PDA

View Full Version : Falcon + Harlequins (Eldarish or Cheese?)



elvinltl
20-11-2007, 13:22
Note: This thread is NOT for Falcon or Rending Bashing. Just curious how people feel about this combination.

I've seen many many post about how people rant and complain how cheese Falcon with Holo-fields, Spirit-stones loaded with 6 Harlequins vomit 24 rending attacks on anything, anywhere.

IMO, fielding Falcons with Holo Fields and spiritstones loaded with 6 Harlequins is an excellent example of a good Eldar army performing as an 'Ochestra' with perfect combination. This is because Harlequins and Falcons performing alone are really ineffective.

Harlequins foot-slogging are plain ineffective. Why?

-Everyone knows how deadly Harlequins are with their rending capabilities and will always try to avoid them unless they've got a good reason to engage them in CC ie. Bait. Thus, unless your army consist of like 30 Harlequins flooding the board, it is really easy for your enemies to keep re-positioning their forces remaining more then 16-18" away from the enemy. No amount of terrain can alleviate this problem.

-Veil if Tears is an overrated skill man! As an Eldar player, i've figured out that the BEST way to use Harlequins is to dump them in a Falcon. Some time ago i asked about VoT on the forum and there were people talking about a "GOLDEN DISTANCE" of 15" where there is a higher probability of assaulting and lower probability of being in spotting distance.
As an Eldar player, VoT is a high risk skill where you place alot of luck in rolling a)A good roll for FoF and b)A bad roll for your enemy to determine spotting range. Only if you roll both a and b well will foot-slogging Harlequins get into CC at full strength at optimal performance.

Falcons alone are useless. Why?

-Ask any Eldar player regarding getting Falcons. The very first golden requirement is <<Are you putting anything inside the Falcon?>>, if the answer is no then Falcons are not recommended and we push FirePrisims instead. The point i am driving is that Falcons are designed to be perform as a transporter AND attack vehicle, somewhere between FirePrisims and WaveSerpent. Having a Falcon alone is cost ineffective, we would rather go for a FirePrisim.

-Another thing people explain how Falcons are abusive Objective grabber. For me, i would rather field 10x2 squads of Guardian Defender and plant them at objectives. No sane Eldar players simply field a Falcon because of grabbing objectives... Actually, 3 Guardian Jetbikes can perform the same role of contesting for objective. >.<

Just food for thought from an Eldar player point of view.

Captain Micha
20-11-2007, 13:45
It's not a form of synergy in the way you would like to think it is. The falcon is great with -any- cargo be it, scorpions fire dragons, banshees or harlequins. It's harder to kill than a monolith, and if it really spent all game shaken or stunned no one would be taking 200+ points of falcon, you can field them with holo and s.s for about 165 points and still be armed

There is nothing Orchestra about a 6 man team being unloaded somewhere on the battlefield in a nearly invincible vehicle.

It's also unfluffy. If you really want to use harlequins, and have them with a transport, perhaps you should see if your friends would let you use the Venom rules in the harlequin codex? (It's downloadable from gw's site)

Damon
20-11-2007, 14:02
I agree whole heartedly with Elvinltl.

dcikgyurt
20-11-2007, 14:06
I'm sorry, but it's both Eldarish and Cheesy. However, I may be slightly biased as I hate skinny hippies with pointy ears. :D

Voodoo Boyz
20-11-2007, 14:09
In one way you're correct.

The Eldar player taking Falcons and Harlies and combining them is making good use of two units. It's taking the capabilities of one unit (Falcon) and using it to cover the weakness of the Harlequin unit.

The problem is that with this combination, it's broken. No one disputes that it's a good or great tactic from the Eldar players point of view, but they are saying that the idea is too good because the Falcon is too survivable and it essentially creates situations that:

1.) Opponents can't escape from when it is executed properly.
2.) It is very easy for an Eldar player to execute the tactic properly.
3.) There is little to no risk to the Eldar player when they use this tactic.

That's why people complain about it, because it's too good and has little to no counter.

Captain Micha
20-11-2007, 14:10
I don't have a thing against space ninja pirate elves, but I do have something against a broken unit. Which is strange considering it's their -only- broken unit. And it's not the unit -itself- that's bad... it's an upgrade that it can take.

and voodoo hit the nail on the head there.

Crimson Reaver
20-11-2007, 14:14
I see the Harlequins as very much doing their own thing, so either they would bring along their own transport (a Venom or similar) or they would pop out of the Webway, run over to something and viciously kill it before fading away again. I don't see them using Falcons as a tour bus.

I tend to use my Falcons (of which I run 2) to deposit Warlocks and Fire Dragons close to enemy armour and then they can shoot with the Falcon providing fire support, much like a combat helicopter with appropriate guns. Sure the Falcons rarely take damage but they do get suppressed a lot. Playing a fast moving Saim Hann Windrider Host I don't think this is unreasonable or unfluffy.

Bunnahabhain
20-11-2007, 14:20
One falcon dropping it's cargo off for a precision strike is nicely Eldarish, when it leads an assualt of foot troops, long range fire power, and other fast moving units.

Three of them doing it, with very little else in the army, is very boring and cheesy.

Razarael
20-11-2007, 16:02
Harlequins in a Falcon just seems unfluffly and kinda lame. For a group of Eldar known for appearing out of no where, being amazingly fast and almost untrackable with the human eye, I think it just makes more sense for them to move on foot. And that is the only way I'll ever field them.

As for Falcon cargo, I'll only ever put Fire Dragons in them. Now that combo makes sense to me, even if Harlies are the better choice.

Bregalad
20-11-2007, 16:13
Same topic here:
http://warseer.com/forums/40k-background/113953-harlie-taxicab.html

Castigator
20-11-2007, 16:18
Falcons alone are useless. Why?

-Ask any Eldar player regarding getting Falcons. The very first golden requirement is <<Are you putting anything inside the Falcon?>>, if the answer is no then Falcons are not recommended and we push FirePrisims instead. The point i am driving is that Falcons are designed to be perform as a transporter AND attack vehicle, somewhere between FirePrisims and WaveSerpent. Having a Falcon alone is cost ineffective, we would rather go for a FirePrisim.

-Another thing people explain how Falcons are abusive Objective grabber. For me, i would rather field 10x2 squads of Guardian Defender and plant them at objectives. No sane Eldar players simply field a Falcon because of grabbing objectives... Actually, 3 Guardian Jetbikes can perform the same role of contesting for objective. >.<

Just food for thought from an Eldar player point of view.

So, because the FirePrism is Uber-cheese, the Falcon cannot be cheesy.

Nice Argument :rolleyes:, Have to remember that for the next time someone blames me of abuse. :chrome:

That aside, I don't mind the combination though.. have fun.

Phazael
20-11-2007, 16:30
The MEQers are out in force to get the Falcon nerfed, again....

Unstoppable delivery platforms? How about ones that deliver ten men with no chance of failure for 30 (or 50) points, like pods? At least Falcons require a heavy choice and can actually be shot at before delivering their cargo. Not to mention their mere existance hasn't obsoleted entire armies from competitive existance, like pods have.

Eldar have had the uber falcon at their disposal forever. Its just the most rescent book is so bad/inflexible, that its become the one competitive option left in the world of AC spam and drop pods. Vectored Engines/Star Engines are the real culprit and never should have cleared playtesting. If you can't handle one six man unit, then you should probably start using full sized squads instead of 5 man las/plas everywhere and then crying because you have been out cheesed.

Captain Micha
20-11-2007, 16:44
I love how everyone assumes that it's just marine players that can't play that hate the falcon.

And how Eldar players are so tactically INEPT that they think the falco spam trick is the only Path the victory. (wonders how many will get that joke)

Drop pods? you're kidding right... aren't those the deepstriking marine vehicles that can scatter right off the board if you're not careful? Those things that once they deploy that's it and they are pretty much foot slogging the rest of the game?

The Song of Spears
20-11-2007, 17:01
Just to give a different perspective here...



The Eldar player taking Falcons and Harlies and combining them is making good use of two units. It's taking the capabilities of one unit (Falcon) and using it to cover the weakness of the Harlequin unit.
(Well said!)

The problem with this combination is that it’s predicable. You always know what the Eldar player is up to with this setup. Each army that is not so min-maxed that it has no flexibility in pickup games/random tourney paring should be able to deal with this. There are many situations that:

1.) Opponents can bait harles with various units, block key units harles want to kill preventing them from assaulting them
2.) It’s very easy to stun a falcon and ensure it is useful for nothing other than a transport, regardless of how reliable, there are a great many tactics for dealing with transports, even if they are assured to not be destroyed.
3.) There is little to no threat from harlequins if they fail to rend, and with a 1/6 chance of rending, it is common to get less than three rends on the charge.

Why do people complain about it? They have tactically unsound, inflexible armies, or gasp! bad table generalship.

Harlequins will likely assault. Though, thanks to you getting to set up your own troops, you can choose who covers who, who is nearby to counter assault and so on. If I have to spout good tactics for every army out there to counter 3 falocns+2x6 harles+6 dragons then some of you need to go back and take a good hard look at your tactics and army list.

Short and simple, let harles assault unit who will be unlikely to get cut down in combat resolution, then have a counter assault unit nearby with a decent number of attacks. Every army in the game has this ability so…

Amnar
20-11-2007, 17:07
I love it, this argument will never die..... My take on the matter is that the falcon is way too survivable. Make holofields and stones mutually exclusive and all's well in the land.

As for the fluff, I think Harlies should always be footslogging, but that's just me ;)

Captain Micha
20-11-2007, 17:09
A shaken transport, that you can't kill.. is a shaken transport that you can't kill. Also that whole "block the exit " trick won't work if he's doing it right, you won't even be able to maneuver in such a fashion to pull it off. It's the fact that for all 40k practical purposes it is immune to death and nothing else on the table top can claim that.

Also fluffwise, I feel harlequins should have gotten venoms or something instead. It has nothing to do with my fear of being assaulted by harlequins, or my capability or lack there of dealing with them or anything else the falcon dumps out. It's dealing with the transport itself that's the killer

The Song of Spears
20-11-2007, 17:22
I never said your only option was to block the exit. Though that is one viable option.

I cant really debate tactics without knowing what army any given one of you wants to use against this falcon list.

So blanket statements such as "falcons are too survivable" will remain childish and obvious signs of poor generalship until people can start talking tactics for each army and showing more evident signs of weakness/strengths per army/list.

Lord Raneus
20-11-2007, 17:36
I think it's a viable combination, but so are three (or nine) Land Speeder Tornadoes.

I think you get my point here. ;)
The inherent problem with cheesy units is that they are indeed viable, too viable, and are an attractive option as such.

Imperialis_Dominatus
20-11-2007, 17:37
Micha, I got your path joke. :D

Phazael, we aren't all incompetent MEQ players. Though I concede that I play Chaos, I enjoyed Guard for a long time and still hated Falcons. :p

I agree with Micha. There should have been a Venom. Then we'd be either complaining about that or the Eldar players would be complaining endlessly about it. Or, third possibility but not likely, GW would make it well balanced and costed and there would be no reason to whine either way.

No, I will not spell whine as whinge. Never.

Captain Micha
20-11-2007, 17:39
I don't enjoy talking about my army list since it's always changing. Usually it sticks with one basic theme, in the case of my tau, it's got a crisis team (fireknife of course.. is there anything else? I mean really....) of course the shaso, firewarriors with a fish, (10 strong), hammerhead, kroot, 3 'sides, and a railhead. Always. I find it's a versatile core that lets me deal with most things quite well (especially depending on what else I give it for the last five hundred points)

The only reason I have sides now is because of the falcon. I used to run without the sides and a stealth team but the falcons proved to be just too annoying to take down with that configuration. I've still not used this new list yet but I want to. (I don't think much anything can survive 3 str 10 ap1 shots on turn 1... at least thats the theory) Or I used to run with a second team of firewarriors in a 2nd fish. Both of the variants proved worthless. so I'm down to this one. Which Tau military doctrine goes as follows against Eldar I've determined. "If you don't get first turn, and there's a single falcon out there. pack up and leave" because if it's not dead after that, the best you can do effectivly is draw. especially since at 1k there's 200 vps gauranteed not to die more or less.

Imperialis proof that 9 times out of 10 we have a sense of humor!

Past tactics are the infamous Eldar lines of "ignore it and bait whatever's in it" Or, "Shoot that bugger with railhead turn 1 if I get turn 1, which almost never happens... or he'll place it somewhere where I don't have los to it. So there goes that option...

The Song of Spears
20-11-2007, 18:09
:P ok.

So Tau, I play a lot of Tau here so let me know how this works for ya...

No need to make a whole list around three falcons, just few unit options should do.

My advice, kroot+kroothounds plus 3 sides with 2 shield drones each plus (if you have issues with leadership) shadowsun or a attached ethereal to the sides.

Put the sides out front with (IMO) a ethereal attached inside them so as not to be able to be contacted in BtB. Have the kroot nearby on cover, within move/assault range.

What eldar player could resist throwing 6-12 harlequins at these broadsides? But how good are harles a this task anyway? lets try each example and see how we fair...

6 harles vs. the sides = 24 attacks = 4 rends + 13 hits = 6 wounds + 4 rends = 1 failed 2+ save and 2 failed 4+ saves, thats three drones. No big deal, and maybe in return you kill 1 harle, either way they are stuck there as to HaR now would be suicide. And with the ethereal, you are not going to get cut down in CC...

next, tau players turn, kroot assault, and even with the harles 18 attacks, they will kill all/most the harlequins(yay for kroot hounds).

Next example:
What if they dump all 12 harles into the sides?
12 harles = 48 attacks = 8 rends + 26 hits = 13 wounds + 8 rends = 2 failed 2+ saves + 4 failed 4+ saves. That's 6 shield drones (suits still in tact!). Again, maybe you kill 1 harle, but due to the fearless and 2+ save, combat ends there.

Tau turn: kroot assault and:
Harles are scared of kroot so (assuming all 12 can reach all kroot, though this is likely not possible due to pile in from previous assault phase, but lets look at worst case, ja) they attack them. Harles = 33 attacks = 5 rends + 18 hits = 9 wound + 5 rends = 10 dead kroot, 4 dead kroot hounds
kroot/hounds attack and get 24 attacks = 12 hits = 8 wounds = 5 dead harles
the broadsides should kill another 1 or two, taking the eldar down to 6 harles left.

So for 6 shield drones, and 14 kroot the eldar lost 6 harles (likely one of them a shadowseer, and thus netting equal points) this is the worst case scenario. The eldar have lost half their assault power and killed little of import to the Tau. And even with this scenario it is unlikely the eldar player will roll so many rends so reliably, IMO the situation would likely result in all 12 harlequins dead.

Keep in mind it took 1000 points of eldar stuff to inflict this little damage on the tau...

As far as the falcons go, they really only pose a problem as scoring units, as tau have little difficulty shaking them. So while the eldar can contest a objective, so can your suits, and with the falcon nearly never shooting, there is next to nothing that can hurt the suits thanks to the eldar player not getting any indirect fire due to using up all his HS slots on falcons.

I am sure there are other ways of dealing with the flying circus, but this one seems to work fairly reliably round here.

Cheers!

