Note: There are lots of these already, but here's my take. I see a lot of people upset with the new codex. We should have known the nerf bat was coming. After all it has been the trend of 7th ed. codices. Sure, a lot was taken away and generally nerfed, but a lot of this also looks pretty neat to me. Aside from losing characters, there are a few units that seem interesting that I really want to give a try in the upcoming 7th edition with my dark kin.
Here are my thoughts:
Units that were bleh in the previous book are now pretty interesting (I use the word "interesting" instead of good because I do not know what they will do on the battlefield until I can get some games in). Wracks now have stealth and shrouded, so a 4+ cover save! + infiltrate means you can probably get them into some kind of other cover for even beefier cover save.. their early arrival will keep the enemy dealing with them right off the bat and if they don't + properly drugged, they will have a semi-useful CC unit in their face early. This could draws some heat away from what you are really trying to do elsewhere on the tabletop. We will see if their points cost justifies this strategy.
Also Reavers seem ..well different now. I almost see them as light vehicle shredders, kind of filling the previous role of haywyches. With a unit of 9, thats a TON of s6 rending HoW hits (3d6!) plus their regular s4 attacks + combat drugs/PFP.. i think they will be pretty decent at popping armor and then of course hit and run shenanigans to either A) finish the job next round B) get into cover or C) make their way to their next victim. Plus the formation allows to have 6 FA choices and still be battleforged, not to mention giving your troops 5+ cover saves and everyone else 6+ cover saves.
Combine Reaver's new found strength against light vehicles with the sheer awesomeness of Scourges now (4 heavy weapons in a squad), and you got your new substitute for haywyches' former vehicle popping capabilities. 4 haywire blasters dropping down with a haywire pistol archon (can't remember the actual name of the pistol, forgive me) with WWP without scattering for some rear AV action sounds nasty as hell. Not to mention there is lots of access to dark lances across the codex. I don't think we will have too much trouble with armor, as everyone seems to bemoan because of the loss of wyches. Again, remember you can have 6 FA choices, so 6 squads of 4 heavy weapons each.
Grotesques will be CC machines and the new WWP can get them where they need to be, escorting your lord into battle, in no time. Just remember to pick your battles wisely.. AKA avoid 2+ armor as huskblades are now ap 3. if you drop a fat squad of grots + archon/succubus down next to something even halfway squishy, that unit will be absolutely fethed (and possibly first blood).
There are tons of cheesy ways to give all your units incredible buffs by being synergistic in your unit choices. Which brings me to my next interesting unit: talos and cronos. With the ability to buff everyone's FnP and also take a group of 3 (MC!) with high T and multiple wounds, I think we will see these guys on the tabletop more.
Also, one thing I realized in my 7th edition games, that I don't believe was a part of 6th edition. Determining who can shoot now takes place on a model to model basis. This has huge implications for footslogging kabalites (I know, I know they should have raiders, but it's gonna get popped eventually). Need some mobility? Perhaps to advance on an objective but would still like to fire your splinter cannon? Well leave him in the back and don't move him at all. Bam, now he can fire his salvo weapon with full shots at full BS. Same thing with Dark lances.
The new bomber. It got pretty good. For a high points cost of course. All those missile options are thoroughly nasty. Each may cost an arm and a leg + the high base cost of the thing, but I feel like they will be worth taking especially in high points games, easily capable of making its points back in a turn with all those high S, low AP missiles. Although its 10/10/10, it has access to a 3+ jink save and can still drop its missiles i believe (correct me if im wrong). So fly in, unleash mayhem on something, get shot at next turn, jink, and either A) fly off the board for another round of death when it returns or B) next victim
So I guess what I want to say is some things suck, some things seem like they could be cool. I have always loved the dark eldar. Things change. We gotta take the positive from the negative. I see it as a challenge to create new and exciting lists. Sure it sucks that the beaststar is no more and the baron, vect, duke, and krajaksdkfasdfbas (the mandrake guy), are all gone. We generally took a huge beating from the nerf bat but i think lots of codexes have. To some extent. i think we are seeing a dewardization of codices in the current edition and who knows.. if its not a good thing, it will at least encourage new ways to play the game that we all love. Lets face it, if we didn't love this game we wouldn't be sitting at a computer reading about it or griping about it on a website dedicated to it.
Well, anyways... I'm sure I'm missing some stuff but I'm tired and these are some things I have thought about surfing all the DE threads of late. Hope it was worth the read. Let me know your thoughts on the new codex.
Just picked up the codex today and had a skim through it so I can only give my preliminary thoughts as somebody who plays a wych army.
Nerf bat.
Like, I honestly don't get why you would take one of the already weaker builds in an already weak codex and decide you'll make it even worse than it already is.
Changing Leliths league apart rules to take away her extra attack ability means she can't kill anything being only str3 and having 6 attacks. Her re roll abilities only work in challenges which makes her even more pointless and over costed for a unit that almost never makes it into CC and is usually killed by overwatch anyway I really do suspect that this is an attempt to sell the newer succubus model which is better in every way for the points cost you pay..
Nerfing wych weapons. Why? How is a hydra gauntlet that gives you an extra d6 attacks game breaking? Were their honestly massive complaints about this in the prior codex? Instead they've just made a crappy unit even more crappy and now totally unable to win assaults against anything other than the most mediocre or half dead units.
Getting rid of haywire grenades. So now wyches have no counter against dreadnoughts? A single dreadnought can destroy an entire army of wyches single handedly? Not to mention how appaulingly bad DE long range AT is. The only reason people loaded up on wyches with haywire and suicide charged them at tanks is because it was the only option a DE player had to deal with armor. Dark Lances are horrible.
Utterly throwing away any opportunity to slash the points cost of wyches or lord forbid give them their invulnerable save against overwatch. Its ridiculous that you can succeed in getting a full ten squad intact to a unit and then have half of it die from instant flamer hits and lucky shots before any attacks are rolled. The old DE codex came out before that ability was introduced and it broke the rationale behind wyches ever since as it robs them of their strike first ability.
Ravagers can no longer move 6 and fire all of their guns. Again, why? Was their really such vocal objection to a paper thin tank with crappy weapons being able to do this? This means my supporting ravagers can't adequately back up my wyches and with the subsequent nerf bat to haywire they are now hopeless against tanks.
Again, if GW really does not want people to use wych armies then why bother supporting them in the first place or selling their models? Do they really think people will just keep bringing their Dark Eldar armies for target practice?
Scourges are insanely better, as are grotesques, mandrakes, reavers, the razorwing jetfighter, and even our core kabalite warriors.
Some people have a tendency to only focus on the negatives, but I think there are a lot of positives here and some of them stem from indirect buffs like changes to power from pain (where we can now get 4+ fnp for example) or field even more venoms than before for less points since we don't have to put a unit of troops inside each one.
Scourges are insanely better, as are grotesques, mandrakes, reavers, the razorwing jetfighter, and even our core kabalite warriors.
Some people have a tendency to only focus on the negatives, but I think there are a lot of positives here and some of them stem from indirect buffs like changes to power from pain (where we can now get 4+ fnp for example) or field even more venoms than before for less points since we don't have to put a unit of troops inside each one.
I am not saying everything got worse.
I am saying that wych cult armies got worse. Considering that they were already near useless its pretty stupid that GW hurls the nerf hammer at them.
Worst of all is the fact that the lore they wrote for wyches completely does not match the ruleset. "Elite shock troops"? ""Unmatched fighters"?"Lelith able to kill a hive tyrant? That's complete bull. Wyches are cannon fodder that can be killed as easily as gaunts and are about as dangerous as gaunts in CC.6 str3 power weapon attacks are not going to do anything to a hive tyrant. Considering the codex actively encourages you through the lore to field a full army of wyches (so don't go all "oh but a dark elder army is meant to be balanced with a mix of units" ) the new codex actually describesd each army separately to reinforce this distinction more so than the previous codex.
