PDA

View Full Version : Should Craftworld Eldar have access to WWPs?



Spell_of_Destruction
15-07-2011, 03:43
I have spent a fair amount of time recently thinking about the balance in the current Craftworld Eldar codex, the reasons that certain builds are strongly favoured over others and how this might be rectified in the next codex.

This is part of the reason that I started a thread about screening a few days ago because I am of the view that the ability to screen certain units behind a Guardian wall made those units more viable as footsloggers. From a fluff perspective this tactic made absolutely no sense so, although it was effective, I have to concede that it's absence is merited.

Most Craftworld Eldar units are uniformly armed. This means that as models are removed a squad's effectiveness decreases in a linear fashion. This can be contrasted with the generalist troops of other factions who often rely on one or two or more heavy/special weapon armed models to inflict damage. Such units can lose several models without severely comprimising the units effectiveness. Coupled with the relative fragility of Eldar units (as far as cost/reslience balance goes) this leads to a strategic mindset in which the player opts for the means of delivery that will best achieve the goal of delivering a squad of Eldar warriors at full strength.

This more or less limits our delivery options to Transports. While I think this makes sense (it seems unlikely to me that Eldar Aspect Warriors would cover much ground on foot unless they are fighting in dense terrain) it also means that in order to get the best out of certain unit types we need to sink a lot of points into Transports. While our Transports are decent units in their own right, I do feel that our hand is sometimes forced to invest points in them.

Those of you who remember the Eye of Terror campaign may also remember the Ulthwe Strike Force list which was basically a cut down version of the 3rd edition Craftworld Eldar Ulthwe list with the ability to use a webway portal. While this list didn't usurp the starcannon/5 man guardian squad/3 wraithlord/seer council spam list I found it highly fun to play. Competitively I think it suffered somewhat at a time when there were several strong Craftworld Eldar builds - furthermore the WWP means of delivery was perhaps not as desirable as the use of a Transport at the time as it was still possible to assault out of a moving Transport.

I was somewhat disappointed that the WWP was not added as an option in the 4th ed codex. While there are perhaps legitimate fluff reasons as to why WWP use is more predominant among the dark kin, I find it strange that it isn't an option for us at all.

Does anyone think there are good fluff/balance reasons for the WWP being a DE only option? Would it be treading on the DE's toes to make it a Craftworld Eldar option? In some ways I think we would benefit from it more because we don't have the same access to cheap(ish) open topped transports.

Ignoring any other changes that may be introduced in the next Craftworld Eldar codex, how would you feel if the current codex gave the option of giving a WWP to Autarchs, Farseers and Warlocks for the same cost as in the DE codex? Do you think it would add much to the army or do you think it would be an uncompetitive choice? Perhaps I am completely missing something and the truth is that it would be too powerful an option for Craftworld Eldar?

I am of the view that it would be nice as an option but unlikely to restore Craftworld Eldar to the top tier. The biggest impact it would have as far as I can see would be to make assault focused Eldar armies viable again - an Avatar leading Howling Banshees and Warlocks out of a WWP sounds like music to my ears.

Nurgling Chieftain
15-07-2011, 07:15
I've always thought it strange that the Craftworld Eldar don't get any sort of WWP. I remember relying on them heavily in the Dawn of War video game...

Shamana
15-07-2011, 08:45
I think it certainly doesn't hurt. Craftworlders do use the webway, and I am not aware of anything stating they are less adept in its use than Dark eldar. The two groups that iirc are described as the experts in navigating it - harlequins and rangers - are probably closer to the craftworlds.

Besides, it's not like the CW wouldn't make good use of it. Foot eldar lists suffer strongly due to the expensive and relatively fragile infantry the CE have (DE units at least tend to be cheaper, and with a haemonculus pain token donor are fairly tough), and webway portals would go a long way towards solving that problem.

Autarchs, harlequin or pathfinder squad leaders are imo all viable options for it.

Izekiel
15-07-2011, 09:25
Considering that the fluff bases a large portion of Eldar attacks being from webway gates and that novels such as Path of the Warrior also feature troops being deployed by a webway portal it seems very odd that the WWP is not a deployment option or a method of deep striking/reserve deployement for Eldar units. It would certainly make it easier to get more fragile units into place and cut back on the transport costs.

Pesky dark kin... :shifty:

cynic
15-07-2011, 10:57
it would be fantastic.

Tamwulf
15-07-2011, 13:29
What is WWP?

Seems like you make a fairly good argument about it, but you fail in one big respect: Know your audience. I don't play Dark Eldar, and only one guy in my club uses Dark Eldar. I'm assuming it's some kind of Dark Eldar wargear?

You could have started off defining what a WWP is. You made some good general statements about why its good, but you never really followed up with why Craftworld: Eldar should get WWP. The whole premise of your argument seems to revolve around the idea of "Why shouldn't Craftworld: Eldar have WWP?"

My basic answer to that, without even know what WWP is, is that the Dark Eldar Codex came out several years after Codex: Eldar.

Sephiroth
15-07-2011, 13:31
What is WWP?

I think it means Webway Portal.

Ravening Wh0re
15-07-2011, 15:48
Perhaps it has to do with balance. I have a hell of a time just downing one Wave Serpent, as well as Eldar having the ability to alter reserve rolls. DE have none of these advantages.

It worked in the Ulthwe list because they never had access to these hard-to-crack tanks.

That's not to say that they won't have access to them in the future codex though (balance be damned say they)

Shamana
15-07-2011, 15:57
/shrug. DE have ways to mess with the first turn. Besides, serpents aren't free - if you calculate the cost of an CW eldar codex lance or starcannon, the raider ends up costing as much as a trukk :) . Actually, I think you'd find a WWP might shift the eldar meta away from the style you dislike - considering that the current WWP does not allow transports, it might offer a viable alternative to the mech option. After all, at present the eldar infantry is too frail for its points to march across the board - so everyone (ok, nearly everyone) takes transports.

Souleater
15-07-2011, 16:27
No. They get psyhic powers and other stuff that DE don't get.

Jaded Patriot
15-07-2011, 16:32
No. They get psyhic powers and other stuff that DE don't get.

And DE get access to Power From Pain and other stuff that Eldar don't get.

...


Yes, Eldar need WWP deployment. Not only does it fit the fluff, it makes foot-dar useful again. They should WD it.

Izekiel
15-07-2011, 16:38
Whilst the 40k Lexicanum might not be strictly canon...

"The Webway's arterial passages are large enough for spacecraft, though most tunnels only allow Eldar strike forces on foot or small vehicles to pass. It is the Webway that allows Eldar to be highly mobile."

"Each Eldar craftworld is connected through the Webway system."

All they need to do is make it so that nothing larger than a Vyper/Hornet can be taken or even just say no vehicles full stop and perhaps even throw in that you need a Farseer as an HQ choice in order to take it.

Sami
15-07-2011, 16:40
[color=plum]as well as Eldar having the ability to alter reserve rolls

The big issue. Mixing the flexibility of WWP deployment with the reserve roll modifications Eldar can pull off would be far too much.

I'm not too familiar with the fluff - do Eldar usually use pre-existing webway exits to move guys around, or are they able to create their own temporary rips/gates? Most of the Eldar stuff I've read (albeit it very limited) seems to suggest that they use ancient pre-existing webway portals, and not the impromptu webway rips that DE utilize (along with the regular gates).

eldargal
15-07-2011, 16:44
DE vehicles can't use the portal anyway, so no need to change it for Eldar.

In terms of background, yes they should have it. I see no harm in them having it in the next codex, but I think fixing their weapons and point costs is far, far more important than an addition like the webway portal.

Inquisitor Kallus
15-07-2011, 16:51
I've always thought it strange that the Craftworld Eldar don't get any sort of WWP. I remember relying on them heavily in the Dawn of War video game...

They do, its just that its mounted on a super heavy chassis...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat490034a&prodId=prod1110082

The thing with 40k is, its usually played at a small scale compared too the war going on around it (most of the time), and you dont see lots of the other stuff.

I think that CWE dont really need a small scale one as such, and it differentiates them from DE. I say this as a big Eldar collecter and fan. That being said, it would be cool to see one if it did happen. It was a long time ago but didnt Eldar have a WWP in Space Crusade?

Shamana
15-07-2011, 16:53
The big issue. Mixing the flexibility of WWP deployment with the reserve roll modifications Eldar can pull off would be far too much.

I'm not too familiar with the fluff - do Eldar usually use pre-existing webway exits to move guys around, or are they able to create their own temporary rips/gates? Most of the Eldar stuff I've read (albeit it very limited) seems to suggest that they use ancient pre-existing webway portals, and not the impromptu webway rips that DE utilize (along with the regular gates).

That depends. Actually, I'm not sure just where the limits of the DE portal technology are detailed. However, the CE certainly do have mobile portals - one of their superheavies, iirc the Storm Serpent, is effectively that in a huge gravtank chassis. A 3E list for the Eye of Terror mega-campaign gave the WWP as wargear to the Ulthwe Strike Forces, so there is also precedent (this (http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1180068_Eldar_Datasheet_-_Ulthw%C3%A9_Strike_Force.pdf) sheet is on the GW site and has more info). Also, the rangers - which tend to be loosely affiliated with the craftworld - and the harlequins are supposed to be the experts of knowing about minor webway tunnels.

Ail-Shan
15-07-2011, 17:05
I would aim for something different as Eldar seem more about maneuverability than simply a straight on assault as Dark Eldar are, and being able to redeploy to another side of the battlefield would be extremely useful. An idea a friend of mine came up with was being able to build webway gates on the field in some way. Units could travel between them just as if they were connected on the table (so the second you hit one, you move to the other and can finish your move as normal, shoot/run and assault). It would allow foot based Eldar, or even aspects out of their transport to be able to redeploy quickly to provide support to or attack another flank. This also gets past the very clumsy 3 turn move it currently takes for an assault unit (embark and move, move, disembark and assault), or even 2 turn minimum for anyone else.

As the WWP is at the moment....I'm not too big a fan of it for Eldar. While using the webway fits, having much of the army come out of a portal one guy through down up close just doesn't feel right.

sean_scanlon2000
15-07-2011, 17:44
you would have to seriously look at how the eldar play now and compare that to their dark kin....
1 you have psychers.... and have the ability to really mess with your opponents psychic abilities.
2 you have the ability to mess with reserves..
3 you have access to hard to crack tanks where as the DE just dont. their transports arent cheap... when you start to put on all the upgrades and weapons on to them to make them last a little longer then they become rather expensive.
4 Where does it say that just because De get to have something that auttomatically you get it? its called shiny new toy syndrome.... you dont see all the space marine players saying i want all my guys armed with power weapons like Grey knights...
5 There needs to be a difference between armies to make them uniuque. other wise we might as well just come out with a single book with basic stats and say here everyone gets what ever they want so that its fair.....

Hendarion
15-07-2011, 17:48
CWE should have access to a WWP in the form of....


the mighty....



STORM SERPENT! CWE think much bigger than Dark Eldar Raiders. They do attack only in well organized forces and less chaotic raids. So imo if they need portals, they will utilize Storm Serpents.

Ail-Shan
15-07-2011, 17:54
4 Where does it say that just because De get to have something that auttomatically you get it? its called shiny new toy syndrome.... you dont see all the space marine players saying i want all my guys armed with power weapons like Grey knights...

When DE got an exact copy of our Harlequins. :)
Also, there is some gripe between Eldar (at least from my perspective) and the imperium getting all out shiny toys (fast skimmers that are heavily armed and transports, quite good offensive psykers and psychic defense).


2 you have the ability to mess with reserves..

DE have the ability to mess with initiative. This is why I would prefer the ability to move through multiple webway gates rather than have it act as another table edge.


STORM SERPENT! CWE think much bigger than Dark Eldar Raiders. They do attack only in well organized forces and less chaotic raids. So imo if they need portals, they will utilize Storm Serpents.

That CAN'T be economical. It would fit the Eldar idea of war though:

"Hi, 1500 points yea? Right, I have 10,000, multiple titans and superheavies with flyer support & 2 Autarchs. My mission is too complex for you to understand, deployment is dawn of war and I'm starting everything in reserve to represent coming from the webway. You can go first to make it even."

Jaded Patriot
15-07-2011, 17:57
you would have to seriously look at how the eldar play now and compare that to their dark kin....
1 you have psychers.... and have the ability to really mess with your opponents psychic abilities.
2 you have the ability to mess with reserves..
3 you have access to hard to crack tanks where as the DE just dont. their transports arent cheap... when you start to put on all the upgrades and weapons on to them to make them last a little longer then they become rather expensive.
4 Where does it say that just because De get to have something that auttomatically you get it? its called shiny new toy syndrome.... you dont see all the space marine players saying i want all my guys armed with power weapons like Grey knights...
5 There needs to be a difference between armies to make them uniuque. other wise we might as well just come out with a single book with basic stats and say here everyone gets what ever they want so that its fair.....

Sigh. DE are unique enough. Their vehicles are open-topped glass cannons that are very effective at what they area meant for. Their troops are glass cannons that are very effective. They have access to Power from Pain and a variety of arcane weapons, their basic troops can be extremely good ranged combat generalists (good at taking on light and heavy infantry and high Toughness critters) or good cc troops. These are notable differences.

The one thing the DE and Eldar actually do have in common, besides being Eldar, is that the Eldar and DE both use the webway. That's completely in line with the narrative. In Path of the Warrior, they use a webway portal to arrive within small arms fire distance of a guarded compound. In Aeronautica Imperialis, the Eldar can fly planes in and out of a deployed WWP in the sky.

Not letting them have it just to make the DE 'more speshul' is not the answer. They are already more seperated from each other than most marine chapters are.

I think Eldar should have access to both small, deployable gates (deployed via Pathfinders, infantry only), and something like sean_scanlon2000 suggested - wraithgate structures that can support larger vehicles. Not to mention the awesomeness that is the Storm Serpent.

fidesratioque
15-07-2011, 18:24
Eldar need some sparkle. I love what Kelly and Goodwin did with the DE Codex. They could bring some of that specialness into the CWE Codex too. 'Magic' seeming items, which give the impression of an ancient, technologically advanced race. Tricks, which show their guile, cunning and underhandedness. Psychic powers that truly manifest the race's mastery of the mental aspect of warfare ("wisdom is the winner of wars"). Foresight, prophecy, and of course, a style of war that is swift, agile and places a huge value on each individual model.

The CWE could be all of that with a few good changes, using the Webway fits into all of the fluff I described above: tech, psychic powers, prophecy, speed, agility, etc.

I'm really looking forward to what Kelly will do with CWE.

vcassano
15-07-2011, 20:02
If they do, I'd rather they work in a different way. I'm not sure how exactly but something different. Maybe make them more defensively orientated somehow, rather than a point from which all hell strikes.

Shamana
15-07-2011, 23:36
If they do, I'd rather they work in a different way. I'm not sure how exactly but something different. Maybe make them more defensively orientated somehow, rather than a point from which all hell strikes.

Simple quetion: why not? The difference in units already means the webway/counterassault units will work differently.

Dorn's Arrow
15-07-2011, 23:58
I think it'd be pretty cool and it would emphasise the similarities between the Dark and Craftworld Eldar without making them TOO similar.

Starchild
16-07-2011, 02:47
I'm really looking forward to what Kelly will do with CWE.I think either Ward or Cruddace will be writing it. They like to rotate the codex authors between editions.

Regarding WWPs, if they offered them to CE I'd never rely on vehicles again. I think WWPs represent best how Eldar fight at the scale the game is at. This is why I always take the Sewer Rats strategem when I play Cities of Death. In place of manhole covers I use little Dawn of War -style portals however. :evilgrin:

The Ulthwe Strike Force army list was awesome and I was sad to see it go. Here's hoping they bring it back in some form (and not just in Apocalypse).

Eldartank
16-07-2011, 06:47
What does "WWP" mean?

Nurgling Chieftain
16-07-2011, 07:38
World Wrestling Presentations

Spell_of_Destruction
16-07-2011, 09:24
Thanks for the responses everyone. Some good ideas and suggestions so far.


you would have to seriously look at how the eldar play now and compare that to their dark kin....
1 you have psychers.... and have the ability to really mess with your opponents psychic abilities.
2 you have the ability to mess with reserves..
3 you have access to hard to crack tanks where as the DE just dont. their transports arent cheap... when you start to put on all the upgrades and weapons on to them to make them last a little longer then they become rather expensive.
4 Where does it say that just because De get to have something that auttomatically you get it? its called shiny new toy syndrome.... you dont see all the space marine players saying i want all my guys armed with power weapons like Grey knights...
5 There needs to be a difference between armies to make them uniuque. other wise we might as well just come out with a single book with basic stats and say here everyone gets what ever they want so that its fair.....

I agree with Jaded Patriot that there are already more than enough differences between the two races. I also disagree that it's a case of 'shiny new toy syndrome'. Firstly, the WWP has been around since the early days of 3rd edition in the late 90s so it isn't new. Secondly we used to be able to use it - albeit by using the restricted codex options available in the Ulthwe strike force list.

GW are currently giving each marine chapter full length codeces and as pointed out there are far fewer differences between these chapters than currently exist between Dark Eldar and Craftworld Eldar.

I actually really like Ali-Shan's idea of fixed wraithgates that can be deployed by the Eldar player. I'm not entirely sure how you are proposing that this would work though - would the Eldar player have to position these on the battlefield during the game or would the be deployed before the battle starts? The idea certainly has some potential and would add a completely different tactical element to 40k.

I really hope that Cruddace doesn't get the job of writing the next Eldar codex. The fact that he wrote one of the most powerful and then one of the weakest codeces in succession doesn't really give me much confidence in his codex writing abilities.

RunepriestRidcully
16-07-2011, 09:51
[QUOTE=Starchild;5649320]I think either Ward or Cruddace will be writing it. They like to rotate the codex authors between editions.
QUOTE]

Oh Please no, I've already stopped using one army after ward destroyed the charecter, feel and trashed the fluff of the Grey knights whilst also turning them from a challenge to win with (note, it was a fun challenge.) to one that me was just unfun to play (I do not see why I should have to buy new stuff to add to my force just so that my opponents get curbstomped, beleive me, I tried using bad GK lists, still was not fun.) I do not want that to happen to Eldar, never had a a codex by Cruddence, but the apparent difference between Guard and tyranids is not faith inspiring, though his tomb kings is a nice book, but it's fantasy. Phill Kelly meanwhile, did space wolves, which was still fun (Just stick away from the cheesy lists) and the "wolf" fetish was not nearly as bad as the "blood" or "psy" fetishs in blood angels and GK, and dark Eldar... the fluff and rules look soo nice.. was really tempting but I just love my wraithguard nd swooping hawks to much, plus it has several different competitive lists, plus nice wargear. I'd like WWP's in the next codex, if only so that GW/FW would have a reason to release a hudge webway portal and eldar terrain like in the old 3rd/4th codex's.

Spell_of_Destruction
16-07-2011, 09:58
Oh Please no, I've already stopped using one army after ward destroyed the charecter, feel and trashed the fluff of the Grey knights whilst also turning them from a challenge to win with (note, it was a fun challenge.) to one that me was just unfun to play (I do not see why I should have to buy new stuff to add to my force just so that my opponents get curbstomped, beleive me, I tried using bad GK lists, still was not fun.) I do not want that to happen to Eldar,

I agree that an overpowered Ward codex would not be a good thing. Eldar players still have to contend with the cheese stigma that has existed since 2nd ed.

I'm not sure that Ward could do that much damage with the Eldar fluff. In any case I have my 2nd edition codex (which Phil Kelly more or less paraphrased for his 4th ed codex) which is never likely to be topped in terms of fluff so I'm pretty sure I could just ignore the worst excesses of a Wardex.

Sami
16-07-2011, 10:13
I'll comprimise. CWE can have the WWP, providing DE get something that make ours actually useful in competitive lists :P. At the moment, the WWP for DE is fun but not actually that effective due to reserve roll issues. Virtually all DE players start with everything on the table (unless expecting a mass of drop-pods) due to the sheer amount of armies that can mess up our reserve rolls.

Shamana
16-07-2011, 10:13
I don't have the 2E codex, what were the worst cases of fluff ownage there? I don't remember all that many cases of eldar warhosts humiliating other armies in that codex.

Personally, I'm hoping for Kelly. I find his style enjoyable, and after the DE codex he's probably a lot better in envisioning and balancing the kind of army CWE are supposed to be - elite, mobile, and hard-hitting. Also, I'm not sure either Cruddace or Ward have ever mentioned caring that much about the Eldar.

Spell_of_Destruction
16-07-2011, 10:27
I'll comprimise. CWE can have the WWP, providing DE get something that make ours actually useful in competitive lists :P. At the moment, the WWP for DE is fun but not actually that effective due to reserve roll issues. Virtually all DE players start with everything on the table (unless expecting a mass of drop-pods) due to the sheer amount of amies that can mess up our reserve rolls.

This is a fair point. The ability to take an autarch or two would likely make the WWP a far more effective tool for Craftworld Eldar than it is for Dark Eldar. I start many games without anything on the board because I know that there is a fair chance my units will turn up in turns 2 and 3.


I don't have the 2E codex, what were the worst cases of fluff ownage there? I don't remember all that many cases of eldar warhosts humiliating other armies in that codex.


There weren't. The codex didn't contain any of the current day fluff style of the Eldar overrunning other armies (and Maugan Ra stood atop a mountain of a hundred slain greater daemons!!!). There were a number of stories taken from the perspective of various Eldar warriors and while they may not have been literary masterworks their focus was the mindset of the warrior, not his uber eliteness (although there was one story in which a scorpion exarch completely owns some unnamed chaos forces).

I particularly liked one story from the perspective of a Guardian who is almost killed in battle by a Chaos Space Marine. He is saved at the last moment by a Warp Spider IIRC (although I may be getting two stories confused here - I don't have the codex to hand). The Guardian spends some time pondering the duality of an Eldar who fights as a Guardian - that the Eldar who fights on the battlefield is a completely different individual from the painter or the craftsman. He also discusses how the Warp Spiders are feared because they are viewed as more deeply immersed in their Aspect of the warrior path than other Eldar

RunepriestRidcully
16-07-2011, 11:39
I really like those short stories in the 2nd ed codex, (so glade I got it for a fiver on ebay :) ) and it would be nice to see some more stuff like that in the new one.

SgtTaters
16-07-2011, 13:20
Ward would be a terrific candidate for writing a new Eldar codex, he's got a good way of making additions without overpowering the codex. The Grey Knights went from their terrible 3e list of stealthsuit wannabes to something that actually resembles Grey Knights in fluff.

That's the thing with the Ward Codices, strong lists are fluffy lists. Blood Angels actually smash things in assault, Grey Knights are psychic knights that bring the fight to the foe.

On the other hand, Kelly's wolves are a psyker heavy shooty army (or space wolves riding thunderwolves armed with wolfclaws lead by wolf wolfborn the wolfkin) and Cruddace guard are elite mechanized skimmers. Cruddace Tyranids just reveal he has no idea how to balance a codex.
Phil Kelly made thunderwolves to be an "I WIN" unit, Ward's paladins are strong, customizable, flavorful, but not instant game winners, they can't even take storm shields! Even something as "goddamn that's ridiculous!" as a Dreadknight is balanced against the dreadnought, which ends up in more tournament lists anyways.
You can belly ache about his fluff, but Ward lists don't dominate tournaments and his 'wtf so overpowered! look at these stats' choices all turn out to actually PAY THE PRICE for what they're worth.

I'd rather have Ward's hallucinagen table to Kelly's "uh, count as a frag grenade+ a tau grenade!"

I'd rather have Ward's various special rules and gear to Kelly's "yeah I'll write a whole paragraph about tormentor helms, then have them DO NOTHING"

I'd rather have Ward's Descent of Angels to Kelly's "Venoms are so small and agile they can fit through a webway portal... OOPS NO THEY CAN'T"

I'd rather have Ward's ws8 4+inv sv legendary figures to Kelly's "eh, phoenix lords don't need an inv sv... by the way let's balance Ahra to the same standard as those 4e Eldar special characters nobody uses!"

I'd rather have Ward's Henchmen squad to Kelly's "I'm going to copypaste Harlequins from a 4e codex in this 5e codex"

If Mat Ward wrote the next Eldar codex and brought the same fun and style of his marine dex's... we'd have heavily customizable Harlequins (and possibly an HQ that turns them into troops!), we'd have Phoenix Lords with an inv sv, we'd have units that feel strong and are balanced on the tabletop.

SgtTaters
16-07-2011, 13:28
I really like those short stories in the 2nd ed codex, (so glade I got it for a fiver on ebay :) ) and it would be nice to see some more stuff like that in the new one.

Assault on Mazoth, the perspective from a Farseer, Guardian, and Jetbiker is like the 10 commandments of Eldar fluff to me.

Their attitude towards aliens, their motivation, their views on war, the effects ov violence on the Eldar psyche, it's all sooooo goood.


Who wrote that story in the first place?

kafrique
16-07-2011, 14:31
Ward would be a terrific candidate for writing a new Eldar codex, he's got a good way of making additions without overpowering the codex. The Grey Knights went from their terrible 3e list of stealthsuit wannabes to something that actually resembles Grey Knights in fluff.

That's the thing with the Ward Codices, strong lists are fluffy lists. Blood Angels actually smash things in assault, Grey Knights are psychic knights that bring the fight to the foe.

On the other hand, Kelly's wolves are a psyker heavy shooty army (or space wolves riding thunderwolves armed with wolfclaws lead by wolf wolfborn the wolfkin) and Cruddace guard are elite mechanized skimmers. Cruddace Tyranids just reveal he has no idea how to balance a codex.
Phil Kelly made thunderwolves to be an "I WIN" unit, Ward's paladins are strong, customizable, flavorful, but not instant game winners, they can't even take storm shields! Even something as "goddamn that's ridiculous!" as a Dreadknight is balanced against the dreadnought, which ends up in more tournament lists anyways.
You can belly ache about his fluff, but Ward lists don't dominate tournaments and his 'wtf so overpowered! look at these stats' choices all turn out to actually PAY THE PRICE for what they're worth.

I'd rather have Ward's hallucinagen table to Kelly's "uh, count as a frag grenade+ a tau grenade!"

I'd rather have Ward's various special rules and gear to Kelly's "yeah I'll write a whole paragraph about tormentor helms, then have them DO NOTHING"

I'd rather have Ward's Descent of Angels to Kelly's "Venoms are so small and agile they can fit through a webway portal... OOPS NO THEY CAN'T"

I'd rather have Ward's ws8 4+inv sv legendary figures to Kelly's "eh, phoenix lords don't need an inv sv... by the way let's balance Ahra to the same standard as those 4e Eldar special characters nobody uses!"

I'd rather have Ward's Henchmen squad to Kelly's "I'm going to copypaste Harlequins from a 4e codex in this 5e codex"

If Mat Ward wrote the next Eldar codex and brought the same fun and style of his marine dex's... we'd have heavily customizable Harlequins (and possibly an HQ that turns them into troops!), we'd have Phoenix Lords with an inv sv, we'd have units that feel strong and are balanced on the tabletop.

I totally agree with this. Ward is quite a bad writer of fluff, but his rules are quite good (as far as 5th ed 40K books go). They generally hit that sweet spot where "strong lists" and "fluffy lists" aren't noticeably dissimilar. His armies play mostly as their fluff would suggest, and aren't particularly unbalanced unless compared against old armies (or nids).

vcassano
16-07-2011, 14:43
I totally agree with this. Ward is quite a bad writer of fluff, but his rules are quite good (as far as 5th ed 40K books go). They generally hit that sweet spot where "strong lists" and "fluffy lists" aren't noticeably dissimilar. His armies play mostly as their fluff would suggest, and aren't particularly unbalanced unless compared against old armies (or nids).

I mostly agree too. However Kelly wrote the Dark Eldar codex, did he not? That is the best written codex out there. Fluffy and incredibly varied and balanced.

RunepriestRidcully
16-07-2011, 14:47
I totally agree with this. Ward is quite a bad writer of fluff, but his rules are quite good (as far as 5th ed 40K books go). They generally hit that sweet spot where "strong lists" and "fluffy lists" aren't noticeably dissimilar. His armies play mostly as their fluff would suggest, and aren't particularly unbalanced unless compared against old armies (or nids).

of course, ward armies are fluffy since he warps the fluff beyond recognition... no one I know has been happy with his "additions" to the fluff and the lists.. s8 auto dread spam? sanguinary preist spam? I'll admit the rules for SM was okay (Fluff though :eyebrows::wtf: ), but GK just no longer felt like the army I started, whilst with wolves I did not have that, so I'd rather go with kelly.
Anyone thinking we could possibly see a falcon chassis based webway gate?, mind you, I hope it's not in heavy support, have it in fast attack, heavy support is wa too crowded at the moment.

Stealin' Genes
16-07-2011, 15:59
I'm not so sure of that, mostly because all the 40k books Ward has done thus far have been power armor, and I get the impression the dude just loves space marines. Like, a lot a lot.

Don't underestimate the power of a codex author's enthusiasm (or lack thereof) for an army. Part of why the nids book isn't as well done or written as the other 5e books is that I suspect Cruddace is indifferent to Tyranids. By contrast, IG have tons of stuff, some great, some meh, some bad, because they ignite Cruddace's imagination.

I'd be worried that a Ward Eldar book (Ward-dar?) would get lackluster rules because he doesn't really like Eldar, along with the not good at all fluff he generally produces.

Just my 2c though.

kafrique
16-07-2011, 18:33
of course, ward armies are fluffy since he warps the fluff beyond recognition... no one I know has been happy with his "additions" to the fluff and the lists.. s8 auto dread spam? sanguinary preist spam? I'll admit the rules for SM was okay (Fluff though :eyebrows::wtf: ), but GK just no longer felt like the army I started, whilst with wolves I did not have that, so I'd rather go with kelly.
Anyone thinking we could possibly see a falcon chassis based webway gate?, mind you, I hope it's not in heavy support, have it in fast attack, heavy support is wa too crowded at the moment.

Every tournament army is going to have something spam, that's what's effective. The difference is that a competitive Blood Angels or GK army, spamming effective choices, looks and plays on the table like something that wouldn't be unheard of in the fluff, where as a competitive Space Wolf or Chaos army, for example, will look and play quite quite differently from how one would expect.

Sildani
16-07-2011, 18:50
Assault on Mazoth, the perspective from a Farseer, Guardian, and Jetbiker is like the 10 commandments of Eldar fluff to me.

Their attitude towards aliens, their motivation, their views on war, the effects ov violence on the Eldar psyche, it's all sooooo goood.


Who wrote that story in the first place?

From the first page of that book: "Stories: Bill King" (William King of Farseer and the *Slayer series of novels.) ;)

Chem-Dog
16-07-2011, 21:06
In answer to the OP, yes it fits the fluff that Eldar use Webway Technology to deploy but I don't think the Craftworlds would be as eager to open a direct path home as their Commorite kin.
In game terms, I'm not sure a portable Webway portal would be the best way to represent a Craftworld's use of the Webway, it's not refined enough.

Am-heh
16-07-2011, 21:24
Should Craftworld Eldar have access to WWPs?

If you wants to say the DE WWPs i say NO. and i'll explain it:


If they do, I'd rather they work in a different way. I'm not sure how exactly but something different. Maybe make them more defensively orientated somehow, rather than a point from which all hell strikes.

As i read my french DE codex, in the WWP description, it's a mobile kind of portal their eldar cousin use to sail in the Web.

So our WWP are not the same as Eldar portal in their fluff. Eldar portal may change in size ( and what can pass by them ) but are static structure (and generally invisible to non-eldar ) and DE portal have limits for what can pass by as they are smaller but transportable version.


The one thing the DE and Eldar actually do have in common, besides being Eldar, is that the Eldar and DE both use the webway.

But they don't use it in the same way:

-Eldar use it to travel through the Web
-DE live in the Web so they use as "gates" to leave their "home" ( for go to shopping .. raids or anything they have to do out of the Web )

Any Eldar can activate an Eldar Portal (just knowing the rightuse/code)
Only DE Archon or Hemi can buy a DE WWP ( so it's only for HQ ! )

So .. if Eldar would have some kind of WWP it would be like this:

Unit: Building
Cost: ?
Slot: ?
Rules: Infiltrate, count as your side of board for all units you have in reserve.
Special: the Portal is always an objective for mission with objectives.

Perhaps if we could take a Large Portal ( wehicles may pass by it ) or 1-3 smaller (for infantry only ) per slot.

may be we can choose that only 1 unit per round can use it to enter the battlefied ( may be 2 for Larger ? )

and Portal are:

Large ( 12/12/12 )
small ( 10/10/10 )

should we use the same rules as fireprism for dammage resolution ?
Should it would be a Fast Attack Slot, Elite, .. etc .. ?
How should it cost ?

It's up to you Eldar player to discuss these points ^^

I'm DE player and i don't use WWP 'cause i can rush turn 2 with all my CC units in raider/venom and i can't before turn 3 for WWP units (turn 1 raider with unit having the WWP / turn 2 unit leave raider, in shooting phase activate the WWP / turn 3 units begin to be able to use the WWP to enter the battlefield)

i hope all that i said will help you and i'm not too hopeless with my english (if you want next time i'll write in french ^^ )

UberBeast
16-07-2011, 21:38
I don't see any reason why Eldar couldn't have a web-way portal for either fluff or balance reasons.

Shamana
16-07-2011, 21:58
But they don't use it in the same way:

-Eldar use it to travel through the Web
-DE live in the Web so they use as "gates" to leave their "home" ( for go to shopping .. raids or anything they have to do out of the Web )

Actually no, I thought in Comorragh there weren't many portals, those that existed were only to far-off colonies/cities or the like, so not that far from the webway conducts on the craftworlds. Considering that the CWE already had the portal in the EoT list and have it in the storm serpent, I think there isn't a big difference in technological levels in that regard. I certainly can imagine an autarch or harlequin troupemaster having something like the DE WWP.

xerxeshavelock
17-07-2011, 09:55
If you were to justify why they shouldn't, I would say that the Dark Eldar portals cause permanent damage to the webway. The Dark Eldar are ruthless/selfish enough to use them, the Craftworld kin aren't.

Kal Taron
17-07-2011, 12:32
There are two options that might work:
1) Akin to Epic buy an upgrade to place a piece of terrain that effectivly acts as a table edge for reserves with a size limit.
2) Allow certain units (Rangers and Farseers?) to buy an upgrade that allows them to open a temporary portal on the spot. Maybe with even harsher size limits?

kafrique
17-07-2011, 23:47
I don't see how anyone can say they're against the fluff, since, as said before, the EoT list from 3rd allowed Eldar to use them.