The fact that I had to reread that Strands of Fate mechanic several times to work out what the hell it was talking about is definitive proof for me that these are legitimate, GW rules.

I think these are probably fake. A lot read like the person went through a certain thread here on Dakka, and is wishlisting.

But if they’re true, and I’m not ruling that out…..COWER BEFORE ME, PUNY MORTALZ!

I first read it as being you roll X dice, and you keep swapping them out with dice you've already rolled.

Suprised not to see some mention of any strats to key off the sixes you roll for your fate dice.

It becomes more and more obvious that this is fake.

The hoaxer would need a very broad knowledge (minituares releases, rules, box contents). This exceeds what he can know from his stated source: a codex test print or playtest rules.
And in terms of miniatures he chooses to only share the ones that were already rumoured instead of something surprising in order to make it harder to be contradicted by the rumour engine.
In terms of rules he seems to be very enamored with his own creation so that he explains his fake rules in detail instead of giving a comprehensive overview.

I hope at least 1% of this pans out

Im all up for all of it.
As long as they make wraith units worth taking

 Vovin wrote:
This exceeds what he can know from his stated source: a codex test print or playtest rules.

Wasn't there meant to be two sources - a playtest codex and parts of a full version sent out for translation? (or am I getting things mixed up?)

So you roll x dice each turn based on the game size, establishing a pool of values. Keep the rolled values in mind.

Then when you roll any dice later in the turn, if any of the values match the dice you rolled at the beginning of the turn, you can then choose to discard a matching die from the pool and convert your rolled die to a 6.

So not only is it less flexible than the SoB version, you have less predictability. Some real solid future seeing there.

Lol, this dude seems to think that rolling a 6 for morale is better than rolling a 2 (and for the sake of argument, let's ignore the silly corner cases where it actually could be advantageous to lose a model to morale).

He doesn't know how to play 9e, I don't see why his rumor would be credible.

yeah, I'm pretty much on the side of this is all just BS. He has nothing regards Reapers or an Autarch with reaper weapon yet there was clearly one in rumour engine today on warcom.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
Lol, this dude seems to think that rolling a 6 for morale is better than rolling a 2 (and for the sake of argument, let's ignore the silly corner cases where it actually could be advantageous to lose a model to morale).

He doesn't know how to play 9e, I don't see why his rumor would be credible.

Unless you can use them on enemy dice.

Khahandran wrote:

Unless you can use them on enemy dice.

Turning your opponent's rolls into sixes is...not a net benefit for one's own army.

Sterling191 wrote:

Khahandran wrote:

Unless you can use them on enemy dice.

Turning your opponent's rolls into sixes is...not a net benefit for one's own army.

Sigh. It is in the example of a moral test.

Khahandran wrote:

Sigh. It is in the example of a moral test.

Because Morale is quite literally the only time (outside of super edge cases involving detonating enemy Psykers via Perils) you want your opponent to have a 6 showing. Building an entire mechanic around "manipulating your opponent's dice" which results in them being better in all but one or two cases would be ludicrous.

I just want Eldar psychic powers to actually be powerful relative to other races. Need a serious boost.

Sterling191 wrote:

Khahandran wrote:

Sigh. It is in the example of a moral test.

Because Morale is quite literally the only time (outside of super edge cases involving detonating enemy Psykers via Perils) you want your opponent to have a 6 showing. Building an entire mechanic around "manipulating your opponent's dice" which results in them being better in all but one or two cases would be ludicrous.

No one said anything about building the entire mechanic around just that. It is simply being used as an example.

Sterling191 wrote:

Khahandran wrote:

Sigh. It is in the example of a moral test.

Because Morale is quite literally the only time (outside of super edge cases involving detonating enemy Psykers via Perils) you want your opponent to have a 6 showing. Building an entire mechanic around "manipulating your opponent's dice" which results in them being better in all but one or two cases would be ludicrous.

Of course leak said nothing about your or enemy. In theory you could do either at will.

Though unlikely gw would allow as freely for opponent for corner case and as example stupid indeed. But what else you expect from trolls.

An example is just that; An example. If it were an equivalent mechanic as SoB you'd have to match the dice rolled but then get to pick whatever value you want. That would be the reverse of what miracle dice are but flexible in a different way. Has to match the pre-ordained value but flexibility in choosing is the reward.

All we have to go on is that you match a dice roll and can change it to a 6. We don't know if that's the whole rule or what the context is. Even if that's the whole rule more often than not you want high numbers and you don't HAVE to swap the dice, so it's still pretty powerful to be able to convert a low one to a high one.

I know the Eldar community is founded upon a strict code of salt and pessimism, but seriously if every single thing that comes out of the woodwork is poo poo'd because the end of our noses are too long to see past, we'll never get any enjoyment out of these releases. Seriously, I came to this thread expecting to see everyone excited and theory crafting over the possibilities and all I see is doom and gloom!

I mean I know its not without justification, but man, I was excited! I guess optimism is one of my virtues lol

Seeing how probable any of this is of actually being true, I wouldn't be too optimistic anyway ^^

 Albertorius wrote:
Seeing how probable any of this is of actually being true, I wouldn't be too optimistic anyway ^^

I get it. GW has burned Eldar players too many times that it's hard to accept any positivity. GW surely owes a lot of people some therapy. But, I mean really? The rumour engine at the moment is showing an Eldar model EVERY DAY, they're all Eldar models! Is it really so hard to believe there's a big revamp on the way? The specifics might be a bit hazy, but the presence of hard evidence should be enough to afford us a little bit of optimism? Right? lol

I have a friend thats going to go bonkers if they actually release fully functional Corsairs, like he has an entire army of them from back in the day. Personally i'm excited for new Warp Spiders, new Scorpions and all the crazy shenanegans the new HQs seem to have floating about them. LIke most people I collected Eldar when I was still at school, most of those models are still around some 20 odd years later so for them to get a reboot is the most exciting thing to happen to 40k in a long time.

Even better if it comes with some actual supporting narrative for the rework. Itd be good to have some closure/progression on the whole Slaanesh is consuming our souls forever plotline thats literally been the only thing to define Eldar for 25 years. Vive le optimism!

 Mr_Rose wrote:
So not only is it less flexible than the SoB version, you have less predictability. Some real solid future seeing there.

You might even say that they don't grasp at strands of fate. But at straws !

Was there any hint at when we can expect this release?

The one thing I find surprising is GW not doing it in time for Christmas.

 vipoid wrote:
Was there any hint at when we can expect this release?

The one thing I find surprising is GW not doing it in time for Christmas.

The word of the bird is it's pretty much the next unannounced codex after the ones we already know are coming out. But given they've delayed GSC and Custodes we're probably talking March or something. Who knows all I heard was it's the next one we haven't had an official announcement for.

Edit: Dont they usually announce big things at Christmas and then follow up in the new year?

Octovol wrote:


I get it. GW has burned Eldar players too many times that it's hard to accept any positivity. GW surely owes a lot of people some therapy. But, I mean really? The rumour engine at the moment is showing an Eldar model EVERY DAY

It's probably all one model. It's a new autarch wearing ranger chaps and the winged helmet crouched on a rock holding the two-handed reaper launcher.

 Arschbombe wrote:

Octovol wrote:


I get it. GW has burned Eldar players too many times that it's hard to accept any positivity. GW surely owes a lot of people some therapy. But, I mean really? The rumour engine at the moment is showing an Eldar model EVERY DAY

It's probably all one model. It's a new autarch wearing ranger chaps and the winged helmet crouched on a rock holding the two-handed reaper launcher.

On a Jetbike

Octovol wrote:

 Arschbombe wrote:

Octovol wrote:


I get it. GW has burned Eldar players too many times that it's hard to accept any positivity. GW surely owes a lot of people some therapy. But, I mean really? The rumour engine at the moment is showing an Eldar model EVERY DAY

It's probably all one model. It's a new autarch wearing ranger chaps and the winged helmet crouched on a rock holding the two-handed reaper launcher.

On a Jetbike

And this Autarch has been exiled from Eldar society and is actually paired with a new Primaris LT and can only be taken by Space Marine factions...



I kid, I really really am trying not to get too excited though because I feel like there is huuuge potential for disappointment....

Today rumour concerns Harlequins.

I’m really sensing BS now.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’m really sensing BS now.

Why? That reads very 9th ed GW to me.

Have you read them all?

From a “quick read of a pre-print copy”?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’m really sensing BS now.

The rules discussed so far are very much believable for GW in 9E. My main hesitation is that I can't see a plausible source for leaks like this. Someone looking at a draft of the codex for playtesting or translation purposes wouldn't know about Harlequin models later in the year, or what Chaos models are coming out at the same time.

However the main thing keeping me hopeful about these rumours at this point is that the advent engine pics so far tend to line up not only with the supposed new models, but specifically the models likely to be out first (Rangers & Autarch in battle box, Corsairs in KT). If we see the advent engine flip to Chaos models in the next few days that will be a very strong indication.

That last part about "the new unit might not be in the codex at the start" just makes it even more credible that this comes from reading the codex.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Have you read them all?

From a “quick read of a pre-print copy”?

The author said they come from the same source who leaked out the roadmap months ago, who clearly has a good breadth of knowledge of what's coming if true.

Edit: to clarify I'm referring to these advent images, not the slightly dubious list on page 1.

At the minute, this whole thing has sub-Faeit credibility levels.

Dudeface wrote:
The author said they come from the same source who leaked out the roadmap months ago, who clearly has a good breadth of knowledge of what's coming if true.

Edit: to clarify I'm referring to these advent images, not the slightly dubious list on page 1.

He never made any such claim. Only that it was third hand info and his source with second hand knowledge has told him something about Custodes.

 Vovin wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
The author said they come from the same source who leaked out the roadmap months ago, who clearly has a good breadth of knowledge of what's coming if true.

Edit: to clarify I'm referring to these advent images, not the slightly dubious list on page 1.

He never made any such claim. Only that it was third hand info and his source with second hand knowledge has told him something about Custodes.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Eldar/comments/r6dd8b/comment/hmshhbw/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

"no, don't worry, the guy from last week has nothing to do with these rumours.

They actually come from the same person that predicted the exact Black tempar mini-lineup, as well as the custodes and GSC releases. There will be no pictures, but considering the accuracy of the rumours up until now, it's not unlikely that there's truth to them.

Of course, still always take them with a grain of salt, as you should take all rumours and leaks."

Could it be GW are behind these leaks to gauge player response?

Dudeface wrote:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Eldar/comments/r6dd8b/comment/hmshhbw/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

"no, don't worry, the guy from last week has nothing to do with these rumours.

They actually come from the same person that predicted the exact Black tempar mini-lineup, as well as the custodes and GSC releases. There will be no pictures, but considering the accuracy of the rumours up until now, it's not unlikely that there's truth to them.

Of course, still always take them with a grain of salt, as you should take all rumours and leaks."

Considering all accounts are that the person who "predicted the exact Black Templar mini-lineup" was censured for their leaks...I find that exceedingly doubtful.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Considering all accounts are that the person who "predicted the exact Black Templar mini-lineup" was censured for their leaks...I find that exceedingly doubtful.

Why is gossip about upcoming products less believable than gossip about an internal disciplinary matter? Did someone leak the related HR documents online?

 xttz wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Considering all accounts are that the person who "predicted the exact Black Templar mini-lineup" was censured for their leaks...I find that exceedingly doubtful.

Why is gossip about upcoming products less believable than gossip about an internal disciplinary matter? Did someone leak the related HR documents online?

Who knows, it seems people never enjoy just idle chitchat about potential happenings, it has to be a hard cold 100% believable fact to be a rumour these days. Personally it's just nice to have some old-fashioned hearsay to mull over and talk about, the demands for credentials and accuracy rates etc isn't the main point of it all to me.

 xttz wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Considering all accounts are that the person who "predicted the exact Black Templar mini-lineup" was censured for their leaks...I find that exceedingly doubtful.

Why is gossip about upcoming products less believable than gossip about an internal disciplinary matter? Did someone leak the related HR documents online?

Because there are reliable rumormongers who talk about these kinds of things, while the Craftworld stuff from Reddit came after everything and seems to trade upon the established credibility of the other rumors.

I get that rumors are rumors and everything, but there's a difference between someone who says they had the same source as a big set of rumors where the person who leaked things was apparently able to have those leaks traced back to them based upon the information they gave(which was why B&C deleted the posts in the first place!) and someone who awhile later says they have the exact same source for reals and doesn't acknowledge the one mistake made in the BT leak.

 Valkyrie wrote:
Could it be GW are behind these leaks to gauge player response?

No, because it’s probably too late in the day to change things if people hate it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Albertorius wrote:
That last part about "the new unit might not be in the codex at the start" just makes it even more credible that this comes from reading the codex.

How? If they’ve read the codex there’s be no ‘might’ about it, and if it’s not in the codex how would they know about a new unit from reading the codex?

Octovol wrote:
An example is just that; An example. If it were an equivalent mechanic as SoB you'd have to match the dice rolled but then get to pick whatever value you want. That would be the reverse of what miracle dice are but flexible in a different way. Has to match the pre-ordained value but flexibility in choosing is the reward.

All we have to go on is that you match a dice roll and can change it to a 6. We don't know if that's the whole rule or what the context is. Even if that's the whole rule more often than not you want high numbers and you don't HAVE to swap the dice, so it's still pretty powerful to be able to convert a low one to a high one.

I know the Eldar community is founded upon a strict code of salt and pessimism, but seriously if every single thing that comes out of the woodwork is poo poo'd because the end of our noses are too long to see past, we'll never get any enjoyment out of these releases. Seriously, I came to this thread expecting to see everyone excited and theory crafting over the possibilities and all I see is doom and gloom!

I mean I know its not without justification, but man, I was excited! I guess optimism is one of my virtues lol

Hard to be excited about troll "leaks"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Valkyrie wrote:
Could it be GW are behind these leaks to gauge player response?

For what? How to do next eldar codex minimum 2 years from now? You realize right that if eldar codex is immident it's been done and locked like a year? More seeing delays on releases.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:
That last part about "the new unit might not be in the codex at the start" just makes it even more credible that this comes from reading the codex.

How? If they’ve read the codex there’s be no ‘might’ about it, and if it’s not in the codex how would they know about a new unit from reading the codex?

Being sarcasm

Octovol wrote:
An example is just that; An example. If it were an equivalent mechanic as SoB you'd have to match the dice rolled but then get to pick whatever value you want. That would be the reverse of what miracle dice are but flexible in a different way. Has to match the pre-ordained value but flexibility in choosing is the reward.

All we have to go on is that you match a dice roll and can change it to a 6. We don't know if that's the whole rule or what the context is. Even if that's the whole rule more often than not you want high numbers and you don't HAVE to swap the dice, so it's still pretty powerful to be able to convert a low one to a high one.

I know the Eldar community is founded upon a strict code of salt and pessimism, but seriously if every single thing that comes out of the woodwork is poo poo'd because the end of our noses are too long to see past, we'll never get any enjoyment out of these releases. Seriously, I came to this thread expecting to see everyone excited and theory crafting over the possibilities and all I see is doom and gloom!

I expect people will enjoy the stuff that actually comes out just fine (with a side lament for whatever personal favorite didn't get an update). Doubt at this stage is normal and healthy, as it means people are not propagating nonsense over and over again. The number of times people have made stuff up or used counter-examples and the idiot websites have picked them up and sent them back as 'official rumors' is non-trivial.

Dudeface wrote:

"no, don't worry, the guy from last week has nothing to do with these rumours.

They actually come from the same person that predicted the exact Black tempar mini-lineup, as well as the custodes and GSC releases. There will be no pictures, but considering the accuracy of the rumours up until now, it's not unlikely that there's truth to them.

Of course, still always take them with a grain of salt, as you should take all rumours and leaks."

I stand corrected. Thank you.

But now he claims that his info comes from a playtester. So another contradiction.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Eldar/comments/rd4hfn/comment/hnzbp9a/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

 Vovin wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

"no, don't worry, the guy from last week has nothing to do with these rumours.

They actually come from the same person that predicted the exact Black tempar mini-lineup, as well as the custodes and GSC releases. There will be no pictures, but considering the accuracy of the rumours up until now, it's not unlikely that there's truth to them.

Of course, still always take them with a grain of salt, as you should take all rumours and leaks."

I stand corrected. Thank you.

But now he claims that his info comes from a playtester. So another contradiction.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Eldar/comments/rd4hfn/comment/hnzbp9a/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

The link you just posted contains another link to a Twitch stream from earlier this week, where Honest Wargamer and the creator of 40kstats corroborate these Eldar rumours as "all true".

 Vovin wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

"no, don't worry, the guy from last week has nothing to do with these rumours.

They actually come from the same person that predicted the exact Black tempar mini-lineup, as well as the custodes and GSC releases. There will be no pictures, but considering the accuracy of the rumours up until now, it's not unlikely that there's truth to them.

Of course, still always take them with a grain of salt, as you should take all rumours and leaks."

I stand corrected. Thank you.

But now he claims that his info comes from a playtester. So another contradiction.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Eldar/comments/rd4hfn/comment/hnzbp9a/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

Ah well, regardless it's given us all something to talk about, read and theorise over. The proof will be in the pudding.

What was today’s leak?

Not sure if this has been shown already or if this is a real model I missed but was going through my BT codex and saw this...




Wondered if it was anything?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry can’t find a way to rotate on my phone

It's the Spiritseer which came out with "Wake the Dead".

Really sexy model by the way, isn't it,

What a poser. Any eldar worth his pointy ears knows they need to pose on a much larger piece of aeldari masonry.

 GaroRobe wrote:
What a poser. Any eldar worth his pointy ears knows they need to pose on a much larger piece of aeldari masonry.

You have to earn your chunk of rubble. Lelith and Drazhar get big impressive pieces, while Sam Spiritseer or Joe Harlequin get little rocks.

 Kanluwen wrote:

It's the Spiritseer which came out with "Wake the Dead".

Ah ok!

Like I said I thought I might have missed something. Thanks

Will Ghost Axes go to flat D3 damage ? Please god.

According to WarCom the new Tau character is being unveiled "very soon" (i.e. tomorrow for New Model Monday). That means they're clear for Eldar to be the big Xmas / New year reveal. Last time was Hedonites battletome announcement + some core models on xmas, then their big centrepiece model shown on Jan 1st.

Fingers crossed that we see the new Avatar this NYD...

 xttz wrote:
According to WarCom the new Tau character is being unveiled "very soon" (i.e. tomorrow for New Model Monday). That means they're clear for Eldar to be the big Xmas / New year reveal. Last time was Hedonites battletome announcement + some core models on xmas, then their big centrepiece model shown on Jan 1st.

Fingers crossed that we see the new Avatar this NYD...

Remember, there are still unsolved Rumour Engines from last year's Advent. So don't get your hopes up.

Oh please. It's two images, from the same character.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Oh please. It's two images, from the same character.

And the fact it's just two images somehow invalidates the fact they're still images, from last years' advent, still not revealed?

It's an Inquisitor character model that got pushed back for whatever reason.

Stop trying to pretend like it means anything. We saw the dice that were supposed to go with the model in Octarius. We saw the rules that were supposed to go with the model in Octarius. Something pushed the model release back, and I'm about 99% sure it has to do with production bottlenecks.

 Kanluwen wrote:
It's an Inquisitor character model that got pushed back for whatever reason.

Stop trying to pretend like it means anything. We saw the dice that were supposed to go with the model in Octarius. We saw the rules that were supposed to go with the model in Octarius. Something pushed the model release back, and I'm about 99% sure it has to do with production bottlenecks.

All it means is that models from this Advent Rumour Engine might not get revealed for a long time, for whatever reason.
And that people shouldn't expect them all to get revealed within a few months.

Other than literally all the other models revealed, naturally.

I miss the old 2nd edition weapon options for Guardians. I remember having an honor guard squad of Guardians for my Farseer equipped with power swords and the leader with an Eldar power fist. Expensive in points but did it to show Eldar tech superiority over the Ork and human IG hordes.

Iracundus wrote:
I miss the old 2nd edition weapon options for Guardians. I remember having an honor guard squad of Guardians for my Farseer equipped with power swords and the leader with an Eldar power fist. Expensive in points but did it to show Eldar tech superiority over the Ork and human IG hordes.

Amen, soldier! I loved the metal guardians with plastic arms & weapon sprue. I made my Autarch out of the female Guardian.

I'm very curious to see what bones GW throws the Craftworlds once all is revealed.

Didn’t someone post that guardians or corsairs would get a warlock added into the squad like a leader and they would get an option for a wraithcannon? That would be nice. I would love if they gave each guardian unit a wraithguard as a big brother to deal with tough threats. Imagine having them sprinkled in guardian units with d scythes or wraith cannons to bolster the line.

Wraithguard with 2+ 4++ and -1D

Twilight Pathways wrote:

Spoiler:

Wraithguard with 2+ 4++ and -1D

That sounds utterly amazing, not a bucket load of attacks but good luck shifting a blob of axe-guard

Feels plausible for Wraithblades. With that said - and I guess the answer is "points" - I'm a bit mystified how you'd balance the sword and axe combo on that basis. 2+/4++ is a fairly dramatic uplift in defense on a regular 3+. I guess there are some targets where 2 damage would be wasted - but it seems to get smaller all the time.

Also a bit mystified on the previous claim that "Iyanden wraiths get tanky". How much more tanky can a T6 2+/4++ with -1 damage get? "They get Transhuman" "Okay then?"

Tyel wrote:
Feels plausible for Wraithblades. With that said - and I guess the answer is "points" - I'm a bit mystified how you'd balance the sword and axe combo on that basis. 2+/4++ is a fairly dramatic uplift in defense on a regular 3+. I guess there are some targets where 2 damage would be wasted - but it seems to get smaller all the time.

Also a bit mystified on the previous claim that "Iyanden wraiths get tanky". How much more tanky can a T6 2+/4++ with -1 damage get? "They get Transhuman" "Okay then?"

It just sounds like you'd be reskinning Dark Angels. Feels like an easy option to make wraith units like that rumour states. Seems sus but we'll see I suppose.

As someone playing Iyanded, I hope those are true, that would be great! Also would make my decision easier on how to arm those 5 Wraithblade I want to build. Was leaning on axe already but the -1 to hit is always lame and old-edition fashion, so only that gone would be great.

I was just complaining to my friend yesterday about how worthless wraithblades with axes are. They constantly do 1 damage. They have 3+ instead of 2+. They cost a ton of points and require psychic support and only hit on 4’s. Horrible value.

warpedpig wrote:
I was just complaining to my friend yesterday about how worthless wraithblades with axes are. They constantly do 1 damage. They have 3+ instead of 2+. They cost a ton of points and require psychic support and only hit on 4’s. Horrible value.

I know that they're one of the go-tos for us to win in competitive games, but I always have the same experience as you. You can make them tanky as hell but they just never do any damage for me. And I guess that's okay, Eldar has other stuff to do damage. But it's definitely made them annoying to use in 9th. I don't believe these rumors overall but I do hope the -1 to hit on the axes goes away; it really doesn't make any sense to be there in the first place since they only hit at S7.

Unless you have hunters of ancient relics you only get 2 attacks. Then only hitting on 4’s. Then still wound on 3’s for most things. Anything really tough will get a 4+ invuln. I had 9 wraithguard with ax hitting 5 terminators yesterday with storm shields. Took 2 1/2 turns to kill them. Such nonsense. They’re underpowered for what they cost. Flat 2 damage and +1 to hit would go a long way.

The wraith cannons going to 18” and 3+D3 would make them viable again. Perfect for webway strike and blasting hard targets.

warpedpig wrote:
I was just complaining to my friend yesterday about how worthless wraithblades with axes are. They constantly do 1 damage. They have 3+ instead of 2+. They cost a ton of points and require psychic support and only hit on 4’s. Horrible value.

I've had the opposite experience, even a squad of 5 in a wave serpent can be very useful for netting objectives and surviving games where Eldar suffer most. If you're complaining about Eldar needing psychic support, you're playing the wrong army, that's how they work. Protect and fortune is enough for a mega tough blob of multiwound minis as is, and if the rumours are true this makes them very much on a par with Blightlord Termies. 4 attacks on the charge with Hunters of Ancient Relics isn't something to sniff at given the army's current power level and the access to Doom and +1 to hit from psychic powers.

The problem is to make this 1 unit not suck balls you have to dedicate stratagems and psychic support to them. What if your psychic powers fail? What if you need to use powers for another unit? Eldar just has so many things that have to go right for their units to be on par with other factions units. 9vs 5 terminators shouldn’t last nearly 3 full turns. Maybe 5v5. But 9v5. They suck.

 Tyranid Horde wrote:

warpedpig wrote:
I was just complaining to my friend yesterday about how worthless wraithblades with axes are. They constantly do 1 damage. They have 3+ instead of 2+. They cost a ton of points and require psychic support and only hit on 4’s. Horrible value.

I've had the opposite experience, even a squad of 5 in a wave serpent can be very useful for netting objectives and surviving games where Eldar suffer most. If you're complaining about Eldar needing psychic support, you're playing the wrong army, that's how they work. Protect and fortune is enough for a mega tough blob of multiwound minis as is, and if the rumours are true this makes them very much on a par with Blightlord Termies. 4 attacks on the charge with Hunters of Ancient Relics isn't something to sniff at given the army's current power level and the access to Doom and +1 to hit from psychic powers.

Yeah, of course it's reasonable to expect support units to buff them, and I've never seen anybody complain about their durability period, but even if you perpetually assume Wraithblades are getting 4 attacks (which really, it's 1 fight phase where they are...), they're hitting on 4s (unless you bring yet another warlock to buff their to-hit). It's just not a lot of output. I actually rather bring Swords on my Wraithblades. Yeah, they're probably worse overall but I have more fun using them.

And then you roll a bunch of D1 for damage. Double face palm. They really suck. Terminator get flat 3 damage per wound with thunder hammers. They kill 1 wraithblades auto on a failed save. Terminators often absorb 2 wounds from a ghost ax before dying. It’s pathetic.

Tyel wrote:
Feels plausible for Wraithblades. With that said - and I guess the answer is "points" - I'm a bit mystified how you'd balance the sword and axe combo on that basis. 2+/4++ is a fairly dramatic uplift in defense on a regular 3+. I guess there are some targets where 2 damage would be wasted - but it seems to get smaller all the time.

Also a bit mystified on the previous claim that "Iyanden wraiths get tanky". How much more tanky can a T6 2+/4++ with -1 damage get? "They get Transhuman" "Okay then?"

IMO this feels like proof that the rumors are made up. How would you even balance a unit like that?

chaos0xomega wrote:

Tyel wrote:
Feels plausible for Wraithblades. With that said - and I guess the answer is "points" - I'm a bit mystified how you'd balance the sword and axe combo on that basis. 2+/4++ is a fairly dramatic uplift in defense on a regular 3+. I guess there are some targets where 2 damage would be wasted - but it seems to get smaller all the time.

Also a bit mystified on the previous claim that "Iyanden wraiths get tanky". How much more tanky can a T6 2+/4++ with -1 damage get? "They get Transhuman" "Okay then?"

IMO this feels like proof that the rumors are made up. How would you even balance a unit like that?

GW makes unbalanced units all the time

chaos0xomega wrote:

Tyel wrote:
Feels plausible for Wraithblades. With that said - and I guess the answer is "points" - I'm a bit mystified how you'd balance the sword and axe combo on that basis. 2+/4++ is a fairly dramatic uplift in defense on a regular 3+. I guess there are some targets where 2 damage would be wasted - but it seems to get smaller all the time.

Also a bit mystified on the previous claim that "Iyanden wraiths get tanky". How much more tanky can a T6 2+/4++ with -1 damage get? "They get Transhuman" "Okay then?"

IMO this feels like proof that the rumors are made up. How would you even balance a unit like that?

I mean it's not like a t5 2+/4++ -1 damage, with a -1t aura, native deepstrike with a potential 6++ is currently in the game and considered "not that good" or anything.

Tranself Shielding

So the "leaks" have reached self-parody level now?

 Vovin wrote:
So the "leaks" have reached self-parody level now?

How do you mean?

Please show your working to two decimal places.

The whole advent calendar thing stinks already. The former rumours already mentioned a truckload off defensive buffs for wraiths and this doubles further down on this trend. When the rumours are finished everything in the codex will have at least two of the following: -1D, invulnerable save and transhuman.

 Vovin wrote:
The whole advent calendar thing stinks already. The former rumours already mentioned a truckload off defensive buffs for wraiths and this doubles further down on this trend. When the rumours are finished everything in the codex will have at least two of the following: -1D, invulnerable save and transhuman.

Almost like people have been complaining for months/years that the game is too lethal and that expensive elf bodies need defensive buffs to be worth the price?

If anything the front half of these advent items seem to be spot on, the unit and subfaction specific stuff, if accurate, will look weird in a vacuum.

People complain about lots of stupid stuff. That doesn't mean that it is justified. Craftworlds are still supposed to be glasscannons, albeit less so than Drukhari and Harlequins. The lethality may be a general problem, but you can't fix it by overdoing the defensive buffs on one of the more fragile races.

But this is more of a game design discussion. My main point is that this whole "leak" reeks of wishlisting. The first half of this calendar was already fishy as hell. The hoaxer didn't account for the reaper launcher for example. I posted a timeline of the Discord chat a while back in this thread that shows how implausible the whole inception of this was. Then the hoaxer contradicted himself directly by both claiming that the leak comes from a playtester and simultaneously that it is from the reliable source who posted the roadmap.

This is one just absurd. Only wounded on a 4+. Why? Lol. What about every other tank? I wouldn’t mind. Definitely wouldn’t see the enemy wasting massive firepower on a wave serpent now just to kill some infantry inside

For those saying this is absurd, you do realise that this is literally just the Quantum Shielding rule that half the Necron vehicles just have as standard, right?

 vipoid wrote:
For those saying this is absurd, you do realise that this is literally just the Quantum Shielding rule that half the Necron vehicles just have as standard, right?

It's also not unprecedented historically, wave serpents have always have top notch defensive abilities

Would be funny how supposed glass cannon faction's vehicles are suddenly tougher than faction who is supposed to be durable.

Would make power creep quite obvious.

But then again. Troll "leaks"

 Vovin wrote:
People complain about lots of stupid stuff. That doesn't mean that it is justified. Craftworlds are still supposed to be glasscannons, albeit less so than Drukhari and Harlequins. The lethality may be a general problem, but you can't fix it by overdoing the defensive buffs on one of the more fragile races.

But this is more of a game design discussion. My main point is that this whole "leak" reeks of wishlisting. The first half of this calendar was already fishy as hell. The hoaxer didn't account for the reaper launcher for example. I posted a timeline of the Discord chat a while back in this thread that shows how implausible the whole inception of this was. Then the hoaxer contradicted himself directly by both claiming that the leak comes from a playtester and simultaneously that it is from the reliable source who posted the roadmap.

So they outlined a box that lines up perfect with the rumour engine, the model and units seem to be accurate. We also cannot confirm it's a reaper launcher, there are enough differences it may be a missile launcher instead. If they were iron-clad sourced and proven they wouldn't be rumours any more.

40k needs a reset and a do-over next edition, it's too lethal, everything's too cramped, every gun is used against everything and every faction has 5 layers of special rules. Nothing good's gonna come out of an endless cycle of buffing units durability and then buffing how killy all the weapons are to make up for it.

The 5++ is definitely even more of a reason not to bother shooting at them. Wave serpents lack much offensive firepower unless you spend a lot of points. Not the highest threat.

 Vovin wrote:
The whole advent calendar thing stinks already. The former rumours already mentioned a truckload off defensive buffs for wraiths and this doubles further down on this trend. When the rumours are finished everything in the codex will have at least two of the following: -1D, invulnerable save and transhuman.

So the one unit line that Eldar have that bucks the trend precisely because they're not squishy organic bodies, and the one Eldar vehicle which is supposed to be tanky because it has a shield and always has suddenly means everything in the codex will be tanky.

Talk about hyperbole.

The wraiths needed that buff because they sucked. They hardly kill anything without layers of psychic buffs and special Craftworld traits. The buff to the wave serpent is not going to change the game much since it’s a delivery vehicle with limited / expensive weapons. There’s cheaper offensive options to go with that do die easier and are better targets. So far I’d say these two changes would be balanced changes and not overpowered.

Next we need the Avatar to have 8 attacks and 4+ Invuln. It is a war god after all. Also needs two options. Swipe and stab. So he can wipe hordes or characters.

These are all buffs to datasheets from a very early 8E codex released in 2017. Of course there's going to be improvements, nearly all of those units were just copied and pasted from indexes.

It's good to see them making supposedly tanky units actually able to take some damage, rather than just cutting their points to make them playable.

We'll see on wraiths. You could have a great defensive profile - but if you are paying near 45-50 points and only have 2 axe attacks, its kind of pillowfisted. If however they get bumped up to 3 base for say 40 points, it feels like a steal.

Not really shocked on the Wave Serpent. I think there's always been issues that you have a very fast, hard to destroy, relatively high damaging with 3 guns transport. They got a fairly hefty points hike I think in mid 8th, which I think people seemed to think was reasonable - but then codex creep took its toll and today 150-160 points for a bit of Shuriken feels decidedly lacklustre.

Be more interesting to see if this becomes a more standard rule for Eldar or just a Wave Serpent only thing.

There should be a simple rule where you get -1 to hit or some kind of bonus to your save when you move 16” or more in your hover tanks. 2nd edition was great for that. If you moved really far you had some - modifiers to being shot at.

There's an aspect warrior reveal in the James Workshop video!

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/12/14/a-festive-message-from-mr-james-workshop/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Article&utm_campaign=xmas+video,+Dec+14&fbclid=IwAR0IOZrBeu6BdaTBkUoPeNU9r6bRKzFN5pNRfsVGnkKw9fcVPsLCO_rINPo

 Daedalus81 wrote:
There's an aspect warrior reveal in the James Workshop video!

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/12/14/a-festive-message-from-mr-james-workshop/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Article&utm_campaign=xmas+video,+Dec+14&fbclid=IwAR0IOZrBeu6BdaTBkUoPeNU9r6bRKzFN5pNRfsVGnkKw9fcVPsLCO_rINPo

Hey at least it confirms existence of something, and we know it doesn't have the musk of dakka.

I love the "Department of Organized Leaks."

Damn you, James!

Is there a pic?

No, just GW teasing.

tneva82 wrote:
Would be funny how supposed glass cannon faction's vehicles are suddenly tougher than faction who is supposed to be durable.

Would make power creep quite obvious.

But then again. Troll "leaks"

Meanwhile, in 4th edition...

Lol, if the rumours are true regarding Wave Serpents have both built in Transhuman and a 5++ save, I almost guarantee you that GW will not price them correctly similar to how they goofed with Raider costs for the DE initial release. We'll be seeing Wave Serpent supremacy unseen since the great days of 4th ed Eldar.

It would make sense in GWs mind to just boost the wave serpent instead of fixing the rules for aspect warriors.
That way they could write an article how awesome and powerfull new aspects are, when they in fact just put them in awesome wave serpents

That would give the Autarch an average of 10 attacks at S5, -4 AP and 1 damage. Not bad but without multi-damage not what I'd call a monster. Hopefully there'll be multi-damage relic weapons

I’m sure there will be a sword with D2 or something like that. A definite improvement over the mediocre underpowered Autarch we have now.

Twilight Pathways wrote:
That would give the Autarch an average of 10 attacks at S5, -4 AP and 1 damage. Not bad but without multi-damage not what I'd call a monster. Hopefully there'll be multi-damage relic weapons

Wouldn't it be S4? Relics replace the weapon, not add to them.

warpedpig wrote:
I’m sure there will be a sword with D2 or something like that. A definite improvement over the mediocre underpowered Autarch we have now.

With a warlord trait and a relic they can now effectively clear out a small guardsmen, gaunt, eldar or nuns unit. Not sure anyone is actually that scared of that profile tbh sadly.

You’ll have to wait and see what other options they get. Auras. Weapons. Etc

And whether even those are true or not.

I heard one warhead option is a ghost ax launcher. So your autarch can shoot ghost axes. It’s assault 10. S7. AP-3 D3. Could just be a fake rumor

Yeah, when I see the stats on that Autarch plus shard, I don't see melee monster. With the AP at -4 he kills 2 Primaris marines.

Definitely a bad attempt at hyping the new Autarch, sounds like you have to overinvest to get even a middling amount of melee power at best. If I remember correctly, both DE and Craftworld Eldar have always had issues making their Archons and Autarchs actually scary in combat. Their blast/fusion weapons were always more lethal than whatever melee weapons they could bring to the table, even the relic ones. I think best an Autarch could bring is basically a laser/star lance and that was about it, assuming they're on a jetbike.

I'm more hoping they don't butcher the options for the Autarchs the same way they did with the Archons. Here's hoping we get more than just "swap one sword for another sword, and you have a choice of 2 pistols for a bloke with an inconceivable array of weapons and horrific wargear to choose from".

 Valkyrie wrote:
I'm more hoping they don't butcher the options for the Autarchs the same way they did with the Archons. Here's hoping we get more than just "swap one sword for another sword, and you have a choice of 2 pistols for a bloke with an inconceivable array of weapons and horrific wargear to choose from".

Unfortunately, I can almost guarantee you GW will be super weird and inflexible with how the Autarch weapon loadouts are. You'll probably have 3 different entries for the Autarch. The one with wings that will only have the options available on that model (shuriken/fusion pistol/power sword/glaive), the one on foot that they're going to fix with the weapons he starts with as well and then the Autarch Skyrunner is basically stuck with his laser lance. Welcome to 9th ed, the edition of "creativity".

There's always a sliver of hope it won't be a compltetly awful kit. Last year's Canoness actually had a lot of options, with several heads, two torsos and backpacks, and like 10 diffrent weapons in the box.

 Sacredroach wrote:
I love the "Department of Organized Leaks."

That sounds like a proactive corporate structure response to the Great Sewage Crisis of 2021 at GW HQ.

 Valkyrie wrote:
I'm more hoping they don't butcher the options for the Autarchs the same way they did with the Archons. Here's hoping we get more than just "swap one sword for another sword, and you have a choice of 2 pistols for a bloke with an inconceivable array of weapons and horrific wargear to choose from".

As a DE player, I'm hoping the same thing.

That way I can just jump ship.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
There's always a sliver of hope it won't be a compltetly awful kit. Last year's Canoness actually had a lot of options, with several heads, two torsos and backpacks, and like 10 diffrent weapons in the box.

A rarity in this day and age. For every Canoness type character mini theres a dozen more that provide no meaningful customization options that carry a rules impact (i.e. something other than a headswap or decorative detailing).

It's also disappointing if a new release has less options than before and suddenly your weapon's loadout turns into "Legends" territory.


Still, better to be optimistic than not. The Autarch with the Shard of Anaris certainly looks better than its current state.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
There's always a sliver of hope it won't be a compltetly awful kit. Last year's Canoness actually had a lot of options, with several heads, two torsos and backpacks, and like 10 diffrent weapons in the box.

The Canoness' weapon/combo options are a garbled hellscape though.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
There's always a sliver of hope it won't be a compltetly awful kit. Last year's Canoness actually had a lot of options, with several heads, two torsos and backpacks, and like 10 diffrent weapons in the box.

A rarity in this day and age. For every Canoness type character mini theres a dozen more that provide no meaningful customization options that carry a rules impact (i.e. something other than a headswap or decorative detailing).

This is one of the reasons why I wanted a Firstborn Captain instead of a Primaris one.

Twilight Pathways wrote:

Oh feth off.

Not you, Twilight Pathways - you're awesome! - but that rumour can feth right off.

We can't have another edition of Wave Serpents terrorising everyone with their near-invulnerability. This alone makes me doubt these rumours.

This could replace their current rules btw.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Oh feth off.

Not you, Twilight Pathways - you're awesome! - but that rumour can feth right off.

We can't have another edition of Wave Serpents terrorising everyone with their near-invulnerability. This alone makes me doubt these rumours.

It took you this long, HBMC?

More transhuman? That needs to stop.

If they’re in cover that’s not bad really. But their weapons mean they are generally being offensive and going to have to be moving. I would prefer they have 24” range weapons so their soft Eldar bodies aren’t so close to rapid firing weapons and charges. If you can include a warlock like a squad leader and give them some buffs that would be even better

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
More transhuman? That needs to stop.

Hey now it's clearly a high priority for GW to protect Storm Guardians from their natural predator, the lascannon.

It's just becoming the latest fad amongst the rules team as their get-out-of-writing-good-rules free card. Just give it transhuman, or some variant of it. One day it'll be like Mortal Wounds in Age of Sigmar - unavoidable and caused by everything.

If everything ends up with transhuman, then is anything transhuman?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
If everything ends up with transhuman, then is anything transhuman?

Society?

Next step would obviously be posthuman, then.

 Albertorius wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
If everything ends up with transhuman, then is anything transhuman?

Society?

Next step would obviously be posthuman, then.

Posthuman physiology (adeptus astartes) - 3cp, may only be wounded on natural 6's. Note: this rule will be handed out as a freebie in later books after people have finished complaining at marines.

Signed: James Workshop

Only Primaris Primaris Marines get that though.

Seriously though, I think these rumours are a giant troll. They started reasonable, but by mid-next week the leaker will "reveal" that all Aspect Warriors at T6 W4 with a 2+/2++ save.

And transhuman.

Indeed. Theirs a very apt sketch from Chewin’ The Fat, a Scottish comedy show, which I’m not allowed to share on Dakka.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Indeed. Theirs a very apt sketch from Chewin’ The Fat, a Scottish comedy show, which I’m not allowed to share on Dakka.

How is the sketch called to find it on Youtube?

I genuinely cannot say!

Perhaps try Chewing the fat I smell?

It's possible the 'transhuman' ability is one of the updated Warlock powers - Heal or whatever it is.

But 4+ saves are pretty likely given DE, -1AP on chainswords makes sense given how crappy a S3 melee unit is (as does 3 attacks).

Storm guardians that look like:

3+ 3+ 3 3 1 3 8 4+
Chainsword S- AP-1 D1

Isn't particularly powerful as a dedicated melee unit...

I imagine the melee aspects will look similar with better weapons and extra skills.

Given Banshee swords are +1S, I can see scorpion swords being +2 but -1AP, keeping them in a similar relative position to banshees.

Shuriken catapults at 18" is also not much of a buff now the standard marine carries a 30" bolt rifle and tau pulse rifles are 36" range now...

There's nothing in that rumour that seems particularly unbelievable to me assuming the TH is a psychic buff and not a default one (no idea why it would be a special rule they had).

There was a rumour that storm guardians also got a weapon platform but it had a field on it - maybe the TH ability comes from an energy field.

 Hellebore wrote:
It's possible the 'transhuman' ability is one of the updated Warlock powers - Heal or whatever it is.

But 4+ saves are pretty likely given DE, -1AP on chainswords makes sense given how crappy a S3 melee unit is (as does 3 attacks).

Storm guardians that look like:

3+ 3+ 3 3 1 3 8 4+
Chainsword S- AP-1 D1

Isn't particularly powerful as a dedicated melee unit...

I imagine the melee aspects will look similar with better weapons and extra skills.

Given Banshee swords are +1S, I can see scorpion swords being +2 but -1AP, keeping them in a similar relative position to banshees.

Shuriken catapults at 18" is also not much of a buff now the standard marine carries a 30" bolt rifle and tau pulse rifles are 36" range now...

There's nothing in that rumour that seems particularly unbelievable to me assuming the TH is a psychic buff and not a default one (no idea why it would be a special rule they had).

There was a rumour that storm guardians also got a weapon platform but it had a field on it - maybe the TH ability comes from an energy field.

I agree with this, it feels like a "wtfomgbbq" moment because it's a big leap from where guardians are now but if people want them to become relevant and worth an inevitable 9/10 ppm price tag, these changes seem about right.

Just tell me what warp hunters and D cannons will look like. I need to know.

Storm Guardians getting a watered down Transhuman is...strange. I was hoping they'd at least make it more Eldar specific and make it Hit related like "This model can only be hit on a roll of 1-3.

 The Red Hobbit wrote:
Storm Guardians getting a watered down Transhuman is...strange. I was hoping they'd at least make it more Eldar specific and make it Hit related like "This model can only be hit on a roll of 1-3.

...on a 4-6, surely?

 Dysartes wrote:

 The Red Hobbit wrote:
Storm Guardians getting a watered down Transhuman is...strange. I was hoping they'd at least make it more Eldar specific and make it Hit related like "This model can only be hit on a roll of 1-3.

...on a 4-6, surely?

I mean.
An unit against which bonuses to hit provide the opposite effect would be a... very interesting concept?

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 The Red Hobbit wrote:
Storm Guardians getting a watered down Transhuman is...strange. I was hoping they'd at least make it more Eldar specific and make it Hit related like "This model can only be hit on a roll of 1-3.

...on a 4-6, surely?

I mean.
An unit against which bonuses to hit provide the opposite effect would be a... very interesting concept?

OooooooOOOOOO......

“Ok, well, I rolled 3 ones, so I hit you three times”
“Aren’t you in range of your chapter master? You’ll need to re-roll those ones...”

I’ll be honest...I don’t hate it. It makes it seem like they’re so fast you’re more likely to hit them through dumb luck rather than taking careful aim which kinda fits I think!

What’s our next little could-be tidbit for everyone to beat each other up about going to be?

 Tiberius501 wrote:
What’s our next little could-be tidbit for everyone to beat each other up about going to be?

T6 W4 2+/2++ Aspect Warriors. I already said so.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Tiberius501 wrote:
What’s our next little could-be tidbit for everyone to beat each other up about going to be?

T6 W4 2+/2++ Aspect Warriors. I already said so.

I’d be fine with this

I'd be okay if they made Phoenix Lords T5 to make them more of the ageless monsters they are supposed to be.

Weapons today, tomorrow is about phoenix lords & aspect warriors

Nothing shocking there really, maybe the damage on the falcon pulse laser being so high, but that's it.

I would’ve liked to also see D Cannons and Hornet pulse lasers.

I see the Shuriken Cannon continues to just be a vastly better version of the worthless piece of garbage that is the DE Splinter Cannon.

Weapon profiles.

warpedpig wrote:
I would’ve liked to also see D Cannons and Hornet pulse lasers.

Hornets aren't in the codex so won't change.

The good news would be jetbikes utility would increase. Having D2 Shuriken cannons or heavy 6 scatter lasers gives them superior functionality for wiping out horde infantry or even primaris. Throw in doom jinx and you can really threaten anything with volume of fire. Much better than before

Dudeface wrote:
Nothing shocking there really, maybe the damage on the falcon pulse laser being so high, but that's it.

And strength. It's a rapid fire bright lance after all, it should be trading down on S and D for the extra shots, not just being better and equivalent, respectively.

Nah. The Falcon is supposed to be the main battle tank of the Eldar isn’t it? Shouldn’t be a surprise that it would have a badass main gun. The fire prism is a bit more specialized of a heavy weapon with unique abilities and no troop transport option Wonder what it’s weapons will be for next edition. Probably also getting boosted

warpedpig wrote:
Nah. The Falcon is supposed to be the main battle tank of the Eldar isn’t it? Shouldn’t be a surprise that it would have a badass main gun. The fire prism is a bit more specialized of a heavy weapon with unique abilities and no troop transport option Wonder what it’s weapons will be for next edition. Probably also getting boosted

Been pondering about Prism when I read the change to pulse laser. I assume everything but damage will remain the same and the damage would have to change because the internal balance goes completely out of whack with these damage changes. You could put a shuriken cannon and a bright lance on a Falcon for less points than a Prism and be more flexible than the Prism.

Wave serpent with twin brightlance will be very hard to kill and hit pretty hard for anti tank. Or at a minimum with 3 Shuriken cannons will actually be a threat to primaris. I could see running three of them and three falcons for a mobile gun line that can deliver troops anywhere needed.

Mechdar is looking good. S9 is a surprise but keeps it away from being too similar to bright lances.

 Dysartes wrote:

 The Red Hobbit wrote:
Storm Guardians getting a watered down Transhuman is...strange. I was hoping they'd at least make it more Eldar specific and make it Hit related like "This model can only be hit on a roll of 1-3.

...on a 4-6, surely?

Yes sorry, wrote that one backwards.

Well that's boring. Believability aside, that's the least interesting non-solution to not fixing aspect warriors.

The Phoenix Lord 4++ is almost to be expected for some shred of survivability, and could be chalked up to battle fate.

Is that Aspect Warrior 5++ meant to be something like a dodge save? Bland but I guess mechanically GW doesn't have much design space to work with, especially now with Initiative gone.

Getting rid of initiative really sucks. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it. Hoping to get bette exarch powers as well. I am hoping the shining spear exarch is also 2+ invuln. Would be nuts if that was the base invuln. He could absorb a massive amount of fire. When he fails just CP reroll. Lol.

Oh please.

Initiative basically mattered at one point and one point only in a game. Outside of that? It was a nothingburger of a stat, unless you were playing a weirdo army that used it instead of a normal stat.

If this is true, this indeed quite lame. It's disappointing to see GW continue to be so lazy in their rules design. Slapping a 5++ invuln on Aspect Warriors doesn't really solve a lot of their inherent issues. I guess we'll have to see their individual datasheets to know if GW actually bothered to make them good at specific roles or not.

warpedpig wrote:
I am hoping the shining spear exarch is also 2+ invuln. Would be nuts if that was the base invuln. He could absorb a massive amount of fire. When he fails just CP reroll. Lol.

This sounds like something that should absolutely not be in the game.

I'm pretty sure that "Exarchs can have a 2+/2+" was referring to their BS/WS, not their saves.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
I'm pretty sure that "Exarchs can have a 2+/2+" was referring to their BS/WS, not their saves.

Yeah, that was my assumption as well.

 vipoid wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
I'm pretty sure that "Exarchs can have a 2+/2+" was referring to their BS/WS, not their saves.

Yeah, that was my assumption as well.

Besides, the Shining Spear Exarch can already get a 2++ with one or two rerolls in a shooting phase.

 Grimskul wrote:
If this is true, this indeed quite lame. It's disappointing to see GW continue to be so lazy in their rules design. Slapping a 5++ invuln on Aspect Warriors doesn't really solve a lot of their inherent issues. I guess we'll have to see their individual datasheets to know if GW actually bothered to make them good at specific roles or not.

If it is true, I want to know what GW thinks is firing at aspect warriors. For the ones with 4+ armor, I guess it matters for bolt rifles in tactical doctrine, inferno bolters and the like, but who's firing -3 AP weapons at the 3+ save aspects? That's a pretty extreme corner case to just throw a 5++ on a unit, especially if they now have to pay points for that crap.

I would expect Aspect Warriors to have rules more akin to Incubi, than this randomness.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Oh please.

Initiative basically mattered at one point and one point only in a game. Outside of that? It was a nothingburger of a stat, unless you were playing a weirdo army that used it instead of a normal stat.

You could make the same argument about Leadership, given how many things either ignored it or boosted it to levels where it became irrelevant.

To put it another way: Just because GW never expanded the use of the stat doesn't mean it was bad to have it.

Voss wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:
If this is true, this indeed quite lame. It's disappointing to see GW continue to be so lazy in their rules design. Slapping a 5++ invuln on Aspect Warriors doesn't really solve a lot of their inherent issues. I guess we'll have to see their individual datasheets to know if GW actually bothered to make them good at specific roles or not.

If it is true, I want to know what GW thinks is firing at aspect warriors. For the ones with 4+ armor, I guess it matters for bolt rifles in tactical doctrine, inferno bolters and the like, but who's firing -3 AP weapons at the 3+ save aspects? That's a pretty extreme corner case to just throw a 5++ on a unit, especially if they now have to pay points for that crap.

There's often several methods to improve AP on regular weapons. Just like for marines, a basic AP-1 profile can easily end up as -2 or -3 for some units. This doesn't just apply to ranged weapons either, it's hardly far fetched for aspect warriors to find themselves engaged against a power sword or rending claws.

I'll also be extremely surprised if this was the only way to improve aspect warrior protection. The invuln is just something being applied as standard to all of them, like how all Skitarii get a 6++ by default. Following the trend of other 9E codexes we could see more specific changes like Banshees built-in -1 to hit in melee now working against ranged attacks too, or Scorpions always counting as in light cover.

Spiders seem cool. A 2nd deep strike and a decent threat with their guns now.

Actually makes them usable now. The warp spider gun is strong and with a -2 and plenty of shots they can definitely do some damage. The swooping hawks could be useful with their mortal wounds on units that are otherwise very difficult to wound. TH and shield terminators for example. The boost to S4 was greatly needed as they suffered from the usual “I can’t kill a damn thing without doom and jinx helping me” syndrome.

Well reliability of those still super low

A lot of these rumors are such bologna it's incredible. Most of it is purely ripped from the DE book, and anything that couldn't be extrapolated that way is where the info just reads really really wish listy lol.

I mean, why would one flavor of guardian have mini transhuman? Or the terrible stats on the pulse laser lol. I guess it's just better then a bright lance in every way now, despite what the fluff says.

Kabalytes received a 4+ so it's pretty easy to predict guardians having a 4+ as well, which makes it fairly obvious that every aspect will have a 3+ you know, like incubi. I'd also be shocked if aspects didn't natively hit on a 2+ either in melee or shooting (not both) like incubi.

The 5++ and 4+ max to wound on the serpent sounds pretty plausible as well although I'd wager it's not all the serpent shield that does it as I'd imagine all eldar vehicles gaining a 5++ and the shield just makes it harder to wound.

Phoenix lord rumors look like they were ripped straight off Drazhar etc. Again, which makes sense and makes it pretty obvious to come draw prediction from.

I'd really be tempering my expectations based on the rest of this crap though. It takes really good players 30 minutes just to figure out how the detachment rules work in a 9th ed book yet this dude somehow casually flipped through everything in that time and remembers every detail? lol

Hope everyone has a great holiday and is having fun, I know these can be fun but I also know how frustrating they are for some folks so thought I'd chime in.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
40k needs a reset and a do-over next edition, it's too lethal, everything's too cramped, every gun is used against everything and every faction has 5 layers of special rules. Nothing good's gonna come out of an endless cycle of buffing units durability and then buffing how killy all the weapons are to make up for it.

40k has needed a reset since 6th. Instead we got formations that forced you to buy a bunch of extra models, psychic/summoning nonsense, 8th/9th where you can take half of someone's army off the table in a single round of shooting, and 3,287 stratagems that used to be wargear/relics/USRs

I love how people like to pretend it was formations that were the problem.

That it's has nothing to do with several armies having effectively been limping along, conceptually and in terms of their design mentalities, since 3E.

Toofast wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
40k needs a reset and a do-over next edition, it's too lethal, everything's too cramped, every gun is used against everything and every faction has 5 layers of special rules. Nothing good's gonna come out of an endless cycle of buffing units durability and then buffing how killy all the weapons are to make up for it.

40k has needed a reset since 6th. Instead we got formations that forced you to buy a bunch of extra models, psychic/summoning nonsense, 8th/9th where you can take half of someone's army off the table in a single round of shooting, and 3,287 stratagems that used to be wargear/relics/USRs

Kanluwen wrote:I love how people like to pretend it was formations that were the problem.

That it's has nothing to do with several armies having effectively been limping along, conceptually and in terms of their design mentalities, since 3E.

See the underlined part? That means that he was very literally not saying or pretending that formations were the problem, rather that instead of a fix for the problems, we got formations (and other stuff).

 Albertorius wrote:

Toofast wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
40k needs a reset and a do-over next edition, it's too lethal, everything's too cramped, every gun is used against everything and every faction has 5 layers of special rules. Nothing good's gonna come out of an endless cycle of buffing units durability and then buffing how killy all the weapons are to make up for it.

40k has needed a reset since 6th. Instead we got formations that forced you to buy a bunch of extra models, psychic/summoning nonsense, 8th/9th where you can take half of someone's army off the table in a single round of shooting, and 3,287 stratagems that used to be wargear/relics/USRs

Kanluwen wrote:I love how people like to pretend it was formations that were the problem.

That it's has nothing to do with several armies having effectively been limping along, conceptually and in terms of their design mentalities, since 3E.

See the underlined part? That means that he was very literally not saying or pretending that formations were the problem, rather that instead of a fix for the problems, we got formations (and other stuff).

And did you read the rest of the post made?

Or the one that I made?

Formations, etc had very little to do with the actual problems inherent with a system that has not made meaningful stat or conceptual changes to certain WHOLE ARMIES for who knows how long.

The one I quoted, where you said that people like to pretend all the problem was the formations and went ranting on the other problems, while right below the only post in a while that talked about it, precisely to say that it wasn't?

Yep. Kinda quoted both, in full, actually. And what the post said is that before all the stated, the game was already fethed.

This thread is for talking about Eldar leaks not formations.

So what, Corsairs and Guardian equivalents will be troops?

This doesn't sound believable.

So just guardians for troops? Dire Avengers are backbone of the craftword army. This makes no sense.

Lots of salt on this one.

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
So what, Corsairs and Guardian equivalents will be troops?

This doesn't sound believable.

I never liked avengers as troops. Just because theyre the most popular aspect doesn't mean there are that many. All aspects are the elite fighting force while the guardians form the core.

Only places like Biel tann can mass a full army of aspects as standard.

And with all the different force orgs you can use that's not going to be a big deal

 Nevelon wrote:
So just guardians for troops? Dire Avengers are backbone of the craftword army. This makes no sense.

Lots of salt on this one.

And the Harlequin Troupe, potentially.

Well if any of the guardian leaks were true, you kind of leave DA without a home unless you buff the living crap out of them, at which point they basically would have to be an elite by definition lol.

Can't imagine them being less then 14-15 ppm with all that gravy added on top.

Yeah, that'd be reaaaallly weird for them to make DA elites.

Finally Dire Avengers have 2nd Edition style shuriken catapults and dont suck. 3D printer go BRRRR

 Hellebore wrote:

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
So what, Corsairs and Guardian equivalents will be troops?

This doesn't sound believable.

I never liked avengers as troops. Just because theyre the most popular aspect doesn't mean there are that many. All aspects are the elite fighting force while the guardians form the core.

Only places like Biel tann can mass a full army of aspects as standard.

And with all the different force orgs you can use that's not going to be a big deal

Originally, Aspect Warriors were the only fighting force. Guardians were a citizen militia raised in times of dire need and a desperation play. Only Ulthwe had a permanent force of them that actually trained to fight while also pursuing whatever civilian Path they were on.
Then Gav Thorpe decided he wanted guardians to be the basic troop type but also gave them the shortest ranged main battle rifle equivalent in the game at the time…

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
So what, Corsairs and Guardian equivalents will be troops?

This doesn't sound believable.

I never liked avengers as troops. Just because theyre the most popular aspect doesn't mean there are that many. All aspects are the elite fighting force while the guardians form the core.

Only places like Biel tann can mass a full army of aspects as standard.

And with all the different force orgs you can use that's not going to be a big deal

Originally, Aspect Warriors were the only fighting force. Guardians were a citizen militia raised in times of dire need and a desperation play. Only Ulthwe had a permanent force of them that actually trained to fight while also pursuing whatever civilian Path they were on.
Then Gav Thorpe decided he wanted guardians to be the basic troop type but also gave them the shortest ranged main battle rifle equivalent in the game at the time…

Whilst all that is true, imagine the modern day population of a country, imagine all it's people all randomly selecting a job to follow based on their feelings. Between all the possible jobs and career paths, industries etc. I'd be shocked if more than a small percentage of a country ended up in the military. Then split that small percentage down by all the different roles within the military, how many core fighting pesons are left? It can't be enough to successfully be the mainstay of a force that threatened your very existence.

Dudeface wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
So what, Corsairs and Guardian equivalents will be troops?

This doesn't sound believable.

I never liked avengers as troops. Just because theyre the most popular aspect doesn't mean there are that many. All aspects are the elite fighting force while the guardians form the core.

Only places like Biel tann can mass a full army of aspects as standard.

And with all the different force orgs you can use that's not going to be a big deal

Originally, Aspect Warriors were the only fighting force. Guardians were a citizen militia raised in times of dire need and a desperation play. Only Ulthwe had a permanent force of them that actually trained to fight while also pursuing whatever civilian Path they were on.
Then Gav Thorpe decided he wanted guardians to be the basic troop type but also gave them the shortest ranged main battle rifle equivalent in the game at the time…

Whilst all that is true, imagine the modern day population of a country, imagine all it's people all randomly selecting a job to follow based on their feelings. Between all the possible jobs and career paths, industries etc. I'd be shocked if more than a small percentage of a country ended up in the military. Then split that small percentage down by all the different roles within the military, how many core fighting pesons are left? It can't be enough to successfully be the mainstay of a force that threatened your very existence.

Well, that would be the equivalent to a professional army, with the difference that, according to eldar lore, most eldar jumped from path to path to avoid overly focusing in one single thing. The only "lifers" would be the exarchs, who are stuck in the path, but many aspects would serve for a time and then go on with a civilian calling, so for one the percentage of the craftworld devoted to the military would be bigger and you probably could justify an "ex-aspect" special guardian squad if you so chose.

Well this new organization for the army kinda makes sense.

I mean if Eldar get new guardians and corsairs as basic troops. Forcing people to buy the new kits instead reuse the older Dire avengers (wich shouldn't be updated yet). The odd thing is the rangers change even when they get a new kit.

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
So what, Corsairs and Guardian equivalents will be troops?

This doesn't sound believable.

still think most of the rumours are sketchy at best

As for Corsairs, if true I think they'll go about it in the typical GW half-assed fashion of making them like Trueborn and Bloodbrides, ie an upgrade for 1 Guardian squad (along with loss of CW doctrine for some corner case ability, it was good enough for ynnari...)

Dudeface wrote:

Whilst all that is true, imagine the modern day population of a country, imagine all it's people all randomly selecting a job to follow based on their feelings. Between all the possible jobs and career paths, industries etc. I'd be shocked if more than a small percentage of a country ended up in the military. Then split that small percentage down by all the different roles within the military, how many core fighting pesons are left? It can't be enough to successfully be the mainstay of a force that threatened your very existence.

That might be true for humans, but eldar are essentially a bioweapon. The warrior paths are among the most popular paths, and more and more eldar are walking the warrior path.

4th ed codex wrote:
The Path of the Warrior teaches the arts of death and destruction. Due to the dark side of the Eldar psyche, it calls to almost all Eldar at some point in their long lives.

Also, how many active combatants would a craftworld actually need, given their fighting style? Craftworlds specialise in surgical strikes, and should need only relatively small numbers of warriors for that. Fielding guardians and wraith constructs makes sense when all plans go to hell, and the craftworld ends up in an (unfavourable) all-out war.

 Lord Perversor wrote:
Well this new organization for the army kinda makes sense.

I mean if Eldar get new guardians and corsairs as basic trooos. Forcing people to buy the new kits instead reuse the older Dire avengers (wich shouldn't be updated yet). The odd thing is the rangers change even when they get a new kit.

From a "buy our new stuff", probably. From a setting perspective, maybe not so much.

You should at least be able to build a full aspects army if you so chose.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Radium wrote:
Also, how many active combatants would a craftworld actually need, given their fighting style? Craftworlds specialise in surgical strikes, and should need only relatively small numbers of warriors for that. Fielding guardians and wraith constructs makes sense when all plans go to hell, and the craftworld ends up in an (unfavourable) all-out war.

Seeing guardians in the field makes quite a bit more sense for Epic and the like, when you've commited to an actual war.

For the 40k level, not really.

 Albertorius wrote:

You should at least be able to build a full aspects army if you so chose.

Well you can even if these rumours were true. Or was there rumoured cap on max aspects you can field?

Is it possible that the Phoenix Lords will let you take the respective aspect as Troops instead?

tneva82 wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

You should at least be able to build a full aspects army if you so chose.

Well you can even if these rumours were true. Or was there rumoured cap on max aspects you can field?

If no aspects are troops, is kinda hard to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Valkyrie wrote:
Is it possible that the Phoenix Lords will let you take the respective aspect as Troops instead?

I am... not fond [/understatement] of having to field a special character to do that kind of stuff.

Radium wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Whilst all that is true, imagine the modern day population of a country, imagine all it's people all randomly selecting a job to follow based on their feelings. Between all the possible jobs and career paths, industries etc. I'd be shocked if more than a small percentage of a country ended up in the military. Then split that small percentage down by all the different roles within the military, how many core fighting pesons are left? It can't be enough to successfully be the mainstay of a force that threatened your very existence.

That might be true for humans, but eldar are essentially a bioweapon. The warrior paths are among the most popular paths, and more and more eldar are walking the warrior path.

4th ed codex wrote:
The Path of the Warrior teaches the arts of death and destruction. Due to the dark side of the Eldar psyche, it calls to almost all Eldar at some point in their long lives.

Also, how many active combatants would a craftworld actually need, given their fighting style? Craftworlds specialise in surgical strikes, and should need only relatively small numbers of warriors for that. Fielding guardians and wraith constructs makes sense when all plans go to hell, and the craftworld ends up in an (unfavourable) all-out war.

"Calls to almost all Eldar at some point in their long lives" again that's not a majority as active aspect warriors, it's that most of them experience it at some point, as they then leave the path when the time comes. But if you want to take on a few guard regimeants you'll need more than a couple hundred eldar. The fluff here about a surgical strike being accomplished by small eldar strike forces is the exact same people wave off as bolter porn about a few marine units toppling armies.

The other knock on is if you claim guardians are only needed in dire circumstances, you enter the odd scenario where they become the elites due to relative scarcity.

Dudeface wrote:
"Calls to almost all Eldar at some point in their long lives" again that's not a majority as active aspect warriors, it's that most of them experience it at some point, as they then leave the path when the time comes. But if you want to take on a few guard regimeants you'll need more than a couple hundred eldar. The fluff here about a surgical strike being accomplished by small eldar strike forces is the exact same people wave off as bolter porn about a few marine units toppling armies.

The other knock on is if you claim guardians are only needed in dire circumstances, you enter the odd scenario where they become the elites due to relative scarcity.

I mean, in both cases it distills into the same idea, and it's the way usually spec ops work: send in small teams to surgically cut the head and extremities (HQ, supply lines, etc) of the army. That won't actually kill them, but it will make them unable to coordinate or resupply, which usually amounts to the same, and then you can go and defeat them in detail.

If you need a straight up fight, though, it's possible that a craftworld will have enough aspects for that, for a limited amount of battles, but not for a full war. And also, most of the support stuff (vehicles, artillery, supplies, etc.) are actually manned by guardians anyways.

They could also change the Troops via Craftworld traits choice as they did in the 3rd ed Craftworlds expansion. So Iyanden moves wraith guard to troops and Guardians to elites, Siam Hann get bikers as troops, Alaitoc gets Rangers to troops, Biel Tan gets Avengers/Aspects as troops, Ulthwe get Warlocks as troops etc.. Obviously some sort of payoff in terms of losing something to gain something but doable..

Eldar fluff debates don't really go anywhere because you can interpret what exists however you like.

Mechanically saying CWE can have Guardians... or "stabby Guardians", in the Troop slot, seems kind of lame. I'd hope that doesn't happen.

Have any 9E codexes so far allowed changing units to be Troops?

I thought they just tend to change the CP cost of special detachments, like Deathwing & Ravenwing.

they didnt change the troops for marines, my jumppacks are fast attack and not troops for my bloodangels so why would they do this for eldar

I'm doubtful that Dire Avengers AND rangers have been moved to elites. In every codex I have read it has been said that it's very uncommon to have an eldar strike force that doesn't contain any Dire Avengers. If both have moved, it only leaves you with 2 flavours of guardian in troops unless we have a miraculous new corsair unit as some seem to think, which again would be weird as I doubt they're commonly part of the standard craftworld forces at all!

I think one or the other could have been moved, but not both.

 silverstu wrote:
They could also change the Troops via Craftworld traits choice as they did in the 3rd ed Craftworlds expansion. So Iyanden moves wraith guard to troops and Guardians to elites, Siam Hann get bikers as troops, Alaitoc gets Rangers to troops, Biel Tan gets Avengers/Aspects as troops, Ulthwe get Warlocks as troops etc.. Obviously some sort of payoff in terms of losing something to gain something but doable..

I liked the way that worked back in the days and wouldn't mind seeing it return as an all Aspect Warrior Biel-Tan player. Even if it just limited Dire Avengers, Scorpions and Banshees to being used as troops.

I don't think you'll see much in the way of swapping spots in the FOCs...

But you might see certain units not counting towards a FOC slot with certain HQs or other choices being taken.

If Dire Avengers, Warlocks and Rangers all end up Elites that is going to be really crowded.

At the moment i run 1 of every Aspect Warrior Unit + The Avatar of Khaine and an Autarch as my basic list.

Any left over points are then spent on Farseer/Warlocks/Transports/Tanks/Rangers.

Having 4 Aspect Warrior Units (5 including Shadow Spectres), Warlocks and Rangers all be Elites will probably cramp my list building somewhat but will need to wait and see.

I'm sure anything will be better than what i've had currently given Biel-Tan's Craftworld Trait isn't anything to write home about for all an All Aspect army. +1Ld on Aspect Warriors doesn't mean much when Aspect Warriors are often taken MSU or are immune to morale near the Avatar and while re-rolling 1 to hit with Shuriken weapons is nice it only it really benefits Dire Avengers and only when an Autarch wouldn't otherwise be nearby.

The two main HQ's you would expect a Biel-Tan army to take make their Craftworld Trait redundant

I mean, Scouts went up to Elites for SM.
Everything is possible.

 DivineVisitor wrote:
If Dire Avengers, Warlocks and Rangers all end up Elites that is going to be really crowded.

Serious question:
Have you never looked at any other armies and how their Elite slots are right now?
Guard and Marines are sitting at 20+, each. Sisters have 15. AdMech have 6(one of which is Servitors! Bloody lobotomized goons as Elites!).

You're going to have Elites being crowded.

At the moment i run 1 of every Aspect Warrior Unit + The Avatar of Khaine and an Autarch as my basic list.

Any left over points are then spent on Farseer/Warlocks/Transports/Tanks/Rangers.

Having 4 Aspect Warrior Units (5 including Shadow Spectres), Warlocks and Rangers all be Elites will probably cramp my list building somewhat but will need to wait and see.

And this is likely why you'll see Rangers and Dire Avengers going to Elites.

They don't want you having cheap and easy MSU Troop capabilities. It's why Marines had Scouts moved to Elites. It's why AdMech had their weapon options changed to be 1 per 5 rather than 2 per 5 and lost their capabilities of doing duplicates until they hit 20 models.

It’s going to be nice when the codex comes out and it is overpowered and we are just absolutely murdering everyone. Until they Tone it back down lol.

I was hoping it would be guardians going to elites as they should be a bit rarer but heyho. Also did DA's not previously belong in elites? In 3rd edition I think it was?

warpedpig wrote:
It’s going to be nice when the codex comes out and it is overpowered and we are just absolutely murdering everyone. Until they Tone it back down lol.

We don't need a repeat of editions 4 through 7. Something solid but not broken would be best.

Nah I want it broken. I want there to be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

kryczek wrote:
I was hoping it would be guardians going to elites as they should be a bit rarer but heyho. Also did DA's not previously belong in elites? In 3rd edition I think it was?

Nope for 3rd. They were core.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

warpedpig wrote:
It’s going to be nice when the codex comes out and it is overpowered and we are just absolutely murdering everyone. Until they Tone it back down lol.

We don't need a repeat of editions 4 through 7. Something solid but not broken would be best.

We already get that with every new 9th army codex release, no sense bucking the trend. let each army be OP for a while then dial it back to obscurity.

Except DE, lets not touch them lol

All of the rumours so far seem pretty feasible to me. As an Admech player I can see just about everything proposed here already existing in my army as well as the intended shifting of army roles makes sense when I compare it to what i have available to me and also what happened with marines. For a long time now in 9th we've seen a constant dumbing down of mechanics and moving complexity into just rememebering a gak load of stuff to get the most out of your army. I personally dont like it, but it does suit me quite well.

I'm just excited for Eldar to be interesting again. I started playing 40k again at the end of 7th and my rejoining army choice was either Eldar or Admech. Admech were interesting. Eldar was bikes or gtfo as i recall. And boring bikes at that. I might be wrong, thats how I remember it. My next army wwas going to be a squig-based Ork army, no buggies, hate those things. but i'm on hold until the Eldar stuff comes out. By the looks of things we only have to wait until xmas day for the reveal, which will no doubt just be a sweeping camera pass on a bunch of units culminating with the Avatar or some other god. I really hope they bring something big story-wise back. The fruits of all this Eldar, Ynarii passive story telling surely has to mean something. Even if thats just 'new god' or resurection of old god. At least it'll put Eldar on the map again.

 Albertorius wrote:

kryczek wrote:
I was hoping it would be guardians going to elites as they should be a bit rarer but heyho. Also did DA's not previously belong in elites? In 3rd edition I think it was?

Nope for 3rd. They were core.

Guardians are going to Elites alongside Avengers and Rangers. Eldar will have no Troops. You won't be able to construct a legal army using the standard Force Org Chart. You'll have to do everything with specialist detachments.

This is to show them as a dying race, or something...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

kryczek wrote:
I was hoping it would be guardians going to elites as they should be a bit rarer but heyho. Also did DA's not previously belong in elites? In 3rd edition I think it was?

Nope for 3rd. They were core.

Guardians are going to Elites alongside Avengers and Rangers. Eldar will have no Troops. You won't be able to construct a legal army using the standard Force Org Chart. You'll have to do everything with specialist detachments.

This is to show them as a dying race, or something...

GW honestly have done weirder things...

Octovol wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:


We don't need a repeat of editions 4 through 7. Something solid but not broken would be best.

We already get that with every new 9th army codex release, no sense bucking the trend. let each army be OP for a while then dial it back to obscurity.

.

IDK man, Necrons didn't exactly dominate. I found them to be rather weak.

God please make Saim Hann badass this edition, pleaseeee.

 Albertorius wrote:

 Lord Perversor wrote:
Well this new organization for the army kinda makes sense.

I mean if Eldar get new guardians and corsairs as basic trooos. Forcing people to buy the new kits instead reuse the older Dire avengers (wich shouldn't be updated yet). The odd thing is the rangers change even when they get a new kit.

From a "buy our new stuff", probably. From a setting perspective, maybe not so much.

You should at least be able to build a full aspects army if you so chose.

You can. You just pay your CP tax & field an Elite detachment. Or a Fast. Or a Heavy. Wichever fits your mix of aspects.

Windriders as troops please Jesus Christ help me

 Albertorius wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

You should at least be able to build a full aspects army if you so chose.

Well you can even if these rumours were true. Or was there rumoured cap on max aspects you can field?

If no aspects are troops, is kinda hard to.ff.

Might want to check rules.

 Marshal Loss wrote:

What strength is an Ork this edition?

So Banshees S4 Base with +1S from their powerswords (unless special Banshee powerswords don't give the S bonus) and then another +1 to wound when charging, so they're wounding T4 and lower on 2's?

I was hoping for a buff but this sounds a little bit nutty and not exactly fitting. Also odd for them to match Scorpion's strength.

I dunno man, it's fun to speculate but I'm thinking these rumours might be bogus.

 Tarvitz77 wrote:
So Banshees S4 Base with +1S from their powerswords (unless special Banshee powerswords don't give the S bonus) and then another +1 to wound when charging, so they're wounding T4 and lower on 2's?

I was hoping for a buff but this sounds a little bit nutty and not exactly fitting. Also odd for them to match Scorpion's strength.

I dunno man, it's fun to speculate but I'm thinking these rumours might be bogus.

Well it reminds me of how they where when they first came out. 2nd Edition they had str 5 powerswords with -2/-3 ap so great for killing marines. Scorpions were tougher, more durable and had more attacks. 3ed ruined them.. to me this looks like a return to form.

Yeah this seems pretty nuts, now they're wounding Knights on 4+ if they charge?

Yeah but they are T3? Points cost also makes a difference.

 Valkyrie wrote:
Yeah this seems pretty nuts, now they're wounding Knights on 4+ if they charge?

If they're still 1 damage then 5 Incubi do way more damage vs a Knight even without Drazhar being near (Incubi = 6.9 wounds, 5 Banshees with +1A and new rules = 4.2)

Well new rumours of dubious reliability

I agree with Silverstu. If banshees don't get improvements to their ability to wound they will remain irrelevant to the army. If these rumours are correct then they will hit like a hammer, but will still fall apart under any sustained attack, which is at it should be.

I'm not concerned about specific strength values. Giving aspects strength 4 doesn't mean they're all space marines suddenly, but it would reflect their precision application of force and very advanced powered armour. If it were strength 3 and+2 from their swords it would have the same effect. This isn't an RPG so I'm not bothered either way.

Hopefully scorpions will have enough durability to tough it out.

Someone on the Reddit has clarified that Banshees are base S3 and scorpions are base 4

With those rules Banshees are gonna cost a bomb in points for sure. Closest point of reference I have is to a Sicarian Ruststalker, they're absolute blenders but even they cant top that ability list and they're 19pts each.

At least you guys won't have to buy new models, Banshees are already plastic right? From when they updated Jain Zar?

But damn:
+1 to wound
-1 to hit
Advance and charge
Can't be overwatched
Power swords AND pistols

Less attacks than a Ruststalker but so much more utility. Course we don't know if all those abilities are free and built-in. Some of them could be strategms as is the trend.

All seems plausible to me.

Khahandran wrote:
Someone on the Reddit has clarified that Banshees are base S3 and scorpions are base 4

That user has been commenting other stuff on the codex too, seems to mostly agree on the leaks but keeps clarifying little details. Unverified of course. Here's some of their recent posts:

"The version I've seen is str3 with +1 from power sword like every other power sword in the game. It might have changed which I will very happy if it did"
"Banshees are str4 after the boost from power swords, scorpions are str 5 after the boost from chain blades"

"Before anyone gets their hopes up of running corsairs as your troops choice, they can only be used as your compulsory battleline role if the whole detachment is corsairs.
My source says rangers are troops and shroud runners are fast attack"

<questions on Fire Dragons>
"Still elite, str9 fusion gun"
"Same range, same shots. Don't have to be within half range to get the +2 to damage"

Starcannons:
"Str7 ap3 D2 2 shots"

Wraithknight:
"5+ invulnerable 4+ with shield"

tneva82 wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

You should at least be able to build a full aspects army if you so chose.

Well you can even if these rumours were true. Or was there rumoured cap on max aspects you can field?

If no aspects are troops, is kinda hard to.ff.

Might want to check rules.

Might want to build regular detachments and them to be like the fluff says armies of the faction are.

I mean, throwing some random Aspect Warriors into troops in any ol' Craftworld army isn't terribly fluffy at all.

I am sure GW'll revive the Windrider Host and Aspect Host in some shape or form as they do in every edition, but it hopefully will and should in turn impose restrictions such as actually running all-Aspect Warriors if you're going down that path.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I mean, throwing some random Aspect Warriors into troops in any ol' Craftworld army isn't terribly fluffy at all

I mean, having avengers as troops for six editions didn't seem to be a problem.

Well, Scatter-Bike Troops didn't create fluffy armies in 7th for the most part, the possibility of a fluffy Windrider Host (that nobody ended up building) notwithstanding.

Space Marine Scouts got moved as well. Etc..

The game's not gonna improve if you don't change it.

Maybe DA in troops didn't hurt anyone. It certainly wasn't fluffy either. Similar to how adding some Tau to a Craftworld army wasn't a problem. But it wasn't very thematic either and the game certainly improved by removing that option.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Well, Scatter-Bike Troops didn't create fluffy armies in 7th for the most part, the possibility of a fluffy Windrider Host (that nobody ended up building) notwithstanding.

Space Marine Scouts got moved as well. Etc..

The game's not gonna improve if you don't change it.

Maybe DA in troops didn't hurt anyone. It certainly wasn't fluffy either. Similar to how adding some Tau to a Craftworld army wasn't a problem. But it wasn't very thematic either and the game certainly improved by removing that option.

How was it not fluffy? They're the generalist professional warriors of the eldar armies, how is that not "troops"?

IT's like saying that tactical marines are too specialized to be troops, or something.

So still better to just use harlequin patrol detachment for your blender infantry. Still nice to see a boost to aspects. But harlequins still are the top murder clown Eldar for hand to hand and probably always will be. They’ll have superior movement rules, more brutal close combat options and fusion pistols. They’re what a banshee wishes they could be.

Or generalist professional warriors such as Sternguard Veterans. Or Astra Militarum Veteran Squads. Or Sororitas Celestians. Or Chaos Chosen. Etc..

Generalist professional warriors all of them.

 Albertorius wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Well, Scatter-Bike Troops didn't create fluffy armies in 7th for the most part, the possibility of a fluffy Windrider Host (that nobody ended up building) notwithstanding.

Space Marine Scouts got moved as well. Etc..

The game's not gonna improve if you don't change it.

Maybe DA in troops didn't hurt anyone. It certainly wasn't fluffy either. Similar to how adding some Tau to a Craftworld army wasn't a problem. But it wasn't very thematic either and the game certainly improved by removing that option.

How was it not fluffy? They're the generalist professional warriors of the eldar armies, how is that not "troops"?

IT's like saying that tactical marines are too specialized to be troops, or something.

Aspects are the equivalent in social and military standing to marines, guardians are to guardsmen. Would you have marines as troops in a guard army?

It actually is odd. Guardians are basically National Guard. Having them being the mainstay of your army over warriors that are your frontline troops is a little strange.
I could see it happening but they need to diversify the Troop slot more than current.
Otherwise, you could take a page out of DA codex for each craftworld. Biel Tan aspects get obsec and +3CP refunded if warlord leads vanguard. Iyanden with wraith constructs, saim hann with bikes in Outrider, etc.

 Albertorius wrote:

How was it not fluffy? They're the generalist professional warriors of the eldar armies, how is that not "troops"?

IT's like saying that tactical marines are too specialized to be troops, or something.

Amusingly it's Guardians that are the generalist warriors, and aspect warriors that are the specialist warriors.

That's why the latter have largely fixed wargear & roles but guardians can still choose between melee or shooting plus a heavy weapon platform.

Ya know, as long as DA have the CORE keyword (like a TON on non-troop Marine units do) that's probably enough to keep them the fluffy backbone of many Armies. It's just that you'll either have to field MORE Guardians (which is also fluff appropriate) or take Vanguard detachments.
It's not as bad this edition since you don't HAVE to take Battalions to squeeze in as many CPs. Sure it's still less CPs, but not nearly as fewer than 8th.

That said, I'm still annoyed. I used exclusively jetbikes as my Troops since 5th ed. When they were moved to FA, I was forced to buy more models just to have viable Troops.
Guess which 2 unit types I chose. DAs and Rangers.

That alone makes me hope Windriders become Troops again, just so I don't have to buy a bunch of Guardians to build and paint up. WRs aren't nearly as bad as they were in 7th because the no longer have move-shoot-move (aside from a SINGLE unit using Fire and Fade) nor do they have the 48" turboboost.
With the power creep of other Codices, WRs as Troops now would be pretty tame.

-

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Or generalist professional warriors such as Sternguard Veterans. Or Astra Militarum Veteran Squads. Or Sororitas Celestians. Or Chaos Chosen. Etc..

Generalist professional warriors all of them.

Literally defined as elites in their own factions, no matter ho generalists. Dire Avengers, OTOW, are literally the standing regular troopers of a craftworld, while guardians are drafted militia.

So, no, no cookie.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:
Aspects are the equivalent in social and military standing to marines, guardians are to guardsmen. Would you have marines as troops in a guard army?

I literally would have a single Imperium army, honestly, probably working as it did in Epic 40k back in the day: separate detachments with their own organization, but that you could mix and match.

So no, because the organization is different, yes in their own detachment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 xttz wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

How was it not fluffy? They're the generalist professional warriors of the eldar armies, how is that not "troops"?

IT's like saying that tactical marines are too specialized to be troops, or something.

Amusingly it's Guardians that are the generalist warriors, and aspect warriors that are the specialist warriors.

That's why the latter have largely fixed wargear & roles but guardians can still choose between melee or shooting plus a heavy weapon platform.

1 ) Guardians are militia.
2) Not with that basic weapon they're not. They're plattform escorts. Which is something you could do with militia, yes.

Again, Dire Avengers have been troops for 7 editions and non-existend for one (in 2nd all aspects were simply squads). Why is now suddenly a problem?

If the reason is "because you already have dire avengers and don't have our new shiny troops that we want to sell you"... well, feth off. Make me want to buy those shiny new troops then.

If DAs are truly getting AP-2, 3shot catapults and all Aspects are getting ++ saves, I could see them as Elites.
And if Guardians are getting 4+ armour and 18" AP-1 catapults, that makes them BETTER than DAs are currently.

That said, it would have been SMART of GW to keep DAs as Troops if this release is coming with a bunch of plastic Aspect warriors. They could make serious bank from all the people wanting to collect an ALL Aspect warrior army. But without an Aspect Troop, they are missing an opportunity.

I'm sure plastic Aspects will sell plenty, but imagine how many more DA kits they could sell alongside.

-

We'll see how much (if any) of this is true anyways.

 Galef wrote:
If DAs are truly getting AP-2, 3shot catapults and all Aspects are getting ++ saves, I could see them as Elites.
And if Guardians are getting 4+ armour and 18" AP-1 catapults, that makes them BETTER than DAs are currently.

For me that's the equivalent of having all custodes infantry be Elites. Eldar are an army of elite troops, as are marines, as are harlequins, etc, etc. The Elite tag in 40k list construction should be reserved for a battlefield role within each codex. DA certainly don't fit that bill, given that they've been noted consistently as the most numerous aspect and fill a mid-field objective securing role.

Argue whatever you want. If they buff the Dire Avengers enough they become elites for game purposes. The fluff doesn’t rule the game. They’re gonna aim for balancing armies internally and competitively. If that means boosting them a lot and then making them elites. So be it.

If they decide to leave them as troops. Then great. Who cares either way. GW is gonna do whatever they want and you’ll adapt like you have every other edition



Personal opinion - They are basically a superior guardian. They’re not highly specialized troops like banshees or fire dragons. They have superior Shuriken rifles and are the line troops of the Eldar. Guardians are more like auxiliary troops who bolster the main lines of dire avengers and man support weapons.

They should be troops. But if they’re boosted really high then I could see them becoming elites - as in elite troops.

warpedpig wrote:
...as in elite troops.

I think using the CORE keyword is how GW plans to achieve this moving forward.
I have no doubt that DAs will be CORE, whether they stay Troops or move to Elites.

CORE is now how GW wants to represent units that are main-stay fluff units. Troops, it seems, are just units GW wants you to field to represent the most common members of any given faction.

DAs may be the most common Aspect and exist on every Craftworld, but I've always gotten the impression that Guardians (militia/ national guard/ reserves or not) have always been the most numerous of MOST Craftworld hosts. Iyanden and Beil-tan being exceptions, even though they too have always been depicted as having plenty of Guardians.

So DAs being Elites (assuming the buffs are true) but specifically CORE Elites, could make sense.
But I am 100% with you about Windriders hopefully being moved BACK to Troops.
Heck, I'd even be happy if they had 2 types of WRs: Troops that could only get 1 heavy weapon per 3 models and a FA unit that has to have all Shuricannons or Scatter lasers.
Same kit, just different loadout requirements

-

Windriders. At least for Saim hann. Should definitely be troops.

Posted by the other leaker in that Reddit thread regarding fire prism linked fire:

Add two shots to the focused fire profile for the first fire prism for each additional prism. Invuls can't be taken for these shots. The other prisms can't fire their main gun

 Galef wrote:

warpedpig wrote:
...as in elite troops.

I think using the CORE keyword is how GW plans to achieve this moving forward.
I have no doubt that DAs will be CORE, whether they stay Troops or move to Elites.

CORE is now how GW wants to represent units that are main-stay fluff units. Troops, it seems, are just units GW wants you to field to represent the most common members of any given faction.

-

I'm not sure GW had a good idea what it wants to do with core. They just shoved it on everything that was infantry or a dreadnought in the marine codex.
I'm not sure why terminators are considered more mainstay than predators. They applied it sparingly with necrons, but then gave in when they needed to apply a general buff to the army and dumped it on a load more units, but oddly not on the units that make up the actual core of an army. For admech they decided to give it to ballistari but not onagers.

The Black Adder wrote:
For admech they decided to give it to ballistari but not onagers.

Then they took it away from them...

The Black Adder wrote:

 Galef wrote:

warpedpig wrote:
...as in elite troops.

I think using the CORE keyword is how GW plans to achieve this moving forward.
I have no doubt that DAs will be CORE, whether they stay Troops or move to Elites.

CORE is now how GW wants to represent units that are main-stay fluff units. Troops, it seems, are just units GW wants you to field to represent the most common members of any given faction.

-

I'm not sure GW had a good idea what it wants to do with core. They just shoved it on everything that was infantry or a dreadnought in the marine codex.
I'm not sure why terminators are considered more mainstay than predators. They applied it sparingly with necrons, but then gave in when they needed to apply a general buff to the army and dumped it on a load more units, but oddly not on the units that make up the actual core of an army. For admech they decided to give it to ballistari but not onagers.

Core is basically anything but some tanks and random units GW wants to punish and make sure players don't field.

Can they make Wraithseers HQ choices again so we can do all-Wraith armies...

Is this a thing, that units have -1 damage, so in effect a d1 weapon cannot injure or damage them?

If so, I think that I like it. Sort of does armor piercing in a different way. So a LR might ignore also d3 weapons, a predator d2, something like that would seem to make special weapons special.

-1 to a minimum of 1.

So far, it's always been "reduce damage by one, to a minimum of one". I do think a flat reduction of damage (without a minimum) could be a good way to represent exceptionally tough units (titans, land raiders, etc). We all know it'd start out that way, and then GW will hand it out like candy to all sorts units, which also results in them giving lots of weapons a higher damage stat, etc.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Can they make Wraithseers HQ choices again so we can do all-Wraith armies...

It's a ForgeWorld kit, so never going to happen.

On Titans and other stuff? One could adopt the Void Shield rule from Titan Legions.

Basically, to drop a shield you needed at least a -1 save modifier. This prevented massed Bolter and other super weedy weapons stripping shields, making Titans that little bit more survivable.

In 40K? You could say weapons with AP0 or AP-1 can only do a single point of damage regardless.

I'm hoping the Nightspinner also gets a more reliable number of shots as opposed to 2d6.

Twilight Pathways wrote:

Still missing the point of the lance profile. What actual use is there for it? My initial thought was linked fire would make it a perfect monster and tank killer, but it's now focused profile only. That makes a Falcon a superior anti-tank option, and multiple fire prisms go infantry hunting, and that just doesn't feel right.

The Black Adder wrote:

 Galef wrote:

warpedpig wrote:
...as in elite troops.

I think using the CORE keyword is how GW plans to achieve this moving forward.
I have no doubt that DAs will be CORE, whether they stay Troops or move to Elites.

CORE is now how GW wants to represent units that are main-stay fluff units. Troops, it seems, are just units GW wants you to field to represent the most common members of any given faction.

-

I'm not sure GW had a good idea what it wants to do with core. They just shoved it on everything that was infantry or a dreadnought in the marine codex.
I'm not sure why terminators are considered more mainstay than predators. They applied it sparingly with necrons, but then gave in when they needed to apply a general buff to the army and dumped it on a load more units, but oddly not on the units that make up the actual core of an army. For admech they decided to give it to ballistari but not onagers.

GW had an article about ‘Core’ in Dec’s WD.

They outright stated it was a game mechanics thing almost entirely divorced from fluff.

They gave the example of Space Marines where vehicles are not Core as they wanted to dissuade ’parking lot’ gameplay but Dreads are as they felt that didn’t warp gameplay as much.

Necrons getting more core added for balance reasons is entirely in line with this.

 jeff white wrote:
Is this a thing, that units have -1 damage, so in effect a d1 weapon cannot injure or damage them?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
-1 to a minimum of 1.

I'm still debating whether that second part is required for balance or not. There's an argument to be made that reducing to 0 damage increases the design space, and allows you to show that certain types of units are immune to certain types of weapons (ie. Landraiders vs Laspistols).

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Is this a thing, that units have -1 damage, so in effect a d1 weapon cannot injure or damage them?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
-1 to a minimum of 1.

I'm still debating whether that second part is required for balance or not. There's an argument to be made that reducing to 0 damage increases the design space, and allows you to show that certain types of units are immune to certain types of weapons (ie. Landraiders vs Laspistols).

Removing the minimum of 1 is a change that couldn't really have made at the start of 9E, as not all factions had access to updated weapon profiles like heavy bolters. However once the cycle of codex updates is complete it's a viable option. I think there should be an exception for melee weapons though, at least with a certain AP value. Weapons like power swords should still be a threat.

Hopefully tomorrow we get the Fast Attack leaks for Vypers and Windriders.

warpedpig wrote:
Hopefully tomorrow we get the Fast Attack leaks for Vypers and Windriders.

They posted a schedule on day 1. Tomorrow is the new Avatar rules and Friday is something related to Kill Team.

For vehicle and monster design space, they really need to just bump toughness. If Leadership can go to 11 now, vehicles ought to go higher than 8

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Is this a thing, that units have -1 damage, so in effect a d1 weapon cannot injure or damage them?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
-1 to a minimum of 1.

I'm still debating whether that second part is required for balance or not. There's an argument to be made that reducing to 0 damage increases the design space, and allows you to show that certain types of units are immune to certain types of weapons (ie. Landraiders vs Laspistols).

So... what was the point of doing away with the S/T table, again?

 Albertorius wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Is this a thing, that units have -1 damage, so in effect a d1 weapon cannot injure or damage them?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
-1 to a minimum of 1.

I'm still debating whether that second part is required for balance or not. There's an argument to be made that reducing to 0 damage increases the design space, and allows you to show that certain types of units are immune to certain types of weapons (ie. Landraiders vs Laspistols).

So... what was the point of doing away with the S/T table, again?

I mean we do still have a S/T table, you might be thinking more of AoS. The main difference is that the variance across wounding has been flattened because you need to be double someone's profile to wound them on 2's or be wounded on 6's. And 6's always wound.

 Grimskul wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Is this a thing, that units have -1 damage, so in effect a d1 weapon cannot injure or damage them?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
-1 to a minimum of 1.

I'm still debating whether that second part is required for balance or not. There's an argument to be made that reducing to 0 damage increases the design space, and allows you to show that certain types of units are immune to certain types of weapons (ie. Landraiders vs Laspistols).

So... what was the point of doing away with the S/T table, again?

I mean we do still have a S/T table, you might be thinking more of AoS. The main difference is that the variance across wounding has been flattened because you need to be double someone's profile to wound them on 2's or be wounded on 6's. And 6's always wound.

Yes, in the sense that it's still a formula, but if we a) are not using the fact that now you can go over S/T 10 and b) there is a need to, once again, set a limit for stuff that won't damage... those were the two main points of that change.

Seems kinda pointless, by now.