Sneak Peek at New Drukhari Codex

Soulless Samurai wrote:

Burnage wrote:

Flayed Skull, Black Heart, Dark Technomancers, as well as a few others all currently offer very meaningful improvements to offense - we do need to see what obsessions (and auras, and stratagems, and..) look like before we have a good overview of what we're capable of.

Dark Technomancers has been repeatedly nerfed and we don't know whether it will even be in the new codex. But even if it is, the Splinter Cannon has lost almost all synergy with it.

A DT Venom used to fire 12 D2 shots that wounded on 3s.

Now it fires 6 AP-1 D3 shots that wound on 3s.

Even if you like the second profile better, what are you even firing them at?

Death guard, Gravis, Any marine near the auto take apothecary.... Dude what planet are you on? You can't bitch to know end about marines being better and everywhere THEN ignore them as an obvious target for the leaked new weapons lol.

red_head wrote:

I really hope their Hekatarii Blades still give them +1 A, otherwise the AP is effectively the only change there.

Soulless Samurai wrote:

Also, are those plasma grenades or are Haywire grenades back?

Haywire grenades would be nice, but I doubt they'll return. Especially not as the only grenade option.

I wonder what the Succubus profile will be. I'd like to see more attacks for her. Having fewer than an Archon just doesn't make any sense.

I am betting the attack is no baked into their profile but who knows.

It has -1 ap and also note the asterix on the strength (could be poison)

The attack baked into the profile is bigger then you might expect at first glance since it applies to all the specialist weapons.

Also note that this basically means hellions and reavers are also base 3 attacks, huge for their weapons.

Drugs will be a big factor, I am hoping you just pick an effect for the army pregame personally as I am tired of the idiotic book keeping forced by the current method.

Red Corsair wrote:

Soulless Samurai wrote:

Burnage wrote:

Flayed Skull, Black Heart, Dark Technomancers, as well as a few others all currently offer very meaningful improvements to offense - we do need to see what obsessions (and auras, and stratagems, and..) look like before we have a good overview of what we're capable of.

Dark Technomancers has been repeatedly nerfed and we don't know whether it will even be in the new codex. But even if it is, the Splinter Cannon has lost almost all synergy with it.

A DT Venom used to fire 12 D2 shots that wounded on 3s.

Now it fires 6 AP-1 D3 shots that wound on 3s.

Even if you like the second profile better, what are you even firing them at?

Death guard, Gravis, Any marine near the auto take apothecary.... Dude what planet are you on? You can't bitch to know end about marines being better and everywhere THEN ignore them as an obvious target for the leaked new weapons lol.

Those are the targets of dissintegrator cannons also ... and dissies do a much better job at removing them, it's great that the splinter cannon has the ap-1 and has damage 2 but it's target of basic troops hasn't changed I'd still only shoot this into standard Marines (as they are all 2w now) and leave anything elite that's guarding a character to the dissies

Red Corsair wrote:

Also note that this basically means hellions and reavers are also base 3 attacks, huge for their weapons.

Drugs will be a big factor, I am hoping you just pick an effect for the army pregame personally as I am tired of the idiotic book keeping forced by the current method.

I agree with you about the drugs, the book keeping was annoying but unrestricted drug use would give better flexibility.

As for hellions and reavers getting an extra attack, I don't see that we can assume this. If as you say (and I agree) it's baking the hekatari blade attack into the profile it won't follow that other units that don't use it will get the extra attack. I'd love you to be right here but so far I don't think we should expect it.

I guess I should have known better by now. Most of all, the changes to Splinter Rifles are completely and utterly bizarre. How could the 4+ poison rule possible change that S2 makes any sense?

At least the Wyches look nice, I suppose?
GW just broke me... I can't even.

Seriously the only thing that would peak my interest right now is an army wide -1 ap on all shooting kabal trait... And looking at the marine stuff that would not even be too strong

Im curious about any changes to the heat lance. Need a scourge datasheet leak for that.

