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.

Yeah, I do indeed think it is an art style by different artists. Digitally draw and they stop a few steps before they are all done. More like last stage consept art. I like the SW one, but the SM and DE codex is not so good. I have not studied the others.

That beeing said cover art is not a selling point for me anyway. I just want a good codex. Perhaps we even get a new model: Baron Satonyx, Vect, Blood Brides or Trueborn all comes to mind. Although just new rules for bad units would go a long way. Everything so far is good :-)

My wishlist would have to be as follows:

-Give hellions a clear purpose and playstyle, love the models and I want to use them so bad.

-Make our HQs feel on the table how they behave in the lore. Archon should be good in a fight but his main way to operate should be as a scheming force multiplier, give him some ways to manipulate things or have some dirty tricks. Succubus should be an amazing duelist and scary for enemy characters to face, raise her points and make her worth those points in lethality. 50 points is too cheap and there's no room in design space with that to make her an adequate duelist. Haemy... weird one cause +1T is actually still good. Maybe tinker with his wargear options a bit? Also make it so we can have good HQs without having to rely on specific warlord trait and relic combos, I don't want to feel punished for trying to take more than one of each.

-We are fast but really only thanks to strats compared to other armies. Those have scaling issues. Make us natively fast. I play scions and a Taurox Prime moves just as fast as a Raider but is tougher and has way more firepower. On that note I get why we don't have skyboard or bike options for our HQs, there is no model. There should be, but there isn't sadly. In the mean time for the love of the Dark City please bump our transports to 6 and 11 for Venoms and Raiders respectively.

-Just let me pick the combat drugs I want. I despise playing the distribution game, it's cumbersome and janky and I hate it. Bake the drug cost in to the wyches and hellions etc and let me just have my pick.

-Poison... oh boy that rule needs some help. Do something.

Those are the main things I'd like to see resolved. As for models I would prefer our existing finecast models get good proper plastic releases before we get in to special characters. Characters are cool but often locked to factions that you may not play so they don't help you at all. Grotesques, mandrakes, court, and beasts can help any Drukhari army.

Looking it those sick new van saar skyboarders make our hellions look like gak...

personal wishlisting

Make ghostplate effective, thereby making scourges more than just suicide AT squad.

make characters scary, make characters fit in a fething transport with a squad in a raider... make character auras apply to units in said transport....

bring back clone field and options for characters. remove the drawback on the shadowfield, T3 2++ model isnt that oppressive anymore when there are units that can vomit out 108 attacks. or rework shadowfield to be like a storm shield but let the characters have real armor that would make use of it.

bring back trueborn/bloodbrides etc etc, while they were only around for a short time having a veteran option of our base units isnt a bad thing...

bring back the scores of characters they deleted, also when we have primarchs and chapter masters running around where big daddy vect.

rework power from pain and combat drugs.

rework poison, i dont know if it needs to combine every poison buff trait in psychic awakening to make it work but it would be a nice start (6+ to hit auto wounds, 6+ to wound +1 damage, strength > T +1 to wound) etc etc... or a fundamental rework.

footdar needs to be a thing for more than just covens.

expand out mercenaries. let some units who dont benefit from army wide abilities benefit from them (incubi, scourges).

make the court of the archon not absolute garbage, give me a reason to them.

give our aircraft 2 turns, we are suppose to be the fastest most maneuverable race around and we get out maneuvered by eldar.

more vehicles!!!

rework the telos back to the scorpion, it was way cooler than the garbage model we have now.

affordable grotesques, but knowing GW if they gave us a new model it would somehow cost more than the current ones (see sisters of battle being more expensive than metal sisters)

build your faction rules that arent 100% insulting melee abilities on kabal... though melee kabal should be a viable thing.

more relics more gear options, new weapons, etc etc...

basically the entire codex needs work.

Well it's probably too late to change anything they've already done for our codex or more likely haven't done for our models. At least rules can be changed a bit but I imagine it's too late for anything but a post release FAQ.

