I mean realistically, SM Necrons Tau and Eldar all have their cheese and ways to beat them. Eldar just seems to have a little more options of cheese and easier access. And it's not like Eldar are dominating 100%, like Eldar armies are 1st 2nd 3rd 4th and so on. I mean sure I can kite the crap outta your troops, wound on 2's and get some D, but let's not mention free vehicles and grav spam, ignores cover or the army wide FNP. Yea I get the WK may kill 2 IK in CC, but then again 1 unit of grav can still splat a WK, or when drop pod Melta melts all my tanks turn 1, or when all the troops I kill come back to life. I guess I get that some of the units are rediqulously strong, but I mean sure you can complain to me for bringing my 3 units of scatbikes and warpspiders while you bring your 5 riptides and 40 markerlights
Ha-ha nah I agree some things they have are op, but other armies do have some op stuff as wellXD plus i like seeing peoples opinions about the armies seriously though people automatically call cheese with almost all Eldar lists, and try to weaken things like warpspiders flicker jump, yet still running all the cheese in their army like its totally ok so you can run your cheese and all I can do is use my army of striking scorpians jetbike aurtchs and Banshies?- I get for casual games yea leave the WK at home but I mean in turnies and stuff y not just expect the bikes and WK and warpspiders and swooping hawks and take some stuff that can kill them? The majority of Eldar is just 3+ Nid toughness( 3 for troops 4 on bikes 6-8 on the big guys) with long range high strenght crappy ap (aside from rending/D) guns and lots of moving random amounts of inches.
The last couple years have been...very kind to Eldar with their 6E and 7E army books. They can do each point of the tactical trinity without sacrificing anywhere. Firepower, mobility, and resiliency. They can match (or exceed) shooting with armies like IG, while being the most mobile army in the game, and often as hard or harder to kill than armies like Space Marines (especially between abilities like Jink, special rules like Flickerjump, and widespread access and availability to psychic powers like Conceal and Fortune, etc).
It's not just that they're able to be very good at a couple of things, it's that they're able to do *everything* as well or better than everyone else, and do it all at the same time. Like...to the point where you actually have to put a lot of thought into making an Eldar army that won't do well.
HuskyWarhammer wrote: I think the problem isn't that Eldar as a whole is OP, but they have one very specific build that's very powerful.
I think if you took the average power of their codex's units against, say, average Necron unit power, they'd be much more middle of the road.
I vehemently disagree with this. The Farseer is the best value psyker in the game, the Spiritseer is also pretty great. Seer Councils (including Warlocks) are one of the most potent psychic death-stars in the game. Jain Zar is hands-down the challenge queen of 40K and a phenomenal close combat character. Windriders are the best Troops choice in the game. Dire Avengers are good to great with Wave Serpents, whom still rank as a top tier dedicated transport. Rangers are an ideal objective camping unit. Eldar Sergeants - Exarchs - are the best value squad leaders in the entire game. Striking Scorpions are an above average melee unit. Fire Dragons are among the most terrifying anti-tank units in the game. Wraithguard are downright ridiculous with the right support due to being regular infantry packing Destroyer weapons. Swooping Hawks and Warp Spiders are among the most powerful Fast Attack units of any codex, and indeed among the best Jump Infantry/Jet Pack Infantry units in the game respectively. Crimson Hunters are well above average flyers and dominate against other flyers. The Hemlock Wraithfighter is a cheap flyer that packs in two Destroyer blast weapons and powerful psychic capabilities. Dark Reapers murder anything that can Jink - i.e. Jetbikes and Skimmers that are so popular nowadays - while Vaul's Wraith Support Batteries are extremely deadly for the points. Their battle tanks are all average to above average, War Walkers are superior to almost any other Walkers in the game for sheer points-to-damage output efficiency, the Wraithknight is arguably the single most under-priced model in the game. Oh, and don't forget Forge World with Hornets, Skathach Wraithknights, Nightwings, Revenants, etc....Hell, even their "bad" units - Howling Banshees, Shining Spears, Fire Prisms, Guardians, etc - are all still better than heaps of units from other codices and can be seen by external balancing as average to good units on their own merits.
I don't play Eldar or really complain about them, but saying they have a whole bunch of middle of the road units instead of an all-round strong codex is flat out wrong.
HuskyWarhammer wrote: I think the problem isn't that Eldar as a whole is OP, but they have one very specific build that's very powerful.
I think if you took the average power of their codex's units against, say, average Necron unit power, they'd be much more middle of the road.
This is an incredible, blatantly inaccurate statement. Eldar are "OP" precisely because almost ALL their units, average or not, are good. Their basic units are point-for-point better than almost any other comparable unit in another codex. Look at what scatter bikes get for 27 pts; what warp spiders get for 19 and our good friend the wraithknight gets for 295. Other codices have one or two hyper-efficient units (grav cents, dreadknights, etc) but the Eldar are good across the board. When you add in their formation bonuses, they get even better. What other codex can field 19 point models that hit on 2s, wound on 2's (with rending) and can move up to 36" a turn while literally avoiding being shot at? There are builds that can beat them, but they nearly always involve "shenanigans" like invisibility, 2++ rerollable saves and 3+ detachments from more than one codex. Eldar do fine with just one vanilla detachment from their book. This is why they might not win tournaments; but at your local store against the guys with single-CAD or semi-competitive list they will wreck their opponents.
Just to argue devils advocate, the scat bikes are still 27 pts per model, wraith Firedragons warpspiders and dire advengers are super low range average -low mobility (asode from warp) majority is t3 (aside from wraith) no assult tansports so you gotta pay the DE tax for their CC elites, swooping hawks shoot pea shots- really just AA and anti tankish in CC, kinda think all flyers arnt tol good and the phenix Lords are still 200 pts, also I do love the Vauls Wrath, but 24 inches on the D can still take till T2 or 3 to get in range, with blast markers and CC as a major wprry. The majority of Eldar models cost 20-30 pts so you can't really horde either and are primarily specialized so that you can stop them if you can keep up with the speed
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not looking at my codex rn but don't Deathmark's wound on 2+ and are about 18 pts? Not as menuverable but are more durable
The Big four are above the others mostly, but Eldar are the first among equals. What defines Eldar as stronger than the others is a reliance on certain builds, units and formations. Eldar don't need any of that. an Eldar CAD is very strong and can take almost any combo of units and be strong.
They also have hands down the best troop in the game. Scat bikes for their price do everything that you need in 7th. Their durable, have excellent mid strength shooting with a high rate of fire at an excellent range, and are fast. The last part gives them an edge in Maelstorm.
marcman wrote: Just to argue devils advocate, the scat bikes are still 27 pts per model, wraith Firedragons warpspiders and dire advengers are super low range average -low mobility (asode from warp) majority is t3 (aside from wraith) no assult tansports so you gotta pay the DE tax for their CC elites, swooping hawks shoot pea shots- really just AA and anti tankish in CC, kinda think all flyers arnt tol good and the phenix Lords are still 200 pts. The majority of Eldar models cost 20-30 pts so you can't really horde either and are primarily focused at doing 1 thing really well
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not looking at my codex rn but don't Deathmark's wound on 2+ and are about 18 pts? Not as menuverable but are more durable
Deathmarks get that for one turn, not going to address how stupid Warp spiders are RAW, and to describe any Eldar unit as low mobility when they has battle focus is being disingenuous.
Lets compare a similar unit. Space marine Bike (an excellent unit in it's own right and one that craps on most troops). Base is 21 points. More durable but a far weaker weapon. Can take two specials the best of which is grav in most cases, a weapon that wounds on Armor and has an 18 inch range. Scat lasers wound the majority of units on 2s to 3s, gets four shots and has a 36 inch range. Jet bikes are better than normal bikes.
As a player who has the second/third best codex I admit what I have, as should you. We are lucky to have good books but don't deny it. Enjoy the options, recognize that your entering into a joint exercise when you play someone and keep their enjoyment in mind.
The problem with arguments that Caederes and the like make come from a lack of follow-through thought with what happens when you actually play as Eldar.
S/he points out that specific unit A is good at task A, and specific unit B is good at task B, therefore OP. Problem is, that's bad logic. If you can do task A, great...but the game isn't exclusively task A. Games are a large combination of tasks. For example, a Crimson Hunter may be good at killing another flyer, but it can be toasted by bolter fire without effort. In order to take advantage of all of those benefits he describes, you'd have to have every unit on the board, ready to use, in the right place at the right time. Hell, if you can manage that task, you can make *any* army OP.
It actually fits really nicely with the Eldar fluff - their army is made of a symphony of specialists, trying to play together in a harmony in destruction. There are days I wish I could pull a SM and put a rocket launcher in a squad of scouts, a power fist in a Dire Avenger unit, etc.
Edit: Again, I'm not saying that they don't have some very OP units, but by and large the race isn't.
I'm not denying it, but I don't thing it is as op as so many people make it out to be. Again w/ devils advocate: you still get ap2 on grav and I think you can get that 2+ rerollable jink as well
Also to point out seer councils, though hilariously amazing and trolly, can still roll perils and have the whole unit sucked into the warpXD though I think you can save a warp charge to sacrifice and avoid perils?
marcman wrote: Just to argue devils advocate, the scat bikes are still 27 pts per model
Sure, they're not guardsmen, but a Space Marine with a plasma gun is 29pts, an SM Bike with a Plasma Gun is 35pts. The Eldar unit is only T4 instead of T5 like the SM Biker, but has way more firepower, the same save, far more range, and an assault phase move to hide behind terrain to boot. Nothing else I can think of has so much firepower point for point, much less on such a mobile and long ranged platform
wraith Firedragons warpspiders and dire advengers are super low range average -low mobility (asode from warp)
Sure, they don't have a super long range. They are however generally fairly resilient (especially since Fire Dragons saves got turned into 3+) as far as infantry go, and are simply vastly more capable at their given tasks than any equivalent in another army. You can't get Sternguard doing what Fire Dragons do at BS5 and AP"0"/1+.
They also aren't all that slow. They can move and run+fire/Fire+run, and they have access to two of the fastest transports in the game, that are better armored than most Imperial Guard tanks (can can take advantage of JInk and/or Holofields), and gets to run around with firepower equal to many IG Russ tanks (with up to seven S6 BS4 shots, 4 Tl'd and the other 3 pseudo-rending, on top of the Serpent Shield or Pulse Laser, is pretty impressive on a Wave Serpent or Falcon) helps that mobility problem quite a bit.
majority is t3 (aside from wraith)
Which, when shooting is increasingly S6+ or are of such volume as to make the difference between T3 and T4 irrelevant, is often not a meaningful downside. They also frequently will be suppported by psykers that can enhance their saves or allow them to reroll saves and the like.
no assult tansports so you gotta pay the DE tax for their CC elites
Most armies don't have such access, and of those that do not all can really make it work (you don't see Land Raiders running around in games these days typically), and Eldar *can* ally with DE to get that ability and take far greater advantage of it than any other army in the game.
swooping hawks shoot pea shots- really just AA and anti tankish in CC
They're not really there to shoot infantry to death, they're amazing vehicle killers and still have their grenade attack to boot.
kinda think all flyers arnt tol good
Most flyers aren't that great, but Eldar still probably have some of the best, you actually see them on tables unlike the Tau or DA flyers.
Still though the scatter laster is ap 6 while plasma or grav is ap 2
The big difference for me is really the 36 inch range and that you can move out of LOS after shooting, if it were 24, the shurican cannons rending would probably be the better choice, and it still beats out other snipers who have to be in LOS of the enemy after shooting
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also ha-ha I do also feel the need to point out that SM can ally as battle brothers with nearly half the armies in the game. So for example my GK can make IK ignore cover and get SW Droppods or I can put Skitarii vangaud in an actual transport or ally in Cult to get basic troops with grav
Automatically Appended Next Post: Then use presence to fix their crappy BS if I really needed to
marcman wrote: Still though the scatter laster is ap 6 while plasma or grav is ap 2
The big difference for me is really the 36 inch range and that you can move out of LOS after shooting, if it were 24, the shurican cannons rending would probably be the better choice, and it still beats out other snipers who have to be in LOS of the enemy after shooting
Yeah. Scatbikes would be fine if they had much shorter range, no assault move, or less shots. With all three they are undoubtably the best troop choice in the game, and possibly the best unit as well. Just compare them point for point with anything else. The only thing that's even close are Crisis Suits from the Farsight Enclaves. And they still cost 53 points a model with two good guns.
HuskyWarhammer wrote: The problem with arguments that Caederes and the like make come from a lack of follow-through thought with what happens when you actually play as Eldar.
S/he points out that specific unit A is good at task A, and specific unit B is good at task B, therefore OP. Problem is, that's bad logic. If you can do task A, great...but the game isn't exclusively task A. Games are a large combination of tasks. For example, a Crimson Hunter may be good at killing another flyer, but it can be toasted by bolter fire without effort. In order to take advantage of all of those benefits he describes, you'd have to have every unit on the board, ready to use, in the right place at the right time. Hell, if you can manage that task, you can make *any* army OP.
It actually fits really nicely with the Eldar fluff - their army is made of a symphony of specialists, trying to play together in a harmony in destruction. There are days I wish I could pull a SM and put a rocket launcher in a squad of scouts, a power fist in a Dire Avenger unit, etc.
Edit: Again, I'm not saying that they don't have some very OP units, but by and large the race isn't.
If the units in question are the best in their role at Task A, they should be classed as great units, no? It's pretty darned simple logic.
Also, to the idea of Eldar being exclusively specialists..... Windriders murder almost anything in the game that isn't T8+ or AV13+.
Warp Spiders destroy anything with a Toughness value that doesn't have a ridiculously high Initiative value....which is the vast majority of units in the game - including Gargantuan Creatures, and they scythe through light vehicles too.
Dark Reapers obliterate MEQs, Bikes/Jetbikes, Skimmers, medium to low Toughness Monstrous Creatures and - depending on load-out - Flyers and Flying Monstrous Creatures.
Swooping Hawks murder light to medium infantry with their Grenade Packs and massed S3 AP5 shots, they can destroy Flyers very easily, ground vehicles fall prey to their Haywire Grenades. There's almost nothing that they aren't good against short of TEQs and Monstrous/Gargantuan Creatures.
Fire Dragons destroy Vehicles, Super Heavy Vehicles, Monstrous Creatures and TEQs.
Striking Scorpions can hurt nearly anything in the game with their Mandiblasters and mass of S4 attacks plus the Exarchs power fist that strikes at Initiative order.
The basic infantry of the codex are just as capable of killing Space Marines as they are Gargantuan Creatures due to Bladestorm, though obviously the efficiency drops the higher the targets' Toughness value is.
Wraithguard with either D-Scythes or Wraithcannons are a death sentence to anything they get in range of short of flying units.
Fire Prisms can be used for anti-tank, anti-TEQ or anti-MEQ duties at a moments' notice.
Vaul's Wrath Support Batteries with D-Cannons are a threat to literally everything in the game short of flying units.
The Wraithknight with Ghostglaive punches through any ground target imaginable, including Super Heavies and other Gargantuan Creatures, while Stomps balance the equation against hordes.
The Hemlock Wraithfighter can blast ground vehicles/squads/monsters with its pair of Heavy D-Scythes, Psychic Shriek Flying Monstrous Creatures and just generally be a nuisance with its unrestricted access to Telepathy psychic powers.
Most of their units don't specialize in a single role as you claim, but are massive threats to a wide range of unit types. In that sense, do they really class as specialists in the usual sense or are they just general murder machines? I vote in favor of the latter. Again, even if you do subscribe to the idea that they are all specialists, you can fit enough divergent firepower into an Eldar list to run a broad mix of units and still have an incredibly competitive army list. Also, as noted before, their specialists are among the best in the game at what they do. Fire Dragons are a fantastic unit but you don't seem them much because Wraithguard fulfill the same role, just better. How many other codices in the game can make a claim like that?
Ha-ha i mea you get a funny feeling in lowpoint games using only 10 models- if you lose 1 Scatbikes its like losing 20% of your army-
Let's say warp spiders could only flicker jump once per turn, would they be only considered average then- around striking scorpians power? Ig they still wound on 2+ because lots of models have around a 4 initiative, but they're guns would still be a 12 inch range, so it would take around 2 turns to even fire a shot, and lots of dice rolls using battlefocus and the mve during assult to get to cover as you only get 1 flicker jump makes they're survivability a lot lower and makes them even more situational. I may have gotten used to looking at all the OP models in Eldar ha-ha, but I mean without flicker they would be blown to pieces and probably banshie usable
marcman wrote: Ha-ha i mea you get a funny feeling in lowpoint games using only 10 models- if you lose 1 Scatbikes its like losing 20% of your army-
Let's say warp spiders could only flicker jump once per turn, would they be only considered average then- around striking scorpians power? Ig they still wound on 2+ because lots of models have around a 4 initiative, but they're guns would still be a 12 inch range, so it would take around 2 turns to even fire a shot, and lots of dice rolls using battlefocus and the mve during assult to get to cover as you only get 1 flicker jump makes they're survivability a lot lower and makes them even more situational. I may have gotten used to looking at all the OP models in Eldar ha-ha, but I mean without flicker they would be blown to pieces and probably banshie usable
Actually, even with only one flicker-jump a turn they are still excellent. With that nerd in effect the winning list at LVO had either 30 or 45 spiders. I don't remember which, but it was quite a large number.
marcman wrote: I'm not denying it, but I don't thing it is as op as so many people make it out to be. Again w/ devils advocate: you still get ap2 on grav and I think you can get that 2+ rerollable jink as well
Also to point out seer councils, though hilariously amazing and trolly, can still roll perils and have the whole unit sucked into the warpXD though I think you can save a warp charge to sacrifice and avoid perils?
Eldar can spend a charge to ignore the worst of perils something no one else can do.
Only dark angels can do the 2+ cover save with reroll and ignores cover is not rare.
AP barely matters when you get 4 shots at S6. Your wounding most units on 2s and your glancing most vehicles to death in short order. As a Marine player whose good friend played Shoota heavy boys, if you make me roll enough dice, anything will die
marcman wrote: Just to argue devils advocate, the scat bikes are still 27 pts per model, wraith Firedragons warpspiders and dire advengers are super low range average -low mobility (asode from warp) majority is t3 (aside from wraith) no assult tansports so you gotta pay the DE tax for their CC elites, swooping hawks shoot pea shots- really just AA and anti tankish in CC, kinda think all flyers arnt tol good and the phenix Lords are still 200 pts, also I do love the Vauls Wrath, but 24 inches on the D can still take till T2 or 3 to get in range, with blast markers and CC as a major wprry. The majority of Eldar models cost 20-30 pts so you can't really horde either and are primarily specialized so that you can stop them if you can keep up with the speed
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not looking at my codex rn but don't Deathmark's wound on 2+ and are about 18 pts? Not as menuverable but are more durable
You can run minimum squad sizes of three for Windriders, they are possibly the fastest ground unit in the game, they are the hardest hitting ranged unit in the game relative to their points cost, and they can play Jump-Shoot-Jump due to the Eldar Jetbike rules along with their massive range guns to eliminate a lot of return fire. They are widely seen as the best unit in the game for numerous reasons regardless of their points cost per model, not to mention that they are better in objective games than any other Troops choice you could think of.
Eldar have ways of mitigating the low mobility of Wraithguard, Fire Dragons and Dire Avengers. Firstly, the Craftworld Warhost gives each of the 18" range units an effective shooting range of 30" without factoring in a transport. Wave Serpents are incredibly mobile, great value transports, and Falcons are fairly good for that too. The Falcon Cloudstrike group, while inefficient, is yet another option. There's also the Allied Archon with a Webway Portal. Ergo, their mobility and range deficiencies are easily accounted for due to the presence of Battle Focus and other surrounding factors.
Yes, Eldar don't take return volleys well, but they are also the best in the game at positioning for minimizing return damage - again, Battle Focus plays into this, as do the Flickerjumps from Warp Spiders. Also, if a Wraithknight with a Ghostglaive is bearing down on your army, what would you rather focus on?
Striking Scorpions don't require an Assault Transport as they can Infiltrate and get numerous defensive bonuses before they shoot or charge. Shining Spears don't need them either as they are Eldar Jetbikes with a built-in 4+ cover save. Only Wraithblades and Howling Banshees really need them, and even then, Eldar can use Sanctic Daemonology and other psychic abilities to buff up the former and teleport them around the battlefield, while the latter is fast as all hell.
Swooping Hawks do not "shoot pea shots", three S3 AP5 shots per model will tear up light to medium infantry fairly well, all things considered. Their Grenade Pack is also straight murder to 4+ armored infantry.
Eldar flyers are among the best in any codex, not including Forge World (even then, they are still pretty good). The Crimson Hunter is fantastic in an aerial dominance role, while the Hemlock Wraithfighter is a powerful generalist - come on, two small blast D-Scythe weapons and a bunch of Telepathy powers on a flyer somehow isn't good? Really?
You can take Eldrad to get in range with the D-Cannon artillery platforms if you want due to his Warlord Trait conferring Scout on D3+1 units. Eldrad is less efficient than two Farseers but he's still good solely for that Scout bonus. They are highly resistant to shooting and most melee units that get in range of them are going to be sorry unless they are death-stars, in which case you would be relying on Wraithknights for Stomps anyway.
The thing with Eldar is that point-for-point they shoot better as a whole army than any other codex barring perhaps Tau, for raw efficiency they are nearly unparalleled in that department. Tau also can't match their speed and are outclassed in melee, while also entirely lacking psychic powers.
I respect that you are playing devil's advocate, and again, I don't actively participate in anti-Eldar whining, but denying that they are the overall strongest faction in the game - especially if you include Forge World support - or at the very least one of the top four armies currently just isn't something I can agree with.
I suppose yes they are more varsitile than killing just one thing, but they still are more situational than most. The only thing that makes up for it is battle focus as some armies just cant keep up to counter move. Honestly I find that the range of some of their guns is stilll a huge problem, which prevents lots of spam(except for units like WK warp and swooping which can move fast on foot and scat with 36 inch guns), which is why I don't plan on taking fire dragons and have to limit my D strenth Vauls Wrath and Wraith gaurd- if only there was an extra 6-12 inches man I'd be in heaven
Automatically Appended Next Post: Haha I just don't like transports too much IG, they're such a hassle
marcman wrote: Ha-ha i mea you get a funny feeling in lowpoint games using only 10 models- if you lose 1 Scatbikes its like losing 20% of your army-
Let's say warp spiders could only flicker jump once per turn, would they be only considered average then- around striking scorpians power? Ig they still wound on 2+ because lots of models have around a 4 initiative, but they're guns would still be a 12 inch range, so it would take around 2 turns to even fire a shot, and lots of dice rolls using battlefocus and the mve during assult to get to cover as you only get 1 flicker jump makes they're survivability a lot lower and makes them even more situational. I may have gotten used to looking at all the OP models in Eldar ha-ha, but I mean without flicker they would be blown to pieces and probably banshie usable
As someone else said, an army featuring well over thirty Warp Spiders won the most recent LVO, one of the largest grand tournaments ever, and that's even with the nerf to having only one Flickerjump per turn as per the ITC rules. They are stupidly powerful by themselves and in an Aspect Host.
In an untimed game nothing about eldar really bothers me. Wraith Knights don't bother me, Scat bikes don't bother me, and the massed psykers doesn't bother me.
What gets me is in a tournament setting where you have limited time to play, any army that has 25+ warp dice a turn and 15 guys with powers. Yes it is a legitimate build, but I have seen people who are not practiced at it literally take 20 minutes for one PHASE of the game. That isn't the eldar's fault. That problem isn't even specifically eldar. However, eldar is one of culprits. Returning to the old method of "hey roll a leadership check at the beginning of your movement phase, or shooting phase (depending upon the power), and you only get to cast as many times as your ML" would help speed that along.
With that being said, yes they have some VERY nasty builds. Yes they can be a tough army to beat. However, they require a VERY good player to be handled right. Over the years what I really am sorry to have seen change is that eldar use to be the glass hammer. Super powerful, but died easy if you weren't careful. The tendency to run lots of wraiths, scat bikes, and the increase in all aspect armour to 3+ has changed the way they play.
Yea ha-ha I heard it was 45, 3 aspect hosts! I didn't know it was with the nerf though! I've never actually tried them yet. Also it may be just me, but I've found that you need to spam farseers to be useful, otherwise they're worthless... Really though Eldar already have good BS, giving Invisibility to 1 min squad of guys is silly, ig divination could be useful, but then if you choose to use an eldrich bomb you get in that 24 inch range and shoot it, but then get blown to pieces the next turn, which is why I feel like either you need to go with 4 farseers and a seer council and do cheese death star or just take a warlock as the cheapest HQ and put him with some dark reapers for shrouded. Although would you USD bike farseers cause he can move again in assult to hide after casting a spell?
marcman wrote: I suppose yes they are more varsitile than killing just one thing, but they still are more situational than most. The only thing that makes up for it is battle focus as some armies just cant keep up to counter move. Honestly I find that the range of some of their guns is stilll a huge problem, which prevents lots of spam(except for units like WK warp and swooping which can move fast on foot and scat with 36 inch guns), which is why I don't plan on taking fire dragons and have to limit my D strenth Vauls Wrath and Wraith gaurd- if only there was an extra 6-12 inches man I'd be in heaven
Automatically Appended Next Post: Haha I just don't like transports too much IG, they're such a hassle
The LVO came down to Eldar vs Eldar and they have down well in many tournaments and that's after a few direct and indirect tweaks. You have consistently ignore my quotes, which I find disappointing. Once again I'm an Astartes player, we both have top tier books. I'm happy about that but I don't deny it. This game is a social contract and to pretend your not on top is just unnecessary
Yea it seems like dark Eldar took the more glass cannon and abuse cover approach, Eldar bikes are very durable in my opinion, if they were like reavers 5+ and I believe T3 but with 3+ jink it'd be totally different. I think their OPness doesbattract a lot more inexperienced players ha-ha but then they're so complicated that yea I imagine a 20 min qsycic phase could be possible XD plus you have to move after every phase which gets tedious, on the bright side they only have probably 40 models compared to others who use 100 or more so moving phase doesn't take 40 minXD
marcman wrote: Yea ha-ha I heard it was 45, 3 aspect hosts! I didn't know it was with the nerf though! I've never actually tried them yet. Also it may be just me, but I've found that you need to spam farseers to be useful, otherwise they're worthless... Really though Eldar already have good BS, giving Invisibility to 1 min squad of guys is silly, ig divination could be useful, but then if you choose to use an eldrich bomb you get in that 24 inch range and shoot it, but then get blown to pieces the next turn, which is why I feel like either you need to go with 4 farseers and a seer council and do cheese death star or just take a warlock as the cheapest HQ and put him with some dark reapers for shrouded. Although would you USD bike farseers cause he can move again in assult to hide after casting a spell?
You only need more than one Farseer if you are playing against a highly psychic army. They provide you with three warp charges, use mostly Blessings (meaning no Deny the Witch bonuses for the opponent), and can re-roll the dice for any single cast or deny attempt per psychic phase. They are the most self sufficient psyker in the game for those reasons; regardless of whether you run Telepathy or Runes of Fate, they will be generally have a big presence on the game due mostly to the defensive bonuses and occasional highly damaging witchfire. Farseers on Jetbikes are a logical choice because it offers the Farseer mobility to keep up with the rest of the list without being stuck in a transport and thus being incapable of casting until he jumps out, as well as the aforementioned Jump-Shoot-Jump capabilities. I'm not sure what you mean by your Invisibility comment, you'd probably be giving that to a Wraithknight if you got the power. If it's a big enough game, casting Invisibility on a Revenant will probably see your opponent slap you in the face.
I haven't ignored ur qoutes ha-ha I do skim some of the really long paragraphs and do admit they are op, just not so op that it's the automatic win who is in dire need of nerfs army that its made out to be. Even if I play Eldar and try to bring a good list its not like I'm tryna suck all the fun into the warp or slmethingXD I honestly find some of the other players in my gaming group bring more cheese than me from armies like tau necron and SM and I guess it irritates me that they feel the need to run RAW or RAI as it benefits they're army yet nerf my army into oblivion, like i really wanna be like yea ill follow itc rules on my warp spiders if you dont use decurion ormarkerlights ignores cover heheXD I guess using Eldar puts you up to the no sympathy sorta path but stillXD
I do know they're op ha-ha I just feel like others are op too, maybe not as op, but still op
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh lol currently ive only played 500 and 750 with Eldar and so haven't taken a WK, and because your supposed to run min squads of troops with Eldar casting invisiblity on one unit seems irrelevant as there are 8 others to shoot at. IG when I do every get around to using a WK it makes more sense to get a farseers, currently I have been saving the 65 pts to use on say an extra squad of 3 Dark Reapers. I do hope to get some Vauls Wrath Support batteries, which can benefit from guide and invisiblity and such.
No army is an automatic win, but Eldar/Necrons/Tau/Space Marines/Chaos Daemons (if you go the cheese build) still have higher chances of winning a game based purely on using that faction due to possessing better overall rules if you look at a codex as the sum total of its constituent parts.
Take Tyranids for example, the Flying Hive Tyrant is probably the best non-Unique Flying Monstrous Creature in the game, but the vast majority (not all though as some people believe) of other Tyranid units are awful. Thus, competitive Tyranid builds tend to lack diversity and become easily predictable and thus can be countered with little difficulty, whereas the more variable nature of the top codices in terms of what competitive builds they can put out makes such an approach less applicable.
Of course, tournament lists for each faction tend to follow a set archetype - Windriders, Warp Spiders/Swooping Hawks and Wraithknights for Eldar; Gladius Strike Force or Centurion Devastator death-star for Space Marines, etc - but the unpredictability of an army such as the one consisting of 45 Warp Spiders popping up and winning a major tournament is what really sets the top factions aside from the others.
I can't speak to your Meta or what your bringing. The big four run roughly equal to each other, with Eldar being able to push it if you want the strongest. Can a Astartes, Necron or Tau be stronger if your taking the weakest options in an eldar list, yes.
The issue is Eldar codex over all has some of the strongest internal and external balance, you have one bad unit, shinning spears and that is mostly because you have scatter bikes as troops.
marcman wrote: I haven't ignored ur qoutes ha-ha I do skim some of the really long paragraphs and do admit they are op, just not so op that it's the automatic win who is in dire need of nerfs army that its made out to be. Even if I play Eldar and try to bring a good list its not like I'm tryna suck all the fun into the warp or slmethingXD I honestly find some of the other players in my gaming group bring more cheese than me from armies like tau necron and SM and I guess it irritates me that they feel the need to run RAW or RAI as it benefits they're army. I guess usig Eldar puts you up to the no sympathy sorta path but stillXD
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh lol currently ive only played 500 and 750 with Eldar and so haven't taken a WK, and because your supposed to run min squads of troops with Eldar casting invisiblity on one unit seems irrelevant as there are 8 others to shoot at. IG when I do every get around to using a WK it makes more sense to get a farseers, currently I have been saving the 65 pts to use on say an extra squad of 3 Dark Reapers. I do hope to get some Vauls Wrath Support batteries, which can benefit from guide and invisiblity and such.
Small points games aren't really indicative of standard games as almost every faction in the game is built to shine at the 1500+ point level where all their options unlock and can properly mesh with each other.
Are you just going to deflect the counterpoints for the entire thread? Because your counterpoint is that it takes the strongest lists from the next three strongest armies to stand on even ground.
I feel like there's some self-contradiction going on here:
"An army of 45 warp spiders is speaks to the codex being OP."
And
"Small points games don't count because units need to properly mesh with each other."
Because you need at least 45 warp spiders in order to mesh with each other, apparently...? Yeah, no. Honestly, this is why it sucks to play Eldar - no matter what you do or how hard you try, people will accuse you of cheese or OPness when the reality is that it's nowhere near as bad as people say. They're good, not godly. It's a convenient excuse, though - if you get accused of playing unfairly, it means they're the innocent victims here.
As an aside, what the first point actually speaks to is one unit's balance and the meta being played against more than a faction. Pulling one of the admittedly stronger units out and highlight it doesn't reflect the entire codex.
Tournament results would tend to disagree. They're doing disproportionately well, by a somewhat ridiculous statistical margin, at tournaments, even with many of their more powerful abilities nerfed (e.g. D-weapons, Invisibility, 2+ rerolls, Scatterlaser availability for Jetbikes, etc).
Scatbikes are over the top. GW has broken a tabu by creating a TROOP unit in which EACH member can get a special weapon.
The same holds for Wraithguard giving them D weapons. As said, two other very good units are Warp Spiders and the WK.
In view of this, I have still shelved my beloved Eldar after winning two consecutive RTTs in the 6th edition.
I'm playing with the thought to sell them. But then I guess I'm dying inside.
"An army of 45 warp spiders is speaks to the codex being OP."
And
"Small points games don't count because units need to properly mesh with each other."
Because you need at least 45 warp spiders in order to mesh with each other, apparently...? Yeah, no. Honestly, this is why it sucks to play Eldar - no matter what you do or how hard you try, people will accuse you of cheese or OPness when the reality is that it's nowhere near as bad as people say. They're good, not godly. It's a convenient excuse, though - if you get accused of playing unfairly, it means they're the innocent victims here.
As an aside, what the first point actually speaks to is one unit's balance and the meta being played against more than a faction. Pulling one of the admittedly stronger units out and highlight it doesn't reflect the entire codex.
Note the terminology I used in my post. "...aren't really indicative..." "...almost every faction..." You can theoretically break any points limit by spamming certain unit choices and lots of hijinks ensue where many factions are at a disadvantage because their top builds only shine in game sizes that allow them room to breathe. This is the case with death-star builds, super-detachment armies (Decurion, Gladius Strike Force, Hunter Contingent, etc) and so on. My posts aren't contradictory whatsoever once you account for the other point I made, that being the more competitive codices have multiple top tier builds available to them rather than just one. This is why Tyranids (Flyrant spam with Mucolids and Mawlocs) or even Chaos Daemons (Fateweaver, Belakor, Pink Horror Troops, stuff to taste) tend not to be as competitive as Space Marines (Gladius Strike Force, Skyhammer, Centurion Devastator death-star) or Eldar (Aspect Host spam of either Warp Spiders or Swooping Hawks, Wraithknight spam, Windrider spam, Corpsethief Claw null deployment lists, Seer Councils, etc). Notice the amount of top-tier competitive builds that the top factions have compared to other armies. Warp Spider spam is an EXAMPLE of one of the competitive Eldar lists. The list it beat in the Grand Final was built more around Swooping Hawks. An army that recently won...Nova I believe?...was oriented around Wraithknight spam. You can see a wide range of Eldar units in those lists too. It is very much indicative of the overall power level of the codex as a whole that they can have such diversity in their tournament lists and still be wildly successful.
I'm sorry, but saying they are "good, not godly" when they are staunchly in the top four codices in the game for tournament participation and wins is patently wrong. Again, don't misconstrue what I am saying as Eldar whining, I am merely pointing out the facts of the matter and that is that Eldar have been dealt a better hand than almost every other codex in the game. Again, your final point ignores the earlier statements I made backed by tournament results as evidence; you can make a proven tournament-winning Eldar list with more than just Warp Spiders, they just happen to be the most recent example of what Eldar are capable of due to the updated Doom of Mymaera. As an aside, do you refute what I stated earlier with regards to your "specialists" comments?
As an aside, what the first point actually speaks to is one unit's balance and the meta being played against more than a faction. Pulling one of the admittedly stronger units out and highlight it doesn't reflect the entire codex.
The effectiveness of a codex is usually determined by the strength of a single unit, as long as that unit is spammable. CSM in the 6th were overpowered, the Heldrake was that good. Eldar in the 6th edition were overpowered; the wave serpent was that good. The issue with Eldar in the 7th isn't that people are unfairly representing the codex by only commenting on a single option, but rather that they have lots of options are straight up better than anything else in any other codex. It's not just the Warp Spiders that are good, it's not just the Scatbikes, or the Wraithknights, etc it's getting all of them. Any other book outside the top 4 with any one of those options would become a top tier book on that merit alone.
Saying "well this codex isn't OP if we ignore the 5 or 6 best unit choices" is no argument at all, especially considering there are several books out there that simply don't have even one choice that could be argued is OP. Even with that having been said, the Eldar book isn't even weak without it's top 5 or 6 unit, it still sits comfortably at the top of Tier 2, below the 7.5 codexes. I mean, what other book can you remove all of the best units from and still say it's better than half the armies in the game?
I can't wait to see GW read this thread and nerf to oblivion the Howling Banshees
Anyway, the OP is in
- D weapons
- Wraithknight
- Too many heavy weapons on bikes (and bikes troops in general one could argue)
- possibly psionics
- Spiders too "slippery"
The rest just works more as intended. Many codexes, like my beloved CSM, just do not have functional units so in comparison Eldar are OP. An unit should not be considered OP because you select it without regretting it, but because is really and clearly unbalanced (see what I listed above)
Kaiyanwang wrote: I can't wait to see GW read this thread and nerf to oblivion the Howling Banshees
More like they somehow interpret that because Dark Eldar make such good allies to Eldar than they need to nerf Raiders to "balance" Eldar. Then they somehow make guardian's with a weapon platform count as artillery so they become T7.
Can we just pin "yes eldar are op, next discussion please" to the top of the board. Every month, sometimes multiple times someone comes here after their friends complain about their eldar army, try to say that they aren't, then promptly get shot down with facts and hard evidence to the contrary. It could save alot of time. Title it "before you complain about eldar hate, read this".
Based on all possible metrics using actual data of their game performances, Eldar can not be considered overpowered.
There are several other armies performing within the same ranges of success.
Unless you're also going to declare Space Marines, Dark Angels, Tau, Necrons, Chaos Daemons, and Chaos Renegades as overpowered, you cannot apply that to Eldar. If 7 armies are equally powerful, calling them all overpowered would be disingenuous.
wuestenfux wrote: Scatbikes are over the top. GW has broken a tabu by creating a TROOP unit in which EACH member can get a special weapon.
The same holds for Wraithguard giving them D weapons. As said, two other very good units are Warp Spiders and the WK.
In view of this, I have still shelved my beloved Eldar after winning two consecutive RTTs in the 6th edition.
I'm playing with the thought to see them. But then I guess I'm dying inside.
Yea, as a n Eldar player mostly I only run one special weapon on bikes (tournament play is an exception to this), I get that they wanted people to buy kits to get the bits to make more scatter bikes... but still not something other troops can do and Eldar should not have been given the option to begin with. some stuff was cheese with GW wanting to sell models I suppose such as wraithguard and WK and adding D over the str 10 ap1 made them way to cheap for what they do. spiders though while good I think are actually not OP for the points.
one thing I would point out in regards to the OP would actually have to do with ease of play, I get that Eldar are a powerful codex but I still think they are on the upper end of skill required to use, they are not as forgiving as other codexes to mistakes and you have a lot more to keep track of. I love playing my orks and other armies as well but I never have as mush to keep track of in them as making sure my glass cannons are safe, my tough units are enticing, and I am in good positions to deny range where needed but still grab objectives if the risk/reward is present. A new player is unlikely t pick up elder and be as successful immediately as if they had just taken vanilla marines
DarknessEternal wrote: Based on all possible metrics using actual data of their game performances, Eldar can not be considered overpowered.
There are several other armies performing within the same ranges of success.
Unless you're also going to declare Space Marines, Dark Angels, Tau, Necrons, Chaos Daemons, and Chaos Renegades as overpowered, you cannot apply that to Eldar. If 7 armies are equally powerful, calling them all overpowered would be disingenuous.
I do think multiple tournament results can conclusively say Eldar are clearly superior. Gladius SM can win by maelstrom points of just dying slowly enough to last the 6 turns. Necrons are difficult to remove from the board but haven't won in quite some time, and tau while as scary as they sound, haven't won any major tournament in a long time. even after a "7.5" update.
So based on all possible actual data, using the highest performers and competitive builds (you can always sluff build and ruin the comparison) they are clearly the best. Dice are dice, and can ruin the best build with bad luck. unless your ranges of success are + or - 50% win/loss.
Most has been said already: Eldar are what others build of it, it has the most cheese and WAAC and TFG are going to ruin it for all.
How ever in a good group many fun and fair lists can be built.
Jetbikes should have never had access to all heavy weapons 1 for every 3 was sufficient and balanced.
Ghosthelm is hardly OP, however Runes of the Farseer are, they should have never been allowed to do the reroll in both players turn.
Many aspects got boosts with out paying a tax
However, gargantuan/super heavy, D weapons, formations are all problems of the game in general; IMHO, not just Eldar. They should have never been allowed in normal 40K. Apoc was an excellent game and all those things had a place there.
DarknessEternal wrote: Based on all possible metrics using actual data of their game performances, Eldar can not be considered overpowered.
There are several other armies performing within the same ranges of success.
Unless you're also going to declare Space Marines, Dark Angels, Tau, Necrons, Chaos Daemons, and Chaos Renegades as overpowered, you cannot apply that to Eldar. If 7 armies are equally powerful, calling them all overpowered would be disingenuous.
Except in essentially every major tournament, elder are disproportionally ranked in the top ranks compared to other armies. Just look at LVO for example
Eldar are strong because they dont need formations to shine, they can take a CAD and do as well as any free points formation out there because, for the most part, the army has no bad units.
