This is my Eldar Codex for use in Warhammer 40,000 games.
Here I've tried to follow a fairly similar design ethos to my previous Chaos Space Marine Codex and that used by Games Workshop, attempting to add some diversity and internal balance to the Eldar army; to bring them up to a 5th edition level of competitiveness and rules, whilst making as many viable options within the Codex as possible.
I've tried to remain true to the Eldar style of gameplay, by making them fast and powerful, but also relatively fragile and specialised, hopefully making them a nice, balanced army that has plenty of options and variety, whilst remaining balanced but competitive.
Please read through it, recommend it to others (or even exalt it) and provide any feedback. All constructive criticism and feedback is welcome.
Thanks, Dave.
A complete Eldar Codex/Fandex, providing up-to-date, characterful rules for the Eldar army, including new units and increased customisation. Please check it out, leave feedback and even use it in games!
Here's a few thoughts:
* Is a power weapon on a S3 model really worth +5 points over a 2+ poisoned weapon that is S9 against vehicles? (Although I personally don't think a Spear is wroth +3 points, either, since you lose a CC attack in melee, but...)
* Has the Doomweaver on the Night Spinner been upgraded, considering it's still prohibitively expensive and it's tactical implementation is dubious at best? (I do not personally think that +1BS is a big deal on a weapon that spends most of the time firing Barrage)
* Lasblaster statline is an unknown factor, and I see that Skyleap, while "free", is now slightly less powerful. Has the grenade pack changed?
* Hawks/Warlocks vs Scorpions: what's the difference between Fleet and Eldar Fleet?
Eldar fleet - That's a lot of movement if I'm reading this right. Just to make sure, let's find out! I have a unit of Harlequins, who move forward 6" on my movement phase. I then run them during the shooting phase for another 1 - 6 inches, followed by an Eldar Fleet move in the assault phase for an additional 1 - 6 inches and then assault for up to 6"? Holy crap. A 14" - 24" assault range is pretty crazy. While I do like the idea of them being super fast, I think I may be looking too much into the "Additional" movement granted in the assault phase. Or is it truly intended to be a bonus to your assault move? (If not, could use some clarification)
Eldrad's points went up (expected) but his toughness went down? And the loss of his re-deploy ability. That hurts him a little. We'll see if maybe his runes grant him that power instead?
Athairiel is a very interesting home brew character. I applaud you for your creativity!
Yriel will certainly see more play with that spear of twilight buff. The wonder twins shall be reborn. I wonder though, if he might be a bit too strong for his lower point cost?
Phoenix Reborn - I see the books had some influence on the Phoenix Lords, if nothing else
Battle Fate - seems a bit strange. I believe I get where you're going with this, and it is certainly useful to say the least, but could use some work on the wording maybe?
Baharroth - Eldar one time use Ghost Mantle. That could be fun.
Karandras - While I've yet to read if you have changed Striking Scorpion weapons to make up for his (in my opinion) wasted high initiative, I do like his The Hidden Death ability. Makes his unit a true threat.
Colds Bane - I now have a reason to take Fuegan.
It saddens me to see Maugan Ra get nerfed. Why the changes to The Maugetar?
New Phoenix Lords! About freaking time. Kirahnna seems dangerous. Will certainly add a punch to any Spider unit. Tamarelle'Eve will probably be an auto-include to any army that intends to run at least a single unit of Shining Spears (Due to Burning Fist)
Avatar of Khaine - Seeing the points jump and his stats stay the same was a bit disappointing. I expected them to go up, but not that much, especially since the only thing he seemed to gain was a Large Blast weapon (Which could easily drift back on him or a nearby unit in his fearless bubble) and God of War, and Feel No Pain. God of War is certainly a nice upgrade, but at 230 points, I feel this guy won't be worth his points anymore without a good delivery system.
Farseers seem to have gone downhill, unless I'm missing something. Stats appear to be unchanged, they don't include any runes, and they only get a single power. I'm surprised these guys didn't go more along the lines of Grey Knight Librarians, and as of yet I am disappointed with their entry. We'll see if things change as I read what the wargear does.
Autarchs certainly do have enough options now. I like the fact that despite the weapon options, it would appear they are still primarily a force munipulator
Striking Scorpions Hunter - That will be very useful for taking out some of the nastier hidden units out there. I could see these guys making their way back into a competitive mindset again.
Stat Lines - The first aspect warriors I come across left me a little saddened. While I am not expecting uber death assassins, I was expecting slightly more. Looking at their Dark kin, Wyches, who are a troop choice, cost significantly less than Striking Scoprions, but accomplish the same goal with a much higher success rate. Wyches will lose out on the 3+ armor, but have access to FnP and a 4+ invuln save in combat, and a higher Initiative. Would it be completely absurd that melee aspects get WS5 BS4 (Or maybe even 3) while shooting aspects get WS4 (again, maybe 3) BS5? As is, I am still not getting my points worth when comparing to other armies.
Banshees - Acrobatic will certainly make up for the lack of open-topped / assault vehicle. Nice thinking!
Sundering Sentinel - Certainly interesting. For the price, nothing seems too over the top. I will have to play test them to get a better feel. Though, slicing orbs almost seems suicidal with a 6" range large blast. Even if it can only drift 3" you still risk demolishing your very expensive units.
Wraithguard - Interesting approach. While making them multi-wound models, you also opened them up to instant death from Strength ten (which would have killed the earlier versions anyways). I am curious though, why did you increase the price? The extra wound should be counter balanced by the increased vulnerability to small arms fire, wraithguns are no different as far as I know (Haven't gotten to them yet), so I'm a bit confused. I do like the fact that you can now make melee wraithguard. That will be a fun thing to try.
Iyanna - This made me chuckle. Again, I see the books influence
Harlequins - They were already good if used right, I can't wait to take these guys out for a spin.
Solitaire - A difficult unit to bring into the codex. This guy is spitting out a ton of attacks, but without Independent Character he won't live long without a transport. Perhaps give him an ability like Hidden Death?
Dire Avengers - Tried and true, basically moving along unchanged.
Rangers - The Addition of Eldar Fleet and a reduced cost will certainly make these guys a very usable objective sitter. The Pathfinder - now that's a unit I'm going to have to put to use. Honestly he doesn't seem too OTT to me, but he does seem like an auto-include for every unit of Rangers.
Storm Guardians - Glad to see these guys got their own entry, and are slightly cheaper than defenders (handy for their usual roll).
Jetbikes - Already a strong troop choice that was made better. Will certainly be a strong competitive alternative to Mech Spam.
Wave Serpents - Now including the cannon's cost into the vehicle is nice, but Ouch! No reduction on the weapon upgrades? (after counting in the 10 point discount for the cannon trade)
Swooping Hawks - These guys probably got worse than before. While yes, their points were reduced, and they come with Skyleap built in, it's a one time use and these guys are still terrible at the job that you want them to do. They aren't good at assault, they don't have enough S3 fire to make a difference with their lasguns, they are only meh against vehicles. Perhaps changing them around, and going in a different direction than GW's currant model is the way to go. Bring them back up to their old point cost, but give their lasguns' a haywire effect against vehicles?
This will give you an alternative to Fire Dragons as your go-to tank destroyers, and give the Hawks a different roll than Spiders (Who are already anti-infantry machines)
Vypers- Thank you for including the Crystal Targeting Matrix. This will make these guys much more hit and run feeling. Though, again with the lack of weapon option point reductions (after including the Cannon's replacement cost).
Asp - Allow squadrons for these guys, and I'm sold.
Support Weapon Battery - Cloaking Field, good answer! I've always tried to find a use for these things, but cover is a pain for them. This will allow them to be a bit more flexible.
Dark Reapers - I still feel either you want these guys to have slow and purposeful, some kind of anti-tank weapon besides the Exarchs upgrade, OR change the swooping Hawks to an anti-tank roll. Otherwise, these guys are too expensive. ~ After reading their Reaper Launcher is being changed to S6, I retract my statement.
Nova Lance - That's one hell of a weapon.
Starcannon - A S7 tank weapon in an Eldar codex? Blasphemy.
D-weapons - all improved. AP1 is going to make them even more deadly against vehicles, and the D-cannon having a Large blast... yikes.
Psychic Powers - Fog of War is going to see a lot of use I think. My only regret, is it's low range, but with high Eldar movement, it shouldn't be a problem.
Runes -
Nice way to fill in some of the gaps (Enlightenment for example).
Runes of Scoring, will be a deadly addition to singing spears
Runes of Witnessing - Disappointed to see someone else thinking that board wide psychic defense is going to be gone.
Biting Blade - That should help Karandras past his I7 wasted on a powerfist!
Clarion Blades / Laser Flares - okay, my issues with Witchblades not ignoring armour, dealt with.
Vibro-spear - Eldar blood Talons?
Wraithsabres - Good answer to bogged down Wraithlords
Web Beacon / Webway Translator - Should be fun.
Power Diversion Matrix - Plenty of ways to now get around the higher AP of Eldar.
Armoured Consort - 9 fire prisms!? I will find the points, because that's just insane at first glance.
Shadows and Dust - Okay, Eldrad's Diviniation loss was painful, but this ability might well more than make up for it. This is brutal. I can literally move your units out of cover and make you open yourself to my alpha strike.
What if you changed Bonesinger to be more like a bubble version of Tyranid regeneration? Instead of rollling a single die for each wounded model, why not a D6 for each wound missing from all wraith models within 6"? Obviously, doing this you'd probably lose out on the vehicle repair side of it, but it's a thought.
Anyways, it's late. Hope my early ramblings as I first glance through the dex aren't too all over the place and help out in some way! Glad to see the dex out and about.
I just noticed that on page for runes (42) it contains:
Rune of Scoring: This model’s ranged weapons count as AP1. Note: this doesn’t affect psychic powers
Did you mean it to be Runes of SCOURING? I just thought I would make it aware as it stuck out to me
Automatically Appended Next Post: It looks AWESOME by the way
Eldrad: Amanax, he's been given a score more runes. Whether this weighs up for the changes, I do not know.
Layout: I like the layout in general. The names are good, eldarish, and fitting and the layout is in general clear, although lacking fluff (for obvious reasons).
The psychic-specific equipment could be bunched up a bit more, combining runes with stones and witch-weapons, maybe?
Warlocks in Guardian Squads: They have become more expensive since instead of adding a Warlock for +25, you replace a Guardian.
Rune of Scoring: the name can be a bit confusing, hinting at squads claiming objectives rather than making Singing Spears / Shuriken Pistols AP1
Just a quick couple of comments in response to some feedback by your kind selves...
I don't intend to write much immediately as I figured I'd leave you all to read through it and analyse it yourselves - but hopefully you have faith in my decision making - I wouldn't be surprised if this followed the same kind of reaction many new (official) Codices too, so I would recommend that if something strikes you as odd or imbalanced, it may be worth a second glance (hopefully!), but as ever all feedback is welcome!
Thanks for the feedback and kind words guys, seriously it's nice to get a good initial response. Thanks.
A couple of points:
- Whilst he's lost T4, Eldrad has gained all the Runes but more importantly, I'd say divination is better than it's previous version.
- Runes of Scoring was an intentional name, as score can also refer to slicing/cutting something, and I won't deny, I thought it was a nice little jab at (not) capturing objectives. - Warlocks also get a psychic power included in their pts cost as well as a stat boost.
- In regards to the avatar, think of the standard Space Marine ranged weapons that could deny his Feel No Pain, and hopefully his cost and abilities may be more justified.
Just Dave wrote:Just a quick couple of comments in response to some feedback by your kind selves...
I don't intend to write much immediately as I figured I'd leave you all to read through it and analyse it yourselves - but hopefully you have faith in my decision making - I wouldn't be surprised if this followed the same kind of reaction many new (official) Codices too, so I would recommend that if something strikes you as odd or imbalanced, it may be worth a second glance (hopefully!), but as ever all feedback is welcome!
Thanks for the feedback and kind words guys, seriously it's nice to get a good initial response. Thanks.
A couple of points:
- Whilst he's lost T4, Eldrad has gained all the Runes but more importantly, I'd say divination is better than it's previous version.
- Runes of Scoring was an intentional name, as score can also refer to slicing/cutting something, and I won't deny, I thought it was a nice little jab at (not) capturing objectives. - Warlocks also get a psychic power included in their pts cost as well as a stat boost.
- In regards to the avatar, think of the standard Space Marine ranged weapons that could deny his Feel No Pain, and hopefully his cost and abilities may be more justified.
Again, thanks guys!
The runes for Eldrad certainly make up for the loss of the toughness and point gain. Though, saying Divination is better now seems like a stretch. Redeploying a key unit is just something that can't be measured. Though, the Autarch ability Shadow and Dust will effectively replace it, so I don't mind, but thought I should clarify.
As for the Avatar, no, I don't believe it will make up for it. Even if you only look at the Imperial army, there are still a handful of weapons that can easily bring him down. Lascannons, Assault Cannons (while rending), and Demolisher Cannons all come to mind. Combine that with the fact that he still has to march his way up the field and the only way to insure he makes it there is with a babysitting Farseer (Though, FnP does help with that) means you'll be investing at LEAST 300 points minimum needed to run a foot Eldar list. After upgrades, probably closer to 400 points just to have the privilege of running the Avatar, who is arguably comparable to a TMC. While Tyranids get away with it thanks to have more than one of these big nasty guys, Eldar, do not. He's going to soak a lot of fire (Which is what he's there for, well that and his fearless bubble). However, at 230 base points, he doesn't fulfill that roll. I would think 200 points would be enough, keeping in mind that like all Eldar, he's terrible without support, and his cost needs to reflect that. Alternatively, you could always give him at least the option to take a Webway Translator, which would give you a delivery system.
I missed the part about the free psychic power for Warlocks. :p
Fire Dragons: I always considered flamers to be the more powerful of the choice for Storm Guardians, and a unit of 16ppm flamers is... needs playtesting. Luckily C-Eldar do not have open-topped transports!
Slicing Orbs of Zandros!
Crack Shot: Personally not a fan of Exarch-only Exarch powers. Slight risk in the squad becoming cheerleaders.
Harlequins: The update is sorely needed and the armour save improvement as well.
Face of Death vs Face of Fear: there is a discrepancy in it's use in the Harlequin profile.
Shrieker Cannon: Is this a poisoned weapon in melee as well?
Dire Avengers: I like what you've done here a lot (suits their fluff big time), but I found them rather good at 12 points before and now with a less expensive Bladestorm as well as better melee, well... points is a case of playtesting but it feels they're a bit cheap.
Bladestorm: is it intentional that an Autarch with a Flamer or Fusion Gun is supposed to be able to shoot twice as well?
Mmmm... proliferation of plasma grenades... You also patched Banshee Masks! (Although the devil ruleslawyer in me says they still strike at I1 if they charge out of cover )
P.S. Spirit Stones - if a result of Crew Stunned can be ignored completely with luck, would it not stand that a Crew Shaken can as well?
I LOVE most of this codex all though I cannot lie about missing the 155 point Avatar
I found some errors or issues that need to be addressed and I will work backwards from the Autarch rules section to the beginning of the "dex"
Autarch powers were great but the "shadows and dust" , I feel, needs to be stated if the moving player is allowed to reposition the facing of the vehicle as this could easily break this rule imho
Vehicle armory: Repulsor Fields are useless as no enemy models may remain in "base contact" with the vehicle after the assault phase assuming the vehicle survives. I would change it to a flat distance or a d3 inches distance for the effect.
Eldar Runes: A nitpick perhaps, but did you intend to switch the effects of Runes of Warding with Runes of witnessing?
Fanboyish Suggestion for Fuegan: Fire axe is now only plus 1 str, and now confers the ability for fuegan to project his psychic might through it with the same profile as the dragons breath flamer. I say this because I hate how firedragons still seem like nothing but melta carriers when they could be so much more (especially with your awesome addition of the crystalline dragons unit. I think Fuegan should be able to hang with either unit and either contribute via synchronicity or compliment.
This is really all I could find that was something I felt compelled to comment on. GREAT work Just dave... I hate you for making such great codexes that will never be tourny legal
I'm a bit sadfaced about the change to Night Spinner. It wasn't very good before, and now that it's no longer dangerous terrain nearly half of it's killing power has been removed. I'd personally rank it at around 85 points as presented - a fast and reasonably durable, but impotent, artillery piece. Night Spinner's closest equivalent I can find would be a Fast Skimmer Griffon.
thakabalpuphorsefishguy wrote:Vehicle armory: Repulsor Fields are useless as no enemy models may remain in "base contact" with the vehicle after the assault phase assuming the vehicle survives. I would change it to a flat distance or a d3 inches distance for the effect.
Actually, they do remain in base contact, but they aren't locked in close combat.
Vectored Engines, however, is fairly useless since Repulsor Field is significantly cheaper, significantly reduces the risk of suffering immobilized result, and requires a conscious choice to expose yourself to the risk of the result. (You can't suffer immobilized->destroyed result in opponent's turn)
Mahtamori wrote:I'm a bit sadfaced about the change to Night Spinner. It wasn't very good before, and now that it's no longer dangerous terrain nearly half of it's killing power has been removed. I'd personally rank it at around 85 points as presented - a fast and reasonably durable, but impotent, artillery piece. Night Spinner's closest equivalent I can find would be a Fast Skimmer Griffon.
thakabalpuphorsefishguy wrote:Vehicle armory: Repulsor Fields are useless as no enemy models may remain in "base contact" with the vehicle after the assault phase assuming the vehicle survives. I would change it to a flat distance or a d3 inches distance for the effect.
Actually, they do remain in base contact, but they aren't locked in close combat.
No they dont, per the BRB once an assault is resolved against a vehicle, you may not leave any model of yours within 1 inch of the enemy vehicle if you failed to destroy it for the simple reason that you may not position one of your models within 1 inch of an enemy model you aren't in an assault with. And since you cannot be "locked in assault" with a model without a weapons skill you cannot be "in base to base" with an enemy vehicle for longer than your assault phase if you fail to destroy it.
thakabalpuphorsefishguy wrote:No they dont, per the BRB once an assault is resolved against a vehicle, you may not leave any model of yours within 1 inch of the enemy vehicle if you failed to destroy it for the simple reason that you may not position one of your models within 1 inch of an enemy model you aren't in an assault with. And since you cannot be "locked in assault" with a model without a weapons skill you cannot be "in base to base" with an enemy vehicle for longer than your assault phase if you fail to destroy it.
We're straying off topic, but I suggest you rehears the rules regarding Assaulting Vehicles since it makes a specific exception to the 1" rule, and that additionally if a vehicle pivots, but does not move, models in base contact with it are moved out of the way and then moved back in to base contact once the pivot is done.
Did you name the runes of warding and witnessing as each other on purpose? Because now, runes of witnessing does what runes of warding did, and vice versa.
Lord Magnus wrote:I actually think I might like this Eldar Dex better the your CSM one, are you planning to do any more of them?
I was wondering when someone would ask this! This may be my last, or I may do a Dark Angels one next. Who knows?!
woodbok wrote:Did you name the runes of warding and witnessing as each other on purpose? Because now, runes of witnessing does what runes of warding did, and vice versa.
Whoops! No, I didn't; I'll change that, thanks.
Mahtamori wrote:I'm a bit sadfaced about the change to Night Spinner. It wasn't very good before, and now that it's no longer dangerous terrain nearly half of it's killing power has been removed. I'd personally rank it at around 85 points as presented - a fast and reasonably durable, but impotent, artillery piece. Night Spinner's closest equivalent I can find would be a Fast Skimmer Griffon.
85pts would be far too cheap for that IMHO, but the point is moot anyway as that is a mistake on my part; it will be edited to dangerous again. Cheers!
(You can't suffer immobilized->destroyed result in opponent's turn)
Crap.
Forgot this rule; vectored engines, meet drawing board.
thakabalpuphorsefishguy wrote:I LOVE most of this codex all though I cannot lie about missing the 155 point Avatar
I found some errors or issues that need to be addressed and I will work backwards from the Autarch rules section to the beginning of the "dex"
Autarch powers were great but the "shadows and dust" , I feel, needs to be stated if the moving player is allowed to reposition the facing of the vehicle as this could easily break this rule imho
Vehicle armory: Repulsor Fields are useless as no enemy models may remain in "base contact" with the vehicle after the assault phase assuming the vehicle survives. I would change it to a flat distance or a d3 inches distance for the effect.
Eldar Runes: A nitpick perhaps, but did you intend to switch the effects of Runes of Warding with Runes of witnessing?
Fanboyish Suggestion for Fuegan: Fire axe is now only plus 1 str, and now confers the ability for fuegan to project his psychic might through it with the same profile as the dragons breath flamer. I say this because I hate how firedragons still seem like nothing but melta carriers when they could be so much more (especially with your awesome addition of the crystalline dragons unit. I think Fuegan should be able to hang with either unit and either contribute via synchronicity or compliment.
This is really all I could find that was something I felt compelled to comment on. GREAT work Just dave... I hate you for making such great codexes that will never be tourny legal
Thanks man, appreciated. Cheers!
For me, the Avatar was underwhelming in game power; it's a fragment of a god of war, equal to primarchs etc. and it didn't reflect that IMHO; now it should be able to stand up to some of the toughest characters/creatures in the game. I don't blame you for missing the cheaper version, but I do think this version is more powerful, reflective of the background and can actually work without Fortune IMHO.
That's a good point regarding Shadows and Dust (cookie for anyone that gets the reference (without google!)), I shall clarify that in the 'dex. Cheers!
I did consider giving Feugan a template melta () but decided against it in the end. I will consider giving him an alternative fire mode or something, but I still think he works with Crystal Dragons (cookie for anyone that gets the reference (without google!)) through his rules and versatility. I will give him another look though, rest assured.
Mahtamori wrote:New batch!
I missed the part about the free psychic power for Warlocks. :p
It's alright; I found people did this a lot with the CSM Codex too!
Fire Dragons: I always considered flamers to be the more powerful of the choice for Storm Guardians, and a unit of 16ppm flamers is... needs playtesting. Luckily C-Eldar do not have open-topped transports!
I think that's probably partially due to Storm Guardians being BS3 and the synergy with Destructor. I agree, it was/is the superior choice for Stormies, but I don't think it should be a problem considering that meltaguns are typically more expensive than flamers as a result of typically being a better weapon, but a unit can still wield solely these without problem. A unit of flamers seems to be less popular than meltas (Sternguard/Chosen/Vets/Purgation), with the except of Burnas who can be taken in large numbers, open-topped deffrolla-mobiles and with power weapons.
I can understand your hesitance, but I can't imagine it being a problem. They are also less point-and-click than Fire Dragons too IMHO.
Slicing Orbs of Zandros!
Cookie for getting the reference!
Crack Shot: Personally not a fan of Exarch-only Exarch powers. Slight risk in the squad becoming cheerleaders.
I think that's a reasonable concern, but I don't think it's really the case with any of the Eldar units to be honest. By all means point out such a circumstance, but personally I don't see it happening with any of the units IMHO.
Harlequins: The update is sorely needed and the armour save improvement as well.
Face of Death vs Face of Fear: there is a discrepancy in it's use in the Harlequin profile.
Shrieker Cannon: Is this a poisoned weapon in melee as well?
Cheers! The discrepancy was due to me changing the name during the creation; I'll edit that out; cheers man. But no, the Shrieker Cannon will be ranged poison only, which I'll clarify in the entry.
Dire Avengers: I like what you've done here a lot (suits their fluff big time), but I found them rather good at 12 points before and now with a less expensive Bladestorm as well as better melee, well... points is a case of playtesting but it feels they're a bit cheap.
Thanks man. Bladestorm's the same cost it was before IIRC, but I can't say I'm keen on the idea of raising their price. At the moment DA's are seen as the best of a bad bunch (troops choices) but too expensive. Whilst, yes, that is reduced with their boosts, if you compare them to the likes of Kabalite Warriors and Sisters of Battle, I'd say 11pts is fair IMHO.
Bladestorm: is it intentional that an Autarch with a Flamer or Fusion Gun is supposed to be able to shoot twice as well?
No. Good catch there man!
Mmmm... proliferation of plasma grenades... You also patched Banshee Masks! (Although the devil ruleslawyer in me says they still strike at I1 if they charge out of cover )
The devil ruleslawyer in you can shove it! I'll re-clarify that part though...
P.S. Spirit Stones - if a result of Crew Stunned can be ignored completely with luck, would it not stand that a Crew Shaken can as well?
I'm not sure I understand tbh man?
Amanax wrote:First impressions as I'm reading the codex -
Eldar fleet - That's a lot of movement if I'm reading this right. Just to make sure, let's find out! I have a unit of Harlequins, who move forward 6" on my movement phase. I then run them during the shooting phase for another 1 - 6 inches, followed by an Eldar Fleet move in the assault phase for an additional 1 - 6 inches and then assault for up to 6"? Holy crap. A 14" - 24" assault range is pretty crazy. While I do like the idea of them being super fast, I think I may be looking too much into the "Additional" movement granted in the assault phase. Or is it truly intended to be a bonus to your assault move? (If not, could use some clarification)
I expected you to be the 1st person to respond in detail!
Yeah, it's not ON TOP of the assault move; it would be instead of. I'll be sure to clarify this in the entry.
Eldrad's points went up (expected) but his toughness went down? And the loss of his re-deploy ability. That hurts him a little. We'll see if maybe his runes grant him that power instead?
Again, I would argue having a increased chance of getting 1st turn to be more beneficial that the de-deploy ability, whilst he now has more psychic powers, better psychic powers and the runes. I didn't really understand the T4 to be honest, other than him possibly being more crystallised due to his age...
Athairiel is a very interesting home brew character. I applaud you for your creativity!
Ha! Thank you man; I won't say I didn't struggle with him at times, but cheers!
Yriel will certainly see more play with that spear of twilight buff. The wonder twins shall be reborn. I wonder though, if he might be a bit too strong for his lower point cost?
I have pondered this too; but ultimately decided against it on account of T3 and Doomed. He's a similar price to Kharn (my Kharn) who's pretty balanced in himself IMHO.
Phoenix Reborn - I see the books had some influence on the Phoenix Lords, if nothing else
That's true!
Battle Fate - seems a bit strange. I believe I get where you're going with this, and it is certainly useful to say the least, but could use some work on the wording maybe?
I'll give it another look, just to make sure the wording's clear. Yeah...
Baharroth - Eldar one time use Ghost Mantle. That could be fun.
Can't say I know what a Ghost Mantle is, but hey...
Also, cookie for anyone that gets the reference (without google!) of Furious Angels.
Karandras - While I've yet to read if you have changed Striking Scorpion weapons to make up for his (in my opinion) wasted high initiative, I do like his The Hidden Death ability. Makes his unit a true threat.
Colds Bane - I now have a reason to take Fuegan.
Cheers man, glad you like 'em!
It saddens me to see Maugan Ra get nerfed. Why the changes to The Maugetar?
I think calling it a nerf is a bit subjective to be honest; he's able to fire 7 Str 4, rending, re-rolling to wound and ignoring-cover shots a turn, whilst this is in-line with the new Shuriken Cannon profile.
New Phoenix Lords! About freaking time. Kirahnna seems dangerous. Will certainly add a punch to any Spider unit. Tamarelle'Eve will probably be an auto-include to any army that intends to run at least a single unit of Shining Spears (Due to Burning Fist)
Again, I'm glad you like 'em buddy! I must admit to liking Kirahnna's profile a lot. I don't think Tamarelle'Eve will be an auto-include on account of her price tag to be honest, but I agree, it is a powerful ability, maybe too so, I'm not sure, I'll look over it again...
Avatar of Khaine - Seeing the points jump and his stats stay the same was a bit disappointing. I expected them to go up, but not that much, especially since the only thing he seemed to gain was a Large Blast weapon (Which could easily drift back on him or a nearby unit in his fearless bubble) and God of War, and Feel No Pain. God of War is certainly a nice upgrade, but at 230 points, I feel this guy won't be worth his points anymore without a good delivery system.
Whilst his stats have stayed the same (which is reasonable IMHO), he has gained a fair bit. Extra attack or ranged attacks, re-rolling to-wound and to-hit, eternal warrior, feel no pain and improved melta/flamer immunity. I think the likelihood of a BS5 blast scattering onto him is unlikely to be honest, whilst his stats would shrug it off.
He may be overcosted at 230pts (though I feel 200pts as you suggested is too few), but he's a tough cookie. With FNP, any missiles that hit him only have a 20% to wound, without Fortune. This means, that the only weapons effective (IMHO) against him in a standard Space Marine army are Lascannons and Plasma Guns (I believe a Demolisher Cannon and Assault Cannon are too situational) which are pretty fair. In a standard net-list Space Wolf army, this would typically only be 3 Razorbacks, or in an IG army probably only Vendettas, which can be neutralised by the rest of the Eldar army.
This suggests to me he should be able to run up the board with relative impunity, let alone if he had a Wraith/vehicle/cover shield or fortune.
I reckon he's going to be in a similar boat to the swarmlord; expensive but powerful and quite slow. However, even at 230pts I think the Avatar is powerful enough to just be able to be included without dedicated support; relied upon to either threaten the enemy enough to take their fire (saving your vehicles), buff your forces and then mash many things in assault.
He may be 15pts-ish over-costed, but I'm otherwise pretty happy with him IMHO.
Farseers seem to have gone downhill, unless I'm missing something. Stats appear to be unchanged, they don't include any runes, and they only get a single power. I'm surprised these guys didn't go more along the lines of Grey Knight Librarians, and as of yet I am disappointed with their entry. We'll see if things change as I read what the wargear does.
I'm not sure why you say this to be honest; their powers are now typically better and their cost represents the incorporation of these powers, whilst they now have more choice in all areas.
What do you mean by the lines of GK librarian too btw?
Autarchs certainly do have enough options now. I like the fact that despite the weapon options, it would appear they are still primarily a force munipulator
Thanks man! Seriously, that's a big compliment for the design of this unit. Cheers!
Striking Scorpions Hunter - That will be very useful for taking out some of the nastier hidden units out there. I could see these guys making their way back into a competitive mindset again.
Thanks man! Glad this rule went down well.
Stat Lines - The first aspect warriors I come across left me a little saddened. While I am not expecting uber death assassins, I was expecting slightly more. Looking at their Dark kin, Wyches, who are a troop choice, cost significantly less than Striking Scoprions, but accomplish the same goal with a much higher success rate. Wyches will lose out on the 3+ armor, but have access to FnP and a 4+ invuln save in combat, and a higher Initiative. Would it be completely absurd that melee aspects get WS5 BS4 (Or maybe even 3) while shooting aspects get WS4 (again, maybe 3) BS5? As is, I am still not getting my points worth when comparing to other armies.
I think it's fair that they are of similar skill to Wyches and (more importantly) Space Marines IMHO. Whilst what you say of Wyches is true, also bear in mind that they only have a 4++ and FNP/FC in certain situations. Whereas Scorpions can infiltrate, move through cover, are Str4, have more attacks and a 3+. Banshees meanwhile have In10, a 4+, Eldar Fleet and Power Weapons.
Honestly, I have no intentions to lower the BS of a close-combat aspect, nor make any line-trooper BS5 (hitting on a 2+!); I think their stats are fine IMHO.
Banshees - Acrobatic will certainly make up for the lack of open-topped / assault vehicle. Nice thinking!
Sundering Sentinel - Certainly interesting. For the price, nothing seems too over the top. I will have to play test them to get a better feel. Though, slicing orbs almost seems suicidal with a 6" range large blast. Even if it can only drift 3" you still risk demolishing your very expensive units.
Cheers man!
I think the SS's are pretty balanced too to be honest, whilst a 3" scatter is less than a 30% chance and relies on you being so close to the enemy...
Wraithguard - Interesting approach. While making them multi-wound models, you also opened them up to instant death from Strength ten (which would have killed the earlier versions anyways). I am curious though, why did you increase the price? The extra wound should be counter balanced by the increased vulnerability to small arms fire, wraithguns are no different as far as I know (Haven't gotten to them yet), so I'm a bit confused. I do like the fact that you can now make melee wraithguard. That will be a fun thing to try.
I increased the price as a result of them being tougher (2 wounds) and having better weapons (AP1/18"). I had been going back and forth with the price to be honest, but 38pts seemed fair considering their stats and weapons and in comparison to termies.
Iyanna - This made me chuckle. Again, I see the books influence
Where's the books influence here? lol!
Harlequins - They were already good if used right, I can't wait to take these guys out for a spin.
Solitaire - A difficult unit to bring into the codex. This guy is spitting out a ton of attacks, but without Independent Character he won't live long without a transport. Perhaps give him an ability like Hidden Death?
Cheers man! Yeah, the solitaire was very difficult to implement. I originally had him immune to ID-by-double-strength, but removed it in the end. In close combat he's likely to rip the enemy to shreds, but he is certainly fragile; which I hope Veil of Tears and a 4++/3++ should protect against. I also compared him to the new, but typically uncompetitive, assassin clades for the Grey Knights.
Rangers - The Addition of Eldar Fleet and a reduced cost will certainly make these guys a very usable objective sitter. The Pathfinder - now that's a unit I'm going to have to put to use. Honestly he doesn't seem too OTT to me, but he does seem like an auto-include for every unit of Rangers.
I'm glad you don't think he's OTT. I know what you mean though, but that is a 20pts auto-include, which deters somewhat IMHO.
Storm Guardians - Glad to see these guys got their own entry, and are slightly cheaper than defenders (handy for their usual roll).
Well, I made them cheaper on account of their CC Str3 being worse than a Shuriken Catapult Str4 mainly.
Wave Serpents - Now including the cannon's cost into the vehicle is nice, but Ouch! No reduction on the weapon upgrades? (after counting in the 10 point discount for the cannon trade)
Well the Shuriken Cannon will now be more typically used as underslung, rather than the main weapon, whilst Scatter Lasers have always been the go-to choice but are now cheaper-overall. I'm not sure I see the problem to be honest.
I respond to the rest of your points another time buddy.
Thanks for the feedback everyone! As ever, all C&C is welcome and please spread the word, eh?
Thanks, Dave.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Amanax wrote:Swooping Hawks - These guys probably got worse than before. While yes, their points were reduced, and they come with Skyleap built in, it's a one time use and these guys are still terrible at the job that you want them to do. They aren't good at assault, they don't have enough S3 fire to make a difference with their lasguns, they are only meh against vehicles. Perhaps changing them around, and going in a different direction than GW's currant model is the way to go. Bring them back up to their old point cost, but give their lasguns' a haywire effect against vehicles?
This will give you an alternative to Fire Dragons as your go-to tank destroyers, and give the Hawks a different roll than Spiders (Who are already anti-infantry machines)
I don't see how they are worse than before. Whilst one-use, Skyleap is now reliable. They are cheaper and their guns are better. 8 Swooping Hawks would kill on average over 8 Guardsmen in a round of shooting, and that's before the Grenade Pack. That's not a bad damage output.
I don't think the Fire Dragons would be as popular with the improved access to Bright and Nova Lances within the rest of the Codex.
I may consider an underslung Haywire Grenade launcher or glancing on 6's however.
Asp - Allow squadrons for these guys, and I'm sold.
They're overcosted at the moment, but honestly, I have no intentions to make them squadrons; they impedes upon Vypers and Support Weapon Batteries too much IMHO.
Support Weapon Battery - Cloaking Field, good answer! I've always tried to find a use for these things, but cover is a pain for them. This will allow them to be a bit more flexible.
Cheers! Also; conceal.
Dark Reapers - I still feel either you want these guys to have slow and purposeful, some kind of anti-tank weapon besides the Exarchs upgrade, OR change the swooping Hawks to an anti-tank roll. Otherwise, these guys are too expensive. ~ After reading their Reaper Launcher is being changed to S6, I retract my statement.
I was a bit unsure why you were saying that at first...
I have noticed a lot of people suggest slow and purposeful for these guys in proposed rules and whilst it does make some sense from a gameplay perspective, it makes none in terms of fluff; I've never had any intention to include it.
Starcannon - A S7 tank weapon in an Eldar codex? Blasphemy.
Some of the best tech in the galaxy man.
D-weapons - all improved. AP1 is going to make them even more deadly against vehicles, and the D-cannon having a Large blast... yikes.
Vibro-spear - Eldar blood Talons?
I did not think of those when I made it, but sure!
Wraithsabres - Good answer to bogged down Wraithlords
Exactly. BUT that does mean no shimmershield or heavy weapons...
Web Beacon / Webway Translator - Should be fun.
Also, Master Strategist & Runes of Dawning.
Armoured Consort - 9 fire prisms!? I will find the points, because that's just insane at first glance.
Fair point; that may be too much. Though it may also be like the whole Leman Russ thing in that it's not competitive?
Shadows and Dust - Okay, Eldrad's Diviniation loss was painful, but this ability might well more than make up for it. This is brutal. I can literally move your units out of cover and make you open yourself to my alpha strike.
Yep. But don't rely on it; you can't guarantee what you move or how far...
What if you changed Bonesinger to be more like a bubble version of Tyranid regeneration? Instead of rollling a single die for each wounded model, why not a D6 for each wound missing from all wraith models within 6"? Obviously, doing this you'd probably lose out on the vehicle repair side of it, but it's a thought.
I'm not sure I see the difference?
Automatically Appended Next Post: The opening post has been updated to include the latest version of the PDF; mainly to fix a few typo's (e.g. RoW, Face of Death etc.), to fix the things outlined above but also to update a few rules:
- Avatar reduced to 220pts.
- Asp reduced in points cost.
- Repulsion Field no longer effects terrain, but reduces to-hit chance in close combat, whilst it and vectored engines are now 10pts.
- Some other things.
P.S. Spirit Stones - if a result of Crew Stunned can be ignored completely with luck, would it not stand that a Crew Shaken can as well?
I'm not sure I understand tbh man?
Well, the quick and dirty of it is: it's the worse result which can be fully ignored, not the less threatening result, while conceptually the two results are similar to each other.
Keeping on the theme of vehicle upgrades...
Here's a thought on Repulsor Field: on a Tank Shock it does a S3 hit for each model which is in that vehicle's path (this line is as wide as the tank in question), in addition to the normal effects of a Tank Shock.
Question on Power Diversion Matrix: Stationary as in pivot-only, or Stationary as in "Fast vehicles that move at combat speed may fire all of their weapons, just like other types of vehicles that have remained stationary[...]"
How does it work on models with Crystal Targeting Matrix?
Star Engines: the old debate, can you tank shock with this move? Can you ram? If you ram, how far does the vehicle count as having moved?
[fluff]Targeting Beacon: Here's something I don't understand. The Empire have a large amount of master-work weapons. When comparing how these are described to be manufactured and then comparing to how Eldar makes their weapons, it doesn't quite make sense that there are no masterwork weapons among the Eldar (I mean, going by fluff nearly every damned item would be masterwork and the Aspect Warrior stuff would be epic quality gear).[/fluff]
End of vehicle thoughts there
Shadows and Dust: I don't think the rules allow you to actually interface with models embarked on transports. I'd also present it such that vehicles can be affected, since vehicles would be a top priority for the Rangers to disrupt.
Swift Strike: Might want to clarify that "these Vypers are scoring, even though they are vehicles" since the BRB states that "[...]of Troops does not count as scoring: * If it is a vehicle. * If it has the Swarm special [...]" (page 90)
Eldar Fleet: Back to top of document, I think you need to state in what way it is slowed by difficult terrain since normal difficult terrain movement would be 2D6 selecting the highest (i.e. exactly the same).
What does Fog of War do to vehicles besides reducing their targeting distance?
Support Weapons: Number of Guardians per support weapon is not specified.
Light anti-tank and light anti-mech weapons for Jetbike under-slungs a'la Dark Eldar?
(I'm missing long-ranged assault weapons for the Autarchs)
.... that said, rough outline of an Eldar foot army (I'm allergic to special characters):
HEAVY War Walker Squadron. 135 pts
War Walker [Shuriken Cannon, Shuriken Cannon] Power Diversion Matrix
War Walker [Shuriken Cannon, Shuriken Cannon] Power Diversion Matrix
War Walker [Shuriken Cannon, Shuriken Cannon] Power Diversion Matrix
HEAVY Support Weapon [Shadow Weaver] 30 points
HEAVY Support Weapon [Shadow Weaver] 30 points
Sum total: 1981 points.
Models in army: 66 (counting Support Weapons as 2 Guardians + 1 Artillery piece)
I'm not even certain if it is a sane idea, but the Farseer squads go off using Eldar Fleet to do disruption, together with the Support Weapons providing ample difficult+dangerous terrain. The Farseer squads are the main source of anti-tank, so they still need to stick reasonably close to the rest of the army with the Gaurdian Squads providing S8 hits. The War Walkers may opt to use Power Diversion Matrix to clean out plagues of Space Marines.
I mostly made the list in order to spam Farseer squads.
-- It would be interesting making a 2x Autarch list which is Warp Spider-based (both Autarchs with Swordwind, deployed with Warp Spider squads as troops). Troop selection would be mostly Jetbikes.
To avoid the quote chain of death, I'll start a new -
I'm glad I didn't fail to disappoint you on my quick detailed reply! Even if it was done at 3 in the morning and I was half asleep while writing it!
Thank you for clearing up Eldar fleet. I knew I had to be misreading it, as it just seemed far too strong. Though, I'm surprised you went this route, as it does detract from Warp Spiders a bit.
Eldrad - Agreed on all points, though his T4 didn't really make sense to me either, it seemed to be pretty well established (I believe it was even in the third edition codex, but I could be mistaken on that). So I was surprised you dropped it. Means I have to be even more weary where he ends up in combat, that's all.
Baharroth - Ghost Mantle is from the new Necron Codex. It is a special Veil of Darkness that only one SC has, that allows him to still DS his squad even if they are locked in combat, similar to how you have Baharroth now.
Maugan Ra - While 7 S4 shots are cool, he practically loses his ranged anti-tank punch, and the extra shots don'tt seem to make up for the two points in strength. Also, it now means his weapon is inferior to that of his aspect. Something just seems wrong about that.
Avatar - Fair enough. I hadn't considered the 2+ on top of FnP. Though, still without a delivery system will hurt him as he'll still be a bullet magnet. Still unwilling to consider giving him access to coming out of the Webway?
Aspect Stats - How about making the melee aspects WS5 (hitting Marines on 3's, and keeping in line with the fluff), and making the Ranged aspect weapons TL to represent their pin point accuracy? (Or maybe just a weaker version, like they re-roll 1's, similar to Tyranid Scything Talons mentality)
Solitaire - I think I see why I was so disappointed with this guys survivability. The portion that states
If the army includes a squad of Harlequins, then a single Harlequin Solitaire (see overleaf) may be included for 140pts, occupying no space on the Force Organisation Chart, but otherwise counting as an Elites unit.
makes it sound like he is his own choice, and not actually a member of the Harlequin's squad. Your answer, on the other hand, seems to imply otherwise. Might want to reword that.
Storm Guardians - Str3 means nothing when their job is to jump out of a Wave Serpent and flame you to death
Wave Serpent - If the Cannon is meant to be underslung, than you might want to reword how you obtain the other weapons (It currently states you have to replace the cannon if you wish to take a new weapon). Currently cannons are 10 points, and each of the weapons for the vehicles you have here, are only ten points reduced from the current codex. So, in essence no change in points for the weapon upgrades.
Swooping Hawks - Whilst killing 8 Guardsmen with 8 hawks is cool and all... Lets think about that for a moment. A standard Guardsmen comes in at a third of the cost of these Hawks, and in squads ranging from 10, to usually 30 is the most you'll see (Though we know they can get bigger). Killing 8 of them, with 8 of your guys, is not something to brag about. The return fire is going to devastate your unit. Speaking that Hawks as they are now are really just glorified guardsmen with wings, this isn't a good thing. Now, lets put them in a role they will see a lot, vs marines. A standard squad of 10 hawks lands, drops a pack, hits 4 of the marines, wounds two, kills 0 - 1. They will then unleash a torrent of fire, dealing 17 hits, 5 wounds, 1 - 2 dead marines. So, in total, you have killed 2 marines on average. Same amount of points go into a Guardsmen Squad (without First Rank, Fire!) you get varying results based on range, obviously. We'll say two hits, since that's likely (with either FRF;SRF or being in rapid fire range). For the points, you get 30 guardsmen. So that's 60 shots, 30 hits, 10 wounds, 3 dead marines.
All of this, says they are still a subpar unit, and with the loss of the yo-yo strategy means there is no reason to ever field them. The option to take Haywire weapons, would give them a battlefield role, which is something they need, as right now, anything they can do, something else in the codex can do better and cheaper.
Wraithsabres - True. Though, why you wouldn't be able to mount a heavy weapon on their shoulder and still wield two swords. Given that he'd be extremely expensive, would you be willing to consider to allowing it in addition to taking a heavy weapon?
Armoured Consort - While 9 Leman Russ may not be considered competitive, they lack the flexibility, mobility, and (lets face it) fire power of Fire prisms. It only takes two of them to create a S10 AP1 TL blast. With three squads of these, that could be pretty nasty. Who knows if it'll be nasty enough though.
Bonesinger - Well, the difference is this: Your version right now reads
If a Farseer is upgraded to a Bonesinger, then roll a D6 for every wounded Wraithguard or Wraithlord model within 6”. On a 6 that model regains a single wound. Furthermore, if the Bonesinger is in contact with a vehicle that has suffered a Weapon Destroyed or Immobilised result, instead of performing another action during the shooting phase, the Bonesinger may attempt to repair the vehicle; removing a single immobilised or weapon destroyed result on a D6 roll of 4+
The version I am suggesting would be more like...
If a Farseer is upgraded to a Bonesinger, then each Wraithlord or Wraithguard within 6" that has suffered at least one wound may roll a D6 for each wound lost. For each result of 6, recover a lost wound.
On a side note, you may want to clarify when this roll takes place.
I love the possibbility of a deepstriking Eldar army!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Speaking of which: how does the Web Beacon work if the model/unit equipped with it is inside a vehicle? Is the distance measured from the vehicle hull, or does it simply not work?
A couple of notes...
1. Pathfinder: I would change it so the model chosen MUST be in LOS of the Pathfinder. (Personally I feel this should apply to any model that gets to choose who he hits. Vindicare I'm looking at you!)
2. Armored Consort: Vehicles only take Dangerous Terrain tests, not Difficult terrain. Additionally skimmers only take the test when entering or leaving difficult terrain (which should be very, very rarely...)
3. Agree with Amanax about healing wraithguard/wraithlord.
4. I'm assuming Althenian is a wraithlord, however you may want to include a note that it counts as a wraithlord for all purposes.
For me, the Avatar was underwhelming in game power; it's a fragment of a god of war, equal to primarchs etc. and it didn't reflect that IMHO; now it should be able to stand up to some of the toughest characters/creatures in the game. I don't blame you for missing the cheaper version, but I do think this version is more powerful, reflective of the background and can actually work without Fortune IMHO.
That's a good point regarding Shadows and Dust (cookie for anyone that gets the reference (without google!)), I shall clarify that in the 'dex. Cheers!
I did consider giving Feugan a template melta () but decided against it in the end. I will consider giving him an alternative fire mode or something, but I still think he works with Crystal Dragons (cookie for anyone that gets the reference (without google!)) through his rules and versatility. I will give him another look though, rest assured.
If i recall "shadows and dust" is a line uttered by the emprorer, to maximus, right before he dies in the movie Gladiator. It is also repeated throughout the movie.
Crystal Dragons? Possibly Legend of Dragoon?
For the gladiator reference that is (although it wasn't said by the Emperor), you missed with the Crystal Dragons!
Cookies remaining for getting the following references (without using google!): - Crystal Dragons
- Furious Angels*
- Burning Fist
- Althenian Fireblade*
- Siren Mirror*
- Shadows and Dust: Cookie got by thakabalpuphorsefishguy
- Slicing Orbs of Zandros: Cookie got by Mahtamori
* These Cookies should be the ones least likely to be gotten. Furious Angels doesn't relate to the Eldar if that helps.
-------
I'm pretty damn busy atm so I can't go into too much detail with any responses, so I'll just try to go over the ones I can do immediately, now:
- Web Beacon works as you (Thom) thought and Mahtamori pointed out; within 6" of the hull.
- Pathfinder; well his shooting is with the rangers, so the unit must be within LoS, but if you mean the model he specifically targets then I shall clarify this.
- The solitaire is a separate unit, I'll clarify this.
- The TL Shuriken Cannon is NOT underslung, I was saying that Shuriken Cannons are arguably more suited to the role thanks to defensive.
- Power Diversion Matrix is indeed stationary as in pivot only. A Vyper wouldn't then be able to move via Crystal Targetting Matrix; this shall be clarified.
- Vehicles can be affected by Shadows and Dust (counting as Ld10), however passengers may not; I hoped this was shown in the rule?
- IIRC doesn't the BRB say vehicles are not scoring unless stated otherwise; which this does?
Thanks again for the feedback guys, keep the comments coming. Cheers.
Crystal Dragons is easy, they are mentioned briefly in Path of the Warrior when the protagonist is visiting the Hall of the Autarchs alone prior to choosing his own shrine-rune.
If the Solitaire is indeed his own unit, than my question about his ability to make it up the board is still viable. He doesn't have Veil of Tears, or anything along those lines. He only has that 4++ save to keep him from biting the big one, at least against weapons that cause instant death. Doesn't seem like a good investment. Did you intend to give him Veil of Tears?
Soulless:
"Finally a Solitaire always counts as under the effect of the Veil of Tears psychic power (see the Harlequin unit entry), although is not classed as a psyker and need not pass a psychic test. This cannot be nullified."
Nice way of including the Crystal Dragons without them sort of overshadowing the Fire Dragons. I like this over all, very nice for example that you included Iyanna and also tadded Autarch powers.
Some things I'd like to point out though, is
- I think you should fix is that at character entries like the exarch, it says the Exarch f.ex. can replace their Close Combat Weapon - shouldn't this be his/her? This is now grammar only, it doesn't really have anything to do with the rules, but still...
- The Bonesinger rules should be something like
If a Farseer is upgraded to a Bonesinger, then at the beginning of each of your turns roll a D6 for every wounded Wraithguard or Wraithlord model within 6”. On a 6 that model regains a single wound.
- The Runes of Warding and Witnessing seems a bit messed up. I'm not sure, but I think you have written wrong names in each entry, but right titles, so to speak.
- No Wraithseer..?
Also, not really a correction, but... The Siren Mirror - Wow!
Saintspirit wrote:Nice way of including the Crystal Dragons without them sort of overshadowing the Fire Dragons. I like this over all, very nice for example that you included Iyanna and also tadded Autarch powers.
Some things I'd like to point out though, is
- I think you should fix is that at character entries like the exarch, it says the Exarch f.ex. can replace their Close Combat Weapon - shouldn't this be his/her? This is now grammar only, it doesn't really have anything to do with the rules, but still...
- The Bonesinger rules should be something like
If a Farseer is upgraded to a Bonesinger, then at the beginning of each of your turns roll a D6 for every wounded Wraithguard or Wraithlord model within 6”. On a 6 that model regains a single wound.
- The Runes of Warding and Witnessing seems a bit messed up. I'm not sure, but I think you have written wrong names in each entry, but right titles, so to speak.
- No Wraithseer..?
Also, not really a correction, but... The Siren Mirror - Wow!
Thanks man, appreciate the feedback.
I'll look into the bonesinger when I get a chance (give me a week or so).
I put 'their' as unlike Marines for example, they can be either gender; then I remembered that 'his' is used in gender-neutral circumstances, so again this will be changed when possible.
RoW/RoW will be cleared up too; i initially got the names the wrong way round, then just copied and pasted the titles! Whoops.
I did consider the Wraithseer or making Eldrad an optional Wraithseer, but I do think it's best that Forgeworld keep some of their exclusivity.
Is that Siren Mirror as in "wow! good", "wow! OTT" or "wow! I get the reference!" ?
Just Dave wrote:
Thanks man, appreciate the feedback.
I'll look into the bonesinger when I get a chance (give me a week or so).
I put 'their' as unlike Marines for example, they can be either gender; then I remembered that 'his' is used in gender-neutral circumstances, so again this will be changed when possible.
RoW/RoW will be cleared up too; i initially got the names the wrong way round, then just copied and pasted the titles! Whoops.
I did consider the Wraithseer or making Eldrad an optional Wraithseer, but I do think it's best that Forgeworld keep some of their exclusivity.
Is that Siren Mirror as in "wow! good", "wow! OTT" or "wow! I get the reference!" ?
As ever, all C&C is welcome. Thanks!
Actually, it was more about the fact that the word "their" is used only in plural, not singular. Supposed it could be "its" if you wish to be neutral in sexes.
And the siren mirror was mainly "Wow! I must take that on my seer"
No, that's intended to affect Harlequins as a whole (Harlequin Troupe is the unit). You're right about the banshee's though; I shall edit that.
@ Saint; I'll probably just go for 'his'. I would it's would be suitable if they weren't sentient. We're getting a bit 'deep' in this naming thing, eh?
Updates will be made when I have an opportunity, which may not be for another week. As ever, all feedback is welcome. Thanks!
"Their" can actually be used in the singular instead of his/her according to most grammar styles for cases of indeterminate gender. Overall, great job on the codex. It looks overpowered, but that might just be because I'm comparing it to the current codex.
I thought 'their' could be singular as well, however I think I'll with his anyway, it feels more 'right' to me at least and it's the same method (bar wyches) used in the DE 'dex.
Honestly, I have worried that it would be overpowered as well (as I do/should with any rules designs), but I don't think it is to be honest; the vast majority of units all have their niche and their identifiable weaknesses, whilst few actually got point decreases and instead increased abilities.
For example, apart from their Ld modifier, Banshees are no better against Guardsmen than they were before, but they still cost the same. They are however better against Marines (hitting on a 3+).
Shining Spears now hit harder and can hit and run (and are cheaper), but ultimately, they are pretty much as tough as a MeQ and struggle against hordes.
Warp Spiders are now less effective against vehicles, but better against infantry.
Vypers are more expensive, but better.
Harlies are better, but just as fragile at range.
Again, I'm not refuting your opinion, I feared it may be overpowered too. but as I've attempted to identify above, I've tried to balance it throughout by maintaining clear roles and weaknesses in the army to encourage it to be more finesse, as Eldar should be IMHO.
I have worried about Eldar fleet, but it's uses are potentially limited and it is worth a pts or 2 in itself.
Again, thanks for the feedback, it's always welcome.
Singing Spears should struggle against hordes, so it's a good design. Warp Spiders were a bit of a jack of most trades, master of none, adding a weakness while implementing a clear role is good, though I do worry they are still somewhat similar to Hawks.
As far as Vypers go... I don't know. They're half the price of a Wave Serpent with none of the survivability. They are absolutely dependent on a good solid cover, which is highly unlikely to be present.
Realistically a single Falcon is a better choice for points over two Vypers since it's more versatile, has better firepower, is more accurate, and provides significantly better returns for vehicle upgrades.
Small point, it is sufficient, under the current rules, for a Shadow Asp not to fire weapons - since moving over 12" automatically disables the option of shooting.
Interesting choice setting these up as Fast Attack, by the way. What hull do they use? Hornet?
Eldar Fleet is definitely required to make a foot army containing melee elements viable. I'm not certain it does require any extra points (over that which is presented in 4th edition codex), but the Eldar (melee) warriors are excessively fragile in comparison to the numerous Orks, and the more durable Space Marines.
Eldar Fleet on Eldar treehuggers (NOT Rangers, since they will remain a weird stationary element in an otherwise mobile force) with guns, though... it's just lucky potential tree-huggers have such short range guns. In and out of a forest (or over a wall and back)...
I think that you should drop the hawks points to 15 so they get the same amount of laser fire as guardsmen for the same points. They are still much more fragile so 10 hawks vs 30 guardsmen seems like a upphill batlle for the hawks anyway, and that while attacking their preferd target. Adding haywire grenades would also be a nice addition.
Oooo another well made Fandex.
First off well done on a great piece of work. It looks great, is well layed out and has some really interesting rules and ideas.
One can see it obviously took a lot of time and effort.
I think some of the ideas really add an interesting dimension to the Eldar, Im less convinced of other changes however but to that later on.
I'll start with a few very minor typos, mistakes and changes needed. Might as well have it as professional as possible
If the D6 rolls any other result, Wraithsight has no effect or that turn.
Change to: on
This third power may be the same as one already cast that turn
Insert fullstop.
Athairiel Morniynstar
Athairiel Mornynnstar,
Difference in spelling.
The Tempestiel Blades are a pair of Witchblades (therefore conferring an additional attack) that on any to-wound roll of 5 or 6, that attack will ignore
armour saves.
Change to:
The Tempestiel Blades are a pair of Witchblades (therefore conferring an additional attack) that on any to-wound roll of 5 or 6, will ignore armour saves.
A Phoenix Lord only contributes a kill point if they have 0 wounds remained at the end of the game.
Change to: remaining.
Mandiblasters that confers 2
Change to: confer
The Farseer may be accompanied by a unit of Warlock Seer Council (see overleaf) for 70pts,
Change to: The Farseer may be accompanied by a Warlock Seer Council unit (see overleaf) for 70pts,
The Exarch may allocate all wounds caused upon an enemy unit (by the Exarch only) in that phase to model(s) with a specific stat-line within that
unit.
A bit clunky. Change to:
All wounds caused by the Exarch that phase may be allocated to models who have the same stat line within that enemy unit (does this apply in the shooting
phase too?)
All enemy units within 6” of the solitaire are at -1Ld. (Note: that this can stack with a Face of Death)
Should this be Face of Fear? I cant find a face of death reference anywhere else.
The Exarch and his unit benefits from the Hit and Run special rule.
Change to: benefit
I think the Eldar fleet rule is a little confusing. When I initially read it it seemed like they could move 6, run 6 and assault 12.
Not a major thing but it did take 2-3 rereads. I'd clarify the wording more perhaps putting in an actual example of a unit using it.
This lasts for the duration of the Eldar players
Insert: turn.
A few rules queries then
Do runes of dawning stack if you have 2 characters with them? Could be a little powerful, in the fact that they can be used each turn on different units?
Under the Pheonix Lords you can have a max of two per army?
Under Baharroths Skyleap can this be used in any assault phase including the enemies? It can be used every turn?
Does hell hath no fury stack with face of fear? I assume so.
If Althenian is in a vehcile how many transport slots does he take up considering he is a monstorous creature, if any at all.
Under Iron Guardin it states he must stay with 6" of Iyanna. What if he does not? What is the penalty?
Under Veil of Tears it staes if the enemy does not spot the Harlies they cannot fire that turn. Is that cannot fire at all? I think thats a little OTT. Perhaps change it so that they cannot fire at the Harlies but can select another target?
Can Soulless, FoF and the Banshee ability stack for -3 LD tests?
Under Pathfinder it does not allow cover saves. However if it rolls a 5-6 it counts as AP1 therefore ignore armor saves too? I think that is pretty lethal for a 20pt squad upgrade. I'd consider a change there. Im not sure to what though.
Suggested rules changes:
Yriels weapon from ap3 to ap5. Too strong vs mid level infantry units and combined with his formidable hth abilities with it being assault is slightly overpowered.
I would change the PL Disciples rule from Fearless to Stubborn. Whilst they are inspirational leaders I dont think they should make their unit Fearless because of the excess wounds rule. In addition whilst hardy warriors there are some terrors not even a PL and his squad can face down. Rules and fluff wise I think stubborn is a bit better.
I would change Karandras' Hidden Death rule from deepstriking to the Ymargl genestealer rule. I think its more characterful, interesting and tactical.
I dont agree with the change to Maugan Ra. I think it makes him an infantry killer only, removing some of his utility. Whilst the pinning rule is nice he becomes defunct vs vehciles and with the Reapers not being superbly effecive vs them either its back to the same porblem of "why bother selecting them?"
I would give his weapon an assault or heavy option firing mode. For the heavy mode something like Str8 ap3 Heavy3. It would then allow him and his squad to take out light to heavy vehicles adding much needed utility. I would also insert a rule that he can fire at a different target then his squad.
I would change Baharroths Furios Angels to allow them once per game to perform a deepstrike and skyleap same turn. Its characterful and would really make them a nice hit and run unit albeit only once per game. Leave the rest of the rule as it is.
I like Kirahnna and Tamarelle Eve a lot though
Taking onboard all that has been written about the Avatar I think he is fine as he stands. You need to view his in relation to other top tier characters and their costs/abilities - Ghaz, Draigo, SW gang etc etc.
My biggest issue overall with the Codex is the ridgid squad size for all the Eldar troops and the mandatroy inclusion of an Exarch.
My view of the Eldar always centered around them being a "relatively" small, elite, flexible force both tactic and fluff wise.
From a fluff perspective having 4 squad members in a squad with an Exarch makes them almost "regimented", too similar to other armies. The Eldar have always been excellent proponents of warfare and this is based on their knowledge, training and skill. It seems more reasonable to allow them the option to form small, elite "hit squads" because their sheer skill over rides their lack of numbers.
From a tactical standpoint, most especvially with Guardians I think it would be very interesting to allow them of squad sizes 3+. You could have 5,6,7 very small Guardian squads running around rather then uniform and unweildy 10 man squads. Same with the Aspects. I would allow them a 3+ squad size rule with the option of a Warlock. The best codexes allow players to field different types of units and setups with flexibility. I think having 4+Exarch is too limited and restricting.
In short(!) allow each troop and Aspect unit to have 3+ members with an Exarch as an option. Leave it up to the player then to decide what is best.
Under the Banshee acrobatic rule (which I really like) I'd amend it slightly however to:
Whatever vehicle they are in becomes an assault vehicle with relevant rules. I think the 2d6" extra is just too hit and miss for what is already a relatively fragile squad. Rolling a double 1 or 2 wont help much at all. Again part of the current Banshee problem is "why take them"? Eldar transports have poor hatch/door setups, they cant assult the turn athey get out and usually have to weather a turn of fire before hth. Making whatever vehicle they ride in assault would fix that
with the cavet they can be the only ones riding in it obviously.
I'd give the Fire Dragons a 3+ armor save. Since 2nd ed they wrere always supposed to be hard hitting but durable troops. 3+ will allow them to survive a bit more after their shooting, something which as it stands is a problem for them.
Sundering Sentinels are very interesting. From my reading of them, they are supposed to be a dedicated anti light infantry unit with teir Hipcannons and Slicing Orbs?
I think the slicing Orbs however are OTT especially if in a 10 man unit with 2 use. I would remove the assault rule for them. Having that hit something like an
Ork unit and then the SS charging the remains would be lethal. 10, 2+ blast templates on hordes is powerful. I'd also chnage the AP to 6, perhaps even "-".
The Wraithguard rule that 10 can become troops isnt very viable imo. By my calculations including a Warlock the squad would cost over 400 points just to get into the troop section.
I can certainly see where the rule comes from, building a Ghostwalker list but I dont think it will work. Perhaps allow Iyanna, if included in the army to make WG count as troops. That could be a very fun idea and army. You will stall pay the points for them but could have multiple 3-5 man squads running around supported by Warlocks and Wraithlords.
As above I think Veil of Tears is too strong and would also amend it to 3d6x2. As it stands a 24" range is too short and contravines the basic nightfight rules from which this rule is derived presumably.
I think the Solitaire rules need a change. As it stands from what I can see he can have up to 11 attacks on the charge with his Blazing assualt rule that can reroll all wounds and get rend on a 5+? Way too powerful imo. Added to Ws7 and I7 hes a true squad wrecking machine even with str3. And for 140 points too cheap. I'd change it to something similar to Lilleths hth rule bonus attack rule.
Under Skyleap can they use it in an enemy assault phase to escape combat? That would seem fitting, characterful and useful.
For the Warp Spiders I would consider giving them some sort of movemtn restricting weapon bonus to reflect the mono filaments and problems it can pose.
I'd suggest something like if a squad is hit and wounded by WS attacks they must pass a initiative test or count as moving through difficult terrain next turn.
It would open up some interesting tactical options for the rest of the army, is within fluff/character and isnt too OP I feel.
Gotta break here but will hopefully come back with the rest of the Codex later.
Again really well done on the work and hope my comments are taken as positives rather then criticisms
I think the Solitaire rules need a change. As it stands from what I can see he can have up to 11 attacks on the charge with his Blazing assualt rule that can reroll all wounds and get rend on a 5+? Way too powerful imo. Added to Ws7 and I7 hes a true squad wrecking machine even with str3. And for 140 points too cheap. I'd change it to something similar to Lilleths hth rule bonus attack rule.
The Eversor Assassin, on the charge, can have up to 11 attacks at WS8 and Strength 5,and I8 as well, with rerolls to wound, that ALSO ignore armour without having to charge certain inches for this bonus, the solitare is 5 points more and as Dave stated he is supposed to be similar, while a little less skilled, he has some more techy sort of abilities, and some defensive ones, but no T4 S4.. I think when you compare the unit that the Solitaire is based around, you will find he is a fluffy, and balanced character.
I hope you don't mind me discussing these comments. First of all, though, big thumbs up for the obvious effort!
Ratius wrote:
The Exarch may allocate all wounds caused upon an enemy unit (by the Exarch only) in that phase to model(s) with a specific stat-line within that
unit.
A bit clunky. Change to:
All wounds caused by the Exarch that phase may be allocated to models who have the same stat line within that enemy unit (does this apply in the shooting
phase too?)
Well, I believe that the Exarch choosing stat-line is the important thing here, so you can snipe hidden power fists, and so on, and therefore the suggested wording might simply give rise to a misbelief of which player chooses. "may be allocated by the Exarch" maybe?
The Exarch and his unit benefits from the Hit and Run special rule.
Change to: benefit
I think the Eldar fleet rule is a little confusing. When I initially read it it seemed like they could move 6, run 6 and assault 12.
Not a major thing but it did take 2-3 rereads. I'd clarify the wording more perhaps putting in an actual example of a unit using it.
I'd agree with the assessment of Eldar Fleet.
Perhaps "Any unit with Eldar Fleet benefit from the Fleet universal special rule, and may additionally make a special run move of the highest of 2D6 in the assault phase instead of assaulting. Please note that any rules for movement still apply, and a unit which has used a weapon or ability which would be prevented by normal movement in the movement phase will also negate this special movement."?
Do runes of dawning stack if you have 2 characters with them? Could be a little powerful, in the fact that they can be used each turn on different units?
Additionally, may be good specifying if they are declared before or after the roll.
Under the Pheonix Lords you can have a max of two per army?
Well, according to codex, Baharroth + Karandras + Maugan Ra = 630 points, 3 KP, 1 HQ slot.
If Althenian is in a vehcile how many transport slots does he take up considering he is a monstorous creature, if any at all.
I believe that Monstrous Creatures can't enter transports under standard rules, and that additionally it would be irrelevant since he's his own unit and can't enter it with other models.
Under Iron Guardin it states he must stay with 6" of Iyanna. What if he does not? What is the penalty?
Good catch!
Under Veil of Tears it staes if the enemy does not spot the Harlies they cannot fire that turn. Is that cannot fire at all? I think thats a little OTT. Perhaps change it so that they cannot fire at the Harlies but can select another target?
This is actually exactly how it work in the current codex, and Harlies aren't exactly a stellar unit at the moment, so there's room for improvement. Don't know how much Dave's done for their viability as is, though. Keep in mind they may not be transported except with a Falcon or a borrowed Serpent, so Veil is absolutely necessary as a delivery method.
Under Pathfinder it does not allow cover saves. However if it rolls a 5-6 it counts as AP1 therefore ignore armor saves too? I think that is pretty lethal for a 20pt squad upgrade. I'd consider a change there. Im not sure to what though.
It's not a squad upgrade, it's a sergeant upgrade and applies only to the sergeant.
I would change the PL Disciples rule from Fearless to Stubborn. Whilst they are inspirational leaders I dont think they should make their unit Fearless because of the excess wounds rule. In addition whilst hardy warriors there are some terrors not even a PL and his squad can face down. Rules and fluff wise I think stubborn is a bit better.
Regarding fluff, the presence of a Phoenix Lord taints an entire Craftworld, and his psychic presence fills the consciousness of all Aspect Warriors, regardless of shrine, almost to the extent of the Avatar itself. I don't know, I don't think Fearless is excessive, but certainly open for debate.
I would change Karandras' Hidden Death rule from deepstriking to the Ymargl genestealer rule. I think its more characterful, interesting and tactical.
Agree on this, since Scorpions can select Webway Translator as default, it's only a minor upgrade.
My biggest issue overall with the Codex is the ridgid squad size for all the Eldar troops and the mandatroy inclusion of an Exarch.
My view of the Eldar always centered around them being a "relatively" small, elite, flexible force both tactic and fluff wise.
From a fluff perspective having 4 squad members in a squad with an Exarch makes them almost "regimented", too similar to other armies. The Eldar have always been excellent proponents of warfare and this is based on their knowledge, training and skill. It seems more reasonable to allow them the option to form small, elite "hit squads" because their sheer skill over rides their lack of numbers.
From a tactical standpoint, most especvially with Guardians I think it would be very interesting to allow them of squad sizes 3+. You could have 5,6,7 very small Guardian squads running around rather then uniform and unweildy 10 man squads. Same with the Aspects. I would allow them a 3+ squad size rule with the option of a Warlock. The best codexes allow players to field different types of units and setups with flexibility. I think having 4+Exarch is too limited and restricting.
In short(!) allow each troop and Aspect unit to have 3+ members with an Exarch as an option. Leave it up to the player then to decide what is best.
While the MSU does seem to be the Eldar flavour Warfare, each shrine is based around an Exarch, and the Exarch of a shrine answers the call of that shrine and decides how to best answer the requirements set by the Autarchs. From Path of the Warrior, having a squad of Aspect Warriors on duty without an Exarch seems completely unheard of, while having very large squads is more common the less traditional the craftworld or Exarch is. In it's essence, it seems likely the Eldar would field Exarch + 2-9 or Exarch + 2-20 Warriors, but a squad without an Exarch is unlikely.
It's a major point raised in the Eldar discussion threads, but the addition of an Exarch may prevent exploitation of DAVU and bring down the appeal of kamikaze Fire Dragons.
Eldar are, more than any other race, very much into guidance and mentorship. When even the civilian roles such as the paths of servitude mandates personal mentors, it would seem unlikely that an Eldar army would let anyone go without their mentor to war.
The Wraithguard rule that 10 can become troops isnt very viable imo. By my calculations including a Warlock the squad would cost over 400 points just to get into the troop section.
I can certainly see where the rule comes from, building a Ghostwalker list but I dont think it will work. Perhaps allow Iyanna, if included in the army to make WG count as troops. That could be a very fun idea and army. You will stall pay the points for them but could have multiple 3-5 man squads running around supported by Warlocks and Wraithlords.
+1 on this
Under Skyleap can they use it in an enemy assault phase to escape combat? That would seem fitting, characterful and useful.
4th edition codex, yes. Just Dave codex, only with Baharroth.
For the Warp Spiders I would consider giving them some sort of movemtn restricting weapon bonus to reflect the mono filaments and problems it can pose.
I'd suggest something like if a squad is hit and wounded by WS attacks they must pass a initiative test or count as moving through difficult terrain next turn.
It would open up some interesting tactical options for the rest of the army, is within fluff/character and isnt too OP I feel.
Gotta break here but will hopefully come back with the rest of the Codex later.
Again really well done on the work and hope my comments are taken as positives rather then criticisms
Warp Spiders actually have the same monofilament rule as Night Spinner and Doom Weaver.
Again, sorry for highjacking your comment, hope you don't mind me addressing stuff instead with my own input.
Not at all Mahtamori, as I said under the recent Nid Fandex, the only way this thing is going to come to fruition is if everyone chips in with logical, open and progressive analysis and comments
"Allocated by the Exarch" is a very nice addition.
Didnt see the 3 PLs rule = 1 slot. Missed that one. So under two HQ slots you can have 6?
Hmmm not sure that would work from either a fluff or game perspective.
Althenian in the transport I suppose relates to the other question of what happens if hes out of range. Assuming its a hard and fast rule an exception will have to be made and since hes monstorous maybe he takes up 3 slots?
Ah wasnt aware of the Veil of Tears current rule, not overly familiar with Harlies.
But since we're tweaking a few things I'd still keep it to Harlies only YMMV
Yes I didnt word the Pathfinder query quite right. My point would be when the seargent hits he can still potentially remove armour and cover saves which is pretty lethal. Not sure if its completely OP but I'd still question it.
We'll agree to disagree on the fearless/stubborn rule! I would point out though the last thing I feel codexs need are "USR spam" such as FNP and psychic powers all over the place, I find it one dimensional tactically and doawn right tough to counter in others. Allowing PL and squads to have fearless, could potenitally have 3 different squads running around fearless and thats before the Avatar is centrally placed. Boring imho.
Concede on the Exarch in squad rule but would still most definetly allow smaller unit sizes. Tactical options are key yo a Codex and I think this option helps that out.
I'd revert Skyleap to original. Not sure I see why the change.
Didnt know about the WS monofil rule. Kinda shows how "poor" they are currently, havent fielded them in months and months!
Concede on the Exarch in squad rule but would still most definetly allow smaller unit sizes. Tactical options are key yo a Codex and I think this option helps that out.
While I will agree with you that tactical options are key to viability, allowing squads of three is going to overly abuse Mech spam.
Dire avengers are cheaper than they are currently as it is, so are wave serpents. How would you like to go up against an army like this -
(For this test, we'll say it's 40 points for an Exarch and two dire avengers. Which is actually a bad turn around but it'll just go to show you what I mean)
4x Fire Dragons + Exarch (185)
- Dedicated Wave Serpent
4x Fire Dragons + Exarch (185)
- Dedicated Wave Serpent
****Fast Attack - 100*****
Vyper (50)
Vyper (50)
****Heavy Support - 465****
Fire Prism (155)
- Spirit Stones
- Holo-Fields
Fire Prism (155)
- Spirit Stones
- Holo-Fields
Fire Prism (155)
- Spirit Stones
- Holo-Fields
****Total = 1995****
11 AV12 hulls, and 2 AV10 hulls. All with Eldar tricks to stay alive, making them more durable than most other mech forces. You have +2 to your reserve rolls, so you can almost always ensure you get your alpha strike. You have 15 melta dragons to deal with anything your scatter lasers and fire prisms don't want to deal with. Your vypers duck and dodge providing harassment/support.
Hmm excellent analysis.
I'll have to ruminate some but my initial thoughts would be twofold:
Firstly, other armies can "spam" as many armour hulls as that so its nothing new, groundbreaking or game changing.
Would it be toruney winning or unfair? TBC.
Secondly, whilst I do think that list is evil! it is definetly at one end of army compilation scale. Is it an abuse of the army list? Thats not for me to decide and with the smaller squad sizes that list becomes possible. However, so is a more varied and ultimateloy balanced list.
I can only reiterate what I said before, create interesting, varied and flexible codex options and let the players decide.
Just to quickly interject; minimal squad sizes will not be getting reduced, for the reasons outlined by others above. Furthermore, at that point, they become much less a squad, and in game-turns are less valuable to the Eldar player to keep alive, which is not how it should be IMHO.
Thanks for the feedback again; I will respond to it in greater detail when I can. Thanks.
Keep up the discussion though, by all means!
I'll try not to turn this into thread IV of the Huge Eldar Discussion™ and I know it's slightly outside the scope of the codex, but... The MSU inside Serpents can be reduced if the option for a Serpent is only granted a squad of a certain minimal size. Additionally, a force allocation slot for Dire Avengers (for example) could be good for 3 to 10 Dire Avengers in total. Splitting the squad costs 15 points and each squad will consist of Exarch + 2 Aspect Warriors, minimum - thus a single Dire Avenger slot could provide 3x <Exarch + 2 Dire Avengers> for 144 points (a single squad of Exarch + 8 Dire Avengers would cost 114 points). Each Exarch would, additionally, purchase abilities on their own. Serpents or a Falcon would only be available to a squad of 5+ which has not been split.
However, I don't think it's a game mechanically potent strategy of having a significant amount of squads since they are easy to take out, most Exarch abilities scale better the more warriors he has, and leadership becomes a problem. The golden balance must be reached where it is a waste of resources having the squads inside the vehicles all the time, but sadly Eldar do not have the wargear, toughness, nor numbers for this.
Too long, did not read: I don't believe in MSU except for in the fluff-novels, I believe in universally available holographic upgrades for all Eldar infantry similar to Support Battery's Cloaking Field.
(Say... all infantry has a Holographic Distortion Projector which provides the squad, but not it's vehicle, with a 5+ cover save for 5 points. Cover's easy to get in current edition, but this provides a light backup for that turn when you step out of the vehicle or get flanked.)
. Furthermore, at that point, they become much less a squad, and in game-turns are less valuable to the Eldar player to keep alive, which is not how it should be IMHO.
I dont agree with this. Just because the squad has a smaller size dosent make it any less important or valuable to keep alive.
In a KP game they infact become even more important because they can be killed more easily and dont have the survivability of larger squads. Hence it will force players to play more tactically in keeping them alive.
The same in an Obj game. Instead of having a big 20 man guardian squad backed up with Farseer, WLs and Warlocks camping an obj, you could have 2-3 smaller squads doing the same job. They wont have the survivability of that 20 man unit but will be able to support each other much better and provide cover/help to each other. Much more interesting I feel.
I acknkowledge you have made your decision but will simply reiterate to give the playerbase the options to take MSUs and let them decide for themselves. Maybe the wont maybe they will but as a Codex creater one should not make that decision for them. Flexibility.
Anyway! On we go
Wraithguard
Way include a Warlock for 35pts. Who may replace his Witchblade with:
Change to: May.
Wave SErpent seems fine.
Swooping Hawks.
Im not sure they have been changed enough to make them usable. I still wouldnt take them in a competitive list. Granted, whilst not ever unit should make it into a competitive environment I think the following suggestions may make them more interesting and viable.
I would change Mark of Guilt to:
Nominate a single enemy unit before deployment. Once per game any Eldar unit may reroll to-hit shooting rolls against this unit.
This could provide some interesting options, similar to the Necron DMs and would certianly make the Hawks a nice choice.
Under Skyleap I would remove the line that they cannot Skyleap whilst in hth. The fact that it is a once per game use, means that it wont be game breaking but gives them a nice "get out jail" card should they find themsleves in trouble and engaged by a better squad.
I'd also change the Grenade pack to cause pinning. Both from a fluff and game play perspective I think it fits.
Warp Spider look good, I think they can be used as a good hit and run unit, harrying the enemy and slowing them down whilst the rest of the Eldar shoot them/outmanouver them.
However the Exarchs points seem a bit high - 36 if my math is correct? I think thats a lot for his stat line (sans powers) and those powers dont bring a massive boost to the squad in general. Perhaps revise.
Under the Vyper Im a little unclear how CTM works.
If the Vyper moves 6" or less in the movement phase it can assault a further 6" in the assault phase for a total of 12" (or 18" if you add movement too)?
Im not sure I see the point. The extra 6" in the assault phase is pointless since I would hope it will never be charging!
Is it supposed to be like the Tau JSJ ability?
Asp is interesting as an addition. Like to test it out though.
Shadow Asp seems ok and in keeping with recent Codex trends.
I like the Cloaking Field ability on the SWBs.
Im liking the Reapers a lot more now since the gun has been changed. I think it gives them a chance to pop light to light medium armor whilst still being capable vs MEQs. Again though by my math the Exarch is 46 points without skills? Very high imo.
Under the Falcon its Pulse Laser counts as defensive? I'd be worried about some combinations with that.
Add in a PDM for a mere 5 points and you have 2 shots at str8 with lance. Throw in a targetting beacon for 10 and you can only miss on a 2? Could be quite nasty, espeically with an ML added in there too. It means the Falcon can sit in cover popping away but also get out of trouble and still fire if needed. Something to think about
For the Wraithlord, I'd drop his T to 7. I think T8 is gone the way of the Dodo and we might as well keep him up with current trends. A cost drop of 5-10 points could compensate.
Again for flexibilty I would drop the rule that he must take an extra heavy weapon, I'd be very happy having both catapults upgraded to Reapers and leaving it at that. Forcing players to take another HW is perhaps not necessary and he can only fire two weapons a turn anyway so. Having him as a big loaded gunship dosent fit with the fluff imho.
Under monofilament I would change it to affect both the movement and assault phase.
The idea is to use it as a weapon to slow down enemy forces as the Eldar shoot and avoid them. However, say if a unit moves first, is affected but gets a lucky 6, it can still get off a 12" charge range against the Eldar. Having it affect both phases limits that potential and with it not being a very widesrpead weapon in the army it shouldnt be too game breaking.
More later hopefully
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ratius wrote:
I think the Solitaire rules need a change. As it stands from what I can see he can have up to 11 attacks on the charge with his Blazing assualt rule that can reroll all wounds and get rend on a 5+? Way too powerful imo. Added to Ws7 and I7 hes a true squad wrecking machine even with str3. And for 140 points too cheap. I'd change it to something similar to Lilleths hth rule bonus attack rule.
______________
The Eversor Assassin, on the charge, can have up to 11 attacks at WS8 and Strength 5,and I8 as well, with rerolls to wound, that ALSO ignore armour without having to charge certain inches for this bonus, the solitare is 5 points more and as Dave stated he is supposed to be similar, while a little less skilled, he has some more techy sort of abilities, and some defensive ones, but no T4 S4.. I think when you compare the unit that the Solitaire is based around, you will find he is a fluffy, and balanced character.
Dont agree with him either but thats another Codex
I think the table looks ok overall.
I'd suggest a few minor changes however.
What about making the Bright Lance str9 but removing lance from it. My concern is the Eldars ability to open AV14 vehicles.
As it stands only yhe Nova Lance can do it. The BL change would give them another option but reduce its effectiveness somewhat due to losing lance.
I'd increase the Shuriken Catapult range to 18" and the Avenger SC to 24". With many armies of late being in that 24" range killzone, I think it allows the Eldar to compete on an equal footing or use their mobility to engage at better ranges. I feel the last thing that is needed is another army that can "only fight optimally in one range bracket" (yes a pinch of salt needed there but I hope you get the basic point).
I think the Shirken Cannon at assault6 with AP4 is overpowered. It'll shred all but MEQs and the fact that it can be spammed army wide is worse. I'd reduce the Ap to 5 perhaps even 6. Wounding every troop type on 2s is very powerful as is with assault6.
I would change the monofilament rule to affect both movement and assault phases as per my reasoning above.
I would change the Deathspinner to a template weapon, I think its more fluffy and will force correct placement of the user model to maximise hits rather then spam assault3 shots.
Farseer powers.
They all look quite good. A few minor changes though I would suggest:
Change Fog of War to when it is cast the enemy must take a Ld test or suffer its effects. I think it could be very very powerful when used in conjunction with other abilities and the fact that its a simple Ld10 test to activate makes it nasty. Fearless units could be immune to represent them pushing on regardless.
I would change Eldritch Storms AP from 6 to -. VS Orks, gaunts etc potentially much to strong in addition to pinning and large blast.
Warlock powers.
I would change assail to D3-1. The fact that all Lock powers are "constant" it means Warlocks are running around with an automtic extra attack, potentially up to 3 (4 on the charge). Thats 6 attacks on the charge? Very powerful!
D3-1 means they may get a couple of extra attacks or they might not. I always found it unsettling that Lock powers had beneficial strenghts with no negatives.
I would change Expedite to simply a move through cover bonus. The secondary bonus, again, in combination with other abilities/offensive powers could be much to powerful.
Paths of the Seer.
Is Bonesinger the same as other army repair abilities i.e. sacrifice a phase to do it? Or is it an "any action" sacrifice? Depending on which align it with other armies for game mechanic simplicity and fairness.
I would change Warseer to not stack with enhance or assail.
Picture this combo:
4 man Warlock council as Warseers.
One "casts" enhance, another assail. They charge.
That is 4 guys at Ws7 I6 with witchbaldes wounding on 2s hitting a potential of 7 times all for 200 points on the nose? Ouch!
28 attacks, hitting on 3s vs virtually everything, wounding on 2s. Farseer casts doom on the enemy and its a steamroller unit.
I think a very deep analyiss will have to be done on potential power/path/weapon combos, dont get me wrong, a lot of them I love and are very well thought out individully but I can see exploits with combos even with a skim read to date.
More later hopefully.
Ratius wrote:I think the Shirken Cannon at assault6 with AP4 is overpowered. It'll shred all but MEQs and the fact that it can be spammed army wide is worse. I'd reduce the Ap to 5 perhaps even 6. Wounding every troop type on 2s is very powerful as is with assault6.
Take another look at strength. It's S4. It's a defensive weapon, which is the major advantage.
In terms of killing MEQ, it's gone from 3x[5/6] to 6x[1/2], which is arguably better. Against GEQ it's 3x[5/6]->6x[1/3], which is also better. However, the saving grace with the change is that you can no longer instant death a Farseer or other T3 W2+ models, nor can it effectively attack vehicles - forcing you to upgrade/regrade in order to achieve more versatility. As it stands at the moment, a Scatter Laser is just plain better for near no cost, with Dave's codex the choice is more interesting. You either keep the free weapon, which is generally better at killing infantry and can be used in conjunction with other heavy weapons at 0-12" speed - or you choose the slightly more expensive, longer ranged, and more versatile Scatter laser at the cost of infantry killing power.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and you do realize that any power which simply requires the enemy to pass a (personally modified) leadership test has about 1 chance in 12 of succeeding, meaning it is more dangerous for the Farseer to use Fog of War than it is for the single enemy unit to be subjected to it.
If Leadership is going to be a protection against it, it should work against all models in a generous range (such as the entire battlefield) or be a Warlock power.
I do believe, however, that it does not represent fear, but actual crap sight conditions, probably even tanglible smoke which physically might hamper movement as well as obscure it.
Sure, a fearless guy might ignore the little bit of fear he feels for it and just run on, but he'll likely break his leg before he gets anywhere. Fear isn't a drawback, fealing fear is an advantage in most situations (as long as it's in moderation) since you act more cautiously. From a Darwinian perspective, creatures incapable of fear tend towards extinction.
Not sure what you mean about the FoW though?
A unit with say a LD8 has an 8/12 chance of passing that test (they can only fail on a 9,10,11 or 12 roll). Thats a 66% pass chance not 1 in 12.
My basic point was that a farseer takes a test, the unit is automatically affected and in conjunction with other abilities in the codex it could be OP. Many powers require the psyker to take the test and then do something else (roll to hit, enemy must take a characteristic test, enemy must roll off Vs the caster etc etc). FoWimo should be no different and the enemy taking a LD test is reasonable enough I feel as a secondary condition.
Other suggestions are welcome of course!
To answer your question regarding my posts with snipers, it is that he needs LOS on the target model, not just the target unit. Again though, this is something I feel should affect any model with the ability to target specific models in a unit.
Hopefully clarified a few things and make grammatical/proof-reading corrections (as per Ratius' comments; thanks) and changed Swooping Hawks slightly (cheaper and can make multiple skyleaps).
I'll try to respond to peoples comments when I have the time/motivation; I've developed quite a backlog!
TheMind wrote:Haven't read it entirely yet, but do you intend to include the Shadow Spectre's from The Doom of Mymyrea?
I've never had any intention to include the Shadow Spectre's to be honest. Whilst they have great models, I don't think they really make sense in rules or background, and they are neither a particularly strong or well-fitting concept IMHO and have no real place in the Codex, I feel they should remain as FW only; much like Tomb Stalkers etc.
Rightyhoo, first 'batch' of replies *wipes brow*, apologies if I miss some stuff off but I can't afford to reply to everything. Cheers!
Mahtamori wrote:Singing Spears should struggle against hordes, so it's a good design. Warp Spiders were a bit of a jack of most trades, master of none, adding a weakness while implementing a clear role is good, though I do worry they are still somewhat similar to Hawks.
I agree, but with them both being anti-infantry mainly, it was inevitable that they would be similar and whilst I tried to differentiate them somewhat, I didn't intend to make SH solely anti-tank, so they'd always have some overlap in roles, but I hope they're sufficiently different. At the very least, Warp Spiders have more consistent firepower, less reliance on hit and run, superior standard-weapon, better armour and inflict difficult terrain.
As far as Vypers go... I don't know. They're half the price of a Wave Serpent with none of the survivability. They are absolutely dependent on a good solid cover, which is highly unlikely to be present.
Realistically a single Falcon is a better choice for points over two Vypers since it's more versatile, has better firepower, is more accurate, and provides significantly better returns for vehicle upgrades.
If that were the case though, then you'd never see Land Speeders used as Predators fit under the same analogy.
Crystal Targetting Matrix adds an extra degree of survivability to Vypers, whilst they are also a good source of hit and run attacks and all-round firepower, for less.
There's inevitably some overlap again in they're both primarily firepower-vehicles (bar Waveserpent), but Falcons, Vypers, Prisms and Serpents are all sufficiently different IMHO.
Small point, it is sufficient, under the current rules, for a Shadow Asp not to fire weapons - since moving over 12" automatically disables the option of shooting.
Interesting choice setting these up as Fast Attack, by the way. What hull do they use? Hornet?
I imagined a cross between Hornet and Falcon/Prism/Spinner/Serpent; smaller than the Falcon, but bulkier than the hornet is how I imagined them.
Ratius wrote:Oooo another well made Fandex.
First off well done on a great piece of work. It looks great, is well layed out and has some really interesting rules and ideas.
One can see it obviously took a lot of time and effort.
I think some of the ideas really add an interesting dimension to the Eldar, Im less convinced of other changes however but to that later on.
Cheers man, appreciate it.
I'll start with a few very minor typos, mistakes and changes needed. Might as well have it as professional as possible
I've corrected where you've suggested; thanks man, I really appreciate the proof-reading and all grammatical corrections are welcome, thanks.
Do runes of dawning stack if you have 2 characters with them? Could be a little powerful, in the fact that they can be used each turn on different units?
Nope; this has been clarified, thanks.
Under the Pheonix Lords you can have a max of two per army?
Nope; Phoenix Lords only ever occupy a single FoC slot (in total/between them); so you can have as many as you want in an army.
I expected some people may be a bit put-off by this, but bear in mind they are single models that cost over 200pts each; I don't see this as being abusable, but providing potential for some fun armies and scenarios.
As some have demonstrated with sample lists; having a lot of Phoenix Lords in one army really isn't a competitive option, but I think it could be good fun, interesting and lead to really characterful games, like a Rhana Dhandra.
Under Baharroths Skyleap can this be used in any assault phase including the enemies? It can be used every turn?
Skyleap can only occur in your assault phase; therefore with being unable to leave assault (without baharroth); this is a vulnerability for Hawks.
Does hell hath no fury stack with face of fear? I assume so.
No; I've clarified this to say so.
To be fair though, any unit that's managed to end up in combat with both Harlies and Banshees (and even a Solitaire) is probably toast anyway!
If Althenian is in a vehcile how many transport slots does he take up considering he is a monstorous creature, if any at all.
As stated, MC's cannot enter vehicles.
Under Iron Guardin it states he must stay with 6" of Iyanna. What if he does not? What is the penalty?
There's no penalty, Iyanna/Althenian simply cannot be moved more than 6" away from one another; I've tried to clarify this in the 'dex.
Under Veil of Tears it staes if the enemy does not spot the Harlies they cannot fire that turn. Is that cannot fire at all? I think thats a little OTT. Perhaps change it so that they cannot fire at the Harlies but can select another target?
I feared that it could be a bit OTT, but as stated by Maht, this is the case in the current Codex and isn't complained about AFAIK whilst it doesn't really provide a drawback to targeting them if you then move on to another target.
Can Soulless, FoF and the Banshee ability stack for -3 LD tests?
Souless and FoF will; otherwise see above.
Under Pathfinder it does not allow cover saves. However if it rolls a 5-6 it counts as AP1 therefore ignore armor saves too? I think that is pretty lethal for a 20pt squad upgrade. I'd consider a change there. Im not sure to what though.
As someone stated, it's one character/sergeant, rather than squad-wise and it still relies on A) LoS, B) Hitting and C) 5-6 to-wound.
I have bumped this to 25pts however.
Suggested rules changes:
Yriels weapon from ap3 to ap5. Too strong vs mid level infantry units and combined with his formidable hth abilities with it being assault is slightly overpowered.
It is however one-use and if anything less powerful than his current ability; which is a large-blast.
I would change Karandras' Hidden Death rule from deepstriking to the Ymargl genestealer rule. I think its more characterful, interesting and tactical.
That was originally the plan, however I decided to give him his own, but similar, flavour to it.
I dont agree with the change to Maugan Ra. I think it makes him an infantry killer only, removing some of his utility. Whilst the pinning rule is nice he becomes defunct vs vehciles and with the Reapers not being superbly effecive vs them either its back to the same porblem of "why bother selecting them?"
I would give his weapon an assault or heavy option firing mode. For the heavy mode something like Str8 ap3 Heavy3. It would then allow him and his squad to take out light to heavy vehicles adding much needed utility. I would also insert a rule that he can fire at a different target then his squad.
This has been made Str5 but took away pinning.
Please bear in mind however he's Str4/5 with 7 shots, re-rolling to-wound and ignoring cover and rending!
Taking onboard all that has been written about the Avatar I think he is fine as he stands. You need to view his in relation to other top tier characters and their costs/abilities - Ghaz, Draigo, SW gang etc etc.
Thanks. That's basically my idea though; I wouldn't say he's any more powerful (or significantly so) than the Swarmlord, Ghaz, Mephiston, Draigo, Abby etc.
Whatever vehicle they are in becomes an assault vehicle with relevant rules. I think the 2d6" extra is just too hit and miss for what is already a relatively fragile squad. Rolling a double 1 or 2 wont help much at all.
Personally, I didn't want to make it straight-up assault vehicle, whilst 2D6" adds an element of controllable unpredictability; for only 15pts.
I'd give the Fire Dragons a 3+ armor save. Since 2nd ed they wrere always supposed to be hard hitting but durable troops. 3+ will allow them to survive a bit more after their shooting, something which as it stands is a problem for them.
That's not a bad idea, however they are currently considered competitive whilst a 3+ would require a points-increase.
Sundering Sentinels are very interesting. From my reading of them, they are supposed to be a dedicated anti light infantry unit with teir Hipcannons and Slicing Orbs?
I think the slicing Orbs however are OTT especially if in a 10 man unit with 2 use. I would remove the assault rule for them. Having that hit something like an
Ork unit and then the SS charging the remains would be lethal. 10, 2+ blast templates on hordes is powerful. I'd also chnage the AP to 6, perhaps even "-".
I've changed the AP to 6; however ultimately this is useless vs. vehicles, has short range and the unit would cost ~240pts.
The Wraithguard rule that 10 can become troops isnt very viable imo. By my calculations including a Warlock the squad would cost over 400 points just to get into the troop section.
I can certainly see where the rule comes from, building a Ghostwalker list but I dont think it will work. Perhaps allow Iyanna, if included in the army to make WG count as troops. That could be a very fun idea and army. You will stall pay the points for them but could have multiple 3-5 man squads running around supported by Warlocks and Wraithlords.
Bear in mind that current WG scoring units also cost in the region of 400pts (as do 10-man termies etc.) and are worse overall than my Wraithguard, so I agree, whilst expensive, I wouldn't say it's unreasonable or something new.
Whilst Ghost Warriors does allow for more flexible Wraithguard-heavy lists.
I think the Solitaire rules need a change. As it stands from what I can see he can have up to 11 attacks on the charge with his Blazing assualt rule that can reroll all wounds and get rend on a 5+? Way too powerful imo. Added to Ws7 and I7 hes a true squad wrecking machine even with str3. And for 140 points too cheap. I'd change it to something similar to Lilleths hth rule bonus attack rule.
I think Magnus goes over this nicely. Please also bear in mind he's a single unit, with T3 and the Eversor and co. are typically considered uncompetitive. This guy really suffers when shot.
Lord Magnus wrote:
Ratius wrote:
I think the Solitaire rules need a change. As it stands from what I can see he can have up to 11 attacks on the charge with his Blazing assualt rule that can reroll all wounds and get rend on a 5+? Way too powerful imo. Added to Ws7 and I7 hes a true squad wrecking machine even with str3. And for 140 points too cheap. I'd change it to something similar to Lilleths hth rule bonus attack rule.
The Eversor Assassin, on the charge, can have up to 11 attacks at WS8 and Strength 5,and I8 as well, with rerolls to wound, that ALSO ignore armour without having to charge certain inches for this bonus, the solitare is 5 points more and as Dave stated he is supposed to be similar, while a little less skilled, he has some more techy sort of abilities, and some defensive ones, but no T4 S4.. I think when you compare the unit that the Solitaire is based around, you will find he is a fluffy, and balanced character.
As far as Vypers go... I don't know. They're half the price of a Wave Serpent with none of the survivability. They are absolutely dependent on a good solid cover, which is highly unlikely to be present.
Realistically a single Falcon is a better choice for points over two Vypers since it's more versatile, has better firepower, is more accurate, and provides significantly better returns for vehicle upgrades.
If that were the case though, then you'd never see Land Speeders used as Predators fit under the same analogy.
Crystal Targetting Matrix adds an extra degree of survivability to Vypers, whilst they are also a good source of hit and run attacks and all-round firepower, for less.
There's inevitably some overlap again in they're both primarily firepower-vehicles (bar Waveserpent), but Falcons, Vypers, Prisms and Serpents are all sufficiently different IMHO.
A Predator isn't a fast skimmer like the Land Speeder, and I fear I must point out that the Land Speeder is both a Fast Skimmer with Deep Strike and BS4 at the same price as a limited JSJ BS3 Fast Open-Topped Skimmer. Land Speeder is a good measuring stock since both perform similar functions and currently cost the same. Review what the different versions of Land Speeders get for 50 points, I think you'll see my point then.
Oh, and shouldn't all vehicles in the squadron have the same upgrades? Maybe reduce the price on Holo-Fields since it's not very effective on open-topped AV10. In general the upgrades on the Vyper needs to be in relation to what it protects - starting off at approximately half the price of that on the Falcon/Serpent/Prism I should say, since the Vyper to start off at half the points. Or possibly make the upgrades squad-wide to promote 2 or 3 vehicle squads.
Also, regarding Star Engines - cover saves are gained at above 12" movement, not 24". Maybe take the opportunity to clarify if this move can be used to tank shock?
- If a vehicle can not tank-shock with the move, there is not a lot of point having it in the shooting phase (except for giving units free line of sight and then moving a tank in the way of return fire). Maybe it could increase vehicle movement increments by +6"? Max speed 30", Combat Speed at 18"? Stationary would still be stationary.
Ratius wrote:Firstly, other armies can "spam" as many armour hulls as that so its nothing new, groundbreaking or game changing.
I can only reiterate what I said before, create interesting, varied and flexible codex options and let the players decide.
Some of my intentions throughout my Codices has been to create interesting, characterful, fluffy, varied and balanced armies that have a wide variety of viable units. I don't think smaller squad sizes changes this, if anything it makes it less characterful and fluffy (remember in Path of the Warrior an Aspect would be disbanded if below 5 (incl. Exarch) men.
Just because other armies can spam units/hulls and adopt certain play-styles, does not make it viable or reasonable for other armies to do it/be able to do it. I have been concious to try and restrict the viability of spam armies (which are inevitable, but I don't encourage them).
Similarly, the design of characters such as Mephiston and Vulkan, units such as Beast-packs, Blood Angel Razorbacks, Jokaero and other units is something I have attempted to avoid. Again, just because others can do it, doesn't mean I want it possible here...
Ratius wrote:However the Exarchs points seem a bit high - 36 if my math is correct? I think thats a lot for his stat line (sans powers) and those powers dont bring a massive boost to the squad in general. Perhaps revise.
Im liking the Reapers a lot more now since the gun has been changed. I think it gives them a chance to pop light to light medium armor whilst still being capable vs MEQs. Again though by my math the Exarch is 46 points without skills? Very high imo.
All Exarchs cost an additional 15pts (for +1BS, WS, I, A, Sv).
Under the Vyper Im a little unclear how CTM works.
...
Is it supposed to be like the Tau JSJ ability?
Exactly.
Shadow Asp seems ok and in keeping with recent Codex trends.
Hmmm... That wasn't intentional; what trend would that be?
Under the Falcon its Pulse Laser counts as defensive? I'd be worried about some combinations with that.
Would you say it contradicts with its partial role as a transport or is any more powerful than the Ravagers ability to move and shoot?
It basically enables it to actually be able to make the most of its manoeuvrability, whilst maintaining its firepower.
Add in a PDM for a mere 5 points and you have 2 shots at str8 with lance. Throw in a targetting beacon for 10 and you can only miss on a 2? Could be quite nasty, espeically with an ML added in there too. It means the Falcon can sit in cover popping away but also get out of trouble and still fire if needed. Something to think about
The Power Diversion Matrix does require your fast vehicle to remain stationary (hence its low cost) and contradicts the defensive ability, furthermore it does only make it AP1 (or 1 lower), not lance.
Furthermore, the above combination costs 155pts. Providing you remain stationary, this provides you with 3 Str8 shots, 2 at AP1, which may re-roll any to-hit roll of 1. Would you say that's worse than the 160-ishpts Tri-las predator? Which has 3 Str9, AP2 shots, but is generally considered uncompetitive?
For the Wraithlord, I'd drop his T to 7. I think T8 is gone the way of the Dodo and we might as well keep him up with current trends. A cost drop of 5-10 points could compensate.
Again for flexibilty I would drop the rule that he must take an extra heavy weapon, I'd be very happy having both catapults upgraded to Reapers and leaving it at that. Forcing players to take another HW is perhaps not necessary and he can only fire two weapons a turn anyway so. Having him as a big loaded gunship dosent fit with the fluff imho.
Under monofilament I would change it to affect both the movement and assault phase.
The idea is to use it as a weapon to slow down enemy forces as the Eldar shoot and avoid them. However, say if a unit moves first, is affected but gets a lucky 6, it can still get off a 12" charge range against the Eldar. Having it affect both phases limits that potential and with it not being a very widesrpead weapon in the army it shouldnt be too game breaking.
Honestly, I fear this would be too powerful. Enforcing difficult terrain relying only on a single wound is quite potent, this would be even more powerful if it affected movement and assault I think. I imagine if a unit wants to be able to assault, then its going to want to be able to reliably move too.
Celtic Strike wrote:To me, I feel that Dark reapers, Wave serpents, Falcons, Wraithguard and wraithlords are far too expensive for what they do.
Swooping hawks still don't really do anything and are also a few points more expensive.
Asps should be able to be squadroned, that'd be cool.
Eldrad seemed a bit nerfed.
We've already gone over Eldrad, his Divination ability is arguably better and he has even more - and better - abilties, for 5pts more and a loss of 1 toughness. Considering his current abilities, I wouldn't call this a nerf tbh.
If Asps were able to be squadroned, then they'd really damage the viability of Vypers and reduce some of their character.
Personally, I completely disagree with the idea of Falcons, Wraithlords and Wave Serpents being far too expensive, I think it's flat-out wrong IMHO. The Falcon costs 5pts more (currently considered semi-competitive), but is BS4, has a defensive main weapon and can be taken as a dedicated transport. And some of its options are cheaper/better.
The Wraithlord is slightly more expensive, but tougher and with better options. Compare it to a Dreadknight; it's of pretty-much equal toughness (bar size-difference) but cheaper and with better options.
The Waveserpent is 5pts cheaper than before, but is currently considered a competitive option and stacks up well with a Razorback in terms of point and ability differences.
That Wraithguard and Dark Reapers are overcosted is debatable, but incorrect IMHO.
Dark Reapers are comparable to a ML Devastator; slightly less durable, slightly less flexible, but slightly cheaper and much more efficient at a specific role.
Wraithguard are comparable to Terminators; tougher, but with significantly better ranged firepower. However, they are weaker in CC (unless equipped with a Wraithsword), have Wraithsight, are more vulnerable to (only, really) AP3 and are 2pts cheaper.
I think the table looks ok overall.
I'd suggest a few minor changes however.
What about making the Bright Lance str9 but removing lance from it. My concern is the Eldars ability to open AV14 vehicles.
As it stands only yhe Nova Lance can do it. The BL change would give them another option but reduce its effectiveness somewhat due to losing lance.
Honestly man, I think you're completely off the mark here.
A Bright Lance is better against AV14 than a Lascannon (which it would otherwise be). I see no reason to change it at all tbh.
Furthermore, a fair few ranged weapons work against AV14; Bright Lance, Nova Lance, Wraithcannon, D-Cannon, Star Lance, Fusion Gun, Fire Pike, Prism Cannon, D-Pistol, Fusion Pistol...
I'd increase the Shuriken Catapult range to 18" and the Avenger SC to 24". With many armies of late being in that 24" range killzone, I think it allows the Eldar to compete on an equal footing or use their mobility to engage at better ranges. I feel the last thing that is needed is another army that can "only fight optimally in one range bracket" (yes a pinch of salt needed there but I hope you get the basic point).
I feel that would decrease some of the advantage of Dire Avengers. The Shuriken Catapult is only 12" range, but it is Assault and they can then withdraw out of assault range via Eldar Fleet; I see no reason to make Eldar more similar to other armies...
I think the Shirken Cannon at assault6 with AP4 is overpowered. It'll shred all but MEQs and the fact that it can be spammed army wide is worse. I'd reduce the Ap to 5 perhaps even 6. Wounding every troop type on 2s is very powerful as is with assault6.
Mahtmatori has addressed this...
I would change the Deathspinner to a template weapon, I think its more fluffy and will force correct placement of the user model to maximise hits rather then spam assault3 shots.
I'd say that's an interesting idea, but tbh I don't see how Template makes more sense than Assault 3.
Farseer powers.
They all look quite good. A few minor changes though I would suggest:
Change Fog of War to when it is cast the enemy must take a Ld test or suffer its effects. I think it could be very very powerful when used in conjunction with other abilities and the fact that its a simple Ld10 test to activate makes it nasty. Fearless units could be immune to represent them pushing on regardless.
Would you say it's any more powerful than some of the other Psychic Powers out there, such as Murderous Hurricane which inflicts actual damage as well as inflicting difficult terrain.
It is powerful, I won't deny, but it is short-ranged and its effects unreliable. Furthermore, would you see it regularly taken over Guide/Fortune/Doom or being more powerful than some other Psychic Powers in the game. It doesn't actually hurt the enemy and it may not even affect them too...
I would change Eldritch Storms AP from 6 to -. VS Orks, gaunts etc potentially much to strong in addition to pinning and large blast.
I can imagine being able to save 1 of 6 wounds is a significant change. Furthermore, it only affects 6+ units, which are rare, or cheap...
Warlock powers.
I would change assail to D3-1. The fact that all Lock powers are "constant" it means Warlocks are running around with an automtic extra attack, potentially up to 3 (4 on the charge). Thats 6 attacks on the charge? Very powerful!
D3-1 means they may get a couple of extra attacks or they might not. I always found it unsettling that Lock powers had beneficial strenghts with no negatives.
That's a fair point, however this would mean they have potentially no effect, which would be a big problem.
The negative here is that it's unreliable, occurs on a single model (who's Str3 or can't ignore armour saves) and is contextual.
I understand the concern, honestly, but I'm not sure it's entirely... 'correct' tbh.
I would change Expedite to simply a move through cover bonus. The secondary bonus, again, in combination with other abilities/offensive powers could be much to powerful.
What other abilities/powers?
I think just Move through cover is too weak for such a power, whilst expedite is unreliable and only affects one movement...
Paths of the Seer.
Is Bonesinger the same as other army repair abilities i.e. sacrifice a phase to do it? Or is it an "any action" sacrifice? Depending on which align it with other armies for game mechanic simplicity and fairness.
Yeah, I'll double check this against other bonuses...
I would change Warseer to not stack with enhance or assail.
Picture this combo:
4 man Warlock council as Warseers.
One "casts" enhance, another assail. They charge.
That is 4 guys at Ws7 I6 with witchbaldes wounding on 2s hitting a potential of 7 times all for 200 points on the nose? Ouch!
28 attacks, hitting on 3s vs virtually everything, wounding on 2s. Farseer casts doom on the enemy and its a steamroller unit.
True. But that is also only 4 guys, at T3, 4++. Furthermore, they don't ignore armour saves and have practically no shooting ability.
Being generous, and saying they all have assail and are all under the effects of conceal, and all have +2 attacks from conceal...
... That's 6 attacks each (24 total, without the charge). Against average MeQ's, that's 4.44 kills in total. For 200pts, with the above drawbacks.
I think a very deep analyiss will have to be done on potential power/path/weapon combos, dont get me wrong, a lot of them I love and are very well thought out individully but I can see exploits with combos even with a skim read to date.
More later hopefully.
I agree, but combinations are supposed to be there and usable. However, hopefully they remain just combinations, rather than exploitations...
Thanks for the feedback man.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Saintspirit wrote:On the Farseer, it doesn't state how many psychic powers it can have or what they cost - was this intended?
Yep. They're included in their cost and their abilities (hence the increased cost for Farseers and Spirit Stones), furthermore their ability to accessing extra powers is available through just Spirit Stones, unless a character...
I_AM_THE_SLAW wrote:Great codex, absolutely love it
Just a quick question though... I take it the fire prisms can no longer link guns as the rule isn't there anymore?
Whoops! Yeah, they can still link, I shall correct this!
Thanks man, appreciate the feedback and kind words!
MrTau wrote:I think that you should drop the hawks points to 15 so they get the same amount of laser fire as guardsmen for the same points. They are still much more fragile so 10 hawks vs 30 guardsmen seems like a upphill batlle for the hawks anyway, and that while attacking their preferd target.
I wrote this a bit further upp and i feel you havent addresed this yet so i re-posted this with some mathhammer
10 hawks (w/ out exarch) shooting at 30 guards at 18"
30 shots
20 hits
10 wounds
Guardsmen shoot back
20 shots
10 hits
5 wounds
2,5 unsaved wounds
Hawks are reduced to three quatersstrength and guardsmen two thirds. Also, the hawks began shooting at optimum range at their prefered target while being more expensive. Sure, they have jump pack, but they do not have acces to FRFSRF (or other orders), special wepons or heavy wepons while not being scoring, not being able to shoot beyond 18" not having rapid fire within 12" and can not be taken in platons.
If the guardsmen start to fire within 12" while both has acces to 4+ cover (doesent realy matter to hawks in this case) it will look like this:
Furthermore, I think such a comparison isn't entirely fair for the Swooping Hawks; it doesn't take into account their far superior mobility, their superior firepower, their slightly better toughness, their slightly better CC ability, their ability to Skyleap, their natural ability to be able to combat tanks and their different prices.
Nor does it account for all different factors that may influence the Guardsmen (orders/ numbers/ cover/ special weapons etc.)
I think such a mano-el-mano, point-to-point comparison isn't a particularly fair method of comparison for such vastly different units.
Here's two ways of looking at it:
1. 160 points of specialist unit engaging their preferred target at their preferred range and only expect to kill 60 points worth of models is a bit of a let down.
(Small note, PASM 30+ pts, TASM 54+, any Eldar infantry except Scorpions, etc are better targets)
2. In many cases, the Swooping Hawks can move in to an otherwise suicide position, shoot at a soft target such as a team of Long Fangs (of which they kill 2-ish) and then Skyleap into invulnerability.
In my mind the Swooping Hawks presented by Dave aren't a killing unit but a unit that's a pain in the arse and also a surgical tool. The balance is finding a balance where their tactical prowess meets points cost.
However, due to wound allocation rules the Swooping Hawks must be spammed in order to truly be good. Giving the Exarch a weapon option which allows him to kill hidden 'fists would make the unit godly, for example.
--
Here's a bit of constructive input. I realise that power weapons are good on sergeants, but why not reduce their costs on units that are shooty by nature? Swooping Hawks don't really want to get into melee, so why pay 10 points for a power weapon?
Warp Spider Power Blades are a good example of what I am trying to say, since for 10 points the exarch gains +1A as well.
Just don't give Swooping Hawks 3rd edition Web of Skulls
--
Oh, and while on the subject: Swooping Hawk Grenade Pack and cover! Maybe specify how to handle cover? Is it a directional blast or is it a barrage blast?
Additionally, I always found it odd that the grenade pack when fired from a lonesome 'hawk has the same strength as when fired from a full unit... but yes...
Just Dave wrote:
Furthermore, I think such a comparison isn't entirely fair for the Swooping Hawks; it doesn't take into account their far superior mobility, their superior firepower, their slightly better toughness, their slightly better CC ability, their ability to Skyleap, their natural ability to be able to combat tanks and their different prices.
Nor does it account for all different factors that may influence the Guardsmen (orders/ numbers/ cover/ special weapons etc.)
I think such a mano-el-mano, point-to-point comparison isn't a particularly fair method of comparison for such vastly different units.
Hawks have greater toughness and fire power? Mayby firepower if you factor in double grenade packs but not toughness! 10 hawks are defenetly more fragile then 30 guardsmen. Also, I think 30 guardsmen are better in assualt aswell. But, yeah I see your point and it is the problem with most mathhammer but more so in the case with two so different units.
Dire Avengers: Subsequent Shooting Phase is your opponent's shooting phase - they can't shoot then anyways D:
Striking Scorpions Hunter: "All wounds caused by the Exarch may be allocated by the Exarch's controlling player to any single wounds group." is a bit of a simplification on the wording - I believe it's what you'd intended?
Wave Serpent: perhaps mention rending as well as melta - it's a zone of contention, as d3 != d6, except you usually use a d6 to represent a d3 zzz
Nova Lance: Isn't that simply Ordnance? Or did you not want to deal with the Ordnance + other weapons firing rules :V
Fire Pike: Melta?
Biting Blade: Made at the same initiative, do the extra hits generate more hits?
Diresword: Each wound suffered, or each unsaved wound :V? Potentially awesome
Laser Lance: Perhaps rending in cc, so it can still poke landraiders in assault? Same with the star lance?
Vibrospear see Biting blade
Wraithsabres: Mention that the str is sacrificed and the attacks are made at the model's initiative.
Banshee Mask: Perhaps Ignores all other initiative modifiers, period?
Heavy Aspect Warrior Armour: Typically, models with Heavy* aspect warrior armour do not have fleet?
Neuro Disruptor: "At the beginning of combat, after assault moves but before blows are struck..."
Repulsor Field vs 6+ to hit on cc =...?
Power Diversion Matrix - decreased -> Improved.
Targeting Beacon: Furthermore, it *gains the Acute Senses rule
I always use your dex in vassal, and it's gaining traction at my FLGS. Keep on truckin'!
I must say, one thing I’m surprised people haven’t commented on so far is the Craftworld-to-special character ratio/balance/representation…
Ratius wrote: Change Fog of War to when it is cast the enemy must take a Ld test or suffer its effects. I think it could be very very powerful when used in conjunction with other abilities and the fact that its a simple Ld10 test to activate makes it nasty. Fearless units could be immune to represent them pushing on regardless.
As Mahtamori demonstrated, the chances of failing a leadership test are quite slim, whereas something like an initiative test – whilst preferable to leadership, unless the leadership is on 3D6 – only has one attempt at passing/failing, meaning your power has a flat-out chance of doing nothing, whereas things like JotWW and Warp Rift inflict multiple initiative tests.
Furthermore, would you say Fog of War is more powerful than the psychic abilities (or non-psychic, such as Necrons Tremostave/Writhing Worldscape etc.) that enforce/inflict difficult terrain; as these abilities both reduce movement and can inflict casualties?
I can understand your concern and I’ll likely change it to a Leadership test at Ld8 or on 3D6, but otherwise I’m reluctant to opt for a standard leadership test or single characteristic test.
As a note, Fog of War doesn’t so much as represent fear (but it kind of can/does), but the psyker inflicting hallucinations and false images and psychic mist etc. upon the enemy. Akin to the power presented in the Gaunts Ghosts 2nd novel (forget the name), but much less powerful.
woodbok wrote: Autarch W/ Dragons breath flamer and seer strike
Autarch W/ Dragons breath flamer
4 Fire dragons + exarch W/ Dragons breath flamer and crack shot // Wave serpent W/ 2X Shruiken cannons and spirit stones
4 Fire dragons + exarch W/ Dragons breath flamer and crack shot // Wave serpent W/ 2X Shruiken cannons and spirit stones
4 Avengers + Exarch // Wave serpent W/ 2X Shruiken cannons and spirit stones
4 Avengers + Exarch // Wave serpent W/ 2X Shruiken cannons and spirit stones
Asp W/ Vibro cannon
Asp W/ Vibro cannon
Asp W/ Vibro cannon
3X War walkers W/ 6 Scatter lasers
3X War walkers W/ 6 Scatter lasers
3X War walkers W/ 6 Scatter lasers
I will be playtesting this list against blood angels soon.
Nice list man, please let me know how it goes Woodbok! Cheers!
Ratius wrote: For the Wraithlord, I'd drop his T to 7. I think T8 is gone the way of the Dodo and we might as well keep him up with current trends. A cost drop of 5-10 points could compensate.
Again for flexibilty I would drop the rule that he must take an extra heavy weapon, I'd be very happy having both catapults upgraded to Reapers and leaving it at that. Forcing players to take another HW is perhaps not necessary and he can only fire two weapons a turn anyway so. Having him as a big loaded gunship dosent fit with the fluff imho.
Whoops! Realised I didn’t address this point.
I had considered changing him to T7 and did the math-hammer at T7/W4 and IIRC he was then actually less survivable than he is currently (whereas I wanted it to be more survivable). I did also consider T7/W5 but in the end I stuck with T8.
I considered this, as, as you said, T8 is only present on the Wraithlord these days IIRC…
As for the enforced upgrade, bare-bones Wraithlord at 105pts would not serve much real purpose other than to soak wounds/firepower; this isn’t really a characterful unit design not does it suit the Eldar way IMHO. An enforced upgrade need only cost 10pts however and can turn your Wraithlord into a capable close combat model – and ranged with Reaper Launchers – adding a degree of flexibility.
I think that he’s either carrying a huge pokey stick (CCW) or gun does fit with the fluff and their previous designs IMHO.
Mahtamori wrote: Here's two ways of looking at it:
1. 160 points of specialist unit engaging their preferred target at their preferred range and only expect to kill 60 points worth of models is a bit of a let down.
True, but that’s also not taking into account the grenade pack or that the Swooping Hawks could move out of effective/rapid fire range of the guardsmen via Eldar Fleet.
Note however that they cannot do both in the same turn (cannot Eldar fleet if arrived via deepstrike that turn), so the player has the choice of increased damage output (Grenade Pack) or increased safety/survivability (Eldar fleet).
Furthermore, this 95-160pts unit is also capable of destroying any vehicle in the game AFAIK.
2. In many cases, the Swooping Hawks can move in to an otherwise suicide position, shoot at a soft target such as a team of Long Fangs (of which they kill 2-ish) and then Skyleap into invulnerability.
Just to clarify however, they couldn’t deepstrike behind this unit and then Skyleap on the same turn, if that’s what you’re suggesting.
In my mind the Swooping Hawks presented by Dave aren't a killing unit but a unit that's a pain in the arse and also a surgical tool. The balance is finding a balance where their tactical prowess meets points cost.
Exactly. It’s never been my intention to make swooping hawks a real killing unit or one that will excel in a straight-up fight, but an excellent hit and run unit and one that can kill both infantry or vehicles, particularly if combined with other units (as Eldar should; work in conjunction), whether it be to Haywire a stunned/stationary vehicle, weaken/finish off a horde alongside units such as Dire Avengers, Sundering Sentinels, War Walkers etc. or harass the enemy and their otherwise out-of-reach units.
I’m not sure I’ve achieved this perfectly and obviously they have already had to be changed, but I think with the above role in mind they are at least decent. As I said, there’s a lot of factors that makes straight-up math-hammering them in a single context/vacuum against a single unit flawed IMHO. Also note that in their latest role, Swooping Hawks are cheaper and can perform multiple Skyleaps in one game (but not in the same turn/if in assault, so they’re not without issue)
Also, Scourges are 22pts yet semi-competitive.
Here's a bit of constructive input. I realise that power weapons are good on sergeants, but why not reduce their costs on units that are shooty by nature? Swooping Hawks don't really want to get into melee, so why pay 10 points for a power weapon?
Warp Spider Power Blades are a good example of what I am trying to say, since for 10 points the exarch gains +1A as well.
That’s a fair call man, but these Sergeants are also fast, WS5, A2 and I6 (though only Str3), whilst 10pts provides close-combat viability and ability, enabling some shooting units (e.g. Hawks/Spiders/Sentinels) to perform in close combat in a pinch too.
Ultimately, I’d say the main problem is that at 5pts it’s too cheap as well…
Oh, and while on the subject: Swooping Hawk Grenade Pack and cover! Maybe specify how to handle cover? Is it a directional blast or is it a barrage blast?
Additionally, I always found it odd that the grenade pack when fired from a lonesome 'hawk has the same strength as when fired from a full unit... but yes...
I’d imagine it would be determined in the same way as normal blasts; from the centre of the blast?
I know what you mean about the always-full-strength blast mechanic, but changing it to per-individual is difficult. Although, I guess granting each Hawk a single Str 4, AP5 ranged attack on the turn they deepstrike wouldn’t be unreasonable instead. Also, theoretically, if on the turn they deepstruck the Grenade Pack made their ranged attacks Str 4, rather than Str3, that would make Swooping Hawks a better, killy, unit...
MrTau wrote: Hawks have greater toughness and fire power?
Well, individually…
nathan2195 wrote: Also Great work much better then current dex and will hopefully use this dex on the next weekend.
Thanks man, I appreciate the kind words!
chrisrawr wrote:RAWR! A couple of things
Dire Avengers: Subsequent Shooting Phase is your opponent's shooting phase - they can't shoot then anyways D:
Will be clarified to subsequent Eldar shooting phase.
Striking Scorpions Hunter: "All wounds caused by the Exarch may be allocated by the Exarch's controlling player to any single wounds group." is a bit of a simplification on the wording - I believe it's what you'd intended?
Will be changed to a blend of both; thanks.
Wave Serpent: perhaps mention rending as well as melta - it's a zone of contention, as d3 != d6, except you usually use a d6 to represent a d3 zzz
Will be clarified, and will not affect rending; they’re tough enough as it is IMHO.
Nova Lance: Isn't that simply Ordnance? Or did you not want to deal with the Ordnance + other weapons firing rules :V
Same effect yeah. But as you said, it’s not actually ordnance.
Fire Pike: Melta?
Whoops! Good catch. Will be changed.
Biting Blade: Made at the same initiative, do the extra hits generate more hits?
No, they don’t generate extra hits; this will be clarified. And yeah, it’s still at normal initiative unless stated otherwise…
Diresword: Each wound suffered, or each unsaved wound :V? Potentially awesome
Yeah, the entry states “unsaved wound”
Laser Lance: Perhaps rending in cc, so it can still poke landraiders in assault? Same with the star lance?
Well they still strike as lance’s at range, so can still harm Land Raiders at range, otherwise at Str6 striking rear armour they’re plenty capable against vehicles, I’m not sure I want them any more powerful against vehicles than this (which is already pretty powerful), but I could make it so they’re lances in CC too.
Wraithsabres: Mention that the str is sacrificed and the attacks are made at the model's initiative.
As with all special CC weapons (AFAIK) they will still strike at normal initiative; same with witchblades/lightning claws/power weapons etc.
Banshee Mask: Perhaps Ignores all other initiative modifiers, period?
Good idea, I don’t see why I didn’t think of this sooner… I can’t think of any modifiers that should actually affect it?
Heavy Aspect Warrior Armour: Typically, models with Heavy* aspect warrior armour do not have fleet?
Again, nice catch!
Neuro Disruptor: "At the beginning of combat, after assault moves but before blows are struck..."
Good call; will be changed.
Repulsor Field vs 6+ to hit on cc =...?
Will remain 6+ and I’ll change it, cheers!
Power Diversion Matrix - decreased -> Improved.
Yep; AP is strange like that and hence the example!
Targeting Beacon: Furthermore, it *gains the Acute Senses rule
Same thing really…
I always use your dex in vassal, and it's gaining traction at my FLGS. Keep on truckin'!
Wow. Brilliant! I’ve been disappointed by how little feedback this has been getting, so I really appreciate that it’s picking up in your area and you use it, thanks man, thanks a lot!
Thanks for the re-wording feedback too, that will be included in the next version. Cheers!
How do you find its performance in vassal? Balanced? OP? Fun?
----
Right, I think that's all the feedback I need to respond to for the moment...
" Diresword: Each wound suffered, or each unsaved wound :V? Potentially awesome
Yeah, the entry states “unsaved wound” "
It stated each wound suffered when I read it, which was why I brought it up. While potentially awesome, I figured it might not've been what you were looking for.
I brought up the extra generated attacks from things because everything that generates extra attacks AFAIK states which initiative they're generated on.
The lances in CC I just brought up because, on 6's, they're already penning any rear armour in the game - Rending or Lance in CC would just allow them to continue this trend against landraiders.
Haven't had a chance to use it yet, my guineapigs have been busy with school lately.
OK, on the game, I forgot to take pics. Although, the general outline of the game was that the Asps with vibro cannons did an amazing job of keeping blood angel predators shaken. And although I only have 2 troops, you don't actually need more. The war walkers kill anything big, the asps suppress vehicles, and fire dragons kill big tanks.
Another awesome codex, well done dave.
I wept with joy and grief at this Codex. Joy because it fixes many of the problems with the Eldar, and grief because GW won't touch this with a forty-foot pole.
Not to throw too much of a damper on it, but the "leak" is far from confirmed whether it is an actual GW document, not to mention that it has nothing to do with a 5th edition fandex
Fact of the matter is, Eldar will remain without an up to date codex for nearly another year, so refining Dave's codex to a state where more people will find it acceptable and challenging is very much a good endeavour.
No one was claiming the leak is going to be anywhere near officail 6e. But it's really, REALLY fun to play, and having a 'dex updated with rules for it would be all the better!
chrisrawr wrote:The lances in CC I just brought up because, on 6's, they're already penning any rear armour in the game - Rending or Lance in CC would just allow them to continue this trend against landraiders.
True, but I think it's fair that Land Raiders/Monoliths don't also have to fear assault (put can still be nuked by shooting) considering their toughness/price/etc...
I completely understand what you're saying, and thank ye for the feedback, but I think it's OK for Spears to not be able to take out a LR in CC too...
woodbok wrote:OK, on the game, I forgot to take pics. Although, the general outline of the game was that the Asps with vibro cannons did an amazing job of keeping blood angel predators shaken. And although I only have 2 troops, you don't actually need more. The war walkers kill anything big, the asps suppress vehicles, and fire dragons kill big tanks.
Another awesome codex, well done dave.
Don't worry about pics; it's more the feedback that's important to me (then again, I wouldn't complain at pics either; loves me a good battle report!), thanks man.
Thanks for the big compliment and feedback Woodbok; seriously, cheers.
Would you say the 'dex seemed balanced to you or Vibro Cannons were too good? From your general outline it sounds like you kicked ass, however it also sounds like you have a really good game plan and really well designed list and pulled it off, deserving the win.
All feedback, particularly from this and any future playtesting is welcome man, cheers!
Mordoskul wrote:I wept with joy and grief at this Codex. Joy because it fixes many of the problems with the Eldar, and grief because GW won't touch this with a forty-foot pole.
Thanks!
Ratius wrote:How much does 6ths imment release (leak) put a dampener on this?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Any point in continuing through it?
chrisrawr wrote:I was actually going through my own dex in 6e perspective; I'll go through Dave's and see what might benefit from some basic changes.
Mahtamori wrote:Not to throw too much of a damper on it, but the "leak" is far from confirmed whether it is an actual GW document, not to mention that it has nothing to do with a 5th edition fandex
Fact of the matter is, Eldar will remain without an up to date codex for nearly another year, so refining Dave's codex to a state where more people will find it acceptable and challenging is very much a good endeavour.
It's not changed anything for me.
6th Edition is what, 6 months away, at least? Particularly with GW's secrecy-policies, there's little way to predict 6th edition or what it will contain, outside of a questionably-accurate leak.
This Codex was designed with 5th edition in mind and I think it would still be pretty good under any later rules too, however if 6th edition comes around (whenever) and it does need an update, then if people are still using this Codex (which I'd love to be the case) then I'll update it for 6th, but as it stands, it doesn't change a thing for me, nor will it for a pretty long time in all likelihood...
VIth legion wrote:Will you be updating this with the new units from IA 11?
No. I don't have any plans to.
For me, Imperial Armour =/= Codex. I'm happy for some things to remain separate and exclusive to one-another (otherwise people would only buy the Codex for one thing; screwing over FW) whilst some units either don't fit, aren't needed, aren't good or are already well accounted for in what is an already pretty-well-accommodated FOC.
When creating the Codex I did consider some FW units, such as Hornets, Wasps, Warp Hunters etc. But I thought they didn't really fit; Hornets and Warp Hunters overlap too much with Vypers and Asps, whilst Wasps are an odd concept that isn't likely to be really missed within the Codex and again, I think most FOC slots are pretty full IMHO.
If you're asking about Shadow Spectres specifically, then I addressed them last page IIRC.
Falcon: Maybe add to the respective unit entries May select a Falcon (see page 35), may only be selected by one unit per army. Just to be a bit more clear on the options. My wording is grossly imperfect, though.
Dark Reapers: Mind Link is good, but why not tie it in with their wargear. Stick it into their mask and make the mask available to the Autarch as well!
Support Platform: The Guardians arming these platforms are essentially Defenders, but they come equipped with Plasma Grenades while Defenders do not?
Sundering Sentinels: What does a Hip-Cannon look like?
I also find it odd that the Exarch of a ranged infantry unit can only upgrade his weapon with melee variations.
Autarch: Shouldn't Hip-Cannon be one of the options?
Falcon: Maybe add to the respective unit entries May select a Falcon (see page 35), may only be selected by one unit per army. Just to be a bit more clear on the options. My wording is grossly imperfect, though.
Originally I was going to do this, but I think the entry in solely the Falcon listing is better/clearer as it makes it much clearer that it's only 1-per-army, which is much less clear with the above IMHO...
Dark Reapers: Mind Link is good, but why not tie it in with their wargear. Stick it into their mask and make the mask available to the Autarch as well!
Nice idea and I had considered this, but realistically it should only work with the Reaper Launcher and then you get into the issue of would it be taken over something like mandiblasters/banshee mask/crystalline?
Support Platform: The Guardians arming these platforms are essentially Defenders, but they come equipped with Plasma Grenades while Defenders do not?
Good spot; this is changed and will appear in the next update...
Sundering Sentinels: What does a Hip-Cannon look like?
I also find it odd that the Exarch of a ranged infantry unit can only upgrade his weapon with melee variations.
I imagine the hip-cannon as a slightly smaller Shuriken Cannon (kinda similar to Maugan Ra's) that is supported at the forearm and by the linked plate armour via anti-grav/fancy-tech means, or more conventional/low-tech means; therefore held at the hip in a similar manner to Smart Guns off Aliens...
Autarch: Shouldn't Hip-Cannon be one of the options?
I would, but the hip-cannon requires linked plate-armour as support and is quite cumbersome (i.e. can you imagine it being used alongside some close-combat dealies?!).
You may then ask why linked-plate-armour isn't an option, which I have also considered but ultimately decided against it (for now...) as it would cost Eldar Fleet and would be liable to become a must-take...
Bladestorm only functions if the Autarch with the squad has a Shuriken weapon. Mind Link could function "with a missile launcher only". Speaking of which, I don't have the PDF at work, can the Exarch/Phoenix Lord still use a Shuriken Cannon / Maugetar with this rule?
Mahtamori wrote:Bladestorm only functions if the Autarch with the squad has a Shuriken weapon. Mind Link could function "with a missile launcher only". Speaking of which, I don't have the PDF at work, can the Exarch/Phoenix Lord still use a Shuriken Cannon / Maugetar with this rule?
Nope, though the Maugetar would have be benefiting from Fast Shot anyway, so it's at +1 RoF anyways...
As I mentioned in my previous post regarding mind-link; I would imagine it would ultimately be too limited a piece of wargear to be worth taking over the other options?
Right, here is the 1st in a series of posts I will make providing possible army lists (1750pts) with this Codex in order to demonstrate and explore possible builds and (hopefully) balance within the Codex, whilst hopefully keeping it near the top of proposed rules (88 comments, over 2000 views; really?! ).
Some of these lists will be designed to be flat-out competitive, others themed or both...
First up, Saim Hann:
HQ - Autarch - Swift Strike, Eldar Jetbike, Mandiblasters, Dragon's Breath Flamer, Executioner - 135pts
Troops - 5 Eldar Jetbikes - 2 Shuriken Cannons, 1 Warlock with Singing Spear and Conceal - 173pts
Troops - 5 Eldar Jetbikes - 2 Shuriken Cannons, 1 Warlock with Singing Spear and Conceal - 173pts
Troops - 5 Eldar Jetbikes - 1 Shuriken Cannon, 1 Warlock with Singing Spear and Conceal - 163pts
Fast Attack - 5 Shining Spears - Exarch w/ Star Lance - 155pts
Fast Attack - 5 Shining Spears - Exarch w/ Power Weapon - 140pts
Heavy Support - Fire Prism - Power Diversion Matrix - 125pts
Heavy Support - Fire Prism - 120pts
Heavy Support - Night Spinner - Power Diversion Matrix - 125pts
Total: 1749pts
So a themed and hopefully semi-competitive Saim-Hann list. Heavy-anti-tank comes from the 4 Bright Lances, Star Lance and 2 Fire Prisms, whilst the 2 EML's, 3 Singing Spears and even Night Spinner can provide some additional anti-tank if needed.
Obviously this army packs loads of mobility; the Vypers and Heavy Support will hang back and provide fire support, hopefully enabling them to stay away from any serious anti-tank firepower whilst the Vypers can seize objectives, whilst the Jetbikes (all with skilled rider) zoom forwards to engage the enemy, using hit and run tactics whilst the Autarch and Shining Spears engage anything heavy. With Stealth and Skilled Rider, the Guardian Jetbikes can either turbo-boost or remain in cover for a good cover save and therefore durability.
Weaknesses are however: fragile vehicles, low model count (26 MeQ's) and potential problems against large numbers.
On the topic of Saim-Hann, I'm still missing more interesting under-slung upgrades for Guardians. Cannons are all fine and well, but I'm looking at the Webway Eldar codex and their bikes are more interesting in their customization.
I had considered more options for Guardian Jetbikes (and still may), such as Flamers, Fusion Guns, Laser Lances etc. but ultimately I decided against it as I felt many of these (such as Fusion Guns) would encourage an almost suicide-role, which is something I feel the Eldar should avoid when at all possible.
Maybe I'm deluding myself, and such a role cannot be avoided or should not be avoided, but I didn't want to endorse such gameplay with Eldar jetbikes...
I assume by Webway Eldar you mean Dark Eldar?
Yeah, honestly don't know why I wrote it like that...
Fusion guns are always going to be a bit iffy, but looking at how Dark Eldar guns are configured you have a longer ranged melta weapon with lower strength. Possibilities abound, haywire launcher? Straight up heavy weapon similar to Defender options (risks making Scatter Laser spam)?
The Jetbikes seem a bit weak for their points, though, since their gear essentially hasn't changed. Their main role remains last-turn objective grabbers.
The fact that there's no model in the 4th edition codex carrying catapults that are actually good is a good motivation for simply improving the catapult rather than individually each model.
Right, here is the 2nd in a series of posts I will make providing possible army lists (1750pts) with this Codex in order to demonstrate and explore possible builds and (hopefully) balance within the Codex, whilst hopefully keeping it near the top of proposed rules (92 comments, over 2500 views; really?! ).
Some of these lists will be designed to be flat-out competitive, others themed or both...
In at number two; a Deepstrike/Webway list.
HQ - Autarch - Master Strategist - Web Beacon, Warp Jump Generator, Firepike, Executioner, Solar Flare - 140pts
Troops - 5 Rangers - Star Rifle, Pathfinder - 130pts
Troops - 5 Rangers - Star Rifle, Pathfinder - 130pts
Troops - 5 Rangers - Star Rifle - 105pts
Fast Attack - 6 Warp Spiders - Exarch w/ Power Blades & Exarch Twin Death Spinners - 161pts
Fast Attack - 6 Warp Spiders - Exarch w/ Power Blades & Exarch Twin Death Spinners - 161pts
Heavy Support - 2 Support Weapon Platforms - 2x Nova Lance - 90pts
Heavy Support - 2 Support Weapon Platforms - 2x Nova Lance - 90pts
Total: 1748pts
Looks like a pretty funky army to me. No vehicles, 5 scoring units, 14 Kill Points.
The Support Platforms and Rangers would start on the board, hopefully popping some vehicles (Sun Rifles & Lances) and generally hindering the enemy until the goodies show up.
The Autarchs can manipulate reserves until ready, then the Deepstrike Units can arrive around the Rangers (without scatter; Web Beacons) and be unleashed upon the enemy; the Autarchs and Warpspiders or Fire Dragons handling serious threats, whilst the former and Dire Avengers go after infantry (though the Autarchs have firepikes for flexibility) and the latter handle tanks.
Doesn't look too bad to me, but I think there's a good chance it's too gimmicky to be too competitive however.
--------
Writing this up did illuminate me to a couple of mistakes within the 'dex; namely some units (Vypers & HQ's) not having access to Webway gear. Obviously this will be updated in the next update, in the mean time I'm pondering Shuriken Catapults (Mahtamori)...
--------
As ever, all C&C is welcome. Please spread the word of this Codex or try out some army lists of your own! Thanks, Dave.
I have decided that this will almost certainly be the last Fandex I make. With the low view-to-comment ratio, it's easy to get frustrated with a lack of feedback for something that so much work went into, although it is also fun making them...
In other news, the Shuriken Catapult will be getting changed. As it stands, it'll be getting changed to a 18", Strength 3, Armour Piercing 5, Assault 3 weapon.
Before people potentially scream of a nerf, I will interject that the only thing it is worse against is T5 and above targets and vehicles; both of whom were unlikely or unsuitable targets anyway.
In exchange, a Shuriken Catapult would be better against GeQ, equal against Space Marines and have greater range.
This means that the Shuriken Cannon will be further diversified as a result of its Str4.
Another way this works is that it has always struck me as odd how a weapon that ultimately fires discs is as powerful as a mini-grenade-launcher (read, Boltgun). The Shuriken Catapults main advantage should now be it's RoF as the fluff suggests.
A fairly controversial change, I admit, but I think it makes sense. What this means for the Avenger Shuriken Catapult or Lasblaster I haven't decided yet...
*Maths calculated with Heresy Combat Calculator*
In other, other, news, here's my 3rd list, Elfzilla:
Heavy Support - Wraithlord - 2x Flamer, Nova Lance - 140pts
Heavy Support - Wraithlord - Bright Lance, Eldar Missile Launcher - 165pts
Heavy Support - Wraithlord - Bright Lance, Eldar Missile Launcher - 165pts
Total: 1748pts
So the classic Elfzilla. Pretty one-dimensional; slow, short-ranged, low on numbers, but really frickin' tough. With 5 monstrous creatures and 15 Wraithguard it's a tough cookie to put down, simple as that.
Yo if you use vassal at all, seriously hit me up most mornings PST after 7amish, or all next week past 5pm. I'll throw together a bunch of lists, from nids to guard to marines, and we can get some serious playtesting in. Everything I've played and seen of your dex has been nothing but fancy goodiness in my opinion.
I know it can be annoying when the feedback dries up, but tbh I think a simple list of additions/alterations would work wonders. Even after reading the OP I wasn't really sure what (other than point costs perhaps) had actually been changed. Granted, I don't play Eldar, but making things a little clearer would help a lot.
Not trying to nitpick, just saying. You obviously put a lot of effort into this.
I have decided that this will almost certainly be the last Fandex I make. With the low view-to-comment ratio, it's easy to get frustrated with a lack of feedback for something that so much work went into, although it is also fun making them...
Im not quite sure what you are looking for JD. Seems a bit like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
If I recall your Chaos Dex had over 25 pages?
The Eldar one has 4.
However, and this is the salient point, whilst the work gone into the Eldar one was great, the Eldar themselves didnt need a huge rewrite, their army despite being well "out of date" is still fun to play with, semi competitive and has several builds that are playable.
Chaos had none of those features and was not just out of date it was pretty much defunct.
As a result you had 3 factors coming into play:
1. A much larger fanbase for the Chaos codex all of whom had a vested and passionate interest in it
2. A Codex that was functional and hence didnt need as many tweaks, meaning not as many people had an interest or could see the benefits (Eldar)
3. The ratio of Chaos players (old and new) to Eldar in general
That inevitable has led to the lack of excitment and feedback around the Codex.
In addition to that there is the immenent release of 6th edition. I acknowledge we've dicsussed this previously but for me I am quite worried about how relevant his Codex will be come 6th and the proposed changes I've seen. Reviewing, critiquing and commenting on a Codex takes quite a lot of time and you have to be focused and ready to look at all angles of it. For some people I have no doubt its a case of "its a lot of work to feedback on this Codex when it'll be defunct with 6th". Whether it actually becomes defunct or not is another argument but I'll wager that mental effort is being directed more towards the 6th ed rumour threads then here unfortunately.
Added to that is the fact that the Codex seems to be pretty much finished from what I can tell , needing only minor tweaks so obviously comments are going to dry up. Thats just the way threads naturally evolve.
I've seen batreps, proposed rules and generally interesting threads with literally 0 replies so I'd take your disappointment with a pinch of salt and hopefully some perspective.
You admit you enjoy writing the Codices and even if it hasnt got 25 pages of comments 4 is still quite good and I personally enjoyed the back and forth in thread and discussion
Take a break from writing and come back fresh is my advice. Perspective is everything.
I think another factor playing into it is that we've already had more than 200 pages of Eldar codex discussion, which inevitably died down when someone actually compiled a codex out of it :p
With the Eldar codex it is a matter of either updating it, which honestly GW could've done with a 3-4 page errata, or redesigning it. The latter will cause some upset since Eldar is a fairly well established army in how they are portrayed - even if the army's execution hardly represents their presentation, their units have a fairly set-in-stone kit of gear.
You can't just give Guardians some other weapon, even though the codex' internal balance needs it. It would be like giving Space Marines multilasers (*kicks a BL book under the table*).
So, the fandex went the update path. Least amount of kinks to work out, fewer ruffled feelings, less "but this unit is portrayed like this and not that".
Personally, I'd like to see a redefined Eldar codex. Less something-of-everything, more focused on being good in a certain area. Tau, for instance, do not have melee units as such. Eldar have melee, ranged, long range, jump, vehicles, monsters, etc etc. They are the most complete and diverse army out there, even more so than IG, and it is this that I'd like to see... go away.
What I'd like to see is remove Eldar long-range focus. In short, anti-tau (although still not a horde army).
I'm sorry to hear that this will likely be your last fandex Dave. You have done a great job with both of the ones you've done so far.
I would like to point out, however, that not having much feedback isn't always a bad thing. Think about how many kinks you had to work out of your chaos codex before you got things to where you feel it is "done" and compare it to the lack of rewrites you've had to do for the Eldar codex. With a few typos, and forgotten things here and there that you had to update, and tweaking of some other things, you pretty much hit the nail on the head in your first swing with this codex. All that's left, is playtesting.
With playtesting, comes its own difficulties. Someone earlier mentioned that they're gaming store had started to recognize and use your codex (I can't remember if it was just this one, just chaos, or both) as a standard for their respective armies. However, other people are having a hard time finding opponents to play against with the codex. As Eldar seems to have less of a fan base on this forum than chaos, you'll have less potential players. So this could be another contribution.
In short, don't lose hope Dave. Your dex (both of them) are awesome, and I, for one, am sad that I have yet to be able to even give the sucker(s) a try myself. :(
After a big read, i say i generally like the codex. But just generally. There are some stuff that irks me:
- I'm not a big fan of the layout. It's a bit chaotic with all that special rules and wargears scattered in the codex.
- Eldar Fleet is a bit messy. If you ask me, it should give a fix 6" run instead of Assault phase movement.
- This new Wraithsight gives a huuuuge boost to Wraith constructs. Outside of close-combat, this special rule is completely negligible.
- The Phoenix Reborn special rule is a bit odd. I mean, what is its point? And isn't it a bit unfluffy?
- I think the Farseer is completely unfluffy. The OPest psyker of the craftworld and has one psychic ability? Srsly? It should take any number of powers. The first is free, any other is 10 pts per power or so.
- Not a fan of the "Exarch weapons for the Autarch!" movement. Exarch weapons should be weapons of the Exarches. And as far as i know, Autarch are not Exarches, and they never were.
- I think the compulsory Exarch for the aspect warriors is needless.
- Uhhh... The Harlequins are different from the Harlequins in the DE codex...
- Rangers are slightly underpriced with their built-in Pathfinder upgrade. It is used to be a 5 ppm upgrade...
- I guess you should meld the Support weapons into the Guardian Defender weapon options. Just for simplicity's sake.
- The Wraithlord is now completely OP. T8, W4 and 115 points? Is that a Carnifex crying in the corner?
- And what's happend with the Shuriken Cannon? Why S4? -2 Strength and +3 RoF is hardly a fair trade.
- Bright lances are badly overcosted. Should be 15 points or 20 at maximum.
- Oh, and i'm a big fan of Heavy 3 Star Cannons. Heavy 2 is a bit... insufficent.
After a big read, i say i generally like the codex. But just generally. There are some stuff that irks me:
- I'm not a big fan of the layout. It's a bit chaotic with all that special rules and wargears scattered in the codex.
- Eldar Fleet is a bit messy. If you ask me, it should give a fix 6" run instead of Assault phase movement.
- This new Wraithsight gives a huuuuge boost to Wraith constructs. Outside of close-combat, this special rule is completely negligible.
- The Phoenix Reborn special rule is a bit odd. I mean, what is its point? And isn't it a bit unfluffy?
- I think the Farseer is completely unfluffy. The OPest psyker of the craftworld and has one psychic ability? Srsly? It should take any number of powers. The first is free, any other is 10 pts per power or so.
- Not a fan of the "Exarch weapons for the Autarch!" movement. Exarch weapons should be weapons of the Exarches. And as far as i know, Autarch are not Exarches, and they never were.
- I think the compulsory Exarch for the aspect warriors is needless.
- Uhhh... The Harlequins are different from the Harlequins in the DE codex...
- Rangers are slightly underpriced with their built-in Pathfinder upgrade. It is used to be a 5 ppm upgrade...
- I guess you should meld the Support weapons into the Guardian Defender weapon options. Just for simplicity's sake.
- The Wraithlord is now completely OP. T8, W4 and 115 points? Is that a Carnifex crying in the corner?
- And what's happend with the Shuriken Cannon? Why S4? -2 Strength and +3 RoF is hardly a fair trade.
- Bright lances are badly overcosted. Should be 15 points or 20 at maximum.
- Oh, and i'm a big fan of Heavy 3 Star Cannons. Heavy 2 is a bit... insufficent.
Some of your pointsdon't make sense to me. I'll address them, and Dave can sort through it
- Phoenix reborn is actually the most fluffy way to represent the phoenix lords.
- Autarchs may not have Exarch weapons in the fluff, but they usually carry the best of the best weapons the craftworld has to offer (Or so it would seem from what I've read in the newest BL eldar books) It would make sense to me that instead of adding a bunch of unique weapons that this one character can use, you just allow access to exarch weapons. As these weapons would follow a similar structure, with only slight differences in the story anyways, I see no problem with it on the table top.
- Exarchs should be compulsory. An aspect shrine doesn't usually go to war without their exarch. So why would they on a tabletop? How many space marine companies do you see without their sergeant? Not too many, I'd imagine.
- Harlequin's aren't the same as the Dark Eldar book!? Oh noez! Personally, I think they should have been changed in the dark eldar book, and one of these days, harlequins WILL change, and guess what... you guessed it, they will change in either D.Eldar or C:Eldar first before the other is errata'd. I don't see the problem with the change.
- Rangers underpriced? Yeah, they are cheaper then what we have now, but they aren't exactly great at their current price right now, are they? (And if you are one of the people that think they are, I don't want to have that argument in this thread, as it would horribly derail things, so PM me and we'll discuss it. Who knows, we might change one another's minds)
- Wraithlords are a gimmick right now. For 90 points (Oh yeah, they're cheaper right now... or did you forget that?) they are T8, with 3 wounds. A missile launcher, meltagun, hell, any anti-tank weapon that are overly abundant these days, take these things down without a problem. For a 25 point upgrade, they got upgraded, and made a little better. Who knows, maybe now they would be considered tournament level, as opposed to friendly? As to the carnifex comment, of course it's crying, it's a terrible unit that shouldn't see the table in the current edition. I hope the wraithlord is never reduced to that level of unplayability.
- I was a bit confused about the cannon change myself, but after looking things over, I'm for it. Eldar have a great deal of S6 firepower. Another one, isn't too useful. However, giving your tanks an underslug cannon (Which is now a defensive weapon with a high rate of fire) is now a good option. Means I can slap on my typical scatter laser, upgrade to the cannon from the catapult, and still move my 12" giving me decent anti tank (from the scatter) and great anti infantry (From the high RoF from both weapons). Truly Eldar to make tanks so versatile.
However, Dave, there are a few points I do agree with, and since someone brought them up, I will bring them up again, as they are just what I mentioned before - Farseer's should be stronger psychically. Honestly, with the introduction of Grey Knight Librarians (Who naturally cast 2, and can upgrade to cast 3 psychic powers) I wouldn't be too shocked to see it standard for Farseer's to cast 3 abilities, and warlocks to cast 1 (with an upgrade option to 2). This would stay with the fluff, as by the time they have become a farseer, they would have mastered many different runes, as has been shown by the books. You could make it less powerful, and say that they can't cast the same power twice, or something along those lines to balance it. (That said, something would need to change to Eldrad, to make him more unique.)
- Bright lances need a point reduction. They are completely off the charts! Dark Eldar get their lances for what? 10 points on their tanks? Most even come standard? I'm not asking for that level, as they are the lance masters, but a little leway should be given, I think.
Guess there were only two... Ah well.
Anyways, sorry if it came off a bit snippy. It wasn't intended to be (But on the re-read it sounds that way to me, and I'm the one who wrote it!) so I wanted to let everyone know, it's not meant that way, so please don't take it that way!
Sloooooow response to AtoMaki: - The layout is less spread out than in the GW codexes. Wargear and abilities is gathered in one place, and only ever placed with the units if the wargear or ability is unique to that ability. In GW codexes you may have to look up unit X AND Y in order to get the wargear for units A B and C. - Wraithsight isn't that much different. It just doesn't kill you off if you fail it. - Phoenix Reborn is taken from Path of the Warrior, where Karandras absorbs the body of an Exarch in order to be reborn - I'll agree on the low amount of initial psychic powers considering that the considerably less knowledgeable librarians start with two. - In truth, Autarchs have their own weapons which are at least on par with exarchs'. - Mandatory squad leaders follow examples set in all other codexes. - Harlequins in DE codex are 4th edition Harlequins, not 5th. - Old costs have no bearing what so ever on new ones. Just because Ranger upgrades used to be 5 ppm doesn't mean it's worth it. Same goes for Bright Lance, but the other direction. - It is interesting you compare the Wraithlord to the Carnifex, a model which has seen it's glory days pass and is in decline. Currently the Wraithlord is good, but only situationally point effective. - Do the math on the Shuriken Cannon, or look up my post earlier in the thread. It's actually a damage improvement against all infantry - PLUS it is a defensive weapon now! Downside is that it's not able to damage vehicles. - I tend to agree on the Bright Lance. It is a Missile Launcher without Frag, but with Lance - meaning it's the same against AV10-12, better against AV13-14, and significantly worse against infantry of all sorts except TEQ. It shouldn't cost more than the Missile Launcher, maybe not necessarily less, but definitely not more.
Star Cannon. I tend to agree. At 25 points, the Star Cannon offer no significant improvement over the Scatter Laser at killing marines in cover, no improvement other than cost compared to the current Star Cannon at killing them outside of cover, it's improved ability to damage vehicles is only marginally better than a missile launcher or scatter laser on AV12 and worse on lower AV compared to the Scatter Laser. The Missile Launcher is in general a better option since it is decent against vehicles and good against infantry which don't conga line. The Scatter Laser is still better in most situations.
Mahtamori wrote:- Wraithsight isn't that much different. It just doesn't kill you off if you fail it.
Yeah, and that little change actually made it totally worthless. If you have a shooting wraith construct unit then you can now ignore it completely. Even in close-combat, WS1 and I1 isn't that big disaster.
Mahtamori wrote:- Phoenix Reborn is taken from Path of the Warrior, where Karandras absorbs the body of an Exarch in order to be reborn
i still don't think that it should happen instanty. I mean, the transformation should take up some time...
Mahtamori wrote:- In truth, Autarchs have their own weapons which are at least on par with exarchs'.
Then give them their own weapons...
Mahtamori wrote:- Harlequins in DE codex are 4th edition Harlequins, not 5th.
But the DE codex is 5th ed. So i guess it makes the Harlies in it 5th ed too...
Mahtamori wrote:- Old costs have no bearing what so ever on new ones. Just because Ranger upgrades used to be 5 ppm doesn't mean it's worth it.
But it is worth it. Super-stealth and super-rending for 5 points? When normal stealth is 2 ppm and normal rending is 5?
Mahtamori wrote:- It is interesting you compare the Wraithlord to the Carnifex, a model which has seen it's glory days pass and is in decline. Currently the Wraithlord is good, but only situationally point effective.
I 've just threw in the 'fex for a random example. My real point was that +1 W and the toned down Wraithsight worth more, than a simple +15 points.
Mahtamori wrote:- Do the math on the Shuriken Cannon, or look up my post earlier in the thread. It's actually a damage improvement against all infantry - PLUS it is a defensive weapon now! Downside is that it's not able to damage vehicles.
Wraithsight: the only change is that they may make an attack at abysmal WS, otherwise it is unchanged.
Regarding the rule itself, to each their own. I strongly dislike Wraithsight since it makes too much rely on random numbers of the dice.
Phoenix Reborn: I understand where you're coming from. I don't agree, but I fully understand
Autarch weapons: fair point, but that would also require a significant amount of pages simply to make Executioner-with-a-different-name etc.
Autarch weapons are of the same calibre as Exarch or Phoenix Lord, by the way, sometimes being as old or older than the craftworlds themselves, forged long before the breaking.
Harlequins: and yet they aren't very useful in either codex, costed to an edition where they could assault out of a covered vehicle and where rending was deadly.
They badly need an update, so why not give it to them?
Rangers: Oh, the upgrade to Pathfinder is worth 5 ppm, but the Rangers themselves aren't worth the points. It's not horribly off the way it is for the entire Fast Attack section, but it's still worth altering.
Wraithlord: But where we disagree is that the Wraithlord does his job. With stupidity rule it gets even worse.
Shuriken Cannon: old cannon would cause 2,5 wounds on them, new cannon would cause 4 wounds. The difference there is marginal, for a weapon which is essentially free, it's bloody excellent.
Thanks for the responses and kind words guys, I appreciate it. I think I have a better idea of what I'll do, but as Ratius suggested, I'm going to take a few days off as it were. I'll post infrequently - e.g. now - but feel free to post and create army lists/feedback or whatnot in my absence.
Again, thanks guys. Some great advice and definitely something for me to think about.
Thanks for the feedback Ato'. While I don't agree with it in many cases, I do genuinely appreciate the feedback. I'll point out my justification for it:
As Mahtamori said, the layout is much more condensed than GW Codices. Whilst this means that each unit has their own page (making the army list section longer), unit-specific wargear or rules are located on their page, whilst other stuff is at the back. In the Eldar Codex you have to go back and forth comparing rules to prices etc.
A fixed 6" run gives all Eldar with fleet (so, the vast majority) a 18" assault range. That's huge. As it is, Eldar fleet has potential to be teetering on overpower, but it doesn't increase their assault or weapons range, it makes them more agile and more adept at hit-and-run tactics and keeping out of harms reach; as Eldar really should be. The 2D6 is to provide balance.
As Maht' said, the only change is they can actually strike in assault now. At WS1, In1 (woo). Contrary to what you seem to be saying, Wraithsight is even worse outside of close combat as your primarly shooty unit cannot fire their deadly weapon, nor move. I have - and still am - considered making Wraithsight occur 1/3 or 1/2 without a psyker nearby, to give it greater influence on gameplay, but that doesn't really relate to your points. Ultimately, it's the same as it was before, except now they aren't completely useless in close combat (what they really sit their letting themselves get hit, even if disorientated?!)
As stated by Amanax and Maht', Phoenix Reborn fits in perfectly with the fluff of the Phoenix Lords. As for it not happening instantly, it does in the novel and compare it to Thawn.
Farseer: Seriously. What's different to how they are at the moment? Their psychic powers are better. How good are Farseers at the moment? Very. How good are Grey Knight Librarians? Very. They can still cast as many abilities as before, or even better with Runes and better powers, just now they can't select loads. And I don't recall anyone selecting more than 2 for their Farseers before. I may change it to be in-line with Grey Knights, as suggested by others and yourself, but as it stands, I don't see it as a problem, but I do admit it could be improved.
There are several Autarch-unique weapons and pieces of wargear (the former of which are, as Maht' said "at least on par with exarchs"). Trying to conjour twice that many would be difficult, particularly without recycling the abilities of Exarch-weapons. You're right, they're not Exarchs, but I think it would make sense for them to have the best weapons in the craftworld, or to be gifted weapons from shrines, to use weapons from currently dormant shrines or to wield weapons of similar characteristic to those of an Exarch. There's many ways you can swing it to make sense in the fluff, whilst as it stands it at least makes sense in-game.
As stated; mandatory Exarchs make sense in fluff and in-game. Furthermore, it reduces potential for squads to be used for suicide-roles
As Amanax stated; Harlequins are going to have to change at some point. When designing a Codex you cannot really afford to be resistant to change. As stated by Amanax and Maht', Harlequins aren't a terribly good unit atm. When was the list time you saw a DE list include Harlequins? Let alone Harlequins for a role more than just delivering a WWP.
The point on the Rangers seems to suggest they're a good choice at the moment? They are still T3, 5+ models for 19pts and they still have 3 distinct weaknesses: Templates, Combat and Damage-Output.
I don't see how it makes sense to render the Guardians as no more than additional wounds for the Support Weapon; as someone stated, now Support Weapons can be taken without crippling your Heavy Support section or list in general. I personally prefer the existing solution of the "simple" solution; the latter isn't needed when the former is already introduced. Maybe if someone else wrote the Codex and didn't include the solution that I tried to...
I think the Carnifex is crying in the corner as a result of his own issues. Requiring 8 Frag Missiles to put down is not OP. The Dreadknight is just as tough, if not tougher, but has a larger model and superior combat abilities and movement.
However, The Wraithlord had already been increased in points, but that PDF hasn't been uploaded until I decide what to do with the Shuriken Catapults etc.
As others have stated, they and I believe the Shuriken Cannon to be a fair trade. Doubling the rate of fire and making it defensive has made it widely usable on vehicles and better against ALL types of standard infantry (Guard, Orks, Necrons, Space Marines, Gaunts). As for multiple-wound T3 models? How many of these are there? GeQ and Eldar HQ's and Swarms are all that spring to mind. The former either have a save that will render a single Str6 shot useless or are hidden in squads that don't care, the latter is taken care of by the multitude of other Str6 weapons or the significantly increased damage output.
Bright Lances are in a similar price bracket to Lascannons; short of the rare Nova Lance, Bright Lances are arguably the best anti-tank in the Eldar Codex, even at their points they are good choices and less than they are in the existing Eldar Codex.
The Starcannon had been placed at the same points as the Scatter Laser in the latest PDF, which again, isn't up yet. It's more akin to an Autocannon (a very good weapon), but with AP2. It's a rapid-firing Plasma Gun, with triple range and no gets-hot. A Scatter Laser (now the same pts as a Starcannon) is around 15pts usually, a competively priced Plasma Gun is 10. Which is better? A Falcon with it will put out 4 AP2 shots at high strength and be able to move (and you could add the defensive Shuriken Cannon). Or it could AP1 with the Power Diversion Matrix. Or it can target side armour thanks to the Eldar speed. Tactically, it provides a lot of options whilst also displaying Technological Superiority over Tau and IoM.
I admit, my response was a bit more... 'clipped' than my usual polite self, but do unto others and all that...
Thanks for responding with justification Maht' and Amanax; that was really nice to see and I do appreciate it A LOT! You're welcome to do so more often btw.
As I said, I will largely be taking a break for a bit and thinking about things in general and working on the next update. Thanks guys!
P.S. Could someone list the existing (official) Codex's units in 5 tiers please? Tier 1 being really competitive and good options in a 5th Ed. Codex (e.g. Farseer), Tier 2 being good but flawed, 3 being average, 4 being weak/poor and 5 being near-worthless (e.g. Hawks).
That way I can compare where I've made changes and why etc. compared to peoples opinions on the existing Codex. It'll make sense when you see it...
Thanks again.
T1: Farseer, Eldrad, Fire Dragons, War Walkers, Fire Prisms, Yriel, Warlocks. T2: Autarch, Avatar, Dire Avengers, Rangers, Nightspinner, Wave Serpent, <buffing/debuffing psychic powers> T3: Wraithlord, Vypers, Warp Spiders, Falcon, Storm Guardian, Jetbike Guardian T4: Support weapon, Defender Guardian, Dark Reaper, Harlequin, Umm... Fire Dragon Phoenix Lord (in larger battles such as apocalypse), support weapons. T5: <offensive psychic powers>, Swooping Hawks, the other Phoenix Lords T6: Baharroth Probably missed something. Tempted to put Vypers further down, but...
Wraithsight: if Wraithsight is meant to be debilitating, why not make it punishing if there aren't a psycher nearby. What I mean is: the model is treated as if having WS/BS/I at 1 and treats all terrain as difficult if there are no psycher within 6" at the start of the phase (note: phase, and not turn). Sure, you can shoot and you can move and you aren't auto-hit, but you don't have any chance at all of avoiding it if out of range.
For me they just blow up (maybe I should stop blowing up poorly painted & maintained models from 10+ years ago when I started the hobby, though...). In all fairness, I just can't get expensive models that die to bolter fire to work in my gaming group.
LOL gus, wait a minute, i have an EPIK fail on my part, because i skip the first sentence of Wraithsight with all the no move/shoot/assault thing ... Doh, now my problems with the Wraithsight and the Wraithlord are non-existant. Sorry...
Well, maybe i missed something, but i cannot see the "solution" for Support Weapons. They are still super-duper-fragile artilelry units that are also totally lacks any kind of mobility.
Oh, and one more thing. I did a little creative works, and "invented" some Autarch weapons instead of the Exarch weapons:
Ghostblaster (replaces Dragon's Breath Flamer):
Range Strength AP Type
Template 10 4 Assault 1, Pinning
To-wound rolls are against Leadership instead of Toughness.
Voidbeam (replaces Triskele):
Range Strength AP Type
12” 5 2 Assault 1
For each wound the weapon causes roll for an additional hit.
Solar Cascade (replaces Fire Pike):
Range Strength AP Type
24” 6 1 Assault 1, Lance, Melta
Chronosabre (replaces Bitting Blade):
Normal close-combat weapon. When the Autarch fights with a chronosabre, he gains 2D6 attacks instead of his normal number of attacks (bonuses from charging and two ccw-s apply). To-wound rolls of 6 ignore armour saves.
Tempest Gauntlets (replaces Diresword):
A pair of power fists that hits at Strength 8 instead of 6 and roll 2D6 for armour penetration.
Windsword (replaces Broadblades):
Power weapon that allows to re-roll all failed to-hits and to-wounds.
Surge Glaive (replaces Executioner):
Two-handed power weapon that gives +D3 Strength and has a Thunder Hammer like side effect (I1 for survivors and auto-Shaken for vehicles).
Fire Veil (replaces Shimmershield)l:
Reduces the Strength of incoming attacks by 1. Works for both shooting and cc. Affects the squad of the Autarch.
The names are silly and the points costs should change. But it is just an intention to help .
Yup, the move from static zero-level to 1s with prohibition took two reads for me to spot as well. Difficult when you expect something and find something else
The big problem with Autarch is that, contrary to most other codexes, you don't get two or three levels of command staff character. You don't get a Lann Caihe on the ground.
You don't have a Captain, Chapter Master and Chaplain sharing the same upgrades, so it doesn't make sense making a longer specific list for just one model - at the same time, the standard kit of the Autarch is well developed and there's not a lot of room for improvement on miscellaneous items such as armour.
What it all boils down to, I think, is the fluff. Autarch weapons are the best the craftworld armoury can offer, while Exarch weapons are the personal weapons of each Exarch.
Changing the fluff to describe how the Exarchs and Autarch operate, train, and equip themselves would solve this - the weapons the Exarch carry is the same he has carried for many hundreds of years, and no two Banshee Exarchs carry similar weapons. It is game terms their weapons may be Executioners, but outside there'd be differences. Different names, slightly different curving of the blades, there may even be functional differences which may not matter on the table - one Exarch may even have his Executioner (yes, they may be male) be able to separate the blades.
So no, an Autarch wouldn't use Exarch weapons, but he's using weapons which are functionally the same. (Even though in some cases the Autarchs may get their hands on weapons not really meant to be used - see Yriel)
Support platforms: I think leaving them defunct or merging them into Guardian Defenders is the only way to go. It's a matter of edition rules, and compensating for the poor rules for artillery makes little sense.
It would be interesting to see them as a normal platform in Defender squad, although with the exception of not counting the weapon as assault - i.e. force them to remain stationary.
Mahtamori wrote:
You don't have a Captain, Chapter Master and Chaplain sharing the same upgrades, so it doesn't make sense making a longer specific list for just one model - at the same time, the standard kit of the Autarch is well developed and there's not a lot of room for improvement on miscellaneous items such as armour.
Well, it isn't without example that a codex cannot include lots of one-shot items. Like Haemoncolus arcane wargear. Giving a character some unique items isn't a loathsome idea. It gives the character... uhm... character and many cool converting/personalizing options to the player. And nobody forces noone that the Autarch should use re-named Exarch weapons. He should just use Autarch weapons that replace the much-needed Exarch weapons (like the ones i proposed).
Interesting, another codex that's mostly updates, and in this case even more so than with Eldar. Fewer units in dire need, more of the "doesn't work well within the codex itself, but good otherwise" type of units.
I dunno, there's a lot of work that needs to go into the Space Marine Codex, particularly on the whole chapter-customisation side. It may require even more work than the Eldar...
... Still less than Chaos though.
Either way, I'm going to take it at my own pace rather than 'rush' to get it released, so I'm going to consciously be less caring for feedback and just enjoy the process of making it.
I hope you have a great time with Space Marines. I know no matter what you come up with, you won't let the community down, your fandexs are FAR to high quality for that.
- Have changed Shuriken Catapults to generally Str3, AP5, Assault 3, 18".
- Have changed Lasblasters to Assault 2, AP3.
- Have changed Avenger Shuriken Catapults to AP4 and granted Mind Link.
- Have made Mind Link available to Autarchs.
- Farseers can select any number of additional psychic powers.
- Starcannons same price as Scatter Lasers.
- Wraithlords more expensive.
Maybe some other things too, I can't quite remember.
------------
Also, here I will list the units in the existing Codex according to their competitiveness and sum up the changes made to them, in order to compare the existing opinions on units to the basic changes made. Units are rated out of tier 1-5, with tier 1 representing really competitive and good options in a 5th Ed. Codex (e.g. Farseer), Tier 2 being good but flawed, 3 being average, 4 being weak/poor and 5 being near-worthless (e.g. Hawks). From left-to-right in brackets, the tier ratings are by 'chrisrawr', 'Mahtamori' and myself. Providing they remembered the unit!
Farseer (1,1,1) - Increased base cost to represent incorporated psychic power, more wargear & powers also available, but not free.
Warlocks (1,1,2) - Increased base cost to represent incorporated psychic power, has +1A and Ld, more options, but not for free.
Autarchs (1,2,2) - Same base price, Master Strategist improved, more options all-round, but not for free. Should be viable alternative to a Farseer.
Avatar (_,2,2) - Dramatically increased base cost, but dramatically increased abilities. Now should be capable against the best in any army and not reliant on a Farseer/Fortune.
Phoenix Lords (5,5,5) - Reduced cost, reduced armour save but 4+ inv. as standard, better weapons, can return to game, only occupy 1 FoC, better benefits to Aspect Warriors.
Eldrad (1,1,1) - 10pts point increase, Runes as standard, more powers, better divination, lost T4.
Yriel (_,1,3) - increased pts cost, better force-multiplier, increased damage output, better save, reduced eye-of-wrath template-size.
Striking Scorpions (2,_,3) - Infiltrate, Move-through-cover & fleet as standard.
Howling Bansheers (_,_,2) - Increased hitting power against MeQ without out-classing Scorpions at anti-infantry, increased manoeuvrability, can (semi-reliably) assault from transport with exarch power.
Fire Dragons (1,1,1) - No changes, however Exarch as mandatory increases base cost, reduces desire-to-suicide, can be changed to anti-infantry.
Wraithguard (_,_,3-4) - Increased base cost to include changes of increased durability (but can be ID'ed by Str10), increased range and AP1, and can be equipped for CC.
Harlequins (4,4,3) - 1pts increase, increased movement, increased inv. save in CC, grenade-equivalent as standard, damages enemy leadership, more options.
Dire Avengers (2,3,2) - 1pts decrease, improved overall damage-output, reduce enemy coversaves, 2x CCW as standard.
Rangers (4,2,4) - Point decrease, Pathfinder-stealth as standard, increased damage output, free web beacon.
Storm Guardians (4,3,3) - Point decrease, more viable close-combat options, grenades as standard.
Defender Guardians (4,4,3) - Point decrease, increased damage output, grenades, reduced cost of heavy weapon.
Jetbikes (4,3,4) - Point decrease, increased damage output, scouts special rule.
Waveserpent (2,2,1) - 5pts point saving on Shuriken Cannon as standard, options cost decreased.
Shining Spears (4,_,4) - Hefty point decrease, increased damage output on charge and at range. Still vulnerable to pro-longed combat.
Warp Spiders (_,3,3) - Minor point decrease, reduced damage output vs. vehicles, increased vs. infantry, more reliable JSJ, inflict difficult terrain-movement.
Swooping Hawks (5,5,5) - Reduced cost, increased RoF, decreased range, AP3, can skyleap reliably and multiple times. Good for hit-and-run, vulnerable to straight-up-fights.
Vypers (2,3,4) - Increased cost to incorporate JSJ ability and incorporated weapon, weapon & upgrades cheaper.
Support Weapons (_4,4) - No pts change, better weapons, more durable, less hindrance on FoC, 4+ cover save as standard.
Dark Reapers (3,4,4) - Hefty pts decrease, better weapons, negates cover effectiveness.
Wraithlord (3,3,3) - Point increase, tougher, better & more options.
War Walkers (1,1,2) - Decreased upgrade & weapon cost.
Fire Prism (1,3,1) - 5pts increase, better against vehicles, less-reliant on joint-shot.
Falcon (3,3,3) - Point increase, BS4 as standard, decreased weapon cost, better for move-and-shoot, so can transport and provide firepower effectively, 1 can be taken as dedicated transport.
Lord Magnus wrote:I hope you have a great time with Space Marines. I know no matter what you come up with, you won't let the community down, your fandexs are FAR to high quality for that.
Codex Catapults.
GEQ. 2 chances of 1/2 hit, 2/3 wound, 1/1 pierce. 55,6% chance to score at least one kill. MEQ. 2 chances of 1/2 hit, 1/2 wound, 1/3 pierce. 16,0% chance to score at least one kill
Dave Catapults.
GEQ. 3 chances of 1/2 hit, 1/2 wound, 1/1 pierce. Average 4,5 killed per 6 models shooting. 57,8% chance to score at least one kill MEQ. 3 chances of 1/2 hit, 1/3 wound, 1/3 pierce. 15.8% chance to score at least one kill.
Conclusion: While the expected outcome is only marginally better, the real difference is the variation in outcome (which will tend to slightly better results) and above all the range.
With 18" range the models do have a chance to do something before they are locked in close combat, but it is above all an upgrade for vehicles where the catapults were often something you could be excused forgetting.
Regarding the Lasblaster change - very neatly done, sir. Differentiating Hawks and Spiders just like that.
Codex Catapults.
GEQ. 2 chances of 1/2 hit, 2/3 wound, 1/1 pierce. 55,6% chance to score at least one kill. MEQ. 2 chances of 1/2 hit, 1/2 wound, 1/3 pierce. 16,0% chance to score at least one kill
Dave Catapults.
GEQ. 3 chances of 1/2 hit, 1/2 wound, 1/1 pierce. Average 4,5 killed per 6 models shooting. 57,8% chance to score at least one kill MEQ. 3 chances of 1/2 hit, 1/3 wound, 1/3 pierce. 15.8% chance to score at least one kill.
Conclusion: While the expected outcome is only marginally better, the real difference is the variation in outcome (which will tend to slightly better results) and above all the range.
With 18" range the models do have a chance to do something before they are locked in close combat, but it is above all an upgrade for vehicles where the catapults were often something you could be excused forgetting.
Regarding the Lasblaster change - very neatly done, sir. Differentiating Hawks and Spiders just like that.
Whoops. That's what I meant; same damage output, but better range. Correct me if I'm wrong (I haven't done the maths) but I'd imagine this Shuriken Catapult pulls ahead when BS4 or twin-linked.
As you said though, the increased range is the key thing here.
And you get Mind Link on Autarchs as you suggested before.
Thanks for the kind words man.
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Like the new catapults.
Cheers!
Out of curiosity, why the ''? Just 'cause?
Otis The Barbarian wrote:needs more freebooters.
Automatically Appended Next Post: woohoo, my very own page. I don't have the material to make my own, so I pirated yours!! kidding.
Yeah, you did write 18" range, don't worry, though I haven't looked through the PDF, only your summary.
Well, the new version is better regardless of hit chance, due to having three chances. The comparable risk of not scoring a kill at all should be the same assuming BS4 or twin-link for both models compared, but the fact that while the chance of killing something is the same, you get increased chance of killing multiple enemies per model, meaning the average kill rate is higher.
I just wrote down the numbers for anyone who'll react to the lower strength. (Oh, and another aspect is that S3 can not glance vehicles from behind.)
And yes, I am all for more options and more interesting HQ
motorhead1945 wrote:Maugan Ra, Harvester of Souls:
Is it correct that the Maugetar is "only" a ranged weapon now? It used to have close combat potential...
Oops. Helluva catch man! Yeah, that's a mistake, I'll edit it to include an executioner, so yes, it should also include and executioner...
Otis The Barbarian wrote:you know, Eldar corsairs.
Ah, well then, no, they are not going to be added.
For several reasons really, the main 3 being (in no particular order):
1) They don't have a role within the Codex; as standard they'd be similar to Dire Avengers, whilst the other units have covered most other combat roles and leave little if any space to be occupied by Corsairs.
2) It's a Craftworld Eldar Codex.
3) They're covered by Forgeworld.
Just Dave wrote:
3) They're covered by Forgeworld.
I'm just here to chime in that Just Dave has a point here. ImoFW has done a pretty good job with the corsairs, giving them powerful mobility of dark eldar but still giving a good flavor of Craftworld.
I'm trying to convince my brother and my primary opponent to let me use your fandex in our homebattles. He plays Orks and Grey Knight Inquisition, but the main problem he has with it is that Scorp exarchs and Pathfinders can pick the teeth out of his forces support (Painboyz, Nobs, Inquisitors, Jokero ect.) I really like these powers and was wondering if I could get a quote on their balance. His main argument is that most units that ignore wound allocation are much more exspensive (Assasins, Tellius, ect.) and that a model that costs only around 43 points that can do it is seriously OP.
Oriallis wrote:I'm trying to convince my brother and my primary opponent to let me use your fandex in our homebattles. He plays Orks and Grey Knight Inquisition, but the main problem he has with it is that Scorp exarchs and Pathfinders can pick the teeth out of his forces support (Painboyz, Nobs, Inquisitors, Jokero ect.) I really like these powers and was wondering if I could get a quote on their balance. His main argument is that most units that ignore wound allocation are much more exspensive (Assasins, Tellius, ect.) and that a model that costs only around 43 points that can do it is seriously OP.
Thanks Oriallis, if you could use it (even at the expense of those models/powers) that would be great! In regards to the abilities you specifically mention, my opinion behind their balancing is this:
A standard sniper shot would only have a 18.5% chance, per shot, to wound a MeQ. Obviously this would be better with the rending on a 5+, rather than 6+, but the chances are still not that high. Also remember that it's only a single shot, so your Nobs and Painboyz should be relatively safe.
Furthermore, although the model is relatively cheap, it is still 43pts for a single wound, T3 model that must remain stationary to fire.
He suffers many of the limitations of low damage output of snipers, is in a high-cost-per-model unit that has clear vulnerabilities.
Kommandos and Incinerators would provide a serious, serious danger to any ranger unit which are also stationary troops.
That they are stationary also means it can be easier to evade Line of Sight, particularly when combined with vehicles.
I won't deny, the Pathfinder is a powerful model, but he has clear weaknesses and is still expensive for a single-wound. Ultimately, I think it would be best to play-test it ().
Telion and the assassin also have other uses (such as buffing their unit or anti-tank, respectively) unlike the Pathfinder.
As for the Exarch, again, as with all Eldar, he has clear identifiable weaknesses, particularly a complete lack of ranged abilities, a lack of armour-piercing and a relative lack of manoeuvrability.
Against a standard MeQ, a Scorpion Exarch would only do 0.56 wounds and that's on the charge.
I admit, I think your brother faces an issue in that he plays two predominantly low-save infantry armies, which are what these 2 units excel against (whereas proper Grey Knights would probably be fine), but I genuinely don't believe these units are too powerful and I would encourage play-testing if possible, but I honestly welcome the criticism and understand it, but as with most Eldar, these units have limited and specialised use, requiring smart and tactical play which a smart and tactical opponent could counter (e.g. with the use of vehicles for protection or out-flanking).
I'd love to hear if you have anything more to say on this or if you do play with the Codex though, thanks Oriallis!
You could always look for ork fixes for your brother. Grey knight inquisition is already one of the most powerful things in the game. Mention to him the viability of a Xenos inquisitor with Rad and Pschotrope grenades, in a squad of 4 DCA and 5 crusaders, in a rhino. 5 ablative 3++ wounds, a bunch of high initiative power weapons at decent WS and S, the enemy will be at T2 most of the time (meaning instant death!), and they can get fairly far up the map if they pop smoke.
Ork Kommandos (with Burnas), Battlewagons and Deffkoptas would be my recommendations for the Orks if you're worried about the Rangers. Or almost ANY attack that ignores cover, which can include blast weapons...
As for the Scorpions; as the Ork adage goes, "chop the shooty onez, shoot the choppy onez"
So, me and my pals play tested your codex, and after ~5 battles (2 with v4, 3 with v5) we agreed in that:
- The Jetbike Council is totally OP. 8 Jetbike Warlock with a Jetbike Farseer clock around 610 points but they can kill anything. 35 points for a Warlock is waaaay too cheap. Especially with the free psychic powers. Especially with Assail.
- Sundering Sentinels are way too good compared to Dire Avengers. Especially with the Shuriken nerf. On this note, the Shuriken hip-cannons are still S4 - is this intentional?
- The drop of strength in the case of shuriken weaponry caused a true rage-fest for our Eldar player. And honestly, i can understand him. Shuriken weapons are essentially hand-held railguns that fire clouds of power weapon chips. And they have the same strength of a lasgun ?
- The list of the completely unusuable units in the codex (under unusuable i mean "totally crap"): Phoenix Lords, Dire Avengers, Guardian Defenders, the whole Fast Attack selection (the Shining Spears have some redeeming qualities), Support Weapon Batteries.
- There was also some whinning about the ExarchAutarch weapons, but just the ones i mentioned before.
- And our player also missed the Shadow Spectres. Mostly because he has 14 of them ...
He fought three battles with this list and tabled his opponents in all three. And all three enemy armies were super-competitive (SW tourny list, IG leafblower, Ork Battlewagon horde).
Thanks for the informative feedback and playtesting Ato', I'll respond to the final point/game results 1st as I think it's the most pressing/corcerning issue.
He fought three battles with this list and tabled his opponents in all three. And all three enemy armies were super-competitive (SW tourny list, IG leafblower, Ork Battlewagon horde).
Honestly, I am truly surprised this list did so well. I'm not saying that as a slight to the player or as defence of my Codex, but I genuinely am surprised. There's only 4 real threats in that list; the Seer Council, Fire Dragons and Wraithlords. Theoretically, 12 missiles at BS4 will down a Wraithlord (who costs 170pts each), that leaves 3 missiles for the Wolves (assuming they have Long Fangs) to target probably the wave-serpent. That's 420pts, leaving 1330pts pretty much free to target the Seer Council. I don't doubt the killyness or toughness of that unit (at 610pts it's justified), but theoretically (IIRC), the Warlocks should only be as tough against small arms fire as 24 MeQ's. While that's still a lot, that's potentially up against 1300pts of firepower from 2 of the potentially shootiest armies in the game (Wolves & Guard).
Again, I don't doubt the strength of that unit, but facing the brunt of the enemy army should really do a lot more damage and they are no tougher than existing jetlocks.
I really think I will need some more information from the games and how they went to seriously consider those results. Again, I don't doubt the power of the jetlock council (and it's already powerful in the current game), but that it won so successfully against the armies, despite the weaknesses of the list REALLY surprises me. And again, I don't mean that as a slight against the player or defence of my 'dex, but as genuine surprise.
How did the V.4 version do btw?
35 points for a Warlock is waaaay too cheap. Especially with the free psychic powers. Especially with Assail.
I'll up their cost to 40pts and take a 2nd look at assail.
Note: at 40pts that includes the cost of the psychic power and minor stats boost and is still a T3, 4++ model with no armour-piercing.
- Sundering Sentinels are way too good compared to Dire Avengers. Especially with the Shuriken nerf. On this note, the Shuriken hip-cannons are still S4 - is this intentional?
I'm surprised you think Sundering Sentinels are so much better than Dire Avengers. 5 Sundering Sentinels costs as much as 10 Dire Avengers, but with their Shuriken Hip Cannons actually inflict less damage than the Dire Avengers against GeQ and MeQ.
Furthermore, whilst individually (but not points-for-point) tougher and have slightly better range, they are less manoeuvrable and cannot score. At double the cost.
And yes, the Str4 is intentional; they're meant to be more Shuriken Cannon than Catapult, but I'll give it a second look.
- Especially with the Shuriken nerf... The drop of strength in the case of shuriken weaponry caused a true rage-fest for our Eldar player. And honestly, i can understand him. Shuriken weapons are essentially hand-held railguns that fire clouds of power weapon chips. And they have the same strength of a lasgun ?
It's not a nerf.
Honestly, I'm saying that flat-out (i.e. without 'IMHO'). It's genuinely not a nerf, only in appearance if that. They gain the all important increased range, making them much more survivable and viable. The damage output is equal - if not superior - against GeQ and MeQ (as Maht' has already gone over) than the Str 4/AP5 2-shot version. It suffers against Monstrous Creatures and AV10, but it allows them to reliably stay out of assault range and I think that's a much greater benefit.
As for being the same strength as a lasgun; they essentially fire discs and the main strength of a shuriken weapon has always been its RoF, whilst it has always struck me as odd that a disc has the same damage output as a boltgun.
Again, it really is not a nerf.
- The list of the completely unusuable units in the codex (under unusuable i mean "totally crap"): Phoenix Lords, Dire Avengers, Guardian Defenders, the whole Fast Attack selection (the Shining Spears have some redeeming qualities), Support Weapon Batteries.
I almost take offence at the "totally crap" comment, but I'll respond politely anyway.
Phoenix Lords; look at their stats and what they provide. Compare them to MeQ characters (such as the still pretty competitive - but not wholly - Ragnar Blackmane). They have stats superior to a Chapter Master, Eternal Warrior, impressive weaponry, manoeuvrability, resurrection, only 1 FoC slot and army & squad buffs. They could easily be under-costed.
Dire Avengers; better damage output than current, cheaper, close combat potential and faster.
Guardian Defenders; cheaper upgrades, cheap & ranged scoring unit, cheaper unit, included grenades, better weapon, Warlock has better Ld.
Whole fast attack section:
Shining Spears - Hefty point decrease, increased damage output on charge and at range. Still vulnerable to pro-longed combat.
Warp Spiders - Minor point decrease, reduced damage output vs. vehicles, increased vs. infantry, more reliable JSJ, inflict difficult terrain-movement.
Swooping Hawks - Reduced cost, increased RoF, decreased range, AP3, can skyleap reliably and multiple times. Good for hit-and-run, vulnerable to straight-up-fights.
Vypers - Increased cost to incorporate JSJ ability and incorporated weapon, weapon & upgrades cheaper.
Support Weapon Batteries; less 'damage' to FoC, cheaper, better weapons, cover save as standard. They're not perfect, they never will be with the artillery rules.
- There was also some whinning about the ExarchAutarch weapons, but just the ones i mentioned before.
I'll think about it.
- And our player also missed the Shadow Spectres. Mostly because he has 14 of them ...
"I've never had any intention to include the Shadow Spectre's to be honest. Whilst they have great models, I don't think they really make sense in rules or background, and they are neither a particularly strong or well-fitting concept in-game or background IMHO and have no real place in the Codex, I feel they should remain as FW only; much like Tomb Stalkers etc. "
Just Dave wrote:Honestly, I am truly surprised this list did so well. I'm not saying that as a slight to the player or as defence of my Codex, but I genuinely am surprised. There's only 4 real threats in that list; the Seer Council, Fire Dragons and Wraithlords. Theoretically, 12 missiles at BS4 will down a Wraithlord (who costs 170pts each), that leaves 3 missiles for the Wolves (assuming they have Long Fangs) to target probably the wave-serpent. That's 420pts, leaving 1330pts pretty much free to target the Seer Council. I don't doubt the killyness or toughness of that unit (at 610pts it's justified), but theoretically (IIRC), the Warlocks should only be as tough against small arms fire as 24 MeQ's. While that's still a lot, that's potentially up against 1300pts of firepower from 2 of the potentially shootiest armies in the game (Wolves & Guard).
Again, I don't doubt the strength of that unit, but facing the brunt of the enemy army should really do a lot more damage and they are no tougher than existing jetlocks.
The biggest problem with the Jetbike Council is its speed and the ability to multi-assault everything without problem. Even a single warlock can deal (~5 attacks with WS5, 2+ wounding and Doom) and take (essentially 2+/3++ save) a lots of punishment.
Just Dave wrote:I really think I will need some more information from the games and how they went to seriously consider those results. Again, I don't doubt the power of the jetlock council (and it's already powerful in the current game), but that it won so successfully against the armies, despite the weaknesses of the list REALLY surprises me. And again, I don't mean that as a slight against the player or defence of my 'dex, but as genuine surprise.
The battles were the same: 1st turn - Eldar storms forward with everything / enemy tries to do damage; 2nd turn - Warlocks assault and destroy/swamp everything dangerous in the enemy army; 3rd turn onwards - the Eldar kills stuff. It must be noted though that the Eldar player is one of the best 40k player around who started the Eldar around 2.ed.
Just Dave wrote:How did the V.4 version do btw?
Aside the problems mentioned above, the Eldar player liked your codex. He put it to the "Imperial Guard power level" so: "Very solid army list with weird internal balance.".
Just Dave wrote:I'm surprised you think Sundering Sentinels are so much better than Dire Avengers. 5 Sundering Sentinels costs as much as 10 Dire Avengers, but with their Shuriken Hip Cannons actually inflict less damage than the Dire Avengers against GeQ and MeQ.
Furthermore, whilst individually (but not points-for-point) tougher and have slightly better range, they are less manoeuvrable and cannot score. At double the cost.
Dunno about this. He used both in his Aspect Army, but eventually dropped the DA-s for more SS and after the battle with the changed list he said that the Sundering Sentinels kill the Dire Avenger as a unit selection.
Just Dave wrote:It's not a nerf.
Honestly, I'm saying that flat-out (i.e. without 'IMHO'). It's genuinely not a nerf, only in appearance if that. They gain the all important increased range, making them much more survivable and viable. The damage output is equal - if not superior - against GeQ and MeQ (as Maht' has already gone over) than the Str 4/AP5 2-shot version. It suffers against Monstrous Creatures and AV10, but it allows them to reliably stay out of assault range and I think that's a much greater benefit.
As for being the same strength as a lasgun; they essentially fire discs and the main strength of a shuriken weapon has always been its RoF, whilst it has always struck me as odd that a disc has the same damage output as a boltgun.
Again, it really is not a nerf.
It was something about rolling an 5+ to-wound is harder than rolling a 4+. Its kind of a psychological effect (especially for people that rolls with a D4 ...).
About the strength: i always thought that a single shot from the Shuriken Catapult represents all the shurikens fired by the weapon. I don't know if you can represent the real RoF of the shuriken weapons because it would be like S2 AP4 Assault 20.
Just Dave wrote:Phoenix Lords; look at their stats and what they provide. Compare them to MeQ characters (such as the still pretty competitive - but not wholly - Ragnar Blackmane). They have stats superior to a Chapter Master, Eternal Warrior, impressive weaponry, manoeuvrability, resurrection, only 1 FoC slot and army & squad buffs. They could easily be under-costed.
Dire Avengers; better damage output than current, cheaper, close combat potential and faster.
Guardian Defenders; cheaper upgrades, cheap & ranged scoring unit, cheaper unit, included grenades, better weapon, Warlock has better Ld.
Whole fast attack section:
Shining Spears - Hefty point decrease, increased damage output on charge and at range. Still vulnerable to pro-longed combat.
Warp Spiders - Minor point decrease, reduced damage output vs. vehicles, increased vs. infantry, more reliable JSJ, inflict difficult terrain-movement.
Swooping Hawks - Reduced cost, increased RoF, decreased range, AP3, can skyleap reliably and multiple times. Good for hit-and-run, vulnerable to straight-up-fights.
Vypers - Increased cost to incorporate JSJ ability and incorporated weapon, weapon & upgrades cheaper.
Support Weapon Batteries; less 'damage' to FoC, cheaper, better weapons, cover save as standard. They're not perfect, they never will be with the artillery rules.
On the Phoenix Lords, he complained mostly about their lack of synergy with anything but their discipline squad. He said that they are essentially very expensive squad upgrades that also take up a precious HQ slot.
Guardians and DA-s mostly suffer from "job stealing" - ie there are units in the codex that could do the same thing much better.
Shining Spears are good, but they need plasma grenades badly.
I think the only problem of Warp Spiders are their lack of versatility. He said that they would be perfect with S6 weapons.
Same for Swooping Hawks, their biggest issue is the 18" range of their Sunrifles. Increase it to 24" and they will be good.
There weren't much opinion on Support Batteries only that they should be merged with Guardian Defenders.
Warp Spiders 161 pts
(6, Twin Death Spinners, White Guardians)
Fast Attack:
Shadow Asp 145 pts
(Shadow Asp, TL Nova Lance, Holofields, Spirit Stones)
Heavy Support:
War Walkers 120 pts
(3, 2 Shurik,en Cannoons each)
Basically Mornynnstar hangs with the avengers giving support throughout the army, While the Autarch gives alot of support to the Scorpions with his grenades and prefered enemy, what do you think?
*Molten Body The Avatar benefits from the Feel No Pain special rule (included), furthermore Melta weapons and flame/heat based template (not blast!) weapons cannot wound the Avatar; such as Flamers, Heavy Flamers, Flamestorm Cannons, Hellfire Cannons, Hand Flamers, Scorcha’s, Burna’s, Incinerators, Inferno Cannons, Dragon’s Breath Flamers etc.
Does this include then, things like Flamers of Chaos?
They are breathing Pure Warp Energy onto them ?
I don't think it's the Warlock cost, I think it's the Jetbike cost. Essentially, the improved threat range and armour just makes the model so much better.
--
The Avatar is immune to everything that's fire in fluff. Similar to the GK anti-plasma shield.
I've read your codex and so far I think it's quite a good one, I'll be playing same games using it and doing some battle reports with them, I hope that helps a little.
Btw, Assail now provides +1 attack and a 1/3 chance of +2, which should hopefully be more balanced IMHO and personally, I'd probably take Destructor for sheer offensiveness...
AtoMaki wrote:Aside the problems mentioned above, the Eldar player liked your codex. He put it to the "Imperial Guard power level" so: "Very solid army list with weird internal balance.".
What would he say causes the weird internal balance? Other than the apparently weak units you've told me about...
Dunno about this. He used both in his Aspect Army, but eventually dropped the DA-s for more SS and after the battle with the changed list he said that the Sundering Sentinels kill the Dire Avenger as a unit selection.
I'd be interested to see the justification for it, after what I had already elaborated upon regarding their comparison to Dire Avengers...
It was something about rolling an 5+ to-wound is harder than rolling a 4+. Its kind of a psychological effect (especially for people that rolls with a D4 ...).
Honestly, I'm OK with a "psychological effect" if it's better in-game and arguably more representative of the weapons description, and ultimately it's really boosted Guardians and Jetbikes, without over-shadowing the bolter IMHO.
On the Phoenix Lords, he complained mostly about their lack of synergy with anything but their discipline squad. He said that they are essentially very expensive squad upgrades that also take up a precious HQ slot.
Guardians and DA-s mostly suffer from "job stealing" - ie there are units in the codex that could do the same thing much better.
Shining Spears are good, but they need plasma grenades badly.
I think the only problem of Warp Spiders are their lack of versatility. He said that they would be perfect with S6 weapons.
Same for Swooping Hawks, their biggest issue is the 18" range of their Sunrifles. Increase it to 24" and they will be good.
There weren't much opinion on Support Batteries only that they should be merged with Guardian Defenders.
Personally, I don't see what else they are supposed to 'synergise' with, nor do I entirely agree with that statement. They almost all powerful close-combat models and as such could work very well with any other the other close combat units, such as Banshees, Harlies, Wraithguard etc. For example, Asurman's Diresword would be very potent in combination with Banshees or Harlies Ld modifier.
Many of the Lords also have reasonable-to-potent ranged abilities as well, so could work in any short-ranged shooty unit, such as Dire Avengers or Sentinels. They are getting a lot of bonuses for their points and make a unit of their disciples very powerful, whilst buffing all others, only taking a single FoC slot together and being powerful themselves. To me, their flaws are their cost (but for what they provide they're still pretty good value) and that they compete with the Farseer.
That other units can do their job but better is inevitable as they are cheap and troop choices, but other choices aren't as cheap or scoring. Dire Avengers can still remain one of the premium anti-infantry ranged units in the army (and can score), whilst Guardians are a cheap support unit and source of additional heavy weapons; as they should be IMHO. Maybe I'm too defensive, but I don't know what he expects from these units?
I don't see the sense of models on jetbikes having grenades personally; it wouldn't make sense in fluff (i.e. Jetbikes are faster than grenades), whilst they are quick enough to pick their own targets, without being forced to charge into terrain IMHO.
Again, I'm not sure what is being expected from an Eldar unit that is primarily anti-infantry (particularly in-fluff); they are now better against infantry, as well as more reliable jumpers, cheaper and (most importantly?) inflicting difficult terrain. Eldar aspects are known for their specialisation and I've sought to follow that trend to reinforce that play-style and balance the Codex...
I really have no intentions to make Support Weapons a part of Guardian Squads, nor do I see the logic behind it, personally. It benefits Support Weapons by making them scoring (the only scoring artillery unit in the game AFAIK) and not occupying a precious Heavy Support slot, however it makes Guardians stationary, unlikely to use their catapults and ultimately little more than additional wounds for the Support Platform.
The support platform is now cheaper, tougher (give him conceal for a 3+), with better weapons and has a significantly less detrimental affect on the FoC slot. I would definitely take them in a Footdar list personally (particularly for Nova Lances) and I don't see the logic in changing this at the cost of the role and abilities of Guardians.
Oriallis wrote:Been coming up with a 2000 point list so far with your codex, wanted to hear your opinion...
Thanks for the list and feedback man!
I'd recommend going for either all-mech or all-foot personally, I feel at 2000pts your army has too few vehicles for them to last very long IMHO. There are advantages to either, with Mech providing better protection, firepower and chance to contest in the last turn (enhanced by Mornyynstar), but Foot-slog renders most Anti-tank weapons useless and enables more actual units.
I'd say choose foot-slog or mech and work from there. If mech, then ensure your heavy support can pop-tanks, get anti-infantry troops in some tanks and fire dragons in others and it should be good.
If foot-slog, I'd recommend Hawks for constant, fast-harassment and potential anti-tank, who could keep the enemy suitably occupied (with scorps?) until the rest reaches them. I'd again recommend Dire Avengers at the core though.
Good luck man!
Bloodhorror wrote:*Molten Body The Avatar benefits from the Feel No Pain special rule (included), furthermore Melta weapons and flame/heat based template (not blast!) weapons cannot wound the Avatar; such as Flamers, Heavy Flamers, Flamestorm Cannons, Hellfire Cannons, Hand Flamers, Scorcha’s, Burna’s, Incinerators, Inferno Cannons, Dragon’s Breath Flamers etc.
Does this include then, things like Flamers of Chaos?
They are breathing Pure Warp Energy onto them ?
While I'd be tempted to agree with Maht' in this case, the the Flamers A) breath warp energy, B) which isn't necessarily heat-based and C) need all the help they can get, I'd say that this doesn't include Flamers of Chaos.
jgehunter wrote:I've read your codex and so far I think it's quite a good one, I'll be playing same games using it and doing some battle reports with them, I hope that helps a little.
Thanks. If you do play some games, please let us know how they go!
Just Dave wrote:What would he say causes the weird internal balance? Other than the apparently weak units you've told me about...
He actually made a few parallels with you codex and the IG:
- Your Elites and the IG Fast Attack: both filled with the best selections of their respective codex, but there is only place for three... He loved the Stormwind Autarch though .
- Heavy Support selections in both codexes are full with good stuff, one piece of "mehness" (Dark Reapers/Basilisks) and one piece of "toy for fun play" (Support Weapons/Deathstrike).
- And there is one FOC selection that is full with weak selections (your Fast Attack and the IG Elites).
So yeah, i guess his problem is the weak units...
Just Dave wrote:I'd be interested to see the justification for it, after what I had already elaborated upon regarding their comparison to Dire Avengers...
I guess it was something that the better resilience of the SS actually gives them more "firepower time". And even while you can take double as many DA for every SS, the maximum squad size is the same for both aspects, so the DA squad cannot "soak up" damage with bodies.
Just Dave wrote:Maybe I'm too defensive, but I don't know what he expects from these units?
I only know his expectations about the Warp Spiders: he wants them super-duper OP, because he has 56 of them ... But seriously, he said that the -1S drop on their weapon is like hitting the unit with Satan's sword ...Becuase they cannot hit light vehicles/tougher non-vehicles that good, so their whole hit-and-run strike infantry role is dumped, and they are now a n+1 anti-infantry unit.
So after an additional 3 battles with the codex, our Eldar player finally summarized his proposals about each unit:
- No opinions on special characters, as as he didn't tried them out yet.
- Phoenix Lords (in general): Make their discipline boosting powers army-wide, so it will affect every discipline squad in the army, not just the ones the Phoenix Lords joined. Get rid of the Phoenix Reborn rule, but drop their points cost to 170-180 points.
- Baharroth: his Hawk's Claw should have a range of 24".
- Avatar: maybe drop his points cost to 180-190. The second firing mode of the Wailing Doom should be Template instead of Large Blast.
- Farseer: Increase the cost of the runes (all of them) by 5. Increase the cost of the Eldar Jetbike to 35 points.
- Farseer Psychic Powers: Eldricht storm should have unlimited range.
- Warlock Seer Council: Increase the cost of Eldar jetbike to 30 points per model.
- Autarch: Get rid of the Exarch wargear options, and replace them with unique Autarch wargear options. Increase the cost of Eldar jetbike to 35 points.
- Striking Scorpions, Fire Dragons, Sundering Sentinels and Howling Banshees: they are good as they are.
- Wraithguard: Just an option to take Sentinence Spears. Otherwise, they are good.
- Harlequins: Increase the cost of the Shadowseer to +35 points. Increase the cost of the Death Jester to +20 points but make his Shrieker Cannon Poisoned (2+).
- Solitaire: Decrease its points cost to 100-120 points.
- Dire Avengers: See the ideas for Shuriken weapons.
- Guardians (in general): An option to take 4+ armour save. defenders should have the option to take support weapons on their heavy weapon platforms.
- Rangers: Increase their points cost to 20 ppm. Increase the cost of the Pathfinder upgrade to +35 points.
- Wave Serpent: Decrease its cost to 75-80 points. An option to take an assault ramp would be nice (for +30-40 points).
- Swooping Hawks: Increase their weapon range to 24".
- Warp Spiders: Increase their weapon's Strength to 6.
- Shining Spears: They should have a "fly-by attack" like Reavers, and an increased cost of 30ppm with it. Also some sort of instant-killing exarch power instead of Tank Hunters.
- Vypers: BS 4 would be nice, but whatever, they are good as they are.
- Asp: MOAR weapon options.
- Support Weapon Batteries: merge them with Guardian Defenders.
- Dark Reapers: They aren't a bad unit.
- Falcon: Drop points cost to 100 points.
- Fire Prism/Night Spinner: They are good.
- Wraithlord: Increase its points cost to 130 points. Drop the shimmershield option. The second heavy weapon should make the first twin-linked if the two are indentical.
- War Walkers: Increase the cost of Power Diversion Matrix to 10-15 ppm.
- Shuriken weapons: They need some sort of pseudo-rending. Like all to-wound rolls of 6 ignore armour, but no +D3 for armour penetration. This would instantly fix the DA-s. Also drop the range of the shuriken pistol to 12".
- Bright Lances: They should be 20 points each at maximum. But preferably cheaper.
Well, that is all i guess. There are also some rants on the list he gave me, but these are just usual Eldar fanboy raging (like no Shadow Spectres, "Why the Warp Spiders, oh why?" and a very long rant on the Exarch/Autarch weapons). But i spare you from these, because they have zero creative criticism ...
Just Dave wrote:What would he say causes the weird internal balance? Other than the apparently weak units you've told me about...
He actually made a few parallels with you codex and the IG:
- Your Elites and the IG Fast Attack: both filled with the best selections of their respective codex, but there is only place for three... He loved the Stormwind Autarch though .
- Heavy Support selections in both codexes are full with good stuff, one piece of "mehness" (Dark Reapers/Basilisks) and one piece of "toy for fun play" (Support Weapons/Deathstrike).
- And there is one FOC selection that is full with weak selections (your Fast Attack and the IG Elites).
So yeah, i guess his problem is the weak units...
Again, I guess I disagree with the Fast attack section being full with weak selections; I feel every one of the units in Fast Attack is viable personally.
AtoMaki wrote:Hi!
So after an additional 3 battles with the codex, our Eldar player finally summarized his proposals about each unit:
Thanks again for the feedback and play-testing 'Maki, thanks also for cutting out the whining/complaining crap that I don't want to be dealing with.
- No opinions on special characters, as as he didn't tried them out yet.
- Phoenix Lords (in general): Make their discipline boosting powers army-wide, so it will affect every discipline squad in the army, not just the ones the Phoenix Lords joined. Get rid of the Phoenix Reborn rule, but drop their points cost to 170-180 points.
I feel that would be far too powerful. Making them fearless is a big boost, giving out the unit-only power to everything would be far too powerful IMHO; no scatter Hawks, FNP 'Dragons, Furious Charging Banshees, it'd simply be too much. Furthermore, through wargear alone they're worth more than 180pts. Doing some very simplistic maths: Wolf Lord: 100pts, + Belt of Russ/4++ (20pts), + Saga of the Bear/Eternal Warrior (30pts), +2 exarch powers (~20pts) and weaponry (25pts) - that's 195pts for gear alone and that's being generous. on top of this they have the resurrection, disciple-fearlessness, one-unit-boost and the stats boost.
Furthermore, Phoenix Reborn is very fitting with the fluff and likely too popular for me to want to remove it.
- Baharroth: his Hawk's Claw should have a range of 24".
Done.
- Avatar: maybe drop his points cost to 180-190. The second firing mode of the Wailing Doom should be Template instead of Large Blast.
I've been over before why the Avatar should be fairly priced as it is. If template, then in many cases the player would be better off going for the +1 attack over blast IMHO.
- Farseer: Increase the cost of the runes (all of them) by 5. Increase the cost of the Eldar Jetbike to 35 points.
I don't believe the runes should be that expensive; they may not look it but their cost can quickly rack up and can be similar to how people don't take many upgrades beyond the minimum for some models. AP1 such short-ranged and rare-to-use weapons is not worth 10pts, nor is a one-use destructor worth 10pts IMHO. One I can see the price increasing on is Runes of Warding and that's about it.
Jetbike cost has been upped to 35 however.
- Warlock Seer Council: Increase the cost of Eldar jetbike to 30 points per model.
This I don't intend to do; even with their abilities 65-70pts is a lot for a single model; compare it to Thunderwolves for example, there are weaknesses to the Jetlock council such as psychic-nullification, damage-output (particularly against armour saves) and reliance on a Farseer/Guide.
- Autarch: Get rid of the Exarch wargear options, and replace them with unique Autarch wargear options. Increase the cost of Eldar jetbike to 35 points.
I don't think the Jetbike is worth 35pts for the Autarch. I no longer have any intention to remove the Exarch wargear; if I want these Codices to be anywhere near the level of GW's I cannot be afraid to change; there are masses of justification for Exarch wargear which we (myself and others) have been over already, however I see little justification for MORE (there's already several Autarch-only pieces of equipment) Autarch-only gear outside of conservation; furthermore it would add a lot of entries that can only be used by one model in the entire army.
- Harlequins: Increase the cost of the Shadowseer to +35 points. Increase the cost of the Death Jester to +20 points but make his Shrieker Cannon Poisoned (2+).
I don't see the need for the change to the Death Jester, whilst the Shadowseer will be less necessary with the change I'm about to implement for Harlies/Holo-suits.
- Guardians (in general): An option to take 4+ armour save. defenders should have the option to take support weapons on their heavy weapon platforms.
4+ save is a nice idea, although probably not worth it with the prevalence of cover and conceal and may impinge upon DA's.
I have been over the Support Weapon suggestion in my previous post and I see no real reason to change that stance.
- Rangers: Increase their points cost to 20 ppm. Increase the cost of the Pathfinder upgrade to +35 points.
I am considering a point increase on Rangers, however I believe both 20 and 35pts for each is too much; there are far too many exploitable weaknesses for them to cost too much.
- Wave Serpent: Decrease its cost to 75-80 points. An option to take an assault ramp would be nice (for +30-40 points).
Isn't happening. 75-80pts is too cheap; compare it to a Razorback, who may have better armament, but has worse armour, much worse mobility and half the transport capacity. Wave Serpents are a good unit in the current Codex.
- Swooping Hawks: Increase their weapon range to 24".
I have no intention to change this. At 18" they can either shoot and Eldar-fleet back out of the range of most rapid-fire weapons, or they can Skyleap/deepstrike and use their grenade packs to inflict greater damage, but risk greater punishment, I like the tactical decisions it creates, amongst the other boosts to the 'hawks.
- Warp Spiders: Increase their weapon's Strength to 6.
I shall make them AP5. Better damage output against their main target (infantry) and slightly better against tanks without making them as powerful as Str6 does.
- Shining Spears: They should have a "fly-by attack" like Reavers, and an increased cost of 30ppm with it. Also some sort of instant-killing exarch power instead of Tank Hunters.
Why can the reavers ability not remain unique to reavers? Shining Spears are tougher and much harder-hitting, however they're not as manoeuvrable as Reavers. Tank Hunters adds some greater versatility and hitting power to the unit IMHO.
- Asp: MOAR weapon options.
I don't see why; for these weapons players have the options of Vypers or Waveserpents, or Falcons or War Walkers, or Guardians or Wraithlords. Asp weapons are only use by 2 other units in the 'dex and it helps keep them unique whilst their weapons are already powerful.
- Falcon: Drop points cost to 100 points.
This isn't happening. 100pts is much too cheap. Compare them to Predators: for 5pts more, the Falcon has ~equal armour, much greater speed, slightly-worse damage output, but transport capacity and less FoC occupation.
- Wraithlord: Increase its points cost to 130 points. Drop the shimmershield option. The second heavy weapon should make the first twin-linked if the two are indentical.
+1 wound is barely worth 20pts let alone 40pts. The shimmershield provides protection to a large area, such as squads (and provides interesting options for an Autarch) or large creatures, e.g. the Wraithlord. Paying double-price for twin-linking is also too much.
- War Walkers: Increase the cost of Power Diversion Matrix to 10-15 ppm.
I don't intend to do this, although 10pts isn't unreasonable, nor is 5pts IMHO; they're very fragile, only BS3 and one of the big advantages of Walkers is the ability to move and shoot; all of these seem to work against the increased cost of a PDM IMHO.
- Shuriken weapons: They need some sort of pseudo-rending. Like all to-wound rolls of 6 ignore armour, but no +D3 for armour penetration. This would instantly fix the DA-s. Also drop the range of the shuriken pistol to 12".
No. I don't see the justification for this in-game or in-fluff, pseudo-rending is something I only briefly considered when designing this and is too powerful IMHO. I am unsure of the perceived flaw with DA's, I've explained how they are (arguably) superior to Sundering Sentinels (who are 'good') in damage output and point-to-point toughness, however DA's are also faster, better in close combat, scoring, higher AP and inflict cover-penalty.
Personally I don't see the need to change Shuriken.
- Bright Lances: They should be 20 points each at maximum. But preferably cheaper.
They're the Eldar equivalent to a Lascannon but are only 5pts more than a missile launcher a 1-in-3 chance to penetrate a Land Raider is nothing to be sniffed at and twice-as-good as a Lascannon's chance.
But i spare you from these, because they have zero creative criticism ...
Just Dave wrote:
I no longer have any intention to remove the Exarch wargear; if I want these Codices to be anywhere near the level of GW's I cannot be afraid to change; there are masses of justification for Exarch wargear which we (myself and others) have been over already, however I see little justification for MORE (there's already several Autarch-only pieces of equipment) Autarch-only gear outside of conservation; furthermore it would add a lot of entries that can only be used by one model in the entire army.
Okay, this make little sense for me. In the recent xeno dexes, there are a lot of unique wargear that is available for only one character in the whole army. The Dark Eldar codex has a full page of nastyness for the Haemonculi. The Necron 'dex has two pages worth of Cryptek-only wargear. Even the GK codex is full with such stuff (like inquisitor-specific wargear)...
Oh, and about the Guardian 4+ saves: i guess he mentioned this with Storm Guardians, and that with a 4+ armour save, mechanized Storm Guardians become a very solid choice.
On the Shining Spears. If they are moved towards MC-hunters, a fly-by makes sense. If they can only make a single high strength armour negating attack each, this limits their optimal target - additionally we know that Eldar and Dark Eldar will share a lot of abilities, although not as many as to make them codex-copy-paste a'la Marines. Keeping the attack at S6 (maybe even "hits top" aka hits side armour) would prevent them from hunting vehicles.
Crypteks have a major spot in the codex. An Autarch may, in the fluff, have access to a significant portion of the Eldar's exotic armoury, but on the table it's the Farseers and Warlocks that're the main characters.
Now, as far as the fluff goes, Exarchs seem to pick their weapons from the same armoury. The true difference is that the Autarch has a choice of weapons for each battle - Exarchs typically stick with their weapons for a few millenia until they are finally killed permanently (and I don't mean being beaten in battle here).
This leads to an interesting situation. Exarchs could conceivably have vastly different weapons within the same aspect, but the prospect of adapting weapons to the situation would be slim (although it's conceivable the craftworld would instead send warriors from a different shrine to better suit the needs for the intended target).
Dave's codex is actually pretty good. The local Eldar player in my gaming club playtested the codex and wih all his hardcore-Eldar-fanboyism and around 20 years of gaming expreience, he only found like 2 major and 2 "personal" problems...
I still stand by my statement that Daves work is somethign to be admired.
More importantly, and the thing I respect the most in this case, is that he takes criticism, (even completely ridiculous) in stride and only ever improves his work from it.
This is an important part toward building.
No matter how much players, myself included, complain about the unfair codexes or rules that get put out by GW, in the end, you'll find competitive games being played with many different armies, merely just some (tau) needing major upgrades to compete with the new edition dexes, (Necrons got a damn good one) and in the end the people writing the codex can stand above any criticism in the fact that it plays competitively in many different builds, doesn't prove to be to OP in terms of final results, and encourages many builds. (Though the many builds thing is something GW fails at kind of often.)
I garner admiration in Daves work in that he is attempting to reach this kind of balance.
I hope people posting hate, like some have very succesfully done, post it with critical points so the man can improve his work not just to be spiteful at his work.
Hope this support wasn't seen as unneccesary, and hoping Dave continues said work.
Mantis840 wrote:-Post removed by insaniak. Feedback is great, but please remember Dakka's rule #1, which is to be polite.-
As Insaniak said; feedback is great and I appreciate almost all feedback, but then there's someone posting comments with no support, no back-up and an attitude that suggests I ran over their puppy, which I didn't.
But hey, rather than just making snide comments or having a tantrum as a response, how about I suggest that you back-up your own comments and criticisms, before Insaniak (rightly, IMHO) deleted your response, I recall you saying a few things:
- That I've made units worse. Which ones? Name me any unit you think is worse than its current incantation. Personally, I can't think of any, except potentially Eldrad which is understandable considering his current power.
- That I've made upgrades more expensive. Which ones? If there are any, have I done this without justification?
- That I've ruined the dynamic or play-style of the Eldar? How? Aspect unit's are more specialised, the army hits harder, moves faster but is still very fragile and low on numbers. What they have in hitting power, speed and specialisation, they lack in durability, numbers and cheap-units. Try to tell me where this is different to what is stated or suggested in the fluff.
I_AM_THE_SLAW wrote:I was thinking about Asurmen's battle fate ability and well compared to rest of the phoenix lords its not really that great.
Its very situational and most of the time it goes to waste. Wouldn't an ability like +2 to bladestorm be better? Or make DA more more effective in cc?
As iv said before great work Dave, i have really enjoyed using your codex.
Thanks Slaw, appreciate the kind words and feedback, thanks man!
My reasoning behind Battle Fate is two-fold; 1st, I believe Battle Fate to be deceptive in its effectiveness; there are far more AP4 weapons than there are AP3, which can significantly increase their toughness against most weapons.
2ndly, Dire Avengers benefit most (IMHO) from being fearless as a result of being troops.
Definitely makes Eldar able to compete with T1 armies. Obviously a little bit less balanced in the Eldar player's favor, but MUUUUUCH less so than most Fandexs. I think it's reasonable enough and most importantly... if another player I didn't know showed me it and wanted to field it, I would honestly have no qualms against letting the, which I believe is the ultimate test. I also like what you did with the Autarch traits, allowing for many different Craftworld playstyles.
Heavy Support - 2 Support Weapon Battery's - Nova Lance - 90pts
2 Support Weapon Battery's - Nova Lance - 90pts
2 Support Weapon Battery's - Nova Lance - 90pts
Heavy Support - 2 Support Weapon Battery's - Shadow Weaver - 60pts
1750pts
I fear this list could be too powerful if anything. I think it also provides evidence to the usability Support Weapon Battery's and 'Hawks IMHO.
Number 5 in my example lists from the Codex: Mech Eldar. Arguably the most competitive army type in the current Codex, it can easily convert to my Codex.
Heavy Support - Falcon - Starcannon, Shuriken Cannon, Holofields, Spirit Stones - 185pts
Heavy Support - Fire Prism - 120pts
Heavy Support - Fire Prism - 120pts
Total: 1750pts
7 AV12 Hulls, including 2 Holofields with a Farseer for fortuned turbo-boost, 2 AV11 Hulls, 3 scoring units.
I'd actually say the army this would be strongest against is Draigowing; with 8 meltaguns, 2 Str9 AP2 Templates, 4 Str8 AP2 shots, 4 Str7 AP2 shots and 2 D-Cannons, combined with manoeuvrability, Paladins would have a serious problem.
Just Dave wrote:Number 5 in my example lists from the Codex: Mech Eldar. Arguably the most competitive army type in the current Codex, it can easily convert to my Codex.
Heavy Support - Falcon - Starcannon, Shuriken Cannon, Holofields, Spirit Stones - 185pts
Heavy Support - Fire Prism - 120pts
Heavy Support - Fire Prism - 120pts
Total: 1750pts
7 AV12 Hulls, including 2 Holofields with a Farseer for fortuned turbo-boost, 2 AV11 Hulls, 3 scoring units.
I'd actually say the army this would be strongest against is Draigowing; with 8 meltaguns, 2 Str9 AP2 Templates, 4 Str8 AP2 shots, 4 Str7 AP2 shots and 2 D-Cannons, combined with manoeuvrability, Paladins would have a serious problem.
By comparison what you get that's similar with the 4th edition codex:
Heavy Support - 3 War Walkers - 2 w/ 2x Scatter Laser, 1 w/ 2x Starcannon - 180pts
Heavy Support - 3 War Walkers - 2 w/ 2x Scatter Laser, 1 w/ 2x Starcannon - 180pts
Heavy Support - 3 War Walkers - 2 w/ 2x Scatter Laser, 1 w/ 2x Starcannon - 180pts
1748pts
Again, I'd say another solid list. Jetbikes (with Autarchs) and Rangers start on board, the bikers and autarchs boosting forwards for a 3+ cover save, further protected by a Solar Flare if needed.
Then, reserves will be modified until everything is wanted, at which point the War Walkers outflank for side and rear-armour shots, the Avengers home in to pepper troops and steal objectives and the Dragons appear to fry heavy armour.
I'm pleasantly surprised to say all bases seem covered and it seems like another, viable but themed list possible with the Codex.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Thanks for posting a comparison mech-list Maht', saved me doing it!
This is amazing Dave, really cool. You have managed to encompass everything I could hope for Eldar in a FANDEX!!! (No offense) I think I will try to play using these rules. Now, if only I could find a fandex for Space Marines('nilla)...
Haha, thanks man, appreciate the kind words! No offence taken, I know fandex's are often a bit... Questionable as it were! Thanks again man, that means a lot. If you do play with it please let me know how it goes. Ironically, I'm actually currently working on making a Fandex for (Vanilla) Space Marines.
I would be quite pleased if this was the real update for the Eldar codex alot of good changes to make certain units more useable, keep up the good work !
Automatically Appended Next Post: After reading it more warlocks can get like 6 or 7 attacks in close combat? warseer + assail + pistol/ccw pretty crazy they can also have WS 6 and Iniative 6 too, are they meant to be that good?
One thing I'm still kind of bummed about; Rangers.
Their special rule is slightly off; normally, to-hit rolls of 6 do nothing, so there's that (you were thinking of to-wound rolls, and ap2.)
Secondly, they're bs4 sniper rifles. As we can see from Ratlings at 10ppm being less than useless, sniper rifles are almost never a very good choice for anything, ever.
For example, what you're looking at here is a total of 1.3r unsaved wounds per turn against MEQ, from 10 rangers. With a Pathfinder and Star Rifle, we get ~1.83r UW/MEQ
This is 200+ Points! Sure, they are gaining a 2+ cover save in most scenarios, which makes them acceptable campers against a decently sized portion of opponents. But starting from the other side of the board, moving slowly and not running, >200 points of any other unit in the entire game (including gretchin, firewarriors, and zombies)< can kill them. When you have a unit that cannot, in any situation, make up its own points value, and doesn't even serve as a credible enough threat to prove as a DISTRACTION...
My offer: Ranger Rifle is at least 48" range, maybe even 60. Heavy 2. Rangers drop down to 15 points per model. Star Rifle is Pinning as well as Rending, Heavy 2. Pathfinder Upgrade confers BS5. Ranger Rifle "To-Hit" rolls of 5+ are AP1. Ranger Rifle "To-Wound" rolls of 5+ are rending.
What this does:
10 Rangers is 150 points. They put out 13.3r hits per turn. 4.4r of these hits are AP1. 2.2r of those ap1 hits wound, 1.48148r of those would rend anyways leaving....
6.6r wounds, 4.4r of which are rending, .741 of which are ap1, and 1.48148r of which rend at ap1.
Roughly 7.4 unsaved wounds against meq from a decent distance, with little fear of heavy weaponry or mass weaponry reprecussions. Can damage AV11/12 vehicles fairly consistently, if not severely.
This also makes the Ranger and Star Rifle (both expensive upgrades) actually worth their points - almost a guaranteed directed wound each turn for something that comes out at minimum to almost the expense of a vindicare assassin, with much less versatility.
Mahtamori wrote:What if their weapons were assault instead of heavy?
Doesn't get them much, and doesn't fit well with the fluff of their sniping style. Now instead of a stationary point with 2+ cover and 36" range, you have a moving point with variable cover and 36" range. Neither of them can do any real damage, and neither of them can assault a held objective, so you can continue ignoring them as usual.
I don't want to lower their cost; they're supposed to be the expensive militia. They're not really as great as an aspect warrior, so they need to have wargear that does awesome things, and a gimmick.
The gimmick is they're AP1 on a to-hit roll of 5+.
HOWEVER!
This AP1 hit has a 50% chance of being WASTED.
So you have a 1/6 chance of an AP1 hit and a 1/6 chance of a rending hit (if you continue to have rending on 5+ as well) meaning that only a small amount of your shots can do >anything<, and you're limited to 60 people who can actually >shoot< so if you're only putting out 60 shots, you have 10 of these that are ap1 and 10 of these that rend and 6.6r of the AP1 shots are ALSO RENDING. meaning you're only REALLY getting 13.3r shots OUT OF 60 that ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING AT ALL, and that's only to INFANTRY! And 60 Rangers is 1080 points. What else can you get for 1080 points? 24 twin-linked lascannons and 16 heavy bolters over 8 vendettas. 6 Dreadnoughts in drop pods with a MotF. 180 ork boyz (that's right - you're forgetting that 10 rangers costs as much as a full 30 boyz! And they can do absolutely nothing against them, either!)
Increasing the range, and rending on 5+ from Rangers makes them almost worth their points. I want to remove the out-dated 4th edition sniping rules from their To-Hit roll (it makes them clunky), and lower their points, rather than give them anything more.
Final damage output is 6.6r hits, 3.3r wounds. 2.2r of which rend, 2.6 total unsaved vs meq for 150 points. If they stay at 18-20 points, I'd probably want to see their shots output doubled on top of a range increase.
Freakehh wrote:I would be quite pleased if this was the real update for the Eldar codex alot of good changes to make certain units more useable, keep up the good work !
Automatically Appended Next Post: After reading it more warlocks can get like 6 or 7 attacks in close combat? warseer + assail + pistol/ccw pretty crazy they can also have WS 6 and Iniative 6 too, are they meant to be that good?
Thanks man, that's a huge compliment and working as effectively an official 'dex is basically exactly what I aim for, cheers!
Regarding Warlocks, at 37pts base they could have 4-5 attacks standard in close combat. However, bear in mind this is on a WS4, I4, T3 model and doesn't ignore armour saves. For 52pts each they can have 5-6 attacks at WS/I5, but this is a particularly large points cost IMHO.
Compare it to Assault Terminators for example who have stat 4's all-round, 2+5++, 3 base attacks, ignore armour and re-roll wounds for 3pts more.
I can understand the concern regarding Warlocks, but I feel that a unit of Warseers w/ assail is too 1-dimensional and expensive to work as well as it may initially seem IMHO.
chrisrawr wrote:One thing I'm still kind of bummed about; Rangers.
Their special rule is slightly off; normally, to-hit rolls of 6 do nothing, so there's that (you were thinking of to-wound rolls, and ap2.)
Secondly, they're bs4 sniper rifles. As we can see from Ratlings at 10ppm being less than useless, sniper rifles are almost never a very good choice for anything, ever.
For example, what you're looking at here is a total of 1.3r unsaved wounds per turn against MEQ, from 10 rangers. With a Pathfinder and Star Rifle, we get ~1.83r UW/MEQ
This is 200+ Points! Sure, they are gaining a 2+ cover save in most scenarios, which makes them acceptable campers against a decently sized portion of opponents. But starting from the other side of the board, moving slowly and not running, >200 points of any other unit in the entire game (including gretchin, firewarriors, and zombies)< can kill them. When you have a unit that cannot, in any situation, make up its own points value, and doesn't even serve as a credible enough threat to prove as a DISTRACTION...
My offer: Ranger Rifle is at least 48" range, maybe even 60. Heavy 2. Rangers drop down to 15 points per model. Star Rifle is Pinning as well as Rending, Heavy 2. Pathfinder Upgrade confers BS5. Ranger Rifle "To-Hit" rolls of 5+ are AP1. Ranger Rifle "To-Wound" rolls of 5+ are rending.
What this does:
10 Rangers is 150 points.
They put out 13.3r hits per turn.
4.4r of these hits are AP1. 2.2r of those ap1 hits wound, 1.48148r of those would rend anyways leaving....
6.6r wounds, 4.4r of which are rending, .741 of which are ap1, and 1.48148r of which rend at ap1.
Roughly 7.4 unsaved wounds against meq from a decent distance, with little fear of heavy weaponry or mass weaponry reprecussions. Can damage AV11/12 vehicles fairly consistently, if not severely.
This also makes the Ranger and Star Rifle (both expensive upgrades) actually worth their points - almost a guaranteed directed wound each turn for something that comes out at minimum to almost the expense of a vindicare assassin, with much less versatility.
Thanks for the input man.
I fear what you may describe may be a problem with the sniper rules in general rather than specifically rangers.
I think as it stands my incarnation of Rangers may be the best Sniper unit in the game (bar Deathmarks?), I mean despite the damage-output issues associated w/ sniper rules, they are still tough in cover, handy for webway and have a lot of versatility and movement shenanigans. I still find myself including them in lists designed with the 'dex, particularly as solid objective holders and on-board beacons in deep-strike lists.
I really appreciate the input man, although I feel your suggestion is too far in the other direction: 7.4 unsaved MeQ wounds, from 48", with 2+ cover at 150pts and able to damage tanks is wheyhey too much IMHO.
I'll look into a possible change to them, but I think they're a solid unit atm, within existing sniper rules at least.
Good spot with the to-wound vs. to-hit thing though, I shall change that. Thanks!
thephenomenalZ wrote:Won't download right.
Bugger. Sorry man, that's nothing I can personally help you with. If you PM me an email address I can try emailing you a copy.
Yeah, I'd initially over-halved the number of wounds from them when calculating heavy 2, which is why my second post reneges on that in favour of a simple range increase and the rending fix. I don't even think I'd keep AP1 in the mix; too many dice to designate as different when it all comes down to it. It worked fine when your to-hit roll determined your damage, but it just ain't kosher anymore
Dave: Thank you for making codices that should bring out what so many other's fail to do: Make EVERY unit in the codex worth taking! I can't explain how much more fun, in depth, and in general 'Eldar-y' this fandex is, it makes me squee! ^^
On a second look through I have a few things I think are kinda over powered. The first of which are Starcannons. WHOA! Useful Starcannons?!?! But seriously, I think the combo of dropping their price dramatically AND giving it an extra shot is a bit too much. Power diversion matrix is really interesting, BUT for 5 points those Pulse Laser/Starcannon Falcons now get 5 shots that gain +1 on the damage chart from being AP1? I know you're sacrificing Eldar's ever important mobility to do it, but with 36" range you have some room to toy with it. Especially since you can run an Eldar gunline (?!?!?!) now. Plus EMLs' plasma is then AP3, MEQ players will cry foul all day =P Just junk food for thought!
The Starcannon isn't Heavy 3, it's S7 Heavy 2. The point regarding Plasma Missile is very valid, though, since that risks having EML Walkers be seriously versatile - both decent against armour and very good against MEQ.
Let's compare with the Codex Space Marine.
Autocannon has roughly the same stats as a Star Cannon, one less AP (which admittedly is rather huge) and 6" more range. At BS4, the converted cost of an Autocannon is 25 (10 points for multi-melta, +15 points to upgrade to twin-linked Autocannon).
Just Dave's point costs for Starcannon seem just about right when directly compared to one of the more bland 5th edition codexes.
Dave, question for you: was it intentional that Eldar Missile Launchers should have such varied costs? 25 points on BS4 Wraithlord, 20 points on BS3 War Walker and BS4 Falcon, 15 points on BS3 Vypers, BS3 Guardians, and twin-linked BS3 Serpents (as well as 10 points to replace BS5 Reaper Exarch weapon).
Mahtamori wrote:Dave, question for you: was it intentional that Eldar Missile Launchers should have such varied costs? 25 points on BS4 Wraithlord, 20 points on BS3 War Walker and BS4 Falcon, 15 points on BS3 Vypers, BS3 Guardians, and twin-linked BS3 Serpents (as well as 10 points to replace BS5 Reaper Exarch weapon).
Hey Maht, I had another look at the 'dex in response to this point, as when you put it like that, it is weird.
However, this was intentional; it's typically costed as slightly less depending on the platform.
For example, on the Guardians and Vypers it's a BS3 platform that's replacing an existing weapon; the Shuriken Cannon.
On the Falcon, it's due to its manoeuvrability and the general stacking of points on the heavy weapons: Shuriken < Scatter & Star < EML < Bright Lance
On the Wraithlord it is again, the weapon stacking and due to BS4 working better with 1-shot weapons.
Would you say the points cost makes it imbalanced or a poor choice on any of these? Personally, I wouldn't.
chrisrawr wrote:Yeah, I'd initially over-halved the number of wounds from them when calculating heavy 2, which is why my second post reneges on that in favour of a simple range increase and the rending fix. I don't even think I'd keep AP1 in the mix; too many dice to designate as different when it all comes down to it. It worked fine when your to-hit roll determined your damage, but it just ain't kosher anymore
Aye. I think snipers (and pinning) as a whole needs fixing, which will hopefully come in 6th Ed.
felixander wrote:On a second look through I have a few things I think are kinda over powered. The first of which are Starcannons. WHOA! Useful Starcannons?!?! But seriously, I think the combo of dropping their price dramatically AND giving it an extra shot is a bit too much. Power diversion matrix is really interesting, BUT for 5 points those Pulse Laser/Starcannon Falcons now get 5 shots that gain +1 on the damage chart from being AP1? I know you're sacrificing Eldar's ever important mobility to do it, but with 36" range you have some room to toy with it. Especially since you can run an Eldar gunline (?!?!?!) now. Plus EMLs' plasma is then AP3, MEQ players will cry foul all day =P Just junk food for thought!
Starcannons didn't gain an extra shot, but a point of strength. They're effectively longer-ranged Plasma Rifles that don't Get(s) Hot, or are roughly equal in power to Plasma Cannons, but more-so than Autocannons.
They're priced as they're effectively the same level as Scatter Lasers; they have half the shots, but greater strength and AP. In doing the maths they typically have an equal damage-output, but Starcannons are fethed by cover. Lets be fair, they needed a big fix from their current 'dex.
My reasoning for the Power Diversion Matrix is as you said; you loose the all-important Eldar movement. Not only does the wargear itself come with a restriction (needing to stay still), but you're paying for it. Most Eldar vehicles (and all tanks?) can move 12" and fire all their weapons; having to stay still can really hinder them; losing out on speed and to an extent toughness (flat-out cover and vulnerable to other attacks).
You do raise a good point on the EML; shall be edited.
evildrspock wrote:Some very good ideas here, excellent work. I particularly like making Guardian squads outflank - suddenly, they're fun and sneaky!
Thanks man, I appreciate it!
TheMostSlyFox wrote:Dave: Thank you for making codices that should bring out what so many other's fail to do: Make EVERY unit in the codex worth taking! I can't explain how much more fun, in depth, and in general 'Eldar-y' this fandex is, it makes me squee! ^^
Wow. HUUUUGE compliment mate; depth, fun, characterful and full of options is what I aim for and that I can apparently fulfil that whilst making someone squee is huge; thanks a lot.
Ah, no, it was pure lack of attention that some were upgrades while others were purchases. Still used to the good ol' 'dex.
I am a bit sad that the groups I game with only accepts official sources so I'll never be able to have a go with this codex more than number crunching.
You're right about it being H2, I must have had some extra derp that day. But I still think a lot of people will call foul on the AP1 tanks, maybe it needs a price hike? But that's just an opinion.
BUT! Page 46 does say that a Forceshield is a 4+ armor save (triple checked) and in a GJB squad couldn't the Warlock replace the ShuriCan biker? And abuse Runes of Scoring as the jetbike and weapon are his then and he gets 6 S4 Ap1 shots? Seems a bit too powerful.
Technically the Warlock can replace such a biker, yes, but I don't see why you'd replace the biker with the Shuricannon since the Warlock will have his own wargear which is a standard jetbike The rules do say that it's Guardian Jetbikers that may upgrade their under-slung.
Good catch on the Forceshield, to which I'll add that it's also inconsequently spelled. Force Shield in Autarch entry, Forceshield in wargear entry.
Mahtamori wrote:Technically the Warlock can replace such a biker, yes, but I don't see why you'd replace the biker with the Shuricannon since the Warlock will have his own wargear which is a standard jetbike The rules do say that it's Guardian Jetbikers that may upgrade their under-slung.
Good catch on the Forceshield, to which I'll add that it's also inconsequently spelled. Force Shield in Autarch entry, Forceshield in wargear entry.
Well then shouldn't you mention that it's a warlock on a jetbike? As is worded either the rider on the jetbike becomes a warlock, leaving the ShuriCan on or the Guardian Jetbike model is replaced by a Warlock on foot. Always better to leave things without room for interpretation as I believe it currently does.
Mahtamori wrote:Actually, when I read it as if I were a rules lawyer you replace the Guardian Jetbiker with a Warlock that's walking
Exactly my point. Though I still think Warlock Bikers should be able to have ShuriCannons and Runes of Scoring for a massively overpowered you to Termies, Feel no pain, etc. ;D
Nice attempts at rules-lawyering fellas, but I think I have already covered those bases.
felixander wrote:
Mahtamori wrote:Actually, when I read it as if I were a rules lawyer you replace the Guardian Jetbiker with a Warlock that's walking
Exactly my point. Though I still think Warlock Bikers should be able to have ShuriCannons and Runes of Scoring for a massively overpowered you to Termies, Feel no pain, etc. ;D
- For the Shuriken Cannon it says "One in every three Guardian Jetbikers may replace his twin-linked Shuriken Catapults with:" As Guardian Jetbiker is a different model/profile to Warlock, it's not a Warlock that's equipped with a Shuriken Cannon. Even so, do you really think I'd allow an AP1 Shuriken Cannon for 5pts?!
- For the Warlock that's walking, the entry states "The Warlock comes equipped with Rune Armour, Eldar Jetbike, Witchblade, Shuriken Pistol and Plasma Grenades".
I don't mind rules lawyering guys, and obviously it's something I try to account for in the creation of the Codex, but I'd rather such lawyering wasn't pedantic to be honest. I'm not trying to complain or offend everyone, but neither myself nor GW want to spell everything word-for-word, so some common sense should be applied please.
I may go back to the 'dex and add some new things however; completely original things that really fit the character of the Eldar and update the Codex. I'll try to immerse myself in the Eldar fluff and see what I can come up with, as if it were an official new Codex.
- For the Shuriken Cannon it says "One in every three Guardian Jetbikers may replace his twin-linked Shuriken Catapults with:" As Guardian Jetbiker is a different model/profile to Warlock, it's not a Warlock that's equipped with a Shuriken Cannon. Even so, do you really think I'd allow an AP1 Shuriken Cannon for 5pts?!
- For the Warlock that's walking, the entry states "The Warlock comes equipped with Rune Armour, Eldar Jetbike, Witchblade, Shuriken Pistol and Plasma Grenades".
So this means if you want a warlock with the jetbikes and you want a shuriken cannon you have to have one more model? Ex 2 Normal Jet Bikes, 1 Shuriken Cannon Jet Bike, and 1 Warlock on Jet Bike?
- For the Shuriken Cannon it says "One in every three Guardian Jetbikers may replace his twin-linked Shuriken Catapults with:" As Guardian Jetbiker is a different model/profile to Warlock, it's not a Warlock that's equipped with a Shuriken Cannon. Even so, do you really think I'd allow an AP1 Shuriken Cannon for 5pts?!
- For the Warlock that's walking, the entry states "The Warlock comes equipped with Rune Armour, Eldar Jetbike, Witchblade, Shuriken Pistol and Plasma Grenades".
So this means if you want a warlock with the jetbikes and you want a shuriken cannon you have to have one more model? Ex 2 Normal Jet Bikes, 1 Shuriken Cannon Jet Bike, and 1 Warlock on Jet Bike?
Technically, yes.
This part isn't intentional however, so I'll clarify it.
Two potential ideas for additional units to fit with the fluff of the Eldar:
- Eldar in heavy, highly-advanced armour; appearing as [just-above] man-sized Revenant Titans, these would be of a role/construction similar to Tau Battlesuits, fitting with the specialised, highly advanced nature of Eldar, allowing them to fight without putting their warriors in too much danger. These guys would be of a similar price - but not tougher than - Terminators and be equipped with weapons such as twin-Catapults, Fusion Guns, Power Blades etc. Not sure if they'd be Guardians, Aspect Warriors or like a cross in-between.
- Anti-tank Aspect Warriors; says it all really. Would be something like Str8, AP1. Probably as Heavy Support. Three distinct flaws with this idea however; the Heavy Support is full already, Fire Dragons are close-ranged anti-tank and Shadow-spectres are longer-ranged anti-tank. However, there is some kind of niche/potential for this unit, particularly as ranged, infantry anti-tank.
I'm currently also working on a 'Why?' section and fluff for some of the new additions, which will be included in the next update.
I'm of the opposite notion; The shattered and warp-pocketed entrance to a webway maze opens, and from it march the desperate guardians trapped inside - millenia have passed for us, but scant minutes for them as they cleared debris in their suits of lost technology. While too unweildy for most aspect warriors, these suits dramatically increase the combat effectiveness of every craftworlds' Guardian defenders.
OR SOMETHING LIEK THAT I DUNNO.
Proposed stats
28 ppm WS3 BS3 S3(6) T3(4) W2 I4 A2 Ld8 Sv3+
Slow and Purposeful Acute Senses Feel no Pain Fleet
Shuriken Cannon Bonesung Armour OR WHAT HAVE YOU Plasma Grenades Photon Grenades
Bonesung Armour: Doubles Str and Power Weapon, 3+ save, +1T +1W +1A +1I. Poisoned Weapons always roll on 5+ or worse? I dunno what else :V
good read, but i spotted a few problems. one, all phoenix lords have no point values and two your special character in the elites slot has no point value
If I do down the Guardian route - which is unlikely, as it won't explain the war mask schtuff - it'd probably be through Guardians that have previously walked the path of the Warrior and have their abilities are enhanced by the suits. Rather than following/worshiping Khaine, they follow/worship Asuryan.
The rules will be definitely somewhat similar to yours Chrisrawr, but I don't think I'll use that general method of background tbh.
TyraelVladinhurst wrote:good read, but i spotted a few problems. one, all phoenix lords have no point values and two your special character in the elites slot has no point value
Thanks, but check again. The Phoenix Lords points are at the top of their 1st page, Iranna's under the Warlock part of the Wraithguard entry.
chrisrawr wrote:I'm of the opposite notion; The shattered and warp-pocketed entrance to a webway maze opens, and from it march the desperate guardians trapped inside - millenia have passed for us, but scant minutes for them as they cleared debris in their suits of lost technology. While too unweildy for most aspect warriors, these suits dramatically increase the combat effectiveness of every craftworlds' Guardian defenders.
OR SOMETHING LIEK THAT I DUNNO.
Proposed stats
28 ppm WS3 BS3 S3(6) T3(4) W2 I4 A2 Ld8 Sv3+
Slow and Purposeful
Acute Senses
Feel no Pain
Fleet
Shuriken Cannon
Bonesung Armour OR WHAT HAVE YOU
Plasma Grenades
Photon Grenades
Bonesung Armour: Doubles Str and Power Weapon, 3+ save, +1T +1W +1A +1I. Poisoned Weapons always roll on 5+ or worse? I dunno what else :V
Can swap S.cannon for an array of weapons?
I like this for the most part. Though slow and purposeful seems wrong on this unit, on any Eldar unit for that matter.
I would also give it BS:4 to represent its technological awesomeness (Cant think of a better term) and reduce its close combat abilities, like remove the power weapons.
TyraelVladinhurst wrote:good read, but i spotted a few problems. one, all phoenix lords have no point values and two your special character in the elites slot has no point value
Thanks, but check again. The Phoenix Lords points are at the top of their 1st page, Iranna's under the Warlock part of the Wraithguard entry.
chrisrawr wrote:I'm of the opposite notion; The shattered and warp-pocketed entrance to a webway maze opens, and from it march the desperate guardians trapped inside - millenia have passed for us, but scant minutes for them as they cleared debris in their suits of lost technology. While too unweildy for most aspect warriors, these suits dramatically increase the combat effectiveness of every craftworlds' Guardian defenders.
OR SOMETHING LIEK THAT I DUNNO.
Proposed stats
28 ppm WS3 BS3 S3(6) T3(4) W2 I4 A2 Ld8 Sv3+
Slow and Purposeful
Acute Senses
Feel no Pain
Fleet
Shuriken Cannon
Bonesung Armour OR WHAT HAVE YOU
Plasma Grenades
Photon Grenades
Q
Bonesung Armour: Doubles Str and Power Weapon, 3+ save, +1T +1W +1A +1I. Poisoned Weapons always roll on 5+ or worse? I dunno what else :V
Can swap S.cannon for an array of weapons?
Slow and purposeful... And fleet? O.o I think Jetpack, no fleet is a better option.
Honestly though aren't war walkers just a big suit of armor with weapons? And the Forgeworld WASP a more mobile one? I know you were thinking more Crisis suit style but the more I think about it I believe we already have it. And I agree that Eldar do not need another anti-tank squad. I'm afraid that if you add too much opponents will start thinking its too much and not let you play it. I already have friends who say its over powered and won't play it :(
Asuryan and Isha worship is sort of short on the craftworlds for some reason, though I can see plenty of homage to Vaul.
For some reason I see anything in combat where direct control of weapons is required to be a Aspect Warrior thing, while Guardians are more indirect through weapons interfaces and the likes.
Mahtamori wrote:Just Dave: maybe I'm just a lousy rules lawyer
Asuryan and Isha worship is sort of short on the craftworlds for some reason, though I can see plenty of homage to Vaul.
For some reason I see anything in combat where direct control of weapons is required to be a Aspect Warrior thing, while Guardians are more indirect through weapons interfaces and the likes.
Is there any other kind of rules lawyer?
I agree with what you're saying regarding Guardians, minus Storm Guardians that's effectively been my intention for them. I think my idea regarding worshipping Asuryan is to make a war unit that doesn't worship Khaine, whilst such advanced suits can make sense with experienced Guardians IMHO. But probably gonna go with the Aspect Warrior theme; worshipping Khaine's unstoppable wrath.
felixander wrote:Slow and purposeful... And fleet? O.o I think Jetpack, no fleet is a better option.
Honestly though aren't war walkers just a big suit of armor with weapons? And the Forgeworld WASP a more mobile one? I know you were thinking more Crisis suit style but the more I think about it I believe we already have it. And I agree that Eldar do not need another anti-tank squad. I'm afraid that if you add too much opponents will start thinking its too much and not let you play it. I already have friends who say its over powered and won't play it :(
Do you reckon you could get your friends to say where/why they think it's overpowered? It doesn't have to be in huge detail or time-consuming, I'd just be interested to know where they think it's flawed, so I can either change it or provide my view on why it may not be?
I really know what you're saying about too many options though, most slots seem very well accounted for IMHO and it's the same size as my CSM Codex at least, and smaller than the current Space Marine 'dex. Really though, I've only added 2 non-unique units. I also admit, I think there may be room for this suit-style aspect warrior, particularly due to it requiring few numbers and having such a large battlefield impact, linking to the limited numbers/near-extinction of the Eldar.
Again though, I agree with what you're saying about not needing more units. I'm going to finish designing this one and see how it may fit...
Also, numbers of units in each 'dex, with brackets being upgrade characters, retinues, or daemonic units.
Codex Space Marines: HQ - 15 (+2)
Elites - 8
Troops - 2 (+1)
Fast Attack - 7
Heavy Support - 8(+1)
Dedicated Transports - 3
Total - 44(+3) = 47
My CSM Codex: HQ - 10(+1)
Elites - 7(+1)
Troops - 8(+1)
Fast Attack - 4
Heavy Support - 9
Dedicated Transports - 2
Total - 40(+2) = 42
My Eldar Codex: HQ - 14(+1)
Elites - 7 (+1, +1)
Troops - 5
Fast Attack - 5
Heavy Support - 7
Dedicated Transports - 1
Total - 39(+3) = 42
Changes include:
- Changing the two Dark Reaper Exarch powers; definitely making Reapers worth taking and reducing the idea of the Reapers as 'cheerleaders' for the Exarch, as suggested by Maht'.
- Aligning the Force Shield with Forceshield and clarifying it as an invulnerable save.
- Eldar Fleet also INCREASES Fall Back distance; they're a dying race and it adds balance.
- Costs of Eldrad and Yriel bumped up.
- Plasma Missle is now AP5 to stop Power Diversion Matrix abuse.
- Adding a 'Why' section, like that in my Chaos Codex.
I finally got around to replying to this...also a free bump to the top because that's where this should be.
My fiance plays Eldar, and while she loves the models, she's a little adverse to playing as she'll likely get crushed more often than not.
However, with this codex, the options and overall playability are improved by the perfect amount. The codex still feels very Eldar-y, and all the options almost make me want to pick up Eldar too.
This will likely be the codex I use whenever I play against her, and hopefully the codex I can get my fictional gaming group to adopt, if I ever get another one.
Excellent work, and truly the best example of a fandex I've yet to see. Hell, I don't even like CSM, but I'd pick up an army to use with your codex.
Thanks Blacksails. Seriously, thanks. That's a HUGE compliment and yours is an opinion I respect, so again, thank you. I'm glad you like it.
The Codex has been updated with a new piece of wargear: Runes of Persecution.
Runes of Persecution basically allows a Farseer to cast an Mind War or Eldritch Storm once-per-game (or twice if the psychic power is also purchased) on top of any other psychic powers.
This basically boosts their damage output and psychic potential.
On the subject of Farseers, I had considered allowing Spirit Stones to be purchased twice and stack; so you could effectively have a bog-standard Farseer casting 3 powers per-turn. However, as I'm sure opponents of Eldrad will vouch for; this is a pretty unfriendly mechanic at times. Even with a steep points cost of around 170pts or whatever with dual stones and powers, being able to cast 3x Guide/Fortune/Doom/Amplify/Fog of War is too much IMHO, and whilst Eldar psykers are bad-ass and the best in the galaxy and whatnot, being able to do this would simply be too much IMHO.
Hence, Runes of Persecution, as in my opinion, multiple offensive Powers like Mind War or Eldritch Storm is a lot less unfriendly or abusable than multiple army-boosters, like Fortune et al.
I had also considered allowing Exarchs/Warlocks to use the Ld of a Farseer on a successful psychic test (with immunity to perils), however I decided against his as Morale is too small a factor within 40K as it is.
Just Dave wrote:
On the subject of Farseers, I had considered allowing Spirit Stones to be purchased twice and stack; so you could effectively have a bog-standard Farseer casting 3 powers per-turn. However, as I'm sure opponents of Eldrad will vouch for; this is a pretty unfriendly mechanic at times. Even with a steep points cost of around 170pts or whatever with dual stones and powers, being able to cast 3x Guide/Fortune/Doom/Amplify/Fog of War is too much IMHO, and whilst Eldar psykers are bad-ass and the best in the galaxy and whatnot, being able to do this would simply be too much IMHO.
Uhm... How about a simple limitation that says that one power could be casted only once per turn? So no triple Guide/Fortune/Doom/Amplify/Fog of War. Or just simply replace Spirit Stones with Psychic Mastery levels like in the GK 'dex.
Also, in my gaming group, we play-tested an Eldar "lazy fix" fandex that had one major, simple, but genius power boost: it improved the armour save of all Eldar models by 1 (except for jetbikes and wraith constructs). And hell, it really encourages fluffy armies (aspect warriors with aspect warriors)! It also had Aerial Assault and Assault Vehicle on all vehicles (AV as an upgrade for +20 points), and those were also solid changes.
Hey, that sounds extremely interesting, AtoMaki, although I don't think +1 armour is truly Eldarish. (Ok, 4+ on troop is suitable for Craftworlders, but 3+ or even 2+ Aspect Warriors... I'll have to consult my periodic time table for that one)
Mahtamori wrote:Hey, that sounds extremely interesting, AtoMaki, although I don't think +1 armour is truly Eldarish. (Ok, 4+ on troop is suitable for Craftworlders, but 3+ or even 2+ Aspect Warriors... I'll have to consult my periodic time table for that one)
Well, their fluff is not exactly about being squishy (actually, it is pretty much the other way around), that's the Dark Eldar way. And they supposed to be the second most advanced race (after the 'crons), so super-duper armour saves could be easily justified.
Just Dave wrote:
On the subject of Farseers, I had considered allowing Spirit Stones to be purchased twice and stack; so you could effectively have a bog-standard Farseer casting 3 powers per-turn. However, as I'm sure opponents of Eldrad will vouch for; this is a pretty unfriendly mechanic at times. Even with a steep points cost of around 170pts or whatever with dual stones and powers, being able to cast 3x Guide/Fortune/Doom/Amplify/Fog of War is too much IMHO, and whilst Eldar psykers are bad-ass and the best in the galaxy and whatnot, being able to do this would simply be too much IMHO.
Uhm... How about a simple limitation that says that one power could be casted only once per turn? So no triple Guide/Fortune/Doom/Amplify/Fog of War. Or just simply replace Spirit Stones with Psychic Mastery levels like in the GK 'dex.
I honestly don't know why I didn't think about it being one of each power per-turn (which the current rules enforce anyway), rather than any number of any power. I shall think about it a bit more then.
Also, in my gaming group, we play-tested an Eldar "lazy fix" fandex that had one major, simple, but genius power boost: it improved the armour save of all Eldar models by 1 (except for jetbikes and wraith constructs). And hell, it really encourages fluffy armies (aspect warriors with aspect warriors)! It also had Aerial Assault and Assault Vehicle on all vehicles (AV as an upgrade for +20 points), and those were also solid changes.
Are you suggesting a psychic ability that improves the armour save, or a general armour save improvement? Because, honestly, neither really appeal to me.
Fortune fulfils the former, whilst the latter isn't needed; the Eldar are meant to be fragile; they still have a lot of 3+/4+ saves in the army (in-fact IIRC only Guardians have an unmodifiable armour save of 5+) and it enforces tactical, hit and run play-style due to their low numbers and fragility.
As for assault vehicles, I have no intention for that either. Everyone and their mothers would want assault vehicles in any Codex, but that doesn't mean it should happen IMHO.
Just Dave wrote:Thanks Blacksails. Seriously, thanks. That's a HUGE compliment and yours is an opinion I respect, so again, thank you. I'm glad you like it.
No problem, its refreshing to read such a well presented, thought out, and balanced codex. I can only imagine the amount of time you've invested in the two you've completed and the third you're working on (the one I'm most excited about), so the least you deserve is some positive feedback.
I came up with a 1500pts list I'll get future Mrs. Blacksails to run, something like this;
Farseer – Spirit stones, Runes of Warding, Guide, Doom/130pts
Dire Avengers (10) – Power sword, Shimmershield, Bladestorm, Wave Serpent, Shuriken Cannon, Twin-linked Scatter Lasers/270pts
Dire Avengers (5) – Falcon, Bright Lance, Power Diversion Matrix/235pts
Storm Guardians (10) – 2x Flamers, Wave Serpent, Shuriken Cannon, Twin-linked Scatter Lasers/185pts
Fire Prism – Power Diversion Matrix/130pts
Fire Prism – Power Diversion Matrix/130pts
Which, when compared to the current dex incarnation;
Farseer - Runes of Warding, Doom, Guide/115pts
Fire Dragons (5) - Wave Serpent, Scatter Lasers/195pts
Fire Dragons (5) - Wave Serpent, Scatter Lasers/195pts
Dire Avengers (10) - Exarch, Two Shuriken Catapults, Bladestorm, Wave Serpent, Eldar Missile Launcher/272pts
Dire Avengers (10) - Exarch, Two Shuriken Catapults, Bladestorm, Wave Serpent, Eldar Missile Launcher/272pts
Dire Avengers (5) - Exarch, Bladestorm/87pts
Fire Prism - /115pts
Fire Prism - /115pts
Falcon - Eldar Missile Launcher/135pts
The two are strikingly similar, and pose the same number of AV12 hulls to deal with. I can easily swap the scatter lasers on two wave serpents to missiles, which would make both lists even more similar.
Initial analysis tells me they're both largely the same in terms of effectiveness, but its all the little tweaks that add up that makes your codex that perfect amount better. The power diversion matrices on the Prisms and Falcon give me more reliable anti-tank, while still maintaining the option of mobility. The Falcon is a great deal better with BS4, power diversion option, and the Pulse Laser being a defensive weapon. The farseer can cast two powers, which is really nice. Overall, its easy to ensure you have a good blend of anti-tank and anti-infantry with your dex, while still ensuring the Eldar are a low model count army overall.
I'll be seeing what else I can come up with, as the Autarchs unlock some really, really cool options.
Question about the armoured consort option for autarchs though; it says may take Falcons instead of wave serpents as dedicated transports. Does the option for Wave Serpents as dedicated transports still exist if that option is taken?
Just Dave wrote:Are you suggesting a psychic ability that improves the armour save, or a general armour save improvement? Because, honestly, neither really appeal to me.
A general armour save improvement. Not for jetbikes or wraith constructs, but for everyone else.
Just Dave wrote:Fortune fulfils the former, whilst the latter isn't needed; the Eldar are meant to be fragile; they still have a lot of 3+/4+ saves in the army (in-fact IIRC only Guardians have an unmodifiable armour save of 5+) and it enforces tactical, hit and run play-style due to their low numbers and fragility.
I don't know if the Eldar meant to be fragile... Their codex pretty much points to the other way (just read the Eldar way of war on page 9). Fragility is the key word of the Dark Eldar. And for some units the durability boost come very handy (Striking Scorpions and Swooping Hawks being the two most favored).
I would have to say, I'd be against the Eldar's saves improving by one across the board. It would overbalance them on the tabletop.
You should be using your higher mobility to win fights, not the "Stand here and take it" mentality of the Space Marines. It's what the Eldar are about. True, they aren't as fragile as their dark kin, but that's already true, so no improvements need to be made on that front to abide by the fluff.
Amanax wrote:I would have to say, I'd be against the Eldar's saves improving by one across the board. It would overbalance them on the tabletop.
You should be using your higher mobility to win fights, not the "Stand here and take it" mentality of the Space Marines. It's what the Eldar are about. True, they aren't as fragile as their dark kin, but that's already true, so no improvements need to be made on that front to abide by the fluff.
Yes, but the biggest problem with Eldar is that they have to take damage because:
- They cannot assault out of their vehicles.
- They often lack the punch to completely slaughter everyone with the first try.
The DE can accomplish both of those, but the Eldar can't (thats why people take "instant-strike" units like jetbikes with the current dex). An improved durability across the board could greatly help to give a chance to the less "instant-strike" units like Striking Scorpions.
AtoMaki wrote:Yes, but the biggest problem with Eldar is that they have to take damage because:
- They cannot assault out of their vehicles.
- They often lack the punch to completely slaughter everyone with the first try.
The DE can accomplish both of those, but the Eldar can't (thats why people take "instant-strike" units like jetbikes with the current dex). An improved durability across the board could greatly help to give a chance to the less "instant-strike" units like Striking Scorpions.
What always makes me reluctant to taking full squads of Avengers is disembarking 10 models from serpent after it moved. Single rear access point is kinda small and makes blasts/templates hurt like hell.
I know guard also has only one access but 5 fire points are more than enough to keep them safe while dishing out damage. Am I the only one who has problem with that?
I'm quoting AtoMaki because I feel that perhaps some mitigation in that area would increase survivability of Eldar troops without changing any stats.
Btw. I really want to commend you on this codex. Unfortunately there is almost zero chance my friends would allow playing with those rules so even though I carefully follow this thread I won't have any test results
Amanax wrote:I would have to say, I'd be against the Eldar's saves improving by one across the board. It would overbalance them on the tabletop.
You should be using your higher mobility to win fights, not the "Stand here and take it" mentality of the Space Marines. It's what the Eldar are about. True, they aren't as fragile as their dark kin, but that's already true, so no improvements need to be made on that front to abide by the fluff.
Yes, but the biggest problem with Eldar is that they have to take damage because:
- They cannot assault out of their vehicles.
- They often lack the punch to completely slaughter everyone with the first try.
The DE can accomplish both of those, but the Eldar can't (thats why people take "instant-strike" units like jetbikes with the current dex). An improved durability across the board could greatly help to give a chance to the less "instant-strike" units like Striking Scorpions.
See, and I feel things should move in the other direction. The problems you pointed out are true, however, going with more defensive stats would again promote a more static style of play. I would rather have more hit and run special abilities combined with slightly higher firing strength to provide that more mobile firepower that Eldar should be.
Amanax wrote:See, and I feel things should move in the other direction. The problems you pointed out are true, however, going with more defensive stats would again promote a more static style of play. I would rather have more hit and run special abilities combined with slightly higher firing strength to provide that more mobile firepower that Eldar should be.
Well, you cannot really go static with an Eldar army. Like... IIRC only Dark Reapers have weapons that allow this. Everyone else should go around (with better or worse saves), as they need to get close to their targets. The only difference with better save is that they will suffer less casualties from the attack/counter-attack. And of course the player will feel way more safe with them as they can survive tactical fumbles.
I don't have any intention to boost their armour saves largely across the board. It would simply unbalance things IMHO. Such a change would make Scorpions, Spiders et al. as 2+ and Banshees, Hawks, Avengers et al. as 3+ and that's not needed and isn't fair on Marine players.
If you then suggest only having it not reach 2+, then it's Scorpions and Spiders et al. being imbalanced against.
Increased durability in true Eldar fashion is provided by A: Increased range on Shuriken Weaponry and B: Eldar fleet.
The advantages of increased range is obvious, the advantage of Eldar fleet allows for increased movement in an offensive fashion, to close the gap with the enemy or contest objectives, or in a defensive fashion to avoid return fire/charges or back into cover.
As has been stated, increasing their saves largely encourages more static and callous gameplay, rather than the surgical, glass-scalpel nature that Eldar are renowned for and that this Codex (IMHO) emphasises.
I understand the merits of increasing their armour saves, but as you basically said yourself, it's a fairly 'lazy' fix and IMHO it is not needed in this/my Codex, doesn't fit with the fluff and would otherwise imbalance the Codex.
I believe with the changes I've made, it's not needed. Eldar are individually often expected to not have the punch or durability to work individually, that's why you manipulate it to their advantage.
For example, a Dire Avenger unit may be unlikely to wipe a Tactical Squad, so that's why you use Bladestorm and/or Doom and/or Guide and/or combine them with another squad.
Ultimately, it's not happening and hopefully I've explained why sufficiently.
They key with Eldar is movement. Being faster than the opponent is key in surviving, and should continue to provide some safety if they go fast (cover saves, harder to hit, etc), plus the added mobility of finding and selecting targets.
And obviously, Eldar needing this perhaps a bit more than other armies, but usually you need to isolate small parts of the enemy force and combine your targets to really only deal with 1-2 enemy units a turn. Maybe a pot shot here or here to shut down a tank for a round, but you really have to pool your resources to kill that one tactical squad, or deepstriking Terminators, or whatever. But between avenger/guardian fire with support Cannons/Emls/Scatter lasers, etc for infantry, and various heavy weapons/Fire Dragons for tanks, etc, you can lay some serious damage to secure wiping out a unit. Combined with Force multipliers like Guide, Doom, and Fortune, isolating units seems to be one of the best strategies for Eldar.
My point here is that any modification to the rules should encourage this style of play, with fitting in with the Eldar style and feel. Eldar are a dying race, few and far between; for them war is a delicate balance of fates, each death weighs a heavy toll on the battlefield. Being fragile and dying easily to the enemy's weaponry makes winning a well earned challenge of outwitting and solidly outplaying the opponent with all the tools they bring to their disposal.
With this in mind, I highly approve of some of the ideas in this codex - Vyper Jetbikes getting an assault move, for instance - keeping the feel, making it a little more competitive. Eldar Fleet? Make em faster than the other armies again, another great step.
..... One idea for the "Eldar Fleet" Rule ... subtle, but possibly a good choice: what if Eldar infantry moved an additional 1" for models with Fleet via a universal army special rule? Base move 7" vs. 6"? Might be silly (like the paint it red rule), but to make Eldar able to outrun slightly with an advantage, without running waaaaay too far (9" or 12", for instance), might be a fun choice, as you benefit from the speed before choosing to shoot/run.
Edit:
Obviously Eldar can go the footdar route with slow units aka War Walkers, Wraithlord, Reapers and Rangers ... not that this playstyle is bad, just seemed that the outmaneuvering was a key Eldar Tactic and feel. I'm just really enjoying my Mechdar right now (new army, yay!).
Brilliant Fandex but some of the points prices went up for no viable reason ie Maugan Ra (nerfed) Avatar (230 points....ouch?) and Eldrad (Nooooo!!! Give us back T4 and re-deploy ability!)
A couple things: is the Avatar's Wailing Doom a power weapon? Also, why is the Wraithlord now T7? Also, how did you make the template/layout for the codex?
This looks interesting, I'd have to make a more thorough reading to give you more detailed feedback but I would like to note two things one a quick glance:
Typo: On page 43, the Runes of Emanation add 6" to the range of the effect of Runes of Witnessing, since Runes of Witnessing don't actually have a range I suspect you meant Runes of Warding.
Errata: On page 28, the Swooping Hawks' Intercept rule as written allows them to hit a Venerable Dreadnaught on a 4+ in close combat despite it having a WS of 5; the official GW errata for the current Eldar Codex specifies that the rule applies to vehicles without a WS, you may want to add that clause.
Other notes:
Seer Strike Force should put limits on the number of Aspect Warriors taken to remain in-character, I think, probably make any Aspect unit 0-1.
If we're adding additional units (you added a new Aspect and the Harlequin Shadowseer into Elites), I'd like to request the Firestorm and Warp Hunter grav-tanks make it into these rules in one form or another.
Replying on my phone, so I'll reply to the quicker comments now...
Lightning Shadows wrote:Brilliant Fandex but some of the points prices went up for no viable reason ie Maugan Ra (nerfed) Avatar (230 points....ouch?) and Eldrad (Nooooo!!! Give us back T4 and re-deploy ability!)
Thanks man, I appreciate the kind words. I suspect some of the things you think are nerfed actually have improved in other ways:
The Avatar is much tougher and hits much harder; having more versatile ranged attack or extra close combat attack, as well as re-rolls and is much tougher. With FNP only 4 ranged weapons in the SM Codex can (IIRC) reliably negate his FNP and armour save; plasma weapons (which are rare) and Lascannons; meaning he's much tougher, acts as target saturation for vehicles and doesn't rely on a Farseer to survive.
Eldrad is more fragile, but divination is arguably better, his offensive psychic powers are better, he has lots of buffs via Runes and more powers overall. And lets be fair, he's arguably too good in the current Codex.
Finally, Maugan Ra is arguably better than before; being a much better force multiplier, having more shots and actually still being Str6 vs. Vehicles. I have realised however that his Exarch powers aren't in-line with the Reapers new powers; count them as if they were.
McNinja wrote:A couple things: is the Avatar's Wailing Doom a power weapon? Also, why is the Wraithlord now T7? Also, how did you make the template/layout for the codex?
The Avatar's a MC, so ignores saves in CC.
The Wraithlords got 2 more wounds, so is actually tougher, whilst there's few (if any) T8 models left in the game. I didn't really examine his cost closely when i changed him to W5, T7 so I'll give that another look to make sure i think its fair.
The template was actually originally designed by Majortom11 (who also designed the new Dakka logo) for my CSM Codex, but otherwise its done in Word and converted into a PDF.
Just Dave wrote:
The Avatar's a MC, so ignores saves in CC.
The Wraithlords got 2 more wounds, so is actually tougher, whilst there's few (if any) T8 models left in the game. I didn't really examine his cost closely when i changed him to W5, T7 so I'll give that another look to make sure i think its fair.
The template was actually originally designed by Majortom11 (who also designed the new Dakka logo) for my CSM Codex, but otherwise its done in Word and converted into a PDF.
I seemed to have missed the whole "MC" thing... And I do believe that the Wraithlord would be the last one. However, 5 wounds more than makes up for it. I've also tried using word, and it has sort of worked. Perhaps I just need more text boxes.
evildrspock wrote:They key with Eldar is movement. Being faster than the opponent is key in surviving, and should continue to provide some safety if they go fast (cover saves, harder to hit, etc), plus the added mobility of finding and selecting targets.
And obviously, Eldar needing this perhaps a bit more than other armies, but usually you need to isolate small parts of the enemy force and combine your targets to really only deal with 1-2 enemy units a turn. Maybe a pot shot here or here to shut down a tank for a round, but you really have to pool your resources to kill that one tactical squad, or deepstriking Terminators, or whatever. But between avenger/guardian fire with support Cannons/Emls/Scatter lasers, etc for infantry, and various heavy weapons/Fire Dragons for tanks, etc, you can lay some serious damage to secure wiping out a unit. Combined with Force multipliers like Guide, Doom, and Fortune, isolating units seems to be one of the best strategies for Eldar.
My point here is that any modification to the rules should encourage this style of play, with fitting in with the Eldar style and feel. Eldar are a dying race, few and far between; for them war is a delicate balance of fates, each death weighs a heavy toll on the battlefield. Being fragile and dying easily to the enemy's weaponry makes winning a well earned challenge of outwitting and solidly outplaying the opponent with all the tools they bring to their disposal.
With this in mind, I highly approve of some of the ideas in this codex - Vyper Jetbikes getting an assault move, for instance - keeping the feel, making it a little more competitive. Eldar Fleet? Make em faster than the other armies again, another great step.
Thanks man, this is basically exactly what I was shooting for and my motivation behind the changes.
Furthermore, the increased fallback distance also represents their speed, need to conserve lives and adds balance.
..... One idea for the "Eldar Fleet" Rule ... subtle, but possibly a good choice: what if Eldar infantry moved an additional 1" for models with Fleet via a universal army special rule? Base move 7" vs. 6"? Might be silly (like the paint it red rule), but to make Eldar able to outrun slightly with an advantage, without running waaaaay too far (9" or 12", for instance), might be a fun choice, as you benefit from the speed before choosing to shoot/run.
Thanks again for the feedback.
I did originally consider this, but IMHO it doesn't quite represent their speed in its entirety, whilst it also doesn't provide the hit-and-run benefits of the current Eldar Fleet, which also has key restrictions, such as those for Heavy Weapons and when units would be unable to perform an assault move.
AnomanderRake wrote:This looks interesting, I'd have to make a more thorough reading to give you more detailed feedback but I would like to note two things one a quick glance:
Typo: On page 43, the Runes of Emanation add 6" to the range of the effect of Runes of Witnessing, since Runes of Witnessing don't actually have a range I suspect you meant Runes of Warding.
Errata: On page 28, the Swooping Hawks' Intercept rule as written allows them to hit a Venerable Dreadnaught on a 4+ in close combat despite it having a WS of 5; the official GW errata for the current Eldar Codex specifies that the rule applies to vehicles without a WS, you may want to add that clause.
Ooooh, thanks man, very good spots. I'll change those for the next update. Cheers!
Other notes:
Seer Strike Force should put limits on the number of Aspect Warriors taken to remain in-character, I think, probably make any Aspect unit 0-1.
One of my design philosophies - that can also be seen in my CSM Codex and upcoming SM Codex - is to avoid restricting the player where possible, but to provide them the opportunity to customise and make unique armies, without going overboard.
Basically, I let the unit choices and FoC account for the vast majority of the customisation, but push/encourage the player in a certain direction and allow them to specialise through modifiers such as the Legion Rules and Autarch Powers (and later Chapter Tactics).
As I said, I'm really not a fan of restrictors and often i feel they're not needed. For example, with Seer Strike Force, you'd already be liable to eat away at your Elites section via Farseers, whilst the increased usability of non-aspect units itself discourages the use of Aspect Warriors. It's subtle, but IMHO it works, but I'm aware (and OK with this) that it's not entirely fool-proof.
If we're adding additional units (you added a new Aspect and the Harlequin Shadowseer into Elites), I'd like to request the Firestorm and Warp Hunter grav-tanks make it into these rules in one form or another.
I did originally consider these, but decided against it as A) they're Forgeworld's units, B) the HS slot is pretty damn well accommodated for already and C) They're not really needed.
I can really understand you suggesting so - and as I said, I did originally consider it - but I feel there are several reasons for them not to be included, whilst I'm perfectly happy for them to remain as Forge World units, which are themselves more usable [with other players] then Fandex's!
Honestly, I couldn't be more chuffed with this codex. You have created a codex which actually fits in with fluff and is fair while allowing for fun builds! I am definatly going to be using this (providing my buddies will let me )
And did I see you're planning on doing a Space Marine one?
The thing with speed is that it's only a defense if it allows you to do extra movement after you've executed what your unit is meant to do, or if it allows you to get into a position in which you are safe (such as close combat, in case you are a good CC unit). In the case of the Eldar, they lack both the armour and toughness to withstand much firepower or melee, even their dedicated melee units, and their weapons are the shortest ranged weapons of all codexes bar Tyranids - even shorter ranged than their more melee-oriented dark kin. As such, simply adding movement to the Eldar will not really benefit them much. Sure, they will be able to unleash their weapons prior to as sever casualties, but it is not protection.
Now, should Eldar simply have improved armour save the balance between Dark Eldar and Craftworld will shift such that Craftworlders are on average tougher but more susceptible to power weapons (melee units have no dodge). When compared with Marines, Eldar will still be lower toughness and lower strength. Warp Spiders, Scorpions and Reapers would be the Eldar equivalents of Terminators, but without the invulnerable saves, and I don't think this is a bad thing as such, it's just that the perception need to shift from comparing Scorpions to assault marines. I am really warming to this idea, although something would still need to be done in order to make Wraithguard and Jetbikes actually worth while and to make Wraithlords more than just gimmicky.
My current problem with the Eldar codex is simply thus: I don't want to use any troop choices.
(P.S. written at work as a response to page 7, sort of, so this is my disclaimer for oddities)
I feel that increased armor saves is the LAST thing Eldar need, that will take them into the opposite direction of their fluff. The game needs it's share of lower than 3+ Armor Saves, and the Eldar fulfill that role quite nicely with a variety of units. I am quite happy with majority 4+ armor on Aspect Warriors, that is formidable enough for my pointy-eared folk. Craftworld Eldar are already much tougher than Dark Eldar anyways, with Grav-TANKS and higher saves. I admit I am not too familiar with the new Dark Eldar, but I remember they had lots of 5+ & 6+ armor saves before.
I never thought about their Range being so short compared to other codexes. Are they really shorter Ranged than Marines, a run-of the mill for average ranges? Sure, Shuriken Catapults are 12" Assault, but Avenger Catapults balance it out nicely with 18" Assault, and they have plenty of Range 36", even some 48", 60" & 72". I can see Tau & Imperial Guard out-ranging Eldar for sure, but not really other armies.
It's true the Troop Choices are generally short Range (gotta love 12" Catapults!), but then you have units of Rangers with Sniper Rifles, & 2 others can take Wave Serpents, so ... I would offer Eldar are a strong middle-range.
Just a random question that was brought up in a game: the high heavy weapons costs are intentional or some uncleaned leftover from the previous editions? Because 30/25pts Bright Lances are kinda'... expensive.
Also, did you consider a Melta Cannon-like heavy weapon? A multi-melta with Blast. It could help to balance the longer ranged anti-AV14 monopoly of lance weapons.
Part of me always wanted an Autarch with swooping hawk wings to make swooping hawks troops/scoring/D3 scoring/one unit scoring. They're badass models, and they're certainly better in your iteration, but there's just something extra about making them scoring if you have a winged autarch.
Just a thought.
*Edit* I also re-remembered something else.
In the wargear section listing weapon profiles, the laser lance and star lance are stated as being AP1.
In the wargear section for close combat weapons, it explains what they do in close combat, and also that their ranged attack is AP3. Which one is correct?
Blacksails wrote:
Part of me always wanted an Autarch with swooping hawk wings to make swooping hawks troops/scoring/D3 scoring/one unit scoring. They're badass models, and they're certainly better in your iteration, but there's just something extra about making them scoring if you have a winged autarch.
If you take an Autarch with Swordwind (or what) then your Swooping Hawks become Troops (and thus Scoring).
Blacksails wrote:
Part of me always wanted an Autarch with swooping hawk wings to make swooping hawks troops/scoring/D3 scoring/one unit scoring. They're badass models, and they're certainly better in your iteration, but there's just something extra about making them scoring if you have a winged autarch.
If you take an Autarch with Swordwind (or what) then your Swooping Hawks become Troops (and thus Scoring).
Blacksails wrote:
Part of me always wanted an Autarch with swooping hawk wings to make swooping hawks troops/scoring/D3 scoring/one unit scoring. They're badass models, and they're certainly better in your iteration, but there's just something extra about making them scoring if you have a winged autarch.
If you take an Autarch with Swordwind (or what) then your Swooping Hawks become Troops (and thus Scoring).
Swooping hawks are not included in that list.
Nah... that's just a mistype. Everything else are in, but no Swooping Hawks? That should be accidental.
Blacksails wrote:
Part of me always wanted an Autarch with swooping hawk wings to make swooping hawks troops/scoring/D3 scoring/one unit scoring. They're badass models, and they're certainly better in your iteration, but there's just something extra about making them scoring if you have a winged autarch.
If you take an Autarch with Swordwind (or what) then your Swooping Hawks become Troops (and thus Scoring).
Swooping hawks are not included in that list.
Nah... that's just a mistype. Everything else are in, but no Swooping Hawks? That should be accidental.
Swooping Hawks not being included under Swordwind is indeed an accident and will be rectified.
I'll address the other points later. As ever, all feedback is welcome.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
cheapbuster wrote:very nice job!
Thanks man. Nice Avatar btw.
evildrspock wrote:That would make swooping hawks go from suck to awesome quite quickly.
I still think Swooping Hawk's Rifles should have a vehicle armor penetration rule similar to the Hawk Grenades
Blacksails wrote:Part of me always wanted an Autarch with swooping hawk wings to make swooping hawks troops/scoring/D3 scoring/one unit scoring. They're badass models, and they're certainly better in your iteration, but there's just something extra about making them scoring if you have a winged autarch.
Personally, I'm very satisfied with the role and abilities of Swooping Hawks in my Codex; I think they're a solid and versatile unit, much improved over their maligned official counterpart. I.e. I think they're far from "suck" (whether that was a reference to my 'Hawks, or the official ones, the point stands) and I don't believe any further revisions are really needed, except maybe a boost to Haywire grenades, which i am currently looking at.
As has been clarified - and VERY good spot, thanks for seeing that - they're supposed to be 0-1 troops as part of Swordwind, which has been added.
In the wargear section listing weapon profiles, the laser lance and star lance are stated as being AP1.
In the wargear section for close combat weapons, it explains what they do in close combat, and also that their ranged attack is AP3. Which one is correct?
Again, very good spot Blacksails, thanks! The AP3 is the correct version and will be changed.
AtoMaki wrote:Just a random question that was brought up in a game: the high heavy weapons costs are intentional or some uncleaned leftover from the previous editions? Because 30/25pts Bright Lances are kinda'... expensive.
Most of the prices are intentional, some of them are slightly-cleaned left-overs from the previous edition. I can see the point though and it's been edited so 25pts is the maximum cost for an upgrade-version of the Bright Lance (still being 30pts for a Wraithlord, as he doesn't purchase it as an upgrade and is BS4).
Also, did you consider a Melta Cannon-like heavy weapon? A multi-melta with Blast. It could help to balance the longer ranged anti-AV14 monopoly of lance weapons.
I don't really see the problem of the monopoly of lance weapons for AV14 tbh. Amongst other things, the Eldar probably still possess more long ranged anti-AV14 weapons that most other Codices, having the Prism Cannon, Bright Lance & Nova Lance. Whereas Space Marines for example, only have the Lascannon and Conversion Beamer for anti-AV14 at 24" or more.
---------
The necessary changes are being implemented, as well as rules for that battle-suit-like unit mentioned before.
---------
As ever all C&C is welcome, thanks.
P.S. Please don't mistake brevity for rudeness or a lack of appreciation; I'm a busy man!
First I would just like to say that you're doing an amazing job and the Codex is extremely solid.
One thing I never liked about the Eldar is the whole Wraithsight rules. I understand why they are there lore-wise, but in terms of modern codex armies it's just too far of a detriment to really want to take them. I don't see Wraithguard played very much, locally or abroad, and I actually asked a few people who play Eldar why they don't play (or even own) any Wraithguard. Their response was almost always because of the Wraithsight rule. This, in my opinion, is also why virtually nobody plays Tyranids in the tournament scenes anymore and why new players shy away from Tyranids (Synapse Creatures/Instinctive Behaviour).
If anything I think that Random Behaviour of any kind should (and if rumours are true, already is) be removed from the game, the Wraithsight rule being no exception. In its place, perhaps reducing certain characteristics of Wraithguard and Wraithlords (WS, BS, and I) slightly and allowing the Wraithsight rule to simply increase these attributes when within range of a psyker or spiritseer. Perhaps put Wraithguard at WS 3, BS 3, and I 3 and Wraithlords at their current range, with psykers/spiritseers increasing these values by +1.
I dunno, just my two cents, really don't like units which I can randomly lose control of.
Thanks Dave. Writing this from my phone, so excuse the lack quoting.
Swooping hawks became that much better,so myself and my fiance are quite pleased.
As to my second point, kind of sad as AP1 is awesome. I understand fully the balance reasons and agree completely, as much as Id love to see 6+ shining spears shooting S7 AP1 shots at vehiclee.
Still great work and your ability to accept criticism and work it in (within reason) is second to none.
I look forward to your next codex, as my fiance will be using this one, and Ill be using your next.
Just Dave wrote:Most of the prices are intentional, some of them are slightly-cleaned left-overs from the previous edition. I can see the point though and it's been edited so 25pts is the maximum cost for an upgrade-version of the Bright Lance (still being 30pts for a Wraithlord, as he doesn't purchase it as an upgrade and is BS4).
Well, the common opinion here is that a Bright Lance type weapon worths 15 pts (as it is clearly inferior to the 20pts lascannon), that should/could be 20 in your codex. 25 is a bit high, because there isn't any cheap "spamming platform" in the codex (like Ravagers for DE).
I don't really see the problem of the monopoly of lance weapons for AV14 tbh. Amongst other things, the Eldar probably still possess more long ranged anti-AV14 weapons that most other Codices, having the Prism Cannon, Bright Lance & Nova Lance. Whereas Space Marines for example, only have the Lascannon and Conversion Beamer for anti-AV14 at 24" or more.
It isn't really a game problem, more like it is just boring. And on most platforms, it either competes with something better (AP1 Starcannons) or simply doesn't worth the points (transports). The only exception is Nova Lances on Support Batteries. Those things are beastly (i fell victim to them too many times to care ).
Oh, and just sayin', but our Eldar player uses your codex with minor changes (FW units, unqiue Autarch weapons, "old" Wraithlords) and the Kustom Armour Upgrade (tm) and he has the following success rates:
- He crub stomps Grey Knights (!!!), Blood Angels (!!), Dark Eldar and Tau
- He gives IG, Necrons, Orks and Salamanders a run for their money
- He has hard time against SoB (!!!) and CSM - His nightmare enemies are Tyranids (!!), Space Wolves and Chaos Daemons (!!)
Just Dave wrote:Most of the prices are intentional, some of them are slightly-cleaned left-overs from the previous edition. I can see the point though and it's been edited so 25pts is the maximum cost for an upgrade-version of the Bright Lance (still being 30pts for a Wraithlord, as he doesn't purchase it as an upgrade and is BS4).
Well, the common opinion here is that a Bright Lance type weapon worths 15 pts (as it is clearly inferior to the 20pts lascannon), that should/could be 20 in your codex. 25 is a bit high, because there isn't any cheap "spamming platform" in the codex (like Ravagers for DE).
I don't really see the problem of the monopoly of lance weapons for AV14 tbh. Amongst other things, the Eldar probably still possess more long ranged anti-AV14 weapons that most other Codices, having the Prism Cannon, Bright Lance & Nova Lance. Whereas Space Marines for example, only have the Lascannon and Conversion Beamer for anti-AV14 at 24" or more.
It isn't really a game problem, more like it is just boring. And on most platforms, it either competes with something better (AP1 Starcannons) or simply doesn't worth the points (transports). The only exception is Nova Lances on Support Batteries. Those things are beastly (i fell victim to them too many times to care ).
Oh, and just sayin', but our Eldar player uses your codex with minor changes (FW units, unqiue Autarch weapons, "old" Wraithlords) and the Kustom Armour Upgrade (tm) and he has the following success rates:
- He crub stomps Grey Knights (!!!), Blood Angels (!!), Dark Eldar and Tau
- He gives IG, Necrons, Orks and Salamanders a run for their money
- He has hard time against SoB (!!!) and CSM - His nightmare enemies are Tyranids (!!), Space Wolves and Chaos Daemons (!!)
Lascannons do have a better range and have 1 higher strength but are WORSE than Brightlances against AV14 and the same as AV13. For AV 12 and lower you would probably want to spam SL or Star Cannons anyways. For IG we use ACs against AV 12 and below. So the Bright Lance is not "clearly inferior" they simply have different roles. I think Bright Lances as they are is simply fine.
I don't understand your point of it being boring to use the Bright Lance. Why are lascannons fun in comparison? Maybe I'm missing something.
I'm glad to hear that the codex has worked as a counter to other codexs but still has armies it does not do well against, especially the "weaker" codexs.
felixander wrote:
Lascannons do have a better range and have 1 higher strength but are WORSE than Brightlances against AV14 and the same as AV13. For AV 12 and lower you would probably want to spam SL or Star Cannons anyways. For IG we use ACs against AV 12 and below. So the Bright Lance is not "clearly inferior" they simply have different roles. I think Bright Lances as they are is simply fine.
Compared to the lascannons, the bright lance is:
+ Better against AV14
x The same against AV13
x AP2
- Worse against AV12/11/10
- Worse against T8/9/10 (LOL, but true)
- Has -12" range
It is 1 + versus 2 x and 2 (3) -. So clearly inferior. And you cannot even smear it with a "but it is for different roles!" because both weapon is a heavy-duty AT gun.
felixander wrote:I don't understand your point of it being boring to use the Bright Lance. Why are lascannons fun in comparison? Maybe I'm missing something.
No they aren't fun either, but at least i can take multi-meltas.
Marik Law wrote:First I would just like to say that you're doing an amazing job and the Codex is extremely solid.
Thanks man, much appreciated. Cheers!
One thing I never liked about the Eldar is the whole Wraithsight rules. I understand why they are there lore-wise, but in terms of modern codex armies it's just too far of a detriment to really want to take them. I don't see Wraithguard played very much, locally or abroad, and I actually asked a few people who play Eldar why they don't play (or even own) any Wraithguard. Their response was almost always because of the Wraithsight rule. This, in my opinion, is also why virtually nobody plays Tyranids in the tournament scenes anymore and why new players shy away from Tyranids (Synapse Creatures/Instinctive Behaviour).
If anything I think that Random Behaviour of any kind should (and if rumours are true, already is) be removed from the game, the Wraithsight rule being no exception. In its place, perhaps reducing certain characteristics of Wraithguard and Wraithlords (WS, BS, and I) slightly and allowing the Wraithsight rule to simply increase these attributes when within range of a psyker or spiritseer. Perhaps put Wraithguard at WS 3, BS 3, and I 3 and Wraithlords at their current range, with psykers/spiritseers increasing these values by +1.
I dunno, just my two cents, really don't like units which I can randomly lose control of.
I don't blame you for your dislike of Wraithsight/more randomised behaviours, however, I personally do not mind Random Behaviours/aspects when there's an element of control, which there is with Wraithsight; through having Psykers in the unit or nearby. Therefore - to me at least - Wraithsight usually has relatively little effect, due to the prevalence of Eldar psykers.
If anything, I would've made Wraithsight even more debilitating - and reduced the cost of Wraith units - to show their reliance of psykers; which could make an interesting game mechanic IMHO. Obviously this is still done, but to a much lesser extent.
Again, I can understand your qualms, but IMHO - like with synapse - I feel random behaviours work, so long as there is an element of control/they're not entirely random. Which is the case with Wraithsight as-is.
Blacksails wrote:Thanks Dave. Writing this from my phone, so excuse the lack quoting.
Swooping hawks became that much better,so myself and my fiance are quite pleased.
As to my second point, kind of sad as AP1 is awesome. I understand fully the balance reasons and agree completely, as much as Id love to see 6+ shining spears shooting S7 AP1 shots at vehiclee.
Still great work and your ability to accept criticism and work it in (within reason) is second to none.
I look forward to your next codex, as my fiance will be using this one, and Ill be using your next.
Thanks man, I really appreciate your kind words and constant support, I'm glad you like them. Cheers!
I'm also glad you added the 'within reason' bit to the criticism part! I honestly believe the amount of feedback I take in may be a bit deceptive, as although it's refined, these Codices have actually changed relatively/very little from their original design, but obviously player feedback such as yours has really helped refine them.
Again, thanks.
I'm afraid the next 'dex has been put on the back-burner for now due to work commitments, however I'll still get it done when I can however and hopefully I won't disappoint!
AtoMaki wrote:Oh, and just sayin', but our Eldar player uses your codex with minor changes (FW units, unqiue Autarch weapons, "old" Wraithlords) and the Kustom Armour Upgrade (tm) and he has the following success rates:
- He crub stomps Grey Knights (!!!), Blood Angels (!!), Dark Eldar and Tau
- He gives IG, Necrons, Orks and Salamanders a run for their money
- He has hard time against SoB (!!!) and CSM - His nightmare enemies are Tyranids (!!), Space Wolves and Chaos Daemons (!!)
I don't feel this is information I can or want to use to be completely honest. If the increased armour is applied as your previously suggested then I do not feel it will represent my Codex, nor would I like it to tbh, particularly if used alongside my Eldar fleet and unit pricing/abilities.
felixander wrote:Lascannons do have a better range and have 1 higher strength but are WORSE than Brightlances against AV14 and the same as AV13. For AV 12 and lower you would probably want to spam SL or Star Cannons anyways. For IG we use ACs against AV 12 and below. So the Bright Lance is not "clearly inferior" they simply have different roles. I think Bright Lances as they are is simply fine.
This is why I feel Bright Lances are equal-to or slightly inferior to Lascannons and worthy of a similar cost, rather than a dramatically reduced 15pts cost.
The Codices heavy weapons are generally priced in the following manner:
Scatter Laser & Starcannon - Equal cost (around 15pts)
Eldar Missile Launcher - 5pts more (around 20pts)
Bright Lance - 5pts more than EML (around 25pts)
The Bright Lance is still usable and is priced similar-to, if not better-than Lascannons in other Codices it seems.
Just Dave wrote:
I don't feel this is information I can or want to use to be completely honest. If the increased armour is applied as your previously suggested then I do not feel it will represent my Codex, nor would I like it to tbh, particularly if used alongside my Eldar fleet and unit pricing/abilities.
Nah, as i said before, the Kustom Armour Upgrade (tm) doesn't count that much. The army becomes more durable and intimidating, but also more elite (KAU comes at a cost of +2 ppm for every affected unit except the Autarch). Still zipping around in Wave Serpents/Falcons or jumping around and causing havoc with Spiders/Hawks only with safety-belts fastened. And the scene where 30 Ork Boyz runs away from 4 Fortuned Striking Scorpions instead of charging them is priceless !
Just Dave wrote:
I don't feel this is information I can or want to use to be completely honest. If the increased armour is applied as your previously suggested then I do not feel it will represent my Codex, nor would I like it to tbh, particularly if used alongside my Eldar fleet and unit pricing/abilities.
Nah, as i said before, the Kustom Armour Upgrade (tm) doesn't count that much. The army becomes more durable and intimidating, but also more elite (KAU comes at a cost of +2 ppm for every affected unit except the Autarch). Still zipping around in Wave Serpents/Falcons or jumping around and causing havoc with Spiders/Hawks only with safety-belts fastened. And the scene where 30 Ork Boyz runs away from 4 Fortuned Striking Scorpions instead of charging them is priceless !
If that really is how it's implemented, then in all honesty I neither believe that is balanced, nor something I would like to have as representing this Codex or my own efforts/rules.
Just Dave wrote:If that really is how it's implemented, then in all honesty I neither believe that is balanced, nor something I would like to have as representing this Codex or my own efforts/rules.
Whatever. It works without breaking inner/outer balance. And i'm saying this after playing like 4 or 5 games against it and watching another 10+ battles (including a 10k+ points Apo and the games of a 750/750 2v2 tournament) where it was involved. The consensus is that the codex (with the KAU) is nigh perfect (it needs some outflank/reserve/StI helping stuff) for the Eldar, as it superbly represents an elitist, tactical army where manauvering and the combined efforts of specialist units play a key part to win the day.
As to bright lances, they really are Land Raider insurance. I've seen people do math hammer calculations and show that really scatterlasers are the most useful AT weapon against most armor. As long as their price was dropped from the standard 30 pts, even a little, then that's fair. I mean, one War Walker in the Official codex with 2 lances - 90 points? Really kinda silly.
Maitereya wrote:Cant find neuro disruptor. Says autarch can take it, but its not in the weapons section.
It's in the wargear section, as it doesn't have a ranged profile as such:
"In close combat, at the beginning of combat, after assault moves but before blows are struck, the Eldar player may nominate a single enemy model in the same combat as a model with a Neuro-disruptor; roll to-hit as if using a ranged weapon, if the Neuro-disruptor hits, roll a D6 and consult the following chart:
1-2: The targeted model is at -1 Initiative and Weapon Skill.
3-4: The targeted model is at -1 Strength, Initiative and Weapon Skill.
5-6: The targeted model is at -1 Strength, Initiative, Weapon Skill and suffers a single, automatic wound.
Note: The initiative, weapon skill and strength modifiers last for the duration of that game turn"
Out of interest, have you taken a look at the Corsair codex? Corsair use nearly exclusively Craftworld gear, although not the full spectrum most of the time, but their Prince and Void Dreamer have some interesting gear that might be good designs for CWE Autarch.
Among others is a flamer that target's the models' LD value and is AP1 and on vehicles it does automatic penetrating hit with 1D3(+1 for AP) on damage table.
Or what about the one-shot item that does massive amount of short-range shots and is pinning?
Now, Void Sabre is grossly overpriced, but still... interesting idea?
P.S. and what about a flier? I love the Nightwing, but what about having a glance on the Dark Eldar codex and make an adaption with a few upgrade options, maybe the odd one-shot missile or bomb?
Mahtamori wrote:
Among others is a flamer that target's the models' LD value and is AP1 and on vehicles it does automatic penetrating hit with 1D3(+1 for AP) on damage table.
He decided it should have these rules instead:
It's in the wargear section, as it doesn't have a ranged profile as such:
"In close combat, at the beginning of combat, after assault moves but before blows are struck, the Eldar player may nominate a single enemy model in the same combat as a model with a Neuro-disruptor; roll to-hit as if using a ranged weapon, if the Neuro-disruptor hits, roll a D6 and consult the following chart:
1-2: The targeted model is at -1 Initiative and Weapon Skill.
3-4: The targeted model is at -1 Strength, Initiative and Weapon Skill.
5-6: The targeted model is at -1 Strength, Initiative, Weapon Skill and suffers a single, automatic wound.
Mahtamori wrote:
Among others is a flamer that target's the models' LD value and is AP1 and on vehicles it does automatic penetrating hit with 1D3(+1 for AP) on damage table.
He decided it should have these rules instead:
It's in the wargear section, as it doesn't have a ranged profile as such:
"In close combat, at the beginning of combat, after assault moves but before blows are struck, the Eldar player may nominate a single enemy model in the same combat as a model with a Neuro-disruptor; roll to-hit as if using a ranged weapon, if the Neuro-disruptor hits, roll a D6 and consult the following chart:
1-2: The targeted model is at -1 Initiative and Weapon Skill.
3-4: The targeted model is at -1 Strength, Initiative and Weapon Skill.
5-6: The targeted model is at -1 Strength, Initiative, Weapon Skill and suffers a single, automatic wound.
I did miss the name, but that's nothing at all similar. I mean a straight up special flame thrower that doesn't borrow from Exarchs.
Oh, and that disruptor seems like it would benefit from having "grenade" in it's name.
DarknessEternal wrote:
These Shuriken Catapults remain just awful. Still no reason to ever use Guardians.
As far as i know:
- Defender Guardian Squads are the only places where you want Bright Lances.
- Storm Guardians with 2x Fusion Guns and Wave Serpents are damn annoying (personal experience).
- Defender Guardians in a Wave Serpent and the BS4 Autarch power are the poor man's Dire Avengers. But really. They effectively have the same gun.Get them a Warlock (w/ Destructor) and a Scatter Laser and they will be deadly.
- Storm Guardians w/ 2 Fusion Guns + Webway Translator = pretty cheap suicide DS melta delivery unit.
Some of you may remember me mentioning an idea for a psuedo-battlesuit unit before:
Spoiler:
- Eldar in heavy, highly-advanced armour; appearing as [just-above] man-sized Revenant Titans, these would be of a role/construction similar to Tau Battlesuits, fitting with the specialised, highly advanced nature of Eldar, allowing them to fight without putting their warriors in too much danger. These guys would be of a similar price - but not tougher than - Terminators and be equipped with weapons such as twin-linked Catapults, Fusion Guns, Power Blades etc.
Not sure if they'd be Guardians, Aspect Warriors or like a cross in-between; they'll probably appear as Veteran Eldar, more dedicated to Asuryan than Khaine.
Any ideas for a name for such a unit would be more than welcome.
As would any ideas for a name for a (ground-attack) flier.
The battlesuit unit is likely to be somewhere in between Guardians and Aspect Warriors, don't worry about the fluff - that's my job - but if anyone has any name suggestions bearing in mind the above brief, that'd be great.
As ever all feedback is welcome, particularly if polite or constructive.
--------------------------------------------
Maitereya wrote:Thanks, I found it. Also the support weapon battery unit composition doesn't make sense. I have to assume there is only 1 guardian shooting the thing?
ps great fandex
pss iyanna arienal doesn't have a point cost
Thanks man, appreciated.
I've changed the Support Weapon entry to be a bit clearer (each platform is crewed by 2 Guardians).
Iyanna's points cost is listed on the Wraithguard page, as she's an upgrade to the unit. I've made this a bit clearer too.
Marik Law wrote:Any plans to include Exodite units?
Nope.
I feel the Exodites play too minor a role altogether, whilst this is a Craftworld Eldar Codex and most unit types are covered, e.g. Shining Spears = lance-type exodite fellows.
Mahtamori wrote:Out of interest, have you taken a look at the Corsair codex?
Nope.
Never seen it. I know it exists of course, but I've never looked at it or seen its rules, outside of the FW PDF/Experimental rules, so it'll have to remain separate from mine, as I'm not intending to fork out the money for it any time soon!
P.S. and what about a flier? I love the Nightwing, but what about having a glance on the Dark Eldar codex and make an adaption with a few upgrade options, maybe the odd one-shot missile or bomb?
A flier is being considered - alongside that battlesuit unit mentioned before - I'll need to find a way to make it separate from any other 'Fast, Skimmer' type unit, but I'll try to see what I can do.
DarknessEternal wrote:Neither of Yriel's Strength reducers mention how long they last. If something is permanent, it should say so.
I personally believe it should be the other way round. Nonetheless, it's be clarified in his entry as being permanent.
Various places (eg Skyleap): there's no "in assault" defined in the rules, you want "locked in close combat".
Done.
These Shuriken Catapults remain just awful. Still no reason to ever use Guardians.
I disagree.
The increased range is a huge boost, alongside increased manoeuvrability and reduced cost all-round. Guardians can serve as cheap objective holders and weapon support, as I feel they should and the fluff seems to suggest.
They're unlikely to survive in a straight-up fight with many other units (unless they're Black Guardians), such as Tactical Marines, but I don't believe they should be able to.
They're cheap enough to draw less attention and require less baby-sitting, whilst their weaponry allows them to support other units, whilst being able to remain out of reach of rapid fire or conventional weapons.
They were never going to be a stunning unit, and I don't think they should be.
In case you were going to suggest it, I'm not going to make them like their 2nd Ed incarnation, either.
Runes of Emanation add range to Runes of Witnessing. Runes of Witnessing have nothing to do with range.
Ok, Just Dave, I'll take those answers as a jab to post a few suggestions on those topics.
Flier Ever read the Dark Eldar codex? Let's look at the Dark Eldar codex, 'cause the Forgeworld version (even though I love it to death) isn't adaptable.
The Razorwing is closed topped, fast skimmer, with AV10. It's got some basic armament, which for CWE would translate to twin Shurican and single Lance, and several one-shot missiles.
Aerial Assault allows it to fire any number of weapons if it can fire any at all, Super Sonic allows it to move 36" (Corsair fliers as well as Corsair/CWE Hornets have this as well).
The customization for Razorwing includes standard vehicle upgrades (it needs to buy Flicker Field if it wants it I think) as well as one-shot missiles of two types.
(The Dark Eldar bomber seem more focused on Splinter Cannons... though it's actually got bombs)
Here's a suggestion, without name. 145 points
BS4, AV10/10/10.
Fast Skimmer.
Aerial Assault, Super Sonic, Plasma Wake.
Armament:
* Prow-mounted Shuriken Cannon
* Prow-mounted Shuriken Cannon
* Wing-mounted Shuriken Cannon
* Wing-mounted Shuriken Cannon
Upgrades:
* Each Wing-mounted Shuriken Cannon may be upgraded to a Missile Launcher or a Bright Lance for +15 points.
* May be upgraded with Holo-fields, Repulsor Field, or Spirit Stones.
Plasma Wake: if the model during it's movement phase passes over any enemy unit, it may use Plasma Blast on those units as if fired directly from above.
Plasma blast has the following profile: S4 AP4 Blast Pinning.
(By the way, it would be awesome if Vectored Engines made sense for a flying model )
Potential Autarch wargear
Void Sabre - grants the model Rending and +1 strength. (IA11 has it at +15 points(!) which is more than a power weapon). This would replace the Executioner.
Neural Shredder - S8 AP1 flamer that attacks LD value. Dark Eldar has this, but the Corsair version can damage vehicles for damage result 2-4. This would replace the Dragon's Breath.
Balelight - 6" assault lasgun that's rending, pinning and shoots a lot of shots. One-shot item. I never found a hypothetical situation where this is good, but it's still such an awesome concept! (This is a bracelet, by the way.)
Gyrinx - Pet cat. One shot re-roll single dice. (They are attracted to psychers, though, so maybe not Autarch)
Shadow Field - 2+ invulnerable. Stops working if a save is failed. Forces each save to be rolled separately in turn.
P.S. Chasing Shadows requires the vehicle to move. An immobilised or otherwise stationary flier is in a very real sense of the word a sitting duck.
Mahtamori wrote:Ok, Just Dave, I'll take those answers as a jab to post a few suggestions on those topics.
Potential Autarch wargear
Don't even bother. Some pages ago, i also tried to convince Dave that bringing special Autarch gear is a good thing. But Dave dumped the idea, because he didn't wanted one-off wargears in his codex (above Aspect stuff, runes and other one-off wargears ).
Also, a little wish before i forget it:
Can we have a .doc format of the codex? Or something editable... Pretty please ?
The interesting part with the corsair design was that their psycher shared upgrades to a large extent with their prince. The same design can be used with Warlocks and Autarch. I present possibilities, not just a wish for unspecified changes (still doesn't change that he'll probably reject the idea, though)
Marik Law wrote:Any plans to include Exodite units?
Nope.
I feel the Exodites play too minor a role altogether, whilst this is a Craftworld Eldar Codex and most unit types are covered, e.g. Shining Spears = lance-type exodite fellows.
Was just curious as rumour has it the next official Eldar codex might include Exodites. Would be cool to have an Autarch that can ride some big beasty and have some Exodite-influenced army-wide special rule.
Marik Law wrote:Any plans to include Exodite units?
Nope.
I feel the Exodites play too minor a role altogether, whilst this is a Craftworld Eldar Codex and most unit types are covered, e.g. Shining Spears = lance-type exodite fellows.
Was just curious as rumour has it the next official Eldar codex might include Exodites. Would be cool to have an Autarch that can ride some big beasty and have some Exodite-influenced army-wide special rule.
Whaaat?!!? Every good codex has dinosaurs I need to make some really good fluff to bring in a Lizardmen Stegadon to my Eldar army!
Mahtamori wrote:Ok, Just Dave, I'll take those answers as a jab to post a few suggestions on those topics.
Potential Autarch wargear
Don't even bother. Some pages ago, i also tried to convince Dave that bringing special Autarch gear is a good thing. But Dave dumped the idea, because he didn't
wanted one-off wargears in his codex (above Aspect stuff, runes and other one-off wargears ).
Mahtamori wrote:The interesting part with the corsair design was that their psycher shared upgrades to a large extent with their prince. The same design can be used with Warlocks and Autarch. I present possibilities, not just a wish for unspecified changes (still doesn't change that he'll probably reject the idea, though)
Y'know, if people could not talk about me as if I'm not going to be reading it, that'd be swell.
Ato', the one-off wargear thing was only part of the reason why I didn't change the Autarch wargear. Despite how it may seem, I didn't include it from a game-design perspective, not due to stubbornness.
Fluff changes, rules change. I know I'm not the only one to like the Autarchs having Exarch wargear and to see many ways it makes sense.
As for one-off wargear, many Exarch stuff is no longer one-off and the Runes are shared within the psykers and frankly makes a helluvalot of sense.
Whilst the Autarch is the only unit in the Codex (bar Harlequins for the Neuro Disruptor) to have access to the D-Pistol, Neuro-disruptor, Vibro-Spear, Disruption Blade, Laser Flare, Solar Flare and Tanglefoot Grenades. Oh, and I'm going to be adding another in the next update.
So the Autarch actually has more Autarch-exclusive wargear than he does Exarch wargear, and that's before I add anything else.
AtoMaki wrote:Battlesuit name:
Watchman (if you go with the Guardian angle)
Wight Warriors (if you go with the Aspect angle)
Flier name:
Firehawk (C&C3 reference! Also a name for a fighter-bomber)
Starfall (for a clear-cut bomber)
For the flier, i think you should know that now all Eldar fliers have Chasing Shadows (Eldar Titan Holo-Fields, a 4+ invu essentially).
Thanks for the suggestions, I like the names. I like the idea of a C&C reference, but Firehawk sounds far too Marine-ish to work IMHO.
Mahtamori wrote:Ok, Just Dave, I'll take those answers as a jab to post a few suggestions on those topics.
Flier Ever read the Dark Eldar codex? Let's look at the Dark Eldar codex, 'cause the Forgeworld version (even though I love it to death) isn't adaptable.
The Razorwing is closed topped, fast skimmer, with AV10. It's got some basic armament, which for CWE would translate to twin Shurican and single Lance, and several one-shot missiles.
Aerial Assault allows it to fire any number of weapons if it can fire any at all, Super Sonic allows it to move 36" (Corsair fliers as well as Corsair/CWE Hornets have this as well).
The customization for Razorwing includes standard vehicle upgrades (it needs to buy Flicker Field if it wants it I think) as well as one-shot missiles of two types.
(The Dark Eldar bomber seem more focused on Splinter Cannons... though it's actually got bombs)
Here's a suggestion, without name. 145 points
BS4, AV10/10/10.
Fast Skimmer.
Aerial Assault, Super Sonic, Plasma Wake.
Armament:
* Prow-mounted Shuriken Cannon
* Prow-mounted Shuriken Cannon
* Wing-mounted Shuriken Cannon
* Wing-mounted Shuriken Cannon
Upgrades:
* Each Wing-mounted Shuriken Cannon may be upgraded to a Missile Launcher or a Bright Lance for +15 points.
* May be upgraded with Holo-fields, Repulsor Field, or Spirit Stones.
Plasma Wake: if the model during it's movement phase passes over any enemy unit, it may use Plasma Blast on those units as if fired directly from above.
Plasma blast has the following profile: S4 AP4 Blast Pinning.
(By the way, it would be awesome if Vectored Engines made sense for a flying model )
I actually have the Dark Eldar Codex, but thanks for the info.
I'm pretty happy with my intended rules for the flier to be honest, it'll be a ground attack craft, somewhat similar to what you propose and the Razorwing, designed so people can use the Razorwing model.
It'll probably have 2 TL Shuriken Cannons, 2 one-shot missiles and a nose/prow weapon of some sort, as well as a strafing ability, rather than bombs.
The only thing I'm not really set on is the Armour Value and what the missiles abilities will be.
Thanks for the suggestions Maht' but I'm afraid you probably jumped the gun somewhat as the rules for the new units are basically already designed, it's just the names that are really lacking.
Potential Autarch wargear
Void Sabre - grants the model Rending and +1 strength. (IA11 has it at +15 points(!) which is more than a power weapon). This would replace the Executioner.
Neural Shredder - S8 AP1 flamer that attacks LD value. Dark Eldar has this, but the Corsair version can damage vehicles for damage result 2-4. This would replace the Dragon's Breath.
Balelight - 6" assault lasgun that's rending, pinning and shoots a lot of shots. One-shot item. I never found a hypothetical situation where this is good, but it's still such an awesome concept! (This is a bracelet, by the way.)
Gyrinx - Pet cat. One shot re-roll single dice. (They are attracted to psychers, though, so maybe not Autarch)
Shadow Field - 2+ invulnerable. Stops working if a save is failed. Forces each save to be rolled separately in turn.
P.S. Chasing Shadows requires the vehicle to move. An immobilised or otherwise stationary flier is in a very real sense of the word a sitting duck.
Thanks for the further info on Chasing Shadows, and thanks for the FW info.
Would you be able to post the exact wording of the Gyrinx or provide a better description of its abilities, because he sounds like a good inclusion to me.
Honestly, the rest don't really appeal to me; some of them are Dark Eldar options or gimmicky, although the Void Sabre has somewhat inspired a couple of new weapons!
It's worth bearing in mind that the Autarch will also gain access to the battlesuit shiz in future too.
AtoMaki wrote:Can we have a .doc format of the codex? Or something editable... Pretty please ?
Nope, sorry.
felixander wrote:dinosaurs
And that's another reason why I'm not really keen on the idea of Exodites to be honest.
I mean, I like Dinosaurs as much as the next guy, but I believe WHFB and 40K should remain separate and the reaction to the rumours of the Chaos mechanical dragon have supported this for me.
-------------------
If any responses are perceived as rude or curt; I'm currently nursing a hangover
Just Dave wrote:
Y'know, if people could not talk about me as if I'm not going to be reading it, that'd be swell.
Nah, i know you read the stuff here, but your stubborness is really annoying sometimes .
Just Dave wrote:Ato', the one-off wargear thing was only part of the reason why I didn't change the Autarch wargear. Despite how it may seem, I didn't include it from a game-design perspective, not due to stubbornness.
Fluff changes, rules change. I know I'm not the only one to like the Autarchs having Exarch wargear and to see many ways it makes sense.
As for one-off wargear, many Exarch stuff is no longer one-off and the Runes are shared within the psykers and frankly makes a helluvalot of sense.
Whilst the Autarch is the only unit in the Codex (bar Harlequins for the Neuro Disruptor) to have access to the D-Pistol, Neuro-disruptor, Vibro-Spear, Disruption Blade, Laser Flare, Solar Flare and Tanglefoot Grenades. Oh, and I'm going to be adding another in the next update.
So the Autarch actually has more Autarch-exclusive wargear than he does Exarch wargear, and that's before I add anything else.
And exactly this is why it is soooooooooo wrong that you cannot fit in 2 or 3 custom weapons for him. I mean, he only needs a high-strength power weapon, a Huskblade ccw and a versatile ranged weapon (like the Death Spinner, that is currently missing from his selections).
Just Dave wrote:
AtoMaki wrote:Can we have a .doc format of the codex? Or something editable... Pretty please ?
Nope, sorry.
Its not like we don't have it already (PDF->DOC converters FTW!), but it weights some 7 megs and is a nighmare to print. Amybe in PM/E-Mail? We are trying to convert another Eldar player here, but we can't do it with that unholy abomination .
Just Dave wrote:
The only thing I'm not really set on is the Armour Value and what the missiles abilities will be.
If any responses are perceived as rude or curt; I'm currently nursing a hangover
Well, the great thing about 'Flier' type vehicles (Razorwings, VoidRavens, so on...) is that they're all pretty uniformly AV10 all around. Granted, you could make it more of a gunship as opposed to a fighter/bomber, a la StormRaven/Vendetta/Valkyrie and make it AV12/11/10 or 11/11/10.
As for the missiles, you could have two options; the first being an anti-tank weapon (S8 AP2/3, possible lance), the second being an anti-infantry option (S5 AP4, Large Blast, no cover). To me, its the simplest option, though I can easily see some sort of fancier, unique option, seeing as they are Eldar afterall.
As to your second point I quoted, we've all been there...
Skipping the descriptive text, but it notes "is attracted to a few Eldar as companions and pets (especially Eldar psychers)."
A Gyrinx confers a character with a single re-roll that can be used at any time during the game, on any single D6 roll (i.e. to hit, to wound, an armour save, etc). It cannot be used if the player's opponent is making the roll (i.e. Armour save, etc).
AtoMaki to be honest Just Dave might be stubborn but it is his fandex and he puts a lot of time into it so that you can read it and enjoy it but all you seem to be doing is complaining that he isn't changing everything that you think needs to be changed to what you would like. If you want an eldar fandex where everything is changed to your requirements make one yourself.
How does Hell Hath No Fury interact with War Shout's WS changes? Using normal 40K logic, it reduces the opponents' WS to 0... abuh? Unless the statement in HHnF applies to the WS as well, but it only singles out Ld :V I may just be nit-picking
Da dakka boy wrote:AtoMaki to be honest Just Dave might be stubborn but it is his fandex and he puts a lot of time into it so that you can read it and enjoy it but all you seem to be doing is complaining that he isn't changing everything that you think needs to be changed to what you would like. If you want an eldar fandex where everything is changed to your requirements make one yourself.
Problem is, that i (or we, because i represent the opinion of my whole gaming club of 17+ gamers) saw Just Dave's fandex in real action so i know what (kinda') should change. I'm not barking here only because i have fun, but because the general consensus in my gaming club is that JD's fandex is almost perfect and only needs a few tweaks and changes to be absolutely brilliant. Things like the awkward tactical sensitivity, the Exarch/Autarch weapons, the somewhat weak FA selections and the overcosted Bright Lance (and side stuff, like the Farseer's dominance in the HQ selection, the jack-of-all-trades Aspect options and somewhat medicore "psychic phase").
Chrisrawr:
Hell Hath No Fury happens before War Shout. So first the -1, then the drop to 1. Or something like that, but the HHNF Ld modifier effects War Shout, so i guess the answer is first HHNF then War Shout.
Read up on Characteristic Modifiers again - It's the same as Furious Charge or Nemesis Halberd vs. "reduced to 1 Initiative" - the additional modifiers are applied afterward.
Random questions:
- Does Tanglefoot grenades affect vehicles?
- How do multiple Tanglefoot grenades effect the same unit? -2D3 I? Or re-roll the -D3 I? Or roll twice and pick the highest -D3 I?
- Do Laser Lances benefit from the +1 A for using them with another ccw (when they charge)?
- When does an Autarch with the Master Strategist distribute his special rule? Can he give a unit Counter-Attack in the opponent's Assault phase?
Before anyone asks it, yes, today was Shining Spears Day. With crying Salamanders and humiliated Space Wolves. And the Shining Spear Phoenix Lady (?) is a beast.
Also, some observations/suggestions:
- Maugan'Ra still has the old Dark Reaper powers.
- The two new Phoenix Ladies (?) are 'Infantry' (guess they really aren't).
- The Shining Spear Exarch powers are a little bit off. Tank Hunters don't really help in anything, and Skilled Rides should be a basic special rule. Our proposals are 'Advance' (gives Scouts) for 10pts and 'Thundering Charge' (gives assault grenades) for 15pts.
- Tanglefoot grenades are way too good for their points cost. They should be at least 20pts.
A number of questions. Neuro-Disruptor: 1. Do the effects of this stack? For example I choose Chapter Master Bob, in player 1's turn getting a 3 (-1 WS/S/I). In Player turn 2, I nominate Bob, hit again and roll a 1. Is Bob at -1 WS/I or -2 WS/I? 2. Does using this count as a Shooting attack or Close Combat Attack (i.e. for things like Wych Dodge and Hypnotic Gaze). 3. Can my opponent take armor saves for the wound (or cover save if it is classified as a shooting attack)?
Wraithsabres: Does the Strength loss last until no longer locked in combat, or just for the one turn?
Mind-link: Can it negate a cover save entirely (i.e. going to ground in the open which normally grants a 6+ cover save)?
Tanglefoot grenades (comment); You put "may not do not"
Repulsor Field: If the vehicle was stationary, do enemy models still automatically hit?
Star Engines: Since they allow a second move, can that move be used to Tank Shock (and yes I am aware of the GW codex ruling)?
Doomed: You take the test at the start of your turn, but if Yriel kills a model (with the spear) in your turn, this rule doesn't apply. Huh? May I suggest having the test at the end of your turn, unless an enemy model was killed? Doomed: I also suggest changing it so that no test is required if he kills a Monstrous Creature, or Character (Independent/Unique/Upgrade). In other words, if he kills Joe Shmoe he still takes the test, but if he kills Chapter Master Bob, he does not.
Seer Council: For both Eldrad and Farseers I reccomend changing the wording so that the Seer Council is a Retinue. Additionally, I would delete (& Farseer) from unit composition as (to me) it imples that I can either take a Farseer for 75 pts, or a Seer Council (with 2 Warlocks and Farseer) for 74 points.
Harlequins: Just to clarify I can take a Harlequin's Kiss or Fusion Pistol, but not both? Or is it supposed to be close combat weapon and/or Shuriken Pistol?
If someone were to (anonymously) send you the necessary information, would you include the Shadow Spectre aspect to your codex (from IA 11)?
Again, I'm still intending to add a couple of new units. The flier will definitely be included, I'm not sure whether the battlesuit unit is really required to be honest, it may be over-saturating things, but I like the idea and it does work and remains unique IMHO, whilst the army list is still smaller than many others, so it'll probably be added. Nonetheless:
Any ideas for a name for such a unit would be more than welcome.
As would any ideas for a name for a (ground-attack) flier.
The battlesuit unit is likely to be somewhere in between Guardians and Aspect Warriors, don't worry about the fluff - that's my job - but if anyone has any name suggestions bearing in mind the brief (below), that'd be great.
Spoiler:
- Eldar in heavy, highly-advanced armour; appearing as [just-above] man-sized Revenant Titans, these would be of a role/construction similar to Tau Battlesuits, fitting with the specialised, highly advanced nature of Eldar, allowing them to fight without putting their warriors in too much danger. These guys would be of a similar price - but not tougher than - Terminators and be equipped with weapons such as twin-linked Catapults, Fusion Guns, Power Blades etc.
Not sure if they'd be Guardians, Aspect Warriors or like a cross in-between; they'll probably appear as Veteran Eldar, more dedicated to Asuryan than Khaine.
As ever all feedback is welcome, particularly if polite or constructive.
AtoMaki wrote:Nah, i know you read the stuff here, but your stubborness is really annoying sometimes
That works both ways to be honest.
Ultimately, Ato' I've tried to be polite and considerate throughout. You say I'm stubborn, I say I'm stubborn but largely right (sounds big-headed, but ultimately I'd change something if I didn't think it worked).
I've considered EVERY idea you have proposed and incorporated many (e.g. Warp Spiders, Farseers - see next update - rules changes etc.), but clearly we disagree on what either contributes to game balance or the style of the Eldar in some aspects. It may seem stubborn, but ALL input provided by people is considered to some extent or another, even when something is referred to as "totally crap", I try to consider why it is seen this way and see if it should change.
Hell, I've even thought about whether I have actually been stubborn or simply disagreed etc.
I don't deny for a second, if you had been more respectful/considerate (IMHO) I may have likely incorporated more of your ideas, but again we simply disagree on what is either balanced or suitable for the Eldar and I accept that and I'd rather you did too.
As Dakka Boy said, ultimately it's my Codex, that I've created and has received much support and it's for these (&above) reasons and [mainly] our disagreement on balance that I do not wish to give you a .doc format of the Codex.
On which note, the reason why I've included the "Truly the best example of a fandex I've yet to see" quote in the title isn't because I believe it (although I won't deny, I'm pretty happy with it), but to encourage people to look at the Codex and try and criticise it themselves.
Blacksails wrote:Well, the great thing about 'Flier' type vehicles (Razorwings, VoidRavens, so on...) is that they're all pretty uniformly AV10 all around. Granted, you could make it more of a gunship as opposed to a fighter/bomber, a la StormRaven/Vendetta/Valkyrie and make it AV12/11/10 or 11/11/10.
As for the missiles, you could have two options; the first being an anti-tank weapon (S8 AP2/3, possible lance), the second being an anti-infantry option (S5 AP4, Large Blast, no cover). To me, its the simplest option, though I can easily see some sort of fancier, unique option, seeing as they are Eldar afterall.
As to your second point I quoted, we've all been there...
Thanks man, still never fun though!
But yeah, being Eldar I'm going to try and make a couple of rather fancy missiles (incl. Anti-tank and infantry as you suggested).
Atm, it'll probably be AV10 all round with the 4++ & extra speed, but I'm loathe to make such a large target AV10. But it does work (just) for the Razorwing at least
On which note, do others know the AV's for the other FW fliers, such as the Void Dragon etc?
Mahtamori wrote:Skipping the descriptive text, but it notes "is attracted to a few Eldar as companions and pets (especially Eldar psychers)."
A Gyrinx confers a character with a single re-roll that can be used at any time during the game, on any single D6 roll (i.e. to hit, to wound, an armour save, etc). It cannot be used if the player's opponent is making the roll (i.e. Armour save, etc).
Aaah, thanks Maht', I think he'll definitely be included then. Can you give me the points cost man, even if it's something like "1/6 of a waveserpent" or in a PM?
I don't think the psyker thing should be too much of a problem; he'll be an option for Farseers too and all Eldar are psykers after all.
Da dakka boy wrote:AtoMaki to be honest Just Dave might be stubborn but it is his fandex and he puts a lot of time into it so that you can read it and enjoy it but all you seem to be doing is complaining that he isn't changing everything that you think needs to be changed to what you would like. If you want an eldar fandex where everything is changed to your requirements make one yourself.
P.S Loving the 'dex keep up the good work.
Thanks for the kind words and support man.
AtoMaki wrote:Random questions:
- Does Tanglefoot grenades affect vehicles?
- How do multiple Tanglefoot grenades effect the same unit? -2D3 I? Or re-roll the -D3 I? Or roll twice and pick the highest -D3 I?
- Do Laser Lances benefit from the +1 A for using them with another ccw (when they charge)?
- When does an Autarch with the Master Strategist distribute his special rule? Can he give a unit Counter-Attack in the opponent's Assault phase?
Before anyone asks it, yes, today was Shining Spears Day. With crying Salamanders and humiliated Space Wolves. And the Shining Spear Phoenix Lady (?) is a beast.
Also, some observations/suggestions:
- Maugan'Ra still has the old Dark Reaper powers.
- The two new Phoenix Ladies (?) are 'Infantry' (guess they really aren't).
- The Shining Spear Exarch powers are a little bit off. Tank Hunters don't really help in anything, and Skilled Rides should be a basic special rule. Our proposals are 'Advance' (gives Scouts) for 10pts and 'Thundering Charge' (gives assault grenades) for 15pts.
- Tanglefoot grenades are way too good for their points cost. They should be at least 20pts.
These will be clarified in the next update - which should include the new units - thanks.
Regarding Tank Hunters; basically combine it with their lance weapons, it allows your Lances to then penetrate (rather than glance) AV12 and even can create a Str9 lance!
Happyjew wrote:A number of questions.
Neuro-Disruptor:
1. Do the effects of this stack? For example I choose Chapter Master Bob, in player 1's turn getting a 3 (-1 WS/S/I). In Player turn 2, I nominate Bob, hit again and roll a 1. Is Bob at -1 WS/I or -2 WS/I?
2. Does using this count as a Shooting attack or Close Combat Attack (i.e. for things like Wych Dodge and Hypnotic Gaze).
3. Can my opponent take armor saves for the wound (or cover save if it is classified as a shooting attack)?
Wraithsabres: Does the Strength loss last until no longer locked in combat, or just for the one turn?
Mind-link: Can it negate a cover save entirely (i.e. going to ground in the open which normally grants a 6+ cover save)?
Tanglefoot grenades (comment); You put "may not do not"
Repulsor Field: If the vehicle was stationary, do enemy models still automatically hit?
Star Engines: Since they allow a second move, can that move be used to Tank Shock (and yes I am aware of the GW codex ruling)?
Doomed: You take the test at the start of your turn, but if Yriel kills a model (with the spear) in your turn, this rule doesn't apply. Huh? May I suggest having the test at the end of your turn, unless an enemy model was killed?
Doomed: I also suggest changing it so that no test is required if he kills a Monstrous Creature, or Character (Independent/Unique/Upgrade). In other words, if he kills Joe Shmoe he still takes the test, but if he kills Chapter Master Bob, he does not.
Seer Council: For both Eldrad and Farseers I reccomend changing the wording so that the Seer Council is a Retinue. Additionally, I would delete (& Farseer) from unit composition as (to me) it imples that I can either take a Farseer for 75 pts, or a Seer Council (with 2 Warlocks and Farseer) for 74 points.
Harlequins: Just to clarify I can take a Harlequin's Kiss or Fusion Pistol, but not both? Or is it supposed to be close combat weapon and/or Shuriken Pistol?
If someone were to (anonymously) send you the necessary information, would you include the Shadow Spectre aspect to your codex (from IA 11)?
As above, these will all be included in the next update. Thanks for the feedback, much appreciated. Love the use of "Chapter Master Bob" and "Joe Shmoe" but that's probably my immaturity coming through. It's these wording/rules clarifications that are my biggest issue when creating 'dex's unfortunately; I have no-one to proof read outside of you guys and understandably I'm prone to skimming things as I read through it for the whatever-th time...
I've never been completely satisfied with Yriel's 'Doomed' rule in either mine or the official incarnation to be honest, I'll give it a ponder a bit more, but the no-Joe-Shmoe idea is a good one and could likely be included.
Regarding the Shadow Spectres, I'm reluctant to for two reasons; 1) it's effectively plagiarism. Whilst obviously this is a variant of GW's work, no unit in this Codex is exactly the same as their official counterpart and 2) I'm not really a fan of the Shadow Spectres to be honest; they have lovely models, but I don't really like their rules or concept...
Just Dave wrote:
I don't deny for a second, if you had been more respectful/considerate (IMHO)
I try my best, but because of my rather... uhm... limited English knowledge i often sound harsher than i actually want to be (y'know, not too often... only 99% of the times ). Sorry if i offended you, it wasn't my intention.
Just Dave wrote:I may have likely incorporated more of your ideas, but again we simply disagree on what is either balanced or suitable for the Eldar and I accept that and I'd rather you did too.
I dunno Dave, but as far as i can remember, you mentioned somewhere that you don't play-test your fandex. And this is (as i feel) the main "conflict point" between us. Because in my gaming club, our veteran Eldar player plays with your fandex instead of the official one (and i mean it - he plays all his battles with the fandex!), and hell, he already has lots of real from-the-battlefield experience with it. And i only deliver his experiences: the army needs safety belts (the Kustom Armour Upgrade is just one example that could solve this), the Exarch/Autarch weapons are "needless" and unfluffy and of course his newest whim, the self-crippling HQ selections (i will explain this later, in another post).
And the real source of our annoyance is that these things are simply soooooo stupidly simple and so easy to correct, but each time they (either the problem or the solution) come up, you say "NO" and that's all folks.
Again, i respect your work and greatly appreciate what you did here, but it feels that all the time we spend in the club brainstorming about your codex is wasted.
On the Shining Spears/Tank Hunters: this is simply a matter of unprofitableness. They cannot really kill anything with it (even with 10 shots, they only cause ~1 Wrecked result on a Rhino) so ultimately, it just eats up the place of something more useful (like Scouts - these guys really need Scouts!). Not to mention that i you want to open transports then you can take much more effective units to do the job (like War Walkers with Star Cannons and Power Diversion Matrix).
No, it's true. I haven't play-tested this Codex, nor my Chaos Space Marine one, I simply don't have the time to play 40K anymore.
I do obviously see the benefit of play-testing and if i could, I would, and as I said before, I have listened to/considered ALL feedback. However, lets be fair 80% or so of the Codex has not needed changing; the foundations and the vast majority of the Codex has been usable from the get-go. So it would seem I'm doing something right, without needing to play-test.
Again, to clarify, I'm all for play-testing and value all feedback, particularly play-tested, but much of the time, I simply haven't needed it to make balanced or competitive units and I feel I can say this when analysing most Codices/40K rules and tactics.
And again, I have considered ALL feedback you and your gaming group/Eldar player have posited, but some of it simply wouldn't work IMHO. As examples, merging Guardians with Support Platforms would make Guardians immobile and little more than extra wounds for platforms - which themselves are now largely viable choices, increasing the Wraithlords price would've potentially crippled the units effectiveness, whilst reducing the price of the Falcon, Avatar and Waveserpents so substantially would have made them far too cheap.
And again, I have also incorporated much of your feedback where I feel it would work; such as increasing the price of Warlock/Farseer jetbikes, improving the Farseer (see next change), making Warp Spiders AP5 (see next change) etc.
As for the claim that I 'say "NO" and that's all folks', I've explained why I haven't accepted some changes before, and for clarity I'll do it again:
Exarch/Autarch weapons: - On the tabletop, it works: they are potent and exotic weapons and are often selected as the Autarch's wargear, instead of his other choices.
- The Autarchs have access to the best equipment of the Craftworld, these can be assumed to have the same abilities or be on par with the Exarch weapons, therefore rather than having a 'Striking Scorpion Biting Blade', you could just say he's got a 'freakin' fancy chainsword'. As Mahtamori said "he's using weapons which are functionally the same" and I'm not intending to create a load of gimmicky weapons that have the same/similar effects as pre-existing ones.
- There are only so many Exarchs and Shrines active, this means that either through their Exarch only using one of the shrines weapons, or the shrines currently being inactive, there are 'spare' Exarch weapons available.
- Ultimately, there are loads of ways you can swing this either within the current fluff, or with new fluff that would come with a Codex.
- Ultimately, I can't imagine your resident Eldar player uses my 'dex for it's fluff (there isn't much), so he can ignore the exarch weapons if he wants.
- Ultimately, I really like the idea of an Autarch running around with a pseudo (or actual) Executioner/Broadblades or whatever, modelling-wise it has huge advantages and as an image, I really like it.
Armour Upgrade: - This would give Eldar the same or better armour saves as Space Marines - the guys that are supposed to have amongst the greatest armour in the galaxy - throughout the Eldar Codex.
- Instead of simply making Eldar tougher through an armour save, I've made them tougher and more mobile through Eldar fleet, allowing them to withdraw out of harms way/range, or close in to harm the enemy, whilst simultaneously benefiting foot-slog.
- As Amanax said "You should be using your higher mobility to win fights, not the "Stand here and take it" mentality of the Space Marines. It's what the Eldar are about. True, they aren't as fragile as their dark kin, but that's already true"
- A 4+ armour save is surprisingly common and potent; Ap4 weapons are relatively rare, whilst Ap3+ weapons are usually anti-tank. Combine this with Conceal, Fortune, 5th Edition Cover and even using cheap-Guardians or not-so-cheap Harlequin or Wraith units as shields and there's plenty of means to improve toughness.
- This change was yourself described as a "lazy fix". I've tried to fix the Eldar through non-lazy means.
- As an example, combining your proposed change to things, a Howling Banshee with a 3+ save would be 18pts. Compare this to a Wolf Guard with a Power Weapon for 28pts. For 10pts LESS the Howling Banshee loses: 1 attack, 1 toughness, 1 strength & counter-attack/acute sense, but gains In10, ignores cover, Fleet, Eldar fleet, -1 enemy WS, -1 enemy Ld and +1 initiative.
Or, a Warp Spider would have a 2+ armour save for 23pts. Compare this to a Assault Marine for 17pts (17 because they're fairly weak at 18). For 6pts MORE the Warp Spider loses: 1 Strength, 1 Toughness & 1 attack in close combat, but gains 3 12" Str5, AP5 shots that inflict difficult terrain, Fleet, Warp Jump Generator's assault move, initiative 5 and all-importantly, a 2+ armour save.
HQ Choices; they were designed with the following intentions in mind:
- Farseers are self-explanatory and currently all-out dominate the FoC in the official Codex(and will soon be getting the ability to cast 3 powers).
- To counter this, Autarchs have improved force-multiplier abilities, better CC potential & wargear and can be used to really specialise or theme your army.
- The Avatar is much tougher, hits much harder and can compete with the toughest the enemy has to offer. And this is before he is augmented by a Farseer or shielded by a tank or wraithlord.
- Phoenix Lords are powerhouses; themselves being close combat beasts equal to that of Space Marines, as well as improving all units of their aspect and a select unit they lead. I've already explained why they are good value, but despite this I'm still considering decreasing their cost.
- Yriel is a close combat hard-ass, particularly adept at taking down monstrous creatures, walkers or anything expensive, he's better than an autarch in basically every way, save his flexibility, price and Doomed.
- Eldrad is even better than he was before.
- Athairiel is an aggressive Farseer; benefiting Warlock or Exarch-led armies and favouring an aggressive play-style, whilst being able to take of himself in CC.
I do think this is the only 2nd-ish time you've mentioned the safety belt thing, so I shall look into that a bit more (albeit that was somewhat intended to be helped by Farseer & Autarch abilities and Eldar Fleet) - however, I will not be using the armour-save boost to fix it, but as ever, from anyone, any ideas are welcome.
On the Shining Spears/Tank Hunters: this is simply a matter of unprofitableness. They cannot really kill anything with it (even with 10 shots, they only cause ~1 Wrecked result on a Rhino) so ultimately, it just eats up the place of something more useful (like Scouts - these guys really need Scouts!). Not to mention that i you want to open transports then you can take much more effective units to do the job (like War Walkers with Star Cannons and Power Diversion Matrix).
I don't deny it's not the most effective or obvious way to improve anti-tank within the Codex, but it is aimed to give an extra level of flexibility to an otherwise specialised unit (such as with Reapers/Tank Hunters or Avengers/Defend) and help a Swordwind army which may otherwise lack anti-tank.
Just Dave wrote:I do think this is the only 2nd-ish time you've mentioned the safety belt thing, so I shall look into that a bit more (albeit that was somewhat intended to be helped by Farseer & Autarch abilities and Eldar Fleet) - however, I will not be using the armour-save boost to fix it, but as ever, from anyone, any ideas are welcome.
After looking back, i realized that i only mentioned this problem, but never explained it. Whooooops... So here it comes:
Back in the good ol' days (before the Kustom Armour Upgrade) our Eldar player had a lots of trouble because you designed this codex to be tacitcal and "smart". This isn't a problem, and it fits the Eldar, but tactics isn't the key part of a 40k game (so to say). It is important, but too much dice rolling and too much stuff your opponent can throw into your face. So the question was: what happens when you make your big plan with your army, but the plan fails because of bad luck/enemy counter-plan/random botch? With your codex, the answer was usually "You lose!" because it lacked mechanics to avoid damage (and lets be honest, for an Eldar army, any damage could be cricitcal). Yeah, Eldar Fleet is funny, but it doesnt protect much (it is effectively a poor man's Jet Packs rule) and in some cases, it doesn't protect at all (close-combat, vehicle explosions) and more importantly, its use is limited (often limited when the player needs it, like after disembark or Deep Strike). Oh, and the most funny part: if you want to save a unit with EF because you've just screwed up something then you should pray for the Dice Gods - because you can screw up EF too !
All in all: the army was super sensitive, because of the specialized units and low numbers without a reliable method to counter this. You can say that with the Kustom Armour Upgrade, we took the simplest but the most reliable way. Because good saves can... well... save stuff. We were brainstorming about other stuff (buffing Eldar Fleet, some sort of army-wide Dodge save) but each time we had something, someone always hit us with a Dark Eldar codex ... So its hard to come up with something that works and doesn't turn the Eldar into a "Different Dark Eldar" (Army/gameplay wise. Fluff wise, the Eldar is a different Dark Eldar though ).
And here i come with the HQ problem: It is strongly tied to the safety belt problem, because the (maybe only) reliable unit that can make other units fool-proof is the Farsser. So optimally, you need, like one of them in each squad. Éacking this, you just fill the 2 HQ slots with Farseers and forget the other selections. The solution could be the reintroduction of the Warlock psychic power 'Augment': it is a passive power that adds +6" to the range of the Farseer's psychic powers (affects one Farseer in the same squad as the Warlock and it is also comulative).
Attaching support weapons to Guardians will make them immobile (unless the grav platform removes the no-move requirement, of course), but the only thing making the Guardians (weak) ablative wounds is that they do not have compatible equipment. This has always been the case with Guardians and platforms when you bought them for the platforms (and in order to get rid of the poor troop choices).
After all, when you buy support weapons in HQ you make the choice to have a static army without the AV14 to hide behind, so...
Just Dave wrote:I do think this is the only 2nd-ish time you've mentioned the safety belt thing, so I shall look into that a bit more (albeit that was somewhat intended to be helped by Farseer & Autarch abilities and Eldar Fleet) - however, I will not be using the armour-save boost to fix it, but as ever, from anyone, any ideas are welcome.
After looking back, i realized that i only mentioned this problem, but never explained it. Whooooops... So here it comes:
Back in the good ol' days (before the Kustom Armour Upgrade) our Eldar player had a lots of trouble because you designed this codex to be tacitcal and "smart". This isn't a problem, and it fits the Eldar, but tactics isn't the key part of a 40k game (so to say). It is important, but too much dice rolling and too much stuff your opponent can throw into your face. So the question was: what happens when you make your big plan with your army, but the plan fails because of bad luck/enemy counter-plan/random botch? With your codex, the answer was usually "You lose!" because it lacked mechanics to avoid damage (and lets be honest, for an Eldar army, any damage could be cricitcal). Yeah, Eldar Fleet is funny, but it doesnt protect much (it is effectively a poor man's Jet Packs rule) and in some cases, it doesn't protect at all (close-combat, vehicle explosions) and more importantly, its use is limited (often limited when the player needs it, like after disembark or Deep Strike). Oh, and the most funny part: if you want to save a unit with EF because you've just screwed up something then you should pray for the Dice Gods - because you can screw up EF too !
All in all: the army was super sensitive, because of the specialized units and low numbers without a reliable method to counter this. You can say that with the Kustom Armour Upgrade, we took the simplest but the most reliable way. Because good saves can... well... save stuff. We were brainstorming about other stuff (buffing Eldar Fleet, some sort of army-wide Dodge save) but each time we had something, someone always hit us with a Dark Eldar codex ... So its hard to come up with something that works and doesn't turn the Eldar into a "Different Dark Eldar" (Army/gameplay wise. Fluff wise, the Eldar is a different Dark Eldar though ).
And here i come with the HQ problem: It is strongly tied to the safety belt problem, because the (maybe only) reliable unit that can make other units fool-proof is the Farsser. So optimally, you need, like one of them in each squad. Éacking this, you just fill the 2 HQ slots with Farseers and forget the other selections. The solution could be the reintroduction of the Warlock psychic power 'Augment': it is a passive power that adds +6" to the range of the Farseer's psychic powers (affects one Farseer in the same squad as the Warlock and it is also comulative).
Since you seem to be hard pressed to push your ideas, no matter how many times you are told no, could you do some battle reports of both the unmodified Dave codex, and then with the modifications? It would allow all of us to better understand where you are coming from other than what we're seeing now, which looks like a bad excuse for poor tactics.
- If you do decide to do battle reports, remember that as of right now, Dave has requested that the modified version not be represented as his Fandex, so just remember to clarify which battle has his and which does not.
1750 points, Pitched Battle, 4 objectives (scattered around the middle of the battlefield), opposing Space Marines
Eldar Army:
Farseer (Doom, Fortune, Spirit Stones, Runes of Warding)
Farseer (Guide, Fortune, Spirit Stones, Runes of Witnessing)
Fire Dragons 9+Exarch
Wave Serpent (Twin-Linked Scatter Laser)
Howling Banshees 9+Exarch (Acrobatics, War Shout, Executioner)
Wave Serpent (Twin-Linked Scatter Laser)
Dire Avengers 9+Exarch (Bladestorm)
Wave Serpent (Twin-Linked Scatter Laser)
Guardian Defender Squad x10 (Bright Lance)
Guardian Jetbike Squad x3 (Shuriken Cannon)
Guardian Jetbike Squad x3 (Shuriken Cannon)
Dark Reapers 4+Exarch (Tank Hunters)
War Walkers x2 (4x Star Cannons, 2x Power Diversion Matrices)
War Walkers x2 (4x Star Cannons, 2x Power Diversion Matrices)
Space Marine Army:
Vulkan He'Stan
Librarian (Null Zone, Vortex of Doom, Terminator Armour, Storm Shield)
Assault Terminators x5 (5x TH+SS)
Land Raider
Ironclad Dreadnought (Meltagun, Heavy Flamer)
Drop Pod
Tactical Squad 9+srg (Missile Launcher, Meltagun, Power Fist)
Razorback
Tactical Squad 9+srg (Lascannon, Flamer, Power Fist)
Razorback
Attack Bikes x2 (2x Multi-Melta)
Attack Bikes x2 (2x Multi-Melta)
Attack Bikes x2 (2x Multi-Melta)
The battlefield was rather open, with one big LOS blocking building complex occupying its left side (with some ruins), some craters in the middle and a few patches of forest on the right.
The Space Marine player won the roll-of for deployment and decided to go first. He placed much of his stuff around the center of his deployment zone. He combat squaded the Tac squads, putting the heavy weapon halves into a slightly elevated position (so cover+good LOS). Vulkan went with the flamer squad, the Librarian accompanied the Termies.
The Eldar player placed his army on the left side, utilizing every bit of cover to gain some concealment for his vehicles. He also used the Dark Repaers and the defenders to bubble-wrap his main army from the Ironclad Dread. Both jetbike squadrons were placed into Reserve to Outflank. The DoomSeer joined the Avengers. The GuideSeer was placed behind a LOS blocking terrain place - out of sight, out of mind!
The Eldar player failed to Seize the Initiative.
Turn 1 (SM):
The whole SM army turned towards the Eldar. The SM player took the risk, and dropped the Ironclad into the midst of the Eldar force (dangerously close to the table edge) - and his risk paid off, the Ironclad arrived just behind the Fire Dragon's Wave Serpent. In the Shooting phase, the Attack Bikes blew the Fire Dragon Serpent sky-high, and the dazzed survivors were quickly obliterated by the Ironclad Dreadnought and the Razorbacks. The HW Tacs also destroyed a War Walker (the other was spared by cover).
Turn 1 (Eldar):
The remaining two Wave Serpents darted out towards the SM deployment zone. Everything else held its ground. The Dark Reapers and the War Walkers killed two Attack Bike Squads, and the Defenders Stunned the Ironclad (it was in fact a Shaken, but we always forget that the IC Dread has EA).
Turn 2 (SM):
Just some positioning: the bulk of the SM forces moved towards the center/left side of the battlefield. After some awful shooting, one War Walker finally bit the dust. The remaining Attack Bike Squad assaulted the Defenders (this combat will last until the end of the game).
Turn 2 (Eldar):
One Jetbike Squad arrived at the right side and turbo-boosted into safety (but close to an objective). The Wave Serpents continued their advance, targeting the Tac Squads (both the HW and the Razor squads, as they were pretty close to each other). Combined War Walker and Dark Reaper fire wrecks Vulkan's Razorback but do little damage to the other (multiple Shaken).
Turn 3 (SM):
The Land Raider moves into a defensive position against the Wave Serpents. Some shooting later the Avenger Serpent loses its Scatter Laser. The Ironclad assaults and wipes out the Dark Reapers.
Turn 3 (Eldar):
The Banshees target the HW Tacs and the Avengers go for Vulkan's Tacs. from these, only the Banshees succeed, as they wipe out the HW Tacs easily.
Turn 4 (SM):
In a nutshell: the Termies assault the Avengers, and the Avengers die a sad and horrible death.
Turn 4 (Eldar):
The other Jetbike Squadron arrives, but they do it at the bad left side (they turbo-boost into safety). The Banshees re-embark, and goes for the undamaged Razor Tacs. The other Jetbike Squad tries to do something with the Razor using their Shuriken Cannon... but no effect.
Turn 5 (SM):
Vulkan and his remaining pals secure an objective, and the Razor Tacs secure another. All SM firepower (LR and the Razor) goes to the Jetbike Squad on the right side, killing two.
Turn 5 (Eldar):
The Jetbikes jump at their objectives, the one on the left side goes for Vulkan's objective, and the other goes for a free objective. The Banshees jump out to contend the objective of the Razor squad. In assault, the Banshee Exarch tries to wreck the Razor, but his efforts are all, but futile.
Turn 6 (SM):
What can i say? The turn where the SM won. The LR killed the lone jetbike on the "free" objective, and Vulkan destroyed the other. Some Banshees also died, and i guess this was the turn when the Avenger's Wave Serpent finally succumbed to the might of the Termies.
Turn 6 (Eldar):
The Banshees and their Serpent wipes out the Razor Tacs. TROLOLOL . As it later turned out, the Serpent needed only +2" to contend Vulkan's objective!
Oddly enought, the dice wanted a Turn 7 too, but the players agreed in a Game Over. 1-0 to the Space Marines!
We choosed this battle because it pretty much represents the whole sensitivity thing: the SM won the battle because he screwed up the Eldar plan (take out the LR with FDs, charge everything with Banshees, PROFIT!) and the Eldar player could only make faces, because he couldn't do the same with the SM player.
To be fair though, that's not exactly an optimized list... His entire army was screwed from the get go because his army was, in my opinion, all over the place.
So, in total... Your friend only brought 7 realistic targets to the field. I mean, it's pretty hard to say the codex is bad when the design of the list isn't exactly great. Dave can correct me if I'm wrong here, but Daves' codex improves upon the current codex, while keeping the same mentality to play style. So old styles of play are still something you'll want to look at as a good base line. He's just made the models that were a little too good (Fire dragons and fire prisms) a bit more expensive to show their worth, while making other units that weren't as good have better options for a bit cheaper. So yes, you have more reliable choices in the codex, and the units are more balanced, you can't just throw together some random units into a list without any cohesion and pray they work together! They aren't space marines
Personally, I would suggest a list more like what you would see out of the modern day codex. Something like...
****HQ - 225****
Farseer - 145
Guide
Fortune
Runes of Witnessing
Runes of Warding
Spirit Stones
****Heavy Support - 480****
Fire Prism - 160
- Spirit Stones
- Holo - Fields
Fire Prism - 160
- Spirit Stones
- Holo - Fields
Fire Prism - 160
- Spirit Stones
- Holo - Fields
**** Total - 1735***
Use the last 15 points to move around some wargear, or maybe give the autarch some weapons (Honestly though, he's just there so if you reserve to hide from an alpha strike, your force comes in more reliably).
This list has 8 vehicles on the field, each with weapons that can damage vehicles, and each of their paylouds is a threat in some way or another. You have answers for infantry in the storm guardian squads and fire prisms, a solid home objective holder in the falcon (w/ dire avengers and farseer). If anything in here but the falcon dies, there is another to take it's place.
The only thing I didn't bring an abundance of to the field, was AP2 weapons. So your prisms might have to spend some turns hammering termis after their transport is dead.
This isn't a real new list, but it is a tried and true list and has been updated as per Dave's fandex. Go ahead, give it a try. I bet he'd be surprised at how effective it can be. I would be shocked if my standard footdar list isn't in the same boat as this one (Which looks like my current mechdar list, minus a few units as I play at a little higher points for more wiggle room).
On a side note - I'll try to come up with a list later that uses some of the newer features of the codex, as it looks like I might get a chance to pull my Eldar out of the box in the upcoming weeks, and I'd love to try the new dex out, personally.
We choosed this battle because it pretty much represents the whole sensitivity thing: the SM won the battle because he screwed up the Eldar plan (take out the LR with FDs, charge everything with Banshees, PROFIT!) and the Eldar player could only make faces, because he couldn't do the same with the SM player.
Amanax wrote:To be fair though, that's not exactly an optimized list... His entire army was screwed from the get go because his army was, in my opinion, all over the place.
Exactly this.
The list had a grand total of two units that could hurt a Land Raider, and only one that would do the job effectively, but ironically, too well. Between the excessive amount of Fire Dragons, odd mix of troop choices, poor vehicle and infantry target saturation, the list wouldn't do well against any remotely optimized list. The SM list is by no means some sort of A++ tournament fisting list, but its a lot more cohesive and focused than the Eldar list.
Dave's codex provides a number of very viable builds that would have fared a lot better. I'll post a few for the 1500pts level that I feel take advantage of the multiple options available and do anti-infantry and anti-tank very reliably across a number of units.
Note that I've never been a fan of psychic powers (I'm a Guard player, we just use more bodies), so these lists are Autarch led and take advantage of the FOC modding.
Standard Competitive Mech-dar
Spoiler:
Farseer – Spirit stones, Runes of Warding, Guide, Doom/130pts
Fire Prism – Power Diversion Matrix/130pts
Fire Prism – Power Diversion Matrix/130pts
I think that regardless of the ultimate competitiveness of this codex, the sheer number of equally viable builds (or close enough anyways) is to be commended. While I in no way believe the lists I posted above to be some sort of end-all be-all, I do believe they are all solid and would stand up well to just about any list shy of the hardest SW, GK and IG lists.
Wow, guys, i think you totally missed the point . The Eldar list was anything, but optimized, but only because it was an all-arounder casual game list. So a list against everything and not against super-optimised tournament lists. The point of the BR was the "and then, the enemy screws you up, and you are screwed up for the rest of the battle". This can easily happen with those lists you guys posted (some of them will show up, especially the Armoured Consort and the Swift Strike): just some smart play on the other side (like focus firing the Fire Prisms) or simply some fast, hard-hitting close-combat units and the Eldar player will face a very tough match.
And i don't think that JD designed this codex as something that can only win with 2(3) Fire Prisms, some MSU Fire Dragons and min/maxed Troops. In a good codex (and i think Dave's Eldar codex is a good codex) every army setup should have around the same power, so the player won't be stuck with one or two effective build(s) (example: Chaos Space Marines).
AtoMaki wrote:Wow, guys, i think you totally missed the point . The Eldar list was anything, but optimized, but only because it was an all-arounder casual game list. So a list against everything and not against super-optimised tournament lists. The point of the BR was the "and then, the enemy screws you up, and you are screwed up for the rest of the battle". This can easily happen with those lists you guys posted (some of them will show up, especially the Armoured Consort and the Swift Strike): just some smart play on the other side (like focus firing the Fire Prisms) or simply some fast, hard-hitting close-combat units and the Eldar player will face a very tough match.
And i don't think that JD designed this codex as something that can only win with 2(3) Fire Prisms, some MSU Fire Dragons and min/maxed Troops. In a good codex (and i think Dave's Eldar codex is a good codex) every army setup should have around the same power, so the player won't be stuck with one or two effective build(s) (example: Chaos Space Marines).
I don't think we missed the point at all. You can't judge a codex by using un-optimized lists and then claiming it doesn't have any safety nets (redundancy). The point your trying to make is true for many codices, and particularly true for every codex when you bring a non-optimized list.
As to the lists I posted having Fire Prisms; I just personally prefer them. I could easily run a pair of war-walkers with scatter lasers or starcannons with power diversion matrices for the same cost. Similar effect really. In today's meta, min/maxed/optimized troops are what wins, and this codex does that nicely. MSU is what works, and again, this codex does that nicely. You can run non-MSU or foot lists, and I'm sure they'd be better with this codex than with the actual one. The point I'm trying to make is that to properly analyze a codex and find the problems so they can be properly assessed and fixed is to try and break the codex; run the hardest lists possible against a variety of opponents at various points levels.
The codex is by no means on the level of GK/SW, but its certainly better than the current 4th ed codex. Sure, a smart opponent can ruin you, but the same could be said of any codex/list really.
Blacksails wrote:
I don't think we missed the point at all. You can't judge a codex by using un-optimized lists and then claiming it doesn't have any safety nets
Ghosh, frankly, the last thing i was ready for is problems with the army list ... For the next battle report, we've chosen a better (anti-Meta centered) army.
I'll comment on this in more detail later (never gonna get the updates or next Codex done at this rate! ), but for now I'll say that I think both sides have credence:
- The list was flawed and this was the main cause for the loss (not the lack of a safety net); having only 1 unit that could realistically take down a Land Raider made it an obvious target and the loss of this unit was no surprise and decided the game IMHO, leaving over 400pts to roam around un-phased. It would be the same for any army that only brought (and then lost) just one unit capable of stopping a Land Raider.
- However, the safety net argument may also have credence; I had after all rarely reduced the cost of units, but made them better - as was the right thing to do IMHO as they are Eldar after all. This is something I have and will consider more.
- But, if the safety net is truly lacking, then why isn't this a problem with the existing Eldar Codex, which itself lacks Eldar Fleet AND a plethora of viable units?
Just Dave wrote:
- The list was flawed and this was the main cause for the loss (not the lack of a safety net); having only 1 unit that could realistically take down a Land Raider made it an obvious target and the loss of this unit was no surprise and decided the game IMHO, leaving over 400pts to roam around un-phased. It would be the same for any army that only brought (and then lost) just one unit capable of stopping a Land Raider.
I guess the actual problem wasn't really the loss, but its ease. It was like 4 Attack Bikes busted the WS, some other stuff took a bad stare at the Dragons and *puff* a key unit gone. And there was no way to counter this, or at least soothe the damage. Even if he would take two FD squads in two WS-s, the SM had enough firepower remaining to blast the other WS and it would take less to finish off the surviving passangers. Other armies have built-in mechanics to counter this (numbers (IG, nidz, Orks), versatility (SM), durability ('crons) or annoying special rules/wargear (DE)).
Also, he had two anti-Av14 units: the Fire Dragons and the Defenders (just trollin' ).
Just Dave wrote:- But, if the safety net is truly lacking, then why isn't this a problem with the existing Eldar Codex, which itself lacks Eldar Fleet AND a plethora of viable units?
I think it is a problem, but only a minor one. In your codex though, it appears much stronger because... well... everything else is much better.
Just Dave wrote:- But, if the safety net is truly lacking, then why isn't this a problem with the existing Eldar Codex, which itself lacks Eldar Fleet AND a plethora of viable units?
I think it is a problem, but only a minor one. In your codex though, it appears much stronger because... well... everything else is much better.
In all honesty I simply disagree with the 1st part, but this bit doesn't make sense to me, could you elaborate?
Just Dave wrote:- But, if the safety net is truly lacking, then why isn't this a problem with the existing Eldar Codex, which itself lacks Eldar Fleet AND a plethora of viable units?
I think it is a problem, but only a minor one. In your codex though, it appears much stronger because... well... everything else is much better.
In all honesty I simply disagree with the 1st part, but this bit doesn't make sense to me, could you elaborate?
Uh, i'm not an Eldar player, but i'll try:
So, because of the many-many nice tricks the units in your codex can employ, the playstyle of the Eldar changed a bit towards "finesse" over "brute strength". I'll risk it: the army is pretty much unplayable in "brute strength" mode. But "finesse" is more vulnerable than "brute strength" (for obvious reasons) and there is little compensation in the codex for this. Not to mention that "finesse" is not something that the Warhammer 40k rule mechanics always reward.
Just Dave wrote:- But, if the safety net is truly lacking, then why isn't this a problem with the existing Eldar Codex, which itself lacks Eldar Fleet AND a plethora of viable units?
I think it is a problem, but only a minor one. In your codex though, it appears much stronger because... well... everything else is much better.
In all honesty I simply disagree with the 1st part, but this bit doesn't make sense to me, could you elaborate?
Uh, i'm not an Eldar player, but i'll try:
So, because of the many-many nice tricks the units in your codex can employ, the playstyle of the Eldar changed a bit towards "finesse" over "brute strength". I'll risk it: the army is pretty much unplayable in "brute strength" mode. But "finesse" is more vulnerable than "brute strength" (for obvious reasons) and there is little compensation in the codex for this. Not to mention that "finesse" is not something that the Warhammer 40k rule mechanics always reward.
See, that's where this point doesn't make sense to me; that the units becoming better have somehow made them worse? It's still just as finesse, but it's better at it and actually more capable of killing stuff, but this improved capability doesn't necessarily make it more "brute strength", it can, but it also makes it better at finesse.
Again, I'm aware you're not an/the Eldar player and I appreciate that, and I will/have look into the safety belt concept/lack, but this idea doesn't make sense to me. It suggests that the units becoming better have somehow made them worse, which also goes back to the previous point of the safety belt part if anything more lacking in the current Eldar Codex; which lacks the good units and Eldar Fleet (and improved Ld on Warlocks).
Uh, the problem is not with the units but with the army/gaming experience. It is simply so easy to make a 1+1=3 combo (like the 10 Dragons + 10 Banshees <- these guys can wreak insane ammount of havoc!), but the enemy can break this combo on so many points that the risk begins to overshadow the reward.
Again, I'm afraid the 'gaming experience'/1+1=3 thing doesn't make sense to me. If you could elaborate, that'd be appreciated, because it still seems as though the suggestion is that making the units better has somehow changed things negatively...
Although, I do think splitting the Fire Dragons into 2 five-man squads and reducing the banshees to 7/8 (wo)men would be more efficient, game and points wise, but that's a separate point to the whole changed-from-finesse thing.
Just Dave wrote:Again, I'm afraid the 'gaming experience'/1+1=3 thing doesn't make sense to me. If you could elaborate, that'd be appreciated, because it still seems as though the suggestion is that making the units better has somehow changed things negatively...
So the 1+1=3 is something like this:
Unit A can kill Stuff X. Unit B can kill Stuff Y. But when working together, they can kill Stuff X,Y,Z and even seriously damage Stuff V. We fell that your codex is all about this. To make Unit A and Unit B work together and kick ass (finesse!). But it is simply easy to knock out Unit A and/or Unit B, maybe a bit too easy according to the importance. Other armies have various solutions to this: maybe they have numerous Unit A's and Unit B's (numbers!), or they have a Unit C that can take the place of unit A and/or Unit B (versatility!), or Unit A and/or Unit B are simply dead hard to kill (durability!). Or they simply don't rely on cooperation that much, because Unit A/B can kick ass on their own too (special rules/wargears!). Your codex has some versatility and some special rules/wargears but they are often insufficent.
Rightyhoo, so the ol' safety net/arguably weak list thing:
I agree that the list was not a good representation of the safety net thing; the list itself lacked any safety net by only having one unit that could realistically damage a Land Raider (this one unit in itself is probably a bit overkill). This meant that the opponent did the logical thing and went straight for the Fire Dragons, getting through any castling that may or may not have been there to land an Iron Clad right next to them, before prompty dispatching the only unit in the army that had any real chance of stopping 450+pts of his.
There could have been several solutions to this; better castling to protect the Fire Dragons, replacing one or both Warwalker Squadrons with Wraithlords with 2 Bright or 1 Nova Lance (which have featured in a list of his before), Warlocks with Singing Spears and Runes of Anaris in the Jetbike Squads, giving some of the Waveserpents Bright Lances or splitting the Fire Dragons into two squads. There's so many ways that this could've been fixed.
I don't think the list itself was weak, but I would never have rated its chances with only 1 real anti-AV14 unit, let alone after that 1st turn and/or when facing an army with a Land Raider.
As for the 1+1=3 idea, I don't entirely agree with the logic here. Little requires the attention of both Fire Dragons and Howling Banshees (minus a Land Raider full of Termies), whilst I think simply having 1+1+1=3 is a better solution. The other armies solutions can apply here too:
Numerous A's and B's: simply split the Fire Dragons into 2 5-man units. Little requires 10 meltaguns (including a BS5 one) and this achieves 2 solutions: more targets for you, more targets for the enemy.
Unit C that can take the place of A and B: An example: Shining Spears; give them tank-hunters and they can take out the Land Raider or its contents. Or a Wraithlord can operate as ranged anti-tank and assault anti-anything.
Unit A and/or B are simply too hard to kill: Fortune, target saturation (splitting the Fire Dragons), castling, LoS blocking. Trueborn being fragile doesn't make Trueborn a bad unit as there is ways around this and it's the same with the Eldar, but even more-so.
Unit A/B can kick ass on their own too: These are 10-man squads equipped with Power Weapons or Meltaguns, I'm struggling to think of a single target that requires such concentrated force.
Furthermore, and crucially for the idea of the 'safety net', the 1+1=3 thing does not explain why this problem is not existent in the existing Eldar Codex.
However, despite my lack of consensus with the above points, I do feel the safety net idea could have credence. As I said before, one of my key designs with the Codex was to, rather than simply reduce their cost, make units more deserving of their price tag; Howling Banshees are a key example of this. This means that the army retains its emphasis on tactics, rather than simple application of force (Space Marines) or numbers (Imperial Guard); this does however mean that some units retain their arguably high points costs (which I believe are fair, the 'high' refers to the 'safety net' concept) which can be crippled by simple bad luck.
One 'safety net' of sorts that was introduced is itself not wholly reliable (intentionally); Eldar fleet.
However, there are 3 key flaws to the safety net idea IMHO:
1) Is it existent in the existing Eldar Codex? Apparently not.
2) If not, then why is it suddenly existent by units being made better?
3) There are ways around this in itself; unit redundancy, target saturation, application of psychic powers, you name it.
And...) There were some 'safety net' aspects included within the Codex from the start: Eldar Fleet, increased Shuriken Range (without decreased damage output), making units more reliable, increased Ld (Warlocks), Warlock psychic powers (need safety? Cover/Go-to-ground and Conceal. Need speed? Expedite and Fleet.) and Master Strategist (allowing reserving to avoid Alpha Strikes - your Eldar player could've done with this - and granting flexible special rules such as Stubborn, Counter-Attack and Hit and Run).
However, as I have said, the 'safety net' idea could have credence (although I'm not sold, I admit, for all the above reasons, which there are a fair few of) and I have considered ways around this.
1st, Autarchs (with any Autarch Power) could allow any unit within LoS to re-roll a single Eldar Fleet D6.
2nd, An ability similar to Athairiel's Skien of Command could be implemented; with a rune allowing this to work with Warlocks within LoS, whilst Autarchs could get the above ability and the Avatar makes all units within LoS fearless. But then Athairiel would need a boost of his own, which could be it applying to Exarchs and not requiring LoS.
Blacksails wrote:
I don't think we missed the point at all. You can't judge a codex by using un-optimized lists and then claiming it doesn't have any safety nets
Ghosh, frankly, the last thing i was ready for is problems with the army list ... For the next battle report, we've chosen a better (anti-Meta centered) army.
I just spend a lot time reading through fan dexes and what-not, and the only real test of their power is to break them. Space Wolves aren't considered one of the strongest codices because people brought fun lists all the time. It became top because people found the strongest combinations and beat face with them.
The same should be attempted with this codex to really see what isn't working, what is working, and what could price tweaks.
Now, that all being said, I do realize I come off a touch harsh in my posts due to my wording, but that is not my intentions. Then again, Ato, you know full well how I go about critiquing fandexes, seeing as how I did it to you. We also disagreed on you and your groups perceived weakness of the Troop Crawler which I would LOVE to have for my IG list.
I'll come up with some lists using units I probably wouldn't use myself, but I still think are useful, such as warwalkers, wraithlords, dark reapers and swooping hawks.
Just a quick thing that I feel safe with my current state of exhaustedness: if the Eldar codex is still overly reliant on Fire Dragons for AT, why not make a Space Marine? No, not Power Armour, but give all Eldar Aspect Warriors Haywire Grenades. Space Marines get Frag and KRAK and I'd argue that Haywire are worse than Krak most of the time, but safer for Eldar's lower-save/T units. Maybe even give ALL infantry Haywire (obviously not Fire Dragons and most likely not Reapers and maybe Krak is more appropriate for Scorpions)
It's a subtle thing, but it does make (nearly) all infantry have a Plan B. Fire Dragons and/or Bright Lance is still Plan A.
Now, I'm too tired to know if the units already have viable grenades for this, but plasma grenades are not really worthy a back up for such expensive units as Eldar.
Mahtamori wrote:Just a quick thing that I feel safe with my current state of exhaustedness: if the Eldar codex is still overly reliant on Fire Dragons for AT, why not make a Space Marine? No, not Power Armour, but give all Eldar Aspect Warriors Haywire Grenades. Space Marines get Frag and KRAK and I'd argue that Haywire are worse than Krak most of the time, but safer for Eldar's lower-save/T units. Maybe even give ALL infantry Haywire (obviously not Fire Dragons and most likely not Reapers and maybe Krak is more appropriate for Scorpions)
It's a subtle thing, but it does make (nearly) all infantry have a Plan B. Fire Dragons and/or Bright Lance is still Plan A.
Now, I'm too tired to know if the units already have viable grenades for this, but plasma grenades are not really worthy a back up for such expensive units as Eldar.
An interesting idea. If I recall ,and I'm at work so I can't check, but only the swooping hawks really ahve access to haywire grenades. They aren't really game breaking piece of wargear, not even realiable. But, as Mahtoamori stated, it would give a viable plan B.
What do you think Dave? Would you be willing to throw the Haywires on a few other units? If not, would you mind explaning?
Without trying to come from nowhere, (slow work day) I kind of (more yes than no) agree that the small addition of haywire grenades as wargear would be a nice addition to a few other units as an upgrade or even as base equipment.
Sorry guys, but Haywires aren't going to be included everywhere. The reason for this is simple:
I'm kidding. I think its a good idea and will be included for the next update; nice suggestion Maht' and spot on with the feedback guys. I'll probably price it the same as Wyches.
I'll also change intercept (for the Hawks) to make Haywires count as AP1.
@Runna, you're welcome to come in from nowhere, its fine man.
@Blacksails, whilst I don't think its the definitive conclusion, I agree that trying to break a Codex is important and a good test. I'd welcome people to try here, I know I have.
@Blacksails and Amanax, thanks for the lists you posted above, I'll look through them and see if they suggest any unwanted imbalance within the 'dex. Cheers gals.
Ok, time for a bit less tired feedback: one of the problems with grenades on Eldar (and other T3) is when you get a penetrating hit - it hurts to get an explode result. Maybe Intercept would be better off making the grenades more reliable and safer?
Essentially, 1d3+2 would be ideal. This means that on a penetrating hit you reliably destroy the vehicle's functionality with a 5+ to safely dispose of it. On a glancing hit you reduce it's ability to shoot.
Problem is, it doesn't make much sense. "Suddenly, instead of rolling 1D6 you now roll 1D3+2". Maybe this would be a good piece of wargear somewhere.
In either case, the functionality of Vehicle Destroyed - Explodes! is why I dislike having anti-vehicle grenades as a unit's primary function.
Mahtamori wrote:Ok, time for a bit less tired feedback: one of the problems with grenades on Eldar (and other T3) is when you get a penetrating hit - it hurts to get an explode result. Maybe Intercept would be better off making the grenades more reliable and safer?
Essentially, 1d3+2 would be ideal. This means that on a penetrating hit you reliably destroy the vehicle's functionality with a 5+ to safely dispose of it. On a glancing hit you reduce it's ability to shoot.
Problem is, it doesn't make much sense. "Suddenly, instead of rolling 1D6 you now roll 1D3+2". Maybe this would be a good piece of wargear somewhere.
In either case, the functionality of Vehicle Destroyed - Explodes! is why I dislike having anti-vehicle grenades as a unit's primary function.
Well it isn't ideal. But that would be the point.
You would still primarily rely on your other anti-tank options, like you were saying, but this would be a last ditch effort idea. If all else fails, you can always have squad "X" blow it up.
I mean, I don't know about you... but if *&$# hit the fan, and all my anti-tank was destroyed, in most situations I would gladly sacrifice a 100-150 point squad (Not even fully sacrificed either) to destroy that land raider. But again, I would rather not send any of my units to their death, the Eldar are too few in number to do that
Dave:
I think you misunderstood the "1+1=3". It isn't about numbers or safety (as i mentioned before, this tactic is vulnerable than say, MSU or Zergling Rush), but about efficiency saturation. The 10 men Fire Dragons with the Howling Banshees are a good example: they can take even large quantities of MEQ, TEQ, they can kill tanks/vehicles for sure (without fear from the passanger's punishment) and even seriously damage hordes. And they do it at a nice cost. 2x5 Fire Dragons can't really do the same, because they need more attention, and its harder to keep them together and much harder to support them with psychic powers. And they come at a greater cost. Yeah, its safer, but it is no longer 1+1=3 but MSU with Howling Banshees support.
And currently, i guess the only armies that do 1+1=3 effectively are Space Marines (LR, AssTermies and Attack Bikes) and Imperial Guard (Hydras + Plasma/Meltavets). And no, MSU =/= 1+1=3, it is quite the opposite actually.
A full squad of Banshees would have about 1-in-6 chance of Exploding a generic vehicle on assault and 2-in-6 to destroy it. Generously speaking (10 grenades, roughly 5 hits on Combat Speed, roughly 0,8 chance of penetrating). Add to this a whole bunch of glancings.
On an explodes, generally speaking 25% of the Banshees will die.
I suppose these are acceptable odds as a back up plan. Maybe I'm a bit stuck with the Codex way of thinking, but I feel Eldar's biggest current drawback is that there are no plan A options to Fire Dragons. (This is part of the reason I love Corsair, since the Nightwing are a brilliant Plan A against tanks)
Amanax wrote:Well it isn't ideal. But that would be the point.
You would still primarily rely on your other anti-tank options, like you were saying, but this would be a last ditch effort idea. If all else fails, you can always have squad "X" blow it up.
More prevalent haywires will make great back-ups and add versatility, but it will have its risks on account of being back-up. I don't feel I can really explain my opinion much better than Amanax has, above.
That said, there are many more options than Fire Dragons for anti-tank; Asps w/ Nova Lances (awesome), Support Platforms, Wave Serpents, Fire Prisms, Falcons, Wraithlords, War Walkers, Tank-hunting Reapers, Tank-hunting Spears, multiple Bright Lance Guardians, Singing Spears w/ Anaris on Jetbikes and more.
That said (again), there are relatively few anti-tank infantry; should a longer-ranged anti-tank infantry squad be added?
(Dawn Guardians - below - can somewhat provide this however)
AtoMaki wrote:Dave:
I think you misunderstood the "1+1=3". It isn't about numbers or safety (as i mentioned before, this tactic is vulnerable than say, MSU or Zergling Rush), but about efficiency saturation. The 10 men Fire Dragons with the Howling Banshees are a good example: they can take even large quantities of MEQ, TEQ, they can kill tanks/vehicles for sure (without fear from the passanger's punishment) and even seriously damage hordes. And they do it at a nice cost. 2x5 Fire Dragons can't really do the same, because they need more attention, and its harder to keep them together and much harder to support them with psychic powers. And they come at a greater cost. Yeah, its safer, but it is no longer 1+1=3 but MSU with Howling Banshees support.
And currently, i guess the only armies that do 1+1=3 effectively are Space Marines (LR, AssTermies and Attack Bikes) and Imperial Guard (Hydras + Plasma/Meltavets). And no, MSU =/= 1+1=3, it is quite the opposite actually.
I'm afraid, outside of cost (which technically is only 15pts/Exarch more - although depending on your preference also another Waveserpent, which has it's own benefits) and the fact they would require 2 Psychic Powers for the same effect, that I think MSU is superior.
-----------------------
As it stands, the rules for the proposed Battlesuit Unit/'Dawn Guard' are basically this:
Wargear:
Twin-linked Shuriken Repeater - 24", Strength 3, AP 5, Assault 4, Rending.
Wraithbone Battle Armour - Confers the changes you see & Psychic Shielding (below), would be an option for an Autarch also.
Special Rules:
Psychic Shielding - 5++ invulnerable save, requires psychic test to activate, but cannot be nullified etc.
Fleet.
- Upgrade 1 dude to a Warlock for ~18pts.
Who has the same options and:
- 2x Witchblade Free
- Singing Spear and Shuriken Repeater - 5pts
And normal psychic powers with an additional one, Enhanced Aegis, which improves the invulnerable save to 4++.
Might include an option to replace Psychic Shielding w/ Jump Infantry or Mind Link, but these upgrades may be more trouble than they're worth including.
The basic fluff is that they are basically Eldar who have previously trod the path of the warrior, but do so no more. They have overcome their bloodlust and battle urges (which is required as a war-mask-like state feths about too much with the delicate psychic uplinks within the suit), something an Autarch has also done. They use these advanced technologies and training to protect the Eldar, as Asuryan once did - who they effectively revere - working towards the 'Dawn' of a new age, or preventing the setting of the sun that once was the Eldar race, hence the 'Dawn' in their name.
The Wraithbone suit is effectively a complex Battlesuit that provides a level of protection and firepower unparalleled to Eldar infantry, using dense Wraithbone material for protection and a psychic uplink with the suit, moving as if wearing little more than a body-glove. The Shuriken Repeater is a scaled-down Shuriken Cannon or scaled-up Shuriken Catapult, depending on your optimism, that converts the generated heat into sporadic plasma bursts, hence rending.
Basically, do peoples think they should be included? I'm not sold on them to be honest, they're a neat concept and unit all-in-all and definitely something different, but they'll require 2 pages within the 'dex and may not really be needed overall. Thoughts?
![[Disk]](/dakkaforum/templates/default/images/icon_disk.gif){kind=icon}
) but decided against it in the end. I will consider giving him an alternative fire mode or something, but I still think he works with Crystal Dragons (cookie for anyone that gets the reference (without google!)) through his rules and versatility. I will give him another look though, rest assured.
) much better then current dex and will hopefully use this dex on the next weekend. 
you to Termies, Feel no pain, etc. ;D
?