THE DARK CITY
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.



 
HomeDark Eldar WikiDark Eldar ResourcesNull CityRegisterLog in

 

 Splintermind reactions

Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
AuthorMessage
Dark Elf Dave
Wych
Dark Elf Dave

Posts : 747
Join date : 2017-05-19

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 10:48

@Gelmir wrote:
@Dark Elf Dave wrote:
GW put Harlequins in our codex because they were being lazy. Please don’t see that as a reason to suggest they should be a part of a DE army today. They shouldn’t be...they don’t take enough prisoners!

Under that argument, Incubi shouldn't be in our codex either.
Harlequins should be blades for hire, like Incubi and Mandrakes. They became to big for that now, sure. So at least we should just be allowed to ally with them.

That’s a bad example. I’m sorry I don’t agree with that.

You can ally with Harlequins for a fun game...just not a competitive one at this present moment.
Back to top Go down
albions-angel
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 234
Join date : 2014-05-22

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 11:13

Im lost. When were Quins part of our codex? I remember them being part of the CRAFTWORD codex, but never ours.

They were craftworld before our big reboot in 5th, and that was also when Quins became their own force!
Back to top Go down
Soulless Samurai
Incubi
Soulless Samurai

Posts : 1589
Join date : 2018-04-02

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 11:14

DE losing PfP when they ally is the equivalent of Craftworlders losing the ability to cast any psychic powers when they ally.

_________________
@TeenageAngst wrote:
Never trust the French.
Back to top Go down
Count Adhemar
Dark Lord of Granbretan
Count Adhemar

Posts : 7568
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : London

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 11:23

@albions-angel wrote:
Im lost. When were Quins part of our codex? I remember them being part of the CRAFTWORD codex, but never ours.

They were craftworld before our big reboot in 5th, and that was also when Quins became their own force!

They were an elite choice in the 5e codex.

_________________
Splintermind reactions - Page 3 YhBv3Wk
You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting. In what world could you possibly beat me?
Back to top Go down
harlokin
Kabalite Warrior
harlokin

Posts : 142
Join date : 2013-07-24
Location : London

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 12:12

I think the fact that it is difficult to balance codex for both mono use and soup is really important. You could see the effects with the whole Doom/Jinx interaction with Drukhari, then Razorwings getting points increases because of 'Aeldari plane spam'. You also had Shining Spears and Dark Reapers receiving points hikes not based on their effectiveness in a Craftworld Army, but because they were overpowered when fielded as Ynnari.

I found it laughable that some people used to try and justify taking Skyweavers with their Drukhari as being "all about the fluff". I'm sure it was nothing to do with the fact that Skyweavers were (and still are) deserving of shooting with a nerf cannon, whereas Reavers were thoroughly mediocre.

_________________
"Death is only a concern if you're both weak enough to be killed, and dumb enough not to arrange your own resurrection."

Kabal of the Mon-Keigh's Paw
Coven of the Screaming Statues
Cult of Veiled Malice
Back to top Go down
Soulless Samurai
Incubi
Soulless Samurai

Posts : 1589
Join date : 2018-04-02

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 13:19

@harlokin wrote:
I think the fact that it is difficult to balance codex for both mono use and soup is really important. You could see the effects with the whole Doom/Jinx interaction with Drukhari, then Razorwings getting points increases because of 'Aeldari plane spam'.

While true, I think it's worth remembering that things have already changed considerably since then.

Hell, the whole psychic thing was stopped years ago now.

What's more, it used to be that fielding additional detachments granted you additional CPs - now it's the opposite.

Indeed, DE probably suffer more than most because their Patrol bonus is only accessible in pure DE detachments.

_________________
@TeenageAngst wrote:
Never trust the French.

harlokin and TheBaconPope like this post

Back to top Go down
krayd
Hekatrix
krayd

Posts : 1110
Join date : 2011-10-03
Location : Richmond, VA

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 13:59

@sekac wrote:


I keep seeing this point, and I don't understand it. Other armies lose their monofaction bonus for souping, so do we. How is it that it counts as a penalties for us but count as only "not bonuses" for other armies? It's exactly the same. The difference is in your perception of the rules, not in the rules themselves.

It's not the same at all. If marines lose combat doctrines, then they are still functionally marines. They just lose an additional boost that they get during certain turns. Us losing PfP basically makes the army (especially Covens) pretty non-functional.

Also, you can justify just about anything with a fluff reason. I can justify my reasoning by saying that Drukhari try harder to impress each other when they're the only in the presence of their peers, so they tend to try harder for more precision strikes; therefore Blade Artists should be the mono-faction rule instead. Razz

The Strange Dark One, TheBaconPope, Gelmir and Soulless Samurai like this post

Back to top Go down
sekac
Wych
sekac

Posts : 614
Join date : 2017-06-03

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 17:44

@krayd wrote:
@sekac wrote:


I keep seeing this point, and I don't understand it. Other armies lose their monofaction bonus for souping, so do we. How is it that it counts as a penalties for us but count as only "not bonuses" for other armies? It's exactly the same. The difference is in your perception of the rules, not in the rules themselves.

It's not the same at all. If marines lose combat doctrines, then they are still functionally marines. They just lose an additional boost that they get during certain turns. Us losing PfP basically makes the army (especially Covens) pretty non-functional.

Also, you can justify just about anything with a fluff reason. I can justify my reasoning by saying that Drukhari try harder to impress each other when they're the only in the presence of their peers, so they tend to try harder for more precision strikes; therefore Blade Artists should be the mono-faction rule instead. Razz

That's all fine. I was responding to the assertion that it makes no sense from a fluff angle. By your logic here, that is an impossible assertion to make.

Regardless, you're missing the overall point. For every single army in 9th thus far, the mono-faction benefit is the one that is tied to what turn it is. You may WISH that we had a special exception to the way GW is designing the edition, or you may WISH they were designing the edition differently.

This was an obvious and inevitable change that lines up our codex design with the others already released and the ones still to come.
Back to top Go down
krayd
Hekatrix
krayd

Posts : 1110
Join date : 2011-10-03
Location : Richmond, VA

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 17:53

@sekac wrote:


Regardless, you're missing the overall point. For every single army in 9th thus far, the mono-faction benefit is the one that is tied to what turn it is. You may WISH that we had a special exception to the way GW is designing the edition, or you may WISH they were designing the edition differently.

This was an obvious and inevitable change that lines up our codex design with the others already released and the ones still to come.

Yeah, and my overall point is that, so far, every mono-faction ability is a bonus that doesn't gimp the army if you were to remove it. You're focused on this per-turn thing, but really, it's too early to tell whether that's something that GW will remain consistent with at all. If they want to be really lazy, They could give Craftworlds the shooting equivalent of Blade Artists, and make Battle Focus their mono-faction rule. The point is, at it's core, the mono-faction ability should be a buff for playing mono-faction, and not a punishment for not - so far, until now, the 9th ed codices have been consistent on that front.
Back to top Go down
sekac
Wych
sekac

Posts : 614
Join date : 2017-06-03

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 20:12

@krayd wrote:
The point is, at it's core, the mono-faction ability should be a buff for playing mono-faction, and not a punishment for not - so far, until now, the 9th ed codices have been consistent on that front.

You understand that this is PURELY a perspective thing, right? Glass half-full or half-empty type thing. A space marine player could equally claim that they're being punished for not taking a mono-faction build. Are they factually wrong for feeling that way? Of course not.

You have every right to your feelings on the subject, but that is where this "they only don't benefit, where we get punished" dichotomy resides.
Back to top Go down
Soulless Samurai
Incubi
Soulless Samurai

Posts : 1589
Join date : 2018-04-02

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 20:37

@sekac wrote:
@krayd wrote:
The point is, at it's core, the mono-faction ability should be a buff for playing mono-faction, and not a punishment for not - so far, until now, the 9th ed codices have been consistent on that front.

You understand that this is PURELY a perspective thing, right? Glass half-full or half-empty type thing. A space marine player could equally claim that they're being punished for not taking a mono-faction build. Are they factually wrong for feeling that way? Of course not.

Sorry but this is just untrue. It's not a glass half-empty/half-full situation because we can objectively say that our army is being penalised for allying, rather than being rewarded for playing a mono-army.

The reason is that other armies were given extra bonus for not allying, which were in addition to all their pre-existing army rules (all of which they got to keep, even when allying).

Conversely, Dark Eldar now lose one of their pre-existing core rules (PfP) if they ally.

That is objectively not the same because we have not been given a new bonus in addition to PfP. Instead, we simply lose one of our existing core rules if we ally.

Again, this is not subjective opinion this is objective reality.


_________________
@TeenageAngst wrote:
Never trust the French.

krayd and TheBaconPope like this post

Back to top Go down
The Strange Dark One
Wych
The Strange Dark One

Posts : 833
Join date : 2014-08-22
Location : Private subrealm of the Eldritch Skies Kabal.

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 21:14

I've said it in the past, the only tool that GW knows of is the sledgehammer.

Should there be a drawback in taking multiple factions? Of course there should be. Such flexibility should come at a cost.

Should said drawback make taking allies a pointless endeavor? Probably not, because why would you bother with the possibilities of allies to begin with.

Could GW solve the issue of soup in a more subtle way? Of course they could have.


@harlokin wrote:
I think the fact that it is difficult to balance codex for both mono use and soup is really important. You could see the effects with the whole Doom/Jinx interaction with Drukhari, then Razorwings getting points increases because of 'Aeldari plane spam'.

Frankly, that can be attributed to GW screwing up for the most part. GW designed detachments so that psychic powers and buffs only benefit the units inside that detachment... who had the glorious idea to remove the limitation for one of the best psychic powers? Genius alert.

Stacking negative modifiers on a D6 is simply ridiculous. I doubt GW did the simple math behind this or they would have realized this.

Who had the great idea of stacking ALL the good Kabal abilities into Kabal of the Black Heart? Of course people will do a Spearhead of BH Ravagers. TYVM.

@harlokin wrote:
You also had Shining Spears and Dark Reapers receiving points hikes not based on their effectiveness in a Craftworld Army, but because they were overpowered when fielded as Ynnari.

I found it laughable that some people used to try and justify taking Skyweavers with their Drukhari as being "all about the fluff". I'm sure it was nothing to do with the fact that Skyweavers were (and still are) deserving of shooting with a nerf cannon, whereas Reavers were thoroughly mediocre.

I don't know about that Ynnari part, but I kinda agree on the Skyweavers. Still, I don't think Skyweavers were remotely as popular if they weren't superior to Scourges in every metric conceivable. And and Ravagers/Fliers being nerfed throughout the edition.


The single largest issue is that GW doesn't have a formal concept of allies. A mere CP cost is a very lacking solution. And why again could you bring allied detachments in 8th edition and gain CP by doing so? Nobody knows.

You can have constraints on allies and not totally ruin the viability of lists by doing so. Make it cost 2 extra CP, limit it to a Patrol or make allies not benefit from their racial abilities (instead of all the factions). The design space is virtually infinite.

But we get a really lazy ruling instead which doesn't even hit Kabals that hard.

And it's not just the soup power-players. Many people have a patrol of "Dark Craftworld", "Tortured Wraith Engines" or "Converted Harlequins". Our range is very limited and only got smaller over the years, allies are one way to mitigate this in a fluffy way.


This isn't directed at anyone in particular. I'm just a passionate Game Designer myself.

Edit: So, I don't consider myself a negative person, but I'm kinda salty because I wanted to make a Corrupted Wraithhost as a next big hobby project. Now, I'm not even sure if it's worth it since I'd need to ask my opponent if we can make an exception because otherwise the list will be unplayable.

harlokin and Soulless Samurai like this post

Back to top Go down
sekac
Wych
sekac

Posts : 614
Join date : 2017-06-03

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 22:11

@Soulless Samurai wrote:
@sekac wrote:
@krayd wrote:
The point is, at it's core, the mono-faction ability should be a buff for playing mono-faction, and not a punishment for not - so far, until now, the 9th ed codices have been consistent on that front.

You understand that this is PURELY a perspective thing, right? Glass half-full or half-empty type thing. A space marine player could equally claim that they're being punished for not taking a mono-faction build. Are they factually wrong for feeling that way? Of course not.

Sorry but this is just untrue. It's not a glass half-empty/half-full situation because we can objectively say that our army is being penalised for allying, rather than being rewarded for playing a mono-army.

The reason is that other armies were given extra bonus for not allying, which were in addition to all their pre-existing army rules (all of which they got to keep, even when allying).

Conversely, Dark Eldar now lose one of their pre-existing core rules (PfP) if they ally.

That is objectively not the same because we have not been given a new bonus in addition to PfP. Instead, we simply lose one of our existing core rules if we ally.

Again, this is not subjective opinion this is objective reality.


Incorrect. We have been given Blade Artists. I understand you don't think that qualifies, but objectively, it does.

Moreover, comparing 9th edition to previous editions is pointless, it's a different design concept. I'm comparing 9th edition mono-faction rules to 9th edition mixed factions. You're comparing apples to oranges for purely subjective reasons.
Back to top Go down
Soulless Samurai
Incubi
Soulless Samurai

Posts : 1589
Join date : 2018-04-02

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 22:14

@sekac wrote:

Incorrect. We have been given Blade Artists. I understand you don't think that qualifies, but objectively, it does.

And if Blade Artists had been our mono-faction bonus you'd be right.


@sekac wrote:

Moreover, comparing 9th edition to previous editions is pointless, it's a different design concept. I'm comparing 9th edition mono-faction rules to 9th edition mixed factions. You're comparing apples to oranges for purely subjective reasons.

"You can't compare this to anything else because doing so proves me utterly wrong."

Man, what an outstanding argument. Rolling Eyes

_________________
@TeenageAngst wrote:
Never trust the French.
Back to top Go down
Gelmir
Sybarite
Gelmir

Posts : 253
Join date : 2018-01-06
Location : near Rotterdam

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 22:19

I mostly wonder what I'm supposed to do with my Harlequins. I mean, at least Drukhari and Craftworlds have plenty of models to make an army without allies. But the Harlequin line is six boxes. I hate spamming the same model too many times, but Harlequins now don't have another option really. You'd have more models to choose from if you use only Cults! And even though Cults are pretty good now, I'm sure not many of you are thinking of making a pure Cult-only list.
I hope the Harlequin codex gets a rule stating you can add a Harlequin detachment in an Aeldari army  without losing your mono-faction rule. Because without some fix like that, Harlequins won't see much play at all anymore.

_________________
For my introduction and pics of some of my models:
https://www.thedarkcity.net/t17117-noob-alert
Back to top Go down
Soulless Samurai
Incubi
Soulless Samurai

Posts : 1589
Join date : 2018-04-02

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 22:46

There seems to be a significant level of indecision and contradiction on GW's part as to whether or not the Eldar factions are meant to function as close allies or not.

Notwithstanding replacement sculpts, the last innovation for any of the Eldar lines was Ynnari (and that was back in 7th), which are supposed to unite the Eldar factions under a single banner.

This alone would kind of imply that the Eldar factions are meant to work closely together. However, the rules really haven't managed to support that. Even after revisions and such, you couldn't field Ynnari units from different Eldar books in the same detachment and even when you fielded them via different detachments it was still an exceptionally clunky army with a lot of stuff that didn't really work properly (e.g. commander units were still restricted to buffing units from their own book, rather than all Ynnari units).

The DE book seems to hint that some of this might change, yet in the meantime we're rather stuck because the current ally rules strip DE of a key ability if they ally (and nothing Ynnari currently gives them makes up for that).

Indeed, even if Ynnari changes, it's hard to see how it will help us. After all, if Ynnari gives us back the invulnerable saves and charge after advancing that we currently rely on PfP for, that's going to be a bit depressing for Ynnari Harlequins who'll have both of those things already. tongue

Maybe there will be a solution but in the meantime we're stuck waiting for the other Eldar codices to be released in order to even find out.

_________________
@TeenageAngst wrote:
Never trust the French.
Back to top Go down
krayd
Hekatrix
krayd

Posts : 1110
Join date : 2011-10-03
Location : Richmond, VA

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 23:28

@Gelmir wrote:
I mostly wonder what I'm supposed to do with my Harlequins. I mean, at least Drukhari and Craftworlds have plenty of models to make an army without allies. But the Harlequin line is six boxes. I hate spamming the same model too many times, but Harlequins now don't have another option really. You'd have more models to choose from if you use only Cults! And even though Cults are pretty good now, I'm sure not many of you are thinking of making a pure Cult-only list.
I hope the Harlequin codex gets a rule stating you can add a Harlequin detachment in an Aeldari army  without losing your mono-faction rule. Because without some fix like that, Harlequins won't see much play at all anymore.

A BH ravager spearhead would still work okay, and give Harlies some support fire. That's really all that I can think of at the moment.
Back to top Go down
sekac
Wych
sekac

Posts : 614
Join date : 2017-06-03

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeMon Mar 29 2021, 23:29

@Soulless Samurai wrote:
@sekac wrote:

Incorrect. We have been given Blade Artists. I understand you don't think that qualifies, but objectively, it does.

And if Blade Artists had been our mono-faction bonus you'd be right.


@sekac wrote:

Moreover, comparing 9th edition to previous editions is pointless, it's a different design concept. I'm comparing 9th edition mono-faction rules to 9th edition mixed factions. You're comparing apples to oranges for purely subjective reasons.

"You can't compare this to anything else because doing so proves me utterly wrong."

Man, what an outstanding argument. Rolling Eyes

It is extremely simple. Every 9th edition army has baked in rules no matter if it's mono-faction or mixed. Blade Artists is what we have.

If someone takes a mono-faction list they get an extra turn-based progressive ability. PfP is what we have.

That is EXACTLY the same structure as Space Marines, Necrons, and Death Guard.

That is a fact.
Back to top Go down
Soulless Samurai
Incubi
Soulless Samurai

Posts : 1589
Join date : 2018-04-02

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeTue Mar 30 2021, 01:18

@sekac wrote:

It is extremely simple. Every 9th edition army has baked in rules no matter if it's mono-faction or mixed. Blade Artists is what we have.

Yes. Which is a huge change from what we *had*, and a change not shared by other factions.


@sekac wrote:

If someone takes a mono-faction list they get an extra turn-based progressive ability. PfP is what we have.

Which is an entirely arbitrary "rule" that seems to exist just to screw us over.

Seriously, there's no reason why a mono-faction rule has to be turn based.

Hell, even if it did, there's no reason why we couldn't have had a different turn-based ability as our mono-faction rule.

Alternatively - and bear with me because this is the *really* crazy part - maybe don't put make-or-break rules on a table that's now apparently become our mono-faction bonus rule.

As an example, we used to get Fleet (Advance and Charge) as standard on our models in past editions. It's a pretty damn important rule, especially for an army that's supposed to be fast. Yet we now lose access to it when we ally.


@sekac wrote:

That is EXACTLY the same structure as Space Marines, Necrons, and Death Guard.

Except for the fact that none of those factions had turn-based rules to begin with so they just gained extra rules whilst keeping all their existing ones.

We've now lost a core rule, which has become out mono-faction bonus, whilst our new faction bonus isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

So no, it's not the same at all.


I'm going to try and explain this a different way:

Person A has 5 bananas. He keeps his 5 Bananas and if he agrees to work alone he gets 5 apples as well.

Person B has 5 oranges. He keeps his 5 oranges and if he agrees to work alone he gets 5 apples as well.

Person C has 5 apples. His 5 apples are taken away and he's given a single lemon instead. If he agrees to work alone he gets his 5 apples back.

According to you, these individuals have all been treated exactly the same because they get 5 apples if they work alone.

According to objective reality, person C has not been treated equally because the apples he already had were taken away, replaced with a single lemon, and now he only gets to have them back if he agrees to work alone.

Does that help?

_________________
@TeenageAngst wrote:
Never trust the French.

Gelmir likes this post

Back to top Go down
sekac
Wych
sekac

Posts : 614
Join date : 2017-06-03

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeTue Mar 30 2021, 01:35

In the first 8th edition Space Marine codex they gained Combat Doctrines but it was not mono-faction. They have since been punished.

In 7th, Necrons could ally with Orks. They got punished in 8th because they no longer could. We suffered no such punishment, we could still take allies.

Up until now, Death Guard suffered no punishment for mixing with other Chaos factions or demons. Now players who wanted to run DG+Nurgle demons are being punished.

Everybody is getting punished for mixing factions in 9th. It doesn't matter that you don't feel like it's even. It doesn't matter if you don't like Blade Artists. We all have the same decisions to make in this edition.

If we look at previous editions compared to 9th edition, players of every army could argue they are being punished. Or they could say "this is how 9th works" and come to terms with it.

The punishment is a matter of perspective.
Back to top Go down
Ripper.McGuirl
Hellion
Ripper.McGuirl

Posts : 65
Join date : 2017-01-29
Location : East Coast

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeTue Mar 30 2021, 01:39

@Soulless Samurai wrote:
There seems to be a significant level of indecision and contradiction on GW's part as to whether or not the Eldar factions are meant to function as close allies or not.

Notwithstanding replacement sculpts, the last innovation for any of the Eldar lines was Ynnari (and that was back in 7th), which are supposed to unite the Eldar factions under a single banner.

This alone would kind of imply that the Eldar factions are meant to work closely together. However, the rules really haven't managed to support that. Even after revisions and such, you couldn't field Ynnari units from different Eldar books in the same detachment and even when you fielded them via different detachments it was still an exceptionally clunky army with a lot of stuff that didn't really work properly (e.g. commander units were still restricted to buffing units from their own book, rather than all Ynnari units).

The DE book seems to hint that some of this might change, yet in the meantime we're rather stuck because the current ally rules strip DE of a key ability if they ally (and nothing Ynnari currently gives them makes up for that).

Indeed, even if Ynnari changes, it's hard to see how it will help us. After all, if Ynnari gives us back the invulnerable saves and charge after advancing that we currently rely on PfP for, that's going to be a bit depressing for Ynnari Harlequins who'll have both of those things already.  tongue

Maybe there will be a solution but in the meantime we're stuck waiting for the other Eldar codices to be released in order to even find out.

I was really hoping they were going to simplify it and just make Ynnari an obsession. There is a possibility they could very quickly amend the wording for adding Ynnari characters to a Drukhari army to say it does not interfere with PfP, the way it stipulates it does not interfere with obsessions. I think, ultimately, they are just not willing to sink the production resources into Ynnari models/lore/rules. They just need their own codex with their own unit entries that alleviate the need to be connected to the other codexes.
I think Harlequins have them in a similar spot where for the longest time they were just a random thing you could add in, and now they are their own thing, but they feel weird as their own thing. I find Grey Knights and Deathwatch to be similarly weird.
The only way out of it for harlequins, to my eye, is to go way down the rabbit hole of weird characters in the elite and HQ slots, the way the Genestealer Cults have.
All of that to say: I think they just really don’t want allies any more, and want to go back to the days where they weren’t really a thing. I also think Ynnari happened before they really decided on that, and now they are stuck with them.
Back to top Go down
http://destroydestroydestroy.org
Koldan
Kabalite Warrior
Koldan

Posts : 179
Join date : 2017-10-26

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeTue Mar 30 2021, 02:55

@Ripper.McGuirl wrote:
I was really hoping they were going to simplify it and just make Ynnari an obsession. There is a possibility they could very quickly amend the wording for adding Ynnari characters to a Drukhari army to say it does not interfere with PfP, the way it stipulates it does not interfere with obsessions. I think, ultimately, they are just not willing to sink the production resources into Ynnari models/lore/rules.

I may be wrong, but the new colour scheme seen on some newer pictures of Drukhari models look a lot like an updated version of their Ynnari colour scheme. Red armour, black cloth, some bronze metal parts and blue details. The black and blue got green mixed in and the bronze moved to other parts but it looks for me like they are updating the Ynnari studio army. And if they invest into newly painted miniatures for the pictures in the next Ynnari publication, I think they seem to be willing to sink resources into it, so there may be bigger changes.
Back to top Go down
Ripper.McGuirl
Hellion
Ripper.McGuirl

Posts : 65
Join date : 2017-01-29
Location : East Coast

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeTue Mar 30 2021, 04:09

That would be awesome! Someone clearly wanted it to be a thing at some point: blood of the phoenix existing and the bare heads on the banshee and incubi sprues all point to there being intention there...but they just have made so little effort. I guess we’ll see! Maybe they’ll surprise me and put out my dream of a Ynnari Heresy black book from Forge World! (This will not ever happen)
Back to top Go down
http://destroydestroydestroy.org
fisheyes
Incubi
fisheyes

Posts : 1769
Join date : 2016-02-18

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeTue Mar 30 2021, 13:30

Just out of curiosity, how many of us played during the dark days of 7th edition Ally nonsense? I vividly remember Taudar mixes of tripple-riptide wings backed up by eldar scattbikes, all buffed with farseer psychic powers. It was not a fun time, and the community largely hated it (from what I recall).

I much prefer this current Ally system. Allows for fluffy players to mix their Space Elf factions, while stopping competitive players from cherry picking the bestest best units from a half dozen books.

That's my $0.02 anyway. Surprised that I seem to be in the minority

Cavash likes this post

Back to top Go down
Grimcrimm
Kabalite Warrior
Grimcrimm

Posts : 200
Join date : 2014-10-15
Location : Ohio

Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitimeTue Mar 30 2021, 16:07

My group never had any waac players (tau triptide wings by itself was bad enough) ive played dark eldar with wraiths forever and i used to have a fun fluffy sisters/stormtrooper/inquisition list before inquisition was beat with the "you dont get to exist " stick

_________________
I dig the salt mines deeper (Babyhammer 40k) and now introducing "The big book of buffs" Brought to you by Tau space marines "cant keep beat em in melee AND they will shoot you dead"
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




Splintermind reactions - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Splintermind reactions   Splintermind reactions - Page 3 I_icon_minitime

Back to top Go down
 
Splintermind reactions
Back to top 
Page 3 of 5Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
THE DARK CITY :: 

GENERAL DRUKHARI DISCUSSION

 :: Drukhari Discussion
-
Jump to: