Hi there I'm pretty new to the hobby and just moved to Toronto (I used to love about 18 hours north of Toronto) and I have some eldar stuff from my army back in the day, now I've been out of it for about 4-5 years so first thing I picked up was the book and tried to make my army list best I could, about 1000pts. I show up to a local store and no on will play me and everyone just kept saying ""oh you play eldar, no thank you" like idk about anyone else but I think that's pretty dumb to refuse a game, what's wron with eldar.? I can't tell you since I don't get to play

Primarily because of that scatter laser special rule, and the addition of strength D weapons to a non-apocalypse codex.

They are a very powerful codex, with very powerful detachments and formations. When playing locally, pick up games will be hard to find until you are seen to not be ''Just another Scatbike spammer''.

Many, many people have had very unfun games against Eldar due to how ridiculously powerful Scatterlaser toting bikers, Wraithknights and Wraithspiders are. Those scars don't heal quickly, and while I know it's prejudice, it's going to have to be your job to alleviate the locals fears.

Take Banshee's, Vipers, Scorpions, Melee Autachs and Wraithblades. Don't take more then 2 units of anything. Play Nice. Then, once you've intragrated yourself into a group of people who know you are a Nice Guy people will offer you competitive games where you can bring out everything.

When the Eldar got a new codex it is apparently pretty good and relatively powerful, people shout top tier a lot but I don't play Eldar so can't really comment with any authority.

Do you use a lot of jetbikes with scatter lasers, vast amounts of warlocks? If so, that will probably get a few peoples knickers in a twist.

PacificRimJob wrote:
first thing I picked up was the book and tried to make my army list best I could, about 1000pts.

This is a problem. Your list might be too competive to others.

I have 10 bikes total 3 cannons 1 for every 3 dudes, 2 falcons a farseer and 30 guardians

Some people are under the misapprehension that points balance the game. GW did a poor job and some players insist on exploiting their mistakes.

If you accept players balance the game, Eldar is fine. Different attitude though as you can't claim you're playing too competitively if you handicap armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Incidentally your list sounds like a lot of fun. No worries.

Tho I went to a GW the other day in Toronto and saw a all bike army I there display case, it looked super cool. I'm sure it's hard to beat like you guys say, but I love the look, a lot more then my old ones :(

Sorry to hear that Toronto's developed that mentality. The quality of "pick up games" continues to go downhill it seems... because no one should be refused a game just because they play a specific faction. They should have the decency of looking at lists first.

Generally, Eldar hate occurred because they are very high-tier right now. They objectively have no truly "bad" units, with even their less-than-best units being rock solid options. That wouldn't be so bad if the Eldar didn't also have so many "best" units too! The crux of this comes to 2 units;

!#1 - The Wraith Knight. Didn't exist 4-5 years ago. It's a bigger-er Wraithlord that's a Gargantuan Creature. You'd have expected this thing to be in Apocalypse/Mega-Battles ages ago, but it's technically a part of standard play now. Lots of people dislike that fact as it is, but the Wraith Knight takes the cake for best Super Heavy in the game right now. It's a low cost compared to most Super Heavies, yet is able to win against most Super heavies.

#2 - The Scatter Bike. Good save, amaze-balls speed, TROOPS, and each carries a heavy weapon. They do everything, and do that well. Their only real weakness is a low leadership score.


This isn't a problem in tournament play of course, because most of the current meta makes Wraithknights and Scatterbikes not great choices (Grav weapons destroy Wraithknights, and Tau demolish Scatbikes). But in anything less than a super-powered tourney list, the Eldar are rather dominating and people find that to be an unfun game.

My suggestion, join some forums for people local to you, and set up games where you tell people you're limiting yourself to no Wraithknights and one heavy gun per 3 bikes. I myself play Eldar and haven't had any problems, but that may also be because I play primarily Harlequins with Eldar reinforcements.

Post you list here maybe so dakka can judge how rude or not rude you are XD

I am sorry you happen to start up during a dark time for Eldar players. I don't think anyone should refuse a game based on what army your opponent has, but people do.

Maybe you should change your approach to be one of "hey, I haven't played 40k in 5 years, would you mind doing a learning game with me?" and after that point, I think only the worst humans will refuse to play a game with you regardless of what army you have.

Cause when others get nerfs and sidegrades, eldar get scatbikes, free S: D and 295 GMC.
And than the rest of the codexes have to adjust to them. And once again, a painful power creep cycle begins. Some like sm get in in months, others like orks or dark eldar get it in 5-7 years. And than the new eldar book gets released.
It was in 6-th, it was in 7-th. There was basicaly 1 edition where eldar weren't broken - 5-th one.

Eldar were a reason 4-th was called an edition of god falcons. They, alongside tau, were a reason why 6-th lost tons of players and the player base hasn't recuperated yet...and probably never will. Eldar, gravguns and decurion are a reason 7-th gets bad rep.

PacificRimJob wrote:
I have 10 bikes total 3 cannons 1 for every 3 dudes, 2 falcons a farseer and 30 guardians

Eldar lists can be cheesy as all get out, your’s is not.

"I’ve got some bikes, but am sticking with the old 1-in-3 rule for the heavy weapons”
“No wraiths, no D. Heck, no aspect warriors!”
“I’m using Falcons, not Wave Serpents”
“I don’t have the stuff for the new broken formations, so I’m just building with a CAD”

It’s harder to make a “fun” list then a competitive/broken one with Eldar these days. Yours looks like it should be fine. You just have a lot of bias and hate from all the tools out there poisoning the water for you. But as with most prejudice, a little education and understanding should help clear things up. Get to know the locals, show them your list/models, let them know that you aren’t TFG. If they/you are willing, you might want to offer an army swap, and them them play your force.

 koooaei wrote:
Cause when others get nerfs and sidegrades, eldar get scatbikes, free S: D and 295 GMC.
And than the rest of the codexes have to adjust to them. And once again, a painful power creep cycle begins. Some like sm get in in months, others like orks or dark eldar get it in 5-7 years. And than the new eldar book gets released.
It was in 6-th, it was in 7-th. There was basicaly 1 edition where eldar weren't broken - 5-th one.

Eldar were a reason 4-th was called an edition of god falcons. They, alongside tau, were a reason why 6-th lost tons of players and the player base hasn't recuperated yet...and probably never will. Eldar, gravguns and decurion are a reason 7-th gets bad rep.

it's just a game tho, these guys at the local store make it sound like I'm some horrible person, I just want to move models around and roll dice. Who cares how strong something is.

PacificRimJob wrote:

it's just a game tho, these guys at the local store make it sound like I'm some horrible person, I just want to move models around and roll dice. Who cares how strong something is.

Playing Devils advocate here. Reverse the situation.

What if you're the guy at the local store and someone want's to play with you using their over-powered army. Would you *really* not care how strong their army is if you know you were going to lose 95% of the time?

Imagine it was a game of chess where you only had pawns and a king while the opponent had every piece available - would it be enjoyable?

PacificRimJob wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
Cause when others get nerfs and sidegrades, eldar get scatbikes, free S: D and 295 GMC.
And than the rest of the codexes have to adjust to them. And once again, a painful power creep cycle begins. Some like sm get in in months, others like orks or dark eldar get it in 5-7 years. And than the new eldar book gets released.
It was in 6-th, it was in 7-th. There was basicaly 1 edition where eldar weren't broken - 5-th one.

Eldar were a reason 4-th was called an edition of god falcons. They, alongside tau, were a reason why 6-th lost tons of players and the player base hasn't recuperated yet...and probably never will. Eldar, gravguns and decurion are a reason 7-th gets bad rep.

it's just a game tho, these guys at the local store make it sound like I'm some horrible person, I just want to move models around and roll dice. Who cares how strong something is.

To an extent that's the point. People want to have a fun game not just move models off the table and that means cheesy Eldar lists are disliked. However because of how certain people act about Eldar there's the ridiculous view in some places that ALL Eldar are automatically some evil terrible army which is ridiculous. Your army seems fine for a fun game and there is no reason you shouldn't be allowed to play.

PacificRimJob wrote:
it's just a game tho, these guys at the local store make it sound like I'm some horrible person, I just want to move models around and roll dice. Who cares how strong something is.

This guy.



That's the guy who cares how strong something is.


But seriously; the issue is that not everyone plays the same game, despite it having the same name on the box. It's the whole idea of the social contract. The way you expect a game to go and the way others expect a game to go are not the same thing. I remember when I played just to push around toy soldiers and roll dice, and that was glorious! I've changed since then. I care a lot more about playing cinematic games now, but I also enjoy making smart plays. That's not at all the same, and if my current self played against my younger self, we'd probably both leave the game a little disappointed. This is another reason why it's important to find the right group that shares your values, or to have a clear communication with your opponent ahead of a game.

Apart from making me laugh with that glorious statement...




Yarium is on point and I agree whole heartedly with them.

Eldar are honestly pretty reasonable in ITC, maybe you should introduce your gaming group to it!

But really, they're strong, I think your opponents just need to understand that you're playing for fun and those happen to be the models you own.

 Nevelon wrote:

PacificRimJob wrote:
I have 10 bikes total 3 cannons 1 for every 3 dudes, 2 falcons a farseer and 30 guardians

Eldar lists can be cheesy as all get out, your’s is not.

"I’ve got some bikes, but am sticking with the old 1-in-3 rule for the heavy weapons”
“No wraiths, no D. Heck, no aspect warriors!”
“I’m using Falcons, not Wave Serpents”
“I don’t have the stuff for the new broken formations, so I’m just building with a CAD”

It’s harder to make a “fun” list then a competitive/broken one with Eldar these days. Yours looks like it should be fine. You just have a lot of bias and hate from all the tools out there poisoning the water for you. But as with most prejudice, a little education and understanding should help clear things up. Get to know the locals, show them your list/models, let them know that you aren’t TFG. If they/you are willing, you might want to offer an army swap, and them them play your force.

But his list still stomps BA. That's why Eldar hate.

What's ITC.? Sounds cool

It's the "Independent Tournament Circuit", which has its own set of consistent FAQs and modifications, votes on new issues that come up, and is one of the larger tournament groups around. It's run by Frontline Gaming here; https://www.frontlinegaming.org/

Good folks. Some people are very against ITC though, as they strongly disagree with some of the FAQs and modifications. For example, in ITC you are not making Snap Shots at an Invisible unit, but are instead brought down to BS1. This is a big difference, because now you can shoot Flamers at the invisible unit. They also restrict any reroll on a save to being a 4+ or worse, so you can't get 2+ Invulnerable, rerollable saves. Some people do not like these changes, as they go directly against the written rules. Others prefer them, because they provide balance and allow a greater diversity of lists to exist.

 Yarium wrote:
It's the "Independent Tournament Circuit", which has its own set of consistent FAQs and modifications, votes on new issues that come up, and is one of the larger tournament groups around. It's run by Frontline Gaming here; https://www.frontlinegaming.org/

Good folks. Some people are very against ITC though, as they strongly disagree with some of the FAQs and modifications. For example, in ITC you are not making Snap Shots at an Invisible unit, but are instead brought down to BS1. This is a big difference, because now you can shoot Flamers at the invisible unit. They also restrict any reroll on a save to being a 4+ or worse, so you can't get 2+ Invulnerable, rerollable saves. Some people do not like these changes, as they go directly against the written rules. Others prefer them, because they provide balance and allow a greater diversity of lists to exist.

Even with ITC, Eldar are crazy strong.

Martel732 wrote:But his list still stomps BA. That's why Eldar hate.

“Stomp” I think is a little bit of hyperbole. Even with BA you should be able to have a decent game against that. I’ll give that BA is towards the bottom of the competitive circle, but at the less competitive FLGS, they do fine.

PacificRimJob wrote:What's ITC.? Sounds cool

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/community/frontline-gamings-independent-tournament-circuit/itc-2015-season-40k-tournament-format/

(I think that’s the up to date relevant link)

Community based restrictions/formats/FAQ to make some more balanced competitive play. Since GW is not big on that sort of thing these days. Not everyone plays by them, but they are one standard out there.

Ninja'd

The devil is in the details. That many bladestorming guardians at BS 4 are a serious problem. They have deceptive range with battle focus. Too many special rules that make even a basic unit very fearsome for lists that don't have their own special rules.

Another big part is meta. BA players don't bring weapons to kill guardians because they are too busy trying to survive against, Stormsurge, WK, and TWC. And mass IK.

They're fething OP my brother has eldar and i must agree that the''re just too OP for a fun match

Martel732 wrote:

 Yarium wrote:
It's the "Independent Tournament Circuit", which has its own set of consistent FAQs and modifications, votes on new issues that come up, and is one of the larger tournament groups around. It's run by Frontline Gaming here; https://www.frontlinegaming.org/

Good folks. Some people are very against ITC though, as they strongly disagree with some of the FAQs and modifications. For example, in ITC you are not making Snap Shots at an Invisible unit, but are instead brought down to BS1. This is a big difference, because now you can shoot Flamers at the invisible unit. They also restrict any reroll on a save to being a 4+ or worse, so you can't get 2+ Invulnerable, rerollable saves. Some people do not like these changes, as they go directly against the written rules. Others prefer them, because they provide balance and allow a greater diversity of lists to exist.

Even with ITC, Eldar are crazy strong.

I always considering the Independent Tournament Circuit's changes something specific to tournaments, so I really never cared whether or not something was crazy strong. As strong as Eldar are, in the world of top-tier tournaments, they're pretty much average. Below Average even in some cases due to limitations on numbers of Lords of War.

 Yarium wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Yarium wrote:
It's the "Independent Tournament Circuit", which has its own set of consistent FAQs and modifications, votes on new issues that come up, and is one of the larger tournament groups around. It's run by Frontline Gaming here; https://www.frontlinegaming.org/

Good folks. Some people are very against ITC though, as they strongly disagree with some of the FAQs and modifications. For example, in ITC you are not making Snap Shots at an Invisible unit, but are instead brought down to BS1. This is a big difference, because now you can shoot Flamers at the invisible unit. They also restrict any reroll on a save to being a 4+ or worse, so you can't get 2+ Invulnerable, rerollable saves. Some people do not like these changes, as they go directly against the written rules. Others prefer them, because they provide balance and allow a greater diversity of lists to exist.

Even with ITC, Eldar are crazy strong.

I always considering the Independent Tournament Circuit's changes something specific to tournaments, so I really never cared whether or not something was crazy strong. As strong as Eldar are, in the world of top-tier tournaments, they're pretty much average. Below Average even in some cases due to limitations on numbers of Lords of War.

Perhaps. Although I can't see how a list with Windrider troops is anything worse than above average. They have the mobility to stay away from death stars. And can whittle away in the process.

Martel732 wrote:

 Yarium wrote:
I always considering the Independent Tournament Circuit's changes something specific to tournaments, so I really never cared whether or not something was crazy strong. As strong as Eldar are, in the world of top-tier tournaments, they're pretty much average. Below Average even in some cases due to limitations on numbers of Lords of War.

Perhaps. Although I can't see how a list with Windrider troops is anything worse than above average. They have the mobility to stay away from death stars. And can whittle away in the process.

That's what I mean . The lists out there, combined with the extremely high skill levels, are so insane-o that taking on Windriders ain't no thang.

I did just pick up 12 more bikes, they look super cool and after reading there rules finally there good! Can't wait to use then

PacificRimJob wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
Cause when others get nerfs and sidegrades, eldar get scatbikes, free S: D and 295 GMC.
And than the rest of the codexes have to adjust to them. And once again, a painful power creep cycle begins. Some like sm get in in months, others like orks or dark eldar get it in 5-7 years. And than the new eldar book gets released.
It was in 6-th, it was in 7-th. There was basicaly 1 edition where eldar weren't broken - 5-th one.

Eldar were a reason 4-th was called an edition of god falcons. They, alongside tau, were a reason why 6-th lost tons of players and the player base hasn't recuperated yet...and probably never will. Eldar, gravguns and decurion are a reason 7-th gets bad rep.

it's just a game tho, these guys at the local store make it sound like I'm some horrible person, I just want to move models around and roll dice. Who cares how strong something is.

You asked why - i told you why

Not that you should be ashamed of playing eldar or something. If you like the faction, go for it. Imo, eldar are not the most broken stuff around atm. They're strong indeed and you can literally pick up any unit and make it work. Personally, i've tried playing strong eldar lists and they didn't prove to be fun. It's just that you have so many stuff going for you that you start to get overly relaxed, make slight mistakes here and there and they don't affect the performance so much cause your book does most of the job...and than back to playing orks and...oh, boy, every inch in the movement phase matters again.

I just feel sad that such a race like eldar is represented in a way you don't need to be really good to make them work. They're supposed to be an army that requires mastery in all fields. But nope, they're too fast, too shooty, too tough, don't have glaring ld problems, excel at maelstorm, are strong casters and don't cost much. There's nothing eldar aren't good at. And it spoils the fun.

I much prefer harlequins. Now that's an interesting army. That's the feeling eldar should provide when you play them. The army with subtle bonuses that relies strongly on tactical aspect and planning your moves ahead.

Once again, i'm not claiming that you're completely carried by the codex when you play eldar. If you make serious mistakes, even the best book won't help you. But eldar are just too easy atm.

That's a good idea to swap armies and make your own opinion. This way, you will start to see the problem. And the opponent will also start to see that eldar are not as op as he depicts them. Strong? Yes. Strong but manageable.

Sorry I was just doing a quick search just to see some eldar lists and threads. All I see is unbeatable this, eldar are the best, and then some guy dman137 or something..


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry I was just doing a quick search just to see some eldar lists and threads. All I see is unbeatable this, eldar are the best, and then some guy dman137 or something..

PacificRimJob wrote:
I did just pick up 12 more bikes, they look super cool and after reading there rules finally there good! Can't wait to use then

It's perfectly fine to really like Jetbikes. My suggestion would be to pick up some rare earth magnets and magnetise the guns. This way, you can safely shift between playing much softer 1-per-3 upgraded guns as the old rules used to be, right up to being able to take a high level tourney level list of all min/maxed Scatbikes in games where it's appropriate to do so.

What grinds peoples' gears most of all and thus will earn you a reputation as a flaming donkeycave, is the type of person who only builds their stuff in the most optimised fashion, and insists on never playing anything but the filthiest & creamiest cheddar that Codex: Kraftworld Smeldar can provide!

In open LGS's, you need to remember to be flexible. The vast majority of people who play are not looking for nut-crushing, hard core 'Prohammer 40k' style games.
When the vast majority of the group plays for example a much more friendly/non-competitive style game, then the onus is on the very few who enjoy a much different style of gaming to act accordingly and tone down, (or indeed in some cases, turn-up!), the power level of their lists.

Otherwise, if for example only using the 'best of the best' and only playing hyper competitive style games is what you want, then obviously it sounds like you need to find a new group that enjoys that style of gaming.
The local shop sounds like it's made up predominantly of non-competitive/friendly narrative types. Hence why there's such a hate-on for Eldar, as they're so far above the level of most other armies. (basically, anyone not playing Vanilla Marines, Tau & Decurion Necrons)

It is not your fault for picking Eldar. It is Games Workshop's fault for breaking them. 40k right now is in a pretty awful state balance wise. If you had picked Necrons or Tau you would still be in a similar situation. If you had picked Blood Angels or Chaos instead you would find yourself virtually unable to win a game no matter what you took.

Bottom line here, Eldar are good.

If you pair up Eldar against other new codecs (tau, necrons, SM parking lots) then I feel you find some balance to it all.

But the issue is not everyone plays these newer armies, and their is always a power creep.

Eldar matched against the majority of older codexs have a higher win percentage because they just are.... as unfortunate that may be.

As I said before.. your best bet is to market yourself as a new to 7th player and try some low point learning games. ~500 points or so. then after you play these guys and they see your a cool dude, it shouldn't matter what army you play.

I am about to take my Eldar off the shelf again myself My club is anxious to kill some space elves (as i am one of 2 eldar players in our group)

I think it's easy. 40k has always had a dominant army and all you gotta do is play what you want to play and eventually something else will come in. Back in the day Rhino rush Blood Angels were king gak. You had Serpent spam, Grey Knights were crazy good. Nid Carnifex spam was awesome.Tau Buffmander combos were brutal. Arguably Daemons are even better than Eldar (2015 Da Boyz). Necron Decurion is still pretty awesome.

Almost every army has had its day (however brief) and the cycle continues.

A lot of it is just folks have what they have because it was either good at some point or they just like it and the game has moved on. I used to run foot eldar guardian spam with an Avatar in 4th but I don't cry that the Avatar gets no play these days because i know the game has moved on a lot since then. If they can't handle that the meta is changing then it is on them for being unrealistic to this game.

I play a fluff oriented space marine list and I dont think the Eldar are that bad. Sure the bikes are pretty good but at the end of the day they are only 3 marines!

I wish more people in my area played Eldar, the models look so cool!

Zoner wrote:
I think it's easy. 40k has always had a dominant army and all you gotta do is play what you want to play and eventually something else will come in. Back in the day Rhino rush Blood Angels were king gak. You had Serpent spam, Grey Knights were crazy good. Nid Carnifex spam was awesome.Tau Buffmander combos were brutal. Arguably Daemons are even better than Eldar (2015 Da Boyz). Necron Decurion is still pretty awesome.

Almost every army has had its day (however brief) and the cycle continues.

A lot of it is just folks have what they have because it was either good at some point or they just like it and the game has moved on. I used to run foot eldar guardian spam with an Avatar in 4th but I don't cry that the Avatar gets no play these days because i know the game has moved on a lot since then. If they can't handle that the meta is changing then it is on them for being unrealistic to this game.

Play it now mate! Avatar got better, and the Guardian warhost with auto 6" runs is deceptively FAST!

It's a really old army right. Like if you look at my old posts I called my original army the "Iron Donut" where basically I had fearless guardians and a fortuned Avatar shooting a million s6 shots.

I will look into the warhost. The Avatar though, my sense is that he is still too pricey. Back then he was DIRT cheap. Realistically, I run a more Dark Eldar/Eldar these days. But I will consider it.

Zoner wrote:
It's a really old army right. Like if you look at my old posts I called my original army the "Iron Donut" where basically I had fearless guardians and a fortuned Avatar shooting a million s6 shots.

I will look into the warhost. The Avatar though, my sense is that he is still too pricey. Back then he was DIRT cheap. Realistically, I run a more Dark Eldar/Eldar these days. But I will consider it.

I think he is fairly balanced now for his points. he has melta in shooting and armorbane in CC which is a bump. He also gives a furious charge and possibly a rage bubble which i think would be hilarious with storm guardians!

PacificRimJob wrote:
Sorry I was just doing a quick search just to see some eldar lists and threads. All I see is unbeatable this, eldar are the best, and then some guy dman137 or something..


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry I was just doing a quick search just to see some eldar lists and threads. All I see is unbeatable this, eldar are the best, and then some guy dman137 or something..

Careful, if you say his name 3 times then he'll make a thread posing a question that he really didn't need an answer to and was instead just trying to spark another debate about hate against Eldar and 'fluffy players'.

Ahh yes, Dman1337. He has a particular thing about Eldar and insists that they are not OP, despite all the evidence contrary.

I think the problem isn't so much Eldar as a whole, but the (slightly) irrational fear that you are running some horrible "spam list o'doom" that they have read about on the internet and assume all Eldar players must be using. As long as you try to stick to a list with a bit of everything and talk to people about what you are using first to try and assuage their fears, you should be able to talk your way into a game.

I would suggest that at anything under 2000pts, you probably want to avoid Wraithknights, more than 1 unit of wraithguard or more than 1 unit of predominantly scatter laser jetbikes, especially if you are trying to pick up games with people you haven't played before with any regularity.

With what you posted above, I wouldn't have thought any reasonable person would object to a game as there isn't anything particularly "OP".

Maybe you should lead with "I don't have a wraithknight/D-Spam/Scatterbike spam/Aspect Host Spam, will you play against my Eldar?"

Which gaming store did you go to?

Is PacificRimJob an acceptable alias on this forum? Seriously?

I will admit I am an Eldar hater and it comes down to a list of reasons, starting with more fluff reasons and then going into more of the crunch. That being said let me make this point very clear I do not hate Eldar PLAYERS. My hatred is for the 40k faction.

1. Elves are arrogant d bags in basically every fantasy lore. 40K elves are no exception and honestly tend to come off as more arrogant than most.
2. I like Orks which generally dislike Elves.
3. Eldar just reek of hypocrisy. Their hedonism reached such a critical state that they birthed a chaos god and it resulted in the deaths of the vast majority of their species. Eldar continue to be arrogant d bags despite what should be a very humbling experience but now they are incredibly stuck up and puritan in nature.
4. They modify, bend, or ignore game mechanics in a multitude of ways. No scatter deep strike with WWP, run and shoot, reroll saves with fortune, invisibility, ignore perils with minimum effort, wave serpent shield, etc. Its very irritating to play against so many mechanics that bend the rules to their advantage. (Tau mechanics are often guilty of this as well and I get why people get frustrated with Tau).
5. Str D coming out of the squig hole on non Lord of War units. Who though that making the distort mechanic Str D was an acceptable change without really adjusting the points costs. In general I hate Str D in non Apoc games as it just ignores AV on vehicles which makes a Monolith just as durable as a Trukk.
6. Some incredibly undercosted units like scatter bikes and wraithknights. This results in them being very powerful if not overpowered.

Call it petty or childish but I just do not like Eldar at all. Dark Eldar get a little bit of sympathy from me if only for the fact that they live in the same gutter as the Orks in terms of codex power.

Sounds like a Dman alias

1000 pt game would be no problem. But the norm for my area is 2000. Lots of cheese builds. Scatbike Wraith knight spam, Armored Company AM, Triple tide (and now stormsurge) Tau, Nidzilla Flyrant spam, Imperial and Chaos Knights, 30k armies, and Forgeworld pieces (with no rules to back up). I've seen baneblades, Thunder hawks, and ork Stompas regularly....

When I see those things on the table I have to ask if it's worth even the time and patience to play a game. Also note I am a CSM and Ork player, so "If ya can't beat em, Join em" is kinda out of the question....

OP, check your pm box. Don't let that experience colour your view of TO40k. We are not all mouth breathing gremlins.

 Vankraken wrote:
I will admit I am an Eldar hater and it comes down to a list of reasons, starting with more fluff reasons and then going into more of the crunch. That being said let me make this point very clear I do not hate Eldar PLAYERS. My hatred is for the 40k faction.

1. Elves are arrogant d bags in basically every fantasy lore. 40K elves are no exception and honestly tend to come off as more arrogant than most.
2. I like Orks which generally dislike Elves.
3. Eldar just reek of hypocrisy. Their hedonism reached such a critical state that they birthed a chaos god and it resulted in the deaths of the vast majority of their species. Eldar continue to be arrogant d bags despite what should be a very humbling experience but now they are incredibly stuck up and puritan in nature.
4. They modify, bend, or ignore game mechanics in a multitude of ways. No scatter deep strike with WWP, run and shoot, reroll saves with fortune, invisibility, ignore perils with minimum effort, wave serpent shield, etc. Its very irritating to play against so many mechanics that bend the rules to their advantage. (Tau mechanics are often guilty of this as well and I get why people get frustrated with Tau).
5. Str D coming out of the squig hole on non Lord of War units. Who though that making the distort mechanic Str D was an acceptable change without really adjusting the points costs. In general I hate Str D in non Apoc games as it just ignores AV on vehicles which makes a Monolith just as durable as a Trukk.
6. Some incredibly undercosted units like scatter bikes and wraithknights. This results in them being very powerful if not overpowered.

Call it petty or childish but I just do not like Eldar at all. Dark Eldar get a little bit of sympathy from me if only for the fact that they live in the same gutter as the Orks in terms of codex power.

At least you're polite about your hatred. Most other Eldar haters I've met aren't quite so polite about it. Have to give you props for that (even if I'm an Eldar player myself)

 Vankraken wrote:
I will admit I am an Eldar hater and it comes down to a list of reasons, starting with more fluff reasons and then going into more of the crunch. That being said let me make this point very clear I do not hate Eldar PLAYERS. My hatred is for the 40k faction.

1. Elves are arrogant d bags in basically every fantasy lore. 40K elves are no exception and honestly tend to come off as more arrogant than most.
2. I like Orks which generally dislike Elves.
3. Eldar just reek of hypocrisy. Their hedonism reached such a critical state that they birthed a chaos god and it resulted in the deaths of the vast majority of their species. Eldar continue to be arrogant d bags despite what should be a very humbling experience but now they are incredibly stuck up and puritan in nature.
4. They modify, bend, or ignore game mechanics in a multitude of ways. No scatter deep strike with WWP, run and shoot, reroll saves with fortune, invisibility, ignore perils with minimum effort, wave serpent shield, etc. Its very irritating to play against so many mechanics that bend the rules to their advantage. (Tau mechanics are often guilty of this as well and I get why people get frustrated with Tau).
5. Str D coming out of the squig hole on non Lord of War units. Who though that making the distort mechanic Str D was an acceptable change without really adjusting the points costs. In general I hate Str D in non Apoc games as it just ignores AV on vehicles which makes a Monolith just as durable as a Trukk.
6. Some incredibly undercosted units like scatter bikes and wraithknights. This results in them being very powerful if not overpowered.

Call it petty or childish but I just do not like Eldar at all. Dark Eldar get a little bit of sympathy from me if only for the fact that they live in the same gutter as the Orks in terms of codex power.

Vankraken, as an Eldar player, I can't really argue with most of your points, but 4 & 6 are questionable.

1. Yes, arrogance from a long running rein of supremacy, but can't argue with that, it's lore!
2. Fair enough
3. True in some regards, but not the whole truth. I suspect they are slightly less arrogant than before, but the fall is more or less within living memory for some Eldar, so old habits die hard. This has plenty of corollaries in the real world (obviously not the birth of a god in a literal sense) where a great calamity hasn't diminished the spirit of a people/nation.
4, Space Marine Drop Pods, Tyranid Mawlocs/Trygons also get scatter without mishap on terrain/units off the top of my head and had it around/before Eldar.
They are meant to be one of the fastest species, so running and shooting is probably the easiest(laziest) way of representing that in the current game mechanics (imperial guard have a rule to do the same through orders or did at least?) but they aren't entirely unique. It was easier when difference races moved different distances back in the olden days.
Wave Serpent shield got nerfed in 7th, 1 shot now and you lose the defensive aspect when you shoot it. No twin-linking it with scatter lasers either. Both good changes in my opinion. In Epic, it was shoot, go an entire turn without it, then have it back from the start of the following turn (So shoot turn 2, miss turn 3, have back turn 4). It didn't cause damage, but it completely disabled the targeted enemy unit for 1 turn, enabling easy assaults for the aspect warrior cargo.
Invisibility and save douchebaggery isn't a uniquely Eldar problem (re-animation protocols/feel no pain/[insert deathstar here] shenanigans amongst many others)
5. Yup, completely with you here, Str D in non-apocalypse is un-necessary, they were Str 10 before, which was frankly overkill in many cases, but I think this is a move back towards 2nd edition distort/vortex mechanics.
6. I don't think scatterbikes are undercosted, I do think the heavy option should have stayed at 1/3. Apart from the newly D'd wraith units, I don't think any of the individual units are under/overcosted, I think they are bang on given the general trend for unit costs to decrease from 1 edition to the next. (GW sells more by making everything cheaper so you can fit more in!)
I'm with you on wraithknights though, more points, less Gargantuan/Destroyerness and/or harder to take in armies, but this seems to be the way 40k is going (Epic scaled up to 25mm scale).
Overall, I think we can expect to see more armies following suit over the course of 7th edition (Tau being another prime example, as you pointed out).

As been said elsewhere in this thread and the countless others since C;Craftworlds came out, it's up to the players to seek balance whilst they are re-releasing codices after a core edition change. People with the money and who want to exploit the most powerful combo's out of a codex/rules update will do so, no matter what codex it is, only the people using it can choose to make it a fun game by not being a WAAC player.

Even in 4/5th without using the "indestructible DAVU falcon" I found Eldar were top tier. I've always been a fan of Vypers, Support Platforms, Shining Spears, Howling Banshees and Swooping Hawks amongst many other units everyone else hated or believed were "useless" and had a great degree of success. I'm just glad to see most of them given a more prominent role.

@War Kitten. Thanks, I know the feeling of being hated for playing or liking a faction (Tau) and it really sucks. People can hate my blue anime space commie goats all day long but please don't direct that hate to me

@Ace Rimmer. Most of my dislikes of Eldar are from my perception of them. In the case of #4 its just how often they can alter game mechanics to their favor. Its basically Eldar's M.O. but honestly its just not a style that I'm not very fond of. Individually each one of those mechanics aren't what a directly dislike (except fortune, rerolling saves start to get ugly when you get down to 3+ and 2+ rerollable) but its the sum total of all of them that rub me the wrong way. The issue with the Serpent Shield was that 5/6 of the time it down graded a pen to a glance. Shooting the shield is definitely annoying (glad 6th edition style serpent spam is "dead") in its own right but that mechanic of ignoring pens goes along with the whole Eldar bending the rules theme that I am not fond of.
With #6 its the combination of points cost and codex rules that makes them seem incredibly power. Scatter bikes combine decent durability, good firepower, crazy mobility, and being troops that feels like they are above average at most things but without any premium for that versatility. Ork Tankbustas are guilty of this as well with stupidly dirt cheap assault krak missile spam and melta bombs all with tankhunter. If Orks had good army wide rules then Tankbustas would be brokenly OP but given the glaring weaknesses of the Ork codex Tankbustas aren't as unbearable to go up against (and often times have to carry the Ork codex on their back).

Eldar have been a very powerful army in just about every edition, in fact in every edition they've had a codex printed (all except 5th), they've been at least one of the top 3 armies of that edition if not *the* top army.

They're an army that, in theory, is built around mutually supporting specialist elements having to work together in perfect sync with excellent generalship needed to get the most out of them. In practice however, they just end up being able to min max incredibly effectively and able to do everything anyone else can do, but better. They're an army that, initially, looks like a glass cannon in many respects, but often ends up being one of the most resilient armies in the game, while retaining probably the best mobility and nearly unmatched offensive output.

The exact nature of this has changed every edition (Warp Spiders & psychic powers &move-shoot-move skimmers in 2nd, starcannon spam & alaitoc tables in 3rd, invinciskimmers in 4th, Wave Serpents in 6th, and just about *everything* in 7th), but, ultimately, it's pretty much been a constant.

To top it off, you have a large number of Eldar players that insist that they're not and have never been overpowered, or, on the opposite end, that they simply "deserve" to be overpowered because "Well...Space Elves".

And I say this as someone who owns about 5000pts of Eldar

So, that's my take at least on why you'll see a whole lot of Eldar hate out there.

 Vankraken wrote:
@War Kitten. Thanks, I know the feeling of being hated for playing or liking a faction (Tau) and it really sucks. People can hate my blue anime space commie goats all day long but please don't direct that hate to me

@Ace Rimmer. Most of my dislikes of Eldar are from my perception of them. In the case of #4 its just how often they can alter game mechanics to their favor. Its basically Eldar's M.O. but honestly its just not a style that I'm not very fond of. Individually each one of those mechanics aren't what a directly dislike (except fortune, rerolling saves start to get ugly when you get down to 3+ and 2+ rerollable) but its the sum total of all of them that rub me the wrong way. The issue with the Serpent Shield was that 5/6 of the time it down graded a pen to a glance. Shooting the shield is definitely annoying (glad 6th edition style serpent spam is "dead") in its own right but that mechanic of ignoring pens goes along with the whole Eldar bending the rules theme that I am not fond of.
With #6 its the combination of points cost and codex rules that makes them seem incredibly power. Scatter bikes combine decent durability, good firepower, crazy mobility, and being troops that feels like they are above average at most things but without any premium for that versatility. Ork Tankbustas are guilty of this as well with stupidly dirt cheap assault krak missile spam and melta bombs all with tankhunter. If Orks had good army wide rules then Tankbustas would be brokenly OP but given the glaring weaknesses of the Ork codex Tankbustas aren't as unbearable to go up against (and often times have to carry the Ork codex on their back).

What, you mean like how my imperial guard can choose to ignore:

-running and shooting in the same phase
-Cover
-All units must fire at the same target
-going to ground then still getting to act

My choice, at will, on any unit?

