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 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 DE HQs. 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 DE HQs 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.

tneva82 wrote:

 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.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:

 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 DE HQ 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 DE HQ 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.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 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 DE HQ 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.

tneva82 774578 10424414 wrote:

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.

As pointed out in the other thread, GW just loves IoM and Marines much more than Eldar factions (or other Xenos)

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 don't know about this.

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.

A simple change like "HQ auras still work from open-topped vehicles" would make a big difference.

Triple-Patrol should be a single Detatchment for DE. It wouldn't solve everything, but it'd certainly help.

Lt-level HQs for DE would also be a huge boon. They should have them for a variety of reasons. Totally agree on that point.

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+.

 Eldarsif wrote:

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.