Switch Theme:

Drukhari are OP, what next?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Been Around the Block




I'm not convinced that raiders are the problem either. However, there does seem to be an internal balance problem for DE. Yes they are a transport faction, but they have 2 transports and competitive lists are only spamming one of the two. If you increase the raider by 10 points my question would be does that help the internal balance of raider vs. venom? Is that enough of a points hike to make venoms viable?

I am not convinced by their DT fix. Covens come with fnps anyway, which makes them more resistant to mortal wounds anyway. I still think this comes down to internal balance. If you went with the goonhammer change, would you start to see any other coven show up in competitive lists? As long as there is really only 1 option the codex is poorly designed within itself.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




RandomHeretic wrote:
I'm not convinced that raiders are the problem either. However, there does seem to be an internal balance problem for DE. Yes they are a transport faction, but they have 2 transports and competitive lists are only spamming one of the two. If you increase the raider by 10 points my question would be does that help the internal balance of raider vs. venom? Is that enough of a points hike to make venoms viable?


Making a raider 95 points base doesnt make the 75 point base Venom any more attractive.
   
Made in us
Perfected Haemonculi Living Sculpture






The venom took a hit based on the way hit mods work in 9th, and then took another further hit when they changed the splinter canon.

I actually think the venom is probably priced about right, definitely leaning on the high side but I think thats better then being too cheap.

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Knock the hull down by 5 and cannons down 5 and you'd have an actual choice to make between Venoms and Raiders.
   
Made in gb
Been Around the Block




Question regarding killing raiders - would dropping them down to bottom bracket be (almost) as effective as destroying them?

Bottom bracket drops them to M6 and BS5+, making them slower than the infantry that they are carrying and halving the effectiveness of their DL.

Also, even with a maxed advance roll, provided you are set up 24" away the DT Wrack liquifiers they're carrying won't be in range T1.

Then, next turn it is easier to mop up the last 2 wounds to crack them open to get at the gooey innards surely?
   
Made in us
Battle-tested Knight Castellan Pilot





If you get first turn, I guess? Not sure how you can build a list around that, though. After turn 1, if they have already moved, I think you're SOL.
   
Made in it
Focused Fire Warrior





I'm of the idea that rules should be great, fun and fluffy.
If the unit ends up too strong (or too weak), the point cost is the lever to push/pull to balance it.

Not playing DE I have no idea if the current rules are "great, fun and fluffy", but the army as a whole is definitely on a broken level so it should be toned down.
45-55% win rate is the sweet spot, anyhting over or under that should be addressed.


 
   
Made in gb
Been Around the Block




Rihgu wrote:
If you get first turn, I guess? Not sure how you can build a list around that, though. After turn 1, if they have already moved, I think you're SOL.


Oh, yeah - ATM going first is pretty much your only hope. But if you don't have to kill the raiders straight away then you should need 20% less firepower than the current theorycrafting is assuming, which might make it less of a impossibility.
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 Red Corsair wrote:
The venom took a hit based on the way hit mods work in 9th, and then took another further hit when they changed the splinter canon.

I actually think the venom is probably priced about right, definitely leaning on the high side but I think thats better then being too cheap.

You do realize the splinter cannon is straight buffed over it's current iterations? Plus it got an additional transport capacity. I do think the venom is about right - it is however overcosted compared to a starweaver which is just flat out better for no reason other than the same person who said raiders should be 85 points said a starweaver should be 80... Starweavers with a 4++ and a -1 16" move and fly should be 100 points min. Then the venom looks just fine at 85 points.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






sanguine40k wrote:
Question regarding killing raiders - would dropping them down to bottom bracket be (almost) as effective as destroying them?

Bottom bracket drops them to M6 and BS5+, making them slower than the infantry that they are carrying and halving the effectiveness of their DL.

Also, even with a maxed advance roll, provided you are set up 24" away the DT Wrack liquifiers they're carrying won't be in range T1.

Then, next turn it is easier to mop up the last 2 wounds to crack them open to get at the gooey innards surely?


