Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

One of the complaints that I hear pop up wit a surprising amount of regularity is that the eldar codex contains too much rending/pseudo-rending. Now, I'll be the first eldar player to admit that our codex could use some adjustments, but I always find it bizarre that people complain about this specifically. Sure, I've had good to-wound rolls where I get a surprising number of pseudo-rends, but there's a reason dire avengers are taken in minimum squad sizes. I tend to go on lengthy rants when in forums, so I'll try to address specific points and remain concise.

"Bladestorm makes eldar so much better at killing everything!"
Not really. on average, 10 shuriken catapults fired by avengers or guardians will get 1 or 2 pseudo-rends. So on average, they're killing rough 1.5 more meq than 10 bolters will. Against anything with a 5+ armor save or worse, they're equally good as bolters.

"Mathhammer is silly! I remember this time where bladestorm caused sooooo many rends!"
I remember the time three wyches took on a double flamer dreadnaught after passing 5 out of 6 6+ feel no pain rolls. That doesn't mean I expect three wyches to perform that well most of the time. Mathematical averages aren't everything, and it's easy to forget that just because X is the average result , it doesn't mean there isn't still a Y% chance you'll get a different result. But it's still the average. Sometimes I'll roll nothing but 6s to wound. Sometimes I'll roll nothing but 1s. Just because I've seen wyches take on a dreadnaught doesn't mean I complain about them being unstoppable walker killer.

"But it's on ALL your weapons!"
Well, sort of. We have pseudo-rending or rending on a lot of our weapons, but certainly not all of them. Let's look at a few.
Shuriken Pistols: Any unit that has shuriken pistols is not scary because they have shuriken pistols. On average, you'll get something like 0.75 pseudo-rends with 10 pistol shots. So more likely than not, a full squad of pistols will kill 1 extra meq. Yay.
Shuriken catapults: Guardians are as durable as guardsmen. You know. Those guys that get made fun of for dying in droves. Except that guardian defenders have shorter range on all but one or two of their guns and cost more. Which isn't to say that guardians are bad, but they're either going to hop out of a serpent to do some drivebye shooting (thus leaving them very exposed to return fire, assault, etc., even with battle focus, or else they're sitting back in cover where they're well out of range to even use the shuriken catapults that are the topic of this thread. Avengers and their catapults have sufficient range to hide after shooting by using battle focus, and that's certainly nice. Compared to tac marines (which are considered a bad unit by some), they have worse armor, worse toughness, no way of hurting AV11+, no special weapons (plasma, flamer, melta, etc.), no ATSKNF, and no krak grenades. Remember, a full-sized avenger squad is killing about 1 or 2 more non-vehicles than 10 bolters most of the time.
TL Catapults: So jetbikes basically. Twin-linked catapults are nice, but they're still firing from 12" away. I'd agree that guardian jetbikes could use a bit of a price hike, so I'll concede that point.
death spinners: These guns have decent rate of fire and high strength fired by a model with good ballistics skill. If you hit a target with low enough intiative or a vehicle, they get even stronger. These things can stack on wounds/glances/pens with scary efficiency. But it's not death spinners themselves I hear complaints about. It's that they're yet another pseudo-rending weapon. You're not at all bothered by the scary-good weapon's high strength and vehicle killing power, but the fact that they'll average one extra kill against meq irritates you?
Night Spinner's guns: Also a pretty solid weapon. That said, how many guys do you normally find yourself catching with a large blast? If the answer is less than 6, you're averaging less than 1 pseudo-rend each time you use the large blast. The torrent is a bit scarier, I think, but it also requires you get pretty close to the enemy to make the most of it. At that point, the enemy will likely be able to charge you. Also, neither of these weapons may be fired if you jink.
Shuriken Cannon: It's relatively affordable, but it's also basically an assault cannon with fewer shots that has no chance of hurting AV 13+. You can sprinkle a lot of them through your army, but I get the impression people aren't normally complaining about the shuriken cannon. Maybe I'm wrong?
Harlequin's Kiss: And harlequins show up in eldar lists all the time, right? Note that we're talking about the kisses from Codex: Eldar here.

"But pseudo-rending lets you hurt monstrous creatures!"
Know what else lets you hurt MCs? Plasma and melta. Also krak grenades, which you can use in melee while avengers are stuck hoping they fail morale without getting swept after an MC charges. Oh, and power fists. On average, a full squad of avengers is putting about 1.5 wounds on an MC. Which isn't terrible, but it's also not good enough for you to rely on it. It's more of a last-ditch effort. I get the impression people are also annoyed that there's a chance that avengers can hurt things of any Toughness 8 or higher, but that's what? Wraithknights? Great Unclean Ones?

I'm not trying to argue that tac marines are amazing here. I'm not trying to claim that pseudo-rending isn't useful. I'm just puzzled as to why people complain so much about a rule that, outside of anecdotes, doesn't actually seem to make too big a difference. If eldar lose all their pseudo-rends in the next book, I won't be terribly upset. It simply doesn't make enough of a difference most games for me to spill any tears over it. You won't be depriving me of a game changing edge. You'll be making my avengers kill one less guy per volley. Why does this rule get so much hate?

My theory: people are frustrated by serpents, wraith knights, and other real issues with the book, and just like to complain about pseudorending on top of it because they like to vent and pseudorending looks good on paper.

People see a min squad of troops with no upgraded weapons and assume they will have the damage output of a bolter or similar infantry gun. So when the most popular Eldar troop gets rending on a standard weapon, it comes across as another eye roll inducing Eldar special rule. Eldar have an obsec trsnsport that is a fantastic gunship, can spam psychic dice/summon demons, giant T8 jump MC AND a basic infantry unit with no upgrades gets rending on its weapons. By itself bladestorm is fine, but it is the combo of everything else that people get pissed about.

It is currently ok, and helps mitigate the downside of their poor range.

However, I would be more happy if it could only rend against things that it could already wound on a 5 or better.

Having guardians tear down Bio-titans is a little bit too much imo.

The fact that you get rending on models that cost, what, 9 points? That's the issue. Count again how many more wounds you'll do to TEQ compared to bolters for cost. Anyone else has to think about how to deal with 2+ saves and/or MC's, or at least worry about drowning them in wounds, but eldar just roll half a dozen dice and get a rend, problem solved. Not to mention that this problem is solved in the troops slot, which you're already spamming because bikes and serpents are brutally efficient on their own, even without rending.

"On average, a full squad of avengers is putting about 1.5 wounds on an MC." First, it's about 2.22 and second, a 10 man squad of bolter marines in rapidfire range is managing .74 wounds or ~1.76 if they've got a plasma gun and plasma cannon (still notably less and now the marines cost 40 points more than the dire avengers instead of 10 and can't move and fire the plasma cannon).

You're also comparing your 13 point dudes to marines 14 point dudes and complaining about the lack of plasma while forgetting you're more than doubling the cost of the trooper and accepting that every other game he'll kill himself, not to mention that it's 1 guy that can affect a target while the rest of the squad achieves nothing and may not assault if he fires it.

As for krak grenades hurting monsterous creatures, hitting on 4's, wounding on 6's and allowing an armour save means it's going to take 36 grenades on average get a single wound to stick on a wraithknight. That's not something useful at all considering the marines aren't getting an armour save. Even a "normal" MC like something from the 'Nids codex (T6, 3+ Sv) is going to see you fail to stick a wound through on any normal round of combat. You also need to remember that power fists cost 25 points, almost double the cost of the marine you put it on and ensuring that he strikes after everything else if he even survives to get into combat.

No-one bats an eyelid at spiders getting fancy rules since they're FA and you're Eldar. Specialised units can have special rules and that's fine, it's when troops can mow down termies and MC's with ease that raises peoples eyebrows. 19 ppm for less than marine survivability (little to none with all the AP 2/3 around) and no dedicated transport makes it at least somewhat of a tradeoff as well as being more difficult to get the volume of fire that makes pseudo rending such a talking point.

I had to go look up what a nightspinner is, as I've never seen one taken or even heard of them before. They seem ok'ish (which is actually pretty bad for the Eldar codex), but as I was told a while ago about a vaul support batterey, "they suffer from "Not Wraithknight or Fire Prism" disease". Besides, it's an AV 12 skimmer with blast/template weapons. If I shoot it, it either jinks and can't fire or it doesn't and I destroy it.

As 997Turbo mentioned, it's just another helping of special rules for many units in a codex that's already incredibly strong, and the fact theat it's also on a troops unit (meaning everyone will get rended virtually every game) means it's quite obnoxious.

I tend to go on lengthy rants when in forums, so I'll try to address specific points and remain concise.

Not your best try

I think most get upset because of the leap it was from the prior codex in the power level of a basic weapon, combined with extra movement and a massively better transport... all with no significant points increase.

Imagine if bolters became assault 3 shred, marines got +1 T, and Rhinos became 13/12/11 and gained an autocannon... It wouldn't matter how much Mathhammer you threw out to prove it not OP.... People would deservedly hate on it

Take a Tac squad. No upgrades, not even a transport. What can they do? Everything up to and including T7, and they usually still get armor saves.

Take a Guardian squad. No upgrades and they can hurt anything that uses T and they don't get a armor save. An armor save btw that every unit pays for, invalidated by essentially a free upgrade.

It mostly annoys me because for a negligible durability boost (3+/6++ instead of 5+), my Retributors only rend once a game for the same 13 points per model.

If they did like gauss (always damage on 6s), I believe noone would complain. But having AP2 as well on TROOPS?

Guardians needed buffing from the last codex. That is without a doubt. They were given +1bs, +1ws, + battle focus and + psudo rending.
The issue (as well as what has been mentioned above) is that bs, battle focus and rending on their guns all compliment each other really well so are better than the sum of their parts.

Also jetbikes did not need buffing, neither did shuriken cannons.

It would have been ok if direavengers got the psudo-rending as part of their aspect (for a small points increase) to differentiate the from guardians rather than just +6" range and +1save. Or if bladestorm had just stayed as +1 shot for a loss of shooting for a turn.

Lets compare guardians to a veteran guardsman (almost same stats, same slot). For 2pts you get:
-+2 I.
-+ move and shoot heavy weapons
-+ battle focus
-+ psudo rending on basic guns
-+ access to OS WS rather than OS Chimera.
- unable to take 3 special weapons or doctrines (which are appropriatly costed for the advantage they bring, appart from the plasma gun being 5pts too much.)

Because terminators did not need even more things that kill them easily.
And in a troop slot no less. That kind of ability is not a troop ability.

I'm hoping they keep speeding along with all the codex updates at breakneck speed so they can get back around to some of the ridic 6e books and blanderize them a bit back down here with the rest of us "have-nots."

Then only necrons will be on the pedestal.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
It mostly annoys me because for a negligible durability boost (3+/6++ instead of 5+), my Retributors only rend once a game for the same 13 points per model.

you mean the ones who get an armor save against aything that isn't plasma or a dedicated antitank weapon? Those sisters who aren't mowed down by assault cannons and auto cannons? Did you really call that a negligible durability boost?

The eldar got blade storm and battle focus to compensate for every army in the game getting a FREE damage and mobility boost in 6th edition. That was when they started allowing rapid fire to be able to fire maximum range on the move. Before that, dire avengers could out maneuver people because we got multiple shots 6" farther away than anyone else, and guardians matched range with bolters when moving. With the 20 or so games I got in with the old codex when 6th edition hit, I was taking ridiculous amounts more fire than I had before, even from older codecies. And with wounds from the front the problems exacerbated the longer the game went on. My dire avengers were dying like carapace veterans, without being able to fire back as effectively. People don't see the huge buff that rapid fire got, because the eldar were the only shooty army in the game that relied on the old rapid fire rules to get their damage done. That simply cannot work in thee edition.


Edited for my phone doing really stupid things with the English language...

I would have made them S3 AP 5 Assault 2 Rending

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
People don't see the huge buff that rapid fire got, because the eldar were the only shooty army in the game that relied on the old rapid fire rules to get their damage done. That simply cannot work in thee edition.

I'm not entirely sure what this sentence means.

Are you trying to say they relied on exploiting the weaknesses of Rapid Fire with their troops, via Assault weapons that had over 12" range.

Because Grey Knights kind of did that too.

And Tyranids.

And Orks.

Yes, but those armies were good in assault, and the grey knights had 24" as opposed to our 18" so they could simply walk away from the dire avengers killing them by the handful. Also, the two armies you mentioned utilize those guns on much more survivable platforms( terminators, strike teams, and warriors) or cheap expendable piles of bodies( termagants)
As I said, the eldar are the only army reliant on their shooting to carry the majority of their damage, that has a maximum 18" range on their basic infantry

I appreciate the feedback, everyone. I hope I don't come across as a dick here. I'm not trying to beat people over the head with rudeness; I'm just trying to understand a common complaint I hear.

A lot of what I'm hearing is that the problem with eldar having a lot of pseudo-rending is that they have it on their troops. I presume because powerful units are usually only found non-troop units for most armies.

If that's the source of everyone's irritation, why is it a source of irritation? I know that people often talk about there being a "troop tax." I certainly know I was frustrated by lacklustre troops in the *last* eldar codex. But would you really rather see all troops in all books feel like a tax, or would you rather have troops be useful in their own right?

Let's take a peek at other troop units that are roughly comparable:

Tac Marines: Already discussed above. A kitted out squad costs more, but can also threaten a wider variety of targets including vehicles (which shuriken catapultsgenerally can't touch unless they're AV 10). So avengers are more specialized but better at their specialization.

Veteran Guardsmen: Broken down above. Lack pseudo-rending, better maximum range (slightly mitigated by battle focus), access to 3 special weapons. No heavy weapon. I'd argue that these guys are pretty comparable. The vets can hunt whatever unit they're equipped to hunt, but usually have to get close to do it. The guardians have the option to sit back, but then they're only firing a single gun. Also, don't vet guarvsmen get carapace armor?

Fire Warriors: Much better range than things with shuriken catapults even after you factor in bladestorm. Can threaten AV 11 at maximum distance. Same armor as avengers. Less mobile, but wounding geq on 2s. Overwatch shenanigans instead of battle focus shenanigans.

Kabalite Warriors: Less durable than avengers, but more durable than guardians (because of PFP). Able to shoot from inside their vehicle. Access to special and heavy weapons. Poison instead of pseudo-rending. Transport is almost mandatory which ups their cost but still has its advantages.

Necron Warriors: Far more durable than either avengers or guardians even before reanimation protocols. Has a similar rule to bladestorm that makes them threatening against vehicles (even things like land raiders or flyers in a pinch) rather than making them more effective against infantry and MCs.

These all seem like reasonably similar units to me. I'm probably letting my pointy-eared bias blind me to something, but it seems like other troops have some sort of range or durability advantage or the ability to tackle vehicles that aren't paper-thin. Guardians/avengers are pretty easy to kill. Guardians especially. In exchange for being easier to kill, they get to kill heavily armored stuff slightly better. Is it rough against terminators? Sure. Terminators are kind of a perfect target for shuriken catapults. But there are multiple threads in proposed rules discussing various problems with that unit.

The fact that shuriken catapults are able to hurt T8 MCs is a good point. After all, those are some of the more annoying threats in the game right now, right? But wouldn't it be better to say, "I wish more units in my codex had ways to deal with MCs," or, "I wish MCs weren't so prevalent and hard to deal with," rather than complaining about units that can discourage them from being spammed slightly? To be fair, we don't see a ton of T8+ stuff around here (outside of a barbed hierodule).

@Poly Ranger: I rather like the idea of taking bladestorm away from guardians and jetbikers and leaving it an avengers-only thing. It would make avengers feel more skilled with their weapons of choice than the millitia.

Wyldhunt wrote:
I appreciate the feedback, everyone. I hope I don't come across as a dick here. I'm not trying to beat people over the head with rudeness; I'm just trying to understand a common complaint I hear.

You do, but you play Eldar, We expect no less.

Wyldhunt wrote:
A lot of what I'm hearing is that the problem with eldar having a lot of pseudo-rending is that they have it on their troops. I presume because powerful units are usually only found non-troop units for most armies.

If that's the source of everyone's irritation, why is it a source of irritation? I know that people often talk about there being a "troop tax." I certainly know I was frustrated by lacklustre troops in the *last* eldar codex. But would you really rather see all troops in all books feel like a tax, or would you rather have troops be useful in their own right?

You've answered your own question (with the answers from this very thread even!). Your troops shouldn't have stronger stuff than my troops while costing less than my troops. I'm not sure why this isn't sinking in. We've no problem with stuff being better and costing more, or being worse but costing less, it's the annoyance of you getting stuff that significantly better while paying a relatively low price for it. The fact that you do is just another helping of sh*t on the turd sandwich that fighting Eldar is at the moment. Yes, we'd all love for troops to be useful, but they aren't. We are complaining about the imbalance that virtually every other codex's troops are a tax while your aren't to anywhere near the same degree (even though many eldar treat them as a wave serpent tax).

Wyldhunt wrote:
Let's take a peek at other troop units that are roughly comparable:

Yes, lets.

Wyldhunt wrote:
Tac Marines: Already discussed above. A kitted out squad costs more, but can also threaten a wider variety of targets including vehicles (which shuriken catapultsgenerally can't touch unless they're AV 10). So avengers are more specialized but better at their specialization.

You realise that 10 dire avengers roughly equate to having 5 budget assault cannons, right? For free? Every last bit of damage that marines do relies on their special weapons that they have to pay for. Unless you're trolling (Which I'm beginning to suspect you are), go do some mathhammer vs some common targets about the damage output of DA compared to Marines. Avengers aren't specialised at all, rending lets them kill anything without an AV above 10, marine tac squads can maybe put a minor amount of damage on whatever you kit them to fight, at 10-20 points per weapon while making the rest of the squad useless.

Wyldhunt wrote:
Veteran Guardsmen: Broken down above. Lack pseudo-rending, better maximum range (slightly mitigated by battle focus), access to 3 special weapons. No heavy weapon. I'd argue that these guys are pretty comparable. The vets can hunt whatever unit they're equipped to hunt, but usually have to get close to do it. The guardians have the option to sit back, but then they're only firing a single gun. Also, don't vet guarvsmen get carapace armor?

3 specials that double or triple the cost of the trooper and is even less fragile that your guys. I'd suggest you're out of your mind to compare vets against DA point for point. You tell us the vets have a range advantage, then tell us that the vets have to get close while the DA can sit back, bit of a disonance there isn't it? Vets can buy carapace, again, bumping up the cost of the squad. A 10 man vet squad with triple plasma and carapace is putting out 2 armour ignoring wounds on most things for 120, while DA are doing about the same, but their other non-rending shots are more than making up the difference against infantry, since they're 2 shot assault bolters vs Str3 AP- lasguns. Against MC's then the plasma guns have a slight advantage against T6, slightly worse vs T7 and do notably worse vs T8. Not to mention that they're Ld 7, WS3 and I3 vs your Ld 9, WS4 and I5 and can have their actual firepower picked out by positioning or prescision shot while you can continue firing at maximum effectiveness down to the last guy.

Wyldhunt wrote:
Fire Warriors: Much better range than things with shuriken catapults even after you factor in bladestorm. Can threaten AV 11 at maximum distance. Same armor as avengers. Less mobile, but wounding geq on 2s. Overwatch shenanigans instead of battle focus shenanigans.

No argument from me that fire warriors are great for 9 ppm. But then, Tau are also quite strong, and marine players have complained about their troops being outranged and wounded on 3's for quite a while now. It also annoys me when Tau players complain about fire warriors not being good, since they are.

Wyldhunt wrote:
Kabalite Warriors: Less durable than avengers, but more durable than guardians (because of PFP). Able to shoot from inside their vehicle. Access to special and heavy weapons. Poison instead of pseudo-rending. Transport is almost mandatory which ups their cost but still has its advantages.

They also tend to die to a man when their open topped AV10 carboard box gets blown up. You remember complaining about only being able to hurt AV10 with your rending bolters? These things are AV10 with 2 hull points. They also have to buy their specials rather than getting them built into the squad, again, more than doubling the cost of the trooper. FNP on t3 isn't quite the boon you think it is, especially against something like a wave serpent with multitudes of Str 6/7. Again, no argument that poison is rad, but they face the same issue of not being able to hurt vehicles with poison (discounting their specials they pay for on super fragile platforms).

Wyldhunt wrote:
Necron Warriors: Far more durable than either avengers or guardians even before reanimation protocols. Has a similar rule to bladestorm that makes them threatening against vehicles (even things like land raiders or flyers in a pinch) rather than making them more effective against infantry and MCs.

Again, another contender for a codex too strong compared to others. What do they all have in common? Very strong troops. Again, no argument from me that army wide FNP in combination with bolters than can glance a land raider to death is a bit to strong.

Wyldhunt wrote:
These all seem like reasonably similar units to me. I'm probably letting my pointy-eared bias blind me to something, but it seems like other troops have some sort of range or durability advantage or the ability to tackle vehicles that aren't paper-thin. Guardians/avengers are pretty easy to kill. Guardians especially. In exchange for being easier to kill, they get to kill heavily armored stuff slightly better. Is it rough against terminators? Sure. Terminators are kind of a perfect target for shuriken catapults. But there are multiple threads in proposed rules discussing various problems with that unit.

The fact that shuriken catapults are able to hurt T8 MCs is a good point. After all, those are some of the more annoying threats in the game right now, right? But wouldn't it be better to say, "I wish more units in my codex had ways to deal with MCs," or, "I wish MCs weren't so prevalent and hard to deal with," rather than complaining about units that can discourage them from being spammed slightly? To be fair, we don't see a ton of T8+ stuff around here (outside of a barbed hierodule).

@Poly Ranger: I rather like the idea of taking bladestorm away from guardians and jetbikers and leaving it an avengers-only thing. It would make avengers feel more skilled with their weapons of choice than the millitia.

You are. In the end, it doesn't really matter how easy to kill DA or similar are since they're safe inside their WS (that is statistically more durable than a land raider), only coming out to rend to death anyone in range if it manages to fall over. It's not just terminators though, everything that's not a vehicle is a perfect target for shuri-cats due to rending. If you didn't have entire units with melta guns, Str10 AP2 ranged weapons on impossibly fast unkillable platforms, transports which are more durable and heavily armed than other factions main battle tanks for cheaper or half a dozen other options to deal with AV then you might have a point.

It would be fair to say that I wish my troops could be armed with half strength assault cannons for free too, but it's just not going to happen is it?

The change to Guardians vs DA also wouldn't change a damn thing since DA are the cheaper way to get WS, so they'll still be the troops of choice the majorty of the time when you're not taking jetbikes. Bladestorm can just bugger right off alltogether.

It's pretty easy. Just put on the other shoe.

If all other troops in the game had pseudo-rending tossed in for free, how would you like that?

It's easy to say that troops shouldn't feel like a tax (which I agree with). However, it's unfair if it's not a tax to only a couple of factions.

@drasius

What you said. I think if thx op had to play 4 games against eldar as marines, he wouldn't need to ask the question.

 997Turbo wrote:
People see a min squad of troops with no upgraded weapons and assume they will have the damage output of a bolter or similar infantry gun. So when the most popular Eldar troop gets rending on a standard weapon, it comes across as another eye roll inducing Eldar special rule. Eldar have an obsec trsnsport that is a fantastic gunship, can spam psychic dice/summon demons, giant T8 jump MC AND a basic infantry unit with no upgrades gets rending on its weapons. By itself bladestorm is fine, but it is the combo of everything else that people get pissed about.

Summoning Daemons is a mistake from 7th edition. I don't like that a lot unless you are doing so to grant the Grey Knight commander 2+ invul save.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I never find Bladestorm really that good. I mean, the thing that makes Guardian and Dire Avengers too good as troops is Plasma Grenade. S4 Ap4 Blast.

The big issue with the pseudo-rending is that it adds a lot of flexibility to formerly anti-basic-infantry weapons to allow them to engage heavier targets, making for an extremely versatile weapon, in an army of otherwise specialist units and weapons, and particularly in an army or on units that many see as having gotten overbuffed with broad bumps in ballistic skill across the board, fantastic mobility boosts, while the pseudo-rending further reinforces the capability of min/max builds, increasing the killing power of dreaded Wave Serpent and it's often minimum sized Dire Avenger unit in ways that were really unnecessary.

For Guardians specifically, it was also a somewhat lazy way out, instead of creating some sort of unique battlefield role for them that isn't just "horde dire avengers".

Poly Ranger wrote:
Guardians needed buffing from the last codex. That is without a doubt. They were given +1bs, +1ws, + battle focus and + psudo rending.
The issue (as well as what has been mentioned above) is that bs, battle focus and rending on their guns all compliment each other really well so are better than the sum of their parts.

Also jetbikes did not need buffing, neither did shuriken cannons.

It would have been ok if direavengers got the psudo-rending as part of their aspect (for a small points increase) to differentiate the from guardians rather than just +6" range and +1save. Or if bladestorm had just stayed as +1 shot for a loss of shooting for a turn.

Lets compare guardians to a veteran guardsman (almost same stats, same slot). For 2pts you get:
-+2 I.
-+ move and shoot heavy weapons
-+ battle focus
-+ psudo rending on basic guns
-+ access to OS WS rather than OS Chimera.
- unable to take 3 special weapons or doctrines (which are appropriatly costed for the advantage they bring, appart from the plasma gun being 5pts too much.)

Don't forget that they nerfed the Chimera too with the latest book

 Big Blind Bill wrote:
It is currently ok, and helps mitigate the downside of their poor range.

Incorrect. That have 18" Assault 2 guns with Battle Focus and Fleet. That's what helps with their "poor" range.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Then only necrons will be on the pedestal.

I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

niv-mizzet wrote:
Because terminators did not need even more things that kill them easily.
And in a troop slot no less. That kind of ability is not a troop ability.

I'm hoping they keep speeding along with all the codex updates at breakneck speed so they can get back around to some of the ridic 6e books and blanderize them a bit back down here with the rest of us "have-nots."

I would love for them to re-do Daemons, Tau, and Eldar, and bring them in line with the rest of the 7th ed. books. And then of course, DA and CSM need to just be made better,

@Drasius: Thanks for the response. I'm afraid my forum-fu is a bit weak, so I'll try to respond to each point despite not knowing how to use the quote function properly.

Troop Tax: Hmm. So is the complaint about having bladestorm on troops that eldar can potentially have many shuriken-wielding units? Is it that the points that go into troops feel less wasted than points that go into other armies troops? Some combination of the above? I'm all for having books balanced against each other, but if many books have weak troops that make their players feel like they're wasting points, wouldn't it be better to give lacklustre troop options a slight boost rather than taking things away from the units that carry their weight? That said, I'd probably be fine with bladestorm vanishing altogether. Most games, it simply doesn't do enough for me to miss it all that much. More of a nice bonus than something I can depend on.

Troop Comparisons: You make excellent points here. According to my (very sloppy) number crunching, the difference in killing power between a 10 man marine squad with special and heavy weapons wasn't distressingly different, but the cost for similar results was definitely significant. The difference between marines and avengers still doesn't look too terrible on paper. I believe you're right when it comes to vets, however. As you've pointed out, many of the other troops I brought up were "strong," but not dissimilar in ability to avengers/guardians. I see your points here though.

Regarding the Wave Serpent: I won't argue that the WS isn't broken. I"m of the opinion that it's the main thing in our codex that needs to be fixed.


So, if the issue is that avengers/guardians are just plain better than some other troops, would you say it would be a better move for the game for the next codex to simply remove bladestorm altogether or to increase avenger and guardian costs?

If the latter, how much would you say bladestorm is worth on each unit? If the former, do you feel avengers, guardians, etc. would be worth their current points with such a change? I feel that avengers might be as their range and battle focus means that they can potentially hide behind corners and essentially be a harassment unit. Guardians would become a ~100 point heavy weapon platform like in our last codex. Which is pretty much what they seem to be now, but hopping out of a wave serpent would be a bit riskier for them as they'd have less killing power. Guardian jetbikes would still be a solid choice though.

Wyldhunt wrote:
@Drasius: Thanks for the response. I'm afraid my forum-fu is a bit weak, so I'll try to respond to each point despite not knowing how to use the quote function properly.

Troop Tax: Hmm. So is the complaint about having bladestorm on troops that eldar can potentially have many shuriken-wielding units? Is it that the points that go into troops feel less wasted than points that go into other armies troops? Some combination of the above? I'm all for having books balanced against each other, but if many books have weak troops that make their players feel like they're wasting points, wouldn't it be better to give lacklustre troop options a slight boost rather than taking things away from the units that carry their weight? That said, I'd probably be fine with bladestorm vanishing altogether. Most games, it simply doesn't do enough for me to miss it all that much. More of a nice bonus than something I can depend on.

Troop Comparisons: You make excellent points here. According to my (very sloppy) number crunching, the difference in killing power between a 10 man marine squad with special and heavy weapons wasn't distressingly different, but the cost for similar results was definitely significant. The difference between marines and avengers still doesn't look too terrible on paper. I believe you're right when it comes to vets, however. As you've pointed out, many of the other troops I brought up were "strong," but not dissimilar in ability to avengers/guardians. I see your points here though.

Regarding the Wave Serpent: I won't argue that the WS isn't broken. I"m of the opinion that it's the main thing in our codex that needs to be fixed.


So, if the issue is that avengers/guardians are just plain better than some other troops, would you say it would be a better move for the game for the next codex to simply remove bladestorm altogether or to increase avenger and guardian costs?

If the latter, how much would you say bladestorm is worth on each unit? If the former, do you feel avengers, guardians, etc. would be worth their current points with such a change? I feel that avengers might be as their range and battle focus means that they can potentially hide behind corners and essentially be a harassment unit. Guardians would become a ~100 point heavy weapon platform like in our last codex. Which is pretty much what they seem to be now, but hopping out of a wave serpent would be a bit riskier for them as they'd have less killing power. Guardian jetbikes would still be a solid choice though.

Personally, the way I see it, change Bladestorms effect. Have it always wound on a 6, or make a To Wound roll of 6 become AP 4 or something of the like. And Guardians need to be WS/BS 3 again.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Big Blind Bill wrote:
It is currently ok, and helps mitigate the downside of their poor range.

Incorrect. That have 18" Assault 2 guns with Battle Focus and Fleet. That's what helps with their "poor" range.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Then only necrons will be on the pedestal.

I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

niv-mizzet wrote:
Because terminators did not need even more things that kill them easily.
And in a troop slot no less. That kind of ability is not a troop ability.

I'm hoping they keep speeding along with all the codex updates at breakneck speed so they can get back around to some of the ridic 6e books and blanderize them a bit back down here with the rest of us "have-nots."

I would love for them to re-do Daemons, Tau, and Eldar, and bring them in line with the rest of the 7th ed. books. And then of course, DA and CSM need to just be made better,

Niv-Mizzet said he can't wait for the OP 6ed codexes to be addressed and nerfed. I said that would leave just the Necron Codex on a pedestal since all the other 7th ed codexes are pretty balanced. That's what I was referring to. Should have quoted. Sorry.

Poly Ranger wrote:


Niv-Mizzet said he can't wait for the OP 6ed codexes to be addressed and nerfed. I said that would leave just the Necron Codex on a pedestal since all the other 7th ed codexes are pretty balanced. That's what I was referring to. Should have quoted. Sorry.

How is the Necron codex not balanced?

Half the time your already potent units don't stay dead.

That isn't too dissimilar to bringing 50% more models to the table to your opponent.

That is an entirely different subject. Lets not get into it,

 Quickjager wrote:
That is an entirely different subject. Lets not get into it,

Agreed.

Wyldhunt wrote:
@Drasius: Thanks for the response. I'm afraid my forum-fu is a bit weak, so I'll try to respond to each point despite not knowing how to use the quote function properly.

Troop Tax: Hmm. So is the complaint about having bladestorm on troops that eldar can potentially have many shuriken-wielding units? Is it that the points that go into troops feel less wasted than points that go into other armies troops? Some combination of the above? I'm all for having books balanced against each other, but if many books have weak troops that make their players feel like they're wasting points, wouldn't it be better to give lacklustre troop options a slight boost rather than taking things away from the units that carry their weight? That said, I'd probably be fine with bladestorm vanishing altogether. Most games, it simply doesn't do enough for me to miss it all that much. More of a nice bonus than something I can depend on.

Troop Comparisons: You make excellent points here. According to my (very sloppy) number crunching, the difference in killing power between a 10 man marine squad with special and heavy weapons wasn't distressingly different, but the cost for similar results was definitely significant. The difference between marines and avengers still doesn't look too terrible on paper. I believe you're right when it comes to vets, however. As you've pointed out, many of the other troops I brought up were "strong," but not dissimilar in ability to avengers/guardians. I see your points here though.

Regarding the Wave Serpent: I won't argue that the WS isn't broken. I"m of the opinion that it's the main thing in our codex that needs to be fixed.


So, if the issue is that avengers/guardians are just plain better than some other troops, would you say it would be a better move for the game for the next codex to simply remove bladestorm altogether or to increase avenger and guardian costs?

If the latter, how much would you say bladestorm is worth on each unit? If the former, do you feel avengers, guardians, etc. would be worth their current points with such a change? I feel that avengers might be as their range and battle focus means that they can potentially hide behind corners and essentially be a harassment unit. Guardians would become a ~100 point heavy weapon platform like in our last codex. Which is pretty much what they seem to be now, but hopping out of a wave serpent would be a bit riskier for them as they'd have less killing power. Guardian jetbikes would still be a solid choice though.

The complaint is that Eldar troops units can deal with any single infantry unit in the game, while every other unit that isn't Firewarriors or Necrons warriors sucks a big bag of d...readnaughts. An assault cannon is 24" Str6 AP4 Assault 4, rending. A Shuri Cat is 18" Str4 AP5 Assault 2, pseudo-rending. Your troops get one each for 13 points. Space Marines can take 1 per 5 men on one of the worst units in the book and it costs 20 points on top of the 40 point chassis and is in elites. The point is that it's much easier to bring 1 or 2 codices back into line rather than buffing the other 15 or more to match. The main issue with making troops feel worthwhile is that then what's the point of having stuff in the Elite/FA/HS slots if troops are just as good? If troops are just as good as E/FA/HS choices, then why not spam them and get ObSec everything and not give up points in Big Guns or Scouring. Troops are meant to be the bulk with other slots providing flavour, but since 40k doesn't work that way anymore (and it's arguable if it ever really did), it's all gone to hell.

As for how to fix it, I'm not 100%, but toning bladestorm down to being "to wound rolls of a 6 forces a re-roll of successful saves" would be my suggestion, though I would be putting Guardians back to BS3 personally for fluff reasons and to differentiate them from DA. Not sure about how i'd adjust points cost given those changes though, I'd have to actually crunch the numbers to get something that ensure they're not too good or too bad. Don't get me started on jetbikes.