You know, it has occurred to me that very few armies can match Drukhari for how many Damage D6 weapons they can field for so cheap. Especially at BS 3+.
Which brings me to a proof of concept: the blastergeddon infantry list.
Kabal of the Obsidian Rose - 2 battalions
Archon with venom blade (57)
Archon with venom blade (57)
Archon with venom blade (57)
Drazhar (100)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
Ravager with 3 dark lances (140)
Ravager with 3 dark lances (140)
Ravager with 3 dark lances (140)
Total = 1999 points
This list includes 45 blaster-type weapons. With 24'' blasters thanks to Obsidian Rose, you just march your units forward and lay down a punishing hail of Damage D6 gunfire, making short work of vehicles and monsters. Your units are individually easy to wipe out, but even if you get second turn, few armies have enough firepower to significantly blunt the impact of your return fire.
Note that I have no plans to run such a list. For one thing, it would be ridiculously expensive unless you can kitbash or proxy some blasters. For another, it would lose me all my friends. It would also be tedious to paint and boring to play. It's only intended to challenge conventional wisdom about what a competitive Drukhari list looks like.
-Guardsman- wrote: You know, it has occurred to me that very few armies can match Drukhari for how many Damage D6 weapons they can field for so cheap. Especially at BS 3+.
Which brings me to a proof of concept: the blastergeddon infantry list.
Kabal of the Obsidian Rose - 2 battalions
Archon with venom blade (57)
Archon with venom blade (57)
Archon with venom blade (57)
Drazhar (100)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
10 Kabalite warriors with 2 blasters and a dark lance (109)
Ravager with 3 dark lances (140)
Ravager with 3 dark lances (140)
Ravager with 3 dark lances (140)
Total = 1999 points
This list includes 45 blaster-type weapons. With 24'' blasters thanks to Obsidian Rose, you just march your units forward and lay down a punishing hail of Damage D6 gunfire, making short work of vehicles and monsters. Your units are individually easy to wipe out, but even if you get second turn, few armies have enough firepower to significantly blunt the impact of your return fire.
Note that I have no plans to run such a list. For one thing, it would be ridiculously expensive unless you can kitbash or proxy some blasters. For another, it would lose me all my friends. It would also be tedious to paint and boring to play. It's only intended to challenge conventional wisdom about what a competitive Drukhari list looks like.
.
I know it's only hypothetical anyway but in that list I'd probably swap out the Ravagers, mainly because they give your opponent's a perfect target for all their anti-vehicle weapons. Not sure what I'd replace them with. Maybe Scourges or Mandrakes for a bit of mobility? (Or some form of allied detachment.)
Also, I'd be tempted to give the Archons Blasters, probably swapping out some of the Dark Lances. That give some of your Warrior squads more mobility and it means you have 3 Blasters firing at BS2+ (though admittedly this is dependant on the Legacy rules being legal).
I'd also be tempted to use Yvraine in place of Drazhar - since she can throw out a couple of Smites each turn, whilst Drazhar is either stuck on the backlines or else trying to advance alone.
(Again, I know it's only hypothetical, just thought I'd chime in a bit.)
To be honest, it's the sort of list I'd kinda like to play, just because it would be amusing to play DE in the style of Imperial Guard. Unfortunately, as you say, it would be horrendously expensive - especially for an army that probably won't even see much use.
vipoid wrote: I know it's only hypothetical anyway but in that list I'd probably swap out the Ravagers, mainly because they give your opponent's a perfect target for all their anti-vehicle weapons. Not sure what I'd replace them with. Maybe Scourges or Mandrakes for a bit of mobility? (Or some form of allied detachment.)
Yes, perhaps. Or enlarge some of the warrior units to 15 or 20, allowing you to add yet more blasters and dark lances. It makes them more vulnerable to morale, but the Obsidian Rose stratagem Failure Is Not An Option will come handy, especially against an opponent who's not familiar with it.
Also, I'd be tempted to give the Archons Blasters, probably swapping out some of the Dark Lances. That give some of your Warrior squads more mobility and it means you have 3 Blasters firing at BS2+ (though admittedly this is dependant on the Legacy rules being legal).
Even with blast pistols, Archons have a 14-inch threat range thanks to their movement. Problem is, they're unlikely to get in range of anything, because their warriors will already have mowed down everything else. I think I would keep the dark lances. Everyone acts like the -1 to hit when moving makes the dark lance no longer worth it, but that's not true at all. My Imperial Guard pays 20 pts for a lascannon (vs. the 15-pt dark lance), yet they have worse BS and no aura re-rolls.
I'd also be tempted to use Yvraine in place of Drazhar - since she can throw out a couple of Smites each turn, whilst Drazhar is either stuck on the backlines or else trying to advance alone.
-Guardsman- wrote: Yes, perhaps. Or enlarge some of the warrior units to 15 or 20, allowing you to add yet more blasters and dark lances. It makes them more vulnerable to morale, but the Obsidian Rose stratagem Failure Is Not An Option will come handy, especially against an opponent who's not familiar with it.
That's also a possibility.
To be honest, I often forget that you can take up to 20 Warriors in a single squad. Probably because you can't fit more than 10 in a transport and there's rarely much reason to take more than 5.
Even with blast pistols, Archons have a 14-inch threat range thanks to their movement.
.
Whilst technically true, the men around them have weapons with ranges of 15+", so if an Archon wants to fire a Blast Pistol he'll be hard pressed to do so without exposing himself to enemy shooting. Blasters, though, can shoot from well behind the front line.
-Guardsman- wrote: Problem is, they're unlikely to get in range of anything, because their warriors will already have mowed down everything else. I think I would keep the dark lances.
.
I mean, you could always fire the Archons first.
Hell, if you're determined to keep the Dark Lances, you could swap out 3 Kabalite Blasters for 3 Archon Blasters. Exact same weapon but you're doubling your chance of hitting.
I don't know, maybe it's just me but I like to feel that my HQs are actually contributing to the fight. Otherwise I might as well model them wearing waitress uniforms, bringing cakes and refreshments to their men.
-Guardsman- wrote: Everyone acts like the -1 to hit when moving makes the dark lance no longer worth it, but that's not true at all. My Imperial Guard pays 20 pts for a lascannon (vs. the 15-pt dark lance), yet they have worse BS and no aura re-rolls.
The main difference is that DE are supposed to be one of the most mobile armies in the game, IG are almost the opposite. It's expected that a good portion of their units will just sit where they are and shoot, whilst DE expect to be moving around. Especially when you consider that Kabalites are meant to be riding atop highly-mobile transports (which themselves suffer no penalties for moving and shooting).
Incidentally, IG actually do have access to reroll auras (granted, only from special characters, but still), as well as potential rerolls from Orders. What's more, I'd argue that the Lascannon's S9 is far more valuable then the Dark Lance's extra point of AP.
Thats a lot of infantry with no protection. You'll just be shot off the table by any army that can shoot as D6 weapons are almost pointless when we can have flat 2D and 3D easily on vehicle.
A raider with a Dis cannon is 10 wounds, T5(6), 5++, 3 Shots, as Coven str5 +1 wound 3D at 36", can move fast/fly as well all for 80pts.
10 Warriors with 2 Blasters is 10 wounds, t3, shorter range (18") slower, no fly, 2 shots vs 3 shots, no invul but PFP, but 8 wounds before you lose damage, sure its str 8, but that doesn't really matter 90% the time. This is 94pts.
Even staying as Kabal and not Coven i would still add in Raiders or venoms, i prefer raiders.
It would be better to do 5mans with 1 shredder and a Raiders for 118pts
Archon
Yvarine
5man, Shredder, Raider DC 5man, Shredder, Raider DC 5man, Shredder, Raider DC Raider DC Raider DC
Drazhar
Archon
5man, Shredder, Raider DC 5man, Shredder, Raider DC 5man, Shredder, Raider DC Raider DC Raider DC
Archon
Ravager 3x DC Ravager 3x DC Ravager 3x DC Raider DC Raider DC
1994pts
To add: You can make Blasters out of Shredders if you REALLY wanted too.
Shredders are fun but im not entirely convinced we have a good points cost for putting out shredders anymore. Maybe if someone puts a bunch in raiders but the issue is the short range becomes a problem esp. If somebody just decides to charge your raiders. At that point you have to run away from combat and you can't shoot with the guys inside. At least splitting up the units in many raiders can be good.
My real issue is just about anything outside ravagers and maybe spammed venoms can be handled better with the new wych cult and coven obsessions. I mean I could run our flyers as kabal instead of wych cults but why would I when I can get the boost for anti tank and anti monster against any of those units with 10 wounds or more.
Honestly I'd probably use kabal more for anti infantry right now. I feel like the reavers with anti tank seem to live quite long for what they are too and often people don't have as many dedicated anti bike units which only have 2 wounds tops. It sounds iffy and sometimes it sorta is but it can do some decent work against some armies. I still have trouble with tau and custodes but that will only be until my new list destroys them. I can only hope this new list can handle most factions decently. I don't think it will be able to handle a massive tank force but we will just habe to see.
This is all so weird because while I play dark eldar efficiently or attempt to (keeping up with the cost of this game is hard for me). I don't know if a mono dark eldar list is esp. Competitive. Tau destroy us pretty hard as is regardless of most army lists which forces us to rely on objectives. Custodes are tough unless you can do lots of mortal wounds. I dont know space marines now but before the nerf all the super competitive not fun to play opponents switched to them. So yeah i think i play competitive for dark eldar but not competitive for 40k. I like the armies i like. If i dont like the playstyle and/or lore im not going to play the army.
Oh and though I also planned to try out infantry dark eldar like you the issue is dark eldar are basically guardsmen now. Horde infantry isn't that hard to kill but vehicles tend to be much harder to kill in 8th. Plus if you take them in transports they're more mobile and you dont have to worry about waiting till turn 2 to ds your shredder units.
@amish: I love dissies I really do but against lots of toughness 8 tanks with 3+ armor they leave a lot to be desired (dark technomancers might be the exception). I take dissies on my ravagers and I realize dark lances and blasters roll bad from time to time and suck vs anything better than a 5+ inv. Save but saying they don't have a place would be a lie. I'm also worried about it but I may use heat lances again on reavers with the +1 To wound obsession vs tanks and monsters. It's pretty dangerous to get within half range with heat lances but 2 rolls and take the highest for damage might balance out that crappy d6 damage randomness.
Once again, DC are almost equal to lances even against most tough things 90% the time and in more situations they are just better. Basically they are only worst in a couple situations, 1 of them being T7 with no invuls (not T8 funny enough lol). Then if you go Coven (which i would) its even better, nothing we have are better than Coven DC's the sad thing is you might take a wound yourself. Unlike Blastes/HL's you don't need to get close with fragile units. Plus now you can kill and wound marines on a 2+, or a + vs Aggressors b.c +1D, meaning you have a chance to kill 3.
Also if you really want dedicated Anti-Tank and not anti-MC, just takes Haywire.
3 DC and 3 DL vs a T8 with and without an Invul at 3+ save.
3 DC vs T8 3+ no Invul = 3.33w, w/ DT = 7.5 3 DC vs T8 3+ w/ Invul = 2.67w, w/ DT = 6
3 DL vs T8 3+ no Invul = 3.50w, w/ DT = 6 3 DL vs T8 3+ w/ Invul = 2.33w, w/ DT = 4
As you can see its only when there is no Invul that a DL is better and only by 0.17 wounds, the utility of DC and that they are better 90% the time makes them well worth it until something changes. If you prefer a DL, sure thats fine, but right now how 8th works DC is just better.
Now as for HL's, bc of the 2D6 pick highest roll, it might be worth it if you like that style, not sure i haven't look as i don;t play Reavers anymore after they change what i liked about them (HoW hits and Fly byes without using CP).
Im actually unsure about taking heat lances again. Its more due to the lack of wounding power vs tanks and the fact I have to get within 9 inches to hurt the enemy. Test of skill helps a lot but its more vs toughness 8 tanks with 3+ armor where it shines.
Ugh I just don't know. I might add warriors to raiders with blasters. I forgot that if I put my core tax in raiders instead of venoms that I could get some decent special weapons firepower for fairly cheap. The real question is do I want the poisoned shots at long range more or not. Decisions, decisions. Btw if I run scourge I'd either run em with dark lances , shardcarbines or shredders. The simple reason is they don't really live long enough or cost a cheap enough amount to run as anti tank in any serious form. I could run haywire but a game vs tau or nids or another army build that is infantry heavy or vehicles without inv. Saves makes them suck. With few exceptions not many vehicles outside of eldar factions and maybe orks have -1 To hit monsters or vehicles and I don't face any of those. Plus range works very well for our faction where we can get it due to lack of return fire. Also dark lances got less expensive in points so that blasters oddly cost more.
On the subject of venoms while they seem to do some work and arrive turn one they also don't have many poisoned shots per boat. Spread in many units they can be ok but the more you have the less good they are and it comes down to core tax. I'm just unsure if I should take mandrakes or some anti infantry scourge now. Perhaps 30 shardcarbines scourge. Ugh I just don't know. Keep in mind this is just because I'd rather have my core tax with blasters in vehicles and be harder to kill while my anti infantry units are easier to kill. I don't feel like venoms with warriors as well as raiders with warriors will be efficient enough.
Amishprn86 wrote: Thats a lot of infantry with no protection. You'll just be shot off the table by any army that can shoot as D6 weapons are almost pointless when we can have flat 2D and 3D easily on vehicle.
A raider with a Dis cannon is 10 wounds, T5(6), 5++, 3 Shots, as Coven str5 +1 wound 3D at 36", can move fast/fly as well all for 80pts.
10 Warriors with 2 Blasters is 10 wounds, t3, shorter range (18") slower, no fly, 2 shots vs 3 shots, no invul but PFP, but 8 wounds before you lose damage, sure its str 8, but that doesn't really matter 90% the time. This is 94pts.
Even staying as Kabal and not Coven i would still add in Raiders or venoms, i prefer raiders.
It would be better to do 5mans with 1 shredder and a Raiders for 118pts
Archon
Yvarine
5man, Shredder, Raider DC 5man, Shredder, Raider DC 5man, Shredder, Raider DC Raider DC Raider DC
Drazhar
Archon
5man, Shredder, Raider DC 5man, Shredder, Raider DC 5man, Shredder, Raider DC Raider DC Raider DC
Archon
Ravager 3x DC Ravager 3x DC Ravager 3x DC Raider DC Raider DC
1994pts
To add: You can make Blasters out of Shredders if you REALLY wanted too.
I've got a couple of questions if you don't mind me asking:
1) Do you really prefer Shredders to Blasters? They always seem a lot more niche to me - especially given that the rest of the unit is already rocking anti-infantry shots.
2) Are Raiders really efficient enough to be worth using even though you're only utilising half their transport capacity? I know Disintegrators are good but paying 80pts just for one doesn't seem terribly efficient.
Its cheaper and almost as effective, you have a good chance to still do a wound or more, but now you can have a much better weapon vs infantry, with AP and re-rolls for that. Also you are in double tap range for infantry on your poison, i really like the combo for warriors and feel they fit better.
Shredder worst part is its range so i can see if you don't like the range, that can be a deal breaker and i fully understand that. But D6Str 6 shots are always good, and its more effective against light vehicles than blaster, say against T5-T6 vehicles (its only 0.25 wound less than a blaster vs T6) it does more damage to T5 than a blaster on average as well. Vs T8 its again only 0,25 wounds less (assuming the vehicles has 5++ for this purpose). So really 0.25 wounds to give you a much better anti-infantry weapon for less than 1/2 the points to me is well worth it over a blaster.
A venom is 65pts, a Raider is 80pts so 15points difference, they have 40% more wounds, but takes 16.7% more damage. Assuming a Stalker Bolter shooting both for now with re-rolls all 1's it'll take 16 shots to kill a venom but it'll take 24 shots to kill a Raider. So it is actually more survivable without any outside help and IMO worth the points.
We just don't see Raider spam b.c for a long time they gave up a lot of secondaries for ITC and ITC is king for list building on dakka, and also there has been a lot of Hordes, with IG, Daemons, Drones, etc.. compare to elite Marine units like we are seeing now.
I personally play with 5 of each and either throw in Talos for mono or Skyweavers for Mix, or sometimes fliers.
Amishprn86 wrote: Its cheaper and almost as effective, you have a good chance to still do a wound or more, but now you can have a much better weapon vs infantry, with AP and re-rolls for that. Also you are in double tap range for infantry on your poison, i really like the combo for warriors and feel they fit better.
Shredder worst part is its range so i can see if you don't like the range, that can be a deal breaker and i fully understand that. But D6Str 6 shots are always good, and its more effective against light vehicles than blaster, say against T5-T6 vehicles (its only 0.25 wound less than a blaster vs T6) it does more damage to T5 than a blaster on average as well. Vs T8 its again only 0,25 wounds less (assuming the vehicles has 5++ for this purpose). So really 0.25 wounds to give you a much better anti-infantry weapon for less than 1/2 the points to me is well worth it over a blaster.
I'll admit I do like the range on the Blaster, though that's at least partially because it makes it fairly easy to get within range of infantry (for the splinter rifles) and also a vehicle/monster (for the blaster).
Going by your math, the Shredder is more effective than I thought against vehicles.
I'll try swapping out my Blasters for Shredders and see how it goes.
A venom is 65pts, a Raider is 80pts so 15points difference, they have 40% more wounds, but takes 16.7% more damage. Assuming a Stalker Bolter shooting both for now with re-rolls all 1's it'll take 16 shots to kill a venom but it'll take 24 shots to kill a Raider. So it is actually more survivable without any outside help and IMO worth the points.