Captain Micha
20-11-2007, 18:17
not bad. using an ethereal might have a point after all then.
Fire dragons still scare me though in falcons. only thing that'd scare me more is fire dragons and a wave serpent. all that meltal fire.. is just ouch. however I'm still left holding the bag on killing a falcon *L*

Amnar
20-11-2007, 18:18
So blanket statements such as "falcons are too survivable" will remain childish and obvious signs of poor generalship until people can start talking tactics for each army and showing more evident signs of weakness/strengths per army/list.

Blanket statements such as those only remain childish and signs of poor generalship until they're backed up by stats, and they are. The falcon is statistically the most survivable non super heavy tank in the game.

Torga_DW
20-11-2007, 20:12
Don't forget though, that the falcon has survived unchanged through 2 codexes now. So apparently GW thinks they are what they should be.

Imperialis_Dominatus
20-11-2007, 20:31
Don't forget though, that the falcon has survived unchanged through 2 codexes now. So apparently GW thinks they are what they should be.

Because that is the best judge of what's good for the game.

Lord Raneus
20-11-2007, 21:04
The fact that the Falcon is more survivable than the Monolith scares me.:eek:

Especially as a Guard player, who doesn't have S10 BS4 weapons but yet can't afford to have a Falcon tearing into his tanks/infantry.
Although, isn't it the upgrades and not the tank that are the problem?

The Song of Spears
20-11-2007, 21:07
not bad. using an ethereal might have a point after all then.
Fire dragons still scare me though in falcons. only thing that'd scare me more is fire dragons and a wave serpent. all that meltal fire.. is just ouch.

Yeah, but here you are more safe. if he puts anything in a serpent you are good to go, just send a few railgun shots his way, and my likely the 3rd/4th shot would will have blown the thing out of the sky.



however I'm still left holding the bag on killing a falcon *L*

Yeah i am afraid so. Tau can put out a decent number of srt7+ shots a turn, so you might just keep plinking away at them and hope for ouble 5's or 6's... it happens :D

Also, i noticed you had a fish + firewarriors. These guys could have a pretty good chance of destroying a falcon if you can transport them to a rapid fire position behind one of the three falcons (more possible than you think considering there are three of them, he can hide all their asses ) 20 str 5 shots even at BS 3 could do some damage...

While eldar can drop of troops reliably, by taking three falcons, the eldar player is actually limiting his shooting power a ton. No war walkers, no wraithlords, no prisms, no heavy weapons batterys. Thus essentially means that armies that normally had to fear tons of return fire, don't against the tri falcon list.

Believe it or not, you can bully tri falcon lists around a bit by forcing them to either run and hide to not get shaken, or to drop off their cargo and hope it gets the job done, casue if it doesn't, they are out gunned and undermanned.

Son of Makuta
20-11-2007, 21:26
Hey hey, it's not *that* impossible. I pranged a Fire Prism on turn one of a game last Sunday with a venom-cannon-armed Warrior. OK, I was lucky, but it can happen.

Personally I don't see Harlequins as that much of a problem. I've used them. They tend to assault a unit, wipe them out, and then die horribly to bolters/pulse rifles/whatever. Or they'll get annihilated straight away anyway. OK, I'm using them on foot and this doesn't always happen, but I just don't like the idea of them in a transport. Doesn't seem right. (Besides, I own 10 Fire Dragons and only one Wave Serpent. As the American saying goes, go figure that out. :P)

Besides, Falcons may be hard to kill sure, but they can't shoot for s***. I'm talking BS3 and no twin linking here. That's inaccurate. Pulse lasers do very little, usually. So while the Eldar player's dumped 200 points into a Falcon, that can often give you 200 points of stuff that won't die because Mr. Falcon is pretty pathetic at killing things. Particularly if you space your units out for a shooty army, so the 'quins kill one sacrificial unit and then get shot to hell, or play an assaulty army which can hit them right back (Genestealers anyone?).

That help? :)

Edit: SoS got there before me :angel:

While eldar can drop of troops reliably, by taking three falcons, the eldar player is actually limiting his shooting power a ton. No war walkers, no wraithlords, no prisms, no heavy weapons batterys. Thus essentially means that armies that normally had to fear tons of return fire, don't against the tri falcon list.

Believe it or not, you can bully tri falcon lists around a bit by forcing them to either run and hide to not get shaken, or to drop off their cargo and hope it gets the job done, casue if it doesn't, they are out gunned and undermanned.

The Song of Spears
20-11-2007, 21:28
Blanket statements such as those only remain childish and signs of poor generalship until they're backed up by stats, and they are. The falcon is statistically the most survivable non super heavy tank in the game.

You are missing my point. All people who whine about mech eldar are.

Complaining about the statistics of any given unit is not only a waste of time, but it does nothing to develop tactics against this unit.

My comments were not to say that the falcon is weak and easy to destroy. It was that when someone reads a comment like, "Yeah Falcons are more tough than a monolith, thats terrible!" = all that brings to mind is a 11 yr old whining about a unit he probably only fights against once a month if not less. :rolleyes:

As i am discussing with Micha, there are many tough nuts to crack in 40k. And the best way to fight them is to use these forums to find out what things others have done to defeat any given unit. There are ways of dealing with 9 tornados, 7 MCs, drop podding armys of doom etc etc... and if you drop the whiny attitude about how impossible it is to defeat unit X, you will notice there are many pearls of wisdom on this site if you just ask.

Phazael
20-11-2007, 21:49
The Falcon/Prism is the hardest vehicle for SM/Chaos to crack, not the hardest to crack. Honestly, no Tau player should EVER have issues popping falcons with the vast array of Fire Knife suits and high volume S6 firepower available to them in even tame lists. Honestly, the last time I played against Eldar as a Tau army I got behind them with Devilfish and hosed them down. The real issue is that the armies that are excellent at demolishing the Falcons/Prisms (and eldar in general) get absolutely crushed by the common Marine lists out there now, especially the podding big boo AC spam lists of doom (with a side of Terminator) which they have no chance against. Mech Eldar thrives on the sheer prevalence of the army it is strongest against. Its just taken about a decade for the MEQ armies to run off all of the Ork, Gunline Tau, Cron, and Guard players out there. Honestly, people, the Uber falcon has been around since the beginning of third edition and you are all acting like its a brand new tactic.

And about the woes of pods, give me a break. In half a decade of games against them I have only ever seen one deviate off the table and GW has made ever ruling concession make them so idiot proof that they should have the damn wheel chair symbol on the side of them. The fact that you can have precission reliable deep strike with every single unit in your army is WAY more ridiculous and game altering than Falcons could ever hope to be.

Finally, you guys love to whine about how unkillable falcons are, but consider how hard it is to score points against the average SM list which keeps one or two guys alive from every unit, since they are better than fearless. The only time the pendulum swings to the eldar favor is when objectives come into play, which the current edition overvalues. You would be having the same issues with an orc or necron army that squats on objectives. The real issues are the last minute objective grab enabled by Star Engines and Vectored Engines making the contents of a falcon ridiculously safe from entanglement (which the Orks are going to be even worse with). Both those upgrades need to get removed.

Amnar
20-11-2007, 21:50
You are missing my point. All people who whine about mech eldar are.

Complaining about the statistics of any given unit is not only a waste of time, but it does nothing to develop tactics against this unit.

My comments were not to say that the falcon is weak and easy to destroy. It was that when someone reads a comment like, "Yeah Falcons are more tough than a monolith, thats terrible!" = all that brings to mind is a 11 yr old whining about a unit he probably only fights against once a month if not less. :rolleyes:

As i am discussing with Micha, there are many tough nuts to crack in 40k. And the best way to fight them is to use these forums to find out what things others have done to defeat any given unit. There are ways of dealing with 9 tornados, 7 MCs, drop podding armys of doom etc etc... and if you drop the whiny attitude about how impossible it is to defeat unit X, you will notice there are many pearls of wisdom on this site if you just ask.

I think you're either misunderstanding me, or in fact it is you who is missing the point. The point I was making earlier isn't that the falcon is unkillable, or that there are no tactics out there that can mitigate it. The point is that the number of roles that it can effectively perform (usually very well),for the points cost you pay, makes it an unbalanced unit.

There is nothing in this game that is impossible to beat, that's a fact.
There are units in the game that are unbalanced, that's also a fact.

I see nothing wrong with calling those units out.

Grand Master Raziel
20-11-2007, 21:52
Note: This thread is NOT for Falcon or Rending Bashing. Just curious how people feel about this combination.

I've seen many many post about how people rant and complain how cheese Falcon with Holo-fields, Spirit-stones loaded with 6 Harlequins vomit 24 rending attacks on anything, anywhere.

Harlequins, in and of themselves, don't bother me. I've had decent luck dealing with them on the tabletop when fielded by themselves. Knowing what the unit does helps a lot when it comes to dealing with it. That said, I do have issue with the thematic appropriateness of Harlies in Falcons. From what I've read in Codex: Eldar, Harlies aren't really part of the Eldar fighting forces' standard tactical doctrine. They just show up when they feel like it, and are not really inside the chain of command. Therefore, something else would probably be tasked to ride in any given Falcon - Aspect Warriors of one stripe or another, most likely, or a Farseer and a retinue of Warlocks. I doubt an Autarch is going to bench Aspects that will do as they're told in favor of erratic, unpredictable Harlies just so they can have a cushy ride in a grav tank. Plus, while they're in the grav tank, no one can see how slick they are, so the Harlies, for whom battle is a form of performance, would be unlikely to consent to ride in the thing. Finally, all other Eldar find Harlies to be at least a little creepy, and therefore might balk at being inside an enclosed space with them for any given length of time. So, there are plenty of thematic problems with the Instant Canned Harlies combo, before even getting to the balance issue.


IMO, fielding Falcons with Holo Fields and spiritstones loaded with 6 Harlequins is an excellent example of a good Eldar army performing as an 'Ochestra' with perfect combination.

Yeah, I'm starting to love how Eldar players pat themselves on the back for taking their practically-unkillable fast skimmer transport tank and really effective assault unit and putting them together. :rolleyes: Don't get me wrong, you've done well by yourselves by recognising the utility of the combo, but it's hardly a Sun-Tzu-esque feat of tactical acumen. It's less 'Orchestra' and more 'Barberhouse Quartet'.




-Everyone knows how deadly Harlequins are with their rending capabilities and will always try to avoid them unless they've got a good reason to engage them in CC ie. Bait. Thus, unless your army consist of like 30 Harlequins flooding the board, it is really easy for your enemies to keep re-positioning their forces remaining more then 16-18" away from the enemy. No amount of terrain can alleviate this problem.

Maybe not, but the fact that Harlies can move over Difficult Terrain as if it's Clear Terrain and can Fleet ought to help. Plus, if your opponent constantly moves away from the Harlies, then you can take advantage of that to herd his stuff away from objectives or into things he won't like much either, like Wraithlords or Striking Scorpions or something. Plus, moving frequently keeps units from doing something that's bad for your stuff, like shooting heavy weapons.


-Veil if Tears is an overrated skill man!

It's a damn sight better than the Shrouding.


Falcons alone are useless.

Bah! You don't seriously expect anyone to believe that, do you? Even without the transport capacity, it's still a nigh-unkillable fast skimmer tank that can pump out two S8 AP2 shots and 5-7 S6 shots of varying APs. In the dictionary, under "useless", you will not find a picture of an empty Falcon!


-Ask any Eldar player regarding getting Falcons. The very first golden requirement is <<Are you putting anything inside the Falcon?>>, if the answer is no then Falcons are not recommended and we push FirePrisims instead. The point i am driving is that Falcons are designed to be perform as a transporter AND attack vehicle, somewhere between FirePrisims and WaveSerpent. Having a Falcon alone is cost ineffective, we would rather go for a FirePrisim.

Now, that's a slightly different kettle of fish. If you try and peddle the "Falcons are useless" line, you're going to get people laughing in your face a lot, but the above at least rates valid debate. That said, you can make a case for Falcons over Prisms. With Falcons, you've got less riding on any single given die roll, and the effectiveness of Falcons is not contingent on having other Falcons in play. Plus, I'd think Falcons would be more reliable for tankbusting anything that isn't AV14 all-around, due to the greater number of middle-high to high strength shots it can pump out.


-Another thing people explain how Falcons are abusive Objective grabber. For me, i would rather field 10x2 squads of Guardian Defender and plant them at objectives. No sane Eldar players simply field a Falcon because of grabbing objectives... Actually, 3 Guardian Jetbikes can perform the same role of contesting for objective. >.<


Well, the thing with Falcons is that they can perform useful battlefield functions all game, then zip to objectives on the last turn, whereas with slower units you have to think a little more in advance in order to do objective-nabbing. Also, Falcons are way more hardy than Guardians or a teeny unit of jetbikes. Finally, in some missions, it pays to have more expensive units to put places, such as in Recon.


The MEQers are out in force to get the Falcon nerfed, again....

Unstoppable delivery platforms? How about ones that deliver ten men with no chance of failure for 30 (or 50) points, like pods? At least Falcons require a heavy choice and can actually be shot at before delivering their cargo. Not to mention their mere existance hasn't obsoleted entire armies from competitive existance, like pods have.

Complaints about Drop Pods are certainly well-aired and perhaps they have a degree of validity to them. However: any units in pods start in Reserve, so you can't control when they come into play; once they do come into play the embarked unit has to get out immediately; the embarked unit cannot assault out of a drop pod; once deployed, the embarked unit gets no further benefit from the drop pod, and finally; using drop pods literally hands VPs over to your opponent. So, maybe they could be better balanced, but they're more so than Falcons.


Eldar have had the uber falcon at their disposal forever. Its just the most rescent book is so bad/inflexible, that its become the one competitive option left in the world of AC spam and drop pods.

Or maybe it's simply the only really broken thing in the list, so powergamers who happen to play Eldar have latched onto it with a vengeance.


Vectored Engines/Star Engines are the real culprit and never should have cleared playtesting.

Actually, neither of those things are, in and of themselves, particularly offensive. Nor are Holofields or SMF. Where Falcons (and Prisms) get offensive is in how all those various rules synergize with each other. I'd argue that the Holofield+SMF combo is where the problem of Falcon-balance really lies. Holofields would be a reasonable rule on an AV12 vehicle if it was possible to score Penetrating hits on the thing. However, as long as a Falcon is kept moving at more than 6" a turn, you can't. Stacking on Spirit Stones and Vectored Engines mitigate the consequences of the more-dangerous non-Destroyed results on the Glancing Hits table, leaving Star Engines as just something that's nice to have for zipping a unit into position and/or zipping over to an objective on the last turn of the game.


If you can't handle one six man unit, then you should probably start using full sized squads instead of 5 man las/plas everywhere and then crying because you have been out cheesed.

The unit of Harlies, I generally don't have a problem with. The Falcons, on the other hand, are a major problem for me. My two armies are Space Marines and Daemonhunters. I've made a point of playing my SM chapter as fully Index Astartes compliant, so basically the antithesis of the SM-gunline. The upshot of that, however, is that I have a lot less anti-vehicle firepower on the table than a SM-gunline does. I've got enough to deal with a reasonable amount of reasonable vehicles, but if an opponent brings 3 Falcons with all the trimmings, I'd be lucky to bring down one of them.

As for my Daemonhunters, one thing that army really lacks is long-range anti-vehicle firepower. If someone brings a lot of vehicles, Daemonhunter armies tend to really struggle with them. Against a straight DH army, Falcons are practically immune, and can be run around the table with impunity. Now, you might argue that the DH army is underpowered, and I'd be quick to agree with you. However, it's not just SM-gunline players who have difficulty with the uber-Falcon.