Paging though the book at home i get the strong impression that they have used the layout (big pictures, several pages with not much text and one piece of art but a lot of empty space) to avoid having to use content they could put in the DLC.
No new units is disappointing. I don't think a new codex has to have new units...that can lead to some wasted kits...but we lost stuff and have had kits wasted on stuff we really didn't need (plastic Archon and Succubus could have been the Baron and Malys). VRB and plastic Wracks are good.
And we have expensive DLC that should have been in the codex. It feels as if this book as pushed out either with a lack of care or because they didn't have anything else ready.
Furyou Miko wrote: Reaver Jetbikes are a Wych unit, and they're apparently now very good against tanks according to the OP.
They just want you to buy more models, they have nothing against Wyches in particular.
Killing vehicles with charging them with bladevanes sounds bit risky tactic as your unit will stay clumped together and is a nice magnet for every template weapon the opponent has.
Whats the dlc? Im mostly into fantasy now but I've been waiting for the DE since theyre my favorite army but as it stands it seems like they got nothing new.
My mandrakes are now allegedly useful but a lot of our special characters got axed.
I know haemonculi are a supplement but is there anything else?
As it stands i may "accquire" a digital copy to peruse but I'm not hearing any exciting news that makes me want to go buy the uth ed rulebook and the new codex. Especially when fantasy gets new stuff, characters without modelz, and not to mention the end times stuff. I guess I'm hoping someone can give me something in the new DE dex that will get me interested in 40k again
Welcome to 7th edition codex writing. The new method is to make rules that make more sense with the fluff. Wyches with anti-tank wargear made zero sense seeing as how they were gladiators. Seems the DE focus is now on speed and picking off isolated units. They should have little trouble eliminating squads that hang out in the backfield, such as heavy weapon squads and artillery. Still trying to figure out how dark lances suck as so many say.
Kind of stupid that DE lost all AP2 assault wargear though, given how much AP2 their craft world brethren have.
ClassicCarraway wrote: Welcome to 7th edition codex writing. The new method is to make rules that make more sense with the fluff. Wyches with anti-tank wargear made zero sense seeing as how they were gladiators. Seems the DE focus is now on speed and picking off isolated units. They should have little trouble eliminating squads that hang out in the backfield, such as heavy weapon squads and artillery. Still trying to figure out how dark lances suck as so many say.
Kind of stupid that DE lost all AP2 assault wargear though, given how much AP2 their craft world brethren have.
Don't worry craft world Eldar will get the bat soon enough.
ClassicCarraway wrote: Welcome to 7th edition codex writing. The new method is to make rules that make more sense with the fluff. Wyches with anti-tank wargear made zero sense seeing as how they were gladiators. Seems the DE focus is now on speed and picking off isolated units. They should have little trouble eliminating squads that hang out in the backfield, such as heavy weapon squads and artillery. Still trying to figure out how dark lances suck as so many say.
Kind of stupid that DE lost all AP2 assault wargear though, given how much AP2 their craft world brethren have.
Like the fluff of wyches being elite close combat specilaists = as hard as hormagaunts in close combat Poisoned weapons or rending would have made sense and could have made them worth the points, but well, what can you do...
Exergy wrote: Ultimately the DE codex use to have a weakness for massed medium armor.
Now the DE codex has a more acute weakness for massed light and medium armor.
In a world full of land raiders, DE are still king.
Considering you need 9+ Dark lances to take down a land raider in a single turn, I'm not exactly sure that's to their benefit.
As opposed to the 12+ Lascannons needed by Imperial armies? What's your point?
Dark and Bright Lances are the equivalent to S10 to anything AV14. What more do you need???? Lance weapons are perfectly suited for popping Land Raiders. Why do people think that because their army can't easily destroy a 250 point tank in a single turn, they suddenly have no anti-armour ability. The bigger problem (and its really not that big of a problem) for Lance weapons is AV12. Anything more, and they gain an advantage with Lance, anything less, and their high strength negates any loss of the Lance ability.
Personally, I think most of the grumbling about lack of anti-armour is about wytches losing haywire grenades (which having them made no sense from a fluff perspective). Mass haywire in any unit is broken IMO, and I can only hope that Necrons lose their cryptek weapons that given them large volumes of haywire fire. Now if we could just get rid of them on Swooping Hawks, all would be right with the world
The Succubus can have an AP2 weapon that gives her +1S but that and Lelith#s attacks seem to be our only armour save ignoring assault attacks.
I agree that on paper Wyches seem a bit limp for 10ppm. they aren't paying for armour, can't Dodge shooting and will spend a lot of time ineffectually slapping at Power Armour. I don't mind them losing access to Haywire Grenades (as my Wyches clearly didn't know how to use theirs ) but I was expecting them to get a little more peppy in assault.
ClassicCarraway wrote: Welcome to 7th edition codex writing. The new method is to make rules that make more sense with the fluff. Wyches with anti-tank wargear made zero sense seeing as how they were gladiators. Seems the DE focus is now on speed and picking off isolated units. They should have little trouble eliminating squads that hang out in the backfield, such as heavy weapon squads and artillery. Still trying to figure out how dark lances suck as so many say.
Kind of stupid that DE lost all AP2 assault wargear though, given how much AP2 their craft world brethren have.
Don't worry craft world Eldar will get the bat soon enough.
ClassicCarraway wrote: Welcome to 7th edition codex writing. The new method is to make rules that make more sense with the fluff. Wyches with anti-tank wargear made zero sense seeing as how they were gladiators. Seems the DE focus is now on speed and picking off isolated units. They should have little trouble eliminating squads that hang out in the backfield, such as heavy weapon squads and artillery. Still trying to figure out how dark lances suck as so many say.
Kind of stupid that DE lost all AP2 assault wargear though, given how much AP2 their craft world brethren have.
Don't worry craft world Eldar will get the bat soon enough.
Well I like the new codex its about the best of the new codex type (ork and sw)
Wyches arnt great but you pay for the 4invun save in cc but there weapons are crap now.
To me it seems that de are now a bit more durable infantry wise with the new boosts per turn but it is so so easy to have your HQ go nuts pts wise
But I could be biased because I like de and never like wyches any way lol
Taking away the wych grenades is fine. But at least give them something to make them able to actually fight in CC rather than be an over costed hormagaunt.
If GW continues down this line, we actually have to pay money to get worse codexes than the hardcover ones we already possess...perhaps only DA and CSM players will shrug since their codexes arent holding up to well in the first place
Jihadin just come to the fantasy side. No supplements, plenty of characters, mostly balanced army books. At least until GW points their 40k death beam at us. Seriously most fantasy players i know are hoping GW just gives us our occasional armybook and leaves us alone.
The deal is that GW seems to be bringing more "balance" to the game via toning everything down. When things were going haywire (punny, I know) back in 6th and especially 5th with horribly OP units/rules/exploitation of poorly written rules, everyone complained about how imbalanced the game had become. Now they seem to be responding to it by "streamlining" codices at the expense of some peoples beloved units/characters/conversions. It sucks for sure, but we gotta stop being surprised. This has been the trend since the tyranid codex arguably but especially orks/GK/SW.
We obviously like this game and it would just be better for everyone if they would just accept that things change. This is the current state of 40k. It's still the game we know and love. Use the new rules as a challenge to build new and interesting lists instead of the one you have used a thousand times and you just might find yourself having some fun with the game.
ClassicCarraway wrote: Welcome to 7th edition codex writing. The new method is to make rules that make more sense with the fluff. Wyches with anti-tank wargear made zero sense seeing as how they were gladiators. Seems the DE focus is now on speed and picking off isolated units. They should have little trouble eliminating squads that hang out in the backfield, such as heavy weapon squads and artillery. Still trying to figure out how dark lances suck as so many say.
Kind of stupid that DE lost all AP2 assault wargear though, given how much AP2 their craft world brethren have.
They didn't lose all of their AP2. The only thing I can think off that did lose it was the Huskblade.
Generally I like the 7th edition writing style. Sure, nothing jumps off the page and slaps you so hard that you can see your long dead ancestors from the Stone Age with how poorly balanced it is compared to the rest of the army and how much you need to spam the crap out of it, buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut that's a good thing. The armies are feeling more internally balanced and the books so far feel appropriately balanced with each other. If Tau and Eldar can be appropriately nerfed down to fit in with the rest of the 7th Edition books we may end up with the best balanced edition to date, even if it's not the most exciting in terms of things that everyone feels they need to field en masse.
Sure, nothing jumps off the page and slaps you so hard that you can see your long dead ancestors from the Stone Age with how poorly balanced it is compared to the rest of the army and how much you need to spam the crap out of it,
Am sorry which codex does that, because it aint the nids with their 3+tyrant per list , SW spaming pods with ally centurions, GK spaming NDKs, terminators and SW ally pods full of centurions or purifires. Am almost sure ork players spam the lobbas to.
I don't have a problem with weaker codex, if they updated all books at the same time or at least started with the most powerful one. Nerfing other armies while eldar play the same codex they did in 6th is stupid. But what realy makes me angry is the fact that they make it realy hard to impossible to play an army with one book. The multi cad thing was stupid enough in 6th , but avoidable. Not multi cad is in even in 1k point games and the books look as if they were design to force people to buy multiple books. Your army is slow and has no MSU units to do storm missions, let me show you the wonderful world of marines. If DE army has problems with anti tank, load up on those eldar ally . Three serpents some fire dragons, some DA and a WK or a prism will fix you up.
Sure, nothing jumps off the page and slaps you so hard that you can see your long dead ancestors from the Stone Age with how poorly balanced it is compared to the rest of the army and how much you need to spam the crap out of it,
Am sorry which codex does that, because it aint the nids with their 3+tyrant per list , SW spaming pods with ally centurions, GK spaming NDKs, terminators and SW ally pods full of centurions or purifires. Am almost sure ork players spam the lobbas to.
Nids are a 6th edition book, not a 7th and thus excluded from this basis. Also are you really saying that Nids are really a game breaking threat with 3+ Tyrants? SW spamming a 6th edition unit via allies? Again, 6th edition unit. Doesn't count for the purposes of the game generally being toned down this edition.
The only people I see jumping up and down saying that NDK are the only way to play GK are people on the internet. We have a couple of local GK players, and they definitely disagree with that idea. About the only true misses in the GK book are the non-Librarian HQs, PAGK (mostly due to the Psycannon change) and the Purgitation Squad (who really needs a longer range weapon). That's two weak units and two HQs with the stronger units not feeling overpowered, just not feeling as crap.
And Purifiers can Deep Strike without drop pods, so I'm not really seeing the huge advantage there. Is it the reduced scatter?
Makumba wrote: I don't have a problem with weaker codex, if they updated all books at the same time or at least started with the most powerful one. Nerfing other armies while eldar play the same codex they did in 6th is stupid. But what realy makes me angry is the fact that they make it realy hard to impossible to play an army with one book. The multi cad thing was stupid enough in 6th , but avoidable. Not multi cad is in even in 1k point games and the books look as if they were design to force people to buy multiple books. Your army is slow and has no MSU units to do storm missions, let me show you the wonderful world of marines. If DE army has problems with anti tank, load up on those eldar ally . Three serpents some fire dragons, some DA and a WK or a prism will fix you up.
Most of the armies who got updated so far are the oldest armies who had codexes from 5th. And I'm fine with that because they were left to lag for a long while and needed an update. Yes, Eldar and Tau need their nerfs, and soon, but I don't think it's wrong to start with the older books, or not having all the books at the same time.
And it's not impossible to play with a single book. The supplement books are alternate ways to play an army (just like FW army lists are optional ways to play armies, some of which rely on you having the core codex on hand for certain units and options). They bring variety for those who really want to specialize with a specific force instead of something more general. Many of them really force you into specific army builds too.
As for allies, any feeling you have of needing allies is in your head more than anywhere else. The ally system is there to sell you an army, but not by making it a manditory gap filler (remember, GW is designing a narrative, not a tournament, based game. It's core concept is more based on playing a campaign with friends to tell some kind of story, than to play a tournament for a prize), but as a way to make it easier to branch off into other armies. Really want to start Guard but don't have the money to play them right now? There's a system to make it possible to play them as allies without shooting yourself in the foot or needing to wait 3+ months to have scraped together a full army.
So yes, it's to sell stuff, but no, not in the way you think.
The new Venoms and Raiders are tougher with stealth when they jink.
This was impressive to see in a game yesterday.
Between all these wouldbe nerds this is a big plus for a fleet DE army.
And it's not impossible to play with a single book. The supplement books are alternate ways to play an army (just like FW army lists are optional ways to play armies, some of which rely on you having the core codex on hand for certain units and options). They bring variety for those who really want to specialize with a specific force instead of something more general. Many of them really force you into specific army builds too.
how do you play nids without skyblight, how do you do anti tank with DE without either taking eldar as ally or taking the 6 fast farmation and spaming scourges ?
As for allies, any feeling you have of needing allies is in your head more than anywhere else. The ally system is there to sell you an army, but not by making it a manditory gap filler (remember, GW is designing a narrative, not a tournament, based game. It's core concept is more based on playing a campaign with friends to tell some kind of story, than to play a tournament for a prize), but as a way to make it easier to branch off into other armies.
I have never seen people buy two separate armies of the same faction to play tournament and non tournament games. People play the same lists. The system when you had to buy unit X to have an optimal list was not perfect, specialy if GW decided to make one choice good per slot. But at least you didn't have to buy multiple books. Right now there is a ton of armies that either lack the ability to play 7th ed or have units which only work if ally stuff is taken. Purifires do not work at all, unless one takes SW drop pods for them. The only way for a AM army to get cheap and resilient MSU units is to take marine as ally. The only source of divination and grav centurions for SW is taking sm as ally. Etc.
Really want to start Guard but don't have the money to play them right now? There's a system to make it possible to play them as allies without shooting yourself in the foot or needing to wait 3+ months to have scraped together a full army.
But you would have a bad IG list unless you somehow played SM before and have all the units wanted as ally, but even then you would still need to buy around 900pts of guard and cost wise it wouldn't be saving much, as the units needed for the 900pts cost a lot of money, even when bought as recasts.
Sure, nothing jumps off the page and slaps you so hard that you can see your long dead ancestors from the Stone Age with how poorly balanced it is compared to the rest of the army and how much you need to spam the crap out of it,
Am sorry which codex does that, because it aint the nids with their 3+tyrant per list , SW spaming pods with ally centurions, GK spaming NDKs, terminators and SW ally pods full of centurions or purifires. Am almost sure ork players spam the lobbas to.
I don't have a problem with weaker codex, if they updated all books at the same time or at least started with the most powerful one. Nerfing other armies while eldar play the same codex they did in 6th is stupid. But what realy makes me angry is the fact that they make it realy hard to impossible to play an army with one book. The multi cad thing was stupid enough in 6th , but avoidable. Not multi cad is in even in 1k point games and the books look as if they were design to force people to buy multiple books. Your army is slow and has no MSU units to do storm missions, let me show you the wonderful world of marines. If DE army has problems with anti tank, load up on those eldar ally . Three serpents some fire dragons, some DA and a WK or a prism will fix you up.
Nids need to spam Flyrants to be anywhere near competitive, the army is practically built on them - it's a weak codex in 7th (partly why I'm changing to DE).
