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.

Apologies if I managed to overlook a dozen similar threads. None jumped out at me on the first page.

Just got my new Drukhari 'dex and skimmed over everything but the crusade rules. (They look pretty juicy though!) Some random thoughts:

* Overall, it seems like they went for a raw power boost to statlines rather than fixing some of the more nuanced issues. For instance, most of our melee weapons got an extra point of AP, but the mindphase gauntlet remains a super bland never-take. Our characters are better beatsticks, but we still have the same issue of being a pirate ship army that can't use strats or buff auras on our embarked units. Power From Pain is probably more useful, but it's still the "charging your pain batteries" approach. The shadowfield is unchanged despite being annoying for drukhari players and their opponents alike.

* There are a few weird rules overlaps/interactions/non-interactions. The Webway Raiders kabal trait is still a thing and says something to the effect of, "Each time you use the Webway Assault stratagem..." But they cut out the rule that lets you use that stratagem more than once meaning the kabal trait basically just refunds you a single CP if you use the 3CP version of the strat. The flesh gauntlet on grotesques seems like it might just always be worse than using their monstrous cleavers now thanks to the changes to both weapons. Hellions still don't look great to me, but there's a stratagem that can turn them into a buffing unit for your reavers. More scourge weapons than ever are susceptible to the heavy weapon to-hit penalty thus making you actively want to avoid using the movement stat on your jump pack unit. Just a couple odd things like that here and there that make me wonder if something got changed a few times during development and then never got polished.

* Despite not addressing every single one of my pet peeve units/rules, they did do a lot of cool stuff. Mandrakes are now infiltrators instead of deepstrikers during deployment, but you can basically Sky Leap them (like a swooping hawk). Which fits t heir shadow dancer shenanigans pretty well. The Shock Prow stratagem looks really heckin' fun to use, and I hope other books go a similar route with their own "ramming weapons." The court of the archon is back to being a single unit, and all the court members seem useful again. Beast masters can give advance + charge to a beast unit each turn, which feels way more satisfying than just being a captain for them. Cronos feel like proper support units again. They remembered to give the Hovering rule to all our skimmers this time... Just. Lots of satisfying little improvements that make me excited to use the book.

* Our HQs feel more on-brand. The succubus is back to being more stabby than the archon. The haemonculus can heal things without spending CP. All of them seem like they have the potential to actually win a fight against an enemy beatstick. Overall, a good change. Even if the haemonculus is less customizable than ever.

* Our wargear got stronger, but didn't gain back any of the flavor it used to have. Mindphase gauntlets are still bland. The electrocorrosive whip is still basically a better agonizer (though at least there's an AP difference to differentiate them slightly). No return of the clone field or ghostplate options for non-scourges or wings/bikes for HQs or any of that. Shredders lost their anti-infantry special rule (but are still pretty good). Ossefactors no longer cause bone-splosions. Basically, there's no return to the juicy, exotic wargear of the past or the flexible armory system that let you make your characters feel unique, but what's there is mostly pretty good. Except the mindphase gauntlet. Poor mindphase gauntlet.

Overall, it looks like a good book to me. I'm excited to use it. I think I can play some really flavorful armies. I feel like I could build a competitive, optimized list that coudl compete with competitive marines if I were so inclined. It seems like the focus was to power things up rather than to recapture the fluff we've lost over the years, but the crusade section seems like it might be juicy enough to offset that lack of flavor. Glad I bought it. Looking forward to using it.

Oh. And they still seem to think the cool thing about the Poisoned Tongue kabal is the literal poison they use. Which I personally find gauche, but at least Flayed Skull losing their splinter rerolls means we're actually the best splinter kabal instead of a worse version of FS.

As a non-Dark Eldar player, I think it's a fantastic book. Very few parts where it falls short. Really hope that CSM receive as solid a treatment.

 Marshal Loss wrote:
As a non-Dark Eldar player, I think it's a fantastic book. Very few parts where it falls short. Really hope that CSM receive as solid a treatment.

