Kroothawk wrote:Do you know why Lelith is barefoot?
She is so kicking ass that her boots got stuck there

I so now want to model a SM w/ Lillith's boot up his bum. Or maybe an objective marker, "Lillith's Boots".

Been trying to follow the thread since page 1 and I am not sure I have seen anyone clarify the new(ish) background for the DE. Has it changed? How much has it changed?

We don't know...sadly

wuestenfux wrote:

Farmer wrote:

wuestenfux wrote:Well, we all seem to have the same oppinion that GW did a great job with the design of the models we've seen so far: Raiders, Warriors, Wyches, Archon, Reaver Jetbikes, Haemonculi.
How about the other models? Taloi, Hellions, etc.?

GW hasn't shown the new Haemonculi.

I remember a pic from the French Games Day two (or even three) years ago.

oh lol, i wouldn't be surprised if those were dropped altogether.

Has anyone else noticed that Lelith has hooks in her hair? So that topknot and all that hair is, in fact, another weapon. Sweet.

Between her legs and waist, I think the model is already feminine. Not bewbs required.

IMO, her and all the models are great and are definitely my next army.

You know guys, we all like the models and we know they are women so you really may want to shut up about the whole chest-size/attractiveness thing. It's both irrelevant and really doesn't help the image of war-gamers dribbling at the sight of women and many of you - not just Scott - have been on about it.

I recognise I have no real authority, but ultimately it's against the rules of Dakka and you're mewling over the breast-size of 1" tall plastic women...

Just Dave wrote:You know guys, we all like the models and we know they are women so you really may want to shut up about the whole chest-size/attractiveness thing. It's both irrelevant and really doesn't help the image of war-gamers dribbling at the sight of women and many of you - not just Scott - have been on about it.

I recognise I have no real authority, but ultimately it's against the rules of Dakka and you're mewling over the breast-size of 1" tall plastic women...

Correction, we are mewling over 1" tall RESIN women. That is, until we get the model, then it'll be METAL ones.

While I see half a dozen things I would do differently - I am very impressed overall and really excited about all the new conversion fodder and great new armies we will see.

ProtoClone wrote:Been trying to follow the thread since page 1 and I am not sure I have seen anyone clarify the new(ish) background for the DE. Has it changed? How much has it changed?

I think the only real thing I've heard was quite general. That the DE now have more than just Commorragh now.

Just Dave wrote:You know guys, we all like the models and we know they are women so you really may want to shut up about the whole chest-size/attractiveness thing. It's both irrelevant and really doesn't help the image of war-gamers dribbling at the sight of women and many of you - not just Scott - have been on about it.

I recognise I have no real authority, but ultimately it's against the rules of Dakka and you're mewling over the breast-size of 1" tall plastic women...

lol talk about overreacting.

btw of course we don't want to ruin the image of wargamers, that would be terrible.

Well... the GW site has offically called them 'combat enhancers' rather than combat drugs. I'm a little disappointed but can't say I didn't see it coming.

I'm fine with that wording. As long as the concept and items are kept in the game, changing the description of them is fine. Besides GW is way bigger now than 12 years ago, the last thing they need is a lawsuit because 'little Timmy' took drugs before fighting the big bully and ended up getting his head ripped off.

Pen≥Sword wrote:Well... the GW site has offically called them 'combat enhancers' rather than combat drugs. I'm a little disappointed but can't say I didn't see it coming.

DAMN YOU GW!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rymafyr wrote:I'm fine with that wording. As long as the concept and items are kept in the game, changing the description of them is fine. Besides GW is way bigger now than 12 years ago, the last thing they need is a lawsuit because 'little Timmy' took drugs before fighting the big bully and ended up getting his head ripped off.

Little Timmy was a victim of Natural Selection, Sue Darwin.

Fiend wrote:Between her legs and waist, I think the model is already feminine.

This is my current favorite post.

Combat Enhancers?

pffft

Gwar! wrote:

Rymafyr wrote:I'm fine with that wording. As long as the concept and items are kept in the game, changing the description of them is fine. Besides GW is way bigger now than 12 years ago, the last thing they need is a lawsuit because 'little Timmy' took drugs before fighting the big bully and ended up getting his head ripped off.

Little Timmy was a victim of Natural Selection, Sue Darwin.

Wonder if he gets an Award?

If breasts and sexy outfits didnt sell models then Reaper would have been out of business a LONG time ago.

IE I still get to call them combat drugs. check.

Scott_K wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:Who cares about her rack? Look at that sweet metal thong! She must be a freak if she's got the fortitude to wear that out of the house

That's why I'm waiting to see the back of the model, before I judge the model as a whole.

You HAVE to be the only person I know that only likes female models if the have large, luscious butts and over-sized chests. You are really freaking me out, as I am 16 and only buy models that look coo/help my army, no matter how large their "unmentionables" are.

Hopefully they will re-sculpt the Wych succubus, and she will make you happy.

I really like the Jabba the Hut sail-barge influence that is visible on the skimmers.

_Tim?

I guess this thread is now officially devoid of any new useful posts. It appears to be reduced to geek concerns over nomenclature and model breasts. I guess there's a lot of this guy on the forum:

From The Onion:
Sci-Fi Geek Only Hangs Out With Models

Kirasu wrote:If breasts and sexy outfits didnt sell models then Reaper would have been out of business a LONG time ago.

Soda-pop, too.

kirsanth wrote:

Fiend wrote:Between her legs and waist, I think the model is already feminine.

This is my current favorite post.

Yeah, I did not mean it like that, but now I see what it looks like I wrote. Lol, anyways my point stands.

Attempting to save the thread from weirdness...

Hey guys, what do you think of the hooks on the Incubis blades? Also, don't the smooth faced helmets make the wearers look really aggressive and inhumane, as DE should look?


_Tim?

Attempting to save the thread from weirdness...

Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:You HAVE to be the only person I know that only likes female models if the have large, luscious butts and over-sized chests. You are really freaking me out, as I am 16 and only buy models that look coo/help my army, no matter how large their "unmentionables" are.

You poor kid. Did the '90's really make you SO scared with political correctness that you can't admit appreciating the female body?

If that's the case, I'm thankful for growing up in the 70's

As for "attempting to save the thread from weirdness"... coming from someone with a Monty Python avatar? Some of us were around when that movie came out. Look up the word "irony" sometime

Good god! this has to be the fastest growing thread on dakka!

nickmund wrote:Good god! this has to be the fastest growing thread on dakka!

Nah, I've seen faster. Especially on the OLD Dakka boards

Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:Attempting to save the thread from weirdness...

Hey guys, what do you think of the hooks on the Incubis blades? Also, don't the smooth faced helmets make the wearers look really aggressive and inhumane, as DE should look?


_Tim?

Attempting to save the thread from weirdness...

I kinda like the spikey bit at the leading edge of the end of the blade. It seems like that would be really good for getting SM's outta their shell.

nickmund wrote:Good god! this has to be the fastest growing thread on dakka!

/tries to refrain from making lilith/boob-size/not the only thing growing joke, fails, giggles to himself like a schoolboy.

edit* have to say though, while I like the new lilith model I really like the old one too...I'll have to grab one soon before they disappear.

I think one of these 3rd part add-on bits companies should do some stickers to replace "enhancers" with the far more appropriate "drugs"... give them away with purchase of some bits.

this has to be the fastest growing thread on dakka!

It will be one of the fastest to be closed today if it doesn't start going somewhere useful again.

BrassScorpion wrote:I guess this thread is now officially devoid of any new useful posts. It appears to be reduced to geek concerns over nomenclature and model breasts. I guess there's a lot of this guy on the forum:

From The Onion:
Sci-Fi Geek Only Hangs Out With Models

callling people geeks is not nice, not nice at all!

Just Dave wrote:You know guys, we all like the models and we know they are women so you really may want to shut up about the whole chest-size/attractiveness thing. It's both irrelevant and really doesn't help the image of war-gamers dribbling at the sight of women and many of you - not just Scott - have been on about it.

I recognise I have no real authority, but ultimately it's against the rules of Dakka and you're mewling over the breast-size of 1" tall plastic women...

The "rules" only apply to certain people.

ProtoClone wrote:Been trying to follow the thread since page 1 and I am not sure I have seen anyone clarify the new(ish) background for the DE. Has it changed? How much has it changed?

The difference is, now they have a background

Kroothawk wrote:

ProtoClone wrote:Been trying to follow the thread since page 1 and I am not sure I have seen anyone clarify the new(ish) background for the DE. Has it changed? How much has it changed?

The difference is, now they have a background

Yeah, and I am excited to see what they have done with them.

I am thinking of selling my SW or Tau, still deciding, to start a small force of DE or Ork.

Just Dave wrote:You know guys, we all like the models and we know they are women so you really may want to shut up about the whole chest-size/attractiveness thing. It's both irrelevant and really doesn't help the image of war-gamers dribbling at the sight of women and many of you - not just Scott - have been on about it.

I recognise I have no real authority, but ultimately it's against the rules of Dakka and you're mewling over the breast-size of 1" tall plastic women...

You know it's human instinct for men to admire the female form, no matter is its a woman at the bar, on the tv or in a video game, the fact is that the part of our brain that makes us "dribble over the breast size of 1" tall plastic women" doesn't care if the woman is reall or not it just goes: "Hey look! Bewbs!"

That aside i will agree that lilith (did i spell that right?) is certainly one of GW finest female models and certainly looks like i'd expect a space-elf gladiatorial campion to look like, and in regards to her lack of shoes, didn't it say in the book Dune that if involved in a knife fight on an unknown surface, bare feet is best?

the sail is a nice addition

Updated from Jes Goodwin:

Jes Goodwin wrote:Well there are enough parts to make 10 Kabalite Warriors. There are 6 male and 4 female torsos, 10 helmets, 5 bare heads [male and female], all the weapon options you need, parts for a couple of different Sybarites and lots of extras. The frame is cross compatible with the Wyches, other frames in the Dark Eldar range and even some of the Eldar plastics, plenty of scope for conversion and personalisation, so that none of your squads need be the same.

And in regards to the Wyches:

Jes Goodwin wrote:With the Kabalite Warriors defining the basic look of the Dark Eldar troops, it was time to address the other core troops of the army, the Wyches. We wanted the 'Hekatarii' to be very dynamic and to feature a range of exotic weaponry as well as a new knife design. Swords were considered initially, but it just seemed cooler and scarier if the Wyches could be lethal in close combat with just a knife. The fighting suits they wear are armoured in the style of the Kabalite Warriors, but only down one side, primarily the left shoulder and arm, gladiator style. This was also the side that would have the close combat weapon, with the pistol on the unarmoured right. Although this seemed a bit regimented, it did allow for the weapon arms to be swapped with other models in the range, particularly for the squad leaders.

The heads were a challenge. We needed lots of designs to give the models character, but the plastic moulding process makes hair difficult, and getting good female faces in a small scale is even tougher (they couldn't all be bald and male). They finished up with a lot of exotic haircuts, styled, but with barbaric decorations, pins and blades woven into them. The high collars tied the Wyches in with the Kabalite Warriors and allowed us to add the pipes, which deliver combat enhancers to the Wyches.

A nod to Combat Drugs there? ^^

Jes Goodwin wrote:Although the knife is the signature weapon of the Wych, we wanted to include a number of exotic hand blades for variety; indeed, the first Wych prototype was armed with a weighted chain while I was dithering about swords. The weighted chain weapons were achievable in plastic without looking like anchor chains; the punch daggers were a nod to the old range; the bladed gauntlet another gladiatorial reference. The frame itself makes 10 Wyches. There are six female torsos and four male torsos, and you can swap the male torsos with the female torsos from other Dark Eldar kits if you'd prefer all your Wyches to be female. There are 14 different heads in the kit, and parts to make several variations of Hekatrix (squad leader) and a plethora of nasty weaponry, including the exotic weaponry of the sub-cults.

And about Lelith herself:

Jes Goodwin wrote:Lelith Hesperax was the first special character to receive an updated design. I chose to draw the concept in a neutral pose - it is often better to work the pose out in 3D and as Juan Diaz would be sculpting the model I wanted him to have as much freedom as possible to make the model dynamic (as well as showing off his anatomy skills). There is always a challenge with Eldar special characters; you cannot make them bigger than their fellows like Orks, or as ornate as Marines, because you don't have the room. Lelith needed to be slim and lithe but still needed presence. The long sweeping hair, tied through with hooks for a nasty edge, added volume and the broken banner scenic base gave extra height, as well as allowing her to be depicted balanced on her toes. The rest of her is really stripped back; barefoot, with much less armour than the ordinary Wyches, armed with just two of the cult knives and no combat enhancers, we wanted to imply that she was so deadly that she needed none of those things. With more of her skin showing she would contrast well with the rank and file of the army. Juan really hit this one out of the park, one of the nicest female models we've ever made.

And a nod to the fact that Lelith -won't- have Combat Drugs?

The sails make them look more like a raiding fleet. And I don't know why....

bloodaxegit wrote:The sails make them look more like a raiding fleet. And I don't know why....

isn't that the point?

Nice to hear from Jes. He really talks/speaks/writes like you'd expect him too. He sounds like a movie director or something

Well, in the fluff Lelith doesn't use combat drugs.

hehe, I'd use some drugs on her...Hehe.

Amaya wrote:Well, in the fluff Lelith doesn't use combat drugs.

That make her seem scarier, as she more deadly then even the most skilled of the other wytches and is not off her rocker on drugs, so everything she does is controlled and calculated.

Thats it, i'm collecting a wych cult. To quote Spike from Cowboy Bebop: "i love the kind of woman who can kick my ass."

Well, actually, the reason her Cult does that is because they want to experience the heat of battle to the fullest. Which kind of makes her scarier.

Nice to hear from Jes.

You don't have to rely on forums for that or wait for others to post it. As I've often said, a visit to the actual GW website can do wonders for keeping up to date on new releases. All that is required to get that kind of information is to visit the Games Workshop website where the information is posted with continuity, context and pictures here. That information has been up for many hours now, I already read it myself about six hours ago at the link provided.

BrassScorpion wrote:

Nice to hear from Jes.

You don't have to rely on forums for that or wait for others to post it. As I've often said, a visit to the actual GW website can do wonders for keeping up to date on new releases. All that is required to get that kind of information is to visit the Games Workshop website where the information is posted with continuity, context and pictures here. That information has been up for many hours now, I already read it myself about six hours ago at the link provided.

Yes. I know The GW website is a little more comprehensive than dakka, which is always welcome

Does that mean that her statline is going to make up for the lack of combat-drugs?

Farmer wrote:

BrassScorpion wrote:I guess this thread is now officially devoid of any new useful posts. It appears to be reduced to geek concerns over nomenclature and model breasts. I guess there's a lot of this guy on the forum:

From The Onion:
Sci-Fi Geek Only Hangs Out With Models

callling people geeks is not nice, not nice at all!

Reality isn't nice.

sum1thtdiesalot wrote:Does that mean that her statline is going to make up for the lack of combat-drugs?

Incoming beast mode. Lelith Hesperax, TERRORIZE!

Athera wrote:

The "rules" only apply to certain people.

Is that you, Howlingmoon?

Scott_K wrote:

Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:You HAVE to be the only person I know that only likes female models if the have large, luscious butts and over-sized chests. You are really freaking me out, as I am 16 and only buy models that look coo/help my army, no matter how large their "unmentionables" are.

You poor kid. Did the '90's really make you SO scared with political correctness that you can't admit appreciating the female body?

If that's the case, I'm thankful for growing up in the 70's

As for "attempting to save the thread from weirdness"... coming from someone with a Monty Python avatar? Some of us were around when that movie came out. Look up the word "irony" sometime

I am always willing to have a laugh at myself, so LOL!

Also, do we have any idea about when the new DE Army book *ahem* Codex, is supposed to come out? I am sorely tempted to start a new army, with a different color scheme.

_Tim?

Is it just me, or do they seem to be Hyping Dark Eldar a lot more than they do most armies? I mean, Games Day, and the promise of a week-long series of articles, which are so far fairly interesting designers notes? What do youn think, eh?

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:Is it just me, or do they seem to be Hyping Dark Eldar a lot more than they do most armies? I mean, Games Day, and the promise of a week-long series of articles, which are so far fairly interesting designers notes? What do youn think, eh?

This is a major Gamble for GW. If the DE don't sell well, then the Higher Ups in their infinte wisdom will say "Well, Look what we did, it seems that Xenos don't sell, MOAR MAHRINES HURRRRRRRRRR!" and then they Squat the Tau.

Hold on, why do I say that (last bit) like it's a bad thing?

In any case, the Dev team (aka the, perhaps, one remaining person in GW who actually cares about the game) are pulling out all the stops to make sure DE sell well, because if they don't, it's going to become MarineHammer 40Marines.

Scott_K wrote:

Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:You HAVE to be the only person I know that only likes female models if the have large, luscious butts and over-sized chests. You are really freaking me out, as I am 16 and only buy models that look coo/help my army, no matter how large their "unmentionables" are.

You poor kid. Did the '90's really make you SO scared with political correctness that you can't admit appreciating the female body?

If that's the case, I'm thankful for growing up in the 70's

I don't think it's so much what you and others have been saying, as it is what you haven't been saying. Your points and the points of others are all well and good, but why do the lelith figure/wyches dissapoint you so much? It's not like there aren't a thousand barbie-doll-proportioned minis out there already. For once, just once we get vaguely realistic females, who aren't bimbos or dressed like sluts, and you're going to complain about it?

Look, don't take me for some kind of prude, my Slaanesh army is full of reapers' "sexy" figures, and all my daemonettes are all symmetrical in the chestal department (IMO the plastics look like victims of breast cancer, rather than androgynous).

But know what else makes sense? Gladiators (wyches), who look like actual combatants, rather than "genies in magic bikinis". I think the new wyches are a brilliant representation of highly skilled, lightly armed pit fighters.

Must... buy... Hesperax... DAMNED BE THE EMPEROR! I NEED THESE XENOS!

I keep trying to picture how the sculpts for the other Special Characters might look... I hope to be equally as blown away.
In fact, I fantasize about all the models we HAVEN'T yet seen. I now have high expectations for their unveiling... Which will likely be met or probably exceeded.

Munch Munch! wrote:

Farmer wrote:

BrassScorpion wrote:I guess this thread is now officially devoid of any new useful posts. It appears to be reduced to geek concerns over nomenclature and model breasts. I guess there's a lot of this guy on the forum:

From The Onion:
Sci-Fi Geek Only Hangs Out With Models

callling people geeks is not nice, not nice at all!

Reality isn't nice.

depends on who you are, and how lucky your draw of the cards are.

Archonate wrote:I keep trying to picture how the sculpts for the other Special Characters might look... I hope to be equally as blown away.
In fact, I fantasize about all the models we HAVEN'T yet seen. I now have high expectations for their unveiling... Which will likely be met or probably exceeded.

I can't agree enough. Vect, Drazhar and Urien. Not to mention the other 'rank and file' models like the Mandrakes.

Yes!
I'm also curious to see how they redefine scourges. They used to just be Warriors that could jump. I predict they'll be given more personality to separate them as the mercenaries that they're supposed to be. Unrelated to the Kabalites.

And what about the new units?!

I'm glad this unveiling was just Archon, Incubi, Wyches, Warriors, Lelith and Raiders. The full glimpse might have been a fatal overdose of awesome...

I really wanna see new warp beasts with better rules. Since they are basically deamons why dont they have an invulnerable save? And those models have a lot of possibility since none of them have to look the same. And has anyone heard about any new grotesques? The old/current ones are horrid. (No pun intended)

Clay Matthews is a Space Marine? I knew it!

Gwar! wrote:

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:Is it just me, or do they seem to be Hyping Dark Eldar a lot more than they do most armies? I mean, Games Day, and the promise of a week-long series of articles, which are so far fairly interesting designers notes? What do youn think, eh?

This is a major Gamble for GW. If the DE don't sell well, then the Higher Ups in their infinte wisdom will say "Well, Look what we did, it seems that Xenos don't sell, MOAR MAHRINES HURRRRRRRRRR!" and then they Squat the Tau.

or they could just add space marines into the new tau codex

Nah. If the Dark Eldar fail, the Necrons die, Eldar get pushed back, and the only Xeno release we'll see in the next two years will be the Tau.

Is there a model for the Venom?

They look awesome

SpacePanzee wrote:Is there a model for the Venom?

No.

And there is unlikely to be one.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

SpacePanzee wrote:Is there a model for the Venom?

No.

And there is unlikely to be one.

Business!

Whatcha wanna bet, H.B.M.C.?

I'm putting odds on a GW model for the Venom within... oh, two years. (Notice safely hedged bet including likely date-range of Eldar reboot...)

It'll be the DE Codex's Storm Raven.

Savnock wrote:Whatcha wanna bet, H.B.M.C.?

I'm putting odds on a GW model for the Venom within... oh, two years. (Notice safely hedged bet including likely date-range of Eldar reboot...)

Don't you think that one's weighted pretty heavily against you Savnock? We don't even know in the Venom is actually in the book yet. It's still just rumours.

It is in the codex, confirmed for me by someone who has read it. Doesn't look like there is a model for it though, he mentioned there was a picture of it in the book but it just looked like a spikey Vyper. While it seems very unlikely that there will be a model for the Venom at this stage I wouldn't bet against one coming out in the future. I expect the Venom to be in the next Eldar codex (as they really need an open topped transport) as well so they could do an update of the Vyper and incorporate it into the kit.

If it is just a "spiky Vyper", I'd expect the recut of the Vyper sprue (to be done when the Eldar are re-done no doubt) to become a Vyper/Venom boxed set, where you either give it a turret or a platform for transported troops.

SpacePanzee wrote:Is there a model for the Venom?

This is the official conversion by GW, using a Vyper and adding some Raider bitz:

The venom was used in the Harlequins codex as a transport (some years ago)
It's in the page 10.

I would like to see what one of those looks like using the new Raider kit . . . Could be quite interesting.

Oshova

I think eventually, like all other players with the older models - my 3rd edition Raiders will gradually be turned into Venoms while the new raiders will serve as Raiders.

I guess I would just really have to see if they still have the 6 troop capacity and just how big they intend them to be now, and if the old dark lance is a suitable proxy for their fusion gun or whatever they are armed with now.

Here a nice shot from the DE box background art, posted by Heresy Online moderator MadCowCrazy:

That is really cool. I wonder if GW would make it available as a desktop wallpaper.

Gwar! wrote:So, just because they don't have Boobage rivalling the Heavy Metal chick, you don't like them?

My girlfriend's mum was the model for that chick. True say.

Powerguy wrote:It is in the codex, confirmed for me by someone who has read it. Doesn't look like there is a model for it though, he mentioned there was a picture of it in the book but it just looked like a spikey Vyper. While it seems very unlikely that there will be a model for the Venom at this stage I wouldn't bet against one coming out in the future. I expect the Venom to be in the next Eldar codex (as they really need an open topped transport) as well so they could do an update of the Vyper and incorporate it into the kit.

Makes me wonder if it is like the Land Speeder Storm. It's not a Dedicated Transport for Harlequins, rather it's a FA choice that can carry Harlequins.

puma713 wrote:

Powerguy wrote:It is in the codex, confirmed for me by someone who has read it. Doesn't look like there is a model for it though, he mentioned there was a picture of it in the book but it just looked like a spikey Vyper. While it seems very unlikely that there will be a model for the Venom at this stage I wouldn't bet against one coming out in the future. I expect the Venom to be in the next Eldar codex (as they really need an open topped transport) as well so they could do an update of the Vyper and incorporate it into the kit.

Makes me wonder if it is like the Land Speeder Storm. It's not a Dedicated Transport for Harlequins, rather it's a FA choice that can carry Harlequins.

I hope not. Making the LSS compete for fast attack slots was the best way to insure it was hardly ever used.

Commander Endova wrote:I hope not. Making the LSS compete for fast attack slots was the best way to insure it was hardly ever used.

Because there are just soooooooo many other useful Fast Attack units in the SM codex? Fast Attack have always been SM and CSM's "Dump" slot. (Like how Heavy Support is Nid's, Elites is Necrons and Troops is Tau ).

Gwar! wrote:

Commander Endova wrote:I hope not. Making the LSS compete for fast attack slots was the best way to insure it was hardly ever used.

Because there are just soooooooo many other useful Fast Attack units in the SM codex? Fast Attack have always been SM and CSM's "Dump" slot. (Like how Heavy Support is Nid's, Elites is Necrons and Troops is Tau ).

I have to agree with that. Outside of Assault Squads, I never took a FA slot for SM.

Gwar! wrote:

Commander Endova wrote:I hope not. Making the LSS compete for fast attack slots was the best way to insure it was hardly ever used.

Because there are just soooooooo many other useful Fast Attack units in the SM codex? Fast Attack have always been SM and CSM's "Dump" slot. (Like how Heavy Support is Nid's, Elites is Necrons and Troops is Tau ).

Er, what? Tyranids don't really avoid any slots, especially the Heavy Support. Trygons? Those are a 'dump'?

Gwar! wrote:

Commander Endova wrote:I hope not. Making the LSS compete for fast attack slots was the best way to insure it was hardly ever used.

Because there are just soooooooo many other useful Fast Attack units in the SM codex? Fast Attack have always been SM and CSM's "Dump" slot. (Like how Heavy Support is Nid's, Elites is Necrons and Troops is Tau ).

Umm. MM/HF Landspeeders? I agree on CSM though.

And isn't HS kind of important for Nids? Every list I see has packed HS (Tyranno, Carnis or Trygons).

No argument on Necrons and Tau though. lol

Samus_aran115 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Commander Endova wrote:I hope not. Making the LSS compete for fast attack slots was the best way to insure it was hardly ever used.

Because there are just soooooooo many other useful Fast Attack units in the SM codex? Fast Attack have always been SM and CSM's "Dump" slot. (Like how Heavy Support is Nid's, Elites is Necrons and Troops is Tau ).

Er, what? Tyranids don't really avoid any slots, especially the Heavy Support. Trygons? Those are a 'dump'?

They have Carnifex in that slot. That makes it a dump slot.

But Ok, I was a bit harsh. Nids do seem to have a good Balance, though their Elites Slot is the "Key" slot.

Gwar! wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Commander Endova wrote:I hope not. Making the LSS compete for fast attack slots was the best way to insure it was hardly ever used.

Because there are just soooooooo many other useful Fast Attack units in the SM codex? Fast Attack have always been SM and CSM's "Dump" slot. (Like how Heavy Support is Nid's, Elites is Necrons and Troops is Tau ).

Er, what? Tyranids don't really avoid any slots, especially the Heavy Support. Trygons? Those are a 'dump'?

They have Carnifex in that slot. That makes it a dump slot.

But Ok, I was a bit harsh. Nids do seem to have a good Balance, though their Elites Slot is the "Key" slot.

you're always harsh picking on my litte men.

What's New Today: German and Italian Games Day; Dark Eldar Ravager
Lots of good new information about the Raider/Ravager kit and crew on today's What's New Today on the GW website.

And for those who break out in hives at GW's Website:
Click for Bigger pics:

Just noticed a nasty little detail that makes me jump for joy:



Note that nasty little hook on the front hanger-on's spear.

Maybe my "perhaps that's how they pick up slaves" prediction wasn't too far off the mark. Imagine a Raider zipping by and grabbing you by a squishy part of your anatomy at the end of that hook.

And apparently they're all interchangeable with the warriors/wyches so we could use the wych impaler/trident as a swapsie on one to differentiate between raiders.

That Raider pic has some (slightly) better shots of the Ravagers in the background.

Ya know, the guy with the bottom half of his face covered would look a LOT better with out the top knot. In fact, I only ever hear complaining about top knots and never anyone standing up for them... Which really makes me wonder why they've sprinkled them in these new models.

I mean, you can say "you can chop the top knots off" but a lot of times that makes it look awkward. And with a model that's bald aside from that, you'd have to get rid of the rest of the hair and run the risk of having a head that looks like it was recently lobotomized.

I also think the helmets are still a bit too big. and some of them have some kinda dumb features. Like the one that has the spikes that run up his face.