I'm fine with nerfing, it's not the armies that are being streamlined that are the problem, it is the Eldar Codex being stronger than the rest. I (and I think a lot of other people) would be very happy if CE were the first codex to be streamlined into 7th if GW decide to update all of the 6th edition Codexes into 7th formatting.
I'm also the first to say that the Allies Matrix should have never have been made, IMO when you pick up an army you learn that army and you play to it's strengths whilst trying to stop your opponent exploiting it's weaknesses, you shouldn't be able to bring in another army that excels at what should be able to defeat you, therefore giving you no weaknesses whatsoever.
As opposed to the 12+ Lascannons needed by Imperial armies? What's your point?
Why would marines be using lascannons on land raiders? They have meltaguns for that very purpose, and can even drop pod those meltaguns next to the land raider on turn 1.
Making idiotic comparisons only weakens your point.
Dark and Bright Lances are the equivalent to S10 to anything AV14. What more do you need???? Lance weapons are perfectly suited for popping Land Raiders. Why do people think that because their army can't easily destroy a 250 point tank in a single turn, they suddenly have no anti-armour ability.
Because most things in the game aren't land raiders, yet many are just as hard to destroy with Dark Lances.
9 Dark Lance shots to destroy a 240pt land raider isn't too bad. 9 Dark Lance shots to destroy a Chimera is bloody awful. That's your entire HS allowance of Ravagers (minimum 375pts worth in the new book) being needed to down a single 65pt transport. Are you really telling me you don't see any problems with that?
Does their stealth, shrouded, infiltrate get applied to a vehicle they are in? If so a couple of units in venoms infiltrating into a ruin could be exceptional.
By the way, has anybody bought the bomber? Would be interesting to hear which year is written in the sprues. Is it made for this release, or has it been ready "on the shelf" since the last release wave when there was rumours that it was made, but was too big for the boxes.
- I like the changes they made to the Court of the Archon. No 1+ nonsense any more for each of the models, build a unit that you like and go from there.
- The wych weapon changes are disappointing. I really liked the old Hydra Gauntlet and Shardnet + Impaler rules.
- The Clawed fiend losing it's special rule where it gained attacks as it is hurt is a shame. It was very fluffy and made it a scary thing to fight against.
- Did Ur Ghuls get better?
Ah I don't have the rulebook handy - aren't there some special rules that work like that? I think scout does?
I think it's only the deployment-related rules that transfer - presumably because it would be a bit weird if a squad could only scout ahead by tearfully bidding farewell to their transport.
Ah I don't have the rulebook handy - aren't there some special rules that work like that? I think scout does?
It's a unique exception noted in the scout special rule, and even there it only works for dedicated transports. Putting Space Marine Scouts in a Land Raider does not give it scout.
So I guess what I want to say is some things suck, some things seem like they could be cool. I have always loved the dark eldar. Things change. We gotta take the positive from the negative. I see it as a challenge to create new and exciting lists. Sure it sucks that the beaststar is no more and the baron, vect, duke, and krajaksdkfasdfbas (the mandrake guy), are all gone. We generally took a huge beating from the nerf bat but i think lots of codexes have. To some extent. i think we are seeing a dewardization of codices in the current edition and who knows.. if its not a good thing, it will at least encourage new ways to play the game that we all love. Lets face it, if we didn't love this game we wouldn't be sitting at a computer reading about it or griping about it on a website dedicated to it.
Well, anyways... I'm sure I'm missing some stuff but I'm tired and these are some things I have thought about surfing all the DE threads of late. Hope it was worth the read. Let me know your thoughts on the new codex.
Considering the string of moans over Orks, Grey Knights, and Dark Eldar, you might be right that they're trying to de-escalate the codices to a more normal power level. And decreasing the number of named characters should be a good thing so the game is less about building a death-star to exploit one character's rules. I would be more convinced if there was decent internal balance or attention to detail in the codexes. Hopefully the de-escalation will bring more weaker units into balanced play, but I'm not really counting on it.
They're de-escalating the codexes only to make 8th that much more interesting so they can re-escalate stuff again for another 2-3 year round of codexes people buy
The last thing GW wants is the community to start thinking "wow, all codexes are updated for this edition. I think it's time to stop collecting here." They came dangerously close to that by the end of 5th edition.
Considering the string of moans over Orks, Grey Knights, and Dark Eldar, you might be right that they're trying to de-escalate the codices to a more normal power level. And decreasing the number of named characters should be a good thing so the game is less about building a death-star to exploit one character's rules.
Yes, I'm sure it's entirely about balance and nothing to do with the removed characters being the ones who didn't have models.
Obviously The Decapitator had been dominating too many tournaments - there was just no way to include him without making him overpowered.
TheSilo wrote: I would be more convinced if there was decent internal balance or attention to detail in the codexes. Hopefully the de-escalation will bring more weaker units into balanced play, but I'm not really counting on it.
The problem is that the nerfs seem to have no relevance to a unit's power level. Like removing Haywire Grenades from wyches and nerfing their melee weapons. So, they still suck in combat and now they don't even have a niche use as anti-vehicle units. To top it all off, warriors then get a point drop while wyches remain at 10pts.
This sort of de-escalation doesn't result in balance, it just results in blander codices with the same problem of some units being outright better than others.
e.g.
Is there ever a point to take hellions now? When reavers are just better in every way? For only a three point increase.
Reaver: -3 S3 attacks on the charge
-1 S4 rending auto hit on the charge
-2 splinter shots before charging
-12" movement
-Jink for 3+ cover save
-48" redeploy
-skilled rider
-hit and run
-T4
-5+ armour
-combat drugs
-access to AT weapons
-access to cluster caltrops
Hellions: -2 S4 attacks on the charge (hellglaive no longer gives +1 attack and is two handed)
-1 S3 auto hit on the charge if they don't use their jump pack in the movement phase
-2 splinter shots before charging
-fleet
-12" movement
-deep strike
-hit and run
-T3
-5+ armour
-combat drugs
-access to phantasm grenade launchers and stunclaws
-3 points cheaper
Seems like two almost identical units, just one is miles and above better in every way.
wuestenfux wrote: The new Venoms and Raiders are tougher with stealth when they jink.
This was impressive to see in a game yesterday.
Between all these wouldbe nerds this is a big plus for a fleet DE army.
I don't know. I can't bring myself to drop an extra 15 points onto a 55 point model for it. Of course, the only opponent I've played in 7th edition is a Craftworld player and you don't get cover saves against the d6+1 S7 hits from that ridiculously overpowered field that are on all the Wave-Seprents... that may color my perceptions a bit.
I haven't played my dark eldar since the the 3rd edition codex (last game was at the beginning of 5th edition) and I'm mostly pretty excited. The only thing that really gets under my skin is that Incubi can't have grenades. Heck just on the Klaive would make a difference. Sigh. I've decided to solve the problem by having a Succubus escort them. That way, if they have to charge into/through terrain, she can kill a few guys and lessen the impact.
I guess I have one other issue. But it's about CE and all their S6 weaponry. I mean every gun I face, every game is S6 or higher. I don't get Feel No Pain against shooting with any of my regular guys. Renders PfP pretty useless for most of the game. Oh well.
I am hoping there is a grand plan at work over at GW. We have to live with the Tau and Eldar codexes for now until they get nerfed down to the level of the last few codex releases.
As other people have said though, this does not solve the internal balance issues of each codex. This has always been a problem unfortunately, it's nothing new.
I am not so concerned about the loss of special characters. For me, hq's were all about taking a stock model and adding your own fluff and back story to them. The loss of rules is a problem but I honestly don't think you should have to take a specific hq to make wracks or hellions or whatever competitive. They should be capable units in and of themselves.
turgon868 wrote: I am not so concerned about the loss of special characters. For me, hq's were all about taking a stock model and adding your own fluff and back story to them.
