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.
So Im thinking of starting again.. 15 years ago I could field a pretty large Dark Eldar army. Tried to buy the codex last night and now its Drakhari.. so I have some catching up..
Im already kicking myself over this but do I need the Codex that says Drukhari or will the one with the same picture but says Dark Eldar do?
I've heard the changes are fantastic but I suspect I cannot play the same way.. I gots to find out...
Leave you beasts at home, don't take incubi, and all you true born and blood brides are warriors and wytchs now. Other than that you can use anything.
Don't listen to the forum campers that say dark elf (in spaaace) lists are boring and all the same. You don't have to take 3 tripple ravangers if you don't want to. You don't have to play black heart kabal. You can use wytches and bikers. I haven't seen any Hellions but I want to put some on the table.
Don't listen to the forum campers that say dark elf (in spaaace) lists are boring and all the same.
No, listen to them because they're completely correct.
Want to play Kabal? Okay, you have precisely 1 HQ option (2 if you include special characters), 3 Elite options (except 2 are garbage and of those one wasn't even printed in the codex), 1 Troop option, 1 FA option, 1 HS option and 2 Flyers. Oh, and Court of the Archon, I guess.
Want to play Wych Cult? Okay, you have 1 HQ option (3 if you include special characters), 3 Elite options (except 2 are garbage and of those one wasn't even printed in the codex), 1 Troop option, 3 FA options, 0 HS options and 2 Flyers.
Want to play Coven? Okay, you have 1 HQ option (3 if you include special characters), 3 Elite options (except 1 is garbage), 1 Troop option, 1 FA options, 2 HS options (except one is entirely pointless) and 0 Flyers.
Anyone who says that Drukhari lists aren't all boring and the same is talking out of their rear end.
Headlss wrote: Leave you beasts at home, don't take incubi, and all you true born and blood brides are warriors and wytchs now. Other than that you can use anything.
Don't listen to the forum campers that say dark elf (in spaaace) lists are boring and all the same. You don't have to take 3 tripple ravangers if you don't want to. You don't have to play black heart kabal. You can use wytches and bikers. I haven't seen any Hellions but I want to put some on the table.
Go Nuts.
Wat? Incubi were basically your spacemarines? I considered them the be my HQ killer team...
I had a very clear action plan previously. Max out splinter cannons, overwhelm with troops. Basically out roll my opponent...
Headlss wrote: Leave you beasts at home, don't take incubi, and all you true born and blood brides are warriors and wytchs now. Other than that you can use anything.
Don't listen to the forum campers that say dark elf (in spaaace) lists are boring and all the same. You don't have to take 3 tripple ravangers if you don't want to. You don't have to play black heart kabal. You can use wytches and bikers. I haven't seen any Hellions but I want to put some on the table.
Go Nuts.
Wat? Incubi were basically your spacemarines? I considered them the be my HQ killer team...
I had a very clear action plan previously. Max out splinter cannons, overwhelm with troops. Basically out roll my opponent...
DE play revolves around spamming venoms with min units of khabs (usually 1 blaster each) Then Flyers and ravagers with dissie cannons. Or you go half with Coven and a mega Grot unit. Or you mix in a batallion of wych cult and bring ether bikes or big DS units of wyches.
Incubi are not terrible if you chose to fill out a brigade with them. Unfortunately they don't synergize well with anything and mandrakes are better in this roll because they are cheaper and dont need a transport.
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
Tyrant wrote: Wont lie. This has taken some of the shine off.
...spose I better find a codex to read before I buy one.
It's defintiely a good idea to go through the codex first as the restrictions we have on army build are very specific and quite annoying (if your new to 8th it helps to go through the main rulebook and look at the rules for detachments first as that will help inform you of how the army works). It's worth remembering though that our HQ's are aweful, our troops are rather good (though Wyches require careful play), Scourge and Mandrakes are good, all of our vehicles are good and Grotesques and Talos are amazing. It's not a huge selection of decent units but there some codexes out there with a considerably smaller pool of quality.
As for Incubi, they're Marine killers in an edition where the standard Tactical Marine is so bad that they don't see play, meaning they have no targets.
Tyrant wrote: Wont lie. This has taken some of the shine off.
And that's why you shouldn't listen to people online about this stuff. Or at least take whatever they say with a few grains of salt....
Some of the advice will be ok. Some pure BS. Some based on their own bias/inability to use unit x. Some don't play, they just do (questionable) math while failing to consider any # of variables. Others only view how an army should work/be built based on whatever other people have used well in tournaments.
None of them know what play environment you'll be fielding your DE in.
Tyrant wrote: ...spose I better find a codex to read before I buy one.
Yes.
Also consider where you'll be playing & how they play there.
As for how to easily tell an 8e Codex from a 7th ed? The 8th ed ones have a border around the cover picture.
ccs wrote: As for how to easily tell an 8e Codex from a 7th ed? The 8th ed ones have a border around the cover picture.
Or compare them to the pics found on the Games Workshop website.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
Drukari are kinda cool, because for most armies, patrol detachments, which are the easiest detachment to make, don't count for squat- ie they don't get you enough command points to be able to power strategems.
But because Drukari armies were meant to be alliance between the Kabals, Cults and Covens, GW REWARDS you for taking many patrol detachments.
Also kinda cool is that now there are multiple Kabals you can play, and each gets a special rule; each also has a specific relic and a specific strategem which really defines how they feel on the battlefield. Same with Cults and Covens.
If you like the intrigue and politics that exist in Commorragh, then this is the best edition to date. If you don't care about those things and you just want a decent tournament army, you may not like it as much as previous editions. I grow Kabals, Cults and Covens by playing them as Kill Teams in campaign play. Your Haemonculus an Wracks take out an Ogryn in a kill team game? You know they're turning it into a Grotesque or Talos before the next game.
I'm writing a scenario where a Beast master is escorted across a battlefield by Hellions in order to bind an Ambull into service for the cult. The first Wych to strike a killing blow against it in the arena will be promoted to succubus. No other edition of the game has done so much to make cool things like this possible. It may not win a tourney, but damn, nothing beats that story hook for me.
Also, in this version of the game, there's this character named Yvranne who basically did all things eldar before becoming the Avatar of a new Eldar God who might be able to save his children from Slaanesh. She is the bridge between Eldar and Dark Eldar. So if there are Eldar units you always wanted to put in a Drukari army but couldn't, take Yvranne and make it happen.
Last thing: Scourges, Mandrakes and Incubi are mercenaries- they can be in Kabal, Cult or Coven, and that group will still be able to benefit from their special rule, though the mercenary models themselves never do. This means they can play with anybody. Incubi always seemed to be the Archons bodyguard, but now there just as likely to work for a Haemonculus.
You will mourn the loss of so many cool special characters (even if they never did have models). I'm not sure how I feel about the changes to the Court of the Archon- they're all character elites now- multi-wound, but you're limited to 4 per detachment.
I'm just at the very early stages of my army, and haven't actually played, but two of the strategems intrigue me given the way Kabals, Cults and Covens work together: one allows your non warlord subfaction leaders to use warlord traits, and another allows you to take three relics. So you get an Archon with a warlord trait and a relic, a wych with a warlord trait and a relic and a haemonculus with a warlord trait and a relic, though only one will actually be your warlord.
This edition wasn't perfect for Drukari- especially for competitive tournament play. But it also wasn't awful, especially if you like narrative campaign play.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/22 23:29:46
Drukari are kinda cool, because for most armies, patrol detachments, which are the easiest detachment to make, don't count for squat- ie they don't get you enough command points to be able to power strategems.
But because Drukari armies were meant to be alliance between the Kabals, Cults and Covens, GW REWARDS you for taking many patrol detachments.
Also kinda cool is that now there are multiple Kabals you can play, and each gets a special rule; each also has a specific relic and a specific strategem which really defines how they feel on the battlefield. Same with Cults and Covens.
If you like the intrigue and politics that exist in Commorragh, then this is the best edition to date. If you don't care about those things and you just want a decent tournament army, you may not like it as much as previous editions. I grow Kabals, Cults and Covens by playing them as Kill Teams in campaign play. Your Haemonculus an Wracks take out an Ogryn in a kill team game? You know they're turning it into a Grotesque or Talos before the next game.
I'm writing a scenario where a Beast master is escorted across a battlefield by Hellions in order to bind an Ambull into service for the cult. The first Wych to strike a killing blow against it in the arena will be promoted to succubus. No other edition of the game has done so much to make cool things like this possible. It may not win a tourney, but damn, nothing beats that story hook for me.
Also, in this version of the game, there's this character named Yvranne who basically did all things eldar before becoming the Avatar of a new Eldar God who might be able to save his children from Slaanesh. She is the bridge between Eldar and Dark Eldar. So if there are Eldar units you always wanted to put in a Drukari army but couldn't, take Yvranne and make it happen.
Last thing: Scourges, Mandrakes and Incubi are mercenaries- they can be in Kabal, Cult or Coven, and that group will still be able to benefit from their special rule, though the mercenary models themselves never do. This means they can play with anybody. Incubi always seemed to be the Archons bodyguard, but now there just as likely to work for a Haemonculus.
