July 23, 2019, 12:08:57 PM

Author Topic: Dark Eldar Discussion  (Read 4830 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #15 on: April 28, 2017, 06:25:00 PM »
Eh, not to many new things at once.

Changing the mimic engine plus hulk idea will be good enough.

Hmm, but even if Slavetaking isn't functionally changed, something needs to be done about the VP earnings or there still won't be any incentive to make use of the hulk idea. Perhaps having only work once per enemy ship? (i.e. all the obvious spoils are taken in the first hit&run, so if you want more you'll need to hulk the ship and take the time to pick over the remains).
If the (dull) Alpha Strike Mode is denied then the Dark Eldar will need to play more like a regular Eldar player.

The leadership modifier for shooting is a real good one. So Seahawk's idea regarding the modifier is fine with me (less random then 3d6). Some playtesting needed for the exact value. Difficult to pinpoint something like this out of the blue.

Eg, Slavetaking: may be used on hulks for double victory points. This added will be suficient, right?

Offline Xca|iber

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 206
  • *Transcribing Intensifies*
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #16 on: April 28, 2017, 07:31:15 PM »
Eg, Slavetaking: may be used on hulks for double victory points. This added will be suficient, right?

This seems like a good starting place. I'm thinking something along the lines of:

> Normal value for slave-taking is +5VPs per hit & run / per boarding difference.
> If the target is at least crippled, the value is 2x = 10VPs per hit & run / per boarding difference.
> If the target is a drifting or blazing hulk, the value is 2x again = 20VPs per hit & run / per boarding difference.

EDIT: Alternatively, for simplicity it could just be 5, 10, or 15 VPs for normal, crippled, destroyed targets.

Also, Impalers would remain the same as D6x the corresponding slave-taking value.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2017, 07:35:41 PM by Xca|iber »
++Ask Not, Fear Not++
-------------------------
BFG:XR - The Battlefleet Gothic Expanded Revised Rules Project

Offline Tves

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • Loc: Iceland - Battlefleet Borealis
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #17 on: April 29, 2017, 11:20:18 AM »
Slave taking on a hulk with boarding will break the game. Hulks have 0 hits and thus the boarder will always be attacking at the maximum bonus for boarding Value. A boarding action at +5 to the dice (+4 boarding value difference and +1 racial) will generate on average 100vp a turn (since the hulk does not explode but remains a hulk so they can repeat again next turn). A DE player could win the game simply by repeatedly boarding the same hulk a few turns with a single ship.

Offline Xca|iber

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 206
  • *Transcribing Intensifies*
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #18 on: April 29, 2017, 07:54:25 PM »
So now that you mention it, I'm pretty sure that's already possible (just at a lesser value). Maybe horizon is right and we're making this too complicated.

Perhaps just start with:

Mimic Engines:
> Ld test w/ -4 penalty or can't attack (as described on the previous page)

Slave-Taking:
> Hit & Run may forego rolling in exchange for +5VP (+bonus 5VP if target is crippled).
> Impaler is D6x the appropriate H&R value.
> Boarding earns +10VP per hit, +100 for bridge smashed.
> Slave-Taking can't be used on hulks (by any means).

Salvaging Hulks:
> DE earn extra VPs equal to 50% of the total points value of each enemy hulk on the table (but not friendly hulks), regardless of whether they hold the field or not. This is in addition to the normal VPs awarded for salvage captured (if any).
« Last Edit: April 30, 2017, 01:47:12 AM by Xca|iber »
++Ask Not, Fear Not++
-------------------------
BFG:XR - The Battlefleet Gothic Expanded Revised Rules Project

Offline Tves

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • Loc: Iceland - Battlefleet Borealis
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #19 on: April 30, 2017, 06:26:53 PM »
Mimic Engines:
> Ld test w/ -4 penalty or can't attack (as described on the previous page)

LD at -4... this means the average chaos/imperial ship has a 16,65% chance of passing. Orks have about 8% and Eldar/Marines around 28%. Would mean multiple rolls slowing stuff down even more. Effect to the Dark Eldar play style would be near to none. (especially since you sorta just made the alpha ding dong ditch method better in later changes). Why not a scout move? A single movement phase between deployment and game start.

Quote
Slave-Taking:
> Hit & Run may forego rolling in exchange for +5VP (+bonus 5VP if target is crippled).
> Impaler is D6x the appropriate H&R value.
> Boarding earns +10VP per hit, +100 for bridge smashed.
> Slave-Taking can't be used on hulks (by any means).

Unchanged except 50% reduction in VP generated on non crippled ships. Except now they don't even need to roll... Sure its a nerf but does not add any thing or change their playstyle.

Quote
Salvaging Hulks:
> DE earn extra VPs equal to 50% of the total points value of each enemy hulk on the table (but not friendly hulks), regardless of whether they hold the field or not. This is in addition to the normal VPs awarded for salvage captured (if any).

So effectively you've decided to give Dark Eldar nearly 150% VP per capital ship cost. The Ding dong Ditch method is now king. Alpha strike a single cruiser or a pair with your fleet and disengage. VP victory guarenteed (a destroyed lunar is worth 270 if hulked for them). 

This proposed fixes do nothing to change the fact that the Dark Eldar fleet has about a single tactical option. Mimic engine in, setup for a overwhelming alpha strike and then without much fear of reprisal blow a giant hole in the enemies fleet. I really can't see any of these actually changing anything, except perhaps add confusion and book keeping (atleast in the original you could count the number of slave takes on a die, now you need twice as many since they come in an instance of 5 iso 10).

Offline Xca|iber

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 206
  • *Transcribing Intensifies*
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #20 on: April 30, 2017, 08:21:25 PM »
Mimic Engines:
> Ld test w/ -4 penalty or can't attack (as described on the previous page)

LD at -4... this means the average chaos/imperial ship has a 16,65% chance of passing. Orks have about 8% and Eldar/Marines around 28%. Would mean multiple rolls slowing stuff down even more. Effect to the Dark Eldar play style would be near to none. (especially since you sorta just made the alpha ding dong ditch method better in later changes). Why not a scout move? A single movement phase between deployment and game start.

The penalty amount doesn't have to be -4, if that seems too high. And remember that this would bring back the 30cm "revealed zone" around enemy ships. The idea here was to have mimic engines potentially in-play for a longer period of time, depending on how the DE player wants to move/deploy their forces.

Going back to the classic Armada DE mimic engines is still possible, of course.

Quote
Slave-Taking:
> Hit & Run may forego rolling in exchange for +5VP (+bonus 5VP if target is crippled).
> Impaler is D6x the appropriate H&R value.
> Boarding earns +10VP per hit, +100 for bridge smashed.
> Slave-Taking can't be used on hulks (by any means).

Unchanged except 50% reduction in VP generated on non crippled ships. Except now they don't even need to roll... Sure its a nerf but does not add any thing or change their playstyle.

They didn't need to roll in the current BFG:R rules...

As far as why people seem resistant to the large "PfP" tables you suggested, the book-keeping issue isn't as much about how you have to remember stuff (compared to tallying VPs, anyway). It's more an issue of having to look up your options every turn, as players may not feel like memorizing all 18 potential bonuses, or (more likely) will simply want to check every option to see if it's the most advantageous in that moment. If you cut it to 6 options or less (with all the same effect duration), it would probably work a lot better. Alternatively, simply a single bonus with a scaling effect based on the number of "points" spent.

Quote
Salvaging Hulks:
> DE earn extra VPs equal to 50% of the total points value of each enemy hulk on the table (but not friendly hulks), regardless of whether they hold the field or not. This is in addition to the normal VPs awarded for salvage captured (if any).

So effectively you've decided to give Dark Eldar nearly 150% VP per capital ship cost. The Ding dong Ditch method is now king. Alpha strike a single cruiser or a pair with your fleet and disengage. VP victory guarenteed (a destroyed lunar is worth 270 if hulked for them). 

This proposed fixes do nothing to change the fact that the Dark Eldar fleet has about a single tactical option. Mimic engine in, setup for a overwhelming alpha strike and then without much fear of reprisal blow a giant hole in the enemies fleet. I really can't see any of these actually changing anything, except perhaps add confusion and book keeping (atleast in the original you could count the number of slave takes on a die, now you need twice as many since they come in an instance of 5 iso 10).

Fair enough. Perhaps the extra VPs is too much. In that case, it seems like we still need something thematic to give the DE player an actual incentive to stay on the board. Even if we assume mimic engines revert to their classic state, and the slave-taking provides some kind of bonus rather than VPs, there isn't much to differentiate the DE from regular Eldar, but without the weird movement options.
++Ask Not, Fear Not++
-------------------------
BFG:XR - The Battlefleet Gothic Expanded Revised Rules Project

Offline Seahawk

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 446
  • Bombardment!
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #21 on: May 01, 2017, 12:32:28 AM »
Yea, that got needlessly complicated.

Slave taking doesn't have to change at all. Frankly I already think it's ridiculous and over the top that DE already get soooo many free VP's so easily compared to all other fleets. I'm not sure how to change it, other than maybe restrict the module to just capital ships, since escorts are lightning fast and agile, and having that many dudes crammed into it can't be good for a ship's crew complement.

Offline Xca|iber

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 206
  • *Transcribing Intensifies*
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #22 on: May 02, 2017, 02:10:11 AM »
So I've been thinking about Tves' suggestion regarding 40k's "Power From Pain" rules as a starting point for further developing DE in BFG (a reasonable place, considering DE barely existed when BFG was first brought about).

Of course, if a whole new block of rules gets added to the DE book, some things will probably need to be dialed back, such as mimic engines and slave-taking (which seemed to be the main points of contention in this thread). So that led me to this next iteration:

Mimic Engines:
Until a DE ship attacks (incl. boarding, teleport H&Rs, etc.), launches ordnance, moves within 30cm of an enemy ship, or defends against enemy ordnance, any opposing ship attempting to attack it must pass a Ld test with a -2 penalty. If it fails, it must attack a non-mimicking target or not at all. Effect automatically goes away at the end of the 2nd game turn.

(There will also be some conditions to prevent using friendly-fire or indirect weapons to bypass the rule, and still no effect vs Tyranids or Necrons).

Slave-Taking:
Score +10VPs per hit inflicted during a boarding action, and +100VPs if the Bridge Smashed critical is inflicted. (No effect for H&R or Impaler attacks).

Power from Pain (taking a cue from 40k 7E Dark Eldar):
At the start of the DE player's turn, their capital ships gain the bonus below corresponding to the current turn number. This lasts for the rest of the game:
  • None
  • Re-roll attempts to repair critical damage.
  • Repair critical damage on a roll of 5+ instead of 6.
  • Immune to negative leadership penalties.
  • In a boarding action, use the ship's starting hits to determine its boarding value.
  • In a boarding action, the ship does not award a bonus to the attacker for being in contact with blast markers,
     being on special orders, or being crippled.

+++++++++

The idea here is to work towards removing some of the DE's alpha strike potential without killing the strategy outright. In theory, with mimic engines offering much less protection, and no way to generate VPs with H&Rs, the DE player may benefit from alpha-striking, but should not be consistently able to disengage before turn 3. To keep them in the game afterwards, their ships become harder to disable and stronger at boarding the longer the game goes on.

So how does this look? Too much? Too little? Just right?
++Ask Not, Fear Not++
-------------------------
BFG:XR - The Battlefleet Gothic Expanded Revised Rules Project

Offline Seahawk

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 446
  • Bombardment!
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #23 on: May 02, 2017, 02:39:28 PM »
I'm a better fan of -3, and keep it all game until lost. -2 feels like most captains could see through it without too much issue. I realize that's what you were aiming for, but there's no need to go overboard on the other stuff at expense of fluffy rules.

Instead of power from pain, how about a flat bonus per turn for certain actions?

Example:
Turn 1: +0VP per winning boarding action, +0 per H&R
Turn 2: +10VP per winning boarding action, +5 per H&R
Turn 3: +20VP per winning boarding action, +5 per H&R
Turn 4: +30VP per winning boarding action, +10 per H&R
Turn 5: +40VP per winning boarding action, +10 per H&R
Turn 6: +50VP per winning boarding action, +10 per H&R


Personally, any chance for free VP is already OP when some fleets struggle to generate any, so this is still an enormous boon. Players are very encouraged to stay in the game, because while they get some early on, the big bucks are late game. It also encourages use of capital ships over pure escort fleets. It meshes very well with my first iteration of mimic engines, since you'll be able to keep ships ghosting around the edges until the moment to strike is right, resulting in the enemy fleet trying to chase them down to discover their identity.

Finally, with the bonus for capturing hulks, there is a lot of opportunity for DE to gain their thrice-damned free VP that makes sense (slaves!) and gives lots of reason to stay in the game.

To me, that sounds like a really story-driven game that delivers in the rules, as all games should be.

Offline Xca|iber

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 206
  • *Transcribing Intensifies*
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #24 on: May 03, 2017, 03:40:17 AM »
I'm a better fan of -3, and keep it all game until lost. -2 feels like most captains could see through it without too much issue. I realize that's what you were aiming for, but there's no need to go overboard on the other stuff at expense of fluffy rules.

Instead of power from pain, how about a flat bonus per turn for certain actions?

Example:
Turn 1: +0VP per winning boarding action, +0 per H&R
Turn 2: +10VP per winning boarding action, +5 per H&R
Turn 3: +20VP per winning boarding action, +5 per H&R
Turn 4: +30VP per winning boarding action, +10 per H&R
Turn 5: +40VP per winning boarding action, +10 per H&R
Turn 6: +50VP per winning boarding action, +10 per H&R


Personally, any chance for free VP is already OP when some fleets struggle to generate any, so this is still an enormous boon. Players are very encouraged to stay in the game, because while they get some early on, the big bucks are late game. It also encourages use of capital ships over pure escort fleets. It meshes very well with my first iteration of mimic engines, since you'll be able to keep ships ghosting around the edges until the moment to strike is right, resulting in the enemy fleet trying to chase them down to discover their identity.

Finally, with the bonus for capturing hulks, there is a lot of opportunity for DE to gain their thrice-damned free VP that makes sense (slaves!) and gives lots of reason to stay in the game.

To me, that sounds like a really story-driven game that delivers in the rules, as all games should be.

My concern here, which is what I was trying to get away from with my previous suggestion (after Tves' comments), is that free VPs may not be the best core mechanic for DE. The issue is really what you brought up in your post - other fleets may struggle to generate VPs, especially in the early game. This is central to the problem Tves brings up in the OP; namely that the VPs from an alpha strike, plus a bit from slave-taking, is usually enough to allow a victory through disengagement, because the opponent can't generate enough VPs in one turn to counter it.

In short, if the opponent hasn't scored on their own, the DE player only needs to score enough to cover 10% of their fleet's cost (due to disengaging), plus a small buffer. For a 1500pt fleet, this is actually quite easy to do with a single LC kill and a few slave-taking runs. If the alpha-strike output is better than that, the effect is even harder to mitigate.

So under your system, the change may not be as large as you might think (and now that I mention it, this is probably true for most of my suggestions as well). While the early-game VP's have been reduced, the late-game VPs aren't much of an incentive due to the risk of giving up VPs to the opponent by that point. Thus the ideal play would still be to kite on T1, then alpha on T2 or 3, and disengage the next turn before the opponent has scored any VPs for himself.

The more I consider it, the more it seems to me that (as you said) free VPs can be pretty OP under certain conditions (or against certain fleets), and that perhaps we should move away from that as a core mechanic for the Dark Eldar. Similarly, I'm not totally convinced that "complete attack negation" is an ideal function for mimic engines. After reading your comment: "...keep ships ghosting around the edges until the moment to strike... resulting in the enemy fleet trying to chase them down..." I realized that doesn't actually sound very fun for the opponent, in my opinion. To be clear, while extensively kiting is a valid DE tactic, I'm not sure (for the fun-factor) that it's the first thing we want DE players doing every game.
++Ask Not, Fear Not++
-------------------------
BFG:XR - The Battlefleet Gothic Expanded Revised Rules Project

Offline AJCHVY

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 34
    • Loc: La Habra, California USA
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #25 on: May 22, 2017, 11:54:42 PM »
So, my 2 cents for what has been discussed so far.

Changing the slave taking VP could be a neat way for DE to have an incentive to board and HnR, but I felt the way it is currently done is a simple enough solution. Regarding the slave taking during a HnR, you are only getting VPs and not hurting the enemy vessel so its a choice of damage or points. And for boarding, there is a chance you lose the fight and therefore don't get any points.

The mimic engine is clearly a problem, as the "you have to wait until I attack you" is not a good way to go about it. I like the -4ld check to see them, but my issue with that is, if a ship gets discovered turn one, it can get blasted apart by the enemy before it gets to do anything other than Brace. I like the idea of DE having to pounce, do damage, and then leave quickly before a counterattack. That's how they play in 40k and they should reflect that in BFG.

Also, being able to re-mimic should not be a thing.

What if the mimic engine was a bonus to shadowfield, but you could always shoot at DE. They could get a bonus to the shadowfield save based on range, and if an enemy ship passes a -4 or more ld check, that ship loses the mimic engine bonus. This way there can still be alpha strikes, as the DE could choose to not Brace and be locked on or ready to fire ordnance when they get in close.

Also, while the idea of a power from pain ability is cool, it leads to rules bloat. Look at the Nid and Ork fleets, they are on the verge of having too many abilities/rules, I'd rather not add DE to that list.

Offline Lotus

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 90
    • Loc: germany
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #26 on: May 25, 2017, 04:23:08 AM »
This reads as if it is a discussion about a non-official ruleset/houserules. Maybe the thread name should be changed to avoid confusion.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #27 on: May 26, 2017, 09:12:07 AM »
This reads as if it is a discussion about a non-official ruleset/houserules. Maybe the thread name should be changed to avoid confusion.
The question started from the original rules FAQ/Compendium 2010.

BFG:R crew started adressing them into those rules.

Offline AJCHVY

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 34
    • Loc: La Habra, California USA
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #28 on: June 12, 2017, 10:18:43 PM »
What if the mimic engines only worked until the end of turn 2. That way, it could give the DE player the ability to alpha strike, but they would have to be quick about it. And their opponent could attempt to deploy or move in such a way as to mitigate their effectiveness.

Offline Xca|iber

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 206
  • *Transcribing Intensifies*
Re: Dark Eldar Discussion
« Reply #29 on: June 12, 2017, 11:05:33 PM »
What if the mimic engines only worked until the end of turn 2. That way, it could give the DE player the ability to alpha strike, but they would have to be quick about it. And their opponent could attempt to deploy or move in such a way as to mitigate their effectiveness.

It already functions this way in the BFG:R rules.
++Ask Not, Fear Not++
-------------------------
BFG:XR - The Battlefleet Gothic Expanded Revised Rules Project