Must Have Rules.

FuelDrop wrote:

Vect seizes the initiative on 2+. Turns out he had it the whole time...

Why not a dark eldar (or vect only) stratagem, 3 points you get first turn.

I like the idea of being able to advance and charge (I hate that right now orks have a larger threat range than we do for cc)

I am not sure about being able to disembark from vehicles after moving (maybe if they then cannot move themselves anymore after disembarking) but I think a suggestion from earlyer to disembark (an charge) when our transport charges is a nice one.

Our melee needs a boost (cult, coven monsters, HQ)
Some special weapons need a boost (Haywire, heat lance, splinter cannon, shredder)


I think our kabalite and most unassociated units are quite ok right now.

Wych cults are easily our weakest subfaction right now. My proposed boosts are as follows:

1) Subfaction Wide advance and charge. We had Fleet before most armies could even RUN, it is so dumb that our fastest warriors have such a terrible threat range. Including Beasts.

2) Subfaction Wide fight twice in the fight phase. Like Korne berserkers, but with super fast super skilled BDSM Space Elves. Yes it literally doubles our number of attacks, but for the most part Wych Cults are horribly gimped for offense anyway. Does not apply to beasts.

3) Faction Wide Disembark from moving transport at the end of the movement phase. You can jump out directly into a charge, but you cannot disembark then move.

4) Better Wych Weapons/more reliable special rules. Wyches literally live and die by whether they are in melee or not. The difference between 6+ armour and 4++ invulnerable is huge. They need to be able to a) reliably prevent the enemy from just walking away from them and shooting them and b) Dodge Pistols when in melee.
The fact that we have only one viable Wych weapon is a complete joke, and the shardnet doing literally nothing is just salt on the wound.


I really think that all of the above are more or less required for Wych cults. What follows are some fun ideas that might be great special rules for specific cults:
1) Re-embark during Consolidation, even if you disembarked this turn.
2) Increased Consolidation range. (let's be honest, 8" consolidation would be awesome!)
3) Always strikes first.
4) -1 to hit them with ranged weapons.

In regards to No Escape, instead of rolling off to keep them in combat, the Wyches can immediately move 2D6" in any direction. If this move places them a) within 1" of an enemy unit that fell back from them this turn, or b) within 3" of a transport they are capable of embarking, they may then a) re-enter close combat with the unit that had fallen back from them, in which case that unit may not fire Overwatch and may not shoot in the following movement phase as it has fallen back, or b) embark on the transport.

The distance could be changed to Mv+D6, the distance of an advance, in case 2D6 without in-built re-rolls (turn 2 PfP would have to be adjusted to specifically include this) is too unreliable.

Ikol wrote:

In regards to No Escape, instead of rolling off to keep them in combat, the Wyches can immediately  move 2D6" in any direction.  If this move places them a) within 1" of an enemy unit that fell back from them this turn, or b) within 3" of a transport they are capable of embarking, they may then a) re-enter close combat with the unit that had fallen back from them, in which case that unit may not fire Overwatch and may not shoot in the following movement phase as it has fallen back, or b) embark on the transport.

The distance could be changed to Mv+D6, the distance of an advance, in case 2D6 without in-built re-rolls (turn 2 PfP would have to be adjusted to specifically include this) is too unreliable.

I rather like that idea.

Count Adhemar wrote:

I rather like that idea.

Yeah, the utility on something like that would be awesome.

It also means that the Shardnet and Impalet's mediocre stat line could be offset by a rule similar to its 5th ed incarnation. "All enemy models within 1" of a model equipped with a Shardnet and Impaler (or Barbed Hair, in Lelith's case) have their Attacks characteristic reduced by 1, to a minimum of 1."

Well dark angels version of "no escape" makes a lot more sense than ours does ... But I do like the above idea of instead of rolling off, we get the ability to immediately reengage the enemy ... As i picture a unit trying to run away from the wyches and failing to outrun them over the enemy just standing there and not even trying to escape

Count Adhemar wrote:

Ikol wrote:

In regards to No Escape, instead of rolling off to keep them in combat, the Wyches can immediately  move 2D6" in any direction.  If this move places them a) within 1" of an enemy unit that fell back from them this turn, or b) within 3" of a transport they are capable of embarking, they may then a) re-enter close combat with the unit that had fallen back from them, in which case that unit may not fire Overwatch and may not shoot in the following movement phase as it has fallen back, or b) embark on the transport.

The distance could be changed to Mv+D6, the distance of an advance, in case 2D6 without in-built re-rolls (turn 2 PfP would have to be adjusted to specifically include this) is too unreliable.

I rather like that idea.

Or a simplier, more likely to be granted: "When a unit fall back from a wych unit, all wychs units in base contact have a free close combat phase, without any fight back from the faling back unit. The unit can then fall back as normal.

dumpeal wrote:

Count Adhemar wrote:

Ikol wrote:

In regards to No Escape, instead of rolling off to keep them in combat, the Wyches can immediately  move 2D6" in any direction.  If this move places them a) within 1" of an enemy unit that fell back from them this turn, or b) within 3" of a transport they are capable of embarking, they may then a) re-enter close combat with the unit that had fallen back from them, in which case that unit may not fire Overwatch and may not shoot in the following movement phase as it has fallen back, or b) embark on the transport.

The distance could be changed to Mv+D6, the distance of an advance, in case 2D6 without in-built re-rolls (turn 2 PfP would have to be adjusted to specifically include this) is too unreliable.

I rather like that idea.

Or a simplier, more likely to be granted: "When a unit fall back from a wych unit, all wychs units in base contact have a free close combat phase, without any fight back from the faling back unit. The unit can then fall back as normal.

I'd even go as far as the Wych Cult units gets a +1 to wound roll or all attacks made in the falling back units movement phase get ap-1 (stacking with units that already have it), for attacking the fleeing targets in the back. Stay in combat and not shoot your guns... or... You want to run away? You're gonna pay dearly for it.

I think Wyches with Always strike 1st and Rending (-3ap on wound of 6's) is something i like to see in wyches, the "cant fallback" is cute, but there is almost 0 reason to fall back vs wcyhes unless your a vehicle... I mean Unless you Tau or Nids... and if Wyches are charging Tau or Nids they are playing wrong.

Quote :

and if Wyches are charging Tau or Nids they are playing wrong.

With the current state of our army. Pretty sure it will change when/if we get some movement shenanigans. After all, it's not hard to dictate the combat when you own a damn ship...

Honestly with every new codex I think our wishlist looks weaker and weaker. If we Got EVERYTHING we asked for in that letter we would be the weakest codex in the game. And I doubt we get even that much.

The Red King wrote:

Honestly with every new codex I think our wishlist looks weaker and weaker. If we Got EVERYTHING we asked for in that letter we would be the weakest codex in the game. And I doubt we get even that much.

Yeah I agree. It sometimes feels like the group has just been beaten down by poor rules and now ppl are attempting ask for what they feel is reasonable compared to where we currently are and what they've seen us get in the past. I just put together a Death Guard list to play against a friend; While I have played against codexed armies, I haven't played as a codexed army...holy crap do they have some sweet rules, stats, etc...

I'd prefer to aim high as opposed to not aim high enough!!

Give the wyches haywire grenades back, advanced and charge, 1a extra each.

Must Have:

Everything I need for a Kabal and/or Wych army to be the fastest and most maneuverable army. Without question. I want to be able to redeploy my entire army each turn without spending command points. I don't care what points I have to pay as long as I feel they're efficient and those points are going into speed/maneuverability

Ideas of how to achieve this:

Charging out of vehicles

Charging after advancing

Charging after falling back

Why not all three? We're wishlisting here right? I don't see anything wrong with paying more points on our Raiders and Venoms for the ability of the unit inside to get out, advance, and charge after the vehicle moves. Of course I would want those charge and advance rolls to be re-rollable sans CP. I would pay a lot of points to be able to do all of this but I know there is no way we'll be this fortunate. Similarly, I would like my kabalites to be able to advance and shoot or at least advance and charge just like the Wyches. I think power from pain is fine. The only ways I see that it could be improved would be complete overhauls. "Would like" section to follow.

everyone else is getting armywide special rules.... how about the negative to enemy range we used to have? I think that would be fluffy and cool

Aschen wrote:

everyone else is getting armywide special rules.... how about the negative to enemy range we used to have?  I think that would be fluffy and cool

Completely agree. I would like to see some way of reducing charges made against us as well. I agree with everyone's take that our army should be T4+, I like us at T3, but given the added bonuses so many armies have now to get in your face, deepstrike, and all around ignore what use to be ~24inches of no-mans land territory, I would like to see an ability or stratagem that allowed us to make charges against us more challenging than even 9".

It would be one thing if it was one unit charging at 9", but when there is the potential of 2-4, it stands to reason SOMETHING is making its charge!

SushiBoy013 wrote:

Aschen wrote:

everyone else is getting armywide special rules.... how about the negative to enemy range we used to have?  I think that would be fluffy and cool

Completely agree. I would like to see some way of reducing charges made against us as well. I agree with everyone's take that our army should be T4+, I like us at T3, but given the added bonuses so many armies have now to get in your face, deepstrike, and all around ignore what use to be ~24inches of no-mans land territory, I would like to see an ability or stratagem that allowed us to make charges against us more challenging than even 9".

It would be one thing if it was one unit charging at 9", but when there is the potential of 2-4, it stands to reason SOMETHING is making its charge!

Does anyone else remember when the PGL gave us wide ranging access to Defensive Grenades? That was awesome!

Do you remember when Kabals had Grenades on their rules to match the models? I member!

amishprn86 wrote:

Do you remember when Kabals had Grenades on their rules to match the models? I member!

Silly man, everyone knows that Xenos don't have grenades! Only the mighty Imperium can afford to hand out grenades to every soldier!

Most of those ideas are awesome, and would really feel like I'm playing DE again.

Especially love all of the cult propositions, and the ideas to have differents poisons (in particular the +1 to wound vs infantry).

If you ever do a letter to GW with all those propositions, count me in

Quote :

If you ever do a letter to GW with all those propositions, count me in

So we're establishing the Dark City News Letter : a wishlist sent to GW every 2 months. That oughta change things in our favour !

Mppqlmd wrote:

Quote :

If you ever do a letter to GW with all those propositions, count me in

So we're establishing the Dark City News Letter : a wishlist sent to GW every 2 months. That oughta change things in our favour !

Someone needs to remind them that the Dark Eldar, y'know, exist.

Mppqlmd wrote:

Quote :

If you ever do a letter to GW with all those propositions, count me in

So we're establishing the Dark City News Letter : a wishlist sent to GW every 2 months. That oughta change things in our favour !

I get that you're joking, but I'm not sure that this is the worst idea in the world. If GW is updating the game as frequently as they are then it might be good for them to get similarly frequent feedback from the community.

Agreed ... Plus, honestly, who better to play test the army and suggest changes that not only make sense but still keep a sense of balance (if not slightly tipped in our opponents favor) than the denizens of the Dark City? One thing I've noticed about Dark Eldar players is, I don't think anyone here wants the dark eldar becoming an army that wins just by showing up to tournaments, we love playing and mastering a tactically difficult army to master, one that punishes bad plays and is heavily punished by playing badly, we relish the idea that we out think, out maneuver, and out play our opponents. In short we love our finesse army ... But right now, and more than likely in the future, without constructive feedback GW will probably continue to think the changes they are making to the army are fun and something DE players want. GW receives so much negativity from so many different players (I've hear space Marine players complaining about how their codex was the first to drop so it's the weakest codex, and that there was a month dedicated to xenos releases only ....) That I'm sure they have basically learned to block out and filter anything that is just screaming and complaining.

I like the idea of PGL becoming defensive grenades again.
When a unit charges a unit with a PGL the unit loses all benefits of charging and any rules that allow them to strike first.

But I agree, we should not be writing new letters every 2 months.
Most things are still exactly the same, we just want to have more right now.