We just don't see Raider spam b.c for a long time they gave up a lot of secondaries for ITC and ITC is king for list building on dakka, and also there has been a lot of Hordes, with IG, Daemons, Drones, etc.. compare to elite Marine units like we are seeing now.
I personally play with 5 of each and either throw in Talos for mono or Skyweavers for Mix, or sometimes fliers.
Hmm, I can see where you're coming from. I haven't actually used Raiders in a while as they tended to die really early on (they're more survivable but in my experience they also draw far more fire). As with Shredders, I'll give them a go and see what happens.
Amishprn86 wrote: Thats a lot of infantry with no protection. You'll just be shot off the table by any army that can shoot as D6 weapons are almost pointless when we can have flat 2D and 3D easily on vehicle.
120 bodies don't get shot off the table as easily as you think. When I run my Cadians with 12 units of 10 guardsmen, it takes my opponent several turns to chew through them, even at 2000 pts. Guardsmen have roughly the same defensive profile as Kabalite warriors (T3 and 5+), worse Leadership, and no 6+ FNP.
I feel like the conventional Drukhari list that you are proposing, while well-intentioned, misses the point I'm trying to make: namely, that if you just spam the hell out of the Drukhari's cheap infantry (essentially running them as a horde army), you have enough "staying power" and special weapons to survive a first strike, then deal such a devastating second strike that you pretty much pre-empt a third strike.
I already run a transport- and Ravager-heavy Kabalite list. Believe me, I know it's effective. But at some point all Drukhari lists end up looking the same. I'm proposing an alternative take, even though I know that the Blastergeddon list is just impractical for a variety of pragmatic reasons (such as cost).
flamingkillamajig wrote: Shredders are fun but im not entirely convinced we have a good points cost for putting out shredders anymore. Maybe if someone puts a bunch in raiders but the issue is the short range becomes a problem esp. If somebody just decides to charge your raiders.
With Obsidian Rose, shredders are quite effective, now with a 18'' range.
Amishprn86 wrote: Thats a lot of infantry with no protection. You'll just be shot off the table by any army that can shoot as D6 weapons are almost pointless when we can have flat 2D and 3D easily on vehicle.
120 bodies don't get shot off the table as easily as you think. When I run my Cadians with 12 units of 10 guardsmen, it takes my opponent several turns to chew through them, even at 2000 pts. Guardsmen have roughly the same defensive profile as Kabalite warriors (T3 and 5+), worse Leadership, and no 6+ FNP.
I feel like the conventional Drukhari list that you are proposing, while well-intentioned, misses the point I'm trying to make: namely, that if you just spam the hell out of the Drukhari's cheap infantry (essentially running them as a horde army), you have enough "staying power" and special weapons to survive a first strike, then deal such a devastating second strike that you pretty much pre-empt a third strike.
One amusing thing you could do (which I think someone else proposed a while back) would be to run the list as Ynnari and use Shield of Ynnead to give most of your infantry a 5++.
Also, on the subject of infantry lists, I'm wondering if it would work better to have a Battalion of Warriors and then a Battalion of Wracks (instead of 2 Warrior Battalions)?
(I know none of us will be making this list but it's fun to theorise. )
I normally take flayed skull for my units in transports because cover bonuses are annoying as hell. In the case of blasters in raiders I might take obsidian rose (24" blasters are a decent range to prevent being charged or shot at by as many things) since I plan to go for either shardcarbine scourge or mandrakes. Shardcarbines scourge could at least be numerous enough for a little durability and fast enough I might be able to start them on the field. Considering the assault weapons I'd even be able to advance them around without issue (provided -1 To hit will be worth it).
If you are so dead set on this warrior list like i was then do what I suggested when I planned for the same thing. Take them in units of 20 and instead of taking the dark eldar codex sub factions go into Phoenix rising. One obsession allows you to only lose one guy if you fail a morale check. The other obsession allows you to spam webway assault (or whatever it's called) and that lets you buy another webway assault stratagem per detachment with that obsession (This could allow you to deep strike 4 groups of 20 warriors each for 80 total and costs 6 cp). I'm not sure if you can realistically spend more cp effectively and if any more guys ds'ing would be beyond the ds limit. 80 warriors popping up in front of you within rapid fire is still kind of scary though esp. With special weapons like blasters or shredders. If you go pure shredders that's 16 shredders. That by itself is horrifying. Not only that but every time you try to kill warriors you have to kill off the whole squad and if you don't they only lose one guy to morale failures which will still probably lose special weapons last. The issue with this list is whatever survives this shooting is now really close to you and can do a lot of damage to those warriors whether through melee or shooting.
Amishprn86 wrote: Thats a lot of infantry with no protection. You'll just be shot off the table by any army that can shoot as D6 weapons are almost pointless when we can have flat 2D and 3D easily on vehicle.
120 bodies don't get shot off the table as easily as you think. When I run my Cadians with 12 units of 10 guardsmen, it takes my opponent several turns to chew through them, even at 2000 pts. Guardsmen have roughly the same defensive profile as Kabalite warriors (T3 and 5+), worse Leadership, and no 6+ FNP.
I feel like the conventional Drukhari list that you are proposing, while well-intentioned, misses the point I'm trying to make: namely, that if you just spam the hell out of the Drukhari's cheap infantry (essentially running them as a horde army), you have enough "staying power" and special weapons to survive a first strike, then deal such a devastating second strike that you pretty much pre-empt a third strike.
I already run a transport- and Ravager-heavy Kabalite list. Believe me, I know it's effective. But at some point all Drukhari lists end up looking the same. I'm proposing an alternative take, even though I know that the Blastergeddon list is just impractical for a variety of pragmatic reasons (such as cost).
flamingkillamajig wrote: Shredders are fun but im not entirely convinced we have a good points cost for putting out shredders anymore. Maybe if someone puts a bunch in raiders but the issue is the short range becomes a problem esp. If somebody just decides to charge your raiders.
With Obsidian Rose, shredders are quite effective, now with a 18'' range.
.
You can't really compare DE to IG tho, while DE are slightly better at BS and as a 5+/6++, they are also more points. You are almost a 400pts difference for 60IG vs 60Kabals.
120 Guardsmen with no updrades (B.c you wont need them, put the weapons on something better) thats only 480pts. Your 120 kabals, 1,308pts, thats 1,128pts difference. That is over 1/2 an army more you can bring.
But you say "well they have 2 blasters and a DL each", ok so? turn 1 your blasters wont hit anything of value, that means if you moved your DL's so your other 9 guys can get into range, with an Archon rr1's you still only hit with 7. If you are Obi rose you might get away with not moving some of your heavy weapons each turn, but for sure you will move them all at least 2-3 times, and at times you'll need to run making it so they cant even shoot (if playing objective games).
My post has a more optimized version of what he wants to do if you wish to read it. It's more based around shredders though and the Phoenix rising obsessions. It should be the 2nd paragraph of my previous post.
It's basically 80 warriors with shredders in ds with Phoenix rising allowing more ds. It costs 6 cp though but it costs about 128 pts for the 16 shredders and 480 pts for the warriors. So 608 pts total but this doesn't count what you wish to do aside from that. The other issue is it's a unit that relies on waiting till turn 2 to do anything. That said much of our anti infantry is in that boat unfortunately.
Yeah and since i have'nt tried DSing 80 Kabals, idk how well it'll work but it is IMO better than 120 with DL's starting on the table. My only concern would be you being zoned out easily. Or zoned to force to DS where you don't want too. It is 80 bodies after all.
You can't really compare DE to IG tho, while DE are slightly better at BS and as a 5+/6++, they are also more points. You are almost a 400pts difference for 60IG vs 60Kabals.
120 Guardsmen with no updrades (B.c you wont need them, put the weapons on something better) thats only 480pts. Your 120 kabals, 1,308pts, thats 1,128pts difference. That is over 1/2 an army more you can bring.
But you say "well they have 2 blasters and a DL each", ok so? turn 1 your blasters wont hit anything of value, that means if you moved your DL's so your other 9 guys can get into range, with an Archon rr1's you still only hit with 7. If you are Obi rose you might get away with not moving some of your heavy weapons each turn, but for sure you will move them all at least 2-3 times, and at times you'll need to run making it so they cant even shoot (if playing objective games).
On this note, I had a bash at making an infantry IG list.
I ended up with a MT Battalion and a regular IG Brigade.
It was a total of 144 bodies including:
- 4 psykers
- 14 BS3+ Plasmaguns
- 3 BS3+ Plasma Pistols
- 3 BS4+ Plasmaguns
- 6 Grenade Launchers
- 3 Missile Launchers
- 9 Autocannons
- 3 Plasma Cannons
Now, on the face of it that might sound considerably less impressive than 24 BS3+ Blaster Shots and 12 Dark Lance shots.
But here's the kicker - the above cost just 1388pts. Less than 75% of the Infantry-Kabalite list. Hell, even if we're only playing at 1500pts, I've still got enough points to add at least a couple more squads or to tool up the existing ones further (I used Grenade Launchers because they're cheap and to see how far I could stretch the points, but I could easily trade them for more Plasmaguns, as well as adding Lascannons if I feel like it). What's more, all the BS3+ weapons have the option of deep-striking, so you've got quite a bit more flexibility when it comes to deployment.
To be honest, I'm only posting this because I'd actually forgotten just how much you can have in an IG list (shows how long it's been since I last played mine ).
Amishprn86 wrote: Thats a lot of infantry with no protection. You'll just be shot off the table by any army that can shoot as D6 weapons are almost pointless when we can have flat 2D and 3D easily on vehicle.
120 bodies don't get shot off the table as easily as you think. When I run my Cadians with 12 units of 10 guardsmen, it takes my opponent several turns to chew through them, even at 2000 pts. Guardsmen have roughly the same defensive profile as Kabalite warriors (T3 and 5+), worse Leadership, and no 6+ FNP.
I feel like the conventional Drukhari list that you are proposing, while well-intentioned, misses the point I'm trying to make: namely, that if you just spam the hell out of the Drukhari's cheap infantry (essentially running them as a horde army), you have enough "staying power" and special weapons to survive a first strike, then deal such a devastating second strike that you pretty much pre-empt a third strike.
I already run a transport- and Ravager-heavy Kabalite list. Believe me, I know it's effective. But at some point all Drukhari lists end up looking the same. I'm proposing an alternative take, even though I know that the Blastergeddon list is just impractical for a variety of pragmatic reasons (such as cost).
flamingkillamajig wrote: Shredders are fun but im not entirely convinced we have a good points cost for putting out shredders anymore. Maybe if someone puts a bunch in raiders but the issue is the short range becomes a problem esp. If somebody just decides to charge your raiders.
With Obsidian Rose, shredders are quite effective, now with a 18'' range.
.
See, that's the problem.
You say you play Imperial Guard. 120 bodies of 4 point 5+ saves don't just get shot off the table. 120 bodies of 6 point 6+ is a whole different story.
I'm not really a fan of plasma guns and I haven't played guard since 5th. In 5th plasma and melta were good. Now plasma is kinda meh (Dunno about executioner leman russ).
I still think anti infantry is poorer at long range than close range but these days im more worried about tau, custodes and marines. Tau will just spam drones and while you have to get close to deal with that (all of our anti infantry shooting is 18" max for any good volume of firepower with dissies being the exception). Funny bit is people say tau effective shooting range is 18" or less so basically all our anti infantry options have to be spammed in numbers and take either insane overwatch due to our melee units being anti infantry or we have to be in the tau shooting death zone so we either make our anti infantry shooting count and hit hard or making it spread out super far. The good thing about this is marker lights are needed just to make tau shooting somewhat accurate so negative modifiers to hit make tau cry. I may take mandrakes since a lot of anti tank my regular tau opponent takes tend to have a +1 To hit sub-system for flyers on battlesuits. Mandrakes don't fly and aren't vehicles and the -1 To hit base would annoy him.
On the other hand we have custodes which hit hard and super accurately and are great at melee. The problem again is all our anti infantry shooting except dissies is 18" range and the negative modifiers to hit doesn't do much against custodes. Also poison sucks vs armor that heavy so shredders, dissies and mandrakes are more viable. The fact custodes are accurate and lack number of shots means a lot of spread out wounds annoys them. Other good ways to counter them are good inv. Saves. I imagine wyches with 3+ inv saves with that one cult obsession would be super obnoxious for them or just wyches in general but lack of a consistent inv. Save is also crap so wracks are probably better here. If I recall custodes can't do mortal wounds or at least not in any big way and they don't have good resistance to mortal wounds. Sadly mandrakes aren't as good here except for the ap they have and mortal wounds. The inv save is ok but they are expensive and custodes shooting and melee would still shred them. They just become extremely expensive and fragile per model vs custodes shooting and melee and can't really run away too fast.
@amish: I could always try out this warrior horde in ds build. I already have the shredders I need. I just don't know if I want to do this because it'd really screw up my current idea for handling tau. Also once those warriors are bogged down in melee they are stuck there. The main issue is short ranged shooting doesn't work so hot in numbers as you said and most of our spammed shots for shooting are either longer range and less bodies (mandrakes, shardcarbines scourge and venoms), lots of shots and bodies at 12" range (spammed warriors in the loadout I suggested), short range (shredder scourge) or mounted good anti infantry at 12" range (Shredders in transports). Anything at 12" range will be charged, have trouble shooting something due to unit size or get lit up by shooting like times square on new years eve. 18" shooting is vulnerable usually to be wiped out. Looking at all the options I'm actually thinking mandrakes are the best option all around but it's all hardly ideal.
Amishprn86 wrote: You can try out the horde list, just if you don't have the models i would proxy them for now before you buy them lol. If you do show us a Bat rep!
When I asked people for a counter to all the lists I fight the most interesting response and "oh I'm stupid" feeling I had was somebody suggesting lots of grotesques. After that I realized if I took a small detachment of 10 or more grotesques and gave them the -1 damage trait it'd basically negate those annoying heavy burst cannons I hate so much (I might take em on foot). Another thing it does is it negates a lot of the multiple damage attacks of custodes, has invulnerable saves the custodes can't get rid of and a fairly high toughness and wounds. The flesh gauntlet attacks should also eventually hurt riptides and should hurt custodes. My only problem is that riptides will still probably be able to stay away from them if they want to. They won't be easy to shift though.
I will have to give support to these grotesques though (killing off single damage attack enemies where possible so the grotesques don't get hurt too badly) but 350 pts for 10 is a steal and I already have at least 10. Grotesques in this build won't be able to really hurt vehicles, knights or even big monsters too well though. So yeah if nothing else grotesques would be there to hold those enemies down while the anti vehicle and anti monster goes to work. I'm also unsure if I should start them out on the table, in transports or ds them. I think I was thinking of starting them on the board but then it'd take forever to get em somewhere if im facing a gun-line whereas if its a melee army they become a good shield for my shooting units. If I ds them and fail a charge though they'll be out in the open with all these guns in their face. It might not be a big deal though since they'd make a good bullet sponge for not a lot of points and they'd be able to eat up shots. Yeah ds is probably the way to go even with haemonculus as his own ds with them.
No I'm saying I chatted in some dark eldar Facebook page for tactics on my local meta and grotesques with the -1 damage obsession sound like the best choice they suggested. It was something I have and something that's so obvious to do and yet I didn't realize it.
That said I heard farsight enclaves got some really nasty crisis suit ds abilities but I'm still on vacation and haven't seen their greater good psychic awakening book yet. It sounds ridiculously OP and cheap in points. I feel like somebody wrote something wrong because there's no way something so low in points could hit that ridiculously hard. I don't know all the circumstances but the best tactic against the crisis suit spam seems to be spamming cheap units possibly, using dissies and focusing them down but that still might not be enough.
-------------
It's also probably irrelevant but maybe I should zoom a couple archons over there in transports to get ready for the turn 2 ds so I can get lots of re roll to hit 1s. Hmm but if I am already ds'ing so many infantry maybe I should ds archons there as well since it isn't safe to go in a transport and on foot is far too slow. Meh it's probably not worth it getting the archons over there. It'd just end up costing too much in various ways and/or being too risky and they might not get there in time anyway. Re roll 1s to hit on all those warriors would be hilarious but i dont know that itd be worth it. Spending more than 6 cp on this is also crap for giving them archon 6" buff.
vipoid wrote: Since we're on the subject of unusual lists/tactics, might I ask if anyone has managed to make use of any of the following:
- The Soul-Seeker (Seems fun but IMO could do with an extra shot, and is further hampered by being exclusive to Poison Tongue)
- Spirit-Sting (Another pistol and one that negates invulnerable saves but with D1 I'm uncertain as to what it's meant to be shooting at.)
- Traitor's Embrace (The idea of a suicide-Succubus amuses me greatly but has anyone got this to work?)
- Treacherous Deceiver Warlord Trait (This looks like it's meant to combo with something... but for the life of me I can't figure out what.)
- Literally any of the Custom Kabals (Especially curious as to whether anyone has used the melee ones)
- Slashing Impact or Dark Harvest
- The Cronos
the soul-seeker and spirit-sting both fill a similar role of being a character hunting relic. Personally i find the spirit string better since it bypasses most non-marine character save completely, while leaving marines with a 6+ usually. the downside is that you need to be playing the dark creed and pay 2 cp to be able to snipe characters. with 3 shots its got decent generic firepower against infantry at least. I'd love to see it get a buff on its damage tho.
Suicide succubi is fun when it works. I use her with painbringer + the net to lock down a character in combat and force him to blow me up, keep a reroll for the damage roll.
treacherous deceiver is a great addition to the previously mentionned succubis when running an alliance of agony (so you don't forfeit your warlord).
custom kabals are a joke and i see no reason to take any of them over black heart/flayed skull, the only one that has a redeeming quality is the extra webway strike one for gimmicky lists.
slashing impact is good but really needed to work on vehicles too.
the cronos is cute and helps in cult/coven lists but from my experience any support units that are targettable will get blown up super fast. If the cronos was a character instead of a regular unit, it would be much more interesting, as it stands hes just an overly expensive half-lieutenant that might heal something if youre extremely lucky.