Fantastic book?
I don't have my ordered copy yet.
For me, everything will depend on the competitiveness of the codex. Here I'm a bit sceptical.

There are definitely a lot of positives about the book but for me at least there are also a lot of frustrations.

These aren't necessarily big things but a lot of little niggles can still add up.


- Power From Pain is better overall but there are now two major problems. The first is that you now lose it entirely if you ally with other Eldar, even if you go Ynnari. And since the rule that replaced it is unwashed garbage, DE are now severely penalised if they want to take allies. This is in stark contrast to other armies which get extra rewards for playing mono-armies, rather than losing a chunk of their existing bonuses if they don't.

The second issue is that the changes to PfP don't seem to have been acknowleged elsewhere in the codex. To give some examples, the Nightmare Doll used to upgrade a Haemonculus' 6+ FNP to 4+ FNP, which was a marked improvement. Now, however, the Haemonculus has 5+ FNP as standard and yet the Nightmare Doll still only upgrades it to a 4+ FNP with no extra effect. Similarly, the Obsidian Veil granted a 4++ to an Archon, allowing him to conserve his Shadowfield for use against the most dangerous weapons and also ensuring that he still has a save when it finally fails. Now, though, an Archon will have a 5++ by turn 4 at the latest, yet the Obsidian Veil remains unchanged.

This sort of thing really bothers me - especially for a codex that was hardly swimming in options to begin with.


- On a similar note, I definitely don't agree about our HQs being much improved. Outside of special characters (which I really don't care about either way), only the Succubus saw any significant improvement. And, in complete fairness, she was improved substantially. She's now a lot more solid in terms of her base stats and abilities, her Master ability is great, and (IMO) she has by far the fewest duds in terms of Relics and Warlord traits. The problem is that the Archon and Haemonculus came of very much the worse for wear.

Firstly, it seems that the Succubus' melee prowess came not just by buffing her own statline (good) but by nerfing the melee abilities of the Archon and Haemonculus (bad). The Archon's best weapon was already weak, now it's just a waste of ink (and his other weapons are no better). Meanwhile, the Haemonculus has lost an attack and also his entire selection of wargear. That's right, the master of science who brings all manner of unusual and esoteric weapons to the field now has 0 weapon options. Hell, even if you factor in the artefacts, his selection amounts to 1 sword and 1 pistol. Wheeeee. So now his wargear amounts to a garbage pistol, a melee weapon you can only ever make 1 attack with, a mediocre melee weapon, and a melee weapon you'll never use because his other melee weapon is outright better.

Now, I don't mind the Archon and Haemonculus not being great at combat. Though I'd make the case that they weren't particularly good in combat anyway. Even with their old stats and weapons, they'd still be lucky to kill 2 Marines per combat. Is this really considered over the top? Regardless, I wouldn't mind them being bad in melee - provided they had other abilities to make up for it. Instead, it's almost the opposite.

The Haemonculus has actually lost both his Hexrifle and Liquifier Gun options, so he can't be a ranged threat. He did at least gain the ability to heal Grotesques, Talos and Cronos. However, he now feels exceptionally expensive for a character stuck completely in a support role (and a role he's not even particularly good at). He's helped even less by the codex shifting the focus of Covens far more towards transport-based lists, which the Haemonculus is completely unsuited to supporting.

Meanwhile, while the Haemonculus at least got the ability to heal Coven units, the Archon got . . . nothing. There were so many possibilities. They could have given him more of a ranged focus, perhaps letting him take a Blaster and maybe even other weapons like Shredders. Instead, he's still stuck choosing between a worthless pistol and a pistol with a range so short you practically need to be pointing up the enemy's nostril before it will fire. What's more, the only artefact with a decent range (the Soul Seeker) was already weak in 8th and received basically no improvement at all. For context, it's meant to be a character-sniping pistol, yet its so weak that even if you add in a warlord trait that would let it reroll all hits and wounds, it still won't even kill a Platoon Commander on average dice, let alone be a threat to anything more substantial. It really needed an extra shot at the very least, instead it lost the ability to target units out of LoS.