I agree. But, they could make our lives easier by not making 90% of the stock options crap.
turgon868 wrote: The loss of rules is a problem but I honestly don't think you should have to take a specific hq to make wracks or hellions or whatever competitive. They should be capable units in and of themselves.
I agree - pity neither of them are competitive alone, and now lack any backup from HQs.
And it's not impossible to play with a single book. The supplement books are alternate ways to play an army (just like FW army lists are optional ways to play armies, some of which rely on you having the core codex on hand for certain units and options). They bring variety for those who really want to specialize with a specific force instead of something more general. Many of them really force you into specific army builds too.
how do you play nids without skyblight, how do you do anti tank with DE without either taking eldar as ally or taking the 6 fast farmation and spaming scourges ?
The same way I play Sisters with no allies: I build an army of the stuff I like to try and solve the problems I think I may face in a typical game in my meta and bring it with me for a pick up game. I know this seems like a strange concept to you but not everyone plays the way the internet says is best.
As for allies, any feeling you have of needing allies is in your head more than anywhere else. The ally system is there to sell you an army, but not by making it a manditory gap filler (remember, GW is designing a narrative, not a tournament, based game. It's core concept is more based on playing a campaign with friends to tell some kind of story, than to play a tournament for a prize), but as a way to make it easier to branch off into other armies.
I have never seen people buy two separate armies of the same faction to play tournament and non tournament games. People play the same lists. The system when you had to buy unit X to have an optimal list was not perfect, specialy if GW decided to make one choice good per slot. But at least you didn't have to buy multiple books. Right now there is a ton of armies that either lack the ability to play 7th ed or have units which only work if ally stuff is taken. Purifires do not work at all, unless one takes SW drop pods for them. The only way for a AM army to get cheap and resilient MSU units is to take marine as ally. The only source of divination and grav centurions for SW is taking sm as ally. Etc.
Just because some people build lists to play tournaments doesn't mean all people do. And even some of us who do, have done so without relying on a lot of what the internet jumps up and down and says is "best" (seriously, I played Sisters for a long while until the meta I played in after moving got so bad that playing them as they are now became a lot less fun). Look at your top table players in most big tournaments (like Nova), sure there are a fair number of Tau and Eldar armies running around, but there are people getting there with non-conventional army lists. You can sit here and tell me the only way to win with certain lists is allies, but I heavily disagree.
Really want to start Guard but don't have the money to play them right now? There's a system to make it possible to play them as allies without shooting yourself in the foot or needing to wait 3+ months to have scraped together a full army.
But you would have a bad IG list unless you somehow played SM before and have all the units wanted as ally, but even then you would still need to buy around 900pts of guard and cost wise it wouldn't be saving much, as the units needed for the 900pts cost a lot of money, even when bought as recasts.
Replace Guard with Dark Eldar, or Grey Knights, or even Nids. The point still stands on what the intent was from the start.
It's all just going through the stages of grief. Some are in the anger stage, some are in the denial stage, some are in the acceptance stage, etc.
I still like the game and the models, so I've just sort of accepted that my focus will be almost solely on Fast Attack choices. Scourges and Reavers are quite good, and fortunately I love those models so they will be expanding in my lists at the expense of Wyches/Bloodbrides, HQs, Hellions (RIP Baron), warriors (RIP Duke), and Ravagers.
No sense getting upset about it, what's done is done, just have to adapt and move on.
Exergy wrote: Ultimately the DE codex use to have a weakness for massed medium armor.
Now the DE codex has a more acute weakness for massed light and medium armor.
In a world full of land raiders, DE are still king.
Considering you need 9+ Dark lances to take down a land raider in a single turn, I'm not exactly sure that's to their benefit.
I believe that way of thinking to be the problem with the current Ed - Many players believe their unit-counters have to be able to do their job flawlessly and without failure. People assume that Anti Tank must be able to destroy Land Raiders in a turn, Anti Infantry to be able to shred a full unit of Orks completely in the same amount of time, and so on. That is what people wanted prior, and what they got was the Codex power creep - Every damned codex just got better and better and tried to tobble the last one. Now, GW is trying to down the Codexes a bit to make an enemy army an actual thread to your succes, as it should be, and soon Eldar and Tau will get their nerfs, ending the Power Creep. Hopefully.
That, of course, make some people pretty miffed that their favourite armies are getting less powerful and unable to table certain other armies within a few turns, but the thing is, that isn't the point anymore. Everything is getting nerfed, yes, but you know what isn't getting nerfed? The durability of most of the models in the game. Sure, they aren't getting buffed directly, but their direct counter (Guns and stuff) are being less powerful, so that consitutes as a buff for most units. This means that tabling and blatantly overpowered units won't exist anymore, and the game will be more enjoyable for it IMO. Some models are still somewhat weak on the defensive side, most of them vehicles, but that will at least be helped when the AT gets toned down a bit.
So yes, you need 9+ Dark Lances to kill a Land Raider in a turn. That might sound ridicoulus to you, but that's the important part - Land Raiders (and other BFTs in the game like the Leman Russ, Battlewagon and Monolith) are not meant to be killed in a turn. Same with big blobs of infantry - their defence is numbers instead of durability, and the rules must reflect that. In rules and Codexes prior to those we have now, many armies just had an "I win now" choice to remve threats with impunity, but is that the point? Isn't the point the fight itself, and that careful application of firepower and tactics will down the beast, and not your instant-win gun of doom?
The Dark Eldar Codex can't deal with everything, the way all armies should be. Do you make an all-comers list and see what you meet, or do you make specific armies that can deal with a certain threat better, like a Dark Lance spam list, an Tau Air Defence list or maybe five Deathstrike Missiles via Unbound?
The way I see it, this game is being fixed by simply taking our toys and letting us learn from that loss, and I truly think it might turn the game around.
wuestenfux wrote: The new Venoms and Raiders are tougher with stealth when they jink.
This was impressive to see in a game yesterday.
Between all these wouldbe nerds this is a big plus for a fleet DE army.
I dont think Venoms can get stealth, they are not able to get nightshields. If you mean from nightfighting, well they already had that.
Exergy wrote: Ultimately the DE codex use to have a weakness for massed medium armor.
Now the DE codex has a more acute weakness for massed light and medium armor.
In a world full of land raiders, DE are still king.
Considering you need 9+ Dark lances to take down a land raider in a single turn, I'm not exactly sure that's to their benefit.
So yes, you need 9+ Dark Lances to kill a Land Raider in a turn. That might sound ridicoulus to you, but that's the important part - Land Raiders (and other BFTs in the game like the Leman Russ, Battlewagon and Monolith) are not meant to be killed in a turn. Same with big blobs of infantry - their defence is numbers instead of durability, and the rules must reflect that. In rules and Codexes prior to those we have now, many armies just had an "I win now" choice to remve threats with impunity, but is that the point? Isn't the point the fight itself, and that careful application of firepower and tactics will down the beast, and not your instant-win gun of doom?
The Dark Eldar Codex can't deal with everything, the way all armies should be. Do you make an all-comers list and see what you meet, or do you make specific armies that can deal with a certain threat better, like a Dark Lance spam list, an Tau Air Defence list or maybe five Deathstrike Missiles via Unbound?
f.
The problem is not how long it takes DE to kill a land raider, they dispatch them just fine. The problem is Rhinos. Razorbacks, Ork Buggies, Chimera, Wave Serpents, other DE raider, dreadnaughts etc.
O you brought more than 2 vehicles? O well my list cant deal with that, guess ill just keep playing until I face someone with less than 3 vehicles, that is where DE have a chance.
The same way I play Sisters with no allies: I build an army of the stuff I like to try and solve the problems I think I may face in a typical game in my meta and bring it with me for a pick up game. I know this seems like a strange concept to you but not everyone plays the way the internet says is best.