And the good ones are really good, be it because of the strength of their rules or the fact they're undercosted compared to a similar unit of another army that fills the same role.
one thing I would point out in regards to the OP would actually have to do with ease of play, I get that Eldar are a powerful codex but I still think they are on the upper end of skill required to use, they are not as forgiving as other codexes to mistakes and you have a lot more to keep track of. I love playing my orks and other armies as well but I never have as mush to keep track of in them as making sure my glass cannons are safe, my tough units are enticing, and I am in good positions to deny range where needed but still grab objectives if the risk/reward is present. A new player is unlikely t pick up elder and be as successful immediately as if they had just taken vanilla marines
I disagree with this. I find Eldar almost play themselves in many instances. Because so many of their units are either A) clearly defined in their role and excel in that role, or B) absurdly good against everything, its not hard to run an Eldar army at all. How is the ability to grab objectives anywhere on the board with better-than-MEQ durability in any given turn difficult to manage? How is absurdly easy (and inexpensive) access to ranged D difficult to manage? Even their Decurian-style formations are easy to utilize, with a phenomenally efficient Core detachment (oh nooo, I have to spend a whopping 50 points on a Vyper that is only sort of useful, there goes my army!) and a number of very flexible and efficient Auxiliary detachments (seriously, a single WK or D-flyer, two very desirable units, as its own aux detachment! who else has that kind of Decurian efficiency?)
The only thing tough to manage with Eldar is the amount of special rules to keep up with. This might discourage some new players, but since points A and B still exist, they can forget half of the special rules and still pull out a victory in a casual game. I speak from experience both having used Eldar in 6th for the first time (1-0 record, woo hoo), and having regularly played against a 40K rookie starting with 6th edition and an Eldar army. To this day, he still forgets a third of his special rules, and usually comes out on top.
one thing I would point out in regards to the OP would actually have to do with ease of play, I get that Eldar are a powerful codex but I still think they are on the upper end of skill required to use, they are not as forgiving as other codexes to mistakes and you have a lot more to keep track of. I love playing my orks and other armies as well but I never have as mush to keep track of in them as making sure my glass cannons are safe, my tough units are enticing, and I am in good positions to deny range where needed but still grab objectives if the risk/reward is present. A new player is unlikely t pick up elder and be as successful immediately as if they had just taken vanilla marines
I disagree with this. I find Eldar almost play themselves in many instances. Because so many of their units are either A) clearly defined in their role and excel in that role, or B) absurdly good against everything, its not hard to run an Eldar army at all. How is the ability to grab objectives anywhere on the board with better-than-MEQ durability in any given turn difficult to manage? How is absurdly easy (and inexpensive) access to ranged D difficult to manage? Even their Decurian-style formations are easy to utilize, with a phenomenally efficient Core detachment (oh nooo, I have to spend a whopping 50 points on a Vyper that is only sort of useful, there goes my army!) and a number of very flexible and efficient Auxiliary detachments (seriously, a single WK or D-flyer, two very desirable units, as its own aux detachment! who else has that kind of Decurian efficiency?)
The only thing tough to manage with Eldar is the amount of special rules to keep up with. This might discourage some new players, but since points A and B still exist, they can forget half of the special rules and still pull out a victory in a casual game. I speak from experience both having used Eldar in 6th for the first time (1-0 record, woo hoo), and having regularly played against a 40K rookie starting with 6th edition and an Eldar army. To this day, he still forgets a third of his special rules, and usually comes out on top.
Completely agree with this.
Can the "Eldar take a lot of skill to manage their specialized scalpel like units" myth die in a fire already
ClassicCarraway wrote: Even their Decurian-style formations are easy to utilize, with a phenomenally efficient Core detachment (oh nooo, I have to spend a whopping 50 points on a Vyper that is only sort of useful, there goes my army!) and a number of very flexible and efficient Auxiliary detachments (seriously, a single WK or D-flyer, two very desirable units, as its own aux detachment! who else has that kind of Decurian efficiency?)
Well, I disagree with you sir.
The Warhost is atrocious. Eldar are the only 7.5 edition dex that does not want to use their Decurion. All of the Cores are lackluster, and the Auxiliaries either A. Don't benefit from the detachment, so why bother? B. Are too expensive for your average list (Wraith Host). Or C. Are just as easily (and probably more effectively) used with a CAD.
Eldar are certainly OP compared to pretty much every army, but they do have one of the worst detachments currently (Orks probably take that, with the new supplement).
HoundsofDemos wrote: Eldar are probably the only army were a CAD makes more sense for the most part.
Depends. Due to ITC nerf of CFP, essentially all top Tau tournament lists are CAD as well
That's based on a nerf from an unofficial FAQ meant for Tournaments. So, in a traditional sense, their detachment is still good. Even in the most casual setting, Eldar's Warhost is extremely lackluster.
The problem with Eldar is self control. There are a ton of really good options in the codex, but none of those options are particularly "broken" by themselves (except the WK, but SHV & GC's are a whole separate issue). Yes Scatterbikes are the best troop in the game, but they still die fast in every game I have ever played (both as Eldar and against them). Spyders are annoying, but just charge them, not enough will survive to Hit & Run. If you don't have good assault options (or enough shooting to not need assault units), that's an issue with you're army, not Eldar.
The issue is the small group of players who abuse ALL the options together. It only takes 1 guy in a group that runs Scatterbikes, WK's, Spyder Hosts, etc and suddenly EVERY Eldar player is the cheesiest neckbeard TFG since cheddar came to mozzarella-ville.
Not every Eldar player fields that list and MOST players that do would be happy to swap out some of those options to make the game more enjoyable for both players. I have played Eldar since 4th ed and have always played bikes, even when the only tactic was to hide them all game. I love the army and outside of tournaments most of my bikes have Shuricannons, not Scatters. If an opponent doesn't what to play against a WK, I drop it for something else like a Nightspinner and some Hawks.
Seriously guys, can we stop with the "Eldar are OP" threads? Even the ones started innocently like this one quickly devolve into: "Yes, they are" " I hate Eldar" and comments like that.
Seriously guys, can we stop with the "Eldar are OP" threads? Even the ones started innocently like this one quickly devolve into: "Yes, they are" " I hate Eldar" and comments like that.
--
To stop those threads, troll posters need to stop trolling, and having people take it seriously
"generally powerful and good army Isn't that powerful"
"generally weak army isn't as weak its agreed it is"
"Free vehicles that produce a statistically unkillable army and wins by points not kills is not op"
"inflammatory article is inflammatory"
Don't feed the troll, but don't try and defend an obvious troll post with legit defense, because its undermined by troll OP.
Galef wrote: The problem with Eldar is self control. There are a ton of really good options in the codex, but none of those options are particularly "broken" by themselves (except the WK, but SHV & GC's are a whole separate issue). Yes Scatterbikes are the best troop in the game, but they still die fast in every game I have ever played (both as Eldar and against them). Spyders are annoying, but just charge them, not enough will survive to Hit & Run. If you don't have good assault options (or enough shooting to not need assault units), that's an issue with you're army, not Eldar.
The issue is the small group of players who abuse ALL the options together. It only takes 1 guy in a group that runs Scatterbikes, WK's, Spyder Hosts, etc and suddenly EVERY Eldar player is the cheesiest neckbeard TFG since cheddar came to mozzarella-ville.
Not every Eldar player fields that list and MOST players that do would be happy to swap out some of those options to make the game more enjoyable for both players. I have played Eldar since 4th ed and have always played bikes, even when the only tactic was to hide them all game. I love the army and outside of tournaments most of my bikes have Shuricannons, not Scatters. If an opponent doesn't what to play against a WK, I drop it for something else like a Nightspinner and some Hawks.
Seriously guys, can we stop with the "Eldar are OP" threads? Even the ones started innocently like this one quickly devolve into: "Yes, they are" " I hate Eldar" and comments like that.
--
And fully justified, because the Eldar are ridiculously OP. Even without abuse of scatterbikes or other such cheese. Almost everything in the codex is really good. Try playing as BA against an Eldar list, then come again. Any Eldar list will beat any BA list.
I don't hate Eldar, and arguably, the problem is not with the Eldar codex (in a perfect codex, all options should be good) but with underpowered codices like Orks, BA or CSM, but that doesn't take away the fact that playing against Eldar just isn't much fun because even non-cheese Eldar lists are so powerful compared to my BA .
Galef wrote: The problem with Eldar is self control. There are a ton of really good options in the codex, but none of those options are particularly "broken" by themselves (except the WK, but SHV & GC's are a whole separate issue). Yes Scatterbikes are the best troop in the game, but they still die fast in every game I have ever played (both as Eldar and against them). Spyders are annoying, but just charge them, not enough will survive to Hit & Run. If you don't have good assault options (or enough shooting to not need assault units), that's an issue with you're army, not Eldar.
The issue is the small group of players who abuse ALL the options together. It only takes 1 guy in a group that runs Scatterbikes, WK's, Spyder Hosts, etc and suddenly EVERY Eldar player is the cheesiest neckbeard TFG since cheddar came to mozzarella-ville.
Not every Eldar player fields that list and MOST players that do would be happy to swap out some of those options to make the game more enjoyable for both players. I have played Eldar since 4th ed and have always played bikes, even when the only tactic was to hide them all game. I love the army and outside of tournaments most of my bikes have Shuricannons, not Scatters. If an opponent doesn't what to play against a WK, I drop it for something else like a Nightspinner and some Hawks.
Seriously guys, can we stop with the "Eldar are OP" threads? Even the ones started innocently like this one quickly devolve into: "Yes, they are" " I hate Eldar" and comments like that.
--
And fully justified, because the Eldar are ridiculously OP. Even without abuse of scatterbikes or other such cheese. Almost everything in the codex is really good. Try playing as BA against an Eldar list, then come again. Any Eldar list will beat any BA list.
I don't hate Eldar, and arguably, the problem is not with the Eldar codex (in a perfect codex, all options should be good) but with underpowered codices like Orks, BA or CSM, but that doesn't take away the fact that playing against Eldar just isn't much fun because even non-cheese Eldar lists are so powerful compared to my BA .
Do my eyes deceive me? Some is complaining about BA and its not Martel?
Eldar just have more cheese in their codex and more ways to stuff that cheese into an army than any other codex right now. There isn't a phase of the game they suffer in. SM don't gunline that well, necrons and tau have no psykers, etc. Eldar can gunline, own the psychic phase against anyone but daemons, are the most mobile army, have great durability and units with unique tactics that are well suited to tournament style missions packets. Then add in 6" battle focus for everyone, the ability to take 12 wraithknights in a battleforged list and you have an army that has a 60%+ win rate against everyone.
Galef wrote: The problem with Eldar is self control. There are a ton of really good options in the codex, but none of those options are particularly "broken" by themselves (except the WK, but SHV & GC's are a whole separate issue). Yes Scatterbikes are the best troop in the game, but they still die fast in every game I have ever played (both as Eldar and against them). Spyders are annoying, but just charge them, not enough will survive to Hit & Run. If you don't have good assault options (or enough shooting to not need assault units), that's an issue with you're army, not Eldar.
The issue is the small group of players who abuse ALL the options together. It only takes 1 guy in a group that runs Scatterbikes, WK's, Spyder Hosts, etc and suddenly EVERY Eldar player is the cheesiest neckbeard TFG since cheddar came to mozzarella-ville.
Not every Eldar player fields that list and MOST players that do would be happy to swap out some of those options to make the game more enjoyable for both players. I have played Eldar since 4th ed and have always played bikes, even when the only tactic was to hide them all game. I love the army and outside of tournaments most of my bikes have Shuricannons, not Scatters. If an opponent doesn't what to play against a WK, I drop it for something else like a Nightspinner and some Hawks.
Seriously guys, can we stop with the "Eldar are OP" threads? Even the ones started innocently like this one quickly devolve into: "Yes, they are" " I hate Eldar" and comments like that.
--
And fully justified, because the Eldar are ridiculously OP. Even without abuse of scatterbikes or other such cheese. Almost everything in the codex is really good. Try playing as BA against an Eldar list, then come again. Any Eldar list will beat any BA list.
I don't hate Eldar, and arguably, the problem is not with the Eldar codex (in a perfect codex, all options should be good) but with underpowered codices like Orks, BA or CSM, but that doesn't take away the fact that playing against Eldar just isn't much fun because even non-cheese Eldar lists are so powerful compared to my BA .
Do my eyes deceive me? Some is complaining about BA and its not Martel?
I have regular Ork, BA and CSM opponents that not only have fun against my Eldar, but often make winning hard for me. I don't always win, nor do I want to.
Heck, most of my "wins" have more to do with my allies then my main Eldar force. I rarely play pure Eldar at 1850, usually I have around 700pts of either DE venom spam with Reavers or a GK Nemisis Strike force.
All I ask is that you don't refuse an Eldar player because they're Eldar. Instead refuse them a game if they're a D-bag that won't tone their list down in casual games.
marcman wrote: I mean realistically, SM Necrons Tau and Eldar all have their cheese and ways to beat them. Eldar just seems to have a little more options of cheese and easier access. And it's not like Eldar are dominating 100%, like Eldar armies are 1st 2nd 3rd 4th and so on. I mean sure I can kite the crap outta your troops, wound on 2's and get some D, but let's not mention free vehicles and grav spam, ignores cover or the army wide FNP. Yea I get the WK may kill 2 IK in CC, but then again 1 unit of grav can still splat a WK, or when drop pod Melta melts all my tanks turn 1, or when all the troops I kill come back to life. I guess I get that some of the units are rediqulously strong, but I mean sure you can complain to me for bringing my 3 units of scatbikes and warpspiders while you bring your 5 riptides and 40 markerlights
Please forgive my nievity, but how can a wk kil 2 imperial knights in melee?
I get the wk is i5 and st10... But the ik has a d melee weapon.
As far as I see it, if the wk doesn't kill the ik on the first round of melee, its dead.
If you *have* to water down the army by taking a huge chunk of non-eldar stuff just to not be a "d-bag", something clearly is wrong with the army.
