NZ has 'em up. No sprue pics for the Guardians, sadly. Nice pick of all the heavy weapons though:
And behold the sprue that gives you two minis, zero weapon options, and costs almost as much as a full box of new Guardians:
I guess it was so important that the feet be all different parts, not leaving enough room for a second spear/sword. Not that that would justify this box's criminal price band, but it would make you feel less dirty buying it.
What the hell, GW? ONE pistol on that Warlock sprue? Man, they are cheap as gak.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Iracundus wrote: Well, there are flip through reviews of the new Codex already and the Autarch entry in there is the same as Eldritch Omens, as we feared:
In other words pants on head stupid, no backward customizability and interchangeability allowed with the old Autarch set, despite that being touted as a model design feature. So the Codex cover Autarch is illegal and the same goes for virtually all pre-existing Autarch artwork.
Maybe people should start asking GW innocently why their Codex cover portrays an illegal weapons combination as the main centrepiece?
So infuriating. They even broke out the points cost for each piece of wargear separately, meaning they could have made them cross-compatible, but didn't as a subtle feth you to the players.
Not that there isn’t a ton wrong with the autarch situation, but are we missing out on any good combinations from the lack of compatibility? Mandiblaster, swooping hawk wings, etc. Are those options worth mixing with the new autarch or would they be options most people would never take?
Iracundus wrote: Well, there are flip through reviews of the new Codex already and the Autarch entry in there is the same as Eldritch Omens, as we feared:
In other words pants on head stupid, no backward customizability and interchangeability allowed with the old Autarch set, despite that being touted as a model design feature. So the Codex cover Autarch is illegal and the same goes for virtually all pre-existing Autarch artwork.
well hur-dur they do say "modeling choices" not actual usable in-game choices
I am personally still quite happy with a lot of the new releases but these little things GW does get so freaking irritating - they look so dang stupid and duplicitous
petrov27 wrote: well hur-dur they do say "modeling choices" not actual usable in-game choices
I am personally still quite happy with a lot of the new releases but these little things GW does get so freaking irritating - they look so dang stupid and duplicitous
I dont know but personally the high price on these kits is actually stopping me from getting some Eldar. So for me its actually a big thing to the point of no sale.
I wonder if enough people wrote in to GW about the Autarch situation and illegal cover depiction (and why have modelling options only to make it illegal to use them), whether GW would adjust it.
Iracundus wrote: I wonder if enough people wrote in to GW about the Autarch situation and illegal cover depiction (and why have modelling options only to make it illegal to use them), whether GW would adjust it.
I thought GW's recent art policy was only depict things that are possible in game. So could mention how artwork centrepiece for the new Codex is actually not possible/allowed. All other older existing artwork of the Autarch with glaive and wings is also rendered obsolete and illegal as well.
GaroRobe wrote: Not that there isn’t a ton wrong with the autarch situation, but are we missing out on any good combinations from the lack of compatibility? Mandiblaster, swooping hawk wings, etc. Are those options worth mixing with the new autarch or would they be options most people would never take?
The options are wings, fusion pistol, Banshee blade, and mandiblaster helmet. All those are currently hard locked to that specific combination of gear. The choices for the other Autarch are thus almost binary:
1. Glaive or chainsword.
2. Banshee helmet or Dire Avenger helmet (i.e. nothing)
3. Warp spider jump generator or banner (i.e. nothing)
4. Ranged weapon option is the only one that is a non-binary choices
I'm sure these massive pictures taking up 60% of the page are wholly and completely necessary and definitely aren't just a desperate effort to hide just how few artefacts the writers could be arsed putting in the book.
Iracundus wrote: I wonder if enough people wrote in to GW about the Autarch situation and illegal cover depiction (and why have modelling options only to make it illegal to use them), whether GW would adjust it.
Probably not, but it's worth trying.
What would be the best way to contact them about this? I think it would be worthwhile to send a note asking "I'd like to field an Autarch like the picture shows but the rules don't seem to allow that."
Iracundus wrote: I wonder if enough people wrote in to GW about the Autarch situation and illegal cover depiction (and why have modelling options only to make it illegal to use them), whether GW would adjust it.
Probably not, but it's worth trying.
What would be the best way to contact them about this? I think it would be worthwhile to send a note asking "I'd like to field an Autarch like the picture shows but the rules don't seem to allow that."
Maybe lie and mention buying the older autarch as well, because the community article said the kits were cross compatible. If they don’t think you’re using third party bits, maybe they’ll be more understanding
I mean I have the older Autarch, so making it incompatible with the newer bits is a put-off for me. I'd hope their sales and marketing department could understand that.
Iracundus wrote: I wonder if enough people wrote in to GW about the Autarch situation and illegal cover depiction (and why have modelling options only to make it illegal to use them), whether GW would adjust it.
Probably not, but it's worth trying.
What would be the best way to contact them about this? I think it would be worthwhile to send a note asking "I'd like to field an Autarch like the picture shows but the rules don't seem to allow that."
I would go with noting the pictures on the cover of the codex that is and illegal loadout because the rules don't allow you to mix options from the two kits. Options the Warhammer Community article about the new kit says are compatible with the Autarch with Swooping Hawk Wings but that the datasheet options don't allow you to use.
"GW I thought that new cover artwork was super cool and I was super excited to buy the new Autarch model to kitbash with my existing older model to recreate the cover art. But I was distrought to see that the cover art isn't a legal loadout and I won't be able to use this in game, is this an error? I'm ever so excited to get that as a model"
"Sucks to be you, it's artwork not rules, use Legends"
The Red Hobbit wrote: Sorry folks I meant what was the best way to contact them. Is there a preferred email to contact GW with these sorts of concerns?
Iracundus wrote: Well, there are flip through reviews of the new Codex already and the Autarch entry in there is the same as Eldritch Omens, as we feared:
In other words pants on head stupid, no backward customizability and interchangeability allowed with the old Autarch set, despite that being touted as a model design feature. So the Codex cover Autarch is illegal and the same goes for virtually all pre-existing Autarch artwork.
Oh for feth's sake...
Spoiler:
Rules illegal loadout is one thing, but false and misleading advertising is actual illegal activity under UK law - touting multiple times that you can do a thing to garner interest in customers purchasing goods that turn out to be bogus is stepping beyond the stupidity of no models no rules and into the realm of advertising standards.
"MoDeLLiNG CHoicES" would be insufficient defence here, as misleading alone is the standard to meet, not flat out lies.
Iracundus wrote: Well, there are flip through reviews of the new Codex already and the Autarch entry in there is the same as Eldritch Omens, as we feared:
In other words pants on head stupid, no backward customizability and interchangeability allowed with the old Autarch set, despite that being touted as a model design feature. So the Codex cover Autarch is illegal and the same goes for virtually all pre-existing Autarch artwork.
Oh for feth's sake...
Spoiler:
Rules illegal loadout is one thing, but false and misleading advertising is actual illegal activity under UK law - touting multiple times that you can do a thing to garner interest in customers purchasing goods that turn out to be bogus is stepping beyond the stupidity of no models no rules and into the realm of advertising standards.
"MoDeLLiNG CHoicES" would be insufficient defence here, as misleading alone is the standard to meet, not flat out lies.
Nah, GW is usually either very quick on deleting evidence once they're called out, or juuuust vague enough to not be sued under false advertising. I don't see them ever getting sued.
I'm sure these massive pictures taking up 60% of the page are wholly and completely necessary and definitely aren't just a desperate effort to hide just how few artefacts the writers could be arsed putting in the book.
And who in their right mind puts an illustration right on the bookbinding ?! I bet even the illustrator is pissed !
I'm sure these massive pictures taking up 60% of the page are wholly and completely necessary and definitely aren't just a desperate effort to hide just how few artefacts the writers could be arsed putting in the book.
And who in their right mind puts an illustration right on the bookbinding ?! I bet even the illustrator is pissed !
Don't worry - there's another massive illustration taking up 60% of the space for the CWE artefacts as well, also right in the middle of the bookbinding.
H.B.M.C. wrote: NZ has 'em up. No sprue pics for the Guardians, sadly. Nice pick of all the heavy weapons though:
And behold the sprue that gives you two minis, zero weapon options, and costs almost as much as a full box of new Guardians:
I guess it was so important that the feet be all different parts, not leaving enough room for a second spear/sword. Not that that would justify this box's criminal price band, but it would make you feel less dirty buying it.
Guardian kit looks really nice, the warlocks can suck it.
I'm still going to wait for a combat patrol before getting any more eldar.
Iracundus wrote: Well, there are flip through reviews of the new Codex already and the Autarch entry in there is the same as Eldritch Omens, as we feared:
In other words pants on head stupid, no backward customizability and interchangeability allowed with the old Autarch set, despite that being touted as a model design feature. So the Codex cover Autarch is illegal and the same goes for virtually all pre-existing Autarch artwork.
Oh for feth's sake...
Spoiler:
Rules illegal loadout is one thing, but false and misleading advertising is actual illegal activity under UK law - touting multiple times that you can do a thing to garner interest in customers purchasing goods that turn out to be bogus is stepping beyond the stupidity of no models no rules and into the realm of advertising standards.
"MoDeLLiNG CHoicES" would be insufficient defence here, as misleading alone is the standard to meet, not flat out lies.
Maybe since you seem to be in the UK, you could hint at their Codex cover and their WarCom article as being misleading (and take screenshots of the WarCom article as evidence). Although GW might claim just modelling choices, it might come down to what are "reasonable expectations" to have. How many other GW examples do we have where they tout modelling choices (and depict on their Codex cover) something that is completely illegal in their rules as written? It could be argued that a player would reasonably expect that a modelling choice would also be rules legal, especially if it appears right smack in the middle of the Codex cover.
That is the standard set I think in certain countries. Reasonable customer expectations of what to expect out of a product so a company cannot weasel out by saying for example, "I sold you a car I said you could sit in and take pictures with, but none of my advertising said the wheels could turn."
Maybe we can hope that if GW gets enough flak about it or enough hints of legal stuff that maybe they will quickly issue a FAQ modification. Would be cheaper for them than a legal case.
How about we just all write to ask them to FAQ it to allow, instead of pretending to be legal experts and kidding ourselves that anyone will attempt to sue?
JohnnyHell wrote: How about we just all write to ask them to FAQ it to allow, instead of pretending to be legal experts and kidding ourselves that anyone will attempt to sue?
Not a matter for courts for anyone here - no one is out of pocket or subject to any material loss, just pointing out that advertising standards exist and anyone can raise a claim to ASA at any point if they so much as feel they or anyone else are being mislead by marketing claims. In reality everyone spamming FAQ requests is the best and most reasonable course of action as there are bound to be plenty of honest mistakes in the rest of the codex (for example clowns seem to have a few like the lack of core on anything but bikes and the weird unit sizes required for wargear options to kick in).
warpedpig wrote: If you guys don’t like their product don’t buy it.
Most of the time it's not about buying new products, but being able to use the ones you've already purchased.
For example, I have a Jetbike Autarch equipped with Lance AND Fusion gun, which was perfectly fieldable prior to 8th ed.
But now it's an either/or. So I'll either have to continue using the LEGENDS (which now has inferior stats) or rip parts off my 10+ year old model.
Even if I don't buy the Codex, the expectation is that I still use it's rules. It's frustrating.
On the bright side, at least they didn't Squat the Autarch Skyrunner like I thought they were going do, since it's a Finecast rider on a SUPER outdated plastic bike.
warpedpig wrote: If you guys don’t like their product don’t buy it.
And your next line is:"Just buy a 3d printer !"
And then instead of "overpriced models" you can battle with incorrect sales; holes; resin traps; strange thicknesses; poor supports; pock marks; resin printer woes; spotty resin supplies and rising resin prices (resin I use was £35 a bottle last year and now its £45 a bottle)
I've seen several conversions with people using a mix of the old and new Autarch models so I'm not sure where this crack about them not being compatible is coming from?
Olthannon wrote: I've seen several conversions with people using a mix of the old and new Autarch models so I'm not sure where this crack about them not being compatible is coming from?
The codex. The rules do not allow for mixing and matching the wargear.
Basically the codex is written from the extreme angle of "no models no rules" so each kit is built around the idea of what you can get exactly from the model kit itself.
Meanwhlie the autarch models were designed from the idea of swapping parts between the two kits.
Basically the designers went one way and the rules writers went another way (or the manages strong armed them to go that way).
Whlist I like GW's "no models no rules" practice as a general principle*; its extreme angle is somewhat limiting and leads to some very odd choices in how GW approaches army design in the rules.
Eg in AoS there's a push toward having all the muscians and banners out of every box being used - which means you end up with more command models than actual troops in infantry blocks.
*At one stage it was getting silly as GW were adding more and more models into codex and more weapons but not actually giving gamers the models. Tyranids had several codex with termagaunts having weapons that there was no model for; and "hero" style models which, again, had no model. And they kept adding to them.
No models no rules at least put a stop to enforced conversions/proxies being part of the game. Which I think is a good thing - conversoins/proxies should always be optional or only required in the short term (a few months)
If you advertise based on the two Autarch kits having interchangeable parts, you might induce customers to buy both kits to play around with mixing and matching.
Instead, what they are doing is basically forcing people to buy either old Autarch kit with its rigid wargear selection or the newer Autarch kit that has rules legal gear selection only within that kit itself. Instead of potentially getting customers to buy both kits, you've just forced them to buy only 1.
Waste of designer time to make sure the Autarch kits are interchangeable if this feature is then explicitly barred from being used. Expending resources to develop a feature, only to then shoot down your own product feature and forbid it is what is so dumb and the commercial equivalent of shooting yourself in the foot.
So if I'm getting it right it's this last sentence in the Omens Autarch list, that if they don't have a mask or the spider pack they can take the wings and mandiblasters?
Is it not that the 'and' should just be an or?
Why would they make it so if you have the wings you have to have the blade and blasters and fusion pistol as a single loadout?
EDIT: I see because that's the old model.
EDIT2: hey that really is fething stupid fair play.
Simple solution: just buy 300 dollars worth of itty bitty magnets and magnetize every weapon option for every model so that no matter what GW does, you'll always be able to have a legal squad. Even if they remove the entire unit from the codex and their product page, you can still use those models to count as something else by popping on weapons from other, still relevant models!
Just make sure that every single polarity is the same, which will likely take literally days to do across a whole range of models and double your workload across your entire army. No big deal.
warpedpig wrote: If you guys don’t like their product don’t buy it.
Did you seriously just unironically write that as a response to the Autarch thing?
Seriously. Did you like. Omg.
You guys complain so much about GW rules and products. No one is forcing you to buy them. And it details from the topic of the thread which is rumors and news.
drbored wrote: Simple solution: just buy 300 dollars worth of itty bitty magnets and magnetize every weapon option for every model so that no matter what GW does, you'll always be able to have a legal squad. Even if they remove the entire unit from the codex and their product page, you can still use those models to count as something else by popping on weapons from other, still relevant models!
Just make sure that every single polarity is the same, which will likely take literally days to do across a whole range of models and double your workload across your entire army. No big deal.
warpedpig wrote: If you guys don’t like their product don’t buy it.
Did you seriously just unironically write that as a response to the Autarch thing?
Seriously. Did you like. Omg.
You guys complain so much about GW rules and products. No one is forcing you to buy them. And it details from the topic of the thread which is rumors and news.
The news is: GW advertised the product falsely and the rules are in a direct contradiction to how the kit was designed and how it was advertised.
This was my first Codex for any army since 7th edition so I thought I might as well go with Collector's edition.
In additon to Codex I got box of Guardians, Warlocks and the Yncarne for now. I will get more Guardians and maybe Dark Reapers and Avatar once they hit my FLGS shelves. I have zero interest in Shining Spears and Shroudrunners and the last time I player Eldar, Autarch didn't even exist.
Hilarious thing about the Autarch mess is that (as usual) GW has overtuned the bike option, making the ancient and terrible Autarch Skyrunner the obviously most competitive choice over either the new or the newish plastic Autarch model.
JohnnyHell wrote: How about we just all write to ask them to FAQ it to allow, instead of pretending to be legal experts and kidding ourselves that anyone will attempt to sue?
Not a matter for courts for anyone here - no one is out of pocket or subject to any material loss, just pointing out that advertising standards exist and anyone can raise a claim to ASA at any point if they so much as feel they or anyone else are being mislead by marketing claims. In reality everyone spamming FAQ requests is the best and most reasonable course of action as there are bound to be plenty of honest mistakes in the rest of the codex (for example clowns seem to have a few like the lack of core on anything but bikes and the weird unit sizes required for wargear options to kick in).
The Aeldari Discord is carrying out a coordinated email campaign asking GW to errata that datasheet. At the end of the day a revision is in everyone's best interest including their own, so hopefully common sense will prevail.
Definitely seems like a more constructive course of action than amateur legal 'experts' googling advertising laws at least.
JohnnyHell wrote: How about we just all write to ask them to FAQ it to allow, instead of pretending to be legal experts and kidding ourselves that anyone will attempt to sue?
Not a matter for courts for anyone here - no one is out of pocket or subject to any material loss, just pointing out that advertising standards exist and anyone can raise a claim to ASA at any point if they so much as feel they or anyone else are being mislead by marketing claims. In reality everyone spamming FAQ requests is the best and most reasonable course of action as there are bound to be plenty of honest mistakes in the rest of the codex (for example clowns seem to have a few like the lack of core on anything but bikes and the weird unit sizes required for wargear options to kick in).
The Aeldari Discord is carrying out a coordinated email campaign asking GW to errata that datasheet. At the end of the day a revision is in everyone's best interest including their own, so hopefully common sense will prevail.
Definitely seems like a more constructive course of action than amateur legal 'experts' googling advertising laws at least.
I think what Insularum was suggesting was the same but making it even more apparent how everyone's best interest would be served as the negative outcome is even more negative:
1. Errata the datasheet and potentially increase sales of both kits. It would definitely increase customer goodwill. It's a win win situation for all parties.
vs.
2. Refuse to errata the datasheet. Find out someone made a complaint to the UKASA and have to waste time and money dealing with paperwork and the case, regardless of the outcome. Everybody loses even if GW wins the case.
Now one would think a rational company would choose option 1. Of course a rational company would never have been caught with this problem in the first place as the designers, rulers writers, and artists should all have been on the same page. The rules writers shooting down the work of the designers and artists and their own advertising is comically funny in the sad sort of "laugh instead of crying" way that incompetence is funny.
So while I may hope for option 1, I would not put it past GW to do the equivalent of option 2 and refuse to errata anything and claim everything is as intended and just as planned.
warpedpig wrote: If you guys don’t like their product don’t buy it.
Did you seriously just unironically write that as a response to the Autarch thing?
Seriously. Did you like. Omg.
You guys complain so much about GW rules and products. No one is forcing you to buy them. And it details from the topic of the thread which is rumors and news.
That GW isn't "forcing you to buy" a particular product makes no difference to if there are problems with that product or not. Saying that people aren't allowed to be unhappy with and complain about something is just absurd.
Iracundus wrote: Maybe people should draw in the dotted lines for GW by actually writing in with stuff like:
"I thought I would buy both Autarchs if I could mix and match. But I guess now I won't buy that old Autarch kit."
Maybe GW really is that dense that it needs to be explicitly laid out how they are losing potential extra sales.
This is me. I would much prefer a winged autarch for theme reasons and would have bought one. I’d prefer to have him flitting around the backfield with the more shooty options. If I wanted one to get close and stab things, I’d go with the bike.
I got the one in the omens box, and he’ll kinda fit the role. Jump pack is not quite as good for my army, but will work.
Kanluwen wrote: The two Autarchs are potentially to be released together as a boxed set later.
They called it "Craftworld Command" in one of the articles.
Now that's absolute peak hilarity.
Such a release would only make sense if there were cross-kit customizability. If that had been the original case, and they changed the rules to remove that, then it is incompetence as it destroys the reason for the set. Way to go to crater your sales of that set.
Kanluwen wrote: The two Autarchs are potentially to be released together as a boxed set later.
They called it "Craftworld Command" in one of the articles.
Now that's absolute peak hilarity.
Such a release would only make sense if there were cross-kit customizability. If that had been the original case, and they changed the rules to remove that, then it is incompetence as it destroys the reason for the set. Way to go to crater your sales of that set.
Maybe they're banking on people buying the set not knowing about the rules, OR are going to sell a DLC allowing you to mix and match your autarch?
Kanluwen wrote: The two Autarchs are potentially to be released together as a boxed set later.
They called it "Craftworld Command" in one of the articles.
Now that's absolute peak hilarity.
Such a release would only make sense if there were cross-kit customizability. If that had been the original case, and they changed the rules to remove that, then it is incompetence as it destroys the reason for the set. Way to go to crater your sales of that set.
Maybe they're banking on people buying the set not knowing about the rules, OR are going to sell a DLC allowing you to mix and match your autarch?
Or they could just errata the datasheet, get sales of both kits without needing to go to the effort of repacking the 2 Autarchs together. They get the money earlier for less effort!
I do wonder if GW will feel a pinch with the new pricing? I dropped my order of Maugan Ra with the local store after realizing its now $45 for the model. If I feel the model is worth it on the table, I'll either buy discount later or more than likely just convert one of my Harlequin Death Jesters
bullyboy wrote: I do wonder if GW will feel a pinch with the new pricing? I dropped my order of Maugan Ra with the local store after realizing its now $45 for the model. If I feel the model is worth it on the table, I'll either buy discount later or more than likely just convert one of my Harlequin Death Jesters
Nah, the sales lost from people stopping aren't enough compared to the money they gain from raising the prices every year. Otherwise they would, you know, stop constantly jacking up the prices to the point of stupidity.
Or they could just errata the datasheet, get sales of both kits without needing to go to the effort of repacking the 2 Autarchs together. They get the money earlier for less effort!
OR they don't errata the datasheet, because they don't think it should be a big deal since Autarchs are now 1 per Detachment?
It sucks that you can't replicate the art 1:1, for sure. But frankly...it's not like you're the only ones with covers being "lies" or whatever. No model for whatever's on the AdMech cover. Hell, we got a new HQ(the Technoarcheologist) that doesn't even have a model available.
Or they could just errata the datasheet, get sales of both kits without needing to go to the effort of repacking the 2 Autarchs together. They get the money earlier for less effort!
OR they don't errata the datasheet, because they don't think it should be a big deal since Autarchs are now 1 per Detachment?
It sucks that you can't replicate the art 1:1, for sure. But frankly...it's not like you're the only ones with covers being "lies" or whatever. No model for whatever's on the AdMech cover. Hell, we got a new HQ(the Technoarcheologist) that doesn't even have a model available.
But they also did advertise you being able to model the cover art Autarch thanks due to the models being compatible, as as selling point.
there's very little chance of a complaint to the advertising standards authority being upheld
you can swap bits between the kits as they've said, it's just if you do so the model you build isn't game legal at things appear to stand and they didn't promise that
(not that i don't think it would make far more sense to amend the rules to allow the cross kitting)
bullyboy wrote: I do wonder if GW will feel a pinch with the new pricing? I dropped my order of Maugan Ra with the local store after realizing its now $45 for the model. If I feel the model is worth it on the table, I'll either buy discount later or more than likely just convert one of my Harlequin Death Jesters
Nah, the sales lost from people stopping aren't enough compared to the money they gain from raising the prices every year. Otherwise they would, you know, stop constantly jacking up the prices to the point of stupidity.
yeah, I don't think 'feeling the pinch" is ever going to happen, but I do wonder how sales will go for the Warlocks and Maugan ra.. It might be a Blood of the Phoenix all over again.
Or they could just errata the datasheet, get sales of both kits without needing to go to the effort of repacking the 2 Autarchs together. They get the money earlier for less effort!
OR they don't errata the datasheet, because they don't think it should be a big deal since Autarchs are now 1 per Detachment?
It sucks that you can't replicate the art 1:1, for sure. But frankly...it's not like you're the only ones with covers being "lies" or whatever. No model for whatever's on the AdMech cover. Hell, we got a new HQ(the Technoarcheologist) that doesn't even have a model available.
So why is it a big deal to you that Infantry Sergeants carry Lasguns again?
I’ve been Looting twice this weekend, securing goodies for the good and not for the greedy.
Shameless plug out the way? The Warlocks continue to baffle me price wise.
Event Exclusive models are £21 each. Not great, but the exclusivity, for some, kind of justifies that tag somewhat.
But £37.50 for two models? Yeesh.
It's brutal. I was excited for plastic Warlocks, but that kit is so bland, the price just feels like being kicked while I'm down. When I saw it was $55, I assumed the site was defaulted back to AUS by mistake.
So, it amuses me as I'm reading the codex overview and review, that I like the Ynnari the most.
Yes, it guts the special rules from all the factions and is almost certainly less powerful. But it also ditches a LOT of the BS accounting & rules bloat, and that just feels better.
Not being able to take corsairs when you can take dark or clown elfs and the tax on incubi and scourges just feels petty, however.
---
Not sure about the reviews, though. Getting a 'thematic but expensive and not amazingly competitive' vibe from the assessments.
Voss wrote: So, it amuses me as I'm reading the codex overview and review, that I like the Ynnari the most.
Yes, it guts the special rules from all the factions and is almost certainly less powerful. But it also ditches a LOT of the BS accounting & rules bloat, and that just feels better.
Not being able to take corsairs when you can take dark or clown elfs and the tax on incubi and scourges just feels petty, however.
I could live with some of Ynnari's limitations but taken together they just feel excessive.
The loss of stuff like Pivotal Roles feels not just unnecessary but spiteful.
Its a sort of lame cry - but the army build rules for Ynnari give me a headache. So I think the prospect of building such a force is probably dead and buried.
Someone on youtube or something will probably give a sensible run down of how you can take X+Y and keep rules A+B, but if you include C you lose everything. But I'm sort of struggling.
Tyel wrote: Its a sort of lame cry - but the army build rules for Ynnari give me a headache. So I think the prospect of building such a force is probably dead and buried.
Someone on youtube or something will probably give a sensible run down of how you can take X+Y and keep rules A+B, but if you include C you lose everything. But I'm sort of struggling.
Army building fairly straight forward. Everything loses <Saedath>, <Kabal> and <Wych Cult> keywords and gains the Ynnari faction keyword which replaces the <Craftworld> keyword, so Ynnari are by default a de facto 'Craftworld.'
Craftworlds: Anything EXCEPT Corsairs (because.. reasons), Avatar of Khaine (obviously) or special characters that aren't the Ynnari Three (So no phoenix lords, Yriel or whoever)
Dark: any wych or kabal units plus incubi and scourges (but you have to pay extra for those two, because... reasons). No haemonculi stuff, or named characters. But also no Lords of Comorragh or Favored Retinue upgrades (so no trueborn)
Clowns: any except Solitaires (for the same reason as the Avatar of Khaine, essentially- wrong god), but no Pivotal Roles.
If you _don't_ include Dark or Clowns, you get Strands of Fate.
However, adding _any_ clowns or dark elfs turns off Strands of Fate. And Power from Pain. And Luck of the Laughing God. You... just don't get faction 'doctrine' at all.
Oddly, Travelling Players is still in play, so if you take clowns as a separate patrol detachment (and no dark elfs), you can keep Strands of Fate. Because... reasons.
Also no one can take Runes of Fate, and get Ynnari Rune powers instead (mostly..? Warlocks might not get the option to take Ynnari rather than Battle)
Really, Ynnari losing the big Army Doctrine rule seems a bit much. Less book keeping, but losing any measure of auto-successes, rerolls or toughness really hurts the army.
Transports are restricted to keywords (only Asuryani models in Asuryani transport, etc), except the two special Ynnari characters. Given all the keyword changes... a little weird. I know nothing loses Asuryani, Darkuryani or Clownuryani, but still... they're crossing all sorts of lines uniting in their new god of death, but touching someone else's ride is just right out. I mean, sure, Fire Dragons in open-topped boats would be oppressive (or... a useful way to use them), but it feels 100% gamey rather than fluffy (and most of this feels like a Ynnari player is making a fluffy decision)
Tyel wrote: Its a sort of lame cry - but the army build rules for Ynnari give me a headache. So I think the prospect of building such a force is probably dead and buried.
Someone on youtube or something will probably give a sensible run down of how you can take X+Y and keep rules A+B, but if you include C you lose everything. But I'm sort of struggling.
Army building fairly straight forward. Everything loses <Saedath>, <Kabal> and <Wych Cult> keywords and gains the Ynnari faction keyword which replaces the <Craftworld> keyword, so Ynnari are by default a de facto 'Craftworld.'
Craftworlds: Anything EXCEPT Corsairs (because.. reasons), Avatar of Khaine (obviously) or special characters that aren't the Ynnari Three (So no phoenix lords, Yriel or whoever)
Dark: any wych or kabal units plus incubi and scourges (but you have to pay extra for those two, because... reasons). No haemonculi stuff, or named characters. But also no Lords of Comorragh or Favored Retinue upgrades (so no trueborn)
Clowns: any except Solitaires (for the same reason as the Avatar of Khaine, essentially- wrong god), but no Pivotal Roles.
If you _don't_ include Dark or Clowns, you get Strands of Fate.
However, adding _any_ clowns or dark elfs turns off Strands of Fate. And Power from Pain. And Luck of the Laughing God. You... just don't get faction 'doctrine' at all.
Oddly, Travelling Players is still in play, so if you take clowns as a separate patrol detachment (and no dark elfs), you can keep Strands of Fate. Because... reasons.
Also no one can take Runes of Fate, and get Ynnari Rune powers instead (mostly..? Warlocks might not get the option to take Ynnari rather than Battle)
Really, Ynnari losing the big Army Doctrine rule seems a bit much. Less book keeping, but losing any measure of auto-successes, rerolls or toughness really hurts the army.
Transports are restricted to keywords (only Asuryani models in Asuryani transport, etc), except the two special Ynnari characters. Given all the keyword changes... a little weird. I know nothing loses Asuryani, Darkuryani or Clownuryani, but still... they're crossing all sorts of lines uniting in their new god of death, but touching someone else's ride is just right out. I mean, sure, Fire Dragons in open-topped boats would be oppressive (or... a useful way to use them), but it feels 100% gamey rather than fluffy (and most of this feels like a Ynnari player is making a fluffy decision)
I honestly don't think you helped him much at all, lol. It really is still a nightmare....I'd probably start building a list, and then go "ah bollocks, let's just run regular craftworlds"
Voss wrote: Army building fairly straight forward. Everything loses <Saedath>, <Kabal> and <Wych Cult> keywords and gains the Ynnari faction keyword which replaces the <Craftworld> keyword, so Ynnari are by default a de facto 'Craftworld.'
Craftworlds: Anything EXCEPT Corsairs (because.. reasons), Avatar of Khaine (obviously) or special characters that aren't the Ynnari Three (So no phoenix lords, Yriel or whoever) Dark: any wych or kabal units plus incubi and scourges (but you have to pay extra for those two, because... reasons). No haemonculi stuff, or named characters. But also no Lords of Comorragh or Favored Retinue upgrades (so no trueborn) Clowns: any except Solitaires (for the same reason as the Avatar of Khaine, essentially- wrong god), but no Pivotal Roles.
If you _don't_ include Dark or Clowns, you get Strands of Fate. However, adding _any_ clowns or dark elfs turns off Strands of Fate. And Power from Pain. And Luck of the Laughing God. You... just don't get faction 'doctrine' at all. Oddly, Travelling Players is still in play, so if you take clowns as a separate patrol detachment (and no dark elfs), you can keep Strands of Fate. Because... reasons. Also no one can take Runes of Fate, and get Ynnari Rune powers instead (mostly..? Warlocks might not get the option to take Ynnari rather than Battle) Really, Ynnari losing the big Army Doctrine rule seems a bit much. Less book keeping, but losing any measure of auto-successes, rerolls or toughness really hurts the army.
Transports are restricted to keywords (only Asuryani models in Asuryani transport, etc), except the two special Ynnari characters. Given all the keyword changes... a little weird. I know nothing loses Asuryani, Darkuryani or Clownuryani, but still... they're crossing all sorts of lines uniting in their new god of death, but touching someone else's ride is just right out. I mean, sure, Fire Dragons in open-topped boats would be oppressive (or... a useful way to use them), but it feels 100% gamey rather than fluffy (and most of this feels like a Ynnari player is making a fluffy decision)
Thanks for breaking that down for us. It's going to make studying for the Eldar Codex final I've got next week far easier.
Remember when rules weren't like this? I don't remember the 3.5 Legion rules requiring such an crazy breakdown.
JohnnyHell wrote: How about we just all write to ask them to FAQ it to allow, instead of pretending to be legal experts and kidding ourselves that anyone will attempt to sue?
Not a matter for courts for anyone here - no one is out of pocket or subject to any material loss, just pointing out that advertising standards exist and anyone can raise a claim to ASA at any point if they so much as feel they or anyone else are being mislead by marketing claims. In reality everyone spamming FAQ requests is the best and most reasonable course of action as there are bound to be plenty of honest mistakes in the rest of the codex (for example clowns seem to have a few like the lack of core on anything but bikes and the weird unit sizes required for wargear options to kick in).
The Aeldari Discord is carrying out a coordinated email campaign asking GW to errata that datasheet. At the end of the day a revision is in everyone's best interest including their own, so hopefully common sense will prevail.
Definitely seems like a more constructive course of action than amateur legal 'experts' googling advertising laws at least.
I think they will listen if that effort is polite and well reasoned. They did listen with respect to the Cursed City models and the Soulblight Battletome, I bet they will here too.
I for one hope so. I'm itching to make an Autarch who has walked the path of both the Scorpion and the Spider! Who do we email if we'd like to join in?
JohnnyHell wrote: How about we just all write to ask them to FAQ it to allow, instead of pretending to be legal experts and kidding ourselves that anyone will attempt to sue?
Not a matter for courts for anyone here - no one is out of pocket or subject to any material loss, just pointing out that advertising standards exist and anyone can raise a claim to ASA at any point if they so much as feel they or anyone else are being mislead by marketing claims. In reality everyone spamming FAQ requests is the best and most reasonable course of action as there are bound to be plenty of honest mistakes in the rest of the codex (for example clowns seem to have a few like the lack of core on anything but bikes and the weird unit sizes required for wargear options to kick in).
The Aeldari Discord is carrying out a coordinated email campaign asking GW to errata that datasheet. At the end of the day a revision is in everyone's best interest including their own, so hopefully common sense will prevail.
Definitely seems like a more constructive course of action than amateur legal 'experts' googling advertising laws at least.
I think they will listen if that effort is polite and well reasoned. They did listen with respect to the Cursed City models and the Soulblight Battletome, I bet they will here too.
I for one hope so. I'm itching to make an Autarch who has walked the path of both the Scorpion and the Spider! Who do we email if we'd like to join in?
40kFAQ@gwplc.com
Maybe the sales aspect does need to be literally brought up in case they are obtuse
You currently can do Scorpion/Spider. It just has to be chainsword and warp jump generator. You can't get the mandiblaster helmet under the current rules. Whereas if you could, you might be buy the old Autarch kit as well.
What the heck does a phoenix lord need with Ynnari for resurrection? That’s their whole thing already. Stick another exarch in there and they power up again.
Army building fairly straight forward. Everything loses <Saedath>, <Kabal> and <Wych Cult> keywords and gains the Ynnari faction keyword which replaces the <Craftworld> keyword, so Ynnari are by default a de facto 'Craftworld.'
Craftworlds: Anything EXCEPT Corsairs (because.. reasons), Avatar of Khaine (obviously) or special characters that aren't the Ynnari Three (So no phoenix lords, Yriel or whoever)
Dark: any wych or kabal units plus incubi and scourges (but you have to pay extra for those two, because... reasons). No haemonculi stuff, or named characters. But also no Lords of Comorragh or Favored Retinue upgrades (so no trueborn)
Clowns: any except Solitaires (for the same reason as the Avatar of Khaine, essentially- wrong god), but no Pivotal Roles.
If you _don't_ include Dark or Clowns, you get Strands of Fate.
However, adding _any_ clowns or dark elfs turns off Strands of Fate. And Power from Pain. And Luck of the Laughing God. You... just don't get faction 'doctrine' at all.
Oddly, Travelling Players is still in play, so if you take clowns as a separate patrol detachment (and no dark elfs), you can keep Strands of Fate. Because... reasons.
Also no one can take Runes of Fate, and get Ynnari Rune powers instead (mostly..? Warlocks might not get the option to take Ynnari rather than Battle)
Really, Ynnari losing the big Army Doctrine rule seems a bit much. Less book keeping, but losing any measure of auto-successes, rerolls or toughness really hurts the army.
Transports are restricted to keywords (only Asuryani models in Asuryani transport, etc), except the two special Ynnari characters. Given all the keyword changes... a little weird. I know nothing loses Asuryani, Darkuryani or Clownuryani, but still... they're crossing all sorts of lines uniting in their new god of death, but touching someone else's ride is just right out. I mean, sure, Fire Dragons in open-topped boats would be oppressive (or... a useful way to use them), but it feels 100% gamey rather than fluffy (and most of this feels like a Ynnari player is making a fluffy decision)
I'm afraid I can only award you a B-, Voss.
Mostly a good breakdown but you missed the crucial rule wherein each Dark Eldar or Harlequin unit you take has to be balanced with a Craftworld unit in the same slot.
But don't let this discourage you - I'm sure with a little more revision you can get an A in the final exam.
Voss wrote: If you _don't_ include Dark or Clowns, you get Strands of Fate.
However, adding _any_ clowns or dark elfs turns off Strands of Fate. And Power from Pain. And Luck of the Laughing God. You... just don't get faction 'doctrine' at all.
Oddly, Travelling Players is still in play, so if you take clowns as a separate patrol detachment (and no dark elfs), you can keep Strands of Fate. Because... reasons.
Also no one can take Runes of Fate, and get Ynnari Rune powers instead (mostly..? Warlocks might not get the option to take Ynnari rather than Battle)
Really, Ynnari losing the big Army Doctrine rule seems a bit much. Less book keeping, but losing any measure of auto-successes, rerolls or toughness really hurts the army.
Thanks for the breakdown - tbh its this bit that causes me to go crosseyed.
So my reading is you can take a fully CWE army (with the somewhat random restrictions, but you get Yvraine+friends) using Ynnari effectively as your craftworld. Its the same as playing say Ulthwe and you keep Strands of Fate. You can also slot in a Harlequin patrol (I wasn't sure on this so thanks for clarifying).
If you do anything else however, the rules fall into little bits. So its very hard to see why anyone would run the multi-faction detachment outlined in the book even with the restrictions. And DE are basically impossible to include without severely hurting yourself. (I.E. is an Incubi who can fight first but loses power from pain worth 22 points? I think the answer is no.)
Mr_Rose wrote: What the heck does a phoenix lord need with Ynnari for resurrection? That’s their whole thing already. Stick another exarch in there and they power up again.
Basically:
Jain-Zar herself is bisected and then dragged away by the returning mandrakes to a forgotten realm, which is a smart move on his part as it forbids anyone ever finding her armour again. But luckily for the Craftworlders, Yvraine hears/feels her soul’s death wail and does the same trick she had done to her back when she was in the arena to a Banshee Exarch, who awakens from her death sleep, finds the armour and the eaten remains of the old wearer nearby. She puts on the armour, Jain-Zar now awoken once more with not only her original alignment to Khaine, but to Ynnead too.
Army building fairly straight forward. Everything loses <Saedath>, <Kabal> and <Wych Cult> keywords and gains the Ynnari faction keyword which replaces the <Craftworld> keyword, so Ynnari are by default a de facto 'Craftworld.'
Craftworlds: Anything EXCEPT Corsairs (because.. reasons), Avatar of Khaine (obviously) or special characters that aren't the Ynnari Three (So no phoenix lords, Yriel or whoever)
Dark: any wych or kabal units plus incubi and scourges (but you have to pay extra for those two, because... reasons). No haemonculi stuff, or named characters. But also no Lords of Comorragh or Favored Retinue upgrades (so no trueborn)
Clowns: any except Solitaires (for the same reason as the Avatar of Khaine, essentially- wrong god), but no Pivotal Roles.
If you _don't_ include Dark or Clowns, you get Strands of Fate.
However, adding _any_ clowns or dark elfs turns off Strands of Fate. And Power from Pain. And Luck of the Laughing God. You... just don't get faction 'doctrine' at all.
Oddly, Travelling Players is still in play, so if you take clowns as a separate patrol detachment (and no dark elfs), you can keep Strands of Fate. Because... reasons.
Also no one can take Runes of Fate, and get Ynnari Rune powers instead (mostly..? Warlocks might not get the option to take Ynnari rather than Battle)
Really, Ynnari losing the big Army Doctrine rule seems a bit much. Less book keeping, but losing any measure of auto-successes, rerolls or toughness really hurts the army.
Transports are restricted to keywords (only Asuryani models in Asuryani transport, etc), except the two special Ynnari characters. Given all the keyword changes... a little weird. I know nothing loses Asuryani, Darkuryani or Clownuryani, but still... they're crossing all sorts of lines uniting in their new god of death, but touching someone else's ride is just right out. I mean, sure, Fire Dragons in open-topped boats would be oppressive (or... a useful way to use them), but it feels 100% gamey rather than fluffy (and most of this feels like a Ynnari player is making a fluffy decision)
I'm afraid I can only award you a B-, Voss.
Mostly a good breakdown but you missed the crucial rule wherein each Dark Eldar or Harlequin unit you take has to be balanced with a Craftworld unit in the same slot.
But don't let this discourage you - I'm sure with a little more revision you can get an A in the final exam.
Designer's Note: Since their introduction, we have failed to truly utilise the Ynnari as a proper fighting force. Their rules have gone back and forth between detailed and scarcely there.
With the release of the new Aeidlelererrii Codex, we decided it was finally time to change how they are represented.
Now putting a Ynnari army together is so overly complicated that we are certain people will just give up and stick to regular Aieirldlerrir or just do a Sade... Sethh... Sadie... whatever we're calling Harlequins now. That army.
Kanluwen wrote: At least it makes army building fairly easy...
Your mandatory troop choices go quick!
It does make the question of whether they want or don't want you to play Ynnari more complicated.
The whole package feels like an over-reaction to their old power level. They're probably fine but not amazing as a pure 'Craftworld,' and you can sneak in a Clown patrol with no trouble (but you have to pay CP, in an army that wants them), but one stray clown in the main detachment or any dark eldar shuts down the army's primary gimmick. That's a really high price for... whatever you're souping for. Open transports and wyches? Disintegrators? (There are plenty of native platforms for bright lances across multiple FOCs and even transports). Overpriced independents? Are any of the DE options better than just taking the improved craftworld units? (Honest question, I don't really know one way or the other)
It feels like a 'you can but why would you want to?' Just play pure Craft.
Wait, you can't use the Corsairs with the Ynnari? That's super infuriating, as visually they go together super well; they both mix Craftworld and Drukhari aesthetics.
Crimson wrote: Wait, you can't use the Corsairs with the Ynnari? That's super infuriating, as visually they go together super well; they both mix Craftworld and Drukhari aesthetics.
Using Corsairs at all is randomly a challenge. The troops version gets ObSec, but can't be used for mandatory slots.
Some options (including the psyker) are reserved for the elite slot version, and it has a _lot_ of competition (in addition to everything that was already there, warlocks, dire avengers and even wraithlords got jammed in there sideways).
But no, Ynnari just can't take them at all. Which has fluff people a bit cranky, since apparently Corsairs were among the first recruits Yvraine picked up.
----
Yikes at the combat patrol. That's really committing hard to bikes.
zamerion wrote: i tried looking for it but i couldn't find it.
Ah, found it: You can't use any Phoenix lords, no Anhrathe (the corsairs' fancy name...), no Avatar, no solitaire, and no non-Ynnari named character in an Ynnari detatchement.
Seriously WTFGW! You publish a picture of Corsairs with Yvraine, and they make perfect sense together both visually and fluff wise, yet the rules don't allow it.
I am so done with all the idiotic restrictions about how I can build my army or equip the models. This is really killing my fun.
Crimson wrote: Seriously WTFGW! You publish a picture of Corsairs with Yvraine, and they make perfect sense together both visually and fluff wise, yet the rules don't allow it.
I am so done with all the idiotic restrictions about how I can build my army or equip the models. This is really killing my fun.
It feels like something they will FAQ.
Maybe I should actually email to indicate I vaguely care.
Crimson wrote: Seriously WTFGW! You publish a picture of Corsairs with Yvraine, and they make perfect sense together both visually and fluff wise, yet the rules don't allow it.
I am so done with all the idiotic restrictions about how I can build my army or equip the models. This is really killing my fun.
It feels like something they will FAQ.
Maybe I should actually email to indicate I vaguely care.
Just like that they'll FAQ the Autarch loadouts?
You'd think a multi-billion-pounds company would be able to afford a proofreader.
Oh wait then they'd have to pay him, reducing their profits, nevermind.
Crimson wrote: Seriously WTFGW! You publish a picture of Corsairs with Yvraine, and they make perfect sense together both visually and fluff wise, yet the rules don't allow it.
I am so done with all the idiotic restrictions about how I can build my army or equip the models. This is really killing my fun.
It feels like something they will FAQ.
Maybe I should actually email to indicate I vaguely care.
Just like that they'll FAQ the Autarch loadouts?
You'd think a multi-billion-pounds company would be able to afford a proofreader.
Oh wait then they'd have to pay him, reducing their profits, nevermind.
That isn't a proof-reader problem (or even a technical writer). That was 100% a deliberate decision.
It might get overturned as a sore point due to player complaints, but given Eldritch Omens reactions, its something they already know people aren't happy about. It'll either show up in the 'two week' FAQ or it won't happen at all.
But it did not happen because GW is too cheap to pay an editor.
The autarch thing definitely happened because gw is afraid people won’t buy both kits. Though miscommunication with the warcom team made the matter much worse
GaroRobe wrote: The autarch thing definitely happened because gw is afraid people won’t buy both kits. Though miscommunication with the warcom team made the matter much worse
I fail to see how making the two kits mutually exclusive (since you can only really have one Autarch apparently nowadays in your force, so people would just pick the better one) would sell more, than if they advertised them as completly compatible with each other, so you'd need both for the full range of options.
The most amusing thing is the autarch build that's really being touted is the one on the jetbike. Foot autarch is effectively DOA, if the meta-chasers are to be believed.
Voss wrote: The most amusing thing is the autarch build that's really being touted is the one on the jetbike. Foot autarch is effectively DOA, if the meta-chasers are to be believed.
It would be amazing if people would stop acting as if that matters. For feths sake just because some min/max feth-hole thinks .224 more damage is significant, doesn't mean people will not use the other option. There are hundreds of examples on the Eldar reddit of people who've bought the foot models to use in their armies. I plan on buying another one to make different choices for mine once the kit is available. Meta isn't the only way to enjoy this game. I've been playing non-cult terminators in my Black Legion for years now even though the meta says they suck. They don't. They're a lot of fun to use and play games with.
EDIT* Sorry Voss, I'm not yelling AT you. Just so tired of the common belief that if a model's rules aren't near perfect or broken that they're suddenly useless. It's frustrating sometimes.
That isn't a proof-reader problem (or even a technical writer). That was 100% a deliberate decision.
It might get overturned as a sore point due to player complaints, but given Eldritch Omens reactions, its something they already know people aren't happy about. It'll either show up in the 'two week' FAQ or it won't happen at all.
But it did not happen because GW is too cheap to pay an editor.
GaroRobe wrote: The autarch thing definitely happened because gw is afraid people won’t buy both kits. Though miscommunication with the warcom team made the matter much worse
What probably happened is something like:
2+ years ago a model designer is creating the new Eldar & looks at old Autarch CAD files for reference, and thinks it would be a good idea to make the kits cross-compatible.
Codex writer is working from home in 2020/21, may not have even seen all the new models in person or talked to the designer. They follow their usual guideline to write datasheet rules based on what they're told will be in the kit.
WarCom writer gets asked to do an article on the new EO models, has a chat with model designer and gets told about kit compatibility.
As much as I appreciated working from home most of the time, there were communication issues like this all the time that would have been avoided by being in the same building as a colleague.
I was ready to splash out and finally start playing 9th edition, but I just cancelled the order for the Eldar codex and accompanying kits.
Kill Team 2018 was a blast, and have been enjoying 3rd edition 40K for the last few years reviving old Tyranid and Eldar armies. I just feel that with the new Kill Team and 9th edition I'm trying to fix what isn't broke, and going broke by doing so. This isn't a complaint against modern 40K but merely coming to my senses, as it were.
Voss wrote: The most amusing thing is the autarch build that's really being touted is the one on the jetbike. Foot autarch is effectively DOA, if the meta-chasers are to be believed.
It would be amazing if people would stop acting as if that matters. For feths sake just because some min/max feth-hole thinks .224 more damage is significant, doesn't mean people will not use the other option. There are hundreds of examples on the Eldar reddit of people who've bought the foot models to use in their armies. I plan on buying another one to make different choices for mine once the kit is available. Meta isn't the only way to enjoy this game. I've been playing non-cult terminators in my Black Legion for years now even though the meta says they suck. They don't. They're a lot of fun to use and play games with.
EDIT* Sorry Voss, I'm not yelling AT you. Just so tired of the common belief that if a model's rules aren't near perfect or broken that they're suddenly useless. It's frustrating sometimes.
Bold to assume that the benefits of the Jetbike aren't too good to pass up to begin with. Even if just babysitting, that's extra durability and speed as necessary. I even do that with my shooting Marine armies (bless the Captain escaping the Legends Hammer).
Its the relic thing for the jetbike. Even more faster and gives the character objective secured.
Reaching out from halfway across the table and simply declaring 'mine now' on any objective without troops is stunningly stupid amazing. Some factions have counters to this (like the necron trait that gives ObSec to everyone), but against other factions its just... game change.
I plan to buy 2 boxes of shining spears and convert one to autarch on bike, leaving a 5 man spears squad. I also plan to use the foot autarch, and Yriel, why not...diverse is fun.
As for the Corsairs and Ynnari (plus Yriel I guess), I hope people just don't play Ynnari and GW start wondering why. They have always screwed up with Ynnari and it looks like they just keep doubling down on it.
bullyboy wrote: I plan to buy 2 boxes of shining spears and convert one to autarch on bike, leaving a 5 man spears squad. I also plan to use the foot autarch, and Yriel, why not...diverse is fun.
As for the Corsairs and Ynnari (plus Yriel I guess), I hope people just don't play Ynnari and GW start wondering why. They have always screwed up with Ynnari and it looks like they just keep doubling down on it.
I don't think they will. This is one of the most diverse books they've put out so far, I expect to see all kinds of interest in Ynnari, Craftworlds, Harlies, heck even DE orders might get a boost as well (I know I'd like to own some DE again...)
Voss wrote: The most amusing thing is the autarch build that's really being touted is the one on the jetbike. Foot autarch is effectively DOA, if the meta-chasers are to be believed.
It would be amazing if people would stop acting as if that matters. For feths sake just because some min/max feth-hole thinks .224 more damage is significant, doesn't mean people will not use the other option. There are hundreds of examples on the Eldar reddit of people who've bought the foot models to use in their armies. I plan on buying another one to make different choices for mine once the kit is available. Meta isn't the only way to enjoy this game. I've been playing non-cult terminators in my Black Legion for years now even though the meta says they suck. They don't. They're a lot of fun to use and play games with.
EDIT* Sorry Voss, I'm not yelling AT you. Just so tired of the common belief that if a model's rules aren't near perfect or broken that they're suddenly useless. It's frustrating sometimes.
Bold to assume that the benefits of the Jetbike aren't too good to pass up to begin with. Even if just babysitting, that's extra durability and speed as necessary. I even do that with my shooting Marine armies (bless the Captain escaping the Legends Hammer).
GaroRobe wrote: The autarch thing definitely happened because gw is afraid people won’t buy both kits. Though miscommunication with the warcom team made the matter much worse
I fail to see how making the two kits mutually exclusive (since you can only really have one Autarch apparently nowadays in your force, so people would just pick the better one) would sell more, than if they advertised them as completly compatible with each other, so you'd need both for the full range of options.
I think GW's "logic" is that if autarchs had all the weapon options, someone will buy one kit, and then just find a third party alternate for the extra bits, instead of spending $26 for the second autarch kit. By having the two autarchs be restrictive in their loadouts, players that want to field either or are stuck buying both kits. GW is also kind of dumb, and prefers to limit options to whatever is included in the kit, even if the model could use arms/helmets from other units in the army. Once again, I think that was a result of Chapterhouse and GW's quest to force people to exclusively use their products .
Predictions game for fun for anyone that wants to play along with me (I use the reddit meta mondays over a couple of weeks to see if I got close or was way off):
Craftworlds - Will put up win % results in tournaments close to Tau/Custodes. I think it will be close to 55%. Why so low?
Harlequins - Will put up the best win % results in tournaments, above Tau/Custodes. Around 60%. They push Tau/Custodes/Craftworlds down.
Eldar soup - Will be one of 8 or so options (Tau/Cust/CW/Harlie + 4) that get above 50% win %.
I keep seeing people saying that Eldar units are expensive, but wow their rules are good. The Phoenix Lords are amazing just based on defences. With 1 unit of 5 Aspect Warriors and 1 Phoenix Lord you need to kill the Aspect Warriors in shooting, then take off 3W in shooting from the Lord. Then you have to charge and take the last 3W to kill them. 3 unit activations total, 1 in melee. All targets have invulnerables so you have to overcommit or risk under damaging. If you don't kill them they will hold a point using their ObSec. And holding points wins the game.
The secondaries look solid too. The Eldar Mutated Landscape knock off with their cheap and very fast Warlocks is very doable (and they can switch to other warpcraft secondaries on the maps it doesn't work on).
Togusa wrote: It would be amazing if people would stop acting as if that matters. For feths sake just because some min/max feth-hole thinks .224 more damage is significant, doesn't mean people will not use the other option. There are hundreds of examples on the Eldar reddit of people who've bought the foot models to use in their armies. I plan on buying another one to make different choices for mine once the kit is available. Meta isn't the only way to enjoy this game. I've been playing non-cult terminators in my Black Legion for years now even though the meta says they suck. They don't. They're a lot of fun to use and play games with.
You know, I'd normally agree with you, because most of the time, tiny bit more/less efficiency matters less than cool look, but with Eldar/Tau book, writer incompetence managed to shatter that paradigm to pieces. The upgrades are way too broken, when you can take like 60+ inch movement for very little points, basically teleporting across the table at will (while also lugging around anti-tank weapons "balanced" around it's "short" range, something almost comically irrelevant with such move speeds), why wouldn't you? IMO, 12 inches should be the max infantry model could move (maybe 18 if it's a relic) but alas, both of these armies have writers with zero clue how to balance them and a tendency to make their pet armies as OP as possible...
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: I fail to see how making the two kits mutually exclusive (since you can only really have one Autarch apparently nowadays in your force, so people would just pick the better one) would sell more, than if they advertised them as completly compatible with each other, so you'd need both for the full range of options.
You act like GW has a clue what would sell more models. See primaris, whose selling point since day zero was 100% compatibility of arms, shoulder pads, and helmets with old SM range, but then were denied to actually take these upgrades Which then some took to 12 by banning primaris from taking frakking upgrades designed for primaris (GW would sell zillion BT upgrade sprues if other chapters could take their multi-melta bit, or BT captain models if other captains could take its axe or sword with combi-plasma/plasma pistol upgrades, but writing 30 second FAQ with these options is apparently too hard)
Crimson wrote: Seriously WTFGW! You publish a picture of Corsairs with Yvraine, and they make perfect sense together both visually and fluff wise, yet the rules don't allow it.
I am so done with all the idiotic restrictions about how I can build my army or equip the models. This is really killing my fun.
Crimson wrote: Seriously WTFGW! You publish a picture of Corsairs with Yvraine, and they make perfect sense together both visually and fluff wise, yet the rules don't allow it.
I am so done with all the idiotic restrictions about how I can build my army or equip the models. This is really killing my fun.
Just houserule it tbh
Or run her as a farseer. Or just run them as wtfever unit makes the most sense if you want to be compliant.
Maybe it's because the rules now say you can only take one autarch per detachment?
They wanted to avoid the complaints from people who purchased two models to mix and match only to find they could only use one, unless they played some force org shennigans?
Question: I don't get the whole ' in the footsteps of the acients' part page 90 about custom craftworlds..
So you choose one of the five craftworlds or simply pick two separate attributes for a custom craftworld, but it seems like you can also pick something ' in-between'??? Could somebody explain that?
The footsteps thing is duplicated in every codex with custom rules; basically you paint your models how you like and use the big names as your rules but really it’s your custom name so you don’t get the special characters. Or you do but they don’t get the benefit of the trait.
So technically the footsteps thing is the in-between option.
So if you choose Footsteps of the Ancients for your custom craftworld called Zandros, all your unit cards say Zandros instead of <craftworld> plus you can pick a named craftworld and use those traits as if they said Zandros instead of Ulthwé or Iyanden or whatever. But since you still have Zandros on your units, if you take Eldrad or Yriel they don’t change their designation so are “just visiting” and don’t get the Zandros trait. Even if that happens to be identical to their home traits.
Mr_Rose wrote: The footsteps thing is duplicated in every codex with custom rules;
Nope. If you want to use a custom Dark Eldar Kabal (or Cult or Coven), then by the rules you *must* choose the custom traits.
There's no equivalent of footsteps to let you, for example, use the rules for Black heart but call it something different (and paint your models in your own colours).
Mr_Rose wrote: The footsteps thing is duplicated in every codex with custom rules;
Nope. If you want to use a custom Dark Eldar Kabal (or Cult or Coven), then by the rules you *must* choose the custom traits.
There's no equivalent of footsteps to let you, for example, use the rules for Black heart but call it something different (and paint your models in your own colours).
But there is nothing saying that you really have to paint them in that colour¿no? I always thought that you could just say that it's a small part of the Craftworld or whatever faction that for internal reasons have a different scheme.
Darkial wrote: But there is nothing saying that you really have to paint them in that colour¿no? I always thought that you could just say that it's a small part of the Craftworld or whatever faction that for internal reasons have a different scheme.
Unless Eldar are different I don't think paint ever comes into it. Although this sort of system may allow GW to start pushing against that in the future.
The point is that the Eldar, Tau and GSC books all have the option to basically be "Craftworld/Cult/Sept Zandros", which is in fact, rules wise, "Craftworld Ulthwe". Or Twisted Helix, Vior'la etc.
Technically DE doesn't. If you want to be "Kabal Zandros" you should notionally take custom traits and not just use the Black Heart rules as if you were Black Heart.
But really... I don't think anyone has ever stopped someone from doing so if they wanted to.
Crimson wrote: Seriously WTFGW! You publish a picture of Corsairs with Yvraine, and they make perfect sense together both visually and fluff wise, yet the rules don't allow it..
Should I point out ALL the artwork of Death Guard Plague Marines carrying Heavy Bolters? An illegal, impossible option despite multiple art pieces until the Traitor Legions supplement at the very end of 7th that allowed you to take Death Guard Havocs with the relevant weapons. (And the joy was that the Death Guard Legion rules basically turned their units into Plague units- basically what people wanted for YEARS.)
And then they nuked it like, 6 months later for 8th ed.
Mr_Rose wrote: The footsteps thing is duplicated in every codex with custom rules; basically you paint your models how you like and use the big names as your rules but really it’s your custom name so you don’t get the special characters. Or you do but they don’t get the benefit of the trait.
So technically the footsteps thing is the in-between option.
So if you choose Footsteps of the Ancients for your custom craftworld called Zandros, all your unit cards say Zandros instead of <craftworld> plus you can pick a named craftworld and use those traits as if they said Zandros instead of Ulthwé or Iyanden or whatever. But since you still have Zandros on your units, if you take Eldrad or Yriel they don’t change their designation so are “just visiting” and don’t get the Zandros trait. Even if that happens to be identical to their home traits.
Or you just say they are whatever you want and painting to be damned.
Wonder how many white/black/red ultramarines with guillimann I have already seen...
So most of the reviews etc feel this codex is a bomb.
What can be done to fix it? Lower point costs on many of the overcosted units?
Are these the same people who were saying Tau was mediocre and that Custodes were very bad? Because that happened, everywhere, especially with the Custodes.
Let's let the book come out, people play with it a bit and see what can be done, instead of trying to form an opinion based of what some "who ever" says on the internet about what they have seen before we talk about balance for an as yet released product.
To be fair, Custodes were losing a 3++ Invul and Obsec on Jetbikes which was a big deal. Not many of us were able to predict that katahs and the new subfaction Emperor's Chosen would be so powerful to overcome that loss.
I'm not sure "we don't think it will dethrone two clearly overpowered codexes" is really a bomb.
GW have been relatively restrained with the points. I thought (and feared) everything would be 10-15% cheaper. As it is I think you have an army that should stack up well - perhaps especially so when GW eventually nerf Custodes and Tau, which surely can't be a million weeks away.
GW published a 'how to start an aeldari army' article which includes the sentence:
The Ynnari pull Aeldari together from all walks of life, including the mysterious Exodites, the mercenary Corsairs, and even the dark-tempered Drukhari. ...
...
...
I'm guessing that either they ignore that of we're gonna get a very quick FAQ to be able to use pirates in the Ynnari armies...
ChaosDad wrote: GW published a 'how to start an aeldari army' article which includes the sentence:
The Ynnari pull Aeldari together from all walks of life, including the mysterious Exodites, the mercenary Corsairs, and even the dark-tempered Drukhari. ...
...
...
I'm guessing that either they ignore that of we're gonna get a very quick FAQ to be able to use pirates in the Ynnari armies...
Or they'll just ignore that, like with the Autarch being compatible with the previous one but-not-really
The impression I get is that it's a good codex with great internal balance.
On a similar level to armies like sisters, drukhari and ad mech. It's just that it's released into an incredibly toxic meta where T'au and Custodes are absolutely stomping everything else.
ChaosDad wrote: GW published a 'how to start an aeldari army' article which includes the sentence:
The Ynnari pull Aeldari together from all walks of life, including the mysterious Exodites, the mercenary Corsairs, and even the dark-tempered Drukhari. ...
...
...
I'm guessing that either they ignore that of we're gonna get a very quick FAQ to be able to use pirates in the Ynnari armies...
Glad someone else caught that.
WarCom feels like a bad dream sometimes. At other points they seem more sane than the rules folks- I can't think of a fluff reason why Ynnari would turn corsairs away (or a rules reason why, either)..
Just a heads up for people buying the new guardians. There are left handed sword options but no right handed gun option to go along with it. So build your guys and gals careful, unless you want some dual wielding eldar
H.B.M.C. wrote:Are there any pointing hands and whatnot to make up for it?
One pointing hand, one rangefinding monocular hand.
Togusa wrote:For the Eldar Forgeworld Models Titans to the smaller units, where do I find their rules? Is there a book I need?
Imperial Armour Compendium is the book. Plus the FAQs of course. Fortunately it does come with a code for the app so it is more portable than it could have been.
It's certainly not any less realistic than a Marine being able to swing around a Combi-Rifle the size of his torso in the off hand in a pistol grip, while using a two handed Power Sword in the other one.
It's certainly not any less realistic than a Marine being able to swing around a Combi-Rifle the size of his torso in the off hand in a pistol grip, while using a two handed Power Sword in the other one.
I'd say it would be best if we simply didn't engage anymore. At this point, they are obviously trolling.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Point to a space marine leader that can fly. Shoot a missile launcher and has a giant weapon. There isn’t one. Because it’s just silly
Automatically Appended Next Post: Point to a space marine leader that can fly. Shoot a missile launcher and has a giant weapon. There isn’t one. Because it’s just silly
That's probably because GW barely gives Space Marines missile launchers nowadays.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Point to a space marine leader that can fly. Shoot a missile launcher and has a giant weapon. There isn’t one. Because it’s just silly
I got my Guardians today. Instructions are definitely misprinted and the two left-handed chainswords without intended pairs is a weird oversight but it doesn't really affect the build options. You can still build 10 models with shuriken pistol and close combat weapon. The left handed chainswords are effectively spare parts (as opposed to what the instructions suggest).
GaroRobe wrote: Just a heads up for people buying the new guardians. There are left handed sword options but no right handed gun option to go along with it. So build your guys and gals careful, unless you want some dual wielding eldar
He throws the 2nd chainsword, giving the ranged attack.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Point to a space marine leader that can fly. Shoot a missile launcher and has a giant weapon. There isn’t one. Because it’s just silly
Wraithbone is quite lite for being a composite material. The Eldar did science for 60 million years. They're taller, faster, stronger and long-lived compared to humans.
There is a Chaos marine who flys, wields a massive heavy as heck spear and a big power claw.
Olthannon wrote: Out of interest, how does old Ra Ra look in the plastic? Is there much give and take with that model or does it end up pretty monopose?
It's a plastic character model with zero options, spare parts or poseability. What you see is what you get.
Dysartes wrote: Would you leave the backpack off as well, Kan?
Indeed. That's part #13, the Reaper Targeter. It's all one big part, which is highly impressive IMO!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Olthannon wrote: Out of interest, how does old Ra Ra look in the plastic? Is there much give and take with that model or does it end up pretty monopose?
It's going to depend upon how comfortable you are cutting things up. As mentioned, he's basically got the one pose.
Dysartes wrote: Would you leave the backpack off as well, Kan?
Indeed. That's part #13, the Reaper Targeter. It's all one big part, which is highly impressive IMO!
Yeah, the actual basic assembly is much more solid than it looks considering he’s doing the splits on rubble and the most delicate/fiddly parts are the front of his hood and the spare ammo for the Maugetar, both of which are nowhere near as tiny as Darkstrider’s baby-drone hats. Or anything on Szeras. The thing nearly assembles itself tbh; it’s only 14 parts and none of them are readily confused with each other except the shoulders and they are keyed.
Olthannon wrote: Out of interest, how does old Ra Ra look in the plastic? Is there much give and take with that model or does it end up pretty monopose?
It's going to depend upon how comfortable you are cutting things up. As mentioned, he's basically got the one pose.
He looks really nice though.
Much agreement. The eavy metal “highlighting extreeem!” style combined with their chosen display angle really does not show off the underlying sculpt very well.
Dysartes wrote: Would you leave the backpack off as well, Kan?
Indeed. That's part #13, the Reaper Targeter. It's all one big part, which is highly impressive IMO!
Ah, I wouldn't've thought of it as that piece, hence my confusion - I know one of the painters I watch on Twitch was saying last week that she wished she'd left it off.
Dunno it looks pretty good to me - is it just a reaper head swap? Is there a change to the backpack/banner and stance as well - looks different to me but may just be the angle...
Worth noting that the actual head for Maugan Ra is two pieces: one is sculpted to the main body and the other is the front bit of the cowl, extending over top of the Maugetar.
You can leave the Maugetar off and still place it underneath of the cowl bit though for anyone wanting to do that.
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: He kinda looks like he has a massive chin with that headswap
Eldar have that Egyptian aesthetic of having pointy chin/beard things on their helmets (autarchs and I think maybe farseers?), so having a massive chin is probably a huge flex
So… random thing that will probably get FAQd; the Travelling Players rule for Harlequin patrols… it doesn’t seem to care about whether the rest of the army is aeldari?
I mean, read strictly it certainly appears to let you ad a harlequin patrol to any army, not just space elf ones.
Also, am I imagining things or can you throw Corsairs into a Dark Eldar army pretty much at will? They have Drukhari listed as a faction keyword…
Mr_Rose wrote: So… random thing that will probably get FAQd; the Travelling Players rule for Harlequin patrols… it doesn’t seem to care about whether the rest of the army is aeldari?
I mean, read strictly it certainly appears to let you ad a harlequin patrol to any army, not just space elf ones.
Also, am I imagining things or can you throw Corsairs into a Dark Eldar army pretty much at will? They have Drukhari listed as a faction keyword…
I noticed that too. I might have to look into getting some Dark Bois later in the summer.
So far I don't see any data sheets that are unusable. The internal balance seems to be very, very high in this book. Even the Neuro Disruptors got better.
Mr_Rose wrote: So… random thing that will probably get FAQd; the Travelling Players rule for Harlequin patrols… it doesn’t seem to care about whether the rest of the army is aeldari?
I mean, read strictly it certainly appears to let you ad a harlequin patrol to any army, not just space elf ones.
Also, am I imagining things or can you throw Corsairs into a Dark Eldar army pretty much at will? They have Drukhari listed as a faction keyword…
It looks like it's a detachment ability for Asuryani Detachments. So you need at least one Asuryani Detachment to get Travelling Players? That or the codex is poorly laid out and the rule in the box on the Detachment Abilities page is not a Detachment Ability. With GW, who knows?
Three words....two...Warlocks...105NZD. Frig off, GW it's $16 cheaper on Mighty Ape but that's still $89 for two models. Also, $115 for five Dark Reapers? Just...crazy.
Well, apart from the corsairs in the next KT box next week? No, not really.
Unfortunately second waves can be separated by weeks or by months lately without any particularly obvious rhyme or reason so I’m betting mid April since that’s towards the end of the three-month window from the Avatar reveal.
Mr_Rose wrote: So… random thing that will probably get FAQd; the Travelling Players rule for Harlequin patrols… it doesn’t seem to care about whether the rest of the army is aeldari?
I mean, read strictly it certainly appears to let you ad a harlequin patrol to any army, not just space elf ones.
Also, am I imagining things or can you throw Corsairs into a Dark Eldar army pretty much at will? They have Drukhari listed as a faction keyword…
No. In order to gain the ability the army must be Battle-forged. If the army is Battle-forged only then does the Patrol detachment gain the ability. This means you must add the Patrol detachment before you gain the ability.
As soon as you add Harlequins to an army with which is doesn't share any keywords at all, it would be an Unbound army and not Battle-forged.
If it said something along the lines of 'If your army is Battleforged, you may then add a Harlequins Patrol detachment and not lose stuff' you'd be right.
Earth127 wrote: No rumours yet for when the next models arrive?
We know the Combat Patrol box is due in April - if I were a betting man, I'd expect the remaining unreleased kits to come out then (Avatar, Shining Spears - am I missing anything?).
Corsairs should see a release outside of Kill Team Nachmund in late May or early June, assuming the pattern we're seeing here is retained.
The units from Eldritch Omens could release alongside either of these, or even on their own - I'd probably lean closer to with the Corsairs than the Combat Patrol, but that's a guess on my part.
Earth127 wrote: No rumours yet for when the next models arrive?
We know the Combat Patrol box is due in April - if I were a betting man, I'd expect the remaining unreleased kits to come out then (Avatar, Shining Spears - am I missing anything?).
Corsairs should see a release outside of Kill Team Nachmund in late May or early June, assuming the pattern we're seeing here is retained.
The units from Eldritch Omens could release alongside either of these, or even on their own - I'd probably lean closer to with the Corsairs than the Combat Patrol, but that's a guess on my part.
Rangers on foot box would be nice but im afraid to see the price, specially after the Dark reapers price.
I don't think they did either of those Autarchs in the last MTO batch either, but I could be wrong. I know they did swooping hawk wings + reaper launcher + sword, but I haven't seen the Shuriken one. Not sure about the Biel Tan one either.
Kanluwen wrote: And yet they couldn't be bothered to fix their screw-up on the Skitarii weapon loadouts.
Ah well, good for the people wanting all the Autarch stuff.
Skitarii fans didn't complain. Most people I know playing Ad Mech just accepted it. We Eldar fans, did not. There was an organized campaign writing in to GW on this issue!
Voss wrote: No... don't encourage the Kan AdMech/Skitarii rants that matter only to him. Especially not in non-AdMech threads.
No I'm genuinely curious: Does he actually think that this gak wasn't intentional (despite all the others justlikeit), or is he talking about something else, like something to do with the Omnispex/Data-Tether?
Voss wrote: No... don't encourage the Kan AdMech/Skitarii rants that matter only to him. Especially not in non-AdMech threads.
No I'm genuinely curious: Does he actually think that this gak wasn't intentional (despite all the others justlikeit), or is he talking about something else, like something to do with the Omnispex/Data-Tether?
Already tore apart my old autarch (wasn't yet painted). Scorp helm replaced with banshee mask head, and fusion pistol replaced by deathspinner. Will use him mainly as anti-infantry, giving him shard of anaris for between 9 and 11 attacks, in addition to shots from deathspinner.
Will replicate cover art with one of others I just ordered, and then finish last with WJG and fusion gun.
Great ! Even if I can't help but notice the wording in the article itself:
A highly customisable new Autarch kit was released last month in the Eldritch Omens boxed set – and it’ll soon be released separately. The cleverest part is that it’s completely compatible with the other plastic Autarch in the Aeldari range, and they both come with a ton of bits to help you craft the splendid Aeldari general of your most murderous dreams.
Quite a few of you have been in touch to ask whether this flexibility can be reflected in the datasheet (which currently assumes you own one or the other – but not both). Given that every Autarch is a unique hero to their Craftworld, we’ve decided to update the datasheet to reflect their extensive martial prowess.
They coyly say: "Whoops, when we boasted cross compatibility between kits we were obviously talking about the model only and not the rules . But since we are such a good company we listened to you !"
In any case, goodbye auto hitting Death Spinner. We hardly knew ya.
I'm glad they updated it, and that's neat and good, but y'know, changing a datasheet like days after the Codex ships is fairly dispiriting. Also, y'know can all datasheets be like this instead of the ridiculousness we have with every other 9th ed book.
Nevelon wrote: Look at how clean that datastlate is, without all the nested if/or decisions. Simple, flexible, lets you play the way you want.
Must be nice to have writer buffing their pet army into the stratosphere, because anything less than this level of devotion and they will be content to leave obvious issues rotting for multiple books. See the flaming gak that is primaris character weapons five years later
And the less said about who ruined DW in both 7th and 9th editions, the better
Nevelon wrote: Look at how clean that datastlate is, without all the nested if/or decisions. Simple, flexible, lets you play the way you want.
Must be nice to have writer buffing their pet army into the stratosphere, because anything less than this level of devotion and they will be content to leave obvious issues rotting for multiple books. See the flaming gak that is primaris character weapons five years later
And the less said about who ruined DW in both 7th and 9th editions, the better
I’ve ranted plenty about no-model, no-rules, and marine captains before.
GW did the right thing here, IMHO. Now they need to keep on doing it.
And from what I’ve seen, eldar are far from stratospheric. I think “viable, with a few good builds” is where we are at.
GW are constantly inconsistent, and never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and here we have an example of them doing good.
I think the codex art pushed it over the edge (which is what i put in my email, that I wanted to build that model). I think if it were just a comment in a WHC article, they would have redacted it, but the sheer in-your-face image of an illegal loadout on the front cover just wouldn't hold up. Either way, I'm happy with the response.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Is it just me being thick, or is there little reason to swap the Star Glaive for….any of the other CCW?
Perfectly open to this being me completely missing something obvious.
If you want to blend pure chaff, or want one more shot to trigger a MW from the mandiblaster, the chainsword has a place.
The sword is only there to swap for a relic. You might be able to find a mathhammer niche where that 1 point of AP makes it a marginally better choice, but I doubt it.
The glave is the best choice almost all the time, as far as I can tell.
They released this very quick, which is odd because you think they could go back and easily FAQ a bunch of existing datasheets with weird and stupid weapon restrictions.
Or are they only doing it this one time because people were vocal about it?
Rumor guy says that new chaos codex is full of locked wargear options so we'll see I guess.
yeah, glaive wins out but when i will use the sword, it will indeed be swapped for a relic. I have a spare glaive from Dire avengers that hopefully will fit on remaining Autarch when I get it.
Nevelon wrote: The glave is the best choice almost all the time, as far as I can tell.
If you listen closely to the breeze, you can faintly hear ~~~ 'Buy the new model' ~~~
Or listen to WHC shouting the same thing.
Plastic glaives are one of the few bits that should be easy to get. Everyone built DAs with paired cats, so all the stabby bits go straight into the bitz boxes.
I magnetized my new autach, not because I could ever see myself not fielding the glaive, but if I got the one with wings, I might want to use the part on that model as well.
Don Savik wrote: They released this very quick, which is odd because you think they could go back and easily FAQ a bunch of existing datasheets with weird and stupid weapon restrictions.
Or are they only doing it this one time because people were vocal about it?
That and you can now actually field the model using the build on the cover of the codex.
Damn, the codex has been out for a week and it's already been made partly redundant. I struggle to see why folk still choose to play 40K, it's pretty ridiculous without a living digital rulebook available.
Argive wrote: Any idea if MTO are usualy metal of failcrap?
These were metal originaly and have since been up*i mean* down graded to failcrap before being made oop
Middle Earth miniatures that I have bought MTO have all been metal.
Don Savik wrote: They released this very quick, which is odd because you think they could go back and easily FAQ a bunch of existing datasheets with weird and stupid weapon restrictions.
Or are they only doing it this one time because people were vocal about it?
That and you can now actually field the model using the build on the cover of the codex.
Think it was the total combination of the previously mentioned article on WHC talking about compatibility, the in your face nature of the then illegal Autarch loadout HQ choice in the middle of the Codex cover, and the concentrated write-in campaign, rather than any one thing alone.
Argive wrote: Any idea if MTO are usualy metal of failcrap?
These were metal originaly and have since been up*i mean* down graded to failcrap before being made oop
All Made-to-Order miniatures so far have been cast in the material they were last available at. If the Autarch were last available in resin, they will be resin.
There will probably be additional Eldar content in a future campaign book; I wouldn't be surprised to find a Corsair supplement or a Ynarri army of renown. White Dwarf has already stepped up with Althansar for CWE and Harlequins for KT, but I could see them adding more to the mix in the months to come.
*tin foil hat on*: the Autarch fix was planned from the biginning so GW can say "we still listen to the community and make changes to the game by popular demand"
kodos wrote: *tin foil hat on*: the Autarch fix was planned from the biginning so GW can say "we still listen to the community and make changes to the game by popular demand"
I was thinking the very same thing when watching the Auspex Tactics video on it earlier today. You never know, you never know lol
kodos wrote: *tin foil hat on*: the Autarch fix was planned from the biginning so GW can say "we still listen to the community and make changes to the game by popular demand"
kodos wrote: *tin foil hat on*: the Autarch fix was planned from the biginning so GW can say "we still listen to the community and make changes to the game by popular demand"
kodos wrote: *tin foil hat on*: the Autarch fix was planned from the biginning so GW can say "we still listen to the community and make changes to the game by popular demand"
I highly doubt it.
If it was planned, it was a dumb plan.
Any good will generated by the "look we listen to the players" wouldn't be enough to gain back the good will lost by the stupidity of how it was written in Codex upon release.
I'm glad it's fixed for the Infantry Autarch, but I'm still sore about the lack of Skyrunner Autarch options.
Don't think I've seen a versus box contents jump to sold separately so quickly before.
And the avatar, aspect bikers and combat patrol. Good grief. This looks like a real release weekend for once.
Don't think I've seen a versus box contents jump to sold separately so quickly before.
And the avatar, aspect bikers and combat patrol. Good grief. This looks like a real release weekend for once.
Nevelon wrote: That a wrap for Eldar? Just the KT corsairs left as stand alone?
Yep. Khaine only knows how long that will take, though. Baby Sisters and their opponents took until this release, but apparently eldar get fast tracked for solo releases.
Nevelon wrote: That a wrap for Eldar? Just the KT corsairs left as stand alone?
That is correct.
Should be May or June for them to see a release.
As a point of interest that I do not remember hearing mentioned in the reviews of the models, they seem to be a kit designed some time ago. The arms actually all can be mixed+matched fairly easily. There's one Specialist even that has twin Power Blades and a Shuriken Pistol(not the Shaderunner!) that they did not really show off at all...because it's just a wicked looking serrated power blade that denotes which one it is.
Nevelon wrote: That a wrap for Eldar? Just the KT corsairs left as stand alone?
Yep. Khaine only knows how long that will take, though. Baby Sisters and their opponents took until this release, but apparently eldar get fast tracked for solo releases.
Chalnath released the first week of November; preorders were October 30th. Roughly 4 months from boxed set to individual releases.
Don't think I've seen a versus box contents jump to sold separately so quickly before.
And the avatar, aspect bikers and combat patrol. Good grief. This looks like a real release weekend for once.
Do we know if the jet bikes in the combat patrol are dual kits Shining spears/wind runners ? It's a new kit right ?
Don't think I've seen a versus box contents jump to sold separately so quickly before.
And the avatar, aspect bikers and combat patrol. Good grief. This looks like a real release weekend for once.
Do we know if the jet bikes in the combat patrol are dual kits Shining spears/wind runners ? It's a new kit right ?
No, the jetbikes in the combat patrol are the old ones, both Shining Spears and Shroud Runners are two different new kits.
Don't think I've seen a versus box contents jump to sold separately so quickly before.
And the avatar, aspect bikers and combat patrol. Good grief. This looks like a real release weekend for once.
Do we know if the jet bikes in the combat patrol are dual kits Shining spears/wind runners ? It's a new kit right ?
No, the jetbikes in the combat patrol are the old ones, both Shining Spears and Shroud Runners are two different new kits.
Damn... So how are the jet bikes in the combat patrol ? They are plastic right ?
The new plastic jetbikes came out in 7th? Still a reasonably modern kit.
I think they have suffered rules-wise for their broken days of yore, but the new book looks OKish for them? Probably not the most point efficient way to get firepower to the table, but not a complete trap choice.
Nevelon wrote: The new plastic jetbikes came out in 7th? Still a reasonably modern kit.
I think they have suffered rules-wise for their broken days of yore, but the new book looks OKish for them? Probably not the most point efficient way to get firepower to the table, but not a complete trap choice.
The Windriders themselves were relased in 2015, but the sculpts themselves are much older - they're Goodwin's sculpts from 2007, and were shelved for unknown reasons for over 8 years. It was a rather bizzare sequences of events.
Wow, that's great how fast the new models are coming out.
I'm hoping the Shining Spears have the old style plastic stand with the simple insert, instead of the ball joint they have on the Vertus Praetors. Far too wobbly.
I'm hoping the Shining Spears have the old style plastic stand with the simple insert, instead of the ball joint they have on the Vertus Praetors. Far too wobbly.
Has anything new been on the old stands? The shroudrunners were on the new ones, I would expect the same for the spears.
They are a little harder to magnetize, but still doable. I drop a tiny bit of green stuff into the socket, push in the magnet and smooth it off. File top of the ball flat and glue the magnet there. Makes transportation a lot easier.
Olthannon wrote: The combat patrol is great, the only downside I see is not buying more than one because suddenly you have a crap load of jetbikes.
Or, for Saim-Hamn players: How many copies of units that touch the ground do you want? The guardians you can put in a WS, but your seers are on bikes and WLs just track dirt everywhere.
So £99 rrp for the Eldar half of Eldritch Omens, considering that I paid less than that from Element and was able to sell the Chaos half for 50 odd quid that turned out to be a decent deal.
Bit odd that the Shroud Runners are £2.50 more than the Shining Spears, is there an extra half sprue or something?
Not sure on the sprues but it might be the case. Shroud Runners are 6 guys on 3 bikes whereas Shining Spears are 3 guys on 3 bikes, so those extra 3 dudes gotta come from somewhere I guess?
ListenToMeWarriors wrote: So £99 rrp for the Eldar half of Eldritch Omens, considering that I paid less than that from Element and was able to sell the Chaos half for 50 odd quid that turned out to be a decent deal.
Bit odd that the Shroud Runners are £2.50 more than the Shining Spears, is there an extra half sprue or something?
Dual boxes always are if you want all models for one side. Still pricey but compared to getting solo cheaper. Thus i always laugh at 'i wait for solo releases' comments.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Avatar is a pretty good price at £60. Comparatively speaking. I mean, it’s still a single plastic model, just considerably less than I was expecting.
With potential 3rd party discount its possibly going to be about £50 - Feels like that's a good price.
If only other GW products followed the same vein..
Don't think I've seen a versus box contents jump to sold separately so quickly before.
And the avatar, aspect bikers and combat patrol. Good grief. This looks like a real release weekend for once.
This was hugely unexpected for me. And I have to say I am a tiny bit sad. Had I known this would be available that quickly, I wouldn't have bought the box. This is a first for this kind of box set.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Avatar is a pretty good price at £60. Comparatively speaking. I mean, it’s still a single plastic model, just considerably less than I was expecting.
tis a dirty dirty trick to lure me into completing my Avatar collection. the original little fellow with the spear, the chunky in its time metal one, the FW one, along with the two epic ones
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Avatar is a pretty good price at £60. Comparatively speaking. I mean, it’s still a single plastic model, just considerably less than I was expecting.
Comparative to what? The ultra-expensive Greater Daemons? The uber-expensive Great Gargant Giant things?
As has been pointed out, this doesn't appear to be a giant model - more Trygon sized, and more expensive than that - so whilst we can be happy it's not priced alongside Greater Daemons, or even Be'lakor - let's not pretend that this is a good price. What surprises me more is that the price doesn't match thesetwo very expensive and not all that big models.
Perhaps it’s a form of Stockholm Syndrome, but when a kit I want to add to my army, and looks great, is £30-£40 less than I was expecting in RRP? It’s £30-£40 less than I was expecting in RRP.
Way more fun to make what I'd call a "War Monument", a reference to a memorable old game of 3rd Ed where we had a War Walker become a "War Stander" once it was immobilised, and then a "War Monument" once it lost its guns.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Way more fun to make what I'd call a "War Monument", a reference to a memorable old game of 3rd Ed where we had a War Walker become a "War Stander" once it was immobilised, and then a "War Monument" once it lost its guns.
The single best shot I’ve ever rolled for in 40K was a Bloodclaw’s bolt pistol against a War Walker in 2nd Ed. I hit. Rolled for location, pilot failed his 2+ inv (I think it was 2+, I should probably proper read those books again) and got all ded. That of course cause the War Walker to topple over….into another War Walker. Which snuffed it and toppled into another. And another. And another. And another.
You know that moment in Saving Private Ryan where Tom Hanks is on the bones of his arse, defiantly firing his pistol at a tank and the tank blows up and he looks at his pistol with a puzzled expression? That, but without the fighter bomber plane thing after.
War Dominoes trumps your anecdotes. Probably.
The moral of the story is don’t pack a dozen or more light walkers down a restricted flank because scatter dice have a sick sense of humour!
Basilisks fired 2 shots back in those days. Fired both shots at a single Assault Marine. One hits, one misses (which is what you preferred, as the second shot could scatter onto something nice).
The shot that hits kills the Assault Marine and the 4 other Assault Marines standing around him. Also clips a Land Raider's track. Max damage result on 'Tracks' chart. Land Raider flips over, lands on Tactical Marine with Missile Launcher, killing him.
The shot that missed scattered onto a Land Speeder. Land Speeder goes out of control and slams into a Dreadnought. Dreadnought explodes, sending the other Land Speeder out of control. That Land Speeder slams into the Techmarine, killing him.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Avatar is a pretty good price at £60. Comparatively speaking. I mean, it’s still a single plastic model, just considerably less than I was expecting.
tis a dirty dirty trick to lure me into completing my Avatar collection. the original little fellow with the spear, the chunky in its time metal one, the FW one, along with the two epic ones
There's four Epic Avatars so you'll still have a way to go after this one.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Avatar is a pretty good price at £60. Comparatively speaking. I mean, it’s still a single plastic model, just considerably less than I was expecting.
tis a dirty dirty trick to lure me into completing my Avatar collection. the original little fellow with the spear, the chunky in its time metal one, the FW one, along with the two epic ones
There's four Epic Avatars so you'll still have a way to go after this one.
And 2 variants of the FW one- sword and spear.
Nice thing about the Avatar coming with 3 heads is that you have 2 spare for Calgar or others to hold up as a severed trophy.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Avatar is a pretty good price at £60. Comparatively speaking. I mean, it’s still a single plastic model, just considerably less than I was expecting.
tis a dirty dirty trick to lure me into completing my Avatar collection. the original little fellow with the spear, the chunky in its time metal one, the FW one, along with the two epic ones
There's four Epic Avatars so you'll still have a way to go after this one.
Wait, wut ? I don't know you stop playing a game for 25 years or so....
So I'm glad the Avatar isn't Greater Daemon priced, but for some reason I seem to have lost my enthusiasm for getting one, nonetheless.
I was super hyped when the pictures and rules leaked. But now that I've had time to digest the Codex, I just don't see myself ever fielding it over a Farseer/Autarch combo.
I was ready to buy it when I bought my Codex, but GW staggered the releases inconveniently (for me)
Maybe once I get my 40k crossover models finished and need something to paint, I'll revisit the Avatar.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Way more fun to make what I'd call a "War Monument", a reference to a memorable old game of 3rd Ed where we had a War Walker become a "War Stander" once it was immobilised, and then a "War Monument" once it lost its guns.
Now all I can picture is the poor pilot with his face pressed up against the cockpit glass.
As has been pointed out, this doesn't appear to be a giant model - more Trygon sized, and more expensive than that - so whilst we can be happy it's not priced alongside Greater Daemons, or even Be'lakor - let's not pretend that this is a good price. What surprises me more is that the price doesn't match thesetwo very expensive and not all that big models.
Aside, I don't care if Slaanesh is the god of excess, those models are absurd.
vipoid wrote: Now all I can picture is the poor pilot with his face pressed up against the cockpit glass.
It was a 2nd Ed Warwalker, so he was just kinda sitting there in the open. Still, better than a 1st Ed Warwalker. Poor guy would've just been left hanging there!
I'm genuinely astonished that they replaced the 1995 one with the 1997 one. I remember when the 1995 one came out - I thought it was a fantastic update. The 2004 one was overly busy, but that's Epic 40k for you, but did not even know about the tiny detail-less 1997 one.
Galef wrote: So I'm glad the Avatar isn't Greater Daemon priced, but for some reason I seem to have lost my enthusiasm for getting one, nonetheless.
I was super hyped when the pictures and rules leaked. But now that I've had time to digest the Codex, I just don't see myself ever fielding it over a Farseer/Autarch combo.
I was ready to buy it when I bought my Codex, but GW staggered the releases inconveniently (for me)
Maybe once I get my 40k crossover models finished and need something to paint, I'll revisit the Avatar.
-
I'm in the same boat for story reasons: my Eldar Crusade is journeying far, far away from their craftworld, so even if I wanted one, the story doesn't really allow me to field it. At some point, the Crusade will likely return to its craftworld, but until then, they're kinda cut off- all of their supply limit increases will be rangers and corsairs until they find a planet with a warp gate they can use to to connect with the craftworld.
Galef wrote: So I'm glad the Avatar isn't Greater Daemon priced, but for some reason I seem to have lost my enthusiasm for getting one, nonetheless.
I was super hyped when the pictures and rules leaked. But now that I've had time to digest the Codex, I just don't see myself ever fielding it over a Farseer/Autarch combo.
I was ready to buy it when I bought my Codex, but GW staggered the releases inconveniently (for me)
Maybe once I get my 40k crossover models finished and need something to paint, I'll revisit the Avatar.
-
I think I've gone full circle on this one. New stats were initially very exciting. Then I got the codex, and none of my lists featured an avatar. Now, with a whole bunch of games under my belt, I'm revisiting my lists and writing new lists centered around the avatar. I'm grabbing the avatar right away because the new model is awesome (and that's coming from someone who already owns 2 FW avatars), and because I definitely see a future (yes, got my farseer cap on here) coming up soon where I'll field one. The more I play with the new book, the more I see a place for an avatar as a strong forward assualt piece.
Convert from pounds to $, and add 20% - should be pretty close. So about $75?
Ignore the real exchange rate. Take the price in GBP and multiply it by about 1.6 then round a tad to make it a more even number. $95 or $100 is likely
It can't be that much bigger than the latest Avatar model with that sprue can it? Does anyone have an actual picture of both models side by side or at least a picture of the new one next to something for size comparison?
I received my Nachmund set couple of days ago and have been building the Corsairs. I think they look much better in their 40k equipment than as KT specialists.
. But since we are such a good company we listened to you !"