Why do people complain about it? They have tactically unsound, inflexible armies, or gasp! bad table generalship.


Hey, let's not act as if pulling off the Falcon-Harlie combo is an act of tactical brilliance. You're putting together a unit than be absolutely relied upon (or as close to such as you can get in this game) to get its payload on target every time, combined with a payload unit that's effective against everything, even Monstrous Creatures. It's not brilliant tactics to put an omni-useful unit in the right place at the right time when it's easy. Rather, brilliant tactics is putting just the right unit in just the right place when it's hard. The simple fact is that it's a lot harder to counter the Falcon-payload gag than it is to pull it off.


Don't forget though, that the falcon has survived unchanged through 2 codexes now. So apparently GW thinks they are what they should be.

Because that is the best judge of what's good for the game.

I love I_D. If Captain Jack Sparrow played 40K and frequented Warseer, he'd be just like I_D.

The Song of Spears
20-11-2007, 21:57
I think you're either misunderstanding me, or in fact it is you who is missing the point. The point I was making earlier isn't that the falcon is unkillable, or that there are no tactics out there that can mitigate it. The point is that the number of roles that it can effectively perform (usually very well),for the points cost you pay, makes it an unbalanced unit.

There is nothing in this game that is impossible to beat, that's a fact.
There are units in the game that are unbalanced, that's also a fact.

I see nothing wrong with calling those units out.

Good for you *golf clap*. Now lets hear how you deal with falcons. Because without ever stating how you defeat them, all you are essentially doing is whining about how tough they are with no solution other then to fix the rule.

My statements have asked for/given solutions for dealing with falcons. They are one of the MANY tough units in the game. And thanks to custom list design there are many units that can deal with them from a variety of codexes.

graveaccomplice
20-11-2007, 21:58
I don't enjoy talking about my army list since it's always changing. Usually it sticks with one basic theme, in the case of my tau, it's got a crisis team (fireknife of course.. is there anything else? I mean really....) of course the shaso, firewarriors with a fish, (10 strong), hammerhead, kroot, 3 'sides, and a railhead. Always. I find it's a versatile core that lets me deal with most things quite well (especially depending on what else I give it for the last five hundred points)

The only reason I have sides now is because of the falcon. I used to run without the sides and a stealth team but the falcons proved to be just too annoying to take down with that configuration. I've still not used this new list yet but I want to. (I don't think much anything can survive 3 str 10 ap1 shots on turn 1... at least thats the theory) Or I used to run with a second team of firewarriors in a 2nd fish. Both of the variants proved worthless. so I'm down to this one. Which Tau military doctrine goes as follows against Eldar I've determined. "If you don't get first turn, and there's a single falcon out there. pack up and leave" because if it's not dead after that, the best you can do effectivly is draw. especially since at 1k there's 200 vps gauranteed not to die more or less.

Imperialis proof that 9 times out of 10 we have a sense of humor!

Past tactics are the infamous Eldar lines of "ignore it and bait whatever's in it" Or, "Shoot that bugger with railhead turn 1 if I get turn 1, which almost never happens... or he'll place it somewhere where I don't have los to it. So there goes that option...


What senarios do you play?

Merreck
20-11-2007, 22:34
Interestingly given the rumors about 5th ed. skimmers, should they be true, that alone should hopefully alleviate any problems. This may in fact be why such a ridiculously powerful/laughably easy to accomplish/you'd have to be braindead not to realize how good it is combination of 2 units made it through playtesting- the 4th ed. rules weren't meant to accommodate them in a balanced fashion.

My two cents.

Kahadras
20-11-2007, 23:36
I don't feel that the Falcon/Harliquin combo is very Eldarish. My army (foot based SW) is particularly screwed against this sort of army. It's nice to discuss tactics to use against such an army but seen as most SW anti tank firepower is either....

a. Short ranged (melta guns/power fists)
b. On small, expencive infantry units (Long Fang)
c. On Tanks

they struggle to even threaten Eldar anti grav tanks. I've played several games against differing 'levels' of the 'Cylon death fleet' and the best I've ever managed is a draw.

My tactics revolve around grabbing cover, digging in and aiming to kill whatever I can that isn't either in an anti grav tank or is an anti grav tank. Missions help as it's a way of winning without having to deal with the problem directly.

Kahadras

Amnar
20-11-2007, 23:41
Good for you *golf clap*. Now lets hear how you deal with falcons. Because without ever stating how you defeat them, all you are essentially doing is whining about how tough they are with no solution other then to fix the rule.

My statements have asked for/given solutions for dealing with falcons. They are one of the MANY tough units in the game. And thanks to custom list design there are many units that can deal with them from a variety of codexes.

I deal with them by rolling 5s and 6s on two dice. Doesn't happen often... And I've given my solution to the problem many times, make HF and stones incompatible.

Seriously though, the way I personally deal with them is by supporting the Harlie's targets to ensure I wipe them out post charge, and by blocking ramps when I can. I play a mech chaos list, so I don't have a ton of AT firepower, nothing like a gunline army, and my powergaming days are behind me, so I'm not really willing to change my army around to take some of the cheesier items.

If you really want to talk about defeating them consistently, then you get into discussions about the usefulness of asscan spam, min max las/plas etc. and all the other things in the game that I find equally lame.

It's not that I find the falcon tough, it's that I find it unbalanced, and that's a huge difference. Abaddon is tough... unbalanced? At 275 points and a 6 inch move, hell no.

azimaith
21-11-2007, 00:18
Note: This thread is NOT for Falcon or Rending Bashing. Just curious how people feel about this combination.

You start a thread about the two things that so many thing are overpowered and broken then ask people not to bash? Its kind of like tying steaks to your arms and jumping into a badger den saying: "please don't bite."



I've seen many many post about how people rant and complain how cheese Falcon with Holo-fields, Spirit-stones loaded with 6 Harlequins vomit 24 rending attacks on anything, anywhere.

Well they do generally just vomit harlequins where they like to gut what they like.



IMO, fielding Falcons with Holo Fields and spiritstones loaded with 6 Harlequins is an excellent example of a good Eldar army performing as an 'Ochestra' with perfect combination. This is because Harlequins and Falcons performing alone are really ineffective.

An orchestra is more than two instruments playing. A tyranid army has to play an orchestra to get things just right. With Harlequins and Falcons its the equivalent of playing a recorder with the holes numbered the notes color coded.



Harlequins foot-slogging are plain ineffective. Why?

-Everyone knows how deadly Harlequins are with their rending capabilities and will always try to avoid them unless they've got a good reason to engage them in CC ie. Bait. Thus, unless your army consist of like 30 Harlequins flooding the board, it is really easy for your enemies to keep re-positioning their forces remaining more then 16-18" away from the enemy. No amount of terrain can alleviate this problem.

BS, harlequins fleet. That means you close distance every turn unless the opponent fleets or jump packs away. Even then you can still catch up. No tyranid player would claim his genestealers were so slow people could just stay 18" away, same with harlequins. You fleet, you ignore terrain, and you've got VoT making it much less risky to go directly toward them. It would be hard to tilt things even more in the harlequins favor save for giving them jump packs. If your going to try to claim hardship at least bring up something thats not false.



-Veil if Tears is an overrated skill man! As an Eldar player, i've figured out that the BEST way to use Harlequins is to dump them in a Falcon. Some time ago i asked about VoT on the forum and there were people talking about a "GOLDEN DISTANCE" of 15" where there is a higher probability of assaulting and lower probability of being in spotting distance.

VoT is somewhat overrated. Its still very good, it means the first turn you move, going in the open against guns will probably not end up hurting you.



As an Eldar player, VoT is a high risk skill where you place alot of luck in rolling a)A good roll for FoF and b)A bad roll for your enemy to determine spotting range. Only if you roll both a and b well will foot-slogging Harlequins get into CC at full strength at optimal performance.

The probability is with the harlequins here with an average spot of 12" and an average fleet of 3.



Falcons alone are useless. Why?

-Ask any Eldar player regarding getting Falcons. The very first golden requirement is <<Are you putting anything inside the Falcon?>>, if the answer is no then Falcons are not recommended and we push FirePrisims instead.

A falcon alone doesn't have to be especially useful alone to be good. Anything with a falcon is very likely to arrive unscathed.



The point i am driving is that Falcons are designed to be perform as a transporter AND attack vehicle, somewhere between FirePrisims and WaveSerpent. Having a Falcon alone is cost ineffective, we would rather go for a FirePrisim.

Only if your trying to make it an attack vehicle instead of an IFV, which is what it is. You find the falcon lacking because your designating roles that it is not designed for.



-Another thing people explain how Falcons are abusive Objective grabber. For me, i would rather field 10x2 squads of Guardian Defender and plant them at objectives. No sane Eldar players simply field a Falcon because of grabbing objectives... Actually, 3 Guardian Jetbikes can perform the same role of contesting for objective. >.<

ITs easy to kill 20 guardians or 3 guardian jetbikes. Its freaking hard to kill a falcon. I think its obvious. The falcon can drop whatever it likes off and then at the end of the game move fast to whatever objective happens to be within 24" contesting it/capturing it.



Just food for thought from an Eldar player point of view.
I find alot of this somewhat *dishonest* intellectually. It doesn't address the falcon as it is and how its played and seems to rely more on possibility of failure rather than probability as a determining factor.

If I had a choice for it.
1: No skimmer would have the extra armor rule. Not with SMF still in existence.
2: Holofield becomes: "You may choose to have the damage done of the vehicle chart re-rolled but the second result must stand."
Suddenly holofields isn't a no-risk upgrade of the same magnitude.

Fixer
21-11-2007, 00:53
I would say that it's both un-eldar and cheesy.
Fluff would have the Harlequins appearing from nowhere to assist the Eldar, or in their own transports. Seems odd that the craftworlds have a pimped out falcon on hand to bring them to battle everyime they pop around for a cup of tea.

Un-Eldar because the army is 'supposed' to be base on fast hitting fragile units which are specialised. With the Falcon + Harlequins it's less like a skillfully weilded scalpel cutting away at the heart of the enemy in an elegant dance of death, more like a heavilly armored sledgehammer tied to an ICBM.

It's possible to kill a Falcon with a Vortex missile in Apocalpse, so there's at least one way to counter it with a single missile from a unit that costs about 11-12 times as much as the target it intends to destroy. Now I just have to make that Warlord Battle Titan and think of an excuse to get it into my Tyranid army.

I do find it hard to find why people defend the Falcon. The current Eldar codex is great, the Aspects are better, the guardian-meatshield starcannon spam is gone, Wraithlords have been rebalanced so they they're a still tough but now have an exploitable weakness.

There-in lies the problem. An exploitable weakness. Falcons don't have one. The only real way you can harm it in a competetive tournament game is if you get first turn, can actually see it and it's not an escalation game. All of the Eldar heavy support options are great but Falcons and Prisms are the obvious choice because you can sit them in the middle of the field of fire of an entire Imperial guard anti-tank company and get little more than the paintwork scratched.

My mixed force tyranid army is screwed. I have a couple of venom cannons and two zoanthropes. I think it's fairly pointless to endlessly try and chase the damn skimmers with assaulting units for the low chance of getting maybe a pointless glancing hit where my stealers or Carnifex would normally be able to rip a baneblade to shreds (or at least make it useless for the rest of the game).

There's more than enough mathhammer and discussion on the fact to move the 'unbalanced falcon' theory from opinion to hard undeniable fact. Eldar players are just embarassing themselves if they claim otherwise. I honestly don't care if you lost a game once because of some extremely unlikely series of events and dicerolls.

Back in 3rd Ed falcons were far more unstoppable by ranged firepower than they are now, stones meant the things could shoot. You could still get penetrating hits on the things though by hitting them in close combat. I'd like to see the SMF rule removed from close combat, being only able to hit them on 6s in the first place is enough of a defensive bonus without piling on the 'immunity to the advantage of high strength weapons, monsterous creatures and other items with a high reliability of beating your armor' crap.

Also, I'd like for there to be some way to get penetrating hits on the thing from shooting as well. The current rumour that SMF will equal concealment will do fine for me.

[SD] Bob Plisskin
21-11-2007, 01:06
or holofields become 30 points and are now, any damage received is ignored on a roll of 4+, as the enemy chooses to shoot at the wrong target (ie. the hologram).

Jaeger48
21-11-2007, 02:33
holofields & stones.... hmmm

Any complaint about falcons with the holo/stone combo is falling on my deaf ears. in 3 of the last 5 games I've played with a falcon it's been shot down in the first 2 turns and destroyed by the 4th, BY GUARDSMEN. Yes, it took 3 teams to shoot at it with lascannons but it only took one round of shooting in each case. with vectored engines it sunk to the ground and the cargo lived but my flank rush was denied and his leman-demolisher then advanced and lobbed death on my troops.

People who complain about falcons need to get over it and realize that they aren't that bad, just play better. You sound worse than tau complaining about 'fear of the darkness'.

Jaeger48
21-11-2007, 02:42
You are missing my point. All people who whine about mech eldar are.

Complaining about the statistics of any given unit is not only a waste of time, but it does nothing to develop tactics against this unit.

My comments were not to say that the falcon is weak and easy to destroy. It was that when someone reads a comment like, "Yeah Falcons are more tough than a monolith, thats terrible!" = all that brings to mind is a 11 yr old whining about a unit he probably only fights against once a month if not less. :rolleyes:

As i am discussing with Micha, there are many tough nuts to crack in 40k. And the best way to fight them is to use these forums to find out what things others have done to defeat any given unit. There are ways of dealing with 9 tornados, 7 MCs, drop podding armys of doom etc etc... and if you drop the whiny attitude about how impossible it is to defeat unit X, you will notice there are many pearls of wisdom on this site if you just ask.


Thank you very much, forums like this are best used to discuss tactics. Holofields don't ignore melta weapons or rending, I've lost my skimmers to both. Facing a speeder with assault cannon is down right scary when I know I have to hit on 4s with my vyper while that marine is hitting on 3s.

Necrons against any vehicle heavy army should be able to zap pesky skimmers.

Tau are scary good if the other player included targeting arrays on his suits, 2 missles and 1 plasma shot a suit rapes light armor.

After playing an army like eldar I better know how I would face them with my other armies, and also how to best defeat those other armies. Regardless of tactics though dice can be dice and screw either side. Let's remember this is a game meant for fun, if you are facing an extremely difficult list and lose it isn't the end of the world.

Amnar
21-11-2007, 03:14
holofields & stones.... hmmm

Any complaint about falcons with the holo/stone combo is falling on my deaf ears. in 3 of the last 5 games I've played with a falcon it's been shot down in the first 2 turns and destroyed by the 4th, BY GUARDSMEN. Yes, it took 3 teams to shoot at it with lascannons but it only took one round of shooting in each case. with vectored engines it sunk to the ground and the cargo lived but my flank rush was denied and his leman-demolisher then advanced and lobbed death on my troops.

People who complain about falcons need to get over it and realize that they aren't that bad, just play better. You sound worse than tau complaining about 'fear of the darkness'.

You're amazed that multiple lascannon destroyed a tank??? If that's not proof...

By play better, do you mean roll more 5s and 6s?

azimaith
21-11-2007, 05:45
What is with this constant dishonesty.
Isolated unlikely incidents are not a basis for determining game balance.

Oh, this one time, I killed 4 terminators with grots. That means grots MUST be ovepowered.

This other time I killed a land raider by hitting it with a bio-acid spore mine. Bio acid is *SO* overpowered.

And don't even get me started on this one time, a bunch of tau crisis suits shot my destroyers, and they failed to wound with all of them! Since the destroyers *obviously* caused me to roll poorly its their fault and they should have their ability to cause bad luck seriously nerfed.

The amount that BS comes up is disgusting.


You're amazed that multiple lascannon destroyed a tank??? If that's not proof...

Oh but its guardsmen. Since it happened once in an isolated incident it must *always* happen. Chance has *nothing* to do with rolling dice at all! No, its all magic and *******' fairies that the other players use to cheat and make their army unbalanced.

People who use their minds and logic are not welcome with some Amnar. Be happy not to be welcome.



By play better, do you mean roll more 5s and 6s?
Duh, because if you play well it means random dice rolls become favorable.
I play so well, that all I roll are 6's when I want them and ones when I don't. It means i'm totally awesome.

Jaeger48
21-11-2007, 06:20
There's so much virulence in your voice it's kinda' difficult to tell who it is directed at.

I know from my experience that falcons are not the end all god machines make them out to be. Taking 3 heavy weapon shots destroyed it utterly, that's not even a full devy squad.

And yes, glancing a skimmer until it crashes is a tactical choice, that means multiple str8 weapons on the field from different angles and attention to firing lanes.

kikkoman
21-11-2007, 06:26
A falcon isn't a landraider of a monolith. It doesnt have a high AV, but it can't get penetrated. I guess that's what throws most people off, they expect it to die the same as a heavy armor slow moving vehicle. A plasma cannon won't do much against fortuned warlocks, yeah?

Sitting at av12 does make finding an ideal weapon difficult though. Multishot weapons like multilasers and scatter lasers gotta roll 6's, autocannons 5's 6's. S8 is... I can't think of any multishot ones that are commonly available.

azimaith
21-11-2007, 06:30
There's so much virulence in your voice it's kinda' difficult to tell who it is directed at.
Its directed at people who try to use isolated situations that are unlikely and apply them to the game as a whole as if they are regular occurance. Its directed at people who attempt to disregard probability for superstition or attempt to down play it.



I know from my experience that falcons are not the end all god machines make them out to be.

I know from my experience they are very very difficult to kill.



Taking 3 heavy weapon shots destroyed it utterly, that's not even a full devy squad.

There is a 1/36 chance of a falcon being destroyed by a glancing 6, there is a 4/36 of it being destroyed by a glancing destroyed or immobilized. Thats a 11% chance of loss per damaging hit. Add in how many damaging hits you'd need and it makes the chance of dealing significant damage to a falcon to prevent it from scoring or transporting is very low. If you add vectored engines it becomes a 2% per damaging hit. This means you'd need around 9 damaging hits on a non-vectored falcon to have a good chance of at least one downing it. If your using the vectored engines you'd need around 50. Since stuns and spirit stones make penetration through stuns impossible you'd need to first immobilize it (if its a vectored engines vehicle) which is a 3/36 or an 8% chance to get a chance to penetrate. Effectively you'd have 11% of making it dead or vulnerable. And if you simply manage to immobilize it with vectored you can now penetrate it on and destroy it on a 4-6, in other words a 8/36 chance of blowing it up. (22% once immobilized and penetrated).


Compare this to a more expensive land raider and it becomes evident how much of a difference there is.

So lets take the approximate likelyhood of your dev squads 3 lascannons killing it dead outright.
3 shots, 66% to hit, 1.98 hits, approx 2 hits, 3+ to glance, 1.3 damaging hits. (without vectored) 11% to destroy. .14, 14% Chance of outright destruction.

With vectored, .017, IE 1.07% chance of destruction.

What you encountered was very unlikely.




And yes, glancing a skimmer until it crashes is a tactical choice, that means multiple str8 weapons on the field from different angles and attention to firing lanes.

Sure is, doesn't mean the falcons still probably not going to die from it.


A falcon isn't a landraider of a monolith. It doesnt have a high AV, but it can't get penetrated. I guess that's what throws most people off, they expect it to die the same as a heavy armor slow moving vehicle. A plasma cannon won't do much against fortuned warlocks, yeah?

Actually people just kind of expect it to deny when shot at with lots of guns, which it generally doesn't. Its not uneasonable to expect a result like death with gunfire that would reduce other more expensive and defensively lauded vehicles a smoldering ruin.



Sitting at av12 does make finding an ideal weapon difficult though. Multishot weapons like multilasers and scatter lasers gotta roll 6's, autocannons 5's 6's. S8 is... I can't think of any multishot ones that are commonly available.
Autocannons are only common with guard which limits their effectiveness quite severely in killing enemies (even with greater numbers. Autocannon havocs would probably be best.


More numbers:
Afformentioned fire knives with BS4 arrays.
2 s7, 1 S6.
1.32 missiles, .66 plasma hits.
missiles need 5+, plasma needs 6.
.43 damaging missile, .10 damaging plasma.
total of .53 damaging hits, 2% to kill outright, 11% to possibly kill or disable for penetrating.
.016 chance of outright death, .05 chance for disable or death depending on vectored engines.

Assuming scenario with all the upgrades you'd have a 1.06% chance of destruction from one volley. You'd need an about 94 more volleys of this. As in 95 combined 3 shot volley to statistically get at least one destroyed result. (It could occur on the first or the 95 of course.)

Necron warriors:
1 shot, .66 to hit, .16 to glance, .10 glances. .002 outright destroyed, thus .2% chance to destroy. You'd need 5 necron warriors to reach about 1%, then multiply that by a hundred to to get around 500 shots to get at least one statistical outright destruction.

Now let me bring this into context.
A land raider, costs more than falcon with its defensive upgrades.
1 Necron Warriors: .66 to hit, .10 glances. .016 destroyed, thus 1.6% chance. You'd need about 60-61 shots to destroy it outright with at least one of them.

With full defensive upgrades a falcon is 30 points cheaper than a land raider. Part of the falcons survivability V armies weapons it mitigated by the greater variety of weapons that can harm it, but at basic 8 times more survivable than a land raider under gauss fire I'd hardly worry much about it necrons. Its not going to be 8 times more survivable against other armies, but its still considerably more survivable than any other tank of equivalent price.

If the eldar were supposed to have great firepower and high mobility at the cost of fragility why are they packing some of the toughest tanks and walkers in then game?

Imperialis_Dominatus
21-11-2007, 10:45
I love I_D. If Captain Jack Sparrow played 40K and frequented Warseer, he'd be just like I_D.

The rest of the post was brilliant enough to be QFT. This part made me blush, but I might incorporate it into my sig when I get that privilege back. :)


WTF does cheese mean?

Falcon. No, just kidding, don't lynch me Eldar players... anyway. Cheese or beardiness is what one calls something that is unbalanced (or really fricking unbalanced). However, many misuse it.


2: Holofield becomes: "You may choose to have the damage done of the vehicle chart re-rolled but the second result must stand."
Suddenly holofields isn't a no-risk upgrade of the same magnitude.

I seriously cannot see why this was not done before. It's been suggested before often enough that, were GW to choose to do any playtesting, it's an option that would come up easily to fix the Falcon.

"But that's like a Venerable Dread, and I don't want to be like them!"

Too bad, I don't care. And neither would GW if they had something between their ears other than bone and empty space. Your Guardians look suspiciously like Guardsmen, and serve a similar role. Who cares? Like I said, not me.


I honestly don't care if you lost a game once because of some extremely unlikely series of events and dicerolls.

Thank you Fixer. You summed up my attitude as well.

EDIT:


holofields & stones.... hmmm

Any complaint about falcons with the holo/stone combo is falling on my deaf ears. in 3 of the last 5 games I've played with a falcon it's been shot down in the first 2 turns and destroyed by the 4th, BY GUARDSMEN. Yes, it took 3 teams to shoot at it with lascannons but it only took one round of shooting in each case. with vectored engines it sunk to the ground and the cargo lived but my flank rush was denied and his leman-demolisher then advanced and lobbed death on my troops.

See the quote just above this one.

elvinltl
21-11-2007, 10:56
Hmm... Ok, maybe some people still don't grasp the concept of optimum performance. Well, what i would just like to explain is that Falcons and Harlequins arn't simply just used because it is cheese and unstoppable. Seriously, if you do some thinking about tatica and point costing, most Eldar tourney players will strike out certain units such as WraithGuards and Guardians.

Captain Micha talker about how Eldar players could simply dump any unit inside a Falcon. That is certainly untrue, the only 2 BEST unit to put into a Falcon is FireDragons and Harlequins ONLY. This is a excellent case of how Eldar players optimise their army performance for if they wanted to field Banshees or DireAvengers instead, they would have opted for WaveSerpent.
Why? DireAvengers work best in 10 man squad due to the dilution of Bladestorm cost and 10 can't fit into a Falcon. Banshees are hazy but man, since you are getting a cheaper infantry type as compared to Harlequins, may as well max the squad to 10 and give them a cheaper Serpent to offset the expensive Falcon cost.

Thus, the product of Falcons + Harlequins combo is due to careful planning and syncronisation of an Eldar army. Yes i know no Ochestra works with 2 Instrument, ie Falcons + Harlequins and it only goes to show how suicidal it is to field a Falcon with Holo-Field loaded with 6 Harlequins in a 750 points army. The combo itself chews up 250+ points and only 1500+ points upwards can afford such tatica. Even at 1000 points, you risk too much putting 1/4 of your army in a single target at which your enemy can focus fire at.

Another point about the LandRaider thing. You know another way of looking at how LandRaider pale in comparison to Falcon is to simply say LandRaiders are too weak and Falcons are fine instead of taking the assumption LR is fine and Falcons are overpowered. This comparison is really up to individual perspective. The LR and Falcon comparison is a good example of Half-Filled and Half-Empty Glass of water.
Maybe it is time people start demanding the strengthning of the expensive LandRaider. Even so, Monoliths are better then LandRaider and i don't see much rant demanding people nerf Monolith to the level of LR fragility.

Maybe to a non-Eldar player, Falcons and Harlequins combo is a flaw in the game. But considering the overall planning of Eldar armies, this combo is certainly not an abuse of rules.

Another Analaogy of how Falcon's durability combined with Harlequin's lethal capability could also be illustrated by placing WraithGuards in a WaveSerpent. You get Mobile and Uber Durable combination that could stall units in CloseCombat for 4 turns until the game ends. Or maybe another analaogy will be how Farseer Guiding 3 Warwalkers, Guide covers the low BS problem and coupled with the numberous shots WW have become a lethal combo.

Of course a rebuttal said will be those combo above have flaws. Yes, Falcons and Harlequins have flaw. I won't drag in point cost because the above combos also cost around the same BUT rememeber Harlequins are often stranded after battle and always die to nearby firepower, and 6 output 24 rending initially. After that they face casualty in CC and their potency drops dramatically. Falcons always are shaken and can't fire and only act as a Transport. What's more, nobody drive a Falcon up and vomit Harlequins with no planning for it is suicidal. And lastly, once this combo is used once (drive up, unload the next turn and assualt, it ends there) unlike WW guiding which can be recycled every turn.

Crimson Reaver
21-11-2007, 11:57
As the discussion seems to have moved away from fluff issues to a simple "Are Falcons Cheese?" type of discussion I'd like to add my 2 cents to the discussion in that regard.

I think over all the games I've played since the new Codex came out I've managed to contrive to lose a single Falcon. The two I use in my army are damn near unkillable and everyone in my group knows it. They shoot them enough to stun them and then move on.

I think however one aspect of Holo-Falcon spam that hasn't really been touched on is the knock-on effect that using Falcons has on the rest of your list.

Firstly, if you are using the Falcon to transport troops, you will only be putting 6 guys in there. Sure, Aspect Warriors are great troops, and a Warlock Squad with Farseer is scary, but with only 6 men I've found that once the Falcon has deposited the payload, the payload can die very quickly without achieving very much. My 10 Dire Avengers tend to do better overall than 6 of anything else, unless you're using Dragons to destroy vehicles (ie something the Avengers REALLY cannot do).

Second, if you opponent has good fire lanes and some heavy weapons, it doesn't take all the firepower in the world to stun my Falcons. Just get a single hit at AV12 and you stop my 200+ point tank from firing. Considering I upgun my Falcon so when it fires I can actually kill things (I tend to use Starcannon/Scatter Laser with the Shuriken Cannon upgrade), not being able to shoot it for 3+ turns means that I lose a lot of firepower. In that respect I love Wraithlords and Dark Reapers as they kill far more than my Falcons ever do.

Also, I find that my army rapidly gets sub-divided into "Squashy" and "Non-Squashy" sections. With my Falcons speeding around trying to deploy Fire Dragons, Scorps et al, the foot slogging elements of my army are often left isolated. Sensible players tend to neutralise the Falcon's decent firepower and then the move onto blasting chunks out of the rest of my army. Guardians with a Warlock and a Platform weapon aren't all that cheap (about the same as 10 plain Tactical Marines) and they can't shoot straight and die if you sneeze on them. Going with Dire Avengers in Wave Serpents is better but they tend to crash and explode as they are next in the firing line after the Falcons.

In essence having your Dark Reapers sitting there blazing away with some Scorps behind them to counter charge if required often kills more and fragments my army less than using the Falcons. I do mix and match my HS choices but I think Falcons look cool and they fit my army a bit better so they are used a bit more than the other options out there.

So just to reiterate I fully agree that Falcons are really tough to even hurt, let alone destroy, and my own experience says that they will survive most games I use them in without a scratch. What I am saying is that you're still looking at an outlay of about 350 points for Fire Dragons in a Holo-Falcon and in a lot of cases you will be low on volume of fire and killing power, and the rest of your army starts to look like an all you can eat victory point buffet. So we have a broken unit which potentially has a degree of balance within the army selection metagame.

Bunnahabhain
21-11-2007, 12:22
What I am saying is that you're still looking at an outlay of about 350 points for Fire Dragons in a Holo-Falcon and in a lot of cases you will be low on volume of fire and killing power, and the rest of your army starts to look like an all you can eat victory point buffet. So we have a broken unit which potentially has a degree of balance within the army selection metagame.


Very true. the problems arise when the the broken unit is taken in multiples, so the less strong ( not weak, it's really not an appropriate word for, say, dire avengers) units, which are supposed to be balancing the falcons and their cargo are reduced down to an almost negligable level.

Voodoo Boyz
21-11-2007, 12:56
Hmm... Ok, maybe some people still don't grasp the concept of optimum performance. Well, what i would just like to explain is that Falcons and Harlequins arn't simply just used because it is cheese and unstoppable. Seriously, if you do some thinking about tatica and point costing, most Eldar tourney players will strike out certain units such as WraithGuards and Guardians.

Captain Micha talker about how Eldar players could simply dump any unit inside a Falcon. That is certainly untrue, the only 2 BEST unit to put into a Falcon is FireDragons and Harlequins ONLY. This is a excellent case of how Eldar players optimise their army performance for if they wanted to field Banshees or DireAvengers instead, they would have opted for WaveSerpent.
Why? DireAvengers work best in 10 man squad due to the dilution of Bladestorm cost and 10 can't fit into a Falcon. Banshees are hazy but man, since you are getting a cheaper infantry type as compared to Harlequins, may as well max the squad to 10 and give them a cheaper Serpent to offset the expensive Falcon cost.