No one plays the game like that here. Someone would have to be mad to spend 600+$ on an army which is not good.
I believe that way of thinking to be the problem with the current Ed - Many players believe their unit-counters have to be able to do their job flawlessly and without failure.
And yet fire draongs or grav stars do what they suppose to do well. Drop pod melta units too. 3+tyrants works as anti tank or anti horde for nids.
Same with big blobs of infantry - their defence is numbers instead of durability, and the rules must reflect that.
Tell that to stuff like purifires in a SW drop pod.
The way I see it, this game is being fixed by simply taking our toys and letting us learn from that loss, and I truly think it might turn the game around.
Which means after all codex are redone, one is going to be able to build a tac list and it is probably going to be eldar or sm. And we will have the same situation only the armies playing against the top will have fewer option and be weaker.
Look at your top table players in most big tournaments (like Nova), sure there are a fair number of Tau and Eldar armies running around, but there are people getting there with non-conventional army lists. You can sit here and tell me the only way to win with certain lists is allies, but I heavily disagree.
That is more or less how people build armies here. Check what does good in tournaments and how much money you can spend, buy an army that non of your friends play.
The same way I play Sisters with no allies: I build an army of the stuff I like to try and solve the problems I think I may face in a typical game in my meta and bring it with me for a pick up game. I know this seems like a strange concept to you but not everyone plays the way the internet says is best.
I too build my armies with no allies.
No codex should have to use allies, nor should any player feel that they're being punished for not bringing allies.
The same way I play Sisters with no allies: I build an army of the stuff I like to try and solve the problems I think I may face in a typical game in my meta and bring it with me for a pick up game. I know this seems like a strange concept to you but not everyone plays the way the internet says is best.
No one plays the game like that here. Someone would have to be mad to spend 600+$ on an army which is not good.
I wish Sisters could be built for $600! And local metas are different from place to place. I mean locally we have like 3 Tyranid players but only 1 Eldar player. Why? People are more concerned with playing armies they like and not the "most powerful" armies.
I believe that way of thinking to be the problem with the current Ed - Many players believe their unit-counters have to be able to do their job flawlessly and without failure.
And yet fire draongs or grav stars do what they suppose to do well. Drop pod melta units too. 3+tyrants works as anti tank or anti horde for nids.
Same with big blobs of infantry - their defence is numbers instead of durability, and the rules must reflect that.
Tell that to stuff like purifires in a SW drop pod.
No one ever really said what the Purifiers are gaining by having all the points sunk into allies to get them a drop pod.
Look at your top table players in most big tournaments (like Nova), sure there are a fair number of Tau and Eldar armies running around, but there are people getting there with non-conventional army lists. You can sit here and tell me the only way to win with certain lists is allies, but I heavily disagree.
That is more or less how people build armies here. Check what does good in tournaments and how much money you can spend, buy an army that non of your friends play.
Which is the complete opposite of how it's played here. We run Rogue Traders, sure, but campaigns are where it's really at.
GW is doing business all wrong. No one likes nerf bats or debuffs. Other things should be brought up in power. Then, to de-escalate the game, all points values should go up across the board. So then you're actually playing a tactical game of piece trading and movement versus "lolspam 6 raiders 6 scourges" vs "lolspam 6 serpents 3 wraightknight".
By doing what GW is doing, they will only bleed more and more players as their army is made complete garbage and forced to buy something completely different to keep playing it (Nids, Orks, Dark Eldar, GREY KNIGHTS).
And to that, I say, try Malifaux, Infinity or Warmachine. Updates come out for all factions at once and the stuff is play tested and DOESN'T invalidate your armies or play styles. Nor do they delete your units you spent time building, painting, and playing with.
I still can't believe folks are defending this nonsense. It's got to be related to the Stockholm Syndrome based upon the sunk cost fallacy.
No AA is a big weakness. JUst had whole game where I was winning turned into a draw by one helldrake and a bloody overwatch shooting. Lelith taking overwatch plasma pistol to the face.
As usual I prefer to put my thoughts in my videos rather than repeat myself.. I think the new 'dex is strong, but damn.. no more Wyches for me, they'll be collecting dust. I was really hoping that CC would become something strong in 40k again. I guess not
I took a brief hiatus from 40k due to personal issues, but I think this is just going to extend it.
Seriously...ALL the good special characters gone? (Except Rakarth, and even he got hit with the nerf bat?)
I try, REALLY hard, to avoid caterwauling about the 'bad new codex,' but I seriously wish they hadn't even given us one. I think that I categorically would have preferred the old one. I've heard people say the changes were SOLELY to deny sales to third party miniature creators, but I cannot believe that a company as large and successful as GW would be as petty as that.
I can't think of a single change that actually happened that I've ever heard a Dark Eldar player ask for. By the flip side of the token, the changes I heard clamored for most (some form of generic leader on a skyboard, some form of generic leader on a bike, AA defense, anti-psyker defense) utterly failed to manifest.
I have very, very slim hopes that Haemonculus Covens will provide a foothold of mediocrity, otherwise my DE may find themselves going on a shelf for the next ten years. I know that's an overreaction, but this gak has just been so disheartening. I truly believed (at one point) that there was no such thing as a bad codex, but this has mightily shaken my faith in game balance. I know there's good stuff here, I can see that, but I'm having a hard time seeing them through the tears of mourning for Duke Sliscus, Baron Sathonyx, useful Beastpacks, and Ravagers that could move and shoot effectively.
@Jimsolo: all special characters without models are being pulled from codexes as they're being updated regardless of how good or bad they are.
I think if you compare DE to the other 7th ed codexes you'll find they aren't too far off. Yes, there is an issue with vehicle killing but at this point I feel it's an issue with the vehicle rules not working as well as they should. Anti-tank weapons aren't doing the job as well as they should and that's a fatal flaw in the current system, regardless of the good it does to stop parking lot armies from existing.
ClockworkZion wrote: @Jimsolo: all special characters without models are being pulled from codexes as they're being updated regardless of how good or bad they are.
I think if you compare DE to the other 7th ed codexes you'll find they aren't too far off. Yes, there is an issue with vehicle killing but at this point I feel it's an issue with the vehicle rules not working as well as they should. Anti-tank weapons aren't doing the job as well as they should and that's a fatal flaw in the current system, regardless of the good it does to stop parking lot armies from existing.
Unless of course you are space wolves, then you get two new special characters with sculpts.
Jimsolo wrote: I took a brief hiatus from 40k due to personal issues, but I think this is just going to extend it.
Seriously...ALL the good special characters gone? (Except Rakarth, and even he got hit with the nerf bat?)
I try, REALLY hard, to avoid caterwauling about the 'bad new codex,' but I seriously wish they hadn't even given us one. I think that I categorically would have preferred the old one. I've heard people say the changes were SOLELY to deny sales to third party miniature creators, but I cannot believe that a company as large and successful as GW would be as petty as that.
I can't think of a single change that actually happened that I've ever heard a Dark Eldar player ask for. By the flip side of the token, the changes I heard clamored for most (some form of generic leader on a skyboard, some form of generic leader on a bike, AA defense, anti-psyker defense) utterly failed to manifest.
I have very, very slim hopes that Haemonculus Covens will provide a foothold of mediocrity, otherwise my DE may find themselves going on a shelf for the next ten years. I know that's an overreaction, but this gak has just been so disheartening. I truly believed (at one point) that there was no such thing as a bad codex, but this has mightily shaken my faith in game balance. I know there's good stuff here, I can see that, but I'm having a hard time seeing them through the tears of mourning for Duke Sliscus, Baron Sathonyx, useful Beastpacks, and Ravagers that could move and shoot effectively.
I did see some good changes that a lot of people were asking for like Razorwings to fast attack and useable mandrakes and scourges. I think the new combat drugs are better, too.
For anti-air, we might not have gotten a dedicated skyfire unit, but I went ahead and bought another razorwing jetfighter because I think it's really become a fantastic option with the variety of targets it can handle (missiles wipe out infantry, lances take out armor in the air or on the ground) and all at a better price than it was.
I'd definitely say don't give up with DE yet, I think a lot of my army lists are stronger than ever now.
I always likes the speciel characters, not really because of who they were but they allowed for more interesting and unique rules/abilities.
The normal HQs always lacked that flare for me. Usually only 1 or 2 weapons worth taking and the "must take survival buff" with no special abilities at all to choose from.
This seems to be getting better with the artifact items and warlord traits. But with the latest codex that dream has been smashed.
No Reaver jetbike or Hellion skyboard (now that Sathonyx is gone), no ap2 weapon for your Archon and only the webway portal and helm of spiteis is useful for supporting your army.
Not only DE has this problem and for me its a big deal when I can't make a HQ that feels unique and personal.
Same problem plagues most units since they have no or only 1 upgrade worth wasting points on, but its with the HQ I have the biggest issue.
salix_fatuus wrote: I always likes the speciel characters, not really because of who they were but they allowed for more interesting and unique rules/abilities.
I always disliked them for the same reason - GW has an unfortunate tendency to give all the best rules, weapons and wargear to SCs.
I'd much rather standard characters had a wider range of wargear and such, and that SCs existed only as specific builds for standard HQs.
salix_fatuus wrote: I always likes the speciel characters, not really because of who they were but they allowed for more interesting and unique rules/abilities.
I always disliked them for the same reason - GW has an unfortunate tendency to give all the best rules, weapons and wargear to SCs.
I'd much rather standard characters had a wider range of wargear and such, and that SCs existed only as specific builds for standard HQs.
That result is rather why SC's are 99% of the time why they are never used in fantasy, why take something you can already build better?
ZebioLizard2 wrote: That result is rather why SC's are 99% of the time why they are never used in fantasy, why take something you can already build better?
Good.
I'd much rather see SCs used for their flavour, as opposed to having them used because they're miles better than any of the standard choices.
salix_fatuus wrote: I always likes the speciel characters, not really because of who they were but they allowed for more interesting and unique rules/abilities.
I always disliked them for the same reason - GW has an unfortunate tendency to give all the best rules, weapons and wargear to SCs.
I'd much rather standard characters had a wider range of wargear and such, and that SCs existed only as specific builds for standard HQs.
Exactly, if the standard had a wider range of wargear and such that would be awesome and for me it seemed like they were going that way for some time.
I liked them since they were the only way to get it but would prefer the standard to have it, so should correct that it was a kind of love/hate relationship.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: That result is rather why SC's are 99% of the time why they are never used in fantasy, why take something you can already build better?
Good.
I'd much rather see SCs used for their flavour, as opposed to having them used because they're miles better than any of the standard choices.
Not me, I enjoy actually having SC's that are actually "Special" rather then "Hey, please gimp yourself by using this character we haven't balanced well"
ClockworkZion wrote: @Jimsolo: all special characters without models are being pulled from codexes as they're being updated regardless of how good or bad they are.
Doesn't it make more sense to make models for the characters you already HAVE rules for, rather than axing them and creating whole new models?
I MIGHT have even been okay if they'd replaced them with other characters. Seems pretty barren now.
Part of the cost of the quick release method that is running these days.
I'll expect that once everyone are up to at least 6th edition the pace will slow down, and further releases will be more focused on making slight tuning and adding on characters and such
BoomWolf nailed it. I mean we're seeing some releases right now who aren't even getting any new things (Grey Knights and now rumors of Necrons). I believe we'll see more new stuff once the release schedule has a chance to breathe again (maybe after everything is 7th'd up).
Or, due to their sinking profit margin, GW really is going to go down the route of merely focusing on publications than new models and will start updating 6th ed codexes from next year onward.
Have fun re-buying hardcover 30 quid books, DA and CSM players.
I do think they're experimenting with things to try and turn things around before they get really bad, but I don't think solely updating books with no models is it Sir Arun.
Sir Arun wrote: Or, due to their sinking profit margin, GW really is going to go down the route of merely focusing on publications than new models and will start updating 6th ed codexes from next year onward.
Have fun re-buying hardcover 30 quid books, DA and CSM players.
And they wonder why their profits are declining...
You guys are implying GW knows what its doing and isnt a sinking ship that doggedly refuses to do market research (which they themselved admitted in their last annual report)
What I've found to be somewhat funny is that the book seems to have moved back to its 5th edition lists without really trying.
Wyches never were tank busters when it first game out. It was only the change to 6th and assault changes that people said. Well damn, these guys can get haywire and hit on 3s with little to no overwatch. Sold.
Before that, they were what they are now. A somewhat poor to adequate assault unit that was really only useful for mopping up stragglers than taking on fully healthy squads.
Warriors in raiders/venoms spreading around the poison is the same it has always been. Large Grot squads coming out of WWP is nothing new. The things that got better like scourges, mandrakes just add more tools to the tool box and choices.
Yes, I too am saddened by the loss of all the SC and I think it really is a dick move by GW, and several of the other nerfs just dont make sense since I myself feel like they had nothing super over powered in the first place that needed it. Did Ravagers really need to loose some shooting power? Did Dark Lances really need to go up in cost? Probably not, but GW hasn't really been on the giving side in these last few codexs.
Sir Arun wrote: You guys are implying GW knows what its doing and isnt a sinking ship that doggedly refuses to do market research (which they themselved admitted in their last annual report)
They may do no proactive research, but they do react to sales numbers. I'm betting they track them either quarterly and react based on if the quarter was better than the previous one or not.
Sir Arun wrote: You guys are implying GW knows what its doing and isnt a sinking ship that doggedly refuses to do market research (which they themselved admitted in their last annual report)
They may do no proactive research, but they do react to sales numbers. I'm betting they track them either quarterly and react based on if the quarter was better than the previous one or not.
Yes, but they might be daft enough to follow the downward spiral of reacting to reduced sales number by limiting their spending on creating new units, which in turns leads to an even greater drop in sales, which in turn limits their spending on ambitious redesigns even more etc.
Sir Arun wrote: You guys are implying GW knows what its doing and isnt a sinking ship that doggedly refuses to do market research (which they themselved admitted in their last annual report)
They may do no proactive research, but they do react to sales numbers. I'm betting they track them either quarterly and react based on if the quarter was better than the previous one or not.
Yes, but they might be daft enough to follow the downward spiral of reacting to reduced sales number by limiting their spending on creating new units, which in turns leads to an even greater drop in sales, which in turn limits their spending on ambitious redesigns even more etc.
They know letting codexes sit for long periods of time isn't working, and for the ones who need immediate fixing they're doing just that. For others they're (Orks and Wolves for instance) they're giving them new models too. By not giving every single codex new models they can put out stuff when it's ready instead of putting it on a burner for an indeterminate amount of time.
They know the old formula of taking forever and a year to update things doesn't work, so they're trying new things. I'm not saying everything they're trying is working or is the right way to do it, but I am happy to at least see them doing something to try and turn things around. And honestly I don't think this approach is a permanent one. I have a feeling they're only trying to avoid letting books that need updates and have said updates ready from sitting around until models are ready too.
They know letting codexes sit for long periods of time isn't working, and for the ones who need immediate fixing they're doing just that. For others they're (Orks and Wolves for instance) they're giving them new models too. By not giving every single codex new models they can put out stuff when it's ready instead of putting it on a burner for an indeterminate amount of time.
Uh huh. Sure. Some armies get books. Some armies get models. Some armies lose units, lose models, and their Codex exists in no official, physical manner.
