Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm happy to post a battle report when I get home. It was actually a very bloody awesome game, despite the tau player getting tabled at the last min turn 5. Closer than most DE games go.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:
You found a friend. How nice.
Now you just need to convince yourself that he represents the majority of the attitudes presented in this thread.
You could take lessons from GW. They also stuff their fingers in their ears and go: "La la la la. I can't hear you!".


BTW, how did your game go?

It was the relic, and I finished his last unit off the table by turn 5. It was bloody and only had 2 ravagers, 7 kabalite warriors, and 3 splinterborn left on the table, but I still technically tabled tau. Instant deathing broadsides ftw.

What a surprise, yet another army that you table. You must be the Napoleon of 40k, or you play people that don't know what they're doing.

I can post pics to prove my battles if you'd like

I can post pics proving the existence of Bigfoot. Doesn't make it any more or less real.

Lmao, listen to yourself! I don't have any obligation to justify anything to you because you're a complete stranger, but I have better things to do than lie about victories in toy soldiers. But if you must know, since picking up Dark Eldar a month ago, my record is 6 wins and zero losses. 4 of those wins being complete tabling. The armies faced have been:

Imperial guard
Tyranids
Space Marines
Space Marines w/ imperial guard allies
Chaos Space Marines
Tau


Also as a side note: Big foot isn't real?

Right, so either your list is total cheese (doesn't matter if it's not uber cheese, still can be cheese), or your tactical acumen is on par with Napoleon, or your regular opponents are just bad. The fact you seem to have picked up what is largely considered one of the most unforgiven and "hard" armies to play a month ago yet have utterly destroyed most everybody you've played is what smells fishy.

That's no shot at you, as maybe you really are that good at picking up an army or maybe your opponents just aren't very tactical, but it doesn't excuse the fact that your army is a pretty standard netlist type Dark Eldar army (hence cheesey in some regard) and your attitude overall seems like one that only wants praise, not criticism. You seem to have expected people to say that your list is not cheese at all, and that you must be a superb player, given how defensive you've gotten when somebody questions it.

WayneTheGame wrote:
Right, so either your list is total cheese (doesn't matter if it's not uber cheese, still can be cheese), or your tactical acumen is on par with Napoleon, or your regular opponents are just bad. The fact you seem to have picked up what is largely considered one of the most unforgiven and "hard" armies to play a month ago yet have utterly destroyed most everybody you've played is what smells fishy.

That's no shot at you, as maybe you really are that good at picking up an army or maybe your opponents just aren't very tactical, but it doesn't excuse the fact that your army is a pretty standard netlist type Dark Eldar army (hence cheesey in some regard) and your attitude overall seems like one that only wants praise, not criticism. You seem to have expected people to say that your list is not cheese at all, and that you must be a superb player, given how defensive you've gotten when somebody questions it.

I don't know if I'm a good player or not. I've played 5 different armies, in different metas and states and haven't lost many games at all. I'm just arguing that the list isn't cheese because it's running transports and heavy support. The transports as admitted in this thread are 100% neccessary... So are my ravagers making this cheese? It's only a 3 lance platform...

I don't know if I'm a good player or not. I've played 5 different armies, in different metas and states and haven't lost many games at all. I'm just arguing that the list isn't cheese because it's running transports and heavy support. The transports as admitted in this thread are 100% neccessary... So are my ravagers making this cheese? It's only a 3 lance platform...

LOL this is the most hilarious statement I've read. "The list cannot be Cheese because I'm running Transports and Heavy Support."

So this isn't cheese either then

Spirit Seer

6 x 5 Dire Avenger Squads in Serpents
3 Wraithknights

Like I said before cheese is respective to your meta, in a meta with worse players, or non-competitve lists your army is going to run roughshod, because it is a strong list. If your local players don't enjoy playing it then it is a problem that you should address (you shouldn't have to but thanks for the balance GW).

Breng77 wrote:

I don't know if I'm a good player or not. I've played 5 different armies, in different metas and states and haven't lost many games at all. I'm just arguing that the list isn't cheese because it's running transports and heavy support. The transports as admitted in this thread are 100% neccessary... So are my ravagers making this cheese? It's only a 3 lance platform...

LOL this is the most hilarious statement I've read. "The list cannot be Cheese because I'm running Transports and Heavy Support."