Thus, the product of Falcons + Harlequins combo is due to careful planning and syncronisation of an Eldar army. Yes i know no Ochestra works with 2 Instrument, ie Falcons + Harlequins and it only goes to show how suicidal it is to field a Falcon with Holo-Field loaded with 6 Harlequins in a 750 points army. The combo itself chews up 250+ points and only 1500+ points upwards can afford such tatica. Even at 1000 points, you risk too much putting 1/4 of your army in a single target at which your enemy can focus fire at.

Another point about the LandRaider thing. You know another way of looking at how LandRaider pale in comparison to Falcon is to simply say LandRaiders are too weak and Falcons are fine instead of taking the assumption LR is fine and Falcons are overpowered. This comparison is really up to individual perspective. The LR and Falcon comparison is a good example of Half-Filled and Half-Empty Glass of water.
Maybe it is time people start demanding the strengthning of the expensive LandRaider. Even so, Monoliths are better then LandRaider and i don't see much rant demanding people nerf Monolith to the level of LR fragility.

Maybe to a non-Eldar player, Falcons and Harlequins combo is a flaw in the game. But considering the overall planning of Eldar armies, this combo is certainly not an abuse of rules.

Another Analaogy of how Falcon's durability combined with Harlequin's lethal capability could also be illustrated by placing WraithGuards in a WaveSerpent. You get Mobile and Uber Durable combination that could stall units in CloseCombat for 4 turns until the game ends. Or maybe another analaogy will be how Farseer Guiding 3 Warwalkers, Guide covers the low BS problem and coupled with the numberous shots WW have become a lethal combo.

Of course a rebuttal said will be those combo above have flaws. Yes, Falcons and Harlequins have flaw. I won't drag in point cost because the above combos also cost around the same BUT rememeber Harlequins are often stranded after battle and always die to nearby firepower, and 6 output 24 rending initially. After that they face casualty in CC and their potency drops dramatically. Falcons always are shaken and can't fire and only act as a Transport. What's more, nobody drive a Falcon up and vomit Harlequins with no planning for it is suicidal. And lastly, once this combo is used once (drive up, unload the next turn and assualt, it ends there) unlike WW guiding which can be recycled every turn.

By that logic it's as much an orchestra for my Marines to use nothing but 6 Man Las/Plas squads, Assault Cannon Speeders, and Terminator squads with 2 Assault Cannons.

At some point optimization stops being an "Orchestra" and starts becoming "abusive".

The Falcon is a problem because of it's near invulnerability in game and the fact that it allows you to play points denial, objective grabbing, and setting up "skimmer walls" that segregate enemy troops and tank shock them, in multiples, with little to no risk to the Falcon itself.

When you can lock up 1000+ Points in 3 units that are near indestructible, especially when used well in conjunction with terrain, the points cost of the combo goes from being a liability to a huge benefit.

And likewise, because of the silly durability Eldar players who go second can always keep things in their tanks till the 5th or 6th turn and then "come out" to do damage with very few turns left for their opponent to respond and wipe out the unit that just used it's super offensive power to nab a bunch of Victory Points.

So to get back to the point of the thread, no Harlies in Falcons aren't "Eldarish" because of the Fluff reasons stated, but it's cheese.

That's fine, just don't get all hot and bothered when you face off against me with your Falcons+Harlies and I start playing cheesy builds from other armies - like all shooty infantry with hidden power klaw Orks. :evilgrin:

elvinltl
21-11-2007, 14:32
By that logic it's as much an orchestra for my Marines to use nothing but 6 Man Las/Plas squads, Assault Cannon Speeders, and Terminator squads with 2 Assault Cannons.

At some point optimization stops being an "Orchestra" and starts becoming "abusive".

The Falcon is a problem because of it's near invulnerability in game and the fact that it allows you to play points denial, objective grabbing, and setting up "skimmer walls" that segregate enemy troops and tank shock them, in multiples, with little to no risk to the Falcon itself.

When you can lock up 1000+ Points in 3 units that are near indestructible, especially when used well in conjunction with terrain, the points cost of the combo goes from being a liability to a huge benefit.

And likewise, because of the silly durability Eldar players who go second can always keep things in their tanks till the 5th or 6th turn and then "come out" to do damage with very few turns left for their opponent to respond and wipe out the unit that just used it's super offensive power to nab a bunch of Victory Points.

So to get back to the point of the thread, no Harlies in Falcons aren't "Eldarish" because of the Fluff reasons stated, but it's cheese.

That's fine, just don't get all hot and bothered when you face off against me with your Falcons+Harlies and I start playing cheesy builds from other armies - like all shooty infantry with hidden power klaw Orks. :evilgrin:

A well ochestrated Harlequins in Falcon will beat AssaultCannon and Plasma Spam, my SM friend plays that army afterall. And anyway, 6 Harlequins in a Falcon is just a portion of an Eldar's army. Well, obviously 3 Falcons loaded with FireDragons and Harlequins seemed too much but a balance army usually require various other element to make Falcon + Harlequin combo effective. You can't simply plonk Harlequins on the enemy and expect them to work wonder, they don't have the staying power.

My army only have 1 Falcon loaded with 6 Harlequins with other various units such as Warwalkers and WarpSpider supporting my Harlequins. I feel opponents should look beyond the WOW factor when Harlequins assault with 24 Rending attacks after unloading from an indestructable Falcon and understand the consequences of assaulting. The after effect and afterall this tatic of deployment and assault can only be used ONCE with great potency.

And most importantly, it carries the teamwork Eldar are famed for. The different aspects which covers each other flaws promoting only their strength producing a seemingly unstoppable force.
IMO, failing to optimise an army and whining about overpowered opponent's forces is unacceptable. Of course a player's skill and tatica prowess also plays a part too.

Anyway, Eldar are also a cheese race when used properly. If you play Dawn of War, Warhammer 40k PC game, you will know Eldar is the cheese race. Anything happens and we simply on FoF and dance our way out so much so that people started giving suggestions which mocks the Eldar race itself. In fact, the Eldar in DoW have FoF DarkReapers in an attempt to balance them because traditional DarkReapers proved too deadly; strange eh?. :P

Master Jeridian
21-11-2007, 16:08
Trying to claim the Falcon and Harlies is balanced is bad enough, trying to pass it off as some sort of tactical genius on the Eldar players part is extremely laughable.

So, you took the most durable tank in the game- no worry about incoming fire, no worry about terrain.
Then, erm, well...you put one of the most powerful close combat units inside it- no worry about striking second, or of terrain, or of being trapped in combat (seriously, Space Clowns look like they've been written by a fanboy who just had to add just one more special rule on top of the last, etc).

Then you move invulnerable tank within Harlie strike range of the target unit, laugh off the fire directed at it- then charge in with impunity, doing more damage than you recieve, often crippling the enemy.

Wow, what tactical genius, no-one else could have figured that one out.

From Shadows
21-11-2007, 16:13
[QUOTE=Master Jeridian;tc).

Then you move invulnerable tank within Harlie strike range of the target unit, laugh off the fire directed at it- then charge in with impunity, doing more damage than you recieve, often crippling the enemy.

.[/QUOTE]


But is that not the name of the game.I agree with you that it is a cheesy way of playing,but again if it works it works.Maybe we need to find tactics to counter this.

Master Jeridian
21-11-2007, 16:23
There's only so far 'tactics'* can take you in 40k, some units are genuinely far more powerful than their pts costs indicate.

*if 40k has Tactics...and not just Army List choices. The sad proof is that most posts in a Tactics section are about what Army List choices you should and should not take, not any actual ..you know, tactics.

Voodoo Boyz
21-11-2007, 17:00
A well ochestrated Harlequins in Falcon will beat AssaultCannon and Plasma Spam, my SM friend plays that army afterall. And anyway, 6 Harlequins in a Falcon is just a portion of an Eldar's army. Well, obviously 3 Falcons loaded with FireDragons and Harlequins seemed too much but a balance army usually require various other element to make Falcon + Harlequin combo effective. You can't simply plonk Harlequins on the enemy and expect them to work wonder, they don't have the staying power.

My army only have 1 Falcon loaded with 6 Harlequins with other various units such as Warwalkers and WarpSpider supporting my Harlequins. I feel opponents should look beyond the WOW factor when Harlequins assault with 24 Rending attacks after unloading from an indestructable Falcon and understand the consequences of assaulting. The after effect and afterall this tatic of deployment and assault can only be used ONCE with great potency.

And most importantly, it carries the teamwork Eldar are famed for. The different aspects which covers each other flaws promoting only their strength producing a seemingly unstoppable force.
IMO, failing to optimise an army and whining about overpowered opponent's forces is unacceptable. Of course a player's skill and tatica prowess also plays a part too.

Anyway, Eldar are also a cheese race when used properly. If you play Dawn of War, Warhammer 40k PC game, you will know Eldar is the cheese race. Anything happens and we simply on FoF and dance our way out so much so that people started giving suggestions which mocks the Eldar race itself. In fact, the Eldar in DoW have FoF DarkReapers in an attempt to balance them because traditional DarkReapers proved too deadly; strange eh?. :P

That's funny, I played a Las/Plas+Assault Cannon spam army at tournaments this year and put some serious hurt on Eldar Falcon bomb lists.

The problem with the Falcon+Harlie Bomb lists (that's normally 2x Harlies in Falcon + Firedragons in Falcon), is that it takes a min/maxed army to beat it. If I was playing a friendly marine list like the ones in my sig, I'd be toast against any opponent with half a brain.

So yeah, that's my point. The Eldar with the Falcon-Harlie bomb is a cheese tactic.

The Song of Spears
21-11-2007, 17:05
Just reading peoples posts it's pretty clear that Elvinltl and Crimson Reaver are the ONLY ones who seem to have actually used the falcons and harlequins combo.

What they said in their last few posts is thoroughly mimicked thorughout so many tourneys and so many batreps and games that even disregarding their opinions, their comments ring true.

three falcons + two harles + 1 dragons = nearly 1100 points. that leave me with 1 very close range anti tank squad of 6 lightly armoured men, and 12 assault models and three tanks that only hit half the time they are not shaken (which is nearly all the time as they are in the enemy's face tying to dump off their payload)

So without any numbers or knowledge of the other army, the Eldar only have 400 points left for a HQ and troops. Neither of which will help against tanks or massed infantry.

12 harlequins wont kill 30 marines, or a full tau army, or 100 guardsmen. They will eventually die or be be overwhelmed and die.

6 fire dragons get 1 shot on a tank and then its the other guys turn, with only 4+ armour, any army can mow down 6 of them in a single turn of firing. No more eldar anti tank...

Seriously folks. You who whine, especially you voodoo boyz looking back at your previous posts on this topic, have obviously never used or often played against the falcon heavy army. If you had, it would be blazingly apparent that no matter how durable the falcons were, or how reliably the harlequins got into CC, this list is strongly lacking.

contesting objectives and killing unit or tow of the enemy is not going to win the eldar a game. Not when there is easily 1100 points more of the other guys army to contest with as i pointed out with the Tau example earlier.

The strongest eldar army is not one with three falcons and some harles and dragons. It's one that has support from all FOC options. Some walkers for fire support, some spyders for anti infantry, some harles for assault, some dragons for antitank, some avengers for staying troops force or guradians for cheap heavy weapon use, a far seer to use his powers on a avatar or warlocks on bikes etc etc...

Thing is, the new eldar codex is all about durability and low numbers. Fortuned wraithguard with conceal on them are really tough. Fortuned warlocks on jetbikes are really tough, fortuned avatars are really tough, wraithlords are really tough, pathfnders in 4+ cover are rally tough... see a theme here? Believe it or not the really tough to kill falcon just fits in with all the other units that are hard to take down.

But the cost of all this durability is low numbers, also fitting of the story. A mech eldar list with three falcons will be lucky to get over 35 men at 1500 points. 35 men? Thats pittance compared to marines, IG, or most any other army out there. Especially with how many big guns other armys can field to at least make sure that the 600 points the eldar guy spent on heavy support is ONLY good for transporting a small number of troops.

I am afraid that the whiners here are just that - whining. The new dex is out, there is no removing of holofields, and this is the third time GW has included this which means that this is the way its gonna be for a long time. Even a 5th ed wont take away holofields, so these complaints really mean nothing other than to start a whine-fest.

So again i say quit whining and making petty wish lists about the falcon, and start swapping ideas about how to defeat it, even if you don't want to change your non-competitive list, i am sure there are things you can do to mitigate the falcons.


P.S.
There is nothing worse than a sore looser. And as it seems there are people who 'don't make power lists' who bitch about 'power lists'. If you would just get you head out of your ass and realize that its you who are choosing to make a less competitive list for your own fun, that it is going to have to be you who request your opponent to make a similar list or quit your bitching and suck up the loss. This is a competitive game, so get with it or don't whine about it.

Mort
21-11-2007, 17:18
Hmm... Ok, maybe some people still don't grasp the concept of optimum performance.

Captain Micha talker about how Eldar players could simply dump any unit inside a Falcon. That is certainly untrue, the only 2 BEST unit to put into a Falcon is FireDragons and Harlequins ONLY. This is a excellent case of how Eldar players optimise their army performance for if they wanted to field Banshees or DireAvengers instead, they would have opted for WaveSerpent.
Why? DireAvengers work best in 10 man squad due to the dilution of Bladestorm cost and 10 can't fit into a Falcon. Banshees are hazy but man, since you are getting a cheaper infantry type as compared to Harlequins, may as well max the squad to 10 and give them a cheaper Serpent to offset the expensive Falcon cost.

Oh,come on,man!

What youre talking about about has nothing to do with orchestras, tactical finesse or background,its just common sense.
I mean, all your arguments with the serpent/die avengers and so on,well,a 10 year old boy could figure that out after reading the eldar codex-it has nothing to do with tactics,seriously.
I play eldar on a regular base,and i know as well as anybody else how hard it is to take down 2 or three of them. You do,too,obviously.
I wont start crying "cheese" because it would take 5 seconds until somebody realizes that i play SM and then gives me the flame with the old AC argument.
( of which i use 2,by the way.)

But i say it is unfluffy because harleys are the lone boys in the eldar army,they just dont snatch a falcon from an aspect unit.

And i say its damn hard to use harleys in combination with a falcon,because its almost guaranteed that they will get into CC,which can be really devastating against some armies.
Dont start to tell stories about "thats the way falcons are meant to be" ask a friend of mine who plays tau,he starts laughing everytime i use my overpriced land raider out of nostalgia, but h quits laughing as soon as he faces 2 falcons.
I mean,the "light,fragile eldar tanks take more damage than a ******** monolith! If the rules woulfd be realistic theese tanks would be immobilized just by the pure weight of missiles and shells sticking in their armor after two rounds.

You wanted to know if it is eldarish or cheesy to use two units in a combination that obviously is pretty tough.
By asking the question you have already answered it.

My opinion.

Voodoo Boyz
21-11-2007, 17:23
Seriously folks. You who whine, especially you voodoo boyz looking back at your previous posts on this topic, have obviously never used or often played against the falcon heavy army. If you had, it would be blazingly apparent that no matter how durable the falcons were, or how reliably the harlequins got into CC, this list is strongly lacking.


WOW.

Just amazingly wow.

You've read my posts on the subject? I've played against the Falcon bomb army a ton. An absolute ton! I practiced against it constantly when preparing for the tournaments this year.

I played against it using my own Min/Maxed completely cheesy space marine army.

And I've won. A lot. In fact when it came to the tournament time, I won against the Eldar lists.

I've also lost plenty too.

So don't you dare sit there and tell me what I do and do not know about the Eldar list. I've played against it so much I could run the army exactly how it's supposed to be played to win.

You're absolutely out of your mind when you say top tournament lists use War Walkers. They all have 3 Holofield+Spirit Stone tanks. Most of the time with Falcons. Why don't you go down to the tournaments forum and ask exactly how many people at the UKGT Heats or at Baltimore ran the Falcon army?

It's called points denial. It's called Tank shock, it's called holding your Harlies in your tank till 5th or 6th turn and then coming out and bombing on something, killing it, leaving no turns left for reprisals. And then your Falcons can contest or claim objectives, many times tankshocking units off things or tank shocking multiple units in a line.

The fact that you sit here and try to defend it is ludicrous. Even the tournament players I know who use it admit it's broken. I'll admit my own marines are, or that Nidzilla is. But to sit here and try to state that it's somehow tactical genius to throw Harlies in Falcons and that it's perfectly OK to do - that's just a load of crap.

Amnar
21-11-2007, 17:54
WOW.

Just amazingly wow.

You've read my posts on the subject? I've played against the Falcon bomb army a ton. An absolute ton! I practiced against it constantly when preparing for the tournaments this year.

I played against it using my own Min/Maxed completely cheesy space marine army.

And I've won. A lot. In fact when it came to the tournament time, I won against the Eldar lists.

I've also lost plenty too.

So don't you dare sit there and tell me what I do and do not know about the Eldar list. I've played against it so much I could run the army exactly how it's supposed to be played to win.

You're absolutely out of your mind when you say top tournament lists use War Walkers. They all have 3 Holofield+Spirit Stone tanks. Most of the time with Falcons. Why don't you go down to the tournaments forum and ask exactly how many people at the UKGT Heats or at Baltimore ran the Falcon army?

It's called points denial. It's called Tank shock, it's called holding your Harlies in your tank till 5th or 6th turn and then coming out and bombing on something, killing it, leaving no turns left for reprisals. And then your Falcons can contest or claim objectives, many times tankshocking units off things or tank shocking multiple units in a line.

The fact that you sit here and try to defend it is ludicrous. Even the tournament players I know who use it admit it's broken. I'll admit my own marines are, or that Nidzilla is. But to sit here and try to state that it's somehow tactical genius to throw Harlies in Falcons and that it's perfectly OK to do - that's just a load of crap.

You just don't get it voodoo. Let me spell is out for you.

Falcon + Harlies = tactical genius.

Grand Master Raziel
21-11-2007, 17:56
Just reading peoples posts it's pretty clear that Elvinltl and Crimson Reaver are the ONLY ones who seem to have actually used the falcons and harlequins combo.

Maybe, but I can read and do math. Plus, I've faced Holo-Falcons from the other side of the table often enough to know just how abusive they are. This is not a recently adopted position, either. I hated them worse than Wraithlords back in 3rd ed, when Wraithlords were widely regarded to be the uber-cheese. I guess that makes me a man ahead of my time. :D


three falcons + two harles + 1 dragons = nearly 1100 points. that leave me with 1 very close range anti tank squad of 6 lightly armoured men, and 12 assault models and three tanks that only hit half the time they are not shaken (which is nearly all the time as they are in the enemy's face tying to dump off their payload)

So without any numbers or knowledge of the other army, the Eldar only have 400 points left for a HQ and troops. Neither of which will help against tanks or massed infantry.

The 1500pt tournament list is not the only type of list people play. I personally like playing 2000pt games better, because you can have a little more fun with your lists. The downside to that is that it lets the cheese-minded player have more cheese if he's of a mind to play that kind of game.


12 harlequins wont kill 30 marines, or a full tau army, or 100 guardsmen. They will eventually die or be be overwhelmed and die.

6 fire dragons get 1 shot on a tank and then its the other guys turn, with only 4+ armour, any army can mow down 6 of them in a single turn of firing. No more eldar anti tank...

Seriously folks. You who whine, especially you voodoo boyz looking back at your previous posts on this topic, have obviously never used or often played against the falcon heavy army. If you had, it would be blazingly apparent that no matter how durable the falcons were, or how reliably the harlequins got into CC, this list is strongly lacking.

Another thing I love is how Falcon-defenders completely disregard the offensive value of the Falcons themselves. Having two S8 AP2 shots and a probable 5-7 S6 shots of varying APs is nothing to sneeze at, especially coupled with the mobility to either dart and hide if a Shaken result is suffered or go forth and Tank Shock with near impunity if you're more offensively minded. AV12 isn't exactly tissue paper, either. Even S8 weapons that score hits on that will only glance half the time. So, if you've got one Holo-Falcon in your list, it might be pretty well guaranteed to spend a lot of time Shaken, but if you've got two or three in your list, then the likelihood of all of them being Shaken all game becomes much smaller, and further diminishes as the game progresses and attrition takes its toll on the opponent's ability to put fire on the damn things.


contesting objectives and killing unit or tow of the enemy is not going to win the eldar a game. Not when there is easily 1100 points more of the other guys army to contest with as i pointed out with the Tau example earlier.

Depends on the units. Sure, if you send your go-to guys after the first thing you see without thinking about it, then yes that won't win you the game. However, if you put some elementary thought into target prioritization, you multiply the advantage of your near-guaranteed risk-free squad placement. If, for example, you dump Harlies on your opponent's fire support squads (be they Devestators, Havocs, Anti-Tank squads, or whatever) and task the Dragons to nuke the transport of your opponent's best assault unit (thus Entangling them for a turn), then you're going to be sitting pretty for the rest of the game.




I am afraid that the whiners here are just that - whining. The new dex is out, there is no removing of holofields, and this is the third time GW has included this which means that this is the way its gonna be for a long time. Even a 5th ed wont take away holofields, so these complaints really mean nothing other than to start a whine-fest.

I would like to point out that this thread was not started by an Eldar-hater, but rather an Eldar player, who specifically seemed to want to provoke this very discussion for reasons that can only be guessed at. In the OP, he stated he wanted to discuss the thematic appropriateness of Harlies in Falcons, but must not have wanted to that badly, because the thematic points that have been made by myself and others have gone largely without comment. Apparently, he only wanted to have thematic discussion if the comments were all ones that agreed with his pre-conceived notions.


P.S.
There is nothing worse than a sore looser. And as it seems there are people who 'don't make power lists' who bitch about 'power lists'. If you would just get you head out of your ass and realize that its you who are choosing to make a less competitive list for your own fun, that it is going to have to be you who request your opponent to make a similar list or quit your bitching and suck up the loss. This is a competitive game, so get with it or don't whine about it.

As a Marine player, what this amounts to for me is "play lasplas+AC spam", which I find ironic, as SM players get a storm of criticism for using this type of army, and now you're criticizing us for not using this style of army. Apparently, we can't get any respect coming or going. Makes me feel like Rodney Dangerfield.

The Song of Spears
21-11-2007, 17:56
You've read my posts on the subject? I've played against the Falcon bomb army a ton. An absolute ton! I practiced against it constantly when preparing for the tournaments this year.

Again, you miss my point. You whine about these armies, but you nearly never post on how to defeat them. Thanks to the search engine here, i can see that you post a lot on the subject, and make a ton of claims. But i have as of yet to see you post a thoughtful and effective tactica post on how to defeat any of these armies.

What i am trying to get people here to do is to stop whining. And start gathering ideas on how to defeat these armies. You can claim cheese all you want, and i can claim fairness all i want. In the end It MEANS NOTHING. the codex is written, the rules stand, and will for some time to come.

So quit telling us how much you think certain armies/lists are cheese and start talking tactics. The armies wont go away, so why bother trying to make up rules or suggest changes for them?

You say you beat the eldar falcon spam army, and you lost to them too. How? what list did you use, how did the game go? Play by play comments on the game and what either side did wrong/right?

Somehow, many complainers on this forum seem to lack these type of posts. You all just want to sit back and claim cheese and never really talk about the games themselves. Lead some to believe there is some unexperienced bias here...

Hell i will start, anyone want to hear how i beat the Eldar falcon spam army with a foot slogging ork army? Or how about with the current chaos codex? Or how about with Tyranids?

Do any of you have games you could discuss tactics over? Games that you can describe in more detail then "My marines beat them"? Lets hear it! Cause no matter how much you think any army is cheese, it means nothing. The armies will be legal for a long time, and will be used for a long time. So lets do something productive here.




Another thing I love is how Falcon-defenders completely disregard the offensive value of the Falcons themselves. Having two S8 AP2 shots and a probable 5-7 S6 shots of varying APs is nothing to sneeze at, especially coupled with the mobility to either dart and hide if a Shaken result is suffered or go forth and Tank Shock with near impunity if you're more offensively minded. AV12 isn't exactly tissue paper, either. Even S8 weapons that score hits on that will only glance half the time. So, if you've got one Holo-Falcon in your list, it might be pretty well guaranteed to spend a lot of time Shaken, but if you've got two or three in your list, then the likelihood of all of them being Shaken all game becomes much smaller, and further diminishes as the game progresses and attrition takes its toll on the opponent's ability to put fire on the damn things.

Great, another non-specific "falcons numbers roxors" post. Lets hear a few full batreps on the falcon army. Then maybe we can find out if all this meta game is true or not. Or how hard it is to counter or not.

Lord Balian
21-11-2007, 18:13
Hmm an interesting idea I suppose, dropping harlies into a falcon. Personally I'll take banshees over harlies any day though. I've put 6 banshees in a falcon before and it's awesome. Zip that bad boy to a flank or even behind the enemy. Stand there and shoot, and laugh as they try to take you down. Next turn dump out, move up, shoot and assault. I've seen this take out full compliment marine units, and even a 12 strong CSM unit, after two turns of combat, and only lost one banshee. Then they do the old sweeping advance into the rest of the enemy still in the deployment zone.

It could be considered cheesy to load up 3 falcons with harlies or banshees or what ever. But I have to ask, are the people calling it cheese the same marine players that take a 6 man las/plas squad with razorback for transport?

Fixer
21-11-2007, 18:27
I'm with Voodoo here.

Anyone that has played in a tournament knows how retarded Falcons and Prisms with Holofields and stones are for all the reasons he has already mentioned. It's the easy way to victory in tournament style games. Even if you screw up, make hideous mistakes and lose your entire army but for the three skimmers you can still force a win or a draw with tankshocking and siezing objectives.

Strategies to beat them? Block the doorway if you have a unit available to do it. Stay 20" away from the door if you cannot block it. Or, alternatively have 600 points of dedicated specialised anti-eldar tank firepower per falcon. That's about it.

It'd be nice to see some more Eldar players without skill crutches playing the game, though I have nothing against Eldar players that at least admit the state of imbalance and have the mental faculties available to realise that when the three skimmers are all they have left after playing terribly and still win that it was the skimmer tanks that won it for them and not the brilliant skill and insight that comes from buying a mech Eldar army and posting about it on the internet.

There's worse things than sore losers. There are terrible winners in a state of unending denial.

kikkoman
21-11-2007, 18:35
But to sit here and try to state that it's somehow tactical genius to throw Harlies in Falcons and that it's perfectly OK to do - that's just a load of crap.

well... if it's obviously a great combo, why not do it? I don't think anyone is saying it's a super obscure move. Tactical Genius like... taking heavy bolters against horder armies. It's obvious, so you do it.


I wonder if part of it is 'cause they're Eldar. Snooty space elves that are superior to you is probably more annoying imagery than... if somehow space orks had an unbeatable combination. Like... I think it would be pretty funny/entertaining of orks had an invincible Battlewagon build and three of them were tootin' around absorbing all kinds of firepower. Losing to invincible space elves though, naturally draws more shame.

Amnar
21-11-2007, 18:45
It could be considered cheesy to load up 3 falcons with harlies or banshees or what ever. But I have to ask, are the people calling it cheese the same marine players that take a 6 man las/plas squad with razorback for transport?

Ironically enough, those are pretty much the "tactical" recommendations that the "falcon is totally fair and balanced" camp propose.

I personally think that both are cheesy, lame, and unfluffy.

Amnar
21-11-2007, 19:07
well... if it's obviously a great combo, why not do it? I don't think anyone is saying it's a super obscure move. Tactical Genius like... taking heavy bolters against horder armies. It's obvious, so you do it.


I wonder if part of it is 'cause they're Eldar. Snooty space elves that are superior to you is probably more annoying imagery than... if somehow space orks had an unbeatable combination. Like... I think it would be pretty funny/entertaining of orks had an invincible Battlewagon build and three of them were tootin' around absorbing all kinds of firepower. Losing to invincible space elves though, naturally draws more shame.

I'm not speaking to anyone else, but personally I find it pretty lame that the number 1 finesse race has the single most durable tank. To me personally, Eldar are agile, hit like a ton of bricks, yet are fragile. That's their main weakness, lack of numbers, and fragility. The falcon kind of laughs in the face of that.

Where's the drawback of the falcon? What weakness does it really have, compared to other tanks? Here's how I would break it down personally, in comparison to other tanks (LR, Monolith, Russ, etc.)

Speed - Highest
Durability - Highest
Transport Capacity - Medium
Firepower - Medium
Points Cost - Medium

IMO the only thing that needs to be done is to reduce the durability, besides that, it's totally fine. All other current major issues become a non-issue when the tank stops being quasi invincible. Also, in my eyes, it brings the Eldar back in line with what they're supposed to be, a fragile, finesse side, that runs circles around you, but doesn't just run right up the table with no fear of losing tanks.

It's not like all of a sudden it will totally suck if the SS - HF combo goes down in strength, where it's 4+ to ignore stunned results, or ineligibility of both, or whatever.

Kahadras
21-11-2007, 19:28
Again, you miss my point. You whine about these armies, but you nearly never post on how to defeat them. Thanks to the search engine here, i can see that you post a lot on the subject, and make a ton of claims. But i have as of yet to see you post a thoughtful and effective tactica post on how to defeat any of these armies.


Perhaps you could get us started then? Knock togther a general tactica on how to overcome the Cylon death fleet and shove it in the tactics forum. It's OK to complain about people whinging about the problem and not dealing with it but it's always better to actual show some evidence about how to deal with it. If you don't then all you're doing is whining yourself.

Kahadras

tayrin
21-11-2007, 20:23
i think a falcon is'nt that powerful compared to other tanks,
it only has AV 12, although some upgrades can make it more
resilient, it still isn't that hard to kill. i use a wave serpent most
times instead of a falcan, because it has a better survivability
against the real anti-tank guns because of it's power-field and has
more transport capasaty and almost as much firepower.

The Song of Spears
21-11-2007, 20:33
Perhaps you could get us started then? Knock togther a general tactica on how to overcome the Cylon death fleet and shove it in the tactics forum. It's OK to complain about people whinging about the problem and not dealing with it but it's always better to actual show some evidence about how to deal with it. If you don't then all you're doing is whining yourself.

Kahadras

I was just thinking about doing that. I just hoped i didn't have to be the one to start the thread. I don't have issues fighting against eldar aircav, and i don't have issues using eldar aircav, so the thread is not something I personally am interested in.

But hey, if that is what it takes to get the whiners off their soap box and back into the game, then i guess i will start the thread... I will see all you who don't feel like listening to whining about rules that can't change over in the tactics forum.

Cheers.

Kahadras
21-11-2007, 20:33
i think a falcon is'nt that powerful compared to other tanks,
it only has AV 12, although some upgrades can make it more
resilient, it still isn't that hard to kill. i use a wave serpent most
times instead of a falcan, because it has a better survivability
against the real anti-tank guns because of it's power-field and has
more transport capasaty and almost as much firepower.

That's an interesting point of view. Have you actualy played using multiple Falcon yet? Looking at the Wave serpent it's far inferior to the Falcon. It doesn't get three weapons systems (only two) so it's firepower falls quite short of the Falcon (a third less not being almost in my book). The powerfield is nice but falls far short of the holofield in terms of boosting survivabilty. The extra capacity is nice but the units that work well in the Falcon (Fire Dragon) really don't need to be fielded in large squads (noting that Harliquins can't be transported in Wave serpents).

At the end of the day the Wave serpent costs a fair whack, isn't a scoring unit and doesn't have the survivability or the firepower of the Falcon. If you like them then there's no reason not to take them but I think the Falcon is a better vehicle all round.

Kahadras

The Song of Spears
21-11-2007, 20:53
There done and done. The thread is started. (http://warseer.com/forums/40k-tactics/114321-bird-hunting-and-killer-clowns-from-outer-space.html) Lets see some of you step up to the plate and offer something constructive.

Voodoo Boyz
21-11-2007, 23:14
Again, you miss my point. You whine about these armies, but you nearly never post on how to defeat them. Thanks to the search engine here, i can see that you post a lot on the subject, and make a ton of claims. But i have as of yet to see you post a thoughtful and effective tactica post on how to defeat any of these armies.

What i am trying to get people here to do is to stop whining. And start gathering ideas on how to defeat these armies. You can claim cheese all you want, and i can claim fairness all i want. In the end It MEANS NOTHING. the codex is written, the rules stand, and will for some time to come.

So quit telling us how much you think certain armies/lists are cheese and start talking tactics. The armies wont go away, so why bother trying to make up rules or suggest changes for them?

You say you beat the eldar falcon spam army, and you lost to them too. How? what list did you use, how did the game go? Play by play comments on the game and what either side did wrong/right?

Somehow, many complainers on this forum seem to lack these type of posts. You all just want to sit back and claim cheese and never really talk about the games themselves. Lead some to believe there is some unexperienced bias here...

Hell i will start, anyone want to hear how i beat the Eldar falcon spam army with a foot slogging ork army? Or how about with the current chaos codex? Or how about with Tyranids?

Do any of you have games you could discuss tactics over? Games that you can describe in more detail then "My marines beat them"? Lets hear it! Cause no matter how much you think any army is cheese, it means nothing. The armies will be legal for a long time, and will be used for a long time. So lets do something productive here.





Great, another non-specific "falcons numbers roxors" post. Lets hear a few full batreps on the falcon army. Then maybe we can find out if all this meta game is true or not. Or how hard it is to counter or not.

Oh no you don't. You're not running away from the stupidity you posted in response to me.

You explicitly came out and stated that I must never play against Falcon heavy lists because otherwise I'd understand how lacking the army is.

And that's a load of crap.

I know exactly how good the list is, and just how much better it is as an army list of merely putting almost everything into the Falcons.

And I've played against it, and it's variations, a lot. And in tournaments.

Your claim about #1 my experience and #2 the Eldar army in general shows that either you:

a.) Are trying to purposefully mislead people into thinking that the Falcon+Harlies combo and indeed entire army type (because people base lists around Falcons exclusively)

b.) Really have no idea what you're talking about in terms of what makes an effective tournament army.

It sounds like you're finally going to admit that the combo is broken/cheesy or whatever. At least that's what it sounds like when you start to call for a "tactica" on how to down one.

That's the first step, and really the point of my posting.

This thread started out with the preposterous idea that taking Falcons with Harlies wasn't "broken" but was an orchestra of tactical genius. That kind of tripe needs to get squashed down the minute such silly things are uttered.

That's like saying it's fluffy to take lots of 6 Man Las/Plas squads. It's both dumb and annoying to hear as some army fanboy tries to defend their cheesy units.

And second of all, you must not have searched very hard for my advice on beating Falcons and Harlies. I did a quick search for posts in the tactics forum with me as the poster with the search term being Falcon. A ton of results came up and a number of posts with me giving the advice I used came up. Link (http://warseer.com/forums/search.php?searchid=476038)

But if you want to see the best advice I've given to replicate my own success vs. Mech Eldar using a cheesed out, tournament style SAFH Marines list, you will have to look over on dakka (http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/191826.page#192059).

I'll quote it:


I've played this game (vs. Mech Eldar) a bit, there are ways to beat them, though I run a different version of the SAFH Ultras. No Devs, bigger assault Squad, more Las/Plas, and more Termies.

Main thing is shoot a las/plas at each tank, you should glance. Once glanced, move on.

Termies deepstrike and fire at anything not in a bloody tank, and failing that, shoot at a bloody tank in the ass.

Use speeders to try and block hatches. Your terminators should deepstrike away from your gunline forcing the Eldar player to come get them instead of focusing on your gunline. The gunline should be spread apart as much as possible to avoid consolidation, but still allow them to move up and rapid fire. 6 Man Las/Plas squads die real quick to a dedicated assault from Harlies/Banshees. The goal is that they die, you give up 115 points, and then shoot the hell out of the Harlies/Banshees.

The game is probably 75% decided by terrain setup and deployment. If you get a bad terrain environment to deploy in, I find it's exceptionally hard to win.

Also if he's got Shining Spears, they'll be turbo boosting, shoot them with Assault Cannon termy squads as the volume of fire should net you enough wounds to torrent the Exarch once or twice over (I normally see squads of 4 spears).

Remember, you may be playing marines but the Las/Plas squads are expendable. You have to know when to sacrifice units to force the Eldar player into a bad situation. Once he' s out of the tanks he's exposed himself and you have to take that opportunity to hit them, the only way to do that is to sacrifice squads. If you see a squad alive with one marine, opt not to use the Masters Leadership and hope you fail the test and get out of combat and use the chance to pounce on them with Speeders or an assault squad (shooting first, obviously).

It's going to be hard for your list since you have points tied up in the Dev squads, I don't like them mainly because I like my fire bases to be small, cheap, and expendable. Moving away from this may be a bit hard for you if you don't have the models though.

Just keep plinging the skimmers and if you're lucky one will go down.

In the scenario per above with all those skimmers, the idea is to move the squads in such a way that whatever gets out is going to be stuck assaulting something in a bad position. If you have to move, just double tap with Plasma and hope for the glance. If you can keep the falcons from shooting you, then you shouldn't be taking that much more firepower, and anything that is trying to shoot at you can be dealt with by the deepstriking terminators.

Not everything is going to be in the unkillable falcons, and depending on the points level the Eldar player is going to be forced to take things that are vulnerable. Use the terminators to go after these elements.

And obviously, after you go through your shots at the Falcons/Prisms and you can take shots again with other squads, double shots up on the Waveserpents if any, they go down a LOT easier.

Good luck, just know that it can be done, but to win you seriously have to outplay your opponent as they have the better army list. Oh and pray for good terrain setups for your army, that always helps too.

You see, this is the point of the brokeness of the Eldar army which centers on Falcons and their cargo. There aren't any real sure fire tactics. You almost always need to hope for a mission that say, isn't cleanse, or has say, more than 3 objectives, and that you can get a favorable terrain setup.

Because without it, they can run over you and there isn't much you can do besides hope to get lucky.

There are things that mitigate your problems. You can minimize Harlies impact by min/maxing all your squads, so when the Harlies charge, or setup for a charge, you move units away and make it so that when they DO get to charge, they wipe the unit out and then get blasted for being out in the open.

Of course if you don't min/max like that, you're going to have a very hard time of it. Proving that to beat the cheese that is Mech Eldar, you really need to bring the cheese of whatever army your playing. And may the Emperor protect you if you're using an army that just can't cope with them, like say Demon Hunters or the old Codex Orks.

Imperialis_Dominatus
22-11-2007, 00:27
i think a falcon is'nt that powerful compared to other tanks,
it only has AV 12, although some upgrades can make it more
resilient, it still isn't that hard to kill. i use a wave serpent most
times instead of a falcan, because it has a better survivability
against the real anti-tank guns because of it's power-field and has
more transport capasaty and almost as much firepower.

Interesting, as Kahadras put it. Is this based on your experience in-game? Because I assure you the math will eventually catch up. Falcons are more durable than Wave Serpents, period. No matter how much you pray to the dice gods, it evens out over time.


well... if it's obviously a great combo, why not do it? I don't think anyone is saying it's a super obscure move. Tactical Genius like... taking heavy bolters against horder armies. It's obvious, so you do it.

I wouldn't call it so much tactical genius as 'duh.' Is it tactical genius, then, to field a Nidzilla list? Or an AssCanSpam heavy list? Say any form of LasPlas list? Triple IG tank list? Not that that one is so much cheese, by the way. IG are a long way from cheese. Twin Lash list with Vindicators to reap the rewards?

Blatantly powerful combinations have no bearing on the tactical genius of the player. It's how you use what you have that determines tactical genius. If someone were to find a way to defeat a triple Falcon list using average, non-specialized forces, barring incredibly, exponentially good luck, that, friends, would be tactical genius. Taking a combination of units known specifically for their power on the table does not fall under the same category.

Xerxes throwing thousands of troops at a tiny number of them: Not tactical genius. It's what you do in his fictional situation. Or find some traitorous scum to surround them.

Leonidas forcing Xerxes' forces to engage him on essentially a man-to-man basis when his men count for essentially hundreds of the other on a battleground of his choosing: tactical genius.


I wonder if part of it is 'cause they're Eldar. Snooty space elves that are superior to you is probably more annoying imagery than... if somehow space orks had an unbeatable combination. Like... I think it would be pretty funny/entertaining of orks had an invincible Battlewagon build and three of them were tootin' around absorbing all kinds of firepower. Losing to invincible space elves though, naturally draws more shame.

I'd complain if Orks had an overpowered something or other. I assure you. No matter how much they deserve it after years and years of neglect...


There's worse things than sore losers. There are terrible winners in a state of unending denial.

Thank you again, Fixer. You again have posted admirable statements.


You just don't get it voodoo. Let me spell is out for you.

Falcon + Harlies = tactical genius.

See above.

Crimson Reaver
22-11-2007, 01:16
Just to clarify, I use mainly Fire Dragons and Farseer/Warlock and Scorps when I give the Falcon a payload. I said way up the thread that I consider the "Rending Space Clowns" a pretty silly unit on the whole, I can't be bothered to spend years painting a 6 man unit in micro detail only to wheel it out and have everyone yell "Cheese!" as me. I'd rather use Scorpions as they look cooler and I just love the balance the unit has on the whole, they can fight anyone and have a good chance of winning through good armour, weapons and the most awesome Exarch the Eldar get!

I would urge people to read and consider my previous post as I genuinely believe that using Grav Tanks in my Heavy Support slots leaves me very much outnumbered and outgunned. My typical opponents tend to be Marines, Necrons and Guard, and I know most of the players I go up against have enough guns to seriously hamper my attempts to use the guns on my Falcons. They tend to go vehicle light as they are aware of the weakness (not just compared to the Falcon but in general) of MBTs on the 40K battlefield. So I'll have a reasonable number of heavy Gauss weaponry, Lascannons, Missile Launchers and the thrice accursed Tank Hunting Havoc Squads with Autocannons (don't know if this pick is still valid now) looking to take me down.

I'm certainly not here to be a Falcon apologist and again I realise that I'm neither the greatest user of Falcons nor the best Eldar general (I'm a Sisters player using Eldar because I get addicted to Ebay from time to time and thus have the models!) so I'm not as dangerous as the hardcore Flying Circus Triple Falcon Holo Harlie Spam (can I TM that? :D) with a side order of Gouda. I do think the Falcon is too hard to kill but then I'd also argue that I find it tough going to actually shoot much with it, average Ballistic Skill with little tank busting capability (most of the time I'm only using the Pulse Laser and on average I rarely take out enemy tanks packing AV13 or better with it over the course of the game) coupled with being stunned a lot isn't all that great.

The main area that they break the game in is taking objectives and in this respect they are far too good. The last few (4 and counting) games should have gone to my opponents because most of my army had been crispy fried, but I managed to contest enough objectives with my Grav Tanks to claim 3 draws (2 in Apocalypse) and a win. It's not fair, it's not fun and I don't like it, but they're one of the few things I use that actually do much good in my army. I'm well aware it's a crutch and it's probably slowing down my tactical development in terms of using the rest of my models but the Falcon is one of my all time favourite models and when I collected the army under the old Dex the Falcon was tough but killable and it did also get to shoot sometimes after coming under heavy fire, which was ace. When the new Dex came out I kept it in the list with the kit it had before and now it's suddenly cheesy and my army is broken (sigh). It just annoys me as I even got called cheesy using Battle Sisters (not sure exactly what my group smokes but still!) and I'm seriously considering removing either the Holo Field or the Spirit Stones from my Falcons just so the risk/reward ratio can be re-established.

I'm just getting really depressed at the fact that even a unit that doesn't work as I'd like it to (gunship not fire magnet!), which I certainly don't use with either the most broken tactics or the best payload and which was fine rules-wise under the 3rd Edition Dex is now the subject of so much ill will. It just seems to be the hyper-competitive tournament players who are taking a stupid army selection and ruin it for those people who actually use Falcons halfway sensibly. Harlies and Falcons are not fair and they're not fluffy in the slightest and if you take a list like that I think stupid is just about the nicest thing I can say about you, because not only has this irked the rest of the 40K community but GW's typical knee-jerk reaction when nerfing previously decent choices will mean my Falcons will probably end up about as useful as a chocolate fireguard come the next rules revision. It is already crippling to take Bright Lances or Starcannons in anything more that tiny amounts because they got spammed and subsequently were made significantly worse.

At this rate they'll have to make Storm Guardians some kind of ninja because GW are likely to be goaded into swinging the Nerfbat at anything else that is vaguely good come the next revision :(

Orbital
22-11-2007, 01:16
I have only skimmed this thread. I wanted to post this before I sat down to read at length.

Now that elvinltl has started this discussion back up again and we're several pages in (despite it having been wrung out ten times over in several other recent threads)... how would we say this discussion is going? Has there been a wealth of fresh insight on this topic? Has there been a whole lot of new perspective that has changed the thinking of previously entrenched forum members? Have those who hammered their points into the ground over and over again in other threads stepped aside, having already spoken their mind, and opened the floor for new voices on the subject? To put it simply: Has one more thread on this contentious, raw nerve of a topic yielded some jewel of insight that made it worth igniting the debate again?

If so, then kudos to elvinltl for seeing that there were still unturned stones where the topic of Falcons and Harlequins is concerned.

Amnar
22-11-2007, 01:21
See above.

Arghghg, foiled again by the lack of a sarcasm smiley

Master Jeridian
22-11-2007, 01:47
Just to say, Good Luck with the Tactica.

No amount of hand holding, discussion, feedback, advice will change the fact the Falcon and Harlie combo punches way above it's pts value and refuses to ever give pts up.

I expect a humongous chunk of that Tactica to be "Do this...then pray you are extremely lucky".

Unfortunately, luck is not a good tactic that can be relied upon.

Arbiter7
22-11-2007, 04:57
Just outlining some things very few or nobody has mentioned yet:


1)AV 12 for a TANK is the absolute minimum for anything to class as a "tank". It's chimera-class front AV. Making holofields and spirit stones mutually exclusive on a AV12 tank would in my opinion basically remove the title "tank" and effectively remove the falcon from the "heavy" support choices. Without the combo, it just isn't "heavy" anymore. It's a gun-loaded, one-shot fast attack choice. And paying 185 points for it would be plain silly.


2)Why doesn't anyone see that something that IS really good, but included only ONCE in an army list is NOT ABUSIVE. Come on people, ONE falcon cannot mess the whole game up, but THREE can.


Therefore, why not leave the falcon as it is, but make it a 0-1 choice?

I feel that the abuse is in numbers, not the falcon itself.

I would face any army in which some MEASURE has been kept in mind.

Darquewing
22-11-2007, 07:43
OK, I've read all this and feel the need to interject my own un-valuable opinion:)

In my current Eldar "AC" list (2 Falcons, NightSpinner, 3 Serpents, 4 Vypers, etc... about 36-42 models in total), I do understand that a Falcon with H-F and Stones is hard to kill. Not hard to neutralize though. Sure they may be around in turn 6, but by then they are unarmed, still shaken, and a hair's bredth from destruction.

I would also like to point out that these same units are also NOT major damage dealers. Sure I usually have one or two tanks that can go the distance in a game, but they can spend a lot of time not shooting. And with a BS 3, they don't hit very much when they do. Also, if we run and hide to avoid shaken, then we've probably lost a good firing opportunity in the process.

And if you add in Vectored Engines, you are going well over 200 pts for the tank. If you leave it the rear, it could prove harmful to the enemy for a while. If you use it as a transpo, then you'll get a VERY expensive taxi that, though it won't die, won't do any serious damage on it's own. So now you put in an Uber CC unit.

Congrats, you've just blown half your points on two units. Sure, it will get an objective. Your enemy will go grab all the others. Or concentrate all their fire power to annihilate it.

Well, now you can send in those guardians you bought with the left over points, I suppose.

And some things I would ask of ANY other army. If you send 400-500 points worth of your forces against a single objective, wouldn't you be expecting to take it? How many other armies only get 7 models for that point cost? How many others would be expecting 6 of those to die after the first round of CC?

I don't mind some of the proposed "fixes" for the Falcon, but I do see the need for some concessions in return. Either I would expect a marked increase in damage potential per turn, or a reduction in points. I would NOT field a unit that is neither good at taking hits or seriously good at killing the enemy for what they cost.

That's the Eldar way. We are not generalists. We specialize very far, one way or another. In the Falcon's case, they specialize in staying alive.

azimaith
22-11-2007, 07:46
Just outlining some things very few or nobody has mentioned yet:


1)AV 12 for a TANK is the absolute minimum for anything to class as a "tank". It's chimera-class front AV. Making holofields and spirit stones mutually exclusive on a AV12 tank would in my opinion basically remove the title "tank" and effectively remove the falcon from the "heavy" support choices. Without the combo, it just isn't "heavy" anymore. It's a gun-loaded, one-shot fast attack choice. And paying 185 points for it would be plain silly.

Better there be a "always ignores stuns and shaken results" and no holofield (as in improved spirit stones) and the tank always fire until it gets blown to bits relying on speed and limiting LOS than it be a holofield using monster that just soaks up everything and sits around the entire game never shooting. I figured the falcon was an *eldar* tank. Give it an extra gun, make it BS4 with 2 weapons rather than twin-linked ones, ect and make it fragile. Leave transport to wave serpents and add options for more firepower, change the point cost accordingly.


Eldar, fragile with great firepower, not durable with the inability to deliver firepower because of shaking.



2)Why doesn't anyone see that something that IS really good, but included only ONCE in an army list is NOT ABUSIVE. Come on people, ONE falcon cannot mess the whole game up, but THREE can.

One can mess up a game depending on points value.

Crimson Reaver
22-11-2007, 09:42
Better there be a "always ignores stuns and shaken results" and no holofield (as in improved spirit stones) and the tank always fire until it gets blown to bits relying on speed and limiting LOS than it be a holofield using monster that just soaks up everything and sits around the entire game never shooting. I figured the falcon was an *eldar* tank. Give it an extra gun, make it BS4 with 2 weapons rather than twin-linked ones, ect and make it fragile. Leave transport to wave serpents and add options for more firepower, change the point cost accordingly.


Eldar, fragile with great firepower, not durable with the inability to deliver firepower because of shaking.

You offer me that Falcon over the one I've got to play with at the moment and I would happily bite your arm off for it sir! I like to kill things with my army and Falcons never give me enough killing power. If you made Holofields like a Venerable Dreadnought's protection and allowed Spirit Stone to move and fire the tank at BS2 or something, and give it BS4 as standard it would play much better than it does now!

Imperialis_Dominatus
22-11-2007, 17:19
Arghghg, foiled again by the lack of a sarcasm smiley

Whoops. Sorry, I'm kinda literal. Will attempt un-retardation next time. :D

Phazael
26-11-2007, 05:29
If six clowns can wreck your entire army this bad, you need to re-examine your list design and stop relying on AC spam and 5 man las/plas. Beating mech eldar means taking full sized squads and more mobility than just pods.

Honestly, I never use falcons anymore, because the clowns need ten to work reliably and the prism is a much better deal with vastly superior firepower. I did use Falcons under the old codex, for years, however. Before that I played jetbike and falcon heavy mech eldar in the days of 2nd edition. I can tell you plainly that the current falcon has nothing on the old Crystal Targetting Matrix (pop-up in 2nd) falcon, so whether you realize it or not, the Falcon has been steadily nerfed every time a new book has come out. Its just that the current batch of MEQ army lists in common circulation out there have made running an infantry based Eldar (or Tau) army suicidal. Couple that with a bunch of newer eldar players who can get an effective army for less money buying a handful of grav tanks, and you have the current Eldar metagame situation. Eventually, SM players will start using a different army build and the Mech skimmer lists will become a lot less effective, but for now the teeming masses playing the training wheels army of 40k are going to continue complaining (this is what, the 20th thread on the same subject?) like its the World of Warcraft boards because they refuse to adapt their lists.

zendral
26-11-2007, 05:42
I can tell you plainly that the current falcon has nothing on the old Crystal Targetting Matrix (pop-up in 2nd) falcon, so whether you realize it or not, the Falcon has been steadily nerfed every time a new book has come out.

They have...and yet they have not. At least in the old dex there was a chance to penetrate it ala old spirit stone rules. Although to keep it from dying, ppl just used CTM in the most annoying of ways. Today, your almost always garunteed to only get glancings with ST transforming into EA.
I do actually prefer to take on the new falcon instead of CTM. I think the intention on making eldar skimmer hard to beat was good...but it doesn't even fit well when stepping outside of mathhammer and game mechanics. Falcons should be hard as hell to hit....but when you do hit...they should crack like twigs.

Darquewing
26-11-2007, 16:30
In all honesty, I'd take the old 3rd ed. Spirit Stone back. It gives a greater chance of the Falcon not being able to move, but also gives us a greater chance of being able to return fire.

And it holds true to the fact that "nothing is for certain".

Grazzy
26-11-2007, 16:48
Eldar, fragile with great firepower, not durable with the inability to deliver firepower because of shaking.



So true. A vehicle like the falcon that is very hard to destroy is not very eldary at all. People dont even get it for any firepower - it is victory point denial and transport for harlies and dragons.

Using the current tules, I think that it should be max of one falcon for every full 750 points (so 2 at 1500 points), but this would still be powerful because the third choice could just be a fire prism.

elvinltl
27-11-2007, 03:01
I still fondly remember how my 6 Harlequins squad went on a killing frenzy with the sweeping advancement rule. They just jumped from CC to CC and performed the Dance of Death Rending everything to oblivion.

Razarael
27-11-2007, 06:08
I played a game today where I footslogged against an imperial guard/grey knight ally army. I got six harlequins to their line, killed 5 grey knights and 20 guardsmen before they got whacked. And that was done without the use of a transport. Albeit, I ended up getting utterly destroyed in the long run (a grandmaster walked through my army), the point is that it isn't absolutely necessary to use a falcon to get them up close.

kikkoman
27-11-2007, 07:33
Eldar, fragile with great firepower, not durable with the inability to deliver firepower because of shaking.


So true. A vehicle like the falcon that is very hard to destroy is not very eldary at all.


Eldar get t8 monsters, troops with enhanced cover saves, horde troops that can get mobile cover saves, another troop that can get an inv save in close combat, a troop option with t4 3+, another troop option with t6 3+, and an HQ guy that lets you re-roll those saves. The invincible Falcon fits in with everything else.

If you want fragile, speedy, great firepower, play orks :D

Orbital
27-11-2007, 08:01
Eldar get t8 monsters, troops with enhanced cover saves, horde troops that can get mobile cover saves, another troop that can get an inv save in close combat, a troop option with t4 3+, another troop option with t6 3+, and an HQ guy that lets you re-roll those saves. The invincible Falcon fits in with everything else.
Posts like this really rub my fur backwards. It's so one-sided that it makes it look as though the Eldar are the no-brainer choice for cheesemeisters of all shapes and sizes.

Why do I say this? I'll tell you why.

It's easy to just make a list of "they get this, they get that" while forgetting to make a list of the down-sides. No-one ever forgets to mention that one of the Eldar heavy support choices has T8 (the Wraithlord, whom most players generally regard as being good, but not amazing)... but where's the mention of the rest of the basic infantry, which are all T3? No-one ever forgets about Eldar being T3 when they're buying Heavy Bolters at 5 points apiece. It only slips their mind when they're trying to draw a picture of how unfair the army is.

Everyone loves talking about the Conceal power, but people forget to mention how much it costs (Warlock + Conceal is not free), nor the fact that cover saves don't protect you from flamers or some indirect fire. They also forget to mention that Conceal is a 5+ save... which, if you take the average Warseer opinion as gospel, is crap. Let's also bear in mind that most of the threads about Guardians on Warseer characterize them as ineffective and pointless. You can't have it both ways, Warseer: You either complain about how useless Guardians are to prove one point or how awesome they are to prove another. Not both.

As for this "a troop option with t4 3+, another troop option with t6 3+, and an HQ guy that lets you re-roll those saves"... how about talking about some of those point values to go with it? And then we can compare to what other armies get for the same cost. Kay? Helps to have a bit of context when you say that Wraithguard cost X points and then you compare to how much Terminators cost. And as for Jetbikes, I don't think you want to pretend they compare favorably with with the Marine bikes or even the Dark Eldar bikes... unless you want to talk about speed which, of course, is what the Eldar are supposed to be all about.

Let's not forget that, troop-wise, there is such a thing as AP3 Bolters... troops with Feel No Pain... troop units that teleport... troop units that can get back up after being killed... and so many T4/S4/BS4/WS4/3+ save troops in the game with 24" shooting range that a lot of players feel like it's the standard by which all other troops are compared. Before we characterize "invincible" as part of the Eldar army's characteristic, I think you should take a look at a few other codices and ask yourself if you'd want to put a Guardian, Dire Avenger or Ranger up against a Nurgle Marine (to name one choice).

I love the Eldar troop choices and I wouldn't complain about them (and I'm fine with most of the other army's troop choices, too), but come on. Don't pull out your violin for those who have to go up against Eldar just yet. They're still pretty fragile as far as gaming in the 40k universe goes.

Sekhmet
27-11-2007, 08:05
I see the Harlequins as very much doing their own thing, so either they would bring along their own transport (a Venom or similar) or they would pop out of the Webway, run over to something and viciously kill it before fading away again. I don't see them using Falcons as a tour bus.


I agree. Not fluffy at all.

Orbital
27-11-2007, 08:13
I agree. Not fluffy at all.

I'm the same. I'm disappointed the Venom didn't appear in the Eldar Codex.

kikkoman
27-11-2007, 08:42
Posts like this really rub my fur backwards. It's so one-sided that it makes it look as though the Eldar are the no-brainer choice for cheesemeisters of all shapes and sizes.

I was thinking of adding "but they come in small numbers due to pts cost", guess I should have.

Elite is more the word, fragile... fragile makes me think of tyranid little bugs or 15pt 6+ sv orks.

Orbital
27-11-2007, 08:45
I was thinking of adding "but they come in small numbers due to pts cost", guess I should have.

Elite is more the word, fragile... fragile makes me think of tyranid little bugs or 15pt 6+ sv orks.

I'm not saying you had an agenda, but there's enough Eldar hate in the world (and just think for a moment about how stupid it is that I can even say such a thing) without people saying the kind of stuff that was said in your earlier post.

Captain Micha
27-11-2007, 12:52
Orbital wins the thread.

cruise
27-11-2007, 13:01
I agree it doesn't seem to make sense for Harlequins to be riding in vehicles - at least, a standard list vehicle - Harlequins aren't really meant to be part of the usual Eldar.

From an actual gaming point of view, making skimmers unable to unload troops while shaken seems reasonably believable, severely limits the effectiveness of the Falcon as unkillable taxi, and makes ground-based vehicles feel a bit more rugged.

If that hurts the Tau players too much, I'm sure the Tau can be exempted because of their technology, or get some wargear upgrade, or whatever.

elvinltl
27-11-2007, 16:09
Falcons paradox.

Current Falcons - Hated by non-Eldar players due to their indestructable nature, objective grabber capability and transportation capability.

Future Falcons (They gets nerfed someway of another making them much more destroyable) - Abandoned by Eldar players because they are not reliable Transporters, can't provide firepower because they spend the whole game shaken with spirit stones and since they goes down more easily, they can't survive to the 6th turn to grab objectives.
OMG Falcons have no use!!!

Orbital
27-11-2007, 16:24
Future Falcons (They gets nerfed someway of another making them much more destroyable)...
I dunno. Falcons have stayed pretty much the same or gotten better over the last two Eldar codex revisions. I'm not so sure GW believes there's anything wrong with it.

Sildani
27-11-2007, 17:04
As for making Falcons 0-1, I proposed making them 0-2 in another thread some time ago. The idea was shot down because the consensus seemed to be that the tank should be perfectly balanced rules-wise, not simply restricted in number.

Hogwash.

Face it, the Falcon will probably always be annoyingly hard to kill. It's supposed to be. AV 12, yes, holo-field, spirit stone. These upgrades represent things that are integral to the Eldar way of combat - evade, avoid, hit and run - and for the points they cost, they had damn well better be effective. Taken like this, I believe restricting mumbers are the only real way to balance things.

Now, someone else recommended some changes to the Falcon I wouldn't mind at all - BS 4, another pulse laser (NOT twin-linked) in place of the heavy weapon, all instead of its transport capacity. Not bad. An Eldar Apache instead of a Hind. That could work. Maybe that person could repost his or her ideas here.

But, in the end, I doubt the Falcon will change, and I believe the most elegant way to fix it would be a 0-2 restriction. It'd be canon-faithful, too, since they're supposed to be handmade anyway.