PDA

View Full Version : Eldar Craftworld Codex, miss it or not



rcm2216
24-01-2007, 19:22
I miss Eldar craftworld codex. I think they did a good job with the new Eldar codex, but there a few things I miss.
1. What do you guys miss or do not miss.
2. What changes you like or do not like.


Overall I like the new codex. I like the layout, new avator, harlequins, what they did for the dire avengers, and autarch selection. I miss the flexibility of the old supplement codex, heavy 3 starcannon, and TRUE Biel-Tan list of all aspects other than 2+ compulsory Dire Avengers.

I do not like the fact that pretty much ever Elder army list is going the way of the Tau, by most armies looking like cookie cut mech skimmer armies. They were to restrictive in the force organization chart selection. The Eldar codex needed the flexibility that was given to the Space Marines by their trait system. I might want to take an all warp spider army like I have in the past going 4-1 in a GT in 2006. Space Marines can take an almost all assault marine army composed of over three fast attack selections.

Granitearm
24-01-2007, 19:30
I miss being able to take Wraithlords as troops.

I only took 2 of them, but now that really handicaps my heavy support selection. But worse than that, I lose the feeling of playing Ghost Warriors because I can't throw in as many wraithlords.

I had been hoping to take a 3rd wraithlord and get a new model for him. Then I would have had one new and two old. The new one was going to represent the spirit of an autarch, and he would have led the forces of the dead while the farseer led the forces of the living.

But I just can't give up all three HS slots just for that.

I do really like the new rules, but i miss the flexibility and creativity of the craftworld lists.

Drasriath
24-01-2007, 19:33
I don't miss it. They made alot of good changes in the new codex, and I feel that it is presently alot more balanced than the old Craftworld Eldar codex armies. Does this mean I don't think they'll make a new one? Not at all.

The only thing I would change from the Eldar codex's present incarnation (as far as craftworld themed armies) is the rule implimented for Iyanden. Spending 762 points on your compulsary two troop choices is absurd. The Iyanden list was already the weakest, and changing wraithguard only made it on par with the others. Biel-tan players like to complain alot, but I don't see the problem with taking Dire Avengers as your troops for the all aspect army, not to mention the Autarch is a very 'fluffy' HQ choice, moreso than an avatar or farseer, also I should add that every Biel-tan army I've ever seen has one unit of guardians in it.

Gorbad Ironclaw
24-01-2007, 19:35
Well, I miss actually having some troops I like/want to use(main reason I didn't restarted my Eldar army, don't want to use any of the troop choices), I don't really miss the Craftworld Codex. Didn't liked it much in the first place, and didn't thought it should be needed really. I also think it distorted the perception of the Eldar armies, as I think they overemphasised the differences.


Edit: Drasriath, you should have seen my Biel-Tan army then. No guardians at all. Have hardly used them since 2nd. I think the changes made to them(especially the shuriken catapult) was way out of character and made for no good reason at all, and I refuse to use them. That Avengers got a slightly better version doesn't help.

rcm2216
24-01-2007, 19:54
I had a army list consisting of 5 troop choices of warp spiders, one falcon with six dragons riding shotgun, two wraithlords, farseer, and squad of rangers at 1,850. No guardians. I miss my list of all over the place spiders. I would like to see a reprint of craftworld Eldar with similair flexibilities of the old. I believe craftworld distinctions are blurred. I am telling the truth when I say I see the cookie cut list of at least four to five skimmers regularly at this website and at three different local GW stores. I see the heavy support all taken up with either falcon or fire prism and two wave serpents transporting banshees and dire avengers. Something has to bring back the craftworld options back to the game table.

xenoknight
25-01-2007, 15:09
I miss it. There is nothing like taking Dark Reapers as troops :) massive firepower in troop choices and it freed up heavy slots for other things such as Falcons, War Walkers and Prisms. I miss my Anti-marine army.:cries:

Seth the Dark
25-01-2007, 15:30
I initially missed it but I'm getting used to the new codex since it does provide plenty of flexibility.

cwiles
25-01-2007, 15:38
My wife just got her list together.... She loves snipers. In every game we play (computer, console, RPG, and now tabletop). So in wasn't surprising when she decided to play an Alaitoc list.

From my poor memory

HQ.

Farseer with doom

Troops

5X Pathfinders
5X Pathfinders
5X Pathfinders
5X Pathfinders
5X Pathfinders

Fast Attack

10X Warp Spiders (Exarch, spinneret rifle, withdraw)
10X Swooping Hawks (Exarch, skyleap, hawk's talon)

Elites

10x Striking Scorpions (Exarch, biting blade, stalker)
1x Wave Serpent with TL missile launchers and shuriken cannon

10x Howling Banshees (Exarch, Mirror swords, acrobatic)
1x Wave Serpent with TL missile launchers and shuriken cannon

Heavy

3x War Walkers with TL missile launchers

1x Wraithlord with sword and bright-lance

I think that was it... Just a couple of points shy of 1850. Did beautifully against an undivided chaos army the other day.

So I love the new codex (since I can't beat Chaos with my Necron army to save my life), even without the disruption tables. The current Pathfinders are still great, and my wife put together a pretty nasty little list with little confusion. We didn't need a separate codex, and it's not an army I have seen dozens of before.

Weregerbil
25-01-2007, 15:43
Don't miss it at all, the new codex allows for most of the stuff from the craftworld one.

Shadowseer Crofty
25-01-2007, 16:38
i miss black guardians and the seer council. i miss being able to have BS4 shuriken catapults for 8 pts a throw, rather than the 11 or 12 for avengers and WS4 storm squads, with enhance to make them i and ws 5.
and i miss being able to eldritch storm at 36" or guide at 12"

studderigdave
25-01-2007, 16:48
i miss my distruption table....:(

lord_blackfang
25-01-2007, 17:00
Good riddance to one of the most broken books of 3rd ed. I don't miss it at all. For the record, I wouldn't miss SM chapter-specific books, either.

Son-Of-Sparda
25-01-2007, 18:55
I miss it. As a Biel-Tan player, it means I can't field all my aspect warriors any more, and have to field two units of DA instead :(

Direhamster
25-01-2007, 19:23
I miss the Court of the Young King of five executioner wielding Banshees...
Not very practical perhaps, but it was good to see those biker chaplains run away from your falcon as fast as possible... Harlies do that now, but it is not the same... The Court allowed you to build impossibly powerful units and it was sooo fluffy.

Direhamster

Azuremen
25-01-2007, 19:32
I miss Ulthwe... I liked the seer council and black guardians.

Though I still run mini council of doom... 1 farseer with doom and fortune, and 5 warlocks, 1 with enhance, the rest with destructor. Stuck in a Falcon. Its just great to drive up, pop them out and cook entire squads that have armor saves of 4.

Orbital
25-01-2007, 20:51
I miss the Seer Council and the all-Aspect Biel Tan lists, but you know what? We have ourselves to thank for making it necessary to eliminate them. Too many abuses by too many cheeseheads who just had to build a 25-Warlock council or an all-Vyper/Starcannon list are the ones who made it priority one to wipe them from the rules forever.

That having been said, I'm very pleased with the new codex. If you wanna go Rangers, you can get that flavor. If you wanna go Aspect-heavy, you can get that flavor (Hello? Did we forget that Dire Avengers are Aspect Warriors?). If you want to go Jetbikes, you can get that flavor too. You can't get the exact lists you might have fallen in love with... but you can still get the basic shape and feel of the various Craftworlds.

One Exception: Ulthwe Strike Force. I miss that list, and it's impossible to recreate even the basic structure of it. Those were good days.

Radical Inquisitor
25-01-2007, 21:33
The only thing that I miss is the disruption tables, not that I found them all that effective but they were super cool.

THE KAPPTIN
25-01-2007, 21:44
One thing I think we have no right to complain about is having our rules weakened. If GW decides to make a codex weaker, that is because it's too strong. For example, lamenting the H3 starcannon in the top post seems wrong to me. They did that so that you would have a more interesting selection of weapons. Now, you actually think about what you pick.

However, losing the craftworld codex has not had the same effect, it has had the opposite: Eldar now have LESS choices.

The unbalanced-ness of the c'world codex (I've heard nothing but bad about it from those who did not use it) is enough to put me on the side that says good riddance. But the point made at the top about giving the 'dar something like the marines trait system made me think: hey! Why don't we have a trait system!??

Honestly, thinking about that now, it makes me think GW just got lazy. Many armies have huge customization (Nids with crazy variability, SM traits, CSM marks & wargear, Guard doctrines) but Eldar are left out. We CAN represent any craftworld we want by unit selection alone, but it's just a tad more bland than being able to change our rules or our FOC style.
(It is much easier for GW to balance though -- is this good because it's more balanced, or bad because we get less variet? Are they just lazy?)

You said that all lists are starting to look like mech tau. I disagree. While we have more limited choices as to number of units from each FOC category, players are still going to have fun writing interesting and diverse armies. Many players write their lists to a theme more than to be competitive, so I suspect many players will not necessarily be using the army that is tactically the "best".
(For example, I love the new DA's, so I'm getting some of those. Love the Farseer with blades, so... gonna use him & some warlocks. I have some ideas I think are cool about how to paint wraiths, so they're in, etc...)

Witch Hunter
25-01-2007, 21:47
I thought the Craftworld lists were over-the-top over emphasizing CW differences, and really enjoy the flexibility the new codex has brought to army selection. Not to mention Harlequins, the new list also returned my favourite Eldar.....

Karhedron
25-01-2007, 21:55
I miss the Seer Council and the all-Aspect Biel Tan lists, but you know what? We have ourselves to thank for making it necessary to eliminate them. Too many abuses by too many cheeseheads who just had to build a 25-Warlock council or an all-Vyper/Starcannon list are the ones who made it priority one to wipe them from the rules forever.
Sad but true.

My son is just old enough to walk and he loves to throw his toys about etc. Every so often I have say "don't do that or I will take it away". I think we threw our toys about once too often. :(

Karma
25-01-2007, 22:48
I miss the Seer Council and the all-Aspect Biel Tan lists, but you know what? We have ourselves to thank for making it necessary to eliminate them. Too many abuses by too many cheeseheads who just had to build a 25-Warlock council or an all-Vyper/Starcannon list are the ones who made it priority one to wipe them from the rules forever.

That having been said, I'm very pleased with the new codex. If you wanna go Rangers, you can get that flavor. If you wanna go Aspect-heavy, you can get that flavor (Hello? Did we forget that Dire Avengers are Aspect Warriors?). If you want to go Jetbikes, you can get that flavor too. You can't get the exact lists you might have fallen in love with... but you can still get the basic shape and feel of the various Craftworlds.

One Exception: Ulthwe Strike Force. I miss that list, and it's impossible to recreate even the basic structure of it. Those were good days.

I miss the craftworlds big style....Now you have Eldar and its all the same

I feel GW in general trying to make everything the same and losing the key things which made the armies different

:cries: :cries:

MAGUNRA3K
25-01-2007, 23:17
the new codex is far far better than the old ones ,everything is back were it should be ,its just one big fix for what was a hugely broken army that got broken by the last codexes ,the new rules let you play eldar the way they are supposed to be played and means with real skill .

it scares me that even after the new release of the codex people are still emailing me at the shop to ask if i can supply them with guardians ???

after a few slaps they soon learn the error of their ways ! its dire avengers or nothing i tell them while they bleed

studderigdave
25-01-2007, 23:28
i was never a fan of guardians. my current eldar list is just a rebirth of my first list from when the CW codex came out, all troop slots are pathfinders.

giodude
26-01-2007, 01:47
I think the codex is great but I do miss a few things.

Court of the young king (what the hell do I do with all those exarchs!!)

All dark reaper armies (Too many meq opponents)

Heavy 3 Starcannon (Again, too many meq opponents).

d6 Scatter laser (weird i know but i used to have incredible luck with those rolls, always 5 or 6).

You can pretty much do everything the same as before, you just can't go OTT.

A few things I really like is the cheaper troop choice bikes, and the better Avatar. I like the harlequins too but I wish we could get a Great Harlequin HQ or maybe a Solitaire elite choice.

Just my thoughts anyway...

Vandur Last
26-01-2007, 07:48
Good riddance. The whole span of 3rd Ed. Eldar stopped me from playing 40K entirely and prompted me to sell my 3,500 pts of Eldar. It was unfluffy, weak in places where it shouldnt have been (Jetbikes & hawks) and way too strong in places it shouldnt have been (Wraithlord). Also lets not forget the kick in the bojangles we got with the Shuriken catapult nerf, the lasting and painful legacy of the old codex that still stays with us.

An army that was SUPPOSED to be fast and hard hitting but fragile had rubbish bike/jump units but the most rock hard dreadnought equivalent in the game? Yeah, good balancing geniuses.

I was so excited about the new Eldar codex, and getting rid of the rubbish 3rd ed one, that i rushed out and bought it ASAP. The fact of the matter is that I am the people that GW was/should have been targetting with this codex release.
Since we were freed from the shackles of 3rd ed. Eldar i have bought about 1700 points of Eldar including the preicey Jetbikes and Wraithguard, so im firmly in the "yay new codex" camp.

Orbital
26-01-2007, 08:24
Good riddance. The whole span of 3rd Ed. Eldar stopped me from playing 40K entirely and prompted me to sell my 3,500 pts of Eldar.

Gracious me.

Scythe
26-01-2007, 09:45
Honestly, thinking about that now, it makes me think GW just got lazy. Many armies have huge customization (Nids with crazy variability, SM traits, CSM marks & wargear, Guard doctrines) but Eldar are left out. We CAN represent any craftworld we want by unit selection alone, but it's just a tad more bland than being able to change our rules or our FOC style.
(It is much easier for GW to balance though -- is this good because it's more balanced, or bad because we get less variet? Are they just lazy?)


Eldar have their vast amounts of units. Look at the list: 3 HQ (not counting special characters), 5 elites, 4 troops, 4 fast attack, 5 heavy support, all with options. And what sets them apart from other armies: all these choices are actually usefull, unlike armies which are stuck with ineffective rarely seen units like Techpriest, Techmarines or Biovores.


All dark reaper armies (Too many meq opponents)


No offence, but that was one of the most retarded army builds out there (right up with the all starcannon vyper armies). And that's comming from an purely non MEQ player.

JMMelo
26-01-2007, 11:13
I do miss C:CWE though... even agreeing that the new codex is better...

I play Iyanden, and the ONE reward we got for using WG as troops was the option to have WLs and still have the 3 slots of heavy support free...

Now I am having to use only 5 WGs (and I own 30!) and bought a bunch of stuff to fill the gaps in my army.

SpinO
26-01-2007, 13:23
I spend my days dancing around a bonfire made from old copies of Craftworld Eldar singing hallelujah and hugging my 4th edition codex. The CE: Codex was a bad excuse for extreme and unbalanced army list. Just because the fluff is "they use alot of aspect warriors" doesn't mean that the army should consist of nothing but dark reapers and falcons! Good riddance I say.

Captain Micha
26-01-2007, 14:21
lol. new codex>old. period. I'm glad to see everyone else has finally come around, you guys were starting to worry me about what kind of eldar you guys were *L* no more broken lists... no more comical craftworld representations.

scarvet
26-01-2007, 14:41
mem, 3rd ed Codex for 3rd ed rules

Sildani
26-01-2007, 15:08
I'll echo Orbital: I miss the Strike Force list quite a bit. Other than that, I love the new Codex far more than the old ones. Far too much open invitation for abuse, and unfortunately too many accepted that invitation.

So, no Reaper army: good!
No Ranger disruption: good!
No 30-man Seer Council o' Doom with its 15 ablative cheapo Warlocks: Damn Good!
No Iyanden army of six Heavy Support choices: good! Disclaimer: I had an army of 1500 points that fielded two Wraithlords, two Falcons, two Wave Serpents with five Wraithguard and a Warlock, and a Farseer to Guide a Falcon. Maybe two Farseers. How was this true to the fiction of Iyanden? How was it a fair army? It wasn't on both counts.
No Saim-Hann army of 18 Vypers: good!

No, I don't miss the old stuff (see proviso at top) at all, really. My current Eldar build doesn't have a single skimmer in it, either. That's how improved the new book is, in my opinion.

Hellebore
26-01-2007, 15:54
I miss the bits of character that actually echoed the background.

I mainly miss the seer council and the court. They didn't have to be removed to tone them down...


Hellebore

Pootleflump
26-01-2007, 17:12
I will still play some CW:E whenever I can, I think
Because I do really miss it.
It was a really fun codex when used responsibly
With my mates we had discussed issues they had with it
and I would always try to respect those views when writing lists
not simply using 9 HS choices etc.
We had great games, always close and always varied

I also love the new codex,
such a breath of fresh air compared to the 3rd ed C:E!
Some strange rules wording, but nice balance so far I think
And all our choices offering something worthwhile

My dream come true would be a trait system/supplement
developed and balanced as well as the new Codex: Eldar :p
A nice dream, but a dream none the less :)

rcm2216
26-01-2007, 19:44
maybe they should have made each aspect limited in the force organization chart to 0-2 or 0-3.

Shrike30
26-01-2007, 20:33
Most aspects (dire avengers aside) are limited to 0-3 simply because you run out of whatever slot they fill once you've got 3.

The only lists that I feel really took a hit were support-heavy Ilanden lists. I'm not sure that's a horrible thing, but honestly, it wasn't like they were a stupidly broken list.

Asides from them, the Saim-Hann lists that I always imagined (that is, those heavy on the lighter jetbikes, not so much with the Vypers) are more possible with the reduced cost Guardian Jetbikes and Spears, while still leaving room for a squadron of Vypers and some of their tanks.

I'm going to miss the Seer Councils (although not the stupid-huge ones) and the Court of the Young King.

Disruption tables were amusing, and compensated for the Pathfinders being an army that really couldn't field a lot of models. I didn't mind them. At the same time, I don't really miss them either.

Not being able to take non-Avenger Aspect Warriors as Troops may limit your ability to totally wig out on a couple of the Aspects, sure, but to be honest I'm not sure I'm going to miss facing 60 Scorpions :p With the Dire Avengers being a lot more useful, I think that making the Aspect-heavy lists is still totally doable, though it might require (gasp) taking Hawks or Spears to balance it out a bit... :)

Wraithbored
26-01-2007, 23:23
No I don't miss anything, besides the new dex is briliant and we have a whole range of fun new toys to play with. And besides aside from ulthwe strike force I can pretty much create any army I could before. I've never fielded the vyper army of doom, the seer conference, the ranger preshooty list or the dark reaper wind.

rcm2216
27-01-2007, 05:31
somethings changed roles like scorpions and hawks.

Zubb
27-01-2007, 07:14
i miss my distruption table....:(
me 2
But overall the new codex is fine. Well its a challenge, but it is works nice, and then you win a challlenge this is pretty rewarding:D
PS going for kill3day again, hope the stats will keep rising:rolleyes:

rcm2216
28-01-2007, 02:56
the use of special characters is nice this time around, without asking your opponent.

Sakura
28-01-2007, 05:26
With the new codex we can all get by.

10 waithguard as troops is nuts though.

The Heavy support competition is nuts.

It would be nice if you could get Ulthwe guardians and a special Biel tan force org.
other than that the codex is sweet.

in bullet points.

~make fire prisms into squadrons.
~give WS, BS 4 ulthwe guardian options.
~swap elites for troops for bial tan.
~If you have 1 unit of wraithguard as troops you can have one wraithlord as troops too.

Vandur Last
28-01-2007, 07:37
~If you have 1 unit of wraithguard as troops you can have one wraithlord as troops too.


Ohh i like that last suggestion. Still my opinion of the new dex is still overwhelmingly positive.

As for better Guardians for Ulthwe i disagree, despite the fact that i used to play Ulthwe in 2nd Ed. If Guardians get better then they undermine the usefulness of Dire Avengers.

Also i dont understand the problem with making a Beil-tann list. I suspect the problem is that certain Beil-tan players interpret the words "Aspect warriors" to mean "Dark Reapers and Striking Scorpions"

Scythe
28-01-2007, 07:58
~make fire prisms into squadrons.

Do you really want to see 9 fire prism armies all with holofields? Cause they will appear, there are always people crazy enough to buy them.


~give WS, BS 4 ulthwe guardian options.

Meh, doesn't add that much gameplay wise.


~swap elites for troops for bial tan.

I can see the 6 fire dragon squads in wave serpents rushing at me already. Or worse, 6 Harlequin squads.


~If you have 1 unit of wraithguard as troops you can have one wraithlord as troops too.

I could live with that. Iyanden has been hit a bit by the new codex I agree.

Sakura
28-01-2007, 09:26
Do you really want to see 9 fire prism armies all with holofields? Cause they will appear, there are always people crazy enough to buy them.


You may not have noticed but these were loose suggestions.
I'm not sure but does squadron specifically mean 3 of but 3 is fine to gain superfluous strength to combined shots
It could be max of 2 per squadron and 0-1 in the army listing.
Many things could be twiddled if play testing is involved and im sure it would be.

But lets just take what you said into consideration.

I read your message in the tone that this was cheesey.
How much does one fire prism cost with holofields?
How much does 9 of them cost?
like 1200 points.

For 3 very strong shots.

You gotta be kidding right?
People would spend 1200 points on that?

I think my suggestion even if it is just of the top of my head and unplay-tested to be be rather balanced freeing up room for the contested heavy support options.

My whole post was to set around freeing up the heavy support selection whilst giving some ideas for possible Craftworld options.

Orbital
28-01-2007, 11:18
~make fire prisms into squadrons.
~give WS, BS 4 ulthwe guardian options.
~swap elites for troops for bial tan.
~If you have 1 unit of wraithguard as troops you can have one wraithlord as troops too.

Sakura, I totally disagree with this and I would like to explain why.

The new codex is powerful but goes far to reduce cheese in many ways, but the most important is that it forces the Eldar player to use the same Force Org Chart that everyone else does. This is a vital part of the new book, as almost every abusive list from the previous rules was created through manipulating the Force Org Chart. That needed to change, plain and simple... and it has. For instance: Want the incredibly powerful combination of 3 Fire Prisms? You have to sacrifice the chance to field Wraithlords, Falcons and War Walkers if you do. Want to mass Vypers? You have to want them enough to give up Warp Spiders, Swooping Hawks and Shining Spears. Picking two from the HQ list of Farseers, Avatars, Autarchs, Phoenix Lords, Eldrads and Yriels means that you have to leave something awesome and useful behind when you do.

Does it sound restrictive? It's not. Eldar playesr should never complain about having to take Troops anymore: Dire Avengers, Rangers, Pathfinders, Defender Guardians, Storm Guardians, Wraithguard and Jetbikes are all available for that slot now, and I don't know many armies which offer seven Troop choices in the basic codex. That's why it works: You have to follow the same rules as everyone else, but the new book rewards you for doing so.

What you're suggesting is that players be able to cherry-pick all the things they want from the codex without having to work within any restrictions. You're basically restoring the Craftworld variants which allowed the players to create some truly unfair lists, but with all the great new stuff to make it so much worse. Three Wraithlords *and* three more Heavy Support choices were bad enough when Wraithlords only got to carry one gun... Black Guardians were cheap and effective before you could take them with a platform in a Wave Serpent (to say nothing of the enhanced, WS5, I5 Guardians that would be available to everyone)...

What makes a codex work isn't just what cool things it gives you, but in what ways it limits you. Not every restriction is a minus. The gifts and prizes that an army gets are part of what makes that army great, but the things it has to give up play an equal role. Take the latter away, and that army will be no fun for anyone to play or play against.

Permanganate
28-01-2007, 11:22
You gotta be kidding right?
People would spend 1200 points on that?

Yes, quite possibly. Armored lists for Tau, IG, and Eldar are powerful because they make a huge chunk of their opponent's firepower worthless. All those Marines with bolters are now just meat shields for the people with useful weapons. Maxed-out Fire Prisms are very hard to kill and they have powerful and flexible weapons; annihilating your opponent is quite possible.


My whole post was to set around freeing up the heavy support selection whilst giving some ideas for possible Craftworld options.

I think your Craftworld difference ideas are in the spirit of 3E, where fluff was stretched into ridiculous stereotypes. ("This craftworld has a lot of Aspect Warriors - so let's let them take bajillions of Dark Reapers! That fits the fluff exactly!") I'm really glad those days are gone.

Lord Malek The Red Knight
28-01-2007, 14:48
~give WS, BS 4 ulthwe guardian options.
wouldnt using DAs (w/no Exarchs) to "count as" be a better option, though?

anyways... i wont miss C:CWE - i never used it (sticking to the basic codex instead) as i felt guilty about pretty much every list i came up with (apart from those that were viable with the normal codex anyway). i'd think "OMG, i could take loads of Reapers!" and then i'd imagine the look on my opponent's face when i wiped him out in the first turn. :eyebrows:

i have seen some cool fluffy armies from the book, though, like all Fire Dragons, lead by an Avatar and supported by WLs and Fire Prisms. but that sort of thing is still viable with just a few less Dragons, replaced by something else to fill the min. Troops slots. on the plus side, they now get a fluffy Autarch and the Fire Prism linkage rule, plus an improved Avatar.

~ Tim

Scythe
29-01-2007, 14:52
You may not have noticed but these were loose suggestions.
I'm not sure but does squadron specifically mean 3 of but 3 is fine to gain superfluous strength to combined shots
It could be max of 2 per squadron and 0-1 in the army listing.
Many things could be twiddled if play testing is involved and im sure it would be.

But lets just take what you said into consideration.

I read your message in the tone that this was cheesey.
How much does one fire prism cost with holofields?
How much does 9 of them cost?
like 1200 points.

For 3 very strong shots.

You gotta be kidding right?
People would spend 1200 points on that?

I think my suggestion even if it is just of the top of my head and unplay-tested to be be rather balanced freeing up room for the contested heavy support options.

My whole post was to set around freeing up the heavy support selection whilst giving some ideas for possible Craftworld options.

It is not the offensive power of the prisms that is the problem. It is the defemsive power. 2 tanks with holofields are managable, maybe even 3. However, when there is 9 of them floating around, you are basically looking at 1200 near indestructable points. In other words: scoring enough victory points for a win is nearly impossible.

Son of Makuta
29-01-2007, 19:26
I miss my Biel-tan list. I spent 200 on Eldar after Christmas and THEN realised I didn't have enough Troop choices.

Everyone else seems ok, except poor ol' Iyanden.

Orbital
29-01-2007, 19:32
I think when the new codex came out, we all realized we didn't have enough troop choices painted up. If you listened very carefully in mid-November, you could hear a million Dire Avengers being primed... :)

BlakLanner
29-01-2007, 19:32
I miss the CW codex as well. The fluff and options were very nice to have. Some of the stuff was left in with the new codex, such as Bikes and Pathfinders being troops now, but I miss the uniqueness that was in some of the CW lists.
While I believe the new codex is much improved over the basic 3rd ed one, I also think that Eldar should have gotten a Trait/Doctrine like list to offset that.

Karhedron
29-01-2007, 21:19
somethings changed roles like scorpions and hawks.
True but that was more to do with the overall changes to codex:Eldar rather than the loss of the craftworlds supplement. Besides, they have not really changed roles that much. Scorpions still excel at infiltrating and shredding hordes of light infantry in combat. Hawks still excel at hopping about the place and shooting up said light infantry.

The only real change is that Scorps have lost haywire grenades and Hawks have gained them. I feel that this was a fair change on both counts since in 3rd edition, there was literally nothing Scorpions couldn't handle (not entirely fitting considering aspect warriors are supposed to be specialists). Simmilarly Hawks needed something to make them better and since the fluff already established that they had grenade packs...

Farseer Silvanus
29-01-2007, 22:43
Personally I love the new codex. I really like all the diffrent choices we now have for our Eldar. I never liked the codex lists because to me they made alot of Eldar players forget what 1st made them choice Eldar. The syenergy of the whole army. Each troop had its assignment and if they did not do it then the whole army folded. I like that the brought back some of the Eldar psyers power but I would have liked to have the power Executioner back but we can have everything can we..lol

Sakura
30-01-2007, 04:46
I like the new codex, I dont like a few useless exarchs and exarch weapons.
I wish there was a little bonus for being a crafter world but we can manage.

topic of thread: Do you miss CW Eldar? Yes, I think we do. But we can all get a long fine.
Some lists took more of a hit than others and i'm sure if the game isnt super competitive then people will let you use the old Codex or just have some themed rules bending.

zodgrim
30-01-2007, 05:46
As someone that has fought Eldar consistantly for 15 years, I never miss anything Eldar.:evilgrin: