Hey guys, I recently got back into warhammer (2 months ago) I've since constructed an 1850 point Necron army (really enjoying them). Played about 10 games thus far already. I'd like to do a second army, partially for change of pace when I need a break from my Steel Skeletons, and partially so I can introduce friends to the hobby by playing with another army instead of having to invest so much from scratch.

My question is, whats your feedback on these three! I'm interested in all 3, each for various reasons, and curious what you guys think!

Grey Knights - Costly, but gorgeous models to me.
Dark Eldar - They have a badass feel to them, all their weapons etc look creepy and I kind of like that appeal. Plus their corsair + dark eldar troops bundle is great value.
Tau - Love Tau, only thing is every list I see runs like all crisis suits etc, which i'm not sure im a fan of. Personally I think their tanks are incredibly dope (especially their fire warriors + devilfish bundle)

Additionally, whats your guys thoughts on the Nurgle getting started box? The units seem very unique and fun, but are they trash? I've never seen them used in a nurgle army list before haha.

I'd love to hear all your feedback from your experiences/knowledge!

Thanks guys!

Well, Grey Knights are a super cheap army to collect because they are very elite.

They can work if you are really good with them, but they are all a bit overcosted, Great fun to play against I think.

Dark Eldar are really tough to get the hang of, almost everything in the book has no survivability, lots of poison, and very very very shockingly fast, but almost no survivability. And they are really really weak without allies, same with Grey Knights

Tau are tau, very shooty, lots of fun and different builds. If you use mainly firewarriors in Devilfish its a fun way of nerfing tau down a bit.

Grey knight are extremely boring to play IMHO, very few number of models doesn't help. Many players start them because they're the cheapest army in 40k but abandon that army after a short period, I'd suggest to start them only if you love the models.

Dark eldar are among my fav armies, but they require a lot of experience to play them, so you have to consider that you're going to take a lot of horrible defeats before learning how to play them efficiently. And even after that they would still lose a lot of games, as they require a perfect game by the controlling player and some luck in dice rolling. But with some experience they can be mid tiers, many players have fought just a few games against dark eldars as they're not very popular so they can give them some nice surprises.

Tau have several combinations, I'm not a fan of them but they're certainly more fun to play than other shooty armies like Astra Militarum, they have some variety.

thanks for the feedback thus far! would love more from others! the psykers from Greg knights and dark Eldar intrigue me also

Dark Eldar don't have psykers.

I'd probably recommend Tau as being the fairest fight against your Necrons.

The Nurgle GS box is pretty good. Plague flies are often used in a competitive Nurgle "bus" (I don't use it myself, but people like it). Plaguebearers all have the same ability as Necron Gauss weapons against vehicles, just against close combat. And Nurglings hold objectives and are IMPOSSIBLE to dislodge by shooting. It's a good starting point. I bought two boxes, personally.

Start Collecting Nurgle is a great starting point for Nurgle, plus the Plague Drones are some of my favorite models across all of Warhammer (AoS and 40K).

That aside, If you're looking for variety (which it kinda sounds like you are), maybe consider the Ynneade Reborn Warhost Detachment from Gathering Storm II: Fracturing of Biel-Tan. The formation/detachment allows for units from Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Harlequins all in the same formation/detachment.

SG

Tau might give you more mileage than grey Knights. I own both and all I can say is that grey Knights are only good if your there for the modeling. You get so few models and so few builds that you exhaust them quickly after a few games.

You can get roughly 800-850 points out of two Start Collecting Nurgle boxes and start a decent army. From there, if you want to stick with nurgle maybe a daemon prince and you've got a pretty tough army at 1000 points:

HQ:
[325] Daemon Prince of Nurgle, Flight, 2 Greater, 1 Lesser, ML3
[140] Herald of Nurgle, ML2, FNP Locus, Greater
[120] Herald of Nurgle, ML1, Doomsday Bell, Greater

Troops:
[45] Nurglings
[90] Plaguebearers

Fast Attack:
[277] 6x Plague Drones, Upgrade one to Plaguebringer with a Greater Reward.

That puts you at 997 and you have a squad of Plaguebearers and Nurglings that you can summon during the game.

Edit: Thought I should add that I think the Nurgle box is among the best value start collecting boxes, and units are quality. The above army costs somewhere between $170-$200 depending on where you buy it, and I'd certainly have fun playing it. Plague Drones just refuse to die when you stick the FNP Herald with them, Nurglings are great for objectives, and Plaguebearers hold their own against armor. I've bought two of those boxes for myself already.

sirknighter wrote:
Hey guys, I recently got back into warhammer (2 months ago) I've since constructed an 1850 point Necron army (really enjoying them). Played about 10 games thus far already. I'd like to do a second army, partially for change of pace when I need a break from my Steel Skeletons, and partially so I can introduce friends to the hobby by playing with another army instead of having to invest so much from scratch.

My question is, whats your feedback on these three! I'm interested in all 3, each for various reasons, and curious what you guys think!

Grey Knights - Costly, but gorgeous models to me.
Dark Eldar - They have a badass feel to them, all their weapons etc look creepy and I kind of like that appeal. Plus their corsair + dark eldar troops bundle is great value.
Tau - Love Tau, only thing is every list I see runs like all crisis suits etc, which i'm not sure im a fan of. Personally I think their tanks are incredibly dope (especially their fire warriors + devilfish bundle)

Additionally, whats your guys thoughts on the Nurgle getting started box? The units seem very unique and fun, but are they trash? I've never seen them used in a nurgle army list before haha.

I'd love to hear all your feedback from your experiences/knowledge!

Thanks guys!

Of the three choices, the one most likely to be "unique and interesting" as well as aesthetically pleasing is most definitely Dark Eldar, and they have a very good number of answers to a lot of the meta at ITC events, if played the way they can be. If you are looking for competition, take a Riptide Wing, a Stormsurge and some markerdrones and whatever. End of need. its efficacy is pretty well beyond debate, despite its weakensses to swarmy assault. Grey Knights are boss looking but they are not nearly as competitive as one would like them to be. However, if you do take them, invest in Celestine from the Fall of Cadia book. She has VERY strong synergies wit hthat army and is a legal HQ choice for them.

Well I definitly have been scared away from Grey Knights! Everything ive seen from them is theyre not very competitive and get dull quickly due to few models.

So I think i'm going to perhaps look more into Death Watch and Dark Eldar! (And a bit into nurgle, nurgle seems so fun to play! but I dont think i'd enjoy painting them too much).

Only thing with Dark Eldar, looking at the points of their models, i'm going to be flooding a ton of $ into them eh? Even the bundle deal for 10 of their "warriors" and transport its like 135 points total for $55.

Any last feedback from anyone ?

Thanks so much for the current feedback!

Gray knights are fun for a low model count army of elites. want a 2000 point army that will fit in a small case... you can do that. the models are well designed and they are pretty straightforward to play.

DE. one of if not the most difficult armies to play. spikey bits everywhere on their fragile models. they will be an uphill battle to master but if you like painting and having something truly unique in todays metas go for it

tau. do you like gun lines? cause if you want to win you are basically playing a gun line. doing them without crisis suits is hampering yourself but can be done. I like the models and have several thousand points (probably 5-6k) but might put em on the table 3-4 times a year (they are boring to me, both to play and to play against,but I understand not everybody feels that way)

sirknighter wrote:
Well I definitly have been scared away from Grey Knights! Everything ive seen from them is theyre not very competitive and get dull quickly due to few models.

So I think i'm going to perhaps look more into Death Watch and Dark Eldar! (And a bit into nurgle, nurgle seems so fun to play! but I dont think i'd enjoy painting them too much).

Only thing with Dark Eldar, looking at the points of their models, i'm going to be flooding a ton of $ into them eh? Even the bundle deal for 10 of their "warriors" and transport its like 135 points total for $55.

Any last feedback from anyone ?

Thanks so much for the current feedback!

Dark Eldar aren't inexpensive. None of the armies are, though I suppose one can argue for marine armies always sicne they are kind of Cross Platform. Boring but... There. also, Battle Companies with Grav Spam are highly effective. Dark eldar are however one of the most interesting and beautiful lines of models for sure.

Also I dont agree as to their difficulty. the version i play is EXCEPTIONALLY straightforward.

Dark eldar are not among the most expensive armies but not among the cheapest one either, a typical collection of their miniatures requires paying an average amount of money if you make a comparison to other armies.

Some of their most expensive miniatures, like talos and grotesques, can also be converted using cheaper models with great results.

The new game Gangs of Commorragh provides jetbikes with a nice discount, the entire box is cheaper than buying two single reavers boxes but you'll also get the game itself and two kits of hellions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jancoran wrote:


Also I dont agree as to their difficulty. the version i play is EXCEPTIONALLY straightforward.

Playing dark eldar requires experience, even a no brainer can win with eldar, SM; daemons, tau and necrons, but with dark eldar you have to be a skilled player and don't make any mistakes. If played correctly they can be a mid tier army.

Dark Eldar are absolutely not competitive.

As said by blackie, if you do everything perfectly, you will be able to challenge other mid-tier armies. yay.

Only for those who want the hardest challenge really, unless you're only into modelling.



As for other less competitive builds, it happens sometimes that with the right player, the right amount of luck (a lot) and the right mission package, a tournament can be won.
That doesn't make said less competitive build any better, it just goes to show that there's a lot of luck involved.

morgoth wrote:


As said by blackie, if you do everything perfectly, you will be able to challenge other mid-tier armies. yay.

To be honest I only play against mid tier armies. I'm not interested in tournaments, and playing against the cheesiest lists is not fun for both players, unless they both play overpowered lists. I have no problem fighting tau, necron, eldar, SM, but I won't play against the same identical list everytime I face them.

With dark eldar you won't win supercompetitive tournaments but if you play in a friendly environment in which the most cheesiest things are avoided (and IMHO every group of friends should do that) they can beat everyone. I'm not suggesting to ban all the grav and D weapons, scatter bikes, tau big robots, ecc but it's actually very boring to play against the most competitive lists and if you are interested in a balanced game you shouldn't play all those overpowered things. A skilled dark eldar player can defeat a 70% optimized SM, tau, eldar list without relying on an insane amount of luck.

 Blackie wrote:

morgoth wrote:


As said by blackie, if you do everything perfectly, you will be able to challenge other mid-tier armies. yay.

To be honest I only play against mid tier armies. I'm not interested in tournaments, and playing against the cheesiest lists is not fun for both players, unless they both play overpowered lists. I have no problem fighting tau, necron, eldar, SM, but I won't play against the same identical list everytime I face them.

With dark eldar you won't win supercompetitive tournaments but if you play in a friendly environment in which the most cheesiest things are avoided (and IMHO every group of friends should do that) they can beat everyone. I'm not suggesting to ban all the grav and D weapons, scatter bikes, tau big robots, ecc but it's actually very boring to play against the most competitive lists and if you are interested in a balanced game you shouldn't play all those overpowered things. A skilled dark eldar player can defeat a 70% optimized SM, tau, eldar list without relying on an insane amount of luck.

I don't know how anyone could measure 70% optimized, but sure, if they have average non-competitive lists and you're bringing the top of what DE can bring and you're better than your opponent, you definitely don't need that much luck.

With 70% I meant just an evalutaion and not extremely average non competitive lists but actually good ones, just not the most powerful lists they can make, same for DE as we don't actually have some tournaments lists, I haven't seen two DE lists that look the same.

Outside tournaments some cheese is acceptable, the biggest amount of cheese available it's not.

So dark eldar are definitely an army for experienced players but it's not impossible to win with them against good-tough lists.

I would just wait until 8th ed comes out, so you can see which armies get the nerf bat when it's released before rolling the dice with a new army.

 chrispy1991 wrote:
I would just wait until 8th ed comes out, so you can see which armies get the nerf bat when it's released before rolling the dice with a new army.

this. altho if it's anything like Age of Sigmar, they will all be somewhat balanced.

morgoth wrote:
Dark Eldar are absolutely not competitive.

That is false.

 chrispy1991 wrote:
I would just wait until 8th ed comes out, so you can see which armies get the nerf bat when it's released before rolling the dice with a new army.

When is 8th supposed to come out though

 Jancoran wrote:

morgoth wrote:
Dark Eldar are absolutely not competitive.

That is false.

Dude, in every single thread about how an army is not really competitive, you argue that it's actually pretty good.

All the while, nobody apparently manages to do any consistent winning with that army.

So yeah.. I mean your spirit is awesome, but how about you try and base this off actual statistics or really anything but your point of view?

morgoth wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

morgoth wrote:
Dark Eldar are absolutely not competitive.

That is false.

Dude, in every single thread about how an army is not really competitive, you argue that it's actually pretty good.

All the while, nobody apparently manages to do any consistent winning with that army.

So yeah.. I mean your spirit is awesome, but how about you try and base this off actual statistics or really anything but your point of view?

I think he's just trying to have an optimistic spin on it so I don't immediately discredit playing them thinking theirs no chance ever.

sirknighter wrote:

morgoth wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

morgoth wrote:
Dark Eldar are absolutely not competitive.

That is false.

Dude, in every single thread about how an army is not really competitive, you argue that it's actually pretty good.

All the while, nobody apparently manages to do any consistent winning with that army.

So yeah.. I mean your spirit is awesome, but how about you try and base this off actual statistics or really anything but your point of view?

I think he's just trying to have an optimistic spin on it so I don't immediately discredit playing them thinking theirs no chance ever.

Not necessarily. Jancoran makes a lot of statements that most users don't agree with. Dark Eldar aren't entirely hopeless, but they do suffer pretty harshly. They're in the same boat as Tyranids and Orks, they really only have 1 or 2 competitive builds, if we're talking tournaments.

morgoth wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

morgoth wrote:
Dark Eldar are absolutely not competitive.

That is false.

Dude, in every single thread about how an army is not really competitive, you argue that it's actually pretty good.

All the while, nobody apparently manages to do any consistent winning with that army.

So yeah.. I mean your spirit is awesome, but how about you try and base this off actual statistics or really anything but your point of view?

Would actual wins be okay? Lol.

My spirit IS awesome, you're right. I also play the game for the right reason still: to have fun. and I have found a nice balance between having fun and not pissing off every opponent with my list and still winning. and if people were more imaginative, they wouldn't buy into all the internet negativity about...basically everything.

Here's a true fact: at any one time there is only one best army. Every single other army be definition, therefore isn't. So you can whine about that if you want or you can overcome it. That's what i choose to do.

It is patently false that the Dark Eldar are terrible. You can say they are. it just isn't true.

I'd love to see a dark eldar list I will not absolutely crush with a half assed competitive Eldar list. Which isnt top 1 right now thx to ED.

"Every single other army be definition, therefore isn't"

There are degrees of magnitude to this that you seem to forget a lot. This ruffles some people the wrong way. And you are sometimes very vague about how these inferior armies are supposed to proceed. Like now.

Your wins fall into anecdotal evidence. Even if you play a lot of games, it's still just anecdotal unfortunately. That's why mathhammer comes up so much because its universal.

"and if people were more imaginative, they wouldn't buy into all the internet negativity about...basically everything. "

Sorry, I don't think any amount of imagination can save BA. And you have never provided any specifics about BA, either. I know you stated they're not your thing, and that's fine. But BA are literally vanilla marines minus everything good about vanilla marines.

 Jancoran wrote:

morgoth wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

morgoth wrote:
Dark Eldar are absolutely not competitive.

That is false.

Dude, in every single thread about how an army is not really competitive, you argue that it's actually pretty good.

All the while, nobody apparently manages to do any consistent winning with that army.

So yeah.. I mean your spirit is awesome, but how about you try and base this off actual statistics or really anything but your point of view?

Would actual wins be okay? Lol.

My spirit IS awesome, you're right. I also play the game for the right reason still: to have fun. and I have found a nice balance between having fun and not pissing off every opponent with my list and still winning. and if people were more imaginative, they wouldn't buy into all the internet negativity about...basically everything.

Here's a true fact: at any one time there is only one best army. Every single other army be definition, therefore isn't. So you can whine about that if you want or you can overcome it. That's what i choose to do.

It is patently false that the Dark Eldar are terrible. You can say they are. it just isn't true.

Janc, this is the most recent data I could find. Yeah, DE aren't bottom tier, but they're pretty low. It's not just that people aren't playing DE the right way, there are absolutely TERRIBLE DE units.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/713481.page

The above data is far less anecdotal than Janc's personal wins for example. Metadata implies that DE are not terribly strong. It's going to take specifics to refute the metadata.

"anecdotal" is what people say when they dopnt want to have to actually admit someone wins. It's a slap in the face and it wins no arguments.

The original poster gave THREE options... and of those options I represented all three factions in their appropriate light. Tau for competitive smashfacery, Dark eldar are quite good and Grey Knights sturggle but Celestine helps a lot. A lot.

What no one gets to do is pretend my wins did not happen. Nor do they get to suggest that they could NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS win with a list that I just won with. Thats just spitting in the face of the most relevant data you have: actual games.

This game isnt played in a vacuum. DarkEldar HAVE units that i dont use much either. But to flat out say "Dark Eldar are absolutely not competitive. " as morgoth did is simply the furthest thing from the truth that it could be.

Facts:

So when someone says "Dark Eldar are absolutely not competitive. " of COURSE I'm going to disagree because it isn't true. There were 4 Dark Eldar Generals that scored in the 400+ club (meaning total points for the 2016 season in their best five events) in the ITC. They did so using Dark Eldar specifically out of 157 who tried. That's 2.5%

28 did it as Eldar but it took them 714 Generals to do it. 3.9%.

When you REALLY look at it,. you can see that while its definitely more with Eldar, that percentage isn't so far apart that it screams "no one can do it with DarkEldar" comparatively.

Chaos Space Marines had just 3 Generals in the 400+ Club out of 370 Generals who tried. 0.81%. ouch.

The point is, when you look at competitiveness, you have to ask yourself the question: of those ATTEMPTING to compete in the ITC, who are demonstrably the best players, with a certain army, how many can reach that elite sort of 400+ club standing. Those are generally your local heroes at Warhammer. the ones you expect to win a lot of the time.

In that context, the Dark Eldar are far from the worst, and they are not populace enough to reach the critical mass of player talent they need to break through to see more 400+ players.