You will mourn the loss of so many cool special characters (even if they never did have models). I'm not sure how I feel about the changes to the Court of the Archon- they're all character elites now- multi-wound, but you're limited to 4 per detachment.
I'm just at the very early stages of my army, and haven't actually played, but two of the strategems intrigue me given the way Kabals, Cults and Covens work together: one allows your non warlord subfaction leaders to use warlord traits, and another allows you to take three relics. So you get an Archon with a warlord trait and a relic, a wych with a warlord trait and a relic and a haemonculus with a warlord trait and a relic, though only one will actually be your warlord.
This edition wasn't perfect for Drukari- especially for competitive tournament play. But it also wasn't awful, especially if you like narrative campaign play.
Please don't give out bad advice.
For competitive play Drukhari are one of the best singel codexes in the game, arguably only behind Cratworlds and Tau (soup of course muddies the water a lot, and Aeldari soup is largely dead at this point).
The Raiding Force rule that gives you extra CP for taking 3+ Patrol detachments was a good rule for only 2 weeks, then we got the first major FAQ of the edition. Boosting the CP generated by Battalions has meant that in taking the Raiding Force you get less force org slots for Fast Attack, Elite and Heavy Support whilst now also having less CP, the worst of both worlds. Yes, people still use it in very friendly environments, but if your friends are running relatively strong lists then you'll be seriously handicapping yourself.
Detachment artributes are a core aspect of the game, please don't talk as if it was a unque aspect to Drukhari, it isn't. However, the majority of Drukhari "Obsessions" are good, more so than you will find in most codexes.
Kill Team is a separate rule set that is very different to 40K, slotting in those points into the middle of a 40K discussion could get confusing to someone new to the edition and army. (Also, what did that Wrack do wrong to deserve being turned into a Grotesque? Thats considered one of the worst forms of punishment that an Haemonculus can dish out.)
Don't confuse things with Ynnari, thats something to look at later. However, if someone really wants to ally in some Craftworlders or Harlequins it's far better to do so via their own codexes and ignore Ynnari, who have some truly aweful rules now.
Yes, Alliance of Agony is a very cool stratagem that lets you take extra warlord traits so long as you actual Warlord is an Archon, but the extra relics is a stratagem that every codex has and isn't unique to Drukhari.
Don't listen to the forum campers that say dark elf (in spaaace) lists are boring and all the same.
No, listen to them because they're completely correct.
Want to play Kabal? Okay, you have precisely 1 HQ option (2 if you include special characters), 3 Elite options (except 2 are garbage and of those one wasn't even printed in the codex), 1 Troop option, 1 FA option, 1 HS option and 2 Flyers. Oh, and Court of the Archon, I guess.
Want to play Wych Cult? Okay, you have 1 HQ option (3 if you include special characters), 3 Elite options (except 2 are garbage and of those one wasn't even printed in the codex), 1 Troop option, 3 FA options, 0 HS options and 2 Flyers.
Want to play Coven? Okay, you have 1 HQ option (3 if you include special characters), 3 Elite options (except 1 is garbage), 1 Troop option, 1 FA options, 2 HS options (except one is entirely pointless) and 0 Flyers.
Anyone who says that Drukhari lists aren't all boring and the same is talking out of their rear end.
That is pretty much true. There are only 3 HQs (and 3 named charcters), and 3 troops. Each troop is limited to its type of leader, you could change them up but our obsessions are too good to lose.
But you can still get a lot of variety in you lists. Our units are very different from each other. We never need to decide if we are taking assult Marines with jump packs, vanguard veterans with jump packs, death company or sangunary guard. Which all take the same force org and all do the same thing. Warriors are different from wytches are different from wracks. All are worth taking. A talos heavy army is going to play different from a venom heavy army. You can bring a ton of bikes if you want. You could fill the board with big infantry, add in 60 hellions, and 3 units of deep striking scourges. That last one probably wouldn't win but it would play differently and it would 'work.' You can add air power to any of those lists.
We don't have the HQ choice we used to or even what most codexes still have but we have a couple options for competitive builds. And if you don't have to win every game, there are lots of things you could try out especially if you have a large collection from eariler days.
Detachment artributes are a core aspect of the game, please don't talk as if it was a unque aspect to Drukhari, it isn't. However, the majority of Drukhari "Obsessions" are good, more so than you will find in most codexes.
Thanks for being polite- I will try to do the same. OP hasn't played in 15 years, which means the last time he played, detachment rules didn't exist; I figured it was a good idea to talk about that, since detachments are critical to 8th ed. Furthermore, the sub traits that subfactions get, for the most part are new to 8th ed; I've been informed that some armies did have them in previous editions, but in 8th, I believe ALL armies have them. There's never been an edition of 40k until now where the Cult of Strife had a different Cult rule, a different warlord trait and a different relic than the Cult of the Blade denied.
[quote/] The Raiding Force rule that gives you extra CP for taking 3+ Patrol detachments was a good rule for only 2 weeks, then we got the first major FAQ of the edition. Boosting the CP generated by Battalions has meant that in taking the Raiding Force you get less force org slots for Fast Attack, Elite and Heavy Support whilst now also having less CP, the worst of both worlds. Yes, people still use it in very friendly environments, but if your friends are running relatively strong lists then you'll be seriously handicapping yourself.
You are correct that the Big FAQ changes to Battalions and Brigades did undermine the Raiding Force rule. Your statements aren't exactly true either though; at minimum, a patrol is 1 HQ and one troops. A Battalion is 2 HQ and three troops. So three minimum Patrols require one more HQ than a minimum Battalion. The Battalion gives you 5 CP, the Three Patrols only give you 4, so Battalion is still the better deal on that front. But guess how many heavy support choices fit into three patrols? Six. How many in a Battalion? Three. Same for fast attack. A battalion does let you take six elites, so that's a tie.
Now you might be inclined to mention that most people limit the number of detachments in an army; that's true, but it's not a GW rule. The Drukari encourage taking 6 Patrols, and we have enough HQ that we could take 12 patrols if we wanted to (diminishing returns after six though).
To be fair to your point though, we didn't deal with Brigades yet, and that's where GW stacked the points. You could field six patrols and a battalion though, which gives you 16 command points where the standard Brigade + Battalion would give you 20. But you could get the former with fewer models, though a greater number of the models that you did take would have to be HQ.
[quote/] Kill Team is a separate rule set that is very different to 40K, slotting in those points into the middle of a 40K discussion could get confusing to someone new to the edition and army. (Also, what did that Wrack do wrong to deserve being turned into a Grotesque? Thats considered one of the worst forms of punishment that an Haemonculus can dish out.)
Yes Kill Team, Blackstone and all the other Minigames do have separate rules and systems. But again, we are dealing with someone who hasn't played in 15 years, who is considering returning to the game. For me, one of the reasons why this is the Golden age of 40k is that all of these games exist again/ for the first time. The Drukari IS particularly suited to Kill Team because you can have a Kill Team sized Kabal, Cult and Coven which fight amongst themselves, until they work together in tenuous alliances against common foes, at which point each Kill Team becomes a patrol detachment.
And that is added value for a DE player. And it might impact OP's decision on whether to stick with DE. It's the reason I want a DE army.
Finally, in my campaign, it's not the wracks who get turned into grotesques- it's the Ogryn they help their Haemonculus master capture that gets turned into the grotesque. In order to take the grotesque in 40k, you have to capture the ogryn in Kill Team. That's one of the ways you can link games in a narrative campaign.
[quote/]Don't confuse things with Ynnari, thats something to look at later. However, if someone really wants to ally in some Craftworlders or Harlequins it's far better to do so via their own codexes and ignore Ynnari, who have some truly aweful rules now.
Okay- you got me here. Last time OP played, DE and Craftworld Eldar were not allowed to be in armies together. Now they are. I thought the only way that could happen was if you included Ynarri, but it sounds like I was wrong about that. The important thing for OP to understand if he wants to get back in is that SOUP is a thing in 8th, more so than it has been in the previous editions. He can use SOUP himself if he wants to, but whether he likes SOUP or not, he's going to have to fight against it, so I figure it's worth talking about.
[quote/]Yes, Alliance of Agony is a very cool stratagem that lets you take extra warlord traits so long as you actual Warlord is an Archon, but the extra relics is a stratagem that every codex has and isn't unique to Drukhari.
Also true; I'm sorry you thought I was implying other dexes don't have it. I wasn't. It is a rule that didn't exist last time OP played; now it does, so I figured I'd tell him that. Full disclosure, the GSC army also has the alliance strat, but for them it works on a Patriarch, Primus and Magus. There might be other dexes that have a similar rule.
Thanks again for the respectful tone, and your obvious interest in controlling the spread of misinformation. I share your commitment to those ideals, and I hope my rebuttal does not come across as disrespectful to you. I am also open to further corrections, because as previously noted, I have not read the Ynarri/ Craftworld 8th ed stuff yet, and I'm only at the earliest stages of my own Drukari list. Just so you don't waste your time though, I don't care about the type of feedback that optimises lists for tournament play.
I'm an old school narrative campaign player who loves interactions of scale. I'd rather watch TV than play in a tournament.
Similarly OP, if you are mostly interested in tournament play, I will freely admit that most of the fine folks in this thread will be able to give you better advice than I can. It's why I freak out a little every time someone says a unit is "useless" - my game play is driven entirely by stories. So if in the story, there is a terrible unit that couldn't do anything effective in tournament play, they would still be useful to ME because the story is all I really care about.
We don't know whether OP is a tourney guy or a narrative guy, so it's probably best to give him advice that comes from both sides of the field, but I concede that maybe I should have given a better sense of context in my original post.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/07/23 21:30:02
That is pretty much true. There are only 3 HQs (and 3 named charcters), and 3 troops. Each troop is limited to its type of leader, you could change them up but our obsessions are too good to lose.
But you can still get a lot of variety in you lists.
You can get a bit but I think you've overestimating the variety that DE has to offer.
Headlss wrote: Our units are very different from each other. We never need to decide if we are taking assult Marines with jump packs, vanguard veterans with jump packs, death company or sangunary guard. Which all take the same force org and all do the same thing. Warriors are different from wytches are different from wracks. All are worth taking.
The trouble is, other armies get these 'variant' units in addition to their normal units. We have nothing to replace them.
I think our HQs are the biggest example of this. Eldar can take Jetbike versions of most of their HQs (and the Autarch has 4 different versions). We can't take any HQs with Jetbikes... but nor do we get any alternate HQs in their place. Hell, you could remove all the 'variant' Eldar HQs and they'd *still* have twice as many HQs as us.
Put simply, this isn't a point in our codex's favour and if anything it's a huge detriment to list variation as it means you have no options. Want to take a Jetbike Succubus to support Reavers? Tough luck. A Hellion Succubus to support Hellions? Nope, can't do that either. Any non-special-character Cult HQ that isn't a Succubus? Still no.
Headlss wrote: A talos heavy army is going to play different from a venom heavy army.
True. But how much variation can you get with, say, different Coven armies? I'm going to hazard a guess that they'll all include a lot of Talos and Grotesques because that's basically all they've got.
Headlss wrote: You could fill the board with big infantry, add in 60 hellions, and 3 units of deep striking scourges.
Only if you have a deep-seated grudge against winning games.
Headlss wrote: That last one probably wouldn't win but it would play differently and it would 'work.'
Er... if a list is going to lose almost by default, saying it works seems like a stretch.
And this is part of my point. I don't count false choices as being options. It's like saying the Haemonculus is the epitome of customisation, so long as you ignore the fact that he has all of one good melee weapon (and 0 good ranged weapons) and everything else is utter garbage. Yes, you could take Hellions... so long as you don't mind them just being inferior Reavers. Yes, you could take a Cronos... except that the Talos is drastically better and actually serves a purpose. yes, you can take Incubi... but Mandrakes are better and don't need a transport.
If you want to call all of these choices, fine. To me they seem like a classic case of 'I can but why would I want to?' Yes, I can choose to not take the best unit in the codex, but why would I want to? Yes, I can ignore good units in favour of crap ones, but why would I want to?
Headlss wrote: You can add air power to any of those lists.
Unless you're using Coven. Then no fliers for you.
We don't have the HQ choice we used to or even what most codexes still have but we have a couple options for competitive builds. And if you don't have to win every game, there are lots of things you could try out especially if you have a large collection from eariler days.
Possibly, though a lot of options from earlier editions have been effectively cut off by the new army-building restrictions.
Anyway, if you find Drukhari to have a ton of variation at the moment, fair enough. I've no wish to ruin your fun. All I'll say is that I've found them very restrictive when it comes to list-building and very difficult when it comes to adding any meaningful variation.
Unless you're using Coven. Then no fliers for you.
What are you talking about? Take a battalion made of only coven models. Then take a Kabalite Airwing.
Guess what? Now you have fliers in an army with a coven. Done.
Good point on bikes though- a Wych would certainly use one. An Archon might, but I think an Archon is more likely to ride a venom with four court models riding shotgun. I suppose you could create a character history that would see a Haemonculus on a bike, but it's really weird and without that story/ character stuff, it wouldn't feel right to me.
A Hellion HQ would also be awesome. They can fly with Beast Masters, though I know that's not an HQ and that they aren't great models.
Your point about taking only the models which are best at each job and everything else being "useless" is exactly why I don't play in tournaments. If you do, then I'd say your point is valid. I don't, so for me it isn't. If a Haemonculus decides to build a Cronos in order to feed his creations during the space between raids, and then he gets a call to help his Archon buddy in a realspace raid, he's probably not going to leave the Cronos at home. That's all the hook I need to include one in my Coven, whether it's as good as a Talos or not.
I get that your needs are different than mine; the way I play this game probably feels weird and alien to you, and I get that too. But tournament play is weird and alien to me, because it doesn't matter which army you play- there's a best build for all of them if you just reduce it to math and probability, so armies that are spoiled with choices end up being no more flexible than armies that aren't.
What good does it do to have one hundred options when you're only going to pick the best ten anyway?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/24 10:21:51
From my experience with the army so far, its possible to have some sort of variation depeding on what obsession you give each of your detachment. Every combination will play differently.
The codex doesnt have many bad units and even less unplayable ones
The worst units are :Incubi, hellions, beastmaster/beasts(excluding flocks)
basically everything else is playable if you use their strengths.
It does suck that we are limited in our detachment numbers (god i wish the 6* patrol for 8cp was playable in matched play).
And we have another magic aspect, we have the Aeldari keyword. Souping in the other elfs lets you make even more varied lists.
Compare Drukhari to Admech/Tau/Necrons/1ksons/nurgle demons for example, the lists are a lot more varied with drukhari than these armies (and probably other ones im not thinking of), you can actually develop different strategies,which is what most people mean by "the lists are varied"
That is pretty much true. There are only 3 HQs (and 3 named charcters), and 3 troops. Each troop is limited to its type of leader, you could change them up but our obsessions are too good to lose.
But you can still get a lot of variety in you lists.
You can get a bit but I think you've overestimating the variety that DE has to offer.
Headlss wrote: Our units are very different from each other. We never need to decide if we are taking assult Marines with jump packs, vanguard veterans with jump packs, death company or sangunary guard. Which all take the same force org and all do the same thing. Warriors are different from wytches are different from wracks. All are worth taking.
The trouble is, other armies get these 'variant' units in addition to their normal units. We have nothing to replace them.
I think our HQs are the biggest example of this. Eldar can take Jetbike versions of most of their HQs (and the Autarch has 4 different versions). We can't take any HQs with Jetbikes... but nor do we get any alternate HQs in their place. Hell, you could remove all the 'variant' Eldar HQs and they'd *still* have twice as many HQs as us.
Put simply, this isn't a point in our codex's favour and if anything it's a huge detriment to list variation as it means you have no options. Want to take a Jetbike Succubus to support Reavers? Tough luck. A Hellion Succubus to support Hellions? Nope, can't do that either. Any non-special-character Cult HQ that isn't a Succubus? Still no.
Headlss wrote: A talos heavy army is going to play different from a venom heavy army.
True. But how much variation can you get with, say, different Coven armies? I'm going to hazard a guess that they'll all include a lot of Talos and Grotesques because that's basically all they've got.
Headlss wrote: You could fill the board with big infantry, add in 60 hellions, and 3 units of deep striking scourges.
Only if you have a deep-seated grudge against winning games.
Headlss wrote: That last one probably wouldn't win but it would play differently and it would 'work.'
Er... if a list is going to lose almost by default, saying it works seems like a stretch.
And this is part of my point. I don't count false choices as being options. It's like saying the Haemonculus is the epitome of customisation, so long as you ignore the fact that he has all of one good melee weapon (and 0 good ranged weapons) and everything else is utter garbage. Yes, you could take Hellions... so long as you don't mind them just being inferior Reavers. Yes, you could take a Cronos... except that the Talos is drastically better and actually serves a purpose. yes, you can take Incubi... but Mandrakes are better and don't need a transport.
If you want to call all of these choices, fine. To me they seem like a classic case of 'I can but why would I want to?' Yes, I can choose to not take the best unit in the codex, but why would I want to? Yes, I can ignore good units in favour of crap ones, but why would I want to?
Headlss wrote: You can add air power to any of those lists.
Unless you're using Coven. Then no fliers for you.
We don't have the HQ choice we used to or even what most codexes still have but we have a couple options for competitive builds. And if you don't have to win every game, there are lots of things you could try out especially if you have a large collection from eariler days.
Possibly, though a lot of options from earlier editions have been effectively cut off by the new army-building restrictions.
Anyway, if you find Drukhari to have a ton of variation at the moment, fair enough. I've no wish to ruin your fun. All I'll say is that I've found them very restrictive when it comes to list-building and very difficult when it comes to adding any meaningful variation.
Very long back and forth on what can viably be played.
My point is we have 3 tournament winning lists that all play very differently. Venom spam. Grotesques and talos. Bikers with back up. Then we can add air power on top of that or not. We can get varations of each of those syles, the coven army doesn't have to be pure coven. You can add the writ archon spearhead detachment if you want.
3 radically different winning play styles in the codex I see as a lot of choice. How many different was can you play guardand win? Knights? Orks?
I wish we had a tougher HQ and a few different buffs. All I wsnt in the world is to put my succubus on a jet bike. But I am bery glad we don't have a book full of fake choices. Either unplayable unuts or units that are so similar it doesn't matter which you take.
It's the same as everything 40K, if you want to win, win, win, you will likely be heavily restricted in what you can take and in what combination.
If you want to play for fun and collect then DE have a range of lovely figures which have lots of potential for conversions and painting themes. A well done DE army is one of the best looking you can get.
That is pretty much true. There are only 3 HQs (and 3 named charcters), and 3 troops. Each troop is limited to its type of leader, you could change them up but our obsessions are too good to lose.
But you can still get a lot of variety in you lists.
You can get a bit but I think you've overestimating the variety that DE has to offer.
Headlss wrote: Our units are very different from each other. We never need to decide if we are taking assult Marines with jump packs, vanguard veterans with jump packs, death company or sangunary guard. Which all take the same force org and all do the same thing. Warriors are different from wytches are different from wracks. All are worth taking.
The trouble is, other armies get these 'variant' units in addition to their normal units. We have nothing to replace them.
I think our HQs are the biggest example of this. Eldar can take Jetbike versions of most of their HQs (and the Autarch has 4 different versions). We can't take any HQs with Jetbikes... but nor do we get any alternate HQs in their place. Hell, you could remove all the 'variant' Eldar HQs and they'd *still* have twice as many HQs as us.
Put simply, this isn't a point in our codex's favour and if anything it's a huge detriment to list variation as it means you have no options. Want to take a Jetbike Succubus to support Reavers? Tough luck. A Hellion Succubus to support Hellions? Nope, can't do that either. Any non-special-character Cult HQ that isn't a Succubus? Still no.
Headlss wrote: A talos heavy army is going to play different from a venom heavy army.
True. But how much variation can you get with, say, different Coven armies? I'm going to hazard a guess that they'll all include a lot of Talos and Grotesques because that's basically all they've got.
Headlss wrote: You could fill the board with big infantry, add in 60 hellions, and 3 units of deep striking scourges.
Only if you have a deep-seated grudge against winning games.
Headlss wrote: That last one probably wouldn't win but it would play differently and it would 'work.'
Er... if a list is going to lose almost by default, saying it works seems like a stretch.
And this is part of my point. I don't count false choices as being options. It's like saying the Haemonculus is the epitome of customisation, so long as you ignore the fact that he has all of one good melee weapon (and 0 good ranged weapons) and everything else is utter garbage. Yes, you could take Hellions... so long as you don't mind them just being inferior Reavers. Yes, you could take a Cronos... except that the Talos is drastically better and actually serves a purpose. yes, you can take Incubi... but Mandrakes are better and don't need a transport.
If you want to call all of these choices, fine. To me they seem like a classic case of 'I can but why would I want to?' Yes, I can choose to not take the best unit in the codex, but why would I want to? Yes, I can ignore good units in favour of crap ones, but why would I want to?
Headlss wrote: You can add air power to any of those lists.
Unless you're using Coven. Then no fliers for you.
We don't have the HQ choice we used to or even what most codexes still have but we have a couple options for competitive builds. And if you don't have to win every game, there are lots of things you could try out especially if you have a large collection from eariler days.
Possibly, though a lot of options from earlier editions have been effectively cut off by the new army-building restrictions.
Anyway, if you find Drukhari to have a ton of variation at the moment, fair enough. I've no wish to ruin your fun. All I'll say is that I've found them very restrictive when it comes to list-building and very difficult when it comes to adding any meaningful variation.
Very long back and forth on what can viably be played.
My point is we have 3 tournament winning lists that all play very differently. Venom spam. Grotesques and talos. Bikers with back up. Then we can add air power on top of that or not. We can get varations of each of those syles, the coven army doesn't have to be pure coven. You can add the writ archon spearhead detachment if you want.
3 radically different winning play styles in the codex I see as a lot of choice. How many different was can you play guardand win? Knights? Orks?
I wish we had a tougher HQ and a few different buffs. All I wsnt in the world is to put my succubus on a jet bike. But I am bery glad we don't have a book full of fake choices. Either unplayable unuts or units that are so similar it doesn't matter which you take.
Bikes with back up? Reavers are one of the worst units in the codex, nobody is winning any tournaments of note with that. I think you meant flyers spam, because thats more likely to be winning than any number of Reavers.
The problem with our codex is not what can be viably played, we do seem to have more options in that regard than most, but how you field them. Last edition I could easily slot a single Hameonculus and a unit of Grotesques into my list without problem and whilst in theory I can still do that, everything in that detachment loses their bonuses. There is no other army in the game that is that hamstrung in it's list building.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Isengard wrote: It's the same as everything 40K, if you want to win, win, win, you will likely be heavily restricted in what you can take and in what combination.
If you want to play for fun and collect then DE have a range of lovely figures which have lots of potential for conversions and painting themes. A well done DE army is one of the best looking you can get.
I always play for fun, especially at tournaments, but losing every game because I'm running Incubi and Hellions (models I love) isn't fun.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/07/25 11:45:17
I always play for fun, especially at tournaments, but losing every game because I'm running Incubi and Hellions (models I love) isn't fun.
Thats what we are saying, the army has some bad units, but most of them can do work if used properly, you happen to like two of the worse ones, which is a shame but dont focus on that, look at the rest of the viable units. (also i think hellions can be used to decent succes, they are far from a minmax unit but they can do some decent work if you use them to clear hordes for example.)
The most annoying thing is the codex is how its subdivided in three factions, when it comes to listbuilding this is really a thorn in my side, lets say i want a blob of wyches , then i need to at the very least take a succubus. Its not the end of the world, it just removes some flexibility.
Still, the army is tons of fun to play and unless youre taking the litteral worse units in the codex then you can have great success, Drukhari have very little matchups that are counters (maybe a tank-heavy list against a cult-only list).
Bikes with back up? Reavers are one of the worst units in the codex, nobody is winning any tournaments of note with that. I think you meant flyers spam, because thats more likely to be winning than any number of Reavers.
See thats my point right there. I am winning my games with reavers. I'm undeafeated in my last 2 tournaments. They aren't huge, 3 games instead of 5, but people are bringing good lists and playing to win. Could I win with that list at the Las Vegas open? No probably not, but it doesn't matter what list I bring I am not winning that tournament.
But I found a unit everyone thinks is trash, built a list where that is the key unit and am stomping everyone in my local scene. We have 4 top lists becuase you are right flyier spam is seperate from the 3 I mentioned. 4 lists that play very different from each other and can wreck shop against everyone you play against.
If you want to argue that Reavers can't take the top tables at world cup level events I will concede your point for now. I haven't done it yet. But maybe they could. 4 different play styles is pretty good variety from one codex. (I don't think the marines have 3 different ways to play in 7 codexes) There are more if you want to bring in allies or forge world. And way more if you are just playing pick up games for fun or to try something out.
24 reavers and 60 hellions would be awesome to put down. Run that into a green tide or a scuttling swarm, Awesomesauce! Might be a bad match up against 5 knights
My point is we have 3 tournament winning lists that all play very differently. Venom spam. Grotesques and talos. Bikers with back up. Then we can add air power on top of that or not. We can get varations of each of those syles, the coven army doesn't have to be pure coven. You can add the writ archon spearhead detachment if you want.
This is good to hear.
These lists look like spam, don't they?
Former moderator 40kOnline
Lanchester's square law - please obey in list building!
Illumini: "And thank you for not finishing your post with a "" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever."
My point is we have 3 tournament winning lists that all play very differently. Venom spam. Grotesques and talos. Bikers with back up. Then we can add air power on top of that or not. We can get varations of each of those syles, the coven army doesn't have to be pure coven. You can add the writ archon spearhead detachment if you want.
This is good to hear.
These lists look like spam, don't they?
They are considered spam yes.
Atleast there are three flavours of it.
That's better then most dexes can field at toptable.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
My point is we have 3 tournament winning lists that all play very differently. Venom spam. Grotesques and talos. Bikers with back up. Then we can add air power on top of that or not. We can get varations of each of those syles, the coven army doesn't have to be pure coven. You can add the writ archon spearhead detachment if you want.
This is good to hear.
These lists look like spam, don't they?
They are considered spam yes.
Atleast there are three flavours of it.
That's better then most dexes can field at toptable.
In their purest forms they would be spam. But you don't have to spam them if you don't want to. You could blend them. 9 talos and 15 Grotesques could work. But you could drop down to 3 talos and 6 Grotesques and then have plenty of room for mobile fire power and an alpha strike from venoms and bikes.
I posted the most extreme versions to get the biggest difference in play styles.
In their purest forms they would be spam. But you don't have to spam them if you don't want to. You could blend them. 9 talos and 15 Grotesques could work. But you could drop down to 3 talos and 6 Grotesques and then have plenty of room for mobile fire power and an alpha strike from venoms and bikes.
Well, I prefer to blend units in order to combat the enemy at all thread ranges.
So 3 talos and a few Grotesques would fine.
I'd fill the rest with venoms, ravagers, and fliers.
Former moderator 40kOnline
Lanchester's square law - please obey in list building!
Illumini: "And thank you for not finishing your post with a "" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever."
