Actually started this thread last week, then was told it was premature, despite the whole thing leaking.
How will major tournaments adjust. They have already started filtering out Str D ranged weapons. This is like GW seeing this trend, feeling their profits threatened, and the wrote this book to give the big double deuce to tournament organizers doing this. It seems like every time organizers try and put restrictions and smart adjustments in place, GW swiftly comes out with something that throws that out of whack.
This new codex just breaks the game over its knee. I dont think any but the most hard core delusional eldar players will dispute this. The problem comes in game variety. Eldar as it stands would be in some form or another probably be in 8/10 top placing lists in any tournament that dident seriously curb their power.
Are there any peliminary trials going on? Any gameplay testing by tournaments, since GW cannot be bothered.
I have to say, this one codex has killed any and all desire I have to play in any kind of paid event, or where I would have to have expenses. I think that tournament organizers are smart enough to read the writing on the wall, and are scratching their heads about the issue as well.
One thing is for sure. if nothing is done, eldar WILL win more than their fair share, and will only be met by "of course" and "boo" chorus from the rest of the peanut gallery.
To me, the Wraithguard are the same. The Wraithknight on the other hand.......
The bikes I am still unsure on, might be easier to deal with than people think, but they might be to tough. Till I play a game against them, or actually get the codex, no clue.
The Aspect warriors are actually better now, and could probably make the table as something other than a unit tax for Wave Serpents.
The Psychers.....Never a big fan of Psychic powers, they are so random in use and now generating the power, that it is something I don't focus much on. Plus the Deamons seem to be able to throw down a lot more so it will probably be shut down against them anyway.
There are basically 3 ways to deal with it (other than just not having tournaments):
1. Ban the new codex. Kind of a bad precedent, but it's the cleanest solution. The fact that Eldar already were "top-tier" will make this easier to swallow for Eldar players, and requires no change in current army builds. But then you're telling people they can't use the most current codex for their army.
2. Selectively ban/mod units. This could lead to issues with consistency, as one tournament might think a 170 pt unit with 5 ranged d-weapons is bad while another doesn't. There is the issue that someone who buys the codex is going to be told in a pickup game "those rules are different". Also there is the mostly unnoticed (simply due to more glaring problems) that even the basic aspect warriors are now undercosted when you compare stats and special rules to other equivalents, especially when using the warhost formations.
3. Write a new codex. Aside from the obvious potential copyright issues and inability of the community to agree on things, it would take a huge amount of work and be subject to controversy. Consistency is again an issue if multiple sources try it. And at that point...if we can make a more balanced codex, then why not create more balanced core rules and simply do a re-write of EVERY codex when it comes out?
It's a powerful codex no doubt but banning it is just plain silly. For me, the only thing that grinds my gears with the new dex is the hilariously under-costed wraithknight. If tournaments keep the usual "No LoW except characters" ban then I think everything else should be manageable and fine.
greyknight12 wrote: Also there is the mostly unnoticed (simply due to more glaring problems) that even the basic aspect warriors are now undercosted when you compare stats and special rules to other equivalents, especially when using the warhost formations.
This is actually not quite true. In some cases yes, but in many cases no. Depends on the codex that you are matching it to. Several of the Aspect Warriors were over costed as compared to other units in the previous codex, and this has corrected that issue for some of them. Many of the Aspect Warrior cost more than a Marine, and get worse on everything except Initiative, and Leadership. The special rules add bonuses to correct this issue, plus match the special rules available to the unit it is matched to.
The Special rules bloat is an issue with the game, as not all rules are equal in ability, but GW seems to just treat them as equal when pricing a unit. Example: Night Fight is usable for 1 turn out of 50% of the games you may play.
Battle Focus is always useful, to add range, or get back into cover.
Battle Focus is the more powerful of the two, but both appear to apply equally to their respective model.
Guardians are actually the unit that is under costed, as compared to other troops choices. I can only guess as to why, probably because they pay through the nose for weapon upgrades, and Aspect Warriors don't have as many options.
Formations are their own thing, although they are fluffy, they are easily abused at the moment. I don't think they will be going away anytime soon, and they will get worse before they get better.
Byte wrote: We already know Str D gets nerfed at events. What is your primary complaint? The bikes?
D-weapons get nerfed at tournaments by simply getting banned. But if you ban ranged Str D, then you ban both variants of wraithguard, Vaul's wrath batteries, the hemlock, and the stock wraithknight. It puts TOs in a weird position, since the previously accepted solution now cuts 5 units from a codex.
And yes, the bikes are also an issue, leaving 6 obvious violators before people get into a fluff/points/balance debate about other stuff (such as fire dragons with +3 on the vehicle damage table or melee units with an average of 10" charge before fleet that you can't overwatch).
Codecies have previously been viewed as untouchable in terms of comp, while it was acceptable to limit supplements and expansions. The new Eldar codex is different because to fix it requires a paradigm shift in tournament comp.
It's still not time. The book needs to be used and analyzed through the lens of actual games in a competitive setting. If we just discuss using the book and no real world experiences to draw on, a mere day after release, it's still just wild conjecture and knee jerk reactions.
I overall don't see it as that bad. MY main problem with playing against elder in the pest were:
1)Wave Serpents - fire out put with shield (this has changed)
2)Objective secured bikes stealing things left and right - if taking the new formations (which you would have to do to get all of the aspect special rules) then bikes no longer have Objective secured
3)Wraithknights in general - well, now that they are a LoW, you are having to take the formations (which has a higher tax now of vypers, more warlocks and a 3rd bike squad). By that point, you are getting heavy into the allowable points for your army. If you go CAD, then you can only take 1 LoW per CAD, which would again increase the point taxes on your army.
Let's be honest, they took a overpowered Codex and didn't knock it down. But, its the same with Deamon summing/Fate weaver spam, or Tau bombs. They are the top 3 armies, so find ways to deal with them.
megatrons2nd wrote: To me, the Wraithguard are the same. The Wraithknight on the other hand.......
For some armies, it doesn't matter. For a lot of others, it's a huge, gigantic, massive difference between a bit of Str 10 Ap1 and Str D. My main army is GKs. With Str 10, meh, my Dreadknight will take a wound or two and then I'll get into combat. Now, he'll get 2D3 wounds, which will likely kill him, and there's a solid chance of them rolling a 6 in which case he's straight up dead. All the Str D (and the Jetbikes) took competitive Eldar from being a rough matchup against my GKs to me hoping that the Eldar player is both simply utterly incompetent and rolls terribly if I want to even have a shot.
OverwatchCNC wrote: It's still not time. The book needs to be used and analyzed through the lens of actual games in a competitive setting. If we just discuss using the book and no real world experiences to draw on, a mere day after release, it's still just wild conjecture and knee jerk reactions.
This, Orock. I have had the codex in my hands for less than 24 hours. Maybe I'll get a play test tonight. The local TO is going to let it ride unfettered for the first monthly tourney. Sounds like a good way to test things out before axing it.
Let's see how this car handles on the track before banning it from public roads, eh? " ... breaks the game over its knee." C'mon, man.
Given how "meh" the Imperial Knight's impact has had on our local tourney, LVO 2015, and all of their "Sky is Falling" D weps, I don't see how a WK, just one on the table, is going to do more damage to the game.
WraithGuard? 12" guns and the same to kill as they were before. I'm not going to poop my drawers if they're in groups of ten deployed or in Wave serpents in groups of five. They'll scrag one unit and then get tarpitted in h2h, with FWs, other elves, SM, etc.
Formations? Just allowing one at a tourney, like things already are ...
megatrons2nd wrote: To me, the Wraithguard are the same. The Wraithknight on the other hand.......
For some armies, it doesn't matter. For a lot of others, it's a huge, gigantic, massive difference between a bit of Str 10 Ap1 and Str D. My main army is GKs. With Str 10, meh, my Dreadknight will take a wound or two and then I'll get into combat. Now, he'll get 2D3 wounds, which will likely kill him, and there's a solid chance of them rolling a 6 in which case he's straight up dead. All the Str D (and the Jetbikes) took competitive Eldar from being a rough matchup against my GKs to me hoping that the Eldar player is both simply utterly incompetent and rolls terribly if I want to even have a shot.
Dreadknight versus WK was a decent match up, in favor of the Dread, given his Force Wep. Now, it's the other 'way round. Still a decent match up, but the WK has the edge, in h2h. And in shooting.
If the DreadKnight gets caught within WG range, then that 'utterly incompetent' ought to be placed on the Grey Knight player's ability.
Wouldn't bother changing anything. the more you comp every release, the more work you make for yourselves. The next dex will have similar stuff and issues and the next one and the next one. banning a codex is a stupid, stupid precedent. It wont change anything from GWs POV, as they already don't support the IC but it will put people off events in the long run. (what if marines get the much rumoured plastic thunderhawk - ban marines too? )
Something will always be top dog. screamerstar, adlance, serpent spam, helldrake spam, cron air, venomspam, valk spam. The newer dexes historically have tended to have stronger options than older ones, until you get to the point that old ones are almost forgotten about then someone turns up with it and fists everyone who's like "wtf does an excorcist do?" Used to be called codex creep, and people just got on with it. now everyone's gaking the bed over it.
all you do by banning and comping one dex or unit or weapon is keep the current one/s top.
For those who don't want to click out of dakka and read blogs this small excerpt sums it up pretty well.
"You know what scares me about the online community? Not that they'll be right about something but that they'll be wrong and we will have gone so far beyond the pale that it's nearly impossible to come back from the brink they led us to in a blind rage."
OverwatchCNC wrote: It's still not time. The book needs to be used and analyzed through the lens of actual games in a competitive setting. If we just discuss using the book and no real world experiences to draw on, a mere day after release, it's still just wild conjecture and knee jerk reactions.
I guess I'm just one of those mystical few people that can read statlines, weapon profiles, abilities, and point costs, tumble them together, and then make a good estimation of how they are on the table. It probably helps that I've been playing 40k for over a decade, have played strategy games for almost my entire lifetime, and specifically in 40k, I've played at least 2 games both as and against every current army, including horus heresy. (There are just some formations that I haven't tried out.)
The biggest offender to me is actually the d scythes. S4 ap2 flamers before, str D-1 flamers now. They used to knock out armored infantry or infantry in cover.
Now they knock out armor, cover, reanimation, anything relying on fnp, monstrous creatures, things relying on multiple wounds like nobs and dark eldar coven units, light armor, medium armor, heavy armor, super heavies, and gargantuans. I don't think land raiders need MORE things discouraging their use. And of course the hilariously undercosted knight, the amazing artillery and flyer, and stupendously all-around best-basic-troops-in-the-game jetbikes are no slouches either. And all of that is backed up by very solid units that only look subpar because they aren't as good as those ridiculous things above.
7dar is the most obviously broken book I've seen in the game, to the point where I'm convinced GW is actively trying to give tournaments the finger.
Taking a wait and see approach is bad. When things like this hit, your tournies start losing people. And once they find something else to do with their Saturdays, it's hard to pull them back. If you want your tournament scene to NOT drop by a good 20% or more in the next few months, tell your local TO to get in front of this bull and take it by the horns. Waving the cape and letting it run by is not a good option.
As usual, this is for tournies. For funsies games in your game room or lgs, do whatever you want!
Dozer Blades wrote: There are lots of easy ways to get the Wraithguard in close range... To shrug them off as only having 12" range is not accurate.
Besides the Strategic Warlord trait that gives 3 units infiltrate? Please share, DB. I'm likely to be the one guinea pig that brings eldar Wraith/Dwep-spam to my local rtt, so I would like to give as best as can be delivered. Seriously.
We are a bunch of guys to actually see if it's broke before applying a modification.
OverwatchCNC wrote: I wrote a long summary of my feelings on this on Capture and Control.
Too bad you had to ruin a perfectly good article with another "PEREGRINE SUCKS AND HAS NO RIGHT TO AN OPINION" rant. I mean really, you spend more time complaining about the fact that I pointed out how your painting standards are your personal preferences and not universal tournament rules than discussing legitimate balance issues. The irony here is that I haven't called for any of these extreme reactions to the new Eldar codex, so bringing in your pointless little vendetta has no purpose besides giving you a straw man to beat up on and make yourself feel better.
PS: you don't know what tournaments I have attended, will attend in the future, am considering attending, or have wanted to attend but rejected because of their decisions. Refusal to play your idiotic "my is bigger than yours" game and get into a credential war is not the same thing as having no stake in the discussion.
OverwatchCNC wrote: It's still not time. The book needs to be used and analyzed through the lens of actual games in a competitive setting. If we just discuss using the book and no real world experiences to draw on, a mere day after release, it's still just wild conjecture and knee jerk reactions.
... It probably helps that I've been playing 40k for over a decade,...
OWCnC and I are in the same boat as you. Long time gamers, 10+ years in 40k, long time tourney goers.
Go back a year in time and review the furvor over Malefic Summoning Spam. Further back, Riptides. Trip-tides. The Tau book. And the last Eldar book. Serpent-spam was a contender and did win big GTs, but then stopped. And, well, were there the same "Sky is Falling" rants over Grav-Bikes and Drop Pods? Flying Circus?
I am not complaining about Grav-bike White Scars, though they dominated my FLGS tourneys through 2014, nor Drop Pods, nor flying bugs. And we now know that all the freak-outs about Malefic Summoning Spam, were without merit. Ad-Lance, too. The meta shifted, and Ad-Lance is only a pain, if you didn't adjust.
Serpent Spam got its comeuppance too = Sternguard+Drop Pods+meltas.
niv-mizzet wrote: tell your local TO to get in front of this bull and take it by the horns. Waving the cape and letting it run by is not a good option.
You let it make a pass, and watch its moves and then if it's broke, make a fix. But let it run as it is at first. Unfettered, a rules set might just be balanced, like Malefic Summoning.
Dozer Blades wrote: There are lots of easy ways to get the Wraithguard in close range... To shrug them off as only having 12" range is not accurate.
Besides the Strategic Warlord trait that gives 3 units infiltrate? Please share, DB. I'm likely to be the one guinea pig that brings eldar Wraith/Dwep-spam to my local rtt, so I would like to give as best as can be delivered. Seriously.
We are a bunch of guys to actually see if it's broke before applying a modification.
Haemon from Dark Eldar can use Webway portal to deepstrike with no scatter as battle brothers, off the top of my head anyways.
I do not believe the Craftworlds codex will have any organizational effect on tournaments. Organizers will either host games according to the rules or with modified rules of their choosing. As to players winning using an Eldar army, it remains to be seen. I imagine there could be a high number of wins with Eldar armies.
Dozer Blades wrote: There are lots of easy ways to get the Wraithguard in close range... To shrug them off as only having 12" range is not accurate.
Besides the Strategic Warlord trait that gives 3 units infiltrate? Please share, DB. I'm likely to be the one guinea pig that brings eldar Wraith/Dwep-spam to my local rtt, so I would like to give as best as can be delivered. Seriously.
We are a bunch of guys to actually see if it's broke before applying a modification.
Haemon from Dark Eldar can use Webway portal to deepstrike with no scatter as battle brothers, off the top of my head anyways.
Yep, WWP works. But DozerBlades said 'easy' ways. Paying a Dark Eldar attachment/CAD tax sounds less than that.
ZebioL - I hope that doesn't come off as dismissive or arrogant. Contribution appreciated.
There's a sizeable portion of the tournament going community that thinks that the new Eldar codex with everything allowed (other than basic tournament restrictions like only 1 LoW that is superheavy or gargantuan) is a breath of fresh air to the game, and will take the game to a better direction.
Eldar win rates probably won't change from the already good place they were at, but the emphasis on death stars will take a sizeable hit, and that's a welcome development.
The ban/restrict/change Eldar is a kneejerk reaction by the comp crowd who lost the battle in nerfing the previous top dogs like Daemons or Flyrant spam and decided to direct their madness towards the next power army that enters the game. I guess Necrons weren't offensive enough, despite being an unbelievably good army.
As far as the 'most broken book in the game ever' goes it's not even in the top 10 of all time if you count both Warhammer and Warhammer 40K together. There's nothing unprecedented here and GW making a book like this isn't a new direction or an unforeseen phenomenon, so stop acting like a bunch of drama queens and man up. The people who thought GW wasn't pushing for Apocalypse and 40K merging were simply living in denial and refused to see the signs that have been as obvious as they can get.
I'm expecting a Warhound Titan as a heavy support choice in a 40K codex at some point, for about 500 points.
OverwatchCNC wrote: It's still not time. The book needs to be used and analyzed through the lens of actual games in a competitive setting. If we just discuss using the book and no real world experiences to draw on, a mere day after release, it's still just wild conjecture and knee jerk reactions.
Therion wrote: There's a sizeable portion of the tournament going community that thinks that the new Eldar codex with everything allowed (other than basic tournament restrictions like only 1 LoW that is superheavy or gargantuan) is a breath of fresh air to the game, and will take the game to a better direction.
Eldar win rates probably won't change from the already good place they were at, but the emphasis on death stars will take a sizeable hit, and that's a welcome development.
The ban/restrict/change Eldar is a kneejerk reaction by the comp crowd who lost the battle in nerfing the previous top dogs like Daemons or Flyrant spam and decided to direct their madness towards the next power army that enters the game. I guess Necrons weren't offensive enough, despite being an unbelievably good army.
As far as the 'most broken book in the game ever' goes it's not even in the top 10 of all time if you count both Warhammer and Warhammer 40K together. There's nothing unprecedented here and GW making a book like this isn't a new direction or an unforeseen phenomenon, so stop acting like a bunch of drama queens and man up.
OverwatchCNC wrote: It's still not time. The book needs to be used and analyzed through the lens of actual games in a competitive setting. If we just discuss using the book and no real world experiences to draw on, a mere day after release, it's still just wild conjecture and knee jerk reactions.
Honestly for 295 points to deep strike one squad of wraithguard without scatter then 2 raiders to put other Eldar goodies into your list that sounds super easy and cheap to me brotherkose.
Dozer Blades wrote: There are lots of easy ways to get the Wraithguard in close range... To shrug them off as only having 12" range is not accurate.
Besides the Strategic Warlord trait that gives 3 units infiltrate? Please share, DB. I'm likely to be the one guinea pig that brings eldar Wraith/Dwep-spam to my local rtt, so I would like to give as best as can be delivered. Seriously.
We are a bunch of guys to actually see if it's broke before applying a modification.
Haemon from Dark Eldar can use Webway portal to deepstrike with no scatter as battle brothers, off the top of my head anyways.
Wave Serpents add about 6" to their movement speed. If used as part ofthe wriathhost formation you can add another d6" to their range.
Chancetragedy wrote: Honestly for 295 points to deep strike one squad of wraithguard without scatter then 2 raiders to put other Eldar goodies into your list that sounds super easy and cheap to me brotherkose.
(sarcastic, silly response):
**drools**
"Now that's just ... hold on a second."
I can field that. Haem, raiders fulla Kabalites and/or Trublasters in a Venom. Darn it, ChanceT, now I wanna try it!
- - - - - - - - -
Thanks, ChanceTragedy. You do make a good point and I do miss playing DE.
Okay, so:
1. Warlord Trait that Infiltrates 3 units (not easy to get, just a 33% chance, rerolling on the Strategic table)
2. DE help with WWP
Chancetragedy wrote: Honestly for 295 points to deep strike one squad of wraithguard without scatter then 2 raiders to put other Eldar goodies into your list that sounds super easy and cheap to me brotherkose.
(sarcastic, silly response):
**drools**
"Now that's just ... hold on a second."
I can field that. Haem, raiders fulla Kabalites and/or Trublasters in a Venom. Darn it, ChanceT, now I wanna try it!
- - - - - - - - -
Thanks, ChanceTragedy. You do make a good point and I do miss playing DE.
Okay, so:
1. Warlord Trait that Infiltrates 3 units (not easy to get, just a 33% chance, rerolling on the Strategic table)
2. DE help with WWP Infiltrating Ind.Character help is out ... #3?
What about Thaylens suggestion of the Waveserpents and the host formation? Could you field that also as the third or is it points/List prohibitive?
Thaylen wrote: Wave Serpents add about 6" to their movement speed. If used as part ofthe wriathhost formation you can add another d6" to their range.
I discounted transport WG, Thaylen. It is ~9 inches (with the formation bonus) of Serpent movement, 6" disembark ... 12" gun. 27 inches is under standard SM movement and range for bolters, and many other trooper guns. Max move gets the same as SM. Without the formation less. Sorry that I don't include this one with the other two.
Thaylen wrote: Wave Serpents add about 6" to their movement speed. If used as part ofthe wriathhost formation you can add another d6" to their range.
I discounted transport WG, Thaylen. It is ~9 inches (with the formation bonus) of Serpent movement, 6" disembark ... 12" gun. 27 inches is under standard SM movement and range for bolters, and many other trooper guns. Max move gets the same as SM. Without the formation less. Sorry that I don't include this one with the other two.
Speed is a big issue in competitive formats so I see where you're coming from. But wouldn't the WS be a better (by which I mean more survivable and better armed) delivery system for the WG than the Webway Portal? It's been a long time since I played Eldar so I might be off base with that thought process but it seems to me that WS are still good, not insane like 6th ed, so using them plus a great unit like WG is a decent option.
OverwatchCNC wrote: What about Thaylens suggestion of the Waveserpents and the host formation? Could you field that also as the third or is it points/List prohibitive?
For the formation, I am short one unit of WG. I have the WK, WL and 10 WG.
...
@bro erekose (i'm on my phone and Multi-quoting is a pain.)
Daemon summoning farm lists are pretty broken-awesome, but they have a severe weakness in tournaments: Time limits. The lists typically win by crowding you off the board with superior forces late in the game, and with a giant psychic phase, plus a novel's worth of bookkeeping for powers, as well as placing 40 to 50 more models on the table each turn, you run out of time super fast. Our six round test games tended to run about 4 to 6 hours. I could probably practice to get that down to roughly 3 1/2 before I'm winning the game by tabling, but that's nowhere near the typical 2 1/2 to 3 hour time limit at most tournies.
Also after a good deal of play testing with them, we determined that the lists have a very high skill ceiling. Not one generally met by most 40k players. Having a very intimate relationship with the daemon units and understanding their slight differences is key in the list. It is very far from an auto-pilot list if played correctly. (You COULD just spam daemonettes without a care, but that playstyle is a bit weaker than "always summon the best thing for every situation.")
Riptides (and the tau 6e book) were hightier good until 6e eldar followed it just a couple months after. They are still very very good, but generally are a second detachment alongside something else in tourneys. (Like say...a bunch of serpents with a firebase cadre formation.) just going off memory of the current ITC tournament results for this season, I want to say that the armies with Tau secondary are vastly outperforming armies with tau primary.
It's hard to say whether or not knights have had an impact, because, like tau, they are almost always secondary forces.
Another thing to remember is that any army can lose. The game still involves several hundred dice rolls. It doesn't matter if you're using str D flamers on a trukk full of orks. If you just roll all ones (and twos in that situation,) your guys are going to die.
No one is claiming that the new eldar are unbeatable, just that they push the eldar starting advantage way above the norm.
Some people also mistakenly believe that that means we will see results that say that place 1-10 out of 80 are all eldar.
Swiss style tournaments don't work like that. For one, you (a hypothetical eldar player) may get incredibly unlucky and barely lose a round. Also, several of the Eldar players will be playing each other. This means that after round one, a simple guy who came in with orks who beat his round one non-Eldar opponent, is now ranked above several Eldar armies. If he manages to keep winning against non-Eldar opponents, he never has to face any of the Eldar lists he outranks.
I pulled off something similar recently, where my blood angels came in third, but I outranked a Drago star that would've broken me in half by several ranks.
So bear that in mind. Just because a list makes first place, does not mean that a third of the lists at the tournament would not have destroyed it in one-on-one face downs.
Any large tourney magic player knows that matchups can work miracles for you if you're running a dark horse deck, or they can wreck you, by constantly putting you in 80-20 matchups or 20-80 matchups, respectively.
niv-mizzet wrote: @bro erekose (i'm on my phone and Multi-quoting is a pain.)
And keeping up with a hot, fast paced, rapid post, thread. Perfectly understandable.
niv-mizzet wrote: No one is claiming that the new eldar are unbeatable, just that they push the eldar starting advantage way above the norm.
The word 'unbeatable' hasn't been used that I saw, but nearly ever other 'Sky is Falling' brokenbroken, RABBLERABBLERAGEQuit phrase has.
niv-mizzet wrote: Some people also mistakenly believe that that means we will see results that say that place 1-10 out of 80 are all eldar.
Swiss style tournaments don't work like that. For one, you... that matchups can work miracles for you if you're running a dark horse deck, or they can wreck you, by constantly putting you in 80-20 matchups or 20-80 matchups, respectively.
I gotta chew on this. I tip my hat to you as you have a far better notion of grander tourney mechanics than I do.
Lnyx were popular at LVO and one army made it to the final day.
The D flamer Wraiths loaded into a raider with a WWP Archon or Haem is a very easy way to get them into range. There are other ways to but require more of an investment.
Even after elder book gets its tournament faqs it will still be the best codex and army to beat.
Tournament rule 1) No lord of war super heavies or gargantuan... No change wraith knight banned.
Tournament rule 2) no range str d. In the case of Eldar and any future army books with range str d revert all str d range to str 10 ap2 and the old elder distort rules. No book keeping no confusing rules. All range str d is the same.
There is not a single elder player who ever complained the old distort weapons were to weak. Wraith guard were already a popular unit before and will continue to be popular even with the old rules staying in effect.
Tournament rule 3) bikes I recommend not changing however some tournaments might resctrict them back to the old rule of upgrading 1 of 3 with heavy weapon.
Even with these changes reverting back elder will still be by far the best codex.
Dozer Blades wrote: Lnyx were popular at LVO and one army made it to the final day.
The D flamer Wraiths loaded into a raider with a WWP Archon or Haem is a very easy way to get them into range. There are other ways to but require more of an investment.
Do you mean into a Wave Serpent? You can't fit the minimum 5 Wraithguard (bulky) and a WWP Holder into a Raider.
In another thread, 40kGen Discussion, the CraftWorld Warhost organization came up. Given it is like decurion stuff, my guess is that TOs will likely put some hobbles on this.
If I'm reading it right, 12 WKs can be taken. 'course that is instantly hobbled by most tourneys allowing only one LordofWar (and it'd be over 3000 in points, before you event start with with compulsory HQs and such). Which makes me wonder why this section is here at all (pages 94 & 95). It's pretty much Apoc with flimsy yellow tape wrapped around it, pretending to give a semblance of 'order'.
Anyone else looking over the CraftWorld Warhost stuff and going, huh?
-
TL - DR
This CraftWorld Warhost stuff will likely be the first thing *I* would ban or inhibit if I were a TO.
Wow this post got longer than I thought it would but there is a lot to discuss with this topic. If this post is TLDR, tournaments are likely going to limit Wraithknights to 1 or 0 and modify what Destroyer weapons do, which I think is completely appropriate, otherwise the dex is fine. However...
Since the last Eldar codex dropped two years ago, there have been a lot of allegations of Eldar being "OP." In my experience, however, there has not been much support for those allegations. Are Eldar strong? Yes, definitely strong but I very much doubt they are "OP." What does "OP" mean in a gaming context anyway? To me, saying something is "OP" in 40k seems like this nebulous concept that exists in people's minds of something that seems unfairly strong...Something that can and will beat them irrespective of skill. Eldar are not that and on a personal note, I've found that when people lose games, they tend to blame dice, how OP the person's army was or maybe even the other player-I know that I've sometimes done this myself and that never got me anywhere. The times I've really grown as a player were when I got past my "nerd rage" and looked at games that I've lost and thought of ways I could have played better.
Anyway, simply saying "because Serpents" or "because Wraith Knights" or "because they do well at tournaments and so many people play them" or any amount of math/theory hammer is not enough to warrant Eldar being "OP." Saying "well, I lost because the guy took lotsa Serpents and had Wraith Knights and we all know how OP Eldar are!" is a cop-out but I've heard people say those kinds of things!
Overall, yes, Wave Serpents/Wraith knights/Seer Counsels were very durable and had a strong offensive potential. Therefore, when spammed or used in combination with each other, they posed a problem for many armies. However, there were many armies that dealt just fine with Serpent Spam armies that even had up to 4 Wraith Knights and perhaps even a Seer Counsel (though those combinations were rare). Looking at the tournament scene in the past two years, while there were a lot of Eldar players, there still appeared to be a decent diversity of armies and play styles-in the top tables anyway. Indeed, I even think Eldar were a minority at the top tables at the last few GTs I attended (BAO/Brawl in the Fall in 2014). White Scars/Centurion Star, Flyrant spam, Necrons, FMCs in general, Demons, Tau and even other Eldar all could go toe to toe with pretty much any Eldar build. Indeed, I found that player skill went a lot farther than the army lists involved.
All this to say that there appears to be a VERY big disconnect between what people say on the internet, including here on Dakka, and what we see in reality. It really astounds me how much vitriol and general doom and gloom this recent Eldar release has garnered. Yes, the new Eldar appear to have some very strong options but to declare the game is broken is either hyperbole, at best, or an overreaction steeped in ignorance, at the worst and neither adds anything to the discussion.
Moving on to the current and new Eldar, the biggest offenders appear to be Guardian Jetbikes able to all get heavy weapons; Wraith Knights being Gargantuan Creatures at 295 points; and, D-Weapons galore.
All I can say is that in my real world experience, with many games played:
(1) Jetbikes with all Heavy Weapons are not going to break the game or be THAT strong. I'd go so far as to say you probably won't even see max bikes with Scatter Lasers/Shiruken Cannons very often. First of all, I know what that kind of firepower can or cannot do having played with max Vypers/War Walkers for fun and it only goes so far. As has been pointed out but ignored are statements that illustrate the fragility of bikes. Pretty much most all of my armies have had some Wind Rider presence and Bikes are not hard to kill by any stretch of the imagination. For one, large bike units have a large footprint and so they are pretty much impossible to hide completely from incoming fire. Furthermore, getting into position to get all of those shots against specific targets is easier said than done and Jetbikes in any amount can be caught and tarpited in combat. Then there is the problem of their Ld 8 which makes them vulnerable to Ld tests and Psychic Scream. Ultimately, saying "but they are so mobile and put out so many shots" is merely theory hammer and meaningless in a real world context of actual games.
(2) Wraithknights being gargantuan creatures and costing only 295 points are not going to break the game, either. I think the main problem people have with Wraith Knights is how durable they can be and the D weapons (but see below on D weapons). Personally, I don't think Wraith Knights would be worth it at any price point beyond 350 points and many, if not all, of the existing Gargantuan creatures are probably over priced for what they do. One Wraith Knight is not going to be a big deal and without any limitations, the only way to get multiple Wraith Knights is either in the Craft World formations or taking multiple detachments-all of which have their own limitations/taxes that ensure you can't have THAT many. In average points limits, at most, you could reasonably spam 3-4 Wraith Knights and such armies won't do well in a competitive context against good players for the same reason that armies of 5 Knights are not dominating the Meta. Anyway, from Grav Weapons to Psychic Shrieks to Rending and generally a lot of incoming fire, Gargantuan Creatures are not THAT hard to take down. I know-I've played with and against them in various circumstances. So with that in mind, with ITC rulings in place, limiting Wraith Knights to 1 per army and adjusting what Destroyer Weapons do will go a long way to preventing Wraith Knights from having any hope of dominating the meta. Overall, I maintain that no matter how many Wraithknights/ranged D weapons would be permitted, a good player would be able to deal with it and still win the game.
(3) D Weapons readily available on Wraithguard models and various other platforms won't break the game either but this where I can most readily sympathize with people as D weapons in 40k don't sit well with me in general. After all, nobody likes having their models removed from the table for no other reason than a "6" was rolled. Heck, even in Monopoly, when you get a "do not pass go, go directly to jail" card, you can still have a chance to get out of Jail, but not with D Weapons! So as it stands, with how D weapons work, are they that bad in the Eldar army? Personally, I don't think so.