Mostly the point is to kill the very strong squad on the inside of the raider, which can often make its points back in a single round of melee combat or shooting in the case of DT wracks.

The raider's only job is to move forward once, and then exist for one turn. Everything past that point is gravy! a gravy boat, so to speak.

to be clear, I actually don't think it makes that much sense to nerf raiders that much as 'the source of all evil.' it's just that nerfing them is a convenient way to nerf courts, wyches, wracks, kabs, etc etc etc all at once. If you started out the gate and nerfed, say, wcyhes and incubi, I think there's enough gas in the tank that kabalites or even non-DT wracks could still be relatively problematic.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






Very serious about this. If Space marines could take raiders for all their units they would.

If CWE could...they would.

If tyranids could...they would.

Pretty much every army would. Raiders are certainly an issue. Why were they not an issue in 8th? Probably because spamming dessie cannons was even more an issue? and CWE Harlies and DE have a lot of top end units that weren't really benefitted by radiers much?

Wracks before wanted to be on the table with their 4++ free save from Rakarth.

Warriors wernt really taken much because everyone was taking wracks.

Wyches werent a popular unit and anyone bringing them was taking 20 man units from deep strike.

Plus the raider was clearly the worse choice between it and the venom...MY DE list had A LOT of venoms...

The game has changed now though. 10 man units get a lot more out of stratagems...you want to use those stratagems. ECT. The culmination effect here is there are very few DE units that don't become better when you put them in a raider. It is clear. They are the primary issue.

I agree it is the way DE should be playing...with lots of transports. They just need to pay properly for these benifits.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Perfected Haemonculi Living Sculpture






Every army in the game would also take eradicators if they could, or repentia if they could etc etc.

That's a really silly way to look at it honestly.

Your other points are also pretty inaccurate.

Nearly every point on that list is subjective.

For example I had been favoring raiders with dissy canons over venoms since the prior codex dropped. More bang for the buck and measurements taken from a long hull are almost always more useful then that tiny 60mm base.

Hardly anyone has the fabled Yacht club because raiders are not only expensive, they werent stuffed into army deals like venoms PLUS they are largely a PITA to assemble and paint. Folks like me that had the choice between the two seemed to be in agreement the raider was better well before this last book.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/06 19:38:42


   
Made in us
Tunneling Trygon




Mexico

 Red Corsair wrote:


The main issues with 8th and now 9th are chapter tactics and their equivalent. I said this way back in the early days of the index and I stand by it now. You cannot possibly implement accurate points to a faction whos special rules are so different and have zero cost.

We had like a month of 8th without chapter tactics, Space Marines players hated that.

I'm not going to question the fact that they make a mess of balance, you are right about that. But people want their sub-faction rules and that kinda trounces balance.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 Red Corsair wrote:
Every army in the game would also take eradicators if they could, or repentia if they could etc etc.

That's a really silly way to look at it honestly.

No it isn't because it shows where there might be a problem. Not everyone is going to take Repentia if they could, but everyone will take Raiders and Eradicators because they do stupid stuff for the points.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I dunno, space marines don't even take eradicators much any more since MM attack bikes are basically just better.
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




 Xenomancers wrote:
The venom took a hit based on the way hit mods work in 9th, and then took another further hit when they changed the splinter canon.

I actually think the venom is probably priced about right, definitely leaning on the high side but I think thats better then being too cheap.

You do realize the splinter cannon is straight buffed over it's current iterations? Plus it got an additional transport capacity. I do think the venom is about right - it is however overcosted compared to a starweaver which is just flat out better for no reason other than the same person who said raiders should be 85 points said a starweaver should be 80... Starweavers with a 4++ and a -1 16" move and fly should be 100 points min. Then the venom looks just fine at 85 points.


People seriously think , that the harlis transport is properly costed at 100pts?

Half the problems with them and DE raiders come from the fact, that for what ever reason, GW design team thought that the way to counter DE would be to break their transports , to shot the living hell out of t3 troops that are inside them. What they either didn't know or didn't understand though, is that with the core rules terrain change, 9th is an enviroment with ton of LoS blocking terrain. Meaning the shoting down of raiders, or starweavers, doesn't happen because they sit safely behind terrain and unlike all the tracked transports, they do not have to worry about terrain because they can fly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote:
I dunno, space marines don't even take eradicators much any more since MM attack bikes are basically just better.


