Letter to GW about our wishes and requests

Does anyone remember the old Bloodtithe table from Khorne Demonkin? Maybe something similar to that?

Yeah, i figure KDK would get it back actually. I have a large KDK army.

(back in the day everyone i think had 1 of either, SM, CSM or IG) i was one that had Chaos, and over the years i just gravitated to Knorne so now i have a large KDK army, i played it in 7th and i high enjoyed it.

Im waiting for it again. (My local, we have a 24/7 play group so i can get in games literally anytime i want, after a year or 2 like that you REALLY get bored playing the same army, so we all have 3+ armies, crazy i know, but I LOVE IT).

For DE, that style of table for 1-4 would work but not 5-8 (those were meant more for summoning).

A table is a neat idea tho.

Total units killed from both sides and it just a cumulative number for a table ranging from 0-10.

THO, the IMO "purpose" of PFP chart is that DE is suppose to get strong as more thing die, so i rather like the table idea over PFP like it is now.

I agree with mppqlmd's proposed pfp mechanism.

I really like the letter and thank you for writing it.

I also am not that sure about the power from pain change, so would not mind at all if it is removed.
Also I think the HQ section could have a quick mention that the succubus now fights worse then the other HQs?
And some math would be great but put it in an appendix, to make the text itself not impossible to read.

Gaining CP per unit destroyed doesn't really sound unbalanced depending on what the Strategems available are.

If the actual competitiveness of most of our units stayed about the same / improved where they're lacklustre, a PfP chart like this would make the Drukhari such a fun but scary race against the clock for any opponent. Imagine either a series of small bursts or fresh rounds of shooting OR a huge sink in CP once or twice a game that was able to turn the tide of a battle?

I don't think this is the appropriate thread for reasoning what kind of PfP is best suited for us. This topic should unify the general consensus and we shouldn't lose ourselves in details such as PfP.

I thought there was a majority on the board who favoured the "gain CPs for killing" mechanic, but I was wrong. I'd much rather see the format of the letter being discussed here.

I think you're right, and i will remove that subject from the letter as it does not represent a consensus.

Mppqlmd wrote:

I think you're right, and i will remove that subject from the letter as it does not represent a consensus.

I think there is a consensus that PfP could use an overhaul. The only question is specifics.

I just included a statistics part that explains why Blasters, HL and HWB aren't viable when compared to the Dark Lance.
Link again :
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XNp5SwzBsbeTpjx4zcOVD3BBI6teZY5PGFwR7uRk50I/edit

If someone has an idea of how to show clearly through calculus why Taloi, grotesques, wyches and reavers are not worth their points, i'd be glad to have some help.


I also added a small suggestion to either create some minor HQs for DE (haemonculus assistant, Kabalite Dracon) or shift some characters from the Elite department to the HQ department (Beastmasters/Court of the Archon), to help us fill the HQ slots of detachments.

HQ choices on reaver jetbikes would be nice.

Mushkilla wrote:

HQ choices on reaver jetbikes would be nice.

That's already in it, i think it's one of the most popular request
I listed Jetbikes, Scourges wings, Coven anti-grav Throne, Skyboard, WWP, and even the possibility to turn an Archon into a Mandrake.

An opinion on the anti tank calculus: I think the weapons should be grouped by toughness and not by weapon type.

A nice overview of all T5-T9, which lists all AT weapons ordered by their efficiency. Right now it is cumbersome to effectively compare weapons as you need to jump from one block to another.

Edit: I also included some headlines to make it more structured and rephrased a paragraph on Wyches. I found the brackets to be confusing and not good for the flow of reading.

I also say that, once the letter is finished we take the text and give it a cleaner format and include some nice DE imagery. This way it looks more appealing and gives the impression of a polished piece of work. I am proficient in Word which allows for far more elegant documents, so I could polish that up if you guys want.

I will point out that there may actually be a reasonable chance of this having some effect, especially if GW have reverted back to an earlier philosophy regarding their customers.

I remember that, back around 6th ed WFB, the members of druchii.net put together a list of needed changes in the *existing* dark elf army book, sent them to GW, and GW actually took them to heart, published the changes in White Dwarf *and* included the changes in future print runs of the army book, within the same edition.

krayd wrote:

I will point out that there may actually be a reasonable chance of this having some effect, especially if GW have reverted back to an earlier philosophy regarding their customers.

I remember that, back around 6th ed WFB, the members of druchii.net put together a list of needed changes in the *existing* dark elf army book, sent them to GW, and GW actually took them to heart, published the changes in White Dwarf *and* included the changes in future print runs of the army book, within the same edition.

So far they are still taking ideas and they also did just come from nova.

http://www.thedarkcity.net/t16408-it-always-pay-to-talk-to-gw

I am really excited about how this letter is coming together, awesome job! I got inspired and want to contribute. So... Just thinking out loud here...

To really make clear we gave this serieus thought (as opposed to just wish listing to make our codex OP) how about we add a clause explaining how actually all our units, vehicles especially, are too durable! Yeah I know, I am mad right? But as long as our next codex is going to make Drukhari the fastest and most mobile army with great offensive power, while being the most fragile of all, we'll get our army back in sync with the fluff and the reason most DE players wanted to play this army. Namely so we can walk around claiming to be master tacticians after every victory because our army is the most difficult to play. ;-)

So, as payment for our fragile units (wounds on vehicles can be less I think and things like that), we need our vehicles to be the fastest (faster or just as fast as harlies), we need reliable charges (maybe a rule to throw 2 dice and pick the highest). We need the portal back so we can deploy more stuff like mandrakes and scourges.

P.s.: I saw somewhere "they" instead of "the".

I think Raiders really need to have those 10 HPs if they are to stay at a 100pts tag. They doubled in price, so they became a bit tanky. Same for Venoms, for that price you can't have a paper boat. The Ravager could go down to T5, but it would be nitpicking.

For the rest of the army, i don't really feel like we are survivable to begin with (except Coven, but hey, that's Coven, of course they are survivable). Except for Reavers, that i would be okay to see become 1W models if they came back to -20pts price tag.

Quote :

An opinion on the anti tank calculus: I think the weapons should be grouped by toughness and not by weapon type.

This is an excellent remark, and i'll do it tomorrow

Would also like to run some numbers on the splinter cannon as to why we would like to see it change and add it as another table.

Same thing with the Shredder - it's not mentioned at all, nor is our glaring lack of psychic defense. Beyond Crucibles, it would be nice if there was some bit of war gear or power that can be used to help block, deny, or disrupt enemy powers.

Bring back our Archangel of Pain - all those screaming souls could disrupt the warp. One use per game, and any psychic powers withing 12" of it cause perils on any double roll. Something like that

Shredders are fine IMO they just need to be 4pts, splinter cannons tho needs either become better pr cheaper.

Rapid 6 at 15pts or drop to 8 points and stay as is.

3rd option, make them Assault 4 for 12pts.

SC would become better by the simple addition of splinter racks being able to stick more base shots into the same raider would become more useful.

Hasn't the setting moved forward to a point where there's civil war or something in Comorragh? They may as well just streamline things a bit and give us access to our own Psychic discipline so long as we don't include Kabal of the Black Heart units in our Battle-Forged armies or whatever canonical restrictions are appropriate (trading away named Kabal/Cult/Coven Strategems for Psyker access).

I can kill Psykers already I just want a fair shot at Denying the Witch in the turns before I come to grips with them.

All our special weapons need to be at least 18" range as well, I find it weird that the Shredder is the one special weapon that's 12" and it doesn't have enough damage output to make it even shine as an AI specialist. If Splinter Cannons improve in points efficiency or damage output the Shredder probably will still never find a home if it's 12" and does what it does for however many points.

lcfr wrote:

Hasn't the setting moved forward to a point where there's civil war or something in Comorragh? They may as well just streamline things a bit and give us access to our own Psychic discipline so long as we don't include Kabal of the Black Heart units in our Battle-Forged armies or whatever canonical restrictions are appropriate (trading away named Kabal/Cult/Coven Strategems for Psyker access).

I can kill Psykers already I just want a fair shot at Denying the Witch in the turns before I come to grips with them.

We could have a strategem for recruiting Psykers, something like spend 1 or 2 CP to give one Aeldari Psyker the Drukhari keyword. Maybe replace any mention of Asuryani, Harlequins or Ynnari in their psychic power rules with Drukhari as well, although that might be too powerful.

Hell, you could even broaden that out to any Aeldari model, not just Psykers, if GW wants to really encourage mixing of the factions.

[quote="Burnage"]

lcfr wrote:

We could have a strategem for recruiting Psykers, something like spend 1 or 2 CP to give one Aeldari Psyker the Drukhari keyword. Maybe replace any mention of Asuryani, Harlequins or Ynnari in their psychic power rules with Drukhari as well, although that might be too powerful.

Hell, you could even broaden that out to any Aeldari model, not just Psykers, if GW wants to really encourage mixing of the factions.

That may be too cumbersome if we have access to army wide abilities like Legion Traits, for example, that only take effect if our entire detachment is using the appropriate keyword/s.

It'd be easier to just simply have a Psyker character or even just ANY access to Deny the Witch rolls. Even if it's an upgrade on a Coven unit or Haemonculus or something.

The game has moved in a really intuitive and rules light direction (FINALLY), they just need to keep keeping it simple but offer us tools and options: do we want to add Asuryani or Harlequin Psykers for Psychic phase defense? Okay, now we lose out on a few Strategems or perhaps abilities or units. Do we want to keep all of the Drukhari Strategems and abilities and units but have Psychic defense? Okay, now we pay a moderate or high Points/PL cost for access to Deny the Witch rolls.

I personally don't really care which route they ultimately take, so long as there are choices that have pros and cons and force us to consider how we want to play. The fewer no-brainer options a game has the more variety you'll see when it comes to play, that's real balance.

Mppqlmd wrote:

SC would become better by the simple addition of splinter racks being able to stick more base shots into the same raider would become more useful.

Only if it effects the vehicles also and we can get it for venoms.

Jeah I think normal splinter cannons are expensive, but making them 8 points is over the top, they could do with 1 ap, or maybe some extra shots, but that is not the biggest issue.
The major problem is when a splinter cannon sometimes replaces a free weapon that is better then a splinter rifle. On a venom costs 15 points and you lose 2 normal splinter rifles, effectively you pay 15 points for upgrading a rapid 2 to a rapid 3 weapon with a slightly bigger range, on a scourge it is slightly better but you still get the same extra shots you would get if you bought another scourge. I think they should not make all the weapons 0 points for standard weaponry, because different units exchange different weapons but now pay the same cost for the upgrade.
I still think a good solution would be to give the splinter cannon ap1. That way splinter cannons suddenly become much better against MEQ etc and there is an actual difference between a splinter cannon and just another splinter rifle.

I HATE the fact that they still wound T3 on a 4+, sure we can wound MCs on a 4+ also, but there are way less MC's than T3 :/