First of all, there are several limitations on how D weapons work in the Eldar codex that are not necessarily present on some of the other big offenders (like Revenants, Lynx and so forth). For starters, nothing in the Eldar codex that has D weapons is as durable as a Lynx or some of the other platforms that D Weapons were available on. Second of all, the amount of hits that can be scored-over the course of an average game-and consequently the number of "6" results are not as much as would be had by some of the other platforms for D weapons. This second point is true because typical platforms with ranged D weapons can fling out rather large blasts/templates able to cover whole units and in some cases fling out multiple large blasts/templates at a decent range. Eldar units, on the other hand, are limited to either only affecting a single model per shot (like Wraith Cannons/Heavy Wraith Cannons) or are limited to pretty much engaging a single target once per game due to a limited mobility/range.
Indeed, in no particular order:
-Wraith Knight can have 2 36" Destroyer shots. Over the course of an average game, that's 10-12 shots if it survives until turn 5/6 and it can be tarpited in combat or killed much easier than typical D slinging platforms limiting the incoming number of Destroyer shots. You still have to roll to-hit and then on the Destroyer table-there are still a lot of chances along the way for the Wraith Knight's shooting to be ineffective but there are now more of a chance for it to be more devastating. Overall, stronger but I don't think by THAT much and if Destroyer Weapons have their rules toned down in ITC I don't think we'll have much complaints.
-Wraith Fighter has 2 18" Destroyer blasts that suffer a -1 on the Destroyer chart so you never have to worry about that "6" result. True, it has mobility to get anywhere it wants but its still a Wraith Fighter, meaning nobody in their right mind will take one (it costs too much for what it does and is so easy to kill).
-Vaul's Wrath batteries have 24" Destroyer blasts which are pretty strong but they are still only 24", not very mobile (can't move and shoot) and are on Eldar Artillery... Seriously, if you have stuff die to Vaul's Wrath Batteries either you deserve it or something went terribly wrong somewhere along the game.
-Wraith Guard with Wraith Cannons can each fire a single Destroyer shot at 12". The single most limiting factor here is the fact that you still have to hit and you have a very short range so getting into position will be a challenge. Really, either you have to rely on Serpents to get there and risk getting shot down on the way or you have to rely on Dark Eldar Allies with a WWP to get 5+Wave Serpent (prob best option) or 6+ with no Wave Serpent into position. Overall, yes, you will get into position and probably kill dead what you shoot at. However, barring bad dice, 5-10 Wraith Guard typically killed whatever they shot at anyway. Now, you have the chance of that dreaded "6" appearing but that result on the old Distort weapons typically meant whatever you hit was dead anyway. Now once the Wraith Guard drop into position (and will likely have 6" to disembark plus 6" to run then shoot with formation rules) they are stranded with their short range weapons. They will likely die or not contribute too much to the game unless the opponent deployed bad.
-Wraith Guard with D-Scythes each fire a template of DoOm. Yes, Wraith Guard with D-Scythes will absolutely erase whatever they target with an almost absolute certainty (something the above options can't boast as well as these guys) and this is where the biggest problem lies in the Eldar codex. Going from S4 and only Pen/Instant Death on a 6 to always auto wound/pen with d3 wounds/HP is absolutely brutal. Also, as with the regular Wraith Guard discussed above, getting them into position won't be terribly hard. However, once deployed, they are pretty much done for the game and will likely be wiped out with retaliatory shooting/combat.
Overall, keeping vulnerable targets in reserves, bubble wrapping vulnerable targets, having strong interceptor shooting or even invulnerable saves will go a long way to mitigate or eliminate the threat of Eldar D weapons (good invul saves more so against D-Scythes). Heck, even spreading out as much as possible goes a long way to deal with D-Scythes. There is also that added level of "random" because Wraith units coming in via WWP might come in on a turn where there are no good targets or too late in the game when their desired target is either in combat or has already done its damage. Special mention should be made to Gate of Infinity which would potentially allow for Eldar units to get into position and wreck stuff multiple times over the course of a game but it is not a sure shot by any means.
Conclusion: Ultimately, in the Eldar rumor thread, several people have accused me of wantonly casting aside their arguments for "Eldar are OP, no skill required, end of world-math hammer FTW says so" and in turn only hearing "L2P" from me. Well, if Eldar are giving you a hard time, learn to play against them-they are definitely not unbeatable and definitiely won't break the game. Part of the game is building a list that can handle the strongest things other players can throw at you so if you find your list unable to compete, maybe the problem is with your list or skill level rather than Eldar being OP. If players find that what the Eldar can bring to the table are too strong, then house rule things to be toned down. I imagine that many tournaments will consider implementing limitations on how many Wraith Knights can be taken (likely 0 or 1) as well as how ranged D weapons will function in an Eldar army.
Personally, I propose changing all D weapons to doing nothing on a 1 while on a 2-6 doing a single auto-pen/auto-wound.
The D flamer Wraiths loaded into a raider with a WWP Archon or Haem is a very easy way to get them into range. There are other ways to but require more of an investment.
Is it possible that wraithguard might not be as good as everyone thinks?
#1. They cost a lot of points. Add to this their delivery system and that is a chunk of you army.
#2. They land and kill one unit. Do you know what else kills one unit? Anything else that you spend those points on.
#3. They are slow and have short range. Yes you can mitigate some of that with transports and WWP and then what? So you come out and kill a unit big deal. Then everything else will try to kill them, and if they can't do that, they will just walk away from them and you have an expensive unit that cant kill anything else.
#4. There is a model named Coteaz. That is the thing about a meta is that if one build becomes good, there are ways of countering it. If wraithguard ever become as powerful as some here think, then all of the imperials will start to counter it with Coteaz, and then all of a sudden your killer army build will become useless.
Every new codex and rules edition get theoryhammered to death, and most of the time they are wrong,
Last year when the new Tyranid codex came out everyone was saying how bad they were. So I took them to the LVO and beat 2 Eldar players and ended up winning my first 4 games before losing my last game to the eventual overall winner.
Do you know what theoryhammer players where complaining about and wanted banned with 7th edition? Invisibility and demon summoning. Are they game breaking builds that are dominating tournaments? No, Are they good? Yes, but they are not as good as everyone thought.
So we need to wait and see if things are as bad as people think before raging against something that has not proven to be a problem,
Invisibility has been nerfed by ITC which is one thing that could afford great protection against D - is that fair? Ranged D is banned by ITC so something must be done. Fix D, limit WK to 0-1 and I think everyone will be happy. Testimonials by well known eldar players supporting the new codex is laughable - sorry but it's true.
Dozer Blades wrote: Invisibility has been nerfed by ITC which is one thing that could afford great protection against D - is that fair? Ranged D is banned by ITC so something must be done. Fix D, limit WK to 0-1 and I think everyone will be happy. Testimonials by well known eldar players supporting the new codex is laughable - sorry but it's true.
@DB,
But the thing is, mortetvie and Blackmooor are right on pretty much every point they made. *I* do know both these guys irl, and regardless of their personalities, or eldar records, they better stated the points I have been trying to make.
Since it got brought up, ITC's D-range ban is okay with me, too. And a similar fix on the Wraith's D-weps sounds reasonable to me too. Like my voice weighs in so much.
What nobody seems to be talking about is the Eldar are but the first codex in this fashion. It is rumored another IK codex is already coming with more IK variants. D wpns are in the game and aren't going away. The banning is going to be a slippery slope. Ban one thing and something else rises up to be the new broken. If folks are OK with that, then have at it. Personally, I am not a fan of telling folks they can't use the stuff they bought, painted and are perfectly legal within the rules.
Sarigar wrote: What nobody seems to be talking about is the Eldar are but the first codex in this fashion. It is rumored another IK codex is already coming with more IK variants. D wpns are in the game and aren't going away. The banning is going to be a slippery slope. Ban one thing and something else rises up to be the new broken. If folks are OK with that, then have at it. Personally, I am not a fan of telling folks they can't use the stuff they bought, painted and are perfectly legal within the rules.
Even the 0-1 superheavies or gargantuan creatures is going to be just a temporary fix. More and more gargantuan creatures, superheavies, and d-weapons will enter the game as months and years go by. It's not going to change, other than that the speed might even accelerate.
Bans and 0-1 restrictions aren't as good as trying to find a fix to the general rule. What's the problem with gargantuan creatures? Is it the feel no pain? Is it the immunity to poison? Is it the stomps? Whatever it is, that generic rule can be adjusted. What's the problem with superheavy vehicles? That can be adjusted. Likewise, what's the problem with D weapons? That rule can be adjusted. I would have also assumed by now that the Flying Monstrous Creature rule would have been adjusted too since it's blatantly overpowered, but I guess the community leaders disagree.
Adjust those core rules and then people can bring 3 Wraithknights or 30 D-Scythe Wraithguard. We still won't have perfect balance, but we'll have a better balance everyone can get along with grudgingly like they always have.
Of course, a lot of tournaments were already doing this, and I expect that these sane people continue the trend and not ban anything from the Eldar codex, and just further keep an eye on whether superheavy, gargantuan, or strength destroyer core rules need to be adjusted.
Sarigar wrote: What nobody seems to be talking about is the Eldar are but the first codex in this fashion. It is rumored another IK codex is already coming with more IK variants. D wpns are in the game and aren't going away. The banning is going to be a slippery slope. Ban one thing and something else rises up to be the new broken. If folks are OK with that, then have at it. Personally, I am not a fan of telling folks they can't use the stuff they bought, painted and are perfectly legal within the rules.
I am perfectly fine telling people what units they can and can't bring. We're not playing in a vacuum. There's another person at the table and their ability to play and enjoy the game must also be considered.
TOs will have to make a determination about what they are more worried about. One guy buying 6 wraith knights and not coming because he can't field them all, or the 5 people who decide not to come because they have no interest in playing against those wraith knights.
I am perfectly fine telling people what units they can and can't bring. We're not playing in a vacuum. There's another person at the table and their ability to play and enjoy the game must also be considered.
So you are ok with others telling you what units you can and can't play? I think Centurions, flying monstrous creatures, Imperial Knights should be banned because they take away my enjoyment of the game.
bogalubov wrote: I am perfectly fine telling people what units they can and can't bring. We're not playing in a vacuum. There's another person at the table and their ability to play and enjoy the game must also be considered.
TOs will have to make a determination about what they are more worried about. One guy buying 6 wraith knights and not coming because he can't field them all, or the 5 people who decide not to come because they have no interest in playing against those wraith knights.
Yeah, but what happens when you have to tell a long standing Iyanden player "sorry you can't play the army you've had since second."?
I am perfectly fine telling people what units they can and can't bring. We're not playing in a vacuum. There's another person at the table and their ability to play and enjoy the game must also be considered.
So you are ok with others telling you what units you can and can't play? I think Centurions, flying monstrous creatures, Imperial Knights should be banned because they take away my enjoyment of the game.
Concur. I'll be the first to concede some points. I'll not bring any D Weapons if Centstars, Superfriends, Ad Lance and 4+ Flying Hive Tyrants are also removed from the game.
Sarigar wrote: What nobody seems to be talking about is the Eldar are but the first codex in this fashion. It is rumored another IK codex is already coming with more IK variants. D wpns are in the game and aren't going away. The banning is going to be a slippery slope. Ban one thing and something else rises up to be the new broken. If folks are OK with that, then have at it. Personally, I am not a fan of telling folks they can't use the stuff they bought, painted and are perfectly legal within the rules.
Ban them. Ban them ALL. Anyone argues? Ban them too.
Thaylen wrote: Wave Serpents add about 6" to their movement speed. If used as part ofthe wriathhost formation you can add another d6" to their range.
I discounted transport WG, Thaylen. It is ~9 inches (with the formation bonus) of Serpent movement, 6" disembark ... 12" gun. 27 inches is under standard SM movement and range for bolters, and many other trooper guns. Max move gets the same as SM. Without the formation less. Sorry that I don't include this one with the other two.
Are you forgetting the possible 6-9" run? Or do they not have battle focus?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sarigar wrote: What nobody seems to be talking about is the Eldar are but the first codex in this fashion. It is rumored another IK codex is already coming with more IK variants. D wpns are in the game and aren't going away. The banning is going to be a slippery slope. Ban one thing and something else rises up to be the new broken. If folks are OK with that, then have at it. Personally, I am not a fan of telling folks they can't use the stuff they bought, painted and are perfectly legal within the rules.
Except IK are way more expensive. And now they might get one-shotted by a <50 point gun or swarmed by D-Scythes. No one in their right mind would bring one to a meta where Eldar armies have 10+ D-weapons ready to shoot them to pieces.
Listen - in my opinion is goes way beyond Eldar. The 5-6 Hive Tyrant List, Deathstars (with 2+, 2+ (or 4+) ), serpant spam, the new eldar codex - this has been a culmination of many things. Not to be nostalgic, but I remember tournaments being less janky and power hungrey than this. I remember tournaments when you look across the table and say - it will be hard but I think I got this. Now a days you look across the table and it no longer is "I think I got this," its "how many points can I score until I get wiped off the table." That is not what a tournament should be. Armies should be balanced - they should have some great units but still be able to account for some sort of strategic placement or fireing. There should be some semblance of hope. Now a days the hope is pretty much gone for me and others.
I have played marines for a very loing time - switched to other armies but always kept my marines around. I have bikes, assault marines, pretty much a thematic "white scars" army before white scars were a thing. Now did I put grav guns on my bikes, sure - but I always used a little of everything I had. Assault marines, for example, I can no longer use in my lists, because of the current state of the game. When I cannot use 30 of my beautiful custom models that I payed and loved for because I know in my heart that there is no way for them to win - that is a loss in my book. There should not be a time when you essentially feel like you should not take the unit because you know that it will lose to pretty much any combination of armies - or even worse - a net list army.
I think what people are reacting too is not that the Eldar codex is OP, but rather its a further push by GW to slightly unbalance certain aspects of the game. You have a cool landraider that you love to play - well now its even WORSE due to the amount of stregnth D. You play drop pod marines, well here comes the scatter lasers. Now I am not blaming just Eldar, for example you have an army that uses tanks to get quickly cause you love the fluff - well here are 6 flyrants enjoy.
At the end of the day a game should not activly feel hopeless to win. There should be some balance between units you have and units you want to get or new units.
I personally feel that everytime a new codex comes out I have to buy this new thing that they came out with effectivly rendering me as a cash cow.
But I have moved on - I rarelyplay 40k and moved on to other systems that feel fairer to me as a consumer and a gamer (spartan games looking at you FSA ). I still like 40k dont get me wrong, but at the end of the day I have just become disheartneded over the years.
Core Choice unlocks Wraith Host. Wraith gain Battle Focus and Craftworld Battlehost Detachment (or whatever clunky name it has) grants automatic 6" run. So that's a 19" threat range for Scytheguard (7" template?), and a 24" threat range for Wraithguard. This isn't an ultimate doom machine, but it is easy to get (and can come in at 1847 with a couple of upgrades here and there). Includes Wraithknight with Battlefocus that can run 6" and still shoot, for funzies.
Thaylen wrote: Wave Serpents add about 6" to their movement speed. If used as part ofthe wriathhost formation you can add another d6" to their range.
I discounted transport WG, Thaylen. It is ~9 inches (with the formation bonus) of Serpent movement, 6" disembark ... 12" gun. 27 inches is under standard SM movement and range for bolters, and many other trooper guns. Max move gets the same as SM. Without the formation less. Sorry that I don't include this one with the other two.
Are you forgetting the possible 6-9" run? Or do they not have battle focus?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sarigar wrote: What nobody seems to be talking about is the Eldar are but the first codex in this fashion. It is rumored another IK codex is already coming with more IK variants. D wpns are in the game and aren't going away. The banning is going to be a slippery slope. Ban one thing and something else rises up to be the new broken. If folks are OK with that, then have at it. Personally, I am not a fan of telling folks they can't use the stuff they bought, painted and are perfectly legal within the rules.
Except IK are way more expensive. And now they might get one-shotted by a <50 point gun or swarmed by D-Scythes. No one in their right mind would bring one to a meta where Eldar armies have 10+ D-weapons ready to shoot them to pieces.
Exactly. If folks aren't bringing masses IK or uber deathstars, D weapons are pretty much overkill and not a good choice to make.
Dozer Blades wrote: Invisibility has been nerfed by ITC which is one thing that could afford great protection against D - is that fair? Ranged D is banned by ITC so something must be done. Fix D, limit WK to 0-1 and I think everyone will be happy. Testimonials by well known eldar players supporting the new codex is laughable - sorry but it's true.
I'm not so sure I would like the D Slangers being invisible.
Thaylen wrote: Wave Serpents add about 6" to their movement speed. If used as part ofthe wriathhost formation you can add another d6" to their range.
I discounted transport WG, Thaylen. It is ~9 inches (with the formation bonus) of Serpent movement, 6" disembark ... 12" gun. 27 inches is under standard SM movement and range for bolters, and many other trooper guns. Max move gets the same as SM. Without the formation less. Sorry that I don't include this one with the other two.
Are you forgetting the possible 6-9" run? Or do they not have battle focus?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sarigar wrote: What nobody seems to be talking about is the Eldar are but the first codex in this fashion. It is rumored another IK codex is already coming with more IK variants. D wpns are in the game and aren't going away. The banning is going to be a slippery slope. Ban one thing and something else rises up to be the new broken. If folks are OK with that, then have at it. Personally, I am not a fan of telling folks they can't use the stuff they bought, painted and are perfectly legal within the rules.
Except IK are way more expensive. And now they might get one-shotted by a <50 point gun or swarmed by D-Scythes. No one in their right mind would bring one to a meta where Eldar armies have 10+ D-weapons ready to shoot them to pieces.
Exactly. If folks aren't bringing masses IK or uber deathstars, D weapons are pretty much overkill and not a good choice to make.
You've heard of tanks and MC right - how about special characters and HQ's?
Doesn't a lot of the D get countered by most Tourny things anyway? especially since it doesn't get the 6 roll?
Looking at you 2++ RErollable invuls. and cover saves.
I have a feeling we are going to see a lot of E/DE combos using WWP. a lot of which will be countered by proper use of transports and cover. only issue i see is the jetbikes :/
Thaylen wrote: Wave Serpents add about 6" to their movement speed. If used as part ofthe wriathhost formation you can add another d6" to their range.
I discounted transport WG, Thaylen. It is ~9 inches (with the formation bonus) of Serpent movement, 6" disembark ... 12" gun. 27 inches is under standard SM movement and range for bolters, and many other trooper guns. Max move gets the same as SM. Without the formation less. Sorry that I don't include this one with the other two.
Are you forgetting the possible 6-9" run? Or do they not have battle focus?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sarigar wrote: What nobody seems to be talking about is the Eldar are but the first codex in this fashion. It is rumored another IK codex is already coming with more IK variants. D wpns are in the game and aren't going away. The banning is going to be a slippery slope. Ban one thing and something else rises up to be the new broken. If folks are OK with that, then have at it. Personally, I am not a fan of telling folks they can't use the stuff they bought, painted and are perfectly legal within the rules.
Except IK are way more expensive. And now they might get one-shotted by a <50 point gun or swarmed by D-Scythes. No one in their right mind would bring one to a meta where Eldar armies have 10+ D-weapons ready to shoot them to pieces.
Exactly. If folks aren't bringing masses IK or uber deathstars, D weapons are pretty much overkill and not a good choice to make.
The problem is that at many events we are seeing lots of IK's and Deathstars. Furthermore, D weapons are absurdly capable against vehicles and MC's, often taking only one or two shots to do what you might otherwise needs 5-10 melta or plasma guns to do at 2-3x the price.
niv-mizzet wrote: How many rungs of the ladder down are dreadnoughts and land raiders now? Because they are collateral damage in this as well.
At this rate, the land raider is gonna need to cost barely 100 points to see the table!
non-skimmer vehicles are so absolutely hammered by the core rules and competitive meta it hurts. Knights get away with it because they've got D attacks and an invul save, but most anything else, Land Raiders, Leman Russ tanks, Dreads, Hellhounds, Predators, Battlewagons, Killa Kanz, etc just have far too many widely available and commonly included hardcounters to really function appropriately most of the time, especially if not spammed mercilessly. The mobility and Jink available to Skimmers (coupled with the fact that JInk has no effect on passengers) is just such a huge boost to their effectiveness in surviving and capturing/contesting objectives and reacting to threats.
Xenomancers wrote: You've heard of tanks and MC right - how about special characters and HQ's?
I did address this eariler. Yeah, Destroyer does hurt all of those far worse than Distort. Expressing my sympathy for 'Nid players.
Otherwise, the majority of what you see are footers, 1 wound footers. Distort to Destroyer has no impact there.
I assert that Wraithguard sucks without Invis. I back this up having played them and having only seen them at big GTs, with the seer council set to guarantee Invis (looking at you mortetvie!, BAO 2014)
And if fielded, with Invis, they're still killing 1 wound models most of the time, the same results with Distort or Destroyer. As you pointed out Xenomancers, the ICs & MCs will cry on a . Which Distort did anyway, Instant Death. The worse now is Eternal Warrior no longer Instant Deaths out, just by sheer weight of 6 + wounds.
Now, are we still pooping our drawers over a 2 shot WraithKnight? 2 Shots! That's it! Not a template nor blast. Two. Shots.
Now, we *can* Chicken Little over how much tougher it became, and how under cost it is compared to the other Tokyo Stompers.
Otherwise, guys, the Destroyer weps have little impact, except for bug and the rapidly fading Mech-meta (due to Drop Pod meltas spam, which was a reaction to Serpent Spam).
And somehere Mat Ward and Phil Kelly are responsible for all.
@Brothererekose, I love Wraith Guard (specifically wraith blades) and I don't think they suck without invisibility but Invisibility does go a long way to improve their survivability. I primarily liked them because they were objective secured and a tough nut to crack with the 4++. Interestingly enough, my Wraith Guard only got invisibility in like 2 out of 6 of my games and getting it never mattered too much =/. Also, I only took 2 Spirit Seers and a Farseer-no counsel (so obviously nothing was guaranteed).
I think the same thing happened in Brawl in the Fall and the only game Invisibility mattered there was against Reece at my final game. Even so, my Wraith Guard were still killed to the man!
All in all, what made my "Wraith Star" tick was the fact that they were objective secured, had an item from the Iyanden codex on my Warlord, some Psychic support and Baron for the 2++ and Hit & Run. Now, to make that same unit work, it will cost more points (will need Baharoth) but be less effective (no objective secured). Anyway, I much preferred having Shrouding for the AOE cover saves-made it so my Serpents could jink for a 2+ cover save (I didn't bother taking Holo Fields).
With all of that said, D-Scythes are going to be my go-to unit for dealing with Centurion Star and other big things, but they generally already killed those things dead with proper support so... I don't think there will be much change there.
Seriously, whenever I took D-Scythes, there wasn't anything that they DIDN'T annihilate when they shot at it so for them to be even MORE killy is like if we dropped a second nuke on Hiroshima-the damage was already done with one...
Also, good interceptor shooting went a long way in minimizing the impact WWP Wraith Guard had in my games that faced Tau and Coteaz.
This only leaves 2 shots a turn per Wraith Knight to worry about and they already either missed horribly or killed stuff dead on that 6 result. If ITC fixes D weapons to just make the 6 result the same as the 2-5 result, I don't see any problems going forward in the tournament meta.
Historically, when GW was releasing a 2-3 codices per year, Individual event organizers could make “reasonable” adjustments to the game as they saw fit. Generally, things had time to settle out and players had time to make adjustments to the changes in meta.
Currently, with Games Workshop’s rapid release schedules players and event organizers have very little time to digest releases before the next release is upon them. Nothing currently points to this trend slowing down anytime soon. As such, I assert that making changes to the game in this
type of environment can only lead to confusion and angst for players. Once a tournament’s rule-set diverges significantly from the main rules of the game it results in a constant state of reassessments, email barrages, endless debates. In the end, this leaves both the event organizers and players very little latitude to evaluate the effectiveness of the changes.
My recommendation remains to play the game as presented, and let it stand or fall on its own. Certainly events can develop multiple formats to appeal to different segments of the community and let attendees determine the formats they want to support. Wholesale changing/banning D, altering core rules, banning codex units outright, may provide some short term comfort but it is not a path for long term support of the game we all love.
Thaylen wrote: Wave Serpents add about 6" to their movement speed. If used as part ofthe wriathhost formation you can add another d6" to their range.
I discounted transport WG, Thaylen. It is ~9 inches (with the formation bonus) of Serpent movement, 6" disembark ... 12" gun. 27 inches is under standard SM movement and range for bolters, and many other trooper guns. Max move gets the same as SM. Without the formation less. Sorry that I don't include this one with the other two.
Are you forgetting the possible 6-9" run? Or do they not have battle focus?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sarigar wrote: What nobody seems to be talking about is the Eldar are but the first codex in this fashion. It is rumored another IK codex is already coming with more IK variants. D wpns are in the game and aren't going away. The banning is going to be a slippery slope. Ban one thing and something else rises up to be the new broken. If folks are OK with that, then have at it. Personally, I am not a fan of telling folks they can't use the stuff they bought, painted and are perfectly legal within the rules.
Except IK are way more expensive. And now they might get one-shotted by a <50 point gun or swarmed by D-Scythes. No one in their right mind would bring one to a meta where Eldar armies have 10+ D-weapons ready to shoot them to pieces.
Exactly. If folks aren't bringing masses IK or uber deathstars, D weapons are pretty much overkill and not a good choice to make.
You've heard of tanks and MC right - how about special characters and HQ's?
Never needed Destroyer to stop any of that in the past. But, if a player thinks he may be facing D-Weapons, he may rethink that 700 point near unkillable deathstar as there is now something on the table that bites back.
I do agree the codex is very strong right now but just wait. Everyone thought the Decurion detachment was OP and it is but Eldar are a good counter to Crons, and I'm sure when the next codex is released they will counter Eldar and so on and so forth.
I personally am gutted as the four biggest tournaments of the the year where i lived recently have passed and I will have to wAit until next year when every army will be loaded with D weapons and superheavies/gargantuan. With the speed of GW releasing codices there won't be long till everyone has had a time to shine.
Cheers,
Ben
Automatically Appended Next Post: I do agree the codex is very strong right now but just wait. Everyone thought the Decurion detachment was OP and it is but Eldar are a good counter to Crons, and I'm sure when the next codex is released they will counter Eldar and so on and so forth.
I personally am gutted as the four biggest tournaments of the the year where i lived recently have passed and I will have to wAit until next year when every army will be loaded with D weapons and superheavies/gargantuan. With the speed of GW releasing codices there won't be long till everyone has had a time to shine.
RageQuitRabbit wrote: Everyone thought the Decurion detachment was OP and it is but Eldar are a good counter to Crons, and I'm sure when the next codex is released they will counter Eldar and so on and so forth.
So whoever has the latest codex wins. Seems like an awesome game you are describing.
I cannot help but wonder that if certain major tournament formats, like itc, would finally leave all of 6th edition behind in terms of not only army building but mainly how you determine victory conditions- that the outcry against new armies wouldn'y be so much.
A lot of people bothered by this are more upset because certain tournament formats favor 6th edition win rules like FB and denying FB rather than maelstorm objectives etc which are the actual rules for 7th. The 4-5 GC WK army is powerful but becomes less so when the game is not about FB/FB denial and more about the objectives.
The new codexes coming out are "balanced", whether you agree or not, around the rules of 7th including force selection (there are no limits on detachments/formations, and unbound is something that is not optional in the core rules..) and the 7th edition mechanics for determining the outcome of a game, not some weird hybrid of 6th/7th that still favors the deathstar game from last edition.
I think the amount of nerdrage would be much lower, if the game was played in the current edition, and a WK/IK/whatever list- alibeit powerful, would be on the backfoot to a list that was built to control objectives as it would have a limited amount of units that it can choose to deal with each turn do to its low model count from being high cost powerful models,and would have to risk splitting force etc. A 1850 game with 4 wks is not necessarily fun to some people, but in ITC format is powerful, in normal 7th edition its pretty average. Yeah you probably will not table it, but it is going to have a very hard time scoring maelstorm points versus most TAC armies built for 7th.
Eldar were most certainly not balanced around 7th. If they were balanced around anything at all, it was balanced around gw's checkbook. Purr brainless pandering and I refuse to believe they spent one hour play testing this garbage.
The new codexes coming out are "balanced", whether you agree or not,
Maybe internal balance, yes. External? No. Eldar and Necron maybe balanced against each other, but this is a game that also has CSM and DA and they are no where near the power level of these new dexes.
I do agree the codex is very strong right now but just wait. Everyone thought the Decurion detachment was OP and it is but Eldar are a good counter to Crons, and I'm sure when the next codex is released they will counter Eldar and so on and so forth.
Releasing eldar D spam to counter unkillable 4+ necron RP is kind of like trying to treat a feral cat infestation in your neighborhood by releasing grizzly bears.
And hoping for the next codex to be so broken that it effectively counters eldar isn't something that I really want to see - it'll reach a point where the game falls apart.
Yeah, some armies already git their 7e codices and are just worse than Eldar. They cant count on being the new hotness.
Also the problem is Eldar units are criminally undercosted. You can spam bikes, bring a WK, bring WWP scythes, and still have hundreds of points left. Most armies have to choose between their strongest builds.
How can it be argued that WGs with WWPs are killing only one wound models?!
My closely grouped Bully Boyz in 3 trucks benefitting from an escorting BM w KFF on a bike. Moves 12". Flat Outs 12". Turn 2 comes around and they deep strike in before I can get out. They get the D... twice. Open Topped then the truck explodes. 700 pts evaporated. Or how about a 770 stompa (orks only access to the D)? Or a dorkanaut? Or green tide vs illych night spear with rangers. Dead pain boy round 1. Either the codex gets banned or competitive meta from other races is over. Its simply THE WORST CODEX EVER. At least we can shoot down that new Hemlock with Traktor cannons... Oh wait. Its Dblasts are better range than our AA.
blaktoof wrote: I cannot help but wonder that if certain major tournament formats, like itc, would finally leave all of 6th edition behind in terms of not only army building but mainly how you determine victory conditions- that the outcry against new armies wouldn'y be so much.
A lot of people bothered by this are more upset because certain tournament formats favor 6th edition win rules like FB and denying FB rather than maelstorm objectives etc which are the actual rules for 7th. The 4-5 GC WK army is powerful but becomes less so when the game is not about FB/FB denial and more about the objectives.
The new codexes coming out are "balanced", whether you agree or not, around the rules of 7th including force selection (there are no limits on detachments/formations, and unbound is something that is not optional in the core rules..) and the 7th edition mechanics for determining the outcome of a game, not some weird hybrid of 6th/7th that still favors the deathstar game from last edition.
I think the amount of nerdrage would be much lower, if the game was played in the current edition, and a WK/IK/whatever list- alibeit powerful, would be on the backfoot to a list that was built to control objectives as it would have a limited amount of units that it can choose to deal with each turn do to its low model count from being high cost powerful models,and would have to risk splitting force etc. A 1850 game with 4 wks is not necessarily fun to some people, but in ITC format is powerful, in normal 7th edition its pretty average. Yeah you probably will not table it, but it is going to have a very hard time scoring maelstorm points versus most TAC armies built for 7th.
stop playing 6.7 and just play 7th edition.
First of all, you might want to go to your local GW and get a refund of your rules book as your copy seems to be missing the parts where FB and Eternal War missions are still in.
Secondly, "just play 7th, bro" is not an argument. It's a preference. The argument would be the part where you try to convince people why your preference is better.
Thirdly, what mostly resembles an argument in your post is the part where you say 4 WKs suck in Maelstrom missions. To that I refer you to my first point as well as Wikipedia's entry on 'Straw Man Argument.' Also, "the books are balanced; I'm right, you're wrong!" Seriously? You must try harder.
And, finally, put your money where your mouth is and set up a no-comp, no-holds-barred 7th edition GT and see how many people actually want to come. You might as well argue to you're blue in the face about how everyone should go to baseball matches, but baseball is stupid and the beer's too expensive, so I'd rather do something else instead. Very few people are interested in playing what you call "true 7th edition" so they just don't instead. Sucks for you, deal with it.
Lets not let this thread degenerate into "Eldar are OP, sad times." Yes, we know that not every army is perfectly balanced when compared to other armies... To put it lightly, some armies are very strong and have well written rules/combos while other armies you just look at and wonder why GW even bothered.
Overall, I really do think the Eldar codex is well balanced internally and, as far as the tournament meta goes, externally as well. Overall, I will need more testing to see how I feel about the D weapons (which I never liked in the first place). I wrote an article about Eldar not being OP on my blog for anyone who cares...