Hopefully the Goodwin Regime doesn't burn me at the stake for criticizing the models like they have been everyone else.

SamplesoWoopass wrote:

I also think the helmets are some kinda dumb features. Like the one that has the spikes that run up his face.

The DE aesthetic has sort of an undercurrent of fetishism and sadomasochism that can't be denied...

Imagine how the models would look if GW took the criticism they get from every hater and altered the models accordingly. They'd really have something great to sell then, wouldn't they? People have to get over the fact that they can't sculpt each model range to please each individual customer, not till they invent "sculpts on demand" technology anyway.

CT GAMER wrote:

SamplesoWoopass wrote:

I also think the helmets are some kinda dumb features. Like the one that has the spikes that run up his face.

The DE aesthetic has sort of an undercurrent of fetishism and sadomasochism that can't be denied...

That's fine. I like the theme, but the one on the left, next to the guy with the stupid looking blades coming out of the side of their helmet is just bad. And to me, doesn't really even fit the theme too well imo.

I suppose that makes an entire culture of warriors that had 'top-knots' look silly as well, but I sure wouldn't be saying that to the face of a samurai. Seriously, drop the top-knot issue. It's already been stated that casting in plastic has certain issues that are difficult, primarily: hair. That level of detail is just not available to have stupendous hair options. Also, most women in the military (and men if they were allowed) who have long hair have to put it up in order to utilize their gear. That's fine if you just plain don't like either the helmeted or un-helmeted heads. Don't use either...

Samus_aran115 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Commander Endova wrote:I hope not. Making the LSS compete for fast attack slots was the best way to insure it was hardly ever used.

Because there are just soooooooo many other useful Fast Attack units in the SM codex? Fast Attack have always been SM and CSM's "Dump" slot. (Like how Heavy Support is Nid's, Elites is Necrons and Troops is Tau ).

Er, what? Tyranids don't really avoid any slots, especially the Heavy Support. Trygons? Those are a 'dump'?

I don't get how Elites is Necrons either. Immortals are next to Destroyers for most commonly used unit...

...Although he got Tau right. If I could not take troops... I would have a half-decent army.

Note that nasty little hook on the front hanger-on's spear.

Maybe my "perhaps that's how they pick up slaves" prediction wasn't too far off the mark. Imagine a Raider zipping by and grabbing you by a squishy part of your anatomy at the end of that hook.

Reminds me a bit of a fishermans gaffe... those are a pretty brutal little tool.

While I don't agree with the gigantic horns on...is it the incubi...I do overall love the range. Especailly the raider.

I think I may just scrap my CSM army for this and my birthday is in November so that is a plus...Muwahahahaha!

BrassScorpion wrote:Imagine how the models would look if GW took the criticism they get from every hater and altered the models accordingly. They'd really have something great to sell then, wouldn't they? People have to get over the fact that they can't sculpt each model range to please each individual customer, not till they invent "sculpts on demand" technology anyway.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Everyone who has a problem with any aspect of the models is deemed "hater" so obviously they're just stupid and wrong. So, I guess if I'm a hater for pointing out that the models weren't retrieved from God's rectum then I guess I'll be a hater. Their are bad points done with the models, and I'm sure if the new release had been a different army from GW then there'd be complaints and not everyone who said something bad would get attacked by the Goodwin Regime.

But since it's dark eldar and you've been waiting so long for it then people don't want to come to terms with the fact that even this range has some problems.

Hey, My birthday is end of October. We're doing good here. Gift Certificates. All should give me Gift Certificates! And Cards....

It is not the criticism that makes a hater, but the intensity with which they make it.

aka_mythos wrote:It is not the criticism that makes a hater, but the intensity with which they make it.

Which makes SamplesoWoopass decidedly not a hater, as he's giving honest criticism at a reasonable volume, and if Sandra is going to listen to her headphones while she's filing then he should be able to give honest criticism while he's collating so I don't see why he should have to turn down the radio because he enjoys listening at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven.

Wait, I lost my train of thought somewhere in there.

aka_mythos wrote:It is not the criticism that makes a hater, but the intensity with which they make it.

And I think if you read my post, or hell, any of the posts that criticize the models they weren't done with any particular intensity, but still get flamed to hell.

Rymafyr wrote:I suppose that makes an entire culture of warriors that had 'top-knots' look silly as well, but I sure wouldn't be saying that to the face of a samurai. Seriously, drop the top-knot issue. It's already been stated that casting in plastic has certain issues that are difficult, primarily: hair. That level of detail is just not available to have stupendous hair options. Also, most women in the military (and men if they were allowed) who have long hair have to put it up in order to utilize their gear. That's fine if you just plain don't like either the helmeted or un-helmeted heads. Don't use either...

Yes, people who have topknots look silly too. Including samurais. I mean, why should I have to drop the issue? The OLD plastic spacewolves sprue (I think it was copyright 1992) had hair styles that weren't top knots that looked good, and I doubt that their technology has gotten worse since then. And I really find it strange the people who are trying to cite ancient cultures that they probably aren't truly familiar with. And remember, these are minis for a fantasy game, they aren't true to life in a plethora of aspects, so why should they choose hair to suddenly become the point of realism if it makes the models look worse? That was even one of the things people complained about the old DE models.

SamplesoWoopass wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:It is not the criticism that makes a hater, but the intensity with which they make it.

And I think if you read my post, or hell, any of the posts that criticize the models they weren't done with any particular intensity, but still get flamed to hell.

. . . wait . . . what was my argument again . . . ???

Oshova

The big limitation with having a variety of hair styles on bare heads with plastic models comes with assembly. Since the hair on a plastic head is inflexible, it limits the way in which the head can be attached to the torso unless the hair is kept out of the way of the body. That's the reason they have so many bald, short haired, or top-knotted heads. This gives more flexibility in modeling head position on the torso.

SamplesoWoopass wrote:

Yes, people who have topknots look silly too. Including samurais. I mean, why should I have to drop the issue? The OLD plastic spacewolves sprue (I think it was copyright 1992) had hair styles that weren't top knots that looked good, and I doubt that their technology has gotten worse since then.

'Our topknot technology is light years ahead of yours.'






Kudos to anyone who gets the reference.

But Light Year is a unit of Distance...

But Light Year is (or was afaik, (i think the new one has a much broader audience, so no offence to anyone)) the constant of some 5 year olds dreams...



the new dark elves really do look awesome btw!

I love Hellraiser! consider lots of models I can't really afford led by a model i'll convert to look like Hellraiser! niiiice, would still fit in the image with that glowy box thing on the cover of the codex! this just keeps getting better

YmeLocSquirrel256 wrote:But Light Year is (or was afaik, (i think the new one has a much broader audience, so no offence to anyone)) the constant of some 5 year olds dreams...



the new dark elves really do look awesome btw!

Fixed that for ya. (Credit: *lily-fox via DeviantArt via TheDailyWh.at)

SamplesoWoopass wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:It is not the criticism that makes a hater, but the intensity with which they make it.

And I think if you read my post, or hell, any of the posts that criticize the models they weren't done with any particular intensity, but still get flamed to hell.

Rymafyr wrote:I suppose that makes an entire culture of warriors that had 'top-knots' look silly as well, but I sure wouldn't be saying that to the face of a samurai. Seriously, drop the top-knot issue. It's already been stated that casting in plastic has certain issues that are difficult, primarily: hair. That level of detail is just not available to have stupendous hair options. Also, most women in the military (and men if they were allowed) who have long hair have to put it up in order to utilize their gear. That's fine if you just plain don't like either the helmeted or un-helmeted heads. Don't use either...

Yes, people who have topknots look silly too. Including samurais. I mean, why should I have to drop the issue? The OLD plastic spacewolves sprue (I think it was copyright 1992) had hair styles that weren't top knots that looked good, and I doubt that their technology has gotten worse since then. And I really find it strange the people who are trying to cite ancient cultures that they probably aren't truly familiar with. And remember, these are minis for a fantasy game, they aren't true to life in a plethora of aspects, so why should they choose hair to suddenly become the point of realism if it makes the models look worse? That was even one of the things people complained about the old DE models.

Sounds like some serious incoherent ranting and hate to me. If as you say, 'these are minis for a fantasy game', why are you getting bent out of shape over it? My opinion isn't dependent on you agreeing with it; but obviously the reverse isn't true. As I said previously, if you don't like the helmets or heads...fine. I don't give a rat's anyway, but stop trolling.

Since you mentioned it, I happen to know quite alot about ancient cultures. Keep your personal attacks to yourself.

so glad I invest that $12.14 into phillip morris 12 years ago to pay for my dark eldar when they got revamped, Now I can buy a whole army for the cost of what was 3 packs of cigarettes

btw thanks for the pics, love em.

concept art is nice, but honestly the concept art for nids imo was best ever concept art gw has done.

airmang wrote:That Raider pic has some (slightly) better shots of the Ravagers in the background.

Good eye. I didn't notice those till you mentioned it. I like how they put the gunners on the side of the ship. Those should make for some easy conversions from raider to ravager as well. There almost wasn't enough room on the original models to fit the gunner behind the armored panel.

How about we all stop attacking other posters for having an opinion, and stick with the ogling and the oohing and ahing, hmm?

*ogle!* *oooh* *Ahhh!*

*puts money aside. isn't enough. Starts shoveling money aside*

I'm wondering now, is this the direction GW will go with all future model ranges as these blow anything prior out of the water most definitely but that sets the precedent for future projects to compare to. Will people now groan about range creep along with codex creep?

Kurgash wrote:I'm wondering now, is this the direction GW will go with all future model ranges as these blow anything prior out of the water most definitely but that sets the precedent for future projects to compare to. Will people now groan about range creep along with codex creep?

Well, from what I can tell that's always been an issue. Just look at the recent Island of Blood release, and people talking about how the main troops of the High Elf ranger didn't live up to the new sculpts in Island of Blood, or the new Rat Ogres compared to the current boxed sets. If this is the way GW is going to be handling all of their future releases, I imagine everybody is going to be eager to have their lines redone ASAP. Opinion about the style and subject of the models aside, I think most people will agree that they're very well done with a very consistent aesthetic throughout. But that depends on those in charge of the sculpting, of course.

Anyways, anybody find it odd that the tagline for the What's New Today mentioned Ravagers specifically, but the article only showed Raiders, and no Ravager-specific parts?

Btw, I read the thread but didn't see it mentioned, forgive me if I missed it... But is there any news on Scourges? Are they being redone? Plastic, metal? If I missed it, again, I apologize.

Ok. I like what they did with the Raider and Ravager.
But I was hoping they would have went a bit more "Reavers from Firefly" with it.

I think I may have to sell an army so I can pick Dark Eldar up.

All that Unemployment money I had saved and gone without food for so I could afford things like "a Rent Deposit" and "A Car" is looking mighty tempting. D:

Those Ravagers are indeed t3h nice looking.

If this is the way GW is going to be handling all of their future releases, I imagine everybody is going to be eager to have their lines redone ASAP

Beastmen.

I'm going to enjoy taking apart new DE players as they struggle with the concept of a glass hammer.

*insert maniacal laughter here*

InventionThirteen wrote:I'm going to enjoy taking apart new DE players as they struggle with the concept of a glass hammer.

*insert maniacal laughter here*

HA! Very true... Assuming DE don't become easy to play.
If DE become an army for noobs, like SMs, I'll be very unhappy.
I always loved having to think 2 steps ahead of my opponent, cause it took a while to master.

Kamsm8 wrote: If this is the way GW is going to be handling all of their future releases, I imagine everybody is going to be eager to have their lines redone ASAP in 10-15 year's time.

FYP.

There's a price for the full redo, one that not every player is willing to pay...

For a long-time veteran, 10 years between model updates isn't too long. For a lot of kids, not seeing something new within 5 years leads to an awful lot of whining.

Unless you're a necron or something 10 years is a hella long time for anybody, imagine if you suddenly got 10 years older or younger you'd notice to say the least. 10 years is around 1/7 to 1/8 of your lifespan.

so glad I invest that $12.14 into phillip morris 12 years ago to pay for my dark eldar when they got revamped, Now I can buy a whole army for the cost of what was 3 packs of cigarettes

In that case, how about i throw you $18 to send me 3 packs a time?
Over here they are £6 a pack (20)
So, £18 for 60 ($27 ish?)

If you're going to be playing for 30 years, 10 years is 3 full refreshes.

sooo no talos news yet?

No, but a rumour on the specialty item by tlronin over at Warseer:

The specialty item for the DE which Scryer in the Dark mentioned first is in fact a representation of the WWP. It's a transparant globe thingie which makes it look as if DE warriors are coming out the portal. Yeah I got it described to me by a GW manager @ my local club, so it's a bit vague. He didn't know how it further fits into the game though.

Yeah but the main difference is you can still play the game while waiting so its not quite as bad. or you can play different armies

i was waiting a long time for a proper BA codex with actual fluff

Kirasu wrote:Yeah but the main difference is you can still play the game while waiting so its not quite as bad. or you can play different armies

i was waiting a long time for a proper BA codex with actual fluff

Aren't you still waiting? I'm pretty sure there's no actual fluff in that codex

Samus_aran115 wrote:sooo no talos news yet?

not coming out till next wave

something tells me they will re-do it into a fancy dark spikey wraithlord...

Farmer wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:sooo no talos news yet?

not coming out till next wave

something tells me they will re-do it into a fancy dark spikey wraithlord...

A spikey wraithlord would be the exact wrong direction for the model design - too derivative for starters.

Farmer wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:sooo no talos news yet?

not coming out till next wave

something tells me they will re-do it into a fancy dark spikey wraithlord...

Ah. Well at least I can have a look at the codex before then.

That would be pretty awesome. Not really the most original thing ever though...

does anyone get the games workshop newsletter????????? they just showed a whole bunch of models and THEY ARE AWESOME! the wyches actually look cool! AAAAAAAAAAA! its awesome!!


games workshop teaser for the models!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&pageMode=multi&categoryId=§ion=&pIndex=1&aId=10500182a&start=2

What I picture the talos? A torpedo that is attached to the the ravenwing fighters that is launched into the enemy. It then transforms into a 4 legged walker shooting everything in every direction.