Archon_91 wrote:

Red Corsair wrote:

Soulless Samurai wrote:

Burnage wrote:

Flayed Skull, Black Heart, Dark Technomancers, as well as a few others all currently offer very meaningful improvements to offense - we do need to see what obsessions (and auras, and stratagems, and..) look like before we have a good overview of what we're capable of.

Dark Technomancers has been repeatedly nerfed and we don't know whether it will even be in the new codex. But even if it is, the Splinter Cannon has lost almost all synergy with it.

A DT Venom used to fire 12 D2 shots that wounded on 3s.

Now it fires 6 AP-1 D3 shots that wound on 3s.

Even if you like the second profile better, what are you even firing them at?

Death guard, Gravis, Any marine near the auto take apothecary.... Dude what planet are you on? You can't bitch to know end about marines being better and everywhere THEN ignore them as an obvious target for the leaked new weapons lol.

Those are the targets of dissintegrator cannons also ... and dissies do a much better job at removing them, it's great that the splinter cannon has the ap-1 and has damage 2 but it's target of basic troops hasn't changed I'd still only shoot this into standard Marines (as they are all 2w now) and leave anything elite that's guarding a character to the dissies

I was thinking about this. If you are expecting the new cannon to be the armies best anti-marine weapon, then you are right, it disappoints - especially as the dissi does better at that. But...

The cannon and the dissi are never mutually exclusive options. So anything that CAN take a dissi isnt forcing you to decide if the dissi or the cannon is better at anti marine. And same with anything that can take a cannon.

But, it IS true that the cannon is better at efficiently killing marines than nearly any option on the units that CAN take cannons.

Its not the army's best marine killer. But it IS the most efficient marine killer in units it can be taken. Or at least, close to it.

Which shifts the point of it. Its not the weapon you load your army up with to fight everything. Its the weapon you slot in when facing an infantry heavy marine army.

Ok, ok, thats bad (I assume - I have never played in one) for tournaments. I am guessing in a tournament, you turn up with your ONE list, and you try to play that list vs every other opponent. You CANT swap out weapons mid tournament. In those cases, the cannon never sees any action. You take dissis to deal with marines, and you load up on any other option to tackle whatever else you think you will be facing.

BUT THATS NOT HOW MOST PLAYERS PLAY. The tournament crowd is very small compared to the casual play crowd (which itself is dwarfed by the collecting crowd - many of which are the kid demographic who have aspirations to play, but dont really ever get the opportunity). In casual play, either at your FLGS or at your mates house, you play 1 game. You might have 3 or 4 mates, each with a different army. You all have the same basic set of models. So you just declare what they all have rather than build them to have a certain weapon loadout. You might be facing AdMech today, so taking lots of dark light to delete the walkers is useful. But next week your Tau friend is down with his massive gunline, so suddenly all those blasters are shreders and you get trying to get in close. And the week after its an IG chaff army, or Khorn melee boys, and splinter fire is absolutely fine for that. But the models are all the same.

Its in those games that you would tend to go "Ok, last time we played I couldnt cut down your marines. Either I over killed single models, or underkilled them. So this week, these 4 units are carrying splinter cannons in addition to these 2 ravagers taking dissis". Because Dissi + cannon is better than dissi alone.

I am having to do a big mental shift with 9th. The army I want Drukhari to be does not exist. Maybe it has never existed and I bought too much into the lore. I dont like coven units. So I was always screwed. But 8th was ok, because I went heavy on the gunboats, and I play vs armies that was effective against. I tweaked a few things each game, but generally found my groove.

9th has been cruel to me. I vehemently dislike how objective based it is. Drukhari have no reason to be engaging in taking and holding objectives, while wiping the enemy out does NOTHING. BUT THATS THE GAME I HAVE TO PLAY. And so I have been reading and watching and thinking and I am starting to see that these changes, while I dont like them, while they are not what i would have done, they do make SOME sense. Your troops should be sat on points, or pushing others off of them. Which means melee is more common. So Kabalites get more attacks. They still are not GOOD in melee, but they are better than they were. Marines pose a problem for D1 armies, so we now have, in addition to a limited supply of GOOD anti-marine weapons, a few AVERAGE anti-marine weapons. With melee being so important, Wyches seem to have been given a flat upgrade (though we cant know that until we see the actual weapon stat blocks). Even if it doesnt make sense to us, even if it doesnt make sense for single list tournament armies, it DOES make a kind of twisted sense for objective-heavy-brawl-oriented-smaller-board-9th-edition. And I might not like it, but I can SEE the place for the new cannons in that. Its just not the place I wanted it to be.

