# New Dark Eldar rules conversation (no fluff or non-related plz)



## yshabash (Apr 11, 2010)

Lets make sure that in this thread we stick to the rules/codex or new models. 

Don't mind a little fluff talk just don't make it the only thing in your post. You can also talk about things your expecting/hoping to come out.

If your still bored talk about a possible army list, a model you would recommend to be in the codex (plz include points and don't make overpowered, in other words be realistic) and ect.

going to respond to posts when I can and be active.

new dark eldar teaser video link:http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/c...ryId=&section=&pIndex=1&aId=10500182a&start=2

CHEERS:drinks::drinks::drinks:

:training:me getting ready for new DK


----------



## hippypancake (Jul 14, 2010)

I really don't like the new Raider model it looks wierd with a random sail on it.

Also before anyone says it I'm going to put my opinion about it out there

For those who are saying "Sure there will be bandwagoners but they'll join the DE army play it for awhile then find out it's too hard and quite" I must say this

I have been playing SW since before they're update and they were a really difficult army to win with I constantly had thoughts of switching too..._vanilla_ marines which is scary. Does that first bit sound a lot like DE now? yes it does. What happened to the SW after the update? they became easy and noobs in abundence joined (I hate being thought of as "That guy who picks the op'ed armies" because I play nids and SW) so in following

if A=B and UpdateA=Easy then I am going to think that UpdateB=Easy as well...basically I'm saying yeah they're hard to play now...but I'm willing to bet that they are going to be easier after the update so the noobs can have a new race

Food for Thought mates


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

hippypancake said:


> I really don't like the new Raider model it looks wierd with a random sail on it.
> 
> Also before anyone says it I'm going to put my opinion about it out there
> 
> ...



Food for thought true. But it doesnt make it any less lame. 40k codex creep is just a major pain the ass. 

but on topic- I think all the new models look pretty good, I might get some just from a collecters standpoint, but I have no interest in a bunch of BDSM loving emos.

Why are you asking about rules? Have any even been released? Otherwise Im just going to throw in- The ravager gets 8 Dark lances. And Drazhar instant kills on a 2+ :laugh::biggrin:


----------



## Creon (Mar 5, 2009)

I'm personally not sure about the new sail barge models. But since my current crop of Ravagers are half Wave Serpent, half Raider, I may continue the trend with the Sail Barges, since the new figs are far more interesting. 

I'm very intrigued that the Melta-Lance seems to be in the army. I can hear the screams of anguish from Land Raiders now! And the rumored 5+ Invul armor upgrade for Raiders! Schweeet!


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

Lord Sven Kittyclaw said:


> Food for thought true. But it doesnt make it any less lame. 40k codex creep is just a major pain the ass.
> 
> but on topic- I think all the new models look pretty good, I might get some just from a collecters standpoint, but I have no interest in a bunch of BDSM loving emos.
> 
> Why are you asking about rules? Have any even been released? Otherwise Im just going to throw in- The ravager gets 8 Dark lances. And Drazhar instant kills on a 2+ :laugh::biggrin:


why does EVERYONE call half the armies in 40k emo? the Dark Eldar are far more akin to Goth then Emo, They are into BDSM and pain, they dont feel sorry forthemselves to the point of being emo, rather they have an insatible hatred that shows in how ruthless they can be.

what Constitutes emo? In my opinion it is a lack of style and a self hatred leading to hurting onesself in order to become popular in a group of like minded morons.

Dark Eldar are far Darker then Emo, they dont have self hate, in fact as far as I can see. its quite the opposite in that they love what they do to the point of obsession, and what they do is Torture maim rape and kill.


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

Before KA derails this into a social commentary thread, I was merely making a comment, you didnt have take it so seriously, meanwhile not contributing anything. 

OT- Does anyone actually have any known rules/abilities for the upcoming DE?


----------



## Chaosftw (Oct 20, 2008)

Unless Someone got their hands on a Codex then I am going to say no. Some stats may have been leaked here and there but I believe there is a thread dedicated to that stuff. From what I have seen the models look nice. I too may pick up a few and convert them into nurgle possessed. as Elite Spawn like I have done with Eldar Banshees, and Space Wolf Long Fangs just for kicks.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

hippypancake said:


> I really don't like the new Raider model it looks wierd with a random sail on it.


don't glue it on then..........*room falls silent with stunned amazement*

I'm glad they got rid of all the stupid OTT spikes from everything, and that everyone doesn't look like some anorexic goth teen, they look serious now, they look like bad guys...and girls....and hermaphrodites....and whatever else they might be.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Lord Sven Kittyclaw said:


> Food for thought true. But it doesnt make it any less lame. 40k codex creep is just a major pain the ass.


For one thing, there is no codex creep, it simply doesnt exist. Also, If you say something someone could call "silly," you can be called out on it... and on that point; I agree with KA.

Back to the topic at hand; you might have to wait till the codex comes out for any rules for DE.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

well Gen, the other post has some rules, and the warseer folks have the new statlines posted.

I am truly hoping that the new Deldar still play as a more finesse army that hits hard and fast, but has versitility. I think the whole Versitility of the craftworld Eldar is one of my attractions to Eldar, but their designs are not my cup of tea. Dark Eldar, on the other hand, have a style that suits my tastes perfectly.


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

Stella Cadente said:


> don't glue it on then..........*room falls silent with stunned amazement*
> 
> I'm glad they got rid of all the stupid OTT spikes from everything, and that everyone doesn't look like some anorexic goth teen, they look serious now, they look like bad guys...and girls....and hermaphrodites....and whatever else they might be.


Finally another person who has common sense, I'm not a big fan of the sail but have decided if I really don't want it I just won't be gluing it on!


----------



## Evil beaver2 (Feb 3, 2009)

Stella Cadente said:


> don't glue it on then..........*room falls silent with stunned amazement*


But then what would you do with it? Youd have this extra sail just sitting there mocking you with its ugliness.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

All this Sail hate is pathetic. the sails fit perfectly for a pirate theme, I dont see why everyone is hating on them.


----------



## yshabash (Apr 11, 2010)

I dunno I think the sail is fine, btw srry for the name I understand now I won't be getting any more rule talk until the codex  oh well anyway you can post anything you want about dark eldar now. 

The think that I think makes DE better than eldar is well because... with eldar most of the stratagy comes in choosing your guys, not what you do with them on the table. Don't have a problem with pre planning, just pre gaming XD. 

DE on the other hand strike fast and strike hard and always make for a very fun experiance feuturing highly original tactics. 

maybe not the best army but sure as $%^& a lot funner to be playing with or aignst than any other army that takes not stratagy and just moves forward oh so boringly (looks at space marines...


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Evil beaver2 said:


> But then what would you do with it? Youd have this extra sail just sitting there mocking you with its ugliness.


give it to someone who likes them? (not too difficult), or throw it away?


----------



## Sir Whittaker (Jun 25, 2009)

From what's been shown I'm really looking forward to the DE release, I'll probably get the codex to read over, but I'm unsure whether or not I'll actually build an army of them. We'll have to wait to see what lies within that fantastical tome, and I look forward to seeing some DE on the battlefield!

P.S. I'm undecided on the sail...


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

KhainiteAssassin said:


> All this Sail hate is pathetic. the sails fit perfectly for a pirate theme, I dont see why everyone is hating on them.


Sure, it fits a pirate theme... for the 1700's.


----------



## Creon (Mar 5, 2009)

Have you seen Eldar Spacecraft? Sails

But there's no need to worry. If you don't want your sails, send 'em to me. I got old raider conversions gonna need sails!

Enjoy the new models. Do what you want with them. Have fun. That's the point.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Vrykolas2k said:


> Sure, it fits a pirate theme... for the 1700's.


Would you rather them put a group of ass whipes with laptops on there?


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

gen.ahab said:


> Would you rather them put a group of ass whipes with laptops on there?


LMAO k: Good one!


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

Vrykolas2k said:


> Sure, it fits a pirate theme... for the 1700's.


Incorperating older, tested, designs that WORK into newer material is done many times over to this day. 

the WHEEL is a great example. its been refined, but its still used.

SAILS are still widely used even WITH ENGINES. why? BECAUSE IT SAVES ENERGY.


----------



## humakt (Jan 2, 2008)

KhainiteAssassin said:


> Incorperating older, tested, designs that WORK into newer material is done many times over to this day.
> 
> the WHEEL is a great example. its been refined, but its still used.
> 
> SAILS are still widely used even WITH ENGINES. why? BECAUSE IT SAVES ENERGY.


I thought sailing ships were still used because its fun, exciting and challenging, all of which would appeal greatly to a hedonistic higly intelligent race of sadistic killers. Personally I like them, the sails that is.


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

KhainiteAssassin said:


> Incorperating older, tested, designs that WORK into newer material is done many times over to this day.
> 
> the WHEEL is a great example. its been refined, but its still used.
> 
> SAILS are still widely used even WITH ENGINES. why? BECAUSE IT SAVES ENERGY.


I guess I've been too blind to see those massive sails on aircraft carriers, destroyers and so on...


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Vrykolas2k said:


> I guess I've been too blind to see those massive sails on aircraft carriers, destroyers and so on...


There is a rather large difference between nuclear powered steel warship and pleasure boat.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Vrykolas2k said:


> I guess I've been too blind to see those massive sails on aircraft carriers, destroyers and so on...


who said anything about carriers with sails?, all that was said is that sails are still used today, and guess what, they are.


----------



## Greese_m0nkey (Apr 22, 2010)

I think the Raiders look OK. Still wouldn't use the sail's. All I really want is the Codex. DE was my first army I have had them for 16 years and I think it would be nice to blow the dust off and send them back to war.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

Vrykolas2k said:


> I guess I've been too blind to see those massive sails on aircraft carriers, destroyers and so on...


Useing Sails on Heavy frigate ships not very smart. Sails are used on lighter Boats, which still stand the test of time. the boats are 1. massive 2. weigh how many tons?

to put this in 40k Terms. those ships would easily be 14 AV all sides with multiple plating levels and Apoc Only. they would be easily, the equivalent of a thunder hawk. in fact I think they would be bigger then a thunder hawk, by a few times.

a RAIDER / RAVAGER is not an aircraft carrier or a destroyer. they are boats designed to be light weight, carry under 15 bodies on it plus loot. and built for speed. the Design of the sail even fits that, since its Angled design lets it catch wind and help the ship go faster on the winds of the warp, but has little resistance infront of it, so any winds against it dont take a massive toll.


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

yshabash said:


> DE on the other hand strike fast and strike hard and always make for a very fun experiance feuturing highly original tactics.


As in you can be sure that they'll always hide their Raiders behind cover for half the game, sit two 20 Men blobs with DLances on home objectives, and contest the rest with Jetbikes? Yeah, dead original.



> maybe not the best army but sure as $%^& a lot funner to be playing with or aignst than any other army that takes not stratagy and just moves forward oh so boringly (looks at space marines...


Play against a proper SM army, and not some copy-pasta Vulkan list that some 12 year old got off the internet.

Edit - to KA - have you ever heard of a RIB? Ever wonder why Safety Boats, Crash Boats, or Ships Boats are RIB's with outboards or Aquajets? I'll also take it you nothing whatsoever about how wind and resistance works.


----------



## H0RRIDF0RM (Mar 6, 2008)

Now I could be entirely wrong so please take this with a grain of salt. Comparing the assembled Raider to the Raider sprue I've deduced that this alleged sail is a banner... 

Lets look at some common place facts. A sail should be designed with a minimum 45 degree curve to effectively catch wind. I also noticed that there's no backstay let alone any ropes to tighten the sail. Now without getting technical on Heresy there's practicly no elements that a sail requires to operate. What your seeing is just a trianguler cloth supported by multiple poles.

Now by this point I probably have some of you thinking so I am going to play devils advocate so that I dont anger anyone.

Since this is 38,000 years in the future and we all know Dark Eldar have access to serious technology. Perhaps a cloth with millions of embedded chips that are controlled by a crystal skull. This logicly explains the missing aspects of a sail.

Either way I'm confident its a banner.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

H0RRIDF0RM said:


> Now I could be entirely wrong so please take this with a grain of salt. Comparing the assembled Raider to the Raider sprue I've deduced that this alleged sail is a banner...
> 
> Lets look at some common place facts. A sail should be designed with a minimum 45 degree curve to effectively catch wind. I also noticed that there's no backstay let alone any ropes to tighten the sail. Now without getting technical on Heresy there's practicly no elements that a sail requires to operate. What your seeing is just a trianguler cloth supported by multiple poles.
> 
> ...


you might have been right on it being a banner BUT 1. multiple pictures show different variations of an arching sail at 45 degrees. yes it looks to be glued on perfectly straight which is wrong for a sail of its nature. also im pretty sure that since, as you said, 38,000 years in our future, and an alien race, I am pretty sure that they have no need for manual adjustments. in fact, I could probably make a sail today that did not "need" rope to adjust itsself (useing internal electronic pullies and rope storage , along with gears to turn the sail as needed)


----------



## H0RRIDF0RM (Mar 6, 2008)

KhainiteAssassin said:


> you might have been right on it being a banner BUT 1. multiple pictures show different variations of an arching sail at 45 degrees. yes it looks to be glued on perfectly straight which is wrong for a sail of its nature. also im pretty sure that since, as you said, 38,000 years in our future, and an alien race, I am pretty sure that they have no need for manual adjustments. in fact, I could probably make a sail today that did not "need" rope to adjust itsself (useing internal electronic pullies and rope storage , along with gears to turn the sail as needed)


or perhaps thers's no need for a sail since the Dark Eldar have anti-grav technology lol? Maybe the Dark Eldar also have some back up anti-grav oars incase the raider is immobilized and there's no wind.

Its a banner!


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

H0RRIDF0RM said:


> or perhaps thers's no need for a sail since the Dark Eldar have anti-grav technology lol? Maybe the Dark Eldar also have some back up anti-grav oars incase the raider is immobilized and there's no wind.
> 
> Its a banner!


banners tend to all be made in the same sizes with different designs, the fact that it has one spot where the mast has an extra limb to hold 2 peices of what looks like cloth.

"The steersman controls the Raider through a complex combination of engines, keelblade and aethersail." right off of Wedensdays whats new. AETHERSAIL sounds like a sail to me

Horrid, sorry, but you lose.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

DE are getting new crap. Really, in the grand scheme of things, we all lose a little.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

na, I win, the new models fit my mental image perfectly


----------



## H0RRIDF0RM (Mar 6, 2008)

KhainiteAssassin said:


> banners tend to all be made in the same sizes with different designs, the fact that it has one spot where the mast has an extra limb to hold 2 peices of what looks like cloth.
> 
> "The steersman controls the Raider through a complex combination of engines, keelblade and aethersail." right off of Wedensdays whats new. AETHERSAIL sounds like a sail to me
> 
> Horrid, sorry, but you lose.


Aethersail, Aether oar, Aether long boat. I dont carry either way. Its more amusing to poke fun then to allow the sail to be taken seriously. I know I plan to devour soul essence in November regardless of what the model is!


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

gen.ahab said:


> There is a rather large difference between nuclear powered steel warship and pleasure boat.




Right.
Which, aside from superior tech, is one reason sails aren't used in warfare anymore.
Yet another reason is due to the inherent weakness of being dependant on sails.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

It's DE tech. It doesn't necessarily have to have anything to do with wind. Also, simply because it uses a sail, assuming that it works as a normal sail should, doesn't mean they don't have some other method of propulsion.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Vrykolas2k said:


> Right.
> Which, aside from superior tech, is one reason sails aren't used in warfare anymore.
> Yet another reason is due to the inherent weakness of being dependant on sails.


thats assuming eldar sails work by using the wind...which they don't


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

Vrykolas2k said:


> Right.
> Which, aside from superior tech, is one reason sails aren't used in warfare anymore.
> Yet another reason is due to the inherent weakness of being dependant on sails.


2 things.

first, Dark Eldar are not warfare types. they are raiding types, which is different from warfare. warfare is going after an opponent who they know they will get into battle with, so they bring the big guns as best they can, where Raiding, is going after targets with mixed results, even if the possibility of the ship they attempt to go for ends up being heavily armed. they pick their battles. For example: you see a cargo ship one way, or a Battle Friggate the other. Warfare would go for the battle friggate, Raiders would go for the cargo ship. going on faster, lighter ships that dont seem to be designed for warfare, would be more appropriate for raiding. 

second, why do people think that ships with sails have to rely on them? there is nothing saying that the ships rely on the sails. but that they use them to help control their ship.


----------



## Trevor Drake (Oct 25, 2008)

Is it just me, or is it crazy to try to bring REALITY into a science FICTION based game? Yes, their space boats have sails on them, get over it or don't use them. That is like trying to explain how a monolith works, or how you can justify getting a cover save from a plasma gun 'getting hot' on you.

As far as rules, I am interested to see how the new wych weapons will work, and if they are bringing back the ability to pick and choose specific weapons. Anyone remember the original hydraknives?


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

who cares about the way a DE sail works and that sails are outdated in warfare. you cannot justify anything in 40k when we look at it from the current perspective on warfare. why do SM and orks and everything else carry melee weapons when they have guns that can tear people apart? i know why; because it is cool. the sails are cool, they add to flavour, just like all of the other ridiculous weapons and things that are theoretically pointless or impossible.
I personally think that the new DE are some of GW's nicest models, especially the new Lelith Hesperax.
Rules wise, there is supposedly army wide Power from pain, Night vision and possibly fleet on all infantry. Wych weapons sound insane, with one that grants +D6 attacks on the charge instead of +1, one that counts as 2 ccw and re-rolls to hit and to wound and one that counts as 2 ccw that takes away an attack from every model in base combat to a minimum of 1.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

yup, Mr muffin man. you have the Jist of it. they did some of the BEST works they have ever done with these new models. its why im actually turning from my wolves to build DE. and im an avid pup player.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Which is why I cannot wait for our second wave. It will be glorious! Lol


----------



## Creon (Mar 5, 2009)

Their ships use solar sails to maneuver better than the Imperium. I assume the sail is actually an energy antenna tuned to the "winds" of the webway. It allows the ships to carry smaller engines per deck space, giving more room for slaves to sacrifice to distract "She Who Thirsts"


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

Creon said:


> Their ships use solar sails to maneuver better than the Imperium. I assume the sail is actually an energy antenna tuned to the "winds" of the webway. It allows the ships to carry smaller engines per deck space, giving more room for slaves to sacrifice to distract "She Who Thirsts"


what Iwas thinking aswell. now to make some nice Markers for point capture.


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

Trevor Drake said:


> Is it just me, or is it crazy to try to bring REALITY into a science FICTION based game? Yes, their space boats have sails on them, get over it or don't use them. That is like trying to explain how a monolith works, or how you can justify getting a cover save from a plasma gun 'getting hot' on you.
> 
> As far as rules, I am interested to see how the new wych weapons will work, and if they are bringing back the ability to pick and choose specific weapons. Anyone remember the original hydraknives?


I loved Hydraknives... not to mention some other things GW got rid of.


----------



## yshabash (Apr 11, 2010)

Ok guys I made my decision thanks to you, wait for it.....almost.... I'M GETTING A NEW DE ARMY! Yes I am jumping on the bandwagon but I don't think its a crime. The point of updating an army is to get more ppl on board or else GW loses money. Thanks guys and keep posting!

P.S. whats a hydra kinfe?
P.S. 2. nm I looked it up
P.S. 3. nm that wuz fantasy stuff still don't know what it is -_-


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

I'm amused by the four consecutive pages of discussion about the sail. In an apparantly "rules only" topic. Although the OP did retract that restriction later on.

I plan to build the model, look at it without the sail, and then look at it with the sail. Whichever looks cooler - happens. Simple. Even if I do choose to use it, it's blatantly going to be pinned so I can take it out on demand anyway. How else are you going to fit it in the damn case?

I think the new codex looks interesting. It's definitely my next army, because I love playing Eldar with only one quibble - we don't have any assault transports. Dark Eldar fix that problem nicely. I also like the idea they seem to have spread throughout the codex of having "Elite" versions of squads, e.g. Wyches, Warriors, Grotesques etc.

I love the new models, with the exception of the Incubi, who I think look far far too Slaaneshi, and are in very static boring poses with bad looking swords. The jetbikes make me drool, but the price tag makes me bite my tongue. I can see myself building this force up slowly with help from Wayland! :laugh:


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

Sethis said:


> I love the new models, with the exception of the Incubi, who I think look far far too Slaaneshi, and are in very static boring poses with bad looking swords. The jetbikes make me drool, but the price tag makes me bite my tongue. I can see myself building this force up slowly with help from Wayland! :laugh:


whats with EVERYONE saying they look chaosy? they dont look ANYTHING like chaos. ooooooooooo they have horns, SO WHAT, that HARDLY makes them look slanesh. get over your horns = chaos crap.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Um, no? It's more the daemonic faces combined with the horns... when Eldar do not traditionally have either. If I remember correctly, the only Eldar/Dark Eldar model to ever have horns was a Warlock sculpted in the 90s, and it looked terrible. On the other hand, every single chaos box set since 2nd Edition has had a head option with horns on it.

And instead of getting worked up about it, consider that if "EVERYONE" says they look Chaotic, it probably means that they ARE Chaotic. In simpler terms, if 99 people say one thing, and one person says something different, the one person is probably wrong.

The heads look like worse versions of the horned head off the chaos mutation sprue.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

Sethis said:


> Um, no? It's more the daemonic faces combined with the horns... when Eldar do not traditionally have either. If I remember correctly, the only Eldar/Dark Eldar model to ever have horns was a Warlock sculpted in the 90s, and it looked terrible. On the other hand, every single chaos box set since 2nd Edition has had a head option with horns on it.
> 
> And instead of getting worked up about it, consider that if "EVERYONE" says they look Chaotic, it probably means that they ARE Chaotic. In simpler terms, if 99 people say one thing, and one person says something different, the one person is probably wrong.
> 
> The heads look like worse versions of the horned head off the chaos mutation sprue.


Point out one thing aside from the horns that would make this model more chaosy then Dark Eldary. you cant. the face on the helmet looks demonic to you? it looks like someone painted the face white on a cone head helmet to me. 

EVERYONE is saying they look chaosy because they have come to Asociate Horns with chaos in this game. to be honest, it makes me sad that you still go back to the horns saying they are chaosy.

Do chaos have an abundance of horns? yes. are the horns what MAKES chaos? no. 

As i said earlier, point out 1 thing outside of your 'demonic' face and 'chaos horns' that looks even remotely slaanesh. and dont say purple cloth because lets face it, Dark elves ruled over the purple cloth long before chaos.


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

Sorry KA but I agree with the mass here as a very passionate Dark Eldar player - ever since they came out, the Incubi look Chaos-like to me the Head screams a Beastmen(or formly known as beasts of chaos) head to me very chaotic, the sleek spiked armour very much screams slaneesh or that these men/women have given themselves over to a darker power. 

Bar the spirit stones and wraithbone styled back ornaments, they say to me chaos styled death cult assissins or male version of a repentia sister turned to chaos.

Not saying I don't like them - I love them, but you can really see a chaos-like influence here.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

Personally i hate them.
The way they are holding the sword is awkward.
Not to mention the fact that they look waaaaaay too Slaanesh-like.

Get rid of the horns, the spikes coming out of their backs, and the stupid looking swords, and they might be a nice model.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

Blue Liger said:


> Sorry KA but I agree with the mass here as a very passionate Dark Eldar player - ever since they came out, the Incubi look Chaos-like to me the Head screams a Beastmen(or formly known as beasts of chaos) head to me very chaotic, the sleek spiked armour very much screams slaneesh or that these men/women have given themselves over to a darker power.
> 
> Bar the spirit stones and wraithbone styled back ornaments, they say to me chaos styled death cult assissins or male version of a repentia sister turned to chaos.
> 
> Not saying I don't like them - I love them, but you can really see a chaos-like influence here.


I see a Dark Elf Influence, their Rigid armor design is very VERY similar to the dark elves. the legs look similar to Cold one Knights, or even to their warrior counterparts.

the only thing remotely similar to ANYTHING chaos is the horns, which are... well they are HORNS which you can only do in so many ways.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

KhainiteAssassin said:


> As i said earlier, point out 1 thing outside of your 'demonic' face and 'chaos horns' that looks even remotely slaanesh.


Eh, sorry, what?

"Point out one thing about the model you don't like, apart from the one thing that you've said you don't like"?

The entire HEAD looks like it came out of the next daemon release. The head is what makes the models look chaotic! I can say "Point out one thing about Daemonettes that make them look Daemonic apart from the claws, because I think they look more like Witch Elves".

You can't just ignore a major part of the model when you're arguing about what the model as a whole looks like. Jeez. :training:


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

Sethis said:


> Eh, sorry, what?
> 
> "Point out one thing about the model you don't like, apart from the one thing that you've said you don't like"?
> 
> ...


you dont get what im saying, the HELMET itsself DOES NOT LOOK CHAOSY aside from the HORNS and the only reason the HORNS look chaosy is because CHAOS is cluttered with the F'ing things. the helmet itsself doesnt even look demonic outside of it having HORNS, the face is a CONE HEAD HELMET just like the helmet the WARRIORs wear, the design is almost identical aside from a few extra cuts into the helm. in NO WAY does it like a demon head, but it may intentionally give a more demonic feel when you look at it because the eavy metal team PAINTED it that way.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

Who care if they look Slanneshy. They gave birth to the fukin BDSM god. Sheesh, they better look Slaneshy.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

KhainiteAssassin:
What does it matter if they look like choas or not?
As long as you like the models thats all that matters.

If other people think they look like chaos, then let them think that.
It shouldn't matter to you anyway if you see them differently.

No point getting your knickers in a knot over it. :wink:


----------



## SGMAlice (Aug 13, 2010)

I personally like them. The way they hold the Blade half way up is a little stupid though.
When i get some i'm just going to extend the Grip and make them hold it like a Hand&Half or 2Hand Sword.
And yes, The Eldar created Slaanesh so he/she/it looks like the DE, them being Eldar unbound, so to speak, not the other way round.

SGMAlice


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

KhainiteAssassin said:


> you dont get what im saying, the HELMET itsself DOES NOT LOOK CHAOSY aside from the HORNS and the only reason the HORNS look chaosy is because CHAOS is cluttered with the F'ing things. the helmet itsself doesnt even look demonic outside of it having HORNS, the face is a CONE HEAD HELMET just like the helmet the WARRIORs wear, the design is almost identical aside from a few extra cuts into the helm. in NO WAY does it like a demon head, but it may intentionally give a more demonic feel when you look at it because the eavy metal team PAINTED it that way.


Too right I don't get what you're saying... But that's probably because what you're saying makes no sense.

I'll try to break it down very simply for you.

*Chaos have lots of models with horns.*


*Daemons have lots of models with horns.*


*Dark Eldar do not have lots of/any models with horns.*


*The heads of these models have horns.*


*Therefore these models have more in common with Chaos and Daemons than other Dark Eldar models do.*

Can you follow my logic now?

Your argument seems to be (from what I can make of it):

Incubi have horns.

Chaos have horns.

Incubi do not look like Chaos because they have horns.

Anyone calling Incubi "Chaotic" are deluded children who are jumping on a "bandwagon" of Incubi hate, and are obviously totally wrong, because you said so.

Is that about right? :wink:


----------



## Culler (Dec 27, 2007)

Sethis said:


> *Chaos have lots of models with horns.*
> 
> 
> *Daemons have lots of models with horns.*
> ...


Respectfully I disagree. Dark Eldar have always had horns and spiky bits and pieces of chaos beasts as part of their armor, even in the old range. This is not a new thing for DE, this is completely within the lines of their previous aesthetic, updated to a better version.
Here are some old DE for comparison.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)




----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

Sethis said:


> Too right I don't get what you're saying... But that's probably because what you're saying makes no sense.
> 
> I'll try to break it down very simply for you.
> 
> ...


as stated by another. with the PICTURES of OLDER Eldar is showing that they have spikey bits and horns (sort of).

Your logic is "Incubi have horns so they are chaos" my Logic is "just because Incubi have horns does not make them chaos" see the difference? YOU judge a model from a single aspect, as if ONLY chaos is allowed to have horns, and because they have horns they obvously HAVE to be more chaosy then Eldary?


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

I disagree Culler, I think those are bits of spikey armour on the first two pics, which I have no problem with. The beastmaster wearing the hide of a warp beast makes sense.

You'll notice none of them actually have horns growing out of their heads.

It appears, KA, you still can't grasp basic english. Either that or you are actually trolling. Try rereading this:

*Therefore these models have more in common with Chaos and Daemons than other Dark Eldar models do.*

Please identify where you think I call Incubi "Chaos". To rephrase myself again in a desperate attempt to be understood:

The Incubi are the most Chaotic-looking models out of the entire Dark Eldar range. I do not like the Chaotic influence on what should be a Dark Eldar model. Therefore I do not like these models.

Is that clear enough?


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

from what ive seen/heard about the new dex rules wise the DE will still have the "Glass Hammer" style of play from before, almost - if nothing - nothing above AV11. however Lance weaponry is cheap, so mech armies will have issues.


----------



## hippypancake (Jul 14, 2010)

KA are you really trolling this thread too?

it's ok that people disagree with you don't worry your mother will love you all the same


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

No, this is his original attempt. He split it off into another topic for some reason, but thought I'd continue in here since it's a lot of effort to quote across topics.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

once again, Sethis, you fail to see anything.

You think, because of HORNS the models are more chaos then Dark eldar, even though EVERYTHING OTHER THEN THE FACT THEY HAVE HORNS ON THE HELMET is more ELDAR like in EVERY WAY, SHAPE, and FORM, yet the incubi are more CHAOS like then Eldar like. yes.

Your argument, once again, is: they have horns, they are chaos.

my answer to your argument is: they have horns, why does that automatically make them chaos.

You have Obviously failed to give any reasoning to your "they are tooo chaosy" other then they have HORNS, whoop dee doo.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

For gods sake, give it a break the lot of you.

Some people think they look like Chaos, some dont.
Deal with it for fuck sake.
Its not the end of the bloody world. unish:

Can we get this thread back on topic?
Or is it just going to turn into a massive bitch about shit till the thread gets locked?


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

KingOfCheese said:


> Or is it just going to turn into a massive bitch about shit till the thread gets locked?


do you really need to ask?


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

KingOfCheese said:


> For gods sake, give it a break the lot of you.
> 
> Some people think they look like Chaos, some dont.
> Deal with it for fuck sake.
> ...


No, seriously, this is the straw that breaks the camel's back.
Thanx to Incubi having horns, the gods have decided the world will end in 2012.


----------



## yshabash (Apr 11, 2010)

I do agree with KA on the incubi, they have the same helmet as the archon/dracon model and they also have bigger versions of the kalbites head which, ahem, ALSO HAVE HORNS! jeez DE's new theme yes it is dark and yes horns can be part of a dark army. its like saying white is only for good armys so evil armys can't have them. No thats not true, yes I can see the similarity witht he horns but the rest of DE also has that so I don't really see why they're so chaotic. They are DE because they follo the theme and the face included just look and the kalbite heads, now imagine them bigger, thicker horns and painted white. Almost the same isn't it?

Although I hold this opinion I do not mind others and I can see where your coming from (ok so it is a little bit more slaneshy over the kalbite heads because of the white.) you are free to have your own opinion and KA even though I do agree with you I do not agree in your actions to try to change everyone because I for one realize that everyone can't be like you want them to be and everyone has the right to their own opinion on this topic.

I will agree the way they are holding their sword does look like their about to take all their clothes down to a bathing suits and then lying in a seductive pose or do some kind of beach pose 

now lets gets this thread back on topic people!


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

yshabash said:


> 1. I do agree with KA on the incubi, they have the same helmet as the archon/dracon model and they also have bigger versions of the kalbites head which, ahem, ALSO HAVE HORNS! jeez DE's new theme yes it is dark and yes horns can be part of a dark army. its like saying white is only for good armys so evil armys can't have them. No thats not true, yes I can see the similarity witht he horns but the rest of DE also has that so I don't really see why they're so chaotic. They are DE because they follo the theme and the face included just look and the kalbite heads, now imagine them bigger, thicker horns and painted white. Almost the same isn't it?
> 
> I will agree the way they are holding their sword does look like their about to take all their clothes down to a bathing suits and then ly in a seductive pose or do some kind of beach pose


SO, your saying, Imagine the models changed this way, so they looked more like the models in question...and they ARENT THAT DIFFERANT?! Holy shit. Go get yourself a cookie. 

I would say, give this shit up. KA is determined to ignorantly troll. And unless your oppinion is the same as his, your a fuckwit. 

Kudos to you KA, thanks for the derailing of the thread.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

Lord Sven Kittyclaw said:


> SO, your saying, Imagine the models changed this way, so they looked more like the models in question...and they ARENT THAT DIFFERANT?! Holy shit. Go get yourself a cookie.
> 
> I would say, give this shit up. KA is determined to ignorantly troll. And unless your oppinion is the same as his, your a fuckwit.
> 
> Kudos to you KA, thanks for the derailing of the thread.


what else are we going to talk about. its not like theres a ton of new news about Dark eldar that hasnt been looked over a million times. people are already making lists from the FLGS Codex's.

and Sven, if we are fuckwits for argueing against a single thought that spread like wild fire, in which has only a fraction of semblence, then what does that make you for defending the thought by insulting us. 

You all say im ignorantly trolling, for what, defending a beautiful looking model from being condemned to the "I dont belong in the army im made for" category that so many seem eager to place the model in because it has horns and its colourscheme happens to be similar to slaanesh? who by the way, took his colours from the DE, not the other way around.


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

Its getting rather annoying, from reading your arguements, the perspective you have regarding the fluff. You talk about it like its the be all end all. Get over it. They have horns, horns DO make chaos, look at ANY army in ANY range for GW. Look at fucking ringwraiths in LOTR, Covered in horns and spikes. They look Slaaneshi as fuck. Dont like it? Sorry that your the one only "Free minded" Individual who hasnt been enslaved in this follow the leader game, but sucks to be you. Get over it.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Guys why are you getting so heated over a handful of models? Be at least civil to each other.

Some people think the Incubi look chaosy, some don't- not sure how those opposing view points require insults.

Baron


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

Baron Spikey said:


> Guys why are you getting so heated over a handful of models? Be at least civil to each other.
> 
> Some people think the Incubi look chaosy, some don't- not sure how those opposing view points require insults.
> 
> Baron


Because some people don't realize that getting into a heated arguement on the 'net is like running in the special olympics.
Even if you win, you're still a fucking retard.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)




----------



## humakt (Jan 2, 2008)

Ignoring the heads, because I dont want to get involved with that, the stances do look a little awkward. I think this is because the grip being used by several of the models is too far apart. The 2 models where the grip is shorter look much better and have a more natural stance. I think the sculpter was trying to get a more dynamic pose but has totally failed.


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

The photo of the pony and the girl is one of the funniest things I've ever seen to illustrate the point.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

On an actual on-topic note, I went into store today and got my hands on the codex and the new models.

The codex looks good, had a quick skim read and the army list looks promising. At a glance, the best HQ in my mind is the ~160 point one that makes a unit of Warriors (aka Kabalites with 2x Splinter Cannon) have 3+ Poisoned Weapons and makes all Raiders and Ravagers Deep Strike (!!!).

The Lesser Talos (forget the name) also have a very very good statline and weapons, for a very cheap cost. The only problem is that they're slow as hell compared to the rest of the army.

The artwork for Grotesques, Wracks and Pain Machines all looks very good, I hope they justify it with the sculpts.

My raiders are going to be very sleek, with no sail, no railing in the middle and no blades on the underside. This makes it look more like a skiff from Return of the Jedi (The mini sail barges that Luke pwns before jumping onto the fat one), as well as giving more space for converted Warriors/Incubi/Wyches depending on which unit it's transporting.

Slightly aggravated about the 5/10 man transport capacity actually, because it means you can't have a full squad + character.

I don't really see the point of the Venom - you're paying 15 less points (effectively) for a model with half the transport capacity and a much crappier gun... not a great bargain in my mind.

Looking good!


----------



## the cabbage (Dec 29, 2006)

I saw a few of the models in store today. They look pretty nice. The pictures of the old range earlier in the thread reminded me how fcuking ugly they were.

I didn't read the codex because it would have been annoying to just glimpse it. My mate had a chat with a staffer and he seemed to think there was a way to get 4 melta weapons in a squad of normal warriors. If that's true then a lot of SM and CSM players are going to be trading in Land Raiders


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

the cabbage said:


> My mate had a chat with a staffer and he seemed to think there was a way to get 4 melta weapons in a squad of normal warriors. If that's true then a lot of SM and CSM players are going to be trading in Land Raiders


You can get 4 Blasters... which are shorter ranged assault 1 Lances. Nowhere near as good as melta guns. And even then you have to take the Warriors as an elites choice to do so, as a troops choice you're stuck with the traditional "1 [Heavy Weapon], 1 [Special Weapon]" unit options.

Typical GW staff ploy of making new army sound far more awesome than it actually is in order to promote sales.


----------



## yshabash (Apr 11, 2010)

well I looked through the codex and it looks epic. I especially like the epic new parasite engine (weaker talos). Though it is weaker than the normal talos any of its weapons confer 1 pain point to it or a freindly DE unit within 12 inches meaning its great to put with about only 2 squads and you have an amazing spearhead right there (especially if those 2 squads are wyches or their stronger ancestors the bloodbrides!)


new fighter/bomber are pretty cool too (3 dark lances or epic bomb that obliderates anything and 2 void lance take your pick ) however of all the new units only one of them seems to be stupid and useless, the venom!

seriosly this bucket of bolts in barely cheaper than a raider and half the capacity, worse gun and I'm pretty sure worse armor as well. -_-

keep on posting guys!


----------



## Creon (Mar 5, 2009)

The Venom is 15 points cheaper than a raider. Since almost everyone is missing it comes with a Flickerfield standard. I think it's a good choice for, oh, dropping some wracks near the objective.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

It's 5 points cheaper than a naked raider - I was saying it was 15 points less because the flickerfield is effectively 10 points of the cost.

And Raiders are more expensive than I thought they would be, one with a flickerfield comes in at double the cost of a Rhino. Admittedly the Rhino can't Turbo and doesn't have a 5++, but it is AV11, unlike the Raider.


----------



## Creon (Mar 5, 2009)

Add the Rhino doesn't come equipped with a Lance Weapon, skimmer, fast - The Raider is cheap at the cost! What I miss is no Extra armor/Spirit stones/Slave matrix/Rowers that allow Stunned to shaken.


----------



## yshabash (Apr 11, 2010)

I concur (agree) the raider is probably the best transport in the game (competing with valkrie cause who wouldn't like 3 lascannons on their transport?!) that said I think DE desperatly needs a transport that is made for nearly nothing but speed (no weps on it or maybe 1 very weak one) for armys that like to be fully transported and have more than 2 squads and a dracon in a small game. in fact I might make some rules for one of those and release it in the houserules and homebrews sections for anyone that wants to use those rules instead of using a raider,maybe... (recommend you use a raider model with those rules but anything dark eldarish like a venom or a homemade model would probably work.)


----------

