G'day All,

Welcome to the first Dark Eldar Lets Poll!
Ovee the course of the Dark Eldar Army List re-development I intend to run a number of "Lets Poll" and "Lets Talk" sessions in order to engage with the community about their ideas and and points of view on list changes.

The first Lets Poll session features the Dark Lance.
The Dark Lance is currently 30cm AT5+ and is featured on the Raider, Ravager, and Scourges.

A general comment it is that Dark Eldar lack some AT punch. Is a modification to the Dark Lance the way to achieve that?

I am cognizant that at present it fits within the appropriate 40k to epic conversion bracket.

Thoughts?

Cheers,
Jim

Who's saying the DE lack AT?

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Would you like names and addresses? Or is there another actual question?

At least links to posts where it's mentioned.

I'd like to hope that there's an actual reason we're considering the change that involves playability and games played.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Oh right okay. It has been a comment made to me. The poll is to allow people to express an opinion so I can determine whether it needs to be looked at for playtesting or changes as part of the list dev process. I will be running a number of polls and forums to see what areas people would like looked.
Cheers,
Jim

I don't think the army lacks an AT punch. This is the first I've seen it even mentioned.

Given the number of games the list has seen and the amount of work that went into playtesting it small point adjustments is what I think we should be looking at.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Wow Dave... How bout you take a breath mate.

You're opinion is that they don't need a change, fine. I think the whole point of the pole is to see if the community agrees with you... This is a community driven game isn't it... Frankly ACs don't need people leaping down their throats for even proposing the possibility of perhaps exploring if there is some interest in looking at a change...

I don't think the list lacks AT more than it should.

It's an extremly assault heavy list, not a shooty one.

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam

I think Dave's issue, and it's quite a reasonable one, is that any complaints or modifications need to be backed by proper playtesting, not just poll results.
A poll is fine and easy, but they also tend to be biased. The people most likely to answer this poll would be DE players, who naturally see the weaknesses in their list and want to strengthen it. It's easy to go too far, even if the intentions are good, simply because we tend to see the lists failings more than its strengths. Democracy can be a questionable thing because of this, and at some point real-world politics may even give excellent examples of when it enters shady territory...

A poll is a fine start though, and I trust that Jim won't go proposing serious list changes on these polls alone.

Thanks guys.
Exactly geep, just a way to start discussion. I hear Dave's opinion, thanks for contributing to the discussion.
I will reserve mine for the moment as I don't want to bias the results.
Cheers
Jim

Nice start to the process Jim.. Thank you.

I tend to agree that the list is more assault, then shooty......

_________________
Regards
Greg

*************************************************

Not against change, so long as it done fairly and no one is left behind....

I'm human and not a !@#$%^# Robot..

I've never heard anyone comment that Dark Eldar needed to have their AT firepower bolstered and happen to agree with that unvoiced perception. No boost required.

I don't think Dave has been jumping down anyone's throat with his questions - if anything, I find the aggressive replies to Dave's query to be inappropriate and disproportionate. I think Jim needs to take a deep breath and not take things so personally.

How is this post furthering your collegiate environment Jim? You PM me saying my post will discourage people from posting so be mindful in the future. I can't see how you think you're encouraging anything but attacks back at you.

Geep, my issue is more the question is completely out of the blue to me. It's why I asked who's clamoring for more AT. Thought experiments are fine but we're discussing a potential change so it should have something to stand on. I don't feel it does given the responses, we're talking about this because some unamed person made a comment to Jim.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

I don't understand how any of my posts would warrant an attack back at me. I certainly dont perceive myself to be under attack. It is an interesting choice of words...

The question may seem out of the blue, it is intended to promote discussion. The journey of a thousand miles and all that... However, who said it though is less relevant to the question of "does it have validity?"

I will keep my opinion on the matter to myself, because it isn't necessarily important - I already know what it is after all. I would like to hear what other people have to say. And i dont want to close down ideas or discussion on it by saying I think this. I want the debate to be less about personalities and more about Dark Eldar army list development.

As I have stated. I hear you loud and clear that it is fine as it is and I welcome your opinion. Thats why I included the "none" option in the poll.

I welcome the discussion about the issue, but the "who said it" is really immaterial to the debate.
Cheers,
Jim

Correct me if I am wrong
But if the community votes to change or not change Jim would then follow with play tests before any changes become permanent

So either the community tends to agree no change

Or

The community tends to agree there needs to be a change and we play test

I don't see why this has caused issues it is a simple question at the end of the day