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.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Maybe there's a rule in their Codex that says that they can have multiple patrols inside of a detachment. Or maybe GW is just being GW again and didn't consider the ramifications of what they wrote. Or maybe there's something that we don't know yet that allows patrol detachments to be something else.

Why don't we wait for the Codex before banning/burning/celebrating DE.

Or maybe that rule is what it is. If everybody can bring 6 dets de can bring 6 patrol for 8 cp. No need to make things harder than it is. Remember game has 3 game modes. That rule doesn't need to work on standard game mode to have reason to be in codex. After all open exists as well as narrative

I realy wish I could get behind the it will be balanced positivity train, but right now I dont see this being used to create interesting mutiple patrol dark eldar armies.
I see it turning eldar into the same broken mess of imbalance that imperium and choas factions are.

Well some nice strategems for eldar soup but then no de patrol cp boost. De isn't all that easy faction to soup up. Maybe small det to unlock strategems

Guys don't panic, the March (lol) FAQ is still on the way, they MAY have written something about soups. I dislike the abuse soups can provoke, so if they're still allowed but less powerful I'm all in.

 Xenomancers wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/03/30/codex-drukhari-preview-stratagemsgw-homepage-post-3/

Pretty cool we have a Vect strategem but no rules for Vect. Anyways - this stratagem is immensely powerful and quite possibly will shut down entire armies ability to function.
.

'Shut down entire armies abilities to function'?

AHA HA HAA!!!!

Its like people might have to start using their models tactically rather than relying on stratagems out the wazoo.

Emperor knows what we did back in the day before stratagems...

tneva82 wrote:

Or maybe that rule is what it is. If everybody can bring 6 dets de can bring 6 patrol for 8 cp. No need to make things harder than it is. Remember game has 3 game modes. That rule doesn't need to work on standard game mode to have reason to be in codex. After all open exists as well as narrative

It works in standard matched just fine.

 Inquisitor Kallus wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/03/30/codex-drukhari-preview-stratagemsgw-homepage-post-3/

Pretty cool we have a Vect strategem but no rules for Vect. Anyways - this stratagem is immensely powerful and quite possibly will shut down entire armies ability to function.
.

'Shut down entire armies abilities to function'?

AHA HA HAA!!!!

Its like people might have to start using their models tactically rather than relying on stratagems out the wazoo.

Emperor knows what we did back in the day before stratagems...

Calm down grandpa, did you know the kids can also read the rules on their iPads now?

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

 Inquisitor Kallus wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/03/30/codex-drukhari-preview-stratagemsgw-homepage-post-3/

Pretty cool we have a Vect strategem but no rules for Vect. Anyways - this stratagem is immensely powerful and quite possibly will shut down entire armies ability to function.
.

'Shut down entire armies abilities to function'?

AHA HA HAA!!!!

Its like people might have to start using their models tactically rather than relying on stratagems out the wazoo.

Emperor knows what we did back in the day before stratagems...

Calm down grandpa, did you know the kids can also read the rules on their iPads now?

What a constructive and on topic comment.

 Crimson wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Or maybe that rule is what it is. If everybody can bring 6 dets de can bring 6 patrol for 8 cp. No need to make things harder than it is. Remember game has 3 game modes. That rule doesn't need to work on standard game mode to have reason to be in codex. After all open exists as well as narrative

It works in standard matched just fine.

Seeing standard is 3 det yeah 3 patrols works. Not many wants to play broken soup more dets allow so they play like gw suggests to play.

tneva82 wrote:


Seeing standard is 3 det yeah 3 patrols works. Not many wants to play broken soup more dets allow so they play like gw suggests to play.

Suggested for organised events. If people want to use houserules for their casual games, that's fine, but then it's not GW's fault if that causes problems.

Ice_can wrote:
I see it turning eldar into the same broken mess of imbalance that imperium and choas factions are.

And in that imbalance there is... balance?

I mean, a funny statement to make.

"Imperium and Chaos are imbalanced, so let's make damned sure the Eldar are balanced" - which immediately means they are imbalanced because they are below the power level of the two that are out of balance.

Which way do we go here?

And why are we suggesting we kick unreleased codexes in the nuts because other factions soup too well?

I mean... advocate fixing that instead of making it the defacto due to everyone else having to play to a different standard of power.

 Crimson wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


Seeing standard is 3 det yeah 3 patrols works. Not many wants to play broken soup more dets allow so they play like gw suggests to play.

Suggested for organised events. If people want to use houserules for their casual games, that's fine, but then it's not GW's fault if that causes problems.

That's hairsplitting. If most use it it's pretty much same as saying not following it is house rule. Sometimes common practice is more powerfull than theoretical rules. If raw trumps common practice i could glue rock from beach to base, write what it represents and play with those. 100% raw. Of course nobody plays with me.

Similarly not many wants to play with broken crap free dets allow so while raw says no limit in practice no limit is the house rule

tneva82 wrote:

That's hairsplitting. If most use it it's pretty much same as saying not following it is house rule. Sometimes common practice is more powerfull than theoretical rules. If raw trumps common practice i could glue rock from beach to base, write what it represents and play with those. 100% raw. Of course nobody plays with me.

Similarly not many wants to play with broken crap free dets allow so while raw says no limit in practice no limit is the house rule

That's completely crazy, you can't expect GW to design their rules based on people's houserules. Furthermore, what 'everyone does' varies locally, I've never used the detachment restriction rule, and I'm even playing in a league with no such restriction in effect.

Purifying Tempest wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
I see it turning eldar into the same broken mess of imbalance that imperium and choas factions are.

And in that imbalance there is... balance?

I mean, a funny statement to make.

"Imperium and Chaos are imbalanced, so let's make damned sure the Eldar are balanced" - which immediately means they are imbalanced because they are below the power level of the two that are out of balance.

Which way do we go here?

And why are we suggesting we kick unreleased codexes in the nuts because other factions soup too well?

I mean... advocate fixing that instead of making it the defacto due to everyone else having to play to a different standard of power.

No I'm saying you'll get sucky rules and everyones answer of how do I stop getting tabled by list x is take dark reapers.
Doesn't help you build a good dark eldar army. Now if it had said if your dark eldar army contains 3 patrols you get 4 cp and 6 patols gets you 8 cp I would be all for this rule.

Soup means that units that suck never get fixed as tournament players just move to soup in 3+ codexs for a 2k list.

You also get the embrace the soup bro comments. I shouldn't have to play 3 flippin armies just to build a viable force.

Wow! Agents of Vect is a pretty good Ynnari stratagem

 Ordana wrote:
Here is a simple solution.

Warhammer Fest is in May, and with it the Warhammer World GT finals. I'm assuming DE will be legal by then. So lets see what GW's 'official' word will be and if they allow DE to take more then 3 detachments.

My bet?
DE will keep the same limit.

Hopefully we'll get a good idea of how tehy do, Lawrence of Tabletop Tactics has already said he'll be taking Drukhari to the finals, and he won the first heat with Ultramarines.

What armies actually rely on stratagems to work? I keep reading that and no one has actually explained it?

 Formosa wrote:
What armies actually rely on stratagems to work? I keep reading that and no one has actually explained it?

BA and CWE heavily do. CWE can work without, but not to top 3 levels of tournaments.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
What armies actually rely on stratagems to work? I keep reading that and no one has actually explained it?

BA and CWE heavily do. CWE can work without, but not to top 3 levels of tournaments.

What stratagems ?

 Formosa wrote:
What armies actually rely on stratagems to work? I keep reading that and no one has actually explained it?

The two ones of the top of my head are Poxwalker Farm and Blood Angels. Basically this stratagem kills Poxwalker farm lists.

 Formosa wrote:
What armies actually rely on stratagems to work? I keep reading that and no one has actually explained it?

relying on strats to work....probably not many that absolutely depends on them.

but definitely some basic power ones that could mean an objective or a dead unit or the game it self.

for example the counter charge strat keeping some multi charge alive.
or a unit that is about to put the hurt down with something like veterains of the long war. or the multi attack one used to scoot up an extra 3" and an extra swing.
slannesh double shots havocs if they decided to make a list with less long range anti tank.

wasnt cloud of flies like stupid powerful or was that a spell.?

 Formosa wrote:
What armies actually rely on stratagems to work? I keep reading that and no one has actually explained it?

Not a ton, although some feel it more than others. Imagine shutting down a critical Blood Angel charge from reserves, for instance. You could also use this to prevent dark reapers from intercepting your deepstriking units, which could be a big deal.


Regarding the detachments thing, I actually don't hate the idea of being forced to choose between running multiple patrols or taking a more conventional list. 7 CP is pretty typical for me, so a trio of patrols and nothing else wouldn't be awful as far as CP access. We can take a relic for 1d3 extra and a trait to help recycle them, after all. On the other hand, I could still see myself taking a batallion of a coven/cult/kabal of m y choice to run alongside some other flavors of eldar.

The only scenario that I see as a little unpleasant is when I really want to field a single batallion that mixes coven/cult/kabal units alongisde my other eldar factions but then have to give up my strats/traits/faction bonuses to do so. So if I just want to field kabal stuff alongside my craftworlders, no problem, but throwing wyches into the mix means I'll need a detachment (and HQ tax points) to spare.

 Galas wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
What armies actually rely on stratagems to work? I keep reading that and no one has actually explained it?

The two ones of the top of my head are Poxwalker Farm and Blood Angels. Basically this stratagem kills Poxwalker farm lists.

Sounds like a meta-shift to me.

But it comes at a hefty price of 3 CP. And all you're really doing is delaying the stratagem, not nullifying it. MOST of the time there is no CP lost by the affected player.

 Formosa wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
What armies actually rely on stratagems to work? I keep reading that and no one has actually explained it?

BA and CWE heavily do. CWE can work without, but not to top 3 levels of tournaments.

What stratagems ?

Dont know the names well.

BA: 3d6 to charge and fight twice
CWE: Move after shooting (keeps Ynnari 9 man Dark Reaper unit out of LoS, double range of powers for Jinx against
Chaos: IDK know this one, but i am told they are a must (no one at my local plays this lists)

Edit: I might be missing 1-2 i cant remember, no codex in front of me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Purifying Tempest wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
What armies actually rely on stratagems to work? I keep reading that and no one has actually explained it?

The two ones of the top of my head are Poxwalker Farm and Blood Angels. Basically this stratagem kills Poxwalker farm lists.

Sounds like a meta-shift to me.

But it comes at a hefty price of 3 CP. And all you're really doing is delaying the stratagem, not nullifying it. MOST of the time there is no CP lost by the affected player.

But you dont care if they get the CP back, you just stop them from doing their "special niche" to win the game.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
What armies actually rely on stratagems to work? I keep reading that and no one has actually explained it?

BA and CWE heavily do. CWE can work without, but not to top 3 levels of tournaments.

What stratagems ?

Dont know the names well.

BA: 3d6 to charge and fight twice
CWE: Move after shooting (keeps Ynnari 9 man Dark Reaper unit out of LoS, double range of powers for Jinx against

I might be missing 1-2 i cant remember, no codex in front of me.

This is fine. Because it costs the Drukhari player equal or MORE CP to do this. 1/6th of the time it is game-changingly brutal, 1/6th of the time it is a 4 CP trap, and 1/36th of the time it is a 3 CP robbery.

Purifying Tempest wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
What armies actually rely on stratagems to work? I keep reading that and no one has actually explained it?

BA and CWE heavily do. CWE can work without, but not to top 3 levels of tournaments.

What stratagems ?

Dont know the names well.

BA: 3d6 to charge and fight twice
CWE: Move after shooting (keeps Ynnari 9 man Dark Reaper unit out of LoS, double range of powers for Jinx against

I might be missing 1-2 i cant remember, no codex in front of me.

This is fine. Because it costs the Drukhari player equal or MORE CP to do this. 1/6th of the time it is game-changingly brutal, 1/6th of the time it is a 4 CP trap, and 1/36th of the time it is a 3 CP robbery.

yeah but against BA and even Chaos it could win you the game, you dont really care if they get CP back or spending the CP if it means the BA player didnt charge and kill 4 of your units

Maybe we should play lists that can win without absolutely crutching on a stratagem?

Or at least acknowledging that Vect is a damned genius and doesn't like your petty mon-keigh tricks?

This is the funniest thread to read! 1. I'm Orks so I don't care... 2. I feel what DE players are going through. They finally get something cool and the other players are upset that they might maybe ome time play a dark eldar player and not use a strat that phsse... it's like with Orks... some players genuinely complain because there is a 1 in 144 chance our guns might harm a tough unit.

Nice. DE get to be a top tier army for once. I might just get back into them.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Purifying Tempest wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
What armies actually rely on stratagems to work? I keep reading that and no one has actually explained it?

BA and CWE heavily do. CWE can work without, but not to top 3 levels of tournaments.

What stratagems ?

Dont know the names well.

BA: 3d6 to charge and fight twice
CWE: Move after shooting (keeps Ynnari 9 man Dark Reaper unit out of LoS, double range of powers for Jinx against

I might be missing 1-2 i cant remember, no codex in front of me.

This is fine. Because it costs the Drukhari player equal or MORE CP to do this. 1/6th of the time it is game-changingly brutal, 1/6th of the time it is a 4 CP trap, and 1/36th of the time it is a 3 CP robbery.

yeah but against BA and even Chaos it could win you the game, you dont really care if they get CP back or spending the CP if it means the BA player didnt charge and kill 4 of your units

This feels about right to me. Personally, I intend to put units in deepstrike basically every game. Between that and using Agents of Vect once, I'll have spent just about all of my CP. Which feels pretty fitting for Vect. One grand gesture that turns the tide of battle. I still think the Black Heart stuff we've seen would arguably be a better fit for Poisoned Tongue, but...

Anyway, I'm pretty okay with this stratagem. It's very expensive, but it can set you up to potentially have one really good turn after you shut down your opponent's clutch play. Assuming those BA don't just make their charge anyway, and those reapers don't make all thehir saves when you shoot them, etc.