PDA

View Full Version : Eldar Rangers: Overcosted?



Woodsman
09-11-2010, 22:11
Rangers, I think they're okay maybe a re-cost to bring them in line with recent codices.

Ail-Shan
09-11-2010, 22:14
Rangers, I think they're okay maybe a re-cost to bring them in line with recent codices.

Sniper rifles in general should ignore cover (or at least force re-roll successes), but rangers I think are pretty good as they are.

Shining spears probably would be pretty good if they simply had grenades and pistols and a point drop to 30ish.

Shamana
09-11-2010, 22:43
I don't know, they strike me as a bit expensive. T3 snipers need to have some pretty good stuff going for them if they cost 19 points... before they could fleet to reposition themselves, but now everyone has it for free, so that's pretty much a wasted ability on them. The idea that snipers are foiled by cover is also a little counter-intuitive.

Eumerin
09-11-2010, 23:47
Yes and no.

Historically the way that you "dealt" with a sniper was by staying hidden until someone else could hit the sniper's hiding place. If troops are genuinely staying in cover, then they should get a bonus from this.

The problem that arises is that the drawbacks from this tactic - i.e. the fact that you can't move, see, or shoot while you're hiding from the sniper - aren't simulated in the game.

Dr.Clock
10-11-2010, 01:07
Unless you go to ground.

You could say that snipers ignore cover except against units that have gone to ground... That would allow units of fodder to get picked off if they keep running heedless of the incoming fire, but allow your troop units to hunker down and survive, just not do much else.

Basically, this would give players an incentive to voluntarily 'pin' themselves if they're trying to survive. Right now, pinning is a pretty useless rule in general. I think there should be a better way of representing not only the confusion that snipers cause, but the way units traditionally avoided them (hiding).

Cheers,

The Good Doctor.

Toadius80
10-11-2010, 01:21
I don't get it. How are rangers over costed in the current codex? They get a brilliant cover save making them possibly the most resilient models from shooting and have by far the best sniper rifle for any unit in the game. Hmmm. Maybe it's just me.

Dr.Clock
10-11-2010, 01:48
I think the discussion was veering off on the discussion of sniper weapons in general...

If anything, rangers need to be brought in line to reflect the way sniper weapons actually work now. Having to keep track of 6s on to hit AND to-wound rolls slows things down considerably.

Cheers,

The Good Doctor

Squallish
10-11-2010, 02:06
Because they cost a tonne and kill (in my experience) about 1/4 of their point value before dieing to something in assault. They're just not as efficient as they used to be with the extra speed available in 5th Edition (Run, faster new choices like TWCav, Outflanking, etc..). With Cover edition negating almost 1/2 the wounds (except on MCs), the killing power against infantry dropped immensely.

In a nutshell, they're only great against MCs, so they're not a good all-comer unit, unlike BBQ Storms or Avengers who can threaten almost everything with the help of their Serpent.

TheLaughingGod
10-11-2010, 02:28
I think the discussion was veering off on the discussion of sniper weapons in general...

If anything, rangers need to be brought in line to reflect the way sniper weapons actually work now. Having to keep track of 6s on to hit AND to-wound rolls slows things down considerably.

Cheers,

The Good Doctor

This could be done by making Long Rifles rend on a 5-6 and Pathfinders with Long Rifles rend on a 4+

Codsticker
10-11-2010, 16:07
I believe this thread was accidently closed so I have re-opened it.

Codsticker

The Warseer Mod Squad

Hendarion
10-11-2010, 16:19
This could be done by making Long Rifles rend on a 5-6 and Pathfinders with Long Rifles rend on a 4+
And that would probably be just enough I guess.
But still it isn't really that hard to roll 5s & 6s from hits separately from the 3s and 4s. In the end the AP1 or AP2 nearly never makes a difference, so it doesn't really slow that much at all. At least not much more as rending in general, because rending either grants to take off the dudes or use a cover/invul save. But I guess it comes up to the personal taste.

However, mathematically there is of course a big difference of 4+ rending and the current system. Currently there is a 22.2% chance per shot to get AP1 or AP2. Rending on 4+ means a chance of 33.3% chance per shot to get AP2. That is actually equal to the chance to make a wound at all ;) So you can make Pathfinder rifles directly poisoned (4+) AP2, there won't be a difference (as they would wound and have rending always on 4+ anyway).

Ravenous
10-11-2010, 16:23
Honestly they are guardians with a cover save bonus and fancy sniper rifle. Guardians themselves need to be dropped to 6 points, but rangers Im okay with at 19 points if they upgraded their BS to 5 and gave them the rule that you always roll for nightfight to see them.

As for Pathfinders they need Ld10 and stubborn again.

Hendarion
10-11-2010, 16:28
Ld10 and stubborn? Do you really have issues with leadership tests that you want to spend points for such abilities? I actually never have. Either they don't get shot or die by assault or flamers. Or you want that stuff for free (although I still won't see the use of it)?

Dr.Clock
10-11-2010, 16:33
I'd actually prefer if rangers/pathfinders got a bit of a nerf to keep costs reasonable...

When the book was introduced, sniper weapons in general didn't have rending.

They also used to hit on a 2+ regardless of BS.

We now, due to the inclusion of sniper (used to be poison, hits on 2s) in the weapon profile, both rend (in the 5e sense) and have the original 'super sniper' rules.

I think going to BS5 snipers is a good start, with pathfinders either rending on 5s or ignoring cover altogether.

Cheers,

The Good Doctor.

Ravenous
10-11-2010, 16:36
Ld10 and stubborn? Do you really have issues with leadership tests that you want to spend points for such abilities? I actually never have. Either they don't get shot or die by assault or flamers. Or you want that stuff for free (although I still won't see the use of it)?

They had it before this codex and it worked fine, but then again last time I ran rangers was in 4th when fear of the darkness was around.

Basically you have to give them something that makes them suck less. Either a points drop or increase in abilities.

Ghost-13
10-11-2010, 18:11
I started with an alaitoc ranger list, so i have like 25 of the guys. I still feel like i should take at least one squad every game. Their effectiveness really depends on my opponent.

When i'm playing something with several MC, such as nids they do really well. I've had a full squad of 10 drop a fex turn one.

But than against someone like imps with nothing over t3 on the board, they normally just end up going to ground on top of an objective.

I agree 19 pts is a bit over kill. I'd like it reduced a bit, somewhere around 16, i don't think they should cost more than a howling banshee or a striking scorpion.

SumYungGui
10-11-2010, 18:18
The answer to this question is easily addressed with a simple flow chart;


Is the model Eldar?
Y:----> overpriced
N:----> then maybe

DeathMetal4tw
10-11-2010, 18:41
I only wish the dark eldar got snipers :*

Shamana
10-11-2010, 20:54
What for? It's not like they can't bring expensive and possibly long-range weapons to bear. A unit of warriors or trueborn can be quite good at sitting down on an objective and firing from cover. Add in a haemy with a hexrifle, and you can be pretty nasty. Besides, splinter weaponry wounds as a sniper anyway, and 2 splinter weapons in heavy mode can generate more wounds than a full detachment of snipers. They only miss the pinning and pseudo-rending, but you have weight of fire on your side if the enemy gets closed. Between the cover save and the FNP from a haemy, you can probably match rangers in survivability.

I'm not sure they can be given stealth, though - is there a way for DE to give that to a random squad? I think the Baron enabled it for hellions, and that was all.

Daklathen
11-11-2010, 01:15
Most of the troop options in the Eldar codex are over-costed, except for maybe the Jetbikes, but then again, they aren't that great. I play Eldar and I never, ever field pathfinders/rangers. The only times I did, they did nothing all game except kill 3 space marines.

Maybe have them be able to snipe specific models, such as targetting the powerfist guy, or w/e so the opponent doesn't do wound allocation. That would make them win in my book.

Woodsman
11-11-2010, 01:33
That would be interesting actually, definitely give some more options.

The problem with the improved cover save is, whilst great it doesn't really matter because people don't have to target rangers. The only thing they really threaten is MC's otherwise you can ignore them until close enough to assault/flame, when cover no longer really helps. I think the dominance of mech has put a bit of an end to them coupled with the fact most people seem to ignore pinning now.

TheLaughingGod
11-11-2010, 02:36
Most of the troop options in the Eldar codex are over-costed, except for maybe the Jetbikes, but then again, they aren't that great. I play Eldar and I never, ever field pathfinders/rangers. The only times I did, they did nothing all game except kill 3 space marines.

Maybe have them be able to snipe specific models, such as targetting the powerfist guy, or w/e so the opponent doesn't do wound allocation. That would make them win in my book.

Jetbikes are easily the MOST overcosted.

Meriwether
11-11-2010, 02:56
When 5th edition changed snipers to hit on BS instead of a flat 2+, guided pathfinders actually got *better*.

I use them to great effectiveness -- with the caveat that there tend to be a lot of monstrous creatures in my metagame.

Shamana
11-11-2010, 10:55
Well, I don't know - they just seem "less bad" to me than some other snipers :) . Then again, pathfinders are just that expensive - 24 points is a lot from something that is butcheted by a stray flamer.

Hendarion
11-11-2010, 10:59
24 points is a lot from something that is butcheted by a stray flamer.
Even worse when it comes to barrage or Hellhounds, as they can kill them outright from large distance, whereas a normal flamer can't.

drmarco
11-11-2010, 11:19
One slightly contentious option that might make the ranger/pathfinder a juicy choice might be the idea of 'sniping on the move' - represent their superiority as snipers by removing heavy from their rifles...maye change to rapid, to encourage 'hail of fire' static rangers, but still make redeployment and 'melting away'/'fighting ghosts' more than fluff based rhetoric...

Marco

Tethylis
11-11-2010, 12:41
I think the dominance of mech has put a bit of an end to them coupled with the fact most people seem to ignore pinning now.

I've had some success using them to target rhinos and other lower AV vehicles when there are no soft infantry targets. AP1 combined with rending means they hit upto AV12 and can destroy penetrated vehicles on a 4+. I love watching the expression on a SM players face when my snipers manage to blow his troops out of their little hiddy boxes. ;)

Scelerat
11-11-2010, 13:08
I use guided Pathfinders to get rid of some Termies (the normal ones, not the 3++ horrors) before my Banshees get to them. Even a small squad can put out a decent amount of pain.

Meriwether
11-11-2010, 14:51
Then again, pathfinders are just that expensive - 24 points is a lot from something that is butcheted by a stray flamer.

Consider the fact that your opponent essentially *has to* use flamers or close combat to deal with them is a tactical advantage. Any time -- ANY TIME -- you can make your opponent do something predictable, it is something you can take advantage of.

Hendarion
11-11-2010, 14:57
Or the opponent can do what Eldar players have to do with Terminators: spam them with S5+ (actually 4+ because or T3).

CoolKidRoc
11-11-2010, 15:08
Yeah, I find a mass of shots will just about kill anything, even with a 2+ cover save. Which isn't any different then what I do for terminators.

Meriwether
11-11-2010, 15:19
Whenever I bring a large squad of Pathfinders, they are joined to Eldrad, and are thus fortuned...

Hendarion
11-11-2010, 15:56
Wow, really expensive unit if you consider the number of shots and cover saves their AP1/2 targets will receive. Sounds like a bad deal to me to waste Eldrad just to keep some low-shot-guys alive. For that points an opponent can throw in some nice shooty things *and* a close combat mofer unit... or some nice heavy flamers...

Meriwether
11-11-2010, 17:10
Um, you're not using Eldrad to keep some low-shot-guys alive. You're using some **tremendously resilient against shooting** low-shot-guys to keep Eldrad alive. He can stand there and fortune the squad, guide the pathfinders, and then use one other power (as necessary) to bolster the base of your mixed-mech list.

The point is to have other units around to deal with threats that come in. I've found this to be very effective, even in competitive environments where the conventional wisdom is that full mech is the only viable strategy.

haletotheking986
12-11-2010, 10:05
ummm
im still new so.. ive found that using a farseers guide on pathfinders too re-roll hits and wounds makes a huge impact ont their effectiveness. forgot what the items name was that allowed me too cast twice, but tis nasty.

Mr_Foulscumm
12-11-2010, 11:19
The Eldar player allocates the hits. Just like if they had Telion. But for the whole squad.