That is true. The difference between something like SM, which in some versions are a very good army, and harlis or DE, is that the eldar armies are more or less pre build for players.

If someone plays DE, there is no reason not to take 6 raiders, with the taxi share rules they have. There is going to be 3 units of DT wrecks with liquifires, there is going to be the razorflail succubus etc. There army list, to a degree, write themselfs. IH at least run on a broken interaction between new rules and really old FW units, which GW probably didn't even consider when writing the 2.0 codex. DE on the other hand are fit in to one book, which was cut in two parts to sell the event book, but at its core it is a one book pre build army. You can even see it in the point costs, the optimal lists just click the right way, there are no strange left over point, they can even fit stuff like courts and get the three patrol bonus which on its own is not broken, and even with the other stuff DE have is not the thing that makes them a bit too good, but it is just another very efficient thing.

It is as if someone sat down, wrote a list with units they want to use, and then wrote the rules and points cost for it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/07 01:09:35


If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




NE Ohio, USA

Karol wrote:

That is true. The difference between something like SM, which in some versions are a very good army, and harlis or DE, is that the eldar armies are more or less pre build for players.

If someone plays DE, there is no reason not to take 6 raiders, with the taxi share rules they have. There is going to be 3 units of DT wrecks with liquifires, there is going to be the razorflail succubus etc. There army list, to a degree, write themselfs. IH at least run on a broken interaction between new rules and really old FW units, which GW probably didn't even consider when writing the 2.0 codex. DE on the other hand are fit in to one book, which was cut in two parts to sell the event book, but at its core it is a one book pre build army. You can even see it in the point costs, the optimal lists just click the right way, there are no strange left over point, they can even fit stuff like courts and get the three patrol bonus which on its own is not broken, and even with the other stuff DE have is not the thing that makes them a bit too good, but it is just another very efficient thing.


I can assure you all that when I get around to building my own DE force there will be zero raiders & zero wracks in it.
A razor sucubus.... Sure, maybe. (I do need 1 model to be the leader afterall) But honestly I'll likely go with a Homunculus for theme.
Spoiler:
1x Homunculus(or Succubus/Archon)
9x Talos
9x Cronos



Karol wrote:
It is as if someone sat down, wrote a list with units they want to use, and then wrote the rules and points cost for it.


That is their pattern in many a Codex & Sigmar Tome...
   
Made in ca
Jinking Ravenwing Land Speeder Pilot



Canada

Raiders should absolutely go up in points and should only be able to carry Drukhari with the same Kabal/Coven/Cult keyword or the mercenary types.

All you have to do is fire three rounds a minute, and stand 
   
Made in hk
Longtime Dakkanaut





The problem lies mainly with the transports. And their ability to take dark lances. This allows them to spread out multiple anti tank weapons across multiple vehicles which are almost impossible to all be killed in one or two turns.

A raider has a 5++ invul, 10W and it can fly. And it can take a super effective anti tank weapon which is the dark lance. (Besides carrying troops).

Imagine the humble Rhino. The Rhino cannot fly, nor can it carry a multi melta, or a lascannon, and it does not have an invul save. Now, if you suddenly made the Rhino come with a default 5++, and it can fly, plus I can take a multi melta on the Rhino, and it only cost 85 or 90 points only to do all that. Now you can bet suddenly all space marine armies will take 6 Rhinos. Because now, suddenly, even the combat focused armies will have at least 6 anti tank guns which cannot easily be all silenced. (Not unless you killed 6 Rhinos).

See, once you place it in a context with a comparable transport. It becomes super clear how powerful the raider is.
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran





I mean, they’re like 8th edition impulsors but open topped. Imagine if you could have taken the shield dome AND missile for LESS points. Sure 1 less toughness but vs the weapons that target them, t6 vs t7 is not a break point that is worth much.

