I keep complaining about my chosen faction in other threads (where it's related), but I'm cautious of becoming like certain players of other factions that shall remain nameless. Instead, I thought I'd get all my thoughts out in a post and people who want to engage can, point out how I'm wrong or add things I've missed. Then I can stop whining elsewhere (as much, I mean I'm still human).
Dark Eldar are strong at the moment, stronger than they have been for a long time, but there are still some fundamental issues that I think many none DE players (even other Aeldari players) may be unaware of. I'm not suggesting that the DE need a power bump, but rather than they need to be made more playable in general, rather than being shoehorned into such a tiny number of builds.
Firstly I should point out that to use an Obsession (our equivalent of Chapter Tactics) a DE detachment needs to be constructed from a very limited number of units, split into 4 groups. Kabal, Cult and Coven units can't be mixed in a detachment without losing bonuses and Mercenaries have no Obsession and can be taken in any detachment. The breakdown for each is as follows:
Kabal
Slotless 4
HQ 1
Troops 1
Elites 1 (Index only)
Fast Attack 0
Heavy Support 2 (Including 1 400 point Forgeworld model)
Dedicated Transport 2
Flyer 2
Lord of War 0
Cult
Slotless 3
HQ 2 (including 1 special character locked to 1 Obsession)
Troops 1
Elites 2 (1 is Index only)
Fast Attack 2
Heavy Support 1 400 point Forgeworld model
Dedicated Transport 2 (The same 2 as Kabal)
Flyer 2 (The same 2 as Kabal)
Lord of War 0
Coven
HQ 2 (including 1 special character locked to 1 Obsession)
Troops 1
Elites 1
Fast Attack 0
Heavy Support 3 (including 1 400 point Forgeworld model)
Dedicated Transport 2 (The same 2 as Kabal)
Flyer 0
Lord of War 0
Mercenary
HQ 1 Special Character
Troops 0
Elites 2
Fast Attack 1
Heavy Support 0
Dedicated Transport 0
Flyer 0
Lord of War 0
As you can see from the above taking double battalion or heaven forbid a brigade is going to be very tricky without slamming into the rule of 3 forcing you to take particular obsessions or a (terrible) mercenary special character.
This leads neatly to my second point, which is about DEHQs. DE are the fastest army in the game* **, however, their HQs all have 6" auras and are on foot. They can't be given any way of speeding them up and as such can't keep up with the units they are supposed to be buffing. They can't even ride in a transport easily as DE units are minimum 5 (a change since the last edition when many were min 3) and our transports are capacity 5 or 10. As such for DEHQs to get any mobility they need to take a transport slot big enough for an entire unit on their own (or with bodyguards, which we will get to in a bit). Like everyone else their auras also don't work inside transports so they have a choice of keep up and be useless or be left behind and be useless. This would be OK if they were terrifying beatsticks in their own right (which Succubi and Archons should be), instead, they suck and can only be used for gimmicky nonsense. This is why you most often see an Archon babysitting ravagers, a unit that the Archon can't keep up with on the rare occasions it needs to move quickly.
One last comment on HQs. We've lost a lot. GW have steadily removed all the special characters we've had except 3 and most generic characters as well. We've lost Lady Malys, Baron Sarthonyx, Duke Sliscus, Absdruael Vect, The Decapitator, Kruellagh the Vile, Archon on Bike, Archon on Skyboard, Archite/Succubus On Bike, Archite/Succubus on Skyboard, Dracon, Drachite and Haemonculus Ancient (including bike and skyboard variants for the Haemonculus, Haemonculus Ancient, Dracon and Drachite).
We put a pin in bodyguards, so I'm going to circle back now. Archons can take a Court, which can be made up of a number of single model units without the character keyword. This makes them very vulnerable (as they are not exceptionally tough), but was OK before the rule of 3 (provided you didn't mind haemorrhaging kill points) as 9 of them made up of Lhameans and/or Sslyth were... ok. Not great, but OK. Before 8th this was a single unit and as such would not have been seriously restricted by the rule of 3 and would still have been viable (a unit of 9 Sslyth would actually be decent, though expensive). They probably still wouldn't be tournament worthy, but they would at least be casually playable.
On to troops. Dark Eldar troops are all great and my only complaints are weird grognard stuff about losing options we used to have in 3rd, or that my favourite weapons are no longer any good. In other words, they are simply all solid. Love em. Moving on.
So.. The elites section. Bloodbrides and Trueborn are now index only and horrifically overcosted. Mandrakes are quite nice these days, if they were 1 point cheaper or had access to obsessions, well, they'd be nice. Incubi suck. Grotesques are amazing, so that's really nice. We've also got the Beastmaster, who is intrinsically linked to beasts, so really we can only talk about him in that context.
I think it's also interesting that we get a specialist detachment structure (3 Patrols gives 4 CP, 6 gives 8 CP), but this was then quickly gutted by the 3 detachment max limit (that is used just about everywhere) and the fact that a battalion went up to 5CP, which is just better. It would make sense if our Raiding Force could count 3 patrols as 1 detachment for the purposes of the event limit.
I'm going to pause here for now and come back and edit more stuff in later, but my last comment is to point out that the things that people (possibly rightly) want to see nerfed in DE are our only options, so if they are nerfed to uselessness unlike Guard or Marines we can't plug in something else, we just have to take more CWE or Harlies.
*Except triple moving Ynarri
**And not including our raider and ravager , which are stripped down, low armour versions of CWE vehicles to gain speed and are therefore, naturally, slower.
To put this simply, this is a problem due to lack of foresight on GW's part.
They should have introduced a lower tier/rank character for each type that had a weaker/different buff available sort of like Lieutenants for space marines.
Eihnlazer wrote: To put this simply, this is a problem due to lack of foresight on GW's part.
They should have introduced a lower tier/rank character for each type that had a weaker/different buff available sort of like Lieutenants for space marines.
We had those before, instead of introducing them they removed them. You are right though, in your point, just not in the level of dumbass ball dropping by GW.
Eihnlazer wrote: To put this simply, this is a problem due to lack of foresight on GW's part.
They should have introduced a lower tier/rank character for each type that had a weaker/different buff available sort of like Lieutenants for space marines.
That would require them to produce more plastic sprues though. GW isn't giving non-imperium factions new sprues all that easily.
Eihnlazer wrote: To put this simply, this is a problem due to lack of foresight on GW's part.
They should have introduced a lower tier/rank character for each type that had a weaker/different buff available sort of like Lieutenants for space marines.
That would require them to produce more plastic sprues though. GW isn't giving non-imperium factions new sprues all that easily.
The models for them already existed in metal, but didn't get ported to finecast. Which is a shame.
DE had something like 70% of units/rules removed, it had more removed than any other GW army (besides squats and Corsairs, i mean still functioning armies).
I love my DE a LOT, but many of the rules and units going away was pointless, many armies still have elite versions on troops without a seperate kit, why cant DE have Trueborn and Bloodbrides? Why cant we have a lower tier HQ? etc...
Also DE shouldnt be limited to 3 detachments with our Rading Force, its only 8CP, we can take 2 Battalions for 10, so there is no reason to limit it.
I'm also mad about many of the rules that re Gone or turned into stratagems. Reavers were my favorite unit, now i hate them, them using the Fly over damage and the Hammer of Wrath (D6 auto hits at S6) made them fun to play with and unique, not they are just boring, same with CoM and Soul Traps.
Removing (i think i counted 15 rules) Rules and sweet units like Baron, sub HQ's, Vect himself, it really takes away some of the old flavor, they even removed a sweet Archon for that plastic POS posed one.
Between, 5th to 6th/7th, to index, then to 8th. I felt like a chewed up gak of gum...
BUT, with that said, i love DE and they are playable now, i am having fun with them, i just wish a few minor things would change.
Eihnlazer wrote: To put this simply, this is a problem due to lack of foresight on GW's part.
They should have introduced a lower tier/rank character for each type that had a weaker/different buff available sort of like Lieutenants for space marines.
That would require them to produce more plastic sprues though. GW isn't giving non-imperium factions new sprues all that easily.
They made 7 Primaris Captains, they can make 1 Generic Mercenary DEHQ unit.......
DE had something like 70% of units/rules removed, it had more removed than any other GW army (besides squats and Corsairs, i mean still functioning armies).
Ork HQ's aswell as R&H come aswell to mind, frankly tough the DE Codex is out of that perspecive quite shallow now aswell.....
They made 7 Primaris Captains, they can make 1 Generic Mercenary DEHQ unit.......
I mean we now get more sorcerers and other footslogging chaos charachters, where's the cool daemonic rides?
None of these have any option for bike,jumppack etc.
God forbid people convert something.....
I feel like it would even be OK with me if we just got a generic lieutenant type built out of the sergeant from each of the troop box kits. The Kabalite one is just a basic dude in Ghostplate armor with spliter pistol/blast pistol swap and Agonizer/Venom Blade/Power Sword swap. The Wych one is just the hekatrix weapon options+the wych weapons. Etc. Especially for the Wracks, the Acothyst having access to this SPRAWLING fething weapon list is so pointless when you have no reason to ever want half of them on an el cheapo squad sergeant. Why does he need a sniper rifle? Why does he need like 8 different melee weapon options just for him? Make that guy a character, suddenly you've got a reason to exist.
That, and some kind of transport capacity fix (I'd just add 1 to the transport capacity of Raiders, but you could even say 10 Infantry models and 1 Character if you want to WYSIWYG it as the guy who stands in the back of the raider who is obviously in command) and the DE character situation would be at least passable.
I feel like the Drukhari codex was definitely one of the best designed from a stratagem/tactic/trait and point cost levels, and not great from a rules design "let's get creative within these new restrictions from our legal team" levels. With some other codexes, like Thousand Sons, they clearly took this mandate from their legal team that they couldn't make new models no way no how and they went "Well...let's see if we can't wiggle around within that rule a little bit and give the players SOMETHING new to play with..."
Yea, reintroducing Drachons would make a lot of sense as it is thematic for the Archon to be sitting on a dais at the back, eating grapes and letting his minions do the dirty work but the Drachons should be gunning their skyboards and jetbikes to the front, shouting orders and whipping the warriors into a frenzy as they go.
Listening to Splintermind though, it seems Dark Eldar are in a good place with most units being viable even if not hyper competitive atm.
Eihnlazer wrote: To put this simply, this is a problem due to lack of foresight on GW's part.
They should have introduced a lower tier/rank character for each type that had a weaker/different buff available sort of like Lieutenants for space marines.
That would require them to produce more plastic sprues though. GW isn't giving non-imperium factions new sprues all that easily.
They made 7 Primaris Captains, they can make 1 Generic Mercenary DEHQ unit.......
Since when primaris are non-imperium faction? GW loves it's imperium. Others gets lot less releases. We are supposed to be happy with just codex.
Kroem wrote: Listening to Splintermind though, it seems Dark Eldar are in a good place with most units being viable even if not hyper competitive atm.
I mean, I think this is the fundamentally most awkward thing about 8th edition Dark Eldar. They're solid overall, and quite a few of their units are incredibly strong... but list building with them just feels shallow and there's some real jankiness in how the army functions as a whole.
The problem is that you can't really fix those issues without risking them spiralling out of control.
Our HQ's are defintiely a serious problem, it's very frustrating spending hundreds of points for 4 models that do literally nothing. The only way to make an Archon reasonable in combat is to take the Djin Blade and the Hatred Eternal warlord trait but because he spends all his time on foot he rarely sees combat unless your opponent comes to him, and his measely aura of re-roll 1's to hit is no where near as good in such a fast moving army, where he ends up buffing about 1 unit at most and of course we're a mechanised army where half the force rides in transports, so can't get his buff either. He can stay behind to buff Ravagers, which works, but feels very wrong for this army and if you're running a batalion still leaves you with a completely redundent 70 odd point character.
The Succubus is an even bigger problem because she's completely aweful in combat, something they should be extremely good at since it's what they spend their entire lives doing. Why on earth did they make her main weapon -1 to hit when it's only +2S and 1D, it makes no sense at all? Recently I've been running a Wych bomb with a 20 girl unit deepstriking in and the Succubus I have to take in the Patrol detachment is just complete dead wait. The only way to make a Succubus good in combat is going Red Grief and taking the Blood Glaive relic (a Power Fist without the -1 to hit), which is cool but your Wyches are now bad (Advance and Charge is not that useful on them it turns out, +1A or +1S and only ever losing 1 model to moral from the other 2 Obsessions are far better) whilst the units it should be great for, Reavers and Hellions, are pretty rubbish anyway and don't synergyse at all well with a Succubus to start with.
I don't really have any complaints about the Haemonculus, he's good at his job which is buffing Coven units near by by making them tougher, the only real downside is that he has a long list of combat weapons he can take but the Electrocorrosive Whip is the only one worth bothering with, the others are rubbish, but thats a small problem to be honest.
The only other thing I'd point out is that most of our stratagems are complete rubbish. Sure, AoV is the best strat in the game and Lightning Fast Reflexes and The Torturers Craft are rather good but there's nothing else of value beyond the occaisonal use of the Torment Grenade. This leaves us in the bizzare position of being about the only single codex with almost no force multipliers of any note, we have to take a Craftworld Doomseer to get anything.
With all of that it's amazign our codex does as well as it does.
Since when primaris are non-imperium faction? GW loves it's imperium. Others gets lot less releases. We are supposed to be happy with just codex.
But that is only primaris they made, and I think some models for kill team for ad mecha. Other imperial factions were happy, if they got one new model.
With DE there is a very strong feeling that someone at the design team really wanted people to buy the codex CWE and use farseers in every DE list. What I don't understand though, is why can't an archon model also represent a lower tier HQ. A brother capting and a chapter master can be the exact same model. I get why GW doesn't want to make rules for units that don't have models. But why they can't make two set of rules for an HQ, when they are already doing for troops with kabals or chapter tactics, seems to make no sense at all.
It's a shame that we get smacked in the nuts by detachment/unit limits aimed at other people because of our unique structure. The love for IoM extends to not thinking about other factions when releasing global fixes I think.
Drager wrote: It's a shame that we get smacked in the nuts by detachment/unit limits aimed at other people because of our unique structure. The love for IoM extends to not thinking about other factions when releasing global fixes I think.
I mean, drukhari are the exception, theyre the only faction getting shafted by the suggested tournament rule that lets you only run 3 detachments and the rule of 3. these arent rules that are mandatory, and dont even affect casual games.
Honestly i just started playing drukhari (my main army is admech) and let me tell you about useless HQs/units.
I do think that its a normal reaction to start seeing small things that aren't perfect in your codex and then react by complaining. The thing is that most codexes have the same problems.
Lets not forget that as long as people want to win they are going to use the best units in a codex, no matter the army.
I agree that splitting the Codex into 3 (arguably 4) parts has not worked out as well as it might have. With the upgrade to Batallions/Brigades the spam patrols=CP has been dead on arrival, even if tournaments allowed you to take 6 patrols (and, for unclear reason, you wanted to.)
While its a common gripe in other books (see Marines, CSM) that certain units get chapter tactics and others do not, this feels especially painful here because all the obsessions are so good. You might say you are paying for the flexibility to slot these units into detachments - but the reality is Incubi, Scourge and Mandrakes losing out on this synergy makes them explicitly feel like second best choices.
I also think its a mistake that Black Heart is almost an autotake (yes yes, flayed skull, but the BH relic, warlord trait and stratagem are much better). A 4++ is also ludicrously better than an extra -1 AP or a laughable -1 LD. Only Cult is balanced sufficiently that there can be real debate.
Most units are cheap/"pointed correctly". Hellions are perhaps a point too expensive given they are the softest unit (for their points) in 40k. Cronus have reasonable defensive stats for their points - but combine this with terrible offensive stats, to the point where killing much more than a marine a turn is a minor miracle.
I agree and disagree on the HQs. Sure, it might be nice if they would issue some new models where everyone could ride a jetbike, or a skyboard. I would also like more options - but I disagree the ones we get are rubbish full stop.
Even without transport options Archons and Succubi are fairly fast. You might think its stupid to have an Archon jogging along behind some ravagers, but assuming you advance the Archon (and its not exactly a hardship to do so, even if you are carrying an index-option blaster) he will tend to keep up unless you hit a wall or something.
The problem is the unnecessary duplication. One Black Heart Archon with the living muse and labyrinthine cunning angled such to buff 3 ravagers+2 razorwings on the first turn is excellent. Having 2, or even 3, is redundant. Would everyone take a 35~ point Dracon even if he had a really marginal buff and was essentially just a kabalite with say 4 wounds, 4 attacks and a 5++? Probably.
I also feel Succubus are cheap enough that its hard to complain too much. The regular Glaive should be base 2 damage but that's about all I would change. Again, the issue is duplication. Rerolling 1s to hit in combat is nice enough, but I probably only need one source of it. If there was another option that would be better.
Haemis are okay but its a similar gripe. Grotesques need proper models.
As said, I think DE are good on their own, but its hard to see why you wouldn't want a farseer coming along to make you better.
I think some fixing to the patrol formation they have will fix all these problems.
Each patrol is supposed to represent a separate raiding party so the rule of 3 should no apply to these detachments. Literally each time you take something like a ravager - you'd also have to take an archon - so it really can't get out of hand.
It should just be something like 2-3 CP per patrol detachment (working under the current garbo CP system) with expressed permission to violate the rule of 3. Maybe with the requirement that no patrol detachment is identical by datasheets (to prevent abuse and add character)
Also - currently. This isn't really a competitive problem. A DE batallion is one of the most efficient things in the entire game. It is more of a character problem.
Xenomancers wrote: I think some fixing to the patrol formation they have will fix all these problems.
Each patrol is supposed to represent a separate raiding party so the rule of 3 should no apply to these detachments. Literally each time you take something like a ravager - you'd also have to take an archon - so it really can't get out of hand.
It should just be something like 2-3 CP per patrol detachment (working under the current garbo CP system) with expressed permission to violate the rule of 3. Maybe with the requirement that no patrol detachment is identical by datasheets (to prevent abuse and add character)
Also - currently. This isn't really a competitive problem. A DE batallion is one of the most efficient things in the entire game. It is more of a character problem.
The problem with this is that the rule of 3 isnt an official rule, its only a suggestion that many people have taken as a golden rule. If it was officially part of 40k then yeah they could say to ignore it for the DE patrols but as it stands , its not against the rules of the game itself to take 4+ detachment or 4+ copies of the same model, its against tournament rules if anything, TO's should be the ones that need convincing that DE can ignore these rules
It's not against the rules of the game to agree with your opponent that Marines hit and wound on 2s, always. You really can play this game however you and your opponent want.
The majority, it seems, play with Rule of 3, and usually 3 Detatchments.
Adding to the Suggested detachment limits for tournaments that 3 DE patrols count as 1 detachment would really make me happy. I'd gladly drop 1 CP to also jettison the junk Arhcon and Succubus and pick up a Haemie. I'd also then have all 3 sections represented as I'd probably take 1 of each (in my tournament and regular play lists). I don't think it would be a huge power boost, but being able to not wase ~120-150 points on useless duplicate HQs would obviously give a little more punch. If we could do this I think you'd see a lot more variety in DE lists (and Aeldari in general as DE are currently a key part).
The problem with this is that the rule of 3 isnt an official rule, its only a suggestion that many people have taken as a golden rule. If it was officially part of 40k then yeah they could say to ignore it for the DE patrols but as it stands , its not against the rules of the game itself to take 4+ detachment or 4+ copies of the same model, its against tournament rules if anything, TO's should be the ones that need convincing that DE can ignore these rules
More or less every beta rule and suggestion has become de facto rules so it is kinda pointless at this time to say that it isn't an official rule. At this point in time it is all but official in name.
Bharring wrote: It's not against the rules of the game to agree with your opponent that Marines hit and wound on 2s, always. You really can play this game however you and your opponent want.
The majority, it seems, play with Rule of 3, and usually 3 Detatchments.
Except it is against the rules since in the rules, marines hit on a 3+.
The problem with this is that the rule of 3 isnt an official rule, its only a suggestion that many people have taken as a golden rule. If it was officially part of 40k then yeah they could say to ignore it for the DE patrols but as it stands , its not against the rules of the game itself to take 4+ detachment or 4+ copies of the same model, its against tournament rules if anything, TO's should be the ones that need convincing that DE can ignore these rules
More or less every beta rule and suggestion has become de facto rules so it is kinda pointless at this time to say that it isn't an official rule. At this point in time it is all but official in name.
Yeah i know this, what i meant in my reply is that its not up to GW to adapt the rules so DE can ignore these suggested ones, since officially, they are not "real" rules. Therefore its up to the TO's to adapt the rule.
Basically i agree with the fact that something could be done to make the DE patrols actually legal to play, and i also agree that the rule of 3 is basically official at this point. Its just my background as an MTG player, where the rules are clear and there is no such thing as "suggestions", in MTG, its black or white. lets just say that 40k lacking clearly defined rules sometimes bring out the "ACKCHUALLY" in me.
Bharring wrote: It's not against the rules of the game to agree with your opponent that Marines hit and wound on 2s, always. You really can play this game however you and your opponent want.
The majority, it seems, play with Rule of 3, and usually 3 Detatchments.
Yeah, my next game we're going to be playing a custom "mad max" scenario where vehicles have front and rear arcs, can shoot out of combat with turret weapons and into units within 1" of them with hull/sponson weapons (as well as being able to fall back and shoot at -1 if they want), and can't fire overwatch to reduce the overall firepower/give an incentive to just ram your vehicles into each other.
And the next game I'm probably going to be playing a scenario where all infantry in one player's space marine army get a mandatory +3pt upgrade that gives them +1W, +1A, and reduces the AP of weapons targeting it by 1 to a minimum of 0. CHARACTER models pay 5 points and just get the AP reduction ability (to prevent super goofy smash captain antics, because marine characters tend to already have plenty of wounds and attacks).
People don't seem to realize there is a whole world of possibility out there with house rules and two players whose ultimate goal is to create a fun, close game will create a fun, close game more reliably than two players who just want to be as competitive as possible...it just takes more effort on the part of those two players.
Drager wrote: I keep complaining about my chosen faction in other threads (where it's related), but I'm cautious of becoming like certain players of other factions that shall remain nameless.
Lol oh man, I wish rule 1 wasnt so broadly enforced. The ork playerbase on this site is soooo god damned toxic for these un-named players
VladimirHerzog wrote: Yeah i know this, what i meant in my reply is that its not up to GW to adapt the rules so DE can ignore these suggested ones, since officially, they are not "real" rules. Therefore its up to the TO's to adapt the rule.
Basically i agree with the fact that something could be done to make the DE patrols actually legal to play, and i also agree that the rule of 3 is basically official at this point. Its just my background as an MTG player, where the rules are clear and there is no such thing as "suggestions", in MTG, its black or white. lets just say that 40k lacking clearly defined rules sometimes bring out the "ACKCHUALLY" in me.
If GW led the way int heir own tournaments by fixing how DE take patrols and added that to their suggestions that is all that would be needed. TOs would take that and run with it. In 7th Dark Eldar was the last codex before super detachments but had all it's formations chunked up into 3-400 point groups that, if you could take 4-6 of them would make a solid army. No TO allowed this, as DE didn't have a 'Decurion' DE could only take up to 3 formations, despite clearly being designed to be played as a group of formations. I don't see 8th being any different.
My biggest concern with the DE codex is how..bland list building feels.
The 7th Edition Codex, despite being a trash fire, had far far more opportunities for unique builds. Do you want an Archon to Webway Portal in with his pack of personal wardogs? Go ahead. Do you have a Succubi who needs a Cronos to accompany her everywhere so she can remain at the peak of outward perfection? Go ahead.
Now with the split, it just feels like I'm piecing together a list from a set of six pre-made detachments. Kabal Battalion, Ravager Spearhead, and whatever flavor I feel like tacking onto the end.
So many units have caveats attached to them, like the Court and Beasts, that limit an already limited selection of the Codex. You can't take just one or two units of something you like, you have to grab a variety of units from other factions to slot them into its own detachment.
I'm winning games and having fun, sure, but it definitely feels like everyone else gets to play with Lego while I'm stuck with Jumbo Mega Bloks.
onlyroad wrote: My biggest concern with the DE codex is how..bland list building feels.
The 7th Edition Codex, despite being a trash fire, had far far more opportunities for unique builds. Do you want an Archon to Webway Portal in with his pack of personal wardogs? Go ahead. Do you have a Succubi who needs a Cronos to accompany her everywhere so she can remain at the peak of outward perfection? Go ahead.
Now with the split, it just feels like I'm piecing together a list from a set of six pre-made detachments. Kabal Battalion, Ravager Spearhead, and whatever flavor I feel like tacking onto the end.
So many units have caveats attached to them, like the Court and Beasts, that limit an already limited selection of the Codex. You can't take just one or two units of something you like, you have to grab a variety of units from other factions to slot them into its own detachment.
I'm winning games and having fun, sure, but it definitely feels like everyone else gets to play with Lego while I'm stuck with Jumbo Mega Bloks.
Well said. I honestly forget about beasts time to time, taking them is so hard now, i have 3 BM's 3- RWF, 3 Claw Fiends and 20+ Khymeraes, but i never take them as they are Wyches and i dont want to 4 HQ's (1 Succubus and 3 BM's) just to play them, If BM's were HQ's, or if they were Mercenary, now that would be a different story.
At the OP the cults have 2 fast attack. Bikes and Hellions. Other than that you are spot on.
We do have a few options for list building. There are a few more options than you suggest. But you are right we are very much constrained.
I also find our charcters better in close combat than you give the credit for. Obsidian rose Archon with the -1 to hit in CC armor does work. Give him a CC warlord trait and he is even tougher, I am running mine with the one that lets him heal when he kills a model.
Blood glave succubus is good.
Heamy with the electro whip is good. Blast pistol s are great in CC.
But they do lack toughness and the ablity to really dish it out. But for 50 points I won't complain too much on the Succubus. Provided she has an artifact or a warlord trait.
I don't even care if they get tougher, I just want to put my Succubus on a jet bike.
I also find our charcters better in close combat than you give the credit for. Obsidian rose Archon with the -1 to hit in CC armor does work. Give him a CC warlord trait and he is even tougher, I am running mine with the one that lets him heal when he kills a model.
Blood glave succubus is good.
Heamy with the electro whip is good. Blast pistol s are great in CC.
You know, that's my big problem with our HQ's.
They seem purpose built and priced to have a relic and Warlord Trait.
An Archon with a Djin Blade and Hatred Eternal is a great melee beatstick.
A Writ of the Living Muse Archon is the best support unit in the Codex.
A Succubus with the Blood Glaive and Hyper Swift Reflexes is cheap, deadly, and durable.
A Haemonculus with an EC whip, Vexator Mask and Master Nemesine is one of the best CQC characters we have.
As a design choice, all of these are perfectly fine, at least in a vacuum. It makes sense that the leader of a raiding force should be decked out in their most valuable artifacts of torture.
The problems arise when you've used your relics and warlord traits on one, maybe two HQs, and you still have three other expensive and useless beatsticks you need to fit in.
It is a strange situation with DE. They are competitive but ultimately boring.
GW doesn't seem to know what to do with the army.
Here's my personal wish list.
-Bring back all the missing characters.
-Add wings, jet bikes, and skyboards to the wargear options for all HQ's
-Close combat weapons should be made deadlier...a lot deadlier. They should be the ultimate glass cannon in shooting and melee
-New HQ's like a Drachon. Master Incubi. Dark Eldar Assassin
-New models for Trueborn. Come standard with Ghost Plate and Shard Carbines. Full customizable options for the whole unit.
-New models for Blood Brides. Full options for the whole unit. Can pick their combat drugs or roll for 2 drugs and use both.
-New models for Grotesques. More combat options. There's lots of strange weapon options for the Coven lists that seem redundant.
-Increase the transport capacity for Raiders and Venoms to 12 and 6. It drives me absolutely insane that I can't take an HQ in a transport with a fully equipped unit. Just the ultimate case of stupidity and oversight.
-Increase Incubi base strength to 4 and give the entire unit additional attacks on a successful wound roll of 6.
-find a purpose for the Cronos
-Incubi on skyboards
-incubi on jetbikes
-Incubi Chariot
-Hellion Chariot
-Incubi Samurai version of Wraith Knight for Lord of War choice.
Headlss wrote: At the OP the cults have 2 fast attack. Bikes and Hellions. Other than that you are spot on.
We do have a few options for list building. There are a few more options than you suggest. But you are right we are very much constrained.
I also find our charcters better in close combat than you give the credit for. Obsidian rose Archon with the -1 to hit in CC armor does work. Give him a CC warlord trait and he is even tougher, I am running mine with the one that lets him heal when he kills a model.
Blood glave succubus is good.
Heamy with the electro whip is good. Blast pistol s are great in CC.
But they do lack toughness and the ablity to really dish it out. But for 50 points I won't complain too much on the Succubus. Provided she has an artifact or a warlord trait.
I don't even care if they get tougher, I just want to put my Succubus on a jet bike.
Thanks. How could I forget the mighty Hellions? My complaint with the HQs is that they suck without a relic + WL trait.
Amishprn86 wrote: Sadly the other relics are more important as well, Vex mask, Helm of Spite, Writ of Living Muse, etc...
Totally agree with this, it's hard to justify a combat relic when the utility ones are so good.
vex mask is definitely a combat relic though surely...?
Pretty sure they meant an actual relic weapon, vex is more of a supporting relic for combat, its main goal is to keep whatever you have fighting alive.
Drager wrote: Thanks. How could I forget the mighty Hellions? My complaint with the HQs is that they suck without a relic + WL trait.
As I said though - I don't think this is right.
Lets take an Archon. With a basic husk blade you are hitting on 2s rerolling, S4 (a bit meh), AP-2 D3 damage.
He only has T3 and 5+, but he does have a 2++ that lasts until after the round you fail your first save in, and he has a 6+++ cos DE. Rerolling charges by turn 2.
Will he solo a squad of Marines? No. Will he solo Daemon Princes or other characters who cost 2.5 times as much? No.
Will he handle himself respectably against other characters in this bracket? Yeah I think so. Certainly for 74 points. You can also give him a blaster (index) or blast pistol to take advantage of a 2+/rerolling 1s, S8, AP-4 D6 damage gun. Which is a menace to anything but chaff. (6" is a bit of liability, but with movement 8" thats not the worst threat range in the world.)
Succubi is in the same boat. If you drop the Agonizer (unless you are going after monsters its probably a good trade off) you are just 50 points.