They know letting codexes sit for long periods of time isn't working, and for the ones who need immediate fixing they're doing just that. For others they're (Orks and Wolves for instance) they're giving them new models too. By not giving every single codex new models they can put out stuff when it's ready instead of putting it on a burner for an indeterminate amount of time.
Uh huh. Sure. Some armies get books. Some armies get models. Some armies lose units, lose models, and their Codex exists in no official, physical manner.
I haven't seen any armies lose full units or even models (beyond Sisters) this edition. Things that had no models (namely SCs) have largely been pulled, and so far we've had 3 books get models (though DE mostly just plugged old holes) and 2 who didn't get any (Grey Knights, and if rumors hold true, Necrons). All armies have gotten books, just some have gotten model kit releases with the books.
Like I said in my post (which you ignored to dispute that one portion), I don't think this is a long term thing, and I think these books will get more support later. They needed an update and making them wait for one until models were ready wasn't going to cut it. So in the mean time a quick update that gets rules in line, and later they can release model kits with rules (like they've done before with things) that get rolled into a later codex, which may even be in this edition (not to unlike the 3.5 ed books we saw in the past).
ClockworkZion wrote: Like I said in my post (which you ignored to dispute that one portion), I don't think this is a long term thing, and I think these books will get more support later. They needed an update and making them wait for one until models were ready wasn't going to cut it. So in the mean time a quick update that gets rules in line, and later they can release model kits with rules (like they've done before with things) that get rolled into a later codex, which may even be in this edition (not to unlike the 3.5 ed books we saw in the past).
It may not be a long-term thing, but GW certainly doesn't do much to inspire confidence that the rapid succession of new books with a shiny new 30% increase-in-price-tag will be abated for something more, let's say, customer-friendly.
The same thing goes for the special characters- there is no indication GW will ever bring them back. It's certainly a high possibility (given their tendency to recycle content), but if they are brought back it's not going to be in the guise of customer concern.
Well later they can release models with a dataslate we see the trend all ready. I do not mind if they release a new special character with a cool formation with them on a data slate download. For lets say 15 bucks US, or some type of redeemable code for the new model included with it for the data slate.
I think this method could be...tolerable if they went the route of offering rules for new units on cards, ala Warmachine or something like that. The whole idea of buying an expensive (albeit very nice) miniature and then being expected to pay more than $5 for the rules to utilize said unit is ludicrous.
Anyway, on-topic I think reavers will impress me more than I immediately anticipated. Their caltrops seem like the real reason for their use, and you can take the heat lance from the kit and use it to build some scourges.
lliu wrote: I always liked the positive reviews. There's no point in ranting about something already done. Good job!
Because a chorus of yes-men isn't helpful? If something's wrong, you don't need to keep silent.
No Bro we have you for that. For someone that posts only bad reviews while openly admitting no matter how good GW products will ever be released till the end of time you will have a complaint on it. I think you should edit your sig to, I hate GW do not buy there products but will always give it a bad review never looking at it in person or taking it home to read or assimble it. I bet if gw had a box with a glod plated model in it you would complain its not silver or platinum. I honestly do not know why you even waist secounds of your life poating in the gw section.
lliu wrote: I always liked the positive reviews. There's no point in ranting about something already done. Good job!
Because a chorus of yes-men isn't helpful? If something's wrong, you don't need to keep silent.
No Bro we have you for that. For someone that posts only bad reviews while openly admitting no matter how good GW products will ever be released till the end of time you will have a complaint on it. I think you should edit your sig to, I hate GW do not buy there products but will always give it a bad review never looking at it in person or taking it home to read or assimble it. I bet if gw had a box with a glod plated model in it you would complain its not silver or platinum. I honestly do not know why you even waist secounds of your life poating in the gw section.
I've never said that I will always hate it and I don't hate GW products just because it's fun. (though they do make it easy.)
I view the hobby as a whole, not just Games Workshop. And compared to the rest of the wargaming hobby, GW kinda sucks.
Lately I commented on the Nagash and how I love that model and thought the whole idea of the campaign was quite cool. If GW does something I like, I won't criticize it just out of spite. But I also won't shut up about things I think are less than stellar.
Do you want an echo chamber of similar opinions? (serious question.)
No there are faults to everything. But when I look at the faults I look at the bright side. I think the balance in the new dexes is great foe the hobby as a whole. I would rather see aemiea of every race with a bog in the fight not just 2 over powered armies. I know my blood angela are next to get wacked. But if they wack it and give me more balance overall ill takw the hit. I was to see 4+ races in a tourney and not be able to go there is the winner.
And yes I buy every codex expt orks. Why? Because I study where they are weak and strong. Also so when I see them I know what it can do not just them saying it does this. I would give up 3 BA special characters for 1 solid unit to use as troops.
Thanks OP for the level-headed and pretty optimistic reflection on our new Codex. Frankly, I've been avoiding these threads like the plague because of the post-release doomandgloom, but this was really great!
There will be good and bad with a new codex, and you can argue to which end any codex leans towards; we lost cool things (Characters) but gained interesting possibilities too. Lists and tactics will adapt, and those who really love the DE play style will just adapt to keep on hitting hard and fast like we should. Again, I like your interpretation of what has changed and how to keep on with what we have now.
Jpogfreak886 wrote: Thanks OP for the level-headed and pretty optimistic reflection on our new Codex. Frankly, I've been avoiding these threads like the plague because of the post-release doomandgloom, but this was really great!
There will be good and bad with a new codex, and you can argue to which end any codex leans towards; we lost cool things (Characters) but gained interesting possibilities too. Lists and tactics will adapt, and those who really love the DE play style will just adapt to keep on hitting hard and fast like we should. Again, I like your interpretation of what has changed and how to keep on with what we have now.
Thanks a lot. I'm looking forward to painting everything and getting some battles in. Will post my list soon and my results thereafter.. Waiting for GW to stock more Sslyth and Medusae!! Happy hunting my dark kin
We obviously like this game and it would just be better for everyone if they would just accept that things change. This is the current state of 40k. It's still the game we know and love. Use the new rules as a challenge to build new and interesting lists instead of the one you have used a thousand times and you just might find yourself having some fun with the game.
Well its not like I'm going to be throwing my DE models in the bin, however why should I lie about my feedback and just nod my head positively in regard to every change?
They buffed a bunch of gak, and nerfed a bunch of other gak, so now we are replacing one unbalanced codex with a new one. Except for $70 for the rules. Not including DLC. And the fact that absolutely everything unplayable except the transports (and even they can't be played as they used to) from my last editions army was nerfed. Now don't get the term "nerfed" confused with the term "rebalanced", plenty of those models (all of them) were far from OP and the changes have not balanced them at all, merely making them unplayable so that I have to make a new army. Why would anyone be happy with this ? I don't get it? We've got nothing new, lost a bunch of units, and for every playable unit in the dex there is one that will never see competitive play. The changes to Talos don't make them any less trashy.
ClockworkZion wrote: Sure, nothing jumps off the page and slaps you so hard that you can see your long dead ancestors from the Stone Age with how poorly balanced it is compared to the rest of the army and how much you need to spam the crap out of it.
Actually, models do exactly that, jump right off the page at how unbalanced they are, but instead of spamming the crap out of them, you are avoiding them like the plague. You seriously gunna take Wyches Ravagers Khymera Malys Pain Engines (yes, they still suck even in numbers. Yes, both of them) etc etc?
But oh great I can play my court of the Archon and my Mandrakes now. Possibly. But gak I don't own any of those models, and conveniently, my well balanced far from OP models from the last edition have been neutered into shelfwarmers or counts-as. Guess it's time to crank the wallet out.
Am I really not allowed to be disappointed in the fact that they ruined good unit balancing for the sake of model sales?
Poisoned weapons or rending would have made sense and could have made them worth the points, but well, what can you do...
) but I was expecting them to get a little more peppy in assault.
