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.

They're extremel powerful with a good player, the thing is they're the hardest army to play and not many play them.

Since their new codex:

I've placed, 3rd,2nd,2nd, 1st and 1st

They're strong if you can find a player who actually plays th and one that can actually play them well. As ignores cover armies become less and less prevalent, they're going to only get stronger with their 3+ jink gunboats.

 vipoid wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Tanks are literally the easiest thing in the game to kill.

No they're not.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Nothing is easier.

Guardsmen, for one, say 'hi'.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Most people have stopped using them.

Your meta must be very different from mine then because I still see a ton of vehicles.

Also, maybe we just use more/different terrain, but I see vehicles getting cover saves all the time (to say nothing of jink).

 Xenomancers wrote:
However - blasters, DL, Heatlance, haywire nades/blasters - are not only not bad anti tank weapons - but some of the best in the game.

By what possible measure are any of those the best AT in the game?

Dark Lances are a poor-man's Lascannon against anything but land raiders and leman russ, and heat lances are available on barely any units and have -2 strength over standard meltas.

Haywire blasters are the only things on that list that even remotely qualify as reliable anti-tank, and even they are far from infallible. They are good anti-tank, but we're also very limited in terms of where we can actually get them (I believe there are only 2 units in the codex that can take them at all).


I should point out again though that I don't think DE are the weakest codex. And, if you rarely see any vehicles... well I can certainly see why DE are having a good time.

I have to strongly disagree with you. Tanks are way too easy to kill (my IG tank list suffers a lot) and DE are far from powerless against armour. I rarely have problems dealing with it when playing my DE.

I wouldn't say they're the weakest codex, but they certainly are worse now than ever before against the new Eldar codex(which will be the most popular tournament army). Scatter laser proliferation is ridiculous now. The wraithknight is now impossible to kill unless you bring a list maxed out on lance weaponry. It's too bad destroyer weapons ignore feel no pain as well( the strength 10 wraith cannons already 1 shot grotesques anyway). My coven army was doing pretty well for a few months.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

I have to strongly disagree with you. Tanks are way too easy to kill (my IG tank list suffers a lot) and DE are far from powerless against armour

My IG tanks frequently die too, but then I use a lot of plasma cannons - so a lot of damage is self-inflicted.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I rarely have problems dealing with it when playing my DE.

Can I ask then what anti-tank stuff you include in a typical DE list?

 Jimsolo wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Davor wrote:
Don't worry at GW pace you will get a new codex next year. Hell maybe even this year.

Probably get one this year AND another one next year, lots of opportunities for GW to impress/disappoint

If I get the Duke back, I will pay for both.

Vect or bust. We need a mean-ass LoW that people crap their pants on

All they'd have to do to make me pour lots of love into my DE would be to add a couple of good heroes and make a plastic kit of 3 for Grotesques. Buffing Wyches would be nice too.,

I will forgo a LOW, D weapons, or any decent anti- flyer or psyker capacity if it meant I got Sliscus back. Most painful cut from the old book.

 Jimsolo wrote:
I will forgo a LOW, D weapons, or any decent anti- flyer or psyker capacity if it meant I got Sliscus back. Most painful cut from the old book.

I think, when he absconded, he also stole everyone's Venom Blades. I hear he's selling them to the Skitarri at a tidy profit.

Personally, I'd have liked to see a more interesting pfp mechanic - something like the Blood Point mechanic in the new Daemonkin book (though without the daemon summoning, obviously ). Just something a bit more involving than a static table.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Tanks are literally the easiest thing in the game to kill. Nothing is easier. Tanks have no armor saves and can rarely gain cover. Most people have stopped using them. Those who don't - might fare okay against DE that didn't bring a lot of AT. However - blasters, DL, Heatlance, haywire nades/blasters - are not only not bad anti tank weapons - but some of the best in the game. So I really fail to see your point here. DE are fine against vehicles and even if they weren't it wouldn't much matter because mech doesn't matter.

