SGTPozy wrote:
Do we really need three different threads for this stuff? People hated on me for my "Cheesy" threads yet you've done the same.

 TheNewBlood wrote:
Was this errata made with the current codex, or just the hints from the rumor thread? Because it doesn't seem to match up with the Eldar Craftworld codex I know. Still, there are some good ideas here.

The Good/Obvious:
Change back to 6th edition Distort rules. No complaints there.
Wraithknight as MC, keeps current points cost. Wraithcannon upgrade too expensive IMO.
Windriders/Skyrunners get 4+ save. Keeps it consistent with other Eldar bikers.
Warp Spiders cost increase. They honestly deserve it, as well as only being able to only jump once in the enemy shooting phase.
Wraithlord points decrease. It needs it, and with that people might actually run it.

The Bad/Dumb:
2d6 highest for Warhost run move. Eldar already have fleet, so this isn't much of a change. I also fail to see how an automatic 6" run move from a restricted formation is that huge of a buff to warrant a nerf.
Scatter Laser to S5. The problem with the SL was that it had Laser Lock. Now that it's gone, the Scatter Laser isn't nearly as powerful. Why change to S5?
No change to Windrider weapon options. One per three is an obvious change that greatly decreases the brokenness of Scatbikers.
Change to Bladestorm. Shuriken weapons need it to provide Eldar infantry with gun that isn't the worst in the game. The change also has no effect on their ability to kill MEQ, if that was the intent.
Vehicle wargear is costed appropriately now for what they do. The only real change needed was Holo-Fields going to 5++.
Spiritseer allowing for slot swaps. This is 7th edition; no codex is doing this anymore.
Guardian weapons platforms are costed well now. They're also free in the Guardian Battlehost.
Storm Guardians, bad as they are, don't need to get worse with the removal of their meltas.
Exarch upgrades are costed appropriately in the current codex. The only real problem I have with them is how cheap the upgrade to them is. Should be 20 points.
Wave Serpent is fine now that the Serpent Shield was nerfed.
EML upgrade is too cheap. The reason it costs so much is that it has the longest range and most firing modes of any Eldar heavy weapon.
Crimson Death is fine the way it is now. 420 points for three AV10 flyers with a 4+ save is not nearly as bad as people make it out to be.
No mention of the Dire Avenger Shrine formation, which is much worse than Crimson Death.

In summary, this errata doesn't go far enough in key areas, and too far in others. Honestly, if you ignore the obvious brokenness and cheese of certain units, Eldar have a perfectly balanced codex. All this errata does in bring Eldar too far down in power.

 TheNewBlood wrote:
I did look at the Space Marine and General errata; there are plenty of problems there too, as others have pointed out.

The reason I used the terms "obvious" and "dumb" are because the problems with Eldar are glaringly obvious to anyone with even the slightest sense of game balance. Also, going by your thread title, you might enjoy some scorn and snark.

The problem with your suggestion of 2d6 highest for the Warhost is that Eldar have fleet, so it would be 2d6 picked re-rollable highest. Mathematically, this works out to around 5.5" average, so almost not a change for more hassle. Or are you getting rid of fleet for Eldar as well? Because that really would be dumb.

Battle Focus is the only reason why people play Footdar any more; it gives very squishy troops some needed mobility.

There is already enough differentiation between the Eldar heavy weapons. Just because Heavy Bolters are bad at S5 for their cost doesn't mean that SL should be made bad at S5. All this suggestion does is make the default Shuriken Cannon better.

The problem with Scatbikers is that they have too many heavy weapons in the squad, not that their heavy weapons are too good. It also doesn't address the Shuriken Cannon in the Windrider host.

People don't take Guardians for the heavy weapon; those are only to allow them to contribute at range. Guardians are taken because they are a cheap scoring unit that can shoot anything to death at close range, especially with psychic support.

The EML is fine at 15 points currently, same with the vehicle upgrades. The reason nobody took these before was because of monobuild tendencies in the previous codex with certain units *coughWaveSerpentscough*.

4+ re-rollable sounds tough, but keep in mind that these are AV10 3HP vehicles. They are not easy to take down, and jinking massively reduces their damage output.

Your suggestions address the fundamental problems of the new Eldar codex, but go too far in the other direction; applying nerfs and buffs where none were needed.

Bharring wrote:
I really like why you're doing. And really agree with most of what you've come to. That said, I do disagree with some points. Which is natural - the closer you get to balance, the more split people will be in regards to your suggestions.

To be clear, overall, what you have done is better than the current state. Don't mistake my criticisms!

On to the specifics about Eldar:

It feels like this writeup is mostly "Last Dex -1". Which is probably a good thing - as a whole the last dex was cleaner and better. That said, in some cases, perhaps it'd be better to stick to the new paradigm.

The WraithKnight. Everyone's favorite pseudo GMC. Your proposed solution is to basically revert it to the last book and drop a HP. I felt like the last book went wrong where it tried to make it as much a GMC it could without using those rules. I think it really should be a GMC.
That said, the new book made things worse by (1) criminally undercosted a mini-Titan, and (2) made spamming it both possible and easy, despite the move to LoW.
It seems to me that the appropriate fix is a points boost. And deny spam. Perhaps 360 for Wraithcannons, 350 for the other build? And limit its selection in any Detachment (see Wraith Constrict) to 0-1. How would that route compare to the above?

Bladestorm. I think its the most overrated thing in the CW Eldar toolbox, but many (including you) think its one of the most stupid. I've argued most points to death elsewhere, so won't go too far into this one. Being AP3 and not auto wounding on a 6 will work, if necessary. Remember that CW Eldar get very little in the way of Specialist and Heavy weapons. The Shiriken Catapult is already a very weak weapon (12" range), and the Avenger Shuriken Cstapault needs to be better than the Boltgun or Gauss Rifle somehow. If we were redoing units (out of scope) other fixes become reasonable, but this'll work.

Scatter Lasers. We need to decide if this is an analogue to the Heavy Bolter or the Assault Cannon. As discussed elsewhere, S5 makes it compare reasonably to the Heavy Bolter, and so you've re-pointed it to match. The other option is to point it as an analogue to the Assault Cannon. Different roles but comparable. Either change should work.

Runes of the Farseer. They didn't need that buff. Much less for free. That said, when doing CSM (or Tigiris), take note of Spell Familiar. Recall how amazing rerolling Psyker checks. Then ask why CSM sorcerers should be so much better at psykers than Farseers. Again, your Change works. Just a comment.

Gotta start writing code. I'll respond more later.

 AtoMaki wrote:
Zagman, I hope you are aware to the fact that Bladestorm turns only To Wound rolls of 6 into AP2. That's as much as 1 AP2 Wound per 6 Bladestorm Wounds. So ten Avengers firing 20 shots with their Shuriken Catapults will score something like 2 AP2 Wounds, roughly as much as any random unit with BS4 and 2 plasma guns. The rest of their shots will be no better than your average Boltgun shots. And two plasma guns in a basic infantry unit isn't such a big deal. In fact, the 10 Avengers with their 20 shots aren't such a big deal either. 10 Fire Warriors do roughly the same damage to targets with 2+ saves with their Strength 5 guns.

If you want to shake up Eldar weapons, then revamp Shuriken weapons from the ground: say, decrease their Strength by 1 (2 for the Shuriken Cannon) and add +1 RoF (double the RoF for the Shuriken Cannon). This way, you have the ultimate infantry killer weapon family, while the Scatter Laser is the jack-of-all-trades, and the Starcannon is the big guy (increase its Strength to 7 because Strength 6 is stupid for this weapon).

Also, the Warp Spiders still have unlimited jumps in the enemy Shooting Phase. Feel my disappointment .

 Zagman wrote:

I'm well aware of the Math haha, but in rapid fire range 80pts of Storm Guardians and 90pts of Guardian Defenders deal .73 wounds through 2+AS and 2.2 wounds that ignore armor. So 3 Wounds.

Five Tacticals with Plasmagun 85 pts(80 under my errata) deals .44 wounds through 2+AS and 1.1 wounds that ignore armor. 1.5 Wounds. It'd have to be 10 Tacticals with 2 Plasma Guns to put out the same damage as 10 Guardians.

Bharring wrote:Ignoring range and durability, of course they look strong. Factoring it in, however, it is a different story.

If 13 Guardians get the drop on 9 CSM (same points), their best target, they kill 5. Good round.

If 9 CSM get the drop on 13 Guardians (Assume RF range), they kill 8. Much better round.

So, ignoring everything but optimal strength and durability, it isn't looking so good for Guardians as a troop of the line.

Start talking range (CSM should get 2 rounds of non-RF shooting first), and things become scary bad for Guardians.

Ignoring range and durability, only focusing on shot strength, is of course going to make short range, GEQ survivable units look OP.

All that said, Guardians aren't troops of the line so much as specialists.

They man their heavy weapon, and hold a backfield objective. Getting them within 12" range is a very costly endeavor for the Eldar player. And they die just as fast as 5ppm Guardsmen.

(I'd still accept AP3 on 6 Bladestorm, just trying to clean up the math.)

AtoMaki wrote:

 Zagman wrote:

I'm well aware of the Math haha, but in rapid fire range 80pts of Storm Guardians and 90pts of Guardian Defenders deal .73 wounds through 2+AS and 2.2 wounds that ignore armor. So 3 Wounds.

Five Tacticals with Plasmagun 85 pts(80 under my errata) deals .44 wounds through 2+AS and 1.1 wounds that ignore armor. 1.5 Wounds. It'd have to be 10 Tacticals with 2 Plasma Guns to put out the same damage as 10 Guardians.

10 IG veterans with 2 plasma guns (90 points) will do the same damage as the Guardians. For a meager +15 points, they will cause one more Wound with the plasma guns alone.

Tactical pay their points for the 3+ armor, the S4/T4, ATSKNF and the other stuff they get. Guardians can outshoot Marines, and the Marines outperform the Guardians in every other field (maybe the Guardians have a slight edge in terms of tactical mobility because Battle Focus and Fleet, but the Marines can take a Chapter Tactic to boost their mobility and deal with it). Like, what would survive 20 boltgun shots better? 90 points of Guardians or 90 points of Space Marines?

Bharring wrote:
It really comes down to is are ShuriKats the CWE equivalent to Boltguns or Boltgun/PG mixes?

I still accept the nerf, but would feel better about it if we were closer to agreement on that point.

Wraithknight: 300pts
Wargear: Ghostglaive and Scattershield
May exchange Ghostglaive and Scattershield for.... Suncannon and Scattershield: 20pts; Two Heavy Wraithcannons: 40pts
May take up to two of the following in any combination... Scatter Laser: 10pts each; Shuriken Cannon: 10pts each; Scarcannon: 15pts each

Restrictions: Add "Only one Wraithknight may be selected as a Wraith-Constructs Command Formation/Dataslate per Craftworld Warhost, this does not impact the number of Wraithknights that can be fielded through the Wraith Host Formation."

Flickerjump: Add "Only one Flickerjump may be made per Opponent's Shooting Phase."

Bharring wrote:
Gets better 'n better.

Bharring wrote:
For Matchless Agility, Crusader isn't the right fit, sure, but largely because it would invalidate getting Crusader.

The biggest balancing factor for BattleFocus, aside from durability (don't laugh! We aren't all Wraiths and vehicles!), is supposed to be its unreliability. Rolling that 1 is bad.

The minimum-4 goes a long way yo eliminate it.

Some alternate ideas:
-Language identical to Crusader, but not Crusader (When this unit Runs, roll an additional die, and discard the lowest).
-+1" to the Run (simple, but powerful)
-Minimum equal to number of Warhost Guardian (Storm, Defender, or Windrider) squads on the board (or within 24"), capped at 6". Sure, it could mean auto-4" or auto-6" run, but it would be insanely costly to go above 3, and the opponent has a clear path for reducing the benefit.

Thoughts?

Craftworld Warhost
Command Benefits: Matchless Agility: "If a unit composed entirely of models from this Detachment Runs, it never counts as rolling less than a 3 for its run distance regardless of the die roll or reroll with Fleet."

Bharring wrote:
Outliers are huge when either you need to cover distance to get in range, or if you need distance or get destroyed.

Imagine a couple scenarios:
-Guardians are 21 inches from target. They can move up, and plan on a 3 for run, and murderise being within 12". However, a 1 or 2 mean they don't get to shoot at all, and get absolutely destroyed next round. Is it worth the risk? Up to the player. Quite scary.
-Instead, Guardians are in range. They unload at 12". And run away. They roll a 2. Do they reroll? If they don't, the enemy has to charge at most 8". If they do, there is a 1/6 chance they only need a 7. (Throw in the Gamer's Inch - annoying, but usually innocent - and it gets a lot closer). When do you reroll? When not? Not as simple as it usually seems.

Perhaps allow them to take a 3" run *or* roll? The chance for terrible is quite important, I feel.

(What you have works, just trying to make it better.)

DCannon4Life wrote:
Note: Warp Spiders, RaW cannot Flickerjump more than once. The rule for Flickerjump states that the Warp Spiders make a "Warp jump" that is limited to 2D6" rather than 2D6+6". When you look at the rule for Warp jump, it states, "roll once each turn" (referring to the distance moved). If you can only make that roll once in a turn, you can only Flickerjump once.

Zag--I'll wait until you 'balance' the Tau codex to decide how I feel about 4+ armor save jetbikes, etc.

 Zagman wrote:

DCannon4Life wrote:
Note: Warp Spiders, RaW cannot Flickerjump more than once. The rule for Flickerjump states that the Warp Spiders make a "Warp jump" that is limited to 2D6" rather than 2D6+6". When you look at the rule for Warp jump, it states, "roll once each turn" (referring to the distance moved). If you can only make that roll once in a turn, you can only Flickerjump once.

Zag--I'll wait until you 'balance' the Tau codex to decide how I feel about 4+ armor save jetbikes, etc.

That is a tenuous RAW situation as Flickerjump is its own special rule that is triggered each time it is targeted, either way spelling it out doesn't hurt anything and avoids a RAW dispute.

DCannon4Life wrote:

 Zagman wrote:

DCannon4Life wrote:
Note: Warp Spiders, RaW cannot Flickerjump more than once. The rule for Flickerjump states that the Warp Spiders make a "Warp jump" that is limited to 2D6" rather than 2D6+6". When you look at the rule for Warp jump, it states, "roll once each turn" (referring to the distance moved). If you can only make that roll once in a turn, you can only Flickerjump once.

Zag--I'll wait until you 'balance' the Tau codex to decide how I feel about 4+ armor save jetbikes, etc.

That is a tenuous RAW situation as Flickerjump is its own special rule that is triggered each time it is targeted, either way spelling it out doesn't hurt anything and avoids a RAW dispute.

Sure, Flickerjump 'triggers', but the process can only be completed once: The rule for Warp jump (which is what a Flickerjump is: "...it can immediately make a Warp jump" (p 124)) is explained on page 154. In it, we are directed to, "roll once per unit each turn" (p 154), when making a Warp jump. So, if we've already rolled for a unit once this turn, we cannot roll again. That doesn't seem tenuous at all.