[40k] Dark Eldar, new units needed?

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Any other dark eldar players here think there should be more units added
in the new codex?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Lattes" <bumpin_removetoemail_@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:1PydncSnDd34iXHcRVn-vg@rogers.com...
> Any other dark eldar players here think there should be more units added
> in the new codex?

To be fair, we have more units than most: Three HQ choices (one of which
rearranges the Force Org Chart), Four Elites, Two Troops, Two Fast, and
Three Heavy Support for 14 total choices: Tau only have 12, and two of
those only bolster Kroot, while Necrons have 11 (12 if you count C'tan.)
Dark Eldar really win the "new alien race" prize for 3rd Edition in terms of
variety. Obviously, the top shelf armies like Space Marines, Chaos, IG,
Orks and Eldar all have more, but I think that's more due to the
customizable nature of their lists. If you think about it, each of those
lists is really just the parent for many small sublists: Traits, Doctrines,
Hive Fleets, Clans, Craftworlds, and complete variants like Wolves and
Templars all stem from one of those basic Codices. Dark Eldar is a simple
list, with really only one sublist: Wych Cult, that switches a couple of
units around.

I'd like more units as much as the next guy, but there are also units I've
never really used, like Haemonculi, Hellions, Grotesques, Ravagers,
Scourges, etc. Plus, don't forget that you can use Kroot Mercenaries, which
isn't a horrible idea. Adding a Master Shaper in place of some Incubi, or
Kroot Vulters in place of REavers makes for an interesting game.

It looks like we've got years (and years) until a new DE codex, but
hopefully they'll bring them back in Chapter Approveds and White Dwarf.

Karyth Teel
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

>
> I'd like more units as much as the next guy, but there are also units I've
> never really used, like Haemonculi, Hellions, Grotesques, Ravagers,
> Scourges, etc. Plus, don't forget that you can use Kroot Mercenaries, which
> isn't a horrible idea. Adding a Master Shaper in place of some Incubi, or
> Kroot Vulters in place of REavers makes for an interesting game.

Fair enough, I should have noted "Any other dark eldar players here
think there should be more USEFUL units added in the new codex?"

My army list usually contains nothing but warriors, wyches, Archites &
Dracites, sometimes I field some Mandrakes & Warp beasts but the warp
beasts only being able to have 5 beasts in a pack is a bit of a downer.

What I would most like to see would be a type of attack bike.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

In article <1PydncSnDd34iXHcRVn-vg@rogers.com>,
Lattes <bumpin_removetoemail_@rogers.com> wrote:

> Any other dark eldar players here think there should be more units added
> in the new codex?

Dark Eldar need new models.

--
Be seeing you-
Qrab
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Lattes" <bumpin_removetoemail_@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:1PydncSnDd34iXHcRVn-vg@rogers.com...
> Any other dark eldar players here think there should be more units added
> in the new codex?

no, but plenty of their existing units could do with some comprehensive
overhauls.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

On 17-Jan-2005, "Karyth Teel" <spo2@case.edu> wrote:

> I'd like more units as much as the next guy, but there are also units
> I've never really used, like Haemonculi, Hellions, Grotesques,
> Ravagers,
> Scourges, etc.

Never used Ravagers????????

120pts for 3 Disintegrators.

With the new rules you can shoot one at 7 2 Heavy1 Blast and the other
two
at 4 3 Heavy3 and still move 12".

I play two, sometimes three, they are the ultimate SM killer, better,
and cheaper
than Starcannons.

--
I was born to rage against them
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:38:24 -0500, Karyth Teel wrote:

>
> "Lattes" <bumpin_removetoemail_@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:1PydncSnDd34iXHcRVn-vg@rogers.com...
>> Any other dark eldar players here think there should be more units added
>> in the new codex?
>

i've given this a lot of thought, and while there are a few things i think
could be added, the army needs some various tweaks as much as it
needs more units. I just don't feel much thematically from the army
(except the faux-sm stuff, but even that's weak)

> To be fair, we have more units than most:
> Three HQ choices (one of which rearranges the Force Org Chart), Four
> Elites, Two Troops, Two Fast, and Three Heavy Support for 14 total
> choices:

But, the two troop choices are basically the same; they could have
combined it to a single entry with little trouble. The fast attack choices
are both wych choices, which is annoying from a fluff standpoint.
Modifying unit options could help this without adding a ton of new units.
For example, have normal jetbikes but give them the option to be upgraded
to whiched for +5 points or so.

> Dark Eldar is a simple list, with really only one sublist: Wych Cult,
> that switches a couple of units around.

Fluffwise, the dark eldar don't have the huge variety you can expect from
marines or IG, so doctrines/trait are less important. My Dark Eldar
Revisted Project (DERP) changes the system around so that there are
actually 4 different armies but they are different in the same vein as the
wych cult is diferent from a standard army. Within that framework
there is stil much leeway for making unique forces, but DERP doesn't focus
on doctrine like approaches, instead it trys to make units more
characterful so the unit selection will be what makes your army different.


--
Error: file not found
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Lattes bumpin_removetoemail_@rogers.com wrote:
>Any other dark eldar players here think there should be
>more units added in the new codex?

Nope.

But that doesn't mean the DE army isn't in need of a total revamp, both in
rules and in models.

IMO, the DE army has all of the right pieces, but that they aren't quite
concepted and balanced properly. And the non-Warrior models are really, really
poor. With a motivated game designer matched with a properly inspired
sculptor, the DE could be a *great* army.

The basic DE concept of "evil, semi-Slaaneshi Eldar" is OK. The problem is
that they're stuck in the midst of 3 other non-specialist S3 T3 armies: IG,
Tau, and Sisters.

IMO, the DE ought to be more inherently "fighty" than they currently are, and
something like True Grit might be very helpful. The basic DE Warriors and
Wyches both ought to be moved into the 10-12 ppm range, with stats and options
to match. Finally, the DE rules arcana ought to be stripped away, so things
like the Talos become as simple and sensible as a basic Dread.

--
--- John Hwang "JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com"
\-|-/
| A.K.D. F.E.M.C.
| Horned Blood Cross Terror LED Speed Jagd Destiny
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Lattes" <bumpin_removetoemail_@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:5LudnbxwWJ_btXHcRVn-1Q@rogers.com...

> What I would most like to see would be a type of attack bike.

What's up with the jet bikes? They're quick, and can take nasty weaponry.
And you can take quite a few.

Dan
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Lattes" wrote...
> Any other dark eldar players here think there should be more units added
> in the new codex?

You mean *if* they do a new DE codex?

No, I don't think so. They could use a bunch of tweaks and balances, but I
think they have enough variety in the unit types. Necrons, on the other hand...
--
- Ward.
wardcb at earthlink dot net

The "upper crust" is a bunch of crumbs held together by their dough.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"StreetSam" wrote
> Never used Ravagers????????
>
> 120pts for 3 Disintegrators.
>
> With the new rules you can shoot one at 7 2 Heavy1 Blast and the other
> two at 4 3 Heavy3 and still move 12".

Beg pardon? Unless I'm very much mistaken, the new vehicle rules state that any
variable strength weapon is always considered to be at maximum strength for
determining what a vehicle can fire. So, you could shoot either one
disintegrator at S7 Hvy 1 Blast OR one disintegrator at S4 Hvy 3 and still move
12"...
--
- Ward.
wardcb at earthlink dot net

The "upper crust" is a bunch of crumbs held together by their dough.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

> What's up with the jet bikes? They're quick, and can take nasty weaponry.
> And you can take quite a few.
>

I don't really find them worth the points. If you put a blaster on a
bike you are in HTH range of the enemy you fire at and that is death for
bikes.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Lattes" <bumpin_removetoemail_@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:496dnduBeqJ9oHDcRVn-oA@rogers.com...
>
>> What's up with the jet bikes? They're quick, and can take nasty weaponry.
>> And you can take quite a few.
>>
>
> I don't really find them worth the points. If you put a blaster on a bike
> you are in HTH range of the enemy you fire at and that is death for bikes.

It's a 6 for them to hit you though, isn't it?