So this isn't cheese either then

Spirit Seer

6 x 5 Dire Avenger Squads in Serpents
3 Wraithknights

Like I said before cheese is respective to your meta, in a meta with worse players, or non-competitve lists your army is going to run roughshod, because it is a strong list. If your local players don't enjoy playing it then it is a problem that you should address (you shouldn't have to but thanks for the balance GW).

Serpents are a much different story, they're tough as nails to crack, have table range with a nice strength gun and they're quick.

Raiders and venoms aren't durable at all. That'd be like somebody calling a space marine list with 6 rhinos "cheesy"...

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I'
I can post pics to prove my battles if you'd like

I can post pics proving the existence of Bigfoot. Doesn't make it any more or less real.

Lmao, listen to yourself! I don't have any obligation to justify anything to you because you're a complete stranger, but I have better things to do than lie about victories in toy soldiers. But if you must know, since picking up Dark Eldar a month ago, my record is 6 wins and zero losses. 4 of those wins being complete tabling. The armies faced have been:

Imperial guard
Tyranids
Space Marines
Space Marines w/ imperial guard allies
Chaos Space Marines
Tau


Also as a side note: Big foot isn't real?

I remain open minded on the subject of Bigfoot.

The sheer volume of these sorts of threads and similar you've started has pretty much made my mind up on the subject of whether you have anything better to do or not.

 azreal13 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I'
I can post pics to prove my battles if you'd like

I can post pics proving the existence of Bigfoot. Doesn't make it any more or less real.

Lmao, listen to yourself! I don't have any obligation to justify anything to you because you're a complete stranger, but I have better things to do than lie about victories in toy soldiers. But if you must know, since picking up Dark Eldar a month ago, my record is 6 wins and zero losses. 4 of those wins being complete tabling. The armies faced have been:

Imperial guard
Tyranids
Space Marines
Space Marines w/ imperial guard allies
Chaos Space Marines
Tau


Also as a side note: Big foot isn't real?

I remain open minded on the subject of Bigfoot.

The sheer volume of these sorts of threads and similar you've started has pretty much made my mind up on the subject of whether you have anything better to do or not.

Lol, think what you wanna think man. I'm glad you're an avid reader of my material. It's always good to have a fanbase.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

I don't know if I'm a good player or not. I've played 5 different armies, in different metas and states and haven't lost many games at all. I'm just arguing that the list isn't cheese because it's running transports and heavy support. The transports as admitted in this thread are 100% neccessary... So are my ravagers making this cheese? It's only a 3 lance platform...

LOL this is the most hilarious statement I've read. "The list cannot be Cheese because I'm running Transports and Heavy Support."

So this isn't cheese either then

Spirit Seer

6 x 5 Dire Avenger Squads in Serpents
3 Wraithknights

Like I said before cheese is respective to your meta, in a meta with worse players, or non-competitve lists your army is going to run roughshod, because it is a strong list. If your local players don't enjoy playing it then it is a problem that you should address (you shouldn't have to but thanks for the balance GW).

Serpents are a much different story, they're tough as nails to crack, have table range with a nice strength gun and they're quick.

Raiders and venoms aren't durable at all. That'd be like somebody calling a space marine list with 6 rhinos "cheesy"...

ha if rhino had guns worth a dam, a mobile cover save, and was oppened tops then abosultly

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Spoiler:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I'
I can post pics to prove my battles if you'd like

I can post pics proving the existence of Bigfoot. Doesn't make it any more or less real.

Lmao, listen to yourself! I don't have any obligation to justify anything to you because you're a complete stranger, but I have better things to do than lie about victories in toy soldiers. But if you must know, since picking up Dark Eldar a month ago, my record is 6 wins and zero losses. 4 of those wins being complete tabling. The armies faced have been:

Imperial guard
Tyranids
Space Marines
Space Marines w/ imperial guard allies
Chaos Space Marines
Tau


Also as a side note: Big foot isn't real?

I remain open minded on the subject of Bigfoot.

The sheer volume of these sorts of threads and similar you've started has pretty much made my mind up on the subject of whether you have anything better to do or not.

Lol, think what you wanna think man. I'm glad you're an avid reader of my material. It's always good to have a fanbase.

The words "avid" and "fan" have no place in describing my opinion of much of your posting I'm afraid, probably best replaced with "strangely fascinated" and "car crash."

Don't get too flattered, I find my brain tracks usernames quite easily, especially when they persistently post "memorable" things.