There was also the possibility to make the Archon more strategic. Maybe let him reduce the cost of a stratagem by one each turn or let you case one of a small pool of such for free each turn. Or just give him a way to potentially generate extra CP. Just anything that would emphasise that his main focus is on the wider strategy, rather than melee combat. Or maybe change his aura into something more appropriate, which could also work from inside transports (e.g. let him designate a unit within 18" of himself/his transport each turn for the appropriate units to reroll hits against).

These are just random ideas off the top of my head but the point is that he needed something. Other HQs get the same (usually better, in fact) aura he does whilst also being good in combat to boot. The Archon gets his aura... and that's it. That's all he gets. He utterly sucks in combat beyond one very specific combination of relic and warlord trait, yet he has absolutely nothing else to do instead. No strategic abilities, no other support abilities, no ranged ability. He seems to exist just to be punched to death by a Canoness (incidentally, another HQ with the same aura but with vastly better weapons and support options).

But do you know the hilarious part? Having completely defanged the Archon's melee ability, GW had the brilliant idea to let his aura also affect a melee unit now. Also his Master ability lets him fight twice 1/game with his utterly garbage melee ability.


Sorry for the long rant but this really bugs me. In another book it might not be so bad but DE have just 3 generic HQs and now two already mediocre ones have been hammered into the ground for no good reason.

It's a shame because there are many things to like about the new book but, as someone who cares about the characters, this really puts the dampers on it for me.

I don't play DE but the book looks pretty decent, looks like certain units such as Wyches and Hellions have got the buff they were desperately needing.

Bit meh on the fact that they could have made some upgrades, relics, etc, a bit more unique, whereas we're given the standard boring buffs such as 5+ FNP, -1 to hit, etc.

Could have done something a bit more unique for the special units such as Bloodbrides and Trueborn. It's a welcome addition but I would have liked to see a little more.

I mean, I guess the way I look at it is, there's a distinction between 'how a unit looks in a vacuum on its own without considering any traits/options/etc' and 'how will I actually, practically use a unit within a game'?

yes, the archon has an extremely narrow use window and an extremely poor melee damage output in his default loadout.

I will never ever ever ever ever ever use his default loadout in a game. Why the hell would I? If I want to run an all-kabals list, I'm gonna run a battalion, my first HQ is going to be INSANELY better, not even in the same universe Master Archon with Djinn Blade and Hatred Eternal, who does literally like 10 times as much damage in melee as a default archon on the turn he double fights, and my second HQ, oh look, it's drazar, Dude Who Kills Everything.

If I want to run Kabals plus something else in patrols or a realspace raid, I want my archon to be the warlord anyway to use the various strats tied to that, so either I'll have the Actually Useful Support Build Archon (whose aura effects basically everything, who also refunds me cp, and who also has a reroll 1s to wound aura) or I'll have Murder Archon again.

The haemonculus took a small damage hit specifically against W2 targets with the loss of the EC whip (he kills 1.11 meq instead of 1.3) but he gained better damage vs GEQ, better damage vs invuln-protected characters (because while he did technically lose 1 from his Attacks STAT, one of his weapons now makes 2 bonus attacks....), and better ability to support his creations. since he's always been designed and fluffed as a support HQ - it feels like that's a more important buff to have.

Also, in terms of 'practically, how is my stuff going to actually play' it's worth noting that I get 2 extra CP just for choosing to structure my army as patrols. the extra warlord trait and relic stratagems happen to cost 1cp each. So I feel like it makes sense for me to basically only consider HQs as holding relics and having traits and let that be the general barometer for their quality, because I have absolutely no reason ever to field them without them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, on hellions.... No idea where youre getting that theyre no good. Imo theyre basically 100% better at melee reaver jetbikes now. They murder intercessors efficiently, which is something I always always need in my life.

A hellion has a 100% points return in melee vs an intercessor. And they casually doubled their durability.

the_scotsman wrote:
I mean, I guess the way I look at it is, there's a distinction between 'how a unit looks in a vacuum on its own without considering any traits/options/etc' and 'how will I actually, practically use a unit within a game'?

yes, the archon has an extremely narrow use window and an extremely poor melee damage output in his default loadout.

I will never ever ever ever ever ever use his default loadout in a game. Why the hell would I? If I want to run an all-kabals list, I'm gonna run a battalion, my first HQ is going to be INSANELY better, not even in the same universe Master Archon with Djinn Blade and Hatred Eternal, who does literally like 10 times as much damage in melee as a default archon on the turn he double fights, and my second HQ, oh look, it's drazar, Dude Who Kills Everything.

I think it's incredibly telling that you managed to make one good Archon and then immediately had to take a special character instead of a second Archon.

Because the Archon has maybe one good combination of weapons and warlord traits and then you're stuck scraping the bottom of the barrel for anything that will make him slightly less abysmal.

Look, I agree with you that you're never going to take an Archon without Warlord Traits or Artefacts.

But what you perpetually ignore is that those things have an inherent opportunity cost because you can only ever have 1 of each. Yes, you can make a decent blender-Archon with the right relic and the right warlord trait but the point I keep making is that you're doing that at the expense of everything else.

Just imagine for a moment if the Archon's basic melee weapons were actually worth a damn on their own. Now you can still take a blender-option if you really want to but you could also take other options - defence, ranged, support etc. without completely compromising his ability to contribute meaningfully in melee.

I honestly don't understand why this seems to be considered a heinous request. Imagine if SM captains had just a single Power Sword as their only melee weapon, and then maybe a single Relic Blade as an actual Relic item for if you really wanted to build them as melee characters. Do you think SM players would shrug and point to the one good melee build available, or would they be rather annoyed that their characters have just one functional melee build?

the_scotsman wrote:

The haemonculus took a small damage hit specifically against W2 targets with the loss of the EC whip (he kills 1.11 meq instead of 1.3) but he gained better damage vs GEQ, better damage vs invuln-protected characters (because while he did technically lose 1 from his Attacks STAT, one of his weapons now makes 2 bonus attacks....), and better ability to support his creations. since he's always been designed and fluffed as a support HQ - it feels like that's a more important buff to have.

I think you're forgetting the extra damage from the Electrocorrosive Whip. Even against characters with Invulnerable saves, the single extra attack doesn't come close to making up for that.

To be honest, though, the biggest issue for me is that I now look at the Haemonculus and just can't find anything to get excited about. He's got four weapons but none of them are remotely interesting, and nor can he take any other wargear anymore (farewell my sniper Haemonculus). His support abilities are okay but again, nothing exciting. Most of his relics and traits just make him a bit tougher, rather than helping him actually accomplish anything.

I don't think he's quite as bad as the Archon in terms of role. I just find his new design to be rather boring and uninteresting, which is the last thing I want to see in my mas scientist.

the_scotsman wrote:

Also, in terms of 'practically, how is my stuff going to actually play' it's worth noting that I get 2 extra CP just for choosing to structure my army as patrols. the extra warlord trait and relic stratagems happen to cost 1cp each. So I feel like it makes sense for me to basically only consider HQs as holding relics and having traits and let that be the general barometer for their quality, because I have absolutely no reason ever to field them without them.

Again, it's not that I expect Archons and such to be fielded without relics or traits. It's that I don't think they should have to rely on them just to be even vaguely competent at their core roles.

Librarians don't have to take an artefact and Warlord trait jus to unlock the ability to actually cast psychic powers.
Tau commanders don't have to take an artefact and warlord trait in order to obtain basic, functional guns.
But one of our primary melee HQs has to take an artefact and a warlord trait just to function as a melee character.

I'm sorry but I just cannot fathom why people seem to think this is good design.

