2W troops.... 3W T5 basic troops ATV? Sword mateys ? 100+ data sheets to pick from
*Looks at kabalite leaked stat as comparison* LOLS and walks off..
1. As was possible since 8th edition. Exciting? For those who like their Firstborn armies and assumed GW would put them into Legends. Quite a different situation to Dark Eldar. 2. S4 T5 W3 A2 Sv3+. Exciting? 3. A Primaris Attack Bike with twice the wounds and attacks for twice the price of an Attack Bike. Exciting? 4. S4 T4 W3 A3 Sv3+. Exciting? 5. 100+ data sheets were not previewed, so there is nothing to get excited about.
I'll throw another one in: S3 T3 W1 A4 Sv6+ Exciting statline, right? Belongs to one of the, if not the strongest armies right now and is their only Troupe choice.
But it can get better: M6" S3 T3 W1 A2 Sv7+ Statline of one of the hardest hitting melee units right now.
A statline alone is nothing to get excited about.
Mind giving me a realistic example statline for Kabalites that would excite you?
You are the one that stated marines dont have exciting stat lines. Despite having acess to 100+ data sheets being able to run anything from scouts to repulsors/ super heavies... Despite having acess to 100+ data sheets... Marines dont have exciting stat lines. Anywhere. According to you. You said it not me. I was merely pointing out that if you compare the Kabalite to 99% of them (maybe bar scouts ? ) its far more lame.. Of course you are welcome to disagree and you can happily field and buy all the DE you can get your mits on instead of space marines.
If by Ynnari versions, you mean the Banshee Exarch without the full helmet?
Wait was that really the only difference? Wow. I thought it was more than that.
Close to - you could do a full squad of banshees and a full squad of incubi with no helmets and GW said that was a Ynarri thing.
Why Ynnari hate hats they didn’t say, but that’s apparently a thing (Visarch aside)...
I'm actually vaguely insulted that GW expects me to believe that not putting a helmeted head on my minis is a customization feature that makes them into a completely separate unit for a different army or whatever.
I wish/hope that is the case there would be more releases coming for DE but I really doubt it at this point.
Regarding the plastic Banshee release, yeah overall that was pretty underwhelming. I mean, yes its great they redid them in plastic - big win. But I had hoped they might do more with them; like maybe alternate weapon option, alternate helmet (not just bare heads = Ynarri) maybe some add on bits. Then of course tying the initial release into a poor overpriced box set took it to a new level of meh.
It feels like adding some options to them would make them sell better as well - more incentive for folks who already have them in metal or failcast to upgrade but what do I know.
petrov27 wrote: I wish/hope that is the case there would be more releases coming for DE but I really doubt it at this point.
Regarding the plastic Banshee release, yeah overall that was pretty underwhelming. I mean, yes its great they redid them in plastic - big win. But I had hoped they might do more with them; like maybe alternate weapon option, alternate helmet (not just bare heads = Ynarri) maybe some add on bits. Then of course tying the initial release into a poor overpriced box set took it to a new level of meh.
It feels like adding some options to them would make them sell better as well - more incentive for folks who already have them in metal or failcast to upgrade but what do I know.
Yeah. Missed opportunity. A whole squad with either sword and pistol or twin blades or executioner would have been nice veriety.
petrov27 wrote: I wish/hope that is the case there would be more releases coming for DE but I really doubt it at this point.
GW isn't the type to be that coy about new miniatures. If there were anything in the pipeline, they absolutely would have at least hinted at it already. I don't think even the Rumor Engine has anything indicative of a single DE model. Remember how far back we had that first blurry shot of the Outriders and Storm Speeder?
Yeah, there's nothing, it's a one-model codex release, that's why it got shuffled up to the front in the time of covid. I'm also guessing the only reason we got a litlte mini-preview so early is GW wanted to get out in front of potential datasheet leaks from instructional booklets.
The HW Community team has been providing these little snippets in the “down weeks” of the release schedule. The full lowdown will come after the official announcement of preorder date.
alextroy wrote: The HW Community team has been providing these little snippets in the “down weeks” of the release schedule. The full lowdown will come after the official announcement of preorder date.
That so? well, I stand corrected then. I thought we got like 4 previews for the new DA and DG.
They missed a good opportunity to make Banshees a 10-man dual-kit with parts for a completely new unit, which is what they often do with existing units that get re-done so that even old players have a reason to buy. The whole Banshee/Incubi release was every kind of awful you can think of: an initial expensive 2-army pack sticking you with old models followed by a year-later release that was a 5-model squad for the price of a 10-model squad.
There's still too much of both armies in resin with no plans to remake them, I'd be surprised if Drukhari got anything beyond the codex and some repacked items and GW justifies the poor sales as disinterest for another 10 years
the_scotsman wrote: I'm also guessing the only reason we got a litlte mini-preview so early is GW wanted to get out in front of potential datasheet leaks from instructional booklets.
Yes, they say so in the article. It’s a preview in anticipation for the reboxings (that are coming this month), not for the codex (which we don’t know yet when it is coming)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kalamadea wrote: They missed a good opportunity to make Banshees a 10-man dual-kit with parts for a completely new unit
I agree with you. But... *sigh* i’m not sure GW does. I still remember when they changed Dire Avengers from a 10-models box to a 5-model box, and increased the price by 10%
the_scotsman wrote: I'm also guessing the only reason we got a litlte mini-preview so early is GW wanted to get out in front of potential datasheet leaks from instructional booklets.
Yes, they say so in the article. It’s a preview in anticipation for the reboxings (that are coming this month), not for the codex (which we don’t know yet when it is coming)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kalamadea wrote: They missed a good opportunity to make Banshees a 10-man dual-kit with parts for a completely new unit
I agree with you. But... *sigh* i’m not sure GW does. I still remember when they changed Dire Avengers from a 10-models box to a 5-model box, and increased the price by 10%
TBH, I think the 10-man to 5-man reboxing may have been the community's fault to some extent. The reboxing happened at a time when Eldar players were popularly running two 5 man DA squads as part of MSU spam lists in Wave Serpents. I can only imagine that someone in GWs marketing/accounting team looked at whatever data collection GW does on customer behavior and said to themselves that they are getting fleeced selling Eldar players 2 units for the price of 1. The same has been true of some of the other units that GW has done unit reboxings on without updating the minis.
GWs product and pricing strategies are based on production costs leveraged against expected sales and lifetime value, etc. (rather than the false meme of "its based on point costs of the unit") which is how you end up with a 20-skellie box of Mortek Guard costing the same as a 5-man unit of CSM Termies. The expectation is that units will most commonly be run in a configuration that aligns with the contents of the box that GW is selling you. They are always happy to sell you more copies of the same kit if you need to tool up a unit with equipment, as that just drives up the ROI on the product, but they try to avoid giving you any sort of real dollar efficiency by letting you double dip on something if it means a stark reduction in that products sales performance. If they see that people are overwhelmingly achieving some unintended dollar efficiency running two min units from a box designed to produce one max unit, they are going to respond in kind - especially if people are only buying one copy of that box to cover their entire army when it was expected the average customer in the market for that product would by 2, 3, 4+ copies of that box to form an armies core.
