PDA

View Full Version : 5th ed putting the damper on Eldar



Orbital
18-01-2008, 17:09
If you carry an irrational, seething, white-hot hate for Eldar (VoodooBoyz, I am looking in your direction), let me pile up a few things which show how the Eldar will change in 5th ed (if the rumors are right):
- Falcons can now be penetrated. If they move fast, they can get a 5+ save and that's it.
- Falcons can now only move 18" a turn at most.
- Falcons can no longer fire 9 Heavy weapon shots per turn. The most they'll ever get is four S6 AP5 shots or two S6 AP2 shots.
- On the basic vehicle damage table, three of the six results destroy a Skimmer moving fast.
- Now when someone crashes in a vehicle, they take a S4 hit (rather than rolling 4+) which increases the likelihood that Eldar infantry are gonna die in a crash.
- Dark Reapers (or other stand-and-shoot models that you don't like) can no longer put a Guardian meatshield between them and your assaulters. If they can shoot you, you have a clear path by which to assault them.
- The only infantry Eldar have with a Scout move are Rangers/Pathfinders, and a lot of Eldar players don't take many of them. Point: Don't expect to see a lot of Scouting transports.

That's just off the top of my head. For the record, I think this is all excellent. For the first time in years I may start fielding a Falcon... because the guilt will be gone. :)

This isn't to say that Eldar won't be powerful still (in fact, some units -like Rangers/Pathfinders for example- get a boost)... but the scary stuff, the stuff that people complain about, take a major knock under these rumored changes.

Does it bother me? Absolutely not. I'm all about balance and fair play, and I've thought that Falcons are too powerful for a long time. Doesn't scare me at all. I'll still kick your ass*.

*Actual ass-kicking may or may not occur.

Kulgur
18-01-2008, 17:17
You do realise this is all rumour....

Orbital
18-01-2008, 17:20
You do realise this is all rumour....

Absolutely. I believe I used the word "rumor" twice in my post, so obviously I realize that. And I welcome those comments which stress the fact that this is unconfirmed stuff.

Iceheart2112
18-01-2008, 18:04
Falcons will be able to move 30 inches. Granted they won't be firing anything, but the Star Engines are still around.

LittleLeadMen
18-01-2008, 18:15
Well, Kulgar, it's not EXACTLY just a rumour. It's in the new book and many of us have read it directly, not second hand.

Xenocidal Maniac
18-01-2008, 18:17
Yeah, and thank God. Eldar are truly broken as they are now. Eldrad, Warwalkers with scatter lasers, Falcons, Harlequins. It's ridiculous. It makes me wonder if GW playtested the codex at all before they released it. It's to the point where I don't even want to play against Eldar anymore (yeah, I know, I just must not be very good at 40k blah blah blah...)

Orbital
18-01-2008, 18:20
Falcons will be able to move 30 inches. Granted they won't be firing anything, but the Star Engines are still around.

It's still less than the 36" they can move now, and don't forget that you have to pay for that upgrade.

Ex-Blueshirt
18-01-2008, 18:21
Well, Kulgar, it's not EXACTLY just a rumour. It's in the new book and many of us have read it directly, not second hand.

I'm assuming you mean the 5th ed bgb? If so where have you read it please?

Orbital
18-01-2008, 18:26
Yeah, and thank God. Eldar are truly broken as they are now. Eldrad, Warwalkers with scatter lasers, Falcons, Harlequins. It's ridiculous. It makes me wonder if GW playtested the codex at all before they released it. It's to the point where I don't even want to play against Eldar anymore (yeah, I know, I just must not be very good at 40k blah blah blah...)
There are those who feel that everything in the Eldar book is wrong, broken or cheesy. For example: I'm not going to indulge anyone who says that War Walkers are broken. No vehicle that is AV10, moves 6" per turn, and you can bust open with a bolt pistol should be considered too powerful. Just because you got raped by them doesn't mean it didn't happen fairly (because, hey, sometimes your units die en masse... that doesn't mean there's something wrong with the rules). And Eldrad? I'm personally undecided about if I think that he's unfair (he works miracles on the table, but 210 is a lot of points).

By and large you will find more threads about indestructible Falcons on Warseer and, from now on, that's no longer an issue. The next thing you'll see is threads about Harlequins in Falcons, and the Rending rules are being toned down considerably.

This thread isn't intended to be a springboard for people to complain. I was hoping for it to be a way to see that many necessary changes to the Eldar play style are happening, and that's a good thing.

Orbital
18-01-2008, 18:27
Well, Kulgar, it's not EXACTLY just a rumour. It's in the new book and many of us have read it directly, not second hand.

It's not a rumor that people have read an illegally acquired book of rules floating around the net right now. It's nowhere near confirmed that these will be released in the form in which they currently appear, if they are released at all.

So... still closer to "rumor" than "fact".

Bloodknight
18-01-2008, 18:30
Well, it's probably an Alpha version. Most of the pictures are missing and some of them are 3rd edition diagrams which will most probably change.

That said, I could list a few things which I think gimp IG, to add insult to injury *g*.

Atomic Rooster
18-01-2008, 18:32
"Dear Development Team,

Rock is overpowered. Please nerf. Paper is fine.

Sincerely,
Scissors"

ya, that.

Imperialis_Dominatus
18-01-2008, 18:37
If you carry an irrational, seething, white-hot hate for Eldar

You rang, Orbital?

Orbital
18-01-2008, 18:43
You rang, Orbital?

You're late, so we started without you. Get to work! :)

Orbital
18-01-2008, 18:45
"Dear Development Team,

Rock is overpowered. Please nerf. Paper is fine.

Sincerely,
Scissors"

ya, that.

Can you flesh that out a bit to illustrate how it pertains to this chat? I'd like to know more.

Joewrightgm
18-01-2008, 18:57
I think Atomic Rooster was saying that its people's nature to complain about armies which have a slightly higher 'built in' power level, and immediatly assume that its broken for one reason or another.

My two. My only problem with Eldar is the local player at my GW store is a legitimate cheater.

Orbital
18-01-2008, 19:01
I think Atomic Rooster was saying that its people's nature to complain about armies which have a slightly higher 'built in' power level, and immediatly assume that its broken for one reason or another.
See, I read that little "nerf rock, paper is fine, signed: scissors" thing as the perception that a unit is overpowered solely because it has an easy time beating you... rather than looking at the armies (both your opponent's and your own) as whole, interdependent entities.


My two. My only problem with Eldar is the local player at my GW store is a legitimate cheater.
For guys like that, it doesn't matter what the rules actually are.

Joewrightgm
18-01-2008, 19:03
Well spoke Orbital.

Kulgur
18-01-2008, 19:05
Can you flesh that out a bit to illustrate how it pertains to this chat? I'd like to know more.

People will always say whatever they're beating regularly is fine and whatever they are beaten by is overpowered and needs "nerfing"

Orbital
18-01-2008, 19:08
I love how, on Warseer, you can ask one poster to flesh out a point and two others step up to do it for him before he says another word.

Latro_
18-01-2008, 19:13
hehe this all reminds me of the 20pints of water the iron warriors list was diluted with when the new chaos codex came out.

Its great when GW write rules that nerf what are conisdered exploited unit combos/tactics. All the people who use them cant moan as it shows off how much of a beardy git they were haha.

Seems the 5th ed is geared alot more towards the little guys, armies of more than 40men and only a smattering over big stuffe.

hear hear i say.

TheOneWithNoName
18-01-2008, 19:41
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of Eldar players suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something wonderful has happened.

Orbital
18-01-2008, 19:44
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of Eldar players suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something wonderful has happened.
If Eldar players who depend on Falcons ever start realizing how great the rest of the book is, you guys are gonna feel it. :)

Lexington
18-01-2008, 19:47
You do realise this is all rumour....
At this point, with the document leaking out at the rate it is, people are going to have to stop calling these "rumors" before too long.

Well, aside from the "all vehicle hits in CC are on the rear armor" bit, which is simply bunk.

PS: Orbital, you're an inspiration and a warm reminder that there is some cool-headedness in the 40K community, if one looks hard enough. Cheers!

Lord Inquisitor
18-01-2008, 19:47
- Falcons can no longer fire 9 Heavy weapon shots per turn. The most they'll ever get is four S6 AP5 shots or two S6 AP2 shots.
But the big change will be that they won't NEED to be moving fast. A falcon that stays still can fire all of it's weapons - and if you actually use cover you can retain the protection of SMF! Not to mention that this would protect you from immobilisation crashes.

It'll make using Grav tanks and other heavy skimmers more tactical and interesting IMO. And you will still be able to fire off all your shots. You just won't be able to do that while hurtling across the board, harlequin cargo and all.

Da Reddaneks
18-01-2008, 19:52
Does it bother me? Absolutely not. I'm all about balance and fair play, and I've thought that Falcons are too powerful for a long time. Doesn't scare me at all. I'll still kick your ....
good for you orbital.

Its great when GW write rules that nerf what are conisdered exploited unit combos/tactics. All the people who use them cant moan as it shows off how much of a beardy git they were haha.
exactly.

If Eldar players who depend on Falcons ever start realizing how great the rest of the book is, you guys are gonna feel it. :)
yep. those that depended on three uber-falcons to win will have to take a step back and re-examine things. Eldar are still a great army to play.

Orbital
18-01-2008, 20:01
At this point, with the document leaking out at the rate it is, people are going to have to stop calling these "rumors" before too long.
Let's make sure we stay clear on which part is the rumor and which isn't:
Confirmed fact: A PDF which has rules in it is making the rounds.
Not confirmed: This will be the 5th edition rules.

Things change between various versions and drafts. Don't assume that PDF is what we'll end up with.


PS: Orbital, you're an inspiration and a warm reminder that there is some cool-headedness in the 40K community, if one looks hard enough. Cheers!
Oh, I wish. I keep getting banned for stuff around here so I can't be that well-liked (by the admins at least).

colmarekblack
18-01-2008, 20:02
Bet most of the Eldar haters are coming out in droves with this news, partying on the streets :D.

Anyhoo, how are people getting these leaks? Is there a source for them?

Dweomer
18-01-2008, 20:48
As an Eldar player, I would personally like to protest the Falcons getting nerfed. I've been loving the hatred people have for 3-Falcon lists. It has meant my opponents don't bat an eye when I drop 2 Prisms and 30 Pathfinders. They've been heaving sighs of relief that I don't have 3 Falcons and letting their guards down about what I am taking. Ever seen someone get beaten down in CC by Rangers and Storm Guardians? It's well worth the effort.

Seriously though, I don't think the proposed changes are a problem. The problem with the Falcon isn't how much damage it actually does, but how much fire it can take. These potential items will make it harder for people to do stupid things with it. It should also return the Monolith back to the pinnacle of "beardy, broken, unkillable" tanks. I'm looking forwards to the upcoming months of heaping scorn and derision upon the backs of the robo-boys, as they rightly deserve!

(Why yes, one of my most common opponents plays Necrons... why do you ask?)

Orbital
18-01-2008, 20:52
As an Eldar player, I would personally like to protest the Falcons getting nerfed. I've been loving the hatred people have for 3-Falcon lists. It has meant my opponents don't bat an eye when I drop 2 Prisms and 30 Pathfinders.
My experience as an Eldar is that certain kinds of players are always going to complain can say the Eldar list is overpowered if you win or even do well, no matter what you field. If you lose, they're usually fine (or, at least, quieter). Those aren't people we can cater to because their problem isn't rules-based.

Carlos
18-01-2008, 21:03
Yeah, and thank God. Eldar are truly broken as they are now. Eldrad, Warwalkers with scatter lasers, Falcons, Harlequins. It's ridiculous. It makes me wonder if GW playtested the codex at all before they released it. It's to the point where I don't even want to play against Eldar anymore (yeah, I know, I just must not be very good at 40k blah blah blah...)

- Eldrad isnt invincible. Hell, he always dies when I field him.

- Falcons are NOT invincible. Mine always seem to get blown to bits, despite being pimped out. I much prefer Serpents.

- Warwalkers? With AV10? Which die to bolters and heavy bolters? Yeah....

- Rending requires one to roll 6's to start with. Ive had 10 charge terminators and not roll ANY.

Eldar arent as broken as you think. Its just Warseer really.

Irisado
18-01-2008, 21:06
If the rumours for fifth edition turn out to be true, then I have no problem about how they will impact on the Eldar.

I only ever use one Falcon, and it will be good to have to come up with new tactics for using it. At the moment, it really is too one dimensional.

I don't use Harlequins, but in any case, the rumoured toning down of rending is welcome all round. I never did much care for the rule when it was introduced in the first place, so making it less effective is a good idea in my opinion.

With reference to an earlier post, there is no way that War Walkers are overpowered as they are because they are very vulnerable to firepower.

In short, I share Orbital's positive outlook, and I have always felt that are far more devastating combinations in the Eldar codex than the Falcon and Harlequins.

Marneus Calgar
18-01-2008, 21:15
At least warwalkers are much better than sentinels, poor IG. :cries:

10 Harlequins usually should destroy a terminator squad with easy. Sometimes you get bad luck and not get many 6's, same could be said for genestealers. I also had one lone ravener kill a wraithlord in one turn or close combat with rending. That was fun.

Imperialis_Dominatus
18-01-2008, 21:27
You're late, so we started without you. Get to work! :)

Work? Who the hell said anything about work? Abomination!

...

It's a trap!


Can you flesh that out a bit to illustrate how it pertains to this chat? I'd like to know more.

Looks like a kneejerk response made without reading the OP or responses to me.


Bet most of the Eldar haters are coming out in droves with this news, partying on the streets :D.

Dude, you should come out with us! We've got Orkoid fungus beer by the truckload and a whole ton of Daemonettes showing up! (3rd edition 'Nettes, yeeeaaah boiiii!)

The Song of Spears
18-01-2008, 21:34
Did you mention yet that since the majority of models in a unit have to have grenades to use them, most all eldar will loose access to grenades (such as when a autarch would join a group of storm guardians to give them access to plasma grenades) :mad:

And there is NO WAY in the codex to give out grenades to certain models....

And did you mention that once the troops have gotten out of a STATIONARY transport the transport may not move away at max speed or else the squad can do NOTHING :wtf:

Defcon
18-01-2008, 21:54
Falcons can be fortuned.
Falcons can sit in terrain for a better fortuned coversave
Falcons don't need to move anymore, as Waveserpents can carry any unit, so falcons can be static or semi-static guntanks to still use all of their weaponry.
Units are no longer entangled, ever, when their vehicles explode. Ergo you can jam forward with waveserpents, have them die, and still get a next-turn charge.
Fleet still has a purpose.

These are all rumored changes, of course.

colmarekblack
18-01-2008, 22:00
Dude, you should come out with us! We've got Orkoid fungus beer by the truckload and a whole ton of Daemonettes showing up! (3rd edition 'Nettes, yeeeaaah boiiii!)

3rd ed 'nettes and fungus beer you say? :D

Atomic Rooster
18-01-2008, 22:14
Can you flesh that out a bit to illustrate how it pertains to this chat? I'd like to know more.

I should have been wordier with the paper/rock/scissors thing, people don't understand the Eldar list. They're trying to beat rock with scissors. (They're trying to beat Eldar with an anti MEQ list using anti MEQ strats.)

I could see a slanted debate about to start which was based on false precedences, such as:
1. Falcons are overpowered - false, the synergy of SMF & holo-field is overpowered, making the tank as durable as a monolith (though with different vullnerabilities). This is exasperatedly by the fact that non-skimmer vehicles are underpowered with respect to durability.
2. The eldar list is overpowered - false, it's very close to being on par with the other new codexs, and yet it never dominated tournament play even against the older, poorer codexs. Something many people don't understand is that you can't bring your anti MEQ list and expect to beat Eldar.

I'm not trying to threadjack, so if you somehow have a beef with one of the above statements, start a new thread or jump on board one of the many existing ones on these topics.

Xenocidal Maniac
18-01-2008, 22:25
- Warwalkers? With AV10? Which die to bolters and heavy bolters? Yeah....
Eldar arent as broken as you think. Its just Warseer really.

Yes, I think Scatter-laser armed Warwalkers are broken for the points. A squadron of 3 spits out 24 S6 shots per turn. Everyone always says "but boltars can taek tehm down", but scatter lasers far outrange bolters. So, you end up having to waste valuable anti-tank shots with greater range against them. And that's assuming there aren't higher priority targets, such as, say, fully tooled broken Falcons loaded with fully tooled broken Harlequins on the table.

And with Eldrad around to Guide them? Forget it. I've had 6 Terminators knocked out by 1 round of shooting from Guided Warwalkers (granted, that was pretty unlucky)

So, yes. All things considered, Warwalkers are broken. I wouldn't mind them if they were about 15-25 points more expensive.

Keep in mind that as a Guard player, I pay MORE points for only 9 S6 shots on the same AV 10 platform with my Sentinels. Then you can see why I am a bit miffed.

Irisado
18-01-2008, 22:44
Yes, I think Scatter-laser armed Warwalkers are broken for the points. A squadron of 3 spits out 24 S6 shots per turn. Everyone always says "but boltars can taek tehm down", but scatter lasers far outrange bolters. So, you end up having to waste valuable anti-tank shots with greater range against them. And that's assuming there aren't higher priority targets, such as, say, fully tooled broken Falcons loaded with fully tooled broken Harlequins on the table.

And with Eldrad around to Guide them? Forget it. I've had 6 Terminators knocked out by 1 round of shooting from Guided Warwalkers (granted, that was pretty unlucky)

So, yes. All things considered, Warwalkers are broken. I wouldn't mind them if they were about 15-25 points more expensive.

Keep in mind that as a Guard player, I pay MORE points for only 9 S6 shots on the same AV 10 platform with my Sentinels. Then you can see why I am a bit miffed.

What's the problem with using heavy bolters to take down War Walkers? They are not anti-tank, have sufficient range, and with three shots per weapon you are bound to severely cripple an Eldar War Walker squad.

I also feel that you are tarring too many Eldar players with the same brush. There are a lot of Eldar players who don't field Eldrad you know. I, for one, have never used him, and never will. Also, even if you come up against a special character, such as Eldrad, the points cost means that other areas of your opponent's army will be lacking, so you can exploit this.

I agree that Harlequins should not be allowed to ride in Falcons, but again there are Eldar players who won't take this option.

In addition, as has already been said, with the rumoured reduction in the capabilities of rending they won't be quite as powerful as they currently are.

Killgore
18-01-2008, 22:51
i dont use a single falcon in my eldar

im looking forward to 5th ed.

Iracundus
18-01-2008, 22:52
I'm sure people will eventually find something else about the Eldar to complain about. From Wraithlords to starcannons to Falcons, there will always be something. Sometimes I get the feeling peole won't be content until the Eldar are super expensive, even more fragile, and armed with water pistols that can't possibly harm their precious MEQ's.

lord_blackfang
18-01-2008, 22:56
- Falcons can now be penetrated. If they move fast, they can get a 5+ save and that's it.


Which makes them more resilient to damage, not less... typical whiney Eldar propaganda :p

Old SMF: 2 out of 6 results on the glancing table crash a skimmer
New SMF: 3 out of 6 results on the penetrating table crash a skimmer... but 1/3 or all hits are ignored, so we're back on 2 out of 6. In addition, 1/3 of lesser damage results like weapons destroyed are also ignored, which was not the case previously. That's not to mention how actual glances (ie. rolling a 12 for penetration) don't do much of anything anymore, so you can just forget about shooting them with Str6 guns (or with Str4 in the butt armour)

Prince Facestab
18-01-2008, 23:16
Did you mention yet that since the majority of models in a unit have to have grenades to use them, most all eldar will loose access to grenades (such as when a autarch would join a group of storm guardians to give them access to plasma grenades) :mad:

And there is NO WAY in the codex to give out grenades to certain models....

And did you mention that once the troops have gotten out of a STATIONARY transport the transport may not move away at max speed or else the squad can do NOTHING :wtf:

Blech. As an Eldar player, I can't say I approve of that one, as it mostly hurts units that people don't complain about. Harlequins are fine, falcons and warwalkers and prisms are fine, banshees are fine, fire dragons are probably unaffected. Shining spears, assaulty dire avengers, assaulty warpspiders, storm guardians, and autarchs for their utility in giving squads grenades all take a hit. I haven't heard people complain about these things too much.


Falcons can be fortuned.
Falcons can sit in terrain for a better fortuned coversave
Falcons don't need to move anymore, as Waveserpents can carry any unit, so falcons can be static or semi-static guntanks to still use all of their weaponry.
Units are no longer entangled, ever, when their vehicles explode. Ergo you can jam forward with waveserpents, have them die, and still get a next-turn charge.
Fleet still has a purpose.

These are all rumored changes, of course.

I don't think "Fleet still has a purpose" counts as a change.:D

The_Outsider
18-01-2008, 23:26
Oh how the dark eldar shall weep.

TzeentchForPresident
18-01-2008, 23:41
From Gilligans post. Post nr 762 5th Edition Rules discussion

__________________________________________________ _____________

Ok, I've done some mathammer based on this rumor and that of SMF becoming 5+ save and .... skimmers are becoming HARDER to take down, in particular:

- glancing hits have only remote chances to down (destroy/immobilise) a skimmer (2% Vs SMF; 3% otherwise), let alone holofielded skimmers (0.3%;0.5%)

- on average SMF are harder then in 4th edition though with performance decrease when S of shot increases (AV10 is 33% better Vs S5 and only 10% better Vs S10)

- on average skimmers not moving fast are much harder then in 4th edition, with little performance decrease as S increases (average 30% better)

- Falcon moving fast with holofield is worse Vs weapons with S8+ (average loss of 15% performance), else is better

- Falcon not moving fast with holofield is twice as hard as it is now!

- AP1 S8/10 weapons Vs SMF are slightly better then today, BUT Vs holofielded SMF they are two times stronger then today

- AP1 S8/10 weapons Vs skimmers not moving fast are actually worse then today

I also spent few calculations on normal vehicles, and it turns out that on average non skimmers are a little harder to eliminate then a skimmer moving fast with the same armor, due to not being possible to destroy it with immobilised result. Again AP1 weapons are less effective then they used to in 4th edition.

Cheers
Giltharin

Orbital
18-01-2008, 23:42
Yes, I think Scatter-laser armed Warwalkers are broken for the points.
You can hit them with Whirlwinds. You can hit them with Basilisk rounds. You can hit them with Heavy Bolters. You can hit them with Lascannons. You can Deep Strike any number of units next to them and blow them away. Snipe them. Hit them with Landspeeders. In the rumored new rules you can enter from a variety of table edges. And all those shots you're talking about? AP6. This means even Guardsmen get a save without having to be in cover.

When I say that I think the Falcon is broken, I do it on the basis of two things: Personal experience and some Math-hammer. In my personal experience, Falcons are hard to kill. When I dial up the statistics and probability, the numbers I see support that.

When I say that War Walkers are not broken, I use the same two criteria. In my personal experience, War Walkers go down if the opponent wants them to go down. When you do a little Math-Hammer, you'll see that they are very vulnerable.

War Walkers can neither move fast nor survive a lot of gunfire. Just because they're able to dish out a lot of gunfire doesn't mean they're broken. It means that's what they do. It so happens that every unit in every codex can do something, so if you take that away you get a bunch of paper weights cause they've got nothing else.

You're really barking up the wrong tree on this one.


Yes, I think Scatter-laser armed Warwalkers are broken for the points. A squadron of 3 spits out 24 S6 shots per turn. Everyone always says "but boltars can taek tehm down", but scatter lasers far outrange bolters. So, you end up having to waste valuable anti-tank shots with greater range against them.
So which tank were you going to take down with your Heavy Bolters? Was it the Vyper or was it the War Walker? Cause you aren't taking "valuable anti-tank" away from anything else that a Heavy Bolter can scratch... and God knows you can afford a lot of Heavy Bolters in a Marine army.

Orbital
18-01-2008, 23:44
(Re: 5+ saves for SMF)

Which makes them more resilient to damage, not less... typical whiney Eldar propaganda :p
Whiny Eldar propaganda. Gee, thank you.

Your math is wrong and your attitude sucks. Ignored.

Godgolden
18-01-2008, 23:49
waralkers... simply are not balanced oint wise, just compare it to a sentinel, seriously.

but there not overpowered, just really good, a joy to fight against too.

kikkoman
18-01-2008, 23:53
hmmm

does this give a use for Vyper squadrons?

You'll get 3 av10 models with 5+ re-rolls

but their firepower is halved with defensive=s4...

Orbital
18-01-2008, 23:56
Falcons can sit in terrain for a better fortuned coversave.
And that's better than the way it was before, when you could never, ever Penetrate a Falcon?

Let us not forget that you are talking about a combination which probably rings in at around 350-400 points, depending on loadout and if you put a Farseer on a bike to follow the Falcon around or not.

Does that sound like a good deal to you?


Fleet still has a purpose.
Fleet is somewhat devalued (not that I mind, personally) because all other armies can now move in the Shooting Phase. Saying "it still has a purpose" doesn't really draw an accurate picture. You might as well "The Eldar still have armor" and use that as a counterpoint.

Orbital
18-01-2008, 23:59
waralkers... simply are not balanced oint wise, just compare it to a sentinel, seriously.

but there not overpowered, just really good, a joy to fight against too.
You can't compare units that way. It's just not right. The Sentinel, for instance, takes up a different Force Org Chart slot (and yes, that does matter) and fits into an army with different strengths, weaknesses, and tactica. Let's also not forget that most Guard players are saying that their codex (and I would assume the point values that go with it) are out of date and not appropriate for 4th ed, so why would you want to see a change in a current codex rule so that it's in step with an older, out-of-date one?

Measure it in absolutes. If Sentinels should be cheaper (which may or may not be the case; I'm not really of any opinion there), that's a separate argument.

lord_blackfang
19-01-2008, 00:01
Whiny Eldar propaganda. Gee, thank you.

Your math is wrong and your attitude sucks. Ignored.

I didn't really mean that before (as evidenced by the smiley) but I do now.

Lord_Squinty
19-01-2008, 00:04
RE: comparing the Warwalkers points cost to IG sentinels:
Points costs take into account factors other than armour, gun strength and BS.
They also take into account the army type they are supporting.
There are countless wepons etc out there with the same BS, S and AP - yet all cost differing points - why? - because of the overall army makeup. *and not their lipstick*

So comparing Sentinels to Warwalkers is not an even comparison as they come from totally different lists - play and option wise.

<Edit>
BOoooo! Orbital beat me to it ;)

shabbadoo
19-01-2008, 00:11
I just thought it was funny joke actually.

Eldar players will just have to think a bit about how to use a Falcon now rather than fly it around willy nilly with nairy a care in the world. Yes, just like any other vehicle, the Falcon can get popped now, and more esily depending on what type of weapon is fired at it. Rather than being the GOD of skimmers, it is now merely the KING of skimmers(as if that really is a bad thing). It would be nice to see a few more Wave Serpents on the prowl too though. With the proposed changes to the vehicle weapon firing rules that is likely to be the case. Tactically speaking, Eldar and the other armies for that matter will play a bit more sensibly I think.

Skyth
19-01-2008, 00:13
Btw, skimmers sitting in cover take a dangerous terrain check every turn. Sitting in cover not a good thing for skimmers.

But with the rumors, an AV14 vehicle will be as hard to take down with a lascannon as a falcon is now.

Lower strength weapons have an even harder time.

Dosadi
19-01-2008, 00:18
Did anyone else notice that walkers can now only fire one main weapon on the move? This sure makes warwalkers less goodly.

Also, I can now just buy a wave serpent fo one of my guardian squads and then have my 10 man harlequin squad mount up on the first turn (YAY!).

You can now use things like Wraithlords to get a 4+ cover sabve for units behind them thanks to "covering fire".

I have much more to say about these "leaked" rules, but they are not eldar specific so I'll save 'em for elsewhere.


Dosadi

Imperialis_Dominatus
19-01-2008, 00:19
Orbital, lord_blackfang, I honestly hope you are both joking about the massive level of drama you are raising. He was being sarcastic, Orb. Kiss and make up, now.


3rd ed 'nettes and fungus beer you say? :D

Yep. Right on the corner of LibrariumOnline and Warseer. :)


Oh how the dark eldar shall weep.

They've been weeping since 3rd edition, and why not? They have good reason, especially now that Orks have had an update.

Defcon
19-01-2008, 00:23
And that's better than the way it was before, when you could never, ever Penetrate a Falcon?
Uh...yes? No effect is better than a shaken Falcon. It's riskier, but also potentially safer.



Let us not forget that you are talking about a combination which probably rings in at around 350-400 points, depending on loadout and if you put a Farseer on a bike to follow the Falcon around or not.

Does that sound like a good deal to you?

Yes, because Falcons can sit and shoot. Not that I use Falcons, or even really play my Eldar.



Fleet is somewhat devalued (not that I mind, personally) because all other armies can now move in the Shooting Phase. Saying "it still has a purpose" doesn't really draw an accurate picture. You might as well "The Eldar still have armor" and use that as a counterpoint.

I assume you know what Fleet does in this new edition from what is posted, so I'm going to outright ignore this. If you do not know what Fleet does in this new edition, you should check up on it. It still is a big, big deal. I'm beginning to concur with others on your hatred of effects to devalue Eldar in any way, shape, or form. There's a LOT more to hate about 5th edition than this, and Eldar are not the most effected army by far.

LittleLeadMen
19-01-2008, 00:32
Let's make sure we stay clear on which part is the rumor and which isn't:
Confirmed fact: A PDF which has rules in it is making the rounds.
Not confirmed: This will be the 5th edition rules.

Things change between various versions and drafts. Don't assume that PDF is what we'll end up with.

However, anyone that's even minimally familiar with publishing can tell that this is a near final copy, with primary layout complete. Typography is finished, organization, layout, page numbers, etc. The only element missing is to place it on the art background, and photographs for the placeholders. At that point, usually the only changes are editing/spelling corrections, and maybe a few minor tweaks. The key elements are certainly NOT going to change. This document is too far along and has likely already been finished and near the printing process for release within 6 months.

Ravenheart
19-01-2008, 00:33
Did anyone else notice that walkers can now only fire one main weapon on the move? This sure makes warwalkers less goodly.

...and gives the already overcosted marine (DA / BA) dreadnoughts a good kick in the theeth.

From my gaming experience, there wasn't really a reason to change walkers of any kind for the worse.
While it's pretty pointles whining about rules changes, I still would like to see the reasoning - the bigger picture behind this.



I have much more to say about these "leaked" rules, but they are not eldar specific so I'll save 'em for elsewhere.

I'd love to hear more imput. Preferably to something that cools down the currently heated atmostphere.
Looking forward to it.

Ronin_eX
19-01-2008, 00:39
Hmm, bikes with meltas seem to be a great option against them (+1 on damage chart). My really basic number crunching has shown a slightly better ability to kill a Falcon now (math might be wrong I am kind of rushing it). These are assuming a hit has been made.

Here it is:

Chance of downing new Falcon with a LasCannon shot: 9.6%
Chance of downing old Falcon with a LasCannon Shot:9.2%

Remember that these include immobilized results as I am assuming the Falcon rush tactics here so it is not going to be stationary (and an immobilized result will see any consecutive shot tearing it a new one as it loses its SMF ability).

Now my calculations for hitting it in a melta weapon's "short" range yield these stunning results:

Melta weapon vs. new Falcon: 42.2% chance of destruction or immobilization.

In fact any AP 1 weapon will be getting a high number like that. Pretty nice huh?

To compare under the new rules a LR in cover (usually this will be a 4+ save) will be killed by a LasCannon about 5% of the time now. Take this all with a grain of salt as I am rushing these numbers a bit but unless I did something very wrong (which has a 50% chance of happening :D) they should give a pretty good idea of what it happening. Overall the new rules don't make the Falcon a paper tiger but its utility as a Harlie delivery system is completely shot and transporting troops will require some thought on the part of Eldar players now.

Dosadi
19-01-2008, 00:48
From my gaming experience, there wasn't really a reason to change walkers of any kind for the worse.



It was done to make wraithlords and carnifexes that much better. :p


Dosadi

Prince Facestab
19-01-2008, 01:01
It was done to make wraithlords and carnifexes that much better. :p


Dosadi

Heh. I think this is a problem with 5th edition coming out at such a weird time. First the Eldar codex comes along, saying "Down with wraithlords, up with warwalkers!" Fast forward a year and a half, and we're getting rumors that indicate the opposite. It's a wacky, wacky, world. Hopefully the new Ork codex was made with this in mind.

And carnifexes, yeah! They also get better because they get the ability to run, don't they? Maybe we'll see some good old close combat 'fexes from time to time again. I miss those guys.

Lord_Squinty
19-01-2008, 01:04
Chance of downing new Falcon with a LasCannon shot: 9.6%
Chance of downing old Falcon with a LasCannon Shot:9.2%


This is why the rules are being changed.....
You're using the wrong guns to take down falcons.

Whens 6th edition due? - so it can nerf the 9 vibro cannon armies that'll replace the falcons? *sarcasm, of a sort*

Bloodknight
19-01-2008, 01:07
No, he does not. Under the current rules, the Lascannon is the best gun against a Falcon. The autocannon looks better, but mathematically, it is not.

Lord_Squinty
19-01-2008, 01:20
No, he does not. Under the current rules, the Lascannon is the best gun against a Falcon. :D :D :D

There - fixed that for you - no extra charge! :angel:

pwrgmrguard
19-01-2008, 01:24
underlying problem...

I need the lascannons in my list to deal with the landraider/monolith/russ/carnifex/big nasty high AV thing. These take up the spots i would give to auto cannons in an antifalcon role.

I need the heavy bolters in my list to dela with hordes of nids/marines/traitor guardsman/normal troops, again taking the place i would give to auto cannons.

Granted I play guard, and often have more heavy weapons (every time, i mean come on its guard) than my opponent, but to optimise the potential of my army, i can't include the falcon killer weapons. So.....nerf the falcon is easier than, invent /redo multiple other armies to make the weapon's good against falcons readily and easily played.

Lord_Squinty
19-01-2008, 01:33
So, thats back to the "Rock, paper, Scissors" discussion of earlier....
Lose some lascannons or heavy bolters - why nerf the army because your list isnt right?

BTW - couldnt care less about the falcons - I'm just pointing counter-arguments out.
And most of the "I hate falcons" arguments are unjustified - yes, theyre hard to kill, but so is a Landraider crusader with blessed hull to Dark Eldar.
Shall we nerf that too?

No, because that is what the game is all about. It's not impossible to take out falcons, I play eldar, but I also play WH, SM, DE, Necrons, Tyranids and guard. I dont have any problems with falcons, in fact - when I use them in my eldar - they die. Quickly.
Nerf the falcons and, as Orbital has allready said - next week you'll all be complaining about something else in the eldar army.

As someone said before - "eldar aren't MEQ - stop trying to use the same tactics against them"

theshadowduke
19-01-2008, 01:42
btw orbital, its a S3 hit, not S4.

Imperialis_Dominatus
19-01-2008, 01:47
You're using the wrong guns to take down falcons.

Man, this is gonna p*ss off Voodoo_Boyz something fierce.

Lord_Squinty
19-01-2008, 01:49
Why? should I charge him?? How much?

Probably not gonna 'p*ss him off' as much as trying to down falcons with lascannons :)

Orbital
19-01-2008, 01:53
Eldar players will just have to think a bit about how to use a Falcon now rather than fly it around willy nilly with nairy a care in the world.
I agree on this point. It's a change I really wanted to see. I'm really glad.


Orbital, lord_blackfang, I honestly hope you are both joking about the massive level of drama you are raising. He was being sarcastic, Orb. Kiss and make up, now.
There's no drama. It's over and done.


Uh...yes? No effect is better than a shaken Falcon. It's riskier, but also potentially safer.
"No effect is better than a Shaken Falcon". I don't understand what you mean by this.


Yes, because Falcons can sit and shoot. Not that I use Falcons, or even really play my Eldar.
My feeling is that once you've dumped upwards of ~350 points on the setup you're talking about then yes, it should be allowed to sit and shoot.


I assume you know what Fleet does in this new edition from what is posted, so I'm going to outright ignore this. If you do not know what Fleet does in this new edition, you should check up on it.
To the best of my knowledge, Running is when you can move D6 per turn during the shooting phase without assaulting after, and Fleet is when you can do the same thing but assault after. Did Fleet change in the rumored new rules in some way? And if it hasn't, then I believe my point stands as it is.


I'm beginning to concur with others on your hatred of effects to devalue Eldar in any way, shape, or form.
You've completely and entirely misread both my posts and their meaning. To be clear: I believe 5th ed (as rumored) puts a huge dent in the elements of the Eldar army which are overpowered, and I am utterly and completely in support of that. As for other armies, I'm not commenting on if they're nerfed more or less because I don't feel qualified to say... but this thread is about rumored 5th ed and Eldar, which is why I'm talking about (wait for it) 5th ed and Eldar.

I don't know who you think you're concurring with there. You've certainly misread my original post.


However, anyone that's even minimally familiar with publishing can tell that this is a near final copy, with primary layout complete. Typography is finished, organization, layout, page numbers, etc. The only element missing is to place it on the art background, and photographs for the placeholders. At that point, usually the only changes are editing/spelling corrections, and maybe a few minor tweaks. The key elements are certainly NOT going to change. This document is too far along and has likely already been finished and near the printing process for release within 6 months.
Things do change between the PDF form and the final. I'm with you in that I don't think it's likely, but this isn't the first leaked doc from GW... and others in the past just like it have seen changes at the last minute.

Again, my guess is that the final will be very much like the leaked PDF, but I have also worked enough in the print industry to know that it's not final till it's final.

Orbital
19-01-2008, 01:57
btw orbital, its a S3 hit, not S4.

I'm sorry, but I got a look at this PDF of pre-released rules finally and no, it's S4, AP-.

Of course it could all be malarky. I kinda like the idea of a S4 hit, but whatever works... ya know?

Lord_Squinty
19-01-2008, 02:02
I'm sorry, but I got a look at this PDF of pre-released rules finally and no, it's S4, AP-.

Of course it could all be malarky. I kinda like the idea of a S4 hit, but whatever works... ya know?

I've never seen or heard any of the 5th ed. rumours *regarding this* from any GW sources.

But - I would think its gonna be S3.
Why? -
1. Its whats in Ork codex, it could be codex specific, I know...
2. Heaven forbid that the precious marines would get harmed on a 4+!!
As if marines dont have enough advantages.....

But, as said - you've seen the PDF, I've not - you know better than me atm

Orbital
19-01-2008, 02:10
I've never seen or heard any of the 5th ed. rumours *regarding this* from any GW sources.

But - I would think its gonna be S3.
Why? -
1. Its whats in Ork codex, it could be codex specific, I know...
2. Heaven forbid that the precious marines would get harmed on a 4+!!
As if marines dont have enough advantages.....

But, as said - you've seen the PDF, I've not - you know better than me atm
The Ork codex says it differently, because their vehicles are open-topped... and they suffer a S3 when they crash instead of a S4.

Marines already get harmed on a 4+ in the current rules so I can't see a difference there. The S4 rule kills more T3 infantry in crashes, though. I'm ok with it... seems fine to me... I'm just saying that's what I saw.

And, as I said... it could all be malarky. And that's fine too. We're just chattin'.

Lord_Squinty
19-01-2008, 02:21
The Ork codex says it differently, because their vehicles are open-topped... and they suffer a S3 when they crash instead of a S4.

Marines already get harmed on a 4+ in the current rules so I can't see a difference there. The S4 rule kills more T3 infantry in crashes, though. I'm ok with it... seems fine to me... I'm just saying that's what I saw.

And, as I said... it could all be malarky. And that's fine too. We're just chattin'.

Its all gravy - I have no reason to doubt you, I aint seen it, you have... just saying that orks are hit S3,
but as stated - probably a codex specific thing.
But you know what GW are like with they're 'poster boys'....
Maybe it'll be "Ultramarines take a S2 hit" :rolleyes:

theshadowduke
19-01-2008, 02:26
I'm sorry, but I got a look at this PDF of pre-released rules finally and no, it's S4, AP-.

Of course it could all be malarky. I kinda like the idea of a S4 hit, but whatever works... ya know?

my pdf says S3

downundercadet07
19-01-2008, 02:28
I'm a little afraid because my eldar army is going to get buffed a little. I'm Alaitoc, with 20 pathfinders. And a doomseer.

Hopefully the nerfing of warp spiders (no destroy result with glance hit) and the harles getting toned down will make it a wash and not auto-promote my army to cheese. I've played it since the codex came out!

That said, my prisms look like they are getting hurt something fierce. With the rules for the templates being the way that they are, BS4 rerollable looks pretty useless. And I can't use them to skimmer wall people away from my vulnerable pathfinder fortresses anymore, because they are too slow and fragile. Plus, the shiruken cannon upgrades are useless.

However, I can see a way around it; I'll drop all three grav hulls, then start slapping down warwalkers. I'll fortune them in hard cover and they might be even more durable and dangerous than the old prisms (which I loved in 4th ed). I am worried about how static and vulnerable to deep strikers that will make me though. I'm already heavily tied to terrain as it is.

Eldanar
19-01-2008, 02:28
All the mech lists of every army are more or less taking a low blow in the next edition. This is not to say that there might not be a few surprises in store for people who do run mech lists.

These "rumoured rules" are all very preliminary and might not be the final version, or they may be incomplete; i.e., people may see a blip of a rule without knowing all of the new mechanics which also interact with those new rules.

Lord_Squinty
19-01-2008, 02:29
Oh, *insert name of religous deity here*, we're now disagreeing on a PDF thats unreleased, where the rules are but speculation,....

I cant wait 'till the 5th Edition RAW kicks in - 4 months before release....
:rolleyes:

Eldanar
19-01-2008, 02:38
I'm a little afraid because my eldar army is going to get buffed a little. I'm Alaitoc, with 20 pathfinders. And a doomseer.

However, I can see a way around it; I'll drop all three grav hulls, then start slapping down warwalkers. I'll fortune them in hard cover and they might be even more durable and dangerous than the old prisms (which I loved in 4th ed). I am worried about how static and vulnerable to deep strikers that will make me though. I'm already heavily tied to terrain as it is.

This is where you take your 3 war walkers and book end them with wraithlords. Combined with your 20 pathfinders this makes a dead hard and nasty gun line.

Assault troops however will potentially be getting to you faster though. Combine this with flankers and deep strikers, and this style of army could be seriously hamstrung. Hence the need for book end type models/units to counter assault.

studderigdave
19-01-2008, 02:41
Eldar arent as broken as you think. Its just Warseer really.

this has to be the best quote i have seen in a while, and ive seen ALOT. there is so much hate on these threads about certain armies, and certain lists. all this talk about "theoryhammer" and "mathhammer" and "TEH INVICIBLE FALCON" really gets old very fast.

i think alot of warseer posters get a bad taste about a certain army, then go off on an extreme tangent about how the army is completly broke, not really knowing much about the army in itself, only knowing that, heaven forbid, it beat them in a GAME, a game in which you cannot always win.

OT: i think that 5th edition is targeting alot of areas. ALOT of these rumors are straightup lame. all blasts scatters and defensive weapons str 4 and below are horrible. plasma for everyone is also pretty bad. i am an eldar player, and the blast thing hits hard for me alot cuz i run 3 fire prisms, so where does my new shiny BS 4 go to?

eldar were never broken as a race. that guy at your store that runs 3 falcons in a 1000 point list, the same guy who runs maximum kissed out harlies and eldrad clones for days? he is abusing the codex and should be flogged in the street, but the rest of us enjoy the codex and take it in strides, and i think we are getting the flak to.

Vermiculatus
19-01-2008, 02:51
Flogged in the streets. that is nice, and i agree.

Eldanar
19-01-2008, 03:03
OT: i think that 5th edition is targeting alot of areas. ALOT of these rumors are straightup lame. all blasts scatters and defensive weapons str 4 and below are horrible. plasma for everyone is also pretty bad. i am an eldar player, and the blast thing hits hard for me alot cuz i run 3 fire prisms, so where does my new shiny BS 4 go to?



See the Rumour Roundup. Blasts scatter, but somehow BS stil plays a role. With this somewhat arcane reference to something we do not at all have a clue about, I am sure that the designers have taken the varying BS's of blast weapon users into account in some way. Consider a fast shot Dark Reaper exarch firing plasma missiles. Talk about redundancy.

I have a feeling that we do not quite know the whole picture yet, or even that this rumour is entirely 100% accurate.

So take anything with a grain of salt, even stuff on our Roundup...;)

Orbital
19-01-2008, 03:54
So...Armies that can benefit from the Defensive strength raised to 5...
Space Marines (Predators, Dreads, Raiders and Speeders)
Chaos Marines (Predators, Dreads, and Raiders)
Tau (Any Tank with multiple Burst Cannons)
Guard (Any tank with 2 or more guns)
Inquisition Armies (Same as Marines/Guard)
Orks (Any Vehicle with more than 1 Gun)
That helped me. Thank you.


What would make an opponent a prick for exploring his creativity in a hobby that is supposed to induce just that, but later changes rules to the game the models are used for... creating a change in a competitive situation that wasn't there before and didn't need to exist? I think I'd be more of a prick for not playing someone for being creative with their modeling and not then re-modelling the piece.
No, of course it wouldn't bother me if someone wanted to put their Farseer on a rock, or a rock on top of a rock. Or a rock on top of a rock on top of a rock (hey, it could happen). What would bother me is if my Farseer and his Farseer want to do some shooting... and his can, but mine can't because I haven't put mine on a rock on top of a rock on top of a rock. That's just stupid. Are you saying the 5th ed rules creates that situation?


Lies! A Fire Prism firing a dispersed shot is only S5, so it could fire that as a defensive weapon and a shuriken cannon as the primary gun.
Clever thinking :)


I'm a little afraid because my eldar army is going to get buffed a little. I'm Alaitoc, with 20 pathfinders. And a doomseer.
Yeah, but Alaitoc as it is in the new codex can use a little help. Just sayin'.

Orbital
19-01-2008, 03:55
my pdf says S3
I wrote this into a second post because it looks like there's more than one PDF going around.

Interesting.

Logic512
19-01-2008, 04:05
If Eldar players who depend on Falcons ever start realizing how great the rest of the book is, you guys are gonna feel it. :)

People never seem to bitch about vibro cannons... I think they are one of the most broken Eldar units, that's why I field them.

And people haven't figured out that you can put 10 man harlequin squads in another unit's Wave Serpent now... That's gonna be rough

Orbital
19-01-2008, 04:19
And people haven't figured out that you can put 10 man harlequin squads in another unit's Wave Serpent now... That's gonna be rough
I didn't realize you could swap dedicated transports like that. Interesting. For the record: I will never, ever do that.

Halfpast_Yellow
19-01-2008, 04:22
I'm an idiot and wrote a book about Eldar in 5th ed based off the PDF rumours.

Gah.. (http://www.40konline.com/mos/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=861&topic=154505.0)

You can read if you like. Have to say I agree with Orbital on most points.
Funny thing is though, Eldar get the best defensive weapons, Str 4 EMLs...

Raising it to 5 does nothing for em.

Oh and one more thing, Taking a str 4 hit on a T3 model due to a case of exploding Waveserpent is still better than taking a 4+, rerolling fails.

Wraithguard will laugh it off also.

Loki73
19-01-2008, 04:26
Wait you can assault a unit behind another in 5th ed? Or did I read that wrong in your first post Orbital?

pwrgmrguard
19-01-2008, 05:31
squinty,

what's the right list then? Is there a right list? If there is...well we would be seeing nothing but carbon copies at tournaments (not that we aren't already)

Xenocidal Maniac
19-01-2008, 06:26
this has to be the best quote i have seen in a while, and ive seen ALOT. there is so much hate on these threads about certain armies, and certain lists. all this talk about "theoryhammer" and "mathhammer" and "TEH INVICIBLE FALCON" really gets old very fast.

i think alot of warseer posters get a bad taste about a certain army, then go off on an extreme tangent about how the army is completly broke, not really knowing much about the army in itself, only knowing that, heaven forbid, it beat them in a GAME, a game in which you cannot always win.

Why is it always assumed on Warseer that no one who complains about an army has ever played against it?

I complain about Eldar. I genuinely think they are broken. And that is based off of the dozens of games I've played against them. They've always got Eldrad and Warwalkers and Falcons and Harlequins. And they beat everyone consistently.

I wish everyone wouldn't reach for the pre-packaged "learn to play" answer. I genuinely think GW screwed up when making the Eldar codex. It is genuinely unbalanced.

And I am glad that they are getting the nerf stick a bit in 5th ed.

ChrisAsmadi
19-01-2008, 09:55
I, personally, am curious as to how this will affect Tau.

I am, however, glad that Falcons are being nerfed to a reasonable level.

the1stpip
19-01-2008, 10:07
Slightly off topic, but as a DE player, these rumours worry me even more. I know they are rumours, and also that the new codex is in development, so they will be aware of the issues (if they bother to playtest) but Raiders are flimsy enough as it is, under these rules they are more so.

randomalias
19-01-2008, 10:08
As if the new edition wasn't leaked on purpose to gauge public reaction. Have you heard GW officially deny the leaked codex yet? But anyways, I have a strong feeling the new Eldar codex was balanced with the upcoming 5th edition in mind. A year or so of being fairly powerful makes up for the likely 4-5 years it would be sitting around underpowered while other armies get new codex.

lord_blackfang
19-01-2008, 10:24
Raiders are flimsy enough as it is, under these rules they are more so.

No they're not. They're actually a bit tougher. Just slower.

marv335
19-01-2008, 11:17
I can't believe people are complaining about the scattering blast issue.
as I understand it it'll work much like it used to.
1. roll to hit
2a. place blast template on target for a hit
or
2b. scatter template for a miss.

currently if you miss the blast template disappears. under the new rule (as I understand it) blast weapons get better because even if you miss you can still cause damage. This would actually make those Bs4 linked shot Fire Prisms better

Honestly, as soon as a new rulebook is rumoured, people on Warseer start running around with their hair on fire screaming that the sky is falling.

lord_blackfang
19-01-2008, 11:25
Blasts won't roll to hit, just scatter.

marv335
19-01-2008, 11:37
You've seen you're version of the 5th ed rules, I've seen mine.
This is one of those things where I'm going to wait and see.
there are several "leaked PDFs" around with differences to their rulesets
I will make no final judgement on the good or bad of the 5th ed rules until I have the official rulebook in my hand, and have played a few games with it.
I suggest everyone else does the same.

The_Outsider
19-01-2008, 11:50
Hell I call BS at leaked rumours from the second I saw the morale section.

There is a rule in it that was in the 3rd ed rulebook that was dropped because even GT playing veterans forgot it - it makes no sense to put it back in.

Sarigar
19-01-2008, 12:12
Interesting, as it does appear multiple copies may be out there.

The one I acquired has blasts simply rolling a scatter dice (which bones Marine Dev squads and Fire Prisms off the top of my head)

Mine also has a S4 hit for closed top and S3 hit for open top vehicles for models inside destroyed vehicles.

Personally, I don't think the Eldar will be crushed with 5th edition. Falcons aren't gun platforms now, but may become so in the future. If the leaked copy holds, we will be able to field 10 Harlies and place them in Wave Serpents. Wraithlords will get cover saves from being behind Guardians. Fortune works on vehicles. No more sniping of Guardian platform gunners. No more insta kill Farseers with a failed Perils of the Warp. No more arguements about Witchblades vs. Monoliths. (possibly) not having to fear massive Space Marine Missile Launcher spam. It will be easier to drop special weapons, upgraded characters in squads, powerfists lose their additional weapon bonus in assault (except for Marneus Calgar) The list goes on...

I'm hoping these 'leaked' copies are not near the finished product. Casualty removal and Whose in Cover has a huge contradiction. We'll see how it goes. Should prove very interesting.

lord_blackfang
19-01-2008, 12:29
Funny. I think I have a scatter-only, but S4 hits for all vehicles version. It's dated July 19th 2007.

Killmaimburn
19-01-2008, 12:49
It's dated July 19th 2007.
The one created by quark xpress 6.5 on 13:44 19\07\2007 (go to file properties in a pdf reader) has rules different to the one that was handed around seniorish staff a month or so back. So sayeth the "them" :D I don't know how different though so don't ask :(


I'm hoping these 'leaked' copies are not near the finished product. Well heres hoping a year has taught them to spell "move through cover" the same way twice in a row :rolleyes:, but thats because its not a release product yet, is it.

Epicenter
19-01-2008, 13:14
Perhaps they're playing CIA and putting in different rules in different copies. That way, they can find out who's leaking what and shut it down?

It's also possible they're handing out slightly different rules to different play groups and seeing what the feedback is on stuff like S3 and S4. Do the playtesters like S3 more? Do the S4 guys complain more about it?

Not having seen these supposed v5 rules, I can't really decide for sure, but everyone talking about a return to gunlines makes me a bit sad. This reminds me of some story like the "Monkey's Paw" or something.

Me: "I want Guard to get better mobility options so I could play can the mobility game of 40k to win objective based games because right now I feel I'm at a serious disadvantage with my Codex with the "Value Subtracted Tax" on everything."

*Monkey's Paw Works Magic and now everyone has to play a dull gunline like Imperial Guard*

Monkey's Paw: Happy?

Me: Erm...no.

Monkey's Paw: There's no pleasin' some people.

lord_blackfang
19-01-2008, 13:37
Not having seen these supposed v5 rules, I can't really decide for sure, but everyone talking about a return to gunlines makes me a bit sad.

I assure you there's just as many people claiming that close combat armies will rule supreme.

Consder this: If everyone thinks their army got nerfed, they're probably still all balanced.

Snipafist
19-01-2008, 16:04
My experience as an Eldar is that certain kinds of players are always going to complain can say the Eldar list is overpowered if you win or even do well, no matter what you field. If you lose, they're usually fine (or, at least, quieter). Those aren't people we can cater to because their problem isn't rules-based.

Agreed. I don't think I've ever met someone with an Eldar hate-on who didn't play space marines. Space Marine players don't seem to understand that Eldar use an army of specialists and that because the game is so super-saturated with marines players, most Eldar armies include specialists who tear marines to shreds. Somehow it's our fault that everyone else plays a cookie-cutter marine army?

lord_blackfang
19-01-2008, 16:29
Agreed. I don't think I've ever met someone with an Eldar hate-on who didn't play space marines. Space Marine players don't seem to understand that Eldar use an army of specialists and that because the game is so super-saturated with marines players, most Eldar armies include specialists who tear marines to shreds. Somehow it's our fault that everyone else plays a cookie-cutter marine army?

Funnily enough many Eldar players also don't understand they're playing an army of specialists. Oh, if I had a penny for every time an Eldar player complained about how small and fragile his units are and how it's unfair they don't get T4 and a 3+ save on top of their superior speed and offensive capabilities.

Orbital
19-01-2008, 17:15
As if the new edition wasn't leaked on purpose to gauge public reaction. Have you heard GW officially deny the leaked codex yet?
They're not going to do this one way or the other. If the book is a fake and they say it's a fake then they're going to get called on it if something real gets leaked and they don't deny it. If it's real then they're not going to tell people "Yeah. That's the exact same thing we're going to charge you $75 for in six months. Except you can have it now. For free." It's not common practice for corporations to comment on rumors in this way.


You've seen you're version of the 5th ed rules, I've seen mine.
This is one of those things where I'm going to wait and see.
there are several "leaked PDFs" around with differences to their rulesets
I will make no final judgement on the good or bad of the 5th ed rules until I have the official rulebook in my hand, and have played a few games with it.
I suggest everyone else does the same.
When they are testing a new codex, GW sends several versions of the new book to various playtesters; certain testers put some of the new rules to the test... some of them test others. What's more, those codices-in-testing often appear like partly-finished versions of the final. If the 5th ed books we're seeing are being leaked from playtesters then I wouldn't be surprised to find out that they're just the test versions, and that the final has yet to show up in its entirety.

Orbital
19-01-2008, 17:26
Agreed. I don't think I've ever met someone with an Eldar hate-on who didn't play space marines. Space Marine players don't seem to understand that Eldar use an army of specialists and that because the game is so super-saturated with marines players, most Eldar armies include specialists who tear marines to shreds. Somehow it's our fault that everyone else plays a cookie-cutter marine army?
I'm not ready to say that all Eldar-haters are Marine-players, or that all Marine-players are Eldar-haters. I personally think there are "jerks" and "non jerks". When Jerks play Space Marines, they espouse a ridiculous prejudice against Eldar players. When Jerks play Eldar, they espouse a ridiculous prejudice against Space Marine players.

I'm cautious of people who say things like "[Certain Army] players are [a certain way]". It also the discussion away from rules and gameplay and starts making it about people creating an "us vs them" paradigm, which isn't gonna end well.