But that's just my wishlisting. I want wraithlord toughness with some deepstriking involved to keep with the fast theme. It would be nice if the army had a way to play a hammer instead of 3 varieties of scalpel.

I don't think it'd be right for the Talos to be Wraithlord tough - it's not solid Wraithbone like a Wraithlord. It exposes a soft, fleshy pilot as an obvious weak point. I'd suggest T6 Sv4+, maybe T7 Sv5+

I'd complain that the music in that video is ripped straight from DOW2, but the I remembered that GW basically owns the material.

EDIT: And they credited Relic at the end.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I don't think it'd be right for the Talos to be Wraithlord tough - it's not solid Wraithbone like a Wraithlord. It exposes a soft, fleshy pilot as an obvious weak point. I'd suggest T6 Sv4+, maybe T7 Sv5+

You know i see no reason it can't keep its statline. Just remove some of the bizare rules and its fine. After all whats wrong with WS5, BS3, S7, T7, W3, I4, A(D6), LD10, 3+ ... Maybe make MC and move as jet pack and we're done.

necrongod wrote:does anyone get the games workshop newsletter????????? they just showed a whole bunch of models and THEY ARE AWESOME! the wyches actually look cool! AAAAAAAAAAA! its awesome!!


games workshop teaser for the models!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&pageMode=multi&categoryId=§ion=&pIndex=1&aId=10500182a&start=2

Sooo... The thread was Too Long, and you Didn't Read it?

It's 25 pages, Ktulhut. That seems pretty TL;DR to me.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I don't think it'd be right for the Talos to be Wraithlord tough - it's not solid Wraithbone like a Wraithlord. It exposes a soft, fleshy pilot as an obvious weak point. I'd suggest T6 Sv4+, maybe T7 Sv5+

? Exposed pilot?

"Constructed by the insane Haemonculi, the Talos is a torture device that sweeps across the battlefield on anti-gravitic motors, latching on to its foes and incarcerating them within its armoured shell. The death spasms of those captured propel the Talos towards its enemies as its unique sting wildly spews death in all directions and its many-bladed arms cut through armour and bone with lashing blows."

I don't recall ever seeing anything about a pilot in a Talos, and the model is a fully enclosed, armored, floating beasty thing. The current stat line is S/T 7 and 3+ save.

There was a Torso coming out near the tail wasnt there? I always thought of it as a prisoner/victim, though it could be seen as a pilot.

Tri wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:I don't think it'd be right for the Talos to be Wraithlord tough - it's not solid Wraithbone like a Wraithlord. It exposes a soft, fleshy pilot as an obvious weak point. I'd suggest T6 Sv4+, maybe T7 Sv5+

You know i see no reason it can't keep its statline. Just remove some of the bizare rules and its fine. After all whats wrong with WS5, BS3, S7, T7, W3, I4, A(D6), LD10, 3+ ... Maybe make MC and move as jet pack and we're done.

Except there is nothing in any dex since the last eldar dex with toughness above 6, not even the GREAT UNCLEAN ONE which should be tougher than ANYTHING on the field (specifically to allow S3 weapons to be able to wound everything)...the last few things with T7+ are the talos, Wraith lord, and the 2 ctan...you are going to see the t go down to 6 (if it stays a MC) and like Mephy it may get a whole bunch of wounds...get ready for wraith guard to keep T6 and be a single wound and WLord T6 with 6 wounds....

Saldiven wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:I don't think it'd be right for the Talos to be Wraithlord tough - it's not solid Wraithbone like a Wraithlord. It exposes a soft, fleshy pilot as an obvious weak point. I'd suggest T6 Sv4+, maybe T7 Sv5+

? Exposed pilot?

"Constructed by the insane Haemonculi, the Talos is a torture device that sweeps across the battlefield on anti-gravitic motors, latching on to its foes and incarcerating them within its armoured shell. The death spasms of those captured propel the Talos towards its enemies as its unique sting wildly spews death in all directions and its many-bladed arms cut through armour and bone with lashing blows."

I don't recall ever seeing anything about a pilot in a Talos, and the model is a fully enclosed, armored, floating beasty thing. The current stat line is S/T 7 and 3+ save.

No pilot, but there is a slave strapped to it and its pain and suffering powers the thing...

Ktulhut wrote:

necrongod wrote:does anyone get the games workshop newsletter????????? they just showed a whole bunch of models and THEY ARE AWESOME! the wyches actually look cool! AAAAAAAAAAA! its awesome!!


games workshop teaser for the models!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&pageMode=multi&categoryId=§ion=&pIndex=1&aId=10500182a&start=2

Sooo... The thread was Too Long, and you Didn't Read it?

\

25 pages? yup

Havik110 wrote:

Tri wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:I don't think it'd be right for the Talos to be Wraithlord tough - it's not solid Wraithbone like a Wraithlord. It exposes a soft, fleshy pilot as an obvious weak point. I'd suggest T6 Sv4+, maybe T7 Sv5+

You know i see no reason it can't keep its statline. Just remove some of the bizare rules and its fine. After all whats wrong with WS5, BS3, S7, T7, W3, I4, A(D6), LD10, 3+ ... Maybe make MC and move as jet pack and we're done.

Except there is nothing in any dex since the last eldar dex with toughness above 6, not even the GREAT UNCLEAN ONE which should be tougher than ANYTHING on the field (specifically to allow S3 weapons to be able to wound everything)...the last few things with T7+ are the talos, Wraith lord, and the 2 ctan...you are going to see the t go down to 6 (if it stays a MC) and like Mephy it may get a whole bunch of wounds...get ready for wraith guard to keep T6 and be a single wound and WLord T6 with 6 wounds....

Saldiven wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:I don't think it'd be right for the Talos to be Wraithlord tough - it's not solid Wraithbone like a Wraithlord. It exposes a soft, fleshy pilot as an obvious weak point. I'd suggest T6 Sv4+, maybe T7 Sv5+

? Exposed pilot?

"Constructed by the insane Haemonculi, the Talos is a torture device that sweeps across the battlefield on anti-gravitic motors, latching on to its foes and incarcerating them within its armoured shell. The death spasms of those captured propel the Talos towards its enemies as its unique sting wildly spews death in all directions and its many-bladed arms cut through armour and bone with lashing blows."

I don't recall ever seeing anything about a pilot in a Talos, and the model is a fully enclosed, armored, floating beasty thing. The current stat line is S/T 7 and 3+ save.

No pilot, but there is a slave strapped to it and its pain and suffering powers the thing...

Pure Speculation: Talos to be T6 multiwound, and have some means to regenerate wounds by kills in assault?

Fueled by Pain: Everytime the Talos successfully kills an enemy in close combat, it regains 1 wound (Up to a maximum of X)

Sidstyler wrote:

If this is the way GW is going to be handling all of their future releases, I imagine everybody is going to be eager to have their lines redone ASAP

Beastmen.

rip

JohnHwangDD wrote:I don't think it'd be right for the Talos to be Wraithlord tough - it's not solid Wraithbone like a Wraithlord. It exposes a soft, fleshy pilot as an obvious weak point. I'd suggest T6 Sv4+, maybe T7 Sv5+

Tri wrote:You know i see no reason it can't keep its statline. Just remove some of the bizare rules and its fine. After all whats wrong with WS5, BS3, S7, T7, W3, I4, A(D6), LD10, 3+ ... Maybe make MC and move as jet pack and we're done.

Nothing, per se. Jump Infantry Fleet MC would be fine, too.
____

Saldiven wrote:? Exposed pilot?

"Constructed by the insane Haemonculi, the Talos is a torture device that sweeps across the battlefield on anti-gravitic motors, latching on to its foes and incarcerating them within its armoured shell. The death spasms of those captured propel the Talos towards its enemies as its unique sting wildly spews death in all directions and its many-bladed arms cut through armour and bone with lashing blows."

I don't recall ever seeing anything about a pilot in a Talos, and the model is a fully enclosed, armored, floating beasty thing. The current stat line is S/T 7 and 3+ save.

No, there's a pilot on the model, hardwired into the thing. I process the model as a DE Dreadnought, for what it represents. Instead of being piloted by Eldar spirits, it's piloted by a slave who's been grafted to the model. Similar to SMs, but not as armored because the pilot is outside and fresh meat, rather than ancient, half-dead and entombed.

necrongod wrote:

Ktulhut wrote:

necrongod wrote:does anyone get the games workshop newsletter????????? they just showed a whole bunch of models and THEY ARE AWESOME! the wyches actually look cool! AAAAAAAAAAA! its awesome!!


games workshop teaser for the models!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&pageMode=multi&categoryId=§ion=&pIndex=1&aId=10500182a&start=2

Sooo... The thread was Too Long, and you Didn't Read it?

\

25 pages? yup

But..... the name of the THREAD directly refers to the email. That's just damned lazyness.

JohnHwangDD wrote:No, there's a pilot on the model, hardwired into the thing. I process the model as a DE Dreadnought, for what it represents. Instead of being piloted by Eldar spirits, it's piloted by a slave who's been grafted to the model. Similar to SMs, but not as armored because the pilot is outside and fresh meat, rather than ancient, half-dead and entombed.

You say that with such authority, but it's bollocks. I've built and painted 2 of these models, and there's no pilot. Lots of twisty bits and pieces, some skull-like bits and a few trophies, but no pilot.

Tailgunner wrote:

You say that with such authority, but it's bollocks. I've built and painted 2 of these models, and there's no pilot. Lots of twisty bits and pieces, some skull-like bits and a few trophies, but no pilot.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1251819_99110112012_DETalosmain_873x627.jpg

Always assumed the red thing at the back that looks like cables is actually some dude strapped in.

necrongod wrote:

Ktulhut wrote:Sooo... The thread was Too Long, and you Didn't Read it?

\

25 pages? yup

How about next time you just pick 2 random pages, hell even 2 random posts, and use your immense brainpower to deduct that we have been in fact talking about the new DE for 25 pages.

Tailgunner wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:No, there's a pilot on the model, hardwired into the thing. I process the model as a DE Dreadnought, for what it represents. Instead of being piloted by Eldar spirits, it's piloted by a slave who's been grafted to the model. Similar to SMs, but not as armored because the pilot is outside and fresh meat, rather than ancient, half-dead and entombed.

You say that with such authority, but it's bollocks. I've built and painted 2 of these models, and there's no pilot. Lots of twisty bits and pieces, some skull-like bits and a few trophies, but no pilot.

You guys are just blind. People is used to say DD's wrong, but -at least with this- he is right. Pics from Dakkaite's own gallery:









Don't you see the helmet, torso and arms on rear top of the main body? With the helmet attached to the "tail"? That IS a slave. Fugly as hell, according to the older line style. But a pilot slave after all.

Gwar! wrote:But Light Year is a unit of Distance...

You've never heard of the Millennium Falcon?…It's the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs!

Tek wrote:

Gwar! wrote:But Light Year is a unit of Distance...

You've never heard of the Millennium Falcon?…It's the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs!

No, should I have? :3

Telos Pilot

Havik110 wrote:Except there is nothing in any dex since the last eldar dex with toughness above 6, not even the GREAT UNCLEAN ONE which should be tougher than ANYTHING on the field (specifically to allow S3 weapons to be able to wound everything)...the last few things with T7+ are the talos, Wraith lord, and the 2 ctan...you are going to see the t go down to 6 (if it stays a MC) and like Mephy it may get a whole bunch of wounds...get ready for wraith guard to keep T6 and be a single wound and WLord T6 with 6 wounds....

And that's a shame, don't'cha think? Maybe back in early 3rd, when the Wraithlord was a dominating force with T8, was that sort of toughness level 'unfair', but nower days? It's quite bad that Toughness above 6 aren't used. We've got AV14, so why not T10? They have rough parallels between the two - AV14 can be killed in one shot, but S7 does nothing to it, with T10 you have to eat through its wounds, but S7 can hurt it.

All Dreads and Walkers should have Toughness values (Sentinel T4(5), War Walker T4(5), Killer Kan T5, Marine/Ork/Chaos Dread T8, etc.). Makes things so much cleaner.

Havik110 wrote:

Except there is nothing in any dex since the last eldar dex with toughness above 6, not even the GREAT UNCLEAN ONE which should be tougher than ANYTHING on the field (specifically to allow S3 weapons to be able to wound everything)...the last few things with T7+ are the talos, Wraith lord, and the 2 ctan...you are going to see the t go down to 6 (if it stays a MC) and like Mephy it may get a whole bunch of wounds...get ready for wraith guard to keep T6 and be a single wound and WLord T6 with 6 wounds....

Yea, this.

A lot of things used to be far greater toughness than what they are now. Great Unclean One and Carnifex are the two prime examples that come to mind; both used to be completely immune to small arms fire (t8 if I remember right for both). And the Carnifex had a Terminator sv. /end nostalgia Only the Wraithlord kept that, and at one point I think it was a vehicle...

Frankly I think the loss of anything with T7 or greater has to do with the darned streamlining that was so prevelant in 3rd and 4th. The probably thought process is that most small arms have such a small chance to hurt them with their T and their save that most wouldn't bother. IMO I think bumping some of those monsters up to at least t7 (or higher) would help to alleviate some of the mech issues we have right now. But GW seems to over-estimate the effectiveness of many MCs compared to what can actually harm them.

necrongod wrote:does anyone get the games workshop newsletter????????? they just showed a whole bunch of models and THEY ARE AWESOME! the wyches actually look cool! AAAAAAAAAAA! its awesome!!

@Luna: No one double crosses Lord Zedd and LIVES!

Tailgunner wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:No, there's a pilot on the model, hardwired into the thing. I process the model as a DE Dreadnought, for what it represents. Instead of being piloted by Eldar spirits, it's piloted by a slave who's been grafted to the model. Similar to SMs, but not as armored because the pilot is outside and fresh meat, rather than ancient, half-dead and entombed.

You say that with such authority, but it's bollocks. I've built and painted 2 of these models, and there's no pilot. Lots of twisty bits and pieces, some skull-like bits and a few trophies, but no pilot.

Maybe you don't know what you're painting?

There's a dude with a full-head helmet wired into the thing, with his arms are pulled back and wired into the thing. That's a pilot.

I can see where you're coming from since it definitely looks like there's a dude strapped in there, but I don't know if I would go so far as to truly call that thing a pilot. At least from my perspective, I'd be more inclined to say that it's some kind of fuel source for the Talos, maybe some kind of engine that feeds off of the pain given off by the victim. So once that victim finally dies, they just strap in a new one.

That'd be my guess, at least. Granted, I've no idea about the fluff behind the Talos, so it's pretty much just me taking a shot in the dark.

It's a torture device, so he's probably an insane victim alleviating his own pain by inflicting it on others.

Maybe MCs should be above T6.. For all the whining and hissy fits about wraithlord T8 thats STILL only armor 11/12 and most good dreadnoughts nowadays are armor 13. I do realize MCs can fight with 1 wound left but on average it takes 3 penetrating hits to kill a vehicle which *gasp* is the same amount of wounds a wraithlord has! Most weapons you wound it with will ignore its armor, so thats fairly irrelevant

Wow 2 attacks and some weapons that cost a ton... Its not a coincidence that carnifexes suck now that they lost their ability to be T7 and 5W (also they cost too much)

the talos is powered by the pain and death convulsions of the slave attached to it, who looks like he has had his skin peeled off.

I don't think the talos needs toughness 7+ honestly. If they can be bought cheap and in squads

DiscoVader wrote:I don't know if I would go so far as to truly call that thing a pilot.

This exactly.
That thing wired into the Talos is never mentioned specifically in any DE fluff. But it has no skin, and it's arms are cranked backward with the head shoved down... Doesn't look comfortable.
Raiders have pilots. The Talos has torture victims. That thing might have something to do with the Talos' actions, but I doubt that it's 'in control' of them.

Erasoketa wrote:
Don't you see the helmet, torso and arms on rear top of the main body? With the helmet attached to the "tail"? That IS a slave. Fugly as hell, according to the older line style. But a pilot slave after all.

I'm looking really hard. I see something that might be called a helmet, but nothing that I'd call a torso or arms.

In either case, it's not a pilot. If anything, it is some that has been captured and is having pain inflicted upon it. It's twisting in agony is providing the energy it uses to pursue further victims. By all the fluff ever written on the Talos that I have ever seen, there is no pilot.

But all that is beside the point. I don't see any reason that they would reduce the toughness from 7 to 6, or reduce the armor save from 3+ to 4+, unless they either add rules to compensate for the weakening of the unit or reduce its cost.

Andarus wrote:

Tailgunner wrote:

You say that with such authority, but it's bollocks. I've built and painted 2 of these models, and there's no pilot. Lots of twisty bits and pieces, some skull-like bits and a few trophies, but no pilot.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1251819_99110112012_DETalosmain_873x627.jpg

Always assumed the red thing at the back that looks like cables is actually some dude strapped in.

This is correct. Just under the tail section. I wouldn't say it's a pilot however as the Talos, by current fluff, operates under 'torture power'. So that poor soul is a slave of some sort. Though I think it would also be wrong to imply that the Talos is vulnerable because of that figure when it could just entomb yet another slave from the field of battle.

I always saw the Talos as a Wraithlord done with Dark Eldar Power. Lacking Soulstones to power the core, they use the insane pain induction impulses. But a Redone Talos would be good. I currently use A Tomb Spyder with a Tomb Scorpion set of claws as my Talos. I like it better.

I hope the Talos gets a new special rule like its old "skimmer" rule that will confuse people and require FAQs for THREE editions!

@H.B.M.C
Except you can one shot AV14 but you would need to successfully wound T10 three times... Not a parallel, quite different actually....

Make the wraith lord T10 but with 1 wound, then maybe you have a good point...

Walkers with T value is just stupid.... Hey a vehicle with legs, lets just change the whole vehicle paradigm for them because it travels differently....

sexiest_hero wrote:The picture of the male witch with the purple pony tail and female with the short cropped blue hair are some of the best work I've ever seen. Lilith looks like a real female and not a 12 year olds fantasy. Hell all the women look real. I can't belive it. the females look dangerous, realistic and good. the breast look normal, and they look fit enough to run 5 miles killing the whole way. the males look non pansy for some pointy eared freaks.

GW has outdone anything ever!

I thought Lelith was a male on his way to a leather party when I first saw her. Oversize proportions can be good thing when it comes to miniatures.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/blogPost.jsp?aId=13000014a

If I'm understanding this right, Incubi are plastics?

EDIT: Their metal, my bad. I guess the plastic references were to the warriors/wyches.

They are metal, but I'm really liking that they have made the arms and heads separate to allow simple conversions using the plastics . This is good news for those people that don't like the horned heads

It doesn't say if they did the same thing for the Archon... I hope they did. the conversion pictures from GD looks like they did. *fingers crossed*

I think they did considering they mentioned all that for the first time in relation to the archon (or that was my understanding anyway, the piece seems pretty poorly written to me).

The article is pretty good but the "high elf tournament army" above it is hilarious.. 2 dragons and 2 units of spearmen? really? this isnt 7th ed!

DiscoVader wrote:I can see where you're coming from since it definitely looks like there's a dude strapped in there, but I don't know if I would go so far as to truly call that thing a pilot. At least from my perspective, I'd be more inclined to say that it's some kind of fuel source for the Talos, maybe some kind of engine that feeds off of the pain given off by the victim. So once that victim finally dies, they just strap in a new one.

blaktoof wrote:the talos is powered by the pain and death convulsions of the slave attached to it, who looks like he has had his skin peeled off.

OK, let's pretend that the Talos is pain-powered as the fuel source. If the fuel source goes kaput, then the Talos has no power, so it drops like a stone and doesn't move.

Either way, it's the living weak point.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

DiscoVader wrote:I can see where you're coming from since it definitely looks like there's a dude strapped in there, but I don't know if I would go so far as to truly call that thing a pilot. At least from my perspective, I'd be more inclined to say that it's some kind of fuel source for the Talos, maybe some kind of engine that feeds off of the pain given off by the victim. So once that victim finally dies, they just strap in a new one.

blaktoof wrote:the talos is powered by the pain and death convulsions of the slave attached to it, who looks like he has had his skin peeled off.

OK, let's pretend that the Talos is pain-powered as the fuel source. If the fuel source goes kaput, then the Talos has no power, so it drops like a stone and doesn't move.

Either way, it's the living weak point.

And still no reason to reduce its toughness, as that supposed "weak point" has always existed.

Saldiven wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

DiscoVader wrote:I can see where you're coming from since it definitely looks like there's a dude strapped in there, but I don't know if I would go so far as to truly call that thing a pilot. At least from my perspective, I'd be more inclined to say that it's some kind of fuel source for the Talos, maybe some kind of engine that feeds off of the pain given off by the victim. So once that victim finally dies, they just strap in a new one.

blaktoof wrote:the talos is powered by the pain and death convulsions of the slave attached to it, who looks like he has had his skin peeled off.

OK, let's pretend that the Talos is pain-powered as the fuel source. If the fuel source goes kaput, then the Talos has no power, so it drops like a stone and doesn't move.

Either way, it's the living weak point.

And still no reason to reduce its toughness, as that supposed "weak point" has always existed.

I've always been OK with the Talos at T6 or T7.

My issue was with the suggestion that it should be Wraithlord tough (T8 Sv3+), and that obvious weak point says it should be clearly less tough.

(Of course, a proper Necron Dread should be T9 Sv2+).

JohnHwangDD wrote:I've always been OK with the Talos at T6 or T7.

My issue was with the suggestion that it should be Wraithlord tough (T8 Sv3+), and that obvious weak point says it should be clearly less tough.

(Of course, a proper Necron Dread should be T9 Sv2+).

Ah, I understand. I don't think the Talos should be Wraithlord tough, either. Honestly, I don't think the Wraithlord should be T8, but that's neither here nor there.

Wraithlord's been so heavily-nerfed since 3E, at this point, T8 is all it's got left.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Wraithlord's been so heavily-nerfed since 3E, at this point, T8 is all it's got left.

Good point. I personally think they should have left everything else and lowered the T by a point, but they didn't ask me.

I would have cut the cost of the Dread, but that's me.

Tek wrote:

Gwar! wrote:But Light Year is a unit of Distance...

You've never heard of the Millennium Falcon?…It's the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs!

You do know that that DOES make sense right?

"Making the run in 'X' parsecs" refers to how close you skim to the Maw, a cluster of black holes.

The Falcon did it faster because they got closer to the Maw and therefore shaved time off the run.

Sorry, pet peeve.

Red Corsair wrote:Walkers with T value is just stupid.... Hey a vehicle with legs, lets just change the whole vehicle paradigm for them because it travels differently....

I'm assuming that you are basing your conclusion on years or extensive play-testing, yes?

puma713 wrote:

'Our topknot technology is light years ahead of yours.'

It was 'Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie'.

"Our chair technology is light years ahead of yours."

It was 'Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie'. "Our chair technology is light years ahead of yours."

Hooray, another MSTie!

Has everyone seen the lord notes, the incubi (metal I'm afraid) but designed to be customisable...

The one thing that has been mentioned a lot by GW, (and that I happen to love too,) about the new DE is that most of the models have interchangeable heads/arms/weapons. - Even the crew on the sides of the new raiders can have head swaps!

It will give the models great versatility and also allow for great customisation. I hope this is continued into other lines. - Even if they end up half as interchangeable as the SM range, then I'll be happy.

Phototoxin wrote:Has everyone seen the lord notes, the incubi (metal I'm afraid) but designed to be customisable...

Just saw the post and the notes concerning the new incubi.

What's new today wrote: "With limited time to produce variant models, the trophy racks and helmets were made as separate pieces that would fit all the bodies, adding some variation and a little poseability".

Anybody find it funny that even though they had 12 years to redesign the whole range, they still say they had limited time?

Scottywan82 wrote:

Tek wrote:

Gwar! wrote:But Light Year is a unit of Distance...

You've never heard of the Millennium Falcon?…It's the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs!

You do know that that DOES make sense right?

"Making the run in 'X' parsecs" refers to how close you skim to the Maw, a cluster of black holes.

The Falcon did it faster because they got closer to the Maw and therefore shaved time off the run.

Sorry, pet peeve.

If you want to take the expanded universe explanation. Though Lucas had said in his commentary for the movie that the comment was made because it was indicating that the Falcon had a superior navigational system, which was able to plot the most optimal route before they jumped to lightspeed...I'm not sure how either explanation indicate a well performing ship. One indicates a daring captain and the other indicates a well designed subsystem. I think Solo was just doing some hand waving there to shut Luke up

I got to read the new Codex last night! It's brilliant!

...

Damn my wallet!

Asdrubael Vect is now officially the most expensive character ever ever!

Where pray tell did such a gift from the gods come?

Was it perchance brought upon multi-faceted winds of change?

Kirasu wrote:Maybe MCs should be above T6.. For all the whining and hissy fits about wraithlord T8 thats STILL only armor 11/12 and most good dreadnoughts nowadays are armor 13. I do realize MCs can fight with 1 wound left but on average it takes 3 penetrating hits to kill a vehicle which *gasp* is the same amount of wounds a wraithlord has! Most weapons you wound it with will ignore its armor, so thats fairly irrelevant

Wow 2 attacks and some weapons that cost a ton... Its not a coincidence that carnifexes suck now that they lost their ability to be T7 and 5W (also they cost too much)

I think the issue with T values above 6 is CC,though. Most units have access to some type of grenades so they at least have some chance against a Walker in CC. However,T7 makes a model completely invulnerable in CC against models with Strength 3 and T8 puts it out of the range of models with S4. You can just assault a MC with T7+ into a lot of units and off 1-2 models per Assault phase until the unit finally breaks and there's absolutely no way the unit in question can harm it.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:I got to read the new Codex last night! It's brilliant!

...

Damn my wallet!

Asdrubael Vect is now officially the most expensive character ever ever!

You there! The Inquisition demands you spill your guts, right now!

...we have ways of making you talk.

Whatever1 wrote:

Kirasu wrote:Maybe MCs should be above T6.. For all the whining and hissy fits about wraithlord T8 thats STILL only armor 11/12 and most good dreadnoughts nowadays are armor 13. I do realize MCs can fight with 1 wound left but on average it takes 3 penetrating hits to kill a vehicle which *gasp* is the same amount of wounds a wraithlord has! Most weapons you wound it with will ignore its armor, so thats fairly irrelevant

Wow 2 attacks and some weapons that cost a ton... Its not a coincidence that carnifexes suck now that they lost their ability to be T7 and 5W (also they cost too much)

I think the issue with T values above 6 is CC,though. Most units have access to some type of grenades so they at least have some chance against a Walker in CC. However,T7 makes a model completely invulnerable in CC against models with Strength 3 and T8 puts it out of the range of models with S4. You can just assault a MC with T7+ into a lot of units and off 1-2 models per Assault phase until the unit finally breaks and there's absolutely no way the unit in question can harm it.

But is that not as it should be? Monstrous Creatures are meant to be large powerful beasts of war that barely even notice the existence of the lesser mortals they trample underfoot. You should have to destroy them with superior firepower or with a hero armed with some sort of fancy weapon.

Munch Munch! wrote:

Phototoxin wrote:Has everyone seen the lord notes, the incubi (metal I'm afraid) but designed to be customisable...

Just saw the post and the notes concerning the new incubi.

What's new today wrote: "With limited time to produce variant models, the trophy racks and helmets were made as separate pieces that would fit all the bodies, adding some variation and a little poseability".

Anybody find it funny that even though they had 12 years to redesign the whole range, they still say they had limited time?

Limited time when they decided not to drop them more like.

GW just wants us to think they're amazing almighty gods, and they didn't neglect a entire army of fans who eventually branched onto other armys...

Xca|iber wrote:

Arctik_Firangi wrote:I got to read the new Codex last night! It's brilliant!

...

Damn my wallet!

Asdrubael Vect is now officially the most expensive character ever ever!

You there! The Inquisition demands you spill your guts, right now!

...we have ways of making you talk.

My favourite things from the new book are the Hellions.

I don't know what has been leaked so far, but basically they have the Hit And Run rule... and when they use it they can drag an Independent Character out of the unit with them!

Another scary concept is that of 'Pain Tokens' - the more pain you inflict on your opponents, the more frenzied you become! Units that win combats or destroy enemies with shooting earn these tokens that grant you such bonuses as... oh, say... Feel No Pain anyone?

So, I don't want to leak everything... but does anyone have any big questions burning their souls, oh pathetic denizens of Real Space?

Lets see...raider has too many things added on and looks like its going to break, incubi are metal which i think is a huge mistake since they had so much potential if plastic (I'll stick to my old models), archon looks similier to dark elf dreadlord model (may aswell use my dreadlord).

Oh, and yes, Dark Eldar have full access to Harlequins now.

Ohh! How many Reavers are in a squad and can you field an army of them?

@Arctik

I would love to know as much as you are willing to give. A friend of mine wants to start DE and a heads up would be great. Incubi in particular since I love the models.

raider has too many things added on and looks like its going to break

Fragility has become an issue with some of GW's models the past few years. A lot of newer kits have some really fine detail on them that looks great, but it's difficult not to break it when handling the models. I broke the lure on the River Troll's angler fish head tonight just putting it back in a transport case to take it home from the GW store.

Do you have the codex in front of you? What is your overall impression and does anything stand out as cheesy OP in your opinion?

@H.B.M.C.

Actually yes considering I have been playing since 40k was first released... As soon as the wraith lord gained a toughness value over an armor rating our play group toyed with the difference and the associated point costs, (we also tested the difference if the marine dread had a T value over armor) so when I said your argument was stupid, its because it was, maybe you should try play testing yourself before you make such silly claims.

If walkers gain T values then heck... why not tanks too...while we are at it lets just nerf the game down to chess...

Whatever1 wrote:I think the issue with T values above 6 is CC,though. Most units have access to some type of grenades so they at least have some chance against a Walker in CC. However,T7 makes a model completely invulnerable in CC against models with Strength 3 and T8 puts it out of the range of models with S4. You can just assault a MC with T7+ into a lot of units and off 1-2 models per Assault phase until the unit finally breaks and there's absolutely no way the unit in question can harm it.

And how is that a bad thing? Most wimpy dudes have Transports that outrun every T7+ MC I can think of.

Also, those Grenades only work on 6s, so not so awesome.

LunaHound wrote:Telos Pilot

I know this guy is from power rangers but what was his name?

:edit: LORD ZEDD

Woooooo paaaarty. Haha thank you sidstyler. : )

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Red Corsair wrote:

If walkers gain T values then heck... why not tanks too...while we are at it lets just nerf the game down to chess...

I didn't know Rogue Trader was so similar to chess. Consider my mind blown.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:

Xca|iber wrote:

Arctik_Firangi wrote:I got to read the new Codex last night! It's brilliant!

...

Damn my wallet!

Asdrubael Vect is now officially the most expensive character ever ever!

You there! The Inquisition demands you spill your guts, right now!

...we have ways of making you talk.

My favourite things from the new book are the Hellions.

I don't know what has been leaked so far, but basically they have the Hit And Run rule... and when they use it they can drag an Independent Character out of the unit with them!

Another scary concept is that of 'Pain Tokens' - the more pain you inflict on your opponents, the more frenzied you become! Units that win combats or destroy enemies with shooting earn these tokens that grant you such bonuses as... oh, say... Feel No Pain anyone?

So, I don't want to leak everything... but does anyone have any big questions burning their souls, oh pathetic denizens of Real Space?

Pain tokens. Do you lose the benefit if the unit carry them is destroyed? Other posters have said Hemiculii(sp) give a free paintoken to a unit they join, does that stack with army wide tokens or is that bonus token only applied to the unit he's with? (i.e. I put a hemculii with a unit of warrirors, giving them a pain token, I gain another token during the game. Does this mean my army now has FnP and furiuous assault, or just feel no pain?).

Are they any characters that change FOC rules for certain units?

I want to know the points cost of a warrior. Me and some friends are debating how much they are going to cost (and I want desperately to win).

I'll be able to give more specific information (FOC stuff, etc) when I sneak another look tomorrow - for now I'm relying on my shaky memory to dredge up information that I was honestly a bit too drunk to appreciate with anything but excitement and wonder.

I reefuse to answer questions regarding whether or not the army is 'OP'. The codex is written by Phil Kelly so go figure.

There's a S7 re-roll wound weapon that sounded nastily cool... the concept was that the first charge sucked the heat out of the area, followed by a percussive charge that shatters the presumably frozen target.

There are definitely two varieties of Talos - and the standard Talos is pretty much the same as in the old book. I can't quite recall points.

I'll have to get back to you on exactly how Pain Tokens work. I'm pretty sure only the unit that collects the tokens are affected, but yes, it starts with Feel No Pain. I'll have to verify the army-wide buffs from subsequent tokens.

Feel free to keep posting questions and I'll answer what I can.

can the Archon be given wargear options like taking a reaver jetbike? And if so are there any White-Scar-esque bonus's like making RJB's troops and others elites?

What weapons are the hellions packing? arhhh!! too many questions!

Munch Munch! wrote:

What's new today wrote: "With limited time to produce variant models, the trophy racks and helmets were made as separate pieces that would fit all the bodies, adding some variation and a little poseability".

Anybody find it funny that even though they had 12 years to redesign the whole range, they still say they had limited time?

Yeah, are they implying they've just been procrastinating the update?

Anyways, was anyone else hoping they'd make the HQs (i.e. the Archon) a super multi-part plastic kit a la Space Marine Commander? Maybe that's just the SM love...

No. I prefer the metal models. Detail over genericness and options. The SM captain kit is imo pretty bland, but it works for SM who do not have many overlapping or dynamic parts.

Fiend wrote:

Munch Munch! wrote:

What's new today wrote: "With limited time to produce variant models, the trophy racks and helmets were made as separate pieces that would fit all the bodies, adding some variation and a little poseability".

Anybody find it funny that even though they had 12 years to redesign the whole range, they still say they had limited time?

Yeah, are they implying they've just been procrastinating the update?

Anyways, was anyone else hoping they'd make the HQs (i.e. the Archon) a super multi-part plastic kit a la Space Marine Commander? Maybe that's just the SM love...

I do find it rather amusing that they say they had limited time, even if you factor in all the other ranges they've done since DE.

On the topic of HQ's, I'm not surprised that they didn't go the multi-part plastic route. Nearly all HQ's are still metal for the most part, as far as I can tell, and if any army were going to get a kit like that sometime soon, I'd be inclined to say it'd be a plastic Ork Warboss/Big Mek kit, since it's one of the most popular armies these days. (I would not object to a kit like that at all.) Either that or a multi-part IG command team, with options for various Guard units. That being said, I'll gladly take the metal models, as I feel they look far better when painted.

The Archons are metal, but can easily be converted with all the DE plastic kits. Jes Goodwin outlined this in today's 'What's New Today?'.

I really like the new dark eldar. Need some for my =I=-Munda-DE-Slave Hunter/-Pirate-Gang. And, I think, they have a lot conversion material.

Arctik_Firangi - I just have one question, I'm able to wait for leaks/info/the real codex for the rest.

Any way to make Reavers troops or scoring? I've been dying for a DE jetbike army for years now.

@Arctik_Firangi I'd be happy if you could get as complete a list as possible of the unit entries in the army. Just their names would be cool, although I won't complain if you get more info.

...limited time. Limited time.

A DECADE ISN'T LONG ENOUGH TO PRODUCE VARIANT MODELS!

I'm gonna go hit something. lol

His whole life and focus wasn't just DE during that whole decade - the time might span a decade, but the actual time measured is, I bet, considerably less. Think of all the things Jes and company have done in between, after all.

BrassScorpion wrote:

It was 'Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie'. "Our chair technology is light years ahead of yours."

Hooray, another MSTie!

Make that another. Oh, and watch out for snakes

On a note that's on topic, these models just look awesome. Hoping on getting away with just converting my existing vehicles with sails that I buy from some bitz website. I actually like the DE Warrior models from the last edition, so long as you only have the helmeted heads. Wyches looked like garbage, Warp Beasts were typical of other similar models of the day, vehicles and Talos all looked cool to me. It still astonishes me that they never even made all the models for the current DE Codex.

consider this another person wanting to know more about the reaver jetbikes and whether or not they are troops/scoring/even useful..

Red Corsair wrote:Actually yes considering I have been playing since 40k was first released... As soon as the wraith lord gained a toughness value over an armor rating our play group toyed with the difference and the associated point costs, (we also tested the difference if the marine dread had a T value over armor)

Ok, just to save yourself some effort, next time I ask something like "And I assume you know this due to years of extensive playtesting", just answer "No". It'll be quicker and I'll be wasting less of your time.

Red Corsair wrote:...so when I said your argument was stupid, its because it was, maybe you should try play testing yourself before you make such silly claims.

You know when 4th Ed came out? Yeah? Well since then - and I really do mean that, since then - we've been playing all Walkers with T values. 4(5) for Sentinels and War Walkers, T8 for Dreads/Chaos Dreads/Ork Dreads/Wraithlords, and so on. We meshed their rules with Monstrous Creatures, making them their own singular category. Works really well. For years now we've been doing that. We've worked, refined and changed and playtested those rules for years. They work perfectly. Great fun too.

So I'll just continue laughing at you, because you're clueless, and think that calling my argument "stupid" makes yours any less idiotic.

Red Corsair wrote:If walkers gain T values then heck... why not tanks too...while we are at it lets just nerf the game down to chess...

Yay! Slippery slope fallacy wrapped in a red-herring. Try again.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Red Corsair wrote:...so when I said your argument was stupid, its because it was, maybe you should try play testing yourself before you make such silly claims.

You know when 4th Ed came out? Yeah? Well since then - and I really do mean that, since then - we've been playing all Walkers with T values. 4(5) for Sentinels and War Walkers, T8 for Dreads/Chaos Dreads/Ork Dreads/Wraithlords, and so on. We meshed their rules with Monstrous Creatures, making them their own singular category. Works really well. For years now we've been doing that. We've worked, refined and changed and playtested those rules for years. They work perfectly. Great fun too.

So I'll just continue laughing at you, because you're clueless, and think that calling my argument "stupid" makes yours any less idiotic.

But doesn't that remove the preclusion that there are armor values for a reason? What's the point of taking an Ironclad over a regular dreadnought (a seismic hammer and assault launchers?)? Why does my Soul Grinder at 13 front AV have the same toughness as a Deff Dread (front 12? - I could be wrong there), or a regular dreadnought? A soul grinder costs more than a Deff Dread and the armor values are one reason for it. And rear armor is a representation of actually firing into the back of the vehicle - walkers, just like other vehicles, are armored more lightly in the rear and undercarriage as they are in the front or sides.

While I don't agree that your idea or the way your gaming group plays it is 'stupid' (in fact, I think it's interesting that you're playing it that way), I don't agree it's in the best interest of the unit type (walkers) and vehicles as a whole. I think the walker rules work pretty well and making them have a toughness and mixing their rules with monstrous creatures changes the game in a fundamental way - whether good or bad (depending on the point of view).

Arctik_Firangi wrote:I'll be able to give more specific information (FOC stuff, etc) when I sneak another look tomorrow - for now I'm relying on my shaky memory to dredge up information that I was honestly a bit too drunk to appreciate with anything but excitement and wonder.

I reefuse to answer questions regarding whether or not the army is 'OP'. The codex is written by Phil Kelly so go figure.

There's a S7 re-roll wound weapon that sounded nastily cool... the concept was that the first charge sucked the heat out of the area, followed by a percussive charge that shatters the presumably frozen target.

There are definitely two varieties of Talos - and the standard Talos is pretty much the same as in the old book. I can't quite recall points.

I'll have to get back to you on exactly how Pain Tokens work. I'm pretty sure only the unit that collects the tokens are affected, but yes, it starts with Feel No Pain. I'll have to verify the army-wide buffs from subsequent tokens.

Feel free to keep posting questions and I'll answer what I can.

Im interested in hellions, the new, larger groteques, and the new fighter aparently in heavey support. Anything you can do to glance at rules/ describe them, that will be great.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:I'll be able to give more specific information (FOC stuff, etc) when I sneak another look tomorrow - for now I'm relying on my shaky memory to dredge up information that I was honestly a bit too drunk to appreciate with anything but excitement and wonder.

I reefuse to answer questions regarding whether or not the army is 'OP'. The codex is written by Phil Kelly so go figure.

There's a S7 re-roll wound weapon that sounded nastily cool... the concept was that the first charge sucked the heat out of the area, followed by a percussive charge that shatters the presumably frozen target.

There are definitely two varieties of Talos - and the standard Talos is pretty much the same as in the old book. I can't quite recall points.

I'll have to get back to you on exactly how Pain Tokens work. I'm pretty sure only the unit that collects the tokens are affected, but yes, it starts with Feel No Pain. I'll have to verify the army-wide buffs from subsequent tokens.

Feel free to keep posting questions and I'll answer what I can.

How have hellions changed?

Also, what is this bit about "Ex Wife"?

puma713 wrote:But doesn't that remove the preclusion that there are armor values for a reason? What's the point of taking an Ironclad over a regular dreadnought (a seismic hammer and assault launchers?)? Why does my Soul Grinder at 13 front AV have the same toughness as a Deff Dread (front 12? - I could be wrong there), or a regular dreadnought? A soul grinder costs more than a Deff Dread and the armor values are one reason for it. And rear armor is a representation of actually firing into the back of the vehicle - walkers, just like other vehicles, are armored more lightly in the rear and undercarriage as they are in the front or sides.

Because it's not as simple as that. We didn't just make all Walkers either T4(5) or T8. There are differences in wounds, armour saves and so on. For instance the Chaos Dread (which has the same stats as the Marine Dread, and roughly the same stats as the Ork Dread, minus some WS or Init here and there) is T8 W3 Sv3+. The Defiler sits at T8 W4 Sv2+. Makes a world of difference.

I understand that you could make everything have a Toughness value (like vehicles), but we found that unifying the rules for MC's and Walkers made life easier, whilst tanks and actual vehicles (as opposed to big creatures or robot creatures) was more fun.

So how do you deal with Damage? One of my complaints about the Wraithlord was that it took three decent hits to kill it, and until it was down, it remained at full effectiveness?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Red Corsair wrote:Actually yes considering I have been playing since 40k was first released... As soon as the wraith lord gained a toughness value over an armor rating our play group toyed with the difference and the associated point costs, (we also tested the difference if the marine dread had a T value over armor)

Ok, just to save yourself some effort, next time I ask something like "And I assume you know this due to years of extensive playtesting", just answer "No". It'll be quicker and I'll be wasting less of your time.

Red Corsair wrote:...so when I said your argument was stupid, its because it was, maybe you should try play testing yourself before you make such silly claims.

You know when 4th Ed came out? Yeah? Well since then - and I really do mean that, since then - we've been playing all Walkers with T values. 4(5) for Sentinels and War Walkers, T8 for Dreads/Chaos Dreads/Ork Dreads/Wraithlords, and so on. We meshed their rules with Monstrous Creatures, making them their own singular category. Works really well. For years now we've been doing that. We've worked, refined and changed and playtested those rules for years. They work perfectly. Great fun too.

So I'll just continue laughing at you, because you're clueless, and think that calling my argument "stupid" makes yours any less idiotic.

Red Corsair wrote:If walkers gain T values then heck... why not tanks too...while we are at it lets just nerf the game down to chess...

Yay! Slippery slope fallacy wrapped in a red-herring. Try again.

You know, people at my FLGS think I'm nuts, but I think posts like these are why I like Dakka so much.

A limited damage chart. The chance to kill one in a single shot is there, it's just difficult.

Of course, taken out of context the what I said above is quite meaningless. We have our own vehicle damage charts as well, where glancing hits really are glancing hits (eg. 1 on our glancing chart is 'no effect', 2 is 'shaken on a 4+', 6 is 'roll on the penetrating chart').

We have very different vehicle rules. The basis is the same, but it's truly the most different of our sections.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Scottywan82 wrote:You know, people at my FLGS think I'm nuts, but I think posts like these are why I like Dakka so much.

I know! What was I thinking! I even have a grammatical error where I said "yours any less idiotic".

Silly me!

This is everything that I've seen posted supposedly from the codex compiled together from varies sources. Take it for what you will!


General Remarks/Rules
3 kind of armies with this book: Kabalyte, Wych Cult and Haemunculus army. But units are strong enough to make most combinations competitive as well. No point costs yet, as the Codex only had the main entry pages. But preview copies of the Codex should be instore in 2-3 weeks.

Universial rules
Night vision rule army wide (= acute senses?)
Strength through pain (mostly for Wych Cult units): After destroying non-vehicle unit, DE unit gets one pain token (1+ tokens means unit gets FNP, 2+ tokens means army gets Furious Charge, 3+ tokens means army gets fearless). Maximum is 3. Seems to buff all units with this rule simultaniously!
Combat drugs: One roll for for every unit with combat drugs before the game (all get the same).
Shadow Field in., 12“ assault not.
3-5 new units ,no old ones dropped. New units seem to be: New Archon bodyguard, new man-sized Haemunculi construct, new beast for beastmaster, Venom transport and something else.
Splinter weaponry makes a wound in a 4+ (normal poison weapon).
Dark Matter spam is gone with a more realistic allocation of heavy/special weapons mainly based on squad size. Similarly for reavers.
Web portals are still in.


HQ

Asdrubal Vect (SC not on his Ravager).

His Ex-Wife

Lelith Hesperax

Drazhar

Archon
WS7, BS7, +1 BS, +1WS, +1A, +1LD compared to previous edition, can take Blaster (18“ range).
If he kills and enemy MC/SC in close combat, he doubles his Strength to 6. If he kills another one, he doubles his Strength to 10.
Can have bodyguard retinue (not Incubi anymore).

Wych Lord

Haemunculi


Troops
Warriors (also in an elite version, upgrade names: Kabalite warrior, Synabite, Kabalite Trueborn, Dracon)
Stats as before. Splinter Rifle rapid fire, no plasma grenades or Splinter pistols.
Have strength through pain rule.

Wyches (also in an elite version, upgrade names: Hekatrix, Hekatrix Bloodbride, Syren)
Stats as before. 6+ armour save, 4+ inv against cc attacks. Upgrades with special close combat weapons.
Their weapon options are:
-1A to enemy in combat and base contact (to a minimum of 1), Hydra Gauntlets: +d6 attacks for 2 CCWS rather than +1A (Yes - really!) or Chain-of-blades weapon gives +2A, as well as re-rolls to hit and to wound.
Have strength through pain rule.


Elite
Incubi
T3, S3, 2 attacks but lose Tormentor Helm, with a 3+ save, can be upgraded with an Exarch (one option „preferred enemy“).
Have Klaives (2 handed powerweapon +1 strength). The klaive gives the unit to roll again (only one time) the 6 to wound.
Their squad leader (WS5, 3 Attacks) has a weapon that either gives him +2 S or +2 attacks (2 single handed weapons), and gives each member of the squad another attack on a roll of 6 to hit (no limit)
Have hand flamers like BA. Can chose an IC as preferred enemy. Klaivex has some more rules, one similar to Old One eyes but not as good as blood angels blood talons.

Mandrakes
Have some kind of shooting attack that gets stronger with every kill they make, but not strength from pain rule.

Harlequins
As in Eldar Codex. No Solitaire.

Grotesques
Bigger with Ogryn stats. Dont have strength through pain rule.

Other Haemunculi Construct
New. Man-sized.

Beastmaster
Beastmasters can take different kinds of beasts.


Fast Attack
Hellions

Reaver Jetbike
Can turbo boost 36", S3, T4, 5+ save, -1 to save and -1 to strength compared to previous edition. Jetbike gives +1 to save and +1 to Toughness (included in the profile).
They can perform a "fly-by" attack on units they fly past WITHOUT getting into CC. There were several upgrades for reaver jetbikes that inflict different numbers of S3/4/6 hits on units when doing their 'fly by' attack.
Can take Melter Blaster (S8 with Melter AND lance special rule)
Have strength through pain rule.
Blade under jetbike causes pinning test when wounding.

Heavy Support
Ravager
Fast, skimmer, open-topped, AV 11 11 10, can fire all three dark lances at cruising speed

Talos
In a standard and lighter version.

Scourges
Seem to get some kind of haywire grenade launcher.

2 new units in Heavy Support:
razorwing
Something completely new


Transports
Raider
Fast, skimmer, open-topped, AV 10 10 10
More expensive, many upgrades, a.o. +2D6 movement and 5+ Invulnerability save
has a Dark Lance

Venom
Formerly in Harlequin list (capacity 6)

warmonger wrote:This is everything that I've seen posted supposedly from the codex compiled together from varies sources. Take it for what you will!


General Remarks/Rules
3 kind of armies with this book: Kabalyte, Wych Cult and Haemunculus army. But units are strong enough to make most combinations competitive as well. No point costs yet, as the Codex only had the main entry pages. But preview copies of the Codex should be instore in 2-3 weeks.

Universial rules
Night vision rule army wide (= acute senses?)
Strength through pain (mostly for Wych Cult units): After destroying non-vehicle unit, DE unit gets one pain token (1+ tokens means unit gets FNP, 2+ tokens means army gets Furious Charge, 3+ tokens means army gets fearless). Maximum is 3. Seems to buff all units with this rule simultaniously!
Combat drugs: One roll for for every unit with combat drugs before the game (all get the same).
Shadow Field in., 12“ assault not.
3-5 new units ,no old ones dropped. New units seem to be: New Archon bodyguard, new man-sized Haemunculi construct, new beast for beastmaster, Venom transport and something else.
Splinter weaponry makes a wound in a 4+ (normal poison weapon).
Dark Matter spam is gone with a more realistic allocation of heavy/special weapons mainly based on squad size. Similarly for reavers.
Web portals are still in.


HQ

Asdrubal Vect (SC not on his Ravager).

His Ex-Wife

Lelith Hesperax

Drazhar

Archon
WS7, BS7, +1 BS, +1WS, +1A, +1LD compared to previous edition, can take Blaster (18“ range).
If he kills and enemy MC/SC in close combat, he doubles his Strength to 6. If he kills another one, he doubles his Strength to 10.
Can have bodyguard retinue (not Incubi anymore).

Wych Lord

Haemunculi


Troops
Warriors (also in an elite version, upgrade names: Kabalite warrior, Synabite, Kabalite Trueborn, Dracon)
Stats as before. Splinter Rifle rapid fire, no plasma grenades or Splinter pistols.
Have strength through pain rule.

Wyches (also in an elite version, upgrade names: Hekatrix, Hekatrix Bloodbride, Syren)
Stats as before. 6+ armour save, 4+ inv against cc attacks. Upgrades with special close combat weapons.
Their weapon options are:
-1A to enemy in combat and base contact (to a minimum of 1), Hydra Gauntlets: +d6 attacks for 2 CCWS rather than +1A (Yes - really!) or Chain-of-blades weapon gives +2A, as well as re-rolls to hit and to wound.
Have strength through pain rule.


Elite
Incubi
T3, S3, 2 attacks but lose Tormentor Helm, with a 3+ save, can be upgraded with an Exarch (one option „preferred enemy“).
Have Klaives (2 handed powerweapon +1 strength). The klaive gives the unit to roll again (only one time) the 6 to wound.
Their squad leader (WS5, 3 Attacks) has a weapon that either gives him +2 S or +2 attacks (2 single handed weapons), and gives each member of the squad another attack on a roll of 6 to hit (no limit)
Have hand flamers like BA. Can chose an IC as preferred enemy. Klaivex has some more rules, one similar to Old One eyes but not as good as blood angels blood talons.

Mandrakes
Have some kind of shooting attack that gets stronger with every kill they make, but not strength from pain rule.

Harlequins
As in Eldar Codex. No Solitaire.

Grotesques
Bigger with Ogryn stats. Dont have strength through pain rule.

Other Haemunculi Construct
New. Man-sized.

Beastmaster
Beastmasters can take different kinds of beasts.


Fast Attack
Hellions

Reaver Jetbike
Can turbo boost 36", S3, T4, 5+ save, -1 to save and -1 to strength compared to previous edition. Jetbike gives +1 to save and +1 to Toughness (included in the profile).
They can perform a "fly-by" attack on units they fly past WITHOUT getting into CC. There were several upgrades for reaver jetbikes that inflict different numbers of S3/4/6 hits on units when doing their 'fly by' attack.
Can take Melter Blaster (S8 with Melter AND lance special rule)
Have strength through pain rule.
Blade under jetbike causes pinning test when wounding.

Heavy Support
Ravager
Fast, skimmer, open-topped, AV 11 11 10, can fire all three dark lances at cruising speed

Talos
In a standard and lighter version.

Scourges
Seem to get some kind of haywire grenade launcher.

2 new units in Heavy Support:
razorwing
Something completely new


Transports
Raider
Fast, skimmer, open-topped, AV 10 10 10
More expensive, many upgrades, a.o. +2D6 movement and 5+ Invulnerability save
has a Dark Lance

Venom
Formerly in Harlequin list (capacity 6)

I'm pretty sure that there's more info in the OP...

Seen it. A few pages back if i'm not mistaken.

Edit: Shown here too – http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/319496.page

WAITAMINUTE

Incubi have hand flamers???

Leggy wrote:WAITAMINUTE

Incubi have hand flamers???

Isn't this obviously obvious?

wuestenfux wrote:

Leggy wrote:WAITAMINUTE

Incubi have hand flamers???

Isn't this obviously obvious?

Incubi didn't have flamers before
I can't see any flamer-like parts on the models
It's the first time i've seen it mentioned in a rumour compilation
No-one has discussed incubi with flamers in any of the threads i've read (and i'm excited for this release, so i've read a lot!)

So I'm gonna have to go with No. No it is not obvious.

Its been mentioned as an Incubi upgrade more than once in several different locations, not our fault you didn't read that until now.

Flamers in a DE army?
Must be a recent technological achievement.

DE always had the Haemy flamers with variable AP - far superior to the pitiful imperial flamers.

Thor665 wrote:DE always had the Haemy flamers with variable AP - far superior to the pitiful imperial flamers.

I know, but nobody in the DE army had conventional flamers.

I'm very disappointed with the metal miniatures personally. While few armies have a plastic HQ, the level of detail in plastic minis is not so underwhelming compared to their metal counterparts to be a legitimate complaint these days.

But if I had a choice between an HQ in metal or Incubi, I'd certainly choose the HQ.

But then to think we may very well see a metal Talos again? I thought we would have atleast moved away from the whole "models that double as lethal weapons" era of GW.

As for the codex questions, did they have a complete codex you can review, or just a summary sheet for the most part?

Do you think you could dig into the background any? Specifically the Incubi, as it's really bugging me how they've moved the Incubi was from the 'evil striking scorpions' they were in the past. Curious if their lore is still suggesting they're evil striking scorpions.

Some rules questions I'd love to find out are some details on the 'light' haemonculi unit. Are they a troop so the codex can really be turned into a Kabal, Cult, or whatever the Haemonculi belong to. Do they have any fun, unique rules or do they function more like Plague Marines and have stats/points to mimic them.

Anything you can give us about Grotesques would also be great news.

Some information on what the Lord's retinue actually is would be nice too as there was some speculation earlier in the thread that they were an entirely new unit?

Some info on the scourges would be great. Specifically jetpack vs jumppack.

Confirmation on the lance weaponry (S8/Ap1? S8 Ap2? S6/Ap1) etc etc as I don't recall seeing anything concrete yet.

Details on the venom also please. Is the point of 6 troop capacity because it has more armor? Or is it a lighter craft.

Could you try to describe what the new talos looks like? Is it much the same? More walker/wraithlord looking?

It was all going well until I read that Raiders were more expensive!!! MORE EXPENSIVE!!!???

That's a massive dislike from me. =/

Anyone else's thoughts on more expensive transports?

Oshova

Oshova wrote:It was all going well until I read that Raiders were more expensive!!! MORE EXPENSIVE!!!???

That's a massive dislike from me. =/

Anyone else's thoughts on more expensive transports?

Oshova

Aren't they insanely cheap right now?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that there is going to be a ton of point shuffling in the codex, as the entire thing is being redone. I bet you will get discounts on some things and increased prices on others. Panic?

I think that if they really are still 10/10/10 they shouldn't get more expensive, not without some optionall upgrades that is.

They're 55 points atm. But it's just that every other transport has been getting cheaper when the codex has been redone. Especially SMs and their variants. 35 point Rhinos, they have better armour, same capacity, less firepower, and move slower . . . so they won't be AS cheap, but they should still be cheaper.

Oshova

Oshova wrote:Anyone else's thoughts on more expensive transports?

It's not a good thing unless the price hike is 5 pts and bundles in a ton of previously optional stuff in the process.

warmonger wrote:This is everything that I've seen posted supposedly from the codex compiled together from varies sources. Take it for what you will!

Actually, you just copypasted my summary in the first post of Dakka's "Dark Eldar Rules Discussion" thread without any changes.
I am not amused that you want to get all credits for my work, especially when it is done so bluntly for everyone to see.

@Oshova - I agree with you quite a bit. 55 points was not an insane deal of super brokeness, it was a solid value for what the Raider was.

When I look at other vehicles that cost less or equivalent to the Raider I usually feel that the DE were either on parity or (perhaps) having to pay too much.

More expensive Raiders with no change to their stat line and capabilities will be worrisome.

I'm guessing (hoping) that we're getting some sort of additional value we're unaware of at this point if there is a price hike.

This is my problem with the eldar too. The vehicles cost way to much and if the raiders cost more than in the past it was just the wrong way to go. With marine vehicles being so cheap but still having a lot of options and seeing the guard vehicles so cheap I wonder what the xenos do to cause their construction costs to go so high hehe.

I would rather have cheaper vehicles with the option to spend more on them, instead of them bundling together stuff and hiking the price up.

Oshova

Fishboy wrote:This is my problem with the eldar too. The vehicles cost way to much and if the raiders cost more than in the past it was just the wrong way to go. With marine vehicles being so cheap but still having a lot of options and seeing the guard vehicles so cheap I wonder what the xenos do to cause their construction costs to go so high hehe.

Soaking every component in the blood of a thousand innocents adds considerably to labour costs.

If the Venom is on the codex as rumoured that might factor in to a more geared but more expensive Raider.

5 pts isnt that bad of a increase, I'm hoping that the upgrade to get a 5+ invul will be cheap.

Thor665 wrote:@Oshova - I agree with you quite a bit. 55 points was not an insane deal of super brokeness, it was a solid value for what the Raider was.

When I look at other vehicles that cost less or equivalent to the Raider I usually feel that the DE were either on parity or (perhaps) having to pay too much.

More expensive Raiders with no change to their stat line and capabilities will be worrisome.

I'm guessing (hoping) that we're getting some sort of additional value we're unaware of at this point if there is a price hike.

Well, some people have said that Raiders will have a 5+ "invulnerable" save and have the capacity to "flat out" an additional 2d6 inches. If all other things remain the same, would that justify a 5-10 point increases to you?

In a vacuum, sure, but it's going to depend heavily on the cost/effectiveness of other units like reavers, hellions and the Venom.

As we know something can be "worth the points" in theory but not be the best choice in a book...which is the equivalent of being completely useless to certain people.

Your assuming they will not make us pay for those options as well..

Saldiven wrote:

Thor665 wrote:@Oshova - I agree with you quite a bit. 55 points was not an insane deal of super brokeness, it was a solid value for what the Raider was.

When I look at other vehicles that cost less or equivalent to the Raider I usually feel that the DE were either on parity or (perhaps) having to pay too much.

More expensive Raiders with no change to their stat line and capabilities will be worrisome.

I'm guessing (hoping) that we're getting some sort of additional value we're unaware of at this point if there is a price hike.

Well, some people have said that Raiders will have a 5+ "invulnerable" save and have the capacity to "flat out" an additional 2d6 inches. If all other things remain the same, would that justify a 5-10 point increases to you?

Also, even through the cheap rhinos and transports of 5th edition, the raider remained a steal.

I think it's deserving of a points increase. The vehicle can move 24 inches, claim a cover save in the open after going flat out, allow any infantry unit a whopping 24~ inch charge out of it ignoring most terrain due to it's skimmer status, carries an anti tank weapon, can zip around empty and contest objectives later in the game, can leap frog units stranded from their own Raiders being destroyed due to open top status - for 55 points?

The Raider has been far too cheap for it's own good, it was under priced in 3rd edition when everyone else was paying 55 points for Rhinos, and it was still under priced when everyone started paying 35 points for rhinos. Lower armor values aside, it out performs other transports on a point for point basis.

Even if they cost 70+ points, I still think you will see 10 of them on the table in a lot of games. The utility is too much to ignore.

Kroothawk wrote:

Actually, you just copypasted my summary in the first post of Dakka's "Dark Eldar Rules Discussion" thread without any changes.
I am not amused that you want to get all credits for my work, especially when it is done so bluntly for everyone to see.

Actually I copied from a different site which had no pictures with it and I took no credit for anything. I simply stated that this was everything I've seen about the codex compiled together. This was only done after several comments about things that were covered before, I just pasted it in this thread for those to lazy to read the first one.

As far as you being amused or not, I don't really care! Too many people with an ego complex' ruin threads like this and the hobby in general, whatever happened to just sharing the information and discussing it? so sad

Ill trade you 1 wave serpent with brightlance for 3 raiders with dark lances.. Wish theyd give eldar a throw away transport

Kirasu wrote:Ill trade you 1 wave serpent with brightlance for 3 raiders with dark lances.. Wish theyd give eldar a throw away transport

Haha...and I wish they'd give DE one that had a legitimate chance to survive turn 3....

Warmonger, please, [Mod Edit - Rule #1 - Learn it. Live it.]


Kroot goes to an insane amount of trouble to gather any and all info for everyone, so we arent just finding out little bits and pieces here and there.
For that, he deserves a bit of respect.
[Mod Edit - Rule #1 - Learn it. Live it.]

Problem is you can't compare the price of a raider vs that of a rhino. For example, how much is a Warrior now? Are they still 8 pts even though they now have poisoned weapons? Vs double that almost for a Space Marine? All our guys can shoot out of a raider. None of theirs can. All our guys can assault from a raider. None of their guys can.

It really depends what happens to the cargo of the raider to determine if they're truly overcosted. If a warrior is still super cheap though? Probably warranted.

Saldiven wrote:

Thor665 wrote:More expensive Raiders with no change to their stat line and capabilities will be worrisome.

I'm guessing (hoping) that we're getting some sort of additional value we're unaware of at this point if there is a price hike.

Well, some people have said that Raiders will have a 5+ "invulnerable" save and have the capacity to "flat out" an additional 2d6 inches. If all other things remain the same, would that justify a 5-10 point increases to you?

Well, codices should start taking into account the numerous perks that 5th edition has granted vehicles over both 4th and 3rd editions rule books. A fifth edition raider is far superior to a 3rd edition raider due to massive benefits in survivability to both the raider itself and its passengers as well as fire power in the case of passengers. I just wish they had started this trend when the 5th edition SM codex came out.

My memory is admittedly a bit hazey, but from what I can remember, compared to 3rd:

Passengers may now double tap when moving

Skimmers no longer auto destroyed on an immobolized result (In 4rth they were auto destroyed if moving over 6")

Glancing can only destroy raiders on a 6 (-2 glancing, +1 open topped), rather than a 4-6 (imobolized and open top penalty)

Passengers aboard a fast vehicle going flat out no longer take double wounds when vehicle is destroyed

Blast templates strength is 1/2 if the hole isn't over the hull, allowing raiders to bunch up without much worry of suffering multiple casualties from a single hit

Ordinance no longer has the chance of inflicting instant death on passengers

2/3 of missions are won via objectives vs. (VP/KP); which puts greater value on transports

Cover saves (vs always glancing if moving over 6"); giving the nerf to the glancing chart in 5th edition, I would say that the cover save is preferable

Compared to 4th, infinately better:

Passengers no longer auto pinned when vehicle is destroyed

Passengers no longer need to get out of the box when vehicle suffers a penetrating shot

Even if surrounded in an assault and the vehicle explodes on a 6, the passengers stick around

Ignoring a damage result all together due to cover is far superior to simply having a a penetrating shot being reduced to a glancing shot on a 4+

I agree that, as Saldiven has stated, DE will be likely be getting bundled gear options.

The only thing that vehicles have really lost is that you don't always need 6s to hit skimmers (unless the vehicle moves over 6") and you hit on back armour in CC (not very meaningfull to a raider).

@Wyomingfox

You missed something pretty big.

Currently, if a Raider moves greater than 6", then none of the passengers may fire from it. This is a HUGE downgrade for the usefulness of Warriors mounted on the Raider compared to previous editions.

Honestly, I actually prefer SMF to the current rules. In previous editions, my Raiders never moved less than 6" unless stunned in a previous turn. Since I had this benefit all the time, I didn't have to worry about terrain to obtain "Hull Down" for the same effect. Currently, you only gain the cover save if you move the vehicle so fast that it can neither shoot nor embark/disembark troops.

Another big loss from previous editions is the inability to embark onto a vehicle as part of your post combat consolidation move. In 3rd, I used that one a lot to protect my wyches from being shot off the board on a turn after they wiped out an opponent's unit.

I have to wonder, though, that if the Raider is getting some sort of 5+ "invulnerable" save, how will that combine with the 4+ cover that every skimmer gets for moving flat out?

Saldiven wrote:

You missed something pretty big.

Currently, if a Raider moves greater than 6", then none of the passengers may fire from it. This is a HUGE downgrade for the usefulness of Warriors mounted on the Raider compared to previous editions.

Agreed .

Honestly, I actually prefer SMF to the current rules. In previous editions, my Raiders never moved less than 6" unless stunned in a previous turn. Since I had this benefit all the time, I didn't have to worry about terrain to obtain "Hull Down" for the same effect.

Yes, but a glancing hit would destroy a raider (effectively) on a 4+ (immobolized=wrecked, and open topped) in 3rd.

Currently, you only gain the cover save if you move the vehicle so fast that it can neither shoot nor embark/disembark troops.

Yes, but there is the tactical advantage to having one raider in front of another given that blast weapons strength are halved.

Another big loss from previous editions is the inability to embark onto a vehicle as part of your post combat consolidation move. In 3rd, I used that one a lot to protect my wyches from being shot off the board on a turn after they wiped out an opponent's unit.

Also agreed.

Saldiven wrote:@Wyomingfox
Honestly, I actually prefer SMF to the current rules. In previous editions, my Raiders never moved less than 6" unless stunned in a previous turn. Since I had this benefit all the time, I didn't have to worry about terrain to obtain "Hull Down" for the same effect. Currently, you only gain the cover save if you move the vehicle so fast that it can neither shoot nor embark/disembark troops.

That's such a perfect summary of why this was such a great change...

Now there is actually a trade off for skimmers, be safer or be aggressive, an actual decision for the player to make.

Jack

People shouldn't freak out over the rumored cost increase for raiders until they actually know the cost and the rules for the vehicle. If it's the exact same thing, but simply costs more, that might be head-scratching, but if it has some special rules attached for a price increase, then it may still be awesome.

so no new models untill games day germany? when is that

SweetLou wrote:so no new models untill games day germany? when is that

Around the 17th.

Jackmojo wrote:

Saldiven wrote:@Wyomingfox
Honestly, I actually prefer SMF to the current rules. In previous editions, my Raiders never moved less than 6" unless stunned in a previous turn. Since I had this benefit all the time, I didn't have to worry about terrain to obtain "Hull Down" for the same effect. Currently, you only gain the cover save if you move the vehicle so fast that it can neither shoot nor embark/disembark troops.

That's such a perfect summary of why this was such a great change...

Now there is actually a trade off for skimmers, be safer or be aggressive, an actual decision for the player to make.

Jack

Agreed. More tactical decisions makes for a better game.

On the raider points cost i can't imagine a raider coming with a 5+ inv or a 2D6 boost as standard, it all seems very expensive for a transport that is mainly use dto get troops into position then often destroyed without much concern from the DE player. I think they'll be upgrades, so the DE player has the option to make his raiders more durable if he wants.

And let's not forget there may be other delivery systems in the codex as well besides raiders.

We have heard web-way portals are in.....but are there any other modes to deliver your units....like outflank or deep strike (though I expect this from scourges, but we'll see)?

All this in conjunction with the Raider's alleged cost increase might be somewhat warranted, providing one with a more broad set of options to get your forces on the field in a somewhat "safer" manner.....the Venom (if true) could be interesting as well.

Thats a point, how many points is the Venom going for?

Its going to be the same basic stats as a raider but with less of everything.

Do we know if the new metal Archon is the only metal Archon they're doing? I'd be quite disappointed if it was...

At least you can convert it easily with the plastics. But yeah I know what you mean, I was hoping they would at least do a male and female version.

Ah, yes, true. Didn't think of that. Between the Wyches, Warriors and the Raider crew, making an Archon shouldn't be all that difficult.

I'm late-- have they said anything about a new Battleforce box or is it just individual unit releases?

nope nothing yet.. but one should assume that with the overhaul they'd have one.
Battleforces are just box set sprues under one roof anyway, cant be that difficult.

I bought the old one 2 weeks ago just in case the new one has 10 warriors, 3rjbs and some jungle trees.
They're blu-tac'd waiting for the new bits to spruce them up a bit! Pre-orders are up Tuesday so maybe we'll have confirmation then?

Are battleforces always part of 1st wave? and do they pre-order?

A little while after. Not an initial release. I could be wrong though. Also, if the release is a month from October 5. I believe the black boxes and codex should be in store next week as well. That stuff has always been pretty reliable, arriving one month out from release. Here is to hoping!

I never liked that raiders were through away transports, it doesn't suit the fluff at all. Considering that they are piratical raiders who need to get in and out fast.... Getting in fast only to have your escape transport destroyed immediately always seemed kinda silly, how are they getting home with all those slaves, chain gangs!?!?! Ha ha...

Just some food for thought.