The Strange Dark One wrote:

I guess I should have known better by now. Most of all, the changes to Splinter Rifles are completely and utterly bizarre. How could the 4+ poison rule possible change that S2 makes any sense?

At least the Wyches look nice, I suppose?
GW just broke me... I can't even.

Unless poison has not changed really.

What if they wanted to give the cannon a strength? So that it was marginally better vs weak vehicles. You cannot do that with the way poison was worded before (which said "these weapons do not have a strength").

So you get rid of that line. Poison still functions the same. It still wounds on a +4 vs creatures and a +6 vs vehicles.

But you also want that strength score to DO something, so you add the line "If the weapon's strength score would enable it to wound creatures on less than +4 or vehicles on less than +6, use this value instead."

Cool, the poison rule now permits cannons to have a strength score AND for that strength score to do something.

But, and this is the bit we struggle with here, WHAT IF GW FELT SPLINTER RIFLES WERE ABOUT WHERE THEY SHOULD BE?!

We can crow all night about how crap they are, but GW might still think they are behaving as intended and up to spec. I mean, all throughout 8th, gunboats remained fairly meta. Not always the best option, but solid at deleting MSUs. And yeah, Marines got more durable in 9th. But we have not really had an opportunity for much playtesting vs that. Not officially. GW might be assuming they STILL behave as intended.

But, they have (in this hypothetical) just removed the line that says that poison weapons dont have a strength score. So now they need one. So you need a value that basically does not change how they behave. That value is either 1 or 2. 1 is totally useless. 2 is essentially useless, but has a handful of situations in which it is helpful. And buffing it (if thats possible - and even if its not when the codex comes out, it leaves them room to potentially add something later) has an appreciable effect.

When viewed in that context, I feel I can see the logic. I might not like it, but its there.

krayd wrote:

Im curious about any changes to the heat lance. Need a scourge datasheet leak for that.

So am I. At the moment, their anti-tank role is filled way better by other options, but they are pretty nice against Gravis Marines and the like.

I bet that the poison rule will just be worded "automatically wounds non-vehicle units on a 4+". Since there is a S rating, there's no need to add the " wounds vehicles on 6+" part.

albions-angel wrote:

But, and this is the bit we struggle with here, WHAT IF GW FELT SPLINTER RIFLES WERE ABOUT WHERE THEY SHOULD BE?!

I'm not sure what your point is here.

GW could feel that anyone not playing Marines deserves a bucket of fresh excrement instead of a codex.

Should we use that as our metric?

Now, what *would* be neat is if kabalite warriors had access to different ammo types for splinter weapons, as per fluff. For example, corrosive splinters that wound vehicles on 4+. Of course, I have no expectation that GW thought to include this.

albions-angel wrote:

But, and this is the bit we struggle with here, WHAT IF GW FELT SPLINTER RIFLES WERE ABOUT WHERE THEY SHOULD BE?!

We can crow all night about how crap they are, but GW might still think they are behaving as intended and up to spec. I mean, all throughout 8th, gunboats remained fairly meta. Not always the best option, but solid at deleting MSUs. And yeah, Marines got more durable in 9th. But we have not really had an opportunity for much playtesting vs that. Not officially. GW might be assuming they STILL behave as intended.

Marines have doubled in durability against typical anti-infantry weaponry due to gaining an extra wound. If GW thought that splinter rifles were working as intended in 8th they cannot also think they are still working as intended in 9th when their effectiveness has halved.

Unless 'working as intended' means 'barely working at all' over in Nottingham.

Soulless Samurai wrote:

albions-angel wrote:

But, and this is the bit we struggle with here, WHAT IF GW FELT SPLINTER RIFLES WERE ABOUT WHERE THEY SHOULD BE?!

I'm not sure what your point is here.

GW could feel that anyone not playing Marines deserves a bucket of fresh excrement instead of a codex.

Should we use that as our metric?

Count Adhemar wrote:

Marines have doubled in durability against typical anti-infantry weaponry due to gaining an extra wound. If GW thought that splinter rifles were working as intended in 8th they cannot also think they are still working as intended in 9th when their effectiveness has halved.

Unless 'working as intended' means 'barely working at all' over in Nottingham.

No, thats not OUR metric. And we can say that we dont like the lack of a meaningful change to splinter rifles, or that S2 is useless. And, importantly, I DO say that.

But if you frame it in the context of GW potentially going "Splinter Rifles are how we think they should be for anti-infantry, but we want splinter cannons to have a little more punch vs light vehicles and a little less punch vs infantry", then you can at least see how the changes could be arrived at.

I am not defending GW. At all. I think all splinter weapons need -1 AP. Frankly, I think nearly all weapons that were 0 AP should be -1 AP, which cancels out the rise in saves for a lot of armies, which means actually I am kinda cool with them staying at AP 0 and the saves not going up. AND THEN splinter weapons should all be AP -1. But I dont work for GW.

Yeah, its clear that splinter weapons cannot possibly be as effective if they remain as they are while their opponents get stronger. But that has never appeared to be how GW builds their codex updates. Instead it feels like they look at rankings when they have them, and at the old codex when they dont. Its flawed logic, but it IS logic.

So I guess, my point was not that the change (or lack thereof) to splinter weapons is good. Its that framed in the eyes of "Cannons should be slightly better vehicle killers but rifles performed well in their anti infantry role in the data we have (largely 8th ed)", then you can see how they arrived at those changes.

Of course, my speculation could be wrong. Its possible, but not likely that GW want to remove Drukhari from the game, but not until sales have dropped. 8th saw a lot of people buying them, even after the nerfs. So in 9th, they are really driving home the point. "Your one new model does not fit your aesthetic, and your units are crap now. Please bugger off and play Eldar, or better yet, Marines" The changes also make sense when viewed in that context.

I compared the specs we have for the 2 units against the 8th ed index and suspect that GW has simply taken the warrior and wych statlines and replaced them with trueborn and bloodbrides, then gave warriors a +1 Armor buff.

I also suspect that this means that all wych weapons no longer provide a +1 A, since the 3/4 Attacks wyches now have is the same number bloodbrides had, including their weapon profiles.

What I'd like to know is what are the unit equipment rules? If they did simply replace the stat blocks, they may have also given kabalites the equip rules of trueborn from 8th (max of 4 special weapons per 5 warriors, and 2 heavy per 10). Mind you this is very wishful thinking.

If that is the case, then we can also safely assume that there will be no new elite models for the army any time soon.

edit: the codex wyches were already copies of the index bloodbrides, so if there have been any real changes, it would be copying the trueborn stat block and giving it to the warriors.

Count Adhemar wrote:

albions-angel wrote:

But, and this is the bit we struggle with here, WHAT IF GW FELT SPLINTER RIFLES WERE ABOUT WHERE THEY SHOULD BE?!

We can crow all night about how crap they are, but GW might still think they are behaving as intended and up to spec. I mean, all throughout 8th, gunboats remained fairly meta. Not always the best option, but solid at deleting MSUs. And yeah, Marines got more durable in 9th. But we have not really had an opportunity for much playtesting vs that. Not officially. GW might be assuming they STILL behave as intended.

Marines have doubled in durability against typical anti-infantry weaponry due to gaining an extra wound. If GW thought that splinter rifles were working as intended in 8th they cannot also think they are still working as intended in 9th when their effectiveness has halved.

Unless 'working as intended' means 'barely working at all' over in Nottingham.

Worth bearing in mind that it doesn't look like other factions are seeing substantial buffs to their basic weaponry, either. The bog standard boltgun is still S4 AP0 D1 despite the Tactical Marines that carry it moving to 2 wounds, and I'd guess GW are happy with the "better in some situations, worse in others" balance that our current Splinter Rifles represent.

I do think it's probable that we still wind up seeing AP-1 for them in the Codex from a different source than the wargear profile, but we'll have to wait and see about that.

Burnage wrote:

Count Adhemar wrote:

albions-angel wrote:

But, and this is the bit we struggle with here, WHAT IF GW FELT SPLINTER RIFLES WERE ABOUT WHERE THEY SHOULD BE?!

We can crow all night about how crap they are, but GW might still think they are behaving as intended and up to spec. I mean, all throughout 8th, gunboats remained fairly meta. Not always the best option, but solid at deleting MSUs. And yeah, Marines got more durable in 9th. But we have not really had an opportunity for much playtesting vs that. Not officially. GW might be assuming they STILL behave as intended.

Marines have doubled in durability against typical anti-infantry weaponry due to gaining an extra wound. If GW thought that splinter rifles were working as intended in 8th they cannot also think they are still working as intended in 9th when their effectiveness has halved.

Unless 'working as intended' means 'barely working at all' over in Nottingham.

Worth bearing in mind that it doesn't look like other factions are seeing substantial buffs to their basic weaponry, either. The bog standard boltgun is still S4 AP0 D1 despite the Tactical Marines that carry it moving to 2 wounds, and I'd guess GW are happy with the "better in some situations, worse in others" balance that our current Splinter Rifles represent.

Just a point, but Marines also got Doctrines and Bolter Discipline.

So while the Bolter and Splinter Rifle are effectively unchanged in terms of profiles, Bolters can get double shots and will have AP-1 for turns 2 and possibly 3 each game.


I'm highly doubtful DE will get similar treatment.

So we did get some actual leaks today, but one thing no one is mentioning (or everyone is avoiding mentioning?) is no preorder today.

Where does that leave us with predictions for the release date? Late march if this week is preorder for Kill Team, next week is release of Kill Team?

I would be willing to bet that the Hecktari blades no longer give +1 attack
This makes the Wyches change JUST -1 AP, not any extra attacks.


Any Takers?

On a slightly different note, I don't suppose anyone's opened a pack of Wracks?

Skulnbonz wrote:

I would be willing to bet that the Hecktari blades no longer give +1 attack
This makes the Wyches change JUST -1 AP, not any extra attacks.


Any Takers?

I think that it's pretty obvious the knife will not add attacks.

They did this exact thing with Mandrakes glimmer steel blade from the index going into the 8th ed book.

It seriously makes no sense to add attacks to a unit via a basic piece of war-gear unique to them. Just bake it into the profile and make life easier.

This also makes it easier to boost the other cult units attacks, hence why I expect hellions and reavers to go to 3 attacks as well.

It also has the added boost of buffing the unit leader, who previously when equipped with an agonizer or power sword ended up with attacks equal to a normal squad member. It also boosts the specialist arena weapons.

I am banking on hellions and reavers having 3 base attacks, beastmasters gaining a 4th attack and succubi finally bumping to 5 attacks.

Hopefully, the Succubus Glaive is either D2 or D1d3 to be more in line with other Eldar glaive type weapons.

albions-angel wrote:

So we did get some actual leaks today, but one thing no one is mentioning (or everyone is avoiding mentioning?) is no preorder today.

Where does that leave us with predictions for the release date? Late march if this week is preorder for Kill Team, next week is release of Kill Team?

Don't be too optimistic they promised one codex or expansion each month for the first three months of this year. The first two had codices and why would they add "or expansion" if they plan to release a codex each month. Could be they are planning to release the campaign book in March and our codex in April.

Koldan wrote:

albions-angel wrote:

So we did get some actual leaks today, but one thing no one is mentioning (or everyone is avoiding mentioning?) is no preorder today.

Where does that leave us with predictions for the release date? Late march if this week is preorder for Kill Team, next week is release of Kill Team?

Don't  be too optimistic they promised one codex or expansion each month for the first three months of this year. The first two had codices and why would they add "or expansion" if they plan to release a codex each month. Could be they are planning to release the campaign book in March and our codex in April.

More like the opposite: our Codex in march, campaign in April.

But I think Campaign will be on summer.