Oh, and you can carry blood angels inside an iron hands impulsor, and for that “inconvenience”, they give you 2 extra CP.

It just feels like there isn’t any real trade offs in the codex. You get to have your cake, eat it, and still there’s another cake.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Raiders should absolutely go up in points and should only be able to carry Drukhari with the same Kabal/Coven/Cult keyword or the mercenary types.


Going up 5-10pts is moot to me so sure, but only carrying XYZ is silly as no other army is force into 3 mini armies and all other armies can take any units as well, i can put a Priest, Arcos, and BSS in a single Rhino for SoB, but Arcos and Priest are different keywords and should be their own faction (if going by how DE sub factions works), so why do other armies get to do it and we can't? If you remove all this 3 subfaction no one would notice the difference.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Quasistellar wrote:
I mean, they’re like 8th edition impulsors but open topped. Imagine if you could have taken the shield dome AND missile for LESS points. Sure 1 less toughness but vs the weapons that target them, t6 vs t7 is not a break point that is worth much.

Oh, and you can carry blood angels inside an iron hands impulsor, and for that “inconvenience”, they give you 2 extra CP.

It just feels like there isn’t any real trade offs in the codex. You get to have your cake, eat it, and still there’s another cake.


Impulsor is grossly over costed, the problem isn't the raider is amazing, its that other transports are trash, Do you see Impulsors, Taurox/Primes, Chimeras, etc.. on the table? No, did you before DE update? No, why? B.c they all suck. So you really can't say the Raide ris understand compare to something that is over costed (Now if you say the Raider is over costed via a stats and gun perspective then sure I can understand that). I've see a little over 200 SM lists in 9th (games watched, played, players written, etc...) and not a single Impulsor was used. B.c why? Why take it when a 2nd units is better? That things needs to be 80pts before upgrades (cheaper than what goes in it B.c there is no way its viable otherwise).

Is the raider a bit too cheap? Sure but not by much, maybe 5pts-10pts at most, its other things that are the problem like DT, Court, etc... If you take 8 Raiders with 8 units of Kabals I don't think you'll have any unhappy opponents, its when you add in DT flamers in them and 15-30 Incubi combine with too much Obscuring. Kabals can't hide behind obscuring at all where Incubi can until they are able to pounce.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/05/09 12:56:31


15k+
3k
Emperor's Spears 2k
Beastmen 9500
CoS: 3500

Reading/Writing LD, be kind!

https://maddpaint.blogspot.com 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Point costs are one thing, but rules are another. With the amount of LoS blocking terrain required and used in 9th. A transport with flight is incomperably better then one without it.

DE are dominating right now, not because some units are too powerful, even if some rule interactions are too strong, but because of the fact that in todays 9th ed 6 raiders have no efficient counter, and if the raiders don't get stopped then DE can charge and shot the living hell out of opposing army.

And no I don't think that all armies should be able to kill 6 raiders with shoting turn 1. But there has to be some middle ground between that, DE having no way of being stopped, as long as there is terrain on the table.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
ccs 797783 11117745 wrote:

I can assure you all that when I get around to building my own DE force there will be zero raiders & zero wracks in it.
A razor sucubus.... Sure, maybe. (I do need 1 model to be the leader afterall) But honestly I'll likely go with a Homunculus for theme.
.


And I played a termintor army in 9th for GK. Doesn't mean that anyone around the world playing the few GK players, would have expected to see any termintors till the PA book came out.

People are going to run wrecks, raiders etc. I don't think it is fair to base an argument about a books imbalance, with the counter argument of "but, I don't use it" .

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/09 14:11:58


If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in ca
Jinking Ravenwing Land Speeder Pilot



Canada

 Amishprn86 wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Raiders should absolutely go up in points and should only be able to carry Drukhari with the same Kabal/Coven/Cult keyword or the mercenary types.


Going up 5-10pts is moot to me so sure, but only carrying XYZ is silly as no other army is force into 3 mini armies and all other armies can take any units as well, i can put a Priest, Arcos, and BSS in a single Rhino for SoB, but Arcos and Priest are different keywords and should be their own faction (if going by how DE sub factions works), so why do other armies get to do it and we can't? If you remove all this 3 subfaction no one would notice the difference.



The DE sub factions have their sub faction traits, so your SoB comparison is not a good one. I said I am fine with the mercenary types (Incubi etc) riding in Raiders that have an Obsession etc. Those are closer to the Priest/Arcoflaggelants in keyword/game design. Ecclesiarch Battle Conclave folks are like the Blades for Hire, so the Drukhari transportation freedom is an outlier.

Not that anyone takes SM transports, but a Ultramarines Razorback cannot transport Imperial Fists.

All you have to do is fire three rounds a minute, and stand 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






TangoTwoBravo wrote:
 Amishprn86 wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Raiders should absolutely go up in points and should only be able to carry Drukhari with the same Kabal/Coven/Cult keyword or the mercenary types.


Going up 5-10pts is moot to me so sure, but only carrying XYZ is silly as no other army is force into 3 mini armies and all other armies can take any units as well, i can put a Priest, Arcos, and BSS in a single Rhino for SoB, but Arcos and Priest are different keywords and should be their own faction (if going by how DE sub factions works), so why do other armies get to do it and we can't? If you remove all this 3 subfaction no one would notice the difference.



The DE sub factions have their sub faction traits, so your SoB comparison is not a good one. I said I am fine with the mercenary types (Incubi etc) riding in Raiders that have an Obsession etc. Those are closer to the Priest/Arcoflaggelants in keyword/game design. Ecclesiarch Battle Conclave folks are like the Blades for Hire, so the Drukhari transportation freedom is an outlier.

Not that anyone takes SM transports, but a Ultramarines Razorback cannot transport Imperial Fists.


SoB could have been multi sub factions and GW chose not to, SoB has 3 subfactions too why didn't they get 3 subfaction army? Thats the point GW chose only us to do this stupid jumping through hoops crap to play our army, and the result is we can mix and match units in Transports.

Even if you could only have DT inside DT, its not going to change much at all b.c now the DL instead of re-roll 1 hit it wounds on a 2+ with 5-7D, i'm sure people will complain about raiders still and not about DT the real problem, heck i've seen and even done this, take PGL's so you can advance and shooting the DT flamers not even charging to shoot the DL so being BH had no difference.

Also about UM razorback carrying IF's, that is true SM also are not forced to take different detachment to even get rules for 2/3's of their book, thats like saying "First born and Primaris must be in different detachments" you know darn well marines would get a free detachment for each one of those.

Really we could have had a better system and then i wouldn't care, if we were something like this "As long as the detachment has an HQ for a <Obsession> all units in the detachment gain their <obsession> even if another <Obsession> was in the same detachment." then yes make it so onyl <obsession> and Blades for hire can go into a transport b.c now we can play my army in 1 detachment like every other army can. This would also make it so Drazhar can't be a long HQ funny enough that many wants to happen.

15k+
3k
Emperor's Spears 2k
Beastmen 9500
CoS: 3500

Reading/Writing LD, be kind!

https://maddpaint.blogspot.com 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Also about UM razorback carrying IF's, that is true SM also are not forced to take different detachment to even get rules for 2/3's of their book, thats like saying "First born and Primaris must be in different detachments" you know darn well marines would get a free detachment for each one of those.


But DE don't pay anything for being "forced" to run 3 patrols. In fact they get only boon from it. Primaris not being able to ride in classic marine stuff and vice versa is a problem. Losing rules if you mix marines is a bad thing. Being "forced" in to taking 3 units of DT wrecks , isn't much forcing if DE players take them for powerful rules.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Spoiler:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
 Amishprn86 wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Raiders should absolutely go up in points and should only be able to carry Drukhari with the same Kabal/Coven/Cult keyword or the mercenary types.


Going up 5-10pts is moot to me so sure, but only carrying XYZ is silly as no other army is force into 3 mini armies and all other armies can take any units as well, i can put a Priest, Arcos, and BSS in a single Rhino for SoB, but Arcos and Priest are different keywords and should be their own faction (if going by how DE sub factions works), so why do other armies get to do it and we can't? If you remove all this 3 subfaction no one would notice the difference.