Cult Mechanicus only had FOUR players make it to the 400+ club out of 211 and no one is screaming about how bad War Convocatiosn are, now are they? thats 1.89%

I am OBJECTIVELY showing you results as to why I believe that Dark Eldar are not this terrible thing that Morgoth claims.

Dark Angels who won some REALLY big events this year? Just 4 made the 400+ club, out of 326 who tried. Just 1.2% could do it.

9 Tau made it...but there were 601 of them trying. Here again: 1.5%. Yet you claim that Dark Eldar aren't competitive at 2.5%?

its absurd. the BEST of every faction are in the 400+ club and its rare air. Dark Eldar did not in fact do worse than many you would consider better than them! those are real facts.

Bustin out the big guns there Jancoran!

Just sick of listening to drivel is all.

"anecdotal" is what people say when they dopnt want to have to actually admit someone wins."

No, it's not. You are completely wrong about the concept of anecdotes. Your personal victories, while impressive, are the very definition of anecdotal. I don't have a dog in this; I don't care if the DE are deemed competitive or not. But you can't take your personal experiences an apply them to all players everywhere and call that the standard. Your victories did happen; they are just statistically irrelevant to overall competitiveness, due to small sample size.

You could have just posted the stats in the first post instead of just proclaiming "false" without saying why its false. And the comparison between DE and DA is much more compelling than your personal victories.

Why bother going to this extent to show someone they are wrong unless they persist? Its wearying. But the data backs up what I "anecdotally" know.

 Jancoran wrote:
Why bother going to this extent to show someone they are wrong unless they persist? Its wearying. But the data backs up what I "anecdotally" know.

Yes, it does. In a formal way, which makes all the difference for people looking for rigorous evidence. I'm not even saying you're wrong. That was the other guy. But it matters how you show that you are right.

Uh...no. Someone does not get to demand that I spend my day "proving" them wrong. Morgoth said something absurd and instead of the forum demanding he justify his absurdity, I have to disprove his Dark Eldar aspersions? Meh. I don't think so. I did it here out of annoyance.

For the benefit of the original poster, I expressed my opinion. He can take it or leave it. He paid exactly nothing for it. It may well be worth every penny he paid for it. I enjoy Dark Eldar. It's not my tournament army but thats just because I play so many codex's and painting sucks my soul out of me. Its not up to snuff so it kinda stays in my "gotta fix and paint that someday..." pile. Otherwise you might well see me rising in the Dark Eldar standings. I play it often though and have a game with it Friday scheduled. The models themselves are marvelous.

"Morgoth said something absurd "

You actually have to, you know, present evidence to support this claim. Which you eventually did. But just calling a position absurd or false isn't sufficient, especially when most conventional mathammer backs up his statement.

Most people I know online and in RL consider DE pretty weak. So that's probably why no one was demanding a justification.

Martel732 wrote:
"Morgoth said something absurd "

You actually have to, you know, present evidence to support this claim. Which you eventually did. But just calling a position absurd or false isn't sufficient, especially when most conventional mathammer backs up his statement.

Most people I know online and in RL consider DE pretty weak. So that's probably why no one was demanding a justification.

backwards thinking in my opinion. You've basically said here that anyone with a negative opinion is right until proven otherwise... Let that sink in. that's not a game I feel like playing. Negative people arent offering solutions, just limitations. they are selling despair and Im not buying.

Lets try a new game: If I have a positive opinion, you prove ME wrong or we all get on with it. That's the game I want to play. Becaue when you dont like something it should take little effort to figure out why and explain it to all of us in vivid and rigorous detail.

I like that game better.

I'd say go DE just because it plays AND models COMPLETELY differently than the Necron. I sold my cron army, as I found them just boring to both build and play. However, crons were my third army, so they paled in modeling opportunities compared to my chaos army. If you're playing to get some wins, go Tau. If you're looking for fun models, look to the DE or Nurgle kits.

Even if we assume for the sake of argument that DE aren't very good, at least you'd still have your necrons to fall back on if you wanted to play in an environment where the DE wouldn't cut it.

DE are considered weak by many players because it's not immediate to learn their mechanics and find lists that actually work. The have a lot of useless units like the majority of the armies, but they're not as resilient as the majority of the armies, so playing them without experience means a certain epic defeat.

How many players have faced competitive DE lists? Not many I guess.

If you say DE are not competitive you should also say only SM, eldar and tau really are. Because their cheesiest lists are superior than everything else.

Tournaments stats are not an evidence, because many players hate using armies composed by miniatures that don't like even if they're superstrong. I hate SM, daemons and tau models and I would never play them, no matter what.

And DE are not considered among the most beloved models, the majoirty of the players like power armors. This combined to the fact that they're not easy to play and you can see why they're not so common in tournaments. Orks for example, which are another underestimate army, are way more common in tournaments and it's not because they're stronger but because it's a more beloved army.

So if actually only one guy has won a tournament with DE it doesn't mean that they are not competitive.

A pure DA, SW, genestealer cults, or necron army has not the slightest chance to defeat tau, eldar and SM in a row, so if they actually win a tournament that's because the most cheesiest things were absent, not because they're competitive.

But no one would say that those armies aren't competitive.

Munga wrote:
I'd say go DE just because it plays AND models COMPLETELY differently than the Necron. I sold my cron army, as I found them just boring to both build and play. However, crons were my third army, so they paled in modeling opportunities compared to my chaos army. If you're playing to get some wins, go Tau. If you're looking for fun models, look to the DE or Nurgle kits.

yup.

I don't think power armor correlates to easy to play at all.

Personally, I feel that Dark Eldar have a ton of bad matchups, and like any army these matchups are hard to win, but with Dark Eldar, the bad matchups are certain loss unless you are an amazing Dark Eldar player.

 Blackie wrote:
DE are considered weak by many players because it's not immediate to learn their mechanics and find lists that actually work. The have a lot of useless units like the majority of the armies, but they're not as resilient as the majority of the armies, so playing them without experience means a certain epic defeat.

Let me address the very first point you made: that something is not IMMEDIATELY obvious does not define competitiveness. Competitiveness is defined as this: "Given you HAVE figured out how to use them well....do they win?".

The answer is yes. They do. The statistics I posted are showing people who REALLY know how to use them...using them...and specifically the success THOSE people had. There is no better barometer that exists.

You also say they aren't resilient. I think you may wish to take a second and even a third look at their codexes and supplements. They actually are pretty resilient.

Example: it's rare to see as many multi-wound models as Dark Eldar can bring. My list has 24 Multi-wound models in it and 9 pieces or armor! With cover (and Jinking), that is significant. Most of those multiwound models are T5 which is even better. Comparing that to say... a 55 model Space Marine army, that doesn't sound so bad, does it?

One of the things that makes that much high toughness really count is speed. While it may be true that an army with excellent range or rate of fire (or both) often overcome toughness with sheer volume over time, the Dark Eldar do not suffer this frailty. They allow so little time for the enemy to express its firepower advantage. One round, generally. That isn't enough for most armies, especially when deployed conventionally. To explain that further:

The Dark Eldar begin 42.1 inches away from the enemy except the beastpack which is intentionally left about 31" away. Most weapons are therefore out of range in turn one. Assuming the enemy goes first they can choose to either move up and fire as much as possible into the beastpack or stand back and wait. if they stand back and wait, they have given up the advantage of going first. In ITC missions where Maelstrom Objectives are a thing, it is quite often not advisable to stand back anyways and sending out some disparate units in the vain hope they wlll last long enough to claim the objectives is one play but being isolated like that is usually just an invitation to lose your units for no gain so movement will be genersally en masse with some units i nthe back to hold things down. So what does it all boil down to? The enemy has some reason to come forward no matter the ranges involved, or be made impotent round one.

It matters not to the Dark Eldar who lurk in wait. They've taken very little in the way of fire at this stage and the enemy is now encroaching. Scout armies will of course have already come forward to the 36" mark if they are a battle Company, but because Grav Cannons are salvo, even if they move forward again on their turn (and i dont seize) they cannot fire at anything but BeastPack which are generally wounded on 6's (Grav range is reduced to half when moving). The Pod armies are really the only armies that are upon the Dark eldar in turn one and some stray 48" range stuff. The BeastPack has provided spacing to force the pods out of melta range and all the Raiders will be jinking. naturally, this also leaves the pod units dangerous close to the beastpack which they may or may not be comfortable doing. No telling. Generals vary. Still doesn't matter.

As pods and Wolfstars are really the main concern, lets talk about them. lets say its a true pod army and 7 pods rain down turn one, each with its min/maxed unit.14 melta shots (9.33 hitting, 7.78 damage results reduced to 3.38 Hull points plus bolters doing 2) at Jinking Raiders if they ignore the Beastpack completely. Now we can never know for sure but that's essentially one Raider down. Assuming concentrated fire and no abnormally bad luck (bad luck happens on both sides so I'm ignoring it for fairness sake). Already you can start to see the difficulties, even when an enemy goes first, when its properly deployed with a beastpack around it, and even when the enemy has the perfect counter. Whatever insolent units popped us out will soon be embroiled in close combat never ending. Precisely where my army wants to be and where 5 man squads with meltaguns do not want to be.

On Dark Eldar turn one, the 7 pods and their embroiled units (most likely against my incubi and beastMasters) are going to be on one end of the board and the rest of my Dark Eldar will be on the other, using Aethersails, moving 36" into and around the enemies remaining forces on the board, while the line breaking holding action proceeds apace. This forces a fateful round 2 in which all my best and most ferocious will be upon an enemy that cannot escape.

Wolfstars and their ridiculous speed require you to be very crafty and make good use of terrain. i have learned that luring them into usingthat speed can allow you to cage the wolfstar and keep it in place long enough to be ineffective in the grand scheme since nothing can really challenge it in melee other than with blind luck. I can tell you that i have had success doing this. the over aggression of such unitsis so strong that they can get isolated and trapped in a corner so to speak.

This does not win every game. i think it should be said that this is a strategic explanation, not a guarantee of any success. However, there are not many units that engender fear into the units i have. They are very well equipped to annihilate most conventional enemies and their multiple wounds help them stay combat effective much longer.

I have lost with my Dark Eldar as surely as people have lost with Riptide Wings and War Convocations and Battle Companies. There is never going to be a perfect plan, perfect army, perfect solution. WraithKnights are a serious concern for anyone in any army because T8 is silly good so you must focus it dowen early if thats what you're up against. Things with Rear armors of 12 are a serious issue (as are Dreadnoughts). Your generalship gets tested when those things are on the field and you need to make sure that your Ravagers and in my case, Voidraven Bomber are on point in striking those targets first. The enemy may even opt to go after the Ravagers instead of the Transports to make sure that doesn't happen. Legitimate countermeasures to attempt if they can even reach them with their weapons in round one. I actually only took Ravagers specifically to handle Voidshield Generators, but they work just as handily for sniping the one or two things i cannot handle with my conventional ground forces.

The essential way the army works and the resilience of that particular build that i use is a testament to how tough the army really can get if you build it that way. many people do not and perhaps that leads those playing against "squishier" versions to only evaluate that one possibility. Could be. It's not the only possibility though.

I completely agree with you, but you also have to consider that someone that starts a dark eldar army wouldn't probably buy/convert grotesques and talos, if he plays at 1000 point he won't probably include them.

A typical DE army has reavers, venoms and kabalite spam. Maybe a unit of scourges. Some of our best units are very expensive or need to be converted, that makes a lot of players out.

You may also face a lot of ignores covers, and when it happens you're going to expect bad losses. Grav can evaporate talos quite easily, not to mention that being slow many units can tarpit them, and grots only rely on their T5 and 4-5 FNP as they have got no armor. A warboss in MA with da lucky stikk can easily wipe out 4-5 grots in a single round of combat.

I love DE, they're my second army, and I would never play them without the grotesquerie or the corpsethief claw, so I know they can be tough, but honestly they require way more experience than playing necrons, tau, SM or eldar.

I think they're an average army, definitely one the most underrated ones, but they require some skills, it's not an army for everyone.

I wasnt referring to Talos. But yes, Talos are susceptible to Grav. Also: Even at 1K, you want the Grotesquerie in my opinion.

 Jancoran wrote:
"anecdotal" is what people say when they dopnt want to have to actually admit someone wins. It's a slap in the face and it wins no arguments.

The original poster gave THREE options... and of those options I represented all three factions in their appropriate light. Tau for competitive smashfacery, Dark eldar are quite good and Grey Knights sturggle but Celestine helps a lot. A lot.

What no one gets to do is pretend my wins did not happen. Nor do they get to suggest that they could NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS win with a list that I just won with. Thats just spitting in the face of the most relevant data you have: actual games.

This game isnt played in a vacuum. DarkEldar HAVE units that i dont use much either. But to flat out say "Dark Eldar are absolutely not competitive. " as morgoth did is simply the furthest thing from the truth that it could be.

Facts:

So when someone says "Dark Eldar are absolutely not competitive. " of COURSE I'm going to disagree because it isn't true. There were 4 Dark Eldar Generals that scored in the 400+ club (meaning total points for the 2016 season in their best five events) in the ITC. They did so using Dark Eldar specifically out of 157 who tried. That's 2.5%

28 did it as Eldar but it took them 714 Generals to do it. 3.9%.

When you REALLY look at it,. you can see that while its definitely more with Eldar, that percentage isn't so far apart that it screams "no one can do it with DarkEldar" comparatively.

Chaos Space Marines had just 3 Generals in the 400+ Club out of 370 Generals who tried. 0.81%. ouch.

The point is, when you look at competitiveness, you have to ask yourself the question: of those ATTEMPTING to compete in the ITC, who are demonstrably the best players, with a certain army, how many can reach that elite sort of 400+ club standing. Those are generally your local heroes at Warhammer. the ones you expect to win a lot of the time.

You could've said from the start that you weren't playing regular 40K but ITC where the rankings and the game are very different.

Also with the allied multi detachment nature of the game now how much of those lists are Dark Eldar?

 gummyofallbears wrote:
Personally, I feel that Dark Eldar have a ton of bad matchups, and like any army these matchups are hard to win, but with Dark Eldar, the bad matchups are certain loss unless you are an amazing Dark Eldar player.

And massively lucky or playing against someone who is bad.

I've done it too, but honestly, you can't hope to win more than 35% of the time against a decent army played by someone of your level.

Of course, that means there's still a chance.

Maybe Jancoran's stats are affected by that as well (beyond not playing actual 40K but ITC), in the sense that the only players who play DE are generally people in for a challenge and not attempting an easy win, like the FOTM players can be.

morgoth wrote:

You could've said from the start that you weren't playing regular 40K but ITC where the rankings and the game are very different.

Of COURSE there are rankings. No one "hid" that I play in the ITC (and I play outside of it for that matter as well). The ITC is 40K. Don't even try.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eldarain wrote:
Also with the allied multi detachment nature of the game now how much of those lists are Dark Eldar?

The majority of the list has to be Dark Eldar for it to be a Dark Eldar player...and since the same exact rule is applied to all the forces, its a more true indicator than say...not having a rule for it at all.

I mean in theory you can call your force an INquisitiorial force with just a 25 point Inquisitot in 40K if you just make up a story about it. The ITC actually requires you to play a majority of your list as that faction to call it that faction.

Outside of that, there is no way to keep order on the subject. 40K is a Pandoras box and has been since 6th dropped. Bemoaning that "other things" make their way into lists is pointless at this late stage.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

morgoth wrote:

And massively lucky or playing against someone who is bad.

I've done it too, but honestly, you can't hope to win more than 35% of the time against a decent army played by someone of your level.

Of course, that means there's still a chance.

Maybe Jancoran's stats are affected by that as well (beyond not playing actual 40K but ITC), in the sense that the only players who play DE are generally people in for a challenge and not attempting an easy win, like the FOTM players can be.

The last bastion of the losing side: attack opponent strength. Hilarious.

Clearly you cannot learn to win with them, according to you, so stop giving advice about them? I mean seriously? What can you add to a discussion with a claim that 35% is the best you can do? It's absurd, honestly.

Just to contribute -

I played against a really nasty eldar list, actually my first game on with Dark Eldar in a while and I won, almost tabled the guy actually. I had some pretty bad rolls, but nobody at the shop was expecting Dark Eldar, they just didn't know what they could do.

He underestimated the Grotesquerie as it wiped his jetseer warlord turn 2, and once he changed his focus with scatpacks and warpspiders onto the grots, my venoms did work.

And I feel that's dark eldars strength.

I went on a huge winstreak after that game, and then I started losing.

People understood Dark Eldar's weaknesses and exploited them, they knew that my armies backbone was the grotesquerie and they knew that venoms are useless if they are snapshotting, so wahlah!

Dark Eldar are countered by so many armies, and most of those armies are super prevalent in the 7th meta.

yeah theres never going to be a perfect answer so you have to bring more than just a reliance on the grotesquerie. Its the keystone but you can do a lot with it.

 Jancoran wrote:

morgoth wrote:

You could've said from the start that you weren't playing regular 40K but ITC where the rankings and the game are very different.

Of COURSE there are rankings. No one "hid" that I play in the ITC (and I play outside of it for that matter as well). The ITC is 40K. Don't even try.

The ITC is absolutely not regular 40K, and that's why it has very different rankings than regular 40K.
That's it.

 Jancoran wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

morgoth wrote:

And massively lucky or playing against someone who is bad.

I've done it too, but honestly, you can't hope to win more than 35% of the time against a decent army played by someone of your level.

Of course, that means there's still a chance.

Maybe Jancoran's stats are affected by that as well (beyond not playing actual 40K but ITC), in the sense that the only players who play DE are generally people in for a challenge and not attempting an easy win, like the FOTM players can be.

The last bastion of the losing side: attack opponent strength. Hilarious.

Clearly you cannot learn to win with them, according to you, so stop giving advice about them? I mean seriously? What can you add to a discussion with a claim that 35% is the best you can do? It's absurd, honestly.

Dude... I told you it's possible, just an uphill struggle, and you keep on saying they're good and stuff.
Like you did for CSM.
And for both, you still haven't shown a single element of proof that Dark Eldar - or CSM is capable of going toe to toe (not toe to heel) with tier 1 codexes and builds.
I think you may be trying too hard to share your opinion that barely playable competitively is more than good enough.

It's fine if you like it, you don't need to run around pretending that bottom tier codexes are "good".

