I've been back in the hobby for about four months, and have played five games against Eldar. Every one has ended with me tabled and it's the only army that has tabled me.
Playing today in a 2v2 (Guard+Guard versus Eldar+Tau, 1,000 points each player) the Eldar shining spears wrecked house. Two max units each with a lvl 3 farseer, both with fortune. I had two lvl 1 psykers, but could never manage to deny the witch on fortune. So, while on average 1/36 lasgun shots will kill a terminator, in this game on average 1/54 shots will kill a shining spear with fortune.
Turn 1 it was my ally's leman russ battle tank that bit the dust.
Turn 2 it was my tank commander vanquisher and his eradicator buddy tank.
Turn 3 it was my conscript squad and my ally's conscript squad.
Turn 4 it was a single unit double assaulting against a 20 man blob squad and 10 of my camo vets, wiped out both of them.
Turn 5 it was both my chimeras and their squads, by the end of the turn I had nothing left on the table. And my ally had one chimera and a valkyrie.
Playing against Eldar is the worst 40k experience ever. In this game, the Tau player rolled horrendously, he was a non-factor. His hammerhead failed its armor penetration rolls three turns in a row and Shadowsun mishapped on turn 3, finally made it on in turn 4, only managing to kill my wyvern. 80% of our entire combined 2,000 points of tanks and guardsmen were wiped clean by two units of shining spears, sporting armor saves 50% better than terminators. Even if they have to jink, their 4++ dodge save is 30% better than space marine armor. All armed with +S power weapons and S6 lance weapons. This is the second time I've faced this list and I'm at a complete loss for how I'm supposed to even contend with it.
I hate to be That Guy, but I'm ready to simply stop accepting games against Eldar.
TheSilo wrote: I've been back in the hobby for about four months, and have played five games against Eldar. Every one has ended with me tabled and it's the only army that has tabled me.
Playing today in a 2v2 (Guard+Guard versus Eldar+Tau, 1,000 points each player) the Eldar shining spears wrecked house. Two max units each with a lvl 3 farseer, both with fortune. I had two lvl 1 psykers, but could never manage to deny the witch on fortune. So, while on average 1/36 lasgun shots will kill a terminator, in this game on average 1/54 shots will kill a shining spear with fortune.
Turn 1 it was my ally's leman russ battle tank that bit the dust.
Turn 2 it was my tank commander vanquisher and his eradicator buddy tank.
Turn 3 it was my conscript squad and my ally's conscript squad.
Turn 4 it was a single unit double assaulting against a 20 man blob squad and 10 of my camo vets, wiped out both of them.
Turn 5 it was both my chimeras and their squads, by the end of the turn I had nothing left on the table. And my ally had one chimera and a valkyrie.
Playing against Eldar is the worst 40k experience ever. In this game, the Tau player rolled horrendously, he was a non-factor. His hammerhead failed its armor penetration rolls three turns in a row and Shadowsun mishapped on turn 3, finally made it on in turn 4, only managing to kill my wyvern. 80% of our entire combined 2,000 points of tanks and guardsmen were wiped clean by two units of shining spears, sporting armor saves 50% better than terminators. Even if they have to jink, their 4++ dodge save is 30% better than space marine armor. All armed with +S power weapons and S6 lance weapons. This is the second time I've faced this list and I'm at a complete loss for how I'm supposed to even contend with it.
I hate to be That Guy, but I'm ready to simply stop accepting games against Eldar.
I understand, but I also feel if he hadn't have rolled horribly, the Tau would've been a bigger threat. Eldar at least sometimes get into close combat. Tau just sit back and wreckhouse from long range, as well as having shots that ignore cover. Idk, I haven't played games against Eldar yet, but if I had to pick, I'd say I hate Tau more.
Playing both Guard and Eldar, I find that the IG is one of the few armies out there that Eldar should really be worried about. Traditional massed infantry IG supported by ample tanks should be able to hammer the xenos into submission, or at least to bits. And if my IG sees an Eldar army sink so many points into 2 units of Shining Spears, it's actually good news. That means there's more IG to shoot at less xenos.
Question: Is it annoying that Eldar are better at the movement phase than your army? Or is it the fact that they dominate the psychic phase? Perhaps it's that they're a better shooting army than (insert your army here). Wait, I know! It's the fact that you can't make it to the assault phase vs them!
I admit, I'm not an Eldar fan... Mild exaggeration aside, they aren't THAT bad. They're just currently the best army out there. Grey Knights had their time to shine too. Against shining spears (Not the most broken unit out there at all) conventional Leman Russ will do well, also giving the ignores cover order and pointing heavy weapons at them is effective. Try full stormtrooper squads and ignore cover, each wound is jut one dead.
It sounds to me like you don't have the know how of your army yet to deal with a synergy combo.
I would try some lascannons, plasmaguns, and/or meltaguns with a company commander ordering them for ignore cover. It has an excellent chance of removing a model a lascannon.
Another key problem I see is that you should screen your tanks from charges with your infantry and have a morale booster to keep the conscripts in the fight (usually a priest). Your conscript squad should not die in a single turn against shining spears.
When something gets fortune off on it you really need to negate as much of it's save as possible or ignore it. If you can kill the exarch then you could also tarpit the unit.
For deny the witch attempts it will normally take you 6 dice to have a reasonable shot to deny a single fortune. However keep in mind that to manifest the power in the first place takes two 4+'s with 2 farseer's your opponent should have a tough time getting enough dice to consistently keep both unit's fortuned and getting 2 fortunes is already pretty poor odds.
Another idea: Blob with priest and Power axe sergeants! Sergeants and priest in back. He kills the scrubs on the charge, then take a ton of hateful ap 2 hits to the face.
I feel like you need to give him ten man squad speedbumps, with two units he can at best kill two units a turn. Buy an aegis, put it near the halfway point, and apply pressure. Go cheap and dont blob up, forget the psyker, he will be better at it that you so use those points elsewhere. When all else fails add more annoyance/sacrifice units, the more you can divide his attention the better. A small army needs to wipe out one target a turn, force him to split his fire or provide too many targets. Buy so many dudes you clig the board and limit his movement, the cheaper the unit the better.
Tldr,
Use many cgeap units to provide too many targets for him, ignore the psychic phase and hinder his movement buy adding so many dudes.
The only way to beat eldar is swarm them with bodies. All the Eldar Players I know are scared of too many targets. As long as they dont have wraithlords and knights just load up krak grenades and run forward guns blazing. Of course you should find decent combinations etc but I find this is what usually beats eldar.
ansacs wrote:It sounds to me like you don't have the know how of your army yet to deal with a synergy combo.
Yeah, this, probably.
Eldar ramming you with jetbikes turn 1 is far from the cheesiest thing that eldar can do, and if you can't handle a few tough models jumping into your deployment zone early on, then you're going to have problems with a lot more than eldar. Just wait until you face against deathwing assault or drop pods, etc. etc.
If the lasguns you bring aren't enough then either:
1.) bring more lasguns. 54 shots is nothing more than 20 guardsmen with FRF. It's pretty easy to bring more than 20 guardsmen to the table.
2.) bring things other than lasguns. A squad of veterans hiding in a chimera, waiting for the bikes to get close (especially if they, say, just got out of a close combat), and then popping out and drenching them with plasma will do rather more than fishing for 6's against rerollable armor saves.
In any case, you should be glad that your opponent is at least bringing stuff up to you. It's not until wave serpent gunlining starts that things properly start to get boring against eldar.
ansacs wrote: It sounds to me like you don't have the know how of your army yet to deal with a synergy combo.
I would try some lascannons, plasmaguns, and/or meltaguns with a company commander ordering them for ignore cover. It has an excellent chance of removing a model a lascannon.
Another key problem I see is that you should screen your tanks from charges with your infantry and have a morale booster to keep the conscripts in the fight (usually a priest). Your conscript squad should not die in a single turn against shining spears.
When something gets fortune off on it you really need to negate as much of it's save as possible or ignore it. If you can kill the exarch then you could also tarpit the unit.
For deny the witch attempts it will normally take you 6 dice to have a reasonable shot to deny a single fortune. However keep in mind that to manifest the power in the first place takes two 4+'s with 2 farseer's your opponent should have a tough time getting enough dice to consistently keep both unit's fortuned and getting 2 fortunes is already pretty poor odds.
With fortune and jink, you will only remove 1 model for every 4 lascannons that hit. In order to kill a single shining spear I would've needed 9 lascannons. 4.5 hit, 3.75 wounds, 0.94 dead models.
We both had large infantry screens in front of our tanks, the infantry got pulverized by their twin-linked fire.
All of our conscripts had commissars. They didn't turn and run, they were each killed individually. Also the entire shining spears unit has hit and run with an initiative test at I6. You cannot tarpit them.
ansacs wrote:It sounds to me like you don't have the know how of your army yet to deal with a synergy combo.
Yeah, this, probably.
Eldar ramming you with jetbikes turn 1 is far from the cheesiest thing that eldar can do, and if you can't handle a few tough models jumping into your deployment zone early on, then you're going to have problems with a lot more than eldar. Just wait until you face against deathwing assault or drop pods, etc. etc.
If the lasguns you bring aren't enough then either:
1.) bring more lasguns. 54 shots is nothing more than 20 guardsmen with FRF. It's pretty easy to bring more than 20 guardsmen to the table.
2.) bring things other than lasguns. A squad of veterans hiding in a chimera, waiting for the bikes to get close (especially if they, say, just got out of a close combat), and then popping out and drenching them with plasma will do rather more than fishing for 6's against rerollable armor saves.
In any case, you should be glad that your opponent is at least bringing stuff up to you. It's not until wave serpent gunlining starts that things properly start to get boring against eldar.
Except that's a 20 man guard squad that somehow manages to get into rapid fire range, FRF, and then only manages to kill a single 25 point model.
I've faced Deathwing drop pod assault armies, that's easy. Dark Angels terminators don't have 12" movement, battle focus, hit and run, initiative 6, and a 1/9 armor save. And terminators cost twice as much as the shining spears.
They don't get their save if you put the Ignores Cover order on your firepower.
Doing that while using your meatshields to protect your tanks should yield much better results.
You're talking about 20 wounds of T4 Sv3+ rerollable. That's the rough equivalent of 20 terminators who have no invul save.
I really don't know what you're going on about. At 1,000 points, you can easily field something like...
CCS - lascannon
PCS - lascannon
PIS - lascannon, plasma gun
PIS - lascannon, plasma gun
PIS - lascannon, plasma gun
PCS - lascannon
PIS - lascannon, plasma gun
PIS - lascannon, plasma gun
PIS - lascannon, plasma gun
PCS - lascannon
PIS - lascannon, plasma gun
PIS - lascannon, plasma gun
... which is a pretty typical MSU list. That's MORE than enough to handle what you're talking about, easily. I mean, let's assume that nobody passes any orders, and that only half of them get to double-tap. That's still, in a single turn of shooting, 12 lasgun wounds, 5 lascannon wounds, and 5 plasma gun wounds.
If you catch your opponent without a jink save, you just blew half his army off the table in a single volley, with less than ideal circumstances and no passed orders. Then, with proper use of speedbumps, he kills a squad of guardsmen or two and then you repeat the next turn. Eldar jetbikes, even with fortune should more or less bounce off of a basic weight-of-fire guard list. And that's not even remotely optimized to handle this situation.
But if you have a bunch of problems with your list, and your level of tactics is "deploy everything in a line, don't move, and hope for the best", then, well, you probably deserve to get stomped by a high-mobility list practicing good force concentration.
I think your problem isn't that eldar are necessarily un-fun, so much as that you're losing (and probably for reasons you can change), and are considering losing un-fun.
I mean, there are things you can do to bring fun back in, but it doesn't mean eldar are necessarily non-fun, especially not in this loadout.
he doesn't get ignore cover. he uses the tank commander HQ. And even if he did the survival ratio of IGHQs is realy low. turn two they are dead against all armies and against fast moving and shoty armies they are dead turn 1, unless they are in reservs.
Eldar can be pretty obnoxious. Really, they've always been in some form or fashion.
In 2nd it was decked out Exarchs
In 3rd it was Craftworlds
In 4th it was Holofalcons
In 5th it was Seer Council
In 6th it was Wave Serpents, Seer Council, Taudar
In 7th it's Wave Serpents, psyker spam, Wraithknights
Not a lot you can do except try to get your Eldar playing friends to rein it in to make games more fair and fun.
I never built my Eldar because I knew I'd never get to play them, at least in my previous city. My communities knew I was a good player and putting Eldar on the table would just be a bad show. I already made people cringe with Sisters of Battle.
They're extremely powerful and versatile and probably still the best army in the game with 51 points, 50"+ single turn moving, objective secured unit choice.
There's a lot of strange assumptions being made in this thread.
Eldar have too many too fast units, that can destroy a chimera in one turn. If they start the Regimental is dead turn 1, if they don't it is dead turn 2.
Plasma units with ignores cover is your best bet. Keep a CCS with 4 plas in a Vebdetta or chimera. Jump out turn 2, double tap after ignoring cover.
How do you make it sure that your vendetta with Command section is on the table turn 2 and a HQ chimer won't live longer then turn 2, so if the eldar starts there will be no ginmpuj tou.
Eldarplayer wrote: What was the eldar list he brought, I am curious what else he had. At first look shining spears didn't look great but I need to rethink.
Spears are great. Expensive but great. Small teams of 3 with an exarch destroy armour. So many monoliths and leman russes I killed with those playing as eldar. Loved it.
My friends told me today that If I start playing again (id pick eldar) I would find myself "without people to play with"... They can't be that bad.... especially since my friends all play either necrons or tau. Wish someone could talk sense into them...
Eldarplayer wrote: What was the eldar list he brought, I am curious what else he had. At first look shining spears didn't look great but I need to rethink.
Spears are great. Expensive but great. Small teams of 3 with an exarch destroy armour. So many monoliths and leman russes I killed with those playing as eldar. Loved it.
In that case they seem fun, but a bit OP from what others are saying.
amhhs wrote: My friends told me today that If I start playing again (id pick eldar) I would find myself "without people to play with"... They can't be that bad.... especially since my friends all play either necrons or tau. Wish someone could talk sense into them...
you never "beat:" eldar. you only survive. in 6th you had the chance to play escalation and laugh with your warhounds str D doom cannons wiping out his units regardless of the saves he brought to the field. now you arent even guaranteed to do that much.
eldar codex is B R O K E N broken and i refuse to play eldar ever. if my store owner fields his eldar im forfeiting the match or im going to simply yolo at him in a banzai charge until the match ends as victory is basically impossible.
i hope eldar players enjoy having fun with their armies playing among themselves i wont be joining you.
i think that if GW want to continue with the eldar as a race they need to radically rethink their approach to the book, or kill it outright. thats right no more eldar codex i said it. if GW kills the eldar codex or nerfs it into the ground with massive points hikes and relic re-writes that would also be sufficient. eldar are suppose to be a race of few. an elite strike team. jack up prices. and ya know what remove the wave serpent. night spinner fine, and make the falcon the troop carrier of the eldar.
amhhs wrote: My friends told me today that If I start playing again (id pick eldar) I would find myself "without people to play with"... They can't be that bad.... especially since my friends all play either necrons or tau. Wish someone could talk sense into them...
you never "beat:" eldar. you only survive. in 6th you had the chance to play escalation and laugh with your warhounds str D doom cannons wiping out his units regardless of the saves he brought to the field. now you arent even guaranteed to do that much.
eldar codex is B R O K E N broken and i refuse to play eldar ever. if my store owner fields his eldar im forfeiting the match or im going to simply yolo at him in a banzai charge until the match ends as victory is basically impossible.
i hope eldar players enjoy having fun with their armies playing among themselves i wont be joining you.
i think that if GW want to continue with the eldar as a race they need to radically rethink their approach to the book, or kill it outright. thats right no more eldar codex i said it. if GW kills the eldar codex or nerfs it into the ground with massive points hikes and relic re-writes that would also be sufficient. eldar are suppose to be a race of few. an elite strike team. jack up prices. and ya know what remove the wave serpent. night spinner fine, and make the falcon the troop carrier of the eldar.
I have been lobbying to remove eldar and replace them with squats.
amhhs wrote: My friends told me today that If I start playing again (id pick eldar) I would find myself "without people to play with"... They can't be that bad.... especially since my friends all play either necrons or tau. Wish someone could talk sense into them...
And yet people still see nothing wrong with 40k's lack of balance.
I personally don't see how this kind of crap could possibly be good for either the long-term health of 40k or GW in general. GW doesn't make money when people are talked or peer-pressured out of buying into it, which leads to higher prices and all the other things we've been bitching about for years, and we as a community suffer because the pool of players is ever decreasing, which means fewer opportunities to actually get games in (and in some cases maybe even game stores going out of business, the few who still rely on GW sales to keep going anyway). Some people argue that better balance would be "boring" and would somehow ruin the game, but I'd argue not getting to play the game at all, either because you picked an army that ended up being OP as feth 8 years down the road, or everyone else picked an OP army (whether intentionally or not) and you've shunned them for it, would be even more boring. I can't help but feel like I'm alone in thinking that way, though.
Do you guys really think it's okay for Eldar to just be "off limits" to new players, and for existing players to shelve their armies until a new edition or codex update "nerfs" them? Do you care if people decide to skip out on 40k altogether because everyone told them they wouldn't play with them if they picked the faction they wanted, which for the vast majority of us is a decision based purely on aesthetics with little to no knowledge of how they play on the tabletop, or even more than a blurb or two of fluff? A decision, mind you, which doesn't seem to be an issue AT ALL in ANY other game BUT 40k? Because personally I think this is all fething absurd and I don't think of it as anything less than straight-up bullying. From grown-ass people, no doubt.
ionusx wrote: i think that if GW want to continue with the eldar as a race they need to radically rethink their approach to the book, or kill it outright. thats right no more eldar codex i said it.
I guess my question was answered long before I even finished my post.
2x10man Spears.... 500pts
2xJetSeers.............. 230pts
Min Troops.............. 101pts
That leaves 169 points for upgrades or everything else. That means at most 1 Serpent.
Spears have a maximum 18" threat range t1 (6" shooting, can't battle focus), but can flat out to basically anywhere.
2xFortune has, at best, a 1/4 chance of being available. That was just bad luck. But unless he tried for being absurdly lucky, you didn't need to worry about invis, as he didn't roll on Telepathy at all.
Fortuned Spears are t4 3+ sv, 3+ cover while jinking. That save 8 of 9 shots. That is kinda scary. Usually I'd say hit the rest of the army and endure it, but with 10 SS, that's going to be one non-CC-monster unit a turn. If you did have the Ignore Cover option, you'd be able to deny him any saves from any ap3 weapons (and anything s6+ on the Seer may only wound 1/4 times, but IDs the Seer).
Spread out so he can't always charge the next best target every round? It'll take a lot of firepower, but if you can Weight of Fire termis down, this is only half again as much. And it can't really do anything the turn it moves into range of your guns, so you're guaranteed first shot if you play it right.
I've never enjoyed playing with/against death stars from any army, but this really doesn't sound any worse than a gravstar or other things many other codexes put out.
How is this worse than the helldrakes destroying my demicompany in the first half of 6th, and laughing at anything the Marines could put out?
Serpent Spam backed by Wraithkights is unfun, certainly, but not all of Eldar is.
(Also, Eldar weren't cheese for over half of 6th - their old codex wasn't a problem)
T4 3+ re-rollable is FAR from the unstoppable behemoth the OP thinks it is. If two units are killing your entire army you've done something terribly wrong.
Eldarplayer wrote: What was the eldar list he brought, I am curious what else he had. At first look shining spears didn't look great but I need to rethink.
By the way, this was a campaign game. We deployed around three central objectives, they deployed within 6" of any table edge.
I don't have his exact list, but roughly (if shining spears don't have battle focus, he was moving them in the assault phase somehow without doing hit and run):
- Lvl 3 Farseer with 10 shining spears (with exarch) - Lvl 3 Farseer with 10 shining spears (with exarch) - Two guardian bike squads with ~6 guardians in each.
Tau had the following, but like I said he was completely a nonfactor: - Shadowsun + 1 crisis suit - Crisis suits (3) - Pathfinders - Firewarriors - Devilfish - Hammerhead - Kroot
Bharring wrote: So tank-heavy, and he happened to not invest in units that can't hurt tanks?
That conscript squad should cost his Spears at least a turn.
And if you ever charged (or held) the Spears they'd have been s3 ap- 1 attack each.
This looks like he just rolled well, IMO.
He has hit and run at initiative 6. Twin-linked overwatch with shuriken catapults and he will successfully disengage at the end of the first assault phase on a d6 1-5. I know, because I tried that strategy the last time I played against him, it didn't work. He overwatches, strikes first, and only 1/54 of my attacks is going through, and I have a lot fewer attacks once he's done. Then he hits and runs to shoot and assault on the next turn. If I'm not mistaken his power lances are always at least Ap 4.
Eldarplayer wrote: What was the eldar list he brought, I am curious what else he had. At first look shining spears didn't look great but I need to rethink.
By the way, this was a campaign game. We deployed around three central objectives, they deployed within 6" of any table edge.
I don't have his exact list, but roughly (if shining spears don't have battle focus, he was moving them in the assault phase somehow without doing hit and run):
- Lvl 3 Farseer with 10 shining spears (with exarch)
- Lvl 3 Farseer with 10 shining spears (with exarch)
- Two guardian bike squads with ~6 guardians in each.
Tau had the following, but like I said he was completely a nonfactor:
- Shadowsun + 1 crisis suit
- Crisis suits (3)
- Pathfinders
- Firewarriors
- Devilfish
- Hammerhead
- Kroot
The problem here is that the Eldar list is attempting to be heavily competitive and both of your lists would be generously called "mediocre". Your heavy firepower is pretty naff, you're trying to pile on non AP2/3 wounds but doing it extremely inefficiently.
Take an Executioner/Punisher or two, and see how long those Shining Spears last over continuous fire, especially with Pask in there.
Scrap the Conscripts/naff blobs and reassemble them into strong blobs of minimum 30, no waste-of-points mortars or GL's, at most with flamers and autocannons/lascannon teams. Scrap all the Chimera squads and either assemble them into blobs or make them Vet Mechanised squads and give them max high-end specials. Ditch the Valkyrie if its only going to be for fire support, or take a Veteran Squad with the demolitions doctrine and high end specials maxed out in it so it can alpha strike.
To be honest, when I see an Eldar player sinking points in shining spears I am happy. They are one of the worst units in the codex and only an inexperienced player will have any issues against them.
Now you did have extreme bad luck that he rolled Fortune on both his Farseers, but even then they are not that scary. Still surprising he got off all his Fortunes as statistically he should fail it a couple of times.
Still, at most his units can kill of 1 unit per turn so he will be hard pressed to kill much.
Also since they don't have grenades any unit in cover will hit them first in close combat.
I think the major problem is the Eldar player came prepared with a decent list and he played against the OP which is at best a poorly designed list.
They are jetbikes with H&R vs guardsmen. They should ALWAYS.be doing the charging. And there is a reason I sold my Eldar after 3 games. I started eldar in 6th because I liked the aesthetics of grav tanks and vypers. That turned out to be a very expensive mistake for someone.who gets a dirty feeling for bringing too much grav against CSM or Nidzilla in friendly games.
Did it occur to you that if enough people are complaining then there might actually be something wrong? Now that Eldar list wasn't even that nasty, it seemed fun to play with and like the Eldar player was having a Yolo moment. Ask yourself, if those Shining Spears didn't get fortune either through him failing it or not rolling it, do you think they'd of survived even a single turn of being the target of the entire Guard Gunline? No, because they are as tough to kill as a Marin to anything >AP3.
I'd say the OP's game was dictated by lucky powers and if he didn't get those powers the game would of been much funner. On the other hand, i straight up refuse to play anyone who uses more then 2 Wave Serpents. I play Dark Eldar, they ruin the game for me, no matter how many points we play...
Honestly guard can easily give eldar a run for their money ,cover ignoring orders help bring down things like wave serpents and shining spears (which to be honest aren't the scariest unit in the eldar codex by far). Your wyverns slaughter eldar infantry and your leman russ are very good units , i think guard have the least to complain about.
Their are a few armies that eldar are broken against but its definitely not guard an army like dark eldar struggles to bring down our wave serpents due to nerfs to dark lances while the eldar can easily glance the av 10 dark eldar skimmers to death.
You know I am going to be the counter to all of the, "Suck it up" type post.
I had a 5k Eldar army once upon a time that I got from a friend who was getting out of the game, I could field a LOT of different armies including Wave Serpent spam. When 6th rolled around I finally pulled the army out of storage, fixed it up, and ran a couple of games and theory crafted a number of list.
Eldar ARE the anti-fun of this game. Eldar have no weaknesses like most armies, they can counter ANYTHING, they do not have a single unit that I would consider useless like so many codices, they can abuse most any mechanic the game has short of flier spam, they can do everything without sacrificing. Not ONLY that but even on a casual level just building a fluff list it will work extremely well and if you are a competent Eldar player you can win against other armies competitive list with it. My favorite build for 6th was using nothing but moral based attacks from Farseers, Hemlocks, to Nightspinners and Vauls Support Batteries. Even if I were playing against Space Marines with their ATSKNF I could still obliterate them with the amount of shooting the list was putting out.
Eldar are not impossible to beat, but they are not fun to play against. I found them so over bearing that I sold the army for the most part because I got bored of playing them and people in my group stopped wanting to play against me when I brought them. Eldar dominate the tournament scene for a reason and even at their worse they are on par with some armies best.
Unbeatable? Don't recall anyone saying that. I've had some good games against my buddys Iyanden list. Its just when someone drops serpents, bikes, knights and prisms like they're going out of style that games truly become a waste of time. The fact that even a foot guardian list will be hitting you with more BS4 rending dice than you can count is a perfect example of why Phil Kelly should NEVER be allowed to write another eldar dex.
The fact that this thread exists because someone brought a bad eldar list against a fluffy.IG list, and the AM dex is one of the most potent books to drop in 6th.
I think anyone who says Eldar are never fun to play with should play with different people.
The army doesn't automatically remove fun from the game. The player making unfair lists does.
It would be better if the game didn't allow for this but the fact someone uses Eldar doesn't automatically mean all fun is gone.
To be honest, when I see an Eldar player sinking points in shining spears I am happy. They are one of the worst units in the codex and only an inexperienced player will have any issues against them.
Now you did have extreme bad luck that he rolled Fortune on both his Farseers, but even then they are not that scary. Still surprising he got off all his Fortunes as statistically he should fail it a couple of times.
Still, at most his units can kill of 1 unit per turn so he will be hard pressed to kill much. Also since they don't have grenades any unit in cover will hit them first in close combat.
I think the major problem is the Eldar player came prepared with a decent list and he played against the OP which is at best a poorly designed list.
Yes, clearly it was my inexperience (having only played since 3rd edition) and my ally's (having played since 5th edition). In the previous game I allied with the guy hosting (who has played since 2nd edition). So clearly it was just our stupidity and inexperience.
Alone, I had over 50 infantrymen on the board with 1,000 points. Pask and his buddies would have been dead on turn 2, just like my tank commander. And all of these recommendations rely on me having a CCS that makes it past turn 1. My teammate had a CCS issuing ignore cover, but with shining spears basically ignoring all movement restrictions, he only ever got a couple plasma shots off. In order to dispel fortune, I need to on average throw 12 dispel dice at that single spell. The most my army could ever physically get was 8.
His 1,000 point list all but tabled our combined 2,000 points. And all of this is missing the main point of the thread, that playing against Eldar is not fun. I'm not about to build a 100-man list in 1,000 points to win a campaign mission. I have not lost a game in the past four months, unless I was playing against Tau or Eldar. That includes beating IG, Chaos, Demons, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Necrons, Orks, and Tyranids. Part of that is because IG is such a strong codex, part is because I don't play win-at-all-costs people. I've lined up well against Tau, and the games are never slam-dunks (unless they're allied with Eldar), so I feel like I can actually eventually beat Tau. I have never, in any of my games, felt like I could actually beat Eldar, none of those games were even close. Again, they are one of only two armies I've lost to (against multiple players) and I always lose to the Eldar by a mile.
Eldar have every strength in the game and almost no negative downside. They are ridiculously points efficient, super fast, can gunline like no tomorrow with incredible range, and still effectively fight in your face.
Compare a space marine assault marine (17pts/per) to an eldar jetbike (17pts/per). A dude with a pistol and 12" move, 12" charge, T4, 3 Attacks on the charge vs. a dude on a bike with up to 50"+ movement a turn, twinlinked "pistol" (only 12" range) with pseudo-rending, 2 attacks on the charge, same toughness and armor. Let's not forget the "always-on if chosen to be" cover save versus the marine who has to risk life and limb to get his or sacrifice movement.
Eldar are really, really good. In the hands of a good player, they may approach unbeatable status determining on what you field against them. As I said, I had a full 2000pt Eldar army ready to play (only 2 Wave Serpents in the list...) and I already knew I'd get to play it only a handful of times before my peers said "No thanks..." Because that's a good use of my money. If the game gets fixed, I'll repurchase said Eldar, but until then, I guess I have to go elsewhere for my pointy eared fix.
I don't play Eldar but I personally like the codex I just think it's open to abuse and the majority of eldar players I face a use the hell out of it.
One guy I face quite regularly runs Eldrad at 900pts, I mean c'mon not only is the guy seriously OP anyway but there is no way I can mount a decent pyschic defence or offence with him running round at low point levels.
In a doubles game I played Eldar/Eldar vs Space Marine/Blood Angels they had 13 psychic levels! 13! No one should be able to mount that kind of offensive without having to sacrifice on units which they don't.
I do enjoy playing against them and it is a challenge but somebody was definitely wanting to return them back to their 2nd edition glory when they wrote this.
Sidstyler wrote:And yet people still see nothing wrong with 40k's lack of balance.
I personally don't see how this kind of crap could possibly be good for either the long-term health of 40k or GW in general.
It's what makes 40k40k. The game would much more quickly wither away if it tried to be something it wasn't.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: Eldar have no weaknesses like most armies, they can counter ANYTHING, they do not have a single unit that I would consider useless like so many codices, they can abuse most any mechanic the game has short of flier spam, they can do everything without sacrificing.
I would like to hear absolutely any justification for these statements.
When I look at an army filled with expensive T3 units with bad armor saves and only a few units that approach real versatility that doesn't have access to several special rules, none of what you said makes sense to me.
ionusx wrote:if GW kills the eldar codex or nerfs it into the ground with massive points hikes.
Like they did at the end of 4th edition? The (somewhat justifiable) rage still leaves a ringing in my ears louder than tau before their current codex, blood angels now, or any whining that's ever happened about tyranid.
Everything got a huge price hike for getting zero amount more effective, but eldar was still broken cheese all through 5th edition? What, do you want to make everything twice as expensive?
Decisions on game balance shouldn't be made in anger.
Yeah, your opponent brought a tight list with a single focus and has the ability to reasonably handle everything with plenty of killing power. You brought a bunch of grenade launchers and autocannons. There are 4 BS3 weapons with Ap2 or better, and you don't really have any weight of fire with a combination of only a few infantry squads that you then hide in transports. A few common-sense changes would turn your situation around greatly.
I also wonder what you're doing with deployment and movement. My guess is that if you have a list like this, you're pretty new at the game, which means you're also making a bunch of easily-fixable mistakes on the table as well, but we'd need to see some pictures in a battle report to know for sure.
40k is a game with a steep learning curve, I'll easily admit, but you'll probably be better off here (as with everything else in life), if you step up and meet your challenges with effective behavior changes rather than sitting down, whining, and blaming everybody else for your situation.
pm713 wrote: The 50" movement isn't a thing anymore is it? I thought the rule changed so they got to move 36 in the shooting phase or 2d6 in the assault.
That very well could be, I am operating off 6E and the minimal 7E I've skimmed. That would still be 48" movement in one turn. The length of 50" is worst case scenario previously of only rolling snake eyes. The point still stands that you can place objective secured troops anywhere on the board turn one to completely cycle out your hand for something like Maelstrom. Otherwise, you hide them in reserve until 4th turn and do late game steals. Either still works in that scenario. And for 51 points, it's pretty broken.
pm713 wrote: Unless you put your objective secured troop on the objective or shoot the jetbikes. They're good at that one thing but thats it.
Yes, but you're going to have to put fire power on them to do so, thus taking away shots from killing the other stuff that will wreck your day. And if you have objective secured troops, I fire until you aren't contesting and then score. If you're playing Maelstrom, Eldar want to go first. Regular, Eldar want to go second.
I'd not be so reductive on how broken jetbikes are. When the one thing they are good at is called "winning the game," I'd say I'm okay with that.
Guys, it doesn't matter how good or bad the OPs list/tactics were, he's still correct.
Eldar is the best codex in 40k, efficient in the hands of dummies, borderline-broken when wielded by veterans. "Fun" is a subjective term, but unless you're definition of it is accepting the consequences of battling a superior foe, you probably didn't have any...
TheSilo wrote: Yes, clearly it was my inexperience (having only played since 3rd edition) and my ally's (having played since 5th edition). In the previous game I allied with the guy hosting (who has played since 2nd edition). So clearly it was just our stupidity and inexperience.
Alone, I had over 50 infantrymen on the board with 1,000 points. Pask and his buddies would have been dead on turn 2, just like my tank commander.
You say you've been playing since 3rd edition, yet your list is garbage, being filled with useless items like grenade launchers, and you apparently have no idea what "bubble-wrap" is. Shining Spears can only kill a Leman Russ in assault. How exactly are they going to assault a Leman Russ when it's literally surrounded in a U-shape formation by guardsmen? There is no physical space for Shining Spears to get into assault with it. So they have to punch through the Guardsmen first, and if they're relying on hit and run to not get stuck in then that gives you free reign to shoot them off the board, which you should be able to easily do with the IG's readily available access to AP3 and AP2.
That Eldar are extremely powerful is a given, and I don't think anyone would disagree. However the problem presented in this thread by you is not a balance problem, it's a learn2play problem.
TheSilo wrote: Yes, clearly it was my inexperience (having only played since 3rd edition) and my ally's (having played since 5th edition). In the previous game I allied with the guy hosting (who has played since 2nd edition). So clearly it was just our stupidity and inexperience.
Alone, I had over 50 infantrymen on the board with 1,000 points. Pask and his buddies would have been dead on turn 2, just like my tank commander.
You say you've been playing since 3rd edition, yet your list is garbage, being filled with useless items like grenade launchers, and you apparently have no idea what "bubble-wrap" is. Shining Spears can only kill a Leman Russ in assault. How exactly are they going to assault a Leman Russ when it's literally surrounded in a U-shape formation by guardsmen? There is no physical space for Shining Spears to get into assault with it. So they have to punch through the Guardsmen first, and if they're relying on hit and run to not get stuck in then that gives you free reign to shoot them off the board, which you should be able to easily do with the IG's readily available access to AP3 and AP2.
That Eldar are extremely powerful is a given, and I don't think anyone would disagree. However the problem presented in this thread by you is not a balance problem, it's a learn2play
problem.
While your quote is true, do you really need to berate someone like that?
Just seems like this dude is playing an army he likes.
I can sympathize. My list would be awful in any competitive environment. I still go down fighting every time, but its a list I enjoy. Its just unfortunate than most eldar lists are leagues ahead. Heck, even if the eldar guy went easy it would still be an uphill battle.
Just dont play eldar mate. And if you do, make sure you talk before hand. If thats a list you like, then keep playing it. Just be careful who you play with. If you really want to keep playing the eldar forces, simply try learn fast how to reduce the speed in which they kill you. Last game I had around 50% losses by turn 7 against an eldar list. Still lost, but its better than 99% losses I had last time by the end of the game.
Dont turn it into an arms race via list building. Its easy for someone (baxicanX) who plays only online and can change the list however and whenever, but using models is a vastly different story.
Swastakowey wrote: Just seems like this dude is playing an army he likes.
I can sympathize. My list would be awful in any competitive environment. I still go down fighting every time, but its a list I enjoy. Its just unfortunate than most eldar lists are leagues ahead. Heck, even if the eldar guy went easy it would still be an uphill battle.
Just dont play eldar mate. And if you do, make sure you talk before hand. If thats a list you like, then keep playing it. Just be careful who you play with. If you really want to keep playing the eldar forces, simply try learn fast how to reduce the speed in which they kill you. Last game I had around 50% losses by turn 7 against an eldar list. Still lost, but its better than 99% losses I had last time by the end of the game.
Dont turn it into an arms race via list building. Its easy for someone (baxicanX) who plays only online and can change the list however and whenever, but using models is a vastly different story.
That's a fair jab- but the point remains, it's silly to cry "waaah Eldar" when your loss really has nothing to do with your opponent.
The situation as presented in this thread could be exactly reversed.
How do you think it feels to play a horde assault list like 'nids or orks and to go up against an IG gunline backed up by 12 wyverns? It's not fun. How do you think it feels to play a Guardian-heavy / Banshee-heavy Eldar list and go up against an AV14 wall or a Vandetta-spam list with little or no AV or AA? It sucks. You might as well just pack up your models and go home.
"Play the list you want" and "play with what you have" is all well and good. But don't complain when someone brings a list that's simply better than yours and uses tactics that are better than yours and proceeds to trounce you. Replace that Eldar list with my Khorne-Raptor list and the end result would have been the same. Is CSM suddenly an EZ-mode-auto-win-no-skill army that you're better off just not playing against?
Swastakowey wrote: Just seems like this dude is playing an army he likes.
I can sympathize. My list would be awful in any competitive environment. I still go down fighting every time, but its a list I enjoy. Its just unfortunate than most eldar lists are leagues ahead. Heck, even if the eldar guy went easy it would still be an uphill battle.
Just dont play eldar mate. And if you do, make sure you talk before hand. If thats a list you like, then keep playing it. Just be careful who you play with. If you really want to keep playing the eldar forces, simply try learn fast how to reduce the speed in which they kill you. Last game I had around 50% losses by turn 7 against an eldar list. Still lost, but its better than 99% losses I had last time by the end of the game.
Dont turn it into an arms race via list building. Its easy for someone (baxicanX) who plays only online and can change the list however and whenever, but using models is a vastly different story.
That's a fair jab- but the point remains, it's silly to cry "waaah Eldar" when your loss really has nothing to do with your opponent.
The situation as presented in this thread could be exactly reserved.
How do you think it feels to play a horde assault list like 'nids or orks and to go up against an IG gunline backed up by 12 wyverns? It's not fun. How do you think it feels to play against an AV14 wall or a Vandetta-spam list with little or no AV or AA? It sucks. You might as well just pack up your models and go home.
"Play the list you want" and "play with what you have" is all well and good. But don't complain when someone brings a list that's simply better than yours and uses tactics that are better than yours and proceeds to trounce you. Replace that Eldar list with my Khorne-Raptor list and the end result would have been the same. Is CSM suddenly an EZ-mode-auto-win-no-skill army that you're better off just not playing against?
I have to agree with you there. If he really wants to win, he should build a better list.
Swastakowey wrote: Just seems like this dude is playing an army he likes.
I can sympathize. My list would be awful in any competitive environment. I still go down fighting every time, but its a list I enjoy. Its just unfortunate than most eldar lists are leagues ahead. Heck, even if the eldar guy went easy it would still be an uphill battle.
Just dont play eldar mate. And if you do, make sure you talk before hand. If thats a list you like, then keep playing it. Just be careful who you play with. If you really want to keep playing the eldar forces, simply try learn fast how to reduce the speed in which they kill you. Last game I had around 50% losses by turn 7 against an eldar list. Still lost, but its better than 99% losses I had last time by the end of the game.
Dont turn it into an arms race via list building. Its easy for someone (baxicanX) who plays only online and can change the list however and whenever, but using models is a vastly different story.
That's a fair jab- but the point remains, it's silly to cry "waaah Eldar" when your loss really has nothing to do with your opponent.
The situation as presented in this thread could be exactly reserved.
How do you think it feels to play a horde assault list like 'nids or orks and to go up against a Pask-Star backed up by 12 wyverns? It's not fun. How do you think it feels to play against an AV14 wall or a Vandetta-spam list with little or no AV or AA? It sucks.
"Play the list you want" and "play with what you have" is all well and good. But don't complain when someone brings a list that's simply better than yours and uses tactics that are better than yours and trounces you.
Well the tactics bit is all assumption. So unless we see a battle report its better off just leaving it to the list which is all we have to go on.
All lists can have bad match ups along with all codices. But its very well known that eldar are by far the most efficient and deadly codex out there. Some argue Tau or demons but overall I think many would say Eldar. They are not invincible true, but they are almost never easy.
I for one, no matter my list, always feel at a disadvantage when facing any Eldar list. I know exactly what he is going through. If he was facing space marines or tyranids, I am very certain his game would have gone a lot better. And by a lot better I dont mean he wins. By better I mean he may have felt like his loss was more his tactics and not just his opponents army.
There is nothing worse than having an army you love and put the time and effort into being faced off by an army thats naturally better than yours because of its codex. Eldar are the worst offender at this. I too feel Eldar have a natural advantage, and while I wont complain or not play them, deep inside I resent some of the games I play with eldar. Just feels like wasted time.
Its not the loss or win. Its how cheated many feel after facing Eldar.
Swastakowey wrote: Well the tactics bit is all assumption. So unless we see a battle report its better off just leaving it to the list which is all we have to go on.
Only to an extent. When we know exactly what list the players had, which we do, and we have a statement from the IG player saying "the Eldar player killed all my Leman Russes and my CCS-Chimera turn 2" it doesn't exactly take a psychic to figure out how that mistakes were made.
All lists can have bad match ups along with all codices. But its very well known that eldar are by far the most efficient and deadly codex out there.
But only at a high-play level. Do you think an Eldar list consisting of Guardian squads and Howling Banshees is "the most efficient and deadly" list out there? No. Yeah, a full-on Seer-Council GJB spam with fortune and invisibility out the ass and Wave Serpents everywhere is one of the toughest armies out there, but that's not what we saw here is it? We're seeing a slightly competitive Eldar list versus a below-average Guard list, with all evidence presented thus far pointing to the Guard list being played sub-optimally.
There is nothing worse than having an army you love and put the time and effort into being faced off by an army thats naturally better than yours because of its codex.
Cool, but that's not what happened here. What happened is that a decent player with a decent list went up against a poor player with a poor list. Eldar have nothing to do with what occurred in this scenario.
And for the record, the Imperial Guard are one of the scariest match-ups to an Eldar player, second only to Tau. An army that relies almost exclusively on cover saves and speed versus an army that has army-wide ignores cover and LOS-ignoring AP3 out the ass? Yeah, Guard players should never be rubbing their butts and wincing after a match with Eldar, even if they lose.
Whenever I play against someone who puts nearly all his points into two units, it's usually a bad game. Any codex can do this. Eldar get the most crap for being OP right now (they are), but this problem doesn't seem to be Eldar specific.
Imagine if you were a Green Tide army, and I dropped two 10-man Tac Termites on the board. You'll get much the same result as you did against the Spears. Spam is spam, and bad matchups suck, but that's not just an Eldar problem.
I also question how things unfolded. Spears cannot touch anything first turn that's inside your deployment. They can't shoot after moving more than 12".
Also, getting 2xFortune was really good luck, but he's likely to fail some of them. And he *might* get another power off some rounds, but that should be extremely rare.
Honestly, 2x10man raptors with Sorcs for Invis would probably be a lot stronger (Sorcs beat the snot out ofFarseers for manifesting, especially WC2 powers). And that's a 'bad' dex.
Eldar probably have the most WAAC players right now, because some of their options, but its the problem is the player, not the Dex.
Oh, and BS on having played the Hemlock since 6th came around. Didn't exist until over halfway through (when the Dex came out)
Swastakowey wrote: Well the tactics bit is all assumption. So unless we see a battle report its better off just leaving it to the list which is all we have to go on.
Only to an extent. When we know exactly what list the players had, which we do, and we have a statement from the IG player saying "the Eldar player killed all my Leman Russes and my CCS-Chimera turn 2" it doesn't exactly take a psychic to figure out how that mistakes were made.
All lists can have bad match ups along with all codices. But its very well known that eldar are by far the most efficient and deadly codex out there.
But only at a high-play level. Do you think an Eldar list consisting of Guardian squads and Howling Banshees is "the most efficient and deadly" list out there? No. Yeah, a full-on Seer-Council GJB spam with fortune and invisibility out the ass and Wave Serpents everywhere is one of the toughest armies out there, but that's not what we saw here is it? We're seeing a slightly competitive Eldar list versus a below-average Guard list, with all evidence presented thus far pointing to it being played sub-optimally here.
There is nothing worse than having an army you love and put the time and effort into being faced off by an army thats naturally better than yours because of its codex.
Cool, but that's not what happened here. What happened is that a decent player with a decent list went up against a poor player with a poor list. Eldar have nothing to do with what occurred in this scenario.
Well for a start Guardians are pretty decent. Unless you have ignores cover the chances of them zooming around with their buffed weapon platforms (which are the same price as guard heavies but buffed) then they can be hard to kill. Those heavy weapons do wonders to a mobile squad that can run shoot run. With fleet. I would love to trade my heavy weapons for theirs! Their units are almost always better than any other units equivalent. Mobility, survivability and deadly weapons are an amazing combination. Banshees arent that bad either. A bit wasteful against guard however. Not the best, but not horrifically bad. Just less than meh.
Anyways, think what you will, but I personally think against another faction he wouldnt have felt so hopeless in that fight. Which is all im saying. Eldar are real hope and joy killers. Unless you can make a list to kill theirs in advance. Which isnt always possible.
Swastakowey wrote: Well the tactics bit is all assumption. So unless we see a battle report its better off just leaving it to the list which is all we have to go on.
Only to an extent. When we know exactly what list the players had, which we do, and we have a statement from the IG player saying "the Eldar player killed all my Leman Russes and my CCS-Chimera turn 2" it doesn't exactly take a psychic to figure out how that mistakes were made.
All lists can have bad match ups along with all codices. But its very well known that eldar are by far the most efficient and deadly codex out there.
But only at a high-play level. Do you think an Eldar list consisting of Guardian squads and Howling Banshees is "the most efficient and deadly" list out there? No. Yeah, a full-on Seer-Council GJB spam with fortune and invisibility out the ass and Wave Serpents everywhere is one of the toughest armies out there, but that's not what we saw here is it? We're seeing a slightly competitive Eldar list versus a below-average Guard list, with all evidence presented thus far pointing to the Guard list being played sub-optimally.
There is nothing worse than having an army you love and put the time and effort into being faced off by an army thats naturally better than yours because of its codex.
Cool, but that's not what happened here. What happened is that a decent player with a decent list went up against a poor player with a poor list. Eldar have nothing to do with what occurred in this scenario.
And for the record, the Imperial Guard are one of the scariest match-ups to an Eldar player, second only to Tau. An army that relies almost exclusively on cover saves and speed versus an army that has army-wide ignores cover and LOS-ignoring AP2-3 out the ass? Yeah, Guard players should never be rubbing their butts and wincing after a match with Eldar, even if they lose.
If only all guard players had all the models for all these options all painted up, assembled and ready for every game if eldar happened to show up.
Whilst I am usually one of the first in a conversation to state how OP the eldar are - 'the anti-fun' is a bit harsh!
As long as its not a serp spam (or more than two - at a push 3), playing against eldar is ultimatly more fun than playing against a static IG or Tau gunline, or waiting hours for a horde nid or ork player to complete their movement.
Yes they are by far the most difficult to beat, even without serpents, and if they have taken mass, cheap st6/7 high rof guns on durable platforms its not fun just removing models. But there are a huge amount of eldar builds that are really fun to play against!
The words 'eldar' and 'are' in your title should be switched and a poll put in tbh.
Swastakowey wrote:Anyways, think what you will, but I personally think against another faction he wouldnt have felt so hopeless in that fight. Which is all im saying.
What? You think he would have had a more enjoyable experience against a triptide or missilespam tau list? A guard leafblower? A demon factory?
There are tons of possible things that would have been worse than this from several other codices.
Swastakowey wrote:Just seems like this dude is playing an army he likes.
This is likely true... but.
40k is a game that gives you near infinite choice, but it also has certain basic rules and certain things you sort of have to do. This means that there is a vast, vast, swaths of ways to make lists bad. Of course, there are still tons of ways to make lists that are good and can be fun to play even if you follow the basic principles of the way the game is supposed to be played. "Play what you want, whatever" is likely to end poorly, just like in any game, really. What the OP needs in this case is "play what you want, respecting the fundamentals of the game".
I mean, if what the player wants is to not bring anti-tank weapons, then he needs to understand that 40k is a game with tanks, and "play what he wants" in this case will get him crushed by every single mech list in the game.
If he changes his list to play what he wants with a few reasonable restrictions, then there shouldn't be any problems. Saying "I should be able to field whatever models I want and still not get stomped" is fundamentally against the spirit of 40k.
An army that relies almost exclusively on cover saves and speed versus an army that has army-wide ignores cover and LOS-ignoring AP3 out the ass? Yeah, Guard players should never be rubbing their butts and wincing after a match with Eldar, even if they lose.
I would take a tiny bit of umbrage with this, though. Guard isn't exactly a hard counter to eldar (especially not compared to, say, tau). They do have monstrous creatures, which guard struggle against, and any foot guard list is likely going to have problems with the vast quantity of anti-infantry firepower that eldar can put out. I definitely had my power blobs blown off the table a few times by eldar.
Guard can make lists that can beat good eldar lists, but we're not exactly talking about GK vs. demons or Tau vs. orks level of hard counter, here.
You missed the point alarios. That eldar list wasnt even a 'internet name here" style list. Chances are those sorts of lists arent common where this guy plays and chances are he would have faced a normal list from another opponent instead. I dont know if im explaining it very well though.
As for the list. He had some anti tank (how many tanks did the enemy have?) he had some infantry weapons, he had a mix. It just wasnt the best of the best so his chances of harming a codex of better units was a lot smaller.
Anyways. Thats all I say. I feel you OP. Just dont let them see it in your face. Loose like a man and take it. in time. You will learn how to overcome them. If not, hopefully by then the next edition has come and their codex goes back a bit.
Id just like to stick up for guard in the cover ignoring aspect. Ignores cover on eldar vehicles in particular.
Lets admit straight away that no sane guards player is going to take HWS against eldar.
Now thats out of the way:
The way to get the most efficient use out of ignores cover order against eldar mech is 5 lascannons in a blob. To get 5 lascannons in a blob and for the order you need: 5 lascannons, 5 infantry squads, platoon command squad, company command squad. So without ANY upgrades barring the lascannons you are talking 440pts. 440pts for 5 bs3 cover ignoring lascannons is not good economy.
This whole outrage at guards ignores cover order is totally OTT.
TheSilo wrote: Yes, clearly it was my inexperience (having only played since 3rd edition) and my ally's (having played since 5th edition). In the previous game I allied with the guy hosting (who has played since 2nd edition). So clearly it was just our stupidity and inexperience.
Alone, I had over 50 infantrymen on the board with 1,000 points. Pask and his buddies would have been dead on turn 2, just like my tank commander.
You say you've been playing since 3rd edition, yet your list is garbage, being filled with useless items like grenade launchers, and you apparently have no idea what "bubble-wrap" is. Shining Spears can only kill a Leman Russ in assault. How exactly are they going to assault a Leman Russ when it's literally surrounded in a U-shape formation by guardsmen? There is no physical space for Shining Spears to get into assault with it. So they have to punch through the Guardsmen first, and if they're relying on hit and run to not get stuck in then that gives you free reign to shoot them off the board, which you should be able to easily do with the IG's readily available access to AP3 and AP2.
That Eldar are extremely powerful is a given, and I don't think anyone would disagree. However the problem presented in this thread by you is not a balance problem, it's a learn2play problem.
Well thank you for more of your mean-spirited posts. They're truly helpful. Clearly my decision to field grenade launchers in a TAC list was my doom and downfall. A horrendous mistake on par with Chamberlain's appeasement or Pickett's Charge. I'm very sorry for trying to maximize hits through cheap mortars and frag grenades, stupid me for trying to experiment.
Your previous suggestion for FRF against the shining spears is precisely why the bubble wrap on the tanks opened up. My vanquisher had to move to target the Tau vehicles, the eradicator had to follow, and my twenty conscripts had to move within 12" of the shining spears to rapid fire. You see, as someone who plays in the real world, the battlefield conditions actually change and aren't perfectly optimized to fit your tidy tactical narrative. Trying to seize the opportunity my guard moved forward, hoping to strike hard before they could do their damage. We poured lasgun fire into those units on turn 1. Between my ally and I we had about 70 lasgunners, many with FRF. As I pointed out before, even with rapid fire and FRF we would only manage to kill 4 on average. We didn't have rapid fire and frf on everyone, and only managed to kill 2.
All your theory-crafting is very entertaining and I'm sure it works terribly well in your head and the imaginary battles that you planned. Deciding to go with plasma or melta vets puts serious points constraints on the list, and I would have needed to choose between a mass of infantry or a mech list. Mech vets wouldn't have been able to benefit from any ignores cover orders anyway. A fifty man blob squad would have been a disaster, it's bad enough that the bikes can disengage whenever they like, locking in combat through our shooting phases, but a single assault would completely disrupt a 50 man bubble wrap blob. That entire unit would not be able to shoot, and would need to make pile in moves, taking them out of position. My lascannons would be utterly useless in close combat, and the sheer mass of models means that he can cluster one part of the unit, escaping hits from the majority of them. The squad can either be condense or spread out for bubble wrap, it can't do both, and it's against the rules to have all 50 of them magically make it into combat 12" away on the other side of the unit. Read the rules.
How could I possible take advantage of hit and run? They make the choice whether or not to disengage, if I charge them, then they disengage in time to move/shoot/and assault in their own turn, if they charge me, they hang around in combat with their 3++ armor save through my shooting phase and then disengage. It does not "give you free reign" to shoot them off the table. That's not how it works. If you're going to belittle and harass somebody on the forum at least have the decency to know what the hell you're talking about.
People like you are exactly the problem in this hobby. Taking a game and turning it into "I'm right, you're wrong." It's the attitude that is putting off so many people.