The DE sub factions have their sub faction traits, so your SoB comparison is not a good one. I said I am fine with the mercenary types (Incubi etc) riding in Raiders that have an Obsession etc. Those are closer to the Priest/Arcoflaggelants in keyword/game design. Ecclesiarch Battle Conclave folks are like the Blades for Hire, so the Drukhari transportation freedom is an outlier.

Not that anyone takes SM transports, but a Ultramarines Razorback cannot transport Imperial Fists.


SoB could have been multi sub factions and GW chose not to, SoB has 3 subfactions too why didn't they get 3 subfaction army? Thats the point GW chose only us to do this stupid jumping through hoops crap to play our army, and the result is we can mix and match units in Transports.

Even if you could only have DT inside DT, its not going to change much at all b.c now the DL instead of re-roll 1 hit it wounds on a 2+ with 5-7D, i'm sure people will complain about raiders still and not about DT the real problem, heck i've seen and even done this, take PGL's so you can advance and shooting the DT flamers not even charging to shoot the DL so being BH had no difference.

Also about UM razorback carrying IF's, that is true SM also are not forced to take different detachment to even get rules for 2/3's of their book, thats like saying "First born and Primaris must be in different detachments" you know darn well marines would get a free detachment for each one of those.

Really we could have had a better system and then i wouldn't care, if we were something like this "As long as the detachment has an HQ for a <Obsession> all units in the detachment gain their <obsession> even if another <Obsession> was in the same detachment." then yes make it so onyl <obsession> and Blades for hire can go into a transport b.c now we can play my army in 1 detachment like every other army can. This would also make it so Drazhar can't be a long HQ funny enough that many wants to happen.

Um, isn't that how a Realspace Raid works already? Or are you complaining about having to take 1 of each HQ and troops type?
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






 Gadzilla666 wrote:
 Amishprn86 wrote:
Spoiler:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
 Amishprn86 wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Raiders should absolutely go up in points and should only be able to carry Drukhari with the same Kabal/Coven/Cult keyword or the mercenary types.


Going up 5-10pts is moot to me so sure, but only carrying XYZ is silly as no other army is force into 3 mini armies and all other armies can take any units as well, i can put a Priest, Arcos, and BSS in a single Rhino for SoB, but Arcos and Priest are different keywords and should be their own faction (if going by how DE sub factions works), so why do other armies get to do it and we can't? If you remove all this 3 subfaction no one would notice the difference.



The DE sub factions have their sub faction traits, so your SoB comparison is not a good one. I said I am fine with the mercenary types (Incubi etc) riding in Raiders that have an Obsession etc. Those are closer to the Priest/Arcoflaggelants in keyword/game design. Ecclesiarch Battle Conclave folks are like the Blades for Hire, so the Drukhari transportation freedom is an outlier.

Not that anyone takes SM transports, but a Ultramarines Razorback cannot transport Imperial Fists.


SoB could have been multi sub factions and GW chose not to, SoB has 3 subfactions too why didn't they get 3 subfaction army? Thats the point GW chose only us to do this stupid jumping through hoops crap to play our army, and the result is we can mix and match units in Transports.

Even if you could only have DT inside DT, its not going to change much at all b.c now the DL instead of re-roll 1 hit it wounds on a 2+ with 5-7D, i'm sure people will complain about raiders still and not about DT the real problem, heck i've seen and even done this, take PGL's so you can advance and shooting the DT flamers not even charging to shoot the DL so being BH had no difference.

Also about UM razorback carrying IF's, that is true SM also are not forced to take different detachment to even get rules for 2/3's of their book, thats like saying "First born and Primaris must be in different detachments" you know darn well marines would get a free detachment for each one of those.

Really we could have had a better system and then i wouldn't care, if we were something like this "As long as the detachment has an HQ for a <Obsession> all units in the detachment gain their <obsession> even if another <Obsession> was in the same detachment." then yes make it so onyl <obsession> and Blades for hire can go into a transport b.c now we can play my army in 1 detachment like every other army can. This would also make it so Drazhar can't be a long HQ funny enough that many wants to happen.

Um, isn't that how a Realspace Raid works already? Or are you complaining about having to take 1 of each HQ and troops type?


No b.c you have to take 1 of each, what if I don't lie coven? No i have to take the HQ and a troop, thats still not giving me options and is still a page of text to understand a rule, my way is simple and easy, only take a few sentence and everyone understand it.

15k+
3k
Emperor's Spears 2k
Beastmen 9500
CoS: 3500

Reading/Writing LD, be kind!

https://maddpaint.blogspot.com 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Why would you not run draz, an archon and a succubus? I would get it if the stuff coming with the was bad, but the DE lists can easily build a triple patrol list with zero bad units in it. Cabalites and trueborn are cheap and good. Witchs are very good, and Wrecks are too good.

helions, raiders, courts, nothing that the DE lists run is bad, even the tax units aren't really tax, because they are , at worse, good.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Amishprn86 wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Spoiler:
 Amishprn86 wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
 Amishprn86 wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Raiders should absolutely go up in points and should only be able to carry Drukhari with the same Kabal/Coven/Cult keyword or the mercenary types.


Going up 5-10pts is moot to me so sure, but only carrying XYZ is silly as no other army is force into 3 mini armies and all other armies can take any units as well, i can put a Priest, Arcos, and BSS in a single Rhino for SoB, but Arcos and Priest are different keywords and should be their own faction (if going by how DE sub factions works), so why do other armies get to do it and we can't? If you remove all this 3 subfaction no one would notice the difference.



The DE sub factions have their sub faction traits, so your SoB comparison is not a good one. I said I am fine with the mercenary types (Incubi etc) riding in Raiders that have an Obsession etc. Those are closer to the Priest/Arcoflaggelants in keyword/game design. Ecclesiarch Battle Conclave folks are like the Blades for Hire, so the Drukhari transportation freedom is an outlier.

Not that anyone takes SM transports, but a Ultramarines Razorback cannot transport Imperial Fists.


SoB could have been multi sub factions and GW chose not to, SoB has 3 subfactions too why didn't they get 3 subfaction army? Thats the point GW chose only us to do this stupid jumping through hoops crap to play our army, and the result is we can mix and match units in Transports.

Even if you could only have DT inside DT, its not going to change much at all b.c now the DL instead of re-roll 1 hit it wounds on a 2+ with 5-7D, i'm sure people will complain about raiders still and not about DT the real problem, heck i've seen and even done this, take PGL's so you can advance and shooting the DT flamers not even charging to shoot the DL so being BH had no difference.

Also about UM razorback carrying IF's, that is true SM also are not forced to take different detachment to even get rules for 2/3's of their book, thats like saying "First born and Primaris must be in different detachments" you know darn well marines would get a free detachment for each one of those.

Really we could have had a better system and then i wouldn't care, if we were something like this "As long as the detachment has an HQ for a <Obsession> all units in the detachment gain their <obsession> even if another <Obsession> was in the same detachment." then yes make it so onyl <obsession> and Blades for hire can go into a transport b.c now we can play my army in 1 detachment like every other army can. This would also make it so Drazhar can't be a long HQ funny enough that many wants to happen.

Um, isn't that how a Realspace Raid works already? Or are you complaining about having to take 1 of each HQ and troops type?


No b.c you have to take 1 of each, what if I don't lie coven? No i have to take the HQ and a troop, thats still not giving me options and is still a page of text to understand a rule, my way is simple and easy, only take a few sentence and everyone understand it.

So you are complaining about the 1 HQ + 1 troops of each subfaction tax. But isn't that the tradeoff? In a Realspace Raid you get everything in one detachment, and everything gets an appropriate Obsession, but you have to pay the HQ + troops tax. If you don't want all three subfactions you go with multiple patrols, with the requisite costs of that setup, but everything still gets an Obsession. It's a choice.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




At this point everyone knows what the problems are for DE and the obvious solutions, it's just up to GW to get off the pot and do something about them.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: