Dark Eldar, is there a point playing without formations?

Mushkilla wrote:

The Shredder wrote:

Out of interest though, Mush, what's your opinion on haemonculi in general?

A borderline tax that gives you WWP,+1 Power From pain, I5 for sweeping advance, LD9 (against psychic powers that affect leadership), and the ability to bounce wounds with look out sir. Only really worth it if you can use him to buff as many grotesques as possible (ideally 10). Outside of that he's garbage.

It's sad, because I really like their fluff, models and even some of their artefacts. But, they just seem to cost about 50% more than they're actually worth. They're awful in combat, their ranged weapons are abysmal and their buff just seem... piddling.

I guess I just can't help but compare them to stuff like psykers - which are cheaper, come with force weapons and tend to bring much better support for their armies.

T1 Fearless. Well worth it for Grotesques.

Vasara wrote:

T1 Fearless. Well worth it for Grotesques.

I've often used Coven grots without an attached Haemonculus (or even any character at all), and not noticed the difference.

1. Going first: You speed the grot Raider towrads enemy. Opponent in turn shoots down the Raider and grots get pinned (witch is good as you get benefits and they automaticly get up next turn). But if they lose 25% of models they will run almost certainly. Then they are out of the fight until T3.

2. Going second: Opponent shoots their Raider They get pinned and not going to get up until turn 2. They also can aesily run of the board if they lose 25%.

it would be nice if we still had the option for a hero level haemie for 50 points. but gotta live with that new, more restricted, less flavourful design philosophy i guess. it'll be nice when all the books are done to the same level.

kidfist0 wrote:

it would be nice if we still had the option for a hero level haemie for 50 points. but gotta live with that new, more restricted, less flavourful design philosophy i guess. it'll be nice when all the books are done to the same level.

It appears GW has moved on from that philosophy now and is currently working to the "Dial it up to 11" philosophy.

This is possibly the most frustrating part of the design studio for me, in that it never seems to actually complete a cycle of book releases before moving on.

Sure, you can probably reason that the new style decurion detachments are a response to the preference of TO's to limit the number of detachments/formations you can take, but I honestly don't think too many people would have been upset if they'd kept 6th ed and done all the books to that standard, de-flavourising them (it is a word, I just made it up) before re-introducing raspberries to the mix for the 7th edition books.

I've been in this hobby long enough to know that they tend to go in cycles, limiting things, then releasing all the bindings and going crazy, then bringing everything back to basics again. You can even see that style in the models - they go from releasing model-less characters to 'inspire the community to create their own' to only releasing rules for models they make and back again. Kind of annoying but it does sort of work at keeping things fresh if you're in it for the long-haul.

kidfist0 wrote:

it would be nice if we still had the option for a hero level haemie for 50 points. but gotta live with that new, more restricted, less flavourful design philosophy i guess. it'll be nice when all the books are done to the same level.

The other problem, of course, is that the Ancient Haemonculi were never worth their cost to begin with.

Considering their current stats, wargear and rules, I think the current haemonculi could reasonably cost 50pts.

The_Burning_Eye wrote:

This is possibly the most frustrating part of the design studio for me, in that it never seems to actually complete a cycle of book releases before moving on.

Agreed.

What's worse is that they don't even seem to give books equal treatment. Look at the effort that went into the Daemonkin Blood Point system, and compare it with the dull, lifeless table we got for Power from Pain.

I do wonder, though, if it isn't part of GW's marketing strategy. As in, they don't want to make a complete cycle because that would let players ignore future releases and just keep playing with what would be a self-contained ruleset.

'It appears GW has moved on from that philosophy now and is currently working to the "Dial it up to 11" philosophy.'

Sorry, i was being a bit facetious.

'I do wonder, though, if it isn't part of GW's marketing strategy. As in, they don't want to make a complete cycle because that would let players ignore future releases and just keep playing with what would be a self-contained ruleset.'

That, however, is quite a chilling thought. id always put it down to incompetence. but maybe not...

Azdrubael wrote:

Quote :

Just got the Eldar codex today. It´s good...damn good...

Hey Vyper, is there a way to use Rangers as a formation? With Illic maybe.

Nope...but they got Shrouded back...