I already suggested that open topped transports should work like the whole vehicle has the aura instead. Realistically you can see the archon and they should be able to talk to their troops since they can see them face to face.

Shadowfields needs to be as good as it was in 7th at least where if it fails once it still lasts the rest of the phase. I just want dark eldar characters to be scary again rather than completely neutered.

Footdar would be fun if they allowed lots of webway assaults.

Poison needs serious boosts esp. AP, boosting to wound and damage per shot or melee attack.

If I recall sub factions are gone in this new codex.

Agreed with both vehicles and aircraft. I honestly just want a super heavy vehicle or monster and/or shooty bikes. Maybe a new reaver kit that makes multiple different units.

Oh god do we need new grotesques. Give em a new weapon option too or a couple more.

Agreed on kabal but if we had trueborn still it wouldn't have been as insulting.

Omg new special and heavy weapons would be a god send. Can you imagine if we had an assault version of dissies, shredders on bikes or our grav talons and cluster caltrops didn't suck. That'd be great.

Yeah I agree with the codex bit too.

 warmaster21 wrote:
bring back clone field and options for characters. remove the drawback on the shadowfield, T3 2++ model isnt that oppressive anymore when there are units that can vomit out 108 attacks. or rework shadowfield to be like a storm shield but let the characters have real armor that would make use of it.

We definitely need more options.

But 2++ without a drawback would definitely be too good. Your archon will spend most of his time within look-out-sir range until it's time to get into combat, and then he will be almost invincible (especially in character-to-character combat). I think the Shadowfield should be a 3+ invul (no fizzling out, can be re-rolled), and on an unmodified saving throw of 1, you take a mortal wound in addition to any other damage. Simple, no bookkeeping, and more unique than the ubiquitous 4++.

IMO the best rules for the shadowfield would be if you fail it you lose it for the rest of the phase.

Keeps the fluff of being able to overload it and the weakness to massed attacks, but means an unlucky roll to a single shot is nowhere near as devastating.

Means you can be a bit tactical about where you expose the Archon.

I'd be fine with shadowfield if it was simply 2++ until you fail a save then you lose it at the END of that phase as it reverts to a 5++. Means no more rolling single dice waiting for a 1, you can batch roll all your saves and they will be all 2++ even if you fail one or more but after the phase is over it's only 5++. Means you could potentially shoot the shield out prior to a charge to make the Archon more vulnerable and on our end we don't have to roll bloody saves one at a time.

Maybe have the Shadowfield reduce it's invulnerable save by 1 every time it's failed. 2++>3++>4++ etc.

Ghostplate should probably be 4+ save, 5++ invulnerable and possibly -1 to hit.

Although, I feel like this army should get -1 to hit for the first like turn or two anyway. Called Strike from the shadows or something.

I don't know if and when they plan on giving us a Truborn unit but if if they do they should come with Ghostplate and Shard Carbines standard.

It would be nice if they made DE a true glass cannon. Maybe we can have actually powerful weapons without downsides for once. Kinda like Marines have always had?

Or maybe they should give our bikes -1 to hit which would make it behind harlequins, gsc and maybe eldar or ork bikes.

-1 army-wide for turn 1 isn't asking much considering the boosts i saw necrons get in my last game.

Trueborn used to have shardcarbines in 5th i think. Sadly we lost both shardcarbines on trueborn since then and then the trueborn themselves.

I don't mind downsides but we should be the fastest faction and with some of the most potent weapons but fragile as a paper plane. Sadly they only get the paper plane fragility right atm.

Anyway all of our wish-listing isn't really gonna matter until they do an FAQ or a supplement for dark eldar. Oddly we seem to be getting a campaign book soon too. I think Admech is gonna be one of the next codexes given the campaign book.

------

Edit:

Ok so i just noticed something i found a bit odd. Warriors have a 5+ armor save like guardsmen but in many cases their armor looks fairly solid at the front like tempestus scions. If this is the case shouldn't we accept armor saves for warriors along the lines of the scions? Here's the pictures for example:

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Drukhari-Kabalite-Warriors-2017

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Imperial-Guard-Cadians-5-models-2017

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Militarum-Tempestus-Scions-2017

Kabalite armor at 5+ makes sense to me. It offers more coverage than Cadian flak vest but it's way thinner it seems. Scions are fine at 4+ but I don't think our Kabs need 4+, just make them more lethal and give us tricks to survive not just plain stat boosts.

Also going by size Kab armor is almost non-existent compared to Scion armor which is super thick in comparison. If I had to pick from a game designer standpoint the Kab armour should never match value with the Scion plate.

5+ or 4+ I don't think matters much for Kabs.

If they aren't in a boat or in cover they're dead if someone looks at them the wrong way. I don't want to risk another points increase for basically the same amount of protection. Plus it adds to the fragile nature of the army.

Strangely, it seems like GW has long been attempting to increase the survivability of this army with various special rules. Everything dies in this modern game, quickly. Concentrate on the lethality of the army, not the survivability.

I agree here Brutus_Apex. Unless it's a Coven unit survivability should be a non-point for us. Kabs and Wyches should be scary and able to dish out pain. Die if you look at them sternly enough but otherwise will ruin your day.

I agree. Transports are (and should be) essential to how the Drukhari play. IMO we need to be able to shoot out of our transports if they are in close combat, and be able to charge after the transport has moved.

Hello All, what do people think of scourges? I bought two boxes I love the models

are people running them in squads of 5 as troop harassers

or what I wanted squad of 10 tank hunters?

Hello ballzonya the answer to your question is we have a codex coming out soon so any tactics we could give you will be obsolete soon.

We tend to run scourge in squads of 5 as a suicide anti tank unit but they weren't really great in 9th or even most of 8th. I used to use dark lance scourge so trust me. Scourge sound fun but in 8th they're not so good at anti tank due to how powerful tanks and monsters got. They usually deep strike, under perform and then die.

I've heard scourge maybe being ok with shredders but our codex is coming too soon to know what'll be good or bad for sure.

Someone just offered me a Venom, 5 Scourges and 5 Hellions for 50€. I wanted to wait until Codex drop for buying more minis, but man that's cheap...

A Venom it's a Venom, and I don't think it's going to be bad... Scourges and Hellions... I think they are going to be better, but who knows.

Do I bite?

Might as well. Even if you use the scourges and Hellions for conversion material they got some amazing parts in there. And I am cautiously optimistic that both those units will be better in the new codex. It's not like they can get worse right?

Of course, at the end I bought the bundle

Now I'm so tempted to build the Scourges, but might as well wait for the new weapon profiles.

How are you running them right now? I've tested them online both with Blasters and Haywire. They feel overcosted for what they do right now.

I run haywires, but would drop them from my list if I hadn't just finished painting the unit. I get more haywire damage from three Talos, which get to shoot on turn 1 and usually get more than one shooting phase. I might try heat lances because my common opponents just aren't using vehicles anymore.

For a deepstriking unit they often need to forgo shooting to perform an action or be durable enough to stick around for one turn, and Scourges are poor choices for both.

But they are so beautiful models! I had to buy them for that price

I'm pretty sure they'll bet better in a couple months. Same with Hellions, if they get a way to stay alive and some AP those D2 Hellglaives could be strong.

Just make a the Shadowfield a relic ffs, a 2++ with the option to re-roll one 1. Just dont give it as standard wargear.

I want blasters to be like fusion weapons, half range you get to roll 2d6 and pick the highest value for damage.

Would making poison weapons str 4 with +1 to wound make them better? Maybe hit rolls of 6 automatically wound.

No, make it a option like older editions, Archons used to be able to pick the armor they wanted, let us pick the Incubi warsuit or Shadowfield, honestly they should just have a 3+ and a 4+ standard but w/e.

Blasters are not like Melta, just give back the Lance rule, +1 to wound vs Vehicles.

Poison just needs Str4 and then its fine. Don;t need auto wound or +1 to wound stuff.

How would you word the Poison rule with a Strenght value?

S4 and +1 to wound would be terrifying, wounding MEQ on 3+ would be super strong. I don't see it.

 Denegaar wrote:
How would you word the Poison rule with a Strenght value?

S4 and +1 to wound would be terrifying, wounding MEQ on 3+ would be super strong. I don't see it.

Str 4, Poison; When rolling to wound against non vehicle units never roll less than a 4+. (or 2+ if its a 2+ poison)

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Denegaar wrote:
How would you word the Poison rule with a Strenght value?

S4 and +1 to wound would be terrifying, wounding MEQ on 3+ would be super strong. I don't see it.

Str 4, Poison; When rolling to wound against non vehicle units never roll less than a 4+. (or 2+ if its a 2+ poison)

Id borrow the trait from psychic awakening. give poison a S value and fixed wound on 2+ / 4+ depending on type and give it a strengh value giving it +1 to wound if the poison strength is higher than the T of the model. would open up some more varience on the weapons.

if using previous example splinter rifles were S4, they would still wound meqs on 4's guard/elves on 3's, splinter cannons could be s5 wouding meqs/geqs on 3's whiel heavy mqs and deathguard on 4's still, or save the higher strength for the more exotic rarer weapons.

+1 to wounds can be modified and limited to being modified more, a base rule doesn't need modifications IMO. Just having a strength will let you wound on a 3+ if it is higher than the toughness already, so you are just making rules clutter.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
+1 to wounds can be modified and limited to being modified more, a base rule doesn't need modifications IMO. Just having a strength will let you wound on a 3+ if it is higher than the toughness already, so you are just making rules clutter.

You don't need a S characteristic if it modifies the to-wound roll. Poisoned wounds on a 4+, but if you have a +1 to your to-wound rolls than would trigger it on a 3+. Honestly I feel like Poisoned just needs to be changed to read like: "Poisoned Weapon (4+)". We can define them to always wound on a 6+ against vehicles and explain that they'll always have a target number for non-vehicle units listed in their profile and it'd work fine.

On a different note, I'm slowly building some Incubi at the moment, but I've got a Talos/Chronos box sitting on my desk to work on next. Any recommendations, or should I just leave the weapons off for now?

You don't need +1 to wound if you had strength though, why do we need +1 to wound when strength is already in the game to give us that 3+/2+ to wound vs low targets?

If you are building something, i would just not glue on the weapons for now, our book will be out in a couple months for sure, but currently Scalpels and HWB or Sting pods for cheap and if you don't need anti tank.

 ClockworkZion wrote:


I'm slowly building some Incubi at the moment, but I've got a Talos/Chronos box sitting on my desk to work on next. Any recommendations, or should I just leave the weapons off for now?

I found the Talos to be one of the simplest models to magnetise for different weapon options. The hands pop in and out - you almost don't even need magnets - and if you snip the ball at the end of the tail in half and glue a magnet, the other magnet will fit in the space on the tail weapon. I'm not sure what changes to make it a Chronos though so don't know if it's easy to magnetise between the two options entirely.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
+1 to wounds can be modified and limited to being modified more, a base rule doesn't need modifications IMO. Just having a strength will let you wound on a 3+ if it is higher than the toughness already, so you are just making rules clutter.

the difference if there was a S6 or even S8 poison weapon but the intention was for it to only ever wound on a 3+ max (poisoned 4+ with a +1 to wound roll ability) would stop it from ever wounding on a 2+ from its strength, granted could just have a limit of to a maxmium of 3+ to wound or something. and GW already made the strength poison +1 to wound thing as a melee trait on psychic awakening, so their rules clutter.