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.

Let's assume for a moment that there would be a Ynnari codex/supplement coming.

How would you guys like to have it being handled?

Should it just reference to Eldar, Deldar and Harlys for their units and rules, or contain all datasheets in the book?

I like the idea of Ynnari... as a supplement for the other Aeldari factions.

Release a fully functional 9th ed Codex for Drukhari, Craftworlds and Harlequins and then I'd happily buy the Ynnari supplement, with updated datasheets to play the units as Ynnari. I would be fine with slightly changed datasheets from Aeldari codexes into the Ynnari supplement for fluff or rules reasons.

As someone said already, Drukhari has a really good and "modern" range of models, we just need Mandrakes and Grotesques (and some Court members) as plastic and we are fine.

What we really need is updated rules and a Codex that is not a subfaction mess. And some of our old options back.

a_typical_hero wrote:
Let's assume for a moment that there would be a Ynnari codex/supplement coming.

How would you guys like to have it being handled?

Should it just reference to Eldar, Deldar and Harlys for their units and rules, or contain all datasheets in the book?

I think it would be nice if the relevant dataslates were actually in the Ynnari codex (I say relevant since some units can't be in a Ynnari army). Perhaps with some rules differences where appropriate, to reflect their different fluff.

Otherwise, you end up with a lot of Eldar units that *should* be able to work together, but actually can't. Because they have to be taken in separate detachments and can't share any buffs.

I realise that having access to all Eldar units would be strong, hence why I suggest tweaking both individual rules and also the specific units that are available to Ynnari.

However, for me the most important aspect by far is that the Ynnari rules not be locked behind 3 special characters.

IDK why some are suggesting to merge Eldar -- they don't share units and even have different methods of army construction altogether.

And I don't play or even like Eldar.

I would like two proper Asuryani and Drukhari codexes.

...and I would like a third codex with Harlequins, Ynnari, Corsairs, and Exodites, usable in any combination with the others.

Lastly, I would also like a lottery win.

a_typical_hero wrote:
Let's assume for a moment that there would be a Ynnari codex/supplement coming.

How would you guys like to have it being handled?

Should it just reference to Eldar, Deldar and Harlys for their units and rules, or contain all datasheets in the book?

Make it so Ynnari lets you soup all 3 elf factions in the same detachment but you are force to use the Ynnari strats/warlord traits/relics/psychic. And remove the "must have a triumvirate character to unlock the trait"

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:
Let's assume for a moment that there would be a Ynnari codex/supplement coming.

How would you guys like to have it being handled?

Should it just reference to Eldar, Deldar and Harlys for their units and rules, or contain all datasheets in the book?

Make it so Ynnari lets you soup all 3 elf factions in the same detachment but you are force to use the Ynnari strats/warlord traits/relics/psychic. And remove the "must have a triumvirate character to unlock the trait"

The problem is that souping allows for unforseen/unbalanced rules interactions, which end with the parent codex being 'punished'.

How long did Crfatworld Eldar have to put up with overpriced Shining Spears and Dark Reapers, simply because of how powerful they were with Ynnari? Drukhari suffered similarly, with Ravagers and Razorwings being hiked in cost because they were spammed in soup lists.

A supplement with the Ynnari units changed slightly with different costs and rules. Balanced as Ynnari, with the same models as CWE/DE/Harlies.

We'd have to remember 2 different point costs for the same model, maybe, not sure if that happens to other factions.

 harlokin wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:
Let's assume for a moment that there would be a Ynnari codex/supplement coming.

How would you guys like to have it being handled?

Should it just reference to Eldar, Deldar and Harlys for their units and rules, or contain all datasheets in the book?

Make it so Ynnari lets you soup all 3 elf factions in the same detachment but you are force to use the Ynnari strats/warlord traits/relics/psychic. And remove the "must have a triumvirate character to unlock the trait"

The problem is that souping allows for unforseen/unbalanced rules interactions, which end with the parent codex being 'punished'.

How long did Crfatworld Eldar have to put up with overpriced Shining Spears and Dark Reapers, simply because of how powerful they were with Ynnari? Drukhari suffered similarly, with Ravagers and Razorwings being hiked in cost because they were spammed in soup lists.

That was the case with the old Ynnari rules, where you could have dark reapers with Doom/Guide shooting multiple times in a turn. By removing all these interactions and giving them the Ynnari framework, you get rid of much of the abuse.

