Eldar Triumvirate

Jimsolo wrote:

If anything, the Ynnari rules seem to fit our fluff better than the Codex rules do.

Amen.

Quote :

Okay. So the entire army identity is tied up in a single rule? (PFP?)

You wanted an example, I gave you one. You wanna move those goalposts a little further or are they good where they're at?

Quote :

The theme of the army remains unchanged. (If anything, Craftworld Eldar should be complaining that they've been turned into us.) The new Empowered by Death (or whatever it's called) rule seems like it gives you the Dark Eldar that people on the forums have been saying they want for years now.

I mean if it doesn't change your army theme then great for you. It does mine, that's why I said it did.

Quote :

It encourages MSU armies, an aggressive playstyle, and rewards destruction of both friendly and enemy units (the former being an essential part of DE nature that up until now has been missing).

A similar argument could be made for Corsairs.

Quote :

If anything, the Ynnari rules seem to fit our fluff better than the Codex rules do.

Too bad their fluff doesn't fit my army very well.

I don't understand. I told you why I don't like it and you seem convinced that if you drive the point home that the army is good somehow I will turn around. You and just about everyone else seem to be taking it awfully personally that I *don't* like this new faction. I'm allowed to not like things, and for my own reasons. At what point did I say no one should run it? At what point did I imply that people could or should not have fun with it? If anything I said exactly the opposite, that it's so good there is no reason to run anything other than the new faction. That every single bad unit in our codex can be replaced by some of the best units in the game and all you have to do is glue spiky bits on them and boom, you now have Dark Eldar Fire Dragons. You now have Dark Eldar Jetseers, Dark Eldar Warp Spiders and Shadowseers and Solitares, whatever you want. The hell is doomsaying about that?

No, you're perfectly entitled to your opinion. And don't assume that, while someone may respond directly to you, they're stating the case solely for your benefit. I absolutely understand you don't like the changes. I do like the new options, and me stating the reasons I do isn't to change your mind, but to ensure that the full spectrum of ideas is represented here, so that some random who happens upon this thread doesn't walk away from it feeling like "DE players in general don't like the new stuff", which is the feeling a thread gives off when no one responds to negative posts.

Threads like these impact public opinion FAR more than people give credit.

Quote :

No, you're perfectly entitled to your opinion. And don't assume that, while someone may respond directly to you, they're stating the case solely for your benefit.

You and I both know if I rebutted the opinion of the people who are going to enjoy this release the same way you and others have rebutted mine I'd be banned faster than my ex-wife at an all you can eat buffet.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Quote :

Okay. So the entire army identity is tied up in a single rule? (PFP?)

You wanted an example, I gave you one. You wanna move those goalposts a little further or are they good where they're at?

No one's moving anything, there. (And I wasn't asking for an example--I was asking for an explanation, which I still am unclear on.)

Quote :

Quote :

The theme of the army remains unchanged. (If anything, Craftworld Eldar should be complaining that they've been turned into us.) The new Empowered by Death (or whatever it's called) rule seems like it gives you the Dark Eldar that people on the forums have been saying they want for years now.

I mean if it doesn't change your army theme then great for you. It does mine, that's why I said it did.

This is where I'm confused: we're talking about the same army. I don't understand why you think it changes your army's theme.

Quote :

Quote :

It encourages MSU armies, an aggressive playstyle, and rewards destruction of both friendly and enemy units (the former being an essential part of DE nature that up until now has been missing).

A similar argument could be made for Corsairs.

Corsairs don't have many mechanics (maybe one?) that give you mechanical rewards for inflicting wounds/casualties. But yes, in many other ways Corsairs do fit with the Dark Eldar themes.

Quote :

Quote :

If anything, the Ynnari rules seem to fit our fluff better than the Codex rules do.

Too bad their fluff doesn't fit my army very well.

That's fine--then don't use their fluff. Where's the problem with using the rules and discarding the fluff?

Quote :

I don't understand. I told you why I don't like it and you seem convinced that if you drive the point home that the army is good somehow I will turn around. You and just about everyone else seem to be taking it awfully personally that I *don't* like this new faction.

Actually, I think you'll find that I concede or defend your point of view in several occasions (or at least your right to have it).

I'm not trying to beat you over the head with my POV, I'm trying to get you to walk me through YOUR point of view so I can understand it (because I still don't) so that I can help you find an aspect of this that you might find enjoyable, or a different way of looking at it. Operating under the assumption that you want to enjoy the game, I'm trying to be helpful.

Quote :

I'm allowed to not like things, and for my own reasons. At what point did I say no one should run it? At what point did I imply that people could or should not have fun with it? If anything I said exactly the opposite, that it's so good there is no reason to run anything other than the new faction. That every single bad unit in our codex can be replaced by some of the best units in the game and all you have to do is glue spiky bits on them and boom, you now have Dark Eldar Fire Dragons. You now have Dark Eldar Jetseers, Dark Eldar Warp Spiders and Shadowseers and Solitares, whatever you want. The hell is doomsaying about that?

In the context of much of your earlier dialogue on the upcoming supplement, your comments are taken (certainly by me) as a prediction that this will somehow negatively impact the game, (or "ruin" Dark Eldar, Eldar, or 40k in general) and thus should be avoided. Given that I've seen this conversation played out in various forms a couple of times over the past few days, I think that's the core of the issue.

Here's a question: when the 6th ed Codex dropped, I compared it replacing the 5th edition codex with waking up to find that someone had stolen my vintage cherry red '70's Chevy Corvette out of my garage and replaced it with a 2016 powder blue Pontiac Vibe. Now, arguably the car I've been given gets better mileage, has better safety features, is more reliable, cheaper to insure/operate, and is brand new. By almost every metric it's arguably a better car, but I still wanted my freaking Corvette back and couldn't fathom why everyone around me thought trading in a 'vette for a Vibe was a good trade.

Does that metaphor sound about right, or am I still missing something?

TeenageAngst wrote:

Quote :

No, you're perfectly entitled to your opinion. And don't assume that, while someone may respond directly to you, they're stating the case solely for your benefit.

You and I both know if I rebutted the opinion of the people who are going to enjoy this release the same way you and others have rebutted mine I'd be banned faster than my ex-wife at an all you can eat buffet.

And not at all. You're doing fine. You aren't attacking anyone personally, the only point of contention seems to be some of clarity. No one is getting banned for having a disagreement. (Certainly not that I know of.) Talking out disagreements and helping each other is precisely what the forum is for.

Quote :

That's fine--then don't use their fluff. Where's the problem with using the rules and discarding the fluff?

Tell a CSM player you're running your Blood Angels as Emperor's Children and see if you can count the veins in their head. It's kinda like that.

Quote :

I'm not trying to beat you over the head with my POV, I'm trying to get you to walk me through YOUR point of view so I can understand it (because I still don't) so that I can help you find an aspect of this that you might find enjoyable, or a different way of looking at it. Operating under the assumption that you want to enjoy the game, I'm trying to be helpful.

Rules-wise, I don't like the overfaction. I think it promotes death stars even more than the current meta does and we will see CWE being run as the overfaction with even more efficiency and minimal list modifications needed to take advantage of it. I also don't like the loss of the Power from Pain rule, as it forces me to completely rethink how I play Dark Eldar in order to benefit from marginally superior army-wide rules. I also don't like that taking all of one faction per detachment is now entirely optional since I have every reason to shove scatbikes into those troop slots and clowns into those elites and no reason to run warrior boats and Mandrakes other than confusing my opponent.

Fluff wise I don't like the idea of my army serving an Eldar god since their entire premise is pride, vanity, and self worship. I could choose to ignore the fluff I don't like, but if I did that across all of 40k then the Tau wouldn't exist at all and we'd probably be back in 3rd edition where half of my army's models originate from.

Quote :

Does that metaphor sound about right, or am I still missing something?

You're missing something. Imagine racing the Vibe and managing to beat tuners and Corvettes with it. You become known as the Vibe guy, people are impressed by the kind of wizardry you're able to perform behind the wheel to pull some of those wins off. It feels good because those races are tough, but even the losses are close, and no one else is running a Vibe. Now imagine someone hands you a project car. You can put any engine in it, even a Corvette engine so you'd be racing with essentially the same machine everyone else has. Or, you could put your old Vibe engine in it. It's the same thing, right? Except it's not. You go from being able to pull off underdog victories with a bad car to purposely hamstringing yourself with a poor choice of parts. You go from Initial D to the guy trying to justify why they chose the I4 turbo Mustang.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Quote :

That's fine--then don't use their fluff. Where's the problem with using the rules and discarding the fluff?

Tell a CSM player you're running your Blood Angels as Emperor's Children and see if you can count the veins in their head. It's kinda like that.

That's not what is happening though, We're just pretending your daemonkin are worldeaters even though fluffwise it's a totally different faction of khorne. THAT happens all the time.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Quote :

I'm not trying to beat you over the head with my POV, I'm trying to get you to walk me through YOUR point of view so I can understand it (because I still don't) so that I can help you find an aspect of this that you might find enjoyable, or a different way of looking at it. Operating under the assumption that you want to enjoy the game, I'm trying to be helpful.

Rules-wise, I don't like the overfaction. I think it promotes death stars even more than the current meta does and we will see CWE being run as the overfaction with even more efficiency and minimal list modifications needed to take advantage of it. I also don't like the loss of the Power from Pain rule, as it forces me to completely rethink how I play Dark Eldar in order to benefit from marginally superior army-wide rules. I also don't like that taking all of one faction per detachment is now entirely optional since I have every reason to shove scatbikes into those troop slots and clowns into those elites and no reason to run warrior boats and Mandrakes other than confusing my opponent.

See I reject this out of hand because we just got permission to bring back the best anti-deathstar unit in the game bar none: Wraithguard deep striking in raiders.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Fluff wise I don't like the idea of my army serving an Eldar god since their entire premise is pride, vanity, and self worship. I could choose to ignore the fluff I don't like, but if I did that across all of 40k then the Tau wouldn't exist at all and we'd probably be back in 3rd edition where half of my army's models originate from.

Then don't. Ally corsairs in with traditional dark eldar and covens. That's still going to be totally viable given that we likely won't be able to spam scourge or reavers quite as hard Ynnari style.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Quote :

Does that metaphor sound about right, or am I still missing something?

You're missing something. Imagine racing the Vibe and managing to beat tuners and Corvettes with it. You become known as the Vibe guy, people are impressed by the kind of wizardry you're able to perform behind the wheel to pull some of those wins off. It feels good because those races are tough, but even the losses are close, and no one else is running a Vibe. Now imagine someone hands you a project car. You can put any engine in it, even a Corvette engine so you'd be racing with essentially the same machine everyone else has. Or, you could put your old Vibe engine in it. It's the same thing, right? Except it's not. You go from being able to pull off underdog victories with a bad car to purposely hamstringing yourself with a poor choice of parts. You go from Initial D to the guy trying to justify why they chose the I4 turbo Mustang.

You can absolutely still do that. Covens lists have been mid-tier forever. They aren't going to stop being such and you just got a personal fluff defining narrative point in that you willingly reject the death cults.

Actually I got many sympathetic nods when I said I was running night lords out of the blood angels codex. I have cold one reavers and a nagash turned wraithknight. People love it. This hang up about the flavor of your army not being 100% supported by the word for word flavor provided is entirely a personal bias.

Furthermore it's a pointless argument, currently in our own codex there isn't much reason to run warrior boats or Mandrakes and in comparison why run shining spears when you can now run reavers, which have recently and definitively been shown to be viable at the highest level in the right hands.

Okay, so it sounds like the primary concern is the rules, rather than the fluff. You liked being able to win with a sub-par codex that you had learned how to handle better than ostensibly more powerful (or easier to use) armies. Is that about accurate?

Well that one is easy The red king: Pale courts with triple shining spears is still the cheapest Eldar warhost detachment possible.

You know I actually wanted to run that setup because I like shining spears. Is that really the cheapest too? I'm the power gamer my friend told me I was and I didn't even know it :/

Oh well, back to pale court triple scorpions then, which I do do think scorpions benefit from Ynnari rules and that makes me happy (in an aspect host of course)

Quote :

That's not what is happening though, We're just pretending your daemonkin are worldeaters even though fluffwise it's a totally different faction of khorne. THAT happens all the time.

Ok.

Quote :

See I reject this out of hand because we just got permission to bring back the best anti-deathstar unit in the game bar none: Wraithguard deep striking in raiders.

Um, the Warp Hunter replaced wraithbombs long before they couldn't be taken anymore.

Quote :

Then don't. Ally corsairs in with traditional dark eldar and covens. That's still going to be totally viable given that we likely won't be able to spam scourge or reavers quite as hard Ynnari style.

I don't use Reavers, I only use a handful of Scourge, and if I wanted to run my models as another faction like Corsairs we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place.

Quote :

You can absolutely still do that. Covens lists have been mid-tier forever. They aren't going to stop being such and you just got a personal fluff defining narrative point in that you willingly reject the death cults.

Covens are a hammer, a good hammer, but not every problem is a nail. I can't rely on just a Covens army.

So long as you count the non-playables (Dire Avengers because better ways to field, and banshee's because banshee's) yes. At 225 for 3 squads no exarchs it's the cheapest matching cost with Shadow spectres. Even adding the Exarchs with s8 attacks doesn't quite bring it up to the next squad.

Hmm neat.

Jimsolo wrote:

Okay, so it sounds like the primary concern is the rules, rather than the fluff.  You liked being able to win with a sub-par codex that you had learned how to handle better than ostensibly more powerful (or easier to use) armies.  Is that about accurate?

I mean that's part of it, yeah. Obviously fluff is also a large concern or I wouldn't have wasted time writing my concerns about the fluff.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Quote :

See I reject this out of hand because we just got permission to bring back the best anti-deathstar unit in the game bar none: Wraithguard deep striking in raiders.

Um, the Warp Hunter replaced wraithbombs long before they couldn't be taken anymore.

Nah, Only in some formulations the real deathknell didn't come until the ruling was announced in the draft. A warphunter with a crystal targetting matrix and the other upgrade it needs winds up costing almost the same as the base squad to put out a single shot albeit at ID10 D rather than ID4 D. when we were limited to 5 bodies flowered around a wwp character and therefore limited to 3 hits upon deep strike max it was over. but 5, often occupying a singular footprint is a totally different matter. ESPECIALLY if I can do it in a single detachment.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Quote :

Then don't. Ally corsairs in with traditional dark eldar and covens. That's still going to be totally viable given that we likely won't be able to spam scourge or reavers quite as hard Ynnari style.

I don't use Reavers, I only use a handful of Scourge, and if I wanted to run my models as another faction like Corsairs we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place.

Don't you have a corsairs army? Haven't you said before that if you really wanted a competitive game you'd break them out? I'm saying if you don't want to embrace a death cult it's about time to break them out in your personal fluff. I guess if your that restricted my question becomes why are you using CAD's anyway? It sounds like you'd be a prime candidate to really abuse the Kabalite Raiding party.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Quote :

You can absolutely still do that. Covens lists have been mid-tier forever. They aren't going to stop being such and you just got a personal fluff defining narrative point in that you willingly reject the death cults.

Covens are a hammer, a good hammer, but not every problem is a nail. I can't rely on just a Covens army.

That's true. But Covens with harlies give you all the duct tape and wd40 you'll ever need!


Separately, but so I don't double post: I'm actually kind of bumbed there is no Purge Cotorie in the formations list, and does anybody think a lahmian is still going to be the optimal HQ pull? LOL

Quote :

Don't you have a corsairs army? Haven't you said before that if you really wanted a competitive game you'd break them out? I'm saying if you don't want to embrace a death cult it's about time to break them out in your personal fluff. I guess if your that restricted my question becomes why are you using CAD's anyway? It sounds like you'd be a prime candidate to really abuse the Kabalite Raiding party.

I have a Corsairs army in as much any Eldar/DEldar player "has a Corsairs army". I could run my DE as a Corsairs army and only have to belligerently insist that the TO accept it for it to fly. I do have about 4000 points of mostly chinaforge CWE that I bring out when I know I'm going to be facing a Riptide Wing because the only thing that feels better than winning with DE is tabling a Tau player by turn 4. As for the Raiding Party, it has too many tax units, and even THAT can be run by the Ynnad faction better.

That's just it tho: For what you are suggesting the only tax is a single unit of hellions, and just because the Ynnari can take it doesn't make their version better. Their version negates architect of agony since no one in the formation will have PFP to benefit from it. A KRP with a grotesquerie would probably be pretty potent albeit lacking Obsec.

An Incubi unit that is already getting +1 to PFP will be striking with furious charge turn 2 if you want with a covens haemonculus. The court is fielded as a medusae or 2 in a raider, scourges as anti-vehicle and as many units of trueborn with blasters as you can cram in.

The Incubi, the Ravager, and the Hellions are all taxes in that formation. Losing obsec destroys the main advantage of flooding the field with troops and their dedicated transports. It's a garbage formation, which is a shame, because it would benefit me if it wasn't so full of trash and didn't remove obsec.

And +1 PFP doesn't hold a candle to being able to act out of turn like a Warp Spider on crack.

Why are you even considering kabalites when they should clearly all be trueborn? And you aren't wrong there, but then there isn't really much that's going to be leveraged out of PFP to compete with that.

Because who runs Trueborn? 180 points for a boat full of 18" lance shots that snap-fire if the driver hits the gas too hard. I'd rather bring Scourges with Blasters, they're cheaper, can still deep strike, and can move 12" without having to worry about snap firing.

I was pessimistic too. I was worried about becoming evil Uber elves. I just want a pure drukhari codex to play as well as ynnari. But i agree, the death rule seems very dark eldar and I love that it can make our high initiative models into great assault armies.

I don't get this discussion at all...
Don't like the Ynnari?

Don't use them. All the other factions are still viable. You like the rules and the fluff? Great!
You like the rules but not the fluff? Use them but change it.
You like the fluff but not the rules? Stick to your rules but change your background story.

For example:
I was unsure about the fluff but was willing to adopt it if the rules are great. Unfortunately they don't for what I imagine of my army since transports aren't affected.

Quick question: does this new rule affect units in transports?

So I won't adopt the fluff either. I don't want that my death empowers others. I don't want to die in the first place. We use soul swapping and stealing devices. Everyone that read the dark Eldar novels knows what I'm talking about.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

It should be noted that, by the looks of the book, it has been worded and formatted in such a way that it should be compatible with future releases of codices. Hopefully this is an indication that they have plans for a new codex release in the not to distant future.

Agreed.
I wouldn't surprise me if GW is actually working on an 8th edition codex for DE right now. It's not unusual for them to write the books far in advance.

They just must be aware of the incosistent power levels in the Eldar codices.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Because who runs Trueborn? 180 points for a boat full of 18" lance shots that snap-fire if the driver hits the gas too hard. I'd rather bring Scourges with Blasters, they're cheaper, can still deep strike, and can move 12" without having to worry about snap firing.

Agreed, what do you need Trueborn for if you can get Fire Dragons? Same slot, same costs, better stats, better wargear. Or really just the HWB Scourges.