I think you are looking at this without actually looking at the codex. Some of the weapons arent bad but the codex limits who and how many you can bring.

Blasters are great AT? They cost more than a meltagun, are less likely to pen and less likely to explode. They are slightly better than a krak missile against most tanks.

Heatlances are availible only on Reavers, Talos, and Scourges. The first 2 are CC units that are woefully overcosted if you are using them for their shooting characteristics. Still there are precious few instances where you wouldnt rather have a meltagun which is again cheaper.

Haywire nades. Did you notice how in 7th they were removed from the dex? Now only characters can get them. It's like how all marines are simply awesome at AT because they have meltabombs available to sergeants. In 5th and 6th, when wyches could mass carry them, yes DE had some scary AT; That got removed.

Haywire Blasters are alright. They are only availible to Talos and Scourges, which again means they are only good on scourges.


So basically DE have 1 unit that can carry 1 weapon that is credible AT. Scourges with haywire blasters. Being haywire they are pretty good at AV14 but they kill that just as fast as they kill AV10. If DE had an answer to mass AV10-12 this would be great. But seeing how the codex doesnt have an answer, it really gimps the codex.

 Exergy wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Tanks are literally the easiest thing in the game to kill. Nothing is easier. Tanks have no armor saves and can rarely gain cover. Most people have stopped using them. Those who don't - might fare okay against DE that didn't bring a lot of AT. However - blasters, DL, Heatlance, haywire nades/blasters - are not only not bad anti tank weapons - but some of the best in the game. So I really fail to see your point here. DE are fine against vehicles and even if they weren't it wouldn't much matter because mech doesn't matter.

I think you are looking at this without actually looking at the codex. Some of the weapons arent bad but the codex limits who and how many you can bring.

Blasters are great AT? They cost more than a meltagun, are less likely to pen and less likely to explode. They are slightly better than a krak missile against most tanks.

Heatlances are availible only on Reavers, Talos, and Scourges. The first 2 are CC units that are woefully overcosted if you are using them for their shooting characteristics. Still there are precious few instances where you wouldnt rather have a meltagun which is again cheaper.

Haywire nades. Did you notice how in 7th they were removed from the dex? Now only characters can get them. It's like how all marines are simply awesome at AT because they have meltabombs available to sergeants. In 5th and 6th, when wyches could mass carry them, yes DE had some scary AT; That got removed.

Haywire Blasters are alright. They are only availible to Talos and Scourges, which again means they are only good on scourges.


So basically DE have 1 unit that can carry 1 weapon that is credible AT. Scourges with haywire blasters. Being haywire they are pretty good at AV14 but they kill that just as fast as they kill AV10. If DE had an answer to mass AV10-12 this would be great. But seeing how the codex doesnt have an answer, it really gimps the codex.

I really don't want to argue about the effectiveness of anti tank weapons. DE have plenty of tools to kill armor and they have no less problems killing tanks than any other army - they are actually higher up the ladder of AT IMO - I don't see it as a weakness.

Again I'm not saying DE have no weakness - they for sure have weakness. It's the same weakness they have always had - being army wide super frail.

This is why I think Talos are a must for DE and all of the DE players I see doing well build around the talos when building armies.

I also have to disagree about revers - they are properly pointed and very effective.

I think the biggest weakness they suffer from excluding the lack of resilience is no way to take on a GC, especially if said GC is fearless. Best method would be talos/cronos, but stomps/str D have a great way of negating our greatest strength.

After using DE against eldar, if an Eldar player brings a competent list and is competant, then DE cannot do much against them.

oz of the north wrote:
I think the biggest weakness they suffer from excluding the lack of resilience is no way to take on a GC, especially if said GC is fearless. Best method would be talos/cronos, but stomps/str D have a great way of negating our greatest strength.

Ossefactors and dark light weapons are the best bet. That being said, a Shadowseer in a DE army obliterates GCs. Our negative lead modifiers plus Psychic Shriek or (even better!) Mirror of Minds shreds GCs.

After using DE against eldar, if an Eldar player brings a competent list and is competant, then DE cannot do much against them.

Have to disagree. Eldar vehicles are light enough that we can usually pen them, and our mobility is high enough that we can combat the Eldar speed advantage. They have no immunity to our fear tactics. We're actually one of the better codexes to fight them with. I think high-armor IG are more of a threat than CWE.

I just scrolled down immediately to answer these questions, so I apologize if I just cover something that has already been said.

Its not that the codex is bad. It has better options than Dark Angles, Tyranids, Orks.

I do not think that any codex in the game is "bad", just a lot more difficult to play.

It is easier to play Eldar or Necrons than Dark Eldar, or Dark Angels, or Orks, but that does not mean the codes is "bad"

Dark Eldar have many better options than some of the other codexes mentioned above, but many worse options from some of the armies mentioned above.

When I wanted to play Dark Eldar when I was getting into 40K, my entire FLGS laughed at me, and now I have used the codex to my advantage, and won at least a few games against each of them (that is not saying that they are bad guys, just saying). Dark Eldar need many things including but not limited to -
-a way for raiders to deepstrike reasonably without an archon WWP in the unit
-a troop that might survive a shooting attack
-a decurion detachment would be cool
-a buff to wyches
-AP2 at initiative CC attacks.
-a few other things

(I did not include more survivability because DE's thing is glass hammer, so by playing DE you agree to this much.)

That is not saying the codex is bad.
some of the things the DE excell at
-speed
-amazing anti-infantry and anti-TMC firepower
-cost effective troop choices
-a very strong roster of HQ choices
-among a few other things.

The codex did get the short end of the stick, sadly. Us losing many HQ choices and a huge de-buff to wyches, and a lot less randomness (good and bad).
Playing any army in 40k is about exploiting the weaknesses of your opponent and using good listbuilding and playing to outsmart your opponent, just Eldars way of exploiting enemies and building strong lists happens to include gargantuan creatures, scatter bikes, and D weapons.

Similar to orks, we lost a flourish of fun, to make a more "streamlined" (hate that word) codex.

The one problem about the DE that annoys the crap about me, is the price. Not as bad as tryanids or orks, but pretty bad. Roughly $40 for a brown paper bag that I would take at least 3 of in one of my lists. Thats $120, not including HQ, actual troops, elites, fast attack, heavy support, maybe more $40 brown paper bags, and a few venoms, thats a lot of money out of my broke pocket.

Thats just my humbe opinion. Good luck getting the raiders of commoragh (spelling) to do you well. Happy wargaming,

-Mikey

I'd say BA, DA, CSM, 'nids, SoB, Orks are all inferior to the Dark Eldar Codex.

There are some really insane things in that book and multiple viable builds. Yeah, there aren't 10 of those viable builds, but rarely there are in many books.

 Jimsolo wrote:

Ossefactors and dark light weapons are the best bet.

Do the math against a WK. It takes over 1000pts of either to kill the thing.

 Jimsolo wrote:

Have to disagree. Eldar vehicles are light enough that we can usually pen them

Aren't most Eldar vehicles AV12? i.e. maximum inefficiency for Dark Lances.

Though, in any case, the vehicles are far from our biggest concern (unlike in their last book). I'm much more concerned about the scatter-laser jetbikes they can have as troops, and about the WKs that can shoot 4 of our vehicles each turn, whilst taking negligible damage in return.

 Jimsolo wrote:
and our mobility is high enough that we can combat the Eldar speed advantage.

You say that, but Eldar are actually considerably more mobile than we are - whilst being much more durable and better armed to boot.

 Jimsolo wrote:
They have no immunity to our fear tactics.

Aside from obliterating our fear units with overwhelming firepower, you mean?

 Jimsolo wrote:
We're actually one of the better codexes to fight them with.

I don't see how, to be honest. Unless you're talking about tailoring against them with Shadowseer allies and such.

 Jimsolo wrote:
I think high-armor IG are more of a threat than CWE.

I'm not sure about that, though I'll certainly admit that IG also tend to be a poor matchup for us.

In any event, I'm not talking about list-tailoring, Vipoid. I'm talking about the same morale-based strategies I've been advocating since December. And yes, from the get-go I've said that to fight WKs you will need to devote a higher percentage of your army to it. You will have to maneuver correctly to minimize the damage you take in return. This is pretty much the definition of a hitch-priority target.

But in the end, the truth is that I don't have problems against new Eldar. The active DE players I see talking, here and abroad, aren't having insurmountable difficulties either.

New Wraithknights are definitely an adjustment. But a defeatist, General Eeyore attitude isn't going to solve anything. With some fore planning, we should be able to learn effective strategies for dealing with them, as well as the other nastiness the new Eldar codex brought.

Our codex puts us at a disadvantage against CWE, but it doesn't guarantee a loss.

 Jimsolo wrote:
I'm talking about the same morale-based strategies I've been advocating since December.

I'll come back to this.

 Jimsolo wrote:
And yes, from the get-go I've said that to fight WKs you will need to devote a higher percentage of your army to it.

So, whilst you're using your entire army to kill a single 300pt model (and not necessary even succeeding in a single turn) what's the rest of the Eldar army doing?

 Jimsolo wrote:
You will have to maneuver correctly to minimize the damage you take in return. This is pretty much the definition of a hitch-priority target.

I can think of no other model in the game that is so hard to kill for its cost.

With regard to manoeuvring, it seems like it will be a patch-job at best. The sheer amount of firepower you'll need to put into a WK to even have a chance of killing it means you'll be at a massive disadvantage in terms of retaliation, especially since you have no mobility advantage over Eldar - or even over the WK itself. Not to mention that if you fail to kill it (which is far from unlikely even if you pour your entire army into it), it's still shooting back at full effectiveness.

 Jimsolo wrote:

Our codex puts us at a disadvantage against CWE, but it doesn't guarantee a loss.

I don't disagree, but that alone seems quite different from what you've been saying so far.


Anyway, I don't think either of us is going to convince the other via theorycrafting/mathhammer alone. Do you have (or know of) any battle reports where DE beat the new Eldar book? It might be that I'm simply misunderstanding what you mean, so it would be a great help I could see these anti-WK/anti-jetbike tactics in action.

Also, could you explain these morale-based strategies in more detail?

just scrolled down immediately to answer these questions, so I apologize if I just cover something that has already been said.

Its not that the codex is bad. It has better options than Dark Angles, Tyranids, Orks.

I do not think that any codex in the game is "bad", just a lot more difficult to play.

It is easier to play Eldar or Necrons than Dark Eldar, or Dark Angels, or Orks, but that does not mean the codex is "bad"

Dark Eldar have many better options than some of the other codexes mentioned above, but many worse options from some of the armies mentioned above.

When I wanted to play Dark Eldar when I was getting into 40K, my entire FLGS laughed at me, and now I have used the codex to my advantage, and won at least a few games against each of them (that is not saying that they are bad guys, just saying). Dark Eldar need many things including but not limited to -
-a way for raiders to deepstrike reasonably without an archon WWP in the unit
-a troop that might survive a shooting attack
-a decurion detachment would be cool
-a buff to wyches
-AP2 at initiative CC attacks.
-a few other things

(I did not include more survivability because DE's thing is glass hammer, so by playing DE you agree to this much.)

That is not saying the codex is bad.
some of the things the DE excel at
-speed
-amazing anti-infantry and anti-TMC firepower
-cost effective troop choices
-a very strong roster of HQ choices
-among a few other things.

The codex did get the short end of the stick, sadly. Us losing many HQ choices and a huge de-buff to wyches, and a lot less randomness (good and bad).
Playing any army in 40k is about exploiting the weaknesses of your opponent and using good listbuilding and playing to outsmart your opponent, just Eldars way of exploiting enemies and building strong lists happens to include gargantuan creatures, scatter bikes, and D weapons.

Similar to orks, we lost a flourish of fun, to make a more "streamlined" (hate that word) codex.

The one problem about the DE that annoys the crap about me, is the price. Not as bad as tryanids or orks, but pretty bad. Roughly $40 for a brown paper bag that I would take at least 3 of in one of my lists. Thats $120, not including HQ, actual troops, elites, fast attack, heavy support, maybe more $40 brown paper bags, and a few venoms, thats a lot of money out of my broke pocket.

Thats just my humble opinion. Good luck getting the raiders of commoragh (spelling) to do you well. Happy wargaming,

-Mikey

hat is not saying the codex is bad.
some of the things the DE excel at
-speed
-amazing anti-infantry and anti-TMC firepower
-cost effective troop choices
-a very strong roster of HQ choices
-among a few other things.


end quote

They are fast, but, the same can be said of many other armies such as elder and space marines. However those units come at a very similar cost and a re much more durable and with access to more psychic powers to provide various buffs that just aren't available to Dark Eldar. By all rights they should be near identical to their craftworld cousins but come with 5+ armor whilst the CE magically get access to 3+ armor. Raiders are also excessively expensive, nearly thrice the price of a rhino and those upgrades can easily push it close to a wave serpents points cost; never mind a chimera. Plus, you only want to be fast so that you can get into close combat and sadly the DE do not have very many decent CC units. So most DE don't use that mobility as they hang back and pelt the enemy with dark lances and splinter cannons. So you're paying points for abilities you don't really get to use.

Only the venom can really spam splinter cannons. Outside of that it all has to be carried by very squishy infantry squads that are pretty expensive. I can't comment too much on the MC thing but when I fought my chaos mates demon prince he just kept making his armor saves and was fine.

Probably biggest thing I disagree with is the "cost effective" troop choices. Which one are you referring to? The 10 points wych with t3, no armor, average ws and whose only weapons in battle are a knife and a pistol.. The dedicated close combat unit which cannot point for point beat any unit above guardsmen and gaunts. This is of course assuming they aren't killed in overwatch. Or are you referring to kabalites whose sole gimmick is that they have a splinter rifle which wounds guardsmen on a 4+. Compared to a fire warrior which has a rifle with a better range, better armor and unlike the kabalite gets synergy with other units to make him much better. Also, power from pain buffs DE in the area they are weakest at, CC, so you're paying a premium for an abiklity you don't get good use out of. Wyches should only be 6-7 points for what they as they are basically a glorified hormagaunt. They have only kept the price at 10 because they want to maintain the pretense that they are actually in the same league as howling banshees and this was before the new elder codex BTW Also, being as vulnerable to shooting as guardsmen who are half their price means that most of your army has to put in raiders and venoms. This tax increases the cost of all dark elder units. A kitted out wych squad in an upgraded raider can hit the 200-250 points range really quickly. Plus, it also restricts your armies firepower as jinking and movement limits your shooting potential, which again, is another in-built problem with this dysfunctional army.

Clearly you have never heard of an autocannon. It is embarresing how easy it is to kill T3 characters. BUt also, none of these characters can work with mediocre units., Good HQ choices don't work on their own they are meant to boost and compliment strong squads. ie You put a chapter master in a squad of marine bikes to make them brick. Putting Lelith in a squad of wyches doesn't do this as the wyches are so bad they don't add much beyond ablative wounds. Plus at str3 and t3 they don't hit hard enough and are too vulnerable.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Personally, I feel like Battle Brothers is fine as a concept--but the issue comes from the execution.

"Shared transports" are something which I feel need to be looked at in-depth before allowing them to be shared out.

While it might not make for great balance, it does make perfect sense. Why wouldn't the Americans let the Brits on their helos?

I find that Deldar are stronger, the lower your points level.
My Deldar kill team hasn't lost yet and I believe if we went up in points, I'd start struggling.

DE have in their basic troop choices, some of the best option and availability of burst DMG available. Venom, cannon, splinter spam and you win against most armies.

Poison en mass (and I mean EN freaking MASS) and lance weapons cheaply available, beastpack... What do DE not have to deal with most armies?

Just my experience for the past two years but against

SM of any variant, CSM, Sisters, GK, I feel Dark Eldar can win way more than they lose.

CD, Nids, Orks, AM you have a 50/50

Dar, Tau we struggle vs and will lose 9/10 times to a competent tourney list/player.

I havent gotten any games vs new Cron book yet so didnt include it.

Tried the Talo formation and it doesnt work in my meta. (Adepticon misions) (again with a competent opponent) they spread objectives and are much more mobile than a M6 w 6" scout.

Statistically 5 scourge cant even kill a Wave Serpent so no idea what you are talking about with DE having good AT. Lances are bad AT. Any heavy mech army DE struggle vs.

DE vehicles are so fragile and without LOS blocking terrain dar or tau destroy us. Ive lost 7 vehicles on first turn if you have nothing to hide behind.

My problem with DE is every list I make I end up allying in Eldar and taking more and more of them because there is NOTHING DE do that DAR cant do for cheaper and better.

I think local meta might affect this more than anything. My DE have always blown away 'Nids with all the hard work of sandblasting a soup cracker. It's IG that give me a fight.

 Jimsolo wrote:
I think local meta might affect this more than anything. My DE have always blown away 'Nids with all the hard work of sandblasting a soup cracker. It's IG that give me a fight.

To an extent, sure, meta matters. A FMC or MC heavy list will struggle against DE more than a swarm, though the nids codex leans towards a FMC spam build.
But DE do struggle against light tank spam and horde spam. Certain armies, Orks, IG, any army spamming Rhinos, will do badly against them. This makes them a little anti-meta, where having a T6-8 model is excellent, but I don't think it makes them a strong codex.

I think the other issue is that it doesn't really make them a fun army to play.

e.g. When my friend is using MC-heavy Chaos Daemons, and my basic weapons are shredding them from the other side of the board, neither of us are having fun because it just doesn't feel like a proper game.

Likewise, if that same list is up against IG and is itself getting obliterated from the other side of the board, whilst most of its weapons just bounce off armour, then that's not fun either. Nor is it fun if I go coven heavy and run into GKs - which don't give a crap about multiple wounds and FNP when Force Weapons ignore both.


DE really don't seem to have much middle-ground, which is a shame because those are usually the most fun games.

It's certainly not the most powerful, that's for sure, but I wouldn't go as far as saying it's the WEAKEST. I am a long time ork/tyranid/space marine collector, and orks had quite a tough time with their new codex.

oz of the north wrote:
I think the biggest weakness they suffer from excluding the lack of resilience is no way to take on a GC, especially if said GC is fearless. Best method would be talos/cronos, but stomps/str D have a great way of negating our greatest strength.

After using DE against eldar, if an Eldar player brings a competent list and is competant, then DE cannot do much against them.

well that has always been true. CWE have always been just about as fast as DE, very resilient to DE weaponry and had weapons that devastate DE.

 Jimsolo wrote:
I will forgo a LOW, D weapons, or any decent anti- flyer or psyker capacity if it meant I got Sliscus back. Most painful cut from the old book.

Truer words have never been spoken... Come back Sliscus! I miss all your fun Poison 3+ in a trueborn squad :(

The weakest? Dont make me laugh, have you even SEEN the Sisters of Battle codex? No? Well take a look. Atleast your army can do something.

Now try playing imperial Guard against vanilla SM. Sure, your gunline is great but you had better be prepared for your tanks to be glanced to death, assault units Deepstriking/assaulting from transports right into your lines and hell, if the enemy reaches you you are fethed.

DE are like that. Sure, they are weak. Until you shove them in fast moving skimmer transports and fly across the board, unload on turn one and by turn two be smashing your opponents army in close combat.

DE codex can't be worse then the ork codex. At least DE can call on your big brother for help