Dan
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Spack wrote:
> "Lattes" <bumpin_removetoemail_@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:496dnduBeqJ9oHDcRVn-oA@rogers.com...
>
>>>What's up with the jet bikes? They're quick, and can take nasty weaponry.
>>>And you can take quite a few.
>>>
>>
>>I don't really find them worth the points. If you put a blaster on a bike
>>you are in HTH range of the enemy you fire at and that is death for bikes.
>
>
> It's a 6 for them to hit you though, isn't it?
>
> Dan
>
>

I would not have interpreted the rules that way, they are not
technically vehicles so I don't think the skimmer rules apply.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Spack" <news@worldofspack.co.uk> wrote in message
news:354tprF4hqrv9U1@individual.net...
> "Lattes" <bumpin_removetoemail_@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:496dnduBeqJ9oHDcRVn-oA@rogers.com...
>>
>>> What's up with the jet bikes? They're quick, and can take nasty
>>> weaponry. And you can take quite a few.
>>>
>>
>> I don't really find them worth the points. If you put a blaster on a bike
>> you are in HTH range of the enemy you fire at and that is death for
>> bikes.
>
> It's a 6 for them to hit you though, isn't it?

Unless it's been changed recently, like in the v4 rulebook or some obscure
FAQ, that rule only applies to a model that is considered a vehicle and of
type "skimmer". Jetbikes are considered infantry (with some extra move and
shoot rules added of course) so you don't need 6s to hit them in hth.

You don't need a 6 to hit the Talos as it isn't considered a vehicle either
but to make things extra confusing they gave it a special rule called
"skimmer".

--

-smithdoerr
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

W. B. wrote:
> "StreetSam" wrote
>
>>Never used Ravagers????????
>>
>>120pts for 3 Disintegrators.
>>
>>With the new rules you can shoot one at 7 2 Heavy1 Blast and the other
>>two at 4 3 Heavy3 and still move 12".
>
>
> Beg pardon? Unless I'm very much mistaken, the new vehicle rules state that any
> variable strength weapon is always considered to be at maximum strength for
> determining what a vehicle can fire. So, you could shoot either one
> disintegrator at S7 Hvy 1 Blast OR one disintegrator at S4 Hvy 3 and still move
> 12"...


I think the reference to variable strength means weapons such as the
Zzapp gun which has a strength of 2d6, ie you dont know what strength
its going to be until you fire.

--
Dogboy
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"smithdoerr" <askmeforname@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:354vraF4hbn7uU1@individual.net...
>
> "Spack" <news@worldofspack.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:354tprF4hqrv9U1@individual.net...
>> "Lattes" <bumpin_removetoemail_@rogers.com> wrote in message
>> news:496dnduBeqJ9oHDcRVn-oA@rogers.com...
>>>
>>>> What's up with the jet bikes? They're quick, and can take nasty
>>>> weaponry. And you can take quite a few.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't really find them worth the points. If you put a blaster on a
>>> bike you are in HTH range of the enemy you fire at and that is death for
>>> bikes.
>>
>> It's a 6 for them to hit you though, isn't it?
>
> Unless it's been changed recently, like in the v4 rulebook or some obscure
> FAQ, that rule only applies to a model that is considered a vehicle and of
> type "skimmer". Jetbikes are considered infantry (with some extra move
> and shoot rules added of course) so you don't need 6s to hit them in hth.
>
> You don't need a 6 to hit the Talos as it isn't considered a vehicle
> either but to make things extra confusing they gave it a special rule
> called "skimmer".

Yeah, my mistake, I was at work trying to post from memory. Stupid idea.

They do get the turbo-boosters rule though, giving them 24" movement and a
invulnerable save, allowing them to move quickly to flank the enemy.

Dan
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

>> Beg pardon? Unless I'm very much mistaken, the new vehicle rules state that any
>> variable strength weapon is always considered to be at maximum strength for
>> determining what a vehicle can fire. So, you could shoot either one
>> disintegrator at S7 Hvy 1 Blast OR one disintegrator at S4 Hvy 3 and still move
>> 12"...
>
>I think the reference to variable strength means weapons such as the
>Zzapp gun which has a strength of 2d6, ie you dont know what strength
>its going to be until you fire.

This changed with 4E's release - now, the strength of the weapon on
the turn you fire it is used to determine if it's defensive or not.
The example given is a missile launcher counting as a defensive weapon
if you fire frag.

Yes, this is strange. No, I have no idea how to deal with zap guns. I
guess if you attempt to fire it as a defensive weapon you'd roll its
str for the turn, and if it's too high, ignore the shot.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Tim Oliver wrote:
>>>Beg pardon? Unless I'm very much mistaken, the new vehicle rules state that any
>>>variable strength weapon is always considered to be at maximum strength for
>>>determining what a vehicle can fire. So, you could shoot either one
>>>disintegrator at S7 Hvy 1 Blast OR one disintegrator at S4 Hvy 3 and still move
>>>12"...
>>
>>I think the reference to variable strength means weapons such as the
>>Zzapp gun which has a strength of 2d6, ie you dont know what strength
>>its going to be until you fire.
>
>
> This changed with 4E's release - now, the strength of the weapon on
> the turn you fire it is used to determine if it's defensive or not.
> The example given is a missile launcher counting as a defensive weapon
> if you fire frag.
>
> Yes, this is strange. No, I have no idea how to deal with zap guns. I
> guess if you attempt to fire it as a defensive weapon you'd roll its
> str for the turn, and if it's too high, ignore the shot.

My understanding is that variable strength weapons where you can choose
the strength are allowed as both main and defensive weapons if you use
the appropriate strength. They are not clear on *random* strength
weapons in the rule book.

Random strength weapons are not mentioned anywhere I can see (at a
glance) but previous 4th edition rules updates and stuff like that have
always stated that "random str weapons with a potential str of 7 or
higher the weapon counts as a main weapon".

The absence of this seems more like an ommission than a actual rules
change so Im going to keep on playing it the "counts as a main weapon" way.

How many weapons are random str and have the potential to be higher than
str 7 anyway? I cant think of anything apart from the Zap gun, some
wierd tyranid gun maybe?


--
Dogboy
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:39:17 -0500, Lattes
<bumpin_removetoemail_@rogers.com> wrote:

>Any other dark eldar players here think there should be more units added
>in the new codex?

No. The units just need some reworking, especially to match the
background.

As it currently goes, the Dark Eldar are mostly a shooting army. A
fast shooting army, yes, but they're supposed to be a close combat
style army, ready to get in close and smack people around. A recent
fluff piece talked about how an unarmed Dark Eldar warrior could still
take down several opponents with the blades on his army. And yet they
remain a primarily shooting army (with the exception of the Wyches).

Remedy? Give the Warriors more in the way of close combat ability.
This might increase their cost, but so be in. I'd like to see an
extra attack from all those blades, like the Kroot have. Maybe make
the splinter rifles Assault 1 18" or something of the sort so they can
fire and assault. Or even Assault 1 24". They are not supposed to
stay withdrawn, but if they assault now they have a good chance of
being killed!

That's the only flaw I can really see. I've seen the Dark Eldar win
much too often to think they're a weak army.
-Erik
"There's a lot to be said for just letting go. It also helps to keep in mind that that bastard Grim Reaper is loose in the room and moving targets are harder to hit."
-Randy Wayne White

RGMW FAQ @ http://www.rgmw.org
Read it for your own good!
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:39:17 -0500, Lattes
<bumpin_removetoemail_@rogers.com> wrote:

>Any other dark eldar players here think there should be more units added
>in the new codex?


Units should have more options, a bit like IG or SM.

..But they need new models, Jes Goodwin should design them.
Keep the warriors,get rid of the "hair" on the helmet and throw out
all the ugly wyches.

Sjap.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Follower of Confucius
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

> .But they need new models, Jes Goodwin should design them.
> Keep the warriors,get rid of the "hair" on the helmet and throw out
> all the ugly wyches.
>

Just keep the cute wyches!
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

And maybe give the Talos a few upgrades options/ tweaks?
Sjap.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Follower of Confucius
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS