Druchii fluff aggression

[Lord uramael]

I am sorry Linda i did read your post many times and i respect your opinion. However, that comment standed out and i wondered why.


So far, most armies have a special ability that others would envy/fear/hate...while it seems like a simplistic approach, it does give a sense of balance...as army A cannot do what army B can etc. Warhammer is a tad more complex with some combinations of specialities...as that quickly made list would imply:

Chaos: Strong Characters with elite troops (read a la space marines)

Undead: Strong Characters with thrash core troops but insane morale.

Lizardmen: Strong troops (Saurus) and Light troops (skinks) with great morale and magic.

Orks: Tough and numerous, a huge list to take troops from, so unpredictable.

Empire: a generalist (the niche is that you can do everything) army with nice troops in almost every aspect, numerous and bring a very powerful artillery.

Dwarves: very tough (high T with good save) and high morale, notable artillery support.

Chaos Dwarves: Tough and high morale, notable artillery support and numerous hobgoblins.

Wood Elves: extremely skilled at shooting, High morale, varied specialised troops.

Beastmen: Tough and very numerous, now very mobile. Strong Chariotry

Tomb Kings: insane morale. Numerous Chariotry. decent number.

High Elves: High morale, great spearmen, very fast heavy cavalry, highly skilled troops (white lions, swordmasters, phoenix guard). Highly efficient in everything magic-oriented.

Dark Elves: High morale, access to many monsters?, few efficient troops(wytches, Corsairs, Dark riders). ???

I am sure you could go on with the list and complete it...but while i try to do one for Dark elves, most aspects of the game are already mastered by other armies and...it seems to me we are master of none w/o being jack of all trades

[Linda lobsta defenda]

i will just say that we have to agree to disagree on this.

[Draichlord]

It is factual that certain items within the profiles are more important. If this were still 4th ed or prior, WS would make a big difference for us as we'd be much harder to hit. Those enemy with WS3 would be hitting us on 5+ rather than 4+...a big difference. It was the biggest selling point for elven armies. I love the executioner models, but what was taken away (heavy armor, S4, D3W) in exchange for light armor, S3, killing blow was criminal to me. I didn't mind the older slight expense (Ravening Hordes) for the benefits gained. I'm upset over shades going from BS5 to BS4 as well. These 2 points, as well as the stupidity problem and crap magic items, horrible Cauldron rules and a pathetic Beastmaster combine to keep me aggravated. The kick is that it's all so easy to fix and doesn't make the army "overly powerful". These fixes would actually put us back in the "balanced" category. The city guard is the final complaint.

[Langmann]

I have to agree with Linda on her points, I have found that WS and I is actually quite useful against a front line of enemy that cannot fight in ranks. I usually manage to kill at least 1 or 2 enemy before he gets to hit back. Then if the DE WS is higher I benefit again. It works out, you should try a combat simulator like one that is downloadable from leadership10. Match your units against whatever and see, it'll surprise you.

Don't send a unit of spearmen against an uber unit without a combo flanker and expect to win. Thats just the way it goes with the DE. However I have held a turn or two because of what I stated above. When I see a unit that has M4, WS3 and S4, T4, I know that a good charge with knights can often do it in!

Consider execs for example. At times I think that executioners with heavy armour is too expensive (option would be nice). I like light armour because often paying for heavy is a waste. If fighting dwarves, execs mow through a unit of greatweapon armed heavy dwarf troops because usually the greatweapon nulls the benefits of heavy armour. Remember also that heavy armour and light armour do nothing against S4 armour piercing handguns. So why pay for it???

As Linda says, DE are elite. Which means don't expect to not have to vary your lists depending on what army you fight. Elite doesn't mean you'll mow everything down necessarily, it can mean its specialized for certain missions. Witches against Orcs for example kick but, but die to chosen.

But I do agree with the rest of you that we need some better tweaking of things such as the beastmaster and magic especially.

[Crimsondeath]

i personally think i is an important stat specially with fragile troops. that means if we by some reason do not break the enemy on the charge we can at least make sure to suffer few attacks in the next round. for dwarves i isn't important as they can take a few blows. but to us it is important.

M of 5 being "average"?? exuse me? just because skaven and beastmen have the same move as our elves we are suddenly average? what about the dwarves with 3, empire, brettonia, undead, dogs of war etc with 4. oh wait the maximum that infantry have across an army is now average? please explain that. i am sure my students will be happy when I say "i am sorry there were 2 people that aced the test so they are now just average, the rest of you are under average"


ws IS important. hitting the enemy on 3+ is A LOT better then 4+.

"and our LD is _good_, but hardly anything special" ahh i think you hti the head on the nail... you are not content with "good" you want "best". and that is where it all falls apart for you.

sorry if the next sentence is harsh but read it with tounge in cheek:

your whole post comes off as a whiny kid going "mommy i want the best army at everything with no flaws. noone is to have anything better"

yes i know that is not what you are saying, but I do feel that if you sit down and think you will see that there is something about it. you don't seem content with "good" LD. if you are not pleased with core with LD 8 and lords with 10 then there is something wrong.

btw chaos has worse LD then us.

Woah, settle down there Linda.

It was, like, tongue in cheek - hence the ";)"

(Well, it was actually meant to be a wry comment on the current state of WH - obviously I failed that one dismally)

Now, let me address any specific issues you may have:

M - I said it was now "looking decidedly average". When the DE book was released this was quoted as our big advantage, and one of the reasons our troops are so expensive. Skaven also have troops with M6, and Beastmen are skirmishers, so are VERY mobile. I think if you did the maths, the average move rate (for infantry) would be around the 4.3 - 4.5 mark. So M5 is nothing special.

WS & I - these stats just aren't as useful as S & T. Full stop. I don't think anyone will disagree with this.

And I never said I wasn't pleased with Core Ld8 troops. But Empire also get Core Ld8 troops. So what? (They also have unbreakable troops too) I was just saying that it was a *good* stat, but nothing more :shrugs: No need to crucify me over this statement.

And no, I am not one of the "DE SuXX0rs - I want the best of everything" camp. I just didn't happen to agree with everything that was being said, so I voiced my own opinion.

I just re-read my earlier post, and I just cannot see where you got the whole "whiny/I want my mommy" thing from.

[Linda lobsta defenda]

well then i appologise to you CrimsonDeath. but that is how i read it. and once again i will just comment with that we have to agree to disagree

[Crimsondeath]

I have to agree with Linda on her points, I have found that WS and I is actually quite useful against a front line of enemy that cannot fight in ranks. I usually manage to kill at least 1 or 2 enemy before he gets to hit back. Then if the DE WS is higher I benefit again. It works out, you should try a combat simulator like one that is downloadable from leadership10. Match your units against whatever and see, it'll surprise you.

Hmmm, not quite sure what you're saying here - I have made my own combat simulator and matched all the Dark Elf units against just about everything else out there. The results didn't really surprise me.

EDIT: (I should have included this dislcaimer) Warning! Sweeping generalisation made below!

Our units (in an even fight), can only generally hold their own against much cheaper troops (Skaven clanrats, Empire anything etc.). Against anything vaguely fighty they are in trouble...

[Crimsondeath]

well then i appologise to you CrimsonDeath. but that is how i read it. and once again i will just comment with that we have to agree to disagree

Fair enough then!

[Dungeon_god]

In the group that I play with, it is commonly accepted that WS is the LEAST useful of any of the stats. I and LD are important, but WS, IMHO, is not useful at all.

The only time it is useful is when it is against other races, like VC, who have a WS of 2 on their main units (skeletons and Zombies), and then only to make sure they can't hit back, and that is only useful with our WS5 troops (of which I never have very many).

Sorry, but as far as I am concerned, in this version of Warhammer, WS is useless.

Again, just my opinion. (Ducks from the flames)

[Decheran]

What i wish and what i think most dark elves wish is a niche. Something that "defines" the army, something that we could identify to. It is to dark elves what artillery is to empire...it is to dark elves what cold blood is to lizardmen...it is to dark elves what number is to a skaven...it is to dark elves what cavalry is to Bretonnia

this is pretty much what i was talking about when i said i wanted a special rule that is uniquely druchii, but alas, we don't have one. Everything we have seems almost generic, we don't have really anything that noone else does

[Dungeon_god]

I would be fine with us being a "jack of all trades" army rather than a "jack of none"-I'm sorry, but I can win with any other army fairly regularly (and I have played VC, Empire, Skaven, Chaos Demons, Chaos Mortal, Lizardmen, Brettonia), but I cannot seem to win with DE except through extreme luck.

[Fallen angel]

I would be fine with us being a "jack of all trades" army rather than a "jack of none"-I'm sorry, but I can win with any other army fairly regularly (and I have played VC, Empire, Skaven, Chaos Demons, Chaos Mortal, Lizardmen, Brettonia), but I cannot seem to win with DE except through extreme luck.

OK, this has obviously been a heated topic, but those armies there are completely differemt to DE in the way they play. Many peple have said it, DE are a very hard army to win with, but this is counterbalanced by the fact that when you crack them, they can become very powerful, but if you use simliar tactics to those of other armies, you are doomed from the outset to fail, simply because DE are not like other armies. All it requires is practice, I found, and after a while, you develop the skills needed to use DE effectively.

Fallen Angel

[Dragnipur]

I currently reside in the "i need better/more/more diverse magic items"-camp. We, being the "ultimate dark magic users" and "advanced in sorcery"-race, as wel as having plundered numerous towns, castles, abbeys over countless centuries, should have made or plundered much more/diverse/better magic stuff.

And a question to the people who think we are ok: According to you, what armybook (of the new ones) is worse though out then ours.

[Dungeon_god]

I would be fine with us being a "jack of all trades" army rather than a "jack of none"-I'm sorry, but I can win with any other army fairly regularly (and I have played VC, Empire, Skaven, Chaos Demons, Chaos Mortal, Lizardmen, Brettonia), but I cannot seem to win with DE except through extreme luck.

OK, this has obviously been a heated topic, but those armies there are completely differemt to DE in the way they play. Many peple have said it, DE are a very hard army to win with, but this is counterbalanced by the fact that when you crack them, they can become very powerful, but if you use simliar tactics to those of other armies, you are doomed from the outset to fail, simply because DE are not like other armies. All it requires is practice, I found, and after a while, you develop the skills needed to use DE effectively.

Sorry, Fallen. I respectfully disagree. I have never been called a "tactics" slouch, and amongst my friends I am considered a fair tactician (maybe all of us suck, who knows?) I play chess, strategy board games, strategy computer games, and am a GM who delights in forcing his players into tactical situations. I have yet to "crack" anything in the DE, and I have been playing them for almost 9 months now.

I have read almost everything I can in the tactics board, and none of it has helped me one whit.

Sorry, either I am just too stupid, or else the DE are underpowered.

Again, I do not think it is a HUGE underpowering, just that it is enough of one to be worth an update or 5.

Where specifically?
Magic Items and Variety of Troops are my personal votes, but those are just my own gripes. I'm sure others have other ideas, but this is where I have problems with the list.

[Langmann]

I have to agree with Linda on her points, I have found that WS and I is actually quite useful against a front line of enemy that cannot fight in ranks. I usually manage to kill at least 1 or 2 enemy before he gets to hit back. Then if the DE WS is higher I benefit again. It works out, you should try a combat simulator like one that is downloadable from leadership10. Match your units against whatever and see, it'll surprise you.

Hmmm, not quite sure what you're saying here - I have made my own combat simulator and matched all the Dark Elf units against just about everything else out there. The results didn't really surprise me.

EDIT: (I should have included this dislcaimer) Warning! Sweeping generalisation made below!

Our units (in an even fight), can only generally hold their own against much cheaper troops (Skaven clanrats, Empire anything etc.). Against anything vaguely fighty they are in trouble...

My next points are made using the combat simulator over 100 rounds of combat :

This point means that troops that have T4, ie orcs, are not always the combat monsters. Even against big uns armed with 1 choppa, shield and light armour, corsairs often win or at least hold their own (draws)! Big uns are M4 WS4 S4 T4 I2. Remember to include charging and init... So the only thing the elves have here is initiative! Of course it happens that the big uns cost 2 points less....

Of course give the big uns two weapons and the corsairs get toasted even if they charge. Now these big uns cost 9 points each, and I'll agree with you, they are cheaper. However we cannot judge the value of movement with the combat simulator.

Now lets take an example of just toughness vs initiative. Ie the dwarfs. Consider a dwarf unit armed with hand weapon, shield and heavy armour. Dwarf M3 WS4 S3 T4 I2. Corsairs toast them, even so can spear warriors with shield! These Dwarfs cost 9 points.
Give the dwarfs a great weapon. S5, and they toast us. But once again, what is the price of greater movement?

So consider our famous execs against the dwarfs core armed with shield, great weapons, heavy armour costs 11 points. Equal cost. (many dwarfs attach a shield to give better AS against missiles...) And the execs drive them into the ground easily! Moral of the story here, uses execs against those morons.


SO to sum it up, while I agree that T and S count for a lot, and many of the real high WS T and S troops like chaos destroy us in combat, we can usually overcome a unit with better "combat S and T" due to our higher I and sometimes WS. Yes we cost more than those particular guys but we move faster.

Do not discount WS and I, you are making a small mistake.

[Dungeon_god]

I have not been able to find the combat simulator on LD 10-anyone have a link to it?

Thanks!

[Langmann]

I have not been able to find the combat simulator on LD 10-anyone have a link to it?

Thanks!

Here it is, I invite everyone to try for themselves what I did in my post two back.

http://www.leadership10.com/fantasy/strategy/daplan/daplan.htm

[Dungeon_god]

Thanks! I'm gonna play around with it now...

[Crimsondeath]

This point means that troops that have T4, ie orcs, are not always the combat monsters. Even against big uns armed with 1 choppa, shield and light armour, corsairs often win or at least hold their own (draws)! Big uns are M4 WS4 S4 T4 I2. Remember to include charging and init... So the only thing the elves have here is initiative! Of course it happens that the big uns cost 2 points less....

Of course give the big uns two weapons and the corsairs get toasted even if they charge. Now these big uns cost 9 points each, and I'll agree with you, they are cheaper. However we cannot judge the value of movement with the combat simulator.

Now lets take an example of just toughness vs initiative. Ie the dwarfs. Consider a dwarf unit armed with hand weapon, shield and heavy armour. Dwarf M3 WS4 S3 T4 I2. Corsairs toast them, even so can spear warriors with shield! These Dwarfs cost 9 points.
Give the dwarfs a great weapon. S5, and they toast us. But once again, what is the price of greater movement?

So consider our famous execs against the dwarfs core armed with shield, great weapons, heavy armour costs 11 points. Equal cost. (many dwarfs attach a shield to give better AS against missiles...) And the execs drive them into the ground easily! Moral of the story here, uses execs against those morons.

Now I am confused - are you trying to tell me that the Ld10 combat simulator thinks that Corsairs are likely to beat Dwarfs with Heavy Armour, Shield and Hand Weapons?

I've done this myself, and statistically speaking, Corsairs can expect to lose to those Dwarfs, even when they charge (or in subsequent turns - it works out the same anyway).

Without any rounding - 5 Corsairs can expect to kill 0.55 of a Dwarf in one round of combat. The remaining Dwarfs can expect to kill 0.74 of a Corsair. Net result is that the Dwarfs can expect to win. And they're cheaper too. Give the Dwarfs Great Weapons and the equation moves even further in their favour.

The Big 'Un example is closer - as long as the Corsairs get the charge, they should expect to win against Big 'Uns with a Choppa, Light Armour and Shield. The difference here is 1.11 to 1.08, so it is very close however. Give the Big 'Uns 2 hand weapons and they turn it around 2.0 to 1.39

(And just don't mention Black Orcs OK )

Executioners are a peculiar case, as they are most effective against Dwarfs. Of course, Witch Elves are invariably better (better in all but 2 cases I believe) in a straight-up fight.

[Langmann]

Now I am confused - are you trying to tell me that the Ld10 combat simulator thinks that Corsairs are likely to beat Dwarfs with Heavy Armour, Shield and Hand Weapons?

I've done this myself, and statistically speaking, Corsairs can expect to lose to those Dwarfs, even when they charge (or in subsequent turns - it works out the same anyway).

Without any rounding - 5 Corsairs can expect to kill 0.55 of a Dwarf in one round of combat. The remaining Dwarfs can expect to kill 0.74 of a Corsair. Net result is that the Dwarfs can expect to win. And they're cheaper too. Give the Dwarfs Great Weapons and the equation moves even further in their favour.

The Big 'Un example is closer - as long as the Corsairs get the charge, they should expect to win against Big 'Uns with a Choppa, Light Armour and Shield. The difference here is 1.11 to 1.08, so it is very close however. Give the Big 'Uns 2 hand weapons and they turn it around 2.0 to 1.39

(And just don't mention Black Orcs OK )

Executioners are a peculiar case, as they are most effective against Dwarfs. Of course, Witch Elves are invariably better (better in all but 2 cases I believe) in a straight-up fight.

Yeah I did some quick goat thinking in my head later because I didn't feel that the dwarf thing was right and realized that I forgot to add the bonus for hand weapon with shield. It changes it, your statistics are what I got. And they are cheaper, I wonder if dwarves aren't underpriced a tad, like by 1 point? I admit I am wrong there, sorry.

Well I get your point, I liked the old WS chart better, of course. Anyhow about the orcs it can obviously work on some troop types with better T than us, as long as their armour save is not good. SO to conclude, if the AS isn't great then the DE can beat higher S and T troops.

Well anyway we cannot assign a benefit by better movement using statistics, other than win ones, of which we do not do badly against the dwarfs.

GW had better make a point of protecting our movement advantage by keeping it away from other races unless there are penalties involved or we are done for.

The other points you made I already mentioned.

Its a good thing I never charge anything head on and hope to win without our core units backed up eh?

[Da'al]

"your whole post comes off as a whiny kid going "mommy i want the best army at everything with no flaws. noone is to have anything better"


I think you shot 30 yards off target with that one Linda . No offense but i think no dark elf player wants the best army blah blah blah.

What i wish and what i think most dark elves wish is a niche. Something that "defines" the army, something that we could identify to. It is to dark elves what artillery is to empire...it is to dark elves what cold blood is to lizardmen...it is to dark elves what number is to a skaven...it is to dark elves what cavalry is to Bretonnia

I think you get my point there, the goal is NOT to have the best army and cry...it is to have an army that is specialised in one area and be feared for it...

I think we could have found a huge part of our problem: the warhammer system do encourage the "Conan" mentality...I mean what would you fear the most:

WS6 Str3 or WS3 Str5 ? Ini 10 T3 or T6 Ini 3? Mv8 str4 or Mv9 str3?

This could be the reason why the fluff doesn't follow well on the table...

I fear high strength, since it does double-duty in increasing the chance to wound (since the table goes down to 2!) and decreasing armor saves. WS3 S4 attacks are more 'useful' than WS4 S3 attacks if both are attacking something with armor (which a large part of the WH population has)

But...DE do have a niche: Stupidity. We have the greatest possible number of units/army (since our list is so small) that can be affected by stupidity: Highborn on CO, High Sorceress on CO, Noble on CO, Sorceress on CO, Beastmaster on CO, CO Knights, and CO Chariot! A quick calculation shows that, with a little effort, 7 of our 19 possible units (including characters) can have to make that simple little check every turn! I challenge any other army list to be that stupid!!!

Seriously, though, I think that DE're supposed to be like a blender--lots and lots of attacks...we've got repeater crossbows on three unit types, corsairs, witch elves, and the mighty reaper bolt throwers (which do rock, although they're a little pricey?). With literally dozens of dice being rolled sometimes, we should be able to generate a couple of wounds against anything...right? The bad news is that we generally don't have the strength to make those buckets of hits turn into unsaved wounds against armored foes.

We also get monsters. Unfortunately, in a USGT situation, using monsters will cause us a huge penalty in comp, since they're either rare or character buffs, but that's another rant. Aside from that, I don't see much message traffic with "dude, I ALWAYS bring two hydras to every battle" or "man, that beastmaster on manticore is worth double his points". Part of that, I suspect, is the power of artillery, and the other part is the power of cheese (never underestimate the power of cheese)...monsters just feel cheesy to me, for some reason--I should get over that. I'd like to see some 'veteran' 6th Edition DE players weigh in on our monsters' strengths, weaknesses, and general utility--anyone?


Our other alleged strengths include high Ld (already debunked earlier in the thread), high WS (not really that high, and since WS isn't a 'primary' stat, the baseline 4 isn't a huge strength), and high move (also debunked). We're kinda average, it seems, but we're still better off than Empire!


But...what's our most important strength? Cool models...and we should all thank Khaine that they got rid of the goofy hats from 5th edition.

[Shockwave]

Your right this is a tough and hot topic

Dwarf warrior at 10 pts is hvy armour great weapon.
vs Our lovly corsairs

due to increased movement we will most likly get the charge thus we strike first.
so here goes.
5 corsairs hitting half the time equals
2.5 hits
1 in 3 wound equals
.833 wounds
2 in 3 will fail armour save equals
.55 dwarfs dead

so now we have only 4.45 dwarf hitting half the time equals
2.225 hits
wounding 83.3% the time equals
1.96 wounds
saving 1 in 3 equals
1.31 corsairs dead

The ratio is better then 2 to1 dwarfs favour

now if you change to a dwarf with hand weapon light armour, corsairs kill .69 dwarfs but they have seven to start with.
so there is 6.31 dwarfs hitting back
3.155 hits this time half wound
1.577 wounds
1 in 3 save
1.05 corsairs dead

Almost 2 to 1 dwarfs favour and that with taking into account iniative/ charging

Which brings to a point where to win you need to gain those extra points combat res from flank charges etc.

So it looks like the main way to win with Delfs is MANOVEUR to the flanks cos your not gonna do it on straight kills
Vs the likes of empire and such i expect the difference to be smaller to allmost evens and thus attrition comes into play but than they have alot more troops so they can play that game

Which is why i believe poeple find it so hard to beat Skaven (can't believe i just typed that word) we can't manoveur cos their army is so big that they effectivly have no flanks and while all our troops are better they win the war on attrition.

ARSE why did i have to go type that up!!
Now i'm depressed

[Lord uramael]

Dark elves niche: stupidity? lol i admit this one cracked me up

Now, if we need 2 units to beat 1 unit and we are usually outnumbered 3 to 1; there is a problem... there is a limit to what dark riders can do.

"When i finished the fluff part i was thinking: aaah they followed the dark eldar route...fast, strong, numerous but fragile. It turned out we are fast, weak, few and fragile..."

How do you folks react to this statement?

[Dgoflo]

It's downright humiliating to read the fluff (a whole civilization geared toward war and dark magic with one of the longest living leaders in the Olde World!), and then throw some spearelves or corsairs up against a unit of BigUns (an obviously less civilized race) and watch as model for model, point for point you can't match up. (This has recently become a noticable thorn in my side as, recently a O&G player came into our club, whereas before there was none...)

Another frusterating point specifically about the fluff, is the whole story in the book about using slaves to create terrain for the Shades thus giving the Druchii the upper hand.. however, slaves aren't playable. Why even include the story!?? Just to piss me off?

And while I'll say whole heartedly that DE are by no means horrible (I've had about a 40% win ratio in the last month or so of play), that it is a weak excuse to call them an army that takes being a vetern of to use successfully. If you put a skilled general at the head of a DE army, and an equally skilled general at the head of say VCs, wouldn't the VC general still have the advantage, as his army started out better? Or are we ready to make the claim that there is a cut off rate for how good you can make your army through generaling, and that most armies cap off before the DE do? That sounds a bit fishy to me.

Luckily, I love my Shades, Execs, Dark Riders, Witchelves, War Hydras, and even Black Gaurd ( ...as long as my opponent is letting me use Kouran anyway ) regardless of how GW has tried to sabotage their list.

[Shockwave]

I think what might be the case is the power curve of the Delf army goes up dispropornately with a veteran/ good general but if thats the case then Delfs would be OVERPOWERED at the high end of the scale.

but the only way to find out would be to do a poll based on average/ good generals and their win ratio vs vs very good generals and their win ratio but untill there is a standard to judge poeple buy (and their opponents) this would next ot impossible.

I also think if the above is true then it's bad marketing by GW to relie on poeple buying a second army to sell Delfs.