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.

I like the fact that the Void bomber can fly go 36' and anything under be can destory. I haven't got the chance to used it yet, but I believe that it will be effective against Mech and foot armies.

Just to throw in the mathhammer about voidravens and ravagers, the math is in one of the other threads.
Basically, against Av 12-14, there is about a 1% difference in the damage potential of the Void Raven and Ravager.
Against Av 11 and Av 10, this margin continues to grow, in favor of the ravager. I think the ravager comes out 10 - 15% ahead, but the math is in one of the other DE threads if anyone wants to see it.

One thing that hasn't really been mentioned yet, in regards to missiles and cover: Firing 2 missiles at the same target will negate the effects of cover. Firing 4 missiles at a target in regular circumstances seems fairly overkill anyway.
For another, fliers get that nice flying stand mount, which generally allows fairly clear Los to most of the field. Unless your opponent is in area terrain, you should probably be able to shoot unhindered.

Thanks for all the interesting perspectives by the way

Hesperus wrote:Why does a unit need to be focused if it can do a particular job as well as one focused on that job? Or do you think the cost of a Razorwing is too high for, let's say, 12 wounds and a platform for its remaining weapons? Let's say a Dark Lance is worth 15 points on that platform. Comparing the Razorwing to the Ravager, then, you have 55 points to make up. You don't think 12 wounds is worth 55 points? I'm not saying it definitely is, just that it can be.

I agree that specialization is generally better, but I think the razorwing's a special case, for two reasons. First, it's roughly as good as the available specialists for anti-infantry, point for point. Consider that, using my conservative wounds estimate, a Razorwing with the Splinter Cannon upgrades can put out as many wounds as 4 Venoms (with 2 Splinter Cannons each). It costs nearly 100 points less, and doesn't require you to buy min-sized squads or use 4 troop/elite slots. Yes, it has no transport capacity and is much more vulnerable, but the two options are comparable.

Second, the Razorwing's primary anti-infantry weapons are one-shot, so it's only a generalist for one turn. If you don't upgrade to Splinter Cannons, you'll waste 2 Dark Lance shots on infantry. In subsequent turns it'll be shooting at tanks, so you'll be wasting 4 splinter rifle shots/turn. Big deal.

well it has to be focused because you're paying, in points, for all of the capabilities of the unit. take a chaos land raider for instance. what is this tank supposed to do? it has two tl lascannons and a heavy bolter and no option to fire at seperate targets. so while I pay for both the heavy bolter and the lascannons, I'll never get to use the full value of my tank in any one shooting phase, since heavy bolters dont help me against tanks and lascannons arent at their best against infantry. some of my points will have been wasted. Then again I cant shoot the lascannons or the heavy bolter at all if I want the tank to be a transport for terminators or other assault troops. for the first few turns of the game I'm again paying for a capability - the guns - that I'm not using at all. or else I dont use it as an assault vehicle and again I'm paying for transport capacity that I'm not using. This is not a good situation. I'm basically fighting with one hand tied behind my back, right? because I'm not making full use of the points I have available to me. Thats why I say units need to have specialized roles in order to be used to be really great. a great unit doesnt force me to pay for capabilities I cant use.

my objection to the razorwing is that it uses volume of fire attacks to defeat its enemies. I dont think its a good strategy when everyone and their brother is wearing power armor, has feel no pain, is high toughness etc. the last isnt much of a problem for dark eldar admittedly but low armor and feel no pain are. the only gun it can take that I like is the disintegrator cannons, but those are available elsewhere in the codex. now lets say you set out to kill hordes of infantry. if thats your mission and you look through all of the options available to you in this book, I think that the razor wing has to come in second place to spamming liquifier guns. they get to the target almost as fast, they automatically hit, they ignore cover, 1/2 of the time they ignore power armor too. light infantry will get baked pretty much regardless of how you roll if you hit them with 2 3 or 4 of them at once. it has a good chance of knocking out heavy infantry too. so here's a gun that has a stronger set of characteristics and better flexibility than the razor wing, and you can take it in spades on cheap units that ride cheap, fast transports. In light of that the razor wing just doesnt look that appealing to me. is it usable? sure. Its not like chaos spawn that is just plain junk. I just dont care for it in light of the other options available.

side note flexibility is a good thing when its not detracting from the main mission of the weapon. for instance its awesome that a meltagun can hurt a terminator or carnifex. doesnt detract from its anti tank role in any way so the added capability is just a bonus. but you wouldnt want to pay extra for the ability on what is, after all, an anti tank weapon.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:Defiler


Automatically Appended Next Post:







about the monoscythe missile strength 6 is good no doubt.... I think the ap5 is somewhat misleading. I mean its obvious to you that it will wipe out a squad of boys or guardsmen right? well its obvious to your opponent too, so you have to assume he'll try to keep his guys in cover to avoid getting wiped. and since cover is so abundant in 5th you've also got to assume he'll have some success with this. Its an ok blast weapon.... but nothing more. Its not the str 6 ap 3 ignores cover gun that that the guard have or the str 10 ap2 vindicator cannons that space marines get. its just... well... ok. dont take ok stuff. take great stuff.

the disintegrator cannons are good but you can have 3 of them for 105 points on a ravager, so I dont think they make a whole lot of sense here. especially since they're both heavy support units.

the splinter cannons are fine but you've got an army full of splinter weapons so I'm not really sure it's adding much.

the fighters lack focus (4 disintegrator cannons or 6 splinter cannons would be different, no?) and are overpriced imo. if you're only armor 10 you need to alpha strike them and completely eliminate their ability to respond or else you'll get blown away pretty fast. I dont see either DE flyer doing that, so I dont advocate those units.

Stop it. Most things in the DE codex do not ignore 3+ armor. We have Implosion missiles, Incubi, agonizers, lances and discintegrator cannons. the DE philosophy of killing units is the same as that of the orks, believe it or not. We put enough wounds down range that you GOTTA fail a save eventually. 4 S6 missiels hitting anything short of terminators or MCs is going to put around 20 wounds on a squad if the template can even get a medicore grouping. This is not thinking what is going to happen to those space marines that just got demeched by a lance earlier that phase. Oh yeah, they get 4+ cover as it is!

Instead of looking at units in a vacumn, look at them as being in an army. The razorwing is clearly meant to clear out large blobs, or focus fire on hapless demeched marines.

right. but thats what I'm saying. I dont think volume of attack strategies really work anymore. imo liquifier guns are better at clearing out blobs, so I think thats the stronger play here.

Liqueifier guns require you to get within 8 inches of what you want to hit. That can be highly problematic at times, especially if it is that annoying as hell long fangs or lootas squad hiding in the back-field over there. if you are putting liquifier guns on an assault squad? great!

but can you truly get to the enemy in the back with them? no.

Liquifier guns can also only be taken on Wracks, the Talos, Grotesques and haemonculi.

That is not really widespread availability. I think this guy is just a troll though, so I'm ignoring him.

Please tell me you're not trying to say that large blasts are bad against infantry. Have you seen what a manticore can do? A Shatterfield missile is going to put a wound on pretty much every t5 or lower model in the blast zone. You can fire up to 4 in the same phase, which goes a great way to compensate for armor/cover saves.

Volume of Fire is one of the best ways in the game to knock out things like Thunderhammer terminators, where your high ap weapons are much less effective than usual. Just look at some of the tactics for IG powerblobs or ork green tide.

Brother-Thunder wrote:Liqueifier guns require you to get within 8 inches of what you want to hit. That can be highly problematic at times, especially if it is that annoying as hell long fangs or lootas squad hiding in the back-field over there. if you are putting liquifier guns on an assault squad? great!

but can you truly get to the enemy in the back with them? no.

dark eldar are the fastest army in the game. getting close shouldnt be a problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Defiler wrote:Liquifier guns can also only be taken on Wracks, the Talos, Grotesques and haemonculi.

That is not really widespread availability. I think this guy is just a troll though, so I'm ignoring him.

wracks are troops and they're cheap. 2 liquifier guns per squad. you can take 3 homonculi per hq slot. yes that is widespread availability. dont confuse bringing up new points with trolling.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Irdiumstern wrote:Please tell me you're not trying to say that large blasts are bad against infantry. Have you seen what a manticore can do? A Shatterfield missile is going to put a wound on pretty much every t5 or lower model in the blast zone. You can fire up to 4 in the same phase, which goes a great way to compensate for armor/cover saves.

Volume of Fire is one of the best ways in the game to knock out things like Thunderhammer terminators, where your high ap weapons are much less effective than usual. Just look at some of the tactics for IG powerblobs or ork green tide.

they're 2nd best. take weapons that are 1st best.
look none of you are looking at the math here. you're just flatly asserting that I'm wrong. well how do you know? forget that you dont like me for a second, forget that there's safety in numbers and its fun to gang up on the outsider, just look at the actual numbers. 3 liquifier guns are 100% better than 4 monoscythe missiles. if you cant debate like adults its time to end the conversation, no?

Well, I can see the 4 missiles being better in certain situations.
100% is a bit of a stretch, but if we are talking about consistancy and reliability, then the liquifier guns do come out a bit ahead IMO.

I did look at the math. I compared to Venoms, though, not liquefier guns, because I think they're more directly comparable. Even though liquefier guns kill the same kind of unit as the various missiles, they are not the same kind of weapon.

Missiles are backfield weapons: They'll be hitting first turn (or the first turn the razorwing/voidraven is on the field) and they stay out of danger.

Liquefiers are midfield or closer weapons: They have to get close to be used, which means they'll be hitting second turn at best (well, unless your opponent goes first and moves towards them without destroying the Raider). Liquefier-armed troops, and the Raiders that carry them, can clog attack lanes. My guess is a lot of people will run suicide Trueborn or Warrior squads in Venoms as part of their AT. They're going occupy the same space as Liquefier-armed troops.

Just to check your math: Conservatively, 4 monoscythe missiles will get 16 hits, so roughly 14 wounds against almost any infantry. Against non-SM in cover, that's 7 dead. Assuming SM, that's roughly 5 dead.

Generously, each liquefier will get 7 hits, so 21 total.

Against marines, if you get a 3- on AP, that's approx. 11 dead. If you don't. it's approx 4 dead. So your expected kills are approx. 7 dead (4x0.5 + 11x0.5). That's not 100% better than the missiles, though it is better.

Against T3 models, you'll get about 14 wounds. Depending on the AP you roll and their armor, that's between 14 and 7 wounds. So it's close to 100% better.

Finally, what's it cost to put 3 Liquefiers on a squad? You can only get three in a squad if you: (1) put 2 Haemonculi in a squad with 5-8 Wracks in a Raider, or (2) put one Haemonculus with 10 Wracks on the ground. (2) isn't remotely comparable to a Razorwing, so let's look at (1)

At best, it's 240 points, so it's actually close to costing 100% more than a Razorwing. Plus it takes a Troops and HQ slot.

So, to summarize: Razorwings and Liquefier-armed troops aren't directly comparable, and though 3 Liquefiers are better than 4 monoscythe missiles, they also cost (close to) proportionally more. And that's with generous hit estimates for the Liquefiers and conservative ones for the missiles.

Does that meet your standard for adult debate?

Hesperus wrote:
Just to check your math: Conservatively, 4 monoscythe missiles will get 16 hits, so roughly 14 wounds against almost any infantry. Against non-SM in cover, that's 7 dead. Assuming SM, that's roughly 5 dead.

I dont have my book on me so I cant look but IIRC the razorwing is 145 points base and the monoscythe missiles are 10 points a piece, right? If thats so then you're paying 185 points for an armor 10 flyer that will kill 7 guardsmen for its alphastrike. are you really satisfied with that result? if you assume 3 liquifier guns and 6 hits per gun, assume all of them get ap 5 or lower, you'll kill 12 guardsmen and *then* you can assault. the homonculi + racks + raider is more expensive but then it does alot more too, doesnt it? Its scoring, its a fairly good assault unit, its alot more resilient.

Hesperus wrote:
Generously, each liquefier will get 7 hits, so 21 total.

Against marines, if you get a 3- on AP, that's approx. 11 dead. If you don't. it's approx 4 dead. So your expected kills are approx. 7 dead (4x0.5 + 11x0.5). That's not 100% better than the missiles, though it is better.

ok.... its somewhat better.

Hesperus wrote:
Against T3 models, you'll get about 14 wounds. Depending on the AP you roll and their armor, that's between 14 and 7 wounds. So it's close to 100% better.

toughness 3 models tend to av 5 or worse. that's not always true but it holds pretty generally. in that case thats 14 dead light infantry, basically the whole squad except in a few situations. even if the guys have heavier armor, you'll always have at least a 1/3 chance of ignoring it, compared to the monoscythe which only ever ignores av 5. the liquifier almost always ignores av 5 and often heavier armor too. the monoscythe missiles are one shot, the liquifier guns hit over and over and over again.

Hesperus wrote:
Finally, what's it cost to put 3 Liquefiers on a squad? You can only get three in a squad if you: (1) put 2 Haemonculi in a squad with 5-8 Wracks in a Raider, or (2) put one Haemonculus with 10 Wracks on the ground. (2) isn't remotely comparable to a Razorwing, so let's look at (1)

At best, it's 240 points, so it's actually close to costing 100% more than a Razorwing. Plus it takes a Troops and HQ slot.

well I dont have the book on me right now but IIRC the racks take 1 liquifier gun for every 5 guys in the squad and there are 10 guys per squad. so you can take 2 in a squad and that will give you results that, for shooting, are about comparable to the monoscythe missile (for alot of other capabilities thrown in too), and if you take multiple homonculi then it's getting more expensive yes but you're also getting a better unit from stacking pain tokens and from the wargear options that homonculi can take, and your guys are scoring and they can follow up their liquifier attacks with assaults. a guard or ork squad that gets hit with these guys is pretty much finished, but as the math above shows the monoscythe missiles are less than completely effective here. a 20 man guard squad will live through the attack pretty well. as will a large ork squad. even a 10 man guard squad will probably live with its most important elements - its special weapons - in tact.

hesperus wrote:
So, to summarize: Razorwings and Liquefier-armed troops aren't directly comparable, and though 3 Liquefiers are better than 4 monoscythe missiles, they also cost (close to) proportionally more.
Does that meet your standard for adult debate?

yes. we're not calling names or rejecting other peoples points out of hand. its true they're not directly comparable. at some point there's a value judgment about what total package of capabilities is best. whether your willing to pay the extra expense to get the liquifier-armed racks and homonculi depends on whether you think the increased capability against heavy infantry, the scoring, the assault ability, the additional pain tokens, etc. is worth it. I think it is.....
AF

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

Brother-Thunder wrote:Liqueifier guns require you to get within 8 inches of what you want to hit. That can be highly problematic at times, especially if it is that annoying as hell long fangs or lootas squad hiding in the back-field over there. if you are putting liquifier guns on an assault squad? great!

but can you truly get to the enemy in the back with them? no.

dark eldar are the fastest army in the game. getting close shouldnt be a problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Defiler wrote:Liquifier guns can also only be taken on Wracks, the Talos, Grotesques and haemonculi.

That is not really widespread availability. I think this guy is just a troll though, so I'm ignoring him.

wracks are troops and they're cheap. 2 liquifier guns per squad. you can take 3 homonculi per hq slot. yes that is widespread availability. dont confuse bringing up new points with trolling.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Irdiumstern wrote:Please tell me you're not trying to say that large blasts are bad against infantry. Have you seen what a manticore can do? A Shatterfield missile is going to put a wound on pretty much every t5 or lower model in the blast zone. You can fire up to 4 in the same phase, which goes a great way to compensate for armor/cover saves.

Volume of Fire is one of the best ways in the game to knock out things like Thunderhammer terminators, where your high ap weapons are much less effective than usual. Just look at some of the tactics for IG powerblobs or ork green tide.

they're 2nd best. take weapons that are 1st best.
look none of you are looking at the math here. you're just flatly asserting that I'm wrong. well how do you know? forget that you dont like me for a second, forget that there's safety in numbers and its fun to gang up on the outsider, just look at the actual numbers. 3 liquifier guns are 100% better than 4 monoscythe missiles. if you cant debate like adults its time to end the conversation, no?

getting close to units in the rear of an army is hard for everybody save Reaver jetbikes.

Also consider this: at 145 points base, a razorwing jetfighter gets 4 S6 missiles standard. to get 3 liquifier guns, it costs about 180, not including the raider for transport. even then, the models cannot take a raider, because one requires 10 wracks to get the other 2. That brings in the problem of mobility, that the razorwing has tons of! We may need another haemonulus with a webway portal to make that 10 man wrack squad more survivable and mobile, which brings in an additional 85 points worth of stuff, minus the raider to get the WWP haemonculus there.

Honestly? while 3 liquifier guns may kill more, the razorwing is cheaper and puts down almost as many wounds. In a vacumn, the haemonculus + wracks may do more, but on the field of battle? The Razorwing WILL fire its payload, while there's a decent chance the wracks and haemonculus may actually never make it to their target, due to lack of mobility.

The Razorwing comes with four missiles, though you can pay points to upgrade to other missiles.

10 Wracks with 2 liquifier guns in a raider will cost a minimum of 170, I believe (thought, it might be 180), compared to the 145 of the Razorwing.

The Razorwing can engage enemies on turn 1 even if the preferred target hangs back. Wracks with LGs cannot reasonably expect to engage until turn 2.

Missiles and liquifier guns share one purpose and specialize in two different purposes:

They both work at thinning hordes. i would argue that the missiles are slightly better at this simply because they have a significantly better chance of hitting a larger number of models. The LGs have the advantage of being used multiple times over the course of the game.

The missiles are absolutely superior to the LG in taking out small to average size high priority units that are in the enemy's backfield and unlikely to advance: Longfangs, Obliterators, Havocs, Devastators, etc. These units are more than likely going to neuter a Wrack squad trying to close with them to get into LG range.

The LG may be one of the best pre-assault softening guns in the game. Wracks don't come with grenades, depend on FnP for a save in assault, and only kill enemies through weight of armor saves. Consequently, they need to limit the number of enemy models that might be there to strike back in the assault. The LG excels at this, and it's a job the missiles cannot do because of the threat of scatter into the friendly unit you intend to assault with.

As far as AF's positions are concerned, my opinion is that the two items are not directly comparable, primarily because they don't share a force org slot. A player is never in the position to have to decide which one they would like to get. You can have Wracks with LGs and Razorwings/Void Ravens; even their relative costs in points do not prevent a player from fielding each of them. When discussing the RW or VR, the comparison should be with the Ravager, Talos, and Cronos.

With that in mind, I actually prefer the RW/VR to the Ravager. Yes, over the course of the game, the Ravager is likely to have a slightly greater effect (probably in the area of one more destroyed/immobilized result over four turns) than one of the fliers, but I cannot ignore the fact that sometimes early in the game I really need a specific unit of infantry to die right now even though that unit is 36+ inches away. The DL Ravager can only kill 3, while the RW/VR should render the unit ineffectual.

Yes, the missiles are one-shot, but I shouldn't need more than one alpha strike to make that Long Fang unit with Rune Priest go away.

the cronos is a good comparison. it has alot of the kinds of guns I like, its not terribly expensive, it generates pain tokens which plays into the synergy of the army. thats what imo a really good unit looks like.

Well, comparing the razorwing (or the ravager or voidraven) to the cronos really isn't going to work, because they perform entirely different roles. It's not apples to oranges; it's apples to eyeglasses.

Out of curiousity, AF, what's on your short list for the DE? Wracks, Cronos...what else?

I admit that I like the Cronos & Talos, too, but they both necessitate a completely different overall build with the army than would the Ravager/RWF/VRB. The two MCs fill radically different roles in an army than do the more long range, shooty vehicles.

I really wanna run a Haemonculus themed army with nothing but Haemonculus, Grotesque, Wrack, Scourge, Talos & Cronos, but haven't decided on how exactly to make it semi-competitive.

@AF: The big limitation with the Cronos is that all the guns are short range and it's a slow-moving unit that isn't that particularly tough, as far as MC's go. I like it, but I think it takes more thought in how to work it in effectively with the overall army list and playstyle.

The missles are better for taking out devestator/longfang/lootas than 3 lances would be and that is what makes them good.

Saldiven wrote:I really wanna run a Haemonculus themed army with nothing but Haemonculus, Grotesque, Wrack, Scourge, Talos & Cronos, but haven't decided on how exactly to make it semi-competitive.

Cut out the Talos and Cronos, and it's fairly easy to make a competitive build with the rest.

I've thought and thought for quite some time, and I can't figure out how to make either even semi-competitive.

I like the Razorwing as an anti-personnel powerhouse, but am not sold on the Voidraven yet. As I have 3 Ravagers on pre-order, I'll probably stick with them for the time being and gradually play-test a Voidraven to see if it has anything to offer that the other two can not.

Irdiumstern wrote:I've been looking through the new codex, and I really liked the fluff for the new voidraven.
However . . . it seems to be a somewhat sub-par

Stop right there and define 'par'.

Also, consider it's wealth of available Bombs and that. Quite a flexible beasty, certainly more flexible than most Dark Eldar units, no?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Irdiumstern wrote:Just to throw in the mathhammer about voidravens and ravagers, the math is in one of the other threads.
Basically, against Av 12-14, there is about a 1% difference in the damage potential of the Void Raven and Ravager.
Against Av 11 and Av 10, this margin continues to grow, in favor of the ravager. I think the ravager comes out 10 - 15% ahead, but the math is in one of the other DE threads if anyone wants to see it.

One thing that hasn't really been mentioned yet, in regards to missiles and cover: Firing 2 missiles at the same target will negate the effects of cover. Firing 4 missiles at a target in regular circumstances seems fairly overkill anyway.
For another, fliers get that nice flying stand mount, which generally allows fairly clear Los to most of the field. Unless your opponent is in area terrain, you should probably be able to shoot unhindered.

Thanks for all the interesting perspectives by the way

Also, consider that with a Darklance, against AV12 (which is a lot of stuff when you have Lance!) you have a 50% chance of doing dick all with each hit. The Voidlance though...drops to 33%. Might not seem like much, but with Dark Eldar, I see it as being as much about preventing the Tank shooting as taking it out in a oner. Shake or Stun a shooty tank, and it's not going to be shredding anything delicate for another turn at least, possibly more if by then you're comfortably in swirling melee, where they can't shoot you anyway. Plus, the extra strength is so worth it against stuff like Blessed Hull (think that's the one) and other Lance Immunity rules...

IMHO its big benefit is it is not open topped (ie higher survivability than Ravager). Whether this is worth 40 more points is doubtful. There are 48" range missiles, but they are 1 shot/10 pts so that is expensive for say 4.

Not when you can hammer a unit from 48" away.

Seriously, with the right kit out and the appropriate target, this thing can outshoot IG artillery comfortably.

Following the late comments - Its place is purely dependent on how you want to build out the rest of your army. The alpha-strike anti-troop role is something it can do for you that others cannot do so easily. If I want something to reduce hoards early in a game then both supersonics have a point and whether razorwing or void raven depends on the points I want to spend. OTOH it seems they have put some usefulness into all the heavy choices so it is not - as with the old codex - spam the ravagers because the other options don't matter.

The bonus to me is you are not just forced into assuming your 9 darklances on 3 ravagers because depending on tactical preference, a DE player can
build for pain token madness, hoard coverage, anti-tank coverage or some HTH fill-in. I think you could also argue 3 x heavy choices is not automatic in every list either as you might want to trade pure firepower for - let's say - 2 more raider squads kitted out for your AT role or perhaps some HTH oriented elite concentration.

Hesperus wrote:Well, comparing the razorwing (or the ravager or voidraven) to the cronos really isn't going to work, because they perform entirely different roles. It's not apples to oranges; it's apples to eyeglasses.

Out of curiousity, AF, what's on your short list for the DE? Wracks, Cronos...what else?

yeah the cronos has some issues too. no doubt. I'd look to deploy it out of a webway to compensate for the mobility issues.
one thing about this codex is that although there are a lot of solid units I dont see any that just scream "take me!" I think its overall well designed. there are a couple units (mandrakes) that I cant see any possible reason to take, like ever, at all, but on the other side..... hm. from what I've seen so far (1 game and just glancing over the codex) I'd put my short list as:

homonculi (because they have wargear options, bring pain tokens, and let you take wracks as troops)
wracks (because they bring pain tokens, are decent fighters and carry liquifier guns)
cronos engines (high strength low ap guns, high toughness, pain tokens)
raider transports (as opposed to venoms, because they're so mobile and have a dark lance)
scourges (heat lances for anti tank work)
those 5 units would be my starting point for a dark eldar army. between them you'll be knee deep in pain tokens almost before the game even starts, you have awesome anti tank and anti infantry weapons, and truly frightening mobility. but thats just at a first glance so I wouldnt say its the end all be all of dark eldar. not trying to overstate the case here.

some other units I would look at:
ravagers (mobility, good weapons)
incubi (all power weapons at init 5 or 6 is really strong)
archons (wargear options, high initiative)
trueborn (wargear options)

I dont care for the special characters as a general rule. wyches, warriors, the flyers, and mandrakes would all be on my out list. not really sure about the rest of the stuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Saldiven wrote:I admit that I like the Cronos & Talos, too, but they both necessitate a completely different overall build with the army than would the Ravager/RWF/VRB. The two MCs fill radically different roles in an army than do the more long range, shooty vehicles.

I really wanna run a Haemonculus themed army with nothing but Haemonculus, Grotesque, Wrack, Scourge, Talos & Cronos, but haven't decided on how exactly to make it semi-competitive.

@AF: The big limitation with the Cronos is that all the guns are short range and it's a slow-moving unit that isn't that particularly tough, as far as MC's go. I like it, but I think it takes more thought in how to work it in effectively with the overall army list and playstyle.

yeah I agree with you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I would buy sails for all the transports as a matter of course. also take a couple webway portals just in case I want them. bringing multiple options to the battlefield is always good.

Magnalon wrote:

Saldiven wrote:I really wanna run a Haemonculus themed army with nothing but Haemonculus, Grotesque, Wrack, Scourge, Talos & Cronos, but haven't decided on how exactly to make it semi-competitive.

Cut out the Talos and Cronos, and it's fairly easy to make a competitive build with the rest.

I've thought and thought for quite some time, and I can't figure out how to make either even semi-competitive.

one way I can think of that can get him lances while still being a good part of the "I modified my dark eldar!" army, is to take 3 x5 scourges with dark lances or blasters. I mean, that is 6 lances for somewhat cheap!

Brother-Thunder wrote:

Magnalon wrote:

Saldiven wrote:I really wanna run a Haemonculus themed army with nothing but Haemonculus, Grotesque, Wrack, Scourge, Talos & Cronos, but haven't decided on how exactly to make it semi-competitive.

Cut out the Talos and Cronos, and it's fairly easy to make a competitive build with the rest.

I've thought and thought for quite some time, and I can't figure out how to make either even semi-competitive.

one way I can think of that can get him lances while still being a good part of the "I modified my dark eldar!" army, is to take 3 x5 scourges with dark lances or blasters. I mean, that is 6 lances for somewhat cheap!

I honestly don't think 5 Scourges with 2 Dark Lances is stupid. I think people will end up using that configuration more when the new book shock wears off.

I do not think the idea is stupid either. The unit is able to keep up with Raiders, and has an 18 inch lance range while still being mobile. I can see that kind of config working in many lists.

Comparing the Fliers with things that they are not directly competing for spots against (ie other Heavy Support) seems a little silly.

The staple HS slot for DE has been 3x Ravagers. Ravagers got even better in the new codex (move 12" and shoot all 3 Dark Lances is really good) so they're even more worth it now.

The Fliers are interesting. You're going to be excluding Ravagers in order to take them, so you want to make sure that you're getting close t othe same kind of impact. The Razorwing has 2 Dark Lances, which is close to the Ravager. It can also move 12" and shoot everything just like a Ravager. It has a 36" flat out move, which is better than a Ravager. It also has 4 Missiles that are damn good against infantry, something DE has had a problem dealing with in large quantities and continues to struggle with in the new book. With the Razorwing you sacrifice a Dark Lance to pick up incredible anti-troop firepower. This means you have weapons on the vehicle that contradict each other (Dark Lances for armor, Missiles for troops). This makes the vehicle very flexible, but still good at performing against either target. Generally when you take weapons that target different unit types, you end up being pretty mediocre at best against all of them. The Razorwing remains good at damaging armor and is great at shooting infantry.

The Voidraven is a little different. In order to get the Missiles and stuff on it you need to pay a fair bit more points. It gets the same movement perks as the Razorwing. It comes with a pair of uber Lances though (str9 Lance Weapons are really good), which makes it an interesting choice. It will probably never use it's Void Mine since it'll want to stay away from enemy guns as much as possible. It is fantastic against armor in its base form though. Personally I don't like it as much as the Razorwing because it tends to be more expensive to get the anti-troop capacity out of.

I've done all of my testing so far with 3x Ravager because my initial impression of the fliers was "meh, whatever" but in the past couple of days my opinion has been starting to change. I'm certainly going to playtest them and see how they work, but as far as theory goes I'm starting to like them a bit.

^ Good evaluation. Very balanced and fair.

I'd just like to add that outside of a spent VoidRaven (out of missiles), I don't see much use for the Void Mine in situations that don't include deep striking terminators, or elite troops piling out of vehicles.

You might be able to corral some quality bomb runs in conjunction with artful tank shocks, but I'm also struggling to find use for the bomb.

I think if it ends up being able to go supersonic and also do a bombing run, it ends up being useful. For the most part, I view it as something to do if you're shaken or your weapons are blown off/spent, or during an off turn where you're repositioning or contesting objectives.