There's some truth to that. Marines can still make a suicide Captain with a Jump Pack and Thunder Hammer if they wanted for example, it's just less efficient of a bomb. GW meanwhile didn't fix the HQs for Dark Eldar AGAIN.

 vipoid wrote:


But what you perpetually ignore is that those things have an inherent opportunity cost because you can only ever have 1 of each.

I take your point, but merely post to illustrate the impact of writing from a particular point of view.

We have not one, but two ways to increase the number of WL traits available to our armies- one that functions to create virtual Warlords in realspace raids and one that works to create additional warlords in other patrol detachments and the third option of using both at the same time.

We have a strat that impacts the number of Relics we can take too.

And for those of us playing Crusade, warlord traits and relics are EVERYWHERE.

Again, your point does stand- it would have been better to create a better suite of viable non-relic, non-WL Trait options for all of HQ's. I'm not disagreeing with that.

As for the Crusade content of this dex, which folks haven't really written about yet, it's the best I've seen so far; the Ascendant Lord/ Commorragh mini-game is fabulous. Like it's so good that this book could have been marketed as the Lords of Commorragh mini-game, which includes the Drukhari dex. Seriously- if you are a Crusade player, even if you don't play DE, this book is an examplar of how far Crusade content can go.

Id argue there are three useful archon builds available, but honestly, yeah. I do think you coyld have one good melee build and one good command build for basically any given HQ, and theyd function just fine. And I do think that being reliant on relics and traits is OK for us in particular, because gw said "here, have 2 extra CP, Treat Yoself."

I do feel your pain regarding characters, I don't necessarily want every archon in my army to be as killy as a hatred eternal djinn blade fight twice archon, but most of his options do feel like redundant/inferior versions of each other. It used to be that your archon could take basically any wargear in the book plus a few unique options available only to himself. You could make an archon feel uniquely yours and turn him into an infantry blender (of several varieties), a tank hunter, a monster hunter, or a gunner depending on how you equipped him. Presently, it feels like your options are reduced to making him a good infantry blender, an okay infantry blender, or a bad infantry blender, and you can only have one of the first.

And yeah, giving him basically a captain aura again just really feels like the designers don't have much personal experience with drukhari. We spent all of 8th commenting on how weird the "jog behind your boats" archon was. I really hoped they'd give him a targeted buff that he could use while embarked. Something akin to the 7th edition starter box's formation.

Haemonculi in 5th edition were the unit for fielding all sorts of interesting and exotic wargear. Now they have literally no wargear options, and a bunch of cool conversions/kitbashes just became wracks.

I feel like I'm coming off as very negative in this thread, and I don't mean to be. I like more about the codex than I dislike. I'm excited to use it. I just get the impression that the rules writers are not themselves drukhari players. There's no nod to the old customization options that we loved. There's no understanding of some of the semi-subtle things that bug us. Like, the archon aura works on incubi now. That's nice, but was that change made because someone only half-understood our frustration around mercenaries being unbuffable?

No model in the game has an ability they can use from inside a transport (outside of being able to shoot because of a transports specific rule). What reason do you have that a DEldar character should get the protection of being untargetable by functionally everything (mortal wound splash / explosions / snipers / etc) and be able to pass out a buff from a larger footprint than any other infantry sized model in the game.

This forum talks about 'balance' so much you'd have thought the above idea wouldn't even get to print, let alone be suggested as a 'we want this'

I would say that the archon being able to buff everything in a Realspace Raid is more of a nod to that. Mercenaries, covens, cults, and kabals.

A few use case ideas for an archon:

1) the obvious one. Shred a whole squad of custodes, a tank, whatever you want really.

2) in a transport with the animus vitae in a turn 2 tempo fast assault list.

Give your whole army +1 to hit on turn 2. Give him a warlord trait like Connsumate Weaponmaster for a D2 venom blade or one of the two +1 strength ones to give him decent melee capabilities so he can participate in the charge with the Incubi.

3) give him the writ and labyrinthine and run him in a realspace raid with some Talos pain engines/scourges for him to buff the hit rolls of

4) give him a gun relic and pop him into a dark tech venom with a wrack squad and melt space marines.