Going back to the aforementioned marketing/accounting example, its not hard to imagine that GW tracks the sales performance of every one of its specific SKUs. I have no doubt that they ran a report one day on kits that were drastically underperforming vs expected sales estimates and Dire Avengers came up on it, amongst others. That would trigger an investigation into why, and when it was noticed that it was apparently common behavior for Eldar players to buy one, and only one, 10 man box in order to field two 5 man units in their army, they got their numbers back in line with projections by changing the contents of the box to force more sales.
chaos0xomega wrote: TBH, I think the 10-man to 5-man reboxing may have been the community's fault to some extent. The reboxing happened at a time when Eldar players were popularly running two 5 man DA squads as part of MSU spam lists in Wave Serpents. I can only imagine that someone in GWs marketing/accounting team looked at whatever data collection GW does on customer behavior and said to themselves that they are getting fleeced selling Eldar players 2 units for the price of 1. The same has been true of some of the other units that GW has done unit reboxings on without updating the minis.
and for the same reason we see 5 model boxes of Space Marines, because 5 model units were the most used unit sice outside of some CSM fluff lists, for 3 Editions
Kalamadea wrote: They missed a good opportunity to make Banshees a 10-man dual-kit with parts for a completely new unit, which is what they often do with existing units that get re-done so that even old players have a reason to buy. The whole Banshee/Incubi release was every kind of awful you can think of: an initial expensive 2-army pack sticking you with old models followed by a year-later release that was a 5-model squad for the price of a 10-model squad.
There's still too much of both armies in resin with no plans to remake them, I'd be surprised if Drukhari got anything beyond the codex and some repacked items and GW justifies the poor sales as disinterest for another 10 years
I was very disappointed that this didn't happen. Imperial units get this treatment, but the banshees seemed to be 'literally convert this failcast unit into a plastic one please', which seems at odds with their need to sell units...
Imagine if you will, a plastic kit that made craftworld banshees AND Ynnari 'hag warriors' or whatever, you not only get two different units out of the same sprue, you cover two different ARMIES in the same sprue. GW's thorough enjoyment of doing this for marines makes this a no brainer...
agreed - I just do not understand their decisions on some of these things.
Maybe this is too out there, but ok, they only have "space" in their production lineup to do a single DE release for 9th because of all the drastically needed Space Mareen Lts that need to be done. OK. So they choose to do Hesperax - good to get rid of a failcast offering and such. But why not offer that as a "dual kit" box? Like I get that it must be "single pose" because of reasons, but give it a head option and weapon/hand options. Right there then you got the new Hesperax sculpt that all DE players were screaming for (not) but the kit also has a different head and weapon options to build some other new HQ choice they add with new rules. Everyone wins right? GW sells more because folks will want two boxes of this to build both options assuming the rules for both are not total butt.
Hellebore wrote: Imagine if you will, a plastic kit that made craftworld banshees AND Ynnari 'hag warriors' or whatever, you not only get two different units out of the same sprue, you cover two different ARMIES in the same sprue. GW's thorough enjoyment of doing this for marines makes this a no brainer...
One kit covering two armies from the same game system? Hersey!
Ynnari always struck me as a half-baked idea that never really went anywhere. Even a whole edition after they were introduced they've not progressed beyond "Oh, yeah, them. Umm... here are some alternate helmets in the Banshee kit."
H.B.M.C. wrote: Ynnari always struck me as a half-baked idea that never really went anywhere. Even a whole edition after they were introduced they've not progressed beyond "Oh, yeah, them. Umm... here are some alternate helmets in the Banshee kit."
As I've said before, we should just have Ynnari HQs that are treated like Inquisition except for Eldar armies.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Ynnari always struck me as a half-baked idea that never really went anywhere. Even a whole edition after they were introduced they've not progressed beyond "Oh, yeah, them. Umm... here are some alternate helmets in the Banshee kit."
As I've said before, we should just have Ynnari HQs that are treated like Inquisition except for Eldar armies.
I think that there's a range of simple things you can do for the Ynnari that reflect them without building an entire army for them. This is one thing, but you can do some basic stuff like:
Upgrade sprues for craftworlds, DE, harlies. Like the marine chapter sprues. You could maybe add a single unique model on each one that represents a new squad leader that emerges from the Ynnari, and further differentiates the squad you upgrade.
Your example HQs, unique HQs that mean you aren't forced to use special characters.
I think they should get at least one new troop - maybe some kind of resurrected/reborn eldar that maybe reflect the pre-fall eldar and their psychic supremecy to show how Ynnead are supposed to bring back the glory days of the eldar.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Ynnari always struck me as a half-baked idea that never really went anywhere. Even a whole edition after they were introduced they've not progressed beyond "Oh, yeah, them. Umm... here are some alternate helmets in the Banshee kit."
It doesn't help that the mere existence of Ynnari also seems to have stalled all other progress on the Eldar factions.
Quick question (I've been up for 20 hours, so forgive me if this is silly)
Is there anything that keeps the Dark Eldar from activating an Avatar? I know that chunks of Khaine wound up on craftworlds, but is there anything to say that the Dark Eldar didn't get a few too?
Craftworlders use a volunteer sacrifice to jumpstart an Avatar, but what if the Dark Eldar used an unwilling subject? I'd love to see a Dark, twisted version of the Avatar.
Oh, and the return of Vect. This, I outright DEMAND.
Dark Avatar used to be brought up as wish listing material before the 5th ed. rework of dark eldar.
I guess the fleshed out background kind of refocused people’s thought’s and wishes. It could be a cool!
(Though DE are pretty scornful of gods, so I’m not sure how well it could fit. Always tweekable in some way, though!)
Regarding Vect, I think it seems like just a matter of time. With regards to how intensely they increased his power and brought him, even more, to the forefront in the last codex (and even gave him a fancy sobriquet to put on the box) I find it hard to believe that there wouldn’t be a plan to bring him back at -some- point
An updated Dais of Destruction kit, with a Vect that could be used with it or on its own (like Logan and his sled), would be cool.
Having said that, I'm not sure a Vect-on-foot-alone option would fit with the idea of Big Faction Leader Models we seem to be seeing recently, so maybe you'd just get an updated Dais.
Passionately hostile to Vect, who I think is an albatross on interesting DE fluff development, but yes, its likely only a matter of time. If GW were half-sensible they'd make it possible to run his inevitable pimpmobile as a plastic Tantalus or something similar (so that's out.)
It would be relatively easy to come up with Avatar-esque creatures. Expand the lore on the dark muses and away you go. In the same way it would be relatively easy to have "evil Wraithguard" (that of course existed in the Path of the Dark Eldar books).
Red Viper wrote: Jetbike Archon with punisher, shadowfield, and drugs was one of the highlights of my life.
Yeah!! ^^ Missing that so much </3
It’s weird that they haven’t made a skyboard or jetbike variant to any of the DEHQs. Feels like such an obvious design space, and could bring a lot of interesting synergy to reavers, hellions, and scourges, to have them accompany/accompanied by.
The fact that nobody at GW has ever apparently noticed the obvious HQ pet peeve with drukhari - namely, that they have no mobility option and because the transports only have unit capacity in intervals of 5 putting an HQ in your transport means he basically takes up 5 transport slots - is basically all the proof I need to tell me that the last 3 codexes they've gotten have been written by people who've literally never played the army.
The question of 'what the feth do I do with my worthless HQs' is so persistently obnoxious when playing drukhari and is unlike any of the other ~10 factions I've played in 40k that any person with more than 2-3 games of experience with them who gets the chance to design a book would immediately go
"Wait...no, that's wrong. Let me fix that."
Every other faction I'm either perfectly OK with the HQ slot or I'm really wishing I had more HQ slots. The fact that Drukhari HQs are annoying to fit into the list, annoying to move around and protect during the game, and have basically no lynchpin function in any list is immediately obvious when you play basically any list with the faction.
Haemonculus: "oh, cool, my Grotesques are T6 instead of T5 and my pain engines are T7 instead of T6. That's...that makes no difference almost ever, does it? Yep, nope, looks like almost all anti-elite weaponry is S7 or S8 and almost all anti-monster weaponry is S8 or S9, literally makes a difference like once per game."
Succubus: Melee duelist HQ who can only win duels against tau, guard, and eldar HQs, everyone elses characters rips her a new one in 2 rounds. Guard HQs can be a problem if they bring powerfists. Most useful thing you can do with her is take the gak drugs like +WS and +LD so you can give more good drugs to the rest of your list.
Archon: Best HQ of the bunch, because he can stand in the back and read fanmail from Vect to a trio of Ravagers. Guess which thing we know for 100% certain is changing in the new codex to not work anymore?
Well I like my archon like it is currently: All powerful madman in Venom with snake people as bodyguards and armed with blaster pistol with golden ork skull attached to it.
Although if talking about options, I would really like a proper unit of Sslyths. Not just an bodyguard to Archon but as an proper Elite unit. Would be an nice option.
Archons are clearly meant to ride in a transport with a Court bodyguard (note that this is obviously not the most effective way to play them), while Haemonculi work fine on foot. It's really only Succubi that would benefit hugely from additional mobility options, in my mind.
How Drukhari HQs should work as a whole is definitely a question that GW didn't really manage to find a good answer for in 8th and I'm hoping they do come up with a better solution here.
Red Viper wrote: Jetbike Archon with punisher, shadowfield, and drugs was one of the highlights of my life.
It's especially depressing because of how interchangeable the DE range is - so you could easily convert a Jetbike, Skyboard or Winged Archon without even needing a dedicated kit.
Leggy wrote: If we're wish listing, I would love a Drukhari Psyker. The fluff preventing it is silly, and easily retconned or circumvented.
I've always thought a Mandrake Lord could fulfil a psyker-like role in terms of having various support abilities. I mean, Mandrakes are shown to have all manner of strange powers, many of which resemble magic. Plus, if the army remains split, a Mandrake Lord would be useable by all 3 factions.
It would give DE psyker-like elements without breaking the 'no psykers' fluff.
Anybody with an ounce of common sense or who has played like 3 games of 40K should know that the limited transport capacity of their vehicles, coupled with their almost completely useless and mandatory HQ choices make for some of the most frustrating list building I’ve ever seen.
You can’t even take 4 incubi and an Archon in a venom anymore.
Also, I hate the council of the archon and refuse to use them unless they put Incubi in there.
Also, where’s out generic Incubi Lords? Literally the coolest unit in the army and they’ve done nothing with Incubi. You could expand that concept into an entire sub-faction.
Leggy wrote: If we're wish listing, I would love a Drukhari Psyker. The fluff preventing it is silly, and easily retconned or circumvented.
The fluff provides a model that is basically the dark eldar version of that. The Cronos. It just is often overlooked because it's rules are arguable the worst in the entire game.
Leggy wrote: If we're wish listing, I would love a Drukhari Psyker. The fluff preventing it is silly, and easily retconned or circumvented.
The fluff provides a model that is basically the dark eldar version of that. The Cronos. It just is often overlooked because it's rules are arguable the worst in the entire game.
Honestly it's so goddamn cheap at this point that in a coven list one kinda makes sense as a lieutenant aura with quasi-dreadnought level durability.
It's jus so funny that this huge thing puts out such hilarious, pitiful damage. I always love when it rolls up on some opponents model and I'm like "AND NOW you shall face the wrath of his....ONE STRENGTH THREE FLAMER! And then, quiver in fear of his....TWO STRENGTH FIVE DAMAGE 1 MELEE ATTACKS!"
its like if you could buy a dreadnought with just the feet attack, no guns, but a lieutenant aura.
I'll also echo The_Scotsman's eloquent words regarding both mobility/transport capacity and also the functionality (or lack thereof) of our HQs.
Indeed, I think transport capacity could well function as a litmus-test for whether the new codex has been written by someone who is familiar with the army, or a Marine player who is just randomly flicking switches to create the illusion of meaningful change, so that he can go back to writing more Marine books.
Regarding HQs, Scotsman was spot-on when he said that they didn't fulfil a lynchpin role in the army, or really any role at all.
However, I think a related problem is that the DEHQs just aren't fun.
The Archon doesn't feel like a master strategist or an expert swordsman wielding all manner of alien devices. He doesn't even feel like the commander of Dark Eldar. He has almost no wargear or other options (in contrast, does anyone remember the First Prince rule for Corsairs?), and the few weapons he has access do certainly don't feel like they are the best, most expensive gear available. No, they all feel like he found them in a bin on a planet where the Heavy Stubber is the pinnacle of advanced weaponry. He has zero fun abilities, zero tricks, zero interesting special rules. All he has is the most basic, boring aura available, except that is doesn't work on 2/3 of the army, nor on the remaining third if he and/or it is in a transport.
And this is the closest thing we currently have to an overall leader of our faction.
Then we have the Succubus, an alleged melee specialist who is supposed to be an expert in duelling other characters. Naturally, then, she has the fewest attacks of all the DEHQs and none of her base weapons do multiple damage or Mortal Wounds. Indeed, it should probably say something about her base wargear that one of her artefacts is just a Power Fist. She also has no rules pertaining to duelling or indeed to melee in general, barring her aura (reroll 1s in melee, wooooo). Impressively, her aura works on even fewer units than the Archon's as it doesn't affect Beasts (in spite of them being Cult units for all intents and purposes), and while it technically works on Reavers and Hellions, good luck catching up to them with no access to jetbikes or skyboards.
And lastly we come to the Haemonculus, a mix of mad-scientist and beastmaster. He has the most options out of the three HQs (not that that's saying much), it's just a pity that almost all of them can be summed up as 'An Electrocorrosive Whip but much worse'. Naturally, he has no gear that would give him a different role - it's just a lot of poisoned weapons that do basically the same thing, with the aforementioned whip being objectively better. What thrilling options. But the Haemonculus isn't really about interesting weapons, right? Well actually he kinda is, but let's just set that to one side anyway. After all, what they're best known for is their hideous science experiments - including their fearsome, once-humanoid creations, regenerating fallen Archons, and all manner of surgical experiments and augmentations. So how is all of that represented? Can the Haemonculus heal or revive fallen HQs? No. Can you buy augmentations for your other HQs when you have one? No. Does he whip his experiments into a frenzy, forcing them to charge impossible distances or attack at unerring speed, even as their metabolism consumes itself? No. Coven stuff just kinda gets a bit tougher when he's standing near it (though never to the point where it would actually be meaningful, of course). That's it. That's all he does. Boy what an exciting rule and what a thrilling realisation of a mad geneticist.
If our HQs aren't allowed to be good, would it be too much to ask that they at least do something functionally interesting?
Leggy wrote: If we're wish listing, I would love a Drukhari Psyker. The fluff preventing it is silly, and easily retconned or circumvented.
The fluff provides a model that is basically the dark eldar version of that. The Cronos. It just is often overlooked because it's rules are arguable the worst in the entire game.
That's an interesting point. Certainly stealing life to heal or empower other units would be in keeping with DE's flavour (aren't Mandrake Bane Blasts specifically fuelled by stolen life?).
Out of interest, are you thinking along the lines of an improved Cronos or a HQ with that sort of ability?
Weirdly, when GW does represent "scientific" type units, they tend to be more random and less precise abilities than space wizards channeling the powers of turbo hell to shoot lightning out of their nipples.
The haemonculus is almost unique in the fact that it is a science-y character and the benefits he provides are not random and have no chance to instantly kersplode the things he's buffing.
Its certainly hard to see why Venoms getting 6 spots and Raiders getting say 12 would break the game.
Not sure what I'd hope for on characters. I know Marine salt etc - but I just don't see Archons/Succubi or Haemonculi running around like Smash Captains. And if they can't, I'd rather they were 50 point buff bots. Except GW has clearly decided buff bots are the worst thing ever for factions that have the temerity to use vehicles, so.... yeah.
If characters could be comparable to buffbot/stabby Cannonesses that's probably enough for me. Or just go back to letting us take a 10 (or whatever) point Lhamaean as our warlord.
Tyel wrote: Its certainly hard to see why Venoms getting 6 spots and Raiders getting say 12 would break the game.
Not sure what I'd hope for on characters. I know Marine salt etc - but I just don't see Archons/Succubi or Haemonculi running around like Smash Captains. And if they can't, I'd rather they were 50 point buff bots. Except GW has clearly decided buff bots are the worst thing ever for factions that have the temerity to use vehicles, so.... yeah.
If characters could be comparable to buffbot/stabby Cannonesses that's probably enough for me. Or just go back to letting us take a 10 (or whatever) point Lhamaean as our warlord.
I've proposed those capacities for the transports, and it's clear that the way DE should operate isn't done well with the rules. We would need basically a whole section on the codex to go over Open Top transports. Like for aura purposes you can benefit, and then something regarding how flamers and auto hit weapons and blast weapons can still affect them.
Leggy wrote: If we're wish listing, I would love a Drukhari Psyker. The fluff preventing it is silly, and easily retconned or circumvented.
The fluff provides a model that is basically the dark eldar version of that. The Cronos. It just is often overlooked because it's rules are arguable the worst in the entire game.
That's an interesting point. Certainly stealing life to heal or empower other units would be in keeping with DE's flavour (aren't Mandrake Bane Blasts specifically fuelled by stolen life?).
Out of interest, are you thinking along the lines of an improved Cronos or a HQ with that sort of ability?
I think theres room to include that role in both the Cronos as well as the Haemonculus.
The crucibles of malediction/caskets of flensing and black orbs for example. Remember the shattershard? I feel like the Haemoculus can have science based effects similar to crypteks while the Cronos cna be more like a soul based effect like the powers of the C'tan.
I'd rather they fix the stuff that already exists before moving on to new things. I get that other DE players want expanded HQ options and so would I, but that's a pipe dream. I actually expect the HQ's to have even LESS options then they currently have. Why? Because the current plastic kits have so few options. I doubt the Succubus can take wych gear or the haemi can take coven gear like hexrifles or E-whips or the Archon can take agonizers or venom blades as they all are missing from the official kits. So I am really hoping they make everything at least functional and preferably viable. Nobody wants to be stuck with set gear that also blows lol.
Tyel wrote: Its certainly hard to see why Venoms getting 6 spots and Raiders getting say 12 would break the game.
Not sure what I'd hope for on characters. I know Marine salt etc - but I just don't see Archons/Succubi or Haemonculi running around like Smash Captains. And if they can't, I'd rather they were 50 point buff bots. Except GW has clearly decided buff bots are the worst thing ever for factions that have the temerity to use vehicles, so.... yeah.
If characters could be comparable to buffbot/stabby Cannonesses that's probably enough for me. Or just go back to letting us take a 10 (or whatever) point Lhamaean as our warlord.
I've proposed those capacities for the transports, and it's clear that the way DE should operate isn't done well with the rules. We would need basically a whole section on the codex to go over Open Top transports. Like for aura purposes you can benefit, and then something regarding how flamers and auto hit weapons and blast weapons can still affect them.
Venoms are tiny so I can see the hard cap on 5, especially since they are not really considered impressive or opulant rides. Raider however should at the very least allow for 10 models plus 1 character with some sort of Dais/Command deck rule that projects their auras from the hull.
Red Corsair wrote: I actually expect the HQ's to have even LESS options then they currently have. Why? Because the current plastic kits have so few options. I doubt the Succubus can take wych gear or the haemi can take coven gear like hexrifles or E-whips or the Archon can take agonizers or venom blades as they all are missing from the official kits. So I am really hoping they make everything at least functional and preferably viable. Nobody wants to be stuck with set gear that also blows lol.
If DEHQs get saddled with no options beyond the single, garbage loadouts in their kits, I think I'll take an extended break from this hobby.
Red Corsair wrote: Venoms are tiny so I can see the hard cap on 5, especially since they are not really considered impressive or opulant rides. Raider however should at the very least allow for 10 models plus 1 character with some sort of Dais/Command deck rule that projects their auras from the hull.
An alternative (especially where the Venom is concerned) would be to lower the squad caps. They could make Warriors, Wyches and Wracks minimum 4 instead of 5, and let them take 1 special/wych weapon per 4 instead of per 5. Hell, Mandrakes, Wracks and Incubi all used to be minimum 3.
Red Corsair wrote: I actually expect the HQ's to have even LESS options then they currently have. Why? Because the current plastic kits have so few options. I doubt the Succubus can take wych gear or the haemi can take coven gear like hexrifles or E-whips or the Archon can take agonizers or venom blades as they all are missing from the official kits. So I am really hoping they make everything at least functional and preferably viable. Nobody wants to be stuck with set gear that also blows lol.
If DEHQs get saddled with no options beyond the single, garbage loadouts in their kits, I think I'll take an extended break from this hobby.
Red Corsair wrote: Venoms are tiny so I can see the hard cap on 5, especially since they are not really considered impressive or opulant rides. Raider however should at the very least allow for 10 models plus 1 character with some sort of Dais/Command deck rule that projects their auras from the hull.
An alternative (especially where the Venom is concerned) would be to lower the squad caps. They could make Warriors, Wyches and Wracks minimum 4 instead of 5, and let them take 1 special/wych weapon per 4 instead of per 5. Hell, Mandrakes, Wracks and Incubi all used to be minimum 3.
I mean if it were up to me i'd just leave the weapons as 1 per 5, that way you're not creating a system whereby people just save 1 models worth of points on every squad.
Being the reboxed sets Venoms, Scourges and Kabalites...
DE players have enough of those to not bother buying more until the Codex drops. Even then those models are incidentally in so many boxes that I think I've never bought one separately. Maybe my first Venom 4-5 years ago...
I mean if it were up to me i'd just leave the weapons as 1 per 5, that way you're not creating a system whereby people just save 1 models worth of points on every squad.
Because then you're still stuck with the exact same problem you have right now - wherein the HQ is actually detrimental to any squad he joins in a vehicle.
Without an Archon, I can have 2 Blasters in a Raider. With an Archon, I'm limited to 1.
I can tell you which of those will be more useful 99% of the time, and I'm afraid it ain't the Archon.
A raider should have more(or the same) transport capacity than a wave serpent, not only is it open with lots more room to stand rather than crammed into the hull, we know that dark elder literally hang off the side of the hull holding onto the railings.
and venoms should have at least 6 transport spots.
warmaster21 wrote: A raider should have more(or the same) transport capacity than a wave serpent, not only is it open with lots more room to stand rather than crammed into the hull, we know that dark elder literally hang off the side of the hull holding onto the railings.
On that note, it would be nice if Raiders were also faster than Wave Serpents, given that this was the whole point of their trading out armour.
vipoid wrote: On that note, it would be nice if Raiders were also faster than Wave Serpents, given that this was the whole point of their trading out armour.
Yeah, really hoping for an increase in movement for the DE transports/vehicles ^^
I am just wondering how they are going to justify taking an Archon when he is most likely only going to allow reroll 1s on Core units(and maybe only limited to Kabalite warriors).
I do hope they boost his combat utility and damage.
vipoid wrote: On that note, it would be nice if Raiders were also faster than Wave Serpents, given that this was the whole point of their trading out armour.
Yeah, really hoping for an increase in movement for the DE transports/vehicles ^^
I have faith GW will deliver, and Drukhari players everywhere will rejoice...
...until the updated Craftworld codex releases and Wave Serpents inexplicably move even faster than the Raider.
At this point, all I'm hoping for is perhaps we can run our forces combined again as opposed to focusing on the cabals, covens, etc. Like keep the rules for those groups but I dislike needing multiple detachments or just focusing on one group of DE units.
That they won't bugger up the weapon load outs and make the army feel good.
I think asking for anything more is setting up for sadness as really they don't seem to care about giving DE new models outside of touching up a certain special wych who while nice already had a very good model, Imo.
I got my fingers crossed for all you DE out there, myself included.
the_scotsman wrote: It's jus so funny that this huge thing puts out such hilarious, pitiful damage. I always love when it rolls up on some opponents model and I'm like "AND NOW you shall face the wrath of his....ONE STRENGTH THREE FLAMER! And then, quiver in fear of his....TWO STRENGTH FIVE DAMAGE 1 MELEE ATTACKS!"
Oh come on! There's no way the Cronos is that bad...
*reads Codex entry*
... oh damn!
Yeah. That needs fixing!
Daedalus81 wrote: Sooo...who is going to go buy dome DE kits and get us some leaks?
I got a brand new box of Kabalites in the mail today...
... and it's the old box, not the new one. So no fancy rules.
Sotahullu wrote: Well I like my archon like it is currently: All powerful madman in Venom with snake people as bodyguards and armed with blaster pistol with golden ork skull attached to it.
Although if talking about options, I would really like a proper unit of Sslyths. Not just an bodyguard to Archon but as an proper Elite unit. Would be an nice option.
According to the Field manual, it looks like the "bodyguard" section makes all the bodyguard you take a single unit now, not just a bunch of individuals. So, that's kind of what you're after.
As a whole, I think we need to have a clear vision of what Dark Eldar are as an army. I wan them to be a semi-horde army that is FAST. They need to hit like a ton of bricks on any turn they charge, but start to flounder in any kind of protracted combat. I think they need rules that allow them to decide where and when combat happens, and punishes them for letting the enemy dictate that. With that in mind I'd love it if Dark Eldar got an army-wide "Always Strikes First when charging" rule. Making their weapons suck less would help too.
Eldarsif wrote: I am just wondering how they are going to justify taking an Archon when he is most likely only going to allow reroll 1s on Core units(and maybe only limited to Kabalite warriors).
I do hope they boost his combat utility and damage.
It is possible that they removed the army restrictions, allowing you to build a cohesive force from all 3 elements of the army, but that their HQ choices will buff only units that are considered core to their respective sub-factions. The core elements would be the units currently limited to their separate detachment sub-factions
Brutus_Apex wrote: It is possible that they removed the army restrictions, allowing you to build a cohesive force from all 3 elements of the army, but that their HQ choices will buff only units that are considered core to their respective sub-factions. The core elements would be the units currently limited to their separate detachment sub-factions
Yup, that's kind of what I am guessing otherwise the HQ's would only buff the troops aside from cult probably hitting reavers.
Eldarsif wrote: I am just wondering how they are going to justify taking an Archon when he is most likely only going to allow reroll 1s on Core units(and maybe only limited to Kabalite warriors).
I do hope they boost his combat utility and damage.
Unless ravagers are in fact core...
Considering the past few codexes I fear we won't be seeing that.
They may work how DA codex does, archon is effectively a chapter master to warriors, captain to everything else, and the same for the leaders of the sub factions, so a wyche leader will be a chapter master to wyches and captain to everything else (or some variety of this).
Alternatively, an archon may give re-rolls to everything (other than vehicles etc as is common now) and the sub faction leaders will be lieutenant equivalents
Automatically Appended Next Post: OR and something I would personally like to see.... They sack off the re-roll hit and wound mechanic and leave that as marines thing and they get something totally different (but obviously good).
Eldarsif wrote: I am just wondering how they are going to justify taking an Archon when he is most likely only going to allow reroll 1s on Core units(and maybe only limited to Kabalite warriors).
I do hope they boost his combat utility and damage.
Unless ravagers are in fact core...
Considering the past few codexes I fear we won't be seeing that.
Extrapolating from necrons and death guard, it's fairly safe to assume that anything that is not an actual eldar walking or riding a bike, it's very unlikely to get CORE unless it's a dread equivalent. Tranports, tanks and characters definitely will not get it. I don't know DE well, but I'm sure that things like ravagers, voidraven bombers, cronos or clawed fiends won't be CORE, while wyches, kabilites, scourges or reavers are guaranteed to get it.
Eldarsif wrote: I am just wondering how they are going to justify taking an Archon when he is most likely only going to allow reroll 1s on Core units(and maybe only limited to Kabalite warriors).
I do hope they boost his combat utility and damage.
Unless ravagers are in fact core...
Considering the past few codexes I fear we won't be seeing that.
Extrapolating from necrons and death guard, it's fairly safe to assume that anything that is not an actual eldar walking or riding a bike, it's very unlikely to get CORE unless it's a dread equivalent. Tranports, tanks and characters definitely will not get it.
I don't know DE well, but I'm sure that things like ravagers, voidraven bombers, cronos or clawed fiends won't be CORE, while wyches, kabilites, scourges or reavers are guaranteed to get it.
Talos might see CORE keyword if GW considers it Dreadnought equivalent. I won't be keeping my hopes up though.
OR and something I would personally like to see.... They sack off the re-roll hit and wound mechanic and leave that as marines thing and they get something totally different (but obviously good).
I actually think we might see a +1 to Wound on Splinter Poison weapons. It would be different and actually add some lethality to Drukhari. Don't Deathwatch get similar with their SIA? A +1 to only CORE would limit it to units that have up until now not posed much of a threat, but wounding on a 3+ and the weight of fire might change that.
Eldarsif wrote: I am just wondering how they are going to justify taking an Archon when he is most likely only going to allow reroll 1s on Core units(and maybe only limited to Kabalite warriors).
I do hope they boost his combat utility and damage.
Unless ravagers are in fact core...
Considering the past few codexes I fear we won't be seeing that.
Extrapolating from necrons and death guard, it's fairly safe to assume that anything that is not an actual eldar walking or riding a bike, it's very unlikely to get CORE unless it's a dread equivalent. Tranports, tanks and characters definitely will not get it.
I don't know DE well, but I'm sure that things like ravagers, voidraven bombers, cronos or clawed fiends won't be CORE, while wyches, kabilites, scourges or reavers are guaranteed to get it.
Talos might see CORE keyword if GW considers it Dreadnought equivalent. I won't be keeping my hopes up though.
OR and something I would personally like to see.... They sack off the re-roll hit and wound mechanic and leave that as marines thing and they get something totally different (but obviously good).
I actually think we might see a +1 to Wound on Splinter Poison weapons. It would be different and actually add some lethality to Drukhari. Don't Deathwatch get similar with their SIA? A +1 to only CORE would limit it to units that have up until now not posed much of a threat, but wounding on a 3+ and the weight of fire might change that.
Maybe as a doctrine esq ability for a specific Kabal maybe, and yes Deathwatch do get this. However as an overall special rule I doubt it, as well, they may as well have just made splinter weapons wound on 3+ instead.
I assume the interaction and special rules will come from power from pain and combat drugs etc etc. I personally, think power from pain is a good enough working ground of special rules to not need the re-roll mechanic from HQ's. Obviously, power from pain would need to be tweaked etc to be more potent, but it would be nice to see leaders of some factions that aren't hanging around being supporting characters and instead being whirlwind death machines leading from the front and not really caring for their followers as long as their goals are completed (as well, an archon wouldn't really care would they, they don't care who dies as long as they get their reward from a raid).
They should just copy almost wholesale the "Power from Pain" table from Daughters of Khaine. That is a glasshammer army done right in my opinion even if it is showing its age.
Eldarsif wrote: Talos might see CORE keyword if GW considers it Dreadnought equivalent. I won't be keeping my hopes up though.
Reading up on its fluff, almost definitely not. Craftworld warwalkers or ork deff dreads might have chance of becoming core, but these things are more similar to daemon engines or destroyers than to dreads.
Eldarsif wrote: Talos might see CORE keyword if GW considers it Dreadnought equivalent. I won't be keeping my hopes up though.
Reading up on its fluff, almost definitely not. Craftworld warwalkers or ork deff dreads might have chance of becoming core, but these things are more similar to daemon engines or destroyers than to dreads.
It does illustrate a problem with Drukhari. If haemonculus only buffs CORE <Covens>(I am guessing) then it's going to be Wrack and Grots and nothing else.
Of course we might get a buffet and each HQ buffs all CORE(Cult, Kabal, and Covens) with different boosts. That would be kinda awesome.
Jidmah wrote: It's not like that's much different from how DG or necrons work.
A haemonculus could just be buffing <Coven> units, like the Skorpekh Lord buffs all destroyers cult units.
Which means that the overall lethality of those HQ needs to be buffed considerably to make them useful. Which we might see. The current usefulness of HQs in Drukhari is woefully inadequate for the task. At least with the big DG and Necron Lords I can actually get some use out of them during the battle as they are not purely just buff bots.
At this point they kind of need to reinvent these HQs instead of just making them cheaper and cheaper.
Jidmah wrote: It's not like that's much different from how DG or necrons work.
A haemonculus could just be buffing <Coven> units, like the Skorpekh Lord buffs all destroyers cult units.
Which means that the overall lethality of those HQ needs to be buffed considerably to make them useful. Which we might see. The current usefulness of HQs in Drukhari is woefully inadequate for the task. At least with the big DG and Necron Lords I can actually get some use out of them during the battle as they are not purely just buff bots.
At this point they kind of need to reinvent these HQs instead of just making them cheaper and cheaper.
It may be a nice idea to allow say, a haemonculus and succubus without taking up a HQ slot if you take an Archon (though with the option to take them by themselves, or be allowed to take up a HQ slot also if that is your choice). If they did go down that route, so you don't run out of HQ slots but allows you to still access the special sauce HQ's if you want.
Yeah, I have no clue what you are talking about, I was just trying to help by pointing out the patters of the codices we already have. Honestly, I'm mostly reading this thread to find out if they manage to do DE well, because that's going to have implications on what orks are going to get.
I do I wish you the best of luck with your codex. The DG one is really fun to play and I absolutely wish that everyone gets a codex like that, especially all the xenos.
It may be a nice idea to allow say, a haemonculus and succubus without taking up a HQ slot if you take an Archon (though with the option to take them by themselves, or be allowed to take up a HQ slot also if that is your choice). If they did go down that route, so you don't run out of HQ slots but allows you to still access the special sauce HQ's if you want.
This is literally the opposite of the problem DE have.
Dark Eldar aren't suffering because they can't take enough HQs.
They're suffering because their HQs are, collectively, a complete waste of space.
It may be a nice idea to allow say, a haemonculus and succubus without taking up a HQ slot if you take an Archon (though with the option to take them by themselves, or be allowed to take up a HQ slot also if that is your choice). If they did go down that route, so you don't run out of HQ slots but allows you to still access the special sauce HQ's if you want.
This is literally the opposite of the problem DE have.
Dark Eldar aren't suffering because they can't take enough HQs.
They're suffering because their HQs are, collectively, a complete waste of space.
Pretty much this. In the current codex if I would get the option of not taking HQ I would not take any HQs. I think Urien and Haemie come closest to being useful as they increase the strength(Urien) and Toughness(all haemies) which I do find useful in certain Coven builds.
the_scotsman wrote:Weirdly, when GW does represent "scientific" type units, they tend to be more random and less precise abilities than space wizards channeling the powers of turbo hell to shoot lightning out of their nipples.
The haemonculus is almost unique in the fact that it is a science-y character and the benefits he provides are not random and have no chance to instantly kersplode the things he's buffing.
It is a weird pattern. Is it thematic, that in 40k, science will always be unreliable and unpredictable whereas psychic powers are more powerful and dependable? Or is it merely bad game design? I think we all know which.
vipoid wrote:If DEHQs get saddled with no options beyond the single, garbage loadouts in their kits, I think I'll take an extended break from this hobby.
Likewise. At least the haemonculi having access to borderline interesting stuff like hexrifles back when I still played the game meant I liked using them even if they were never that good in game.
the_scotsman wrote:Weirdly, when GW does represent "scientific" type units, they tend to be more random and less precise abilities than space wizards channeling the powers of turbo hell to shoot lightning out of their nipples.
The haemonculus is almost unique in the fact that it is a science-y character and the benefits he provides are not random and have no chance to instantly kersplode the things he's buffing.
It is a weird pattern. Is it thematic, that in 40k, science will always be unreliable and unpredictable whereas psychic powers are more powerful and dependable? Or is it merely bad game design? I think we all know which.
All the science types are stereotypical "mad scientist" tropes so I guess GW wanted the randomness. Maybe they are also concerned that people might try to min-max if they got to choose the science upgrade (even though they let people pick from other tables).
the_scotsman wrote:Weirdly, when GW does represent "scientific" type units, they tend to be more random and less precise abilities than space wizards channeling the powers of turbo hell to shoot lightning out of their nipples.
