PDA

View Full Version : Rate the Dark Eldar COdex



Kurisu313
26-12-2010, 19:03
Following on from Big Squigs' So how do we feel about DE? (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=287534) thread, I'd thought I'd post a poll about how people felt about the DE codex to get some quantitative results.

The poll is out of 10, with 10 being high and 1 being low.

So, How would you rate the Dark Eldar Codex as an overall package? Including the rules, fluff, pictures, artwork and layout, but not the new models, as that is a seperate issue.

I give it a 9, as in I think it is nigh perfect with only a small number of issues.

Mind you, I don't think they'd ever produce a 10 in my eyes - there will always be problems, its just how small they are.

madden
26-12-2010, 19:14
A near perfect example of a dex though we de players waited long enough so it should be good, love the new uses of duff units I've found no single power build lots of choice and the rules are clear the fluff deep but leaves room for imagination/expansion pics are good love it overall.

Drasanil
26-12-2010, 19:18
Near perfect, the only thing that kind of bugs me is an over reliance on pain tokens/FNP and the fact it makes haemonculi a near-absolute must. I would have prefered the option to buy healing options in a similar vein to Urien's ability or te Tyranids Wound Stealing and/or Regen instead of slapping on FNP to just about every unit in the list.


EDIT: Apart for that the only thing that really stands out as pants are Mandrakes and Scourges to a lesser extent. I actually like the fact that most of the codex's SC are not obviously better than the generic HQ choices since I prefer not to use/see SCs all over the place.

dragonet111
26-12-2010, 19:27
I rated 8.

I won't play then (well not in a near future:)) but I love the stories and the army rules. Urien Rakarth looks amazing. It's actually the first time for me to find a mini that looks better than the arts in the codex.

From the downside. The minis are amazing but some sculpts are too fragile.

Marshal Augustine
26-12-2010, 21:23
I think it is a very well done book. It is not begginer friendly, but for the veteran gamer and modeller it offers great challenges tactically and hobby wise!

Da Black Gobbo
26-12-2010, 22:00
I think GW did a fantastic job, the codex is ballanced and nicely done, tomorrow i'm having 2 games and i cannot wait.

Vaktathi
26-12-2010, 22:02
There's a few issues, nothing's perfect, but it's about as close as I think 40k is ever going to see.

Solid 9.

Lord Cook
26-12-2010, 22:26
A well deserved 9. Puts so many other recent codecii to shame, to the extent that if the Dark Eldar book is a fine Van Gogh, the Space Marine and Tyranid books are finger paintings from a six-year old.

Reflex
26-12-2010, 22:46
I think its very well done and as a codex its quite well pieced together.

as an army as a whole it works well and is quite balanced.

Badger[Fr]
26-12-2010, 23:04
It's a very well written book, quite impressive in terms of internal balance (contrary to, say, the Imperial Guard or the Space Marines). 9.

Meriwether
27-12-2010, 00:34
Not perfect, but one of the best. 9.

Baaltor
27-12-2010, 02:23
Fairly high eight, it's what I'd like to see from every book too. It's main faults to me are:
-Wych HQs, did they really get done justice?
-The pain token thing, just doesn't make too much sense, I think the units should've been cheaper, and the rewards should be in reverse (Fearless first, FC next, and FnP next), drugs could have been better too.
-The fluff, whilst I don't think it was bad, I think Phil and Jes answered too much, and made their info too conclusive. It should've been mysterious and scary, not as clear as they made it, with us knowing everything about their society. Again, not bad, but I wanted something more a la mode.

Putty
27-12-2010, 02:27
its a lot better than the tyranid codex that is for sure...

The Inevitable One
27-12-2010, 02:40
We already have a thread based on what people think about the new Dark Eldar Codex here (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=287534).

DDogwood
27-12-2010, 02:45
We already have a thread based on what people think about the new Dark Eldar Codex here (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=287534).

Is that the one the OP referenced in the first post?

I'd give the codex a 9/10. I'm happy with the fact that it gives loads of viable choices, so we shouldn't see too many cookie-cutter armies. I think that everything in the book is at least usable, which puts it above most other codices.