At the moment, picking a detachment of Ynnari Craftworlds + Ynnari Drukhari, they still get the same ruleset. My suggestion would simply remove the CP cost for bringing a fluffy Ynnari army.
Right now to bring a full party of Ynnari you need to pay 4 cp minimum and 500-ish pts in character.

The Newman wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
are you refering to suit commander spam? because GW generally tried to cut down on every faction that spammed HQs, Tau and Marines both got hit with a detachment limit on their beat stick HQs (Marines got that limit in codex 9.0) Tyranids resulted in the rule of 3 becoming a thing..

Just the general state of the game in 9th - the game rewards you for taking objectives in the center field but they didn't bother to give Tau any meaningful ways to do that. So Tau should just be happy to wait around for a few years while their army isn't functional in the current edition... it's pathetic.

A bunch of people have had things to say about this so I know I'm a bit late to the party, but as someone who has been pushing center-field objectives with Daemonettes and Termagaunts I'm not sure I see the problem with Kroot.

They're much better than Termagaunts for that extra point between better melee, better shooting, and pre-game movement, and on average they come pretty close to killing their weight in Daemonettes if they can shoot and then charge them. I will grant that they don't have the morale shenanigans but you're paying for that on Synapse creatures in the one case and banners and Syll'Esske in the other.

They're not great but nothing on the 5-7 point range really is. (Guardsmen not withstanding, and they're not really great either, just a noticable outlier.) Big blobs of Gaunts and daemons seem to be working, can anyone who has tried putting a significant number of Kroot on the table in 9th speak to why they don't work?

The reality is that a Firewarrior with the codex rules just isn't worth half the points of a marine.

Just for a laugh it takes 54 Firewarriors (486 points) to kill 1 Marine in CC on avarage.
It takes just over 2 and a quarter marines 40.5 points (2 Primarchads overkill 40 points) to kill a Firewarrior in CC.
(No doctorine bonuses or subfaction buffs)

Kroot look positively OP be comparison requiring only 18 kroot (108 points) to kill 1 Marine.
It takes 1.35 marines (1 Primarichad) to kill a Kroot in CC.

Kroot really need the Additional Attack(that GW took away from them for WTFK reason) back and either a strike first mechanic or AP on their rifles as a 6+ Save on a CC unit with no real access to Buffs (reroll1 to wound from an elite slot charictor with a 6+ Save in an army reliant on it's elite slots for Heavy hitting suits). Makes them bounce off to often.

It takes 18 pulse (81 points in rapid fire or 162 points outside) rifle shots to kill 1 marine
It takes just over 2 and a quarter old marines 40.5 points to kill a Firewarrior in shooting(No doctorine bonuses or subfaction buffs)

It takes 24 kroot rifle shots (72 points rapidfire or 144 points outside) to kill 1 Marine.
It takes 1.35 marines (24.3 points) to kill a Kroot with shooting (No doctorine bonuses or subfaction buffs)

Now if FW have 2damage rifles, Tau plasma becomes flat 2D that math might change but right now Taking Tau troops is lost points they do negligible damage and are trivially murdered by the meta dominant faction.

Am I one of the few (former) Black Templar players who is snickering in their beer at the tears coming from the Wolves and Angels?

 Charistoph wrote:
Am I one of the few (former) Black Templar players who is snickering in their beer at the tears coming from the Wolves and Angels?

Well we really should not be complaining.

They have not only given us pretty much everything in the Codex but also took the time to sort out a comprehenisve update for the couple of months that we are without a supplement.

Its not like they do anythig remotely similar for any other Sub-sub faction.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Am I one of the few (former) Black Templar players who is snickering in their beer at the tears coming from the Wolves and Angels?

Well we really should not be complaining.

They have not only given us pretty much everything in the Codex but also took the time to sort out a comprehenisve update for the couple of months that we are without a supplement.

Its not like they do anythig remotely similar for any other Sub-sub faction.

Or whole factions made up of similar units. Still waiting for my 2W Warp Talons, who BTW will be able to beat Bladeguard in cc. Not point for point, but squad for squad, which I'm fine with, I'll pay a little extra so that my pack of rabid wolves can tear down some lions. Eventually. All in due time....

a_typical_hero wrote:
Let's assume for a moment that there would be a Ynnari codex/supplement coming.

How would you guys like to have it being handled?

Should it just reference to Eldar, Deldar and Harlys for their units and rules, or contain all datasheets in the book?

In a WD where it beongs..

It should be akin to assasins for IOM.
Doing a full blooded supplement or codex for 3 models from one £36 is dumb..