The haemonculus is almost unique in the fact that it is a science-y character and the benefits he provides are not random and have no chance to instantly kersplode the things he's buffing.
It is a weird pattern. Is it thematic, that in 40k, science will always be unreliable and unpredictable whereas psychic powers are more powerful and dependable? Or is it merely bad game design? I think we all know which.
All the science types are stereotypical "mad scientist" tropes so I guess GW wanted the randomness. Maybe they are also concerned that people might try to min-max if they got to choose the science upgrade (even though they let people pick from other tables).
If GW were at all ever concerned about Min Maxing we wouldn't get the broken garbage we get in the first place.
Red Corsair wrote: Well I'd say Necrons also have some pretty reliable science too, but yea DEldar should have pretty non random science as well I'd say.
You mean the rase that enslaved and repositioned suns?
So the blast pistol and blaster are unchanged (depending on what special rules they have). Shredder up to 18" (edited because I missed that). Splinter rifle and pistol has strength 2, which I'm not sure affects anything? Lowest toughness I'm aware of is a gretchin with 2, and I don't think any vehicles have a tough of 3. I have to assume there is something in the poison rule that interacts with this that makes it actually matter. The agoniser is back to matching the AP of the power sword (which it always should have), so the poison rules and points will see if it is ever a better choice.
Wyches do go up an attack like the warriors did, which I expected but is still nice. All of the wych weapons got better ap except the razor flails (and power sword of course, but that is hardly a wytch weapon). Depending on how the special rules for them work out, wyches may actually be in a good spot.
Banbaji wrote: So the blast pistol and blaster are unchanged (depending on what special rules they have). Shredder up to 18" (edited because I missed that). Splinter rifle and pistol has strength 2, which I'm not sure affects anything? Lowest toughness I'm aware of is a gretchin with 2, and I don't think any vehicles have a tough of 3. I have to assume there is something in the poison rule that interacts with this that makes it actually matter. The agoniser is back to matching the AP of the power sword (which it always should have), so the poison rules and points will see if it is ever a better choice.
Wyches do go up an attack like the warriors did, which I expected but is still nice. All of the wych weapons got better ap except the razor flails (and power sword of course, but that is hardly a wytch weapon). Depending on how the special rules for them work out, wyches may actually be in a good spot.
I believe Spore Mines are T1. Given the rather low S values being given to the splinter weapons I'm not sure what value they could possibly have.
Yeah, it's hard to say, for sure the most confusing thing for me is the increase from S1 to S2 for poison....like....why? Unless they're redesigning the way poison works somehow. Poison could be like "Strength is doubled against targets without the VEHICLE keyword" which would make splinter rifles generally slightly worse but make the splinter cannon profile make a bit more sense.
Like S1-S2 literally doesn't do anything at all, even if it's "the strength you use vs vehicles" - it's still the same against every vehicle in the whole game.
Razorflails are likely to be getting something to explain the buff to the 2 best wych weapons. I'd say most likely they become a "Make X attacks for each attack made with this weapon" weapon rather than the current "+D3 bonus attacks" thing.
EDIT: Also if poison works the way it does now Agonizers would basically never make sense over Pswords.
I wouldn't be surprised to see most weapons that need to be anti tank not take this 3 +D3 for damage approach now. Which I'm good with, leave some out there but limiting some use of random is a good thing, IMO of course. I had called this would be what they'd do with lances.
I would be surprised to see most weapons that need to be anti tank not take this 3 +D3 for damage approach now. Which I'm good with, leave some out there but limiting some use of random is a good thing, IMO of course. I had called this would be what they'd do with lances.
A Little disappointing when comparing to lascannons now though. If dark lances get D3+3 then really they should as well. The justification being that dark lances aren't necessarily better at causing damage than a lascannon, but they do have better armour penetration, which is represented with the AP-4.
However, I will reserve full judgement until we know their point cost and overall availability.
I don't mind a ravager having 3x dark lances and taking out a vehicle each per turn providing they are costed appropriately and a ravager is still a glass cannon.
Spoletta wrote: The costs are likely the ones we already have, so a triple lance ravager is 140.
Of course, I forgot about the field manual.
140pts isn't bad for a fairly flimsy unit they are mounted upon, they will undoubtably be super efficient if they get first turn though at that price if the opponent deploys aggressively.
I think if you have an armour heavy army, you deploy assuming you aren't getting first turn and try and keep as much out of LOS as possible, considering angles the Drukhari player could take to get in LOS.
EDIT: I've discussed dark lances compared to lascannons, totally forgetting that lascannons are in fact S9 and not 8 like dark lance. I still think lascannons should have some form of damage buff though, if not D3+3, a built in damage re-roll or something.
I would be surprised to see most weapons that need to be anti tank not take this 3 +D3 for damage approach now. Which I'm good with, leave some out there but limiting some use of random is a good thing, IMO of course. I had called this would be what they'd do with lances.
A Little disappointing when comparing to lascannons now though. If dark lances get D3+3 then really they should as well. The justification being that dark lances aren't necessarily better at causing damage than a lascannon, but they do have better armour penetration, which is represented with the AP-4.
However, I will reserve full judgement until we know their point cost and overall availability.
I don't mind a ravager having 3x dark lances and taking out a vehicle each per turn providing they are costed appropriately and a ravager is still a glass cannon.
I won't lie, I was thinking that same thing in relation to lascannons. However, they could always find the sweet spot price wise for Lascannons to allow for that high variance in damage. Leaving the potent AT to melta type weapons or certain high end AT uses, like that heavy laser on the primaris tank, or say a vanquisher cannon for guard, etc.
So Lascannons could be more spammy, but less reliable for that heavy damage per shot, and some other high end AT weapons could be more potent per shot, but cost more and have less of them around as a result. I'm not sure how it will work out but if the cost per potency is done well could feel alright in the end.
tbh I'm ok with ONE piece of supposedly superior xenos technology actually being markedly better than the supposedly mass produced antitank weaponry used by countless trillions in the imperial guard.
.....but who am I kidding they'll probably FAQ lascannons to be 3+D3 without adjusting any of the point costs at some point.
Spoletta wrote: The costs are likely the ones we already have, so a triple lance ravager is 140.
Of course, I forgot about the field manual.
140pts isn't bad for a fairly flimsy unit they are mounted upon, they will undoubtably be super efficient if they get first turn though at that price if the opponent deploys aggressively.
I think if you have an armour heavy army, you deploy assuming you aren't getting first turn and try and keep as much out of LOS as possible, considering angles the Drukhari player could take to get in LOS.
EDIT: I've discussed dark lances compared to lascannons, totally forgetting that lascannons are in fact S9 and not 8 like dark lance. I still think lascannons should have some form of damage buff though, if not D3+3, a built in damage re-roll or something.
The problem people keep making with this argument is that if you don't want to spam Lascannons in any of the factions that can take them then you have a massive amount of variety to go with instead, like say Multi-Melta's with their D6+2 (+4 in half range) which is even more reliable for damage output. Drukhari have nothing else readily available for dedicated anti tank besides the Dark Lance, keeping the Dark Lance at D6 damage for the silly reason that Lascannons are D6 (despite them also being S9 and 12" longer range) unnecesarrily gimps Drukhari.
I'm not totally sure the curves work out this way - but an average of 5 damage is only a 42% increase on 3.5 damage. But you could stack 36% more damage with reroll 1s to hit and wound so if those rerolls are removed (thanks Core) its potentially a bit of a wash. (If they aren't, or the Ravager gets something baseline then its different, but... we'll see.)
Probably reasonable on anything without an invul - but they are so common these days.
It's a bit frustrating seeing people constantly compare the DL to a las canon when a multimelta is WAY more comparable.
a dark lance and a multi melta are each s8 ap-4 with a damage buff. The MM has less range and is heavy but also has twice the shots.
I also full heartily disagree with this notion that going forward apparently all AT weapons should have a set minimum damage. That just makes vehicles edge closer and closer to having hull-points again guys. The entire point in variance is to increase the survive-ability of tanks.
Space marines already get litanies and re-rolls galore on an army that is somehow 90% core. They don't need to be MORE consistent.
Guard have 3:1 ratios on guns compared to everyone else, that's their constancy. I think it's kind of fitting that xenos with superior tech get the consistency.
I mean. holy crap, drukhari finally get a much needed buff and already there are marine players opining that the very same buff should apply to them...
Tyel wrote: I'm not leaping up and down on the Lance Ravager.
I'm not totally sure the curves work out this way - but an average of 5 damage is only a 42% increase on 3.5 damage. But you could stack 36% more damage with reroll 1s to hit and wound so if those rerolls are removed (thanks Core) its potentially a bit of a wash. (If they aren't, or the Ravager gets something baseline then its different, but... we'll see.)
Probably reasonable on anything without an invul - but they are so common these days.
The real difference comes in the reliability, nothing felt worse than finally getting a DL shot through only to roll a 1 on the damage and effectively do sod all. The change in the averages might not be huge but it's the lack of feels bad variance that makes things better.
Red Corsair wrote: It's a bit frustrating seeing people constantly compare the DL to a las canon when a multimelta is WAY more comparable.
a dark lance and a multi melta are each s8 ap-4 with a damage buff. The MM has less range and is heavy but also has twice the shots.
Lances don't have a 'damage buff.'
People compare them to lascannons because that's what they are, just lower strength, better AP. Once upon a time they were better than lascannons against AV 14, but worse against AV12.
Imateria wrote: The real difference comes in the reliability, nothing felt worse than finally getting a DL shot through only to roll a 1 on the damage and effectively do sod all. The change in the averages might not be huge but it's the lack of feels bad variance that makes things better.
Certainly true. I'm just not sure that's going to be enough.
Its not totally fair perhaps to pick on the best targets - but right now you get about 5 MM attack bikes for 2 Lance ravagers. That's 10 shots to 6 - and if in 12" (hardly impossible with 14" move) those 10 do more damage. Attack Bikes are Core for unclear reasons so you can engineer rerolls and other buffs if necessary (although probably hard to also get within 12" early game unless choice targets are screaming straight at you). The Ravagers are a bit tougher due to T6 and 5++ - but then dead bikes/versus wounds carrying over and degrading profiles make things a bit complicated.
Basically without additional special rules it feels like you are going to have to get an awful lot out of the soft stats of having 36" range and fly to make Ravagers really good.
I mean it could be worse - look at the Heavy Lokhust for instance.
Red Corsair wrote: It's a bit frustrating seeing people constantly compare the DL to a las canon when a multimelta is WAY more comparable.
a dark lance and a multi melta are each s8 ap-4 with a damage buff. The MM has less range and is heavy but also has twice the shots.
Lances don't have a 'damage buff.'
People compare them to lascannons because that's what they are, just lower strength, better AP. Once upon a time they were better than lascannons against AV 14, but worse against AV12.
Maybe you missed it, but they have a damage buff now. That's what I am referring to.
Voss wrote: ".... just lower strength, better AP."
So literally not the same. Right, exactly, try to keep up
Yes, ignoring the triple range for full effect on the dark lances versus multi-meltas and durability of the platforms and you would find that multi meltas are better.
Ignoring that it isn’t hard to zone out 12 inches with units, ignoring the fly keyword as well, and giving the attack bike the benefits of all its special rules while assuming the raiders get none is par for the course in a fair comparison.
I would 100% take 2 ravages over 5 attack bikes. Guaranteed damage at range is better than situational damage up close.
Leth wrote: Yes, ignoring the triple range for full effect on the dark lances versus multi-meltas and durability of the platforms and you would find that multi meltas are better.
Ignoring that it isn’t hard to zone out 12 inches with units, ignoring the fly keyword as well, and giving the attack bike the benefits of all its special rules while assuming the raiders get none is par for the course in a fair comparison.
I would 100% take 2 ravages over 5 attack bikes. Guaranteed damage at range is better than situational damage up close.
And as much as I hate the new Splinter Cannon, those attack bikes would be the perfect target for them.
Dark eldar have been a combination of Lang range shooting and in your face CC. They have never really been masters of the mid range in my experience and these changes seem to be playing into that.
A lot is going to be down to how the special rules interact, but I think it would be really good to see if all of the different play styles are viable in the new book.
Red Corsair wrote: It's a bit frustrating seeing people constantly compare the DL to a las canon when a multimelta is WAY more comparable.
a dark lance and a multi melta are each s8 ap-4 with a damage buff. The MM has less range and is heavy but also has twice the shots.
Lances don't have a 'damage buff.'
People compare them to lascannons because that's what they are, just lower strength, better AP. Once upon a time they were better than lascannons against AV 14, but worse against AV12.
Maybe you missed it, but they have a damage buff now. That's what I am referring to.
Voss wrote: ".... just lower strength, better AP."
So literally not the same. Right, exactly, try to keep up
That makes even less sense. The shorter range, close range adjustment AND 2 shots of the multimelta makes it even more 'literally not the same' than a lascannon.
Red Corsair wrote: It's a bit frustrating seeing people constantly compare the DL to a las canon when a multimelta is WAY more comparable.
a dark lance and a multi melta are each s8 ap-4 with a damage buff. The MM has less range and is heavy but also has twice the shots.
Lances don't have a 'damage buff.'
People compare them to lascannons because that's what they are, just lower strength, better AP. Once upon a time they were better than lascannons against AV 14, but worse against AV12.
Maybe you missed it, but they have a damage buff now. That's what I am referring to.
Voss wrote: ".... just lower strength, better AP."
So literally not the same. Right, exactly, try to keep up
That makes even less sense. The shorter range, close range adjustment AND 2 shots of the multimelta makes it even more 'literally not the same' than a lascannon.
It was your argument to begin with lol. I was saying comparisons were silly. But sure move the goal post.
At 24", a Multi Melta does 40% more damage than a Dark Lance.
This raises to 120% at 12".
Obviously the Dark Lance is superior at ranges where the Multi Melta cannot fire... But 24" isn't that hard a range band to be in.
Now, I'm okay with a Multi Melta being better than a Dark Lance, provided the costs are okay. They're not directly competing with one another on the same unit, they're different guns in different armies.
We don’t roll enough dice in any given game for averages to matter. Also you can’t just use the average when comparing variable to more fixed damage weapons.
When all is said and done I would rather have guaranteed damage over variable damage, especially with all the 3-4 wound models out there. Specially with dark eldar who want to be far away
Thats a stretch of logic. Nu-marines are here to stay with their 2 wounds, its a new design paradigm, complaining about this is just pointless and dumb.