Or how space marines can, for 35 points, deep strike literally anything that's allowed to be in transports with practically no risk of mishap?

The reason people hate Eldar is that their codex is currently the best, and the reason nobody cares for the most part about all the bs rules SMs get (want to talk about ignoring huge swathes of the game rules? ATSKNF.) is because practically everyone plays space marines of some flavor or another, so they're familiar.

The main issue is that every unit in the eldar codex is at least decent. Even without going for full cheese, an eldar army is inherently strong because everything in the book is good. Few codex's can claim that honor, the closest probably being Necrons or normal Space Marines. Many codex's have half or more of the book being bad.

Atsknf doesnt table other lists in two turns.

And scatterbikes are the poster child for undercosted. For all their rules, they should be 35 pts easy.

Martel732 wrote:
Atsknf doesnt table other lists in two turns.

This is a good point. Morale isn't entirely important I've found this edition.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
@War Kitten. Thanks, I know the feeling of being hated for playing or liking a faction (Tau) and it really sucks. People can hate my blue anime space commie goats all day long but please don't direct that hate to me

@Ace Rimmer. Most of my dislikes of Eldar are from my perception of them. In the case of #4 its just how often they can alter game mechanics to their favor. Its basically Eldar's M.O. but honestly its just not a style that I'm not very fond of. Individually each one of those mechanics aren't what a directly dislike (except fortune, rerolling saves start to get ugly when you get down to 3+ and 2+ rerollable) but its the sum total of all of them that rub me the wrong way. The issue with the Serpent Shield was that 5/6 of the time it down graded a pen to a glance. Shooting the shield is definitely annoying (glad 6th edition style serpent spam is "dead") in its own right but that mechanic of ignoring pens goes along with the whole Eldar bending the rules theme that I am not fond of.
With #6 its the combination of points cost and codex rules that makes them seem incredibly power. Scatter bikes combine decent durability, good firepower, crazy mobility, and being troops that feels like they are above average at most things but without any premium for that versatility. Ork Tankbustas are guilty of this as well with stupidly dirt cheap assault krak missile spam and melta bombs all with tankhunter. If Orks had good army wide rules then Tankbustas would be brokenly OP but given the glaring weaknesses of the Ork codex Tankbustas aren't as unbearable to go up against (and often times have to carry the Ork codex on their back).

What, you mean like how my imperial guard can choose to ignore:

-running and shooting in the same phase
-Cover
-All units must fire at the same target
-going to ground then still getting to act

My choice, at will, on any unit?

*IF* you have an officer (that isn't locked in combat or falling back), within range, and pass an Ld test (for the army that pretty much has the universally worst Ld in the game besides Orks), and only as long as you're wanting to do one of those things on an unembarked infantry unit (which are pretty much the worst units in the army), or a tank in an HQ slot where the orders pretty much just exist to overcome the hamper of being hamfisted into a squadron in the first place...

The huge number conditionals in there means often, with my IG, I'll never issue a single order in an entire game, or, even if I do, they may not function right.

Or how space marines can, for 35 points, deep strike literally anything that's allowed to be in transports with practically no risk of mishap?

The reason people hate Eldar is that their codex is currently the best, and the reason nobody cares for the most part about all the bs rules SMs get (want to talk about ignoring huge swathes of the game rules? ATSKNF.) is because practically everyone plays space marines of some flavor or another, so they're familiar.

People have called "bs" on SM stuff. There have been many threads about Drop Pods, and ATSKNF has been widely criticized, while Grav spam is bemoaned nearly as much as Eldar.

Either you haven't been looking around, or you're actively ignoring it

 Vaktathi wrote:
There have been many threads about Drop Pods, and ATSKNF has been widely criticized, while Grav spam is bemoaned nearly as much as Eldar.

Either you haven't been looking around, or you're actively ignoring it

They probably forgot amongst all the untalented Marine players complaining about how everything in their codex is underpowered.

And yet, Sisters get a single thread maybe every two weeks or so and people complain about it... marine-centric bags of soggy squigs.

People just don't like a Codex where the other guy has to purposefully gimp himself just so there can be an actual game (IE both parties standing a chance of winning). Unlike Space Marines, Imperial Guard, Daemons, etc where you have to try to be that guy, you're automatically "that guy" as an Eldar or Necron player simply by fielding some vanilla formations in the book.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Eldar have been a very powerful army in just about every edition, in fact in every edition they've had a codex printed (all except 5th), they've been at least one of the top 3 armies of that edition if not *the* top army.

They're an army that, in theory, is built around mutually supporting specialist elements having to work together in perfect sync with excellent generalship needed to get the most out of them. In practice however, they just end up being able to min max incredibly effectively and able to do everything anyone else can do, but better. They're an army that, initially, looks like a glass cannon in many respects, but often ends up being one of the most resilient armies in the game, while retaining probably the best mobility and nearly unmatched offensive output.

The exact nature of this has changed every edition (Warp Spiders & psychic powers &move-shoot-move skimmers in 2nd, starcannon spam & alaitoc tables in 3rd, invinciskimmers in 4th, Wave Serpents in 6th, and just about *everything* in 7th), but, ultimately, it's pretty much been a constant.

To top it off, you have a large number of Eldar players that insist that they're not and have never been overpowered, or, on the opposite end, that they simply "deserve" to be overpowered because "Well...Space Elves".

And I say this as someone who owns about 5000pts of Eldar

So, that's my take at least on why you'll see a whole lot of Eldar hate out there.

Well said.

I'll run Orkdar with a lot of footslogging guardians (shootaboyz), stormguardians (choppaboyz), banshees ('eavy armored choppaboyz?), striking scorpions (kommandoes?) and an Avatar (helbrute, suddenly) one day.

 Frozocrone wrote:
Sounds like a Dman alias

That's what I was thinking. Not completely sure if this is the case though because this guy seems to have an idea about grammar and sentence structuring. Compared to Dboy there are barely any spelling errors and every other word in these posts is not "lol". But who knows, maybe Dboy puts some unexpected effort into his different trolling personalities?

 Melissia wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
There have been many threads about Drop Pods, and ATSKNF has been widely criticized, while Grav spam is bemoaned nearly as much as Eldar.

Either you haven't been looking around, or you're actively ignoring it

They probably forgot amongst all the untalented Marine players complaining about how everything in their codex is underpowered.

I think you'll be hard pressed to find a marine player who feels that drop pods, grav cents, special characters, bikes, and sternguard are underpowered. Chapter tactics are also quite strong and very fluffy.
Not to mention many of their amazing formations.

Most marine players are upset because;
1) They play BA, and are now a terrible army
2) They play Wolves, and have become an absurd army that relies on actual wolves instead of the older lists
3) They want to play a traditional or fluffy marine force, which is pretty bad...and has been for a long while
4) Why are terminators still awful outside of DA? And even then, they aren't good, just not terrible.

But everything being underpowered? That's not really a thing.

 Melissia wrote:

And yet, Sisters get a single thread maybe every two weeks or so and people complain about it... marine-centric bags of soggy squigs.

Sisters would get more complaints if they were a popular army. They have been a very difficult army to collect since their inception, probably the most difficult, so naturally you'll see less people talking about them since less people play them. People mainly complain about how they wish sisters were a bit easier to assemble and collect so they could buy a force, rather than the strength of the army since for many that is unknown. Sisters aren't terrible, they just are like nids in that many options are bad, but the ones that are good are very good (not eldar tau necron sm good, but about mid tier or upper mid tier good). Sisters are certainly stronger than Chaos is currently.

You see less complaints about DE than you do about Chaos for similar reasons.

4) Why are terminators still awful outside of DA? And even then, they aren't good, just not terrible.

'
Aren't GK terminators ok?

Makumba wrote:

4) Why are terminators still awful outside of DA? And even then, they aren't good, just not terrible.

'
Aren't GK terminators ok?

Ok is probably the best word for them. Terminators aren't really considered competitive and haven't been for a long time (with a brief exception in 5th for GK).
Chaos, SM, BA, SW, DA, and GK all have mediocre terminators despite termies being the best of the best. You are better off taking cents, veterans, bikes, or MCs depending on which marine force you are playing. Termies are always a subpar choice.

My last game as guard I was issuing two orders each turn (only failing on boxcars) to two units of artillery for ignores cover, and using a second ccs to order my advancing infantry blob (ld10 with attached characters plus reroll for vox) to either move move move or get back in the fight after I sent them to ground for a free buffed cover save.

I have almost always wished I had access to more orders for my ccs squads, and I've loved the option to now get unlimited ccses with buffs as battlegroup detachments. Now I can send one 3-melta vet squad alongside a ccs with melta instead of a second vet, and when they disembark I can order them to ignore cover.

Akiasura wrote:
Sisters would get more complaints

That statement wasn't about Sisters players complaining. It was people saying Sisters players complain too much, even though Marine players do almost nothing BUT complain, and we don't actually have many threads where Sisters players complain.

Marines are kept in business by a handful of cheese combos. If you pull a random unit out of the marine codex, it's a poor unit compared to an Eldar unit or even a Tau unit at this point.

All marine vehicles are essentially garbage because of poor AV and HP. Marine fliers are bad. Assault marines that aren't skyhammer are bad. Terminators are bad. Devastators are bad. Tacs that aren't Gladius are bad. Most marine characters are bad. Bikes are good. Centurions are good. Command squads are good. All the things that don't have the marine stat line. Note that BA have all the bad units from vanilla marines and none of the good units/formations.

Contrast this to Eldar. Eldar have so many units that are amazing outside of a formation or death star.

PacificRimJob wrote:
I did just pick up 12 more bikes, they look super cool and after reading there rules finally there good! Can't wait to use then

This just went against most of the advice given to you.

mhalko1 wrote:

PacificRimJob wrote:
I did just pick up 12 more bikes, they look super cool and after reading there rules finally there good! Can't wait to use then

This just went against most of the advice given to you.

It's fine. Eldar players can't help themselves.

Martel732 wrote:
Marines are kept in business by a handful of cheese combos. If you pull a random unit out of the marine codex, it's a poor unit compared to an Eldar unit or even a Tau unit at this point.

All marine vehicles are essentially garbage because of poor AV and HP. Marine fliers are bad. Assault marines that aren't skyhammer are bad. Terminators are bad. Devastators are bad. Tacs that aren't Gladius are bad. Most marine characters are bad. Bikes are good. Centurions are good. Command squads are good. All the things that don't have the marine stat line. Note that BA have all the bad units from vanilla marines and none of the good units/formations.

Contrast this to Eldar. Eldar have so many units that are amazing outside of a formation or death star.

Can't argue with Eldar/tau.. but disagree with some of your space marine points.

- Storm talons are freaking amazing.. 115 points for assault cannon and skyhammer missles.. That is probably the best flyer in the game for points
- Devastators are not bad at all.. access to grav makes them pretty crazy. Have you fielded a squad of heavy bolters? they are really cheap and can really hold down a line that infantry don't want to have to cross, not to mention some chapter tactics make these units better
- tac marines, same as devastators... keep them cheap, put them in pods, say hello to any objective you want. T4 3+ is essentially the ground work for a unit in the game and that can be decently tough to take down. Mass marine armies are really good objective scoring game winners. The only reason some armies, Eldar/Tau have better units is that those armies sacrifice versatility for specialization.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Marines are kept in business by a handful of cheese combos. If you pull a random unit out of the marine codex, it's a poor unit compared to an Eldar unit or even a Tau unit at this point.

All marine vehicles are essentially garbage because of poor AV and HP. Marine fliers are bad. Assault marines that aren't skyhammer are bad. Terminators are bad. Devastators are bad. Tacs that aren't Gladius are bad. Most marine characters are bad. Bikes are good. Centurions are good. Command squads are good. All the things that don't have the marine stat line. Note that BA have all the bad units from vanilla marines and none of the good units/formations.

Contrast this to Eldar. Eldar have so many units that are amazing outside of a formation or death star.

Can't argue with Eldar/tau.. but disagree with some of your space marine points.

- Storm talons are freaking amazing.. 115 points for assault cannon and skyhammer missles.. That is probably the best flyer in the game for points
- Devastators are not bad at all.. access to grav makes them pretty crazy. Have you fielded a squad of heavy bolters? they are really cheap and can really hold down a line that infantry don't want to have to cross, not to mention some chapter tactics make these units better
- tac marines, same as devastators... keep them cheap, put them in pods, say hello to any objective you want. T4 3+ is essentially the ground work for a unit in the game and that can be decently tough to take down. Mass marine armies are really good objective scoring game winners. The only reason some armies, Eldar/Tau have better units is that those armies sacrifice versatility for specialization.

I don't think storm talons are that good. The assault cannon and skyhammer missiles are actually marginal firepower in today's game. Starting in reserves by default also sucks.

Non-skyhammer devs will likely die before they fire their grav. I should have said non-skyhammer devs. Heavy bolter devs are terrible in the current game. No one cares about heavy bolters any more, and haven't since 5th.

Tac marines are terrible, and have been for a long, long time now. Lists like Tau and Eldar can actually wipe up mass marines and prevent the objective scheme from working. T4 3+ is no longer durable in 40K. The list you describe is one of the marine list types my BA can actually beat, so I know it's not very good in practice.

 koooaei wrote:
Eldar, gravguns and decurion are a reason 7-th gets bad rep.

Honestly, Decurion is rather tame compared to most things nowadays. I'd much rather fight that than Admech, Eldar, Gladius marines, Imperial Knights, or the new Tau book.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

PacificRimJob wrote:
I did just pick up 12 more bikes, they look super cool and after reading there rules finally there good! Can't wait to use then

Umm...

Judging by the OP, you won't be able to use them. People denied you games. You ask why. Then you go buy the thing that's the biggest reason as to why.

 Melissia wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
Sisters would get more complaints

That statement wasn't about Sisters players complaining. It was people saying Sisters players complain too much, even though Marine players do almost nothing BUT complain, and we don't actually have many threads where Sisters players complain.

I find that Marine players whine more than just about any other players. Sisters players, in contrast, whine very little despite being one of the most neglected armies.

A lot of marine players are into the absurd fluff and can't accept that the rank and file marine is just a victim now.

mhalko1 wrote:

PacificRimJob wrote:
I did just pick up 12 more bikes, they look super cool and after reading there rules finally there good! Can't wait to use then

This just went against most of the advice given to you.

so because other people dont like eldar that means i cant buy the models i think look awesome.? the advice ive been getting is on what to do if i want to play fair games, not about what models i get. and if come the time someone brings something crazy then ill have something aswell


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

mhalko1 wrote:

PacificRimJob wrote:
I did just pick up 12 more bikes, they look super cool and after reading there rules finally there good! Can't wait to use then

This just went against most of the advice given to you.

It's fine. Eldar players can't help themselves.

is this suppose to be some kind of insult.? thats pretty rude.

PacificRimJob wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
Cause when others get nerfs and sidegrades, eldar get scatbikes, free S: D and 295 GMC.
And than the rest of the codexes have to adjust to them. And once again, a painful power creep cycle begins. Some like sm get in in months, others like orks or dark eldar get it in 5-7 years. And than the new eldar book gets released.
It was in 6-th, it was in 7-th. There was basicaly 1 edition where eldar weren't broken - 5-th one.

Eldar were a reason 4-th was called an edition of god falcons. They, alongside tau, were a reason why 6-th lost tons of players and the player base hasn't recuperated yet...and probably never will. Eldar, gravguns and decurion are a reason 7-th gets bad rep.

it's just a game tho, these guys at the local store make it sound like I'm some horrible person, I just want to move models around and roll dice. Who cares how strong something is.

Feth these ossholes, if they have already straight up refused to play you move on and find another place to play.

"is this suppose to be some kind of insult.? thats pretty rude."

No, just a statement of fact. Jetbikes are both good looking models and obscenely powerful. That ensures that every Eldar player has a reason to own them.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
Eldar, gravguns and decurion are a reason 7-th gets bad rep.

Honestly, Decurion is rather tame compared to most things nowadays. I'd much rather fight that than Admech, Eldar, Gladius marines, Imperial Knights, or the new Tau book.

IKR! Personally, for me as a primarily ork player, decurion is a fine match up simply cause i can outscore them and not be wiped out in the process. But most other armies tend to gravitate towards 'safer' shooting from afar. And shooting doesn't do as much against necrons as you'd probably like.

Your original post was that people did not want to play you because playing against a WAAC eldar list is not fun. We explain to you what is considered especially broken about eldar and that is the likely reason that you will struggle to get a game. You then double down on the very unit we told you people have an issue with. Not sure what we can do to help you at this point.

HoundsofDemos wrote:
Your original post was that people did not want to play you because playing against a WAAC eldar list is not fun. We explain to you what is considered especially broken about eldar and that is the likely reason that you will struggle to get a game. You then double down on the very unit we told you people have an issue with. Not sure what we can do to help you at this point.

my list is not WAAC. And further more I got 12 bikes to replace my old bikes, how does that make me a bad person.? On a side note tho I have found a gaming group that is opening to playing anything

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
Sisters would get more complaints

That statement wasn't about Sisters players complaining. It was people saying Sisters players complain too much, even though Marine players do almost nothing BUT complain, and we don't actually have many threads where Sisters players complain.

I find that Marine players whine more than just about any other players. Sisters players, in contrast, whine very little despite being one of the most neglected armies.

I hate that a few bad Marine players who whine make the rest of us Marine players look bad, exactly the same with Eldar. Some players take the really nasty lists and make the rest of the Eldar players look bad, so people refuse to play us even though most of us don't take the nasty lists. It's a shame.

So,

question asked
advice given
more advice given much surprisingly cordial and useful
advice ignored for pew pew

Great success

 Melissia wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
Sisters would get more complaints

That statement wasn't about Sisters players complaining. It was people saying Sisters players complain too much, even though Marine players do almost nothing BUT complain, and we don't actually have many threads where Sisters players complain.

You are literally the only person I've seen ever say this.

In this thread alone I see IG, Chaos, Sisters, and BA players complaining. The sisters and BA complainers are one poster for each faction, so we can disregard them if you want. I don't see marine players complaining. If you lump CSM or BA in with standard marines then sure, but CSM have reason to complain and BA do as well currently.
The only complaints you see from marine players are the ones I listed above, and they aren't very common by any stretch. You certainly don't see multi-page threads like you do in regards to IG, Nids, Tau, Eldar, Crons, SM, or CSM. You see far more complaints from CSM and IG players than marines, and you could easily argue that CSM and IG are far outnumbered by marine players.

I have never heard anyone say sisters players complain too much. I have seen people say that in regards to you, but you're very....crass with how you view other players, especially marine players.
You really don't hear about sisters at all, beyond the massive thread regarding why they aren't available in plastic. I've never heard anyone say anything in regards to their complaining, and I'm on the forums pretty frequently.

The marine players have a valid complaint in that 75% of their codex is crap and only max-cheese combos keep them in the top. As opposed to Eldar, whose random units can curb stomp optimized Orks and BA.

A lot of the armies that have, traditionally, gotten a lot of love from GW gets a lot of hate from those who don't.

Eldar, Tau, Necrons, and SM get a ton of hate. Generally this is from the armies that don't get a lot of love, like IG, CSM, Nids, Sisters, and DE. It's the worst from armies that have...similar counter parts that do get love, like CSM and De in regards to SM and Eldar. Those are the armies that complain the most, despite what anyone wants to claim about marine players. Sisters would probably be up there, but they are simply so rare that it doesn't happen.

Keep in mind that these armies aren't exactly common, number wise SM have a huge advantage over them in terms of players, so the fact you see more posts from them than anyone else is pretty damning.
Not that they don't have reason to complain. Every army has a few units that aren't great, and OP armies get flack as well.

I do find it odd that orks, an army that tends not to get a lot of love is usually pretty upbeat about the whole thing.
I do think the angriest players are IG and Sisters. They have the most abused factions, so I suppose it makes sense.
The saddest players are CSM. I think the anger has turned to depression and acceptance for many at this point.


But these generalizations that other posters are making are usually sweeping and not really true. They can't really believe that ALL marine players do nothing but complain about everything. At least on this forum, SM players are not anywhere close to the major part of the whiners, at least in regards to their own army.

I still don't understand the marine hate, because they weren't anything special until GRAV CENTS and INVISIBLITY DUDE FROM FW. Eldar have been godly since the Clinton administration.

I concur with the above. As a marine player who takes a CAD, doesn't use cents at all, plays primarily mounted marines and doesn't abuse the ally rules to have the superfriends of many chapters show up, our book is mostly average outside of formations and one or two units.

What makes eldar the strongest army in the game is that they don't need a mega formation or bonuses to win, there units are just that good. If you limited everyone to one CAD, the eldar list would probably always be the nastiest there is.

Martel732 wrote:
I still don't understand the marine hate, because they weren't anything special until GRAV CENTS and INVISIBLITY DUDE FROM FW. Eldar have been godly since the Clinton administration.

People always hate the most popular thing, regardless of power level. Especially if they are a faction that doesn't get a lot of love.

Cryx, in WMH, is easily the most popular and hated faction in the entire game. This is despite the fact they haven't gotten anything really good in the last few expansions, and armies like Trolls skewing the meta causing the game to become less fun for everyone involved. Cryx doesn't even abuse theme lists as much as the other factions (legion, circle, and Trolls) but get way more hate than anyone else.

I say this as someone who plays Skorne (The weakest army), Cryx, and Cygnar.

I also play Eldar, SM, CSM, SW, Nids, Necrons, Tau, and Orks. I own some IG but they were converted towards gangs for necromunda and gorka morka.

Akiasura wrote:

The saddest players are CSM. I think the anger has turned to depression and acceptance for many at this point.

Through navigating the twisting currents in the warp, I can confirm this is true. As the power of the four main Gods decline a new God has been brought mewling into the nether - Apathy, the God of depression and disinterest, brought into being by the cumulative emotions of Chaos Space Marine players world-wide.

its odd since in AOS chaos has gotten so much love, but none in 40k

HoundsofDemos wrote:
its odd since in AOS chaos has gotten so much love, but none in 40k

Daemons, Everchosen and Khorne Bloodbound - not for classic Warriors of Chaos

I fear this may be what's happening in 40K - with the addition of Khorne Daemonkin (bloodbound eqv.), Daemons and I'm yet to work out if there will be something similar to Everchosen there.

In fantasy, Chaos has always been weird (assuming you mean chaos warriors and not beastmen or daemons).

They have gone from the strongest list to average, though I don't believe they were ever weak. Near the end, before AoS, they were good but not the best. They simply didn't magic well enough, and magic became the strongest thing in the entire game.

In earlier additions warmachines and ranged weapons were a lot stronger, and chaos suffered. They could destroy if they reached CC but rarely managed to do so, and static CR was insanely strong. Then they got that weird cannon which was one of the best warmachines in the game and started doing amazing.

Akiasura wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
Sisters would get more complaints

https://anotherschwab.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/miss-the-point.png
That statement wasn't about Sisters players complaining. It was people saying Sisters players complain too much, even though Marine players do almost nothing BUT complain, and we don't actually have many threads where Sisters players complain.

You are literally the only person I've seen ever say this.

*eyes the other posts in this thread agreeing with me*

That's because you haven't paid much attention.

 Melissia wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
Sisters would get more complaints

https://anotherschwab.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/miss-the-point.png
That statement wasn't about Sisters players complaining. It was people saying Sisters players complain too much, even though Marine players do almost nothing BUT complain, and we don't actually have many threads where Sisters players complain.

You are literally the only person I've seen ever say this.

*eyes the other posts in this thread agreeing with me*

That's because you haven't paid much attention.

You are saying that other people in this thread agree that people claim sisters complain too much? Or that marines do nothing but complain? Because I was clearly talking about the former, and have seen none of this in thread.
Either way, this is an appeal to mob rule, which doesn't make you right. And you, once again, being quite crass for no reason isn't needed. Try providing some evidence that doesn't also link up with what I've claimed as well, as the people agreeing with you fit my take on things quite nicely.

But hey, if you have someone saying sister players complain too much feel free to quote it or link it. It should be pretty easy to do if its so common. I could link people complaining about marines and insulting players several times in this thread, and going outside of this it'd be pretty easy to do as well. Same with many of the points I made.

I'm not sure if you're being serious.

 Melissia wrote:
I'm not sure if you're being serious.

Are you going to link to something in this thread or no? I did the courtesy of re-reading it, but didn't see anything.

I'm not touching that strawman with a ten foot astartes..

I wasn't aware asking someone to back up a claim they have made is a strawman.

Live and learn

Just make a list that doesn't include a lot of Jetbikes with Scatter Lasers, or Warp Spiders and people should play you just fine. Or take 2 lists of different power levels, and find out with your opponent which kind of game he would prefer.

If not, then they are probably so prejudice they were probably not worth your time anyway.

Don't be discouraged, believe it or not there are people out there who are actually fine playing against Eldar and not becoming depressed if they lose.

The thing is people say eldar are op because other people SAY the are op. Very few people own all the things to make them op.

It is like and experment have 10 people, tell 8 of them how op something is starting with those who just lost to it. Wimple say hey its not your fault you loss those damn ..insert name... Are just op do this two or three times. The one guy who does use them will be tild they are op and everyone will carry it on.

It depends on your local meta. We happen to have someone who played each craftworld since...I want to say 3rd. So our iyanden player and saim-hann player were quite well off when the new codex dropped, and as the biel-tan player, I wasn't bad off at all.

Oddly enough, the ulthwe and alaitoc player were the worst off, which was very weird for anyone who played the earlier editions.

 Melissia wrote:
I'm not touching that strawman with a ten foot astartes..

Asking for proof is not a strawman. Quit being a stereotypical Sisters player and accept you're wrong.

Eldar are indeed very powerful compared to most of the books out there, that's just a simple fact, however they are just good compared to the current 7.5 books, marines, crons and tau will have issues beating a competitive eldar list but it can be done, but the issue is that the older books all have serious issues with eldar, orks, nids....poor poor nids, guard etc. Are all at a very large disadvantage straight off the bat, and that's the problem, hopefully when all the books are updated properly it will not be as much as an issue, but we've all heard that before lol

Martel732 wrote:
I still don't understand the marine hate, because they weren't anything special until GRAV CENTS and INVISIBLITY DUDE FROM FW. Eldar have been godly since the Clinton administration.

Or.

You know.

Since GW decided to give them huge army wide mix-n-match special rules for massive decreases, then double down with downright absurd formations.

Sure, not every unit is perfect "out of the box" but at least 75% is above the curve of viability with the optimal configuration/formation.

And before we talk more about Eldar: Banshees, Pheonix Lords not named Jain Zar, Rangers, Storm Guardians, Wraithblades, any vehicle not called a Wave Serpent, Shining Spears, Dark Reapers, Vypers, Wraithlords, and Avatars are all average to below average. Eldar is lucky enough to have at least one thing per slot that's great, and three units that are best-in-show when properly equipped/combo'd. That makes them currently the best army in the game. That does not make their whole codex amaze-balls. The internet may like to think that every person playing a particular faction brings only the best thing possible, gets every favorable outcome and plays like a tourney winner but it's just not true.

If marine units were good, ba wouldn't be the worst list in the game.

I'd say 75% of marine units are not good.

Martel732 wrote:
If marine units were good, ba wouldn't be the worst list in the game.

I'd say 75% of marine units are not good.

Or its just all hyperbole and BA aren't as bad as you think they are

 CrownAxe wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
If marine units were good, ba wouldn't be the worst list in the game.

I'd say 75% of marine units are not good.

Or its just all hyperbole and BA aren't as bad as you think they are

Come play them and give me another list and i'll show you. Or try playing vanilla without gladius, skyhammer, or a gravstar. They aren't good because marine vehicles suck and imperial heavy weapons are subpar sans grav cannon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Personally I find the offer of army swap most accusations of hyperbole with ba.

Martel732 wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
If marine units were good, ba wouldn't be the worst list in the game.

I'd say 75% of marine units are not good.

Or its just all hyperbole and BA aren't as bad as you think they are

Come play them and give me another list and i'll show you. Or try playing vanilla without gladius, skyhammer, or a gravstar. They aren't good because marine vehicles suck and imperial heavy weapons are subpar sans grav cannon.

I've seen space marines play well without the crutchs. It may not be gladius or scatbike good but that doesn't make them absolutely awful. It's probably more likely that you aren't as good at the game as you think you are. Being around for 20 years doesn't automatically make you a good player

I'd be happy to switch armies with you

Possibly, but its been a very long time since ive lost an army swap or even a mirror match.

 CrownAxe wrote:
Being around for 20 years doesn't automatically make you a good player

Certainly the truth, there.

To back up Martel a little here, in torrent of fire's figures on major events of the last couple years, BA are always drowning in losses, usually last or near last in fact.

That of course refers to competitive play though. It's hard to get good figures of non-competitive play, since being non-competitive typically leads to the results being unrecorded. That just leaves us with anecdotes, unfortunately.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And as far as anecdotal evidence is concerned:

When I play my BA, I typically win, but it feels like a hard fought battle that could've swung the other way at any time, and occasionally has a pure luck shot like one-shotting a flyer with a snapshot melta. I frequently find myself hoping that something works, because if it doesn't, that flank has no backup plans.

When I play as core marines, my wife's eldar, or my buddy's tau, I win a lot, and I rarely feel like the game was in contention. When I throw out a tactic, I feel like if it fails, I tend to feel like I have two or three options that I could repurpose on the fly that turn to fix the error.

Everyone, let's keep it polite

 niv-mizzet wrote:
To back up Martel a little here, in torrent of fire's figures on major events of the last couple years, BA are always drowning in losses, usually last or near last in fact.

That of course refers to competitive play though. It's hard to get good figures of non-competitive play, since being non-competitive typically leads to the results being unrecorded. That just leaves us with anecdotes, unfortunately.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And as far as anecdotal evidence is concerned:

When I play my BA, I typically win, but it feels like a hard fought battle that could've swung the other way at any time, and occasionally has a pure luck shot like one-shotting a flyer with a snapshot melta. I frequently find myself hoping that something works, because if it doesn't, that flank has no backup plans.

When I play as core marines, my wife's eldar, or my buddy's tau, I win a lot, and I rarely feel like the game was in contention. When I throw out a tactic, I feel like if it fails, I tend to feel like I have two or three options that I could repurpose on the fly that turn to fix the error.

That mirrors my experiences against the middle tier lists. I hate needing pure luck. It's super frustrating because with tau and eldar, they roll so many dice that they can't really get unlucky.

I think people dislike Eldar because GW took an already good codex, and made it even better, when there are several codices that have been needing updates for far longer (CSM, BA, IG etc...). As an Eldar player I like that my faction gets support, but I can understand why other people are irritated with the Eldar book. Many units got unnecessary buffs (looking at you scatbikes and WK....), and now even our "mediocre" units are pretty dang good. That being said, all the hate against Eldar is depressing as an Eldar player, as even if I take the most relaxed list I can people still view me as a WAAC TFG, and let me tell you, it is NOT a nice feeling. To any of the other Eldar players in this thread, how do you minimize that hate?

I don't blame eldar players for playing their codex. Where do you stop the nerfing? DA level? SW level? Nids? BA?

I don't hate eldar players. I dislike the concept of eldar, just their lore in general doesn't appeal to me. Yet, in no way do I hate eldar players. Trust me, I've lost a fair number of games against eldar, but to be fair, I play CSM, so I lose a fair number of games anyway.Yet very few of them have been unpleasant games, because even though I was facing a nigh impossible challenge, most of my opponents were pretty cool and I enjoyed their company. The one's that stuck out as unpleasant, I took a mental note not to play them again.

It's the players that make the game. Our armies are just our little plastic avatars. Nothing more, nothing less. Put simply OP, If they are too close minded to even play with you. They are not worth playing with. Move along, there are plenty of other gameshops out there.

War Kitten wrote:I think people dislike Eldar because GW took an already good codex, and made it even better, when there are several codices that have been needing updates for far longer (CSM, BA, IG etc...). As an Eldar player I like that my faction gets support, but I can understand why other people are irritated with the Eldar book. Many units got unnecessary buffs (looking at you scatbikes and WK....), and now even our "mediocre" units are pretty dang good. That being said, all the hate against Eldar is depressing as an Eldar player, as even if I take the most relaxed list I can people still view me as a WAAC TFG, and let me tell you, it is NOT a nice feeling. To any of the other Eldar players in this thread, how do you minimize that hate?

Eldar are what they are because ultimately GWs releases are not driven by balance or peoples tears, it is about PROFIT. They know that a new Eldar book is going to make more money then a new Chaos book... They release new demons because they hit both the 40k market and the AoS market.. and by doing so assume that CSM players will be happy because they can ally in game (if they give any care at all).

Space marines are the same way. And Tau's release in general is either showing GWs new approach to how they will release new content, or was a plan to just make a lot of extra money off of the Tau community.

Mr_Piddlez wrote:I don't hate eldar players. I dislike the concept of eldar, just their lore in general doesn't appeal to me. Yet, in no way do I hate eldar players. Trust me, I've lost a fair number of games against eldar, but to be fair, I play CSM, so I lose a fair number of games anyway.Yet very few of them have been unpleasant games, because even though I was facing a nigh impossible challenge, most of my opponents were pretty cool and I enjoyed their company. The one's that stuck out as unpleasant, I took a mental note not to play them again.

It's the players that make the game. Our armies are just our little plastic avatars. Nothing more, nothing less. Put simply OP, If they are too close minded to even play with you. They are not worth playing with. Move along, there are plenty of other gameshops out there.

I am unsure what list you run for Chaos... My friend has a really fun list he runs that he usually has much success with. At 2000 points.. 6 maulerfiends.. 4 troops in rhinos.. usually a lord and dogs.. few other things.. but its the 6 maulers that are rough I tell you! haha!

Martel732 wrote:If marine units were good, ba wouldn't be the worst list in the game.

I'd say 75% of marine units are not good.

My friend loves his BA. Complains all the time that they got shafted by being updated before the SM codex did (and I agree with that), however, I would say he wins just as much as every one else does. He is a solid player who will always fight to the last man, never gives up. Some things he does in his lists that maybe you should try... he usually plays 2 CADs.. runs about 5 pods, drops in a bunch of assault marines. uses the pods to cut off an opponents force into multiple halves. Also usually runs the Flyer formation (2 talons, raven) it is not in the BA codex, but adds some nice threat to his lists. And of course he loves his deathcompany! Usually runs a large 10 man with some chaplain equivalents. Those guys are always a pain!

*EDIT* The key here is.. he gives you the choice.. shoot at his deathcompany or other units that are marching the table.. or shoot at the guys that are in your face now. it's that dual threat that can be hard to deal with most of the time, and ultimately allows his deathco and others to make it into battle.

Yes, I'm aware of that trick. However, Tau, Eldar, and others have the firepower to address that trick. Two DC getting into CC won't win the day.

Note that using pods to cut a force up also by definition is making yourself surrounded. That sounds like a really poor plan. Especially against say, another BA list or other assaulty list.

I've run dual CADs before. And the fleshtearer thing. I've had 8 obj sec units. I've had zero. I've had fliers, I've not had fliers. (Marine fliers are weak, imo) It all comes down to mathematical efficacy, and the BA have virtually none of that.

A huge problem is that quite literally nothing in the BA codex is durable. Yes, T4 3+ FNP is no longer durable in the face of grav cannons, Tau, Eldar, and DA lists. The BA codex forces non-choices on opponents because we have no Wraith or TWC equivalent. Opponents can kill 30 power armor bodies in a single shooting phase if pressed. The survivors don't have enough CC punch to get it done. Also, the fliers you listed as completely ignorable, as they don't have enough firepower to justify their cost. Welcome to 7th.

Martel732 wrote:
Yes, I'm aware of that trick. However, Tau, Eldar, and others have the firepower to address that trick. Two DC getting into CC won't win the day.

Note that using pods to cut a force up also by definition is making yourself surrounded. That sounds like a really poor plan. Especially against say, another BA list or other assaulty list.

I've run dual CADs before. And the fleshtearer thing. I've had 8 obj sec units. I've had zero. I've had fliers, I've not had fliers. (Marine fliers are weak, imo) It all comes down to mathematical efficacy, and the BA have virtually none of that.

A huge problem is that quite literally nothing in the BA codex is durable. Yes, T4 3+ FNP is no longer durable in the face of grav cannons, Tau, Eldar, and DA lists. The BA codex forces non-choices on opponents because we have no Wraith or TWC equivalent. Opponents can kill 30 power armor bodies in a single shooting phase if pressed. The survivors don't have enough CC punch to get it done. Also, the fliers you listed as completely ignorable, as they don't have enough firepower to justify their cost. Welcome to 7th.

It doesn't always work.. but I am not really sure what you want to hear.. myself and others in the thread all have experience with BA (not being a top tier army) but still not being as depressed and dismal as you make them out to be =P

Maybe BA's just aren't for you? That is why I stopped playing marines in general, I never felt like I truly had control of what was going on, and not because my lists were weak or my units were bad, but simply my strategy and what I liked to do in game didn't mesh with how SMs played.

Tau, Eldar, Nids all fit areas of my play style that I really like. Despite Nids not being updated as Tau and Eldar have been, I actually win more games with my Nids then I do otherwise. Weird how that works sometimes!

It is very meta dependent. In a competitive meta where everyone abuses allies and formations I can't see mono ba doing well. If people calm it down ba can go up against mid tier armies and squeak out a win, though it's an uphill struggle.

Martel has a very cut throat meta and Ba simply have no place there. He could run them out of Sm, but he'd need to buy bikes and centurions to make use of the best the sm codex has available. I can't blame him for not purchasing new models given the track record of the game.

I play a ton of armies. Not surprisingly, my Sm, Eldar, Tau, and neurons do a lot better than my csm and nids, despite the latter being my favorite armies in the game. Play style matters, but in a game like 40k, list power trumps all.

If this was wmh I'd agree with you. I did better with cygnar than cryx or trolls, and cryx and trolls are stronger than cygnar atm.

Martel732 wrote:
Yes, I'm aware of that trick. However, Tau, Eldar, and others have the firepower to address that trick. Two DC getting into CC won't win the day.

Note that using pods to cut a force up also by definition is making yourself surrounded. That sounds like a really poor plan. Especially against say, another BA list or other assaulty list.

I've run dual CADs before. And the fleshtearer thing. I've had 8 obj sec units. I've had zero. I've had fliers, I've not had fliers. (Marine fliers are weak, imo) It all comes down to mathematical efficacy, and the BA have virtually none of that.

A huge problem is that quite literally nothing in the BA codex is durable. Yes, T4 3+ FNP is no longer durable in the face of grav cannons, Tau, Eldar, and DA lists. The BA codex forces non-choices on opponents because we have no Wraith or TWC equivalent. Opponents can kill 30 power armor bodies in a single shooting phase if pressed. The survivors don't have enough CC punch to get it done. Also, the fliers you listed as completely ignorable, as they don't have enough firepower to justify their cost. Welcome to 7th.

That's more a Necron problem. BA were in line with the 2014 7th Codexes.
e

As for TWC, well they've always been good. They should cost more for what they do. Nob Bikers cost 5 pts more and for that they -1 WS (SW detachment gives WS5 to TWC), -1S -2 BS, 4+ (and Jink), no rending, S9 max, no invulnerable, etc etc.

True though nob bikers do get the ability to turbo boost and Jink (not saying they're on par with TWC obviously)

 Frozocrone wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Yes, I'm aware of that trick. However, Tau, Eldar, and others have the firepower to address that trick. Two DC getting into CC won't win the day.

Note that using pods to cut a force up also by definition is making yourself surrounded. That sounds like a really poor plan. Especially against say, another BA list or other assaulty list.

I've run dual CADs before. And the fleshtearer thing. I've had 8 obj sec units. I've had zero. I've had fliers, I've not had fliers. (Marine fliers are weak, imo) It all comes down to mathematical efficacy, and the BA have virtually none of that.

A huge problem is that quite literally nothing in the BA codex is durable. Yes, T4 3+ FNP is no longer durable in the face of grav cannons, Tau, Eldar, and DA lists. The BA codex forces non-choices on opponents because we have no Wraith or TWC equivalent. Opponents can kill 30 power armor bodies in a single shooting phase if pressed. The survivors don't have enough CC punch to get it done. Also, the fliers you listed as completely ignorable, as they don't have enough firepower to justify their cost. Welcome to 7th.

That's more a Necron problem. BA were in line with the 2014 7th Codexes.
e

As for TWC, well they've always been good. They should cost more for what they do. Nob Bikers cost 5 pts more and for that they -1 WS (SW detachment gives WS5 to TWC), -1S -2 BS, 4+ (and Jink), no rending, S9 max, no invulnerable, etc etc.

It's not a necron problem. It's a firepower problem. Tau and eldar can just sandpaper through T4 3+ FNP like its nothing. Or just instavaporize them with a Riptide/WK.

Martel732 wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Yes, I'm aware of that trick. However, Tau, Eldar, and others have the firepower to address that trick. Two DC getting into CC won't win the day.

Note that using pods to cut a force up also by definition is making yourself surrounded. That sounds like a really poor plan. Especially against say, another BA list or other assaulty list.

I've run dual CADs before. And the fleshtearer thing. I've had 8 obj sec units. I've had zero. I've had fliers, I've not had fliers. (Marine fliers are weak, imo) It all comes down to mathematical efficacy, and the BA have virtually none of that.

A huge problem is that quite literally nothing in the BA codex is durable. Yes, T4 3+ FNP is no longer durable in the face of grav cannons, Tau, Eldar, and DA lists. The BA codex forces non-choices on opponents because we have no Wraith or TWC equivalent. Opponents can kill 30 power armor bodies in a single shooting phase if pressed. The survivors don't have enough CC punch to get it done. Also, the fliers you listed as completely ignorable, as they don't have enough firepower to justify their cost. Welcome to 7th.

That's more a Necron problem. BA were in line with the 2014 7th Codexes.
e

As for TWC, well they've always been good. They should cost more for what they do. Nob Bikers cost 5 pts more and for that they -1 WS (SW detachment gives WS5 to TWC), -1S -2 BS, 4+ (and Jink), no rending, S9 max, no invulnerable, etc etc.

It's not a necron problem. It's a firepower problem. Tau and eldar can just sandpaper through T4 3+ FNP like its nothing. Or just instavaporize them with a Riptide/WK.

Its not a recent problem either. I remember Eldar having some ridiculous long range, high strength low AP fire power en masse back in 4th as well.
Tau back then weren't as bad, as whilst they had a lot of shots at long range, not many of them ignored armor (unless you were an ork player or nids. But Orks had bodies and vehicles, and nids had MCs and Bloodlords).
Eldar could just hide on their table edge and throw out S6 AP3 or S5 AP3 shots all day from a distance.
If you don't shoot you to death, they'll send in Harlequins and rend your squad into nothing, and jump to another squad.
Phil Kelly really has a thing for Eldar.

I just never thought BA would be back where they were in 2nd ed. I guess they're a bit better, as I was winless in 2nd ed. 2nd ed was VERY lopsided.

Unsurprisingly, the Eldar list you described was able to win more matches in 5th than many care to remember. I still remember a SW player throwing his drop pod against a wall after losing to Eldar. He thought his victory was assured by the new shiny codex. Wrong. Firepower always works.

" BA were in line with the 2014 7th Codexes. "

That's little comfort at this point.

Have you thought about looking into some FW stuff Martel? Things like Sicaran Battle Tanks and Typhon's are a great boon to Marine players, including BA.

 War Kitten wrote:
Have you thought about looking into some FW stuff Martel? Things like Sicaran Battle Tanks and Typhon's are a great boon to Marine players, including BA.

Sicarans are weak in my meta. There's a guy who uses them, and they just get dusted by D weapons or stepped on by IK or WK. The Sicaran's damage output isn't that great in the 7th ed meta, imo. It was more boss in 6th. The Typhon? Maybe. Overall options for BA in FW are rather poor though, which is why I rank CSM ahead of them in the power hierarchy.

Fair enough. FW does offer some nice things for Marines though and most of the Marine players I know (which includes DA and BA) swear by things like Fire Raptors.

 War Kitten wrote:
Fair enough. FW does offer some nice things for Marines though and most of the Marine players I know (which includes DA and BA) swear by things like Fire Raptors.

There's a guy who uses Fire Raptors. I beat him most of the time because fliers just don't cut it in 7th. I see FW as just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic for the BA. I can pay zero additional money and keep losing, or pay more money and keep losing. I'm in a very weird niche I realize because I don't have multiple armies. I'm the complete opposite of whom GW wants to cater to.

 War Kitten wrote:
Fair enough. FW does offer some nice things for Marines though and most of the Marine players I know (which includes DA and BA) swear by things like Fire Raptors.

To be fair, you're wasting your time. Martel only sees Scatter Lasers and WKs now, there is no other option

 jreilly89 wrote:

 War Kitten wrote:
Fair enough. FW does offer some nice things for Marines though and most of the Marine players I know (which includes DA and BA) swear by things like Fire Raptors.

To be fair, you're wasting your time. Martel only sees Scatter Lasers and WKs now, there is no other option

I just said I beat Fire Raptors. So if I can beat them, why would I think I can beat any decent list with them? They are an expensive unit that can be ignored. Now if Fire Raptors could actually damage Riptides or WK on a meaningful time scale, I'd be more impressed. There's a reason I say that the only Imperial heavy weapon worth a damn is the grav cannon. It can remove the targets I care about. All the garbage weapons on Stormravens and Fire Raptors don't matter in the scheme of 7th.

Martel732 wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 War Kitten wrote:
Fair enough. FW does offer some nice things for Marines though and most of the Marine players I know (which includes DA and BA) swear by things like Fire Raptors.

To be fair, you're wasting your time. Martel only sees Scatter Lasers and WKs now, there is no other option

I just said I beat Fire Raptors. So if I can beat them, why would I think I can beat any decent list with them? They are an expensive unit that can be ignored. Now if Fire Raptors could actually damage Riptides or WK on a meaningful time scale, I'd be more impressed. There's a reason I say that the only Imperial heavy weapon worth a damn is the grav cannon. It can remove the targets I care about. All the garbage weapons on Stormravens and Fire Raptors don't matter in the scheme of 7th.

Someone should talk about the difference between 7th and 'Martel's personal hell of bitterness and cheese'.

You act like there's going to be a functional difference. Yes, in theory, players could field lists on par with BA. But why would they, given the option not to?

If you disagree with my assessment of Imperial heavy weapons, explain why you disagree.

Martel732 wrote:
You act like there's going to be a functional difference. Yes, in theory, players could field lists on par with BA. But why would they, given the option not to?

If you disagree with my assessment of Imperial heavy weapons, explain why you disagree.

Legend tells of things called 'games' these were once played for fun and entertainment by many. Legend also says 40k was a game and people would make armies for fun rather than whatever your meta does.

I disagree because you assume your meta is the standard for everyone which I find difficult to believe.

pm713 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You act like there's going to be a functional difference. Yes, in theory, players could field lists on par with BA. But why would they, given the option not to?

If you disagree with my assessment of Imperial heavy weapons, explain why you disagree.

Legend tells of things called 'games' these were once played for fun and entertainment by many. Legend also says 40k was a game and people would make armies for fun rather than whatever your meta does.

I disagree because you assume your meta is the standard for everyone which I find difficult to believe.

Maybe not to the same extent, but the math is all the same. Imperial heavy weapons, when combined with the platforms you find them on and their cost are hilariously poor. The shift on the vehicle damage table really tilted anti-tank work towards things like the scatter laser and HYMP, which were already superior at anti-infantry. Most imperial heavy weapons literally have no nice anymore. The big winner of the group, the multilaser, can't be fielded in sufficient numbers.

It's just not fun to have a weapon like the lascannon be mostly useless now because of MCs and hull points.

Martel732 wrote:

pm713 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You act like there's going to be a functional difference. Yes, in theory, players could field lists on par with BA. But why would they, given the option not to?

If you disagree with my assessment of Imperial heavy weapons, explain why you disagree.

Legend tells of things called 'games' these were once played for fun and entertainment by many. Legend also says 40k was a game and people would make armies for fun rather than whatever your meta does.

I disagree because you assume your meta is the standard for everyone which I find difficult to believe.

Maybe not to the same extent, but the math is all the same. Imperial heavy weapons, when combined with the platforms you find them on and their cost are hilariously poor. The shift on the vehicle damage table really tilted anti-tank work towards things like the scatter laser and HYMP, which were already superior at anti-infantry. Most imperial heavy weapons literally have no nice anymore. The big winner of the group, the multilaser, can't be fielded in sufficient numbers.

It's just not fun to have a weapon like the lascannon be mostly useless now because of MCs and hull points.

I've not really found lascannons to be THAT bad. They're not some awesome anti tank gun but they aren't as bad as you make out.

Care to explain how most of the heavy weapons have no niche? My experience is that they do.

You shoot things with them, and nothing meaningful dies. I'd call that losing their niche.

5 X scatterlasers fire, plenty of stuff dies.
4 X grav cannons fire, plenty of stuff dies.
2 X heavy d-cannons fire, plenty of stuff dies.

4 X ML? Meh
4 X Lascannon? Meh
4 X Heavy bolter? please
4 X Plasma cannon? maybe the worst on the list after the get hots hot and miss (scatter) dice

Also consider the top list can all be put on move and shoot platforms, where as the bottom list is restricted to devastators. Yeah, you can get tanks, but then you cut your firepower down quite a bit.

There's the assault cannon, but imperials pay 20 pts a pop, it has inferior range and can't mass it. Useless.

Take a lascannon against av 12 (pretty common) and bs 4 (again, common).
Hits and wounds on a 3+, so just under 50% (44?) to cause a single hp. That's not assuming cover or jink, which can drop it to about a third or worse.

So 2-3 lascannon shots to damage most tanks, and most tanks have 3hp. So 6-9 lascannons to destroy a single tank, and lascannons are very expensive.

This gets worse against flyers, since it becomes a 6 to hit, or mcs with invuls and Fnp with a ton of wounds and stacked saves. It takes lascannons ages to down a riptide that is trying to survive.

In addition, lascannons are usually on relatively slow platforms, so they have trouble if Los blocking terrain exists.

Plasma, Grav, melta, scats, haywire, and d weapons have replaced lascannons and lances as anti tank weapons. The latter really needs to cause 2 hp or wounds on a pen or something to be cost effective.

Martel732 wrote:
You shoot things with them, and nothing meaningful dies. I'd call that losing their niche.

5 X scatterlasers fire, plenty of stuff dies.
4 X grav cannons fire, plenty of stuff dies.
2 X heavy d-cannons fire, plenty of stuff dies.

4 X ML? Meh
4 X Lascannon? Meh
4 X Heavy bolter? please
4 X Plasma cannon? maybe the worst on the list after the get hots hot and miss (scatter) dice

Also consider the top list can all be put on move and shoot platforms, where as the bottom list is restricted to devastators. Yeah, you can get tanks, but then you cut your firepower down quite a bit.

There's the assault cannon, but imperials pay 20 pts a pop, it has inferior range and can't mass it. Useless.

So it's not as good as one of the most OP things in the game. Therefore is terrible. Gotcha.

Which one? I offered three weapon systems that are all far superior. I didn't even include the HYMP. How many superior weapon systems have to be introduced before they stop being OP and your old equipment becomes underpowered? I'd argue it's already happened.

Oh I'm sorry I forgot to clarify. I'm used to it just being Scatter Lasers and nothing else.

Scatter lasers and Grav cannons are pretty cheesy and I disagree about the D cannon killing "plenty of stuff" considering it kills 2 models at best.

I'd argue the Imperial ones still work. Off the top of my head the only one I'd say is as bad as you make out is a multi melta.

pm713 wrote:
Oh I'm sorry I forgot to clarify. I'm used to it just being Scatter Lasers and nothing else.

Scatter lasers and Grav cannons are pretty cheesy and I disagree about the D cannon killing "plenty of stuff" considering it kills 2 models at best.

I'd argue the Imperial ones still work. Off the top of my head the only one I'd say is as bad as you make out is a multi melta.

But the math on the Imperial heavy weapons argues back. The other poster above showed it quite clearly. And again, I left off HYMP. I can also tell you how my BA will fare against another marine list based solely on number of grav cannons with a pretty good degree of accuracy. Why? Because the other Imperial heavy weapons can't stop me from getting into assault. They can't kill enough. BA start looking good again when you can't make me scoop up 20-30 models a turn. And regular imperial heavy weapons can't do that. Maybe if the Imperium could field more multilasers; ROF mid STR is king now unless you are STR D.

The D cannon can easily down LRs and IKs. That qualifies as "plenty of stuff" to me. Especially when the weapons you are talking about can barely scratch those vehicles.

Do you also consider HYMP pretty cheesy? How many "cheesy" weapons does there need to be before you start to understand that they are the new standard and these old weapons are outdated junk?

And I can tell you I stopped listening at BA because everything after was probably just bitterness and complaining.

So what you're saying is an army with good armour can survive heavy weapons? Shocking. How do they start doing against things like Eldar for example.

Frankly if you think I need to kill 20 models for a turn to be considered good then there's no point talking further as I doubt we'll agree on much.

pm713 wrote:
Oh I'm sorry I forgot to clarify. I'm used to it just being Scatter Lasers and nothing else.

Scatter lasers and Grav cannons are pretty cheesy and I disagree about the D cannon killing "plenty of stuff" considering it kills 2 models at best.

I'd argue the Imperial ones still work. Off the top of my head the only one I'd say is as bad as you make out is a multi melta.

I think the multi-melta is pretty reasonable considering it's one of the cheapest heavy weapons. if I'm going to have non-grav heavy weapons doing very little with the occasional good shot, they might as well be cheap so I can put more bodies down elsewhere!

pm713 wrote:
And I can tell you I stopped listening at BA because everything after was probably just bitterness and complaining.

So what you're saying is an army with good armour can survive heavy weapons? Shocking. How do they start doing against things like Eldar for example.

Frankly if you think I need to kill 20 models for a turn to be considered good then there's no point talking further as I doubt we'll agree on much.

You stopped listening by your own admission, even though I was doing the exact reverse of what you assumed.

What I'm saying is that standard imperial heavy weapons can't cause enough casualties to a standard BA list to prevent being run over. I'm saying specifically that BA can survive against standard Imperial heavy weapons, but not Eldar or Tau. What does that tell you about Imperial heavies vs Xeno heavies?

There's more than one way to be good, but tabling your opponent is the surest way to victory. Something the Eldar and Tau can do to BA rather easily. Again, why can they do it easily, but it's virtually impossible for SM who aren't using grav cannons?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 niv-mizzet wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Oh I'm sorry I forgot to clarify. I'm used to it just being Scatter Lasers and nothing else.

Scatter lasers and Grav cannons are pretty cheesy and I disagree about the D cannon killing "plenty of stuff" considering it kills 2 models at best.

I'd argue the Imperial ones still work. Off the top of my head the only one I'd say is as bad as you make out is a multi melta.

I think the multi-melta is pretty reasonable considering it's one of the cheapest heavy weapons. if I'm going to have non-grav heavy weapons doing very little with the occasional good shot, they might as well be cheap so I can put more bodies down elsewhere!

MM to me is an improved krak launcher.

pm713 wrote:
Oh I'm sorry I forgot to clarify. I'm used to it just being Scatter Lasers and nothing else.

Scatter lasers and Grav cannons are pretty cheesy and I disagree about the D cannon killing "plenty of stuff" considering it kills 2 models at best.

The problem being that those two models ca be anything from a Stompa or a small Titan on down, potentially without any saves, and does so ignoring toughness, AV, etc.

 Vaktathi wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Oh I'm sorry I forgot to clarify. I'm used to it just being Scatter Lasers and nothing else.

Scatter lasers and Grav cannons are pretty cheesy and I disagree about the D cannon killing "plenty of stuff" considering it kills 2 models at best.

The problem being that those two models ca be anything from a Stompa or a small Titan on down, potentially without any saves, and does so ignoring toughness, AV, etc.

Could also be 2 Termagants. Either way 2 is not many which is what I meant.

 Vaktathi wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Oh I'm sorry I forgot to clarify. I'm used to it just being Scatter Lasers and nothing else.

Scatter lasers and Grav cannons are pretty cheesy and I disagree about the D cannon killing "plenty of stuff" considering it kills 2 models at best.

The problem being that those two models ca be anything from a Stompa or a small Titan on down, potentially without any saves, and does so ignoring toughness, AV, etc.

That was my thinking when I listed the heavy D-cannon as a modern heavy capable of inflicting the damage I would expect from a heavy weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pm713 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Oh I'm sorry I forgot to clarify. I'm used to it just being Scatter Lasers and nothing else.

Scatter lasers and Grav cannons are pretty cheesy and I disagree about the D cannon killing "plenty of stuff" considering it kills 2 models at best.

The problem being that those two models ca be anything from a Stompa or a small Titan on down, potentially without any saves, and does so ignoring toughness, AV, etc.

Could also be 2 Termagants. Either way 2 is not many which is what I meant.

But ranged attacks choose their target, unlike assault lists who have their targets chosen for them.

Martel732 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
And I can tell you I stopped listening at BA because everything after was probably just bitterness and complaining.

So what you're saying is an army with good armour can survive heavy weapons? Shocking. How do they start doing against things like Eldar for example.

Frankly if you think I need to kill 20 models for a turn to be considered good then there's no point talking further as I doubt we'll agree on much.

You stopped listening by your own admission, even though I was doing the exact reverse of what you assumed.

What I'm saying is that standard imperial heavy weapons can't cause enough casualties to a standard BA list to prevent being run over. I'm saying specifically that BA can survive against standard Imperial heavy weapons, but not Eldar or Tau. What does that tell you about Imperial heavies vs Xeno heavies?

There's more than one way to be good, but tabling your opponent is the surest way to victory. Something the Eldar and Tau can do to BA rather easily. Again, why can they do it easily, but it's virtually impossible for SM who aren't using grav cannons?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 niv-mizzet wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Oh I'm sorry I forgot to clarify. I'm used to it just being Scatter Lasers and nothing else.

Scatter lasers and Grav cannons are pretty cheesy and I disagree about the D cannon killing "plenty of stuff" considering it kills 2 models at best.

I'd argue the Imperial ones still work. Off the top of my head the only one I'd say is as bad as you make out is a multi melta.

I think the multi-melta is pretty reasonable considering it's one of the cheapest heavy weapons. if I'm going to have non-grav heavy weapons doing very little with the occasional good shot, they might as well be cheap so I can put more bodies down elsewhere!

MM to me is an improved krak launcher.

You need to check what opposite means.

One is balanced or close to it. One is too powerful. That's what it tells me.

I'm really not seeing where you're spotting all these crazy powerful Eldar builds outside of "a few broken cheese combos" like marines have.

Here-don't use transported scythe guard, windriders, or wraithknights.

What are you seeing that's so nuts here? Maybe a dire avenger shrine in serpents, with warp spiders and Farseers? Or maybe are you going to bust out the footslogging Eldar melee powerhouse?

Don't be silly. ALL Eldar are the broken cheese armies. NOBODY uses anything else. Martel says so and Martel is a genius. Like Dman....

Eldar don't have to resort to FW psykers, formations or even special characters to table BA, Orks, DE, Nids.

Grav cents can be neutralized by return fire without the magic of invisibility. Marines trying to play the objective game will be tabled without the freeness of Gladius. Marines fielding grav devs will just have them murdered without the rules from Skyhammer.

Eldar don't need cheese combos; their units are that powerful to start with. Marines are completely reliant on formations and tricks like gravstar.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"One is balanced or close to it. One is too powerful. That's what it tells me."

Who decides where the balance is set? If you look at the last four codices, it's not being set where you think it is. Grav cannons are NOT too powerful in a game with Riptides and Wraithknights. Lascannons are too weak. You can't dial back the power creep; it's too late for that. Hell, Imperial standard heavies aren't even good against a weak codex like BA. I have the victories to prove it.

But I thought you only ever took the cheesiest thing? So therefore there AREN'T non Gladius marine armies.

I laughed at the Eldar bit. That's really not true. At all.

4 new codicies or 19 older ones. Pretty clear which one sets the standard there.

pm713 wrote:
Don't be silly. ALL Eldar are the broken cheese armies. NOBODY uses anything else. Martel says so and Martel is a genius. Like Dman....

And you are completely ignoring Akaisura's post. You haven't addressed it at all. It's not just myself.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pm713 wrote:
But I thought you only ever took the cheesiest thing? So therefore there AREN'T non Gladius marine armies.

I laughed at the Eldar bit. That's really not true. At all.

4 new codicies or 19 older ones. Pretty clear which one sets the standard there.

So if you had an Ork list, you don't think Eldar can table you without a formation? You are really going to claim that?

And I was more talking to Scotsman on that one. lt's pretty clear you've tuned out. All the math is against you, so you resort to pettiness.

Seems more realistic than anything you say if I'm honest. No I don't think Eldar will automatically table Orks by virtue of being Eldar because that's ridiculous.

This whole thread is serving to make me feel guilty for starting Eldar, maybe I would have been better off with having DE as the primary and Eldar the ally...

 War Kitten wrote:
This whole thread is serving to make me feel guilty for starting Eldar, maybe I would have been better off with having DE as the primary and Eldar the ally...

Bank on future codices being up at Eldar level. The marines, Tau, and DA (kind of) can all compete (kind of). Space Wolves can run you over with a Wolfstar. Everyone else pretty much dies a horrible death, though. Wait, I think demons can field some shenanigans that are problematic as well. I'm probably missing a build or two, but as I said, count on the competition coming down the pipe.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pm713 wrote:
Seems more realistic than anything you say if I'm honest. No I don't think Eldar will automatically table Orks by virtue of being Eldar because that's ridiculous.

I didn't say automatically. I said do it without the aid of a formation or special character or FW. The fact that they CAN do it, and marines basically can't is the difference I see between the power level of the two lists. .

Everything I've said about Imperial heavy weapons is completely backed up by math. You can't get MORE realistic.

Akiasura wrote:
Take a lascannon against av 12 (pretty common) and bs 4 (again, common).
Hits and wounds on a 3+, so just under 50% (44?) to cause a single hp. That's not assuming cover or jink, which can drop it to about a third or worse.

So 2-3 lascannon shots to damage most tanks, and most tanks have 3hp. So 6-9 lascannons to destroy a single tank, and lascannons are very expensive.

This gets worse against flyers, since it becomes a 6 to hit, or mcs with invuls and Fnp with a ton of wounds and stacked saves. It takes lascannons ages to down a riptide that is trying to survive.

In addition, lascannons are usually on relatively slow platforms, so they have trouble if Los blocking terrain exists.

Plasma, Grav, melta, scats, haywire, and d weapons have replaced lascannons and lances as anti tank weapons. The latter really needs to cause 2 hp or wounds on a pen or something to be cost effective.

This is the Riptide that's considered extremely durable by most people? Is that with or without it boosting its invul save?

Or that's a tank on the brink of death and probably taken some damage from a penetrating hit as well. Again is it an amazing weapon of instant death? No. Is it way better than Martel claims? Yes.

I'm not going to disagree with the flyer part. Lascannons are not very good against Flyers to put it gently.

pm713 wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
Take a lascannon against av 12 (pretty common) and bs 4 (again, common).
Hits and wounds on a 3+, so just under 50% (44?) to cause a single hp. That's not assuming cover or jink, which can drop it to about a third or worse.

So 2-3 lascannon shots to damage most tanks, and most tanks have 3hp. So 6-9 lascannons to destroy a single tank, and lascannons are very expensive.

This gets worse against flyers, since it becomes a 6 to hit, or mcs with invuls and Fnp with a ton of wounds and stacked saves. It takes lascannons ages to down a riptide that is trying to survive.

In addition, lascannons are usually on relatively slow platforms, so they have trouble if Los blocking terrain exists.

Plasma, Grav, melta, scats, haywire, and d weapons have replaced lascannons and lances as anti tank weapons. The latter really needs to cause 2 hp or wounds on a pen or something to be cost effective.

This is the Riptide that's considered extremely durable by most people? Is that with or without it boosting its invul save?

Or that's a tank on the brink of death and probably taken some damage from a penetrating hit as well. Again is it an amazing weapon of instant death? No. Is it way better than Martel claims? Yes.

I'm not going to disagree with the flyer part. Lascannons are not very good against Flyers to put it gently.

It doesn't matter. It still takes an insane number of lascannon shots to kill even a base Riptide. Add in FNP, ruins (which are free) or the shield and it gets even worse. You'll never do it before it's slagged all your important units. The real kicker is that it fights at 100% effectiveness till the last wound is gone.

It's no better than I claim because I'm claiming it is what the math says it is. Do you dispute the math somehow? 7th ed has made it extremely unlikely to explode a vehicle with AP 2. This means the preferred anti-tank method is hp stripping. Which, as a ROF 1 weapon, the lascannon is extremely inefficient at. Because its ROF 1, it's also bad against MCs.

You haven't given any maths at all. I can't dispute what isn't there. Akiasura's maths doesn't really support what you seem to say either.

pm713 wrote:
You haven't given any maths at all. I can't dispute what isn't there. Akiasura's maths doesn't really support what you seem to say either.

Really? You think using 6-9 lascannon shots to take out a 3 hp vehicle with no cover or jink is a good use of points? I didn't think any other math was required. It takes around 12 BS 4 lascannon shots to kill a Riptide sporting only the 5+++. How are you going to get these 12 uncontested shots off, given the first thing it'll probably do is melt your dev squad? That's with no FNP , no ruins, and no super shield.

Martel732 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
You haven't given any maths at all. I can't dispute what isn't there. Akiasura's maths doesn't really support what you seem to say either.

Really? You think using 6-9 lascannon shots to take out a 3 hp vehicle with no cover or jink is a good use of points? I didn't think any other math was required.

Depends on the vehicle. I doubt maths will actually help considering how you're viewing things.

Then post something and convince me. Just don't say "It's good!" without explaining how or why.

Honestly you won't be convinced by anything I say because you're too busy being irrationally bitter about a game. My point is not all these things are good. My point is that they're not as terrible as you think and that you're logic is incredibly flawed. Not being as good as the cheesiest combo's in the game does not make things bad just not OP.

Merry Christmas

Honestly, part of th reason Imperial heavy weapons other than grav-cannons are bad is that they can't reliably deal with the really tough Monstrous and Gargantuan Creatures that are popping up everywhere. There just isn't the weight of fire required to kill something with cover or an invulnerable save with 4+ wounds and high T if you're not using grav weapons.

pm713 wrote:
Honestly you won't be convinced by anything I say because you're too busy being irrationally bitter about a game. My point is not all these things are good. My point is that they're not as terrible as you think and that you're logic is incredibly flawed. Not being as good as the cheesiest combo's in the game does not make things bad just not OP.

You're arguing semantics. To me, the best stuff is adequate and the rest is junk. Consequently, I have a codex of junk from my point of view. Standard imperial heavy weapons are indeed just as terrible as I think in that they can't get the job done in a reasonable amount of game turns. That's a benchmark that is universally understandable because we are all targeting the same things.

That doesn't seem wrong to you? That the BEST is your mediocre....

pm713 wrote:
That doesn't seem wrong to you? That the BEST is your mediocre....

Not given how often I go up against grav cannons, scatterlasers, HYMP, and D-cannons. Lascannons are the rarity because everyone knows they're bad in my group.

So I'll be honest I stopped reading a lot of that back and forth.

Wanted to comment on lascannons tho. They are not meant to take out heavy armor like you guys are talking about.

Lasconnas are meant for MCs, light armor, and heavy infantry.

SMs have many better options to take out heavy armor.

Also.. heavy bolters are not meh... They are amazing anti troops s5 means your wounding xenos on 2s MEQs on 3s. And there are so many platforms to take them.

 Grizzyzz wrote:
So I'll be honest I stopped reading a lot of that back and forth.

Wanted to comment on lascannons tho. They are not meant to take out heavy armor like you guys are talking about.

Lasconnas are meant for MCs, light armor, and heavy infantry.

SMs have many better options to take out heavy armor.

Also.. heavy bolters are not meh... They are amazing anti troops s5 means your wounding xenos on 2s MEQs on 3s. And there are so many platforms to take them.

But lascannons aren't good at those jobs, either.

Heavy bolters are bad because they are one STR short of the 7th ed sweet spot, S6. And they lack a shot compared to real high ROF weapons.

What do you mean? Lascannons wound most MCs on 2s.. and insta glance av10.. and at 48"



Automatically Appended Next Post:
And again. Most armies aside from eldar don't have s6 in mass.. s5 is very viable.

Lascannons are debatable against MC's because they're single shot so you need a few to do the job quickly. Personally I don't find them that bad.

I've never been disappointed by a Heavy Bolter against Xenos. We come again to the difference between not best and not good.

 Grizzyzz wrote:
So I'll be honest I stopped reading a lot of that back and forth.

Wanted to comment on lascannons tho. They are not meant to take out heavy armor like you guys are talking about.

Lasconnas are meant for MCs, light armor, and heavy infantry.

I don't know what you mean by meant.
Do you mean according to the fluff? This is debatable, but I always see them being used against the heaviest of the heavy.
Do you mean being effective on the table top? Because in that case...no.

Again, for a simple Av 12 3HP tank, it takes over 6 lascannon shots to destroy one. If the tank is in cover, 5+, it goes up to about ~8-9. For 1 tank.
9 lascannons is absurd to remove 1 tank a turn. That's 2 devastator squads. Those will never make their points back, assuming the enemy doesn't remove them. 9 Meltas will do a lot better job, since they have a better AP and roll an additional dice if under a certain range. Not to mention that lascannons are on immobile platforms, or at the least extremely slow moving.
Most MCs don't have a T about 6 or 7, Str 9 ap 2 isn't needed. Spamming mid strength weapons is superior.
Against flyers this gets even worse, and if they have FnP or an invul, Lascannons look worse. Most of the good MCs can either fly, have FnP, or an invul, or a combination of the 3.

Against heavy infantry...I'm not sure what you mean by heavy. Most heavy infantry is terrible, but lascannons, at best, drop a 2+ save to a invul or cover save. That's good, but with only 1 shot and many units with 2+ now coming with more than one wound and being T5...it's not great.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

SMs have many better options to take out heavy armor.

Most armies have better options to take out armor. Haywire, Melta, Str 6-7 spam, melee, str D, and even plasma in the rear are a lot better than a single shot expensive lascannon.
All of the competitive armies do a lot better than lascannons, and chose to leave them at home. Most of the bad armies don't spam lascannons either, though a few of the worst ones do.
Lascannons and lances are some of the worst weapons in the game for most armored targets or MC's. It's hard to think of worst options unless the item is clearly not intended for that role. I can't think of any role where a lascannon is the best choice in the game, or even 2nd best for the points you have to spend.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Also.. heavy bolters are not meh... They are amazing anti troops s5 means your wounding xenos on 2s MEQs on 3s. And there are so many platforms to take them.

Heavy bolters are easily one of the worst weapons in the game.
You get +12 and 1 shot/str over a storm bolter but lose the ability to move, and the only unit that can take them in mass is the devastator squad. A marine squad will essentially be firing equal damage to 2.5 rapid fire bolters in exchange for 4 marines standing around.
Wounding xenos on 2's is...fine, but bolters do it on 3's and can be spammed. They rarely ignore armor, and when they do cover is only slightly worse if its worse at all, and 3 shots on a heavy weapon with such a weak punch is terrible.
Nobody spams h.bolters in tournaments. Heavy bolters haven't been good...well since 3rd at least. Maybe in earlier editions but not in the last decade.

Heavy bolters need 1 or 2 more shots and shred to be viable. As it is now, they are bad.

I remember someone hear posting an IG list that had a ton of h.bolters and the very first piece of advice given to them was "drop all the h.bolters and literally take anything else".


Edit,
For the people who say lascannons and heavy bolters are good but not great, what do you consider to be bad weapons? Lascannons and H bolters are near the bottom for me, if not THE bottom, so I'd be curious to hear what you think is a worst weapon.
For the record, I think the following are better;
Lascannon;
Grav, Plasma, Melta, Missile Launcher (cheaper usually, though not great), melee attacks, grenades, combi weapons

H.Bolter;
Mass bolters/storm bolters, plasma, flamer, autocannon, assault cannon, grav weapons, special issue bolters, combi weapons

I'm including platforms and point costs.

 Grizzyzz wrote:
What do you mean? Lascannons wound most MCs on 2s.. and insta glance av10.. and at 48"



Automatically Appended Next Post:
And again. Most armies aside from eldar don't have s6 in mass.. s5 is very viable.

I disagree. Vehemently. See the above post by Akiasura because he's already covered my points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pm713 wrote:
Lascannons are debatable against MC's because they're single shot so you need a few to do the job quickly. Personally I don't find them that bad.

I've never been disappointed by a Heavy Bolter against Xenos. We come again to the difference between not best and not good.

I'm disappointed every time I fire one.

That's because your standards are ridiculous rather than the weapon.

pm713 wrote:
That's because your standards are ridiculous rather than the weapon.

I don't make the rules. GW does.

Martel732 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
That's because your standards are ridiculous rather than the weapon.

I don't make the rules. GW does.

They don't hold a gun to your head, beat you and force you to accept something as standard either. This is entirely on you not GW.

pm713 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
That's because your standards are ridiculous rather than the weapon.

I don't make the rules. GW does.

They don't hold a gun to your head, beat you and force you to accept something as standard either. This is entirely on you not GW.

No, you're gaming group does that when they decide how competitive they are going to be. If GW could write rules, then you wouldn't be in the situation where some guns (I.e Grav, scatterguns) are leagues ahead of their competition, and also infringe upon other weapons roles as well.

And before you respond with, but you're gaming group can house rule stuff, yes they can, some don't want to, either way a better set of rules would still be conducive to "creative" house ruling, rather than "this needs fixing" house ruling.

As to the topic, the answer is Eldar can do everything competently to amazingly, while other codices, trade one thing for another (I.e Speed, for durability).

pm713 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Oh I'm sorry I forgot to clarify. I'm used to it just being Scatter Lasers and nothing else.

Scatter lasers and Grav cannons are pretty cheesy and I disagree about the D cannon killing "plenty of stuff" considering it kills 2 models at best.

The problem being that those two models ca be anything from a Stompa or a small Titan on down, potentially without any saves, and does so ignoring toughness, AV, etc.

Could also be 2 Termagants. Either way 2 is not many which is what I meant.

It doesn't need to be many, when they can very easily remove the opponent's strongest and most powerful units (of which they likely don't have very many of).

You're not going to be shooting at termagants with those weapons, you're going to be removing Trygons and the like with them.

Still waiting for a list of weapons that are worse than the lascannon and heavy bolter at their intended roles so we can have an actual discussion about their relative ranking rather than he says she says nonsense.

Akiasura wrote:
Still waiting for a list of weapons that are worse than the lascannon and heavy bolter at their intended roles so we can have an actual discussion about their relative ranking rather than he says she says nonsense.

I tend to think that Reaper Autocannons are worse personally. We pay what? A 150% or so mark-up for, get this, Twin-linked!!
For something that's supposedly meant to be just a step below the Assault Cannon, (as Reapers were the early proto-type), that's a pretty special level of steaming monkey poo...

It sucks, because the Reapers look awesomesauce on our Termies, but they're so laughably overcosted for what they're meant to do, that I feel like the dumbest idiot on the planet every time I play pts for the things.
If they were 4 shots + shread they'd be totally worth it.

Alas, they suffer from the traditional "Chaos can't have nice things" design philosophy.

Don't forget having less range too!

Are we comparing it to lascannons or heavy bolters?

I agree with you that the reaperauto cannon isn't a great weapon, though it is extremely rare since it can only be delivered on one platform.

I still think it'd better than a h bolter though. By a lot. Lascannon...eh you can deep strike the unit taking the reaper in though you'll get more mileage out of the combi weapons than the reaper. Still, it'll cause hp against rear armor faster than a lascannon will.

Heavy bolters can be easily taken in mass whether it be through free razerback in gladious. Or land speeders... Centurians.. Devastators..

The problem is everyone compares everything to a scatter laser. Last I checked that's an eldar thing and well put simply marines and every other army are out of luck on that note.

HB is 22 points which is better then 17 for a marine with storm bolter.. yes it has limited movement but it has range to compensate as well as being ap4




Automatically Appended Next Post:
What is meant to take out heavy armor from marines... Grav, and melta which is hugely accessible.

 Grizzyzz wrote:
Heavy bolters can be easily taken in mass whether it be through free razerback in gladious. Or land speeders... Centurians.. Devastators..

Out of all these, only the free razorback is considered good...because it's free. Any weapon is good when it's free.
Land speeders are usually seen with the melta or flamer. The flamer, in one volley, can cause more hits than a h bolter can see over three rounds, and the speeder can get in good positions to deliver the template.
Centurions are never seen with h bolters...the bolter and Grav cannon with amps is so far above every build its not worth discussing.
Devastators lack movement, but outside of the free transport formation, are the only viable way to mass h bolters.

Devastators themselves are not what I would consider a strong choice, but let's see how they do against a geq in cover.
2/3 to hit, 5/6 to wound, 2/3 through cover. 20/54. So a h bolter will kill one geq per round. If this is guard, it can take 4 rounds of shooting to pay for itself. Against Eldar or tau, it's about 2.
Let's look at meq.
2/3 hit, 2/3 wound, 1/3 armor. 4/27. It takes two h bolters to cause a single wound per turn. A dev squad can expect to be killing 2-3 marines per turn per squad, which is pretty fragile.
Against Mc or tanks, the h bolter does pretty terrible since it lacks str 6 or 7.

So there is one target type it does well against, Eldar or tau troops lacking 3+ saves and buffs, and a host of targets it's bad against. None of those targets are very important in the armies they are in either.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

The problem is everyone compares everything to a scatter laser. Last I checked that's an eldar thing and well put simply marines and every other army are out of luck on that note.

This isn't true at all, most of the weapons I am comparing them to come from the imperial army. Plasma guns and Grav weapons being the biggest offenders, but special issue bolters are quite strong as well. Flamers are also a lot better. The large blast weapons can do more in a turn then what h bolters manage all game.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

HB is 22 points which is better then 17 for a marine with storm bolter.. yes it has limited movement but it has range to compensate as well as being ap4

Hm, not a heavy weapon but they are about equally effective. The 36" range is pretty bad, and you can't pod them in or keep them in transports. Devastators are the only place you'll put a h bolter, so to me its worse than a storm bolter, but neither are good. The fact it's a debate is pretty damning.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
What is meant to take out heavy armor from marines... Grav, and melta which is hugely accessible.

 Melissia wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
Sisters would get more complaints

That statement wasn't about Sisters players complaining. It was people saying Sisters players complain too much, even though Marine players do almost nothing BUT complain, and we don't actually have many threads where Sisters players complain.

The only person complaining about marines here is you, ironically complaining that they complain too much. Haven't seen anyone say that sisters players complain too much, but I'd say you complain about stupid things a lot


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Back on topic, if you want games, you should only run rangers and guardians plus 1 aspect squad. If you think your rejection for games is bad, the 2 gaming clubs around here has flat out banned Eldar, and I'm sure you can find many more instances online. If you want to play Eldar, go ahead, just don't come crying when your entire army becomes invalidated. Not many people want to waste 3 hours giving Eldar players the satisfaction of auto-stomping them.

Also, don't spew that stuff about collecting them earlier. They've been the definitive overpowered army 7 editions straight.

Good luck on getting games with your 20 new fancy jetbikes. You might be the straw that gets Eldar banned in your area.

And the people who don't walk away from 40k due to the crap GW keeps pulling, end up being chased off by people like kburn instead. Not hard to see why 40k is fething dying.

Akiasura wrote:

If we start mathhammering we will be here all day. A squad of bolter marines in rapid fire range kills 7 guard. Outside about 3.. the devestator squad takes out 4 and out of threat range.

This is off the OP topic so I will stop here. I guess in my meta heavy bolters seem to do really well. I would imagine against WK spam meta it wouldnt (for example). Huge success with HB, Missle centurians out of Imperial fists. You will shred light armor.

Think op left long time ago

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

If we start mathhammering we will be here all day.

Not really? There are only 2 relevant target types that you'll fire them again. Meqs and Geqs, with the latter, if they are expensive enough, being the only target worth firing at.
It literally took me 2 minutes to run those numbers, it's extremely easy math. Standard deviations would help, but that's more complicated.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

A squad of bolter marines in rapid fire range kills 7 guard. Outside about 3.. the devestator squad takes out 4 and out of threat range.

Let's be clear, if you are coming up equal or lower to bolter marines at any point, and are more expensive, stop. Tacticals, offensively, are extremely weak. You do not see competitive lists take them at all, or at most, a small min squad to pod in to claim an objective or remove a tank.
To me, 1/3 of your points per turn is the minimum of acceptable for a unit that is about firepower. There are few targets where devs armed with heavy bolters manage that, and many more common (and relevant) ones where they do not manage that. Maybe your bar for success is different than mine, and that's fine. That seems to be the litmus test if a unit is competitive or not, but that's strictly imo.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

This is off the OP topic so I will stop here. I guess in my meta heavy bolters seem to do really well. I would imagine against WK spam meta it wouldnt (for example). Huge success with HB, Missle centurians out of Imperial fists. You will shred light armor.

If your meta features eldar troops, tau troops, and nid swarms, I can see bolters doing well. Those units are not powerful, mostly (some aspect warriors are but they have 3+ saves or fly or have stealth rules) so claiming HBs are great isn't true. With tank hunter, they do okay against light armor (shred is a bit much, it still isn't great and you're better off with the other options marines have for armor) but missile cents are downright awful and inferior to grav cents in nearly everyway.

But I'm not trying to change your mind, I just wouldn't go around saying H. Bolters are amazing if you can't back it up. Also, don't assume everyone is comparing it to a scat laser. I don't appreciate strawmans.

I made a list of weapons from the start.

Remember: a Heavy Bolter is the same price as an Autocannon. What are you REALLY going to buy?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Remember: a Heavy Bolter is the same price as an Autocannon. What are you REALLY going to buy?

SM devs can't get autocannons. Because they are losers.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Remember: a Heavy Bolter is the same price as an Autocannon. What are you REALLY going to buy?

Which doesn't make any sense from a balance perspective

Heavy Bolter - 36" range, S5 AP4, Heavy 3

Autocannon - 48" range, S7 AP4, Heavy 2

The autocannon trades 1 shot for 12" range and +2 strength, and its the same price as the HB.
There is no reason to not take an autocannon over the HB. Yeah, you'll kill 1 less guy, but thanks to the long range you'll get another chance or two to fire, and the high strength not only increases the chances of wounding, but it also
gives light AT capability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Remember: a Heavy Bolter is the same price as an Autocannon. What are you REALLY going to buy?

SM devs can't get autocannons. Because they are losers.

Havocs get reaper autocannons. I guess that's one good thing about CSM

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Remember: a Heavy Bolter is the same price as an Autocannon. What are you REALLY going to buy?

Which doesn't make any sense from a balance perspective

Heavy Bolter - 36" range, S5 AP4, Heavy 3

Autocannon - 48" range, S7 AP4, Heavy 2

The autocannon trades 1 shot for 12" range and +2 strength, and its the same price as the HB.
Their is no reason to not take a autocannon over the HB. Yeah, you'll kill 1 less guy, but thanks to the long range you'll get another chance or two to fire, and the high strength not only increases the chances of wounding, but it also
gives light AT capability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Remember: a Heavy Bolter is the same price as an Autocannon. What are you REALLY going to buy?

SM devs can't get autocannons. Because they are losers.

Havocs get reaper autocannons. I guess that's one good thing about CSM

Add it to the list.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Remember: a Heavy Bolter is the same price as an Autocannon. What are you REALLY going to buy?

Which doesn't make any sense from a balance perspective

Heavy Bolter - 36" range, S5 AP4, Heavy 3

Autocannon - 48" range, S7 AP4, Heavy 2

The autocannon trades 1 shot for 12" range and +2 strength, and its the same price as the HB.
There is no reason to not take an autocannon over the HB. Yeah, you'll kill 1 less guy, but thanks to the long range you'll get another chance or two to fire, and the high strength not only increases the chances of wounding, but it also
gives light AT capability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Remember: a Heavy Bolter is the same price as an Autocannon. What are you REALLY going to buy?

SM devs can't get autocannons. Because they are losers.

Havocs get reaper autocannons. I guess that's one good thing about CSM

Except that only BA's for the moments are even remotely jealous about that...
Vanilla's & DA's get Grav Cannons w/amps, while Wolves have Long Fangs that get Split Fire. Besides, odds are that BA's will get a codex update at some point next year that'll give them access to all the basic Marine changes.

You know what Chaos isn't getting next year? Any kind of attention from GW.

And besides, when the badly outclassed Autocannon is considered your crowning glory, you know your army is only 3+ entire editions behind the rest of the game.

Are eldar anything like fantasy's 8th edition wood elves where you pretty much had to cater your army against wood elves to win even when making an 'all-comers' list in your own time?

The sheer range of scatterbikes and the idea jetbikes can move in assault even if they shoot in the shooting phase just sounds pretty ridiculous considering the scatter-bikes range. I'm not totally aware of all the stuff but I know a guy that was getting into eldar after playing space wolves and went for probably a complete scatter-bikes list. Should I have hit this guy for being such a cheese-monger? I wasn't playing him but from what I've heard about eldar he probably should've been taken out back and been beaten by everybody in the store.

To be fair, it is the cheapness of the Autocannon that appeals to me. 115 points gets you plenty of shots and you simply camp in cover. If they were any more expensive, I'd say I'd never take them.

So also to be fair, Grav Cannons are only good with that formation, but they're still ridiculous. When you take a full squad and Combat them into 2 Cannons a Squad, you're pinning and killing lots of targets.

Akiasura wrote:

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

If we start mathhammering we will be here all day.

Not really? There are only 2 relevant target types that you'll fire them again. Meqs and Geqs, with the latter, if they are expensive enough, being the only target worth firing at.
It literally took me 2 minutes to run those numbers, it's extremely easy math. Standard deviations would help, but that's more complicated.

My point being. We can sit here and draw numbers for countless weapons in the game that can be better or worse in numerous scenerios.

Akiasura wrote:

 Grizzyzz wrote:

A squad of bolter marines in rapid fire range kills 7 guard. Outside about 3.. the devestator squad takes out 4 and out of threat range.

Let's be clear, if you are coming up equal or lower to bolter marines at any point, and are more expensive, stop.

If you can remove cover (through psychic) or catch troops in the open the HBs suddenly become much better then that of a marine bolter. And they are out of range of most threats. Where a bolter marine crew won't kill their target and is left in the open nearby.

Akiasura wrote:
claiming HBs are great isn't true. With tank hunter, they do okay against light armor (shred is a bit much, it still isn't great and you're better off with the other options marines have for armor) but missile cents are downright awful and inferior to grav cents in nearly everyway.

Again it comes down to scenerio. Fire them into MEQs meh results but better then some other choices. Fire them at geqs, decent results. Additionally I find them very useful against cron warriors who tend to March across the table.

Akiasura wrote:
But I'm not trying to change your mind, I just wouldn't go around saying H. Bolters are amazing if you can't back it up. Also, don't assume everyone is comparing it to a scat laser. I don't appreciate strawmans.

Not sure how me supplying scenerios where I have had success with a weapon that's fairly costed and available on multiple platforms is strawman ing.. I assume comparison to scatter lasers because of the track record of this entire thread comparing everything to mass s6.

Centurians dev squad with tank hunter effectively at 36" will cause 3 glances and 2 pens on av10 armor. On an average cover of 5+ your going to wreck most vehicles. I'm not saying your going to take out land raiders with the things, but against many light vehicles or rear armor targets your going to do some work. Again.. my experience though. My DE and ork friends hated me when I ran sentinals of terra, as some examples for good matchups.

Being at a safer distance means you can build up your points return over the course of the game rather then trying to get your points back in one go.

I'm still amazed that PacificRimJob is an allowable alias, when the word that would be donkey cave is banned. Do people not know what that means?

Alcibiades wrote:
I'm still amazed that PacificRimJob is an allowable alias, when the word that would be donkey cave is banned. Do people not know what that means?

Idk what the Pacific version is.. maybe it's fine

It makes me chuckle


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grizzyzz wrote:
[
Idk what the Pacific version is.. maybe it's fine

Sone kind of Thai massage thing.

Sidstyler wrote:And the people who don't walk away from 40k due to the crap GW keeps pulling, end up being chased off by people like kburn instead. Not hard to see why 40k is fething dying.

Exalted. I also get the distinct feeling that he has never played against properly supported Guardian squads either. Heavy Weapon plus eighteen Bladestorm shots that can potentially re-roll to-hit and to-wound will put the hurt on virtually anything.

As far as the discussion of weapons goes, the problem is not with the Scatter Laser itself. It is basically a Multilaser with one more shot and an extra point of AP. The loss of Laser Lock has also dramatically reduced its efficiency on vehicles as a primary weapon. By themselves, Scatter Lasers on Wave Serpents/Falcons, Vypers, War Walkers, and certain Wraith units are not the problem. The problem lies in Eldar having one supremely undercosted platform for the Scatter Laser, namely the Windrider Jetbike. In short, the problem with Scatbikers is their nature as a platform, not the weapons they can carry.

I'm sorry Grizyzz, but what gakky Necron player isn't using cover for the Warriors or running them in Ghost Arks?

Over in the Tau HRR Tactica thread, HRRs are bad because over 36" range is worthless. Here, autocannons are way better than HBs because of the extra range.

Alcibiades wrote:
Over in the Tau HRR Tactica thread, HRRs are bad because over 36" range is worthless. Here, autocannons are way better than HBs because of the extra range.

Aren't HRR rifles bad because they are outperformed in most cases by HYMPs, which have a drastically higher rate of fire, and within the glance-to-death sweet spot?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'm sorry Grizyzz, but what gakky Necron player isn't using cover for the Warriors or running them in Ghost Arks?

Easy.. blow up the ark. Now the guys are out in the open. Maybe it's maelstrom and he had to grab objectives not in cover . It's too situational to answer your remark. All I said was HB I again have had success with against crons because of their ap4 and range.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:
Over in the Tau HRR Tactica thread, HRRs are bad because over 36" range is worthless. Here, autocannons are way better than HBs because of the extra range.

Aren't HRR rifles bad because they are outperformed in most cases by HYMPs, which have a drastically higher rate of fire, and within the glance-to-death sweet spot?

In general yes. HRR surprisingly outperform against 3+ MCs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
At least the wraithknight

LOL'd at "Easy. Blow up the Ark".

AV13 that can Jink to anything dangerous isn't something you just "blow up".

Exactly, AV13 with a 4+ save and 4HP's (for god knows what reason) is not exactly the easiest thing in the world to "just blow up"...

 Vaktathi wrote:
Exactly, AV13 with a 4+ save and 4HP's (for god knows what reason) is not exactly the easiest thing in the world to "just blow up"...

Melta squad or grav centurians. Again as I have stated I have played imperial fists so maybe that has skewed my experience some.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And it's only 13 if you hit it's front/side arcs pretty sure .. so rear shot is same old


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I have never had an issue with cron vehicles.. it's always that 4+ reanimation that is the bane of my existence

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:
Over in the Tau HRR Tactica thread, HRRs are bad because over 36" range is worthless. Here, autocannons are way better than HBs because of the extra range.

Aren't HRR rifles bad because they are outperformed in most cases by HYMPs, which have a drastically higher rate of fire, and within the glance-to-death sweet spot?

And the fact that HRRs are almost twice the range matters not!

 Grizzyzz wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Exactly, AV13 with a 4+ save and 4HP's (for god knows what reason) is not exactly the easiest thing in the world to "just blow up"...

Melta squad or grav centurians. Again as I have stated I have played imperial fists so maybe that has skewed my experience some.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And it's only 13 if you hit it's front/side arcs pretty sure .. so rear shot is same old


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I have never had an issue with cron vehicles.. it's always that 4+ reanimation that is the bane of my existence

Does somebody want to show how well "Melta squad" does according to math? I'm currently eating dinner.

For the Grav Centurions, you still get the jink. Then otherwise it is still free to fire and camp on an objective.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Exactly, AV13 with a 4+ save and 4HP's (for god knows what reason) is not exactly the easiest thing in the world to "just blow up"...

Melta squad or grav centurians. Again as I have stated I have played imperial fists so maybe that has skewed my experience some.

Which is usually a whole lot more investment than the 105(?) pt Ark, and with the Meltas, you're needing an average of 8 BS4 meltaguns in optimal range for that through a Jink save to average 1 Explodes result to dump the dudes inside out.

even a full squad of Grav Centurions, through a 4+ Jink save, will only barely average a kill, and not every army has access to Grav Centurions.

And it's only 13 if you hit it's front/side arcs pretty sure .. so rear shot is same old

Which assumes you can get the rear, not always possible (usually not possible if you don't have something with accurate deep strike), and those Ghost Ark has a very narrow rear arc.

I have never had an issue with cron vehicles.. it's always that 4+ reanimation that is the bane of my existence

It's the Jink on top of the AV13 shields that does it. Having effectively an "always on" 4+ save adds a tremendous amount of durability. The only saving grace is the fact that they're open-topped.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

If we start mathhammering we will be here all day.

Not really? There are only 2 relevant target types that you'll fire them again. Meqs and Geqs, with the latter, if they are expensive enough, being the only target worth firing at.
It literally took me 2 minutes to run those numbers, it's extremely easy math. Standard deviations would help, but that's more complicated.

My point being. We can sit here and draw numbers for countless weapons in the game that can be better or worse in numerous scenerios.

It doesn't need to be countless weapons. But looking at your statement that a ghost ark is easy to blow up, I have a feeling the math won't matter.
For some people, that is fine. If that's the case for you, no big deal.
We could easily list weapons that you feel are worse that are commonly taken (PG, Flamer, Melta, Grav) and compare to a few different targets and see in what scenarios H bolters do well. I have a feeling the results are obvious and is why H bolters haven't been seen in a decade however.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Grizzyzz wrote:

A squad of bolter marines in rapid fire range kills 7 guard. Outside about 3.. the devestator squad takes out 4 and out of threat range.

Let's be clear, if you are coming up equal or lower to bolter marines at any point, and are more expensive, stop.

If you can remove cover (through psychic) or catch troops in the open the HBs suddenly become much better then that of a marine bolter. And they are out of range of most threats. Where a bolter marine crew won't kill their target and is left in the open nearby.

36" range isn't great for an immobile platform. On a transport or similar tank it's not bad, I doubt the extra 12" comes up often unless you are facing tau or eldar.
But, for example, against scat bikes, the enemy could move and shoot while you can't fire back all game. Other armies with 48+ weapons also have a similar ability.

Removing cover helps bolters as much as h bolters unless facing 4+ saves. So that's warriors, firewarriors, the weaker aspect warriors...and scouts? Can't think of many units that sport 4+ saves that matter. It's usually 3+ or they have another save mechanic, or a strong transport.
Removing cover to add a few more wounds against guardsmen or aspect warriors seems like a weak use of a divination power (re-rolling to hit is almost as effective, and you always get it) but alright. I'd rather use my psyker on grav cents or something that does more damage though.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
claiming HBs are great isn't true. With tank hunter, they do okay against light armor (shred is a bit much, it still isn't great and you're better off with the other options marines have for armor) but missile cents are downright awful and inferior to grav cents in nearly everyway.

Again it comes down to scenerio. Fire them into MEQs meh results but better then some other choices. Fire them at geqs, decent results. Additionally I find them very useful against cron warriors who tend to March across the table.

Let's be clear, they only do well against Geqs that cost a lot. That's Firewarriors and the weaker aspects from eldar. Against guardsmen they don't cause enough wounds to be point effective, as was shown.
Crons get an RP roll, and with cover, are one of the toughest troops in the game when it comes to weapons like h bolters. Decurion makes it worse. Warriors have little reason to leave cover, since they aren't the hammers in that army. Or will be in the tough to kill ghost ark.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
But I'm not trying to change your mind, I just wouldn't go around saying H. Bolters are amazing if you can't back it up. Also, don't assume everyone is comparing it to a scat laser. I don't appreciate strawmans.

Not sure how me supplying scenerios where I have had success with a weapon that's fairly costed and available on multiple platforms is strawman ing.. I assume comparison to scatter lasers because of the track record of this entire thread comparing everything to mass s6.

And here you are again.
The part I had quoted, the part you had removed, clearly pointed out that you were suggesting that everyone is only comparing them to scatter lasers and nothing else, making them look bad by using a skew. It had nothing to do with scenarios.
Many armies spam mass str 6-7. CSM havoks, Plasma guns, tyranid MCs...it's more than scat bikes.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Centurians dev squad with tank hunter effectively at 36" will cause 3 glances and 2 pens on av10 armor. On an average cover of 5+ your going to wreck most vehicles. I'm not saying your going to take out land raiders with the things, but against many light vehicles or rear armor targets your going to do some work. Again.. my experience though. My DE and ork friends hated me when I ran sentinals of terra, as some examples for good matchups.

Orks and De are pretty weak dexes, a lot from the marine dex will run over them. Front armor 10 is extremely rare in the game, but we can assume they get to the rear armor of every tank and that it is av 10 if you want.
Grav cents will wreck 2 of any tank in the game unless it's a flyer, so are easily twice as good (if not better) and don't require tank hunter to work.
Are you really arguing that h bolters are better than grav cents? I'm just surprised, since grav cents are one of the best units in the game, and h bolters are one of the weakest weapons and have been for a very long time.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Being at a safer distance means you can build up your points return over the course of the game rather then trying to get your points back in one go.

Assuming your enemy just stays in your range and not in his, sure. But you can't back up or you lose firepower, so why would he?
Many fast melee threats can turbo boost or move incredibly quickly (Wraiths, for example, and TWC is slower but still quite fast) while being extremely resistant to H bolter fire. 24 or 36, you essentially have one turn of shooting before they charge the next turn. At 48, you have 2 turns (if you can't move) where a charge isn't reliable, which is why this number is seen as better. So it doesn't buy you a lot of time. If H bolters were assault weapons, you could buy an extra turn and this range would matter more.
Most shooting threats are either just as fast, have the same or better range, or deep strike and ignore range. I can think of a few where this isn't the case (Warp Spiders?), so H bolters seem like pretty bad weapons to me.

I'm not going to quote anything here... I'm not trying to cut quotes of anything being said.. just not trying to consume so much space.

Every weapon in the game has a place. I've said my peace. If someone wants to try it out I suggest they do.

In no way anywhere did I say heavy bolters were better then grav. But that said in some cases they can be.. since grav wound against armor save..

A dev team can't move but that's fine. You give your opponents enough threats and other choices to make and that doesn't become such a problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's fine they don't work out for you. And they don't show at the tourney level, but I think that is more to do with what other armies bring. If wraith spam and flyrants and taubot spam is what you see then I 100% agree you would be foolish to field heavy bolters when you have grav and plasma options.

This turned into something that was not my intention. My apologies for speaking up to what has worked for me and wanting to share.

Cheers!

So what kind of army are heavy bolters good against?

It's somewhat better vs footslogging infantry. So, any army that uses footslogging infantry.

Those that employ lots of light infantry? Isn't it this too obvious to state?

Alcibiades wrote:
Those that employ lots of light infantry? Isn't it this too obvious to state?

Depends. Against guardsmen, it will take a dev wielding a H bolter 5 turns to earn his points back. That's nearly an entire game, and with a 36" range and not being able to move and shoot, it's unlikely they will get a target for 5 rounds.
Against Eldar or Tau, it's a lot better, since you only need 2-3 rounds of firing to earn your points back, which is good but not great. In heavy cover, or if your opponent simply does not use the 4+ save units since they tend to be weaker anyway, this takes longer and they become a bad choice.

Tacticals are bad for similar reasons. It usually takes them 5 turns to earn their points back, outside of the work that special weapons do.
10 tacticals armed with bolters kill 7 guardsmen, which isn't many points unless they eliminate some special weapons (guardsmen really need a discount on special weapons), but 10 tacticals armed with 2 flamers does a lot of damage to guardsmen. For a small points increase, it's crazy how much the firepower of the squad gets boosted.

At no point, however, are h bolters good. Certainly not against an entire faction, and barely against certain units within certain factions. You are always better off taking flamers or heavy flamers on more mobile platforms than heavy bolters. It's sad, because the weapon looks amazing and is very fun in Dawn of War 2, but in the game it has never been a decent choice.

Every weapon in this game, sadly, does not had a place because this game isn't balanced. Certain options are clearly superior to others.
If your meta consists of DE and Orks, and you are somehow easily able to kill the toughest transport in the game, than sure, H bolters are great. If you face Eldar, Tau, Crons, Marines of any flavor, Sisters, FMC/MC spam, H bolters are bad. They need more shots or shred or something more to make them worth it.

Bottom line you play the army that you think looks cool and do you enjoy regardless of what other people think. If people at your FLGS or being that childish and refusing a game against your army then you're better off not playing them because whether they like it or not every updated army so far in the game has several nasty units are combinations that can kick the crap out of others. Space Marines and other Imperial armies are not immune to this either. Your best bet would be to collect enough to play friendly lists and competitive lists and pick and choose regarding who and what your opponent brings. A super fluffy Ultramarines company list you bring a fluffy Eldar strike host. A Space Marine player throws down as many Grav Centurions supported by the Skyhammer Annihilation Force you bring your nasty list out. Believe it or not communication also before a game helps limit and eliminate a lot of this issue.

The only communication that SHOULD exist is what mission and point level to play.

I'm not going to ask my opponent to take out stuff because it is mean. That makes me look like a tool and a jackass.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The only communication that SHOULD exist is what mission and point level to play.

I'm not going to ask my opponent to take out stuff because it is mean. That makes me look like a tool and a jackass.

I agree, but sadly GW's ineptness at balancing things has murdered any chance of this being a sure fire way to get a balanced game at the moment.

Alcibiades wrote:
Those that employ lots of light infantry? Isn't it this too obvious to state?

Ok but which armies are those. I can't think of any army on the to be beat to be good that runs infantry like that. Eldar and necron infantry is very tough, tyranids don't run small nids, marines are tough by default, so that leaves something like IG, but why would anyone want to counter IG ?

Plus it isn't like Heavy Bolters are actually delivering enough firepower for the points, even IF the unit has no cover save.

This game is not won or lost by whether or not a unit earns its points back, in terms of eliminating a certain number of enemy units. This is really silly and I can't believe people are actually making this argument, since I know they aren't dumb.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Makumba wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:
Those that employ lots of light infantry? Isn't it this too obvious to state?

Ok but which armies are those. I can't think of any army on the to be beat to be good that runs infantry like that. Eldar and necron infantry is very tough, tyranids don't run small nids, marines are tough by default, so that leaves something like IG, but why would anyone want to counter IG ?

"on the to be beat to be good that runs infantry"?

Maybe not competitively, I wouldn't know, but this is obviously totally dependent on local meta otherwise.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I see such armies in online battle reports all the time.

Heavy bolters aren't even good against infantry. Cover usually negates the AP 4. They generate significantly less wounds than scatterlasers and come on derpy platforms.

I think it's rather pathetic that people would refuse a game because the other player has a potentially stronger army. I'm sure it's really nice for them to only pick the games they have a good chance at winning. If they won't play your eldar army they are just weak players who like to moan and grown about what they perceive as an an unfair advantage.

Any real player will accept your challenge and if they lose they will blame themselves, not the codex or your army. Anyone else isn't really worth your time anyway.

are you a friend of Dman137?

Some of the pro-playing unbalanced eldar people are posting quite provocatively and in a condescending manner

Alcibiades wrote:
This game is not won or lost by whether or not a unit earns its points back, in terms of eliminating a certain number of enemy units. This is really silly and I can't believe people are actually making this argument, since I know they aren't dumb.

You are confused. No one is discussing units. Units can be judged outside of how much damage they do, since toughness, speed, special rules, and other factors come into play.
Weapons can only be judged by how much damage they do. There is literally no other function most weapons have, certainly not heavy bolters (some weapons have special rules that act as pseudo support...but not h bolters).
There is literally no other metric to use but damage in this case.
But hey, go on suggesting people are dumb when you've clearly misunderstood the entire discussion

Alcibiades wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Makumba wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:
Those that employ lots of light infantry? Isn't it this too obvious to state?

Ok but which armies are those. I can't think of any army on the to be beat to be good that runs infantry like that. Eldar and necron infantry is very tough, tyranids don't run small nids, marines are tough by default, so that leaves something like IG, but why would anyone want to counter IG ?

"on the to be beat to be good that runs infantry"?

Maybe not competitively, I wouldn't know, but this is obviously totally dependent on local meta otherwise.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I see such armies in online battle reports all the time.

Sometimes they show up on battle reports online, but that does not make them competitive units. In this thread, we've listed what targets H bolters want to see, and it's a relatively small list. Furthermore, the units on the list aren't exactly dangerous units, so this makes the H bolter seem weak.
By all means, if your meta consists of Dire avenger spam or Dark eldar, H bolters are fine. If you're like most people, where Meqs are more popular and anything less doesn't leave cover unless forced, h bolters are awful.

PoisonWood wrote:
I think it's rather pathetic that people would refuse a game because the other player has a potentially stronger army. I'm sure it's really nice for them to only pick the games they have a good chance at winning. If they won't play your eldar army they are just weak players who like to moan and grown about what they perceive as an an unfair advantage.

Any real player will accept your challenge and if they lose they will blame themselves, not the codex or your army. Anyone else isn't really worth your time anyway.

So it my fault that GW refuses to balance their game? Thanks got it

PoisonWood wrote:
I think it's rather pathetic that people would refuse a game because the other player has a potentially stronger army. I'm sure it's really nice for them to only pick the games they have a good chance at winning. If they won't play your eldar army they are just weak players who like to moan and grown about what they perceive as an an unfair advantage.

Any real player will accept your challenge and if they lose they will blame themselves, not the codex or your army. Anyone else isn't really worth your time anyway.

It's not potentially stronger. It is stronger. MUCH stronger. Random Eldar units will pulverize pretty much any BA list.

Martel732 wrote:

PoisonWood wrote:
I think it's rather pathetic that people would refuse a game because the other player has a potentially stronger army. I'm sure it's really nice for them to only pick the games they have a good chance at winning. If they won't play your eldar army they are just weak players who like to moan and grown about what they perceive as an an unfair advantage.

Any real player will accept your challenge and if they lose they will blame themselves, not the codex or your army. Anyone else isn't really worth your time anyway.

It's not potentially stronger. It is stronger. MUCH stronger. Random Eldar units will pulverize pretty much any BA list.

I have to agree with Martel at this point, the Eldar are so stupidly strong that they make mincemeat of a BA or IG army. The Eldar player does not even have to bring a Scatbike/Wraithbrigade list, they can just throw anything they feel like together and they will still win almost every game that they play against us weaker armies. Bringing a meta list just means that they take two turns to table us instead of three.

It's basically Codex: Scatguard at this point. I've never seen units that ridiculously efficient.

Alcibiades wrote:
This game is not won or lost by whether or not a unit earns its points back, in terms of eliminating a certain number of enemy units. This is really silly and I can't believe people are actually making this argument, since I know they aren't dumb.

First of all, purge the alien.

Second, correct, there are many times where killing power is not the only metric. Transport space, movement speed, having obsec, being really really hard to remove. These are all good abilities, and I don't believe anyone is saying what you are thinking they are saying about units. WEAPONS, however, have ONE JOB. They are there to murder an intended target. They can't transport anyone, hold anything, or survive without their platform.

Points killed vs. points paid is about the only objective measurement that can ever be applied to them, as well as considering intended target and the importance of having an answer to that target, and prevalence of that target. Yes it isn't a perfect measurement, as sometimes a 50 point quad gun is worth its weight in gold because you have a bunch of flying threats, so you want it dead superbad before turn 2 rolls around, even if it's not point-efficient on paper.

I haven't paid anything more than 0 points (thanks gladius) for a heavy bolter in 2 editions. I would rather pay one extra point for another scout with a boltgun, who can outflank, infiltrate, hold objectives with obsec, and is an extra body to remove. Why? Because the heavy bolter doesn't target anything I consider important to specifically bring answers against. Anything the HB can kill, enough scouts with bolters and/or krak grenades can also kill. Sure rarely I might face an enemy that hit the sweet spot of having 4+ armor out of cover all over the place, but it's so rare, except for decuriCron warriors. And against them, the best bet is melee and sweeping or obsec stealing anyhow, so I would STILL take the scouts over heavy bolters in that list tailor situation.