If I was god and I could write up the whole codex myself, would I give the archon access to the whole wargear list because obviously he should have whatever he wants? Sure.

Would I ever in a million years pass up any of The relic/trait builds in favor of running my archon as a BS2+ dude with a heat lance? No.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BroodSpawn wrote:
No model in the game has an ability they can use from inside a transport (outside of being able to shoot because of a transports specific rule). What reason do you have that a DEldar character should get the protection of being untargetable by functionally everything (mortal wound splash / explosions / snipers / etc) and be able to pass out a buff from a larger footprint than any other infantry sized model in the game.

This forum talks about 'balance' so much you'd have thought the above idea wouldn't even get to print, let alone be suggested as a 'we want this'

He did say "targeted buff". You know, like how a commander can give an order out of a chimera.

Or just, give him the ability to be on a bike/board again.

 BroodSpawn wrote:
No model in the game has an ability they can use from inside a transport (outside of being able to shoot because of a transports specific rule). What reason do you have that a DEldar character should get the protection of being untargetable by functionally everything (mortal wound splash / explosions / snipers / etc) and be able to pass out a buff from a larger footprint than any other infantry sized model in the game.

Well that's a question so loaded it should probably require a firearm licence.


Answering it seems almost pointless as you clearly have no interest on any sort of debate on the matter.

However, for the record, the reason people think DE should have an aura or ability that functions from a transport is because fighting from transports is a unique playstyle that DE have. Hence, it's a bit odd that the DE HQs seem to be built for an entirely different theme than the one they're meant to specialise in.

As it stands, Archons are in the weird position where their retinue of Trueborn want to be flying around in a Raider shooting things, yet if the Archon rides with them he can neither buff them nor contribute to their firepower.

It would be akin to Tau HQs having no guns and only being able to hand out melee buffs.

Even if you don't want an aura to work out of a vehicle (because of the larger footprint) is there a good reason why the Archon's aura couldn't at least affect the occupants of the vehicle he's in?

Yeah. I wasn't suggesting an aura that extends from the vehicle he's in. Letting him benefit the vehicle he's inside of or his fellow passengers would already make more sense. Or maybe let him target a single unit (or the passengers of a single unit) and buff them. Or give him guard-style orders so he can command a vehicle to move after shooting or let passengers in a vehicle disembark instead of shooting provided the vehicle didn't advance this turn, or let him grant the Swift Out Flanking stratagem to a unit from his kabal for free, or any number of other things.

There are tons of ways you could make the archon feel like he's the brains behind a raiding party of flying pirate ships. Making him jump out of said pirate ships alongside units that don't want to leave their pirate ships and then yell, "Shoot more betterer!" is just... weird.

It's like if your khorne daemon HQ had an aura that only buffed shooting and only works if he doesn't charge or fight that turn. It's technically a useful ability, but it feels really awkward and out of place.

EDIT: And it was weird throughout all of 8th edition too, which is part of why I find it frustrating that this is still a thing. They found the time to decide that haywire blasters and heat lances really needed to be heavy weapons, but they didn't think that the goofy archon jogging behind his gunboats was worth addressing.

It is absolutely a book that ups the power levels of a lot of stuff without fundamentally fixing the issues that have developed for the faction over the years. DE is still a faction that floods the board with lots of cheapish junk, the junk is just much more efficient now that it got the typical 9th edition codex creep buff.

I would take this as a signal for what's going to happen moving forward. You're not going to see CWE go back to what they were in early editions of the game. They'll still be a cheap junk faction too, they'll just get much better at being a cheap junk faction the same way that DE did. For whatever reason, GW seems absolutely committed to this world where there are two types of factions - space marines factions, and everyone else. Space marine factions (custodes get a buy-in here as honorary space marines) compete on the strength of their models, everybody else competes through leveraging the power of efficient junk.

Whether you consider that good or not largely depends on whether you're happy with that paradigm. If you are, the DE book works quite well within it, certainly better than the 8th edition one did.

Wyldhunt wrote:
Apologies if I managed to overlook a dozen similar threads. None jumped out at me on the first page.

* There are a few weird rules overlaps/interactions/non-interactions. The Webway Raiders kabal trait is still a thing and says something to the effect of, "Each time you use the Webway Assault stratagem..." But they cut out the rule that lets you use that stratagem more than once meaning the kabal trait basically just refunds you a single CP if you use the 3CP version of the strat. The flesh gauntlet on grotesques seems like it might just always be worse than using their monstrous cleavers now thanks to the changes to both weapons. Hellions still don't look great to me, but there's a stratagem that can turn them into a buffing unit for your reavers. More scourge weapons than ever are susceptible to the heavy weapon to-hit penalty thus making you actively want to avoid using the movement stat on your jump pack unit. Just a couple odd things like that here and there that make me wonder if something got changed a few times during development and then never got polished.

.

Flesh Gauntlets are secretly your anti-horde option. The mortal wound spillover meant they were always your best options attacking 1 wound models with low save/invulnerable saves like orks or harlies, and the addition of s6 and blade artists pulls them ahead against GEQ in the new dex.

Yes, I agree, overall the codex is great.

I feel like a significant chunk of the playerbsse fundamentally disagrees with GW about how elite a space marine should be.

My troops are sbout 1/2 as expensive as a marine, and equal points can hold their own against equal points of marines.

My elites are about the cost of a marine, but faster, killier, and more fragile.

Thats what I signed up for, thats why im here. I checked the box that said dark eldar, id like to be fast, kill a lot, and be more fragile.

You signed up for Eldar elites being roughly equal to a normal space marine, while elite space marines are far more powerful? Not trying to be a gotcha, just making sure we're on the same page here re: how you think things should be.

As for disagreeing with GW, it's a disagreement with the direction GW has taken things from 8th edition on. It didn't used to be the case that eldar were hopelessly inferior to marines and can only compete with them through weight of bodies.

yukishiro1 wrote:
can only compete with them through weight of bodies.

My elites are about the cost of a marine, but faster, killier, and more fragile.

That's not weight of bodies.

If any of my xenos factions get as good a codex a this one, I will be happy, not sad that « my elite stuff is not as good as space marine elite stuff Bouh houh houh I think I will cry » or whatever BS I have read in this thread.
Rejoice, IMHO thescotsman has nailed it. I think uncareful drukari players will lose though, while tourney vets will rake in many wins with that book. It really seems like good stuff, though the lack (disappearance) of very unique stuff is the only « fail » I see here

yukishiro1 wrote:
You signed up for Eldar elites being roughly equal to a normal space marine, while elite space marines are far more powerful? Not trying to be a gotcha, just making sure we're on the same page here re: how you think things should be.

An Incubi at 16 points does 2.78 wounds to a 20 point Intercessor (or any other T4 Sv3+ model), 1.67 Wounds to a 35 point Bladeguard Veteran (or any other T4 model with 2+ Save or 4+ Invulnerable Save), and 2.08 points to a 28 point Heavy Intercessor (or any other T5, Sv3+ model). He dies to a stiff breeze based on his T3, Sv 3+/PFP, but he hits like a truck for his points. Point for point, I can't image there are many units that want to be in close combat with Incubi. They may be an extreme, but they are deadly.

As for disagreeing with GW, it's a disagreement with the direction GW has taken things from 8th edition on. It didn't used to be the case that eldar were hopelessly inferior to marines and can only compete with them through weight of bodies.

Haven't Eldar always been inferior to marines going by their Stat Block? It was always their superior weapons and special rules that made them better in my experience.

yukishiro1 wrote:
You signed up for Eldar elites being roughly equal to a normal space marine, while elite space marines are far more powerful? Not trying to be a gotcha, just making sure we're on the same page here re: how you think things should be.

As for disagreeing with GW, it's a disagreement with the direction GW has taken things from 8th edition on. It didn't used to be the case that eldar were hopelessly inferior to marines and can only compete with them through weight of bodies.

....fething when, my dude? When was a kabalite not several points cheaper than a marine, an incubi not about the same as a marine, a reaver not a bit more than a marine and a grotesque/clawed fiend/court of the archon member not the rough equivalent of a marine elite? I like painting models, I dont want 16 point kabalites and 30 point incubi. Itd be ridiculously difficult to balance drukhari as a glass cannon faction if there werent more expensive elite infantry running around for them to be able to explode.

How are clawed fiends? Can you use them in soup?

Im no DE player but ive always like the models and was considering getting some OOP metal ones for paintings

 Argive wrote:
How are clawed fiends? Can you use them in soup?

They're not great. WS4+ is never what you want to see on a melee unit. Nor a lack of any worthwhile armour, invulnerable and FNP saves.


That said, they're also probably one of the best units to soup because they don't get FNP (and thus don't lose core abilities as a result of souping).

 vipoid wrote:

 Argive wrote:
How are clawed fiends? Can you use them in soup?

They're not great. WS4+ is never what you want to see on a melee unit. Nor a lack of any worthwhile armour, invulnerable and FNP saves.


That said, they're also probably one of the best units to soup because they don't get FNP (and thus don't lose core abilities as a result of souping).

They're basically sliiightly better spawn with M10 and fixed attacks, but no random abilities and much lower LD ( offset by beastmaster a bit ).

They gained an AP and they get extra attacks for all models in the unit instead of just one when one is wounded. Incubi kills 1.4 marines ( 16 points ). Fiend kills 1.1 ( 1.3 in rage ) / ( 25 points plus BM ). One it T5 W4 5+ with little support and the other is T3 3+ with lots of support.

I imagine we'll see some supplement in a campaign that gives them some additional tools.

 Argive wrote:
How are clawed fiends? Can you use them in soup?

Im no DE player but ive always like the models and was considering getting some OOP metal ones for paintings

I'll be honest, given your general level of saltiness and negativity I just kind of assumed you were a dark eldar player.

 Argive wrote:
How are clawed fiends? Can you use them in soup?

Im no DE player but ive always like the models and was considering getting some OOP metal ones for paintings

That last sentence makes me wonder if you mean clawed fiends (the big gorilla rat things) or khymarae (the quadrupeds that look more like the old warp beasts from the first codex.)

Both seem good in their own ways. Khymarae are as cheap as wyches, hit about as hard, and don't need a transport to quickly get up the table. If you go second, I could see these guys being good for advance + charging at an enemy unit that wandered onto an objective turn 1. They're a lot like wyches with the movement, strength, and toughness drugs but with one fewer attacks. I like them.

I think of clawed fiends as faster, squishier grotesques. They move faster, can be advance + charged just like khymarae, and have a very similar offensive output to a grotesque. However, they're 25 points per dude with a 5+ save, and they look scary across the table. I feel like it might be difficult to keep them alive long enough to be a good investment.

I only own one clawed fiend, but I've used both fiends and khymarae in the past as mobile screens and easy-to-hide objective achievers. They can't perform most actions, so you probably won't put them directly on an objective, BUT they're fast and small enough to hide on the flanks for Engage on All Fronts or linebreaker or to just sprinkle around the table to screen out deepstrikers. If you want to run larger units and actually do damage with them, the Leadership drug on the beastmaster is a must.

the_scotsman wrote:
I feel like a significant chunk of the playerbsse fundamentally disagrees with GW about how elite a space marine should be.

My troops are sbout 1/2 as expensive as a marine, and equal points can hold their own against equal points of marines.

My elites are about the cost of a marine, but faster, killier, and more fragile.

Thats what I signed up for, thats why im here. I checked the box that said dark eldar, id like to be fast, kill a lot, and be more fragile.

That sounds like how Dark Eldar should play. Am I wrong?

On Archons: is any 65 PPM HQ very good without a warlord trait and/or relic?