Anyway-the issue as I see it, isn't that the Eldar are "so incredibly strong" but that some of the other books are so incredibly bad and poorly written that it makes Eldar appear to be much stronger than they are. How do I determine this? Well, I have this internal sense of how strong things should be and a lot of things (except the prevalence of D weapons- which may or may not be too bad) in the new Eldar codex "feel about right." This is my opinion, as is anyone else's opinion that Eldar are "OP." However, I base my opinion on over 16 years of playing Eldar and having played almost every army against Eldar over that time period over pretty much every edition.
Sadly, armies like CSM, Tyranids generally suck unless you want to spam a few powerful models (of which CSM and many other books don't have any). GW needs to stop making and releasing army books with terrible rules/options and start releasing everything at or around the power level of the new Necrons and Eldar. Some of the olderish books like SM, Tau and Demons can still compete pretty well, however.
Anyway, as was mentioned several times-D weapons on the units that have access to them in the Eldar codex are not going to break the game/meta for the reasons stated and a simply modifying how D weapons work in 40k as well as limiting the number of Lords of War an army can take would very likely eliminate any of the potential problems the Eldar codex poses. Specifically, yes, we know that D weapons are meant to blow really big stuff up really badly so therefore little things should be vaporized at the mere mention of D weapons... However, such a mechanic does not fit in the scale of 40k where there generally are not any really big things to blow up. Therefore, simply making D weapons very good at killing everything but removing any mechanic that makes it auto-kill everything makes sense if you want to preserve any semblance of game balance. Just my thoughts, feel free to tell me why they are wrong =).
mortetvie wrote: Overall, I really do think the Eldar codex is well balanced internally and, as far as the tournament meta goes, externally as well.
Surely you're joking right? D on Hemlock. D on Wraith Knight. D on Elites. 4++ on jinking JBs. Psychers can be in almost every troop unit. Daemonology Access with nearly no perils an IC. This isn't even mentionining the Battle Brotherhood of Webway Portals.
OverwatchCNC wrote: What about Thaylens suggestion of the Waveserpents and the host formation? Could you field that also as the third or is it points/List prohibitive?
For the formation, I am short one unit of WG. I have the WK, WL and 10 WG. ...
But I'll be buying another box of WG next week.
That wraith knights foot looks vaguely familiar....
Also I think its been away long enough to post this again
The D flamer Wraiths loaded into a raider with a WWP Archon or Haem is a very easy way to get them into range. There are other ways to but require more of an investment.
Is it possible that wraithguard might not be as good as everyone thinks?
#1. They cost a lot of points. Add to this their delivery system and that is a chunk of you army.
#2. They land and kill one unit. Do you know what else kills one unit? Anything else that you spend those points on.
#3. They are slow and have short range. Yes you can mitigate some of that with transports and WWP and then what? So you come out and kill a unit big deal. Then everything else will try to kill them, and if they can't do that, they will just walk away from them and you have an expensive unit that cant kill anything else.
#4. There is a model named Coteaz. That is the thing about a meta is that if one build becomes good, there are ways of countering it. If wraithguard ever become as powerful as some here think, then all of the imperials will start to counter it with Coteaz, and then all of a sudden your killer army build will become useless.
Every new codex and rules edition get theoryhammered to death, and most of the time they are wrong,
Last year when the new Tyranid codex came out everyone was saying how bad they were. So I took them to the LVO and beat 2 Eldar players and ended up winning my first 4 games before losing my last game to the eventual overall winner.
Do you know what theoryhammer players where complaining about and wanted banned with 7th edition? Invisibility and demon summoning. Are they game breaking builds that are dominating tournaments? No, Are they good? Yes, but they are not as good as everyone thought.
So we need to wait and see if things are as bad as people think before raging against something that has not proven to be a problem,
The Tyranid codex IS crap, though. It wins, but there's literally only 3 usable units in there: Flyrants, Mawlocs, and Mucolids (which really are only used for their cheap minimum troop requirement). You can namedrop Lictors if you feel like, but to pretend they have use outside of being expensive Locator Beacons for the Mawlocs is simply foolish.
mortetvie wrote: Overall, I really do think the Eldar codex is well balanced internally and, as far as the tournament meta goes, externally as well.
Surely you're joking right? D on Hemlock. D on Wraith Knight. D on Elites. 4++ on jinking JBs. Psychers can be in almost every troop unit. Daemonology Access with nearly no perils an IC. This isn't even mentionining the Battle Brotherhood of Webway Portals.
Dude.... seriously?
Seriously, dude-I really do think Eldar are balanced internally and as far as what you see taken in the top tournament armies, is fine as far as external balance goes. I'd be interested to have you read my blog post and give a detailed response on why you think Eldar are going to break the game in light of what I said.
Overall, your comments are conclusory so I'd appreciate it if you actually expounded on how and why you think what you do. Also, that will give you an opportunity to further explain what you actually mean because as the information is presented, as written, seems like some of your facts are a bit off (i.e., jetbikes don't get a 4++ but a 4+ cover save which is different).
Also, just as an FYI, since my blog post and previous posts don't address this issue (because I think it is a non-issue), Warlocks were able to be placed in every Guardian based unit before but nobody ever took them as options... Why would that change now and why is that a big deal for you now? Also considered a non-issue by me is the access to Santic Demonology which no Eldar player ever took that I've ever seen.
Anyway, interested in hearing your thoughts on all of that.
doktor_g wrote: How can it be argued that WGs with WWPs are killing only one wound models?!
My closely grouped Bully Boyz in 3 trucks benefitting from an escorting BM w KFF on a bike. Moves 12". Flat Outs 12". Turn 2 comes around and they deep strike in before I can get out. They get the D... twice. Open Topped then the truck explodes. 700 pts evaporated. Or how about a 770 stompa (orks only access to the D)? Or a dorkanaut? Or green tide vs illych night spear with rangers. Dead pain boy round 1. Either the codex gets banned or competitive meta from other races is over. Its simply THE WORST CODEX EVER. At least we can shoot down that new Hemlock with Traktor cannons... Oh wait. Its Dblasts are better range than our AA.
The boys still live so only the trucks are killed.
The rule reads - Vehicle or Building - Devastating Hit: The model suffers a penetrating hit that causes it to lose D6+6 Hull Points instead of 1. No saves of any kind are allowed against this hit.
This only applies to the vehicle model not the units inside just like a normal penetrating hit.
mortetvie wrote: Overall, I really do think the Eldar codex is well balanced internally and, as far as the tournament meta goes, externally as well.
Surely you're joking right? D on Hemlock. D on Wraith Knight. D on Elites. 4++ on jinking JBs. Psychers can be in almost every troop unit. Daemonology Access with nearly no perils an IC. This isn't even mentionining the Battle Brotherhood of Webway Portals.
Dude.... seriously?
Eldar only have access to sanctic daemonology. All those units you just mentioned already had (fake)D so really the only difference is it affects vehicles more. I'm taking the wait and see approach but I have an open offer of $50 per army for anyone that is rage quitting
The boys still live so only the trucks are killed.
The rule reads - Vehicle or Building - Devastating Hit: The model suffers a penetrating hit that causes it to lose D6+6 Hull Points instead of 1. No saves of any kind are allowed against this hit.
This only applies to the vehicle model not the units inside just like a normal penetrating hit.
Umm. The vehicles are open topped, so the No Escape (?) rule is in play. Also, the vehicle suffers a 'penetrating hit', so there is a roll on the pen chart, resolved at +2, so the likelihood of an open topped vehicle blowing up is pretty decent.
Yriel. I read your blog. Prior to posting. I was dismissive. My apologies. I was using hyperbole as well. Again... my bad. However my point-of-view differs SIGNIFICANTLY as a non Eldar player.
Winningest Armies at adepticon per Torrent of Fire.
Eldar #2 behind Imperial Knights.
Now since Eldar were MORE popular than IKs one can argue that there are more chances for them to loose and thus NOT be the WINNINGEST
Refuting math-hammer is like refuting statistics. Believe what you will but math is math.
Regarding your arguments to D weapons that they're "limited and counterable effects" [paraphrasing]
- Lets look at the Orks. We have access to 1 Force weapon that can cause ID the weird boy's staff (HQ). And we have one ranged weapon that can cause ID. It's range is 12" (The Tellyporta Blasta also on an HQ) and is 50 points. Where as your newly minted WK can out shoot a 770 pt stompa and out melee him, depending on your preference. Plus he can only be ID'd by ID weapons and D weapons. Gonna be kinda hard for a stompa to charge and win don't ya think?
I understand your love of the space elves. Theyre awesome. Their models kick but and the eldar painters seem soooo good. Their rules are over the top unarguably spectacular. Just don't think you're a superior player when you wipe the board of orks or DA or Sisters or any of the ghetto codexes. Also don't think gosh I just out played that Tau player when deep striking no scatter D-Flamers into his backfield turn 2 on a 2+.
I like your blog BTW. Well written. Just a little.... hmmmm not so much my opinion.
blaktoof wrote: I cannot help but wonder that if certain major tournament formats, like itc, would finally leave all of 6th edition behind in terms of not only army building but mainly how you determine victory conditions- that the outcry against new armies wouldn'y be so much.
A lot of people bothered by this are more upset because certain tournament formats favor 6th edition win rules like FB and denying FB rather than maelstorm objectives etc which are the actual rules for 7th. The 4-5 GC WK army is powerful but becomes less so when the game is not about FB/FB denial and more about the objectives.
The new codexes coming out are "balanced", whether you agree or not, around the rules of 7th including force selection (there are no limits on detachments/formations, and unbound is something that is not optional in the core rules..) and the 7th edition mechanics for determining the outcome of a game, not some weird hybrid of 6th/7th that still favors the deathstar game from last edition.
I think the amount of nerdrage would be much lower, if the game was played in the current edition, and a WK/IK/whatever list- alibeit powerful, would be on the backfoot to a list that was built to control objectives as it would have a limited amount of units that it can choose to deal with each turn do to its low model count from being high cost powerful models,and would have to risk splitting force etc. A 1850 game with 4 wks is not necessarily fun to some people, but in ITC format is powerful, in normal 7th edition its pretty average. Yeah you probably will not table it, but it is going to have a very hard time scoring maelstorm points versus most TAC armies built for 7th.
stop playing 6.7 and just play 7th edition.
First of all, you might want to go to your local GW and get a refund of your rules book as your copy seems to be missing the parts where FB and Eternal War missions are still in.
Secondly, "just play 7th, bro" is not an argument. It's a preference. The argument would be the part where you try to convince people why your preference is better.
Thirdly, what mostly resembles an argument in your post is the part where you say 4 WKs suck in Maelstrom missions. To that I refer you to my first point as well as Wikipedia's entry on 'Straw Man Argument.' Also, "the books are balanced; I'm right, you're wrong!" Seriously? You must try harder.
And, finally, put your money where your mouth is and set up a no-comp, no-holds-barred 7th edition GT and see how many people actually want to come. You might as well argue to you're blue in the face about how everyone should go to baseball matches, but baseball is stupid and the beer's too expensive, so I'd rather do something else instead. Very few people are interested in playing what you call "true 7th edition" so they just don't instead. Sucks for you, deal with it.
So you like deathstars and got offended unnecessarily, got it.
You can pretend I did not make a point, but complaining about balance of a book that is written for a rules set that is not actually used by most tournament players is asinine.
@blaktoof and Thud
C'mon, guys. The original topic is impact on tourneys, so can we leave off the ... I don't wanna offend by using derogatory terms, but ... " non productive discourse"?
I know one San Diego tourney that has posted , "No formations." Dice something or other games. iven how Dire Avenger Shrine and Aspect Host look, I might asert this seems to be an effect ... of both the Necron and elvish books.
Has there even been enough time to see them play in a tournament?
Also I played some Eldar with a Lynx at the BSB this past weekend. Large blasts of D is scary It's a challenge but my 4++ KFF stopped 5 of the 7 D hits on my gargantuan squiggy. And with the -1 on the D chart its even less hard hitting. Anyhting the Eldar had that would insta kill my dudes before that is now D... still insta kills my dudes. It actually has less of a chance with the -1 on the D chart since a S10 hit wounds on a 2+ while the D wounds on a 3+.
Got a hard Eldar D weapon to crack, throw Mega Nobz at it. That doesn't work? Throw more and shoot it dead for good measure.
It's scary yes but manageable. I mean I placed 6th out of 54. Only one Eldar player placed above me with serpent spam which is now gone.
Also banning formations takes away the only way some armies can function in a tournament environment; I'm looking at you orks. I for one would not attend that tournament.
Oh I should add. I am running a tourney (my first) on May 16th. We are in a town of 3000 but there are 8 - 10 of us. Craftworld is in. So I can report back if the Eldar player decides to use it.
Rules:
1250
- No SuperHeavies (ie knights)
- No FW - No LoW
The low points and no knights were mainly for two of our new members who have smaller armies. (Tau and CSM). So.... We'll see. My Terrain and data sheet are in a seperate thread in this forum "New TO" looking for advice if you have any.
doktor_g wrote: Yriel. I read your blog. Prior to posting. I was dismissive. My apologies. I was using hyperbole as well. Again... my bad. However my point-of-view differs SIGNIFICANTLY as a non Eldar player.
Winningest Armies at adepticon per Torrent of Fire.
Eldar #2 behind Imperial Knights.
Now since Eldar were MORE popular than IKs one can argue that there are more chances for them to loose and thus NOT be the WINNINGEST
Refuting math-hammer is like refuting statistics. Believe what you will but math is math.
Regarding your arguments to D weapons that they're "limited and counterable effects" [paraphrasing]
- Lets look at the Orks. We have access to 1 Force weapon that can cause ID the weird boy's staff (HQ). And we have one ranged weapon that can cause ID. It's range is 12" (The Tellyporta Blasta also on an HQ) and is 50 points. Where as your newly minted WK can out shoot a 770 pt stompa and out melee him, depending on your preference. Plus he can only be ID'd by ID weapons and D weapons. Gonna be kinda hard for a stompa to charge and win don't ya think?
I understand your love of the space elves. Theyre awesome. Their models kick but and the eldar painters seem soooo good. Their rules are over the top unarguably spectacular. Just don't think you're a superior player when you wipe the board of orks or DA or Sisters or any of the ghetto codexes. Also don't think gosh I just out played that Tau player when deep striking no scatter D-Flamers into his backfield turn 2 on a 2+.
I like your blog BTW. Well written. Just a little.... hmmmm not so much my opinion.
Well, thanks for your post and feedback, I do appreciate it. If you are up to it, I'd like it if you can email me at mortetvie13@gmail.com and provide me with your alternate/differing point of view and arguments for that point of view. I'd be happy to post it and see if/how that changes my point of view. Also, I'd like to point out that I am not necessarily ONLY an Eldar player-Tyranids were actually my first and favorite army! Who owns 50 Tyranids Warriors? *this guy* =(. I have also been rocking Tau Farsight Enclaves with lotsa Tau styled Crisis Suits =).
Regarding Orks:
Spoiler:
Regarding Orks... Orks kind of just have a hard time against everything these days so comparing them to Eldar is not the best way to gauge Eldar power (like comparing a puppy to a wolf-they are in different leagues at this point). That phenomenon is because GW failed at writing the Ork codex (among others) rather than Eldar being over the top good. Indeed, there was a point in time where Orks were a respected and feared army on the table top, but I don't think this is one of those times in their history. I actually think the current Ork book doesn't do them any favors at all and possibly the only viable way to play Orks IMO is to spam scouting Battle Wagons with lotsa Orks or to play Greentide. I will concede that Orks generally don't seem to have any really good answers to a lot of the nasty things out there but that only makes them an especially poor comparison to Eldar. With that said, the Stompa being 700ish points getting owned by a 300 point Wraith Knight, well, perhaps the Wraith Knight should be more expensive but perhaps the Stompa is overpriced? Maybe Eldar are not "OP" but Orks are "UP" (under powered, just coined it, Trade mark-me). So ultimately, comparing Eldar against badly written army books is not the best measure of how strong Eldar are =(. However, Mike Fox seems to be having a lot of success with them so more power to him.
Regarding Eldar as a basis for winning:
Spoiler:
Anyway, not to toot my own horn, but if you look at the majority of my lists I take to GTs, they are generally not rocking the cookie cutter Eldar net lists. Therefore, I WOULD like to think that skill is involved when I do beat another player, regardless of their army-especially at the top tables.For example, my list for the past 2 GTs included: Farseer, 2 Spirit Seers, 8 Wraith Blades with a Wave Serpent, 2 Dire Avenger units in serpents, 2x3 Jetbikes, 2 Wraith Knights, Baron, Dark Eldar Warriors and I finished top 3 as far as battle points go with my only losses being very close games that could have gone either way at the end. I think the only hard things in the lists were really the 3 serpents and 2 Wraith Knights-and those things actually died pretty badly lol. Also, I played against some solid armies such as Flyrants, Space Marines, Cent star, White Scars, Serpent spam w/ Seer Counsel, Tau, Necrons, IG and I think one very unfortunate Ork player (sorry to whoever that was).
So while I do like Eldar, just because I play them does not mean my victories are due to using Eldar rather than skill-if that is what you are implying? Because I also play other armies such as Tyranids, Tau, Thousand Sons and many many more-and I play them against other strong armies like Serpent spam with a side of Knights-so believe me, I feel the pain of anyone that has to play with a sub par codex. However, when I see a strong list across from me, I think of what I need to do to win the mission and hang in there until I do. More often than not, I win because of that ability to play to the mission rather than because of what army I play as or against =/. With that in mind, I can look at the times I lost and sometimes it felt like it was because I played against a stronger army but really, it was because I didn't play as conservatively or as focused on the mission at hand as I could have. Even when I played my Thousand Sons in various tournaments against other stronger armies!
So to finally address your point of using Eldar, including the use of D-Scythes-it still takes skill to win. You still have to drop them in the right location and against the right target. But once they drop, they are done for the game. They might as well be a one-shot weapon. Also, I believe that Tau are probably one of the best counters to such a unit with the amount of interceptor they can have-as are any units with a strong invul save. So overall, I don't think Eldar are at the point where Grey Knights/SW were in 5th, for example, where there were almost 50% GK or SW armies. I also don't think Eldar are a point-click-win army, do you?
Regarding mathhammer and statistics:
Spoiler:
Now regarding statistics and math-hammer, statistics and math-hammer can only get you so far-especially if they are not properly analyzed and presented. For example, one can point out that X number of Bikes with Scatter Lasers can do Y shots which amount to Z wounds and therefore they are unstoppable/going to wipe the table. However, those numbers do not consider either (1) the skill of either player; (2) the components of each army; (3) the chance that all of those shots will actually be able to be directed at a specific target due to range/los restrictions; and, (4) various other circumstances that come up in real life gameplay. I certainly know that I've fallen into the trap of making a list thinking "math says I should do this many wounds a turn, it will be GLORIOUS" only to be disappointed with reality because my opponent rolled exceptionally well or I played exceptionally poorly, or any other number of circumstances!
Now Eldar being the second most popular army MAY be indicative of them being super strong, but it is not necessarily indicative of Eldar's power level. If I read your data correctly, for example, Eldar were just 15% of LVO (rounding up) which means that 85% of the playing field was non-Eldar. Likewise, at Adepticon, Eldar were only 30 out of about 160ish players which is just 18% which means that 82% of the other players were non-Eldar. When presented in another light, Eldar don't appear to be dominating the meta as much as those linked charts suggest.
So with all of that said, people are stating how "OP, point-click-win" Eldar are, and they are using scenarios that are not necessarily indicative of what one can realistically expect to see in casual or competitive play. Also, Space Marines are still pulling ahead of Eldar, so where are the people complaining about SM being OP? Are SMOP? Looking forward with this new codex, I think we need to at least see how things develop in the tournament scene to actually see what happens and have real world experience/data in terms of what the new codex does to the meta. Until then, I am going to maintain my position of Eldar not being OP. I still welcome other people's arguments and am not opposed to having my mind changed by compelling arguments/evidence.
Overall, I think a lot of the reactions from people regarding Eldar being "OP" are what they think Eldar will do to their armies/how they normally play. However, I strongly believe that once someone gets a taste for what the new Eldar can do, they will be able to either play differently to counter the new Eldar or build their list differently to account for the new Eldar. That is a good thing and mixes things up. To anyone that doesn't want anything to change because they are comfortable with playing their army in a specific way, well, maybe a narrative type of tournament/event is more up your ally?
Also, I noticed Reece posted a challenge offering $250 to anyone that can beat his Eldar. Oh how I wish I lived closer, I'd be $250 the richer! I would use a Tau army with possibly SM allies.
In general I'm for 7th ED battleforged, minimally modified rules (area terrain, multilevel blasts etc) for my normal games. So I am definitely willing to take an ass kicking from dirty craftworlders.
Automatically Appended Next Post: FYI Morte.... emailed.
I am not sure I can compose a rational response to your blog post. You ignore point costs and the fact that Eldar superior mobility and range generally make it easier for them to use the terrain to their advantage than it is for their opponents. It's not skill when you can jump over terrain that bogs down your opponents, move 12"+ inches, and line up shots from ranges where return fire is almost non-existant.
Pretending that the fact that these units lack a special rule that makes them unkillable makes everything totally balanced isn't going to fool most people. Most armies have to commit heavily to their deathstars if they want to field one. Eldar can spam 30 jetbikes, a WK, and still have almost half their points to fill in the rest of their army with at 1850.
Mavnas wrote: I am not sure I can compose a rational response to your blog post. You ignore point costs and the fact that Eldar superior mobility and range generally make it easier for them to use the terrain to their advantage than it is for their opponents. It's not skill when you can jump over terrain that bogs down your opponents, move 12"+ inches, and line up shots from ranges where return fire is almost non-existant.
Pretending that the fact that these units lack a special rule that makes them unkillable makes everything totally balanced isn't going to fool most people. Most armies have to commit heavily to their deathstars if they want to field one. Eldar can spam 30 jetbikes, a WK, and still have almost half their points to fill in the rest of their army with at 1850.
Yeah because no other army in the game can field units that move 12" and ignore terrain. What will all those raven wing and white scars players do? Seriously the game board is only so big and they can only run so far away. Imperial Guard has Wvyerns that will eat up a unit of jetbikes probably in one round of shooting. It's also unlikely they would get alpha striked considering you can put them in cover and face the jetbikes the AV12. Good luck glancing that to death. Squadron of 3 is 195. 9 Hull points. Other armies have flyers. Explain how jetbikes are supposed to run away from a storm raven? Or a storm talon? Or a thunderfire cannon? Or a hell drake? Or a Flying Hive Tyrant? Need I go on?
Also if the new eldar codex reduce the number of death stars in the game I can't see that as anything but an improvement. Games involving death stars are the most boring games I have/will ever play.
Mavnas wrote: I am not sure I can compose a rational response to your blog post. You ignore point costs and the fact that Eldar superior mobility and range generally make it easier for them to use the terrain to their advantage than it is for their opponents. It's not skill when you can jump over terrain that bogs down your opponents, move 12"+ inches, and line up shots from ranges where return fire is almost non-existant.
Pretending that the fact that these units lack a special rule that makes them unkillable makes everything totally balanced isn't going to fool most people. Most armies have to commit heavily to their deathstars if they want to field one. Eldar can spam 30 jetbikes, a WK, and still have almost half their points to fill in the rest of their army with at 1850.
First off, thanks for reading my blog. However, the points you raise-that I allegedly ignored-are merely culminations of math/theory-hammer. I specifically make the point that regardless of how cost effective Jetbikes appear to be on paper and regardless of how many shots/offensively effective they appear to be as well as how mobile they are-unless you sit down and actually play a few games as/against them you really have no idea what it means to have/use those kinds of units. Furthermore, when you use terms like "unkillable," it is hard to take your position seriously as Jetbikes are anything but unkillable. Simply reiterating what Jetbikes appear to be able to do based on their codex entry-without any meaningful context to go along with your comments (i.e., I played X games and got Y results), your statements ultimately don't add much to the discussion. Did you not read anyone's posts or comments about the limitations to Jetbikes or weaknesses/vulnerabilities of Jetbikes?
Now my attitude is not set in stone, it is just set upon my experience and perception of things. Therefore, I am willing to be challenged and have my mind changed, but I'd like to have my position changed by real world experience rather than what someone things about something. For example, I initially wrote off Wraithknights as being a waste of points when the last Codex came out but once I played around with them I saw their power/utility. If, in the course of my gameplay, I find cause to change my mind on the power level of certain Eldar units then I will sit down and write about how my mind has changed based on the evidence/experience. Until then, all I have to go off of is my own experience of having played as and against Eldar for over 15 years.
I saw it, I LOLed, was good times. Overall, I don't intend to come across as wantonly or blindly dismissing the opposing point of view-I am just more on the side of "I don't think it looks that bad for the reasons I stated and I'll reserve judgment until I see Eldar in action in a real competitive setting."
Not sure if anyone plays Diablo III, I play on USWEST if anyone wants to do any Rifts/Grifts/Farming, but a Barb is my main and I saw a similar video dealing with the recent Blizzard changes to the Barbarian. That clip is pure gold for getting your point across =).
Mavnas wrote: I am not sure I can compose a rational response to your blog post. You ignore point costs and the fact that Eldar superior mobility and range generally make it easier for them to use the terrain to their advantage than it is for their opponents. It's not skill when you can jump over terrain that bogs down your opponents, move 12"+ inches, and line up shots from ranges where return fire is almost non-existant.
Pretending that the fact that these units lack a special rule that makes them unkillable makes everything totally balanced isn't going to fool most people. Most armies have to commit heavily to their deathstars if they want to field one. Eldar can spam 30 jetbikes, a WK, and still have almost half their points to fill in the rest of their army with at 1850.
Yeah because no other army in the game can field units that move 12" and ignore terrain. What will all those raven wing and white scars players do? Seriously the game board is only so big and they can only run so far away. Imperial Guard has Wvyerns that will eat up a unit of jetbikes probably in one round of shooting. It's also unlikely they would get alpha striked considering you can put them in cover and face the jetbikes the AV12. Good luck glancing that to death. Squadron of 3 is 195. 9 Hull points.
Wyverns have been a consistently brought up counter to jetbikes, that really isn't as outstandingly effective as many make them out to be.
If the Eldar player has any decent spread, a Wyvern shouldn't be hitting more than two, often only one, with each blast. Assuming a full battery of Wyverns, with that sort of spread, the Wyverns will on average kill three to five dead jetbikes, not terrible, but they're hardly removing a full jetbike squad every turn unless the Eldar player is bunching them up in really stupid ways (in which case, yes it's possible for a battery of Wyverns to remove a whole unit in one turn).
Likewise, Scatterbikes are not at all ineffective against AV12 in 7E's "HP" meta. A unit of ten with Guide is removing 6 HP's a turn from AV12, a unit of ten against a Doomed unit of Wyverns will be taking off 8 HP's a turn, if they can get both Guide and Doom off, they'll be taking off an average of 11 HP's a turn.
It's also not like Eldar don't have plenty of other options for dealing with the Wyverns aside from throwing the Jetbikes at them.
Vaktathi, yes, in a perfect world-when all of the stars perfectly align and everything goes your way, Eldar Jetbikes will brutalize everything!
However, I don't know about you, but I play in the real world where Ld8 fails LD tests; where 3+ armor saves or 4+ cover saves get failed; when you don't always get the psychic powers you want; or, you are not always able to get into just the right position to do all of the damage that theory/math-hammer says you should be able to do...
So, all hyperbole aside, Jetbikes appear to be strong but I don't think they are as strong as people are making them out to be.
Mavnas wrote: I am not sure I can compose a rational response to your blog post. You ignore point costs and the fact that Eldar superior mobility and range generally make it easier for them to use the terrain to their advantage than it is for their opponents. It's not skill when you can jump over terrain that bogs down your opponents, move 12"+ inches, and line up shots from ranges where return fire is almost non-existant.
Pretending that the fact that these units lack a special rule that makes them unkillable makes everything totally balanced isn't going to fool most people. Most armies have to commit heavily to their deathstars if they want to field one. Eldar can spam 30 jetbikes, a WK, and still have almost half their points to fill in the rest of their army with at 1850.
Yeah because no other army in the game can field units that move 12" and ignore terrain. What will all those raven wing and white scars players do? Seriously the game board is only so big and they can only run so far away. Imperial Guard has Wvyerns that will eat up a unit of jetbikes probably in one round of shooting. It's also unlikely they would get alpha striked considering you can put them in cover and face the jetbikes the AV12. Good luck glancing that to death. Squadron of 3 is 195. 9 Hull points.
Wyverns have been a consistently brought up counter to jetbikes, that really isn't as outstandingly effective as many make them out to be.
If the Eldar player has any decent spread, a Wyvern shouldn't be hitting more than two, often only one, with each blast. Assuming a full battery of Wyverns, with that sort of spread, the Wyverns will on average kill three to five dead jetbikes, not terrible, but they're hardly removing a full jetbike squad every turn unless the Eldar player is bunching them up in really stupid ways (in which case, yes it's possible for a battery of Wyverns to remove a whole unit in one turn).
Likewise, Scatterbikes are not at all ineffective against AV12 in 7E's "HP" meta. A unit of ten with Guide is removing 6 HP's a turn from AV12, a unit of ten against a Doomed unit of Wyverns will be taking off 8 HP's a turn, if they can get both Guide and Doom off, they'll be taking off an average of 11 HP's a turn.
It's also not like Eldar don't have plenty of other options for dealing with the Wyverns aside from throwing the Jetbikes at them.
The game board is only so big. Try it out. I think you'll realize the same thing most Eldar players already know which is it's VERY difficult to space our a unit, move out out of range and move out of line sight. TRY IT. Also it's unlikely they could cast Doom as it has a 24 inch range and I'm trying to stay out of range and sight I probably wouldn't be in range for doom. Guide yes obviously.
mortetvie wrote: Vaktathi, yes, in a perfect world-when all of the stars perfectly align and everything goes your way, Eldar Jetbikes will brutalize everything!
However, I don't know about you, but I play in the real world where Ld8 fails LD tests; where 3+ armor saves or 4+ cover saves get failed; when you don't always get the psychic powers you want; or, you are not always able to get into just the right position to do all of the damage that theory/math-hammer says you should be able to do...
So, all hyperbole aside, Jetbikes appear to be strong but I don't think they are as strong as people are making them out to be.
You're trying to argue a point I didn't try to make.
I didn't say that Guardians couldn't fail Ld tests and I certainly didn't say they couldn't fail saves, just as I didn't say you could always get off psychic powers or anything else. Obviously all of these things can happen. Wyverns can also scatter way the hell off and do relatively little. I'm not trying to discount the fact that there's variability in this game. I gave some examples of what they're very likely to be able to do with relatively minimal support (hardly hyperbolic examples) as well as typical expected casualties versus Wyverns.
My point was that Wyverns are not the automatic hardcounter to jetbikes the way they've sometimes been portrayed, and that the jetbikes really aren't at all helpless against AV12 (a full squad of Scatterbikes, even without any psychic support, will kill an AV12 vehicle with 4+ cover in one round of shooting on average).
The game board is only so big. Try it out. I think you'll realize the same thing most Eldar players already know which is it's VERY difficult to space our a unit, move out out of range and move out of line sight. TRY IT.
I didn't say that it was easy to do all of those things at once, only that a relatively intelligent modicum of spacing (which *should* be relatively easy) will typically negate the possibility of a Wyvern unit getting anywhere near enough hits to obliterate a full squad of jetbikes in one round of shooting. I'm certainly won't make the case that Jetbikes could consistently stay completely out of LoS with those huge bases and whatnot, just that a simple and effective spread (if you're anticipating Wyvern fire) should usually be relatively easy to maintain and still engage your opponent in most instances.
Also it's unlikely they could cast Doom as it has a 24 inch range and I'm trying to stay out of range and sight I probably wouldn't be in range for doom. Guide yes obviously.
Doom is less likely, absolutely, was just throwing the number out there to show what was possible. It's certainly not impossible however to see Doom getting off like that though, that's not a difficult or outrageous event, just not as point-click easy as Guide.
Mavnas wrote: I am not sure I can compose a rational response to your blog post. You ignore point costs and the fact that Eldar superior mobility and range generally make it easier for them to use the terrain to their advantage than it is for their opponents. It's not skill when you can jump over terrain that bogs down your opponents, move 12"+ inches, and line up shots from ranges where return fire is almost non-existant.
Pretending that the fact that these units lack a special rule that makes them unkillable makes everything totally balanced isn't going to fool most people. Most armies have to commit heavily to their deathstars if they want to field one. Eldar can spam 30 jetbikes, a WK, and still have almost half their points to fill in the rest of their army with at 1850.
First off, thanks for reading my blog. However, the points you raise-that I allegedly ignored-are merely culminations of math/theory-hammer. I specifically make the point that regardless of how cost effective Jetbikes appear to be on paper and regardless of how many shots/offensively effective they appear to be as well as how mobile they are-unless you sit down and actually play a few games as/against them you really have no idea what it means to have/use those kinds of units. Furthermore, when you use terms like "unkillable," it is hard to take your position seriously as Jetbikes are anything but unkillable. Simply reiterating what Jetbikes appear to be able to do based on their codex entry-without any meaningful context to go along with your comments (i.e., I played X games and got Y results), your statements ultimately don't add much to the discussion. Did you not read anyone's posts or comments about the limitations to Jetbikes or weaknesses/vulnerabilities of Jetbikes?
Now my attitude is not set in stone, it is just set upon my experience and perception of things. Therefore, I am willing to be challenged and have my mind changed, but I'd like to have my position changed by real world experience rather than what someone things about something. For example, I initially wrote off Wraithknights as being a waste of points when the last Codex came out but once I played around with them I saw their power/utility. If, in the course of my gameplay, I find cause to change my mind on the power level of certain Eldar units then I will sit down and write about how my mind has changed based on the evidence/experience. Until then, all I have to go off of is my own experience of having played as and against Eldar for over 15 years.
If you dismiss Mathhammer, you are wrong. Period.
The fact that a more skilled player or more lucky can defeat a less skilled player despite a handicap is not an indication of balance. It's an indication that one guy is better than another. All other things being equal, math wins unless there's special rules that make it easier for you to gain some advantage (like say, being able to Jink or move more than your enemy). I'm sure some units have an edge on the bikes. Most don't, in fact, quite the opposite. Comparing the bikes to MEQ is silly because most MEQ units can be ignored unless you want the objective they're camped on.
If I asked to you to bet $100 on a coin flip, and used a weighted coin that came up in my favor 75% of the time, I don't think you'd buy the argument that it's totally fair because in the real world, sometimes you win too. Sure, in the real world I sometimes steal initiative and score first blood by shooting 4 heavy bolters at a Wraithlord standing in the open, but you can't balance games around flukes.
Mavnas wrote: I am not sure I can compose a rational response to your blog post. You ignore point costs and the fact that Eldar superior mobility and range generally make it easier for them to use the terrain to their advantage than it is for their opponents. It's not skill when you can jump over terrain that bogs down your opponents, move 12"+ inches, and line up shots from ranges where return fire is almost non-existant.
Pretending that the fact that these units lack a special rule that makes them unkillable makes everything totally balanced isn't going to fool most people. Most armies have to commit heavily to their deathstars if they want to field one. Eldar can spam 30 jetbikes, a WK, and still have almost half their points to fill in the rest of their army with at 1850.
First off, thanks for reading my blog. However, the points you raise-that I allegedly ignored-are merely culminations of math/theory-hammer. I specifically make the point that regardless of how cost effective Jetbikes appear to be on paper and regardless of how many shots/offensively effective they appear to be as well as how mobile they are-unless you sit down and actually play a few games as/against them you really have no idea what it means to have/use those kinds of units. Furthermore, when you use terms like "unkillable," it is hard to take your position seriously as Jetbikes are anything but unkillable. Simply reiterating what Jetbikes appear to be able to do based on their codex entry-without any meaningful context to go along with your comments (i.e., I played X games and got Y results), your statements ultimately don't add much to the discussion. Did you not read anyone's posts or comments about the limitations to Jetbikes or weaknesses/vulnerabilities of Jetbikes?
Now my attitude is not set in stone, it is just set upon my experience and perception of things. Therefore, I am willing to be challenged and have my mind changed, but I'd like to have my position changed by real world experience rather than what someone things about something. For example, I initially wrote off Wraithknights as being a waste of points when the last Codex came out but once I played around with them I saw their power/utility. If, in the course of my gameplay, I find cause to change my mind on the power level of certain Eldar units then I will sit down and write about how my mind has changed based on the evidence/experience. Until then, all I have to go off of is my own experience of having played as and against Eldar for over 15 years.
If you dismiss Mathhammer, you are wrong. Period.
The fact that a more skilled player or more lucky can defeat a less skilled player despite a handicap is not an indication of balance. It's an indication that one guy is better than another. All other things being equal, math wins unless there's special rules that make it easier for you to gain some advantage (like say, being able to Jink or move more than your enemy). I'm sure some units have an edge on the bikes. Most don't, in fact, quite the opposite. Comparing the bikes to MEQ is silly because most MEQ units can be ignored unless you want the objective they're camped on.
If I asked to you to bet $100 on a coin flip, and used a weighted coin that came up in my favor 75% of the time, I don't think you'd buy the argument that it's totally fair because in the real world, sometimes you win too. Sure, in the real world I sometimes steal initiative and score first blood by shooting 4 heavy bolters at a Wraithlord standing in the open, but you can't balance games around flukes.
First of all, I am not dismissing mathhammer, I am just not placing as much weight on it as you appear to be. Consequently, you misstate what I am doing as I am not dismissing mathhammer but pointing out that Warhammer is more than just statistics.
Second of all, even if I was dismissing mathhammer, what is the basis for saying I am wrong to do so? You see, we play a game called WAR hammer, not MATH hammer. Math and Statistics are a good guide to tell us what MAY happen in a specific CIRCUMSTANCE (e.g., if X conditions are met, we can expect Y results). However, you fail to see how I am pointing out that your position is assuming the necessary conditions to achieve the assumed results are present.
For example, one can say that with absolute scientific and mathematical precision that X weapon will yield Y results on Z type of target. However, you fail to add into the equation other factors that might affect X weapon from being able to actually produce Y results on Z type of target. As I stated before, factors such as the relative skills of the players involved, the actual army lists, the terrain, the missions and a myriad other factors may prevent the results you might expect from what mathhammer tells you should happen. I mean, saying that nuclear weapons will wipe out a city is fine and all but as things currently stand, you are not likely to see that becoming a reality due to circumstances and factors as pertaining to world politics. Math-hammer says nuke=wiped out city but reality=not going to happen ATM.
Furthermore, your examples and comments do not accurately reflect the issues at hand. Specifically, comparing Bikes to MEQ in terms of survivability is absolutely appropriate because MEQ units are an appropriate benchmark to determine bike survivability (i.e., T4 and a 3+ save). Finally, comparing the use of Eldar Jetbikes to that of a weighted coin toss is hyperbole at best and doesn't do anything to illustrate or further your point. I mean, are you really saying that Eldar Jetbikes give Eldar players an unfair advantage over other armies? If so, that is just your opinion, which you are entitled to.
yeah, because marines have jink saves, 36" range S6 spammed weapons, and the ability to jump back out of range/LOS of retaliatory strikes of whatever happened to survive their alpha strike. it's a completely legit comparison.
i mean, i know i'm not the first person to bring this up, but your comparison of MEQ vs scatrider is really, really flawed.
of course jetbikes give eldar a serious mechanical advantage vs. other armies because they're criminally undercosted and loaded for bear (smoldering, laser-addled cooked bear) while being a troops choice that can jump across the board.
Gigasnail, How exactly is my comparison flawed? Simply saying "but jetbikes can jink and alpha strike and have such a long threat range and can jump back behind cover" is not enough.
Specifically, comparing any T4 3+ save model to a Space Marine, which is another T4 3+ save model, to determine the relative amount of shots required of any particular weapon to do a wound is an appropriate and logical comparison. If you get X number of bolter shots on a unit of Bikes, you WILL kill Y amount of Bikes and also the equivalent number of Space Marines-where is the flaw in that statement? Indeed, comparing Bikes to Space Marines is appropriate because you will find that it takes the same number of shots to kill an Eldar Jetbike as it would a Space Marine. Furthermore, Space Marines can readily find themselves in 4+ cover and unlike Bikes, can go to ground for a 3+ cover save so saying "but bikes can Jink" doesn't hold much weight in differentiating between Bikes and Space Marines in terms of survivability.
Ultimately, there is a difference between the actual ability to get X shots on Y Bikes versus what happens when you get X shots on Y bikes. you are assuming that the Jetbike will either be out of range or out of LOS to avoid being killed-which won't always be the case and is not guaranteed.
Now, I am not saying that Jetbikes=Space marines in every sense. My position is simply pointing out that (1) T4 and 3+/4+ cover is not THAT survivable in real practice, therefore a Space Marine is an appropriate bench mark to determine how many shots it would take to kill a Jetbike due to both models having T3 and a 3+ save; and, (2) getting all of those jetbikes in position/LOS to a target is easier said than done and not guaranteed as is keeping Jetbikes out of range/LOS..
You people seriously need to come down off the ledge. Wait like 2 months until you've actually had a chance to play mutliple games against the new codex and feel it out. (Also by then there will be a new world ending codex you'll probably being arguing over and scatter laser jetbikes won't matter.)
The comparison between jetbikes and marines is not perfect but literally there is not a unit to unit comparison in 40k that is. Even so it's still a really good comparison. I'd say the biggest flaw in that comparison is the different morale rules for each of those units. Obviously Space Marines fair better in that comparison as they are infinitely less likely to run away given they flee 2D6 while jetbikes flee 3D6 and if I'm "retreating" I won't be far from the board edge.
Jetbikes are a good model now. I don't think anyone can try and argue they're not. They needed some kind of boost becaue they were awful in the last codex. Their only purpose was to grab objectives which they were good at. Unfortunately they were terrible at actually killing other models without then immediately dying themselves. I would have rather seen GW fix the shuriken catapult rules and by extension fix guardians and jetbikes but they didn't. This is an obvious money decision. I have jetbikes but I don't have jetbikes with scatter lasers and no one does. If I want to play with jetbikes now I'll have to buy the new models. Every Eldar player is probably in that same boat. So now I need some new models and turns out so fo a lot of other people. Is it a game breaking move? No. After the dust settles in a few months instead taking units good at killing wave serpents, you'll be taking units good at killing jetbikes. The meta will adapt and we'll all move on.
Jetbikes are a good model now. I don't think anyone can try and argue they're not. They needed some kind of boost becaue they were awful in the last codex.
Jetbikes are a good model now. I don't think anyone can try and argue they're not. They needed some kind of boost becaue they were awful in the last codex.
Umm, isn't anyone arguing that just taking 2 3-man squads with Scatter Lasers is the optimal way to employ jetbikes? That leaves a lot of points for putting units with higher threat profiles on the table, but still maintains its own threat of 12 S6 shots. Easier to hide, small footprint, etc.
I will come out and say the Eldar codex has pretty much reliably broken the meta and hilariously enough has ways to counter the 'counters' to the way in which they broke the meta.
Mass D-weapons negate the Mech Meta.
Mass Scatbikes will do a number on Hordes.
And if we switch to FMC and flyer spam? Well, every unit in the Eldar 'dex that can take an Eldar Missile Launcher gets the skyfire option now.
I am still undecided. I fully believe that jetbikes and wraithknights are just too good for their respective points costs - in terms of mobility, durability and damage output. I fully believe that the Aspect Host formation is disgustingly potent. Free +1 BS/WS depending on what you choose? That is just downright rude. The Seer Council is also disgustingly good for what it does. Warp Charges on a 3+? Throw Eldrad in there and giggle. The base Council already throws in 11 dice to the pool on its own so yeah, you can get a lot of utility out of that alone.
Jetbikes are a good model now. I don't think anyone can try and argue they're not. They needed some kind of boost becaue they were awful in the last codex.
Lol, yeah OKAY.
Is this the part where you convince me you're afraid of jetbike with shuriken catapults? 2 shots at range 12". LD 8. 17 points. Go ahead I'm waiting. They literally had one job capture objectives. 12" range on shuriken catapults is pretty silly.
muwhe wrote: Historically, when GW was releasing a 2-3 codices per year, Individual event organizers could make “reasonable” adjustments to the game as they saw fit. Generally, things had time to settle out and players had time to make adjustments to the changes in meta.
Currently, with Games Workshop’s rapid release schedules players and event organizers have very little time to digest releases before the next release is upon them. Nothing currently points to this trend slowing down anytime soon. As such, I assert that making changes to the game in this
type of environment can only lead to confusion and angst for players. Once a tournament’s rule-set diverges significantly from the main rules of the game it results in a constant state of reassessments, email barrages, endless debates. In the end, this leaves both the event organizers and players very little latitude to evaluate the effectiveness of the changes.
My recommendation remains to play the game as presented, and let it stand or fall on its own. Certainly events can develop multiple formats to appeal to different segments of the community and let attendees determine the formats they want to support. Wholesale changing/banning D, altering core rules, banning codex units outright, may provide some short term comfort but it is not a path for long term support of the game we all love.
Agreed. Play the game as it lays...and a lot of the BS goes away...or at best evens out. Or you can play Robotech. LOL.
DarkStarSabre wrote: I will come out and say the Eldar codex has pretty much reliably broken the meta and hilariously enough has ways to counter the 'counters' to the way in which they broke the meta.
Mass D-weapons negate the Mech Meta.
Mass Scatbikes will do a number on Hordes.
And if we switch to FMC and flyer spam? Well, every unit in the Eldar 'dex that can take an Eldar Missile Launcher gets the skyfire option now.
I am still undecided. I fully believe that jetbikes and wraithknights are just too good for their respective points costs - in terms of mobility, durability and damage output. I fully believe that the Aspect Host formation is disgustingly potent. Free +1 BS/WS depending on what you choose? That is just downright rude. The Seer Council is also disgustingly good for what it does. Warp Charges on a 3+? Throw Eldrad in there and giggle. The base Council already throws in 11 dice to the pool on its own so yeah, you can get a lot of utility out of that alone.
You're right about all of these strengths, but an Eldar player can't take them all at the same time. They can't have Skyfire AND D-Weapons AND scatter spam AND seer council, not to the degree where they matter. The eldar player needs to choose, and whatever he does with will leave vulnerabilities.
It is valid to say that Eldar have great options for nearly every type of play, and a counter for every type of army; it would not be correct to say that they can play all of these tools at the same time. So, unless the Eldar player gets to pick his list after seeing the opponent's every time, they're going to have weaknesses, just like everyone else.
At least they don't have 60" wave serpents, which were stupidly simple and predictable to play.
Well, to be fair, they can take most of them, and Scatterlasers aren't terrible AA at all in and of themselves. They can certainly pack D weapons, massed Scatterlasers, and Pyschic support fairly effectively into armies pretty easily.
Which is going to cause tournaments to see less players:
Having to play against the new eldar codex, or not being able to play the new eldar codex?
I don't have a real answer for that. I'm inclined to believe the latter, but I've got nothing but anecdotal evidence to back it up.
That said, I'd be willing to bet this is the big question on a TO's mind right now. Any ruling one way or another is going to cause consternation in part of the community.
We can blame GW for making it a hard decision all we want, but ultimately it's a done deal that can't be expected to change, as we've seen in the past.
Is it then the community's fault for being unable to reach a consensus? Maybe, but as with anything people are invested in, there are going to be conflicts and differences, and that's just reality. Players have every right to want the best out of the game, and not everyone is going to agree how that should be done.
It then falls to the tournaments themselves to be the arbiters. However this shakes down, there will be blood in the water. As a TO, it seems like it's no longer about how to make everybody happy, it's how do you minimize the damage? A sad state of affairs to be sure.
Do 40k tournaments just give up? I'd like to think not, but I personally don't see how this could be resolved without pissing off some appreciable amount of the player base.
The had more than 1 job, capture, contest (obsec in a CAD, many armies did not play strict CADS), and linebreaker.
And the most important job, 2 squads of 3 of them filled out your required troops for a total of 102pts (17pts a model)
and I know everyone is all excited over the new scatter laser/shuriken cannon on every bike option, but against toughness 7, 5 bikes with scatter lasers (135pts) fires 20 shots, averages 13.2 hits, which is 4-5 wounds with a save to the model, many high toughness models have a 3+ save so 1.32-1.6 wounds done.
8 bikes with no upgrades (136pts) fires 16 twin linked shots, averages 14 hits averages 2.24 wounds at AP2.
The numbers for scatter lasers drop even lower at Toughness 8, of course some high toughness models have an INV save, or cover, but there are not so rare situations where the standard bike outperforms scatter laser bikes, and you get more models so they will stay around longer. Being able to move 12" to shoot offsets the 12" range of the shuriken catapults a bit.
It should only affect the way people build their armies. GW is moving from the Force Org Chart to the Decurion/ Formation army list. Don't like the amount of D Weapons, make smaller less juicy targets. Don't like the amount of shots a jetbike squad can make, don't give them a large target to shoot at. Jetbikes are fragile - they will not be able to hold objectives so when they strike, you need to make sure you can counter strike them. Also going forward, you'll only see one Wraithknight
I feel all this Codex does is frustrate people using a large Deathstar style army. I'm sure when Codex: Adeptus Astartes is released, you will see a change in how Space Marines build their army and all will be right with the world.
Jambles wrote: Which is going to cause tournaments to see less players:
Having to play against the new eldar codex, or not being able to play the new eldar codex?
I don't have a real answer for that. I'm inclined to believe the latter, but I've got nothing but anecdotal evidence to back it up.
That said, I'd be willing to bet this is the big question on a TO's mind right now. Any ruling one way or another is going to cause consternation in part of the community.
We can blame GW for making it a hard decision all we want, but ultimately it's a done deal that can't be expected to change, as we've seen in the past.
Is it then the community's fault for being unable to reach a consensus? Maybe, but as with anything people are invested in, there are going to be conflicts and differences, and that's just reality. Players have every right to want the best out of the game, and not everyone is going to agree how that should be done.
It then falls to the tournaments themselves to be the arbiters. However this shakes down, there will be blood in the water. As a TO, it seems like it's no longer about how to make everybody happy, it's how do you minimize the damage? A sad state of affairs to be sure.
Do 40k tournaments just give up? I'd like to think not, but I personally don't see how this could be resolved without pissing off some appreciable amount of the player base.
Excellent summary.
TO's will want to do whatever keeps the tourney scene most healthy, and the tourney scene's health is measured by player attendance. I would say it's a pretty obvious choice between angering 5 eldar players or discouraging all the players from all the other books from showing up, knowing that they are just competing for the "best non-eldar" title.
We've been testing them a number of times now. Even had a game where we tried to run the eldar really badly. (We discussed what the worst "not stupid" move was and had the eldar do it. Basically they just did obvious things like move on objectives and shoot the closest enemy they could hurt.) That game STILL saw an eldar victory, by both points and near tabling. They have such an advantage going into games that I wouldn't be surprised to see decent eldar players able to rock out in 1500 vs 2k matches as long as their dice don't betray them.
Maybe they can start doing "weight classes" in tourneys. Heavyweights would be anything. Middleweights would drop ranged D, 2+ reroll saves, invis, and limit some key ridic units like WK's, riptides, and scatbikes.
Lightweight would just be the bottom half of the codices: chaos marines, BA, DA, SW, orks, and so on.
It would need a lot of analysis to pick where the line would be drawn between weight classes would be, but I bet you could determine it by say...examining a full season of the ITC and doing average placement for each race etc. each year.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
boyd wrote: It should only affect the way people build their armies. GW is moving from the Force Org Chart to the Decurion/ Formation army list. Don't like the amount of D Weapons, make smaller less juicy targets. Don't like the amount of shots a jetbike squad can make, don't give them a large target to shoot at. Jetbikes are fragile - they will not be able to hold objectives so when they strike, you need to make sure you can counter strike them. Also going forward, you'll only see one Wraithknight
I feel all this Codex does is frustrate people using a large Deathstar style army. I'm sure when Codex: Adeptus Astartes is released, you will see a change in how Space Marines build their army and all will be right with the world.
I've thought about having like a crazy 25-30 unit army to counter eldar, but there are issues with that.
A. Wargear such as a melta bomb to make each squad at least marginally relevant will cost you more to fit everywhere, and each one is less protected.
B. You auto-lose purge the alien, and pretty much always give up first blood and warlord. Also many maelstrom missions want you to kill units.
C. It's now incredibly easy for the eldar to pick out what they consider to be high threat and kill it.
TO's will want to do whatever keeps the tourney scene most healthy, and the tourney scene's health is measured by player attendance. I would say it's a pretty obvious choice between angering 5 eldar players or discouraging all the players from all the other books from showing up, knowing that they are just competing for the "best non-eldar" title.
And those eldar players will be upset that they're being subjected to the tyranny of the majority. And how many non-eldar players are going to feel the meta has been adversely affected by removing a codex from the game?
This is what I mean - it just seems like a no-win situation, for everyone involved.
Personally, I think you're probably right: that banning or at least house-ruling some of the new codex will appease the most players. But is it the right thing to do, to sacrifice a subset of players and a part of the game just to potentially keep some people happy? To draw the line here, rather than at some other brand of cheese?
Or is it the only way to salvage a broken set of rules and keep the competitive side of the hobby legitimate?
It's a decision to be made by someone much braver than I.
The big issue here is that 40k is absolutely nothing near a balanced, competitive game. It doesn't even make the pretense anymore, and GW will be the first to say as much, and they have. This is not a tournament ready game, and increasingly is less and less of a game at all and more simply a storytelling device for playing with toy soldiers from the way GW tells it (though I don't think it's worse for that now than ever too, but that's another topic).
What this means is that In many ways I think the idea of a 40k "tournament" is increasingly pointless and absurd if you're not willing to change units and rules in order to adapt it to function as a tournament style game.
Jetbikes are a good model now. I don't think anyone can try and argue they're not. They needed some kind of boost becaue they were awful in the last codex.
Lol, yeah OKAY.
Is this the part where you convince me you're afraid of jetbike with shuriken catapults? 2 shots at range 12". LD 8. 17 points. Go ahead I'm waiting. They literally had one job capture objectives. 12" range on shuriken catapults is pretty silly.
I heard this rumour once that elder jetbikes can move pretty far and still shoot... I think it was just a joke because as you said jetbikes w catapults only shoot 12".
There have been LOTS of play testing since this codex release and the one thing so far is clear elder are horribly overpowered right now. So really all this anecdotal bull by eldar players saying "naw it's cool you just need to learn 2 play" is not only dismissive but outright lies compared to every test game and play test being posted online and being done at private clubs. The one thing is clear tournament organizers need to adjust this codex if they want anything resembling a fair game. winning with eldar does not take skill quit trying to convince yourself you are a good player because you play eldar. You're playing with a stacked deck.
Dozer Blades wrote: Same as Astartes... It's not a big threat to fmc or flyers. Still hate the ranged D.
C'mon, DB. The "Ranged" Destroyer is not hate-able. Destroyer *is* better than Distort (which was great at STR max, AP2), but not broken, given Destroyer only is worse on bugs, ICs, and vehicles ... worse/more powerful than Distort had been.
WK = 2 shots at 36" of 'ranged' Destroyer. As Distort guns they were fearsome 16% of the time to Bugs & ICs. Now, bugs and ICs are in jeopardy on rolls 2-5 and 6. Worse, but not game breaking. And, granted, vehicles poop their drawers. These are not templates. But. Two. Single. Shots.
WG = 12 range, and we though discussed how to get them in range, they still aren't good, WraithGuard, that is. Getting them in range with WWP and Wave Serpents is still rather poopy kaka.
Hemlock = Flier with 18" range, 2 small blasts. I really don't see the mad rush to buy these things.
Wanna hate? I suggest hating the formations; It's the two formations, allowing pretty much 3 units of Dire Avengers, and 3 units of the other aspect warriors to have BS5. That's the super I'd be ticked off aobut. And, what I'll be playing.
- - - - - - - - - - -
And again, kids, casual games, play what you want. Tell the 4 WraithKnight guy to cram it, legal or not. Don't like formations? Tell your eldar buddy to go standard FoC or to suck eggs.
Tourneys: We know a bunch are already regulating formations and such. So ...
are we done looking for Falling Sky pieces?
I don't understand the use of adjectives that are interpretive, claims without data.
The mathhammer I looked at/posted shows Destroyer *is* more powerful than Distort, but only in 3 cases, MCs, ICs and vehicles. All other single wound footers are still in the same boat. No hyperbole. No invective. Just percentages and numbers.
Anything else is consulting a thesaurus for synonyms.
Jetbikes are a good model now. I don't think anyone can try and argue they're not. They needed some kind of boost becaue they were awful in the last codex.
Lol, yeah OKAY.
Is this the part where you convince me you're afraid of jetbike with shuriken catapults? 2 shots at range 12". LD 8. 17 points. Go ahead I'm waiting. They literally had one job capture objectives. 12" range on shuriken catapults is pretty silly.
And with ObSec and Turbo they could score an objective on the other side of the board. They were better at their role than most other armies troop units. Most armies treat troops as a tax that will barely make back its points. Eldar had a unit that would score enough points to win the game. So what if it isn't killy.
Jetbikes are a good model now. I don't think anyone can try and argue they're not. They needed some kind of boost becaue they were awful in the last codex.
Lol, yeah OKAY.
Is this the part where you convince me you're afraid of jetbike with shuriken catapults? 2 shots at range 12". LD 8. 17 points. Go ahead I'm waiting. They literally had one job capture objectives. 12" range on shuriken catapults is pretty silly.
And with ObSec and Turbo they could score an objective on the other side of the board. They were better at their role than most other armies troop units. Most armies treat troops as a tax that will barely make back its points. Eldar had a unit that would score enough points to win the game. So what if it isn't killy.
They aren't fun models to play with??? Isn't that the point of 40K? Is for me.
I heard this rumour once that elder jetbikes can move pretty far and still shoot... I think it was just a joke because as you said jetbikes w catapults only shoot 12".
There have been LOTS of play testing since this codex release and the one thing so far is clear elder are horribly overpowered right now. So really all this anecdotal bull by eldar players saying "naw it's cool you just need to learn 2 play" is not only dismissive but outright lies compared to every test game and play test being posted online and being done at private clubs. The one thing is clear tournament organizers need to adjust this codex if they want anything resembling a fair game. winning with eldar does not take skill quit trying to convince yourself you are a good player because you play eldar. You're playing with a stacked deck.
This is a "The sky is falling post". Every codex is viewed in this way until the next book is out. Were you complaing about how broke necrons were 2 weeks ago?
Adjusting the codex is a terrible idea. Adjustments could be made to every codex in the game right now. Where do you draw the line? Good luck figuring that out. The only thing I see the "D weapons" actually affecting in game are death stars armies. And for that good riddance.
boyd wrote: It should only affect the way people build their armies. GW is moving from the Force Org Chart to the Decurion/ Formation army list. Don't like the amount of D Weapons, make smaller less juicy targets. Don't like the amount of shots a jetbike squad can make, don't give them a large target to shoot at. Jetbikes are fragile - they will not be able to hold objectives so when they strike, you need to make sure you can counter strike them. Also going forward, you'll only see one Wraithknight
I feel all this Codex does is frustrate people using a large Deathstar style army. I'm sure when Codex: Adeptus Astartes is released, you will see a change in how Space Marines build their army and all will be right with the world.
Yeah, 80 S6 shots in no way frustrates a marine player because with a 3+ save, he's only losing 17-18 models a turn, but it's OK, because the eldar player had to pay 540 points to make that much firepower happen and that leaves him with only 1310 points to buy his WK and other filler.
And those eldar players will be upset that they're being subjected to the tyranny of the majority. And how many non-eldar players are going to feel the meta has been adversely affected by removing a codex from the game?
This is what I mean - it just seems like a no-win situation, for everyone involved.
If the eldar codex is around in its present form, many marginal codices go to being totally useless.
The mathhammer I looked at/posted shows Destroyer *is* more powerful than Distort, but only in 3 cases, MCs, ICs and vehicles. All other single wound footers are still in the same boat. No hyperbole. No invective. Just percentages and numbers.
Yeah, only the things that have a chance to stand up to scat bikers should worry about D...
I'm noticing a trend here. Eldar players pick one unit at a time, point out that it can be countered then ignore the fact that the other side of their army hard-counters the counter and both are cheaper in their codex. The worst part is some armies just got their 7th codex which was more or less balanced with some OP things that will neither make nor break the game. Now they'll be waiting a long time in the shadow of the eldar. I guess at least Tau and Vanilla SM players can hope that they get an equally broken codex in the near future.
Jetbikes are a good model now. I don't think anyone can try and argue they're not. They needed some kind of boost becaue they were awful in the last codex.
Lol, yeah OKAY.
Is this the part where you convince me you're afraid of jetbike with shuriken catapults? 2 shots at range 12". LD 8. 17 points. Go ahead I'm waiting. They literally had one job capture objectives. 12" range on shuriken catapults is pretty silly.
And with ObSec and Turbo they could score an objective on the other side of the board. They were better at their role than most other armies troop units. Most armies treat troops as a tax that will barely make back its points. Eldar had a unit that would score enough points to win the game. So what if it isn't killy.
They aren't fun models to play with??? Isn't that the point of 40K? Is for me.
Leaving out the part where your answer has nothing to do with the statement it's replying to, saying "But FUN lol" is an empty statement, because fun is subjective. Some people might not find it fun to play against a force they can't touch, or to play against / with an army that appears to have an unfair advantage.
Mavnas wrote: I guess at least Tau and Vanilla SM players can hope that they get an equally broken codex in the near future.
I don't want a broken codex, but if GW can stick with this new design philosophy and stop changing horses mid race, then I'll feel less bad about it because then we'll have something kinda resembling parity for once between armies.
Yeah, I'm torn. I think I could put up a fight if I had about 100-150 more guardsmen; however, there's considerably less effort and expense involved in painting a couple WM armies instead and just playing 40K casually. If not for the thousands of points/dollars in already bought but unpainted 40K models I have sitting on my to paint list, I might just make the switch.
So far my win loss draw with the new Eldar is 1-1-1. True I'm not spamming jetbikes, only have enough for three min squads, and I'm not using the warhost, I am still using good things, the list being good at the very least*.My win was against two players who aren't the greatest, to put it nicely, drawed once versus space marines who killed both my knight and scythe guard before turn 3, and lost versus IG.
In the case of the space marine player the knight didn't kill a single thing, taking off the last wound of a centurion and only dealing 1 HP to a vindicator and the Scythe Guard killed a min tac squad and their drop pod before biting it.
Versus the Imperial Guard both did marginally better, killing things that were higher in points, but not in number. Both succeeded in dropping a single leman russ, one vanquisher and one demolisher.
Sorry I cannot give full battle reports, and even still its only my personal experience, but its still something.
*My list is as follows currently.
Combined Arms Detachment
Lord of War
Wraightknight, two heavy Wraithcannons
HQ Autarch with Fusiongun
Elities
5*Wraithguard, D-Scythes, Waveserpent with starcannon and catapult
Troops
Min Windriders
Min Windriders
Min Windriders
Heavy Support
Fire Prism
Fire Prism
2*Falcons with Pulsar and Brightlance
Formation Detachment
Aspect Host, chose +1 BS Min Squad of Fire Dragons
Min Squad of Fire Dragons
9 man squad of Warp Spiders
Mavnas wrote: I guess at least Tau and Vanilla SM players can hope that they get an equally broken codex in the near future.
I don't want a broken codex, but if GW can stick with this new design philosophy and stop changing horses mid race, then I'll feel less bad about it because then we'll have something kinda resembling parity for once between armies.
That's if they fething stick with it, though.
This is a comment i could accept if this was the first 7E codex released, but fact is that it is not.
As it stands we have Orks, BA, SW, GK, Skiitari, DE, Harlequins, Khorne, IG and probably some more that i'm forgetting already with a 7E dress. None of those codices is even close to that power level.
Then we have Necrons, which could be argued that are around midway between 7E power level and Eldar power level.
So do you wanna say to the players of 9 Codices "Sorry, wait for 8E" or correctly consider the Eldar codex the anomaly and treat it as such.
And this isn't even taking 6E codices into consideration.
Spoletta wrote: As it stands we have Orks, BA, SW, GK, Skiitari, DE, Harlequins, Khorne, IG and probably some more that i'm forgetting already with a 7E dress. None of those codices is even close to that power level.
Then we have Necrons, which could be argued that are around midway between 7E power level and Eldar power level.
I worked it out in several of the "General Discussion" threads.
Against AV14 you're increasing average HP inflicting nearly 6 fold, from 0.33 per single BS4 shot to 1.94 per BS4 shot. Scythes, not benefitting from 6's and having an extra "failure" result increase 4 fold from 0.166 Pens per shot to 1.33 pens per shot.
Against a T6 W4 MC, you go from 0.11 ID results per Wraithcannon and 0.55 wounds per shot (including the ID inflicting 6) to inflicting ~3.5x as many wounds with D weapons, an average of 1.944 wounds (and auto-killing regardless of EW on a 6).
The Scythe is a little less clear-cut. The old Scythes inflicted an average of 0.166 wounds (resulting in ID and didn't hurt the MC otherwise) and if that's inflicting ID on a 4 wound MC then we can just increase that number by 4 to 0.66.
The new Scythe is inflicting an average of 1.33 wounds per shot (not inflicting ID).
Basically the older Scythe would outright kill any MC without EW on a 6, but otherwise did nothing, while the new "D-1" Scythes, are inflicting D3 wounds 4x as often but aren't outright inflicting ID. Ultimately, in this case the gap isn't quite as huge as in other instances, on average they'll kill an MC *only* twice as fast as their older counterparts, but still substantial and far less "luck" reliant.
Honestly, I don't know what else can be said that I have not already said because there are no new points that have been raised that actually address what I've been pointing out. However, perhaps I need to expound a bit on what my points are or mean?
Overall, as I've already pointed out, saying X weapon does Y wounds against Z targets-as a blanket statement in a vacuum setting-may be interesting and informative BUT it is hardly demonstrative of what we can expect to see in real world game play. This is because of the various factors I pointed out earlier such as player skill, army lists, terrain, reserve rolls and any other number of factors that may prevent the results one might expect from playing math-hammer instead of warhammer. Therefore, basing the doom and gloom on math-hammer rather than actual real world experience is foolishness. For example, it doesn't matter if you have a weapon that, in ideal circumstances, will wipe out an entire person's army if those ideal circumstances can't be met...
Specifically, a single unit of D-Scythe Wraithguard will generally cost around 455 to take, at a minimum (e.g., 210(5x WG w/ 5D-Scythe+110(Serpent)+95(Archon w/ WWP)+40(Warrior tax for Archon)). Taking this combo also has a hidden cost of forcing you to structure your army around it-which can be unduly limiting (e.g., Dark Eldar allied detachment/Eldar Cad). Consequently, if (1) they do not destroy around 400 points of models in a game; or, (2) if they do not destroy a target worth sacrificing 400+points of models to destroy; they are an inefficient tool or waste of points. Indeed, they might kill a Leman Russ, Wraith Knight or any other vehicle or MC in the game with relative ease-assuming that the target does not have an invulnerable save-but how many of those targets are really worth investing 455 points to take out?
Short and simple, the answer is not many. Realistically, you can expect this unit to do some damage when they drop but then they are done for the rest of the game. For me, the only reason I would take D-Scythes with a WWP is to deal with Centurion Stars or other death-star type units-and only in an ITC format where Invisibility is nerfed. The same analysis can apply to regular D-Cannon equipped Wraithguard, only while these guys may get a "6" result, they will generally be inflicting less hits in general so that balances out. Also, Wraithguard already typically killed anything they shot at anyway so people are effectively complaining "well now my dead thing is even deader, no fair!"
Now looking at a single Wraith Knight-Yes, each shot can do more damage, but is that increased damage potential really THAT scary/bad? Really, as people pointed out, the targets that suffer more from D weapons are MCs, Vehicles and multi-wound targets and part of building a good army list is to try to take multiples of things in case one of those choices dies horribly before it can do something meaningful. That is why only taking ONE Wraithknight in a list was not as strong as taking two. One was not that hard to deal with but 2 helped ensure you'd get at least some meaningful millage out of at least one of the Wraithknights. That is, unless you deployed like a dummy against a White Scars bike army =/. Also, putting your single Riptide, Leman Russ or whatever on the table across from a Wraith Knight, rather than keeping that Riptide, Leman Russ or whatever in reserves, is poor play and just asking for that thing to be killed anyway.
So overall, those complaining about D-Scythes/ranged D weapons in an Eldar army really need to just learn how to play against them or build better army lists IMO. Throwing your hands in the air and going "OP, no fair, if we lose to D-Scythes that means we did not lose to a better player but because they took an OP unit!" That kind of mentality is a cop-out and part of what is wrong in this hobby. Through tactics, strategy and player skill, you can mitigate the effectiveness of Eldar D-Weapons and rather than complain about how OP they appear to be, why not focus on what you can do to play around these things?
gigasnail wrote: Learn to play, guys. I'm so glad to hear there's not a real probelm with game design or balance, the issue is just me.
You said it, not me!
In all seriousness, if that is ALL you got out of my post, you're not really hearing me. Yes, the game is not the most balanced in the context of being played right out of the BRB. However, with what changes many tournament formats impose upon how armies can be built and how missions are won, the game is relatively balanced in that context. Indeed, TOs strive to make competitive play a fun and balanced experience for everyone and THAT is what this discussion is about.
If part of the solution to dealing with the new Eldar is "learning how to play," as it is with any new codex release, then learn how to play rather than complaining about some numbers crunched in a vacuum. If part of the problem with the new Eldar codex genuinely IS that they have some options that are too strong, then how to limit those strengths will be something each TO will need to figure out.
My problem is with the part of the discussion that goes "math says X shots do Y wounds to Z targets, therefore Eldar are OP and require no skill!" without supplying any meaningful alternatives/sollutions or real world game play experience to support their positions.
Honestly, I don't know what else can be said that I have not already said because there are no new points that have been raised that actually address what I've been pointing out. However, perhaps I need to expound a bit on what my points are or mean?
Overall, as I've already pointed out, saying X weapon does Y wounds against Z targets-as a blanket statement in a vacuum setting-may be interesting and informative BUT it is hardly demonstrative of what we can expect to see in real world game play. This is because of the various factors I pointed out earlier such as player skill, army lists, terrain, reserve rolls and any other number of factors that may prevent the results one might expect from playing math-hammer instead of warhammer. Therefore, basing the doom and gloom on math-hammer rather than actual real world experience is foolishness. For example, it doesn't matter if you have a weapon that, in ideal circumstances, will wipe out an entire person's army if those ideal circumstances can't be met...
Specifically, a single unit of D-Scythe Wraithguard will generally cost around 455 to take, at a minimum (e.g., 210(5x WG w/ 5D-Scythe+110(Serpent)+95(Archon w/ WWP)+40(Warrior tax for Archon)). Taking this combo also has a hidden cost of forcing you to structure your army around it-which can be unduly limiting (e.g., Dark Eldar allied detachment/Eldar Cad). Consequently, if (1) they do not destroy around 400 points of models in a game; or, (2) if they do not destroy a target worth sacrificing 400+points of models to destroy; they are an inefficient tool or waste of points. Indeed, they might kill a Leman Russ, Wraith Knight or any other vehicle or MC in the game with relative ease-assuming that the target does not have an invulnerable save-but how many of those targets are really worth investing 455 points to take out?
Short and simple, the answer is not many. Realistically, you can expect this unit to do some damage when they drop but then they are done for the rest of the game. For me, the only reason I would take D-Scythes with a WWP is to deal with Centurion Stars or other death-star type units-and only in an ITC format where Invisibility is nerfed. The same analysis can apply to regular D-Cannon equipped Wraithguard, only while these guys may get a "6" result, they will generally be inflicting less hits in general so that balances out. Also, Wraithguard already typically killed anything they shot at anyway so people are effectively complaining "well now my dead thing is even deader, no fair!"
Now looking at a single Wraith Knight-Yes, each shot can do more damage, but is that increased damage potential really THAT scary/bad? Really, as people pointed out, the targets that suffer more from D weapons are MCs, Vehicles and multi-wound targets and part of building a good army list is to try to take multiples of things in case one of those choices dies horribly before it can do something meaningful. That is why only taking ONE Wraithknight in a list was not as strong as taking two. One was not that hard to deal with but 2 helped ensure you'd get at least some meaningful millage out of at least one of the Wraithknights. That is, unless you deployed like a dummy against a White Scars bike army =/. Also, putting your single Riptide, Leman Russ or whatever on the table across from a Wraith Knight, rather than keeping that Riptide, Leman Russ or whatever in reserves, is poor play and just asking for that thing to be killed anyway.
So overall, those complaining about D-Scythes/ranged D weapons in an Eldar army really need to just learn how to play against them or build better army lists IMO. Throwing your hands in the air and going "OP, no fair, if we lose to D-Scythes that means we did not lose to a better player but because they took an OP unit!" That kind of mentality is a cop-out and part of what is wrong in this hobby. Through tactics, strategy and player skill, you can mitigate the effectiveness of Eldar D-Weapons and rather than complain about how OP they appear to be, why not focus on what you can do to play around these things?
Why do you *need* to take the Dark Eldar contingent for the D-Scythe Wraithguard? What's wrong with just taking them in a Serpent and not bothering with the WWP gimmick? That drops a whole bunch of cost and list construction awkwardness, and still allows you to get them nearly anywhere by turn 2 with a very strong degree of certainty and safety in a very well protected AV12 Fast Skimmer.
The "L2P" retort is ignoring the reality of the situation here. There's nothing different or new to learn about fighting these units, they operate identically to the way they did before, there's no new trick or weakness GW snuck in there. They're just vastly more powerful than they were previously.
Vaktathi, Wraithguard taken in a Serpent without a WWP can easily be shot down along the way, leaving the Wraithguard stranded. Ask any Eldar player and they'll tell you how easy it is to kill a Serpent. So acting like that is a viable or guaranteed alternative to using a WWP is rather naive. But you can just run some numbers and use that math-hammer of yours to realize how easy it is to kill an AV12 vehicle with a 4+ cover save and 3 HP (or no cover save if you have access to Ignores Cover weapons).
Also, if your argument is "nothing is changed except they are stronger" then you have to ask yourself, will that increase in strength make them appear in every/most Eldar list(s)? How often did you actually ever see them or expect to see them, anyway?
Overall, the irony in your last comment is that ignoring being told to "l2p" is actually ignoring reality, not the other way around. This is because with any new release, you really DO have to learn how to play and adjust to that new release.
For example, the DE release giving WWP access to Eldar made D-Scythe drops a thing, but not a very prevalent one-and yet you still had to learn how to play to deal with this threat. The new Eldar release make them more of a thing, but it remains to be seen how prevalent they become. Therefore, if D-Scythe bombs DO become more prevalent, you WILL need to "l2p" against that tactic... Just like you have to have an answer to drop-pod Marines or any other new option/combo that pops up in the meta. Indeed, the better tournament players are the ones that can look at whatever is in a meta and come up with an answer to it, and since this is a topic about tournaments/competitive play, being told to "l2p" is something that should be considered. I mean, are you really saying that Eldar are so OP that they will not take any skill to win with in tournaments and no other army has an answer or stands a chance against them?
As someone who plays Eldar (I've got probably over 4000pts of Eldar sitting here just a few feet away, including 5 Wave Serpents) and who has played against Eldar for many years, Wave Serpents and not stunningly easy to kill.
They're not the hardest thing in the game to kill, but between cover and now possibly invul saves, coupled with AV12 and the Serpent Shield to downgrade pens, stopping them *before* they get to where they want to go, often with only a single turn to do so, is definitely a difficult thing to do. Particularly if there are multiple threats an opponent must engage.
As for having to learn to play and adjust, the reality is that there's nothing new in terms of defeating these units. They have no new weaknesses. The WWP tactic isn't something new. The Wraithguard are just better at killing anything they get to and better at killing a much wider array of units.
If you'd seen and played against the WWP tactic before, nothing has changed. You fight that the exact same way you did before with the last book. Nothing new, except that it's way more powerful. Your defense doesn't change except that its less effective.
There's no new weaknesses to take advantage of or stunningly new tactics that weren't there before (at least in regards to Wraithguard), there's nothing new to "learn" that wasn't possible before. That's my point.
EDIT: sure, if someone's a relatively new player, or if there's been a radical change in the way something actually operates, we can say "L2P", but the units and tactics we're talking about aren't new, they're just way more effective, and I'd like to think we're basing the discussion around players who typically have a good idea as to what they're doing with a good deal of experience.
Vaktathi wrote: As someone who plays Eldar (I've got probably over 4000pts of Eldar sitting here just a few feet away, including 5 Wave Serpents) and who has played against Eldar for many years, Wave Serpents and not stunningly easy to kill.
They're not the hardest thing in the game to kill, but between cover and now possibly invul saves, coupled with AV12 and the Serpent Shield to downgrade pens, stopping them *before* they get to where they want to go, often with only a single turn to do so, is definitely a difficult thing to do. Particularly if there are multiple threats an opponent must engage.
As for having to learn to play and adjust, the reality is that there's nothing new in terms of defeating these units. They have no new weaknesses. The WWP tactic isn't something new. The Wraithguard are just better at killing anything they get to and better at killing a much wider array of units.
If you'd seen and played against the WWP tactic before, nothing has changed. You fight that the exact same way you did before with the last book. Nothing new, except that it's way more powerful. Your defense doesn't change except that its less effective.
There's no new weaknesses to take advantage of or stunningly new tactics that weren't there before (at least in regards to Wraithguard), there's nothing new to "learn" that wasn't possible before. That's my point.
First of all, in tournament play, if someone wants a particular Serpent dead-that serpent will die. It really is not going to be a problem to knock the D-Scythe Serpent out. Second of all, if you have not already learned how to take advantage of the limitations of D-Scythe drops from a WWP, then you need to L2P. There are ways to defend against and deal with them to the point of "ok, that's just one thing I need to deal with and plan for this game."
D-Scythes do not automatically mean that your big thing or powerful unit is dead.
There is nothing new to learn about how to deal with eldar. They die the same way they did last codex, only they're better, often cheaper, shoot more, and the ways they were dealt with are less effective now.
First of all, in tournament play, if someone wants a particular Serpent dead-that serpent will die.
Maybe. A gunline IG or Tau army can probably make sure of it, but again, between saves, speed, possibly terrain/LoS, and Serpent Shield, that's hardly a guarantee. A lot of armies won't be able to auto-kill a Wave Serpent turn 1 with certainty.
If they could, then Serpents in the previous book would not have been the issue that they were.
Second of all, if you have not already learned how to take advantage of the limitations of D-Scythe drops from a WWP, then you need to L2P. There are ways to defend against and deal with them to the point of "ok, that's just one thing I need to deal with and plan for this game."
And my point was that if you already have fought against it, your strategy doesn't change, but the Eldar are just way more effective.
D-Scythes do not automatically mean that your big thing or powerful unit is dead.
Depends on what it is. If it's a Knight, sure. If it's a Macharius or Russ squadron, it's almost certainly dead. If it's a Heirophant, it's probably still alive. If it's a Swarmlord, it's probably dead.
More like his comments are
Point costs don't matter
Comparisons between other armies don't matter
Math and stats don't matter
How much stronger they are from last codex doesn't matter
battle reps and play tests being posted everywhere showing how broken they are doesn't matter
Your problem is you need to learn to play better.
You see if you read my blog you will see learn how if you take a drop pod of space marines and deep strike perfectly in range turn 1 and you get lucky wig blind tests and shooting you can totally kill that knight in this blanket subjective scenario.
It's not eldar that's broken it's everyone else!!!
I'm glad you guys see my point.
More like his comments are
Point costs don't matter
Comparisons between other armies don't matter
Math and stats don't matter
How much stronger they are from last codex doesn't matter
battle reps and play tests being posted everywhere showing how broken they are doesn't matter
Your problem is you need to learn to play better.
You see if you read my blog you will see learn how if you take a drop pod of space marines and deep strike perfectly in range turn 1 and you get lucky wig blind tests and shooting you can totally kill that knight in this blanket subjective scenario.
It's not eldar that's broken it's everyone else!!!
I'm glad you guys see my point.
This quote perfectly sums up the attitude a lot of people appear to have towards my posts. However, what you are getting out of my posts is NOT what I am saying.
At the most basic level, all I am saying is that the Eldar codex is likely not as "OP" as you guys are making it out to be. Additionally, I am trying to point out that basing your position on mathhammer and scenarious that don't necessarily reflect real tournament play is faulty reasoning.
What would be more constructive is if you guys said "I play x army with this type of list and I see these kinds of results against X kind of Eldar units..."
However, simply saying "27 point Scatter Laser Bikes-game over!" Is not helpful.
More like his comments are
Point costs don't matter
Comparisons between other armies don't matter
Math and stats don't matter
How much stronger they are from last codex doesn't matter
battle reps and play tests being posted everywhere showing how broken they are doesn't matter
Your problem is you need to learn to play better.
You see if you read my blog you will see learn how if you take a drop pod of space marines and deep strike perfectly in range turn 1 and you get lucky wig blind tests and shooting you can totally kill that knight in this blanket subjective scenario.
It's not eldar that's broken it's everyone else!!!
I'm glad you guys see my point.
That does appear to be an accurate summation.
Nothing's changed in the new dex. Things just got better. L2P? Already did.
Basically every unit is better... The development team must have spent so much time buffing eldar to the exclusion of the other seventh edition codices. It shows too.
"am saying is that the Eldar codex is likely not as "OP" as you guys are making it out to be."
Remove the Wraithknight from tournament play and restrict heavy weapons on the jetbike to 1 in 3 and your statement has some validity.
#notapocalypse40k - let's stop the infiltration of Apocalypse game design in the 40k we used to know! Eliminating super heavies and gargantuans from GT level events.
mortetvie wrote: Vaktathi, Wraithguard taken in a Serpent without a WWP can easily be shot down along the way, leaving the Wraithguard stranded. Ask any Eldar player and they'll tell you how easy it is to kill a Serpent. So acting like that is a viable or guaranteed alternative to using a WWP is rather naive. But you can just run some numbers and use that math-hammer of yours to realize how easy it is to kill an AV12 vehicle with a 4+ cover save and 3 HP (or no cover save if you have access to Ignores Cover weapons.
Morte you know of AV12, 3HP troop transports that are harder to kill than Serpents?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Nevermind.... actually. This thread is like arguing over climate change, or taxes or god or whatever. Outs....
More like his comments are
Point costs don't matter
Comparisons between other armies don't matter
Math and stats don't matter
How much stronger they are from last codex doesn't matter
battle reps and play tests being posted everywhere showing how broken they are doesn't matter
Your problem is you need to learn to play better.
You see if you read my blog you will see learn how if you take a drop pod of space marines and deep strike perfectly in range turn 1 and you get lucky wig blind tests and shooting you can totally kill that knight in this blanket subjective scenario.
It's not eldar that's broken it's everyone else!!!
I'm glad you guys see my point.
This quote perfectly sums up the attitude a lot of people appear to have towards my posts. However, what you are getting out of my posts is NOT what I am saying.
At the most basic level, all I am saying is that the Eldar codex is likely not as "OP" as you guys are making it out to be. Additionally, I am trying to point out that basing your position on mathhammer and scenarious that don't necessarily reflect real tournament play is faulty reasoning.
What would be more constructive is if you guys said "I play x army with this type of list and I see these kinds of results against X kind of Eldar units..."
However, simply saying "27 point Scatter Laser Bikes-game over!" Is not helpful.
No the problem is you believe you are the only one who is right.
The fact is there are dozens of battkereps and playtests reported that completely back up our math, comparisons and scenarios.
And your comparison are already we'll know. Everyone knows what units can hurt eldar. They never changed and your blog doesn't change that.
And no one is arguing with you on the exact level of overpoweredness. Which is a deflection of the issue that eldar ARE overpowered.
You are being dismissive and demeaning to everyone else's opinion.
Pretty much saying learn to play better
Followed up by you guys just don't get my point.
That 27 point scat bike doesn't mean it's broken by itself but in the context of the entire army, it's relative cost to other comparable units, it's abilities compared to every other troop choice, and a entire weeks worth of play tests supports the intitial reaction of that units. Two major tournament organizers and like 5 blogs not counting people's own playtests prove this unit is broken. Your subjective isolated examples of how to deal with them doesn't change that because people already know what can and can't hurt a bike.
The fact is eldar are the most powerful dex right now and they do have some overpowered unit choice.
I just played in a 1000pt tourney. I used a CAD and used Scatterbikes & a WK, just to see how broken they could be.
I am not a B+ level player and can confidently say that I live in the top of the mid-tier, maybe even lower top-tier. Doesn't matter what army I play, I have a very high win-rate in non-tourney games, because I know how to play the book missions. Too bad most tourneys here don't use book mission, and I usually have trouble adapting.
Even given that, I lost 2 out of 3 games at this tourney and the 1 win was due to rolling a last turn '6' that killed a Spore sitting on an objective. My bikes died/ran off the board in EVERY SINGLE game and my WK was actually first blood in another game. The armies I played against were Imp Guard (Basilisks hurt bikes BAD), Tyranids (Dakka Tyrant and drop pod Devil Gaunts kill the bikes in 1 turn) and Space Wolves (even on the charge against only 3 wolves, my WK got squished). Even with Guide, my WK missed way too many times. 1 shot guns can never be broken, because they are just 1 shot.
So yeah, 'Eldar are broken to the point of no repair because no army has a counter"...oh wait YES THEY DO! You just have to field units that people overlook
The biggest downside with the bikes is that they now have a HUGE target painted on them and it does take much to wipe them. So let them all have Scatter lasers, it is not like they will get to use them for more than 2 turns
Wait, a whole page that is basically a L2P argument stating that the Eldar codex is fair, balanced and not at all flawed when compared to other books?
When did I miss this?
Y'see, the problem is....Eldar got buffs. Buffs in many forms. First they artificially shift the meta through the potential abundance of both Skyfire (Hello EMLs) and Strength D weapons. Then the units that were a bit under par with the last book because they were specialists who suffered in the Flyer and Mech meta (and as such would have become a lot stronger in a meta forced to shift away from that) got buffs as well.
Then, to top that all off they got Formations that buffed them even further. Everyone stating 'I'm not a top tier player but I took Eldar and lost, therefore they are not broken' needs to step back and consider the following.
Take two top tier players. Give one any other codex. Give the other Craftworlds. The units within Craftworlds are heavily stacked in their own favour. The Eldar have always been an army about synergy but now...welll...yeah. What more can I say? They have counters for just about everything you can throw at them and those counters are effective in multiple metas.
S6 multiple shot weapons perform remarkably well in a MC or Mech meta - just ask Tyranids. But they also function exceptionally well in a horde meta.
D-scythes are just amazing all rounders. Sure, 1/3rd of their shots will be a dud. But the other 2/3 times they will destroy any unit they come across. Furthermore the Wave Serpent is still a very sturdy transport. It's still a Fast Skimmer. The Serpent Shield is now disgustingly effective for removing threats to the transport. And if that's not enough you can still choose to stick Holofields on the bloody things to make them even harder to kill.
Why does everyone seem to think that Dark Eldar WWP shenanigans are mandatory? The Wave Serpent is still a monstrously effective beast that doesn't come with a tax.
The formations...hoo. The Aspect Host is downright evil. The shift from BS4 to BS5 on your shooting units? How many points is that actually worth, I wonder? I should imagine it's worth a pretty amount, especially when you consider it bumps the Exarchs (who have the longer ranged, more effective weapons) up to BS6.
And if you decide, hey, the best counter is psychic shenanigans? Hello Seer Council! Again, how much is harnessing a warp charge 66% of the time rather than 50% of the time actually worth? Again, probably a fair bit.
Hi all, new to the forums/40k. I'm currently building a CSM army.
I'm curious as to whether the people defending the new Craftworld codex are aware of how much everything costs in other codices. My biggest complaint about the craftworlds codex isn't about all the zany rules or common strength D weapons (aside from the warp spiders getting to move during MY shooting phase, I mean, wtf is that?) it's that the eldar don't pay for any of it.
Sure you can say, "Anyone can kill my scatbikes, they're only t4 3+!" but do you even care if they do? They're only 27 points apiece. A plasma gun costs me 15 points, not that it will matter, as my CSM models will never get in range to use them. I can take heldrakes and probably roast those bikes, but can't an elder player just take a bunch of ubiquitous and cheap EMLs and shoot them up?
And what do I do about wraith Knights? What's a point-efficient way of taking them out with a CSM army? I read a lot of elder apologists posting about how it's not that hard to kill them, but looking through my codex, I don't have anything that even remotely compares to a WK at any cost. Do I just shoot them with tons and tons of las cannons? Where do I get the points for that and still deal with the scatbikes/other nonsense?
I am a new player and as such I legitimately do need to L2P, so teach me how to play. It seems to me that everything in the elder codex beats everything in the CSM codex in a point-for-point comparison with distressingly few exceptions.
I realize this is an odd place for me to post as I don't plan on attending tourneys anytime soon, but I figured if the tourney players can't tell me how to field a reasonable anti-eldar CSM list no one can.
I'm curious as to whether the people defending the new Craftworld codex are aware of how much everything costs in other codices. My biggest complaint about the craftworlds codex isn't about all the zany rules or common strength D weapons (aside from the warp spiders getting to move during MY shooting phase, I mean, wtf is that?) it's that the eldar don't pay for any of it.
Sure you can say, "Anyone can kill my scatbikes, they're only t4 3+!" but do you even care if they do? They're only 27 points apiece. A plasma gun costs me 15 points, not that it will matter, as my CSM models will never get in range to use them. I can take heldrakes and probably roast those bikes, but can't an elder player just take a bunch of ubiquitous and cheap EMLs and shoot them up?
And what do I do about wraith Knights? What's a point-efficient way of taking them out with a CSM army? I read a lot of elder apologists posting about how it's not that hard to kill them, but looking through my codex, I don't have anything that even remotely compares to a WK at any cost. Do I just shoot them with tons and tons of las cannons? Where do I get the points for that and still deal with the scatbikes/other nonsense?
I am a new player and as such I legitimately do need to L2P, so teach me how to play. It seems to me that everything in the elder codex beats everything in the CSM codex in a point-for-point comparison with distressingly few exceptions.
I realize this is an odd place for me to post as I don't plan on attending tourneys anytime soon, but I figured if the tourney players can't tell me how to field a reasonable anti-eldar CSM list no one can.
This speaks more to the fact the CSM codex is just plain bad than the power of the eldar book. CSM and DA are both woefully underpowered and over costed codices that need a major overhaul to be competitive.
More like his comments are
Point costs don't matter
Comparisons between other armies don't matter
Math and stats don't matter
How much stronger they are from last codex doesn't matter
battle reps and play tests being posted everywhere showing how broken they are doesn't matter
Your problem is you need to learn to play better.
You see if you read my blog you will see learn how if you take a drop pod of space marines and deep strike perfectly in range turn 1 and you get lucky wig blind tests and shooting you can totally kill that knight in this blanket subjective scenario.
It's not eldar that's broken it's everyone else!!!
I'm glad you guys see my point.
This quote perfectly sums up the attitude a lot of people appear to have towards my posts. However, what you are getting out of my posts is NOT what I am saying.
At the most basic level, all I am saying is that the Eldar codex is likely not as "OP" as you guys are making it out to be. Additionally, I am trying to point out that basing your position on mathhammer and scenarious that don't necessarily reflect real tournament play is faulty reasoning.
What would be more constructive is if you guys said "I play x army with this type of list and I see these kinds of results against X kind of Eldar units..."
However, simply saying "27 point Scatter Laser Bikes-game over!" Is not helpful.
No the problem is you believe you are the only one who is right.
The fact is there are dozens of battkereps and playtests reported that completely back up our math, comparisons and scenarios.
And your comparison are already we'll know. Everyone knows what units can hurt eldar. They never changed and your blog doesn't change that.
And no one is arguing with you on the exact level of overpoweredness. Which is a deflection of the issue that eldar ARE overpowered.
You are being dismissive and demeaning to everyone else's opinion.
Pretty much saying learn to play better
Followed up by you guys just don't get my point.
That 27 point scat bike doesn't mean it's broken by itself but in the context of the entire army, it's relative cost to other comparable units, it's abilities compared to every other troop choice, and a entire weeks worth of play tests supports the intitial reaction of that units. Two major tournament organizers and like 5 blogs not counting people's own playtests prove this unit is broken. Your subjective isolated examples of how to deal with them doesn't change that because people already know what can and can't hurt a bike.
The fact is eldar are the most powerful dex right now and they do have some overpowered unit choice.
It's becoming painfully obvious that Morte has a chip on his shoulder about playing an easy mode army. His marathon length posts just ramble in circles yet he thinks we don't see the short obvious message, "L2P guys!"
Here's a fun exercise, since he clearly knows more then everyone else and sees all these failure points in the new book, how about he posts a TAC lists from another 7th ED codex that he thinks is an even match up to the eldar. Go, ahead Morte, I request your version of a DE list that can go toe to toe, or how about Blood Angels....GK...maybe Orks...
My guess is you can't but will default to your useless defense that lists, point costs and math are all liars and we need to learn to play better.
Your in denial and I feel for you, I really do, but your favorite army really is easy mode.
Forgive if some links are posted but I was wondering if there are batreps links published by players who have playtested with the new book.
All the reviews are saying OP-broken see: numbers, play test, and reasons. Well...I've seen the numbers and reasons. Now I want to see (or read) the results of ACTUAL games.
.
Your posts are making less sense as the thread goes on.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Brillow80 wrote:Forgive if some links are posted but I was wondering if there are batreps links published by players who have playtested with the new book.
All the reviews are saying OP-broken see: numbers, play test, and reasons. Well...I've seen the numbers and reasons. Now I want to see (or read) the results of ACTUAL games.
I am a huge fan of Frontline; and Reece and I are friends, that being said there is a bit of sky is falling syndrome at FLG.
They had a similar reaction to summoning and maelstrom missions. Neither of which caused the predicted demise of competitive 40k. Just like Eldar won't, and never have. Lest we all forget that the Eldar codex has always been a meta busting/shifting codex upon its release.
.
Your posts are making less sense as the thread goes on.
the point was that we know the CSM dex is ass, and it's hardly the only one. having another over-powered/horribly externally balanced codex doesn't really help the situation.
internally, the book seems wonderfully balanced. everything's good; it's a rarity.
More like his comments are
Point costs don't matter
Comparisons between other armies don't matter
Math and stats don't matter
How much stronger they are from last codex doesn't matter
battle reps and play tests being posted everywhere showing how broken they are doesn't matter
Your problem is you need to learn to play better.
You see if you read my blog you will see learn how if you take a drop pod of space marines and deep strike perfectly in range turn 1 and you get lucky wig blind tests and shooting you can totally kill that knight in this blanket subjective scenario.
It's not eldar that's broken it's everyone else!!!
I'm glad you guys see my point.
This quote perfectly sums up the attitude a lot of people appear to have towards my posts. However, what you are getting out of my posts is NOT what I am saying.
At the most basic level, all I am saying is that the Eldar codex is likely not as "OP" as you guys are making it out to be. Additionally, I am trying to point out that basing your position on mathhammer and scenarious that don't necessarily reflect real tournament play is faulty reasoning.
What would be more constructive is if you guys said "I play x army with this type of list and I see these kinds of results against X kind of Eldar units..."
However, simply saying "27 point Scatter Laser Bikes-game over!" Is not helpful.
No the problem is you believe you are the only one who is right.
The fact is there are dozens of battkereps and playtests reported that completely back up our math, comparisons and scenarios.
And your comparison are already we'll know. Everyone knows what units can hurt eldar. They never changed and your blog doesn't change that.
And no one is arguing with you on the exact level of overpoweredness. Which is a deflection of the issue that eldar ARE overpowered.
You are being dismissive and demeaning to everyone else's opinion.
Pretty much saying learn to play better
Followed up by you guys just don't get my point.
That 27 point scat bike doesn't mean it's broken by itself but in the context of the entire army, it's relative cost to other comparable units, it's abilities compared to every other troop choice, and a entire weeks worth of play tests supports the intitial reaction of that units. Two major tournament organizers and like 5 blogs not counting people's own playtests prove this unit is broken. Your subjective isolated examples of how to deal with them doesn't change that because people already know what can and can't hurt a bike.
The fact is eldar are the most powerful dex right now and they do have some overpowered unit choice.
It's becoming painfully obvious that Morte has a chip on his shoulder about playing an easy mode army. His marathon length posts just ramble in circles yet he thinks we don't see the short obvious message, "L2P guys!"
Here's a fun exercise, since he clearly knows more then everyone else and sees all these failure points in the new book, how about he posts a TAC lists from another 7th ED codex that he thinks is an even match up to the eldar. Go, ahead Morte, I request your version of a DE list that can go toe to toe, or how about Blood Angels....GK...maybe Orks...
My guess is you can't but will default to your useless defense that lists, point costs and math are all liars and we need to learn to play better.
Your in denial and I feel for you, I really do, but your favorite army really is easy mode.
First of all, my screen name is mortetvie, or mort for short-I suppose. It is three words in French, mort=death, et=and, vie=life. So saying morte is technically incorrect but that is neither here nor there...
Second of all, and this is not directed at you alone Red Corsair as many others are guilty of this, it is sad how several people throughout this thread choose to make personal attacks or attack points I never said/made as if I had made them. Both are logical fallacies, poor ways to argue and generally poor form.
What is actually painfully obvious is when I say "math-hammer and your opinion of how strong things are versus how many points they cost is not the be-all, end-all for determining whether a codex or unit is OP" you guys apparently hear "l2p nubs, mathhammer and unit comparisons don't matter." Indeed, it is one thing to say that X is not the ultimate factor in determining something-which is what I've been saying-and quite another to say X is not a factor to consider at all and we can disregard it-which is what you guys have been saying that I've been saying and consequently misquoting/misrepresenting me and my points.
So saying that I have a chip on my shoulder about playing an easy mode army is baseless and a pointless personal attack that does nothing to further this discussion. Indeed, I've played Eldar when they were both good and bad and I actually have played and still play a myriad of other armies through times they were considered good and bad so what is this deal about me playing in EZ mode?
If anything, it appears like people like you have a chip on their shoulder regarding their armies not being as strong as Eldar. It seems like anyone on this thread that has been most vocal about Eldar being OP and unfair and game breaking are people that play armies that generally don't have a very powerful codex to begin with. Therefore, asking me to make a good Dark Eldar list that can handle Eldar is like asking me to pick someone from the special Olympics to compete against an actual Olympic athlete. Inherently stronger armies will always have an advantage against inherently weaker ones and so one thing I have been trying to point out is that it is not automatically correct to assume Eldar are OP when you are comparing Eldar to other armies that already had inherently badly written rules. And BTW, Eldar have generally always been a hard counter to Dark Eldar, sad but true.
So ultimately, the problem likely isn't that Eldar are too strong-the problem is likely that some of the older armies are too weak. Indeed, one of my main points was that the top armies and lists that are prevalent in tournaments will all do fine against Eldar and have plenty of answers against them. So for you, or anyone else, to come on here and go "yeah, well, X under powered codex can't compete with Eldar" is missing the point and misstating the issue-especially of this thread.
Even if they took Eldar out of the game entirely, the current incarnation of a lot of armies can't compete in a tournament setting which just further demonstrates the problem is not Eldar but those respective armies. Therefore, stop blaming Eldar for your army being bad =/.
Finally, and to reiterate, I never said nor maintained that statistics and other useful sources of data are wrong/liars-only that they are limited in what they can tells us about something and that we still need to do some robust testing of the codex to make a better determination on (1) if it truly is OP; and, (2) what should/could be done about Eldar in a tournament setting.
First of all, my screen name is mortetvie, or mort for short-I suppose. It is three words in French, mort=death, et=and, vie=life. So saying morte is technically incorrect but that is neither here nor there...
Second of all, and this is not directed at you alone Red Corsair as many others are guilty of this, it is sad how several people throughout this thread choose to make personal attacks or attack points I never said/made as if I had made them. Both are logical fallacies, poor ways to argue and generally poor form.
What is actually painfully obvious is when I say "math-hammer and your opinion of how strong things are versus how many points they cost is not the be-all, end-all for determining whether a codex or unit is OP" you guys apparently hear "l2p nubs, mathhammer and unit comparisons don't matter." Indeed, it is one thing to say that X is not the ultimate factor in determining something-which is what I've been saying-and quite another to say X is not a factor to consider at all and we can disregard it-which is what you guys have been saying that I've been saying and consequently misquoting/misrepresenting me and my points.
So saying that I have a chip on my shoulder about playing an easy mode army is baseless and a pointless personal attack that does nothing to further this discussion. Indeed, I've played Eldar when they were both good and bad and I actually have played and still play a myriad of other armies through times they were considered good and bad so what is this deal about me playing in EZ mode?
If anything, it appears like people like you have a chip on their shoulder regarding their armies not being as strong as Eldar. It seems like anyone on this thread that has been most vocal about Eldar being OP and unfair and game breaking are people that play armies that generally don't have a very powerful codex to begin with. Therefore, asking me to make a good Dark Eldar list that can handle Eldar is like asking me to pick someone from the special Olympics to compete against an actual Olympic athlete. Inherently stronger armies will always have an advantage against inherently weaker ones and so one thing I have been trying to point out is that it is not automatically correct to assume Eldar are OP when you are comparing Eldar to other armies that already had inherently badly written rules. And BTW, Eldar have generally always been a hard counter to Dark Eldar, sad but true.
So ultimately, the problem likely isn't that Eldar are too strong-the problem is likely that some of the older armies are too weak. Indeed, one of my main points was that the top armies and lists that are prevalent in tournaments will all do fine against Eldar and have plenty of answers against them. So for you, or anyone else, to come on here and go "yeah, well, X under powered codex can't compete with Eldar" is missing the point and misstating the issue-especially of this thread.
Even if they took Eldar out of the game entirely, the current incarnation of a lot of armies can't compete in a tournament setting which just further demonstrates the problem is not Eldar but those respective armies. Therefore, stop blaming Eldar for your army being bad =/.
Finally, and to reiterate, I never said nor maintained that statistics and other useful sources of data are wrong/liars-only that they are limited in what they can tells us about something and that we still need to do some robust testing of the codex to make a better determination on (1) if it truly is OP; and, (2) what should/could be done about Eldar in a tournament setting.
Morty, you're saying "Eldar aren't OP, everyone else is just too weak!" That's literally the same thing as saying they're OP, just using different terminology.
You've agreed above that Eldar are the strongest and that other armies are weaker, thus putting everyone else at a disadvantage.
You honestly can't see how that might upset people?
Brillow80 wrote: Forgive if some links are posted but I was wondering if there are batreps links published by players who have playtested with the new book.
All the reviews are saying OP-broken see: numbers, play test, and reasons. Well...I've seen the numbers and reasons. Now I want to see (or read) the results of ACTUAL games.
Anyone hook me up, thanks?
how about the frontline gaming games where reece played and challenged anyone to beat him with his new eldar for 250 bucks. He played less than optimal lists and beat tournament quality lists in other armies, without knowing all the rules, dozens of f ups, and sub par choices. He finally lost from just plain not knowing how to play them against someone.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Brillow80 wrote: Thanks Gib, I've seen the challenge but the twitch feed is live stream and I'm too busy. Got any others?
The man gave you exactly what you asked for, but instead you requested some other source.
Here are the rules for a local upcoming RTT (not run by me):
All standard rules apply for building armies, save the following.
-Bound armies.
-No ranged D Weapons. Melee D weapons are okay.
-No stomping units outside of Close Combat.
-Forge World is a go.
-Lords of war are limited only by the rules above, meaning if it has D weapons that it cant switch out, you can not take it and if it has a stomp it will be limited to only stomping units it is locked in combat with.
-Lords of War - They will be limited to one per army.
-Eldar wraith weapons - are allowed, but will all have the distort rule for all their D weapons that are ranged.
-Fortress Assault rules apply.
No real limits other than no D Weapons from buildings
-Two CAD, allies, and formations are allowed.
-Blast and templates - Follow the 6th edition rules for levels.
I'm with Mortetvie on this one; the ad hominem attacks aside, none of you make any salient points
applicable to the real tournament circuit.
The only change the Craftworld codex really has on the competitive meta is that it
screws over Necrons and Deathstars and kills Serpent Spam. Is it more powerful than
other 7E codices? Yes, but so was the old Eldar codex. Did GW miss an opportunity to balance Eldar
for 7E? Yes, but any true power cut would have met equal if not greater outrage than the current wine festival.
Change is good. Change is what keeps the game alive. Embrace change. Adapt to the new meta. Paint new miniatures.
Asmodai Asmodean wrote: I'm with Mortetvie on this one; the ad hominem attacks aside, none of you make any salient points
applicable to the real tournament circuit.
The only change the Craftworld codex really has on the competitive meta is that it
screws over Necrons and Deathstars and kills Serpent Spam. Is it more powerful than
other 7E codices? Yes, but so was the old Eldar codex. Did GW miss an opportunity to balance Eldar
for 7E? Yes, but any true power cut would have met equal if not greater outrage than the current wine festival.
Certainly didn't see anything near this reaction with the AM, DE, GK, SE and Ork books...
Change is good. Change is what keeps the game alive. Embrace change. Adapt to the new meta. Paint new miniatures.
What is there to change to fight Eldar? There's nothing new about fighting them, there's no new secret weakness to figure out, they're just way better. If I'm playing IG, CSM, or GK, what do I radically change about my army to face the new Eldar book that I wasn't already doing before? People keep piping the "adapt" line, but aside from just bringing a bigger tube of lube, nobody has really suggested anything new that people didn't already do before.
Morty, you're saying "Eldar aren't OP, everyone else is just too weak!" That's literally the same thing as saying they're OP, just using different terminology.
You've agreed above that Eldar are the strongest and that other armies are weaker, thus putting everyone else at a disadvantage.
You honestly can't see how that might upset people?
Sad how I make a post about people misquoting me and then arguing against something I never said... And then someone goes ahead and misquotes me and attacks a point I never made... Did you even really read what I said MWHistorian?
I never said "Eldar are not OP, everyone else is just too weak", I said specifically that in the current tournament/competitive environment and meta, the top armies will have no problem against Eldar. This thread is how the new Eldar will affect tournaments, not how OP Eldar are compared to underpowered armies-the latter being a point that many others seem to think is relevant to this thread.
So, Vakathi, AM, DE, GK, SE and Ork books didn't get the same reaction because they were not written with very strong rules and subsequently are not dominating the tournament meta. Those armies subsequently don't compete very well against Flyrant nids, Necrons, Tau, Space Marines or any other top level army out there anyway. So by picking on Eldar and complaining about how OP they are compared to X under powered army is actually an illogical basis for determining whether Eldar are OP or not.
After one week... nobody knows. And that's exactly why people need to calm down and play games.
In my own head though I think these army's will do fine, or even have an advantage:
Daemons of several varieties Necrons, particularly AV13 walls and wraith spam Podding marines, especially allied combinations that pod centurions Nids with lots of Malowcs Tau with lots of interceptor
After one week... nobody knows. And that's exactly why people need to calm down and play games.
In my own head though I think these army's will do fine, or even have an advantage:
Daemons of several varieties
Necrons, particularly AV13 walls and wraith spam
Podding marines, especially allied combinations that pod centurions
Nids with lots of Malowcs
Tau with lots of interceptor
Pretty much this, plus Flyrant nids and I'd add White Scar type lists. Also, with the right FW units, Imperial Guard can be pretty scary as Earthshaker Artillery with ignores cover are pretty brutal to anything Eldar can field.
Dozer Blades wrote: Why not just use the rules for Distort instead of D for the first few weeks if it is not such a big deal then ?
Why didn't Necron players use the old Reanimation Protocol rules for a few weeks until everyone knew they weren't OP.
Going in and trying to modify the game in this way is a Pandora's box of never ending problems, hurt feelings, and unrealistic expectations. And it kills any hope of ever having a unified way to play 40K across the country.
Are we going to change every game mechanic that 51% of people think is broken? What are the rules for undoing these changes when things are no longer broken? Who gets to decide what mechanics we vote on? It's a terrible mess.
If a TO wants to put his money where his mouth is and change things that he thinks will make the game better for his event, more power to him. I personally think in the long run making these kinds of changes is worse than living with a broken book (which again, no one even knows for sure that it is).
Dozer Blades wrote: Why not just use the rules for Distort instead of D for the first few weeks if it is not such a big deal then ?
First of all, why bother going back to using the Distort rules? Ultimately, how to rule/handle D weapons in the Eldar codex is a decision to be made by TOs in a tournament setting and between players in a casual/pick-up game setting..
I don't think so - usually I am against changing rules, restrictions and bans but not this time. I have never used IK because some people think they are OP - eldar players could do the same if its really not a big deal just at first to help disprove the naysayers.
Dozer Blades wrote: I don't think so - usually I am against changing rules, restrictions and bans but not this time. I have never used IK because some people think they are OP - eldar players could do the same if its really not a big deal just at first to help disprove the naysayers.
That's messed up logic.
Perhaps the Eldar players need XYZ to compete. That in and of itself does not mean XYZ is broken.
Asking them to intentionally handicap themselves to assuage the perceptions of a vocal minority, and then using their reluctance to do so as evidence of your argument is disingenuous.
It's just that I don't remember this strong of a reaction before. Personally I don't have any issue with the scatbikes - they are crazy good but nowhere near as survivable as the previous incarnation of the serpent. I totally understand where people are coming from in regards to ranged D though.
I wish the developers would put as much effort into the other codices with great rules for practically every unit.
Dozer Blades wrote: Here are the rules for a local upcoming RTT (not run by me):
All standard rules apply for building armies, save the following.
-Bound armies.
-No ranged D Weapons. Melee D weapons are okay.
-No stomping units outside of Close Combat.
-Forge World is a go.
-Lords of war are limited only by the rules above, meaning if it has D weapons that it cant switch out, you can not take it and if it has a stomp it will be limited to only stomping units it is locked in combat with.
-Lords of War - They will be limited to one per army.
-Eldar wraith weapons - are allowed, but will all have the distort rule for all their D weapons that are ranged.
-Fortress Assault rules apply.
No real limits other than no D Weapons from buildings
-Two CAD, allies, and formations are allowed.
-Blast and templates - Follow the 6th edition rules for levels.
Thoughts ?
All reasonable except for limiting ranged Destroyer. They are more powerful than Distort, but not game breaking. WraithKnighs will bring two D shots to the game.
Dozer Blades wrote: Here are the rules for a local upcoming RTT (not run by me):
All standard rules apply for building armies, save the following.
-Bound armies.
-No ranged D Weapons. Melee D weapons are okay.
-No stomping units outside of Close Combat.
-Forge World is a go.
-Lords of war are limited only by the rules above, meaning if it has D weapons that it cant switch out, you can not take it and if it has a stomp it will be limited to only stomping units it is locked in combat with.
-Lords of War - They will be limited to one per army.
-Eldar wraith weapons - are allowed, but will all have the distort rule for all their D weapons that are ranged.
-Fortress Assault rules apply.
No real limits other than no D Weapons from buildings
-Two CAD, allies, and formations are allowed.
-Blast and templates - Follow the 6th edition rules for levels.
Thoughts ?
All reasonable except for limiting ranged Destroyer. They are more powerful than Distort, but not game breaking. WraithKnighs will bring two D shots to the game.
Two.
That said, I would play in this tourney.
The problem isn't so much Wraithknights bringing two long ranged D weapons but more the fact an Eldar Force Org chart could put ranged D in 10/18 Force Org slots if they wanted.
I actually like these tournament rules. Might pitch this to my local group.
Dozer Blades wrote: It's just that I don't remember this strong of a reaction before.
I think that's a product of 2 things.
1. The prevalence of the internet community. The internet was just not as important, or wasn't around at all for 5th ed grey knights, nidzilla, 3.5 chaos, or whatever your favorite broken codex of yesterday was.
2. The rise of groups like Frontline Gaming setting the expectation that TOs should/will change the game if enough people complain.
And I really don't want to seem like I'm coming down on FLG. They are a HUGE net good to the 40K community. But on this particular topic I think they have it wrong. Like I was saying earlier, soliciting community feedback in the way they do and continually adding fuel to the "this is broken" fire sets the expectation that TOs will/should do something if enough people think the game is "broken". That incentives people to react as loudly as possible to the things they don't like, which doesn't make for civil discourse.
DarkStarSabre wrote: The problem isn't so much Wraithknights bringing two long ranged D weapons but more the fact an Eldar Force Org chart could put ranged D in 10/18 Force Org slots if they wanted.
I actually like these tournament rules. Might pitch this to my local group.
Sorry, I can only see 7 slots, 3 Elite, 3 FA and 1 LoW. What are the other 3?
30 WraithGuard to fill your Elite.
3 Hemlocks for your FA The WK.
38 D-weps, with no formation goofery, just the normal, old-fashoined ForceOrganizationChart.
1275 in points, plenty for Troops and Spiritseers.
mortetvie wrote: Vaul's Wrath in heavy support makes for the other three.
There we go.
And to make it more amusing...
9 of these slots get Strength D in blast or template form (so, can deal with hordes).
Furthermore, if you're worried this leaves you vulnerable to flyers? Well, you can still mount your Troops as well as the 3 Elites in Wave Serpents with Twin-linked EMLs for Skyfire.
Of course, this is just one problem compounding on top of another. Strength D should really not be so freely available in Template or Blast format.
mortetvie wrote: If I see 9 Vaul's Wrath batteries and serpents equipped with EMLs across from me, I'd be pretty happy.
Odds are you won't see more than 1 Vaul's Wrath battery at most. Like I said elsewhere, it sits in far too crowded a Force Org slot - much like the Tyranid Elites slot. However, you cannot dismiss their existence based on that. The amount of Destroyer weapons the Eldar can pull out is only part of the problem. The fact that they got so much skyfire for free in EMLs...well, that's silly too.
"The fact that they got so much skyfire for free in EMLs...well, that's silly too."
The Dark Reapers Exarch's EML is now 20 points rather than the old 10 (+10 for Skyfire) for the launcher. It isn't free, at least not on models I own. It just is no longer an option.
Dozer Blades wrote: It's just that I don't remember this strong of a reaction before.
I think that's a product of 2 things.
1. The prevalence of the internet community. The internet was just not as important, or wasn't around at all for 5th ed grey knights, nidzilla, 3.5 chaos, or whatever your favorite broken codex of yesterday was.
2. The rise of groups like Frontline Gaming setting the expectation that TOs should/will change the game if enough people complain.
And I really don't want to seem like I'm coming down on FLG. They are a HUGE net good to the 40K community. But on this particular topic I think they have it wrong. Like I was saying earlier, soliciting community feedback in the way they do and continually adding fuel to the "this is broken" fire sets the expectation that TOs will/should do something if enough people think the game is "broken". That incentives people to react as loudly as possible to the things they don't like, which doesn't make for civil discourse.
#1 here is simply untrue. If you do a search on Dakka Dakka and do some math you will see that the last 12 months of posting is actually less frequent than any time other than the first year of 6th ed.
May 2010-April 2011 =1,233,321 posts (5e)
May 2011- April 2012 = 1,198,223 Posts (5e)
May 2012 - April 2013 = 617,769 posts (6e)
May 2013 - April 2014 = 1,175,663 Posts (6e)
May 2014 - Present = 1,005,774 Posts (7e)
So you can see that the height of 5th ed (broken GK etc) had a few hundred thousand more posts than current usage.
Throw in with that many other 40k forums closing down, or having much less traffic....Sorry but it simply doesn't hold.
The game is worse that is why you see more complaining, and more people leaving it for greener pastures. This new codex doesn't help this because it rams apoc down the throat of the community. Which many people don't seem to want. Broken or not this codex is bad for the game.
#1 here is simply untrue. If you do a search on Dakka Dakka and do some math you will see that the last 12 months of posting is actually less frequent than any time other than the first year of 6th ed.
May 2010-April 2011 =1,233,321 posts (5e) May 2011- April 2012 = 1,198,223 Posts (5e) May 2012 - April 2013 = 617,769 posts (6e) May 2013 - April 2014 = 1,175,663 Posts (6e) May 2014 - Present = 1,005,774 Posts (7e)
So you can see that the height of 5th ed (broken GK etc) had a few hundred thousand more posts than current usage.
Throw in with that many other 40k forums closing down, or having much less traffic....Sorry but it simply doesn't hold.
The game is worse that is why you see more complaining, and more people leaving it for greener pastures. This new codex doesn't help this because it rams apoc down the throat of the community. Which many people don't seem to want. Broken or not this codex is bad for the game.
Dakka traffic (which isn't even down that much) is not a good measure of internet activity. Much of the internet content has shifted away from Dakka and traditional forums, that does not mean the internet is less important.
Either way, 5th ed GKs was only one of the examples I gave.
And whether the game is better or worse is subjective. It's certainly less tournament friendly. But it has far more content, options, and hobbying opportunities than ever before. And I don't think it's any less balanced than when any of the aforementioned books were running around.
What's different now is the internet community has become an echo chamber of people complaining about how the game isn't what it used to be. And there are several major websites/internet personalities feeding that mentality. You didn't have that in 5th when many of the same personalities were telling everything to play the game as it was written.
Maybe that says something about how the game was written?
I would argue that the game is less balanced than it has ever been as far as producing fun close games. While you may not see a large shift from one book winning most often, it seemed to me at least that I found fewer hard counters, fewer terrible match-ups, and more enjoyable games.
Sure it has more content, and options but as to whether they are any good....that is up to each of us individually. Personally I'd prefer fewer more valid options.
No offense to you personally, but I think this statement is the core of the "Eldar Denial" problem. Because very few people are saying "the game is broken!" in the sense that core mechanics no longer function, or the new Eldar will table their opponents turn 1. The overriding concern is that the deck is so stacked in the Eldar player's favor now that the only way to have a chance of beating them is to bring tailored tournament-tier lists. It doesn't break the game, but it ruins it for some players. Eldar apologists seem to be looking at it as "Sure I'll win, but we can still have a game", while every one else looks at it through the lens of having little to no hope of eventual victory.
No offense to you personally, but I think this statement is the core of the "Eldar Denial" problem. Because very few people are saying "the game is broken!" in the sense that core mechanics no longer function, or the new Eldar will table their opponents turn 1. The overriding concern is that the deck is so stacked in the Eldar player's favor now that the only way to have a chance of beating them is to bring tailored tournament-tier lists. It doesn't break the game, but it ruins it for some players. Eldar apologists seem to be looking at it as "Sure I'll win, but we can still have a game", while every one else looks at it through the lens of having little to no hope of eventual victory.
Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
LOL....."I'm amazing at this game and because I'm awesome I always play a strong codex against bad players." Big fish small pond syndrome.
I hate the new Eldar book for the same reason I have generally hated the Knight Codex, data slate formations etc. IT is forcing Apocalypse into a regular scale game. Which is a game that I don't find enjoyable. Minimal tactics, lots of dice rolling, lots of luck in the game that can make the game unenjoyable.
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
LOL....."I'm amazing at this game and because I'm awesome I always play a strong codex against bad players." Big fish small pond syndrome.
I hate the new Eldar book for the same reason I have generally hated the Knight Codex, data slate formations etc. IT is forcing Apocalypse into a regular scale game. Which is a game that I don't find enjoyable. Minimal tactics, lots of dice rolling, lots of luck in the game that can make the game unenjoyable.
If there is so much luck and lack of skill involved now why is it the same players consistently finish in the top spots at major GTs, often not using the most "broken" things in the game?
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
LOL....."I'm amazing at this game and because I'm awesome I always play a strong codex against bad players." Big fish small pond syndrome.
I hate the new Eldar book for the same reason I have generally hated the Knight Codex, data slate formations etc. IT is forcing Apocalypse into a regular scale game. Which is a game that I don't find enjoyable. Minimal tactics, lots of dice rolling, lots of luck in the game that can make the game unenjoyable.
If there is so much luck and lack of skill involved now why is it the same players consistently finish in the top spots at major GTs, often not using the most "broken" things in the game?
Because those same players regularly change their armies? Many of these heroes of skill you glorify are guilty of alt-itis. The inability to stick to an army that has fallen out of place in the top dogs spot. The ones that do stick to their favorite army thru thick and thin do not put up numbers nearly as impressive.
Without massive nerfs for tournaments, you will see many of these all stars have switched to primary eldar. They play at home with their fulffy armies for fun. They come to tournaments practiced with the hardest lists they can find.
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
LOL....."I'm amazing at this game and because I'm awesome I always play a strong codex against bad players." Big fish small pond syndrome.
I hate the new Eldar book for the same reason I have generally hated the Knight Codex, data slate formations etc. IT is forcing Apocalypse into a regular scale game. Which is a game that I don't find enjoyable. Minimal tactics, lots of dice rolling, lots of luck in the game that can make the game unenjoyable.
If there is so much luck and lack of skill involved now why is it the same players consistently finish in the top spots at major GTs, often not using the most "broken" things in the game?
Because those same players regularly change their armies? Many of these heroes of skill you glorify are guilty of alt-itis. The inability to stick to an army that has fallen out of place in the top dogs spot. The ones that do stick to their favorite army thru thick and thin do not put up numbers nearly as impressive.
Without massive nerfs for tournaments, you will see many of these all stars have switched to primary eldar. They play at home with their fulffy armies for fun. They come to tournaments practiced with the hardest lists they can find.
The codex has been out for a week, and you're telling me you know that the top players have already switched to Eldar?
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
LOL....."I'm amazing at this game and because I'm awesome I always play a strong codex against bad players." Big fish small pond syndrome.
I hate the new Eldar book for the same reason I have generally hated the Knight Codex, data slate formations etc. IT is forcing Apocalypse into a regular scale game. Which is a game that I don't find enjoyable. Minimal tactics, lots of dice rolling, lots of luck in the game that can make the game unenjoyable.
If there is so much luck and lack of skill involved now why is it the same players consistently finish in the top spots at major GTs, often not using the most "broken" things in the game?
Ummm....most top GT players are using a good amount of the "broken" things in the game. I also did not say there was no skill involved there is, some of it is in list building, some on the table. That does not negate the fact that there is a ton of luck involved in the game now. You can work to minimize its impact but it is still there, and when I've played games where things like the Warp Storm Crippled an entire army in one turn....yeah luck is still huge.
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
LOL....."I'm amazing at this game and because I'm awesome I always play a strong codex against bad players." Big fish small pond syndrome.
I hate the new Eldar book for the same reason I have generally hated the Knight Codex, data slate formations etc. IT is forcing Apocalypse into a regular scale game. Which is a game that I don't find enjoyable. Minimal tactics, lots of dice rolling, lots of luck in the game that can make the game unenjoyable.
If there is so much luck and lack of skill involved now why is it the same players consistently finish in the top spots at major GTs, often not using the most "broken" things in the game?
Ummm....most top GT players are using a good amount of the "broken" things in the game. I also did not say there was no skill involved there is, some of it is in list building, some on the table. That does not negate the fact that there is a ton of luck involved in the game now. You can work to minimize its impact but it is still there, and when I've played games where things like the Warp Storm Crippled an entire army in one turn....yeah luck is still huge.
Prior to this edition I had played a game where my opponent failed 90% of his saves in a single turn (we did the math, I think this game was actually with Brothererekos if memory serves) and had his army crippled. That doesn't mean I think using dice to make saves brings too much luck into the game. Luck has always been a huge factor in this game, prior to 5th edition the missions used in tournaments themselves had a massive amount of luck and randomness involved, it's the reality of this game.
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
LOL....."I'm amazing at this game and because I'm awesome I always play a strong codex against bad players." Big fish small pond syndrome.
I hate the new Eldar book for the same reason I have generally hated the Knight Codex, data slate formations etc. IT is forcing Apocalypse into a regular scale game. Which is a game that I don't find enjoyable. Minimal tactics, lots of dice rolling, lots of luck in the game that can make the game unenjoyable.
If there is so much luck and lack of skill involved now why is it the same players consistently finish in the top spots at major GTs, often not using the most "broken" things in the game?
Because those same players regularly change their armies? Many of these heroes of skill you glorify are guilty of alt-itis. The inability to stick to an army that has fallen out of place in the top dogs spot. The ones that do stick to their favorite army thru thick and thin do not put up numbers nearly as impressive.
Without massive nerfs for tournaments, you will see many of these all stars have switched to primary eldar. They play at home with their fulffy armies for fun. They come to tournaments practiced with the hardest lists they can find.
The codex has been out for a week, and you're telling me you know that the top players have already switched to Eldar?
You are acting like many of them dident already have them in the closet from the last round of eldar domination. Many of them started practicing when it was just rumors. Dont take my word for it though, wait until a major tournament happens that foolishly has not put any restrictions on the eldar codex. Tell me who wins.
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
LOL....."I'm amazing at this game and because I'm awesome I always play a strong codex against bad players." Big fish small pond syndrome.
I hate the new Eldar book for the same reason I have generally hated the Knight Codex, data slate formations etc. IT is forcing Apocalypse into a regular scale game. Which is a game that I don't find enjoyable. Minimal tactics, lots of dice rolling, lots of luck in the game that can make the game unenjoyable.
If there is so much luck and lack of skill involved now why is it the same players consistently finish in the top spots at major GTs, often not using the most "broken" things in the game?
almost all top tournament lists still include top tier units and mechanisms. You can for example, point to the lists with lictors that placed well, but only of you ignore the multiple ubiquitous flying hive tyrants.
These players also frequently change armies and builds, and aren't playing the same list the next year.
A lot of tournaments also have their own scenarios, rules, and restrictions that may change the performance and viability of many units and builds.
Let's also not forget that half or more of any given GT's players aren't really competitive and are just there for giggles and many only ever attend once or twice.
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
LOL....."I'm amazing at this game and because I'm awesome I always play a strong codex against bad players." Big fish small pond syndrome.
I hate the new Eldar book for the same reason I have generally hated the Knight Codex, data slate formations etc. IT is forcing Apocalypse into a regular scale game. Which is a game that I don't find enjoyable. Minimal tactics, lots of dice rolling, lots of luck in the game that can make the game unenjoyable.
If there is so much luck and lack of skill involved now why is it the same players consistently finish in the top spots at major GTs, often not using the most "broken" things in the game?
Because those same players regularly change their armies? Many of these heroes of skill you glorify are guilty of alt-itis. The inability to stick to an army that has fallen out of place in the top dogs spot. The ones that do stick to their favorite army thru thick and thin do not put up numbers nearly as impressive.
Without massive nerfs for tournaments, you will see many of these all stars have switched to primary eldar. They play at home with their fulffy armies for fun. They come to tournaments practiced with the hardest lists they can find.
The codex has been out for a week, and you're telling me you know that the top players have already switched to Eldar?
You are acting like many of them dident already have them in the closet from the last round of eldar domination. Many of them started practicing when it was just rumors. Dont take my word for it though, wait until a major tournament happens that foolishly has not put any restrictions on the eldar codex. Tell me who wins.
Do you have any sort of proof of this, or is it just hypobole? You know what is being kept in these people's closets? You saw them sneaking off for secret training sessions with screen shots from the rumor mill? If you don't already, you should really go work for the NSA, your covert skills are clearly honed to a razors edge.
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
LOL! OH boy. "L2p, bro! But L2P like me cause I'm amazing. I play eldar against scrubs and I win...so...I'm awesome."
Dozer Blades wrote: Anybody who wins 95% of the time is clubbing baby seals.
I know I haven't agreed with much you've said in this thread Dozer but I am 100% on your side here. That post is as full of hyperbole as some posts on the other side of the issue.
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
LOL! OH boy. "L2p, bro! But L2P like me cause I'm amazing. I play eldar against scrubs and I win...so...I'm awesome."
Pretty much this.
Don't go tooting your own horn because you beat a few people at your local club with one of the most powerful armies in 40k then claim it has nothing to do with the army it's my leet skills!!!
Go play a real tournament where you can play people with leet skillz!!! And then come back and say how well you really did instead of relying on your army list for a lot of those wins.
No one knows who you are, so posting how amazing you are as a player means absolutely nothing when the majority of 40k players are casual.
Honestly you just come off as an ahole, a major tournament winning player that plays in our local friendly club actually downgrade his lists and plays fun but noncompetitve unit choices so that they don't win all the time or stomp other people like you gleefully stated and believe me you are no where near as good a player as him.
You guys realize he was mocking the Eldar defenders...
Simple truth is that GW took what were already top tier choices and made then even better as well as buffed a lot of what was in the Eldar Dex after a trend of rebalancing towards a much lower point. Thankfully the fixed the Wave Serpent, if only they could have FAQed those changes two years ago. I mean the WK gains over a 50% increase in durability, Stomp, Strength D, etc all for just a 23% increase in Points. Its a damned shame GW had to go and wreck their 7th edition codex trend, they were putting out some, albeit bland, consistently internally and externally well balanced codices. Sure Necron was a bit of an oops, but damn did they ever botch Eldar. I would have enjoyed a full 7th edition release on par with the first half dozen 7th edition books. What worries me competitively is that GW will return to their lower power level balancing trend removing the options that actually stand a chance against Eldar.
All I can say is that I am happy it looks like at least NOVA is sticking to their no GMC/SHV/SHW LoW ruling as well as looking at a small modification to Strength D. It is the one thing stopping me from abandoning ship completely. If so, no WK, reigned in D shooting, no more Imperial Knights and Adamantine Lance once their new dex drops and labels them LoW.... at least at NOVA and that is a trend I'd like to see perpetuated.
Is no 2+/++ Rerollable, no GMC/SHW/SHV, and no FMC Flying Circus too much to ask?? Throw in some limits to Battle Brothers and I feel like we'd have something reasonable for a competitive landscape that would appeal to a greater number of players offering more varied army selections and play-styles.
Zagman wrote: You guys realize he was mocking the Eldar defenders...
Simple truth is that GW took what were already top tier choices and made then even better as well as buffed a lot of what was in the Eldar Dex after a trend of rebalancing towards a much lower point. Thankfully the fixed the Wave Serpent, if only they could have FAQed those changes two years ago. I mean the WK gains over a 50% increase in durability, Stomp, Strength D, etc all for just a 23% increase in Points. Its a damned shame GW had to go and wreck their 7th edition codex trend, they were putting out some, albeit bland, consistently internally and externally well balanced codices. Sure Necron was a bit of an oops, but damn did they ever botch Eldar. I would have enjoyed a full 7th edition release on par with the first half dozen 7th edition books. What worries me competitively is that GW will return to their lower power level balancing trend removing the options that actually stand a chance against Eldar.
All I can say is that I am happy it looks like at least NOVA is sticking to their no GMC/SHV/SHW LoW ruling as well as looking at a small modification to Strength D. It is the one thing stopping me from abandoning ship completely. If so, no WK, reigned in D shooting, no more Imperial Knights and Adamantine Lance once their new dex drops and labels them LoW.... at least at NOVA and that is a trend I'd like to see perpetuated.
Is no 2+/++ Rerollable, no GMC/SHW/SHV, and no FMC Flying Circus too much to ask?? Throw in some limits to Battle Brothers and I feel like we'd have something reasonable for a competitive landscape that would appeal to a greater number of players offering more varied army selections and play-styles.
#KeepApocOutOfMy40k
All those solutions do is create a new meta where Tyranids are once again unplayable and Space Marine builds, except DA of course, will rise to the top. Granted that meta will have the effect you're desiring. A SM dominant meta, being the most abundantly played faction, will mean an increase in tournament interest from otherwise "maligned" SM players. Maybe. But that increase in appeal to greater numbers of players wouldn't be the result of more varied army selections, it would be a result of a power shift toward "traditional" 40k armies like Space Marines.
There should be a separation between a player's skill and the army they play (i.e., player skill =/= army used). A good player playing a strong army who wins or does well in a competitive setting should not be blasted for playing a strong army/using strong units. Likewise, their winning with a strong army should not diminish their victory because in the end, you still have to play other strong armies and opponents to get to the top.
Also, if a player plays Eldar (a strong army overall) but does not take all of the best things or maybe just a few of the strong things in that army, they should not be lumped into the same category of someone who does. And to reiterate, someone who takes only the best out of everything in a strong codex does not make him a bad person or diminish his skill if he wins. If I want to win a car race, I will try to get the best and fastest car, not the worst and slowest. If I just like to drive a car because I like it/think it is cool but it is nowhere near the fastest/best, I shouldn't complain about my car being so slow/bad and the other person's being so fast/good. In the end, we all choose what army/list we want to compete with-if competing is what we are intending to do. The fallacy a lot of people are making, by analogy, is that they are apparently claiming to be stuck with a Ford Focus while Eldar just got a Porche Turbo. I think and maintain that we still need to test things out before jumping to that conclusion.
Indeed, at the top tables and against good opponents, the respective armies being played are less of a factor than the relative skill between the players. I find that the games at that level of play are won or lost due to little mistakes here and there that are capitalized on by an opponent.
It is at this level of play that I maintain Eldar are fine and will not turn out to be "OP and break the game."
Now in terms of things like RTTs, casual gaming, the average tournament player/wargamer in general, I can see how Eldar appear to be too strong. Indeed, if anything, I was simply making the following points:
(1) Eldar are likely not as "OP" as people are making them out to be for the various reasons I stated.
(2) The basis for determining that Eldar are "OP" that the majority of people in this thread have relied on is not conclusive by any stretch of the imagination. We really do need more time to see how Eldar do in the meta.
(3) At top level tournament play, Eldar will not dominate or destroy the meta.
I have also couched my arguments with the understanding that Wraith Knights will be limited to 1 or 0 per army and that D weapons will have their rules adjusted. I have also expressed my *opinion* as to why I don't think that Wraith Knights, D-Weapons, Scatter Laser equipped bikes are as big of a deal as people are making them out to be and why the foundation/basis for saying they are a huge deal is based on faulty reasoning. We simply need to try Eldar out a bit and see what IS or ISN'T a problem with the codex rather than simply rely on a smattering of battle reports/math-hammer. Personal experience speaks more to me than some numbers crunched on the internet. Also, on a personal note, I probably won't take any bikes with Scatter Lasers and would be more than happy to have D weapons toned down and to be limited to a single Wraith Knight. I just want to take Eldar and play them because I like them-not because they are "super strong". I also don't like the notion of people thinking I only win because I play Eldar-it is a bigoted attitude to think people only win because they play a strong army.
If I would have written the codex:
(1) I think keeping Jetbikes at 1 weapon per 3 and having Scatter Lasers be 15 points would have been fair.
(2) I think instead of Destroyer, a modified Distort table would have worked just fine.
(3) I think that a Wraith Knight should have been around 340-350 and rather than Gargantuan, make all Wraith units harder to wound by poison/sniper based weapons and given them FNP.
Wish listing now...
(4) I would have made Wraith Lords 1-3 per choice =(.
(5) I would have given CC aspects/Wraith Blades an extra attack (or given Wraith Blades rampage as well).
Zagman wrote: You guys realize he was mocking the Eldar defenders...
Simple truth is that GW took what were already top tier choices and made then even better as well as buffed a lot of what was in the Eldar Dex after a trend of rebalancing towards a much lower point. Thankfully the fixed the Wave Serpent, if only they could have FAQed those changes two years ago. I mean the WK gains over a 50% increase in durability, Stomp, Strength D, etc all for just a 23% increase in Points. Its a damned shame GW had to go and wreck their 7th edition codex trend, they were putting out some, albeit bland, consistently internally and externally well balanced codices. Sure Necron was a bit of an oops, but damn did they ever botch Eldar. I would have enjoyed a full 7th edition release on par with the first half dozen 7th edition books. What worries me competitively is that GW will return to their lower power level balancing trend removing the options that actually stand a chance against Eldar.
All I can say is that I am happy it looks like at least NOVA is sticking to their no GMC/SHV/SHW LoW ruling as well as looking at a small modification to Strength D. It is the one thing stopping me from abandoning ship completely. If so, no WK, reigned in D shooting, no more Imperial Knights and Adamantine Lance once their new dex drops and labels them LoW.... at least at NOVA and that is a trend I'd like to see perpetuated.
Is no 2+/++ Rerollable, no GMC/SHW/SHV, and no FMC Flying Circus too much to ask?? Throw in some limits to Battle Brothers and I feel like we'd have something reasonable for a competitive landscape that would appeal to a greater number of players offering more varied army selections and play-styles.
#KeepApocOutOfMy40k
All those solutions do is create a new meta where Tyranids are once again unplayable and Space Marine builds, except DA of course, will rise to the top. Granted that meta will have the effect you're desiring. A SM dominant meta, being the most abundantly played faction, will mean an increase in tournament interest from otherwise "maligned" SM players. Maybe. But that increase in appeal to greater numbers of players wouldn't be the result of more varied army selections, it would be a result of a power shift toward "traditional" 40k armies like Space Marines.
Or maybe many of the disgusted players out there that have effectively quit would poke their heads back out, share time with their Warmachine etc armies and reenter the fray giving us higher attendance and a healthier scene.
Of course the Meta would shift, and its likely SM would begin to dominate, maybe not if Battle Brothers weren't such an issue, but the end result would be a narrowing of the overall power level gap in the game. The smaller the overall power level gap and the greater number of viable builds for tournament play across the widest array of different armies the better the hobby and the competitive scene will be in general. Given the trend, relative balance, and power level of most of the 7th edition releases we would be looking at a much narrower power level gap and closer more varied field of competition. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be "better".
See mort that is what I was trying to tell you all along. Maybe now you are finally starting to understand what it is like on the other side of the fence.
Zagman wrote: You guys realize he was mocking the Eldar defenders...
Simple truth is that GW took what were already top tier choices and made then even better as well as buffed a lot of what was in the Eldar Dex after a trend of rebalancing towards a much lower point. Thankfully the fixed the Wave Serpent, if only they could have FAQed those changes two years ago. I mean the WK gains over a 50% increase in durability, Stomp, Strength D, etc all for just a 23% increase in Points. Its a damned shame GW had to go and wreck their 7th edition codex trend, they were putting out some, albeit bland, consistently internally and externally well balanced codices. Sure Necron was a bit of an oops, but damn did they ever botch Eldar. I would have enjoyed a full 7th edition release on par with the first half dozen 7th edition books. What worries me competitively is that GW will return to their lower power level balancing trend removing the options that actually stand a chance against Eldar.
All I can say is that I am happy it looks like at least NOVA is sticking to their no GMC/SHV/SHW LoW ruling as well as looking at a small modification to Strength D. It is the one thing stopping me from abandoning ship completely. If so, no WK, reigned in D shooting, no more Imperial Knights and Adamantine Lance once their new dex drops and labels them LoW.... at least at NOVA and that is a trend I'd like to see perpetuated.
Is no 2+/++ Rerollable, no GMC/SHW/SHV, and no FMC Flying Circus too much to ask?? Throw in some limits to Battle Brothers and I feel like we'd have something reasonable for a competitive landscape that would appeal to a greater number of players offering more varied army selections and play-styles.
#KeepApocOutOfMy40k
All those solutions do is create a new meta where Tyranids are once again unplayable and Space Marine builds, except DA of course, will rise to the top. Granted that meta will have the effect you're desiring. A SM dominant meta, being the most abundantly played faction, will mean an increase in tournament interest from otherwise "maligned" SM players. Maybe. But that increase in appeal to greater numbers of players wouldn't be the result of more varied army selections, it would be a result of a power shift toward "traditional" 40k armies like Space Marines.
Or maybe many of the disgusted players out there that have effectively quit would poke their heads back out, share time with their Warmachine etc armies and reenter the fray giving us higher attendance and a healthier scene.
Of course the Meta would shift, and its likely SM would begin to dominate, maybe not if Battle Brothers weren't such an issue, but the end result would be a narrowing of the overall power level gap in the game. The smaller the overall power level gap and the greater number of viable builds for tournament play across the widest array of different armies the better the hobby and the competitive scene will be in general. Given the trend, relative balance, and power level of most of the 7th edition releases we would be looking at a much narrower power level gap and closer more varied field of competition. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be "better".
A narrowing of the power level gap would only occur between the most powerful and those directly below. Your proposal only applies handicaps to the most powerful while supplying no boost at all to those codices residing at the lowest end of the spectrum. You wouldn't see a more diverse field of armies, you'd see a less diverse field. Those armies at the bottom won't be fielded anymore or less than they are now. Those at the top end, Tyranids excepted, would continue to be fielded in the same numbers as they would still be "good". The middle range armies who received a boost would be played more, skewed toward the SM books since they are already the most popular codices, creating a field full of MEQ armies. You would end up with a net reduction in field diversity and net increase in MEQ armies being played.
Dozer, Maybe you will stop trying to create this false sense of division? What is this fence and what side do you think anyone is on?
I don't only play Eldar and would be fine playing against Eldar with any of my other armies. I also don't win simply because I take super strong armies; news flash, my 86%~ win rate at GT type events are not because I took cookie cutter Eldar lists :/.
Elder will not break tournament play because tournament organizers are willing to adjust elder to be competetive instead of the stacked deck that it is. Even with the rumoured nerfs by tournament organizers elder are still the best codex in game and will dominate tournament play by both number of people playing them and placing. However at least there is the chance at a competitive level.
For the person saying tournament organizers overreacted to changes such as maelstrom you have to be joking. Maelstrom still as written is the most broken point system 40k has ever had and every time someone plays it as written you hear how much luck and Gand deciding drawing a maelstrom card is; in fact I haven't seen a single tournament not play modified maelstrom to keep it balanced which is exactly what I expect from the eldar codex from tournament organizers a heavily modified version to curb how broken and overpowered that codex is regardless of eldar players whining who think they are actually good players because their codex is overpowered. Even with d nerfs and banning Knights, scat bikes and improved seer stars and wwp wraiths, lethal fire dragons, warp spider shenanigans will continue to dominate the meta. Units like howling banshees that eldar screamed how much better they are will still rarely ever be seen.
After a phenomenally well balanced and praised lvo tournament and a close well balanced adepticon including the old eldar codex nova has the luxury of being the first U.S. Major to reign I. The gak that is eldar to make the event fun for all armies not just eldar players who think they are great players because they used the most broken codex.
megatrons2nd wrote: "The fact that they got so much skyfire for free in EMLs...well, that's silly too."
The Dark Reapers Exarch's EML is now 20 points rather than the old 10 (+10 for Skyfire) for the launcher. It isn't free, at least not on models I own. It just is no longer an option.
However, anything that can have an EML...
Wave Serpents, Falcons, Vypers, War Walkers, Guardian Weapon platforms, War Walkers, Wraithlords...
All got the Skyfire missiles tacked on.
Before only the Dark Reapers could have it. Now everyone can. It's factored into the price of the weapon now. Essentially, it is free.
Obviously, but I was asking for you to elaborate. Also, I don't think this discussion needs to degenerate into an "us versus them" mentality between people that think Eldar are OP and BrOkEn and those that think Eldar are fine. Either extreme of those positions and everything in-between is actually largely irrelevant unless supported by more than mere math-hammer and a smattering of battle reports. A sufficient amount of data from more games that have been played than what we have seen so far and a more robust discussion of points for/against is necessary.
Indeed, my position was not intended to come across as "L2P, Eldar are fine nubs," which is what some people have said my position has been. Essentially, all I've been saying at a fundamental level is that I am reserving judgment until I see more convincing evidence to the contrary of what I believe to be true. Forgive me if I prefer to be swayed by real world data/experience. You say Eldar are "OP" and too strong? I say wait and see.
Also, my position that I don't think Eldar are a problem is based on my experience/perspective/perception of things. Consequently, and given my gaming history/experience, I would consider myself as qualifying as an "expert witness" of sorts in terms of things 40k but that does not mean I can't be wrong. I just think an argument based on my opinion has more weight than random people's opinions that seem to be relying on nothing more than (1) numbers crunched in a vacuum; (2) small amount of selected battle reports; and, (3) their own knee-jerk reactions. Indeed, my main points in arguing in this thread have been to point out the logical inconsistencies/fallacious reasoning and foundations for saying Eldar are OP/Broken without a proper foundation having been laid to maintain such a position.
So I apologize if I come across as abrasive, but I give more weight to well thought out and supported statements, which have sadly been quite sparse in this thread...
megatrons2nd wrote: "The fact that they got so much skyfire for free in EMLs...well, that's silly too."
The Dark Reapers Exarch's EML is now 20 points rather than the old 10 (+10 for Skyfire) for the launcher. It isn't free, at least not on models I own. It just is no longer an option.
However, anything that can have an EML...
Wave Serpents, Falcons, Vypers, War Walkers, Guardian Weapon platforms, War Walkers, Wraithlords...
All got the Skyfire missiles tacked on.
Before only the Dark Reapers could have it. Now everyone can. It's factored into the price of the weapon now. Essentially, it is free.
Also, I don't think that EML getting the Skyfire shot included in the cost is anything to complain about. If anything, this leads me to believe that other armies that have access to Missile Launchers will get the same treatment. I mean was it ever worth it to pay 10 points for it to begin with? Is this really something worth complaining about? I'd like someone to point me to a single list that did well in a tournament that took the skyfire option in a missile launcher. Heck, I'd like someone to show me an Eldar list that ever even took EMLs that did well in a tournament.
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
LOL....."I'm amazing at this game and because I'm awesome I always play a strong codex against bad players." Big fish small pond syndrome.
I hate the new Eldar book for the same reason I have generally hated the Knight Codex, data slate formations etc. IT is forcing Apocalypse into a regular scale game. Which is a game that I don't find enjoyable. Minimal tactics, lots of dice rolling, lots of luck in the game that can make the game unenjoyable.
If there is so much luck and lack of skill involved now why is it the same players consistently finish in the top spots at major GTs, often not using the most "broken" things in the game?
almost all top tournament lists still include top tier units and mechanisms. You can for example, point to the lists with lictors that placed well, but only of you ignore the multiple ubiquitous flying hive tyrants.
Not to mention that the Lictors were just expensive Locator Beacons for the Mawlocs too. The Tyrants and the Mawlocs were the workhorse of the list. Lictors had little to do with its success.
I played against a list with my Eldar a couple Days ago. I took 1 wraithknight, and 5 wraithguard, plus 2 DA squads, and 1 squad of each of the other Aspects(except shining spears) and an Autarch. The only vehicle was a Crimson Hunter. I was playing against a list(or similar to it) that I had been unable to beat with my Dark Eldar, and my old Eldar codex. A demon list with Rerollable 2++ saves, and lots of Demon Princes and summoning. I beat said list in 3 turns. The Wraithguard got really lucky, and iced a demon prince with overwatch and a 6 on the D-roll. The Wraithknight killed a demon prince in melee by doubling him out. The Great unclean one got taken out by the wraithguard on turn 3, when we called the game. The Aspects took out some nurglings, tzeentch demons and cultists, but didn't do much else.
If I did not have the D weapons, I have no doubts that I would have lost that game. I have the feeling that this army is meant to reduce Deathstar units taken. I would like to see/try a game against an Orc or Tyranid Horde list.
I can also see where some builds will be horribly unbalanced.
Also, I don't think that EML getting the Skyfire shot included in the cost is anything to complain about. If anything, this leads me to believe that other armies that have access to Missile Launchers will get the same treatment.
Well, we already know that's not the case. Khorne Daemonkin showed us that. And yes, CSM had access to skyfire missiles with havocs. But we certainly don't see Flakk missiles tacked in on Daemonkin missile lauchers - which, for the record would have given Skyfire to Helbrutes and Chaos Marines.
Point is though, the problem with Eldar as they stand isn't just the introduction of X or Y or Z alone. It's the fact they introduced X, Y and Z while buffing A, B and C as well.
The Imperial Knight codex gives no indicator of D-weapons becoming more commonplace and neither did Necrons or Daemonkin, which were both released with a similar format and structure to Craftworlds. Craftworlds is this bizarre oddity, much like Tau Empire and Eldar were in 6th - it's almost like they wrote it, pushed it to be published and then afterwards someone had a word with them and told them to tone it down.
And this is odd. If ranged D-weapons were going to become more commonplace? Fine. But so far we only see them on Monstrous Creatures that are certainly not spammable by any means due to their spot on the Force Org or on Superheavy vehicles - again, just as rare for the same reasons. And we don't even seem them at all on Imperial Knights, which is odd as that was the most logical spot to introduce them for this 'new approach'.
But then, 40k always gets messy when GW decide they need to do a power or style shift mid-edition. You get books that are so horribly bland and underpowered it hurts while you get new, shiny things that in comparison are stupidly overbalanced.
I'm still baffled as to why Eldar needed to be done before CSM and Dark Angels, considering that those two books are the most bland and weak books still currently out there, simply because they were the end of 5th/start of 6th design philosophy, before Eldar and Tau flipped the tables.
I'm still baffled as to why Eldar needed to be done before CSM and Dark Angels, considering that those two books are the most bland and weak books still currently out there, simply because they were the end of 5th/start of 6th design philosophy, before Eldar and Tau flipped the tables.
That's because you are thinking in terms of what would make the game better. GW is thinking in terms of model releases. So they had jetbikes, the seers and the autarch ready to go so that's what they released. So sure CSM and DA really need an updated to make them more competitive, but if GW doesn't have any kits ready to release then they get nothing.
These Eldar kits were long-standing needs for the army. What do CSM and DA need in terms of models? I think they might be out of ideas on the CSM front. Last time we got dinobots and the hellturkey.
DA can have their own Tactical Squad and actual Command Squad with all banners and Chapter Relics in plastic. Interrogator Chaplain model would be welcome too. And maybe range of marine HQ on bikes: Interogator Chaplains, Librarinas and Techmarines. Plastic Azrael (his model is even out of scale with other marines) and Ezekiel (his model is fine, it do not realy need to change).
CSM can have Thousand Sons and Noise Marines redone. Some LR varients.
There are alot that could be done for this two codices.
I'm still baffled as to why Eldar needed to be done before CSM and Dark Angels, considering that those two books are the most bland and weak books still currently out there, simply because they were the end of 5th/start of 6th design philosophy, before Eldar and Tau flipped the tables.
That's because you are thinking in terms of what would make the game better. GW is thinking in terms of model releases. So they had jetbikes, the seers and the autarch ready to go so that's what they released. So sure CSM and DA really need an updated to make them more competitive, but if GW doesn't have any kits ready to release then they get nothing.
These Eldar kits were long-standing needs for the army. What do CSM and DA need in terms of models? I think they might be out of ideas on the CSM front. Last time we got dinobots and the hellturkey.
Spot the new Eldar unit in the Craftworlds codex.
Go on, I'm waiting.
What do CSM need in terms of models? How about plastic clampack Lords or Sorcerers? How about a Lord/Sorcerer on bike option? How about a kit for Noise Marines that isn't reliant on you direct ordering finecast sonic weapons? How about multipart cultists? How about a Chosen kit? How about plastic Cult kits? How about a plastic Obliterator/Mutilator kit? How about a plastic Havok kit?
Plenty can be done for CSM.
And if no new models are needed for DA save a few characters going plastic? Well, that's an easy release then, isn't it?
I'm still baffled as to why Eldar needed to be done before CSM and Dark Angels, considering that those two books are the most bland and weak books still currently out there, simply because they were the end of 5th/start of 6th design philosophy, before Eldar and Tau flipped the tables.
That's because you are thinking in terms of what would make the game better. GW is thinking in terms of model releases. So they had jetbikes, the seers and the autarch ready to go so that's what they released. So sure CSM and DA really need an updated to make them more competitive, but if GW doesn't have any kits ready to release then they get nothing.
These Eldar kits were long-standing needs for the army. What do CSM and DA need in terms of models? I think they might be out of ideas on the CSM front. Last time we got dinobots and the hellturkey.
Spot the new Eldar unit in the Craftworlds codex.
Go on, I'm waiting.
You'll be waiting for a while considering he said new models multiple times and not new units. As for CSM, the cult marines in plastic to my knowledge are still the 2nd/3rd ed versions that need a visual upgrade as much as the jetbikes did.
Yeah, but they've been confirmed sitting on that jetbike for years. AFAYK they aren't sitting on CSM stuff, though it wouldn't surprise me if they were. Trust me I would love for chaos to get some love, specifically the Slaanesh and Tzeentch parts considering they haven't had love in a while, didn't even get end times love.
I'm still baffled as to why Eldar needed to be done before CSM and Dark Angels, considering that those two books are the most bland and weak books still currently out there, simply because they were the end of 5th/start of 6th design philosophy, before Eldar and Tau flipped the tables.
That's because you are thinking in terms of what would make the game better. GW is thinking in terms of model releases. So they had jetbikes, the seers and the autarch ready to go so that's what they released. So sure CSM and DA really need an updated to make them more competitive, but if GW doesn't have any kits ready to release then they get nothing.
These Eldar kits were long-standing needs for the army. What do CSM and DA need in terms of models? I think they might be out of ideas on the CSM front. Last time we got dinobots and the hellturkey.
Spot the new Eldar unit in the Craftworlds codex.
Go on, I'm waiting.
You'll be waiting for a while considering he said new models multiple times and not new units. As for CSM, the cult marines in plastic to my knowledge are still the 2nd/3rd ed versions that need a visual upgrade as much as the jetbikes did.
The Heldrake and Maulfiend were new units altogether. Don't reference them if not referring to new units as they did not exist before. Plus Eldar got new units in 6th as well.
Eldar got the following this release...
Farseer/Warlock on Jetbike
Autarch in plastic
New Jetbikes.
The jetbikes needed to be updated, I'll agree with that. The Bikeseer is a nice thing as well, again, it fills a niche.
You had Autarchs since 4th. The models weren't dated at all.
CSM still don't have any plastic power armour character sets or clampacks aside from the Aspiring Champion.
CSM don't have any bike character sets.
Our cult units have been around since 3rd edition and are either horribly dated plastics, finecast or finecast plastic hybrids.
We can only get monopose snap fit cultists. Seriously. What. The Hell?
We have no Chosen kit.
Our Havocs are finecast-plastic hybrids that date back to 3rd edition.
The Obliterators date back to 3rd and they seem to have missed the ball for the 3 model kit with Mutilators being the same models with different arms and heads.
Hells, the Space Marine range has been updated more than the CSM range has. I kid you not. New plastic SM kit in 3rd. Recut sprues in 5th. New sprues in 6th.
It's not about who deserves what. It's about what GW wants to do. For example, we know that the new jetbike model was sculpted before 2009. It could have been released two years ago with the 6th edition Eldar codex. But they chose to focus on Wraith units instead. Would it have hurt them to release the bikes then too? I don't think so, but GW apparently did.
Remember all the crying about Dark Eldar in 4th and 5th because their codex was old and the models horrible? It took a very long time for GW to update the rules because they didn't have the models ready. Same thing with the Necrons. When they finally did have the models ready for the old-style big, monthly release they released them. In sixth, the emphasis shifted to bigger, higher margin kits and so CSM got Heldrakes and Maulerfiends instead of better Havocs and Berserkers. I'm sure the Chapterhouse debacle was part of that decision too. GW no longer releases rules without a model to go with it.
GW is moving away from Finecast now, which is why the Autarch was redone even though it was only first released in 2006 in metal. I'm sure that GW is well aware of which kits need to be updated in CSM and other factions. They might even have a bunch of kits ready for the next CSM release, some of which could have been released years ago.
Yep. Poor aspects. I spent some time on ebay hunting down metal banshees and scorpions once Finecast started coming out. There were rumors two years ago about plastic aspect combo-kits that haven't panned out. Maybe we'll see them when Eldar get a new codex in 2017. LOL.
Another example I thought was funny was the Hive Tyrant. It was a decent metal kit in 4th. GW switched it to Finecast less than a year before they released the new plastic kit. What was the point of that?
Finecast does seem to be going away, just not as quickly as people would like. When was the last new Finecast model released? There don't seem to be new ones coming anymore.
So I apologize if I come across as abrasive, but I give more weight to well thought out and supported statements, which have sadly been quite sparse in this thread...
So you apologize while swinging that left hook... yea, real classy.
Actually, if you reread the thread, several people did post lengthy well thought posts. Maybe not as long winded as yours, but your posts are just a broken record. You go in circles saying the SAME thing (L2P) then telling everyone else they aren't understanding you. So people got tired of your filibusterer approach.
In reality I don't think you understand your own words. I mean, you even doubled back and changed your position recently, yet you made sure to plug your skill at the game AGAIN. That's why I suggested you have a chip on your shoulder, because it's pretty obvious you do.
Also, you keep labeling ALL opposing viewpoints to your own as "People crying OP" and your last post even suggested we stop creating a divide while yet again throwing that jab in "OP and BrOkEn".... you literally troll spelled broken that way. Your early labeling of people created a massive divide if anything.
Get off that high horse first, then maybe people will take your points more seriously.
So I apologize if I come across as abrasive, but I give more weight to well thought out and supported statements, which have sadly been quite sparse in this thread...
So you apologize while swinging that left hook... yea, real classy.
Actually, if you reread the thread, several people did post lengthy well thought posts. Maybe not as long winded as yours, but your posts are just a broken record. You go in circles saying the SAME thing (L2P) then telling everyone else they aren't understanding you. So people got tired of your filibusterer approach.
In reality I don't think you understand your own words. I mean, you even doubled back and changed your position recently, yet you made sure to plug your skill at the game AGAIN. That's why I suggested you have a chip on your shoulder, because it's pretty obvious you do.
Also, you keep labeling ALL opposing viewpoints to your own as "People crying OP" and your last post even suggested we stop creating a divide while yet again throwing that jab in "OP and BrOkEn".... you literally troll spelled broken that way. Your early labeling of people created a massive divide if anything.
Get off that high horse first, then maybe people will take your points more seriously.
It is sad how it just appears as though you like to take one small aspect of what I've said, ignore everything else then attack/distort what I never actually said nor implied. Indeed, nothing you said about me or my posts is true. But yes, you are welcome to make personal attacks and misstate what another person is trying to communicate-this is the internet, after all.
Played against a damn good player who ran the new eldar. I play straight up Dark Eldar. We played a ITC mission. It was a bloody game, and I lost many a unit. In the end I out maneuvered him by killing his Serpents ( which is still pretty tough) and leaving my fast units alive to grab objectives in the end. The nerf to Serpents is so huge that it effects the dex more than any buff (and there are quite a few) Eldar have received. As for Wraith Knights... Shoot everything at that F'er for a turn, maybe 2 and watch it go down. Assault armies just have to take enough power fist/claws/rending whatever to take it down. "Oh, what if the WK is fortunes though?" Then kill that rat bastard seer council first. Let the wraith knight eat a couple small units in the first couple turns. You will probably be getting Slay the Warlord at that point. I have played this guy and his army many times with my DE and he has kicked my ass every time. This was a welcome change. And here's the tag line of this whole post: "Eldar are no longer the best army in the game" (drops mic)
oddworx wrote: Played against a damn good player who ran the new eldar. I play straight up Dark Eldar. We played a ITC mission. It was a bloody game, and I lost many a unit. In the end I out maneuvered him by killing his Serpents ( which is still pretty tough) and leaving my fast units alive to grab objectives in the end. The nerf to Serpents is so huge that it effects the dex more than any buff (and there are quite a few) Eldar have received. As for Wraith Knights... Shoot everything at that F'er for a turn, maybe 2 and watch it go down. Assault armies just have to take enough power fist/claws/rending whatever to take it down. "Oh, what if the WK is fortunes though?" Then kill that rat bastard seer council first. Let the wraith knight eat a couple small units in the first couple turns. You will probably be getting Slay the Warlord at that point. I have played this guy and his army many times with my DE and he has kicked my ass every time. This was a welcome change. And here's the tag line of this whole post: "Eldar are no longer the best army in the game" (drops mic)
Ha, grats on that win. I think from what I've seen, you tend to do a lot of MSU type lists? I think those type of lists will do well against Eldar in general. Serpents no longer having those 60" d6+1 shots at S7 ignoring cover every turn will hurt Eldar shooting a lot so I imagine Eldar will need to look to other places to get effective shooting to replace what the Serpent Shield offered. Indeed, I first saw the Serpent Shield rules in the previous codex, I actually thought the 60" was 6". If the Serpent Shield had a 6" range in previous dex, I don't think it would have been as problematic.
It seems like Eldar now have have S4-6 shooting even more than before with the potential for S8 here and there on various platforms (probably Crimson Death/Falcon formation/War Walkers will be best source for S8+). Therefore, to reliably deal with AV12+, Eldar will need to rely on units that can get close like Dragons or Spiders who can get to vulnerable facings. There is a HUGE difference between S6 spam and S7 shooting against AV12+.
So I apologize if I come across as abrasive, but I give more weight to well thought out and supported statements, which have sadly been quite sparse in this thread...
So you apologize while swinging that left hook... yea, real classy.
Actually, if you reread the thread, several people did post lengthy well thought posts. Maybe not as long winded as yours, but your posts are just a broken record. You go in circles saying the SAME thing (L2P) then telling everyone else they aren't understanding you. So people got tired of your filibusterer approach.
In reality I don't think you understand your own words. I mean, you even doubled back and changed your position recently, yet you made sure to plug your skill at the game AGAIN. That's why I suggested you have a chip on your shoulder, because it's pretty obvious you do.
Also, you keep labeling ALL opposing viewpoints to your own as "People crying OP" and your last post even suggested we stop creating a divide while yet again throwing that jab in "OP and BrOkEn".... you literally troll spelled broken that way. Your early labeling of people created a massive divide if anything.
Get off that high horse first, then maybe people will take your points more seriously.
anytime someone quotes their own win percentage you know all hope is lost...
oddworx wrote: Played against a damn good player who ran the new eldar. I play straight up Dark Eldar. We played a ITC mission. It was a bloody game, and I lost many a unit. In the end I out maneuvered him by killing his Serpents ( which is still pretty tough) and leaving my fast units alive to grab objectives in the end. The nerf to Serpents is so huge that it effects the dex more than any buff (and there are quite a few) Eldar have received. As for Wraith Knights... Shoot everything at that F'er for a turn, maybe 2 and watch it go down. Assault armies just have to take enough power fist/claws/rending whatever to take it down. "Oh, what if the WK is fortunes though?" Then kill that rat bastard seer council first. Let the wraith knight eat a couple small units in the first couple turns. You will probably be getting Slay the Warlord at that point. I have played this guy and his army many times with my DE and he has kicked my ass every time. This was a welcome change. And here's the tag line of this whole post: "Eldar are no longer the best army in the game" (drops mic)
Ha, grats on that win. I think from what I've seen, you tend to do a lot of MSU type lists? I think those type of lists will do well against Eldar in general. Serpents no longer having those 60" d6+1 shots at S7 ignoring cover every turn will hurt Eldar shooting a lot so I imagine Eldar will need to look to other places to get effective shooting to replace what the Serpent Shield offered. Indeed, I first saw the Serpent Shield rules in the previous codex, I actually thought the 60" was 6". If the Serpent Shield had a 6" range in previous dex, I don't think it would have been as problematic.
It seems like Eldar now have have S4-6 shooting even more than before with the potential for S8 here and there on various platforms (probably Crimson Death/Falcon formation/War Walkers will be best source for S8+). Therefore, to reliably deal with AV12+, Eldar will need to rely on units that can get close like Dragons or Spiders who can get to vulnerable facings. There is a HUGE difference between S6 spam and S7 shooting against AV12+.
What did the respective lists look like?
I'm going to disagree about AV12. Three Scattbikes(81pts) strips 1.33 HP off of AV12 per turn, a Serpent with Scatter/Shield only strips 1.92HP/Turn. Scatt Bikes are actually more significantly more efficient against AV12 than Wave Serpents were for cost when the min DA squad was factored in) when cover wasn't a factor. And are virtually identical if 4+ cover is in play.
Cheap Scatter Lasers are efficient Anti AV12. It takes on average 27 S6 shots to strip 3HP off of AV12. 30 Scattterbikes(Magic Number) would average stripping 13.3HP off of AV12 in a single turn.
Speaking as a very casual player who has a game maybe once or twice a month with good friends, I dont see the point in arguing about the strength of the codex with the occasional posters who insist it isnt crazy powerful.
Everybody knows that it is. I know two good lads who play Eldar and neither would dream of saying "L2P."
Claiming the Eldar Codex isn't a bit hardcore is like claiming that Paris is in Germany. You can do it, but.... whats the point when everybody already knows the answer?
oddworx wrote: Played against a damn good player who ran the new eldar. I play straight up Dark Eldar. We played a ITC mission. It was a bloody game, and I lost many a unit. In the end I out maneuvered him by killing his Serpents ( which is still pretty tough) and leaving my fast units alive to grab objectives in the end. The nerf to Serpents is so huge that it effects the dex more than any buff (and there are quite a few) Eldar have received. As for Wraith Knights... Shoot everything at that F'er for a turn, maybe 2 and watch it go down. Assault armies just have to take enough power fist/claws/rending whatever to take it down. "Oh, what if the WK is fortunes though?" Then kill that rat bastard seer council first. Let the wraith knight eat a couple small units in the first couple turns. You will probably be getting Slay the Warlord at that point. I have played this guy and his army many times with my DE and he has kicked my ass every time. This was a welcome change. And here's the tag line of this whole post: "Eldar are no longer the best army in the game" (drops mic)
Ha, grats on that win. I think from what I've seen, you tend to do a lot of MSU type lists? I think those type of lists will do well against Eldar in general. Serpents no longer having those 60" d6+1 shots at S7 ignoring cover every turn will hurt Eldar shooting a lot so I imagine Eldar will need to look to other places to get effective shooting to replace what the Serpent Shield offered. Indeed, I first saw the Serpent Shield rules in the previous codex, I actually thought the 60" was 6". If the Serpent Shield had a 6" range in previous dex, I don't think it would have been as problematic.
It seems like Eldar now have have S4-6 shooting even more than before with the potential for S8 here and there on various platforms (probably Crimson Death/Falcon formation/War Walkers will be best source for S8+). Therefore, to reliably deal with AV12+, Eldar will need to rely on units that can get close like Dragons or Spiders who can get to vulnerable facings. There is a HUGE difference between S6 spam and S7 shooting against AV12+.
What did the respective lists look like?
I agree Mort. That 1 strength on that one vehicle was so over the top that it skewed the entire perception of the whole army. Also getting rid of Laser Lock was big too.
Dozer Blades wrote: Serpents are sturdier than scatbikes - mathhammer in a vacuum can be meaningless.
Of course. I was just emphasizing that bringing the firepower required is not difficult. Yes, they are less durable, but that is offset by the significantly greater damage per point of the Scattbikes.
Adam said it would be difficult to reliably deal with AV12, I pointed to one unit that puts out significant firepower which can do it, and does it more efficiently than the Serpent it replaced.
I am thinking that top players not bringing eldar will change it up to counter the scatbikes which I think is overall easier to accomplish than the 6e serpents. For example Ghost Arks can be really good if Necron players can counter the new Wraithknight. Of course all this is very obvious.
I am thinking that top players not bringing eldar will change it up to counter the scatbikes which I think is overall easier to accomplish than the 6e serpents. For example Ghost Arks can be really good if Necron players can counter the new Wraithknight. Of course all this is very obvious.
It's going to interesting.
It certainly will be!
Unfortunately there are many more attendees than just the top guys, who will be able to handle Eldar, and it's the rest of the field that really gets hammered.
I'm not worried about the Wraithknight, I won't play in any tournament that allows them, or any GC/LoW. #GetApocOutOfMy40k
oddworx wrote: Played against a damn good player who ran the new eldar. I play straight up Dark Eldar. We played a ITC mission. It was a bloody game, and I lost many a unit. In the end I out maneuvered him by killing his Serpents ( which is still pretty tough) and leaving my fast units alive to grab objectives in the end. The nerf to Serpents is so huge that it effects the dex more than any buff (and there are quite a few) Eldar have received. As for Wraith Knights... Shoot everything at that F'er for a turn, maybe 2 and watch it go down. Assault armies just have to take enough power fist/claws/rending whatever to take it down. "Oh, what if the WK is fortunes though?" Then kill that rat bastard seer council first. Let the wraith knight eat a couple small units in the first couple turns. You will probably be getting Slay the Warlord at that point. I have played this guy and his army many times with my DE and he has kicked my ass every time. This was a welcome change. And here's the tag line of this whole post: "Eldar are no longer the best army in the game" (drops mic)
Ha, grats on that win. I think from what I've seen, you tend to do a lot of MSU type lists? I think those type of lists will do well against Eldar in general. Serpents no longer having those 60" d6+1 shots at S7 ignoring cover every turn will hurt Eldar shooting a lot so I imagine Eldar will need to look to other places to get effective shooting to replace what the Serpent Shield offered. Indeed, I first saw the Serpent Shield rules in the previous codex, I actually thought the 60" was 6". If the Serpent Shield had a 6" range in previous dex, I don't think it would have been as problematic.
It seems like Eldar now have have S4-6 shooting even more than before with the potential for S8 here and there on various platforms (probably Crimson Death/Falcon formation/War Walkers will be best source for S8+). Therefore, to reliably deal with AV12+, Eldar will need to rely on units that can get close like Dragons or Spiders who can get to vulnerable facings. There is a HUGE difference between S6 spam and S7 shooting against AV12+.
What did the respective lists look like?
I'm going to disagree about AV12. Three Scattbikes(81pts) strips 1.33 HP off of AV12 per turn, a Serpent with Scatter/Shield only strips 1.92HP/Turn. Scatt Bikes are actually more significantly more efficient against AV12 than Wave Serpents were for cost when the min DA squad was factored in) when cover wasn't a factor. And are virtually identical if 4+ cover is in play.
Cheap Scatter Lasers are efficient Anti AV12. It takes on average 27 S6 shots to strip 3HP off of AV12. 30 Scattterbikes(Magic Number) would average stripping 13.3HP off of AV12 in a single turn.
Well Zagman, I don't think my dice have a 6 on them but 2 1s instead! Anyway, my point was S6 may be ok to strip HP off if taken in sufficient numbers but when you have infantry you need to take out or vehicles you need to take out-I'd rather shoot the Scatter Lasers at something with a T value. Specifically, Scatter Lasers and other S6 is probably only going to be engaging AV 12 as a last resort rather than be someone's first choice and S8>S6 when it comes to AV12+. This depends on the army you are facing, of course, and what targets are available. Regardless, Jetbikes lose efficiency pretty fast when they get blown out of the sky and die as they will likely have a pretty big target on them.
oddworx wrote: Played against a damn good player who ran the new eldar. I play straight up Dark Eldar. We played a ITC mission. It was a bloody game, and I lost many a unit. In the end I out maneuvered him by killing his Serpents ( which is still pretty tough) and leaving my fast units alive to grab objectives in the end. The nerf to Serpents is so huge that it effects the dex more than any buff (and there are quite a few) Eldar have received. As for Wraith Knights... Shoot everything at that F'er for a turn, maybe 2 and watch it go down. Assault armies just have to take enough power fist/claws/rending whatever to take it down. "Oh, what if the WK is fortunes though?" Then kill that rat bastard seer council first. Let the wraith knight eat a couple small units in the first couple turns. You will probably be getting Slay the Warlord at that point. I have played this guy and his army many times with my DE and he has kicked my ass every time. This was a welcome change. And here's the tag line of this whole post: "Eldar are no longer the best army in the game" (drops mic)
Ha, grats on that win. I think from what I've seen, you tend to do a lot of MSU type lists? I think those type of lists will do well against Eldar in general. Serpents no longer having those 60" d6+1 shots at S7 ignoring cover every turn will hurt Eldar shooting a lot so I imagine Eldar will need to look to other places to get effective shooting to replace what the Serpent Shield offered. Indeed, I first saw the Serpent Shield rules in the previous codex, I actually thought the 60" was 6". If the Serpent Shield had a 6" range in previous dex, I don't think it would have been as problematic.
It seems like Eldar now have have S4-6 shooting even more than before with the potential for S8 here and there on various platforms (probably Crimson Death/Falcon formation/War Walkers will be best source for S8+). Therefore, to reliably deal with AV12+, Eldar will need to rely on units that can get close like Dragons or Spiders who can get to vulnerable facings. There is a HUGE difference between S6 spam and S7 shooting against AV12+.
What did the respective lists look like?
I agree Mort. That 1 strength on that one vehicle was so over the top that it skewed the entire perception of the whole army. Also getting rid of Laser Lock was big too.
Seemed like an interesting set of lists-surprised he took Vibro Cannons and Bright Lances on the Serpents. I still think Scatter is best on Serpent. How did the Razorwing do for you?
oddworx wrote: Played against a damn good player who ran the new eldar. I play straight up Dark Eldar. We played a ITC mission. It was a bloody game, and I lost many a unit. In the end I out maneuvered him by killing his Serpents ( which is still pretty tough) and leaving my fast units alive to grab objectives in the end. The nerf to Serpents is so huge that it effects the dex more than any buff (and there are quite a few) Eldar have received. As for Wraith Knights... Shoot everything at that F'er for a turn, maybe 2 and watch it go down. Assault armies just have to take enough power fist/claws/rending whatever to take it down. "Oh, what if the WK is fortunes though?" Then kill that rat bastard seer council first. Let the wraith knight eat a couple small units in the first couple turns. You will probably be getting Slay the Warlord at that point. I have played this guy and his army many times with my DE and he has kicked my ass every time. This was a welcome change. And here's the tag line of this whole post: "Eldar are no longer the best army in the game" (drops mic)
Ha, grats on that win. I think from what I've seen, you tend to do a lot of MSU type lists? I think those type of lists will do well against Eldar in general. Serpents no longer having those 60" d6+1 shots at S7 ignoring cover every turn will hurt Eldar shooting a lot so I imagine Eldar will need to look to other places to get effective shooting to replace what the Serpent Shield offered. Indeed, I first saw the Serpent Shield rules in the previous codex, I actually thought the 60" was 6". If the Serpent Shield had a 6" range in previous dex, I don't think it would have been as problematic.
It seems like Eldar now have have S4-6 shooting even more than before with the potential for S8 here and there on various platforms (probably Crimson Death/Falcon formation/War Walkers will be best source for S8+). Therefore, to reliably deal with AV12+, Eldar will need to rely on units that can get close like Dragons or Spiders who can get to vulnerable facings. There is a HUGE difference between S6 spam and S7 shooting against AV12+.
What did the respective lists look like?
I'm going to disagree about AV12. Three Scattbikes(81pts) strips 1.33 HP off of AV12 per turn, a Serpent with Scatter/Shield only strips 1.92HP/Turn. Scatt Bikes are actually more significantly more efficient against AV12 than Wave Serpents were for cost when the min DA squad was factored in) when cover wasn't a factor. And are virtually identical if 4+ cover is in play.
Cheap Scatter Lasers are efficient Anti AV12. It takes on average 27 S6 shots to strip 3HP off of AV12. 30 Scattterbikes(Magic Number) would average stripping 13.3HP off of AV12 in a single turn.
Well Zagman, I don't think my dice have a 6 on them but 2 1s instead! Anyway, my point was S6 may be ok to strip HP off if taken in sufficient numbers but when you have infantry you need to take out or vehicles you need to take out-I'd rather shoot the Scatter Lasers at something with a T value. Specifically, Scatter Lasers and other S6 is probably only going to be engaging AV 12 as a last resort rather than be someone's first choice and S8>S6 when it comes to AV12+. This depends on the army you are facing, of course, and what targets are available. Regardless, Jetbikes lose efficiency pretty fast when they get blown out of the sky and die as they will likely have a pretty big target on them.
oddworx wrote: Played against a damn good player who ran the new eldar. I play straight up Dark Eldar. We played a ITC mission. It was a bloody game, and I lost many a unit. In the end I out maneuvered him by killing his Serpents ( which is still pretty tough) and leaving my fast units alive to grab objectives in the end. The nerf to Serpents is so huge that it effects the dex more than any buff (and there are quite a few) Eldar have received. As for Wraith Knights... Shoot everything at that F'er for a turn, maybe 2 and watch it go down. Assault armies just have to take enough power fist/claws/rending whatever to take it down. "Oh, what if the WK is fortunes though?" Then kill that rat bastard seer council first. Let the wraith knight eat a couple small units in the first couple turns. You will probably be getting Slay the Warlord at that point. I have played this guy and his army many times with my DE and he has kicked my ass every time. This was a welcome change. And here's the tag line of this whole post: "Eldar are no longer the best army in the game" (drops mic)
Ha, grats on that win. I think from what I've seen, you tend to do a lot of MSU type lists? I think those type of lists will do well against Eldar in general. Serpents no longer having those 60" d6+1 shots at S7 ignoring cover every turn will hurt Eldar shooting a lot so I imagine Eldar will need to look to other places to get effective shooting to replace what the Serpent Shield offered. Indeed, I first saw the Serpent Shield rules in the previous codex, I actually thought the 60" was 6". If the Serpent Shield had a 6" range in previous dex, I don't think it would have been as problematic.
It seems like Eldar now have have S4-6 shooting even more than before with the potential for S8 here and there on various platforms (probably Crimson Death/Falcon formation/War Walkers will be best source for S8+). Therefore, to reliably deal with AV12+, Eldar will need to rely on units that can get close like Dragons or Spiders who can get to vulnerable facings. There is a HUGE difference between S6 spam and S7 shooting against AV12+.
What did the respective lists look like?
I agree Mort. That 1 strength on that one vehicle was so over the top that it skewed the entire perception of the whole army. Also getting rid of Laser Lock was big too.
Seemed like an interesting set of lists-surprised he took Vibro Cannons and Bright Lances on the Serpents. I still think Scatter is best on Serpent. How did the Razorwing do for you?
Funny you should ask. The Razorwing was the All Star. Took out Karandras and most of his boys by firing all four missiles at once.
Nice-I definitely look forward to trying out the Crimson Death formation. I hear it shoots Wraithguard and runs on the tears of those that had to face Serpents last edition.
In my game last week, with the new codex, two of my serpents (Scatter Lasers, Shuriken Cannon) that I kept with the same loadout as the week before to see how differently they played, engaged in a slap fight with my opponent's serpent (EML, no cannon). Ultimately: He got one of mine when his Autarch chucked a Haywire grenade at it to strip the last hull point. I got his when my Hornets stepped in, said, 'this is how it's done' and blew it up. He got my last one when, having failed to tank shock his Guardians off the table, they gleefully assaulted and glanced it to death with Plasma grenades.
The loss of Laserlock and the reconfiguration of the Serpent Shield have completely redefined the Wave Serpent's battlefield capacity (and therefore its role). It went from being the best gunboat in the game to being the best (most durable, fastest) transport in the game.
DCannon4Life wrote: In my game last week, with the new codex, two of my serpents (Scatter Lasers, Shuriken Cannon) that I kept with the same loadout as the week before to see how differently they played, engaged in a slap fight with my opponent's serpent (EML, no cannon). Ultimately: He got one of mine when his Autarch chucked a Haywire grenade at it to strip the last hull point. I got his when my Hornets stepped in, said, 'this is how it's done' and blew it up. He got my last one when, having failed to tank shock his Guardians off the table, they gleefully assaulted and glanced it to death with Plasma grenades.
The loss of Laserlock and the reconfiguration of the Serpent Shield have completely redefined the Wave Serpent's battlefield capacity (and therefore its role). It went from being the best gunboat in the game to being the best (most durable, fastest) transport in the game.
This to me is not a bad thing.
You know, considering it was always intended as a transport and not as a gunboat.
DCannon4Life wrote: In my game last week, with the new codex, two of my serpents (Scatter Lasers, Shuriken Cannon) that I kept with the same loadout as the week before to see how differently they played, engaged in a slap fight with my opponent's serpent (EML, no cannon). Ultimately: He got one of mine when his Autarch chucked a Haywire grenade at it to strip the last hull point. I got his when my Hornets stepped in, said, 'this is how it's done' and blew it up. He got my last one when, having failed to tank shock his Guardians off the table, they gleefully assaulted and glanced it to death with Plasma grenades.
The loss of Laserlock and the reconfiguration of the Serpent Shield have completely redefined the Wave Serpent's battlefield capacity (and therefore its role). It went from being the best gunboat in the game to being the best (most durable, fastest) transport in the game.
And that is the way it should be. Being the best Transport and the Best Gunboat was ridiculous for its cost. Now, it is merely the best and fastest Transport in the game.
Why don't you mention how you oneshotted another Wraithknight... something most Tau Gunlines would need two turns to do.
At least Eldar are evenly matched against themselves.....
@DarkStar Sabre: Don't mean to imply that it's bad at all. It may even be a positive in an unexpected way--opponents won't try so hard to kill them (they have a reduced threat profile) which means they might still be around for late game/last turn objective grabbing. Their survivability, with the change to holofields from +1 to cover save to 5++ is worse vs. weapons that don't ignore cover and better against weapons that do (right?). So...net gain?
I do mean to point out that they have been effectively neutered. The only choice (for me) now is to decide whether to run my serpents with Bright Lances or EML. I think Shuriken Cannons will go back in the bin.
@Zagman: Spoilers! If people want to know how my game went, they can go watch the battle report! But yes, I held my Wraith Knight in reserve, Deep Struck on turn two, hit his knight twice and rolled a '6' on the D chart. I would like to point out that I did the same thing in my last game with the 6th Ed. codex (Distortion), but in that game he failed a cover save.... On the bottom of turn two his Wraith Guard came in and D-ed my Wraith Knight. Tit for tat.
I'm looking to get a game vs. an Imperial Knight/Grey Knight/Imperial Guard list tonight, and I'll make a report of it too. That or Necrons. /shrug
ConanMan wrote: Eldar have not had a weakened codex and everyone goes beserk.. I don't know why, I know of one other guy who plays them.. the truth is that for 95% of people who play 40k ( who I beat ) make tactically attrocious decisions that I wouldn't ever have made.
You don't know me, but I win a lot I have been regularly thanked by my opponents for being the only person they had played who could beat them. This happens to me a lot. Chaos, Orks..
Why do I win a lot, because play eldar? No. Because I like eldar BECAUSE I know what I am doing. So I win a lot.
Please please please forgive the huge arrogance it may seem to take for me to make that last statement. I DON'T say it lightly. I am not "god" in 40k, far from it, but it may be relevant that I am very good at chess and I am very good at probabilities in my head I can work out all options odds of success and project two turns ahead and have contingencies. So. BECAUSE I can do that I have to play Eldar because they reward good play better than any army and they punish bad play. They have always been like this.
Why do I have to play eldar? Because the other armies are boring to me.
I win a lot because I study the oppnents army books, I watch tonnes of battlereports on youtube, I study what worked, I know the rules (mostly) and I have a plan ahead of time for if the opponent does a b or c and I stick to the plan no matter my emotional angst and I know how to use terrain and I work hard at the prep. Very hard.
When I play 95% of people they have none of this. They stick their big guns in buildings and camp attempting to win by rolling dice.
95% of who I play DO powergame. They don't realise it. They want better armour cheaper troops better guns more invuls. When they don't get it they cry.
that is why I think people hate eldar codexs: they are typically codexes that are not weak. And now because their powergaming toys in a line at the back WILL NOT WORK they cry cheese
With the new Knight book coming out, I think we will need to revisit the 1 LOW option that a lot of tournaments run with. Otherwise Knights can no longer be fielded and are standard codex. So there is now another buff to Eldar in play, they can field multiple Wraithknights again if the 1 LOW is removed.
Thimn wrote: With the new Knight book coming out, I think we will need to revisit the 1 LOW option that a lot of tournaments run with. Otherwise Knights can no longer be fielded and are standard codex. So there is now another buff to Eldar in play, they can field multiple Wraithknights again if the 1 LOW is removed.
Given how much negative feedback there is towards IK armies in tournaments, and they have by far the winninest percentage, I doubt many tournaments will remove the 1 LoW option. I sincerely hope they do not, and I am really hoping NOVA sticks to its guns with no GC/SHLoWs which effectively removes Wraithknights and IKs from play. Keeping my fingers crossed we retain some sanity.
Its really hard to outright ban a codex from an event though. Its a bog standard army in 40k and to remove it would really be changing the game big time. Its really a bigger boon for the Eldar that the Knight book is dropping. The Wraithknights are superior and cheaper to the Knights and would be able to field as many as they like.
Punishing Knights because of another Codex seems backwards thinking.
Thimn wrote: Its really hard to outright ban a codex from an event though. Its a bog standard army in 40k and to remove it would really be changing the game big time. Its really a bigger boon for the Eldar that the Knight book is dropping. The Wraithknights are superior and cheaper to the Knights and would be able to field as many as they like.
Punishing Knights because of another Codex seems backwards thinking.
It is not outright banning a codex, its outright banning a book filled with nothing but SHW LoWs. GW may be calling it a codex, but lets not delude ourselves into believing its anything like the "Standard" Codices.
A line against Apoc in 40k has to be drawn somewhere, and at GC/SHLoWs seems like a pretty damned good place to start.
Sorry but currently it is a codex with essentially 1 unit in it. Not all that much different than a data slate. It is also all superheavies (making it very different from those other books.)
It is a codex in name but it is very different than other books. Then again I think it has been bad for the game since it was released.
The "iKnights is a Codex!" argument is ultra shaky.
It's not like people would be totally OK with banning Craftworlds if GW had randomly decided to change their naming structure to Army Book: Craftworlds instead of Codex: Craftworlds.
Further, if they didn't put the word "codex" on iKnights, it's not as if people who now want to use it would be like YOU'RE RIGHT IT'S NOT A CODEX ANYMORE BAN IT!
Weakest, least impactful argument made about whether or not to use iKnights.
Well, Knights are a full codex in a sense-but that is largely irrelevant. I mean, if they did codex: Wraith Knight and supported it with each Wraith Knight having a unique spirit stone/personality and rules and all you had was an army of 4-6 slightly different Wraith Knights, I don't think that would go over too well but that is effectively what the Knight codex is.
So saying "but it is a codex..." is not a good reason to either include or exclude something. You need to look at how it affects the game as a whole-among other things-and I think that is what many TOs are doing. Any decision making process to balance things out is bound to make some people upset and since there really isn't a clear metric on what makes 40k, or any game completely balanced, I don't think we really have any basis to criticize a TOs decision other than what our own personal preference is. And at that point, we end up with an arguments like "that restaurant only serves steak but I am a vegan so that restaurant is wrong!"
MVBrandt wrote: The "iKnights is a Codex!" argument is ultra shaky.
It's not like people would be totally OK with banning Craftworlds if GW had randomly decided to change their naming structure to Army Book: Craftworlds instead of Codex: Craftworlds.
Further, if they didn't put the word "codex" on iKnights, it's not as if people who now want to use it would be like YOU'RE RIGHT IT'S NOT A CODEX ANYMORE BAN IT!
Weakest, least impactful argument made about whether or not to use iKnights.
You no longer run nova, you shalt be stripped of your to title, the council of wise entitled bols posters who only play apoc have spoken, Case closed
Well fair enough I suppose. I have never had a problem with Knights in the game (don't own one) but if the consensus is that they need to be removed from 40k for balance reasons I can't fault it.
Bringing it back on topic, keeping the Knights out of tournaments would still than hamper the Eldar codex which I imagine most people want.
Thimn wrote: Well fair enough I suppose. I have never had a problem with Knights in the game (don't own one) but if the consensus is that they need to be removed from 40k for balance reasons I can't fault it.
Bringing it back on topic, keeping the Knights out of tournaments would still than hamper the Eldar codex which I imagine most people want.
From at least a NOVA perspective, if we keep SH/GC out, that would certainly continue to apply to the newly GC Wraithknights.
Thimn wrote: Well fair enough I suppose. I have never had a problem with Knights in the game (don't own one) but if the consensus is that they need to be removed from 40k for balance reasons I can't fault it.
Bringing it back on topic, keeping the Knights out of tournaments would still than hamper the Eldar codex which I imagine most people want.
From at least a NOVA perspective, if we keep SH/GC out, that would certainly continue to apply to the newly GC Wraithknights.
That's going to upset a lot of people who already own Knights.
Thimn wrote: Well fair enough I suppose. I have never had a problem with Knights in the game (don't own one) but if the consensus is that they need to be removed from 40k for balance reasons I can't fault it.
Bringing it back on topic, keeping the Knights out of tournaments would still than hamper the Eldar codex which I imagine most people want.
From at least a NOVA perspective, if we keep SH/GC out, that would certainly continue to apply to the newly GC Wraithknights.
That's going to upset a lot of people who already own Knights.
That's going to be the case broadly anyway - I do not believe FLG is likely to change their 0-1 SH/GC LOW ruling to accommodate Knight players, nor do I see any event that has limits to begin with suddenly allowing multiple Wraithknights (despite the fact most Eldar players who were already fielding 3 wouldn't mind spending 150 points to field the same 3 at a much higher power level).
Thimn wrote: Well fair enough I suppose. I have never had a problem with Knights in the game (don't own one) but if the consensus is that they need to be removed from 40k for balance reasons I can't fault it.
Bringing it back on topic, keeping the Knights out of tournaments would still than hamper the Eldar codex which I imagine most people want.
From at least a NOVA perspective, if we keep SH/GC out, that would certainly continue to apply to the newly GC Wraithknights.
That's going to upset a lot of people who already own Knights.
That's going to be the case broadly anyway - I do not believe FLG is likely to change their 0-1 SH/GC LOW ruling to accommodate Knight players, nor do I see any event that has limits to begin with suddenly allowing multiple Wraithknights (despite the fact most Eldar players who were already fielding 3 wouldn't mind spending 150 points to field the same 3 at a much higher power level).
It would appear the slide down the slippery slope has begun.
Slippery slope?? Its a line in the sand that is quite clear, the same line that existed prior to 7th, and the 6th IK "Codex". No SH or GMC in "normal" games of 40k. That was what Apocalypse was for. And its staying consistent with a previous ruling, and not choosing to change the rules just because it upsets a couple of people.
Isn't it a greater risk of a slippery slope changing your rulings to accommodate the WK and IK players and either creating a very special exception for them, or opening up the whole of GMC/SHVs?
Thimn wrote: Well fair enough I suppose. I have never had a problem with Knights in the game (don't own one) but if the consensus is that they need to be removed from 40k for balance reasons I can't fault it.
Bringing it back on topic, keeping the Knights out of tournaments would still than hamper the Eldar codex which I imagine most people want.
From at least a NOVA perspective, if we keep SH/GC out, that would certainly continue to apply to the newly GC Wraithknights.
That's going to upset a lot of people who already own Knights.
That's going to be the case broadly anyway - I do not believe FLG is likely to change their 0-1 SH/GC LOW ruling to accommodate Knight players, nor do I see any event that has limits to begin with suddenly allowing multiple Wraithknights (despite the fact most Eldar players who were already fielding 3 wouldn't mind spending 150 points to field the same 3 at a much higher power level).
It would appear the slide down the slippery slope has begun.
Which slippery slope is that? They exist everywhere for TOs, whether it's nerfing invisibility and fortune and grimoire and jetbike scatter lasers or keeping SH/GC out of the standard mainline GT or creating a variety of missions that emphasize different components of army build.
Slippery Slope is a bit of a fallacy in that it presumes the TO in question feels comfortable starting to ban more things once they keep something out. It also doesn't apply very well to NOVA, as we've generally minimized changes while actually adding more to the game this year than we've taken away in terms fo what's legal (ref: forgeworld, third detachment, etc.). Additionally, as Zagman points out, we have an established, player-approved ruling that prevents the inclusion of SH/GCLoW. To allow iKnights and WK now that their rules have been changed by GW would require us to accommodate two powerful army types (in fact, the two winningest out there, period) purely out of a bowing to the pressures of a vocal grouping. In other words, any Ork or Necron or Warhound or Revenant or Thunderhawk or whoever player who didn't like the ruling wasn't worth our time or attention, but those WK and iK players sure are!
It might be a far slippier slope to start cowing to the pressures of those who were happy fielding the most powerful units when their rules change for the worse ... rather than sticking firm to existing rulings.
OverwatchCNC wrote: That's going to upset a lot of people who already own Knights.
Why is that more important than upsetting the people who own other superheavies/GCs? Knights should never have had their special snowflake exception in the first place, and should have been banned/limited exactly the same as every other superheavy/GC.
OverwatchCNC wrote: That's going to upset a lot of people who already own Knights.
Why is that more important than upsetting the people who own other superheavies/GCs? Knights should never have had their special snowflake exception in the first place, and should have been banned/limited exactly the same as every other superheavy/GC.
However, common sense prevailed and tourneys allowed them. And they didn't win GTs (If, "Yes they did!" then it'd be great to read about it) and, to the best of my finding out about any other tourneys in Calif, they aren't winning any here, not in the year or so they have been out.
is bigger than yours" game and get into a credential war is not the same thing as having no stake in the discussion.
. Which Distort did anyway, Instant Death. The worse now is Eternal Warrior no longer Instant Deaths out, just by sheer weight of 6 + wounds.
I'd be ticked off aobut. And, what I'll be playing.