He thinks general trumps codex strength, which I think is empirically very questionable across a large number of games. At least, that's what I get out of his posts.

Morgoth, good luck to you. You dont play competitive 40K and thats fine. Keep doing what youre doing.

Martel, the entire GAME requires that you be a good general. It isnt as if the lists arent important and ive never said that. But this 35% crap is just stinking thinking. If YOU are any good at all, then this kind of thinking is foolish. Its probably why I win: people like Morgoth thinking that wins happen on forums and in your head. Lol.

There is a 100% chance that a grav spam battle company, a war convocation and a Rehati Formation w Magnus, or a Decurion will show up to these events, and of Riptide Wings too. you will have to play harder than they have to in order to win. What I cannot fathom is why Morgoth cannot see the way to build lists that handle it. Dark Eldar CAN handle them. No you wont just glide to easy victory. Of course not. But prognosticating nothing but failure doesnt in any way reflect on the ARMY. Just saying.

 Jancoran wrote:
Morgoth, good luck to you. You dont play competitive 40K and thats fine. Keep doing what youre doing.

Martel, the entire GAME requires that you be a good general. It isnt as if the lists arent important and ive never said that. But this 35% crap is just stinking thinking. If YOU are any good at all, then this kind of thinking is foolish. Its probably why I win: people like Morgoth thinking that wins happen on forums and in your head. Lol.

There is a 100% chance that a grav spam battle company, a war convocation and a Rehati Formation w Magnus, or a Decurion will show up to these events, and of Riptide Wings too. you will have to play harder than they have to in order to win. What I cannot fathom is why Morgoth cannot see the way to build lists that handle it. Dark Eldar CAN handle them. No you wont just glide to easy victory. Of course not. But prognosticating nothing but failure doesnt in any way reflect on the ARMY. Just saying.

There's a big difference with failing more often than you succeed, and "nothing but failure".

I think that deep down, we agree.

But on the surface, you're selling DE as 49% win and I'm selling it as 35% win, all other things being equal (including playing hard, being lucky, being skilled and whatnot).

I'm fairly sure I'm a lot closer to reality than you are, but you're welcome to prove me wrong.

We dont agree that 35% is "more often than you succeed".

Also: i won most of my games w Dard Eldar so I honestly dont get your point. My last game was a tabling of an Aeldari force. I took out half the rhinos in a white scars grav spam list on round one with melee because it had to scout and come to me to get in range (12" range when you move is a pain sometimes! Proper deployment distances are a thing). Killed all but two scout squads in his backfield by games end. Grav doesnt do crap to 6+ armor (and some 5+). Last two games I played. Dont have any idea why you think I agree w you. The Rehati formation is a bad matchup. The crucible is critical there as a way to ground some of them. Still tough even then. But overall I dont see the struggle you think is there. Losses happen. Cant win em all.

Heading to a tournament. D3cided to do Dark Eldar. Should be interesting.

Just as a follow up:

Just got home, and had a pretty good time at the tournament. First of the new season so that was exciting.

I was able to go 2-1. My loss was to the guy who took second place, and he went undefeated so it was a pretty good time. He seized on me (happeend twice today, which was a super big bummer, and it really mattered in both games, but what can ya do?).

He brought the new Celestine which was REALLY interesting. Essentially impossible to kill. Good damage output for the price, easy to wound, harder to get through her armor and extra wounds. She made all the difference. I was able to smash most everything I wanted to smash (and that VoidRaven Bomber did work, as always!), but Celesine bound up one of my Grotesquerie units right before I was going to deliver the really damaging stroke and shut his Centurion Star down. An immobilized Raider was the keystone for his victory in the end, not Celestine. I got stranded with one of the Grotesquerie units entirely without his help, thanks to that silly 1 coming up on the die. Disallowed the second unit from getting way up field in round 2 where I needed it. Still, the devastation was pretty impressive. We didnt get to finish out game which didnt help. In fact I didn't even get the bottom of my turn because they called time which also cost me secondary points. It was a bit disappointing way to end a game.

Things I learned today: Incubi, while not infinitely good, have always been a part of the list. i dropped them because this tournament was at 1500 instead of 1850, but having an answer to 2+ armor would have been nice. In one of the games I won, a singular biker with 2+ armor and 2 wounds (I forget what he was) kept an important unit tied up FAR too long and the Incubi would have been ideal. You just need that scalpel, even if it's just like 4-5 of them in a unit. I didnt have the points so they were a casualty of that fact but I might have played around with points to try and get that in there looking back. It's a vital function for any list to have anyways and it would have been a perfect scalpel again in the game I lost. INcubi have a definite role to play in my particular list!

Below is how I might have modified it to include them. It's not major changes but it would get the Incubi back in there. Strongly recommend a Night Shield for the Fighter but that's a trade off and I havent had time to really think about what I'd give up for it.

Total Roster Cost: 1500
: Combined Arms Detachment (37#, 970 pts)
Razorwing Jetfighter (Dual Disintegrators, Splinter Cannon, Choice of Monscythe or Necrotoxin Missiles)

3 Incubi
+1 Klaivex+ Demiklaives
1 Raider + Dark Lance x1 + Enhanced Aethersails

5 Kabalite Warrior
1 Venom + Splinter Cannon

5 Kabalite Warrior
1 Venom + Splinter Cannon

Court of the Archon:
1 Lhamaean
2 Medusae
5 Sslyth
1 Raider + Dark Lance x1 + Enhanced Aethersails

Beastmasters:
1 Beastmaster
3 Khymerae
2 Razorwing Flocks
4 Clawed Fiends

Formation: Grotesquerie (12#, 530 pts)
1 Haemonculus+ Stinger Pistol

3 Grotesques
+1 Aberration w/ Scissorhand
1 Raider + Enhanced Aethersails

3 Grotesques
+1 Aberration + Agoniser
1 Raider + Enhanced Aethersails

Coven Power From Pain*:
2: Fearless 3: Fear, Fearless
4: Fear, Fearless, It Will not Die
5: Fear, It will not Die, Zealot
6: Eternal Warrior, Fear, It will not Die, Zealot

Grotesquerie Abilities:
1: +1 STR 2: +1 T
3: Fleet 4: Shred
5: Rage 6: Fnp (4+)

Dark Eldar Power From Pain***:
2: FnP 6+ 3: FnP
4: FnP, Furious Charge
5: FnP, Furious Charge, Fearless
6: FnP, Furious Charge, Fearless, Rage

I usually take a succubus with archite glaive to join the grotedquerie without the haemonculus to get some AP2.

You play the beasts, which are nice, I use to take 15 reavers in 5 min units.

Incubi never worked for me but I love the models and I'll surely give them some other chance in the future.

Why the aberration with agoniser instead of scissor hands?

Hes a total finisher against most units. No points for another HQ and he does wooooooork. 5 attacks, up to 8 w Rampage and re rolling due to poison on a lot of targets. He can throw 9 on the charge that way, 10 if you end up w Rage on the Grotesuerie table. Hes a blender.

Edit: forgot to add that he also makes multicharging easy to justify.

Do people mindlessly load up on grav? Why do people stagger into assault range? You don't assault my BA rhinos unless they are immobilized or I decide you can. They're literally faster than every melee unit I know of. For god's sakes, use a tape measure people.

The last DE tourney list I faced got burned up pretty bad with frag cannons and heavy flamers. On and very angry BA scouts vs DE assault units. But I guess white scars grav spam doesn't have any frag cannons or heavy flamers. They could have dual heavy flamer ironclads, though.

I just don't understand how top tier lists lose to BA, Orks, DE. The math is staggeringly in their favor. Just use the math. To my knowledge, there's not a single DE unit that can't be ripped apart by scatterlasers. They can even overpower the 3+ jink readily. I just don't get it. Shoot down the raiders with the scary stuff, strand them on foot, and then wipe them up. Who cares about regular DE units? Not Eldar, I can assure you. Maybe they cared back before the WK became magically immune to poison.

Martel732 wrote:
Do people mindlessly load up on grav?

As Grav weapons are one of the best weapons there are in 40K, yes. They do. However they are wiser to mix in some plasma or melta to go with it. In the case of my loss, he took Grav Centurions with Hurricane Bolters and the combination was quite the blizzard of accurate shots. It worked well for him, and although I was not AS susceptible to it, it was still very impactful with Ignored Cover to go with it.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Why do people stagger into assault range? You don't assault my BA rhinos unless they are immobilized or I decide you can. They're literally faster than every melee unit I know of. For god's sakes, use a tape measure people.

This was an odd comment. In the case of Dark Eldar, ranges presents no problems. They simply can be wherever on the board they need to be (or nearly so). So it isn't a matter of stumbling into anything really. it's just a matter of th Raider being 1" from your rhino, whether you like it or not. =)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

The last DE tourney list I faced got burned up pretty bad with frag cannons and heavy flamers. On and very angry BA scouts vs DE assault units. But I guess white scars grav spam doesn't have any frag cannons or heavy flamers. They could have dual heavy flamer ironclads, though.
.

Ironclads arent found in competitive lists any longer. Frag Cannons do though now that Deathwatch is a thing. They are quite an excellent choice for an army to employ, and Heavy Flamers always are. The trouble is, you don't know in tournament play who you will or wont face, so you must work on the assumption that you will require a bevy of differing weapons for the various opponent types and that leaves you with choices.

Dark Eldar would naturally attempt to strand or kill the units that most threaten them, as the enemy has and will do to the Dark Eldar. Unless you can dedicate the army to those weapons, as Deathwatch can...but then you'd HAVE to be playing DeathWatch I suppose for it to matter... then while it may be TRUE that taking some of those would be a good idea, the real question is: Will the Dark Eldar let you get close enough more than say...once? Even then there are dice to be rolled so there's that too.

Point is, while certain weapons are "ideal" against my army, what will all those Heavy Flamers an Fragiosos do in round two when they face Imperial Knights? I'm sure you see the conundrum.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:


I just don't understand how top tier lists lose to BA, Orks, DE. .

Don't...or won't?

Martel732 wrote:

I just don't understand how top tier lists lose to BA, Orks, DE.

Because players skills still matter a lot. And also luck is involved in a 40k game. Not to mention that top tier lists are more powerful of course but not extremely more powerful.

Armies that are considered low tiers in the hands of a skilled player (which also means a competitive list, not a fluffy one with wyches, hellions, 200 points archons, flash gitz, gork/morkanauts...) can win games against the cheesiest armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

The math is staggeringly in their favor. Just use the math.

Have you seen the latest Clint Eastwood's movie, Sully? You don't take the human factor into account, just like the people who tried to blame the captain for the crash into the river.

Eldar typically destroy every model i have by turn 4. Don't tell me there's nit a gulf. Eldar are virtually fool proof vs ba. Luck is not a factor because they roll so many dice.

So a human can't take advantage of math? That's absurd.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You still are limited to a 6" move in order to disembark. In this way, the raider is no faster than a land raider on the assault turn. It's pretty easy for a ba rhino to get out of effective assault range.

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar typically destroy every model i have by turn 4. Don't tell me there's nit a gulf. Eldar are virtually fool proof vs ba. Luck is not a factor because they roll so many dice.

So a human can't take advantage of math? That's absurd.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You still are limited to a 6" move in order to disembark. In this way, the raider is no faster than a land raider on the assault turn. It's pretty easy for a ba rhino to get out of effective assault range.

Who, what, where , when, why. Critical thought requires answers to it all, right?

Who you play matters, what the ybring matters, where they deploy and where they ARE when the time comes TO roll dice matters , when they decide to be a target and when they decide to strike matters and of course why you take certain things matters because there is always the problem of poor matchups (such as Grav vs. my Grotesques who laughed heartily on the matter).

As I think I've said to you before: Figures don't lie...but liers can figure. If soemone wants the math to look real bad, they can make it look real bad. Ignores cover with a Servo Skull and a Basilisk? Seems legit, eh? seems uber legit if you're a blood angel who just deep struck in. Bad math for the Blood Angel eh? Sure is. How is it that with that Bad math, IG dont wipe every BA? Well theres a lot of reasons but the MATH alone could lead you to a bad conclusion.

Same goes for Dark Eldar, my frustrated friend. Though you may think of them or Sisters of Battle or Orks as inferior in every mathematical way, I enjoy a very good winning percentage with all of them (well...not Blood Angels obviously since i only rarely ever played them). COULD I win more using Eldar? I think its fair to say that I could... But then I credit myself somewhat for that. But heres a more interesting question: how MUCH more often? If the answer is "a little bit" then I suppose that hardly seems worthy of the hyperbole you've heaped upon them. If I say "a lot" then alright, you might have a point.

No...before you go on about it...No. This isnt me saying Eldar "arent that broken". Im not telling you that so please dont go down that road or suggest I said as much. I didn't. What I am trying CONSTANTLY to convey is that the ARMY does not win all these games. The army may make you change everything about how you play Blood Angels and how you build them. Blood Angels have gooten some capable answers recently as you and I have discussed and no, Blood Angels will never be confused with the same power level as Eldar. But it doesnt have to be at the same power level for you to win. You GOTTA stop defeating yourself before you arrive at the table! THATS all I'm saying to you. If your passion is in fact Blood Angels (and I feel confident based on your many posts of angst about them that it is) then gosh darn it, focus in on what you DO well, accept that you will have some shopping to do, ally in a little bit of what you need if you feel its necessary and get in the ring.

Dark Eldar aren't my TRUE passion, Tau Empire is, and it shows in my tournament winnings. I was winning tournaments in 4th Edition with Tau Empire and anyone who remembers all that knows that its saying something. I had a passion for an army that was nothing but ridiculed and many a forum was filled with people telling me how much of a JERK i was for filling peoples heads with hope about winning with them. I told them the same thing then I'll tell you now: You can't win if you're not in the ring and focused in on what your army DOES do. Any fool can tell me what they DONT do. But that isnt helpful now is it?

You are definitely leading people astray Jancoran and that's not cool.

Nobody serious about winning plays Celestine, and outside of ITC all the grav guns have been replaced by electro displacement.

It's one thing to like playing against the current meta and getting random wins against some average builds, based mostly on years of competitive 40k in that exact mindset.

It's another entirely to sell that as an experience that fits more than people who want an uphill struggle and don't care about maximising their chances to win a serious tournament.

morgoth wrote:
You are definitely leading people astray Jancoran and that's not cool.

Nobody serious about winning plays Celestine, and outside of ITC all the grav guns have been replaced by electro displacement.

It's one thing to like playing against the current meta and getting random wins against some average builds, based mostly on years of competitive 40k in that exact mindset.

It's another entirely to sell that as an experience that fits more than people who want an uphill struggle and don't care about maximising their chances to win a serious tournament.

You're wrong. That simple.

EDIT: Also, the person who played Celestine went undefeated. Just saying. I think your lack of imagination leads you to doubt far more than you should.

The new celestine is one the most overpowered things right now, simply impossible to kill.

How can someone say that's she doesn't fit a competitive army? Just watch a couple of games, that lady is extremely powerful.

There aren't only riptites, grav centurions, scatter bikes, stormsurges and WK in the game.

 Jancoran wrote:

morgoth wrote:
You are definitely leading people astray Jancoran and that's not cool.

Nobody serious about winning plays Celestine, and outside of ITC all the grav guns have been replaced by electro displacement.

It's one thing to like playing against the current meta and getting random wins against some average builds, based mostly on years of competitive 40k in that exact mindset.

It's another entirely to sell that as an experience that fits more than people who want an uphill struggle and don't care about maximising their chances to win a serious tournament.

You're wrong. That simple.

EDIT: Also, the person who played Celestine went undefeated. Just saying. I think your lack of imagination leads you to doubt far more than you should.

And what tournament was that?

As I said above, outside of ITC there is no gravstar anymore... your frame of reference is not regular 40k.

 Blackie wrote:
The new celestine is one the most overpowered things right now, simply impossible to kill.

How can someone say that's she doesn't fit a competitive army? Just watch a couple of games, that lady is extremely powerful.

There aren't only riptites, grav centurions, scatter bikes, stormsurges and WK in the game.

Can she disintegrate my 2+ armor units from 72" away? No? I think I'll manage. I've been dealing with Riptides (unsuccessfully) for some time now already. They are pretty immortal as well.

2+ armor units in SM will never be far away the enemy. You have stormravens and drop pods, not to mention that terminators can deep strike.

Celestine can soak the same firepower that is needed to take down 3-5 riptides. And in close combat is much better than tau units that can also be tarpitted quite easily. Only 200 points.

Tau are maybe the 3rd army in any ranking, and IMHO daemons, DA, SW and necrons are not inferior. Maybe even genestealer cult can be at the same level overall, at least they are an hard counter for the typical tau lists.

Riptides are overpowered, we all know about that, and lists with 3 riptides plus 2 stormsurges or 5 ripdtides and a stormsurge are very competitive, but defeating tau is far from being impossible. I'm not a BA player and I know them only as a possible opponent so maybe for BA tau are impossible to defeat, but for many armies, even mid tiers ones, they're not.

I've killed riptides and stormsurges with orks and dark eldar, also with SW but it's easier with them. Celestine simply can't be killed with her abilities. Surely you can win the game even if she survives, but if you think riptides are immortal as well that means you've never played against celestine and probably never even read her profile and special rules. Maybe 5 riptides are immortal as well but we're talking about 1000 points compared to only 200.

A single riptide can pull enough fire from an undisciplined player to lose the game. That's immortal enough.

Again, if she is that nuts, she FORCES you to ignore her. Riptides will sucker in people like you who think they can take them down with poison or some such nonsense.

Personally, I want units that tempt my opponent to make mistakes, not good decisions.

Look at this batrep, dark eldar against tau with 5 riptides and a stormsurge.

DE victory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQOOoTt1JDI

I haven't finished it yet, but I see there's a bunch of talos in involved. A bunch of MCs vs other MCs. Guess what I can't get? MCs. You guys kill me. Either of these lists table BA with no effort.

 Blackie wrote:
Look at this batrep, dark eldar against tau with 5 riptides and a stormsurge.

DE victory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQOOoTt1JDI

I don't think that video helps your point.

First of all it's ITC, which only nerfs the Tau and boosts the DE significantly.

Second... that game is not a good example of competitive play in my opinion.


AFAIK, in 7th 40K, you do not roll the guy who gives cover separately.
In 7th ed, if one guy sees the target as covered, all shots against that target take that cover into account.

The Tau guy was clearly unprepared and had no clue what a DE army like that does, he bunkered up for no reason and left his markers to be destroyed.

He was shooting at friggin Ravagers when the Corpsethief was still a threat.. that's just rubbish.
Even Dark Artisan would've made more sense.

The DE was lucky enough to seize or go first, whichever.
The Tau's dice were terrible compared to the DE.
Rather heavy terrain, in favor of the DE again.
What kind of strength D are they playing? is that again ITC bs?


Yes, of course the DE wins in this case.

But this is NOT 40k, this is houserule-ITC-40k.

My honest opinion, if you're considering Dark Eldar, go with Ynnari instead (introduced in Gathering Storm II). The Ynnari Reborn Warhost combines Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Harlequins into one army called Ynnari. Granted, you'd need the codices for Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Harlequins as well as the Gathering Storm II book to have all the rules to run an Ynnari army. But, I think it's one of the more fun ideas (the large overfaction with so many different vehicles and unit types to choose from) that GW has come out with in a good long while.

SG

I don't see how ITC even helps BA honestly.

Martel732 wrote:
I haven't finished it yet, but I see there's a bunch of talos in involved. A bunch of MCs vs other MCs. Guess what I can't get? MCs. You guys kill me. Either of these lists table BA with no effort.

It's a legal DE list, and very similar to one of the three typical lists that I also run. DE are considered among bottom tiers, I guess very few people have played against their competitive lists. Anyway talos are MCs, correct, but with only 3 wounds, no invuln, only 4/6 TL poisoned shots as their fantastic shooting phase and 120 points each for a model that moves 6''. Far from being overpowered, and they suffer grav spam and D weapons a lot. Cronos costs 125 points and other than a wonderful S3 template it only serves one purpose, to give +1 FNP to units around it.

That was only one of the possible DE competitive lists, thare are others with no MCs at all, but a bunch of grotesques instead.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

morgoth wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
Look at this batrep, dark eldar against tau with 5 riptides and a stormsurge.

DE victory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQOOoTt1JDI

I don't think that video helps your point.

First of all it's ITC, which only nerfs the Tau and boosts the DE significantly.

Second... that game is not a good example of competitive play in my opinion.


AFAIK, in 7th 40K, you do not roll the guy who gives cover separately.
In 7th ed, if one guy sees the target as covered, all shots against that target take that cover into account.

The Tau guy was clearly unprepared and had no clue what a DE army like that does, he bunkered up for no reason and left his markers to be destroyed.

He was shooting at friggin Ravagers when the Corpsethief was still a threat.. that's just rubbish.
Even Dark Artisan would've made more sense.

The DE was lucky enough to seize or go first, whichever.
The Tau's dice were terrible compared to the DE.
Rather heavy terrain, in favor of the DE again.
What kind of strength D are they playing? is that again ITC bs?


Yes, of course the DE wins in this case.

But this is NOT 40k, this is houserule-ITC-40k.

DE list wasn't 100% competitve to be honest, if you cut those ravagers (which are a meh unit), take only min number of venoms and surround the table with reavers jetbikes you would have a more effective list. The same player often bring a lot of bikes.

Yes, the DE player is more skilled than the tau one, but even a no brainer can win with 5 riptides and a stormsurge. And many of the power players can only face other power players and have no idea about 50%+ of the other 40k stuff. If you go to a tournament eldar, tau, SM TAC lists are thought with the effort to be hard counters for each other, no one makes a tournament list keeping in mind what DE could bring against.

Maybe outside ITC tau would have won but still that DE list is comparable to the tau one, and the tau one was really competitive. And that stormsurge should have died before in that game.

I don't record my games and posted that bat rep because I remembered it, but it's not the only game in which DE defeated competitive tau lists.

If you play armies like DE without experience and a lot of fluffy units you're going to be tabled very often, but you can defeat tournament lists with them. Maybe not an entire tournament full of competitive lists as winning 4-5 games in a row is very tough, but people that thinks DE, orks, and some other armies that are underestimated can't compete with the best ones they simply haven't seen those armies played by someone that knows how to play them and make competitive lists, Of course the top tiers are better overall, especially SM and eldar, but other mid-top tiers armies like tau are not impossible to defeat.

That guy should have novaed his shields a lot more. That's what makes the Riptide $$, not the weaponry. And no FNP? Really? 4 well defended riptides >> than 5 that die like Dreadknights.

Without access to units even as durable as Talos, I have no clue how BA stand up to that Tau list.

 Blackie wrote:
The new celestine is one the most overpowered things right now, simply impossible to kill.

How can someone say that's she doesn't fit a competitive army? Just watch a couple of games, that lady is extremely powerful.

There aren't only riptites, grav centurions, scatter bikes, stormsurges and WK in the game.

Exactly. He just doesnt know apparently.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
That guy should have novaed his shields a lot more. That's what makes the Riptide $$, not the weaponry. And no FNP? Really? 4 well defended riptides >> than 5 that die like Dreadknights.

Without access to units even as durable as Talos, I have no clue how BA stand up to that Tau list.

A lot of players go all offensive with Riptides. The hubris they breed is real. I still have yet to throw a Riptide WING down on a table (don't need to) but Ive faced them plenty and they are super good when you go all out offense so i think that moment of decision becomes a habit that costs you at times when you kind of forget its a dice game.

Blood Angels werent a choice for the original poster though. So there's that. He wan't considering them so i dont think you need to bang on that drum too much here.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

morgoth wrote:


And what tournament was that?

As I said above, outside of ITC there is no gravstar anymore... your frame of reference is not regular 40k.

Lol. keep telling yourself that.

He went to the Annihilation 6 tournament "fist full of Annihilation"




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:


Can she disintegrate my 2+ armor units from 72" away? No? I think I'll manage. .

You say that now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
I don't see how ITC even helps BA honestly.

ITC Missions include:

A limited Maelstrom mission component (roll 3 dice each round, choose the two you want and there is a menu of 6 objectives; and the person with the most Maelstrom points gets 4 points. Malestroms are only scored at the top of your turn though so that's important to note);

and a Primary Mission (from the book, the person who takes the primary gets 4 points);

and tertiaries (what you'd call secondaries normally: First Blood, Warlord, etc... only there are soem additional ones that can be on there such as First Strike which you get credit for if you kill a unit in ropund one, instead of it just being for the FIRSt to kill a unit, each one worth one point each).

You are forced to fight for three different objectives all at once, which is quite a challenge and requires you to recognize mid-game which overall objectives you are most able to get. So mobility is important. Blood angels are mobile. Thus there could be a perception that the ITC mission helps you a little? Maybe?

Other than that, the ITC is just an FAQ. Morgoth wishes it were more, but that's really what it is. It's an FAQ like every other tournament in existence uses (or in its place, the judgement of the TO which is more arbitrary and less predictable). the FAQ is voted on by players themselves, so it has the virtue of being agreed upon by the majority instead of agreed to by one person (the TO).

ALL TO's are allowed to play their tournaments EXACTLY 100% the way they want. It still grants ITC standing. Therefore, the statement that ITC somehow changes anything is absurd. Other than the fact that you wont face three WraithKnights in a game, Invisibility isnt as ridiculous and a couple other things aren't a part of the program, it's the same,

Morgoth isn't into competitive 40K, and so he poo poo's the ITC apparently but you could hold ITC events and start ranking up anywhere in the world using the bestcoastpairings.com app. I personally recommend you checking it out if you havent already.

At any rate, that talos formation is at least decent even if i think i could have done better on the tau side.

Talos are beasts. they haaaaaaate charging Dreadnought units though. True story. Lol. Dreadnoughts got so much better in close combat. 5 attacks at STR 10 on the charge? Dayam. 3 of them can do a number on Talos. Ive been on the receiving end. Now i know you wont see three running around all that frequently, but a friend of mine did it and won a tournament with a Stormlord and Dreadnoughts to guard it from assault while he laid fire downfield. My outflanking Talos were unprepared for the newfound ferocity of Dreadnoughts. Hehehe.

Martel732 wrote:
At any rate, that talos formation is at least decent even if i think i could have done better on the tau side.

I know, the tau player wasn't super experienced and the DE one is extremely skilled, the DE list could have been better though. I've seen several games from that channel and I remember also a DE victory against eldar, with a list that didn't have any talos. Talos are quite good but not an autoinclude, a single MC costs as much as 3 meganobz which are capable of more damage. Almost every DE competitive lists have one these options: grotesquerie, corpsethief claw or corpsethief claw + the dark artisan. In general they're all close combat oriented. Many people still think about DE as a shooty army with lances to crack vehicles and tons of poisoned shots to kill the crew inside.

I don't know about BA, but even orks can defeat tau lists like that one.

Some armies have certainly better odds to win than others, that's why I wish a more balanced game but if tau have 20000 victories in tournaments and DE just one it doesn't mean that armies like DE can't defeat tau, worst case scenario the odds should be around 70%-30% in favor of the tau player.

My chances go up substantially I must admit if Tau players aren't rocking FNP and constantly overcharging the shield with rerolls. I would never play a Tau list the way he did. He didn't have to lose 3 Riptides. He could have fielded one less and had more units and had FNP for the other 4.

Martel732 wrote:
My chances go up substantially I must admit if Tau players aren't rocking FNP and constantly overcharging the shield with rerolls. I would never play a Tau list the way he did. He didn't have to lose 3 Riptides. He could have fielded one less and had more units and had FNP for the other 4.

Had a game against Tau Empire last night. Same list as before, but 1850 so add two Ravagers to the list and Incubi.

I took pictures which I might post later. Round one I shoved Raiders to within an inch of him, failed to hurt his Broadsides with both Ravagers, and the Venom made a Pathfinder squad fall back, inflicting 4 casualties on them. So pretty much i killed 4 Pathfinders for round one. BeastPack moved up to an objective on the far right flank facing the Broadsides.

On his turn he smashed three Raiders with his shooting, plus a Venom. The Crisis Star put out impressive firepower but ironically it was his Fire Warrior Smart Missile systems that were the finishing touches on my armor. I was forced to Jink with most of my armor pretty much. He then charged the fourth Raider with his Stormsurge, exploding it The broadsides fired down on my Beastpack. I was down 5 vehicles turn one, a kabalite Warrior unit was in shambles. The Riptide would not be getting any supporting fire, so he decided since there was nowhere to run, that he would charge the Grotesques and at least steal their charge attacks, hoping his 2+ armor and 3+ invul would protect him. he had two Drones with him as well to soak wounds and of course the Ethereal to bolster him. I went first rolled to wound and got three 6's among them. I made him take the normal saves first and then the Instant Death saves. He failed one of the three instant Death saves and his riptide was destroyed. the Grotesques consolidated towards his Crisis Star which had tried to kill the Kabalite warriors they could reach but had failed the charge.

On my turn two, The Grotesques on the left charged through the rocks and annihilated the Crisis Star despite them hitting on 4's in Overwatch with their Pathfinders help. The second unit of Grotesques with the help of Incubi slew the Ghostkeel unit (again on an Instant Death result),. The Court of the Archon killed both Fire Warriors en masse and the Beast Pack backed away to an objective and so as not to tangle with the Broadsides who were trying to get to them.. The VoidRaven Bomber came in and put a wound on the Stormsurge (his Shield saved him against all but one).

He conceded on his bottom of two. He had the Stormsurge facing Grotesques, ravagers, the VoidRaven Bomber, incubi and the Court of the Archon. He had some Pathfinders facing Grotesques, an Ethereal on his lonesome and then the Broadsides facing a BeastPack. It was over.

Good times.

Being able to assault out of wrecked raiders is pretty sweet. The availibilty of instant death is pretty good too. My lack of instant death makes it almost impossible for ba to handle mass mcs. Notice how the tau were unable to stop the talos formation. MCs are where its at.

Martel732 wrote:
Being able to assault out of wrecked raiders is pretty sweet.

Yup. And that is why i don't cry and complain when people say "yeah but any competent opponent is going to kill those raiders in turn one".

My response: "So what". Lol. They can try. The Tau Empire can and did ignore cover a lot and that is why I got wrecked. Did not mean I was out of the game. Did not mean most opponents would even be able to do it.

He noted that had he gone first, he might have been able to do more. I agreed. I would then be 42.1 inches away from him as we've discussed, allowing pretty much just one of his units to hit me preemptively (the 4d6 missiles and his Large blast from the Surge, and if he wanted to use them early, the STR 8 AP 1, one shot missiles). Now this would have an impact. Missile Rack would average 1.16 damage results. His Large blast would average .25 damage results and the STR 8 AP 1 Missiles .833 damage results. he would have no Markerlight support but given those numbers, he has at least a punchers chance of doing some work. As you can see...probably not as much as he's imagining but it could have stopped the Ravagers from targetting him round 3 if he blew them up for example and that would be worth trying. In turn three, Ten lance shots before the assault would have resulted in two unsaved wounds for the Stormsurge plus the one he already had, which in turn makes him much more likely to die at the hands of the Grotesques, so some whittling there wouldn't have been a waste of time, even if just to stop them from shooting given that many damage results wouldn't stop the assault much (or he could try to halt the assault, though that .again would seem to require all of that shooting to accomplish. Probably the Grotesque Raider if it was possible, though i could as easily vacate the Incubi and continue on my merry way with the Grotesques if he did.

I think my point is still good, which is that the Tau Empire does not have a monopoly on being scary and effective. My list is nothing like the Talos list and yet it worked fine against Tau empire. We haven't even talked about objectives or how good it is at taking them. we just talked about straight up sluaghter here.

You cannot win every game but Dark Eldar are quite good and very aesthetically pleasing!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

morgoth wrote:

AFAIK, in 7th 40K, you do not roll the guy who gives cover separately.

This was an error. when anyone in the shooting unit provides cover to the MODEL being shot...it gets cover...this is on a model by model basis so you would not roll separately for that. You're right. I dont think it affected the outcome in the grand scheme. this is a throwback to the way it used to be done and people who have played for a long time have echoes of the rules i ntheir heads which does rquire some effort to abolish.

Like people who think Celestine isn't awesome.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

morgoth wrote:

The Tau's dice were terrible compared to the DE.
Rather heavy terrain, in favor of the DE again.
What kind of strength D are they playing? is that again ITC bs?


Yes, of course the DE wins in this case.

But this is NOT 40k, this is houserule-ITC-40k.

STR D in ITC is nerf'd. No one likes playing against normal D. So one of the few, but significant changes in the ITC is that it, like Invisibility, is nerf'd. Many TO's already were doing both of those things and the ITC just picked up on it and made it their way of doing things. If you like getting hit with D weapons the way the book is written, I am sure we can make that happen for you in any games we ever play together.

The health of this game REQUIRED some sanity be restored. D weapons as well as Invisibility are two of the most popular changes there are and two of the things that made games simply not fun. You may require a history lesson on Games Workshop and the damage 6E did to the games player base, but i do not. I had to resurrect 40K from the ashes after the Blood Angels and later Grey Knights caused people at end of 5th to really start questioning them and then of course the 6th Edition Pandoras box REALLY did damage.

7th fixed a ton that was errant and players were still slow to come back. The numbers i nthe ITC paricipation in just ONE YEAR tell you all you need to know: the ITC resurrected interest like no other force in 40K. And really most of it was prompted by the failure of GW to answer our questions. The answers i nthe ITC FAQ aren't universally perfect but they certainly are closer than anything like it has ever been.

I was an outspoken opponent of the ITC originally, before it became more transparent and they were more willing to actually ask the player base their opinion. You and i can now vote for or against interpretations and the majority agreement has been moooooostly in agreement with GW's new FAQ. Mostly. Grenades are one big surprise from GW and so we adjust. But you cannot now claim it lacks legitimacy because the majority have ruled o nthese things, It isnt some dude in a tower making decisions like it once was. It is thousands of votes being cast for or against the interpretation.

Skies of Death was ridiculous. ITC simply doesnt use it. TO's are allowed to put anything they want into their tournaments however and in two ITC events i was allowed to use the Tau Empire Gonfort, for example. So even if its an ITC event, as long as both players are playing by the same set of rules, the game is fair and the realities of that are known ahead of time. No advantage for anyone unless they just refuse to know the FAQ. but thats just laziness.

I have come around on the ITC but I understand your position. I held that position at one point. What I hjave come to realize and perhaps you will too, is that this game has a social contract attached that cannot simply be ignored in favor of a couple bad rules that ruin the fun. If you wanted to play purely by the rules, you'd find half as many players competing ebcause its just not fun to play against the way Invisibility was written (for example). it's simply too powerful. The same goes for triple Wraith Knights. the same thing goes for the D chart. D weapons are STILL heinously good, Invisibility is still heinously good. a singular WraithKnight is still as heinously good as its always been.

perhaps more importantly a very large number of ITC and ETC players are here and i am guessing that those who play in competitive play like I do understand this principle truth: playing by the same set of interpretations and minor restrictions creates a better community and a more fair playing field to determine results. With the ITC your standing and what it means is clear. Without it, you both have no way to track it nor any way to consistently be playing the same game. All competition, professional and amateur relies on the idea that the rules are the same for everyone and everyone had the same chance to react to the rules appropriately.

Get in the league or dont. makes no difference to my win percentage, at all.

Dark Eldar /need/ to go first, at least when I play them.

When he strands my hard melee hitters, I struggle, so its better when he strands them right in front of his face.

 gummyofallbears wrote:
Dark Eldar /need/ to go first, at least when I play them.

When he strands my hard melee hitters, I struggle, so its better when he strands them right in front of his face.

Going first is important though not critical if you just remember your 42.1" measurement at all times. being seized on happens as i found out and if you keep the distance you need to, life is good. Even the damage they do will be mitigated in volume to a trickle and you can afford a trickle.

Although shooty Dark eldar is a thing as well and many people play it that way instead. I dont because I prefer to attack the weakest stat in all of 40K as directly as possible.

Come on, stop the circle jerk...

You've admitted that you don't even play regular 40k and you're just agreeing in circles with Blackie while every other reasonable poster (except me) has left the thread.

I guess that means i should leave the thread though, bye.

Take you ball and leave Morgoth. it's fine. It won't make you any less wrong. it will just make you feel better and there's something to be said for feeling better after a good beating.

Just saying.