Meriwether
27-12-2010, 02:45
We already have a thread based on what people think about the new Dark Eldar Codex here (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=287534).

Couldn't be bothered to read the original post, could we?

The Inevitable One
27-12-2010, 03:07
Couldn't be bothered to read the original post, could we?

No, I read mostly all of it. The only part that I missed was the top because the page had been scrolled down, but not all the way fully back up. Thus me missing out on reading the top part which resulted in me posting that reply. As I am human, I make mistakes as much as the next person.

DeathMetal4tw
27-12-2010, 03:56
I forgot weather I voted 8 or 9.

I think the codex is full of really interesting stuff, and the flyers were so utterly appropriate for the army. The idea that we have incredibly fast skimmers that can shoot after deep striking or moving a good distance is really in sync with the dark eldar's battle philosophy.

I love the fact that one of our main HQ choices, the hammie, is so synergistic. I love the option of taking an HQ that actually does something to help the rank and file of the army. Without him, I feel like the codex would have made us more mech reliant but now twenty man mobs with feel no pain give us a mean stand and shoot element.

I also feel like the three main types of dark eldar armies were fairly well represented. Cults, covens and kabals all got enough units (for the most part) for fun theme lists to be available, and even viable.

On the downside I think there were some cop-outs here and there, namely trueborn and bloodbrides. They're pretty much rip offs of their cheaper versions with slightly better ld and another attack (the latter being barely useful for trueborn)

On the whole I think it was a great codex, outstanding even.

Chem-Dog
27-12-2010, 04:30
I'd say a solid nine, which is more than I give my own Armies' Codexes.
Only one real complaint regarding the army and that's the lack of options for giving HQ's Bikes/Wings/Skyboard.

I'll leave Dark Eldar alone for now, at least until Wracks and Grotesques get some models, then I'll be sorely tempted to build a Haemonculus army.
I'd probably need a Cronos or three too.

owen matthew
27-12-2010, 04:59
Solid 9, for many of the reasons listed above.

autarch dsaliuvid
27-12-2010, 05:21
It's very good. We can only hope all future codexes are written and ballanced as well in the future,and that all models are just as good.

Warpcrafter
27-12-2010, 05:23
Last week I had an annihilation game against Dark Eldar. After 6 turns, it was Orks 7, Dark Eldar 2. Against a veteran Dark Eldar player who would probably give it the same score I did, a 1.

Hellebore
27-12-2010, 05:26
I think the reliance on FnP and FC to balance the army is a rather big X against it.

It's rather telling that FnP is the first ability received. It is an obvious example of presenting one face whilst possessing another. DE are not a fragile army anymore, but the T3 5+ sv certainly makes them LOOK like it.

Hellebore

Silent_Moebius
27-12-2010, 06:43
I voted 5.

As we should vote for the overall package, the fluff killed the DE for me. They were for me in the past a race, who just loves to torture and to sell pain. But now, they were reduced to a job - a must have. They can't live without doing that. They had to do it. I liked the thought much more, that they just do it for nothing.

Maybe I just didn't read the old codex carefully enough. -.-

DeathMetal4tw
27-12-2010, 06:50
I think the reliance on FnP and FC to balance the army is a rather big X against it.

It's rather telling that FnP is the first ability received. It is an obvious example of presenting one face whilst possessing another. DE are not a fragile army anymore, but the T3 5+ sv certainly makes them LOOK like it.

Hellebore

I think they CAN be a fragile army, and effectively so.

20 man mobs are always going to want a hammie/FnP, fine. This is true. But an army of small squads (such as a mech army) is going to find less profit from this. Here's why:

Imagine a solid 80 or so point Haemonculus. If you add him to a 200-220 point 20 man squad of warriors, you're adding under 50% of the entire squad's cost to get the ability.

Now consider adding said hammie to a a 121 point squad consisting of 9 warriors with a dark lance and blaster (a small squad you can fit in a transport). All of the sudden to add this same hammie you need to shell out 66% of the squad's cost.

In other words, unless you're adding hammies to large squads you're getting a pretty bad deal- Plus if you're using a lot of small squads instead of a few big ones, you'll need to buy a lot more hammies to confer FnP to the same fraction of your army.

I don't see the dark eldar as a fragile army or a tough one. For once I feel like I genuinely have a choice in the matter.

Harbringerxv8
27-12-2010, 06:55
Gave it a nine. I would've liked to see more varied painting styles in the gallery, but otherwise I consider the book to be perfect.

eyescrossed
27-12-2010, 07:34
Last week I had an annihilation game against Dark Eldar. After 6 turns, it was Orks 7, Dark Eldar 2. Against a veteran Dark Eldar player who would probably give it the same score I did, a 1.

This reply is the epitome of truth.

/sarcasm off :rolleyes:

zantis
27-12-2010, 07:36
fantastic codex. its nice to see that GW still has reasonable codex writers to compensate for the idiotic ones (im looking at you Ward and Cruddace). I voted 9. my only issue is the mandrakes and harlequins. mandrakes are so overshadowed by trueborn, incubi, and wracks(if you dont have any haemonculi) that they will probably only be seen in theme armies. i can understand some people using harlequins because they can be rending and carry melta pistols. mandrakes should either have their points cut in half or get the ability to deepstike like marbo and be able to assault the turn they come in. as they are, they just arent worth it.

Wise Guy Sam
27-12-2010, 07:49
Last week I had an annihilation game against Dark Eldar. After 6 turns, it was Orks 7, Dark Eldar 2. Against a veteran Dark Eldar player who would probably give it the same score I did, a 1.

When you say veteran DE player are you refering to someone who has played the current codex for a long period of time and learnt the book from front to back or are you just refering to someone who has played a previous edition?

eyescrossed
27-12-2010, 08:03
Maybe he's the DE player and rated it 1 because he's bitter about losing.


:p

Vaktathi
27-12-2010, 10:24
Just got to play against it today with my CSM's, and even with the bonuses of going first and controlling the flow and focus of the battle (opening very aggressively) and basically playing on their side of the table the whole time, I only managed a draw against a player with some rather bad dice luck. It's definitely a good book, I don't see where people are rating it 1's. It has problems against certain types of Ork armies and IG (most especially mechanized IG), but then that's nothing new and given the nature of the army probably not anything that will ever change.

Archibald_TK
27-12-2010, 11:57
Maybe he's the DE player and rated it 1 because he's bitter about losing.
Are you implying that losing one game is not enough to judge an entire Codex?

Ridiculous! Calumny!

Next you will pretend that when someone lose a game it may be the player's fault while everybody know it's only because the army is weak!

eyescrossed
27-12-2010, 11:59
This is why we need a Like button :D

AFnord
27-12-2010, 12:20
I think the codex deserves a strong 8. I'm not too fond of the way GW handles FNP (in my mind, it should either be for a few incredibly tough infantry units, where a high T score is not appropriate, or for psychotic mainacs who works themselves up in such a battle frenzy that they won't even notice serious injuries, like a lost arm (like death company marines)). There also seem to be quite a few upgrade options that are less than stellar.

The book itself feels well crafted though, and there does not seem to be any major balancing issues. It feels like one of the best, if not the best, codexes to date.

Souleater
27-12-2010, 12:58
Eight from me.

Solid writing but some ommissions and points costings that just irk me:

Mandrakes - such lovely figures. I must make a diorama with a Zoat Mounted Squat fighting a Pyrovore mounted Mandrake. Call it 'Across the ages' or something.

Incubi lacking Plasma Grenades

Most Arcane Wargear is junk.

Dark Lance costs - double nerfs are stupid, GW. Please learn to tweak things rather than smash them.

Succubi - should have been the hand-to-hand non-SC HQ choice but Archon are so much better.

The naming of Grotesques - why change their name and then use the old one for a new unit?

Bonzai
27-12-2010, 15:19
I posted an 8.

Fluff: Kinda Meh... I wish they went into a little more detail as to how the DE became soul eaters. It's not like some craft world eldar can wake up one morning, and go "Mmmm.... I have a rumbly in my tummy that can only be satisfied by devouring tortured souls". Or can they..... :eek:

Rules: Only a few minor complaints.

1. Mandrakes are awesome models whose rules just don't quite do them justice.

2. I really wish that HQ's could still take Jetboards and jetbikes. Would love a Haemonuculi on a reaver to join the squadron.

Other than those minor things, I think it's a great dex.

orkz222
27-12-2010, 15:41
Perfect 10 here.

I think the two that voted 1/10 must have missed their 100points 10men 2 DarkLances squad. :D

DDogwood
27-12-2010, 16:01
As we should vote for the overall package, the fluff killed the DE for me. They were for me in the past a race, who just loves to torture and to sell pain. But now, they were reduced to a job - a must have. They can't live without doing that. They had to do it. I liked the thought much more, that they just do it for nothing.

Funny, for me it was the exact opposite. The old DE had little appeal to me because the background was sketchy and arbitrary. "We're evil becausewe like to torture, and we like to torture because we're evil!" There just wasn't any logic to it, so the army felt like cheesy Eldar with crappy models.

The new DE are still evil, but now there's at least a reason for them to torment and raid besides "we were kinda bored". I'm ok with a little mystery in an army background, but with the old DE it didn't feel mysterious, just pointless.

Max_Killfactor
27-12-2010, 16:56
As a long time DE player, it gets a solid 8 for me. It greatly exceeded my expectations though.

I really like how my old army list was still playable and competitive, very little changes needed.

The only downside for me are a few balance issues. Drazhar suffers from the same problems as the Eldar PL's, some units I feel are overpriced, and the lack of the jetbike Archon.

Still, I am very happy with this Codex. I think it's power level is perfect and the models are great.

Shamana
27-12-2010, 17:36
On the downside I think there were some cop-outs here and there, namely trueborn and bloodbrides. They're pretty much rip offs of their cheaper versions with slightly better ld and another attack (the latter being barely useful for trueborn)

I'm not sure that's such a big downside. I'd say a lot of armies have such "upgraded versions" units - SM vets and chaos chosen come to mind, and depending on how you see it IG vets/stormtroopers may be similar too.

DeathMetal4tw
27-12-2010, 18:17
I'm not sure that's such a big downside. I'd say a lot of armies have such "upgraded versions" units - SM vets and chaos chosen come to mind, and depending on how you see it IG vets/stormtroopers may be similar too.

Yeah, but I would've loved our trueborn to at least get some nice ghostplate.

Lord Damocles
27-12-2010, 19:23
Incubi lacking Plasma Grenades
This could actually be quite a clever move.

Background-wise, the role of the Incubi is as a bodyguard for high ranking Dark Eldar. By not giving the Incubi Plasma Grenades, players are encouraged to attach the thematically appropriate Archon (with Phantasm!) without being forced to take Incubi as a retinue.

Eldanar
27-12-2010, 20:18
Rated a 9, as I think this is a very well-done book, with lots of choices and options; that captures the look and feel of the army; and that in some way significantly advances the army from its prior incarnations.

Grimtuff
28-12-2010, 12:57
Last week I had an annihilation game against Dark Eldar. After 6 turns, it was Orks 7, Dark Eldar 2. Against a veteran Dark Eldar player who would probably give it the same score I did, a 1.

Warpcrafter: Master of deductive reasoning! :rolleyes:

Seriously, give the codex a good few runs out before condemning it after 1 game.

UberBeast
28-12-2010, 16:21
Overall a magnificent book. They did a great job of rewarding players for following a playstyle that represented the army's fluff and not just throwing a bunch of mechanics and rules at you then letting the players simply build the strongest list. It feels fragile, and without many templates you feel like you're surgically slicing your opponent while trying to keep your scalpel from breaking.

Downsides simply seem to be that some of the units didn't receive enough thinking before they were dropped into the book. Namely: mandrakes, harlequins, and trueborn.

Mandrakes needed some kind of special CC weapon, or even deepstrike instead of infiltrate. They are supposed to enter the real world through shadows and have special ethreal bodies and weapons. Why couldn't they ignore invul saves or something?

Harlequins being copied from the eldar book was a little short sighted as they have long been considered fairly mediocre. All they needed to do was add a special dark eldar weapon or even a ride to give them a bit more flavor.

Trueborn: nice to get the extra special weapons, but I'd have rathered +1 BS over a +1 attack for a unit that I want to be shooting instead of CCing. There are plenty of other options in the list to get heavy weapon support without wasting points on attacks.

Grimtuff
28-12-2010, 19:00
Trueborn: nice to get the extra special weapons, but I'd have rathered +1 BS over a +1 attack for a unit that I want to be shooting instead of CCing. There are plenty of other options in the list to get heavy weapon support without wasting points on attacks.

You wanted 2 BS5 Dark lances for 86pts? Mmmmkay.... :eyebrows:

Kurisu313
28-12-2010, 19:48
So at the time of writing, 90% have voted 8 or above.

So, it seems like it is a success, and no one has posted a good reason for any of the lower results.

Good job, GW. Credit where credit is due.

Hovey
28-12-2010, 20:18
Solid 9.

I've played Dark Eldar since the initial release. I don't know if in any game the anticipation has paid off so well for me.

Using the word "perfect" to describe 10, makes it sound impossible to reach as there will assuredly be something to complain about.

They shattered every expect ion I had. I would not have hoped for so much.

Every single unit is better then it was with the exception of Warriors, who are possibly the same level of power just in a different way (Poison weapons instead of cheap lances).

Most units in the old book were unplayable under any condition; Mandrakes, Hellions, Scourges, and Grotesques.

The only thing really holding Madrakes back in the new book is just being outclassed by competing elite units.

I always thought Splinter Weapons needed something to represent the poison and toxins they use, 4+ poison was a beautiful and flavorful answer.

New Units! Court of Archon, Wracks, Elite versions of Wyches & Warriors, new transport, and 2 new flyers.

Units being labled correctly; Fast Attack - Scourges, Fast Attack - Warp Beasts, Wyches always - Troops, Incubi - Elite.

My biggest complaint are; Mandrakes having such beautiful models that will go unused in most Dark Eldar Armies, no Jetbikes/hoverboards for Archons/other leaders (I had several Converted), gonna miss Retinues of Incubi & warriors (I loved the wound soak for small point investment), and no form of Flight for Talos ( I was expecting them to count as Jump Troopers).

Which to have such a short list, compared to the horrors of the last book is beyond amazing.

UberBeast
28-12-2010, 20:21
You wanted 2 BS5 Dark lances for 86pts? Mmmmkay.... :eyebrows:

Honestly I hadn't thought of that, but it wouldn't have been hard to increase the price on the dark lances to reflect this.

adreal
29-12-2010, 00:00
This could actually be quite a clever move.

Background-wise, the role of the Incubi is as a bodyguard for high ranking Dark Eldar. By not giving the Incubi Plasma Grenades, players are encouraged to attach the thematically appropriate Archon (with Phantasm!) without being forced to take Incubi as a retinue.

+1 to this, and I do:D

I gave this a 8, it's a high 8, but it's an 8. Dark lances cost to much for what they do, or really the cost to much to deal with the over saturation of vechiles this edition, which is okay, but hurts warriors.

While I do like having FnP on my big warrior squad (thanks haemmi) it's pretty powerful, and can be frustrating for the opponent. So the codex, while good, wont get a perfect score, still it's a heck of alot of fun to play

Silent_Moebius
29-12-2010, 08:24
So, it seems like it is a success, and no one has posted a good reason for any of the lower results.

Ok, good you "read" all the posts. I voted 5 and described why. If this what I wrote is a "good reason" for you, I can't tell. But for me it is ;)

Kurisu313
29-12-2010, 08:54
Ok, good you "read" all the posts. I voted 5 and described why. If this what I wrote is a "good reason" for you, I can't tell. But for me it is ;)

Sorry, by lower results I meant the ones' and two's. I wasn't referring to your post.

Sorry for any misunderstanding.

Archibald_TK
29-12-2010, 10:50
Ok, good you "read" all the posts. I voted 5 and described why. If this what I wrote is a "good reason" for you, I can't tell. But for me it is ;)
Out of curiosity, if the fluff was not taken into consideration (or if it was on par with the previous Codex for you), what note would you give it?

Bone Crusher
29-12-2010, 10:56
I love the army. The internal balance is fantastic and I love how fantastically evil they are.:p
I was considering starting them before the codex announcement, boy did I get an awesome surprise.

9/10