This thread is a good demonstration how codex imbalances make the game less fun for some players and very frustrating at times, especially for new players.
People like you are exactly the problem in this hobby. Taking a game and turning it into "I'm right, you're wrong." It's the attitude that is putting off so many people.
But people refusing to play games based on faction choice, most of the time is due to pre-existing collections or aesthetics, is completely fine and not a problem for the hobby?
As a Tau player, I honestly feel that this kind of attitude has ruined the game for me and made my entire collection sit collecting cobwebs. I started in 5th and played for years with a very under performing army just to get updated to the point where pulling my models out of my bag cause agonized groans.
But honestly, what did you want from this thread.
I figure it was either:
A.) Faction 'X' beat me, what could I do to beat faction 'X' or where did I go wrong.
or
B.) Faction 'X' is bad and all players that play them should feel bad.
You've had a lot of people offer advice, and honestly I can't say anything since I don't have much of an Eldar army and no experience as AM. I just can't really agree with the attitude of "I can never play X faction again" especially when people are offering advice on how to handle it.
People like you are exactly the problem in this hobby. Taking a game and turning it into "I'm right, you're wrong." It's the attitude that is putting off so many people.
But people refusing to play games based on faction choice, most of the time is due to pre-existing collections or aesthetics, is completely fine and not a problem for the hobby?
As a Tau player, I honestly feel that this kind of attitude has ruined the game for me and made my entire collection sit collecting cobwebs. I started in 5th and played for years with a very under performing army just to get updated to the point where pulling my models out of my bag cause agonized groans.
But honestly, what did you want from this thread.
I figure it was either:
A.) Faction 'X' beat me, what could I do to beat faction 'X' or where did I go wrong.
or
B.) Faction 'X' is bad and all players that play them should feel bad.
You've had a lot of people offer advice, and honestly I can't say anything since I don't have much of an Eldar army and no experience as AM. I just can't really agree with the attitude of "I can never play X faction again" especially when people are offering advice on how to handle it.
That is all well and good, but the advice was offered in the most mean spirited condescending way. You ever think that maybe he created this thread to see if other people had similar experiences?
He didn't take an optimized list, I am fairly certain that he knows it, we know it, everyone knows it. There is no reason to bash him over the head with it.
The issue is that such wild imbalance exist in the game and frankly, for Eldar, it is really hard to NOT make a list like that. I mean, you could make the worst possible list to make a point but in terms of even relatively thought out list you aren't going to see much weakness. The IG list presented here wasn't terrible, it wasn't optimized, it was a fairly middling list that was pretty fluffy. The Eldar list wasn't even close to optimized but it is still going to shred most any middling list other armies can produce. There is also this wild assumption that our IG player knew exactly what he was facing off against when he was building his list. Just knowing that you are playing against Eldar can mean a LOT of variations because they can run Mech, MSU, Horde, etc.
TheSilo wrote: Yes, clearly it was my inexperience (having only played since 3rd edition) and my ally's (having played since 5th edition). In the previous game I allied with the guy hosting (who has played since 2nd edition). So clearly it was just our stupidity and inexperience.
Alone, I had over 50 infantrymen on the board with 1,000 points. Pask and his buddies would have been dead on turn 2, just like my tank commander.
You say you've been playing since 3rd edition, yet your list is garbage, being filled with useless items like grenade launchers, and you apparently have no idea what "bubble-wrap" is. Shining Spears can only kill a Leman Russ in assault. How exactly are they going to assault a Leman Russ when it's literally surrounded in a U-shape formation by guardsmen? There is no physical space for Shining Spears to get into assault with it. So they have to punch through the Guardsmen first, and if they're relying on hit and run to not get stuck in then that gives you free reign to shoot them off the board, which you should be able to easily do with the IG's readily available access to AP3 and AP2.
That Eldar are extremely powerful is a given, and I don't think anyone would disagree. However the problem presented in this thread by you is not a balance problem, it's a learn2play problem.
Well thank you for more of your mean-spirited posts. They're truly helpful. Clearly my decision to field grenade launchers in a TAC list was my doom and downfall. A horrendous mistake on par with Chamberlain's appeasement or Pickett's Charge. I'm very sorry for trying to maximize hits through cheap mortars and frag grenades, stupid me for trying to experiment.
He's absolutely telling the truth, even it comes across as harsh. I frankly agree with all he has said.
I'm counting 64 points worth of these mediocre upgrades. For the record, that's 4 Plasma Guns that actually do hard killing, or 6 Meltaguns that are versatile extra firepower that are great as an all round choice. I'd say that 64 points could make the difference between victory and defeat.
Mortars and GLs are tack on upgrades that give you basically nothing effective, no extra roles, just mediocrity and the thought of "why not just bring more Guardsmen".
Your previous suggestion for FRF against the shining spears is precisely why the bubble wrap on the tanks opened up. My vanquisher had to move to target the Tau vehicles, the eradicator had to follow, and my twenty conscripts had to move within 12" of the shining spears to rapid fire.
Except you're wrong. You never probably "had" to. The option to do nothing and hide or sustain a potential defence is almost always there, and you compromised your army by trying to exploit targets which resulted in structural weaknesses opening up. Or by making the wrong decision. If it didn't work or pay off, there's three conclusions you can make. 1) Your list isn't geared properly. 2) You made the wrong decision. 3) Your luck was terrible. You've definitely suffered from 1), and probably 2) to at least some degree.
I played a game today against Dark Eldar. 3 Russes, 2 Vendettas, 3 Chimera Vet squads and an Inquisitor+ mini retinue against a Skimmer barge spam list. I lost 3 of the Russes by the beginning of his turn 2, as well as the Inquisitor + Retinue. They moved in fast and haywired/blastered/lanced them to death, mostly by the first as the latter two methods of killing were accomplished on good luck. I reserved all the Chimeras before the game to explicitly avoid feeding. Arguably if I'd bubblewrapped the Pask Russes and hadn't underestimated the Trueborn Haywirers, even if I had to make do with Vets, I would have stood a way better chance of winning.
Next turn 2 Chimeras came on, and a Vendetta. I had a split decision, and one Chimera squad went for the Kabalite Trueborn that had haywired Pasks Squadron to death. They wiped them out, but in turn got massacred by the Archon, his Incubi and dark lances that popped the Chimera. A tactical error in hindsight.
The remaining Chimera instead dashed up the board out of the way as the Vendettas de-meched the Dark Eldar systematically. He had my objective in TEW, but I could still grab his and force the draw. I didn't have to feed men hopelessly to try score kills like I did with the other Chimera. That isn't 40k. What I did was come extremely close to clearing his objective and almost forcing a draw, only failing because a vehicle explosion from a Raider killed about 3 times the statistical likelihood worth of men and ruined my chances of pushing the Kabs off the objective.
You see, as someone who plays in the real world, the battlefield conditions actually change and aren't perfectly optimized to fit your tidy tactical narrative. Trying to seize the opportunity my guard moved forward, hoping to strike hard before they could do their damage.
Except 1) made this strategy inadvisable and essentially impossible to properly pull off. Arguably, if you'd sustained a more defensive formation, you could have gone for stage-by-stage whittling with slight decreases in firepower at first, hence, 2).
We poured lasgun fire into those units on turn 1.
What if you'd held them back, fired the big guns, and got a turn of non-double tap followed by double tap anyway?
Between my ally and I we had about 70 lasgunners, many with FRF. As I pointed out before, even with rapid fire and FRF we would only manage to kill 4 on average. We didn't have rapid fire and frf on everyone, and only managed to kill 2.
But terrible heavy fire support, and 20 of those Lasgunners were Conscripts, which are laughable factored into that number. Plus, your FRF can't have been properly concentrated as your blobs are too small.
Deciding to go with plasma or melta vets puts serious points constraints on the list,
But at least you can actually effectively kill select targets. You can scatter garbage across a wide field but it'll never be more efficient than digging a bloody great hole and filling it with compressed waste.
and I would have needed to choose between a mass of infantry or a mech list.
Instead you went for an ineffective weird mix of both. Don't tell me it isn't possible because I played semi-competitively for years with a mix.
Mech vets wouldn't have been able to benefit from any ignores cover orders anyway.
Between the Command Vehicle special rule and application of brain cells, it is quite possible.
A fifty man blob squad would have been a disaster, it's bad enough that the bikes can disengage whenever they like, locking in combat through our shooting phases, but a single assault would completely disrupt a 50 man bubble wrap blob. That entire unit would not be able to shoot, and would need to make pile in moves, taking them out of position. My lascannons would be utterly useless in close combat, and the sheer mass of models means that he can cluster one part of the unit, escaping hits from the majority of them. The squad can either be condense or spread out for bubble wrap, it can't do both, and it's against the rules to have all 50 of them magically make it into combat 12" away on the other side of the unit. Read the rules.
Then make it 30 man. Or, add a Priest, and tarpit him hilariously or force him to Hit and Run, followed by imminent death.
How could I possible take advantage of hit and run? They make the choice whether or not to disengage, if I charge them, then they disengage in time to move/shoot/and assault in their own turn, if they charge me, they hang around in combat with their 3++ armor save through my shooting phase and then disengage. It does not "give you free reign" to shoot them off the table. That's not how it works. If you're going to belittle and harass somebody on the forum at least have the decency to know what the hell you're talking about.
There's two probable states this unit is in, in this scenario. 1) Tarpitted, giving you breathing room to massacre everything else. 2) Having hit-and-ran, meaning you can shoot them to death.
In addition, during 1), you can have everything else fall back, shuffle back or regroup into a bubblewrap if need be. Falling back voluntarily is one of the most neglected strategies in 40k.
People like you are exactly the problem in this hobby. Taking a game and turning it into "I'm right, you're wrong." It's the attitude that is putting off so many people.
We get that you're leaning towards the casual part of the spectrum. But quit the nauseating supreme-high-and-mighty-I-spit-at-thou act towards competitive players. Both are reasonable mindsets, people need to stop damning people on the other side of the spectrum on principle.
The game of 40k is so poorly written that "right" and "wrong" exist, not flavors of play. If you take specifically bad units, you are doing it "wrong" if your goal is to have some sort of competitive play; that you'd like to win at least sometimes.
Warhammer is very much a strong mixture of what you play and a how you play it. If you want a game where there is less right and wrong, but more how you play, I'd suggest most other skirmish games on the market. They've taken to that style.
Dark Angels and Chaos Space Marines being tepid while Eldar and Tau being amazing is an example of the game breaking down.
Yeah, someone can point out weakness in army composition or in the way something is used, and that's not the same as slandering your honor.
If the OP wanted useful advice (which it now doesn't seem he does), then we gave it to him. Being forthright and honest is a good thing, not a sign of draconian harshness.
Anyways, he can either accept help and work to improve himself, or he can sit down and whine about game balance and how unfair everything is. I think that decision's already been made, though...
Swastakowey wrote: Just seems like this dude is playing an army he likes.
Yeah, unfortunately 40k isn't a game of "bring what you like" or "bring whatever you have painted" and expect to be competitive, and that's without even considering the imbalance between codices. Even within a given codex there is so much imbalance that the difference between an optimised list and an unoptimised list is quite large.
Things like 3x Grenade Launchers on Vets is not only wasting points, it's wasting the effectiveness of the unit. Vets are one of the few cheap Bs4 options we have, if you're not giving them weapons that exploit their Bs4, you're kind of wasting the entire unit.
You say you had 70 lasgunners, but 40 of those were Conscripts, without even doing the math, you can figure out that it's 120pts worth of models... do you expect 120pts worth of shooting from a tarpit unit to actually do a lot of damage? You need to mix in some AP2/3 with your units (most importantly on the Vets where their Bs4 is best exploited) to make sure you're getting the most of the points you're spending. That's not to say Conscripts are bad, they're a good bubble wrapping unit, but to say "I had 40 lasgunners why aren't I hurting anything!" is looking at it the wrong way.
But unfortunately, not all options are created equal, even a casual glance at the codex shows this.
You can discuss the level of list optimisation with your opponent before the game, but I find this really hard and annoying because while a lot of people might accept 40k does not have balanced options, many people don't and even of those who do, you'll not find a consensus on what are balanced options.
Especially since the value of different options is also dependent on the players, some options are only worth their points in the hands of a general who knows how to use them, some options are worth their points even in the hands of a newbie who only knows to march across the battlefield shooting, some options simply aren't worth their points at all regardless of who is using them. Because of that, you'll almost never reach a consensus on what is a balanced game of 40k...
.... it should be up to the rule writers who have years of personal experience and are receiving feedback from hundreds of gamer's experiences. Of course we know that's not the case, so we're left with this awkward situation where you CAN'T just bring whatever you like and/or have available to you and expect to play a balanced game.
This is largely why I'm loosing steam with 40k. Yeah, I like the models, I like the fluff, but damn it when I play a game I actually want to play a game and not just put down my models and go "pew pew", that got boring after a couple of years.
I understand, but I also feel if he hadn't have rolled horribly, the Tau would've been a bigger threat. Eldar at least sometimes get into close combat. Tau just sit back and wreckhouse from long range, as well as having shots that ignore cover. Idk, I haven't played games against Eldar yet, but if I had to pick, I'd say I hate Tau more.
That's just cause you haven't played vs eldar yet.
Swastakowey wrote: Well for a start Guardians are pretty decent. Unless you have ignores cover the chances of them zooming around with their buffed weapon platforms (which are the same price as guard heavies but buffed) then they can be hard to kill. Those heavy weapons do wonders to a mobile squad that can run shoot run. With fleet. I would love to trade my heavy weapons for theirs! Their units are almost always better than any other units equivalent. Mobility, survivability and deadly weapons are an amazing combination. Banshees arent that bad either. A bit wasteful against guard however. Not the best, but not horrifically bad. Just less than meh.
Anyways, think what you will, but I personally think against another faction he wouldnt have felt so hopeless in that fight. Which is all im saying. Eldar are real hope and joy killers. Unless you can make a list to kill theirs in advance. Which isnt always possible.
Right, and I'm sure somewhere in the World there's an Eldar player ho-humming because he wishes he could have chimeras as a DT in his army instead of Wave Serpents.
That Eldar player is also out of his mind, as is any Guard player who would trade Guardsmen for Guardians. Guardians are "okay". Guardsmen, with the flexibility offered by orders and platoons are one of the best troops choices in the entire game.
If only all guard players had all the models for all these options all painted up, assembled and ready for every game if eldar happened to show up.
"I should be able to take any units I want and make any list I want and be able to have a 50/50 chance of winning against any opponent's list."
You're right, and I agree with you that that is how the game should be. 40K is not compatible with that mindset, though, - and that is not a problem that is exclusive to playing against Eldar. The guy who's model collection consists of nothing but a Warboss, 6 units of slugga boy squads and a single squad of tankbustas is up gak-creek when he comes up against Land Raider spam Blood Angels. That's not the Blood Angel codices' fault.
TheSilo wrote: Clearly my decision to field grenade launchers in a TAC list was my doom and downfall. A horrendous mistake on par with Chamberlain's appeasement or Pickett's Charge. I'm very sorry for trying to maximize hits through cheap mortars and frag grenades, stupid me for trying to experiment.
I'm not going to give you a play-by-play on list building because A) We have a tactics and list building section for a reason, and B) Omega and others have already done so. But, yes, grenade launchers suck.
Your previous suggestion for FRF against the shining spears is precisely why the bubble wrap on the tanks opened up. My vanquisher had to move to target the Tau vehicles, the eradicator had to follow, and my twenty conscripts had to move within 12" of the shining spears to rapid fire. You see, as someone who plays in the real world, the battlefield conditions actually change and aren't perfectly optimized to fit your tidy tactical narrative. Trying to seize the opportunity my guard moved forward, hoping to strike hard before they could do their damage. We poured lasgun fire into those units on turn 1. Between my ally and I we had about 70 lasgunners, many with FRF. As I pointed out before, even with rapid fire and FRF we would only manage to kill 4 on average. We didn't have rapid fire and frf on everyone, and only managed to kill 2.
All your theory-crafting is very entertaining and I'm sure it works terribly well in your head and the imaginary battles that you planned. Deciding to go with plasma or melta vets puts serious points constraints on the list, and I would have needed to choose between a mass of infantry or a mech list. Mech vets wouldn't have been able to benefit from any ignores cover orders anyway. A fifty man blob squad would have been a disaster, it's bad enough that the bikes can disengage whenever they like, locking in combat through our shooting phases, but a single assault would completely disrupt a 50 man bubble wrap blob. That entire unit would not be able to shoot, and would need to make pile in moves, taking them out of position. My lascannons would be utterly useless in close combat, and the sheer mass of models means that he can cluster one part of the unit, escaping hits from the majority of them. The squad can either be condense or spread out for bubble wrap, it can't do both, and it's against the rules to have all 50 of them magically make it into combat 12" away on the other side of the unit.
The topic of this thread as posited by you is that the Eldar codex is overpowered, and you lost a match against them recently because there was just no way for you to cope against the broken invincibility of the Eldar codex. I suggest that your lost because your list is bad and you made poor tactical choices. You're offended by this suggestion, and spend two paragraphs telling me that the Tau player forced you into a position where the Eldar player was able to exploit an opening and cripple you, and that your list was "experimental" and lacked focus, being neither a mech-list nor a blob-list.
What part of this is supposed to convince me that your loss is due to the Eldar player's list being a broken, cheesy invincible monster, rather your list being a poor match-up against his and you not making sound tactical decisions?
Also, let's go ahead and nip this in the bud right now:
People like you are exactly the problem in this hobby. Taking a game and turning it into "I'm right, you're wrong." It's the attitude that is putting off so many people...
Well thank you for more of your mean-spirited posts. They're truly helpful...
If you're going to belittle and harass somebody on the forum...
Look, I'm sorry if the tone of my post has upset you. It's not my intention to upset you, in fact I really don't care about your emotional state one way or another.
That out of the way, insofar as "the problem with this hobby", I'd assert that people like you are more of a problem with this hobby than people like me. How many threads have I made in which the sole purpose of the thread is to complain about how much you hate a faction and the people who play it? You talk about my "mean spirited" words, but is it the Eldar players' fault that their codex is good and others are not? No- in fact they had a crap codex for years. Many of them picked their army because they liked the aesthetic or the fluff, just like you, so how do you think they feel when they read a thread filled with people bashing their army and making whack statements like "I don't play Eldar players!" and "Eldar players don't get games!"? I've been wanting to play Tau forever- I think their fluff is great and I love the way their units look and play- but I don't play them because I don't want to hear the groans and the passive-aggressive comments from other players everytime I crap on them with a Tau army. Do you think that's "healthy" for the hobby?
Swastakowey seems to be a genuinely nice fellow, but he doesn't understand that his coddling attitude is hurting you as a player, not helping you. Yes, Eldar are an extremely good army, possibly even the best in the game. But you know what? The truth is that that's not why you lost, and you need to simply deal with that. You're not playing against a Seer Council/Wave Serpent list, you're playing against a couple farseers and Shining Spears. That is not beyond the Imperial Guard's ability to handle in a match. So instead of creating a thread where a bunch of Guard players can sit around having a pity party and quietly ignore the fact that they themselves play one of the strongest armies in the game, why not have some introspection and contemplate on how you fethed up and how you can win next time? And don't be so sensitive when people point that out.
I made a Blood Angels list last week, played it against a CSM list yesterday and got absolutely wrecked- he fething tabled me at the bottom of turn 3. Shall I follow your example and make a thread and call it "Chaos Space Marines are the Anti-Fun"?
Akiasura wrote: I saw 40k and steep learning curve and just....didn't know what to do with myself.
I haven't been this lost since tunneling was explained to me.
Unfortunately the complexity of 40k comes primarily from figuring out how to best exploit (or not exploit but live with) the imbalance.
In an ideal world, the complexity of 40k would be realising that different units have different purposes, creating an army that best combines those purposes and then employing on field tactics to best exploit that. Unfortunately we have the giant spanner in the works of dealing with large amounts of imbalance which skews those unit purposes.
Akiasura wrote: I saw 40k and steep learning curve and just....didn't know what to do with myself. I haven't been this lost since tunneling was explained to me.
Unfortunately the complexity of 40k comes primarily from figuring out how to best exploit (or not exploit but live with) the imbalance.
In an ideal world, the complexity of 40k would be realising that different units have different purposes, creating an army that best combines those purposes and then employing on field tactics to best exploit that. Unfortunately we have the giant spanner in the works of dealing with large amounts of imbalance which skews those unit purposes.
There is more to the complexity than that. I think that, because this is the internet, top-level play tends to get the most attention, so most of us don't really think about things from beyond that perspective.
In the five games I've played since June, the two that I lost I lost turn 1. The games didn't end turn 1, but they were basically just 5 turns of me dying slowly and horribly. Deployment and round 1 movement is extremely important in 40K, and there's a finer point to it that new players struggle to learn, in my experience.
BlaxicanX wrote: "I should be able to take any units I want and make any list I want and be able to have a 50/50 chance of winning against any opponent's list."
You're right, and I agree with you that that is how the game should be.
Well, even in an ideal world, that still wouldn't be true. 40k is a game of list building to some extent, it's just the imbalance has made it far too much about exploiting the imbalance while list building. A 40k where everything is pretty well balanced still doesn't mean you can bring any list and have a 50/50 chance of winning, it means that each unit has a purpose and if that purpose is fulfilled (through proper army list construction and on field tactics) for both armies on the table then you have a 50/50 chance of winning.
Things like "grenade launchers suck" is an imbalance thing. If the game were balanced it would be "grenade launchers are good under X, Y and Z circumstances", it still wouldn't necessarily mean that taking only grenade launchers = a good army, simply that grenade launchers have a place.
Akiasura wrote: I saw 40k and steep learning curve and just....didn't know what to do with myself. I haven't been this lost since tunneling was explained to me.
Unfortunately the complexity of 40k comes primarily from figuring out how to best exploit (or not exploit but live with) the imbalance.
In an ideal world, the complexity of 40k would be realising that different units have different purposes, creating an army that best combines those purposes and then employing on field tactics to best exploit that. Unfortunately we have the giant spanner in the works of dealing with large amounts of imbalance which skews those unit purposes.
There is more to the complexity than that. I think that, because this is the internet, top-level play tends to get the most attention, so most of us don't really think about things from beyond that perspective.
In the five games I've played since June, the two that I lost I lost turn 1. The games didn't end turn 1, but they were basically just 5 turns of me dying slowly and horribly. Deployment and round 1 movement is extremely important in 40K, and there's a finer point to it that new players struggle to learn, in my experience.
I feel like that comes under "realising the different units have different purposes ... and then employing on field tactics to best exploit that." If you buy a tarpit unit and tanks, but you don't bubble wrap your tanks and/or your opponent "forces" you to move your tanks away from your bubble wrapping, then your on field tactics failed to exploit the purpose of the bubble wrapping unit.
Maybe I've just been in the hobby too long, lol, but it seems to me once you figure out what a unit is supposed to be doing then the on field tactics naturally follow.
Though you're probably right, I'm probably over simplifying it, lol.
Not trying to heat up the comments but I don't think you should blame eldar, blame the list he brought, eldar is some cases are very fun if you play friendly games and in competitive settings, your supposed to win.
Once upon a time in 5th Edition IG, Blood Angels, Space Wolves, and Grey Knights were the top dogs, whereas the likes of Dark Angels and Eldar were sub-par while Necrons and Tau were 'utter garbage,' as I overheard one fellow gamer say. I remember playing an only semi-mechanised IG army with a few Russes, a couple hellhounds, a couple chimeras, and a really ill-equipped blob-squad (not a competitive army) and yet IG frustrated people so much they still refused to play it.
Nowadays Eldar and Tau are the game-breakingly good armies, Necrons are competitive, Space Wolves and Grey Knights are the good MEQ armies, but each is starting to show its age in its own ways; Dark Angels are 'ehhh' and Blood Angels are in a really bad spot. Someday Orks and Sisters of Battle might even be top-tier, Chaos Space Marines and Dark Angels could become solid competitive choices, Tau and Necrons might end up mediocre, and IG and Eldar utter garbage. Then someday after that they'll all switch places again.
This is just a part of being an active 40k player. Sometimes your army will be unfairly powerful; sometimes depressingly bottom-tier. As editions come and go there will be certain factions you always stomp and certain factions you struggle against. Is this fair? Not at all, but it's long been a part of 40k and it's no more unfair than making a pleasant (decent, friendly, good sport) player sit out an entire edition's worth of games because Games Workshop happened to make his faction more powerful than most others. Just keep calm and carry on, and eventually IG will be top dog again and Eldar merely 'okay.'
I'd offer pointers on army composition and whatnot--I think IG has a lot of good tools it can bring to bear against Eldar--but it seems a lot of this sort of advice has already been given and, well, disregarded.
I play Eldar and my friend started to play IG (he is a veteran with armies like BA and GK) this year. Matches are even and he uses Ignore Cover ORDERS (no denying) and double tap weapons to kill fe. bikes. Only thing, he complains about (when playing IG ) is Wave Serpents and i don´t like to cheese them up either...i bring maybe two in a game. I hate Necrons the most, but i still play against them. In the 5th ed. i refused to play them one time, but when the 6th edition came, it was all good again. If someone is cheesing it up (like 6 WS´s), i wouldn´t play them either. BUT, if it´s a regular list, hey, maybe it´s the own list you should be tweaking?
Eihnlazer wrote: I have to admit, i proxy played with the standard seerstar list and it was boring as hell.
Its an easy mode, OP army. no fun to play unless you just get hard ons from stomping most opponents.
We'll yea, seerstars are very competitive and very boring, a list the you shouldn't bring for a friendly setting. They are OP and that's why they are used in competitive settings.
Shouldn't .Yeah just like people shouldn't have played multi riptdie taudar, and demon FMCs in 6th , but everyone did anyway. Eldar wouldn't be a problem, if Kelly didn't make them so much better then anything else and from what I have been told it wasn't the first time he did it with eldar.
Likan Wolfsheim wrote: Once upon a time in 5th Edition IG, Blood Angels, Space Wolves, and Grey Knights were the top dogs, whereas the likes of Dark Angels and Eldar were sub-par while Necrons and Tau were 'utter garbage,' as I overheard one fellow gamer say. I remember playing an only semi-mechanised IG army with a few Russes, a couple hellhounds, a couple chimeras, and a really ill-equipped blob-squad (not a competitive army) and yet IG frustrated people so much they still refused to play it.
Nowadays Eldar and Tau are the game-breakingly good armies, Necrons are competitive, Space Wolves and Grey Knights are the good MEQ armies, but each is starting to show its age in its own ways; Dark Angels are 'ehhh' and Blood Angels are in a really bad spot. Someday Orks and Sisters of Battle might even be top-tier, Chaos Space Marines and Dark Angels could become solid competitive choices, Tau and Necrons might end up mediocre, and IG and Eldar utter garbage. Then someday after that they'll all switch places again.
This is just a part of being an active 40k player. Sometimes your army will be unfairly powerful; sometimes depressingly bottom-tier. As editions come and go there will be certain factions you always stomp and certain factions you struggle against. Is this fair? Not at all, but it's long been a part of 40k and it's no more unfair than making a pleasant (decent, friendly, good sport) player sit out an entire edition's worth of games because Games Workshop happened to make his faction more powerful than most others. Just keep calm and carry on, and eventually IG will be top dog again and Eldar merely 'okay.'
I'd offer pointers on army composition and whatnot--I think IG has a lot of good tools it can bring to bear against Eldar--but it seems a lot of this sort of advice has already been given and, well, disregarded.
Of course depending on the army, you have more chances to roll the dice.
Eldar were OP in 2nd, 3rd (craftworld), 4th, and now 6th/7th for example, because Phil Kelly "Really" likes his Eldar.
They do, but cannot use it. I think it's to let ICs join them and not lose BF.
Battle Focus lets them run, but jetbikes cannot run, just turbo-boost.
In 6th, the best a bike can do is:
Move, turbo, assault-move
or
Move, shoot, assault-move
Units that can Run can do both if they have Battle focus.
But, in 7th, they cannot turbo and assault-move in the same turn?
I actually really like the OP's list. I hope that if I played him, I brought a list he'd have fun playing against, even if I brought my Eldar.
Most people agree Eldar are OP. Most people agree that the matchup wouldn't be fun for the Guard player. After that, though, there is disagreement.
OP, and others, contend that this list shows that Eldar, as a force, aren't fun, and this is an example as to why.
I, and others, contend that this example doesn't implicate Eldar as a whole, as its not necessarily representative.
Is that a good summary of everything so far?
From that, it seems worth noting that he Eldar list is a min-maxxed list (it is spam, although id argue its not an OP unit chosen for spam/ not a very 'maxxed' list). The Guard list was a TAC beer & pretzels list.
I usually hate the former regardless of codex, and love the latter. Its a lot more fun for me to throw some units on the table and just see what happens, for me, than to have planned out through t5 before the first die is cast, and see the plan through fruition. Other people are the reverse. Different strokes for different folks.
Perhaps the problem is who you played? As I posted earlier, what if you hit a similar list from another codex (Raptors + Sorcs from CSM, as I posted earlier, would probably be even rougher, fishing for invis instead of fortune)?
Would OP enjoy something more like this:
Rangers
Guardians
Hawks
Dragons in Falcon
Some PL ?
With some Eldar options being downright broken right now, most of the worst WAAC and other crap will probably be seen in Eldar, but that isn't all Eldar have to offer. They do have the problem of being entirely dependant on controlling the engagement (outside WAAC serpent/knights/jetbikes) to be effective, which can feel rough, and Psykers are now higher risk/ higher reward with the new Invis, but I truly believe a lot of fun can be had for the OP playing against the right Eldar player, even using his current list. Especially using his current list.
Spam is a problem in any codex, yes. And Eldar are OP, yes. But I firmly believe Eldar can still be good at friendly levels.
Side note - how many battle reports do you see that have non-WAAC Eldar? The .ore competitive people gravitate to the forums, and those looking for a pub stomp will always be around. Those will be a serious problem in any game or meta. But 40k isn't a strong technical game, but being one won't fix all these problems.
A second note - Eldar only dominated the second half of sixth. For over half the edition, I was repeatedly warned away from Eldar, because, while they had some nice tricks, their army as a whole was quite flat. Now, though, almost everyone looking to start 40k is told that Eldar is right for them. Big change.
They do, but cannot use it. I think it's to let ICs join them and not lose BF.
Battle Focus lets them run, but jetbikes cannot run, just turbo-boost.
In 6th, the best a bike can do is:
Move, turbo, assault-move or
Move, shoot, assault-move
Units that can Run can do both if they have Battle focus.
But, in 7th, they cannot turbo and assault-move in the same turn?
There's also
Move, shoot, assault, H&R
If you turbo boost, I don't believe you can do the assault-jump move:
" Controlling their Bikes at such speeds takes all the riders’ concentration and skill, however. Bikes and Jetbikes therefore cannot shoot, charge or execute any other voluntary action until the end of their turn after Turbo-boosting."
They do, but cannot use it. I think it's to let ICs join them and not lose BF.
Battle Focus lets them run, but jetbikes cannot run, just turbo-boost.
In 6th, the best a bike can do is:
Move, turbo, assault-move or
Move, shoot, assault-move
Units that can Run can do both if they have Battle focus.
But, in 7th, they cannot turbo and assault-move in the same turn?
There's also
Move, shoot, assault, H&R
If you turbo boost, I don't believe you can do the assault-jump move:
" Controlling their Bikes at such speeds takes all the riders’ concentration and skill, however. Bikes and Jetbikes therefore cannot shoot, charge or execute any other voluntary action until the end of their turn after Turbo-boosting."
This is what I meant, not battle focus. The move, shoot, and 2d6 move back into cover.
The hit and run point is that he can easily stay in combat through all of my shooting phases, only disengaging at the end of my assault phase. So shooting them isn't a viable option.
And to my original point with this thread, that playing against Eldar is not fun. I tried to play the campaign mission and prefer to use more casual games. I could have easily taken 150 infantry models and just wrapped the objectives I was defending in unholy amounts of infantry, if my goal was to Waac. It didn't help that the custom mission was written so only infantry could take objectives, the guy plopped his bikes on the table and convinced the DM that bikes should count too.
In all seriousness OP, if you are looking for a balanced game that allows you to field whatever army you like and have a reasonable chance of winning... You are playing the wrong game. 40K will never be the game you want.
Not to go too far off topic....but 40k is an absurdly easy game to play outside of actual list building. Which, for a long time, I also thought was absurdly easy until I went to warseer and saw some of the....apologetic players there.
Unless you are handicapping yourself financially or for fluff reasons, building a list takes about 1 hour for new players. For veterans, it's more likely a few minutes.
Playing the game requires a vague knowledge of what's dangerous for each codex and list. Often you see a few soft options in most pick up games that can be safely ignored.
The most complicated part of 40k is knowing the rule book...to think this game has a steep learning curve is just baffling.
I'm one of those players who would be viewed as an anti-fun player by the OP. I understand some people want a fun fluffy game. That's why I ask them what time of game they want before hand.
Random Dude wrote: I'm one of those players who would be viewed as an anti-fun player by the OP. I understand some people want a fun fluffy game. That's why I ask them what time of game they want before hand.
That last sentence makes you the ideal gamer. Open to playing in a way that leaves both people happy.
Its how we make the game inviting to all skill levels and players where I am. Simply ask, never assume.
Random Dude wrote: I'm one of those players who would be viewed as an anti-fun player by the OP. I understand some people want a fun fluffy game. That's why I ask them what time of game they want before hand.
That last sentence makes you the ideal gamer. Open to playing in a way that leaves both people happy.
Its how we make the game inviting to all skill levels and players where I am. Simply ask, never assume.
I wish everyone would do it. Do Eldar players have to take Wave Serpents all the time? No. Do I have to take Riptides all the time? No.
Random Dude wrote: I'm one of those players who would be viewed as an anti-fun player by the OP. I understand some people want a fun fluffy game. That's why I ask them what time of game they want before hand.
That last sentence makes you the ideal gamer. Open to playing in a way that leaves both people happy.
Its how we make the game inviting to all skill levels and players where I am. Simply ask, never assume.
I wish everyone would do it. Do Eldar players have to take Wave Serpents all the time? No. Do I have to take Riptides all the time? No.
Pretty much. And likewise, do eldar players need to take less wave serpents every time? Do tau need to leave their riptides home every time?
Nope. Compromise is key. If one compromises, the other will soon follow. This creates a good gaming atmosphere. Regardless of the game.
From my experience, it's almost never the game. It's usually the player(s) that determines if you have a fun experience or not. I play IG, Eldar, CSM, and a bunch of other armies, and as far as I can see in my community, if ever people avoid playing someone, it's because of that individual person, not the game or codex. I would agree that the Eldar is really strong in the edition of 40k, but not for every single build. I imagine it will get boring (for both the player and the opponent) to play exactly the same way every time. So in a non-competitive environment, what Random Dude said is pretty relevant. Especially so in a campaign situation. I tend to have fun winning or losing, playing Eldar or IG or whichever, against whichever army. Of course, there have been exceptions. Then again, I usually have some great people to play with, and it's all great fun.
Random Dude wrote: Its how we make the game inviting to all skill levels and players where I am. Simply ask, never assume. I wish everyone would do it. Do Eldar players have to take Wave Serpents all the time? No. Do I have to take Riptides all the time? No.
Random Dude wrote: Its how we make the game inviting to all skill levels and players where I am. Simply ask, never assume.
I wish everyone would do it. Do Eldar players have to take Wave Serpents all the time? No. Do I have to take Riptides all the time? No.
Does GW have to write horribly broken rules? No.
Ruining a good moment here dude...
Spunky Bass, bang on too. All on the player. Good players, good games. Sour players, sour games. Unfortunately it takes two good players to make a good game, but only one sour player to make a sour game. Takes effort.
I will preface this post by stating that Eldar clearly have the strongest stand-alone codex around.
That said, Guard/AM, are more than equipped with tools to take down every the best Eldar army. Their access to allies, orders, psykers and cheap resource effective units makes them an absolute powerhouse against almost any army an Eldar player can throw up.
The OP's list looks like a friendly list for a club game. The Eldar players list looks like a gimmick list, that I would expect to run riot against the AM list. He did get lucky rolling fortune (he SHOULD have rolled for Invisibility).
It sounds as though the OP, had he been running a stronger list would have been able to take care of the spears. Throw an Inquisitor into that blob, and they don't run away. Prescience those lascannons and issue orders, and you'll start dropping some of the spears. Include a Wyvern or two, and start piling on wounds. Include a Pask-Punisher, and he will shred a few of Spears each turn.
Don't turn up to a knife fight with a spoon. Take your lickings, do some thinking, and you'll come up with an answer for whatever keeps beating you. You're not going to win games by complaining online and rambling about how you're hard done by with what's probably the 2nd/3rd best codex around at the moment.
That said, if you're going to be one of those players that cries cheese and refuses to play against an army because you think you can't win... Your opponent won't want to play a game against you either. Nobody likes a sore loser, especially the guy who is tabling you.
Bharring wrote: I disagree. The OP played the wrong player, not the wrong game.
40k has a wide variety of players with very different reasons for enjoying the game. Some metas would love his list.
I would love to play the OP. From his posts etc he sounds like a lot of fun to play. Plus it would still be a challenge for my armies haha.
It does have a lot to do with the players and what they want from the game more than anything else.
The problem is the extreme lack of balance in 40k causes us to blame the players far more than we should.
I wouldn't describe myself as "WAAC", but I definitely play to win. If I didn't play to win, I'd get bored very fast as it would simply become an excuse to line up my models on a table.
If I'm playing against someone who I know doesn't play to win, sure, I can just not try very hard and occasionally do intentionally wrong things to avoid trouncing them. But in the list building stage, I do find it kind of hard to self nerf my army because it's simply in my nature to look at the options and see what is and isn't best. I do it without even thinking about it (other than some weird loophole lists, it's usually pretty obvious which is the better of 2 options in 40k which is really a testament to the internal imbalance).
Not playing hard is one thing, I can deal with that and you come across it in all games. But self nerfing your army due to the terrible imbalance is a fault of the game, not the gamer, at least IMO.
Bharring wrote: I disagree. The OP played the wrong player, not the wrong game.
40k has a wide variety of players with very different reasons for enjoying the game. Some metas would love his list.
I would love to play the OP. From his posts etc he sounds like a lot of fun to play. Plus it would still be a challenge for my armies haha.
It does have a lot to do with the players and what they want from the game more than anything else.
The problem is the extreme lack of balance in 40k causes us to blame the players far more than we should.
I wouldn't describe myself as "WAAC", but I definitely play to win. If I didn't play to win, I'd get bored very fast as it would simply become an excuse to line up my models on a table.
If I'm playing against someone who I know doesn't play to win, sure, I can just not try very hard and occasionally do intentionally wrong things to avoid trouncing them. But in the list building stage, I do find it kind of hard to self nerf my army because it's simply in my nature to look at the options and see what is and isn't best. I do it without even thinking about it (other than some weird loophole lists, it's usually pretty obvious which is the better of 2 options in 40k which is really a testament to the internal imbalance).
Not playing hard is one thing, I can deal with that and you come across it in all games. But self nerfing your army due to the terrible imbalance is a fault of the game, not the gamer, at least IMO.
... I dont know anyone that doesnt try to win. I also dont know anyone who takes a list that hamstrings their enemy. Take a fair list that matches your enemy then fight hard.
That's my point. What I would call a fair IG list is still something more optimised than what the OP brought to the table. Then you have some spammy fluff lists that are significantly less powerful than other spammy fluff lists. Which one is fair and which one is not?
Trying to "match your opponent", IMO, is silly. I don't know how well optimised the opponent's force might be. I don't know how capable my opponent might be of actually exploiting the list they've chosen on the table top itself.
That's my point. What I would call a fair IG list is still something more optimised than what the OP brought to the table. Then you have some spammy fluff lists that are significantly less powerful than other spammy fluff lists. Which one is fair and which one is not?
Trying to "match your opponent", IMO, is silly. I don't know how well optimised the opponent's force might be. I don't know how capable my opponent might be of actually exploiting the list they've chosen on the table top itself.
You and your opponent define a fair list.
Well thats your fault for a lack of communication. I personally discuss my lists weeks in advance and my opponent and I set up the board to suit our scenario and we are both clear on what units each of us are taking etc.
If you arent gonna talk about your lists before the game then you are gonna run into problems.
If you discuss and plan, you will not run into problems. The solution is very simple. Even when playing people I dont know we talk before the game at the very least. Once we played one game we exchange numbers and go from there so next time we can make the game better.
Swastakowey wrote: ... I dont know anyone that doesnt try to win. I also dont know anyone who takes a list that hamstrings their enemy. Take a fair list that matches your enemy then fight hard.
Its simple really. Anyone can do it.
How do you propose to take a fair list for my enemy when I may not even have met them? Should we be expected to make lists that are fair against all armies on the power scale from charge of the light brigade rough riders to triptides and heldrakes and everythign in between (and beyond)? You'd want to have at least 5 lists based on power scale alone (let alone other lists you might want to play) and would need to take at least triple the points worth of models to have enough different lists to cover that.
Swastakowey wrote: ... I dont know anyone that doesnt try to win. I also dont know anyone who takes a list that hamstrings their enemy. Take a fair list that matches your enemy then fight hard.
Its simple really. Anyone can do it.
How do you propose to take a fair list for my enemy when I may not even have met them? Should we be expected to make lists that are fair against all armies on the power scale from charge of the light brigade rough riders to triptides and heldrakes and everythign in between (and beyond)? You'd want to have at least 5 lists based on power scale alone (let alone other lists you might want to play) and would need to take at least triple the points worth of models to have enough different lists to cover that.
I have only played about 20 people without meeting them in my life. Usually it was as simple as reducing the points so we could quickly change up lists to match. This one guy last year had no Aircraft or AA. So I simply reduced the points and took out my aircraft. Was pretty easy. Outside of that, no problems.
So yea, a little talk goes a long way.
Alternatively you could be lazy and just have a crappy game. Or play another game. The choices are there for you to decide
How would you modify an IG Armoured Battle Group or Necron AV13/flyer list for someone with minimal anti-tank? or with a bad list? Would cutting out two of the six scythes do it, even though there were still 4 left, 6 barges and 2 CCBs? Methinks it would take a bit more adjusting so not quite as simple as you'd like to make it out to be.
Its not my problem to fix your issues. Stop asking me.
I fix mine with the people that matter. The people facing me from the other side of the battlefield.
I mean, bring up odd situations all you want. Communication is the only thing that will fix your games (if you dont enjoy them). If you dont want to communicate, then reap the benefits of that decision. No point waiting on GW mate, because they aint gonna do crap for ya.
You said you thought it was easy, I'm just pointing out that it often isn't. If I want to play someone at a lower power level than I'd ordinarily play at, I need to take a completely different list - that's my point. Cutting out my flyers is 600 points. Cutting out my armour is another 700 points. That doesn't leave much of a list left.
Yes playing a high powered list against a low powered list is going to be a bad game for everyone involved - a situation I've never been in because it's obvious up front what a player wants and what their list can do. That situation existing is 100% GWs fault. Players can try to work around it but it's far from convenient when you have to carry dozens or hundreds of models with you.
edit: carry not curry. Curry is always convenient.
It is easy. I could balance whatever lists I felt like. I aint gonna do it because you want me to prove a point. If you hate the game balance so much, why make a list with so many flyers etc in it?
May as well keep fueling the inbalance arms race if you do stuff like that.
Think what you will dude, but it is easy. Just have a think first.
Its simple.
Or play another game... Plenty of ways around it.
As long as a player is playing 40k, I will blame him for anything he does to ruin the game after game 1 has been settled. Call me harsh, but I have never had to complain to anyone. Simply because talking works. In my experience. If yours differ, work around it.
I prefer to play at a cut throat high power level, unless people are trying their damnedest to win it's not that fun for me. I *can* play at a lower power level but it's not my preferred option.
You're blaming me for the imbalance here rather than GW? *boggle* I said I wouldn't play the list against someone without a similarly competitive list so it's not douchy in the slightest. The problem is you think it's so easy to modify it to a substantially lower powerlevel, I'm saying it would take bringing a lot of extra models and completely change the playstyle of the list.
That's my point. What I would call a fair IG list is still something more optimised than what the OP brought to the table. Then you have some spammy fluff lists that are significantly less powerful than other spammy fluff lists. Which one is fair and which one is not?
Trying to "match your opponent", IMO, is silly. I don't know how well optimised the opponent's force might be. I don't know how capable my opponent might be of actually exploiting the list they've chosen on the table top itself.
You and your opponent define a fair list.
Well thats your fault for a lack of communication. I personally discuss my lists weeks in advance and my opponent and I set up the board to suit our scenario and we are both clear on what units each of us are taking etc.
If you arent gonna talk about your lists before the game then you are gonna run into problems.
If you discuss and plan, you will not run into problems. The solution is very simple. Even when playing people I dont know we talk before the game at the very least. Once we played one game we exchange numbers and go from there so next time we can make the game better.
Weeks in advance? Here I was thinking this was supposed to be a game not a diplomatic exercise
But seriously, what you describe sounds absolutely terrible to me and a completely un-fun way to fix a crappy game.
That's my point. What I would call a fair IG list is still something more optimised than what the OP brought to the table. Then you have some spammy fluff lists that are significantly less powerful than other spammy fluff lists. Which one is fair and which one is not?
Trying to "match your opponent", IMO, is silly. I don't know how well optimised the opponent's force might be. I don't know how capable my opponent might be of actually exploiting the list they've chosen on the table top itself.
You and your opponent define a fair list.
Well thats your fault for a lack of communication. I personally discuss my lists weeks in advance and my opponent and I set up the board to suit our scenario and we are both clear on what units each of us are taking etc.
If you arent gonna talk about your lists before the game then you are gonna run into problems.
If you discuss and plan, you will not run into problems. The solution is very simple. Even when playing people I dont know we talk before the game at the very least. Once we played one game we exchange numbers and go from there so next time we can make the game better.
Weeks in advance? Here I was thinking this was supposed to be a game not a diplomatic exercise
But seriously, what you describe sounds absolutely terrible to me and a completely un-fun way to fix a crappy game. I'd sooner invent my own rules, use rules from a different game or just use an older edition of the rules.
Cool you do that.
I only do it weeks an advance because we enjoy our games to be exactly as planned, its a lot of fun planning ahead like that. If its convenient we can do it in a few minutes. But where is the fun in that.
That's pretty much the point, there is no fun available if you do it like that ; p Sadly that's a very common playstyle - pick up games at a club or shop.
Yonan wrote: I prefer to play at a cut throat high power level, unless people are trying their damnedest to win it's not that fun for me. I *can* play at a lower power level but it's not my preferred option.
You're blaming me for the imbalance here rather than GW? *boggle* I said I wouldn't play the list against someone without a similarly competitive list so it's not douchy in the slightest. The problem is you think it's so easy to modify it to a substantially lower powerlevel, I'm saying it would take bringing a lot of extra models and completely change the playstyle of the list.
Cool. You get boggled mate. I will blame the player. The one who chose to play the game, and then chose to play it a certain way.
Not the rubbish company who simply offered you some rules to mess around with.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yonan wrote: That's pretty much the point, there is no fun available if you do it like that ; p
I never said it has to take weeks. It takes minutes if you want.
We discuss terrain, maps, scenarios, narrative etc. We enjoy it. The balancing takes minutes.
Going over the what happens before the game starts takes a few minutes alone and that is just one thing without getting in to specific codex rule questions or stupid stuff like chaos self ally matrix. With seting up the table it could take over an hour to do. By then the next group of people would want the table for themselfs.
The shouting matches I've seen at some FLGSs does not lead me to believe its that quick and easy. Heck, look at the rule disputes here on Dakka. Now put those in the middle of a game. Some people have very different ideas of what makes 40K fun and one minute isn't going to change that. That necessity of pre game negotiations is inexcusable.
There will always be disagreements. A game of 40k requires two+ *people*. As long as two people are involved, there will be a chance for conflict.
Some people are looking for a beer & pretzels game. Some people are looking for a tactical face-off. And some people are looking to feed their egos.
If a beer & pretzel player plays a beer & pretzel player, they'll probably both have fun. If a competitive player played a competitive player they'll both have fun. Even if the rules were tighter, when a beer & pretzels player plays a competitive player, there is a much bigger chance of one or both not enjoying it. Because they're playing different games.
Neither the b&p player nor the comp player are 'ruining the hobby'. 40k is big enough to have both. And some people will fit both categories at different times. Neither is better than the other. I have fun playing players from both camps.
Two players come to mind in this discussion. Hawk, a local Nids player, has always kicked my ass. Aside from an Apoc and a team game, every time I have played against him he has obliterated me (oddly enough, I can beat those that beat him). But I have loved every game he's been in ('Shadow in the Warp harder!' '[Lol] I laughed. It counts. Guardians fail on a 9, if the Farseer is in Shadows.'). They've simply been fun (although we do dispute rules - Area vs tLOS is our eternal debate.
Another local player (not naming) I've never enjoyed playing. He's not hard to beat, but he just comes across as an asshat. Things like taking a Heldrake and Be'lakor in a 1k against a new player with no AA. I don't think I've ever enjoyed playing him, and not for lack of winning, certainly.
Both players have a 4" gamers inch it seems, but one is always fun and the other is not. The players are by far the biggest decider of whether or not the game is enjoyable, not the rules set.
Some people want 'fair' games. Hard to quantify, but the answer seems to coalasce quickly in the meta if you pay attention.
Other people want skull-cracking competitiveness. This is great too.
Still others want to drop models on the table, and just see what happens. This is my favorite, but other players hate the idea.
All of these players make the game better. Some matchups are better than others (OP would probably rather face my demi company marines than the tourney list I faced last night. Others in this thread would prefer the tourney list). With a healthy meta, where people get along and recognize there are different types of players, this can all work out.
Another group of players would be the pub-stompers of old. They enjoy crushing other players. Not the biggest group, but they do exist. They only enjoy the game if their opponent gets destroyed without a chance. These guys are the only group I'd like to remove from the game. Fortunately, you can always just not play them. But they stomp newbies, and make everyone want to quit. I don't think we've seen any of these in this thread.
Rapidly becoming not the case. I wish I could say "sadly" but GW needs to get their heads out their behinds. The rest of your post was pretty much spot on imo.
I don't know about you, but I did't bring my whole collection so I can tailor my list to fit what my opponent might have. I would bring a reasonable TAC list and hope for the best... and sometimes that best is triple heldrakes or triptide. That's not fun. (And now deamon summoning deamons, LOW's and super psykers against my non psyker SOB army.)
That's the game's fault, not the players.
I agree Eldar are an OP army, they can be defeated, and sometimes you can tactically play completely correctly, and still lose just because of the dice gods.
I need to link my opponents to this thread so they will know my Eldar will auto win
In regards of blaming GW, I really don't care. I've played 40K for 25 years now and each edition has had its share of issues. Some of the issues now are unique to this edition, but 40K has nowhere been a completely balanced game in any edition. I enjoy the fluff, models, painting, cool terrain, rolling dice and use 40K in which to enjoy my hobby.
Nearly all of my gaming falls into 2 categories: tourneys and pick up games. I rarely preplan with a certain person to link up with at the FLGS. I also play in two locations and the style of play is different: one is more tourney styled and the other is not. These days, I tend to bring 2 lists with me-one is a fun list based upon the Highlander formats (do a quick search and you can easily find it) and the other may be a bit more tourney related. Generally, I don't bring a LoW unless someone specifically indicates they want to face one.
It takes me a couple of minutes meeting with someone at the FLGS on what type of game they want to play and then I pull out the appropriate list and models. By taking this little bit of extra time before arriving and talking with my opponent, the games are enjoyable.
For tourneys, I already know the parameters and bring just the models for the tourney.
As far as Eldar being anti-fun, not much I can really say to change a person's mind, but I think we all have certain things in this game we find un fun.
Some of the issues now are unique to this edition,
RT jester list banned as being to OP 2ed eldar dominate with their super exarchs, super troops , super weapons , tanks that pop up from behind LoS blocking terrain and then go back with only thing that can hurt those tanks being overwatch, but at -4BS , because of loop hole in the rules that let eldar falcon do a whole move back and forth and then pop up.
3ed The starcannon edition
4th The circus edtion. Much tears from eldar after star cannons get nerfed
5th Eldar stop dominating when GK and necron show up. People are still wining large tournaments with them with footdar lists
6th taudar. seer star. baron star .
7th tau nerfed, demons nerfed. eldar get their shoting while jinking nerfed.
Sure feels like eldar being OP is a problem of 7th ed only.
It takes me a couple of minutes meeting with someone at the FLGS on what type of game they want to play and then I pull out the appropriate list and models. By taking this little bit of extra time before arriving and talking with my opponent, the games are enjoyable.
that would only work if you were the owner of the store and had a 10k points collection of eldar models in the storage area. How many people own
not to mantion carry huge collections of models for any army ?
The players are by far the biggest decider of whether or not the game is enjoyable, not the rules set.
I have never seen anyone buy an army for any other table top system pay as much for it as a w40k army and then find out that the army never works or that the rules that make the army don't work. Never. I have seen people start DA terminator armies and quit the game. We had a good friend start w40k and find out that no matter what he does and how much he buys, he will never win against any of our armies. Warmahordes, infinity , X-wing , the WWII table tops my boyfriend plays have no such problems as w40k. I have never seen someone complain that their casual army lost, because the rules are stupid or that the opposing army was not casual.
Some of the issues now are unique to this edition,
RT jester list banned as being to OP 2ed eldar dominate with their super exarchs, super troops , super weapons , tanks that pop up from behind LoS blocking terrain and then go back with only thing that can hurt those tanks being overwatch, but at -4BS , because of loop hole in the rules that let eldar falcon do a whole move back and forth and then pop up.
3ed The starcannon edition
4th The circus edtion. Much tears from eldar after star cannons get nerfed
5th Eldar stop dominating when GK and necron show up. People are still wining large tournaments with them with footdar lists
6th taudar. seer star. baron star .
7th tau nerfed, demons nerfed. eldar get their shoting while jinking nerfed.
Sure feels like eldar being OP is a problem of 7th ed only.
It takes me a couple of minutes meeting with someone at the FLGS on what type of game they want to play and then I pull out the appropriate list and models. By taking this little bit of extra time before arriving and talking with my opponent, the games are enjoyable.
that would only work if you were the owner of the store and had a 10k points collection of eldar models in the storage area. How many people own
not to mantion carry huge collections of models for any army ?
The players are by far the biggest decider of whether or not the game is enjoyable, not the rules set.
I have never seen anyone buy an army for any other table top system pay as much for it as a w40k army and then find out that the army never works or that the rules that make the army don't work. Never. I have seen people start DA terminator armies and quit the game. We had a good friend start w40k and find out that no matter what he does and how much he buys, he will never win against any of our armies. Warmahordes, infinity , X-wing , the WWII table tops my boyfriend plays have no such problems as w40k. I have never seen someone complain that their casual army lost, because the rules are stupid or that the opposing army was not casual.
I think you took something out of context. Yes, every edition had issues. Are you claiming Eldar being OP is the only issue? I have played every edition and there have been all sorts of unique issues. In 7th, take a look at electronic and paper codexes. They all don't state the same thing which is unique to 7th. Folks don't like Eldar? Not going to try and change the opinion of someone who has already made up their mind.
I don't own a shop and have no problem packing a bag and bringing two styles of army lists to get a game in. I do have @ 15000 points of painted Eldar and there is no way I am bringing them all. I guess I am easy going as I don't have issues getting a game in. I love the Highlander format and can get in great games when I bring something like this.
I enjoy the hobby and still can have fun at the GTs as well as teaching a new player the game of 40K.
Are you claiming Eldar being OP is the only issue?
I may missunderstand something here. But to me being OP since RT and better then any other army out there in seve editions seems like something kind of important in a topic about eldar being unfun to play against. Eldar were more offten then not at the core of problems of editions.
3ed was the Star Cannon edition . in 2ed hero hammer was king and eldar had more powerful heros for cheaper then other factions. Circus turned 4 in to an edition of eldar vs the anti cirucs armies . in 6th deathstars ,ally and super D weapons were a problem and what did eldar have ? the best deathstars , the taudar and eldar super friends ally formations and 4 D templates on a super walker that fit in to a 1500army easily. 7th is the same.7th is about grinding missions cards as fast as possible with MSU units. And eldar MSU are either super cheap and super fast . Or super fast and super resilient. eldar have no missions they can't do and no counter builds unless someone tailores , while eldar themselfs are a hardconter to many armies without tailoring.
I don't own a shop and have no problem packing a bag and bringing two styles of army lists to get a game in.
Ok so you would need to live on top of the shop or own something like a car. I have an am army and it has fewer tanks then 1 eldar army runs and it is impossible to transport unless my boyfriend helps me.
I guess I am easy going as I don't have issues getting a game in. I
Must be fun to play eldar. You can be "easy going" then. Play another army against them for 4-5 years and then we can talk about how fun eldar are.
Are you claiming Eldar being OP is the only issue?
I may missunderstand something here. But to me being OP since RT and better then any other army out there in seve editions seems like something kind of important in a topic about eldar being unfun to play against. Eldar were more offten then not at the core of problems of editions.
3ed was the Star Cannon edition . in 2ed hero hammer was king and eldar had more powerful heros for cheaper then other factions. Circus turned 4 in to an edition of eldar vs the anti cirucs armies . in 6th deathstars ,ally and super D weapons were a problem and what did eldar have ? the best deathstars , the taudar and eldar super friends ally formations and 4 D templates on a super walker that fit in to a 1500army easily. 7th is the same.7th is about grinding missions cards as fast as possible with MSU units. And eldar MSU are either super cheap and super fast . Or super fast and super resilient. eldar have no missions they can't do and no counter builds unless someone tailores , while eldar themselfs are a hardconter to many armies without tailoring.
I don't own a shop and have no problem packing a bag and bringing two styles of army lists to get a game in.
Ok so you would need to live on top of the shop or own something like a car. I have an am army and it has fewer tanks then 1 eldar army runs and it is impossible to transport unless my boyfriend helps me.
I guess I am easy going as I don't have issues getting a game in. I
Must be fun to play eldar. You can be "easy going" then. Play another army against them for 4-5 years and then we can talk about how fun eldar are.
After 25 years of playing 40K, I have zero issues playing against any army in 40K. Over the years, I have owned nearly every army GW ever released and have played against and with Eldar in all 7 editions.
And yes, I do own a car. In the U.S., adults owning a car is not an uncommon occurrence. I utilize an Army Transport case and swap out foam trays as needed in order to not have to take an entire collection.
Some folks not liking to play against Eldar- fair enough. There is a fairly extensive list of things that folks have not liked over each and every edition of 40K. I don't like playing against proxied and unpainted armies. But I have to remain flexible as it takes two people to play the game. Same goes for various army builds over the years, but I learn what I am contending with and adapt.
amhhs wrote: My friends told me today that If I start playing again (id pick eldar) I would find myself "without people to play with"... They can't be that bad.... especially since my friends all play either necrons or tau. Wish someone could talk sense into them...
you never "beat:" eldar. you only survive. in 6th you had the chance to play escalation and laugh with your warhounds str D doom cannons wiping out his units regardless of the saves he brought to the field. now you arent even guaranteed to do that much.
eldar codex is B R O K E N broken and i refuse to play eldar ever. if my store owner fields his eldar im forfeiting the match or im going to simply yolo at him in a banzai charge until the match ends as victory is basically impossible.
i hope eldar players enjoy having fun with their armies playing among themselves i wont be joining you.
i think that if GW want to continue with the eldar as a race they need to radically rethink their approach to the book, or kill it outright. thats right no more eldar codex i said it. if GW kills the eldar codex or nerfs it into the ground with massive points hikes and relic re-writes that would also be sufficient. eldar are suppose to be a race of few. an elite strike team. jack up prices. and ya know what remove the wave serpent. night spinner fine, and make the falcon the troop carrier of the eldar.
Well... I gotta' say. That might be the biggest over reaction I've seen. I learned a long time ago that you just have to get creative against certain lists. Eldar as opponents has helped me build what I now think is a fearsome all comers list that can do especially well against Eldar. And Chaos is no top tier codex.
I've only run into one build that i find difficult to beat no matter what army I play and it isn't Eldar. So I am just surprised at the venom.
Swastakowey wrote: If you hate the game balance so much, why make a list with so many flyers etc in it?
What if you happen to like flyers? There are formations like the Scion Airborne Assault formation and the Forgeworld Elysian drop-lists, that require you to take X amount of flyers, and are designed to appeal to players who happen to like that kind of model.
There are armored lists that are designed to cater to people who like tanks and vehicle lists a lot.
What if Riptides happen to be your favorite unit and you've spent hours lovingly and painstakingly painting them?
Wave Serpents?
Rough Riders?
Why do you think that it's okay for you to use the units that you happen to like, and have spent lots of time on, because they might be gak on the tabletop, yet others need to limit themselves and deny themselves the units they may happen to greatly enjoy so that the guy on the other side table who brought a weaker list can have a more even chance of winning?
Your argument strikes me as odd in general, considering that just a few days ago, in this very thread, you asserted to me that it's unrealistic to expect someone to design a list that can handle other builds because some people have a limited number of models. It seems strange to have that opinion Monday and then on Wednesday tell people, in the most condescending manner possible, that they're bad players for not making sweeping changes to their lists on the fly to accommodate the gak lists of others.
It strikes me as so odd and contradictory that it makes me wonder if you actually have a coherent point to make at all, and are not simply being a contrarian.
Swastakowey wrote: If you hate the game balance so much, why make a list with so many flyers etc in it?
What if you happen to like flyers? There are formations like the Scion Airborne Assault formation and the Forgeworld Elysian drop-lists, that require you to take X amount of flyers, and are designed to appeal to players who happen to like that kind of model.
There are armored lists that are designed to cater to people who like tanks and vehicle lists a lot.
What if Riptides happen to be your favorite unit and you've spent hours lovingly and painstakingly painting them?
Wave Serpents?
Rough Riders?
Why do you think that it's okay for you to use the units that you happen to like, and have spent lots of time on, because they might be gak on the tabletop, yet others need to limit themselves and deny themselves the units they may happen to greatly enjoy so that the guy on the other side table who brought a weaker list can have a more even chance of winning?
Your argument strikes me as odd in general, considering that just a few days ago, in this very thread, you asserted to me that it's unrealistic to expect someone to design a list that can handle other builds because some people have a limited number of models. It seems strange to have that opinion Monday and then on Wednesday tell people, in the most condescending manner possible, that they're bad players for not making sweeping changes to their lists on the fly to accommodate the gak lists of others.
It strikes me as so odd and contradictory that it makes me wonder if you actually have a coherent point to make at all, and are not simply being a contrarian.
Well?
Fluff is second to having a good game. If having 100 flyers creates a bad game. Dont do it.
If having 100 Rough riders makes a bad game. Dont do it.
The focus should be to make a good game. If my opponent has a limited selection of models then I will change my list to match his etc.
I think that your list should work with your opponent and vice versa. Not against. That means not taking the things you enjoy all the time. Communication is a simple way to not waste good gaming time.
I think im pretty consistent on that point.
I love taking lots of infantry. I spent a lot of money on them. If my opponent cant deal with them then I will change my list so he can deal with it a bit better. I dont care that its not 100% what i want. But it makes the game better for all involved. Otherwise whats the point?
So who cares if you like flyers, its not gonna make a good game if your opponent cant kill them at all.
Also I said if you cant change your list up to make a better game, lower the points to help change up the models that can be used. So this creates a situation where someone who cant up the competitiveness of his list can still have the aid of the opponent reducing the competitiveness of his list. Thanks to reducing the points.
In short, yes its unreasonable to expect someone to change their list if they cant. But if they can halve the points of their game to change up their list, then they can still change their list and its no longer unreasonable to ask for a change in game points and subsequently lists. If that makes any sense.
Personally, I learn the most when I get destroyed. This isn't elementary school gym class where everyone gets a medal no matter how poorly they perform. I played tau a couple weeks ago against 2 riptides, 2 hammerheads, broadsides, crisis suits and stealth suits. I got tabled on turn 3. I also learned far more about tactics and how to counter certain things in the future than I ever do when I win. I had fun, my opponent had fun, we shook hands and I went back to the drawing board with my list to attempt to be more competitive against armies like that. Yes, his list was OP. It didn't bother me a bit and I would play him again any time he wants a game. Sometimes Florida Atlantic has to play Alabama, they don't get to sit at home just because the other team has more talent. I think people need to realize that no game is perfectly balanced and if they bring a mediocre list, they lose the right to throw a fit when things don't go their way on the table.
If you both enjoyed the game, TooFast, then it was a good game. I've had similar games. I've also walked away after tabling someone and thought it was a terrible game.
In the OP's anecdote, though, the OP showed up for one game, and the Eldar player showed up for another. Between the rough stomping and the Dice Gods championing the other player, it sounds like it was quite frustrating.
From later posts, it sounds like the OP and the Eldar player should just play other people, as they're looking for different things.
A consistent point many of us have made is that this can happen with any Codex, IMO. I think its more frequently Eldar because they're top of the stack and everyone knows it, but it isn't only Eldar.
(And once again - Eldar have only dominated for about a year - they didn't during the first half of 6th. Sure, they were OP in some older editions as well, but let's not rewrite history)
Toofast wrote: I played tau a couple weeks ago against 2 riptides, 2 hammerheads, broadsides, crisis suits and stealth suits.
Yes, his list was OP.
Doesn't look like it to me, the riptides are the only thing in that list even remotely close to being "OP". In fact without the riptides it pretty much looks like what a typical Tau list has always looked like, except no Tau player ever used stealth suits and many would still argue the hammerheads are wasted points when you could just spam more missiles or riptides.
If all these options are "OP" then that doesn't leave a Tau player with much else to work with. Kroot with sky rays? Is that really it?
Florida Atlantic plays Alabama football because it brings money to their football program. If Florida Atlantic was not getting paid they would never play that game
Well the hammerheads took out my LRC and Las predator in the top of turn 1 before I could even move them, so I would say those points were well spent. I wouldn't have cared if he brought 5 riptides, I still would've played him and that's the point here. Playing against armies like that makes you a better player. Whining on a forum about an obvious fact like eldar being powerful does not make you a better player. Lining up against 4 wave serpents, jetseer and wraith knight and figuring out how to hurt them makes you a better player.
Chute82 wrote: Florida Atlantic plays Alabama football because it brings money to their football program. If Florida Atlantic was not getting paid they would never play that game
That and we desperately want to get out of our current division, get some positive press, and justify the spending so much on a stadium and not, say, new IR machines for the organic 2 labs...
It might make some a better player, but some people aren't all that concerned with getting better. Some people would rather just play random-ish games with other like-minded players. Doesn't mean you - or anyone else - has to, though.
Toofast wrote: Well the hammerheads took out my LRC and Las predator in the top of turn 1 before I could even move them, so I would say those points were well spent. I wouldn't have cared if he brought 5 riptides, I still would've played him and that's the point here. Playing against armies like that makes you a better player. Whining on a forum about an obvious fact like eldar being powerful does not make you a better player. Lining up against 4 wave serpents, jetseer and wraith knight and figuring out how to hurt them makes you a better player.
You seem to be under the impression that any army can beat any army, 40k is so imbalanced that there are so many times that there is literally NOTHING you can do better to make a games outcome any different.
I could build every single list I take as 100% optimized and still lose 95% of the time against certain list because there is far to much rock, paper, scissors in this game. Eldar happen to be the dynamite. You can beat them, sometimes, but a lot of the time there is just nothing you can do about it. Look at 7th Tyranids vs Eldar, nothing the Tyranid player can do is going to beat Serpent Spam short of the dice gods.
Nothing could be further from the truth. I'm fully aware that some armies are more powerful than others. I never once tried to pretend that 40k is a game perfectly balanced between factions. However, if you take an optimized list and play well with it, your chances of getting tabled on turn 2 are slim to none. I don't see how stating the obvious imbalance between factions in 40k diminishes my point that playing against a more powerful army is probably going to teach you the most about how to build an optimized list and make better decisions on the table.
Toofast wrote: Sometimes Florida Atlantic has to play Alabama, they don't get to sit at home just because the other team has more talent. I think people need to realize that no game is perfectly balanced and if they bring a mediocre list, they lose the right to throw a fit when things don't go their way on the table.
While I appreciate that you like the way it works, it's not really comparable to (is that American Football that Florida Atlantic and Alabama play?). Ball sports are balanced, the imbalance comes from a difference in ability of the team. 40k imbalance comes from difference in army choice and how much you are willing to exploit the flaws in the balance. Someone might be very willing to have an army that looks nothing like an army in order to win, another person feel, being a "wargame" and all, they want their army to actually look like an army.
Makumba wrote: I have an am army and it has fewer tanks then 1 eldar army runs and it is impossible to transport unless my boyfriend helps me.
So you have 2 to negative tanks?
I play Eldar, I run at most 3 Tanks, and most of the time 2/3 of them are not Serpents.
My standard list?
Farseer (or two depending on point level)
Warlocks (split up to lead units)
3 squads of Guardians
3 squads of Windriders
1 Crimson Hunter
1 Nightspinner
1 Support Battery
1 War Walker Sqaudron.
Occasionally I'll give one of the Guardians squads a Serpent, and/or swap out the Battery and/or Walkers for a Fire Prism.
Out of the 7 people that play eldar here only one runs fewer then 4 serpents and all run 1 WK . He also runs 6 walkers so it evens out on transportation.
However, if you take an optimized list and play well with it, your chances of getting tabled on turn 2 are slim to none
Unless you end up on a lava board or you don't play a reserv army and your opponent is shoty and gets turn 1. Or when your opponent plays a counter build. I remember in 5th people droping games against draigo wing without playing, not because DW was the best army out there, but just because on avarge it was impossible for them to kill enough models to win kill point missions. They were being tabled not on turn 2, but pre game.
I'd hate your meta, Makumba. Fortunately, not all meta's are like that. I don't think mine has seen 3+ Serpents on the board at the same time. And only 1 player has 1 (rarely used) wraithknight.
This is almost exclusively a problem with 40k. Obviously different metas are always going to have different levels of competitiveness, but the fact you can show up in one meta and get dominated or dominate before you even put your models on the table shows a bit of a flaw in 40k.
I play Eldar, but I haven't ever been refused a game. At my store, we often set up games days in advance, and I always ask what kind of game they want to play. Sometimes the answer is "Bring your "A" game, whatever is competitive," other times it is "I just want a laid back, fluffy game." I build accordingly and usually have a good time. I have tabled someone one time so far in 7th, and that was due to a BRUTAL turn one... we reset the game immediately and I turned over turn one... went great from there.
Tournaments are tournaments, friendly games should be friendly. But one thing is certain, the army the OP faced wasn't NEAR what is scary in the Eldar codex, as I have been beaten by IG with far better lists than that
Eldar are tough, and that means you need to bring a list suited to handling a tough army.
Toofast wrote: I played tau a couple weeks ago against 2 riptides, 2 hammerheads, broadsides, crisis suits and stealth suits.
Yes, his list was OP.
Doesn't look like it to me, the riptides are the only thing in that list even remotely close to being "OP". In fact without the riptides it pretty much looks like what a typical Tau list has always looked like, except no Tau player ever used stealth suits and many would still argue the hammerheads are wasted points when you could just spam more missiles or riptides.
If all these options are "OP" then that doesn't leave a Tau player with much else to work with. Kroot with sky rays? Is that really it?
I've found a couple 3 suit stealth squads with a homing beacon, fusion blaster and markerlight+Target Lock on the Shas'vre can be effective in a Farsight Enclaves list.
Deploy them out of line of sight in some ruins. Opponent either has to dedicate firepower to removing them (and therefore less firepower for killing your other stuff) or risk pinpoint deep strikes from Crisis Suits. Also, with the Fusion Blaster in there, many opponents are nervous about moving vehicles close to the terrain you're hiding in, which can greatly reduce their mobility on the battlefield.
I really don't see Eldar as anti-fun, certain Eldar builds? sure. I got back into 40k after my buddies started playing again, they were ecstatic that I chose Eldar as they had a distinct lack of Xenos in the group. I've played Eldar for years, even back in Epic days they were my favourite list, I just love the aesthetic. And personally, I don't really care about the strength/weakness of a unit. If I like the models, I'm taking it, period. As of right now my force is entirely on foot, 3 units of wraith constructs, rangers, 2 spiritseers, 2 wraithlords, wraithknight. I probably wouldn't have got the wraithknight initially but it came with the bundle, and it's a fantastic model. My old Eldar (before selling) was Biel Tan, all mounted in transports with a few Vypers. i didn't want a repeat of that army so chose wraiths (which I always liked, the new plastics made it harder to resist) After a few more games I may feel like I need some mobility due to the TOCs, so yes I may get a wave serpent for one of my wraith units, but I may also get an allied DE hellion/wych contingent to give me some speed. And harlequins are a must, even if I dread painting them.
I will adjust my army as I go along based on the meta of my group. If I'm getting my ass kicked day in, day out, I'll adjust upwards until the results are more even. I don't want an auto-win list which makes the game unfun for my opponents. We play because it's fun, not to wafflestomp each other. My last game was a 2x2 match of 750pts each. My Eldar plus Ultras vs Guard and DAs. We won the game but the VPs were very, very close. It was a fun game...that's all I'm seeking in this hobby.
bullyboy, that sounds like a nice looking Wraith army. Just a couple of things to add to the discussion:
We have a bunch of Eldar kin where I'm at (myself included), and maybe half of them run 4 Wave Serpents, WK and stuff. And while these armies are strong, I can see that everyone's having fun playing them anyways. The games have not been one-sided, and the mighty Eldar have lost quite a lot of games too. Then there's the other half who run no WK, less or no Serpents, or purist Ranger Force amies and other more exotic list. Not as strong, they do get beaten, and they do win too.
40k is not a balanced game. Wargaming was never balanced to start with, unless you play Chess. Way before I took up 40k, my wargaming experience has been purely refighting Napoleonic and WW2 historical battles. And none fo those battles were ever balanced. In fact, they should be imbalanced, and the guy with disadvantaged side would always have more fun trying to figure out how to survive, or even win.
40k tournaments can never be compared to proper sports like football, tennis, swimming, etc, precisely because 40k is not balanced. I've played in many 40k tournaments before, and even won a couple. And I've also participated in many swimming tourneys before, and won some medals. And I can tell you they are 2 completely different worlds.
spunkybass wrote: bullyboy, that sounds like a nice looking Wraith army. Just a couple of things to add to the discussion:
We have a bunch of Eldar kin where I'm at (myself included), and maybe half of them run 4 Wave Serpents, WK and stuff. And while these armies are strong, I can see that everyone's having fun playing them anyways. The games have not been one-sided, and the mighty Eldar have lost quite a lot of games too. Then there's the other half who run no WK, less or no Serpents, or purist Ranger Force amies and other more exotic list. Not as strong, they do get beaten, and they do win too.
40k is not a balanced game. Wargaming was never balanced to start with, unless you play Chess. Way before I took up 40k, my wargaming experience has been purely refighting Napoleonic and WW2 historical battles. And none fo those battles were ever balanced. In fact, they should be imbalanced, and the guy with disadvantaged side would always have more fun trying to figure out how to survive, or even win.
40k tournaments can never be compared to proper sports like football, tennis, swimming, etc, precisely because 40k is not balanced. I've played in many 40k tournaments before, and even won a couple. And I've also participated in many swimming tourneys before, and won some medals. And I can tell you they are 2 completely different worlds.
You're talking about perfect balance, which no one's calling for. Other wargames do a much better job of balance than 40k, so it is possible and creates a much better community because there is no difference between fluff and competitive players. Sports is a poor analogy to tabletop gamming. Stay with other tabletop games.
If the game is balanced, but you want to create an imbalanced scenario like an ambush or raid, then you can always imbalance it yourself. But to have the default game so grossly imbalanced is a problem.
Toofast wrote: Well the hammerheads took out my LRC and Las predator in the top of turn 1 before I could even move them, so I would say those points were well spent. I wouldn't have cared if he brought 5 riptides, I still would've played him and that's the point here. Playing against armies like that makes you a better player. Whining on a forum about an obvious fact like eldar being powerful does not make you a better player. Lining up against 4 wave serpents, jetseer and wraith knight and figuring out how to hurt them makes you a better player.
You seem to be under the impression that any army can beat any army, 40k is so imbalanced that there are so many times that there is literally NOTHING you can do better to make a games outcome any different.
I could build every single list I take as 100% optimized and still lose 95% of the time against certain list because there is far to much rock, paper, scissors in this game. Eldar happen to be the dynamite. You can beat them, sometimes, but a lot of the time there is just nothing you can do about it. Look at 7th Tyranids vs Eldar, nothing the Tyranid player can do is going to beat Serpent Spam short of the dice gods.
spunkybass wrote: bullyboy, that sounds like a nice looking Wraith army. Just a couple of things to add to the discussion:
We have a bunch of Eldar kin where I'm at (myself included), and maybe half of them run 4 Wave Serpents, WK and stuff. And while these armies are strong, I can see that everyone's having fun playing them anyways. The games have not been one-sided, and the mighty Eldar have lost quite a lot of games too. Then there's the other half who run no WK, less or no Serpents, or purist Ranger Force amies and other more exotic list. Not as strong, they do get beaten, and they do win too.
40k is not a balanced game. Wargaming was never balanced to start with, unless you play Chess. Way before I took up 40k, my wargaming experience has been purely refighting Napoleonic and WW2 historical battles. And none fo those battles were ever balanced. In fact, they should be imbalanced, and the guy with disadvantaged side would always have more fun trying to figure out how to survive, or even win.
40k tournaments can never be compared to proper sports like football, tennis, swimming, etc, precisely because 40k is not balanced. I've played in many 40k tournaments before, and even won a couple. And I've also participated in many swimming tourneys before, and won some medals. And I can tell you they are 2 completely different worlds.
You're talking about perfect balance, which no one's calling for. Other wargames do a much better job of balance than 40k, so it is possible and creates a much better community because there is no difference between fluff and competitive players. Sports is a poor analogy to tabletop gamming. Stay with other tabletop games.
If the game is balanced, but you want to create an imbalanced scenario like an ambush or raid, then you can always imbalance it yourself. But to have the default game so grossly imbalanced is a problem.
Toofast wrote: Well the hammerheads took out my LRC and Las predator in the top of turn 1 before I could even move them, so I would say those points were well spent. I wouldn't have cared if he brought 5 riptides, I still would've played him and that's the point here. Playing against armies like that makes you a better player. Whining on a forum about an obvious fact like eldar being powerful does not make you a better player. Lining up against 4 wave serpents, jetseer and wraith knight and figuring out how to hurt them makes you a better player.
You seem to be under the impression that any army can beat any army, 40k is so imbalanced that there are so many times that there is literally NOTHING you can do better to make a games outcome any different.
I could build every single list I take as 100% optimized and still lose 95% of the time against certain list because there is far to much rock, paper, scissors in this game. Eldar happen to be the dynamite. You can beat them, sometimes, but a lot of the time there is just nothing you can do about it. Look at 7th Tyranids vs Eldar, nothing the Tyranid player can do is going to beat Serpent Spam short of the dice gods.
indeed, GW i think totally overshot their goal and wont be balancing the eldar book next time round as hard. heres what i want to see the eldar book 1st out and then from there gmp the f!ck out of it like they did the DA codex. or just not release one next revision so GW can proceed to 4th edition orkify them. kick the space elves back to the bloody stone age
Started playing in 3rd and stopped in 5th so can't exactly speak to the current state of the game, but this complaint is nothing new. I played Eldar and heard the complaints plenty of times. Thing was, they never really made a lot of sense when you actually looked at the armies I fielded. I didn't spam starcannons and wraithlords in the days before the 4th edition Eldar codex, but if I dared have one or two of either in my list, here came the calls of cheese. Usually the opponents complaining didn't know what they were talking about and it was just a reflex action. If they actually understood Eldar (isn't one of the basics of battle to know your enemy?) they would be able to see that my lists weren't particularly lethal.
The best example of this was a time when I was beginning to play an Iyanden style list following the release of the 4th edition Eldar codex. One opponent saw the three wraithlords and started grumbling like crazy. My list at the time had serious flaws that made it basically impossible to win--I lost the first 7 or 8 games I played with that army and ended up reducing the number of wraithlords to make my list better. Instead I added some Vypers which were a rarely used, not particularly well respected unit, but gave me some benefits that were missing from the list.
I eventually had a good list that I won regularly with, but it took a lot of work, trial and error to get there. I don't think that style army was ever one that was dominating everywhere, but it was Eldar and had "cheesy" units so the reflexive bitterness, fear and whining were there.
My experience was that I would be regularly beat by good players, especially when I was playing lists that I built because I liked the model or the idea of the unit. My games were not auto win no tactics needed games.
Toofast wrote: Well the hammerheads took out my LRC and Las predator in the top of turn 1 before I could even move them, so I would say those points were well spent. I wouldn't have cared if he brought 5 riptides, I still would've played him and that's the point here. Playing against armies like that makes you a better player. Whining on a forum about an obvious fact like eldar being powerful does not make you a better player. Lining up against 4 wave serpents, jetseer and wraith knight and figuring out how to hurt them makes you a better player.
You seem to be under the impression that any army can beat any army, 40k is so imbalanced that there are so many times that there is literally NOTHING you can do better to make a games outcome any different.
I could build every single list I take as 100% optimized and still lose 95% of the time against certain list because there is far to much rock, paper, scissors in this game. Eldar happen to be the dynamite. You can beat them, sometimes, but a lot of the time there is just nothing you can do about it. Look at 7th Tyranids vs Eldar, nothing the Tyranid player can do is going to beat Serpent Spam short of the dice gods.
indeed, GW i think totally overshot their goal and wont be balancing the eldar book next time round as hard. heres what i want to see the eldar book 1st out and then from there gmp the f!ck out of it like they did the DA codex. or just not release one next revision so GW can proceed to 4th edition orkify them. kick the space elves back to the bloody stone age
Except they've never really been bad, the only time they did was because the 5th edition kicked a few mechanics in. 4th edition eldar had the very powerful skimmerspam list.
I know as an Eldar player, there were several "anti-fun" things about playing as them back in 3rd/4th editions.........some of their units were horribly priced out, and defninitely not in the Eldar's favor.
I guess Skimmerspam made them powerful in those editions, but i never have had more than two grav-tanks in my army, so I never experienced either side of the issue.
got to play a game yesterday vs Deathwing with my Iyanden. Things didn't look great for the deathwing initially as he deepstriked Belial, a Librarian and 5 termies into range of my WK with suncannon. I opened up on the unit with Rangers, getting 2 precision shots that went onto the lead terminator with stormshield. One of those was rending and he failed his 3+ save. After that, the suncannon ended up doing 15 wounds on the unit (after rerolls, all 3 of the blasts hit). after some look out sir rolls, etc, the last wound killed off Belial (the rest of the unit, including the Librarian were dead by that point). That was turn 2. However, he came back into the fight, taking out all 3 of my wraith units and 1 wraithlord (assaulted by 3 DW knights who hadn't used their S10 strike). The game ended with him having 3 knights left plus 4/10 scouts. I had my rangers, a lord and the knight. I'd lost all my psykers (farseer and 2 spiritseers). Final VPs were 10-9 in my favour (TOC). Can't ask for a better game than that. My army definitely lacks mobility so it's hard to get some objectives on the cards. The D-scythe guys definitely need a serpent, he was deathly afraid of them so shot the heck out of them.
I've been playing 40k since 1996. At one point in time I've used a variety of "main" armies. Started with SW, moved to Eldar, went to BA, DE then back to Eldar.
Their codex is strong, and it's compeditive. There's no denying it. Honestly, I think it's the best written 6th ed codex top to bottom in terms of being fluffy, challenging and fun.
Yes, there are a few things that are exceptionally good. Wave Serpents are very strong, Warp Spiders work wonders for me. Bike spam can be difficult to stop, until your opponent gets anything that ignores cover -- then say goodbye to that Mantle of the Laughing God Farseer.
Personally, I think it's an experience thing. There's nothing in the Eldar book that's broken or close to it. There are things that are good and can be deadly with the right tactics, but that's it. Eldar play like they always have -- a hamfisted mess in the wrong hands, a friggin' scalpel in the right ones.
Key to beating Eldar is choking their target priority and taking out their biggest threats. Personally, I don't see anything that scary about singing spear spam. If you said he was bringing 8 wave serpents, then we can talk.
TheSilo wrote: I've been back in the hobby for about four months, and have played five games against Eldar. Every one has ended with me tabled and it's the only army that has tabled me.
Playing today in a 2v2 (Guard+Guard versus Eldar+Tau, 1,000 points each player) the Eldar shining spears wrecked house. Two max units each with a lvl 3 farseer, both with fortune. I had two lvl 1 psykers, but could never manage to deny the witch on fortune. So, while on average 1/36 lasgun shots will kill a terminator, in this game on average 1/54 shots will kill a shining spear with fortune.
Turn 1 it was my ally's leman russ battle tank that bit the dust.
Turn 2 it was my tank commander vanquisher and his eradicator buddy tank.
Turn 3 it was my conscript squad and my ally's conscript squad.
Turn 4 it was a single unit double assaulting against a 20 man blob squad and 10 of my camo vets, wiped out both of them.
Turn 5 it was both my chimeras and their squads, by the end of the turn I had nothing left on the table. And my ally had one chimera and a valkyrie.
Playing against Eldar is the worst 40k experience ever. In this game, the Tau player rolled horrendously, he was a non-factor. His hammerhead failed its armor penetration rolls three turns in a row and Shadowsun mishapped on turn 3, finally made it on in turn 4, only managing to kill my wyvern. 80% of our entire combined 2,000 points of tanks and guardsmen were wiped clean by two units of shining spears, sporting armor saves 50% better than terminators. Even if they have to jink, their 4++ dodge save is 30% better than space marine armor. All armed with +S power weapons and S6 lance weapons. This is the second time I've faced this list and I'm at a complete loss for how I'm supposed to even contend with it.
I hate to be That Guy, but I'm ready to simply stop accepting games against Eldar.
You know its not a good thing your losing to some of the worst eldar units there are.
He also got Reaalllyyyy lucky grabbing 2 fortunes. Honestly his list sounds like garbage....
Hmm, sounds like Shining Spears are the inverse of what they have been for 15 years, ever since they got priced at 50pts each in the 3rd edition codex and I cursed heavily.
Auswin wrote: Key to beating Eldar is choking their target priority and taking out their biggest threats.
Could you be more specific?
It comes through how you have to play Eldar. Everything only has one good use and it's critical to remember that unlike many armies Eldar don't get to mix and match ranged weapons inside a squad, outside of exarchs and guardians. The former are simply buffed versions of the regular weapons, the latter are platforms -- but Guardians are easy to kill.
Since a fire dragon squad have meltas they're expensive by Eldar standards. So they have to be used for their intended purpose: Taking out vehicles and/or heavy infantry. To do otherwise is wasting their target priority and ensuring they probably wont earn back their points.
Dire Avengers are fantastic at killing rank and file troops, but are utterly useless in CC outside of a beefed up exarch.
Striking Scorpions are good at taking on hordes, but struggle against everything else.
And so on.
An Eldar player will deploy with these factors in mind and push towards a specific goal with each unit. When it wins it wins big, when it fails you're in deep trouble.
Shining Spears have their very specific role too: Taking out MEQ and monstrous creatures. Yes, having mass units with fortune is a tough nut to crack -- but the list is lacking all over because you opponent is spending a tremendous amount on a unit that's being used sub-optimally.
Also, I'm having a hard time understanding why your lasguns only had a 1/54 chance to kill a shining spear. It's just a 3+ with a reroll at T4.
I broke it down with a dice calculator.
30 shots.
Hitting on 4s: 15 hits
Wounding on 5s: 5 wounds
Saving on 3s: 3.33 saves
Rerolling sales: 2.22 saves
In 30 shots you're killing 1 shining spear, not 1/54.
A single shining spear is 25 pts. A single guardsman is 5 pts. They should be killing 5/1 on a pure points value. A max level Shining Spear squad is shooting 10 times, hitting 6.66 times and killing 5.56 guardsmen. It's essentially equal -- and they're sinking points in a farseer on a bike AND that's not factoring in rapid fire or orders.
Auswin wrote: Key to beating Eldar is choking their target priority and taking out their biggest threats.
Could you be more specific?
It comes through how you have to play Eldar. Everything only has one good use and it's critical to remember that unlike many armies Eldar don't get to mix and match ranged weapons inside a squad, outside of exarchs and guardians. The former are simply buffed versions of the regular weapons, the latter are platforms -- but Guardians are easy to kill.
Since a fire dragon squad have meltas they're expensive by Eldar standards. So they have to be used for their intended purpose: Taking out vehicles and/or heavy infantry. To do otherwise is wasting their target priority and ensuring they probably wont earn back their points.
Dire Avengers are fantastic at killing rank and file troops, but are utterly useless in CC outside of a beefed up exarch.
Striking Scorpions are good at taking on hordes, but struggle against everything else.
And so on.
An Eldar player will deploy with these factors in mind and push towards a specific goal with each unit. When it wins it wins big, when it fails you're in deep trouble.
Shining Spears have their very specific role too: Taking out MEQ and monstrous creatures. Yes, having mass units with fortune is a tough nut to crack -- but the list is lacking all over because you opponent is spending a tremendous amount on a unit that's being used sub-optimally.
Also, I'm having a hard time understanding why your lasguns only had a 1/54 chance to kill a shining spear. It's just a 3+ with a reroll at T4.
I broke it down with a dice calculator.
30 shots.
Hitting on 4s: 15 hits
Wounding on 5s: 5 wounds
Saving on 3s: 3.33 saves
Rerolling sales: 2.22 saves
In 30 shots you're killing 1 shining spear, not 1/54.
A single shining spear is 25 pts. A single guardsman is 5 pts. They should be killing 5/1 on a pure points value. A max level Shining Spear squad is shooting 10 times, hitting 6.66 times and killing 5.56 guardsmen. It's essentially equal -- and they're sinking points in a farseer on a bike AND that's not factoring in rapid fire or orders.
In your math, you have the re-roll reducing the number of saves not increasing the number of saves.
They're tough bastards, but far from unkillable. The view that the Eldar list was far from optimised is very true.
Eldar can make a nice casual game, but it requires the player behind them to be quite casual, and prepared to play 'nicely'.
However, even in competitive, I've found that the games are never uninteresting. However, my reg. opponents play sword wind, with a strong emphasis on up-and-close, so I'm biased.
Plasma/ignores cover order=dead. Shining spears cant hurt your tanks in shooting, and in combat they only do decent. Agaisnt guardsmen you laugh because it will take them a long time to eat through a big blob and then there potential is wasted.
Auswin wrote: I've been playing 40k since 1996. At one point in time I've used a variety of "main" armies. Started with SW, moved to Eldar, went to BA, DE then back to Eldar.
Their codex is strong, and it's compeditive. There's no denying it. Honestly, I think it's the best written 6th ed codex top to bottom in terms of being fluffy, challenging and fun.
Yes, there are a few things that are exceptionally good. Wave Serpents are very strong, Warp Spiders work wonders for me. Bike spam can be difficult to stop, until your opponent gets anything that ignores cover -- then say goodbye to that Mantle of the Laughing God Farseer.
Personally, I think it's an experience thing. There's nothing in the Eldar book that's broken or close to it. There are things that are good and can be deadly with the right tactics, but that's it. Eldar play like they always have -- a hamfisted mess in the wrong hands, a friggin' scalpel in the right ones.
Key to beating Eldar is choking their target priority and taking out their biggest threats. Personally, I don't see anything that scary about singing spear spam. If you said he was bringing 8 wave serpents, then we can talk.
The main problem I have with the argument is that some armies don't have defense against a lot of things in the Eldar book. Like, sure, Ignores cover would kill that Farseer. Necrons have absolutely no ignores cover, which is why a lot of things are hard to counter.
I can - and have - beat pre-nerf Helldrake, with demi-company style lists. In fact, I won more of those games than lost.
I still hated the thing.
In Warmahordes, I could torch Collasals. They still sucked the fun out of the game for me.
I still think 2 Raptor squads with Invis sorcs would have been less fun. I think it was the list style/play style that made this game unfun, not the codex. For the OP anyways. Others might enjoy it.
Jancoran wrote: I find the defeatist mentality of some posts on this thread truly sad.
I just looked at the army that took 5th at BAO. Lol. You'd be surprised. Just goes to show. Generals matter.
You'll notice that the title of the thread is "Eldar are the Anti-Fun" not "Eldar are impossible to beat at BAO and other competitive tournaments."
Thank you for that illumination...
I know what the thread is about. My gripe is with the defeatist attitude. They would seem to indicate the indomitable nature of the Eldar. I uh...don't agree, and then used the army that took 5th as some small piece of information for you to consider in that regard. Just LOOK at that army! Nothing "indomitable" about it. It has a plan and when solidly executed does extremely well. It had to go through a gauntlet of those silly Eldar and Tau lists. It did great. So will you if you keep your head on a swivel, stay frosty and dont make mistakes.
I feel that Eldar are strong. I have no problem with saying that. I play them, alongside my many other armies as you know if you've seen the blog. There's no reason to undersell them. ALL armies that swing 25 dice into your face are a little annoying but then again, if you think back, those same armies used to be able to do what they do almost WITHOUT Resistence.
This negative nellie attitude SOME have posted ilustrates to me how much some people hate losing. There's no shame in losing. There isn't. there IS shame, however in claiming the sky is falling when an Eldar sidles up to the table. This isnt a new codex. You should have adjusted BY NOW.
I'll give you an example. I found that when the new Eldar came, I was like "Wowa... Wasn't ready for that". Lost two in a row. Won a nail biter, then lost again. 3 out of 4? Unheard of! So i went to the drawing board and said "okay, new reality received. i need to change."
I switched out my Chaos Lord for a Black legion Lord on bike. I took 3 separate Mutilators in place of some troops. That was about it,. Result? Resounding victories against vicious Mech spam ever since. Those were not big changes. But they ALSO made me stronger against OTHER armies also. So all in all, those three losses, while they stung a bit, TAUGHT me.
If you're above learning, okay fine. But I'm not. So my encouragement to those who feel overwhelmed is to recognize that the cheese has moved. But stop telling me how there's "no hope". because if those little changes to my list could accomodate a new reality, it's probably the same for yours.
Wow. I have to admit that I don't have the current Eldar codex, so I am woefully out of date with some things. Geez, 25pts for a Shining Spear is 50% of the cost they were when I took up Eldar in 4th edition.
What really sucks is that a lot of people are right, Eldar are just a bit too good overall. I say that as a guy who loves his Eldar, but won't really play them much outside of a super-competitive setting, because I feel bad. Even with my "fun" list of all Aspect Warriors, I can stomp a lot of face. I'll just give it time till some new awesome comes out that scares people, then I can play them again, lol.
TheSilo wrote: What is the BAO army list that you're referring to?
The one that took 5th, as aforementioned. It's online somewhere. I looked at it on Facebook, so I dont have a link for you but its easy to find if you google the results Im sure. I think the guys name was Vincent but I apologize, i dont know him. Link anyone?
Homeskillet wrote: What really sucks is that a lot of people are right, Eldar are just a bit too good overall. I say that as a guy who loves his Eldar, but won't really play them much outside of a super-competitive setting, because I feel bad. Even with my "fun" list of all Aspect Warriors, I can stomp a lot of face. I'll just give it time till some new awesome comes out that scares people, then I can play them again, lol.
I'll hold you to those words. Come the new Necron Codex, we'll be the new superpower! Muahaha!
Space Marines did quite well in the tournament- the first place winner was a SM Primary with a single allied Knight. Notably, only two Eldar lists made it to the top ten, and five Space Marine lists did.
Here's a more in-depth look at the top ten and their lists.
Jancoran wrote: I find the defeatist mentality of some posts on this thread truly sad.
I just looked at the army that took 5th at BAO. Lol. You'd be surprised. Just goes to show. Generals matter.
You'll notice that the title of the thread is "Eldar are the Anti-Fun" not "Eldar are impossible to beat at BAO and other competitive tournaments."
Thank you for that illumination...
I know what the thread is about. My gripe is with the defeatist attitude. They would seem to indicate the indomitable nature of the Eldar. I uh...don't agree, and then used the army that took 5th as some small piece of information for you to consider in that regard. Just LOOK at that army! Nothing "indomitable" about it. It has a plan and when solidly executed does extremely well. It had to go through a gauntlet of those silly Eldar and Tau lists. It did great. So will you if you keep your head on a swivel, stay frosty and dont make mistakes.
I feel that Eldar are strong. I have no problem with saying that. I play them, alongside my many other armies as you know if you've seen the blog. There's no reason to undersell them. ALL armies that swing 25 dice into your face are a little annoying but then again, if you think back, those same armies used to be able to do what they do almost WITHOUT Resistence.
This negative nellie attitude SOME have posted ilustrates to me how much some people hate losing. There's no shame in losing. There isn't. there IS shame, however in claiming the sky is falling when an Eldar sidles up to the table. This isnt a new codex. You should have adjusted BY NOW.
I'll give you an example. I found that when the new Eldar came, I was like "Wowa... Wasn't ready for that". Lost two in a row. Won a nail biter, then lost again. 3 out of 4? Unheard of! So i went to the drawing board and said "okay, new reality received. i need to change."
I switched out my Chaos Lord for a Black legion Lord on bike. I took 3 separate Mutilators in place of some troops. That was about it,. Result? Resounding victories against vicious Mech spam ever since. Those were not big changes. But they ALSO made me stronger against OTHER armies also. So all in all, those three losses, while they stung a bit, TAUGHT me.
If you're above learning, okay fine. But I'm not. So my encouragement to those who feel overwhelmed is to recognize that the cheese has moved. But stop telling me how there's "no hope". because if those little changes to my list could accomodate a new reality, it's probably the same for yours.
Maybe some people have a different idea of fun than you? Maybe some people's idea of fun is an even match where both players have an equal chance of winning and winner is determined by player skill and not list building?
or maybe they are sore losers unwilling to change and maybe I should have just RAGE QUIT after getting spanked 3 out of 4 right? I mean since you know, it should be about my skill and as the more skilled General (and I was in this case) I should be OUTRAGED that he DARED use his new codex on me! Yup I must not want fun games as evidenced by the fact that i adjusted!
What we DO KNOW is that skill expresses itself very well when it has a tool bag. It has no capacity for expression without one.
List changes don't need to be wholsale, as was the case for me. Mine were minor but they allowed my list to do more things. I didn't need to reach for a net list. I learned from my mistakes and got better at Warhammer in general by making my list less specialized and more free form. I dislike this toggle switch that you've offered up because it isnt "either you want a fair fight but NO list changes or you DONT want a fair fight WITH list changes". Makes no sense to even say that. Situation is king.
IF you're saying you couldn't make some slight changes to increase your OPTIONS, okay. I guess. But you need a new hobby in that event.
If you're NOT saying that, then why point out that "some peoples idea of fun involves a fair fight where skill matters" when that's EXACTLY what you'll get if you adjust? My skill level is high and my lists are (supposedly) not so great. On the other hand, the scoreboard would seem to indicate that I'm better at change.
I used to think Eldar were unbearably OP. The BAO results kinda changed my mind. They definitely have some OP options, but forVPs, remember that a Rhino or pod costs 1/4 to 1/3 the points, has sufficient movement, and aren't boned if they move into charge range/ expose rear armor to Avengers the way the Serpent is if it does to Marines. With tactical objectives, Serpents can't just gun line.
All that aside, the OP here is talking about types of builds he doesn't enjoy playing against. A spam list like the one here is even less fun for him than a pure ranger list would be for a competitive Ork player. There are many different ways to play this hobby.
And whats FUN is one issue. Whats OP? I hate that term, honestly. i do.
I dont have FUN playing against Wave spam as MUCH as I do other forces but that has mnore to do with how wierd I find it that most Wave spammers do a gunline. Fastest army i nthe codex and you gunline. It feels wrong. Cant shake that feeling during the game. But thats an aesthetic consideration or fluff one, not really directly related to the list itself per se.
anyways, bottom line is, less crying and more solutions.
There is a lot of crying. Although as an Eldar player, it is understandable, but do something about it. Crying doesn't solve a problem.
You need to know the Eldar army and your own to be able to beat it. knowing what does what, 'knowledge is power'.
Saying that, the list is crap, what has mortars and grenade launchers ever killed?
Saying that, some general advice;
Eldar have extremely good fundamentals and extremely good gimmicks. as others have said, when in the right hands, extremely powerful.
remember, most of our stuff will hit. Everything is Bs4, so don't take chances and leave things exposed, or chances are that units dead. Chances are, my bright lance will hit you tank, and I as a good player, I never have just one, so that tank of yours is gonna get hit by multiple bright lances.
We have good support, so guess what, when I shoot you and I really want something of yours dead, I'm gonna make my unit hit even more than it already does. We are fast too, so if your unit is tough, I can easily bring multiple.
However I can only kill one unit with one of mine, so back your units up, keep multiples around. My aim is to isolate your units and pick them off. I don't ever want to be shot back. Someone said early on in this thread that eldar players hate choices, we do. 1 unit will melt, 2 units will melt, 3 not so much and when you shoot back, it will hurt my precious units.
Eldar have short range, we do need to expose ourselves when we shoot, we need to be up close. but remember(our fundamentals) we will be hiding again when your unit is dead. You need to figure out how to catch us.
Eldar are also control freaks, we are faster than you, we decide where the battle takes place. You will be reacting to us, however, charge us too hard and we can just run away. If you gunline, you can guarantee half your units are never gonna do anything. We will pick off whatever of your units that get exposed. but you need to know this, figure out what I'll be hiding behind after your unit is dead and have something ready to kill mine, Eldar will lose an attrition war.
I'd write more, but thats hopefully enough, and hopefully useful.
I've been back in the hobby for about four months, and have played five games against Eldar. Every one has ended with me tabled and it's the only army that has tabled me.
It can be a pain to play against them. But the game is still rock-scissor-paper.
Eldar has problems against fast moving armies able to threaten the Serpents asap.
Once had an etherial hold his own barehanded against a farseer on death mission for the last round of the game. 500 points, and with the farseer dieing at mission end it was a table.
Also 1/54 las shots wound? That means you just need a couple full conscript squads on FRFSRF. That throws about 200 shots per unit right? If they are in rapid dire range.
LordDavenport wrote: Also 1/54 las shots wound? That means you just need a couple full conscript squads on FRFSRF. That throws about 200 shots per unit right? If they are in rapid dire range.
A full squad of conscripts is 50 models. So 150 shots at close range FRFSRF. But, err, good luck getting 50 Conscripts within 12", lol, if you only space them about 0.5" apart (so blast template fodder) they'll take up a block of space about 10" x 10". Then they're only Bs2, so only a third are going to hit rather than half, so it becomes 1 in 81 shots instead of 1 in 54.
For their price, it's tempting to take Conscripts expecting them to shoot stuff. More practically, I think 10 Vets with special weapons has more potential to deal damage on the battlefield. Conscripts are better used to occupy table space and be a nuisance. Perfect bubble wrap unit.
LordDavenport wrote: Also 1/54 las shots wound? That means you just need a couple full conscript squads on FRFSRF. That throws about 200 shots per unit right? If they are in rapid dire range.
A full squad of conscripts is 50 models. So 150 shots at close range FRFSRF. But, err, good luck getting 50 Conscripts within 12", lol, if you only space them about 0.5" apart (so blast template fodder) they'll take up a block of space about 10" x 10". Then they're only Bs2, so only a third are going to hit rather than half, so it becomes 1 in 81 shots instead of 1 in 54.
For their price, it's tempting to take Conscripts expecting them to shoot stuff. More practically, I think 10 Vets with special weapons has more potential to deal damage on the battlefield. Conscripts are better used to occupy table space and be a nuisance. Perfect bubble wrap unit.
I'm inclined to start including a banewolf, scions, wyrdvanes, or rough riders as backfield protection. 12" move and flame or 12" move and assault with +2S Ap3 power weapons seems like a good way to dissuade any deep strikers or outflanking units. Volley guns or wyrdvanes with smite could clean up anti-tank threats, though they'd be less effective against shining spears.
Goatseer wrote: There is a lot of crying. Although as an Eldar player, it is understandable, but do something about it. Crying doesn't solve a problem.
You need to know the Eldar army and your own to be able to beat it. knowing what does what, 'knowledge is power'.
Saying that, the list is crap, what has mortars and grenade launchers ever killed?
Saying that, some general advice;
Eldar have extremely good fundamentals and extremely good gimmicks. as others have said, when in the right hands, extremely powerful.
remember, most of our stuff will hit. Everything is Bs4, so don't take chances and leave things exposed, or chances are that units dead. Chances are, my bright lance will hit you tank, and I as a good player, I never have just one, so that tank of yours is gonna get hit by multiple bright lances.
We have good support, so guess what, when I shoot you and I really want something of yours dead, I'm gonna make my unit hit even more than it already does. We are fast too, so if your unit is tough, I can easily bring multiple.
However I can only kill one unit with one of mine, so back your units up, keep multiples around. My aim is to isolate your units and pick them off. I don't ever want to be shot back. Someone said early on in this thread that eldar players hate choices, we do. 1 unit will melt, 2 units will melt, 3 not so much and when you shoot back, it will hurt my precious units.
Eldar have short range, we do need to expose ourselves when we shoot, we need to be up close. but remember(our fundamentals) we will be hiding again when your unit is dead. You need to figure out how to catch us.
Eldar are also control freaks, we are faster than you, we decide where the battle takes place. You will be reacting to us, however, charge us too hard and we can just run away. If you gunline, you can guarantee half your units are never gonna do anything. We will pick off whatever of your units that get exposed. but you need to know this, figure out what I'll be hiding behind after your unit is dead and have something ready to kill mine, Eldar will lose an attrition war.
I'd write more, but thats hopefully enough, and hopefully useful.
Sadly your post amounts to little more than:
We have all these great units/ special rules / abilities /advantages........
but you don't - and that's tough (ie you should play Eldar) better figure out a way to beat us - and if you complain well that just crying - cos you know we all like awesome and broken - and that all good.
If certain units were toned down to normal levels - then the game would be better and I would feel comfortable fielding my own cheese serpents
Eldar will end up like every other army. It has its time in the sun.. It'll eventually die and some other army will take its place. That's when the true Eldar players will surface, as well as the powerhouse only own the best army at the time players will as well.
Lshowell wrote: Eldar will end up like every other army. It has its time in the sun.. It'll eventually die and some other army will take its place. That's when the true Eldar players will surface, as well as the powerhouse only own the best army at the time players will as well.
An interesting trend I've noticed is that compared to previous "imba" armies, Eldar has had a much more pronounced effect on their playerbase than the others.
Here's what I mean; of the people who played Eldar prior to their update locally, all have switched to secondary armies most of the time, one of them even bought a new army because "It's just not fun wrecking people without trying." Long-time Eldar players have basically given up playing their army, as they find it an unenjoyable experience. No one has taken up playing eldar either.
Now, going through recent history;
Tau - Two players started Tau, myself included, I sold the Riptide as I felt it was too powerful and fluff-unfriendly, the other player kept his as a tournament army, single pre-existing Tau player rolls so terribly no one considers him a threat, ever.
Necrons - One player sold his 'cron army on the grounds it was too powerful, two people bought 'cron armies
Grey Knights - One player sold his army well after their heydey was over in an attempt to get a new player into the game, no one started GK during the Age of Draigo.
I still saw all the "flavour of the month" armies on the table consistently throughout their tenure, and while people might have groaned when playing them, they never refused a game, and the other side rarely went undefeated (save for the tourney tau player bringing ultra-competitive lists to friendly games, we had to disabuse him of that notion). Eldar, however, have basically become extinct save for two guys just getting back into the game after being out since 4th, with people who loved their army shelving it as being that powerful breaks the game.
Now, I'm a Guard primary player, Eldar don't frighten me overly much when I'm fielding a wall of Guardsmen and a few russes, but if I put my Marines or Tau on the table, I know I'm probably going to get tabled, it's merely a matter of how many of them I can bring with me. They're a ridiculously cost-efficient, highly mobile, flexible army which can easily dominate every phase of the game. Their only real weakness is lots of bodies and high power long range firepower, which only Guard can really do. Daemons also give them some trouble from what I've seen, as their own cheesy ridiculousness can fight eldar at an even or superior level in most ways, save that they're slightly slower and have basically no shooting phase.
Of course, with GW's approach to rules, they won't be changed for years, which has a great deal to do with my disillusionment with the game. A videogame company which produces an imbalanced RTS by rushing it out without proper testing will, unless they're EA, patch it extensively to make it work better. I've played plenty of games with rough starts which become better, and even fun, in about 1/24 of the time it takes GW to do a rules update, with no guarentees of improvement.
Now, of course, there are big logistical differences, but the only thing preventing GW from actually making a better ruleset is their own attitude. They don't listen to feedback, have no channels of communication, and while they have a mechanism for updates, FAQs and Erratas, they limit themselves enormously in content for fear of reducing the value of their massively overpriced codexes. People wouldn't be quitting Eldar, or in my case, consider quitting the whole game, if every mistake, OP unit or power didn't come with the unspoken knowledge that it will be exactly, or more or less as it is for four years or more. If the codexes weren't so consistently screwed up, maybe I wouldn't mind the cycle so much (I certainly won't for Marines, it's one of their only balanced, well-thought out, flexibile books out there, despite my continued annoyance over how to sell models, Marines must be expensive cannon fodder, not supersoldiers, but I digress), but errors in judgement and testing like Eldar, Daemons and Tau, and on the other end of the spectrum, Tyranids and Chaos really make me wonder, "What's the point?" Pay for a premium product, and get support which is basically non-existent.
I really do wish that GW approached the rules aspect of their game like most other companies; inexpensive softcover codexes with regular updates handled by a dedicated team of unbiased rules designers (lord knows the GW team at present has favourites, which shows in the rules) built, in part, from feedback through open channels, like, say, a forum like every other game out there. There are other things they could do to avoid the present state of affairs, like properly testing things beforehand, replacing or expanding their writing team, or hell, giving Forgeworld the reins over rules; they actually release "beta" rules, and change them based on feedback and occassionally produce an overpowered unit, but never whole overpowered armies or lists without intentionally designing weaknesses into them.
Meanwhile, I derive a great deal more gaming pleasure from Company of Heroes or Wargame Red Dragon; they've got balance issues, factions which over or underperform, but every week there're small steps towards ironing out issues, and the game markedly improves over time, and all this requires dedicated coders, compatibility testing, certification, bugfixing and servers for distribution, rather than a simple PDF an a willingness to fix a problem.
Every time i face eldar, which is about 30-40% of my games actually, i feel like im just doing random crap and hoping it works against what he has because that race makes no sense to me. They have a base statline that rivals Guardsmen in crappyness on troops, yet they have elites that are tough as nails, tons of Fearless on models that make no sense to have it since other "similar" models in other races dont have it and should, the most random init and/or WS between their units, and of course the only non-apoc ranged instant death weapon that isnt pistol-ranged
Pretty much every unit they have except the Wraith stuff i end up thinking "why the hell does that unit have that rule?" - i never think that about ANY race's units. Wraiths are the only unit that makes sense with their statline/job/story compared to other armies. And even then, Wraithknights shouldnt be stock S10 without that sword imo but thats not TOO big a deal.
I have to agree that Eldar are the anti-fun race. I never have a fun game against Eldar even if my opponent is a bit of a moron and blunders his rules giving me an advantage. That being said, i dont get steamrolled by them, but i shouldnt be getting a headache every time i face them whether i win or lose.
Vineheart01 wrote: tons of Fearless on models that make no sense to have it since other "similar" models in other races dont have it and should
Oh? There are exactly 5 units that have Fearless (unless you count an HQ with the one Relic). Of those 5(6), 3 of them are Monstrous Creatures. One of those has a Fearless bubble.
Compared to say Tyranids, where 2/3 HQs, 1/3 Troops, 1/6 Elite, 1/6 Fast Attack, and 1/7 Heavy Support (9 units) for a total of not only are Fearless, but have a Fearless bubble.
Vineheart01 wrote: tons of Fearless on models that make no sense to have it since other "similar" models in other races dont have it and should
Oh? There are exactly 5 units that have Fearless (unless you count an HQ with the one Relic). Of those 5(6), 3 of them are Monstrous Creatures. One of those has a Fearless bubble.
Compared to say Tyranids, where 2/3 HQs, 1/3 Troops, 1/6 Elite, 1/6 Fast Attack, and 1/7 Heavy Support (9 units) for a total of not only are Fearless, but have a Fearless bubble.
And that is also crucial to how that army works. Ever seen a tyranid player get out of synapse range by accident? Its decimating to his forces almost every time.
Why are the Eldar fearless outside the undead bas- er Wraiths? By the same logic they are fearless, my Riptide should be fearless or my Warboss should be fearless yet theyre not.
Also, back on the tyranid thing, they dont have insane BS4+, nasty shooting, AND nasty melee all in the same unit except maybe a tyrant. All their other big bugs are specialized to shoot or charge, and do the other very poorly.
Random Dude wrote: I was enticed to buy the Eldar codex when it came out because the fluff and models are so amazing. Their power level is a great bonus.
This is about them being anti-fun. We know you like how over powered they are and how easy it is to win with them. You've made enough posts about wave spam. Please stick to the topic.
Anyway, I feel they are in need of a nurf. Hopefully soon it'll happen, they can take blood angels place.
Vineheart01 wrote: tons of Fearless on models that make no sense to have it since other "similar" models in other races dont have it and should
Oh? There are exactly 5 units that have Fearless (unless you count an HQ with the one Relic). Of those 5(6), 3 of them are Monstrous Creatures. One of those has a Fearless bubble.
Compared to say Tyranids, where 2/3 HQs, 1/3 Troops, 1/6 Elite, 1/6 Fast Attack, and 1/7 Heavy Support (9 units) for a total of not only are Fearless, but have a Fearless bubble.
And that is also crucial to how that army works. Ever seen a tyranid player get out of synapse range by accident? Its decimating to his forces almost every time.
Why are the Eldar fearless outside the undead bas- er Wraiths? By the same logic they are fearless, my Riptide should be fearless or my Warboss should be fearless yet theyre not.
Also, back on the tyranid thing, they dont have insane BS4+, nasty shooting, AND nasty melee all in the same unit except maybe a tyrant. All their other big bugs are specialized to shoot or charge, and do the other very poorly.
Do tell me the units that have fearless that shouldn't.
Random Dude wrote: I was enticed to buy the Eldar codex when it came out because the fluff and models are so amazing. Their power level is a great bonus.
This is about them being anti-fun. We know you like how over powered they are and how easy it is to win with them. You've made enough posts about wave spam. Please stick to the topic.
Anyway, I feel they are in need of a nurf. Hopefully soon it'll happen, they can take blood angels place.
You're right that I should stick to the topic (sorry about that ) but your animosity towards Eldar players is extremely unnecessary.
I suspect it's well earned, and possibly well deserved.
Seriously, I've encountered Eldar players who claim to "love the fluff and the models" yet when I see them play, they NEVER field anything outside of Dire Avengers, Farseers, Waveserpents and anything with "Wraith" in the name.
If you love the fluff and the models, how's about playing in a fluffy way (with specialist units working together in concert to achieve various objectives) and give some of those other wonderful models an airing?
Azreal13 wrote: I suspect it's well earned, and possibly well deserved.
Seriously, I've encountered Eldar players who claim to "love the fluff and the models" yet when I see them play, they NEVER field anything outside of Dire Avengers, Farseers, Waveserpents and anything with "Wraith" in the name.
If you love the fluff and the models, how's about playing in a fluffy way (with specialist units working together in concert to achieve various objectives) and give some of those other wonderful models an airing?
I just have a hard time harboring animosity against anyone, especially over toy soldiers.
Anyway, I feel they are in need of a nerf. It will hopefully happen soon and they can take blood angels place.
I remember sitting in a game store a few years ago (during 5th edition) when Blood Angels were exceptionally powerful and Eldar were weak. The Blood Angels player rubbed the beating in as much as he possibly could. Calling the Eldar players units "cheesedar" and other such nonsense with every vehicle or unit kill. It left said player extremely demoralized and deflated (as it happened all the time at said shop). I often saw similar instances in games against Tau (who also had an old and outdated codex). It was also not limited to Blood Angels. It also included Imperial Guard and Grey Knight players.
I still feel bitter over how I saw the xenos players treated. To those Imperial players of that persuasion I say stuff it. Take your licks like everybody else.
Bitterness aside. Imbalance combined with long update periods and lack of fixing problems creates a player-base divide. It always has (since I started in early third edition). I've found that the best thing to do is to talk to your opponent about worries you have with their army list (and expect visa versa) before the game. Figure out a way to make sure you both have fun. It works surprisingly well.
Seriously, this entire thread is nothing but bad sportsmanship. As a player getting into Eldar since I am completely disenfranchised with Tyranids anymore, I'm seeing nothing but hate for an army that I have just begun to pick up. While there are players that abuse systems, saying an army that I am excited about collecting is 'anti-fun' and countless 'eldar players should be restricted with what they bring' sentiments, it makes me glad this is a global forum and not something at my local store. Because quite frankly, I wouldn't want to play with anyone that is simply so negative about an army they are playing against. I'm not about to restrict my choices of units for another player, though I absolutely will play at a points level of their choosing if I am able to, and I'm not going to play against someone that complains about my Wave Serpents or Jink saves every time I use their rules.
So much of this 'make it a fair match and fun for everyone' being thrown around, but no notice that this much hate is making it anti-fun for Eldar players to even bother playing against folks at all. Eldar is a part of the hobby too. It really is demoralizing to have a faction I'm getting into treated like the worst thing that happened to the game.
Hey, blame GW's for allowing a hopelessly lop-sided book to make it out of the studio, not those players who have spent hours of their (in many cases very precious) hobby time sat opposite someone who was winning, not by virtue of superior skill or list building, but through dumb luck of army selection or bandwagon hopping.
It is a long way from being the only offender in the game, but it is probably the worst, and I ask again, if all these players are collecting Eldar for "noble" reasons, why is it only the same half dozen or so units I keep seeing on the battlefield?
Azreal13 wrote: Hey, blame GW's for allowing a hopelessly lop-sided book to make it out of the studio, not those players who have spent hours of their (in many cases very precious) hobby time sat opposite someone who was winning, not by virtue of superior skill or list building, but through dumb luck of army selection or bandwagon hopping.
It is a long way from being the only offender in the game, but it is probably the worst, and I ask again, if all these players are collecting Eldar for "noble" reasons, why is it only the same half dozen or so units I keep seeing on the battlefield?
Don't GW's excessive prices somewhat contribute to that? It would be extremely expensive to try out all the units in the codex.
Because you need to find other players to play against perhaps. But if Eldar were taken out of the equation, what sort of debilitating Deathstar would they use instead? But this is not an issue with the army at large. Would you call my Alaitoc pathfinder list an issue? Considering only two Serpents hold my Wraithguard and Guardians. No Wraithknight anywhere in my list. That's an Eldar list still built around a somewhat fluffy section of snipers. I'm not going to blame GW for the belly-aching of players that have just as much opportunity to buy Eldar as anyone else or buy the specific units that can take out tanks with ease.
I will agree that some players abuse the system in place, and some players are absolutely full of gak trying to defend their Serpent Spam with 'noble' reasons, but that is the players individually. Not Eldar and not all Eldar players.
SharkoutofWata wrote: Because you need to find other players to play against perhaps. But if Eldar were taken out of the equation, what sort of debilitating Deathstar would they use instead? But this is not an issue with the army at large. Would you call my Alaitoc pathfinder list an issue? Considering only two Serpents hold my Wraithguard and Guardians. No Wraithknight anywhere in my list. That's an Eldar list still built around a somewhat fluffy section of snipers. I'm not going to blame GW for the belly-aching of players that have just as much opportunity to buy Eldar as anyone else or buy the specific units that can take out tanks with ease.
I will agree that some players abuse the system in place, and some players are absolutely full of gak trying to defend their Serpent Spam with 'noble' reasons, but that is the players individually. Not Eldar and not all Eldar players.
SharkoutofWata wrote: Seriously, this entire thread is nothing but bad sportsmanship. As a player getting into Eldar since I am completely disenfranchised with Tyranids anymore, I'm seeing nothing but hate for an army that I have just begun to pick up. While there are players that abuse systems, saying an army that I am excited about collecting is 'anti-fun' and countless 'eldar players should be restricted with what they bring' sentiments, it makes me glad this is a global forum and not something at my local store. Because quite frankly, I wouldn't want to play with anyone that is simply so negative about an army they are playing against. I'm not about to restrict my choices of units for another player, though I absolutely will play at a points level of their choosing if I am able to, and I'm not going to play against someone that complains about my Wave Serpents or Jink saves every time I use their rules.
So much of this 'make it a fair match and fun for everyone' being thrown around, but no notice that this much hate is making it anti-fun for Eldar players to even bother playing against folks at all. Eldar is a part of the hobby too. It really is demoralizing to have a faction I'm getting into treated like the worst thing that happened to the game.
This is the attitude that I've run into. And it's like showing up to a chess match, but bringing two queens and saying "I should be allowed to play with them, I bought them after all. I don't care whether it makes the game un-fun for you."
Some people might want to try a game against that, but pretty soon no one in the club will want to play against someone that brings an unbalanced army to a chess board. It's why video games these days try so hard to get the balance right. Blizzard was releasing balance patches for over half a year when Starcraft 2 came out. They had even more balance releases after the expansion. Balance is hard with three armies, with the dozen or so armies in 40k it's probably impossible. I don't see 40k as a competitive game, for competition you need balance, which is why in pro sports the losing team gets the first pick. So if it's not competitive, then 40k must be for fun, and if your attitude is "I have my fun, I don't care if you have fun" then you're going to be playing all by yourself.
Vineheart01 wrote: Every time i face eldar, which is about 30-40% of my games actually, i feel like im just doing random crap and hoping it works against what he has because that race makes no sense to me. They have a base statline that rivals Guardsmen in crappyness on troops, yet they have elites that are tough as nails, tons of Fearless on models that make no sense to have it since other "similar" models in other races dont have it and should, the most random init and/or WS between their units, and of course the only non-apoc ranged instant death weapon that isnt pistol-ranged
Pretty much every unit they have except the Wraith stuff i end up thinking "why the hell does that unit have that rule?" - i never think that about ANY race's units. Wraiths are the only unit that makes sense with their statline/job/story compared to other armies. And even then, Wraithknights shouldnt be stock S10 without that sword imo but thats not TOO big a deal.
I have to agree that Eldar are the anti-fun race. I never have a fun game against Eldar even if my opponent is a bit of a moron and blunders his rules giving me an advantage. That being said, i dont get steamrolled by them, but i shouldnt be getting a headache every time i face them whether i win or lose.
This is incredibly inaccurate.
"Yet they have elites that are tough as nails." Every single Elites choice in the Codex that isn't Wraith is T3...
"Tons of Fearless on models that make no sense." Only the Wraith units (which you later went on to say actually make sense) and the Phoenix Lords (which are not that great for the points) have fearless stock. The only other way to get it s a 40 point upgrade for a single model that can be taken once per army. (Shard of Anaris)
"The most random init and/or WS between their units." Pretty much everything in the codex is Init 5 WS 4 (the exceptions being Exarches and HQs). Not sure where you are getting your info from.
This is the attitude that I've run into. And it's like showing up to a chess match, but bringing two queens and saying "I should be allowed to play with them, I bought them after all. I don't care whether it makes the game un-fun for you."
Some people might want to try a game against that, but pretty soon no one in the club will want to play against someone that brings an unbalanced army to a chess board. It's why video games these days try so hard to get the balance right. Blizzard was releasing balance patches for over half a year when Starcraft 2 came out. They had even more balance releases after the expansion. Balance is hard with three armies, with the dozen or so armies in 40k it's probably impossible. I don't see 40k as a competitive game, for competition you need balance, which is why in pro sports the losing team gets the first pick. So if it's not competitive, then 40k must be for fun, and if your attitude is "I have my fun, I don't care if you have fun" then you're going to be playing all by yourself.
But we're not playing Chess. We are playing a game where every single piece is for sale in the same combinations and put simply, who are you to design my list for me? If you buy my army, sure, I'll play however you like. Until then, it is absolutely in your ability to refuse a game because you don't like what you see or your list isn't ready for the opponents. But complaining about it, calling a faction anti-fun is bad sportsmanship. I personally do not want to play a game across the table from you no matter if I'm using my Tyranids, Space Marines or any list of Eldar there is under the sun. Not every Eldar list is unbalanced. Not every Eldar player is spamming Wave Serpents and Wraithknights with a Farseer council. I don't play competitive, and never will play competitive because I am in 40k for the fun of it, and playing Eldar now because their guns were friggin scary back in 3rd. If that list that I build is something that you can only complain about just because it has ELDAR on the codex, we belong on different tables.
Azreal13 wrote: I suspect it's well earned, and possibly well deserved.
Seriously, I've encountered Eldar players who claim to "love the fluff and the models" yet when I see them play, they NEVER field anything outside of Dire Avengers, Farseers, Waveserpents and anything with "Wraith" in the name.
If you love the fluff and the models, how's about playing in a fluffy way (with specialist units working together in concert to achieve various objectives) and give some of those other wonderful models an airing?
This would only be really Fluffy if you were running a Biel-Tan army.
As for Wave Serpents and Jetseers, they fit Saim-Hann fluff very well. As does any mechanized Eldar list.
Wraithguard and Wraithknights fit with Iyanden, and even have a supplement to back them up.
SharkoutofWata wrote: Seriously, this entire thread is nothing but bad sportsmanship. As a player getting into Eldar since I am completely disenfranchised with Tyranids anymore, I'm seeing nothing but hate for an army that I have just begun to pick up. While there are players that abuse systems, saying an army that I am excited about collecting is 'anti-fun' and countless 'eldar players should be restricted with what they bring' sentiments, it makes me glad this is a global forum and not something at my local store. Because quite frankly, I wouldn't want to play with anyone that is simply so negative about an army they are playing against. I'm not about to restrict my choices of units for another player, though I absolutely will play at a points level of their choosing if I am able to, and I'm not going to play against someone that complains about my Wave Serpents or Jink saves every time I use their rules.
So much of this 'make it a fair match and fun for everyone' being thrown around, but no notice that this much hate is making it anti-fun for Eldar players to even bother playing against folks at all. Eldar is a part of the hobby too. It really is demoralizing to have a faction I'm getting into treated like the worst thing that happened to the game.
This is the attitude that I've run into. And it's like showing up to a chess match, but bringing two queens and saying "I should be allowed to play with them, I bought them after all. I don't care whether it makes the game un-fun for you."
Some people might want to try a game against that, but pretty soon no one in the club will want to play against someone that brings an unbalanced army to a chess board. It's why video games these days try so hard to get the balance right. Blizzard was releasing balance patches for over half a year when Starcraft 2 came out. They had even more balance releases after the expansion. Balance is hard with three armies, with the dozen or so armies in 40k it's probably impossible. I don't see 40k as a competitive game, for competition you need balance, which is why in pro sports the losing team gets the first pick. So if it's not competitive, then 40k must be for fun, and if your attitude is "I have my fun, I don't care if you have fun" then you're going to be playing all by yourself.
This is not chess. This is Not Starcraft 2. As you said, balance is probably impossible for 40k with so many different factions. Now all that being said, I am not going to show up to a game and have you tell me I shouldn't field the models that I have been collecting for 15+ years on the sole basis that your terrible list cant handle my Eldar list which includes Shining Spears of all things. There is not a single person that has ever refused to play a game against me, and I suspect that with your terrible attitude, it will be only you that misses out on games.
Azreal13 wrote: I suspect it's well earned, and possibly well deserved.
Seriously, I've encountered Eldar players who claim to "love the fluff and the models" yet when I see them play, they NEVER field anything outside of Dire Avengers, Farseers, Waveserpents and anything with "Wraith" in the name.
If you love the fluff and the models, how's about playing in a fluffy way (with specialist units working together in concert to achieve various objectives) and give some of those other wonderful models an airing?
This would only be really Fluffy if you were running a Biel-Tan army.
As for Wave Serpents and Jetseers, they fit Saim-Hann fluff very well. As does any mechanized Eldar list.
Wraithguard and Wraithknights fit with Iyanden, and even have a supplement to back them up.
Yea, except the vypers huh? Or falcons...
His point is, its conveniently fluffy to play crazy Eldar lists, but then you look at all the fluffy stuff thats hardly touched and you realize a lot of eldar armies happen to include all these powerful units when there are other suitable models to include.
I would have thought that a Siam Hann army would be jetbikes, autarch, vypers, Shining spears backed by some Falcons (with maybe small squads in there). But nope, apparently its farseer dire avengers (5 men, usually), wave serpents and bikes. Kinda fluffy, but not really how the art depicts them.
In the wraith front, I also imagined that they would trundle forward mindlessly guided by spirit seers and backed by weapon platforms etc. But instead its almost always a few wraiths in wave serpents with farseer and dire avengers (or something along that line).
With a codex that has SO MANY good units, only the best of the already best are chosen. In my experience this is the case as well. They defend it with fluff, but its always fluff plus wave serpents and other best of the best units.
I cant remember the last time a falcon was discussed or seen on a battle report, even though its the eldars main transport and battle tank. Even wraith lords arent seen often, not are autarchs. Where are the non Psycich based armies gone? Its all conveniently removed in favour of the best of the already best in the book.
It bugs me even more when they have a codex where there is little that is actually bad. Most players would be and do fine without all the OP units.
If someone is taking 5 man squads with wave serpents, instead of putting those 5 men in a falcon, I would question their motives immediately (in my head).
I dont refuse games, I simply fight to the end and then find a better person to play with. But I do hate the fluff twisting to justify a bland and powerful list. Especially a wraith knight, 3 wave serpents and 20 soldiers at 1000 points (my last encounter with eldar). Its a bit stupid really.
I love all the assumptions. From what everyone is claiming, I guess there's something wrong with me. Half the units that "Every Eldar player has", are ones I have either absolutely none, or just one of. No more than one of any Aspect/ Wraithguard unit, no Wraithknight, one Wraithlord, one Wave Serpent (and another of which can be either a Falcon or a Serpent, but is usually a Falcon), absolutely no Jetbike seer council (despite having a jetbike-heavy army).
I would have thought that a Siam Hann army would be jetbikes, autarch, vypers, Shining spears backed by some Falcons (with maybe small squads in there). But nope, apparently its farseer dire avengers (5 men, usually), wave serpents and bikes. Kinda fluffy, but not really how the art depicts them.
My army is absolutely the former. Except only one three-man of Shining Spears, as I made them back when they were as over-priced as they were underwhelming. I just loved the concept of them too much not to make a couple of cool conversion.
AegisGrimm wrote: From what everyone is claiming, I guess I've never been interested in being a 'standard' Eldar player. Half the units that "Every Eldar player has", are ones I have either absolutely none, or just one of. No more than one of any Aspect/ Wraithguard unit, no Wraithlord, one Wave Serpent and another of which can be either a Falcon or a Serpent, absolutely no Jetbike seer council (despite having a jetbike-heavy army).
My eldar army had no tanks. One of every aspect (3 dire avenger squads) led by a n autarch.
Still felt like easy mode at times, but it had a theme of aspect warriors. Since Guardians pilot vehicles I didnt include them. Except the Crimson hunter.
I had a lot of fun for a while, but I got funny looks by the other Eldar players.
Yeah, my army leader is an Autarch on a jetbike. I have the original 2nd edition Farseer, but haven't even gotten around to painting and fielding him yet. I was very pleased when 4th edition let me have something other than an Avatar or Farseer as an HQ unit, as I wanted to have an army of "Corsairs".
My army was originally gifted to me as a bunch of Eldar and 3rd edition Dark Eldar, and had tons of Dark Eldar jetbikes. So I really ended up with a Sam-Hain theme pretty easily, by proxying all the Reavers as Guardian Jetbikes and converting several to have underslung Splinter Cannons as counts-as Shrieker Jetbikes.
It was back in the days of 3rd edition, so I almost had a Black Guardian force from the Eye of Terror campaign.
Azreal13 wrote: I suspect it's well earned, and possibly well deserved.
Seriously, I've encountered Eldar players who claim to "love the fluff and the models" yet when I see them play, they NEVER field anything outside of Dire Avengers, Farseers, Waveserpents and anything with "Wraith" in the name.
If you love the fluff and the models, how's about playing in a fluffy way (with specialist units working together in concert to achieve various objectives) and give some of those other wonderful models an airing?
This would only be really Fluffy if you were running a Biel-Tan army.
As for Wave Serpents and Jetseers, they fit Saim-Hann fluff very well. As does any mechanized Eldar list.
Wraithguard and Wraithknights fit with Iyanden, and even have a supplement to back them up.
Yea, except the vypers huh? Or falcons...
His point is, its conveniently fluffy to play crazy Eldar lists, but then you look at all the fluffy stuff thats hardly touched and you realize a lot of eldar armies happen to include all these powerful units when there are other suitable models to include.
I would have thought that a Siam Hann army would be jetbikes, autarch, vypers, Shining spears backed by some Falcons (with maybe small squads in there). But nope, apparently its farseer dire avengers (5 men, usually), wave serpents and bikes. Kinda fluffy, but not really how the art depicts them.
In the wraith front, I also imagined that they would trundle forward mindlessly guided by spirit seers and backed by weapon platforms etc. But instead its almost always a few wraiths in wave serpents with farseer and dire avengers (or something along that line).
With a codex that has SO MANY good units, only the best of the already best are chosen. In my experience this is the case as well. They defend it with fluff, but its always fluff plus wave serpents and other best of the best units.
I cant remember the last time a falcon was discussed or seen on a battle report, even though its the eldars main transport and battle tank. Even wraith lords arent seen often, not are autarchs. Where are the non Psycich based armies gone? Its all conveniently removed in favour of the best of the already best in the book.
It bugs me even more when they have a codex where there is little that is actually bad. Most players would be and do fine without all the OP units.
If someone is taking 5 man squads with wave serpents, instead of putting those 5 men in a falcon, I would question their motives immediately (in my head).
I dont refuse games, I simply fight to the end and then find a better person to play with. But I do hate the fluff twisting to justify a bland and powerful list. Especially a wraith knight, 3 wave serpents and 20 soldiers at 1000 points (my last encounter with eldar). Its a bit stupid really.
Wow, not only do we agree on something, we agree on it hard.
One can summarise Eldar players by the microcosm on my local club, which features three regular Eldar players.
The first, the classic WAAC player, plays nothing but MSUDA in Serpents with Knjght back up, when he isn't playing his Jetseer Council.
The second plays a little serpent heavy, but his lists frequently feature outliers such as Swopping Hawks and Vypers, as well as other, good but less optimal units like Jetbikes and Warp Spiders. He's even been known to run the odd Avatar.
The third has started a Guard army because he feels bad about exploiting such lopsided rules.
I force myself to take a squad of Swooping Hawks because in my "Corsair" theme, the plastic Dark Eldar Scourges (wielding just the Carbines) make such freaking awesome savage-looking Swooping Hawks I want to see them on the battlefield (and show them off). Same thing with a squad of Storm Guardians made from the Sybarite arms off the old Dark Eldar plastics coupled with the new Dark Eldar special weapons that looks good enough to be "counts as" special weapons.
Anyway, I feel they are in need of a nerf. It will hopefully happen soon and they can take blood angels place.
I remember sitting in a game store a few years ago (during 5th edition) when Blood Angels were exceptionally powerful and Eldar were weak. The Blood Angels player rubbed the beating in as much as he possibly could. Calling the Eldar players units "cheesedar" and other such nonsense with every vehicle or unit kill. It left said player extremely demoralized and deflated (as it happened all the time at said shop). I often saw similar instances in games against Tau (who also had an old and outdated codex). It was also not limited to Blood Angels. It also included Imperial Guard and Grey Knight players.
I still feel bitter over how I saw the xenos players treated. To those Imperial players of that persuasion I say stuff it. Take your licks like everybody else.
Bitterness aside. Imbalance combined with long update periods and lack of fixing problems creates a player-base divide. It always has (since I started in early third edition). I've found that the best thing to do is to talk to your opponent about worries you have with their army list (and expect visa versa) before the game. Figure out a way to make sure you both have fun. It works surprisingly well.
This post summs up 5th edtion for me. With the new eldar book I began to say Its time to get a taste of your own medicine Imperial scum!
But it got to a point where it wasnt fun. any victory of mine, no matter how friendly I made the list was discredited because I play eldar. So then I began to wish for the 5th edtion days, where I could bring the best lists I could make, and not have people b****ing about it all game.
For people saying that its not chess and because there are so many factions it can't be balanced; I can think of several games that manage to do just that It's GW's fault.
Space Marine players always tell me that they play the faction because they like the fluff and they like the models, but every Space Marine player I've ever played against always "conveniently" doesn't take the crap units and usually uses the good stuff like bikers, grav-centurions, chapter masters etc.
I guess Space Marines are an OP faction and everyone who plays it is a WAACTFG sociopath who only plays the faction because it's overpowered.
My personal anecdotes are obviously proof of that. Dur hurr hurr dur.
MWHistorian wrote: For people saying that its not chess and because there are so many factions it can't be balanced; I can think of several games that manage to do just that It's GW's fault.
Trying to turn another thread into an "I hate GW" thread?
Azreal13 wrote: I suspect it's well earned, and possibly well deserved.
Seriously, I've encountered Eldar players who claim to "love the fluff and the models" yet when I see them play, they NEVER field anything outside of Dire Avengers, Farseers, Waveserpents and anything with "Wraith" in the name.
If you love the fluff and the models, how's about playing in a fluffy way (with specialist units working together in concert to achieve various objectives) and give some of those other wonderful models an airing?
This would only be really Fluffy if you were running a Biel-Tan army.
As for Wave Serpents and Jetseers, they fit Saim-Hann fluff very well. As does any mechanized Eldar list.
Wraithguard and Wraithknights fit with Iyanden, and even have a supplement to back them up.
Yea, except the vypers huh? Or falcons...
His point is, its conveniently fluffy to play crazy Eldar lists, but then you look at all the fluffy stuff thats hardly touched and you realize a lot of eldar armies happen to include all these powerful units when there are other suitable models to include.
I would have thought that a Siam Hann army would be jetbikes, autarch, vypers, Shining spears backed by some Falcons (with maybe small squads in there). But nope, apparently its farseer dire avengers (5 men, usually), wave serpents and bikes. Kinda fluffy, but not really how the art depicts them.
In the wraith front, I also imagined that they would trundle forward mindlessly guided by spirit seers and backed by weapon platforms etc. But instead its almost always a few wraiths in wave serpents with farseer and dire avengers (or something along that line).
With a codex that has SO MANY good units, only the best of the already best are chosen. In my experience this is the case as well. They defend it with fluff, but its always fluff plus wave serpents and other best of the best units.
I cant remember the last time a falcon was discussed or seen on a battle report, even though its the eldars main transport and battle tank. Even wraith lords arent seen often, not are autarchs. Where are the non Psycich based armies gone? Its all conveniently removed in favour of the best of the already best in the book.
It bugs me even more when they have a codex where there is little that is actually bad. Most players would be and do fine without all the OP units.
If someone is taking 5 man squads with wave serpents, instead of putting those 5 men in a falcon, I would question their motives immediately (in my head).
I dont refuse games, I simply fight to the end and then find a better person to play with. But I do hate the fluff twisting to justify a bland and powerful list. Especially a wraith knight, 3 wave serpents and 20 soldiers at 1000 points (my last encounter with eldar). Its a bit stupid really.
So what you are saying is that if my army does not conform to your own personal strict guidelines, it cant be fluffy? Hell, look at the Eldar Starter set....it includes 5 Dire Avengers and a Serpent, and is painted as Saim-Hann. The great thing about 40k is that the fluff is very loose and can be interpreted in many ways. To say your way is more "correct" than anything else is pretty ignorant.
Now granted, there are the WAAC Eldar donkey caves out there, but those people also exist across all of the other factions. It is pretty damn rude to lump every other Eldar player in with that group, which is what the title and premise of this thread is based on.
I'm really glad the regulars at my local GW don't reflect the personalities made evident on this thread. Spending so much time griping about how Eldar are "anti-fun" isn't really helping you have more fun. With all the time people have spent on this thread they could have played a few games against other armies.
Random Dude wrote: I'm really glad the regulars at my local GW don't reflect the personalities made evident on this thread. Spending so much time griping about how Eldar are "anti-fun" isn't really helping you have more fun. With all the time people have spent on this thread they could have played a few games against other armies.
Welcome to the internet! You must be new here We discuss things to death, that's how it works. If you are interested in not wasting time beating subjects to death, you are better off talking to people in person.
Azreal13 wrote: I suspect it's well earned, and possibly well deserved.
Seriously, I've encountered Eldar players who claim to "love the fluff and the models" yet when I see them play, they NEVER field anything outside of Dire Avengers, Farseers, Waveserpents and anything with "Wraith" in the name.
If you love the fluff and the models, how's about playing in a fluffy way (with specialist units working together in concert to achieve various objectives) and give some of those other wonderful models an airing?
This would only be really Fluffy if you were running a Biel-Tan army.
As for Wave Serpents and Jetseers, they fit Saim-Hann fluff very well. As does any mechanized Eldar list.
Wraithguard and Wraithknights fit with Iyanden, and even have a supplement to back them up.
Yea, except the vypers huh? Or falcons...
His point is, its conveniently fluffy to play crazy Eldar lists, but then you look at all the fluffy stuff thats hardly touched and you realize a lot of eldar armies happen to include all these powerful units when there are other suitable models to include.
I would have thought that a Siam Hann army would be jetbikes, autarch, vypers, Shining spears backed by some Falcons (with maybe small squads in there). But nope, apparently its farseer dire avengers (5 men, usually), wave serpents and bikes. Kinda fluffy, but not really how the art depicts them.
In the wraith front, I also imagined that they would trundle forward mindlessly guided by spirit seers and backed by weapon platforms etc. But instead its almost always a few wraiths in wave serpents with farseer and dire avengers (or something along that line).
With a codex that has SO MANY good units, only the best of the already best are chosen. In my experience this is the case as well. They defend it with fluff, but its always fluff plus wave serpents and other best of the best units.
I cant remember the last time a falcon was discussed or seen on a battle report, even though its the eldars main transport and battle tank. Even wraith lords arent seen often, not are autarchs. Where are the non Psycich based armies gone? Its all conveniently removed in favour of the best of the already best in the book.
It bugs me even more when they have a codex where there is little that is actually bad. Most players would be and do fine without all the OP units.
If someone is taking 5 man squads with wave serpents, instead of putting those 5 men in a falcon, I would question their motives immediately (in my head).
I dont refuse games, I simply fight to the end and then find a better person to play with. But I do hate the fluff twisting to justify a bland and powerful list. Especially a wraith knight, 3 wave serpents and 20 soldiers at 1000 points (my last encounter with eldar). Its a bit stupid really.
Wow, not only do we agree on something, we agree on it hard.
One can summarise Eldar players by the microcosm on my local club, which features three regular Eldar players.
The first, the classic WAAC player, plays nothing but MSUDA in Serpents with Knjght back up, when he isn't playing his Jetseer Council.
The second plays a little serpent heavy, but his lists frequently feature outliers such as Swopping Hawks and Vypers, as well as other, good but less optimal units like Jetbikes and Warp Spiders. He's even been known to run the odd Avatar.
The third has started a Guard army because he feels bad about exploiting such lopsided rules.
Azreal13 wrote: I suspect it's well earned, and possibly well deserved.
Seriously, I've encountered Eldar players who claim to "love the fluff and the models" yet when I see them play, they NEVER field anything outside of Dire Avengers, Farseers, Waveserpents and anything with "Wraith" in the name.
If you love the fluff and the models, how's about playing in a fluffy way (with specialist units working together in concert to achieve various objectives) and give some of those other wonderful models an airing?
This would only be really Fluffy if you were running a Biel-Tan army.
As for Wave Serpents and Jetseers, they fit Saim-Hann fluff very well. As does any mechanized Eldar list.
Wraithguard and Wraithknights fit with Iyanden, and even have a supplement to back them up.
Yea, except the vypers huh? Or falcons...
His point is, its conveniently fluffy to play crazy Eldar lists, but then you look at all the fluffy stuff thats hardly touched and you realize a lot of eldar armies happen to include all these powerful units when there are other suitable models to include.
I would have thought that a Siam Hann army would be jetbikes, autarch, vypers, Shining spears backed by some Falcons (with maybe small squads in there). But nope, apparently its farseer dire avengers (5 men, usually), wave serpents and bikes. Kinda fluffy, but not really how the art depicts them.
In the wraith front, I also imagined that they would trundle forward mindlessly guided by spirit seers and backed by weapon platforms etc. But instead its almost always a few wraiths in wave serpents with farseer and dire avengers (or something along that line).
With a codex that has SO MANY good units, only the best of the already best are chosen. In my experience this is the case as well. They defend it with fluff, but its always fluff plus wave serpents and other best of the best units.
I cant remember the last time a falcon was discussed or seen on a battle report, even though its the eldars main transport and battle tank. Even wraith lords arent seen often, not are autarchs. Where are the non Psycich based armies gone? Its all conveniently removed in favour of the best of the already best in the book.
It bugs me even more when they have a codex where there is little that is actually bad. Most players would be and do fine without all the OP units.
If someone is taking 5 man squads with wave serpents, instead of putting those 5 men in a falcon, I would question their motives immediately (in my head).
I dont refuse games, I simply fight to the end and then find a better person to play with. But I do hate the fluff twisting to justify a bland and powerful list. Especially a wraith knight, 3 wave serpents and 20 soldiers at 1000 points (my last encounter with eldar). Its a bit stupid really.
So what you are saying is that if my army does not conform to your own personal strict guidelines, it cant be fluffy? Hell, look at the Eldar Starter set....it includes 5 Dire Avengers and a Serpent, and is painted as Saim-Hann. The great thing about 40k is that the fluff is very loose and can be interpreted in many ways. To say your way is more "correct" than anything else is pretty ignorant.
Now granted, there are the WAAC Eldar donkey caves out there, but those people also exist across all of the other factions. It is pretty damn rude to lump every other Eldar player in with that group, which is what the title and premise of this thread is based on.
I said most. Not all. I too was once an Eldar Player.
No what I am saying is fluffy isnt wave serpent, wave serpent, wave serpent, knight, bike seer, wave serpent, wave serpent, wave serpent etc.
5 dire avengers in a wave serpent is fine, but 2 squads of 5 in 2 wave serpents is not when you have jetbikes as your other mandatory choice. That is not fluffy. If you want to carry 5 men around in all your transports, invest in falcons as that is fluffy.
Remember common sense should apply to lists. and common sense isnt having 2 transports for 10 men, when 12 can fit into one. For an army famed for its efficiency, that is not fluffy.
Random Dude wrote: I'm really glad the regulars at my local GW don't reflect the personalities made evident on this thread. Spending so much time griping about how Eldar are "anti-fun" isn't really helping you have more fun. With all the time people have spent on this thread they could have played a few games against other armies.
The time spent on this thread has earned me money (I am working) so if anything I am not being able to play a game in this time.
MWHistorian wrote: For people saying that its not chess and because there are so many factions it can't be balanced; I can think of several games that manage to do just that It's GW's fault.
Trying to turn another thread into an "I hate GW" thread?
Random Dude wrote: I'm really glad the regulars at my local GW don't reflect the personalities made evident on this thread. Spending so much time griping about how Eldar are "anti-fun" isn't really helping you have more fun. With all the time people have spent on this thread they could have played a few games against other armies.
Seek out one of the regulars who plays Serpent spam, play them, then come back when you're better informed.
Random Dude wrote: I'm really glad the regulars at my local GW don't reflect the personalities made evident on this thread. Spending so much time griping about how Eldar are "anti-fun" isn't really helping you have more fun. With all the time people have spent on this thread they could have played a few games against other armies.
Seek out one of the regulars who plays Serpent spam, play them, then come back when you're better informed.
Well, I don't see a problem with it. I'll say it again, if you have a problem with serpent spam, that's fine. But don't expect me to have one as well just because you do.
BlaxicanX wrote: Space Marine players always tell me that they play the faction because they like the fluff and they like the models, but every Space Marine player I've ever played against always "conveniently" doesn't take the crap units and usually uses the good stuff like bikers, grav-centurions, chapter masters etc.
I guess Space Marines are an OP faction and everyone who plays it is a WAACTFG sociopath who only plays the faction because it's overpowered.
My personal anecdotes are obviously proof of that. Dur hurr hurr dur.
It might also be that Bikers were actually good in 5th edition as well, same with Chapter Master (Captains, what are those again?). So SM players likely have a few left over.
I said most. Not all. I too was once an Eldar Player.
No what I am saying is fluffy isnt wave serpent, wave serpent, wave serpent, knight, bike seer, wave serpent, wave serpent, wave serpent etc.
5 dire avengers in a wave serpent is fine, but 2 squads of 5 in 2 wave serpents is not when you have jetbikes as your other mandatory choice. That is not fluffy. If you want to carry 5 men around in all your transports, invest in falcons as that is fluffy.
Remember common sense should apply to lists. and common sense isnt having 2 transports for 10 men, when 12 can fit into one. For an army famed for its efficiency, that is not fluffy.
If I were an Autarch, and I had a Crack unit of Dire Avengers who needed to stay alive as long as possible in order to capture vital battlefield objectives, common sense would dictate that durability of the transport would be the most important factor when choosing vehicle, not capacity. Another view is that 5 men are half as difficult to train as 10 men, and a Serpent requires less resources to produce than a Falcon. (the lower point cost reflects this). So as an Autarch I am spending less time in training and less resources to accomplish the same goal, to nearly the same effect. For an army famed for its efficiency, that is pretty damn fluffy.
Like I said, the fluff is really open ended. Either way, this is all assuming that every game HAS to be fluffy in the first place. Non-fluffy games do, in fact, exist.
No, that is wrong. Eldar have no resources. They simply grow what they need.
What would be efficient in that situation is for the autarch to use falcons, as the falcon hasnt WASTED space and (in theory) has the fire power that ENHANCES to squads ability. That is efficient.
Less transport space, more fire power. Thats what should be transporting small squads. Points reflect nothing (as evident in the Eldar Codex)
So since the only resource is lives and souls, there is no reason for wasted space and efficiency.
Swastakowey wrote: No, that is wrong. Eldar have no resources. They simply grow what they need.
What would be efficient in that situation is for the autarch to use falcons, as the falcon hasnt WASTED space and (in theory) has the fire power that ENHANCES to squads ability. That is efficient.
Less transport space, more fire power. Thats what should be transporting small squads. Points reflect nothing (as evident in the Eldar Codex)
So since the only resource is lives and souls, there is no reason for wasted space and efficiency.
So I disagree.
Psychic energy is also a resource, which the Bonesingers must dip into when creating anything. (such as a tank) Also, using psychic energy to create things is very risky, and very well could cost a soul if there are any unforeseen fluctuations in the warp.
If it did not cost resources to create engines of war, then the true most efficient options would be to field an army of Phantom Titans. This would put the least amount of lives and souls on the battlefield and at the same time provide maximum fire superiority.
This is not a topic to talk about the good of eldar, it is for the anti fun of eldar, extremefreak17, random dude, if you guys want to giggle and talk about how 'awesome' you THINK eldar are, make a thread for it. Do not bring it to this thread which is solely about how they are the suck.
On topic, I feel as though if we get lucky and the powers that be here our cries eldar might get needed hard soon. I personally don't mind playing a few people who have eldar armies at my flgs, they run two wraithnknights, but alas, no dumb serpents spam at all.
Is this whine fest still going? Its like something new every time books get updated. Yeah Eldar are so terrible to play against because playing against AV13 necrons with 4 flyers, tau with 3+ riptides and 60+ missiles a turn, or the only flavor of space marines in the game, white scars running you down first turn is nothing. Not surprisingly eldar didn't even do that well at the BAO. 4 spots in the top 20? So anti fun.
Goldphish wrote: Is this whine fest still going? Its like something new every time books get updated. Yeah Eldar are so terrible to play against because playing against AV13 necrons with 4 flyers, tau with 3+ riptides and 60+ missiles a turn, or the only flavor of space marines in the game, white scars running you down first turn is nothing. Not surprisingly eldar didn't even do that well at the BAO. 4 spots in the top 20? So anti fun.
Except that's total rubbish - Many of the most recent codexes did not get the overpowered cheese like the Riptide or the Cheese Serpent - the latter was made even more broken by 7th ed changes.
Broken units spammed help no one - except the most WAAC gamers enjoy life or gaming.
Like I said, the fluff is really open ended. Either way, this is all assuming that every game HAS to be fluffy in the first place. Non-fluffy games do, in fact, exist.
No what he is saying and many others is that some Eldar players exclusively field/ed Wave Serpent/Seer Council spam and say oh yeah its just a fluffy army you should be able to deal with it with your fluffy army - (which is not just spammed OP units) Its called having your cake and eating it.
Now I totally agree - people should be able to field the units they have bought which is why the problem units should be fixed so we can all use them and not feel bad - (or you may not feel bad but your opponents might just give up when they see the spam)
Lots of armies had access to cheese units though. Or are we not going to count the Heldrake, 2++ rerolling deamons, grav-centurions deathstars, cheap divination psykers for all imperial factions, and IK that every imperial faction has had access to.
It's easier to count armies that didn't get something cheesy. Orks, DA, and Tyranids really didn't get anything that stands out.
Savageconvoy wrote: Lots of armies had access to cheese units though. Or are we not going to count the Heldrake, 2++ rerolling deamons, grav-centurions deathstars, cheap divination psykers for all imperial factions, and IK that every imperial faction has had access to.
It's easier to count armies that didn't get something cheesy. Orks, DA, and Tyranids really didn't get anything that stands out.
Many of the issues with other armies were fixed by 7th or the subsequent FAQs though. Even the worst Tau army got taken out. Serpent spam just kept right in truckin though, unless you want to count the "nerf" to jink, which is essentially just more of a trade off now than it was, and with twin linked everything, still doesn't hurt a Serpent as much as essentially every other skimmer/FMC
Lshowell wrote: This is not a topic to talk about the good of eldar, it is for the anti fun of eldar, extremefreak17, random dude, if you guys want to giggle and talk about how 'awesome' you THINK eldar are, make a thread for it. Do not bring it to this thread which is solely about how they are the suck.
On topic, I feel as though if we get lucky and the powers that be here our cries eldar might get needed hard soon. I personally don't mind playing a few people who have eldar armies at my flgs, they run two wraithnknights, but alas, no dumb serpents spam at all.
My last post was ''I don't have a problem with Serpent Spam" that's it. I didn't realize I am required to share your opinion.
Savageconvoy wrote: Lots of armies had access to cheese units though. Or are we not going to count the Heldrake, 2++ rerolling deamons, grav-centurions deathstars, cheap divination psykers for all imperial factions, and IK that every imperial faction has had access to.
It's easier to count armies that didn't get something cheesy. Orks, DA, and Tyranids really didn't get anything that stands out.
IK aren't that bad, Heldakes didn't let CSM win (They were still rather low on the tourny chart), 2++ daemons is the only comparable faction out of it and even then Eldar Placed higher in the tourny scene.
Versus 7e, where, despite their buffs, they still lost handily to Marines? What wins in tournies isn't everything. After all, the list the OP faced won't be winning any tournies, but still wasn't fun.
I maintain that, while Eldar are broken right now, most/all factions can put out lists that the OP and others wouldn't enjoy playing against. CSM are considered crap right now, but Raptors + Sorcs would probably have been even worse.
As for an edition when Eldar take it, over half of 6th had them in the same place as BAs. So it wasn't that long ago. I hope the Serpent and Knight get nerfed, but let's not rewrite history.
And the jink nerf definitely hit Serpents harder than Ghost Arks. Not hard enough, certainly, but let's keep things strait.
I've played against an army with 6 wave serpents, I took out 4 of them. It had 2 wraith knights which were also dead by the end of the game. I play SW which are considered mid tier at best until our new codex comes out. With a list like the OP ran, he would think any competitive list is the anti fun. I'll say it again, IG can deal with eldar better than almost any other army can. If you're an IG player and you get stomped by a bad eldar list like that, you need to seriously reconsider your list. Also, this is a discussion thread. If you want an echo chamber, go somewhere else. Some of us don't play eldar and still think they're cool because we spend our time looking through our codex for answers instead of whining to anyone who will listen about how tough an opponent is.
Bharring wrote: Versus 7e, where, despite their buffs, they still lost handily to Marines? What wins in tournies isn't everything. After all, the list the OP faced won't be winning any tournies, but still wasn't fun.
I maintain that, while Eldar are broken right now, most/all factions can put out lists that the OP and others wouldn't enjoy playing against. CSM are considered crap right now, but Raptors + Sorcs would probably have been even worse.
As for an edition when Eldar take it, over half of 6th had them in the same place as BAs. So it wasn't that long ago. I hope the Serpent and Knight get nerfed, but let's not rewrite history.
And the jink nerf definitely hit Serpents harder than Ghost Arks. Not hard enough, certainly, but let's keep things strait.
Don't agree - you can no longer alpha strike Serpents - major plus, they only need to jink if shot at - so when spammed all the other ones that did not get shot at are fine - and thats the heart of the issue - one is bad enough - mutiples sap the game of any enjoyment unless you enjoying plying a lopsided game ( which a few people do and then claim to be tactical geniuses) They are a more powerful scoring unit than before. The jink ave - if they have to take it is better than before.
Whilst other armies may be able to put some OP lists - the generic list is not OP and broken - which it is with Eldar - again back to the Original point - sapping the fun from the game.............
It is unfair on those Eldar players who want a decent game that GW made the Serpent borken and then made it the only DT.
I would have no problem with serpents if the Shield was a one use weapon and once fired negated the ability to downgrade pens. Aside from this they really are not that scary.
Also perhaps the weapon that makes everything twin linked should not be... twin linked.
Las wrote: I would have no problem with serpents if the Shield was a one use weapon and once fired negated the ability to downgrade pens. Aside from this they really are not that scary.
Also perhaps the weapon that makes everything twin linked should not be... twin linked.
See thats the issue - they would be fine if they were toned down - but they are not - they are broken.
Random Dude wrote: Just out of curiosity, what were Wave Serpents like in the old Eldar Codex?
90 pts
Same excellent armour (12/12/10)
Energy field meant shots from front or side could never be higher than S8, and Melta did not get extra pen -no defense in CC Came with TL Shuriken Cat and one Heavy weapon - TL Shurikin Cannon, (10), TL Scattter (25), TL Missile (30), TL Starcannon (35), TL Bright (45)
Upgrade Cats to Sh Cannon (10)
It was also BS 3
Cats were S4 AP 5 - no pseudo rending
No way to TL all the weapons on a successful hit
No Super powerful shield gun that blast opposing transports at 60" range with laughable ease and ignores cover and contradicts the fluff in the Codex (weapon of last resort only)
Gwaihirsbrother wrote: Durable, moderately expensive transports with unremarkable shooting.
Didn't they still have pulse lasers and shuriken cannons?
They do not have pulse lasers.... never have. Maybe you're thinking of a falcon?
They did have scatter lasers same as now, but the laser lock rule did not exist.
Typo. I meant to say Scatter Lasers.
This could be shaking the hive here, as we all have very strong opinions here in the world of anonymity... but I think a lot of the issue with Wave Serpents is the Falcon. The Falcon should also be a dedicated transport option (like the forgeworld corsair list). If I had other options to hide my very squishy space elves in, I'd take it. Even a Venom equivalent would be nice, but instead it is ONLY the Wave Serpent. So If I want to protect my troops I am forced to select one of the most high-powered units in the game. That sucks as now I have to hear about it everytime I play.
With that being said, the rest of the game is catching up to this codex creep. I was at a local NOVA prep tournament this past weekend and I was the only Eldar player. I did field a couple wave serpents, but it was not pure WS Spam, no one seemed to have too much trouble getting rid of them. There is a lot of good ignores cover firepower out there now to help even it up, and prescience as well.
As far as the OP, I think as the Eldar fad begins to fade the Eldar will be a lot less annoying to play. The "army of the Month" players will go on to the next hotness (thankfully) and this will become a moot issue. The game always has THOSE lists, some of us remember the Grey Knights of late 5th for example (there have been many over the years). I remember walking into my local game store and being asked directly if I played Grey Knights, because if so... I wasn't allowed to play them there. I have not seen this type of animosity towards Eldar, but this thread definitely indicates it is out there.
I guess the point I am driving towards is Warhammer is a rock, paper, scissors game... it always has been and when a codex comes out with hyper-efficient choices (especially when they're the only dedicated transport option) that becomes the big hated army. I know in 6th seeing those death stars like screamer star or ovesa was the worst. I HATED playing against them, but you find ways around their gimmick and the fun becomes how to take this guys army apart, in spite of how the rules may favor him.
I do realize this is a piss and moan thread, so feel free to attack anything I've said here, but the point is there will always be a "no-fun" army to fight and there will always be a paper to your rock. This is part of the game, and it always has been, so if that is your gripe and major issue... maybe warhammer isn't for you. Perhaps another more mathematically sound game is better... but for me... it's 40k.
in time. You will learn how to overcome them. If not, hopefully by then the next edition has come and their codex goes back a bit.
) is Wave Serpents and i don´t like to cheese them up either...i bring maybe two in a game. I hate Necrons the most, but i still play against them. In the 5th ed. i refused to play them one time, but when the 6th edition came, it was all good again. If someone is cheesing it up (like 6 
r, bro, do you even Warmahordes?
I may missunderstand something here. But to me being 
) but your animosity towards Eldar players is extremely unnecessary.