I think people are wondering how you're pulling off this amazing winning streak. You brought it up as the OP and people are justifiable asking "How is this done?"
I too am curious as to what factors are leading to this.
And a close battle report is always a good thing. I love the ones that come down to the wire.

 azreal13 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Spoiler:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I'
I can post pics to prove my battles if you'd like

I can post pics proving the existence of Bigfoot. Doesn't make it any more or less real.

Lmao, listen to yourself! I don't have any obligation to justify anything to you because you're a complete stranger, but I have better things to do than lie about victories in toy soldiers. But if you must know, since picking up Dark Eldar a month ago, my record is 6 wins and zero losses. 4 of those wins being complete tabling. The armies faced have been:

Imperial guard
Tyranids
Space Marines
Space Marines w/ imperial guard allies
Chaos Space Marines
Tau


Also as a side note: Big foot isn't real?

I remain open minded on the subject of Bigfoot.

The sheer volume of these sorts of threads and similar you've started has pretty much made my mind up on the subject of whether you have anything better to do or not.

Lol, think what you wanna think man. I'm glad you're an avid reader of my material. It's always good to have a fanbase.

The words "avid" and "fan" have no place in describing my opinion of much of your posting I'm afraid, probably best replaced with "strangely fascinated" and "car crash."

Don't get too flattered, I find my brain tracks usernames quite easily, especially when they persistently post "memorable" things.

Too late man, already flattered. I can mail you a signed copy of my thoughts once a week!

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

I don't know if I'm a good player or not. I've played 5 different armies, in different metas and states and haven't lost many games at all. I'm just arguing that the list isn't cheese because it's running transports and heavy support. The transports as admitted in this thread are 100% neccessary... So are my ravagers making this cheese? It's only a 3 lance platform...

LOL this is the most hilarious statement I've read. "The list cannot be Cheese because I'm running Transports and Heavy Support."

So this isn't cheese either then

Spirit Seer

6 x 5 Dire Avenger Squads in Serpents
3 Wraithknights

Like I said before cheese is respective to your meta, in a meta with worse players, or non-competitve lists your army is going to run roughshod, because it is a strong list. If your local players don't enjoy playing it then it is a problem that you should address (you shouldn't have to but thanks for the balance GW).

Serpents are a much different story, they're tough as nails to crack, have table range with a nice strength gun and they're quick.

Raiders and venoms aren't durable at all. That'd be like somebody calling a space marine list with 6 rhinos "cheesy"...

Entirely missed the point your statement was " I'm just arguing that the list isn't cheese because it's running transports and heavy support. ", the list I posted is by your argument "not cheese because it's running transports and heavy support."

Lets look at your list

Vect -nasty in CC and ensures First turn about 75% of the time....which allows alpha strike against your opponent, especially with Seize- Extremely powerful character.

5 venoms - one of the better transports in the game...against infantry have similar damage Output to Waveserpents, and with upgrades are fairly durable...and cost half as much.

4 raiders with splinter racks - not too bad here-but allow spaming of poisoned shooting

3 ravagers - good anti-armor

3x 3 trueborn with 2 splinter cannons each -spamed poisoned shooting

50 warriors 3 w/ splinter cannons -more poisoned shooting.

So you have 13 Lance shots so you could have trouble against a heavy mech list (but that is not really the current meta, outside of serpent spam which essentially hard counters your army), especially if they can take out the ravagers early. Against an infantry heavy meta with first turn and reasonably good LOS you will hammer armies...on the level of serpent spam, kind of damage (more than that against some builds because you put out more shots than serpent spam, just not as high strength, but against high toughness it is largely moot)

Like I said, in a tournament...I have no issue with your army, it is a strong competitive list (it is a spoiler style list, it owns some armies but if you run into serpents you lose).

In a non-competitive meta, or casual play...it is a cheesy army because essentially any competitive list will be.

 MWHistorian wrote:
I think people are wondering how you're pulling off this amazing winning streak. You brought it up as the OP and people are justifiable asking "How is this done?"
I too am curious as to what factors are leading to this.
And a close battle report is always a good thing. I love the ones that come down to the wire.

No idea man. I just show up with my dice and my list. Weigh each move carefully before completing it. and in the end I find myself just winning v.s. different armies and different people and different metas. I go to 3 different FLGS. I'm sure the fact that I've probably literally played over 100 games of sixth probably helps as well. I'm also winning with different armies not just DE. Since sixth I've continued this trend with Necrons, CSM, Daemons, IG and Dark Eldar now. Got Space Wolves on the way!

I also work help desk so I'm pretty much reading tactica and watching battle reports 4-5 hours a day 5 days a week. I'm sure that's helped a lot.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Spoiler:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I'
I can post pics to prove my battles if you'd like

I can post pics proving the existence of Bigfoot. Doesn't make it any more or less real.

Lmao, listen to yourself! I don't have any obligation to justify anything to you because you're a complete stranger, but I have better things to do than lie about victories in toy soldiers. But if you must know, since picking up Dark Eldar a month ago, my record is 6 wins and zero losses. 4 of those wins being complete tabling. The armies faced have been:

Imperial guard
Tyranids
Space Marines
Space Marines w/ imperial guard allies
Chaos Space Marines
Tau


Also as a side note: Big foot isn't real?

I remain open minded on the subject of Bigfoot.

The sheer volume of these sorts of threads and similar you've started has pretty much made my mind up on the subject of whether you have anything better to do or not.

Lol, think what you wanna think man. I'm glad you're an avid reader of my material. It's always good to have a fanbase.

The words "avid" and "fan" have no place in describing my opinion of much of your posting I'm afraid, probably best replaced with "strangely fascinated" and "car crash."

Don't get too flattered, I find my brain tracks usernames quite easily, especially when they persistently post "memorable" things.

Too late man, already flattered. I can mail you a signed copy of my thoughts once a week!

I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you are looking for ransom, I can tell you I don't have money. But what I do have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you forget you ever mentioned sending me your mental effluent once a week, that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you, and I will kill you.

 azreal13 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Spoiler:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I'
I can post pics to prove my battles if you'd like

I can post pics proving the existence of Bigfoot. Doesn't make it any more or less real.

Lmao, listen to yourself! I don't have any obligation to justify anything to you because you're a complete stranger, but I have better things to do than lie about victories in toy soldiers. But if you must know, since picking up Dark Eldar a month ago, my record is 6 wins and zero losses. 4 of those wins being complete tabling. The armies faced have been:

Imperial guard
Tyranids
Space Marines
Space Marines w/ imperial guard allies
Chaos Space Marines
Tau


Also as a side note: Big foot isn't real?

I remain open minded on the subject of Bigfoot.

The sheer volume of these sorts of threads and similar you've started has pretty much made my mind up on the subject of whether you have anything better to do or not.

Lol, think what you wanna think man. I'm glad you're an avid reader of my material. It's always good to have a fanbase.

The words "avid" and "fan" have no place in describing my opinion of much of your posting I'm afraid, probably best replaced with "strangely fascinated" and "car crash."

Don't get too flattered, I find my brain tracks usernames quite easily, especially when they persistently post "memorable" things.

Too late man, already flattered. I can mail you a signed copy of my thoughts once a week!

I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you are looking for ransom, I can tell you I don't have money. But what I do have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you forget you ever mentioned sending me your mental effluent once a week, that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you, and I will kill you.

I'll pm you my address no need to have to "find" me. Also, when I send you my signed memoirs, that should have my return address.

I don't think people are saying "that's broken! Never field that casually!" Or "lawl, that sucks! A wet noodle could eat it!". What some of us have been saying is that:
1) if you're significantly over a 1:1 against a person or group, and you're playing casual, its best that you either find a better opponent to test your mettle against or play down to the meta, trying to approach a 1:1.
2) Many of your claims seem fishy (like facing something often, and always having the same warlord trait, or 13 snapshotting Lances regularly dropping a Drake every round)
3) And you are very confrontational. You seem to virtually drink the tears frustration of others, and enjoy feeling superior when you can trick them into being wrong.

There is certainly room for a healthy debate about if DE skimmer spam is a spoiler, or how those games *might* deviate from what people want to play wholly independently of how hard it is, but this thread doesn't seem to be a healthy pursuit of those discussions.

Bharring wrote:
I don't think people are saying "that's broken! Never field that casually!" Or "lawl, that sucks! A wet noodle could eat it!". What some of us have been saying is that:
1) if you're significantly over a 1:1 against a person or group, and you're playing casual, its best that you either find a better opponent to test your mettle against or play down to the meta, trying to approach a 1:1.
2) Many of your claims seem fishy (like facing something often, and always having the same warlord trait, or 13 snapshotting Lances regularly dropping a Drake every round)
3) And you are very confrontational. You seem to virtually drink the tears frustration of others, and enjoy feeling superior when you can trick them into being wrong.

There is certainly room for a healthy debate about if DE skimmer spam is a spoiler, or how those games *might* deviate from what people want to play wholly independently of how hard it is, but this thread doesn't seem to be a healthy pursuit of those discussions.

I never started confrontation here. I've been just trying to discuss how people seem to think this list is cheese, when I have everyone on thedarkcity.net talking to me and they're agreeing it's a good well rounded non overpowered list. Also, all of my "claims" are factual, I make none of this up. Also, I said I got that warlord trait once, not every time... And as mentioned I only played the CSM list once but I dropped a drake a turn peice mail.

Literally it's the certain individuals on this forum who seem to be obsessed with me.who're turning this dark... no pun intended...

azreal and others... I would have thought you would have known better than to give an obvious attention-seeker exactly what he craves.

Now to find the "ignore" setting....

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
azreal and others... I would have thought you would have known better than to give an obvious attention-seeker exactly what he craves.

Now to find the "ignore" setting....

When my irritation exceeds my amusement, I know where it is....

You aren't discussing anything. You started a controvertial thread, and when you'd attracted enough people, you disagree with them stubbornly, then make troll remarks like 'lololol you are my fans'

You are the most obvious troll I've seen on this forum, I'm surprised the mods are so blind.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
Also, all of my "claims" are factual, I make none of this up.

The problem is that you're making an extraordinary claim, which requires some backing to it. We need more data so we can crunch the numbers and come to a conclusion. For all we know you're playing with loaded dice and get 4+ 75% of the time or roll an unusually high amount of 6's.

You made a claim that you have tabled 5 opponents within 3 turns and played against what at first glance looks like a competitive Tau list while still having a significant force at the end.
Your claim has cast some doubt on people. Merely saying that you are making a factual claim is not helping, since someone lying would say the same thing.
"I'm not lying, I'm telling the truth" is a statement made by liars and honest men alike. We don't have much to go off of for your integrity so we want some more details to see how lucky or how good you have been in games.

I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you are looking for ransom, I can tell you I don't have money. But what I do have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you forget you ever mentioned sending me your mental effluent once a week, that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you, and I will kill you.

the correct response would have been "Good luck."

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I don't think people are saying "that's broken! Never field that casually!" Or "lawl, that sucks! A wet noodle could eat it!". What some of us have been saying is that:
1) if you're significantly over a 1:1 against a person or group, and you're playing casual, its best that you either find a better opponent to test your mettle against or play down to the meta, trying to approach a 1:1.
2) Many of your claims seem fishy (like facing something often, and always having the same warlord trait, or 13 snapshotting Lances regularly dropping a Drake every round)
3) And you are very confrontational. You seem to virtually drink the tears frustration of others, and enjoy feeling superior when you can trick them into being wrong.

There is certainly room for a healthy debate about if DE skimmer spam is a spoiler, or how those games *might* deviate from what people want to play wholly independently of how hard it is, but this thread doesn't seem to be a healthy pursuit of those discussions.

I never started confrontation here. I've been just trying to discuss how people seem to think this list is cheese, when I have everyone on thedarkcity.net talking to me and they're agreeing it's a good well rounded non overpowered list. Also, all of my "claims" are factual, I make none of this up. Also, I said I got that warlord trait once, not every time... And as mentioned I only played the CSM list once but I dropped a drake a turn peice mail.

Literally it's the certain individuals on this forum who seem to be obsessed with me.who're turning this dark... no pun intended...

The issue is that you don't actually discuss anything, so it comes across as you just wanting people to agree that your list is not overpowered. Which is dependent on what/who you are playing against. That is the thing about this game right now, how OP something is depends largely on who you are playing.

 Savageconvoy wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
Also, all of my "claims" are factual, I make none of this up.

The problem is that you're making an extraordinary claim, which requires some backing to it. We need more data so we can crunch the numbers and come to a conclusion. For all we know you're playing with loaded dice and get 4+ 75% of the time or roll an unusually high amount of 6's.

You made a claim that you have tabled 5 opponents within 3 turns and played against what at first glance looks like a competitive Tau list while still having a significant force at the end.
Your claim has cast some doubt on people. Merely saying that you are making a factual claim is not helping, since someone lying would say the same thing.
"I'm not lying, I'm telling the truth" is a statement made by liars and honest men alike. We don't have much to go off of for your integrity so we want some more details to see how lucky or how good you have been in games.

Lol, I don't have to prove anything to the folks here, I'm honestly happy knowing what I've done. But as stated before, I've got pictures of the tabling I'll post later. Also, I don't cheat. I use whatever chessex I got at the battle standard in CT.

Interesting that means you actually live (or did live) near me, I don't recall anyone using DE to dominate any tournaments in this area.

Breng77 wrote:
Interesting that means you actually live (or did live) near me, I don't recall anyone using DE to dominate any tournaments in this area.

At that time I was a heldrake / nurgle CSM player, and a flying circus daemon player. I probably do know you. Went every Friday.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
Also, all of my "claims" are factual, I make none of this up.

The problem is that you're making an extraordinary claim, which requires some backing to it. We need more data so we can crunch the numbers and come to a conclusion. For all we know you're playing with loaded dice and get 4+ 75% of the time or roll an unusually high amount of 6's.

You made a claim that you have tabled 5 opponents within 3 turns and played against what at first glance looks like a competitive Tau list while still having a significant force at the end.
Your claim has cast some doubt on people. Merely saying that you are making a factual claim is not helping, since someone lying would say the same thing.
"I'm not lying, I'm telling the truth" is a statement made by liars and honest men alike. We don't have much to go off of for your integrity so we want some more details to see how lucky or how good you have been in games.

Lol, I don't have to prove anything to the folks here, I'm honestly happy knowing what I've done. But as stated before, I've got pictures of the tabling I'll post later. Also, I don't cheat. I use whatever chessex I got at the battle standard in CT.

Nobody has accused you of cheating, just it's highly suspect that you have an army that you started a month ago and are undefeated and pretty much destroyed everybody you've played, when that army is largely considered to be a very hard army to master.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Interesting that means you actually live (or did live) near me, I don't recall anyone using DE to dominate any tournaments in this area.

At that time I was a heldrake / nurgle CSM player, and a flying circus daemon player. I probably do know you. Went every Friday.

Never went up to the Battle standard, just lots of events around the area, and ran tournies down on the coast.

While it is enjoyable to win while playing 40k the slaughter is all that matters. To ensure this you should attempt to kill as many of your troops and the enemy troops as possible. Again, winning is fun but slaughter is more fun.

WayneTheGame wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
Also, all of my "claims" are factual, I make none of this up.

The problem is that you're making an extraordinary claim, which requires some backing to it. We need more data so we can crunch the numbers and come to a conclusion. For all we know you're playing with loaded dice and get 4+ 75% of the time or roll an unusually high amount of 6's.

You made a claim that you have tabled 5 opponents within 3 turns and played against what at first glance looks like a competitive Tau list while still having a significant force at the end.
Your claim has cast some doubt on people. Merely saying that you are making a factual claim is not helping, since someone lying would say the same thing.
"I'm not lying, I'm telling the truth" is a statement made by liars and honest men alike. We don't have much to go off of for your integrity so we want some more details to see how lucky or how good you have been in games.

Lol, I don't have to prove anything to the folks here, I'm honestly happy knowing what I've done. But as stated before, I've got pictures of the tabling I'll post later. Also, I don't cheat. I use whatever chessex I got at the battle standard in CT.

Nobody has accused you of cheating, just it's highly suspect that you have an army that you started a month ago and are undefeated and pretty much destroyed everybody you've played, when that army is largely considered to be a very hard army to master.

Well I'm a longtime 40k player, and have faced DE many times. I understand the army, and my old tourney playtest partner is a very well known (in my area DE player) the learning curve wasn't that steep for me, and also DE can really punish those (even good players) who haven't encountered DE before. I remember my first game v.s. them... However, I assure you everything here said by me is factual as far as how my games have gone. Am I a Dark Eldar master? Hells no, but I'm learning and growing, and so far am doing well with the army and having fun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breng77 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Interesting that means you actually live (or did live) near me, I don't recall anyone using DE to dominate any tournaments in this area.

At that time I was a heldrake / nurgle CSM player, and a flying circus daemon player. I probably do know you. Went every Friday.

Never went up to the Battle standard, just lots of events around the area, and ran tournies down on the coast.

Oh, yea at the time I lived in Rocky Hill, CT. I went to the one in new brittain a few times, flagship I think it's called. I've been in Sarges comics in new london once...