PDA

View Full Version : Dark Eldar, Competitive or Underpowered?



Knifeparty
10-02-2011, 17:49
Well I had my first REAL game with DE last night, I say real because my actual first game was a 3 on 3 battle against 4000 points of mech guard and 2000 points of Space wolves, it isn't fun when you're flying around in paper airplanes. I'm talking like 12 chimeras 4 leman russ's, 3 medusas, a hellstorm rocket battery and 3 vendettas, add long fangs and razorbacks for flavor.

Anyway...on to my first real 1 on 1

I won the battle last night by 1 kill point against a fairly average mech Eldar army. Lots of Scatter Lasers.

Every single person at my shop looks at me like im insane for trying to use DE because they claim them to be super underpowered albeit a beautiful army. One guy apparently bought an army, lost 14 times in a row and then sold it. Another guy has lost 7 times in a row and given up. I guess it was back to wolves and guard for them...

This was my first time ever using a non-power armour army, and it was definately something to get used to. I'm a little suprised I won to be honest. Lots of people laugh when I say I don't use any haemonculi either, but I managed to get feel no pain on 3 units last night and I probably only made like 5 feel no pain saves anyway, so I'm not sure 50 points is worth it, but that remains to be seen.

What have you guys found with the new DE, underpowered, or just right. I know they are supposed to be the tactical army of 40k, but maybe they should have added a little bit more power?

IcedCrow
10-02-2011, 17:54
They are a challenge to play. They will be underpowered to most people because most people really aren't that good and as such stick to armies that lend more credence to their lack of ability by being hugely forgiving.

Dark Eldar are not forgiving. If you make a mistake in your army build or on the table, and your opponent is halfway decent, you will get put back hard and it could cost you the game.

Armies like marines you can make several mistakes and still be in the game.

I like this about DE though. A person who can win consistenly with Dark Eldar can win consistenly with any army and to me are good players.

By the way I'm in the camp of people that aren't very good. I play chaos marines. And I lose as much as I win.

kalspriggs
10-02-2011, 18:00
I think they're competitive. It's not a 'guaranteed' win, even when you're playing a less than stellar opponent. You just need to think through every move. A single mistake can be the difference between a victory and total defeat. And bad luck can do you in pretty easily as well.

All the same, roll with the punches and refine your list and the True Kin have an amazing ability towards total carnage.

Knifeparty
10-02-2011, 18:07
Yes, I've already started to refine my list.

I'm dropping a unit of witches for reavers, and I bought splinter racks for my warriors with the points saved.

I tried to cram a haemonculus in with my incubi, but I can't bring myself to take him naked without any cool options.

Hendarion
10-02-2011, 18:11
I guess it was back to wolves and guard for them...
I don't wanna be mean, but someone who plays Wolves or Guard maybe doesn't know how to play with a fair army?

On topic, I'd say DE are competitive, but not easy to master. Especially because their transports are so fragile. If I won't have too many minis (to paint) already and would have more money, DE would be a really interesting choice.

Knifeparty
10-02-2011, 18:16
I don't wanna be mean, but someone who plays Wolves or Guard maybe doesn't know how to play with a fair army?

I disagree, I think its up to the person.

I also play space wolves, but I have a pretty assaulty in your face army. I play armoured 2nd great company. No long fangs for me! ...but I do use Njal:angel:

Fable
10-02-2011, 18:33
Half their units aren't out yet so a lot of people aren't building really flexible lists yet. Honestly I think they're quite competitive, but in a similar manner to the old dex you simply have to be on your game every turn in order to succeed. Minor mistakes can easily lose you the game and major mistakes are completely debilitating. When using the Dark Eldar it's best to think of it this way: god forgives, the Dark Eldar do not.

Vaktathi
10-02-2011, 18:48
Well I had my first REAL game with DE last night, I say real because my actual first game was a 3 on 3 battle against 4000 points of mech guard and 2000 points of Space wolves, it isn't fun when you're flying around in paper airplanes. I'm talking like 12 chimeras 4 leman russ's, 3 medusas, a hellstorm rocket battery and 3 vendettas, add long fangs and razorbacks for flavor.

Anyway...on to my first real 1 on 1

I won the battle last night by 1 kill point against a fairly average mech Eldar army. Lots of Scatter Lasers.

Every single person at my shop looks at me like im insane for trying to use DE because they claim them to be super underpowered albeit a beautiful army. One guy apparently bought an army, lost 14 times in a row and then sold it. Another guy has lost 7 times in a row and given up. I guess it was back to wolves and guard for them...

This was my first time ever using a non-power armour army, and it was definately something to get used to. I'm a little suprised I won to be honest. Lots of people laugh when I say I don't use any haemonculi either, but I managed to get feel no pain on 3 units last night and I probably only made like 5 feel no pain saves anyway, so I'm not sure 50 points is worth it, but that remains to be seen.

What have you guys found with the new DE, underpowered, or just right. I know they are supposed to be the tactical army of 40k, but maybe they should have added a little bit more power?

DE are a great army, a very powerful MEQ killer, but have some rather blatant hard counters, such as mech IG as you found out.


DE are generally really very good at dealing with very powerful things. They can take on all the MC's, TWC's, Terminators, expensive & flashy HQ's that anyone wants to throw at them. DE will crush those kinds of units. What DE have a problem with is lots and lots of middling enemies. DE have no problems killing off 4 Land Raiders, they have big problems dealing with 8 Chimeras though.

DE are an army that will take lots of time and patience, as well as an intimate knowledge of the rules to play well. They aren't like SM's where every unit can at least try to do anything and fall back on damage mitigation if it gets putzed.

However that said, once acclimated to the army, it's strengths and weaknesses understood, and assuming you are playing with half decent terrain, DE are very powerful, especially against very "elite" armies.

SPYDER68
10-02-2011, 19:01
i started DE for an army that is a challenge to play.

So far i havent lost yet with my build.

It does take alot of skill and it is very tough if you make a mistake

Yes.. your paper thin.. but that means you just have to use the rest of the army to make up for that.

Hendarion
10-02-2011, 19:05
I don't wanna be mean, but someone who plays Wolves or Guard maybe doesn't know how to play with a fair army?
I disagree, I think its up to the person.
I also play space wolves, but I have a pretty assaulty in your face army.
I think you entirely miss-understood my saying. (broken Wolves are broken and IG is super easy to build up mega-competitive armies)

TheWarmaster
10-02-2011, 19:14
I've played two...three games with my DE, going from KP vs.Chaos Space Marines 2-3, I lost, Objectives against Demons, Draw, and Objectives against Marines, I tabled my opponent. Though the Marine player was my old friend, I must say he was tactically incomptetent. Everytime I play, there have been two constants; My raider and my hellions get killed somehow. And in my first two games my warriors were also destroyed. I'm not sure if I'm doing this right, but I'm going to build a wych cult army based on this knowledge. So yeah, they're challenging but competive.

Xarian
10-02-2011, 19:42
Are reavers used that often? As I look at them, using bladevanes with a large unit, they seem extremely scary... maybe scary enough to be a fire magnet after they slash apart your opponent's shootiest infantry unit

althathir
10-02-2011, 19:54
Dark Eldar are imo a competive army but they're fragile, and have a learning curve. I think the reason most people are down on them is because they're unforgiving and people don't stick with them through the rough patches.

Honestly though most armies can be competitive some armies like IG and wolves are more straight forward and easier to pick up but really besides Necrons (they really need a book) all armies have some pretty tough builds. I have eldar and space wolves (yeah I know cheater armies :D) and honestly CWE is the army im best with even with a dated codex.

Reflex
10-02-2011, 20:42
There are 2 clubs I go to that run tournaments. not my local one, a chap with DE smashed everyone to win. he was devastating to play (I didnt play him) but he smashed 2 mech guard lists, a long fangs list and a vulkan list. he's been playing dark eldar for 8 years.

dark eldar take time to understand. they are quite a tricky army.

Mánagarmr
10-02-2011, 20:50
I don't wanna be mean, but someone who plays Wolves or Guard maybe doesn't know how to play with a fair army?

You're aware that the Dark Eldar codex was done by the same gentleman who did the Space Wolves, right? ..

People who claim that Guard and Wolves are "broken" armies, tend to be unskilled, petty, arm-chair generals who like to explain away their own shortcomings with their army of choice by blaming their loss on another book being "unbalanced". Oh but hey, I'm not trying to be "mean" or anything.

Tarik Torgaddon
10-02-2011, 20:59
Hendarion, your posts are inflammatory and childish.

That said, I think that the Dark Eldar are just right at the moment. They're certainly a contender in the hands of a decent player.

SPYDER68
10-02-2011, 21:08
You're aware that the Dark Eldar codex was done by the same gentleman who did the Space Wolves, right? ..

People who claim that Guard and Wolves are "broken" armies, tend to be unskilled, petty, arm-chair generals who like to explain away their own shortcomings with their army of choice by blaming their loss on another book being "unbalanced". Oh but hey, I'm not trying to be "mean" or anything.

Then you have people in denial about the 2 armies being easymode to build and play.

Hendarion
10-02-2011, 21:13
Now I am childish because I am saying that IG and Wolves are too easy to be played, because they are way too hard?
I never said I can't beat them, quite the contrary. But they offer so many things for so few points (and slots... Russ Squadrons...*cough*), it's insane. Everybody who tries to denie that seriously has to check the point-cost and the massive reductions of them for these two armies over time. That had been proven so many times here on warseer and is a fact.
It is inflamatory to say that it is easy to build mega-competitive lists with these two armies? Explain me please why is that.

And it is also a fact that playing DE instead of Wolves or IG will give a lot of headaches.

Knifeparty
10-02-2011, 21:21
While it is true that SW and IG have some obviously abusable rules, it is in the end up to the opponent to make the decisions on what goes into the army. But this is not the place for that particular conversation.

SPIDER68, I'd like to know what your running and finding useful since you're finding such success.

I run currently:

Vect, 7 incubi, 2 units of 4 Blaster true born, 2 units of 10 Warriors, 2 units of 10 wyches, and 3 ravagers. All units are either in raiders or venoms.

Mánagarmr
10-02-2011, 21:35
Hendarion, your posts are inflammatory and childish.

Glad somebody can call it like it is.


Then you have people in denial about the 2 armies being easymode to build and play.

Your signature says you play Dark Eldar. I bet you must be a pro - because only highly skilled gamers can win with armies that aren't "broken".. :rolleyes:


Now I am childish because I am saying that IG and Wolves are too easy to be played, because they are way too hard?
I never said I can't beat them, quite the contrary. But they offer so many things for so few points (and slots... Russ Squadrons...*cough*), it's insane. Everybody who tries to denie that seriously has to check the point-cost and the massive reductions of them for these two armies over time. That had been proven so many times here on warseer and is a fact.
It is inflamatory to say that it is easy to build mega-competitive lists with these two armies? Explain me please why is that.

It is incredibly childish.

"My army takes skill. Anyone playing another army has it easy, and has forgotten how to play"

:eyebrows:

Minsc
10-02-2011, 21:55
Dark Eldar are very competitive when the player knows how to use them.
My last 3 games vs DE (same player) ended in a win, a draw, and a loss - and not to pat myself on the back here, but I'd classify myself as a fairly good general.

spaghettyhoop
10-02-2011, 22:27
My main army is dark eldar. I Came back to 40k as 5th ed came out (hadent played since second ed until then) and I picked up dark eldar. The staff in my GW store laughed at me when i did, telling me they were very hard to get right and had ugly models. But I fancied a challenge since my 2nd ed days with my good old IG and tyranid armies!

Anyway, a combination of me not knowing 5th ed rules, or dark eldar, meant I was crushed time and time again for the first couple of months. Then I got use to it, going flat out, been very aggressive in my tactics, wych's bogging down huge squads of death company.

It got to a point with the old codex where my friends decided the old codex was "broken" and unbalenced with 5th, becuase I was always winning. I went 17 games without a loss at one point, and in the last 8/9 months or so with the old codex was unbeaten. All because I got used to the armies strengths.

Then came the new codex. So far, I have not lost once. Came close on one occasion, with a draw against a blood angel army thanks to a baal flamestorming me (i overlooked the fast vehicle rule). But what I have noticed is that the tactics are very similar to the old codex, just with more variety. It has now switched to my mates claiming codex creep and that im too powerful because its the latest codex. I cant win! haha.

What it comes down too, is tactics. Ive seen a lot of "newb" dark eldar players moaning about the army, but its glaringly obvious why.

- Treating them like other armies. Dark eldar are an alpha strike army. You cant play them like marines. I have seen a few newer players try and use warriors as a gun line, or to hold back from rushing forward to try and protect transports. That isnt going to win games.

- Models available. I have access to wracks, scourge, and a lot of older models, that are still viable if you dont mind the older style looking weapons. Most new players are running armies purely made of wychs, warriors and a ravager.

They are a hard army to learn I think, much harder than my chaos or red scorpions ones have been. But in the right hands, the dark eldar are near unstoppable!

ps - Regarding reavers. Even a squad of 3 with some cluster caltrops thrown in is deadly. I run 2 squads of 3 with caltrops in each. They simply blast over threatening units early on, softening them up. They often die to a fair bit of fire in the first or second turn, after doing the damage. But usually have done their job in kills, and have on more than a few occasions drawn fire away from mymore valuable units.

Nothing scares your opponent more than 10 or so hits on units he thought were out of range of everything!

madden
10-02-2011, 22:52
I agree with most of the above I've been using them scince there release(first time round 3rd ed) and they are not an easy army to use every unit needs to work with others to get the best out of them mistakes can and do cost you the game but I've more wins than losses over all mine use minimal transports and a hoard of 60+ warriors with elite units here and there to deal with cc specialists (mainly incubi in a venom) with fast attack for distraction and flank/ rear attacks the only thing I have trouble with are walkers so haywires on a unit or two in raiders hiding for counter attack. As to competitive yes IF used carefully.

archont
10-02-2011, 22:57
LOL@people claiming that IG and SW are not the armies requiring the least effort to get working, srsly? Do you play this game? It doesn't even matter what you throw at GH, countercharge+2ccw - those guys are insane and carry up to 3 special weapons with WGBL, sporting t4&3+ they can engage tanks, rapidfire at mediumsized GEQ, boltpistol and charge or rapidfire and countercharge against true hordes - supported with razorspam and target-splitting longfangs w/5missilelaunchers

Guard... Lol lets not even talk


Blood Angels though? They're good, but a long shot from being OP.


People who play DE well clock in right beneath SW and IG, imho, while people who do not play DE well clock in at the bottom quarter of codexes.


All in all though, with decent strategy and listbuilding, there's no such thing as an pverpowered army - not even IG/SW, though they require near nill brains to play... :)

Vaktathi
10-02-2011, 23:14
But they offer so many things for so few points (and slots... Russ Squadrons...*cough*) Leman Russ squadrons are a sore point? really? That? The horrifically punitive squadron rules, along with huge point costs, don't factor in here? When was the last time you saw Russ squadrons in a competitive list?


it's insane. Everybody who tries to denie that seriously has to check the point-cost and the massive reductions of them for these two armies over time. And lets be honest, how often did you see a Chimera pre-2009? :p


Yes, Space Wolves are the current "easymode" Space Marine army and are drastically undercosted, it doesn't mean that players are bad or poor generals just because they play them. Yes, IG are the pre-eminent shooting army, again, it doesn't mean people can't be competent at other armies. Not much has in fact changed with the IG playstyle or skill required to play them, they are still a relatively static SAFH army that likes to stay well away from the enemy and shoot the **** out of them. They are not however the easy win that most people saw them as that they were in 4E when Eldar were the ultimo-easymode army.

This thread should be about Dark Eldar and their strengths, not how bumhurt others are at other armies. Dark Eldar retain the same strengths and most of the weaknesses they've always had. They've never been great against mech IG even when mech IG were rather poor, they've always been great at destroying low model count, highly elite enemies. The big difference now is that they have a much greater variety of useable units and are better against large horde units (though not necessarily lots of weeny units).

Mánagarmr
11-02-2011, 00:40
there's no such thing as an pverpowered army - not even IG/SW, though they require near nill brains to play.

There is no "hard-mode" army in this game aside from Necrons. If you think otherwise, you're doing something wrong.


Yes, Space Wolves are the current "easymode" Space Marine army and are drastically undercosted, it doesn't mean that players are bad or poor generals just because they play them. Yes, IG are the pre-eminent shooting army, again, it doesn't mean people can't be competent at other armies.

It's funny how you manage to be as insulting towards Wolves as the former posters, then defend your army. Guard don't have any under-costed units 'eh? Huh. :rolleyes:

Anyways, I do agree that you cannot judge a gamers skill by the army he plays.


in 4E when Eldar were the ultimo-easymode army.

Exactly. Every time I see an Eldar player lament about "cheese" I do a double-take. I guess some people are bitter that they're not top of the food-chain anymore. I'm sure that all of the Eldar players then were just really good players though, and it wasn't the codex. :)

Anyways, I'm done ranting. It just gets under my skin when people call-out other codices as being "easy", as if their army requires some masterful tactician to play.

On topic, I have had some decent games against the Dark Eldar so far. They seem to definitely have teeth, and the codex doesn't seem to be hurting for anything.

All in all, a well done book.

Evol Intent
11-02-2011, 00:58
They seem strong to me, definitely not underpowered.

Vaktathi
11-02-2011, 02:03
It's funny how you manage to be as insulting towards Wolves as the former posters, then defend your army. Guard don't have any under-costed units 'eh? Huh. :rolleyes:

Anyways, I do agree that you cannot judge a gamers skill by the army he plays. I said both armies are powerful, how am I insulting towards one but not the other? They both have some very undercosted and/or silly units (grey hunters, vendettas, long fangs, Psyker Battle Squads, Thunderwolf Cavalry, Rune Priests, Hydras) and are both very powerful, but playing either does not mean you are a terrible general. My big deal was that LR squadrons are *not* a component of what makes IG powerful.




Exactly. Every time I see an Eldar player lament about "cheese" I do a double-take. I guess some people are bitter that they're not top of the food-chain anymore. I'm sure that all of the Eldar players then were just really good players though, and it wasn't the codex. :) It is indeed a very strange state of affairs, 3 years ago the game was in an entirely different place and the armies people deride today as OP were terrible and the ones seen as mediocre today were at the top of the food chain back then.

Mannimarco
11-02-2011, 02:35
Personal opinion: Its a good solid dex with some nice variety of builds. We should all be so lucky. Lot of bandwagon jumpers got quite the shock when they realised the new army actually required a greater level of finesse that just spamming the clearly undercosted units like we are increasingly seeing in the newer books.

Honeymoon period didnt last long did it?

The natural progression from:

Woohoo DE announced! Its about damn time! Way to go GW we never gave up on you!

DE: so how do we feel about them? they any good? underpowered? overpowered?

in a while we will probably see:

whaa DE beat me! what the effen crap is this? freaking codex creep man, you gotta buy the new dexes or you gonna lose! Thanks geedubya ya broke the game :mad:

shouldnt be long before we start seeing "so.....they botched that one up eh? what would we like for the next codex? DE wishlist here!"

spiderman5z
11-02-2011, 04:46
every game has its over powered codexes were things are undercosted and just flat out ridiculously broken. The trick is to not build your army to be something completely ridiculous and broken. You can make an army list with units that you like the look of but aren't the best, or to a theme and still win.

Hendarion
11-02-2011, 05:54
Exactly. Every time I see an Eldar player lament about "cheese" I do a double-take. I guess some people are bitter that they're not top of the food-chain anymore.
You can feel free about that "double-take" if you wish, but in fact I didn't even bother to play in 4th at all. :D

And to clarify something about Wolves and IG, as you are all taking it personal: I did *not* mean to offend all of you, but it is a sad fact that many kids without *any* tactical knowledge are buying and playing Wolves and IG in GW-stores and these armies are always a real punch in the face, even if still beatable. But it does not *require* a genius to build strong lists with these Codices. That doesn't mean there can't be smart Wolves- or IG-players. Of course not. But still, there are plenty of kids in the stores which have no clue how to win with Dark Eldar and won't ever find out, but do play very hard Wolves- or IG-lists. That has nothing to do with "abusing" those Codices, but even their basic troops are already a hard kern. Long Fangs or Vet Spam in Chimeras for example.

Dark Eldar are so fragile most of the time that a player has to handle them entirely differently. Yea, Guard in open space are fragile, but they are many and cheap as heck. Chimeras a fragile more or less too (for a transport), but not as fragile as Raiders. And Long Fangs are... well, they are tough Marines with perfect setup. Lots of attacks, counter attack, special weapon spam and they cost 1 point less than a normal Marine. That isn't the case with DE. DE hit hard, but they are not really cheap and you have to get them into combat fast and you (opposite to Wolves) have to be the one who strikes first.

No offence, but you can't tell me that Wolves or IG require the same learning curve or are the same hard to lead to victory as Dark Eldar are.

DeviantApostle
11-02-2011, 06:38
I still say that DE's competitiveness depends on the skill of the general. The reason we'll probably see a fall-off of DE players on the tournament scene is that one mistake may cost you a game and sustaining that level of awareness for a whole tournament can be tricky.

On Wolves and IG, people really overstate the problems here. Wolves got some undercosted troops that worked really well with MSU. IG spams heavy weapons but will hopefully come back to more of a medium with the loss of Inquisitorial allies.

On the other hand, alot of the competitive DE lists I've seen at the moment are Duke Sliscus + Deep Strike + Venom to get the MSU that's so popular at the moment covered. Once we see Beastmasters hit the shelves, my prediction is the Webway Portal + Beastmasters combo will become the new Lash/Thunderwolf Cavalry.

Firmlog
11-02-2011, 11:03
I've had great success with my new DE. Then, I liked the old DE when the codex came out in early 3rd, I just believed most players were playing them wrong.

Here is my list so far, not min/maxed yet, I just bought everything the store had.

Archaon: agoniser, SF, WWP, PGL. I try to run him with incubi, but if the mission doesn't allow (dawn of war) it I'll separate him off with a unit of warriors to put out the portal. The portal is key and needs to be at least halfway accross the field.

Lelith: cause. Run her with a wyche unit as retinue.

Incubi, upg. leader with Onslought. 9 men right now. A little expensive and a little over killy. 9 because I want the lord with them in the raider.

Raider: I only have on raider right now. Cheep and basic with a 5+ inv. Too likely to die so I don't want to suck up too many points.

Warrior squad 1. 10 men, leader AG PGL DL or SC I've tried both, splinter cannon to better effect and cheaper. If I need to I'll throw them into assault with wyche support, between the 2 I should kill it. Generally you'll do more damage with shooting.

Warrior squad 2. 20 men, this is about objective and holding terrain. I still have PGL and AG incase anyone assaults it. Running 2 spliter cannons, Good for killing of Multi would units and area denial. Dawn of war these go in the center the lord with them.

Wych unit 1 and 2 are standard with leader PGL and agoniser. One squad has SI's one squad has Gauntlets. Basically testing to see which wyche weapons I want to use more.

Hellions 10: My original plan Take special char to make them troops and multiple units. Leader has AG and possibly AGL. No grappler as it is too situational and I feel would cause more harm than good. Honestly thinking of dropping them. I thought they had the wyche save in cc but don't. However, they are good at both shooting and CC and fast. Great Gang rape unit, the shoot with 3 assault shots and cc at str 4. I often find myself cleaning up with them after the Reaver jetbikes. 30 shots is nice, but will often kill whoever you want to assault.

Reaver jetbikes 6: 2 str 6 upg. lots of hits, drops most squads (marines) down to 3-5 models depending on starting size. Will get Wasted in cc, so try to put them by dev squads who are unlikely to assault of far enough away no one can assault them. Pretty hard after turn 2.

Ravagers 2. Dark lances for killing vehicles. plain and simple. Still debating about 5+ sv or shadow field. So far 5+.

I have come into occasions where a desintegrator equipped Ravager would be usefull, I may add my next ravager as a d. gunship.

Now, my Hellions haven't failed me yet, but I'll loose a bunch if they don't kill everyone with only a 5+ normal save. This puts them at huge risk for getting shot up on the next turn. They will probably become beastmasters after I get some converted beast or GW releases them, not holding breath. I think I'd rather have another 6 man reaver squad instead. The are however great at taking out flanking/separated units and assisting wyches in winning combat.

Inclubi are too big. They chew up a lot of points, kill everything they come in contact with so have to get to cover to avoid getting shot to pieces(so far I've always rolled 5 or 6, so lucky). However, if I fight a ork horde player I'd want the large squad. I'll probably drop them down to 6 or 7 and or drop the leader to save points and 1st round damage output.

I'd like to add another 3 bikes to reavers, for both damage output and survivability. They have yet to actually whipe out a full unit. So, they don't get FNP unless I roll it for combat drugs.

Oh and I use Blasters in my warrior squads, mix anti-tank and inf. weapons? No, I just prefer the feel of hitting on a 3+ and killing what I hit with it over the randomness of shredders. Against Horde armies if I was able to "sideboard or tailor" I would add them though. An who knows I may need one extra shot to kill a LR or chimera some day.

IcedCrow
11-02-2011, 13:12
I still say that DE's competitiveness depends on the skill of the general. The reason we'll probably see a fall-off of DE players on the tournament scene is that one mistake may cost you a game and sustaining that level of awareness for a whole tournament can be tricky.

On Wolves and IG, people really overstate the problems here. Wolves got some undercosted troops that worked really well with MSU. IG spams heavy weapons but will hopefully come back to more of a medium with the loss of Inquisitorial allies.

On the other hand, alot of the competitive DE lists I've seen at the moment are Duke Sliscus + Deep Strike + Venom to get the MSU that's so popular at the moment covered. Once we see Beastmasters hit the shelves, my prediction is the Webway Portal + Beastmasters combo will become the new Lash/Thunderwolf Cavalry.

Yes and yes.

Also people tend to play their armies like space marines. You can't do that with DE.

Wolf 11x
11-02-2011, 15:58
I wish I had the Wolf army you all refer to. Seems some people are just upset about losing. Regardless, I do well with my Wolves, Mech Eldar, Nids, and even Necrons. I've heard countless players complain about ridiculous things.

As for Dark Eldar, I don't even bother playing them with my Nids. Otherwise, I think they make for a fair fight. I do find the 5+ cover to be a bit too forgiving.

Dark Aly
11-02-2011, 16:59
My deathwing are fearless.... except when fighting dark eldar, then they all have a brown 'trousers' moment

GingerBalls
11-02-2011, 17:17
I'm actually with Hendarion on this one (for the first time ever I think :D).

On topic: I just played a one on one last night with my shiny new DE army at 1000pts against a friend playing BA's. Now the Dark Eldar have a steep learning curve and I'm no master strategist (in fact you might say I suck) but even I was able to table an army most people consider, well, let's just say "extremely competitive".

I'm staying around .500 W/L ratio with some effort and experimenting and a lot of learning but I think if you can't win a single game with DE then it has everything to do with your play style and it just not being suited to DE.

I consider them very competitive even for a semi-novice like myself.

koran
11-02-2011, 17:20
Simply DE are VERY competitive but only if you really know how to play tactics wise. Anyone who claims otherwise just isnt very good. Its simple as that.

Torpedo Vegas
11-02-2011, 17:22
Dark Eldar can handle anything thrown at them and can deal tons of damage. The key is knowing how to get the army to do that. They are glass, and you really need to know how the army works to get everything to fall in place. No paying attention, or making even one stupid mistake can ruin you, even against a sub-par opponent.

Firmlog
12-02-2011, 05:21
The armies I fear playing with Dark Eldar.

Space wolf 6+ drop pods, greyhunter focused army especially with 4 psykers.

Blood Angel Librarian Lists.

Imperial guard Template of doom lists or maybe leaf blowers specifically. Or Psyker Battle squads.

At least until I get a hemonculous with a crucible of maldiction (and hope they bunch their psykers). Seems very one trick pony though.

RunawayCanadian
30-03-2011, 00:44
Every single person at my shop looks at me like im insane for trying to use DE because they claim them to be super underpowered albeit a beautiful army. One guy apparently bought an army, lost 14 times in a row and then sold it. Another guy has lost 7 times in a row and given up. I guess it was back to wolves and guard for them...

What have you guys found with the new DE, underpowered, or just right. I know they are supposed to be the tactical army of 40k, but maybe they should have added a little bit more power?


They are a challenge to play. They will be underpowered to most people because most people really aren't that good and as such stick to armies that lend more credence to their lack of ability by being hugely forgiving.


I believe that IcedCrow hit the nail on the head. they are a challenge because the list must be made just right. i enjoy them, because they are a challenge. my friends use armies that are easier (SM, CSM, Necrons, 'Nids), and i either lose or tie constantly, but i have fun and enjoy my army.

if you lose, it is because you either made mistakes in the deployment, or your list entirely.

Charlie Scene
30-03-2011, 01:01
my friends use armies that are easier (SM, CSM, Necrons, 'Nids)


Necrons, 'Nids


Necrons, 'Nids

:wtf:

How do you figure that Dark Eldar are "harder" to play than Tyranids or Necrons?

This whole "Eldar take a skilled commander" junk is getting way out of hand.

althathir
30-03-2011, 01:47
I actually think when your first starting Nids aren't as tough, 1) you aren't trying to make them work like they did in 4th 2) not stuck with a bunch of horrible carnies 3) their problem is more they struggle againist all mech lists and optimized tourney lists then what most of us started with (bunch of units we though were cool)

ShaiAhlude
30-03-2011, 02:12
I Started playing DE back in 3rd, simply because I already had a SM army (Wolves), and wanted something different.
Well, I got different alright :D
I was also one of only 2 people at the store who played DE. Everyone else & their dog was playing marines, and for those who were'nt playing back then, 3rd edition DE were tailor made to kill marines. So I won far more often than I lost. At first it was because my army had a huge advantage over marine armies. By playing them, I learned what worked (Raider Rush, WWP) & what did'nt (hellions, scourges with dark lances). By the time other people started their 2nd armies (nids, Necrons, Tau) I was well versed in the "Dark Eldar Way".
I honestly did not play much 4th, due to moving for a new job, and the place I lived had ZERO 40k gaming groups :cries:
When 5th edition came out, I stared playing again, but DE were so badly outdated, I had 1 list that any chance to be competitive.
Then the new DE codex came out & there was much oohing & aahing over the new models, as well as cackling and evil grinning as I & my fellow archons began drafting new lists. And to my great satisfaction, the DE were not just a Raider spam army (although it still works).
WWP were viable again, since killing the carrier no longer meant no reserves.
Want to deep strike your whole army? Meet the Baron.
Hey, I like having units start with 2 pain tokens : Get some Haemies & Wracks/Grots together.
I love hellions, I want to field 121 of them if I can. I can? Great!
Reavers now kick serious butt. Scourges are now fast attack. Ravagers are no longer our only vehicle-based heavy firepower. And they still own Land Raiders. And hey, I can run some harlequins now. And don't forget the Venom.
But there are balances too. Incubi are really expensive. Grots are really,really expensive. You can't put your Archon on a bike or a skyboard. Mandrakes are still hard to figure out. Disintigrators are'nt as sexy. Raiders are almost double a rhino in cost. Nothing is really cheap (except warriors).
To make a long story shorter (too late), I play DE in 5th edition, and win more often than I lose. So yes, the DE are competitive, for the simple reason that they do quite well against some types of armies, rather poorly against others, and can hold their own against "generic" lists.

Woodsman
30-03-2011, 03:49
they are a challenge. my friends use armies that are easier (SM, CSM, Necrons, 'Nids),

Wait, what? You must be so proud beating those Necrons and 'Nids, I mean, I wish I could :rolleyes:

Seriously though?

I think DE can be pretty competitive its just that a lot of people seemed to start them as a second army/replaced their marines and didn't realise they're not quite the same thing. There also seems to be a lack of perseverance and working at the army until you can win with it. I must have lost my first 20 odd games when the 3rd ed Eldar dex came out and that had a fair amount of inbuilt cheddar.

Both eldar armies are pretty good they don't take a genius to play, you just approach them a little differently to MEQ.

eldargal
30-03-2011, 09:52
I've had great success with Dark Eldar, even against mech IG. The whole 'Eldar need a skilled player' thing is half true. What they need is someone who understands the army, knows how to use it and realises it is less forgiving than most other armies. This doesn't mean an Eldar player that wins is some how better than the (for example) Marine player he or she defeated, it just means they have learnt how to use what is a challenging army.
Space Marines and IG are much more forgiving in comparison, and it is possible for relatively mediocre players to coast along using them. This is not true of any kind of Eldar. But if a mediocre player persists isntead of giving up after, say, 14 losses, they may learn and ultimately become a good player.

Zweischneid
30-03-2011, 10:06
I've had great success with Dark Eldar, even against mech IG. The whole 'Eldar need a skilled player' thing is half true. What they need is someone who understands the army, knows how to use it and realises it is less forgiving than most other armies. This doesn't mean an Eldar player that wins is some how better than the (for example) Marine player he or she defeated, it just means they have learnt how to use what is a challenging army.
Space Marines and IG are much more forgiving in comparison, and it is possible for relatively mediocre players to coast along using them. This is not true of any kind of Eldar. But if a mediocre player persists isntead of giving up after, say, 14 losses, they may learn and ultimately become a good player.

Still doesn't change the fact that against equally skilled players (i.e. those who have "learnt how to use" their Mech IG or Razor-Wolves or whatever to the T, with all the strenghts, weaknesses, trade-offs and options no matter how outlandish, who balanced their list to the same degree, suffered through equal amounts of losses and painful times, etc..), Dark Eldar still come out fairly badly on average (which again isn't saying they never win).

eldargal
30-03-2011, 10:12
What are you basing that on? Becuase it may be true where you are, but its certainly not what I've experienced and witnessed in my group and heard from other groups we have contact with. I think it is gross generalisation.

Tymell
30-03-2011, 10:17
Every single person at my shop looks at me like im insane for trying to use DE because they claim them to be super underpowered albeit a beautiful army. One guy apparently bought an army, lost 14 times in a row and then sold it. Another guy has lost 7 times in a row and given up.

Honestly, I think that says more about them than the Dark Eldar army, since they seem to be using "super underpowered" to mean "lacks obvious insta-win combos".

rattman
30-03-2011, 10:47
I don't wanna be mean, but someone who plays Wolves or Guard maybe doesn't know how to play with a fair army?


Rubbish, I play space wolves, been playing then since they came out (93 ?), I play a shooty space wolf army led by bjorn. Sure I could play a GT army with some thunderwolves and win a lot more, but I love playing something different

Gatsby
30-03-2011, 10:49
I like how SW and IG are getting all upset that people have pointed out that they are the easy button codex's. Guess what? They are!!

However JUST because you play them doesn't make you a bad player (if you run leafblower or longfang spam and claim its your great generalship that wins you games, THAT makes you a bad player.)

The problem with those codex's is that they are far to forgiving, you can make numerous mistakes and still table your opponent within a few turns. To a degree all the SM codex's provide the same forgiveness (though without the same firepower) SoB, Nids, tau, Necrons, DE and eldar dont have that same luxury which is why they are consequently harder to play.

Certain armies ARE more difficult to play and have a certain learning curve, DE are probably the toughest As has been mentioned, if you mess up and your opponent is half decent you are LIKELY to lose.

The trick is to find a build that works for you. Just be aware that things can go INCREDIBLY wrong for you at ANY time (and things will, quite often.)

(as one other poster said... I cant believe I'm siding with hendarion... I feel dirty now.)

Asuron
30-03-2011, 10:53
There is no "hard-mode" army in this game aside from Necrons. If you think otherwise, you're doing something wrong.



It's funny how you manage to be as insulting towards Wolves as the former posters, then defend your army. Guard don't have any under-costed units 'eh? Huh. :rolleyes:

Anyways, I do agree that you cannot judge a gamers skill by the army he plays.



Exactly. Every time I see an Eldar player lament about "cheese" I do a double-take. I guess some people are bitter that they're not top of the food-chain anymore. I'm sure that all of the Eldar players then were just really good players though, and it wasn't the codex. :)

Anyways, I'm done ranting. It just gets under my skin when people call-out other codices as being "easy", as if their army requires some masterful tactician to play.

On topic, I have had some decent games against the Dark Eldar so far. They seem to definitely have teeth, and the codex doesn't seem to be hurting for anything.

All in all, a well done book.

Stop overeacting, Dark Eldar are harder to play than Space Wolves or IG
It doesn't mean anything other than they are more forgiving to play. With Dark Eldar, if you screw up, it could be potentially the game changer, while with those two you can make some mistakes and still get away with winning.

But no do take offense for people stating the obvious=S

orkmiester
30-03-2011, 10:59
they are competitive not under powered simple

i admit with MECH GUARD they have serious issues, but i did come tantalisingly close :mad:

they are really refreshing to play, many people do not know how to cope with them and then you can pick and choose where to strike.

they are very well balanced- unlike some.. and nothing seems to be a major target until things start shooting , and the pain points make up for things as it hurts folks to realise that feeding them units will make them more powerful

they are challenging, but in a different king of way to others, you have to consider your tactics as well as your overall strategy and they are not an auto win army either

just a few of my thoughts

Tymell
30-03-2011, 11:15
Can we drop all the Imperial Guard/Space Wolves arguing? This thread is supposed to be about Dark Eldar, but I'm seeing more posts about those others than them.

Zweischneid
30-03-2011, 11:18
I like how SW and IG are getting all upset that people have pointed out that they are the easy button codex's. Guess what? They are!!

However JUST because you play them doesn't make you a bad player (if you run leafblower or longfang spam and claim its your great generalship that wins you games, THAT makes you a bad player.)


True. SW and IG certainly are "easy button armies". But in comparison, that makes Dark Eldar fairly underwhelming given equal levels of skill by your own words.

Claiming that all is right with the Dark Eldar Dex at "higher skill-levels" even though they suffer at "lower skill-levels" is consequently just as much a misconception. A misconception, which may or may not be caused by the fact that (perhaps regionally), on average, Dark Eldar players may be more skilled than IG/SW players, and the lack of the Codex thus be disguised by an unequal distribution of skilled players between the different armies.

Just because SW and/or IG may be easy to get into, doesn't mean they loose their punch (vis-a-vis Dark Eldar or others) if wielded by an equally/suitably brilliant 40K general.

totgeboren
30-03-2011, 11:32
It's funny how you manage to be as insulting towards Wolves as the former posters, then defend your army. Guard don't have any under-costed units 'eh? Huh. :rolleyes:

To be honest, I think you are the one being inflammatory for calling people 'insulting' when they claim that SW are easier to win with compared to most other armies. It's not a statement against you as a person, it's just a statement of fact, based on the written rules in the different codexses, and their results from tournaments and the like.

Just compare the SW codex with either the SM codex or the CSM codex, and then come back and say that the SW are not "head and shoulders above the rest", or in more competitive terms, "better point for points".

Claiming that is an 'insult' to you is really inflammatory.

And regarding DE, I have played them for many years, though I have not used the latest Codex, so I don't really know how it performs. It seems to be better than the old, and I stopped playing the old because it was an almost auto-win vs small elite armies, and an auto-loss vs hordes, especially IG.

They seem to have even them out a bit, but the general principle remains.

MikeyB
30-03-2011, 11:42
Yeah well! I play a list made up of entirely of blind one-legged gretchin and beat 37 Imperial-space-guard-wolf armies and punched out an Avatar! With my junk!

This just in! Space Marines in "a more forgiving army than most" reveal shocker! Also (D)Eldar die easy! We have more details on these shocking revelations later!

/sigh

As with any army, if you learn to maximise strengths and minimise weaknesses you will do far better. SW/Guard armies str/weaknesses are just easier to spot and adjust for.

I've never liked Deldar for no other reason than I'm an Eldar player of 16 years and biased :P

Son_Of_A_Horus
30-03-2011, 12:54
My two pence...

I haven't played a game of 40k for nearly a year. I miss it. I stopped a few months after SW were released. I was playing SW at the time. Never lost. Wasn't even a beardy list. I got bored. (plus my local shop used to be really clique-y)....but I digress.

I have the Dark Eldar 'dex. I look at it every day. Indeed, when I have some money I will be doing a DE list. From what I can see, the book is well balanced. There is something in there for every gaming style. Yes, the armour on troops and vehicles is a worrisome issue, yet the army has so much serious potential. If you have ever played as Guard or Eldar, you know the risks of low armour and toughness. This army can easily outnumber most others. It is VERY fast. The judicious use of Webway Portals can severely hamper any foe. Heavy weaponry is vicious. The ability to move vehicles 12 and still unload every weapon? COME ON!
IMO, the army would work best if used in a balanced way. Don't go over heavy on specialist units. Named characters? See if you can use an Archon (for example) and tool him up in a similar way...saves points. This army, although I have never played it, is fair and powerful at the same time.

Zweischneid
30-03-2011, 13:00
My two pence...

This army, although I have never played it, is fair and powerful at the same time.

Quite an amazing feat of analysis you pulled there from simply reading through the Codex and never having played (against) the army.

Son_Of_A_Horus
30-03-2011, 13:05
Quite an amazing feat of analysis you pulled there from simply reading through the Codex and never having played (against) the army.

I have seen the army being used and not only that, it doesn't take a genius to analyse the stat lines and the unit costs etc and see what you get for your points in comparison to another 'dex. I HAVE used Eldar before, so the armour thing I am very familiar with. Furthermore, you need only look at what certain rules are available to certain units/characters to see how hard a book is. In game play terms, no, I have no idea from a personal perspective. With that in mind though, how much of the game is skill and how much is luck of the dice? A good General can make ALL the right moves but get shivved by the Dice Gods...

Venkh
30-03-2011, 13:11
I have found that the list overall is weighted towards being able to take down dismounted troops and heavy vehicles.

Every time I have met such a force I have felt in control of the game from the start and if i have lost it has been nothing to do with army selection.

The list struggles a bit with large numbers of mid armoured vehicles like Rhinos and Kans.

This is because the DE do not have an autocannon/scatter laster equivalent with the volume of mid strength shots to trouble them

However, there are loads of options and builds to choose from and any half decent player ought to be able to produce a decent all comers list after the first couple of games.

What tripped me up (initially) was that i overrated dark lances. Once i got over this and retooled my list I got back into being comptetive against mechanised enemies.

The codex is very powerful but it takes time to develop a build and a playstyle that works for you.

Sami
30-03-2011, 13:20
Before DE players start slagging off the codex, I suggest they take a good look at their army list. There are 2 catagories of DE lists:

1) amazing
2) crap

That's it. No middle ground. No average lists. An average list will lose you the game against most other average lists, thus is crap.

Absolutely everything in your army list needs to be there for a very good reason, and ideally have multiple roles. The more flexible you make your units (and by flexible I don't mean taking every upgrade going), the more luck you will have.

You then need to balance your army list to have all bases covered. Redundancies of all weapons (anti-tank and anti-infantry) should be included. Multiple ways of killing different targets (tanks, walkers, MEQ, hordes) should be included. DE are so paper thin that you need to ensure every single point spent will always get use.

You will need to adjust your tactics and playstyle for every single game. Don't even think about a game-plan until you've not only seen the opponent's list, but how he has deployed.

There are very few units in the DE codex that work well in a tourney list. Lots of awesome units, lots of killy units, but only a couple that you will bother taking if you want to win all the time. Of course, you can build a fun list if you want, but don't expect it to win much.

Exercise for DE players: If you take Incubi in your army, justify the reasons why compared to other elite slots (or freeing up points for other slot-types). I'm on about unit usefulness/effectiveness justifications, not "because they look cool" or "because I want to", as that goes into the fun-list category. Why you pick them, how many, who with, and what you plan on attacking with them.

Sister_Sin
30-03-2011, 13:20
I find the discussion interesting. I had fair success with the old Codex but have not yet had a chance to play using the new one. I gather it ought to be a very interesting experience on the whole.

Here, a number of people collected Dark Eldar, a few played them, or so I am told ( I was not present at the time), but they are essentially quite rare on the tables and considered very difficult to master. Consistent with many opinions here.

Sister Sin

CentryTheGrim
30-03-2011, 16:13
A quick Incubi justification for myself. Ppl are scared of that unit and they have to deal with it. With a haemonculi in a raider and you got a 3+ feel no pain power weapon unit that can assault 21" (12" raider + 2" disembark + at least 1" fleet (you detached the haemonculi didn't u?) + 6" charge) can wreck a units day. Since they will put signifigant resources into killing that unit their not after my troops and heavy choices. I'll take that.

Very competitive codex just takes a while to learn. Plus I think its the funnest army to play. Balls to the wall!

Venkh
30-03-2011, 16:40
OK, Ill stick my neck out


There are very few units in the DE codex that work well in a tourney list. Lots of awesome units, lots of killy units, but only a couple that you will bother taking if you want to win all the time. Of course, you can build a fun list if you want, but don't expect it to win much.

I think most of the units in the book are great and will appear in one config or another in even the most competetive lists. Some are only optimal in certain builds

These units are all awesome:
Venom
Twin splinters, free flickerfield, trasport for cheap Troops or specialists
Raider
Cardboard workhorse but just what we need
Voidraven
Expensive but if you want something to die, this thing can do it.
Ravager
Cheap lance platform almost irresistable.
Talos
Great for webway, tough, deadly
Hellion
Work brilliantly in large numbers with the right kit and characters
Haemonculi
Awesome HQ, Cheap, plentiful, pain token, great equipment options, core wracks
Can be core and scoring. Min 3 makes them super cheap troop. Liquifiers rock.
The baron
Very Very wrong with hellions
The duke
Great for your wyches. Cheapo.
Wyches
Wonderful tarpit unit with a sting in the tail.
Trueborn
Not so good vanilla but great weapon configurations
Beastmasters
Great for webway deployment. Fast Cheap and lethal in combat

Not Sure
Chronos Engine
Not tried it yet
Grotesques
Bit pricey, need a babysitter
Scourges
Not used yet but might be good with the right weapons
Reavers
They are OK. Still figuring them out. I like em but they are a little flawed in that if you want them to do anything other than turbo, they are very vulnerable the next turn.
Vect
Nasty but pricey as hell. Whatever you do dont take the dias.
Malys
Not sure abot her yet
Razorwing
A bit of a generalist. I like it but still not really sure about it yet.



Not very good
Kabalite Warriors
Just dont synergise well with the raider. Not being able to move 12" and shoot sucks. Wracks can be a cheaper troop filler.
Incubi
A luxury unit in a list that cant afford luxuries. Need an archon babysitter to assault into cover.
Bloodbrides
Not sufficiently better than wyches to justify the price tag although some people like lots of shardnets.
Mandrakes
I acknowlege that some people like these. No Grenades, need a token to shoot, no decent upgrades Just badly designed imo
The succubus
Too vulnerable not killy enough
The archon and his retinue
The archon is only killy with a hideously expensive set of upgrades and a silly amount of luck. Just not worth it IMO.
Decapitator
Like marbo without the shooting options. Rubbish.
Drazar
Not worth the points.

Max_Killfactor
30-03-2011, 17:21
Dark Eldar are competitive.

I don't think they are much harder than any other army, they just take a different mindset. This whole 'expert army' term is thrown around too much.

They are perfect for me and I have a lot of fun playing them. Really doesn't matter if I lose, the new book is close to perfect imo.

Nurgling Chieftain
30-03-2011, 17:57
The only Dark Eldar unit (as opposed to upgrade) that I can't justify taking is Mandrakes (including The Decapitator, lol). There's only truly one indispensable unit (Ravager) and it's not that good, just substantially better (per point) at its role than anything else in the codex. (The Raider is close to indispensable, I wouldn't go to battle without a couple, but there are decent alternatives.) I think the very notion that list-building is the achilles heel of Dark Eldar is rubbish. I mean, don't get me wrong, some people have posted some terrible lists, but I've seen a fairly wide variety of decent lists, and a surprising number of possible good lists. If anything, Dark Eldar have one of the best internal balances of, well, perhaps any codex ever.

But Dark Eldar are both powerful and difficult to play well.

The most common argument against that assertion is that notion that it's inherently contradictory. Wouldn't an increase in skill level be just as beneficial to another army, an army that wouldn't be as difficult to play in the first place? My answer to that is, "Heck no."

My first army was a "Tide of Slime" army in the 3.0 chaos codex. I had a couple predators, a lot of nurglings, a lot of plague marines (one rhino and a couple squads on foot), and a few plaguebearers. It mostly walked across the table. It won most games despite the fact that I'd never even played before. It was also boring. I made almost no significant non-obvious decisions after deployment (and my only truly substantial deployment decision was where the one rhino went). Could my opponent stop my army, or couldn't they? Some could, most couldn't. My own skill had very little to do with it one way or the other. I mean, sure, I could sabotage my position if I wanted to, but generally speaking my movement and shooting decisions were easily made.

My Dark Eldar are not like that.

It's the speed. You're paying points for it, and it takes skill to use well. If you can't wring significant advantages out of the army's high velocity units, you should lose. If that were not the case, the army would be grossly overpowered; if it had all the capacity to go head on to the enemy AND outmaneuver them, then not only would newbies be able to do well with it, but experienced players would be unstoppable. The ability to set up unfair fights makes it necessary, for balance, that they can't win fair fights.

Virtually every game I play with Dark Eldar is described as extremely intense. Typically on turn 2 my opponent spends a long time staring at the table, realizing that the battle is not going to go as they'd thought it would. They're not trying to figure out how to win; they're trying to figure out how to fight my army at all. If they spread out, I pick off poorly supported outlying units. If they bunch up, they can't catch me. Most armies can't play like that at all. But it's not an easy way to play.

althathir
30-03-2011, 18:20
Before DE players start slagging off the codex, I suggest they take a good look at their army list. There are 2 catagories of DE lists:

1) amazing
2) crap

That's it. No middle ground. No average lists. An average list will lose you the game against most other average lists, thus is crap.

Absolutely everything in your army list needs to be there for a very good reason, and ideally have multiple roles. The more flexible you make your units (and by flexible I don't mean taking every upgrade going), the more luck you will have.

You then need to balance your army list to have all bases covered. Redundancies of all weapons (anti-tank and anti-infantry) should be included. Multiple ways of killing different targets (tanks, walkers, MEQ, hordes) should be included. DE are so paper thin that you need to ensure every single point spent will always get use.

You will need to adjust your tactics and playstyle for every single game. Don't even think about a game-plan until you've not only seen the opponent's list, but how he has deployed.

There are very few units in the DE codex that work well in a tourney list. Lots of awesome units, lots of killy units, but only a couple that you will bother taking if you want to win all the time. Of course, you can build a fun list if you want, but don't expect it to win much.

Exercise for DE players: If you take Incubi in your army, justify the reasons why compared to other elite slots (or freeing up points for other slot-types). I'm on about unit usefulness/effectiveness justifications, not "because they look cool" or "because I want to", as that goes into the fun-list category. Why you pick them, how many, who with, and what you plan on attacking with them.

I think that they have quite a few competitive units its more that you need to make sure the list has alot of synergy, throwing in a couple of good units just cause they're good doesn't work well with them. So in a way I agree with you because once you decide on a theme it narrows the available units, but I think DE are a flexible codex.


Dark Eldar are competitive.

I don't think they are much harder than any other army, they just take a different mindset. This whole 'expert army' term is thrown around too much.

They are perfect for me and I have a lot of fun playing them. Really doesn't matter if I lose, the new book is close to perfect imo.

I think that they are harder to pick up intially because they're expensive and fragile and so people give up on them. This leads to the 'Expert army' tag, which in all fairness is more a marketing term than anything.

jsullivanlaw
30-03-2011, 20:15
Dark Eldar are a great army. Even more competitive than the 3rd edition codex was. They tend to kick the crap out of marines and lose to IG. Their are also a lot of different ways to play the army so no one should get laughed at unless they are running a non webway foot list.

My incubi exercise: Sometimes in an objective game an enemy unit absolutely needs to be wiped out. That's what incubi are for. They can also hack deathstar units to pieces. 7 with an Archon works for me. That helps as well.

My favorite units:

Ravager - needed for anti tank
Reavers - excellent anti tank, anti monstrous creature, good contestors, cheap
Incubi - they were awesome and killy in the old codex, and are now even better and 5 points less
Wyches - much easier to use now, much harder to kill with better leadership and scoring, great troops
Raider - excellent transport, cheap and now with a 5++. I even bring empty ones sometimes.
Wracks - because 50 man guardsmen squads need to die, finally we got flamethrowers on non hq choices
Haemonculli - giving out feel no pain is awesome, great for wyches, also great for suicide flame thrower attacks when the wyches have left the transport or need to stay inside.
Archon - some insane wargear combined with awesome stats make this one killy ****.

DarkAngelsG
30-03-2011, 23:20
I agree that this new dex is more competitive than the old one, and I personally really like it. It seems to be a lot more flexible than the old one was, which had more of that CSM feel - you have these ways to build a good list, otherwise, you'll do horribly.

@sullivan
You are aware that you can't take empty Raiders, right? They're a dedicated transport, a dedicated transport has to have a unit to go inside it and it must be deployed with that unit.

I'll go with my opinions on the units, since that seems to be the thing going on here. Any unnamed units I've never used:
Archon - I really see this guy as more of a fear factor than anything else. He scares my opponent, focuses fire, and saves the hide of the rest of my army. I usually run him with an Agoniser, drugs and shadowfield, sometimes throwing in a nade launcher.
Haemonculi - Love these guys, mostly for taking Wracks as troops, but their wargear options are pretty nice, and the pain token is just amazing. I usually run them with a Liquifer, Venom Blade/Scissorhand and/or Animus Vitae.
Incubi - Like the Archon, these seem to be more of a psychological unit/firepower sink than anything else. They rarely do too much in CC, but they do enough to make them worth their while, but they do make sure the rest of my army survives for just a little bit longer. Always, always, run a Klaivex with Demiklaives and Onslaught.
Wracks - Love em love em. Once I finish up my Kabal, I'm for sure building a Coven. Wracks with liquifier guns are my heart and soul, and I personally am tempted to trade my Kabal away for a Coven.
Trueborn - These are my favorite anti-whatever unit. Run them up in a Venom, guns blazing, get the opponent to draw fire on them, and then rush them with other units. I usually run with 4 blasters or 4 shredders and 1 splinter cannon.
Bloodbrides - Used them a few times. Have to say, I much prefer Wyches.
Warriors - They're really not bad. I personally think they suit a role of anti-infantry much much better than the anti-tank, but still versatile, role they played in the last dex. Sometimes fun to run them with a shredder instead of a blaster.
Wyches - Eh. I'm on the fence for them. They usually get shot to death before they really do anything, and if they do get lucky enough to get stuck in combat, they usually barely do anything. I have had a few lucky runs with them though. I never run more than one unit.
Hellions - Used em once. Hated em. End of story.
Ravager - It's okay. It's really gotten debuffed since the last dex, and frankly I don't use it anymore, where I used to run three in every list. I usually have enough anti-tank without it.
Razorwing - Love it love it love it love it. Just run one with SCs and 4 necrotoxins, and you have it made. Amazing anti-infantry firepower, and then after the missiles are fired, functions as a weakened Ravager with limited anti-infantry capabilities. I once wiped out all of someone's troop choices in an objective game with this thing.

Raibaru
31-03-2011, 00:03
I've only played about a dozen games with the new codex, so take that into consideration, but I still can't find the right niche for a great number of the units in the codex.

The biggest let downs for me are Warriors, Scourges, Hellions, Reavers, and practically the whole elite slot.

Warriors I'm finding it harder and harder to justify. 10 isn't cutting it because they don't shoot from raiders well at all and 10 on the ground just isn't enough. 20 hold objectives well, but so do 10 wracks and at least with them I have a mobile raider to snipe with. I haven't used these in awhile.

Scourges I'm having a lot of problems with. Cannons are too expensive to justify with venoms so easy to get. Lances are overkill for such an expensive unit unless you take a min squad as a throw-away. Haywires I haven't found a use for because I haven't played enough and no ones plays IG or Landraider marines. Most of my targets have been tyranids, blood angels, and another DE army.

Reavers I have similar issues with as the scourges. I've tried to do the whole caltrop thing while waiting for a target to be in the perfect position to blow up and fly over terrain in assault with a lance. Just doesn't work. They've been destroyed immediately after hitting a tank every time I've used them like this. Instead I've just been taking a small unit with a blast and skim around taking pot shots and flying out of line of site similar to how people use crisis suits.

Hellions just suck. I've never tried baron, and I've read numerous posts saying the only way to use them is with baron, so fail on me. But these guys just aren't worth it at all from the 2 or 3 times I've used them.

And I hate all the elites. The incubi force me into an archon (I've always gone with just clones, grenades, and a venom blade) as I learned back with original DE a decade ago that it's not worth investing in him as he always fails his shadowfield save in 3 rolls and is instagibbed. Plus haemonculi outshine him in so many ways.

Trueborn are great for a gun boat, but I just don't like (or know how) to use them effectively. I don't need 4x blasters. I wish they could have pistol, ccw, and special weapons as at least then I could use them a little more effectively. 4x Shredders + ccw + pistol for example would have made them an interesting choice.

Brides I hate because I'm not a fan of their killing power or price.

Incubi I love, but they're hard for me to find that sweet spot with them as I've lost them a couple times because they'll rip through a unit and then die to gun fire the next round. Plus having to add 110 points on top of their already high cost for a grenade launcher is outrageous. I suppose GW wants us to support assaults with them and let wyches lead in since they have grenades. But /shrug.

Overall I'm playing similar to how I did back in 3rd and early 4th (when I quite until recently). I load up on raiders (with wyches and wracks this time instead of warriors with 2x lances), 2 ravagers, and some random other unit to fill out the points.

But yea, the only units I've found to pull their own and warrant a repeat appearance in my lists have been haemonculi, wracks, wyches, ravagers, and beastmasters. None of the special characters seem worth it, partly because I just haven't found a niche I like the Archon for that outshines the way I've been using Haemonculi.

Dorn's Arrow
31-03-2011, 00:25
I've heard a couple of very good Dark Eldar players describe the codex as being a spam codex. What they meant by that was that you can't build a 'balanced' list in the same sense as you can with something like Marines - a bit of this and a bit of that won't cut it because it'll all fall to pieces. Instead you pick the direction you want to go in - Webway, Hellions, Beasts, whatever it is you want to do well with and you pour all your points into that one thing. Lots of things are good, but they require a degree of synergy and to be focused on almost to the exclusion of other choices.

Shas'Steve
31-03-2011, 00:49
Dark Eldar are pirates.

Played a really aggressive player a few weeks back.

I was sporting a Farsight Bomb and he was rockin a variety army.

With the exception of Farsight he ran my army hard dude. Keep in mind this same army played and tied the new Grey knights beat Space Wolves, and tied a mech guard army.

Dark Eldar are no joke if you play them aggressive and keep speed at 11 on the 10 scale. They straight dunk on most armies.

The reason you hear people doing poorly is because going from Marine/Guard to DE is going from a broadsword to a rapier in terms of style.

TheLaughingGod
31-03-2011, 00:49
tl;dr version:

Imperial Guard and Space Wolves are broken codices. (Codecii is not a word)

It is easy to win with Imperial Guard and Space Wolves because they allow more mistakes than most armies.

Imperial Guard and Space Wolves are then, rightfully considered easy mode.

Very few players of those armies are truely skilled because they do not have to be. It can coast along with the inherent advantages of those armies and never need to get better.

The rest of it:

People who complain that Dark Eldar or Eldar are underpowered and then go back to playing Imperial Guard or Space Wolves (or similar) are below average skilled players of the warhammer 40,000 game. They are playing a very powerful and forgiving army that requires little in the way of precise strategy or care. You can swing them like a blunt cudgel and expect to do well most of the time.

Dark Eldar and Eldar (And Tau and Necrons) require quite a bit of skill to properly make up for their natural weaknesses (which are easily exploited!) and take full advantage of their more esoteric and situational strengths. That said, once you fully grasp those armies and all their strengths and weakenesses, all the lessons learned being at a handycap will make you a better player, period. You learn to make less mistakes and play your army in a more skillful and precise manner.

Dark Eldar are not underpowered. They just require you to actually be good at the game and understand your army (as well as your opponents)

The above (in one form or another) has been discussed ad nauseum since the beginning of grimdark and really isn't open for debate anymore. It's a well known fact that Eldar/Dark Eldar require more finesse and practice and that Imperial Guard and Space Wolves are far more powerful than their contemporaries or predecessors. This is not up for debate; the vast majority of players already agrees this is how it is.

MikeyB
31-03-2011, 00:52
Lots of stuff that was right

Well said dude! Succinctly put and very well done!

Edit: I even agree with your sig ^_^

Nurgling Chieftain
31-03-2011, 01:01
...and really isn't open for debate anymore.Oh, don't worry, the red splotch where a dead horse once lay will not be exhausted any time soon. :p There's a raging argument over in 40K rules over the basic procedure of moving a vehicle, which hasn't really changed since 3rd edition.

TheLaughingGod
31-03-2011, 01:19
Oh, don't worry, the red splotch where a dead horse once lay will not be exhausted any time soon. :p There's a raging argument over in 40K rules over the basic procedure of moving a vehicle, which hasn't really changed since 3rd edition.

And there's a Flat Earth Society too, it doesn't mean they have any legs to stand on though. It's essentially a done deal. It's not open for debate because the only people who are going to argue it have no valid arguements anymore. They've all been done, refuted, shot down and buried and you're welcome to keep trying but it's already over and done and I'm championing the winning side, thank you very much.

Majlis al-Jinn
31-03-2011, 02:59
They are definitely not underpowered, haha. I only started them recently, but they are pretty disgusting. They definitely compete with the supposedly "easy mode" armies.

Just play knowing that you can't take a punch, and you'll do fine. At least in my personal experience. :D

Kalishnikov-47
31-03-2011, 06:25
I feel as though Warriors are grossly inferior to Wyches as others have stated due to them not synergising well with the Raider. If you are moving fast (Which you should be) you are not shooting. Therefore, their use is very limited.

Wyches do great cause they are meant for assault and do this job so well.

Wracks are great because they are Warriors and Wyches mixed. Wracks jump out of a transport, shoot and assault. Usually the shooting is enough to neuter your opponent.

I like Bloodbrides, I feel that with combined with razorflails, a chick with an Agoniser and a somewhat CC character they will most assuredly kill whatever is in front of them.

Wyches are indeed your best "bang for your buck" unit.

Reavers I have yet to see them do something good, same as for Hellions unless the character is with them...even then.

I am starting to move over to Archons though I have been running Haemonculi for the longest time. Venom Blade and Liquifier gun standard.

Cheers

TheLaughingGod
31-03-2011, 06:32
Wait, can't you just disembark and fire??

I thought the understanding was that Blaster/Splinter cannon Warrior squads were one of the best troop options you could take!

Venkh
31-03-2011, 09:15
5 Warriors with a blaster in a venom are quite good. You can spam these and the trueborn/venom squads ridiculously.

10 warriors in a raider is just poor by contrast, the sort of thing that is 'deadly in the hands of a skilled general' (we all know what that means ;) )

eldargal
31-03-2011, 09:40
Rubbish, nothing wrong with ten warriors in a raider.

Anggul
31-03-2011, 09:54
It really just sounds like the guys in your club (more specifically the guy who played so many times and lost) just don't know how to play Dark Eldar. They're a brilliantly balanced army, who are strong but not too strong like the Guard or Wolves.

It's not too difficult to figure out how to play them, but it won't happen straight away. Their HQs are absolute slaughterhouses in combat, especially with a retinue of Incubi or Bloodbrides, and this kind of unit will let you deal with the real heavy ones coming your way. Ravagers are great at taking out things like Land Raiders, Predators and the various guard shooty things, which would bring down your sky-boats with ease otherwise. The army in general has to keep on the move, sweeping into the best positions you can find to deliver a powerful strike but not receive a game-crippling retaliation.

I probably haven't described it in a massive amount of detail, and it's hard to do so, but do us proud and prove the people in your club wrong!

P.S. Archon with huskblade, soul trap, combat drugs, shadow field and grenade launcher is amusing. Not that I advocate everyone using the same build because they've been told to, but maybe try it out if you're looking for a build for it. Unless you use a Succubus, in which case just go for an agoniser and maybe blast pistol if you have the points left.

adreal
31-03-2011, 10:53
Rubbish, nothing wrong with ten warriors in a raider.


I agree with this


That's all

Haravikk
31-03-2011, 11:36
Dark Eldar have some very nasty close-range units, but don't have the armour or Toughness to get into a firing match except on your own terms (i.e - very weighted in your favour!). So one of the key aspects to playing the army (and building a list) is getting them close as fast as possible with a minimum of losses, preferably isolating enemy units as much as possible to avoid getting shot at too much, while making sure any combats you get into are fast and brutal.
Wracking up pain points quickly is also a key goal as I think Feel No Pain is a very important ability for you to get on as many of your units as possible.

So overall there is quite a lot to consider in order to get the most out of your troops, however when you can get to grips with them I think they'll do a lot more damage than most marine armies, but a single mistake can be very costly.

Son_Of_A_Horus
31-03-2011, 11:44
@Haravikk
So really, you would say mainly troops with a smattering of special units that can hit hard...

tu33y
31-03-2011, 11:53
answer: no.

new models needed, yes.

Venkh
31-03-2011, 13:03
Rubbish, nothing wrong with ten warriors in a raider.

Dont be selfish, tell us how you use them and in what context?


I agree with this

I dont.

That said, I do own 20 warriors and Id be interested to know how i can make better use of them.

The book is full of tricks and Im always open to ideas.

eldargal
31-03-2011, 14:22
What's to say? Ten Warriors in a raider, preferably with flicker field and splinter racks. Pumping out lots of poisoned shots and a couple of DL shots into whatever takes your fancy, backed with either another raider of warriors or softening up targets before the Wyches head in to start emasculating stuff.

You may find warriors underpowered, they may not suit your playstyle, whatever. Fair enough. But that doesn't mean the unit is underpowered, that is all I'm saying. I, and others, clearly, have found them to be effective.

Venkh
31-03-2011, 15:38
Dont you find it annoying losing all those splinter shots when the squad targets a vehicle? Or grind your teeth when moving 3" takes your range down to 12" Or worst of all, have to dismount your squad and leave them in assault range when you move faster than 6"

Also at ranges of 12" or less your raider is going to get double tapped into oblivion by anything with a s4+ gun.

I much prefer keeping my splinter weapons on vemons where i can enjoy almost the same effect without having to venture into bottom smacking territory.

Telesedrin
31-03-2011, 16:04
I'm thinking Venoms are best for Kabalites/ Trueborn, and Raiders for Wytches/ Wracks. But that of course is my own humble opinion.

Plus 4x venoms = 200% more Scoring units than 2x Raiders (with Kabalites of course). It's all about target saturation.

Kalishnikov-47
31-03-2011, 16:34
Wait, can't you just disembark and fire??

I thought the understanding was that Blaster/Splinter cannon Warrior squads were one of the best troop options you could take!

If you are out of your transport more often then not you are dead. If you did that with every unit you had there would be a good chance of survival, but I just don't like risking it.

EDIT-

I never said they were underpowered I just said they do not synchronize well. Trueborn are awesome! Wracks and Wyches I feel are a better combination.

Venkh
31-03-2011, 17:12
So i guess i actually quite warriors then. Just not full squads in raiders.

I guess that moves them up into the awesome section for me.

My main point was that with the right configuration, most units will find themselves a slot in all all comers comptetitive list. I think thats a sign of good design.

Max_Killfactor
31-03-2011, 19:43
I'm not a big fan of 10 warriors in a raider either, but they're not awful... there's just more effecient choices. I think once wracks get official models, you'll see less people using warriors as troops. I like wracks/wyches as troops and trueborn as elites.

I'm looking forward to the wrack models. I've never taken wracks (formerly known as grotesques) before, despite playing DE for around 10 years.

Aluinn
31-03-2011, 23:09
10 Kabalites in a Raider is fine. The transport itself only barely costs any more than a Venom (essentially it's a 5-point difference, because the Venom should always have two splinter cannons, if you decide to give the Raider a Flickerfield--which is not always necessary and can leave it being cheaper, in fact), and yeah, the squad is more expensive, but of course it's also harder to kill. This is the squad to drop into cover on an objective if you think your Raider/Venom is probably not long for this world.

So what you really have with the whole package is: It costs about 100 points more; it comes with more darklight weapons, and about as many splinter shots, though not at such range; and it is harder to kill.

I think a mix of Raider Warriors and Venom Warriors is fine. Using nothing but Venoms would work, no doubt (though I haven't tried it), whereas using Raiders exclusively would probably be less strong, but this doesn't mean Raider squads should just be dropped in favor of Venom squads across the board.

If there's much to be said for Raiders over Venoms, it's that anti-tank shooting is at a much higher premium in the current metagame, and Raiders bring that while Venoms do not (discounting the squads they may carry).

EDIT: As for how I use them, it is pretty much:

-If it doesn't look like the Raider is in great danger from enemy shooting, for whatever reason, run them up a flank in a pretty tight formation, then float 6" per turn and shoot from them--obviously the Raiders in this case fire their lances at hard targets while the Warriors shoot at infantry, unless none are out of their transports, in which case they lend their blaster. This pretty much requires night shields: If your opponent is relying heavily on standard meltaguns for anti-tank, you're golden, because they'll never get close enough to either fire the melta or to rapid fire boltguns or the like at the Raiders. I'm sure everyone knows this who might also use Venoms, as they do the same thing, though, just with the vehicle shooting at infantry while the passengers shoot tanks.

-If the opponent has a bunch of 48"+ range anti-tank shooting--autocannons, missile spam, etc.--zip the Raider formation to an objective, preferably the furthest from the bulk of their army, and dump Warriors into cover near it. They're not as tough as Wracks but they do a lot more in the shooting phase, from a much longer range, and 10 models in cover are never going to die with pitiful ease unless flamed. If anything moves to go after them, bring down other elements of the army on it, like Reavers, Wyches (though I don't use them), or Incubi, and/or focus the fire of the Warrior squads themselves on it. Their shooting at 18-24" is crazy and you can unleash that before they either get rapid-fired or assaulted, if you've done your job at busting transports or just putting a great deal of distance between them and this flanking force.