 Argive wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:
Let's assume for a moment that there would be a Ynnari codex/supplement coming.

How would you guys like to have it being handled?

Should it just reference to Eldar, Deldar and Harlys for their units and rules, or contain all datasheets in the book?

In a WD where it beongs..

It should be akin to assasins for IOM.
Doing a full blooded supplement or codex for 3 models from one £36 is dumb..

the problem with being WD is what happens if I wanna get into the army 3 months later?

BrianDavion wrote:

 Argive wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:
Let's assume for a moment that there would be a Ynnari codex/supplement coming.

How would you guys like to have it being handled?

Should it just reference to Eldar, Deldar and Harlys for their units and rules, or contain all datasheets in the book?

In a WD where it beongs..

It should be akin to assasins for IOM.
Doing a full blooded supplement or codex for 3 models from one £36 is dumb..

the problem with being WD is what happens if I wanna get into the army 3 months later?

Don't GW publish old WD that contain rules/convert the rules into PDF? I could have sworn they did that for assasins and the PA WD rules for harlies.

Best case scenario GW will sell you an epub.
Worse case scenario you will have to get one off ebay or just ask local /online community for somebody with a copy to scan it for you..

Its better than paying £20 for 5 pages of rules in hard back IMO..

 Eldarsif wrote:


That would just be End Times Elves and we all know how that ended. (Hint: High Elves are no longer a faction and dark elves are a shadow of their former self).

Not a fan of the idea.

I am somewhat aware of players/armies getting screwed by The End Times, yes. See my Sig and why I've not played a single game of AoS.

That's probably where they were going with 40K, but learned their lesson. I still think putting DE, CE, Ynnari, Harlies, etc all in the one book with some supplements, and fleshing out Ynnari as more than three people bridging two factions together isn't bad. I also think it makes a nice testbed to create a soup system that works "fluffy" not "min/max". as a way to let SM play with Guard etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 harlokin wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

What Brian mentioned there is in essence just copy and pasting 3 existing books into 1, how is that any worse?

I'd be against it because, seeing as I more or less have to buy a dead tree codex, I would prefer that it just has my faction's stuff in it. Otherwise, it would be no worse than putting Astra Militarum and and Admech in one book....for convenience.

You're talking to someone who thinks IK should have to take some basic IG/AM troops without bells and whistles (orders, doctrines etc) for their troop component to score objectives. I wouldn't mind at all an IG+IK and AM+IK codexes. The IG houses in the IG book, the AM Houses in the AM book. Tune each knight model down by about a hundred points of value, to pay for some troop/infantry options from their household auxilliary/serfs/whatever they're called.

Putting all flavours of Aeldari into one book is as ridiculous as combining Guard, Admech and Sisters into one book because they're all "Imperium."

In fact that would make a little more sense as there's a lot of overlap with weapons and characters buffs/abilities actually cross over unlike the Aeldari armies!

 Bosskelot wrote:
Putting all flavours of Aeldari into one book is as ridiculous as combining Guard, Admech and Sisters into one book because they're all "Imperium."

In fact that would make a little more sense as there's a lot of overlap with weapons and characters buffs/abilities actually cross over unlike the Aeldari armies!

Agreed - There is more than enough lore and differences to justify the Craftowrlds as one Dex (plus supplements), the Dark Eldar as three Books.

Its not like they are a single Chapter of about 1000 marines with some different naming conventions.....

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Putting all flavours of Aeldari into one book is as ridiculous as combining Guard, Admech and Sisters into one book because they're all "Imperium."

In fact that would make a little more sense as there's a lot of overlap with weapons and characters buffs/abilities actually cross over unlike the Aeldari armies!

Agreed - There is more than enough lore and differences to justify the Craftowrlds as one Dex (plus supplements), the Dark Eldar as three Books.

Its not like they are a single Chapter of about 1000 marines with some different naming conventions.....

You can't suggest supplements for craftworlds then immediately complain about marine publications... which are supplements.

I honestly do not want any more supplements for anyone.

Dudeface wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Putting all flavours of Aeldari into one book is as ridiculous as combining Guard, Admech and Sisters into one book because they're all "Imperium."

In fact that would make a little more sense as there's a lot of overlap with weapons and characters buffs/abilities actually cross over unlike the Aeldari armies!

Agreed - There is more than enough lore and differences to justify the Craftworlds as one Dex (plus supplements), the Dark Eldar as three Books.

Its not like they are a single Chapter of about 1000 marines with some different naming conventions.....

You can't suggest supplements for craftworlds then immediately complain about marine publications... which are supplements.

I honestly do not want any more supplements for anyone.

I just did as sadly we are unlikely to see them except for Marines are we?

The three Dark Eldar factions are far more diverse than any of the Marine Chapters - including Grey Knights and Deathwatch - same as the Imperial guard regiments are. If you delve into their subfactions then there is loads to be explored.

Supplements give the possibility of expanding and enhancing lore without retreading the same old same old again and again with a coupel of models and a few new rules to make a particular sub faction more interesting.

alternatively gw learns that customizable lists actually allow them to explore the models with less publications, but that get's gw less cash....

Not Online!!! wrote:
alternatively gw learns that customizable lists actually allow them to explore the models with less publications, but that get's gw less cash....

Sadly customisable options are seemingly gone.

The Marine dex - esp the characters follows on from the Sisters dex where they had the Cannoness with ultra specific options for the same stupid reason.

Well, back in 3rd, Eldar were the only Codex to have a Codex Supplement for the specific Craftworlds.

I don't think you need individual books for each major CW, but have one supplement for the 5 Major ones that really goes deep into their lore and expands on their styles of play wouldn't really be too absurd of a prospect.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Putting all flavours of Aeldari into one book is as ridiculous as combining Guard, Admech and Sisters into one book because they're all "Imperium."

In fact that would make a little more sense as there's a lot of overlap with weapons and characters buffs/abilities actually cross over unlike the Aeldari armies!

Agreed - There is more than enough lore and differences to justify the Craftworlds as one Dex (plus supplements), the Dark Eldar as three Books.

Its not like they are a single Chapter of about 1000 marines with some different naming conventions.....

You can't suggest supplements for craftworlds then immediately complain about marine publications... which are supplements.

I honestly do not want any more supplements for anyone.

I just did as sadly we are unlikely to see them except for Marines are we?

The three Dark Eldar factions are far more diverse than any of the Marine Chapters - including Grey Knights and Deathwatch - same as the Imperial guard regiments are. If you delve into their subfactions then there is loads to be explored.

Supplements give the possibility of expanding and enhancing lore without retreading the same old same old again and again with a coupel of models and a few new rules to make a particular sub faction more interesting.

Sure then rock around 10th ed with 21 codex and 100 or so supplements to rewrite, sell and buy again.

Just no supplements is better, I get they painted themselves into a corner with marines, the snowflake chapters were out there already and couldn't risk squatting them, but I'd rather we didn't inflict the endless publication bloat on everyone.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Well, back in 3rd, Eldar were the only Codex to have a Codex Supplement for the specific Craftworlds.

I don't think you need individual books for each major CW, but have one supplement for the 5 Major ones that really goes deep into their lore and expands on their styles of play wouldn't really be too absurd of a prospect.

Just put it in the codex, if you're expanding the options in the codex and it won't make the book absurdly large, just put it in there.

 Bosskelot wrote:
Well, back in 3rd, Eldar were the only Codex to have a Codex Supplement for the specific Craftworlds.

I don't think you need individual books for each major CW, but have one supplement for the 5 Major ones that really goes deep into their lore and expands on their styles of play wouldn't really be too absurd of a prospect.

During 3rd, BA, SW and DA were supplements to the main SM book. There was also Codex Armageddon.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Well, back in 3rd, Eldar were the only Codex to have a Codex Supplement for the specific Craftworlds.

I don't think you need individual books for each major CW, but have one supplement for the 5 Major ones that really goes deep into their lore and expands on their styles of play wouldn't really be too absurd of a prospect.

During 3rd, BA, SW and DA were supplements to the main SM book. There was also Codex Armageddon.

Did I imagine a speed freaks supplement?

Kult of Speed were in the Armageddon supplement, along side Black Templars, Armageddon Steel Legion and Salamanders.

Codex: Eye of Terror also gave us Space Wolf 13th Company, Cadian Shock Troops, Lost & The Damned and Ulthwe Strike Force armies.

God I loved both campaign books. They were respectively the reasons why I picked up Cadians and Black Templars back then.

Anyone remember the Lost & Damned upgrade sprue? Good times.

The Eldar supplements, ancient as they are, are why I feel so many Eldar demands in recent years are kind of... unimaginative.

I.E: "Gib plastic striking scorpions".

Who cares? Don't you want Saim Hann assault Vypers, some new "ranger" units showing off Alaitoc as Alaitoc, not "haha, my flyers are OP" - a Young King diorama (I know some people hate those) and so on. Break out the imagination.