So she's made out of naked people? Either that or somebody has a really weird fetish but if it's dark eldar or slaanesh that's not exactly surprising.
On the dark eldar Facebook group I'm a part of there's a significant amount of prudes in there if I recall. A lot aren't but I dunno. For instance some use slave girl models from other studios. Personally I don't think I'd ever buy those models in case I get a girlfriend. It's not my thing but you can't exactly have slave girl models unless the lady you're with is into bdsm or something and while I love pervy girls (in fact I think if I end up with a lady one of the things she must be is a pervert) the whole bdsm thing just isn't my style.
That said if it's your thing and you want to buy these models it's entirely up to you. It's not good to kink shame unless somebody is being hurt or it's super predatory.
And its not prude, DE used to have slave girls for sell up till a year ago.... Slaanesh had naked models for 20yrs. Its 40k its about sex, death, drugs, and war. I just find it funny that we have Wyches and Slaanesh models but people say this is prude.... Remember kids, killing and Drugs are ok, but not nipples.
Even if it didn't have the naked dead women, the style of the model is what i like, i could care less about 2mm plastic toy boobs.
No you mistake what I said. People were getting angry about people using naked female characters for err....political reasons. I don't mind it but it's not something I feel the need to buy and I don't think I'd shame a person for having bought it.
I'd highly doubt many girls play warhammer in general so this might not be that big a deal anyway. There are only maybe 3 female painters at my local gw. I think the general consensus is female gw hobbyists are casual gamers usually if they do play. For that reason forum members which are female are pretty rare because casual players tend not to join the sites as much.
Funny story btw. I haven't seen many attractive gw gamer girls but there was one on a forum I was at once. She seemed to like me and was a nerdy, pervy, hot gamer girl. Talk about a unicorn. Also no I never gave her money and she never asked for it. She was probably a catfish but a friend reverse searched her image and found no other similar image. I messed up bad with her. I still kick myself over that whole incident but pretty gw girls that play every now and then and wear tank tops to attract the guys seem to be a thing. It has to be the attention they're going for.
Hopefully saying this is allowed. I'm not saying this is a problem. Most twilight fans are women and a lot of Harry potter fans are also women. Some hobbies have different demographics and maybe that's ok to have. I mean not everything has to appeal to everybody. As they say if you try to make everybody happy you end up making nobody happy.
Anyway sorry for my rant. Continue enjoying what you like. One cute girl I tried to date at one time which talks to me every so often now at the sandwich shop near the gw is a nerd and she likes vampire shows. It's a little silly to me but I'd never take that away from her and I still always thought she was cute.
--------
I'll trying getting back on topic for next post. I'm sorry.
Oh ok got it Sorry mate.
I'm getting like 100 messages saying how i am satan, i must like BDSM and gak, i'm a little pissed off right now, especially when GW has these very same models and i hate BDSM...
Its so crazy, they are ok with the murder, skinning of people, drugs, torture, and a nipper from GW, but as soon as nother company does it, BAM its "wrong" lol.
EDIT: Look at my profile, i just like the Coven style of aesthetics with mad doctors and a like. A daemon hunting for bodies to flay their skin is nothing new for GW and that is what the model is doing., very Coven like. And Vect like too as he has done that to his own Archons lol.
It's these stupid times we live in Amish. Sometimes I wish I could time travel back to the 90s or at least 2010 before people cried about everything being offensive.
I kind of want to make a tabletop game about biker gangs in hell as a middle finger to overly offended people on both sides of the aisle. Death in the game would be quick, gory, painful and people would quickly forget about you when you die (similar to gears of war or the old fallout games). It'll also be stated depending on the sins you do in hell they'll be added to your sins on earth so if you die in hell after sinning you come back in a much worse part of it.
The game will be about trying to take over hell from the devil originally. Each bike gang fights for territory and how bad they are depends on the player. I'm planning on doing some test games with 40k players at the local gw. We will play at a different game store obviously. I don't know if I'll get into details about sex slaves in the game but it will be implied. They will talk about other slaves though. If I had to say it'll probably be somewhere between 40k models and nude models. I want female models to be sexy but probably not like mega boobs and nips sticking out. There has to be a good middle ground. I really enjoy big boobs and I'm not gonna lie there but if I made female models for this game each boob should fit exactly into the hand of a character model. No more and no less.
Ugh I wanted to talk about dark eldar but now here we are.
EDIT: Ok About DE, that model is my new Yncarne, tho i'll still bring the old Yncarne around in case someone gets mad its not a GW model.
I have a bit of gameplay written already on that bike gang from hell thing. It's a bit hero centric but not entirely. They can buff and do some game changing stuff. I'll let you know more when I add a bunch more.
This is all provided I don't get heavily side tracked by dark souls 1 very soon. I'd have gladly played it tonight since I finally got home from Arizona but my internet cut off time meant my computer wouldn't download it in time and now I'm stuck in effing limbo doing....something until I can play it with an Xbox 360 controller like it's meant to be played.
--------
Anyway I'm gonna write a bunch of dark eldar lists with different army lists at some point. These lists will include 80 warriors with 16 shredders, 10 grotesques or more, dissie raiders with blaster warriors (If possible I might upgrade the raiders with dark lance instead) and other options. I might even try out mandrakes in some lists I write. It really depends on which list I'm happy with.
I'm getting like 100 messages saying how i am satan, i must like BDSM and gak, i'm a little pissed off right now, especially when GW has these very same models and i hate BDSM...
Sorry to hear that. I find that sort of thing utterly ridiculous.
EDIT: Look at my profile, i just like the Coven style of aesthetics with mad doctors and a like. A daemon hunting for bodies to flay their skin is nothing new for GW and that is what the model is doing., very Coven like. And Vect like too as he has done that to his own Archons lol.
Yeah, I really don't see the issue. It seems no worse than, say, the Corpse Cart in AoS. I know one of the corpses has tits but so does near enough the entire Slaanesh range - including the mounts.
Regarding the model, I actually wish it was slightly more mutated-looking. I'd like to have seen the corpses more merged-together somehow, rather than just kinda sitting in a heap.
Maybe something like the front image in this, but with multiple corpses merging:
Spoiler:
Just something to imply that the corpses were actually being assimilated, like in The Thing.
flamingkillamajig wrote: No you mistake what I said. People were getting angry about people using naked female characters for err....political reasons. I don't mind it but it's not something I feel the need to buy and I don't think I'd shame a person for having bought it.
I'd highly doubt many girls play warhammer in general so this might not be that big a deal anyway. There are only maybe 3 female painters at my local gw. I think the general consensus is female gw hobbyists are casual gamers usually if they do play. For that reason forum members which are female are pretty rare because casual players tend not to join the sites as much.
Funny story btw. I haven't seen many attractive gw gamer girls but there was one on a forum I was at once. She seemed to like me and was a nerdy, pervy, hot gamer girl. Talk about a unicorn. Also no I never gave her money and she never asked for it. She was probably a catfish but a friend reverse searched her image and found no other similar image. I messed up bad with her. I still kick myself over that whole incident but pretty gw girls that play every now and then and wear tank tops to attract the guys seem to be a thing. It has to be the attention they're going for.
Hopefully saying this is allowed. I'm not saying this is a problem. Most twilight fans are women and a lot of Harry potter fans are also women. Some hobbies have different demographics and maybe that's ok to have. I mean not everything has to appeal to everybody. As they say if you try to make everybody happy you end up making nobody happy.
Anyway sorry for my rant. Continue enjoying what you like. One cute girl I tried to date at one time which talks to me every so often now at the sandwich shop near the gw is a nerd and she likes vampire shows. It's a little silly to me but I'd never take that away from her and I still always thought she was cute.
--------
I'll trying getting back on topic for next post. I'm sorry.
I'd argue attitudes like this are why female gamer stay away from forums.
I have no issue with the nudity on Slaneesh and Drukhari models, it fits the themes though I'd never use them myself. But this kind of gatekeeping boys club stuff needs to get in the bin. Girls are casuals, pretty girls that play just want attention, look at how they dress etc.
flamingkillamajig wrote: No you mistake what I said. People were getting angry about people using naked female characters for err....political reasons. I don't mind it but it's not something I feel the need to buy and I don't think I'd shame a person for having bought it.
I'd highly doubt many girls play warhammer in general so this might not be that big a deal anyway. There are only maybe 3 female painters at my local gw. I think the general consensus is female gw hobbyists are casual gamers usually if they do play. For that reason forum members which are female are pretty rare because casual players tend not to join the sites as much.
Funny story btw. I haven't seen many attractive gw gamer girls but there was one on a forum I was at once. She seemed to like me and was a nerdy, pervy, hot gamer girl. Talk about a unicorn. Also no I never gave her money and she never asked for it. She was probably a catfish but a friend reverse searched her image and found no other similar image. I messed up bad with her. I still kick myself over that whole incident but pretty gw girls that play every now and then and wear tank tops to attract the guys seem to be a thing. It has to be the attention they're going for.
Hopefully saying this is allowed. I'm not saying this is a problem. Most twilight fans are women and a lot of Harry potter fans are also women. Some hobbies have different demographics and maybe that's ok to have. I mean not everything has to appeal to everybody. As they say if you try to make everybody happy you end up making nobody happy.
Anyway sorry for my rant. Continue enjoying what you like. One cute girl I tried to date at one time which talks to me every so often now at the sandwich shop near the gw is a nerd and she likes vampire shows. It's a little silly to me but I'd never take that away from her and I still always thought she was cute.
--------
I'll trying getting back on topic for next post. I'm sorry.
I'd argue attitudes like this are why female gamer stay away from forums.
Because of one post every million that they (presumably) consider mildly sexist?
I'm not saying the OP is necessarily correct about female 40k players (though i fear I lack any personal experience with such, as to the best of my recollection there haven't been any at the wargaming clubs I usually play at).
Rather, it seems strange to say that posts like this are what's keeping female gamers from frequenting forums, given that such posts are hardly the norm, let alone frequently enough that anyone visiting can expect to be subjected to them on any sort of consistent basis.
flamingkillamajig wrote: No you mistake what I said. People were getting angry about people using naked female characters for err....political reasons. I don't mind it but it's not something I feel the need to buy and I don't think I'd shame a person for having bought it.
I'd highly doubt many girls play warhammer in general so this might not be that big a deal anyway. There are only maybe 3 female painters at my local gw. I think the general consensus is female gw hobbyists are casual gamers usually if they do play. For that reason forum members which are female are pretty rare because casual players tend not to join the sites as much.
Funny story btw. I haven't seen many attractive gw gamer girls but there was one on a forum I was at once. She seemed to like me and was a nerdy, pervy, hot gamer girl. Talk about a unicorn. Also no I never gave her money and she never asked for it. She was probably a catfish but a friend reverse searched her image and found no other similar image. I messed up bad with her. I still kick myself over that whole incident but pretty gw girls that play every now and then and wear tank tops to attract the guys seem to be a thing. It has to be the attention they're going for.
Hopefully saying this is allowed. I'm not saying this is a problem. Most twilight fans are women and a lot of Harry potter fans are also women. Some hobbies have different demographics and maybe that's ok to have. I mean not everything has to appeal to everybody. As they say if you try to make everybody happy you end up making nobody happy.
Anyway sorry for my rant. Continue enjoying what you like. One cute girl I tried to date at one time which talks to me every so often now at the sandwich shop near the gw is a nerd and she likes vampire shows. It's a little silly to me but I'd never take that away from her and I still always thought she was cute.
--------
I'll trying getting back on topic for next post. I'm sorry.
I'd argue attitudes like this are why female gamer stay away from forums.
Because of one post every million that they (presumably) consider mildly sexist?
I'm not saying the OP is necessarily correct about female 40k players (though i fear I lack any personal experience with such, as to the best of my recollection there haven't been any at the wargaming clubs I usually play at).
Rather, it seems strange to say that posts like this are what's keeping female gamers from frequenting forums, given that such posts are hardly the norm, let alone frequently enough that anyone visiting can expect to be subjected to them on any sort of consistent basis.
It's the attitude behind posts like this that keeps women away from the hobby, not some innate male versus female preference for miniatures. Stuff like this makes it clear that men in the hobby look down on women, see them as fake gamers and only value them for their looks. No wonder they avoid nerdy pursuits.
Posts like this might not be the norm, but attitudes like that are all too common in the hobby.
vipoid wrote: Very well, I won't answer. As you say, I doubt it will lead to a positive discussion.
In that case, to get us back onto topic, how are people finding the new Incubi?
Now that a decent amount of time has passed, do you think they were sufficiently improved by Phoenix Rising, or are they still somewhat lacklustre?
I've yet to see them on the board, but I can't tell if that's because they were locked up in an expensive box or because they just aren't much good. I suspect the latter though. I don't see what role they fill that can't be done better by other Drukhari units.
Excuse me? I don't dislike female gamers. I actually tried dating a few. Honestly dude I think the real issue is people such as yourself have a victim complex. I say this because I used to have one. You have seen some legit forms of being a victim and suddenly you think everybody's trying to attack you or someone else even though they're not. I used to get bullied a ton when I was younger but often I would mistake people either mildly teasing me later or actually trying to compliment me as more bullying and because of that I got defensive and because some weren't even intending ill will I was the jerk. I mean how would you feel if you were trying to be nice to somebody that was depressed and then they insulted you and punched you in the nose. You might think "WOW what a jerk?! I was just trying to be nice to that guy! Well never again!" and then they'll start to hate you.
As far as your "question" i'm just saying men and women tend to like different things. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it. I might laugh at vampire shows and a lady working at the local sandwich shop made fun of the guys that came in from GW. She called us "the nerd herd". Where is your hobby of acceptance now when others still look down on us (and she was admittedly a friend of a GW player)? You see the thing is it doesn't really bother me because it's not that big of a deal. There was even a dude that rolled down his window of his car while driving and called us nerds for waiting outside the local GW.
As for women i'm not looking down on them. Sometimes i'm bummed they like different things. I only see someone as a fake gamer if they dress up in a ridiculously sexed up version of some fictional character and do it just for attention. You want women to be treated as fellow gamers right? Well doing that isn't gonna help.
I've yet to see them on the board, but I can't tell if that's because they were locked up in an expensive box or because they just aren't much good. I suspect the latter though. I don't see what role they fill that can't be done better by other Drukhari units.
I'm inclined to agree.
Though I find myself wondering if part of the problem is our transports. It used to be that open-topped transports provided a bonus for assault units (that you could jump out of them and still assault in the same turn). Now though, there's 0 benefit for assault units being in open-topped transports. If I have a unit of Kabalites (or even Mandrakes) in a Venom/Raider, I can move it into position in my Movement phase and then they can immediately fire in my shooting phase. However, if I have a unit of Incubi in a Venom/Raider, I can move them into position... and that's it. They can't get out this turn, so my opponent gets an entire turn to respond - whether re-positioning to take his units out of charge range (meaning my Incubi either blunder across no-man's-land or spend another entire turn stuck in their transport), or else simply blowing the transport out of the sky.
And that's assuming I get to move my transports first. If a unit of Incubi have their transport shot out from under them whilst they're still on the deployment line then they might as well pack it in and go home there and then.
The issue with incubi is they were a mercenary unit and they have good armor in a time when expensive units with good armor is a bad thing. Also they're strength 4 and cut through some armor which oddly means they're going up against grotesques which are just better. The only thing they have grotesques don't is they might be able to do more attacks but lack of durability is gonna be the end of them. Also i'd rather have a 5+ inv. save, str 5 (rather than 4) and 4 wounds and much higher toughness than an incubi that can have its save modified negatively.
*sigh* I'm wondering if I should've let that issue go in my last comment. I just don't like it when people insult me and make claims about my character without me being able to defend myself.
I find the Incubi to be fun (mainly due to how nice the models are), but not great for the reasons already expressed.
I've been putting them in a Raider with my Archon, and at 14pts a model they are now a cheaper explosion insurance than a Lhamaean.
I've found Drazhar to be pretty great for his points, and so I take Incubi pretty much just because I'm fielding him. Overall, Mandrakes are still the better option, albeit not aesthetically.
Amishprn86 wrote: Incubi are suffering from the "GW didn't understand how 8th work so its suck with 7th stats and points"
Yeah there has been a lot of that. You can't change all the rules and not adjust the stats.
I think transports need a rework across the board to be honest. The only good ones are the ones that basically function as cheap gunboats too.
I wish they had those shooting helmets they had in Dawn Of War and then they benefitted from Kabal rules.
They had them in 40k too for a long time lol
Yea and it was garbage it counted them as having a splinter pistol which back then was strength 3 not poison. It was basically a way to get them an extra attack with the old rules because apparently it was to much of a leap back then to just give them another attack on their profile
Back then you could give an archon a punisher or a tormentor helm among other things I won't mention
I don't think incubi are terrible now, as others have said already 8th edition just has too many rules working against assault while promoting shooting so your starting the race on one leg.
It also doesn't help that mandrakes out class them in every department
Amishprn86 wrote: Incubi are suffering from the "GW didn't understand how 8th work so its suck with 7th stats and points"
Yeah there has been a lot of that. You can't change all the rules and not adjust the stats.
I think transports need a rework across the board to be honest. The only good ones are the ones that basically function as cheap gunboats too.
I wish they had those shooting helmets they had in Dawn Of War and then they benefitted from Kabal rules.
