PDA

View Full Version : Eldar Wishlist.



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Austinitor
15-03-2012, 17:20
So, after GhostGate, we've been left without any credible rumors on a new codex, and really, no solid idea when one might be released (spare, not 'til after Dark Angels, Chaos, etc). Naturally, I welcome credible corrections in this regard.

That said, the quasi-useful activity of wishlisting seems to be our only hope to see the army returned to competitiveness. I've decided not to propose re-costing, as it is really difficult to impose some sort of "X stat is worth Y points" after the fact, and because the "dying race" fluff encourages elite units with better equipment/stats (similar to Grey Knights) than it does more numerous cheap troops (like Guard, Orks, or other horde armies).

What would you like to see in the next Codex: Eldar?

Here are a few suggestions I've seen around the web, and a few of my own (okay, maybe more than a few; probably about a fan-dex worth). I hope it is clear that I think that not all of these should be implemented together, as it would be unbalancing; more so, I would like to see something like one or two of the ideas for each unit be implemented.

Likewise, I've tried to only mention rules/stats by reference (e.g. saying something should be "boosted by X" or that it should match some other already extant weapon), rather than disclosing an actual rule. If there's something that seems like it is stepping on IP, please let me know what it is and I will endeavor to fix it.


Moving around the FoC (if indeed there is still an FoC in 6th, rather than percentages like in 2nd edition and 8th edition Fantasy Battle).
+1WS and +1BS across the board.
18" range on all Shuriken Catapults.
Shuriken weapons force a re-roll of successful saving throws (this could get complicated and time consuming against units that already had a re-roll, but could simply add one additional roll per armor save before any other re-roll).
Not quite a codex change, more so something from the supposedly "leaked" ruleset, but the strength value for Assault weapons/Pistols may be used in combat/on the charge. This restores Eldar to the position they held in 2nd edition, which is "between IG and SM" in all aspects of combat, i.e. SM weapon Strength, but IG toughness.
Webway portal access, similar to the Gates of Vaul from Epic 40k/Epic Armageddon/Dawn of War, perhaps even large enough to move grav tanks through (perhaps even a mobile version of such as an Apocalypse unit, like the Engine of Vaul superheavy with the portal on it in Epic).
Inclusion of 40k-stamped Codex Eldar units from IA11, e.g. the Wasp, Hornet, Firestorm, and Wraithseer.
Codex rules for the Nightwing and/or Phoenix. Given the prevalence of other flyers/fast skimmers in 5e codices and Eldar domination in Battlefleet Gothic, some air superiority is in order

HQ
Phoenix Lords for Warp Spiders and Shining Spears.
Asurmen unlocking shuriken weapons forcing re-rolls to armor saves.
Bonesingers added as a vehicle/MC repair unit/Apothecary-equivalent for Wraithguard, with a similar "unlock" with an Autarch like what Farseers do for Warlock Bodyguards.
Avatar unlocks the Court of the Young King (a mixed-aspect all-Exarch bodyguard squad from Apocalypse/Epic).
Bonesinger special character for Il-Kaithe, unlocking a Bonesinger unit upgrade to Wraithguard units.
Tank commander or War Walker pilot special character for Yme-Loc, unlocking Falcons as Dedicated Transports and/or Squadrons, and/or alternately War Walkers as Troops.
Return of the Saim-Hann special character from 3e that it seems the "Autarch on Jetbike" was meant to represent, unlocking Vyper Squadrons as troops.
Great Harlequin special character for Lugganath, perhaps unlocking Harlequins as troops.
Wraithseer from IA.
Ranger special character for Alaitoc, granting Pathfinders some kind of special ability.
Wraithguard and Wraithlord:

18" range for Wraithcannons (closer to the 16" range they offered in 2nd edition).
Close combat weapon options (e.g. Wraithswords) for Wraithguard.
Allow 5 Wraithguard + Spiritseer (previously typo'd as Wraithseer; certainly not what I meant) + Bonesinger to ride in a Wave Serpent.
Poison immunity; why should something that isn't alive be affected by poison?
MC status for Wraithguard, granting power-fist like attacks.
Guardians
Grenades for Guardians, either for an upcharge or built-in.
Lasblasters for Guardians, matching the Swooping Hawks profile. This allows Guardian Defenders not to have to rush forward to their doom or sit statically as extra wounds for their support platform.
More support platforms per Guardian Defender unit, e.g. 1 for every 3, 5 or 10. This provides a better thematic fit because it keeps Guardians further away from the front line.
Support Weapons re-combined with Heavy Weapon platforms, allowing Support Weapons in Guardian Defender squads and Heavy Weapon Platforms in Support Weapon Batteries.
Storm Guardians with +1 WS, Guardian Defenders with +1 BS, both as Elites, following the "Black Guardian" bit from 3rd ed's Codex: Eye of Terror. These could be unlocked by selecting Eldrad. This represents hardened Ulthwe Guardians who've spent too much time circling the drain that is the Eye of Terror.
Guardians in an IG-style platoon formation, allowing the purchase of 1 Wave Serpent per 12 infantry models (similar to the Serpent Rider formation from Apocalypse).
Free Shuriken cannon platform, following the scheme from codices like Codex: Space Marines.
New high shot count special weapon (Sunrifle?) for Storm Guardians; alternately, Support Weapon Platforms for Storm Guardians, perhaps limited to shuriken cannons and D-cannons, providing close fire support.
Guardian Jetbike Squadrons and Vypers
Special/close combat weapon options for Guardian Jetbikes. Fusion guns would make a huge difference on their ability to target... well, anything.
Vypers attached to Guardian Jetbike squads as part of their FoC choice, ala Space Marine Attack Bikes.
Vyper Squadrons under the Fast Attack FoC gain the Scouts rule.
Vypers become closed topped.
Increase in Guardian Jetbike catapult range to match Avenger Catapults; the present range leaves them quite outmatched against (only 3 points more expensive) MEQ bikes.
Shining Spears
Shining Spears gain Shuriken Pistols, conferring an additional attack in close combat. Alternatively, if Assault weapons give an attack on the charge, this might be unnecessary.
Laser Lances work at their current "only on the charge" profile on all rounds.
Laser Lances take on the Star Lance profile, and the Star Lance gains 2 Strength to compensate. This allows insta-kills against MEQ characters, a necessary function ESPECIALLY if the unit cap is not adjusted.
Larger unit capacity for Shining Spears (maximum of 11 attacks on the charge being insufficient to kill, well, anything that is decent at close combat).
Laser Lances improved to AP3. This allows pre-charge shooting to have a decent chance of killing MEQ, plus it is silly that a power weapon has the AP that it currently does.
Shining Spears save improved to 2+ (to match Space Marine bikes, and reflect the very heavy cavalry-style armor worn by the current model).
Dark Reapers
Dark Reapers re-gain Eldar Missile Launchers and the ability to target multiple units, restoring them to parity with other dedicated infantry-carried heavy support (e.g. Long Fangs). This is another "undo" on a 2nd-to-3rd edition nerf.

Grav Tanks
The return of some form of the Crystal Targeting Matrix. If WS and BS are not boosted across the board, this could simply be a +1 BS boost for a modest amount of points.
Spirit Stones improved to be equivalent to Power of the Machine Spirit, rather than equivalent to the Grey Knights vehicle ability.
Falcons as Dedicated Transports for units of 6 or fewer infantry-sized models, or perhaps just for HQ (Farseer+Warlocks or Autarch).
Inclusion of a rules-improved Firestorm to deal with the commonality of flyers.
Fire Prisms become a 1-3 Squadron instead of a single unit FoC choice. These are a synergy vehicle, and it is bizarre that one need dedicate multiple heavy support choices if one wishes to have something that can compete with, say, 1 Basilisk/Manticore (which likewise comes in squadrons).
Prism Cannon gets the Lance rule.
Some sort of Assault Ramp option for Close Combat Aspect Warriors, e.g. a Wave Serpent Upgrade.
Heavy Weapons and Support Weapons
Starcannons stay expensive but are either improved to Heavy 3 or Strength 7.
Brightlances stay very expensive but improve to Strength 9.
Support Weapon Battery gun size increased to six, but crew size left the same, with each gun coming with one crewman. This emphasizes the "dying race" fluff theme by making the unit more fragile than is typical of, say, an IG heavy weapons battery, while improving damage output (as there is nothing in the fluff that suggests Eldar have a shortage of wargear, given that they can create it psychicly by thinking about it/singing to it).
Pulse Laser added as a Support Weapon option, perhaps priced as a Brightlance.
Shuriken cannon range improved to 30". This makes them have a range matching any other heavy weapon on any other army (spare perhaps 'Nids).
D-cannon: gain an Aether Rift option attack similar to the Warp Hunter, i.e. using a template.
Vibrocannon: double the present range; the current range for a static weapon is far too low to be effective.
Shadowweaver: gains matching USRs to the Night Spinner.

War Walkers
War Walkers moved to Fast Attack. As a Scouts unit, it is odd to have them in Heavy Support. Likewise, Heavy Support has too many competing choices, and the Fast Attack slot is currently full of poor choices.
War Walkers re-gain a 2nd-edition style force field, perhaps conferring a cover save (like the Tau vehicle upgrade) or acting as an all-around Strength "normalizer/ceiling reducer" (similar to the Wave Serpent field).

Harlequins
Venoms as Dedicated Transport, following the Corsair Venom profile from IA11 (to keep from giving them wacky Dark Eldar weapons).

Swooping Hawks
Lasblasters increased to range 36". This helps their role as a "standoff" unit.

Dire Avengers Range increased to 24", following a global boost to 18" of other Shuriken catapults, and reflecting their range finder.
Warp Spiders
Replace current range with a template, similar to 2nd edition.

megatrons2nd
15-03-2012, 17:56
I think Bright Lances will drop to a similar value as the Dark Eldar Dark Lances. I could see the Shuriken Cannon getting the range boost to match the Dark Eldar Splinter cannon, but I think the Harlequin Shrieker Cannon kept the same range between both Eldar and Dark Eldar codeci, so I doubt it. A points drop across the board is more likely to happen, in my opinion. Although many of these seem to flow with the way the Eldar are presented in the fluff.

TheRaven
15-03-2012, 18:12
The only thing I want, is for the Eldar to feel like "Eldar". For their tech to some how feel like they are this super ancient race. I'm so sick of Matt Ward and his fricking "But Space Marines Have to do it Better" Attitude this last edition. Lets go back to the feeling back in second edition where their stuff was actually expensive but significantly bad ass. Lately they've felt like Eldar have been overbalanced, like they want to make them super awesome but dial it back too much.

I don't know how they'll do it but hopefully Jervis and cook something up. The Dark Eldar book actually felt good. Hopefully they apply the same approach to Eldar, and hopefully it doesn't get power crept out by the codex after it because Ward came in and said "Well if the eldar have X the space marines should have something > X".

Austinitor
15-03-2012, 18:15
because Ward came in and said "Well if the eldar have X the space marines should have something > X".I share your fear; I worry he'll write Dark Angels and give them better jetbikes (e.g., all armed with plasma guns/cannons).

Fable
15-03-2012, 19:27
I share your fear; I worry he'll write Dark Angels and give them better jetbikes (e.g., all armed with plasma guns/cannons).

Oddly enough I think I'd like to see what Ward would do with the rules (not the fluff) because I think he wouldn't be afraid to rebuild them nearly from the ground up.

One of the major themes going on is that each army seems to have a benchmark unique rule and I'm very curious if and what that will be for the Eldar because they (like the old DE dex) have no such significant rule. They don't have anything like Synapse, ATSKNF, Repair Protocols, Commands, Mob Rule, etc. I think the addition of such a rule has the potential to change the codex in ways that make it hard to create future fixes to current problems.

One thing I didn't see in your list is moving the support weapons. I still think they need to be attached to guardian squads purchased as troops without taking up an additional FOC slot.

While I don't think the D-cannon needs the Aether shot I do think I'd like to see more uniformity in the Eldar dex. Like Pulse lasers and Prisms should have the lance rule, while Shadow Weavers should get the same special rules as shots fired from a Night Spinner's Doom Weaver and Deathspinners gain rending. I think it's important that weapons that are thematically linked should be consistent in their rules.

And for the sake of the gods stop price gouging every fricken unit and weapon in the dex. I'm sick of being so consitently outnumbered in tanks and infantry by Marines.

carlisimo
15-03-2012, 19:32
Im thinking we wont (or shouldnt) get new infantry units because weve got quite a few already, and some of them still have miniatures that date back to 2nd edition. I cant believe certain aspect warriors got resculpted twice while jetbikes, wraithguard, and warp spiders remained static.

In the game, what we need is mobility. I can live with short-ranged weapons as a defining aspect of Craftworld armies, because it forces you to use units in concert (or else they get chewed up because they had to get within charge range to fire). But we need the ability get into that firing position. Fleet doesnt cut it anymore. The fundamental problem is that armies that dont need mobility as badly have 30-50pt transports, and ours start at 100. Webway devices could provide a solution.

Some of our units feel overcosted, too. It was fine back when the Dark Angels codex was the template for MEQ armies, but they've gone way beyond that.

Austinitor
15-03-2012, 19:51
One thing I didn't see in your list is moving the support weapons. I still think they need to be attached to guardian squads purchased as troops without taking up an additional FOC slot.Solidly agreed; I featured that change under the 4th point under Guardians, but didn't really speak to it under my Heavy Weapons heading (now re-titled Heavy Weapons and Support Weapons).

It seems to me that de-seperating Support Weapon Platforms and Heavy Weapon Platforms would do the trick (as they were all one entry back in 2nd edition), but I'd also like to see some means of taking Support Weapon Batteries without the Defender Squad. Ideally, this would be some sort of "Guardian Platoon", with Support Weapon Batteries being part of that FoC choice in the IG FoC model.

Frankly, to cut down on the possibility of Guardian hordes, I would love to see this platoon choice as the only way to take non-jetbike Guardians, and for the Platoon to be a 0-1 Troops choice. Likewise, the unit count could be changed to 5-11 (plus Warlock; it would be nice if these were compulsory and came with some psychic power rolled in, as well, with the option to exchange the power for another on the list). That, of course, would probably require there to be a plastic Warlock (something else I wouldn't mind seeing).

Perhaps the Black Guardian notion would simply allow those who use Eldrad to take a +1 WS Storm/+1 BS Defender Guardian Platoon as a Troops choice, where as perhaps it might otherwise be an Elites choice.

Radium
15-03-2012, 19:54
I'm sick of being so consitently outnumbered in tanks and infantry by Marines.

I don't care about that at all actually, as long as aspect warriors are the absolute pinnacle of martial prowess. They're just mediocre now. Shooty aspect = BS 5, CC aspect = WS 5. And two attacks each.

And whatever else happens, Eldar should return to being the absolute masters of psychic powers. Something to circumvent psychic defense would be nice, so that for once we can actually cast the powers we need for our units to work. More psychic stuff all around and VASTLY increased potential of the powers we have should also be auto-include. The Eldar should put the mon-keigh in silver armour back in their place!

KingDeath
15-03-2012, 20:40
I think Bright Lances will drop to a similar value as the Dark Eldar Dark Lances.

Darklances are overcosted so droping Brightlances to the level of Darklances wouldn't be a good solution. They need to be quite a bit cheaper.
Guardians are currently too short ranged and could realy use a buff as well as a points reduction ( compare them with Kabalite Warriors and weep ).
Otherwise a general points drop is in order imo.

Fable
15-03-2012, 21:11
I don't care about that at all actually, as long as aspect warriors are the absolute pinnacle of martial prowess. They're just mediocre now. Shooty aspect = BS 5, CC aspect = WS 5. And two attacks each.

And whatever else happens, Eldar should return to being the absolute masters of psychic powers. Something to circumvent psychic defense would be nice, so that for once we can actually cast the powers we need for our units to work. More psychic stuff all around and VASTLY increased potential of the powers we have should also be auto-include. The Eldar should put the mon-keigh in silver armour back in their place!

I should probably have said I was sick of paying more than marines while getting less performance and ability out of those high cost units instead of just mentioning that I was sick of being outnumbered. If we actually got a performance level we paid for I wouldn't be at all averse to it.

And another thing, can we have units that perform the way they're intended for the price included on the unit and not be priced to perform X but need a farseer in order to achieve X. We only get two HQ slots so it's not like we're able to attach farseer's to babysit every unit. If farseers are going to be support they should take a unit that can do X and make it do Z and Z should be amazing.

Nurgling Chieftain
15-03-2012, 21:16
...as long as aspect warriors are the absolute pinnacle of martial prowess. They're just mediocre now.Well, they're average precisely because everybody and his kid brother is "the absolute pinnacle of martial prowess", which happens to be WS/BS4.

Radium
15-03-2012, 21:27
Well, they're average precisely because everybody and his kid brother is "the absolute pinnacle of martial prowess", which happens to be WS/BS4.

Yes, I'm quite aware of that. Still, I'd like to see aspects move up to Incubi stats, even if their points cost increases to compensate. I'd like to see aspects be viable units at 6 strong, and be quite a lot more than either a vehicle upgrade (avengers), suicide units (dragons) or useless (the rest - not completely true of course but you get what I'm trying to say).

althathir
16-03-2012, 00:37
Personally my main hope is that our skimmers gain aerial assault, the current size of the army feels right (though the squads could be bigger), but the firepower doesn't matchup. Aerial Assault would fix that for mechdar, changes to reapers and support weapons could do the same for footdar.

I'd also like to see banshees and scorpions have an ability that allows them to treat wave serpents as assault vehicles.


I don't care about that at all actually, as long as aspect warriors are the absolute pinnacle of martial prowess. They're just mediocre now. Shooty aspect = BS 5, CC aspect = WS 5. And two attacks each.

And whatever else happens, Eldar should return to being the absolute masters of psychic powers. Something to circumvent psychic defense would be nice, so that for once we can actually cast the powers we need for our units to work. More psychic stuff all around and VASTLY increased potential of the powers we have should also be auto-include. The Eldar should put the mon-keigh in silver armour back in their place!

The saves would have to be reworked, and the units may get too expensive to be viable. On top of that stat inflation would occur, 2 attacks base though would be fairly nice.

I actually think that the warlock powers should be buffed (and still work without a check), and be able to be attached to any unit. They would fill a lot of units gaps and give eldar more of a unique niche. They would have to be added into unit entries though so that farseers aren't required.


I should probably have said I was sick of paying more than marines while getting less performance and ability out of those high cost units instead of just mentioning that I was sick of being outnumbered. If we actually got a performance level we paid for I wouldn't be at all averse to it.

And another thing, can we have units that perform the way they're intended for the price included on the unit and not be priced to perform X but need a farseer in order to achieve X. We only get two HQ slots so it's not like we're able to attach farseer's to babysit every unit. If farseers are going to be support they should take a unit that can do X and make it do Z and Z should be amazing.

Honestly I think most of the units were pointed correctly at the time of the release. Troops have gotten much better in 5th, 3++ saves really hurt our assault units, and I think we have some unreasonable expectations cause of how broken our book used to be. Like I said earlier I think most of our issues have to do with our transports, and our heavy choices not packing enough a punch for their cost. Fix those and bring our troops in line and eldar are competitive in a hurry.


Yes, I'm quite aware of that. Still, I'd like to see aspects move up to Incubi stats, even if their points cost increases to compensate. I'd like to see aspects be viable units at 6 strong, and be quite a lot more than either a vehicle upgrade (avengers), suicide units (dragons) or useless (the rest - not completely true of course but you get what I'm trying to say).

I wouldn't, eldar wouldn't be that viable, Incubi are rarely used in the competitive scence for a reason.

Cthell
16-03-2012, 01:09
I quite like the "shurikens force a reroll on successful armour saves" mechanic - it does have precedent after all; Peril's of the Warp force "reroll successful invulnerables" and nobody complained that that was too complicated. As for things becoming too complicated when shooting at a unit which rerolls failed saves - this is nonsense. Roll the dice - whatever the result, ignore it and roll again (since shurikens force rerolls of success, and the unit forces rerolls of failure) To save time, simply skip the first set of rolls. Actually speeds up the game.

As for equiping every dark reaper with EML, I actually prefer the reaper launcher - they give the unit a pretty unique roll in the game (long range MEQ killer). I'd much rather see them stay like this than generic missile-launcher spam heavy support unit number 732; I am however open to the idea of either giving them an extra shot or unit-wide Crack Shot (depending on the status of cover in 6th Ed)

I personally dislike using named characters to unlock force org changes (my taste, rather than anything concrete - I just don't like seeing every salamanders army having to contain Vulkan Hestan etc); perhaps allowing an HQ choice to purchase a "craftworld rune" to achieve the same effect would be possible?

megatrons2nd
16-03-2012, 01:19
I wouldn't, eldar wouldn't be that viable, Incubi are rarely used in the competitive scence for a reason.

I do fairly well with my Incubi. Mostly because nobody expects me to use them, and they are used as interceptors with their raider, not as shock troops.

@KingDeath: The Dark Lance does appear to be over priced a little, but I still would expect the Bright Lance brought down to the same cost, which is 3 times lower, rather than below the Dark Lance's cost.

althathir
16-03-2012, 01:45
I quite like the "shurikens force a reroll on successful armour saves" mechanic - it does have precedent after all; Peril's of the Warp force "reroll successful invulnerables" and nobody complained that that was too complicated. As for things becoming too complicated when shooting at a unit which rerolls failed saves - this is nonsense. Roll the dice - whatever the result, ignore it and roll again (since shurikens force rerolls of success, and the unit forces rerolls of failure) To save time, simply skip the first set of rolls. Actually speeds up the game.

As for equiping every dark reaper with EML, I actually prefer the reaper launcher - they give the unit a pretty unique roll in the game (long range MEQ killer). I'd much rather see them stay like this than generic missile-launcher spam heavy support unit number 732; I am however open to the idea of either giving them an extra shot or unit-wide Crack Shot (depending on the status of cover in 6th Ed)

I personally dislike using named characters to unlock force org changes (my taste, rather than anything concrete - I just don't like seeing every salamanders army having to contain Vulkan Hestan etc); perhaps allowing an HQ choice to purchase a "craftworld rune" to achieve the same effect would be possible?

Shurikens weapons forcing re-rolls of successful saves would bog the game down a bit imo opinion, I'd rather see a range increase for guardians, and maybe dire avenger's shurcats gaining +1 str if within a certain range.

I agree on not liking named characters to change the FoC, but honestly I don't think we need FoC swaps (the craftworld supplement I think showed how bad of an ideal that is for eldar). Our base troops need to be reworked and dire avengers need to actually become a flexible unit, either by expanding their grenade options (haywires for example) or allowing them to take warlocks.


I do fairly well with my Incubi. Mostly because nobody expects me to use them, and they are used as interceptors with their raider, not as shock troops.

@KingDeath: The Dark Lance does appear to be over priced a little, but I still would expect the Bright Lance brought down to the same cost, which is 3 times lower, rather than below the Dark Lance's cost.

A squad of Incubi is one thing, but a lot of eldar builds rely on several squads of aspect warriors, and high cost t3 models typically aren't good. It also puts a bigger strain on footlists.

Bubble Ghost
16-03-2012, 01:55
Personally, I pray that Eldar don't get assault vehicles, because that would be such a depressingly defeatist, unsubtle 'improvement'. People seem to have this assumption in 40K that the characteristic of "speed" refers specifically to the ability to charge into a melee across vast distances in relative safety - but is RAAAAAAAARRRRGH IN YOUR FACE!! like a Khorne Berzerker really the best representation of Eldar style mobility? Wouldn't you rather they improved in a more interesting way, rather than shrugging, saying "if you can't beat them, join them" and hijacking a Space Marine special rule because it's shiny and you want it?

megatrons2nd
16-03-2012, 02:19
Personally, I pray that Eldar don't get assault vehicles, because that would be such a depressingly defeatist, unsubtle 'improvement'. People seem to have this assumption in 40K that the characteristic of "speed" refers specifically to the ability to charge into a melee across vast distances in relative safety - but is RAAAAAAAARRRRGH IN YOUR FACE!! like a Khorne Berzerker really the best representation of Eldar style mobility? Wouldn't you rather they improved in a more interesting way, rather than shrugging, saying "if you can't beat them, join them" and hijacking a Space Marine special rule because it's shiny and you want it?

Why not? Marines get abilities from other races.

althathir
16-03-2012, 03:12
Personally, I pray that Eldar don't get assault vehicles, because that would be such a depressingly defeatist, unsubtle 'improvement'. People seem to have this assumption in 40K that the characteristic of "speed" refers specifically to the ability to charge into a melee across vast distances in relative safety - but is RAAAAAAAARRRRGH IN YOUR FACE!! like a Khorne Berzerker really the best representation of Eldar style mobility? Wouldn't you rather they improved in a more interesting way, rather than shrugging, saying "if you can't beat them, join them" and hijacking a Space Marine special rule because it's shiny and you want it?

The thing is that t3 assault units tend to need to cross a vast distant in relative safety inorder to have a chance of affecting the battle. I don't want the vehicle to gain the assault vehicle rule, I want banshees and scorpions to have an ability that counts the vehicle as an assault vehicle (that they would pay for). Thats a large distinction in my mind, otherwise your stuck with the current setup where you have to commit to the charge the turn before and hope your target doesn't move. In my games I don't tend to commit banshees until close to the end of the game to clear an objective, where that isn't to big of a disadvantage because they need to hold it. That makes them a very situational unit though, and It makes my eldar feel slow.

Also suggesting instead of just suggesting we just want to steal a "shiny" ability, why not offer a more interesting improvement.

chromedog
16-03-2012, 04:42
I just want some NEW SCULPTS for the wraithguard, jetbikes, warp spiders.

C'mon guys, they've had the same sculpts for most of the last 20 years.
Warp Spiders: The OTHER aspects have had 3-4 revamped model lines, AND include alternate wargear for the exarch. More than three different sculpts would help also.
Why do these languish behind, forgotten like an old GW game designer?
Wraithguard: Some kind of posability beyond the SAME three figures that were available. Three bodies and two head options.

Bubble Ghost
16-03-2012, 05:33
The thing is that t3 assault units tend to need to cross a vast distant in relative safety inorder to have a chance of affecting the battle.

No they don't. The idea that they haven't contributed if they don't eviscerate something is a fallacy - they've "affected the battle" by presenting a threat. There's nothing wrong with that being part of how they work if things are priced correctly for it, and if other rules enable them to do it.

For instance, what if there was some sort of 'inertial dampener' upgrade that allowed units to disembark when moving flat out? And what if the Wave Serpent's energy field extended some sort of protection to the dismbarked unit, if neither moved away? That would better enable them to present a threat in just that way - and in doing so, would become part of a style of play where you had to plan ahead and have units support each other, which we Eldar players always seem to be going on about anyway.

That's just an example off the top of my head to demonstrate that there are other ways of doing it. And anyway, a flat out Wave Serpent is hard to kill, especially if you Fortune it - it's not like an ork trukk coming at you. If it was an assault vehicle as well, you'd be looking at a point and click auto-squash of a unit of your choice - move your tank forward, the enemy rolls some dice, if they get the right result on the dice they're fine and if they don't they're dead. We like to think that Eldar should be a finesse army, but if we're going to truly believe that, we should have the courage of our convictions, not resort to asking for 16-point models in a 100-point tank who can splatter almost anything they feel like with the ease of terminators in a Land Raider. Where's the fun in that, for either player?

And after all that, I have to say that I'm not really convinced that Aspect Warriors and Wave Serpents are cripplingly underpowered as it is. There's not a lot there that can't be fixed with points values - I don't think they're unfit for purpose particularly.




Also suggesting instead of just suggesting we just want to steal a "shiny" ability, why not offer a more interesting improvement.

Because that's not my job, it's GW's. You're not obligated to offer a superior alternative just for the right to criticise something - there would be no consumer advice at all if that were the case. Although I did it anyway earlier in the post.

I think you've misunderstood my reasons for posting all this - you seem to have assumed I'm a marine player trying to jealously guard my special rules. I'm not, I'm an Eldar player who would prefer my army to play in a unique and appropriate way, rather than cave in to 40K's flaws.:)

Israfael
16-03-2012, 07:29
Shining Spears save improved to 2+ (to match Space Marine bikes, and reflect the very heavy cavalry-style armor worn by the current model).

I'm a bit confused. Why are you requesting a terminators save, to be "comparable" to Marine bikes?

Ravariel
16-03-2012, 07:56
There are a few things in here that I want to address, because as an Eldar player, and one who has written a fandex of my own, it is a bit close to my heart. Please take this in the completely constructive manner in which it is intended.



Moving around the FoC (if indeed there is still an FoC in 6th, rather than percentages like in 2nd edition and 8th edition Fantasy Battle).

The only move necessary is Warwalkers shifted to Fast Attack. That would correct almost all of the "HS crowding" that people complain about. Changing the FOC by HQ is an idea that has been bandied about a lot by many different armies and every time it seems to be a mistake (I'm looking at you, Grey Knights), so I think it should be avoided. Perhaps having the Phoenix Lords allow you to take one unit of their aspect as a troop, but that's it.


+1WS and +1BS across the board.

No. Yes, we're older and wiser and more highly-trained than marines but we're also physically weaker, and not augmented, so neither in fluff nor in game mechanics would it be a good idea to boost our average WS/BS by 1. Hitting on 2's is a way bigger deal than it might seem at first glance. And if some of the changes in the leaked codex turn out to be true, it could render many Farseer choices moot.


18" range on all Shuriken Catapults.

Maybe. I'm not sure that's good enough for basic guardians. Again, especially considering possible 6th ed changes, I think shifting them back to 24" Rapid fire is the way to go.


Shuriken weapons force a re-roll of successful saving throws (this could get complicated and time consuming against units that already had a re-roll, but could simply add one additional roll per armor save before any other re-roll).

Too clunky. Maybe have them reduce the armor save of the target by 1. Make them AP- but treat 3+ armor as 4+, and so on. I know they've shied away from abilities and guns that alter the opponents rolls (other than re-rolls), but this is a mechanic that could be useful if done sparingly. May need a S reduction depending on impact.


Not quite a codex change, more so something from the supposedly "leaked" ruleset, but the strength value for Assault weapons/Pistols may be used in combat/on the charge. This restores Eldar to the position they held in 2nd edition, which is "between IG and SM" in all aspects of combat, i.e. SM weapon Strength, but IG toughness.

I have been playing with the leaked ruleset since it dropped, and I have to say this is one of the more interesting changes I've seen. I like it a lot, and hope it remains. That said, I hope that units like Avengers get a CCW in their wargear so they can make use of the fact that their weapon is Assault. As it is, they're pretty terrible in the new edition (even more so than the current).


Inclusion of 40k-stamped Codex Eldar units from IA11, e.g. the Wasp, Hornet, Firestorm, and Wraithseer.

Unnecessary, as the stamp already allows their use.


Bonesingers added as a vehicle/MC repair unit/Apothecary-equivalent for Wraithguard, with a similar "unlock" with an Autarch like what Farseers do for Warlock Bodyguards.

I actually did this in my fandex. I had individual warlocks you could buy as upgrades to squads. There were no universal powers, but each one had powers specifically tailored to help whatever squad they were in, and usually allowed them to take one of two different roles (for instance, with my guardian defenders, you could choose to give the squad stealth, stubborn(and can regroup below 50%), or reroll armor in cc... which gives you one to hunker down on an objective with stealth, go grab midfield objectives with stubborn, and soak enemy CC with the final one). Wraithlords could buy bonesingers which could give them back wounds on a 6 (similar to Tech Marine's repair). I think it worked well, although the new edition kinda shelved my playtesting as I've been focused on learning the new rules.


Return of the Saim-Hann special character from 3e that it seems the "Autarch on Jetbike" was meant to represent, unlocking Vyper Squadrons as troops.

Nuadhu Fireheart I think you're talking about? My guess is we'll see him as the Shining Spear Phoenix Lord.


Ranger special character for Alaitoc, granting Pathfinders some kind of special ability.

Pathfinders are ridiculously good already (and even better in the leaked 6th ed rules... seriously... so good). They already get Aspect BS, +2 cover and rend on a 5+... what more could you give them?


18" range for Wraithcannons (closer to the 16" range they offered in 2nd edition).

I would love this, but it borders on making them too good. Seriously, an extra 6" on THAT gun is a major boost. I have played perhaps a dozen games recently with a full 10-man with Spiritseer (embolden) and Farseer (Fortune/Guide), and they have died a grand total of twice. The first took 3 turns of dedicated shooting (3 Soul Grinders, Fateweaver, Flamers) and 2 turns of combat with Scarbrand, the second a boss-as-hell first-turn deepstrike with a big unit of flamers of tzeench... they may not kill their points worth in games, but they score like crazy and are nearly impossible to move. The only Anvil the Eldar have. 18" guns would almost make them a default buy.


Close combat weapon options (e.g. Wraithswords) for Wraithguard.

Sweet Jeebus, yes. In my fandex I had the Wraith Vanguard with Wraithswords and Shimmershields. 5++ in cc, and 2 attacks base made them a mean, tough advance force that could tarpit like crazy and didn't fear hidden fists or poison nearly as much as the normal wraithguard. No guns, though, and slow (5+ warlock max in a serpent) so tough to use, but likened to Assault Termies, very useful.


Allow 5 Wraithguard + Wraithseer + Bonesinger to ride in a Wave Serpent.

Isn't the wraithseer wraithLORD-sized? I don't think you'll ever see one in a Waveserpent. :P


Grenades for Guardians, either for an upcharge or built-in.

Would need to be an upcharge, otherwise their main use as a cheap blob unit would be compromised. I would also add the caveat that Storms could only get assault grenades, and Defenders could only get Defensive (I realize Plasma is supposed to do both, but for balance sake)


Lasblasters for Guardians, matching the Swooping Hawks profile. This allows Guardian Defenders not to have to rush forward to their doom or sit statically as extra wounds for their support platform.

A longer-range weapon swap for them would be nice, if they don't go the 24" rapid fire route for normal 'pults. I can't remember if it was ghost or someone else who said they saw something like that in an early build, but this can be reasonably called fairly likely.


More support platforms per Guardian Defender unit, e.g. 1 for every 3, 5 or 10. This provides a better thematic fit because it keeps Guardians further away from the front line.

Can easily turn into too powerful. I would agree to a platform per 10 dudes. 3 or 5 would be putting way too much firepower in the cheapo troops slot (especially if you include the HWPs in their support platforms... which I did in my 'dex). It treads fairly heavily on IGs shtick, so limiting it a bit I think would be for the best. In my dex, they also counted their platform as twin-linked when they remained stationary, for what it's worth.


Storm Guardians with +1 WS, Guardian Defenders with +1 BS, both as Elites, following the "Black Guardian" bit from 3rd ed's Codex: Eye of Terror. These could be unlocked by selecting Eldrad. This represents hardened Ulthwe Guardians who've spent too much time circling the drain that is the Eye of Terror.

Eeeeeeeeh, I hesitate here. Maaaaaaybe have it be from a warlock power, so you have to spend an extra 40-50 points for it. Moving them into elites just crowds an already crowded area.


Free Shuriken cannon platform, following the scheme from codices like Codex: Space Marines.

Agreed, basic platform should be free.


Special/close combat weapon options for Guardian Jetbikes. Fusion guns would make a huge difference on their ability to target... well, anything.

Eh, shuricannons I think work well enough for them. They could use a points reduction, though. Biker troops are less special than they were when the current 'dex was released, so at 20 points apiece I think they would be fairly costed. That said, if the EV rules are true, with an EV of 4, they would justify their current costs quite well.


Vypers attached to Guardian Jetbike squads as part of their FoC choice, ala Space Marine Attack Bikes.

Would like this very much. Let the Hornet take over the Viper's place in FA... it's better at the job anyway.


Larger unit capacity for Shining Spears (maximum of 11 attacks on the charge being insufficient to kill, well, anything that is decent at close combat).

Very much this. How to make Spears work was one of the hardest things for me to wrap my head around in my dex. Boosting the max squad size to 8 helped a LOT. I also gave them special hit-and-run rules that allowed them to get out of dodge after popping a tank.


Laser Lances improved to AP3. This allows pre-charge shooting to have a decent chance of killing MEQ, plus it is silly that a power weapon has the AP that it currently does.

Agreed.


Shining Spears save improved to 2+ (to match Space Marine bikes, and reflect the very heavy cavalry-style armor worn by the current model).

No, too good. Even at 35 points and 5-man max, if you give them a 2+ you're just asking for a Jetbiked fortuneseer to turn it into the new Paladin squad.


Dark Reapers re-gain Eldar Missile Launchers and the ability to target multiple units, restoring them to parity with other dedicated infantry-carried heavy support (e.g. Long Fangs). This is another "undo" on a 2nd-to-3rd edition nerf.

Pretty much agree here. Make one of the exarch powers allow the exarch to shoot at a different unit than the squad, improve the max squad size to 8, and shave a couple points and you have a pretty good choice even with the HS competition.


The return of some form of the Crystal Targeting Matrix. If WS and BS are not boosted across the board, this could simply be a +1 BS boost for a modest amount of points.

Falcon needs BS4, everything else is gravy. Actually in the leaked rules with the -1 to damage for being a tank, Holofalcons and prisms are even harder to kill. I had Scarbrand and a unit of flesh hounds banging on my Prism's hull for 3 full turns, and they managed to get about 30 shakens (thanks, spirit stones) and one weapon result.


Spirit Stones improved to be equivalent to Power of the Machine Spirit, rather than equivalent to the Grey Knights vehicle ability.

Stones are fine as they are. Cheap, effective. Never leave home without 'em.


Falcons as Dedicated Transports for units of 6 or fewer infantry-sized models, or perhaps just for HQ (Farseer+Warlocks or Autarch).

In my dex, they were treated like Land Raiders, where one Aspect unit of 6 or fewer could get one as a DT. Worked fairly well.

Fire Prisms become a 1-3 Squadron instead of a single unit FoC choice. These are a synergy vehicle, and it is bizarre that one need dedicate multiple heavy support choices if one wishes to have something that can compete with, say, 1 Basilisk/Manticore (which likewise comes in squadrons).[/quote]

I though about this a lot, and I even put it in my 'dex. But after playing more with Prisms, I think they need to be limited by only having one in a slot. They are the most versatile and survivable item in the entire army. And for their points (after stones and holocheese) they are a steal. A limiter like one per FOS is necessary.


Prism Cannon gets the Lance rule.

Sweet jeezus, no. They already get a small blast lascannon, no need to make it that OP.


Starcannons stay expensive but are either improved to Heavy 3 or Strength 7.

S7. So good at that level, without getiing too OP. 3 shots treads on Scatter Laser territory, so better to make it S7 to keep it differentiated.


Brightlances stay very expensive but improve to Strength 9.

Actually just dropping them to 30 points makes them pretty good where they are.


Shuriken cannon range improved to 30". This makes them have a range matching any other heavy weapon on any other army (spare perhaps 'Nids).

I'm down with this.


War Walkers re-gain a 2nd-edition style force field, perhaps conferring a cover save (like the Tau vehicle upgrade) or acting as an all-around Strength "normalizer/ceiling reducer" (similar to the Wave Serpent field).

Walkers already one of the best units in the 'dex... no reason to make them OP. Giving them stealth or something similar would force their points north of what they should be. They are a glass cannon, almost by literal definition. They work great as they are... just shift them to FA and they're golden.


Hawk Lasblasters increased to range 36". This helps their role as a "standoff" unit.

If guardians get lasblasters, maybe as a way to differentiate themselves. Perhaps 30" would be enough.


Dire Avengers Range increased to 24", following a global boost to 18" of other Shuriken catapults, and reflecting their range finder.

I's what I did in my 'dex. Worked well for me.


Warp Spiders[list=14]
Replace current range with a template, similar to 2nd edition.

You would need to boost their points to a ridiculous level or make them max squad size 5 to balance this. Just look at Flamers of Tzeench as comparison. Spiders have a better save, better combat ability, better mobility, S6, and cost less. You would need to boost them well north of 40 points to justify multiple S6 templates on jump infantry. For Spiders, a points reduction should be enough, and maybe give them rending... maybe.

The new rule set actually hurts spiders pretty bad due to the movement and turn order changes, so there's some work that needs to be done for them, but I'm not sure what that is, yet.

KingDeath
16-03-2012, 10:38
30 points for a brightlance? A weapon that is little more than a glorified missile launcher against everything up to AV12 and generaly inferior to lascannons until you shoot AV14? You surely must be kidding. 20 points at most would be more viable.

Austinitor
16-03-2012, 14:51
I'm a bit confused. Why are you requesting a terminators save, to be "comparable" to Marine bikes?
Thanks for pointing that out; I just double-checked the rules, and have discovered that a regular opponent of mine (playing all-bike Marines) has been, uh, let's say "confused" about what their save is.

Austinitor
16-03-2012, 15:04
30 points for a brightlance? A weapon that is little more than a glorified missile launcher against everything up to AV12 and generaly inferior to lascannons until you shoot AV14? You surely must be kidding. 20 points at most would be more viable.I have to agree. These are really WAY over costed compared to anything else in any other codex.

Austinitor
16-03-2012, 16:02
First off, thanks for your thoughts.

The only move necessary is Warwalkers shifted to Fast Attack. That would correct almost all of the "HS crowding" that people complain about. Changing the FOC by HQ is an idea that has been bandied about a lot by many different armies and every time it seems to be a mistake (I'm looking at you, Grey Knights), so I think it should be avoided. Perhaps having the Phoenix Lords allow you to take one unit of their aspect as a troop, but that's it.I'd argue that allowing Falcons in some sort of Dedicated Transport role would likewise be an FoC change, as would moving around Support Weapon Batteries.

No. Yes, we're older and wiser and more highly-trained than marines but we're also physically weaker, and not augmented, so neither in fluff nor in game mechanics would it be a good idea to boost our average WS/BS by 1. Hitting on 2's is a way bigger deal than it might seem at first glance. And if some of the changes in the leaked codex turn out to be true, it could render many Farseer choices moot.I think all of your arguments here only apply to increasing their strength (something no one has proposed). Likewise, I would not worry about rendering Farseers moot; it would be nice to have an HQ that can actually not have to act as an offensive asset rather than just a synergy boost, and I would gladly exchange the Guide/Doom utility for effective offensive psychic powers (because, let's face, the current ones and the lack of firing points on transports makes our current set compare very poorly to, say, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Necrons, etc).

Thinking about it, it really is bizarre to have these act as assault weapons/battle rifles when they're given to units we'd almost never want to assault with, anyway. I agree that moving them to Rapid Fire (they've never been Rapid Fire; they actually had a Sustained Fire die under 2nd Edition, along with Storm Bolters, Assault Cannons, Heavy Bolters etc; it was pretty uncommon to have more than one shot 'til the Rapid Fire rule was introduced), but returning them to 24" range does make sense. Honestly, I'd be happiest if they were moved to, say, 24" Heavy 3, AP3, with a cost increase (as it gets closest to their 2nd edition functionality and role). Naturally, this would necessitate a change to Shuricannons, as well.
[QUOTE=Ravariel;6134898]
Too clunky. Maybe have them reduce the armor save of the target by 1. Make them AP- but treat 3+ armor as 4+, and so on. I know they've shied away from abilities and guns that alter the opponents rolls (other than re-rolls), but this is a mechanic that could be useful if done sparingly. May need a S reduction depending on impact.

Your counter-proposal is interesting, but it strikes me as unlikely that they'd become a special case to re-introduce armor save throw modifiers. I think another poster, though, had a better suggestion in saying that it would be best to simply ignore the first armor save for re-roll units (Fortune'd, etc), as it more so follows the aim of replacing save mods with AP (reducing dice rolls and speeding game play).


I have been playing with the leaked ruleset since it dropped, and I have to say this is one of the more interesting changes I've seen. I like it a lot, and hope it remains. That said, I hope that units like Avengers get a CCW in their wargear so they can make use of the fact that their weapon is Assault. As it is, they're pretty terrible in the new edition (even more so than the current).
Interesting points, and that certainly does help.


Unnecessary, as the stamp already allows their use.
Unfortunately, certain bizarre purists still insist that anything that isn't blessed with inclusion in something with the title of "codex", requires opponent's special permission (beyond what is customary in arranging a game, e.g. "what army, how many points"). Especially sadly, this seems to include most tournament organizers. I don't think that is a battle that is easily won, but the design studio making an end run around it and doing an IG-style inclusion of the rules in the codex proper would silence those hostile to IA/Forgeworld. If that also means we get plastic models for these, that'd be icing on the cake.


I actually did this in my fandex. I had individual warlocks you could buy as upgrades to squads. There were no universal powers, but each one had powers specifically tailored to help whatever squad they were in, and usually allowed them to take one of two different roles (for instance, with my guardian defenders, you could choose to give the squad stealth, stubborn(and can regroup below 50%), or reroll armor in cc... which gives you one to hunker down on an objective with stealth, go grab midfield objectives with stubborn, and soak enemy CC with the final one). Wraithlords could buy bonesingers which could give them back wounds on a 6 (similar to Tech Marine's repair). I think it worked well, although the new edition kinda shelved my playtesting as I've been focused on learning the new rules.
re: Bonesingers: I don't think it makes a ton of sense for a heavy support choice to have an IC attached to it.

Nuadhu Fireheart I think you're talking about? My guess is we'll see him as the Shining Spear Phoenix Lord.Indeed; that wouldn't be a bad fit.

Pathfinders are ridiculously good already (and even better in the leaked 6th ed rules... seriously... so good). They already get Aspect BS, +2 cover and rend on a 5+... what more could you give them?Oh, I don't know... I guess I just wanted to throw Alaitoc a bone, but perhaps they're already well-stocked?

I would love this, but it borders on making them too good. Seriously, an extra 6" on THAT gun is a major boost. I have played perhaps a dozen games recently with a full 10-man with Spiritseer (embolden) and Farseer (Fortune/Guide), and they have died a grand total of twice. The first took 3 turns of dedicated shooting (3 Soul Grinders, Fateweaver, Flamers) and 2 turns of combat with Scarbrand, the second a boss-as-hell first-turn deepstrike with a big unit of flamers of tzeench... they may not kill their points worth in games, but they score like crazy and are nearly impossible to move. The only Anvil the Eldar have. 18" guns would almost make them a default buy.Hmm... I suppose I see your point in regards to the Troops option, but am not convinced that a smaller, Elites-sized squad is very functional. Perhaps simply giving them Wraithswords and Shimmer Shields would help.

Sweet Jeebus, yes. In my fandex I had the Wraith Vanguard with Wraithswords and Shimmershields. 5++ in cc, and 2 attacks base made them a mean, tough advance force that could tarpit like crazy and didn't fear hidden fists or poison nearly as much as the normal wraithguard. No guns, though, and slow (5+ warlock max in a serpent) so tough to use, but likened to Assault Termies, very useful.
I suspect I "stole" (really, just repeated without appropriation) the idea from your 'dex.

Isn't the wraithseer wraithLORD-sized? I don't think you'll ever see one in a Waveserpent. :PTypo, there; I mean Spiritseer.

Would need to be an upcharge, otherwise their main use as a cheap blob unit would be compromised. I would also add the caveat that Storms could only get assault grenades, and Defenders could only get Defensive (I realize Plasma is supposed to do both, but for balance sake)I think that makes sense.

A longer-range weapon swap for them would be nice, if they don't go the 24" rapid fire route for normal 'pults. I can't remember if it was ghost or someone else who said they saw something like that in an early build, but this can be reasonably called fairly likely.I'm treating all of Ghost21's stuff as totally debunked. I'd love to be shown reasons to find him credible despite his recantation, but have seen no such things.

If indeed all 'cats do go 24", these guys are probably fine with them (they did well for me in 2nd edition, as it was a novelty to have an all-sustained-fire Troop choice, which computes today to something like have a gun that is Rapid Fire or Assault 4).

Can easily turn into too powerful. I would agree to a platform per 10 dudes. 3 or 5 would be putting way too much firepower in the cheapo troops slot (especially if you include the HWPs in their support platforms... which I did in my 'dex). It treads fairly heavily on IGs shtick, so limiting it a bit I think would be for the best. In my dex, they also counted their platform as twin-linked when they remained stationary, for what it's worth.
I really disagree with the "'cause Guard have it, we shouldn't" angle; after all, they stole our fast skimmers. ;) Likewise, I still think having "Guardian Hosts" as a platoon-style unit with heavy weapon batteries attached would work well without being OP.

Eeeeeeeeh, I hesitate here. Maaaaaaybe have it be from a warlock power, so you have to spend an extra 40-50 points for it. Moving them into elites just crowds an already crowded area.Maybe the solution, instead, is to move one or both assault aspects into Troops?

Agreed, basic platform should be free.I wonder if doing so would be a sufficient enough cost reduction, assuming that the current 'cannon platform cost was deducted from the cost to upgrade to other platform weapon choices?

Eh, shuricannons I think work well enough for them. They could use a points reduction, though. Biker troops are less special than they were when the current 'dex was released, so at 20 points apiece I think they would be fairly costed. That said, if the EV rules are true, with an EV of 4, they would justify their current costs quite well.This makes them much more limited than DE or SM bikes, and as a new sprue may be on the way, anyway, who not make more than one special/heavy weapon option? Likewise, we're due for some kind of new plastic weapon sprue.

Would like this very much. Let the Hornet take over the Viper's place in FA... it's better at the job anyway.This is one of the three most pressing FoC changes, I think, though I'm generally fine with Vyper Squadrons staying FA in the 5e SM model. Naturally, though, Vypers should probably get some sort of free vehicle upgrade (ala the Hornet) to justify the current cost.

Very much this. How to make Spears work was one of the hardest things for me to wrap my head around in my dex. Boosting the max squad size to 8 helped a LOT. I also gave them special hit-and-run rules that allowed them to get out of dodge after popping a tank.I don't know; I really think that, in addition to boosting the size of the unit to 10 or so, they really need a less limited weapon to justify their cost. They are an extremely difficult unit to use, especially in a climate that likes pre-measuring to cheating.

Agreed.

No, too good. Even at 35 points and 5-man max, if you give them a 2+ you're just asking for a Jetbiked fortuneseer to turn it into the new Paladin squad.Another poster pointed out that my regular SM opponent had been, uh, playing those wrong, so I'll retract that one. As to allowing Eldar to have something on-par with Paladins, I wouldn't mind seeing the army have some time in the limelight after release. Likewise, I suspect GW may want compelling rules to sell new jetbikes and Shining Spears.

Pretty much agree here. Make one of the exarch powers allow the exarch to shoot at a different unit than the squad, improve the max squad size to 8, and shave a couple points and you have a pretty good choice even with the HS competition.I'm generally opposed to re-costing, and hesitant about increasing squad size; I'd much rather see power boosted to fit, and see no reason these guys should be inferior to Long Fangs (the most similar competitive unit, spare maybe Lootaz or something).

Falcon needs BS4, everything else is gravy. Actually in the leaked rules with the -1 to damage for being a tank, Holofalcons and prisms are even harder to kill. I had Scarbrand and a unit of flesh hounds banging on my Prism's hull for 3 full turns, and they managed to get about 30 shakens (thanks, spirit stones) and one weapon result.I think Falcons either need to be put in a battle tank role or in a fighting vehicle role (e.g. the Razorback; sort of an up-armed APC, where as the Rhino fills the "just an APC" role).

Stones are fine as they are. Cheap, effective. Never leave home without 'em.

In my dex, they were treated like Land Raiders, where one Aspect unit of 6 or fewer could get one as a DT. Worked fairly well.I think this is one of a few valid directions to take them.

I though about this a lot, and I even put it in my 'dex. But after playing more with Prisms, I think they need to be limited by only having one in a slot. They are the most versatile and survivable item in the entire army. And for their points (after stones and holocheese) they are a steal. A limiter like one per FOS is necessary.I really don't think this compares favorably to how artillery is treated in other armies, especially given the "combined shot" quirk. If "stones and holocheese" make them too good, up-cost "holocheese".

Sweet jeezus, no. They already get a small blast lascannon, no need to make it that OP.... that scatters. Adding Lance would put these on par with Earthshakers, Manticores, Deathstrikes, etc.

S7. So good at that level, without getting too OP. 3 shots treads on Scatter Laser territory, so better to make it S7 to keep it differentiated.Generally agreed.

Actually just dropping them to 30 points makes them pretty good where they are.30 points is still much more expensive than any other comparable weapon at BS4; much worse, still, at our BS3. They either need a power boost (+1AP and +1 Strength) or to be down-costed significantly. I strongly favor the power boost and oppose the cost-shave, because I like the role of Eldar as an elite army (not a horde).

I'm down with this.

Walkers already one of the best units in the 'dex... no reason to make them OP. Giving them stealth or something similar would force their points north of what they should be.Maybe I'm reaching here and simply want to see something like their former rules; I just think it added more flavor than the "like a Sentinel, but with elves" role they play in the current game.
They are a glass cannon, almost by literal definition. They work great as they are... just shift them to FA and they're golden.Fair enough.

If guardians get lasblasters, maybe as a way to differentiate themselves. Perhaps 30" would be enough.24" Rapid Fire shot plus 6" move=your Hawks shot up on any turn after they shoot. I think this needs to be at least 31", really, but 36" is more the "evenly divided by 6" number that GW tends to, these days.

I's what I did in my 'dex. Worked well for me.Probably one of your ideas, then. :)

You would need to boost their points to a ridiculous level or make them max squad size 5 to balance this. Just look at Flamers of Tzeench as comparison. Spiders have a better save, better combat ability, better mobility, S6, and cost less. You would need to boost them well north of 40 points to justify multiple S6 templates on jump infantry. For Spiders, a points reduction should be enough, and maybe give them rending... maybe.The possibility of jump fatalities just isn't factored into their cost. Double-jumping becomes nigh-imperative when their range is reduced to template, thus counter-balancing

The new rule set actually hurts spiders pretty bad due to the movement and turn order changes, so there's some work that needs to be done for them, but I'm not sure what that is, yet.
Again, I think going back to something more like Gav's original is the way to go, and that they changed a lot in 3rd just to have made a change (not for any compelling game reason, but perhaps to move a different model assortment).

cynic
16-03-2012, 16:09
I'm going to wait for 6th ed to hit before i start wishlisting :)

Fable
16-03-2012, 16:57
The only move necessary is Warwalkers shifted to Fast Attack. That would correct almost all of the "HS crowding" that people complain about. Changing the FOC by HQ is an idea that has been bandied about a lot by many different armies and every time it seems to be a mistake (I'm looking at you, Grey Knights), so I think it should be avoided. Perhaps having the Phoenix Lords allow you to take one unit of their aspect as a troop, but that's it.

I also think the Support Weapon squads need to be attached to guardian defender squads without taking up a FOC slot. This effectively would make them troops. That would allow the Heavy Support to be Fire Prism (squadrons preferrably), Night Spinner (potentially in squadrons), Dark Reapers, Falcon, Wraithlord and -insert flyer- while Fast Attack would be War Walkers, Vypers, Swooping Hawks, Warp Spiders, Shining Spears and -insert other flyer-

That would be 6 options for each and round things out nicely.

Rather than have the clunky phoenix lord with single troop aspect I'd prefer that a Phoneix Lord allow all units of their aspect to count as scoring (or whatever passes for scoring in 6th be it additional points or what have you) as it doesn't create any FOC shenanegains, but isntead can make for some interesting themed builds, also dual PL lists could complement each other nicely. It would be a good way to get up to 12 scoring units (and potentially more if you make the support weapon change) and more realistically compete with modern codexes.

Bonzai
16-03-2012, 17:26
I haven't been playing Eldar long, and I play Iyanden, so my perspective is a bit biased from that perspective.

1. Bring back craftworld Rules. I don't want it unlocked by an HQ, but if it must, it must. Just some minor boosts and FOC changes for the preffered units of that craft world.

2. Get a designated transport that is either open topped or an assault vehicle. To balance things out, it won't get all the potential Eldar upgrades that make their vehicles nigh impossible to kill.

3. Add in a Bonesinger as an elite unit that can be split off like sanguinary priests. All wraithbone units within a certain range of the IC get FNP, and poison wounds on a roll of 6 instead of it's normal value.

4. Add in the missing Pheonix Warriors. Us warp spider fans feel left out.

5. Add in nightwings so that they have their "flyers" like the other codexes.

Plus whatever points adjustments and new models are needed.

Dr.Clock
16-03-2012, 17:40
I would KILL to have a themed scorpion/spider list with two PLs that make those aspects scoring.

For that matter, it has only just occurred to me how bizarre and silly it is that only DA, guardians and rangers can score... Aspects are supposed to be doing the heavy lifting, no?

As a possible fix for this, we could use Autarchs as a gateway to increased aspect scoring capabilities: let him 'purchase' 1 or 2 other scoring aspects as a testament to his skill in directing them on the field? It's not FOC weirdness, but it could make the list significantly more flexible, especially in smaller games.

Aside from this, I think most of the suggestions here are pretty much on point.

Greatest wish of all though? Exodites... likely never happen, but a man can dream. I'm actually seriously considering a proxy list using 'nids...

Cheers,

The Good Doctor.

Motsognir
16-03-2012, 18:13
Hith an increas of +1 to the BS the Brightlance is well priced with 30 points if compared to the Darklance (25P). Unlike the DL the BL is assault instead of heavy on the waeponplatform.

One could argue, that the DL is overpriced (looking sadly at 3ed DE Codex)

TheDoctor
16-03-2012, 18:24
Hith an increas of +1 to the BS the Brightlance is well priced with 30 points if compared to the Darklance (25P). Unlike the DL the BL is assault instead of heavy on the waeponplatform.

One could argue, that the DL is overpriced (looking sadly at 3ed DE Codex)

And yet Bright Lances are still 30 points on Falcons, War Walkers, and Vypers, so the weapon platform's special ability doesnt mean jack. Oh, and on wraithlords, it's 40 points to get a BS 4 Bright Lance.

And as a comparison, space marine lascannons are 10 points... for something better and more durable than guardians...

Even if we had BS4 brightlances at 30 points, they would still be overcosted.

Cthell
16-03-2012, 18:30
Hmmm... IIRC my copy of codex:craftworld eldar, the big feature of Alaitoc Pathfinders (besides being better rangers) was inflicting shenanigans on enemy reserves - either taking hits before the game started or delaying reserves?

Given the existence of both of these mechanics (Coteaz's "I've been expecting you", Master of the fleet etc) I could see this being a good way to differentiate Alaitoc Pathfinders from the stock craftworld versions.

For example - "If at least one unit of Alaitoc Pathfinders is on the board, enemy reserve rolls are at -1; in addition, if an enemy unit enters from reserve within 12"/4D6" of an Alaitoc Pathfinder unit, the Pathfinders may immediately shoot at the arriving unit"

Nuadua Fireheart wasn't a Shining Spear or an Autarch on Jetbike; he actually rode a modified Vyper like a chariot and was treated more like a dreadnaught in combat. He also had to be attached to a guardian jetbike squad - if Vypers do become a unit upgrade (ala attack bikes) I could certainly see him making a reappearance.

carlisimo
16-03-2012, 18:33
I would KILL to have a themed scorpion/spider list with two PLs that make those aspects scoring.

For that matter, it has only just occurred to me how bizarre and silly it is that only DA, guardians and rangers can score... Aspects are supposed to be doing the heavy lifting, no?

They’re supposed to do the heavy lifting in terms of killing. They aren’t meant to hold ground, which is what holding objectives is all about. It’s like in modern warfare, where tanks and planes do all the blowing up but only infantry can truly occupy territory.

Israfael
16-03-2012, 20:31
Thanks for pointing that out; I just double-checked the rules, and have discovered that a regular opponent of mine (playing all-bike Marines) has been, uh, let's say "confused" about what their save is.

Not a problem. I love inadvertently busting cheaters. ;)

althathir
16-03-2012, 21:25
No they don't. The idea that they haven't contributed if they don't eviscerate something is a fallacy - they've "affected the battle" by presenting a threat. There's nothing wrong with that being part of how they work if things are priced correctly for it, and if other rules enable them to do it.

A competent player isn't gonna feel to threatened by banshees on foot, t3 4+ save models are fairly easy to get rid of.


For instance, what if there was some sort of 'inertial dampener' upgrade that allowed units to disembark when moving flat out? And what if the Wave Serpent's energy field extended some sort of protection to the dismbarked unit, if neither moved away? That would better enable them to present a threat in just that way - and in doing so, would become part of a style of play where you had to plan ahead and have units support each other, which we Eldar players always seem to be going on about anyway.

What does that accomplish though? Being able to disembark when you move flat out, unless accompanied by a rule that lets you assault, really just buffs shooting units like dragons. Effectively the assault units are still in the same position they are now, except your disembarking them earlier, which doesn't matter unless they can assault at that point (right now people do the same thing but leave them in the serpent) otherwise the opponent can still maneuver away from them fairly easily, unless they have to hold an objective. Which makes them very situational units which is why in all-comer lists you see tons of dragons.


That's just an example off the top of my head to demonstrate that there are other ways of doing it. And anyway, a flat out Wave Serpent is hard to kill, especially if you Fortune it - it's not like an ork trukk coming at you. If it was an assault vehicle as well, you'd be looking at a point and click auto-squash of a unit of your choice - move your tank forward, the enemy rolls some dice, if they get the right result on the dice they're fine and if they don't they're dead. We like to think that Eldar should be a finesse army, but if we're going to truly believe that, we should have the courage of our convictions, not resort to asking for 16-point models in a 100-point tank who can splatter almost anything they feel like with the ease of terminators in a Land Raider. Where's the fun in that, for either player?

:wtf: how does banshees, and scorpions getting an ability that lets them treat a vehicle as an assault vehicle equate to that. We're talking about a vehicle with one access point located in the rear, and two units that don't splatter almost everything. Eldar aren't an assault army, having a couple elements that hit reliably doesn't break the game.


And after all that, I have to say that I'm not really convinced that Aspect Warriors and Wave Serpents are cripplingly underpowered as it is. There's not a lot there that can't be fixed with points values - I don't think they're unfit for purpose particularly.


I'm actually pretty happy with serpents, and aspect warriors in general. My main issue with serpents is offensively they bring very little to the table, adding aerial assault fixes that (while bringing them in line with most 5th edition skimmers) It also justifies the higher costs they pay for options like Bright lances. For aspect warriors, I think banshess, scorps, and dire avengers need to buffed and spears and hawks need a price reduction. Giving banshees, and scorps the ability to pay to be able to treat serpents like assault vehicles is enough IMO, dire avengers just need to become more flexible to keep pace with most 5th eiditon troops.

I'm open the ideal of aspect warriors begining buffed in general (the a2 suggestion, but it would need to be accompanied by a price increase for most), but I think your thinking I want a lot more than what I do.


Because that's not my job, it's GW's. You're not obligated to offer a superior alternative just for the right to criticise something - there would be no consumer advice at all if that were the case. Although I did it anyway earlier in the post.

I think you've misunderstood my reasons for posting all this - you seem to have assumed I'm a marine player trying to jealously guard my special rules. I'm not, I'm an Eldar player who would prefer my army to play in a unique and appropriate way, rather than cave in to 40K's flaws.:)

I'm an eldar player too, and I want my banshees to be a more useful unit, cause right now I use them because I like them, not because their effective.

Ravariel
16-03-2012, 21:36
First off, thanks for your thoughts.
I think all of your arguments here only apply to increasing their strength (something no one has proposed). Likewise, I would not worry about rendering Farseers moot; it would be nice to have an HQ that can actually not have to act as an offensive asset rather than just a synergy boost, and I would gladly exchange the Guide/Doom utility for effective offensive psychic powers (because, let's face, the current ones and the lack of firing points on transports makes our current set compare very poorly to, say, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Necrons, etc).

Yes it seems so, but I'm more thinking about the fact that SM augments are more than just strength. They have cybernetic targeters and, still hundreds of years of training. WS5 is not as rough as BS5, due to the competetive nature, but BSS5 Fire Dragons, Dark Reapers, Bladestorming Avengers (assuming we fix their weapon) would be devastating, and bring them back to CWE brokenness. The problem here is the fact that on a 10-scale system that uses a 6-scale measure, it is difficult to illustrate small differences in ability.


Your counter-proposal is interesting, but it strikes me as unlikely that they'd become a special case to re-introduce armor save throw modifiers. I think another poster, though, had a better suggestion in saying that it would be best to simply ignore the first armor save for re-roll units (Fortune'd, etc), as it more so follows the aim of replacing save mods with AP (reducing dice rolls and speeding game play).

I agree that it's unlikely to actually happen. Perhaps just boost them to AP4... I dunno. Shuricats are a rough one. Just being assault is no longer a benefit.


re: Bonesingers: I don't think it makes a ton of sense for a heavy support choice to have an IC attached to it.

It is a little odd. Then again I had you able to take 1-3 Lords per HS slot and buy 1 bonesinger per group. You rolled a dice for each wound the squad had lower than it's max, and on a 6 one returned. Also all of my warlocks had 2 wounds, so it was harder to snipe them.


Oh, I don't know... I guess I just wanted to throw Alaitoc a bone, but perhaps they're already well-stocked?

Actually, someone else mentioned their old reserve shenanigans. So perhaps a Cronus/Telion-like SC that gives them back something like being able to defensive fire at their max range, or increase the critical range, or re-roll any hits on the scatter die or something (again, assuming leaked 6th-ed rules here).


Typo, there; I mean Spiritseer.

I figured. Just wanted to make sure... you never know on the internets :P


I really disagree with the "'cause Guard have it, we shouldn't" angle; after all, they stole our fast skimmers. ;) Likewise, I still think having "Guardian Hosts" as a platoon-style unit with heavy weapon batteries attached would work well without being OP.
Maybe the solution, instead, is to move one or both assault aspects into Troops?

Well, just imagine a 20-man 7-point-apiece (what they should be) guardian squad with SIX shuricannons and a conceal/embolden 'lock. That's less than 200 points for 18 S6 shots in the troops slot, which has 14 ablative wounds and is almost impossible to move off of objectives outside of dedicated CC. Now imagine a few more points for scatters or EMLs and it gets to be pretty crazy. At that point why bring rangers or Avengers?

The assault aspects need to stay in Elites... they just need to be more elite. Banshees need Furious Charge as an exarch power, Scorpions need S4 base, and infiltrate/mtc for free. My dex had their exarch powers give them either stealth and veiled 1 if they were in cover, or MTC and scouts.


This makes them much more limited than DE or SM bikes, and as a new sprue may be on the way, anyway, who not make more than one special/heavy weapon option? Likewise, we're due for some kind of new plastic weapon sprue.

True. They already get extra movement (likely extra EV if that stays for 6th), but perhaps they need some way to deal with stronger targets. I dunno.


I don't know; I really think that, in addition to boosting the size of the unit to 10 or so, they really need a less limited weapon to justify their cost. They are an extremely difficult unit to use, especially in a climate that likes pre-measuring to cheating.

I would love them 10-strong units, but I wonder if that won't be too powerful. AP3 on their lances would be great, as would pistols to give them an extra attack (or who knows, maybe the bike-mounted catapult will count for the extra attack in 6th) but I think they should also get Skilled rider and mtc for free. Have the exarch still be able to give Hit and Run, and maybe something else... cover save if moving cruising speed? I dunno... they're hard to gauge.


I really don't think this compares favorably to how artillery is treated in other armies, especially given the "combined shot" quirk. If "stones and holocheese" make them too good, up-cost "holocheese".

I would expect to see that happen in the new dex anyway. With 6th, if the tank -1 remains, I would expect Holofields to change or be upped to 40-50 points. It'll still be worth it, mind.


... that scatters. Adding Lance would put these on par with Earthshakers, Manticores, Deathstrikes, etc.

In the leaked rules, they only scatter if they miss their to-hit roll, and then only 2" against most things they'll shoot with that gun. Also, can you imagine if you could squadron them, then have a S7, lance, Large Blast hitting on 2's re-rolled, all on a platform that takes 36 penetrating hits to kill (and then you still have to kill the other two to get any KP if they can squadron)? Granted, any move away from parking lots is a good one, and that is a very expensive unit, but I wonder if that's too good.


30 points is still much more expensive than any other comparable weapon at BS4; much worse, still, at our BS3. They either need a power boost (+1AP and +1 Strength) or to be down-costed significantly. I strongly favor the power boost and oppose the cost-shave, because I like the role of Eldar as an elite army (not a horde).

After thinking a bit more, I am tending to agree with the S9. It differentiated from the EML more, and gives us a more organic HW growth. Brightlances should be our big-mama ace in the hole. I still think 30 points for a S9 lance shot isn't too bad, but maybe 25 is enough... I just wonder if that's too power-creepy and then we'll be seeing 15-point lascannons in dev squads in the next marine dex.


The possibility of jump fatalities just isn't factored into their cost. Double-jumping becomes nigh-imperative when their range is reduced to template, thus counter-balancing

Maybe. They're another one that's hard to gauge. They need help (and new sculpts!), but I dunno what to do with them. One of my original ideas was to bulk them up to 2 wounds, put them on termie bases, gave them back the templates and upped their cost considerably... it still didn't work. As it was I dropped them to 20 points, gave them an extra attack, and gave them a DoA exarch power that let them run 2d6" after deepstriking so they could deepstrike safely but still get their buts in cover, and gave the deathspinner rending. I dunno if it was enough, but I wonder if the template would be too much. Maybe not... hard to say. Irisado has warned against it before, and he's usually pretty on top of things.

carlisimo
16-03-2012, 21:56
C'mon, guys. Threads that become line-by-line exchanges are difficult (and tedious) to read. Post your wishlists and let others do the same.

Cthell
17-03-2012, 00:25
Okay, in the spirit of the thread, my ideal wishlist for the next Eldar Codex. I won't go into points balancing, just offer my opinions on what needs improving/bringing into line with the more modern codices.


Farseers to regain their position as "greatest psykers in the 41st millenium" - if the GK example of "mastery levels" is the shape of things to come, a farseer should be mastery level 2 basic, upgradable to 3 (or maybe even 4) with spirit stones. No need to change the support powers - they are already very good - the offensive powers are also nice, but perhaps some new powers focussed on disruption of the enemy; e.g. making an enemy unit -1 BS, something along those lines.

Autarchs to regain their position as "masters of strategy" - replace the now-useless strategy rating (4) with something like the GK Grand Master's "Grand Strategy". Possibly also gain the ability to pass/fail Ld tests at will (confered to unit joined; representing knowing when to hold and when to retreat). Also some form of off-board fire support like GK orbital strike relays or master of ordinance (although not just a generic "blast template of death", something more esoteric and "Eldar-y").

Avatar to gain Eternal warrior (being the only demon in the game without this rule is embarassing) and maybe either 2+ save or fleet - something to stop it being so fragile.

Phoenix lords for Warp Spiders and Shining Spears

Shuriken Catapults to go up to Assault 3 and Cannons to Heavy 6 - ranges to stay the same. Fluff-wise, they're meant to be notable for 2 features - very high rate of fire (higher than "normal" projectile weapons like bolters) and short effective range. Also, it should be noted that the DE splinter cannon (which is meant to use a similar firing mechanism) is Heavy 6

Scatter Lasers to gain pinning - if Shuriken Cannon go up to heavy 6, the only distinguishing feature of the SL are longer range and worse AP; giving them more shots just invites codex creep, giving rending would turn them into super-assault cannons. It's possible that the strength could be bumped to 7, but that might be overpowered.

Deathspinners and Shadow-weavers to gain rending - pretty self explanatory

Chainsabres to be S4 - making them a usable choice.

Close-combat option for Wraithguard - This is a combination of being a useful option, and the "rule of cool"

A good second weapon option for Fire Dragon Exarchs - the heavy flamer is basically useless; not sure what could replace it - perhaps some sort of multi-shot, lower strength meltaweapon for heavy infantry hunting?

Defensive grenades for Guardian Defender squads, Offensive grenades for Guardian Storm squads - either as standard or an upgrade.

Second special weapon option for guardian jetbikes - some sort of haywire weapon, or pinning blast template?

Weapon platform in Guardian squads to be optional - gives the option of fleeting a 20 strong squad and blasting at point blank, or camping an objective and sniping with the platform.

Hawks to gain the ability to move 6" in the assault phase if not assaulting - reflects their mobility and harassing tactics, whilst not steping on the toes of the Warp Spiders

Firestorm with a hydra-style "ignore cover saves of fast moving stuff" rule or some other anti-flyer bonus.

Wraithlords to have the option of 2 of the same weapon without them being twin linked.

D-Cannons and Wraithcannon to get the IA11 anti-armour profile.

The return of Crystal targeting matrices - either "as-was" or a +1 BS bonus.

Spirit Stones to be improved - like 3rd Ed codex/living metal rule.

Fighter and Ground Attack aircraft

Vehicles to regain the mobile firepower lost with the switch from 4th to 5th ed


In general, I'm pretty happy with the way units work - the codex just suffers from being costed for a significantly different rules system.

As for models


Plastic Wraithguard.

New Jetbikes.

New Warp Spider and Swooping Hawk sculpts (big hand syndrome is getting embarassing).

New Warlock sculpts.


Just my opinions, naturally

Shamana
17-03-2012, 02:30
Note: perhaps only some of the below could be implemented. I insist that any changes be priced accordingly, adjusting up or down to make sure units are balanced both internally and with most other codices. The rule of thumb is: Eldar units should be relatively expensive, and worth every point.

Farseers: Alongside with GK libbies and tzeentch Sorcerers/daemons, these should be the premier psykers of 40k. I'd like to give them the option of having 1 more power and some powers improved. Another upgrade (that you can't get if you cast 3 powers) to make them slightly better in combat would be nice to represent master warlocks, or master bonesingers, or whatever other farseer specialization you have for seers who had spent centuries on a certain element of the seer path.

- warlocks: taken and allocated as wolf guard. Make warlocks a bit more expensive and better in melee. Have the option for other seers - i.e. bonesingers and some other types like mini-farseers. Consider allowing them to join more squads, i.e. aspects. Make better psykers to reinforce the eldar's psychic superiority.

Autarchs: More special skills you can get AND a choice of better wargear. Just because they are commanders and leaders doesn't mean they can't get something better than a power weapon - ask IG officer, Tyrannid hive tyrants, GK masters and so on. If I want to make my autarch both a better leader AND able to pull his weight in a fight, and I get to pay, say, 160 points for it, why not?

Avatar: EW. Options to make aspects better in combat - it's their GOD, people. Lysander makes marines fight better because he's famous - that doesn't nearly compare to the kill-orgasm the avatar should give aspects. FC and FNP (the latter maybe only for exarchs) as a bubble could be nice - of course, we should pay for it. Something like the BA priests would be nice - after all, this is a 0-1 HQ unit so it's not like we can spam it. An upgrade turning the Wailing Doom into a low-AP flamer (eldritch/demonic flame > power armor, I'd say) would also be good.

Phoenix lords - 5++, 3++ for asurmen, maybe a minor cost adjustment. I'd like to see them make aspects of that kind scoring, if not troops (so you can have specialized lists)

Wraithseer: please include. Wraithwall armies can be fun. Also, they are expensive, which is good for GW.

More HQs: Harlequin avatars. Think harlequin meeting DE succubus. Murder on speed.

Wraithguards: slightly longer range on D-cannon, melee option, T5 W2. Cross between paladins and grotesques. Expensive. Include an option for FnP (it's freaking golems, people) - either via upgrade or via the wraithseer

Banshees: something that makes them kill things better (i.e. reroll misses on charge, FC, etc) . Priced accordingly, of course. Banshees are narrow specialists, they shouldn't need support to be darn good at the only thing they do well! Rule of thumb: in a close combat, banshees should beat any marines of equal points - S/T4 and 2/3+ means the marines are, if nothing else, a lot more resilient and thus less specialized.

Scorpions: see banshees. While they are imo better at banshees at their respective schtick, they aren't quite good enough - being specialists, after all. Consider giving them back haywires as optional, what with them being ambushers and showing up in the backfield, and/or making them fleet like incubi, some marines, etc To focus on the ambush specialty, have an aspect upgrade skill to make them better if they attack a unit that's been pinned or already in combat (i.e. scorps can reroll to-hit rolls)

Harlequins: adjust price slightly due to rending not being as good as before. 18-20 points with kisses, perhaps?. More wargear would be nice, as well as mimes being special infiltration meisters. Consider giving a WWP (harlequins are renowned as being skilled in using the webway, perhaps even more than DE)

Fire Dragons - maybe increase cost slightly. Give them the option to trade all guns for flamers: the theme is annihilation with fire from up close, no one says it needs to be only tanks

Avengers: better options to tarpit or torrent. Price accordingly. Give them plasma so they can actually do melee well (part of their schtick is defeating the enemy hand-to-hand if need be) and consider giving them defensive grenades or haywires as optional upgrades. Exarch option with shuriken cannons would be nice.

Guardians: 18 inches catapults, with Assault 3 lasblasters as upgrade. 6-12 per unit, can be changed into storm guardians (pistol+ccw, grenade). Option for up to 1 heavy platform, 1 support platform for every 6 or 1 special weapon for every 4 (introduce another SW option). Price accordinly -shouldn't be better or pricier than DE warriors. OPTION to upgrade into black guardians (WS or BS 4, Ld 9) or give 4++ armor for a price and with limits.

Jetbikes - make slightly cheaper. Pistol + CCW would be nice. Option to upgrade to "veterans" (wild riders => black guardians on jetbikes, essentially), again with limits.

Rangers - make slightly cheaper. Pathfinders get to reduce cover a bit, maybe have the option for a WWP (again, they are supposed to be particularly good at navigating it).

Vypers: multiwound jetbikes if hornets are in, otherwise make a bit cheaper and better.

Hornets: please include. Not-too-light-skimmer with high speed and firepower: that what eldar vehicles are all about.**** you IG with their cheap, fast, uber-gunned gunships, fast and hard-hitting skimmers that aren't 10/10/10 is our turf, so **** off. We don't get 50-model blobs, do we?

Spiders - options for templates (not cheap) or CCW loadouts. Exarch skill to make DS or jumps more reliable. Surprise attack to let them charge after DS or make their shooting more effective just after they come in? Rending would be nice. Yes, they shouldn't be cheap.

Hawks: Assault 3 lasblasters, pinning, can reduce cover saves. Make them a bit cheaper. They are the aspect that does some damage, but also weakens the enemy from afar - by pinning them, haywire grenade launchers, or just some weird rules.

Spears: a bit cheaper, a bit better. 35 points for T4 3+ is a lot. Allow them to take more models, i.e. up to 7 (guys, seriously, terminators can be up to 10, and those aren't exactly common either).

Most vehicles: either BS 4 stock or a decent-priced upgrade (i.e. 10 points). Brightlance either becomes 20-25 points as is or 25-30 with AP 1 (high tech => effective at blowing up tanks) so it stops being an almost universally worse lascannon. Starcannon becomes a bit cheaper (20-ish points) if S7 AP 2 or heavy 3. EML gets a bit cheaper too. Holo-field either means the enemy rerolls to-hits, that the vehicle always gets a cover save or the enemy BS 1 is treated as if 1 lower (the latter 2 should not cost 35 points). Vehicle defensive guns should NOT be 12 inches - so either improve catapults or give eldar vehicles something else.

Prism: focused shot loses blast, gains lance. Yes, it means 2 prisms focused should be insanely good at blowing up a single tank - considering that you need to buy 2 prisms and have them both shoot, what do you expect? That's a single shot and 2 prisms cost as much as a land raider, for crying out loud. For a single shot, S9 ap 2 lance isn't the end of the world. That's what the DE voidlance is: they have a craft that comes with 2 such ones, stock, and DE players tend to still choose the ravager over it. Hint: they have a reason to.

Serpent: becomes slightly cheaper, the energy field becomes an optional upgrade. A way to make the unit inside assault if the transport has moved (how exactly are marines better at mobile warfare than eldar?); whether by giving the aspect the rules or by an upgrade to the serpent. Yes, the eldar should have an assault transport. If BA could get a fast heavy skimmer, we can borrow something from them too.

Firestorm: I don't mind it being expensive, but make it good. This thing should be nasty against any skimmers or fliers.

Warp hunters: shorter-ranged than the prism, with a very powerful cannon; essentially the eldar version of the Vindicator. Yes, this should be in.

Wraithlords: cheaper guns, especially on TL ones: 40 points for a Bright Lance is ********, 80 points for a single TL one is beyond a joke. Option for better CC, i.e. if you take 2 swords (second gives +1 attack, +1 i) or a shield.

Reapers: slightly cheaper, slightly better guns. 35 points is a LOT for BS 4 T3. BA Devastators are 26 points for a marine with a missile launcher, and are still cheaper than reapers if they have a plasma cannon. Have the option for the unit to be bigger - i.e. up to 7 models.

Heavy weapon platforms - make the spinner large blast, the vibrocannon +1 S and the D-cannon +6 inches. Price accordingly and give them the option of having a larger guardian team of gunners or allow a single on in a guardian squad if it doesn't take either a support or a special weapon.

Dwarf Longbeard
17-03-2012, 05:11
I don't think the Eldar army really needs any new units with what it has available between the codex and Imperial Armour 11 book; as an overall upgrade it does need a few tweeks done to it.
I do think that the Avatar and the psychic powers need to be made more powerful and the Pheonix Lords are due a bit of an upgrade.

Guardians: Definatly agree with the 18" range for the shuriken catapults, as an extra bonus maybe add rending to all shuriken weapons to represent the "storm of blades" there supposed to do; keep them as an Assault 2 weapon keeps the unit mobile; give the option of defensive grenades.
Let the Guardians keep their support weapon platform, making a heavy weapon an assault weapon can be a really good bonus; I do like the idea of having Guardians taken in a similar manner to the Imperial Guard platoons, brings the heavy weapon platforms into the game more.

All Aspect Warriors: Allow the abilities to be purchased for the whole squad not just the Exarch, bit odd that the whole unit forgets how to do something when their leader dies, give the Exarch something as a replacement though.
Reapers: Give them the old reaper range finder, make it so they ignore the cover saves for moving flat out as they used to be.

Wraithguard/Wraithlord: Make their saves invulnerable, having the high toughness is fine but there's so many things in the game which can overcome that; the invulnerable save would give them better survivability and make them a rare anvil unit in an otherwise fragile army.
Agree with increasing the range on the Wraithcannons.

Fire Prism: Like the idea of it being a lance weapon, sure it makes it powerful but that's what Eldar weapons are all about. Being able to buy them in a squadron for one slot would make them more useful as well.
Grav Tanks: Give them all the option to deep strike, it's bizarre how a land speeder can do it and eldar skimmers can't :S

Bright Lance: I've seen a lot about this with it being a costly lascannon; to make it different in an over the top way how about making it heavy 2? This is a wish list thread :D

jubilex
17-03-2012, 11:28
One thing I would like to see is bladestorm as a basic rule for all shuriken weapons ...

Shamana
17-03-2012, 11:39
Bright Lance: I've seen a lot about this with it being a costly lascannon; to make it different in an over the top way how about making it heavy 2? This is a wish list thread :D

Heavy 2 might work better for EMLs, which in the codex are mentioned to be much faster to operate, since almost no reload is needed. I'm not sure how well they'd compare to Typhoon MLs, which fire a lot more missiles at once, but then would need a heck of a long time to reload. If EMLs become assault 2, though, the krak should be downgraded a bit so it doesn't step on the pulse laser's toes - for example it could be S7 Hvy 2. The plasma could stay S4, or even (depending on the price) get better AP - since, you know, it is a plasma warhead, not just some shrapnel. Of course, that would make the EML quite a powerful gun, and thus an expensive one.

For the poor lance, I'd like it if the bright (and dark) lance becomes a specialized anti-heavy armor weapon - efficient and streamlined. I'd say a bit lower cost and AP 1 could do that quite well. AP 1 essentially means that the gun is particularly capable against armor, and this is exactly what I expect from an Eldar anti-tank gun.

It once again comes to what should imo be the cornerstone of eldar units: expensive (relatively) and worth it. It's not an easy balance to achieve, but it shouldn't be impossible.

Hendarion
17-03-2012, 11:49
Again such a topic that makes me feel like: "Okay, if GW does what some people suggest, Eldar players will the guys that are looked at because they play a totally imba army. Kinda like GreyKnights players are looked at atm."

Surely there are things that have to be fixed. But making currently broken a unit broken again, just the other way round will not be good for the game. And who wants to crush an opponent just because the own units are utterly uber?

RandomThoughts
17-03-2012, 13:05
Before putting up any specific points, I want my Eldar to play as advertices: Small elite force through technological superiority and style/skill/speed.

So, start by fixing the tech:
- 24" shurican cats (and give the avenger cats a bonus if they are closer to the enemy, they are supposed to be the frontline troops and guardians are supposed to be the backline fire support troops, not the other way round, for god's sake)
- Brightlance better than Imperial lascannon, not the other way round, same for starcannon and everything else. Price it accordingly, if that's needed for balance, but having to pay more for inferior weapons is a joke
- Improve armor across the board. Yes, armor! T3 will always distinguish the Eldar from the likes of Marines and Orks and other tough races, but good armor enforces both the better tech as well as the dying people protecting every last man to the best of their abilities theme.

- Make aspect warriors worth their points. Scorpions could do with the infiltrate ability used by Y genestealers, as well as stealth (pure fluff), Banshees would return to their place of elite killers of heavy infantry with Warcry going off more reliably, Furious attack and arcane eldar technology that pybasses invulnerable saves. Reapers back to normal missile Launchers, currently their only use is against meq out in the open - run into Orks, Terminators, Space Marine Scouts in cover, regular Space Marines in cover, vehicles, imperial infantry, etc. and they are essentially useless. And that doesn't take into consideration that they are T3 1 wound 35p infantry...

- I actually love the idea of Jetbikes with special weapons (flamers and Fusionguns), would take a unit with pretty much no damage output or offensive capabilities and makes it useful for more than hiding and last minute objective grabbing. I mean, they are certainly predestined for that role, high speed without any melee capabilities certainly invites effective short ranged firepower. I wish I had thought of that myself.

Just my opinions, though, since I've been winning games with Eldar on a casual play level despite their codex, not because of their codex for quite a while. Two days ago I had a tournament player (begging me for a game because he needed to finetune his list) take a look at the best infantry list I can come up with with the current codex, look shocked, and then back down because "the game wouldn't help him"...

Radium
17-03-2012, 14:39
Again such a topic that makes me feel like: "Okay, if GW does what some people suggest, Eldar players will the guys that are looked at because they play a totally imba army. Kinda like GreyKnights players are looked at atm."

The problem with GK is that they are insanely overpowered and TOO CHEAP for what they do, next to being marines (ie: quite resilient). What Shamana and I propose is that Eldar become really powerful in their own right, but expensive and fragile as well, as they're supposed to be. That doesn't mean the army will become overpowered, because you have less of an army than your opponent, and losing one of your units will hurt you quite badly. We want the Eldar to become the masterful and synergistic army they should be, not GK++.

Bubble Ghost
17-03-2012, 14:53
What does that accomplish though?

Bad example off the top of my head.:D (although it would help if the 6th ed rules introduce some sensible changes to the objective system). But luckily it's not my job to come up with a better alternative, and even if it was, I'd have longer than a couple of seconds to do it! The point I was badly illustrating was that reaching straight for the assault ramps does not have to be the only way of thinking about this.

Basically there are three reasons why I don't want assault vehicle Wave Serpents.

1. I find the assault vehicle rule itself depressing. Frankly I don't think anything should ever be able to move itself from one position of absolute safety, inside a vehicle, to another [ludicrous] one, in close combat, without the enemy having a chance to react at all. It exacerbates a core weakness in the main rules - namely the enormous amount units can sometimes achieve before the enemy can respond, emphasising rather than hiding the stop-start nature of the turn sequence and making the inactive player feel helpless. But at least in most armies' cases, the vehicle itself is quite flimsy. And...

2. ...while the absolute safety of assaulting from moving vehicles is dumb, it does at least evoke what those armies who can do it are about. But I don't think it does that for Eldar. Shock and awe works for Space Marines, Orks and Dark Eldar because that's what they're about, but while the background talks about Eldar being fast, the emphasis is always on how evasive, not aggressive, that speed makes them.

3. I find the "someone else can do X! Outrage outrage outrage!! So WE must be able to as well!" attitude depressing. (I'm not saying that you personally have that attitude, but plenty of people do)

There you go, that's my manifesto here. Disagreeing with it is fine, obviously! I just absolutely refuse to accept that the boring assault vehicle rule is the only way close combat Aspects can possibly be viable. They're not that bad as it is.



:wtf: how does banshees, and scorpions getting an ability that lets them treat a vehicle as an assault vehicle equate to that. We're talking about a vehicle with one access point located in the rear, and two units that don't splatter almost everything. Eldar aren't an assault army, having a couple elements that hit reliably doesn't break the game.

I must :wtf: at your :wtf:. Banshees may not be a mega-ultra-elite assault unit that completely overkills everything like most armies seem to have one of, but a) people seem to want them improved until they are, and b) even now they have enough kill to make this a problem.

Incidentally I'm with you on being able to shoot more guns while moving faster. Fricking Blood Angels skewing the curve...

althathir
17-03-2012, 17:01
The problem with GK is that they are insanely overpowered and TOO CHEAP for what they do, next to being marines (ie: quite resilient). What Shamana and I propose is that Eldar become really powerful in their own right, but expensive and fragile as well, as they're supposed to be. That doesn't mean the army will become overpowered, because you have less of an army than your opponent, and losing one of your units will hurt you quite badly. We want the Eldar to become the masterful and synergistic army they should be, not GK++.

I understand why you want eldar to be an expensive glass cannon army on principal, but it makes them very difficult to balance, and if you raise the offensive power to much then they become more point & click then synergistic.


Bad example off the top of my head.:D (although it would help if the 6th ed rules introduce some sensible changes to the objective system). But luckily it's not my job to come up with a better alternative, and even if it was, I'd have longer than a couple of seconds to do it! The point I was badly illustrating was that reaching straight for the assault ramps does not have to be the only way of thinking about this.

Basically there are three reasons why I don't want assault vehicle Wave Serpents.

1. I find the assault vehicle rule itself depressing. Frankly I don't think anything should ever be able to move itself from one position of absolute safety, inside a vehicle, to another [ludicrous] one, in close combat, without the enemy having a chance to react at all. It exacerbates a core weakness is the main rules - namely the enormous amount units can sometimes achieve before the enemy can respond, emphasising rather than hiding the stop-start nature of the turn sequence and making the inactive player feel helpless. But at least in most armies' cases, the vehicle itself is quite flimsy. And...

2. ...while the absolute safety of assaulting from moving vehicles is dumb, it does at least evoke what those armies who can do it are about. But I don't think it does that for Eldar. Shock and awe works for Space Marines, Orks and Dark Eldar because that's what they're about, but while the background talks about Eldar being fast, the emphasis is always on how evasive, not aggressive, that speed makes them.

3. I find the "someone else can do X! Outrage outrage outrage!! So WE must be able to as well!" attitude depressing. (I'm not saying that you personally have that attitude, but plenty of people do)

There you go, that's my manifesto here. Disagreeing with it is fine, obviously! I just absolutely refuse to accept that the boring assault vehicle rule is the only way close combat Aspects can possibly be viable. They're not that bad as it is.

I agree for the most part, its mainly banshees that I feel could really use the upgrade, (scorps could get fleet, or grenades and become more the aspect scout unit then another another CC unit). That said...

1) our vehicles are more durable but we have less of them, and I don't expect transports to stay as safe in 6th.

2) Its not quite the shock & Awe of the other armies you listed, DE and Orks have a ton of viable assault units in mutliple FoC slots, and space marines have an all purpose unit (TH & SS termies). For eldar it would mainly just make sure that our dedicated assault unit can get there.

3) I'm not outraged lol


I must :wtf: at your :wtf:. Banshees may not be a mega-ultra-elite assault unit that completely overkills everything like most armies seem to have one of, but a) people seem to want them improved until they are, and b) even now they have enough kill to make this a problem.

Incidentally I'm with you on being able to shoot more guns while moving faster. Fricking Blood Angels skewing the curve...

I don't want them improved as much as most players because I don't see eldar as an assault army, but they aren't very reliable. People want them to win that first assault and they do stall out quite abit due to 3 str. Personally I would just like for them to be harder to outmaneuver because thats the frustrating part for me (buffing fleet is also an option I'm not a fan of the run rule). That said my main hope for aspects is the ability to add a warlock to most squads cause I like the ideal of eldar being an army with a lot of buff support choices.

megatrons2nd
17-03-2012, 17:40
Despite the better save that Banshees have, they consistently lose to their Wyche cousins. Who are cheaper, and more numerous. The Banshees should be doing better as they are more expensive, and fill a similar role. So either Banshees need to get cheaper, or better. Scorpions are supposed to be along the same lines as Incubi, but the match ups I've played actually had the more expensive Incubi winning far more than the Scorpions. Which is as it should be.

I know some will say that it is the army balance issue. But on the balance of each force they fill similar roles and have similar profiles. Meaning they should balance overall with a slight edge toward the "better" unit. Incubi are better than scorpions, and are priced as such. Wyches are better than Banshees, but are not priced as such. The point difference between Banshees and Wyches should be much closer than it is.

althathir
17-03-2012, 19:39
Despite the better save that Banshees have, they consistently lose to their Wyche cousins. Who are cheaper, and more numerous. The Banshees should be doing better as they are more expensive, and fill a similar role. So either Banshees need to get cheaper, or better. Scorpions are supposed to be along the same lines as Incubi, but the match ups I've played actually had the more expensive Incubi winning far more than the Scorpions. Which is as it should be.

I know some will say that it is the army balance issue. But on the balance of each force they fill similar roles and have similar profiles. Meaning they should balance overall with a slight edge toward the "better" unit. Incubi are better than scorpions, and are priced as such. Wyches are better than Banshees, but are not priced as such. The point difference between Banshees and Wyches should be much closer than it is.

Banshees vs. Wyches isn't really a fair comparsion. Wyches are more a tarpit unit that gain some flexibility because of haywire grenades, banshees are an assault unit that specialize againist high armor targets. Wyches should be a nightmare for banshees there isn't much of a point to wyches if they aren't, IMO its ok for some units to have bad matchups. That said one of the reasons I keep bringing up warlocks is that they do add more flexibility to aspect squads like banshees for example a singing spear would provide anti-tank, and help vs. MCs.

If there is a reason to be offended by wyches its more because of how much better they are than our troop choices. Dire avengers should drop a point, and have the ability to pay 2 for haywires making them more flexible (or change bladestorm to rending instead of an extra shot). I'm not comfortable giving advice on our troops choices cause I've always played beil-tan style lists, but they're the source of most of our issues right now.

Shamana
17-03-2012, 20:26
1. I find the assault vehicle rule itself depressing. Frankly I don't think anything should ever be able to move itself from one position of absolute safety, inside a vehicle, to another [ludicrous] one, in close combat, without the enemy having a chance to react at all. It exacerbates a core weakness in the main rules - namely the enormous amount units can sometimes achieve before the enemy can respond, emphasising rather than hiding the stop-start nature of the turn sequence and making the inactive player feel helpless. But at least in most armies' cases, the vehicle itself is quite flimsy. And...

Vehicles in general got a lot safer in 5th, which is why the serpent - which is fairly pricey and had further upgrades to be hardier - was quite good in 4th edition. If you want to remove the "absolute safety" part, tweak the vehicle damage table for everyone.


2. ...while the absolute safety of assaulting from moving vehicles is dumb, it does at least evoke what those armies who can do it are about. But I don't think it does that for Eldar. Shock and awe works for Space Marines, Orks and Dark Eldar because that's what they're about, but while the background talks about Eldar being fast, the emphasis is always on how evasive, not aggressive, that speed makes them.

I don't agree with you here. Eldar are said to be evasive, because they always want to fight on their own terms - and when they want to fight, they can bring in concentrated force at an enemy's weak spot like few others. It's just that the books don't always show that, because a) generally, Eldar try to avoid battle with numerically superior forces (read: most who try to bring the fight to them) and strike at the poorly defended targets and b) in most recent (non-eldar) codices that give a battle in more detail (Codex: SM, Codex: Necrons, parts of IA 11) Eldar tend to be portrayed as a mass attacker, pushed back by a heroic effort of a numerically inferior force with superior leadership, nevermind whether that works for the Eldar fluff. Can't have the non-protagonists pull off the spec ops stuff now, can we ;) .


. I find the "someone else can do X! Outrage outrage outrage!! So WE must be able to as well!" attitude depressing. (I'm not saying that you personally have that attitude, but plenty of people do)

Look, when I was getting into the game, here's how the eldar were described: elite force that doesn't have big numbers, but boasts very skilled warriors, great mobility, and arcane weaponry and psychic support. Here's how Games Workshop pitches them on their site:"If you like the idea of leading an army of elite warriors whose actions manipulate the fate of others, then read on to learn more of the Eldar". That concept, as well as the overall aesthetic, was what attracted me to Eldar in the first place.

There are a lot of things I don't want Eldar to be all that good at. Orks, Nids and IG should be the ones bringing loads of bodies (at least if they go that way), SM/CSM or Necrons should be hard to put down and have good shooting, Tau should be deadly if they can keep you at range... I don't want aspects that can outlast plague marines or 50-guardian blobs, but speed (especially heavier fast skimmers), synergy and psychic power should be areas where Eldar are the gold standard.

Bubble Ghost
17-03-2012, 21:05
I don't see what any of those perfectly reasonable viewpoints have to do with assault vehicles, unless you think "mobility" refers only to how fast you can charge into melee without being shot at.

Cthell
17-03-2012, 21:29
On the subject of mobility, IMHO this was actually the area where the Eldar got screwed the most in the switch to 5th Ed.

Back in 4th Ed, I ran a footslogging list; my usual tactics were to run my assault units (10 strong banshee and avenger squads) towards the enemy, while my firebase suppressed the most dangerous looking enemy units and infiltrating scorpions got up to shenanigans with the enemy firebase. Since my mobile portion all had fleet, I found that they crossed the board almost as fast as mechanised enemies, and actually in greater safety - the vehicle rules at the time being pretty unfriendly to transported models; while a judicious use of cover and fortune could generally get enough of my troops across the table.

At the same time, the Vehicle rules which screwed over most people actually buffed the Eldar transports; Being skimmers (and moving more than 6") all hits were glancing, so the only way to force the occupants out was to destroy the vehicle - something that holofields and vectored engines could make almost impossible.

Both of these mechanisms served to make the Eldar a highly mobile force - the only real opposition in that category came from Dark Eldar, Orks, and Tyranids; this fitted into the fluff pretty well too.

Then 5th Edition rolled in, and suddenly the fleet-footed Howling Banshees - whose fluff was all about how they wore lighter armour than Striking Scorpions in order to gain more mobility - found that they were able to be outpaced by terminators (with a bit of good rolling). At the same time, transported units became a lot more survivable and reliable, whilst the Eldar vehicles found that they were both less shooty and more vulnerable.

Sure, there were some upsides - I now run a wraithsword-equiped wraithlord as a cheap distraction unit, since it can keep pace with the banshee squad (well, nearly anyway) and outflanking adds a whole new set of tactics to Striking Scorpions; but the distinctive "feel" of the Eldar has been taken away.

Couple that with previously slow armies becoming faster than the Eldar (I'm looking at you, Guard and Necrons); a generous amount of psychic power creep (although even the latest "kill everything on a 2+" powers that seem to be popping up are still not as useful IMO as Guide, Fortune and Doom); and the brilliant new Dark Eldar Codex and models, and it's hard not to feel a bit hard-done-by

I'm not arguing for a GK-style Ubercheese 'dex, but I would like to see the Eldar regain their position as "masters of maneuver"

As for the "assault vehicle" argument, I've always imagined the Eldar approach to be "getting into position to launch an assault, then wait for the appropriate moment and pounce"; in other words, I'm against Eldar gaining an assault vehicle - that sort of tactic belongs to the Orks and the Dark Eldar (and to a lesser extent Space Marines). The problem at the moment is that if you drive up into a position to assault next turn, the enemy are able to run away faster than you can catch them (assuming that the unit in question is weak in assault; otherwise they'll assault you) - reinstate the Banshee's speed advantage over your average grunt, and the problem would go away.

Shamana
17-03-2012, 21:42
I don't see what any of those perfectly reasonable viewpoints have to do with assault vehicles, unless you think "mobility" refers only to how fast you can charge into melee without being shot at.

Well, you made two main points about how a) assault vehicles are too good as they provide a fast and safe way to close with the enemy, and b) other races have a style more suited than eldar for using such vehicles. I kinda agreed on the first, but the problem is transports in general are a tad too good (and cheap, in many cases); it's not just assault vehicles but the damage table in general that should be adjusted (imo). On the second point, I essentially meant that Eldar are just as likely to use aggressive tactics as SMs, Orks or DE - they are more often described as elusive simply because their doctrine stresses avoiding enemy concentrations and assaulting vulnerable targets, and they have the means to pull it off. From their description I'd say that when they commit to an attack, they can shock and awe with the best of them.

Bubble Ghost
17-03-2012, 22:10
I wasn't talking about the vehicles themselves, although that is a factor; I was referring more to the gap between being in the vehicle and starting the close combat. 40K allows a unit to move, to fire at the enemy, to move again, and then double their effectiveness in the ensuing fight, all before the other side can do a damn thing - it's the combination of this with the complete absence of reaction or defensive options in the rules that exaggerates this ridiculous sense that one army really is literally standing there and just allowing the other side to have a turn. That makes for unsatisfying gaming, and I think that anything that exacerbates it should be confined to those armies for whom it is a really fundamental part of their schtick. Yes, rationally, the background says that Eldar would be capable of this sort of thing, but there's theme to consider and I don't think it's crucial enough to them to translate to the tabletop in such a crude way. They ought to be different.

We seem to agree on our understanding of the background, just not the extent to which it should be represented in the rules, and I think we're just going to have to agree to differ there.

Even though I'm right.:p

Spell_of_Destruction
18-03-2012, 02:51
I'm going to wait for 6th ed to hit before i start wishlisting :)

I agree to some extent. A ton of salt has been dropped on the more substantial 6th ed rumours. Let's be honest about it - 5th edition boned Eldar in a pretty bad way. I think that it really exposed how 'over-balanced' Phil Kelly's book is and quickly showed up the marginal utility of many of the units, particularly the Troops choices. Maybe 6th edition will be a be a more favourable context for the current book.

It has been a problem since the release of 3rd edition - sub par Eldar units hiding behind a thin layer of overpowered ones. Eldar have consistently had some of the most broken units (3rd ed - Wraithguard, Starcannon spam, 4th ed - Falcons with holo-fields and harlequins) and the cries of cheese seem to drown out the protests of Eldar players who see the lack of choices available to them.

When the 4th edition book came out everyone else was complaining about how cheesy Eldar were and the 'flying circus' list. This makes it easy to ignore the slew of sub par units elswhere in the book.

If we look at the last two codeces, they are basically derived from the the 2nd edition book. Don't believe me? Just look at the units - they are pretty much all the same. The only things we have now that we didn't have then are grav tanks.

In the broadest terms, 2nd edition was very different from the current edition and yet very similar. When I say that, what I mean is that a units attributes and armament essentially conferred the same advantages and disadvantages they do today but certain game mechanics provided for very different tactics. It was a footslogging game for the most part and Eldar, with their highly trained aspect warriors and cheap but well armed Guardians, had an excellent balance of highly skilled warriors who could be screened by 'expendable' rank and file troops.

We're currently in an edition where there are numerous factors which work against the 'aspect warrior' model of unit design. They are all identically armed for starters. This means that the effectiveness of the unit declines with each casualty. Contrast this with many other armies who rely on a 'champion' model or someone armed with a special weapon to do most of the damage - these units can suffer damage and still retain most of their combat effectiveness. Throw in 5th editions 'only Troops can take objectives' (while giving other armies Troops choices who are as good if not better than our Elites) and you have the final nail in the coffin.

The current targetting rules are bad for T3 models. There's no place for them to hide (other than inside transports) and combined with the disdvantage I discussed in the previous paragraph is bad news for aspect warriors. This means that unless Eldar acquire some other means of delivery, they will be a mechanised army for the forseeable future (that is unless you choose to build an army composed of the few units we have that can operate without transportation). Our transports are effective and they are very good but no allowance seems to have been made to take account of the fact that many units need a transport to do their job.

I would like to see Eldar employ more shielding technology (i.e. infantry screening holo-fields - I'm thinking grav platform mounted). These could confer either the stealth or veil special rules. I like veil in particular because it means that the enemy can still inflict a lot of damage if it gets in close but offers a but of protection against ranged fire. I think we should also have the ability to utilise webway technology for deployment but this seems to be Dark Eldar's bag (and it's not as if many players see it as a competitive choice so I doubt that we'll suddenly receive similar abilities that also work better).

My big idea is to separate Exarch powers into 'Exarch Warrior Powers' and 'Aspect Warrior Powers'. This distinction already exists to some extent (in that some powers confer abilities on the exarch and some on the whole squad). I find it irritating though that if the exarch is killed the rest of the squad of highly trained warrior monks suddenly 'forget' their ability. A separation of the two would make Aspect Warriors more viable without taking an exarch while exarchs could be an option that you buy if you really want some extra killing power.

I also think that Aspects should get 2 attacks basic (rather than a WS/BS boost). This brings them closer to Incubi in terms of basic stats, makes the CC Aspects much better (Banshees would almost be as good as DCAs!) and makes CC options for non CC aspects much more viable (I'm looking at you Dire Avengers and Warp Spiders). If you think this is overpowered, do the maths - a tactical marine would still be favourite in a one on one fight with a T3 4+ save aspect warrior.

Kuja
18-03-2012, 05:07
Despite the better save that Banshees have, they consistently lose to their Wyche cousins. Who are cheaper, and more numerous. The Banshees should be doing better as they are more expensive, and fill a similar role. So either Banshees need to get cheaper, or better. Scorpions are supposed to be along the same lines as Incubi, but the match ups I've played actually had the more expensive Incubi winning far more than the Scorpions. Which is as it should be.

I know some will say that it is the army balance issue. But on the balance of each force they fill similar roles and have similar profiles. Meaning they should balance overall with a slight edge toward the "better" unit. Incubi are better than scorpions, and are priced as such. Wyches are better than Banshees, but are not priced as such. The point difference between Banshees and Wyches should be much closer than it is.

Wyches and Banshees have nothing in common... What are you talking about??? :confused:

Fable
18-03-2012, 05:23
If we look at the last two codeces, they are basically derived from the the 2nd edition book. Don't believe me? Just look at the units - they are pretty much all the same. The only things we have now that we didn't have then are grav tanks.

Well, that's sort of true but not really. The Eldar actually lost a number of units from the second edition codex. Also both Fire Prism and Falcon Grav tanks were released during second edition and were codex approved at release (Also the Fire Prism White Dwarf had Eldar Vehicle Upgrades, whereas before that they were only allowed generic vehicle upgrades).

In 3rd they lost Harlequins, Exodites and Pirates, that's not even to mention the characters attached to Harlequins and squad leaders lost from Guardians and pirates or weapon options like D-cannons on vehicles and wraithlords (Eldar dreads) but gained the Wave Serpent.

In 4th they regained Harlequins (without solitaires) and have since had the Night Spinner added.

At this point we can make reasonable guesses and assumptions about what could be regained in the next codex or not, and seeing as this is a wishlisting thread this would be the place for that. Personally I'm less inclined to see Exodites added back to the core codex because I'd like to see Forge World give them a full list at some point like the Pirates got, but I would like to see the Solitaire brought back into the fold (and made available to Dark Eldar).

Spell_of_Destruction
18-03-2012, 09:28
Well, I think what you're describing is that the books after 2nd ed are more 'racially focused' (the 3rd ed book certainly). The Craftworld Eldar units have remained largely the same though. Pirates and Exodites (and even Harlequins) were really on the fringe of the codex - the first two especially as they had no models during 2nd ed (yes I'm aware that Pirate models did exist at some point). The pirate concept was really a big part of the inspiration for DE but the distinction has since been made between the 'piratical' Dark Eldar and the Corsair 'Pirates'. Other than that you're talking about a couple of weapon options and a few units that were actually released at the tail end of the 2nd ed lifespan (grav tanks).

I'm not so much saying that Eldar need to be reinvented from the ground up - clearly that isn't going to happen. Rather, I think that each unit needs to be looked at afresh in order to determine what its role in the army really is and whether or not their rules are fit for purpose - in other words, less design assumptions (a basic design assumption would be that a tactical marine will carry a bolter and wear power armour).

Fable
18-03-2012, 16:09
I'm not so much saying that Eldar need to be reinvented from the ground up - clearly that isn't going to happen. Rather, I think that each unit needs to be looked at afresh in order to determine what its role in the army really is and whether or not their rules are fit for purpose - in other words, less design assumptions (a basic design assumption would be that a tactical marine will carry a bolter and wear power armour).

I completely agree here. I'm hoping the book is quite a departure from the current book, making a lot of our wishlisting moot. The book is in need of a major shake up... as is the game. I think some of the issues I have with rules representation comes down to the design of the core rules, such as speed being mitigated simply to a range of movement. I miss modifiers.

carlisimo
19-03-2012, 01:49
Again such a topic that makes me feel like: "Okay, if GW does what some people suggest, Eldar players will the guys that are looked at because they play a totally imba army. Kinda like GreyKnights players are looked at atm."

You're right, but it would be nice for a non-MEQ army to get that status for a change. I think it'd help increase the army variety in the game.

Hendarion
19-03-2012, 07:14
carlisimo, that might be right in some cases. But if for example WS and BS for all Aspects is increased to 5 and all their armours are made 3+ (as some people suggest), it would be better than MEQ, just with T3. And I really really doubt that this will
1) still feel like Eldar.
2) be good for anybody.
I mean... shooting on 2+? Hitting MEQ in CC on a 3+? Really?

Spell_of_Destruction
19-03-2012, 10:39
carlisimo, that might be right in some cases. But if for example WS and BS for all Aspects is increased to 5 and all their armours are made 3+ (as some people suggest), it would be better than MEQ, just with T3. And I really really doubt that this will
1) still feel like Eldar.
2) be good for anybody.
I mean... shooting on 2+? Hitting MEQ in CC on a 3+? Really?

I don't think it would be that big a deal but at the same time I don't think it's necessary for Aspects to have WS/BS 5.

Although you could just as easily say "Death Cult Assasins hitting MEQ on a 3+? Really?".

As it is I don't think we're sufficiently compensated for the difference between S3 T3 and S4 T4. In combat it's a huge difference.

Like I said, I think that all Aspect should get 2 attacks basic. This would provide a much needed boost for the assault aspects and make assault options on Dire Avenger and Warp Spider exarchs a little more useful. It also brings the statline more in line with Incubi who should be a comparable (if slightly more skilled unit).

Shamana
19-03-2012, 11:20
I mean... shooting on 2+? Hitting MEQ in CC on a 3+? Really?


Mechanically, high WS and BS essentially means that the unit will be more accurate; that's all. Hitting on 2+ in shooting is certainly a noteable boost, although it's about the same (slightly worse, I think) than a TL BS 4. Either way, the efficiency boost isn't as big as from 3 to 4, you basically get 33% more hits. Compared to making the unit cheaper and thus taking more models, the higher accuracy should make for a similar amount of hits but with less randomness - and, of course without the boost in resilience that the added numbers. That's why I'd say a boost from BS 4 to BS 5 would probably be worth no more than 20% increase in cost, presuming the unit was properly costed the first time (many eldar units aren't, at least compared to other codices). You don't need to do it that way, of course - if you want eldar to be more accurate (eldar having to rely on volume of fire rather than accuracy bugs me somewhat) it could be done by, say, getting some of them master-crafted weapons so they can rer

As for hitting (most) MEQs in CC on 3+, I'd actually be quite fine with it. That is what elite melee specialists already do - Death Company, Berserkers, Incubi, Tyranid warriors, Lictors, Genestealers, Harlequins and others. The question is, should melee aspects be "elite" melee specialists? Personally, I'd expect them to be - or why else should I pay over 15 points for a S3 T3 model that can pretty much only do melee?

Hendarion
19-03-2012, 11:24
I don't think that Fire Dragons, Swooping Hawks, Dire Avengers, Dark Reapers or Warp Spiders should hit on a 3+ in melee. They aren't a Death Company, they aren't Berserkers and they aren't Tyranid Warriors or Harlequins.

Shamana
19-03-2012, 11:30
For those the BS boost may be more appropriate, it doesn't have to be both (though avengers, with the whole "hold the line" thing may have a use for it - they are the ones likely to try to hold off elite units, what with skills such as defend or the shimmershield). Although not hitting even orks on 3+ seems a bit of a downer for someone who's been training for decades or centuries. I mean, just how many things can you do with a meltagun, bub?

I don't say it is necessary, but giving aspects a +1 to WS or BS could make sense due to their specialized training and from a game perspective (giving them higher accuracy to compensate for endurance). Making some of them 3/5 or 5/3 is also an option; right now banshees are as good at shooting as reapers. There are other ways to improve their area of specialization, but an accuracy buff seems quite fitting from my perspective. You can do it with the statline, wargear or unit rules, but I think the statline is probably the simplest way.

On a semi-related note, how exactly are genestealers better warriors on birth than a khorne berserker with millenia of experience?

Hendarion
19-03-2012, 12:09
For those the BS boost may be more appropriate, it doesn't have to be both (though avengers, with the whole "hold the line" thing may have a use for it - they are the ones likely to try to hold off elite units, what with skills such as defend or the shimmershield). Although not hitting even orks on 3+ seems a bit of a downer for someone who's been training for decades or centuries.
You know, this paragraph can hold true for so many units - including Space Marines. Fluff doesn't justify any stats. And, apart of that, an Eldar doesn't walk for centuries on the Path of the Warrior. Decades maybe, but that do Space Marines too and they don't all have BS/WS of 5 either. Some specialist shooting guys *maybe* can justify BS5, not Avengers though imo. And some *maybe* can justify WS5, but not Avengers either imo. However, making them 3/5 or 5/3 is more of a logical choice in my eyes, whereas Avengers with 4/4 make a good compromise. Eldar aren't that bad in CC because of I5/6. But the armours in combination with low S *and* low T is a real problem.

Austinitor
19-03-2012, 15:24
@Hendarion: which units do you find least useful or most over-costed in the current codex? What do you hope will change in the next one?

Sildani
19-03-2012, 16:02
Concur with Hendarion, melee Aspects would do well with BS3/WS5, shooty Aspects with BS5/WS3. There's no loss of "eliteness" since a score of 3 indicates "fully trained". As for DAs, I might go a step further and say that their dire catapults count as having a pistol and CC weapon in CC, and allow the squad to choose whether to have +1 BS or WS for X points, reflecting how the squad's Exarch focussed on CC or shooting in his training.

Spell_of_Destruction
19-03-2012, 23:10
I don't like WS/BS 5/3 or 3/5. I think it's a case of confusing the specialisation of Aspects for an incredibly narrow focus of training and skills. I don't think this represents Aspect Warriors well at all. Hell, we could be arguing whether any trained Eldar should have WS or BS 3.

When it comes down to it, I don't think that tweaks to WS and BS are going to have a massive impact on the effectiveness of Aspects. When you analyse it, such an increase marginally improves performance. The thing that would improve the assault aspects the most would be an extra attack. This can easily be justified by the fact that Incubi have 2 attacks. If you keep Aspects at WS/BS 4 then Incubi still have better stats. The current stats suggest a big skill gap between Incubi and Aspects.

I think that special Aspect 'abilities', 'powers' or whatever you want to call them are the next best way to improve aspects. These already exist (e.g. bladestorm) but I'd like to see these sorts of abilities detached from the Exarchs and for the Exarchs to receive their own nasty abilities.

Basically what I'd like to see is an inversion of the current situation where the exarch is either a crucial member of the squad because he confers some ability which is crucial to the function of the unit or he is never taken at all because he offers no tangible benefit. All Aspects should be able to operate effectively without an exarch. I advocate keeping Exarchs as sergent level squad leaders but giving them abilities that reall boost their killing power. The effect would be that exarchs are expensive and you can perhaps only afford to take one in one or two squads.

Here is an example of the sort of power I am talking about for Exarchs:-

Storm of Blades (Banshee Exarch Power): The Exarch's onslaught gathers a blistering momentum of savage grace, cutting down numerous adversaries in quick succession. For each successful to hit roll in close combat, the Exarch may roll one additional attack.

Ivellis
20-03-2012, 00:06
My ideal basic aspect warrior stat line would look something like this:

WS4/5/6 BS4/5 S3 T3 W1 A2 I5 Ld9 Sv4+

Depending on the aspect they would have different stat boosts, Scorpions would have S4 and Sv3+, Banshees WS6 and I6, etc. Shooting aspects have a BS of 5, while melee aspects have 5 or 6 WS. They're still rather fragile with T3 and an average of 4+ save, but they are more skilled and get more attacks, making closer to being worth their points in my eyes.

Then the exarch would be something like this:
WS5/6/7 BS5/6 S4 T3 W2 A3 I6 Ld10 Sv3+

Of course they'd cost somewhere in the realm of 60+ points.

Unfortunately I cannot see my dreams coming to fruition.

autarch1975
20-03-2012, 01:01
I would like them to redo the Eldar codex based on the newest High Elf book. If you borrow ideas from that, it fixes a lot of problems without a massive overhaul.

Quick examples:

USR: Always strikes first, instead of focusing on the "dying race" aspect of the fluff, why not focus on the preternaturally fast and graceful part?
Switch Banshee masks so that they confer warshout automatically, since ASF makes the old ability irrelevant
Scorpion's Claw becomes +2 str pw. Doesn't make sense for Eldar to use slow, clunky weapons, despite how awesome they look on the model. Plus, I try to avoid having my Exarch punching tanks, he's supposed to be killing infantry
Dire Avengers: no heavy weapons, give 'em bladestorm automatically, allow the squad to buy counter-attack and defend. Count them as having both shuricats and a cc, pistol combo.
Shining Spears: up the max squad size, ap3 laser lance, job's a good 'un!
Fire dragons, ditch the exarch's flamer, give back burning fist. They are pretty awesome as is.
Dark Reapers: I'm drawing a blank. Increase the squad size? I haven't had any real problem with them, other than the fact that they're immobile
Swooping hawks: increase either the range of the lasblaster or make it assault 3.
Guardians: Move defenders to HS, increase shuricat range. Storms, move 'em to fast attack, free special weapons or warlock upgrade for any squad of "x" size. Guardians are not front-line troops, they shouldn't be chosen like they are.

Fixing the Autarch is fairly quick as well. Increase his strength to 4 and keep everything else the same and he is a lot more useful.

Anyway, just my thoughts. Had to get 'em off my chest.

megatrons2nd
20-03-2012, 03:38
My ideal basic aspect warrior stat line would look something like this:

WS4/5/6 BS4/5 S3 T3 W1 A2 I5 Ld9 Sv4+

Depending on the aspect they would have different stat boosts, Scorpions would have S4 and Sv3+, Banshees WS6 and I6, etc. Shooting aspects have a BS of 5, while melee aspects have 5 or 6 WS. They're still rather fragile with T3 and an average of 4+ save, but they are more skilled and get more attacks, making closer to being worth their points in my eyes.

Then the exarch would be something like this:
WS5/6/7 BS5/6 S4 T3 W2 A3 I6 Ld10 Sv3+

Of course they'd cost somewhere in the realm of 60+ points.

Unfortunately I cannot see my dreams coming to fruition.

I never want to pay 60 points for a single non HQ/vehicle model, even if it is the sergeant. Especially if it is T3. Besides, your math seems a bit off, with those stats and not being a marine GW would probably make it more like 70-90 points per model. Overall I like the stats of the Eldar, the real problem is that the points cost is way off. Which is an issue with edition change.

Hendarion
20-03-2012, 06:45
@Hendarion: which units do you find least useful or most over-costed in the current codex? What do you hope will change in the next one?
Swooping Hawks and Banshees have serious issues and as much as I like the concepts, they just aren't worth taking. At all.
Other units which are so'n'so are Vypers, Reapers and Warp Spiders. They might have a use sometimes, but they also can fail you badly. Oh... and of course Guardians. I have loads of them, I love the super old models, but... you know... no way.

Kurnous the Hunter
26-03-2012, 14:44
I am going to preface this by saying that I mostly played in that late 90's and early 2000's. Played a lot of 2nd Edition and some 3rd (didn't like it much). Hated the way the game was going and stopped even though 4th Edition Codex corrected the many wrongs of 3rd Ed.

There are a few things that I believe are a near must to 'repair' Eldar.
1. Shuriken Cats Range 18" Minimum
2. Option for Lasblasters for Guardians
3. Increase Range of Shuiken Cannnon to 30"
4. BS4 for all vehicles. Not only do Eldar have better eyesight, reflexes, timing and quicker minds - they have great technology - surely they have better than average
'targeters' - or as others have suggested Bring back the Crystal targeting matrix.
5. Star Cannon either gets a range increase or becomes S7. How is the thing barely better than 2 standard Imperial plasma guns?

Optional Upgrades - not a 'must' but a suggestion.
1. Eldar power weapons rule. Re-roll on a 1 to wound. (better technology!) Makes Banshee's better but still not as good as re-roll or +1S.
2. Guardians with 4+ save. Makes sense fluff wise not sure if it would be balanced.
3. Grenade options for more Aspects and also guardians.
4. 'Greater' Exarchs option - with 2W 3A. Not sure how to cost.
5. Many 'Exarch' abilities transfer to upgrades for Aspect unit.
6. Rending on Deathspinner.
7. Allow the Autuarch some better weapons choices (Executioner for example)
8. Reapers back to missile launchers.
9. Witchblades suck. Treat them as power weapons that re-roll to wound or add +1 to strength or something.
10. Rune armour 3+/4++
11. Bright lance....AP1?
12. Faseer A2
13. Master Warlocks. +1WS, BS,W,A?

That's all for now.

Sildani
26-03-2012, 16:38
Thought I'd add here that in the "Autumn of Flyers" thread in Rumor Discussion, Harry just confirmed that Eldar are coming next year, with at least one flyer. So however the Eldar are getting redone, it's happening in the foreseeable future.

Barfunkel
26-03-2012, 17:10
I just wish they were, you know, more eldar-y, when compared to the fluff. They're supposed to be this ancient race with superior technology. Fragile and vulnerable, I don't mind that, it suits them. But even standard guardians should have an access to better guns than, say, marines. It makes no sense that a weak, dying race wear guns that have a really short range, for example. If something, they should outrange standard marines, because they have the supposedly superior technology. Alternatively, standard troops should have WAY more access to special weapons. A 10-man guardian squad has one special weapon, a 10-man marine squad has 3, when you count in the sergeant. Sure, you can add a Warlock, but they're expensive, especially when you add powers, and not THAT powerful really. Not fair, I say!

Sunshine and Night
26-03-2012, 17:16
Thought I'd add here that in the "Autumn of Flyers" thread in Rumor Discussion, Harry just confirmed that Eldar are coming next year, with at least one flyer. So however the Eldar are getting redone, it's happening in the foreseeable future.

2013?
I mean before it was just 9 months or so away, now at least 10 and posibbly 21!

Goes and cries in corner!

titilititi
26-03-2012, 18:19
My wishlist for Eldar is, erh..., a new codex before 2016... Well I know most of you rode the rumored 6th ed's possible changes, but I'm not in that case. I'll wait to have the new rulebook in my hands before wishing anything more that I've already wished for 5th ed threads... And I wasn't that cynical about 2016. Being one of the first codices to be released gets the inconvenient that you're messed up when GW changes the orientation of the game along the way... (those special units, ridiculizing our aspect warriors on their own skills didn't exist in 2006... It's not that you can't prevail with them, it's just that even harder and that you've lost the classy effect) So... Finally... I just came to say, well, nothing at all...

Ouroboros85
20-04-2012, 19:05
OK, I have been writing a eldar fandex for sometime and it contains many things on my wishlist, they have been somewhat playtested and otherwise run through heresy onlines combat calculator exaustively despite my hatred for the math-hammer. For the most part I recommend keeping the points costs much as they are now.

Striking Scorpions: 2 base attacks (plus wargear), i4 base, furious charge, biting blade becomes rending simply because of ungodly amount of attacks and to provide a somewhat effective anti-tank option, chain sabres give the strength bonus also but probable cost increase for balance. This turns out real nice, they utterly obliterate ork and guard, but still not to good against marines despite amount of attacks due to armour save, exactly as they are supposed to be.

Howling Banshees: ditch this WS1 crap that never works anyway on ld8/9/10 mehrines, give them the ability to exchange there charge attacks for a S10 vs average Ld attack that always hits and ignores armour, invulns still apply. 2 attacks base to match DE assault troops. Probably hit and run.

Phoenix lords: Make there aspect stubborn, allow ONE squad of there aspect as troop and they must start the game joined to it as do we really want potentially 9 fire dragon squads? otherwise all around 4+ invuln, baharroth gets a S5 assault 5 gun and high strength pistol of some type.

Shining Spears: Tank hunter so they can actually use those lance weapons, furious charge would be fluff accurate, squad sizes are fine but give 2 attacks base (again to match the DE stuff) general points decrease.

Fire Dragons: BS 4 squad full of melta? they are awesome as is, not to many changes needed here, possibly let the exarch share the crackshot love.

Warlocks: Ld 9, without question, powers reduced with embolden as free default, 2 base attacks as with practically all squad leaders.

Dark reapers: Make reaper launchers able to alternate fire a S6 AP4 round, this lets them crack rhinos to get at the juicy bits inside.

Vehicles: Everything except the serpent and war walkers become BS4, warwalkers are excellent as is, serpents can just be dropped to 75 pts or so with TL shuriken cannon standard and probably a pricey upgrade for a assault ramp. Would probably support falcons, spinners and prisms in squadrons, but that would get horribly expensive fast. Either join vypers to the guardian squads as assault bike, or put in a new rule: Heavy Jetbike - may make 6" assault move. which would be incredible for stick and jump tactics.

dl
29-04-2012, 05:35
Sorry for the mild theadomancy, but I've always had a soft spot for the eldar and after the DE codex I have such hope for what will eventually happen for CWE, would especially love them to become super-elite, highly priced, low model count. Powerful, but requiring finesse to use well.

my wishlist-
* harlequin solitare. Some kind of combat beast bought with harlies (so doesn't take up extra FOC slot) but cant join them or anyone. Think eversor assassin like prowess with old culexus style bubble of psychological effect. Priced accordingly.
* "official" inclusion of hornet and warp hunter to silence the forgeworld haters
* vypers as attack bikes seems a good call.
* ariel assault on fast skimmers seems to improve mobility. BS4 seems right too.
* farseers need to reclaim their place as the best psykers in the galaxy. Mastery level 2-3 (Eldrad to 4? eeek), maybe a lesser version of divination or an ability to force opponent to reroll where outflankers come in. Boost eldrich storm to JotWW/blood lance levels.
* phoenix lords to get an invulnerable save, and all aspects get a lord. Can take an honour guard of that aspect.
* +1A for all aspects. +1 W for exarchs. exarch powers become squad powers, and gain other ones for themselves.
* swooping hawks lasblaster to assault 3, maybe even assault 4.
* warp spiders need new models, and rending death spinners, spinneret +1 str and the option of a template weapon for the exarch. Need a second exarch power maybe something like DoA.
* stealth and fleet usr for scorpions.
* Banshees need to be better than wyches. Maybe banshee masks force opponent to reroll hits when banshees charge.
* starcannon to s7.
* support weapons for guardian defender squads, and 24" shuriken catapults.
* war walkers to FA.
* WWPs!!!
* bonesingers with repair ability.
* I dont see any of the current grav tanks as assault vehicles, but maybe a new open topped one would be cool.
* An army wide usr, like power from pain but different. Army wide acute senses.

I really hope that forgeworld do an exodite list too.

daa6
29-04-2012, 17:42
2 cent worth...
Warlocks need to be better! 2 attacks base, and a rending on witchblades wouldn't go a miss, as their great agains armour, not so against power armour....
Powers remain (no test needed)
Spiders gain rending...
Waithcannon needs a range increase!!
Banshee power effect change as WS1 sucks and never works...
Scorpoins need Fleet !
Farseer needs better powers and poss Mastery lvl 2 to start with...
Could do with an assault ramp for transport... but holo fields rock! dont need much change other than BS4 !!!!!!!

those are my main ones, and review points costs.....

Spell_of_Destruction
29-04-2012, 23:16
6th ed is so close now that it seems pointless to go into specific wishlisting.

My main hope is that the existing units get the attention they deserve as I think we will get lots of shiny new gubbins (particularly vehicles) to distract us.

bobafett_h
30-04-2012, 02:39
Prism Cannons and Pulse Lasers do not need the Lance rule. Combined Fire should help make up for the lack of Lance on Fire Prisms, especially if they become a squadron unit. Lance would make them a little OP then, more powerful than the likes of the Tau Railgun. What the Prism Cannon does need though is to never scatter. It's a light/energy weapon fired through a massive focussed crystal so why should it ever be effected by things like recoil, gravity, wind, etc.? Trading the Lance rule of the Bright Lance for the 2nd shot of a Pulse laser is a good trade off in my opinion. A points decrease is really all that is needed with these weapons...

Death Spinners should be template weapons like they used to be, otherwise keep them the same stats. Reaper Launchers are fine as they are, but the option for single shot S8 AP3 guns instead of those wouldn't hurt at all for Dark Reapers. Fusion Guns could be reduced to S7 AP1 Melta (with a 1 point drop for Fire Dragons) and would still be deadly. Fire Dragons would come across as being less OP than they are often thought of now, but Tank Hunters would get more use then...

The ranges need to be increased on Shuriken Catapults for sure (why do they have the same range as a Pistol?) and Wraithcannons. 2nd Edition had 16" for Wraithcannons, which was 4 times the standard 4" movement for most units, however 18" would be sufficient now. 18" or 24" would be fine for Shuriken Catapults. Avenger Catapults do not need more range than Guardians either, perhaps they just have Bladestorm as standard instead of it being an Exarch power or re-rolls to hit or are rending or something...

Starcanon should become S7 AP2 Heavy 2. It used to be the Heavy Plasma Gun and should be similar to the Marine Plasma Cannon. It would not Get Hot or be Blast and I think would fill the S7 weapon gap that Eldar has had for some time. Most weapons are only either S6 or S8 and something in between would be good. Range on Shuriken Cannon should be increased to same as Splinter Cannon while the Scatter Laser should be changed to Heavy D3+2 so that it always gets at least 3 shots...

Either change Fleet so it allows units disembarking from Transports or Deep Striking to assault in the same turn for 6th Ed or have some options (vehicle upgrades/Exarch powers) to offer the same effect for units like Banshees, Scorpions and Swooping Hawks. Haywire Grenades need to be more powerful, or the current VDC changed so it is not so hard to destroy a vehicle with Glancing hits...

Lots more suggestions, but those are my main ones for now.

TheDoctor
30-04-2012, 03:28
All aspects really need 2A base, OR WS5/BS3 WS3/BS5, dependent on aspect. Dire Avengers would be WS4/BS4.
-Fluffwise marines are still generalists at heart, aspects focus on EITHER CC or shooting. Dire Avengers, being the generalist aspect, get the generalist statline.

Warlocks need 2A base, and ld 9. I'm cool with farseers only getting 1A. Warlocks are the warrior seers, farseers are the psychic masters, not so much focused on combat.
-Farseers need better offensive powers
-Also, farseers should be able to upgrade to be able to use 3 powers a turn.

Guardians, should become better not cheaper
-4+ armor, options for lasblasters
-Either a better statline, or option for warlock power to give +1 BS
(So storm guardians could have WS4, and defender guardians could have BS4)
-Possible extension of range to 18"
-More access to heavy/special weapons, based on number of dudes in the squad

Now, the main complaint of these changes would be that they would encroach upon dire avengers territory, but in my mind, Dire Avengers were always more of "shock troops"
-Give avengers a 3+ armor, pistol/CC weapon.
-Make the avenger shuriken catapult either S5 AP5 with a 12" range, OR give the avenger 3 shots base.
Would make them be tactically flexible between offense/defense, with volleys of shuriken fire weakening the foe before charging in. They would still be focused on anti-infantry (even with S5 shuriken catapults). Still only T3, and still only S3 in combat.

Autarchs
-Really need better special rules, but that is more of an issue with the age of the codex.
-More wargear options would be nice.
--Im thinking access to witchblades and warlock powers, but with Ld test required to activate said powers. After all, the autarch COULD have gone on the path of the seer.

-Witchblades. I'm thinking 2 modes
--Standard mode that we all know
--Option to ignore armor saves, but going at S4.

Swooping Hawks
-make their guns either S4 or assault 3
--Fluffwise, their guns are aspect lasblasters, like dire avengers have avenger shuriken catapults. Differentiates their guns from guardians, IF guardians get access to lasblasters

Phoenix Lords
-invulnerable, access to FOC changes.
--Make either one squad of their aspect as troops/ thier aspect become scoring/ go whole hog and allow aspect to be taken as troops.

Sensible points costs on everything (although out of everything in this thread, this is probably the least likely)

Reivax26
30-04-2012, 04:01
Bring back the Craftworld Eldar rules from their old dex. Would love to see how that Greyknight Paladin spam would do against the Ranger Disruption Table

Geep
30-04-2012, 05:20
I really don't want to see Eldar become too much like Dark Eldar (eg. just because Incubi have 2 attacks base doesn't mean all Aspect Warrior squads need that, and no open-topped vehicles).

I also don't want to see the Aspects lose their specialties (eg. Dark Reapers are usually not vehicle killers and Banshees are not tough).

I really like the skill it takes to make Eldar work, using each squad to its best potential only against an appropriate target and with the right support. This does make it hard to make an all-rounder list, as we simply don't have the points for all eventualities. I'm happy to accept that difficulty though, as I find its the games that are real uphill struggles that show true generalship, and even if I lose- it's a game and I've probably had fun.

I would like to be able to add Warlocks to Aspect Warrior squads, as the Eldar rely strongly on complimentary units (eg. Farseer powers) and I feel this change would suit that play style.

I wouldn't mind if Guardian Shuriken Catapults went up to 18", but I also don't see this as necessary- for me Guardians are very much a back-line unit that sits on an objective and tries to not get noticed, while the Aspects protect them and secure other areas of the field. This role seems appropriate to militia IMO. It does mean I only ever field one squad of Guardians in my armies, but fluff-wise that seems appropriate anyway.

I'd like for Falcons and maybe a few other vehicles to go up to BS4, or at least have an upgrade making this possible.

Many Eldar things can also do with a small points reduction, although this is mainly just to help them fit with usual codex-creep than for any good reason.

bobafett_h
30-04-2012, 06:18
All aspects really need 2A base, OR WS5/BS3 WS3/BS5, dependent on aspect. Dire Avengers would be WS4/BS4.
-Fluffwise marines are still generalists at heart, aspects focus on EITHER CC or shooting. Dire Avengers, being the generalist aspect, get the generalist statline.


WS5 & BS3/4 for Banshees/Scorpions and WS3/4 & BS5 for Fire Dragons/Dark Reapers then WS4/BS4 for Dire Avengers sounds good to me. Not all Aspects need 2 attacks base, really only Banshees, Scorpions and Dire Avengers. Dark Reapers should get Relentless (makes up for their lack of Fleet too) and increase squad limit to maybe 7 plus Exarch.


I wouldn't mind if Guardian Shuriken Catapults went up to 18", but I also don't see this as necessary- for me Guardians are very much a back-line unit that sits on an objective and tries to not get noticed, while the Aspects protect them and secure other areas of the field. This role seems appropriate to militia IMO. It does mean I only ever field one squad of Guardians in my armies, but fluff-wise that seems appropriate anyway.

I'd like for Falcons and maybe a few other vehicles to go up to BS4, or at least have an upgrade making this possible.

A back-line unit using weapons with the range of pistols doesn't make sense at all. Sure their heavy weapon platforms have better range, but they would be far more effective if all of their guns can actually reach more targets on the battlefield. 18" is really a minimum, but 24" would be even better. I definitely agree on the BS4 for vehicles. At least Falcons and Wave Serpents, but Vypers and Warwalkers would be nice too.

Additionally, I would like to see Guide become a Warlock power, Farseers become level 2 psykers as standard and Witchblades either become proper Force Weapons or gain Rending so they can ignore armour on 6s.

Spell_of_Destruction
30-04-2012, 06:35
Henchman with stormbolters for one point less than a Guardian suggests that even with 18" range Catapults, Guardians would be overpriced.

If there is any truth in the rumours that we'll see multiple shot rapid fire weapons, then I would like to see Catapults go to 18" Rapid Fire 2.

I don't want to see Aspects go to 5/3 or 3/5. I think people take the idea of specialisation a little too literally. They have specialised roles but that does not mean they have completely specialised training. 5/4 or 4/5 would make more sense but is unecessary from a balance perspective.

I would also like to see all Aspects get 2 attacks base. I think it would make some of the Exarch CC options more viable - it would make Dire Avengers in particular a decent tar pit unit.

Ivellis
30-04-2012, 07:07
I definitely think 5/4 WS/BS for Scorpions and Banshees is a must; however, I don't necessarily think the ranged aspects need 4/5, although I would be all for it.

TheDoctor
30-04-2012, 07:52
WS5 & BS3/4 for Banshees/Scorpions and WS3/4 & BS5 for Fire Dragons/Dark Reapers then WS4/BS4 for Dire Avengers sounds good to me. Not all Aspects need 2 attacks base, really only Banshees, Scorpions and Dire Avengers. Dark Reapers should get Relentless (makes up for their lack of Fleet too) and increase squad limit to maybe 7 plus Exarch.

You know, that was in my head, I just didn't put it down.

I could see relentless being an exarch power. But I'll take pretty much anything for dark reapers that affects his entire squad (not saying that the exarch being a badass by himself isn't enough)
Hell, that might even make Maugan Ra worth fielding with his aspect.

@Spell of Destruction
I'm actually kindof dreading 6th edition. If some of those rumors are true, and they will buff rapid fire weapons, Eldar just get nerfed again... with god knows how long until we get a new codex.
Most of the reason I want CC aspects to become WS5 is so that they become less reliant on psychic support.
-Just remember that a stat line of 3 is "well trained"
-In my vision of Eldar, their basic WS/BS is 3. Guardians could increase those through warlock support, vehicles could buy an upgrade to make them BS4, and aspects are "well trained" at what they do not specialize in, and godly at what they do specialize in.

Hendarion
30-04-2012, 12:28
Please do not use fluff to justify any kind of stats. Especially WS or BS of 5. There are other "well trained" or "super good" units with stats 4 (Marines, remember that 4 is an elite-value!). Making them 5 will lead to only one thing: More fanboy-GW-workers of other races will create their next Codex with stats 5 too and then everything will be where it is now (or worse if you think of Dark Reapers with BS5, WS3 compared to Space Marines with BS5, WS5!)
Use game-balance-views to decide what stats or gear should be useful or balanced.
Are Marines with Storm-Bolters and Force-Weapons for 20 points balanced? No. Should Eldar get equivalents? No, because it would be the same imbalance.
Are Henchmen with Storm-Bolters for 7 points balanced? No. Should Eldar get them instead? Nope.

I'm not saying that some Aspects or units aren't broken, we all know some are. But making weapon-specialists hit on a 2+ instead of 3+ is not elite-choice, it is unbalanced.

Neither I don't see what the problem is with Guardians as a concept. I'm not saying they should stay the way they are, no, they are expensive rubbish. But if I imagine a Craftworld, I think of millions of civilians. If they get in danger and get attacked or need to make a pre-emptive strike and have to put in all their available strength, then I think of the same as when I think of the Imperium: A hand full of trained elite warriors (Marines, Aspects) among millions of normal forces (Guardsman, Guardians). That doesn't mean Eldar should consist of only Guardian-forces, but they should be a valid army-build same as an all-Aspect-army should be. That is possible right now. You can chose to pick 6*20 Guardians as your core choices or you chose 2*5 Dire Avengers. It is your choice!

Stop saying that because Eldar are a dying race, the concept of Guardians is wrong. It is not. If they need to defend their Craftworld, I imagine 90%+ of the forces to consist of Guardians. Small elite forces (or even big ones) aren't a contradiction here. It depends on the purpose. If you wanna play a scenario where the Aspects have been slaughtered in defence of their Craftworld, then you should be able to build up an army that consists only of mere Guardians. Removing this ability from the Eldar Codex would be the same like removing Gaunts from Tyranids Codex - a big flaw. They should exist and ever have. That they currently are not a valid choice is not a problem of the concept. In 2nd Ed you gladly took Guardians and they owned!


PS:
I noticed that Vampire Raider and Hunter are AV 10/10/10... made me cry on saturday. Guess I'll leave them just in my cabinets then :p

TheDoctor
30-04-2012, 13:07
@Hendarion

Who said they wanted to get rid of guardians?

Also, where do you play that has a guardian based army be as viable as an aspect warrior list?

Hendarion
30-04-2012, 13:12
Basically the saying: "Guardians do not fit the fluff, Eldar are a dying race and should be expensive and small elite force". You can read that on every page with different words.

Also I didn't say that currently an all-Guardian-force is working. I said it should be (and is) a viable army selection.

Bubble Ghost
30-04-2012, 14:01
Basically the saying: "Guardians do not fit the fluff, Eldar are a dying race and should be expensive and small elite force". You can read that on every page with different words.

Also I didn't say that currently an all-Guardian-force is working. I said it should be (and is) a viable army selection.

Indeed, and a further problem is that when people say "elite", what they mean is "more elite than Space Marines", and that's an idea that's flawed. Eldar already are a small, elite force. All an Aspect Warrior really is is a normal guy who knows kung fu, and so the fact that merely knowing Eldar kung fu makes him more than a match for a Space Marine speaks volumes for how 'elite' he already is.

Eldar could possibly do with some sort of super-duper-mega-ultra-unit that everyone seems to have at least one of these days, but I'm not convinced that's strictly necessary, and I don't think making Aspect Warriors into that sort of thing across the board is remotely the right choice in any case. A sort of "Court of the Young King" made up of Exarchs would be a more appropriate way of doing it, and I'm sure there are others, but frankly I'm good with the status quo as long as the kinks in the rules and points values are ironed out. I like the idea that Eldar armies have to work together rather than rely on a single death star, it's appropriate for their background and it makes them stand out in gameplay terms as well.

All that said, I think Eldar have a fundamental problem fitting into 40K that isn't likely to go away any time soon. This is because of 40K's turn sequence. The game completely fails to account for evasive, hit and run type tactics because of the way a unit is static and helpless once it has acted, with the enemy free to engage it without risk - which means that chess-like 'sacrificing' of units, rather than a cold and callous tactical option, becomes almost a cornerstone of the gameplay. That's completely inappropriate for Eldar, and doubly so for Guardians, and yet it is they as the cheapo choice who are first on the list when you need bait.

Basically, there's nothing wrong in background terms with shuriken catapults having a short range - the problem comes when you factor in what the implications of that short range are in 40K's rules, as opposed to what they would be in reality. Namely, a short ranged weapon perversely makes the Guardians really easy to attack close up where they're most vulnerable, when actually it should mean that going anywhere near them at that range is extremely dangerous. 40K's core rules are completely inadequate for anything but the aforementioned chess-like exchanging of units, but making shuriken catapults at the very least count as defensive grenades would be a good start, and charging a unit armed with them should probably be difficult and dangerous terrain as well, at least for one nominated charging unit.

BooTMGSG
30-04-2012, 14:11
With Eldar the key is specialisation, well with the aspect warriors with some customisation round the exarchs individual teaching.

Dire Avengers - The workhorse, general allrounders in an army of specialists.
*Think these are fine may need a change if the Guardians are changed*
Fire dragons - Melta Melta Meeeeelta
*Good for their job*
Striking Scorpions - Resilent CC against hordes. With some steath ambushing themes
*Again they seem alright*
Howling banshee - The Glass cannon of the CC world, shock troops.
*Str 3 is killing them, they are not brutal enough on the charge Furious charge perhaps?*
Swooping hawks - Death from above, death from anywhere they choose to strike from.
*I miss the bombing runs, let them choose between firing their long range lasguns or give them a 24" movement to drop either Frag, Haywire, or Smoke Grenade along the straight flightpath*
Shining Spears - Tip of the spear, hit hard hit fast, then go.
*Mostly fine, I would up the AP of their lances so they can punch through anything, 1 shot, one attack, but hits like a brick.*
Warp spiders - Teleporters with monofilament wire
*Pretty much fine, I do long for the days where they were flameweapons*
Dark reapers - Death from afar
*I miss them having EML, they should have the same role as Firedragons, but exchange melta for range. If it is true that sixth addition makes enemy movement count against to hit, they should reintroduce they dark reaper targeting system.*

Thats just leaves the reason why the Eldar are a dying race, Guardians.
They should be support, they should be padding for your army. The aspect warriors can be everywhere at once, so the Guardians should fill out the numbers, when you can't use dire avengers to hold an area. 12" Weapons are madness, but I'm not sure where a cheap expendable unit sits with a dying race. They should be on jetbikes, but not all craftworlds agree. Perhaps Warlock support is the key.

Bubble Ghost
30-04-2012, 15:01
12" Weapons are madness, but I'm not sure where a cheap expendable unit sits with a dying race.

This is what I was referring to in my post - in the background they aren't cheap and expendable, and just having short ranged weapons doesn't make them so. The problem is not that the shuriken catapult has a short range; it's what a short-ranged weapon means in the 40K rules. I would rather keep the Guardians and their armament more or less as is in concept, and come up with rules that explain why it isn't madness for them to use such weapons.

BooTMGSG
30-04-2012, 15:35
3 thoughts of the top of my head, either in single or combination
1.) Bumping them up to Dire avenger range, might need to change dire avenger weapon to make it special.
2.) Allow Eldar infantry a version of fleet where they can move after firing. I fear this may be too cumbersome with mass infantry.
3.) Alow for more Eldar weapons platforms + options. Here the Guardians keep their short range weapons, by act more as a protection for a couple of heavy guns. Shurukens are for anyone that gets too close, but their main function is long range support while holding important locations, perhaps throw in some defensive grenades.

Ivellis
30-04-2012, 19:22
Please do not use fluff to justify any kind of stats. Especially WS or BS of 5. There are other "well trained" or "super good" units with stats 4 (Marines, remember that 4 is an elite-value!). Making them 5 will lead to only one thing: More fanboy-GW-workers of other races will create their next Codex with stats 5 too and then everything will be where it is now (or worse if you think of Dark Reapers with BS5, WS3 compared to Space Marines with BS5, WS5!)
Use game-balance-views to decide what stats or gear should be useful or balanced.
Are Marines with Storm-Bolters and Force-Weapons for 20 points balanced? No. Should Eldar get equivalents? No, because it would be the same imbalance.
Are Henchmen with Storm-Bolters for 7 points balanced? No. Should Eldar get them instead? Nope.

This thread is for wishlisting, while we should keep the overall idea of game balance in mind I suppose, we aren't designing the next Eldar codex so I figure we can suggest whatever we want. And yes I could go on and on about fluff reasons for WS or BS5, but the most important reason for the change is simple: It's silly to play a game with WS ranging from 1-10 and BS ranging from 1-10 and having the VAST majority of units has WS 3 or 4 and BS 3 or 4. I'd like more variety, I don't know about you. However, it would also make the Scorpions and Banshees better at their job to have that WS5, which is why I care more about them getting it than any other Eldar units.



Stop saying that because Eldar are a dying race, the concept of Guardians is wrong. It is not. If they need to defend their Craftworld, I imagine 90%+ of the forces to consist of Guardians. Small elite forces (or even big ones) aren't a contradiction here. It depends on the purpose. If you wanna play a scenario where the Aspects have been slaughtered in defence of their Craftworld, then you should be able to build up an army that consists only of mere Guardians. Removing this ability from the Eldar Codex would be the same like removing Gaunts from Tyranids Codex - a big flaw. They should exist and ever have. That they currently are not a valid choice is not a problem of the concept. In 2nd Ed you gladly took Guardians and they owned!

I'm not quite sure where you're coming from here, I haven't read the thread from beginning to end, but usually in these threads no one argues against the concept of Guardians, but simply the execution of the concept. It makes perfect sense for a dying race to use civilian auxiliaries, it does not make perfect sense to equip these auxiliaries with rifles that have the range of pistols and the weakest armour they craft.


BTW, why do you feel the need to tell us to stop doing and saying certain things, is it hurting you or something? As long as we're not throwing around flames I"m pretty sure it's free discussion.

althathir
30-04-2012, 21:26
6th ed is so close now that it seems pointless to go into specific wishlisting.

My main hope is that the existing units get the attention they deserve as I think we will get lots of shiny new gubbins (particularly vehicles) to distract us.

Yeah at least a flier, and hopefully something in fast attack (or just give us hornets :)).


Bring back the Craftworld Eldar rules from their old dex. Would love to see how that Greyknight Paladin spam would do against the Ranger Disruption Table

That table was a gimmick, and I think part of Eldar's problem is that our books have relied on them for too long. So hopefully they stay away from that stuff IMO.


Basically the saying: "Guardians do not fit the fluff, Eldar are a dying race and should be expensive and small elite force". You can read that on every page with different words.

Also I didn't say that currently an all-Guardian-force is working. I said it should be (and is) a viable army selection.

As far as guardians I would almost rather see them move into the elite slot, gain bs 4 & 4+ save, and allow the player to choose between weapon platforms & specials (2 for every 10) as well as between shurcats, and pistols and CCWs. Then only have a couple of base troops (i'm thinking rangers and DA) and have the player choose an origin which makes a couple of other units count as troops.

So for example there would be a Ulthwe style origin that would unlock the improved guardians and jetbikes, a beit-tan one that lets you pick swooping hawks and scorpions*, and Wraith style option that would give wraithguard as troops and maybe allow a scoring wraithlord for every 2-3 squads. The wraithguard origin wouldn't have any additional restrictions on unit size so you could take a min. squad instead of having to take 10.

*This is the one area i'm not completely sold on, I picked hawks & scorpions because they have alternative deployments that don't require transports, they're fairly well rounded as far as aspects go, and I think allowing any aspect to be troops would be unbalanced. Honestly though if Dire Avengers become a bit more flexible aspect armies wouldn't need an origin, maybe something like sternguard ammo?

Beyond that the only suggestion I have is changing fire dragons, so they have heat lances, & tank hunter instead of melta guns. Its makes them a little less rounded, but they could be further from vehicles so they wouldn't get hurt by explosions and would be easier to hide.

bignbadbum
30-04-2012, 21:47
I've just recently started playing Eldar.. and by no means an expert, but I thought I would chime in with my own(hopefully balanced) wishlisting. Note, some things go without saying like offensive grenades on most units.
So here it goes:

Army Wide Rules:
-Fleet of Foot(This would apply to everything in the army except Wraithguard and Wraithlords.. Who could obtain it with a Spiritseer in the unit/nearby)
-Eldar Psychic Might(All Eldar are psychic, and are potentially the best psykers ever next to Tzeentch related Chaos. I think there should be a generic list of several psychic powers that all units,barring Wraithlords/guard and -vechicles, could buy from that did certain things with a psychic test. Units could only buy 1 power. Everything else would work akin to Brotherhood of Psykers in C:GK. Warlocks would work as they do now adding even more abilities to a unit they are attached to)
Acute Senses
All Shuriken Catapult weapons would get +6" to their range. 18" Shuriken Catapults. 24" Avenger, 30" Cannon

HQs:

-Avatar of Khaine(would gain I7 A5, Furious Charge and FNP. His Fearless bubble would also grant Furious Charge. As mentioned above he would also be fleet. Wailing Doom would also gain 2 alternative profiles for a total of 3 and the player would pick which one they want at the beginning of a game and cannot change it. The first would be a S6 AP4 Template, the other a 18" S5 AP2 small blast. This would represent the Wailing Doom taking the form of different weapons like sword or spear and provide a Anti-Horde, Anti Tank, and Anti TEQ option. Would up his cost to at least 200.)
-Phoenix Lords(unlikely, but wish for it nonetheless. Phoenix Lords would gain WS/BS8, I8, W4, A5 and all would gain the Battle Fate rule that Asurmen currently has for an inv save. Drazhar in the DE book would also gain the boost. Points cost adjusted as needed.)
-Autarch(Keep Master Strategist, but add in something akin to the GKGM's Grand Stratedgy rule. D3 units gain one rule from the following: Scout, Counter-Attack, Hit and Run. Also add in more gear options for weapons/utility gear.)
-Farseer(Psychic Mastery lvl 2 base. 35 point upgrade to lvl 3. 35 point Spirit Stones to upgrade to lvl 4. Options to buy other Seer upgrades. I.e. Battleseer = +1WS, +1A. Most other options stay the same. Would choose psychic powers for free at the beginning of a game akin to how Marines psykers are now. Also add in 3-4 new psyker powers that preferably involved mobility or were offensive)
-Warlocks(give I5 A2. Otherwise practically the same.)
-Wraithseer from Forge-World

Aspect Warriors:
-All gain 2A base(Exarch 3A) and have fleet(as above) and a 3+ save.
-Make Exarch powers more unique and not streamlined. Akin to Incubi Klaivex Powers.
-Striking Scorpions(Would have Infiltrate, MTC, and Stealth base. Mandiblasters and chainswords would stay the same. Scorpions Claw would count as an I1 S8 power weapon. Biting Blade would be Rending.)
-Dire Avengers(Counter Attack base. Shimmershield would be +5 Inv at all times. Bladestorm would add +1 shot at max range, +2 shots at half range and cannot fire next turn. Sort of like an Eldar FRF,SRF. Avenger Shuriken Catapult would be 24". Diresword remains the same.)
-Shining Spears(Would have Hit and Run and Skilled Rider normally and be equipped with pistols. Laser/Star Lances would stay the same regarding CC. Laser Lances become AP3, Star would be AP2)

Rangers and Pathfinders:
-Rangers(Gain WS4 would have Scout added to Masters of Stealth)
-Pathfinders(Would become and Elite choice with BS5 I5 and LD9. Their Stealth would still be +2 to cover save. Would still ignore Difficult terrain. Would gain a rule to make their Outflanking work like Wolf Scouts BEL rule. Special rifle remains the same.)

Guardians:
-Only thing I can really think of concretely here(Don't use them) is to give them all a base +4 Armor Sv instead of a +5.

Wraithlord And Guard(Wraithsight remains the same):
-Wraithlord(WS5, W4, A3. Would be allowed to have 2 Heavy Weapons in addition to a melee weapon. Add a couple more melee options in addition to the Wraithsword.)
-Wraithguard(W2. Guns become 18" range. Wraithsword option. No other changes.)

Vechicles:
-All Vehicles gain BS4.

That's about it for now. Most the units talked about are ones I used/plan to field or are interested in. Like some have said the idea for me here was for a mobile force between SM and IG in terms of durability.

Bubble Ghost
30-04-2012, 22:05
usually in these threads no one argues against the concept of Guardians, but simply the execution of the concept. It makes perfect sense for a dying race to use civilian auxiliaries, it does not make perfect sense to equip these auxiliaries with rifles that have the range of pistols and the weakest armour they craft.

Guardians' armour and weapons are ideal for them as is. If you're a "dying race" (which is a debatable description for Eldar, but let's go with it for now) battling against armies that heavily outnumber you, why on earth would you equip your forces for battles of attrition and long-range slugging matches? Against enemies with more guns than you, you want to be out of sight, constantly moving, and right up in their faces, where you can neutralise their advantages and make every one of your own shots count. And Guardians are perfectly equipped for that. Light armour combined with their natural agility is going to help them move quickly through the dense terrain that a "dying race" wants to be in, and a weapon like the shuriken catapult is going to have enormous defensive advantages in that terrain - you can't attack them directly because you'll be sliced up like sashimi, and you can't call in fire support because they'll be gone by the time it arrives. Guardians are perfectly equipped.

The problem - and there is a big problem - is that, like I said a couple of posts back, 40K's core rules reflect absolutely none of that. Instead, once a unit's turn has ended, it stands stock still and just allows the enemy to pound on it. So that's what I want addressed. I don't want the background to start treating the side effects of unrealistic game mechanics as though they're laws of physics, because that way lies madness. I'd rather see rules that make Guardians more or less as they are viable.

dl
30-04-2012, 22:12
dont like the idea of all aspects getting 3+ saves, eldar dont need durability, they need mobility.

pathfinders dont need to join a crowded elites, or need to outflank.

like the idea of grand strategy for autarchs, and some way of showing what paths your hq took before their current one (battleseer/autarch with minor psychic power or exarch powers based on wargear)

fuious charge on banshees seems about right.

BooTMGSG
30-04-2012, 22:21
Guardians' armour and weapons are ideal for them as is. If you're a "dying race" (which is a debatable description for Eldar, but let's go with it for now) battling against armies that heavily outnumber you, why on earth would you equip your forces for battles of attrition and long-range slugging matches? Against enemies with more guns than you, you want to be out of sight, constantly moving, and right up in their faces, where you can neutralise their advantages and make every one of your own shots count. And Guardians are perfectly equipped for that. Light armour combined with their natural agility is going to help them move quickly through the dense terrain that a "dying race" wants to be in, and a weapon like the shuriken catapult is going to have enormous defensive advantages in that terrain - you can't attack them directly because you'll be sliced up like sashimi, and you can't call in fire support because they'll be gone by the time it arrives. Guardians are perfectly equipped.

The problem - and there is a big problem - is that, like I said a couple of posts back, 40K's core rules reflect absolutely none of that. Instead, once a unit's turn has ended, it stands stock still and just allows the enemy to pound on it. So that's what I want addressed. I don't want the background to start treating the side effects of unrealistic game mechanics as though they're laws of physics, because that way lies madness. I'd rather see rules that make Guardians more or less as they are viable.
Could let them go to ground without penalty, and fall back when charged if pass say an initative test.
This would
a. make them more hardy, without decking them out in heavy armour.
b. Let them avoid CC, which is a problem with a 12" weapon.
c. Make them seem more mobile, without bogging down the game.

@Bignbadbum Scorpions, Warpspiders and Dark reapers should not get fleet. They are heavily armoured. I know its a pain for the scorpions, but banshees are supposed to be fast and fragile, and if you make scorpions fast, you'd have to let banshees go at ludicrous speed, and that is well... ludicrous.

Spell_of_Destruction
30-04-2012, 23:28
Please do not use fluff to justify any kind of stats. Especially WS or BS of 5. There are other "well trained" or "super good" units with stats 4 (Marines, remember that 4 is an elite-value!). Making them 5 will lead to only one thing: More fanboy-GW-workers of other races will create their next Codex with stats 5 too and then everything will be where it is now (or worse if you think of Dark Reapers with BS5, WS3 compared to Space Marines with BS5, WS5!)
Use game-balance-views to decide what stats or gear should be useful or balanced.
Are Marines with Storm-Bolters and Force-Weapons for 20 points balanced? No. Should Eldar get equivalents? No, because it would be the same imbalance.
Are Henchmen with Storm-Bolters for 7 points balanced? No. Should Eldar get them instead? Nope.

I'm not saying that some Aspects or units aren't broken, we all know some are. But making weapon-specialists hit on a 2+ instead of 3+ is not elite-choice, it is unbalanced.

Neither I don't see what the problem is with Guardians as a concept. I'm not saying they should stay the way they are, no, they are expensive rubbish. But if I imagine a Craftworld, I think of millions of civilians. If they get in danger and get attacked or need to make a pre-emptive strike and have to put in all their available strength, then I think of the same as when I think of the Imperium: A hand full of trained elite warriors (Marines, Aspects) among millions of normal forces (Guardsman, Guardians). That doesn't mean Eldar should consist of only Guardian-forces, but they should be a valid army-build same as an all-Aspect-army should be. That is possible right now. You can chose to pick 6*20 Guardians as your core choices or you chose 2*5 Dire Avengers. It is your choice!

Stop saying that because Eldar are a dying race, the concept of Guardians is wrong. It is not. If they need to defend their Craftworld, I imagine 90%+ of the forces to consist of Guardians. Small elite forces (or even big ones) aren't a contradiction here. It depends on the purpose. If you wanna play a scenario where the Aspects have been slaughtered in defence of their Craftworld, then you should be able to build up an army that consists only of mere Guardians. Removing this ability from the Eldar Codex would be the same like removing Gaunts from Tyranids Codex - a big flaw. They should exist and ever have. That they currently are not a valid choice is not a problem of the concept. In 2nd Ed you gladly took Guardians and they owned!


PS:
I noticed that Vampire Raider and Hunter are AV 10/10/10... made me cry on saturday. Guess I'll leave them just in my cabinets then :p

I have only ever seen a few people arguing against the concept of Guardians. I normally see this is a counter to the argument "well they're supposed to be crap because they are militia so they're fine as they are".

The problem with Guardians is that they are crap. Or more specifically, their crap gun. No one moaned about Guardians in 2nd edition except marine players. Fix the gun, fix the unit. It's not rocket science. 18" assault 2 would be fine but I really like the idea of 18" rapid fire 2 if 6th ed goes down that route.

Discussions about WS/BS 5/4 or 4/5 or 5/3, 3/5 are interesting but mostly pointless, I agree. Dark Eldar are a less established race than Eldar and they received some pretty conservative stat tweaks across the codex (except on characters - PK went a bit crazy with his WS values there). I don't anticipate any radical changes to the Eldar stat line as it has been pretty established for the best part of two decades.

The reason I'm not too keen on WS/BS 5 is that it's an unecessary shifting of the parameters in a game in which there really only three characteristic levels for non character troops (and yeah - I'm kind of peeved that DCAs got WS 5). I'd rather see warrior powers boosted to give real advantages and skills.

Take Banshees for example. They would greatly benefit from hitting against MEQs on a 3+, particularly in the first round of combat. Giving them WS 5 is a sledghammer approach to this and poor codex design IMO. They already have an ability which can reduce the enemy unit to WS 1. The problem is that it is marginal as it only works if the enemy unit fails a Ld test. Increase the cost and change the ability so that it works without the need for a failed Ld test. Much better codex design than giving a stat boost.

bignbadbum
01-05-2012, 00:49
@Bignbadbum Scorpions, Warpspiders and Dark reapers should not get fleet. They are heavily armored. I know its a pain for the scorpions, but banshees are supposed to be fast and fragile, and if you make scorpions fast, you'd have to let banshees go at ludicrous speed, and that is well... ludicrous.

I disagree with the idea that they are "to heavily armored". Just look at Incubi(the DE mirror to the Aspect Warriors). 3+ (Heavy armor) with fleet. I don't think that argument holds up that great to begin with for Scorpions.. A unit that relies on stealth and infiltration(which arguably to be good at would require some sort of agility and finesse and speed), but is so heavily armored that they are incapable of being.. agile? Which as aforementioned would probably be a good trait to have if you were involved in infiltration and stealth.

If we wanted to take this a step further.. Space Marines can have a whole army with Fleet of Foot(C:SM with Shrike) and they are definitely less agile and more armored than anything in the (Dark)Elder Codecies. In fact this Space Marine Fleet even applies to Terminators. So no.. I don't think the "Scorpions are too heavily armored to be fleet of foot" argument has any weight in the fluff or in game design.

I could see the argument against it for Dark Reapers.. Lugging around large guns and all. Not so much for Scorpions and Warp Spiders.

Spell_of_Destruction
01-05-2012, 00:58
I agree about Scorpions. They are supposed to be stealthy 'ninjas' and now that Incubi get fleet I don't really see why they shouldn't also.

Warp Spiders and Reapers are a different story. Warp Spiders carry huge Warp Jump generators on their backs and Dark Reapers carry heavy weapons (the 2nd ed fluff also states that they have rigid plates in the legs of their armour to help them fire).

Hoshiyami
01-05-2012, 02:02
Dark Reapers carry heavy weapons (the 2nd ed fluff also states that they have rigid plates in the legs of their armour to help them fire).

So how about giving them Slow and Purposeful or relentless?

Geep
01-05-2012, 02:50
I wouldn't be surprised if the next book lets Eldar go the same route as other current books (eg. Fleet despite heavy armour), but I really hope we don't go this way. Armies shouldn't need to rely on gimmicky special rules like these, and even if you do go down that route not everyone should get the same gimmicks. For a similar reason I think the current Eldar book has the perfect number of units with grenades- if you go and distribute grenades as freely as Guard or Grey Knights then we may as well remove the effects of cover from close combat entirely. Having a flaw for units to overcome is a good thing IMO as it makes the game require thought and allows players to develop their skill.


like the idea of grand strategy for autarchs, and some way of showing what paths your hq took before their current one (battleseer/autarch with minor psychic power or exarch powers based on wargear)
More options for HQ units to show other paths is not a bad idea, but Exarch powers should not be mixed up in this. All Aspect Warriors train with the same weapons as each other, sticking to that training 'path' before they leave. Autarchs travel down many warrior paths, so become familiar with a wide variety of gear- but only the basic gear. Exarchs fall off the 'path'- they become trapped as one specific warrior type for the rest of their lives, and hence have the time to learn about new skills and weapons (oddly assisted by a severe case of multiple personality disorder).
An Exarch HQ choice, other than Phoenix Lords, may be an interesting option. I especially like the Court of the Young King idea (mainly because it already has background).

It goes without saying that some Aspects will need different Exarch powers, and Autarchs need a Master Strategist rules tweak. I wouldn't be against it if some of these powers could give people the special rules they all seem to want, as that way the 'crutch' is optional.

Bergen Beerbelly
01-05-2012, 03:25
I think the entire idea behind Guardians is silly from a fluff perspective. Any race on the brink of extinction in an incredibly hostile universe/galaxy would militarize their entire population to ensure their survival. All of the things they need would be made by their military forces so some of them would still be farmers and things like that but they all would be warriors first. In a race that lives as long as the Eldar do their battle skills would be above the trained guardsman because they have had hundreds of years to perfect it. Grand Master human martial artists have far less time than that to perfect their art and they are incredible warriors. A being that lives for hundreds of years would be even more incredible than that.

While I think it is interesting that guardians do exist, it doesn't really make much sense. Especially with the type of weaponry they gave them. Incredibly short ranged with no type of targetting system to get a better aim. For a race that is supposedly as technologically advanced as the Eldar are portrayed to be it's completely rediculous. When they get inside a tank they should have advanced targetting equipment that would allow them to be better shots than a guardsman (after all, they aren't afraid of technology like the Imperium, they embrace it.)

Everything about the concept of the guardian to me just doesn't fit and I hope they remove them completely from the game or change them somehow so they seem to fit better into what a race facing extinction would actually do with their population. And sitting around writing poetry isn't a luxury the Eldar can afford.

Spell_of_Destruction
01-05-2012, 04:21
@Bergen Beerbelly - this line of discussion inevitably leads to a fluff v tabletop argument and those never go anywhere.

Eldar stat lines date back to the 2nd edition codex when the two main systems were pretty similar - 40k was more or less just a skirmish version of WHFB with vehicle rules tacked on. High Elves have superficially similar fluff to Eldar (dying race, all citizens trained to fight) so it's interesting that GW didn't choose to have Eldar stats reflect High Elf stats at that time (WS4 BS 4 for standard troops). My guess is that they didn't want Eldar to be noticeably more elite than Space Marines. Whatever the reason, I think we're stuck with those stat lines and now the two systems have diverged the comparison between Elves and Eldar is less relevant.

I understand the reasoning behind the arguments that Guardians should have better stats. I even sympathize with them to an extent. I just don't think it's necessary and distracts from the real issue which is that their gun is substandard.

Like I said before, Eldar players loved Guardians in 2nd edition. Other players hated them. The shuriken catapult has been completely shafted since the release of 3rd edition and I sincerely hope that GW sort it out with the next codex release.

dl
01-05-2012, 04:37
Having a flaw for units to overcome is a good thing IMO as it makes the game require thought and allows players to develop their skill.

agree wholeheartedly, especially for eldar. But with its flaws each aspect should be the pinnacle of excellence at its specialty, so banshees should hit like a ton of bricks on the charge (give them furious charge, and maybe a sort of chaplain-esqe exarch power forcing opponent to reroll hits if banshees charge), and scorpions should strike from nowhere (ymgarl deployment? stealth usr). I would like to see a much greater abundance of the hit and run usr too, not army wide, but more than just baharroth, shining spears and harlies.

and POP UP grav tanks, damnable tau battlesuits stealing eldar tactics.

bobafett_h
01-05-2012, 08:38
I think the entire idea behind Guardians is silly from a fluff perspective. Any race on the brink of extinction in an incredibly hostile universe/galaxy would militarize their entire population to ensure their survival. All of the things they need would be made by their military forces so some of them would still be farmers and things like that but they all would be warriors first. In a race that lives as long as the Eldar do their battle skills would be above the trained guardsman because they have had hundreds of years to perfect it. Grand Master human martial artists have far less time than that to perfect their art and they are incredible warriors. A being that lives for hundreds of years would be even more incredible than that.

While I think it is interesting that guardians do exist, it doesn't really make much sense. Especially with the type of weaponry they gave them. Incredibly short ranged with no type of targetting system to get a better aim. For a race that is supposedly as technologically advanced as the Eldar are portrayed to be it's completely rediculous. When they get inside a tank they should have advanced targetting equipment that would allow them to be better shots than a guardsman (after all, they aren't afraid of technology like the Imperium, they embrace it.)

Everything about the concept of the guardian to me just doesn't fit and I hope they remove them completely from the game or change them somehow so they seem to fit better into what a race facing extinction would actually do with their population. And sitting around writing poetry isn't a luxury the Eldar can afford.

I agree with most of what you say, but totally getting rid of Guardians wouldn't make sense at all. The Eldar are supposedly on the brink of extinction, so utilitising as many bodies as they can to defend themselves is very logical. For example, Iyanden were forced to go further than this by resorting to resurrecting the dead to fight for them after the numbers of their living were significantly reduced.

What doesn't make sense in the current game is that for such an advanced race technologically (and mentally), why do their civilian militia have short ranged weapons? The Shuriken Catapult should be far more deadly than the basic Lasgun of the Imperium, but unless it can actually reach the target, it is useless. Some one mentioned that the short range suits the Eldar because they are fast and agile, but soldiers are almost always going to survive longer if they can stand behind cover and shoot from a distance. It is not often that Guardians get to fire more than one volley of their Catapults before they are assaulted which is where they are even more likely to suffer losses and do poorly. The Catapult needs to have a longer range to keep Guardians alive for longer and to make them more useful.

Regarding the question of changes to WS/BS, this is far less important and fluffy than an increase to the Initiative of most units. Eldar should be physically and mentally superior to humans. Traditionally Eldar have had the same S and T as humans, but their skill levels and speed should basically always be above that of Guardsmen. Space Marines are obviously super humans, so at least some of their stats should be equal. Aspect Warriors would excel in some areas, but in reality, only versus Guardsmen, not Marines. Exarchs, Phoenic Lords and Autarchs would be an exception. I6 across the board for Aspect warriors and at least 5 for Guardians would be excellent...

BooTMGSG
01-05-2012, 11:12
I disagree with the idea that they are "to heavily armored". Just look at Incubi(the DE mirror to the Aspect Warriors). 3+ (Heavy armor) with fleet. I don't think that argument holds up that great to begin with for Scorpions.. A unit that relies on stealth and infiltration(which arguably to be good at would require some sort of agility and finesse and speed), but is so heavily armored that they are incapable of being.. agile? Which as aforementioned would probably be a good trait to have if you were involved in infiltration and stealth.

If we wanted to take this a step further.. Space Marines can have a whole army with Fleet of Foot(C:SM with Shrike) and they are definitely less agile and more armored than anything in the (Dark)Elder Codecies. In fact this Space Marine Fleet even applies to Terminators. So no.. I don't think the "Scorpions are too heavily armored to be fleet of foot" argument has any weight in the fluff or in game design.

I could see the argument against it for Dark Reapers.. Lugging around large guns and all. Not so much for Scorpions and Warp Spiders.

For the first part agile does not necessarily mean mobile. Scorpions are slower than banshees, but tend to sneak up on your emerging from cover to ambush you. Some sneak attack rule and move through cover would make more sense than fleet.
However, I do get your point that given the number of other armies that have fleet, it is unreasonable for SS to be left in the slow lane.
Personally I would get rid of those other units having fleet, but since that is out of the question, I guess the banshees need to be sped up. Perhaps as they are rumoured to be introducing different lvls of a universal skills, there might be the Addition of Fleet(2) where you get to role two dice for your run and pick the highest

Hendarion
01-05-2012, 11:31
This thread is for wishlisting, while we should keep the overall idea of game balance in mind I suppose, we aren't designing the next Eldar codex so I figure we can suggest whatever we want.
(...)
BTW, why do you feel the need to tell us to stop doing and saying certain things, is it hurting you or something? As long as we're not throwing around flames I"m pretty sure it's free discussion.
It is free discussion. But if I wishlist my Guardians to cost 10 points, have WS, BS of 6, S8 weapons with 48" range and AP1 with an armour safe of 2+, then this is free discussion and wishlist too, but nobody will take me serious. I hope you are interested in a discussion that is serious and keeping game-balance in mind aswell. Designing an unbalanced game is nothing I would wish for. No, really. That won't be any challenge or fun for me and most likely not for my opponents either. See my point?


@bignbadbum:
Absolutely agree. Your example about Banshees is what I'm talking about. Sure, make units better. But use a smart choice to reach that goal and give them something that will do that in the situation they are meant to use it in, not increase stats which endure for the entire game and give them a bonus when they shouldn't get one. Banshees always had been strong at first-strike... well... at least the idea existed always, the execution is questionable in the latest Codex. Make them strike hard in case they assault. But not all the time like WS5 would.

Guardians are rubbish? Give them a protective field which only allows enemies to assault them if they had been 2" away from the unit in the assault phase or that give them a 90 or 180 wide cover-save of 4+. If you catch them from behind, let them die as usual. Or let them move in the assault-phase even if they fired their guns - like Jetbikes do - to represent their speed for which they are said to sacrifice their armour for.
There are ways to fix them more than increased stats, increased armour save and longer ranged weapons. Much more interesting ways!

Bubble Ghost
01-05-2012, 14:10
What doesn't make sense in the current game is that for such an advanced race technologically (and mentally), why do their civilian militia have short ranged weapons? The Shuriken Catapult should be far more deadly than the basic Lasgun of the Imperium, but unless it can actually reach the target, it is useless. Some one mentioned that the short range suits the Eldar because they are fast and agile, but soldiers are almost always going to survive longer if they can stand behind cover and shoot from a distance. It is not often that Guardians get to fire more than one volley of their Catapults before they are assaulted which is where they are even more likely to suffer losses and do poorly.

That last bit is what I meant about 40K's crappy core rules being the problem, not the concept of a short ranged weapon. See, it fits in the context of 40K's background. 40K is a mythological setting that is as much about demons and angels whacking each other with axes as it is about tanks and rocket launchers, and that's the context Eldar armament has to make sense in. And it does. How the hell are you supposed to get anywhere near 10 guys with shuriken catapults in order to assault them? You'd get diced into croutons. The shuriken catapult would be a perfect defensive weapon. It's the crummy tabletop rules, not anything intuitive or realistic, that forces them to stop and stand motionless within the enemy's "assault range".

All this said, I don't think a bump to 18" is incompatible with any of that, and I wouldn't be surprised if GW's blunt instrument "buff everything" approach leads to something along those lines. I also think a lasblaster option would make sense in the background, although if it turned up in the game, I would worry that the aforementioned crappy game rules would mean that shuriken catapults never got used.

I still like the idea of giving them huge defensive boosts. Count as defensive grenades, and assaulting enemy units count as moving through Difficult and Dangerous terrain as they fight through the blizzard of projectiles. Or perhaps they get to shoot at Initiative 10 instead of attacking in the first round of combat, although that would make Storm Guardians a bit redundant, and the howls of indignation from Tau players would be audible from orbit.

Gorbad Ironclaw
01-05-2012, 15:09
Personally I favour giving Eldar, especially Shuriken Catapults, pinning as that would emphasis there supposed mobility advantage (that the current rules don't really represent), however that is in a mythical version of the game where Pinning (or a concept like that. I rather like the FoW version actually) actually does something. But I think this also goes back to Bubble Ghost's argument. There isn't anything inherently wrong with a short ranged Shuriken catapult, however the way it interacts with the game rules means it's a very poor weapon, especially in the hands of Guardians. I prefer them as medium range support for Aspects that can then do the up-close action, but I think the assessment that Eldars to a large extend is trying to play a different game and that's why they don't seem to fit is actually quite true.

Bergen Beerbelly
01-05-2012, 18:14
I have to ask everyone that thinks the Shuriken Catapult is a fine weapon for guardians a question. Have you ever seen what militaries give their soldiers when they are trying to defend a hill or a point in a battle that they are trying to keep out of the hands of of the enemy forces? Do they give them short ranged fully automatic pistols? Because that is exactly what the Shuriken Catapult is in the current rules.

No, they don't give them that kind of weapon. They give them fully automatic weapons with a much longer range than a pistol can reach. Why? Because it is unrealistic to expect troops to defend a position on the battlefield with a weapon that only reaches out to touch someone at the range of a pistol or a shotgun. This has been proven time and time again in warfare.

It is rediculous to believe that any race as supposedly advanced as the Eldar would resort to such a stupid tactic during war. Humans aren't even that stupid.

I think a fine fix for it if they plan on keeping it that range would be to allow the Guardian Defenders the ability to choose wether they wish to move and shoot or shoot and move. And if they chose to shoot, then move, they could not embark on a vehicle as that would be too much. But shoot and move or move and shoot would make them at least a little better. They could at least stay out of range of an assult (which is why armies give their defenders longer ranged weapons in the first place...so they can engage the enemy without fear of assult)

althathir
01-05-2012, 20:56
More options for HQ units to show other paths is not a bad idea, but Exarch powers should not be mixed up in this. All Aspect Warriors train with the same weapons as each other, sticking to that training 'path' before they leave. Autarchs travel down many warrior paths, so become familiar with a wide variety of gear- but only the basic gear. Exarchs fall off the 'path'- they become trapped as one specific warrior type for the rest of their lives, and hence have the time to learn about new skills and weapons (oddly assisted by a severe case of multiple personality disorder).
An Exarch HQ choice, other than Phoenix Lords, may be an interesting option. I especially like the Court of the Young King idea (mainly because it already has background).

It goes without saying that some Aspects will need different Exarch powers, and Autarchs need a Master Strategist rules tweak. I wouldn't be against it if some of these powers could give people the special rules they all seem to want, as that way the 'crutch' is optional.

For Autarchs I think a couple of new weapon options are reasonable, not the exarch gear, but a craftworld is bound to have some exotic gear lying around (like Yriel's spear) that could make them a bit a more interesting. For a example a power weapon that adds +1 str like a frostblade, it would make them a bit better in CC but not have phoenix lord damage potential either.

Master Strategiest is hard to make suggestions for because its very dependent on what changes in 6th. Which is somewhat frustrating because IMO its a big opportunity for GW to make eldar interesting.

I agree about getting rid of some of the crutches, eldar are down right now but in alot of ways they've been more fun in 5th than they were in 4th. The main thing I'm hoping for is that the craftworlds are still viable, and that the troops get boosted a little bit.


I have to ask everyone that thinks the Shuriken Catapult is a fine weapon for guardians a question. Have you ever seen what militaries give their soldiers when they are trying to defend a hill or a point in a battle that they are trying to keep out of the hands of of the enemy forces? Do they give them short ranged fully automatic pistols? Because that is exactly what the Shuriken Catapult is in the current rules.

No, they don't give them that kind of weapon. They give them fully automatic weapons with a much longer range than a pistol can reach. Why? Because it is unrealistic to expect troops to defend a position on the battlefield with a weapon that only reaches out to touch someone at the range of a pistol or a shotgun. This has been proven time and time again in warfare.

It is rediculous to believe that any race as supposedly advanced as the Eldar would resort to such a stupid tactic during war. Humans aren't even that stupid.

I think a fine fix for it if they plan on keeping it that range would be to allow the Guardian Defenders the ability to choose wether they wish to move and shoot or shoot and move. And if they chose to shoot, then move, they could not embark on a vehicle as that would be too much. But shoot and move or move and shoot would make them at least a little better. They could at least stay out of range of an assult (which is why armies give their defenders longer ranged weapons in the first place...so they can engage the enemy without fear of assult)

The thing with eldar is there is a lot of tradition. From what i've been told shurcats we're considered OP in 2nd, so they got nerfed. In 3rd there wasn't a run move so we were a lot more mobile than basically everyone but DE, and we could take small guardian squads with weapon platforms which actually kinda fit the fluff. They were small support squads that basically hid and took potshots with their heavy. The 4th edition book tried to move guardians away from that role, by making the minium squad size higher because some people considered min sized squads with heavies :cheese:. With transports being nerfed into the ground for everyone else, guardians still were fairly decent, but DA were really good in a format with less mech, and fit better in mechdar lists which were OTT.

Regarless thats where they fell out of favor, and after the DA book GW started pushing troops quite a bit harder than they had in the past and it snowballed (moreso with the changes to scoring in 5th). Sorry for the rant its just people are alot harder on Kelly's dex than they really had any right be. All things considered it held up well for an army that was released in the middle of 4th edition during a simplier is better design phase. In which I don't think 5th was anywhere near set in stone.

tl;dr: Shurcats weren't that bad until recently so it wasn't quite as dumb as it appears now.

TheDoctor
01-05-2012, 21:57
For those concerned that lasblasters would replace shuriken catapults
-I run corsairs a lot, and my lasblaster to catapult ratio is about even.
--Dudes that get mounted in tanks tend to get catapults, since they will be operating at shorter ranges to the enemy, while fire support guys get lasblasters.

Or, allow guardians access to Al'rahem's special order "Like the Wind"

Spell_of_Destruction
01-05-2012, 22:33
The thing with eldar is there is a lot of tradition. From what i've been told shurcats we're considered OP in 2nd, so they got nerfed. In 3rd there wasn't a run move so we were a lot more mobile than basically everyone but DE, and we could take small guardian squads with weapon platforms which actually kinda fit the fluff. They were small support squads that basically hid and took potshots with their heavy. The 4th edition book tried to move guardians away from that role, by making the minium squad size higher because some people considered min sized squads with heavies :cheese:. With transports being nerfed into the ground for everyone else, guardians still were fairly decent, but DA were really good in a format with less mech, and fit better in mechdar lists which were OTT.

Regarless thats where they fell out of favor, and after the DA book GW started pushing troops quite a bit harder than they had in the past and it snowballed (moreso with the changes to scoring in 5th). Sorry for the rant its just people are alot harder on Kelly's dex than they really had any right be. All things considered it held up well for an army that was released in the middle of 4th edition during a simplier is better design phase. In which I don't think 5th was anywhere near set in stone.

tl;dr: Shurcats weren't that bad until recently so it wasn't quite as dumb as it appears now.


One thing that people forget is that the current shuriken catapults were designed for 3rd edition. Gav Thorpe had a very specific role envisaged for Guardians when he wrote the 3rd ed codex. He encouraged them to be taken in large squads and used at the front of the Eldar force. Screening was a legitimate tactic in 3rd ed so this worked fairly well.

It is also crucial to remember that in 3rd ed rapid fire weapons could only fire twice if the squad remained stationary. Otherwise the squad could fire once at 12". In this environment the 12" assault 2 shuriken catapult didn't seem too bad as the ability to always fire 2 shots while on the move was a noticeable advantage over rapid fire weapons such as the bolt gun. When 4th ed was released all those rapid fire weapons received a massive boost while the shuriken catapult received nothing.

This is the issue I have with PK. I don't think we wrote a bad codex but he copped out of fixing Guardians for 4th edition (and indeed 5th).

Bergen Beerbelly
01-05-2012, 23:57
It's due to the fear the studio has of Eldar. In 2nd edition they were so broken that they make the current Grey Knights look positively weak by comparison. Some people in the Studio still remember that and don't want Eldar to end up that way again. So they wimp out the Eldar at every opportunity.

But they need to get over it and put some Hero hammer back into Eldar again. Just like they have with all of the 5th edition codexes.

I agree that PK didn't write a bad codex....but he didn't necessarily write a great codex either. It is rather bland. Yes, it was written when Jervis thought less is better so that's the way a lot of the codexes were written, but they could have easily done the same thing for the Eldar codex that they have done for the Dark Angels codex. Give us a FAQ that actually addresses some of the glaring problems with Eldar since 5th edition started.

Howling Banshees striking at Initiative 1 if they assult into cover?
What happens when a Vibro Cannon fires into a Squadron of Vehicles?
Does the Dire Sword cause Instant Death or is it an Eldar only rule of Automatic Death?

These are things the FAQ needs to address. This list isn't complete but it gives you the idea.

And the Shuriken Catapult wasn't the only hold over from 3rd edition...the entire design of the Eldar tanks are. In 3rd you didn't have to worry about the location of your doors on your vehicle. So the Eldar tanks were designed with only one.

With the new rules of disembarking from a vehicle and access points, it's quite a hindrance now. But only because the design never changed from 3rd.

Hopefully they don't feel the need to nerf Eldar anymore when the new codex comes out.

althathir
02-05-2012, 00:13
One thing that people forget is that the current shuriken catapults were designed for 3rd edition. Gav Thorpe had a very specific role envisaged for Guardians when he wrote the 3rd ed codex. He encouraged them to be taken in large squads and used at the front of the Eldar force. Screening was a legitimate tactic in 3rd ed so this worked fairly well.

It is also crucial to remember that in 3rd ed rapid fire weapons could only fire twice if the squad remained stationary. Otherwise the squad could fire once at 12". In this environment the 12" assault 2 shuriken catapult didn't seem too bad as the ability to always fire 2 shots while on the move was a noticeable advantage over rapid fire weapons such as the bolt gun. When 4th ed was released all those rapid fire weapons received a massive boost while the shuriken catapult received nothing.

This is the issue I have with PK. I don't think we wrote a bad codex but he copped out of fixing Guardians for 4th edition (and indeed 5th).

Yeah I should have touched on that a bit, some of it was I never liked the concept of screening with guardians, to the point that I have used Dire Avengers as my main troop since I started right when 3rd came out. Which if you think guardians sucked for 4th & 5th, let me tell you avengers were worse through 3rd and the first half of 4th (that math hammer still depresses me bit). I will point out in kelly's design notes he viewed guardian meatshields as a problem and was trying to make dire avengers the front line troop. In addition I really doubt much of fifth was determined by that point, and for fourth they (troopwise) weren't that bad until the Chaos codex which IMO is when they decided that only troops would score in 5th because orks, and daemons both came out after chaos and have really solid troops.

Regardless for 6th my main hope is that different craftworld style lists are still available but that they restrict the troops a bit more so that they can make them more flexible. Its why I offered the origin ideal to free up the FoC a bit so that some of the troop units can see a boost and be a bit more well rounded at the cost of other choices becoming more restricted.

edit: @Bergen Beerbelly - your forgeting about the craftworld supplement in 3rd, that was OTT it was basically just free bonuses. Also through most of 3rd & 4th eldar were a top tier book, but the changes to fifth were fairly dramatic we're fair from being the only army that punched in the nuts by the edition change.

Solonor
02-05-2012, 00:38
One thing that people forget is that the current shuriken catapults were designed for 3rd edition. Gav Thorpe had a very specific role envisaged for Guardians when he wrote the 3rd ed codex. He encouraged them to be taken in large squads and used at the front of the Eldar force. Screening was a legitimate tactic in 3rd ed so this worked fairly well.

It is also crucial to remember that in 3rd ed rapid fire weapons could only fire twice if the squad remained stationary. Otherwise the squad could fire once at 12". In this environment the 12" assault 2 shuriken catapult didn't seem too bad as the ability to always fire 2 shots while on the move was a noticeable advantage over rapid fire weapons such as the bolt gun. When 4th ed was released all those rapid fire weapons received a massive boost while the shuriken catapult received nothing.

This is the issue I have with PK. I don't think we wrote a bad codex but he copped out of fixing Guardians for 4th edition (and indeed 5th).

touche, that was exactly what happened to the SK catapult back in 3rd edition. A basic weapon that could always fire 2 shots on the move was a big thing and a great advantage, that and the fact you could take a 5 min size squad with the dreaded 3 shot starcannon. since then instead of fixing one of the issues they downgraded all, so rapid fire weapons could fire 2 shots always, guardians having a min of 10 bodies and the starcannon got nerfed.

Bergen Beerbelly
02-05-2012, 00:43
I'm not forgetting about the Craftworld supplement, I just don't consider it as OTT as some people think it was. I considered it refreshing to see the power being brought back when they nerfed the entire system from the change over to 3rd edition from 2nd edition. But because everyone else was bland as well, it seemed OTT to some people.

You see, I used to play Epic Space Marine before 40k and I wanted and still want some of the things from Epic to make their way into 40k without needing a supplement game system like Apocalypse. That's how I want every codex to feel. Like every single codex in the game can kick serious butt. Like it's so broken no one can complain because EVERYONE is broken.

I'd like them to make the Falcon Grav Tank the main transport like it origionally was. And then make the Wave Serpent a specialist vehicle able to shoot out a shock wave that punches a hole in the enemy battle line and releases small shock squads like Howling Banshees and Harlequins into the hole created by the Wave Serpent. That's what the wave serpent origionally did and it would certainly help the Eldar to be able to assult better since they don't seem to want to give us assult ramps.

althathir
02-05-2012, 01:37
touche, that was exactly what happened to the SK catapult back in 3rd edition. A basic weapon that could always fire 2 shots on the move was a big thing and a great advantage, that and the fact you could take a 5 min size squad with the dreaded 3 shot starcannon. since then instead of fixing one of the issues they downgraded all, so rapid fire weapons could fire 2 shots always, guardians having a min of 10 bodies and the starcannon got nerfed.

The rapid fire change I don't think had anything to do with us, you have to remember that just about every other army mainly uses rapid fire fire weapons. So when they made most transports deathtraps in 4th (to get rid of rhino rush) they had to do something to make games between the other armies go smoother.


I'm not forgetting about the Craftworld supplement, I just don't consider it as OTT as some people think it was. I considered it refreshing to see the power being brought back when they nerfed the entire system from the change over to 3rd edition from 2nd edition. But because everyone else was bland as well, it seemed OTT to some people.

You see, I used to play Epic Space Marine before 40k and I wanted and still want some of the things from Epic to make their way into 40k without needing a supplement game system like Apocalypse. That's how I want every codex to feel. Like every single codex in the game can kick serious butt. Like it's so broken no one can complain because EVERYONE is broken.

I'd like them to make the Falcon Grav Tank the main transport like it origionally was. And then make the Wave Serpent a specialist vehicle able to shoot out a shock wave that punches a hole in the enemy battle line and releases small shock squads like Howling Banshees and Harlequins into the hole created by the Wave Serpent. That's what the wave serpent origionally did and it would certainly help the Eldar to be able to assult better since they don't seem to want to give us assult ramps.

The thing is most of the other fractions really didn't have any thing like it at all. I really feel like it was just a bunch of free bonuses, it was basically a good book getting better. Your philosophy really only holds water if every book is OTT which honestly I think is closer to what they're shooting for so far with fifth (with the exception of nids)

Spell_of_Destruction
02-05-2012, 01:50
The rapid fire change I don't think had anything to do with us, you have to remember that just about every other army mainly uses rapid fire fire weapons. So when they made most transports deathtraps in 4th (to get rid of rhino rush) they had to do something to make games between the other armies go smoother.

I agree but you can't ignore the fact that in relative terms it weakened Guardians by giving everything else a "free" boost.

I appreciate that PK wanted to make DAs the front line Troops choice. I completely support that. But not doing anything to fix Guardians wasn't the answer. DAs were neglected but it's not as if Guardians were that great a unit either by the time the 4th ed codex was released. It was mostly just Ulthwe players who were using Guardians by this stage. Meat shield tactics went out of the window with the release of 4th edition in any case. In fact, all he did was nerf Guardians by raising the minimum squad size with a platform from 7 to 10 (and nerfing the Starcannon to the point of being virtually useless).

althathir
02-05-2012, 02:24
I agree but you can't ignore the fact that in relative terms it weakened Guardians by giving everything else a "free" boost.

I appreciate that PK wanted to make DAs the front line Troops choice. I completely support that. But not doing anything to fix Guardians wasn't the answer. DAs were neglected but it's not as if Guardians were that great a unit either by the time the 4th ed codex was released. It was mostly just Ulthwe players who were using Guardians by this stage. Meat shield tactics went out of the window with the release of 4th edition in any case. In fact, all he did was nerf Guardians by raising the minimum squad size with a platform from 7 to 10 (and nerfing the Starcannon to the point of being virtually useless).

I agree I just think sometimes us eldar players throw out the victim card too much, not every game change was meant as a nerf to us.

I'm not disagreeing that guardians couldn't have used a boost but honestly just about every codex has a unit like that. I do wonder if some of it is that Kelly played ulthwe, and was happy with them, or if GW told him that they wanted Dire Avengers (who got a new kit) to be pushed and it tied his hands a bit cause thier roles tend to overlap.

I just tend to defend the codex because when it was first released it was good and had a lot of viable options, its just being the middle release in an edition is a bad thing unless your armies OTT.

Bergen Beerbelly
02-05-2012, 04:45
Eldar players have a good point though. We wouldn't feel like victims so much if GW put out an FAQ to fix the things that the edition change did to the Eldar. Think about this for a minute:

Everyone knows Eldar super specialize. So what do Howling Banshee's do? They assult things. How do they assult things? They use Banshee masks to make all of the enemy defenses not work against them when they charge.

Well, that's how it used to be in 4th edition. But with the 5th edition rules change to how cover works when assulting through it, banshee masks have now become useless when assulting into cover.

How can they fix this? By putting out an FAQ to change the wording on the Banshee mask so it works again when assulting into cover as was clearly it's intent in 4th edition.

The book has been out since 2006. You would think that in six years time they would have noticed and put out a FAQ about it but have they? no.

How can anyone not feel like a victim when things like that are allowed to go on so long?

The reason people feel like a victim when it comes to Eldar is because they are. GW has been taking the nerf bat to them for years because they were scared of them ending up like 2nd edition Eldar again.

If the changes to the game weren't meant as a nerf to the Eldar then GW should errata the stuff that changed with the edition so it works again, and explain the unclear rules. It's not like it's that hard to do.

Hendarion
02-05-2012, 05:56
I don't think the biggest issue with Banshees is when assaulting through cover. I just remember the day when I charged with 5 Banshees into 5 Assault Marines, not a single Marine died, but my squad was wiped out. Sure, I was badly unlucky, but it does not happen rarely that you fail your 5+ rolls to wound, it happens damn often. And something is wrong here big time.

Bergen Beerbelly
02-05-2012, 06:21
I agree, it is not the biggest concern. Their ability to reliably wound what they are designed to kill is the big problem. But couple that with the aforementioned assulting into cover and you can guarentee all of your banshee's will die the turn they charge.

Spell_of_Destruction
02-05-2012, 06:31
Banshees should massacre MEQs in combat. It's not as though there aren't significant balances built in to both the Banshees' stats and the fact that the gaming system makes it (a) difficult enough to get them to combat unscathes and (b) difficult to prevent them being shot to pieces after they have done their job. They are a unit with a lot of inherent risks in their use so the least you would expect is for them to do their job when they pull off a decent assault (without having to rely on Doom).

If they had +1A and were hitting on 3s (make the effect of warshout automatic as I suggested above) I don't think that would be overpowered. They would be similar in power level to DCAs. Right now a direct comparison is insulting.

Bergen Beerbelly
02-05-2012, 06:45
I don't see why it's such an imposition in people's mind to just give them furious charge...there's precedent for it..as in Jain Zar has it. That way they kill what they are designed to kill. Like you said, they have built in inherent risks. making them Strength 4 on the charge along with Banshee masks is not out of the question, especially considering the power level of Grey Knights...And the fact that grey knights can do exactly that!

With all of the 3++ saves going around these days asking for a simple strength boost on the turn they charge isn't asking for much.

I think too many Eldar players have been brow beat into submission by others who believe Eldar players whine too much because they can't get the most powerful stuff so they say things like strength 4 banshees are too powerful. Hogwash..It's a lie! With strength 4 they are just right in this current environment.

Hendarion
02-05-2012, 07:09
I don't see any problem with Furious Charge either. If you ask me, that is the perfect response to the problem. It works only in the first round, this is what Banshee-masks should do anyway. If you want, replace the current Mask-rule by furious charge. It still does what it should - give them higher initiative and the ability to kill their opponents while these are psychically stunned. I5/6 isn't the highest, but everything that has higher I than 6 is probably a) a monster which would either have such a high toughness that Banshees wouldn't work against it anyway or b) a specialist that shouldn't be overwhelmed that easily either. So yea, Furious Charge imo is the right response indeed, it is only for the first round anyway, not like some Khorne Marines with S4 base and S5 on the charge or something.

Ebon
02-05-2012, 09:44
Don't much mind as long as jetbikes get a new sculpt. The Deldar jetbikes give a real impression of speed with the pilot crouched low like a racing bike while the current Craftworld jetbikes look like someone lazily cruising on a Fat Boy.

Solonor
02-05-2012, 10:01
The rapid fire change I don't think had anything to do with us, you have to remember that just about every other army mainly uses rapid fire fire weapons. So when they made most transports deathtraps in 4th (to get rid of rhino rush) they had to do something to make games between the other armies go smoother.

sorry i dindt want to imply that the rapid fire change was to "hurt" the Eldar army, i think it was the right thing to do because of what you said, i was just saying that sometimes the combination of direct and indirect changes made the Eldar Guardians pretty useless, and the rapid fire change was one of them. back then guardian screening squads with platforms and warlock with conceal where a no brainer and dire avengers where just an expensive elite guardian squad. I also dont like to whine since i know some nerfing to eldar was needed, but that nerfing coupled with the new editions and changes made some elements in the Eldar book awkward, wich is a normal thing and its not exclusive to the Eldar, all outdated codices find themselves trapped in awkardness in some units. Eldar still have some competitive builds but they are all tried and tested, we need some new things to spice up a bit and to make the feel of the eldar theme come to life again (Small, Elite, Fast with great Psy High Tech), and add more internal balance in some units that just dont work the way they were supposed to do, or never worked the way they should (like Hawks).

AlphariusOmegon20
02-05-2012, 17:57
Considering the length of the OP, I really need to look at each point one by one and post my thoughts on each. So I warn people this will be a very long post.




Moving around the FoC (if indeed there is still an FoC in 6th, rather than percentages like in 2nd edition and 8th edition Fantasy Battle).

Honestly, 8th proves the system can work and that it was poorly implemented in 2nd ed.


+1WS and +1BS across the board.

Agreed. It brings them in line with the stats of Deldar.


18" range on all Shuriken Catapults.

I can't see any reason why Eldar can't have 24" on their cats. a Disk does tend to fly further than a needle does, so it makes sense Eldar and Deldar weapons at least be equal range. Making Shuricats Assault instead of Rapid Fire would help also.

Personally, I'd like the see the rapid fire rule go away forever from ALL armies.


Shuriken weapons force a re-roll of successful saving throws (this could get complicated and time consuming against units that already had a re-roll, but could simply add one additional roll per armor save before any other re-roll).

Just can't get behind that one. GK are bad enough with their "power weapons for everyone" silliness. I don't think Eldar should follow that line of thinking.



Not quite a codex change, more so something from the supposedly "leaked" ruleset, but the strength value for Assault weapons/Pistols may be used in combat/on the charge. This restores Eldar to the position they held in 2nd edition, which is "between IG and SM" in all aspects of combat, i.e. SM weapon Strength, but IG toughness.

The leaked ruleset was proven to be false, I wouldn't take anything from it and wouldn't count on anything from it appearing in 6th to start with.



Webway portal access, similar to the Gates of Vaul from Epic 40k/Epic Armageddon/Dawn of War, perhaps even large enough to move grav tanks through (perhaps even a mobile version of such as an Apocalypse unit, like the Engine of Vaul superheavy with the portal on it in Epic).

If Deldar can do it, I don't see a reason why Eldar couldn't do it either.



Inclusion of 40k-stamped Codex Eldar units from IA11, e.g. the Wasp, Hornet, Firestorm, and Wraithseer.

Don't hold your breath on most of those. The Firestorm could make the crossover, as could the Nightwing, but I think the "wraithseer" would merely be a psychic upgrade for a Wraithlord, ala the BA Libby dreads.



HQ
Phoenix Lords for Warp Spiders and Shining Spears.

Agreed. They are conspicuously missing.


Asurmen unlocking shuriken weapons forcing re-rolls to armor saves.

Now you're making sense about the Cats.



Bonesingers added as a vehicle/MC repair unit/Apothecary-equivalent for Wraithguard, with a similar "unlock" with an Autarch like what Farseers do for Warlock Bodyguards.

I could possibly see an upgrade for a warlock, but I wouldn't count on it.



Avatar unlocks the Court of the Young King (a mixed-aspect all-Exarch bodyguard squad from Apocalypse/Epic).

I could see it, but I'm thinking it would be based on the Craftworld too. Ulthwe would have a Seer council.



Bonesinger special character for Il-Kaithe, unlocking a Bonesinger unit upgrade to Wraithguard units.

That makes more sense.



Tank commander or War Walker pilot special character for Yme-Loc, unlocking Falcons as Dedicated Transports and/or Squadrons, and/or alternately War Walkers as Troops.

Falcons will most likely already be moving to dedicated Transports anyways. I can't get behind this one.


Return of the Saim-Hann special character from 3e that it seems the "Autarch on Jetbike" was meant to represent, unlocking Vyper Squadrons as troops.

Don't see this one either.




Great Harlequin special character for Lugganath, perhaps unlocking Harlequins as troops.

Nor this one.


Wraithseer from IA.

As I said, I expect maybe an upgrade for a Wraithlord like this, but it would stay Heavy Support if they do.



Ranger special character for Alaitoc, granting Pathfinders some kind of special ability.

It would be nice, but just can't see that happening.



Wraithguard and Wraithlord:

18" range for Wraithcannons (closer to the 16" range they offered in 2nd edition).

Agreed.


Close combat weapon options (e.g. Wraithswords) for Wraithguard.

Maybe, not sure how I feel about that one though. I really don't see Wraithguard as being very CC oriented in their role.



Allow 5 Wraithguard + Spiritseer (previously typo'd as Wraithseer; certainly not what I meant) + Bonesinger to ride in a Wave Serpent.

Wraithguard should have access to a Wave Serpent.



Poison immunity; why should something that isn't alive be affected by poison?

Ask Necrons that question.



MC status for Wraithguard, granting power-fist like attacks.

Makes sense, but doubt it will happen.


Guardians[list=4]
Grenades for Guardians, either for an upcharge or built-in.

You hit the nail on the head on the biggest glaring omission in the book.



Lasblasters for Guardians, matching the Swooping Hawks profile. This allows Guardian Defenders not to have to rush forward to their doom or sit statically as extra wounds for their support platform.

Extended range on the Cats would take care of that.


More support platforms per Guardian Defender unit, e.g. 1 for every 3, 5 or 10. This provides a better thematic fit because it keeps Guardians further away from the front line.

Can't get behind it. One's plenty.


Support Weapons re-combined with Heavy Weapon platforms, allowing Support Weapons in Guardian Defender squads and Heavy Weapon Platforms in Support Weapon Batteries.

No, they should stay different. D cannons and Vibros are vehicle weapons. They should have their own entry, which the Support weapons fill.



Storm Guardians with +1 WS, Guardian Defenders with +1 BS, both as Elites, following the "Black Guardian" bit from 3rd ed's Codex: Eye of Terror. These could be unlocked by selecting Eldrad. This represents hardened Ulthwe Guardians who've spent too much time circling the drain that is the Eye of Terror.

I can agree with BS 4 Guardians, but BS 5 is a bit too far. Likewise WS 4 for ALL Guardians is what they should be to begin with. You really shouldn't need Eldrad to unlock that.



Guardians in an IG-style platoon formation, allowing the purchase of 1 Wave Serpent per 12 infantry models (similar to the Serpent Rider formation from Apocalypse).

No. Just no. That makes it sound like they ARE Guard.



Free Shuriken cannon platform, following the scheme from codices like Codex: Space Marines.

No. Since Deldar have to pay 10 pts for their Splinter Cannon, I see no reason why Eldar shouldn't have to pay 10 points for their Shuriken Cannon.



New high shot count special weapon (Sunrifle?) for Storm Guardians; alternately, Support Weapon Platforms for Storm Guardians, perhaps limited to shuriken cannons and D-cannons, providing close fire support.

I agree that Guardians should get more SW choices, but ALL guardians should have that option, not just Storm Guardians.



Guardian Jetbike Squadrons and Vypers
Special/close combat weapon options for Guardian Jetbikes. Fusion guns would make a huge difference on their ability to target... well, anything.

Agreed.


Vypers attached to Guardian Jetbike squads as part of their FoC choice, ala Space Marine Attack Bikes.

I can get behind that one. They still need their own squads though.



Vyper Squadrons under the Fast Attack FoC gain the Scouts rule.

No.



Vypers become closed topped.

No.



Increase in Guardian Jetbike catapult range to match Avenger Catapults; the present range leaves them quite outmatched against (only 3 points more expensive) MEQ bikes.

Agreed, but match the range I cited, 24".



Shining Spears
Shining Spears gain Shuriken Pistols, conferring an additional attack in close combat. Alternatively, if Assault weapons give an attack on the charge, this might be unnecessary.

Agreed, but I doubt Assault weapons will confer attacks on the charge. That's one rule I don't think will change.



Laser Lances work at their current "only on the charge" profile on all rounds.

I doubt that will change either.



Laser Lances take on the Star Lance profile, and the Star Lance gains 2 Strength to compensate. This allows insta-kills against MEQ characters, a necessary function ESPECIALLY if the unit cap is not adjusted.

The unit cap should be extended to 10, much like every other army, so this is unnecessary.



Larger unit capacity for Shining Spears (maximum of 11 attacks on the charge being insufficient to kill, well, anything that is decent at close combat).

See previous answer.




Laser Lances improved to AP3. This allows pre-charge shooting to have a decent chance of killing MEQ, plus it is silly that a power weapon has the AP that it currently does.

Doubt that will change.



Shining Spears save improved to 2+ (to match Space Marine bikes, and reflect the very heavy cavalry-style armor worn by the current model).

Since Deldar bikes didn't get it, I doubt Eldar bikes will either.



Dark Reapers
Dark Reapers re-gain Eldar Missile Launchers and the ability to target multiple units, restoring them to parity with other dedicated infantry-carried heavy support (e.g. Long Fangs). This is another "undo" on a 2nd-to-3rd edition nerf.

I can agree with that. I still have never understood why they got rid of it in the first place.




Grav Tanks
The return of some form of the Crystal Targeting Matrix. If WS and BS are not boosted across the board, this could simply be a +1 BS boost for a modest amount of points.

BS should get a boost across the board. The Matrix doesn't need to come back.



Spirit Stones improved to be equivalent to Power of the Machine Spirit, rather than equivalent to the Grey Knights vehicle ability.

Why not something akin to the current Chaos Daemonic Possession? It would be more appropriate to what a Spirit Stone actually does, according to what I've read that they do.



Falcons as Dedicated Transports for units of 6 or fewer infantry-sized models, or perhaps just for HQ (Farseer+Warlocks or Autarch).

Already going to happen.



Inclusion of a rules-improved Firestorm to deal with the commonality of flyers.

I'd take a wait and see on this one. We're not even sure true flyers are going to be in 6th ed.


Fire Prisms become a 1-3 Squadron instead of a single unit FoC choice. These are a synergy vehicle, and it is bizarre that one need dedicate multiple heavy support choices if one wishes to have something that can compete with, say, 1 Basilisk/Manticore (which likewise comes in squadrons).

That is the one vehicle that I think REALLY SHOULD be squadroned in that book

.

Prism Cannon gets the Lance rule.

One step too far. If they get squadroned, there's no need for that rule.



Some sort of Assault Ramp option for Close Combat Aspect Warriors, e.g. a Wave Serpent Upgrade.

That I doubt will happen, but damn it, that would be nice!



Heavy Weapons and Support Weapons
Starcannons stay expensive but are either improved to Heavy 3 or Strength 7.

I'd say S7 would be better. Heavy 3 would make the Scatter Laser obsolete overnight.



Brightlances stay very expensive but improve to Strength 9.

Why? Deldar Dark Lances, which are essentially the same weapon, are S8 also. Dropping the cost 5 pts, to come in line with the Deldar costs, makes more sense.



Support Weapon Battery gun size increased to six, but crew size left the same, with each gun coming with one crewman. This emphasizes the "dying race" fluff theme by making the unit more fragile than is typical of, say, an IG heavy weapons battery, while improving damage output (as there is nothing in the fluff that suggests Eldar have a shortage of wargear, given that they can create it psychicly by thinking about it/singing to it).

No, Batteries are normally 3 weapons, no matter the race. That mechanic seems overly complicated when it comes to wound allocation.



Pulse Laser added as a Support Weapon option, perhaps priced as a Brightlance.

No, A Pulse laser should go to as the name of the APOC titan weapon, to avoid confusion. It has no business in the normal 40K game, In fact, I think the Falcon's pulse laser should have it's name changed to Bright Lance, and follow those rules.



Shuriken cannon range improved to 30". This makes them have a range matching any other heavy weapon on any other army (spare perhaps 'Nids).

Nope, the Deldar cannon is ranged at 36", so the Shuriken Cannon should match it.



D-cannon: gain an Aether Rift option attack similar to the Warp Hunter, i.e. using a template.

The Warp Hunter's D Cannon is a lot larger, hence why it gets the template. I can see your point, but there is an explanation for the difference.



Vibrocannon: double the present range; the current range for a static weapon is far too low to be effective.

I could see it maybe going to 48", but '72"? Can't see it.



Shadowweaver: gains matching USRs to the Night Spinner.

Maybe. Not sure if that one would work or not the way you want.




War Walkers
War Walkers moved to Fast Attack. As a Scouts unit, it is odd to have them in Heavy Support. Likewise, Heavy Support has too many competing choices, and the Fast Attack slot is currently full of poor choices.

Agreed.



War Walkers re-gain a 2nd-edition style force field, perhaps conferring a cover save (like the Tau vehicle upgrade) or acting as an all-around Strength "normalizer/ceiling reducer" (similar to the Wave Serpent field).


I think giving them a choice of an upgrade would be good, but make them pay for it.



Harlequins
Venoms as Dedicated Transport, following the Corsair Venom profile from IA11 (to keep from giving them wacky Dark Eldar weapons).



Harlequins in the Deldar book have Shuriken weapons, and that's not gamebreaking. I don't see why Eldar harlequins having a a splinter weapon or two on their transport would either.



Swooping Hawks
Lasblasters increased to range 36". This helps their role as a "standoff" unit.


Lasblaster range is what it should be, and what the ShuriCat should be. 24" is fine.



Dire Avengers Range increased to 24", following a global boost to 18" of other Shuriken catapults, and reflecting their range finder.

Again, boost ALL shuricats to 24" and allow avengers to reroll their hits. There's your range finder rule.



Warp Spiders
Replace current range with a template, similar to 2nd edition.


Agreed. I liked it when it was a flamer template better. makes more sense too.

These are just my thoughts and opinions. YMMV.

althathir
02-05-2012, 20:04
I don't see any problem with Furious Charge either. If you ask me, that is the perfect response to the problem. It works only in the first round, this is what Banshee-masks should do anyway. If you want, replace the current Mask-rule by furious charge. It still does what it should - give them higher initiative and the ability to kill their opponents while these are psychically stunned. I5/6 isn't the highest, but everything that has higher I than 6 is probably a) a monster which would either have such a high toughness that Banshees wouldn't work against it anyway or b) a specialist that shouldn't be overwhelmed that easily either. So yea, Furious Charge imo is the right response indeed, it is only for the first round anyway, not like some Khorne Marines with S4 base and S5 on the charge or something.

My first thougt when I saw this suggestion was instead of furious charge, they should get an ability that makes the opposing unit -1 T representing the fact that their paralyzed. Would make combined charges really interesting, and would make a bit more sense, I would assume other eldar units would have some sort of protection againist it, and they'd be attacking units that were weakened it would seem like they would benefit as well.


sorry i dindt want to imply that the rapid fire change was to "hurt" the Eldar army, i think it was the right thing to do because of what you said, i was just saying that sometimes the combination of direct and indirect changes made the Eldar Guardians pretty useless, and the rapid fire change was one of them. back then guardian screening squads with platforms and warlock with conceal where a no brainer and dire avengers where just an expensive elite guardian squad. I also dont like to whine since i know some nerfing to eldar was needed, but that nerfing coupled with the new editions and changes made some elements in the Eldar book awkward, wich is a normal thing and its not exclusive to the Eldar, all outdated codices find themselves trapped in awkardness in some units. Eldar still have some competitive builds but they are all tried and tested, we need some new things to spice up a bit and to make the feel of the eldar theme come to life again (Small, Elite, Fast with great Psy High Tech), and add more internal balance in some units that just dont work the way they were supposed to do, or never worked the way they should (like Hawks).

I agree, and I didn't mean to call you out its just sometimes we complain too much in general. Our army is at that power level you'd expect considering how dated it is and when it was designed. We could use some new stuff for sure, at the very least i'm hoping gw clears up the forge world thing a bit more cause units like hornets add a lot.

I do disagree a bit with on hawks, they were pretty solid in 4th, its just that the nerfs to glancing hits, losing the ability to score, and the lower costs for jump infantry in general really combined to nail them. They're actually the unit I'm most excited about because they're why I started eldar back in the day.

dl
02-05-2012, 20:29
Avatar unlocks the Court of the Young King (a mixed-aspect all-Exarch bodyguard squad from Apocalypse/Epic).
I could see it, but I'm thinking it would be based on the Craftworld too. Ulthwe would have a Seer council

I was under the impression that all craftworlds had a court to anoint the young king before his transformation into an Avatar. Would make sense to make exarchs of all aspects bar one in the court.

althathir
02-05-2012, 20:44
I was under the impression that all craftworlds had a court to anoint the young king before his transformation into an Avatar. Would make sense to make exarchs of all aspects bar one in the court.

Craftworlds may have several aspects with multiple aspect shrines, or be missing some aspects entirely. So the main thing would be having it made of exarches but the composition shouldn't be to important, honestly its not an option that screams competitive, so it should have a good amount of freedom.

AlphariusOmegon20
02-05-2012, 22:04
Craftworld may have several aspects with multiple aspect shrines, or be missing some aspects entirely. So the main thing would be having it made of exarches but the composition shouldn't be to important, honestly its not an option that screams competitive, so it should have a good amount of freedom.

Bingo. In the case of Ulthwe, they don't have a lot of Aspects to start with, forcing them to rely on Guardians more, so I can see a Seer Council being their retinue type, instead of the Court of the Young King.

Thus you'd have to make concessions to make it possible. Exarchs could be 0-5 and Warlocks could be 0-5, much like what is in the Necron book with their court that consists of Crypteks and Lords.

althathir
02-05-2012, 23:02
Bingo. In the case of Ulthwe, they don't have a lot of Aspects to start with, forcing them to rely on Guardians more, so I can see a Seer Council being their retinue type, instead of the Court of the Young King.

Thus you'd have to make concessions to make it possible. Exarchs could be 0-5 and Warlocks could be 0-5, much like what is in the Necron book with their court that consists of Crypteks and Lords.

They would still be exarchs IMO, Ulthwe has less aspects because more eldar there are on the path of seer, but its always the exarchs that bring the eldar to chosen to be the Yound King to the avatar (after all they're the priests of Khaine). I'm pretty sure its been implied that the young king is an exarch though I can't remember where I read it. So I don't see the need to add warlocks there.

edit: It would be cool if they were composed from the different types of aspects warriors you took.

Solonor
03-05-2012, 00:17
I do disagree a bit with on hawks, they were pretty solid in 4th, its just that the nerfs to glancing hits, losing the ability to score, and the lower costs for jump infantry in general really combined to nail them. They're actually the unit I'm most excited about because they're why I started eldar back in the day.

well yes i think they were pretty good when they came out, another problem that makes them poor choice now his because the abundance of Meqs, when fighting against guard, orks, tyranids and Tau they can still be a good choice.I just feel they never played like the harassing supporting unit that they (im my opinion) should be. it was good when they made the 36" grenade drop run in 2nd. they should make that rule again for Hawks and perhaps give some kind of harassing rule to the grenade strikes, like forcing pinning test with a Ld penalty and/or any enemy unit that gets models in the grenade blast radius counts as under the effect of plasma grenades if assaulted by any Eldar unit in the following assault phase, that would make hawks a good support and harass jump infantry unit.

Spell_of_Destruction
03-05-2012, 01:34
The thing is that t3 assault units tend to need to cross a vast distant in relative safety inorder to have a chance of affecting the battle. I don't want the vehicle to gain the assault vehicle rule, I want banshees and scorpions to have an ability that counts the vehicle as an assault vehicle (that they would pay for). Thats a large distinction in my mind, otherwise your stuck with the current setup where you have to commit to the charge the turn before and hope your target doesn't move. In my games I don't tend to commit banshees until close to the end of the game to clear an objective, where that isn't to big of a disadvantage because they need to hold it. That makes them a very situational unit though, and It makes my eldar feel slow.

Also suggesting instead of just suggesting we just want to steal a "shiny" ability, why not offer a more interesting improvement.

I'm slightly worried that we're going to get screwed by the inevitable transport rebalance when 6th ed is released. We are still paying 4th ed prices for our transports. Imperial transports have been dropped in price to the point of almost being a free upgrade. I can quite easily see GW carrying out this system rebalance and, when it comes round to our codex, getting caught up in the rebalancing zeal and forgetting that our Transports are balanced for a previous edition.

You are dead right that Wave Serpents are poor transports for assault units. The poorly located access point doesn't help. The Swordwind fluff depicts Aspect dropping out of Transports directly into combat with the enemy. For what we pay, I think it is entirely reasonable that we should expect a Transport which offers decent assautl capabilities.

althathir
03-05-2012, 02:37
well yes i think they were pretty good when they came out, another problem that makes them poor choice now his because the abundance of Meqs, when fighting against guard, orks, tyranids and Tau they can still be a good choice.I just feel they never played like the harassing supporting unit that they (im my opinion) should be. it was good when they made the 36" grenade drop run in 2nd. they should make that rule again for Hawks and perhaps give some kind of harassing rule to the grenade strikes, like forcing pinning test with a Ld penalty and/or any enemy unit that gets models in the grenade blast radius counts as under the effect of plasma grenades if assaulted by any Eldar unit in the following assault phase, that would make hawks a good support and harass jump infantry unit.

I love hawks, but honestly the harassing role is something I've never understood, I mean right now I think they're are capable of that, hell they're great at that, now being a legitimate threat.... that they fall short of.

I'd much rather see them either become...

1) Cheaper and troops so they can score and their jack of all trades nature becomes a benefit in which case they're fine as harassers because their movement is the threat.
2) Or see them become more of a anti-vehicle unit which if the hull point rumours are true all they'd really need is a point reduction. Plus imo they'd be a pretty cool anti-flier option so its what i'm hoping for. It would also make the fast attack aspects have clearer roles spears MCs/well armoured Elites, Spiders infantry, and hawks Vehicles.


I'm slightly worried that we're going to get screwed by the inevitable transport rebalance when 6th ed is released. We are still paying 4th ed prices for our transports. Imperial transports have been dropped in price to the point of almost being a free upgrade. I can quite easily see GW carrying out this system rebalance and, when it comes round to our codex, getting caught up in the rebalancing zeal and forgetting that our Transports are balanced for a previous edition.

You are dead right that Wave Serpents are poor transports for assault units. The poorly located access point doesn't help. The Swordwind fluff depicts Aspect dropping out of Transports directly into combat with the enemy. For what we pay, I think it is entirely reasonable that we should expect a Transport which offers decent assautl capabilities.

I don't see most transports being rebalanced that much. Honestly it would be hard to nerf them and not other vehicles and with fliers being the main push (seemingly) I don't see transports becoming worthless. The way I look at imperial transports is their force multiplier for imperial armies and a sales multiplier for GW I expect more for things like firing points to get nerfed, and for infantry to have some more options.

That said if our fire power goes back up to levels it was at in 4th we wouldn't have to rely on their durability as much and really that amount of fire power would be fairly reasonable now. If sixth has a lot of changes I could see aerial assault being added via faq, and if not were probably looking at a codex fairly soon (I expect 3 in 2013 judging from fantasy).

edit: That said with how old are dex is the begining of 6th could be frustrating though if we got a flier in a splash release it could a long ways towards helping us.

bobafett_h
03-05-2012, 06:16
The Court of the Young King would work in a similar way to the Court of the Archon that DE have. For every Avatar (there can be only one in an army) you can have a court consisting of a mix of Exarchs. It should be a flexible arrangement where you don't need to have every Aspect represented since not all Craftworlds have all of the Aspects. And if you have an Exarch in the court there does not need to be a matching Aspect squad elsewhere in the army. I believe there is an Apocalypse formation for this, but it consists of all of the Pheonix Lords (of which there are none for the Shining Spears or Warp Spiders, but there is now one for Shadow Spectres) and an Avatar...

IMO, the Fleet rule for 6th needs to be improved. The current rule for it is a nerf compared to previous editions especially where assault units needed the extra movement to get closer to the enemy (such as Hormagaunt hordes who have no transport options). Now that everyone can make a run move, Fleet needs something extra to make it advtangeous to such units again. Either it needs to go back to how it was and the run move is eliminated, or perhaps make it so that it always lets you move in the assault phase, even if that move does not get you into close combat (like with Jetbikes/Jetpacks). This should include always being able to assault after disembarking from a transport or after Deep Striking. This would take care of several problems while still allowing non-fleet units to do the same from open topped vehicles or assault ramps...

Banshee Masks should simply grant Furious Charge AND count as assault grenades so that even if they assault into cover, they still go in order where their on the charge Initiative of 6 (7 for the Exarch) would beat nearly everything they would have a chance of hurting. Striking Scorpions would not need Fleet as standard in my opininon, but there could be an Exarch power to allow this and make one of the current powers (probably Shadowstrike) standard for the squad instead. Their fluff and current rules tend to be more about ambush assault rather than the fast forward rush of Banshees. Infiltrating or Outflanking is a better suit for Scorpions so the use of transports for them doesn't need to be encouraged...

Falcons should become dedicated transport options in the same way Land Raiders are. That is, some Elite and HQ units can take them as dedicated transports, but other units can only take a Wave Serpent. They should still be available as a Heavy Support option however. In regards to fields for vehicles, both energy fields and holo fields should be available as upgrades for tanks, Vypers and Warwalkers. Wave Serpents could keey the energy field as standard, but having it as an option for Falcons could be more useful than a holo field in some situations such as for assault/Dragon rushing where the transport capacity of a Wave Serpent is wasted on small units like these...

AlphariusOmegon20
03-05-2012, 06:24
They would still be exarchs IMO, Ulthwe has less aspects because more eldar there are on the path of seer, but its always the exarchs that bring the eldar to chosen to be the Yound King to the avatar (after all they're the priests of Khaine). I'm pretty sure its been implied that the young king is an exarch though I can't remember where I read it. So I don't see the need to add warlocks there.

edit: It would be cool if they were composed from the different types of aspects warriors you took.

That was actually my point. From what I've read and understood about Ulthwe, the only aspects they have is Dark Reapers and Banshees, so they wouldn't be able to make a full court anyways. Yet they can still make Avatars. So I'm thinking the Seer Councils take over for that ritual.

Shamana
03-05-2012, 08:43
My first thougt when I saw this suggestion was instead of furious charge, they should get an ability that makes the opposing unit -1 T representing the fact that their paralyzed. Would make combined charges really interesting, and would make a bit more sense, I would assume other eldar units would have some sort of protection againist it, and they'd be attacking units that were weakened it would seem like they would benefit as well.

I think with banshees, rerolls can also work great - maybe a reroll on misses a la the Hatred rule in fantasy. Changing enemy toughness is an iffy rule, I didn't like it with GK rad grenades to begin with (though that might be because it broke the unwritten "don't change the base toughness for ID purposes" rule).

As for Falcons as dedicated transports, eh, I'm not that sold on it. It would essentially be a scoring gunboat, like now, only easier to spam. Nice (or annoying, depending on your viewpoint), but hardly necessary. I'd much rather see an assault transport - ideally one that can house an entire aspect squad - improved vypers and shuriken catapults, better hawks, spears and reapers, and so on.

BTW, what would people think if the brightlance (and the darklance) become AP 1 instead of just receiving a point drop? Right now it's mostly an inferior lascannon (worse against anything but AV 14), and a bonus to vehicle damage rolls would imo tie with the eldar focus on efficiency and high technology. It IS the race's premier anti-armor weapon, after all.


That was actually my point. From what I've read and understood about Ulthwe, the only aspects they have is Dark Reapers and Banshees, so they wouldn't be able to make a full court anyways. Yet they can still make Avatars. So I'm thinking the Seer Councils take over for that ritual.

I don't think I have come across anything that states that. Ulthwe has relatively few aspect shrines, but the key word here is relative. They are still one of the major craftworlds, and chances are they will have quite a few shrines regardless. They definitely have dire avengers, since it is mentioned that they are the most common aspect (and iirc it was mentioned somewhere they are present on every craftworld, large or small) and tend to be featured in near every craftworld action.

Whether the seers are in charge of the awakening I am not sure, but it is quite likely. Remember the Eye of Terror lists? Ulthwe there could field an Avatar with a warlock retinue - the Spear of Khaine.

Solonor
03-05-2012, 11:16
I think with banshees, rerolls can also work great - maybe a reroll on misses a la the Hatred rule in fantasy. Changing enemy toughness is an iffy rule, I didn't like it with GK rad grenades to begin with (though that might be because it broke the unwritten "don't change the base toughness for ID purposes" rule).

rerolls could work, i also would like to see banshee masks reducing the enemy stats in the first round, halving perhaps ememies ws and init. and perhaps changing war shout to reduce the strength of the enemy models by 1. reducing thougness would be a little bit unfluffy, the masks shouts affects the foes nervous system, paralyssing them to some degree, making them slower, awkward and powerless.


As for Falcons as dedicated transports, eh, I'm not that sold on it. It would essentially be a scoring gunboat, like now, only easier to spam. Nice (or annoying, depending on your viewpoint), but hardly necessary. I'd much rather see an assault transport - ideally one that can house an entire aspect squad - improved vypers and shuriken catapults, better hawks, spears and reapers, and so on.

I disagree If Falcons went to dedicated transports they would free a HV support slot, and you could choose to go with a small strike unit in a gunboat, or a full unit in a proper transport. besides one can already do a scoring gunboat with serpents if you put 5 min dire avengers in them


BTW, what would people think if the brightlance (and the darklance) become AP 1 instead of just receiving a point drop? Right now it's mostly an inferior lascannon (worse against anything but AV 14), and a bonus to vehicle damage rolls would imo tie with the eldar focus on efficiency and high technology. It IS the race's premier anti-armor weapon, after all.


i couldnt agree more, for me it would be a perfect solution, although i would still take 5 points from its cost.

FireDragonExarch
03-05-2012, 11:30
Why Don't Wave Serpents have a similar Assault ramp rule to that of the Land Raider? that way they don't suffer the downside of being open topped and as many units in them are great at assaulting (they should all have fleet) then that's the way forward.

FireDragonExarch
03-05-2012, 11:35
As for Banshees changing enemy tougness that would be great! Lowering marines tougness by 1 would make it so easier to sweep them down!

Capamaru
03-05-2012, 12:16
All vehicles need bs4 including warwalkers and vypers. An assault ramp like rule or upgrade is needed for Serpents and Falcons. An upgrade that would allow to shoot all secondary weapons as if they were defensive would return their firepower to their former glory.
Banshees need something that boosts them on the charge but not afterwards. They are shock troops not intended for prolonged battle.
Scorpions need a way to get close to the enemy without a transport. More attacks and a powerfist of str8 would be nice.
Wraithguard need more range FNP rule and some serious close combat options. (Make a new plastic model ASAP)
Wraithlord needs to be able to pick same weapon twice. Be able to mount a single D cannon.
Warp Spiders need a PL a template weapon and maybe some short of ability that allows them to phase out so they can avoid damage. (Make a new plastic model ASAP)
Make a Solitare model that would be available only when you a have a harlies unit with a troupe master.
Make Farseers real psychers (level 2), 3 with stones and give them some new powers that aren't a joke, like storm. Make warlocks able to amplify certain powers of the seer when they are in the same squad, for example the more warlocks you have the stronger the storm the seer casts is.
Fireprisms must be able to create a squadron.
Reapers unit size increased to 8 and are able to fire different ammo types (a second type of STR6, AP5 would be nice when firing at vehicles). Gain relentless USR.
All shuriken weaponry has its range increased.
That from the top of my head. I think we should revisit this thread when 6 edition rules come out so we can be more accurate on our wishes :)

Bubble Ghost
03-05-2012, 13:26
re. Hawks: sadly, you can't really "harass" in 40K. The only way units can affect each other is by inflicting casualties, which do nothing except reduce the attacking power of the target unit. There's no distraction or suppression, there's as good as no morale - just casualties. The tactics in 40K are almost entirely about allocation of firepower, which means a unit can only "harass" by threatening to inflict sufficient casualties of its own that the other player diverts firepower to deal with it. All that means that in 40K, a unit is only any good if: it is capable of effectively killing something; can hold objectives; or is so good at not dying as to present an actual physical obstruction. Merely being able to contest an objective isn't enough, because you might as well take something that presents a threat as well while it's doing that.

And the problem Swooping Hawks have is the same as the problem with Eldar in general, i.e. that 40K is a really, really bad wargame and what they ought to be good at is not actually represented in the rules at all. To make them viable they'll have to tick one of those boxes, there's no way around that. And the first one, giving them something they can kill, is the only one that really makes sense (I bet there's going to be some "aspect becomes scoring if you take the matching Phoenix Lord" nonsense, but I hate that, and it's a cop-out anyway - if a unit needs a particular special character in order to be viable, it isn't)

Here's some fun ideas, none of which I endorse for real so picking holes in them individually is a bit pointless, but just exploring the concept:


Give them AP3 lasblasters and Preferred Enemy: Jump Infantry.:evilgrin:


I don't like the idea of bombing runs, you'd have to give them absolutely ludicrous movement for it to be worthwhile and that breaks a precedent for other flying units (havng said that, GW absolutely love their callbacks to to the mid-90s right now, so I wouldn't be surprised if something like this does turn up). Personally I'd be more tempted to make their grenade pack a short-ranged shooting weapon with a variety of profiles which one model in the unit is allowed to fire instead of his lasblaster, to represent the grenades dropped by the whole unit before they landed - perhaps with a blast, or Assault (number of models in unit), and ignoring cover. That'd make it so they had to get close, making powerful units dangerous targets, but make them more efficient at one of their current theoretical uses, polishing off stragglers


Furious Charge would make intuitive sense and be more likely to bump them up to the level of "hmmmm, maybe I'd better deal with these guys" - suddenly people would be less confident of what might happen if they charged, because they'd be more likely to survive into the next turn and thus pin down the target unit. So they'd be fulflling the nearest 40K has to a "harassing" role. The problem with that I guess is that it's a 'sacrificial' sort of role that really doesn't sit with Eldar




I have to ask everyone that thinks the Shuriken Catapult is a fine weapon for guardians a question. Have you ever seen what militaries give their soldiers when they are trying to defend a hill or...[further real life-based arguments]

What you're saying there does make a lot of sense, but it overlooks that 40K is not a modern wargame, and even if it was, the Eldar are not a modern military. They aren't human, and they have totally different requirements and objectives than a contemporary armed force. "Defending a hill" is exactly the kind of thing Eldar avoid, both because they lack the numbers for battles of attrition, and because they never need to hold ground anyway - they have uniformly flight-capable transport, and they have absolutely no interest in the infrastructure of the alien worlds they're fighting on. They destroy stuff and move on. In terms of the level of believabilty 40K works on - a level where running up and smashing things with swords is a sensible way to wage war, and where fighting in a way that would be impossible for humans is what makes aliens alien - shuriken catapults make complete sense for Eldar.

Yes, you have to abstractly "hold objectives" to play the game, but I don't want the quirky requirements of gameplay to start dictating background, which was my whole point. I don't want Guardians to be pointy-eared Imperial Guardsmen.

Bob Arctor
03-05-2012, 15:38
I rather hope they ditch the Jetbike Seer Councils as I've never been a fan of the concept. It seems like a hybrid of Ulthwe/Saim Hann unit types that doesn't really fit either craftworld properly - the main reason they are one of only 2 units I don't have for the army.

I also hope Shining Spears get a boost or at least a points drop plus better models so I can finally have a reason to get some.

The army hasn't had many new units added to it for a long time (Nightspinner aside) so I'm curious as to what more they could add. Certainly Bonesingers and Solitaires would be a good start.

Solonor
03-05-2012, 15:47
@ Bubble Ghost

"harassment" rules can be implemented and used sucessfully in 40K, night spinners grav tanks work that way, but what you say his also true, if i have unit A that is good at kiling and unit B that doesnt have really much punch but has an fancy rule that delays the enemy, i could have one unit A to kill some enemies while Unit B tries to delay them, but i will probably choose two Units A to kill twice the enemies, so that should reflect itself in the point costs of the abilities.
I like the idea of hawks causing disruption in enemy units and veichles, i think that should translate in a rule that makes them capable of disable enemy units eficiency and making them more vulnerable to other eldar units, and that would contribute to the eldar synergy style of warfare.

AlphariusOmegon20
03-05-2012, 16:05
i couldnt agree more, for me it would be a perfect solution, although i would still take 5 points from its cost.

I highly disagree. Normal Lascannons glance Av14 on 5's and Pen on 6's. The Bright Lance and Dark Lance glance vehicles on 4's and pen on 5's, due to reducing the armor to 12 instead of 14. How is that worse? I think the Lance rule makes them better against high AV, not worse.




Certainly Bonesingers and Solitaires would be a good start.

Bonesingers I can get behind, but Solitaires are a big fat NO. I remember when they existed before, and I do not want to see that OP crap again. There's a reason why they don't exist anymore.

Solonor
03-05-2012, 16:34
I highly disagree. Normal Lascannons glance Av14 on 5's and Pen on 6's. The Bright Lance and Dark Lance glance vehicles on 4's and pen on 5's, due to reducing the armor to 12 instead of 14. How is that worse? I think the Lance rule makes them better against high AV, not worse..

nobdy said that they were worse against AV 14, in fact its quite the opposite they are worse against all AV values except 14, besides that they are costly and only have two reliable weapon platforms (wraithlords and wave serpents). im not counting the lesser range because Eldar units are usually faster.

Bubble Ghost
03-05-2012, 16:47
"harassment" rules can be implemented and used sucessfully in 40K, night spinners grav tanks work that way, but what you say his also true, if i have unit A that is good at kiling and unit B that doesnt have really much punch but has an fancy rule that delays the enemy, i could have one unit A to kill some enemies while Unit B tries to delay them, but i will probably choose two Units A to kill twice the enemies, so that should reflect itself in the point costs of the abilities.
I like the idea of hawks causing disruption in enemy units and veichles, i think that should translate in a rule that makes them capable of disable enemy units eficiency and making them more vulnerable to other eldar units, and that would contribute to the eldar synergy style of warfare.

Yeah, that's the problem - if you want that kind of effect you have to come up with some arbitrary special rule that exists completely outside of the normal game. Too much of that is confusing, contradictory and annoying, and special rule bloat is by all accounts one of the things people dislike about 40K generally. It would work if there was some core rule they could make use of naturally, say something about proximity or position of enemy units - Ld or cover save penalty if you have a nearby enemy unit in your line of retreat, that sort of thing, that Skyleap would make them useful for exploiting - but as it is, I think you have to do what you're going to do with them using killing power and nothing else, because that's the currency the game is designed around.

Then again, maybe 6th ed will have something more like that - the leaky-fakey-leaky rules had a system where broken units were just plain destroyed by nearby enemies. Swooping Hawks with Skyleap would be useful for exploiting that, whereas currently the enemy unit would continue fleeing but almost as an afterthought blow the Swooping Hawks to bits on the way...

insectum7
03-05-2012, 17:00
nobdy said that they were worse against AV 14, in fact its quite the opposite they are worse against all AV values except 14, besides that they are costly and only have two reliable weapon platforms (wraithlords and wave serpents). im not counting the lesser range because Eldar units are usually faster.

I'd also point out that they are an Assault weapon, and can be fired on the move by Guardian units, which is really nice.


@Bubble Ghost
I would give the Swooping Hawk Exarch access to the Web of Skulls weapon again. It was a pretty good weapon in 2nd Ed. and it could be given stats/abilities that would make the unit better at threatening more targets.

Geep
03-05-2012, 17:05
Yeah, that's the problem - if you want that kind of effect you have to come up with some arbitrary special rule that exists completely outside of the normal game. Too much of that is confusing, contradictory and annoying, and special rule bloat is by all accounts one of the things people dislike about 40K generally. It would work if there was some core rule they could make use of naturally, say something about proximity or position of enemy units - Ld or cover save penalty if you have a nearby enemy unit in your line of retreat, that sort of thing, that Skyleap would make them useful for exploiting - but as it is, I think you have to do what you're going to do with them using killing power and nothing else, because that's the currency the game is designed around.
I strongly agree with this. There are some core mechanics that would help harrasment (and many other game ideals) work much better, but as the game stands they currently fail badly. Pinning, for example, is a great way of annoying an enemy without actually killing them- except that due to all around high Ld, fearless and other special rules Pinning is a joke.
This is similar to why I'm against grenades for all, assault ramps for everything and the current over-abundance of special rules. The core of 40k is a fairly neat and workable ruleset*, but it's pretty thoroughly buried under a heap of codex-specific junk. (*yes it's not perfect- Bubble Ghost makes good points there- but I think the solution is to cut away the specialised junk and fix these few core rules rather than continue with the current codex trends)

AlphariusOmegon20
03-05-2012, 17:54
I'd also point out that they are an Assault weapon, and can be fired on the move by Guardian units, which is really nice.


@Bubble Ghost
I would give the Swooping Hawk Exarch access to the Web of Skulls weapon again. It was a pretty good weapon in 2nd Ed. and it could be given stats/abilities that would make the unit better at threatening more targets.

The web of skulls was a Dark Reaper Exarch item IIRC, not a Swooping Hawk one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

titilititi
03-05-2012, 19:44
The web of skulls was a Dark Reaper Exarch item IIRC, not a Swooping Hawk one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's true that it was the Reaper Exarch that was wearing the Web of Skulls, but in the 2nd Edition you could give it to any exarch... It was dark hours for "wysiwyg"...

Shamana
03-05-2012, 21:27
I wouldn't say guardians with BL are that great, they are still BS 3 and pay 30 points for it. It's not a combination fielded very often, and for good reason - 30 points for a single shot at BS 3 is expensive. Actually, most times guardians will just camp in cover so the assault guns make little difference.

The Brightlance has some niche benefits, but in the vast majority of cases is simply inferior to the lascannon: it has lower strength and range against AV 10-12, and lower range at the same strength against AV 13. In all those cases it is flatly inferior with no redeeming characteristics; it only comes ahead in damage (and still has a problem in range) against AV 14. On top of that, it tends to be more expensive. It's got a gimmick that doesn't disguise the fact that it is usually going to be straight-up worse than the Imperial equivalent, and I hope that changes the next time the codex comes around.

25-30 points for a S8 AP1 lance gun is imo fairly decent. The added bonus on the damage table compensates for not having flat-out S9 and 48-inch range, and the cost is comparable to a lascannon - for which imperials tend to pay 20-30 points (20 for IG, 25-35 for marines). Yes, S8 AP 1 is quite decent at busting tanks, well - it should be. And now we've seen zoanthropes with and BA libbies (in dreadnoughts) throwing AP 1 lances, so it's not like I'm asking for something that isn't already there.

As for hawks, I'm hoping for a minor point decrease (18 points perhaps?), assault 3 pinning lasblasters (to go with their theme of winds and buffeting wings), maybe with an aspect upgrade that lets them downgrade cover saves somewhat due to attacking from three dimensions. Extra weapons wouldn't hurt, to go with a theme I saw on another site before: The wings buffet the foe and disorient them (lasblasters), the talons rend and blind (haywire blasters, pinning grenade packs, other pinning stuff if blasters don't), and the beak kills (short-range high-power stuff, like fusion guns, meltagun packs, etc).

Edit: For aspects, I'm more of a fan of a theme rather than a VERY static gear set. For example, Fire Dragons' schtick is using heat-based weapons to utterlyannihilate an enemy from up close: that can work just as well with flamers as it does with meltaguns. Reapers slay an enemy dispassionately from afar, which can be done with other heavy weapons such as shuriken cannons (you know, what their exarch can already get), EMLs, or some other heavy guns. Spiders can ambush a foe from anywhere and have the "spider" image, so why not give them the option for poisoned (power on the exarch) CCWs and allow them to assault after deepstrike, like CSM lesser daemons? Note that these all apply to all aspects in a team. They are still specialists, but have a few options to specialize in.

It's a bit different from the current narrow focus, and it can seem a bit freaky, but imo it can still work and allow for a flavorful and effective army.

althathir
03-05-2012, 21:32
rerolls could work, i also would like to see banshee masks reducing the enemy stats in the first round, halving perhaps ememies ws and init. and perhaps changing war shout to reduce the strength of the enemy models by 1. reducing thougness would be a little bit unfluffy, the masks shouts affects the foes nervous system, paralyssing them to some degree, making them slower, awkward and powerless.
....


Right but if by the same token your paralyzed and awkward isn't gonna be easier to hit a weak spot? The main reason I brought up the ideal was that giving a -1 T modifer would benefit other units in the assault if they're present. I honestly am not sure how well it work out, just that it was worth mentioning.


@ Bubble Ghost

"harassment" rules can be implemented and used sucessfully in 40K, night spinners grav tanks work that way, but what you say his also true, if i have unit A that is good at kiling and unit B that doesnt have really much punch but has an fancy rule that delays the enemy, i could have one unit A to kill some enemies while Unit B tries to delay them, but i will probably choose two Units A to kill twice the enemies, so that should reflect itself in the point costs of the abilities.
I like the idea of hawks causing disruption in enemy units and veichles, i think that should translate in a rule that makes them capable of disable enemy units eficiency and making them more vulnerable to other eldar units, and that would contribute to the eldar synergy style of warfare.

Night spinners are pretty cool, and its a great concept but I don't see how hawks would accomplish the same thing. Its partially why I like the second option so much, if glancing become better at destroying vehicles then their movement can almost be redirector for us, combine that with a gun with nice range and we have a flexible unit (granted thats counting on big points drop).


It's true that it was the Reaper Exarch that was wearing the Web of Skulls, but in the 2nd Edition you could give it to any exarch... It was dark hours for "wysiwyg"...

Exarchs weren't tied to shrines than it was more or less an IC that could pick their gear.

TheDoctor
03-05-2012, 21:57
And now we've seen zoanthropes with and BA libbies (in dreadnoughts) throwing AP 1 lances, so it's not like I'm asking for something that isn't already there.

As for hawks, I'm hoping for a minor point decrease (18 points perhaps?), assault 3 pinning lasblasters (to go with their theme of winds and buffeting wings), maybe with an aspect upgrade that lets them downgrade cover saves somewhat due to attacking from three dimensions. Extra weapons wouldn't hurt, to go with a theme I saw on another site before: The wings buffet the foe and disorient them (lasblasters), the talons rend and blind (haywire blasters, pinning grenade packs, other pinning stuff if blasters don't), and the beak kills (short-range high-power stuff, like fusion guns, meltagun packs, etc).

Edit: For aspects, I'm more of a fan of a theme rather than a VERY static gear set. For example, Fire Dragons' schtick is using heat-based weapons to utterlyannihilate an enemy from up close: that can work just as well with flamers as it does with meltaguns. Reapers slay an enemy dispassionately from afar, which can be done with other heavy weapons such as shuriken cannons (you know, what their exarch can already get), EMLs, or some other heavy guns. Spiders can ambush a foe from anywhere and have the "spider" image, so why not give them the option for poisoned (power on the exarch) CCWs and allow them to assault after deepstrike, like CSM lesser daemons? Note that these all apply to all aspects in a team. They are still specialists, but have a few options to specialize in.

It's a bit different from the current narrow focus, and it can seem a bit freaky, but imo it can still work and allow for a flavorful and effective army.

Dont forget that the Tyranid one is S10 AP1 Lance.
For fluff difference between Eldar and Dark Eldar lances. Dark Eldar use slaves to mass produce their own lances, and then slap it on everything. Craftworld Eldar use Bonesinger Exarchs to produce few but awesome bright lances, necessitating their use of other heavy weapons, which are made by regular bonesingers.

As for the rest of it, I like the ideas.
Now GW employees need to read this thread and *cough**cough* plastic aspect warriors *cough**cough*

Bubble Ghost
03-05-2012, 23:56
I think the solution is to cut away the specialised junk and fix these few core rules rather than continue with the current codex trends

We can dream...

althathir
04-05-2012, 04:19
Dont forget that the Tyranid one is S10 AP1 Lance.
For fluff difference between Eldar and Dark Eldar lances. Dark Eldar use slaves to mass produce their own lances, and then slap it on everything. Craftworld Eldar use Bonesinger Exarchs to produce few but awesome bright lances, necessitating their use of other heavy weapons, which are made by regular bonesingers.

As for the rest of it, I like the ideas.
Now GW employees need to read this thread and *cough**cough* plastic aspect warriors *cough**cough*

Or they could just make so that AP 2 gains some bonuses againist vehicles as well, its not like people consider DL or LCs as a great deal either. Making both ap 1 & 2 add one on the damage chart seems reasonable enough.

Hendarion
04-05-2012, 06:29
Or they could just make so that AP 2 gains some bonuses againist vehicles as well, its not like people consider DL or LCs as a great deal either. Making both ap 1 & 2 add one on the damage chart seems reasonable enough.
The only thing that will do is increase damages from heavy weapons in general. LasCannons are AP2, PlasmaCannons, and god knows how many other weapons. I don't think that's a good idea, really.

bobafett_h
04-05-2012, 06:39
AP2 weapons already have the advantage of being able to ignore any normal armour save and FNP. Giving them the extra advantage against vehicles that the rarer AP1 weapons get would not be good. What I do think would be nice is changing the Glancing hit modifier to -1 instead of what it is now...

Bright Lance being an S8 AP1 Lance weapon seems good to me. In addition, this can be done while leaving the Dark lance as it is as there is plenty of fluff justification for Craftworld Eldar tech being at least slightly better than that of their dark kin. For example, DE apparently don't have access to Wraithbone anymore and have to use other materials to build with while they also miss out on the skill of Bonesingers (which I'd love to see as a unit in the next Codex)...

Bergen Beerbelly
04-05-2012, 06:53
I strongly agree with this. There are some core mechanics that would help harrasment (and many other game ideals) work much better, but as the game stands they currently fail badly. Pinning, for example, is a great way of annoying an enemy without actually killing them- except that due to all around high Ld, fearless and other special rules Pinning is a joke.
This is similar to why I'm against grenades for all, assault ramps for everything and the current over-abundance of special rules. The core of 40k is a fairly neat and workable ruleset*, but it's pretty thoroughly buried under a heap of codex-specific junk. (*yes it's not perfect- Bubble Ghost makes good points there- but I think the solution is to cut away the specialised junk and fix these few core rules rather than continue with the current codex trends)

The last time GW cut away the "specialized junk" from their codexes people hated it. That was the infamous blandification period where Jervis Johnson thought less is better and we ended up with codexes like the current Eldar codex, the Chaos Space Marine codex and a few others. They are bland, boring, and frankly that doesn't sell a lot of models.

The game doesn't need blandification again, it needs those options. Those options are one of the things that makes the game fun. Maybe not to everyone but to the majority of people it does.

insectum7
04-05-2012, 08:31
I wouldn't say guardians with BL are that great, they are still BS 3 and pay 30 points for it. It's not a combination fielded very often, and for good reason - 30 points for a single shot at BS 3 is expensive. Actually, most times guardians will just camp in cover so the assault guns make little difference.

The Brightlance has some niche benefits, but in the vast majority of cases is simply inferior to the lascannon: it has lower strength and range against AV 10-12, and lower range at the same strength against AV 13. In all those cases it is flatly inferior with no redeeming characteristics; it only comes ahead in damage (and still has a problem in range) against AV 14. On top of that, it tends to be more expensive. It's got a gimmick that doesn't disguise the fact that it is usually going to be straight-up worse than the Imperial equivalent, and I hope that changes the next time the codex comes around.


For what it's worth, I think the intended balance is that Imperial armies don't have as much access to S 6 multishot weapons the way that Eldar do. The S 6 multishots such as Shuriken Cannons, Scatter Lasers, Starcannons and even Warp Spiders give the Eldar more viability against lighter vehicles than the Imperial Heavy Bolter, and the Bright Lance is intended to even the odds against the high armor stuff. So while the BL isn't quite a Lascannon, it serves a slightly different niche because the other heavy weapons are expected to pick up the slack against the lighter stuff. This was really apparent in 3rd Ed. where Starcannons were extremely popular because they were good at killing any infantry and damaging vehicles at the same.

In the context of the Eldar army as a whole, one could make the argument that the BL is better than the Lascannon because of it's greater reliability against it's intended target: heavy armor, i.e. 14. It may not be a popular opinion around an Eldar wishlist, but I think it's worth taking note of.



Edit: I'd also note that even if Guardians are sitting in cover for most of the battle, the ability to freely shift your weapon around to get better LOS on a target is still quite valuable, depending on your terrain you reduce the amount of places that a target can hide and possibly mitigate cover saves as well.

TheDoctor
04-05-2012, 09:33
For what it's worth, I think the intended balance is that Imperial armies don't have as much access to S 6 multishot weapons the way that Eldar do. The S 6 multishots such as Shuriken Cannons, Scatter Lasers, Starcannons and even Warp Spiders give the Eldar more viability against lighter vehicles than the Imperial Heavy Bolter, and the Bright Lance is intended to even the odds against the high armor stuff

*cough* Imperial Guard and autocannons *cough*

Solonor
04-05-2012, 11:17
The last time GW cut away the "specialized junk" from their codexes people hated it. That was the infamous blandification period where Jervis Johnson thought less is better and we ended up with codexes like the current Eldar codex, the Chaos Space Marine codex and a few others. They are bland, boring, and frankly that doesn't sell a lot of models.

The game doesn't need blandification again, it needs those options. Those options are one of the things that makes the game fun. Maybe not to everyone but to the majority of people it does.

both cases have some pros and cons:

"Specialized Junk":

Pros - many specialized rules makes every army feel quite unique and funny, every unit has a very unique feeling to it. people dont get bored fast because off so much options.
Cons - rules contradictions are more difficult to control or check, needing faqs after faqs to write. people that dont have access to every army books find themselves faced with rules they never heard before.

"blandification":

Pros - more fluid gaming, everyone that has access to the core rules can understand what each unit can do. fewer rules contradictions.
Cons - after some time the game becames more chess like, the units become bland and similiar to other units form different lists.

in my opinion the solution should be in the middle (and i have some hope for 6th edition), all armies should have some, not many, Army Specific Rules (affecting the whole army or specific units) but the majority of the rules should be tiered USR.

im strongly in favor of tiered USR, i think they would contribute to making many units unique and avoid rules contradictions etc etc.

Take an example in the Eldar army using the tiered version of instant death and eternal warrior (EW 1 beats ID 1 and so on until EW 3 beats ID 3) add an extra ID 4 to ignore all EW

EW 1 would be the most "common", while EW 3 would much rarer, perhaps only availabe to some of the biggest tyranid creatures, greater daemons and Avatars.

currently the diresword has a kind off ID ability in the new rules, with this setup we will give them ID 1, good but any character/monster with EW can shrug it off.

Now take the spear of Yriel, the fluff talks about it having the baleful energies of a dying sun, if you gave the spear ID 3 or 4, it would be a terrifying weapon capable of killing a greater daemon or big monstrous creature with a single blow. (im using this has a fluff example im not saying that Yriel for its current point cost should kill a greator daemon with one blow).

another one is the ID like ability of D-weapons, currently you have W-cannons, D-cannons, and the warp hunter cannon, each has the same rules but each has no template, small template, big template, you could give them ID 1, ID 2, ID 3, the larger the template the bigger the chance that even with EW the enemy his entirely sucked into the warp.

If the tiers are wide enough you can use a multiple number of combinations for different units, having a unit with FNP 3+ and Stealth 1, plays completly different from one with FNP 6+ Stealth 3, the first unit would not be afraid of open terrain, unless facing AP2 or less weaponry while the other would try to embrace cover always with such a big bonus. both have the same USR that have the same interaction but play very differently.

Bubble Ghost
04-05-2012, 11:39
The fact that an army list feels bland with less "specialised junk" is an indictment of the simplistic game underneath. It wouldn't be a problem if the game itself were deeper and more interesting.

insectum7
04-05-2012, 16:28
*cough* Imperial Guard and autocannons *cough*

That is more the case now, however I feel that until 5th Ed. Autocannons were not a popular choice of weapon. Through 3rd and 4th, my experience is that Autocannons just weren't used nearly as much as some of the other options. For example, the "Rifleman" Dreadnought did not exist, and Chimeras (with multilasers) were not as common. The Autocannon was often seen as a poor option.

And while SMs and IG both had access to S 6 and S 7 weapons, the number of platforms they came on was usually somewhat limited. Eldar have pretty much the same weapon choices across every model that can take a heavy weapon. For example, the Land Speeder cannot have either a Lascannon or a Heavy Plasma Gun. The Vyper however can get a Bright Lance or a Starcannon.

TheDoctor
04-05-2012, 17:46
That is more the case now, however I feel that until 5th Ed. Autocannons were not a popular choice of weapon. Through 3rd and 4th, my experience is that Autocannons just weren't used nearly as much as some of the other options. For example, the "Rifleman" Dreadnought did not exist, and Chimeras (with multilasers) were not as common. The Autocannon was often seen as a poor option.

And while SMs and IG both had access to S 6 and S 7 weapons, the number of platforms they came on was usually somewhat limited. Eldar have pretty much the same weapon choices across every model that can take a heavy weapon. For example, the Land Speeder cannot have either a Lascannon or a Heavy Plasma Gun. The Vyper however can get a Bright Lance or a Starcannon.

Agreed, I tended to see more missile launchers, lascannons, and plasma guns, but that could have been due to the abundance of tyranid players (and we now only have 1-2 at my local shop).

Thing is though, what in the hell would posses you to take a bright lance or starcannon on a vyper? While the landspeeder has a good, points efficient role for whatever weapon loadout you equip it with.

Spell_of_Destruction
05-05-2012, 00:32
Bright Lance being an S8 AP1 Lance weapon seems good to me. In addition, this can be done while leaving the Dark lance as it is as there is plenty of fluff justification for Craftworld Eldar tech being at least slightly better than that of their dark kin. For example, DE apparently don't have access to Wraithbone anymore and have to use other materials to build with while they also miss out on the skill of Bonesingers (which I'd love to see as a unit in the next Codex)...

Agreed. There's no reason for the Brightlance and Dark Lance to have the same profile. They're 'manufactured' in different ways.

In terms of balance, DE have codex choices with far better access to Dark Lances than we have to Bright Lances and mostly have superior BS. The Bright Lance just isn't a cost effective choice on most of its platforms - Guardians, Vypers, Warwalkers and Falcons. In fact I can count on one hand the number of times I have seen Brightlances taken on these units in the past decade. It's almost a pointless option at the current cost.

It needs to be cheaper (and I mean 10-20pts cheaper) for BS 3 platforms and better. We're never going to be able to fit in as many Bright Lances as DE do Dark Lances.

AlphariusOmegon20
05-05-2012, 02:24
Crap, double post.

AlphariusOmegon20
05-05-2012, 02:26
Browning M-2's and DShK's are manufactured in different ways too, but they still perform the same at the end of the day, the same as a bright lance and a dark lance would.

There is no difference in the performance between a bright lance and a dark lance. That is unfortunately indisputable. What you are talking about is a cosmetic difference, which generally has no bearing on performance.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Spell_of_Destruction
05-05-2012, 02:37
I'm not sure there's much value in bringing in a RL example. Hell, if there's no real difference between weapons in the same category why bother with race specific heavy weapons? We could just go back to 2nd ed when everyone has lascannons and heavy plasma guns.

The main reason to do it is balance. Despite having the same profile the two weapons are not truly equal as DE can field considerably more DLs than CE can BLs. Yes CE get FDs but DE get trueborn who fulfill the same role. Few armies are as weak as Eldar when it comes to long range AT.

It's a game. You can invent any reason you want to justify why x is marginally better than y.

althathir
05-05-2012, 02:39
The only thing that will do is increase damages from heavy weapons in general. LasCannons are AP2, PlasmaCannons, and god knows how many other weapons. I don't think that's a good idea, really.

Not really that many, AP 2 is fairly rare, from the books I have on me right now
Space wolves - LC, PC, PG, PP
Crons - HGC, C'tan power, and rod of the covent (str 5)
Nids - bio-plasma
Eldar - brightlance, StarCannon, Pulse laser, d-cannon, prism cannon wraithcannon, and triskele (str 3)
Dark Eldar - dark lance, blaster, void lance, void mine

Dark Eldar would be the army that would really benefit the most from it, but it would go two ways (their cardboxes would be even more glasscannon), but ap 2 isn't that common (moreso with marines picking between plasma and melta in a lot of situations).


AP2 weapons already have the advantage of being able to ignore any normal armour save and FNP. Giving them the extra advantage against vehicles that the rarer AP1 weapons get would not be good. What I do think would be nice is changing the Glancing hit modifier to -1 instead of what it is now...

Bright Lance being an S8 AP1 Lance weapon seems good to me. In addition, this can be done while leaving the Dark lance as it is as there is plenty of fluff justification for Craftworld Eldar tech being at least slightly better than that of their dark kin. For example, DE apparently don't have access to Wraithbone anymore and have to use other materials to build with while they also miss out on the skill of Bonesingers (which I'd love to see as a unit in the next Codex)...

-1 glancings would be fine as well, but I think it would have a much more dramatic effect on the game then making ap 2 gain +1 on the damage chart.

Shamana
05-05-2012, 10:15
For what it's worth, I think the intended balance is that Imperial armies don't have as much access to S 6 multishot weapons the way that Eldar do. The S 6 multishots such as Shuriken Cannons, Scatter Lasers, Starcannons and even Warp Spiders give the Eldar more viability against lighter vehicles than the Imperial Heavy Bolter, and the Bright Lance is intended to even the odds against the high armor stuff. So while the BL isn't quite a Lascannon, it serves a slightly different niche because the other heavy weapons are expected to pick up the slack against the lighter stuff. This was really apparent in 3rd Ed. where Starcannons were extremely popular because they were good at killing any infantry and damaging vehicles at the same.

In the context of the Eldar army as a whole, one could make the argument that the BL is better than the Lascannon because of it's greater reliability against it's intended target: heavy armor, i.e. 14. It may not be a popular opinion around an Eldar wishlist, but I think it's worth taking note of..

No, see, that still doesn't work very well. The Imperium might not have quite as much S6, but between multi-lasers, plasma guns (of any size) and autocannons its armies could (and can) still take on lighter vehicles. How efficient it was in 4E and is in 5E is another story, but it's not like they need(ed) lascannons for everything. With eldar, the lighter guns can somewhat work on AV 10 and 11, but that doesn't mean the more powerful ones should be worthless there - and they are your only chance against AV 12 or higher. So the fact that the lascannon is better against AV 10-13 (it outranges the lance against 13) at notably lower cost is, imo, quite significant; the niche where the lance is superior in some ways is simply too small for what you are paying for it. In a way, its problem is the same as that of several specialist units in the Eldar codex : expensive, only somewhat worth it in a very narrow capacity, and poor at anything else. That doesn't mean the lance is completely worthless, just that as it is, it is underpowered for its points (or overcosted for its profile). That is why I'd like to see it at AP 1 and lower points - perhaps the same as the lascannon or at most 5 more. It should be able to effectively (and efficiently) deal with any armour, being the heavyweight among a more versatile, cheaper EML (and starcannon, if it becomes S7) and a faster-firing, but less efficient pulse laser.


There is no difference in the performance between a bright lance and a dark lance. That is unfortunately indisputable. What you are talking about is a cosmetic difference, which generally has no bearing on performance.

There is currently no difference in performance because the rules are the same. That doesn't mean there can or should be no difference. They are actually created in a different way - very much more so than the RL example you gave. A BL is created using using psychic engineering of pseudo-organic materials (if I get the bonesingers right), the other a much more conventional (if still very high-tech) assembly. One fires a high-intensity laser beam, the other uses dark matter projection to induce a, as far as I can tell, matter-antimatter reaction. While the overall purpose is the same - defeating heavy armor - they are noticeably different in their production and functioning.

Hendarion
05-05-2012, 11:59
Space wolves - LC, PC, PG, PP
Excuse me? Wtf, hth, brb, lol?

Shamana
05-05-2012, 13:11
Excuse me? Wtf, hth, brb, lol?

I'd go for "Lascannon, plasma cannon, plasma gun, plasma pistol."

Spell_of_Destruction
06-05-2012, 04:44
I don't see most transports being rebalanced that much. Honestly it would be hard to nerf them and not other vehicles and with fliers being the main push (seemingly) I don't see transports becoming worthless. The way I look at imperial transports is their force multiplier for imperial armies and a sales multiplier for GW I expect more for things like firing points to get nerfed, and for infantry to have some more options.

That said if our fire power goes back up to levels it was at in 4th we wouldn't have to rely on their durability as much and really that amount of fire power would be fairly reasonable now. If sixth has a lot of changes I could see aerial assault being added via faq, and if not were probably looking at a codex fairly soon (I expect 3 in 2013 judging from fantasy).

edit: That said with how old are dex is the begining of 6th could be frustrating though if we got a flier in a splash release it could a long ways towards helping us.

I hope that whoever wrote 6th ed and whoever has written/is writing the Eldar codex sees things from the same perspective.

Don't get me wrong, Wave Serpents are fantastic transports but relative to other common transports there seems to be a gross underpricing of firing points (or taking into account the lack thereof). Wave Serpents are still priced for 3rd ed (along with half the units in the 4th ed codex) when their capability as an assault transport was unparalleled. Right now I'd say they are 10-20pts overpriced (depending on the armament).

Gorbad Ironclaw
09-05-2012, 09:07
So if Shuriken weapons operates at hundreds or thousands of "rounds" a minute, putting out whole clouds of shurikens how about giving them templates? I know from using my Grotzookas how multiple templates shots can quickly rack up the number of hits so that might be a way to increase close range lethality and it would certainly make the Eldar signature weapon into something unique. It would also make it seem less like a sucky version of the Dark Eldars splinter rifles and more of it's own thing.

bobafett_h
09-05-2012, 09:49
So if Shuriken weapons operates at hundreds or thousands of "rounds" a minute, putting out whole clouds of shurikens how about giving them templates? I know from using my Grotzookas how multiple templates shots can quickly rack up the number of hits so that might be a way to increase close range lethality and it would certainly make the Eldar signature weapon into something unique. It would also make it seem less like a sucky version of the Dark Eldars splinter rifles and more of it's own thing.

They used to use the Sustained Fire dice in 2nd edition...

Problem with making them template weapons would still be the issue of range. Assault 2 is fine, but I'd like to see Dire Avengers get Assault 3 or have the Bladestorm rule as standard for their Avenger Catapults instead of a range increase that they don't really need over Guardians. The Death Spinner on the other hand should go back to using a template...

Gorbad Ironclaw
09-05-2012, 10:47
Oh I know, they used to be a better Stormbolter as they had -2 save instead of -1. Maybe they should get AP 4 as well? :p
And I was thinking about the issue of range. If they stay at 12" (and I don't think they should, but they likely will) then odds are you only get one round of shooting. At least with templates you can generate a larger number of hits on units without making it completely obscene against individual models (and I don't think you would get away with a basic weapon with Assault 4 or 5). But maybe it could make the Shuriken Catapult sufficiently lethal at close range to actually make it a viable weapon.

And yes, personally I'd love to see Warp Spiders go back to using templates. Probably not the old rules, they were a tiny bit broken but templates and pinning would represent it nicely (once again, if pinning actually did anything).

Hendarion
09-05-2012, 11:34
Maybe they should get AP 4 as well? :p
That would change Eldar Guardians against a few opponents and units, but their main problem would remain and against the major number of opponents (which are Marines) nothing would change except that Guardians might cost even more points than currently.

Gorbad Ironclaw
09-05-2012, 17:36
It wasn't really a serious suggestion, more as a nod to the old statline. The real problem with coming up with ideas is that we don't know what's going to change in 6th. When we don't know how the game is going to play we can't guess as to what might be good solutions. However I think it's clear that most people want something to happen to Guardians (especially) and Shuriken weapons. I'm not even entirely sure why it is the way it is, I never found it to work very well as a weapon after 2nd so you would have thought it would have been changed before now, but we can always hope.

Sildani
09-05-2012, 20:58
It's possible no one in the Studio knows what to do with them, either. Guardians are, dare I say it, almost unique in 40K: the relatively untrained footslogging "cannon fodder" of an army that's described as elite, mobile, dying out, and quick. And yet, they themselves are none of these things, being slow, numerous, and having uninspiring stats (save I!). In the background, they have a definite role and their existence is explained well. On the tabletop... well...

My take on Guardians - and this is by no means original - is that they should bring the big guns. More heavy weapons per unit, or optionally support weapons. These are the Eldar that dig in and hold ground, establish the salient, man the fortifications. If anyone remembers, rumor had it they were getting a Deep Strikable fortification, or possibly a deployable force field, to help their survivability. I truly hope this is the case. The LAST place these guys need to be is on the front lines. If they are, the Eldar's goose is truly cooked, and that's a situation that shouldn't be represented on the tabletop at the beginning of a game.

Hendarion
09-05-2012, 21:20
Well, they do work fine as front-line-guys in Dawn of War. Of course, you're better off just buying the heavy-weapon-guys instead, but still they perform much better than their original analogous versions.

althathir
09-05-2012, 21:44
It's possible no one in the Studio knows what to do with them, either. Guardians are, dare I say it, almost unique in 40K: the relatively untrained footslogging "cannon fodder" of an army that's described as elite, mobile, dying out, and quick. And yet, they themselves are none of these things, being slow, numerous, and having uninspiring stats (save I!). In the background, they have a definite role and their existence is explained well. On the tabletop... well...

My take on Guardians - and this is by no means original - is that they should bring the big guns. More heavy weapons per unit, or optionally support weapons. These are the Eldar that dig in and hold ground, establish the salient, man the fortifications. If anyone remembers, rumor had it they were getting a Deep Strikable fortification, or possibly a deployable force field, to help their survivability. I truly hope this is the case. The LAST place these guys need to be is on the front lines. If they are, the Eldar's goose is truly cooked, and that's a situation that shouldn't be represented on the tabletop at the beginning of a game.

Yeah guardians are IMO a big catch 22 for the studio. Personally I felt that the 4th ed. book in a lot of ways was trying to de-emphasize them in the fluff, and I'd make the argument that the Path Series has as well. Personally I would like to see storm guardians treated as an elite with bs 4, a couple of specials, grenades, and the option of SP & CCW or Shurcats that can become a troop w/o needing a SC. With another guardian entry in heavy support thats basically weapon teams. Then concentrate on Dire Avengers, Rangers, and jetbikes as our core troops.

Sildani
09-05-2012, 21:45
Althathir: I LIKE those ideas...

Spell_of_Destruction
09-05-2012, 23:41
Of course the other problem is the similarity between Guardians and Dire Avengers.

Even in 2nd ed it was a difficult balance. For a full squad of 7 Dire Avengers (22pts each 15, 154pts in total) you could get 11 shuricat Guardians (14pts each). I loved my DAs but Guardians were a better deal.

Giving DAs longer ranged guns was a good way of giving them an edge but the problem was that it left Guardians neglected. In my view Guardians need to be brought up closer to the current level of DAs and DAs need to have a more flexible battlefield role.

I would like to see DAs become a unit which combines the shooting ability of a Kabalite Warrior (sans heavy/special weapons) with the tarpit abilities of Wyches. I don't think this would be unreasonable for their current cost. If there is going to be a cc element to the squad then it needs to actually be useful rather than the waste of points that it currently is. Up the shimmershield to 4+ inv in combat, give them 2 attacks each (new wargear), maybe even defensive grenades and make them stubborn. They are supposed to be 'immovable in defence' after all.

If DAs can hold up dedicated assault units for a turn or two then that would really give them unique role for a front line Troop not only in the army but in the 40k system as a whole.

I also really like the idea of 'Support Guardians' as a HS choice.

mercury14
10-05-2012, 08:20
I'd like to see a psyker unit between Farseers and Eldrad. Farseers are so limited these days with anti-psyker flooding the game so we see a unique character just way too much.

Shamana
10-05-2012, 10:23
Well, one idea thrown about was having "elder" farseers, who can cast 1 more power than normal, and may have +1T -1I (and no jetbikes) due to starting to crystalize (which supposedly happened to really old and powerful seers). Considering farseers are supposed to be the premier (non-daemon) psykers in the setting having the casting abilities near to those of GK libbies shouldn't be too hard, right?

Gorbad Ironclaw
10-05-2012, 15:40
Another thing I would like to see was delving deeper into the different Aspects. Expanding their functionality, either via different weapon options and/or squad based powers. So for instance Dark Reapers might have the option to exchange Reaper Launchers for Shuriken Cannons or Missile Launchers or Striking Scorpions might be able to play up their stealth abilities or focus more on their Mandiblasters, etc.

I know they are supposed to represent specific approaches to warfare, but as we can see from the Exarches, it's not uniformly rigid one way only and it would make the Aspects more useful in the overall army.

Sai-Lauren
10-05-2012, 17:21
My thoughts (in no particular order):
More exarch powers, and possibly some more alternate weapons too, but limits on what an individual exarch can take (one, at most two powers chosen from say five, possibly some with "take x, can't take y" restrictions. After all, how many people simply take both possible powers for their exarchs? Possibly even boost the powers of some of the powers to higher levels, but charge a lot more for them). Similarly, a few more powers for Farseers and Exarchs, again, with limits (Farseer should certainly be able to get an improved version of the Calidus' "Word in your Ear" ability IMO).

Bonesingers

The Ulthwe strike force portable warp gate.

More ability to disrupt an opponent through Warlocks/Farseer/Bonesinger, and the effects of different weapons (Bio-shuriken cannon ammo anyone? :)). Eldar are supposed to dance around their opponents and only fight when they deem it the right time, not stand there and wait to get punched in the mouth - although again, this probably needs to be limited so that an Eldar player's opponent actually has something to do each turn, other than be lead around by the nose, or reaching the excesses of the 3rd edition Alaitoc ranger disruption lists.

Warlocks removed from their guardian squad sergeant role, boosted a little, and made independant characters, maybe 0-5 as a single non-FOC HQ choice.

Guardians either getting an armour save boost (4+) or better shuriken weapons. Possibly also allow them lasblasters again as a third guardian type (Guardians with lasblasters as the basic version, modifiable into either Storm Guardians with melee weapons or Guardian Defenders with Shuriken catapults - yes, basically, the original RT-era guardian options :)).

Different field options for wave serpents (I know I've mentioned them before on other threads :), but IMO, they need an assault into tank shocked field, a dathedi version and possibly a shock-wave disruptive field like their original epic incarnation).

Maybe a slightly customisable Avatar, reflecting the Craftworld's philosophy (certainly not mutable depending on the aspect of the Young King).

Modelwise, some of the missing exarch weapon options, and a Warlock/Farseer on a jetbike.



Don't much mind as long as jetbikes get a new sculpt. The Deldar jetbikes give a real impression of speed with the pilot crouched low like a racing bike while the current Craftworld jetbikes look like someone lazily cruising on a Fat Boy.

IIRC, when the DE jetbikes came out, the designers said that they kind of took the Eldar race as a whole when designing them, so that when they came back to the Eldar, there'd be obvious similarities between them, and you could see a common ancestor, but they'd still be styled differently depending on who was using them.

So the DE pilot would be leaning forward, eager to get to their prey whilst not really taking in the strategic picture, whilst the CE pilot would be sat back, looking for the best place to attack (and presumably an Exodite and/or Harlequin would be somewhere in between).

dl
10-05-2012, 17:47
How would people feel if the warp spiders assault phase jump was between 1-3 d6 of the players choosing and any double results in a casualty? So you could choose whether to play it safe and go d6, or if you really need it then 2/3d6 and have to deal with a possible casualty.

althathir
10-05-2012, 22:52
Althathir: I LIKE those ideas...

Thanks, to be honest I came up with the ideal because I think our troop choices are too specialized, at least in part because GW has to differentiate them from each other.

At first I was thinking of some sort of origin system, but now I think simply letting the player choose to have either dire avengers, storm guardians, or wraithguard as troops with the other two choices counting as elites would work well.

Then our troops would have more natural roles, rangers would be babysitters/scouts, jetbikes would be a speedy objective stealer, and the unit the player chooses would be the generalist, for da I think just adding the ability to have different ammo types (for example one could be a 12 inch range str 6 ap - shot for use againist vehicles), and for wraiths simply making the 5 man units be able to be counted as troops would be a huge boost (units of 10 with spiritseers cost almost as much as other armies deathstars :eek:). All the current craftworld troops would be still be represented, and each would be quite a bit more viable there would still have to be other fixes for these units but I think its a solid suggestion on my part.


Of course the other problem is the similarity between Guardians and Dire Avengers.

Even in 2nd ed it was a difficult balance. For a full squad of 7 Dire Avengers (22pts each 15, 154pts in total) you could get 11 shuricat Guardians (14pts each). I loved my DAs but Guardians were a better deal.

Giving DAs longer ranged guns was a good way of giving them an edge but the problem was that it left Guardians neglected. In my view Guardians need to be brought up closer to the current level of DAs and DAs need to have a more flexible battlefield role.

I would like to see DAs become a unit which combines the shooting ability of a Kabalite Warrior (sans heavy/special weapons) with the tarpit abilities of Wyches. I don't think this would be unreasonable for their current cost. If there is going to be a cc element to the squad then it needs to actually be useful rather than the waste of points that it currently is. Up the shimmershield to 4+ inv in combat, give them 2 attacks each (new wargear), maybe even defensive grenades and make them stubborn. They are supposed to be 'immovable in defence' after all.

If DAs can hold up dedicated assault units for a turn or two then that would really give them unique role for a front line Troop not only in the army but in the 40k system as a whole.

I also really like the idea of 'Support Guardians' as a HS choice.

I like stubborn for DA's, but I don't like living tarpit units in eldar forces, I'd rather see ammo types, or if they get grenades allow them to purchase haywires as well to add flexibility (as long as their solely anti-infantry people will find them underwhelming).

That said there really isn't a way around them being similiar, its more making it a tough decision or at least one that people don't look at you like your crazy person when you put on or the other down.


I'd like to see a psyker unit between Farseers and Eldrad. Farseers are so limited these days with anti-psyker flooding the game so we see a unique character just way too much.

I'm pretty sure we will see this, if mastery levels are true than we might have quite a bit of control over just how powerful are psychers are. Though to be honest part of the problem with eldrad is that he is just that good.

Spell_of_Destruction
10-05-2012, 23:24
I like stubborn for DA's, but I don't like living tarpit units in eldar forces, I'd rather see ammo types, or if they get grenades allow them to purchase haywires as well to add flexibility (as long as their solely anti-infantry people will find them underwhelming).

That said there really isn't a way around them being similiar, its more making it a tough decision or at least one that people don't look at you like your crazy person when you put on or the other down.

The thing is they already are a tarpit unit - just not a very good one. They can get a 5+ inv save in combat and reduce the enemy's attacks by 1. Those are tarpit abilities. For what other reason would you take them? The problem is that they are too costly and don't work particularly well so they will remain a marginal ability. The next codex should either make them useful or get rid of them altogether.

I would rather have abilities that are useful and costed appropriately. DAs have always had a 'cc' element to them, dating back to the old exarch model with the power sword. And all I'm really advocating is an increase the shimmershield save (just isn't worth it over twin catapults at 5+ inv) and make them stubborn. The +1A would be nice (I'm thinking retractable vambrace blades similar to those Guardians are armed with in DoW) but would really only help against non MEQ armies (it would actually put them on close to a par with tacticals in CC).

althathir
11-05-2012, 00:47
The thing is they already are a tarpit unit - just not a very good one. They can get a 5+ inv save in combat and reduce the enemy's attacks by 1. Those are tarpit abilities. For what other reason would you take them? The problem is that they are too costly and don't work particularly well so they will remain a marginal ability. The next codex should either make them useful or get rid of them altogether.

I would rather have abilities that are useful and costed appropriately. DAs have always had a 'cc' element to them, dating back to the old exarch model with the power sword. And all I'm really advocating is an increase the shimmershield save (just isn't worth it over twin catapults at 5+ inv) and make them stubborn. The +1A would be nice (I'm thinking retractable vambrace blades similar to those Guardians are armed with in DoW) but would really only help against non MEQ armies (it would actually put them on close to a par with tacticals in CC).

I never really saw the tarpit abilities they had as useful. In 3rd I used them because I was stubborn, at the time only the exarch had a tarpit ability but I only ran exarches for the diresword and seriously there really wasn't a justification for the unit based on usefulness guardians were at the time clearly better. In 4th after the new dex I used them both on foot and in mech lists, and kept them fairly cheap but at the time our tanks were worth it. Eldar didn't need troops to score so we could compensate more with our other choices. It was alright that DA were that specialized because they just became a tool rather than the focus. Honestly I don't know if I ever had more than 3 troop choices on the board in 4th.

In 5th we need troops, guardians are lackluster, wraithguard are too expensive (in points and $), jetbikes are ok as objective stealers, rangers alright baby sitters, and DA are mainly used as a wave serpent tax. I tend to use bigger squads than most(7-10), but honestly exarches aren't worth it combine that with serpents being a bit overpriced and well lets just say I've earned every win in 5th since guard. They aren't easy to use, and mainly for me they hop out of vehicles and finish crippled units, or gang up on full ones. I've never used them as a tarpit unit, they're just wasted abilities.

I agree with your premise of making them useful or getting rid of them, but I don't think the answer is to make them a tarpit unit. Units like wyches work as tarpit units more because they have other abilities that force your opponent to make a difficult decision. Wyches are solid in CC for the points, more so with a good combat drug roll, and have the ability to take haywires which with their threat range and cost is a big deal. Their speed allows them to be placed in a situation where the opponent has to either let vehicles get blown up, sac a troop choice (for the most part they'll beat one), try an torrent them (best case for opposing player, but most wych units used like this have fnp, and they're cheap enough that there are commonly several squads of wyches) or put in an elite.

Dire Avengers don't force that reaction, they can only hurt most vehicles on the rear arc, have no answer for walker in cc (wyche's grenades can at least hit on 6, plus they may have a blast pistol in the squad), and while better againist shooting their shots don't have enough fire power to force most troops to want to close. Wraithguard on the other hand can (with their gun plus stats) so why DA into a role they aren't great at?

That said I don't think we're that far behind everyone else its just that our troops are so specialized that we have to use our elites to shore up their weaknesses, instead of having a strong base and picking our elites, HS, FA to make our lists fit our strengths.

mercury14
11-05-2012, 00:58
Well, one idea thrown about was having "elder" farseers, who can cast 1 more power than normal, and may have +1T -1I (and no jetbikes) due to starting to crystalize (which supposedly happened to really old and powerful seers). Considering farseers are supposed to be the premier (non-daemon) psykers in the setting having the casting abilities near to those of GK libbies shouldn't be too hard, right?

Sounds good.

Also I would like to see every Exarch have the option of buying psychic powers. I'd like them to work more like Warlocks if you pay the points for that upgrade... and for Warlocks to be buffed into something different and more remarkable.

mercury14
11-05-2012, 01:22
I never really saw the tarpit abilities they had as useful...

They're very useful as tarpit units, just not against the widest range of opponents. They're great at locking down things like TH termis but still get overrun by horde types, even if the horde isn't that large.

Asurmen + 10 DAs + Shimmer Exarch + Fortune + Doom = Humiliates heavy infantry.

(in a fluffy fun game)

Spell_of_Destruction
11-05-2012, 01:40
I agree with your premise of making them useful or getting rid of them, but I don't think the answer is to make them a tarpit unit. Units like wyches work as tarpit units more because they have other abilities that force your opponent to make a difficult decision. Wyches are solid in CC for the points, more so with a good combat drug roll, and have the ability to take haywires which with their threat range and cost is a big deal. Their speed allows them to be placed in a situation where the opponent has to either let vehicles get blown up, sac a troop choice (for the most part they'll beat one), try an torrent them (best case for opposing player, but most wych units used like this have fnp, and they're cheap enough that there are commonly several squads of wyches) or put in an elite.

Dire Avengers don't force that reaction, they can only hurt most vehicles on the rear arc, have no answer for walker in cc (wyche's grenades can at least hit on 6, plus they may have a blast pistol in the squad), and while better againist shooting their shots don't have enough fire power to force most troops to want to close. Wraithguard on the other hand can (with their gun plus stats) so why DA into a role they aren't great at?

That said I don't think we're that far behind everyone else its just that our troops are so specialized that we have to use our elites to shore up their weaknesses, instead of having a strong base and picking our elites, HS, FA to make our lists fit our strengths.

Perhaps I misled you by suggesting they should be more like wyches...I only meant at the most basic functional level.

The way I envisage DAs functioning as a 'tarpit' unit is as a lynchpin of the Eldar force. They are primarily a shooting unit but with the changes I'm proposing they would also be able to engage enemy units in assault without getting slaughtered (something most Eldar units struggle with) but won't be able to do much damage themselves.

This could serve a couple of tactical functions. (1) It helps them 'hold the line'. They have the 'immovable in defence' tagline. With these changes they can hold off dedicated CC units for a turn or two. It would make them a lot more useful as objective holders. (2) They can tie up enemy units for the dedicated assault units - you could for example lock the enemy unit in place and set up a charge with Banshees next turn. They would also be able to better support dedicated cc units.

So they would fulfill a very different role to Wyches.

althathir
11-05-2012, 02:56
They're very useful as tarpit units, just not against the widest range of opponents. They're great at locking down things like TH termis but still get overrun by horde types, even if the horde isn't that large.

Asurmen + 10 DAs + Shimmer Exarch + Fortune + Doom = Humiliates heavy infantry.

(in a fluffy fun game)

But why, spend 300 plus points to tarpit a unit moreso only againist certain types? I'm fine with dire avengers having access to abilities that allow them to tarpit, I just don't see it as their primary focus, and if they increase those abilities that is what it will be IMO. Avengers aren't severely overcosted, I'd say 2 points, and if we're gonna back to 12 I want them to be able to threaten more things (mainly vehicles cause I can't see them nerfing 33 dollar 35 point models that hard). Our troops need to be more general so that instead of picking elites to cover their weaknesses we're actually building strengths.

Wraithguard also complicate it because they're most likely a troop (or can be unlocked as one), and they're kinda built to be tarpits (plus a CC wraithguard unit has been popular on the wishlists for eldar since I started playing).


Perhaps I misled you by suggesting they should be more like wyches...I only meant at the most basic functional level.

The way I envisage DAs functioning as a 'tarpit' unit is as a lynchpin of the Eldar force. They are primarily a shooting unit but with the changes I'm proposing they would also be able to engage enemy units in assault without getting slaughtered (something most Eldar units struggle with) but won't be able to do much damage themselves.

This could serve a couple of tactical functions. (1) It helps them 'hold the line'. They have the 'immovable in defence' tagline. With these changes they can hold off dedicated CC units for a turn or two. It would make them a lot more useful as objective holders. (2) They can tie up enemy units for the dedicated assault units - you could for example lock the enemy unit in place and set up a charge with Banshees next turn. They would also be able to better support dedicated cc units.

So they would fulfill a very different role to Wyches.

Its not so much that I want them to work like wyches, as much as I think tarpit units need to have an ability that makes the opponent have to consider engaging them on the tarpit unit's terms. Wyches have the threat to force a response, and because they can affect more types of units they succeed at it. What your describing doesn't have that, defensively they're effectively a speed bump, worse at least for this ruleset, they don't provide any anti-vehicle to protect whatever static units are behind them or prevent them from being tank shocked off of an objective (wyches have grenades/blast pistol to scare off vehicles). On offense they can tie up dedicated assault troops for a turn or two but its very hard for that to provide a return on points, and with our army being elite heavy we don't have to numbers to benefit from it as much as our dark kin do.

If the tarpitting is like it is now and completely optional I wouldn't mind it, but if thats where they get a boost then like you said "make them useful or get rid of them". I won't play a specialized army that doesn't that doesn't have more generalized troops in 6th (assuming scoring is similiar) I don't hate myself that much. Thats pretty much killed us for an entire edition, there has to be some more flexibility added, and hopefully for each craftworld style list.

Spell_of_Destruction
11-05-2012, 04:00
I doubt we'll see a greater diversity of options for aspects. They have always been designed around the principle that all members of the squad bar the exarch are armed with the same weapons. Maybe GW will be generous and start handing out plasma and haywire grenades to Aspects but I don't envisage, for example, DAs getting access to special weapons.

One of the reasons I'm completely against "Guardian Vets" is that no one will take DAs if BS 4 Guardians with multiple weapon options can be taken. I'd rather see a more creative approach taken to some of the challenges that Eldar face in the current system.

althathir
11-05-2012, 04:30
I doubt we'll see a greater diversity of options for aspects. They have always been designed around the principle that all members of the squad bar the exarch are armed with the same weapons. Maybe GW will be generous and start handing out plasma and haywire grenades to Aspects but I don't envisage, for example, DAs getting access to special weapons.

One of the reasons I'm completely against "Guardian Vets" is that no one will take DAs if BS 4 Guardians with multiple weapon options can be taken. I'd rather see a more creative approach taken to some of the challenges that Eldar face in the current system.

Right thats why I like ammo types :), seriously a str 6 shot would do wonders for making DA more flexible. While still focusing on the shurcat.

Agree on the guardian vets, thats why I like the ideal of having people have a choice between a few generalist choices with the others becoming elites. 5 man wraithguard troop squads would be nice, and for avengers, ammo types, haywires, or even something as simple as letting warlocks join any unit would help out. Furthermore storm guardians would still have a worse save & close ranged weapons so their would be some drawbacks as well.

Granted it all comes back to what can score, if they go to percentages and let all infantry score and troops are more of a comp requirement then eldar will be in better shape.

Reivax26
11-05-2012, 04:38
I think that Scorpion, Banshee and Avenger exarchs should all have invul dodge saves. If wyches can get a 4+ invul in close combat, I see no reason why Banshees can't. Scorpions should have some ability like Ymgarl Genestealers that lets them hide in cover. Starcannons should have 3 shots and Shuriken Cannons should have 4.

Gorbad Ironclaw
11-05-2012, 08:55
If people want Avenger to be more of a tarpit/interdiction/debuff unit would it be more fun and more appropriate if we gave them some offensive abilities along those lines rather than defenaive abilities? A good inv save and stubborn does not seem Eldarish to me in the alightest and frankly makes them a little boring. But if you give them say psychotropic rounds that could debilitate and so could actively go out and do something. Elder units to my mind should be active, rather than reactive or even worse, inactive units.

Ravariel
11-05-2012, 09:57
Right thats why I like ammo types :), seriously a str 6 shot would do wonders for making DA more flexible. While still focusing on the shurcat.

How about flexbility in the Exarch Power Bladestorm? Make it variable like "+2S (Assaut 1), or +1 Shot, or Rending" chosen when the power is used, same disadvantages apply (no shooting next turn). That way they can deal with almost anything without being too overpowered. And honestly, I think they just need to ditch the 2-cat Exarch. It looks silly and doesn't fit their fluff very well (since when are Eldar footsoldiers Rambo 2-fisting AKs?). Give them the choice to ditch the cat to get a diresword and shimmershield, or upgrade their weapon to something between an Avenger Cat and a Cannon... mebbe S5 Ap 4? Eldar have a dearth of weaponry in that range, and 10 DA toss enough shots downrange that 2 more from another cat isn't that great. Granted, for 5 points, it's like adding another BS5 body to the table, and as such much better than other choices, but losing that isn't going to break anything.

If their range gets bumped to 24" (with corresponding bump of Guardian cats to 18"), with the flexibility of this version of Bladestorm, they're dangerous enough at range to make people want to charge them, have enough of a tarpit ability to hold for a turn or two before Banshees show up, and are differentiated enough from Guardians to make it a choice.

Granted, whatever new paradigm they're going to be working in with the new edition makes all of this 'listing kinda fluid.

Rick Blaine
11-05-2012, 10:20
In the context of the snap fire rumour (firing at BS1 when charged) I think Guardians could be given the ability to do it at full BS.

megatrons2nd
11-05-2012, 13:54
In the context of the snap fire rumour (firing at BS1 when charged) I think Guardians could be given the ability to do it at full BS.

Maybe that is what the overwatch rule will do.

althathir
12-05-2012, 03:24
If people want Avenger to be more of a tarpit/interdiction/debuff unit would it be more fun and more appropriate if we gave them some offensive abilities along those lines rather than defenaive abilities? A good inv save and stubborn does not seem Eldarish to me in the alightest and frankly makes them a little boring. But if you give them say psychotropic rounds that could debilitate and so could actively go out and do something. Elder units to my mind should be active, rather than reactive or even worse, inactive units.

This i'm more a fan of, but like I said I don't mind having the options to make DA a tarpit unit, I just don't want that to be the primary focus.


How about flexbility in the Exarch Power Bladestorm? Make it variable like "+2S (Assaut 1), or +1 Shot, or Rending" chosen when the power is used, same disadvantages apply (no shooting next turn). That way they can deal with almost anything without being too overpowered. And honestly, I think they just need to ditch the 2-cat Exarch. It looks silly and doesn't fit their fluff very well (since when are Eldar footsoldiers Rambo 2-fisting AKs?). Give them the choice to ditch the cat to get a diresword and shimmershield, or upgrade their weapon to something between an Avenger Cat and a Cannon... mebbe S5 Ap 4? Eldar have a dearth of weaponry in that range, and 10 DA toss enough shots downrange that 2 more from another cat isn't that great. Granted, for 5 points, it's like adding another BS5 body to the table, and as such much better than other choices, but losing that isn't going to break anything.

If their range gets bumped to 24" (with corresponding bump of Guardian cats to 18"), with the flexibility of this version of Bladestorm, they're dangerous enough at range to make people want to charge them, have enough of a tarpit ability to hold for a turn or two before Banshees show up, and are differentiated enough from Guardians to make it a choice.

Granted, whatever new paradigm they're going to be working in with the new edition makes all of this 'listing kinda fluid.

Yeah that would work as well, I'm kinding hoping the a lot of the aspect squads gain an ability without having to take an exarch. So dire avengers would have bladestorm or ammo types or whatever without needing one.

Your suggestuins are pretty close to what I was thinking, although I'd limit the range on the str 6 shot quite bit.

RandomThoughts
12-05-2012, 13:20
24" Shuricats, Hit & Run for all Eldar Jetbikes, more firepower for Guardians and Jetbikes, distinctive roles for all Aspects, Dire Avengers could for instance use 4+ Dodge Saves, Relentless, higher number of shots and a power that allows them to disengage from melee. In general I'd up BS, WS and probably even armor by 1. Wraithguard need 18" guns, and they have to stand their ground in melee - either count as monstrous (= ignores armor), or my personal favorite: use their guns in melee.
Scorpions would do great with Stealth and the appear anywhere on the board rule, although I'd much rather see it removed from the game entirely. Mobile flamer templates would be greatly appreciated (Warp Spiders, Jetbikes, whatever), and we seriously lack decent ranged AT. Banshees need furious attack, and personally I'd have the warcry activate without a failed LD test by the target. Potentially add dodge saves and/or arcane eldar technology that allows eldar power weapons to ignore Terminator Armor AND Storm Shield saves, and they would be awesome again. Reapers get back Eldar Missile Launchers and can ignore cover, so do Pathfinders (so that their awesome rifles actually make sense), who can also pick their targets from the enemy unit. Hawks also get dodge saves and Hit & Run, and their weapons become combo weapons with both Assault 3 36" sniper lasblasters and 24" Frak/Krak/Haywire grenade launchers.

Just a few ideas I had kicking around, some of them are probably to good, but feels about right to me (regarding fluff represented on the battlefield and everything)

Cthell
15-05-2012, 14:42
Since the fluff of shuriken weapons is all about trading effective range for rate of fire (A disk might be able to go as far as a needle [unlikely] but it's a lot less directionally stable), what about a straitforward +1 shot across the board? It might be a bit tricky for the pistols, and the scatter laser probably needs to gain even more shots (go the whole hog and bump it up to 6; that would mean it matches the rate of fire of a splinter cannon when mounted on a vehicle) but it would give a definite feel of "storm of shots"

Gorbad Ironclaw
15-05-2012, 15:18
Since the fluff of shuriken weapons is all about trading effective range for rate of fire

Can we have the bits about tearing through flesh, bone and armour with easy as well then? That's been part of the describtion of Shuriken weapons a lot longer than the short ranged thing (it was only brough in after they had reduced the range of them).

althathir
15-05-2012, 17:54
24" Shuricats, Hit & Run for all Eldar Jetbikes, more firepower for Guardians and Jetbikes, distinctive roles for all Aspects, Dire Avengers could for instance use 4+ Dodge Saves, Relentless, higher number of shots and a power that allows them to disengage from melee. In general I'd up BS, WS and probably even armor by 1. Wraithguard need 18" guns, and they have to stand their ground in melee - either count as monstrous (= ignores armor), or my personal favorite: use their guns in melee.
Scorpions would do great with Stealth and the appear anywhere on the board rule, although I'd much rather see it removed from the game entirely. Mobile flamer templates would be greatly appreciated (Warp Spiders, Jetbikes, whatever), and we seriously lack decent ranged AT. Banshees need furious attack, and personally I'd have the warcry activate without a failed LD test by the target. Potentially add dodge saves and/or arcane eldar technology that allows eldar power weapons to ignore Terminator Armor AND Storm Shield saves, and they would be awesome again. Reapers get back Eldar Missile Launchers and can ignore cover, so do Pathfinders (so that their awesome rifles actually make sense), who can also pick their targets from the enemy unit. Hawks also get dodge saves and Hit & Run, and their weapons become combo weapons with both Assault 3 36" sniper lasblasters and 24" Frak/Krak/Haywire grenade launchers.

Just a few ideas I had kicking around, some of them are probably to good, but feels about right to me (regarding fluff represented on the battlefield and everything)

The main problem I would have with this changes would have more to do with how much each model would cost. Most of of our infantry is probably overcosted, but the prices themselves lead to the forces being a proper size for an elite force IMO. These changes would boost most of the models prices up if they were priced correctly, and thats where t3 rears its ugly head. Even with 3+ saves, if you get close to 20 points per model eldar will struggle, and foot lists not based on wraithguard will be fairly horrible based on my experiences with sisters of battle. Its why I tend to be fairly conservative on my suggestions (well at least I try to be ;))

daa6
16-05-2012, 00:32
I have commented before, but one other thing i would like to see is an effective use of the warlocks used in CC, make witchblades rending, retain their 2+ to wound, and against armour double strength first - so (Strength 6 +d6 and Rending against Armour means they dont loose [I]that[I] advantage/ability/strength...

Also up the BS of the vehicles to 4 !! Please...

TheDoctor
16-05-2012, 04:53
The main problem I would have with this changes would have more to do with how much each model would cost. Most of of our infantry is probably overcosted, but the prices themselves lead to the forces being a proper size for an elite force IMO. These changes would boost most of the models prices up if they were priced correctly, and thats where t3 rears its ugly head. Even with 3+ saves, if you get close to 20 points per model eldar will struggle, and foot lists not based on wraithguard will be fairly horrible based on my experiences with sisters of battle. Its why I tend to be fairly conservative on my suggestions (well at least I try to be ;))

Yes, but then it would probably feel like one was playing Eldar. Small, elite strike teams of aspect warriors backed up by the (relatively) cheaper guardians; preferably out of a webway portal.

insectum7
16-05-2012, 08:53
No, see, that still doesn't work very well. The Imperium might not have quite as much S6, but between multi-lasers, plasma guns (of any size) and autocannons its armies could (and can) still take on lighter vehicles. How efficient it was in 4E and is in 5E is another story, but it's not like they need(ed) lascannons for everything. With eldar, the lighter guns can somewhat work on AV 10 and 11, but that doesn't mean the more powerful ones should be worthless there - and they are your only chance against AV 12 or higher. So the fact that the lascannon is better against AV 10-13 (it outranges the lance against 13) at notably lower cost is, imo, quite significant; the niche where the lance is superior in some ways is simply too small for what you are paying for it. In a way, its problem is the same as that of several specialist units in the Eldar codex : expensive, only somewhat worth it in a very narrow capacity, and poor at anything else. That doesn't mean the lance is completely worthless, just that as it is, it is underpowered for its points (or overcosted for its profile). That is why I'd like to see it at AP 1 and lower points - perhaps the same as the lascannon or at most 5 more. It should be able to effectively (and efficiently) deal with any armour, being the heavyweight among a more versatile, cheaper EML (and starcannon, if it becomes S7) and a faster-firing, but less efficient pulse laser.


(bold mine)

Sorry for taking so long to reply, been crazy busy.

I think you are selling short the capability of entire Eldar squads to have weapons that deal well with vehicles. Wraithguard, Fire Dragons, Seer Councils with Singing Spears (a 12" Lascannon vs. vehicles). And again, I'll mention Warp Spiders who bring their multitude of S 6 shots. I honestly think the intent is that Eldar handle vehicles differently than the Imperium, and put a heavier burden on the maneuverability of their troops and platforms.

None of this mentions D-Cannons and Vibro Cannons either, both of which rate well against vehicles. I'd say that they are a much bigger problem for the Eldar than the BL, because when was the last time you saw those actually taken? I'd worry less about how Bright Lances compare point for point against Lascannons, and more about how to make these very flavorful and cool weapons into viable anti-vehicle alternatives.

BL is fine, it might need a knock to it's points but because it's comparable to the DL I'd just leave the stats as is.

RandomThoughts
16-05-2012, 18:01
The main problem I would have with this changes would have more to do with how much each model would cost. Most of of our infantry is probably overcosted, but the prices themselves lead to the forces being a proper size for an elite force IMO. These changes would boost most of the models prices up if they were priced correctly, and thats where t3 rears its ugly head. Even with 3+ saves, if you get close to 20 points per model eldar will struggle, and foot lists not based on wraithguard will be fairly horrible based on my experiences with sisters of battle. Its why I tend to be fairly conservative on my suggestions (well at least I try to be ;))

But if that's the issue, and the models die too fast for what they cost, then the pricing is simply off. Awesome stuff has to cost less on fragile models than it does on sturdy ones.

As a side-note, I'd actually propose a +1 across the board on all Eldar armor saves. 2+ Scorpions and Reapers and 3+ Banshees, Hawks and Avengers with 4++ dodge saves would be quite nice, especially with the advanced tech and every single live counts themes. hehe


Yes, but then it would probably feel like one was playing Eldar. Small, elite strike teams of aspect warriors backed up by the (relatively) cheaper guardians; preferably out of a webway portal.

This!

MajorWesJanson
16-05-2012, 18:31
What I would like to see for Eldar Guardians- treat them as the citizen levy they are. They are not really specialized at anything, but they are there to support the proper warfighting aspects. Make them a 10-30 strong unit which can take one heavy weapon platform per 10 Eldar. If they don't take heavy weapons, they can upgrade into Storm Guardians. For each unit of Guardians, you can take a unit of Guardian Jetbikes and/or a support weapon battery in the same troop slot.

dl
16-05-2012, 22:01
But if that's the issue, and the models die too fast for what they cost, then the pricing is simply off. Awesome stuff has to cost less on fragile models than it does on sturdy ones.

As a side-note, I'd actually propose a +1 across the board on all Eldar armor saves. 2+ Scorpions and Reapers and 3+ Banshees, Hawks and Avengers with 4++ dodge saves would be quite nice, especially with the advanced tech and every single live counts themes. hehe

Can't get behind the idea of TEQ scorpions and MEQ banshees, could maybe see reapers with 2+ and relentless, banshees and harlies need dodge in combat on par with wytches though. But fragility is what makes eldar eldarish, another army of 3+ everywhere wouldn't sit well with me.

Spell_of_Destruction
16-05-2012, 23:38
I have commented before, but one other thing i would like to see is an effective use of the warlocks used in CC, make witchblades rending, retain their 2+ to wound, and against armour double strength first - so (Strength 6 +d6 and Rending against Armour means they dont loose [I]that[I] advantage/ability/strength...

Also up the BS of the vehicles to 4 !! Please...

I would move Warlocks to Elites (don't understand why its necessary to have a Farseer to include them) and drop their cost to 18-20pts. They have been a popular unit in competitive scene (particularly the jetlock variety) but, even bare they are actually very expensive when you compare them to the other assault choices. They are mainly favoured because of the inv save + fortune combo (Another example of the cost and effectiveness of psychic powers being factored into an Eldar unit's price and profile?).

I don't think rending is the answer. We already have rending Harlequins and Banshees with power weapons. Warlocks have a good niche against MCs, vehicles and high T low Sv units. I'd like to see more 'enhance' style powers which can be used to boost the squad (and Guardian squads they join).

althathir
17-05-2012, 02:06
But if that's the issue, and the models die too fast for what they cost, then the pricing is simply off. Awesome stuff has to cost less on fragile models than it does on sturdy ones.

As a side-note, I'd actually propose a +1 across the board on all Eldar armor saves. 2+ Scorpions and Reapers and 3+ Banshees, Hawks and Avengers with 4++ dodge saves would be quite nice, especially with the advanced tech and every single live counts themes. hehe



This!

Why? The base cost should reflect lower toughness but the awesome stuff should cost the same.

The current prices are good baselines, and there is no way an avenger with a 3+ and 4++ dodge would be anywhere near 12-13 points. Then you end up with a durable unit without much firepower thats too expensive (kinda sounds like a wave serpent ;)). When you fix the offense you end up with super expensive t3 guys, and super expensive one wound models rarely work (and when they do they're like th & SS termies and every screams :cheese: at the sight of them.


I would move Warlocks to Elites (don't understand why its necessary to have a Farseer to include them) and drop their cost to 18-20pts. They have been a popular unit in competitive scene (particularly the jetlock variety) but, even bare they are actually very expensive when you compare them to the other assault choices. They are mainly favoured because of the inv save + fortune combo (Another example of the cost and effectiveness of psychic powers being factored into an Eldar unit's price and profile?).

I don't think rending is the answer. We already have rending Harlequins and Banshees with power weapons. Warlocks have a good niche against MCs, vehicles and high T low Sv units. I'd like to see more 'enhance' style powers which can be used to boost the squad (and Guardian squads they join).

I would rather see warlocks be listed as an upgrade in more unit entries then they are now (for example for DA, HB, etc.), and have the unit stay a retinue style choice. Mainly because our elite slot is already crammed full, and also because I'm a fan of the enhance style powers as well and its another way to give our units a bit of flexibility (which is needed to a degree).

I'm sure their price will go down in the next book, 4th tended to overcost elite style generalist units way too much, and people hated the ulthwe seer lists that ran the old warlocks with a ccw & sp, as cheap meat shields.

Spell_of_Destruction
17-05-2012, 03:06
Why? The base cost should reflect lower toughness but the awesome stuff should cost the same.

The current prices are good baselines, and there is no way an avenger with a 3+ and 4++ dodge would be anywhere near 12-13 points. Then you end up with a durable unit without much firepower thats too expensive (kinda sounds like a wave serpent ;)). When you fix the offensive you end up with super expensive t3 guys, and super expensive one wound models rarely work (and when they do they're like th & SS termies and every screams :cheese: at the sight of them.



I would rather see warlocks be listed as an upgrade in more unit entries then they are now (for example for DA, HB, etc.), and have the unit stay a retinue style choice. Mainly because our elite slot is already crammed full, and also because I'm a fan of the enhance style powers as well and its another way to give our units a bit of flexibility (which is needed to a degree).

I'm sure their price will go down in the next book, 4th tended to overcost elite style generalist units way too much, and people hated the ulthwe seer lists that ran the old warlocks with a ccw & sp, as cheap meat shields.

I agree that no one wants to return to 11pt Warlocks armed with CCWs and SPs. I have a feeling that they will move to Elites as GW have been moving away from HQ retinue style units (Incubi also moved to Elites). Elites is a busy slot but as long as you're not spamming Fire Dragons I don't think it would give us too many problems. Plus, it looks like we may be moving to a % system.

I'm not sure about Warlocks joining Aspect Squads. Maybe they could include a higher level Warlock who can be attached to units in the same way as a Commisar. The main problem I envisage is that it could lead to Exarchs being overlooked in favour of Warlocks. It would be pretty hard to overlook 'Enhance' if it became an option for HBs.

I think Warlocks have great potential to help make Guardians a more attractive choice. I've been toying with the idea of a +1 BS upgrade power or maybe a 'reroll 1s' power. The only problem is that functionally it doubles up with Guide. I feel that Guide has been somewhat marginalised since Doom was added (obvious reason - Doom allows rerolls for any number of squads, Guide only for a single squad) and is only really useful for Warwalkers. Our powers are good but I think that Farseers are a little overcosted particularly the amount paid for Spirit Stones to cast another power. I fully expect Farseers to be given a Mastery Level of 2 in the new codex.

althathir
17-05-2012, 03:38
I agree that no one wants to return to 11pt Warlocks armed with CCWs and SPs. I have a feeling that they will move to Elites as GW have been moving away from HQ retinue style units (Incubi also moved to Elites). Elites is a busy slot but as long as you're not spamming Fire Dragons I don't think it would give us too many problems. Plus, it looks like we may be moving to a % system.

I'm not sure about Warlocks joining Aspect Squads. Maybe they could include a higher level Warlock who can be attached to units in the same way as a Commisar. The main problem I envisage is that it could lead to Exarchs being overlooked in favour of Warlocks. It would be pretty hard to overlook 'Enhance' if it became an option for HBs.

I think Warlocks have great potential to help make Guardians a more attractive choice. I've been toying with the idea of a +1 BS upgrade power or maybe a 'reroll 1s' power. The only problem is that functionally it doubles up with Guide. I feel that Guide has been somewhat marginalised since Doom was added (obvious reason - Doom allows rerolls for any number of squads, Guide only for a single squad) and is only really useful for Warwalkers. Our powers are good but I think that Farseers are a little overcosted particularly the amount paid for Spirit Stones to cast another power. I fully expect Farseers to be given a Mastery Level of 2 in the new codex.

They have been, and if there are ways to make aspects troops it would relieve pressure, that said the most recent codex went the opposite way with royal courts. The percentage system is the wild card, but I have no clue how that will shape out. I don't think fantasy really gives us to many clues, because it doesn't have transports and they have two categories for Hqs.

Honestly its just a thought, I just feel like eldar need to become a bit more flexible, otherwise you end up with what you have now. Where fire dragons are considered the auto-include unit because honestly they're our generalists. Making aspects super specialized is the other side of the debate but it scares me because back in 3rd eldar had such a reputation for tailoring, and thats where that path leads IMHO.

I'm really torn on guardians, to me they've never made sense, so while I like the ideal of a warlock power making them have higher bs, why not just give them bs 4, and a 4+ save. It blurs the line between them and dire avengers but thats always been the case. Then the fluff can be expanded a bit (explain the training the cilivilians go through), and they'll at least have the protection that the aspect warriors have (its not like avenger armour and guardian armour look that different).

Farseers are overpriced but I don't think its the spirit stones as much as the price for the powers themselves, when you look at other psychers I just can't see how their powers can count againist them as much as ours do. Again its more of an age problem (i can't remember anyone complaining about seers after our book got updated) than anything.

Hazerdous2Health
17-05-2012, 06:49
Witch blades have always seemed to have strange rules to me. Here you have this weapon that tears through heavily armored vehicles but if you put some extra armor on a guy they can't seem to do much more than scratch the paint. An example is how easily they can tear apart a dreadnought yet a terminator who is wearing "tactical dreadnought armor" is the near impossible to kill.

Spell_of_Destruction
17-05-2012, 06:56
Well that's more a peculiarity of the 40k armour system to be honest. It's a bit dumb to have one characteristic which deals with the ability to penetrate personal armour and another which deals with the ability to penetrate vehicle armour, particularly the way it is implemented in 40k.

The reason for this is that we're still using a stripped down version of 2nd ed's vehicle rules. It worked okay in 2nd edition due to the 'Damage' characteristic.

RandomThoughts
17-05-2012, 11:06
The main problem I would have with this changes would have more to do with how much each model would cost. Most of of our infantry is probably overcosted, but the prices themselves lead to the forces being a proper size for an elite force IMO. These changes would boost most of the models prices up if they were priced correctly, and thats where t3 rears its ugly head. Even with 3+ saves, if you get close to 20 points per model eldar will struggle, and foot lists not based on wraithguard will be fairly horrible based on my experiences with sisters of battle. Its why I tend to be fairly conservative on my suggestions (well at least I try to be ;))


Yes, but then it would probably feel like one was playing Eldar. Small, elite strike teams of aspect warriors backed up by the (relatively) cheaper guardians; preferably out of a webway portal.


Witch blades have always seemed to have strange rules to me. Here you have this weapon that tears through heavily armored vehicles but if you put some extra armor on a guy they can't seem to do much more than scratch the paint. An example is how easily they can tear apart a dreadnought yet a terminator who is wearing "tactical dreadnought armor" is the near impossible to kill.

THIS! I've been saying this exact thing for 2 years now!

Spell_of_Destruction
18-05-2012, 00:06
I'm with althathir on this one. In the current 40k system there is only so 'elite' you can go with a fragile army. Resilience is a huge asset and I think our units have a difficult enough time with T 3 at the moment without becoming even fewer in number.

This is a wishlist thread so everyone is entitled to voice their opinion, but if we're trying to keep the conversation within the realms of what we can realistically expect, then I think changes on the scale we saw in the DE codex are most likely. I don't expect significant changes to the stat line. I'd like to see some of the more maginal exarch powers become more useful (although what I'd really like to see is a separation of 'Exarch Powers' which are taken by the exarch and 'Aspect Powers' which are taken by the squad. It's dumb that the squad suddenly loses an ability if the Exarch dies).

I expect most of the Aspects (except Fire Dragons) will receive a bit of a boost as I think they are overcosted across the board. How this will be achieved I'm not sure, but the alternative is to reduce their cost. Some people are dead against this as it seemingly goes against the 'elite' army style. However, if they revamp warrior powers so they are all useful and are taken by the squad rather than the exarch you have cheaper 'base' aspect warriors who can be boosted by taking special abilities.

An example of this overcosting can be seen with DAs. If you take both exarch powers you are essentially paying 15pts per model which is a lot for a T3 4+ save model. It's not that I don't find both powers useful - I just can't justify paying that much for a DA squad. If DAs were 10-11pts per model then their final cost when the abilities are added on top would seem far more reasonable (although I personally feel that Bladestorm and Defend are both overcosted). The only alternative is to make the abilities standard to justify the current cost. I don't think that stat increases (with a few notable exceptions - 2A base for Banshees and Scorpions would obviously make a massive difference) would improve Aspects in the manner that some people believe they would. As althathir has pointed out, I think we would just end up with an army that is too fragile and too low on bodies to use effectively.

EDIT: I thought I would just add a further point. I like PK as a codex writer but my main concern if he writes the next codex is that he isn't any better at costing things appropriately than Messrs Ward and Cruddace. The DE codex was great but there are a few small pricing issues that suggest PK hadn't learned from small mistakes he made on the last Eldar codex. Incubi are a good example (when compared with my DA example above) - their 'exarch' powers could be useful but once you factor them in it's just too much to pay. Drazhar also suffers from the same problems as the Phoenix Lords - way too pricey and no inv save. This despite having had 4 years to reflect on his work for the Eldar codex.

althathir
18-05-2012, 01:41
I think they'll keep aspects at the same price, but with a couple of possible changes...

1) I think we'll see one of the squad buffs become tied to the unit (for example bladestorm for avengers), it makes the unit feel a bit more specialized than just having that aspects weapon.

2) the exarch will discounted and part of the intial cost of the squad. When you compare exarches to other squad leaders they end up being very expensive for the most part, because you have an upgrade cost, then an optional equipment cost, and finally whatever the abilities the cost.

Its also possible they combine both of those ideals or not.

As far as kelly and the DE book, I kinda wonder if it was a situation similiar to harlequins where it's rumoured that he wanted to boost them but GW wanted them to stay the same as they were in CWE. Which would apply with drazhar as well to degree because he is treated as a phoenix lord.

Spell_of_Destruction
18-05-2012, 01:58
I'm not necessarily against making certain powers 'standard' but how would this work from a design perspective? Would some powers be standard and some optional? How would this be determined? If they keep squad boosting exarch powers then it kind of muddies the waters. Why do some squad abilities rely on the presence of the exarch whereas others do not?

Continuing the discussion with DAs, you could argue that Bladestorm is more relevant to their core role. Players may not want to pay the extra cost associated with having Defend as a standard power as it is situational. You may want it if you are using Avengers as objective campers but you may not if you are using them in more of a support/offensive role. But if it stays an optional upgrade that leads to the issues I discussed in the first paragraph.

althathir
18-05-2012, 02:26
Well I'd probably go with...

DA - bladestorm it ties in with shurcat and if guardians get boosted I think this makes for an easy distinction
Striking Scorpion - I'd be tempted to suggest both current upgrade abilities (granted I think the dex would work better if scorps were aggressive scouts & banshees were our dedicated assault unit)
Fire Dragons - crack shot fits their fluff of attacking fortifications, if they change their gun again tank hunter may be used more as a balancing tool than anything
Banshees - Warshout but it would have to work differently, lots of solutions have been suggested (giving them 2A base would be nice as well)
shining spears - withdraw they just aren't an attrition unit so hit & run fits
Spiders - like banshees I think they would need something new, i'm honestly not familiar enough with them to feel as comfortable suggesting something
hawks - I'd suggest both current powers tbh, I'm just hoping they get rules that those models deserve
reapers - It really depends on their weapons, if they stay same maybe a indirect fire option, if they get EML or heavier weapon maybe something like a hydra making them good againist skimmers/fliers?

The powers listed would be standard, most would really bridge that 1-2 pt gap alot of our choices have when the cost is applied to the whole squad.

edit: for scorps I wouldn't add fleet if it up to me, and for hawks there would still have to be a fairly large price reduction.

2nd edit: I think there would still be room for optional powers, I just think having a standard ability would help make the units more cost effective.

samzor
19-05-2012, 14:55
Iv'e read a few posts in here. Nobody has addressed something i'd like yet (a lot of it already covered). Id still like my say!

In my opinion: Fire dragons death by tank explosion is just stupid. Imagine any army training its troops and along the way not realising that what they primarily do just doesnt work and is hugely risky...
Eldar training learn to shoot the melta as target practice would kill half the trainees after a dozen attempts against something that explodes. So the exarch would say to the surviving recruits 'all done, just do that on the battlefield without getting hit' ;)

The obvious thing to me is just put an exception rule in for them. Fire dragons aspect armour being forged to withstand the heat of explosions and are trained to go to ground just before vehicle detonation. Get a 2+ maybe 3+ unmodified save when hit by a vehicle explosion. Simple and realistic. To make it balanced just compute the sum of probabilities for success against all vehicles in the game. If its overpowered raise the save by one or something.
Also, It does not need apply to any other situation eg: being shot at by heat weapons.
So at least now the typical outcome will be they survive the tank explosion and next turn everything guns into them because opponents dont like them. So it becomes a strategy outcome instead. ;) Very simple, makes them Eldar again!

Also i dont like it how everyone has forgotten how nerfed warp spiders are now since 2nd edition. In my opinion: Smaller squads, more expensive units template weapon. Thats the whole point of a death spinner its a cloud of 1 molecule thick wire! Otherwise give them a totally different weapon at least admit what has been done does not fit the narrative.

Yes as people have suggested here aspects need to have a way to become troops easily and they need to be beefed up. In my opinion Eldar are low toughness, low in number but can have decent armour, extremely specialised with exception/addition rules.
So generally im against most aspects becoming cheaper. I perfer smaller squads its what makes them unique.(also i dont have to paint as many)

samzor
19-05-2012, 15:20
Of course the other problem is the similarity between Guardians and Dire Avengers.

Even in 2nd ed it was a difficult balance. For a full squad of 7 Dire Avengers (22pts each 15, 154pts in total) you could get 11 shuricat Guardians (14pts each). I loved my DAs but Guardians were a better deal.

Giving DAs longer ranged guns was a good way of giving them an edge but the problem was that it left Guardians neglected. In my view Guardians need to be brought up closer to the current level of DAs and DAs need to have a more flexible battlefield role.

I would like to see DAs become a unit which combines the shooting ability of a Kabalite Warrior (sans heavy/special weapons) with the tarpit abilities of Wyches. I don't think this would be unreasonable for their current cost. If there is going to be a cc element to the squad then it needs to actually be useful rather than the waste of points that it currently is. Up the shimmershield to 4+ inv in combat, give them 2 attacks each (new wargear), maybe even defensive grenades and make them stubborn. They are supposed to be 'immovable in defence' after all.

If DAs can hold up dedicated assault units for a turn or two then that would really give them unique role for a front line Troop not only in the army but in the 40k system as a whole.

I also really like the idea of 'Support Guardians' as a HS choice.

I like what you say here. Also in the bigger picture it would be great to field these without needing a farseer to mind them.

As soon as every eldar unit stops needing fortune or doom then we will see people play with 1 farseer and put in an Avatar/Autarch. Something which makes the game more fun (brings back iconic units). Personally more what I imagine eldar to be like.

titilititi
19-05-2012, 20:39
I wish Dark Reapers can switch their launcher by a Shurican, and also that there will be a new aspect warriors assault unit specialized in using witch blades.

Charistoph
19-05-2012, 22:25
There is, they're called Warlocks, though seeing a group of them outside HQ would be interesting.

Going back to the Dire Avenger discussion, I dont't think they are a good candidate as a tarpit, at least not without making them stupidly overpowered. They don't have the numbers, resilience, or protection for such a job. Guardians almost have the numbers, but lack the protection. Wraithguard could be good for the job, lacking only the numbers to hold up. Warlocks could be good for making either Guardians or Wraithguard into some nasty tarpits.

Dire Avengers should be the closest to a generalist that the Eldar should have. Base gear should be Shuricats, ShuriPistol, CCW, Assault, and Krak 'nades. Exarchs should be able to swap out all 3 for better versions. Powers should improve damage or reduce enemy's protection.

RandomThoughts
20-05-2012, 08:32
On a general level, before point values and the stuff are even taken into account, I'd like to se a design decision towards 24" Shuricats, heavy weapns that are actually better than their imperial (or Ork!) equivalents, and BS/WS 4/4 for regular Eldar (inclusing Warlocks) and 5/5 for Aspects. The last one results directly from my idea of Eldar as a finesse/skill army. They are fast, skilled, and make up the brute force they're missing (S3 & T3) for outmaneuvering and outskilling their opponents.

Yes, the argument has been made to death, that BS5 would be overpowered, since nearly all their shots suddenly hit - so what? we're Eldar. We're Eldar Aspects, which is pretty much the equivalent of Shaolin Monks in a Hollywood movie. Why shouldn't we display an unbelievable accuracy in all we do?
The higher WS also, in a way, simulates our fast reflexes and our ability to dodge, as blundering Orks and bulky Space Marine find it hard to hit our light-footed warriors with their clumsy weapons.

The next thing I have to say is this: I don't believe that our fragility should prevent us from becoming the skilled elite army the fluff describes. Even the official company line is that Eldar are a glass hammer. There should be ways to price us accordingly. You don't just add up the point costs for offensive and defensive stats and abilities. An AV14 vehicle with no useful guns on it is way less powerful than an AV14 vehicle with several awesome guns. You can't just take the cost of the first one, add the cost of the guns, and expect the total to accurately catch the value of the new super-tank. Same thing for fragile Eldar infantry. You look at the total performance of a unit, when you price it. Or at least you should. Swooping Hawks and Jetbikes are good examples for where they didn't. From what I hear, they assigned a fixed price to the jumppack the Hawks carry, but missed the point that the Hawks have neither the offensive nor defensive qualities to warrant that extra cost for speed.

If they really did a good job, they could easily make Eldar infantry awesome, and still price them according to their value, taking their fragility into account.

Chrysalis
20-05-2012, 08:57
As long as Space Marines will represent the paragons of warriors in this game, we'll never get 5/5 aspect warrior - although we should! However, If we were balancing the high skill with fragility, I wonder if all our aspects wouldn't become like the fire dragons: wouldn't they strike, destroy their target, and then be destroyed? On the other hand, such a fragile approach would make eldar gaming even more delicate than it is now!

Gorbad Ironclaw
20-05-2012, 10:00
WS/BS 5 would be neat, but I don't expect ever to see it and with the current system I'm not even sure it's really desirable. And mainly I think our Aspects does well enough. Sure, I'd like them to be better but in the context of 40k they are okay. If you wanted to make them better I think you would need to reduce the size of 40k games back down to skirmish level.

Anyway, on the topic of powers. Hopefully they won't feel constrained by the powers that are in the book already. Ideally they should start with the concept of the unit, delete all the current upgrades and then make ones that fit/are useful. If that happens to match some of the old ones cool, if not, that's fine too. Just make it clear what the units are suppose to do and give them powers that help them do that. I also think the idea of each of them coming with a power/special rule is fine, as is the idea of making the basic unit X+Exarch. Then let the exarch have some weapon options and then maybe a further couple of options for the squad. Whatever that be weapon changes or skills.

I would very much like to see Shurikens return to 24" (my pet solution is 24" assault 1 pinning, but it requires useful pinning) as I think that would give it a distinct role in the Eldar arsenal. Currently we got lots of close range weapons and a fair number of long range weapons. And a single medium ranged weapon, the Lasblaster on Swooping Hawks.
Speaking of Hawks, do anyone know or have any idea what they are actually suppose to do in the Eldar army? They are the one aspect I never know what to do with, fundamentally I just don't think they fit 40k. A high mobility, low offence harassment unit just isn't useful. I think they are probably the unit that needs the most amount of work since while some of the other units might be balanced wrong but the Hawks just don't know what they are even suppose to be doing. Any ideas?

If there is a need for a tarpit in the Eldar army (I don't really like the idea, but 40k isn't kind to the Eldar way of warfare so maybe they do need it) then I think it should be left to the Wraith constructs. They can be big and tough without it seeming weird and it also gives them a very distinct role in the Eldar army.

Chrysalis
20-05-2012, 10:51
I could imagine a "tarpit aspect" either equiped with shields, or maybe some kind of dodge power. Specialists of defense with low attack power, or some kind of weapon that would neutralize (pin?) the opponent but not killing him. Maybe some kind of lancers with a shield that provides a force field against ranged weapon, and a "stun lance" as their weapon? However, I agree that the current game mechanics don't favor control very much...

As for swooping hawks, I think they should simply be less expensive. And become operative troops! Then they could be used to get/contest those objectives. In the Epic system, they were barely more than guardians with speed, and it was ok: cheap infantry that doesn't need a tank to get where they want...

However, I also agree with aspects needing a complete refound. I don't think they should simply be assault/AT/etc equivalent to the other races: they should have the "xenos touch" that will make our opponents wonder what kind of strange stuff they'll have to face.

RandomThoughts
20-05-2012, 12:34
My favorite approach to Hawks is mobile light ranged fire. I'd give them hit & run, a 12" move during the assault phase, stealth, dodge saves and anti-infantry guns (something like 24" SX AP5 Assault 4 Sniper) with attached grenade launchers (24", Frag, Krak & Haywire).

That way they become a true hit and run unit, dancing around the enemy, shooting stuff up without ever getting caught.

Studg3
20-05-2012, 13:17
Just scanned over your wish list, and what are you after a army that will completly decinate any foe!?!? nearly everything you have suggested is OTT

Veteran Sergeant
20-05-2012, 15:07
I'm just amused by the excessive use of first person plural pronouns.

Had no idea that we had actual Eldar posting here.

Chrysalis
20-05-2012, 15:11
I'm just amused by the excessive use of first person plural pronouns.

Had no idea that we had actual Eldar posting here.

Actual Eldar probably not (I guess...), but actual players certainly: hence the first person.

Veteran Sergeant
20-05-2012, 15:33
It's still silly. I play Space Marines. I'm not a Space Marine. Thus, the Space Marines do things. "We" don't do things. I hope you can see why I find it funny. Don't feel bad though. I chuckle a bit when fans refer to the actions of their favorite sports teams as "we" too. Though " wasn't referring to your posts about "we" as Eldar players, but more to RandomThoughts.