Complaints

Wow, there are a lot of people here dissing DE. Not being a troll, just saying.

I've had some amazing results playing DE and Covens even against the new Eldar, Marines, Necrons, Skitarri etc. Anyone else want to chime in on the successes they've had, rather than the negatives?

Do you play with eldar allies, or a pure dark eldar army?

Pure DE

Can I guess your army?


Basic:

-lhamean in venom

-4-5 kabalite squad with blaster, on venom
-3 ravagers
-1 heat lance scourge
-1-2 haywire scourge

Lets add flavor: (pick some of these, with caution)

-a dark artisan
-a razorwing jetfighter
-a grotesquerie
-1 gunboat

Did I get close?
No wonder, it's the only working build. And that's what they were complaining about.

Dumpeal,

I do pretty well in the current meta with pure DE and my list doesn't look anything like that. I agree with Suklmo, there are so many winers on this forum. I agree that DE struggle in the current meta, but they have always struggled. I do pretty well in my area and it's no kiddy pool. Loosing with DE is easy, they're unforgiving, but you can win.

Hey moderators, can you guys limit the threads that are moaning about how DE are unplayable to one thread? Thankee.

RB

The only things I used last game where I wiped out my opponent was the grotesquerie and multiple gun boats. It was fun!

Before that I crushed guard and the only units of those I used were two Venom squads (two gun boats) and a jet.

I do fine with DE. But to be fair, I'm a viciously cutthroat competitive player, who tends to play every game like the last round of a GT.

And even then, I can recognize that our codex has suffered. If I played in an environment where everyone was as hardcore as I was, I would probably lose many games, especially against certain armies.

It's understandable that some people are going to be miffed. And it's certainly not an impetus for moderation.

I do fine. My oppoents both love and hate playing my DE, as the games are varied, fluid and unpredictable, which is fun for both of us, but when they win they REALLY win!

I also do fairly well, and I also don't appreciate your calls for moderation. Every one of those threads explore and address different misconceptions about WHY we may or may not be disadvantaged in different situations, and if they were condensed those discussions would be lost in the muddling.

Ahh... There is nothing like a little complaining about complaining to create a delicious negative energy feedback loop and rejuvenate a weary corsair.

I don't think our weak codex directly translates to 100% loss rate for all Dark eldar players. A large part of the outcome in a game is still decided by the skill of the generals and dice.
So people wil still do OK and maybe win 50/50 or more. It is still possible to have fun as long as you are not trying to build a TAC list to win tournaments with. That is, if you are able to get over the fact that GW stripped our dex of flavour while giving all the others shiny new toys for cheaper, and special rules that fits our fluff better.
Coming to grips with, and accepting the reality of it has been a long and difficult process, but thanks to being able to share our feelings on this forum, the nightmares and sudden crying bouts have decreased significantly.

BTW check out the bat rep section. It is full of success stories. Most are even well written and funny.

Quote :

on this forum, the nightmares and sudden crying bouts have decreased significantly.

I have the impression they increase. Basically with every new codex released.
There is a reason for this. every new codex brings a new army from "fair matchup" into the "uphill battle" category.

I suspect GW could release a DE codex made of kindling, where every page is a photocopy of someone's bottom, and which self-ignites immediately after purchase - and you'd still have people praising it as enjoyable and a step forward for the army.

Maybe with a armour save of 55+. Wich is not 5++, it means that you have to succesfully pass two 5+ check in order to save a wound.

RCZ wrote:

Maybe with a armour save of 55+. Wich is not 5++, it means that you have to succesfully pass two 5+ check in order to save a wound.

In that case, Chaos Daemons could all have a 666+.

Ha ha ha.

...

Sorry.

You just have to ignore all those whining and complaining. I honestly have never had the feeling that GW frak us until I read in this forum. But the only army I had problems with was a looters heavy orc list. But on the other hand, my army was kind of limited and he knew exactly what I would bring so...

But the complaining is definitely made me to consider to quit this forum. When I say to my friends that playing dark Eldar is warhammer on hard node, they simply don't understand. They know it's a challenging army, but I do fine.

Peace. Out!

The ideal situation is that a player can pick an army from any codex and be able to compete on a level playing field against an army picked from any other codex. That is never going to happen but it is certainly possible to get far closer to that ideal than GW currently is. There are codexes out there that are head and shoulders above other codexes, where a game between two equally skilled players is almost a foregone conclusion. Note that I say almost, not always. Is it impossible for, say, a Dark Eldar army to beat a Craftworld/Necron/Battle Company army when played by an equally skilled general? No. Is it extremely hard? Hell yes!

The sad truth is that pretty much every unit in our codex has an equivalent in another codex that is either cheaper, better or both. The same can be said for other codexes that were released in the few months preceding our own. Those released since ours, ie Necrons and beyond, seem to be far superior in terms of power and choices.

So I came to a list after trying a few things.

First I use a couple of Coven units. A Coven list revolves around being able to drop tough, large units anywhere they are needed. Most people underestimate Covens. They are point-for-point some of the most resilient units and are more consistently tough than armies which rely on once-offs. The reason that Covens units are so good is that they can be dropped via WWP anywhere, CtC can outflank to similar effect, and these units can more easily be put in cover. Being able to concentrate tough units in cover in your enemies DZ is massive. It means that your units take one turn of shooting, rather than several. Being able to do this with half your army confers an incredible advantage: easily worth more than a 2++ rr, D weapons, psykers or any other once-off ability. I personally use a DA and a DE Grot-bomb led by an Archon from my main detachment.

The main detachment is RSR. I have some DE flyers. The Razorwing is undercosted, relative to its ability to remove whole units in one turn of shooting. The Raven less so, but it fills a gap in that its guns are basically s10 vs av13, similar in fucntion to the Eldar Fire Prism, but unlike the Fire Prism it is a flyer and can target other flyers; it's bomb also allows it to have an effect on the game before being intercepted. Going crazy with DE Flyers is a mistake because they are flimsy, are vulnerable to skyfire and intercept, but a couple can make your opponent make some targeting decisions affecting what gets shot into your ground forces.

Then I have some venoms, some filled with wyches with haywire hekatrixs' and some empty for splinter shots, scourges with haywire for vehicles, some reavers with CC's and heat lances and ravagers. So the 'Ground Force' part of the RSR epitomises the DE paradigm of MSU splinter and darklight spam, with less infantry and more vehicles. The ground force component deals with anti-air, both air and ground forces prioritize ignores cover as targets, making the grot-bomb and Dark Artisan from the Coven component hit harder, while protecting the ground force from its main vulnerability (ic). If my opponenet shoots the 'Air Force' he is ignoring the 'Ground Force' and the Covens. If he shoots the Covens he's ignoring the other two. Most importantly the army has both shooting and assault and, while not overwhelming in the assault phase, it can contain assault-based armies. The final element of the list is a small unit of Mandrakes. With these guys I basically have the option to null deploy against a shooty Eldar or Tau list, while against a flamer heavy drop pod list I would put down an empty Venom behind BLOS cover. If I go first I have the tools to overwhelm my opponent with Darklight and Splinter spam.

So far my list has gone undefeated and I've played against some nasty armies: Eldar, Marines, Skittarri, Knights, Daemons and Decurions. Why I think it does well is that each component of the army can do several things, i.e. target AV14, AV13, av12-spam, infantry, MEQ, TEQ, MC, over the course of several phases in one turn, a large tough component of the army will appear wherever I want it to, making it a priority for my opponent even though he would rather focus on the weaker stuff, and, most importantly, I get a lot of utility for my points. The fact that I can incorporate these three 'components' in the army, each of which does several things well individually and together, means I cover a lot of ground with fewer points.

If I compare each unit in this army to units in the Eldar army, for example, I will undoubtedly find something else that does the job better (>50%). But, in most cases, that unit will be more expensive and not work as well as part of a larger grouping of other units. If you really want to kill Knights, for example, I can't imagine anything better than Swooping Hawks. With an Exarch, they can DS without scatter, then Battle Focus into the arc of the Knight without the ion shield and pummel it with haywire: guaranteed dead knight. But after this, the Hawks may be vulnerable to counter assault. Scourges can do this from range with haywire blasters, albeit that they will need support from other things to pull it off, but it makes them less risky as a points investment. The same goes for most things in the DE army. I believe that micro-management is key, both in terms of play-style and list building, when it comes to DE.

Do I believe that pure DE are tier 1? No prob tier 2, but I could see a meta shift where DE/E (DE primary) is the number one faction in the game, if the right players get behind them.

Massive poison weapons in other Codex? Massive Lance weapons?

Sorry I don't understand what you mean.

The Shredder wrote:

I suspect GW could release a DE codex made of kindling, where every page is a photocopy of someone's bottom, and which self-ignites immediately after purchase - and you'd still have people praising it as enjoyable and a step forward for the army.

There'll always be people who'll defend GW to the hilt. I'm not one of them, but I don't have a problem with the current book. It didn't make an army that I like unplayable, nor did it significantly change the way I played them. I have much more of a problem with the newest ork book, as the sheer amount of stuff I would have to buy to get them to a competitive level means I'm seriously considering selling them rather than spend that much.

I would like it if every choice in the DE book was viable, of course I would, but for whatever reason that isn't the case. I'm going to take up the mantle of weary forum user here, and complain about the complaining, just like people did when I started that Age of Sigmar thread. More fool me for thinking I and others were allowed to express our opinions on this (ahem) forum I guess   If you've never encountered a hypocrite before, you're reading the writings of one now  

I don't think the complaining should be moderated, but it would be great if there weren't new posts or threads about how "terrible" this army that we all still play regardless is. We're practically cannibalising our hobby at this point. I know positivity isn't very characterful for Dark Eldar, but I think some people might be getting a bit too caught up in the roleplaying here...

@Sulmo I was referring to the Count. Sorry.

Mr Believer wrote:

There'll always be people who'll defend GW to the hilt. I'm not one of them, but I don't have a problem with the current book.
...
I would like it if every choice in the DE book was viable, of course I would, but for whatever reason that isn't the case.

See, these are the sort of statements that just seem entirely contradictory to me.

Firstly, you say that you don't defend GW to the hilt, but then you say that units aren't viable "for whatever reason". What do you mean 'for whatever reason'? This isn't like an act of God, where you can say that no one was really to blame. Those units aren't viable because GW is bloody awful at writing rules and balancing units.

Second, I really don't understand how you can not have a problem with the book, and then admit that many of the units aren't viable. You don't consider this a problem with the book?

Some people just don't want to call problems problems because then that makes us complainers which we have been socially trained to believe means entitled wankers who have no fun. They have fun playing with gimped units and seek to distance themselves from complainers, yielding this tortured logic.

CptMetal wrote:

Massive poison weapons in other Codex? Massive Lance weapons?

Eldar can do lances 'til the cows come home, and theirs are cheaper and/or on better platforms (mobile Bright Lance Weapon Platform vs immobile Kabalite or Scourge with Dark Lance for the same cost, twin-linked bright lance on a Wave Serpent replacing TL Shuriken Cannon for 5 points vs a non-twin-linked Dark Lance replacing a non-twin-linked Disintegrator Cannon on a Raider or Ravager for 5 points, Crimson Hunter weaponry vs Razorwing, Vyper Squadrons, War Walker squadrons etc).

Poison I will grant you we have more access to than any other army but that's only a benefit when shooting at T5 or greater (and a penalty vs T3 or less) and is more than offset by the complete inability to so much as scratch a vehicle.

Out of interest, Count, do you see Eldar using lances? I thought most used other (better) options.