They had them in 40k too for a long time lol
Yea and it was garbage it counted them as having a splinter pistol which back then was strength 3 not poison. It was basically a way to get them an extra attack with the old rules because apparently it was to much of a leap back then to just give them another attack on their profile
Back then you could give an archon a punisher or a tormentor helm among other things I won't mention
I don't think incubi are terrible now, as others have said already 8th edition just has too many rules working against assault while promoting shooting so your starting the race on one leg.
It also doesn't help that mandrakes out class them in every department
An Assault 1 6" range that can be used like a Pistol would be a cheap way to just make them slightly better, though it isn't a drastic fix.
I used to always use Grotesques in Raiders (there was a formation for it back in 7th). However, in 8th I'm not keen on it. The transport rules mean you don't actually get much extra mobility and it also means you're not taking advantage of their durability.
If I was set on transports, I'd probably have 4 Grotesques and then a Lhamaean or Ur-Ghul (a cheap model to absorb a roll of 1 if the transport gets shot down).
My preferred option, though, is to simply footslog them, clustered around a Haemonculus.
It's not quite Raider speed but they're still moving 8+d6" on turn 1, and can also move as a formation. What's more, it means they're T6 from the get-go and can hopefully absorb quite a bit of fire from your opponent.
Don't ds with screaming jet raiders. I've done it before. Ds is at the very end of movement meaning it comes after your troops are allowed to leave transports so you have to wait till your next turn with 3 raiders in front of the enemys line doing nothing. Screaming jets should only be used for shooting units and even then I just don't know. It might be better just to start them on the board since our transports are so fast.
The worry of raiders blowing up is very real. For some reason when I ran blaster archons way back the archons would often roll a 1 and auto die. I think I rolled ones for both my archons once. Of course it's always better to run them to boost your ravagers but this was earlier in 8th before I got used to em.
Most of your other choices are good. Even transporting them with raiders is ok. It really depends what you want to do with your grotesques. If you foot slog them they are probably better for screening your units from incoming melee units and only if you have a lot of firepower going to the enemy. Using the webway or raiders is good against gun-line armies.
I looked over the footslog, but didn't like the interaction with them an the Yncarne which I am running in an 1800 point list.
I have been using my Wraithblades as Grotesques because its so hard to find them for a reasonable price.
Now I am running 10 Wraithblades with Yncarne in a Ynarri Supreme Command detachment. I think they can footslog better with the Yncarne and two Warlock Skyrunners than Grotesques......I hope.
Yncarne must survive and not just teleport all over... :-)
I don't play competitively, but I really like using Mandrakes to attack/tag backline units, clear buildings, grab objectives, and target poorly positioned characters.
They aren't exceptional at any one thing, but are really decent, and bring a lot of versatility to a TAC list.
Rafss wrote: Hi, are you using Mandrakes? Rather, in competitive matches or in friendly matches. What is the purpose of Mandrakes in your games?
I'll usually include a unit or two for flavour reasons.
As to their purpose... they don't really have one. They're probably the closest thing in the DE book to a 'jack of all trades' unit. Hence, I don't have a specific role for them when I'm building a list. Instead, I'll always put them into reserves and will simply look at the situation on turn 2-3. Maybe there's an infantry unit I want help killing, maybe there's a unit out of LoS of most of the rest of my army that I want dead, maybe there's an objective I want to get some models on.
I will say that I tend to lean much more towards using them for shooting and holding objectives than for melee combat (especially in the turn that they actually arrive). Indeed, their 'guns' actually have a pretty decent range, so I might well deep strike them in range of a few targets and just see which one I need help killing.
I don't disagree, though I will say that - in spite of their age - the current Mandrake models are still some of my favourites in the DE range. Their lower bodies are a bit blocky but from the torso up I think their sculpts still hold up exceptionally well. Still, they could really do with more poses, not to mention a sturdier material.
Also, I know I've said this a million times but I'd really like them to get an actual HQ model.
I really like their lore but it frustrates me that it's basically impossible to build around them because they're currently just a single unit with no HQs and zero support from the rest of the army.
I'm curious at people's experience and opinion of Scourges?
I love the look of the models, but on paper they seem very one-shot to me. I know that as a Drukhari player I shouldn't be too concerned about disposable units, but they seem super fragile, even by our standards.
How do they compare to Mandrakes as a harassment unit?
harlokin wrote: I'm curious at people's experience and opinion of Scourges?
I love the look of the models, but on paper they seem very one-shot to me. I know that as a Drukhari player I shouldn't be too concerned about disposable units, but they seem super fragile, even by our standards.
How do they compare to Mandrakes as a harassment unit?
scourge are very much a one shot unit and not that great at it either. Mandrakes are much better at harassing and holding objectives because of their -1 to hit.
Scourge benefitting from cover is cute and helps their durability, but even then its still a 3+ save on 1 wounds, T3 models.
If you want to run them, MSU with a specialized role (haywire for big vehicles with invulns, shredder for screens, blaster for light vehicles) is the best way to run them
If you want to run them, MSU with a specialized role (haywire for big vehicles with invulns, shredder for screens, blaster for light vehicles) is the best way to run them
Pretty much this.
Three units of 5 each of which with 4 special weapons of the same type appearing in round 2 could shift the tide in your direction.
harlokin wrote: I'm curious at people's experience and opinion of Scourges?
I love the look of the models, but on paper they seem very one-shot to me. I know that as a Drukhari player I shouldn't be too concerned about disposable units, but they seem super fragile, even by our standards.
How do they compare to Mandrakes as a harassment unit?
The issue with scourge is they're a suicide unit meant for anti-tank and 8th ed 40k has fairly durable vehicles. Point for point they're not gonna eliminate vehicles effectively. If you want to do that you have to put anti-tank in vehicles of your own. That said scourge still have anti-infantry options like shardcarbines and shredders. Shardcarbines have more range and a lot of shots but no ap making them terrible against MEQ units in cover or custodes (they're cheap and you take them in units of 10). Shredders are fun in numbers but the low model count means they'll die fast. At least they don't take up much room and can DS into small areas in units of 5 even with bigger base size due to recent base size increase.
The one anti-tank upgrade that may be effective for scourge is dark lances due to the long range keeping them away from the enemy and that is a huge maybe. If they have to move their shooting weapons are -1 to hit but you can even start them on the board turn 1. The unfortunate thing is whatever can hit them at that long range effectively enough will kill them so you may have to hide them if it's unlikely you'll get first turn which means you'll be at -1 to hit.
harlokin wrote: I'm curious at people's experience and opinion of Scourges?
I love the look of the models, but on paper they seem very one-shot to me. I know that as a Drukhari player I shouldn't be too concerned about disposable units, but they seem super fragile, even by our standards.
I used to use them a lot but they've gradually disappeared from my lists. I think part of it has to do with their weapon options.
I don't like Poisoned Weapons at the best of times, so the last thing I want is Shardcarbines or Splinter Cannons. I know some people like them with Shredders, but my lists rarely need any extra anti-infantry, and the few times I've actually tried them they've just been dismal.
That leaves Dark Lances, Blasters or Haywire. Dark Lances seem like a waste because they can't take advantage of their mobility with them. Blasters are waaaay too expensive for a unit that's already unlikely to live more than 1 turn. That leaves only Haywire.
Indeed, when I used to use them it was always with 4x Haywire. This was at least one of the cheaper ways to run them.
The issue is that, even taking into account their cost, I just don't think they do nearly enough damage for such a fragile unit. Haywire can be good but it's really unreliable as you've got random shots on each weapon and then after that you're basically just fishing for 6s. What's more, I'm not even getting good use of their 14" move. Usually I'll just deep strike them, and then they won't even be around to move next turn.
It's a shame as I adore the Scourge models.
harlokin wrote: How do they compare to Mandrakes as a harassment unit?
I'd definitely pick Mandrakes over Scourges for harassment. They're good all-rounders and I prefer their 5++/6+++ with -1 to hit to the Scourges' 4+/6++/6+++. Plus the Mandrakes can actually do work in melee.
In some ways mandrakes are good but you all have to keep in mind some very important things about our anti-infantry firepower. It's anywhere from 12" to 18" range excepting splinter cannons which are 36" but that's ineffective range because it's rapid fire 3. That only leaves disintegrator cannons as our 36" range anti infantry weapon and it can only be taken on ravagers, raiders and razorwing jets.
I'm not saying mandrakes are bad. They actually sound good all things considered except movement speed and against a custodes army they'd fall over like it's no big deal. Against tau and guard it could be good. The exception is that new farsight enclave crisis suit burst cannon spam but it's dumb and could even kill a unit of 10 grotesques fully boosted. Seriously as far as I heard it's dumb. They supposedly hit on 2+ due to instant markerlights and the fact they're 3+ to hit base. Let's be real here. Tau has never been an easy match-up for dark eldar. Just when I make an army that can maybe handle some riptides or even 3 riptides I have to deal with farsight crisis suit spam DSbs.
flamingkillamajig wrote: That said yeah skyweavers with haywire cannons over scourge with haywire every day all day.
Yeah, it's kinda depressing just how much better Skyweavers are compared with Scourges.
2 Skyweavers with Glaives and Haywire Cannons is 92pts
5 Scourges with 4 Haywire Blasters is also 92pts.
The Skyweavers have 2d6 Haywire Shots whilst the Scourges have 4d3, so the latter are slightly more reliable. Unfortunately, that's really all the Scourges have going for them.
The Skyweavers are faster (+2" Movement, automatically move +6" when Advancing, and can Advance and still Charge).
The Skyweavers are more durable (6 wounds at T4, 4++ and enemies are at -1 to hit vs T3, 4+/6++/6+++)
The Skyweavers actually have decent melee (6 attacks at S4 AP-2 D2), whilst the Scourges have no melee to speak of.
Finally, the Skyweavers can have additional squad members who each bring the exact same tools to the table. So a squad of 4 would have 4d6 Haywire shots and 12 S4 AP-2 D2 melee attacks. Meanwhile, the Scourges can only ever have 4 special weapons. So even the minimum squad can't have the full 5 Haywire Blasters, and the only thing additional Scourges can hope to do is soak up wounds.
And this is before we even get to the fact that Scourges basically have 0 support from their own book.
That is really depressing reading. I was looking at the lovely Scourge models and was hoping I could do something useful with them.
I don't dislike the clowns per se, but I'm really more about using what the Drukhari dex has to offer. That said, I don't mind the idea of using the Ynnari characters, Yvraine in particular seems a good HQ pick.
harlokin wrote: That is really depressing reading. I was looking at the lovely Scourge models and was hoping I could do something useful with them.
I don't dislike the clowns per se, but I'm really more about using what the Drukhari dex has to offer. That said, I don't mind the idea of using the Ynnari characters, Yvraine in particular seems a good HQ pick.
Ynari don't really do anything of worth. If the Ynari characters functioned more like Inquisitors it'd be different.
Yeah this is why you don't use scourge anymore (anti-infantry may be the exception). They haven't been good since the start of 8th and the codex we got didn't help them or any non-mercenary units. Meanwhile they kill off trueborn entirely as a unit because "reasons" and re-vamp the models to incubi which was a mostly perfectly fine model previously and they added no gear options to them and they still suck. Oh and they nerfed archons and ravagers and our jets for some reason. I mean archons are cheaper now but they don't do anything really besides cast a buff aura.
Phoenix rising does help us outside of kabal mostly but these days it just isn't enough compares to everybody else's psychic awakening stuff.
harlokin wrote: I don't dislike the clowns per se, but I'm really more about using what the Drukhari dex has to offer.
I'm the same.
The issue I'm finding, though, is that the Drukhari codex really doesn't seem to have many tricks up its sleeve.
It's split into 3 subfactions + mercenaries, which limits it massively because each subfaction has so few units. What's more, there's no synergy between subfactions, so I can't use an Archon to buff Grotesques or have a Haemonculus beef up Mandrakes. The HQs in general are almost universally awful in terms of what they actually bring to the table (and it's not like we have a large or diverse selection to pick from).
I don't know, it just seems like we're relying on a handful of efficient units to prop up an otherwise shoddy book.
harlokin wrote: That said, I don't mind the idea of using the Ynnari characters, Yvraine in particular seems a good HQ pick.
Yvraine is okay. Obviously you miss out on her support spells if you're not playing Ynnari but she can still deny a power each turn, throw out some Mortal Wound spells and potentially heal herself if she gets injured. I think my biggest complaint is that if I was taking her in a Dark Eldar list, I'd want her as my Warlord . . . but her Warlord Trait is abysmal. Oh well, she's still not an awful choice.
vipoid wrote: Yvraine is okay. Obviously you miss out on her support spells if you're not playing Ynnari but she can still deny a power each turn, throw out some Mortal Wound spells and potentially heal herself if she gets injured. I think my biggest complaint is that if I was taking her in a Dark Eldar list, I'd want her as my Warlord . . . but her Warlord Trait is abysmal. Oh well, she's still not an awful choice.
Yeah, I agree. Thing is, I quite like the idea of taking Drazhar as my Warlord, as Hatred Eternal seems a decent buff for him. Means giving up Alliance of Agony though.
vipoid wrote: Yvraine is okay. Obviously you miss out on her support spells if you're not playing Ynnari but she can still deny a power each turn, throw out some Mortal Wound spells and potentially heal herself if she gets injured. I think my biggest complaint is that if I was taking her in a Dark Eldar list, I'd want her as my Warlord . . . but her Warlord Trait is abysmal. Oh well, she's still not an awful choice.
Yeah, I agree. Thing is, I quite like the idea of taking Drazhar as my Warlord, as Hatred Eternal seems a decent buff for him. Means giving up Alliance of Agony though.
Personally, I'd hesitate to use Drazhar as my Warlord simply because I'd want to retain the option to send him on suicide-missions without giving my opponent a VP.
vipoid wrote: Yvraine is okay. Obviously you miss out on her support spells if you're not playing Ynnari but she can still deny a power each turn, throw out some Mortal Wound spells and potentially heal herself if she gets injured. I think my biggest complaint is that if I was taking her in a Dark Eldar list, I'd want her as my Warlord . . . but her Warlord Trait is abysmal. Oh well, she's still not an awful choice.
Yeah, I agree. Thing is, I quite like the idea of taking Drazhar as my Warlord, as Hatred Eternal seems a decent buff for him. Means giving up Alliance of Agony though.
Personally, I'd hesitate to use Drazhar as my Warlord simply because I'd want to retain the option to send him on suicide-missions without giving my opponent a VP.
flamingkillamajig wrote: I mean archons are cheaper now but they don't do anything really besides cast a buff aura.
vipoid wrote: The HQs in general are almost universally awful in terms of what they actually bring to the table (and it's not like we have a large or diverse selection to pick from).
I find Archons pretty effective in close combat. A melee-oriented Archon can actually punch well above his weight in character-to-character combat as long as his shadowfield holds. "Oh, you got a thunder hammer? IDGAF."
But Succubi definitely need a weapon that deals more than 1 damage. I mean, come on, they're supposed to be gladiators. So why do they suck so much in duels?
I find Archons pretty effective in close combat. A melee-oriented Archon can actually punch well above his weight in character-to-character combat as long as his shadowfield holds. "Oh, you got a thunder hammer? IDGAF."
All I'll say is that this has never been my experience. If anything, it seems like my Archons consistent punch below their weight (especially when you take into account the lack of support abilities). Even with relics, it seems like all I'm doing is bringing them into line with normal HQs, rather than making them exceptional in any way.
Though, I wouldn't mind their crap melee so much if they had some actual tricks or support abilities. Instead, they're about as generic as it gets.
And as far as the Shadowfield is concerned, it's only ever been a liability for me. "Oh, I failed my first save against your Thunderhammer. Now I've taken 3 wounds and I don't get a save against your remaining attacks. Boy, sure am glad we pay premium points for this defensive item. I'd hate for my HQ to be stuck with a useless 3++ Storm Shield that doesn't go away when you fail the save."
But Succubi definitely need a weapon that deals more than 1 damage. I mean, come on, they're supposed to be gladiators. So why do they suck so much in duels?
Agreed.
harlokin wrote: It feels like we really need Artefacts to rescue our HQs from mediocrity.
This is very much how I feel as well.
I think part of the problem is that Dark Eldar generally rely on high-tech wargear for their tricks, but somewhere along the lines that got translated to "artefacts". So rather than being useful with basic wargear, our HQs need to purchase artefacts to unlock what should be basic weapons or abilities.
This would be like if Farseers needed to take a specific artefact in order to know and cast any psychic powers.
flamingkillamajig wrote: I mean archons are cheaper now but they don't do anything really besides cast a buff aura.
vipoid wrote: The HQs in general are almost universally awful in terms of what they actually bring to the table (and it's not like we have a large or diverse selection to pick from).
I find Archons pretty effective in close combat. A melee-oriented Archon can actually punch well above his weight in character-to-character combat as long as his shadowfield holds. "Oh, you got a thunder hammer? IDGAF."
But Succubi definitely need a weapon that deals more than 1 damage. I mean, come on, they're supposed to be gladiators. So why do they suck so much in duels?
.
I don't, i find all our heroes terrible in melee. I have played (even in events) SOB and Quins they have either better or cheaper, heck SoB is both cheaper and better Heroes for aura/melee.
Canoness; 45pts base, with the same stats as an Archon, witha rr1's to all hits. A Blessed blade makes them 54pt (+2str, -3, D3), so fighting they are 5A, Str5, -4, D3 with Bloody rose with a 3+/4++. Also b.c how SoB works with Miracle dice, they will for sure make 1 save, or wound, or make the D3 into 3D.
Troupe master; 60pts base, 67 with a Caress, they are lack of rr hits aura, but rr all wounds melee aura, in combat they are pretty good b.c of the re-roll wounds, either go higher AP or lower Ap with D3, or higher str.
And thats not talking about relics, the SoB Blade is a GODLY melee relic, +3str, -3, 3D, then the WL trait to re-roll all charges, and wounds, Passion sacred rite for 6's to hit are +1 hits, she can have 6-7 hits, 5-6 wounds (or 4-5 on tough targets) with a total of -4ap and 3 damage, all for 54pts.
I just feel sad that other armies can have 50-60 odd point heroes be super beefy damage. The Canoness is cheaper and better, sure she doesn't have a 2++, but a 3+/4++ IMO is better when you can kill 90% of what you fight and you just need to live a couple hits combine with using miracle dice (auto past a save roll), once your 2++ is gone you have nothing.
Granted, i also have a problem with 8th in general as to what they did to the Archon, they took away A LOT of things he used to have that made him fun and good, then with just how 8th is in general. You can't really have a Archon sitting on the battle in combat anymore.
Yep, even tho in 5th-7th we were consider a bit weaker (lol in 6th there was no point to even playing) i still had more fun with them in 5th and 7th than i do in 8th. Just so much more flavor and things you could do.
I only wish for PA was to be able to mix and match, sense we didn't get that i now know GW has no intent on mixing us again and i need to find a way to live with that.
With that said. I don't want to be too negative and off topic. At least in 8th we are a good army, even if we are a messed up codex. We still have man lists that actually works, thats more than many other factions can even do. With Kabal heavy, to Coven heavy, and a mix of them from venom spam to Raider spam, we have some of the most viable units in the game right now.
All are 100% playable and doable even for events. Thats a lot of viable units and lists we could make, if they fixed up the points and rules of a few more units we would almost have a fully playable codex, some factions don't even have a playable book, or at least a list that is fun to play.
As Amishprn86 says, the codex may not be super well designed but at least the army is fairly competitive. I tend to run pure kabals. Limited unit choice, but there are few jobs that Warriors, Raiders, Venoms, Ravagers, Razorwings and Voidravens cannot do between them.
I just posted a proposed rule for a more reliable shadowfield that still has a unique flavor.
It's not really the power level of our army that might kill Dark Eldar for me. I've been playing them for years and in that whole time the only additions we really had were void ravens (which were in our 5th edition codex and took forever to come out) and wracks with a new weapon option that sucks in 8th. If anything we've lost bloodbrides and trueborn. Imperial guard the army I used to play still have conscripts and veterans. I get trueborn were costly but if they just fixed the points cost we'd be fine.
I suppose the biggest issue for me is the lack of care shown with us getting new models. We never get new units anymore and haven't for years. Even our bikes are showing their age. I love the bikes but lack of a special weapon per bike shows our bikes are behind the curve....again. Harlie bikes also have -1 to be hit from shooting. Even freaking GSC have -1 to be hit on their bikes.
I dunno I feel like in the hands of some creators that gave a crap about dark eldar, the aesthetic and had actual ideas of what to work with we'd have more units and more weapons as well as variety.
Not to mention half our models are useless and instead of fixing grotesques they fix incubi models and give em no new gear. 2 pts decrease for units that can't take obsessions. Jeez even harlequins out-do incubi. In a way harlie infantry are what incubi should be except for all the jumping and speed nonsense but with better weapon proficiency, weapon options, 4++ inv. save and a gun that can be good in a transport. They don't have to have all these roles at once but the variety of the roles they can have puts things into perspective vs incubi. Even if harlies have a small codex it will get new units like all other small armies with admech and gsc being examples.
I dunno i'm sorry for complaining it's just i'm feeling the slow burn. Anything I wanted to do with this army isn't always effective (scourge esp. in 8th). At least in 7th a unit of scourge could pop a tank but now it just dies too fast to even perform its job.
I may just need to take a break and play admech or gsc. At least both armies have been getting new units. I just want a new unit to be excited for rather than getting all my faction's special characters axed for no reason and multiple units getting axed. I don't think that's much to ask for.
I do understand and agree about the issues that Drukhari have, but I have owned just about every army in the GW line and every single one of them has issues across the board. You won't find perfection in an army.
My Archon has done very well in melee. Taking down a Blood Angels Smash Captain, Ork Warboss and a variety of others. He is definitely not perfect that is for sure, but if he is failing to do basics in melee there are typically two issues at hand, 1 - Your dice hate you and 2 - You are using him like he is a smash captain.
I just tried to play GSC, (without having the proper stuff) and it sucked. Out of every army I own and play, Drukhari are the most fun and successful.....(in casual play that is).
Da-Rock wrote: I do understand and agree about the issues that Drukhari have, but I have owned just about every army in the GW line and every single one of them has issues across the board. You won't find perfection in an army.
My Archon has done very well in melee. Taking down a Blood Angels Smash Captain, Ork Warboss and a variety of others. He is definitely not perfect that is for sure, but if he is failing to do basics in melee there are typically two issues at hand, 1 - Your dice hate you and 2 - You are using him like he is a smash captain.
I just tried to play GSC, (without having the proper stuff) and it sucked. Out of every army I own and play, Drukhari are the most fun and successful.....(in casual play that is).
LOL on average an Archon is going to bounce off those HQs you mentioned.
Da-Rock wrote: I do understand and agree about the issues that Drukhari have, but I have owned just about every army in the GW line and every single one of them has issues across the board. You won't find perfection in an army.
My Archon has done very well in melee. Taking down a Blood Angels Smash Captain, Ork Warboss and a variety of others. He is definitely not perfect that is for sure, but if he is failing to do basics in melee there are typically two issues at hand, 1 - Your dice hate you and 2 - You are using him like he is a smash captain.
I just tried to play GSC, (without having the proper stuff) and it sucked. Out of every army I own and play, Drukhari are the most fun and successful.....(in casual play that is).
LOL on average an Archon is going to bounce off those HQs you mentioned.
So I'm starting my Drukhari to supplement my craftworlders, I've got three Talos done which I'll be running as Prophets and now I want to start on some Kabalites.
Flayed skull look pretty good rules wise, ignoring cover should help a bit with marines since they can't get down to a 2+ and make my guns plink off.
I just wanted to clarify their obsession bonus, all models that fly or are in transports that fly ignore cover and re roll ones with rapid fire weapons right? So a unit of kabalites in a venom would always ignore cover and would re roll ones with splinter rifles but not with a shredder, correct?
Great, thanks, the wording isn't the clearest in the codex.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
vipoid wrote: On the topic of allies, is there much use for running Farseers or Warlocks in a primarily Dark Eldar list, now that Doom, Jinx etc. have been nerfed?
I ask because I really like the look of Farseers and Warlocks but don't care for the aesthetic of most other Craftworld stuff.
Maybe a supreme command with a farseer and two warlocks on bikes?
Farseer could take executioner and mind war, both warlocks go for embolden and horrify. Combined with drukhari leadership debuffs could make mind war pretty nasty, executioner is always good and you get four denies. Not exactly cheap at 256 pts but there you go.
vipoid wrote: On the topic of allies, is there much use for running Farseers or Warlocks in a primarily Dark Eldar list, now that Doom, Jinx etc. have been nerfed?
I ask because I really like the look of Farseers and Warlocks but don't care for the aesthetic of most other Craftworld stuff.
Not to support DE, if you had another CWE unit that you wanted to be supported then sure. I know a few DE players that takes a Spearhead of Fire prisms and a Farseer.
As others has said, you could take a supreme command of 1 farseer 2 warlocks as a trio to mess up some units with powers and charges.
I've been calculating various builds I want to do and I don't know if I can take much more than one in the same list.
One build is liquifier wracks in raiders with dark technomancers though likelihood of liquifier wracks and acothyst dying is like 1 per 2 models armed this way.
I can have dark technomancers for double heat lance and double liquifier talos. I can do 6 talos and then give them the other ability that increases strength by 1 so they hit at STR 8 with the 2 wound weapons. Also haemonculus support would make them toughness 7. These models would be slow tho and DT might kill them with liquifiers due to low wounds.
Shredder warriors ds en masse sounds fun but they'll take up a lot of space on the table and I'm not sure I need that much anti infantry firepower. Could be fun but any infantry in an army aside from custodes would probably just get deleted.
Then I have the 3 squads of 12 reavers (36 total) with possibly heat lances instead and maybe the tank and monster killing obsession.
Anyway so far the cost of each unit composition with just themselves and transports costs between 600-750 pts per build. Honestly that might be too expensive.
vipoid wrote: On the topic of allies, is there much use for running Farseers or Warlocks in a primarily Dark Eldar list, now that Doom, Jinx etc. have been nerfed?
I ask because I really like the look of Farseers and Warlocks but don't care for the aesthetic of most other Craftworld stuff.
Not to support DE, if you had another CWE unit that you wanted to be supported then sure. I know a few DE players that takes a Spearhead of Fire prisms and a Farseer.
As others has said, you could take a supreme command of 1 farseer 2 warlocks as a trio to mess up some units with powers and charges.
A supreme cmd squad is advisable if you face psykers.
As spearhead detachment I'd also consider support batteries, such as 6 to 9 vibro cannons - cheap and effective.
I only have one eldar player at my local GW and I dunno how good he is. He had a couple heavy weapons platforms but I don't know what vibro cannons are like. Some of the spect warriors and heavy weapons eldar got interested me but I don't know that i'd do eldar myself Maybe i'd do harlequins but it's always tough to take the plunge. I have some of the haywire bikes.
Hi. If I blow the cobwebs of my DE how does the limit on tree of the same model work with dark eldar HQ? I would need at least two brigades of warriors, that woulf be 4 leaders? But I am.only allowe 4. Does that mean Drazhar?
Niiai wrote: Hi. If I blow the cobwebs of my DE how does the limit on tree of the same model work with dark eldar HQ? I would need at least two brigades of warriors, that woulf be 4 leaders? But I am.only allowe 4. Does that mean Drazhar?
Is this a problem for building Dark Eldar since we have such problems with mixing the three dark eldar subfactions?
Yes. And it's a problem not helped by the fact that a sack of whipped cream could lead a DE army better than any of our actual HQ choices.
Unfortunately, the codex was written by a haddock. "Hmm, Dark Eldar have very few units and options in their entire book. I know! I'll split them into three subfactions, remove all synergy between them, and prevent players from mixing subfactions in the same detachment. Wait, what problem was I solving again? Well, nevermind. Anyway, I don't want to accidentally overload the brains of DE players with too much creativity so I'll just go ahead and remove even more units and options from their codex. Phew, that was a hard hour's work.
However, GW haven't given a damn about DE for at least a decade so at present the options are:
1) Sigh and make do.
2) Wait for 9th and ignore that the trend of every DE book since 5th has been to contain fewer options and units than the previous one.
3) Play an army GW actually cares about.
Personally (at least prior to the current pandemic), I've been going with a mixture of 1 and 3. I ally in Eldar or Harlequins so that I can at least have one HQ that doesn't make me cough up blood, whilst viewing all my DEHQ choices as being a points-handicap for my army.
Niiai wrote: But the Ynnari HQ turns them into Ynnari, right? Or?
Also, that sounds odd. But OK.
Is this a problem for building Dark Eldar since we have such problems with mixing the three dark eldar subfactions?
As others said, you can add in Ynnari characters without breaking them but you can not add Ynnari characters to any detachment with Coven.
Yes you can mix and match Kabal, Wych, Coven in 1 detachment, but you'll lose your traits (which is normally bad). We have enough HQ's at least to not need to do that.
Rant time can skip if want... DE Subfactions, Mercs no obsessions at all, and their special detachments, are the 3 worst rules for us for sure. We should never have been split up (no other edition treated us like that), Wyches become high Archons, Archons uses wyches gear, Archons/Kabals higher Coven, etc.. our fluff is full of mixing and matching, one of the bigger Archons was a Reaver (he made the Tantalus). GW failed DE to make a proper DE book, yes it is a good book, yes it is fun. But its not what DE should have been, and its missing Vect...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Niiai wrote: Oh really? Because the Ynnari avatar looks dope!
How can I do that? They share some keyword? I do not loose any opsession or cult creeds? And I get psykick powers?
All Ynnari characters can be added to any detachment, they are treated as part of that army for the purpose of being battleforge (even tho they don't share proper keywords), but they do not share any sub faction keywords (unless you choose for them to be Ynnari detachment). The powers has to follow the normal rules, and for the most part they will only be casting on themselves, and effecting themselves.
I always bring the Avatar in my lists, its a monster, you just have to think a bit about what order to fight with so you can protect it by teleporting it away from danger after she strikes / smites
I almost wonder if I should even post in this thread. Last time I posted the thread was dead for over a month. I'm wondering if you guys are avoiding me or the dark eldar thread is really dead overall.
I'm thinking about having a 3rd unit of 12 reavers with maybe blasters and grav talons. Oddly reavers when given toughness 5 seem to be somewhat durable. I'm just not sure how I will make this do-able. At one point I was considering taking the 3 units of reavers with just grav talons and seeing if I could use slashing impact with them but now I just don't know what's more cost effective in points.
I've also heard something about dark eldar getting a price increase in June which is making me both want to get lots of dark eldar while they're cheap and also leave the faction since we already had a price increase. I'm betting this is every army getting a price increase tho. This game really wants to drop me as a customer with all these price increases.
flamingkillamajig wrote: I almost wonder if I should even post in this thread. Last time I posted the thread was dead for over a month. I'm wondering if you guys are avoiding me or the dark eldar thread is really dead overall.
I'm thinking about having a 3rd unit of 12 reavers with maybe blasters and grav talons. Oddly reavers when given toughness 5 seem to be somewhat durable. I'm just not sure how I will make this do-able. At one point I was considering taking the 3 units of reavers with just grav talons and seeing if I could use slashing impact with them but now I just don't know what's more cost effective in points.
I've also heard something about dark eldar getting a price increase in June which is making me both want to get lots of dark eldar while they're cheap and also leave the faction since we already had a price increase. I'm betting this is every army getting a price increase tho. This game really wants to drop me as a customer with all these price increases.
DE has an established meta of various lists that works and that tactics are all 95% known, so its not that its dead, its just there is nothing to talk about for the DE community.
There are terms i'm going to use to make sure you know them i will explain them quickly:
Mid table, this is your average joe player that is bring a somewhat good list, or a good list but they are just average, or its a bad list but they are a good player trying to work it. Mid table is if you had 5 games played you'll win 2 or 3 of those 5 games.
Top table: This is where your above average players are, normally their lists will be meta, but sometimes will be different to counter meta. Either way they tend to have very good lists and play very well, they normally win 4 or 5 of their 5 games.
Low table (somethings called many other things, friendly, casual, etc..): This where players just want to have fun with lists, are new to the game and don't know how to play other armies, or just like taking cool looking units (Rule of Cool), they normally go 1 or 2 wins.
For DE i'd say the players that has been following DE and been playing it for at least a year knows what units/list are mid, low, and top table. Their isn't any "surprises" at all. Also for all people/armies/communities, it is very common to ignore "fun" lists b.c why rain son someones parade? they are having fun, no reason to tell them to play a better list, so they tend to not have much to say at all (This is not a bad thing, but it also doesn't give the new/friendly player much discussion time) or they have no knowledge of that play style b.c from the best of their knowledge, its a low table list.
For most players, Reavers are in the low to mid table range unit, so you will not get a lot of feedback for above reasons. But i will give you some feedback (A lot if i can, so you are apart of the community discussion).
Feedback on lots of Reavers There are two things i want to talk about fist when having Reavers;
1) Reavers can play a few roles, it is very important to note what role you need in your army, what role you want them to play as ans what role you are good at playing with them. What one person can do with a units isn't always what is best for someone else. There are literally 100's of variables that changes in tactics given minor changes in lists, tactics, playstyles, etc.. If you are taking 700pts of reavers (36 with some upgrades) they better preform that role very well as its almost 1/2 your army. So you need to make sure you are able to do that role. If you want them anti-tank and you take 9 blasters and are charging to get MW's also, play a few games to see if it works for you, if not pick a different role for them.
1a) Find out what role the unit plays the best. Well IMO reavers are best as anti-infantry and Tie up units, think of them just as faster wyches with kabal guns. Yes they can deal with tanks, But keep them primarily as anti infantry, is you want to be heavy infantry killers, HL's work, if you want more horde killing, zero added range weapons to keep them cheap is best. You can also mix their roles slightly, anti-infantry and tying up units.
2) Reavers are somewhat squishy, yes they are 2 wounds, but with Primaris killing weapons everywhere, sadly what can kill a Primaris can also kill a Reaver. So you need to look at a few ways to mitigate they loses and if you are going to lose a lot of them you need something else to pick up the slack. This works in a few different ways
2a) One is what role they play? If they are Anti-infantry, well have some smaller anti-infantry as back up (this is easy with Wyches), if they are Anti-tank, has a little anti-tank as back up. If you go Anti-infantry but back up as Anti-tank, they will be more costly and a bigger target.
2b) Point two. Make sure you have equal threats on the table. If the reavers are your only large scary units, well then they will be targets number 1, 2, and 3. You'll really want something else, and you'll want to mess with his priorities. Some armies like Venom spam has zero priorities, its just kill 2 venoms and 5 kabals each if you can. But if you had say a Knight and then 100 Guardsmen, well the knight will be the first target b.c it is going to do the heavy lifting, or all the Guardsmen will die first b.c the other units might be an objective holding horde army. You see how there is 1 clear priority? If you had say 1 large knight, 2 baby knights, 50 guardsmen, and 3 hiding scout Sentinel's with dual flamers, well now you have hard choices to make.
So for me to give you advice if 24 or 36 Reavers is a good idea. I would need to know, what else are you taking?
PS: about 10-15% of GW items goes up every year. Something in every army goes up. But normally only by 0.25c up to $2-3 for larger items like a 120+ item, the items like Venom, Kabals, etc.. normally never get more than a $1 raise, sometimes its only 25-50c
Sigh. I don't think you understand how i'm going for this list or why i'm going for this list. You see there are a few lists that give me serious trouble. These lists are custodes, tau and knights.
After a lot of thinking I found light infantry is usually not a big issue to face. I am taking slashing impact with reavers merely for the mortal wound spam against infantry and bikers of the custodes variety as well as against riptides and other similar things. The main issue is slashing impact doesn't do mortal wounds against vehicles but this is probably ok given that knights don't have great invulnerable saves and they have lots of wounds. This is where the blasters and test of skill come in.
So you might ask why don't I use grotesques or something for mortal wounds and that is a legit question. Part of it is getting a turn 2 charge from deep strike off with these is a little tough. I suppose I could do it with the -1 to damage taken ability but once again these mortal wounds don't effect vehicles and they fall flat on their face when doing multiple damage. In the case of riptides they will just fly away and shoot me and considering their range I might not be able to keep up with grotesques too easily. It might work but it could be iffy. Also if I put them in transports I might get them there but then I can only take 5 model units which limits killing potential and I could only take 15 total.
I understand fully reavers might not work and still cost a considerable amount of points. I like to try new things to see if they do work. I did ask for advice so I shouldn't complain or argue. It's just considering my absolute hardest opponents at the local GW this is probably the best loadout I can hope for. I honestly don't think anything can output that many mortal wounds and so many 3++ invulnerable saves can only be taken out well enough with a significant amount of mortal wounds.
flamingkillamajig wrote: I almost wonder if I should even post in this thread. Last time I posted the thread was dead for over a month. I'm wondering if you guys are avoiding me or the dark eldar thread is really dead overall.
I'm thinking about having a 3rd unit of 12 reavers with maybe blasters and grav talons. Oddly reavers when given toughness 5 seem to be somewhat durable. I'm just not sure how I will make this do-able. At one point I was considering taking the 3 units of reavers with just grav talons and seeing if I could use slashing impact with them but now I just don't know what's more cost effective in points.
I've also heard something about dark eldar getting a price increase in June which is making me both want to get lots of dark eldar while they're cheap and also leave the faction since we already had a price increase. I'm betting this is every army getting a price increase tho. This game really wants to drop me as a customer with all these price increases.
DE has an established meta of various lists that works and that tactics are all 95% known, so its not that its dead, its just there is nothing to talk about for the DE community.
There are terms i'm going to use to make sure you know them i will explain them quickly:
Mid table, this is your average joe player that is bring a somewhat good list, or a good list but they are just average, or its a bad list but they are a good player trying to work it. Mid table is if you had 5 games played you'll win 2 or 3 of those 5 games.
Top table: This is where your above average players are, normally their lists will be meta, but sometimes will be different to counter meta. Either way they tend to have very good lists and play very well, they normally win 4 or 5 of their 5 games.
Low table (somethings called many other things, friendly, casual, etc..): This where players just want to have fun with lists, are new to the game and don't know how to play other armies, or just like taking cool looking units (Rule of Cool), they normally go 1 or 2 wins.
For DE i'd say the players that has been following DE and been playing it for at least a year knows what units/list are mid, low, and top table. Their isn't any "surprises" at all. Also for all people/armies/communities, it is very common to ignore "fun" lists b.c why rain son someones parade? they are having fun, no reason to tell them to play a better list, so they tend to not have much to say at all (This is not a bad thing, but it also doesn't give the new/friendly player much discussion time) or they have no knowledge of that play style b.c from the best of their knowledge, its a low table list.
For most players, Reavers are in the low to mid table range unit, so you will not get a lot of feedback for above reasons. But i will give you some feedback (A lot if i can, so you are apart of the community discussion).
Feedback on lots of Reavers There are two things i want to talk about fist when having Reavers;
1) Reavers can play a few roles, it is very important to note what role you need in your army, what role you want them to play as ans what role you are good at playing with them. What one person can do with a units isn't always what is best for someone else. There are literally 100's of variables that changes in tactics given minor changes in lists, tactics, playstyles, etc.. If you are taking 700pts of reavers (36 with some upgrades) they better preform that role very well as its almost 1/2 your army. So you need to make sure you are able to do that role. If you want them anti-tank and you take 9 blasters and are charging to get MW's also, play a few games to see if it works for you, if not pick a different role for them.
1a) Find out what role the unit plays the best. Well IMO reavers are best as anti-infantry and Tie up units, think of them just as faster wyches with kabal guns. Yes they can deal with tanks, But keep them primarily as anti infantry, is you want to be heavy infantry killers, HL's work, if you want more horde killing, zero added range weapons to keep them cheap is best. You can also mix their roles slightly, anti-infantry and tying up units.
2) Reavers are somewhat squishy, yes they are 2 wounds, but with Primaris killing weapons everywhere, sadly what can kill a Primaris can also kill a Reaver. So you need to look at a few ways to mitigate they loses and if you are going to lose a lot of them you need something else to pick up the slack. This works in a few different ways
2a) One is what role they play? If they are Anti-infantry, well have some smaller anti-infantry as back up (this is easy with Wyches), if they are Anti-tank, has a little anti-tank as back up. If you go Anti-infantry but back up as Anti-tank, they will be more costly and a bigger target.
2b) Point two. Make sure you have equal threats on the table. If the reavers are your only large scary units, well then they will be targets number 1, 2, and 3. You'll really want something else, and you'll want to mess with his priorities. Some armies like Venom spam has zero priorities, its just kill 2 venoms and 5 kabals each if you can. But if you had say a Knight and then 100 Guardsmen, well the knight will be the first target b.c it is going to do the heavy lifting, or all the Guardsmen will die first b.c the other units might be an objective holding horde army. You see how there is 1 clear priority? If you had say 1 large knight, 2 baby knights, 50 guardsmen, and 3 hiding scout Sentinel's with dual flamers, well now you have hard choices to make.
So for me to give you advice if 24 or 36 Reavers is a good idea. I would need to know, what else are you taking?
PS: about 10-15% of GW items goes up every year. Something in every army goes up. But normally only by 0.25c up to $2-3 for larger items like a 120+ item, the items like Venom, Kabals, etc.. normally never get more than a $1 raise, sometimes its only 25-50c
The little I have played I have mostly been playing nids with Gsc. What is considered good de these days? I have most things. But with the pricevincrease I considered getting 2 boxes of scorges (i have some kitbashed once with regular weapons) and one packbof warriors. I have mostvthings except wytches and both flyers.
Personally I have issues with scourge. I've tried most loadouts and tried to make them good but in 8th they're awful. They're a suicide anti-tank/anti-monster unit in an edition where tanks and monsters are incredibly durable. In most cases I don't like our blasters either due to short range but our infantry based anti-tank is far too fragile and often expensive. You're better off loading anti-tank infantry in transports and at that point it's probably more cost effective just to use ravagers or flyers.
If you give scourge any loadout at all focus it on anti-infantry which isn't even their intended role and mandrakes probably do it better esp. given the mortal wounds. Some people say haywire but I disagree because most vehicles with invulnerable saves have far too many wounds for it to really matter (like knights).
Seriously scourge will get 1 turn of shooting and then die. I'd far rather have something either more durable, longer ranged or both.
You could maybe try the dark lance loadout with some extra scourge as ablative wounds but whenever they move they'll be at -1 to hit and they'll still die to a stiff breeze unless in good numbers and in cover and it's probably just not worth it.
---------
Flyers are good. If you use void ravens take the void lances. It's the better option to dark lance ravenwing jets esp. if you give them test of skill from wych cult and then they wound on 2's for vehicles and monsters. I haven't experienced the razorwing jets enough but they were good. I don't know if they still are. They have the same firepower with 3 as 2 dissie ravagers which sounds great but they can't get boosted by an archon. Could be better vs vehicles though with test of skill.
I imagine most people use dissie raiders with dark technomancers and some wracks now though.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Sigh. I don't think you understand how i'm going for this list or why i'm going for this list. You see there are a few lists that give me serious trouble. These lists are custodes, tau and knights.
After a lot of thinking I found light infantry is usually not a big issue to face. I am taking slashing impact with reavers merely for the mortal wound spam against infantry and bikers of the custodes variety as well as against riptides and other similar things. The main issue is slashing impact doesn't do mortal wounds against vehicles but this is probably ok given that knights don't have great invulnerable saves and they have lots of wounds. This is where the blasters and test of skill come in.
So you might ask why don't I use grotesques or something for mortal wounds and that is a legit question. Part of it is getting a turn 2 charge from deep strike off with these is a little tough. I suppose I could do it with the -1 to damage taken ability but once again these mortal wounds don't effect vehicles and they fall flat on their face when doing multiple damage. In the case of riptides they will just fly away and shoot me and considering their range I might not be able to keep up with grotesques too easily. It might work but it could be iffy. Also if I put them in transports I might get them there but then I can only take 5 model units which limits killing potential and I could only take 15 total.
I understand fully reavers might not work and still cost a considerable amount of points. I like to try new things to see if they do work. I did ask for advice so I shouldn't complain or argue. It's just considering my absolute hardest opponents at the local GW this is probably the best loadout I can hope for. I honestly don't think anything can output that many mortal wounds and so many 3++ invulnerable saves can only be taken out well enough with a significant amount of mortal wounds.
You didn't say what you wanted them for, you didn't say what you struggle against, you didn't say what your meta was, you never said what you wanted out of them, etc.. so what else do you want me to say? I could only give generic information with the limited information i have gotten.
And no i'm not asking "why not grotesques" or any other unit for that matter, b.c you said you are wanting 24 and thinking about 36 Reavers. You did't say anything about other units. I only asked what else are you taking.
I'm not mad, arguing, or anything like that. I am just a very black and white person and if someone miss understands me i'll go more black and white. So try not to take offense at all how i am talking.
PS: I only talked about the Table tiers so you know where a lot of players are coming from in their understanding of DE more for why we don't talk much anymore, the majority of the players knows we are a high mid tier army, and what will get you into Mid tables and what will get you into Top tables.
Yes well now you know and now that you do i'm asking with the details provided what do you think is a good loadout for me with dark eldar.
I will also tell you one of the custodes players took at least 1,000 pts of custodes vehicles from forge world including 2 heavy transports with stupidly powerful guns for a transport. I'm not gonna lie if I face that custodes player again (which is rare since he almost never plays) i'm not sure what I could do to beat him and his fast hover tanks.
flamingkillamajig wrote: I almost wonder if I should even post in this thread. Last time I posted the thread was dead for over a month. I'm wondering if you guys are avoiding me or the dark eldar thread is really dead overall.
I'm thinking about having a 3rd unit of 12 reavers with maybe blasters and grav talons. Oddly reavers when given toughness 5 seem to be somewhat durable. I'm just not sure how I will make this do-able. At one point I was considering taking the 3 units of reavers with just grav talons and seeing if I could use slashing impact with them but now I just don't know what's more cost effective in points.
I've also heard something about dark eldar getting a price increase in June which is making me both want to get lots of dark eldar while they're cheap and also leave the faction since we already had a price increase. I'm betting this is every army getting a price increase tho. This game really wants to drop me as a customer with all these price increases.
DE has an established meta of various lists that works and that tactics are all 95% known, so its not that its dead, its just there is nothing to talk about for the DE community.
There are terms i'm going to use to make sure you know them i will explain them quickly: Mid table, this is your average joe player that is bring a somewhat good list, or a good list but they are just average, or its a bad list but they are a good player trying to work it. Mid table is if you had 5 games played you'll win 2 or 3 of those 5 games. Top table: This is where your above average players are, normally their lists will be meta, but sometimes will be different to counter meta. Either way they tend to have very good lists and play very well, they normally win 4 or 5 of their 5 games. Low table (somethings called many other things, friendly, casual, etc..): This where players just want to have fun with lists, are new to the game and don't know how to play other armies, or just like taking cool looking units (Rule of Cool), they normally go 1 or 2 wins.
For DE i'd say the players that has been following DE and been playing it for at least a year knows what units/list are mid, low, and top table. Their isn't any "surprises" at all. Also for all people/armies/communities, it is very common to ignore "fun" lists b.c why rain son someones parade? they are having fun, no reason to tell them to play a better list, so they tend to not have much to say at all (This is not a bad thing, but it also doesn't give the new/friendly player much discussion time) or they have no knowledge of that play style b.c from the best of their knowledge, its a low table list.
For most players, Reavers are in the low to mid table range unit, so you will not get a lot of feedback for above reasons. But i will give you some feedback (A lot if i can, so you are apart of the community discussion).
Feedback on lots of Reavers There are two things i want to talk about fist when having Reavers; 1) Reavers can play a few roles, it is very important to note what role you need in your army, what role you want them to play as ans what role you are good at playing with them. What one person can do with a units isn't always what is best for someone else. There are literally 100's of variables that changes in tactics given minor changes in lists, tactics, playstyles, etc.. If you are taking 700pts of reavers (36 with some upgrades) they better preform that role very well as its almost 1/2 your army. So you need to make sure you are able to do that role. If you want them anti-tank and you take 9 blasters and are charging to get MW's also, play a few games to see if it works for you, if not pick a different role for them. 1a) Find out what role the unit plays the best. Well IMO reavers are best as anti-infantry and Tie up units, think of them just as faster wyches with kabal guns. Yes they can deal with tanks, But keep them primarily as anti infantry, is you want to be heavy infantry killers, HL's work, if you want more horde killing, zero added range weapons to keep them cheap is best. You can also mix their roles slightly, anti-infantry and tying up units. 2) Reavers are somewhat squishy, yes they are 2 wounds, but with Primaris killing weapons everywhere, sadly what can kill a Primaris can also kill a Reaver. So you need to look at a few ways to mitigate they loses and if you are going to lose a lot of them you need something else to pick up the slack. This works in a few different ways 2a) One is what role they play? If they are Anti-infantry, well have some smaller anti-infantry as back up (this is easy with Wyches), if they are Anti-tank, has a little anti-tank as back up. If you go Anti-infantry but back up as Anti-tank, they will be more costly and a bigger target. 2b) Point two. Make sure you have equal threats on the table. If the reavers are your only large scary units, well then they will be targets number 1, 2, and 3. You'll really want something else, and you'll want to mess with his priorities. Some armies like Venom spam has zero priorities, its just kill 2 venoms and 5 kabals each if you can. But if you had say a Knight and then 100 Guardsmen, well the knight will be the first target b.c it is going to do the heavy lifting, or all the Guardsmen will die first b.c the other units might be an objective holding horde army. You see how there is 1 clear priority? If you had say 1 large knight, 2 baby knights, 50 guardsmen, and 3 hiding scout Sentinel's with dual flamers, well now you have hard choices to make.
So for me to give you advice if 24 or 36 Reavers is a good idea. I would need to know, what else are you taking?
PS: about 10-15% of GW items goes up every year. Something in every army goes up. But normally only by 0.25c up to $2-3 for larger items like a 120+ item, the items like Venom, Kabals, etc.. normally never get more than a $1 raise, sometimes its only 25-50c
The little I have played I have mostly been playing nids with Gsc. What is considered good de these days? I have most things. But with the pricevincrease I considered getting 2 boxes of scorges (i have some kitbashed once with regular weapons) and one packbof warriors. I have mostvthings except wytches and both flyers.
Vehicle spam with 2 battalions at least (venom, Raider, Ravagers, Flyers, etc.. Flyers are getting less and less popular tho after the update), Talos are still top notch. For Kabals its still BH and Flawed Skull, for Coven its Pof and custom traits. AotF and DT are top custom traits (not together)With anti-Primaris meta everyony is taking 2D and 3D weapons, so -1D on all vehicles and Talos are really goof right now, you instantly take 16% less damage before save roles are even made. With 4++ from a 5++ its a 16% increased chance to stop all 2D/3D, when looking at the math -1D is normally better. PS, Mandrakes are getting more and more popular which is nice. Drazhar is in a lot of lists too.
Example Str 7 2D -3AP 10 shots (no rr's and yes FnP 6+++) Aotf = 1.85D PoF = 2.77D
DT is popular with Raider spam. AotF for Talos SPeearhead is popular. And even DT Talos.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
flamingkillamajig wrote: Yes well now you know and now that you do i'm asking with the details provided what do you think is a good loadout for me with dark eldar.
I will also tell you one of the custodes players took at least 1,000 pts of custodes vehicles from forge world including 2 heavy transports with stupidly powerful guns for a transport. I'm not gonna lie if I face that custodes player again (which is rare since he almost never plays) i'm not sure what I could do to beat him and his fast hover tanks.
Not trying to be rude. But that is an example of why Reavers are a mid tier unit, there are to many counters for them. You will need to do 1 or 2 things, either 100% ignore those 2 Vehicles and kill everything else then win by sitting on Objectives out of LoS. Or bring something to Deal with them (This is a example that i already gave, the Knights +100 guardsmen scenario). So you need to decide, do i kill everything else, or do i think i have the tools (maybe tweak my list) to deal with the Heavy Vehicles?
Also take 0 shame in playing 1/2 a game and resetting, asking him to let you play again to learn. If on turn 2 you messed up or its not working, give him the win and just ask "Hey this is not working out, i would like to try something that might even up the score, would you like to play another quick game? And don't worry its not to tailor against you, its just to make my army better in general and to handle a large heavy unit that i seem to be lacking" Make sure he knows its not about beating him but learning. When we practice for GT's this is our mentality, if you are not 100% sure you can win on your 3rd turn, just reset the game (unless its a really interesting game, which is not 90% the time) We can get in 2-3 games sometimes and learn a lot of new tactics vs some armies, or tweak our lists.
That's odd. I figured AotF would be more popular with grotesques due to being a little too weak for dedicated anti-tank and too tough for infantry weapons for the most part. It seems like it'd very much frustrate a tau player with heavy burst cannons or a someone with disintegrators. Of course dark eldar have poison which would interestingly enough handle things like grotesques decently well.
Sadly the problem is that custodes player had 2 hover tanks and another 2 big hover transports. If I could I'd have avoided those things but I don't think I can.
Anyway the other custodes player has been known to cheat a bit and take too many points. I haven't seen him in a while because he supposedly raged so hard from losing I didn't see him for months even before corona. With the new list I want I might beat him with it. Of course he's such a sore loser and cheater that I might not play him anyway.
The tau player takes a fairly weak list for tau. He takes riptides but I haven't seen him do triple riptide yet. I imagine he has lots of drones now.
I also have another friend that took a fairly potent triple riptide list. I might want to face that again.
flamingkillamajig wrote: That's odd. I figured AotF would be more popular with grotesques due to being a little too weak for dedicated anti-tank and too tough for infantry weapons for the most part. It seems like it'd very much frustrate a tau player with heavy burst cannons or a someone with disintegrators. Of course dark eldar have poison which would interestingly enough handle things like grotesques decently well.
ITC made some changes and Grots are not as popular, ITC just made some more changes as well but then we all went into lock down, so the meta is slightly behind right now. TTS is getting a bit more popular so we are starting to see "real" events on it. But it is very clear that the TTS meta is very different than on the table, not just for 40k but also AoS. This might be b.c players that couldn't afford what they want can now play them, players trying out new armies, etc.. we will have to wait another month or two before we get a clear picture.
Also ITC is a standard, but not the only one, the internet just doesn't really show non-ITC standard to much for some reason. GW missions IMo are better (new maelstrom that is) for competitive games. But i can go over that in a different topic. Just know we are only seeing 1 or 2 styles of meta lists and those are normally very different than ones that run GW missions (killing isn't as important in GW maelstrom missions, you need to survive all 5 rounds and you need some speed, ofc you still want damage, but Aoft will high value than say DT raider spam, or Venom spam) I've seen 40 man events with maelstom get amazing score and win, but if you take them into ITC they'll never win 1 game (literally wont win a single game). That means depending on your area and where you are looking at lists you might find something else is better or more popular.
But in a way that is good for the game, this allows different people to enjoy it when they might no normally have, and it allows for different units to be playable. But GW needs to make an official tournament packet for DL (not their Heat event one, i mean a full packet) and it would solidify more GW events.
Niiai wrote: The little I have played I have mostly been playing nids with Gsc. What is considered good de these days? I have most things. But with the pricevincrease I considered getting 2 boxes of scorges (i have some kitbashed once with regular weapons) and one packbof warriors. I have mostvthings except wytches and both flyers.
Kabalite Warriors in transports are good, as are Ravagers, Razorwings, Mandrakes, Taloi, Wracks, and Grotesques.
Scourges look great, but aren't in practice. They are quite expensive, fragile, and don't do enough damage to even work as a kamikaze unit.
Niiai wrote: The little I have played I have mostly been playing nids with Gsc. What is considered good de these days? I have most things. But with the pricevincrease I considered getting 2 boxes of scorges (i have some kitbashed once with regular weapons) and one packbof warriors. I have mostvthings except wytches and both flyers.
Kabalite Warriors in transports are good, as are Ravagers, Razorwings, Mandrakes, Taloi, Wracks, and Grotesques.
Scourges look great, but aren't in practice. They are quite expensive, fragile, and don't do enough damage to even work as a kamikaze unit.
Scourges really do need some help (along with beasts.. lol), or just a lot cheaper. You are paying more to be able to buy more guns... If you look at their stats and what they actually do, they would be 10ppm, But even then its just 10pts less per 5man. I'd rather they get <Traits> We need a Merc traits... PA should have given up Merc traits, or a way to get Merc traits.
Niiai wrote: The little I have played I have mostly been playing nids with Gsc. What is considered good de these days? I have most things. But with the pricevincrease I considered getting 2 boxes of scorges (i have some kitbashed once with regular weapons) and one packbof warriors. I have mostvthings except wytches and both flyers.
Kabalite Warriors in transports are good, as are Ravagers, Razorwings, Mandrakes, Taloi, Wracks, and Grotesques.
Scourges look great, but aren't in practice. They are quite expensive, fragile, and don't do enough damage to even work as a kamikaze unit.
Scourges really do need some help (along with beasts.. lol), or just a lot cheaper. You are paying more to be able to buy more guns... If you look at their stats and what they actually do, they would be 10ppm, But even then its just 10pts less per 5man. I'd rather they get <Traits> We need a Merc traits... PA should have given up Merc traits, or a way to get Merc traits.
Agree totally. For me they compete with Madrakes for space in my lists, and even though they aren't exactly the same thing, I find that Mandrakes are more useful overall.
Niiai wrote: The little I have played I have mostly been playing nids with Gsc. What is considered good de these days? I have most things. But with the pricevincrease I considered getting 2 boxes of scorges (i have some kitbashed once with regular weapons) and one packbof warriors. I have mostvthings except wytches and both flyers.
Kabalite Warriors in transports are good, as are Ravagers, Razorwings, Mandrakes, Taloi, Wracks, and Grotesques.
Scourges look great, but aren't in practice. They are quite expensive, fragile, and don't do enough damage to even work as a kamikaze unit.
Scourges really do need some help (along with beasts.. lol), or just a lot cheaper. You are paying more to be able to buy more guns... If you look at their stats and what they actually do, they would be 10ppm, But even then its just 10pts less per 5man. I'd rather they get <Traits> We need a Merc traits... PA should have given up Merc traits, or a way to get Merc traits.
Agree totally. For me they compete with Madrakes for space in my lists, and even though they aren't exactly the same thing, I find that Mandrakes are more useful overall.
Yep, i 100% agree. I will take Mandrakes over Scourges any day.
flamingkillamajig wrote: I almost wonder if I should even post in this thread. Last time I posted the thread was dead for over a month. I'm wondering if you guys are avoiding me or the dark eldar thread is really dead overall.
I'm thinking about having a 3rd unit of 12 reavers with maybe blasters and grav talons. Oddly reavers when given toughness 5 seem to be somewhat durable. I'm just not sure how I will make this do-able. At one point I was considering taking the 3 units of reavers with just grav talons and seeing if I could use slashing impact with them but now I just don't know what's more cost effective in points.
I've also heard something about dark eldar getting a price increase in June which is making me both want to get lots of dark eldar while they're cheap and also leave the faction since we already had a price increase. I'm betting this is every army getting a price increase tho. This game really wants to drop me as a customer with all these price increases.
I don't think it's anything personal, Drukhari haven't really had anything interesting to shake up the internal meta for a while. The PA stuff was just awful.
For my part, I don't use Wych Cult, so didn't comment on the Reavers. The bikes look amazing, but the rules seem really underwhelming.
I've ordered a couple of boxes of Crypt Horrors to turn into Grotesques, before the prices go up.
Niiai wrote: Crypt horrors are also a bit exspensive? How many do you need to make grotesques work?
I paid £25 per box for mine, and you get three Crypt Horrors in each. It's quite a bit cheaper than the official model which is £15 for one, and is in finecast.
They are really easy to convert, just add some bits you have lying around to make them more Drukhari-like. The Talos kit comes with a lot of spare masks, and so they are easily available from bits sellers.
PS: I have Clawed Fiends painted and some Grotesques painted now as well, so i could take anew pick if you needed me too.
Thos ogor converions looks great. I tryed to make some myself but I did not have the parts to pull it of. (Later converted them back into ogor for AoS as I started an ogor army.)
PS: I have Clawed Fiends painted and some Grotesques painted now as well, so i could take anew pick if you needed me too.
Thos ogor converions looks great. I tryed to make some myself but I did not have the parts to pull it of. (Later converted them back into ogor for AoS as I started an ogor army.)
Are there any tutorial tips?
Talos bits basically. There are better ones out there. I didn't have a tutorial (no one did back then) i needed 16 of them for the Coven supplement book when that came out, after looking at all the GW models for a good hour, it felt like the best option to me.
I think maybi Flesh Eater Court ghouls for wracks. It thematically fits.
Back in 5th edition I ran Barron Satonyx. He was really good. To go with him I used the big squad of beastmasters. Back then the razorwing costed a bunch jad five wounds and they had rend. So I used flesh eater court vinged vampires for them. They worked like a charm. The undead warhounds where the demon beats with 4 ++ save.
I gave all my DE stuff to my son, but if you bought Raiders or Ravagers, the sprues has spare prows.
So, what I did is find the cheapest "ogre-like" models (all mine were pewters) then I'd swap the head with the prows so that it'd look like that Silent Hills Pyramid Head man with a long assed sword.
Curious to know if anyone has ever tried running 100+ PoF Wracks with Urien and some Haemies to control the board with a bunch of T5 4++ bodies? With board control being so important, I'm thinking this might not be too bad, but wondering if anyone has tried it.
wuestenfux wrote: Well, reavers or skyweavers?
I'd go for skyweavers any day. Thoughts?
Skyweavers seem more durable and do more vs knights probably. Skyweavers with haywire are infinitely better than scourge with haywire just on paper and with practice with similar things.
As far as reavers vs skyweavers I've found reavers to be a little tricky but alright. Giving them toughness boost is good as is keeps them alive. Sadly they don't have the -1 to be hit that skyweavers have. Blasters can do more damage than haywire but reavers have a hard limit for this whereas skyweavers don't. As expensive in points reavers can be they are fairly cheap when compared to skyweavers.
Admittedly I haven't really used skyweavers even though I have some due to me hating soup armies. I personally think our Phoenix rising traits help a bit here with slashing impact and the one that boosts wounding vs most vehicles and monsters.
---------
Keep in mind 9th is coming so a lot of strategies are about to be made irrelevant.
---------
Ok so somehow I managed to fit 3 dissie ravagers, 36 reavers with 12 blasters and 12 grav talons, 2 void ravens with 4 void lances and 2 venoms with dual splinter cannons each in a 2000 pts list. I only took a kabal spearhead so it's just 3 dissie ravagers and an archon. The wych cult is a custom battalion with slashing impact and test of skill. I figured since warriors are often a waste outside of the venoms and the traits I may as well skip out on them mostly except for either the wyches or 2 succubus. I'm only giving the wyches transports in case I need more mortal wounds but I really should probably give it to the succubus units. That said having wyches run at an enemy unit could be fun but I highly doubt they'd survive much shooting unless the reavers already gave it a go.
vipoid wrote: So with 9th apparently coming soon, what's everyone's plan?
Are you going to spend CPs just to play our army normally or take everything in one detachment and lose out on all Kabal/Cult/Coven army traits?
As I understand it the CP cost is for non Codex detachments so a Kabal/Cult/Coven army would be fine but a Craftworld/Kabal (for instance) would cost CP
vipoid wrote: So with 9th apparently coming soon, what's everyone's plan?
Are you going to spend CPs just to play our army normally or take everything in one detachment and lose out on all Kabal/Cult/Coven army traits?
As I understand it the CP cost is for non Codex detachments so a Kabal/Cult/Coven army would be fine but a Craftworld/Kabal (for instance) would cost CP
that was my take too, heck they might even throw us a CP bone for the whole alliance of agony to push the mono build
My understanding is also that it wouldn't negatively affect mono Drukhari.
I'd be happy if it stops Asuryani poachers, it seems that whenever we get anything good they add it to their spam lists and the points end up getting hiked.
It depends on what a patrol costs I guess. If it's 2CP or less, you could take triple patrol and come out even, as the +4CP from raiding patrol would counterbalance the -4CP from two extra patrols.
Does CP even really help us? I find horde armies and msu armies often don't benefit much from stratagems. The reason is they tend to effect only one unit per stratagem which heavily favors powerful singular units.
Or just go back to letting the subfactions play together with obssessions being related to their respective hqs (might need to limit it to one kabal/cult/coven per detachment for book keeping and wotnot)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
flamingkillamajig wrote: Does CP even really help us? I find horde armies and msu armies often don't benefit much from stratagems. The reason is they tend to effect only one unit per stratagem which heavily favors powerful singular units.
The reason DE don't get that much benefit from CP isn't so much the unit sizes, it's that DE have a horrible stratagem selection, aside from Vect and a very small handful of others. It's arguably the worst stratagem selection in the game for any fully fledged army. DE really suffered from having a codex release back when stratagems were not very powerful, and then an early PA release, back before new stratagems were standard as part of PA.
I do not know the direct wording in the drukhari book. But I suspect if they do not amend it the drulari codex says the apecial detachments give us 1 cp each. We will be the only army to have positive cp from detachments.
yukishiro1 wrote:It depends on what a patrol costs I guess. If it's 2CP or less, you could take triple patrol and come out even, as the +4CP from raiding patrol would counterbalance the -4CP from two extra patrols.
Unless there are other benefits/drawbacks attached, there's pretty much no chance a Patrol is going to cost less than 3CP, let alone 2CP. Since dets now subtract CPs, you have to reverse-think about their cost. Dets that generated high CP will now cost little, dets that generated few will cost more (because they come with less HQ/Troop tax). In the case of Patrols, the 0-2 limit on many slots may justify it costing the same as a bat but I don't see how it could really cost less.
It should look a bit like this (random guess on the costs per se, but pretty sure about the relative costs):
Brigade: 1 CP Battalion: 3 CP Patrol: 5 CP * refunded if includes Warlord
Vanguard/Spearhead/Outrider/Supreme Command etc. : 4 CP * non refundable
Niiai wrote:I do not know the direct wording in the drukhari book. But I suspect if they do not amend it the drulari codex says the apecial detachments give us 1 cp each. We will be the only army to have positive cp from detachments.
Something will be adressed.
Since the recommended Det number came into effect, and probably in 9th as well, a quick fix that seemed obvious to me was to make the Raiding Force count as one single detachment for all other purposes. Structurally a triple-patrol but functionally a single det:
in 8th that would mean you could have RF + Bat + Other at 2000pts
in 9th that could mean the CP costs of the 3 Patrols is refunded with the warlord thing, not just of one.
Sidenote, as extra dets cost CP, there's a good chance the limit on the number of dets will go away. Make a 7-detachment army if you want to, but it's going to cost all your pre-game CP - choice is yours.
Anyway this is just speculation on the actual adjustment, but I fully agree that some sort of amendment is going to happen.
I dunno, I kinda got the impression that they wanted to get away from the whole idea of detachment taxes, which would imply that the cost of a detachment would be relative to the amount of units you get, not its "use." They have repeatedly articulated that the whole point of the changes was so you didn't have to take a bunch of units you didn't want to take to maximize your competitiveness. It wouldn't make much sense if they then turned that around and did effectively the same thing, by making smaller detachments cost more CP than bigger ones.
Also, if brigades were only 1CP, that would create the perverse incentive that if you were taking a brigade + a patrol, you'd have a massively strong incentive to make your warlord in the patrol, rather than the main force - again, explicitly what they are trying to avoid.
We'll have to see. But my bet is that a patrol will cost less CP than a bat, or, at the very most, the same CP.
I wish infantry were good. I have a crap ton of scourge but in 8th they just suck or at least eventually sucked. Too much anti infantry firepower on the board. Best way to handle it is not to have infantry. Mounted infantry just seem better for horde armies right now. Vehicles can be expensive but they're infinitely more durable. At least we aren't gsc I guess. I wanted to play as them and they're just light infantry based. They want to be a horde army but they cant be and they have to focus on melee which 8th edition is super unkind to.
Infantry is the best keyword in the game in 8th - well, except fly. Flying infantry is literally the holy grail of 8th edition. The minor changes to vehicles ignoring a -1 hit penalty and being able to fire in combat at -1 aren't going to change the value of the infantry keyword; it's just going some small way to making infantry not so wildly better than everything else. Same goes for the stuff about letting monsters hit stuff on the 2nd floor of ruins.
Really? I feel like light infantry are garbage right now. Even in cover they'll just get destroyed. Vehicles and monsters were made too tough for suicide anti tank units like scourge. Believe me I've played scourge enough to realize they're not worth it. They are far too fragile and don't do enough before they die.
Infantry is only good for some armies. Nids, IG, Guardsmen, Daemons and then its only a certain few that are good. Many others like Aeldari they are meh. 9th might change that, will have to wait and see.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Really? I feel like light infantry are garbage right now. Even in cover they'll just get destroyed. Vehicles and monsters were made too tough for suicide anti tank units like scourge. Believe me I've played scourge enough to realize they're not worth it. They are far too fragile and don't do enough before they die.
Scourge are indeed not very good. DE infantry is in a weird place generally because almost every unit has some sort of issue that makes it problematic. It's what comes of splitting the codex into three different armies then sticking them back together. You end up with units that are are kinda all trying too hard in some specific direction and fail for some reason.
It's not a coincidence that the better units for DE are mostly ones that either aren't specialized to one of the sub-armies, or that do something so different from the rest of the codex that they don't need to be weirdly overthought to be good.
With the new system troops that were useful only to provide CPs because they are cheap are going to take a hit. Units like Gretchins were an autotake in 8th, but with the new edition they'll just be a niche unit.
Kabalite warriors never had that role despite being cheap, they still are among the best troops in the game. Wracks can be useful as well. Wyches are overcosted in this edition, but maybe if 9th buffs melee units somehow they can be an interesting option as well.
Scourges simply suffered from shifting editions: they used to be a reliable suicide anti vehicles unit, but with the new rules their firepower can't threat anything while their durability hasn't changed. They just don't have a role anymore and need a full update.
Did anybody check out the obscuring rules yet for 9th edition? I'm actually kind of excited for them for our faction. If obscuring terrain blocks a unit you can't see through windows to claim you see it. It sounds like you can still fire weapons that dont need line of sight at it. I wonder what'll happen if parts of a building dont obscure like an edge of a raider or ravager though. Also how does it effect infantry taking cover in ruins and shooting out of it? Hopefully the full rule comes out eventually.
Actually the rule is kinda weird. It definitely needs to be explained.
I find the rule quite easy to understand. At leats if I understand it corectly.
First, let us asume that the terain here (yellow line) is at least 5" tall and has the obscure rule, and light terain rule.
The draw in red man can see the farseer (in pink). You can draw a line of sight to him without moving over the terain. Therefore he can be seen. (I am a bit unsure on the fine print of he gets +1 to his armour save.)
The warp spiders are in the terain, so the red man can se the spiders and the spiders can se him. (Teal.) The spides get +1 to armour save.
The tank (in purpl)e are behind the terain that has the obscure rule and is over 5 so the red man can not se it.
I wad wondering. How many Grotesques do a dark eldar army usualy bring if they bring Grotesques? (For 8th edition. Things might change for 9th. But I am amsuming new terrainrules will be good for them.)
Niiai wrote: I wad wondering. How many Grotesques do a dark eldar army usualy bring if they bring Grotesques? (For 8th edition. Things might change for 9th. But I am amsuming new terrainrules will be good for them.)
Niiai wrote: I wad wondering. How many Grotesques do a dark eldar army usualy bring if they bring Grotesques? (For 8th edition. Things might change for 9th. But I am amsuming new terrainrules will be good for them.)
As many as you can fit
Seriously that's one ot the best units in the codex and they are good even at their min size. Of course max sized units are amazing but if you don't have the points and you field a coven detachment with 3+ talos even a little 3 man squad of grots can be useful.
I don't play drukhari anymore but in 8th I fielded a single unit of 5-9 grotesques, 2x4 (or a unit of 4 and a unit of 5) or 3x3, all viable options. I had 9 in total.
Footslogging within Haemonculus/Urien's aura to boost their T value. With venoms, talos, flyers, ravagers, etc.. also on the table there's enough target saturation to keem them alive for long. If they are prioritized by the enemy shooting other valuble stuff survives. I've only played Prophets of Flesh with 4++ though.
I've never tried to deepstrike them by the webway stratagem though, it could also be a rewarding combo.
Niiai wrote: I wad wondering. How many Grotesques do a dark eldar army usualy bring if they bring Grotesques? (For 8th edition. Things might change for 9th. But I am amsuming new terrainrules will be good for them.)
Niiai wrote: I wad wondering. How many Grotesques do a dark eldar army usualy bring if they bring Grotesques? (For 8th edition. Things might change for 9th. But I am amsuming new terrainrules will be good for them.)
One of my enemies sometimes brings about 20.
20?! What model did he build them out of? Shurly not the offisial model.
Niiai wrote: I wad wondering. How many Grotesques do a dark eldar army usualy bring if they bring Grotesques? (For 8th edition. Things might change for 9th. But I am amsuming new terrainrules will be good for them.)
One of my enemies sometimes brings about 20.
20?! What model did he build them out of? Shurly not the offisial model.
Ogres are way cheaper, almost 50%. I also made my grots converting those, I was lucky to get a few ogre legs+torso for dirty cheap from a bitz site and had enough arms from the ogre box to assemble 9 dudes.
Blackie wrote: Ogres are way cheaper, almost 50%. I also made my grots converting those, I was lucky to get a few ogre legs+torso for dirty cheap from a bitz site and had enough arms from the ogre box to assemble 9 dudes.
However, Crypt Horrors have a very nice dynamic pose, while Ogres look rather static.
Blackie wrote: Ogres are way cheaper, almost 50%. I also made my grots converting those, I was lucky to get a few ogre legs+torso for dirty cheap from a bitz site and had enough arms from the ogre box to assemble 9 dudes.
However, Crypt Horrors have a very nice dynamic pose, while Ogres look rather static.
The problem is that making ogres look good really means I need to buy spare parts. While using crypt fiends I feel I can get away with just using them spare some special weapons.
If I use crypt fiends I can use the ghouls as wracks. :-)
Drager wrote: I used Stormfiends with spare Talos bits. They're some of my favourite models.
Before the new Obliterators I used Stormfiends as mine, they LOOKED amazing. My whole CSM army was fully converted. Sadly i sold it, luckily i sold it for 4x the cost b.c it was so unique. I'll message him and ask for pics, i still talk to the guy that bought them. I can show my Heldrake adn LoS right now as an example.
I use WereSheWolves from raging heroes but that is by far the least economically viable option, they double as my fiends of slaanesh... probably why i only own 4 lol
Yep the Dark Kin do have a somewhat swingy price points from reasonable (by GW) stuff like Kabalites and Wyches ( that you can use to bash hqs) to absurd like the beasts (razorwing flock being a good shout at best worst priced in the whole range) with grots stuck in the middle with a fair sized unit costing around the same as staples like trip razorjets, ravagers or Talos
Yeah.. for Beasts if you want RWF and still be official GW models, just get the beasts of chaos endless spell, its $35 USD and comes with 3 plastic RWF's, compare to the $18 for 1 fine cast.
Sadly I think they had their moment of glory in index 8th when wounds carried a very low points value, probaly shifted a lot of those zombicide crows as the proxy of choice
So questions: DE bikes where good in 8th because tvey could tie up stuff. Are there some secondery role they can theoretically do if they can not tie up tanks in 9th?
Reavers are decent enough now i think. At least in the way i'm about to run them. I haven't been able to find out due to corona and michigan having one of the most severe lockdowns in the usa despite no longer being one of the worst effected states by it.
I may quit this game due to how frequently the meta changes and how expensive everything is now. I always say it but i can never take the plunge.
Well do you need new models every time the meta shifts?
To bad about the lockdown. Or to bad about the corona vitus rather. Here in Norway we had the lockdown a period and now many things are back to normal. Schools are open. Stil people have home offises. But there are a lot less sick. Relative healthy countries have even opened up for travel, like between Norway and Denmark.
Corona is gonnr be with us for a while. Years perhaps. Hopefully the endgame will be a vacine. Clearly itbis affecting the hobby. You just need to quarentine people until the contamination spread number becones under 0,99 and hold it there for a while. And then have a soft opening. At least that is the Norwegian model and other countries do it as well. As gewer people have it you can play again relativaly safe. I do not want to accidentaly kill somebody who is compromised becaused I played with some plastic wargames.
Niiai wrote: Well do you need new models every time the meta shifts?
It mostly depends on how big your collection of models is, how the units changed with the new codex, and what kind of competitiveness you're seeking. I had a 4000-5000 points army that I mostly played in 7th and when 8th came I didn't add a single model (in fact, I eventually ended up selling the army, lol) as the units that were good before remained good and I had enough models to do the little changes I needed to adapt to the new editon.
If I was a meta chaser and wanted to win tournaments I would certainly have needed to buy new models, like all other factions' competitive players. But I was satisfied with the collection I had, in fact the very same models were even more competitive than they were in the previous edition.
Well, every shift of the meta changes the effectiveness of models and units at the battlefield.
This is intended and is the way GW sustains the purchase of products.
Drukhari has some variety of models ranging from troops to (light) tanks so that it should be possible to adapt to every meta shift.
Aeldari and SM are certainly in a better position but I won't complain.
Yes but no matter what the core of DE is and will always be viable, kabal, vehicles, and transports. Units like reavers, beasts, hellions, mandrakes, scourges, grots, cronos, incubi, etc.. all rotate out time to time. But if you have a solid core you shouldn't need to actually buy more models or swap much. Even if Grots rotated out, if the rest of your army is solid then a couple subpar units is 100% fine.
As long as you are not spending insane amounts of units that are niche and you have a solid 1300 ish points of core DE you shouldn't have anything to worry about.
Automatically Appended Next Post: PS and some units just never been good, like Hellions. Don't buy them unless they actually become good lol.
I'd say right now don't get Hellions, Clawed Fiends, Khymeraes, Ur-ghuls, Medusae for now.
Then these will be more for fun, they can work and should be fine for the future but are slightly weaker, Reavers, Scourges, Cronos, RWF's, Incubi.
And Finally, don't get any FW things right now, they have completely redone all FW and GW did it not the FW team, wait till we see the Index 2.0 for FW.
I'm fairly confident that my Venom/Kabalite playstyle, supported by some Talos will still be fine come 9th. I'm also quietly optimistic that my proclivity for equipping all my Sybarites with Blast Pistols might actually be better than it was.
That said, I'm curious if we'll see more FW Reapers now that their weapon no longer suffers a penalty for moving and shooting.
Niiai wrote: Well do you need new models every time the meta shifts?.
Personally no, but having slowly collected for 30 years or so I can swap stuff in and out as whilst my Deldar isnt anywhre near my CWE Ive got enough core units, if i do 9th the only things id be tempted by is new drazhar and a Cronos, just to replace the fall over metal ones and maybe if i was feeling spendy a box of kabalites/wychs to make some hqs as the metal ones show their age quite badly, might also have a go at kitbashing a Reaper out of a spare raider and a leftover Prism cannon
So, with new CP/army building generation I think Drukhari might get a little boost? If Patrols cost 1CP each, and they take 3 of them, 1 gets refunded and they spend 2, but gain 4 for a net gain of 2 CP over an army that brings a Battalion. Even if Patrols cost 2CP you're breaking even with a similar army.
Might be interesting? Unless a day 1 FAQ completely changes that ability.
Rihgu wrote: So, with new CP/army building generation I think Drukhari might get a little boost? If Patrols cost 1CP each, and they take 3 of them, 1 gets refunded and they spend 2, but gain 4 for a net gain of 2 CP over an army that brings a Battalion. Even if Patrols cost 2CP you're breaking even with a similar army.
Might be interesting? Unless a day 1 FAQ completely changes that ability.
I wouldn't be shocked if they FAQ'd it immediately. Remember 2 weeks or so after our codex allowed the 3 patrol detachment ability for CP's they immediately limited max detachments to 3 at 2k pts and made it nearly worthless.
The detachment thing was a suggestion but many groups adopted it which did affect how they could field their army. The bigger one for me was actually how two weeks after our codex dropped they FAQed the core book to make battalion jump from 3CP to 5CP which now bumped it 1 CP higher than our raiding party for less investment. The fact they never went back and bumped our raiding party to 6 or even just matched Battalion at 5 blows my mind. I hope we get a special way to army-build in 9th to compensate for our weird 3-faction codex but given GW history of working with us to make army building fun and adaptable I wont be holding my breath.
I've always played drukhari with 9-10 CPs guaranteed plus additional 0-2 from the Prophets of Flesh trait and an extra couple from the Black Heart trait. Never had the feeling that I was low in CPs.
So, even if drukhari don't get special rules that allow them to bring multi-detachments without burning CPs I wouldn't freak out. Going 3x detachments will probably mean starting with 6-8 CPs plus 1CP/turn which is pretty close to the starting 9-10 CPs of 8th.
Inevitable_Faith wrote: The detachment thing was a suggestion but many groups adopted it which did affect how they could field their army. The bigger one for me was actually how two weeks after our codex dropped they FAQed the core book to make battalion jump from 3CP to 5CP which now bumped it 1 CP higher than our raiding party for less investment. The fact they never went back and bumped our raiding party to 6 or even just matched Battalion at 5 blows my mind. I hope we get a special way to army-build in 9th to compensate for our weird 3-faction codex but given GW history of working with us to make army building fun and adaptable I wont be holding my breath.
So much THIS.
I would't be too surprised if I ended up sticking with a Battalion and a Spearhead in 9th, as the only Wych contigent I currenly have are Reavers, which I found massively underwhelming.
Blackie wrote: I've always played drukhari with 9-10 CPs guaranteed plus additional 0-2 from the Prophets of Flesh trait and an extra couple from the Black Heart trait. Never had the feeling that I was low in CPs.
So, even if drukhari don't get special rules that allow them to bring multi-detachments without burning CPs I wouldn't freak out. Going 3x detachments will probably mean starting with 6-8 CPs plus 1CP/turn which is pretty close to the starting 9-10 CPs of 8th.
Some of us dont play Prophets of Flesh and/or Blackheart.
Blackie wrote: I've always played drukhari with 9-10 CPs guaranteed plus additional 0-2 from the Prophets of Flesh trait and an extra couple from the Black Heart trait. Never had the feeling that I was low in CPs.
So, even if drukhari don't get special rules that allow them to bring multi-detachments without burning CPs I wouldn't freak out. Going 3x detachments will probably mean starting with 6-8 CPs plus 1CP/turn which is pretty close to the starting 9-10 CPs of 8th.
Some of us dont play Prophets of Flesh and/or Blackheart.
6-8 CPs plus 1/turn is still the amount that a drukhari army tipycally needs, especially if the player is not relying on that 4CPs Agent of Vect stratagem. It's basically what they had in 8th anyway, sometimes even more.
yep was kind of hoping they go with some kind of per model /source so cover or shooting moved heavy weapon still stacks up rather than the lazy choice, especially as rerolls are staying which germageddon aside would haved scared off all the aliatoc -2/-3 insanity
Anticipating that I might have to lean harder into Coven, I'm thinking about buying a Urien Rakarth. I have the option of the metal or the finecast version, has anybody any experience with the model that could advise which to go for?
harlokin wrote: Anticipating that I might have to lean harder into Coven, I'm thinking about buying a Urien Rakarth. I have the option of the metal or the finecast version, has anybody any experience with the model that could advise which to go for?
Well i got 12 reavers in the mail today. With these made i will be able to field 36 reavers with 12 in each of the 3 units. The goal was to have grav talons and blasters on 12 of em and to go the mortal wound on a 5+ per bike on the charge obsession as well as the +1 to wound vs vehicles and monsters at 10 or more wounds obsession. Hopefully it works out vs tau just fine.
Oaka wrote: The new coherency rules look like it will be a pain to run 6+ Grotesques in a unit. I don't think I'm smart enough to not get caught losing models.
Just bunch them up or run them using the movement trays GW sells. That way you'll be safe 95% of the time.
Its for sure either Shadow Elves or DE, no one else has those wrist guards and that tassel is more akin to DE anyways. Shadow Elves blades also don't look like that (at least current ones), i'm guessing DE. My Guess is just more plastic resculpts, this time Lelith.
Do we really need a lilith resculpt? Gw give us new units or even just heroes on bikes or with wings or anything at all. Eldar have like 3 different fast movement options for their autarch. Just give us something with different weapon options at least even if its a resculpt.
In fact eldar have warp spiders? Why do most dark eldar have worse warp travel methods than craftworld? Shouldn't dark eldar either have the best or 2nd best (behind harlies)?
Absolutely. Finescast models need to go. Just like Incubi, also plastic Lelith, Urien, Mandrakes, Beasts, Court, Grots, etc... are needed.
Generally speaking I always prefer resculpts than new units, because new units have the bad habit to outperform or even invalidate older collections, but I see your point about limited HQ options and I agree that some new HQ/character would be awesome.
Not as urgently as Mandrakes and Grots, but I wonder if a new sculpt would come with a 'Lelith Hesperax as a Ynnari' rules update.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Shredders have been 'confirmed' as Blast weapons.
Is this a good thing or not? I can't help but think not. I'm imagining a Shredder in a Venom being unable to fire because the boat is locked in close combat.
Not as urgently as Mandrakes and Grots, but I wonder if a new sculpt would come with a 'Lelith Hesperax as a Ynnari' rules update.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Shredders have been 'confirmed' as Blast weapons.
Is this a good thing or not? I can't help but think not. I'm imagining a Shredder in a Venom being unable to fire because the boat is locked in close combat.
In former editions, shredders have always been blast weapon. So no surprise.
We're looking at a preview of Vect, who has realised the error of his ways and is now a special character for Space Marines.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Do we really need a lilith resculpt? Gw give us new units or even just heroes on bikes or with wings or anything at all. Eldar have like 3 different fast movement options for their autarch. Just give us something with different weapon options at least even if its a resculpt.
Agreed.
Unfortunately, GW are far too busy vomiting Primaris Marines out of every orifice to throw us a bone on that front.
I would love an Archon on a jetbike.....I wouldn't even care if GW didn't actually release a model, but just provided a datasheet. It would be great to kitbash using Reaver stuff. Never gonna happen obvs.
harlokin wrote: I would love an Archon on a jetbike.....I wouldn't even care if GW didn't actually release a model, but just provided a datasheet. It would be great to kitbash using Reaver stuff. Never gonna happen obvs.
Legend models are so-so, as you don't know if you can use it in a tourney.
harlokin wrote: I would love an Archon on a jetbike.....I wouldn't even care if GW didn't actually release a model, but just provided a datasheet. It would be great to kitbash using Reaver stuff. Never gonna happen obvs.
Legend models are so-so, as you don't know if you can use it in a tourney.
Didn't even consider Legends....
Perhaps Archons can beg/steal/borrow a jetbike as a reward from the Crusade campaign?
harlokin wrote: I would love an Archon on a jetbike.....I wouldn't even care if GW didn't actually release a model, but just provided a datasheet. It would be great to kitbash using Reaver stuff. Never gonna happen obvs.
Legend models are so-so, as you don't know if you can use it in a tourney.
I too would love characters on jetbikes, skyboards, wings, etc etc... or being able to fit in a raider with another unit... or having options... and having bodyguard rules work the same across all factions instead of throw a dart on which bodyguard rule a unit will have...
).
