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.

My understanding is also that it wouldn't negatively affect mono Drukhari.

I'd be happy if it stops Asuryani poachers, it seems that whenever we get anything good they add it to their spam lists and the points end up getting hiked.

We will see but that's not the impression I got.

 vipoid wrote:
We will see but that's not the impression I got.

I wouldn't worry, I'm sure that the real reason we got so little from PA is that we will be one of the first factions to get a brand new codex...

I'll know when i see the actual rule, until then its impossible to know.

The reveal says you pay 3CP per battalion your warlord isn't part of. Nothing about only if it's from another faction.

RIP DE even more than they already were. Lol.

yukishiro1 wrote:
The reveal says you pay 3CP per battalion your warlord isn't part of. Nothing about only if it's from another faction.

RIP DE even more than they already were. Lol.

For the moment I assume there will come som amendments or work arounds by gw.

Its a smidge worrying indeed

Fingers crossed we get some kind of reduction if taking one of each subfaction (as beside crazy cat lady and chums HQs are already stretched)

But then again the 6 patrol thing was a work of derp so not holding my breath

It depends on what a patrol costs I guess. If it's 2CP or less, you could take triple patrol and come out even, as the +4CP from raiding patrol would counterbalance the -4CP from two extra patrols.

Does CP even really help us? I find horde armies and msu armies often don't benefit much from stratagems. The reason is they tend to effect only one unit per stratagem which heavily favors powerful singular units.

Or just go back to letting the subfactions play together with obssessions being related to their respective hqs (might need to limit it to one kabal/cult/coven per detachment for book keeping and wotnot)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
Does CP even really help us? I find horde armies and msu armies often don't benefit much from stratagems. The reason is they tend to effect only one unit per stratagem which heavily favors powerful singular units.

Vect

The reason DE don't get that much benefit from CP isn't so much the unit sizes, it's that DE have a horrible stratagem selection, aside from Vect and a very small handful of others. It's arguably the worst stratagem selection in the game for any fully fledged army. DE really suffered from having a codex release back when stratagems were not very powerful, and then an early PA release, back before new stratagems were standard as part of PA.

I do not know the direct wording in the drukhari book. But I suspect if they do not amend it the drulari codex says the apecial detachments give us 1 cp each. We will be the only army to have positive cp from detachments.

Something will be adressed.

yukishiro1 wrote:It depends on what a patrol costs I guess. If it's 2CP or less, you could take triple patrol and come out even, as the +4CP from raiding patrol would counterbalance the -4CP from two extra patrols.

Unless there are other benefits/drawbacks attached, there's pretty much no chance a Patrol is going to cost less than 3CP, let alone 2CP. Since dets now subtract CPs, you have to reverse-think about their cost. Dets that generated high CP will now cost little, dets that generated few will cost more (because they come with less HQ/Troop tax). In the case of Patrols, the 0-2 limit on many slots may justify it costing the same as a bat but I don't see how it could really cost less.

It should look a bit like this (random guess on the costs per se, but pretty sure about the relative costs):

Brigade: 1 CP
Battalion: 3 CP
Patrol: 5 CP
* refunded if includes Warlord

Vanguard/Spearhead/Outrider/Supreme Command etc. : 4 CP
* non refundable

Niiai wrote:I do not know the direct wording in the drukhari book. But I suspect if they do not amend it the drulari codex says the apecial detachments give us 1 cp each. We will be the only army to have positive cp from detachments.

Something will be adressed.

Since the recommended Det number came into effect, and probably in 9th as well, a quick fix that seemed obvious to me was to make the Raiding Force count as one single detachment for all other purposes. Structurally a triple-patrol but functionally a single det:
in 8th that would mean you could have RF + Bat + Other at 2000pts
in 9th that could mean the CP costs of the 3 Patrols is refunded with the warlord thing, not just of one.

Sidenote, as extra dets cost CP, there's a good chance the limit on the number of dets will go away. Make a 7-detachment army if you want to, but it's going to cost all your pre-game CP - choice is yours.

Anyway this is just speculation on the actual adjustment, but I fully agree that some sort of amendment is going to happen.

I dunno, I kinda got the impression that they wanted to get away from the whole idea of detachment taxes, which would imply that the cost of a detachment would be relative to the amount of units you get, not its "use." They have repeatedly articulated that the whole point of the changes was so you didn't have to take a bunch of units you didn't want to take to maximize your competitiveness. It wouldn't make much sense if they then turned that around and did effectively the same thing, by making smaller detachments cost more CP than bigger ones.

Also, if brigades were only 1CP, that would create the perverse incentive that if you were taking a brigade + a patrol, you'd have a massively strong incentive to make your warlord in the patrol, rather than the main force - again, explicitly what they are trying to avoid.

We'll have to see. But my bet is that a patrol will cost less CP than a bat, or, at the very most, the same CP.

It also could be all detachments are 3CP or it costs more CP to even take more detachments to help move players into 1 detachment.

Either way, DE WILL need something, lets hope GW does that something.

At least we are not Chaos.. My CSM friend is super pissed b.c he has to play 2-3 detachments on top of Vigilus detachment costs.

Holy Crap! Does our scourges have infantery or jump infantery keyword?

Scourges with darklances in 9th edition?!

 Niiai wrote:
Holy Crap! Does our scourges have infantery or jump infantery keyword?

Scourges with darklances in 9th edition?!

Fly and Infantry are 2 different keywords. They are Infantry sadly.

I wish infantry were good. I have a crap ton of scourge but in 8th they just suck or at least eventually sucked. Too much anti infantry firepower on the board. Best way to handle it is not to have infantry. Mounted infantry just seem better for horde armies right now. Vehicles can be expensive but they're infinitely more durable. At least we aren't gsc I guess. I wanted to play as them and they're just light infantry based. They want to be a horde army but they cant be and they have to focus on melee which 8th edition is super unkind to.

Infantry is the best keyword in the game in 8th - well, except fly. Flying infantry is literally the holy grail of 8th edition. The minor changes to vehicles ignoring a -1 hit penalty and being able to fire in combat at -1 aren't going to change the value of the infantry keyword; it's just going some small way to making infantry not so wildly better than everything else. Same goes for the stuff about letting monsters hit stuff on the 2nd floor of ruins.

Really? I feel like light infantry are garbage right now. Even in cover they'll just get destroyed. Vehicles and monsters were made too tough for suicide anti tank units like scourge. Believe me I've played scourge enough to realize they're not worth it. They are far too fragile and don't do enough before they die.

Infantry is only good for some armies. Nids, IG, Guardsmen, Daemons and then its only a certain few that are good. Many others like Aeldari they are meh. 9th might change that, will have to wait and see.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
Really? I feel like light infantry are garbage right now. Even in cover they'll just get destroyed. Vehicles and monsters were made too tough for suicide anti tank units like scourge. Believe me I've played scourge enough to realize they're not worth it. They are far too fragile and don't do enough before they die.

Scourge are indeed not very good. DE infantry is in a weird place generally because almost every unit has some sort of issue that makes it problematic. It's what comes of splitting the codex into three different armies then sticking them back together. You end up with units that are are kinda all trying too hard in some specific direction and fail for some reason.

It's not a coincidence that the better units for DE are mostly ones that either aren't specialized to one of the sub-armies, or that do something so different from the rest of the codex that they don't need to be weirdly overthought to be good.

With the new system troops that were useful only to provide CPs because they are cheap are going to take a hit. Units like Gretchins were an autotake in 8th, but with the new edition they'll just be a niche unit.

Kabalite warriors never had that role despite being cheap, they still are among the best troops in the game. Wracks can be useful as well. Wyches are overcosted in this edition, but maybe if 9th buffs melee units somehow they can be an interesting option as well.

Scourges simply suffered from shifting editions: they used to be a reliable suicide anti vehicles unit, but with the new rules their firepower can't threat anything while their durability hasn't changed. They just don't have a role anymore and need a full update.

Did anybody check out the obscuring rules yet for 9th edition? I'm actually kind of excited for them for our faction. If obscuring terrain blocks a unit you can't see through windows to claim you see it. It sounds like you can still fire weapons that dont need line of sight at it. I wonder what'll happen if parts of a building dont obscure like an edge of a raider or ravager though. Also how does it effect infantry taking cover in ruins and shooting out of it? Hopefully the full rule comes out eventually.

Actually the rule is kinda weird. It definitely needs to be explained.

I find the rule quite easy to understand. At leats if I understand it corectly.

First, let us asume that the terain here (yellow line) is at least 5" tall and has the obscure rule, and light terain rule.

The draw in red man can see the farseer (in pink). You can draw a line of sight to him without moving over the terain. Therefore he can be seen. (I am a bit unsure on the fine print of he gets +1 to his armour save.)

The warp spiders are in the terain, so the red man can se the spiders and the spiders can se him. (Teal.) The spides get +1 to armour save.

The tank (in purpl)e are behind the terain that has the obscure rule and is over 5 so the red man can not se it.

I wad wondering. How many Grotesques do a dark eldar army usualy bring if they bring Grotesques? (For 8th edition. Things might change for 9th. But I am amsuming new terrainrules will be good for them.)

 Niiai wrote:
I wad wondering. How many Grotesques do a dark eldar army usualy bring if they bring Grotesques? (For 8th edition. Things might change for 9th. But I am amsuming new terrainrules will be good for them.)

I usually run 10, but have run up to 18.

Wow, that is a lot!

Do you put them on raiders or just wlak them up?

 Niiai wrote:
I wad wondering. How many Grotesques do a dark eldar army usualy bring if they bring Grotesques? (For 8th edition. Things might change for 9th. But I am amsuming new terrainrules will be good for them.)

As many as you can fit

Seriously that's one ot the best units in the codex and they are good even at their min size. Of course max sized units are amazing but if you don't have the points and you field a coven detachment with 3+ talos even a little 3 man squad of grots can be useful.

I don't play drukhari anymore but in 8th I fielded a single unit of 5-9 grotesques, 2x4 (or a unit of 4 and a unit of 5) or 3x3, all viable options. I had 9 in total.

How do you transpor them? 4 in a transport?