Its not even just the worst offenders like Wraithknights and Scatterbikes that are bad. Most Eldar units are simply flat out better at their roles than equivalents from other factions, like Rangers vs Scouts or Ratlings and Fire Dragons vs mechvets or Sternguard. Why a Fire Dragon needed AP "0" on top of a BS5 formation buff (allowing them to be twice as effective at oneshotting tanks as either Imperial unit) is beyond me.
marcman wrote: I mean realistically, SM Necrons Tau and Eldar all have their cheese and ways to beat them. Eldar just seems to have a little more options of cheese and easier access. And it's not like Eldar are dominating 100%, like Eldar armies are 1st 2nd 3rd 4th and so on. I mean sure I can kite the crap outta your troops, wound on 2's and get some D, but let's not mention free vehicles and grav spam, ignores cover or the army wide FNP. Yea I get the WK may kill 2 IK in CC, but then again 1 unit of grav can still splat a WK, or when drop pod Melta melts all my tanks turn 1, or when all the troops I kill come back to life. I guess I get that some of the units are rediqulously strong, but I mean sure you can complain to me for bringing my 3 units of scatbikes and warpspiders while you bring your 5 riptides and 40 markerlights
Please forgive my nievity, but how can a wk kil 2 imperial knights in melee?
I get the wk is i5 and st10... But the ik has a d melee weapon.
As far as I see it, if the wk doesn't kill the ik on the first round of melee, its dead.
Wraightknights with the Sword are also Str D at Ini 5, It should statistically kill the knight before the knight swings
Vaktathi wrote: Most Eldar units are simply flat out better at their roles than equivalents from other factions, like Rangers vs Scouts or Ratlings and Fire Dragons vs mechvets or Sternguard.
So what you are saying is that for once GW released rules that actually match the fluff? Eldar have always been described as better than their Human equivalents, in a similar way as Elves are better then Men in most fantasy worlds
Vaktathi wrote: Why a Fire Dragon needed AP "0" on top of a BS5 formation buff (allowing them to be twice as effective at oneshotting tanks as either Imperial unit) is beyond me.
Yeah, you got me on this one. That was a weird decision. Tank Hunters would have been just fine, if they wanted that, and the Exarch should have been the model to grant it.
So what you are saying is that for once GW released rules that actually match the fluff? Eldar have always been described as better than their Human equivalents, in a similar way as Elves are better then Men in most fantasy worlds.
The issue isnt that they're better, its that their most of their units cost isnt accurately reflected for how much better they are
You can be better if you cost an accurate equivalent in points to show how much better you are
Vaktathi wrote: Most Eldar units are simply flat out better at their roles than equivalents from other factions, like Rangers vs Scouts or Ratlings and Fire Dragons vs mechvets or Sternguard.
So what you are saying is that for once GW released rules that actually match the fluff? Eldar have always been described as better than their Human equivalents, in a similar way as Elves are better then Men in most fantasy worlds
And space marines should be better than everyone because engineering/my duty
And sisters should be better than everyone because faith
And tyranids should be better than everyone because bio-engineering
And necrons should be better than everyone because ancient tech
Lots of factions can claim "better than everyone". It's not exclusively eldar, and to think so is a bit of bias leaking through.
If they are better than guardsmen, fine. If they are better than marines? That's weird. Different sure, equally effective and similar in point cost okay, but not flat out superior.
Vaktathi wrote: Why a Fire Dragon needed AP "0" on top of a BS5 formation buff (allowing them to be twice as effective at oneshotting tanks as either Imperial unit) is beyond me.
Yeah, you got me on this one. That was a weird decision. Tank Hunters would have been just fine, if they wanted that, and the Exarch should have been the model to grant it.
Eldar have many things like this. Str D spam, warp spider teleport, heavy weapons for everyone, Hawks getting haywire grenades. Some of it is a little out there, even if it's fluffy.
I mean, according to some fluff 5 marines can steam roll an Ork Waaagh
So what you are saying is that for once GW released rules that actually match the fluff? Eldar have always been described as better than their Human equivalents, in a similar way as Elves are better then Men in most fantasy worlds.
The issue isnt that they're better, its that their most of their units cost isnt accurately reflected for how much better they are
You can be better if you cost an accurate equivalent in points to show how much better you are
Yeah, if they where priced accordingly then maybe the complaints would be less.
But the Mary Sues are ot even priced fairly. Everything our perfect overlords have is far too cheap for what it should be..
Yeah, its fine if theyre better and comparatively more expensive. Its not fine when they're as much or cheaper, like with Fire Dragons or Rangers relative to equivalents. And the problem is that just about the entire army is like that. Nobody thought Jetbikes, Fire Dragons or Wraithguard were undergunned or incapable in their previous incarnations at the same points costs, why they needed the massive boosts they got is a mystery.
Likewise, the "well they should be better because...elves are just better" thing wears very thin indeed...and I say that as someone with ~5k pts worth of Eldar (including two eldar superheavies and gobs of fire dragons and wave serpents). I mean, it might be fluffy if the IG player got to hit everything with a Basilisk shell before the first turn too for a preliminary bombardment, but few would find that fun or balanced
Vaktathi wrote: Yeah, its fine if theyre better and comparatively more expensive. Its not fine when they're as much or cheaper, like with Fire Dragons or Rangers relative to equivalents. And the problem is that just about the entire army is like that. Nobody thought Jetbikes, Fire Dragons or Wraithguard were undergunned or incapable in their previous incarnations at the same points costs, why they needed the massive boosts they got is a mystery.
Likewise, the "well they should be better because...elves are just better" thing wears very thin indeed...and I say that as someone with ~5k pts worth of Eldar (including two eldar superheavies and gobs of fire dragons and wave serpents). I mean, it might be fluffy if the IG player got to hit everything with a Basilisk shell before the first turn too for a preliminary bombardment, but few would find that fun or balanced
Getting to smack everything my enemy has with a big preliminary bombardment..... Well it would be "forging the narrative"
Just to add a bit of clarification to the points I was discussing earlier, I have never turned down a game against Eldar and enjoy the challenge that they and other armies can all uniquely bring. I've got no problems with players bringing what they want to the table against me. However, denying that they are a top tier faction with probably the highest percentage of strong units out of the total available roster - again, only Necrons really compare in this sense - just doesn't cut it given their tournament representation.
If you played with 0 formations, based book they are BY FAR the strongest, other armies are strong like necrons and Marines but they have formations to make them on par with Eladar. Without those formations Eldar would be the only army you see in all tournaments.
WrentheFaceless wrote: Besides the fluff would establish that they should cost more, because they're a dying race, there are less and less of them as the years go on
This honestly is my biggest gripe with Eldar. I would be 100% fine with their D-spam, insane movement, insane psyker powers, general awesomeness, if their entire codex costed like 1.5% more than it currently does. The fact that a scatterbike, one of the best options in the game, costs less than something like a meganob, which is a unit in a "cheap" army that can only do well in very, very specific circumstances is just dumb. Really, really dumb. Hell, why not compare an actual ork jetbike to the scatterbike?
The deffkopta is BS 2, T4, W2, 4+, and can either take a TL bigshoota (S5 AP4 Assault 3) or a TL rokkit (S8 AP3). It has standard jetbike movement and has no options for adding characters, and can't be a troop choice so no ObSec. Now, I'd be fine with all of this if it costed something cheap, as on paper it's not that fantastic of a unit. And yet, for some reason this thing costs more than a scatterbike- It's 30 points. Why in the hell would anyone make a deffkopta more expensive than a scatterbike? Because of its extra wound and 1 higher toughness? Scatterbikes alone should cost way more than they currently do, somewhere around 40 points.
DarknessEternal wrote: Based on all possible metrics using actual data of their game performances, Eldar can not be considered overpowered.
There are several other armies performing within the same ranges of success.
Unless you're also going to declare Space Marines, Dark Angels, Tau, Necrons, Chaos Daemons, and Chaos Renegades as overpowered, you cannot apply that to Eldar. If 7 armies are equally powerful, calling them all overpowered would be disingenuous.
Except in essentially every major tournament, elder are disproportionally ranked in the top ranks compared to other armies. Just look at LVO for example
Yes, look at that. It only proves what I said.
Eldar have no statistical significantly better performance.
If you think they do, please consult some statistics text books.
There are 4 armies equivalent to Eldar. So until you're willing to admit that Space Marines are also Overpowered (along with Necrons and Demons), there's nothing left to discuss.
Iron_Captain wrote:
And fully justified, because the Eldar are ridiculously OP. Even without abuse of scatterbikes or other such cheese. Almost everything in the codex is really good. Try playing as BA against an Eldar list, then come again. Any Eldar list will beat any BA list.
I don't hate Eldar, and arguably, the problem is not with the Eldar codex (in a perfect codex, all options should be good) but with underpowered codices like Orks, BA or CSM, but that doesn't take away the fact that playing against Eldar just isn't much fun because even non-cheese Eldar lists are so powerful compared to my BA .
Funny story, the second game I ever played as Eldar was versus BA and it ended up in a stalemate. I didn't have any scatbikes nor wraithguard, but did run a WK. It was an intense fight.
DarknessEternal wrote: Based on all possible metrics using actual data of their game performances, Eldar can not be considered overpowered.
There are several other armies performing within the same ranges of success.
Unless you're also going to declare Space Marines, Dark Angels, Tau, Necrons, Chaos Daemons, and Chaos Renegades as overpowered, you cannot apply that to Eldar. If 7 armies are equally powerful, calling them all overpowered would be disingenuous.
Except in essentially every major tournament, elder are disproportionally ranked in the top ranks compared to other armies. Just look at LVO for example
Yes, look at that. It only proves what I said.
Eldar have no statistical significantly better performance.
If you think they do, please consult some statistics text books.
There are 4 armies equivalent to Eldar. So until you're willing to admit that Space Marines are also Overpowered (along with Necrons and Demons), there's nothing left to discuss.
There are what 23 armies? So your saying B.c Eldar is only slightly better than 7 other armies and 4 of them might be within 5-10% as good as Eldar it doesnt make them OP?
So you saying Eldar being better than 16 armies by a good margin that it doesnt make them OP?
Eldar is better than 82% of all the armies and Equal if not slightly better than the rest, that doesnt make them better?
HuskyWarhammer wrote: The problem with arguments that Caederes and the like make come from a lack of follow-through thought with what happens when you actually play as Eldar.
S/he points out that specific unit A is good at task A, and specific unit B is good at task B, therefore OP. Problem is, that's bad logic. If you can do task A, great...but the game isn't exclusively task A. Games are a large combination of tasks. For example, a Crimson Hunter may be good at killing another flyer, but it can be toasted by bolter fire without effort. In order to take advantage of all of those benefits he describes, you'd have to have every unit on the board, ready to use, in the right place at the right time. Hell, if you can manage that task, you can make *any* army OP.
It actually fits really nicely with the Eldar fluff - their army is made of a symphony of specialists, trying to play together in a harmony in destruction. There are days I wish I could pull a SM and put a rocket launcher in a squad of scouts, a power fist in a Dire Avenger unit, etc.
Edit: Again, I'm not saying that they don't have some very OP units, but by and large the race isn't.
Yeah, it only takes 108 bolters in rapid fire range to kill a crimson hunter. So next time you see one, just take your 1,680 points of tactical marines and point them at that crimson hunter.
There are 4 armies equivalent to Eldar. So until you're willing to admit that Space Marines are also Overpowered (along with Necrons and Demons), there's nothing left to discuss.
But then you have to ask where does the Eldar hate come from? If they really were only as strong as Space Marines and Daemons then we'd hear an equal amount of complaining about them, too- but we don't. The most complaining we hear are about Eldar, Tau, and Necrons, in that order (though I actually prefer playing against Eldar over Tau). You can point at statistics until your finger falls off, but there has to be some underlying reason that Eldar are the most complained about army. If Eldar are only as powerful as Space Marines, then there should hardly be any complaints about them.
Also, I think that article actually proves our point. On a 120 point scale, Eldar are 20 points higher than the next highest army- Space Marines. That's a 16% difference. Plus, the median is thirty. Hell, the guy writing the article even stated "Eldar are really, really good. Not only to have the highest performance of any army at the LVO, but also I’m pretty sure to drag up the scores of a number of Dark Eldar primary armies until that codex looks, statistically, like it’s in good shape."
DarknessEternal wrote: Based on all possible metrics using actual data of their game performances, Eldar can not be considered overpowered.
There are several other armies performing within the same ranges of success.
Unless you're also going to declare Space Marines, Dark Angels, Tau, Necrons, Chaos Daemons, and Chaos Renegades as overpowered, you cannot apply that to Eldar. If 7 armies are equally powerful, calling them all overpowered would be disingenuous.
Except in essentially every major tournament, elder are disproportionally ranked in the top ranks compared to other armies. Just look at LVO for example
Yes, look at that. It only proves what I said.
Eldar have no statistical significantly better performance.
If you think they do, please consult some statistics text books.
There are 4 armies equivalent to Eldar. So until you're willing to admit that Space Marines are also Overpowered (along with Necrons and Demons), there's nothing left to discuss.
um, I beg to differ lol
At LVO, Eldar ranked 1, 2, 6, 8, 16, and 19. That is extremely disproportionate to the number of armies there are. Thats 4 out of the top 10 being elder and 6 out of the top 20 being elder.
DarknessEternal wrote: Based on all possible metrics using actual data of their game performances, Eldar can not be considered overpowered.
There are several other armies performing within the same ranges of success.
Unless you're also going to declare Space Marines, Dark Angels, Tau, Necrons, Chaos Daemons, and Chaos Renegades as overpowered, you cannot apply that to Eldar. If 7 armies are equally powerful, calling them all overpowered would be disingenuous.
Except in essentially every major tournament, elder are disproportionally ranked in the top ranks compared to other armies. Just look at LVO for example
Yes, look at that. It only proves what I said.
Eldar have no statistical significantly better performance.
If you think they do, please consult some statistics text books.
Variancehammer wrote:First, lets get this out of the way: An Eldar army won, and an Eldar army game in second. That is not inherently significant in its own right – we have to look at populations, but it’s strong indicator that they’re doing quite well. And, as an aside, I’m rather pleased with myself for calling that we’d see Pale Courts armies because of the utter lack of unit taxes in those formations before I actually looked at the winning list.
...
Eldar are really, really good. Not only to have the highest performance of any army at the LVO, but also I’m pretty sure to drag up the scores of a number of Dark Eldar primary armies until that codex looks, statistically, like it’s in good shape.
and again, straight from the article, here's the score data graph, which shows a commanding Eldar lead in both top end and average above-median performance over even the other "top" armies.
The article you linked would appear to strongly support that Eldar have an edge over and above even the other "strong" factions. So yeah, some of the other armies can be broken and hideously powerful, but Eldar are consistently showing strength above even those.
But then you have to ask where does the Eldar hate come from? If they really were only as strong as Space Marines and Daemons then we'd hear an equal amount of complaining about them, too- but we don't.
Because the IP is Marines. People don't whine about their own army being overpowered.
Incidentally, what I said was that if Eldar are overpowered, then so are Marines (and a few other armies). If your definition of overpowered encompasses Eldar's statistical performance, you are forced to state that several other armies fall into the same bucket. As soon as you're willing to admit that, a proper conversation can be had on the subject. Until then, you're being myopic.
Also, I think that article actually proves our point. On a 120 point scale, Eldar are 20 points higher than the next highest army- Space Marines. That's a 16% difference.
You should go into politics with your ability to spin nonsense into sounding like statistics. The author of that article even did the math for you. "Points" is not a valid statistical comparison of things. What you're looking for is standard deviations.
At LVO, Eldar ranked 1, 2, 6, 8, 16, and 19. That is extremely disproportionate to the number of armies there are. Thats 4 out of the top 10 being elder and 6 out of the top 20 being elder.
Proving your point how now?
Because those are spurious statistics. The sample size is far too small to say anything about a 10 places of ranking, and even 20 isn't very reliable. Seriously, read the guy's summation, it doesn't have any math in it to confuse you.
Because those are spurious statistics, seriously, read the guy's summation, it doesn't have any math in it to confuse you.
The one where he specifically calls out Eldar, above and beyond any other army, as being *really really good*, with by far the best LVO performance, even to the point of radically altering how well another army appeared to do?
But then you have to ask where does the Eldar hate come from? If they really were only as strong as Space Marines and Daemons then we'd hear an equal amount of complaining about them, too- but we don't.
Because the IP is Marines. People don't whine about their own army being overpowered.
Also, I think that article actually proves our point. On a 120 point scale, Eldar are 20 points higher than the next highest army- Space Marines. That's a 16% difference.
You should go into politics with your ability to spin nonsense into sounding like statistics. The author of that article even did the math for you. "Points" is not a valid statistical comparison of things. What you're looking for is standard deviations.
But then where's the complaining about daemons?
Also your second point is kind of funny because that's more or less where I'm trying to go. Anyway, I'd say that the number of points laid out in average is a fine way to measure things. I don't know why you think that one army consistently scoring more points than all the others does not count as evidence. Maybe you just have a passion for statistics, and good on you for that, that there is such a thing as over-complicating matters. Plus, the author of that article keeps backing our claim, not yours.
I feel like there's a lack of real thought about why things are expressed how they are here... Let's address a few:
DE and Eldar combined are crazy OP. Probably, yes...but not because it's just Eldar. The combination has several units that combine together to become extremely powerful when used in concert, not due to one specific codex. There were also a very large number of Eldar (and combined DE) players, so a higher frequency would indeed be expected to be seen when looking at total ranks.
As far as, "there has to be some underlying reason that Eldar are the most complained about army," I agree 100%. It's the illusion that they're so insanely OP, perpetuated by those same complaints, that causes more. Your argument is circular reasoning. It's like saying A causes B but simultaneously B causes A: Eldar are OP because they're complained about, but they're complained about because they're OP. There are probably some other reasons for the complaints (e.g., equipment that looks fancier but isn't actually that great) - this is just my theory. It's more about psychology than balance.
It might also be good to give "overpowered" a definition - is anything that's better than 50% of the other codices OP? Some people seem to be saying so. Eldar are upper tier, but they're far from alone.
It's also good to keep in mind that at the LVO, the point is to cheese the best list possible - often focusing on a few specific units that are, indeed, the most broken. That's a very different discussion from the codex as a whole. Regardless, it's really nice to have people actually number crunching the LVO and bringing us this data, and I'm thankful it's there.
Here's a closing thought: looking at score distributions, playing Eldar alone was certainly nowhere nearly enough to ensure a player did well. They had a good number of low-scoring players. Renegades, on the other hand, pretty much "ensured an above-average performance." Now think on which one of these, really, is indicative of an OP army...
It's also good to keep in mind that at the LVO, the point is to cheese the best list possible - often focusing on a few specific units that are, indeed, the most broken. That's a very different discussion from the codex as a whole. Regardless, it's really nice to have people actually number crunching the LVO and bringing us this data, and I'm thankful it's there.
Here's a closing thought: looking at score distributions, playing Eldar alone was certainly nowhere nearly enough to ensure a player did well. They had a good number of low-scoring players. Renegades, on the other hand, pretty much "ensured an above-average performance." Now think on which one of these, really, is indicative of an OP army...
The Eldar. It's like comparing Ike and Meta Knight in Brawl. It's easy to do good with someone like Ike, because he's friendly to use and has some good things going for him. Meta Knight, however, is awkward to use at first but the people who know how to play him absolutely wreck house. The people who are somewhat competent at Brawl will be able to pick him up and do okay. The people who don't know anything about the game and expect to win just because he's a good character are going to die. But nobody ever argues that Ike is OP because he's only mediocre at best, while everyone argues that Meta Knight is OP.
And I've heard the circular logic argument before, and for Brawl as well. Are Eldar as OP as people make them out to be? Just like with Meta Knight, probably not, but the fact is there is truth to this hate.
It's also good to keep in mind that at the LVO, the point is to cheese the best list possible - often focusing on a few specific units that are, indeed, the most broken. That's a very different discussion from the codex as a whole. Regardless, it's really nice to have people actually number crunching the LVO and bringing us this data, and I'm thankful it's there.
Here's a closing thought: looking at score distributions, playing Eldar alone was certainly nowhere nearly enough to ensure a player did well. They had a good number of low-scoring players. Renegades, on the other hand, pretty much "ensured an above-average performance." Now think on which one of these, really, is indicative of an OP army...
The Eldar. It's like comparing Ike and Meta Knight in Brawl. It's easy to do good with someone like Ike, because he's friendly to use and has some good things going for him. Meta Knight, however, is awkward to use at first but the people who know how to play him absolutely wreck house. The people who are somewhat competent at Brawl will be able to pick him up and do okay. The people who don't know anything about the game and expect to win just because he's a good character are going to die. But nobody ever argues that Ike is OP because he's only mediocre at best, while everyone argues that Meta Knight is OP.
And I've heard the circular logic argument before, and for Brawl as well. Are Eldar as OP as people make them out to be? Just like with Meta Knight, probably not, but the fact is there is truth to this hate.
I think that's mostly fair enough. I've never been to a formal tournament, but I would have to imagine that the people who care enough to travel and enter the LVO at least have some decent competence at the game.
HuskyWarhammer wrote: I feel like there's a lack of real thought about why things are expressed how they are here... Let's address a few:
DE and Eldar combined are crazy OP. Probably, yes...but not because it's just Eldar. The combination has several units that combine together to become extremely powerful when used in concert, not due to one specific codex. There were also a very large number of Eldar/DE players, so a higher frequency would indeed be expected to be seen.
As far as, "there has to be some underlying reason that Eldar are the most complained about army," I agree 100%. It's the illusion that they're so insanely OP, perpetuated by those same complaints, that causes more. Otherwise, it's circular reasoning. It's like saying A causes B but simultaneously B causes A: Eldar are OP because they're complained about, but they're complained about because they're OP. There are probably some other reasons for the complaints (e.g., equipment like bright lances that looks fancier but isn't actually that great) - this is just my theory.
It might also be good to give "overpowered" a definition - is anything that's better than 50% of the other codices OP? Some people seem to be saying so. Eldar are upper tier, but they're far from alone.
It's also good to keep in mind that at the LVO, the point is to cheese the best list possible - often focusing on a few specific units that are, indeed, the most broken. That's a very different discussion from the codex as a whole. Regardless, it's really nice to have people actually number crunching the LVO and bringing us this data, and I'm thankful it's there.
Here's a closing thought: looking at score distributions, playing Eldar alone was certainly nowhere nearly enough to ensure a player did well. They had a good number of low-scoring players. Renegades, on the other hand, pretty much "ensured an above-average performance." Now think on which one of these, really, is indicative of an OP army...
A few things
1) DE being allies is the same of CSM to Daemons it can make them better but not so much that everyone does it, Eldar doesnt need allies.
2) OP, the op 4-5 armies are close to each other, Eldar, Necrons, Sm and Daemons being some of the most powerful, but compare to about 10 if not more other armies they are well over dbl as powerful as them. Look at CSM and Harli as stand alone armies and Compare them to Eldar, Sm and necrons.
3) I fhte point of a tournament is to bring the most powerful stuff then yes that shows what books are able to be more powerful, it doesnt matter if its 1 formation or spaming 3 different units, the 40k Rules are clear that you can do that in Bound lists.
4) Given what was said in Number 3, Eldar is one of the very few books (Next to Sm and Necrons) that has almost 0 bad units in the book. The would be "bad" units arnt actually bad, just others are better, If you place those "bad" units in any of the 16 "Bad" armies they would be instantly taken for all lists.
5) If ren is that much better from your feeling then we will see more of them in the next tournaments, that is something I would like ot see, b.c meta changes from tournament to tournament. With more people seeing these results I cant wait for the next large tournament.
Eldar isnt just OP b.c the units are good, it also is the Psychic phase and the ability to have high mobility with Move/Shoot/Move, lots of high Str weapons and even D weapons. It really is just a amazing balance of, Toughness (via Powers/jink/mobility to get cover) Mobility, Shooting and Psychic.
If you look at other armies they are missing one for more of the 4, Survival, Psychic, Movement, Damage out put.
But then you have to ask where does the Eldar hate come from? If they really were only as strong as Space Marines and Daemons then we'd hear an equal amount of complaining about them, too- but we don't.
Because the IP is Marines. People don't whine about their own army being overpowered.
Incidentally, what I said was that if Eldar are overpowered, then so are Marines (and a few other armies). If your definition of overpowered encompasses Eldar's statistical performance, you are forced to state that several other armies fall into the same bucket. As soon as you're willing to admit that, a proper conversation can be had on the subject. Until then, you're being myopic.
Also, I think that article actually proves our point. On a 120 point scale, Eldar are 20 points higher than the next highest army- Space Marines. That's a 16% difference.
You should go into politics with your ability to spin nonsense into sounding like statistics. The author of that article even did the math for you. "Points" is not a valid statistical comparison of things. What you're looking for is standard deviations.
At LVO, Eldar ranked 1, 2, 6, 8, 16, and 19. That is extremely disproportionate to the number of armies there are. Thats 4 out of the top 10 being elder and 6 out of the top 20 being elder.
Proving your point how now?
Because those are spurious statistics. The sample size is far too small to say anything about a 10 places of ranking, and even 20 isn't very reliable. Seriously, read the guy's summation, it doesn't have any math in it to confuse you.
lol you just can't give it up can you. 40% of the top 10 were eldar. 30% of the top 20 were eldar. the exact article you posted showed elder above and beyond all other armies in the graphs.
The scatterlaser is a blatantly broken weapon. It has been ever since they made it. It's just gotten much, much worse since hull points. Let's start with that.
Martel732 wrote: The scatterlaser is a blatantly broken weapon. It has been ever since they made it. It's just gotten much, much worse since hull points. Let's start with that.
Eh, the Scatterlaser only reaches broken when it's as spammable as it is. When it replaces an armies basic weapon, yeah, it's pretty broken.
HuskyWarhammer wrote: I think the problem isn't that Eldar as a whole is OP, but they have one very specific build that's very powerful.
I think if you took the average power of their codex's units against, say, average Necron unit power, they'd be much more middle of the road.
I vehemently disagree with this. The Farseer is the best value psyker in the game, the Spiritseer is also pretty great. Seer Councils (including Warlocks) are one of the most potent psychic death-stars in the game. Jain Zar is hands-down the challenge queen of 40K and a phenomenal close combat character. Windriders are the best Troops choice in the game. Dire Avengers are good to great with Wave Serpents, whom still rank as a top tier dedicated transport. Rangers are an ideal objective camping unit. Eldar Sergeants - Exarchs - are the best value squad leaders in the entire game. Striking Scorpions are an above average melee unit. Fire Dragons are among the most terrifying anti-tank units in the game. Wraithguard are downright ridiculous with the right support due to being regular infantry packing Destroyer weapons. Swooping Hawks and Warp Spiders are among the most powerful Fast Attack units of any codex, and indeed among the best Jump Infantry/Jet Pack Infantry units in the game respectively. Crimson Hunters are well above average flyers and dominate against other flyers. The Hemlock Wraithfighter is a cheap flyer that packs in two Destroyer blast weapons and powerful psychic capabilities. Dark Reapers murder anything that can Jink - i.e. Jetbikes and Skimmers that are so popular nowadays - while Vaul's Wraith Support Batteries are extremely deadly for the points. Their battle tanks are all average to above average, War Walkers are superior to almost any other Walkers in the game for sheer points-to-damage output efficiency, the Wraithknight is arguably the single most under-priced model in the game. Oh, and don't forget Forge World with Hornets, Skathach Wraithknights, Nightwings, Revenants, etc....Hell, even their "bad" units - Howling Banshees, Shining Spears, Fire Prisms, Guardians, etc - are all still better than heaps of units from other codices and can be seen by external balancing as average to good units on their own merits.
I don't play Eldar or really complain about them, but saying they have a whole bunch of middle of the road units instead of an all-round strong codex is flat out wrong.
100% agree with this. They have the best or above average units in every aspect of the game!
Martel732 wrote: The scatterlaser is a blatantly broken weapon. It has been ever since they made it. It's just gotten much, much worse since hull points. Let's start with that.
Eh, the Scatterlaser only reaches broken when it's as spammable as it is. When it replaces an armies basic weapon, yeah, it's pretty broken.
It's stat line was broken in 4th. There are too many units where it is strictly superior to the starcannon at all times. It's just even more broken now.
Martel732 wrote: The scatterlaser is a blatantly broken weapon. It has been ever since they made it. It's just gotten much, much worse since hull points. Let's start with that.
Eh, the Scatterlaser only reaches broken when it's as spammable as it is. When it replaces an armies basic weapon, yeah, it's pretty broken.
It's stat line was broken in 4th. There are too many units where it is strictly superior to the starcannon at all times. It's just even more broken now.
DarknessEternal wrote: Based on all possible metrics using actual data of their game performances, Eldar can not be considered overpowered.
There are several other armies performing within the same ranges of success.
Unless you're also going to declare Space Marines, Dark Angels, Tau, Necrons, Chaos Daemons, and Chaos Renegades as overpowered, you cannot apply that to Eldar. If 7 armies are equally powerful, calling them all overpowered would be disingenuous.
Except in essentially every major tournament, elder are disproportionally ranked in the top ranks compared to other armies. Just look at LVO for example
Yes, look at that. It only proves what I said.
Eldar have no statistical significantly better performance.
If you think they do, please consult some statistics text books.
There are 4 armies equivalent to Eldar. So until you're willing to admit that Space Marines are also Overpowered (along with Necrons and Demons), there's nothing left to discuss.
gonna go ahead and copy paste some of the statements you linked to in the article without modifying them.
"Eldar are really, really good. Not only to have the highest performance of any army at the LVO, but also I’m pretty sure to drag up the scores of a number of Dark Eldar primary armies until that codex looks, statistically, like it’s in good shape. I’m nigh positive, if/when I have access to allied factions, that the strength of that force is all Dark Eldar/Eldar allied armies.
Whose Afraid of the Big Bad Tau? I hear the Tau called out a lot for being OP, for ruining the game, for being one of the codexes that must be feared and dreaded and nerfed. That’s just not born out in the data. They’re a solid army, on par with Cult Mechanicus/War Convocation, Dark Angels or Chaos Renegades, but they’re not at the big kids table – that’s held by Space Marines, Eldar, Necrons, and Daemons. Like the Chaos Renegades, they’re a mid-table stomping army, but not a contender for the top tables."
and
"Most armies are in a good place, but there are a few that are what I’d call pathologically good – the aforementioned “big kids table”, but especially the extremely prevalent Space Marines and Eldar. Chaos Daemons, while powerful, are trickier to play than those – there’s a lot of middling-poor Daemons lists, while most Eldar and Space Marine armies are enjoying above average performance. This is born out statistically – while the smaller LVO dataset from years ago didn’t really achieve statistical significance for there being more differences in the medians than you’d expect by chance, this year’s P-value is 0.0007. That’s stupidly significant – these results aren’t just the result of random variation/player skill."
so you didn't read the article, you just looked at the graphs and made some assumptions?
Martel732 wrote: The scatterlaser is a blatantly broken weapon. It has been ever since they made it. It's just gotten much, much worse since hull points. Let's start with that.
Eh, the Scatterlaser only reaches broken when it's as spammable as it is. When it replaces an armies basic weapon, yeah, it's pretty broken.
It's stat line was broken in 4th. There are too many units where it is strictly superior to the starcannon at all times. It's just even more broken now.
Is the Multilaser OP then?
It is probably the best heavy the Imperium has, but one less shot and being BS 3 makes it far less dominating. The platforms is comes on aren't nearly as nice, either. The platform thing is pretty important, as that's what ruins the assault cannon as well.
Martel732 wrote: The scatterlaser is a blatantly broken weapon. It has been ever since they made it. It's just gotten much, much worse since hull points. Let's start with that.
Eh, the Scatterlaser only reaches broken when it's as spammable as it is. When it replaces an armies basic weapon, yeah, it's pretty broken.
It's stat line was broken in 4th. There are too many units where it is strictly superior to the starcannon at all times. It's just even more broken now.
Is the Multilaser OP then?
It is probably the best heavy the Imperium has, but one less shot and being BS 3 makes it far less dominating. The platforms is comes on aren't nearly as nice, either. The platform thing is pretty important, as that's what ruins the assault cannon as well.
What about the Tesla Destructor? Is that weapon game breaking?
12" less range make it hard to compare. I'd say the range makes that weapon far more fair. You at least have to move to get that thing within range. The scatterlaser starts in from turn 1 murdering everything in your list potentially. 24" range is one of the big achilles heels on the assault cannon.
Martel732 wrote: 12" less range make it hard to compare. I'd say the range makes that weapon far more fair. You at least have to move to get that thing within range. The scatterlaser starts in from turn 1 murdering everything in your list potentially. 24" range is one of the big achilles heels on the assault cannon.
Well, it comes on the Night Scythe, which doesn't really care about Range. And the other platform it comes on is immune to S6 fire.
Vaktathi wrote: Oh man, when Tesla still worked on snapshots and it had its S5 lash effect, Tesla Destructors were super busted.
Now theyre much less absurd
Sadly.
My point is, like the Tesla Destructor and the Multilaser, the Scatterlaser is a good weapon. Good. Not broken. It's the simple fact that it can replace their basic infantry weapons on a troop unit that it becomes literally game breaking.
Yeah, the scatterlaser as a tank mounted gun was fine, or as a single heavy weapon on an infantry guardian squad, but when it had its 6E Twin Link effect, or now available on every jetbike, makes it rather silly.
Yes they are above the medium baseline across all books.
They are not as OP as the most ridiculous claim you've seen on the net.
They are not as mediocre as the lowest estimation claim you've seen on the net.
Vaktathi wrote: Oh man, when Tesla still worked on snapshots and it had its S5 lash effect, Tesla Destructors were super busted.
Now theyre much less absurd
Sadly.
My point is, like the Tesla Destructor and the Multilaser, the Scatterlaser is a good weapon. Good. Not broken. It's the simple fact that it can replace their basic infantry weapons on a troop unit that it becomes literally game breaking.
It's broken. It burns down 80% of the models in the game from 36". Scatter walkers have always been a thing and many 5th ed power lists still fell to them. It kills IK dammit. An anti infantry gun.
Vaktathi wrote: Oh man, when Tesla still worked on snapshots and it had its S5 lash effect, Tesla Destructors were super busted.
Now theyre much less absurd
Sadly.
My point is, like the Tesla Destructor and the Multilaser, the Scatterlaser is a good weapon. Good. Not broken. It's the simple fact that it can replace their basic infantry weapons on a troop unit that it becomes literally game breaking.
It's broken. It burns down 80% of the models in the game from 36". Scatter walkers have always been a thing and many 5th ed power lists still fell to them. It kills IK dammit. An anti infantry gun.
Martel732 wrote: 12 sides. On a 400+ pt model. But the game is totally pro-imperium.
Its pro-imperium because you can ally in white scars bikers to cover your flanks, or a librarius conclave to (maybe) make an invisible IK with RAW.
I know you don't play that way, but with all imperium as battle brothers, the mix and match options are very high to cover weaknesses elsewhere. where as xenos tend to have very small ally option, and some suffer for it.
Martel732 wrote: 12 sides. On a 400+ pt model. But the game is totally pro-imperium.
Huh. That may make it the only walker in the game that has a lower side armor than front. This made me think you were wrong, but after checking it out you are correct.
Can anyone else name a walker that has lower side armor than front? I guess I'm only familiar with SM and ork ones, really. I know all ork walker have same front/side, pretty sure SM ones are the same, pretty sure about necron ones too.
Martel732 wrote: 12 sides. On a 400+ pt model. But the game is totally pro-imperium.
Its pro-imperium because you can ally in white scars bikers to cover your flanks, or a librarius conclave to (maybe) make an invisible IK with RAW.
I know you don't play that way, but with all imperium as battle brothers, the mix and match options are very high to cover weaknesses elsewhere. where as xenos tend to have very small ally option, and some suffer for it.
Actually if you bring out the "but allies!" defense, everyone can take everything, even come the apocalypse allies. Our BA have the same access to grav cannons, for example, that orks have to scatbikes and wraithknights.
I didn't say hate. But certainly doesn't favor. Although the wulfen guys fit in with SW being little furry Mary Sues. I'll be blood vomiting in the corner.
Bharring wrote: 12 side armor on a 400 pt model means the game hates IoM?
How 'bout 12 *front* and side armor. For 900 points. Oh a Super heavy walker. GW must really hate... CWE?
If you're talking about an Eldar Revenant titan, it has Holofields, crazy mobility and can only be hit on 6's in close combat now unless its another super heavy, in which its 5's.
Honestly Eldar really are OP but I don't think its for the reasons people are explaining.
On a Unit vs. unit basis Eldar are usually T3 and die just like a T3 model should (with the exception of Waithguard). WK can be taken down by Ghazzy's Bully Boys Formation. Maulerfiends can rip apart WS and 10 Marines with Bolters within rapid fire range can easily rip apart a few Fire Dragons and Aspect warriors.
The problem I find is the (keyword here) synergy. Eldar have so many things that are so, so cheap that excel in their roles that when combined with each other make them perform way above average playstyles, shutting down other peoples playstyles in some cases.
Like I say 15 MANZ can take out a WK until that WK is buffed by invisibility. That Maulerfiend can rip apart that WS, but doesn't want too because it knows of the D-Weapon Waithguard sitting inside it. Eldar ignore core rules such as running and shooting with the use of Battle Focus and ignoring Perils with the use of the Ghosthelm as others have suggested, WS have that annoying shield that makes pens glances forcing your opponent to focus fire on one unit (letting all the other units have flexible breating space). This makes them incredibly flexible with the addition of their cheap costs. This is what sets them apart for the other cases presented in the forms of Necrons, SM, etc, etc.
You then have to look at direction 7th edition want you to play in the competitive sense. the game rewards you for playing SMU backed up by big stompy things. Eldar excel at this with the common use of bikers and WK and even though 1st place at that major tourney may have not used a WK (can't remember if they did or not) they surely did play to the MSU role of 7th ed.
With those examples in mind it does not make the Eldar exempt from "Being OP" some factions have good stuff will be limited or very expensive, but how would you say CSM operate with Eldar? sure you can taylor for a 1v1 match but when your in a tournament with multiple factions then how would they opertate? They like Guard and Orks to an extent are not as flexible for the direction of the edition like Eldar are and so Eldar will usually wipe a mono force of these factions.
I think what people need to ask now is Why are Eldar OP? I think its been widely agreed that Eldar are OP, in my area even Eldar players agree their Codex is OP. I have even had a conversation with another Eldar player and he agreed that his stuff was too good and that he thinks he needs to restrict his choices as they perform way too well but then asked why was his stuff too good when others had or have it so rough? I will always think it was codex writer bias combined with that the writer didn't know what direction he wanted the Eldar to go so he made everything above average because pressure to release the book and bias, but that's my opinion.
I always find myself a little lost in these discussions; I assume this is due to OP being a very subjective term.
When you drop an over-powered claim - are you saying that it is (A) above the curve of balance, (B) well above the curve balance, or (C) on the top of the curve of balance?
Taking this idea one step further, are you basing your judgement comparing (X) local FLGS scene, (Y) internet hypothetical, or (Z) large scale tournament scene?
The conversation gets heavily muddled from this lack of distinction. I - for one - if combining A and X would say that Eldar are well overpowered, easily yes. However if I combined C and Z I use my anecdotal information in tandem with empirical understanding of tournament statistics and say absolutely not, Eldar have not had *that* kind of OP presence.
It has always been Eldar on top, usually by a HUGE margin.
I started playing Eldar in 4th ed, they were barely mid-tier., so your statement is False.
you sure you arent thinking 5th? Eldar were amazing in 4th. Between unkillable skimmers, harlies you never got to shoot at, untargetable IC's, fish-o-fury tactic Dire Avengers, and more, they were *very* strong in 4E. 5E was the only edition that Eldar were not a very top tier army
Iron_Captain wrote:
And fully justified, because the Eldar are ridiculously OP. Even without abuse of scatterbikes or other such cheese. Almost everything in the codex is really good. Try playing as BA against an Eldar list, then come again. Any Eldar list will beat any BA list.
I don't hate Eldar, and arguably, the problem is not with the Eldar codex (in a perfect codex, all options should be good) but with underpowered codices like Orks, BA or CSM, but that doesn't take away the fact that playing against Eldar just isn't much fun because even non-cheese Eldar lists are so powerful compared to my BA .
Funny story, the second game I ever played as Eldar was versus BA and it ended up in a stalemate. I didn't have any scatbikes nor wraithguard, but did run a WK. It was an intense fight.
Edit: formatting
Oh, don't get me wrong. It is possible for BA to do good or even win against Eldar. But the Eldar player has to deliberately handicap himself while the BA player needs a really well optimised list and a lot of luck with dice rolls to pull off a narrow win. It is such an uphill battle every time that after the first few times, it stops being fun. I like a challenging game, but it has to be fair (and fluffy. Fluffwise, BA being so much outmatched by Eldar is not correct).
I wouldn't refuse games against Eldar, but I will have less fun then when playing other armies. Ideally, if two players bring a somewhat competitive list of equal points value, both players should have an equal chance at victory.
master of ordinance wrote:
Vaktathi wrote: Yeah, its fine if theyre better and comparatively more expensive. Its not fine when they're as much or cheaper, like with Fire Dragons or Rangers relative to equivalents. And the problem is that just about the entire army is like that. Nobody thought Jetbikes, Fire Dragons or Wraithguard were undergunned or incapable in their previous incarnations at the same points costs, why they needed the massive boosts they got is a mystery.
Likewise, the "well they should be better because...elves are just better" thing wears very thin indeed...and I say that as someone with ~5k pts worth of Eldar (including two eldar superheavies and gobs of fire dragons and wave serpents). I mean, it might be fluffy if the IG player got to hit everything with a Basilisk shell before the first turn too for a preliminary bombardment, but few would find that fun or balanced
Getting to smack everything my enemy has with a big preliminary bombardment..... Well it would be "forging the narrative"
You guys are not thinking big enough. What if Vortex missiles were actually fluffy?
"Remove all models on the table from play with no saves of any kind allowed. The player who fired the Vortex Missile wins the game automatically."
-Codex: Deathstrike Missile Launchers
It has always been Eldar on top, usually by a HUGE margin.
Umm....I started playing Eldar in 4th ed, they were barely mid-tier and only because Falcons were 'annoying", so your statement is not true.
Eldar only became top tier in 6th. Some spoke of the glory days of 2nd or 3rd ed Eldar with super Star-cannon, but I know not of those times.
--
I think you have editions confused. In 4th, Eldar were the strongest army in the game. In 3rd, eldar were up there with marines who were also one of the strongest armies in the game, but eldar countered marines quite well. 5th they were mid, maybe upper mid. 6th and 7th they are again top tier.
I've owned eldar since the start of 3rd edition and I've never felt handicapped outside of 5th. Even then, it wasn't horrible (not like a lot of my other armies are nowadays).
WrentheFaceless wrote: Besides the fluff would establish that they should cost more, because they're a dying race, there are less and less of them as the years go on
This honestly is my biggest gripe with Eldar. I would be 100% fine with their D-spam, insane movement, insane psyker powers, general awesomeness, if their entire codex costed like 1.5% more than it currently does. The fact that a scatterbike, one of the best options in the game, costs less than something like a meganob, which is a unit in a "cheap" army that can only do well in very, very specific circumstances is just dumb. Really, really dumb. Hell, why not compare an actual ork jetbike to the scatterbike?
The deffkopta is BS 2, T4, W2, 4+, and can either take a TL bigshoota (S5 AP4 Assault 3) or a TL rokkit (S8 AP3). It has standard jetbike movement and has no options for adding characters, and can't be a troop choice so no ObSec. Now, I'd be fine with all of this if it costed something cheap, as on paper it's not that fantastic of a unit. And yet, for some reason this thing costs more than a scatterbike- It's 30 points. Why in the hell would anyone make a deffkopta more expensive than a scatterbike? Because of its extra wound and 1 higher toughness? Scatterbikes alone should cost way more than they currently do, somewhere around 40 points.
Its worse than you think. Scatbikes are T4 also...
WrentheFaceless wrote: Besides the fluff would establish that they should cost more, because they're a dying race, there are less and less of them as the years go on
This honestly is my biggest gripe with Eldar. I would be 100% fine with their D-spam, insane movement, insane psyker powers, general awesomeness, if their entire codex costed like 1.5% more than it currently does. The fact that a scatterbike, one of the best options in the game, costs less than something like a meganob, which is a unit in a "cheap" army that can only do well in very, very specific circumstances is just dumb. Really, really dumb. Hell, why not compare an actual ork jetbike to the scatterbike?
The deffkopta is BS 2, T4, W2, 4+, and can either take a TL bigshoota (S5 AP4 Assault 3) or a TL rokkit (S8 AP3). It has standard jetbike movement and has no options for adding characters, and can't be a troop choice so no ObSec. Now, I'd be fine with all of this if it costed something cheap, as on paper it's not that fantastic of a unit. And yet, for some reason this thing costs more than a scatterbike- It's 30 points. Why in the hell would anyone make a deffkopta more expensive than a scatterbike? Because of its extra wound and 1 higher toughness? Scatterbikes alone should cost way more than they currently do, somewhere around 40 points.
Its worse than you think. Scatbikes are T4 also...
Why would they make it cheaper than a Deffkopta? Because money is acquired from selling new kits, that of which the Scatterbike is.
It has always been Eldar on top, usually by a HUGE margin.
Umm....I started playing Eldar in 4th ed, they were barely mid-tier and only because Falcons were 'annoying", so your statement is not true.
--
No, the Eldar were pretty top then too, and with the hard turn limit to the game, bikes and skimmers were excellent last turn quarter grabbers/contestors, as well as being ridiculously hard to kill. IIRC, star cannon spam was a strong build the same way that AC spam was for marines, although Eldar couldn't drop quite as many.
WrentheFaceless wrote: Besides the fluff would establish that they should cost more, because they're a dying race, there are less and less of them as the years go on
This honestly is my biggest gripe with Eldar. I would be 100% fine with their D-spam, insane movement, insane psyker powers, general awesomeness, if their entire codex costed like 1.5% more than it currently does. The fact that a scatterbike, one of the best options in the game, costs less than something like a meganob, which is a unit in a "cheap" army that can only do well in very, very specific circumstances is just dumb. Really, really dumb. Hell, why not compare an actual ork jetbike to the scatterbike?
The deffkopta is BS 2, T4, W2, 4+, and can either take a TL bigshoota (S5 AP4 Assault 3) or a TL rokkit (S8 AP3). It has standard jetbike movement and has no options for adding characters, and can't be a troop choice so no ObSec. Now, I'd be fine with all of this if it costed something cheap, as on paper it's not that fantastic of a unit. And yet, for some reason this thing costs more than a scatterbike- It's 30 points. Why in the hell would anyone make a deffkopta more expensive than a scatterbike? Because of its extra wound and 1 higher toughness? Scatterbikes alone should cost way more than they currently do, somewhere around 40 points.
Its worse than you think. Scatbikes are T4 also...
Why would they make it cheaper than a Deffkopta? Because money is acquired from selling new kits, that of which the Scatterbike is.
Not always. The Wave Serpent kit was like 7 years old when it got made broken with the 6E codex, meanwhile Ogryns have had two model updates in the same timespan and were total garbage the entire time. Then of course there was also Mutilators, Possessed, Pyrovores, whatever they did to the poor Hydra Flak Tank when it got a plastic kit, tauroxes, Scions, etc. GW is not kind to all new kits
No, the Eldar were pretty top then too, and with the hard turn limit to the game, bikes and skimmers were excellent last turn quarter grabbers/contestors, as well as being ridiculously hard to kill. IIRC, star cannon spam was a strong build the same way that AC spam was for marines, although Eldar couldn't drop quite as many.
That's not correct. Eldar could cram in far more starcannons than Marines could get assault cannons. Starcannons were all over the Eldar list like a rash. You could take tiny Guardian squads with them, you could put twin-linked ones on Wave Serpents, you could upgrade a Falcon to have one, Vypers could take them, War Walkers could take them, Wraithlords could take them (and Wraithlords were criminally undercosted in 3rd ed.) Marines could only get assault cannons on 4 units - Razorbacks, Land Speeders, Terminators, and Land Raider Crusaders. Of those units, only Land Speeders were particularly good.
WrentheFaceless wrote: Besides the fluff would establish that they should cost more, because they're a dying race, there are less and less of them as the years go on
This honestly is my biggest gripe with Eldar. I would be 100% fine with their D-spam, insane movement, insane psyker powers, general awesomeness, if their entire codex costed like 1.5% more than it currently does. The fact that a scatterbike, one of the best options in the game, costs less than something like a meganob, which is a unit in a "cheap" army that can only do well in very, very specific circumstances is just dumb. Really, really dumb. Hell, why not compare an actual ork jetbike to the scatterbike?
The deffkopta is BS 2, T4, W2, 4+, and can either take a TL bigshoota (S5 AP4 Assault 3) or a TL rokkit (S8 AP3). It has standard jetbike movement and has no options for adding characters, and can't be a troop choice so no ObSec. Now, I'd be fine with all of this if it costed something cheap, as on paper it's not that fantastic of a unit. And yet, for some reason this thing costs more than a scatterbike- It's 30 points. Why in the hell would anyone make a deffkopta more expensive than a scatterbike? Because of its extra wound and 1 higher toughness? Scatterbikes alone should cost way more than they currently do, somewhere around 40 points.
Its worse than you think. Scatbikes are T4 also...
Why would they make it cheaper than a Deffkopta? Because money is acquired from selling new kits, that of which the Scatterbike is.
Not always. The Wave Serpent kit was like 7 years old when it got made broken with the 6E codex, meanwhile Ogryns have had two model updates in the same timespan and were total garbage the entire time. Then of course there was also Mutilators, Possessed, Pyrovores, whatever they did to the poor Hydra Flak Tank when it got a plastic kit, tauroxes, Scions, etc. GW is not kind to all new kits
Hmm, this is true. There's also the example of the Maleceptor. The only reason people bought that kit was for the Toxicrene. You'd be hard pressed to find someone with a Maleceptor model.
I sort of feel bad for the long-time Eldar players because while Eldar have always been a strong army, ever since 6th, they have been crazy over the top powerful, with units that are long-standing becoming horribly broken. So now whenever those players pull out their army containing older units, they immediately become TFG through no fault of their own.
Of course, the only ones I don't feel bad for are Iyanden players I hate that "fields more wraith units than any other craftworld due to reasons" suddenly became "ALL WRAITH ALL THE TIME!!!!" Beyond the power game elements, I don't even understand why Wraith armies exist under the Eldar name....Hey, I love the slender, sleek aesthetics of the Eldar people, the specialized and subtle style of warfare with the Aspects, the speed of their vehicles and bikes....so Imma gonna field this army of nothing but big, chunky, psy-robot units that are mostly kind of slow, but are extremely tough, unsubtle, and hit like a truck against everything. Actual Eldar in an Eldar army, PFFFFFT! Oh, wait, there is one, the seer, see, totally an Eldar army. (Detect my bitterness against wraith units you will )
ClassicCarraway wrote: I sort of feel bad for the long-time Eldar players because while Eldar have always been a strong army, ever since 6th, they have been crazy over the top powerful, with units that are long-standing becoming horribly broken. So now whenever those players pull out their army containing older units, they immediately become TFG through no fault of their own.
Thank you.
I started in the middle of 4th ed and didn't have a good grasp on the rules until 5th, so I didn't realize Eldar were good in 4th.
So what you guys are telling me is that Eldar started as a top tier army, and with the exception of 5th ed, they continue to be a top tier army? So what's new? Why is this still a surprise to anyone?
I whole-heartedly accept that Eldar are "the" top army. If the top 4 are Eldar, Tau, SM & Necrons, then absolutely Eldar have the edge over the other 3.
HOWEVER, I can only except that an army is OP if there little to no counters to them. Eldar have plenty of counters. Drop pods (and by extension, every army that can take them) have always been a pretty hard counter to Eldar. Drop in, kill half their army and they are on the backfoot for a few turns. Only skilled players can recover from that. This has been made worse with Skyhammer.
Another counter to Eldar is a Decurion with multiple Canoptek Harvests. If you don't kill the Wraiths in the first turn (which is unlikely even for Scatterbike spam) bye-bye bikes or WK. I haven't seen the new Tau in action, but they seem terrifying with all therir shooting and 2+ cover saves
Granted all those examples are from the other top 3, but what about Tyranids and Daemons? Both of those armies have builds that are considered good and can beat Eldar consistently. Dakka Tyrants, Fexes and Devilguants make Scatterbike die and everything has a 2+ cover from Venomthropes. Daemons can drown the board in fast units that can get the Eldar into combat by turn 2. 36" turboboost means nothing if nowhere on the board is safe.
-------
It really sucks that there are so many armies that struggle against the top 4, especially Eldar. Here's hoping CSM get some kinda boosts soon that upset the meta.
ClassicCarraway wrote: I sort of feel bad for the long-time Eldar players because while Eldar have always been a strong army, ever since 6th, they have been crazy over the top powerful, with units that are long-standing becoming horriybly broken. So now whenever those players pull out their army containing older units, they immediately become TFG through no fault of their own.
Thank you.
I started in the middle of 4th ed and didn't have a good grasp on the rules until 5th, so I didn't realize Eldar were good in 4th.
So what you guys are telling me is that Eldar started as a top tier army, and with the exception of 5th ed, they continue to be a top tier army? So what's new? Why is this still a surprise to anyone?
Because they've consistently been overpowered for the past 20 years except for a single edition, no other army has enjoyed anything near such supremacy, and it's old. There's also longstanding myth about Eldar that they're some intricate army that only great generals can play well, which just isn't true, at least, not anymoreso than any other army, and then that gets coupled with a sense that "well, they're space elves, they *should* be better" quite often, and that gets old as well. And I say this as someone who has owned and played and Eldar army about as long as you have.
HOWEVER, I can only except that an army is OP if there little to no counters to them.
OP != unbeatable. If an army can only be considered OP if they're unbeatable, then nothing is ever OP, which is a hard statement to accept. Overpowered inherently means they're unreasonably above the power curve, which pretty much every agrees they are.
Sure, there are some counters. However, that doesn't mean that the Eldar won't still end up on top a majority of the time, and that they don't have some of the best (if not *the* best in may cases) ability to defeat many of these threats (e.g. drop pods, Necron Wraiths, etc) that exist in the game (far moreso than most other armies), which is pretty much the definition of overpowered. Drop Pods can be heavily defanged by a reserve denial strategy (which Eldar can do very well) and have more resiliency against alpha strikes than most other armies (e.g. a squad of 10 drop pod melta sternguard have a negligible chance to explode a Jinking Wave Serpent, and will only on average barely kill one through HP's, while they're likely to combat squad and kill two AV12 non-skimmer vehicles against another army, likely exploding both), and nobody can kill Necron Wraiths (admittedly another absurdly overpowered unit) as well as Eldar can.
seriously though people automatically call cheese with almost all Eldar lists, and try to weaken things like warpspiders flicker jump, yet still running all the cheese in their army like its totally ok so you can run your cheese and all I can do is use my army of striking scorpians jetbike aurtchs and Banshies?- I get for casual games yea leave the WK at home but I mean in turnies and stuff y not just expect the bikes and WK and warpspiders and swooping hawks and take some stuff that can kill them? The majority of Eldar is just 3+ Nid toughness( 3 for troops 4 on bikes 6-8 on the big guys) with long range high strenght crappy 
)