Jump to content

Drukhari FAQ


G8Keeper
 Share

Recommended Posts

According to the latest Forgeworld email we're meant to have a FAQ live on the 40k app. As far as I can tell it's still the same, the Agents of Vect ones still reference the old rule for example. Anyone found anything different?

med_gallery_3547_14064_8711.jpg

The errata for the latest Drukhari codex has been updated in Warhammer 40,000: The App. Still don't have it installed on your phone? Download the app to unlock digital codexes, use Battle Forge to build your armies, and loads more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just gone live now on the FAQs page here: https://www.warhammer-community.com/faqs/#warhammer-40000

I Imagine it'll go live on the app in a short period of time.

 

FAQ content wise, the main big one for me is that Dark Technomancers hasn't been changed at all which is a real shame, it's just clarifications on stuff we already knew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The broken razorflail combo/thing is in Charadon so it needs the FAQ from that?

Just seeing so much on warcom posts from people wanting it to be fixed.

TBF I saw the Auspex Tactics vid on it and looks broken beyond belief

 

That's true and I keep forgetting that -- Book of Rust came out so soon after Drukhari codex that it runs together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The broken razorflail combo/thing is in Charadon so it needs the FAQ from that?

Just seeing so much on warcom posts from people wanting it to be fixed.

TBF I saw the Auspex Tactics vid on it and looks broken beyond belief

That's true and I keep forgetting that -- Book of Rust came out so soon after Drukhari codex that it runs together.

Did they come out the same weekend or just very close to each other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, that 2CP for three patrol thing is just nut bar. Poor, poor writing.

 

No command benefit should ever have been written as "+ x" they should have been written as "This detachment costs 0 if..."

 

Should have been written that way in every codex. The Drukhari dex is the only one so far where it would make a difference, but that's why the error occurs- they're trying to use the same wording from the base rule when the Drukhari dex makes that wording problematic. Bonkers that the internet complaints and tournament list exploits are EVERYWHERE and GW still can't see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, that 2CP for three patrol thing is just nut bar. Poor, poor writing.

 

No command benefit should ever have been written as "+ x" they should have been written as "This detachment costs 0 if..."

 

Should have been written that way in every codex. The Drukhari dex is the only one so far where it would make a difference, but that's why the error occurs- they're trying to use the same wording from the base rule when the Drukhari dex makes that wording problematic. Bonkers that the internet complaints and tournament list exploits are EVERYWHERE and GW still can't see it.

 

That +2 cp thing feels like a weird 8th ed carryover where taking patrols didn't get you enough CP.  It's absolutely nonsensical to have both that and no CP cost to take multiple patrols in 9th.  Feels like they accidently forgot to remove that +2 cp bit when they decided to go the no CP cost route instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame there was no balancing done with the FAQ. Hope next one addresses how underwhelming they are as a faction.

They're...underwhelming?

 

Dark eldar are kind of the opposite of that; they're very capable and are far more fun to play again than venom spam ever was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always said the rule set for 9th edition is great. Geedub nuked all of the gamey things in 8th edition. The problem has always been power creep which is exacerbated this edition due to the slower release of the new codices. I have watched several new battle reports pitting DG with Mortard versus druchii and every time the later smoked him turn 1. To me this is just blatantly bad design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always said the rule set for 9th edition is great. Geedub nuked all of the gamey things in 8th edition. The problem has always been power creep which is exacerbated this edition due to the slower release of the new codices. I have watched several new battle reports pitting DG with Mortard versus druchii and every time the later smoked him turn 1. To me this is just blatantly bad design.

I think has more to due with the basic rules than the army design. That it is too easy to kill the big things and that turn one is extremely important to get. Turn on alpha strikes is a real problem in my experience unless the table contains a lot of los blocking terrain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the codices that are OP get to break all the most important rules.

wait are you telling me that advance and charge, fire and fade, redeploys, and extra cp for taking all the stuff you wanted anyway are good? Next you’ll tell me shooting out of flying transports with unvulns that cost less than 100 points is good.  :tongue.:

Edited by quasistellar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I always said the rule set for 9th edition is great. Geedub nuked all of the gamey things in 8th edition. The problem has always been power creep which is exacerbated this edition due to the slower release of the new codices. I have watched several new battle reports pitting DG with Mortard versus druchii and every time the later smoked him turn 1. To me this is just blatantly bad design.

I think has more to due with the basic rules than the army design. That it is too easy to kill the big things and that turn one is extremely important to get. Turn on alpha strikes is a real problem in my experience unless the table contains a lot of los blocking terrain.

 

 

And there is the elephant in the room - lots of los blocking terrain

 

It won't stop Drukhari being king of the hill but lots of terrain is key in 9th with smaller boards and your point about going 1st is also a very valid point. There were some stats done early in 9th that showed going 1st had a noticable advantage something like a 14% edge which only got exaggerated when there was a player skill difference.

 

Drukhari are going to need some balancing but it's hard to judge because so few factions have an updated 9th codex, is it a codex creep issue or an effort move away from a marine based meta? Based on past experience it's codex creep but i will reserve judgement until we see a few more updated factions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.