Again, WS/BS2+, rerolling 1s in the fight phase. Minus 1 to hit with the glaive in the first 2 turns is annoying, but its gone by turn 3. S5, AP-3, D1. 4 A is a bit lame, but can be upped through drugs. (Admittedly I'd prioritise putting +1A on a blobs of Wyches, but if you were to dedicate to Wych cult you can easily hit 6 squads and be picking +1 attack everything). Defensively you have T3, 4++, 6+++. You can also grab a blast pistol for a shooting threat (there are issues, don't want to oversell it, but it beats what a lot of characters can take.)
The D1 is the problem. I think given the -1 to hit and low number of base attacks the glaive should be D2. Yes you can take an impaler, but the low strength and AP make this a stupid choice.
Even so, 50 points. Not sure what you can expect. I know there are people who would prefer her to be say 100 or whatever points and have more attacks while the Blood Glaive profile be standard, but eh.
I can also understand the approach of "look, if its not a daemon prince/custodes biker captain, or a smash captain, I'd rather just take some naked Lhaemeans as my HQs - they might do nothing, but at least its only 15 points of nothing".
But this feels like a first world problem. There are a lot of books with characters in this price bracket who are not meta defining.
The Shadowfield is really what kills the Archon as a combat character for me. 2++ sounds good, and if you're rolling a hot streak with your dice it can be infuriating for your opponent, but as soon as you roll a 1 the Archon's dead meat.
T3 and a 5+ save is terribly fragile for a character that wants to be getting into melee, especially if they're your Warlord.
onlyroad wrote: My biggest concern with the DE codex is how..bland list building feels.
The 7th Edition Codex, despite being a trash fire, had far far more opportunities for unique builds. Do you want an Archon to Webway Portal in with his pack of personal wardogs? Go ahead. Do you have a Succubi who needs a Cronos to accompany her everywhere so she can remain at the peak of outward perfection? Go ahead.
Now with the split, it just feels like I'm piecing together a list from a set of six pre-made detachments. Kabal Battalion, Ravager Spearhead, and whatever flavor I feel like tacking onto the end.
So many units have caveats attached to them, like the Court and Beasts, that limit an already limited selection of the Codex. You can't take just one or two units of something you like, you have to grab a variety of units from other factions to slot them into its own detachment.
I'm winning games and having fun, sure, but it definitely feels like everyone else gets to play with Lego while I'm stuck with Jumbo Mega Bloks.
Options aren't helping marines. At all. None of our legos fit together.
onlyroad wrote: My biggest concern with the DE codex is how..bland list building feels.
The 7th Edition Codex, despite being a trash fire, had far far more opportunities for unique builds. Do you want an Archon to Webway Portal in with his pack of personal wardogs? Go ahead. Do you have a Succubi who needs a Cronos to accompany her everywhere so she can remain at the peak of outward perfection? Go ahead.
Now with the split, it just feels like I'm piecing together a list from a set of six pre-made detachments. Kabal Battalion, Ravager Spearhead, and whatever flavor I feel like tacking onto the end.
So many units have caveats attached to them, like the Court and Beasts, that limit an already limited selection of the Codex. You can't take just one or two units of something you like, you have to grab a variety of units from other factions to slot them into its own detachment.
I'm winning games and having fun, sure, but it definitely feels like everyone else gets to play with Lego while I'm stuck with Jumbo Mega Bloks.
Options aren't helping marines. At all. None of our legos fit together.
Cool. Let's make the predator good and delete all your other tanks. And make it so landspeeders and preds break Chapter tactics. And you don't get the other tanks back when a meta shift makes preds bad. You in?
This really isn't the place to whine about imperial factions. All the other threads are for that.
Burnage wrote: The Shadowfield is really what kills the Archon as a combat character for me. 2++ sounds good, and if you're rolling a hot streak with your dice it can be infuriating for your opponent, but as soon as you roll a 1 the Archon's dead meat.
T3 and a 5+ save is terribly fragile for a character that wants to be getting into melee, especially if they're your Warlord.
Thats why I like The Armour of Misery, I take the Kabal of the Obsidian Rose any way for the extra 6" range on my blasters. I take bolter shots on the 3 up armor save, and anything multi damage on the shadow field. If I don't roll the invul I can't fail it. I also take Soul Thirst as my warlord trait, so he can heal the little bits of damage that inevitably get through the armor save.
But the scond Archon. You are exactly rigjt on. I give him a blaster and let him babysit a squad or two of warriors on foot, with maxed out blasters and a dark lance.
Automatically Appended Next Post: As for the guy complaining about Marines. You are right aswell parts of that Codex and especially the new shadowspear units explicitly forbid useful and interesting combinations and synergies.
We are lucky that we have 3 codex's in one. Look at the poor Harliquins we have 3 times the book they do.
onlyroad wrote: My biggest concern with the DE codex is how..bland list building feels.
The 7th Edition Codex, despite being a trash fire, had far far more opportunities for unique builds. Do you want an Archon to Webway Portal in with his pack of personal wardogs? Go ahead. Do you have a Succubi who needs a Cronos to accompany her everywhere so she can remain at the peak of outward perfection? Go ahead.
Now with the split, it just feels like I'm piecing together a list from a set of six pre-made detachments. Kabal Battalion, Ravager Spearhead, and whatever flavor I feel like tacking onto the end.
So many units have caveats attached to them, like the Court and Beasts, that limit an already limited selection of the Codex. You can't take just one or two units of something you like, you have to grab a variety of units from other factions to slot them into its own detachment.
I'm winning games and having fun, sure, but it definitely feels like everyone else gets to play with Lego while I'm stuck with Jumbo Mega Bloks.
Options aren't helping marines. At all. None of our legos fit together.
Yep. Marines don't jive with some of the fundamental mechanics of 8th, have been left behind due to codex creep, and have been forced into a meta purpose built to kill them. What else is new?
I'm talking less about how effective the army is --- let's not beat around the bush here, Dark Eldar are an S Tier faction --- but rather how fun it is to collect and play. The 7th edition codex sucked. It sucked bad. But it had more in it that helped build a sense of your dudes.
In 8th? It feels like my detachments have been pre-written in a lot of ways, and the army has been structured to actively prohibit you from sticking to the fluff.
Do you want to take a page from Path of the Dark Eldar and play a raiding force under the command of the eccentric avian enthusiast Maximilian? You know, have a crap ton of Razorwing Flocks accompany the party into battle in some twisted parade and contest? Can't do that now. Now you've got to buy a succubus and a squad of wyches, and a beastmaster to get your Flocks. Flocks with no obsessions, and no battlefield slot.
Do you want some Reaver Jetbikes in your Flayed Skull army? You know, the one where the Archon in charge was literally a Reaver Champion? Hope you like Red Grief, because that's the closest you'll get to having them actually be Flayed Skull.
That's what I'm talking about. Say what you will about the Marine Codex, and I'll probably agree with most of your gripes about their power, but they are unparalleled in their ability to feel exactly like your dudes. And no matter how many games I win, or models I kill, or what have you, will I get that same degree of flexibility and uniqueness with Dark Eldar.
No, but BA in particular have been so deviant from their fluff in terms of capability for so long it no longer matters what their fluff is. GW has broken any hope of suspension of disbelief. There is only disbelief remaining.
Drukhari are at least glass half full. Even if it gets monotonous. Like pentaflyrant from 7th.
Honestly, I don't know why GW makes so MANY marine kits and then makes them all suck in the game. There are other models that badly need updates and what does the game get? More marines that don't work on the table.
More and more, I'm thinking the game would be better if marines were squatted. Which will obviously never happen, but they've created a giant NPC race that are supposed to be setting focus? It's just bad and kinda miserable to act out on the table. Marines aren't adding anything to the game. Just to the Black Library.
Worst part is that conceptually I love Drukhari. It's just really unfortunate that dissy cannons cause a lot of sour grapes, especially for marines.
Whilst I generally find DE to be very confusing and somewhat beyond my ability to really understand how a list is put together, I can understand the frustration.
It's a bit like mini versions of formations from 7th. Sure they make you strong, but also cookie cutter and bland. And you end up paying quite a lot of points for things you don't want, and not taking things you do.
Cynista wrote: Whilst I generally find DE to be very confusing and somewhat beyond my ability to really understand how a list is put together, I can understand the frustration.
It's a bit like mini versions of formations from 7th. Sure they make you strong, but also cookie cutter and bland. And you end up paying quite a lot of points for things you don't want, and not taking things you do.
It's also compounding another issue that the Dark Eldar have - just how cut down the army has gotten. In 5th edition there were 42 units in the Codex, in 8th edition there were only 30 (although most of that, admittedly, is from Harlequins getting spun off into their own Codex and special characters getting removed).
Add in the army getting split into three and they really don't have a deep unit pool to build lists from.
Cynista wrote: Whilst I generally find DE to be very confusing and somewhat beyond my ability to really understand how a list is put together, I can understand the frustration.
It's a bit like mini versions of formations from 7th. Sure they make you strong, but also cookie cutter and bland. And you end up paying quite a lot of points for things you don't want, and not taking things you do.
It's also compounding another issue that the Dark Eldar have - just how cut down the army has gotten. In 5th edition there were 42 units in the Codex, in 8th edition there were only 30 (although most of that, admittedly, is from Harlequins getting spun off into their own Codex and special characters getting removed).
Add in the army getting split into three and they really don't have a deep unit pool to build lists from.
I think this is really the crux of the issue. The split in obsessions is cool, but being forced to take a bazzilion HQs which must be duplicated really kills it. I'm happy to take an Archon a Haemonculus and a Succubus, but I'd rather do that in a Brigade or Battalion. There is also the fact that rule of 3 combined with some design choices have led to some things being nigh unplayable (Court of the Archon; I'm looking at you) and other things being close to mandatory (Ravagers).
Martel732 wrote: No, but BA in particular have been so deviant from their fluff in terms of capability for so long it no longer matters what their fluff is. GW has broken any hope of suspension of disbelief. There is only disbelief remaining.
Drukhari are at least glass half full. Even if it gets monotonous. Like pentaflyrant from 7th.
Honestly, I don't know why GW makes so MANY marine kits and then makes them all suck in the game. There are other models that badly need updates and what does the game get? More marines that don't work on the table.
More and more, I'm thinking the game would be better if marines were squatted. Which will obviously never happen, but they've created a giant NPC race that are supposed to be setting focus? It's just bad and kinda miserable to act out on the table. Marines aren't adding anything to the game. Just to the Black Library.
Worst part is that conceptually I love Drukhari. It's just really unfortunate that dissy cannons cause a lot of sour grapes, especially for marines.
I think the thing I really can't wrap my head around is exactly what you said: They just KEEP shoveling out marine releases, and they just KEEP being total useless garbage.
Honestly though, if you like Drukhari, have you considered stepping away from marines for a while to give them a try? Honestly they're among the most fun armies for someone who enjoys technical play to pick up, really fun to paint, have gorgeous kits that for the most part are still in fifth edition prices..
You always just seem so unhappy, man. There's no reason you have to spam dissie cannons and feel like you're betraying your marines, wych cult and coven armies are a thing too.
Martel732 wrote: No, but BA in particular have been so deviant from their fluff in terms of capability for so long it no longer matters what their fluff is. GW has broken any hope of suspension of disbelief. There is only disbelief remaining.
Drukhari are at least glass half full. Even if it gets monotonous. Like pentaflyrant from 7th.
Honestly, I don't know why GW makes so MANY marine kits and then makes them all suck in the game. There are other models that badly need updates and what does the game get? More marines that don't work on the table.
More and more, I'm thinking the game would be better if marines were squatted. Which will obviously never happen, but they've created a giant NPC race that are supposed to be setting focus? It's just bad and kinda miserable to act out on the table. Marines aren't adding anything to the game. Just to the Black Library.
Worst part is that conceptually I love Drukhari. It's just really unfortunate that dissy cannons cause a lot of sour grapes, especially for marines.
I think the thing I really can't wrap my head around is exactly what you said: They just KEEP shoveling out marine releases, and they just KEEP being total useless garbage.
Honestly though, if you like Drukhari, have you considered stepping away from marines for a while to give them a try? Honestly they're among the most fun armies for someone who enjoys technical play to pick up, really fun to paint, have gorgeous kits that for the most part are still in fifth edition prices..
You always just seem so unhappy, man. There's no reason you have to spam dissie cannons and feel like you're betraying your marines, wych cult and coven armies are a thing too.
I second this, I mean I know I made this thread to bitch, but I still love the army more than any other and highly recommend it!
Yeah. Dark elfs are good, no question. And there are several ways to play. You don't have to take dissy ravagers. I don't have any flyer, no ravangers and no dissy cannons, I don't run vec or writ of the living muse. I still have a fun list that wins.
But a lot of the fine detail we miss out on. With only a troop choice, a heavy and an HQ in a kabal there just aren't many ways to play them.
And we're starved for HQs. We have 3 each locked to a specific faction which means a specific build. You can put a marine captain, in Termy armor, on a bike, or give him a jump pack. Storm shields, melta, T hammer, claws, power sword... Same with libarian, etc. Options and sub options.
I happen to like 3 of the 5 ways to build a detachment so I am quite happy. Just let me put my Succubus on a jet bike and I'm golden.
Headlss wrote: Yeah. Dark elfs are good, no question. And there are several ways to play. You don't have to take dissy ravagers. I don't have any flyer, no ravangers and no dissy cannons, I don't run vec or writ of the living muse. I still have a fun list that wins.
But a lot of the fine detail we miss out on. With only a troop choice, a heavy and an HQ in a kabal there just aren't many ways to play them.
And we're starved for HQs. We have 3 each locked to a specific faction which means a specific build. You can put a marine captain, in Termy armor, on a bike, or give him a jump pack. Storm shields, melta, T hammer, claws, power sword... Same with libarian, etc. Options and sub options.
I happen to like 3 of the 5 ways to build a detachment so I am quite happy. Just let me put my Succubus on a jet bike and I'm golden.
The "thing on a fast thing!" gets brought up really often and I just...I don't know. For so long it's just been the default, always 100% better option that I don't think it brings any additional diversity at all, especially now that so many characters auras are so important.
Would being able to slap jetbikes or "movement enhancing wings" on all my HQs make my army better? Yes. Will it make it more diverse? I mean you tell me man, but I know the second I got a mobility option on any of my DEHQs, I'd go from having 3x footslogging HQs to 3x of their mobility enhanced equivalents, really fast. Much like the only reason any character is ever not taken with a mobility option is if they don't have one, or people are afraid of index options going away so they choose not to use them.
I'd much rather just have a different HQ for each of the three unit types. Some kind of battlefield transmogrifier would be cool for covens, allowing you to do things like change around the stats of coven units, like increasing strength and damage but reducing weapon skill, or increasing speed but reducing toughness. A dedicated character hunter representing a younger, fame-hungry and selfish succubus would be great for cults. Maybe a spymaster with sniper weapons and deep strike for Kabals.
"give me a mobility option" has always just seemed like a kind of selfish complaint, in that you're just asking that they be flatly buffed. I can't think of a time when mobility didn't automatically make the unit better if it was available. Also in the case of the succubus you'd be adding like 4" to her movement, since she currently can just take movement drugs and go 10" anyway. If we're talking about the first real model release drukhari get since fifth edition, I'd have a whole lot of stuff higher up on my list than jetbike HQs.
"Thing on a fast thing" gets brought up so often because the entire point of Dark Eldar is being fast as hell, yet their HQs have no mobility outside of jumping into transports. Like, if I'm playing Flayed Skull, everything in my army will be moving a minimum of 17"... except for the HQs, which are stuck on foot and moving at less than half that speed.
It feels awkward and previous Codexes had bikes and skyboards as wargear options. It would be a buff, but it's not an outrageous one and would get the army playing in a smoother way.
Well, the situation with the HQs is an issue.
They are neither very killy nor very fast.
I guess that GW doesn't want to produce an Archon on a skyboard or a jetbike.
So they are on foot and not very attractive game-wise.
As said, babysitting Ravagers shouldn't be a task for an Archon.
But GW take more care about Marines and their apostate counterparts as to Xenos races these days.
Burnage wrote: "Thing on a fast thing" gets brought up so often because the entire point of Dark Eldar is being fast as hell, yet their HQs have no mobility outside of jumping into transports. Like, if I'm playing Flayed Skull, everything in my army will be moving a minimum of 17"... except for the HQs, which are stuck on foot and moving at less than half that speed.
It feels awkward and previous Codexes had bikes and skyboards as wargear options. It would be a buff, but it's not an outrageous one and would get the army playing in a smoother way.
While true, you can make the same statement for an army where you put everything in transports except for one squad of kabalite warriors, who has to walk.
The solution is the same: buy that squad a transport and they'll move fast too? What's so odious about having to buy a 65-point archon a venom when you happily buy one for a 35-point kabalite squad?
The second a jetbike/wings option exists for an HQ, that becomes the default way to run that HQ. When was the last time you saw a footslogging farseer, daemon prince/hive tyrant without wings, or someone willingly taking a marine captain on foot instead of with a jump pack?
I find "we have no options" a legitimate complaint, but "add mobility options" is not REALLY adding options...it's just a buff to the unit. No mobility option (at least, none that retain the CHARACTER keyword protection) have ever really been "optional", they're just mandatory.
I'd be fine with receiving it, overjoyed in fact if we ever did get new models for DE regardless of what they were. But looking at my eldar armies, the one where my regal, commanding wizard HQ has been forever relegated to a mandatory flying motorcycle is the one where I'm least excited about the fluff and character of my HQs. So just like I don't consider the Haemonculus weapon list to be "a lot of options" because one is just mathematically superior to all the others in every situation, I wouldn't really consider a release of a jetbike Succubus/Archon/Haemonculus kit to be "a new option" as much as it would be "blatantly requiring me to buy six kits and replace my lovingly converted HQ models.
Which probably means it'll be the first thing GW does if kinky effeminate torture sex pirate elves ever focus group well with the 14-17 demographic.
Headlss wrote: Yeah. Dark elfs are good, no question. And there are several ways to play. You don't have to take dissy ravagers. I don't have any flyer, no ravangers and no dissy cannons, I don't run vec or writ of the living muse. I still have a fun list that wins.
But a lot of the fine detail we miss out on. With only a troop choice, a heavy and an HQ in a kabal there just aren't many ways to play them.
And we're starved for HQs. We have 3 each locked to a specific faction which means a specific build. You can put a marine captain, in Termy armor, on a bike, or give him a jump pack. Storm shields, melta, T hammer, claws, power sword... Same with libarian, etc. Options and sub options.
I happen to like 3 of the 5 ways to build a detachment so I am quite happy. Just let me put my Succubus on a jet bike and I'm golden.
The "thing on a fast thing!" gets brought up really often and I just...I don't know. For so long it's just been the default, always 100% better option that I don't think it brings any additional diversity at all, especially now that so many characters auras are so important.
Would being able to slap jetbikes or "movement enhancing wings" on all my HQs make my army better? Yes. Will it make it more diverse? I mean you tell me man, but I know the second I got a mobility option on any of my DEHQs, I'd go from having 3x footslogging HQs to 3x of their mobility enhanced equivalents, really fast. Much like the only reason any character is ever not taken with a mobility option is if they don't have one, or people are afraid of index options going away so they choose not to use them.
I'd much rather just have a different HQ for each of the three unit types. Some kind of battlefield transmogrifier would be cool for covens, allowing you to do things like change around the stats of coven units, like increasing strength and damage but reducing weapon skill, or increasing speed but reducing toughness. A dedicated character hunter representing a younger, fame-hungry and selfish succubus would be great for cults. Maybe a spymaster with sniper weapons and deep strike for Kabals.
"give me a mobility option" has always just seemed like a kind of selfish complaint, in that you're just asking that they be flatly buffed. I can't think of a time when mobility didn't automatically make the unit better if it was available. Also in the case of the succubus you'd be adding like 4" to her movement, since she currently can just take movement drugs and go 10" anyway. If we're talking about the first real model release drukhari get since fifth edition, I'd have a whole lot of stuff higher up on my list than jetbike HQs.
It would also buff her toughness give her a flat S4 weapon an extra wound and incresse her speed from ~11 ish to flat 26. I use red grife. I want to prevent people from falling back from my t1 charge so she is taking a shard net.
I want jet bike cause its easy. It doesn't require any new thing.
I can see where you are coming from, we don't really need buffs. But its annoying to be artificially constrained.
Headlss wrote: Yeah. Dark elfs are good, no question. And there are several ways to play. You don't have to take dissy ravagers. I don't have any flyer, no ravangers and no dissy cannons, I don't run vec or writ of the living muse. I still have a fun list that wins.
But a lot of the fine detail we miss out on. With only a troop choice, a heavy and an HQ in a kabal there just aren't many ways to play them.
And we're starved for HQs. We have 3 each locked to a specific faction which means a specific build. You can put a marine captain, in Termy armor, on a bike, or give him a jump pack. Storm shields, melta, T hammer, claws, power sword... Same with libarian, etc. Options and sub options.
I happen to like 3 of the 5 ways to build a detachment so I am quite happy. Just let me put my Succubus on a jet bike and I'm golden.
The "thing on a fast thing!" gets brought up really often and I just...I don't know. For so long it's just been the default, always 100% better option that I don't think it brings any additional diversity at all, especially now that so many characters auras are so important.
Would being able to slap jetbikes or "movement enhancing wings" on all my HQs make my army better? Yes. Will it make it more diverse? I mean you tell me man, but I know the second I got a mobility option on any of my DEHQs, I'd go from having 3x footslogging HQs to 3x of their mobility enhanced equivalents, really fast. Much like the only reason any character is ever not taken with a mobility option is if they don't have one, or people are afraid of index options going away so they choose not to use them.
I'd much rather just have a different HQ for each of the three unit types. Some kind of battlefield transmogrifier would be cool for covens, allowing you to do things like change around the stats of coven units, like increasing strength and damage but reducing weapon skill, or increasing speed but reducing toughness. A dedicated character hunter representing a younger, fame-hungry and selfish succubus would be great for cults. Maybe a spymaster with sniper weapons and deep strike for Kabals.
"give me a mobility option" has always just seemed like a kind of selfish complaint, in that you're just asking that they be flatly buffed. I can't think of a time when mobility didn't automatically make the unit better if it was available. Also in the case of the succubus you'd be adding like 4" to her movement, since she currently can just take movement drugs and go 10" anyway. If we're talking about the first real model release drukhari get since fifth edition, I'd have a whole lot of stuff higher up on my list than jetbike HQs.
It would also buff her toughness give her a flat S4 weapon an extra wound and incresse her speed from ~11 ish to flat 26. I use red grife. I want to prevent people from falling back from my t1 charge so she is taking a shard net.
I want jet bike cause its easy. It doesn't require any new thing.
I can see where you are coming from, we don't really need buffs. But its annoying to be artificially constrained.
As opposed to those super easy to deal with constraints that aren't artificial, like all of your units just not being any good?
And its not "thing on a fast thing" its "make my fast thing go faster". I want the leader of my cult of speed to lead my cult of speed.
The archon and heamy are fine on foot. Would I put them on bikes if I could maybe. If it was a flat upgrade probably. But let my Archon take up spot 6 or 11 in a boat, and buff that boat and everyone on it I would put him there. Give him a dissy cannon and let him re roll all misses as long as noether he nor the unit moved. Give us a melee warrior build that he buffs maybe I run him that way.
I really think a succubus on bike or board would be amazing. An archon with wings to keep up with the venoms would make me happy as it would allow them to actually participate. Haemies I think I would usually take on foot even with a mobility upgrade available. For other armies the mobility upgrade is nice, for an army that jets around the board, we currently work unsupported or slow down... which sucks.
Burnage wrote: "Thing on a fast thing" gets brought up so often because the entire point of Dark Eldar is being fast as hell, yet their HQs have no mobility outside of jumping into transports. Like, if I'm playing Flayed Skull, everything in my army will be moving a minimum of 17"... except for the HQs, which are stuck on foot and moving at less than half that speed.
It feels awkward and previous Codexes had bikes and skyboards as wargear options. It would be a buff, but it's not an outrageous one and would get the army playing in a smoother way.
While true, you can make the same statement for an army where you put everything in transports except for one squad of kabalite warriors, who has to walk.
The solution is the same: buy that squad a transport and they'll move fast too? What's so odious about having to buy a 65-point archon a venom when you happily buy one for a 35-point kabalite squad?
Sticking HQs in transports has a lot of downsides. You can't use auras, you don't get warlord traits that need your warlord on the field, you don't get to hide from shooting thanks to the character keyword, you can't stick a squad in with them in a Venom (or a full-sized squad in a Raider), if the transport is killed there's a chance they instantly die. Harlequins have a similar problem but they also have a Masque trait which is entirely designed to mitigate some of these issues, and their relatively larger transport capacity also allows a HQ and squad to share a ride comfortably.
I mean, it works to stick them in a transport, but it does feel awkward as hell.
Drager wrote: An archon with wings to keep up with the venoms would make me happy as it would allow them to actually participate.
A winged Archon would make me very happy because I just love winged models.
Spoiler:
Also, as was mentioned earlier, the Shadowfield alone makes me despise the Archon. Could we not move to something more like Mandrakes (a 5++ with a -1 to hit)?
The fact that a single failed save (which I'm not allowed to reroll, ever) makes my warlord lose his save for the rest of the game just makes me disinclined to ever use my Warlord in combat.
Burnage wrote: "Thing on a fast thing" gets brought up so often because the entire point of Dark Eldar is being fast as hell, yet their HQs have no mobility outside of jumping into transports. Like, if I'm playing Flayed Skull, everything in my army will be moving a minimum of 17"... except for the HQs, which are stuck on foot and moving at less than half that speed.
It feels awkward and previous Codexes had bikes and skyboards as wargear options. It would be a buff, but it's not an outrageous one and would get the army playing in a smoother way.
While true, you can make the same statement for an army where you put everything in transports except for one squad of kabalite warriors, who has to walk.
The solution is the same: buy that squad a transport and they'll move fast too? What's so odious about having to buy a 65-point archon a venom when you happily buy one for a 35-point kabalite squad?
Sticking HQs in transports has a lot of downsides. You can't use auras, you don't get warlord traits that need your warlord on the field, you don't get to hide from shooting thanks to the character keyword, you can't stick a squad in with them in a Venom (or a full-sized squad in a Raider), if the transport is killed there's a chance they instantly die. Harlequins have a similar problem but they also have a Masque trait which is entirely designed to mitigate some of these issues, and their relatively larger transport capacity also allows a HQ and squad to share a ride comfortably.
I mean, it works to stick them in a transport, but it does feel awkward as hell.
Bc it is awkward and not fun... DE should have Bike/Wing/SKyboard HQ's its completely ridiculous that we dont and CWE does, the fact that Red Grief Succubus was to walk or ride SOLO in a Venom (a 1/6 chance its removed from the game is stupid solo) is not a good feeling at all, you have to take a Raider to get body guards, Raider in Red grief for my succubus... so fun.. NOT,! Just give us a a upgrade kit that can make 1 of all 3.
pm713 wrote: I wouldn't mind losing the save for the game if you could have a decent backup with armour or something.
I have good news for you if it annoys you to the degree that you're willing to sacrifice something else to get it.
Put the armor of misery on him.
3+sv archon, right there. Take those against low quality shots! Rely on your invuln only for high AP shots!
Again though if the complaint actually ends with a phantom ".......and I would like to get that for free in my already quite strong faction" my sympathy for you is 0.
Martel732 wrote: The jetbike farseer is quite the slap in the face isn't it?
Not really so much as a slap in the face as a very clear demonstration of one of the things wrong with Dark Eldar currently. Even after our Codex, a Farseer and Warlock Skyrunner are practically mandatory competitively. Why? Because they synergise better with the army than any of the native HQs.
Drager wrote: An archon with wings to keep up with the venoms would make me happy as it would allow them to actually participate.
A winged Archon would make me very happy because I just love winged models.
Spoiler:
Also, as was mentioned earlier, the Shadowfield alone makes me despise the Archon. Could we not move to something more like Mandrakes (a 5++ with a -1 to hit)?
The fact that a single failed save (which I'm not allowed to reroll, ever) makes my warlord lose his save for the rest of the game just makes me disinclined to ever use my Warlord in combat.
I disagree with you on the shadow field. I love it. I'm glad its not re rollable, I don't want a 90 point death star. I do take the armor of misery on my beat stick so I have armor. My second Archon is fure support so he has charcter protection until near the end. If you want to improve it I could see getting a roll to bring it back up, but it would have to be a 6 and thats not really what you want.
I've had my Archon go toe to toe with a Castilian for 2 rounds becuase of the shadow field, on the thrid round he couldn't hit me at all, he was on his last tear and I had -1 to hit from Armor of Misery. He doesn't need to be stronger. But if you want a reliable HQ we don't have one.
I'd be okay if the Archon never got an option, as long as when they are embarked on a vehicle their auras work.
The Haemonculus doesn't need a mobility option. They want to stick with Wracks, or Grotesques that don't have major movement anyways.
I love my DE, but I feel that the mercenary choices from the codex were done poorly. Make mercenary units more powerful due to them missing out on obsessions.
Incubi need more attacks, more damage, or something that makes them better in melee. Needs plastic and an HQ
Mandrakes are pretty good, need plastic and an HQ.
Scourge are amazing but need to be something other than a suicide unit.
The one unit I want to see reworked is Beast Packs. I've always wanted to run them, but finecast is a poor option for me. They should be a mercenary unit, not wych cult, but if included in Wych Cult then the Beast master benefits from the obsession. Always gets drugs.
I disagree with you on the shadow field. I love it.
That makes one of us.
Headlss wrote: I'm glad its not re rollable, I don't want a 90 point death star.
Yep, a T3 model with crap damage output who can reroll his save once per turn with a command point would totally be a death star.
Also, you realise that I didn't ask for it to be rerollable, right? But sure, a T3 character with a 5++ and -1 to hit would be completely unkillable. Who needs Imperial Knights with rerollable 3++ saves when you have this.
Headlss wrote: If you want to improve it I could see getting a roll to bring it back up, but it would have to be a 6
Why? You could literally have it come back on automatically at the end of the turn and it wouldn't hurt the game in the slightest.
Headlss wrote: But if you want a reliable HQ we don't have one.
pm713 wrote: I wouldn't mind losing the save for the game if you could have a decent backup with armour or something.
I have good news for you if it annoys you to the degree that you're willing to sacrifice something else to get it.
Put the armor of misery on him.
3+sv archon, right there. Take those against low quality shots! Rely on your invuln only for high AP shots!
Again though if the complaint actually ends with a phantom ".......and I would like to get that for free in my already quite strong faction" my sympathy for you is 0.
It seems ridiculous to need a relic for armour. I want to be able to have the good while it lasts invul and good armour I can buy.
Remember we used to have a Clone field as an option, I LOVED that wargear, i would rather have that back than a 4++ (you roll a D3 and you nullified that many hits). Even if it was 5pts and -1 to hit, that would still be a nice option, but i miss the old rules.
Our Archons used to be good in combat... B.c you didnt take Shadowfields, 4+ and 6+++, D3 hits miss, Combat drugs, Real Huskblade (power sword with Instant death, aka a force weapon) and Soul Trap, he went hunting characters to Bitch slap them.
You couldnt take Clone and Shadow together. But you didnt need to, if hunting units without power weapons, 4+ was good enough especially bc we always hit 1st at Int 7, and if the Sargent was the last guy left, with 2 attacks (bc i charged) they will auto miss D3 of those 2 attacks. Vs Captains, and other HQ's they had 4 attacks (CCW/Psitol and 3 attacks) but again we swing 1st and again D3 attacks miss.
Automatically Appended Next Post: DE had options at one point..... i miss those options, now we are a blanket army with limited options and forced into 3 armies to even further limitations, yes we have lots of Tough guys and good shooting, but that gets boring really fast.
Amishprn86 wrote: With GSC getting Blips.. where is our WWPs? Oh right, we get things taken away.. cant have nice things.
That one isn't remotely worthy of complaining about, it became a stratagem but effectively does the exact same thing.
Umm no? They used to the templates and force area denial, they were impossible terrain, you could run up and throw 3 WWP's blocking tanks/units, then coming out off the sides to create walls, much like the Blips are doing now. It gave you the option to split forces ups, etc..
The way I see it, you have four options when it comes to getting HQs across the field.
1. Footslog them.
2. Fit them in with a squad in a transport.
3. Buy a party boat all to themselves.
4. WWP them in.
For the first, they're either going to be sitting on a backfield objective all game or have to desperately jog towards the enemy while the entire army leaves them in the dust. This prevents them from synergizing with the army.
For the second, they're displacing an occupant in a Raider. Weapon options unlock at ten models, and the HQ can't buff while embarked. You can alternatively take them with an understrength unit in a Venom. Which can only be taken in an Auxiliary Support Detachment, if memory serves. So it costs a command point, and a precious Detachment slot. This prevents them from synergizing with the army and actually penalizes you for trying.
For the third, realistically you're putting 2-3 HQs in a Venom. Functionally, this costs somewhere in the range of 22-38 points per HQ. For this upgrade, you lose your character protection, still don't have access to your auras, and have a chance to instantly die when your basket overflowing with eggs inevitably gets nuked. You could fill some of the empty slots with ablative wounds, to help mitigate it though! Unfortunately, the only candidates to do that are an understrength unit (see above), or the Court of the Archon. Which are single model, non-character, units. So you have a very flimsy transport with six very flimsy kill points you are practically giving to the enemy. This prevents them from synergizing with the army and penalizes you for trying.
Finally, you could Webway Portal them in. But why? You can't provide buffs, it still costs you a Command Point, it prevents you from Deepstriking vehicles, and that Stratagem is much better spent on a blob of Wyches. So it prevents them from synergizing with the army and penalizes you for trying.
Is it honestly any wonder why DE players are clamoring for mobility options?
Regarding WWPs, the thing that really bugs me is that characters can't ride with units anymore.
Previously, I could give a WWP to a character, attach him to a squad and then teleport them in together.
Now, though, teleporting in a squad costs 1CP, but teleporting in a squad and a character costs THREECPs. Why? Why does adding a single character triple the cost of the WWP?
Replying to a lot of posts, but too lazy to use quotes. Also, read lots of Dark Eldar rules- always wanted to, so I've owned every dex and built "wish lists" but never got around to it.
The loss of characters is a drag. I had hoped they'd continue to support gangs of Commorragh and add models and options to the army that way, much as they are using Kill Team and Blackstone to add characters to other lists. The good news is that I think we will still see characters via those two other, more popular vehicles, which are receiving support.
But a lot of the suggestions for fixes seem to go against what I have always perceived to be the fluff.
First off, hellions are wyches. Period. Succubus on skyboard? Absolutely appropriate, and MUST be added as an option. An archon on a skyboard? With custom written fluff in a narrative campaign, maybe. A haemonculus on a skyboard? No. Just no. even if it was technically possible in a previous dex, no.
Now I want to say the same about jetbikes, but I do feel there really is both rules value and fluff validity for an archon on a bike- it would fix the transport/ squad size/ aura issue, and a bike seems more befitting the gravitas of an Archon than a skyboard.
Next, someone seemed to suggest beasts would be cool without a beast master; I'm not sure that's ever been legal and it doesn't seem fluffy. Now creating a named beast master character HQ would be cool. But a generic archon that can control beast packs? No. MAYBE a succubus, because beast packs use to be associated with the wyches before the mercenary classification was expanded.
Incubi should have stayed a kabal option rather than being mercs.
So now onto the unique army structure/ multipatrol issue. Yes, this mechanically is problematic since they changed the CP values for battalions and brigades. It was also fluff genius, because the Dark Eldar have always been 3 armies in their fluff, and I have never thought of them in any other way.
I hated the increase to battalions and brigades and I've hated the detachment limit since its inception. My sisters/ ecclesiarchy always fought as two armies too- a holy choir of only models with AoF and a penitent legion which, aside from Repentia and mistresses, contained zero units with AoF [although Jacobus did join particularly epic battles]. This design also favoured many small detachments rather than a few big ones.
I am glad I don't play in tournaments, because I've never been forced to use the detachment limit rule. But after than cp increase to the uber detachments, many small stopped being viable.
Burnage wrote: "Thing on a fast thing" gets brought up so often because the entire point of Dark Eldar is being fast as hell, yet their HQs have no mobility outside of jumping into transports. Like, if I'm playing Flayed Skull, everything in my army will be moving a minimum of 17"... except for the HQs, which are stuck on foot and moving at less than half that speed.
It feels awkward and previous Codexes had bikes and skyboards as wargear options. It would be a buff, but it's not an outrageous one and would get the army playing in a smoother way.
While true, you can make the same statement for an army where you put everything in transports except for one squad of kabalite warriors, who has to walk.
The solution is the same: buy that squad a transport and they'll move fast too? What's so odious about having to buy a 65-point archon a venom when you happily buy one for a 35-point kabalite squad?
The second a jetbike/wings option exists for an HQ, that becomes the default way to run that HQ. When was the last time you saw a footslogging farseer, daemon prince/hive tyrant without wings, or someone willingly taking a marine captain on foot instead of with a jump pack?
I find "we have no options" a legitimate complaint, but "add mobility options" is not REALLY adding options...it's just a buff to the unit. No mobility option (at least, none that retain the CHARACTER keyword protection) have ever really been "optional", they're just mandatory.
I'd be fine with receiving it, overjoyed in fact if we ever did get new models for DE regardless of what they were. But looking at my eldar armies, the one where my regal, commanding wizard HQ has been forever relegated to a mandatory flying motorcycle is the one where I'm least excited about the fluff and character of my HQs. So just like I don't consider the Haemonculus weapon list to be "a lot of options" because one is just mathematically superior to all the others in every situation, I wouldn't really consider a release of a jetbike Succubus/Archon/Haemonculus kit to be "a new option" as much as it would be "blatantly requiring me to buy six kits and replace my lovingly converted HQ models.
Which probably means it'll be the first thing GW does if kinky effeminate torture sex pirate elves ever focus group well with the 14-17 demographic.
I can't really agree with this. While to some having a mobility option becomes the only way you see it. That isn't always the case. I can only speak for myself, I like to keep my HQs with like. So I take a jump pack/bike to keep up with like units. I still have plenty of HQs on foot for sitting back, riding with transports along side squads or moving up the line with foot sloggers. Not every HQ will default come on bikes or skyboards.
Though I am sure some will only run characters like that but that won't be every player out there. It was like so before when options were all over. It is a bit sad that they are stripping all options away and I don't like that direction and marines are even following, I mean just look at how many LT's there are and Captains, all with 0 options and no mobility options. I feel like as much as modeling is improving our fun in game options are vanishing and I feel sad for the day when they've stripped them all away.
I think we should be prushing for DE to have character set up options for mobility and actual war gear choice we need to save our options not cheer they are all gone.
PenitentJake wrote: But a lot of the suggestions for fixes seem to go against what I have always perceived to be the fluff.
First off, hellions are wyches. Period. Succubus on skyboard? Absolutely appropriate, and MUST be added as an option. An archon on a skyboard? With custom written fluff in a narrative campaign, maybe. A haemonculus on a skyboard? No. Just no. even if it was technically possible in a previous dex, no.
One minor point on the Archon on a Skyboard. Baron Sathonyx is/was an Archon renowned for being a former Hellion. Granted, that's an edge case of a character that, to the best of my understanding, hasn't been mentioned for the greater part of nine years, but it supported by fluff in at least one case. Agreed on Haemonculus, it would be nice to have a relic that would give him some mobility but "speedy" isn't really an appropriate term for the Covens.
Now I want to say the same about jetbikes, but I do feel there really is both rules value and fluff validity for an archon on a bike- it would fix the transport/ squad size/ aura issue, and a bike seems more befitting the gravitas of an Archon than a skyboard.
Agreed. One point to add, though. Vraesque Malidrach is the Archon at the head of the Kabal of the Flayed Skull, and notable for his past as a Arena Champion on his bike. I don't think it's unfluffy at all to have Archon's on jetbikes.
PenitentJake wrote: Next, someone seemed to suggest beasts would be cool without a beast master; I'm not sure that's ever been legal and it doesn't seem fluffy. Now creating a named beast master character HQ would be cool. But a generic archon that can control beast packs? No. MAYBE a succubus, because beast packs use to be associated with the wyches before the mercenary classification was expanded.
You could take Beasts without a Beastmaster in both 7th edition (I think. I was really really bad at 7th edition) and the 8th Edition Index. I was quite fond of the fluff I wrote for my Archon, emerging from the Webway among his most prized Khymera war dogs. As for the fluff, the Court of the Archon is notable for having the Ur-Ghul as part of it, a weird beast that navigates by smell. Not too unlikely that an Archon who prefers his pets to have eyes might elect to take something else. Also, as I've read it Beastmasters are to the Cults as Incubi are to the Kabals. You'll rarely see a Beastmaster outside a Cult, or Incubi outside a Kabal, but both are distinctly separate from their parent organizations.
Incubi should have stayed a kabal option rather than being mercs.
Strong disagree. Incubi are sort of fallen Aspect Warriors. They hold themselves to a code of honor, and belong to an organization completely independent from any Kabal. While it would help them some in game, it'd make me feel about the same as Leilith having the Combat Drugs rule in the Index.
So now onto the unique army structure/ multipatrol issue. Yes, this mechanically is problematic since they changed the CP values for battalions and brigades. It was also fluff genius, because the Dark Eldar have always been 3 armies in their fluff, and I have never thought of them in any other way.
I hated the increase to battalions and brigades and I've hated the detachment limit since its inception. My sisters/ ecclesiarchy always fought as two armies too- a holy choir of only models with AoF and a penitent legion which, aside from Repentia and mistresses, contained zero units with AoF [although Jacobus did join particularly epic battles]. This design also favoured many small detachments rather than a few big ones.
I am glad I don't play in tournaments, because I've never been forced to use the detachment limit rule. But after than cp increase to the uber detachments, many small stopped being viable.
I like the idea of the Raiding Party. It just got stuck being two weeks ahead of the CP boost, with HQs you never want more of, and Detachment Limits that severely limit its use.
Regarding HQ, jetbikes, hellions, and fluff. As someone mentioned we used to have a HQ that was a former Hellion champion. Add on top of that that one of the archons of the largest kabals - Vraesque Malidrach - used to be a reaver. This tends to imply that both Archons and Subbuses have a history using all kinds of vehicles.
Haemies I am however in total agreement. They would just look silly flying on a hellion board or a reaver jetbike. I would - at best - only accept if they were riding hellish creation of theirs.
Replying to a lot of posts, but too lazy to use quotes. Also, read lots of Dark Eldar rules- always wanted to, so I've owned every dex and built "wish lists" but never got around to it.
The loss of characters is a drag. I had hoped they'd continue to support gangs of Commorragh and add models and options to the army that way, much as they are using Kill Team and Blackstone to add characters to other lists. The good news is that I think we will still see characters via those two other, more popular vehicles, which are receiving support.
But a lot of the suggestions for fixes seem to go against what I have always perceived to be the fluff.
First off, hellions are wyches. Period. Succubus on skyboard? Absolutely appropriate, and MUST be added as an option. An archon on a skyboard? With custom written fluff in a narrative campaign, maybe. A haemonculus on a skyboard? No. Just no. even if it was technically possible in a previous dex, no.
Now I want to say the same about jetbikes, but I do feel there really is both rules value and fluff validity for an archon on a bike- it would fix the transport/ squad size/ aura issue, and a bike seems more befitting the gravitas of an Archon than a skyboard.
Next, someone seemed to suggest beasts would be cool without a beast master; I'm not sure that's ever been legal and it doesn't seem fluffy. Now creating a named beast master character HQ would be cool. But a generic archon that can control beast packs? No. MAYBE a succubus, because beast packs use to be associated with the wyches before the mercenary classification was expanded.
Incubi should have stayed a kabal option rather than being mercs.
So now onto the unique army structure/ multipatrol issue. Yes, this mechanically is problematic since they changed the CP values for battalions and brigades. It was also fluff genius, because the Dark Eldar have always been 3 armies in their fluff, and I have never thought of them in any other way.
I hated the increase to battalions and brigades and I've hated the detachment limit since its inception. My sisters/ ecclesiarchy always fought as two armies too- a holy choir of only models with AoF and a penitent legion which, aside from Repentia and mistresses, contained zero units with AoF [although Jacobus did join particularly epic battles]. This design also favoured many small detachments rather than a few big ones.
I am glad I don't play in tournaments, because I've never been forced to use the detachment limit rule. But after than cp increase to the uber detachments, many small stopped being viable.
The Skyboard and Jetbike options aren't just wishlisting, they are what we used to have, but was taken away. Also beasts existed before beastmasters did (you used to run them with a Drahite on a Skyboard). Incubi have always been mercs, it's a core part of their fluff. Other than that I broadly agree.
PenitentJake wrote: But a lot of the suggestions for fixes seem to go against what I have always perceived to be the fluff.
First off, hellions are wyches. Period. Succubus on skyboard? Absolutely appropriate, and MUST be added as an option. An archon on a skyboard? With custom written fluff in a narrative campaign, maybe. A haemonculus on a skyboard? No. Just no. even if it was technically possible in a previous dex, no.
One minor point on the Archon on a Skyboard. Baron Sathonyx is/was an Archon renowned for being a former Hellion. Granted, that's an edge case of a character that, to the best of my understanding, hasn't been mentioned for the greater part of nine years, but it supported by fluff in at least one case. Agreed on Haemonculus, it would be nice to have a relic that would give him some mobility but "speedy" isn't really an appropriate term for the Covens.
Not quite correct, Baron Sathonyx was a Dracon who was forced out of his Kabal by his Archon after bringing a captured Farseer into Commorragh, he then joined a Hellion gang and rose up to become the Lord Hellion. I agree with everyone about not giving Haemoculi mobility options but even if they had them I wouldn't take them myself, given that the fastest moving Coven unit goes 8" and the Haemonculus already goes 7" there's just no reason to ever use such options.
Regarding Beastmasters, you didn't need to take them in 7th or the index but it was silly not to, extremely low leadership meant without a Beastmaster in the unit a single casualty saw the unit run away last edition or lose potentially mutliple models this edition. And you had to take them in 5th, the Beast Pack rules allowed you to take X number of each type of beast per Beastmaster. The problem now is that you can only take 3 Beasts units per detachment and they don't take up slots which means we're back to the problem of pointless redundency, extra useless HQ's, Wyches you may not want or multiple Beastmasters you don't need.
PenitentJake wrote: But a lot of the suggestions for fixes seem to go against what I have always perceived to be the fluff.
First off, hellions are wyches. Period. Succubus on skyboard? Absolutely appropriate, and MUST be added as an option. An archon on a skyboard? With custom written fluff in a narrative campaign, maybe. A haemonculus on a skyboard? No. Just no. even if it was technically possible in a previous dex, no.
One minor point on the Archon on a Skyboard. Baron Sathonyx is/was an Archon renowned for being a former Hellion. Granted, that's an edge case of a character that, to the best of my understanding, hasn't been mentioned for the greater part of nine years, but it supported by fluff in at least one case. Agreed on Haemonculus, it would be nice to have a relic that would give him some mobility but "speedy" isn't really an appropriate term for the Covens.
Not quite correct, Baron Sathonyx was a Dracon who was forced out of his Kabal by his Archon after bringing a captured Farseer into Commorragh, he then joined a Hellion gang and rose up to become the Lord Hellion. I agree with everyone about not giving Haemoculi mobility options but even if they had them I wouldn't take them myself, given that the fastest moving Coven unit goes 8" and the Haemonculus already goes 7" there's just no reason to ever use such options.
Regarding Beastmasters, you didn't need to take them in 7th or the index but it was silly not to, extremely low leadership meant without a Beastmaster in the unit a single casualty saw the unit run away last edition or lose potentially mutliple models this edition. And you had to take them in 5th, the Beast Pack rules allowed you to take X number of each type of beast per Beastmaster. The problem now is that you can only take 3 Beasts units per detachment and they don't take up slots which means we're back to the problem of pointless redundency, extra useless HQ's, Wyches you may not want or multiple Beastmasters you don't need.
My mistake, thanks for correcting me.
For beasts, yeah they got clobbered by the Codex. It's a shame, I really like the concept of them.
Haemonculi should definitely be able to take wings. The whole fluff behind scourges is that they have the money to go to haemonculi to have them surgically implanted. Why wouldn't they be able to do that for themselves?
Also, this is the Dark Eldar we're talking about here. If they have the money to do it, why wouldn't they take every advantage possible over their enemies?
Brutus_Apex wrote: Haemonculi should definitely be able to take wings. The whole fluff behind scourges is that they have the money to go to haemonculi to have them surgically implanted. Why wouldn't they be able to do that for themselves?
Also, this is the Dark Eldar we're talking about here. If they have the money to do it, why wouldn't they take every advantage possible over their enemies?
No option should be left behind for any HQ.
No, they would put a floating anti grav device on them like the Talos and Cronos.
Brutus_Apex wrote: Haemonculi should definitely be able to take wings. The whole fluff behind scourges is that they have the money to go to haemonculi to have them surgically implanted. Why wouldn't they be able to do that for themselves?
Also, this is the Dark Eldar we're talking about here. If they have the money to do it, why wouldn't they take every advantage possible over their enemies?
No option should be left behind for any HQ.
No, they would put a floating anti grav device on them like the Talos and Cronos.
Thanks for all of the clarification on the fluff- especially the Incubi part. I do hope that DE get some kill team/ blackstone love. It's going to be a long time before I get to start a DE army, but when I do, I want to run it up from kill team so that it can grow organically.
Baron Harkonnen in a coven ? I like it. Yeah though, wings would be great to for an HQ option. What says, I'm rich , powerful and deserving of fear and respect like being able to fly ? Too good for that filthy ground.
AngryAngel80 wrote: Baron Harkonnen in a coven ? I like it. Yeah though, wings would be great to for an HQ option. What says, I'm rich , powerful and deserving of fear and respect like being able to fly ? Too good for that filthy ground.
Im still looking for the right model, one of the ones im looking at is the AOS nurgle characters, there is a nice fat ugly hero i like.
Looking at the new Ynarri stuff has given me some ideas. Ynarri DE can take mixed detachments without losing SfD and the Archon and Succubus auras now cross buff (so Archons can buff Wyches and Succubi can buff Kabal stuff). Yvraine also has a (melee only) doom now and there's a strat for +1 atttack and a strat for advance and charge if needed. I think that actually makes Reavers pretty good, and they can bow be taken in a battalion with Kabalites. Reavers with Adrenalight, the reroll wounds power on their target and the +1 attack strat are now hitting on 2s from T1 if you shot something to death (which you did, probably), rerolling 1s if a Succubus or Archon is nearby and have 48 attacks rerolling to wound at S4 AP -1. That's pretty deadly, particularly to something like Eldar flyers or big blobs of orks and doesn't stop you using Doom (from a craftworld Farseer) on another target to boost your shooting.
Depending on how you are using them you also have the potential of a 5++ (bike warlock for example) which really shores up their durability issue. For reavers I think that pile of bonuses is better than a double activation, they have strats to give their prior Wych cult abilities (+1 A/Advance and charge) as needed and still keep Power From Pain as well as not needing wyches as a tax.
