MSU Dark Eldar + Allies

Hello all, this is my first post here at The Dark City but I have been a long time Dark Eldar player. Stretching as far back into 3rd and somewhat into 4th (where imo GW stacked the deck rules-wise against my DE build at the time and then went to other armies).

I've been testing an MSU-style of Dark Eldar that so far has had some amounts of "success". Success being narrowly defined as playing in a competitive fashion against other competitive armies and making a good fight out of it. Prior to this MSU list, it was a struggle for me to design and play a "successful" list. Here is my list in general:

Haemonculus
3 min squad trueborn (2 lances each) + venom for each
2 min squad warriors with blaster + venom for each
3 min squad wracks + venome for each
3 reavers with 1 heat lance
1 ravager (3 lances)
1 razorwing
1 Aegis Defence Line with Quad gun

and the kicker:
Tau Allies: Commander (twin-linked misslepod, 6 firewarriors and 3 broadsides)

Now obviously that is a heck of a lot of kill points and I'm using desperate allies which are 2 negatives to the build.

What I've found is that the Tau are very reliable anti-tank and the fact they are desperate allies means that I end up just using the firewarriors very aggressively (moving them up the table) and the opponents are more reluctant to target them because they do not score. While a squad of 6 is not much in the grand scheme of things, it is convenient to at least have a disposable speed bump in the firewarriors. Also, the broadsides have proven to be a very durable unit that attracts a lot of fire and has so far come out of each game alive without any need for babysitting.

Obviously the real star of the list are the sheer number of venoms on the table and the number of shots they pump out. While many die, that's fine and to be expected.

So far, I'm pretty happy with the build's performance in real games, have any of you tried out a similar MSU build and how have you fared?

Also, does anyone else have experience using desperate allies with the Dark Eldar. IMO, the other good options are IG or Space Wolves.

Moved to the Slaves & Mercenaries section. - Mush

Welcome to The Dark City huymix!

MSU DE have always been strong, that being said I don't think it's the only way to play them this edition, and it's not as strong as it used to be.

As for allies I have dabbled with Chaos Daemon and Space Marine allies, here are my thoughts:

Vect Surprise: Dark Eldar & Space Marines Allies?
Shaa-dom: Dark Eldar & Chaos Daemon Allies?

Also there is a whole Forum section dedicated to allies (Slaves & Mercenaries).

Personally I do a basic check when looking for a viable desperate ally. if it solves these 3 things, then itll work.

1. Does the unit fill in something that DE cant do already well enough
2. Is the HQ/Troop Tax cheap enough
3. Does the unit synergize with the DE build you are using.

1. This is the easiest to understand. Basically your looking for something we cant already do better. Take AA for example. Our AA is actually pretty low tier, but if we ally in some Crons w/ Nightscythes, now we got some decent AA capacity.

2. You need a minimual of 1 HQ and 1 Troop for allies. Considering most HQs are too expensive for their bonus, and desperate allies cant score, these two costs have basically become a tax for us to use them as allies. So we need to find something that is either cheap in both choices, or atleast one gives us something from taking it. Take Orks with Warboss on bike and Nob Bikerz. There we go, you have 1 HQ and 1 Troop, and going back to rule 1 they give us a durable hard hitting unit that the opponent has to deal with.

3. Basically you dont want something that isnt going to work with your list. Why take an IG foot blob with an all mech DE army? There is no need for them. Take something that works well with what you have already. Dont take a slow element in a fast DE army. Its simple army building.

If you follow these 3 rules, any desperate ally can be good

Shadows Revenge wrote:

Take AA for example. Our AA is actually pretty low tier, but if we ally in some Crons w/ Nightscythes, now we got some decent AA capacity.

We are also cheating as we cannot ally with Necrons at all

Indeed otherwise every Archon and his Mother would have access to a Solar Pulses minion.

Mushkilla wrote:

Indeed otherwise every Archon and his Mother would have access to a Solar Pulses minion.

Imotekh would be in every list I wrote, along with a Chronometron Cryptek. Auto Night Fight on Turn 1 and rerolls to keep it going each turn? Yes please!!

Those are all fine points, I wonder, given those criteria, what desperate allies you've been happy with?

I actually, think that your example of don't take a slow with a fast DE army isn't a strong example. Specifically because these are desperate allies, which I consider semi-disposable. Obviously I want them around to do what I paid points for, but if they die, I won't be overly worried.

So the reason why I disagree with your example is the fact that a slow moving unit from a desperate ally can work fine is because their fate is not so tied in with the DE army. For instance, if I take a Manticore or 3 Broadsides, I will want to keep them stationary and they will be fine there.

Overall, I agree with your third point but I just think that the specific example there is not necessarily true.

huymix wrote:

Those are all fine points, I wonder, given those criteria, what desperate allies you've been happy with?

personally Ive been happy with orks and SM. Both have some nasty tricks that when used right, complitment DE army nicely.

Quote :

I actually, think that your example of don't take a slow with a fast DE army isn't a strong example. Specifically because these are desperate allies, which I consider semi-disposable. Obviously I want them around to do what I paid points for, but if they die, I won't be overly worried.

So the reason why I disagree with your example is the fact that a slow moving unit from a desperate ally can work fine is because their fate is not so tied in with the DE army. For instance, if I take a Manticore or 3 Broadsides, I will want to keep them stationary and they will be fine there.

Overall, I agree with your third point but I just think that the specific example there is not necessarily true.

My question is why are you taking either the manticore or broadsides??? Take for example the Manticore. What does it bring??? Large blast S10 AP4. Ok, but we can easily get a warp hunter out of the CWE codex with is a large blaster, wounds everything on a 2+ and easily does damage to tanks AP1 blast that is on a more durable platform, gets us scoring options, gives us the best psy defense in the game, and can keep up with us.

Or the Broadsides, ok, they are S10 AP1 shots. But why not take a hammerhead instead??? more survivability due to the changes to distruption pods, and gives us another large AI blast that can ID most non MEQ armies out there. It also can be made fast to keep up with us, and we can therefor protect it better so that it spends more time doing what you want it to do, shoot down range.

I think the general sentiment is that Broadsides are better than Hammerheads, since a) they're twin linked (good when you have a single shot weapon and Tau bs is pretty mediocre) b) you can get more than one per slot (think max unit size for Broadsides is 3) c) they won't be blown up by a single lucky hit.

Since Hammerheads became a lot more durable in 6th edition (3+ cover save as long as they move), that might have changed now.

That's a very good point about the change to the Hammerhead. Although between Hammerheads and Broadsides I think the twin-linking is key for Tau so I might still choose Broadsides.

The hammerhead is BS4 though, so broadsides only have a 9% more chance of hitting (66% vs 75%).

Nomic wrote:

Since Hammerheads became a lot more durable in 6th edition (3+ cover save as long as they move), that might have changed now.

thats the reason I bring it up though. If this was 5th I would be like "BROADSIDES FTW!!!!"