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.

 gossipmeng wrote:
I would say the lack of fluff is a contributing factor. They have some enjoyable material in the codex and some other information sprinkled elsewhere. It is hard to connect with an army that you don't know too many details about.

That's why we "forge a narrative"! I've been working on crafting my Kabal as a group of Eldar that narrowly escaped the destruction of their craftworld. They're much like Corsairs, but are quite insane, and rarely end up making a good first impression. It's like my aut0-biography.

 gossipmeng wrote:
The major factor for me though is .... that the transports are so bloody difficult to store without breaking.

THIS!I think I'm just going to leave the spikes and stuff off the next time they break. At least the sails can be pinned...

I collect Dark Eldar. I started after I realised my first army (Black Templars) were not being updated.

I've said it before on here, but I think that DE have been given the best update in terms of new models in recent years. Everything from the HQ units down to the troops looks fantastic, with lots of potential variety between armies.

To answer the OP's question I think their lack of popularity is caused by two things :-

1) They are probably the most difficult army to paint. There isn't much space on the models, and they carry a lot of detail. If you don't do a good job they will look rubbish.
That being said, I wasn't a great painter when I got into the hobby - but painting my DE army has really improved my skill. I'm still not the best, but the challenge has improved my skills much more than painting marines ever would have.

2) They are difficult to play (and win with). They die fast, they have quite a few CC units (which are weak in 6th ediiton). I think they require lots more thought than other armies. So if you're into winning, you're probably not going to take Dark Eldar.

Keep the convo going guys, this is actually quite an enlightening discussion!

On the contrary, I'm strongly thinking about starting a DE allied attachment. The rules and play style really stand out as a breath of fresh air compared to other armies.

God In Action wrote:
On the contrary, I'm strongly thinking about starting a DE allied attachment. The rules and play style really stand out as a breath of fresh air compared to other armies.

That's what I'm experiencing. My main tourney army is daemons, and to be honest they're kinda op and faceroll to play. Dark Eldar is making me enjoy this hobby much more, between the painting challenge and the playing challenge!

 Overlord Thraka wrote:
They're (arguably) weaker than Orks... and Orks are not weak in most ways but they are often getting flattened at tourneys.
Also the models look incredibly hard to paint

I'd agree on the "hard to paint" thang. Being intimidated by your own figures is bad...

They're definitely stronger than orks in my opinion.

They're unpopular because of they're not the most beginner-friendly armies around. They're fast and they hit hard, but everything is made of glass and cardboard, ergo making every mistake and loss a fatal one.

When it comes to duking out with the other codices that have a higher power level or units that simply are stronger in general, it discourages people.

They are not popular because it takes a differing approach o use them. If you are new to the game you will get trousered a lot and it’s a steep learning curve. If you are an experienced player its a completely differing play style. But stick with it and its rewarding. My friend used to say he used to take a pair of brown pants with him to tournaments in case he met with a DE player who knew what they were doing.

There is also a common misconception that DE are a alpha strike go first or go home list. Actually this is only the case if the list is build incorrectly and the person using it has not properly positioned them in set up. Going second is a massive advantage. DE are not good at holding objectives so having the last turn with fast units allows for contesting and denying enough to win the game. Also makes like breaker easy.

The skill with DE is that you systematically isolate portions of an opponent’s army and annihilate it before quickly redeploying to do it to another section. With the speed this means that the opponent shouldn’t be able to react fast enough to this. you need to offer something in one hand, while the real danger is inconspicuous in the other, bait them into the trap and close it quickly. DE can dish a lot of pain but cannot take it.

I honestly think that DE are not to popular is due to their difficult learning curve, they are not a win now list. It takes a while to learn to use them, and a lot longer to master them. I have been playing them since the end of 3rd and it took me a long while to learn to use them effectively but once i did, its fun! ( and you have to be slightly sadistic to play them)

Sure, but what happens when your opponent deploys an entire army in a skyshield? Or is eldar and knows how to keep their wave serpents together.

If your opponent is good at keeping their forces cohesive, then it's not possible to isolate and destroy one part of it at a time. This might work on horde armies that have terrible force cohesion, but DE should have no problem with horde armies anyway thanks to mass BS4 Ap5.

In a way, 40k is sort of like Risk or Civilization III / IV - you wad up your army into a ball and then smash it into your opponent. Mobility is pretty pointless against most elite armies, especially if they have basic mobility themselves.

I'd like to see how much of an advantage the DE player would be in going second if they lose 1/3rd of their army in the first volley before they even get a chance to do anything...

then use your own army as cover, placement is everything start dismounted and mount up turn 1, hide things as much as possible. armys with good cohesion you need to be tactical and find a way to pull them out of possition, offer them a bait unit to move them to where you want them to be. DE isnt run forward shoot assault and then win. you really have to master the tactics and master your oppoenet to win with them. A good DE player is a good 40k player and genrally can pick up most armys and win well with them

So, the answer is to hope and pray that your opponent doesn't stay cohesive and just blow you off the board? I don't know if relying on the generosity of your opponent is much of a strategy.

Plus, if you started dismounted, then on turn 1 you opponent blows up a fistful of transports, and now you've got to find a way to make those now transportless units relevant. As you say, running forward to assault probably isn't going to win, at least, not DE on foot across the entire board.

I never said hope and pray. You have to outmanouver them, play a tactical game. you need to use all the tricks inthe book bait them with a juicy target and then pounch - or alternativly surgically remove a small portion and then quickly redeploy and keep applying it so that you can apply the full force of your army against a small portion and then move before they respond and then hit another.

going second if you play on a terrainless board is a joke anyway whatever army you play. if there is a reasonable ammount of cover then use this.

But that's what I'm saying. The idea that if you just have made leet skills, or if you can be really sneaky, or if you can outplay your opponent you'll win just doesn't apply to 40k.

In 40k you already start in weapons range, and play the game over a very small amount of space over a VERY short amount of time, and your opponent gets to see all the moves that you make. It's a game where players can most reliably win by castling up with gunlines.

No amount of attempted outmaneuvering, tricksiness, baiting, or genius tactics are going to do much of anything to an opponent who castles up. They're just going to watch your models move around more before they just blow them off the board by rolling a bunch of dice.

Not that an appeal to virtue is all that strong of an argument in the first place, of course...

Ailaros - i think we will have to agree to disagree i have great sucess in local gaming and in tourniments playing this way. Its not leet skills its about maximising as much advantage as you can get by using somethign other than a rolfstomp star unit of death.

Do you play DE?

Funny this thread popped up, DE has been popping up all over at my FLGS lately, two guys playing them right now with a 3rd on the way perhaps

Well, when you can tell me how any amount of triksiness will have any impact on a game when your opponent deploys like:





You let me know.

40k is a game where who rolls the most dice at the best odds wins. DE can do this, but having a fantasy about the kind of game that 40k isn't doesn't mean much, no matter how romantic and flowery sounding the words.

i haven't seen DE with Demons, but it sounds like they'd be awesome.